The trap-for-heffalumps

[rekraft.livejournal.com]

Answer any three questions in Section B. Answer any three questions in Section C. Then answer as many questions as possible from all three sections, bearing in mind that questions in Section A carry fewer marks than questions in either of the other two sections.

In the words of Janice Scott, no less, Lawrie's Prosser was a "useful gimmick". How believable is the trap-for-heffalumps in the context of a school like Kingscote - or does it come across as a bit of a deus ex machina?

Comments

[rosathome.livejournal.com]

Completely believable. I was only surprised that none of the teachers at my school had thought of it first.

[rekraft.livejournal.com]

Hm. Even so, it doesn't seem to have been a done thing at Kingscote.

[sarahkbee.livejournal.com]

Definitely believable. Our fourth year exam for maths had a diagram question worth 10% on the very back sheet of the paper; about a quarter of the class missed it and were fed up. Our teacher's response was that we'd know to check the back page in future and better fourth year exams than O levels. Even though it didn't catch as many heffalumps as Kingscote's trap, it certainly did the trick for us!

[rekraft.livejournal.com]

I remember one exam with a fiendishly difficult question not worth many marks near the beginning of the paper, which caught a surprising number of people who didn't think to skip it. But I don't think I've ever come across an exam in which the rules were changed as significantly as the heffalumps trap!

[ooxc.livejournal.com]

Absolutely believable that, in the 1950s, we were tested in this way
"Always read through the entire paper before you start."
There was almost always a catch about how the marks were distributed.

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

First thing I remember being taught about taking exams was "Always read the whole paper. You never know that the last question won't read 'This is the only question that carries any marks'". State education, 80s and 90s.

[nzraya.livejournal.com]

Ditto this. I also set such an exam (mine said at the end "If you have answered question 44, ten points will be deducted," or something along those lines) to inattentive first-year university students in the late nineties. Their cries of foul suggested that they had not had "Always read through the entire exam first" drummed into them in secondary school the way I had.

[byslantedlight.livejournal.com]

Been there, done that (1980s/1990s) - rejoiced to the howls of dismay that read the paper that much more carefully in the real exam... *g* Although I wasn't teaching in a school like Laurie's, so... but does that really make a difference?

ETA - posh school in Australia, early 1980s, I remember it being drummed into us to read the whole paper before answering anything...

[bookwormsarah.livejournal.com]

We were certainly tested this way in the mid 1990s, although it was a test paper in class rather than an end of year exam...

[hagsrus.livejournal.com]

I never encountered this. I went to South Hampstead High as well, though rather later than AT.

When I first read this I thought that a warning would spread among those who hadn't yet been thus tested and nullify the trap, then realised that it wouldn't matter since the goal would have been attained.

[ailbhe]

When we were taught to do exams in Ireland in the early 1990s the main thing was to read the ENTIRE paper through first and plan which questions we would do in which order.

[the_antichris.livejournal.com]

My school never (to my knowledge) actually set a trap for heffalumps, but they always told us very firmly and often to read the entire paper first, and to pay attention to how many marks a question was worth. (1990s, a school that Kingscote might have evolved into had it been in NZ. With a principal who bore some disturbing resemblances to Keith.)

[charverz.livejournal.com]

Ontario, private boys' school mid-1960s, we were regaled with stories of such exams, but I don't remember actually getting one.

"Read the instructions first" was definitely drummed into us as a corollary.

[thekumquat.livejournal.com]

Setting an exam like that sounds perfectly plausible - I'm sure we had a few similarly sarcastic warnings and a couple end-of-term exams in second and third year that worked like that. In my first job we had a 3-week training course with an assessment at the end that was 20 increasingly-daft questions and on the back "Answer any three questions. Or hand your paper in and do something useful instead" - a stern warning to watch out for bullshit!

The bit I didn't find so realistic was the content of the school report -"had ... paid more attention in class or the exam itself, her mark would have been higher" - even in the 1970s private school parents would have thought of themselves as paying for an education and would have been most unimpressed if their little darlings suddenly got poor results, Meg's dad notwithstanding.

[rosathome.livejournal.com]

Yes, although Crommie didn't actually write that, did she? She just threatened to.

[biskybat.livejournal.com]

I never found this plausible. Bright conscientious girls at a school like Kingscote taught in a very formal way would not suddenly need to be warned to read exam instructions - they would have been trained to do so long before this. And they would hardly have overlooked such instructions in every exam. I simply can't imagine the extra conscientious ones like Meg Hopkins or Esther doing so especially as they've actually been told to be careful by Miss C herself.

Also, Miss Cromwell says '- it escaped the notice of all but five of you ...' etc . Why does Miss C say (something like) 'Nicola alone cleared the first fence' when there were four others who also did so? And why didn't any of them comment on this sudden new format in the inevitable post exam comparing of notes?

[rekraft.livejournal.com]

And they would hardly have overlooked such instructions in every exam.

Is something I'm wondering, actually. I had assumed the staff didn't spring the heffalump trap very often at all, because so many of them - including the conscientious ones - got caught out this time, and with all their papers.

And Forest does write that Lower IV.A. was stunned 'less by the lowness of its marks, than that it should have been so tricked' - sounds like they'd never thought it'd happen to them, whether or not they had heard about it happening to others.

And yes, I wonder who the other four are. Jean Baker is presumably one, although I don't imagine her doing so badly (despite remembering to read the instructions) as to let Nicola romp home alone.

And why didn't any of them comment on this sudden new format in the inevitable post exam comparing of notes?

Come to think of it, this if nothing else may suggest that the different format was not altogether new to some of them - it could be that the ones who did notice the different instructions didn't think them remarkable enough to comment on after the exam.

[ethelmay.livejournal.com]

I had at least one exam in school where the headnote said to read the whole exam through before doing anything. The first numbered instruction was not really a question, but told you to put your name at the top of the paper. All the rest of the instructions told you to do various silly things like make a paper airplane, throw it, retrieve it, put it in the wastepaper basket, etc., until you got to the last one, which said "Now that you have finished reading all of the instructions, follow only Number One." So about three of us sat at our desks laughing while everyone else rushed about doing silly things and then said "Wait -- what? No fair!"

[antfan.livejournal.com]

Agree with BiskyBat.

The wonder of Forest is that it all seems so plausible in the context of the books. Like Karen getting married in a matter of weeks and moving the entire family - new husband and three kids that nobody has ever even met before - immediately into Trennels. Yeah right. Supposedly this is because it is hard finding houses to buy in Colebridge...

Or the ultimate improbability I guess is the sheer amount of drug gang busting, spy catching, child kidnapping, child paedophile foiling, train saving etc that they are able to squeeze into - what is it - 18 months? They are virtually the Famous Five!

[rekraft.livejournal.com]

I suspect it helps that all the other Marlows are almost as incredulous on hearing the news! Whereas the Famous Five's feats are never in doubt...

For me, Karen's situation becomes plausible in light of her character (or should that be vice versa?) - as a result of it, we see the more selfish or self-absorbed aspects of her, as well as her inability to cope very well with these situations.

[colne-dsr.livejournal.com]

Worse (or better) than the famous five, antfan. Danger of death, from memory:

Pre-series - Patrick on the cliff, Ginty in the bomb.
Traitor - Nicola in the sea, Peter with a gun pointed at him, Nicola/Peter/Ginty waiting for the submarine, Lawrie knocked down.
Falconer's Lure - Peter on the cliff, Jon in the plane
Peter's Room - Lawrie nearly shot, and does Nicola jumping the cut or nearly having her knee shattered out hunting count?
Thuggery Affair - Peter chased by the Thuggery, one Thuggery stabbed dead, at least one badly hurt in bike crash, Jukie and Patrick car crash
Ready-made Family - Rose and Nicola in Oxford, 2 potential train crashes
Run Away Home - Giles and Peter at sea.

That's 22 death or near-death experiences in one family, in two and a half years. Not counting the hunting or anything I've forgotten. The Famous Five at least had infinite time for their experiences, they weren't getting any older!

[catwithcreamy.livejournal.com]

Trap-for-heffalumps is very believeable as far as I'm concerned...coming from a strict 70s Scottish education - and also I think definitely in character from 'ferocious' Crommie, surely.

[colne-dsr.livejournal.com]

I think it's very believable that they would set a trap, but I don't see how that particular trap would have worked across the board. Children always talk about exams after they happen - surely they would have compared notes about how long the exam was, and how they couldn't finish all the questions. They could be caught out first time, but they'd have got wise before long.

[lizzzar.livejournal.com]

I don't remember anything quite as bad as Cromwell's trap at school
but I'm pretty sure I was warned to read the questions. I suppose
that it is not completely implausible as part of Cromwell's oddities
- the purpose being to provide an awful warning. It wasn't a practice
O level or anything like that which I think would have been totally
implausible. Some of AF is a little strange even if it works in the
the context of the plot - like Edwin apparently thinking he has no
choice but to move in the Trennels old farmhouse in strained
conditions with the rest of the Marlows even though you later find
out that he previously owned or at least rented( I can't quite remember)
a family house in North Oxford. It certainly keeps him around the
Marlows though.

nRWlzkGZdtDFseVLKeRvYQtyqNhtgLMYRYTgyuYYTrCP

[(Anonymous)]

web site (http://convertium.com/snake/buytramadolonline/#x433u) tramadol withdrawal fatigue - tramadol hydrochloride for dogs side effects