Ap English Language Certificate Program Application Form China: Fill & Download for Free

You’re asking a really broad question. All I can give you is what I experienced from a personal perspective, as a student in the U.S., particularly from someone who lived in CO throughout the ‘80s. I had what I consider to be an “okay” education. Not great, but not terrible.In summary, almost everything was analog. It was expected that some of the knowledge you would absorb was from the textbooks you were given, and some of it would come from lectures during class. Lectures included what the teacher wrote on a chalkboard, though if the teacher chose to write hardly anything on it, that was their option. They would just talk to us. Teachers had different styles they used for using the chalkboard. Some used it really well. Others used it hardly at all.Primary schoolMost subjects were taught in the same classroom in the primary grades. The exceptions were PE and music, and maybe an art class. Once I got into Jr. high and high school, we changed rooms to change classes.In the main classroom (in primary school) we’d learn English, history, geography (in the higher grades), arithmetic (practicing the algorithmic method), and we’d read about scientific subjects (no experiments), such as the formation of the Solar System, astronomy, and biological evolution.I started the 80s in 4th grade. Most of my memories about that are from a one-room schoolhouse I attended, in a small mountain town in CO. It was one of the last one-room schoolhouses in the country. Grades 3–6 were all in the same room, and were taught by the same teacher(s). Grades kindergarten through 2nd grade were in a separate room in the back of the same building. I’m not sure how they taught different subjects to us, because of course the different grades had different learning materials that we were assigned to work on, and we’d all be sitting in the same room at the same time.We moved out of the mountain town after about 6 months, and moved out of the mountains into a small city. I transferred to a different school, and finished 4th grade, and spent part of 5th grade there, before we moved again. I don’t remember much about my 4th grade experience.One thing in particular I remember about 5th grade is we were taught Greek and Latin roots to English words. We had some Earth science, learning about volcanoes, and faults, and the ecosystem (just reading/lecture, no lab).Every year, we were assigned some children’s novels to read. We would either write book reports on them, or take quizzes on their content. In other cases, we could choose short stories to read, and then write book reports on them.Everything we wrote was expected to be in cursive. In my earlier grades, in the late ‘70s, we had penmanship lessons.Beginning in 6th grade, we learned about writing short papers and fiction stories. We would write drafts, which would be graded, and then we’d write final drafts. This meant that we’d write the same paper completely two or three times (usually two). This continued when I got into 7th grade (Jr. high).In 6th grade, we had U.S. and Canadian geography, which consisted of memorizing the locations of states/provinces, and the names of their capitals.The most significant subject I remember from 6th grade was World History. This was epic in nature, though it was tedious. The epic nature of it was that we discussed how human communities began, in tribal groups, before civilization. We talked about how roles in such societies began, and what the historical consequences of those roles were (not always what was expected). We didn’t talk about a continuum from tribes to civilizations. Instead, we had sections on civilizations that were historically significant to the development of the West, and the other civilizations that allied or went to war with them. We talked about the reasons for the alliances, but not so much about the reasons for war. That frustrated me, because over and over again, I’d hear about some civilization that was not the main subject of study that went to war with the civilization being studied, but it was just talked about to mention that this happened. We never discussed who those people were, or why they went to war. It was perhaps taught to us to tell us about the effect that those wars had on the civilization that was the “main event” for the moment. Not to say that all wars were described in a one-sided fashion. Sometimes both sides of a conflict were described in more detail, though I had no understanding why some “outside” civilizations were given more coverage, and others were not.I mentioned that World History was tedious, because there was a lot of memorization of dates, and certain facts about the civilization and time period. The unfortunate consequence of this form of education was that I didn’t get a sense of relevance, for a long time, about why we were learning about this information. I don’t think it became apparent to me until years later. I can say that there were things about it that were still interesting, and some good memories of going through that experience of learning it stick with me to this day.In primary school, we had music classes. We’d leave the main classroom, and go to a special music room, and we’d have a different teacher. There, we would learn about singing, and playing the recorder. Part of the class was singing in choir, and once a year each grade would have a recital in front of our parents.We had recess, where we could play outside, and as I remember, it was more than once a day.In gym, we used to play dodgeball, baseball, what we called touch football (a touch from an opposing teammate, or pulling off a strap that was attached with velcro, when you had the ball, was considered a “tackle”, to avoid injuries), and basketball. That continued through Jr. high. In Jr. high, they added wrestling to the gym activities. Recess ended in Jr. high, though what I remember is sometimes we had free periods where we could do anything we wanted, so long as we either stayed on campus, or were within a few blocks of campus. It was the same policy in high school.Jr. highI entered Jr. high school in 7th grade. There were some required classes, because after all, there was a curriculum, but before the beginning of every year, students and parents went to school buildings around town to sign up for their course schedule. We had to come up with it ourselves. Prior to this, we’d get a catalog of courses, and what curriculum requirements we had. We’d decide which courses we wanted to take, taking requirements into account, maybe with certain teachers, or preferring certain times of day (whatever was our priority), and then we’d go around to tables at the school, and we’d try to get the classes at the times we wanted. If we didn’t succeed with some, we had to reconfigure our schedules so that everything we needed (and wanted) would fit into a school day.In Jr. high, there was continued training in arithmetic (larger problems), gradually moving into algebra. I got my first formal education in English literature. I had science courses in Earth science, chemistry, and physics (the latter two had lab experiments). Earth science was where I got my first exposure to scientific skepticism.Chemistry was a striking course to me, because it started off talking about atomic forces, the electrostatic force, for example, and talking about how much force the positive and negative forces inside of atoms exerted on each other, and the forces between atoms. I remember wondering if I was in the wrong class, physics instead of chemistry, because that’s really what it felt like. We had labs in the course, but the only one I remember was the final lab, which was about distillation, and using some simple detection methods (like sight and smell) as a method for finding out the components of a mixture of elements in a fluid.The way labs were conducted was we’d get a packet of instructions, and some chemical ingredients, and tools, like burners and test tubes, and we were supposed to follow the instructions, being careful not to contaminate what was put into the mixtures, and then carefully measure the results against some formula or table of numbers that was supposed represent the “correct” answer. There was always some difference between the two, and so we were expected to try to explain why the results weren’t the same, examining, basically, our own feebleness.I don’t remember Physics in detail. The thrust of the course was to learn Newtonian physics, things like velocity, acceleration, momentum, for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction, etc. We had labs in it, and it followed the same pedagogy as in chemistry.As I remember, Jr. high was the first time we had what was called “health class.” I think we had this once in Jr. high and once in high school. Mostly what I remember about it is it taught about nutrition, drugs, both legal and illegal (the clinical effects they had on the body), and sex ed. Sex ed. was something that was controversial, and so the school had to get parents’ permission to allow students to be part of it. My mom opted me out of it in Jr. high. An exercise I remember seeing sex ed. students do was to carry an egg around with them for a week or two. It was supposed to be a poor simulation of caring for a child, as a way of getting across the responsibility they would have if they were to be sexually active, and cause a pregnancy (and carry the child to term). If they damaged their egg, or lost it, they were docked for it. They were supposed to be seen carrying it around with them, because that was supposed to simulate them “caring” for it, but as I recall, some students just stowed it in their lockers, and left it there.Once we got into high school, the sex ed. became more detailed, talking about different kinds of sex, and more about contraceptives. There was some discussion about the emotions around romantic relationships. There was also a day where teen moms came in to talk about their experiences. They were all cautionary tales. A common thing they all said was that their social lives ended once they got pregnant. And they all said, “Don’t get married for the child. It never works out.”Most classes had periodic written tests. The only exceptions I can remember were in arts classes.Speaking of which, aside from Orchestra (which I get to later), I had a visual arts class that got into painting with tempera, sculpting with wire and plaster, and making clay pottery.The first time I’d seen a computer in a school that students could use was in Jr. high. When I first got there, they had one Apple II computer in the school library that students could sign up for time on. Two teachers in the school had Apple II’s in their offices, which were just for them. One of the math teachers started up a small computer club of about 4 students (including me). Once a week, we were allowed into his office to use his computer. He planned out activities on learning how to program it.A year later, the school set aside a room as a computer lab. I had my first computer courses, one being a programming course, and one that was half about programming, and half about learning to use what would now be called office applications (word processing, spreadsheets, and databases). This was icing on the cake for me, since I’d already taught myself programming, starting when I was 12, but I wondered whether I’d learn anything more advanced in these classes. I was particularly interested in the applications course, since I had no idea how to use a word processor.I entered an orchestra course for the first time, in 2nd violins. My mom bought me a student violin. That was rather like being thrown into the deep end of the pool. Most of the other students in orchestra were a lot better prepared to play classical instruments. I came in green, and I struggled with it for a while. We played pieces by classical composers. I don’t remember most of them, but I remember we played:“Finlandia” by Sibelius (arranged for strings)“Air” by J.S. Bach“Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 in G Major” by J.S. Bachand “Canon in D Major” by PachelbelIn English Literature, I remember we read “Call Of The Wild,” by Jack London, “Lord Of The Flies,” by William Golding, and we recited some passages from Shakespeare from memory (I got the famous monologue in “Hamlet,” “To be, or not to be. That is the question. …”). I’d heard this phrase for years, always connected with the idea of great drama, but I had no idea until I read this passage what it was connected to. I wondered what the monologue meant for many years. I knew it was about a choice, but it wasn’t until I got into my twenties that I realized Hamlet was asking whether it was worth living the rest of his life, or whether he should commit suicide.One of my all-time favorite courses was the one I had on government in Jr. high. The teacher came out of the private sector. He was just teaching temporarily, but he believed in giving his students experiences in what he was teaching. When he taught about current events, he tried to bring in people who participated in those events to talk to us about them. When we talked about how the federal government worked, he devoted a section of the course to simulating the forming of a constitution. We started fresh, and debated what should be in it. For the most part, we adopted the U.S. Constitution as our model. It became an exercise in justifying the Constitution’s existence, for the most part. Then we simulated Congress, where we acted as legislators. We could champion for our pet causes, and experience trying to convince others to vote with us, and watching how factions and voting blocs developed. When we covered how the court system worked, we acted out a mock trial of an accused criminal, with some of us on the jury, voting on the accused’s fate, after hearing witness testimony from students in the class who acted their parts. In each of these exercises, the passions were real enough that we took them fairly seriously, as if what we were doing really mattered. As each exercise progressed, our teacher would point out some dynamics to us, “Notice what’s going on here.” He didn’t correct what we were doing. He just made a point of having us notice some things.What was great about the way he did it is everybody was interested in what was being taught, even the students who were usually troublemakers. They genuinely cared about what they were learning, which was something I had never seen in them before.He taught us a bit about political discernment, how to read political literature with a critical eye, to notice how it would slant arguments to favor a certain position, and against its opposition. He taught us about how to watch political speeches, to watch for rhetorical devices and themes that were used to persuade. He taught us about what were good outlets for viewing politics, and which were not, but he taught this from an analytical level, getting us to notice that the half-hour nightly news can only spend a few minutes on each topic, whereas C-SPAN, or the News Hour on PBS spends more time on them, and how that’s better, because you can take in the full breadth of what’s discussed, not just sound bites. We didn’t get into how the news is presented in a biased fashion. He was just talking about how length of coverage of the genuine subjects tends to translate into a higher quality understanding of those subjects. Once I experienced it, I agreed.All of us enjoyed the course immensely. We learned the sad news at the end of the year that our teacher was leaving. He would not be returning to teach the following year. Somehow some of the students got it in their heads that he was being forced out by the school, because his teaching methods were unconventional. So, a bunch of them decided to hold a protest with signs outside during lunch period. The whole thing reminds me a lot of the movie “Dead Poets Society,” that came out several years later. I had never seen such a thing in my life, kids actually taking an interest in their own education, and getting really passionate about it. It wasn’t even directly affecting them, because we weren’t going to have him again, even if he stayed.Before this, I’d seen kids resent school. They wanted little to do with it. They only attended school because that’s what adults expected them to do. Here, they were taking some part of their education into their hands, like they were owning it. It was gratifying to see.I can’t remember in what class this started, but I remember starting to do research papers. They could be on any historical topic we wanted. The idea was that we were to get at least a few different sources on a subject, and then compile the knowledge we’d gathered into a paper, with endnote citations. This continued into high school. Mine were history papers. I would talk about a technology, or someone I thought was an important scholar.I don’t know how this developed, but another thing I remember about Jr. high is right before PE class, we’d have a quiet period. Kids could lie on the benches that ringed the gym and take a short nap, or we could sit and read a book, or we could just sit silently. Whatever we did, we were not allowed to talk. Most of us opted to bring a novel to read.As I remember, Jr. high had what was called Home Economics (or “Home Ec”) and “shop” class, and I think a class called something like “cooking chemistry.” I don’t know much about what these classes were about, since I didn’t take them. I remember in the “cooking chemistry” course, the final project was making a pizza from scratch. As I remember, “shop” class was a sort of crafts class, where kids learned how to work with wood, and perhaps other materials to make simple furniture. Home Ec, as I recall, taught about making a home budget, and did some meal preparation. What I heard years later was that Home Ec tended to have mostly girls in it, and “shop” tended to have mostly boys. It wasn’t restricted by genders, but boys and girls tended to self-segregate into those classes.High schoolI talked quite a bit about my high school experience (starting in ‘85) at Mark Miller's answer to What was it like to go to high school in the 1980s?. I’ll add some more re. the coursework here.I had U.S. history and World History in high school. U.S. history covered the Revolutionary War period. That’s what I remember most from it. I’m sure it covered more, but I don’t remember that experience. I think the course that covered history from the Civil War to the middle of the 20th century was called Social Studies.World History was my most demanding course. It got into much greater detail than my world history in 6th grade. It still had the same issue where there were many instances where “one civilization went to war with another,” but our textbook didn’t talk about who the other civilization’s were, usually, just the one that was the “main event” for a section of history. As in 6th grade, there were exceptions, but this was the rule, and it continued to be frustrating. Thankfully, it wasn’t as bad as it was in 6th grade. Some other non-Western civilizations were studied in pretty good detail, such as China, and Mongolia. It seemed like 6th grade world history only studied ancient history, whereas high school world history got into the Middle Ages, in addition to ancient history. There was so much reading in this course, and so much detail to keep track of, re. politics and economics of different periods, that I found it difficult to keep up. As I remember, our teacher was a former college professor, and in retrospect, he ran the course as if it was a college-level course.I had English Literature in high school, as part of its English course. What I remember is that we read a little science fiction, but mostly it was a few English classics: “Beowulf,” “The Canterbury Tales” by Chaucer (as I remember, they were translated to fairly modern English), and the Shakespearean play “Macbeth.” Some of it covered English composition, where we learned formally how to write an essay form. Teachers started demanding that papers be typed, rather than written in cursive. Papers from a word processor were fine, and the only option we had in that case was to print our papers using a dot matrix printer. In most cases, students used typewriters. In my last year of high school (‘87/’88), the English department got its own lab of Apple Macintosh Pluses, so that English students could write papers with a word processor.An odd thing I remember about English is we had a section on how to write checks, as in from a checking account. I guess they considered it a necessary life skill, and they couldn’t figure out where else to put it.I had Mythology, where we learned about ancient Greek and Roman myths. What we were told was it was a complementary course to English literature and the arts, because throughout those disciplines there are references to these myths, and you can understand those works better if you know these stories.I had Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. The main thing I remember about biology was that we dissected worms and frogs (they were dead before we got to them). An extra challenging part of the frog dissection was dissecting the cranium to look at the brain. Many students failed on that part.Our biology teacher had a bunch of animals in wood and glass cases around the classroom: a couple adult boa constrictors, at least one kind of viper, a rattlesnake, a gila monster, and more I can’t remember. There were times when I needed to come in after school to work on biology labs (the dissections), and our biology teacher would be feeding the boa constrictors with live rats while we worked. That was not a pleasant sound, though brief. We talked a little bit about the animals he had in the classroom, but mostly it seemed they were just there for display, so we could look at them in the flesh.In Chemistry, we had some book instruction on atomic weights, positive and negative charges, the Periodic Table, organic chemistry, and we did some labs. The labs operated the same way they did in Jr. high. I remember the final lab was creating aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid). We did not ingest it to see if it worked. If we got a white powder, that was good enough.My memory of physics was that it was largely an applied math, and history course, with a little lab work thrown in, but my memory could be incorrect. One of the thought-questions I was asked, to illustrate what was actually happening with the air around us, was to figure out how much force something like 30,000 air molecules would exert on my head if all of them hit the same area, measured in square centimeters, at the same time, traveling at some fast speed (realistic to the speed they actually travel at, say, 1,000 m/s). Taking their mass into account, I calculated it, and was amazed. I said, “That would literally blow my head off!” My teacher said that the reason we weren’t hurt by air molecules, even when the wind is blowing, is that they bounce about randomly, so they don’t all hit us at once. That creates the air pressure our bodies experience.As in Jr. high, Physics was largely about Newtonian mechanics. One of the labs I remember was predicting where a ball would land, if it was launched laterally. We gave it a little acceleration by running it down a small ramp, which then let it roll along a bit of a flat countertop, where it then rolled off, and landed on the floor. We timed it from the time it landed on the countertop to when it went off the countertop. We got the velocity from that, and put that into a formula that incorporated the acceleration due to gravity (9.8 [math]m/s^2[/math]). We got the height of the countertop from the floor, and from that, we computed the distance where we predicted the ball would land. We got a Dixie cup to put on that spot, which was about the size of the ball. Then we rolled the ball again off the ramp, and the next thing we knew, the Dixie cup flipped around. Our teacher told us the ball went right in the cup. To me, that was the coolest thing, because in the past, I would’ve thought the only way I could have gotten the ball in the cup was by trial and error. The idea that I could get the ball in it on the first try was amazing.The math courses I had were Geometry, Algebra II, Algebra III (I would classify it as pre-calculus), and Trigonometry. It was an uncertain time for using calculators in class. Some math teachers didn’t believe in them, thinking they took students away from thinking about the math, and didn’t allow them in their classrooms. Others were fine with them. You had to ask the teacher.In addition to periodic tests, we had midterms and finals. As in Jr. high, the only exceptions were in arts classes.I continued on with orchestra in high school. I don’t remember much of what we played. All I remember is that we played “Eine Kleine Nachtmusik” by Mozart, and “Spring” and “Summer” from Vivaldi’s “The Four Seasons.” We had a concert maestro and mistress who were students at my high school for most of my time there. They were head and shoulders in ability above the rest of us!“Eine Kleine Nachtmusik” (“A little night music”)“Spring” (first movement)“Summer”I think a big difference between education in the ‘80s and what’s happened in schools since the ’90s is that there was a code of conduct for teachers, and within that conduct, anything the teacher said went. You were expected to sit attentively in class, and only talk with other students if you were in a group activity. If the teacher instructed you to do something, you were expected to do it. If you did something where the teacher considered you misbehaving, you might get a couple warnings, and if you kept it up, you’d be told to stand outside until you could control yourself. If you continued to act up, you’d be sent to the principal’s office. That wasn’t a frequent thing, but if someone got sent to the principal’s office, the attitude from the other kids would get serious, “Ooooh… You’re in trouble…” Usually being singled out, and told to stand outside was enough that it would get rowdy kids to behave. I went through that once myself.Sometimes detention was used to discipline kids. I also went through that once. Detention wasn’t so bad. You just had to report to a classroom after school, and sit quietly and read for a half-hour, or an hour, with a teacher watching over all of you. It was like the school version of being sent to time out.Another big difference between then and now is we had an English immersion policy. Everyone was expected to speak English in class at all times, even when talking to other students. The exception being, of course, in foreign language courses, such as Spanish, German, and French. That rule wasn’t for most of us, because we only knew English well, anyway. It was for ESL students. ESL students had a class they could go to during the day that was, as the label says, for people who had English as a Second Language. So, it was an extra, remedial course in English, to work on their oral and written vocabulary, and spelling. If a student had trouble reading or speaking English in a regular course, the teacher was patient with them. If anyone laughed at them, the teacher would stamp that out immediately, to encourage them to keep learning and practicing the language.There were AP classes, but I don’t remember what was offered. I didn’t take any of them. Some AP courses were independent study, which had a teacher to provide guidance, and, I assume, to administer the AP test, but it was up to the student to make their way through the material on their own time.CollegeI graduated high school in 1988, and we had planned for me to go to college (I took a college track in high school). I took the ACT, and applied to an in-state college, and got in. Before entry, we took an entrance exam from the university, though perhaps it was only in math and science. This was to ensure that we had sufficient background to handle the freshman-level courses we would be taking. If there were deficiencies in math (which I had a few), they required entering students to take math modules to get caught up. A math module was a packet of instructional material that we were expected to study, and then at scheduled times each week, fill-in-the-bubble tests for the module would be given. We would get our scores a day or so later, posted in the math department. If we passed a unit in the module, we could go on to the next one, and if we passed the final units of our required modules, we could go on to freshman math courses.I had one full math module I needed to to take, and a couple units of another module to pass, before I could be accepted into calculus. As I remember, I got through those within a week or two. At least I’d convinced myself of that… They allowed me in the calculus class along with the other calculus students, but I had to pass all of my prereq. modules by a deadline to stay in the class. That became a problem, because I forgot about the final unit in the full module I needed to take. I passed all the others. It was real embarrassing to hear my name called as being among those who was being ejected from my calculus class, because I hadn’t met all of my requirements. I needed to ask for a “gimme” from the head of the math department, apologizing profusely for my oversight. I took the final unit immediately, passed it, and was allowed to stay in calculus. Minor snafu.I pursued a Bachelor’s degree in computer science at a liberal arts school, so I had a mix of history, language, philosophy, science, math, and CS courses.The most disappointing thing for me was the math courses were all about memorization. In Jr. high and high school, some understanding of math was emphasized. Not in college. The science courses were much the same way, though the lab sections were usually a nice exception.As a lot of freshmen typically experience, my freshman year felt like being thrown into the deep end of the pool, and floundering to keep my head above water.The rules for classes were pretty strict. You were expected to attend every class. Most teachers didn’t take attendance, but they would not repeat material you missed. If you missed a day of class, you had to ask classmates for their notes. If you missed a test, you had to have a very good excuse, such as an illness or injury that required seeing a doctor, or a death in your immediate family. You had to have documentation of this, a note from a doctor, or a death certificate. Otherwise, you got a zero. No exceptions.You could repeat a class if you weren’t satisfied with your performance the first time through (or flunked it), but the credits for the first class through the class you repeated would be averaged. The best course of action if you were doing badly in a class was to drop it by the midterm, and sign up for it again in another semester. That would give you an Incomplete, which didn’t count against you. Some classes (like the math modules) were pass/fail. With the modules, you could only fail if you scored badly on the tests. If you didn’t take the tests, you would get an Incomplete.Since I took CS, I had access to the school’s computers, and the internet (starting in my 2nd year). I and my fellow CS students also had our own computers. It was the same story with some electrical engineering students I knew. My memory is most students didn’t have computers, unless they wanted them for word processing, writing their papers. If they did, they had desktop systems. I don’t remember anybody having a portable. They just weren’t practical for school yet. They were large (really desktop units, still, but lighter and compact), expensive, and their battery life was not very good. As I remember, portables required you to have them plugged in to use them for anything longer than 10 minutes. The school had a lab filled with Apple Macintoshes in which you could use a word processor.There was less use of chalkboards in college. They were still used, but my memory is most of my teachers ended up using whiteboards and markers. One reason for that was some of my courses were videotaped for distance learning students, and chalk didn’t show up well on video. A practice I found really annoying was that some professors did everything on transparencies on overhead projectors. Rather than write anything while they were lecturing, they’d slap up a transparency with prepared text, say what they had to say about it, remove it, and put the next one up. It was like a primitive version of PowerPoint. I found it really hard to take notes in that class format, because they’d run through the written material in a lecture too quickly. Having to write material on a board slowed the teacher down enough that there was a chance I could keep up.A couple of the non-CS courses I remember taking in the ’80s was Comparative Religious Studies, which exposed us to a bunch of different religious beliefs from around the world, and got us to examine our own faith backgrounds.I had a freshman English Composition course that was a requirement for all majors. It gave us practice with writing different kinds of documents, with an emphasis on clearly explaining our ideas, and backing up our assertions with sourced material.All papers had to be typed, either using a typewriter, or a word processor.As in Jr. high and high school, some classes, like in math, had weekly quizzes. All classes had tests. Midterms and finals were worth a significant part of our grades. On rare occasions, classes would have us do take-home tests. Those were much harder than in-class tests, because it was assumed that we would look up material to answer the questions.Dorms were segregated into a “male side” and a “female side.” Each gender had its own sections in the same dorm buildings. If you were a freshman, you were required to live in the dorms for at least one year. It was considered as part of in loco parentis (Latin for “in place of a parent”). Each dorm had a common area, and gaming area (with a pool table, and maybe an arcade game, or pinball machine), along with a common cafeteria.As you can guess, all of our books were physical books. The cool thing was even though publishers had the same sort of thing where they’d sell new editions every so often that had hardly anything new in them (but would make your older edition worth less), you could sell your old books, and get some money back for them. Some old editions were made obsolete, though, and so all you could do was either trash them, or donate them for…something. I never knew who used them. Maybe they were donated to non-profit reading programs. I always went for the used books, if they qualified for the courses I was taking, because they cost significantly less than the new editions, and they were usually not in bad shape.In retrospect…I notice as I look back that most of my teachers, from Jr. high through college, graded on a curve. I don’t know whether this was a good idea or not. It seemed like it was teachers acting out a guilt trip on themselves. They thought lower performance over a whole class was their fault. To assuage that, they would give out higher grades using a curve formula, but it didn’t reflect how much we had learned. It just reflected how well we did relative to each other, not to the knowledge base we were supposed to learn.