ok, so i am still not over graduation. it has occured to me that there are 3 classes of achievers (sp?)- first there are your straight-up achievers- the ones who have both aptitude and work ethic to use that aptitude to the fullest. i was so proud of chiara, rowan and tyler at graduation-they each fit the bill when it comes to aptitude and work ethic. next are the over-achievers. they make up for aptitude with strong work ethic and personal drive- there were a few people with 3.5+ gpa's who received no scholarships, possibly because they failed to have the test scores to go along with gpa. scholarship or no, they will proably do well in college because their work ethic will drive them to find enough paying work to fund college. ironically, their classmates may scoff at them, knowing that 'they aren't that smart' . smart or not, they still achieve, and this is a results-oriented world. lastly, there are the underachievers- os as chiara described them in her speech- the ones who sat back andlet high school just happen to them. they are the ones with the brilliant test scores but mediocre gpas- the ones who have yet to live up to their potential. if these individuals approach college in the same way that they approached hs, then they might as well flip burgers for the time being and save the money they would have spent on college. higher education is wasted on the underachiever who sleeps in class. or worse still, skips class altogether because extracurricular stuff like partying, computer games, and the like takes up all of ones time and energy. the underachievers lack discipline, and somehow must find some in order to make an honest go of the future. no names to the underachievers of the class of 2002. they know who they are. there is still time to change the road that they are on.