reverse snobbery re: academic achievement

[dazedandbemused]

The OP's conceptualized this term "reverse academic snobbery" as a function of an individual's education level. Terribly misguided. I fully stand behind my original comment.

To place my position in further context, I am an academic engineer and even in a STEM field, I still face onslaughts of family and close friends who are not entirely receptive of my continuing to a PhD. The gamut runs from 'you're an engineer- why don't you go out and work', to 'you should have went to medical school', etc. And these are people with considerably less education than I. Do I think that their sometimes hurtful comments and opinions about my academic successes are a function of their lower level of education? Absolutely not. In fact, once I began to be self-effacing and honest with myself, the reason why their comments hurt so much because therein lies elements of truth. I am taking a financial risk in endeavoring for tenure track position instead of working in industry or attending medical school. I am taking a risk in family planning. I am taking a risk in my own emotional sanity and mental health. These are indisputable facts. Sometimes it is good to be around those that are not shielded by the 'life of the mind' to keep life in perspective, unless it becomes emotionally unhealthy, and in that case it is time to restrain yourself at all costs from those individuals.

The OP specifically said that the people s/he is dealing with believe that STEM fields are the only ones worth pursuing. How does that read as accusing people of not having enough education? Plenty of well-educated people have said essentially the same thing to me.

[Elizabeth Reed]

I'm late to the party here, but will offer my 2 cents anyway...

 

A lot has been said already (Queen of Kale: amen!) - I'm just going to throw out some thoughts that seem relevant and worth considering in this context.

 

Seeking - or, perhaps more precisely, needing - validation from others is a sure path to unhappiness, resentment, and interpersonal strife. If more than minor, transient upset occurs when others "snub" or look-down-upon or whatever, the question that naturally follows is: why is it so deeply affecting to experience this? If it is a matter of personal insecurity then it may be beneficial to examine one's core beliefs regarding self-worth and ability. If it is not a matter of insecurity or fragile self-esteem, then the best way to "deal" with these experiences is probably with graciousness and unflappability. A serene smile and change of subject can do a wonderful job of pointing out others' rudeness without engaging in any yourself. There is no need to make everyone else see things the way you do, simply letting differences of opinion go is often the best option. 

 

Look for common ground, even if someone else is disparaging your interests or profession. If your PhD in comp lit comes up in conversation with someone in a tech field and they say, "studying literature is a waste of time, it's all fluff." You might try responding with, "I noticed your bumper sticker from Mt. Snow, do you ski or snowboard?" If there is really zero common ground, then you might consider smiling and nodding (if it's a family member), reducing or eliminating interactions with the person (if it's a personal acquaintance), or limiting interactions to whatever is necessary in order to get your work done (if it's a professional relationship). There needn't be a judgment involved -- you can recognize that there is little similarity between you and that you do not wish you were more like this other person without resorting to "Susy is an idiot, my perspective makes me a superior being." Holding that "I appreciate the perspective I have" is not incompatible with recognizing "her perspective works for her, and that's fine." Furthermore, it is often advisable to prioritize being effective over being "right" -- that is, unless there is something necessary or important to be gained by convincing someone else that you are right about X, Y, or Z, why not put that aside and seek the most effective way of managing your interactions?

 

Level of education is a rough indicator of intelligence, nothing more. Many intelligent people do not have a great deal of formal education, and many thoroughly educated people do not have a great deal of intelligence. Moreover, "intelligence" as a construct is a useful heuristic, but also a limited one. Mastery comes in many forms - someone who is a mathematical genius may be unable to lay brick properly; someone who is a brilliant essayist may be incapable of cooking anything that can't be heated in a microwave. Determining which of the various forms of intelligence and skill are superior to others isn't really important - what is important is determining where one's own strengths lie, what one enjoys, and how best to build a productive, meaningful, satisfying life based on those determinations and one's more abstract values. Success in the latter endeavor should go a long way toward minimizing one's reactivity to perceived slights. 

 

Intelligent is not synonymous with wise, perceptive, insightful, etc. The characteristic that "smart" connotes is, IMO, even less correlated with the latter qualities. You never know how someone else may broaden your perspective. When necessary, treating interactions with those one dislikes as though the exchange is a sociological experiment wherein you are gathering information about other belief systems, values, etc., can turn even the most tedious encounters into interesting ones. 

[imonedaful]

I think it is weird that you read for fun too...

 

Just kidding.

 

This is an interesting topic. It is funny to me that some people have this over romanticized idea in their head that academicians are super intellectuals. In reality, it is just a career choice. It may involve a different kind of thinking, require different training, etc. from different occupations but ultimately is a job that somebody chooses. It is not necessary to downplay or overplay your accomplishments. Just act like a normal person (I know normal can be a tough word to tackle for some academics ). If somebody has no interest in, or has no respect for what you do, that is not your problem. It is their problem for being close-minded. You should also be respectful and equally interested in what other people do. The kindergarten rule of treat others how you want to be treated can go a long way. 

 

People trying to downplay something you take pride in (whatever it may be) is a personality issue. Somebody who says something along the lines of what you do doesn't matter, everything you have accomplished is easy, or calls you an idiot has a complex that makes them for whatever reason want to feel superior to you. The only reason they say things like this to you is because they are trying to counteract their own problems with feeling inadequate.  Do not take it personal because it is not about you or what you do. However, whatever you do, do not stoop to their level. 

 

I have experienced this same type of issue in a different realm. I competed athletics collegiately as an undergrad and master's student. Often times, people have the same expectations of you to downplay being successful as an athlete. For instance, I went on a date with this guy once (it never made it past date one for good reason) and we were having a conversation about competing sports in college. He had never participated in a competitive sport in his life (on a high school level) yet told me that he believed that if he had just decided to compete sports in high school he could have gotten a college scholarship. I asked him why and he said "I am athletic, of course somebody would want me." It is quite frequently I hear somebody who was an average high school athlete tell me they could've gotten a scholarship to go to college but decided not to. I am not a fan of "could'ves" and assumptions but I generally ignore these people. However, this guy had taken it to a completely different level. Getting a college scholarship as an athlete is not easy, it is hard work (just like getting a PhD) and I feel like he was severely trying to downplay something I had spent a lot of time working towards. So I politely gave him a statistical example of how many people get recruited athletically to compete in college and how even fewer are rewarded scholarships (it is probably around 5% or less who even participate and only a portion are awarded scholarships... about the same for getting published in a great research journal). He was much quieter after our discussion. Fortunately for me, I never saw him again.

 

So, I wouldn't worry too much about people attempting to belittle your field. You have the right to defend what you love doing, but always be respectful. Sometimes people dislike what they do not understand. Having a discussion with somebody about what your job actually entails can help people gain better perspective and build a mutually respectful relationship. 

Edited May 27, 2013 by imonedaful

[wildviolet]

Seeking - or, perhaps more precisely, needing - validation from others is a sure path to unhappiness, resentment, and interpersonal strife.

 

Yes, but... we are constantly seeking validation from others in academia. First, as graduate students we seek/need validation from our advisors, other faculty, and colleagues. Then, we seek approval from our dissertation, job search, and tenure committees. If we teach and we actually care about the quality of our teaching, then we seek approval (or at least neutrality) from our students. The whole peer review process is infused with the need to validate and be validated. Quality control, research integrity, whatever you want to call it, is endemic to the academic enterprise (and probably the human condition).

 

So I guess the question for me is whose approval do I seek? Right now, I'm definitely concerned with what my advisor thinks of me and my work. While I am sure that he can separate the personal from the professional, I know that it helps my case tremendously if he actually likes me and thinks I'm funny and considerate as well as competent and thoughtful.

 

A care a little less about the approval of my colleagues. At the same time, I will encounter my colleagues (and those in the cohorts ahead of mine) at some time in the future (academia is a very very small world), so it doesn't make sense to burn any bridges. Generally, even if I dislike/disagree with someone, I know that being successful in academia is a combination of who you know and the quality of your work. Academics actually enjoy disagreeing with each other--it's the fuel that feeds intellectual imagination.

 

I care a little about approval from the undergraduates I teach. As a teacher, I know that I won't be able to reach all students. Some is good enough for me. There will always be some students who think you didn't grade fairly or that they didn't learn what they wanted to learn (rather than what you thought they were supposed to learn), etc.

 

So, I think it's impossible to escape the need to seek validation from others in academia (and perhaps in life as well). You can say, "screw it, I'm going to do whatever I want to do." But, that doesn't quite fly (for most people) in a world in which your colleagues are constantly evaluating the way you dress, the way you talk, and the way you work with others. At this point, I'm not in a position to be the gatekeeper of my own dreams. It's no wonder then, that academics tend to be certain types of people--and that they let in/approve of people who are quite similar to themselves. Thus, the (academic) world is produced and reproduced in the structures that we put in place (i.e., GRE scores, admissions, preliminary and comprehensive exams, written dissertations) and the practices we engage in (i.e., peer review, conferences, grant writing, job talks). To push the boundaries of what is acceptable/not acceptable and to change the structures and practices to promote diversity and multiculturalism (if you value those things), is indeed a difficult task.

[Andean Pat]

I only encountered this situation only once.

 

An old man who owns a local archive is known for (I found out later) that he hates university students. I realized this when I went to his local shop to chat with him and see if I could have access to the archive (I needed material he had). The curious thing was that he was condescending with university students, apparently, because he has never finished primary school but he had accomplished something nobody else had: scholars, researchers an humble students like me needed his archive.

 

Now, he disliked our "formal education" because he believed he had achieved the same or better education by self instruction/lots of reading (which I give him credit for). So in this case reading was a compensation for not having an official diploma. Thankfully, he got along really well with researchers that helped me, including my advisor, so I had no problem in accessing the archive.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Andean Pat

[CageFree]

I think there are two separate issues here which keep getting conflated.

 

1. "Snobbery" by STEM types who believe that the humanities and social sciences are inferior to their own fields.

 

2. Negativity by people with less (or little) formal education, which can be due to anything from insecurity to a sense of "I accomplished X, Y and Z without your education." 

 

For #1, I think one major issue is that *some* STEM majors did well in AP-level classes in high school (like US History) and maybe did ok in a survey class or two for general ed... so they think that they know what the "field" really is about and what it is that we do. That, combined with the stereotype that "humanities people are not good at math," makes them feel superior. Of course, those of us who majored in the humanities (and especially those who went on to grad school) know there are HUGE differences between high school history, survey classes, upper division work, and graduate work. And not all humanities people are bad at math.. I majored in a STEM field when I started college and HATED every second of it, which is why I switched out. 

 

Note that I said *SOME.* My partner majored in a science field and now teaches math, and he will the the first to admit he can't write a paper to save his life. Our relationship works because he respects what I do and I respect what he does.

 

For #2, there really isn't much you can do except deflect or avoid contact. My father didn't finish HS and to this day he still considers my education a waste of money (even though I went to a public university and he didn't pay a dime of it) because I switched to the humanities. My first marriage collapsed in part because my partner was very insecure about my education (and I only had a BA, and no plans to go to grad school). He kept shoving it in my face how I acted 'superior' because I had gone to college. He had only finished high school and joined the military, and even though this was not an issue for me, it clearly was a huge problem for him. (And clearly I picked a guy who was a lot like my father the first time around. Didn't make that mistake again).

 

I would add that the educational emphasis at the high school level on "going to college" has created resentment in people whose skill set and abilities might not be suited for university but might do great in vocational or technical fields (a good mechanic is worth his or her weight in gold). Schools have eliminated vocational training in favor of college prep, and that has alienated a significant proportion of the population. You don't need to go to college to be successful or even to make money.Some type of education is generally a requirement, but high schools make it seem like if you are better at building houses than you are at chemistry, you're not "living up to your potential," which is BS.

 

At the same time, we have a political culture that devalues education as "elitist" and "snobbish," and that combined with the fact that a college degree nowadays can't guarantee you a job at McDonald's, have emboldened people who chose not to pursue higher education (or were unable due to a variety of circumstances) to try to bring down those who have.

 

I think it's just symptomatic of a larger issue in this country, which is class warfare promoted by politicians whereby people tear each other down to their "level" rather than demanding that living standards be better for everyone. Look at the backlash against public employee unions, for example. People in the private sector complain that "they don't have unions protecting them" so public employees (teachers, firefighters, etc.) shouldn't either. A better solution would be for private employees to demand collective bargaining rights, given that unions helped forge the middle class in this country and make it accessible to people who often did NOT have formal education beyond high school.

 

And let's not even get started on this country's war on education (especially in the humanities), which is the reason why few people know why we have unions in the first place. 

Edited May 28, 2013 by CageFree

[juilletmercredi]

I think more often than not it's a phenomenon much like "reverse racism" - in that the very people who feel they are being wronged are in fact simply worried they will not get the advantage they feel they are owed. 

 

I was trying to say this and/or put a finger on what bothered me about this post/idea and Queen of Kale just hit the nose on the head with this.

 

Why would you even care if certain people think you're a bit ridiculous for getting a PhD?  First of all, getting a PhD IS a bit ridiculous (I'm getting one myself).  Embrace that you are doing something that is just a bit crazy, and laugh at yourself.  Second of all, I don't see how this would actually affect you other than just being annoyed.  So I would ignore them.  Just chuckle at their jokes, ignore their rants or excuse yourself when they happen.

 

I have family that's kind of like this, although they are changing.  Tell me I should've gone to medical school; by this time I could've been a doctor, etc.  I just ignore them.  I completely agree with Soul - their comments bothered me the most when I wasn't sure of myself and what I was doing, when I was berating my own self for getting a PhD.  Now that I am more confident in myself and my life's choices - and have made peace with the things I have done - those comments don't bother me anymore.  I just shrug or laugh them off because I like myself and I don't regret anything I've done.  And you know what, interestingly enough, they've stopped making them.

 

Third of all, I find that people who have this kind of attitude usually have it because they have been looked down upon by someone with a higher degree at some point in their lives, sometimes multiple times, and they feel (rightfully) bitter about that.

[Swagato]

I think there are two separate issues here which keep getting conflated.

 

1. "Snobbery" by STEM types who believe that the humanities and social sciences are inferior to their own fields.

 

2. Negativity by people with less (or little) formal education, which can be due to anything from insecurity to a sense of "I accomplished X, Y and Z without your education." 

 

For #1, I think one major issue is that *some* STEM majors did well in AP-level classes in high school (like US History) and maybe did ok in a survey class or two for general ed... so they think that they know what the "field" really is about and what it is that we do. That, combined with the stereotype that "humanities people are not good at math," makes them feel superior. Of course, those of us who majored in the humanities (and especially those who went on to grad school) know there are HUGE differences between high school history, survey classes, upper division work, and graduate work. And not all humanities people are bad at math.. I majored in a STEM field when I started college and HATED every second of it, which is why I switched out. 

 

Note that I said *SOME.* My partner majored in a science field and now teaches math, and he will the the first to admit he can't write a paper to save his life. Our relationship works because he respects what I do and I respect what he does.

 

For #2, there really isn't much you can do except deflect or avoid contact. My father didn't finish HS and to this day he still considers my education a waste of money (even though I went to a public university and he didn't pay a dime of it) because I switched to the humanities. My first marriage collapsed in part because my partner was very insecure about my education (and I only had a BA, and no plans to go to grad school). He kept shoving it in my face how I acted 'superior' because I had gone to college. He had only finished high school and joined the military, and even though this was not an issue for me, it clearly was a huge problem for him. (And clearly I picked a guy who was a lot like my father the first time around. Didn't make that mistake again).

 

I would add that the educational emphasis at the high school level on "going to college" has created resentment in people whose skill set and abilities might not be suited for university but might do great in vocational or technical fields (a good mechanic is worth his or her weight in gold). Schools have eliminated vocational training in favor of college prep, and that has alienated a significant proportion of the population. You don't need to go to college to be successful or even to make money.Some type of education is generally a requirement, but high schools make it seem like if you are better at building houses than you are at chemistry, you're not "living up to your potential," which is BS.

 

At the same time, we have a political culture that devalues education as "elitist" and "snobbish," and that combined with the fact that a college degree nowadays can't guarantee you a job at McDonald's, have emboldened people who chose not to pursue higher education (or were unable due to a variety of circumstances) to try to bring down those who have.

 

I think it's just symptomatic of a larger issue in this country, which is class warfare promoted by politicians whereby people tear each other down to their "level" rather than demanding that living standards be better for everyone. Look at the backlash against public employee unions, for example. People in the private sector complain that "they don't have unions protecting them" so public employees (teachers, firefighters, etc.) shouldn't either. A better solution would be for private employees to demand collective bargaining rights, given that unions helped forge the middle class in this country and make it accessible to people who often did NOT have formal education beyond high school.

 

And let's not even get started on this country's war on education (especially in the humanities), which is the reason why few people know why we have unions in the first place. 

 

This is a really wonderful post. I like that you encompass so many different issues which nonetheless relate to, and influence, each other. Certainly, the valorisation of STEM (politically, and in popular culture, but also by the 'market') has contributed to creating the Scientism bubble. Since the sciences and the humanities have, unfortunately, separated, I suppose we had better learn to live with it. To that end I always try to point out that science and the scientific practice of today work toward answering questions and solving problems, but they consistently fail to formulate questions, and they fail to provide qualitative reasoning. 

 

But you are also right in saying that, separately, the post-WW2 college bubble created the mass illusion that everyone should, or indeed deserves, to achieve collegiate education. And then there's the myth of everyone being (born?) equal. Both of which are patently false. They may be nice things to think about, but they're simply illogical. The child born to a starving family in Nigeria is unlikely to be "born equal" (in any sense) to the scion of a Vanderbilt or a Rothschild. Even if I allow that they may both possess the same potential, the different resources and support structures available to them will all but ensure vastly different lives. For all general purposes, some people should be encouraged to pursue collegiate and higher education, and others should be encouraged to do what they do best. This need not be related to education, and there frankly is no shame in that.

 

As it stands, it is indeed sad that sustained research is perceived as airy abstraction/laziness/elitism. Yet, given all the different forces that collaborate in creating conditions that encourage this perception, I'm not sure what can be done until those forces themselves are confronted. 

 

And that requires political will that nobody in this nation appears to possess. 

[NeuroTU]

"What other people think of you is none of your business". Live and learn that quote and life will suddenly be so much more enjoyable!

[Swagato]

On the other hand, we do get by in life based quite a bit upon what other people (an interviewer, a search committee, etc.) think of you. So I won't entirely dismiss the value of perception of one's self by others both within and without one's field of work. 

[St Andrews Lynx]

Hmmm... I'm thinking that if I should simply not-care that they are reverse-snobbing me then it should be OK for me to regular-snob them.  And if they don't like it, they can just ignore it!  If they can dish it out, they can take it!

 

I don't think this "reverse snobbery" comes from a vacuum. I think it is less "arrogance" on the less-educated people's part than a defensive response to a previous or ongoing snub against their lack of education. The best approach to alleviating "reverse snobbery" is surely to treat everybody with equal levels of respect & politeness, whether they are a professor or toilet cleaner? 

[margarets]

^{Wow!  I had no idea this thread had developed like this!}

 

^{Anyway, here's some more context.  This is my current workplace where, for reasons I have never been able to figure out, I seem to be perceived as not too bright, with not too many skills and little capability to learn new things.  I'm basing this on accumulated comments and the like over the years, rather than just one incident.  It's as if my prior education and experience count for literally nothing.}

^{I did not have this problem in previous jobs, and if anything I'm more professional and present myself better than I did when I was younger, so it's really odd that I have this problem in this job.  It matters because it's definitely holding me back in terms of getting my work taken seriously, getting to work on projects where I can develop my skills, and so on, and all of *that* inhibits my career progress.  I've been stagnating and nothing I've tried seems to work.}

 

^{Trust me, it's not like the people I work with are all geniuses and I simply can't keep up.  These are people who struggle on a daily basis with the routine tasks of their very average jobs.  (I'm not being snarky, that's actually true!)}

 

^{The update is that the time has come to tell people in the office that I'm doing a graduate degree part-time.  (It requires an adjustment to my work schedule, which is the only reason why I bring it up at all.)  My boss's reaction was as flat as possible:  "that's fine".} 

 

^{It's occurred to me that since most of these people did not go to university, they might honestly have no idea what graduate study involves or that, in general, people who do it can at the very least learn new things, and aren't usually stupid.  I think they might see it as more like a hobby, but irrelevant to my capabilities as a worker.  (Because, you know, doing grad school part-time while working full-time is like SO EASY.)}

 

^{Now I'm looking at the situation as a tiny sociological study.  What does it take for a smart person to get a group of people who think she's dumb to change their minds, even a little bit?}

Edited August 14, 2013 by margarets

[zapster]

 

^{Now I'm looking at the situation as a tiny sociological study.  What does it take for a smart person to get a group of people who think she's dumb to change their minds, even a little bit?}

 

The smart person should stop caring about what the group of people thinks - caring too much places inhibitions on what the smart person says or does, thus not allowing the "true smart self" (TSS) to show itself. Stop caring, and it becomes easier for the TSS to show itself, hopefully changing a few minds along the way.

[wildviolet]

^{Now I'm looking at the situation as a tiny sociological study.  What does it take for a smart person to get a group of people who think she's dumb to change their minds, even a little bit?}

 

Honestly, why do you even care to change their minds? It seems like you don't value them, so why should they value you? There's nothing special about going to graduate school, and there are many ways to be "smart," not just book smart or school smart.

[margarets]

I wrote this in my post from yesterday.

 

^{It matters because it's definitely holding me back in terms of getting my work taken seriously, getting to work on projects where I can develop my skills, and so on, and all of *that* inhibits my career progress.} 

 

^{In the workplace, it absolutely does matter what people think of you.  Look at all the studies that show that various physical characteristics influence how people are perceived in the workplace and how it directly affects their income. It's no different for other characteristics, especially anything subjective like "competence" or "interpersonal skills".  I don't care about it in the core of my being, it's not the basis of my self-esteem.  It's more of a tactical thing.}

 

There's nothing special about going to graduate school

 

^{Um, OK, then why are we all here, stressing & freaking out over every little word in our SoPs and sinking into depression with every rejection?   Why care so much about this or that school's ranking or prestige, if it's "nothing special"?  Why bother going at all?}  

 

^{And I never disputed that there are other ways of being smart.  My issue how to change perceptions.}

[ANDS!]

Um, OK, then why are we all here, stressing & freaking out over every little word in our SoPs and sinking into depression with every rejection?   Why care so much about this or that school's ranking or prestige, if it's "nothing special"?  Why bother going at all?  

 

Speak for yourself?

[danisj]

This is an amazing thread. It pretty much hit the nail on the head for me. I've struggled with this all of my life. It's only this year that I have learned to ignore them. At 23, it's time for me to embrace my academic side and go to grad school. I was smart in high school, but I made no effort whatsoever. I didn't read, was a procrastinator and I took the easy way out all of the time. Low achievers who end up doing well enough are "cool." I wanted to be cool so I did the bare minimum. I made it to my dream college, but I kept up the same work ethic. This did not fly in college, but I didn't have a good support group to break out of my bad habits. After being in a job I hate for two years, I regret downplaying my academic achievement. I should have worked harder and been proud about academic achievements. It only hurt me in college and I can see it hurting me in the future.

 

At the same time, we have a political culture that devalues education as "elitist" and "snobbish," and that combined with the fact that a college degree nowadays can't guarantee you a job at McDonald's, have emboldened people who chose not to pursue higher education (or were unable due to a variety of circumstances) to try to bring down those who have.

 

We have to ignore these people. People are nonsense. We can't always figure out their motives behind what they say, so there is no need to let it affect us. I have to make up for the time I lost by listening to these people. I just hope that it's not too late.

[Chiqui74]

I hate walking on egg shells and while I don't go around annoucning I'm a grad student (I also have a full time job not related to my studies), I don't donwplay it either.  I work too hard at work and I too work hard at school to allow anyone to make me feel bad for wanting to pursue an advanced degree....or two. They can think whatever they want, but I don't let it bother me.  The saddest part is when said dismissive attitude comes from close family members.