As I read through this article, I couldn't help but reflect on the students in my school that were labeled "book smart" and those that were "street smart". There were other catagories of students but these students were held up to a different standard. The book smart students received A's, were at the top of the class, but often lacked "character" and were outcasts from their peers. The street smart students weren't necessarily at the top of the class but they did what they had to maintain acceptable grades and successfully involved themselves in the social aspect of school as much as the academic. These students would have fit into Randolph's idea of good "character".
I don't necessarily believe that character is the answer to the education issues that we face today, knowing that many students who lacked character have moved on to become successful individuals. However, I do agree that many students need encouragement to look beyond the test. We have set test standards that leave students feeling they are failures if they aren't "proficient" in a subject area. We do not allow them to be "graded" based on the things they are good at, only what the tests say they need to be good at.
Encouraging character in all aspects of the school day at KIPP and Riverdale was exciting to read about, until I read about the meeting with a student concerning his "character report card". We are given one student who had a pretty positive character report card, but what about the students with less favorable report cards? What do we do when a teacher does not present a character report card in a positive way? I remember taking a test in high school and the results made predictions about what type of career path you might take. The results were given to us with no additional support from teachers or administration. Students received the results in class and we all shared our results during homeroom. I do not remember my results, but I remember one girl who was in tears because her results predicted she should be a farmer or in the circus. This was not encouraging for a student from a middle class suburban family in an urban private school. Although in some demographics these careers would be considered commendable there is a stigma attached to them in other demographics.
Although the Grit test or character report cards seemingly have been more thoughtfully administered, how do we avoid damaging and negative influences on our character? Do we customize every test for an individual school? Who makes these decisions? Who administers them? Most importantly are the same ideals carried out throughout a students education? I wonder if the KIPP students received the same type of character instruction in high school.
Shannon,
ReplyDeleteI really like the connection you made. The dichotomy you present is a really good way to approach this concept, and I'm with you up to a certain point. But I do think it's a bit of a misstep to say that the "book smart" do not have character where the "street smart" do. There is an awful lot of gray area that I think you're overlooking. For instance, just because the "book smart" are considered social outcasts (a crime in itself), does not necessarily mean that they do not possess character. It just means that they see things differently than their peers.
Or maybe it has to do with different definitions of the term "character". If you are defining "character" as having a dominant or bright personality, then I think your classifications are spot on in terms of the stereotypes that accompany both groups. However, if your definition of "character" is something along the lines of the definition provided in the article (a set of traits that define a person), then I think it's unfair to say that those who are "book smart" do not have character. In fact, an argument could be made that exposure to the various literary characters and their traits and stories might give the "book smart" a distinct advantage over the "street smart". After all, they have example after example of good and bad characters and characteristics, where the "street smart" may only have a few.
That being said, I agree with your comments on the character report cards and that they could be as negative as they are positive. I found it interesting that the article did not report on someone who had a negative reaction to their character report card, even though I understand the article was meant to present the positive side. It feels like there is a lot more that can go wrong than right in that kind of situation.
Kirsten, I understand your interpretation but no I was definitely not implying that all students who were "book smart" did not have character. A close friend of mine was 5th in our class and she definitely has character. I was simplifying the many categories of high school into two just to make comparison to the article. I agree many who are book smart do have character. I guess my focus should have been more on the "street smart" students who would benefit from the character grading scale, because they may often think they would never do well in school because their strengths were not a focus in school testing.
Delete