In waiting for a response from my previous Sociology 111 professor about his ideas, I've been thinking and looking up articles about credentialism.One thing I thought about was what Sean M commented on my post. He brought up the idea that we as a society simply have the wrong definition of success. We strive for a do instead of a be.
Remember after World War II when every American wanted a white picket fence, two kids, and a home in the suburbs? Remember when they wanted their own patch of Levittown with a garbage disposal and a clothes iron? Those things, those dos, were the credentials of the day.
Remember when black people couldn't get those credentials? Well, actually, they could. But once they did, all the white people fled to different suburbs where they could fulfill their American dreams in a canvas that was less...colored.
Black people could get the credentials, but they could never do white. And you needed "white" on your resume to be a true success.
According to Lani Guinier (and most humans), that's stupid. That's stupid to expect the same thing from every person, to want the same thing from every person. In an interview about the 'merit' in meritocracy (published just six days ago, mind you), Lani discusses the disadvantages of working toward the credential of a good SAT score. Why does the world of business (and most other worlds) want all those good-SAT guys? Wouldn't you rather have "a collaborative team where people have different strengths and the capacity to work with people with different perspectives"?
Why does "success" have to be the same type of success (the same dos) for everyone?
That is an awesome question. It just goes to show that people like to stick to a good thing (even if it becomes outdated). When the school system was created it served it's purpose well and I am sure that credentialism was the same way. A tool used to measure ones performance to ascertain what they are able to "do" and in those days that is what was important to them. Times have changed so drastically now. We are in a new age. To quote Sir Ken Robinson, "We live in the most intensely stimulating period in the history of the earth..." yet we continue to hold onto the old ideas that used to be "good." These unrealistic standards as to what determines a successful individual are distorting the minds of our creative youth. I believe your topic goes along well with reforming our education system to better cater to the needs, capabilities and desires of the youth. This is essential in order to help them see their true potential instead of having them rely on some piece of paper telling you what you are capable of doing.
ReplyDeleteI love the change of perspective here. You help me question my credentials (work experience, GPA, LSAT, etc.), but then I wonder, how would we recognize the different strengths in people without credentials? Even the phrase "hard worker" or "good at thinking outside the box" are credentials, they are just credentials that the person places on themselves. Maybe we need to begin to trust personal credentials more than we trust standardized credentials.
ReplyDelete