As a child I was fascinated by the concept of school and learning. I'm sure much of it had to do with growing up in a very strong Chinese culture that puts great emphasis on education. The philosophy of Confucianism, so prominent in the Asian culture, stresses education as a way one can rise above the social rank one is born into. Both my parents, and in particular my father, saw education as the guiding light of our future. Although my siblings and I viewed school as important, I was the one who ultimately became the perennial student. I love to learn. I feel I can never know enough. My parents once told me a story of how at age 3 or 4, while we were still living in Hong Kong, I wanted to go to school just like the girl next door, except I wasn't old enough. They went out and purchased a school bag for me so that "I could go to school" like the little neighbor girl. Funny thing is I do recall proudly carrying the book bag around pretending I was also going to school.

I guess I never really thought much about how we are so greatly influenced by the way the system defines as "smart". The Chinese custom is to obey your elders (ie teachers, parents, and other people of authority) and don't question what is said or taught. We are to take everything dished out to us at face value. From elementary school through high school I was very comfortable with the traditional school system of not being disruptive and doing my work in and out of class and doing well on exams. Will Yliniemi and Clark Montgomery jokingly teased me, when we were in Duluth for our classes in June, that I was probably the "teacher's pet". I was embarrassed to admit that I was. Suddenly it didn't seem like a good thing to have been that. I don't know why I felt awkward letting out that bit of information. In school I was the quiet, obedient kid who generally knew the answers, as defined by the teacher. I didn't cause trouble and I didn't make the teachers uncomfortable. I was predictable and reliable. That behavior was reinforced at home and in school. In the end I did well in school and was rewarded with the good fortune of getting into a fine women's college.

When I was in college, I suddenly discovered that some of the learning and teaching rules changed. It was so liberating that I found myself growing up faster in just the first few months than I had in all the years in high school. The college admitted the cream of the crop for its student body. My fellow classmates were all so brillant. I was no longer special. Instead I was now one of many fish in the pond. It was a rude awakening that I had to quickly adjust to.

In reflecting back to grade school, I'm amazed at how damaging some of our teachers might have been to our self-esteem. I recall how in 5th grade, Miss Burns kept telling us how popular and beautiful Christine was compared to the rest of us. The strange thing was we all agreed with Miss Burns. I think it was because the elementary school was in New York City's Chinatown and 90% of the student body was Chinese. Anyone who was non-Chinese was considered unique. Christine was half Caucasian and half Chinese. Of course, her features would be different and subsequently be considered "beautiful". In that same vein, there are teachers who have damaged children by telling them how stupid and dumb they are. That kind of statement stays with a person forever and can take a long time to shake off.

The system that I grew up in defined "smart" as the person who got good grades and who didn't question authority. It took me many years later to realize that a smart person is more likely the person who had a questioning mind, who debated the teachers, and who didn't just easily accept what was put forth as truth.

Several years ago a friend of mine, a baby boomer medical doctor, made a comment that made me think. He said that it wasn't right that just because a person who worked with his hands and didn't have fancy academic credentials that such a person was not regarded as smart compared to someone with university degrees. He said a potter can create beautiful things that unfortunately society doesn't equate with smart. Another friend, not too long after that incident, was talking about farmers he knew in Wisconsin. He said those people knew alot more than books could ever teach them. He said they had "native intelligence". It was the first time I had heard that term. Then in June last year, that term came up again when Will Y., Clark M., and I were visiting Sue Damme at her cabin in Two Harbors. During that visit we met one of Sue's logging friends. Clark casually remarked that the fellow had native intelligence. It really made me realize that book knowledge isn't the only thing that can make a person intelligent.

In the Star Tribune (Minneapolis newspaper) dated Dec. 13, 1999 on page 1 of the Variety section, an article on the question of "how smart is smart" caught my attention. The article talked about emotional intelligence (EQ) and that in the new millennium it will be more important than intellectual intelligence (IQ). EQ refers to social and emotional skills and to a person's capacity for relationships and sensitivity to oneself and others. EQ is a survival skill, a learned response and promotes IQ. Feeling good about yourself is the basis for EQ. The more sure you are of yourself, the more you are capable of learning, and of giving of yourself. This is an intelligence that can't be measured like IQ and then the measurement is only anecdotally. I had not heard of this form of intelligence until I read the article. I had heard of the other 8 intelligences: bodily-kinesthetic (body smart), visual-spatial (art smart), verbal-linguistic (word smart), logical-mathematical (math smart), musical-rhythmic (music smart), naturalistic (category smart), interpersonal (people smart) and intrapersonal ("me" smart).

As a result of this M.Ed Cohort program, I have beome aware of the existence of all these different types of intelligence. I have had to step back and analyze my old assumptions of what is defined as "smart" and "how smart is smart". I've had to rethink my old approaches to teaching and understand that each situation will be different; thus, making it necessary to be flexible. There will be times when I will need to be the traditional teacher who has all the answers and then there will be other times when I will need to be the facilitator who provides the guidance to help move the learning along.

-- Anonymous, January 18, 2000