I deplore the use of numbers to define achievements. In using numbers as a shorthand, a tool of abstraction, we paradoxically reduce and magnify the subject, thereby inexorably distorting it.

Case in point: Assigning a numerical grade to an examined essay is subjective and reductive. No two examiner will read and interpret the essay in the same way - perhaps one would see insight and astuteness whilst the other sees inconsistency and bias. At best an essay can only be said to have merit or demerit in a multifaceted way, where each opinion is equally viable. Numbers will never be able to accurately distill the essence of an essay, nor can individual essays be compared above aspects of factual accuracy, subject content and grammatical forms.

Disclaimer: I believe the reductive nature of numbers can only be said for disciplines which are inherently subjective, such as in literature, history, aesthetics, ethics, social sciences, etc. (which is why I used the term "essay"). Numbers quite accurately represent achievement where there is a "correct answer" (at least one that is the prevailing view held by the larger community) in such subjects as mathematics and the natural sciences.

Another case in point: Rankings, revered numbers that induce obsession in some people and institutions, are examples of the misleading, reductive nature of numbers. They seek to establish a clear, unequivocal hierarchy of achievement or value, where there might be complexity and ambiguity. College rankings, that which drive many college-goers to the point of obsession, are especially arbitrary and misguiding. Some college rankings give weight to college prestige/reputation or student satisfaction, and such aspects that cannot be objectively determined. Moreover, how does one determine which factor of college rankings should be given more or less weight such that an objective comparison can be made between colleges? Clearly this is an impossible task as the value (and hence weight) of each factor must be personally determined by the college-goer, and as such a college's value differs by the individual. Perhaps rankings are good shorthands to gain a broad, albeit shallow, approximation of value from which further in-depth assessments can be made, but they should not be treated as more than the subjective opinions they really are.

I lament the fact that in my pursuit of college admission, my chances lie squarely on my "stats", the numbers which define my achievements. Sure, I did extremely well in my SAT and above average for my GCE 'A' Levels, but I hardly consider them my strongest suit nor the defining culmination of my years of general education. It might sound hypocritical to say these numbers don't matter in the aftermath of arduously working to achieve them, but I truly feel that they really don't, or at least not as much as others might make them out to be. Yet the truth is people will judge me based on these paper achievements which both minimise my achievements (through abstraction) and magnify them (through comparison with other abstract numbers). Such superficial interpersonal assessments, that which is systematically encouraged and perpetuated through modern society, are perhaps what led to the preponderance of people being locked into what Thoreau so aptly called "lives of quiet desperation", whereby people associate their worth and achievements to the superficial and arbitrary - from prestige in college, to brand in material goods.

0 Comments

Name Website		Comment smaller | bigger
		Write the displayed characters Add Comment