dead Harper Lee

[Phantom 2,533]

I know what O-Levels are. Every single one of my teachers ever used the "We used to do O-levels in my day, y'know!" line in an attempt to sound like a wisened old character who's seen it all and remembers the day JFK died like it was yesterday.

 

Incidentally, the way Gove's going people like me will be having to explain to the kiddos what GCSEs were aren't we.

 

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

 

The point about O-levels was that they were a two tiered system either you would be entered for the O-level or the CSE if you were "less able"

 

The GCSE system was intended to create a continuum that all students took the same exam but there has always been the suspiscion from employers that the new system was 'dumbed down'.

 

I did O-levels but we were guinea pigs for the first proto GCSEs.

[Phantom 2,533]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

 

No I wouldn't say that if you couldn't perform on exam day you're totally screwed, however I did see quite a few people that consistantly had exceptional grades throughout the year being reduced to a nervous wreck on exam day. They eventually retook them and got the grade they needed to go ahead with A-levels or college or whatever it was that they wanted to do. Much of it was also pressure from their parents to get specific grades in those particular subjects. Perhaps their mentioning of O-Levels is them saying "count yourself lucky." The school system was very different back then and I'm only going back as far as 1987 when I left school.

 

I screwed up on my mock Chemistry O-Level and ended up with an E, but the teacher took my actual coursework into consideration and entered me in for the O-Level exam instead of the CSE and I ended up with a B. And I certainly wouldn't call myself a "victim". My year was the last year for O-Level and CSE, but also an experimental year with certain subjects such as Drama being used for GCSE.

[Phantom 2,533]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

 

The point about O-levels was that they were a two tiered system either you would be entered for the O-level or the CSE if you were "less able"

 

The GCSE system was intended to create a continuum that all students took the same exam but there has always been the suspiscion from employers that the new system was 'dumbed down'.

 

I did O-levels but we were guinea pigs for the first proto GCSEs.

 

If I remember rightly an A in CSE was the equivalent of a C in O-Level.

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

 

The point about O-levels was that they were a two tiered system either you would be entered for the O-level or the CSE if you were "less able"

 

The GCSE system was intended to create a continuum that all students took the same exam but there has always been the suspiscion from employers that the new system was 'dumbed down'.

 

I did O-levels but we were guinea pigs for the first proto GCSEs.

 

If I remember rightly an A in CSE was the equivalent of a C in O-Level.

 

Close but CSEs were graded 1-5 so a Grade 1 was equivalent of an O-level.

 

I got 5 O-levels and three CSEs because I made really bad option choices for my subjects. I was told to pick German if I wanted to study Chemistry at degree level but I was really bad at languages.

[Phantom 2,533]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

 

The point about O-levels was that they were a two tiered system either you would be entered for the O-level or the CSE if you were "less able"

 

The GCSE system was intended to create a continuum that all students took the same exam but there has always been the suspiscion from employers that the new system was 'dumbed down'.

 

I did O-levels but we were guinea pigs for the first proto GCSEs.

 

If I remember rightly an A in CSE was the equivalent of a C in O-Level.

 

Close but CSEs were graded 1-5 so a Grade 1 was equivalent of an O-level.

 

I got 5 O-levels and three CSEs because I made really bad option choices for my subjects. I was told to pick German if I wanted to study Chemistry at degree level but I was really bad at languages.

 

Oh yes, they were numerical grades. I did the same number as you. I screwed up on my languages by choosing to do French, Spanish and German in my 3rd year which totally screwed me up for that year. I ended up doing Home Ec., French and Drama for CSE. My real surprise was getting a B for O-Level in Art even though I was crap at it.

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

 

The point about O-levels was that they were a two tiered system either you would be entered for the O-level or the CSE if you were "less able"

 

The GCSE system was intended to create a continuum that all students took the same exam but there has always been the suspiscion from employers that the new system was 'dumbed down'.

 

I did O-levels but we were guinea pigs for the first proto GCSEs.

 

If I remember rightly an A in CSE was the equivalent of a C in O-Level.

 

Close but CSEs were graded 1-5 so a Grade 1 was equivalent of an O-level.

 

I got 5 O-levels and three CSEs because I made really bad option choices for my subjects. I was told to pick German if I wanted to study Chemistry at degree level but I was really bad at languages.

 

Oh yes, they were numerical grades. I did the same number as you. I screwed up on my languages by choosing to do French, Spanish and German in my 3rd year which totally screwed me up for that year. I ended up doing Home Ec., French and Drama for CSE. My real surprise was getting a B for O-Level in Art even though I was crap at it.

 

I also picked English Lit. I loved reading the books but hated writing essays, although I did meet my future wife in the Eng Lit class so it wasn't all wasted. It is my wedding anniversary on Friday (22 years).

[Phantom 2,533]

I doubt the people that did O-Levels at school are attempting to make themselves sound wise, the main difference was that you could get good grades all year and everything hinged on that final exam. If you screwed that up, then it's all for nothing. GCSE on the other hand gives you a chance to improve on your final grade throughout the year. And yes, I did O-Levels.

 

Alright, chillax! I was only kidding ffs.

 

But really I can't remember a single time when they actually explained that difference. They just said "They weren't GCSEs in my day they were O-levels!". So if they were trying to express that point it never came across.

 

I guess maybe I'm talking to a "victim" of the "if you can't perform on exam day, you're screwed" system? Or not?

 

Funny little anedcote-type thing about the whole "improving your grade" thing is that I did a short story for my English Literature GCSE that my teacher said would receive an A grade if I actually corrected the spelling errors. I could never be bothered to do this, despite the fact that it was typed out on Word and all I had to do was click the autocorrect button and then print out a fresh copy. But I couldn't even be arsed to do that. And eventually that was the difference between me getting an A in Eng Lit and a B which is what I would have got. And it would have been my only A too.

 

Damn you wrestling or videogames or whatever dumb crap I was doing at the time.....

 

The point about O-levels was that they were a two tiered system either you would be entered for the O-level or the CSE if you were "less able"

 

The GCSE system was intended to create a continuum that all students took the same exam but there has always been the suspiscion from employers that the new system was 'dumbed down'.

 

I did O-levels but we were guinea pigs for the first proto GCSEs.

 

If I remember rightly an A in CSE was the equivalent of a C in O-Level.

 

Close but CSEs were graded 1-5 so a Grade 1 was equivalent of an O-level.

 

I got 5 O-levels and three CSEs because I made really bad option choices for my subjects. I was told to pick German if I wanted to study Chemistry at degree level but I was really bad at languages.

 

Oh yes, they were numerical grades. I did the same number as you. I screwed up on my languages by choosing to do French, Spanish and German in my 3rd year which totally screwed me up for that year. I ended up doing Home Ec., French and Drama for CSE. My real surprise was getting a B for O-Level in Art even though I was crap at it.

 

I also picked English Lit. I loved reading the books but hated writing essays, although I did meet my future wife in the Eng Lit class so it wasn't all wasted. It is my wedding anniversary on Friday (22 years).

 

Congratulations on your anniversary.

 

I did English Lit too, I wasn't all that keen on writing essays either, I found it very difficult to fill out the expected quota of words that they wanted and could always sumarize what I wanted to say in just 2 paragraphs. Probably what gave those grading the essay papers the hardest time was trying to decipher the handwriting from everyone.

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

I fucking hated English Lit so god knows how I nearly got an A in it. Couldn't understand a single syllable of Shakespeare and didn't really give much of a shit about any books. And I barely ever read novels even now...

 

My short story was sort of a vague rip-off/pastiche of a TV series I was watching about a career criminal at the time (although I guess my work wasn't completely unoriginal, I came up with my own names and re-worked them into different scenarios. I just had no idea how to come up with a story of my own). I kept getting paranoid that somehow one of the English teachers would "figure out" what I got the idea from and I would be stripped of my grade, haha...

[Phantom 2,533]

I fucking hated English Lit so god knows how I nearly got an A in it. Couldn't understand a single syllable of Shakespeare and didn't really give much of a shit about any books. And I barely ever read novels even now...

 

My short story was sort of a vague rip-off/pastiche of a TV series I was watching about a career criminal at the time (although I guess my work wasn't completely unoriginal, I came up with my own names and re-worked them into different scenarios. I just had no idea how to come up with a story of my own). I kept getting paranoid that somehow one of the English teachers would "figure out" what I got the idea from and I would be stripped of my grade, haha...

 

It's a lot easier now to see if anyone plagiarises another's work, whereas before you had the advantage of whether or not the person grading your essay had read where you lifted your information from. We did a good year and a half of "understanding Shakespeare" working through Julius Caesar, Romeo & Juliet, Midsummer Night's Dream, Richard III and MacBeth.

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

Yes, this wasn't pre-internet but it was pre internet-as-we-know-it-today that's for sure. Actually, I'm not exactly sure when the current "era" we're in started. In what exact year did it all become clear that Google fucking owns our arses? 2009 maybe? I was gonna say 2006 or 7 but I think that's a bit early.

 

But like I said it wasn't a direct rip-off of anything (and more importantly it wasn't a rip-off of a book or short story) so I didn't have to worry too much. (But I felt worried and mildly "guilty" at the time!).

 

Also I seem to remember one or more of my teachers saying stuff like "If you copy something, we have ways of knowing". That sounded scary enough to put me off if I had actually been tempted to cheat. But not quite as scary as it would sound now.

[Phantom 2,533]

Yes, this wasn't pre-internet but it was pre internet-as-we-know-it-today that's for sure. Actually, I'm not exactly sure when the current "era" we're in started. In what exact year did it all become clear that Google fucking owns our arses? 2009 maybe? I was gonna say 2006 or 7 but I think that's a bit early.

 

But like I said it wasn't a direct rip-off of anything (and more importantly it wasn't a rip-off of a book or short story) so I didn't have to worry too much. (But I felt worried and mildly "guilty" at the time!).

 

Also I seem to remember one or more of my teachers saying stuff like "If you copy something, we have ways of knowing". That sounded scary enough to put me off if I had actually been tempted to cheat. But not quite as scary as it would sound now.

 

I would have liked to be able to type out my essays as I usually got cramp halfway through writing the damn things.

[Bibliogryphon 9,586]

Still well enough to take legal action against local museum

[wildstorm 297]

Harper's sister, Alice Lee, dead at 103.

[Guest Guest]

Fuck me with a pitchfork.If her sister lived to 103 it's a fair bet Harper ain't going anywhere for a while yet

[Sean 6,330]

Harper Lee to publish 2nd novel ! She wrote it years ago but still did not expect that as she always said she never would.

[Sean 6,330]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31118355

[Phantom 2,533]

Harper Lee to publish 2nd novel !

 

Well it's only taken her 60 years to write a sequel. "Go Set a Watchman" pretty lame title if you ask me. I was hoping for "To Kill A Mockingbird 2: The Revenge"

[Dr. Zorders 1,271]

I was waiting for "Tequila Mockingbird: Fatticus Finch's Lost Decade"

[Phantom 2,533]

I'm wondering if deciding to publish the sequel now, means that either she's run low on cash and just wants a bit extra to live out the rest of her days, or she just can't bear the thought of someone else cashing in on it.

[Guest Guest]

Sadly unconfirmed reports tonight are saying that Harper Lee only has months to live,which is why she feels the need to write the sequel to TKAM now. I hope that writing the sequel gives her some comfort in her final months

[time 8,617]

Sadly unconfirmed reports tonight are saying that Harper Lee only has months to live,which is why she feels the need to write the sequel to TKAM now. I hope that writing the sequel gives her some comfort in her final months I'm an absolute bellend.

 

EFA

[Guest NewHarperLeeInformation]

Here's an article that goes more into detail about the new book and Ms. Lee's condition now.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/02/the-tragedy-of-harper-lee/385132/

[Phantom 2,533]

Sadly unconfirmed reports tonight are saying that Harper Lee only has months to live,which is why she feels the need to write the sequel to TKAM now. I hope that writing the sequel gives her some comfort in her final months

 

She wrote the sequel years ago