Why “Academic Excellence” No Longer Cuts It Today
Tuesday, 15 December 2009 Clay Burell 
Print This Post
I just stole a moment from grading the stack of research papers and semester exams to watch the first few minutes of the TED Talk embedded below on “The Art of the Interview.” The speaker discusses the importance of having interviewees who have not only intellect, but also “energy” (what he even called “Life Force”), and moreover, who throw “modesty” out the window in favor of the desire to acknowledge the extraordinary and to unabashedly try to illuminate it. And all of this connected, in this teacher’s head, to an experience I had last week in my classroom.
So let me steal a couple more minutes from my gradebook deadline and share it. It’s this:
Single semester courses at my new school give Academic Excellence awards at semester’s end. One award is given per 50 students or so, and I have only 36 combined in my two Chinese history classes — a semester course.
So: given that a good six or seven students from those two classes all qualified as “academically excellent,” how choose one over the other?
Highest grade point average wasn’t the magic bullet, since the few tenths of a decimal point separating several of the students were surely as attributable to the performance of the grader — me — as to the performance of the students (that will be a revelation or a scandalous idea only to those who have never taught, read the research on, or thought for five unbroken minutes about the imprecision of grades as a measurement of student quality).
Long story short, I looked at the little canned script the school gave us teachers to read (optionally, bless their hearts) when presenting the award. It had a blank list of “five accomplishments” we were encouraged to fill out. I played along: 1) likes history; 2) good thinker; 3) good writer; 4) good speaker; 5) reliable and accountable, yadda yadda. Again, that still described at least five or six students.
Then it hit me.
Our Past is not Your Future — And Why That’s Bad News
What separated one from all the others was this: social intelligence. Call it “energy” or “life force,” if you will. It’s what the vast majority of “academically excellent” students are lacking. As I tried to explain it to the class when presenting the award:
The Dow topping the 10,000 mark aside, many economists are arguing that the U.S. economy may take years to recover to pre-crash levels in terms of something more important to most people than stocks — I mean jobs. Employment and production continue to decline, and many say those jobs may never come back.
High school students are so stuck in the myth that grades will lead to jobs — and so stuck in the textbooks about yesteryear — that they’re oblivious to this. The evidence for it pervades the classroom daily in the “I’ve done my work and I’ve got a high GPA, and that’s enough” attitude. I can slouch in my chair during class, use my mouth during discussions only as an oxygen-intake port, foul the collective sound- and vision-scape with complaints and sighs and sour looks, promote complacency by refusing to put any imagination or energy into improving the group experience, on and on. Again, my GPA is enough. It will get me into college, and college will get me into a job, because I have no inkling how much more difficult my future may be due to the several gathering clouds on the horizon — have no inkling, for example, that for every single vacancy in the professional job-rolls today, there are between five and six very qualified people seeking and needing that job.
The Only Thing Worse than a Suck-Up….
So in deciding how to give that award, I gave it to the person I wouldn’t only hire for being academically capable, but would promote for qualities of character: a person whose body language said “I’m awake and alert,” whose facial language said “I’m not sour,” whose actions said “Let me help improve the class” instead of shirking that option — who was, in short, “energetic,” positive, constructive – neither a “suck-up,” as I put it in class, nor, as importantly, a “suck-down.”
In a sense, by giving that student the award, I did “promote” her. That honor might, after all, be the tipping point in a favorable college application decision down the road.
I don’t know where I read it — and now that I think about it, I believe I saw it on a TV interview — but somewhere I saw a headhunter or executive type respond to a question about how the new economic landscape was affecting his hiring decisions, and his response should be posted above the gates of all schools for the privileged (such as mine): He didn’t care, he said, about an applicant’s academic pedigree, regardless of how ivy-covered it was; in fact, he went on, such a pedigree can even be a red flag and a demerit. Because the last thing he was looking for, he said, was people whose backgrounds led them to believe they were entitled to the best things in life. He wanted people who see privilege as a thing to be earned.
This is something American students, especially, may need to hear, since they’re less able to compare themselves to their English-speaking peers from India and Asia — perhaps India especially, since it has two advantages over both East Asia and America: the presence of native English literacy skills equal or superior to those of American students, and the absence of the Confucian submissiveness and rote learning habits of many East Asian countries.
(The short version: watch out for India. It’s confident, it’s capable, it’s talkative; it’s hungry, it’s not spoiled, and it’s socially intelligent. This is made abundantly clear in my international school classroom every day.)
Psst…Your Code is Showing
In any case, in this age of the interwebs, this teacher once again shares with the rest of the world what he shares in his classroom, hoping it’s of value to students anywhere, whether they’re in his gradebook or not. What I hope you’ll take away:
First, your grades might get you in the door, but they won’t get you up the ladder. (And in this Age of Defining-Down “Success,” even getting in the door shouldn’t be taken for granted. Having a job at all, in other words, may be the “new” success. Just ask the 1-in-5 Americans currently unemployed or under-employed.)
And second, we don’t see you as a GPA, because we see the rest of you daily. How you walk and who you walk with, how you sit and how you compose your face, where your eyes go and don’t go, what comes (and doesn’t come) out of your mouth — all of things things are very obvious codes that we decode daily. And when you leave us, others with the power to pull you up or keep you down will take our place, and they’ll read those same codes.
I know this sounds crazy authoritarian, and that maybe one or two of you might be possessed of the type of genius that can beat the odds and conquer the world without an ounce of social intelligence or maturity of character. But — to share a dirty secret — I, like most teachers, really do want you to succeed. And I write this because I think it may help some of you.
Now here’s that TED Talk:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Tags: India, Indian students, intelligence, international schools Print This Post
No. 1 — December 15th, 2009 at 4:07 am
This one goes under the “wish I’d have said it first” tag. This post says “Beyond School” is back. In teacher circles (some rather lofty) this extra something is often referred to as “withitness.” Though “withitness” is one of those words that would require a 5,000 word essay to do any definitive justice to, it does carry some force in my mind.
I have 20 students who will very soon get a link to this post. Now THAT is a compliment.
.-= Sean Nash´s last blog ..Zero Hour in the Edublogger World =-.
Reply
No. 2 — December 15th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
This not only works in the classroom. Often students are awarded on their accolades only to find out the world is very different from the classroom.
Reply
No. 3 — December 15th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
[...] Burrell wrote about social intelligence today, and why grades and current assessment methods are increasingly unrepresentative of a persons [...]
No. 4 — December 15th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
I think this post is very interesting espcially to me because i have seen many students with excellent academic grades but no social intelligence. They seem to think that it is okay to lack social intelligence as long as they are smart. But in reality, isn’t the grade the most important thing above all? Social intelligence do matter but it is like a dessert, and grade like a main dish…(i am not sure whether it is a good metaphor.. iam not a native speaker ^^…) It is good to have both social intelligence and good grade, but what if you habe to choose one of the two? Wouldn’t employees prefer the ones who are capable than the ones who are socially intelligent but lacking in ability?
And basically this comes to a conclusion that it is difficult to succeed because you have to work hard to build up both your grade and your personality..No wonder the world is more competitive..
Reply
No. 5 — December 15th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Hello Clay, I agree with Ji Hee above, I don’t think that social intelligence counts for all that much in society today if you’re smart. If I had to make a choice to hire someone, I would pick the most qualified, not the one who would entertain me the most at work. So I don’t think that your comment about “being entitled to things in life” is entirely correct, because people who go to Harvard or other Ivy Colleges (that level) are generally smarter than those going to State Universities who might have charisma and a great attitude.
Reply
Clay Burell Reply:
December 16th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Fred, JiHee, I tried to make clear that a good handful of students passed the “academic excellence” threshold, and that “social intelligence” (or, more plainly put, attitude and personality) was the factor that distinguished one of those GPA stars from her peers. (And Fred, read the post more closely and you should agree that your “entertain me the most at work” comment is way off the mark.)
So Fred, it wasn’t an either/or (and I don’t think it normally is in the employment world either, where on paper many or most candidates probably look very similar).
Finally, Fred, I’d argue Ivy admissions are as much a function of family economics and upbringing (and connections, as our last brilliant president shows), and the quality of applicants’ k-12 schools and counseling departments, as of intelligence or “smarts,” as you put it. Wouldn’t you agree? Or do you really think that a person’s intelligence can be generalized from the reputation of his or her school?
Reply
No. 6 — December 16th, 2009 at 2:49 am
Let’s also not forget the impact of one’s digital footprint. I’m sure the kid at Wisconsin-La Crosse who was fined for underage drinking based on Facebook photos can tell you all about that. I think what you’re getting at here is that employers are looking for a holistic picture, not single one piece of data that will make you or break you. Indeed, this is exactly what you were doing when you made your choice for the Academic Excellence award (what a terrible name for an award, btw — why is “academia” so highly valued?).
Now, what if we were to take this a step further and apply this holistic perspective to everything in “school”? Let’s start with assessment. I think you’ve made a perfect case for it here in this post. Let’s find ways to assess our students by looking at multiple “pieces” of them, from multiple angles, from multiple perspectives, with some balance. I would be willing to bet my next semester’s tuition (at a private fancy university, to boot) that if we did that, we’d be turning out a heckuvalot more young adults like the one you “promoted” with your award.
.-= Adrienne´s last blog ..An Observation: Blog Habits =-.
Reply
Clay Burell Reply:
December 16th, 2009 at 8:26 am
Hi Adrienne,
You put me to mind of what the US Army calls the “total soldier concept.” Two soldiers can violate the same regulation but receive radically different punishments based on the totality of their performance in the institution.
It’s not often that I say the Army could teach the Academy, but if I read you right, I think this is one case where we might agree it could.
Reply
Adrienne Reply:
December 16th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Absolutely. I’d like to think, too, that our schools’ disciplinary measures reflect what you’re describing as the “total soldier concept,” but that perhaps is a topic for a different post. One-size-fits-all discipline policies always bothered me for that very reason: no two people bring the same experiences to the situation (well, at least not usually), yet we adopt rules that discipline them the same way. I see this as being completely unfair and dehumanizing — how can you punish someone without looking at the “totality” of who they are?
.-= Adrienne´s last blog ..Resuscitated: Assessment — For What it’s Worth =-.
Reply
No. 7 — December 16th, 2009 at 8:35 am
And, to Fred and Ji Hee, I have seen many people in my life and my career promoted and given extra advantages and opportunities because of their winning personalities–over people with higher GPAs and “better” degrees. Yes the academic qualifications can close fewer doors, but it’s the personal qualities that open them.
.-= Diana´s last blog ..Like being in jail. =-.
Reply
JiHeeLeee Reply:
December 16th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
I agree with you on the part that there ‘are’ some people who succeed with their good personalties. What i wanted to suggest is that unless you have both excellent GPA and good personality, isn’t it more practical or let’s say more realistic to focus on good grades rather than good social personality?
Reply
No. 8 — December 16th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
[...] Still tunneling out of the avalanche of semester exams (have I mentioned I love my ninth graders in Western Civ? Exam essay quote: “Without the Reformation, Obama would be planning his Pakistan policy with the Pope.”), but I can’t let Paul Krugman — you know, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and NYTimes columnist — get away without tying his recent observation about the limitations of “mere” academic excellence to what I yammered about in the last post. [...]
No. 9 — December 18th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
[...] Learning leads to Social Intelligence which leads to Success. Why “Academic Excellence” No Longer Cuts It Today via [...]
No. 10 — December 20th, 2009 at 10:20 am
[...] felt it here, noticed Paul Krugman touching it here, and now Seth Godin here: [W]hen we ask you to look people [...]
No. 11 — December 25th, 2009 at 1:55 am
[...] students to join you in generating solutions. (Read my “Recession Skills 101″ posts here, here, and here to get my take on how you should see yourself as a stakeholder in your education [...]
No. 12 — December 26th, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Reading your post, I was reminded of the video of Randy Nelson of Pixar, who talked about how they look for employees who are “interested”, rather than interesting.
(There’s a link to the video in this post I did a year ago on the need for curiosity in students:
http://libedge.blogspot.com/2009/01/curiosity-close-cousin-of-creativity.html )
I would argue that curiosity or the attitude of being interested is the kind of “life force” you were looking for in your students.
Social intelligence is something else…
.-= Katie Day´s last blog ..21st C Learning@HK: a team approach =-.
Reply
Clay Burell Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Hi Katie,
Curiosity is no doubt part of it, but again, several of the contenders for the award — the A+ few — were definitely curious about history. But none of them had the other bits I mentioned:
Lots of those bits qualify as social intelligence by my own homemade definition.
Reply
Katie Day Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Maybe “being interested” in the class rather than just in history. Being interested in being there, in the learning space, in all senses of the word. Interested in what others have to say.
I just finished reading Francine du Plessix Gray’s memoir “Them” re her flamboyant parents Tatiana and Alex Liberman, both of whom had highly developed social intelligence, but of the kind that veered (I’m being kind) into self-interest. So perhaps today I’m dwelling on the motivations behind some forms of social intelligence…
Merry Christmas!
.-= Katie Day´s last blog ..21st C Learning@HK: a team approach =-.
Reply
Clay Burell Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
GREAT post, by the way, with GREAT links to GREAT VIDS. What a great Xmas gift
Reply
No. 13 — December 29th, 2009 at 11:43 pm
I’m late to this one, Clay, so don’t sweat a reply too much but I was curious: a) how much of this blogged speech did you deliver to your class? and b) to what degree were your students convinced?
It’s easy for me to find your argument here persuasive but I have never found much traction with appeals to student success based on their future job prospects.
(I think the unspoken rebuttal goes something like, “Great. My reward for working hard in school is more work.”)
But, academically and demographically, we work with different people.
You seem (and I may be misreading you) frustrated with the entitlement of the academic elite. Meanwhile, on my side of the Pacific, teaching kids who see high school graduation itself as some kind of prize [1], I’m terrified. These students won’t be competing with each other for enrollment at Brown or for court clerkships in the summer. They’re competing with a) the staggering unemployment you reference, plus b) cheap migrant labor in California, plus c) mechanical automation.
That’s an incredible storm bearing down on them and I can’t seem to convince them it’s real.
N.B. Kottke posted a video some time ago, a demonstration of a robot pancake stacker [2]. Ordinarily, I’d show this to my classes but, halfway through, some corporate flack talks about how much the robot has allowed him to “absorb a number of overheads” and I get all queasy.
[1] http://blog.mrmeyer.com/?p=5080
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg8YYuLLoM0
.-= Dan Meyer´s last blog ..What Can You Do With This: The $6400 Question =-.
Reply
Clay Burell Reply:
December 30th, 2009 at 12:38 am
Hi Dan,
You’re not misreading me. I don’t want to overstate things, though, because many students at my school have great attitudes. Maybe unsurprisingly, it’s most of the ones with the best ability that have the sub-par attitudes, though. (Give me a mathematical law for that, Mr. M.)
I gave pretty much the whole thing, and pretty shamelessly, too, since I kept the medal and certificate in plain sight in front of me as I discussed my decision-making process.
Observed responses: When I mentioned slouching, several laughed at a slouching student who immediately sat up (with a laugh); when I mentioned “suck-downs” being worse than “suck-ups,” students not only laughed but nodded their heads. Lots of nods throughout the thing, in fact. But maybe prefacing it with the “you need to hear this because your future professional and economic prospects are dimmer than any time since the ’30s, and I don’t think you realize that” helped.
The demographic and geographic differences seem large indeed. I don’t know what to say in a situation like yours. But if anybody can figure out how to say it well, it’s you.
Let’s keep the holiday tradition between us going with a “Happy New Year.” Hope your marriage is going well, and everything else.
Reply