I am serious. And don’t call me Shirley. 
No, I send my child to Catholic school and I expect the teachers to impart Catholic understanding, which wholeheartedly includes evolution. If it were to develop that this teacher had some crazy objection to evolution, my child would be out of the class.
Awesome - thanks!
Okay, I’m glad it’s not the evolution thing. Sadly, it’s not that Farfetch’d. My coworker won’t let his kids have anything to do with Pokemon because it’s “demonic.”
Anyway, I play competitively, and I’m probably going to be starting as a league leader soon, so I’m fairly knowledgeable about TCG. If you PM me your town, I can probably take a look at the leagues in your area and help you pick a good one. All leagues are not created equal.
You’re a lawyer and don’t understand why it’s necessary to follow laws?
So, you’re brillant child has come up with this super awesome way to do his assignment even though it doesn’t follow the assignment?
I would think that you, being Catholic and a lawyer would understand that strictures are in place. You may not understand why they are there. Heckfire, you may even not agree with them. But…you still follow them. The same should be the same in this case.
Your child’s teacher deserves respect and your child deserves a lesson from Dad telling him to do his homework as it is assigned.
Your kid is awesome. Not all kids are awesome. Getting deluged with hundreds of pokemon homework assignments every single year is not at all awesome. Children don’t usually have the ability to figure out that sometimes pokemon are appropriate and sometimes they are not, changing the rule would just mean nothing but pokemon every single time.
Huh? I don’t see how Bricker is telling his child not to do the lesson. He’s just asking if he can go to a previous teacher and show her how he was able to apply what he learned in the classroom to something he did on his own. Yeah, it involved Pokemon, but it’s not like he’s bringing his teacher a Pokemon report after she told him not to.
This does not relate to an assignment. Bricker’s child was a student of this teacher LAST YEAR. Child wishes to advocate for a change in the rule, by demonstrating the educational relevancy of Pokemon with a project he has undertaken on his own time. Such a change can only benefit other students, and not himself.
A more careful reading of the OP would have revealed these facts.
In regards to the rest of your idiotic post, it is the very essence of our legal system to argue for a well-founded change in the law.
I agree with your budding little liberal looking out for the less fortunate. This sounds like it might be an excellent teaching tool that the tykes would be able to relate to. And its probably much better than how I was finally taught probability in high school when Mr. Hartlaub took all our money playing craps.
Is that so? Your insults aside, their is no need to change the assignment, especially as it doesn’t apply to the student. The teacher has a curriculum, the law is law, the Catholic church has its strictures. I asked Bricker the question.
Reading really is fundamental.
Teachers have enough work that they should not have to worry about parents who think that their children (third grade students, no less!) are the second coming and want to change everything just to service the little, brilliant tyke.
Thanks for not contributing in any way to any meaningful answer.
Oh, when this brilliant kid makes it through law school, then maybe he can have a say about, what was it?..to “argue for a well-founded change in the law.”
For fuck’s sake…
One thing that just occurred to me…it’s a sense of entitlement.
What “you” want regardless of staff, resources or what’s working.
Did you even read the OP? The kid doesn’t want the curriculum changed just for him. The boy just wanted to tell the teacher that this is one particular instance where the lesson plan really ties in with Pokemon and maybe suggest that it could be a tie-in. It’s not like anyone is putting a gun to the teacher’s head and telling her it’s Pokemon or die. It’s just a suggestion/comment. Or are you saying that no one should ever dare to suggest a former teacher, ever?
Gotta disagree. A child having thoughtful comments about the curriculum and expressing them is a useful part of the education process. All people are entitled to their thoughtful opinions, not just lawyers.
This seems like a good summary of the possible outcomes. Additionally, as others noted, he could be making things a bit easier/understandable for the next class.
I think otherwise the life lesson is, “Life isn’t fair,” but he’ll learn that sooner or later.
I can vouch for BrickJr knowing his stuff. The time I beat him was mostly due to the fact that I had just the right Pokemon that I used at a whim, his strategy (involving multiple Pokemon to set up things up over a few turns for the real offensive!) was otherwise flawless. I came into the battle expecting a simple brute force fight with legendaries and was pleasantly surprised that he had put more thought into his lineup than me.
After learning the relatively simple rules, its all about knowing when and how to apply them. The video game is a bit different, but Green Bean’s description of the card game is mostly the same kind of process. Knowing how to use what you’ve previously learned to adapt to a new situation is a great skill to have, and one that too many adults don’t even possess.
While the teacher probably doesn’t want Pokemon due to being sick of them, the argument that they’re educational isn’t too hard to make. Teaching about strategy and adaptation might be a bit beyond what a school is prepared for, but the way the games use math is probably a good way to reach certain students. “What are the odds of finding a Ponyta?” can make more sense than a spinning wheel.
As others have suggested, I think this first post of yours misses the boat – perhaps even misses the marina – in some important ways. My child has no pending assignment with this teacher; she is his second grade teacher and he’s now in third grade. There’s not even a scintilla of seeking to dodge work or change what he has to do; he’s merely asking her to consider changing her rules for the benefit of future classes. Her decision won’t impact him, as far as he knows.
(Now, what he doesn’t know is that there is a possibility this same teacher may be assigned to teach fourth grade next year, so there is a chance he may have her again – but this didn’t form any part of his reasoning…)
Your other, more general point – that the teacher deserves respect – is a valid one, and it’s why I posted this OP. My shoot from the hip reaction was to approve my son’s plan, but I wanted to get a sanity check from others to see if perhaps I was missing something that would seem disrespectful.
So far, you’re the only person that has suggested it might, but I’m not really seeing how that might be. I think if the message is crafted along the lines of, “Here’s what I did with what you taught, and how I used it in Pokemon,” it would be more laudatory than anything else. Can you give me a little more insight into why (or if) you disagree?
I think that women have a harder time with the entire Pokemon phenom. it is very much a guy thing. My 10 year old daughter kinda likes Pokemon, but only the cute ones. Her nearly 12 year brother is an encyclopedia about every kind of pokemon there is. If he turns into some UltraDork, can I sue Pokemon?
( In fairness, my husband has less interest in pokemon than me. I at least know about 20 characters and can ‘duel’ with my kids, often with hilarious results, as I make up names and ‘powers’. Mr. Ujest also has a one bit memory drive for the Harry Potter series or any fiction for that matter. He watches it once and promptly forgets the entire story line.)
Teachers, even harder, because they have not been taught to free-ball and run with whatever the trends in kids are learning from the electronic pacificier (TV and video games) Older teachers with no young kids of their own have barely a clue of what cartoons or books are popular at all.
That said, if I had to grade 25 papers on pokemon, I would stab myself in the eye. It’s like it is the same language but nothing is comprehensible. Social Dyslexia.
Kids need to learn outside their comfort zones, which is how they/we all learn and open up …uh…neural pathways ( or something like that) . Teachers need to pull the stick out of their ass once in awhile and take a bullet for the team and do something that is REALLY FUN.
To add to the chorus, yes, your kid is very intelligent and he deserves your congratulations for his extra work.
But I wouldn’t let him go to the teacher with this. Acknowledge that his point that Pokemon can be used here is valid. You can explain that the teacher almost certainly knows that about Pokemon. You can explain that the limitation, whatever the reason, wasn’t the difference between success and failure on the assignment for anyone.
You might suggest other students have also done this the teacher’s way AND with Pokemon independently like him. The extra work means they’ve learned the lesson better, which is all to the good. (I thought that up as I was composing this post. A really good rationalization, no? )
Even if he diplomatically phrased what he’s done if he talked to the teacher, the teacher would certainly see the implied challenge, whether she saw it as a very minor matter or a major one.
I had one or two experiences similar to this when I was a kid, and I didn’t think it was fair. And now that I know the trouble teachers have to put up with (not to mention mistakes of my own as an adult), I feel differently. There really are more important issues.
If the teacher is just sick of Pokemon, having her not be irritated by it is a good thing.
The main problem here is that I think it’s most likely that LittleBrick’s point – that Pokemon can be used as a good example of the lesson – is not what’s spurring the ‘No Pokemon’ rule.
I’m guessing it’s some combination of ‘The teacher doesn’t want to go through the trouble of learning Pokemon rules enough to understand what 2nd graders who don’t understand the rules themselves are trying to say about it’, ‘those kids who do get the lesson can find another example besides Pokemon, while those kids who don’t will only get confused by using Pokemon’, ‘Experience has shown that Pokemon assignments only lead to arguments in class’, and ‘I’m sick of #%$@ Pokemon’.
So best case scenario is that the teacher carefully listens to LittleBrick, acknowledges that he’s correct, then explains that there are other good reasons, that LittleBrick hasn’t thought of, for the ‘No Pokemon’ rule. And LittleBrick learns that sometimes there are reasons you haven’t thought of for rules, but that asking why rules are there is worthwhile.
I suppose second-best scenarios involve LittleBrick learning lessons about power, arbitrary rules, and the unwillingness of those with power to be challenged. But I’m not sure that’s a lesson that he’s ready for.
If it was my kid, I’d probably play the teacher in best-case scenario for a bit first: tell LittleBrick that they’re right: this is a great example of the lesson that uses Pokemon. Then get them thinking about whether there might be other reasons for the ‘No Pokemon’ rule. That way if and when they do show the example to the teacher, they’re ready for the teacher saying ‘Sure, thanks for showing me this, but I’m not changing the rule.’
I had no idea that Pokemon was still so popular among kids. I’m guessing that the teacher made her rule back when the fad was really going and she was sick of every homework assignment being about Pokemon. Perhaps that would still be the case, and perhaps not.
This reminds me of a school supply list my daughter got one year that said “NO TRAPPER KEEPERS”. She had no idea what a Trapper Keeper was, and I’m not even sure they sell them anymore. So, I told her it was a kind of three-ring binder that had a little flap across the open end that you could Velcro closed.
She was confused. “It’s a three-ring binder? But, they allow three-ring binders. And that flap seems like a really good idea–it would keep papers from falling out. Why would they ban something like that?”
Frankly, I remember teachers not being crazy about them when they were the hot thing, but I can’t remember why. Maybe they didn’t like the Velcro noise. The rule seems stupid then and very stupid now when I haven’t even seen a Trapper Keeper for about 15 years.
My children’s middle school and high school both specify “no Trapper Keepers” as well. I never gave it much thought since it has been years since I have even seen one…but now I do wonder why. They were the thing to have back when I was in elementary and junior high (they were no longer the “it” thing to have by the time I was in high school) and I can’t think of a single reason they should be banned.
Your “son”, eh? :dubious:
Yes. My own interest in both Pokemon and second grade assignments is considerably more attenuated.