You are NOT special!

[applecorped]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/high-school-teacher-tells-graduating-students-special-article-1.1092109

"Yes, you've been pampered, cosseted, doted upon, helmeted, bubble-wrapped," McCullough said in his speech. “Yes, capable adults with other things to do have held you, kissed you, fed you, wiped your mouth, wiped your bottom, trained you, taught you, tutored you, coached you, listened to you, counseled you, encouraged you, consoled you and encouraged you again. You've been nudged, cajoled, wheedled and implored. You've been feted and fawned over and called sweetie pie. ... But do not get the idea you're anything special. Because you're not."


:D

[steve s]

So much for American exceptionalism.

Steve S

[Scootch]

There was a great line in the movie "The Incredibles". The little boy was told that everyone was special and he responded if everyone is special then no one is special (or something like that)

[TragicMonkey]

People are like snowflakes: unique, amazing, and an incredible pain in the butt when gathered in vast numbers. Also, people melt when exposed to high temperatures. Practically identical to snowflakes, really. So I say, "some people are snowflakes, and a few are Frosted Flakes. They're grrrrreat!"

[Dunstan]

By the way, the whole speech (http://www.theswellesleyreport.com/2012/06/wellesley-high-grads-told-youre-not-special/) is worth reading, and makes it a little clearer than the article does that the speaker wasn't simply ranting about "kids these days."

[Saule]

the quoted part, was it for a synonym contest?

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I half agree and half disagree. I think his assumption that the people he is talking to has been treated that way is rather off. At the extreme, think of how many kids are abused, come from broken homes with distant parents, and so on. Maybe his school and the schools I've been to were just different in socioeconomic status, but it really doesn't speak to me or my "crowd". Overparenting is an extablished poor parenting style (linky (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2011.00689.x/abstract;jsessionid=16EA6162D0DA00692602969FF0C0E3 30.d03t02?systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+ be+disrupted+on+9+June+from+10%3A00-12%3A00+BST+%2805%3A00-07%3A00+EDT%29+for+essential+maintenance&userIsAuthenticated=false&deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=)) along with the now defunct "self-esteem" movement, but I dislike that people generalise so much.

Also, I am always dubious of "kids today" arguments because they have been going on for recorded history. I think his argument was poor when he resorted to numbers.

And I love the silliness of this:

The teacher's controversial advice caught the nation's eye, in an age where many believe today's youth suffer from a sense of self-importance.

The reaction to the teacher's blunt advice was overwhelmingly positive, both from students at the receiving end of the reality check and people who saw the speech as it circulated the Internet this week.

"For once someone told us what we need to hear and not necessarily what we wanted to hear," said one commenter on The Swellesley Report.

"Undoing all 'they've' done in on 10-minute speech. My faith in the world may have been restored," another commenter said.

Yeah, clearly he took a brave stand. Everyone loves to bash entitled youths. Even the article doesn't give a counter-point.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

There was a great line in the movie "The Incredibles". The little boy was told that everyone was special and he responded if everyone is special then no one is special (or something like that)

Yup, he copied the line :) .

[m-n-m]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/high-school-teacher-tells-graduating-students-special-article-1.1092109

"Yes, you've been pampered, cosseted, doted upon, helmeted, bubble-wrapped," McCullough said in his speech. “Yes, capable adults with other things to do have held you, kissed you, fed you, wiped your mouth, wiped your bottom, trained you, taught you, tutored you, coached you, listened to you, counseled you, encouraged you, consoled you and encouraged you again. You've been nudged, cajoled, wheedled and implored. You've been feted and fawned over and called sweetie pie. ... But do not get the idea you're anything special. Because you're not."


:D

What's your point, applecorped? And why the big grin?

[applecorped]

What's your point, applecorped? And why the big grin?

No point. I liked his speech. I grin because I just had an amazing fish taco with an excellent pico de gallo.

[Toontown]

...

Also, I am always dubious of "kids today" arguments because they have been going on for recorded history. I think his argument was poor when he resorted to numbers.

Dubiousness about "kids today" arguments is naive. Complaints about "kids today", throughout recorded history, have usually been correct, often followed by catastrophic proof therof.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Dubiousness about "kids today" arguments is naive. Complaints about "kids today", throughout recorded history, have usually been correct, often followed by catastrophic proof therof.

Evidence? And if I give you a quote that isn't linked to a catastrophe, will you discount it? Broken clock, etc.

Here's some data on the "problem" described by the guy in the OP:

First, contrary to her central point that youths today show vastly elevated self-esteem and -satisfaction, high school seniors report no change in self-satisfaction over the last 30 years. Further, the biggest drops occur on exactly the questions we would most expect to balloon if Twenge is correct: students’ feeling that “I am a person of worth” (a notion she claims self-esteem programs injected into 1980s students en masse). Yet, self-attributed youthful worth fell more rapidly than any other measure! Nor did teens show increases in other areas of self-satisfaction, such as increased assumptions of personal competence. They report a less positive attitude toward themselves (82% in 1976, 73% in 2005). The difference was made up in neutral responses; there is no change in either personal satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

Tables 5 and 6 show reading and math scores along a constant measure of competence. Here we see a bit of backsliding by 17 year-olds after 1990 in reading and math, but the kids supposedly most drenched in self-esteem (9- and 13-year-olds) show impressive improvements in both skills. Note that by 2004, the average math skills of 9-year-olds were approaching those of 13-year-olds of 1975.

Well, surely the entitled, handed-everything-on-a-platter brats of today are dodging the tough classes for “Sparkle Mind,” “Me Poem,” and other New Age frills Twenge seems to think are taking over modern schools? Table 7 shows, yet again, exactly the opposite is the case. Note massive leaps in the percentages of high schoolers taking Algebra II and all three major science courses; only trigonometry has slipped, in favor of more Calculus. While the increasing percentage of Asian students (100% of whom take math and science coursework) influences these trends, they occurred for all races.

Further evidence of the increased structure and focus of high school students' coursework is seen in the percentages graduating with minimum credits (4 in English; 3 each in social science, physical science, and math; 2 in foreign language; and 0.5 in computer science) recommended by the National Commission on Excellence in Education for college-bound seniors: 2% in 1982, 18% in 1990, 36% in 2005. The proportion of seniors graduating with 4 English credits, 3 social science credits, 2 science credits, and 2 mathematics credits rose from 32% in 1982 to 82% in 2005 (Digest of Education Statistics, 2007, Table 144). Yet again, these are the opposite trends from the educational dissipation Twenge depicts.

Are the uninflated Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores plunging as GenMe replaces the tougher Boomers among high school grads? Yet again, exactly the opposite transpired. The low points in SAT scores occurred in 1979 and 1980, long before the self-esteem movements took hold. Since 1980, SAT scores have generally improved, which is very impressive for two reasons. First, the percentage of high school seniors taking the test has risen rapidly, meaning that test-takers are no longer the elite students as was the case in the 1960s and 1970s (the high test scores of 1966-74 reflect very few test takers). Second, black and Hispanic students, who have lower scores than whites, increasingly dominate public schools, and they show rising scores as well.

Linky. (http://www.youthfacts.org/twenge.php)

The whole article is a good look at the "facts" people present.

[m-n-m]

No point. I liked his speech. I grin because I just had an amazing fish taco with an excellent pico de gallo.

Yeah, I've bolded the obvious.

[applecorped]

Yeah, I've bolded the obvious.

Of course it was obvious. I wrote it.


p.s. fish tacos are special!:D

[I Ratant]

Here it is, all laid out..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faU-SK0pHCI

[fuelair]

People are like snowflakes: unique, amazing, and an incredible pain in the butt when gathered in vast numbers. Also, people melt when exposed to high temperatures. Practically identical to snowflakes, really. So I say, "some people are snowflakes, and a few are Frosted Flakes. They're grrrrreat!"

But, most are just flakes. And flakes are just flakes.........:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:eek:

[C_Felix]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avenue_Q

and

http://www.amazon.com/Half-Empty-David-Rakoff/dp/0385525249

[I Ratant]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avenue_Q

and

http://www.amazon.com/Half-Empty-David-Rakoff/dp/0385525249
.
A more useful link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/books/review/Scheft-t.html

[mike3]

I've got some questions about this:

1. does even a lot of "genuine achievement" still not make one "special"? That essentially nobody is "special"? (note he is saying it to everyone there, which would mean that he would also be saying it to the highest-genuine-achiever as well)

2. does it sound like there's a problem in the way the parents raise the kids, that gives them this notion of being "special"?

3. he talks about having them live "extraordinary" lives. But if everyone does that, then the "extraordinary" is now "ordinary". And how does this work with the implied idea that _nobody_ is "special"?

[crimresearch]

I've got some questions about this:

1. does even a lot of "genuine achievement" still not make one "special"? That essentially nobody is "special"? (note he is saying it to everyone there, which would mean that he would also be saying it to the highest-genuine-achiever as well)

2. does it sound like there's a problem in the way the parents raise the kids, that gives them this notion of being "special"?

3. he talks about having them live "extraordinary" lives. But if everyone does that, then the "extraordinary" is now "ordinary". And how does this work with the implied idea that _nobody_ is "special"?
At 18, Mozart was special. Sho Yano (The guy who just finished medical school at 21) is special.

Getting a 4.2 GPA out of 4.0 by playing in the school band, isn't special.

In between there is a lot of room to draw distinctions about 'how special?'.

Your 'nobody is special', is of course a fallacy of omission.

[mike3]

At 18, Mozart was special. Sho Yano (The guy who just finished medical school at 21) is special.

Getting a 4.2 GPA out of 4.0 by playing in the school band, isn't special.

In between there is a lot of room to draw distinctions about 'how special?'.

Your 'nobody is special', is of course a fallacy of omission.

So then there are "varying degrees of 'specialness'" -- so what is the point being made? And also, if there's a continuum of "specialness", what then do the terms "special" and "not special" mean? Note that he says to everyone there that "they are not special". Not that some are "a little bit special", others "a little more", others "not even a little special", others "a fair bit of special", but to _all_ of them "you are not special".

And what about the "extraordinary" vs. "ordinary" point I mentioned? By definition, only a small subset can be considered "extraordinary". So to tell them to _all_ live "extraordinary" lives doesn't make any sense. Or does it? If so, how?

What did I "omit" in the "fallacy of omission" that was there?

[bigred]

Great speech. Course I love ice cream, so......

[angrysoba]

Also, I am always dubious of "kids today" arguments because they have been going on for recorded history. I think his argument was poor when he resorted to numbers.

This is true, you can find these kinds of rants in the works of Confucius, Shakespeare and Anthony Burgess. Not that kids today actually read books, so they have no idea, too busy playing computer games and "sexting" and sitting around eating junkfood. When I were their age...

[bigred]

? His complaint in that regard, if any, wasn't about the kids but how their parents are raising them. If a child is coddled/spoiled, it's hardly the child's fault. So even if you take it as a rant about "these kids today" rant (which it is not, or very little of it at least), he's not faulting them.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

? His complaint in that regard, if any, wasn't about the kids but how their parents are raising them. If a child is coddled/spoiled, it's hardly the child's fault. So even if you take it as a rant about "these kids today" rant (which it is not, or very little of it at least), he's not faulting them.

I disagree. He was talking to the kids, telling them they were spoiled and have overly-high opinions of self-worth and that everything from grades to trophies are watered down. I think the implication is that is on them. He wasn't giving a parenting seminar.

[Mehdimentio]

There was a great line in the movie "The Incredibles". The little boy was told that everyone was special and he responded if everyone is special then no one is special (or something like that)

Another priceless quote from that movie is when the father responds to the mother trying to get him to go to the son's elementary school graduation from some class to another:

"It's psychotic! They keep inventing new ways to celebrate mediocrity. But when someone is genuinely exceptional..."

[23_Tauri]

Timmy is special (http://southpark.wikia.com/wiki/Timmy_Burch)

:p

[C_Felix]

I've got some questions about this:

1. does even a lot of "genuine achievement" still not make one "special"? That essentially nobody is "special"? (note he is saying it to everyone there, which would mean that he would also be saying it to the highest-genuine-achiever as well)

2. does it sound like there's a problem in the way the parents raise the kids, that gives them this notion of being "special"?

3. he talks about having them live "extraordinary" lives. But if everyone does that, then the "extraordinary" is now "ordinary". And how does this work with the implied idea that _nobody_ is "special"?

I used to be a teacher and I read a book; the title of which escapes me. It was something along the lines of "Why Our Children Aren't Learning" or "Why Our Schools Fail our Children"...etc...

The author was talking about kindergarten and the self-worth the teachers try to instill. A typical lesson he's seen time and time again was the "I am special because...", where the teacher would write the first line and the child will fill in the rest.

Typical answers were, "I can color inside the lines." "I can read." "I can add 2+2"

He then wonders, "What happens when the child learns these accomplishments aren't special at all, and they are not unique in any way." While these exercises are intellectually vapid, parents eat this stuff up.

He then continues, "Why don't we see kindergarteners or first graders writing to prompts like, 'I want to get better at....' or 'If I could change one thing about the world...'"

[MNBrant]

If I am not special then what am I?

[crimresearch]

So then there are "varying degrees of 'specialness'" -- so what is the point being made? And also, if there's a continuum of "specialness", what then do the terms "special" and "not special" mean? Note that he says to everyone there that "they are not special". Not that some are "a little bit special", others "a little more", others "not even a little special", others "a fair bit of special", but to _all_ of them "you are not special".

And what about the "extraordinary" vs. "ordinary" point I mentioned? By definition, only a small subset can be considered "extraordinary". So to tell them to _all_ live "extraordinary" lives doesn't make any sense. Or does it? If so, how?

What did I "omit" in the "fallacy of omission" that was there?
On the scale of 'specialness', one of the 'varying degrees', includes the zero point (or lowest common denominator if you will), which would be 'not at all special'.

Likewise, the set 'genuine achievement' (which contains even routine goals like getting passing grades), holds the sub set of more difficult and less common achievements like say, a perfect SAT score.

In both instances, membership in the larger set doesn not equate to membership in the smaller set.

To omit the distinction that 'all A can be B, but that doesn't mean that all B are always A', is to create a logical fallacy.

What he said was appropriate for those to whom it applied, so there is no value in extrapolating further.

[derchin]

http://th04.deviantart.net/fs70/300W/f/2012/153/0/a/everyone_wants_to_be_a_snowflake_by_derchin1-d521fgk.jpg

[arthwollipot]

Always remember that you are unique. Just like everybody else.

[JJM 777]

The little boy was told that everyone was special and he responded if everyone is special then no one is special
This.

/thread

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Another priceless quote from that movie is when the father responds to the mother trying to get him to go to the son's elementary school graduation from some class to another:

"It's psychotic! They keep inventing new ways to celebrate mediocrity. But when someone is genuinely exceptional..."

Yeah, that movie had weird Objectivist leanings...

Seriously though, I've heard these complaints all my life and I have yet to be in a competition where everyone got trophies. And "special" was the universal code-word for mentally handicapped.

Is there any evidence of a specialness pandemic smothering our future?

[bigred]

I disagree. He was talking to the kids, telling them they were spoiled and have overly-high opinions of self-worth and that everything from grades to trophies are watered down. I think the implication is that is on them.
Where did you get that? Where he say or imply any of that was their fault? Nope. In fact early on he makes a point of saying how they were coddled etc etc. Frankly I wished he had gone on more about the idiocy of parental permissiveness and coddling and general irresponsibility that has been rampant for some time now. Then we act surprised that there are so many kids (or by this point "adults") who don't behave in public. d'oh.

[Legend]

Where did you get that? Where he say or imply any of that was their fault? Nope. In fact early on he makes a point of saying how they were coddled etc etc. Frankly I wished he had gone on more about the idiocy of parental permissiveness and coddling and general irresponsibility that has been rampant for some time now. Then we act surprised that there are so many kids (or by this point "adults") who don't behave in public. d'oh.

No one "acts surprised", that's an oft-repeated cliché used in conjunction with the "kids these days" tripe. No one ever sees a kid misbehaving and gets overcome by a sense of bemusement at how this morbid vision was ever spawned. The first thing one thinks is, "Christ, his parents should be locked up."

Anyway, I think his message is solid, for what it's worth, but I don't think he should be getting praised for it. I and my brethren of "kids these days" hear that sort of ego-bashing all the time.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Where did you get that? Where he say or imply any of that was their fault? Nope. In fact early on he makes a point of saying how they were coddled etc etc. Frankly I wished he had gone on more about the idiocy of parental permissiveness and coddling and general irresponsibility that has been rampant for some time now. Then we act surprised that there are so many kids (or by this point "adults") who don't behave in public. d'oh.

Yeah, any evidence of this?

We may disagree, but I still say it is presumptuous to tell people they have been spoiled (whether this is about them or their parents). And trying to use numbers to tell Valedictorians, who are obviously not a watered down title, that they are still not special was just odd.

[crimresearch]

Then in all seriousness, you simply haven't gotten around much, or you are overlooking it when it happens.

Co-Valedictorians? Middle school, elementary school, and kindergarden Valedictorians? 4.5 GPAs?

Gold stars for everyone, even if they weren't actually there, so they won't feel bad?

It happens enough that the OP comments needed to be said.

[Weak Kitten]

Yeah, wonderful, go and diss every accomplishment they may have had in their entire young life. Tell them that every prize they've won was a lie and every good grade they got is unimportant. Crush all the pride they have now so it'll be easier to keep them from doing anything unpredictable in the future.

Then you can go tell all the unemployed people out there that it's because they just aren't smart or hard working enough. Tell them there are thousands of jobs going unfilled but they aren't good enough for them and that's why they are still unemployed. Then when they ask where these jobs are and what training they would need to get them you can just ignore them as worthless loosers.

[I Ratant]

Dubiousness about "kids today" arguments is naive. Complaints about "kids today", throughout recorded history, have usually been correct, often followed by catastrophic proof therof.
.
That's what I say to the proud parents with their cutest newborns at the Mall.
"Too bad they grow up to be people".

[I Ratant]

If I am not special then what am I?
.
A fluke of the universe, as noted above.

[The Man]

If I am not special then what am I?

[Mermaidman voice]EEEEEEEEVILLLLLLLLLLLL!!!![/Mermaidman voice]

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Then in all seriousness, you simply haven't gotten around much, or you are overlooking it when it happens.

Co-Valedictorians? Middle school, elementary school, and kindergarden Valedictorians? 4.5 GPAs?

Gold stars for everyone, even if they weren't actually there, so they won't feel bad?

It happens enough that the OP comments needed to be said.

Sounds just like the War on Christmas. "I heard Ridiculous Sounding Thing happened there!"

Having middle, elementary and kindergarden valedictorians actually sounds like it is increasing competitiveness and not "everybody is a winner". And not everybody follows the 4.0 GPA scale... I'm not seeing the problem?

(Personally, I dislike Valedictorianism because it is such an arbitrary award bound to have sample biases. You also get complaints from parents (though accurate) that a kid taking easy classes and getting As can then beat the kid taking AP classes and getting Bs. Then we develop mixed grading scales that I think is being complained about here. We do national testing all the time, why should a school rank that incorporates you Typing and Workshop scores matter? It just gets so messy and I don't see the point of trying to preserve it.)

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Yeah, wonderful, go and diss every accomplishment they may have had in their entire young life. Tell them that every prize they've won was a lie and every good grade they got is unimportant. Crush all the pride they have now so it'll be easier to keep them from doing anything unpredictable in the future.

That was the weird thing about the speech. You could take his arguments even further:

"You want to start a family? Go ahead and be like 70% of the population. You want to serve in the military? Thousands of people join every year."

It is just odd.

[crimresearch]

Sounds just like the War on Christmas. "I heard Ridiculous Sounding Thing happened there!"

Having middle, elementary and kindergarden valedictorians actually sounds like it is increasing competitiveness and not "everybody is a winner". And not everybody follows the 4.0 GPA scale... I'm not seeing the problem?

(Personally, I dislike Valedictorianism because it is such an arbitrary award bound to have sample biases. You also get complaints from parents (though accurate) that a kid taking easy classes and getting As can then beat the kid taking AP classes and getting Bs. Then we develop mixed grading scales that I think is being complained about here. We do national testing all the time, why should a school rank that incorporates you Typing and Workshop scores matter? It just gets so messy and I don't see the point of trying to preserve it.)
Firing up the straw man factory hmmm?

Didn't say it was the end of the world... simply that it exists, and that it runs counter to the notion of 'special' when things get too watered down.

A 4.5 out of 4.0 GPA, with points being added for non-scholastic things like bake sales and clubs is a 'special achievement' how?

And kindergarden Valedictorian based on what 'competition? Raising their hand to go potty better than the other kids? Coloring inside the lines the most?

For some of the millions of kids in school today, the comments were right on target. For the rest, how were they harmed by it being said?

[bigred]

Then in all seriousness, you simply haven't gotten around much, or you are overlooking it when it happens.

Co-Valedictorians? Middle school, elementary school, and kindergarden Valedictorians? 4.5 GPAs?

Gold stars for everyone, even if they weren't actually there, so they won't feel bad?

It happens enough that the OP comments needed to be said.
"Do you have evidence blah blah blah"

Nice try but you are likely wasting your time, as I suspect you already realize. Don't hold your breath waiting for the light to pop on.


Yeah, wonderful, go and diss every accomplishment they may have had in their entire young life. Tell them that every prize they've won was a lie and every good grade they got is unimportant. Crush all the pride they have now so it'll be easier to keep them from doing anything unpredictable in the future.

Then you can go tell all the unemployed people out there that it's because they just aren't smart or hard working enough. Tell them there are thousands of jobs going unfilled but they aren't good enough for them and that's why they are still unemployed. Then when they ask where these jobs are and what training they would need to get them you can just ignore them as worthless loosers.
Yeah that's what he's saying. :rolleyes:

It would seem and I'm betting the kids he spoke to got where he was coming from far better than some of you. Good grief.

[mike3]

I used to be a teacher and I read a book; the title of which escapes me. It was something along the lines of "Why Our Children Aren't Learning" or "Why Our Schools Fail our Children"...etc...

The author was talking about kindergarten and the self-worth the teachers try to instill. A typical lesson he's seen time and time again was the "I am special because...", where the teacher would write the first line and the child will fill in the rest.

Typical answers were, "I can color inside the lines." "I can read." "I can add 2+2"

He then wonders, "What happens when the child learns these accomplishments aren't special at all, and they are not unique in any way." While these exercises are intellectually vapid, parents eat this stuff up.

He then continues, "Why don't we see kindergarteners or first graders writing to prompts like, 'I want to get better at....' or 'If I could change one thing about the world...'"

So then it seems that the "specialness" thing is not the way to go, and that it may actually set them up for disappointment further down the line. And thus, that the speech mentioned in the OP is an attempt to "bandage" a problem that started further back in the kids' lives.

What's the "intellectually vapid exercise", anyway? The "you're special" thing?

[mike3]

I disagree. He was talking to the kids, telling them they were spoiled and have overly-high opinions of self-worth and that everything from grades to trophies are watered down. I think the implication is that is on them. He wasn't giving a parenting seminar.

This sounds like a problem with our school system. It shouldn't be giving awards willy-nilly.

[mike3]

Yeah, wonderful, go and diss every accomplishment they may have had in their entire young life. Tell them that every prize they've won was a lie and every good grade they got is unimportant. Crush all the pride they have now so it'll be easier to keep them from doing anything unpredictable in the future.

Then you can go tell all the unemployed people out there that it's because they just aren't smart or hard working enough. Tell them there are thousands of jobs going unfilled but they aren't good enough for them and that's why they are still unemployed. Then when they ask where these jobs are and what training they would need to get them you can just ignore them as worthless loosers.

I thought the argument was not so much about "dissing" accomplishments, but rather that things that were not accomplishments were being treated as though they were. Difference. Like the "trophy for anything, no matter how bad" stuff. (Which is silly, since it renders "trophies" essentially totally meaningless, worthless baubles.)

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Firing up the straw man factory hmmm?

I don't think that word means what you think it does.

Didn't say it was the end of the world... simply that it exists, and that it runs counter to the notion of 'special' when things get too watered down.

Firing up the straw man factory hmmm?

A 4.5 out of 4.0 GPA, with points being added for non-scholastic things like bake sales and clubs is a 'special achievement' how?

That is something that I've never even heard debated. Evidence it is widespread?

And kindergarden Valedictorian based on what 'competition? Raising their hand to go potty better than the other kids? Coloring inside the lines the most?

Yeah, grades at that level tend to be "is the kid functioning", so I'm not really sure how a valedictorian could be determined... Nevertheless, you just cited watering down the exclusivity of the position as a problem above, but then went on to cite making exclusivity when there was previously not a problem. It makes no sense.

For some of the millions of kids in school today, the comments were right on target. For the rest, how were they harmed by it being said?

Firing up the straw man factory hmmm?

[Tsukasa Buddha]

"Do you have evidence blah blah blah"

Skeptics, how the **** do they work?

Nice try but you are likely wasting your time, as I suspect you already realize. Don't hold your breath waiting for the light to pop on.

Don't mind me, I'll just stand over here.

[crimresearch]

I don't think that word means what you think it does.



Firing up the straw man factory hmmm?



That is something that I've never even heard debated. Evidence it is widespread?



Yeah, grades at that level tend to be "is the kid functioning", so I'm not really sure how a valedictorian could be determined... Nevertheless, you just cited watering down the exclusivity of the position as a problem above, but then went on to cite making exclusivity when there was previously not a problem. It makes no sense.



Firing up the straw man factory hmmm?
So, do you have anything either correct or useful? Because nothing you posted there fits either category... or bears any resemblance to rational discourse all.


Whatever you get out of coming into thread after thread and trying to drown out useful discourse by playing these 'Oh yeah? Am not so too!!' games, I really don't care.

Until such time as you choose to provide an honest assessment of what others have said, you'll have to drag this thread to AAH all by yourself.

[wobs]

"You're all different!"

"Yes, we are all different!"

"I'm not"

[Tsukasa Buddha]

So, do you have anything either correct or useful? Because nothing you posted there fits either category... or bears any resemblance to rational discourse all.


Whatever you get out of coming into thread after thread and trying to drown out useful discourse by playing these 'Oh yeah? Am not so too!!' games, I really don't care.

Until such time as you choose to provide an honest assessment of what others have said, you'll have to drag this thread to AAH all by yourself.

You flatter me :blush: .

[Cuddles]

I actually am special.



<-- evidence.

[Careyp74]

the quoted part, was it for a synonym contest?

Yeah, each new word, I could picture the drop in the number of kids still understanding what he was talking about.

[Spindrift]

Here's an example. When my daughter was in 3rd grade she was identified as 'gifted'. Didn't get her a whole lot, they gathered the kids that were gifted once a month and did a special project after school. I don't even remember what it was.

The next year, after parental complaints AND teacher complaints, they lowered the standards so more kids could participate. My daughter asked if she had to go, because the projects were 'dumb' and most of the kids were there because their parents made them go and they didn't really participate. Apparently, they not only lowered the standards but when some parents still complained that their genius didn't qualify they just gave them a waiver.

[ZirconBlue]

What I took from the speech, was, "You're not inherently special, it's your accomplishments in life that can make you special."



A 4.5 out of 4.0 GPA, with points being added for non-scholastic things like bake sales and clubs is a 'special achievement' how?

My school had weighted GPAs to encourage to students to take AP classes. I've never even heard of the sort of GPA weighting you are suggesting, so I'd like to see some evidence that it actually happens before weighing in on it.

[halides1]

Dubiousness about "kids today" arguments is naive. Complaints about "kids today", throughout recorded history, have usually been correct, often followed by catastrophic proof therof.
I am a bit of a true crime buff. I have been surprised more than once when a story that started out as a "What is wrong with the kids of today?" turned out to be a 'What is wrong with the adults of today?" story.

[applecorped]

I am a bit of a true crime buff. I have been surprised more than once when a story that started out as a "What is wrong with the kids of today?" turned out to be a 'What is wrong with the adults of today?" story.

Don't all adults start out as kids?

[I Ratant]

Yes, but some of us stretch the maturing time...;)

[bigred]

Don't all adults start out as kids?

Many stay there, appearances to the contrary. I've always said adults are far more like children than not.