I push my kids and have NO shame! You should too!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

These days, you get more "public support" if you are trans, queer or some minority group than if you are motivated passionate student.

That's what the pro-privilege parents like to tell themselves.

You are serious about "privilege" how about dropping preference for children of alumni at universities? That goes a long way in increasing the capacity that is available to others.

How about actually helping minorities and economically disadvantaged from pre-k and in FCPS from k onwards with extra additional support. Special after school programs, additional hours, tutors, etc. right from k. Actively put money towards education of these children, who deserve this kind of support at an early age which builds a solid foundation.

But no, what you want is really signal your woke status and pretend to help. Getting 50 kids to TJ from these groups would allow you to signal your own moral superiority. All the tens of thousands of other kids from these groups who need help are ignored. There is no story there.

My child and I help coach kids at an elementary school in math from 3rd grade and many kids show a big improvement and lose fear of math. Many are economically disadvantaged. Some actively love math competitions. It is very little effort on our part actually. FCPS could scale this 1000x with a little investment. But no this is too low level and not much woke signaling is possible here. So they would rather focus on getting a few more kids to TJ to signal their wokeness.

The vast majority of people who believe in the recent TJ reforms would be THRILLED to see alumni preferences go away at universities. They won't because of donor relation concerns, but we would certainly love it if they did.

The bottom line is that academic institutions can and should be able to admit who they want to based on what's in the best interest of the school, its educational environment, and its students. There's no universe in which admitting an entire class of students along the same evaluation axis creates a positive academic environment. And that is why you need subjectivity in an admissions process.

Of course. Without subjectivity, how do we keep whites on top?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

These days, you get more "public support" if you are trans, queer or some minority group than if you are motivated passionate student.

That's what the pro-privilege parents like to tell themselves.

You are serious about "privilege" how about dropping preference for children of alumni at universities? That goes a long way in increasing the capacity that is available to others.

How about actually helping minorities and economically disadvantaged from pre-k and in FCPS from k onwards with extra additional support. Special after school programs, additional hours, tutors, etc. right from k. Actively put money towards education of these children, who deserve this kind of support at an early age which builds a solid foundation.

But no, what you want is really signal your woke status and pretend to help. Getting 50 kids to TJ from these groups would allow you to signal your own moral superiority. All the tens of thousands of other kids from these groups who need help are ignored. There is no story there.

My child and I help coach kids at an elementary school in math from 3rd grade and many kids show a big improvement and lose fear of math. Many are economically disadvantaged. Some actively love math competitions. It is very little effort on our part actually. FCPS could scale this 1000x with a little investment. But no this is too low level and not much woke signaling is possible here. So they would rather focus on getting a few more kids to TJ to signal their wokeness.

The vast majority of people who believe in the recent TJ reforms would be THRILLED to see alumni preferences go away at universities. They won't because of donor relation concerns, but we would certainly love it if they did.

The bottom line is that academic institutions can and should be able to admit who they want to based on what's in the best interest of the school, its educational environment, and its students. There's no universe in which admitting an entire class of students along the same evaluation axis creates a positive academic environment. And that is why you need subjectivity in an admissions process.

Of course. Without subjectivity, how do we keep whites on top?

I do not think it is about keeping whites on top.

The powers that be at academic institutions want donor money, alumni preferences is a way to get that. More whites is a byproduct. Look at how they took Chinese money and sold away many secrets.

Same with TJ admissions. Woke is cool and would win votes. Hence the changes at TJ. Nothing to do with whites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

If by success, you mean the privilege that wealth affords the wealthy then sure.

Bingo!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

If by success, you mean the privilege that wealth affords the wealthy then sure.

Bingo!!

More like Dingo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

These days, you get more "public support" if you are trans, queer or some minority group than if you are motivated passionate student.

That's what the pro-privilege parents like to tell themselves.

You are serious about "privilege" how about dropping preference for children of alumni at universities? That goes a long way in increasing the capacity that is available to others.

How about actually helping minorities and economically disadvantaged from pre-k and in FCPS from k onwards with extra additional support. Special after school programs, additional hours, tutors, etc. right from k. Actively put money towards education of these children, who deserve this kind of support at an early age which builds a solid foundation.

But no, what you want is really signal your woke status and pretend to help. Getting 50 kids to TJ from these groups would allow you to signal your own moral superiority. All the tens of thousands of other kids from these groups who need help are ignored. There is no story there.

My child and I help coach kids at an elementary school in math from 3rd grade and many kids show a big improvement and lose fear of math. Many are economically disadvantaged. Some actively love math competitions. It is very little effort on our part actually. FCPS could scale this 1000x with a little investment. But no this is too low level and not much woke signaling is possible here. So they would rather focus on getting a few more kids to TJ to signal their wokeness.

The vast majority of people who believe in the recent TJ reforms would be THRILLED to see alumni preferences go away at universities. They won't because of donor relation concerns, but we would certainly love it if they did.

The bottom line is that academic institutions can and should be able to admit who they want to based on what's in the best interest of the school, its educational environment, and its students. There's no universe in which admitting an entire class of students along the same evaluation axis creates a positive academic environment. And that is why you need subjectivity in an admissions process.

Of course. Without subjectivity, how do we keep whites on top?

I do not think it is about keeping whites on top.

The powers that be at academic institutions want donor money, alumni preferences is a way to get that. More whites is a byproduct. Look at how they took Chinese money and sold away many secrets.

Same with TJ admissions. Woke is cool and would win votes. Hence the changes at TJ. Nothing to do with whites.

You may be right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Winner if everyone was studying an extra hour or two a day things would be very different same with sports

There needs to be a way to differentiate between talent and spending more time at something. Aap should be based on talent not time spent preparing.

This idea that there is such a thing as 'intelligence' or 'talent' that is meaningful without effort, and that it is somehow more 'real' than achievements that are worked for is a distortion (one that is more common in American culture than many others).

I think the difference to me is that spending more time at something to get good at the actual thing (e.g., reading, writing, mathematics, arts, science, sports) is worthwhile, what I think would be problematic is if you are spending most of the time to beat some artificial hoop (e.g., Cogat test) rather than spending the effort to excel at what actually matters. I get why people do it, but it's a sign of a flawed system.

This is spot on. We have a cultural problem when it is more important to prove that you have the skill than it is to have the skill. This is why standardized exams are deeply problematic - because in many cases they test only for the raw skill rather than the ability to leverage the skill towards the greater good.

Standardized tests aren't meant to be used in isolation to determine someone's potential. That's why they use standardized tests + grades: one shows raw abilities, one shows that you can put in the work.

That's why they're optional at many schools these days. They just aren't all that meaningful.

I know! More and more the leading schools aren't using these things. They just aren't that helpful in determining much of anything.

That's not why schools are not using standardized tests. The problem is they don't give the results that schools want. That's why (some) schools are moving away from them.

Brutally, indefensibly false.

Colleges are businesses. If it was in their best interests to continue the outdated practice of overemphasizing standardized exam performance, that’s what they’d do.

It’s not, so they don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Winner if everyone was studying an extra hour or two a day things would be very different same with sports

There needs to be a way to differentiate between talent and spending more time at something. Aap should be based on talent not time spent preparing.

This idea that there is such a thing as 'intelligence' or 'talent' that is meaningful without effort, and that it is somehow more 'real' than achievements that are worked for is a distortion (one that is more common in American culture than many others).

I think the difference to me is that spending more time at something to get good at the actual thing (e.g., reading, writing, mathematics, arts, science, sports) is worthwhile, what I think would be problematic is if you are spending most of the time to beat some artificial hoop (e.g., Cogat test) rather than spending the effort to excel at what actually matters. I get why people do it, but it's a sign of a flawed system.

This is spot on. We have a cultural problem when it is more important to prove that you have the skill than it is to have the skill. This is why standardized exams are deeply problematic - because in many cases they test only for the raw skill rather than the ability to leverage the skill towards the greater good.

Standardized tests aren't meant to be used in isolation to determine someone's potential. That's why they use standardized tests + grades: one shows raw abilities, one shows that you can put in the work.

That's why they're optional at many schools these days. They just aren't all that meaningful.

I know! More and more the leading schools aren't using these things. They just aren't that helpful in determining much of anything.

That's not why schools are not using standardized tests. The problem is they don't give the results that schools want. That's why (some) schools are moving away from them.

Brutally, indefensibly false.

Colleges are businesses. If it was in their best interests to continue the outdated practice of overemphasizing standardized exam performance, that’s what they’d do.

It’s not, so they don’t.

They don't want to be sued. They saw the conservative bent on the supreme court and have adjusted.

I agree colleges are businesses. They are looking for leadership and leaders who are most likely to make the most money and donate back to the school. That's much more than top scores on a test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Winner if everyone was studying an extra hour or two a day things would be very different same with sports

There needs to be a way to differentiate between talent and spending more time at something. Aap should be based on talent not time spent preparing.

This idea that there is such a thing as 'intelligence' or 'talent' that is meaningful without effort, and that it is somehow more 'real' than achievements that are worked for is a distortion (one that is more common in American culture than many others).

I think the difference to me is that spending more time at something to get good at the actual thing (e.g., reading, writing, mathematics, arts, science, sports) is worthwhile, what I think would be problematic is if you are spending most of the time to beat some artificial hoop (e.g., Cogat test) rather than spending the effort to excel at what actually matters. I get why people do it, but it's a sign of a flawed system.

This is spot on. We have a cultural problem when it is more important to prove that you have the skill than it is to have the skill. This is why standardized exams are deeply problematic - because in many cases they test only for the raw skill rather than the ability to leverage the skill towards the greater good.

Standardized tests aren't meant to be used in isolation to determine someone's potential. That's why they use standardized tests + grades: one shows raw abilities, one shows that you can put in the work.

That's why they're optional at many schools these days. They just aren't all that meaningful.

I know! More and more the leading schools aren't using these things. They just aren't that helpful in determining much of anything.

That's not why schools are not using standardized tests. The problem is they don't give the results that schools want. That's why (some) schools are moving away from them.

Brutally, indefensibly false.

Colleges are businesses. If it was in their best interests to continue the outdated practice of overemphasizing standardized exam performance, that’s what they’d do.

It’s not, so they don’t.

Your take is so wrong. I was at a university for over a decade. And now run a business. Universities may have some business like characteristics but there is no way to say that colleges are businesses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Winner if everyone was studying an extra hour or two a day things would be very different same with sports

There needs to be a way to differentiate between talent and spending more time at something. Aap should be based on talent not time spent preparing.

This idea that there is such a thing as 'intelligence' or 'talent' that is meaningful without effort, and that it is somehow more 'real' than achievements that are worked for is a distortion (one that is more common in American culture than many others).

I think the difference to me is that spending more time at something to get good at the actual thing (e.g., reading, writing, mathematics, arts, science, sports) is worthwhile, what I think would be problematic is if you are spending most of the time to beat some artificial hoop (e.g., Cogat test) rather than spending the effort to excel at what actually matters. I get why people do it, but it's a sign of a flawed system.

This is spot on. We have a cultural problem when it is more important to prove that you have the skill than it is to have the skill. This is why standardized exams are deeply problematic - because in many cases they test only for the raw skill rather than the ability to leverage the skill towards the greater good.

Standardized tests aren't meant to be used in isolation to determine someone's potential. That's why they use standardized tests + grades: one shows raw abilities, one shows that you can put in the work.

That's why they're optional at many schools these days. They just aren't all that meaningful.

I know! More and more the leading schools aren't using these things. They just aren't that helpful in determining much of anything.

That's not why schools are not using standardized tests. The problem is they don't give the results that schools want. That's why (some) schools are moving away from them.

Brutally, indefensibly false.

Colleges are businesses. If it was in their best interests to continue the outdated practice of overemphasizing standardized exam performance, that’s what they’d do.

It’s not, so they don’t.

Your take is so wrong. I was at a university for over a decade. And now run a business. Universities may have some business like characteristics but there is no way to say that colleges are businesses.

… They’re not-for-profit businesses, mostly, but they are absolutely businesses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Winner if everyone was studying an extra hour or two a day things would be very different same with sports

There needs to be a way to differentiate between talent and spending more time at something. Aap should be based on talent not time spent preparing.

This idea that there is such a thing as 'intelligence' or 'talent' that is meaningful without effort, and that it is somehow more 'real' than achievements that are worked for is a distortion (one that is more common in American culture than many others).

I think the difference to me is that spending more time at something to get good at the actual thing (e.g., reading, writing, mathematics, arts, science, sports) is worthwhile, what I think would be problematic is if you are spending most of the time to beat some artificial hoop (e.g., Cogat test) rather than spending the effort to excel at what actually matters. I get why people do it, but it's a sign of a flawed system.

This is spot on. We have a cultural problem when it is more important to prove that you have the skill than it is to have the skill. This is why standardized exams are deeply problematic - because in many cases they test only for the raw skill rather than the ability to leverage the skill towards the greater good.

Standardized tests aren't meant to be used in isolation to determine someone's potential. That's why they use standardized tests + grades: one shows raw abilities, one shows that you can put in the work.

That's why they're optional at many schools these days. They just aren't all that meaningful.

I know! More and more the leading schools aren't using these things. They just aren't that helpful in determining much of anything.

That's not why schools are not using standardized tests. The problem is they don't give the results that schools want. That's why (some) schools are moving away from them.

Brutally, indefensibly false.

Colleges are businesses. If it was in their best interests to continue the outdated practice of overemphasizing standardized exam performance, that’s what they’d do.

It’s not, so they don’t.

Your take is so wrong. I was at a university for over a decade. And now run a business. Universities may have some business like characteristics but there is no way to say that colleges are businesses.

… They’re not-for-profit businesses, mostly, but they are absolutely businesses.

Not true. For one, most state funded instititions are driven significantly by political considerations - because of the state funding. also faculty politics is a big deal. even in private institutions, lots of other factors involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

These days, you get more "public support" if you are trans, queer or some minority group than if you are motivated passionate student.

That's what the pro-privilege parents like to tell themselves.

You are serious about "privilege" how about dropping preference for children of alumni at universities? That goes a long way in increasing the capacity that is available to others.

How about actually helping minorities and economically disadvantaged from pre-k and in FCPS from k onwards with extra additional support. Special after school programs, additional hours, tutors, etc. right from k. Actively put money towards education of these children, who deserve this kind of support at an early age which builds a solid foundation.

But no, what you want is really signal your woke status and pretend to help. Getting 50 kids to TJ from these groups would allow you to signal your own moral superiority. All the tens of thousands of other kids from these groups who need help are ignored. There is no story there.

My child and I help coach kids at an elementary school in math from 3rd grade and many kids show a big improvement and lose fear of math. Many are economically disadvantaged. Some actively love math competitions. It is very little effort on our part actually. FCPS could scale this 1000x with a little investment. But no this is too low level and not much woke signaling is possible here. So they would rather focus on getting a few more kids to TJ to signal their wokeness.

Good points. grunt work isn't woke/cool.

Agree, grunt work isn't cool, but if you're happy with your kid doing worksheets instead of learning something meaningful go for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Winner if everyone was studying an extra hour or two a day things would be very different same with sports

There needs to be a way to differentiate between talent and spending more time at something. Aap should be based on talent not time spent preparing.

This idea that there is such a thing as 'intelligence' or 'talent' that is meaningful without effort, and that it is somehow more 'real' than achievements that are worked for is a distortion (one that is more common in American culture than many others).

I think the difference to me is that spending more time at something to get good at the actual thing (e.g., reading, writing, mathematics, arts, science, sports) is worthwhile, what I think would be problematic is if you are spending most of the time to beat some artificial hoop (e.g., Cogat test) rather than spending the effort to excel at what actually matters. I get why people do it, but it's a sign of a flawed system.

This is spot on. We have a cultural problem when it is more important to prove that you have the skill than it is to have the skill. This is why standardized exams are deeply problematic - because in many cases they test only for the raw skill rather than the ability to leverage the skill towards the greater good.

Standardized tests aren't meant to be used in isolation to determine someone's potential. That's why they use standardized tests + grades: one shows raw abilities, one shows that you can put in the work.

That's why they're optional at many schools these days. They just aren't all that meaningful.

I know! More and more the leading schools aren't using these things. They just aren't that helpful in determining much of anything.

That's not why schools are not using standardized tests. The problem is they don't give the results that schools want. That's why (some) schools are moving away from them.

Brutally, indefensibly false.

Colleges are businesses. If it was in their best interests to continue the outdated practice of overemphasizing standardized exam performance, that’s what they’d do.

It’s not, so they don’t.

Your take is so wrong. I was at a university for over a decade. And now run a business. Universities may have some business like characteristics but there is no way to say that colleges are businesses.

… They’re not-for-profit businesses, mostly, but they are absolutely businesses.

Not true. For one, most state funded instititions are driven significantly by political considerations - because of the state funding. also faculty politics is a big deal. even in private institutions, lots of other factors involved.

You speak as if businesses aren't driven at least in part by political considerations. Indeed, they are much more so than most colleges and universities.

I sense there's a point you're trying to beat around, but you're not really making it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Asians and Europeans learn Algebra in 5th or 6th grade. Americans are not into academics in general compared to the rest of the developed world and thus the slow but sure decline.

+1. I'm so confused by the posters who think Algebra in 7th is that difficult. The rest of the world does it. Why can't our kids? Oh, that's right. Because American parents insist that math is too difficult for young kids to learn. But somehow, those same parents have their 2 year olds learning advanced sports skills. We know exactly what the issue is in this country, and it's not the capacity of the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

These days, you get more "public support" if you are trans, queer or some minority group than if you are motivated passionate student.

That's what the pro-privilege parents like to tell themselves.

You are serious about "privilege" how about dropping preference for children of alumni at universities? That goes a long way in increasing the capacity that is available to others.

How about actually helping minorities and economically disadvantaged from pre-k and in FCPS from k onwards with extra additional support. Special after school programs, additional hours, tutors, etc. right from k. Actively put money towards education of these children, who deserve this kind of support at an early age which builds a solid foundation.

But no, what you want is really signal your woke status and pretend to help. Getting 50 kids to TJ from these groups would allow you to signal your own moral superiority. All the tens of thousands of other kids from these groups who need help are ignored. There is no story there.

My child and I help coach kids at an elementary school in math from 3rd grade and many kids show a big improvement and lose fear of math. Many are economically disadvantaged. Some actively love math competitions. It is very little effort on our part actually. FCPS could scale this 1000x with a little investment. But no this is too low level and not much woke signaling is possible here. So they would rather focus on getting a few more kids to TJ to signal their wokeness.

Good points. grunt work isn't woke/cool.

Agree, grunt work isn't cool, but if you're happy with your kid doing worksheets instead of learning something meaningful go for it.

This has always been my difficulty with the attitude of TJ parents. It always seems like they are more concerned with setting a high floor for their child's achievement and potential than cultivating the possibility of a high ceiling. It's as though they're terrified that if their child doesn't end up as a doctor, lawyer, or full-stack web developer, that they're going to be working at a 7-11 or a drive thru. It's so myopic and it results in their kids not achieving what they could.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So absolutely absurd to not push kids to do advanced stuff. Especially since some average people are deciding the standards.

Push your kids to do well in school, on screener tests, and everywhere, becait will make them better at the end. They will learn about themselves the most.

Go for Algebra in 7th, even in 6th if you can.

LA should have better acceleration too.

Yes ! Yes ! Yes ! For goodness sake,where would Bill Gates be without a college degree ?! Push ! Push ! Push !

Bill Gates did programming in high school...when that was almost unheard of. sometimes it is good to be silent rather than parade your ignorance.

+1

Bill Gates was programming since he was 13 years old. He forgot to check his privilege, bow down to "equity officers" and stop his accelerated education. He should have studied "Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity".

Down with success.

These days, you get more "public support" if you are trans, queer or some minority group than if you are motivated passionate student.

That's what the pro-privilege parents like to tell themselves.

You are serious about "privilege" how about dropping preference for children of alumni at universities? That goes a long way in increasing the capacity that is available to others.

How about actually helping minorities and economically disadvantaged from pre-k and in FCPS from k onwards with extra additional support. Special after school programs, additional hours, tutors, etc. right from k. Actively put money towards education of these children, who deserve this kind of support at an early age which builds a solid foundation.

But no, what you want is really signal your woke status and pretend to help. Getting 50 kids to TJ from these groups would allow you to signal your own moral superiority. All the tens of thousands of other kids from these groups who need help are ignored. There is no story there.

My child and I help coach kids at an elementary school in math from 3rd grade and many kids show a big improvement and lose fear of math. Many are economically disadvantaged. Some actively love math competitions. It is very little effort on our part actually. FCPS could scale this 1000x with a little investment. But no this is too low level and not much woke signaling is possible here. So they would rather focus on getting a few more kids to TJ to signal their wokeness.

Good points. grunt work isn't woke/cool.

Agree, grunt work isn't cool, but if you're happy with your kid doing worksheets instead of learning something meaningful go for it.

This has always been my difficulty with the attitude of TJ parents. It always seems like they are more concerned with setting a high floor for their child's achievement and potential than cultivating the possibility of a high ceiling. It's as though they're terrified that if their child doesn't end up as a doctor, lawyer, or full-stack web developer, that they're going to be working at a 7-11 or a drive thru. It's so myopic and it results in their kids not achieving what they could.

The poster spoke about doing the grunt work early so that kids can be helped over a longer period of time, build a good foundation and lose their fear of math. You are just saying something different. some fancy high horse stuff. care to elaborate in any case - what is cultivating high ceiling? seems like fun. i am guessing it doesn't involve work(sheets).