A decent enough post. At first glance, it seems solid, though upon closer analysis, I find myself questioning its depth.
To successfully file a tax return, one simply needs the basic reading comprehension skills acquired in elementary school; there is really no need to squander precious academic years obsessing over such a triviality. The concept of taxation is something children grasp quite easily if they bother to read the fine print or engage in discussions with their parents regarding household finances; if they don't, well, there is always civics and economics, subjects taught in half of all American high schools anyway. As for how to vote—even those who sign their names with a thumbprint understand the mechanics, and the poll workers at the precinct will guide them through it without much trouble. The true dilemma lies in deciding *for whom* to vote. Developing a genuine political stance demands significantly more intellectual labor and reflection than any classroom curriculum could ever provide, and frankly, any attempt to suggest a specific candidate feels like an intrusion on privacy or a blatant move toward indoctrination. Is there anything else concerning banking? This feels somewhat forced... while students learn about simple and compound interest in school, true comprehension of monetary policy remains elusive even for many who have graduated from top-tier American universities with finance degrees. It brings to mind a certain high-ranking Democratic official—I believe he was an Assistant Secretary at the Treasury—who openly admitted to carrying a mortgage with a Swiss bank. How does one apply for a loan? One can simply ask the clerk at a Chase teller window. But how to accurately assess risk—and let's be clear, we aren't talking about just one single risk factor—is a question many finance graduates still cannot answer. And buying a car or a house? Oh, that is the easiest part of all. You Google it, ask some acquaintances, or drive down to a local dealership. However, one must first actually earn the money required to afford those things in the first place.
I find myself in agreement regarding anatomy being a mandatory prerequisite for medical school enrollment. From those acquaintances I know who were born in the early seventies, I can recall only one individual who transitioned from a vocational nursing program directly into a medical degree. He was an exceptionally gifted student, possessing both a broad general intelligence and a specialized depth of knowledge that simply cannot be acquired through standard schooling alone. He completed his studies on schedule and moved straight into his residency... However, I am also aware of several valedictorians from technical high schools who successfully navigated their way into MIT. Of course, the vast majority of MIT students tend to hail from elite math-focused preparatory academies.
Furthermore, university admissions criteria should not be dictated by political maneuvering; rather, they ought to be established by the faculty members themselves, who possess the practical experience to understand which foundational skills actually facilitate a smoother and more profound mastery of the curriculum at such institutions.
About a year ago, I was scrolling through an article in a liberal newspaper, and it mentioned an AP project that was part of the push for the recent curriculum reforms. They listed certain schools that were essentially acting as the pilot leaders for these changes. From what I recall, it wasn't a huge group of famous schools; in fact, there were only a handful of them in the Chicago area...
If I'm understanding the rollout correctly, they start with the first, third, fifth, and seventh grades, and then move to the even-numbered grades when the kids hit 17 or 18.
Also, I have this feeling—and I really hope I'm right—that the shift toward moving away from traditional grading starts for everyone this year. 😂 Basically, they'll be using descriptive feedback for individual students instead of letter grades, and numerical grades won't kick in until the third grade. 🤔
But what follows? Or rather, where does this path actually lead? I find myself asking this because of my daughter, who is currently in seventh grade and is quite intensely interested in this proposed "specialization" for general high schools during their junior and senior years. Is this something that will actually manifest in her generation's academic reality?
Calling her a cow just because she teaches religion class? Well, if you consider that a compliment, then I suppose it’s a step up from the nasty labels religious parents throw at our local school's religion teacher. It is truly remarkable, isn't it? Simply because this woman insists that children actually engage with the subject matter rather than just going through the motions, she becomes a target. These very same religious parents, who act so offended, seem to harbor this strange, nostalgic longing for those darker days when they could skip class entirely and still walk away with all their sacraments without ever having to set foot in an American church on a Sunday morning.
There is absolutely no reason to suppress who you are. It is quite rare to find an atheist or someone from a different faith who actually takes issue with you identifying as Catholic or wearing a cross around your neck. On the contrary, I would argue that no religion truly fosters common ground; instead, they tend to assert their own specific values as universal truths, placing them above everyone else's beliefs and certainly above the foundational principles of secularism. The presence of religious education in our public schools bothers me specifically because my own convictions—provided they don't violate the law or basic common sense—are treated as inherently inferior to those held by Catholics. To provide a banal example: I have been in a domestic partnership for eighteen years now, yet the Catholic faith, and by extension the school's religious curriculum, views my relationship as fundamentally "lesser" than a marriage performed in a church. This judgment persists regardless of the actual quality or stability of either union. There are even more absurd instances, such as seeing statements in first-grade textbooks where a story might imply that only certain groups of people bother to pray.
Furthermore, we cannot ignore the fact that this elective subject skews grade point averages, which can unfairly influence a student's ability to get into a competitive high school.
As for the practical utility of knowledge, well, any information can be useful in its own way. But why on earth should we prioritize teaching the intricacies of various faiths over essential life skills like cooking or even basic home maintenance like painting walls?
We have these hyper-involved parents of first graders—those who find themselves forced to bridge the gap for skills their children failed to acquire before starting school, when they absolutely should have had them, and now, unfortunately, these poor kids are tasked with catching up while simultaneously trying to master the actual curriculum expected of a six-year-old.
Indeed, there is a baseline of prerequisite knowledge required for kindergarten readiness: things like proper pencil grip, the ability to retell or describe events, basic analysis and synthesis, an understanding of number relationships up to twenty, tying shoelaces, hopping on one foot, wiping one's own nose, and coloring or drawing at an age-appropriate level...
I certainly wouldn't dismiss vocational nursing schools. On the contrary, they represent one of the few specialized paths that provide young people with the concrete, practical expertise needed to work as a nurse—a profession where you can actually secure employment here in the States—while also laying the groundwork for further pursuit of a Bachelor of Science in Nursing or other less demanding university programs.
Abroad, nurses don't necessarily hold a four-year degree right away; instead, they complete specialized vocational training. Is the knowledge gained through those programs truly equivalent to our domestic vocational nursing schools, or perhaps the associate degree programs we used to see, or even today’s professional nursing tracks? I honestly cannot say for certain. What I do know is that some nurses overseas find work as caregivers, while for others, that specific vocational schooling and subsequent clinical experience are recognized as meeting the requirements for a full nursing degree.
I certainly concur that nurses in certain hospital departments are being pushed to the brink, both by the sheer volume of their monthly hours and the overwhelming workload they carry.
I don't find you particularly well-informed on this matter. With the transition to a nine-year K-12 system, there is a proposal to introduce a kindergarten-style preparatory year, where children undergo the necessary foundational training that is currently handled in preschool—but under a structured curriculum rather than just a "play whenever we feel like it" approach. We are talking about learning how to retell stories, counting with actual comprehension, and mastering basic penmanship. While most kids seem to have these skills down, the reality is that they don't, and the disparity in readiness among incoming first graders is staggering; those who arrive without these basics struggle immensely to grasp reading, writing, and math. One could argue this can be rectified if parents step up, but isn't it far more logical to instill these habits early on rather than burdening students with extra hours of remedial homework once school has already begun?
Regarding vocational nursing programs, the curriculum remains just as rigorous as it was under the old four-year models. Students still retain the theoretical path to medical school; they simply need to excel on their high school exit exams and pass the university entrance tests. Even now, only a select few manage to achieve that. This is because the requirements for medical school demand a much broader spectrum of knowledge than mere patient care—which is the core focus for a nurse—whereas doctors primarily require a different subset of that expertise. Those who graduate from a specialized nursing high school do not possess some sort of "lite version" of medical knowledge, nor are they halfway to becoming physicians; furthermore, medical school professors do not waste precious lecture time re-teaching what was already covered in vocational training. Instead, they move straight into advanced coursework that requires a broad intellectual foundation and the mental stamina to process massive amounts of data into cohesive knowledge. These specific cognitive skills are cultivated in a traditional American preparatory high school if one is a high-achieving student. It is important to remember that even a top-tier student from an elite prep school does not automatically possess the capacity to survive medical school.
analogseal18, she isn't strictly forbidden from everything; however, I certainly won't permit her to consume garbage like mindless reality TV junk. She watches it rarely, and her screen time remains at the absolute minimum recommended by her ophthalmologist.
I am in complete agreement with mayamama—the fundamental issue lies with parents who are digitally illiterate and harbor the delusion that their child can simply curate their own content, mistakenly believing that surfing the web or playing video games constitutes actual computer literacy. Lately, I have been encountering various articles discussing what skills American school computer science programs ought to instill in students (such as navigating the IRS website or managing a household budget in Excel, for instance), and I find myself wondering why they insist on such trivialities. While these are indeed skills a young adult will require, they represent the bare minimum of the minimum. I cannot fathom why, on one hand, we constantly praise the intelligence of our children, yet on the other, we fail to provide them with challenging tasks; instead, we seem obsessed with simplifying both curriculum and life itself, rather than teaching them how to grapple with significant problems or, more importantly, how to think.
Giftedness... that is a profound complication. On one hand, we are perpetually told there is an abundance of gifted children, yet very few actually demonstrate that potential over the long term. Those who are truly exceptional often happen to have parents or perhaps a professor who recognizes their talent and actively pushes them forward; essentially, it is merely a matter of the stars aligning by chance.
As for the argument regarding extracurricular activities, I must disagree. It is precisely within those activities that a child discovers what resonates with them, what does not, and how to strive toward personal growth rather than merely working "for a grade." Even if a child is not exceptionally gifted in a particular area, they still develop specific competencies and knowledge that will leave them superior to those who never engaged in such pursuits. Frequently, the most fulfilled individuals are those whose careers are closely tied to their hobbies and personal interests. A well-structured activity fosters imagination, creativity, self-awareness, and socialization... For some, aimless tinkering leads to true creativity, but there are fewer and fewer children nowadays who spend their time building a makeshift carriage for a Barbie doll. Instead, free time is largely squandered through superficial scrolling on a screen. And children have plenty of time—at least during elementary school, where every educational reform seems to reduce the amount of material covered, which is clearly reflected in the constant rise of average grades for that age group.
My child is involved in more activities than anyone else I know. She is interested in everything and hasn't settled on a specialty yet. As long as her schoolwork doesn't suffer, why should I stop her?
brightheron64 said:My friends are quite devout, and their child is currently enrolled in religious education classes, though I can't help but wonder just how much longer that will actually last...
They weren’t exactly thrilled with what their kid was being taught in class to begin with, but once the religion teacher started voicing those harsh, negative views regarding IVF, they finally reached their breaking point... It turns out their child was conceived through that very process after years of heartache and failed attempts, so hearing someone in a position of authority describe their miracle as something sinful or even demonic just felt like a direct assault on their family...
This type of conduct warrants an immediate report to the Department of Education, the Vatican, and the Children's Ombudsman. The subject matter she touched upon is incredibly sensitive and frankly inappropriate for a school setting; children of that age shouldn't be forced to shoulder the weight of such perceived "sins." If she feels the need to disparage assisted reproductive technology, perhaps she should stick to leading engagement seminars at her local parish—there, she might find candidates who actually require her timely warnings. 🍿
As for the question of the Church's moral responsibility, one can only offer a cynical laugh. The official Church has never truly been a bastion of morality, nor have they ever consistently practiced the very principles they demand from their flock.
As a "staunch atheist," I find myself in complete agreement with the sentiments expressed by plus.nešto. Through this contract, the church has secured exactly what it set out to achieve—something I would never personally grant them—but let’s be clear: this does not imply any sort of obligation toward the children. Students who choose not to participate in religious studies, and the resulting gaps in their daily schedules, should be treated as an administrative issue for the school to solve. Should the school not be capable of designing a schedule that ensures these students aren't left idling during those periods? If such a feat is truly impossible, then surely they could provide an alternative activity or even just an empty classroom where they might focus on their homework while their peers attend religious instruction.
My seventh grader is experiencing one of these scheduling gaps for the very first time because of these religious classes. Most of the time, she simply uses that period to get ahead on her homework, though occasionally she joins a geography study group. While I would certainly prefer a schedule free of these interruptions, one must accept the reality of the situation; at least the teachers aren't being paid for doing absolutely nothing.
quote: but they aren't allowed to use them. Because computers are seen as inherently evil, and they are just too naive.
"Smart parents," they say. Apparently, fourth graders are far too intellectually fragile to handle a computer on their own. They supposedly lack the maturity to filter information or the technical literacy to actually accomplish anything meaningful online; instead, they just drift through mindless video games that offer zero educational value. In my household, my child was strictly prohibited from using a computer solo at that age, unless it was specifically to Google something for a school project—and even then, we were right there monitoring her activity. Most of what she stumbled upon boiled down to horror movie trailers, low-brow jokes about blondes or some other tired trope, and the most "intellectual" thing she ever managed to find was Amy Winehouse lyrics.🙂 It would have been much better if she had spent that time reading books or perhaps rolling some dice in a tabletop game.
As for computer science in schools, it absolutely ought to be a mandatory part of the curriculum starting in first grade, supplemented by extracurricular programs for those kids who actually show an interest. Perhaps one day we will finally reach that level of foresight.
Guitar is an incredibly competitive program at the local high school, and honestly, it might be better if he doesn't attempt to jump straight in unless he possesses genuine talent coupled with a relentless drive to practice. Furthermore, the registration windows for the preparatory classes—which would have been the most appropriate fit for his current age group—have already closed. My suggestion would be to enroll him in a private music academy this year instead; perhaps through that process, he will truly discover his passion and mature a bit, allowing you to evaluate next year whether he should stick with the lessons, try for the high school guitar program, or perhaps pivot toward a less sought-after instrument.
Lawrence Torres56 said:Man, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. If anything, it's the schools that teach these kids not to think for themselves, forcing them to believe that the only thing that matters is what's printed in some textbook—definitions that, half the time, have zero connection to real-world phenomena or anything actually happening around them. The curriculum they serve up to these kids is just mind-numbing and totally alienating for most of them, but hey, who cares about that, right? As long as someone's lining their pockets with textbook royalties, the job's done.🙄
Textbooks are riddled with errors; I certainly wasn't impressed by them either.
It is quite rare to encounter professors who actually demand rote memorization. If one truly grasps a concept, they can construct a definition by combining a general category with its specific distinctions. When students begin explaining things in their own words, it becomes painfully obvious who actually understands the material and who is merely struggling to recall an unfamiliar string of words. Take geometry and physics formulas, for instance... one simply does not learn those through memorization. If you grasp the underlying principles, you sketch them out and visualize the relationships. Understanding is the difficult part; memorizing is the easy way out. 🍿
Then there is fifth grade... that sudden, jarring leap from kindergarten-level concepts to material tailored for a much older age group. The children get lost in the transition. In my own class, they started off catastrophically; supplemental tutoring was organized, yet most of the students who desperately needed it refused to attend. Consequently, the standards are lowered just to compensate. 🐔
says: It is frankly delusional to expect some specialized "test prep centers" to ready children for their SATs regardless of what they actually absorbed during their years in the classroom. nosorog, do you truly believe that a child can somehow compensate for twelve years of academic development in a mere three-month sprint? In my estimation, the preparation for writing an essay on a standardized exam should effectively begin with simple composition exercises in elementary school. Anyone who posits that a student can be fully prepared for national exams in just ninety days likely views such tests as nothing more than a rote memorization of facts—something that can be crammed into the brain through intense, short-term grinding. But that is not what these exams are. I could speak at length about the English language portion, which is designed to test comprehension and analytical skills far more than any collection of static, factual knowledge. What these prep courses offer is merely the opportunity to review material (assuming one possesses enough self-discipline to have learned it initially), perhaps clarify certain points, or build upon existing foundations; they are by no means a substitute for the entire educational journey.
Furthermore, they are not replacements, but rather a systematization of what has already been acquired. For instance, while certain vocational schools might not focus heavily on essay writing, if a student actually uses their intellect—meaning they are literate in English and possess a strong command of a second language—they can utilize these prep sessions to learn how to structure an essay and receive specific instructions on how to execute a particular task.
Who is ultimately to blame for the declining knowledge levels among graduating seniors? It is the parents and their immediate social circles. They fail to demand critical thinking in daily life; they discourage reflection on the phenomena and events surrounding them, instead filling their children's heads with the mantra that "there are no rules, everything is random, it's all just luck." Well, let me tell you, luck and randomness will not help you calculate the angles of a trapezoid, which was certainly required on this year's exam!
Education is not confined to the walls of a school or the memorization of a curriculum; true education requires one to keep their mind engaged and active throughout the entire day.
gentlemarlin14 said:The Lawsuit exists because his prognostications robbed both me and my sister of ten years of life. He is a surgeon, and quite frankly, he has no business offering such prognoses since that falls entirely outside his domain of expertise. This was even confirmed to us by one of his own colleagues, who refused to offer any prognosis whatsoever for that very same reason.
If they turn us away in Pula, we will head to Rijeka, given that a smaller hospital must defer to a larger one. Regardless, he provides recommendations, coordinates with physicians, advises on the best course of action, and issues all necessary medical reports with incredible speed... and so on.
First, I find myself in agreement with the preceding posts; do not squander your precious energy on a lawsuit or on harboring anger... You and your sister have become secondary figures now; truly, your shock and your anxieties must take a backseat to the actual battle that lies ahead of you. Is it realistic to believe you would win a lawsuit? Do you honestly think that doctor and his associates would offer anything resembling honesty during a legal hearing?
And no, a small hospital does not have to listen to a larger one. In my father's case, they established a diagnosis in Pula with remarkable speed and extreme courtesy. After consulting with close acquaintances who are physicians, we decided he should receive treatment in Chicago, under doctors who are more "specialized" regarding his specific condition. He received his diagnosis and underwent therapy in Chicago on an outpatient basis—there is no need for hospitalization unless it is absolutely vital. Private accommodations cost about 35 dollars a day; one simply cannot drag a critically ill patient to Istria day after day. Medical protocols are not universal, and approaches vary significantly, so you cannot expect one doctor to dictate a therapy and then assume another will follow suit just because the first one hails from a major hospital.
If you can afford it, go where you have received the most reliable recommendations. Good luck!
I am not a religious person. Is there not a certain weight to the tradition of gift-giving? To me, the entire purpose of such an act should be to bestow something of genuine substance upon a godparent—something of lasting value that serves as a constant, meaningful reminder of their role. When my peers were going through their confirmations, the standard was almost always a Bible paired with a small piece of gold jewelry. One might consider more contemporary, albeit significantly more expensive, gestures; I have heard of groups organizing joint trips for the confirmands and their godparents to visit Rome and the Vatican. Such an experience would surely remain etched in one's memory forever.
wanderinggardener12 said:I find myself wondering what people’s actual experiences have been with a functional music school? How does the curriculum actually unfold on a day-to-day basis? For a child in those first three or four grades, how many hours a week are we really looking at? What are the genuine advantages of choosing this type of institution, and just how much flexibility can one expect when it comes to scheduling? The reality is, we live 12 miles outside of Washington, D.C., and since she attends elementary school here, the area around Washington, D.C. is quite manageable for music lessons—provided we aren't stuck waiting months for an opening. Does anyone have specific piano instructors they would recommend?
Our secondary option would be the Berklee College of Music over in Newport. Little Carmen mentioned she has her heart set on the piano. What is the reputation of the piano faculty there? We assume everyone is highly skilled, of course, but what we truly need is someone spirited—someone capable of building a genuine rapport with a child so she doesn't feel constant pressure.
Any other suggestions regarding piano studies and the early grade levels would be more than welcome. Ultimately, our goal is for her to play and to actually enjoy it. I have no grand ambitions for her to become a professional musician; once she’s older, I’ll let her decide for herself, and she can show me if that's the path she wants to take. I certainly wouldn't want music to become a source of stress or a heavy burden that eventually drives her to quit altogether.
That really hinges upon the child's individual temperament. In a specialized conservatory setting, as opposed to a standard community music school, it is virtually impossible to make any meaningful progress by merely attending classes. One must practice their instrument daily—not just playing pleasant melodies, but working through scales, technical etudes, and vocal exercises if they are wind players...
The schedule itself rarely poses a problem for children. My twelve-year-old currently manages a weekly extracurricular load that equals, or sometimes even exceeds, her standard school hours. If a child shows true talent or a serious interest, you should expect additional "pressure" at a conservatory, such as extra lessons, unscheduled sessions, competition prep, concerts, or being coaxed into chamber ensembles. Typically, one doesn't resist this; rather, one feels grateful for the teachers' dedication to the child's growth. When they are that committed, they might assign two forty-five-minute practice sessions, expecting the student to complete at least one session every single day—and both sessions during weekends and holidays.🍿 If your child isn't selected for the "elite" tracks, the atmosphere is much more relaxed, where the main goal is simply steady progress and mastering the curriculum.
As for scheduling ear training and instrument lessons, it is largely up to chance. There are so many students that it is often difficult to align both on the same day. My daughter is fortunate enough that her instrument lesson follows her ear training every year, which is the ideal arrangement for most. On the other hand, a friend’s son specifically requests that his activities be spread out over different days—ear training one day, instrument another, orchestra a third. That structure suits him better.
You are permitted to select your instrument instructor, provided they haven't already filled their roster.
Regarding the situation in Finland, it seems quite obvious that they are preparing to discard much of what made their educational system unique—specifically, that decade-long standardized approach where everyone follows the exact same path regardless of their individual talents, passions, or innate abilities. That example involving waiters is rather clumsy; honestly, all they really need for that line of work is fourth-grade level math.
Vocational schools ought to be training students for actual, tangible jobs, rather than saddling them with some imaginary career that nobody is hiring for or merely providing a vague foundation for further schooling. For instance, when you look at nursing, the most critical skills are patient care and the ability to follow strict protocols and instructions; conversely, doctors are expected to possess high-level abstract reasoning and the capacity to absorb massive amounts of data, which they must then synthesize into creative, concrete knowledge during a crisis—think diagnostic reasoning. A day only has twenty-four hours, and we simply cannot expect the same student to master both of these vastly different skill sets.
While there is technically a pathway to pursue higher education after vocational school, very few students actually manage to get into top-tier universities. However, one could always take a gap year to fill in the gaps by studying core subjects from a standard high school curriculum before attempting to pass the advanced levels of the national exams.
The most effective strategy for ensuring a child achieves academic excellence is to provide them with a robust foundational education before they even step foot into a classroom, yet so many parents fail to recognize this crucial prerequisite. Instead, we witness a frantic, misguided struggle where parents attempt to force-feed curriculum at breakneck speeds to compensate for these early deficits, which inevitably breeds a deep-seated resentment toward learning itself. In these instances, the teacher is unfairly cast as the villain simply because they are tasked with managing the fallout of this systemic unpreparedness.
A child truly needs to have mastered basic penmanship, developed fine motor skills through drawing, established sound hygiene habits, and understood the fundamentals of social decorum; furthermore, they must possess an innate curiosity for expanding their knowledge, a baseline level of concentration, and the grit required to see a task through to its conclusion. They should be able to categorize objects based on various criteria and intuitively grasp similarities and differences. It is quite telling that children who are regularly read to by their parents often find themselves eager to learn their letters and begin reading independently. When engaged in thoughtful conversation, these well-prepared children can articulate complex ideas, such as classifying different species of trees or modes of transportation using complete, sophisticated sentences, all while possessing a firm grasp of numerical relationships. Ultimately, the quality of one's preschool years is absolutely paramount to future academic success, arguably carrying more weight than the subsequent years of elementary or middle school.
Most first graders couldn't care less about their grades until their parents start treating them like they're the most important metric in the entire school system.
But what about the parent's perspective? How does that actually feel? Grades are meant to be a snapshot of current knowledge, not a measurement of progress from point A to point B. While some people harbor massive expectations, we have to remember that everyone brings different life experiences and distinct personalities to the table; there simply isn't a one-size-fits-all answer here.
Looking at the child mentioned in the original post, perhaps they should aim for slightly higher marks in English Language Arts. It is entirely possible the teacher is holding off on grading certain areas because they recognize the student is still "in transit." In early elementary school, a C or a B isn't exactly considered a stellar achievement, especially since teachers often lean toward more encouraging, inflated grades that don't necessarily reflect reality. In this specific instance, I suspect the issue is that the child is still a developing reader whose brain is heavily occupied with the mechanics of decoding words rather than truly grasping the narrative or visualizing the imagery. That is merely the current state of things. Is it truly fair to assign the same grade to a child navigating this initial phase as we would to a student capable of writing elaborate essays with only minor grammatical slips—the kind of skill seen in children who have spent years reading fluently and actively?