'Hidden Intellectualism' by Gerald Graff: Summary & Analysis

Graff’s main purpose in writing this essay is to critique the education system and its inability to divulge the hidden treasures of knowledge encased in student’s hobbies, street smarts, extracurricular actives and social interest. Graff gives a supporting experience to his claim by using his childhood as it relates to this issue. His love of sports and unending quest

“Hidden Intellectualism,” an excerpt from They Say/I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing by Gerald Graff, explains the importance of having diverse intellectualism and helping the kids with street smart intellectualism turn it into academic growth. The author’s claim in this excerpt is that school and colleges are missing out on an opportunity of helping the street smart kids grow their intelligence into good academic work. The significance in the author’s claim is that the students who believe they don’t have much of an opportunity in school or other things related to academics, realize they do.

“Hidden Intellectualism” an article written by Gerald Graff is a very interesting piece of writing intended for the audience of high school and college educators. Throughout the text Graff argues that high schools and colleges are failing to incorporate topics that interest street smart students into the school system, which is therefore resulting in street smart students failing to do well academically in high school and college. He uses his own personal anecdote to support this. Graff successfully persuades his audience that high school and colleges can develop a student’s intellectualism by using topics that already interests students. He successfully does this through the use of development, conventions, and evidence.

Everyone knows some young person who is impressively street smart but does poorly in school. What a waste, we think, that one who is so intelligent about so many things in life seems unable to apply that intelligence to academic work. This is how Gerald Graff’s essay titled “Hidden Intellectualism" begins. Although this is not Graff's personal belief, he is approaching us with a common stereotype. After reading Graff's article I would say that I agree with him from beginning to end. Gerald Graff begins with differentiating between “book smarts” and “street smarts". Book smart is defined as a person who is intelligent and very well educated academically. People that are book smart can write and discuss subjects taught in school. On the

Gerald Graff’s article “Hidden Intellectualism” asserts that academic settings, such as public schools, need to incorporate students’ personal interests into the school policy so that students are more inclined to engage in an academic mindset. The problem, however, is that the school systems do not attempt to tie non-academic material with academic assignments, therefore neglecting students the opportunity to engage in intriguing, intellectual conversation (Graff 245). Targeting students, educators, and administrators, Graff makes an effective explicit, qualified claim of policy as he utilizes the rhetorical strategies of ethos, logos, and pathos.

The essay Hidden Intellectualism is based upon whether street smart should be considered equal with academic intelligence. Many people have remarkable street intelligence, but have very little academic intelligence. The author of the essay, Gerald Graff uses his personal examples before college of possessing street smarts then developing academic intelligence. More often than not students prefer video games, clothes designers and sports. “It’s a good bet that students get hooked on reading and writing by doing term papers on Source, they will eventually get to On Liberty” (Graff, pg 250) most likely students would prefer reading a book and writing a paper on a topic of their choice, and be better informed about the subject to write the paper,

Graff never thought that he would research intellectualism, not even a bit. However, based on his hood experiences he didn’t know that he was in training for it. First of all, Graff described his neighborhood environment in Chicago as a postwar society. The hood was surrounded by people with a separate mind set, which made it hard to fit in. While it was hard to live there, he found his personal intellectualism inside the hood when he had to maintain a strong position for his arguments. Graff uses himself as an example too, when he decides to trade his preferred sports team, everyone that knew him would make fun of him and criticize his choice. He struggled to persuade his reasons to defend his new

When it comes to the topic of hidden intellectualism, most of us will readily agree that a lot of students are seen to have an issue with it. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of is it the students fault. Whereas some are convinced it is, others maintain it is at the fault of the teachers or professors. Gerald Graff has his argument that in many cases book smarts can be hidden in street smarts. I believe that kids that struggle with their talents being hidden behind “street smarts” need a certain amount of attention and focus to help them acquire their abilities and strengths.

Graff opens “Hidden Intellectualism” by presenting one of the piece’s three major points of focus. He states, “What doesn’t occur to us, though, is that schools and colleges might be at fault for missing the opportunity to tap into such street smarts and channel them into good academic work” (Graff 264). By introducing his argument as something that is commonly dismissed by a large group of people, he utilizes the writing template in They Say I Say for introducing what “they say” as a tool to keep the big

Academic work should not define intelligence nor should a job define ability; a person, regardless of grades, degrees, or job title, is an intellect. Together, Gerald Graff, a coauthor of They Say I say, professor, and former anti-intellect, author of "Hidden Intellectualism," and Mike Rose, professor, author, and in depth thinker, author of "Blue-Collar Brilliance," share two different perspectives on what an intellect truly is. Yet, both writings hold meaningful points and experiences to prove who qualifies to be an intellect. Society continuously focuses on what leads to a successful and rounded life: go to school, graduate, go back to school, get a degree, and then a job. It is believed that these high expectations of higher academics enables one to be more successful is correct; however, it is not. It is a person’s individual goals that give them the success they wish to have whether that be education, volunteering, or donating. Also, street smarts is not to be overlooked; a person with common sense can know more than a Doctor. Typically, a person can have either common sense or intelligence, not both. Street smarts is, without a doubt, a superior quality to possess as it encompasses more in life than just a degree does. For example, it is more appropriate to know how to cross a street properly in life than know how to perform a craniotomy. Furthermore, one does not gain knowledge and life lessons through school alone, but through experience,

As I read Gerald Graff’s Hidden Intellectualism I agree that “street smart” can also be adapted in a scholarly setting. Graff attest that “street smart” overpowers academic intellect. Graff uses his childhood experience to prove his arguments. I’m on Graff’s side of argument on his beliefs that “street smart” is gained before academic intellect. In my own experience as a child growing up, I was around agriculture from the day I was

“There must be many buried or hidden forms of intellectualism that do not get channeled into academic work…” (Graff 22), this said by non-other than Gerald Graff himself within his article “Hidden Intellectualism”. This quote being his overall main point of the entire article. Graff meaning that students can be intellectual even if they feel like they aren’t a book smart student. Graff argues that students who are street smart could also be intellectual. Within Graff’s article, there are a few arguments he makes that I agree with but also a few that I disagree with. “Hidden Intellectualism” offers various points about how every student possesses intellectualism but it’s also possible that not every student possesses this trait.

The issue being debated in the article “Hidden Intellectualism” by Gerald Graff is street smarts versus book smarts. Gerald Graff is an English professor at the University of Illinois and has written many books. The author claims that people are better off if they are more street smart than book smart. The authors is very persuasive using real life examples. I although disagree with this claim. I think that you need an equal mix of both street and book smarts.

This essay Schall wrote is simily a complex version of the book he wrote in 1988 “Another Sort of Learning”. In the essay he makes a point stating “Just because someone is smart, does not mean he is wise” (pg.2) and that we need to remember that the “objection to the “intellectual” is not that he uses his brain, but that he uses it wrongly.” (pg.2). Most in my opinion would agree with this statement, in the sense of “street smarts” and “book smarts”, just because you’re book smart does not mean you’re street smart, and just because you’re street smart, does not mean you’re book smart; almost in the same sense of being smart and wise. The idea of an intellectual human being is one that can obtain knowledge in a complex order, therefore Schall states that one who is not intellectual just uses their brains incorrectly, but how can one use their brain wrong? Everyone has a different though process and a way of interpreting things? However by the power of the definition of “intellect”, he is in everyway correct that one who

What is Anti-Intellectualism? According to Dictionary.com, Anti-Intellectualism is defined as being hostile toward intellectuals and the modern academic, artistic, social, religious worlds as well as other theories that are associated with them. Although Richard Hofstadter’s Anti-Intellectualism in American Life won the 1964 Pulitzer Prize, it is now almost fifty-fives out of date. Not to mention the ideas within the book are seen as suggesting a type of self-defensive justification rather than an actual deep investigation. Hoftstader used the aftermath of McCarthyism and how there were wide range witch hunts among the academics and progressives and how that is influenced by the reform, socialists and communist movements between the World Wars. Applying McCarthyism, Hoftstader looks at the tension from four different perspectives: religion, politics, business, self-help culture, and education. Taking into consideration the year the book was written, each angle is explored from the colonial period up until the 1950s. Throughout the introduction, Hofstadter makes it clear that the purpose of the book is to shed a little light on our cultural problems. Focusing on the social and political phenomenon of “anti-intellectualism” Hofstadter applies broad abstractions to social issues. He explains how applications of the abstracts presented by intellectuals can ultimately pose a threat to the social and political ambitions of certain and specific individuals. Because of this,