This situation and discussion bring out some interesting issues. Over the years, I have witnessed significant differences between those students who aspire to be "learners" as compared with those primarily driven to be "achievers".
Those who are deeper and sufficiently mature enough to realize that knowledge/wisdom/great skills are the highest goals of learning will seek the classes and teachers that are most likely to help them in their quest. Those students basically are in competetion with themselves and the world of learning. They seek the challenges.
At the other end of the spectrum of bright students are the ones who tend to rate themselves in comparison to the acomplishments of others and need the "marks" and the "noted achievements" for gratification. These are a different breed than those above, and quite often they will seek the easier course/teacher grading in their quest. With these students, a lot of contention can arise when the grades and "honors" are awarded.
At times the roles and vicarious experiences of parents come into play, sometimes to silly excess, and can push toward extremes. It seems sad when that factor is overbearing with regard to grades and "honors".
Of course, many good students are working between the extremes and experience varying degrees of personal outcomes and benefits. I most enjoy the students who are serious learners focused on their own development but who also have the competetive drive to give the "achievers" a good run for the medals.
