i've been to more than one high school and the one i'm currently at has a really different social dynamic than the others--there are really few cliques and if they exist, it's more so self acknowledgment than anything. we don't have a group of populars, or nerds, or jocks, or musicians, or anything like that (my old school was REALLY divided...as in parts of the cafe were just naturally assumed taken by those cliques and you didn't really go sit if you didn't belong). my school is more of a merging thing; most of the people involved in Student Activities/Leadership are naturally more popular, but also very heavily involved in sports and school (since there are requirements and voting to get into those positions). So the top 10% of the school in terms of marks is also the top 10% of the school in terms of involvement and sports and usually popularity. the top academic spot though, currently i think goes to someone who isn't that involved but is exceptionally smart. the only real divisions that exist within the school might be ethnic ones (we've got a large Asian bloc and they sorta stick together and produce some of the students with the highest averages and as a whole aren't that involved except perhaps in music or maybe chess or math club or something but rarely sports, not to generalize but just as an observation). Last year's valedictorian wasn't the person with the highest average but she had a high one nonetheless (around 94), along with extensive involvement in academic competitions and sports competitions (and student council prez) so she was truly the best candidate. She represented pretty much every aspect of student life so she was a great choice. On the other hand, the valedictorian for my sister's year at her school had a 74 average (theirs was solely a popular vote; no teacher involvement at all). it just doesn't really seem that good of a choice to have the valedictorian (who is supposed to represent the best graduating student) be someone with such a low average. He wasn't even in the top quarter of the graduating class in terms of marks, wasn't that involved except in a musical and a sports team, but was just known as the funny guy. The final speech was amusing i suppose but there were many people far more qualified to get that position than he was.

Being valedictorian means absolutely nothing, and the fact that it's a popularity contest shouldn't bother anyone except those who manage 98 averages yet cannot grasp any nuance of the way the real world works if it isn't memorizable from a textbook.

Being valedictorian should have nothing to do with grades at all, and there should be no pre-selection by teachers ever.

Here's why. http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/files/aw_ednext.pdf (If your attention span is particularly poor, skip to the graph on page 5.)

why should being valedictorian have nothing to do with grades "AT ALL"?

you go to school primarily to learn. the person who best exemplifies the ideal student role should at least be able to manage an average that puts them in the top 10% of the graduating class. they should also be involved in other things at school--leadership, sports, arts, competitions, etc. but marks should be a relevant factor. i'd rather have the super achiever with the marks, the sports, and the leadership who i might not like win that spot than the guy with crap marks and no involvement who just knows enough people

i took a look at the graph. it's easy to just post an article and then expect everyone to just read all the way through it. summarize your main argument points and post them here rather than just posting someone else's

My main argument, which annie seemed to infer just fine, is that selection of valedictorian candidates based on grades significantly disadvantages non-white racial groups, due to substantial differences between groups in the trade-off between grades and popularity.

yeah same here, the social/economic tensions is definitely not as magnified/intense in canada, i can easily name popular/smart valedictorian-worthy kids from all ethnicities in my school (which is at least 80% asian).

---

Math/CA Waterloo '13

so you're saying that we should set aside the marks requirement for valedictorian position so the disadvantage you are ASSUMING exists for non white minorities will be leveraged? what about the fact that other studies might show that white students are usually more popular anyway? to be a valedictorian is to be the ideal student--good in school, liked by peers, and involved. If someone can't get over a perceived social barrier (which frankly i don't see as existing within canada as much anyway), then do they really deserve that spot? why not take away the popularity part then, and just have it based on selection on marks alone (so in the tradeoff between marks and popularity the students can choose marks instead)? what makes that worse than choosing it based just on popularity? frankly i just see it as idiotic to change the standard for someone who is supposed to exemplify and ideal person. it's not difficult to be involved in school, have good standing with your peers, and still manage at least an 85 average.

It should be determined 100% by a vote of the graduating class. They are picking somebody to represent them at their graduation. Marks, involvement, etc. should have no bearing at all.

---

-Stringer

same goes with me, my school has IB too, and i feel that if it went by marks, an IB person would win. However this person would not preresent the graduating class, since they only mingle and interact with other IB people, and have IB classes with each other

---

UTM - Commerce '12

Totally agree.