Quote:
Originally Posted by cortman
^ This puts it extremely well. In our current dialogue of political correctness excelling is not safe, it would seem.
|
Nope.
As the japanese proverb reportedly says:
"The nail that stands out, gets hammered."
The self-directed and self-motivated are derided as curve busters, obsessive, nerds, etc. Grandstanders making everybody else feel bad.
The politically correct approach is supposed to be cooperation and teamwork so that everybody shares the glory or avoids the embarrassment of failure. It is all about limiting risk, celebrating the mild, decrying the bold. Not about about pushing yourself to your limits, finding them, and then growing past them or working around them.
The evidence is piling up, though, that motivation and determination matters. That the willingness to work hard and stick with a task in the face of challenge and opposition is the best indicator of future success for children. More so than getting along with others and following the herd.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...n-ever/309402/
The above snippet is from the author of a recent, well-reviewed book on education, that highlights the effectiveness of challenging children, even *demanding* excellence, in developing a child's full potential.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Smartest-K...7094473&sr=1-1
http://www.economist.com/news/books-...-and-brightest
Quote:
Ms Ripley credits Poland’s swift turnaround to Miroslaw Handke, the former minister of education. When he entered the post in 1997, Poland’s economy was growing but Poles seemed destined for the low-skilled jobs that other Europeans did not want. So he launched an epic programme of school reforms, with a new core curriculum and standardised tests. Yet his most effective change was also his wooliest: he expected the best work from all of his pupils. He decided to keep all Polish children in the same schools until they were 16, delaying the moment when some would have entered vocational tracks. Poland’s swift rise in PISA rankings is largely the result of the high scores of these supposedly non-academic children.
This is a lesson Ms Ripley sees throughout her tour of “the smart-kid countries”. Children succeed in classrooms where they are expected to succeed. Schools work best when they operate with a clarity of mission: as places to help students master complex academic material (not as sites dedicated to excellence in sport, she hastens to add). When teachers demand rigorous work, students often rise to the occasion, whereas tracking students at different cognitive levels tends to “diminish learning and boost inequality”. Low expectations are often duly rewarded.
|
Competition is by definition a challenge.
Those that decry competition are saying that teaching conformity and acquiescence is preferable to challenging kids to excel. Makes for more pliable, less contentious citizens, obviously. Easier to lead for the powers that be, whether library directors or politicians.
And, of course, if challenging kids to excel is deplorable, how much more deplorable the ones that challenge themselves. A bunch of trouble makers, really. Inventing things, disrupting businesses and tradition. Pushing to the boundaries and beyond.
Better to wish them away, right?
(Good luck with that, BTW.)