Accomplishments

In the age of Reality Television, one interesting feature has come to light for me. The issue of competition has become the foundational basis for nearly all reality shows. Joanie and I have become fans of the show "Top Chef" - we've watched several seasons of it. Hits like "Dancing with the Stars" and "American Idol" have created a whole industry built up around competition between either well known stars in unfamiliar settings (ballroom dancing) or unknowns seeking to become known (to become the next "American Idol"). The one thing they all have in common, like the game show formats upon which they seem to be based, is that they engage the viewer in the "cliff hanger" motif. You never know who is going to win the competition.
The shows on television today that constantly receive the highest ratings are the major sports competitions - Super Bowls, World Series, NCAA Basketball Tournament, NASCAR races like the Daytona 500, and New Years Day Bowl Games, etc. Like Reality TV, they are competition based. This emphasis on competition leaks into the corporate world, into politics, and even into churches that seem to be in competition with other churches for parishioners, bigger budgets, and larger numbers. When High School athletics are on TV and the networks put on shows like "Kidnation" that glory in competition at the lowest ages; when parents fight to get their toddlers into the "perfect" Kindergarten or fear that their children's future educational lives may be ruined by not getting into a prestigious preschool; when young people assign value and importance to other people's lives based on what car they drive or what clothes they wear, competition has gotten out of hand. As my son, Jonathan, once said about Survivor, "How can you say that a bunch of people running around half-naked on a deserted island being filmed by dozens of camera people and then having those pictures sent out over the airwaves to millions and millions of people - how is that reality?"
Somehow we have to change the standard by which we evaluate what is foundational in people's lives. Competition isn't working. Something else has to supplant it that will make a better society... a better world. Maybe the better standard would be accomplishment (the symbol at the top of this post is the Chinese symbol for accomplishment). I think accomplishing something is far more important than beating someone in a competition. A child's crayon drawing is a far greater accomplishment than getting a soccer trophy. It shows development, creativity, and a growing understanding of the world in which the child is living. A soccer trophy means that your child has physically grown or developed at a greater speed than his peers. Eventually the others will catch up and pass them. What will they do then when their competitive edge is lost? Steroids? While I love sports and enjoyed my children playing them, it is not a great judge of their future accomplishments. Some traits from the world of competition may very well help in other phases of life, the ability to accomplish something is far superior to being able to win competitions at an early age.
Here at Fuller you hear a lot of students talk about education in terms of competition. This is especially true for those who want to go beyond the Master's Degree and get into a Ph.D. program. You have to get good grades to get into Graduate School. I understand that. In my own case, my strongest argument for getting into the Ph.D. program at Fuller may have been the high grade point average I accumulated in my Master's work. I understand how competition for spots can be fierce. However, the best thing about graduating with a Master's Degree was the learning that I received during the experience. When I received my diploma, it was the sense of accomplishment that I felt that was the most rewarding thing of all. Getting the grade was merely a way of judging how well I had accomplished the goals for learning in the course. It was not a competition. It was a challenge. I like challenges.
By the way, grades came out today for both the Spring and Summer quarters. I got my first A on a paper for the Ph.D. program. The first two papers I handed in (for the Fall and Winter Quarters of my first year) received A-. For the Spring Quarter I received an A. The difference between the two at this level of education is that an A- is a quality paper. An A paper is not of greater quality but has a deeper and better organization of thought that makes it of publishable quality. The difference is not really a subtle one. These are being graded by professors, all of whom have published several books and numerous articles and papers. They know the difference between a good paper and one that others in the field of your expertize will find meaningful. Getting an A is an accomplishment. No one is ever going to look and see if I got an A or an A- in any of my doctoral seminars. They will only look to see if I have the degree and completed my dissertation. However, it means a great deal to know that I may have reached a place where my thoughts and my work will be valued by others. It may mean that I have taken my first measurable step toward becoming a scholar. At the very least it is an accomplishment. And that feels good!
By the way, I got an A in Latin, too. That's not an accomplishment. That's a miracle.