High School as a "Game"...Thoughts? (SAT, colleges, private schools)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey everyone! I hear fairly often the term "game" used to describe academics in High School. What this essentially means (for those who don't know), is that the students willing to "play the game" (or just work their asses off) are the ones getting the 4.0 or whatever and that High School does not truly indicate true smarts. I think it implies that some of the smarter kids see what's going on and decide they are not going to play the game (and the rat race that comes along with it in terms of colleges), while people who aren't very smart decide to play the game and get a 4.0
So, I was wondering what you all thought of this idea of high school as merely a "game". I, to some degree, agree with this idea. I think that some kids who are really smart just decide they don't want to get involved in this rat race and decide to just back off a bit.
One more thing...I think this who idea is more centered at the top public and private schools in the country and not in your average-joe school. I think at the top schools, a top college is seen as the holy grail of academic achievement and people will just submit themselves to academics in order to get the bragging rights of saying that they got into a top school (and thus playing the game).
It isn't a phrase only used in high school. Playing the game is the way it is in many areas of life in general. Employees of a corporation have to play the game. Cooperate and do what is expected and everything will be great. Even members of an internet discussion forum have to play the game.
It isn't a phrase only used in high school. Playing the game is the way it is in many areas of life in general. Employees of a corporation have to play the game. Cooperate and do what is expected and everything will be great. Even members of an internet discussion forum have to play the game.
Yep... and it is a term that was around when I was in school.
Nothing new.
I think it implies that some of the smarter kids see what's going on and decide they are not going to play the game (and the rat race that comes along with it in terms of colleges), while people who aren't very smart decide to play the game and get a 4.0
What do you all think?
I think this sounds like justification. ^^^
Since when do people who "aren't very smart" pull off 4.0s???
The first excuse of a slacker is always some lame protest about "the system" or how they aren't gonna "play that game."
Hey everyone! I hear fairly often the term "game" used to describe academics in High School. What this essentially means (for those who don't know), is that the students willing to "play the game" (or just work their asses off) are the ones getting the 4.0 or whatever and that High School does not truly indicate true smarts. I think it implies that some of the smarter kids see what's going on and decide they are not going to play the game (and the rat race that comes along with it in terms of colleges), while people who aren't very smart decide to play the game and get a 4.0
So, I was wondering what you all thought of this idea of high school as merely a "game". I, to some degree, agree with this idea. I think that some kids who are really smart just decide they don't want to get involved in this rat race and decide to just back off a bit.
One more thing...I think this who idea is more centered at the top public and private schools in the country and not in your average-joe school. I think at the top schools, a top college is seen as the holy grail of academic achievement and people will just submit themselves to academics in order to get the bragging rights of saying that they got into a top school (and thus playing the game).
What do you all think?
It is a game but you still have to be smart to pull off a 4.0 (or close to it). There aren't a whole lot of kids who aren't very smart that are getting As in AP classes, which is what you need to get into the top colleges. Most kids who have lower grades are either: a) not that smart or b) don't do the work they need to do. I don't think there are tons of smart kids who get poor grades because they "don't want to play the game." There are probably a few, but kids who get low grade are a) not that smart or b)don't do the work they need to do.
It is a game but you still have to be smart to pull off a 4.0 (or close to it). There aren't a whole lot of kids who aren't very smart that are getting As in AP classes, which is what you need to get into the top colleges. Most kids who have lower grades are either: a) not that smart or b) don't do the work they need to do. I don't think there are tons of smart kids who get poor grades because they "don't want to play the game." There are probably a few, but kids who get low grade are a) not that smart or b)don't do the work they need to do.
I think the 4.0 for the not so smart students is probably a typo.
I hear "playing the game" most often in reference to college admissions. It means instead of presenting yourself as who you are--putting your best foot forward--you tailor whatever assets you have to match what you think will get you into the top school of your choice.
That could mean playing sports or taking up extra curricular activites you really aren't intersted in but might look good to a aprticular school, buttering up teachers one can't stand in order to get better recommendations, taking courses you're not interested in but look good on the transcript, taking the SAT again to move from a 680 to a 700 (20 points won't make or break anybody's admissions chances, all else being equal), trying to establish some "ethnic" background that really isn't relevant to the student's life ("Hey, my great great grandfather was 1/4 Cherokee! Can I check off the box for Native American?"), and even I read once, a particularly strong student moving to a lower-performing district so she'd be at the top of her class.
It happens a lot at selective high schools and at schools in affluent cometitive suburban districts. I think it's all abhorent, pyschologically damaging, and self-defeating in the long term. I hope college admissions officers can see through the crap some kids do to "win" at the "game" of college admissions. Remember that great line of the 1983 movie War Games?: "The only winning move is not to play"
plenty of smart kids just arent motivated in high school and still manage to do well in college and life thereafter. either they're smart and they have good SAT scores so can still get into a decent enough school and later get motivated to do well, or they don't bother with college and use their smarts elsewhere to do something else.
its kinda like running/racing. you have to have both the work ethic and the talent to be a true competitive athlete. a couch potato could say all day that he's faster than X runner, but he really has nothing to back up his statement. he could be super talented and hell he could train and make something of himself later, but who really knows. alternatively, someone who isnt naturally gifted could work their ass off and still just be a mediocre runner.
as the couch potato, you just come across as another bitter person who thinks he's smarter than he really (probably) is. totally "the systems" fault. or let me guess...a "bad test taker"
plenty of smart kids just arent motivated in high school and still manage to do well in college and life thereafter. either they're smart and they have good SAT scores so can still get into a decent enough school and later get motivated to do well, or they don't bother with college and use their smarts elsewhere to do something else.
its kinda like running/racing. you have to have both the work ethic and the talent to be a true competitive athlete. a couch potato could say all day that he's faster than X runner, but he really has nothing to back up his statement. he could be super talented and hell he could train and make something of himself later, but who really knows. alternatively, someone who isnt naturally gifted could work their ass off and still just be a mediocre runner.
as the couch potato, you just come across as another bitter person who thinks he's smarter than he really (probably) is. totally "the systems" fault. or let me guess...a "bad test taker"
I'm not bitter. I was just asking you all's thoughts on this matter. I just remember the "smartest" kid in my grade buttering up to teachers, studying countless hours for everything, and claiming the test was really hard when she knows she aced it (which my mother always said when other people do this it is to sike everyone else out).
That type of person really bugged me because she was just so desperate to play "the game". I was just looking for other perspectives on this matter. Not that there's necesarily anything wrong with what she did, it's just that there were plenty of other I'd say brilliants kids who, I just can't explain it, they made first honor roll and everything, but the buttering up wasn't there, they never claimed the test was impossible.
I'm not bitter. I was just asking you all's thoughts on this matter. I just remember the "smartest" kid in my grade buttering up to teachers, studying countless hours for everything, and claiming the test was really hard when she knows she aced it (which my mother always said when other people do this it is to sike everyone else out).
That type of person really bugged me because she was just so desperate to play "the game". I was just looking for other perspectives on this matter. Not that there's necesarily anything wrong with what she did, it's just that there were plenty of other I'd say brilliants kids who, I just can't explain it, they made first honor roll and everything, but the buttering up wasn't there, they never claimed the test was impossible.
There was just a notable difference.
Some of those kids who didn't say much and just did the work were playing the game too, it was just in a different way.
I have observed kids doing all manner of things to intentionally give themselves an edge. Sometimes it works. I have also seen kids who, without the intent of trying to best anyone, did all the right things because they enjoyed them (varsity sports, As in AP classes, student leadership etc.) and earned the respect of their teachers without buttering anyone. I bet some of those students are really annoying to compete with...if you think of it as a game.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
