Do you think our culture is anti-intellectual? - Page 5

[bczmama]

"In the end of the upper secondary school there are tests that determinates your ability to continue to upper education paths. You can't just walk in university, no matter how much money you have, you have to get through university tests + have good grades."

And we think the testing for NCLB is bad. This is my problem with the more typical european system. From what some British friends have said, there doesn't seem to be a good way for those that slacked off in high school or messed up on the testing to work their way into college. In the US, there is almost always the option of a community college for one or two years and, then, after proving an ability to do the work, it is possible to move on to a better 4 year school.

"Our culture values skills, e.g., computer programming. It doesn't value knowledge. Intellectualism as I define it, is being interested in knowledge for knowledge's sake. What does a liberal arts education teach you? It doesn't give you marketable "skills", and so many people don't want to pursue that. What it should teach you is how to learn and how to think.

Far too few people value learning because it's interesting. They value the college degree because it's supposedly gets them a better job. I wish we had a decent system of trade schools for those people. They make my life as a professor a pain!"

And an excellent example of why many people don't like "intellectuals" -- the disdain for those who just want to get a good job to, you know, to be able to have a family, and a decent house and a nice vacation every now and then. These students are jumping the hoops and getting their tickets punched to make that happen, and there is nothing wrong with it. Given the cost of the average college education today, it should be understandable that the average student will expect a return for the investment made. Having a "life of the mind" is a wonderful thing, but not everyone has the luxury of the time and money for it (especially to the exclusion of more practical pursuits) or even the interest and that's okay.

I grew up in a town that was home to one of the public ivys, and my neighborhood was filled with college professors and Ph.ds that worked in the pharama. co. down the road. It was an intellectual bubble, where A's were expected and the question wasn't if you were going to college, but which grad school you would eventually be aiming for. My soph. year of HS one of the neighborhood kids committed suicide when he didn't get into Harvard. Most everyone there was convinced they were smarter and more knowledgeable than "your average bear" which gets a little wearing for all those that don't fit that mold.

I had a full ride merit scholarship to college and went to an excellent law school. I've never felt uncomfortable mentioning either fact (where and when appropriate) and have never had a "bad" reaction by others to it.

[kxsiven]

Originally Posted by bczmama

there doesn't seem to be a good way for those that slacked off in high school or messed up on the testing to work their way into college.

I do not know anything about english system but here there are other ways to university if you mess up Secondary school and testing(which can include also psychological testing for certain curriculums for example doctors).

Anybody can go to open university and get inside that way. After certain amount of accepted courses in open university you get in. Another way is through those "mix-up" schools that I talked about in my previous post.

The tests to universities are very different. For example if you want to study history, you get list of history related books(usually 2-3 books)and the test will be about those books. You have several months to study them(tests are during early summer and names of the books are out in December-January).

Here you start to study your main subject at once - because during the secondary education you have allready studied everything else. I've understood that in USA Universities you have lot of subjects during first years that might have nothing to do with your mainsubject.

Also universities are not concidered here "the must", most important is that you go to school you like and university education is no more valued than any other education. More important is that you do what you love.

[CYL]

Originally Posted by bczmama

And we think the testing for NCLB is bad. This is my problem with the more typical european system. From what some British friends have said, there doesn't seem to be a good way for those that slacked off in high school or messed up on the testing to work their way into college. In the US, there is almost always the option of a community college for one or two years and, then, after proving an ability to do the work, it is possible to move on to a better 4 year school.

Er, that's entirely wrong. Virtually anyone can get into University in the UK, at any time in their life. That's the problem. (The anyone, not their ages, that is). It's made having a degree virtually pointless. Case in point, one of my friends has been unemployed for nearly a year now, inspite of have a good degree from a well regarded university. The problem is she hasn't got a good enough degree for most graduate tracking schemes, and hasn't spent the last four years (actually, more like the last 6 or 8 years) working in a shop. This means she is over qualified for most office jobs, and doens't even get an interview, even though she could do them really well, and can't get into graduate schemes because she had a life at university.

Half the people on our course were 'mature' students (i.e. over 25), and most of them wouldn't have got in to university when they left school (for whatever reason).

We have so many universities now, you can get always get into one if a degree is all you are interested in getting.

[eilonwy]

Originally Posted by bczmama

"Far too few people value learning because it's interesting. They value the college degree because it's supposedly gets them a better job. I wish we had a decent system of trade schools for those people. They make my life as a professor a pain!"

And an excellent example of why many people don't like "intellectuals" -- the disdain for those who just want to get a good job to, you know, to be able to have a family, and a decent house and a nice vacation every now and then. These students are jumping the hoops and getting their tickets punched to make that happen, and there is nothing wrong with it. Given the cost of the average college education today, it should be understandable that the average student will expect a return for the investment made. Having a "life of the mind" is a wonderful thing, but not everyone has the luxury of the time and money for it (especially to the exclusion of more practical pursuits) or even the interest and that's okay.

Nobody's saying that there's something wrong with pursuing higher education to get a good job, but I do have a problem with people pursuing fields in which they have no interest whatsoever (like engineering) in order to support themselves when they're going to be miserable about it. I have a huge problem with people who deingrate intellectuals because they're obsessed with making money, and an even bigger problem with people who choose intellectually intense majors and then whine about not being able to handle it.

I grew up in a town that was home to one of the public ivys, and my neighborhood was filled with college professors and Ph.ds that worked in the pharama. co. down the road. It was an intellectual bubble, where A's were expected and the question wasn't if you were going to college, but which grad school you would eventually be aiming for. My soph. year of HS one of the neighborhood kids committed suicide when he didn't get into Harvard. Most everyone there was convinced they were smarter and more knowledgeable than "your average bear" which gets a little wearing for all those that don't fit that mold.

I had a full ride merit scholarship to college and went to an excellent law school. I've never felt uncomfortable mentioning either fact (where and when appropriate) and have never had a "bad" reaction by others to it.

Of course you didn't feel uncomfortable, but you already acknowledged the reason for that-- you grew up in an intellectual bubble. Most of us don't live there.

[That Is Nice]

Originally Posted by Freeman

Well, it varies widely depending on the various circles in which you travel....but you are asking about North America as a whole. I think society values high achievers more than it value intellectuals. Intellectuals who are also high achievers are valued. So, society values "intellectual," inventive achievers such as Albert Einstein, Bill Gates, etc., but also values the physical achievements of professional athletes, the financial achievements of the rich, the self-evident beauty of the beautiful, etc. Many children will want to achieve the type of success that is valued by society as a whole.

I agree with this. :

I do think that it varies widely depending on where in North America you live, and the circles of people you interact with.

I know that education spending, just as one marker, varies greatly from community to community, and state to state. Education performance, as another marker of many, also varies widely among different geographic areas.

But, I think, in general, intellectualism is valued. Achievement is valued more, obviously. But, often (not always) intellectualism and achievement go hand in hand.

Personally, I think that it really depends on the circles of people in which you interact. I was not born into a very educated family (not at all). There wasn't much emphasis placed on education, intellectualism, or, sadly, achievement. To some extent, intellectualism was made fun of, or dismissed. I never understood it when I was a child, but as an adult looking back, I think the dismissal of those who were intellectual was because of feelings of not measuring up, or not being smart themselves.

Anyway, I was born into a family of uneducated, non-intellectuals. But I was pegged pretty early on as talented and gifted. I always performed at the top of the class and scored 90th percentile or above on all tests in school.

I always felt intellectualism, and achievement, were valued highly by the school and by the teachers, who were themselves educated. I think intellectualism and achievement were valued both separately and together in school.

I was one of the few and first people in my family to go to college. Intellectualism and achievement were very highly valued in college.

I graduated from college and made my way in a career. Again, intellectualism and achievement were very highly valued, recognized, and rewarded.

So, it really does depend on the circles in which you interact.

[Kappa]

I have a lot to say on this issue, but I think I will stick with an anecdote. I have a 4mo, I have no idea if he is gifted, but I certainly plan on giving him access to the tools he needs to develop himself. I have told several people that I plan on having him trained in the area of music and that the training will likely start with the piano and may branch out if/when he develops interest in other instruments/voice/production etc. This has been met with various comments, but the essence of most comments have been "That's gay/homosexual/geeky/weak/for girls." I do not tell anyone that I would like to do this anymore, it's really sad because all evidence says that music education helps develop the brain in ways that are extremely useful outside of music. I don't see why I should limit my son's access because he is a boy, and therefore I should not make any other plans for him besides making the NFL

[That Is Nice]

Originally Posted by Kappa

I have a lot to say on this issue, but I think I will stick with an anecdote. I have a 4mo, I have no idea if he is gifted, but I certainly plan on giving him access to the tools he needs to develop himself. I have told several people that I plan on having him trained in the area of music and that the training will likely start with the piano and may branch out if/when he develops interest in other instruments/voice/production etc. This has been met with various comments, but the essence of most comments have been "That's gay/homosexual/geeky/weak/for girls." I do not tell anyone that I would like to do this anymore, it's really sad because all evidence says that music education helps develop the brain in ways that are extremely useful outside of music. I don't see why I should limit my son's access because he is a boy, and therefore I should not make any other plans for him besides making the NFL

Well, just as you said, you shouldn't limit your child's access to music. I am shocked that you've encountered so many opinions of the nature you described.

I could see some people I know from the community I grew up in, and I don't think my own family would place very much importance on music education, but it is a known fact that musical exposure enhances so many other things in life...math, reading, imagination, creativity, love and appreciation for art, etc, etc.

I think again it really depends on the circles of people you interact with. I would be very hard pressed to find any of my friends, colleagues, co-workers, etc who didn't place importance on music in education, or education in general. Nearly all of them have enrolled their children, both boys and girls, in music, etc. Then again, these are all fairly educated people themselves.

You give your child every opportunity you want to. Don't listen to the naysayers.

[littlest birds]

Just answering the OP without reading it all...

Yes, definitely strongly anti-intellectual. Don't you love to learn? I do, and I was always made to feel foolish for it by mainstream culture. There are so many messages out there saying that the best way to be is fluffy, easily entertained, and out for fun, fun, fun. I think it brings the U.S. down.

Even our schools tend to convey the idea that learning is a chore to be done to the minimal degree needed, and rarely enjoyed.

[That Is Nice]

Originally Posted by deeporgarten

Even our schools tend to convey the idea that learning is a chore to be done to the minimal degree needed, and rarely enjoyed.

I never got this impression in school or from my teachers. I went to public schools. Some teachers were better than others, but all teachers fostered a love for learning, encouraged educational achievement, and most encouraged creativity, as well.

I never felt like teachers gave the impression that learning, or even homework, was a chore.

I actually enjoyed homework, and loved interacting with my teachers. They were way better than my parents at fostering a love of learning and a love of reading.

My teachers in elementary, junior high, and high school definitely valued intellectualism. My college professors did as well. I think intellectualism is valued in society, particularly when it's coupled with achievement.

[wowsa]

Yes,and I think it has always been so. Even educated Americans tend to be quite anti-intellectual. They get highly specialized degrees to practice some lucrative profession,but other than that they tend not to have many intellectual interests; I've met drop-outs with more depth and imagination than your average "professional".

[ShadowLark]

Originally Posted by MusicianDad

They're taught that in high school unfortunately. If they don't do it exactly like the teacher expects they get low or failing grades. One friend got a C- on a paper that was meant to express her opinion and the teacher wrote on the paper that it was the wrong answer. The question specifically asked for an opinion. Confused the heck out of her cause as far as she knew an opinion couldn't be wrong. So the students start looking for exactly what the teacher wants and by the time they get to college they have a hard time with doing it their own way. :

GAH! That sounds like what happened to my sister. She wrote a Reader's Response Journal (read, opinion piece) on a Sherlock Holmes book (The Exploits of Sherlock Holmes, I believe) and got it back with the comment that it was "too opinionated"! Or like the C I got on a 10th grade essay on Hamlet, not because my writing sucks (I usually pull As on essays) but because I disagreed with the teacher about Ophelia.
In my eyes, her death was NOT a suicide - she was too far away from reality to realize she was in danger, and then she fell into the river. In Denmark. Wearing a good 10 yards of clothing if she had on an inch. How the HE// is anyone supposed to survive that?
But I digress. Yeah, I was lucky - that was one bad teacher in a sea of great ones. And I have NEVER allowed anyone to tell me I can't think for myself. I feel sorry for those kids - they've been towing the line for so long that now that they can spread their wings and fly, they're afraid to try!

[eilonwy]

Oh wow... this is totally making me want to go back and discuss all the strange opinions I had in high school literature classes. Anyone up for [re]reading some Shakespeare? (Only half kidding... I'd so do it. )

[TEAK's Mom]

Originally Posted by eilonwy

Oh wow... this is totally making me want to go back and discuss all the strange opinions I had in high school literature classes. Anyone up for [re]reading some Shakespeare? (Only half kidding... I'd so do it. )

Don't tempt me...

[rhubarbarin]

Originally Posted by That Is Nice

I never got this impression in school or from my teachers. I went to public schools. Some teachers were better than others, but all teachers fostered a love for learning, encouraged educational achievement, and most encouraged creativity, as well.

I never felt like teachers gave the impression that learning, or even homework, was a chore.

I actually enjoyed homework, and loved interacting with my teachers. They were way better than my parents at fostering a love of learning and a love of reading.

My teachers in elementary, junior high, and high school definitely valued intellectualism. My college professors did as well. I think intellectualism is valued in society, particularly when it's coupled with achievement.

This made me laugh beause I had an exactly opposite experience! I attended public schools as well.. mostly very highly rated ones.

Maybe it is mostly our own attitudes that shape how our school experience goes.. I felt negatively about school from age 7 or so.

[siobhang]

Dh and I discuss this all the time. He is from the UK, and feels strongly that the US has a strong anti-intellectual streak, especially for men. He feels that for men, there is an equation of "intellectual= effeminate" that plays a HUGE role in American anti-intellectualism. Men can be smart in order to earn a lot of money/power but if they express interests in intellectual endevors which won't make money or give them more status, they are treated as "not masculine enough".

There is an associated bias against any high culture - music, wine, food, interior design, etc. Basically, if you are male and you actually care about such things, well, you MUST be gay.

It's a twofer - both homophobic AND anti-intellectual. Yeah, baby.

This is one reason why we tend to hang out almost exclusively with geeks. Our geek friends get why I'll read a sociobiology book for fun or why dh will write a maj jong computer game, never intending to sell it. They think it is COOL that our kids play "Liopleurodon and Opthalmasaurus" (think, tag) and they understand why it bugs dh when they get the dinosaur epochs wrong in their games. And they get it when they see dh slaving over a sunday roast or an Indian recipe, and don't find it odd that he would devote so much time to cooking very complicated meals.

As PPs pointed out, there is an appreciation for intelligence, but only if it leads to power or money. Outside the little enclaves that intellectuals build for themselves, there is little appreciation for learning for learning's sake in popular culture.

I suspect it is part of our puritain heritage, where such undirected, "unuseful" learning was seen as an indulgence, and indulgences were sinful, or something.

[siobhang]

One friend got a C- on a paper that was meant to express her opinion and the teacher wrote on the paper that it was the wrong answer. The question specifically asked for an opinion.

WTF? This is one reason why I loved my high school. We had to write a paper on our opinion on Egyptian President Nasser - good or not good for Egypt. While the teacher was pretty biased (Nasser != good), after the papers were returned, he held one up and said "this paper says that Nasser was the best thing that ever hit Egypt and the Middle East. I completely disagree with the entire premise, but the arguments are very very solid, well researched and excellently written. A+"

My supposedly superior elementary and junior high schools (one of the best public school systems in the US) were anti-intellectual - I got teased daily about being a brain and had few friends. We moved and I went to a private prep school for high school and MAN the difference was amazing. It was JUST NOT COOL to not work hard and be smart. In my old school, people would brag about not studying or not completing assignments - they would do just enough to not fail. But at my high school, the competition for academics was very stiff - and also for other intellectual accomplishments - music, drama, art, social work, etc. Being dumb was just not cool.

The move made a tremendous impact on me, since I had definitely been academically slipping because I desparately wanted to stop being a pariah. And I also was finally challenged and had to learn how to WORK to get decent grades (vs just turn up after reading the assignment).

And it saved my butt when I got to college. I knew so many people - validictorians at their schools, who freaked when they got to college because the standards were so much higher than they were used to. I personally had to teach people how to complete timed essays and do proper research, bibliographies, etc. My college was also full of intellectuals - lots of policy wonks and econ geeks - which was a great atmosphere for me.

I am a tad concerned for my kids - I need to make sure they are surrounded by people who value intellectual pursuits or at least don't make them feel like freaks for having such interests.

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by siobhang

suspect it is part of our puritain heritage, where such undirected, "unuseful" learning was seen as an indulgence, and indulgences were sinful, or something.

Intelligence leads to questioning the religious dogma, which leads to questioning the church in general which leads to less power the church has. That's why people have been punished in the past for claiming the world was round, not center of the universe and so on.

Not all religous people are like that, but it's still prevelent. Anything that challenges what the church/bible says is inherently bad and intelligence tends to do that on a regular basis since the intelligent people tend to question what is stated as fact.

Reminds me of a scene in the movie Jesus Camp, where the mother asks her son "Did you get to the part where it says science hasn't proven anything?"

First thing that goes through my head is "WHAT!?"

[siobhang]

Originally Posted by MusicianDad

Not all religious people are like that, but it's still prevalent. Anything that challenges what the church/bible says is inherently bad and intelligence tends to do that on a regular basis since the intelligent people tend to question what is stated as fact.

Perhaps that is why we are UU. ; ) I also loved my Jesuit education - man, those Jesuits are freaky smart.

Reminds me of a scene in the movie Jesus Camp, where the mother asks her son "Did you get to the part where it says science hasn't proven anything?"

First thing that goes through my head is "WHAT!?"

wow... just, wow. I just looked it up on google. Wow.

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by siobhang

Perhaps that is why we are UU. ; ) I also loved my Jesuit education - man, those Jesuits are freaky smart.



wow... just, wow. I just looked it up on google. Wow.

Don't know anything about UU teachings. But, I looked it up and it does sound smart.

The family was homeschooling, studying science but only science as the far right Evangelical Fundimentalists do it. It's really sad that some parents are so obsessed with religion that they work so hard to prevent their kids from questioning things. *Sigh*

Enough about religion before this gets nasty. There's a reason you never discuss religion, politics or sports in polite conversation.

[That Is Nice]

Originally Posted by siobhang

were anti-intellectual - I got teased daily about being a brain and had few friends.

This was from your fellow students, though, right? Kids making fun of kids?

I think that happens everywhere, especially if one child/teen is naturally intelligent and gifted, and another one feels inadequate. Kids are juvenile and one way they react people who are different than they are is to make fun of them.

But that doesn't make school or culture or the instituation of public education anti-intellectual.

Kids will be kids.

It really comes down to how the teachers did things, felt about things, and how society in general places importance or no importance on academics, intelligence, etc.

I think our society places high importance on intelligence, especially intelligence paired with achievement.