Good point. But I’m more self-satisfied with my own mediocrity if I cling to my original position.
I think that’s it. They realize they are popular, and want to hang out with other popular kids. That serves to reinforce their sense of security, and the insecurity of those outside the group. Some of realized this was the case back in the 8th grade. We just couldn’t figure out how to be popular to start with.
The “in” crowd are picked by their teachers in kindergarten and first grade. Looks and size matter in this- the older in the class are frequently picked, therefore. They are groomed in class, consciously and unconsciously, by their teachers and then presented as “leaders” in conversations with the teachers that will teach them the next year. The process continues through the senior year. Yes, many deserving individuals are ignored due to their looks or stature, and they learn their places quickly.
This is my opinion, based on observations made during twenty-six years of teaching in U.S. public schools.
As the top ten percent are being pushed forward, here’s what happens to the next-to-the-bottom ten percent.
Differential social effects start small. Maybe in grade one, a kid could learn social skills and make the leap from out to in more easily than in grade six, or grade ten. But the kid has to know that it’s possible.
The worst thing about being in the out-group is also the most subtle: you end up jailed by your own mind. You think you don’t have a chance, even if you might. The second-worst thing is that, as time goes by, you have more and more catching up to do. The front-runners pull away even as you speed up.
[AHA!] This is a facinating new insight for me: sports teams in school operate the same way that gangs do in jail [/AHA!]
I think a large part of the reason that the in-crowd is often the arrogant, ignorant, muscle-bound, machismos is due to boobies, specifically the desire to touch them. I went to an all-boy’s high school, and the in-crowd there was the group of gregarious, friendly kids. But, they weren’t dick’s or even jocks. There was also no out-crowd. Everyone got along. I miss it actually.
Where I grew up, the charismatic, physically attractive, and humorous were the popular ones, though we didn’t really have an in-crowd, just lots of small clusters of nerds and geeks with varying degrees of respect or disrespect bestowed upon them.
My high school experience was atypical, because at the end of my freshman year I transferred into a “let’s all sit on the floor and call teachers by their first names!” type alternative school with a strict no-bullying policy and no athletic program. But the school I’d attended before that was a more typical football-crazy big American high school, and I returned (grudgingly) for two classes a day during my junior year to take science and foreign language classes that weren’t offered at my new school.
Anyway, there was a certain status that came with being a member of the football team at my first high school, or really any of the team sports. Being a cheerleader actually did not seem to carry much prestige, the “popular” girls were more likely to be on the swim team or softball team.
I use the scare quotes because, despite the way most TV shows and movies portray things, there isn’t ever really one group of kids who everyone in the school likes, admires, or envies. My geeky friends and I had some awareness of who played team sports because of jerseys on game day, letter jackets, etc., we basically felt that jocks were idiots. We didn’t want to date or hang out with them. We probably would have laughed at anyone who said they did. I’m not saying this is the greatest attitude to have, but that’s how it was.
Beyond participation/ability in sports and other highly visible school activities (the theater program was very competitive and landing the lead in the school play was a big deal), I’d say that socioeconomic factors played a big role in the divide between different groups at this particular school. Thinking back it’s my impression that there wasn’t so much an “in” group as there was a group of kids whose families had a lot of money. They had the time and money for the extracurricular activities of their choice as well as visible status symbols like trendy clothes and their own cars. These wealthier kids and those of us who were more or less middle class and/or decent students had most of our classes together, but who you were actually friends with was influenced by other things like personality, interests, and identification with particular subcultures. Due to academic tracking and a school-within-a-school program for ESL students, most of the poor and minority kids wound up (from my perspective) in a weird sort of shadow world. I might pass them in the halls, but I didn’t have classes with them.
There is no “in” group, that is mostly a Hollywood construct. There is only the group that you longingly want to be in but can’t be for some reason, like, for example, you are too bashful to join in; the group people who look like they are having fun and doing all the things you wish you could be doing. The fact that they do fun things isn’t taking away from anyone else. Sure, there are some kids who don’t mind stepping up and taking part in group activities and the schools generally encourage that. That doesn’t make them “in” or exclusive.
I think what social class your parents belong to also has a lot to do with it, especially if you’re in an economically diverse school district, where kids who live in trailer parks mingle with kids whose parents are doctors, lawyers and factory owners, as was the case where I grew up. At my school the most popular kids were the jocks and braniacs who came from money. That’s not to say that there weren’t any rich kids who were unpopular, but they tended to be socially awkward. And likewise, there were also poor kids who were smart and good athletes, but never achieved the same status as the rich kids.