missewoodhouse

[missewoodhouse]

now now, don't cry. eighteenth-century yiddish folktale about sir gawain becoming emperor of china, okay?

#so what you're saying is that Yiddish Arthuriana is about as geographically accurate as a Shakespeare play? #(specifically Winter's Tale. and its Bohemian coastline.)

[missewoodhouse]

We ask your questions so you don’t have to! Submit your questions to have them posted anonymously as polls.

#no but my brother was #and it was very much a safety thing #that boy would squirm out of holding your hand and BOLT

[missewoodhouse]

As someone who did my undergrad in the US, and postgrad in the UK (in arts and humanities subjects), I like think of the two grading scales as requiring conversion in the same way I need to convert temperatures from Fahrenheit to Celsius when I'm cooking a NY Times recipe in my UK oven. (The level of heat / quality of the work is roughly the same, but the numerical markings are going to different.)

If your grades are on a percentage scale, then you want to add about 20% from the UK number to get your equivalent US number. (During my MA, a "high distinction" was calculated as a 78%, which in US terms would be about a 98%.) Some UK universities, at least in Scotland, do use letter grades (and don't always use percentages), and there I think generally, an A is a first (70%+), a B is a 2:1 (60%+), a C is a 2:2 (50%), and a D is a third (40%+).

If you're doing a taught postgrad degree, instead of First, 2:1, 2:2 you have Distinction, Merit, Pass. (Magna and Summa Cum Laud are much harder to standardize, as different US institutions have different cutoffs.)

Odd question but - I'm looking to study in the UK this fall, and I'm trying to get to grips with the grading system. Could you explain the grading boundaries to me please? It's different from the US, as far as I can see!

I found this handy table which you might find useful - I don't really understand the US system either lol.

Here's what I will say though - I have many times before seen Americans online seeing the percentages for the UK grade boundaries and immediately wax lyrical about how EASY and SIMPLE it must be to do well in the UK because OH MY GOD I could tooootally get 70%!!! In the US that's barely a C!!! Wow education must be soooo simple in the UK -

And uh. I have seen very few Americans in those discussions stop and ask themselves how much harder it might be to hit 70% in the UK. Which, as the international academic office in every university will tell you, is the crucial question you absolutely should be asking. Does an American 70% look the same as a UK 70%?

(It Does Not.)

So don't be fooled by that! Over here, at undergrad the pass mark is 40%. 40-49% gets you a third; 50-59% gets you what's varyingly known as a lower second (formally), a 2:2 (most commonly), or a Desmond (by sad people. It's a reference to Desmond Tutu - two two). A 2:2 is also the most commonly awarded degree classification over here.

60-69% is a 2:1, or upper second class honours. And then the top level is the first - 70% and up. The vast majority of firsts are earned by students who got 70-79%. Exceptional work pushes into the 80s. It is incredibly rare that you ever see a mark in the 90s, and when you do, it's almost always on maths papers where there are right or wrong answers and that's it.

I can't remember how the US's summa cum laude etc stuff maps onto that, though you could probably find that on Google as well. But as a rule of thumb, think first = excellent, 2:1 = good, 2:2 = fair, and third = you need to be careful and see what you can do to improve (although that is still a pass at university and that is not to be sniffed at).

Ooh, as a final point, though, there's also how assessment works, which again, I know is very different over here (again I don't really understand it in the US). Your lecturer cannot set random work here and there to count as summative assessment. Every module is different in how it's set up, but let's give an example:

Module: Coastal and Marine Conservation Two assessments, each worth 50% of the final grade. Assessment 1: A report on the biodiversity of Ramsey Island in the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park. Explore the cause of the lower biodiversity there than nearby Skomer/Skokholm; how was this challenged/rectified? How have species recovered since? What should be done into the future? Assessment 2: A two-hour closed book exam. Half of this exam (50 marks) will be a mix of short and medium length questions; things like "Define these five terms (two marks each)", or "Describe the process of longshore drift and its impact on sedimentation patterns (15 marks)" or what have you. The second half is a 50 mark essay - pick one of three essay questions offered, and off you go. (Essay questions are a staple feature of exams over here, and multiple choice questions are extremely rare and generally frowned on as being Not Sufficiently Academic.)

Now, in the case of this module, these are the only two assessment points. Both the report brief and the exam paper are registered with the academic office in the summer before the academic year even starts, and both are triple verified - by the lecturer who writes/sets them, by an internal verifier in the department, and an external verifier from another university. This is part of quality control.

If, for some reason, you fail one of these, or cannot submit them by their due date, or what have you, you still have to do them. If you claim for Extenuating Circumstances (e.g. "I was made homeless and my cat blew up, so I couldn't do it in time") then you get an extension on it; as long as you submit by the end of the academic period, you're fine. If you don't, you need to resit it. This normally means over the summer after the main term ends.

But, in the UK system what we can't do is go "Okay never mind, how about you submit a write-up of the volunteering you're currently doing with SeaLife instead and we'll count that?" The reason being, under the UK system that is not a quality-controlled solution. That has not been checked and verified as an equivalent assessment to what the rest of the class has done; so if you do that and get a 2:1, there is no assurance that you are actually of the same academic quality as one of your peers who got a 2:1 for that research report on Ramsey's biodiversity.

Which... don't let it scare you! As I say, there are a LOT of systems that can help you if things start going wrong (always, always, always keep Student Support and your lecturers in the loop). But that is a different system from what I understand you might be used to, so heads up on that.

(I am not arguing that one is better than the other, by the way. Last time I explained a difference in the UK university system I got a very hostile and aggressive American in the notes throwing a right strop over how terrible the UK system clearly is because XYZ, right up until I had to actually say "I am literally just describing how it's different, not claiming superiority," and then they went mysteriously quiet and stopped replying. So to forestall that, I am only describing the differences. There are advantages and disadvantages to each.

The UK system is certainly more inflexible. But it does, incidentally, at least free you from the tyranny I see reported so often by US students of the dreaded Tenured Professor who deliberately as a matter of pride sets impossible exams that everyone fails. Over here, that shit Does Not Fly. So there's that.)

Anyway - hopefully that answers your question! Any others, hit me up. Good luck, and enjoy your studies!

#studyblr

[missewoodhouse]

With April 8 coming up I feel the need to remind you all to NOT buy weird plants during the eclipse.

#little shop of horrors #feed me

[missewoodhouse]

Jane Austen heroines exist on a sliding scale of "You are always right, and no one ever listens to you" (Fanny Price) to "You are never right, and everyone always listens to you" (Emma Woodhouse.)

#this is because emma woodhouse studied rhetoric at the school of convincing her anxious father to let her do literally anything at all

[missewoodhouse]

When a student copies an essay online instead of writing it and then painstakingly changes every word to a synonym until the text no longer makes any sense...

call that the Ship of Thesaurus

#so much mood #i've taken to calling them Frankenstein's Monstrosities #because much like Victor's creation they are parts stitched together in the shape of something recognizable and yet so viscerally incorrect #i should definitely not be sharing examples #but lets just say that my favourite hails from Scotland and concerns the difference between two different types of Tattoo

[missewoodhouse]

I think it has a lot to do with the way the two characters are introduced to us: Pride and Prejudice starts us off with the foibles of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet. Within that whole "Netherfield Park is let at last" sequence, we're told that Lizzy's father thinks she's clever, and then we see her trying to be the rational one while her father winds her mother up. As a character, she makes a really good First Impression. Our first impression of Emma is the narrator telling us that she is "handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition [...] with very little to distress or vex her." Her greatest misfortune, we're told, is getting her own way too often. And we talk a lot about Emma's perceptions being unreliable, but I think this essay by Carole J. Adams makes a really good point about that opening narration being unreliable as well: (even if we don't read Mr. Woodhouse's anxieties as something clinically diagnosable) Emma does have things to vex her. She doesn't have to worry about losing her home, but she would be so jealous of the Bennet's social sphere. (Her line about "how very, very seldom I am ever two hours from Hartfield" is not talking about travel distance. It's talking about things like dinner parties that let her spend more than two hours at a time outside the house.)

Speaking of the sidelining of Elizabeth's arc in pop culture/fandom takes on P&P, I do have a more uncharitable than usual speculation about it:

I don't think Elizabeth is written as an audience stand-in in a general sense. But the novel does give audiences a carefully-constructed space to fuck up in the same ways that Elizabeth does.

The audience participating in Elizabeth's flawed patterns of thinking and reacting and engaging with other people is not equivalent to Elizabeth doing it in-story. But I think the novel is more broadly concerned with these kinds of patterns in ways of thinking and approaching the world and especially approaching people in the world than with it as a purely in-story thing.

The novel's exact central turning point is Elizabeth's horrified epiphany about her faults following Darcy's letter. That moment is integral to Elizabeth's characterization, but much of what she says of herself and how she's been approaching the world could be fairly turned on much of the audience because of how the book is constructed. This construction is very clearly deliberate.

It's easy to feel like Elizabeth's flaws and mistakes are not really a big deal when it's stuff we ourselves do all the time and when the person doing them is as generally admirable and engaging as Elizabeth. But while she overstates things in the horror of the moment, the novel still insists that the flaws in her approach are a big deal, ethically. They are morally wrong. Elizabeth has to struggle to grow past those patterns and flaws, however imperfectly, and I think there's an implicit challenge in that: so should we.

tbh I suspect that challenge is really uncomfortable for some people to think about too hard, and that's part of the reason there's so much flailing to make the book centrally about anything else.

[missewoodhouse]

Academic pro-tip: When you put something like "[insert Reference]" in a draft (we all do it), highlight it in a bright standout color. That way, you remember to GO BACK AND CHANGE IT before you turn the thing in.

#marking essays once again #grad school #studyblr

[missewoodhouse]

This came across my dash as Lord Peter and Harriet (and yes, this is one of the reasons the Wimsey-Vane books are so good).

But before that, for me, it is Gilbert Blythe and Anne Shirley. That boy has been in love since he first called her carrots, and it takes her more than a decade to catch up.

Look slow burn is great but have you considered: slow burn and the opposite at the same time.

One of them looks at the other for the first time and is like “that one.” Ready to marry them five minutes later. Falls like a ton of bricks.

Other one is completely oblivious to this and fails in love so slowly that they go boiled frog and don’t realise for years that they love the other one back just as fiercely, and have for a while, until it’s “oh” time.

#anne of green gables #anne of the island

[missewoodhouse]

#the phantom of the opera episode of wishbone #fully convinced if he could come through a mirror he might also come through my tv

[missewoodhouse]

Strong agree with this rec!

That said, while both Ella Enchanted and Fairest are excellent, Two Princesses of Bamarre has always been my favorite Gail Carson Levine. (I’m a sucker for a good Kate-Crackernuts-style sister story — and I am adamant that Bamarre is totally a Kate Crackernuts variation, even if Levine has said it started out as a take on 12 Dancing Princesses.)

did you read Fairest? Because it's so much fun to find the connections in the story happening in Enchanted and match them with what happens in Aza's story. Also just the amazing analysis on music and Ayortha's culture.

I DID. I LOVED IT.

Writing Ayorthian must be so difficult, honestly, since every word begins and ends with the same letters. I also found it really interesting how Aza does have the classic Snow White coloring- but in her world it's considered ugly, because they only like pale blondes/redheads like the queen, or dark-skinned brunettes like Areida.

Highly recommend to fans of Ella Enchanted! Same author; same universe. CW for devaluing of a "large" woman's appearance- no further clarification on what that means -verging on fatphobia; mostly internalized and not endorsed by any protagonist characters besides the (very insecure) PoV.

#book recs #gail carson levine #fairytale retellings

[missewoodhouse]

I keep seeing posts about the fact that Ken got an Oscar nomination, but Barbie didn't, and like -- you do realize that they were in different categories right?

Ryan Gosling was nominated for best supporting actor. Because Ken is Barbie's sidekick. (He would not have been nominated if Ken had been classified as a leading role.)

And no, Margot Robbie wasn't nominated for best actress, but America Ferrera was nominated for best supporting actress. (You know, the equivalent category to Gosling's nom for Ken.) And I only saw her mentioned once in all the "someone missed the message here" posts.

#barbie #yeah it sounds clever #but lead and supporting are VERY different categories #so i don't understand why any of this was a surprise

[missewoodhouse]

It feels really important to note that while this is ABSOLUTELY Nazi bullshit, it is not UNIQUELY Nazi bullshit. The racist pseudoscience of phrenology (along with other forms of physiognomy) was pretty widely embraced by the 19th century Euro-American elite. The Victorians fucking LOVED phrenology -- it was a fun parlour trick (like palm readings) AND a justification for imperialism all rolled into one! (Any of your historical faves who were into mesmerism were probably also into phrenology.) Think pieces discussed whether certain facial features were predictive of criminality! (Take a look at Degas' "Criminal Physiognomies, shown at the same exhibition as "Little Dancer Aged Fourteen".) And that context (that mundanity) is important. NOT because it distances these ideas from the horrors of the Holocaust but because it reminds us how easy it can be to accept this sort of bullshit when it sounds flattering -- without stopping to consider the full ramifications of those ideas (or without considering them a problem, if they don't seem to impact you).

Physiognomy is racist, it is ableist, it is classist and sexist. It defends power hierarchies. And the Nazis wouldn't have risen to power if these ideas weren't already circulating. THAT'S the scary part.

not the coquettes literally reinventing nazi phrenology on tiktok

#fucked up Nazi bullshit #belongs to a much longer line of fucked up bullshit #and history may not repeat but it often rhymes

[missewoodhouse]

Reblog for larger sample size whatever

#while we’re at it would anyone like an oversized wooden horse?

[missewoodhouse]

Some characters are consigned to a Shakespearean fate in the sense that their deaths will be tragic and poignant and illustrate fundamental truths about the human condition, and some characters are consigned to a Shakespearean fate in the sense that they're likely to suddenly and randomly be eaten by a heretofore-unmentioned bear.

#burbage (probably): and why does antigonous get eaten by a bear? #shakespeare: because we own a bear costume now and we might as well use it?

[missewoodhouse]

The Met once had a really cool exhibit called Relative Values, which estimated the value of different items from the 16th Century Northern European collection in terms of how many cattle it would have been worth when it was made! A milk cow is NOT great reference point for comparing those values to my life as a 21st century suburbanite, but this was also converted into 175g silver, 35 days pay for a skilled craftsman, 59 days pay for an unskilled laborer, 27 bushels of wheat, or 5,350 loaves of rye bread. (Pilgrim badges, which were some of the lowest-cost items on display, would have cost about 1/12th of a cow -- so 3 days pay for a skilled craftsman or 5 for an unskilled laborer.)

This crystal "parade tankard", by contrast, was worth about 158 cattle

[Text from the display is in the alt text image description.]

historian: -writing about sums of money in the past-

me: alas how will i ever have context for the value of currency at that time

historian, about to immediately hit me with the wages of a skilled tradesman in that era:

[missewoodhouse]

what if you went to your normal job and they were doing a musical episode

#i mean i work in theatre so... #isn't every day a little bit like an episode of smash? #or maybe fosse/verdon?