I do – at least for the year 1964 because that was the date of the University of London GCE “O” level exam in Biology.
I am seated in a single desk in one of many rows in a packed but silent school assembly hall. I have my pen and a spare – with extra ink cartridges just in case – and sharpened pencils for the diagrams all lined up in the grooved slots. The desks are spaced and set apart and teachers will patrol up and down to ensure no cheating (very distracting). The exam regulations are quite specific on such matters as I learned years later after I had moved through the system from pupil to invigilator.
Together with thousands of sixteen year olds across the country, I am waiting for the words: “You may begin”. This is high stakes time – the exam season that will determine whether I move on to the next level of education. I am entered for seven subjects – English Language, English Literature, History, French, Physics with Chemistry, Mathematics and this one – Biology. (You can already tell from that list that I am not considered a top-tier student – no Latin and the combined sciences.) I hope to pass six. I had eliminated math from my life several years before and French was always iffy. I need to pass at least five. Biology is a must.
The sudden rustle of papers being turned over and then the quick study of all the questions. Read the instructions at the top. Same as we had been told they would be but always important to check (We had been taught well). Try to be a neat and orderly or be penalized. Six out of 10 questions. Three hours. 30 minutes each. Watch the time. Scan the questions. Mark the easy ones (best fit with the material you have memorized). And start writing.
Here is a copy of the actual exam paper.
I’m trying to think which questions would have chosen. I know I did number 3 but interestingly I have no memory of ever knowing the word saprophytic.
It’s common these days to hear British people bang on about the dumbing down of exams. How standards are lower and about how in ye olden days skool was hard and tests rigorous and etc.
I can’t speak for what’s happening now but seems to me there was little rigorous about the biology course I took nor the exam that tested my knowledge.
First of all we didn’t actual do any science. The class met in a lab and we sat at benches with the usual sinks and gas taps. There were some creepy looking items in big glass jars on a top shelf, some faded wall chart of the periodic table and a faint sickening whiff of formaldehyde. But we didn’t actually do any science.
As this was fairly easy to do and did not fully engage the brain I spend my time being awkward and annoying or entertaining myself by making diagrams of things and making up nonsensical labels.
I liked the teacher well enough and I was not out to get him when I insisted that black treacle was an excellent source of nutritional iron.
I knew this because my mother – who was an avid reader of “Health for All” magazine and a vegetarian since the age of 15 and therefore knew about such things – had said so quite definitively. She had made Fowlers and Lyle’s black treacle a household staple accordingly.
The teacher thought this was nonsense and said so but nevertheless I persisted in my opinion. This relatively harmless diversion is one of the few things I remember about the class.
As for the supposed rigor and difficulty of the exam: It was the essay type based on factual recall with a few simple diagrams. I was not being asked to do any personal experimental work, inquiry, interpretation of evidence or weighing of data. The exam favored those who could write reasonable well and could memorize.
The point is that this “O” level was pretty easy to get if you could take notes, memorize stuff and write it down fairly quickly and accurately. You could game the content and if you erred on the generous side you could prepare for say 60% of the material and stand a good chance of being able to answer the required six questions. Sometimes the examiners got a bit tricky and mixed and matched the topics Question #10 for example sneakily expects you to know both animals and trees. But still – the odds were good you would be covered.
So for all those grumpy old farts who like to sit about and bang on about the tough old days when exams were hard and standards high and grades meant something I say: “‘Luxury!’ Monty Python’s Four Yorkshiremen already outdid you.
Black treacle by the way does contain iron. Unlike refined sugar, which has zero nutritional value, it contains all kinds of vital vitamins and minerals such as iron, calcium, magnesium, vitamin B6, and selenium. So basically it’s a health food.
And I did pass the exam and scientifically speaking was not any scientifically wiser for having done so. Maybe that wasn’t the purpose.
And just in case you don’t know – black treacle – not to be confused with the much lighter golden syrup – is the thick dark residue gathered from the late stages of the sugar refining process after the sugar has been removed. Basically it’s like molasses.
As a product it was first sold in 1950 by the London sugar refiners Tate and Lyle. They already sold Golden Syrup in the iconic green tin and they paired it with black treacle in a matching red tin.
When I was in the emergency room last year having busted my elbow, a nurse…
Most of us have done it at some point or another - accidentally locked ourselves…
Thanks to the #1970 Club, I've spent the spare moments of the past week immersed…
The #1970 Club is starting tomorrow (October 14th) and I'm prepared with some reading and…
How Do They Live with Themselves? This was the question Roger Rosenblatt asked in The…
View Comments
I can only speak of my experience. The exams seemed hard for me then. I was a very reserved and compliant child at schoo,l though bright, and extremely nervous at the external exam time. Just reading your post made me sweat in recall. So I very unexpectedly did not pass onto Grammar school..then. I probably spent the three hours desperate to go to the toilet! My whole experience of the educational system of this disunited kingdom is a story of rejection, corruption and class elitism. That's our "Great" Britain for you and I daresay these same hurdles affect kids today. Messages at home were conflicting. My mother wanted me to succeed (probably as it looked good and she had been denied it) but there was also ridicule for having "your head stuck in a book" or looking "clever". That said my parents did try to support me in my "academic reading" best they could...but it was not part of their experience and so not an integral part of my growing up. I could go on...like a Monty Python sketch....but so many more factors affect us than school education. A kind, understanding and supportive teacher would have been so helpful. The personal makes so much difference. Life itself is an education of a kind but formal teaching that takes us beyond that is the key to developing a wider perspective, analytic understanding and enjoyment. That is what I would wish from any educational system. At almost 70 I am now so excited by all there is to learn and enjoy. And somehow along the way I have developed confidence to analyse, entertain and question in class and outside of it. Education has at last become exciting rather than terrifying. And I give thanks to all teachers who do their best in these challenging times.
"My whole experience of the educational system is a story of rejection, corruption and class elitism." That is probably the story of far too many children now as then. Thanks for telling that personal version of what can only be called a tragic waste. Looking on the bright side though - you emerged from the long dark tunnel pretty well it seems! All was not lost.
It's good to hear that a teacher's personal response to and care of a student can mitigate the alienation of our education system. I've just returned from three weeks' working in Zambia with community school (e.e. unfunded) teachers whose commitment was astonishing in dreadful conditions. They wanted to learn how to support their pupils better despite working often without even basic resources.
And that's a story I would love to hear more about. Learning and bare essentials. Will you be writing it up somewhere?
1. I still don't know what saprophytic is. It sounds uncomfortable and I don't want to catch it.
2. We did look through microscopes. I didn't understand anything I saw through them. I only took biology because it sounded (and was) safer than chemistry or physics for someone with zero ability in math.
3. I think people who claim the tests used to be harder only say that because they remember them as hard, or at least frightening, not because they've done any actual comparison.
I think you are absolutely right with #3. And the gutter press love to run with these stories and get everyone fired up to bash kids and teachers and schools because that always sells papers. And sets everyone up for cuts and educational "reform" which generally means returning to more Gradgrindery.
Saprophytic (I looked it up) has to do with fungus so you are right not to want to catch it.
Saprophytes are heterotrophs so you wouldn't want to be one of them either.
In those days I was blessed with a very good memory and a gift for writing crap. Got through a BA Hons in English Language and Literature with absolutley nothing retained.
On the other hand I am going out in search of black treacle today.
Wise move.
I'd like to follow your very interesting blog, but (unless I'm too dumb to find it), I don't see anyplace on your posts that allows me to do so. I don't do twitter, facebook, etc., so it's either follow you on Wordpress or nothing!
Thanks mistermuse. Added a button.
Sorry -- still don't see a WordPress follow button.
I finally figured it out! Thanks for persisting mistermuse.
Education under the Tories is one big treacle mine. One big sticky mess based on myth. You have to wonder if they've ever met an actual child that wasn't down for Eton. They have no conceptual grasp of how learning happens. None.
The big Tory treacle mine. Biggest, nastiest bunch of smarmy selfish sickos ever to despoil Westminster.
Not disagreeing with your political assessment @judy and @Jack. But I am fond of treacle and would love to discover a treacle mine.
You were a better student than I was. I could never force myself to learn all that stuff and regurgitate it in the exam. As a result, I gained only four O-levels and was told to leave school at age 15. I went to see the headteacher, and, with support from my mother, was allowed to enter the sixth form and start an A-level course. There, I found English studies engaging, and went on to take a degree at Cambridge. But it was only 25 years years later, when I finally studied for a PhD, that I realised my capacity for original and sustained thinking.
Throughout my education, I was told that I had to accept given knowledge In order to move onto the next stage. The next stage was always supposed to offer more freedom of thought. Of course knowledge is crucial, but it has to be genuine, the result of engagement and understanding.
That's quite a story! You beat (!) the egg sorting machine. Maybe you needed a year - or another year - in the reception class to set you up for learning. But your recovery was spectacular!
I don't know whether gaming the system and relying on factual recall means I was a better student. In the end what it shows is an ability to assess the odds and determination to get through the hoops and get out of there. And fortunately I had the means to do that. A few foundational years in the infants school had equipped me well in spite of all the miseries that followed.