My Rabbi said something once. He said, "There's a difference between a smart boy and a wise guy."

For all of you who know me, and those who know Papa Dunn, this is another life lesson from my dad.

As my brother and I got up into the middle years of our grammar school education, he felt that it would behoove our grades, to offer us an incentive. This incentive amounted to a dollar for each top mark. With six or seven subjects, that could add up to real cash, which was hard for kids to come up with back then.

When I attended Adlai E. Stevenson Elementary School on the southwest side of Chicago during the 1960's, we were graded by the letters E,G,F, and U (Excellent, Good, Fair, and Unsatisfactory). I think it's ironic that the last two letters pretty much summed up the attitude of the kids that got them.

But there was also a numbering system, 1, 2, or 3. 1 meant that you were trying your hardest, were active and attentive in class, handed your homework in on time, and did well on tests.

2 meant that you showed up to class on time, did generally well on tests and homework, but could do better if you tried a little harder.

3 meant that the teacher was happy if you turned in any piece of paper with your name on it for the semester, took time out from your smoking on the playground lot to wave hello through the window, and pretty much the army, prison, or a job with the city if your father knew someone in the Democratic machine, was your best bet.

So, as you might expect, there were a lot of E-1's and G-1's for those students working hard and getting good grades. Most kids probably fell in the G-2 and F-2 range because they were the class clowns and the kids who'd rather be playing baseball, and school was just the place where all the kids went during the day.

U's were bad. Every kid dreaded the idea of bringing home a U on their report card. U's were reserved mostly for disciplinary reasons. These were for the kids who cut class, and disrupted it when they were there, and did poorly on their classwork. Consequently, most of these U's were followed by the number 3. Occasionally a U was followed by the number 2, meaning that if the pupil worked a little harder, they could bring their grades up to an F, or even a G.

I think teachers did not like to give out U-1's, because that would mean that your child was doing the absolute best that they could and yet still not understanding the material enough to pass, even in a Chicago public school.

But, Noooooo! None of this was good enough for my old man. Earning E's, even straight E's, like our report cards were some kind of a poker hand, was not good enough. Getting an E-1 - working hard for the grade - was no good. Getting an E-2 - getting top grades, but could apply ourselves more - wasn't sufficient.

We would only earn our reward if we brought home an E-3 - the teacher had no choice but to grant us the top grade based on our test scores and papers, but that we were also lazy, no good, smartasses on top of it.

I think I only got two, maybe three, E-3's over my entire career, so my dad got off cheap. As to the lesson learned, based on my Facebook posts and blogs, I'll let you be the judge.

Adlai E. Stevenson Elementary School