9 posts shown.
Tyler Reyes86 said:Oh, really? Is that so? Just because your middle school art teacher gave you an A because you were "helpful" making posters for the class even though you can't draw to save your life, what then? Are you suddenly going to believe you're the next Michelangelo? Please, stop talking such nonsense.
Dennis Mitchell2 said:😉 This kid is actually quite an incredible artist; he can draw exactly what’s in his head, and he even knows how to write lyrics—not just in English, but in Italian too! He spends most of his time sketching the cartoons he watches, and if I’m being completely honest, he isn't exactly the athletic type. However, those mediocre grades he's pulling in school are nothing more than a direct reflection of his total lack of motivation; the subject matter simply doesn't capture his interest, so he just doesn't bother putting in the effort. Consequently, I find myself unable to complain about his report card, as he truly gets exactly what he deserves.
Tyler Reyes86 said:I suppose I should start by saying that I am quite out of my element here, but I felt compelled to weigh in on this. One simply cannot ignore the sheer, unbridled chaos of it all! It’s like watching a rhinoceros charge through a china shop—completely unpredictable, slightly terrifying, yet strangely fascinating to witness from a safe distance. Honestly, I was just sitting there, sipping my coffee, when the thought struck me. Does anyone else feel that sudden, overwhelming sense of momentum? It’s much like being stuck in gridlock on the I-95 during rush hour, only with significantly more heavy lifting involved. Anyway, I digress. My apologies. Just a bit of a wandering mind today! kaže:
If you think a "C" is a terrible grade, then frankly, we’re all part of the problem—parents, teachers, the news media, everyone. It’s a systemic issue. If we decide that anything less than an "A" is essentially a failure, what are we actually doing? We are breeding a generation of tiny perfectionists who can't function without constant external validation. It creates this toxic mindset where anything short of absolute perfection is seen as "not good enough." And honestly? It's unfair. We end up devaluing students who earned a "B" through hard work, or even those who deserve a top mark but just don't fit into this narrow, rigid definition of success. We are actively suppressing kids who have genuine skills and stand out from the crowd just because they didn't hit some arbitrary, impossible standard. We're teaching them that being "good" is actually a failure, and that's a dangerous way to raise children.
It seems like you were just getting started there! You cut off right at the beginning. What was it that you were going to say about "the one who..."? I'm all ears and ready to dive into whatever thought you were about to share. Don't leave me hanging! Significantly. I have to point out that we really shouldn't lump these kids in with everyone else. It’s just not right. Gifted children need specialized attention and a curriculum that actually challenges them—something far more rigorous than the standard American school program. If we don't provide that, they never learn how to develop real work ethics. Instead, they just sit there bored out of their minds during an hour-long lecture. It creates this frustrating cycle where average students feel stifled by them, while these gifted kids end up feeling just as frustrated by their peers, simply because of a natural advantage they didn't even ask for. Nature gave them this edge, but without the right outlet, it just becomes a source of friction for everyone involved.
It’s exactly what I’ve been trying to get across in my previous posts: those straight A's shouldn't be reserved exclusively for the small handful of natural-born geniuses. When we do that, we essentially devalue hard work and end up just glorifying genetic luck. An actual grade ought to be a true reflection of the effort and sweat an individual puts in, measured within the context of that specific student's natural abilities. Anything else is frankly inhumane and completely goes against everything good about pedagogy.
To be perfectly honest, I know someone with a kid currently in seventh grade, and there’s a student sitting right next to them who happens to be a member of Mensa. It’s quite fascinating, really—though perhaps a bit frustrating from a certain perspective. Instead of applying the standard grading criteria or docking points for mistakes like they would with anyone else, the teachers seem to just give this kid a free pass. If he doesn't feel like doing the work or if he slips up, they just let it slide. It’s as if being high-intelligence grants you a sort of academic hall pass where the rules simply don't apply.
On the other hand, you have those kids in class who just process things a bit slower than the rest. There’s one student in particular—he works incredibly hard, stays on top of everything, and genuinely puts in the effort—but he simply can't break past a B grade. It makes you wonder, though: if we start bumping up his marks just because he's trying so hard, where do we draw the line? What happens when we have to decide what kind of grade to give a literal little genius?
It seems they’re applying the exact same set of rules to someone who was born under a lucky star as they are to someone whom nature itself has already punished. Now, on top of everything else, they're going after him too.
It seems the philosophy among these teachers is pretty straightforward: if you have something, they’ll take it from you, and if you don't, they'll make sure you end up with nothing at all. It’s quite a cynical way to run a classroom, isn't it?
It is quite simply inhuman. Those who believe such methods are acceptable seem to view human society as a mere mirror of the natural world, structured entirely around the principles of so-called social Darwinism. However, that perception fails to align with reality. Even if it did happen to be true—which it isn't—most of us wouldn't stand a chance in such a system. In fact, the very people currently advocating for that kind of order would likely be the first ones to fall.
The three-year vocational programs in this country are fundamentally flawed. It’s honestly quite misguided to force a child to make a decision that dictates their entire career trajectory during such an incredibly immature stage of life, leaving them with virtually no room to pivot later on. Adolescence is defined by intense, rapid shifts; kids change their minds about everything as they grow up. I personally know several people who went through vocational training only to completely switch gears and pursue entirely different degrees in college later. Students in these specific three-year tracks simply don't have that luxury. At the moment they enroll, they are saddled with the weight of a "permanent" decision—a level of responsibility that just isn't appropriate for a fifteen-year-old. Because of this, both students and parents go out of their way to avoid these schools, and it isn't even because of some perceived social stigma. In this transitional economy we live in, the only true shame is being broke. No one actually cares how you made your money or whether you lack the necessary skills or specialized knowledge when it comes down to it. But, since we are already discussing social prejudices and how they influence our judgment...
Dennis Mitchell2 said:Well, what can I even say about it, because honestly, my kid pulls straight A's in everything from History and Math to English, yet somehow he's pulling C's and B's in Art, Music, and Gym. It feels like I am quite possibly the only parent out there who actually has to sit down and help their child study for a music exam, which is just absurd. 🤣
Not that I am complaining, mind you, since his teacher is absolutely wonderful.
Susan James said:In my opinion, we really shouldn't be grading subjects like art, music, or PE at all.