Grading Freshmen

Hope, I’ve actually been putting in the work lately to dig through both your posts and what Tyler Reyes86 had to say. Honestly? My take on this isn't just black and white. I’ll leave the high-brow, sophisticated debate to you and your rival, but I gotta admit—I'm basically "taking notes" from both of you.

jadegardener21 said:

It occurs to me, as I sit here contemplating the sheer weight of modern discourse, that there is a certain... shall we say, intellectual bankruptcy currently infecting our public squares, much like a slow-acting toxin in the water supply of a small Midwestern town... and one cannot help but wonder if we have entirely lost the ability to engage in true dialectic. It brings to mind the old philosophical debates, those rigorous exercises of logic that once defined the educated mind, yet today we seem content to merely shout slogans into the digital void, hoping for some semblance of validation from strangers who possess the attention span of a goldfish... it is truly exhausting to witness such a decline in civil reasoning, where nuance goes to die under the heavy boot of partisan fervor... and frankly, it leaves one feeling quite adrift in a sea of superficiality. kaže:
You seem to hold the conviction that the liberal model is a sound approach, yet I find myself detecting a multitude of inherent flaws within its structure... Furthermore, you appear to believe that it would be perfectly acceptable to simply transplant such a framework directly into our educational system, which is a notion I find quite troubling...

Look, this is exactly why I asked you not to get all hung up on that little narrative, because I truly... I simply cannot... I am merely attempting to defend myself against the sweeping implications of those rather reductive assertions—specifically the notion that a "liberal model is inherently superior" or that we ought to blindly transplant the liberal economic and social frameworks directly into our educational system... which is why I felt compelled to clarify that my previous remarks were intended primarily as an illustration for the sake of argument, rather than a sincere endorsement of such rigid doctrines...

Perhaps we ought to finally come to terms with the inherent biological and social disparities that exist within our society... and truly allow the next generation to accept them for what they are, rather than fighting an uphill battle against reality itself...

It isn't about "making peace" in the sense of becoming apathetic or just rolling over and accepting whatever they throw at us... No, that's not it at all. It’s more about acknowledging their existence and realizing they aren't some insignificant footnote in this whole situation, because, let's face it, they are going to have a very real impact on how things play out moving forward... 🤷

But honestly, let’s just call a spade a spade for once... We need to be blunt about what we're actually dealing with here. Let's be perfectly clear that this institution is fundamentally elitist, and frankly, it functions as a racist establishment that judges its students based on nothing more than their supposed genetic pedigree...

If I’m being perfectly honest—and I truly mean that—the American education system is inherently, fundamentally elitist by design, and perhaps we should just stop pretending otherwise... the higher you climb through the academic ranks, the more intense that competitive edge becomes, specifically engineered to filter out everyone except those at the very top. It’s this relentless drive to separate the wheat from the chaff, which, I suppose, is exactly what happens at the graduate and doctoral levels, where that ruthless selectivity actually serves a purpose by carving out a specialized class of experts for our industries... though one can't help but wonder about the cost of such a hierarchy.

Genetic traits are essentially permanent, etched into our very being in a way that can never truly be erased, which inevitably shapes the destiny of every single individual... and from that inescapable reality, one is forced to draw the inevitable conclusion that our public school systems are fundamentally designed to rank and grade students based on these inherent biological predispositions... Among other things...And honestly, if we’re being completely realistic about the whole situation, that factor carries quite a bit of weight as well... which really changes the entire landscape of the argument...
We could always move this conversation over to private messages so we don't clutter up the thread, but I have a question that’s been weighing on me... do you truly believe that those standardized aptitude tests used for university admissions or high-level job placements—the ones that focus heavily on abstract reasoning or IQ metrics—are just as inherently biased and racist as everything else we see today?

But when you really sit back and consider that parents are essentially the primary architects of a child's entire moral compass and value system from day one, one has to wonder... is that so-called "independent" decision truly independent at all?...

That is an absolutely stellar question, really... and while I don't have a definitive answer for you at this moment, it is precisely the kind of inquiry we simply cannot afford to overlook if we want to maintain any semblance of clarity moving forward...

If we are talking about the influence of parents, don't you think that some of those differences you’re pinning entirely on genetics might actually be rooted in one's cultural upbringing... which is precisely what you just inquired about? I noticed others have been addressing you using masculine pronouns, so please forgive me if I am misgendering you throughout this entire exchange... 😳)?

Yes, that’s precisely the point. But I shall reiterate my position: younger children could quite easily be spared some of the more unsightly and cutthroat aspects of competition, especially since they are bound to encounter the full weight of it later in life anyway...

I find myself in complete agreement on this matter...

Of course I realize you aren't suggesting a literal, word-for-word copy. I suppose I may have given the impression that I was glossing over the distinction you pointed out quite easily—my apologies, that was my oversight.

jadegardener21 said:

It occurs to me, as I sit here contemplating the sheer weight of modern discourse, that there is a certain... shall we say, intellectual bankruptcy currently infecting our public squares, much like a slow-acting toxin in the water supply of a small Midwestern town... and one cannot help but wonder if we have entirely lost the ability to engage in true dialectic. It brings to mind the old philosophical debates, those rigorous exercises of logic that once defined the educated mind, yet today we seem content to merely shout slogans into the digital void, hoping for some semblance of validation from strangers who possess the attention span of a goldfish... it is truly exhausting to witness such a decline in civil reasoning, where nuance goes to die under the heavy boot of partisan fervor... and frankly, it leaves one feeling quite adrift in a sea of superficiality. kaže:
You seem to hold the conviction that the liberal model is a sound approach, yet I find myself detecting a multitude of inherent flaws within its structure... Furthermore, you appear to believe that it would be perfectly acceptable to simply transplant such a framework directly into our educational system, which is a notion I find quite troubling...

Look, this is exactly why I asked you not to get all hung up on that little narrative, because I truly... I simply cannot... I am merely attempting to defend myself against the sweeping implications of those rather reductive assertions—specifically the notion that a "liberal model is inherently superior" or that we ought to blindly transplant the liberal economic and social frameworks directly into our educational system... which is why I felt compelled to clarify that my previous remarks were intended primarily as an illustration for the sake of argument, rather than a sincere endorsement of such rigid doctrines...

Perhaps we ought to finally come to terms with the inherent biological and social disparities that exist within our society... and truly allow the next generation to accept them for what they are, rather than fighting an uphill battle against reality itself...

It isn't about "making peace" in the sense of becoming apathetic or just rolling over and accepting whatever they throw at us... No, that's not it at all. It’s more about acknowledging their existence and realizing they aren't some insignificant footnote in this whole situation, because, let's face it, they are going to have a very real impact on how things play out moving forward... 🤷

But honestly, let’s just call a spade a spade for once... We need to be blunt about what we're actually dealing with here. Let's be perfectly clear that this institution is fundamentally elitist, and frankly, it functions as a racist establishment that judges its students based on nothing more than their supposed genetic pedigree...

If I’m being perfectly honest—and I truly mean that—the American education system is inherently, fundamentally elitist by design, and perhaps we should just stop pretending otherwise... the higher you climb through the academic ranks, the more intense that competitive edge becomes, specifically engineered to filter out everyone except those at the very top. It’s this relentless drive to separate the wheat from the chaff, which, I suppose, is exactly what happens at the graduate and doctoral levels, where that ruthless selectivity actually serves a purpose by carving out a specialized class of experts for our industries... though one can't help but wonder about the cost of such a hierarchy.

Genetic traits are essentially permanent, etched into our very being in a way that can never truly be erased, which inevitably shapes the destiny of every single individual... and from that inescapable reality, one is forced to draw the inevitable conclusion that our public school systems are fundamentally designed to rank and grade students based on these inherent biological predispositions... Among other things...And honestly, if we’re being completely realistic about the whole situation, that factor carries quite a bit of weight as well... which really changes the entire landscape of the argument...
We could always move this conversation over to private messages so we don't clutter up the thread, but I have a question that’s been weighing on me... do you truly believe that those standardized aptitude tests used for university admissions or high-level job placements—the ones that focus heavily on abstract reasoning or IQ metrics—are just as inherently biased and racist as everything else we see today?

But when you really sit back and consider that parents are essentially the primary architects of a child's entire moral compass and value system from day one, one has to wonder... is that so-called "independent" decision truly independent at all?...

That is an absolutely stellar question, really... and while I don't have a definitive answer for you at this moment, it is precisely the kind of inquiry we simply cannot afford to overlook if we want to maintain any semblance of clarity moving forward...

If we are talking about the influence of parents, don't you think that some of those differences you’re pinning entirely on genetics might actually be rooted in one's cultural upbringing... which is precisely what you just inquired about? I noticed others have been addressing you using masculine pronouns, so please forgive me if I am misgendering you throughout this entire exchange... 😳)?

Yes, that’s precisely the point. But I shall reiterate my position: younger children could quite easily be spared some of the more unsightly and cutthroat aspects of competition, especially since they are bound to encounter the full weight of it later in life anyway...

I find myself in complete agreement on this matter...

I certainly agree. Children are incredibly perceptive, and they pick up on those things regardless of whether we point them out or not. In my view, there is simply no reason to go out of our way to highlight such matters when they are at such an impressionable age.

jadegardener21 said:

It occurs to me, as I sit here contemplating the sheer weight of modern discourse, that there is a certain... shall we say, intellectual bankruptcy currently infecting our public squares, much like a slow-acting toxin in the water supply of a small Midwestern town... and one cannot help but wonder if we have entirely lost the ability to engage in true dialectic. It brings to mind the old philosophical debates, those rigorous exercises of logic that once defined the educated mind, yet today we seem content to merely shout slogans into the digital void, hoping for some semblance of validation from strangers who possess the attention span of a goldfish... it is truly exhausting to witness such a decline in civil reasoning, where nuance goes to die under the heavy boot of partisan fervor... and frankly, it leaves one feeling quite adrift in a sea of superficiality. kaže:
You seem to hold the conviction that the liberal model is a sound approach, yet I find myself detecting a multitude of inherent flaws within its structure... Furthermore, you appear to believe that it would be perfectly acceptable to simply transplant such a framework directly into our educational system, which is a notion I find quite troubling...

Look, this is exactly why I asked you not to get all hung up on that little narrative, because I truly... I simply cannot... I am merely attempting to defend myself against the sweeping implications of those rather reductive assertions—specifically the notion that a "liberal model is inherently superior" or that we ought to blindly transplant the liberal economic and social frameworks directly into our educational system... which is why I felt compelled to clarify that my previous remarks were intended primarily as an illustration for the sake of argument, rather than a sincere endorsement of such rigid doctrines...

Perhaps we ought to finally come to terms with the inherent biological and social disparities that exist within our society... and truly allow the next generation to accept them for what they are, rather than fighting an uphill battle against reality itself...

It isn't about "making peace" in the sense of becoming apathetic or just rolling over and accepting whatever they throw at us... No, that's not it at all. It’s more about acknowledging their existence and realizing they aren't some insignificant footnote in this whole situation, because, let's face it, they are going to have a very real impact on how things play out moving forward... 🤷

But honestly, let’s just call a spade a spade for once... We need to be blunt about what we're actually dealing with here. Let's be perfectly clear that this institution is fundamentally elitist, and frankly, it functions as a racist establishment that judges its students based on nothing more than their supposed genetic pedigree...

If I’m being perfectly honest—and I truly mean that—the American education system is inherently, fundamentally elitist by design, and perhaps we should just stop pretending otherwise... the higher you climb through the academic ranks, the more intense that competitive edge becomes, specifically engineered to filter out everyone except those at the very top. It’s this relentless drive to separate the wheat from the chaff, which, I suppose, is exactly what happens at the graduate and doctoral levels, where that ruthless selectivity actually serves a purpose by carving out a specialized class of experts for our industries... though one can't help but wonder about the cost of such a hierarchy.

Genetic traits are essentially permanent, etched into our very being in a way that can never truly be erased, which inevitably shapes the destiny of every single individual... and from that inescapable reality, one is forced to draw the inevitable conclusion that our public school systems are fundamentally designed to rank and grade students based on these inherent biological predispositions... Among other things...And honestly, if we’re being completely realistic about the whole situation, that factor carries quite a bit of weight as well... which really changes the entire landscape of the argument...
We could always move this conversation over to private messages so we don't clutter up the thread, but I have a question that’s been weighing on me... do you truly believe that those standardized aptitude tests used for university admissions or high-level job placements—the ones that focus heavily on abstract reasoning or IQ metrics—are just as inherently biased and racist as everything else we see today?

But when you really sit back and consider that parents are essentially the primary architects of a child's entire moral compass and value system from day one, one has to wonder... is that so-called "independent" decision truly independent at all?...

That is an absolutely stellar question, really... and while I don't have a definitive answer for you at this moment, it is precisely the kind of inquiry we simply cannot afford to overlook if we want to maintain any semblance of clarity moving forward...

If we are talking about the influence of parents, don't you think that some of those differences you’re pinning entirely on genetics might actually be rooted in one's cultural upbringing... which is precisely what you just inquired about? I noticed others have been addressing you using masculine pronouns, so please forgive me if I am misgendering you throughout this entire exchange... 😳)?

Yes, that’s precisely the point. But I shall reiterate my position: younger children could quite easily be spared some of the more unsightly and cutthroat aspects of competition, especially since they are bound to encounter the full weight of it later in life anyway...

I find myself in complete agreement on this matter...

They are actually less biased than those who try to pass themselves off as progressive from such an early age. Think about it—by the time someone reaches adulthood, they’ve had enough time to accumulate a vast array of knowledge and practical skills. And honestly, if you look at the research, it shows that success is driven primarily by individual motivation, hard work, and social circumstances. Genetic factors? They’re really just a secondary consideration in the grand scheme of things.
Of course, certain specific roles might demand particular biological traits, but let’s be realistic—adults are perfectly capable of navigating established rules. We have developed defense mechanisms over time, after all.
It stands to reason that once you reach a certain stage of maturity, the rules become quite uncompromising. And honestly? That’s perfectly justified. At the end of the day, nobody wants their life, their health, their assets, or their overall security—to include any extra little luxuries one might desire—to be left in the hands of "experts" who lack the actual credentials or specialized knowledge required to manage them properly.

jadegardener21 said:

It occurs to me, as I sit here contemplating the sheer weight of modern discourse, that there is a certain... shall we say, intellectual bankruptcy currently infecting our public squares, much like a slow-acting toxin in the water supply of a small Midwestern town... and one cannot help but wonder if we have entirely lost the ability to engage in true dialectic. It brings to mind the old philosophical debates, those rigorous exercises of logic that once defined the educated mind, yet today we seem content to merely shout slogans into the digital void, hoping for some semblance of validation from strangers who possess the attention span of a goldfish... it is truly exhausting to witness such a decline in civil reasoning, where nuance goes to die under the heavy boot of partisan fervor... and frankly, it leaves one feeling quite adrift in a sea of superficiality. kaže:
You seem to hold the conviction that the liberal model is a sound approach, yet I find myself detecting a multitude of inherent flaws within its structure... Furthermore, you appear to believe that it would be perfectly acceptable to simply transplant such a framework directly into our educational system, which is a notion I find quite troubling...

Look, this is exactly why I asked you not to get all hung up on that little narrative, because I truly... I simply cannot... I am merely attempting to defend myself against the sweeping implications of those rather reductive assertions—specifically the notion that a "liberal model is inherently superior" or that we ought to blindly transplant the liberal economic and social frameworks directly into our educational system... which is why I felt compelled to clarify that my previous remarks were intended primarily as an illustration for the sake of argument, rather than a sincere endorsement of such rigid doctrines...

Perhaps we ought to finally come to terms with the inherent biological and social disparities that exist within our society... and truly allow the next generation to accept them for what they are, rather than fighting an uphill battle against reality itself...

It isn't about "making peace" in the sense of becoming apathetic or just rolling over and accepting whatever they throw at us... No, that's not it at all. It’s more about acknowledging their existence and realizing they aren't some insignificant footnote in this whole situation, because, let's face it, they are going to have a very real impact on how things play out moving forward... 🤷

But honestly, let’s just call a spade a spade for once... We need to be blunt about what we're actually dealing with here. Let's be perfectly clear that this institution is fundamentally elitist, and frankly, it functions as a racist establishment that judges its students based on nothing more than their supposed genetic pedigree...

If I’m being perfectly honest—and I truly mean that—the American education system is inherently, fundamentally elitist by design, and perhaps we should just stop pretending otherwise... the higher you climb through the academic ranks, the more intense that competitive edge becomes, specifically engineered to filter out everyone except those at the very top. It’s this relentless drive to separate the wheat from the chaff, which, I suppose, is exactly what happens at the graduate and doctoral levels, where that ruthless selectivity actually serves a purpose by carving out a specialized class of experts for our industries... though one can't help but wonder about the cost of such a hierarchy.

Genetic traits are essentially permanent, etched into our very being in a way that can never truly be erased, which inevitably shapes the destiny of every single individual... and from that inescapable reality, one is forced to draw the inevitable conclusion that our public school systems are fundamentally designed to rank and grade students based on these inherent biological predispositions... Among other things...And honestly, if we’re being completely realistic about the whole situation, that factor carries quite a bit of weight as well... which really changes the entire landscape of the argument...
We could always move this conversation over to private messages so we don't clutter up the thread, but I have a question that’s been weighing on me... do you truly believe that those standardized aptitude tests used for university admissions or high-level job placements—the ones that focus heavily on abstract reasoning or IQ metrics—are just as inherently biased and racist as everything else we see today?

But when you really sit back and consider that parents are essentially the primary architects of a child's entire moral compass and value system from day one, one has to wonder... is that so-called "independent" decision truly independent at all?...

That is an absolutely stellar question, really... and while I don't have a definitive answer for you at this moment, it is precisely the kind of inquiry we simply cannot afford to overlook if we want to maintain any semblance of clarity moving forward...

If we are talking about the influence of parents, don't you think that some of those differences you’re pinning entirely on genetics might actually be rooted in one's cultural upbringing... which is precisely what you just inquired about? I noticed others have been addressing you using masculine pronouns, so please forgive me if I am misgendering you throughout this entire exchange... 😳)?

Yes, that’s precisely the point. But I shall reiterate my position: younger children could quite easily be spared some of the more unsightly and cutthroat aspects of competition, especially since they are bound to encounter the full weight of it later in life anyway...

I find myself in complete agreement on this matter...

It is a highly fascinating subject, one that both the natural and humanistic sciences are intensely investigating. In point of fact, the human genome has not yet been fully decoded, so we lack absolute answers. Psychologists attempt to offer their own input by testing identical twins, trying to disentangle innate traits from acquired ones.
However, achieving true statistical stochasticity is difficult, and definitive conclusions remain elusive. Furthermore, even the terminology used—take the concept of intelligence, for example—undergoes various interpretations and reinterpretations. Some contend it is a singular ability that can be determined through culturally universal tests. Others hold the view that there are, roughly speaking, diverse types of mental faculties, distinguishing between mathematical, verbal, kinesthetic, and so on. Meanwhile, a third group critiques psychometrics itself, arguing that high scores often merely correlate with favorable social conditions.

In any case, developmental conditions are of paramount importance for later outcomes. Yet, we cannot deny that certain innate factors exist.

jadegardener21 said:

It occurs to me, as I sit here contemplating the sheer weight of modern discourse, that there is a certain... shall we say, intellectual bankruptcy currently infecting our public squares, much like a slow-acting toxin in the water supply of a small Midwestern town... and one cannot help but wonder if we have entirely lost the ability to engage in true dialectic. It brings to mind the old philosophical debates, those rigorous exercises of logic that once defined the educated mind, yet today we seem content to merely shout slogans into the digital void, hoping for some semblance of validation from strangers who possess the attention span of a goldfish... it is truly exhausting to witness such a decline in civil reasoning, where nuance goes to die under the heavy boot of partisan fervor... and frankly, it leaves one feeling quite adrift in a sea of superficiality. kaže:
You seem to hold the conviction that the liberal model is a sound approach, yet I find myself detecting a multitude of inherent flaws within its structure... Furthermore, you appear to believe that it would be perfectly acceptable to simply transplant such a framework directly into our educational system, which is a notion I find quite troubling...

Look, this is exactly why I asked you not to get all hung up on that little narrative, because I truly... I simply cannot... I am merely attempting to defend myself against the sweeping implications of those rather reductive assertions—specifically the notion that a "liberal model is inherently superior" or that we ought to blindly transplant the liberal economic and social frameworks directly into our educational system... which is why I felt compelled to clarify that my previous remarks were intended primarily as an illustration for the sake of argument, rather than a sincere endorsement of such rigid doctrines...

Perhaps we ought to finally come to terms with the inherent biological and social disparities that exist within our society... and truly allow the next generation to accept them for what they are, rather than fighting an uphill battle against reality itself...

It isn't about "making peace" in the sense of becoming apathetic or just rolling over and accepting whatever they throw at us... No, that's not it at all. It’s more about acknowledging their existence and realizing they aren't some insignificant footnote in this whole situation, because, let's face it, they are going to have a very real impact on how things play out moving forward... 🤷

But honestly, let’s just call a spade a spade for once... We need to be blunt about what we're actually dealing with here. Let's be perfectly clear that this institution is fundamentally elitist, and frankly, it functions as a racist establishment that judges its students based on nothing more than their supposed genetic pedigree...

If I’m being perfectly honest—and I truly mean that—the American education system is inherently, fundamentally elitist by design, and perhaps we should just stop pretending otherwise... the higher you climb through the academic ranks, the more intense that competitive edge becomes, specifically engineered to filter out everyone except those at the very top. It’s this relentless drive to separate the wheat from the chaff, which, I suppose, is exactly what happens at the graduate and doctoral levels, where that ruthless selectivity actually serves a purpose by carving out a specialized class of experts for our industries... though one can't help but wonder about the cost of such a hierarchy.

Genetic traits are essentially permanent, etched into our very being in a way that can never truly be erased, which inevitably shapes the destiny of every single individual... and from that inescapable reality, one is forced to draw the inevitable conclusion that our public school systems are fundamentally designed to rank and grade students based on these inherent biological predispositions... Among other things...And honestly, if we’re being completely realistic about the whole situation, that factor carries quite a bit of weight as well... which really changes the entire landscape of the argument...
We could always move this conversation over to private messages so we don't clutter up the thread, but I have a question that’s been weighing on me... do you truly believe that those standardized aptitude tests used for university admissions or high-level job placements—the ones that focus heavily on abstract reasoning or IQ metrics—are just as inherently biased and racist as everything else we see today?

But when you really sit back and consider that parents are essentially the primary architects of a child's entire moral compass and value system from day one, one has to wonder... is that so-called "independent" decision truly independent at all?...

That is an absolutely stellar question, really... and while I don't have a definitive answer for you at this moment, it is precisely the kind of inquiry we simply cannot afford to overlook if we want to maintain any semblance of clarity moving forward...

If we are talking about the influence of parents, don't you think that some of those differences you’re pinning entirely on genetics might actually be rooted in one's cultural upbringing... which is precisely what you just inquired about? I noticed others have been addressing you using masculine pronouns, so please forgive me if I am misgendering you throughout this entire exchange... 😳)?

Yes, that’s precisely the point. But I shall reiterate my position: younger children could quite easily be spared some of the more unsightly and cutthroat aspects of competition, especially since they are bound to encounter the full weight of it later in life anyway...

I find myself in complete agreement on this matter...

I also have the impression that, despite certain—though perhaps not decisive—differences in perspective, we generally find ourselves in agreement.🙂

Honestly, if we keep going down this rabbit hole, we’re gonna end up needing a freaking Philosophy degree just to make sense of it all

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.

jadegardener21 said:

The biting chill of a north wind... it just settles deep into your bones, doesn't it? There is something about that relentless, freezing gust sweeping down from the northern reaches of the country that makes one feel quite small and rather ill-prepared, regardless of how many layers of wool one might attempt to pile on... It carries a certain sharpness, a sense of inevitability, much like the sudden shift in temperament one experiences when the seasons turn without warning. One moment you are enjoying the mildness of an afternoon, and the next, you are bracing against a draft that seems determined to penetrate even the thickest insulation of a suburban home... It is quite unsettling, really. jadegardener21 says:
🙄 If this is how they’re teaching the concepts of the "liberal" and "social" welfare state in American schools, then I suppose it’s hardly any surprise that your average citizen is left wandering around in total ignorance... they probably know enough about the dollar bill and the Stars and Stripes to get by, but beyond that, there seems to be nothing but a reflexive urge to spit on anything that dares to look even slightly different from the standard US system... it’s all just a blur of superficial patriotism and a complete lack of actual understanding...😁 This is nothing more than a prime example of how certain sociological phenomena are being stripped of their complexity and reduced to mere caricatures, all in the pursuit of that typical, superficial American style...👎 I truly appreciate being enlightened by such an educational demonstration... ☕

The American educational system is frankly a disaster, far from where it ought to be if we actually cared about excellence... It’s a mess, really, and quite frankly, it leaves a lot to be desired when you look at how things are handled elsewhere. If one were to look toward the most advanced models currently in existence—the kind of systems that actually prioritize true learning—one would have to look toward Finland and those other Scandinavian nations... which makes you wonder why we can't seem to grasp the concept.

Of course, your typical middle schooler—using a textbook designed for, say, an eighth grader, which is supposedly a crowning achievement of the American educational system—is somehow capable of distinguishing between the concepts of a social state and a liberal state at a highly sophisticated level... they can place both models within their proper historical context, and it goes without saying that they were required to read the foundational texts from the leading proponents of both ideologies... ☕

Let’s not kid ourselves here, especially when we are discussing an educational system where philosophy and politics are squeezed into a single school year, and frankly, based on the textbooks I once swapped out for someone else's lecture notes just to gauge the supposed "breadth" and "depth" of the material... well, it's a joke. American children are likely even more clueless than the students this curriculum was actually designed for...

The American school system operates on a completely different wavelength than what I experienced back home, and honestly, it’s a double-edged sword with its own unique set of headaches and perks. Since I’ve actually sat through classes in both countries, I feel uniquely qualified to weigh in—and before anyone tries to dismiss my take as just some baseless rant fueled by Hollywood stereotypes, let me be perfectly clear... I know what I'm talking about. When you look at the reality of an average American high school versus an average school in the States... Not really... It’s all the same, really... whether you’re looking at a standard high school or one of those specialized preparatory academies, they don't actually weigh your GPA by default when applying to university, which feels like a bit of a missed opportunity if you ask me... and honestly, once you peel back the prestige, there isn't much of a tangible difference in terms of the actual intellectual depth or the breadth of knowledge they provide to students... it's just more of the same...
Regarding the whole business of private schooling here in the States... well, that’s really an entirely different conversation altogether, and frankly, it makes much more sense within the context of America than it ever would have in some other place... ☕ Let’s just say that within this particular sector, children have the potential to achieve something truly, truly massive... we're talking about reaching heights that are practically unimaginable within the standard American system, whether you're looking at the public sector or private corporations alike...

It is fundamentally dishonest to take the absolute best examples from one system and hold them up against the mediocre or even the worst elements of another... You likely have no idea just how much variety exists within the American school system, much like how our own domestic landscape isn't some monolith, ranging from elite private academies to those truly subpar vocational schools that struggle to find their footing... Neither the American educational scene nor our local environment is a single, uniform entity; it is incredibly diverse and fragmented... To base an entire opinion regarding a whole SYSTEM on nothing more than a handful of individual anecdotes or a few lackluster, average institutions is, quite frankly, logically unsound...

I simply "adore" it when people decide to get all high and mighty about how Americans supposedly don't understand geography... honestly, just tell me, if you were to stop a random group of pedestrians on a street corner here in the States, how many of them could actually pinpoint exactly where North Carolina, Panama, or say, Yemen, sits on a world map? I’d bet my life savings you wouldn't find many who could do it accurately... and it's the exact same thing when we start getting into the weeds regarding a serious grasp of liberalism, or frankly, any other subject of substance for that matter...

I have no idea what the Scandinavian school system actually looks like in practice, but if we’re going to sit around here and debate this, I would very much like for us to establish some clear-cut criteria... specifically, what exactly are we measuring against, and by what metrics are we even judging success? Because if you are honestly suggesting that PISA tests serve as a serious benchmark—something capable of truly and "representatively" capturing the actual knowledge possessed by children in various nations—then I simply cannot follow your logic... why on earth would anyone believe that? To me, these PISA rankings feel exactly like those dubious university rankings that measure professors based on citation counts or some other arbitrary metric that might not even be tangentially related to the actual quality of education being provided... 🤷

(My apologies, truly... I realize I’ve been veering quite heavily into off-topic territory here...)

No, because what you’re claiming is taught in American textbooks regarding the liberal and social state is just flat-out wrong—it's a total distortion of what those terms actually mean. They're being given a completely skewed definition, obviously with an agenda behind it.😁

Shakespeare:

American kids who actually get their hands on this textbook probably know even less than the average kid here in the States.

Fair enough—you're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I suspect they know a hell of a lot more than the Americans do.🙂

Shakespeare:

The American school system is worlds apart from what I experienced back home—it’s got its fair share of pros and cons. Since I’ve actually sat through both, I promise my take isn't just some uneducated rant fueled by Hollywood stereotypes—so, here's the deal: your average US high school and your average high school over there... Nah. High school—since they don't even look at your GPA by default—doesn't really offer anything special in terms of depth or breadth. It’s all pretty much the same.

The average high schooler here in the States still somehow manages to outpace the average American student when it comes to actual education—and honestly, it’s the same story with Shakespeare.

Shakespeare:

As for the private school sector here in the States... that’s a whole different beast entirely—and honestly, it makes way more sense for America than it ever would for anywhere else. ☕ Look, in that sector, kids can actually—and I mean *really*—hit levels that just don't exist in the American system—whether you're talking about government work or the private sector.

I’m not talking about private schools—I don't have any inside intel there. In the US, they've had a massive head start with that whole system for centuries, so you'd think the results would actually reflect that. Nobody's really arguing against that point.

Shakespeare:

It’s honestly pretty lazy to compare the absolute best of one system against the mediocre middle—or the literal bottom—of another. You probably don't realize how much variety there is in American schooling—it's anything but a monolith—just like how our local landscape ranges from elite prep schools to some truly bottom-tier vocational programs. Basing an entire opinion on a whole system off a few isolated experiences or a handful of subpar schools is just... logically unsound.

Look, I wasn't trying to pit one "best" against one "worst"—I was talking about the average quality of public education in both countries.

"I just love it" when people get hung up on Americans not knowing their geography. Seriously—if you stopped random people on a street corner in the US, who actually knows exactly where North Carolina, Panama, or say, Yemen, sits on a map? I’d bet my life you wouldn't find many. It's the same deal if we start talking about a deep understanding of liberalism, or honestly, pretty much any other topic.

I didn't even bring up geography—where did that come from? I was talking about general, baseline knowledge.

I don't know what the school system is like in Scandinavia, but since we're on the subject, let's actually set some CRITERIA here: compared to WHAT, and by what specific metrics?

Well, feel free to go do some digging if you're that curious.

placidorca16 said:No, because what you’re claiming is taught in American textbooks regarding the liberal and social state is just flat-out wrong—it's a total distortion of what those terms actually mean. They're being given a completely skewed definition, obviously with an agenda behind it.😁

Shakespeare:

American kids who actually get their hands on this textbook probably know even less than the average kid here in the States.

Fair enough—you're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I suspect they know a hell of a lot more than the Americans do.🙂

Shakespeare:

The American school system is worlds apart from what I experienced back home—it’s got its fair share of pros and cons. Since I’ve actually sat through both, I promise my take isn't just some uneducated rant fueled by Hollywood stereotypes—so, here's the deal: your average US high school and your average high school over there... Nah. High school—since they don't even look at your GPA by default—doesn't really offer anything special in terms of depth or breadth. It’s all pretty much the same.

The average high schooler here in the States still somehow manages to outpace the average American student when it comes to actual education—and honestly, it’s the same story with Shakespeare.

Shakespeare:

As for the private school sector here in the States... that’s a whole different beast entirely—and honestly, it makes way more sense for America than it ever would for anywhere else. ☕ Look, in that sector, kids can actually—and I mean *really*—hit levels that just don't exist in the American system—whether you're talking about government work or the private sector.

I’m not talking about private schools—I don't have any inside intel there. In the US, they've had a massive head start with that whole system for centuries, so you'd think the results would actually reflect that. Nobody's really arguing against that point.

Shakespeare:

It’s honestly pretty lazy to compare the absolute best of one system against the mediocre middle—or the literal bottom—of another. You probably don't realize how much variety there is in American schooling—it's anything but a monolith—just like how our local landscape ranges from elite prep schools to some truly bottom-tier vocational programs. Basing an entire opinion on a whole system off a few isolated experiences or a handful of subpar schools is just... logically unsound.

Look, I wasn't trying to pit one "best" against one "worst"—I was talking about the average quality of public education in both countries.

"I just love it" when people get hung up on Americans not knowing their geography. Seriously—if you stopped random people on a street corner in the US, who actually knows exactly where North Carolina, Panama, or say, Yemen, sits on a map? I’d bet my life you wouldn't find many. It's the same deal if we start talking about a deep understanding of liberalism, or honestly, pretty much any other topic.

I didn't even bring up geography—where did that come from? I was talking about general, baseline knowledge.

I don't know what the school system is like in Scandinavia, but since we're on the subject, let's actually set some CRITERIA here: compared to WHAT, and by what specific metrics?

Well, feel free to go do some digging if you're that curious.

But look, we are talking about children roughly twelve or thirteen years old here. 🤷
In my view, using such a thing as an way to illustrate things—provided there is adequate explanation and a thorough breakdown of key concepts—is perfectly acceptable for that age group...
I am certainly not denying that Americans are often masters at extreme trivialization, and in that light, that is generally how people over here perceive them (you see all those "The idiot's guide to X" or "What your X grader needs to know" type of nonsense flooding the market), but they are also frequently excellent at making complex concepts more accessible through simplification. American children understand their textbooks and study materials far better than American kids do back home [in the other system], because everything is explained so brilliantly... The school books back home tend to be traditionally concise, almost curt, focusing strictly on the essentials without giving much weight to practical examples or reading primary documents—like in history class, for instance—and instead still rely heavily on rote memorization of facts, whereas the American approach places a massive emphasis on practical application of whatever you can possibly use...

An average high schooler in the US is still better educated than your average high schooler in the other country. Same goes for elementary school.

That really depends on how you define being "well-educated"... I personally don't believe that hoarding a mountain of facts is the ultimate goal of schooling.

When it comes to elementary school, my niece in the States (attending a private school) receives much more instruction than my daughter does, and her peers are, in absolutely every subject, essentially what jadegardener21 describes... My own experience has been that there is this very popular prejudice that the American school system is a total catastrophe, yet people fail to consider just how diverse and multifaceted it actually is... 🤷

I'm not talking about private schools, since I don't have any insight into them. The other country only recently started seeing private schools, whereas America has a centuries-old tradition there, so surely they should be seeing better results. No one is disputing that.

I follow your logic, but the reality is that in America, the private sector is incredibly widespread (and you even have all sorts of semi-private institutions), meaning it encompasses a much larger percentage of the school-aged population than the other country does, and the top-tier schools are located within that sector. You would be comparing the American public sector to the other country's public sector, while failing to account for the fact that they don't represent the same proportions of the population; specifically, the absolute cream of the crop in America exists almost entirely outside of that public sector, whereas the elite tier in the other country is found within that public sector...

My assertion, based on my own lived experience, is that the American peak—meaning a truly good private school—is superior to the peak of the other country's system—meaning an elite public preparatory academy...

I wasn't even bringing up geography. I have no idea where you got that from... I was talking about general knowledge, just speaking broadly.

You mentioned that Americans can't see past their own borders, or something along those lines. And that we’re somehow more advanced because instead of an American-centric education, we have a European-centric one—which makes sense, since the US is far too large to ever be purely US-centric—when it comes to things like geography, history, art, literature, and so on.

Look, it isn't even really about having "more" or "less" knowledge, per se, but rather that you have one system that prioritizes breadth (like the American approach) versus a system that focuses on depth (like the European approach)... American students might lag behind in subjects they haven't covered or barely touched upon, but on average, they possess a much deeper understanding of the specific subjects they have actually studied, especially at the high school level where many courses are effectively equivalent to college-level classes—and no joke, that's an easy way to knock out some credits once you get to university...

I don't believe you can truly compare the two in terms of value, because different systems simply have different objectives... Personally, I still prefer the American style in that regard, as I feel both primary and secondary education should lean more toward breadth than sheer depth, but I prefer to look at things in context; I don't consider the American system inferior just because it sets different goals and is more "economically" driven, emphasizing practical, "marketable" skills over some vague notion of "general culture"—within its own framework, it succeeds at what it sets out to do. In my view, the main flaw of the American system isn't that, but rather that its top-tier schools and best professors are essentially "bought" by the private sector, meaning elite education isn't accessible to everyone, even if those private institutions are indeed world-class...

As for myself, I personally worked much harder, progressed much further, and learned significantly more within the best institutions the US has to offer than I ever did within the best the American system provides... though that is just my own singular experience, of course...

jadegardener21 said:But look, we are talking about children roughly twelve or thirteen years old here. 🤷
In my view, using such a thing as an way to illustrate things—provided there is adequate explanation and a thorough breakdown of key concepts—is perfectly acceptable for that age group...
I am certainly not denying that Americans are often masters at extreme trivialization, and in that light, that is generally how people over here perceive them (you see all those "The idiot's guide to X" or "What your X grader needs to know" type of nonsense flooding the market), but they are also frequently excellent at making complex concepts more accessible through simplification. American children understand their textbooks and study materials far better than American kids do back home [in the other system], because everything is explained so brilliantly... The school books back home tend to be traditionally concise, almost curt, focusing strictly on the essentials without giving much weight to practical examples or reading primary documents—like in history class, for instance—and instead still rely heavily on rote memorization of facts, whereas the American approach places a massive emphasis on practical application of whatever you can possibly use...

An average high schooler in the US is still better educated than your average high schooler in the other country. Same goes for elementary school.

That really depends on how you define being "well-educated"... I personally don't believe that hoarding a mountain of facts is the ultimate goal of schooling.

When it comes to elementary school, my niece in the States (attending a private school) receives much more instruction than my daughter does, and her peers are, in absolutely every subject, essentially what jadegardener21 describes... My own experience has been that there is this very popular prejudice that the American school system is a total catastrophe, yet people fail to consider just how diverse and multifaceted it actually is... 🤷

I'm not talking about private schools, since I don't have any insight into them. The other country only recently started seeing private schools, whereas America has a centuries-old tradition there, so surely they should be seeing better results. No one is disputing that.

I follow your logic, but the reality is that in America, the private sector is incredibly widespread (and you even have all sorts of semi-private institutions), meaning it encompasses a much larger percentage of the school-aged population than the other country does, and the top-tier schools are located within that sector. You would be comparing the American public sector to the other country's public sector, while failing to account for the fact that they don't represent the same proportions of the population; specifically, the absolute cream of the crop in America exists almost entirely outside of that public sector, whereas the elite tier in the other country is found within that public sector...

My assertion, based on my own lived experience, is that the American peak—meaning a truly good private school—is superior to the peak of the other country's system—meaning an elite public preparatory academy...

I wasn't even bringing up geography. I have no idea where you got that from... I was talking about general knowledge, just speaking broadly.

You mentioned that Americans can't see past their own borders, or something along those lines. And that we’re somehow more advanced because instead of an American-centric education, we have a European-centric one—which makes sense, since the US is far too large to ever be purely US-centric—when it comes to things like geography, history, art, literature, and so on.

Look, it isn't even really about having "more" or "less" knowledge, per se, but rather that you have one system that prioritizes breadth (like the American approach) versus a system that focuses on depth (like the European approach)... American students might lag behind in subjects they haven't covered or barely touched upon, but on average, they possess a much deeper understanding of the specific subjects they have actually studied, especially at the high school level where many courses are effectively equivalent to college-level classes—and no joke, that's an easy way to knock out some credits once you get to university...

I don't believe you can truly compare the two in terms of value, because different systems simply have different objectives... Personally, I still prefer the American style in that regard, as I feel both primary and secondary education should lean more toward breadth than sheer depth, but I prefer to look at things in context; I don't consider the American system inferior just because it sets different goals and is more "economically" driven, emphasizing practical, "marketable" skills over some vague notion of "general culture"—within its own framework, it succeeds at what it sets out to do. In my view, the main flaw of the American system isn't that, but rather that its top-tier schools and best professors are essentially "bought" by the private sector, meaning elite education isn't accessible to everyone, even if those private institutions are indeed world-class...

As for myself, I personally worked much harder, progressed much further, and learned significantly more within the best institutions the US has to offer than I ever did within the best the American system provides... though that is just my own singular experience, of course...

Yeah, I know exactly what we're talking about—and what those people up there are doing—because they... Wrong. Learn by doing—using actual examples.

I’m not saying Americans aren't masters at making everything incredibly banal—honestly, that’s how most people here see them anyway—but between all those "Idiot's Guide to X" books and the endless "What your toddler needs to know about Y" nonsense clogging up the market, they really have perfected the art of oversimplification. Still, they can be just as... Top tier. When it comes to breaking down complex ideas and making them actually make sense—American kids definitely have the edge. Got it. I'd definitely grab my textbooks and study guides from back home in America—it was my experience too—because everything is explained perfectly there.

I mean, obviously American kids don't need an instruction manual attached to every single textbook—as if they wouldn't figure it out on their own.

American textbooks tend to be pretty traditional—short, punchy, and focused strictly on the essentials without wasting time on fluff. They don't lean much into deep dives or primary sources—like reading actual historical documents, for instance—and still rely heavily on just memorizing facts for a test. Meanwhile, over in Europe, there’s a much bigger push toward practical application—actually using what you learn in the real world.

So you did a content analysis on American textbooks, and now you're suddenly an expert? I have no idea when you last actually laid eyes on an American textbook—but around here, they swap them out every single year (which is definitely a mess)—and there are so many different publishers involved that you can find completely different books being used for the exact same subject within a single school district. We’re basically just like Americans in that regard, unfortunately.😁

Depends on how you define "well-educated." Personally—and I might be wrong here—I don't think the whole point of school is just to cram a bunch of random facts into your head.

Not me either—honestly.🙂 I have no idea why you'd lump me in with that crowd—honestly.

When it comes to the basics—my niece over in the States attending that private academy gets way more than my daughter does—and honestly, her classmates are basically just living out that exact scenario placidorca16 described.🤷 In my experience, there’s this huge, sweeping prejudice here that the American school system is a total disaster—people just completely ignore how incredibly diverse it actually is.

I already pointed out which part of the system I’m talking about—not really in the mood to repeat myself.

I get where you're coming from, but here’s the thing—the private sector in the US is massive (we've even got those weird charter schools everywhere). It covers a way bigger chunk of the student population than what we see back home, and honestly, the top-tier schools are almost exclusively in that private bracket. You're basically trying to compare the American public sector to our public sector without accounting for the fact that their demographics aren't even the same—it's like you're ignoring the fact that the best of the best in the US is tucked away entirely in the private sector. Out. That sector is a mess—especially since the leadership in the States is such a joke. Inside. That whole sector—just my luck.

Well, some private K-12 schools—especially those prep academies—have already carved out a niche here in the States by churning out students with massive Ivy League acceptance rates. So, really—your point about the US doesn't quite hold water anymore.

Based on my own experience, I’d argue that the top tier of American education—think elite private schools—actually outperforms the best of our public high schools.

That’s your take—and honestly, I’m just not buying it.

You mentioned that Americans can't see past their own borders—or something close to that. And honestly, we’re kind of ahead of the curve since we have a more globalized education instead of that hyper-US-centric approach. It makes sense, though—it's hard to build a curriculum centered entirely around one country when you don't have the massive scale they do—but in terms of geography, history, art, and literature, we definitely get a much broader view.

Look, we don't exactly have that exact brand of "centrism" here—but any kind of Western-centric bias (or just being overly patriotic) isn't quite the same level of trivialization you were describing when you brought up how we teach 12-year-olds in the States about our liberal welfare state. Personally, I think the Canadian system handles it with much more depth—it’s definitely less shallow.

Look, it isn’t really about having "more" or "less" knowledge—it’s more about how the systems are built. You have one system that prioritizes breadth—think the American approach—versus a system focused entirely on depth. American students might lag behind on things they haven't officially covered yet, but when you look at the subjects they actually study, their specialized knowledge is usually way ahead of the curve. Yeah, they are. High school was basically a grind—especially since half the classes were basically college-level courses in disguise. No joke, you could practically knock out a chunk of your future degree requirements before even stepping foot on a campus.

😂 Well, you really cracked me up there. I guess we finally get a front-row seat to all the "glories" the American university system has to offer us.🙄 Basically, it all boils down to lowering the bar, shrinking the scope, and diluting the actual quality of knowledge—all while ramping up the bureaucracy and obsessing over appearances. It’s just endless paperwork and style over substance at this point. So, thanks for nothing, I guess.👎 Every single day—it's like the universe is just checking off boxes to prove my points right.

I don't think you can compare them one-to-one—different systems just have different goals. Personally, I still lean toward the American approach in that regard; I feel both primary and secondary education should focus more on breadth than depth. But look, I like to provide context—I don't view the American system as inferior just because its objectives are framed differently. It’s heavily geared toward economics, prioritizing practical, "marketable" skills over some vague sense of "general culture"—but within those specific goals, it actually succeeds at what it sets out to do.

Why the sudden shift? You’re coming across as a bit inconsistent here. Up until now, you've been championing the overall "quality" of the American system, but now it sounds like you're saying its main virtue is just being pragmatic.😢 While I agree pragmatism is a plus, I definitely wouldn't say it's the *only* thing you can get from a high-quality education. There are other benefits—and they're just as vital.

In my opinion, the real flaw isn't about the curriculum—it's that the top-tier schools and best professors have essentially been "bought out" by the private sector. That means elite education isn't accessible to everyone, though granted, those private institutions are truly world-class.

True, I'll give you that. But the issue isn't just about accessibility; it's that those "pragmatic" goals aren't aimed at the public good, but rather at serving private interests. It's an elitist structure designed to be reproduced for the sake of maintaining the power of the upper class. There's no real intention to make that kind of "pragmatism" available to the masses.😁

Personally, I’ve worked harder, progressed further, and learned significantly more through the best things the US has to offer compared to anything available back home. But again, that's just my own experience.

Well, nobody is disputing that. 🙂 You had that experience, and you aren't the only one—and I assume you didn't stop after high school, either. We aren't even talking about universities here. But we can't generalize an entire national education system based on individual anecdotes. Experiences can be great or terrible, whether you're in the US or anywhere else. We're talking about large-scale systemic trends, not just single people.😉

Terry Campbell said:Yeah, we did music class in third grade too—just sat there in front of our lockers, trying to memorize songs from some random CD...

In first grade, we have to memorize 15 songs from a music CD,

it would be reasonable to play the music during tests to help a kid if they forget how a song starts, because if they hesitate for even a second, it’s treated like they don't know the whole thing.

And grading is a whole other story; it mostly depends on the teacher. My daughter had an amazing teacher—strict but fair. She didn't get straight As in first grade, but she ended up on the Honor Roll later, and that teacher was such a great educator (she still is). She encouraged the stronger students to help those struggling and never allowed the slower kids to feel inferior.

And there's no way they were memorizing this many songs in music class seven years ago; that's just a recent invention.

But my son's teacher is someone who lacks any warmth or care for them. Cold and repulsive. And best of all, you get an F for three minor infractions across all subjects—like if he forgets his bells for music, or if he forgets the plastic cover for his desk in art. Or English and Math if he forgets to glue in a worksheet she gave him.
They are still little and forgetful; the rule where three strikes equals an F should only start in third or fourth grade, not first.
She isn't grading him; she's grading the mother for failing to pack everything. Especially since he has so many books and constant worksheets to carry, plus PE—it's too much for them.
When I ask the teacher at the end of class if they noted down the homework, she just snaps, "How am I supposed to find the time for that?" even though I point out there are only 17 students in the class, whereas the after-school programs deal with 30.
And they aren't even in the same boat, because the kids in the after-school program do their homework at school; some don't even bring books home for a week, so they can't even forget homework and get penalized. My son could already read, write in print, and do addition and subtraction up to 100 before preschool, but how unstimulating the system is shows in the fact that now he's thinking in increments of 10 or 20; he doesn't calculate as fast as before. He gets As on his tests, which she can't take away, but those Fs from minor infractions will tank his GPA. It never occurs to me to call some mom every single day to ask about homework, especially since my son isn't even aware he got an F due to those three strikes, and I wouldn't even know unless I went to parent-teacher conferences. When I tell him, he doesn't even get upset. This method of punishment is completely pointless.

Ultimately, it all comes down to what kind of person the teacher is. A friend of mine had a daughter just like this—a bit of a dreamer (just like my son, who might be staring at the stars while she's explaining the Democratic Party platform)—but she had a wonderful teacher who always said, "They're still little, they can't be expected to manage all these things," which saved the girl from becoming frustrated.
I just hope we survive this school year. Next year, I'm transferring him to a different school, but I'll make sure to research the teacher thoroughly instead of leaving my child at the mercy of some frustrated old woman who uses her RED pen to scribble in a child's notebook just to prove her superiority.

I honestly think grading kids in first grade is totally counterproductive—it’s pure idiocy, really. I was lucky enough to go to a school modeled after the French system back in the day, where everything in those early years was handled through play and drawing. Even the educational experts say that's the superior way to do it. It feels like we just have this sick obsession with pressure here, which ends up causing kids actual trauma sometimes. At best, they just end up scared and confused. I used to laugh at some of the parents who would drill their little ones to read and write before they even stepped foot in kindergarten. Look, I get wanting them to be educated, but forcing a five-year-old to master literacy before school starts? That’s just insane.
So, here I am, my daughter is seven and she’s already getting grades finalized. One subject is a solid B, but for everything else, it’s hovering between a C and a B-minus... and this is first grade. My experience as a parent has been exhausting; I feel like I'm dealing with an eighth grader instead of a little kid.
And don't even get me started on the rules—apparently, according to the handbook, a teacher isn't allowed to help a student if they don't understand a question. They're supposed to figure it out themselves. Every single question? That's what the teacher told me. To me, it sounds completely nonsensical. No one is asking for the answer to be handed to them; they just want the question to be explained. And some of these questions—mostly math—are so convoluted I swear they were designed by a masochist. I went through a college program where we dealt with heavy-duty math and mechanics, and I can tell you for a fact that some of these problems are just abnormal for that age group. Plus, some kids are a year younger than their peers, yet they're treated exactly the same. There is zero individual approach in our school system.

Another huge issue is how they cram every random bit of information into the curriculum later on instead of letting kids specialize early. For instance, we have young people who can tell you the capital of Papua, but we lack actual skilled professionals.
Our education system is regressing when it should be moving forward.

What specific regulations are they citing when they claim a first-grade teacher isn't allowed to help a student? Look, I’m obviously not suggesting she should just sit there and do their homework for them, but there are times when the whole class needs to tackle a concept together when nobody gets it, or when a teacher needs to step in to guide and explain things—that is literally the entire point of her job.
Where is this even written? Which handbook is making these claims? It’s absolute nonsense...

I completely agree.
Sometimes we’re looking at a new type of problem that requires extra explanation—like those tricky word problems. However, if it's a concept they've practiced thoroughly, I find it's better to just point them toward their textbook or notebook. It encourages them to be independent and teaches them how to use their resources to find information on their own.
The most important skill being built here is learning how to learn.

With math, kids often give up before they even start, claiming they don't understand the question. My response is always the same: read it five more times if you have to, and ask yourself some key questions (What do we already know? What's missing? How can I find out what's missing?). Then, just give it a TRY. Most students end up solving it perfectly; they were just feeling discouraged at the beginning.

If they're still stuck, I won't just give them the answer. Instead, I'll guide them through the logic using targeted questions. For some, all they need is a little bit of context to make it click—for example, "If YOU had 15 Beyblades and you gave John 5 to play with, how many would you have left?"

David Anderson49 said:I honestly think grading kids in first grade is totally counterproductive—it’s pure idiocy, really. I was lucky enough to go to a school modeled after the French system back in the day, where everything in those early years was handled through play and drawing. Even the educational experts say that's the superior way to do it. It feels like we just have this sick obsession with pressure here, which ends up causing kids actual trauma sometimes. At best, they just end up scared and confused. I used to laugh at some of the parents who would drill their little ones to read and write before they even stepped foot in kindergarten. Look, I get wanting them to be educated, but forcing a five-year-old to master literacy before school starts? That’s just insane.
So, here I am, my daughter is seven and she’s already getting grades finalized. One subject is a solid B, but for everything else, it’s hovering between a C and a B-minus... and this is first grade. My experience as a parent has been exhausting; I feel like I'm dealing with an eighth grader instead of a little kid.
And don't even get me started on the rules—apparently, according to the handbook, a teacher isn't allowed to help a student if they don't understand a question. They're supposed to figure it out themselves. Every single question? That's what the teacher told me. To me, it sounds completely nonsensical. No one is asking for the answer to be handed to them; they just want the question to be explained. And some of these questions—mostly math—are so convoluted I swear they were designed by a masochist. I went through a college program where we dealt with heavy-duty math and mechanics, and I can tell you for a fact that some of these problems are just abnormal for that age group. Plus, some kids are a year younger than their peers, yet they're treated exactly the same. There is zero individual approach in our school system.

Another huge issue is how they cram every random bit of information into the curriculum later on instead of letting kids specialize early. For instance, we have young people who can tell you the capital of Papua, but we lack actual skilled professionals.
Our education system is regressing when it should be moving forward.

It isn't idiotic to grade them—it's idiotic to grade them poorly.

If I recall correctly, first grade isn't actually "first grade"—kids at that stage are essentially going through a "pre-school transition year," where they are gradually moved from that kindergarten phase of "just playing all day" into a phase where actual learning begins. Besides, if we had school without any kind of grades, it would just feel like another year of daycare for most children (not all, obviously, but enough of them). And frankly, which of us adults takes our jobs seriously if there isn't some sort of accountability mechanism in place?

What’s truly problematic—aside from the curriculum being fundamentally misaligned—is that those first four years should be about instilling a foundation for how to approach learning... basically ensuring that even if they don't love it, they at least don't grow to hate school. As it stands now, kids are coming out of fourth grade as nothing more than a mindless heap of memorized facts—and quite often, they're functionally illiterate.

I can say with certainty that some of the questions are abnormal (for that age group).

Can you give me a few examples?

Having an engineering degree from MIT isn't a guarantee that someone can explain math to a six-year-old. No, I'm really not joking.

Nicholas King said:It isn't idiotic to grade them—it's idiotic to grade them poorly.

If I recall correctly, first grade isn't actually "first grade"—kids at that stage are essentially going through a "pre-school transition year," where they are gradually moved from that kindergarten phase of "just playing all day" into a phase where actual learning begins. Besides, if we had school without any kind of grades, it would just feel like another year of daycare for most children (not all, obviously, but enough of them). And frankly, which of us adults takes our jobs seriously if there isn't some sort of accountability mechanism in place?

What’s truly problematic—aside from the curriculum being fundamentally misaligned—is that those first four years should be about instilling a foundation for how to approach learning... basically ensuring that even if they don't love it, they at least don't grow to hate school. As it stands now, kids are coming out of fourth grade as nothing more than a mindless heap of memorized facts—and quite often, they're functionally illiterate.

I can say with certainty that some of the questions are abnormal (for that age group).

Can you give me a few examples?

Having an engineering degree from MIT isn't a guarantee that someone can explain math to a six-year-old. No, I'm really not joking.

The first semester is really just an adjustment period, which is why we don't issue grades then. It's about building a solid foundation for the second semester, which builds directly upon those early lessons.
If you take the time to explain the grading process to students, you won't find a single child who feels traumatized by their assessment. In fact, they often become quite self-aware and hold themselves to high standards—not because they lack confidence, but because they have such a clear understanding of what they know. Even at that young age, if you just talk to them, they might actually surprise you. 🙂

In neighboring Canada, the first group of students will graduate from the new primary tier next school year, following a system where elementary school lasts five years. These kids move straight from preschool into first grade. There are no grades given, and the curriculum covers the exact same basics our students tackle in their first semester (things like uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers up to 10, etc.).

Personally, I think it's a decent program, though I doubt we'll adopt it here since it would require a massive financial investment.

Nicholas King said:It isn't idiotic to grade them—it's idiotic to grade them poorly.

If I recall correctly, first grade isn't actually "first grade"—kids at that stage are essentially going through a "pre-school transition year," where they are gradually moved from that kindergarten phase of "just playing all day" into a phase where actual learning begins. Besides, if we had school without any kind of grades, it would just feel like another year of daycare for most children (not all, obviously, but enough of them). And frankly, which of us adults takes our jobs seriously if there isn't some sort of accountability mechanism in place?

What’s truly problematic—aside from the curriculum being fundamentally misaligned—is that those first four years should be about instilling a foundation for how to approach learning... basically ensuring that even if they don't love it, they at least don't grow to hate school. As it stands now, kids are coming out of fourth grade as nothing more than a mindless heap of memorized facts—and quite often, they're functionally illiterate.

I can say with certainty that some of the questions are abnormal (for that age group).

Can you give me a few examples?

Having an engineering degree from MIT isn't a guarantee that someone can explain math to a six-year-old. No, I'm really not joking.

I don't have an engineering degree, but I have an example for you.🙂

I remembered a specific problem that frustrated me to tears. Even back then, I couldn't figure out how to set up the equation for my sixth grader, and even after asking for help on a forum, nothing clicked.😬
To be honest, I still wouldn't know how to teach it today unless I just told her to "guess!" And when it comes to math, I refuse to resort to that.

It goes like this:

Claire and Sarah picked 20 strawberries.
Sarah says, "If you give me two strawberries, we will both have the same amount."
How many strawberries did Claire pick, and how many did Sarah pick?

The catch is that at that age, kids only know basic addition and subtraction.

Michelle Ward3 said:I don't have an engineering degree, but I have an example for you.🙂

I remembered a specific problem that frustrated me to tears. Even back then, I couldn't figure out how to set up the equation for my sixth grader, and even after asking for help on a forum, nothing clicked.😬
To be honest, I still wouldn't know how to teach it today unless I just told her to "guess!" And when it comes to math, I refuse to resort to that.

It goes like this:

Claire and Sarah picked 20 strawberries.
Sarah says, "If you give me two strawberries, we will both have the same amount."
How many strawberries did Claire pick, and how many did Sarah pick?

The catch is that at that age, kids only know basic addition and subtraction.

You have to work backward from the end here... 🙂>

Marina and Mark picked 20 strawberries and they currently have an equal amount—so how many does each have? And then, what happens if Marina gives Mark two strawberries? I mean, just two... 😬

Great. How are you supposed to figure out how many items are in an equal set when you haven't even learned division yet?

Though, I suppose it’s only fair to mention there’s more to the story.
Naturally, I headed into the elementary school the next morning to ask the teacher how on earth they expected a first grader to tackle a problem like that.

The response? "Oh, you weren't actually supposed to be doing those; that's just enrichment math."

So, I can't exactly claim this is standard curriculum when the average six-year-old should be able to handle it without help.

Michelle Ward3 said:Great. How are you supposed to figure out how many items are in an equal set when you haven't even learned division yet?

Though, I suppose it’s only fair to mention there’s more to the story.
Naturally, I headed into the elementary school the next morning to ask the teacher how on earth they expected a first grader to tackle a problem like that.

The response? "Oh, you weren't actually supposed to be doing those; that's just enrichment math."

So, I can't exactly claim this is standard curriculum when the average six-year-old should be able to handle it without help.

"Which two identical numbers add up to 20?"
If the child can't make that connection, then we just start from 1.
"Let's add equal numbers until we reach 20. 1+1=2, 2+2=4..."

With just a few guided questions, the student will learn the concept systematically without needing to know division first.

Michelle Ward3 said:Great. How are you supposed to figure out how many items are in an equal set when you haven't even learned division yet?

Though, I suppose it’s only fair to mention there’s more to the story.
Naturally, I headed into the elementary school the next morning to ask the teacher how on earth they expected a first grader to tackle a problem like that.

The response? "Oh, you weren't actually supposed to be doing those; that's just enrichment math."

So, I can't exactly claim this is standard curriculum when the average six-year-old should be able to handle it without help.

I mean, does this kid even have a sense of what a single unit is? If they actually had a brother or a sister around, maybe they’d realize how to split things by two. It's like, "Hey, we've got twenty bucks—how are we going to split this fairly, and not just give it all to one sibling?" 🤣. 😁

The real issue here—and I think this is important—is that adults tend to force everything into these rigid, cliché mathematical formulas instead of just leaning on a child's natural intuition and common sense.

So, I wouldn't exactly go so far as to say this is standard curriculum that an average first grader couldn't tackle on their own.

Wait, you actually think you have an "average" child??? 😲😲😲

😂😂😂😂😂
I think I could actually tackle this one... though I’ve never 🤣🤣🤣
. Honestly, whenever I’ve taken IQ tests where math and logic were involved, my scores always ended up being way lower than even people with significant 😂
.

The problem presented here isn't quite suitable for a first-grade assessment, though I suppose it serves as decent practice to teach children that they actually need to engage their brains rather than simply following a template. My own daughter would likely have burst into tears if she couldn't solve it immediately, but if I applied my preferred method—tell her to sit and think for five minutes before calling for help—she would have figured it out on her own.

Nicholas King claims that fourth graders emerge from the classroom completely dazed by data, yet I find myself unable to agree with that assertion. In my specific classroom, nearly half of them are straight-A students, which makes it painfully obvious that the curriculum lacks sufficient rigor. Furthermore, my daughter hasn't even truly studied or mastered the art of learning yet; she simply absorbs everything during class. She isn't some sort of wunderkind; she’s merely attentive, curious, and happens to have encountered most of this information previously through documentaries and encyclopedias. Regarding the lower grades, I feel more a sense of pity for the wasted time and the physical toll of sitting at a desk all day when the child isn't truly gaining any depth. It strikes me that she will struggle significantly once she hits fifth grade, where actual work and discipline become mandatory.

To return to the original topic—I am in favor of grading, provided we also establish clearer standards and raise the bar. If we start early, children will grasp more quickly that being graded isn't a nightmare, but rather an inherent part of life.