What is in Kelvin's Head?

5 things about exams that matter more than results

04/08/2015

Today is exam results day in Scotland. Lots of young people will be getting examination results that will make a significant difference to further study.

Such public exam results carry with them a lot of stress.

I’ve sat lots of exams in my life and I think it would be fair to say that I’ve had mixed results. Some have been hugely disappointing and others have been exactly what I hoped for.

My most difficult exam results were my A levels which I got when I was 17. Oh yes, I got a bunch of science A levels but they were not the grades I was hoping for and they meant that I couldn’t get into the university course that my heart was set on. I had to go somewhere else to get a Maths and Computing degree. At the time it seemed like the end of the world. Now, I’ve lost track of the number of people who have said to me, “wow, you got a degree in maths!”

As it happens, I resat part of the middle year of that degree as I comprehensively failed some exams and had to take a year resitting. It also happens that I had rather an enjoyable time in the year I was failing exams and an even better time in the year that I eventually passed. And yes, thank you very much, I did get a maths degree. And though I don’t remember all that much of what I learned, I didn’t forget everything either.

Anyway, thinking about the exam results this morning got me thinking about a few things that are more important than exam results.

1 – I’m still in touch with friends that I sat all my exams with

I’m glad I live in the first years of the social media revolution. It makes life completely different. It means that I’m in touch with people that I sat all my exams with. Indeed, when I think back to particular periods of my studying life I tend to think of those periods as much through the lens of the friendships that I made than the things that I was actually supposed to be learning.

Friendships matter more than exam results. Some people find it difficult to make friends. Like passing exams, it is a knack that can be learned. However, I’d say that studying together with other people is one of the best ways of making friendships that last a long time. Many friendships made during study last longer than romantic entanglements. Go figure.

2 – I’ve forgotten most of what I studied for

I think it probably is the case that I’ve forgotten most of the things that I studied in order to pass examinations. I don’t think that this means that those exams were worthless – not at all. I think that eventually I learned that passing exams is about learning how to learn. I rather wish some of my teachers had been better at communicating this to me but there you go, I figured it out in the end. I struggle to conjugate French verbs and I can barely read the Hebrew characters that I once learned in order to read the book of Genesis in the original. I know I wouldn’t get very far with a calculus paper and I get frustrated that I can’t remember what I once thought I’d learned about databases. However, that’s not the point. I’ve learned how to learn and I know that I can acquire new skills when I need to. Indeed, one of the things I decided to do today was spend some time at home learning how to use a particular computer graphics package that’s going to set me free to do all kinds of tricks at work. I’ve learned how to learn and that’s more important than any number of the certificates that I have. Indeed, I go on learning with rapacious intent.

3 – I can remember more of what I studied for than I expect

When push comes to shove, as it does in life sooner or later, I find that I can actually remember all kinds of things that I thought I had forgotten. I may not be able to remember my Hebrew but if someone asks me why we pause in the middle of the psalm verses in morning prayer I’m straight off to dig out my Hebrew bible to show them. I can’t remember my French verbs but when life puts you on a sinking yacht in a canal in France and you have to call out les pompiers in french on a dodgy mobile phone, suddenly you find you can remember far more than you expect. (And you learn even more vocabulary on the way – I’ll never to my dying day forget that la grue means the crane). I don’t think I’d enjoy taking a driving test again but I get myself around without bumping into things rather efficiently. I’ll probably never sit any more music exams but they gave me enough to enjoy sitting at the piano and to my astonishment I find that I’ve become an opera critic whom some folk seem to listen to. I regret not taking more courses in English literature but I had an English teacher who gave me a love of the stage which has never done away and which has given me more delight than anyone else ever has. (And bless him, he’ll probably never know that was the gift he gave me).

4 – You can almost always resit and you can always revise your plans

So, I got disappointing A levels, I failed a year at college, I failed a driving test and when I tried the first time, the church comprehensively said I had no vocation to be a priest. In the end, none of these things defined my life. I’ve learned that you can almost always resit exams and you can always revise your plans. Things can still work out even if you get a disappointing result. Indeed, the truth is, you are going to have disappointments in life. Exams can teach you how to deal with them. Sometimes you don’t get what you want but so what? Being able to adapt and change your plans is a greater life skill than passing exams in the first place. Exam results sometimes feel like the end of the world. They never are. The trick is not to be defined by the things you have not succeeded at. An exam result is only a snapshot of how you were doing at one particular part of life. It isn’t life itself.

5 – I’m glad I sat the exams I did, even the ones I failed

It takes time to learn to be thankful for disappointment. Indeed, there’s no real point talking about it with someone who is in the first phase of coming to terms with it. However, the truth is, there are silver linings in many a cloud. The trouble is, it takes time and wisdom to be able to see them. Don’t ask what you learned in order to pass an exam – ask what you learned by getting the result you got. Don’t ask why you can’t do what you hoped to do, ask what you hope to do now.

One of the things that I’ve been getting people at St Mary’s to work towards in the next few months is a new course for people to think about their own gifts and skills. I have a hunch that people are far too much defined by the exam results and certificates that they have got when in fact they have surprisingly diverse gifts which are incapable of being examined in traditional ways which add up to all kinds of inner calls.

My congratulations go to all those rejoicing today. My commiserations to those who didn’t get what they wanted. It’s miserable. I know it is miserable but I also know it isn’t the thing that needs to define who you are.

examinations, failing exam, friendship, matter more than exams, results

41 responses to “The Columba Declaration”

Edward Andrews

11/02/2016

As Anglicans get down to the important issue of the niceties of Theology, lets get into the broad brush situation.
The relationships between the Churches of the Celtic tradition and the Southern tradition have been fraught since the 7th Century (Whitby). Part of the whole question surrounding the war of Independence (and before with King David was teh independence of the Scottish Church.
The irony is that the present attempt is to bring the Churches of the united Kingdom together may well blow back on them. While the Kirk today doesn’t mean much in Scotland the most secular part of the UK I’m not convinsed that playing footise over Bishops is going to impress the older members – the ones who voted No.
The fact is that the Scottish Episcopal Church has the Anglican franchise in Scotland. It is an authentic Scottish Church (especially if you ignore the instances when it has gone to England for Episcopal ordination.) and to negotiate over its head about something so sensitive it at the best discourteous.
Those of the reformed tradition don’t get wound up by the antics of a few Episcopalians. We seek whatever degree of true unity is available to us, but do not see the need for uniformity. I spent some very pleasant years as a guest of the Scottish Episcopal Church when the climate of the Kirk became unattractive to me, and am grateful for the table fellowship which I received.
The site of two big boys presuming to set things up is not pleasing. For the information of those who want to get up tight about the real presence, that is what the reformed tradition believes, we are Calvinists not followers of Zwingli. I am not going to seek to discuss which Greer philosopher we get our understanding of existence from.

Reply
Father David

12/02/2016

Father Ron: let us not forget that the great Arthur Michael Ramsey was born an ecumenical baby. His maternal Grandfather was Vicar of Horbling in Lincolnshire and his paternal Grandfather was a Congregationalist Minister. His Anglican Grandfather baptised him and when in adult years he visited Horbling parish church he was deeply moved when standing by the font – the place where this great man of God began his Christian pilgrim journey. However, as a child he worshipped with his family at the Congregationalist church in Cambridge. To the great benefit of the Church of England and the Anglican Communion – the kind of High Jinks that took place next door at Little St. Mary’s proved to be an attractive magnet and so the pull of Anglo-Catholicism brought to us a spiritual giant and a contender (in company with William Temple) for the title of the greatest Archbishop of Canterbury of the 20th century and a man who yearned and longed for Christian Unity.
Edward Andrews: Even as we all long and hope for the unity of all Christians your words are wise when you point to unity not uniformity.

Reply
Keith Barber

12/02/2016

Cynic I may be, but my first response is to ask what is the hidden agenda. For I’m pretty certain there will be one, whether it’s about trying to create an ecclesiastical bulwark against disintegration of the UK or get ++Welby an ally or two in the aftermath of the huge and hostile reaction to the Anglican Primates’ decision to punish TEC (sorry Kelvin) for its moves towards inclusion of LGBT people.

Reply
1. Jeremy Bates
  
  13/02/2016
  
  Or perhaps it’s like the Easter-calendar announcement–a convenient way of changing the subject, at Synod and elsewhere.
  
  Reply
Father Ron Smith

12/02/2016

Whatever the motivation for this ‘secret’ accord with the Church of Scotland; simple courtesy would require that the Church of England promoters consult with their Episcopally governed equivalent in Scotia.

Another point is this; do the Presbyerians realise that they may have signed up to the catholic premise of recognition of the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Holy Communion? Are they happy with that?

Reply
1. Edward Andrews
  
  12/02/2016
  
  Well actually the Presbyterians believe “Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.” You will see the word real is there. Don’t know what the 39 articles say you believe.
  Those of us who are big on the real presence use the Platonic rather than the Aristotelian understanding of reality.
  
  Reply
  1. Father Ron Smith
    
    12/02/2016
    
    Not believers, then, in con-substantiation? Freely translated as bread and wine ‘together with’ the Body and Blood of Christ? Note, not the more literal trans-substantiation, which would nean the disappearance of the bread and wine. (although as some of my more scientific friends would say, this is a tautology.
    
    What all must agree on, though, is that some members of the Church of England, and many of its constituent partner Churches of the Anglican Communion, do have a problem with the ‘Real Presence’ – a reality that, for me, and I suspect most Anglican Catholics, means that the substance of the bread and wine consecrated at the Eucharist is truly “The Body and Blood of Christ” in accordance with the dominical instruction: “This IS my Body, my Blood” (Not, you will notice, “this REPRESENTS my Body, my Blood”). ‘A Sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace’ – this saying sums it all up pretty well, I think
    
    Reply
    1. Kelvin
      
      12/02/2016
      
      I think it is time to draw the discussion about the real presence to a close on this comment thread. It is hardly the main point and I’ve never ever known a comment thread about transubstantiation to be constructive.
      
      Comments on the Columba Declaration welcome. Comments trying to explain what transubstantiation *really* means – not so much.
      
      Reply
      1. Edward Andrews
        
        12/02/2016
        
        Thank you Kelvin. As I see it the C of E has come poaching in your preserves. This is wrong and unhelpful. If there were going to be Anglican/Presbyterian dialogue the SEC should be the lead player. I have my own problems with the declaration as a Member of the Church of Scotland who seeks an end to the United Kingdom. However as a Catholic Christian I am in solidarity with my SEC brothers and sisters who have been left out of the loop. Both the Cof E synod and the Kirk’ General Assembly should reject the document, but I don’t suppose that they will.
Augur Pearce

16/02/2016

A contribution to the ‘establishment’ discussion: In my book the terms ‘establish’ and ‘Church of England’ both have more than one meaning. ‘Establish’, for example, can mean ‘set up, bring into existence’ (sense E1), or it can mean ‘endow, privilege’ (sense E2).

Most people who use it of the C of E use it in sense E2, and they understand the C of E (in what I might call sense C3) as an association with its own rules, distinct from the English nation but privileged by law in various ways (with some concomitant obligations).

In fact I think this describes the C of S position fairly well, but is quite wrong as regards the C of E. The C of E (I contend) is not distinct from the kingdom of England, it is that kingdom ‘wearing its spiritual hat’ (sense C1). England, as church, has various spiritual responsibilities to discharge, and in order to do so, it establishes (=creates; sense E1), by its law, a complex of specialist institutions, offices, rules, and assets which itself becomes known derivatively as the C of E (sense C2).

One clear example of how the C of E (in sense C1) and the C of S have been differently understood from very early times is found in comparing Richard Hooker’s well-known words ‘There is not any man of the Church of England, but the same man is also a member of the commonwealth, nor any man a member of the commonwealth which is not also of the Church of England…’ with the Church Act 1567, declaring those ‘quha outher gainsayis the word of the Evangell ressavit and apprevit as the heidis of the Confessioun of Faith professit in Parliament of befoir in the yeir of God 1560 … or that refusis the participatioun of the haly sacramentis as thay ar now ministrat, to be na memberis of the said Kirk within this realme now presently professit’.

The Church of England, in short, is simply England; the Church of Scotland is a privileged sectional group.

Reply
1. Seph
  
  17/02/2016
  
  If this be so, it strikes me as uncomfortably caesaropapist. This may be one of the things that makes me uncomfortable when I am down south and find myself in a C of E church.
  
  Reply