Posts by placidorca16

Sarah James4 said:School starts at 8:00. Kids are at roll call by 7:45, and classes wrap up by 2:30.
Students work in groups during class. They usually sit four to a desk.

Individual work is encouraged too. I mentioned that no system is perfect, including the one we chose. My kid is happy and actually loves school, though. That was our main goal when picking this place.

Sorry, I wasn't expecting much. I thought we were just comparing notes, but you seem pretty defensive for some reason.
It’s a bit silly to ask a question and then get upset by the answer.

The American education system has enough issues without me pointing them out or commenting on quality. I'm just sharing my own experience and what my child goes through in this specific school system.

You feel entitled to criticize the American and British systems—even hinting they're inferior—while simultaneously trying to shut me up if I say anything about how things work here.

I already shared my thoughts on the system in an earlier post. There's really no point in debating this further.

Education and these debates always get heated. I'm going to bow out now. 🙂

Look, I'm just sharing my own take, experience, and knowledge—just like you are. You’re obviously free to disagree with anything I write, but I’d call it a difference of opinion rather than being "negative."

The American preschool and K-12 systems have plenty of issues without me needing to point them out or comment on their quality. I was simply sharing my own experiences and those of my child within a different school system.

I never said the American system doesn't have problems, nor am I denying my own experience.

You feel entitled to criticize the American and British systems—even hinting they're inferior—while simultaneously trying to shut me up if I happen to say something about the American system.

Wrong. I didn't say they were "inferior," though I do think they aren't any better than what we have here, especially public schools. My point is that the American system isn't necessarily better than many others. In fact, over certain decades, our system was arguably even better than the American public one—the proof is in the dozens of American experts educated under our system who earned scholarships and positions at US universities and research institutions where they still work today. The intellectual elite in the US usually comes from other countries.🙂 When a country produces enough of its own talent, it doesn't need to import it, yet Americans are constantly importing it. Even the Bologna Process—which we imported from the US—is already proving to be significantly weaker than the old higher education model we used to have. If it stays in this imported form, the long-term consequences will be serious. I'm speaking from the perspective of the university system where I actually work.👎

It's obvious that education and debating it is a pretty heated topic, so I'm going to bow out of this discussion. 🙂

Whatever works for you—that's your call.

well—another day, another attempt at being productive. turns out, I’m mostly just good at staring blankly at my monitor. placidorca16 says:
In our school, they start teaching history and geography from first grade—yeah, right from the jump.

It’s a stretch trying to compare curriculum standards like this on a random forum. But from what I gather—and I'm no expert—British schools aren't actually all that much better than American ones on average.

I haven't seen any actual books around the house—just a stack of those damn workbooks.The Bond book—just my luck. It’s just her and the English and Mother Tongue worksheets. She’s supposed to tackle them solo within a 25-minute window—though the teacher suggested we time her and let that stretch if she really needs it. We just have to jot down the timing and any specific hurdles on a piece of paper—to leave in the folder for the teacher to check when they're grading everything.

They carry around these little handheld organizers—basically just a folder stuffed with whatever project, worksheet, or daily log they need for the day. Back in my day, we did "mental math" where you were expected to solve everything in your head without touching a pencil or a scrap of paper. Reading was its own thing, too. Spelling. I think you might have hit "send" a little too early there—unless this was some kind of avant-garde minimalist statement, which, honestly, I probably wouldn't even get. The Bond book—just a little something to pass the time. English homework took an hour and a half—all at once. In the upper grades, they’re planning to have kids finish their assignments at school since after-school programs will be running until 5:00 PM—though classes currently wrap up around 2:30 PM.

Look, that’s just how things work over there—everyone has their own way of doing things, even parents. It’s a little different here, but that doesn’t mean it isn't high quality. Honestly, as a parent, I’d actually like to see the books and notebooks once in a while—just to know what's going on.

In our district, only the little kids—up through 4th grade—get that after-school program until about 5:00 PM, where they actually get their homework done and play a bit. Once they hit the upper grades, it’s basically nonexistent because the schools aren't set up for it. We usually kick things off with classes at 8:00 AM, though I'm guessing you guys tend to start around 9:00?

The schedule is airtight—exactly when, how much, and why everything gets done, read, studied, or tested. No awkward surprises here. It’s all about hitting those milestones and actually building some decent work habits. We even use a daily planner where the kids log their assignments—so they know exactly what's due, no "I forgot" excuses allowed. At this point, if something doesn't get finished, it's either pure laziness, a total lack of time, or something completely out of left field.

It’s pretty much the same here—at least according to CNN. Keeping a daily log isn't mandatory, though some teachers have kids doing it as early as second grade. Forgetting homework isn't really tolerated either; most kids actually know exactly what they're supposed to be working on.

Streaming is just one way to do things—kind of like how averaging is just one way to calculate data... I don't see why that would require more money.

What "averaging out" are you actually talking about? If you’re grouping our curriculum in with the standard public school baseline, you’re dead wrong. There is plenty of room here for gifted kids to thrive—but the PTA bears just as much responsibility for that as anyone else. You’re underestimating a system you clearly don't understand, yet somehow expect us to bow down and praise your opinion.👎

Neither approach is perfect... but I personally prefer the first one much more.🙂 I always know exactly how my kid is doing—where they’re crushing it and where they actually need to put in some work.

Those of us keeping a close eye on our kids' progress in the American school system know this all too well. We don't necessarily need "streaming" methods to figure that out—not that I have anything against them personally.

The school uses mobile streaming, which basically means if a student makes strides in math, they move up to the next group, and so on. They aren't stuck in one place; the child sees their own progress firsthand and realizes the effort paid off. There's plenty of positive reinforcement in the school setting.🙂

I'm not knocking it—it's just worth noting there are other ways to get the same results. Positive motivation doesn't require switching groups every time a grade improves. The method you mentioned leans heavily into individual competition, but that shouldn't be the only goal of education. Kids also need to learn how to collaborate and value group progress—especially given today's job market, where being a lone wolf isn't enough. You see this tension between the American model (heavy on the individual) and the Japanese model (focused on the collective), though both have their pros and cons. Nowadays, the Scandinavian and Finnish models are often cited as the gold standards, even if they differ slightly from one another.

Sarah James4 said:It surprises me that computer science isn't mandatory... my daughter goes to a British international school here in the States, and computer science is required. It's alongside math, history, geography, English, science, art, PE, swimming, creative writing, calligraphy, Spanish, French, and Arabic.
I won't even comment on religious studies in schools.🙄

Nor will I comment on hauling heavy backpacks. Nothing has really changed. Thirty years ago, they promised us lockers and told us we'd finish homework at school.😁😂🤣

The school practices selective streaming and I'm happy with it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_(education)

As far as I'm concerned, religious studies doesn't belong in the curriculum either, but that's beside the point. Regarding computer science, it's usually an elective—like religious studies—starting around 3rd or 4th grade in most American elementary schools, though plenty of kids skip it because they already know more than what's being taught, making it pretty boring. Whether it should be mandatory from 1st grade or just starting in 3rd is definitely up for debate.

I’m curious—are history and geography mandatory from 1st grade at that international school (which I assume is here in the States)?

just like hauling around backpacks full of books. It seems absolutely nothing has changed—thirty years ago, they promised us we'd finally get lockers and actually do our homework at school.😁😂🤣

In my kid's school, they bring their books on Monday and take them home on Friday. Most homework is done during school hours anyway. If someone doesn't want to lug a backpack home, they don't have to. We choose to bring it home—we want to stay in the loop with their progress and work.

schools practice selective streaming and I'm all for it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_(education)

To pull that off, schools would need way more funding than they currently get in America—and honestly, that method doesn't guarantee any better results than other teaching styles.

jadegardener21 said:Now, respecting effort is one thing, and on that point, I am perfectly happy to agree with you.
However, insisting that every single child must exert the exact same amount of labor and struggle through every subject—ignoring the fact that some might find certain topics naturally easier or grasp them much faster—is an entirely different matter altogether... This is purely my own subjective take, and please, do not view this as an ad hominem attack, but I can't help but get the impression that you hold a certain grievance against what one might call "gifted children," and thus you want to force them to struggle just as hard as everyone else simply so the system doesn't appear "unfair." (And perhaps I am being far too subjective myself, having once been such a child who absolutely loathed it... I remember feeling like my right to a standard curriculum was under constant assault when I was forced to push against my own will to do things outside those boundaries, tasks that other children weren't even asked to perform. 😛 Even today, I maintain that it is not fair to MANDATE extra work for an advanced student, whereas I firmly believe it is wonderful and necessary to OFFER those extra opportunities.)

If I may drift slightly off-topic for a moment—though if anyone lacks the concentration for such diversions, feel free to skip these next couple of paragraphs—I really must clarify this, otherwise, I shall be biting my tongue from frustration because I haven't been precise enough... one must attempt to distinguish between the concepts of "fair" and "equitable."
Imagine a race where everyone is lined up at the exact same starting line. The race is for a limited cache of treasure—anyone who reaches the finish line gets a portion, but the amounts will vary WILDLY, because those who arrive first will grab as much as they possibly can. What, then, is the role of the official overseeing the race? There are two fundamental stances:
The "fair" stance would be this: the official's job is merely to ensure the runners aren't tripping each other or blocking the path, but essentially, they don't interfere at all. If one runner is an elite athlete and another is somewhat weaker, the official does nothing about it. The official must be FAIR—meaning identical conditions for everyone, and beyond that, it's up to each individual to perform to their own ability (within the permitted rules—that is what the official monitors).
The "equitable" stance would be this: the official's job is to adjust the starting conditions to "level the playing field" for the runners—perhaps letting the slower ones start a bit earlier or moving the finish line closer to them, attempting to erase the disparities caused by genetics or prior training. That is extremely unfair when viewed realistically, yet somehow feels more "equitable" from a human perspective.
(By the way, this little anecdote comes from an American textbook used to explain the difference between a liberal state and a social welfare state 😛 I have no idea who authored it, though I suspect they were paraphrasing one of the liberal philosophers, but it has certainly stuck in my memory.)

Well, it seems to me that we differ on this specific point (of course, this analogy isn't a perfect equivalent to our current discussion, so please don't latch onto it and force me to defend myself by claiming I don't agree with every broader implication presented, let us simply treat it as a rough guide)—I view the school system as a "liberal" framework, whereas you seem to see it as a "socialist" one. My view is that the role of the school is to be fair, providing everyone with the same starting positions and unhindered progress, and after that, it is up to the individual to build upon their own race as best they can. The goal for everyone enrolled in the same group (be it a grade, a course, or whatever you call it) should be identical, because that is how you ensure fairness and comparability—in other words, the final test, the basis upon which results are measured, must be the same for everyone, since they are all in the same class; if someone finds that doesn't suit them, they can move to another class with a different objective, etc. (much like in highly academic schools, where students are clearly in a different type of class with different goals, yet for the race to remain fair, it must still follow a consistent pattern). You believe the role of the school is to intervene in the race, shift the runners around, or set different goals for them, trying to force "equity" through sheer willpower (which I disagree with within the context of the same system or the same classroom—though I certainly agree with the existence of different schools with varying levels of knowledge and objectives, provided that the children in those specific departments are again in a fair race against one another).And that is a perfectly valid stance to take. All I am asking for is that you acknowledge my own position as being just as legitimate, even if we clearly find ourselves on opposite sides of the issue...

My view is that the primary mission of the American school system should be to ensure every single child has the necessary environment to succeed and master the curriculum, providing them with support and offering supplemental instruction—and please, note my choice of the word "offer," because we certainly shouldn't be forcing children into extra work if they have no desire for it; their actual obligation lies strictly within the standard coursework and the prescribed material... whereas attempting to correct flawed genetics or social structures is a far more secondary objective, and one that absolutely cannot be masqueraded as some sort of "educational goal" (a concept which, if we disagree on its priority, essentially amounts to denying the very purpose of schooling itself).

In the past, students who fell outside the expected average were often overlooked, but we are seeing a shift today. We see extracurricular enrichment for gifted students and tailored approaches for those who learn at a different pace. There is a palpable trend toward accepting individual differences. I believe that with a bit more willpower and effort, we could achieve results far more significant than what we see currently.

I agree, provided the system remains fair. That is, as long as we recognize that a student's sole obligation is to the mandatory curriculum, not to any elective enrichment programs (much like how a young 😛 wouldn't be forced into mathematics if it wasn't their calling), and as long as those who fail to meet the required minimum standards are allowed to fail without holding back the rest of the class... actually, I suspect a major flaw in the American education system is the lack of an option to fail a specific subject rather than having to repeat the entire grade, which would resolve quite a few headaches...

It raises an interesting question: does a child have the right to behave or make choices that ultimately harm them? If they have the right to neglect their potential, do they also have the right to neglect their health or adopt habits that damage them? At the end of the day, it is their life and their body. How far can we push the concept of the right to choose?

While this is a complete departure from our topic, it is a fascinating question to ponder...
I don't personally feel that failing to utilize a mathematical talent "harms" someone—it simply means it doesn't "contribute" to them, and there is a profound difference between those two states... On the other hand, eating three bars of chocolate every day or sleeping only two hours a night would obviously do more than just fail to contribute; it would actively "harm" them. That is how I categorize it...

Regarding whether a child has the right to choose, I suppose you should ask all those unfortunate children across the country whom parents force into piano lessons, ballet classes, or professional sports just because the kid happens to have a natural gift for it. I don't believe that is a sound approach, and I would NEVER go against my own child's wishes in such a matter. As I mentioned before, I believe the duty exists only regarding the core curriculum, not when it comes to elective content or advanced studies...

I notice a certain tension here, and a tendency to reduce a theoretical question to a personal level or even resort to ad hominem arguments. Who is to say whether I have children, and does that even matter? I know how things stand in our education system, and I know many people who harbor a certain dissatisfaction with it, which is more or less rationally grounded.

There is no tension; I am actually a very easygoing person, though perhaps I come across as much more "intense" in writing than I truly am in person...
😉 Perhaps my phrasing was a bit clumsy, and if it comes across like I’m coming after you personally, please believe me when I say that isn't my intention... I merely wanted to draw a clear line between how an individual chooses to approach a grade and the fact that the grade itself possesses no inherent value. One's personal methodology doesn't change the fundamental reality that the score, in and of itself, remains entirely devoid of any objective worth...

Whether you have kids of your own or not is really a secondary matter if you actually understand the reality of the situation, but I feel compelled to mention that I personally shed a significant number of my own prejudices once I had a child enrolled in the local school system... prior to that, I thought I "understood" the landscape through observing other people's children, only to discover that I was completely in the dark about many fundamental aspects of how things truly work. Of course, I am not an education professional by trade, so perhaps the perspective differs if you work directly with students every day—you might grasp the nuances of the system even without having a child of your own navigating it... 🙂).

No, the reality remains that grades possess an inherent value-based dimension... if they didn't, educators wouldn't bother notifying parents when their child is struggling or failing, nor would they offer praise when a student truly excels. To label a student as "good" carries a profound axiological weight, just as calling them "bad" carries its own heavy, pejorative significance...

Someone’s personal way of looking at things doesn't change the fundamental reality that a grade, in and of itself, lacks any inherent dimension of value...
Even if we were to go so far as to label someone a "bad student," that particular descriptor only really applies to their academic performance within that specific phrase... It’s quite common for teachers to follow up such a remark by pointing out how wonderful the child is as a friend, or how much they are loved by their classmates, or perhaps highlighting some other admirable quality—but, well, the actual schoolwork just isn't clicking. Personally, I am still not entirely convinced that we should be so blunt as to slap the label of "bad student" on a child, especially not right to their face! However, if one is being exceptionally careful and views this "bad" designation strictly through the lens of academic struggle rather than judging the entire child based on a single metric, then I suppose there is a kernel of truth to be found in it...

One simply cannot maintain the pretense that everything is perfectly fine when someone directs a comment like, "you are a bad mother," toward you... It is impossible to argue that such an accusation is merely a neutral observation, perhaps implying that one is occasionally, I don't know, a bit high-strung, or indifferent, or anything of the sort... Such things are far from neutral...
That is an incredibly potent accusation, one that some might even go so far as to call outright offensive... And if we are going to sit here and argue that labeling someone a "bad mother" is a stinging insult, then I simply cannot fathom why we don't apply that same level of scrutiny when we tell someone they are a "poor student"... It seems there is a strange, inconsistent double standard at play in our social judgments, isn't there...

If I happen to feel a bit on edge or perhaps somewhat indifferent from time to time... well, that single observation is fundamentally flawed because it commits the logical fallacy of taking a mere fragment of my temperament and trying to pass it off as the whole truth... If someone were to assume... It just keeps happening... over and over again, without fail... A bad student... I am not talking about those kids who just happen to have a rough week or fall into a temporary slump, no... I am referring to that singular, unwavering constant throughout their entire academic career, that persistent state of being... Spot on. The statement implies that we will remain vigilant for such an extensive period that we eventually find ourselves forced to "limit" our caution—which is really just a polite way of saying we’ve become a bad student of our own history... Considering the circumstances... The metrics regarding how effectively students are actually mastering the prescribed academic curriculum... When one takes everything into account and weighs it against... "...other kids the same age, blah blah blah." Honestly, you’re free to take offense if someone directs that at you, but let's be real—it's an accurate observation, regardless of how much it stings... I would certainly never utter such a thing directly to a child, given my respect for child psychology, but I can maintain enough emotional distance to recognize that certain circumstances exist where that statement is objectively true... just as there are bad mothers, or reckless drivers on the interstate, or poorly manufactured cars... We simply have to be careful to distinguish our "basis" for judgment, whether it's poor... Compared to what, exactly...? i But really, I have to wonder... what exactly are the criteria being used here? It feels like we’re just throwing darts in the dark without any real framework or established standards to lean on... and frankly, it's a bit exhausting to even contemplate the lack of consistency... Let us be clear about this. Every single one of these educators operates from some sort of foundational platform, some established base of knowledge or authority upon which they build their arguments... The issue only truly arises when YOU—and I am not being aggressive here, mind you, I am simply making an emphatic point that is entirely impersonal—when YOU decide to... 😉So, you’re telling me that you don't actually agree with the database they're using to back up that particular statement... which is honestly quite a bold stance to take given how much people tend to cling to whatever data is thrown their way, but I suppose if one is going to be pedantic about the facts, one might as well go all the way...

If you truly believe that "bad students" simply don't exist... if you’re actually suggesting that we can't compare children's results because every single child is an absolute individual moving at their own unique pace, and therefore nothing is comparable at all, which means objective grading scales shouldn't even exist... then I have to wonder where exactly we are heading with this logic... Alright, that is certainly your perspective, though I find myself standing on the entirely opposite side of the fence... perhaps we should just agree to disagree and leave it at that. 🙂

I would argue that many educators employ a specific type of rhetoric that essentially ties a child's intrinsic worth directly to their academic performance.

This is a profound issue, and honestly, it isn't even confined to the American school system.

In general, attempting to view an individual solely through the lens of one single characteristic is a complete fool's errand, and frankly, it is quite tragic that human nature is wired this way... There will always be people who attempt to measure a person's entire value based on their net worth, their Ivy League degrees, their physical attractiveness, their influential social circles, or any other isolated quality you can think of. Some of these individuals happen to work with children, and one could easily expect them to bleed that exact same flawed mindset into their profession. What can you do, I suppose, it's just how humans are built... I am not suggesting it is right, per se, but I do understand the psychological mechanism driving it. 🤷

(Though, if we were to strip away all the nuances, it might end up being the case that in principle we actually agree on most things... 😛 My point is specifically about this current system, without denying the possibility of something better or acknowledging that, ideally, things ought to be vastly different.)

If I try to steer back toward the original topic, personally, I don't see a massive issue with grading elementary students; "psychologically" speaking, perhaps it feels a bit awkward—much like any form of evaluation—since it is inherently imprecise and acts more as a "placement on a scale" rather than assessing someone within their own unique parameters, which is what the protagonist advocates for (but within the system, I truly believe there is no other way for it to function).
I mean, do people insist there are no winners when kids play any game, even a harmless one, just because they don't want the losing team to feel bad? Are we really trying to scrub that "competitive" edge out of every single aspect of life just to shield children from reality? Grades, ultimately, are the same thing; from my own experience and that of my children, I don't see any more drama surrounding grades than there is around anything else kids obsess over... the only difference is that a larger number of adults will take them seriously and, unfortunately, judge a child through that narrow lens, which again, has nothing to do with the child themselves. I don't believe their existence is "destructive" to a child's psyche, even in the lower grades (though life could certainly be more comfortable without grades there), provided that the adults around them remain sane and don't hyperventilate over them. In my view, the real problem lies in the hysteria of the adults, much more so than in the existence of grades or the comparison of children's achievements.

🙄 If this is how they teach the concepts of "liberal" and "social" states in American schools, then it’s no wonder the average American doesn't know a thing—aside from recognizing a dollar bill, the flag, and having a knack for trashing anything that doesn't fit the standard US mold.😁 This is just a prime example of how certain sociological phenomena get turned into nothing more than shallow, surface-level clichés—the typical American way.👎 Thanks for the lesson—much appreciated. ☕

The American education system? Yeah, it’s a bit of a mess. Honestly, if you want to see how it's actually done, you have to look at places like Finland or the rest of Scandinavia—they're light years ahead of us.

dustysailor13 said:English, math, Spanish, science, computer lab, social studies, PE, music, art, and religion—and yeah, they all get graded. That’s just how an immersion program works here in the US. As for the curriculum I brought up, I was just responding to the post I quoted; everyone follows a similar setup. Personally, I think the program is solid, but it’s overkill on the textbooks. My kid, like most kids, could actually absorb the material better if they weren't drowning in so many books.

In regular American public schools, a second language is usually an elective—starting anywhere from 1st grade to 4th. Computer science is also an elective, typically popping up in 3rd or 4th grade, but rarely in 1st. Religion classes are electives starting in 1st grade too. It feels weird that at this specific academy, computer science is mandatory right from 1st grade if we're supposedly following the same national curriculum. Some public schools that offer electives starting in 1st grade end up having the exact same number of subjects as this academy.

Some elementary schools also follow what you'd call a "classical curriculum"—Latin starting in 5th grade, Greek in 7th. That’s still part of the standard US system, just for certain schools.

Anyway, regarding the mountain of books, workbooks, and whatnot—most schools have supplies for every subject (plus music and art), and most subjects come with multiple books (workbooks, problem sets, textbooks, etc.) starting from 1st grade. My son, for instance, has four books for English in 3rd grade (two textbooks and two workbooks) plus required reading. For math, he has three (textbook, workbook, and a problem set). Science and English each have two books plus three CDs for English. So, most subjects involve a ton of books—which are supposed to be helpful teaching aids, not obstacles. Another thing is that these things are heavy to lug around every day; honestly, it works best in those schools where kids bring their bags on Monday and take them home on Friday. Of course, that’s not an option everywhere.

dustysailor13 said:Clearly you don't have kids in school. First semester is uppercase/lowercase print and addition/subtraction up to 10. Second semester is addition/subtraction up to 20 plus cursive... and I disagree that the pace is slow. My kid has a textbook, a workbook, AND an activity book, not to mention extra worksheets... My kid is juggling 10 subjects in first grade alone. Someone mentioned foreign languages—we're doing English and Spanish (via a language academy), and since day one, they've been learning how to read and write them. It’s no big deal because American kids start writing these subjects early, and personally, I think that's better for them... My son stays for after-school care, but he still does homework at home. Not because he's lazy, but because I insist on it. There are too many kids in after-school programs for one teacher to handle everything, so it's easier for them to just fix mistakes or write in the correct answers for them. Personally, I don't want my kid turning in homework where 90% of it was already corrected by the teacher (not blaming the teacher, though—blame the system. They need more staff to actually manage the numbers), I want him to learn how to be independent with his responsibilities... I've never questioned a teacher's grading, and I won't start now. I'm not an expert. A teacher only sees a kid for a few hours a day, not 24/7, so they grade based on what they see. I'm happy with my kid's teacher, not because of the grades, but because of the fair, honest, and—as some of you say—strict grading standards. And it makes me happy to see how much respect my kid has for his teacher...🙂🙂🙂

Is that Italian school here in the States or over in Italy? Also, care to list those 10 subjects? As for the math and English curriculum you mentioned—that's basically what every other first grader in the country is doing.

Tyler Reyes86 said:I can't agree with that. I don't believe that respecting hard work carries any unhealthy undertones whatsoever.

Yes, I understand your point, and given the current reality, your observation is accurate. However, I am of the opinion that we should always strive for better, both individually and on a societal level. Because settling for mediocrity or a subpar status quo isn't just stagnation; it leads to regression. There was a time when students who fell outside the expected average were simply ignored. But today, there is a shift happening. We see extra tutoring being organized for gifted students and tailored approaches for those who learn differently. So, there is a noticeable trend toward accepting individual differences. I believe that with a bit more willpower and effort, we could achieve results far more significant than what we see now.

It’s an interesting question, really—does a child actually have the right to behave in ways, or make choices, that ultimately harm them? If they have the right to neglect their own potential, then surely they must also have the right to neglect their health or adopt habits that break them down? After all, it is their life and their body at the end of the day. How far can we actually push this concept of "freedom of choice"?

I must admit, I missed that nuance on my first read. I am noticing a certain level of agitation here, and a tendency to take a theoretical question and drag it down to a personal level, or even resort to *ad hominem* arguments. Who is to say whether I even have children? And frankly, does it even matter? I am well aware of how things function within our American education system, and I know plenty of people who harbor a certain amount of dissatisfaction with that system, whether those feelings are rationally grounded or not.
But the reality is that grades possess a very distinct value-based dimension. If they didn't, educators wouldn't bother informing parents that their child is a "poor student," nor would they praise a child for being "excellent." The term "good" carries a heavy axiological weight, much like the term "bad" does, albeit in a pejorative sense.
You cannot claim that everything is fine if someone tells you, for instance, "you are a bad mother." You couldn't argue that such a statement is actually neutral, implying merely that you are perhaps a bit nervous sometimes, or indifferent, or whatever else.
That is a very heavy qualification; some might even call it an insult. So, if calling someone a "bad mother" is offensive, why isn't calling someone a "bad student" considered offensive as well?
My point is this: many educators employ a discourse that equates a child's personal worth with their academic success. And they consider this perfectly normal. In that light, insisting on the supposed "value-neutrality" of grading seems, to me, utterly unrealistic.

I get where you're coming from—grades definitely have a judgmental side because they reflect an overall impression of the student. It sends a subtextual message about whether the kid is "good" or "bad," regardless of whether the teacher intends for it to be that way. And honestly, that's not great for the kid.

Plus, there's a massive dose of subjectivity involved—both good and bad—especially with oral exams or assessing things like motor skills. Sure, some teachers try to keep it strictly data-driven using points and measurable metrics (especially in subjects like math), but others rely almost entirely on that "gut feeling" when they grade.

So, yeah—in my book, a truly "objective grade" just doesn't exist.

Jason Ortiz5 said:I mean, let's be real—the preschool psychologist probably spends the least amount of actual time with these kids. I’m not saying I doubt her assessment or anything, but the daycare teachers are the ones actually there day in and day out. It's hard to know how much a specialist can pinpoint in such a quick little window, especially since my own daughter is all over the place. She gets super hyped about something one minute, then she's obsessed for a week, and then suddenly she's totally bored with it. Just goes how it goes, I guess!

Preschool psychologists are literally trained for this kind of thing—assessing school readiness, focus, and cognitive skills—whereas the daycare staff isn't. That’s basically their entire job description. They don't need to hover over a child 24/7; they work based on standardized testing. Besides, when it comes to kindergarten enrollment, the school asks for medical clearances and psychological evaluations, not a thumbs-up from a daycare provider.

That suggestion from the teacher about enrolling your daughter in a smaller private academy early on? It’s actually a great way to gauge her maturity, and it might even back up the psychologist's positive report.

I started out at, say, 6.5. Born on March 20th—I was basically a fully formed adult and a straight-A student, no issues whatsoever. It’s entirely possible your little one is already totally mature, Stefani. Some kids just hit those milestones earlier, others later. Honestly, if you're worried, just ask the pros—like child psychologists or something.

Stefani, just take the kid to see a preschool counselor. They’re supposed to have actual benchmarks for maturity—maybe she’s already ahead of the curve.🙂 Besides, they’ll probably need some kind of psychological clearance for kindergarten anyway—or at least that was the deal back when my little one started school about three years ago.

Austin Chavez5 said:This is exactly what our education system has turned into. Seriously parents, we need to step up, sit down, and actually study alongside our kids—and I don't just mean during first grade, but throughout their entire schooling 🤷. Was it ever like this before?! Most kids today can't even wrap their heads around the curriculum on their own. Honestly, I know plenty of straight-A students who are constantly stuck in tutoring sessions for half their subjects

Of course it wasn't like this before. Back in the day, kids were expected to be independent learners starting from day one. Getting extra help or tutoring was the exception. Nowadays, it's become the rule, but let's be real—it's not because today's kids are any less capable than their parents were—it’s clearly because something is fundamentally broken within the system itself.👎

Look, I’m no doctor—definitely not—but it might be worth getting Grandma checked out by a neurologist or maybe a psychiatrist. This could be early signs of some kind of cognitive decline, which is unfortunately pretty common for people her age.

No, I'm not saying Katrin should be replaced—based on the current rules, she’s actually doing a solid job. I’d much rather see the rules and posting guidelines themselves get an overhaul.

🙄

rustywalker42 said:This lady has been a headache on this forum for ages. Is there any actual chance we can get a tyrant like her replaced so we can have a real discussion without her constant meddling?
If the hostess is so annoyed by a topic, then please, just don't read it. Don't just sit there posting quotes like:

If she thinks a single debate counts as "mindless bickering," what else are we supposed to talk about? Nobody was even being insulting, but the hostess managed to delete my response—which was just my answer to everything said so far—and slapped me with a 35-point penalty for trolling. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that a group of women attacked me while their own messages stayed untouched?

Is this really worth 35 points? And what exactly is "trolling" here?

http://www.forum.com/showthread.php?p=23108449

They probably would for abortion too, if it were actually illegal.

Where did I ever cite equality? Quote me.

For me, just like under the law, abortion isn't murder; it's ending a pregnancy. If you supposedly defend a woman's right to an abortion, then what's the issue? What are you actually after?

I want men to stop being treated like zero in this whole conversation. Biologically speaking, abortion is murder.

You’re totally ignoring how massive a role pregnancy and childbirth actually play in fetal development and bringing a baby into the world. Seriously?

Not true.Hey, give me a quote where I actually said that.

Negative views on feminism are basically just a hallmark of people who don't get it—it's standard in any patriarchal society. What exactly are you using as "objective" benchmarks here? To me, you just look incredibly biased.

Slow down for a second. Every single move you make just speeds things up. And no, this isn't just about feminism. You can't act like I'm some product of a patriarchal bubble who just "doesn't get" the movement. That’s a reach. Honestly? Feminism is a total train wreck. It feels like it does more damage to women than anything else.

Yeah, and? So what? You’re quoting Wikipedia like it’s gospel, but nowhere does it actually say an embryo equals a human being. It says it's an embryo. Period. If it were a person, wouldn't it actually say "person"? That's the whole point of evolution—an organism develops through stages until it's fully formed and capable of surviving on its own. Otherwise, why even have pregnancy? Why couldn't this "organism" just exist independently outside a woman's body? Just because it has human DNA doesn't suddenly make it a person. Every single part of the human body has human DNA. But look, we aren't here to debate the definition of humanity. We're talking about how to solve the issue of forced pregnancy when someone's life is on the line. How is a woman supposed to exercise her right to an abortion?

We're talking about the entire genome here, not just random scraps of DNA. Seriously, go back and actually read the quotes I posted. Just because pregnancy is a requirement doesn't mean we aren't talking about a human being. If you follow your own logic, what are we even looking at in the eighth month of pregnancy? Not a human? Then what exactly is it?
Look, I’m telling you again: this isn't some forced pregnancy case. This was your friend's situation. Period.

What even is this whole "objective women" vs. "objective men" nonsense? According to you, it sounds like being "objective" is just a code word for any woman who’s terrified of feminism. Is that really how this works?😕 I don't see any logic here. Period.

These people? They run for cover the second things get radical. Doesn't matter which way the wind blows—they’re terrified of both sides. Patriarchal radicals? Feminist radicals? Doesn't matter. If it's extreme, they're out.

You’re being patronizing toward women. Seriously. Why on earth would you claim they "often wouldn't realize that such an action still leaves consequences"? Are we assuming women lack basic reasoning skills here? And why do you think they aren't "seeking counseling beforehand"? (Are those even accurate quotes?) How exactly are men better informed about miscarriage risks than the women actually going through it? Plus, you dodged the second scenario entirely. Why is number two "it depends," but number one isn't?

Nothing about this is patronizing. You think a greeting is an insult? No one ever said women lack common sense, yet here you are, putting words in my mouth. I said they should go to counseling. Period. The real question is how many actually go, versus how many just end up stuck with the trauma.
Look, I gave you a straight answer, lady, but nothing in life is black and white. That’s why I went into more detail.

Since you're personally against abortion, why do you think your stance is "objective" or valid when it comes to someone else's decision—especially a woman's?

Because I'm against abortion, yet I'm also for it being legal. How many anti-abortion people do you know who actually support its legality? Very few.

See, you finally managed to write that out. I was waiting for you. That's exactly what I've been talking about this whole time. You just cherry-picked a crucial part.

After that, the woman alone takes on all the risks and burdens of pregnancy and childbirth—for nine months. The man has nothing to do with it anymore. He doesn't take any risk, he doesn't sacrifice his own body, and he carries none of the burden. He can only watch from the sidelines. So, by what logic should a man have an equal say in the pregnancy?

Only idiots have nothing to do with it. You think all men are idiots?
Any normal man will live through that pregnancy right alongside his wife.

Got a problem with that?

You called this post trolling?! 😕

Do you honestly think it's the same thing to dump seed into a container (or a uterus) outside your own body for a few seconds versus subordinating your entire body and every single organ to the development of a fetus growing inside you for nine months—with the risk of anything from minor issues to lifelong complications or even death?

That isn't trolling, friend. That is the TRUTH.😉

Too bad nature worked out that way. Maybe they'll come up with some robot surrogate since women aren't actually required for pregnancy, and eventually just ban women who think like you from having kids altogether.☕

I really hope the forum leadership takes a look at this hostess. This isn't about actual moderation—it’s just one hostess acting on her own whims.👎

Oh, poor baby—you got attacked by women.🙄 Stop whining; you're acting like such a girl.🙄 Anything that shuts down your argument is suddenly an "attack" to you. Why aren't you defending yourself instead of crying? So much for being a "tough guy"—yeah, right.😁

You aren't the only one who got hit with a penalty. I got a 35-point deduction right before you, and you don't hear me complaining. If the forum rules allow moderators to judge what fits a topic and what doesn't, then they have that right. I don't think crimsonsailor7 is some special case here—other moderators on different sub-forums, like the religion section, hand out penalties for even minor "trolling," which to them is just anything loosely related to the subject. You could easily interpret it that way.

Honestly, it seems to me that the insults thrown at hostess crimsonsailor7—and at women on this forum in general—should warrant much heavier penalties or even bans, since that pretty much qualifies as gender discrimination, which is actually illegal.

Honestly, you aren't going to find a fix for this here—it’s just not the place. If I were you, I'd reach out to actual pros who deal with this specific stuff, like Sigmund Freud. He isn't just some guy; he's a sexologist over at Facebook within the Department of Sociology and Chair of Sexology, plus he's part of an association packed with clinical psychologists and psychiatrists specifically trained for the exact issues you're facing. You can find his website and email listed right on the Facebook pages.

Jerry Martinez5 said:If everyone reacted like that, we’d basically be living in the Wild West. I mean, imagine if my boss just clocked me in the head every time I was five minutes late or caught scrolling through Reddit instead of working?

Physical assault is a crime. You go to jail for that. Period.

Standing up for yourself is good. I guess. As long as you pick actual healthy methods and don't resort to violence.

It’s pretty pathetic that physical assault is a crime, while all the verbal abuse, belittling, and humiliation people endure at work—including what happened here—doesn't count for much legally.👎 These kinds of attacks can drag on for years, but unlike a physical altercation, they're a nightmare to prove in an American court. So much for justice and the law.🙄

It's good to stand up for yourself—provided you pick healthy methods instead of violence.

I agree, but I highly doubt this was really her "choice." She clearly lost control, and I’m with her mom on this one—she needs to learn some restraint, which, let's face it, isn't always easy.

If he decides to sue, she might end up on the losing side of things if her "coworkers" won't testify for her and there's no other evidence—unlike him.😢

slyscout192 said:Here we go again—everyone blaming God and the Church for this law. Look, the Catholic faith might be against it, but they didn't pass it into law, nor are they going to step in and repeal it.

Honestly, if I had my way, I’d scrap that law entirely—and probably ban IVF and abortion too—but hey, what can you do? Just my luck that the European Union gets to dictate our entire legal framework.😁

The church shared its opinion just like any other politician—honestly, the whole church-meets-politics thing drives me absolutely nuts. But I guess that’s just how the world works, and there's no point getting worked up about it.

It doesn't have to be this way—but it is here in the States—mostly because our local officials just let absolutely anything slide. It’s different in other countries where people actually know what a local council is supposed to do.

Someone just mentioned that abortion is actually legal here in the States—I had absolutely no clue! It really goes to show how much of a "Christian nation" we supposedly are. It’s all just a massive facade, ladies and gentlemen. Honestly, it's pathetic. Cheers.

Then you clearly don't know the first thing about women's reproductive rights. Abortion is—at its core—a fundamental right, and there's no way it's just going to be snatched away whenever the GOP and their followers feel like it.🙄

Got it, thanks.

hiddenhound3 said:Absolutely nothing at all. My little one speaks wonderfully, and his motor skills are quite advanced for his age... there isn't anything unusual about him; in fact, he is remarkably witty for a child of this stage.

I haven't the slightest idea, as I didn't inquire about that specific detail.🙂

@thanks Keith Jones76

Any chance you could ask them, if it’s not too much trouble?

hiddenhound3 said:To clarify the situation, he consulted with a highly experienced child psychologist in Boston. He underwent approximately ten sessions, which even incorporated the use of laxatives, yet nothing yielded any significant results. Ultimately, the specialist herself admitted her limitations in this specific case, suggesting that they simply have to wait until puberty begins.

However, I am certain that this is by no means an isolated incident.

Wait, is that psychologist's name John Doe by any chance?