I had to invigilate for a math-related subject today and let it state for the record (obviously I've been watching too much Boston Legal lately- I watched 6 episodes in one sitting earlier on after work) that the company conducting the exams is a douche bag.
Firstly, for a math-related subject, one would expect graphs or some other sorta funny stuff to be going on, so you would expect people to want strings to tie their scripts together. Big mistake number one? Not bringing enough strings for the candidates (2000 candidates needed strings, I reckon 500 got them).
And then many candidates were completely confused with regard to the type of calculator they were allowed to use. Moreover, at this level, which school doesn't allow the use of scientific calculators. For goodness sake, even 13 year olds use scientific calculators and you're telling a bunch of 21 year olds and older NOT to use it. I'd be okay with a ban on programmable calculators but banning scientific calculators borders on absurdity.
Seriously, how much help would a scientific calculator provide over a basic one? Not too much that would render a candidate with a scientific calculator considerably more advantaged. So what's the point?
The school obviously didn't see that and I spent a good portion of time tussling (verbally) with some candidates over it because they didn't know and only brought the scientific ones. Eventually, I decided I didn't have the heart to put them at a ridiculous disadvantage of doing a math-related paper without a single calculator so I metaphorically speaking, closed both eyes.
And then the string issue came back to bite us in the @ss,
At the end of the paper, we had dozens of candidates (the others sat there, meekly, like hamsters) asking for strings (no more strings, remember)?
So the examiners present decided to simply ask the candidates to write their ID numbers on the graph paper and slot them into the answer booklet and submit their scripts.
Needless to say they were brainless enough to expect this little nugget of information to spread via telepathy. Without a formal announcement made using the microphone, the candidates didn't know, so the invigilators had to individually tell the unsure candidates what to do. That wasted unnecessary time, tempers got frayed and people like me got frustrated at the sheer stupidity of the administration.
Anyway, some rows (the hall was arranged in rows of 40, normally with 2 invigilators to a row, but today I handled one row on my own) had 2 invigilators and hence finished considerably faster than others with one (like mine) and there was this particular old fogey who thought herself to be above everyone else.
Her row had 2 invigilators, and her row was next to mine, and guess what did she do after completing collecting scripts for her row?
Absolutely nothing.
She couldn't be bothered to help people from other rows with 1 invigilator (there were numerous others apart from me). Instead, she took it upon herself to play high and mighty and reprimanded me for being slow.
Her exact words? "Everyone is waiting for you, you know?"
I was annoyed, because for one, that sentence was grammatically incorrect and two, I wasn't the slowest!
Not to mention she didn't even bother helping. Plus at the end of the day, she was ONLY an invigilator, like me. No more higher or lower. So other than her considerable age, what gives her the right to reprimand me when she was being completely unhelpful? We certainly don't live in a gerontocracy.
AND I actually helped HER (holier-than-thou old fogey) this morning.
Some people are simply not worth helping because when you do need help, they're contend to stand by and watch, occasionally rubbing salt into your wounds.
And let's not get started on the other old fogies in the group. Utterly lazy.
While I don't think all elderly persons are like the ones I encountered, but it certainly isn't helping the case when the ones I do see are content with sitting around, talking, disappearing for stretches at a go and letting the younger invigilators (who probably account for about half the group) do 80% of the work. The only saving grace? One middle-aged gentleman who did more than his fair share of work and was helpful (he helped me during script collecting). The Presiding Examiner (old man) didn't know the SOP of the exam, even the candidates knew more than he did and he would hang around for maybe 10 minutes and then disappear for 30.
I wonder though, how would the candidates feel if they found out their invigilators (at least the young ones, female especially) are all younger than they are?
DISCLAIMER: This post is not meant to reflect my attitude towards the elderly in general, it merely reflects my observations of a group of elderly I have the unfortunate luck of working with. I'm just...disgusted.
I'm a 3rd year student in what is probably the largest autonomous university in Singapore majoring in a Science-related subject (well it sorta IS SCIENCE). I'm known to be introverted, sarcastic (at times), funny when I rant (which isn't a good thing lol) and somewhat of a loner. I miss LA and would move there in a heartbeat :(
