I don't know if these were special snowflake parents or just weird...
Among other things, I teach a literacy class for four year olds. Some are five, some not quite four, but it works. New students are always welcome, and we get a new one every week or so. It's a class for kids whose reading is anywhere from non-existant to at grade level with maybe a few holes or poor spelling. Age usually isn't a problem.
However, it should go unspoken that a kid can't join the class if they aren't old enough to, say, walk. As of today, I'm having to rethink this assumption. We got a call from a parent a while ago who wanted his son to join the class. He said the son was two and a half, which is young, but still feasible. I made it clear that there would be tracing letters involved and that the child would have to sit down for a whole hour, which a lot of kids can't do at that age, but he assured me that his son was very advanced and all the rest of it. He was quite adamant that his son would cope fine.
Turns out the kid is 18 months old... next month. And he's not Mozart or anyone, just a normal, cute, baby. Who can't quite walk well on his own--he was falling every twenty steps or so. He couldn't engage in a conversation because, well, he's a baby. His vocabulary is too small. And of course he couldn't trace letters or colour inside lines--as is perfectly normal for a kid his age. His motor skills aren't up to it, and won't be until he's older.
We had to explain this to the parents, who were still adamant at how advanced he was despite having just seen how ill-suited the whole thing was. I know all parents have a tendency to think their kid is the bees' knees, and that's usually charming, but this was ridiculous. We suggested a nursery class, which he still might be too little for, but it was better than a kindergarten class. Did they want to show off to their friends? Did they spy some sunlight shining out the edges of the kid's nappy? Or were they just clueless?
I don't know. But I'm amazed.