Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

serious answer.

-In Sports, you practice every day for a race or game. That is considered hard work.
-In Academics, you study and practice every day for a test or a course. That is considered hard work.

-In Sports, it is cheating to take drugs or give the athlete a head start of 10 minutes.
- In Academics, it is affirmative action to give a student a place in a college, course even with astounding poor grades and abilities, ahead of academically high performing students. Everyone knows what it means.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

That's not the right analogy. studying and test prep is analogous to personal trainers and individual coaching. The athlete still has to put in the work. Plenty of UMC parents of young athletes spend tens of thousands on their kids.

Using Steroids would be analogous to using calculators on a non-calculator test.

Taking steroids would be analogous to knowing the types of questions beforehand.

In most sports, the athlete is given the "questions" beforehand (e.g. golf course layout).

In many academic competitions (math competitions and spelling bees come to mind), past questions/words are available for practice. Are winners of those events who practice the same as steroid users?

Past questions don’t equate to types of questions on the test.

In sports everyone knows the standard and the trick. In academic competitions a puzzle has to be novel, and if someone knows beforehand they’d have an advantage.

Math is ne of the easiest subjects to cheat on.

Thanks for proving you are an idiot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

That's not the right analogy. studying and test prep is analogous to personal trainers and individual coaching. The athlete still has to put in the work. Plenty of UMC parents of young athletes spend tens of thousands on their kids.

Using Steroids would be analogous to using calculators on a non-calculator test.

Taking steroids would be analogous to knowing the types of questions beforehand.

In most sports, the athlete is given the "questions" beforehand (e.g. golf course layout).

In many academic competitions (math competitions and spelling bees come to mind), past questions/words are available for practice. Are winners of those events who practice the same as steroid users?

Past questions don’t equate to types of questions on the test.

In sports everyone knows the standard and the trick. In academic competitions a puzzle has to be novel, and if someone knows beforehand they’d have an advantage.

Math is ne of the easiest subjects to cheat on.

knows what beforehand - the question that will be asked? How does someone know beforehand the question that will be asked?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

That's not the right analogy. studying and test prep is analogous to personal trainers and individual coaching. The athlete still has to put in the work. Plenty of UMC parents of young athletes spend tens of thousands on their kids.

Using Steroids would be analogous to using calculators on a non-calculator test.

Taking steroids would be analogous to knowing the types of questions beforehand.

In most sports, the athlete is given the "questions" beforehand (e.g. golf course layout).

In many academic competitions (math competitions and spelling bees come to mind), past questions/words are available for practice. Are winners of those events who practice the same as steroid users?

Past questions don’t equate to types of questions on the test.

In sports everyone knows the standard and the trick. In academic competitions a puzzle has to be novel, and if someone knows beforehand they’d have an advantage.

Math is ne of the easiest subjects to cheat on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

Drugs like Adderall are the analogous component to PEDs. Test prep is analogous to preparing for a game by drilling moves and analyzing past games. The former are obviously cheating, and the latter are obviously not cheating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

That's not the right analogy. studying and test prep is analogous to personal trainers and individual coaching. The athlete still has to put in the work. Plenty of UMC parents of young athletes spend tens of thousands on their kids.

Using Steroids would be analogous to using calculators on a non-calculator test.

Taking steroids would be analogous to knowing the types of questions beforehand.

In most sports, the athlete is given the "questions" beforehand (e.g. golf course layout).

In many academic competitions (math competitions and spelling bees come to mind), past questions/words are available for practice. Are winners of those events who practice the same as steroid users?

Look. Turn off the Tik-Tok. Turn off the video games. Don't spend ALL your afternoons on the playground. Go home and crack a book for a few hours a night practicing the hard subjects and turn in your assignments. This isn't magic. And above all STOP MAKING EXCUSES.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

That's not the right analogy. studying and test prep is analogous to personal trainers and individual coaching. The athlete still has to put in the work. Plenty of UMC parents of young athletes spend tens of thousands on their kids.

Using Steroids would be analogous to using calculators on a non-calculator test.

Taking steroids would be analogous to knowing the types of questions beforehand.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

That's not the right analogy. studying and test prep is analogous to personal trainers and individual coaching. The athlete still has to put in the work. Plenty of UMC parents of young athletes spend tens of thousands on their kids.

Using Steroids would be analogous to using calculators on a non-calculator test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

In sports, everyone is playing the same game. In academics, everything about what to teach and test is subjective

^ my question was inspired by the arrogance and entitled poster who wants to eliminate young scholars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

It is a serious question.

In sports it’s clear, if you take performance enhancers it’s cheating.

In school is nebulous. You take performance enhancers in the form of test prep and other services, and it’s considered hard work.

Anonymous wrote:In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?

In sports, it's usually pretty obvious - which is why sports are so popular.
In academics, I'd say getting all the questions right on a hard math test shows merit -- I mean just look at the curve in the class scores. This can't be a serious question?

Flawed as they are tests, GPA, advanced coursework, contests, and awards are still measures of achievement. You just happen to not like the outcomes, so you’re twisting yourself into knots to redefine achievement.

As for identifying talent that’s a separate question. Teacher recommendations are good but subject to bias. Straight lottery? That won’t help identify talent. What are your alternatives?

In an ever changing diverse and fluid world, why are some fighting for rigidly and narrowly defined merit achievements?

What is a true achievement anyway?

How can we differentiate talent from cogs in the machine?