Failing Our Geniuses 815
saintlupus writes "Time has an interesting article about the failure of the US educational system to properly deal with gifted students. For example, up to ten times as much money is spent nationwide on educating 'developmentally disabled' students as gifted ones. Does No Child Left Behind mean that nobody can get ahead, either?"
of course (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, hang on. (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, I wish I'd gotten help for my actual limitations (mild autism, which has been moderately crippling at times), but frankly, for the genius stuff, it would have been sufficient for the schools to mostly get out of my way.
Nothing has really changed (Score:5, Insightful)
Then, like today, it was much easier for schools to keep classes uniform by holding bright kids back so that more effort could be spent on the "slow" ones. Uniformity is the goal, and it's a lot easier to dumb down smart kids than the other way 'round.
Oh, and here's a clue: if you offer bonuses for teachers of math and science, the teachers with the most seniority (regardless of whether they can add) will teach those classes. My kids had a math PhD teaching music, but she couldn't get into the math program against the ed majors who ran the system.
What a surprise. (Score:1, Insightful)
What I believe, now that I am not in school, is that first off we should have never had public school, secondly they should never have been tied into the government. Thats how propaganda gets spread around. I honestly believe that every child is a genius, and that our public schools do a great job of convincing them that their individual genius is worthless (eg. You're only a genius if you can add these two 50 digit numbers together in your head in less than 2 seconds). My Mom is a teacher, and she teaches special kids, savants and what not.
Anyways, go back to being told
Intelligence reaps mockery in the US. (Score:3, Insightful)
It doesn't take a genius to figure it out !!! (Score:4, Insightful)
"For example, up to ten times as much money is spent nationwide on educating 'developmentally disabled' students as gifted ones."
Duh! Smart kids learn faster than 'tards. Whodathunkit? Was this article written by Captain Obvious? So you've got a choice - either invest more in educating those who are slower learners, or pay to support them. Which is cheaper in the long run (hint - you don't have to be a genius to figure that one out either).
Re:No Child Left Behind doesn't matter (Score:5, Insightful)
We, on the other hand, do not. Culturally, Americans view intellectualism with suspicion. We love the captain of the football team; big, handsome, and dumb. You have only to look at the debates on science to understand that. There is societal pressure to not appear too smart, or you'll have a number of unflattering stereotypes applied to you. The last two losing presidential candidates both had their intelligence used against them in an unflattering way; they were know-it-alls, dorks, geeks, namby pamby sissy faggot intellectuals, whereas the guy everyone regards as the dumber candidate is trustworthy and strong.
A lot of it probably has its roots with Christianity. The Devil is smart, remember? When Dante was populating the Inferno, he dumped Odysseus in the 8th circle, 1 up from the bottom. Why? Because he's a smart, tricky bastard, just like the Devil is supposed to be. This country has a lot of radical Christian roots (Puritans, anyone?) so it's not all that surprising that our views on intellectualism are shaped around that.
Hold up, Dude! (Score:5, Insightful)
More to the point, it would mean treating students as individuals and that would totally screw up the system.
It's still the parent's responsibility. (Score:5, Insightful)
It still comes down to parents doing actual parenting. If you've got a gifted child, you have to know they are only going to get so much from their school.
I was lucky. My parents knew what they were doing. They let me explore my interests without pushing. They had me in a creative writing class. They got me into science competitions. The best thing they did was buy a computer for the house. This was a TRS-80 in 1982. It was a stretch for the household budget, but messing with that taught me more than anything else.
geekd
Obligitory "Incredibles" quote: (Score:5, Insightful)
developmentally disabled (Score:1, Insightful)
Home/Private school (Score:4, Insightful)
Ideally, we need a system of student competitions that identifies talent and sponsors the winners for tuition in private, more challenging schools - as much for their protection as for accelerated education. This is unlikely to happen though because of both lack of money and current attitude of political correctness that allows "special needs" students to beat up gifted ones at will. In the meantime parents should step up to the plate, do home schooling the best they can and organize study groups where students can help each other get more information from books and Internet.
Re:Hold up, Dude! (Score:4, Insightful)
As it happens... (Score:3, Insightful)
Achievement levels off once you start generating knowledge yourself. Learning logarithms when you're 10 instead of 14 isn't going to make you significantly more likely to "cure leukemia or stop global warming".
Look at those "geniuses" who get packed off to college in their early teens. Have any of them ever accomplished anything noteworthy?
Re:Kids today (Score:4, Insightful)
And do you think when the teacher hears your assertion that you've read the book that that teacher will react with anything but scorn? And do you think that teacher will be surprised and pleased that you actually appear to have mastered the material, after he's stopped class to flip ahead and bombard you with study questions from the later chapters of the book?
Or do you think that he will be so enraged at your showing him up in front of the class that he will go out of his way to pick on you for the rest of the year? You'll end up with a reputation as a "discipline problem," and spend the rest of high school magically ending up in classes with other "discipline problems" which is the nail in the coffin as far as ever giving a damn about school.
And those grades are critical for getting you into the sort of college that you'll really need to be in to get the most out of it. Mediocre grades and phenomenal test scores will only take you so far.
Re:No Child Left Behind doesn't matter (Score:4, Insightful)
Now we have powerful lobbies seeking to undermine science education in the United States, trying to find ways to sneak past that great product of the Enlightenment Age; the Bill of Rights, so that there superstitious worldview can be promulgated in public schools.
If the US wants to know why its surrendering the production of scientists to other parts of the world, they only need to look at all those small-minded, anti-intellectual twerps that manage to get on school boards and state Boards of Education, with their Bible in one hand and hatred of knowledge in the other.
Re:of course (Score:5, Insightful)
1.) "My kid should be in the smart class" (whether they belong there or not)
2.) Claims of discrimination / creation of a caste system being unacceptable.
Remember, school board officials are elected and must bow to political pressure.
One of my mentors used to always tell me: "Culture is the hardest thing to change". Parents want they perceive to be the best for their kids whether it really is or not. They also (typically - no matter how many sob stories you hear) have a greater stake in them than the teachers that only see them for a few hours a day.
Would you trust someone at the local public school to put your kid on a path that will determine what opportunities will be available to them? As one of my college professors said: too many Einsteins are passed over because the teacher was looking for that one Gauss.
Re:As it happens... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd like to see the evidence that people educated in the US system are, per capita, more "creative" and "innovative" than those produced in every other educational system in the world. Really, this sounds to me more like nationalist mythology than anything resembling a fact, and contrasting it with "hysteria" is somewhat ironic.
I don't think the difference between "gifted" and "average" students is learning logarithms at 10 instead of 14. Its more like the difference between learning logarithms at 10 and having a vague idea as an adult that they are somehow connected to the Taco Bell chihuahua.
Even assuming the answer is no, wouldn't that demonstrate that, indeed, the US educational system is, contrary to your argument, failing the gifted? I mean, if they weren't being failed, you'd expect them to acheive noteworthy things at the same proportion as the rest of the population.
Re:Kids today (Score:5, Insightful)
In my experience (mine and people I know), it's not that gifted kids don't try to get ahead, it's that they are often actively prevented from doing so.
Re:of course (Score:5, Insightful)
Special needs != Stupid (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It depends... (Score:3, Insightful)
The point? I think most of the smart kids -- especially if they have any kind of decent direction from parents, or a counselor, or some kind of mentor -- can take advantage of the existing system just fine, and learn to find resources outside of it to further their own goals.
You know what they'll figure out on their own? That it takes 10 minutes to get the password of every student in the school. Why? Because it's about the most interesting thing they can do during school hours.
How do you expect a kid to be motivated about anything when they're forced to sit for 6 hours a day in a chair and be subjected to repetitive babbling on things they learned the first time the teacher said it. Of course any attempt to claim they already know this will be returned with a "too bad, you need to stay in this class since we don't care how boring it is" response from the school. And no the school doesn't care how good the child is or how gifted they are but simply sends out the same form reply anytime someone even dares to ask to do something different.
To flesh that out some (Score:5, Insightful)
No child should be left behind, and certainly school can be challenging for some. But by instituting a tenet that "There are no losers" so let's give everyone an award - we're raising a generation that thinks mediocrity is ok. It's not ok, and the failure to nurture gifted children is ensuring our future demise.
What ever happened to respecting and cherishing differences?
Re:No Child Left Behind doesn't matter (Score:2, Insightful)
I hate to sound like I'm insulting your religion, each to their own and all that. But I can't stand by and watch someone say things like
Intellectual != weak (Score:3, Insightful)
You have basically proven that you are just as ignorant and just as wiling to stereotype as those your rail against. Captains are usually intelligent. And some football (American) positions do require intelligence, the ability to quickly analyze a fluid situation (an unfolding play), develop a successful plan and refine that plan in real time as further developments occur. The fact that these skills are applied to big guys hitting your rather than a network intrusion is irrelevant.
It is not intellectualism that people dislike, it is arrogance and condescension. Also, if a political candidate can not communicate without seeming arrogant or condescending then they have some shortcomings in leadership skills.
Not all intellectuals are liberal.
I apologize if the preceding joke went to far. The point is that intellectuals come with various political viewpoints, various athletic abilities, various levels of moral courage, etc. Again, you display a narrow uninformed stereotype and resemble those your criticize.
Re:of course (Score:2, Insightful)
What a bunch of crap, education is not this simple well understood thing. The whole "no child left behind bit" was not going to change a lot since the education system is complex to begin with. If you're gifted you can teach yourself, the internet is a tremendous resource, most truly 'gifted' people teach themselves. Look at John carmack of Doom and Quake fame, that is a REALLY gifted person, someone who doesn't wait on others to teach them, they just pursue their interest, they are active learners. John understands the value of work, many gifted people want easy streat or to fuck around or spread themselves to thin by having too many interests, they become jack of all trades master of none (very common among gifted people who go nowhere).
Seriuosly, if you're a genius there's the library and the internet, tonnes of resources available. Not to mention scholarships if you are truly so 'gifted', I'd say the real problem with teaching gifted students (and teachers in general) is psychometric based placement in classes and schools. But even that is no gaurantee that just because you're smart that you're a good person or have good character. Lots of smart people are total assholes and pricks with an enormous sense of entitlement or how they like to whine and whinge they're not as 'successful as they could be if money had been spent on them'. It's a bunch of bullshit, really gifted people are self starters. And in the age of libraries and the internet why should anyone cry over gifted students?
The real issue is guidance toward the right resources at the right time, the next issue is the persons motivation. Where's people's sense of responsibility for their own learning? In university the try not to hold your hand unless you have serious problems, anyone who is gifted should well come out ahead if as long as they have a backbone and don't care what other people think.
I spent my life struggling with socializtion but that doesn't mean the onus isn't on ME to fit in and learn how to socialize instead of giving in to prejudice and snobbery, being able to suck it up and persist and gain feedback on how others percive you, etc. Sure kids are mean and assholes, but lots of the time the 'gifted' are oblivious to their own shortcomings.
Re:of course (Score:5, Insightful)
Having been one of those freaks you talk about as well as an introvert, going to classes with students 4-5 years older than me HELPED my social skills. It is very easy to socialize with people like you, it takes social skills to socialize with people NOT like you. I didn't take geometry class with 11 year old eggheads like myself, I took them with average and above average 15 and 16 year olds. That way builds social skills. If they can't deal with being a freak, how are they going to manage when they first get a job and their boss is extremely average, or their President is well below average?
Likewise, being able to impress someone your own age is NOT going to get you a job when starting out; your boss is probably going to be at least 10-20 years older than you. The high school cliques do NOT teach you social skills. Only someone who is willing to go outside their clique, even their age group, are the ones who will truly develop social skills, at least for those those for whom it does not come naturally. And if those skills are not inborn, then trying to advance yourself is one way of getting some practice.
Re:of course (Score:3, Insightful)
"Bright" does not correspond to best. There are some students who work hard, but are not going to be tops academically.We need a system that takes the kids who do not want to learn and keep them from interrupting the education of those who do, regardless of their ability.
Shows the failures of socialism (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:of course (Score:4, Insightful)
If a child does not want to learn it's not the teachers job to convince him otherwise. Instead the teacher should cut him loose and accept another student who wishes to learn.
A teacher is there to impart knowledge of the subject. He's not some motivational speaker but rather an aid to study.
School should be focused on turning out students who can pass the prescribed exams not used as some form of entertainment or punishment.
Make no mistake what I want is radical, it's flushing the idea of equality away and letting merit stand on it's own. To the winners the spoils. It's a harsh system but not an unfair one.
Re:Shows the failures of socialism (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, but that pisses on your precious socialism-bashing. Please, do go on.
Re:of course (from a teacher) (Score:3, Insightful)
The answer that immediately came to my mind as well.
I'm a science teacher, and the focus of my school is exactly as described - it is to raise the test scores of marginally achieving populations. There are advanced courses in most subjects, but other than that no extra attention is paid to gifted kids, except at the most minimal level (i.e. the extra efforts of one sponsoring teacher) in some extracurricular clubs. Even the training provided to districts by national consultants such as those of Professional Learning Communities make virtually no mention of gifted kids (I listened very carefully for this at the conference I took part in). They advocate standardizing and homogenizing instruction, to a) increase the teaching skills of poor teachers, and to b) allow all kids to be graded by standardized tests. The implicit and explicit assumption is that a rising tide will raise all boats. Unfortunately, this whole process completely excludes the programs of truly gifted teachers (and they are admittedly too rare), and gifted kids find normal schooling to be incredibly boring a lot of the time.
Re:of course (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Tracking (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a huge difference though, the high IQ type has all ability to self acutalize. The internet and library are there for a reason, you can learn at any pace you want, its more likely gifted kids are just too lazy to do their own learning. In the age of the internet there is less and less of an excuse for high IQ types in my opinion, while the low IQ student will ALWAYS be at a sever disadvantage for the rest of his life, the high IQ type will not be. They just need to be pointed in the right direction and also most of the time to be left alone to study and create new works on their own, the people at teh edge of the high IQ spectrum should not expect their 'needs' to be served so much as as creating what they need since they at the top of the pile, why should anyone gifted expect interesting work when they in the top %1 of the population? I mean come on the dice is so loaded with gifted kids, most of them simply have character flaws, are lazy or oblivious to their own egotistical flaws.
One thing the article never said was: What about having her go to regular classes with her agemates but allowed to do her own learning? Bring her own books, get correspondance cousework from university? The article sounds like a big pity party.
Failing our teachers as well (Score:4, Insightful)
Teachers like my grandmother aren't around anymore because other industries pay better. That's not to say people are greedy money grubbers, though, because in most of the United States it is difficult to support oneself on a teacher's salary. So when given the choice between taking a $40k teaching gig or a $60k software developing gig in a state like, say, California (where schools are nearly last place in the country and living costs are HIGH), the majority would go for the $60k gig. And without good teachers or resources, we end up taking the mindset of "How do we keep the less gifted students on track with the norm?"
We all see ads and propaganda for the Army, right? Recruiters at every school. But where the hell is the propaganda for teacher recruitment? If our public education system had the same budget as the military, none of these problems would've existed. We'd have had ads asking for teachers playing at the theaters before the previews came on. Superintendents of public school boards would be making speaches at universities about why you should get a job in teaching. Gifted students would have access to advanced courses and cirriculum in the same school as the normal kids. (I've got nothing against the nation's military, though, and I wasn't intending to give that message off. Sorry.)
On another note, I took an IQ test a while ago and found out that... well, my IQ wasn't as high as the girl in the beginning of the TIME article, but it was up there. I don't remember being able to talk as well as she did, but in my psychology research I found out I did a lot while I was a kid. Memorizing the names and locations of the United States, making large structures with building blocks, y'know? However when I was at school I was a complete bonehead! I'd find it hard to read a lot of the material they gave in class and outright hated writing and grammar lessons. And I was always imagining different things, I never really focused on the teacher's lessons or anything. I was told that some of my classmates didn't even think that I would get past high-school.
There's a lot in deciding who is smart and who is not. A lot of the issues that students have are simple barriers or developmental issues that they haven't grown out of. Things like dyslexia, attention deficity disorder, or even an early fear of math. And there are a lot of issues with standardized testing, because many students learn and study in different ways, and if teachers aren't aware or open to these different types of learning methods, how are students supposed to excel?
Add onto that a lot of immigrant children don't even know English, so how are they supposed to learn in a classroom? One of the issues with the "No Child Left Behind" Act is that it rewards schools that perform well in academic standardized testing, but when a lot of students from poor immigrant families perform poorly because of a lack of education or the language barrier, the school and the entire district suffer the consequences. Ultimately the children are being taught material from the SATs and standardized testing for the sake of passing the exams only!
Re:of course (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:To flesh that out some (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Shows the failures of socialism (Score:2, Insightful)
In fact, from what I can tell, most have fewer private schools than the United States.
Re:To flesh that out some (Score:4, Insightful)
Cue The Moaning (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:To flesh that out some (Score:3, Insightful)
I understand that they have grand dreams of discovering/moulding the next shakespeare or Einstein, but the truth is useful genius is not acedemic. Shakespeare didn't write plays because his teacher asked/told him to. Einstein didn't study physics because he needed the credit hours. They did those important things because they NEEDED to. No lack of school funding, or increased funding or even a zealous or uncaring teacher would have changed their lives in any way.
You can't MAKE anyone do anything, and that is why the fundamental concept of "education" is flawed. A system designed to 'teach' will always be less effective than one that allows people to learn. Learning is acquiring knowledge and the ability to apply it, sure if there is always some "teach" on tap then you will occasionally take some in and do some learning. But teaching is a side-effect of learning, not the other way around.
If you are trying to drink out of a bucket of water with a straw, and somebody takes the bucket and dumps it on your head, sure you will probably get some water in your mouth, but allowing the student to drink at their own pace would me much more effective, no matter how thirsty the person was or how big their straw is.
Untill you are at a point in your life where you are free to learn, without being actively taught; you aren't learning to your fullest ability, you are at best learning to the fullest ability of your teacher, or they are a distraction to your actual learning.
Re:of course (Score:3, Insightful)
NCLB was also supposed to ensure the all teachers are good teachers by establishing guidelines for basic qualifications and knowledge. If all teachers are good teachers, it's senseless to give only the gifted kids good teachers.
Re:To flesh that out some (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:To flesh that out some (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are smart but otherwise ungifted, you'll probably find yourself surrounded by people you feel smarter than. If you're smart and living up to your potential, you should probably stop feeling smart, because you should be surrounded by people at least as smart as you are.
Re:Tracking (Score:3, Insightful)
Ohh so true. My 2nd grade teachers thought I had learning dissabilities. In reality I was just so damn bored.
Thankfully my mother was a teacher for the school district, so when she told my teachers they needed to challenge me to get me to do better they were willing to give it a shot. They probably hated me for the trouble I was in class and would probably try anything by that point to make me less annoying. My teachers were somewhat surprised that all of a sudden I was less disruptive in class and did better academically.
I was not self actuated until high school. By that point, I didn't need teachers to teach me subjects--particularly math and the sciences. So I agree with your assertion that a young intelligent kid can benefit from some academic coaching.
I was placed in classes where I was the obviously much younger student in the class. I hated the ridicule directed my way for being intellectually capable. I was sensitive to the fact that I was threatening to others, so I learned to not speak up and give answers in a class environment except only occasionally--it wasn't necessary for the education of myself or my classmates, and I could just ignore the class and read ahead. That is an important social lesson that I may not have learned had I only been among peers as capable as me. It allowed me to know when it's appropriate to shine and when it's not--when an answer is needed to solve a problem nobody else knows, then show your stuff. I can pick out the special ed. (as in gifted special ed.) student a mile away. They never learned humility or how to interract with the rest of the world. They never learn how to take their gifts and use them to sway the masses since they are too busy trying to convince everyone they are right to the point of losing supporters. They develop their abilities for the most selfish goal of satisfying their need to feel they are better than everyone else. They become ignored geniuses.
Despite the assumed rigor attached to the study of physical sciences, for instance, acceptance of a scientist's theories often include a measure of politics. The history of science is filled with people long dead before their work is recognised or accepted. Einstein was a rare example of genius excepted in his lifetime. I believe it's not a coincidence that Einstien was also generally a humble and kind person.
I urge you to find a way to have your daughter be in a setting, at least for a small portion of her education, where she interracts with regular people. Afterall, the world is filled with regular people. Your 8 year old could, when ready and appropriate, spend time in some traditional college prep classes in a high school for instance. You can even have her approach this likely dull class not as an opportunity to learn the subject, but rather an exploration into how to interact with normal people. And please do everything you can to ensure she does not learn contempt for average people. Otherwise your daughter could end up sounding like the snotty girl in the article :
" 'People are, I must admit it, a lot of times intimidated by me,' she told me; modesty isn't among her many talents. She described herself as 'perfectionistic' and said other students sometimes had 'jealousy issues' regarding her. "
Re:Do you also own a cat with a diamond collar? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not the original poster, but I'll still answer your question: No. I'm bitter that I lost a lot of my childhood by sitting in a prison of the mind, wasting my time instead of doing something better with my life.
I'm not on Slashdot because of my time in school. I'm here because I value continuing education. Don't laugh.
Except for about four years of my schooling (one in primary, one in middle, and two in high) where I was given a chance to self-educate, I spent my time in school alternately at the top of the class or rebelling. Those times when I was self-paced, I completed a couple of years' coursework at a time. For anyone with an IQ above 130, public school is an undeniable waste of time. I'd even say that it's a waste of several hours a day for the average student. Not much goes on in school except crowd control, lunch, and socializing.
I have had a few teachers who pushed me to my limit and were educated enough to lead me, but most were just average and knew little about their subjects. The textbook was always a better source of information than the average teacher, and I didn't have to waste fifty hours of my life to get through it at a snail's pace. My time on Slashdot educates me better than my time in school did, though the signal/noise ratio has gone down in the last few years.
I understand you'll see this post as egotistical and smug, but I feel qulified to comment on this story (and your post) because
Re:Yes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Do you also own a cat with a diamond collar? (Score:4, Insightful)
After I took the SAT in seventh grade (and scored similarly to an average senior that year), I was allowed to skip eighth grade. There were upsides and downsides, and I'm fairly happy about where I am now -- but it's not for everyone. I lost a lot of friends and there seemed to be a higher asshole to polite person ratio in my graduating class.
I took a self-paced English course the summer after my freshman year. I finished a semester's worth of work in two weeks. I'm still pissed off about all of that wasted time. I could probably have learned a couple of languages, I would probably be better at math.. Hell, I could have become even more of a virtuoso guitarist if I had started music lessons a couple of years earlier ;) .
I've had this discussion with many of my genius friends, and this attitude is pretty much universal among them. Yes, the school system is nearly useless for all ends of the spectrum. In my cynical moments I imagine that it's a plot to keep the country stupid and docile while they turn the Republic into a fascist shadow of its original promise.
Re:To flesh that out some (Score:5, Insightful)
Now that's a pretty damn sour attitude. I was a gifted kid too -- a standout even among the other gifted kids. I was chronically bored in school. By my senior year of high school, I was probably skipping class 60% of the time. Would I describe all the "normal" people I was surrounded by all those years as "violent stupid monkeys?" Not in a million years.
The most important thing I learned in public school is how to interact with so-called "normal" people on the level of an equal, not a brainiac who comes to intellectually lord over them. You know, stuff like "respect," and "politeness," and the concept of giving everybody a fair shot to prove their abilities.
If you really look at the world and think, "What a bunch of complete turd brains!" You are going to have a very sad life.
Re:To flesh that out some (Score:3, Insightful)
Then really, shouldn't our schools be about developing discipline, energy, drive, and attitude even in their best students, instead of developing boredom, cynicism, and putting them in an environment where, paradoxically, people only have their intelligence to feel good for themselves about?
Re:Do you also own a cat with a diamond collar? (Score:3, Insightful)
During my primary standard school i use to finish my whole syllabus before the start of the new term.I am not a genius neither did i take an IQ test, nor do i think i have an IQ of 145+ but i like studying books in my free time.Science was the most easiest and trivial subject to me.As a sidenote for many
After school i went to college for my bachelors in Computers.I realised within one week that i cannot mug anymore somehow. I felt attending classes was a waste of my time. Attending practicals which force you to work rather than learn was a torture. As expected i failed miserably at my grade in my first year of college. That was shock to me.But soon i realised grades do not matter, what matters more is my own satisfaction. Why should i follow the path which makes me feel knowledgeless. Honestly i chose to stop following the stupid rules in college, got one of the lowest marks in the class but managed to get through. I remember being touted as one of the idiot students who do not know a thing about their major.duh... it hurts when those words are from your faculty.Reason being i never liked the idea of sitting at back bench and asking questions which don't make sense. I would prefer reading books and breaking my computer, and personally i learnt more this way.luckily i managed to pass somehow.
Twist of fate, as it seems.My first job after college turned out to be a R&D job where i work as a virtualization hacker full time along with some stints on High Performance computing. And this all makes sense to me.I always liked challenges, and this job is a challenge.I don't regret not following the herd but what i do regret is low grades i got. I know now it may not matter but somehow it hurts.
I hope in US you people get good enough grades for following your heart at colleges?
Godspeed and good luck.