In addition to my lovely Java exam, I also had an exam of a course named Apects of General Education this day.
I have to admit that this is one of the most enjoyable course I've ever taken in university. Basically, it is kind of like a weekly assembly. For each Friday, the class is held by a professor, or someone with its own profession. It is like a talk, and the speaker, the professor, gives us a one to two hour lecture. The course is wonderful because you can have different topic every week. And, for most of the time, the talk is exciting and inspiring. Well, yeah, sometimes it is just boring, I have to say, but it also could be a great chance for you to restore your strength you've lost for the whole week. So, in fact, no matter the talk is interesting or tedious, you always get some benefits.
But the exam, it is quite weird. Like a cake combining ten different tastes, sometimes the questions are about architecture, while sometimes you realise they are about teenager's issues. And maybe somewhere near the end of the paper, after filling 60 or 70 circles with your HB pencil, you'll find that the same topic just comes up again, though maybe it was multiple choice last time but it is true false now before your eyes.
And during the exam, while doing the 94-question-long-paper, I kept asking, what's it for? Is this course about giving us some lovely talks, widening our horizontals, leading us out of the overwhelming piles of books, or is it about giving the academy another way to measure us according to how many scores we've made?
I think we are human. We are not something to be measured, comparing to find which is better and which is worse. We are not measurable, espescially by that way. Sigh, this is a great course, just feel like it is screwed up at the end.