I'm surprised that the world hasn't ended.
Halfway through my Skype conversation with Arnaud this afternoon, I saw that someone posted on the LL.M. Facebook group that he'd received his essay mark. 'Oh my god' was my first thought. 'I have to log in to LSE For You' was what I said. After logging in, 'OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' was my reaction.
Because - oh. My. God. I don't know how else to say this, so I will say it bluntly: What is even more incredible about the fact that I received a distinction for my virtual child pornography essay is the fact that I received the said distinction from Kai Moller.
FINALLY FINALLY FINALLY. After one year of crying and whining and throwing hissy fits everytime he gave me a merit, the distinction finally came - and it was for a piece of work that actually matters. Not only has my chance of getting an overall distinction just increased drastically, I also feel a bit better (okay, a lot better) about the merit that he gave me for the CCL: Rights exam. I care a lot more about my written work than the shit that I scribble furiously in an hour from memory with barely any actual thinking in the moment; I put a lot more effort and thought and care and, of course, linguistic flair into my written assignments. Of course, I would prefer not to have got a merit at all, but since we can't get every single thing that we want, I'm glad that the merit was for the exam and that I got a distinction in the thing that I care a lot more about. I don't even care that it was exactly 70; when it comes to this professor, I'm not fussy as long as the first digit is a '7'.
I'm gonna try to get this published. I missed my chance to publish a paper 5 years ago because I was too lazy to work on it, but not this time. At some point, I'm gonna have to stop letting myself be screwed over by my intrinsic and deep-seated laziness, right?
It has been something like six hours since I checked LSE For You and I'm still so happy. I still don't know how I did for Jurisprudence. When I was almost in tears because I thought I'd received an overall distinction, Arnaud reminded me that I needed one unit of merit on top of 2.5 units of distinction - which, in simple terms, means that I need to get at least a merit for Jurisprudence to secure what is rightfully mine a distinction. At first I was all, Yeah I don't see how I won't get a merit; it's either a merit or a distinction. Then I thought about it further and self-doubt crept in, and it became, Oh my god what if I only get a pass? And then I wondered: how does anyone get a pass in an LL.M. course? I really can't imagine how bad and shallow the work must be to get a pass. Most people can get a merit in their sleep, and it was partly because of how easy it was that I didn't want to just get a merit like everyone else.
The other reason for my wanting a distinction as if my life depended on it (it kind of does, in a warped sort of way) - apart from the fact that I have been programmed by my country to care disproportionately about these things - is that I perversely measure my intelligence and validate my self-worth in accordance with my academic achievements. I know it makes no sense; a friend of mine practically beat me over the head with how little sense I was making when I was particularly stressed out one night and whining about how my life would end if I didn't get a distinction. But I don't care if it makes no sense. It is what I want, and that is the only thing that matters.
Oh please please please let me get at least a merit for Jurisprudence. I mean, according to the degree classification thing on the school's website, I am a borderline distinction as it stands, assuming I didn't fail Jurisprudence; but I'm not sure what this means:
Distinction/Merit borderline (scheme paragraph 5.3.2):
Classification for students with mark profiles falling into this range will always be determined to the advantage of the student.
I think I know what it means, but I can see how it can be interpreted to not mean what I think it means. It's a bit ironic that the rule is somewhat vague since it's for a law degree, and lawyers like certainty. I would keep a phrasing deliberately vague if I don't want to commit to a certain position and that's how I'm reading the above.
This is gonna haunt me and bug me until I get my Jurisprudence results. I'm hoping for the best.
Because - oh. My. God. I don't know how else to say this, so I will say it bluntly: What is even more incredible about the fact that I received a distinction for my virtual child pornography essay is the fact that I received the said distinction from Kai Moller.
FINALLY FINALLY FINALLY. After one year of crying and whining and throwing hissy fits everytime he gave me a merit, the distinction finally came - and it was for a piece of work that actually matters. Not only has my chance of getting an overall distinction just increased drastically, I also feel a bit better (okay, a lot better) about the merit that he gave me for the CCL: Rights exam. I care a lot more about my written work than the shit that I scribble furiously in an hour from memory with barely any actual thinking in the moment; I put a lot more effort and thought and care and, of course, linguistic flair into my written assignments. Of course, I would prefer not to have got a merit at all, but since we can't get every single thing that we want, I'm glad that the merit was for the exam and that I got a distinction in the thing that I care a lot more about. I don't even care that it was exactly 70; when it comes to this professor, I'm not fussy as long as the first digit is a '7'.
I'm gonna try to get this published. I missed my chance to publish a paper 5 years ago because I was too lazy to work on it, but not this time. At some point, I'm gonna have to stop letting myself be screwed over by my intrinsic and deep-seated laziness, right?
It has been something like six hours since I checked LSE For You and I'm still so happy. I still don't know how I did for Jurisprudence. When I was almost in tears because I thought I'd received an overall distinction, Arnaud reminded me that I needed one unit of merit on top of 2.5 units of distinction - which, in simple terms, means that I need to get at least a merit for Jurisprudence to secure what is rightfully mine a distinction. At first I was all, Yeah I don't see how I won't get a merit; it's either a merit or a distinction. Then I thought about it further and self-doubt crept in, and it became, Oh my god what if I only get a pass? And then I wondered: how does anyone get a pass in an LL.M. course? I really can't imagine how bad and shallow the work must be to get a pass. Most people can get a merit in their sleep, and it was partly because of how easy it was that I didn't want to just get a merit like everyone else.
The other reason for my wanting a distinction as if my life depended on it (it kind of does, in a warped sort of way) - apart from the fact that I have been programmed by my country to care disproportionately about these things - is that I perversely measure my intelligence and validate my self-worth in accordance with my academic achievements. I know it makes no sense; a friend of mine practically beat me over the head with how little sense I was making when I was particularly stressed out one night and whining about how my life would end if I didn't get a distinction. But I don't care if it makes no sense. It is what I want, and that is the only thing that matters.
Oh please please please let me get at least a merit for Jurisprudence. I mean, according to the degree classification thing on the school's website, I am a borderline distinction as it stands, assuming I didn't fail Jurisprudence; but I'm not sure what this means:
Distinction/Merit borderline (scheme paragraph 5.3.2):
Classification for students with mark profiles falling into this range will always be determined to the advantage of the student.
I think I know what it means, but I can see how it can be interpreted to not mean what I think it means. It's a bit ironic that the rule is somewhat vague since it's for a law degree, and lawyers like certainty. I would keep a phrasing deliberately vague if I don't want to commit to a certain position and that's how I'm reading the above.
This is gonna haunt me and bug me until I get my Jurisprudence results. I'm hoping for the best.