The Overachievers

[NY Musicologist]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I was browsing at Barnes & Noble this afternoon and ran into (almost literally) a tower of books provocatively titled The Overachievers: The Secret Lives of Driven Kids. Intrigued, I took a copy over to a sunny corner of the store and proceeded to spend much of the next hour thumbing through it. It intertwines the tales of several talented and motivated students’ college-prep experiences with commentary on the alarming (?) consequences of their intense drive toward achievement.

Since I haven’t read the whole thing, I’ll refrain from editorializing (much), but it struck me that even though it’s about high schoolers rather than premeds, many of us could benefit—in increased self-knowledge and/or awareness of our current and future classmates’ situations—from what this book has to offer. Gotta take it with a whole shaker of salt, probably, but still…what I read helped me put my own stress in perspective and made me think a little harder about what some other people go through.

Has anyone read this book? Do you see yourself, a lab partner, a roommate, etc. in the profiles? From where you stand, do you think the author is accurate, or is her alarmism out of touch? Please share your thoughts.

(NB. The author, Alexandra Robbins, has a couple of other exposé-type books out: one about sororities and another about Yale’s Skull & Bones; if you’re familiar with either one, you probably already have a sense of her point of view.)

 

[hsperson]

I KNEW this post would eventually end up on SDN. I didn't want to start it myself but I'm glad it ended up here. I just finished the book today actually. It was no where near perfect, or even greatly written. It may have been better if the author took more time on it. (What can you expect from a journalist? ...halfway serious...) But, despite its misses, it was quite effective and overall good. People should read it. I imagine that SDN is mostly overachievers; often over-fortunate, in many ways immature, people who base their self-worth on often empty achievements at the expense of the rest of their psyches, perspectives and identities.

The book talked about overbearing parents and other external pressures, depression and suicide among overachievers, use of "study drugs" (i.e. Adderol, Ritalin) without prescription, cheating, cutthroat competition, the fraud of college ranking systems, standardized testing, why "top colleges" aren't really top, perfectionism and a TON of other things.

It talks about how increasing numbers of students graduate college not knowing what to do because they felt they weren't allowed to explore themselves in the past nor were they given the independence to do so. It talks a bit about people's motives to become doctors and lawyers, the abnormally high suicide and depression rates at places like NYU, MIT, Harvard, Cornell and many other colleges as well as in many Asian countries where a test score often really does determine your fate. (i.e. In some Asian countries, kids as young as seven are committing suicide in unacceptably high numbers.) It talks a bit about the lack of social development in many students at places like MIT (as described by faculty there). It talks a bit about suffering character development in many of these overachievers, (which was my theory on why so many posts on SDN are so bitter).

It is also written in an interesting but at times ineffective way. The author follows around a couple of highschool/college students, using them as examples in making her points.

It makes many very good points. We need to recognize, what the author calls, "overachieverism" as a problem. Questions or comments anyone? Get the discussion rolling! Thanks.

 

[astrife]

overachievers are in all walks of life... alot of them end up making alot of money... marrying a hott wife/husband because they have alot of money and have kids who are just like them... oh well... over achievers drive the u.s. economy... so I say let them be...

 

[63768]

hahaha from hsperson's post, the book seems to relate almost exactly what i've been ranting about all my life. i may have to pick this book up once i feel emotionally strong enough to handle all the memories rushing back.

also this is why i am a strong advocate of taking a year off between college and medical school. i've learned so much more about myself and have developed drive for what i love (in my case, medicine) by doing so. that and being a reapp means my ego has been squashed many times. hahaaha.

 

[cerulean]

I saw that book at Barnes and Noble and also paged through it. I read a decent-sized chunk of it and found it fairly captivating. I think I saw similarities between some of the characters and myself in high school with regards to applying to colleges (i.e. overachieving and doing well yet being miserable). Looking back at my college years, I'm much happier with having a more balanced life, but now worry that achieving more balance has been hurting me w/ my chances at med school since my stats aren't as great (relative to the rest of the applicant pool) as they were in high school. eh, everything comes at a cost.

 

[Rafa]

It's way too easy to think the sky is falling by visiting SDN as a pre-med. My advice for anyone reading who's overstressed would simply be to unplug yourself from the matrix every now and then. There's no point in getting into med school - or anywhere in life - if it kills you.

 

[baylormed]

It's way too easy to think the sky is falling by visiting SDN as a pre-med.

Very true.

I just stop visiting unless I have a specific question, otherwise all the speculations and rumors circulating around here might drive me to insanity one of these days.
Like the "turn secondaries w/in two weeks or you are screwed" rumor.

 

[Mozzo]

Hmm, I would think twice before saying "everyone on SDN except me is an overachiever", which is what some people seem to imply when they say that most people on SDN are overachievers. I believe that everyone who has succesfully applied/matriculated into medical school has some amount of "overachieverism" in them--it's inherent in the hoop jumping process that is med school admissions.

And about the rumors on SDN, I agree, they can really scare you, and I often wonder how useful the advice is in general...If you think about it, we are premed people giving/taking advice from other premed people. It's the blind leading the blind for the most part (forgive the insensitive expression 😉 ).

 

[sunset823]

I saw that book at Barnes and Noble and also paged through it. I read a decent-sized chunk of it and found it fairly captivating. I think I saw similarities between some of the characters and myself in high school with regards to applying to colleges (i.e. overachieving and doing well yet being miserable). Looking back at my college years, I'm much happier with having a more balanced life, but now worry that achieving more balance has been hurting me w/ my chances at med school since my stats aren't as great (relative to the rest of the applicant pool) as they were in high school. eh, everything comes at a cost.

Haha, I'm the exact same way, overachiever in high school in terms of both stats and ECs, mediocre stats in college, but in keeping my image going for my own sake, still tried to overachieve in other ways - trouble is, I found myself around even higher overachievers in high school (e.g, a Rhodes Scholar) and several Phi Beta Kappa inductees in college, who all seemed to have more balanced lives than myself - It's not necessarily what you do for yourself, it's what you are trying to do to prove yourself worthy to these people, and unless you can get yourself away from them and get mediocre friends, it will never end.

 

[Law2Doc]

Has anyone read this book? Do you see yourself, a lab partner, a roommate, etc. in the profiles? From where you stand, do you think the author is accurate, or is her alarmism out of touch? Please share your thoughts.

Bear in mind who she is selling books to -- predominantly homemakers (that is who buys the majority of hardcover books) with average kids. Thus the suggestion that pushing their kids too hard is bad is really preaching to the converted, and sells more books. Sure there are extreme examples, but I doubt SDN is populated with them.

 

[NY Musicologist]

Bear in mind who she is selling books to -- predominantly homemakers (that is who buys the majority of hardcover books) with average kids. Thus the suggestion that pushing their kids too hard is bad is really preaching to the converted, and sells more books.

Yes, and the release of the book and construction of pyramidal book towers at B&N conveniently timed to coincide with back-to-school time...

Still..."APFrank's" abusive mother... 😱

 

[Doctor~Detroit]

I believe that everyone who has succesfully applied/matriculated into medical school has some amount of "overachieverism" in them--it's inherent in the hoop jumping process that is med school admissions.

heh. no, i'll have you know i'm quite lazy.

. . . wait, i haven't been accepted yet

 

[PerpetualBurn]

Stephen Colbert interviewed Alexandra Robbins on his show about Overachievers. She appeared successful, driven, intelligent, happy and good-looking. Although Stephen half-joked when asking how she could promote this attitude of taking it easy given her own history of overachieving, she failed miserably in her response. I agree that she should not have to justify herself, but she should at least be able to point out the positive aspects of not being a so-called overachiever. Even Homer Simpson is occassionally plagued by self-doubt that results from leading an indolent lifestyle.

 

[gujuDoc]

Bear in mind who she is selling books to -- predominantly homemakers (that is who buys the majority of hardcover books) with average kids. Thus the suggestion that pushing their kids too hard is bad is really preaching to the converted, and sells more books. Sure there are extreme examples, but I doubt SDN is populated with them.

I think the kind of people she describes do exist a lot, but I wouldn't say all of SDN is like that either. I've come to talk with man SDN folks who've gotten in top schools. And by talking with these people, I mean I've talked with them through other means like facebook or other non SDN means. And let me tell you that many of these people do indeed have lives.


Just as a few examples of people who may come off as overachievers on paper but seemed like interesting individuals that have posted on SDN:

The indian girl who was a bharatanatyam dancer and carnatic classical music singer. She seemed to have more to say then constant 24/7 medicine and school and could also hold a decent conversation about other great dancers and musicians and other things non medical. She may have had a 4.0 and 40+ MCAT score with the other typical premed activities but definitely knew how to carry a real conversation from what I saw.

Then there was the guy married to a teacher who is now at UMich. This guy had similar stats but at the end of the day he knew how to carry on how to have a life and balance time with his loved ones and doing other activities too.

There are more people too where I live tha have 3.9+GPAs and 35+ MCAT scores but also have made time to do other side jobs that they enjoy whether it was teaching, doing sport or dance or music or art.

So I guess it just depends.

 

[NonTradMed]

Haven't read the book yet, but want to one of these days. I guess i'm one of those overachievers that the author talks about, albeit without the pushy parents, but I've been surrounded by mediocre students most of my life so to me, it's nice to hear that not everyone is like that. In fact, what's wrong with having ambition and working toward it? Sure, it sounds like the examples she has sounds like extremes, but it sure beats the other extreme (kids with no ambition, no focus, living in parents' basement until they are kicked out). And frankly, I think this country could use more kids who have purpose. Rather than writing a book about how kids who push themselves are bad, maybe she should focus on why so many kids are failing out of school, how they could be pushed to have a goal in their lives.

EDIT: I also wanted to add that I knew plenty of premed overachievers in college and they had little problem socializing. The real difference is, while they enjoy drinking, socializing etc, they choose to put their time and energy into studying and working toward their academic goals. Some intepretated that as meaning they don't know how to socialize or do not enjoy socializing---because why else would one skip out on a party in order to study orgo? Well, I guess these people do it not because they don't enjoy having fun, but because they prioritize having fun as below their ambition of medicine. I guess some people may find something wrong with that workaholism, and I would never do it myself, however, society is made great by all kinds of people, including people whose singular goal is to be highly successful.

 

[baylormed]

The funny thing is that, when taken to an extreme, many of these overachievers are also very dependent on their parents (I know one person like this).

Sure, very driven and ambitious, but only because their parents are bugging them all the time, and watching what classes they take, keeping them busy all the time, pushing them to get A's and work harder and harded. But you throw this person into the real world w/o her parents and she won't know what to do (this happened in reality), because mommy and daddy weren't there anymore.


However, I also agree that some sort of "overachievism" is good for everyone, we need more kids who are motivated. I am surprised at how many people in my brother's middle school barely pass state exams such as the TAKS. It's the most elementary material that's on that test! Children are being relegated to the back of the academic world since an early age, and many of these kids will probably end up with mediocre grades in high school again, therefore will only get into a mediocre college/technical college, etc....it's a cycle that only a few of them break.

I have lived in other countries during my life, and the American culture is slowly drifting towards a "pop culture." Nowadays, other countries place a MUCH HIGHER value on education than the United States does. Look at India, China, Japan and many other Asian countries. Science and Math education is much more advanced even in Mexico (where I lived for many years)...when I was in middle school (7-9th grades there), I started taking O-chem during my 9th grade, and I was taking algebra since 6th grade. Most people in the US don't even know what O-chem is until they get to college!!! Some never do unless they choose to major in science.

So yes, people need to wake up. 😎

 

[Haemulon]

I would like to offer that there should be a distinction between "achievers" and "overachievers". Many people on SDN with great stats, lots of terrific experiences, and numerous successes may be considered simply achievers. Intelligent, capable, and motiveated. For some people, things just seem to fall into place, learning is not difficult and indeed is actually fun, and socio-economic circumstances are very supportive towards success. I can't hold that against them as long as they are genuinely good people. It all comes down to character.

 

[sunset823]

I have lived in other countries during my life, and the American culture is slowly drifting towards a "pop culture." Nowadays, other countries place a MUCH HIGHER value on education than the United States does. Look at India, China, Japan and many other Asian countries. Science and Math education is much more advanced even in Mexico (where I lived for many years)...when I was in middle school (7-9th grades there), I started taking O-chem during my 9th grade, and I was taking algebra since 6th grade. Most people in the US don't even know what O-chem is until they get to college!!! Some never do unless they choose to major in science.

I wrote my senior honors thesis on this - the emphasis on science in foreign countries is basically an issue of national security and economic competitiveness - and right now, it's quite successful. The US is so complacent with its priveleged economic and *snicker* security status that it thinks it's invincible even though it's turning out ignorant dopes.

Not that I am an advocate of masochism, I just think that people here really need to get their act together regarding science education.

 

[hsperson]

It seems like a lot of the posts are confusing overachieverism with social awkwardness. These are two completely different things. There are plenty of overachievers who are very socially adept, (although there certainly is a disproportionate amount of socially inept ones). Additionally, someone doing well in academics or the MCAT does not make him/her an overachiever. Being an overachiever refers less to one's social skill and more to one's motivations in life. Often they are just people who feel that, to gain validation and have a sense of self-worth, must be the best. They never feel good enough regardless of their achievements. Often, these people have many internal conflicts and deal with serious depression.

I observed exactly these things in many of my premed friends. There's this accomplishent-driven, perfectionistic, my-self-worth-is-contingent-upon-validation-from-others (including parents) personality among them. They are often prone to depression. They have a nightmarish intolerance for failure (getting a B+ instead of an A). They go through life unable to find the acceptance they need, either from others or from within themselves, and regard this as failure. They feel that they can gain acceptance by doing something extremely well, (e.g. academic performance, playing an instrument, being the strongest, being the funniest). When their status is challenged by someone smarter, stronger or funnier, they feel weakened because their acceptance is in jeopardy. They look elsewhere for acceptance. They say, "Maybe if I go to Harvard and become a doctor, then, Presto: automatic acceptance; everyone will love me because no one can take away from the validation that saying 'I'm Dr. Loveme brings.'" I believe that it is this that causes some of those who really just can't take being premed to ever so conveniently switch to law, the next most prestigious career. This personality, I conjecture, is also present in many musicians, comedians, athletes, bodybuilders etc.

 

[baylormed]

I wrote my senior honors thesis on this - the emphasis on science in foreign countries is basically an issue of national security and economic competitiveness - and right now, it's quite successful. The US is so complacent with its priveleged economic and *snicker* security status that it thinks it's invincible even though it's turning out ignorant dopes.

Not that I am an advocate of masochism, I just think that people here really need to get their act together regarding science education.

In regards to that...

This summer, when we took my little brother to his school for registration (he started 7th grade), I was looking at his schedule and noticed the following:

*Intermediate Piano
*Art
*Choir
*Math Pre-AP
*Science Pre-AP
*Language Arts
*Physical Education
*Enrichment class: this is an "elective" they give them where students don't really learn much new material, they do a lot of drawing and manual stuff.

I was amazed at how out of 8 classes, three of them were the most important (Math, Science and Language Arts) and the other four, while important, take up MOST OF HIS TIME IN SCHOOL.
Now, I have nothing against art or excercise (it's good, really), but schedules like this is the reason these kids get to high school unable to handle even basic algebra, let alone calculus.
It's not surprising then than when it's time for them to take the state exams (TAKS in Texas) and they are tested only on Math, Science and Language, they perform so poorly. Because they are drawing and singing most of the time.
Thank goodness my brother is a smart little guy and he himself chose the Pre-AP classes, otherwise I'd be worried for him.

 

[gujuDoc]

It seems like a lot of the posts are confusing overachieverism with social awkwardness. These are two completely different things. There are plenty of overachievers who are very socially adept, (although there certainly is a disproportionate amount of socially inept ones). Additionally, someone doing well in academics or the MCAT does not make him/her an overachiever. Being an overachiever refers less to one's social skill and more to one's motivations in life. Often they are just people who feel that, to gain validation and have a sense of self-worth, must be the best. They never feel good enough regardless of their achievements. Often, these people have many internal conflicts and deal with serious depression.

I observed exactly these things in many of my premed friends. There's this accomplishent-driven, perfectionistic, my-self-worth-is-contingent-upon-validation-from-others (including parents) personality among them. They are often prone to depression. They have a nightmarish intolerance for failure (getting a B+ instead of an A). They go through life unable to find the acceptance they need, either from others or from within themselves, and regard this as failure. They feel that they can gain acceptance by doing something extremely well, (e.g. academic performance, playing an instrument, being the strongest, being the funniest). When their status is challenged by someone smarter, stronger or funnier, they feel weakened because their acceptance is in jeopardy. They look elsewhere for acceptance. They say, "Maybe if I go to Harvard and become a doctor, then, Presto: automatic acceptance; everyone will love me because no one can take away from the validation that saying 'I'm Dr. Loveme brings.'" I believe that it is this that causes some of those who really just can't take being premed to ever so conveniently switch to law, the next most prestigious career. This personality, I conjecture, is also present in many musicians, comedians, athletes, bodybuilders etc.

Good post!!!

And to BaylorMed,

Yeah i think the primary education system here is pathetic unless you go to a private school. My dance teacher's son is in the 6th grade and skipped 2 grades. But he's sooooooo much smarter then most of the kids in his class because his mom made him learn to do math and science the way they teach in India where they make you learn most things by hand rather then use of calculators and she makes him read and summarize chapters every day from books. She also has him learning tennis and drums. His father is a percussionist.

But this boy's teacher's first assignment to them was pathetic. Rather then teaching math the teacher wasted their time giving them an assignment that involved word puzzles that described football teams. He shouldn't be wasting students time with that kind of nonsense but should be teaching math.

 

[8744]

Hi.

My name is Panda Bear and I'm an underachiever. In fact, my whole blog is sort of dedicated to the underachieving medical student who is smart but not a super-genius, dislikes many aspects of the medical profession because it cuts into his free time, and is really, really happy at the end of the day to go home from the hospital and watch Iron Chef.

It is also dedicated, kind of, to people who can't remember why they wanted to go to medical school so badly even if they do enjoy being a doctor.

Check it out. I've been doing MICU and PICU for the last couple of months so blogging has been light but I have a call-less stretch coming up and I hope to add more articles. Your comments, positive and negative are welcome but I cannot understand the desire of some people to visit internet "private property" and insult their host.

Get yer' own stinking blog if you don't like it.

 

[riverie]

i recommend that more people (especially us pre-meds and meds) read this book:

The Underachiever's Manifesto

It was written by an M.D., who professes himself to be a "recovering overachiever."

😉

 

[SpeakLittleB]

Good post!!!

And to BaylorMed,

Yeah i think the primary education system here is pathetic unless you go to a private school. My dance teacher's son is in the 6th grade and skipped 2 grades. But he's sooooooo much smarter then most of the kids in his class because his mom made him learn to do math and science the way they teach in India where they make you learn most things by hand rather then use of calculators and she makes him read and summarize chapters every day from books. She also has him learning tennis and drums. His father is a percussionist.

But this boy's teacher's first assignment to them was pathetic. Rather then teaching math the teacher wasted their time giving them an assignment that involved word puzzles that described football teams. He shouldn't be wasting students time with that kind of nonsense but should be teaching math.

Skipping 2 grades and having learned math and science better doesn't equal smarter. I am one of those who has always had high grades and scores handed to me on a silver platter, but I truly believe that some of the smartest people are those who currently (in college or high school) are not determined to be outstanding. I am a great supporter of all those extra classes for creativity, etc. 3 classes for math/language/whatever is enough since these subject can be picked up so easily in a matter of weeks at any age... but it's the creativity and thought process that is hardest to train. Overall, I think the US has done great in this respect.. you have so many "brilliant" asians overseas working on all the technical issues... but US minds are still in control over it all to bring in the new ideas over which someone else will slave over the details. I'm Chinese, and born in China mind you, so I don't think you can say racism here. And I have never been pushed by my parents. Grades and achievements have always come naturally for me, but in some thought problems I feel that my mind is stuck in a box... and I think that if I had more creativity and more intuition and more experiences somehow, I'd be actually "smarter". Being able to do more math, having people think u're smart, getting better grades--they're all empty achievements like we mentioned above.

 

[gujuDoc]

Skipping 2 grades and having learned math and science better doesn't equal smarter. I am one of those who has always had high grades and scores handed to me on a silver platter, but I truly believe that some of the smartest people are those who currently (in college or high school) are not determined to be outstanding. I am a great supporter of all those extra classes for creativity, etc. 3 classes for math/language/whatever is enough since these subject can be picked up so easily in a matter of weeks at any age... but it's the creativity and thought process that is hardest to train. Overall, I think the US has done great in this respect.. you have so many "brilliant" asians overseas working on all the technical issues... but US minds are still in control over it all to bring in the new ideas over which someone else will slave over the details. I'm Chinese, and born in China mind you, so I don't think you can say racism here. And I have never been pushed by my parents. Grades and achievements have always come naturally for me, but in some thought problems I feel that my mind is stuck in a box... and I think that if I had more creativity and more intuition and more experiences somehow, I'd be actually "smarter". Being able to do more math, having people think u're smart, getting better grades--they're all empty achievements like we mentioned above.

I guess I see your point and don't completely agree or disagree with it, but definitely understand it.

 

[sunset823]

Skipping 2 grades and having learned math and science better doesn't equal smarter. I am one of those who has always had high grades and scores handed to me on a silver platter, but I truly believe that some of the smartest people are those who currently (in college or high school) are not determined to be outstanding. I am a great supporter of all those extra classes for creativity, etc. 3 classes for math/language/whatever is enough since these subject can be picked up so easily in a matter of weeks at any age... but it's the creativity and thought process that is hardest to train. Overall, I think the US has done great in this respect.. you have so many "brilliant" asians overseas working on all the technical issues... but US minds are still in control over it all to bring in the new ideas over which someone else will slave over the details. I'm Chinese, and born in China mind you, so I don't think you can say racism here. And I have never been pushed by my parents. Grades and achievements have always come naturally for me, but in some thought problems I feel that my mind is stuck in a box... and I think that if I had more creativity and more intuition and more experiences somehow, I'd be actually "smarter". Being able to do more math, having people think u're smart, getting better grades--they're all empty achievements like we mentioned above.

I see your point as well, especially about the US minds controlling the ideas while the Asians do the technical stuff, but I should clarify myself - I am Indian, born in India, and subjected to plenty of engineers in my life, but I am also an excellent writer, a decent artist, am obsessed with Big 10 football, and consider myself quite creative and balanced - mostly because I grew up in a background of very few Asians.

I don't want to get rid of the arts/humanities in the least, I just feel that ignoring science entirely will prove detrimental. Refer to the post above about the math teacher who gives out word puzzles instead of teaching math to see what I mean.

 

[gujuDoc]

I see your point as well, especially about the US minds controlling the ideas while the Asians do the technical stuff, but I should clarify myself - I am Indian, born in India, and subjected to plenty of engineers in my life, but I am also an excellent writer, a decent artist, am obsessed with Big 10 football, and consider myself quite creative and balanced - mostly because I grew up in a background of very few Asians.

I don't want to get rid of the arts/humanities in the least, I just feel that ignoring science entirely will prove detrimental. Refer to the post above about the math teacher who gives out word puzzles instead of teaching math to see what I mean.

This is the point I was trying to make in my other post.

Also, the thing with this country is that unless you go to a private school a lot of the places don't do justice in teaching the arts that well either. the secondary education here is good but the primary education is not as well as it could be compared to other places like Europe, Asia, South America and so forth.

 

[tracy34]

I am a little disheartened when people complain about American school system and how we " dumb Americans" are so stupid compared to_______. (Insert Indians, Chinese, or Japanese). I heard a lot of this bull**** when I was younger from my parents who are from South Africa, and it was usually to reinforce that I was stupid and worthless. It came from both ways: People in India/Pakistan or S. African Indians were smarter and not worthless like me; In this country, the Asians (Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese) were smarter and just in general better than me because I am brown.
The major way in which the school system I was in failed me was discrimination. But you'll find discrimination everywhere, in every country. But the American school system allowed me to transcend this and learn and love math and english on my own. Sure, I had to spend two years in community college, but those were two years I really loved. I studied on my own and put everything into learning calculus and advanced to Linear Algebra my sophomore year.
It kind of bothers me when Indian people always say how much better India is. I really feel like asking, "Why are you here then?" I am also sick of this whole "NRI flunkie stereotype." I met this FOB student who goes to a private liberal arts college majoring in political science, rarely attends her classes, and she was spouting off about how much better India is and that the voter turn out for major election is 60 percent and the turnout for presidential elections was only 20 percent here...WRONG. I was like HELLO! She definitely did not fit this FOB stereotype.
I guess what I am trying to say is that when we apply generalizations to children about whether they belong to a "smart" group or "lazy/stupid" group it's detrimental. I am not saying the the American school system is perfect or even good. The American school system is falling apart. I work part time for an inner-city school district and these children are being deprived from having a true education. The supplies allocated to each classroom is shameful.
My cousin is in India and he goes to one of the top rated schools. He is two grades behind. He's 16 years old and cannot do long division. He has many classemates like himself. He has all of the resources at his fingertips but still fails.
It is fine to argue that school systems need repair. All of the posts on this thread are very informed and I haven't really seen any of this "Americans are dumb" tone in them. Sorry, if I offended anyone, I just needed to vent.

 

[Philo]

Skipping 2 grades and having learned math and science better doesn't equal smarter. I am one of those who has always had high grades and scores handed to me on a silver platter, but I truly believe that some of the smartest people are those who currently (in college or high school) are not determined to be outstanding. I am a great supporter of all those extra classes for creativity, etc. 3 classes for math/language/whatever is enough since these subject can be picked up so easily in a matter of weeks at any age... but it's the creativity and thought process that is hardest to train. Overall, I think the US has done great in this respect.. you have so many "brilliant" asians overseas working on all the technical issues... but US minds are still in control over it all to bring in the new ideas over which someone else will slave over the details. I'm Chinese, and born in China mind you, so I don't think you can say racism here. And I have never been pushed by my parents. Grades and achievements have always come naturally for me, but in some thought problems I feel that my mind is stuck in a box... and I think that if I had more creativity and more intuition and more experiences somehow, I'd be actually "smarter". Being able to do more math, having people think u're smart, getting better grades--they're all empty achievements like we mentioned above.

(sigh) I am a math major and this is a common misconception that I hear ALL the time. Many people believe that math, engineering, and compsci require little or no creativity. I believe that this is because most people quit taking math after high school or after first-year calculus or they do not venture into a field such as engineering or compsci. When most people think of mathematics they think of early math where you take out your calculator and plug in numbers into well-defined algorithms. Upper level math classes are proof classes. Proving something requires immense creativity, in fact all problem solving requires immense creativity. Imagine how engineers create new technology, how mathematicians create theorems, and/or how computer scientists develop new software. In fact, most universities have mathematics in the science and art departments. I don't mean to start a flame-war or anything, but it could be even argued that science requires more creativity than art because writers, artists, etc., do not seem to create REAL new ideas; its simply cut-and-paste. Think of the mythical creature the 'dragon'; A dragon is created by taking wings of a bird, facial features from humans, etc.. Even writers have common beginings, endings, and plot twists; in addition, they employ common mechanisms for expressing their ideas such as metaphors, alliteration, etc..

I believe that both sides are equally rich in creativity, but I had to show others the other side of the coin.

 

[Rafa]

I don't mean to start a flame-war or anything, but it could be even argued that science requires more creativity than art because writers, artists, etc., do not seem to create REAL new ideas; its simply cut-and-paste. Think of the mythical creature the 'dragon'; A dragon is created by taking wings of a bird, facial features from humans, etc.. Even writers have common beginings, endings, and plot twists; in addition, they employ common mechanisms for expressing their ideas such as metaphors, alliteration, etc..

I realize you said you didn't mean to start a flame-war, but this part of your post suggests you know about as much about good creative writing as the people you rail against for knowing nothing about the creativity in mathematics and science. Saying "every writer employs common mechanisms like metaphors and alliterations" is about as reasonable as decrying mathematicians for all using "numbers" and "equations", or saying that the blueprint for every engineer is the same: "here is a problem", and "let's try to fix it". You're dabbling in the same elitism you decry when levered against math and science. It might do to realize that it isn't any more accurate to paint something you might not be familiar with with such broad strokes - in the same way people who aren't fans of equations and calculus might do better not to say things like "mathematicians spend all their lives proving the same things without improving any facet of human life". Diplomacy is a two-way street. 🙂

I believe that both sides are equally rich in creativity

This, I agree with.

 

[gujuDoc]

I am a little disheartened when people complain about American school system and how we " dumb Americans" are so stupid compared to_______. (Insert Indians, Chinese, or Japanese). I heard a lot of this bull**** when I was younger from my parents who are from South Africa, and it was usually to reinforce that I was stupid and worthless. It came from both ways: People in India/Pakistan or S. African Indians were smarter and not worthless like me; In this country, the Asians (Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese) were smarter and just in general better than me because I am brown.
The major way in which the school system I was in failed me was discrimination. But you'll find discrimination everywhere, in every country. But the American school system allowed me to transcend this and learn and love math and english on my own. Sure, I had to spend two years in community college, but those were two years I really loved. I studied on my own and put everything into learning calculus and advanced to Linear Algebra my sophomore year.
It kind of bothers me when Indian people always say how much better India is. I really feel like asking, "Why are you here then?" I am also sick of this whole "NRI flunkie stereotype." I met this FOB student who goes to a private liberal arts college majoring in political science, rarely attends her classes, and she was spouting off about how much better India is and that the voter turn out for major election is 60 percent and the turnout for presidential elections was only 20 percent here...WRONG. I was like HELLO! She definitely did not fit this FOB stereotype.
I guess what I am trying to say is that when we apply generalizations to children about whether they belong to a "smart" group or "lazy/stupid" group it's detrimental. I am not saying the the American school system is perfect or even good. The American school system is falling apart. I work part time for an inner-city school district and these children are being deprived from having a true education. The supplies allocated to each classroom is shameful.
My cousin is in India and he goes to one of the top rated schools. He is two grades behind. He's 16 years old and cannot do long division. He has many classemates like himself. He has all of the resources at his fingertips but still fails.
It is fine to argue that school systems need repair. All of the posts on this thread are very informed and I haven't really seen any of this "Americans are dumb" tone in them. Sorry, if I offended anyone, I just needed to vent.

Dude I never said the secondary education was better there, just the primary education. And it is FACT that they don't learn to use calculators. Instead they learn how to do everything by hand and how to do it quicker. The European system, NOT JUST THE ASIAN sytem is the same way. So is the South American system the same way.

When they learn how to do math and science they go far more advanced then my middle school or even highschool ever did. Things people learned in highschool here they learned in middle school, and things middle school students learn here they learned in elementary school. They don't waste time with stupid kind of projects like the one I described above. Instead they get down to it and teach the subject that they are there to teach.


EDIT: I'm not saying all indians are smarter or all asians are smarter. I'm just satying the system they apply at a lot of the better schools are better over there. At least that was true for most FOBs that I've known.

 

[8744]

...I am a math major and this is a common misconception that I hear ALL the time. Many people believe that math, engineering, and compsci require little or no creativity...

Liberal arts majors claim increased levels of creativity because that's all they've got. Also because, like most virtues in our society, creativity has has been debased to the point that every piece of crap produced by anybody is lauded as creative.

I was a structural engineer and created all kinds of things, the difference between me an a typical hack artist being that I had to impose some discipline on my creativity while some self-centered artistitic wannabe can throw drops of paint on a canvas, more or less at random, and be celebrated for it.

 

[gujuDoc]

Liberal arts majors claim increased levels of creativity because that's all they've got. Also because, like most virtues in our society, creativity has has been debased to the point that every piece of crap produced by anybody is lauded as creative.

I was a structural engineer and created all kinds of things, the difference between me an a typical hack artist being that I had to impose some discipline on my creativity while some self-centered artistitic wannabe can throw drops of paint on a canvas, more or less at random, and be celebrated for it.

Good post. I agree that there are several "art pieces" that I would not consider art.

 

[sunset823]

Liberal arts majors claim increased levels of creativity because that's all they've got. Also because, like most virtues in our society, creativity has has been debased to the point that every piece of crap produced by anybody is lauded as creative.

I was a structural engineer and created all kinds of things, the difference between me an a typical hack artist being that I had to impose some discipline on my creativity while some self-centered artistitic wannabe can throw drops of paint on a canvas, more or less at random, and be celebrated for it.

Speaking as the resident artist/art historian, there are many well-respected modern artists who toil for many hours at their work, even if it is not appreciated with those without an eye for it at the end. Also, look at the impressionists - Van Gogh's 'Stormy Night' is one of the most lauded artistic pieces in human history. So don't judge until you've studied this stuff in depth.

And not all modern art is 'random' - Salvador Dali, besides being plain awesome, uses meticulous realism to depict abstract ideas; also, to the engineers, there are plenty of pieces at Washington's Museum of Modern Art that are based off of metallurgy and other technical materials.

Going totally off on a tangent and damn proud

 

[gujuDoc]

Speaking as the resident artist/art historian, there are many well-respected modern artists who toil for many hours at their work, even if it is not appreciated with those without an eye for it at the end. Also, look at the impressionists - Van Gogh's 'Stormy Night' is one of the most lauded artistic pieces in human history. So don't judge until you've studied this stuff in depth.

And not all modern art is 'random' - Salvador Dali, besides being plain awesome, uses meticulous realism to depict abstract ideas; also, to the engineers, there are plenty of pieces at Washington's Museum of Modern Art that are based off of metallurgy and other technical materials.

Going totally off on a tangent and damn proud

I don't think he was saying that ALL modern art is not art, just that there are several "pieces of art" that shouldn't be considered art.

 

[8744]

I don't think he was saying that ALL modern art is not art, just that there are several "pieces of art" that shouldn't be considered art.

Right. I'm just saying that there is no creativity without discipline and that the modern liberal arts curriculum, as it emphasises self and ego, is somewhat short on discipline. The artists mentioned by Sunset823 were highly proficient in the technical aspects of painting but chose to paint the way they did for...well...artistic reasons. Their self-discipline gives validity to their methods.

Not to mention that self-discipline cannot thrive in an environment geared towards protecting fragile egos or worse yet, in an environment where political indoctrination has taken the place of critical thinking, both of which are typical of the modern university environment.

 

[SpeakLittleB]

(sigh) I am a math major and this is a common misconception that I hear ALL the time. Many people believe that math, engineering, and compsci require little or no creativity. I believe that this is because most people quit taking math after high school or after first-year calculus or they do not venture into a field such as engineering or compsci. When most people think of mathematics they think of early math where you take out your calculator and plug in numbers into well-defined algorithms. Upper level math classes are proof classes. Proving something requires immense creativity, in fact all problem solving requires immense creativity. Imagine how engineers create new technology, how mathematicians create theorems, and/or how computer scientists develop new software. In fact, most universities have mathematics in the science and art departments. I don't mean to start a flame-war or anything, but it could be even argued that science requires more creativity than art because writers, artists, etc., do not seem to create REAL new ideas; its simply cut-and-paste. Think of the mythical creature the 'dragon'; A dragon is created by taking wings of a bird, facial features from humans, etc.. Even writers have common beginings, endings, and plot twists; in addition, they employ common mechanisms for expressing their ideas such as metaphors, alliteration, etc..

I believe that both sides are equally rich in creativity, but I had to show others the other side of the coin.

Sorry, I have been unclear. Actually, I started off being a math major too, and I certainly agree that it requires a ton of creativity and original thought (in any research endeavor) to succeed. I was referring to math/science in terms of classes in school where people define smartness by grades and how well you do in solving the problems handed to you and already solved by others countless times before. I'm trying to say that increased focus on creativity in classes actually helps in terms of all those subjects (the real math/etc..) whereas spending too much time learning these subjects the "traditional/better" way is actually detrimental to such development.