Over the years, there has been an ongoing debate about “street smarts” and “book smarts” throughout the world. Many people side with either or for their own personal reasons. Although “street smarts” has developed a poor reputation which pushes people to neglect the positive aspects of this particular way of learning. In the article, “Hidden Intellectualism”, Gerald Graff evaluates the structure schools use to teach literature. He explains that intellect is not only found in the academic form of thinking. And furthermore, comprehension goes far beyond academic learning and extends into the day-to-day world. It goes without saying that a lot of people know someone who is “street smart” but doesn't exceed in school, yet “street smarts” are just
Graff says street smarts offer more life skills than the education provided in school. In other words, you can be smart without being highly educated because knowledge goes beyond academics. He grew up thinking he was anti-intellectual because his writing skills were not great about the topics he’s expected to write in school. Graff describes how sports helped him excel in academics and discover his hidden intellectualism. He believes ‘’Making students’ nonacademic interests of an object study is useful, the, for getting students’ attention and overcoming their boredom and alienation, but this tactic won’t in itself necessarily move them close to an rigorous treatment of those interests.’’ (Graff 400) By allowing students express their nonacademic interests in schoolwork then students will be more interested and motivated to do well in school. So no matter what you’re most interested in or have the most knowledge about, if you’re an expert on it, you’re an intellect. My nonacademic pursuit is playing the violin, which is very challenging. You have to learn many things in order to play it correctly and not sound terrible. It takes time and patience to learn
The reading "Hidden Intellectualism" by Gerald Graff reflects views on being "street smart" and "book smart." He explains that society tends to associate people who are intelligent on solely being "book smart" and performing well in academics, rather than being street smart. He goes on to further explain that students perhaps can be intelligent on topics that interest them. Graff opens up the reading by giving his own personal experience on feeling torn between trying to prove that he was smart yet fearing that he was overdoing it. He was trying to prove that he learned just as much about the real world by reading his sports books and magazines as he would have if he had read the classic works of literature like most students in school. Essentially,
Leonid Fridman characterizes the typical American mindset this makes the text easily understood and relatable for the readers. Because the problem at hand is mainly geared toward Americans he brings up the fact that, “In most industrialized nations, not least of all of our economic rivals in East Asia, a kid who studies hard is lauded and held up as an example to other students.” He is showing the reader that in other countries they praise the children for their academic efforts unlike the US that use derogatory language like “nerd” and “geek” when referring to the academically achieving people. He also compares the jobs of individuals from other countries to show the divide between the American mindset and the mindset around the world. Fridman states “In many parts of the world university professorships are the most prestigious and materially rewarding positions but not in America…” Friedman says this so the readers are aware of the rift between America and other countries of the world especially their view of intellectual
“In most industrialized nations, not least of all our economic rivals in East Asia, a kid who studies hard is lauded and held up as an example to other students” (line 37-40). Every other successful country values intellectual people. Instead of being outcasted they are praised. “How can a country where typical parents are ashamed…. Of their son reading Weber…… be expected to compete in the technology race with Japan or remain a leading political and cultural force in Europe?” (line 47-52). America does not value academics like other countries, therefore their advancements would be better. There is no way to compete with countries that care about their academics. “How long can America remain a world-class power if we constantly emphasize socials skills and physical prowess over academic achievement and intellectual ability?” (line 53-56). There is bound to be the decline of power for the U.S. Fridman is asking these critical rhetorical questions to bring up the problem with outcasting nerds. They are the ones that keeps America a world power and without them our rival can over power us. This rhetorical question is forcing the reader to think about how serious the problem is and by society valuing physical fitness over academia it is keeping the country from
The main argument is that perceived throughout the reading is that the schools itself is failing students. They see a student who may not have the greatest test scores or the best grades, and degrade them from the idea of being intellectual. Graff states, “We associate the educated life, the life of the mind, too narrowly and exclusively with subjects and texts that we consider inherently weighty and academic” (Graff 244). Schools need to channel the minds of street smart students and turn their work into something academic.
In the essay “Blue-Collar Brilliance” it begins with a fairly detailed description of Mike Rose’s mother at her work as a waitress in Los Angeles during the 1950’s, when he was a child. Mike Rose is a professor at the UCLA graduate school of education and information studies. This article originally appeared in 2009 in the American Scholar, a magazine published by the Phi Beta Kappa Society. Rose’s intended audience for this article is white collar workers, who usually hold a negative perspective towards their colleagues who aren’t as well educated as them. Mike Rose uses his mother and uncle as examples of his argument that those without formal education have important kinds of intelligence as well just in different ways. He also points out that people assume less time in school means that a person is less intelligent.
In Gerald Graff 's essay “Hidden Intellectualism” starts of by talking about the stereotype of being so called “street smart” and and being “book smart” and how in school when you see someone who is street smart but doesn’t do go in school get a bad wrap. People look at them as a waste because they can’t apply there intelligences that they have and use it towards school, so people view them as not the right kind of smart because they are not a A student in school. Graff then goes on to say that maybe it is not the students that are the problem with how they do in school but maybe it is the school that have missed or overlooked the intellectual potential that kids with street smarts have. Graff also says that we only view the educated minds through schooling as the right way and schools and colleges look at kids who do not like school and don’t do well as anti-intellectual people. As Graff continues his essay he says that he was on the side of being more anti-intellectual and he found that through sports he was more interested in sports then he was in school. He would use this love for sports to build up his hidden intellectualism with sports. I think that Graff is right about what he is talking about with how we as a society think if you want to be smart them you need to do well in school and get all A’s or then you are not that smart. In all reality there are many times that kids go through school and don’t do well not because they are not smart,but because people don’t
Intellectualism is the factor of being intellect or intelligent. The idea of what it means to be educated can be interpreted many different ways by different people. Some think it’s having a 4.0 and going to Harvard, while others believe in the idea of having common sense. In the essay, “Hidden Intellectualism,” Gerald Graff reflects how lack of education is viewed negatively in society. On top of that, a question also lies what it means to educated. In order to be truly educated, a person should be well rounded not in just tests of intelligence, but the tests of life as well.
I believe there is great value in being able to understand and argue for or against concepts and ideas that are rarely, if ever, applied to an academic situation. In the past, there was a heavy premium placed on people of the nonacademic type, the high achievers, and the people who did things with their hands. In the World War II era, which is when Graff is basing a lot of his arguments, smart people were not held to a higher standard in everyday society
Hidden Intellectualism is an article written by Gerald Graff on the school system and how being street smart is better than being book smart. Graff fills most of the article with stories from his childhood and relating the issue back to himself. He starts the article by asserting that “…schools and colleges might be at fault for missing the opportunity to tap into such street smarts and channel them into good academic work.” Immediately Graff blames the school system for not providing a way for street smart students to be academically engaged. Graff goes on to talk about his childhood throughout most of the article and strongly relates his love of sports to how this love could be academically applied in a classroom. Graff ends the article by
In the last few paragraphs of his essay, Fridman compares the U.S. to other countries in world about the amount of anti-intellectualism that occurs in those countries. “There are few countries in the world where anti-intellectualism runs as high in population as it does in the U.S.”(7). this quote shows that no matter how “prestigious” the U.S. schooling is, the U.S. will have the most anti-intellectualism than any other country. In the U.S., even the most intellectually advanced students are not even closely compared to the best athletes. Unlike other countries, the U.S. will never intellectually advance if things do not change. Fridman ends his essay with an open question towards the audience, “How long can America remain a world-class power if we constantly emphasize social skills and physical prowess over academic achievement and intellectual ability” (9). By opening an open ended question, the answers could be in any range. But in Fridman’s perspective, he wants America to change and soon,
What Jouet states about this is that a student named Greg had feigned his interest about the subject they were studying, to receive a good grade from his professor or perhaps he was bluffing to his friends because he didn’t want to seem like an intellectual or a nerd (48). What Jouet means by this statement is that his friend was acting in a way that made others think he was an intellectual or a nerd, but what he did to escape this title was to pretend that he was doing it to receive a grade. What is sad today is the fact that we are scared to be an intellectual or a nerd. It seems that we reward those who are average and those who seek knowledge are labeled. This is what anti-intellectualism is, we see those who are educated as the elite and feel threatened by them. But during the beginning “The founding of the United States coincided with the American Enlightenment, an age of intellectual vitality” (49). In the beginning the thirst for knowledge drove the founding father into believing that every human being had the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but now this knowledge has become useless. If we don’t use it why, do we need
The two authors I will be referring to in this paper is Martha Nussbaum and Aurelius Augustinus. By examining both authors we can see the evolution while still seeing the ideals that have withstood the test of times. These two authors where expressing their ideas in drastically different time periods, yet they still express similar goals for education. Nussbaum bringing the more modern approach to liberal education is expressing ideas that are looking to better the world society. Augustine writing in 426, expressed his views on the purpose for learning and how it should be
While they had different focuses and theories, their shared belief was that some autonomy in education is beneficial to students. While I wholeheartedly concur with their theory that letting students have some choice in what and how they learn does further encourage learning, my personal experiences have shown that this is a difficult concept to put into practice. There must also be some structure to the learning environment as it can not be left entirely in the hands of students too young to comprehend the decisions they're making. Too much autonomy in education increases the possibility that children will act as children and not take their education seriously. It also has the unintended consequence of a severely unevenly educated population when there is a lack of educational standards across the board. There also must be structure in place to ensure that all seven intelligences are cultivated as Gardner urged, not only the select few that a student shows inherent talent for. I support Gardner’s recommendations and feel that a model similar to the public university system should be enacted in K-12 public school systems