[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
As some of you know, I have a 5 year old. Long story short…parent-teacher conferences are this week and I informed the teacher that I wanted my son to attend. The reason for this is that I want to teach him to become engaged in his education (and things that directly affect him) and I don’t want a “filter” when discussing his performance. There are no major issues that I’m aware of and his report card was good. I just want him to “participate”, particularly as it concerns a minor behavioral issue he has in terms of working independently and not disturbing others.
The teacher discussed my intention with the principal and I am meeting resistance. No explanation, just an “against policy” and it’s a “parent-teacher” conference and not a “parent-teacher-student” conference. No shit - as if I needed the literal distinction spelled out to me while ignoring the practical explanation for resistance.
I’m truly bewildered and looking for a second opinion and maybe a teacher’s perspective. Why shouldn’t this open communication be ENCOURAGED among teacher/parent/student? What is the practical need for a “filter”??? Seems to me the conference would be much more valuable if the student attended.
What am I missing here? I"m not interested in debating my parenting decision. I’m interested in knowing what the hell the problem is…[/quote]
The crux of modern education is more about compliance than learning. If your kid becomes involved in his own education he might start thinking, and that is a big NO-NO in compulsory education.
You have already violated rule number one by not doing exactly what you were supposed to. This can easily be construed by the educators as either a lack of ability to follow instructions or as outright defiance, hence the glib brush off referral to policy and statement of the obvious.
[/quote]
LOL but you’re right. And I honestly think they have no fucking clue how to communicate with informed and educated adults. They spend their days communicating with children and forget when they are actually addressing a fellow ADULT. [/quote]
They don’t even want to communicate with adults. In a lot of educators (teachers, principals) minds, the last thing they need is some nosy blowhard parent who doesn’t “understand” making their job any harder than it is already.
You sound like you are becoming “problematic”. As word travels from teacher to teacher and year to year there will be no doubt as to where the kid gets it from. (thats all tongue in cheek)
I went through this wringer starting in about fourth grade when I was being taught how to add whole numbers again after mastering multiplication and division the previous year. Then my dad started asking some valid and very hard to answer questions.
Then I became “problematic”.
[/quote]
My daughter is going to start problematic. Nearly finished the kindergarten curriculum, just turned 3. I have been worried about her schooling for a year now. I am afraid she will get bored in school.[/quote]
Lol sorry Ag this just makes me chuckle. I forgot what its like to have a 3 year old.
You wearing Burnt orange this week? :)[/quote]
I do not believe that our gentlemen’s agreement was ever finalized.[/quote]
Lol I know I had no faith, and was not going to comment in the College thread. 
[/quote]
A&M hurt themselves enough that game but that personal foul call in the last drive where the A&M player grazed the tu players facemask as he went by moved tu into position to win. The commentators were saying how crappy a call that was. In ways it is a fitting ending, however. Tu coming from behind with ‘help’ from the refs and A&M leaving feeling cheated.
