<p>So, here is my question. If its inate, this natural ability, from birth it seems, that some students don’t have to study more than others to get the top grades, why are they then considered the “top” students?</p>
<p>What about the student who works hard, really has to stretch and push themselves, and gets Bs, beyond their “natural” born abilities.</p>
<p>Its interesting that those that are “born” smart are the “top” while those that have to really work at it and don’t get the “top” grades, are not considered when it comes to social life, work ethic, and the like. </p>
<p>So if you are lucky enough to not have to study, and it comes easy, why is that somehow more valued than if you are a student who has a 3.0 but works at it, as its not “natural”.</p>
<p>I personally have more respect for those that have a harder time but are truely putting all they have into it and get that lowly “b”. They may have to put in more hours, ask for more help, get more stressed out, becuase its not so “natural” as those that pull straight As.</p>
<p>Yes, I know that its work to get those straight As, but those kids are often no harder working, don’t have better work ethics, then the B students who study, volunteer, work, do sports, etc.</p>
<p>My younger daughter is a 3.0 student, by no means a “top” student, however, she pushes herself, is super invoived, would contribute alot to whatever college she goes to.</p>
<p>It like watching the natural athlete, with the long legs and woohooing when they win, while not cheering on the kid who may not come in the top ten, but who is working the bottom off.</p>
<p>Why is the former somehow more honored then the later?</p>