I didn't really pick up the smoking habit until high school—kind of late, actually, right around graduation. My parents were basically my suppliers; they’d buy me packs just to keep the peace, with my dad always saying things like, "Well, if you're going to spend my money anyway, we might as well do it this way so it costs less"—he used to get his connections from some guys working trucking routes out of Canada to get the cheaper stuff. I was actually allowed to smoke at home, too, though with caveats. I couldn't do it in the room I shared with my sister because, you know, "you don't smoke where you sleep," so that was off-limits. They’d nag me about how unhealthy it was every now and then—mostly my dad since he doesn't smoke, while my mom would just roll her eyes and light one up herself just to take the edge off 😬—but that was pretty much the extent of it. If they hadn't been footing the bill for my cigarettes, I probably would've just spent that lunch money on breakfast instead. And if they hadn't let me smoke in the house, I honestly would've just spent way more time wandering around somewhere else. It's not like it would have made me smoke less or, heaven forbid, quit altogether. Just thought I'd offer another perspective.
Susan James said:I think people are confusing old-school dictation with actual engagement, like storytelling or getting kids involved in discussions during the lesson. It makes me sad when teachers treat those two things as the same thing. Instead of meaningful interaction, they swap it out for "collaborative learning," where kids just sit there reading a textbook and trying to figure things out alone before the teacher quizzes them. 👎
And honestly, forget about what they're doing in Scandinavia. Has anyone ever stopped to wonder why Sweden imports our doctors and ITevcc professionals? Has anyone asked why they’re constantly facing a shortage of experts? Or why they’re okay with such massive waves of migration? Has anyone wondered why major tech companies in the US are dominated by talent from India and Pakistan? Why are Japan and China moving ahead so fast? Why do we look at Americans (with their three core subjects throughout school) or Scandinavians as role models when they mostly just focus on philosophy? Though, to be fair, those kids at least get some hands-on experience since they learn manual skills starting in preschool, which prevents them from feeling totally frustrated early on.
But generally speaking, looking back over the last ten years, I feel like we're just producing kids who struggle to function. It comes from a lack of actual instruction, a lack of accountability, a lack of homework, and then handing out grades like candy. We take away their ability to deal with frustration, we cut back on practice and studying, yet we still have these massive textbooks filled with pictures and terrible writing—and most kids either check out completely or somehow end up as honor roll students anyway.
Weather forecast: scattered axe showers nationwide. Sarah Hall53 is backing nosorog all the way.
I’d add that part of the problem is how reforms cater to parents. And let's be real—with very few exceptions—parents just want schools to be as friction-less as possible for their kids. They want that "oh, he's so brilliant, he remembers everything instantly" feeling without any actual effort, and straight A's without the grind. Since parents are voters, every new educational reform ends up being designed just to give them exactly what they want. Who cares how much damage that does to the kids or society in the long run? Around here, nobody thinks further ahead than the next four-year election cycle.
Did I ever mention how I dealt with a few freeloaders back in the day? So, basically, I grouped them based on their personalities and skill sets—it was just a practice assignment, after all. I paired some students with peers who actually had the patience and ability to walk them through things, but then there were these two... let's just say I paired them with an incredibly ambitious student who really knows how to hold her own, hoping she’d be able to push them to actually pull their weight. The deadline was two weeks. Fast forward one week, and this girl reaches out via Microsoft Teams. She’s explaining how those two are completely ignoring her and boycotting every single attempt she makes to split up the workload. She’s stuck—she refuses to be their sucker and do the whole thing herself, but she also doesn't want to fail if the project isn't turned in on time. Here’s what I did: I told her she was officially a "one-person show" now. I instructed her to just complete one-third of the assignment by herself and told her not to say a word about the others—unless, of course, they specifically asked why she wasn't working with them. Honestly, I was just curious to see how long it would take them to realize that in a virtual workspace, nothing happens if you just sit there. They didn't realize anything was up until the very last night. They'd spent the whole time assuming she’d eventually cave and choose between getting a grade or doing all the work themselves, so when they realized she hadn't done anything for them, it was too late. They didn't get credit; they just got a note in their progress report and lost a percentage point on the final project, which this was part of. And they learned a pretty vital lesson: freeloading works—right up until the moment it stops working. My only regret is that they were eighth graders at the time, so I didn't get the chance to see if that lesson actually stuck with them the following year.
urbantinker8 said:Does anyone actually still buy into those brilliant "school for life" philosophies?🙄 🤦 Honestly, you can't really pull that off with most college students these days, so I guess it's probably even more impossible with middle or high schoolers.
My absolute favorite thing is when someone tries to sell me on the whole "flipped classroom" concept. The idea is that students do all the reading at home—actually putting in the effort to grasp the material—and finish their prep work beforehand. Then you show up to class, and sure enough, maybe five kids actually did it, while fifteen didn't... so now you’ve got a flip-off classroom. Basically, it's just flipping the burden onto you, because now you're stuck improvising everything since those fifteen kids don't have the basic foundation needed to even touch the advanced stuff you planned.
If they actually bothered to write out an explanation of what the Big Bang even is, you know half the other moms on here would just start standing on their tiptoes, shouting, "wHeN iS iT mY tUrN?!"
In a perfect world, a teacher would design a lesson where students actually have to think—where they read through an explanation, tackle some problems, and hit those tough, high-level questions, all while learning how to ask themselves the right questions to reach their own conclusions. It shouldn't just be about them sitting there while the teacher feeds them everything on a silver platter to scribble down in a notebook.
But then there’s the reality check... if we're being totally honest here, maybe only about 30% of students actually have the headspace for that kind of deep dive—and honestly, even half of that group probably isn't feeling particularly motivated. So, yeah... there you go. That’s "inquiry-based learning" for you. 😍
nimblelynx7 said:And why are people being so entitled about wanting that perfect 4.0 instead of actually seeking real knowledge regardless of the grade? Is it possible this happens because everyone is chasing the GPA, while nobody actually cares about actual learning?
Who, seriously, is asking for perfect grades from first through fourth grade? Besides the parents? (I guess maybe just so they can brag about the report card at the end of the semester... because honestly, I can't see any other reason.)
I’ve actually seen a couple of kids repeat first grade during my thirteen years in the classroom—two cases specifically, across three different schools I’ve worked at. In both instances, these were kids who had actually started school a year late after being held back from enrollment. They were really struggling in that first grade, honestly performing more like three-year-olds than six-year-olds. By the end of the year, if I remember correctly, neither of them could even master five basic letters. They ended up getting individualized learning plans the following year, and they basically just scraped by through middle school with some help along the way. In my experience, it’s pretty rare for an average kid—someone without major developmental hurdles or significant issues at home—to need to repeat first grade.
So, here’s the thing—I was thinking about something a colleague of mine told me about ten years ago. She’s an elementary school teacher I really look up to, and she was digging through some old boxes at the bottom of her closet when she stumbled upon these old exams from back in the late eighties and early nineties. They were specifically designed for students with special needs... and honestly? The scope of the material and the types of problems in those tests were basically identical to what the entire general curriculum was covering back then. Honestly, her references are probably worth next to nothing. I mean, what does she know? She’s only got about forty years under her belt. ☕
The school curriculum today is just insanely intense—it feels like it's seven times harder than it was even ten years ago, and at least fourteen times tougher than when we were kids. The stuff these children are being expected to learn is completely incomprehensible and just way too much volume-wise. It’s actually pretty scary. Are you happy now? Feeling satisfied?
The whole truth of the matter is that back when we’re comparing eras, there wasn't this massive pressure for everyone to pull straight A's. If you pass with a B? Hey, good for you, that’s very good. You pass with a C? That’s good enough. But nowadays, everyone expects these kids to have a perfect 4.0 GPA by the time they finish fourth grade, even if it means they have to spend another four to six hours every single day after school drilling the same stuff over and over again just to keep up. But nobody wants to admit that. Instead, they just throw stones and complain about how "unreasonable" or "overloaded" the current curriculum is.
good morning 1 was what we used for the first half of the year, then for the second half we switched over to good morning 2—same thickness, though. We also had these workbooks to go along with both, plus these little A5 worksheets, you know, those super thick tear-out pads with the red covers. Oh, and there was a third volume of Good Morning too, which served as our reading book. And that was just for American language class.
mistyjackal842 said:Why would anyone want to delay starting school? To me, it’s such a milestone—something every kid should actually look forward to. I suppose the academic pressure on children today is much higher than when I started first grade back in 1984, but back then, the cutoff was just before September 1st once you turned six. There weren't many little ones in my class; most of us were a bit older. And honestly, elementary school isn't that hard. At least, it wasn't for me. Maybe first grade was a bit of a whirlwind since we were all still so restless, but I think I just got incredibly lucky with my teacher. I used to go to the after-school program, too. Personally, I actually preferred being in school over being in preschool. If nothing else, I didn't have to deal with those mandatory afternoon naps.
Higher expectations? Are you kidding me?! They’re spending the entire first grade just mastering print, then moving to cursive in second—and that’s not even touching the math, where they're already doing arithmetic up to 20. When we were kids, we were doing both print and cursive in first grade, and we were counting up to twenty or even a hundred. By second grade, you absolutely had to know how to count to a hundred, have your multiplication tables down pat, and be fluent in both print and cursive. The workload is way heavier now, honestly. No two ways about it.
Wait, so can they just mix people together for religion class? 😂 A friend of mine is dealing with this mess where they're grouping fifteen kids together for German class—including just ONE student from a different section who takes German—and because of that one kid, the entire group has to jump online instead of being in person. It’s wild. Cheers.
Daniel Chase13 said:Only a small fraction of students receive Confirmation during high school—for the most part, it happens in the 8th grade. So, even with the argument that Confirmation happens later, the percentage of kids choosing religious studies over an Ethics course would still be significantly above 60%. Besides, when it comes to grades, students find it just as easy to pull an A in Ethics as they do in religious studies. It’s essentially the same deal.
The reality is quite simple: when given the choice between an elective in Ethics or religious studies, the vast majority of students consistently opt for the latter. That’s just how it is.
Well, if you look at the entire Archdiocese of Chicago—or even the one over in Los Angeles—they’re basically all just part of that same "small fraction" of people getting confirmed. ☕
I don't think so—mostly because we already have plenty of alternatives available in high schools. In fact, about 82% of students in American high schools choose religious studies as their elective, while only 18% opt for an Ethics course instead.
So, if you look at what's actually happening on the ground, there isn't really any fear surrounding religious education in our schools. Honestly, I’m all for introducing more diverse elective options.
The thing is, you guys are forgetting that in certain parts of the US, prom dates have been shifted to different semesters, and attending religious studies is a prerequisite for graduation. 😍 That means all those excuses about "what will the neighbors think" or "I need to graduate for my grandma" basically stop people from picking Ethics like they originally planned. And honestly, someone choosing religious studies just because they want to collect all the Pokémon is a whole different issue entirely.
Daniel Chase13 said:I don't have any issue with how religious education instructors are hired in our public schools. For the vast majority of cases, everything is handled by the book.
If certain administrators or teachers act inappropriately toward specific students, those are isolated mistakes—the kind of lapses you see from teachers or professors in any subject matter. We all know that happens sometimes. No sane person would suggest stripping all subjects from the curriculum just because an occasional teacher in any discipline might mishandle a situation with a student.
As for the actual content of the Catholic elective programs, I think they're excellent. The topics are well-chosen and logically structured. Beyond that, though, the quality really comes down to the individual instructor. Personally, I’m glad that the vast majority of kids in our school system have access to this material if their parents want them to, or if they choose to take it themselves once they hit high school.
In a country like America, where out of roughly 330 million citizens, nearly 240 million identify as Christian (with about 220 million being Catholic plus other denominations), it feels perfectly natural that school events in predominantly Christian communities include certain religious elements. I’m all for it.
I’m confident that, for the most part, things will continue to work out fine for the students who don't enroll in the religious elective. Of course, we all realize it won't always be possible to schedule that class during the first or last period of the day. It's common sense, and there's really no need to make a fuss about it. Everything will turn out okay.
Wait, what exactly is "by the book" about this? The reality is that the religion teacher is basically the only staff member who doesn't even go through a standard job application process—instead, the local diocese just assigns someone to the school, and the administration can't say no, can't ask for someone else... plus, if they actually find a great teacher they love working with, there's absolutely nothing they can do to keep them if the diocese decides to shuffle them off to a different school next year. Is that really how things should work? 😵 😵 😵
Joe, according to the education laws here in the States, once a student picks an elective course, it basically becomes a mandatory part of their curriculum—it sticks with them all the way through the end of middle school, unless they happen to officially drop it within those specific legal windows allowed by the district.
The thing is, according to the rules, you aren't supposed to be picking out elective courses every single year. If the school keeps sending out surveys to vote on electives annually, they’re actually breaking the law. Once an elective is chosen, it carries over to the next school year automatically—unless, of course, you submit a formal written request or an opt-out form within the specific timeframe set by the district.
Jason Hall35 said:Yeah, we’re talking fifth grade here. Only thing is, my kid doesn't even have a workbook from McGraw Hill or some supplemental practice book. What kind of system is this?
Basically, the textbook just has these tables you're supposed to fill out, but she has to manually cross them out and rewrite everything from them before she can even start the actual problems. Proab—do your kids actually get workbooks?
Well, they should take those complaints straight to the Secretary of Education. According to the textbook law, schools can only require extra stuff—you know, workbooks, supplements, atlases, whatever—up to a certain amount, like $67 as a mandatory cost. Anything beyond that requires parents to sign off on it first. But then, it really just comes down to how each individual school board decides to play it... And when we spoke up about how much this sucks, all we got was some corporate nonsense about "easing the burden on parents" and all those tired cliches about publishing monopolies and whatnot.
Oh, did I mention that the textbooks were literally designed on a scale? Seriously. They had to be 30% lighter than the previous versions. Like, physically weighed them. And they had to rip out 30% of the actual content and move it online. All just so they could brag about "lightening the backpacks" and "digitizing the classroom." It's a total joke.
Linguistics nerds practically staged a full-blown revolution when they heard textbooks wouldn't be workbooks anymore and the number of supplemental workbooks was getting capped. And honestly? I’m glad we did—my current fifth graders write at the speed of a snail on summer vacation. If they didn't have those workbooks, they might manage to copy and solve, like, one single problem in a forty-five minute period. :/
edit: I mean, why even have space to write down answers in the first place? It's because the textbooks for every grade except first and fifth haven't changed in forever. Up until this year, those books were perfectly normal workbooks. They would still be working just fine if the government wasn't footing the bill for them.
The textbooks for the younger grades—plus all those foreign language workbooks—aren't actually returned at the end of the year, so kids are more than welcome to scribble whatever they want in them. I honestly find it mind-boggling that any teacher outside of a language department would even think about asking students to write their answers directly in the book, let alone try to grade them that way.