The report belongs to the dark ages, 1947, when I was 12
years and 4 months old. What’s interesting are the enormous discrepancies
between how I performed during the term and in the end-of-term exam and the apparent
unwillingness of the teachers to explain or even acknowledge the difference.
Take French. My term performance was rated 23rd
(out of a class of 26), whereas I was second in the exam. The teacher says: “His
oral work is weak as he does not try to do well.”
Physics reveals the teacher’s genteel priorities. Term 25,
exam second; “He is interested in his work but untidy written work has resulted
in a low term order.” I wonder what Einstein’s penmanship was like.
Note the grudging admission for Maths (Term 20, exam first).
“He tries and has made some progress.”
Only in Divinity (these days Religious Studies) is the
discrepancy addressed but in a way that confirms what most foreigners
(especially in the US) think of British slyness. Term 20, exam 4. “Very fair.”
And with applause comes the slap on the head: English; term
first, exam 4; “Good work; quick and keen in class, but written work too often
spoiled by untidiness.”
To tell the truth I’m surprised by the exam results. That
isn’t how I remember school which was dominated by continuous physical
punishment, sarcasm, and teacher/student incompatibility. Nor, I think, is it
typical of the school. Throughout, I remained among the low performers; those
with talent were treated better.
Eheu fugaces labuntur anni.