Third grade reading scores = prison bed projections?

It's the price we pay for having a government monopoly on education and a rogue political party which is basically in bondage to government workers' unions, particularly the NEA. The way out of the morass is well known.

I'm not following. Are you saying this is Obama's fault? Most of the information I've seen on this dates back to 2006-2007, which most likely means it had been going on for years and years before that.

What is the well known way out of this morass?

The only thing I can think of is to take the money they think they'll need to expand prisons and dump it into reading programs instead.

Sometimes you have to chosen between inner peace, and knowing the truth... =)

I wouldnt know if that is true, but if it is... that would mean either that your politicians have a nearly perfect understanding of how your society works, or that they are stupid and that system doesnt work.

It sounds strange and far-fetched though.

It does seem far fetched. That's why I tried to find out some information about it.

I came across this video where several seemingly credible people discuss it (briefly) starting at about the 4 minute mark:

http://www.childrenofthecode.org/Tour/c1/socialdanger.htm

I think there are other factors aside from reading levels that can predict whether someone will have difficulty in life. These test are just ONE indicator for potential learning disabilities.

When my husband taught middle school (6 - 8 grades) the teachers were not surprised to see some of their graduates taking up an entire wing at Jackson State Prison. Teachers predicted who would be there long before they left middle school.

Very sad.

It seems especially interesting then that the man I quoted above went on to become a Rhodes Scholar and White House Fellow.

Reading at second grade level in third grade would NOT be indicator, especially for boys who can be 9 - 18 months behind.

But progression or lack of progression in reading level IS something to watch.

I don't see why you find this either surprising or heart-breaking. I mean, high prison rates is heartbreaking, but a correlation with reading scores doesn't make it any better or worse. If more good readers were put in prison, would it make you feel better?

Statistics are just statistics. This doesn't mean that an individual is more or less likely to be incarcerated. It is likely that this correlation has more to do with other factors, probably poverty or a instable family life.

If it is true that reading scores can predict future incarceration rates, I don't find it at all surprising. No matter, if incarceration rates are high, I am going to want to have policy to address this anyway.

It seems to me that having sensible policies that addresses poverty, provides stable educational institutions and strengthens communities is a good idea.

http://www.correctionsone.com/correctional-psychology/articles/2975442-Pa-prisoners-low-reading-and-math-levels-surprise-officials/

If this were true (and I doubt it is for reasons to follow), I don't think it says anything bad about our society. Noting a correlation between two variables and using that to make spending decisions is a reasonable thing to do if the correlation is decent. That doesn't mean that variable A (reading level) causes variable B (incarceration rate) only that they correlate and you can use that correlation to make reasonable predictions. If this were true, it might provide some decent insight into variables that drive incarceration rates since some of those variables must drive poor reading scores as well, but that's all it means. It doesn't mean that third graders reading below grade level are destined to a life of crime although I could see politicians with an axe to grind saying that it does.

I don't think this is true because I think the correlation between those two variables would be so poor that you would never use it to make financial decisions. My guess is that there are many variables that influence reading level. There are also many variables that influence crime rate. Some of those variables are the same, but enough are different that the correlation between reading on grade level and crime rate is so poor (if it exists at all) that by itself it is a terrible predictor. No one is going to put real money on a bad model. "Freakonomics" had a whole chapter on predicting crime rates and politicians don't do it very well.

No, Obunga's got nothing to do with this one other than being loosely connected to the demoKKKrat party via George Soros and the Chicago mob.

This one is the work of the dem party and the NEA.

Aside from outlawing and banning the demoshit party, there actually is one thing which we could do which would make it dramatically easier for children to learn to read and write: develop a realistic alphabet for the English language. Russian and German are upwards of 90% phonetic while English is probably more like about 50 or 60. Learning to read and write with a quasi-phonetic system has to be maddeningly difficult for many children.

I think it's tragic!

I understand that a correlation is not causation but it seems so cynical that we're willing to spend money on one end (prison) but unwilling to spend money on the other end (reading).



I agree wholeheartedly. But if this factoid is true (and that's a big "if" for me) that it seems like we'll just have prisons instead.

It's been a while since I read "Freakomonics" but wasn't that kind of their point-- that we use the wrong statistics? That we put real money on bad models?

I agree with you that our unwillingness to invest in education (and communities in general) is tragic. I agree with you that the number of people incarcerated is tragic. This story presuming a statistical correlation doesn't make these two separate problems either more or less tragic.

I think you are reading to much into the statistics. Even if this is true, it is not evidence that spending money on reading will have any real impact on the incarceration rate.

According to wikipedia the US rates are the same as Germany's (99.0%) and slightly below Russia's (99.5%)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate

It was more that politicians claim changes in crime statistics are due to things they implemented (like "community policing") when statistics show that the real causes (more police or the legalization of abortion) are completely different.

Really I'm not. I'm just curious. I fell asleep thinking about it and woke up thinking about it. The Wes Moore who wrote the book certainly disproves that people who are slow to read are doomed to a life of crime.

Oh gosh! I remember reading a thing a few years back where someone studied why crime rates were steadily falling. Turns out there was a big shift in the way crimes were reported for statistical analysis. Nothing had really changed at all.