1.1 Wouldn’t school be easier if we calculated batting averages in math, read John Green in English, and calculated the trajectory of a Pokéballs from Pokémon GO in physics? Unfortunately for many students this is unlikely because these topics aren’t viewed by school boards as “intellectual”, but according to Gerald Graff in Hidden Intellectualism they actually are. In his passage Graff argues that, because anything that can be debated can be debated intellectually, schools should begin to teach course materials while pandering to the students’ interests. I partially agree with Graff’s message that schools would be more successful if they laundered the teachings to the likings of the students. Just because anything can be debated intellectually doesn’t mean it should. According to Gene Carter of good.is, “the purpose of schools must be preparing children to compete in the global environment”; so, if in changing a class syllabus it would devalue the course material, those changes have no place in a school. School is an environment to learn, grow and be challenged and unfortunately the works of Kim Kardashian don’t measure up to Shakespeare when it comes to developing reading comprehension and analytical skills.
Graff qualifies his argument by saying that “there’s no necessary relation between the degree of interest a student shows in a text or subject and the quality of thought or expression such a student manifests in writing or talking about it” (Graff 269), stating that student-centered topics are a means for getting the pupils interested and not a replacement for quality. I agree with this quote but not his intent. Graff stated this to ensure that the students are held accountable for their work, however I use this same quote to explain that not all classes should be taught around students’ interests. There are “hidden values” to classes that aren’t just the lectured material; take calculus for example: calculus teaches kids to critically analyze a new problem using a combination of old and new information and then combine those findings to develop new methods for overcoming such problems. But unfortunately there is no direct correlation between calculus and everyday life (calculus is a tool to model the unseen relationships of the world around us) and so in tailoring the class to each student the teacher would have to simplify the material, thus decreasing the “hidden value” of the course for 94% of the class (the percentage that doesn’t go into a STEM field) and going against the purpose of school as stated in the first paragraph.
School is a place where students should go to receive a challenging education that develops their learning, and that should come before all else when designing a course curriculum. If a student wants to have an easy, fun experience they should spend $8 to go see a movie, not $25,000/semester in tuition.
1.2 Other factors that contribute to intellectualism besides the ability to properly argue include: the desire to learn, to desire to improve one’s self, and the ability to hold an impartial opinion on the given topic. It doesn’t matter how well the person can argue, without an open mind and a desire to learn they are just a debater; this is because an intellect is always seeking the truth and higher knowledge, not someone who debates for the sake of proving they’re right. Likewise, no matter the intent, without the ability to argue and remain impartial the “intellectual” is merely a student since an intellectual is someone who can properly defend his position against opposition.
Graff qualifies his argument by saying that “there’s no necessary relation between the degree of interest a student shows in a text or subject and the quality of thought or expression such a student manifests in writing or talking about it” (Graff 269), stating that student-centered topics are a means for getting the pupils interested and not a replacement for quality. I agree with this quote but not his intent. Graff stated this to ensure that the students are held accountable for their work, however I use this same quote to explain that not all classes should be taught around students’ interests. There are “hidden values” to classes that aren’t just the lectured material; take calculus for example: calculus teaches kids to critically analyze a new problem using a combination of old and new information and then combine those findings to develop new methods for overcoming such problems. But unfortunately there is no direct correlation between calculus and everyday life (calculus is a tool to model the unseen relationships of the world around us) and so in tailoring the class to each student the teacher would have to simplify the material, thus decreasing the “hidden value” of the course for 94% of the class (the percentage that doesn’t go into a STEM field) and going against the purpose of school as stated in the first paragraph.
School is a place where students should go to receive a challenging education that develops their learning, and that should come before all else when designing a course curriculum. If a student wants to have an easy, fun experience they should spend $8 to go see a movie, not $25,000/semester in tuition.
1.2 Other factors that contribute to intellectualism besides the ability to properly argue include: the desire to learn, to desire to improve one’s self, and the ability to hold an impartial opinion on the given topic. It doesn’t matter how well the person can argue, without an open mind and a desire to learn they are just a debater; this is because an intellect is always seeking the truth and higher knowledge, not someone who debates for the sake of proving they’re right. Likewise, no matter the intent, without the ability to argue and remain impartial the “intellectual” is merely a student since an intellectual is someone who can properly defend his position against opposition.