1.

Revising for exams

The way to do well at History is to know which study techniques work best for you as an
individual. Nevertheless here are some sensible guidelines that are worth following.

Apply good study skills from the beginning of your course, rather than seek magical
solutions a few weeks before the exam. Ideally, every evening you should read through the notes
you made that day, improving them and making sure they are useful. Then, every few months, go
through all your notes - this will make your final revision much easier. In this way, essential
information will be committed to your long-term memory and will be readily recalled, even
under stressful exam conditions. You will also avoid last-minute cramming, which is seldom
useful. 

Make sure that you have a copy of the syllabus or course handbook. Check the format of
your exam. How many papers? How many questions must be answered? Are there any
compulsory sections? Sort out any external or personal problems that might hamper your
progress. If necessary talk with your tutor, student counselling service or doctor. From Easter cut
out or cut down your weekend employment until after the exams.

Listen to your teacher's advice on important areas or likely questions. Select topics for
revision. Decide what number you need to know about: for example if you are required to
answer four questions, go through the papers of the last few years and make sure that you can
answer five or six of them. If you can answer them all, take care – you are probably working too
hard.

Do not work from poor material. Improve your notes by comparison with a friend's or
read them alongside a textbook, making any additions and modifications needed. Make sure that
you understand them before you try to commit them to memory - if you don't the ideas simply
will not stick. Underline, color or highlight headings and key points.

The more your notes are rewritten, the better you will remember them. Summarize key
information on each topic on one A4 page. Abbreviate again on small index cards: carry them
round with you and learn them whenever you have a few spare minutes. If you are having
difficulty remembering key quotes or dates, write them out and put them in places around the
house where you will see them frequently. Perhaps record them on tape. But remember to think
actively about key issues as well as memorizing information. Your aim should be to look at
old, familiar material in a new way.

Working with a group (the right group for you) will enable you to share ideas, notes and
books and can help alleviate boredom and stress. Revising in pairs is good, but working in
groups of three or four is better. The ideal is to meet for two or three hour sessions two or three
times a week at home, school or college - look for a working environment with minimum

1
distractions. Discuss questions or problems, do timed questions, read out answers for group
criticism, test each other, prepare outline answers.

When your teachers give you practice exams to do in class time, enter into these
wholeheartedly. They will help you assess your progress and familiarize you with working under
strict exam conditions. Afterwards, take note of the feedback you receive. Pinpoint the errors you
made. Did you include too little information, misread the questions, run out of time? What does
your mark tell you about your revision techniques?

Far more exams are failed because of too little work than too much. But often the
brightest students work too hard at revision and worry unnecessarily. So take regular exercise,
get plenty of sleep, and maintain a sensible social life. If you are an arch-worrier, then by all
means carry on gentle revision until the last moment: you can't worry if your mind is occupied
with something else. But remember that the aim is to reach your peak at the right time, so be sure
not to go into the exam room exhausted from overwork. Frenetic late-night cramming can be
easily avoided by the sort of revision techniques outlined above.

2. Life without death by Duncan Turner

Until recently, the thought that there might ever be a cure for ageing seemed preposterous.
Growing older and more decrepit appeared to be an inevitable and necessary part of being
human. Over the last decade, however, scientists have begun to see ageing differently. Some now
believe that the average life-expectancy may soon be pushed up to 160 years; others think that it
may be extended to 200 or 300 years. A handful even wonder whether we might one day live for
a millennium or more.

Behind this new excitement is the theory that the primary cause of ageing lies in highly
reactive molecules called free radicals, left behind by the oxygen we breathe. Free radicals react
with the molecules in our bodies, damaging DNA, proteins and other cell tissues, and are known
to be implicated in diseases as diverse as cataracts, cancer and Alzheimer's. The body does its
best to protect itself against free radicals by producing its own chemicals to prevent ageing, such
as vitamins E and C, but it is always fighting a losing battle. 

A year ago Gordon Lithgow of the University of Manchester discovered a way to help
combat free radicals. Using one of these anti-ageing chemicals, he managed to increase the
lifespan of one species of earthworm* by 50 per cent. Despite cautionary words from the
scientists, many welcomed this as the first step towards a drug which would extend life.
Research involving the mutation of genes has also thrown up fascinating results: after identifying
two of the genes that appear to control how long the earthworm lives, similar genes were found
in organisms as various as fruit-flies, mice and human beings. When one considers the vast
evolutionary distances that separate these species, it suggests that we may have discovered a key
to how ageing is regulated throughout the entire animal kingdom.

2
  In June last year a small American company called Eukarion sought permission to carry
out the first trials of an anti-ageing drug, SCS, on human beings. Although it will initially be
used to treat diseases associated with old age, Eukarion said, that if the effect of treating diseases
of old age is to extend life, everyone's going to be happy'. 

Some scientists, however, are quick to discourage extravagant speculation. 'There is no

Quite apart from these sorts of horrors, the ethical implications of extending human
lifespan are likely to worry many people. Even if the falling birth-rates reported in the world's
developed nations were to be repeated throughout the world, would this be sufficient to
compensate for massively extended life-expectancy, and would we be willing to see the
demographic balance of our society change out of all recognition? David Gems, the head of the
Centre for Research into Ageing at University College, London, is enthusiastic about the
opportunities opened up by extended life, but even he observes, 'If people live much longer, the
proportion of children would, of course, be very small. It strikes me that it might feel rather
claustrophobic: all those middle-aged people and very few children or young people.

The philosopher John Polkinghorne emphasizes that any discussion of the merits of life-
extending therapies must take into account the quality of the life that is lived: 'One would not
wish to prolong life beyond the point it had ceased to be creative and fulfilling and meaningful,
he says. 'Presumably, there would have to come a point at which life ceased to be creative and
became just repetition. Clearly, there are only so many rounds of golf one would want to play.

 But Polkinghorne, a member of the Human Genetics Commission, also observes that so
far our experience of extended life-expectancy has not resulted in world-weariness. Throughout
the last century, life-expectancy rose consistently, thanks to improved diet, better hygiene,
continuous medical innovation and the provision of free or subsidized healthcare. In 1952 the
Queen sent out 225 telegrams to people on their 100th birthday; in 1996 she sent out 5,218.
Consider also, the lives of our Roman and Anglo-Saxon ancestors,' he says. “By and large, the
doubling of human lifespan we have seen since then has not been a bad thing. Life has not
become frustrating and boring. For example, we now live to see our children's children, and this
is good!