Very true, on all counts.

---

Someone remind me that I don't need this [link] when all I want is a small TV for my bedroom.

---

I love that stat aurelia. Where did you find it?

---

Hec... um. That's good! But, uh, were you making a point? That's not me being snarky sarcasticperson -- I'm not sure if you're disagreeing with me, or pointing out that there are people with a good grasp, or what?

Sorry, not grumping at you and I hadn't seen neo-con education lady yet. I agree with some of her points, but not the agenda she's pushing.

For example, Emmett's Little League works like this. Single-A they don't keep score. The kids keep score but there's no official score keeping. The coach's pitch. It's all about learning the game. In Double-A, they keep score but they don't keep standings. So the kids know if they won or lost, and the kids pitch, but the coach's step in after four balls. It's still about learning the skills but it is also about learning to compete. At the next level up, they keep score and standings and the best players go out in tournaments. (And win the divisional championship! Take that neocon bitch!)

So yes, competition good. Skills and confidence building... also good!

I'm not a big fan of Super-Validation as either a schooling philosophy or a parenting approach. But...even in the East Bay where Emmett goes to school - as liberal and Rainbow Coalition place as you'd ever want - that's really not how kids are being taught.

---

I love that stat aurelia. Where did you find it?

A guy that I've been working with researched it. He's got spreadsheets and everything (with the possible exception of a social life).

---

Heh, aurelia -- sounds like a candidate for the Ig Nobel awards, at least if he publishes it somewhere. :-)

---

Tag is a great game for kids -- not too many rules, but enough that they get some sense of having to follow them; enough leeway to get creative (freeze tag, TV tag, etc.)

Flashlight tag! We played this in the woods all the time. One of my favorite memories.

I didn't stay up for all of TDS. I tend to catch it the next day. Our schools have been good for my kids needs. Brendon gets extra credit for his honors classes and could get more than a 4.0. Bobby gets double time and a quiet room to take his important tests because of his attention problems. I think both these rules make sense. They play tag and dodgeball, often and with enthusiasm.

Alias: SpyDaddy!!!!! Dr. Guy does a great job, but keep him outta Jack's skin. Ewwwwww.

---

In college, grades should be determined by mastery of subject. But in high school? You can't fail kids in Special Ed no matter how poorly they do. They can make no progress over the year and they will still pass because you have to pass them.

I think it is a shame that we're inclined to look at high school as something that is almost assured to end because of a student's age. If a SPED student needs 7 years to learn what we think a high school graduate needs to know, and what the average student is able to learn in 4 years--I wish it were more expected that the SPED student would take the time he needs. I realize this is partially a pipe dream, because even if space and funds weren't an issue for public schools, not too many people are going to remain in high school for too long, after age 18, because they'd feel ridiculous.

I remember a kid who was a couple of years older than me, who ended up graduating with my class. I don't know what his deal was. He always seemed like maybe he was just a wise ass, but now when I look back, I think it's likely he had learning disabilities. It was nearly unheard of in my town, for a 20 or 21 year old to still be coming to school, the way he was. That's a shame. This kid luckily had the attitude and popularity to weather sticking around for a couple more years, and must have had parents who insisted upon it.

Is it fair to the kid who works through high school in regular classes or advanced classes when there's another kid who takes Special Ed classes and they have the same GPA? Depends on your definition of fair, I guess.

I don't know how it is handled today, or nationwide, but when I was in high school, GPA was used in two different ways--to provide two different rankings of students. There was just class ranking, based on a flat GPA. It only took into consideration the number of A/B/C etc. grades a student had. Then there was the weighted GPA. In calculating the weighted GPA, they considered the level of the course (honors; college level A; college level B; standard; special ed).

If I earned a B in honors Spanish, it was worth the same number of points in the weighted rank as an A in college A level Spanish. If I recall correctly, colleges looked at the weighted rank. I know my weighted rank was much higher than my unweighted rank.

---

We had no weighted ranks at my highschool. I think the special ed comparison isn't so much an issue - for us the resentment came in with the other kids of perfectly normal abilities who chose not to take the IB and AP classes that were available.

---

Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise? A world of ewwwwww.

---