Should all kids shine equally at year-end siyum?

BH5745

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 6:45 am

amother wrote:

Was at a year-end siyum for my daughter’s class. While I thought the presentation was excellent I was very surprised that two girls had much bigger parts than the rest of the class. Hate to be the petty mommy but left me with a bad taste. Anyone else have this with their kids? What was your feeling?

I agree with you. That's really bad taste; it's so unfair to the rest of the class. At my kids' ganim in Jerusalem, every child had a more or less equal part. It seemed to me that each got to do something special. I can't say any particular children were made to shine above the rest BH.

But what you're talking is another reflection of how competitive and 'winner-focused' schools (in larger American Jewish communities) are becoming today. A few shine and the rest feel nebbuch...

imasinger

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 6:55 am

I can see this both ways.

I teach music at 4 different schools, and have just finished (b"H!) four grueling weeks of production after production.

In every single case, the teachers did their best to give out parts equally, and to give each student an opportunity to grow and to shine.

I'm sure there were some extra sensitive mothers who felt slighted because their darlings were in the dance rather than the drama. But the effort and intention were there.

So, I ask you, OP. How bad was it?

If it was that egregious, you probably aren't the only one to be upset, and the teacher should be told.

Have you spoken to the teacher to let her know how you feel? You might find there was a reason for the situation.

Maybe the reason is good, like, there are children who are struggling in other areas and this is an essential boost to their low self esteem.

Maybe the reason is bad, like the teacher found a script and was too lazy/lacked the talent to change it and make it equal.

But either way, you're better off bringing it up than stewing.

33055

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 8:57 am

Again, we don't know the circumstances of why the teacher choose those two girls or the age of the students.

Allowing everyone to shine equally does not recognize the achievements of the top students. Perhaps they earned their spots.

Yesterday, I read where a father took out a billboard to recognize his son's achievement of being the top student. The boy had impressive accomplishments of holding a 5.3 average, being in two sports, geting a full scholarship to college, working, and volunteering. The school eliminated the position of valedictorian.

My daughter's school had the top ten percent of the girls named as valedictorian. Essentially, the position is meaningless and robs the best girl of her deserved recognition. Valedictorian is not a ten person accomplishment. What of the eleventh girl? Why not make the whole grade valedictorians? They can all make speeches. Listening to all those valedictorian speeches was ridiculous.

There was a recent article about a girl who tried out for cheerleader and lost. Her mother complained, and she was allowed on the team. The educators deemed anyone who tried out is on the team. This is blatantly unfair to the ones who practiced harder or are more talented. The squad is in a competitive sport competing against other schools who don't have such a ridiculous rule. It was sad to see the real cheerleaders crying.

All of the above scenarios don't teach children that they are rewarded for their hard work.

Again, we don't know the ages of the girls, or if they cooperated, nor do we know if they even wanted to participate. As a first grader, I was forced to recite two lines in front of the whole class. I was mortified. This isn't for every child.

amother

Olive

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 10:11 am

amother wrote:

Talking about 6 year olds here.

And six year olds can earn top spots in their own way too - completing middos charts, aleph-bais, and similar age appropriate stuff.

Imo, there's nothing wrong with teaching kids about the realities of life from the get go, according to their developmental stage. A six year old can understand that another kid got a reward based on what he/she has accomplished. And its up to the parents to find areas in what their respective child can excel in, so he, too, can taste the pleasures of success in his own way.

Its not fair to any child to deny them the pleasures of success, or the chance to seek out success. By treating everyone the same, regardless of input or results, you are taking away the pleasures of success from the successful child, thereby possibly affecting his future efforts. And at the same time, by rewarding a child who did not shine in this area, you are removing any encouragement for him/her to go out and seek success. If your child hasn't found an area to do well in, it's the parent's responsibility to assist him in finding one.

Treating all kids the same is a cop-out, imo. It's trying to make our parenting jobs easier, instead of doing what we have to do. It's hard, its tough, and its especially hard with challenging kids, but our kids will do better if they are prepared for life from the start.

Fox

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 12:04 pm

There is a significant difference between protecting children from the consequences of legitimate competition and creating competition in situations where none needs to exist or where the Torah actually discourages or even prohibits it.

As a result of my profession, I've always been particularly interested in the whole "valedictorian" custom at frum schools. Over the years I've asked a number of recognized gedolim and talmidei chachomim, either personally or through an intermediary, if designating class rank at a Jewish school is appropriate. I have yet for a single one to tell me it is acceptable, and a number claim that it is absolutely assur.

Is it really appropriate to elevate a student with a GPA of 3.917 over a student with a GPA of 3.915? Because that's often what it comes down to. In fact, I just got a call a few weeks ago from a school that was requesting more decimal points be visible on the GPA report because they "needed" to determine the "winner" among three girls with identical GPAs when calculated to the second decimal place! I did it for them, but I lost complete respect for everything connected with the school and its leaders.

There is plenty of competition in life from which children cannot and should not be protected: trying out for a limited number of places on a team; applying for jobs; applying for college; participating in designated contests . . . those are all times when parents should help kids learn to abandon any vestiges of snowflakedom.

But turning everything into a competition is just as bad. Is the girl with a 3.917 GPA really more of a "winner" than the one with a 3.915 GPA? Or even the one with a 3.911 GPA? Of course not! Which is precisely why many of the most competitive universities have done away with such rankings.

How much more so, then, should an end-of-the-year school program avoid introducing stupid competition where none should exist. Yes, some children will be better in their roles than others. But this is not a Broadway production where tickets must be sold and a legitimate reason exists to make sure the best performer is selected. It's an opportunity for parents to enjoy seeing their children and reap some nachas.

Shielding children from competition is wrong. Equally wrong is creating competition for no good reason.

amother

Olive

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 12:19 pm

Fox wrote:

School is a place of academics (and yes, other things too). Is it so wrong to reward the actual leader of the group, regardless of how minute the differences are between the others? In many sports, the difference between the winner and the rest can come down to a split second, and yet we all agree on who the winner is. It plays the same in real life too - the difference between financial deals, jobs, shidduchim and other similar events can often come down to the tiniest fraction of a detail. What's wrong with children learning this early on? Valedictorian is a race of academics, what's wrong with a child knowing that someone edged him out by a teeny percentage? If you want to reward other successes, find another title or means to do so, but there is no reason to devalue the meaning of a valedictorian during the process.

So the valedictorian is the person who edged out ahead of the others academically. In sports, the winner is the person who actually ran the fastest. In drama, it's the person who can act best who gets the part. In music, it's the person who can actually sing the nicest who gets the solo. Why is excelling in academics always getting the shaft? It's a talent just like any others, there is no reason not to acknowledge it.

Fox

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 12:46 pm

amother wrote:

Valedictorian is a race of academics.

According to whom?

On the contrary, even when secular scholars compete for achievement, they are really challenging themselves to come up with more groundbreaking or insightful work. They are competing for the admiration of their peers, not for a designated number of slots.

Torah learning is enhanced by competition to come up with better interpretations, questions, or explanations -- not to win a prize. One of the greatest achievements for a rebbe is when a talmid exceeds him in learning.

In fact, there are many educators who feel that making academics into a race creates a harmful mindset for people: learning new information becomes inextricably linked at an early age with win-lose contests, making people less likely to engage in lifelong learning and education.

It's fine to acknowledge students who have in general shown academic success. There is plenty of evidence that working hard at school and mastering material at various levels creates positive results down the road. There is absolutely no evidence that someone with a 3.917 GPA will have the slightest advantage in life over someone with a 3.915 GPA.

When we insist on fostering competition when it isn't necessary or appropriate, we lose credibility. Our kids don't toughen up; they just become cynical.

amother

Olive

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 1:06 pm

Fox wrote:

According to whom?

On the contrary, even when secular scholars compete for achievement, they are really challenging themselves to come up with more groundbreaking or insightful work. They are competing for the admiration of their peers, not for a designated number of slots.

Torah learning is enhanced by competition to come up with better interpretations, questions, or explanations -- not to win a prize. In fact, one of the greatest achievements for a rebbe is when a talmid exceeds him in learning.

In fact, there are many educators who feel that making academics into a race creates a harmful mindset for people: learning new information becomes inextricably linked at an early age with win-lose contests, making people less likely to engage in lifelong learning and education.

It's fine to acknowledge students who have in general shown academic success. There is plenty of evidence that working hard at school and mastering material at various levels creates positive results down the road. There is absolutely no evidence that someone with a 3.917 GPA will have the slightest advantage in life over someone with a 3.915 GPA.

When we insist on fostering competition when it isn't necessary or appropriate, we lose credibility. Our kids don't toughen up; they just become cynical.

Is there any evidence that someone who wins a race with 2 seconds has an advantage in life? Is there evidence that someone who sings just a tad nicer than the other guy has an advantage in life? Yet, we recognize them and ply them with awards and offer them scholarships accordingly. Why is academics treated any differently? No one has guaranteed valedictorians any certain future, but why shouldn't they be entitled to their due rewards and scholarships?

Yes, Torah learning is enhanced by competition to come up with better interpretations, questions and explanations - but how do they encourage the children to get to that point? Yes, it is via prizes and awards. They continuously hand out prizes and awards in yeshiva.! And, yes, the one who learned the most, or got to the highest level, gets the highest award. And we throw a siyum for when a child completes a mesechta too. And that helps them mature into beautiful adults, where they can mold and redefine their version of success into something greater. Into type of situations where a Rebbe's greatest achievement is the success of his talmid. But a young talmid's greatest success is not his Rebbe's achievement nor his fellows students' achievement. It's his own success and celebration of it, that will in turn bring about good results later in life.

In fact, there are many educators who feel that rewarding many students for similar outcomes (instead of rewarding the winner), causes the intelligent students to downplay their efforts and thus never achieving their true potential. Why would a student give it all they've got, if giving a bit less equals similar results? Who knows what progress and discoveries (both spiritually and secularly) we've actually limited by doing this?

Removing competition and personal drives of people makes them equally cynical into giving their all to contribute to the world, and to society. And that applies to all levels of discipline, including academics. I don't know we've made academics out to be a villain.

Fox

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 2:10 pm

amother wrote:

There are two fallacies here.

The first fallacy is confusing a specific contest with ongoing education. Someone who runs races, sings in contests, or for that matter, breeds ferrets competitively is doing so by choice.

If I run in races and discover I consistently am in last place, I can choose to stop entering races. Students do not really have that option. Ranking students forces everyone into a competition that he/she may simply not be able to do even passably or may simply be uninterested in.

The second fallacy is that "due rewards and scholarships" are based on student rankings. They simply aren't. College admissions, merit-based financial aid, and admission to prestigious programs may include GPA or other measures of academic achievement as a criterion, but rankings are virtually never used. In fact, college admission coaches generally advise students that test scores, demonstrating commitment to hobbies, volunteer work, or other aspects of their lives is worth far more than the hundredths of a point difference between students when classes are ranked.

So ranking students by GPA really serves no practical purpose, and it doesn't even provide a a very realistic life lesson.

amother wrote:

Yes, Torah learning is enhanced by competition to come up with better interpretations, questions and explanations - but how do they encourage the children to get to that point? Yes, it is via prizes and awards. They continuously hand out prizes and awards in yeshiva.! And, yes, the one who learned the most, or got to the highest level, gets the highest award. And we throw a siyum for when a child completes a mesechta too.

You are making my point for me. None of these competitions pit one talmid against another. They are all based on honoring the individual achievements of a talmid, regardless of what his peers are doing. If two boys complete a mesechta, do we insist that only one make a siyum? Of course not! They each make a siyum or at least make a single siyum in which they are both honored.

amother wrote:

In fact, there are many educators who feel that rewarding many students for similar outcomes (instead of rewarding the winner), causes the intelligent students to downplay their efforts and thus never achieving their true potential. Why would a student give it all they've got, if giving a bit less equals similar results? Who knows what progress and discoveries (both spiritually and secularly) we've actually limited by doing this?

I think perhaps you are confusing general academic evaluation with the specific practice of ranking students or comparing them directly to one another.

A ranking by GPA is not really an "outcome." An outcome would be mastering certain material to the level needed for a particular grade. No one, least of all me, is suggesting that students receive similar grades for unequal work. That is not what is being discussed in any way, shape, or form.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons and ways to promote academic excellence as well as ways to recognize students who have achieved significantly. There are even appropriate ways to create knowledge-based competitions, such as spelling bees, bowls, etc. But I've yet to read or hear of anyone, either in the Torah or secular world, who believes class rankings, with their emphasis on minute, meaningless differences, serve any useful purpose.

amother

Olive

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 2:29 pm

Fox wrote:

Of course they do. In grade 3, my boys all memorized mishnayos. The boy who memorized the most, even if there was one student who memorized one less, got the prize. And likewise, the won gets the highest award is competing against the other students. In higher classes, the kid who learned the most blatt of gemara (or covered the most territory), he is the one who got recognized. The ones who came close second or third, got honorary mentions, but not equal awards.

amother

Olive

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 2:35 pm

Fox wrote:

I think your confusing the point of valedictorian compared to the rest of the academics and school curriculum. There is a purpose and direction for academics and schools to focus on developing each student to be their best they can be, but there is also a focus placed on excelling in academics and I'm referring to the latter. Rewarding the ones who excel does not eliminate or reduce the focus on the former. You can do both at the same time, there is no reason to promote one while denigrating the other. Students who excel, who beat out others, deserve the recognition. There is no reason to strip them of it or to reduce the validity of their best work, to boost the best work of other students in other arenas. A good school can do both at the same time, if they put some effort into it.

amother

Olive

Fri, Jun 15 2018, 2:45 pm

Fox wrote:

The second fallacy is that "due rewards and scholarships" are based on student rankings. They simply aren't. College admissions, merit-based financial aid, and admission to prestigious programs may include GPA or other measures of academic achievement as a criterion, but rankings are virtually never used. In fact, college admission coaches generally advise students that test scores, demonstrating commitment to hobbies, volunteer work, or other aspects of their lives is worth far more than the hundredths of a point difference between students when classes are ranked.

It's not a fallacy, and it does hold true, though in select situations. If you have an average GPA then the other factors come into play. If your GPA is around 3.0, then it's true that a 3.01, or 2.99 won't make that much of a difference, and your other activities will be scrutinized. But if you have a great GPA 3.98, 3.99, 4.00 then your pretty much guaranteed entry into your college of your choosing (with the exceptions of the top Ivy League colleges), regardless of extra curricular activities. Rankings are definitely used during college admissions. College admissions coaches do advise to demonstrate hobbies and volunteer work, because they gear their approach based on average performances and not stellar work.

I can personally attest to this. I went back to college, with multiple kids at home. Of course, volunteer work and hobbies wasn't something that I could have applied myself to. I expressed my concern to my professors as I was nearing graduation, and they all told me not to worry about it for a minute, because of my great GPA. Their explicitly told me that I'll be able to get in anywhere of my choosing based on that alone. And they were right! I received acceptance letters to all of my selected colleges within days of my filing of my applications.