I'm an elite super hacker. Undetectable because I use incognito mode, and untraceable because I always delete my browser history.

Fascinating... I thought only a 14 year old could be so skilled in those forms of art... but I guess I was wrong

Nowadays, it wouldn't surprise me if a 14 year old thought incognito was some kind of hate speach. Keep seeing commercials trying to convince these kids to become scientists and engineers. I don't think the majority are capable of carrying that burden. The constant struggle of morality for scientists and ethics for engineers, and the dedication to stand by and accept responsibility for their work. If told to compare the price of redesigning something like a car so that the gas tank is moved forward a few inches before it's approved for mass production to the total estimated cost of compensation that would be offered as out of court settlements to the lawsuits filed by the families of drivers who were burned alive as a result of relatively minor rear-end collisions, how many do you think could make and stand by the decision to go ahead with production because it was estimated to be far cheaper for the company? How do you think they'd handle having to justify agencies like the EPA putting a higher price tag on a human life (a little over 9 million dollars) as an attempt to get more government funding rather than promote human interests while an agency like the DOD puts a lower price tag (roughly 6 million) to present a human life as more expendable?

Well actually, I'm 15, now it may not be the 14 year olds we are taking about but listen. Yeah, there are a lot of dumb kids at the school I go to, will they grow up to be scientists? Well, my guess is no, how ever, there are kids who are very very smart too. So I wouldn't be too concerned about us, I may not be one of the brightest kids in the school, maybe a tiny bit above average at best, but I have faith in all of the ones who are smarter than me.

I think it's the way the commercials are aired that bugs me. It blended the two together like they were the same thing, but never said what they do. It also ignores the steep decline of people seeking medical careers because research and development jobs can better compete in a global economy. You can't just stumble in and do that kind of work, but you don't have to be the second coming of Newton either. I have no doubt many in your age group, including you, are smart enough (lost a good chunk of math and reading abilities my second year of college, and have spent as much time regaining them as design projects, research, and whatnot. Anyone passionate enough to work towards earning their career can find a way to make it work.), that's not what worries me. The general loss of morals and decision making skills while under pressure does. Stress on students is higher now than ever due to the recent growth in technology and increased standardized testing, yet no one seems interested in lowering it. So much focus has been placed on pushing social agendas in education that education itself has been all but forgotten. Recent political climate doesn't help either. It blinds people to real problems. I'm sure you've heard North Korea tested an icbm that can supposedly reach the US a few days ago. Everyone has jumped on board the topic to take jabs at the president. No one has addressed China's mirv test though, an icbm that carries ten individual warheads and is also capable of reaching the US. This was tested a few months ago. While North Korea developed nukes as a threat, Chinese leadership openly admitted it's mirv's were made to strike the US if they felt necessary. It's China's answer to US non-nuclear military superiority and missle defense. We currently know of ten missiles that have been completed and moved to launch silos.

The climate at school, has changed, no doubt, in some ways, better, other ways so, so much worse. What I have noticed though is to the higher ups, as far as administration goes, see us more as numbers. That doesn't surprise me though. From time to time you'll see our Superintendent walk around, and she'll say high to the kids, ask them how they are doing, but that is more just for show, clearly. In the end she just is there to talk to the principle. No one else. I was talking to my math teacher last year (Who , funnily enough, plays destiny as well), and he said that the teachers had been pulled into a meeting all about adding more standardized tests, for more graphs to show her bosses the school is doing well. He asked what I thought on the whole thing and I just said, they have to remember we aren't just numbers, we're human. There should be standardized tests for sure, shows where the school is lacking but, the more tests, the faster they teach us how to learn material that we never use again, until a test comes up. From there we are told to barf up all the information for the test, whether we understand it or not, like, if there is a test on tectonic movements, I may be able to explain how they move "Oh through convection currents in the mantle." But that doesn't mean I understand the material. And in the end, THAT'S what really matters. He just looked at me and nodded. High school, its meant to figure out what you enjoy, for me that'd be java programming as cliche as it is, and pursuing knowledge in that field so, then, you can go on to college, learn more and get out into the real world, get a job and eventually move up to what your dream job is. That's how its supposed to work, that's what they say will happen, but as you go through the years, they slowly show you more and more how for the majority of us, we won't get those jobs. And it sucks. It really, really, sucks. And that has to do with the way its run, the things that are required to complete, and a whole lot of other things. Excuse the occasional spelling and grammatical error.

This is informal, so no need to worry about the spelling and whatnot. I've been using these forums to practice writing for about two years now, so my replies tend to get long. But I couldn't agree more. You're given more standardized test because the school is more worried about presentable data than student success. There's even a set of standardized lesson goals that must be met by the end of the semester in Georgia, almost entirely built around the material covered in exams related to government funding. There are ways standardized tests can be beneficial: seeing where improvements need to be made on an individual level or the school as a whole, let students identify their strengths to help them start thinking of a career, compare the range of material covered to different schools, regions, or countries... but the tests don't need to be done on a regular basis. But because they are, it amounts to exactly what you said: you're tossed a lot of surface level material that you memorize rather than understand. Then you throw it all out and get ready for the next exam. This made me both fear and appreciate my aerodynamics professor. He gave two tests (only because the college wouldn't allow him to give one), both requiring you to understand the material. Even when solving numerical questions, he required a written explanation as to why you used the forms of equations you did and the assumptions you had to make to derive them down to the point you used them. When he asked you to define sweep and ejection, he wanted a description, diagram, list of effects, and explanation for the cause of those effects; even if you did all of that, he would still count the answer as incorrect if you didn't explain how they exist together to generate turbulence (he wanted to understand what they do, not just what they are). When he asked you to explain the methods used to simplify turbulence, he would immediately count your answer as wrong if you used the word "solve" or said it simplifies to a solvable equation because the concept is unsolvable due to a variable of randomness that itself was an equation accounting for multiple types of randomness. In some cases, he'd have us do multiple derivations of the same equation using different assumptions (constant mass, energy, temperature) then tell us to explain why the different equations you end up with share the same result (if one of those directly involved enthalpy, you're in for a bad time). "Define Aerodynamic Heating" was wrong unless it included a derivation of is equation and the surface stagnation temperature it begins under standard atmospheric conditions. He would also count any question, written or numerical, as incorrect if it said turbulence causes flow separation. Two students did this on a test and the professor was so upset that he devoted an entire three hour class to proving how turbulence prevents flow separation (in short: dimples on a golf ball). That may have just been a lot of random words, but the moral is: Google can tell you what "hot" means, but you wont understand it until you microwave a hot pocket.