Betty Williams29 said:Let me try explaining one more time why having a 50% pass rate for the SAT is bad news for everyone involved.
Picture a test with 10 questions and 10 total points: 5.6 points = C 7 points = B 8 points = A- 9 or 10 points = A+
What did we actually achieve with this setup? - Half the test has to be super easy just so kids all over the US taking the SAT can pass and get their high school diploma. - Every student spends half the test solving basic stuff, wasting about half the time without actually gaining anything useful for college rankings. - All the top-tier candidates end up clumped together in a tiny point range, making it impossible to tell who's actually better than whom.
Now, if you have a test with 20 questions and 20 total points, where those first 5 questions are basically the same as before: 5-8 points = C 9-12 points = B 13-15 points = A- 16-20 points = A+
How does this compare to the first one? - You still need the same knowledge to pass with a C, except now it's only 25% of the test instead of 50%. - The amount of time wasted on basic questions is cut down, leaving the rest of the test to actually differentiate between students. - On a national level, there’s a massive difference between the kids aiming for As and Bs versus those hitting the top marks. A range of 13-20 separates them way better than an 8-10 range ever could.
If the SAT doesn't provide a wide enough scoring range to sort out those getting As and Bs, it becomes useless for college admissions. And once it's useless for colleges, the whole project is dead in the water.
I don't get this. Why does every single student taking the exam absolutely *have* to pass? I assumed this was meant to be a graded exam from 1 to 5, but it seems like you and plenty of others disagree.
Since we're getting rid of the failing grade entirely, why are we even sticking to a 25% threshold? It feels hypocritical. If every student has to pass the exam anyway, let's just set the bar at 1%. Heck, make it 0%.
wanderingbadger44 said:It feels like we're looking at yet another believer in the widely held misconception that you can be a brilliant, illiterate mathematician or a linguistic genius who can't solve a basic linear equation with integers.
In my experience, reality works quite differently; if someone lacks intellect or drive, those deficits will show up whether they're studying linguistics, calculus, or geography, much like how a fundamental lack of discipline in one area tends to bleed into every other pursuit. If a person is sharp and hardworking, that clarity and work ethic tend to carry them through math, languages, and social sciences alike.
Besides, it’s not like modern college admissions look at more than two subjects from your high school exams anyway; you basically just need to clear the mandatory hurdles and then your score is calculated based solely on the specific electives required for that major.
Exactly, I couldn't agree more! 👍
Think about it: does someone who only manages to pass 25% of their math exams or 33% of their English exams actually deserve a high school diploma? Regardless of what they plan to do next?
The passing threshold is set so low that someone coming out of a two-year vocational program could probably hit it with just a little extra tutoring. So, what's the point of a four-year high school? What's the value of a prep school or an academy if practically anyone can breeze through it?
wanderingbadger44 said:I honestly don't get why everyone is making such a fuss about the standards being lowered. If they weren't this rigorous, the special interest groups would have already dismantled and shut down the only truly transparent and fair academic program left in the country.
Let everyone pass at a lower threshold if that's what people want. Then, they can try using those mediocre results to apply to their dream universities—assuming anyone will actually accept them. 🕺
But then you have people passing at the higher level who really shouldn't be there either.
Setting a passing threshold at thirty percent—or even twenty-something—is just plain absurd. The real issue is that these students don't even realize when "good enough" isn't actually good enough. 🤷
We just need to build a solid foundation in the right places and actually grade these finals fairly.
Nobody really fails the SATs. I mean, sure, maybe someone might fail once in a blue moon, but I have yet to meet a single person who didn't pass unless they skipped the test entirely or turned in a totally blank sheet.
The passing scores right now are a complete joke. Honestly, nothing under a 50% score should even be considered a pass. Period.
Kenneth Garcia9 said:I'm clearly not urbantinker8, but I highly doubt a high school would open an entire specialized track for just eight kids. What usually happens—and I've seen this happen in real life—is they split the group. Some kids go to the advanced level, others stay in the standard one. It’s basically like how schools handle electives like civics versus religious studies.
I also heard about a situation in a Chicago high school a few years back where they just moved all the kids who signed up for advanced German into the beginner classes without even asking...
So yeah, anything can happen.
Exactly. That’s definitely an option, and it happens all the time.
urbantinker8 said:I suppose kids might want to gamify their schoolwork, but they’re just children, after all, so I guess they tend to care more about the grade on the paper than actually absorbing the material. though parents probably ought to be a bit more discerning about that approach.☕
thankfully, various educational seminars have been highlighting this specific issue where students struggle to truly grasp a second language even after five years of study, and I'm hopeful that some sort of standard will be implemented soon to address it.🎉
Exactly. I’m certain any sensible parent wouldn't view "just scraping by with a B" as the goal of their child's education, regardless of the subject. I actually encouraged my oldest son to drop elective classes where he wasn't making any real progress, even if he was getting decent grades. On the flip side, he stuck with one specific elective where he barely managed a B once in middle school. Now, in eighth grade, he’s still sitting somewhere between a B and an A in that subject, but he actually knows his stuff—he even went to a competition and did incredibly well.
Susan James said:Is there a list somewhere of high schools that offer German as a primary language? Basically, if kids have been learning German since first grade—either because their parents chose it or the district assigned it (hard to say which)—can they continue those studies through high school?
Assuming it's not one of those specialized language academies in Chicago. Maybe something more vocational like a 🤔
Susan James said:It really is a shame, because someone might be genuinely interested in continuing with a language, but they miss the cutoff by just a point or two. It would be amazing if the admissions process gave credit for a second language if the student wants to keep studying it—especially if those extra points help them reach the threshold for a specific program (particularly in high schools where everything comes down to tiny fractions of a point). Honestly, you have to absolutely love a language to want to stick with it through all that. 😬
And honestly, sometimes starting in a beginner class is actually a blessing. About ten years ago, I knew a girl who really wanted to continue with French, but since there wasn't enough interest to form an advanced track, they placed her in introductory German instead. They figured it wouldn't be fair to put someone with French experience into a total beginner class, but I really hope that kind of practice is becoming a thing of the past. I remember how much she struggled, sitting there trying to learn a language she had zero interest in.
And honestly, how much sense does it make to have a girl who has been studying French for years sitting in a beginner class learning stuff like "I am, you are, what is your name?" She’s just sitting there yawning and wasting her time while taking up a seat that could go to someone who actually needs to start French from scratch.
It’s honestly heartbreaking that she has to learn German—which she doesn't even like—even though she'll technically learn something new. But wait, what about the kids who don't like English? Isn't it just as "tough" for them? Or the kids who hate math? Or history? Can they just swap those out for something they actually enjoy? Or better yet, can they just sit in class and review what they already know instead of being forced into something else?
Kenneth Garcia9 said:Maybe it just comes down to whatever generation you belong to. In my day, back in high school, you basically had to choose between basic or advanced German right out of the gate. That’s how they split up the classes...
I don't think it works quite like that anymore. Sure, you can try to pick whatever path you want, but if you've spent four or five years grinding through advanced Spanish and it's right there on your transcript, you aren't exactly going to end up stuck in an introductory class.
Hey rowdypanther12, does your little one usually tackle her homework solo, or are you right there helping her through it? How much study time are we talking about? And honestly, does she find her classes challenging or is it pretty smooth sailing for her? Those are the big questions for me. In my book, taking a year of German tutoring isn't really the dealbreaker here.
In my kid's class, it seems like almost everyone is hitting up a math tutor just to scrape an A. Then you have those kids who just get an A naturally without any extra help at all. To me, if a student is pulling top grades without tutoring, that teacher is absolutely killing it. But for the kids constantly relying on tutors now? They’re setting themselves up for a struggle. Once they hit high school, they'll probably need five times the amount of tutoring just to maintain a B or even a C. That's the reality I'm looking at.
E: @ Susan James, yeah, you hit the nail on the head. We are totally on the same page.
I’m talking about those students who have to grind through endless tutoring sessions just to scrape by with an A. In my book, those kids aren't really cut out for elite prep schools. An A isn't some participation trophy you hand out to everyone, and you can't realistically expect a teacher to spoon-feed the entire class enough material to hit that top mark. Thinking otherwise is just plain crazy.
If a teacher has students who need extra help just to grasp the basics, then frankly, I don't think they're doing their job right.
It honestly catches me off guard whenever I look at my kid’s eighth-grade class list. It seems like almost everyone is signed up for after-school tutoring, and usually for multiple subjects at once. It's clear they're all gunning for those elite prep schools.
Now, go ahead and call me out if you want, but I really feel like kids who struggled and needed extra help throughout middle school aren't necessarily cut out for the high school honors tracks. In my opinion, those intensive academic programs are really designed for the students who breezed through their standard curriculum with top marks and zero struggle. If a kid had to grind through every single lesson just to maintain a decent grade in middle school, they’re going to hit a massive wall in a high-pressure prep school environment. They'll end up working five times harder than everyone else just to stay afloat, and honestly? That just leads to burnout and total misery.
Susan James said:Sure, we didn't have the internet, but we had landlines. I remember spending hours on the phone at night while my parents were asleep; honestly, I think it was actually cheaper back then, plus nobody would complain that they were hogging the line😬. Some of us just preferred studying at night. For me, working the afternoon shift was the best because I could come home and dive straight into my books, get some decent sleep until noon, and then head to class. Even during my time at MIT, most of my exam prep happened under the moonlight. And don't even get me started on reading late at night😍—I spent a huge chunk of my degree hunched over a desk lamp🥱
I honestly find it hard to wrap my head around parents who insist on single-session schools (like those kids who have to commute all the way across town starting in middle school just to avoid second sessions; it's wild) . I feel so bad for the kids stuck in those full-day schedules, unless they can manage to pick a start time around 9:00 AM (maybe with a little elective or something similar at 8:00)
Case in point: my teenager, who basically lives in bed until 11:00 whenever he gets the chance, specifically chose a high school with morning classes just so he could stick to that schedule.
His logic? - If school is in the morning, I have way more free time during the day. - Just as I finally get used to the early mornings, the afternoon shift comes along and messes up my whole flow.
As for me, even at my age, I much prefer the afternoon shift. My internal clock is basically set to "teenage mode"—I am absolutely useless in the morning, but I hit my stride in the evening. Honestly, I'll probably be this way forever (I see it in my mom, too). When I have a long, relaxing vacation, I'm sleeping in until 11:00 without a second thought.
Look, if a kid has spent their entire life nursing sick kittens back to health and won't breathe without dreaming about becoming a vet, then by all means, let them go—even if it means moving to the other side of the country. But if they're eyeing some school that’s a three-day trek away when there's a perfectly good option right down the street that offers basically the same thing? I wouldn't even give it a second thought.
I wasn't saying that success and free time are linked—I think you missed my point there.
It’s all about preference. Some people actually find peace riding the subway, while others see it as a total drain on their energy and a massive waste of life. For me, over the last decade, I managed to save roughly 600 hours just by making sure I lived within a 30-minute commute of the office. And honestly? That was a huge win because I definitely fall into that second group. 😁
Look, urbantinker8, I honestly don't get where you're coming from. If a kid has an hour-long commute to school, that’s two hours gone every single day just sitting in transit. If it’s ninety minutes? That’s three hours down the drain daily. Think about what they could be doing with that extra time instead. Studying, for instance. A student who lives within walking distance of their school basically wins back all that time others waste commuting. They get their homework done early and still have plenty of free time left to actually enjoy life.
And please, don't give me that argument about being able to study on the bus or subway. It's just not realistic. During morning rush hour when everyone is heading to school, those things are packed like sardines.
Personally, I don't drive. In the winter, I take public transit to work, but once the weather warms up, I hop on my bike. The bus takes me about 25 to 30 minutes, while the bike gets me there in 15 to 20.
In fact, when we were scouting out locations to settle down, one of the absolute biggest factors for me was how close it was to my job.
urbantinker8 said:There is just so much I don't want to have to wade through here.🙄 I suppose it’s inevitable that people will let those old biases about "better" versus "worse" schools take over, maybe based on how many kids seem inspired or, conversely, how many are getting into trouble, though I’m not sure how much that actually correlates to anything real. And honestly, the whole idea that how close or far a high school is from home acts as one of these major deciding factors... I guess I’ve never quite understood why that matters so much, and I don't think I ever really will.
I'm with you on the first point, but that second part🤔?
How can you possibly be indifferent about whether you're commuting thirty minutes, ninety minutes, or if you can just walk there? We're talking about whether you spend ten minutes, an hour, or three whole hours every single day just stuck in transit.
I honestly can't believe we're still talking about this, but here we go again. It feels like every time I turn around, there's some new debate heating up, and frankly, I’m exhausted. It's like watching the same rerun of a sitcom where you already know the punchline, only nobody is actually laughing. Look, I get why people are fired up. I really do. But if we take a step back and look at the big picture, isn't it obvious that we're just spinning our wheels? It’s like trying to drive a car with no tires—you can floor the gas all you want, but you aren't going anywhere fast. We need to stop focusing on the tiny, insignificant details and start looking at the actual foundation of what we're discussing. If the base is shaky, the whole house comes crashing down, regardless of how much you paint the walls. I've seen this pattern before, and it always ends the same way: a lot of noise, zero progress, and everyone walking away feeling frustrated. Let's be smarter than that. Let's actually tackle the core issue instead of just shouting at the clouds. kaže: My daughter was actually looking at getting into graphic design for web work, but her school totally poisoned the well. They basically drilled it into her head that the whole field is a dead end and that everyone in the industry is just cutting corners and playing dirty. So, she told me she wants to go to prep school because that's where all the "smart kids" end up. Honestly? It’s just pure pressure. She’s terrified that if she doesn't get in, everyone will look at her like she's some kind of airhead. It’s that classic fear of being left behind while everyone else moves on to the big leagues. Coma.
When he started bringing up Isaac Newton, I was absolutely floored. 😵He ended up heading back to high school just a few days later, but looking back—and I’ve really given this some thought this time around—I truly believe that enrolling him at a place like MIT would have been the right move for him. It’s a shame he walked away from it. He’ll definitely have a backup plan, and honestly, he’ll probably end up getting into his first choice anyway, but man, what a missed opportunity.
Look, I’m not trying to micromanage anyone here, but I really think he needs to hit up the open house events at every single school he’s looking at. It’s just common sense.
Honestly, all I really want is for him to find a school where he’s actually happy, but one that still keeps him on his toes. It's that sweet spot between being comfortable and being challenged. But let's be real—trying to predict or pin that down from a parent's perspective? That's nearly impossible. It's like trying to guess exactly how much spice someone can handle in a dish before they stop enjoying it; you just can't know until they're actually sitting at the table.
Man, my kid actually gave up on computer science back in seventh grade. Back in fifth grade, they had this amazing teacher who kept things super engaging—they were doing really cool, hands-on stuff like programming in Python. It was easily his favorite subject in school.
But then sixth grade rolled around, and they got this new teacher who pushed an "advanced" curriculum that was basically the exact opposite of fun. He spent the whole year complaining because it became mind-numbingly boring. They were just rehashing everything he already knew, and if he hit a topic he hadn't seen before, they’d spend the entire class period dragging out a concept that should have taken him three minutes to grasp.
Even though he was cruising through with easy A's, it felt like such a massive waste of time and mental energy that he just checked out completely. Honestly, I don't blame him. My only worry is that schools shouldn't suddenly make passing computer science in seventh or eighth grade a strict requirement for getting into high school. 😬
Kanye As I was saying: Susan James, what do you think is the actual point of creative assignments in school? I mean, regardless of the subject—do you feel like they actually serve a purpose at all?
Do you think a top-tier student—someone who’s already crushed some STEM competitions here in the States—should follow their heart and enroll in an arts academy or a private fine arts high school? They clearly have the talent and, more importantly, they really want this. Or should we push them toward a traditional prep school or a standard public high school instead? My concern is that the arts academy might not be challenging enough academically, especially since they have the grades and the drive to handle a rigorous academic curriculum. I also wonder about the teachers at those larger preparatory schools. Do you think high school professors there actually have enough creative spark left in them to truly inspire a kid who is a painter at heart?
I’m going to go ahead and restate my question along with the facts, as I’d really love to get your take on this:
I’m not a school teacher, so I don't have to follow a strict curriculum, but in my line of work, creative techniques are absolute lifesavers for hitting my goals. When I decide to use them, I make sure they actually fit the topic at hand and, more importantly, the person I'm working with. I try to tailor everything to their age, their skill set, and what they’re actually interested in. I also think there's a lot of value in giving people a choice. If someone says, "Actually, I'm not really feeling this approach," I just pivot and we find something else that works. In a traditional classroom setting, you don't really get that luxury—everything is mandatory. You’re basically told you *have* to be creative, whether you feel like it or not! 🤔)
From what I can gather from this discussion, the main takeaway is that fostering creativity in school is absolutely vital. We really need to give kids plenty of opportunities to express themselves creatively because those are the exact skills they’ll need to navigate life later on. Plus, let's be honest—kids just love it. Of course, they naturally love to play, and learning through play definitely leads to better results, but I don't think that's quite the core issue we're tackling here.
My wife was asking me about how they handle book reports over at the local high school, and she actually described two different approaches that I found pretty interesting. She also went into detail about how much her little one struggles with staying motivated, especially when it comes to reading and actually wrapping their head around what they’ve just read.
The main issue here is that the assignment is one-size-fits-all. It’s being handed out to the entire class exactly the same way, without any adjustments for different learning styles or individual student needs. And there's another one, much larger than the first. It’s funny—why isn't this handled in the classroom? Instead, it’s assigned as homework, which basically means there's always that risk of a parent stepping in and just doing the whole thing for them. I remember back in middle school, my mom used to help me with my science projects quite a bit, and looking back, I realize how much of the actual work was probably her doing rather than mine!
Looking back at my kid—who was already devouring books before they even hit five—I think I’d probably need to pick up a copy of the book if we didn't have it on our shelf or if the local library branch was out of stock. She’d likely breeze through the required reading in a day or two and then dive headfirst into all that creative stuff: making the pizza, drawing the illustrations, you name it. She’d be totally in the zone. Honestly, I’d probably just stay out of her way entirely, because let’s face it, I’d likely just end up being a distraction!
If you look at this from the perspective of a kid who just isn't into art—maybe someone who doesn't feel particularly talented at drawing or expressing themselves visually—this assignment feels like a total drag. Even if that kid is an amazing reader and genuinely loves getting lost in a good book, being forced to turn that passion into a creative project can feel like nothing but extra frustration. Honestly, looking back, that was exactly how I felt when I was in school. 😬)
From the perspective of a kid who struggles with reading—whether it’s due to dyslexia or just finding it hard to focus—simply getting them motivated enough to pick up a book is already a massive uphill battle. If they know there’s a "creative assignment" waiting for them afterward to prove how much they actually understood, I think that can feel like even more pressure. In the best-case scenario, the process usually goes one of two ways: -They won't do a thing (unless a parent steps in to satisfy the teacher's assignment)... usually involving tears, lectures, and threats. Even more importantly, they just won't practice reading. -They’ll tackle the creative part—since they’re good at art—but when it comes to the book and comprehension, they'll just have someone summarize the plot for them (doesn't necessarily have to be a parent) or they'll just watch the movie if there is one. Again, zero actual reading practice. They won't bother practicing writing either (like what we used to do)
In my opinion, assigned reading has lost its fundamental purpose in all these scenarios (though maybe that's just me), and it would be really interesting to actually study whether this way of handling literature increases an interest in reading or actually kills it... (If nothing else, mathematically speaking, it reduces the amount of time that can be spent actually reading. But hey, if teachers are truly worried about kids spending too much time on TikTok and they hand out assignments like this, then fine—if people want them to just doodle and draw, go ahead, who's stopping them?)
Reading, especially reading comprehension, is the bedrock of education. It's the foundation for everything that follows (especially textbooks) I think that amidst all these creative imperatives, the core mission has been lost 🤷 If we're talking about the current trends, which is where this discussion started. But even looking further ahead, I feel bad that in the rush to "lighten the workload," we're actually burdening kids by making them avoid books and reading altogether.
Or perhaps the focus shifted to preschool age, because you see advertisements everywhere screaming about teaching kids to read from their earliest days... Well, if the goal is for them to learn how to read, to actually read, and to actually *love* reading, then that responsibility falls on the parents 🤔
Alright, let's switch gears. This is a whole different topic. 😉 I have to say, I’m actually pretty surprised that out of everyone in this group, you’re the one pushing back against creative assignments. Whether it’s an essay prompt or some hands-on project designed to get a kid thinking, I just don't see the issue. These tasks are all about forcing a child to actually engage their brain, dig deep, and come up with an original concept from scratch. It’s about the mental heavy lifting. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter if a kid is a budding Picasso or can't draw a straight line with a ruler. Talent isn't the point here. The whole goal is the process—learning how to brainstorm, how to tackle a problem, and how to start thinking outside the box. That's where the real growth happens.
Kanye As I was saying: Susan James, what do you think is the actual point of creative assignments in school? I mean, regardless of the subject—do you feel like they actually serve a purpose at all?
Do you think a top-tier student—someone who’s already crushed some STEM competitions here in the States—should follow their heart and enroll in an arts academy or a private fine arts high school? They clearly have the talent and, more importantly, they really want this. Or should we push them toward a traditional prep school or a standard public high school instead? My concern is that the arts academy might not be challenging enough academically, especially since they have the grades and the drive to handle a rigorous academic curriculum. I also wonder about the teachers at those larger preparatory schools. Do you think high school professors there actually have enough creative spark left in them to truly inspire a kid who is a painter at heart?
I’m going to go ahead and restate my question along with the facts, as I’d really love to get your take on this:
I’m not a school teacher, so I don't have to follow a strict curriculum, but in my line of work, creative techniques are absolute lifesavers for hitting my goals. When I decide to use them, I make sure they actually fit the topic at hand and, more importantly, the person I'm working with. I try to tailor everything to their age, their skill set, and what they’re actually interested in. I also think there's a lot of value in giving people a choice. If someone says, "Actually, I'm not really feeling this approach," I just pivot and we find something else that works. In a traditional classroom setting, you don't really get that luxury—everything is mandatory. You’re basically told you *have* to be creative, whether you feel like it or not! 🤔)
From what I can gather from this discussion, the main takeaway is that fostering creativity in school is absolutely vital. We really need to give kids plenty of opportunities to express themselves creatively because those are the exact skills they’ll need to navigate life later on. Plus, let's be honest—kids just love it. Of course, they naturally love to play, and learning through play definitely leads to better results, but I don't think that's quite the core issue we're tackling here.
My wife was asking me about how they handle book reports over at the local high school, and she actually described two different approaches that I found pretty interesting. She also went into detail about how much her little one struggles with staying motivated, especially when it comes to reading and actually wrapping their head around what they’ve just read.
The main issue here is that the assignment is one-size-fits-all. It’s being handed out to the entire class exactly the same way, without any adjustments for different learning styles or individual student needs. And there's another one, much larger than the first. It’s funny—why isn't this handled in the classroom? Instead, it’s assigned as homework, which basically means there's always that risk of a parent stepping in and just doing the whole thing for them. I remember back in middle school, my mom used to help me with my science projects quite a bit, and looking back, I realize how much of the actual work was probably her doing rather than mine!
Looking back at my kid—who was already devouring books before they even hit five—I think I’d probably need to pick up a copy of the book if we didn't have it on our shelf or if the local library branch was out of stock. She’d likely breeze through the required reading in a day or two and then dive headfirst into all that creative stuff: making the pizza, drawing the illustrations, you name it. She’d be totally in the zone. Honestly, I’d probably just stay out of her way entirely, because let’s face it, I’d likely just end up being a distraction!
If you look at this from the perspective of a kid who just isn't into art—maybe someone who doesn't feel particularly talented at drawing or expressing themselves visually—this assignment feels like a total drag. Even if that kid is an amazing reader and genuinely loves getting lost in a good book, being forced to turn that passion into a creative project can feel like nothing but extra frustration. Honestly, looking back, that was exactly how I felt when I was in school. 😬)
From the perspective of a kid who struggles with reading—whether it’s due to dyslexia or just finding it hard to focus—simply getting them motivated enough to pick up a book is already a massive uphill battle. If they know there’s a "creative assignment" waiting for them afterward to prove how much they actually understood, I think that can feel like even more pressure. In the best-case scenario, the process usually goes one of two ways: -They won't do a thing (unless a parent steps in to satisfy the teacher's assignment)... usually involving tears, lectures, and threats. Even more importantly, they just won't practice reading. -They’ll tackle the creative part—since they’re good at art—but when it comes to the book and comprehension, they'll just have someone summarize the plot for them (doesn't necessarily have to be a parent) or they'll just watch the movie if there is one. Again, zero actual reading practice. They won't bother practicing writing either (like what we used to do)
In my opinion, assigned reading has lost its fundamental purpose in all these scenarios (though maybe that's just me), and it would be really interesting to actually study whether this way of handling literature increases an interest in reading or actually kills it... (If nothing else, mathematically speaking, it reduces the amount of time that can be spent actually reading. But hey, if teachers are truly worried about kids spending too much time on TikTok and they hand out assignments like this, then fine—if people want them to just doodle and draw, go ahead, who's stopping them?)
Reading, especially reading comprehension, is the bedrock of education. It's the foundation for everything that follows (especially textbooks) I think that amidst all these creative imperatives, the core mission has been lost 🤷 If we're talking about the current trends, which is where this discussion started. But even looking further ahead, I feel bad that in the rush to "lighten the workload," we're actually burdening kids by making them avoid books and reading altogether.
Or perhaps the focus shifted to preschool age, because you see advertisements everywhere screaming about teaching kids to read from their earliest days... Well, if the goal is for them to learn how to read, to actually read, and to actually *love* reading, then that responsibility falls on the parents 🤔
You’ve covered a lot of ground here. I agree with a lot of what you said, but several points really bother me, though I don't want to get bogged down in a massive debate right now.
A parent who does the reading assignment for their child will eventually just dictate the summary or the character descriptions to them, or just glue some pictures together and call it a day. There's honestly nothing you can do for the people who do their kids' homework for them; they are effectively sabotaging their own child's progress.