Autism (and it's associated disorders) are very strange. I'm not sure about the ratio of non-autistic to autistic people in western society, so I can't make a claim like "we all know someone with autism." Personally, I do know someone with the condition, and it's quite surreal to see someone who, despite being surrounded by people who speak English and communicate in the same way most other people do, has created their own means of communicating and interacting with the world. It does make you appreciate the ability to communicate.
On Facebook, there is a thing going around called the Autism Spectrum Quotient Test, which basically tells you how strong the autistic traits in your personality are. 0 means you have absolutely none while 50 means you have nothing but, with the whole numbers in between giving you a mild indication of where you sit. The average for men is 17, while the average for women is 15. I scored 13, indicating I have less autistic traits than the average man or woman.
Autism is defined by the American Psychiatric Association as "abnormalities in social and communication development, in the presence of marked repetitive behaviour and limited imagination." These may be mild or extreme, but all people exhibit some traits of autism, even if they're specific to certain times or subjects. What was interesting to read was the article in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders on the test, published 17/05/01. According to said article, students of maths and science scored considerably higher than those of humanities and social sciences. Indeed, British Mathematical Olympiad winners scored 24 on average. Analyses of students scoring greater than or equal to 32 yielded that of the 11, 7 met the criteria for Aspergers Syndrome, a form of high-functioning autism.
Traditionally, when one is seen as talented at maths or science, they are called "smart". Especially in high school, if someone scores well in maths and science tests, they're a smart kid who's going to go far. Meanwhile, doing well at English, Drama, Art or Music doesn't earn you such accolades. And yet, consider how the subjects are taught. "Marked repetitive behaviour"? You mean like grinding out the same problem fifty times? All through high school, I persistently bitched to teachers about "why should we do all 50 of these questions? 30 of them are pretty much the same and the next 20 are pretty much the same but slightly harder." And yet, it was the kids who memorised the process without really understanding it who scored top marks. It might have just been me, but do you know who I thought the smartest kid was? The guy who listened to the theory behind the problem, has a quick read of the process and solved the hardest question first. Did he/she need to go back and do all the simple ones? Of course not, because they got it the first time.
Memorising facts doesn't make you smart. It makes you a computer. And yet we reward people with the ability to commit to memory processes of solving problems and grinding out the same ideas over and over again. You could almost be forgiven for thinking that public school brings the autism out. This is hyperbole, of course, but if you're worried about people not communicating well enough, socialising effectively or demonstrating enough creativity, maybe we need to look at the high school mince meat grinder (Pink Floyd imagery for the win).
Society needs people who are very good at maths and science as much as it needs writers, thinkers and communicators. It's indisputable. However, it would be nice to see some equal recognition for people from different schools. How about, instead of engineers being "smart" and imaginative people being "out there" or "a bit nutty," we do our best to acknowledge the differences between the minds of people and the different skills that contribute to our society. And yes, this is all because I used to get called smart when I studied Engineering and now I don't because I'm studying Journalism and Writing. I'm petty, get over it.
No comments:
Post a Comment