A question that has been repeatedly coming up for me lately is: when should you act to prevent something failing when you know you have the power to “spot” it and help it not fail in the short term. My default has shifted over 20y from “almost always act” to “almost never act”
-
-
“Love of learning” is bullshit because taken seriously that translates to “love of failure.” Nobody likes that. Constant failure is a sign you should quit before you die. What people fall in love with is getting unreasonably lucky where you fail less than expected = is “aptitude”
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nope. Straight A students fail faster more often, we just don't let you see it because it's none of your business and we also do it at home for fun. The only way what you say would be true is if an A wasn't really an A.... which may be true these days. We count down from 100%.
-
Grade inflation is massive and widespread. Also, I think you are describing "curious" or "inquisitive" or "self-directed" students more than "straight A" students per se. Students exploring their interests at home might not be the most compliant.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I agree with this--schools not giving the most proficient reps at failure. But they also do this for most kids across the proficiency spectrum--lessons tailored to the "proximal zone of development" (goldilocks zone) but in reality not enough failure.
-
Then it feeds back cause kids give up at first sign of failure, so teacher reassesses how hard content should be.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.