In general I agree that we should provide more honest feedback to our children. However I think there are several points the article did not mention.

The school system is set up to provide a one-dimensional evaluation of the student (GPA). This is then equated with virtue. I have two objections to this: firstly it is a ridiculously inaccurate way to describe children, and secondly, the damage done by telling one child that he is inferior to another is so great that other ridiculous things (such as those mentioned in the article) have to be done to try to minimize the damage. Where there is less effort to compensate (as in Japan) the suicide rate among students is quite startling.

Whatever criticisms one can level at Mr. Rogers, he was basically benign. Not so ‘Shining Time Station’ which taught that everyone was entitled to sympathy except adult white males.

The article very much seems to mirror Margaret's points about training children to be adults rather than training them to be children. As we can see (if you agree with the article) even NT kids are screwed up by this system, but I'm sure their recovery time and relearning efforts will be much lower than for AS kids.

I agree John. My son was in a private school in first grade. His teacher actually posted a daily board showing who had been bad. When we went to an open house Max said "Look I have the second most bad marks. I am a trouble maker." We pulled him out.

I was completely stunned the first time I encountered a family in which the children "voted" on family decisions (and were allowed to outvote the adults! I have no problem with including children in discussions and explaining why the family is doing something--this is how you learn adult responsibilities).

Children, on some level, know they are less knowledgeable, less powerful and less responsible than competent adults. Placing them in a position to dominate family resources and decisions both weakens the parents' ability to do necessary things, and profoundly unsettles children (even if they seem to be glorying in it). "Training up" children to be adults is the point, not stretching childhood out as long as possible and providing a fantasy-land that deprives the adults of their time, labor and intimate relationships.

I have to deal with the "helicopter" parents of the spoiled college students who all think that they are special (certainly not measured by GPA--the schools give prizes for virtually anything). It is very sad to see professional adults reduced to begging and pleading their 18 year-old monster children to take some control of their own lives, but they caused the situation in the first place. I can tell you the last kid to use my first name and presume "equality" to me got quite a shock. College classes do not run to your convenience, do not give you credit for just showing up and sleeping, do not allow you to cheat and do not care who your parents are. There are crooked schools that do, but mine isn't one of them. This is a big shock to many of them, and the whining is legion.

I am not familiar with "Shining Time Station" other than what I have read in the trades. If I am not mistaken, both Ringo Starr and George Carlin played the conductor.

I did meet Mr. Rogers when I worked at a hotel in San Francisco, and he was exactly the same in person as he was on TV.

My main issue with the article is that Mr. Rogers was considered "square" even when I was a child - and so I am not sure that today's college students ever really watched him or paid any attention to him.

I also would like to take issue with your assertion that GPA is seen as a sign of "virtue," and I will tell you why.

First, I think that an awful lot of parents (and I mean awful in both senses of how this sentence can be interpreted) - don't pay attention, don't care, or don't object to anything that constitutes "passing."

Secondly, I am not sure that people really give that much credibility to teachers anymore, and thus their power to rate children is diminished.

The other night, I was watching the David Letterman program and Nicole Ritchie was the guest. Dave asked her about the prospect of her facing some jail time (which he called "prison" for comedic effect) and her answer was quite telling and started a conversation in the room where I was watching.

She said "Probably - Everyone goes to jail" or something to that effect.

And she just tossed that remark off - as if it were nothing.

Arrest and jail has become meaningless as our society has changed. When I was young, being arrested would be something to be terribly ashamed of. In today's world, it is a virtual inevitability. This is due to changes in our society which are beyond the scope of my remarks here.

I think GPA's are like arrests. Most people understand that it means that some officious moron took it upon him/herself to cause a problem.

What I agree with most in the article is that children should be included in adult discussions. This is how people learn.

I think we are in a downward spiral. As the educational system becomes ever more powerful, it tends to crush more and more students (as at Virginia Tech). I absolutely agree with you that the attempts to compensate are themselves destructive, but I don't see an answer to my point that there is a real problem to compensate for.

Richard Feynman commented that almost all physics students coming to Caltech had been top of their class in high school. Those who found themselves in the bottom half at Caltech suffered a profound shock, and about 35% of freshmen dropped out. He pointed out that there was little Caltech could do about it, given non-selective high schools.

Perhaps I should take a Darwinian approach to your suggestion that children are "crushed" by schools - and offer that those so easily crushed deserve to be.

The school is not the most ominous, skilled, or powerful institution that the child will encounter in life. It is an introduction to oppression, not a demonstration of the full power of oppression.

I suppose my answer to your point would be an appeal to be less obsequious to what you consider "authorities." (This might be a cultural issue between us - You probably did not have the opportunity to know many people who considered authorities the "bad guys" - and with good reason - when you were growing up.)

Most education likely takes place outside the school system. The educational system is just a warehouse.

How much respect should we have for a child who allows himself to be crushed by a warehouse?

I also initially attended a college which selected out very intellectual people. In high school, I had come to the conclusion that most people are stupid. When I was at Reed, I decided that I had been incorrect, and that "regular people" (my peers there) were solid "B" people. When I left there, I realized that my high school assessment was even generous, and that in the real world, most people should have the word "FAIL" tatooed on their heads in red ink so I could more easily avoid conversing with them.

Virginia Tech didn't make that killer psycho - he was psycho before he got there. Ask his Grandma.

"I did meet Mr. Rogers when I worked at a hotel in San Francisco, and he was exactly the same in person as he was on TV."
2 Dimensional?

"Most education likely takes place outside the school system."

I should hope so. It's not even 8 hours per day, nor 7 days per week, nor 12 months of the year.

"The educational system is just a warehouse."

I think it's more akin to a factory. The process is there to mold, and molded we shall be, or be rejected as damaged goods or 'seconds'.

Or, as my very elitist grandmother used to say, "most of these people are peasants, and should be behind a plow."

Industrialization and technology have created a world in which literacy and critial thinking have become more important for more people to have than at any other time in human history. The number of people capable of this has not increased in a commisurate measure. There used to be paternalistic places for people who (although of average intelligence, I am not talking about disabled people) were just dull and could follow simple instructions but who got into trouble when unsupervised. They had a social status clearly defined and society (nobles/churches) conspired to keep them there and happy about it. There had to be a safety valve to promote the small number of capable people to positions where they could be useful, or there would be trouble.