Posts by jadetinker85

Back when I was in school, we had exactly one troublemaker in our class, and he ended up getting expelled after he torched the school's woodshop.

Jason Reyes9 said:Thanks so much! Honestly, I thought I was the only crazy one here,
but now I see there are plenty more just like us.😍

When I was a little kid, I had this pet bunny. One day, my cousins
put together this incredible feast. Once I’d finished stuffing myself on
this delicious meat and potatoes, they asked me if I actually knew what I had just eaten...
well, let's just say I never saw that bunny again.😁

I also used to have this little bird. It passed away, and I made a point to visit its grave regularly,
only to find out later that they never actually buried it—they just tossed it straight into the trash.😁

Plants are especially dear to me. I swear they love me back, too; everything near me seems to grow greener and stay so much fresher. When I talk to them, it feels like they respond in that special "plant language" that only a true, seasoned naturalist could ever understand. Is all of this totally normal? I really don't know.🤷

Reminds me of a friend who used to rescue cats around Washington, D.C. She’d bring a stray home to her mom in Des Moines for the holidays, only for the cat to end up poisoned. Happened about three times. That is, until I pointed out she was basically sentencing every cat she "saved" to death. She stopped picking up strays after that.

Susan James said:

I can't quite make sense of that one—it looks like a bit of a typo or maybe some shorthand I'm not familiar with! If you were trying to share a thought or ask a question, feel free to drop it again. I'm all ears! kaže:
I have a question for River, since you're a lawyer who understands both the legal system and the dynamics of school staff. In our school, we have a student who hasn't adjusted at all since first grade. I won't sugarcoat it—he’s just incredibly ill-behaved. Now that he's in sixth grade, things are spiraling out of control. He’s gathered a little group of five followers who basically act as his entourage. They cause chaos during class, at recess, before school starts, after school ends, and even out at the local park. To give you some context, his mom is a pediatrician, and his dad is a coach for one of our top national rowing champions—a world-class athlete. His dad also plays tennis and has a comfortable job at a major institution in a city like Indianapolis, where the director currently lives in Brooklyn (he's a professional football referee). The kid is genuinely mean-spirited, and lately, he’s become obsessed with one specific girl, constantly targeting her while bullying everyone else too. Just the other day, he told this poor girl that her father—who works for a huge corporation and is always traveling, while her mother stays home—isn't actually on business trips, but is instead using that money to fund an affair and pay for hotels. He’s also been making offensive gestures toward another student based on their last name. He pulls his five followers into everything he does. The school hasn't really done anything about it until recently. The teacher finally woke up after the entire fifth grade had to endure this for a year and started trying to intervene. They began calling meetings with the parents of the kids being targeted, but now the situation has actually gotten worse. The boy has gone on the offensive and doesn't care who he harasses or when. To make matters worse, his dad actually rewards this behavior by taking him to national team games; he even took him to a handball tournament in Mexico, which was a total nightmare.
What kind of methods or resources can actually be used to stop this? I'm also wondering who is officially responsible for protecting the other kids at school, and if any real progress can actually be made here. By the way, just as a heads-up, the kid's uncle sits on the school board right over at City Hall.

So, what kind of qualities does that kid actually have?
Does anyone actually exist out there?
I honestly don't get it—why does someone act so terribly all the time? Is there really nothing good left? No bright spots, no kind gestures, just constant negativity? It’s honestly exhausting to deal with.
🤔

I was wondering, which of the staff members really went out of their way to focus on that child's positive traits? It would be great to know who was working on reinforcing those better behaviors.
I’ve been thinking lately about how we all navigate being parents. I'm curious to hear your thoughts—how close do you feel you actually are to your kids? For some of us, it’s easy; they’re right there with us, joining in on school birthday parties, field trips, or heading off to the movies with their friends. But then there are those moments where things feel a bit more strained. Have you ever felt like your child was constantly being singled out or criticized when you were hanging out with your own circle of friends? It's tough when you feel like they're being judged instead of just being part of the group. 🤔

You know that part from *The Little Prince*? About how you have to tame the Fox?

It honestly makes my stomach turn when I come across stories like this. I truly believe that all those little troublemakers are actually just deeply unhappy and lonely kids. Deep down, they’re actually craving guidance and proper upbringing, but they never get the chance. Instead, they're stuck in a system—from elementary school all the way up through other institutions—where everyone is just playing power games. It becomes this toxic cycle of trying to prove who's tougher, pointing fingers to see who's at fault, or bragging about whose dad drives a bigger SUV or who can bully their way to the top. 😢 🤮

It’s heartbreaking to see how a rebellious child can end up stuck in the shadows—feeling overlooked and unloved. It feels like there's this constant, growing pressure from outsiders for them to just fall in line, demanding they be obedient and hardworking for people who do nothing but criticize, punish, and push them away.
It feels like they’re just picking anyone who will take him—basically settling for the leftovers because everyone else passed him over for not being quite up to par.

Come on, let's try to see things from his perspective for a second.
How would you actually feel if someone called you out like that? And more importantly, would it give you any real motivation to change, or would you just shut down after being criticized so publicly on a forum?
Did you really think three times before posting all that info? It basically lays out his entire identity for everyone to see.

You mentioned one of the things you dislike about boys is how they say mean things to a girl's face about her dad. But what about what you’ve said about him—his dad, his mom, or his relatives? And you aren't even saying it to his face; you're doing it right here on an online forum under a protected username. Is that really okay? Aren't you essentially doing the exact same thing he does—the very behavior you claim should be stopped?
How are we supposed to teach kids not to act certain ways if we adults are out here doing the same thing? Do we just get a pass because we're older? Or are our intentions somehow "pure" while theirs are considered wrong?

😕

Anyway, let's move on to someone else.
👏
🙄

But seriously, I am genuinely curious: how exactly would a different school improve his behavior? Would you just send him off to a juvenile detention center instead?🙄

He probably goes to some. He’s not exactly a loner; he’s got a core group of five followers. So, there are six of them total, just reinforcing each other's nonsense.
In my view, you have to break up that clique first. Spread them out into different classes. In Finland, they reshuffle the kids every year, and it works. It prevents them from forming those tight-knit gangs used for bullying. It doesn't happen overnight, but it's definitely harder when you're forced to make a new crew every single school year. 😬

Jessica Howard5 said:Man, I just scrolled through some of the posts above. Some solid points in there, but honestly, it’s a mixed bag. You can tell exactly who actually knows what they're talking about and who’s just noise. I could probably pinpoint exactly who is an educator versus just a parent, and I’d bet I could guess the age of their kid, too. But I won't play guessing games. I'll just weigh in from a parent's perspective—dealing with elementary and high school. First off, let me try to debunk this myth that teachers are working way more hours than they're actually teaching.
Look, lesson plans (aside from the rookies just starting out) get recycled year after year. Some teachers don't even bother updating them to reflect the real world; they just hand down stuff that isn't even relevant anymore.
For example:
A couple of years back, in a 4th-grade social studies class, we did a unit on "the community where I live."
We're talking about Indianapolis. After school, I grabbed my kid's notebook to see what they actually wrote down that day.
Local industry:
- Leather tannery
- Footwear manufacture
- Niveta
- Mobilia
- Blacksmith
- IPK
- Procter & Gamble
- Silk Mill
- Litokarton
...
I won't list the rest, because it was just a long list of dead or dying industries in Indianapolis.
Out of all that, only Procter & Gamble, Niveta, and IPK are actually still operating. The teacher was listing the local economy as it stood when she was a college student. It makes me wonder: how much prep work is she actually doing, or is she just using lesson plans from twenty years ago? What are we even talking about here?
Second example:
High school—Computer Science class.
Learning programming languages and calculating logic? For what? What’s the point? Is it only because that's what the teacher studied 15 years ago? It's pure nonsense. And the kicker? The kid doesn't even know basic computer concepts. When I asked them to name input or output devices, or explain the difference between software and hardware... it was a struggle. Don't even get me started on the lack of skills with programs like PowerPoint or Word. They have zero clue what Excel is for or how useful it actually is.
So, there you go regarding teacher prep and whether they actually update their curriculum to keep up with technology and the modern world.
As for the whole "upbringing" debate in schools, let's be clear: our school system is officially defined as "developmental and educational." Development comes first; education comes second. Once the system is rebranded as strictly "educational," then sure, I'll accept the idea that teachers shouldn't have to deal with behavioral upbringing. But by choosing this career, you accepted that you'd be working in developmental-educational institutions. Stick to the job description.
Now, a little about us parents.
We're a diverse bunch. We vary in education levels, social status, and whether we're employed or not. If I really broke it down, I'd include the healthy and the sick, the alcoholics, the hypochondriacs, the PTSD sufferers, the optimists, and the pessimists. There are parents who know they're struggling and seek professional help, and there are those who refuse to admit they have no idea what they're doing, so they just keep making mistakes in how they raise their kids. That's why institutions exist—specifically tasked, I emphasize *tasked*, with correcting developmental issues. First, there's the school (the support services), which is supposed to recognize and diagnose the problem. They should try to fix it, and if they can't handle it in-house, they are legally required to refer the matter to the agencies that actually have the authority to solve these issues.
The school isn't some sacred, untouchable institution where you walk in after graduation and clock in for 40 years without anyone asking questions or holding you accountable. You aren't exempt from continuing your education, you don't get to stop being responsible, and heaven forbid someone actually evaluates your performance.
Let’s get real here for a second. We need some actual self-reflection from everyone involved—parents, teachers, school administrators, the whole lot of us.
IN OUR SCHOOLS, WE ARE OBSESSED WITH STUFFING KIDS FULL OF FACTS, BUT WE ARE COMPLETELY NEGLECTING CHARACTER BUILDING. I think we’re failing miserably, and frankly, it’s a disaster.

Only someone setting the curriculum for a specific subject—in this case, computer science—could answer that. So, someone at the Department.

Regarding school discipline and opening up discussions for everyone, I should point out that our system is still defined as being both character-building and educational. Character comes first, academics second.
IN OUR SCHOOLS, THERE IS AN INCREASING FOCUS ON CRAMMING IN KNOWLEDGE, AND A DECREASING FOCUS ON CHARACTER BUILDING. I think we’re missing the mark, and it's not good.

Alright, how would you actually handle the situation you described here? Say a small group of kids, whose parents happen to be big shots, starts bullying other students?😕

Paul Wilson72 said:Of course this is an issue, especially when we are talking about computer science and IT-related subjects. I don't want to offend those who graduated from education programs, but despite having a degree in information technology, many of them lack any real practical connection to the field. You can see it immediately in how they handle basic software like Microsoft Office, let alone teaching complex concepts in high school. On the other hand, look at the motivation levels. A computer science teacher or a tech instructor isn't given the same incentive compared to other professors, even though they have to stay current with constant updates. For them, learning never stops; you can't just walk into a classroom and coast until retirement. Compare that to math, physics, or English. In those subjects, the core curriculum hasn't fundamentally shifted in decades—not even centuries. Books exist in every possible format, and lesson plans are readily available whenever needed. Tech is a different beast entirely.
Buying computers usually just means more work on your plate. You have to deal with constant troubleshooting, system maintenance, and endless technical support. It’s a lot of extra labor that nobody actually wants to pay for, yet everyone expects you to just handle it.
The bottom line here comes down to market value. Most tech professionals are going to choose private sector roles where they actually get paid what they’re worth, rather than taking positions in public schools where their skills are constantly undervalued. As the national economy improves, this gap is only going to widen because nobody with this specific skillset wants to work in a classroom. We shouldn't be shocked when we find ourselves in a situation where computer science is being taught by someone who doesn't even understand how a basic desktop functions. So, let me ask you: how much are you actually willing to pay for someone who truly knows what they're doing?

Actually, @buditedobro, I couldn't agree more. Signed. 🙏

I'd argue the responsibility lies with the university that issued the degree. A diploma should be a guarantee that the graduate actually has the expertise required to teach in a classroom. Otherwise, what's the point of higher education?

Sarah James4 said:We live in New York City, in the US.
There are two parallel tracks here: public and private. Public schools are generally set aside for locals, though local kids attend private schools quite often too.
My little one goes to a private prep school—an international school with a heavy British curriculum. It’s tied to its parent school in Vicksburg. They’ve been doing IB and A-levels for years. Classes cap at 22 students, usually with one teacher and an assistant. In the upper grades, they have assistants spread across the whole floor to support all the classes...

Once they turn three, before September 1st, you can send them to nursery or FS1. The following year is FS2, or what we call preschool. First grade starts at age five.

I should mention that you don't have to send your child to school until first grade...and of course, you don't have to enroll in our specific school. There are plenty of options, so just pick whatever fits your needs and budget.

Sending them to nursery helps with continuity. The nursery and preschool are part of the whole setup; both educationally and physically, they're located right in the school...the junior school is physically separate from the senior school.

They start working seriously on multiplication tables in second or third grade (which is like first or second grade in America). Before that, it's all about the fundamentals (from FS2 through second grade) like even and odd numbers, addition and subtraction up to 20, and doubling or dividing numbers up to 20 or 30...basically, things like 10+10 or half of 10.

For math, they use a "mental math" method...I'm not sure what the specific term is back home.

English is taught using a phonetic "read, write inc." method.

Reading happens every single day. Kids get a few books a week from various programs depending on the current focus or skill being taught. For example, if they're working on uppercase letters, the books will be about that. These are usually little books of 10 to 30 pages, or more, depending on the student's level since they take an individualized approach. Right now, we're focusing on reading comprehension, so we keep the book for a few days until we work through the questions.

The classroom teacher changes every year. This helps prevent a lot of ethical or educational issues, and classes are reshuffled every two years...it helps all the kids get to know each other and builds a sense of community.
Naturally, some people find that weird or unacceptable.

When I think about it, it actually makes sense.😁There will always be kids, parents, and teachers who just won't see eye to eye, so this way you only have to "deal with it" for two years.😛

I read somewhere that in Finland, they reshuffle the students every single year based on the specific programs they choose alongside their teachers and parents.

Sarah James4 said:I don't get it. Why don't schools just buy the geography atlases and hand them out during class, then collect them all at the end of the period?

It’s a solid idea. Could you expand a bit on how the school system works where you live? What's the curriculum like there?
My dad runs a vocational shop, and he gets students coming in who can't even multiply two single digits. Here in the States, kids learn their multiplication tables in 3rd grade. I'm curious—when does that happen in other countries?

jadetinker85 said:Schools could always just build out a couple of extra rooms for those lockers. If there's enough will, anything is possible. 🙂

Public schools in more developed countries are massive compared to ours. In Germany, they dedicate entire floors to a single subject. I don't get why our schools—even the modern ones—are built like tiny bungalows.

Quincy:

Picture a scenario where we had standardized national curricula delivered via online textbooks. Take Finland, for example.

I don't think implementing something like that here should be a struggle. Of course, it wouldn't sit well with the people making a killing off textbook sales.
Honestly, why shouldn't the books sold in local bookstores also be available online?

I meant a hallway, not a whole floor. My mistake. 😳

Jessica Howard5 said:Sure, that’s one way to look at it. But not every school has the facilities—meaning, zero space for lockers or storage. That might work for elementary kids, maybe.
But look at how developed countries handle this. Kids stay at school from 8 AM to 5 PM. They eat breakfast, attend classes, have lunch, finish homework, study, and participate in extracurriculars like sports, music, or dance. It keeps them off the streets and off social media, under the supervision of professionals, and when they finally get home, they actually spend quality time with their parents. No extra stress over homework, studying, or reading lists...
In our country, though, that’s pure utopia.
Imagine if we had online textbooks integrated with a standardized national curriculum? Look at Finland. Imagine not having to worry about whether your kid actually learned the material because it's built directly into the teaching methodology. One less thing to stress about for eight years—or twelve, ideally.
But for that to happen, we need to overhaul the general standards here in America. I just hope my grandkids actually get to see that happen.

Schools could always just build out a couple of extra rooms for those lockers. If there's enough will, anything is possible. 🙂

Public schools in more developed countries are massive compared to ours. In Germany, they dedicate entire floors to a single subject. I don't get why our schools—even the modern ones—are built like tiny bungalows.

Quincy:

Picture a scenario where we had standardized national curricula delivered via online textbooks. Take Finland, for example.

I don't think implementing something like that here should be a struggle. Of course, it wouldn't sit well with the people making a killing off textbook sales.
Honestly, why shouldn't the books sold in local bookstores also be available online?

Nicholas King said:Which of those items would you cut if you could?

The actual answer lies in printing complete curriculum packets for both semesters and switching to lighter-weight paper—not in reducing education down to whatever a teacher decides to dictate in class. Sure, that happens. It happens today, even if it wasn't how things were done back when I was in school 🧐. And yes, there are certainly parents out there who actually praise that kind of teaching style 🤦

And why not just have lockers at school to hold all the books and supplies? Why does a kid have to lug around art kits, drafting tools, gym shoes, rulers, compasses, pencil cases, plus all those textbooks, music notebooks, and English readers? Just grab what's needed for the specific lesson or homework, and leave the rest at school.
Ideally, those storage spaces would just be built right into the desks.

I don't feel like typing a novel here, but in short: I think the American education system is largely outdated, both in terms of tools and actual curriculum.
The simple fact that first graders are lugging around backpacks heavier than they are is frustrating enough. I really hope things change before my kid starts school, because I'm not going to let him struggle through that.

It feels like the curriculum doesn't align with how kids actually develop cognitively; if it did, we wouldn't be seeing such poor results on national standardized tests.

Since there are plenty of successful models out there globally, I hope we stop trying to reinvent the wheel and instead just adopt what works—like taking what the Finnish system does well and adapting it for the US. It would be ideal if we just translated their textbooks and resources for our teachers; that could be done for almost every subject.
My little one isn't old enough for school yet, but I hope that when the time comes, school is a place where he can actually thrive and grow, rather than just a source of frustration.

Taylor Richardson10 said:The first three stages are the most critical—it’s no accident they lead the marketing slogan. At that age, a child is busy forming an attachment (usually to the mother). From an evolutionary standpoint, that bond is non-negotiable; the kid simply can't survive solo. Whether that attachment turns out positive or negative depends entirely on maternal behavior—things like recognizing needs, distinguishing different cries, being actively engaged, not leaving the child alone for extended periods (assuming they stay with the same caregiver for short intervals), and maintaining a stable home environment... you get the idea. Now, it’s not so dramatic that "secure attachment" acts as a magic shield against all future struggles, but it does mean they'll navigate life's hurdles more effectively—more confidence, healthier coping mechanisms, and so on. On the flip side, it isn't a guarantee that an insecurely attached child will face constant catastrophe, but if symptoms of neuroticism or psychosis arise, insecure attachment is almost certainly a contributing factor. For instance, studies have shown that women who developed secure attachments in childhood are actually more likely to select abusive partners and remain in violent marriages.

😕 I don't get it.

Jerry Newman3 said:Back in my psych classes, we touched on how things like eating disorders or interpersonal struggles can actually take root as early as one or two years old. It’s that stuff where parents might force-feed a child or push them into certain behaviors—it just stays lodged in your subconscious. I don't recall the specific details from my old notes, but if anyone is actually interested, I might dig through my notebook and see what I can find.

Definitely write it down 👍

Hey, something relevant to the topic here: http://sites.google.com/site/stjepan...ntalnozdravlje

I’d figure you could track it down in a library; I managed to snag a photocopy from my local high school library.

Honestly, I’m at a loss for words. It wasn't until I started scrolling through the Parenting threads that I realized how much people are experimenting on their infants—trying all sorts of "methods" that just don't make sense. They decide to cut out nighttime feedings when the baby is only a few months old, and then they act shocked when the kid is up every twenty minutes all night long. Nature designed infant feeding for a reason, and who knows what kind of mess parents end up making for themselves with these little experiments.

You gave birth just a month ago; it’s totally normal to be bleeding. Your body is basically just doing its post-delivery cleanup.

I’ve got Oliver James on my nightstand, though I haven't finished it yet... but he seems to trace the roots of everything back to those first few years of life, even for heavy stuff like schizophrenia... feels a bit like an overreach to me.

frozenbison3 said:You can also end up with a potential emotional wreck—just in a different way—from parents who swing too far the other direction and jump at every single whim of their kid. You have to find that middle ground, but honestly? Nobody knows where that line is, or if they do, the general public certainly hasn't figured it out yet.

There's plenty to unpack here. I actually know a few people whose mothers hovered over them constantly—they were pretty sickly kids, one was a preemie and another dealt with asthma. Interestingly enough, those same people turned out to be incredibly successful adults.

I'm looking for some insight into infant development during those first three years. To be honest, I’ve been scrolling through the Parenting subforum, and some of the takes there are wild. Some parents seem perfectly fine with letting an eight-month-old just cry themselves to sleep. To me, that feels like a disaster waiting to happen—like you're setting them up for long-term issues. But then again, maybe I'm the one with the skewed perspective. 🤷