Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations IamaSherpa on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

education and learning 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chance1234

IS-IT--Management
Jul 25, 2001
7,871
US
I didn't want to put this in either of the "if you had to do it again"

threads as im sure someone would take it as an attack on them personally and

will start ranting to the cows come home.

This is more a general view of mine rather than an argument for or against

degree.s.

please read this next line carefully.

"I believe from my experience and knowledge, that the education system

fails"

In the same way , that people leave school with nothing and do succesful, you

also get people who leave universitys with 1:1 who cant do anything other

than right good dissertations.

My definition of a good education system, would be one where everybody came

away with the basics and the skills to be able to take those skills

further and apply those skills.

I can't comment on the USA, but one of the things i found most frustrating

when attempting college/school was the fact that, if i didnt write a XX page

essay on something that instantly meant In the view of my teachers i didnt

understand the subject. If i was set an assignment to read a textbook on the

first world war and answer a question such as "What was life like on the

western front" and then went away and read a different book on the western

front and answered the question from that. I would get a failure because I

didnt answer it from the text book they set, etc etc.

This is where i think the system fails. The system only has one way of doing

things and if you dont do it their way, then you fail. Also, some people get

very good at being good at the system and get passed through coming out

knowing nothing apart from that. The system fails them. If the whole point of

the system is to give people a education and there are both people being

failed and the sytem failing itself, then it can be nothing more than a

failure. I do not like the argument that oh you are always going to get a few

exceptions (dont want to get into politics here -not just yet!)


I am not alone in my next point, which is that people's

thoughts/proceses/brains work in very different ways and people tend to lean

towards one of the three main senses (sight, sound, touch) and whichever of

these senses they lean towards is normally the quickest way of getting

information through to them. This is really cutting down the subject and

leaving huge gaps. but, a lot of what i do involves communicating with people

and i have found that the best tactic to get across information is to

establish what catergory the person im talking to falls in and change

tactics. For example I'm involved in compliance at the moment where getting

the exact information is essential, i or my client can't afford mistakes. I'm

having to deal with several people on one report. I know with one of the

people i can go over with my notepad and pen and draw a few triangle and

squares (oh and a couple of wavey lines) and i get the information i need

from them. Another person involved i can get all i need from talking to them

on the phone. I know when it comes to them doing their contributions on the

report i will do a few wavey line drawings for person A and they will be on

there way and person B ill just give them instructions on the phone.

As said big gaps in the above, but the point here is that whilst in life we

have to adapt. The education system doesnt. It has a fixed view that to know

something you must do X and X , read X and X and then answer X and X. On top

of that we will give you a timelimit to write it all down where we will stick

you under pressure and gives you tons of stress before and on the outcome.

I have a friend who is english but can speak fluent Turkish, Kurdish, Greek.

All self taught from talking to people from those countries. If you asked him

to do say even a GCSE exam in any of those languages at the basic level he

would fail horribly. Also, from experience its a good idea not to let him

anything valuable, breakable or unbalancable ;-)

But then to go the other way for a second, I have to write a hell of a lot of

documentation with my job. I get ribbed enough in TTUK for my spelling and

grammar on this board, but when i come to writing spec, risk, control

documentation etc etc. I can do it literally with my eyes closed. Reason

being is that i have a system in place where i go through in my mind ticking

of this and that, replacing this with whatever name its currently meant to

me, placing this here etc, putting these words here and here and when i come

to type it up, its automatic. If you were to go to every company i worked

for, pulled out all the documentation i had ever written. if you put it side

to side it would all read pretty much identical. Thing is though, its good

documentation and it does what it needs to do. Going back to the point

earlier about some people coming out of university just being able to write

good dissertations is on the same logic. "Start off with Question" , "Put in

debatablle point here ", "Quote so and so here" etc etc.

Don't know if this is just a UK thing, but there is something called "the

what you dont get in an egg" If you ever asked to prepare a presentaion or

speech with little or no deadline. Then use the what you cant get inside an

egg trick.

Very simply

1.introduce the egg and what the shell is made of

2.Then talk about what you dont find in the egg and why for example

you dont find a car inside an egg because its too big

3 .repeat step 2 for however much time you need to fill,

4 . Finally close speech by saying whats inside the egg.

Replace word egg with subject you need to talk about and follow pattern above
for example

may in introduce the XYZ application that we have developed. It is a CD based

package written in Java.
Now you wont find any of the issues that appeared in version 1 as our team

have spent condsiderable time working hard blah blah
You also wont find your time being wasted as it has been designed to be

efficent and streamlined for the business needs
etc , etc
What you will find however, is the solution for your business.

Its a good trick and you can talk about whatver for how ever long you need.

but thats all it is, is a trick. Theres no thought or understanding in it.


At the end of the day, whilst you'll get people at one end of the fence

screaming Look at me i have a degree , you'll never get anyway because you

dont have one. Then at the other end people screaming The school of life is

all you need and a barrow boy smile. I think the majority of us all sit in

the middle of the fence getting on with it swapping stories down the pub.

Now, Learning on the other hand is a different kettle of fish all together and being able to apply what you learn is priceless. you dont need a bit of paper and a hippy friend to be able to benefit from that.

but!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If that is what works for yourself then fine. As this is an IT forum , I think its pretty safe to assume that everyone has at some time have to pick up new skills. the question here is how did you pick them up ? did you attend a evening course with exams and a certificate involved. Did you pick up a few boooks from the libary, forget to read them then crammed in everything on the date they have to be returned ? or did you just simply sit in front of the machine until it worked ? When you take notes at work do you write them out in structured sentences , copy them up later and put in flashy binders. Do you write on the first thing that comes to hand? is your desk covered in post it notes or do you speak all your notes into your PDA? or is a mixture of everything ?

going back to what i was saying about a good education system being the basics and being able to take those skills further and apply them.

There are numerous methods and systems out there for finding out information, remembering information, applying information , working with information out there and i think these skills should be included in the basic.

Someone i recently took on, on the film side i asked them to get their hands on images of medieval Knights, a week later i had no images and called to enquire why, where i was meeted with the reply my internet connection has been down. to which i was fuming. I said what about photocopying images from books , he said he didnt have any books with knights and i said what about the libary and was met by blankness. (young person and i didnt bother asking if they had been to a museum either after that or anything else).

Also, how many times has something you've been working on been held up or failed because someone didnt relay the proper information ?

Finally, Im sure no matter which part of the fence you are sitting on, learning does not stop when you finish school/college/university, so why create a system that is so restrictive ?


Filmmaker, gentleman and [#Error]

 
I was able to make it up to the paragraph starting with "I am not alone in my next point, which is that people's...

Where I went to school, "the fact that, if i didn’t write a XX page essay on something" meant that I'm too lazy to do my homework, not that I didn't understand the subject.

Well grounded answers from different sources, with references to the source, or with convincing proof for more precise disciplines never brought me a failing grade and were even encouraged by many teachers. Even if my opinion was sometimes different from that of a textbook authors. (I am not touching politically sensitive subjects now - it's a different story.)

As for people who could write good dissertations: usually these dissertations are (or at least supposed to be) a result of scientific research which require a lot of knowledge, and to do this is also a great skill which can make you a living.


 
I think some the points you're making, if I understand you correctly, are what makes the difference between a good school and a bad school. Or even the difference between a good professor/bad professor. I know that besides a good knowledge base I also got other important skills from my time in college. College taught me how to learn new skills in my field, not just how to regurgitate information. Now, maybe some of the classes I took that weren't part of my major field of study did that, but I bet English or History students, once they got far enough along, were no longer regurgitating information and were learning more important skills as well. I think that without having gone to college, I'd have gotten more work experience but I'd have more trouble keeping up with the ever-changing world of technology.

When it comes to grading students, I think that, at least in my experience, colleges do a decent job of it. They test you on your knowledge of the material, which is good if you're a good test taker. If not, all is not lost because they usually grade you on projects as well as class participation and even attendance.

As far as the system having one way of doing things, I don't think that's true. The system is different at each school and even different in each classroom. Some teachers are extremely strict and you won't get a good grade unless you answer questions their way and write papers their way. So, like drawing people pictures or talking to them on the phone, you have to adapt and do it their way.

It has a fixed view that to know something you must do X and X , read X and X and then answer X and X. On top of that we will give you a timelimit to write it all down where we will stick you under pressure and gives you tons of stress before and on the outcome.
I don't see how that's a bad thing. This type of thing happens every day on the job and being introduced to it in school is merely preparation for the real world.

I think I've missed about half of the points you're trying to make. I'm also wondering what urged you to write post this message in the first place. I have to say though that to be taken seriously you should present your argument clearly and sound somewhat educated. Your spelling and the format of your post is extremely distracting which is part of why everyone's had so much trouble getting through it. You said you get hounded for your spelling on these forums but claim the documentation you write is flawless. Why is there such a difference? Why can't you use some of the methods you use to write your documentation to write your posts on these forums?

 
IMHO, I think that the key to education or learning is not where you go or who teaches you but rather what you do while you are there.

You can go the the best schools and only learn to regergiate what is required on the exams or go to a lower rated school and put in the time and effort to really learn something. Using the teaches and facilities as tools to your goal of higher knowledge. Instead of waiting for them to motivate you to learn.

Personally I am tired of the constant blaming of the 'system', any 'system'. If you don't like it, or don't feel it is up to par, then take matters into your own hands, use what part of the system you can and go above and beyond. You will be amazed at what you can learn when you want to.

zemp
 
I made a comment in another thread about school and how people will have to decide what is best for themselves. There are four people including myself in my department. I am the only one who is degreed, the other 3 are self taught.
But at least I got to pay off a large student loan for a piece of paper. Maybe it'll work to my advantage years from now. But as many gripe, yes there are people with out formal education making what those with are in the IT industry. Just the way it works for now. If I had it to do all over againg, I would have went straight for MS certs, since I have to get those anyway..
Your thread was very long and I think this is kind of where you where going with this.
 
There's been a lot said about this.

With hindsight, I would probably have taken a couple of years before doing my 1st degree.

I got a lot from it, but was probably too immature to appreciate all it offerred. What I did get (as a scientist) was critical thinking, exposure to literature, history, political thought and philosophy mainly by virtue of the people I lived with. I also got a protected environment as a stage for moving away from home.

I think it offered me a chance to develop in all sorts of ways, whether I took that opportunity was up to me. I never felt academically stifled, but I did learn that if I wanted to disagree with a professor, I'd better have my facts straight and fully referenced. I had a great time and graduated with an adequate degree.

Second time around, intellectually, I got a lot more, and it was a challenge to prove I could hit it academically, espcially as a mature student.

It's impossible to second-guess, if I had't done my degrees when I did , I'd have had a very different career, so diferent "if only's".

The important thing is that what you get out of a degree relates to what you are willing to put into it.

Rosie
"Never express yourself more clearly than you think" (Niels Bohr)
 
Chance1234:
The folk in TTUK have very good reason to chide you about your spelling, grammar, syntax, usage and punctuation. If the post that started this thread are any indication, all these attributes of your writing are, frankly, atrocious.

You argue passionately that your documentation methodology is solid. It may be. But I took a course in college titled "Technical Writing", in which the professor constantly pounded on the subject of reader-centric writing. Anything you write should have a specific target reader in mind, and everything you write should be targeted to that reader.

This brings me back to the subject of rhetoric, and how you apply it. Any reader must make a subjective judgement as to how far he can trust any document he reads. And a large part of the factors in the judgement he makes will be based on grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. If yours is bad, your documentation will be discarded. Case in point is SGTRawlins' response to your manifesto.


I must also comment on the subject of synthesis as it applies here. Your diatribe rambles and is often incoherent. If you introduced information in such a manner writing essays in school, it is little wonder your grades were poor. It isn't because your instructor was failing you because you used foreign sources. It's because so long as you stayed with the prescribed sources, your professor had some idea what you were talking about.

I made it a point both in high school and in college that when writing an essay I picked a subject or interpretation that was not completely in sync with my instructor's view. This forced me to make sure that my synthesis was strong and my logic solid. When I succeeded, I got stellar grades. When I failed, I got hammered, and rightfully so.


As philote has said, all schools are not created equal. I happen to have studied computer science at a univeristy which had a curriculum tough enough that graduate students from other schools had to take large portions of the undergraduate curriculum. They did this to give them the core theoretical knowledge they'd need in their graduage-level courses. A lot of them groused about the extra year it was going to take to get their Masters' or Doctorate degrees. But without it, they would have drowned.

But then, that same school is not renowned for its prestigious Humanities curricula. So a school's strength in one area does not imply strength everywhere.



Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!

TANSTAAFL!!
 
stella740pl said:
Where I went to school, "the fact that, if i didn’t write a XX page essay on something" meant that I'm too lazy to do my homework, not that I didn't understand the subject.

Fine, but I just never saw the point in doing anything that I condsidered to be a waste of time.


stella740pl said:
Well grounded answers from different sources, with references to the source, or with convincing proof for more precise disciplines never brought me a failing grade and were even encouraged by many teachers. Even if my opinion was sometimes different from that of a textbook authors. (I am not touching politically sensitive subjects now - it's a different story.)

Dont get me wrong, one of the points I'm trying to make is, that what works for one person isnt going to work for another. Where we have a system where it has to be X.X.X is not a good system





philote said:
(MIS) May 21, 2004
I think some the points you're making, if I understand you correctly, are what makes the difference between a good school and a bad school.

To an extent yes, but talking about the education system as a whole there shouldn't be good or bad schools. Another argument to throw in here is theres no such thing as a bad pupil, only a bad teacher.


philote said:
When it comes to grading students, I think that, at least in my experience, colleges do a decent job of it. They test you on your knowledge of the material, which is good if you're a good test taker. If not, all is not lost because they usually grade you on projects as well as class participation and even attendance.

Exactly, good if you are a good test taker, going back to the reference of my friend who can speak 3 different languages, If on a bit of paper you wrote a typical GCSE language question , such as "Write a postcard from XXXXX explaining what you got up to on your holiday" he would freeze. He cant picture a imaginary holiday, or come up with fantasy things. Put him in a room of Turks, Greeks and Kurds and hes chatting away happy as larry. System fails him. The skills missing arent language skills, but other skills which in the UK arent taught.

You said you get hounded for your spelling on these forums but claim the documentation you write is flawless. Why is there such a difference? Why can't you use some of the methods you use to write your documentation to write your posts on these forums?

not hounded, but ribbed! part of the difference is because I am actually at work, I can't spend time writing posts to this board. Anything i do post, i post quickly and only have tek-tips open in a tiny window on my screen.


zemp said:
IMHO, I think that the key to education or learning is not where you go or who teaches you but rather what you do while you are there.

You can go the the best schools and only learn to regergiate what is required on the exams or go to a lower rated school and put in the time and effort to really learn something. Using the teaches and facilities as tools to your goal of higher knowledge. Instead of waiting for them to motivate you to learn.

Personally I am tired of the constant blaming of the 'system', any 'system'. If you don't like it, or don't feel it is up to par, then take matters into your own hands, use what part of the system you can and go above and beyond. You will be amazed at what you can learn when you want to.
zemp

couldn't agree more, s

Inappropriate post?

If so, Red Flag it!





Thank rosieb for this valuable post!


Inappropriate post?
If so, Red Flag it!


Check out the FAQ
area for this forum!


(Programmer) May 23, 2004

sleipnir214 said:
I must also comment on the subject of synthesis as it applies here. Your diatribe rambles and is often incoherent. If you introduced information in such a manner writing essays in school, it is little wonder your grades were poor.

Who said my grades were poor ?







Filmmaker, gentleman and [#Error]

 
Chance1234 said:
Exactly, good if you are a good test taker, going back to the reference of my friend who can speak 3 different languages, If on a bit of paper you wrote a typical GCSE language question , such as "Write a postcard from XXXXX explaining what you got up to on your holiday" he would freeze. He cant picture a imaginary holiday, or come up with fantasy things. Put him in a room of Turks, Greeks and Kurds and hes chatting away happy as larry. System fails him. The skills missing arent language skills, but other skills which in the UK arent taught.
I think your friend's the exception, not the norm. Most people can do fairly well on a test if they have studied for it and know the material. But I understand that there are people that for one reason or another perform badly on tests regardless of what they know.

The problem is, how do you determine someone's grasp of a topic in a way where you can say they understand it and also convey to others how well the person understands the topic? Is there a better way than using tests?

 
While a good or bad education can be decided by the teaching system, it can also be decided by the student. The best teaching system or teacher in the world cannot provide better than a mediocre education to a student who feels that the time they are spending sitting in a class will auto-magically convert into learning or money. At the same time, a teacher or system that gets to focused on the infitismal will often lower the education a student can receive by simply sitting in the class.

Teaching and learning both take work. Teaching a student to learn on their own is not possible unless the student has some desire to learn. On the same note, teaching a student to understand an assignment is just as difficult in my mind. Take the example somewhere above of a teacher asking a student to write about a particular subject based on a particular book or article. It could very well have been the teachers goal for the student to analyze the work and provide a piece that outlined the students views based on that piece. This could be for the purpose of showing the class the differences in connotation, or even how to write an insightful piece based on a minimum of resources. Instead one student decides to go out and use other resources entirely. The problem here is that the student was looking at the project and assuming they were writing on one subject (ie, the subject covered in the chosen book) while the teachr had assigned the book with the goal to teach a less obvious subject. By selecting another work, the goal of the teacher has been made more difficult or even impossible by someone who chose to not follow the instructions. This could be blamed on a student be to lazy to folow instructions or on a teacher who did not clearly outline their goals, it's to situational for me to make the call in the case mentioned above.

Now, I agree that there are teachers out there that teach only a simple process for getting from point A to point C in an exact scenario, while other teachers will teach how to find your own path from point A to point C. I had several teachers from both sides of that particular equation. Part of the solution to this is to use the skills learned from the one and apply them to the other, thus getting a better understanding of both. The other part is to pick your teachers wisely. I actually considered taking the same class twice simply so that I could take it with a second teacher I admired, thus getting two views on the subject. Unfortunatly I knew I was too lazy and that my resulting low attendance would make the process worse for both myself and the teacher so i chose not to do so.

I think the most common problem is the reason students are taking the classes. I entered college with a clear set of goals based on my desire to learn. Many of the students I sat through early classes with had no desire to learn, they were there for their parents sake, or to party, or to socialize. In fact, they likely would have been just as well off if they had been sent to a year long party rather than a 4 year college. Perhaps even better off as it would have saved them three years and allowedthe teachers to go into even greater depth with the remaining, focused students. Then again I went to a beach college in a semi-vacation town, so the percentage of those types might have been higher than your average public university.

I don't doubt that some teachers aren't very good at teaching the majority of students, I have had one or two teachers that were mediocre, but I think that even more important than the teacher handing out education on a platter is the energy and desire the student brings to the process. I graduated having learned a slew of subjects that weren't taught at the university simply because the university was a research and learning institute that allowed for easier access to materials than I would have sitting on my butt at home/bar/etc. I have no respect for anyone that blames the college they went to for thir own lack of education. A little research ahead of time would have told you if it was a good school or not, as a little research before signing up for classes would tell you if a teacher was good or not. And if you took all the easy 'A' classes, or the easiest teachers (instead of the "difficult but fair/helpful" teachers/classes) than you have no reason to complain to anyone, except maybe your therapist/mirror/etc.
You can pay for a ride on the ferris wheel, but it is up to you to enjoy it, the ferris wheel operator is just there to press the green button.

-T

01000111 01101111 01110100 00100000 01000011 01101111 01100110 01100110 01100101 01100101 00111111
The never-completed website:
 
Chance1234,

Fine, but I just never saw the point in doing anything that I condsidered to be a waste of time.

Often professors can see beyond what you can see. It's probably not my place to say this, as I am not a native English speaker, but some practice in essay writing could do you a lot of good. From your answer to philote (?), you "can't spend time writing posts to this board". But with practice, you wouldn't need any extra time to do it well enough. Except for a few typos you don't have time to notice, your trained writing style and spelling skills would come to your rescue nearly automatically.

Where we have a system where it has to be X.X.X is not a good system.

I didn't get this.

Many good points were already made by other posters, so I feel I don't have to do some of them over again. (See, I am not in school now, I am also at work. :))

Stella
 
Chance1234,

The degree with no real world experience can go both ways. I give two real life examples:

A classic example of where degrees don't give useful information on how to fix a problem:
A postgraduate student at uni while I was doing my degree needed help with her computer, fixing a problem with screen flicker, which I sorted out in about 5 minutes once I arrived at her house.
Despite her degree and alleged insight into computing (as well as other areas, she had cross trained from another profession) she hadn't the foggiest idea on how to sort it out.
(the machine had magnets on the monitor and the monitor backed onto a radiator, the screen refresh rate settings were fine).

Classic example of where degree (theoretical) experience in a topic can help:
At a former workplace, there was a specialised application running on an NT server with a Pervasive.SQL database which was giving all sorts of problems. Before looking at this, my knowledge of pervasive as a specific application was 0, but I had worked with client/server databases at uni (Oracle) and Sybase at a previous employer, and was able to fix these problems using gut instincts and a little application of real world knowledge.

My point is that it can go either way.

John
 
Another argument to throw in here is theres no such thing as a bad pupil, only a bad teacher." - Chance1234

Okay, maybe I misunderstood, but this is a ridiculous statement. I've known both 'bad' and 'good' teachers, as well as 'good' and 'bad' students.

My husband is currently a tutor (and student) at a University and he comes across 'bad' students all the time. They simply show no interest in the subject or doing work. They come to him expecting him to do their homework for them.

Once again, education is an investment...you get out what you put into it! If you don't put anything into it, don't expect to get anything out.
 
Really shot myself in the foot by not checking through the original post, however.


I don't think there is anything wrong in using tests, its just they have to be the right test and in the right manner for the individual.

Over here with A-levels, there is a stupid amount of pressure put on people around exam time. You open up any newspaper and you will find stories of teenagers doing all kind of unpleasant things to themselves because of the pressure. These are people who are 18.

Even at GCSE level (16 yrs), people are put under pressure and whilst some people strive under conditions like that, a lot don't.

I really dont think there should be anyone classed as exceptions under education, because avoiding the politics side; what does that say about us ? as we tell some 16 year old that becuase they didn't do this or this that they have failed. Condsidering the education system is meant to give an education, it seems a bit strange that if someone fails at 16, suddendly their options in education go straight out the window.

Kind of going into a side argument here,

but to get it out the way,

Reason i mentioned the History example, heres the bit from the files of Chance's life.

I used to argue a lot with my history teacher, but it was a good sort of arguing. The kind of history text books we had in school were rubbish to be honest with you.

At a early age I discovered all the cewl books about history were in the libary where they contained far more gruesome images and far more evil tales, than you would ever find in a school text book.

We had this thing where you had to choose what subjects you would take at GCSE and I was all up for taking history. There was a transition stage if you like between doing all subjects, before you only then concentrated on the subjects you would do for GCSE.

In this transition period you did last years exams paper to see how you would fair doing the subject.

On the history paper, the main question was something like "Describe the rise of facism and racism in Europe In the lead up to the start of the second world war and its part in the cause"

Did the paper and was told very friendly by my history teacher i would of failed.

Reason being ? i wrote about the rise of fascism in the UK in the run up to the second world war. All of the books on the sylabus for GCSE history and the second world war did not mention this at all. He then went through the marking paper for the paper and showed us why i would of failed. Even though you do get extra marks for showing that you have done reading outside the syllabus what they mark you on is extremly daft.

My history teacher wanted us to take history further and his advice was don't
take GCSE history, get the grade in another subject. So, i didn't take History.

anyway back to topic.

I'm sorry but i don't think,

"Another argument to throw in here is theres no such thing as a bad pupil, only a bad teacher." - Chance1234

Is a ridiculous statement. Education system is meant to be there to give everyone a start and skills in life. Don't know about the USA but in the UK it starts when someone is 4/5 years old. It is then compulsory up until the age of 16 when the person can then stay at school till 18, go to college or start work. After 18 someone can then go onto university and do a degree.

I don't believe in that 5 to 16 age group you should write people off, say that they are a bad student, class people in groups. Yes, Education is an investment but, on the compulsory level, surely it is about teachers investing their time into the students.


For the record,

I'm not bitter, i don't blame my education for anything. I just think the system fails.

Filmmaker, gentleman and _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

 
How did you do in English?

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
 
Chance, was that for Language or Literature, or did you get a B in each?

For comparison's sake, Chance is a year or two (can't remember exactly) younger than I am. I got a GCSE C in English language and a D in literature, so how's that for comparison.

John
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top