Benedict Tompkins shyly agrees that he is smart; in four Cambridge exams last year his marks ranged from 92 to 98 per cent.
But even he believes he should not have been able to pass NCEA Scholarship geography without a single lesson in the subject.
That's exactly what the Auckland
17-year-old did, and in the process unwittingly refuelled a row about the quality of the national secondary school exam system.
The King's College student's only preparation was a half-hour chat with a geography teacher and a quick look over a practice paper.
Scholar awards are given to those achieving outstanding performances in three Scholarship subjects. Benedict, already taking four exams, decided to hedge his bets by also taking geography.
The exam was three hours long and based on the future of hydro-electric power.
"It was a resource booklet with charts, graphs and articles and from that you had to answer questions and two essays," he said.
"The major skills were interpreting information and writing."
Benedict's success has sparked a fresh row over the quality and rigour of NCEA.
It is a growing issue in education, of skills versus knowledge and how to balance the two in tests.
King's College headmaster Roy Kelley said the geography paper clearly did not have the right balance. "This was an IQ test and Benedict will kill an IQ test every time."
Mr Kelley said he did not want to criticise Scholarship but as the "gold-medal flagship" of NCEA, teething problems had to be addressed. He acknowledged that Benedict was an exceptional student and his geography mark was an exceptional case.
Associate Education Minister David Benson-Pope has called for a full report on Scholarship awards.
The Qualifications Authority yesterday declined to comment pending completion of that report.
