Again, not surprised really, but I confess I don't understand. I mean, understand the reason given, but the reason seems, well, bass ackawards. How can students be encouraged to excel at learning if any hint of excellence is tamped down from the top?
The theory goes something like this: (Heaven knows I can't make too much sense of it, but I'll try.)
Children are more likely to succeed if they feel good about themselves. Having poor self-esteem leads to failure. That's why little Johnny shouldn't get "A B C" grades but just "Succeeding" or "Developing." (Developing means the same as not succeeding, but"failing" is demeaning.) If little Susie is selected for TAG, little Johnny will feel inferior, so he is likely to, um, develop more slowly. This extends to the idea that if little Johnny can't develop to the point of succeeding, he should not be held back, because, hey, Susie gets to move on and we wouldn't want to damage Johnny by making him feel bad. (It is far worse, you see, for a child to develop low self-esteem than to be illiterate.)
This is something I have seen in a lot of places, not just schools and not just liberal politics. I took a lot of part-time jobs in the military because one income-five kids is NOT conducive to eating. Invariably, whenever I (or other military types with me) would apply the typical military work ethic and DO the job we were getting paid for we were told that we needed to stop showing off. We were making the others look bad. When I do a supply inventory with my present company I always come up perfect to the penny. (We know a week in advance and I get organized, get ready and come prepared.) I have actually been told by auditors that I should have at least a small shortage, because it makes the other guys look bad if I am perfect and they are not. In schools, aside from the academic nail hammering to which Ami referred, other kids get angry if you do well. "You think you're better than me because you got straight A's." There is a bumper sticker out there that reads "My kid can beat up your honor student" in response to the "My kid is an honor student at Damimgood Elementary School." It's funny, I admit, and most of the folks who sport the sticker probably wouldn't actually let their kids go around stomping smart people. But the sentiment is real. There are even cultural reasons for avoiding excellence. Many people think academic achievement is too "uppity," too elitist or just too white.
Finally, this is not a new thing. Back in 1969 I had a sixth grade teacher who got angry with me. He asked for a definition of the word "revolve." Even then, the Pooch was wordy, but the definition I gave was hardly a lengthy diatribe. It was something like "It means to move around something like the planets go around the sun." He angrily said to me "I didn't ask for a scientific analysis, Doctor, I just wanted a definition! You could have just said 'spin.'" After that, he spent the rest of the year referring to me as "Doctor." Ya know, surprisingly, I don't think it was intended in a complimentary way. This was, of course, picked up by the other kids and the rest of the year was jst peachy for me. The teacher was African-American and from California. I'm not sure which cultural norm he was following, but either way, thank God he saved the other kids from having their self-esteem damaged.
