Running Head: CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS 1

A Culture of Competition and Success and the Effects of Stress on the Student Generation Laura Wake-Ramos Pennsylvania State University

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS Abstract

College starts in kindergarten (Robinson, 2006). In this generation, every three-yearold goes to preschool, which prepares for kindergarten, which prepares for elementary school, which prepares for middle school, which prepares for high school, which prepares for college, because college is the finish line in order to be successful. This generation has heard about competition and individual success since they were babies (Jill, 2012). This paper focuses on how the ideology of college has been communicated and warped into a dominant force, pushing students along a linear path of education in order to become successful in society, rather than a distinguished opportunity to be exposed to new, higher ideas. This paper also focuses on the Critical Theory of Communication in Organizations (CTCO), because it explains how the educational system has become a moneymaking corporation, outside of the interests of student education. This paper focuses on the consequences of the pressure on students and society, and hypothetical solutions in the education system.

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS A Culture of Competition and Success and the Effects of Stress on the Student Generation

College has progressively distorted itself into a controlling cultural focus of this generation, causing students to blindly race in cutthroat marathon without a known direction. A generation ago, a fewer than a third of high-school seniors were collegebound; now more than twice as many say theyre shooting for a bachelors degree (Kantrowitz, 2012). Yet many students dont believe their education is valuable for the same reasons that their parents did decades ago. A survey from the University of California in Los Angeles polled over 30 freshmen in 2005 and 1976. In 1976, a survey discovered that 49% of students found making money an important reason to go to college, and 75% gave reasons like to learn about things that interest me. Contrarily, in the 2005 survey, 71% of students said making more money was a very important reason to go to college, and 65% said they were aiming to get a general education and appreciation of ideas (Walsh, 2006). Students years ago valued a college education as an enriching experience meant for intellectual growth, whereas many students now view their education as a pit stop on the road to wealth, fame and success. (2006). This kind of mentality causes disturbing competition and consequences among the students. First of all, college has become a brand scheme, similar to the fashion industry. Students are not considering the perfect fit for them, such as location, programs, or size, but by the colleges prestige. There is an increasing number of people who think that if their child does not go to a certain level of school, they wont make it in life, says Bruce Poch, dean of admission at Pomona College. Furthermore, there is no evidence that a name-

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS

brand degree guarantees anything (2002). This results in the mysterious game of college applications. Students are now trying to predict what these colleges are looking for, and packaging themselves for the part. They stuff their days and resumes with community service, club leadership roles, academic awards, athletic achievements, Advanced Placement classes, perfect SAT scores, and a 4.0 GPA. Many of todays applicants boast accomplishments that were rare a generation ago. And that makes it even harder for the colleges to distinguish between them (2002). A burgeoning industry of private college counselors has occurred in the past decade. These counselors can cost as much as $25,000 for four years of advice, and a surprising number of families are willing to pay for them (2002). Furthermore, there has been a growing trend in cheating and plagiarism in schools and colleges, as students are so competitively driven to be above everyone, and many experts refer to this generation as the copy and paste culture (2006). In the end, this lifestyle of overachieving leads to increases in ulcers,

depression, alcoholism, anxiety disorders and such control-related maladies as eating disorders, self-mutilation among teenagers are a result of parents, teachers and colleges pushing too hard (Salt Lake Tribune, 2006). Students are losing their youth, and ability to carry a balanced life. They should be spending time sleeping, eating, and staring into space to discover their true interests (2006). The CTCO, created by University of Colorado communication professor Stanley Deetz, seeks to ensure financial health of corporations as well as human interests (Griffin, 2012). He believes that these national corporations are the most dominant force in society, and this kind of corporate control has diminished the quality of life for most citizens. They control and colonize modern life (2012). Deetz presents a

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS

communication model that emulates language as the principle medium through which social reality is created and sustained. Language is a part of the production of the thing that we treat as being self-evident and natural within a society (2012). His model yields four different ways in which public decisions can be made: strategy, consent, involvement, and participation. Involvement, which will be focused on in this paper, is defined as the stakeholders free expression of ideas that may, or may not, affect managerial decisions (2012). Deetz claims that people believe they have free expression of ideas, however, they have no voice in the matter. This can become an issue, because when individuals realize their ideas arent represented in a final decision, it can lead to cynicism (2012). This evolution of the college education can be explained using the CTCO theory, because college now has become an economic corporation, just like any other business. Nationally, colleges and universities are spending 50% more on marketing than they did in 2000 (Luettgar, 2008) in order to make their brand seem more marketable to the upcoming generation. High schools, for example Troy High School in Orange County, CA, love to boast that 99 percent of its graduates move on to college the next year, feeding their students to the industry (Carpenter et al, 2007). Certain subjects, such as math and science, are being emphasized in public schools, while other subjects, such as art and music, are at the bottom of the academic hierarchy (2006). The public school system is pushing this academia because they offer the most career opportunities, and as a result, discourages students away from discovering their real talents. According to the CTOC, students are experiencing Involvement in decisions of their education. They believe they have open and endless opportunities, yet dont realize that they are being

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS

nudged on a certain path, and being trained to think slightly to one side (2006). Then, in the end, as proven by the recent trend, many are feeling the result of cynicism of their goals, inspirations, and stressful lives. College psychotherapy services are being pushed to their limits by regular student patients. Columbia reports an increase of 40% of student visits since the 1994-95 academic year, and SUNY Purchase as seen a 48% increase over the past three years (Berger, 2002). MIT reported 50% increase in use of mental health services between 1995 and 2000, and showed an increase of about 69% in student psychiatric hospitalizations, reflecting a growing number of students with serious mental health conditions (2002). Columbia, MIT, and University of Michigan are undergoing research and program developments to improve their services in response to a number of highly publicized suicides (2002). Depression has gone from being a housewifes disorder to a students (2002). College is supposed to be the years of selfgrowth, and discovery of innovation. However, instead, this generation has become emotionally fragile, and will only create a self-centered society where mistakes are seen as failures, rather than a process of learning (2002). In order to reverse the trend and prepare this generation for the future, there has to be an educational revolution. Sir Ken Robinson, an advocate for creating an educational system that nurtures creativity, believes there has been an academic inflation of a certain intelligence, and undermining the process of creativity, which he defines as the process of having original ideas (2006). School academic systems should be balanced and flexible to allow students to create their own learning path, and educate children as their whole being. Currently, national education systems emulate that mistakes are the worst thing you can do (2006). Instead, the teaching process should focus on the innovation,

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS

and creation of solutions, not the right way and wrong way to solve a problem. This would be a proper solution validated by the CTOC theory, because students would actually be able to be involved in the choices of their education, and make their own choices for their future. Then, students would feel confident in their decisions, and believe that their education is valuable for their intellectual growth and future. Another solution that must be considered in order to secure a stable generation is self-education for signs of depression. Experts note that college years are when depression and other mental illnesses tend to first manifest themselves, however college itself does not cause depression, but its stresses including sleep deprivation, and substance abuse, can trigger those who are vulnerable (2002). About 15% of the general population is possibly vulnerable to develop depression symptoms (2002). The idea is to catch yourself in self-defeating thoughts like, This is going really badly, Ive really lost my touch then build up a mental argument for why that isnt so (2002). Furthermore, the educational system should be encouraging students to carry balanced lives, to strive for reachable goals, and to worry more about their mental health, rather than their future success. Rather than setting and striving for goals based on a pure desire to achieve, their underlying motivation impels them out into the world to avoid failure (2012). After all, if success takes the joys out of life it couldnt possibly be considered success (2006).

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS Discussion

This generation has heard about competition and individual success since they were babies, and weve found increases in self-belief across traits that relate to achievement, success, leadership ability, and self-confidence (2012). However, as a consequence, this generation has been molded to be afraid of failure. There has been a relapse in the educational system. The current system forces students along a singular path of learning, and opposes students branching off to discover their talents, interests, and dreams. Instead, students are afraid of deriving from this path and making their own choices. Furthermore, instead cultivating active, creative, eager learners, the system has produced identically packaged machines that are impatient to race to the top. The educational system through college, has developed into a money-making corporation, therefore, the prospective students developed money-making, striving-for-success goals, like a business. This is why the CTCO theory can be applied to explain this phenomena, because its goals have evolved into a corporation. There must be changes in the

educational system, in order to not make the same mistakes in preparing the upcoming generation.

CULTURE OF COMPETITION EFFECTS STRESS ON STUDENTS References (2006). Learning balance: Colleges, parents pressure students too much. The Salt Lake Tribune. Berger, L. (2002). The Therapy Generation: As pressures rise, campus mental health services struggle to keep up. New York Times, D30. Carpenter, E. & Leal, F. (2007). Pressure bears down on college-bound; Local high

school students shooting for a spot at a top university feel the strain. The Orange County Register (California), A2. Griffin, E. (2012). A First Look at Communication Theory. McGraw-Hill, 54-64. Jill, C. S. (2012). Overachiever. Psychology Today, 44(6) 33-34. Kantrowitz, B. (2002). How to win the college game. Newsweek, 139(14), 46-51. Luettgar, L. (2008). Brands speak beyond images; reflect lifestyle, student. Rochester Business Journal, 24(18), 22. Robinson, K. (2006). Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity. Ted. Walsh, M. (2006). Academic Stress: Students Face Mounting Pressure to Succeed. PBS NewsHour.