Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Why children no longer flunk in school

JILL MAHONEY

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 4:10 AM EDT 09/06/07

Some say social promotion prevents 'damning and negative messages' of failure. Others disagree. ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Noone Anywhere from Canada writes: Great story! No dogs, no celebrities, no yuppy boomer trend-of-the-week. A little lacking in hard news, though!
  2. David Demner from Vancouver, BC, Canada writes: ' A little lacking in hard news, though! ' Must be a Conservative/G8 press release ;)
  3. Rick in Redneckland from Canada writes:

    Commence with the teacher-bashing in 3.....2.....1.......
  4. Joe Wallach from Russell, Ontario, Canada writes: The problem with social promotion is that, among other things seen at the university level, the students spell VERY poorly and also have a sense of entitlement. It is long past time when it must be realized that not all people are created equally; not all can be academic achievers and not all can perform needed trade skills. Therefore, if a student fails then he or she must receive a failing grade and must not be promoted to the next grade.
  5. John Smith from Canada writes: This is a good news AND hard news story. The future of our children is very 'hard'. What I read in the article and the study is that failing has damaging effects, but there must also be remedial programming to help them accomplish expected standards in future years. Gee, nothing counter-intuitive here. Darn right logical. Sorry I witnessed the damage of kids being failed when I was young - they never caught up. Lets just make sure those who lag receive the assistance to achieve, otherwise we will just be cheating them in a different way. Merit is not just earned, it is facilitated. P.S. And for those wondering, I passed all my grades went to university and post-graduate studies and succesful career and can even spell ( I hope no errors here and if there are, call them typos).
  6. evelyn robinson from Canada writes: This is a dumb move. If they are not able to learn they need to repeat / particularly grade one. Do not just pass them through the system. I will bet that the remedial learning is minimal. If such resources are available/ start early before year end to help them succeed.
    Kids need a good base for learning or they will struggle all the way through school.
  7. Ozzy Rules The World! from Canada writes: Schools pass people on who should fail, that is the problem. There is a discipline problem and there are REAL bad teachers. I have seen it personally.
  8. p m from vancouver, Canada writes: Let's see if I understand this now. School is a process of setting a number of compentencies, teaching the children so that they acquire these and then assessing them to make sure that they have achieved an adequate level. Failing, if I understand the term, means that they are assessed as having NOT acquired those compentencies. Why, in God's green earth would they then be moved on to a, supposedly, higher level of skill compentencies if they can't pass the first level. We asume that this portfolio of compentencies includes some social skills. If these students are allowed to continue their progression through the grades without comprehending the BASIC levels, they will be FOREVER at risk of not acquiring the appropriate compentencies. Take a good look at the literacy and numeracy skills of Canadian students..abysmal....we cry and rant that foreign students are taking the places in the Universities and we, as a nation, are falling behind. GUESS WHY! This bloody political correctness in the elementary schools has been in place for about 25 years....and it is turning this Nation into a 3rd world. Check out the current ethics and standards of lawyers, politicians and RCMP..as to what is important these days.. As the tree is bent...so does it grow!!
  9. John Lord from Vancouver, Canada writes: Wow, this accounts for all the Liberal voters.
  10. Helen Pettingill from Canada writes: Although it's socially difficult for a kid to fail, I think that making them repeat the grade is the right thing to do if they can't meet the requirements - that is after extra help given them has also failed in its attempts. Every attempt to make them succeed should be made of course but as a previous poster stated, not everyone is academically inclined. Some kids are late bloomers & just need another year to catch up. Keeping them up with their peers when they're lagging so far behind is not doing them any favours in the long run. They'll likely continue to fail & fall even further behind & be labelled as dummies. Once a label is given to a kid in the school system, it's there for the duration. That's not good for a kid either. We have to look at the big picture. We can't have illiterate people or people with no basic math skills running around going nowhere. It's in all of our best interests to make it possible for kids to succeed academically so that they'll have a decent future. We need them to pay for our future medical bills & old age needs after all. If one of my kids were to fail a grade, I'd do the right thing & send them to another school where they won't be ostracized as the other kids never need to know. They would probably thank me at some far off point in the future.
  11. Vasili Yeremenko from Canada writes: It all comes from the idea that kids are equals of adults and that emotions rule logic. The child wants to move on let him, it makes her sad to know her answer was wrong don't tell her.

    I am ateacher and every year the kids and parents gain more control. The other day I phoned a parent because her 18 year old son was not in class. I could not hear her on the phone very well because she was whispering so she wouldn't wake him. Over and over parents tell me they wish their kids would act differently but when they ask them they don't change. There is no discipline anymore and kids do what they want. Don't blame the kids, blame the gutless parents and the equally gutless school system.
  12. Bob Rollheiser from Canada writes: Do we want graduates from medicine or engineering who feel good about themselves but are incompetent? Lowering standards for the politically correct causes problems in the real world. Not everyone is going to be a winner, no matter how much mommy interferes.
  13. sean wood from vancouver, Canada writes: As long as these up and coming canadian brainiacs can use a chainsaw, push a fuel cell lawnmower or run a modern cash register they'll be sound as a pound in the reality that is the socialist wasteland known as Canuckistan. Hewers of wood, drawers of water, a wide screen TV, hockey every Saturday night and a Timmies on every corner. What's the big deal if little Dick and Janie can't do much more then count to ten on their fingers. It's way to stressful pushing them to reach beyond their limited capabilities. This story is so pathetic it's only worth making jokes about.
  14. Joshua Mills from Toronto, Canada writes: At least this generation will feel good about themselves while they flip burgers at McD's in a few years.
  15. Ted Parkinson from Kitchener, Canada writes: The many readers who commented that 'if they didn't meet the requirements, then fail them' should themselves receive a failing grade since it appears they didn't read the article. It says this strategy doesn't work. Failing them doesn't 'solve' anything, except make some folks happy that justice is being done. The key is providing proper support--and it doesn't matter what 'grade' they are in. So you may as well avoid the humiliation of failing them. Grades, particularly in elementary school, are pretty meaningless-they often have more to do with how well you can copy something, than whether or not you understand it.
  16. John Smith from Canada writes: Bob Rollheiser from Canada, suggest you read the article. The message is failure creates problems that do not allow a child to succeed (on average). So why would we adopt THAT as an educational strategy - preparing children for a life of failure. Instead, the approach is do not fail, but provide remedial assistance so they can catch up. The message in the artcile is quite clear and literate so I will assume you are neither from engineering or medicine and your mommy never interfered.
  17. Michael Purcell from Prince George, Canada writes: Sixteen percent of grade 10 students fail a basic literacy test. That number may be skewed by children who don't have english as a first language, but it doesn't seem like a successful outcome to me.
  18. Robert Schmidt from Canada writes: No doubt the social implications for failing kids is bad. Don't worry about your doctor being one of them. Just because are passed, it does not mean they are getting 90%, which would be required to get into med school.

    The problem is not at the highschool level. The kids that should have failed will end up with low grades and in the basic level courses. The real problem lies at the university level. University accept too many students. Many of them should be going to colleges and trade schools.

    It is at the university level where we need to take a stand.
  19. Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, Spain writes:

    'Children are naïve -- they trust everyone. School is bad enough, but, if you put a child anywhere in the vicinity of a church, you're asking for trouble.'

    Frank Zappa
  20. Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, Spain writes: Shielding people from failure is not such a good idea. Face it, we all fail, continuously through life. What needs to be learned is to turn failure into something positive and useful.
    Edison failed over 800 times in trying to make his first lightbulb.......try , fail, try again..........and again and again.
  21. Derek Holtom from Swan River, Canada writes: society is full of graduates who know nothing
  22. Lorenz Weishaupt from Canada writes: Social promotion prevents the kids who didn't learn what they needed to learn from feeling bad by placing them in the next grade.

    But what about the children who earned their pass into the next grade? It cheats them of education they deserve, because they are lumped in with kids who don't understand what they should already know. This slows the pace of teaching, less material is taught, and it robs those who honestly passed of teaching time that has to go to help those who don't understand the previous years' material.

    Self-esteem is important, but not at the expense of depriving other kids of their chance to learn something new. Life isn't equal, and it isn't fair. Sometimes people fail. School shouldn't be about equality either, it should be about helping students excel. It has two jobs: to teach, and to help student's figure out what they're good and bad at. Social promotion gets in the way of both ('cause how will they know they're bad at something if they always pass?).

    I agree with remedial help and summer school giving kids who'd otherwise fail a chance to catch up but passing them to the next grade when they don't catch up after having the extra lessons doesn't make sense to me, unless it's combined with 'streaming' so that there are advanced, normal, and remedial versions of the next grade. But please don't dumb one grade to support those who failed the grade before.
  23. John Smith from Canada writes: Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, please read the article. The problem is that failing children is not resulting in 'try, try again'. Six year old children are not adults and we should not assume resilency. Nor should we assume that being 'touch' teaches success. The point is, the strategy is to try to teach the children how to succeed. Early school failure does not do that. The strategy is move forward and provide assistance so they can reach required standards. Ultimately, if they continue to fail then that will be reflected in their grades and status.P.S. Edison had serious issues, many of which could be construed as pathological and sociopathic so lets not hold him up as a role model.
  24. Jim Cohoon from Chilliwack, Canada writes: Since the mid 1960s the notion of 'self-esteem' has taken on a large role in educational theory, and in social psychology generally. This could potentially have been a positive trend, if by 'self-esteem' was meant something more than just narcissistically 'feeling good' about oneself. Unfortunately, we seem to be stuck with a narcissistic working definition of 'self-esteem' that effectively undermines true and lasting 'self-esteem' -- i.e., the kind that enables a young person to mature into an adult capable of not only emotionally and ethically dealing with life's challenges, but become a contributing part of society. It is now a huge challenge to undue or even slow down the harm we are doing to our children because narcissism has become so culturally entrenched that 'education' itself has become, however unwittingly, basically an ideological tool serving that narcissistic culture.
  25. Robert Schmidt from Canada writes: Derek Holtom,

    you can say that again. We talk about the 'knowledge based economy,' but you know we are the least qualified for it. You might joke about India and the rest of Asia, but they are well qualified for it.

    For sometime now, their best have come here to work for us and grow our companies. Wait until their business sector comes around and they can work in their homes. Our current education system does nothing but produce liberal arts grads in the lowest common denominator. Without hard working immigrant students, we won't be able to sustain a knowledge based economy.
  26. Toronto Bhoy from Canada writes: We held our daughter back against school policy when she was in Grade 3 and it was the best thing we ever did! We had to move schools and boards to do it! Next fall she'll be going to college!

    I remember telling her that like life, school was a marathon not a sprint and she would cross the finish line when she was ready and on her watch (not the school's). That conversation broke my heart but it was in her interest, not the school's. I met her principal from that school last year and when I told him how she was doing, he smiled and said I wish I could have done it myself.
  27. Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, Spain writes:
    John Smith : I did read the article. And I agree with you when you say the system is not making the kids 'try and try again'.
    That was the point of my post exactly. Teach the kids that failing is part of the process of learning, and teach them to act on it.
    That being said, kids know very well if they understood or not, at any age.
    As for Edison, let's not get into a psycholical assesment of the man. I was referring to his way of dealing with failure...........
  28. John Smith from Canada writes: This is the 21st century. The tough love approach of past years (which I had to witness but never experience in scholastic terms) never worked. My father passed high school in the 1930s but his literacy was a joke compared to mine. So much for high achievements for that generation. In the 1960s, I saw school mates who failed, maybe struggled to high school and then dropped out. But they and my father had the benefit of moving into a manufacturing economy where lack of education did not harm income potential. The old 'tough' standards did not work, stop fooling yourself - the failues of our school system were hidden. We need a new stategy.

    P.S. Jim Cohoon from Chilliwack, maybe in B.C. they were talking about 'self-esteem' in school system in the 1960s, but in Ontario that word was never heard. Sorry. I was there. It was 'tough' discipline and failure. Self-esteem did not creep into the lexicon and teaching methods until the 1980s. Perhaps you are confusing sensationalist reactionary backlash hype with reality. And I don't see that word in this Globe story either, maybe its just the reactionary hype you read and want to insert into this story.
  29. Mahatma Gandhi from Calgary, Canada writes: FTA: ''If our goal as teachers is to make sure that kids develop self-discipline and are always trying to achieve to do their best, I think it just has an adverse effect on them because it teaches them that, 'You know what? I can get by without doing my best.''
    What a clueless statement. No, your goal as teacher is not 'to make sure that kids develop self-discipline and are always trying to achieve to do [sic] their best', your goal as teacher is to help them to learn things, like how to read a story, or wash their hands, or tie their shoes. It's grade school, for pete's sake, not the bloody army.
  30. stand up mimi from Canada writes: What some of you don't seem to realize is that a lot of kids at the youngest end of the scale in Grade One just aren't mature enough to focus, and they don't do well. From what I understand, as they get older, they usually catch up. What is the point in failing them if, as the article states, it does more harm than good? To teach them some sort of life lesson about how they're failures? That makes about as much sense as beating up a kid to teach him that life is hard.

    Some people are so afraid the system is coddling kids because things aren't as draconian as when they were kids. Why, some of these young'uns even turn out to be 'lowest common denominator' liberal arts grads! Goodness, what a waste of taxpayer's money! Who needs lawyers, teachers, journalists, MPs, or judges, anyway?
  31. Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, Spain writes:

    Lemmy to Lemmy : psycholical ??????? I need another coffee, AND my glasses.
  32. John Smith from Canada writes: Toronto Bhoy from Canada, the problem with your heart-warming story is you cannot describe the outcome IF your daughter had moved ahead. Perhaps she would have succeeded even better and entering Harvard University rather than just college. Perhaps you made the right decision (sometimes a parent knows best and must fight for that) - but the issue is making failure a policy, particularly in Grade 1. Numbers rather than anecdote suggest it does not lead to success for most, just more failure. Congratulations for your daughter but please don't try to make a case that essentially condemns many children to a life of failure, which your anecdotal account does.
  33. Bruce Rideout from ghetto 436754352, Canada writes: In shool I passed while others failed. In adult life I failed while others passed. Go figure.
  34. jiri Z from Canada writes: Holding a slow student back for another year, say the 'experts', will damage the fragile psyche of the child and sets him/her on a path of failures in life.

    This is hardly supportable by actual life experience.

    1) If a child fails the grade but advances anyway, all the other pupils in the class know that. There is the damage, right there. BUT:

    2) children are far more resilient than the experts care to admit. They don't really need all that psychological counseling so eagerly provided by very well paid social interveners.

    3) School is a preparation for the 'real life'. Unless the real life is also filled with special needs counselors and huge amount of tolerance, these children will not meet the inflated expectation of their parents and teachers. That's how drop-outs are born. Not just from school but from decent civilized way of life.

    Of course, there are many reasons for children not keeping up. We cannot close our eyes to the difference between a kid missing school because of some medical problem like asthma (corrigible) and another with an IQ of 85 whose parent is a junkie (sadly, permanent).

    The liberal educators like to talk about 'root causes'. Solve the root causes here, please. Once you understand what it is.
  35. Bruce Rideout from ghetto 436754352, Canada writes: But I did stay at a deluxe vacation resort spa express online equipped condo last nite.
  36. Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, Spain writes: Junkies have kids with lower IQs ? Where is the study behind that claim ?

    As for drop outs, and those who don't graduate, Bill Gates is not doing so bad. And I'm not talking about money.............this is quite secondary.
  37. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Social Promotion is a foul, horrific lie. As is false 'self-esteem' for its own sake. What this teaches our children is that there is no need to actually know what they are required to know, and that there are no negative consequences for failure to do one's job properly and correctly. Self-esteem normally comes from actual achievemnets - as in 'I did whatever and the positive consequences of my actions were as follows' - not: I am am a 'wonderful' and 'brilliant' individual 'just because'. Yes, I have read the article. It is a huge load of BS. My day job is to ensure that your drinking water is safe - can you say 'Walkerton'? I am under a whole slew of explicit legal, nevermind moral and ethical, constraints to meet as MINIMUM standards in the performance of my duties. If I fail to meet these standards, consequences will ensue. First, and most importantly, my fellow-citizens, who I don't know personally, will get sick, and some will die. The most likely candidates for death are infants/young children and seniors - the most vulnerable among us. Secondly, I personally am liable and likely to spend time in jail if I mess up. My superiors are also likely to end up in jail, especially if my 'mistakes' are a direct result of their failure to actually enforce 'company' policy and procedures. And to appropriately chastise and/or fire me in a timely manner if I repeatedly fail to follow procedures and policy. And then there's the medical field. I have direct experience with youngsters who are products of the current system, who are 'planning' to be doctors, who desperately need to be seriously beaten with 4x4's. These individuals are absolutely unfit to be put in charge of themselves, let alone the lives of others. But, WTF, they have very high self-esteem, and have never experienced any sort of real set-back or failure. I wonder how these clowns will react when good old reality and life slaps them upside the head? Very poorly, I expect. It's your butt on the line. OOPS.
  38. Reasonable Ranter from Toronto, Canada writes: Education isn't one-size fits all, and can't be, because there is almost an infinite difference in capacity between students. Instead, kids with trouble in academic studies should be tought to excel to the best of THEIR abilities (perhaps not advanced studies) then given a chance to focus more on arts or crafts targeted at trades and other professions not requiring advanced university degrees. There are lots of great-paying jobs out there for hard working people of every academic stripe. But, that said, whatever the systems put in place, there always need to be standards because life picks winners and losers even if we don't. The trick is to teach kids to be winners on their own terms, within the limits of their own capacities.
  39. Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, Spain writes:
    I agree with Reasonable. Kids are all different, and even though they can be the same age, they are not at the same level of maturity and intelligence. There are so many factors involved here.
    And then there are the teachers themselves, and the home environment.
    For years I struggles with algebra. Until one year, I had this teacher, a lebanese man, a gem. I could understand HIS words crystal clear. He had a gift, and I met many people later in life who had passed by his classes, and all said the same thing. Complex abstract concepts became so simple when HE explained it.
  40. John Smith from Canada writes: Oh Lemmy, Bill Gates came from a rich, politcal family and was attending Harvard University when he 'dropped out'. He had every opportunity in life and, yes, took full advantage of them, but his life was cakewalk compared to most people. Bill Gates was not a high school drop-out. And Bill Gates had full access to money and resources to enter world of computers.

    Wish I had the chance to 'drop out' of Harvard.
  41. Susan Anon from Victoria, Canada writes: I do not understand how anyone - adult or child - can appreciate success if you have not experienced failure. Schools today do children a great disservice by pretending that the kids have passed on to a higher grade when everyone involved knows otherwise. The teachers know, the parents know, the student knows and all there classmates know that the child has not mastered the work. And, what are educators telling the students who have in fact met the requirements to PASS to the next level? Thank god that most kids play video games - at least then they get to keep playing the game until they succeed and go on to the next level. I don't think they are emotionally scarred by the experience (except by the violence contained in the game of course!)
  42. Notes from my Cave in Sarnia, ON. from Canada writes: Personally, I have always found the school systems to be lacking. I don't blame the teachers either. They are given materials to teach that have supposedly been chosen by more enlightened educational specialists. The fact is that the schools are so concerned about hurting anyone's feelings, that they pass the little darlings. I know teachers who have been threatened within an inch of their lives when they tell the parents that little Johnny is not the brainiac that they think he is. Well, step right up the reality test Mom and Dad! Not everyone gets it. Part of the reason may be the teeacher but some of it is the course of studies. The bottom line is that Jonny and Sally should NLT be passed if they have not achieved. You are not doing them a favour. Fail them if you must.
  43. Emma Hawthorne from Canada writes: When school authorities wished to fail my friend's son, she attended school with him daily for nearly two weeks until they surrendered. By taking her child to see a psychologist and informing the psychologist that she would not authorize release of her report to the school unless it stated that her son would succeed with reading assistance, the psychologist from Sick kids wrote a report mentioning four times (4) that with reading assistance the sweet young boy would be fine. It worked marvellously as he obtained special help for two half-hours per week for one year, and in wonderfully fun reading sessions his mother read to him daily for two years. By grade four he was reading at the grade eight reading level. It would have been a tragedy had this boy been held back.
  44. John Smith from Canada writes: Of course, Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, all those workers protecting Walkerton water were products of the good old school system when things were tough and people failed. Look how well that educational system and strategy turned out for the good people of Walkerton.
  45. Emma Hawthorne from Canada writes: Boys especially often read a little later than girls That is just their nature and it must not be penalized. I think we need more sensitive and highly acculturated teachers, especially in disadvantaged areas.
  46. Lemmy Nothor from Barcelona, Spain writes:
    OK OK ! Bill Gates was not a very good example. But if I name the people I personally know, it wouldn't be the same. I was simply saying that , or attempting to anyway, schooling has it's limits. I know a lot of people who never attended University, and who hold positions of people that all have tons of degrees on their walls. I'm not saying one is better or worse than the other, but I see no difference in the results. The vocabulary sets them apart, other than that, there is no major difference.
    Smart people , with or without a diploma, will succeed in what they set out to do.
    I think it was Bertrand Russell who said : I had to interrupt my education, in order to attend school.
  47. Frank Lee My Dear I Don't Give A Damn from Toronto, Canada writes:
    Mustn't upset the poor little darlings or they'll suffer psychologically? That's a load of bulls**t. I had to repeat a few years of high school. I'm successful in my work, have a great relationship with my wife and friends, don't drool (too much). And I'm happy with myself.
    You may face failures in life. If you can't accept that fact the 'Paris Hilton Mindset' kicks in. In other words, 'If I don't pass, or get what I want and deserve, I will hold my breath until I do'.
    Now that's damning and negative.
  48. Rick Czarnota from Calgary, writes: I don't think you are doing a kid any favors by passing them when they clearly don't have a solid grasp of the current curriculum.

    To suggest a child should have no negative experiences is not realistic. If they fail they fail. At least if they repeat the grade they might have a chance of fully understanding high school cirriculum.
  49. John Smith from Canada writes: Frank Lee My Dear I Don't Give A Damn, despite your best efforts, I believe you proved the contrary point.
  50. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ John Smith: the failure that led to Walkerton was, as has been determined, political and technical. But John, it is clear that you are the sort that was really gung-ho for that 'Common Sense Revolution' that eventually gave us Walkerton. Please expalin how gutting the staff of the MOE and changing the legal reporting req
  51. Jane Z from Canada writes: TO: Lorenz Weishaupt
    I totally agree with you. I am a high school math teacher. I teach grade 8 this year. In one of my classes, out of 23 students, two are at grade three level, 8 are at grade 5~6 level. While I did start a remedial program for those students, I felt so sorry for those students who are at current level. I have to slow my pace and try not to lower the standards.
    I do not totally disagree with social promotion. However, when some elementary teachers say that some kids would never learn how to multiply, I know the education system must have some problems.
    The ideas of failure and developing self-esteem do not contradict to each other.
    Failing and success are part of life. Only if they experience difficulties and challenges, they will embrace their life.
  52. John Smith from Canada writes: Orest, the problem was at the source. The water treatment workers did not really understand what they were doing and lied repeatedly.
    The downstream MOE issues were just that, downstream.

    Bad guess on the Common Sense stuff by the way. And I might note, many of that gang of thugs were also fine products of that good old school system, the first among firsts actually being a teacher (briefly thank god). If thats what tough school teaching discipline produces then please, lets try something else. Sure didn't produce responsibility.
  53. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ John Smith: the failure that led to Walkerton was, as has been determined, political and technical. But John, it is clear that you are the sort that was really gung-ho for that 'Common Sense Revolution' that eventually gave us Walkerton. Please explain how gutting the staff of the MOE and changing the legal reporting requirements by reducing them was the fault of the 'workers'. Stupid, red-neck fascists like you are the exact reason that the likes of Harris are able to create Walkertons. And, staffing and perfromance levels at the MOE are still far below what they were before Harris and his 'advisors' dealt with the MOE. I won't even go into what happened at Health in terms of firing the research scientists looking into 'esoteric' and 'unlikely' new diseases like West Nile Virus and SARS. Stupid, ignorant and ideologically driven baitch that you are, John Smith, your comments are not surprising. It is fools like you that give us the Walkertons, system failures that lead to recurring SARS outbreaks and destruction of research capacity that could protect the citizens of the province from diseases and environmental contamination. Stop blaming the staff for the consequences fo your ideology and stupidity. To all and sundry - appologies for the duplicate partial post - something wierd happend at my end - Sorry for the mess.
  54. Jonah Jamieson from Hamilton, Ontario, Canada writes: Self-esteem is indeed very important for a person's well-being, and I do not advocate crushing any young person's spirit. However, positive self-image should be based on a sense of real achievement. As a high school teacher, I have seen far too many students who expect a pat on the back for doing absolutely nothing. After having been the beneficiary of social promotion, students learn that breathing is cause enough for reward. Most of them ultimately know that such advancement is bogus and when they go on to higher learning or out into the work force they realize that no one is going to pass them or keep them on at a job that they're unprepared for just because it will damage their self-esteem. The most disturbing undercurrent of social promotion, in Ontario at least, is that it seems to be a coded way of saving money by pushing children through the eduction system as quickly as possible, thereby saving the precious taxpayer as much money as possible, with little or no regard for what the student can accomplish. I have had the failing grade of some of my high school students overturned despite solid evidence that they were unable to meet course expectations just so that they we can get them out of the building and off the school board's hands. And if they can't succeed at the core curriculum, they are offered the opportunity to get two to four credits of their high school diploma for playing hockey or volleyball, or reading fashion magazines. What message do we send kids when no effort or responsibility is required on their part? We ultimately do the students and society at large no favour by encouraging an unjustified sense of entitlement and by sending them out into the world unprepared despite a teacher's best efforts to understand that real self-esteem comes through a sense of achievement through persistence and hard work?
  55. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Well John Smith, Harris didn't even finish High School - and was proud of the fact that he was essentially uneducated. As for the 'whiz kids' that came up with the so-called 'Common Sense Revolution' including Leslie Noble and Guy Giorno, none of them were over 40 years old, and all of them came from well-off backgrounds. And none of them had experienced any sort of adversity - fake self esteem anyone? Nothing you have said negates any of my points. You are actually re-enforcing what I said. When Walkerton happened, I was pushing 10 years age gap on Harris's 'whiz kids'. And had lots of experience, as a scout lerader, with the products of the educational system at the time. Trust me, there was a huge diiference in what I and my peers went through and what the likes of Harris's whiz kids went through, and what is the system now. My peers have done a really poor job, overall, with their kids, and what isd happening in the schools is a GD joke.
  56. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Jonah Jamieson: Amen and thank you.
  57. Jonah Jamieson from Hamilton, Ontario, Canada writes: Re: my last post, it's not the 'eduction' system, it's the 'education' system. Sorry if the there's a spelling error or two, but it was 4:30 a.m. when I wrote it.
  58. Corin Warden from Toronto, Canada writes: I work as a high school teacher in the city, and although I have no doubt about the hard science of the studies done, I have serious doubts about the hard news factor. Number 1, there is no discussion about the impact on a child who, after a career of being «promoted» all of a sudden hits the wall of grade nine and fails. Students in Ontario are completely unprepared for the damaging effects of THAT. What happens to a child between June of Grade 8 and September of Grade 9 that all of a sudden they are so well adjusted that failing and not being promoted with their peers no longer matters? Number 2, the promotion experience, so far as I can tell, does nothing to allay the fact that the child, and the child's peers, know perfectly well they didn't pass, but were passed anyway. I teach French, and believe me, by the end of Junior High, they know AND believe if they really passed that course or not. Number 3 is really a corollory of number 2 : unmerited promotion has the extremely negative consequence of showing kids that they really don't have to make an effort or take their learning at all seriously, as they will be passed anyway. And then THEIR learning process is no longer THEIRS, but something created for them, and over which they have less and less control. What are the effects of unmerited promotion on a student's understanding of the idea that all actions have consequences? Whether we want them to understand this or not, the consequences WILL ALWAYS HAPPEN EVENTUALLY. People in general forget that what is taught in schools is generally perceived to be of VALUE by society, and that not knowing the material is DETRIMENTAL to development as a fully functioning member of that society. And the acknowledgement of these facts, I think, is where you'll find the hard news in this story.
  59. Frank Lee My Dear I Don't Give A Damn from Toronto, Canada writes: 'Oh yeah....?', he spluttered tentatively.... ;)
  60. Virginia Crook from United Kingdom writes: Did anyone notice the first line of the article-that it was boys near the cut-off age for entry to kindergarten that were failing? It is a fairly well known fact that boys lag girls in language development and verbal skills by one to two years at the start of primary education. Perhaps it is time that someone looked at the idea that starting school too early is to the detriment of too many pupils; that starting at seven, as they do in much of Europe (who lead us in just about every educational table compiled) would be better all round, that kids would likely not 'fail' those early years.

    If you do fail everyone knows anyway and you get the added grief of having to go into the remedial or 'stupid' class. That perhaps we should re-adjust the school year and drop the long summer holiday in favour of shorter breaks throughout the year because kids forget what they have learned and need to re-learn it before they can go on. Just some suggestions folks, trying to be positive instead of slinging insults or the 'when i was a Kid' or 'life is about failure'.
  61. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    If 'self-esteem' is the major reason for allowing chldren to move on unwarranted, then this society will be more screwed up than I thought.

    The education system, while not perfect, is a type of building block scenario, where it is difficult to learn and move forward if you do not possess or master the basics of the past grades. While some may blast the so-called out dated mode of the system, or its curriculum, history clearly shows Canada has done quite well with this system!.

    How much 'self-esteem' will a youngster have in grade 5 if they cannot actually read or write properly?

    Facing adversity at a young age is not a bad thing. Learning to cope with that and moving on only better prepares a child to face the personal and world problems of the future which they will no doubt experience.

    Is allowing a child to repeat a grade such a degrading experience? In grade school, I remember a fella who did his grade 3 again.....and went on to graduate Cum Laude in university-I believed he had earned his 'self esteem instead of it being 'given' unwarranted!
  62. Geriatric Personage from NB, Canada writes: A 40 hour school week (for grade 5 and above) might be a good start. Forget all the teachers fulminating 'I need prep time I need to upgrade my skills'. Do what anybody else in the real world does: use your own time. In the real world failure to perform results in disciplinary action of some sort (termination, suspension, no wage increase) this is part of the learning process the sooner it is learnt the better.
  63. Brian Trotter from Barrie, Canada writes: One of the more intelligent / civilized and constructive comment threads - congrats. As i see it - the system fails those that do not 'fit' the typical student mold. Special ed is at best a weak bandaid solution. Even the caring teachers do not have adequate time nor resources to get he job done with the kids - at any grade level who are falling through the cracks. Most parents aren't equipped to advocate - so the child suffers. In our health care system - treatment options range from - rest in bed - to seeing specialists and undergoing invasive medical treatments - the full range of options. We are failing in our public sector education by providing no real options to these children.
  64. Henry Allen from Toronto, Canada writes: Corin Warden raises good points about the fly in the ointment. At some point (she refers to the grade 9 wall), kids who are socially promoted are confronted in a hard way by their academic weaknesses and fail anyway.

    Social promotion can only be effective if there are effective remedial programs and kids can benefit from these. After reading this article I was left with strong doubts about remedial programs. My reason: teachers may care about special needs students, but schools are not being given the resources.

    Logically, effective remedial programs require a lot of money. For years I've been reading about over-crowded classrooms, which means students get less personal attention. It is logical that socially promoted students will have special needs requiring different and more intensive approaches. That means these students would require more budget and teacher time on a per student basis. I strongly sense that is not happening. Seems to me the system is broken -- failing students is a failing program, and social promotion is busted, too.
  65. Jonah Jamieson from Hamilton, Ontario, Canada writes: Geriatic Personage, you must have had some mean teacher who said or did something to you you didn't like and then decide that because of that experience (or two or three) that you could tar an entire profession with the same brush. I dare suggest that if that experience repeated itself more often than that, then perhaps the fault didn't lie with the teachers in question. I have worked in the 'real world' in a steel mill, as well as stints in publishing and public relations and no one in his or her right mind would ever believe that every minute of 40 hours is spent doing one particular aspect of a job. As a teacher I put in AT LEAST 50 hours a week working by creating an ever-increasing range of activities in the hope of accomodating students who may have any combination of attention deficit disorder, fetal alcohol syndrome, parental neglect or overindulgence, societal neglect or overindulgence, giftedness, speech or sight difficulties or behavioural issues, by assisting students with the curriculum outside of school hours, by filling out forms to allow students to make up for work they didn't complete (either because of a legitimate, or in more cases, a completely invented excuse), dealing with increasingly appalling and unruly student behaviour in a school's common areas which results in them being hauled down to the office where little or nothing is done by the school administration, to helping to plan and implement extracurricular activities, inform parents and guardians about student progress or respond to the sometimes outrageously unrealistic demands of said parents and or guardians. It is clear from your comment that you have a very limited understanding of what it means to be a teacher and that our job encompasses so much more than just being in a room with a group of upwards of 30 students three times a day for an hour and fifteen minutes.
  66. Brian Scannell from Vancouver, Canada writes: As I sit here reading all these comments I wonder whom has worked with the youth of today in the work force? I am in the film industry and in its exploding growth we had to take in some new blood. And more often than not I am put to work with a kid all of 19 and the person has NO WORK SKILLS! NONE, NADA, ZIP, ZERO! I give the person a siple task and in 2 min. I find him trying to pick up a cute p.a. or is at craft service. Then when they find out that the day is 12-14 hours long you should here the whining! I allways tell them go back to McDonalds the fries need you!!!! And this not failing a child because it is bad for his self esteem it is just silly! Just wait untill they get in the real world and see how they like it because it is sink or swim. The world owes you NOTHING! I was never held back a grade BUT when I was failing my father an alcoholic who lost his wife to cancer earning min. wage HELPED ME!!! If he could not help we found a way for a tutor to come in and help. And sometimes I had to pay for her help. So the onus is on the parents to straighten this out not the school or teachers they are there only to give guidence and not become the guardien for the child. And I do not want to hear any moaning about how hard it is in this day and age to bring up a child blaa blaa. You made the choice to have one and now you must pay the price. If you want a better future for your child YOU MUST TAKE RESPONSIBLITY FOR THE LIFE YOU CHOSE TO BRING INTO THIS WORLD! SO STOP WHINING AND GET ON WITH IT. MAKE MY JOB HARDER AND TURN OFF THE TV TURN OFF THE XBOX AND SPEND SOME TIME WITH THE LITTLE SH**S TEACH THEM HOW TO DO MATH WITH OUT A CALCULATOR, SHOW THEM WHAT YOU KNOW AS A PERSON AND A PARENT AND LETS STOP LETTING MACHINES, POLITIONS AND STUDIES DO IT FOR US! BEACUSE REMEMBER THEY ARE THE FUTURE AND WE WILL HAVE TO LIVE IN THIS WORLD THAT THEY WILL HELP TO MAKE! (as allways please excuse any and all spelling mistakes it is 3:30am)
  67. Carmen Branje from Toronto, Canada writes: As someone who was label 'gifted' with an above average IQ in school I felt I always go the short end of the stick. I always felts as if the slower kids got 95% of a teachers/schools attention while I got stuck twiddling my thumbs and spinning my wheels. I could have been doing calculus in grade 7 instead they gave me more 'busy' work, instead of more challenging work.

    You can't just always think about the people at the bottom of the curve . . . .
  68. G Money from Hamilton, Canada writes: Why should there be consequences for under performance? It's not like people get 'fired' in the real world for less than.
  69. Jonah Jamieson from Hamilton, Ontario, Canada writes: Brian Scannell, right on. How is it that previous generations would raise multiple children without the moaning despite war and severe economic hardship? There are many parents today who accept full responsibility for their children by showing them the value of doing a good day's work, of being aware not only of their rights but also their responsibilities as members of society, of learning how to cope with failure in a way which helps the child confront it head on and rather than trying to scream, coerce or wiggle out from under it. There are also, alas, many other parents who come to regret implicitly their decision to raise a child and abandon their responsibility by using extended family and/or the educational system as a day care, a surrogate parent and a scapegoat. Having a child involves sacrifice, they're not just an accessory like a new set of golf clubs or a pair of shoes. Unfortunately, so many in the current generation of parents don't seem to be prepared for the fact that their lives are going to be changed in ways big and small, positvely and negatively by children.
  70. Rex's Experiment from Canada writes: The kids today are in trouble. My son is in Grade 2 and I routinely correct his spelling on work that the teacher hasn't because it was phoenetically right. In kids sports you don't keep score and everyone gets a trophy. Kids baseball homeruns are a no-no in case you damage the pitchers ego. Kids need to be shown how to lose early and how to fail early if you want them to develop some sort of pride in their efforts. There are ways to tell kids they've failed without shattering them. Having coached sports I've seen how certain coaches will destroy a child and how others through the appropriate tone can tell a child he's not quite good enough at a task but with some work can be. School is not any different. Little Bobby can't add, but with some extra work he'd be as good or better than others - not Little Bobby can't add. One re-instills a need to strive for success and the other just flat out kills the kid.
    Once these kids hit highschool or the work force what happens? Can you picture delivering an absolute crap performance at work but being kept anyway?
  71. Lisa Jones of the Anglo-Celtic nation within a nation from Canada writes: Let me tell you my personal experience. I spent a few years in the USA with my son, who shone down there. Even though he had done well in some national competitions in Canada, he didn't feel the education system cared. But, as you can well imagine, in the USA, academic competitions are embraced throughout the system, especially in math, science and MUSIC. He went all state in music and was in the newspaper for winning math competitions.

    Fast forward back to Canada this past year.

    The band my son played in sucked. Few of the parents in this rich town put their 'band' kids into lessons, and virtually none, except for the Asian parents, would be bothered to buy them instruments. The kids NEVER practiced, and basically, they sucked....But the teachers did not tell them they sucked and that they needed to practice. They went on a band trip to the USA and fundamentally embarrassed the entire country. At the band award banquet at the end of this year, NOT ONE of the top musicians won an award. They handed out really stupid awards for the 'most comical' musician, etc. UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!. God forbid that they should recognize the excellant students. That would make the other students....feel bad....What a joke!
  72. Richie Rich from Uranium City, Sask., Canada writes: With few exceptions, this wouldn't be an issue and most kids would be ready for school if their parents actually gave a crap about them. For a lot of parents/adults, the acquisition of wealth and social status amongst their peers means their kids are not a priority to them. Those parents whose kids are their top priorities will spend a lot of time and effort before the child reaches Kindergarten reading to them, teaching them basic spelling and math, singing, playing with them - in essance nourishing them and readying them for school. I've seen too many parents blame teachers and the education system for their kids educational and social failures, while these same parents spend little to no quality time with their kids. Oh, and I'm not a teacher. Nor a fan of unions. But teaching kids that they can move ahead without earning it is exactly what unions are all about. Lousy ineffective worker, doesn't matter as long as you have seniority then you can move ahead. And John Smith, how many entries have you put on here? If you have young kids please spend your time on them rather than putting twenty entries on one column. BTW, loved your reply to Jon Lord and the Deep Purple reference. I believe post-Deep Purple he played keys for Whitesnake. Wasn't there a recent study saying that metalheads proved to be smarter than the average bear? I say crank metal in the schools and our kids will all come out further ahead.
  73. Jonah Jamieson from Hamilton, Ontario, Canada writes: Carmen Branje, you're absolutely right. There's an unspoken understanding among school administrators and many special education people that the gifted kids will always make out okay, so we don't have to expend a lot of energy on responding to their needs. In my experience, gifted kids do not necessarily make out any more or less okay than anyone else. In Ontario, part of the problem is that, in an effort to give everyone a $200 tax cut and also make sure that everyone's self-esteem is okay, destreaming (i.e. putting kids of wildly varying levels of ability in one class) was put in place and vocational schools have been quietly shut down since the election of the Rae government back in the early 90s. As a result, the average classroom teacher has to spend more time with the students who were socially promoted and/or behavioural problems (stemming from the fact that they don't have the prior skills and knowledge base necessary to work at the class level) and less with those who can quickly (and quietly) master the demands of the course. As in so many areas of life, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. If the public wants individualized learning they have to expect to pay for it by staffing schools accordingly so that teachers can get on with the job at hand instead of running around putting out fires in oversized, undifferentiated classes with a metaphorical fire extinguisher.
  74. John Arthur from Canada writes: And exactly what message are we sending to these kids that are passed 'socially'? They are expected to produce results when they enter adulthood, because in the real world, higher education institutions, and business demands it. On the other hand, we teach them early on that we aren't expecting them to succeed as juniors, and that it's not OK to fail at something, that the education system rewards inadequate results. Feelings get hurt, people fail, that's life!

    Sounds like a recipe to create a bunch of inward thinking narcissists to me. And in looking at the new recruits in the workforce, I'd say we are succeeding.
  75. Lisa Jones of the Anglo-Celtic nation within a nation from Canada writes: Richie Rich.... You have a point....Few parents are committed to their kids, but the education infrastructure in Canada is broken.
  76. john chuckman from Canada writes: It's not just flunking, children no longer have to do much of anything in our public schools. The words 'social promotion' sum up the public-education establishment: they come up with a term which sounds like a policy when in fact they are justifying their inactivity. I've tutored a fair number of kids in recent years, brought to me by parents deeply concerned about the children's future. And they were right to be concerned. In math, I found every kid - ranging from grades 4 to 6 had not learned the times tables. These are something we learned 50 years ago in grade 2 or 3, and they are indispensible to any person's understanding for work as a sales clerk or a carpenter's assistant. More importantly, they are the foundation of much that follows. Imagine the absurdity of trying to teach double-digit division or elementary probability concepts when kids don't even know their times tables? Yet this is what is going on in Ontario schools today. It is the same with language skills. I laugh every time I hear McGuinty say how much progress they've made in literacy. What used to be definitive courses in high school English have been dumbed-down so that anyone can pass. They are the courses that should provide the real literacy test. Indeed, the silly literacy test we have is not objective and provides no genuine information about students at all. It is subject to easy manipulation for improved apparent results. And it can be passed, even when failed, by taking a silly bird course the next term. It is quite meaningless. The same goes for general discipline and values. All the propaganda about bullying is just a substitute for teachers and administrators doing the jobs of responsible adults. The kids have no one to yurn to, so McGuinty gives them an 800-number to a call center in Bangalore, India. Three teachers have spoken out about the horrible problems at the school where the young man was shot in the hall, but nothing was done.
  77. B T from Canada writes: hukdt on fonix werkdt fer me!
  78. chuck me from Canada writes: I failed grade 6 because I had no interest in school. However, once I failed, I got to work because I never wanted to feel left-out again. I am happy to say that I completed three university degrees and now travel the world for my work.

    You have to look at the individual student to know what is an appropriate response. If you know the student is not putting in any effort, why would you promote? A big dose of reality can do wonders for kids.
  79. Timber 'n from Here n' there, Canada writes: Two cents. Perhaps it is time to reevaluate the production line school model used. Children and people in general have never fit this model, we force them in, and some just don't fit well. The grade system is a simple structure of learning, but not really a good one. Who failed, the child, or the system. If the failure rate is that high, I think you really need to look deeper than the kids and make real changes to how they are educated.
  80. Gerry Dunnhaupt from Toronto, Canada writes: Good grief! The politically correct crowd has now even come up with a politically correct code word for grade inflation: 'Social Promotion' indeed -- give me a break!
  81. Stephen McPherson from Bradford, Canada writes: