You are on page 1of 4

Ashley Fagre

Briggs
English 1010, 1:00-2:20, TR
September 29, 2015

Street Smarts vs. Book Smarts


Hidden Intellectualism Summary/Response
Gerald Graffs Hidden Intellectualism insists that schools and colleges are missing out
on an opportunity to tap into street smarts. We associate the life of the mind, too narrowly
and exclusively with subjects and texts that we consider inherently weighty and academic (264).
In making this comment, Graff points out that schools are failing to recognize that students may
need more exposure to subjects such as fashion and sports instead of nuclear fission or the
French Revolution.
However, Graff goes on to acknowledge the fact that students do need to read models of
intellectually changing writingif they are to become intellectuals themselves (265). He only
implores that students would be more willing to improve their intellectual writing skills if they
were introduced to their interests before studying the usual assigned pieces. Graffs suggestion
may seem contradictory to schools standards of higher thinking but he insists, real intellectuals
[can] turn any subject, however lightweight it may seem, into grist for their mill through the
thoughtful questions they bring to it (265). In other words, he is challenging the idea that book
smarts beat out street smarts. Since street smarts are not limited to any academic standards, they
satisfy an intellectuals thirst more thoroughly than school culture, which many students believe
to be pale and unreal, according to Graff (268).
He also believes that the realities of schools methods are unappealing to students and
defeat their purpose of producing academic success. Graff himself failed to see the parallels
between the sports and academic worlds that could have helped [him] cross more readily from

one argument culture to the other (269). The essence of his argument is that if schools want
their students to become flourishing academic thinkers, they need to incorporate students
interests into their teaching techniques.
I agree with Graff that students interests should be incorporated into the classroom. I
cant tell you how many times Ive heard my friends complain about how boring it is to learn
about the Civil War or how confusing Shakespeares plays are, but can go on and on about their
favorite TV show. Indeed, Graff definitely makes a good point; students would be more engaged
in school if they didnt think it was so dull. He also considers that students should be exposed to
their interests first, in order to help them move on to tougher subjects and I agree with him. I
think back to when I first started doing math, we began with basic things like addition and
subtraction, before graphing equations and solving for x. In the end, by building onto concepts it
was easier to move forward.
On the other hand, I can see how this could create a weakness in terms of writing Graff
mentions even if students dont move on to rigorous pieces, magazine reading will make them
more literate and reflective than they would be otherwise (270). However, I disagree. Students
will only continue to read and write about things they like and wont necessarily become critical
thinkers. As a result, when challenging assignments do come up, they will only be uncomfortable
and less likely to apply themselves since they have only dealt with subjects they are comfortable
with. This is exactly what Graff doesnt want to happen but chances are it will, because by
permitting students to use their interests, he allows them to become lazy. Its important to learn
new things, since thats how you escape reverting back to what you already know and taking the
easy way out. In the article Colleges Prepare People for Life, by Freeman Hrabowski he states,
colleges prepare people for jobs, but more critically, they prepare people for life (260). College

is a great example of a time where experiencing and learning new, difficult concepts can help
you become successful. College is also a time when you can gain a greater sense what of being a
part of a community is like. You learn how to get involved with others, and with the world
around you. This stands contrary to Graffs statement that schoolwork [isolates] you from
others (268). School actually gives you the tools to think broadly, according to Hrabowski
(262).
Near the end of Graffs article, it essentially deals with two types of intellectualism. He
expresses, in my reading of sports books and magazinesI began to learn the rudiments of the
intellectual life (267). As a result, Graff came to the conclusion that street smarts beat out book
smarts (268). Yet, in my opinion, it is not a battle between the two intelligences, to test whether
street smarts or book smarts are better, but rather awareness that both exist. We are all different
individuals; something that works for one person might not work for someone else. For instance,
if teachers let students write about their interests, is every student going to be able to see his or
her interests in a reflective, analytical way? For some, probably, but others would struggle with
connecting the two ideas. Graffs piece does not take this into consideration simply because he
only shares his own understanding. Perhaps if he had written about others experiences, his article
would have more credibility.
Ultimately, Gerald Graffs Hidden Intellectualism, is a celebration of gaining higher
thinking with a different way of learning, or as he puts it, through street smarts. However, this
isnt the best route for everyone. It really depends on what your learning style is.

You might also like