Last Thursday was the Scholar's banquet. I had a good time- got to see my favorite teacher and such, but my English teacher was not there, which put a damper on the night. He didn't attend (apparently) because he doesn't believe in the spirit of the award ceremony- giving kids the validation of superiority because they got better grades.
Is it right to reward intelligence?
It seems silly to me that some people missed the cutoff by .009 or a GPA point, when they got into schools like Stanford or Yale, and I didn't. In fact, at the beginning of the year, I resigned myself to the fact that I would not be on the top scholar's list, because I didn't take an overwhelming load of AP classes. So when I was announced, I was happy, and very surprised. I hadn't worked for four years to get on the "smart" list like some others had. And I felt a little guilty, like I stole their spots.
So, on the one hand, the scholar's banquet served to feed into the superiority complex of the lucky few who won the lottery of high school grades.
That definitely sounds wrong, even though I haven't heard of anyone literally acting surperior because of the list.
On the other hand, why should there not be such a list? Good choices and hard work ought to be recognized, as should intelligence. Being smart in our culture is often frowned upon. People felt like we thought we were better than them, and shunned us before we ever did anything. Dork and Nerd and Geek are derogatory terms. Studying is seen as boring, and labels people as "unfun." In that regard, the banquet could be seen as a pick-me-up to make sure we understand why we need to keep motivating ourselves to do better. Athletics does this, music does this with seating. This is no different.
Th cutoff can be explained as a way to limit expenses of the organization, which I'm sure are not miniscule. And after all, an 89.4 is closer to an 89 than a 90, even though it is .1 away from the rounding cutoff. Same principle applies.
In the end, I'm satisfied that I was among those listed. And I know that if I hadn't been, I would never be able to look at this issue from two sides.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Intelligence Qomplex
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Complex subject, but just one point:
Surely, rewarding somebody for something they're born with (intelligence) is no different than shunning somebody for being ugly or black.
And I would say there's no doubt at all that western culture as a whole treats smart people as inherently superior. This is not only irrational, but socially divisive.
Interesting title with the "Q" thrown in. Funny thing is that I read it correctly the first time... and it made sense.
I like how you know your position as part of the Scholar's Banquet changes your perspective of the event's meaning and significance. It's entirely true that you're more understanding of it all, in part because you are one of the (humbled) recognized few.
Congratulations yet again, and may you never forget the other side of the coin ;)
Post a Comment