teenagers stunningly ignorant

Forums: News
Email this Topic • Print this Page

teenager survey

Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one in four said Columbus sailed to the New World some time after 1750, not in 1492.
Readers' Comments

"The sad truth is you don't need a knowledge of history or literature to succeed in almost all jobs. Haven't noticed any discussions about the Treaty of Westphalia at my workplace lately, and I work for a university."

Ffrank, Columbus OH

* Read Full Comment »
* Post a Comment »

The survey results, released on Tuesday, demonstrate that a significant proportion of teenagers live in "stunning ignorance" of history and literature, said the group that commissioned it, Common Core.

The organization describes itself as a new research and advocacy organization that will press for more teaching of the liberal arts in public schools.

The group says President Bush's education law, No Child Left Behind, has impoverished public school curriculums by holding schools accountable for student scores on annual tests in reading and mathematics, but in no other subjects.

Politically, the group's leaders are strange bedfellows. Its founding board includes Antonia Cortese, executive vice president of the American Federation of Teachers, a union that is a powerful force in the Democratic Party, and Diane Ravitch, an education professor at New York University who was assistant education secretary under the first President George Bush.

Its executive director is Lynne Munson, former deputy chairwoman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and former special assistant to Vice President Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne.

"We're a truly diverse group," Mrs. Munson said. "We almost certainly vote differently, and we have varying opinions about different aspects of educational reform. But when it comes to concern that all of America's children receive a comprehensive liberal arts and science education, we all agree."

In the survey, 1,200 17-year-olds were called in January and asked to answer 33 multiple-choice questions about history and literature that were read aloud to them. The questions were drawn from a test that the federal government administered in 1986.

About a quarter of the teenagers were unable to correctly identify Hitler as Germany's chancellor in World War II, instead identifying him as a munitions maker, an Austrian premier and the German kaiser.

On literature, the teenagers fared even worse. Four in 10 could pick the name of Ralph Ellison's novel about a young man's growing up in the South and moving to Harlem, "Invisible Man," from a list of titles. About half knew that in the Bible Job is known for his patience in suffering. About as many said he was known for his skill as a builder, his prowess in battle or his prophetic abilities.

The history question that proved easiest asked the respondents to identify the man who declared, "I have a dream." Ninety-seven percent correctly picked the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

About 8 in 10, a higher percentage than on any other literature question, knew that Harper Lee's "To Kill a Mockingbird" is about two children affected by the conflict in their community when their father defends a black man in court.

In a joint introduction to their report, Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch did not directly blame the No Child law for the dismal results but said it had led schools to focus too narrowly on reading and math, crowding time out of the school day for history, literature and other subjects.

"The nation's education system has become obsessed with testing and basic skills because of the requirements of federal law, and that is not healthy," Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch said.

"You can be supportive of N.C.L.B. and also support strengthening the teaching of history and literature," a spokeswoman for the Education Department, Samara Yudof, said. "It's good to talk about expanding the curriculum, but if you can't read, you can't read anything at all."

A string of studies have documented the curriculum's narrowing since Mr. Bush signed the law in January 2002.

Last week, the Center on Education Policy, a research group in Washington that has studied the law, estimated that based on its own survey 62 percent of school systems had added an average of three hours of math or reading instruction a week at the expense of time for social studies, art and other subjects.

The Bush administration and some business and civil rights groups warn against weakening the law, saying students need reading and math skills to succeed in other subjects.

Sad to say i suck at literature too.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 943 • Replies: 16

No top replies

Re: teenagers stunningly ignorant

OGIONIK wrote:

Sad to say i suck at literature too.

There is something you can do about that, you know . . . it's not as though that were an incurable condition.

0 Replies

Re: teenagers stunningly ignorant

OGIONIK wrote:

teenager survey

Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one in four said Columbus sailed to the New World some time after 1750, not in 1492.
Readers' Comments

Interesting that they neglected to mention that when these questions were asked in 1986 68% didn't know when the civil war was fought and 32% answered that Columbus sailed after 1750.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE6DB133AF932A0575BC0A961948260

If these two items are any indicator, it would seem that students are doing better on this test now than they did prior to NCLB.

0 Replies

Re: teenagers stunningly ignorant

fishin wrote:

OGIONIK wrote:
teenager survey

Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one in four said Columbus sailed to the New World some time after 1750, not in 1492.
Readers' Comments

Interesting that they neglected to mention that when these questions were asked in 1986 68% didn't know when the civil war was fought and 32% answered that Columbus sailed after 1750.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE6DB133AF932A0575BC0A961948260

If these two items are any indicator, it would seem that students are doing better on this test now than they did prior to NCLB.

Given that the period from 1986 to the present represents more than twenty years, and that the new federal educational program is a good deal less than a decade in the application, that is not any evidence that this program were responsible for the putative improvement.

0 Replies

Re: teenagers stunningly ignorant

Setanta wrote:

fishin wrote:
OGIONIK wrote:
teenager survey

Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one in four said Columbus sailed to the New World some time after 1750, not in 1492.
Readers' Comments

Interesting that they neglected to mention that when these questions were asked in 1986 68% didn't know when the civil war was fought and 32% answered that Columbus sailed after 1750.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE6DB133AF932A0575BC0A961948260

If these two items are any indicator, it would seem that students are doing better on this test now than they did prior to NCLB.

Given that the period from 1986 to the present represents more than twenty years, and that the new federal educational program is a good deal less than a decade in the application, that is not any evidence that this program were responsible for the putative improvement.

I fully agree. The point is however, that those quoted in this most recent article are attempting to place blame on NCLB while there is ample evidence that the problem existed long before NCLB was ever brought into existance.

0 Replies

That's reasonable. Actually, i didn't read much of the article, because my immediate reaction was to point out that this doesn't belong in a news forum, because it isn't news, and likely could be applied in one respect or another to the young at any time since literacy were invented.

In fact, several years ago, i read an article in the Times, and shortly thereafter heard a report on one of those television news magazines about the appalling inaccuracy of textbooks which get produced these days. One, rejected by the Texas agency responsible for reviewing textbooks, and only after it came to the attention of university employees who objected, listed Harry Truman as the President at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, which the book stated took place in 1950, and that Eisenhower had dropped the bomb on Japan. I've seen similar crap in textbooks i've seen (i'm such a history junky that i even read history textbooks, which are more or less the comic books of historical narrative), which is either the product of sheer ignorance (and arrogance on the part of professors who write them and think they are obliged to check their facts), or political rectitude, be it from the left or the right.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

In fact, several years ago, i read an article in the Times, and shortly thereafter heard a report on one of those television news magazines about the appalling inaccuracy of textbooks which get produced these days. One, rejected by the Texas agency responsible for reviewing textbooks, and only after it came to the attention of university employees who objected, listed Harry Truman as the President at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, which the book stated took place in 1950, and that Eisenhower had dropped the bomb on Japan. I've seen similar crap in textbooks i've seen (i'm such a history junky that i even read history textbooks, which are more or less the comic books of historical narrative), which is either the product of sheer ignorance (and arrogance on the part of professors who write them and think they are obliged to check their facts), or political rectitude, be it from the left or the right.

I'm not really surprised. In a similar sort of way, a few years ago MA made passing the state's MCAS test a requirement for high school graduation. Many in the local press and teacher's groups screamed about how this was unfair, etc... and as examples of the problems with the tests they pointed out several dozen questions in the test that were factually wrong in themeslves or could nopt be correctly answered with any of the multiple choice answers given.

That died out quickly when it was pointed out that some 60 "expert" teachers from across the state were the ones that developed the questions and created the tests.

I can't be surprised that students don't know the correct info when the textbooks and teachers they rely on don't appear to know either.

0 Replies

I think this has been a problem for quite a while, though. Not all school boards have generous funds, and i suspect that most operate very close to a deficit at most times. Traditionally, to use an example on the topic of the thread, small schools have had the coach teach history, so that he could be paid from state funds as an instructor. There is no reason to assume that someone who completed a phys. ed. degree knows anything about history, and if the text is unreliable, the class is likely to be unreliable, too.

0 Replies

I have a friend who started out as our lab dishwasher, aced her way through city college, went with her husband to the university in the US that would give them both the best scholarships, became a journalist, yadda yadda.

At some point she had a part time job (always working, and always with the stories) teaching english and other subjects in a second language program in central LA. Horrifying, the texts. It was a long time ago, so I can't quote the imbecility re the texts.

0 Replies

You always want to make sure your production force (slaves) are as ignorant as possible. That way they are to stupid to figure out they are slaves. Just market to them the that they are happy and free, give them beer and prozac and 500 channels.

They can spell, they can engineer, They can run complicated equipment. but this is all good for production. When they get to old put them in a closet to die and move on to a youthful production force.

Keep them ignorant but teach them how to be in order with production. Distort and deform freedom and happiness.

The nature of a free happy human, That is knowledge that must be kept secret so they will never pursue it. They will just work and be productive for somebody else.

0 Replies

I think that stating that many teenagers do not know certain dates in history or certain types of literature equals ignorant. They may be ignorant of that subject or that period in history or even that particular novel, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they are ignorant.

Some of those questions I wouldn't be able to answer - I probably could get the Columbus one simply because I remember the rhyme and no other reason. I did well in history in school because I had to memorize stuff in order to get good grades. I don't remember that now. I do remember about history, but I really am horrible at remembering dates and is that really important to know a specific date or is it more important to understand our general history and important incidents themselves. Memorizing dates does not make one intelligent or less ignorant.

As far as literature - how many different novels, types of literature were questioned? There are some "great works of literature" that I haven't read, however, I have read many others. I can't imagine that any school would be capable of having every great work of literature read. It really depends on which these particular teenagers had read. How can you answer a question about a work of literature that you hadn't read, however, you read 30 other great novels, poems, etc.

0 Replies

A lot of what they teach you in school is worthless trivia.

Granted, I think that we should learn and know about our country and history. However, to call someone ignorant is going a little far.

What purpose in life does it serve to know what happened during the Civil War? Yes, we learn from the past mistakes but America is notorious for repeating history. We know what happened in the past but we still continue to do the same things over and over again.

I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me but I think it's true. High school is a waste of 4 years. If they spent more time on learning how to be free thinkers, debaters, challengers, learned every day things like home economics and about real world issues I think that things might start to improve here in the US. We have raised a bunch of apathetic, book smart kids who know nothing about the real world. Knowing how to solve an equation isn't going to help everyone make a difference in the world. Some of them, yes, but not everyone needs in depth mathematical knowledge.

Does any of this make sense? I am so tired most everything I say comes out all gobbly-gooky and non-sensical (is that a word?)

0 Replies

Bella Dea wrote:

A lot of what they teach you in school is worthless trivia.

Granted, I think that we should learn and know about our country and history. However, to call someone ignorant is going a little far.

What purpose in life does it serve to know what happened during the Civil War? Yes, we learn from the past mistakes but America is notorious for repeating history. We know what happened in the past but we still continue to do the same things over and over again.

I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me but I think it's true. High school is a waste of 4 years. If they spent more time on learning how to be free thinkers, debaters, challengers, learned every day things like home economics and about real world issues I think that things might start to improve here in the US. We have raised a bunch of apathatic, book smart kids who know nothing about the real world. Knowing how to solve an equation isn't going to help everyone make a difference in the world.

Does any of this make sense? I am so tired most everything I say comes out all gobbly-gooky and non-sensical.

I agree a bit with this. I do think it is important how to solve equations and stuff like that (maybe because I am a numbers freak), literature and history. However, I agree that the thinking part is also important. Some school systems have gotten so caught up with passing tests that all they do is force feed facts and memorizing - not thinking.

There needs to be a balance between the two. And also for me - thinking and reasoning helps me remember and retain facts and numbers and dates. Not simpy pouring them in my head and spitting them out.

0 Replies

I think we both have the same thoughts on this...I don't think we should go to a hippie-flower lovin'-tree huggin' brand of school system. I think what you said really sums it up.

Teach kids how to learn, not how to memorize.

0 Replies

Bella Dea wrote:

A lot of what they teach you in school is worthless trivia.

Granted, I think that we should learn and know about our country and history. However, to call someone ignorant is going a little far.

IMO, ignorant is the appropriate word. People tend to use it as a pejorative but it is simply being unaware of something.

Quote:

What purpose in life does it serve to know what happened during the Civil War? Yes, we learn from the past mistakes but America is notorious for repeating history. We know what happened in the past but we still continue to do the same things over and over again.

IMO, the problem isn't necessarily knowing specific events but understanding the causes/effects of those events. And a part of understanding things in general is putting a sequence of events in the actual order that they happened. I don't expect people to worry about whether the Battle of Shiloh occurred before or after the Seige of Corinth but being able to put the entire Civil War itself within the appropriate 50 year range doesn't seem like it is asking to much.

Quote:

I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me but I think it's true. High school is a waste of 4 years. If they spent more time on learning how to be free thinkers, debaters, challengers, learned every day things like home economics and about real world issues I think that things might start to improve here in the US. We have raised a bunch of apathetic, book smart kids who know nothing about the real world. Knowing how to solve an equation isn't going to help everyone make a difference in the world. Some of them, yes, but not everyone needs in depth mathematical knowledge.

Does any of this make sense? I am so tired most everything I say comes out all gobbly-gooky and non-sensical (is that a word?)

IMO, this is the education philsophy that we've been operating under for the last few decades and it's been applied to all grade levels. I don't see anything wrong with teaching kids how to be free thinkers, debaters, etc... but that can (and IMO, has) be taken to far as well. Take a quick run through the Philosophy & Debate forum here on A2K and you'll find hundreds of threads that people (most of whom are well into adulthood) started posing some solution to an issue. Many, many, many of them are built on faulty initial assumptions. You can only form an accurate logic chain if you start with accurate assumptions.

Learning how to learn is fine. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it - as long as the person understands that there are limits of their current knowledge (knowing what those limits are helps too!). If a person doesn't recognize the limitations of their own knowledge they won't go and learn anything before acting.

IMO, elementery school should be focused more on rote memorization. This is where the basic "facts" should be laid out. High school should be a transitional phase where the facts previously learned are used to form larger concepts with a broader understanding and research skills should be stressed.

In the end I don't think high schools is where the system is breaking down. IMO, the shift away from memorization in the earlier years creates kids that show up in high school without the basics to debate and challenge. The high schools are then forced to play catch-up and you end up in a catch-22.

0 Replies

The problem though with simple memorization is that you do not retain it. That is why I feel the added understanding of the facts is needed.

In high school I did not retain many of the dates of various historical incidents from elementary school. I did very well in school so I was able to memorize all that crap - but once the test was over, I did not remember much of the details. What good is memorizing if you do not retain the information once you spit it out?

0 Replies

Re: teenagers stunningly ignorant

OGIONIK wrote:

"The sad truth is you don't need a knowledge of history or literature to succeed in almost all jobs. Haven't noticed any discussions about the Treaty of Westphalia at my workplace lately, and I work for a university."

That's because there's no such thing as the "Treaty of Westphalia." There were two treaties signed in 1648 that ended the Thirty Years War: the Treaty of Osnabrück and the Treaty of Münster. Because both cities are in the German region known as Westphalia, they are collectively referred to as the "Treaties of Westphalia."

0 Replies

teenagers stunningly ignorant

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know