@redridge13, I’m definitely taking the younger one, just like I mentioned before. The older kid has an annual judo tournament coming up that we’ve already shelled out for, but honestly, I’m all for getting the kids involved—this is about them too, right?
So my husband just mentioned that our oldest is competing in a judo tournament this Wednesday at 6:00 PM.
"Look, this is a hundred times more important than just some sports match—we're talking about his entire future here," I told him.
Well, we'll see how it goes. Either way, the younger one and I are definitely going. I’m really hoping there's a decent crowd there, though hopefully nothing too wild or chaotic.
Should I go full overboard and hang a giant banner on the door or something?😁
I’m not part of any union myself. Honestly, I just don't trust their leadership, so if someone else could step up and organize the protest, I’d much prefer that. But at the end of the day, the most important thing is that people actually get out there and protest—regardless of who's calling the shots behind the scenes.
I’m just gonna repost my own status from Facebook here:
THIS GOES OUT TO every single parent out there. To everyone currently navigating the American school system, or those getting ready to. It goes out to anyone who feels our education system is stuck in a loop of mindless rote memorization—forcing kids to swallow useless facts they'll never use, while failing to teach them how to actually function in the real world. I mean, we’re seeing graduates who have spent years in classrooms yet can't even draft a basic job application. It goes out to all the teachers who, despite doing exactly what their curriculum demands, find themselves totally stumped when a student asks: "How is this actually going to help me in life?" It goes out to everyone who sees the recent educational reforms—flaws and all—as one of the few genuine wins for American society in recent years. And finally, it goes out to anyone who believes that politics and ideology have absolutely no business meddling in our schools.
silentraven6 said:There are quite a few of us here who aren't exactly thrilled about this (personally, even though people are cheering, I think we should probably slow down the reforms just a bit to get them right—despite all the praise for how much has been achieved in such a short window, especially given the standards used in our schools). Look, we all have Facebook; I can reach out to certain advocacy groups, and we could honestly organize a protest if we wanted to.
It looks like someone is trying to censor the "curriculum reform" based purely on political agendas—basically just stuffing the positions with political appointees and spitting out whatever serves their interests.
I feel terrible for LeBron James and everyone else who poured their heart and soul into this reform, but honestly, I’m shocked they were naive enough to forget exactly how Washington works. 😢
In the Netherlands, kids start school when they're just four, and by age six, they’re already deep into the heavy lifting. They actually pick up certain concepts way ahead of what we see here in the States—for instance, I think they’re already tackling numbers by the time they turn five.
Michelle Nelson4 said:I suppose you could look at it this way: there’s this lingering perception that they're being transitioned from a state of pure bliss into a much harsher reality. It feels like we're essentially robbing these poor kids of one more year of living in a carefree bubble.
I honestly feel like most kids actually crave a life filled with responsibilities and the little challenges that come along with school. A lot of this push for delaying things seems entirely unnecessary to me. It feels like parents approach it from the perspective of, "What if I were given a year of total freedom right now?" But you can't just jump into that—you have to go through years of schooling and building a foundation first. In general, I struggle to understand this widespread negative attitude toward education. Even when you account for the inevitable growing pains and the initial adjustment period, I think for most kids in those early elementary years, school is actually a pretty great experience.
Exactly. I also suspect that when parents push to delay school, there's often a subconscious desire to shield their child from the real world—to make life as easy as possible for them.
The mom of this little boy, who was born on April 4th, had a completely different philosophy. She wanted her kid to "get a grip on life" as soon as possible because she believed it would benefit him more in the long run.
I feel like we've actually had this exact same debate somewhere else before. 🤔
Brenda Stewart59 said:True, there is definitely some flexibility there. For a child who is exceptionally gifted or highly advanced—let's say they were born on August 3rd—you can petition for an early enrollment. Basically, if they haven't hit that official six-year mark by April 1st of the current school year, but they are clearly mentally and emotionally ready, you can make a case for them to start school early.
Honestly, I wouldn't say that. I know a kid born on April 4th—totally mature, physically ready, everything you’d want for school—but his mom basically had to go to war with every single stubborn administrator at the preschool just to explain why she wanted him "enrolled a year early." In the rigid, programmed minds of all those bureaucrats, that kid was just a year younger than everyone else who happened to be born five days earlier, because according to the March 31st cutoff, he's practically ancient history.
Susan James said:It looks like they haven't. Actually, I see that as a major upside, since it keeps everything aligned with the competition schedule. 🙏 (It does sting a little bit, though... Quincy:
The main rule for selecting schools will be that the faculty has to reach a unanimous decision to participate, and they'll also need parental consent.
Which basically means if even one person at the school is against it, the whole school is out. I really hope they can find 48 schools where everyone is on board.
You're totally overlooking how much pressure a principal can put on teachers during those faculty meetings to get them to raise their hands.😁
rowdypanther12 said:If my baby had been born at three months or so, I’d be considering postponing things regardless of how ready she felt. If she had arrived earlier and was actually prepared, I definitely wouldn't be putting it off.
Honestly, obsessing over an exact date feels totally crazy to me. It's not like a six or seven-year-old is going to undergo some massive developmental shift just because a month or two passed one way or the other.😁
I’m just going to say it: I am absolutely, 100% fruity. And honestly? I couldn't care less if people find that weird. There's this weird pressure sometimes to act all stoic and "normal," but life is way too short to spend it pretending you aren't exactly who you are. It’s like trying to force a square peg into a round hole—it’s exhausting, it doesn't work, and you end up just denting the wood. I’d much rather just embrace the chaos and be my colorful, unapologetic self. If being "fruity" means living authentically, then hand me the fruit basket! kaže: Good grief, who on earth brought up Shakespeare in second grade?😕
That article at the link? Total clickbait. It’s clearly written by someone who doesn't have the slightest clue how things actually work on the ground—especially when it comes to vocational schools and trade programs. These projects aren't some massive, all-consuming undertakings. They’re actually done in bits and pieces—mostly just during class time with a teacher right there to help guide the way. I mean, let’s be real—even the most hardcore literature professors probably aren't sitting down and reading the entire Odyssey from cover to cover. It's like saying you've read every single page of the Encyclopedia Britannica just to prove you're smart. Most scholars just dive into the heavy-hitting chapters or the specific parts that actually matter to their research. It’s all about the highlights and the deep dives, not necessarily grinding through every single line.😁 The same goes for the heavy hitters like Shakespeare, Drábek, Gundel, and Zoran—they’re all in the same boat. Look, reading a quick excerpt for homework isn't exactly rocket science. It’s not like you're climbing Everest; if you have some analysis or study guides sitting right under the text to guide you, it’s practically effortless. But here's the catch: you actually have to put in the work. You can't just skim the words; you have to actually turn your brain on and engage with what's on the page. And let's be honest—that part? That’s usually the exact moment students decide they'd rather be doing literally anything else.
Look, I’ve been in this game long enough to know exactly what I’m looking at. I can tell pretty quickly whether a kid is actually breaking a sweat or just going through the motions. When you've spent this much time in the classroom, you develop a sixth sense for distinguishing between a genuine, heavy-duty effort and someone just doing the bare minimum for their age group.😉
I’m honestly struggling to follow your logic here. What exactly are you trying to argue? Are you actually suggesting that the Shakespearean approach... Judith So, here’s the million-dollar question: should you actually sit down and read the whole book for your assignment, or can you just get away with reading the SparkNotes? Honestly? It depends on how much you value your sanity (and your GPA). Look, if you’re just trying to pass a quick quiz where they ask "what color was the protagonist's hat?", sure, a summary will save you three hours of your life. You can skim the plot points, grab some character names, and call it a day. It’s like looking at a photo of a burger instead of actually eating it—you know what it looks like, but you aren't getting any of the flavor. But if you actually want to *understand* what the author is doing—the subtext, the pacing, the way the dialogue hits you—then you’ve gotta read the thing. Reading the full text is like watching a movie in 4K versus looking at a blurry thumbnail on YouTube. There’s a massive difference in the experience. When you read the actual prose, you catch those little details and emotional beats that a summary completely glosses over. Those are usually the exact things teachers bring up in essays to see who actually did the work and who just Googled the ending. My take? If it’s a classic that’s actually decent, give it a fair shot. If it’s something truly soul-crushing, maybe lean a bit harder on the study guides to help you navigate the slog. But don't skip the journey entirely if you can help it. You'll regret it when you're staring at a blank essay page wondering why everyone is talking about symbolism you never even saw.
I mean, if you're really out there advocating for fragmented reading... Judith If you're bringing up those other works mentioned by MLA, then I honestly don't know who you think you're arguing with. It’s like trying to debate the weather—everyone is already on board with that side of things.
silentraven6 said:Look, some of my colleagues from years back couldn't follow original Shakespeare because they weren't exactly paying close attention during their linguistics seminars at Ivy League colleges. 😁
When it comes to Shakespeare's language, it should be easy enough to give kids the basics using some linguistically accessible methods. Honestly, I’d much rather teach Shakespearean Anka satir in a classroom than Judith, but hey, that's just my opinion. 😁
neka čitati i the "translation." Judith can actually serve as a window into understanding certain fundamental literary laws of the era it was written in. It's an excellent foundation for debating the morality of crimes, the author's stance, how female characters are portrayed, taking sides, and justifying bloodshed.
Listen, if a professor doesn't believe their subject is the coolest thing on the planet and a massive source of inspiration, they might as well quit right now. 😁
Of course, the staff follows the syllabus to the letter, forcing kids to memorize types of verse by rote, while having absolutely no clue how to present why a verse exists as a form, how it evolved through history, or why any of it matters to anyone. Understanding verse as expression could, for instance, provide a solid foundation for understanding predecessors—like using Petrarchan styles to show how powerful influence used to be. Then you pivot the conversation to their influences, who they were imitating, maybe play them a hip-hop track to bridge the gap, and talk about their followers. You can discuss why followers exist—is it just a Renaissance thing, or does that concept run through all of literary history and even into modern pop culture?
In the end, it all falls on you as the teacher. Even if you declare a work unreadable during class—and I've definitely had moments like that—it can spark a hell of a debate. You can take a comparative approach; you draw them in to read so they can understand why certain authors wrote such brainless, programmatic works and things like that.
And yeah, 😁
That whole debate about murder being a "holy act" usually gets settled pretty quickly in freshman year right after they tackle the biblical "Judith." 😉
Karen Richardson3 said:To be totally honest, that whole setup used to trip me out so much back in high school. I mean, specifically that part where it wasn't even really a translation, if you know what I mean. I remember us joking around about why they wouldn't bother translating Shakespeare into 16th-century American English instead. 😳
The thing is, it’s not the original work by Dante. It’s just a translation of Dante. Nobody actually sits down to read Dante anymore. And now, everyone is acting all outraged because someone is openly suggesting it, even though it’s already become the standard practice.
Look, it’s not about the presentation itself. The issue is that Runic loves bragging about how she presents Homeric epics to high schoolers by framing them as nothing more than steamy romances and love stories, and how the kids absolutely loved it. Okay, great. But she hasn't provided a single shred of data showing how many of those students actually went home and sat down to read the Iliad from cover to cover on their own initiative. My guess? Zero.
Take Shakespeare, for example—he was an incredibly compelling writer. His life story is legendary, and his plays are packed with fascinating content. I’m sure I could brag just like Runic and say I know how to pitch Shakespeare to teenagers in a way that keeps them hooked. But once they get home, all fueled up with enthusiasm, and pick up "Brer Rabbit" intending to actually read it—they’ll give up by page two. If they’re feeling particularly stubborn, maybe they’ll make it to page ten.
That’s why, when we tackle Shakespeare in my classes, I often have the kids dramatize a single scene. They’ll hold the book in their hands, flip through the pages, and pluck out snippets of text trying to find the perfect moment to act out. They even end up memorizing parts of that ancient text and go all out with the set design and costumes. Honestly, what else can you ask of them? It's not like they're doing a deep dive into the entire work.
And speaking of classics—there’s this edition where you have the original text on the left page and a "modern translation" on the right, and every single student gravitates toward that version. How much do you think they’re actually reading the left side—you know, the actual original text? Usually, I’ll assign them some kind of linguistic or comparative analysis of a specific passage just to force them to focus on at least a tiny portion of the original text. If they're going to claim they're "reading" the classic, they might as well actually engage with it a little bit. But honestly, given the circumstances, I think it's totally hypocritical to complain about the fact that we don't force kids to read the entirety of "Judith."