Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Outliers and Practical Intelligence
Extending his “Trouble with Geniuses” concerns, Malcolm Gladwell offers insight about those particular skills that give talented people the extra edge to become outliers. Gladwell explains that we too often assume that success is based purely on intellect or physical talents. Genetics tend to play vital roles, but they are hardly the sole determining factors.
To describe the differences between a highly intelligent yet underachieving person and a highly intelligent and successful one, Gladwell highlights psychologist Robert Sternberg’s concept “practical intelligence,” which includes “'knowing what to say to whom, knowing when to say it, and knowing how to say it for maximum effect.’” Practical intelligence is “knowledge that helps you read situations correctly and get what you want. And, critically, it is a kind of intelligence separate from the sort of analytical ability measured by IQ.”
The practical intelligence that Gladwell presents can also be thought of as a kind of “social savvy,” an ability to skillfully negotiate multiple social and professional environments. People with high IQs who seemed to squander their talents were actually people who lacked “a community around them that prepared them properly for the world.”
How did you respond to Gladwell’s ideas about the roles of wealth and parenting in the lives of those who are more likely to become socially savvy and/or highly successful?
Or, to take a different concern, what could SIUE do to ensure that larger numbers of students develop higher degrees of practical intelligence during their time here?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I agree with his stand about wealth and parenting that gives people that extra edge to be savvy. People from lower social classes seem to be more defensive around people of authority and they often tend to bite their tongue. It does seem that people who parents were more active in their life and who let them speak up and told them how to stand up for themselves seem to make it farther in the corporate world because they wont let people walk all over them. People whose parents are not well off tend to not spend as much time actively training up their child with the necessities they will need to make it in the world. Like chris Langan because he came from the background he came from he just allowed his college administrators to take away his scholarship and to eventually make him drop out of school because they would not give him the help he needed because he was passive instead of being passive-aggressive.
I agree that practical intelligence plays a large role in the determination of success, that textbook knowledge alone proves meaningless without concurrent practical knowledge. I have Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism and for the longest time I did not understand nonverbal communication cues, an unspoken form of practical knowledge. I had to take Asperger's classes to learn things that I usually was in the dark about and to this day I appreciate tose lessons. If not for them, I might not have been at SIUE right now
Isn't this the same post as last week?
How did you respond to Gladwell’s ideas about the roles of wealth and parenting in the lives of those who are more likely to become socially savvy and/or highly successful?
When reading Gladwell's ideas of how parenting relates to success I must say that I was not surprised. Reading this definitely made me think though. When I thought about it I realized that it made perfect sense.
Gladwell stated how the different classes of parents reacted to authority and it was perfect.
It is seen all the time in our society in real life and in the media. Poorer people always see authority as negative and they are afraid of them. Upper class people, on the other hand, feel that the have the right to challenge authority.
@ Bryan. Yeah, we had a mixup so had to re-post. Apologies. We're back on track now. Of course, given the subject, we're cool extending and on that same topic.
I agree with Gladwell that people who come from wealthy families and people who come from a good family with supportive parents are much more likely to become successful. That is because they formed a high level of self esteem from their childhood experiences and their parents taught them they they deserve to be respected and have the best in life. I still believe personality types play a bigger role in success because I have seen people who have a lot of practical knowledge who come from low income families with bad parents.
Gladwell makes a very good point about how wealth affects parenting styles, which affects how people and their families live. Wealth plays a major role in almost all aspects of life and can affect people's personalities. Like Gladwell noted, wealthier families will tend to be more outspoken and stick up for themselves and take authority, while poorer families will tend to be more quiet and not take charge, they tend to let things just happen. An example would be the story of how Chris Langan, who grew up poor, never graduated from college, even though he was extremely smart, just because he had some obstacles to overcome and he did not stick up for himself. On the other hand, Robert Oppenheimer, who grew up wealthy, attempted to poison his professor, but somehow still managed to just be put on probation when he should have been expelled and sent to prison. I believe that wealth, as Gladwell proves, plays a major role in the success of people and their families.
As far as wealth and parenting goes, I agree with Gladwell's perspective. Those who are raised by parents more involved in teh lives tend to be more outgoing, and not let people stand in their way. Those raised by poorer parents who couldn't intervene as much grew to be more submissive. As far as what the college could do to promote practical intelligence, they could have classes to help with this sort of situation.
SIUE could integrate the developmental skills needed for practical intelligence into classes such as public speaking and English classes so that the students in those classes could perform these acts in a less stressful and demanding environment. These classes should also be made mandatory for students so that when they enter the world they know how to interact with others. SIUE could also institute mandatory intramural sports participation as sports teach team work and communication skills which are the important practical intelligence skills, or offer basic etiquette courses for students who may struggle in these areas.
I agree on the fact that Children of wealthy families have a higher chance at success in their futures. This has been tested and proven many times, however the fact that they were well-off from the beginning does not guarantee the person a successful future. As Gladwell pointed out, a person's practical intelligence determines future events that take place as life lets them happen. The personality and intelligence of the individual as the factor that determines his or her success.
I agree with Gladwell's opinion that wealth and parenting affect success. (Financially) possessing the means to further your education makes it easier to want to do so. Being around supportive people does this as well. Your parents are usually the first people to influence you and your mindset.
I agree with Gladwell's ideas about the roles of wealth and parenting in the lives of those who are most likely to be highly successful. I use myself as an example of his idea. I had a good, wealthy background and some of my peers did not.
I went to a private, Christian grammar school as a child, and a college preparatory academy as an adolescent. Both of these schools helped to nurture me and the background in which i was raised in.
My mother always taught me to "ask questions if you don't understand something." I always question authority when i do not understand certain instructions. It has helped me throughout life, and i can understand how Gladwell came to his conclusions.
My peers who went to public grammar schools and public high schools do not know how to approach authority with certain questions. They weren't taught how to question them in a respectable manner, and sometimes they just fade into the background.
Overall, this passage made me think about the environment that i was raised in and how it was beneficial to my life greatly.
As I read Gladwell's opinion on wealth and parenting I thought of the idea of concerted cultivation.
That is the idea the upper class families of the upper class force their kids to be involved in activities outside of their home and school. They are often allowed to voice their opinion to the parents, and they don't get very many spankings.
On the other hand the kids of the lower class families aren't involved in anything outside of home. They feel like it would be an extra burden that the family would have to pay for, and they often have plenty of chores to do at home so they lack the time.
Acording to sociologists, the kids of the upper class are most likely to succeed in society. When they get to the real world they feel lie they are entitled to anything they want because of the way they were raised. The lower class kids are just thankful for whatever comes their way.
So yes I agree that wealth and parenting has a huge outcome on the success of a child.
Its like time today, we see it everywhere in today where we live. Wealth definitely causes a lot of change in parenting style. The lower income parents have to work to take care of their kids; they can't just sit at home like a surburban house wife!
I believe that SIUE can do some things to improve practical intelligence. TO me, practical intelligence is like common sense in situations. We can take some classes that teaches people to use common sense. We can also raise awarness to other's backgrounds. This will help people to have more practical knowledges to people's backgrounds and the situations that follow. Also, we can help people get into more clubs and activites to increase people's social savy. Programs like this involves campus tours for new students and stuff.
Being a student who took AP Psychology and also Sociology last year as two of my senior electives in high school I am familiar with the concept of practical intelligence. It is completely true that being raised in a community setting that is highly interactive will help develop practical intelligence. Even if a person does not have a high IQ, being "socially savvy" can help make that person successful by creating businessman skills. But there is also an article that I read last yr that said there is a rise in disorders that affects teens' abilities to obey authority, so this will cause practical intelligence to lower.
Dealing with any kind of authority can be hard to deal with coming from any background. But, in most cases, those who come from a background where money was not in a great supply look at those in authority as a bad person who could potentially do something to harm them. So yes I do agree with Gladwell. Those coming from wealthier backgrounds do not think of authority in a bad way like those from poverty.
This is another reason why those from a poverty stricken background do not always know "what to say to whom, know when to say it, and know how to say it for maximum effect." The authority scares them into telling themselves they do not the right answers when they actually do.
I think SIUE should have support for those who come from those types of environments. SIUE may already have these resources but the awareness about them may not be that get. Bringing more awareness to these would be a great start in the positive direction as well.
No matter how one looks at it, practical intelligence relies on background and support. Perhaps a good way to better the lives of students in poorly developed areas would be to give those students the kind of support that they do not get from their parents. A bigger emphasis on the Big Brothers - Big Sisters programs in poorly developled areas?
p.s. whenever I do a posting, the word verification will not show until I press the preview button, is it a problem with the system or a problem with my computer
I also remember reading that Oppenheimer tried to poison one of his instructors. The fact that he got away with this and still was able to work on the Manhattan project without anyone pointing it out is astoundint to say the least. It also made sense that he came from a wealthy background, given that he quotes Hindu scriptures when he saw the bomb being tested.
SIUE could force freshman seminar classes upon all freshman if they want them to develop a higher degree of practical intellegence. In the freshman seminar they should adquetly and quickly prepare you for the world. Those who are lacking the prepeation will benefit the most from a class like that and those who already have it will not mind takig the class because it would be relativley simple for them.
Post a Comment