Marketing Management. That was a tough one, much than I'd been expecting (hoping for). Basically, it was a three hour exam that we had to do in two. Actually, it was worse than that because the questions were purely framed. There was one on the potential profit of GolfLogix that was presented in such a open-ended manner that to answer it properly would have taken three hours easily. Well, if I get a B (or even a C, Heaven forbid), I'll be alright.
In other news, we got our Strategy Management surprise tests back. I'd been quite proud to learn on Saturday that I'd got an A+. I was gutted to discover that virtually everyone else got either an A or an A+. I'm surprised that Annabelle inflated the grades so much. Never find. I got "truly excellent" on my mine. Which might be better than someone else who also got an A+, but "excellent" written on the script.
In other other news, I got an A for the Business Economics. Many people were complaining that the lecturer had graded the assignments very harshly and were particularly upset by some comments he made in an email. I'll admit that the subtext of the email that everyone else picked up passed me by. Did I get the same email? The general standard of the assignments was described as "OK". I suppose that's not so much as damning with faint praises as simply damning. But maybe it's the difference between British and American academic cultures. And we are in the UK. (So, what's the US got to do with it?) We, OK can mean "quite good" as well as... urgh... "OK".
Anyway, it's People and Organisations tomorrow. We'll see how that goes.
Comments