Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awards and metals are for simple minded people. You should not need a metal for simply doing your job.

I guess I don't need metals to do my job, but plastic tools really suck.

ROTFL! Love it! I wonder how many others caught this?

Several people, by the looks of it. I'm not sure why that pp keeps prattling on about giving people metals [sic] . Clearly she never earned any.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a wonderful and impressive achievement to get a 4.0 or higher and yes, I DO think every kid with a 4.0 deserves a medal! And I fully agree with not having just one valedictorian or salutatorian when there are many kids with 4.0+.

OP -- you have too much time on your hands and perhaps too much need to see the negative. Be happy that your kids are surrounded by so many high-achieving kids. Look at the glass half-full. 4.0 = success ... celebrate it!

Clearly the parent of a barely 4.0 kid. I think the risk of the more rigorous course load should be rewarded. By the way, my kid was a 3.7 and that was his best effort.

No. My kids don't get letter grades yet. But, when they do, I will be quite proud of them if they get 4.0 GPA. You and the OP are the epitome of the up-tight, hyper-competitve East Coasters. Life if too short to play your "I'm better than you" games.

I went to a tiny public high school (I graduated with 32 students) and we also didn't have valedictorians, but there were awards for graduating with honors, etc. It is fun to say that I was 15th in my class - but that sounds terrible when I tell you how small it was

In the long run, who cares. That was 20 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awards and metals are for simple minded people. You should not need a metal for simply doing your job.

I guess I don't need metals to do my job, but plastic tools really suck.

ROTFL! Love it! I wonder how many others caught this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have friends in Texas where class rank is hugely important because of the way admissions to UT Austin and A & M work. They tell me that it punishes kids for taking risks (e.g. kids don't take calculus because they're afraid of a B, instead they limit themselves to classes where an A is within reach), or for involvement in the arts (e.g. a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus a free period can get a 5.0, but a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus theater can't because the arts classes aren't weighted). I don't want that for my kid.

I see your point here. It's too bad.

Why do you think "it's too bad".
I think its an appropriate adjustment to the reality of high-achieving high school students today.
Kids are still recognized for being the the absolute top group of students at their high school, without creating the situation described above in the quoted text. More and more districts are recognizing this phenomenon and colleges are taking it into account. As long as there is a system in place that allows the college to know that the student is in the top 10%, 5% of their class, they don't "lose ground" against another kid for not being at a school with valedictorians.

It is not creating a system where "everyone gets a trophy". It's recognizing that there isn't much value in a system in which the top 20 academic superstars at a high school are ranked when the differences between them are insignificant.

High achievers are rewarded with excellent grades in school and compensation in the workplace. Awards and metals are just one more bad reason to have unnecessary meetings.

People are supposed to work hard and excell. That's why they are compensated well and receive excellent grades. Expecting an award is like expecting to be paid twice for the same work.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a wonderful and impressive achievement to get a 4.0 or higher and yes, I DO think every kid with a 4.0 deserves a medal! And I fully agree with not having just one valedictorian or salutatorian when there are many kids with 4.0+.

OP -- you have too much time on your hands and perhaps too much need to see the negative. Be happy that your kids are surrounded by so many high-achieving kids. Look at the glass half-full. 4.0 = success ... celebrate it!

Clearly the parent of a barely 4.0 kid. I think the risk of the more rigorous course load should be rewarded. By the way, my kid was a 3.7 and that was his best effort.

Anonymous wrote:I have friends in Texas where class rank is hugely important because of the way admissions to UT Austin and A & M work. They tell me that it punishes kids for taking risks (e.g. kids don't take calculus because they're afraid of a B, instead they limit themselves to classes where an A is within reach), or for involvement in the arts (e.g. a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus a free period can get a 5.0, but a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus theater can't because the arts classes aren't weighted). I don't want that for my kid.

I see your point here. It's too bad.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a wonderful and impressive achievement to get a 4.0 or higher and yes, I DO think every kid with a 4.0 deserves a medal! And I fully agree with not having just one valedictorian or salutatorian when there are many kids with 4.0+.

OP -- you have too much time on your hands and perhaps too much need to see the negative. Be happy that your kids are surrounded by so many high-achieving kids. Look at the glass half-full. 4.0 = success ... celebrate it!

Winners should be rewarded, not runner-ups

My Howard County HS didn't do valedictorians. They just designated top five/ten percent in the program with a little asterisk. I think we may have worn cords too, but those were given out at an awards ceremony earlier in the week, as to not hold up the commencement ceremony. This was 15 years ago.

I think it's a wonderful and impressive achievement to get a 4.0 or higher and yes, I DO think every kid with a 4.0 deserves a medal! And I fully agree with not having just one valedictorian or salutatorian when there are many kids with 4.0+.

OP -- you have too much time on your hands and perhaps too much need to see the negative. Be happy that your kids are surrounded by so many high-achieving kids. Look at the glass half-full. 4.0 = success ... celebrate it!

Anonymous wrote:I have friends in Texas where class rank is hugely important because of the way admissions to UT Austin and A & M work. They tell me that it punishes kids for taking risks (e.g. kids don't take calculus because they're afraid of a B, instead they limit themselves to classes where an A is within reach), or for involvement in the arts (e.g. a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus a free period can get a 5.0, but a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus theater can't because the arts classes aren't weighted). I don't want that for my kid.

+1. I wasn't willing to take a risk. I really wanted to take AP art history, but it was an extremely hard class/teacher. I was worried it would bring down my GPA so I didn't take it. 10 years later I still wish I had taken it. Would have been more useful to me than Chemistry.

I have friends in Texas where class rank is hugely important because of the way admissions to UT Austin and A & M work. They tell me that it punishes kids for taking risks (e.g. kids don't take calculus because they're afraid of a B, instead they limit themselves to classes where an A is within reach), or for involvement in the arts (e.g. a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus a free period can get a 5.0, but a kid who takes 6 honors classes plus theater can't because the arts classes aren't weighted). I don't want that for my kid.

This is insane. I was in a high achieving IB school with 2k+ students. We still had a valedictorian. I'm pretty sure to get Valedictorian she had to take extra classes at the community college at night (to boost rank), but still we had one.

Anonymous wrote:Awards and metals are for simple minded people. You should not need a metal for simply doing your job.

I guess I don't need metals to do my job, but plastic tools really suck.