Two prong response (maybe three):
- I am, of course, incorrigibly and indelibly happy with my marks. As I said in the previous post, I knew I had studied and that I had used the same studying method as the year before. To know that it all, after all, paid off is a remarkably rewarding feeling. Disclaimer: please do not think I am being snobbish and that D is 'the worst grade I have ever gotten'. I was not wholly upset because of the letter grade, but because I know I could have done much better. Like I said, expectations hurt much more than the actual result.
- That said, I still stand by what I said in the previous post. I still have lots to work on-- my actual percentage dropped by a little, and I can see that my Section B (logic... haha!) needs to be worked on because it pulled my marks down by quite a lot. So I need to work on identifying arguments -not just the premises, but the nuances, and the full scope of its implications- and work on commenting critically on its structure and logic. I think my mistakes from this paper were to mix up the form (logic) and content (morality) of the passages, as well as not being totally clear on what my issues with it were. For Section A-- just to take a clearer view and examine the bare premises-- although a rephrasing of the argument could very well take analysis in a different direction.
What struck me was how very much clearer everything was after the teachers went through their analyses. I suppose taking the paper out of its exam context makes things a lot easier...
Anyway, I'm very very much relieved. Not entirely pleased with my overall results still --my teacher remarked that I was "consistent" in my progress report, but not sure if I was consistently OK or consistently good-- but still. Very much relieved.
(And not very coherent, obviously)