Luo Santar, a professor of psychology at Harvard University, once did an experiment about the effect of education. He divided a group of mice into two groups? Group A gave it to an experimenter and told him that these mice belong to a particularly clever class and should be trained well. Group B was handed over to another experimenter and told that it was a group with average intelligence. Two experimenters trained two groups of mice respectively. After some time, two groups of mice were tested and asked to walk through a maze. For mice, there is food when they go out. But in the process of going out, it must go through a wall, and it must have a certain memory and intelligence to let the smarter mouse go out first. The experimental results show that group A mice are much smarter than group B mice, and they all go out first. In response to this result, Professor Luo Santar pointed out that he randomly divided two groups of mice. He has no idea which mouse is smarter. He just randomly divided the mice into two groups, saying that one group was clever for group A experimenter and the other group was ordinary for group B experimenter. Now that the experimenter has confirmed that Group A is an intelligent mouse, he will train it into an intelligent mouse. As a result, these mice really became smart mice; On the contrary, for group B mice that are considered to be not smart, if they are trained and treated, then these mice are really not smart.

This is just an experiment done by mice, but how many such things are happening in real life?

The teacher divided the students into three classes, six classes and nine classes. They always think that underachievers are not as good as excellent students. They tell good students the problems and only accept students when they run classes. Good questions and problems are only for good students. This is really unfair to underachievers! Are underachievers really not as clever as good students?