|
||
No YouTube Left Behind
The most discredited bromide in American civic life is: "Give the American people the facts, and they will make the right decisions."
But who is giving them the facts?
Fox News? Rush Limbaugh? Bill O'Reilly? Lou Dobbs? The hysterical Chris Matthews?
I don't think so. These people are entertainers pitching themselves as journalists.
Or maybe the fact-gatherers are ABC's Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, who spent the first 50 minutes of the last Obama-Clinton debate asking non-questions for which they surely deserve the year's top Inanity Awards.
Charley and George are not journalists; they're "gotcha" peddlers. Their interest is in ratings and money, not facts.
The short answer is nobody. And the result is a tragically uninformed electorate.
But this state of affairs didn't start with TV talking heads. It started in our middle and high schools, with the parents of the young people who attend these schools and with those who teach those students.
The intellectual poverty of our educational system was recently highlighted in an article in the Journal of Higher Education by Ted Gup, a professor of journalism at Case Western Reserve University and author of "Nation of Secrets: The Threat to Democracy and the American Way of Life" (Doubleday, 2007).
Gup recounted the following experience:
"I teach a seminar called 'Secrecy: Forbidden Knowledge'. I recently asked my class of 16 freshmen and sophomores, many of whom had graduated in the top 10 percent of their high-school classes and had dazzling SAT scores, how many had heard the word "rendition." Not one hand went up. This is after four years of the word appearing on the front pages of the nation's newspapers, on network and cable news, and online. This is after years of highly publicized lawsuits, Congressional inquiries, and international controversy and condemnation. This is after the release of a Hollywood film of that title, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Meryl Streep, and Reese Witherspoon."
Gup wrote that this information deficit was no aberration. He said, "Nearly half of a recent class could not name a single country that bordered Israel. In an introductory journalism class, 11 of 18 students could not name what country Kabul was in, although we have been at war there for half a decade. Last fall only one in 21 students could name the U.S. secretary of defense. Given a list of four countries -- China, Cuba, India, and Japan -- not one of those same 21 students could identify India and Japan as democracies. Their grasp of history was little better. Some students thought that Islam was the principal religion of South America, that Roe v. Wade was about slavery, that 50 justices sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, that the atom bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in 1975."
Should we be surprised? I don't think so.
The study of civics has virtually disappeared from our middle and high school curricula. And many of the few schools that still teach this subject are using a textbook - now in its 11th edition -- that the widely respected Center for Inquiry says contains "inaccurate and misleading statements, in particular in its analysis of certain constitutional law issues, including school prayer and global warming."
And despite the ubiquity of blackberries, laptops, and access to television and the Internet by our youth, survey after survey has validated the sorry state of their knowledge, particularly about American history and America's civic life.
For example, one survey found that 52% of Americans could name two or more of the characters from "The Simpsons," but only 28% could identify two of the freedoms protected under the First Amendment. Another poll found that 77% of Americans could name at least two of the Seven Dwarfs from "Snow White," but only 24% could name two or more Supreme Court justices. Yet another survey showed that only two-thirds of Americans could identify all three branches of government; only 55% of Americans were aware that the Supreme Court can declare an act of Congress unconstitutional; and 35% thought that it was the intention of the founding fathers to give the president "the final say" over Congress and the judiciary.
And according to a new statewide study, thousands of Massachusetts public high school graduates arrive at college unprepared for even the most basic math and English classes, forcing them to take remedial courses that discourage many from staying in school. At three high schools in Boston and two in Worcester, at least 70 percent of students were forced to take at least one remedial class because they scored poorly on a college placement test.
Other studies sadly point in the same direction. One showed that a majority of college students thinks the press has too much freedom. Another found that they believe the freedoms of American Muslims should be restricted. Still another found that a majority of high school graduates couldn't find China on a map. And year after year, America's knowledge scores vis a vis other industrialized democracies keeps going south.
The totally predictable result is, as David Brooks pointed out in a recent New York Times column, "For the first time in the nation's history, workers retiring from the labor force are better educated than the ones coming in."
Lately, amidst our xenophobic immigration debate, there's been lots of chatter about the new test the government is proposing to determine which immigrants qualify for naturalized U.S. citizenship. The Los Angeles Times' Rosa Brooks writes, tongue in cheek, that it "will rigorously assess immigrants' knowledge of 'the fundamental concepts of American democracy'," asking tough questions such as 'Why do we have three branches of government? , 'What is the rule of law?' and 'What are inalienable rights'? "
Ms. Brooks says that requiring those who want the privileges of U.S. citizenship to have some minimal knowledge of American civics "is a great idea." Why, she asks, "should this country mint new so-called citizens who don't know the first thing about American history or law?"
Her zinger, however, is that she wants to make native-born Americans take the test too -- and deport them to their last known countries of ancestry if they flunk. Why, she asks, "should we ask first-generation immigrants to know more about the United States than the rest of us?"
Why indeed!
Do we have reason to hope that the millions of young people who have flocked to support Barack Obama's candidacy represent some kind of a sea change among our youth?
No, we don't. These young people are "the best and the brightest" - far above the norm. A vastly greater number of American young people are high school dropouts, or kids who graduate from high school despite being functionally illiterate, or even those who go on to college clueless about their country's history and government.
These are the young people who click on YouTube to amass an encyclopedic knowledge of Paris Hilton's latest antics.
And despite the Bush Administration's overblown claims of success for its "No Child Left Behind" program, these are the millions of kids who continue to be left behind.
And who leave our country behind in the process.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
WHAT DO YOU MEAN .............................
HUFFPO IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF FACTS I NEED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There's an old punch line, "You can lead a whore to water, but you can't make her think."
Your typical student can't name the things that we (your typical Huff Post reader) think they should know. Why? Because they have no interest in knowing.
In the same way that the poor get poorer, the dumb get dumber...
The Web site at http://www.espionageinfo.com/Ul-Vo/United-States-Counter-Terrorism-Policy.html does a good job showing what Clintion's policy outlined, and the changes that have occurred under Bush:
"The foundation of the United States counterterrorism policy, according to the U.S. State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism, are embodied in four principles:
-----the government makes no concessions to or agreements with terrorists;
-----terrorists must be brought to justice for their crimes;
-----states that sponsor terrorists and terrorism must be isolated and pressured so as to force a change of behavior;
-----and the counterterrorism capabilities of countries allied with the United States, and those that require assistance in fighting terrorism, must be bolstered.
President William J. Clinton outlined U.S. policy on terrorism in Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 39 in 1995, and in 1998 he made specific provisions for combatting terrorism in PDD 62. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the face of U.S. counterterrorism has changed considerably, with the signing of the Patriot Act as well as a number of other measures. "
Sorry about this post -- it should have posted as a response to another post further down the page.
I was just talking with a friend last night about this.
NCLB is clearly designed to focus kids' learning on tests... so the teachers are forced to teach to the tests. What better way to control the knowledge of America's populace than forced teaching to pre-determined concepts in tests? Really effing amazing.
20/20 did a good piece last week on Alabama and poverty. They profiled a working poor husband and wife who had voted against a bill that would have benefited them economically. But they did not have the analytical skills to figure it out and were taken in by all the corporate advertising that outright lied about what the bill would do.
I think Diane Sawyer reported the piece... and she had an Alabama state official who came right out and said that the abysmal education system in Alabama, at least for poor people, did not give them the skills to make an informed vote. She also said that she's trying to get the word out to other states so the same thing doesn't happen across the US. I think it's a bit late for that.
Between corporate American media pumping out "entertainment" 24/7 and an ill-educated or non-caring populace, I really despair for our country... we are so far down in the downward spiral, I don't know if we can recover.
KMKY:
This started well before NCLB. Although NCLB can be blamed on a product of the educational system that I described above.
(George W." Bush attended Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts, where he played baseball, and was the head cheerleader at the all-boys school during his senior year.[16] Following in his father's footsteps, Bush attended Yale University, where he received a Bachelor's degree in history in 1968.[17] As a college senior, Bush became a member of the secretive Skull and Bones society, although, by his own characterization, he was an average student.[18]
I'm sorry, I don't really know why you're addressing me here--not at all trying to be combative, just curious. My only post to this article was to agree with the statement from blindjester about NCLB "strangling" the education system.
What a silly article. Yes, many students lack basic knowledge, but it is largely because they (and their parents) don't care. They aren't motivated to learn. A couple of days, a student at my high school asked another student if the fake baby she was carrying around for a parenting class was Asian? "No," the girl replied. "She's Japanese." The first student looked at me, said, "Did you catch that?" I nodded. The girl who didn't know that Japan is part of Asia didn't even hear us dissing her. I subscribe to 34 channels on youtube and watch it a lot, including BBC Worldwide, Charlie Rose, and a lot that are fun. Using Youtube doesn't make one stupid. Teachers don't make kids stupid (although stupid teachers could, I suppose). Stupid parents make kids stupid.
I'm relieved to see this getting some attention. I've returned to school, a condensed professional program, and most of my co-students are much younger than me, in their early twenties. Despite the program lasting only 6 months, precious time was wasted on a six-week algebra course, and some students acted as if it was the first time they've seen this stuff. (By the way, they may be dispensing medication at a drug store near you once they graduate.) When a subject test is not multiple choice or the teacher doesn't precisely specify what will be on it, it is called "unfair" as if it's an imposition that they should know more than what the test will cover. It gives a clear picture of what was expected of these kids in high school.
What has been done to them is inexcusable: they have been disempowered.
I have had a Brown University student call me confused because they did not know how they were going to wash dishes since the apartment I was renting them did not have a dish washer. And another Brown student called me and asked how to use her (brand new) electric stove. She wanted to wait until someone could come show her how to use it in person because, as she stated, "she was a visual learner". These kids were upper class Americans. Probably scored very well on the SAT but GOODNESS, these are the future leaders of our country and possibly the world?!
"There's nobone to give the electorate the facts." True, 'cause if we get the true skinny we vote them out, ergo, they tell us what we want to hear. Ain't nuthin hard 'bout that.
CaseyBabes,
Indeed, because "[WE] can't handle the truth" as Nicholson so profoundly said.
Schools have essentially become training grounds of workers for employers. Certainly, one can see benefits of job training, but perhaps more of that responsibility should be employers', rather than the public. Providing good thinking skills, and letting employers shoulder more of actual job training, we would address two situations at once.
1) Producing a better citizenry, in general, that would be better skilled at deciphering all the information and disinformation thrown at them.
2) Perhaps employers would not be so quick to dismiss employees if it were their responsibility in terms of expense and time (which equates to more expense).
My wife is looking for a job. At her last interview she received the classic dismissal of "over-qualified". In a nutshell, that's the shortsightedness to which I refer. Logically, one might think an employee is an investment in the business' future. If you hire a highly skilled person in a lower level position, you know eventually the qualifications that person brings will benefit the business. Instead, there is a short-term, throw-away approach to hiring. One societal feature aiding this approach is employers' knowledge of an endless pool of publicly trained workers.
I once missed a bank job because I did not use "scratch paper" on the application math test, and was the first one finished. I was over-qualified; an employee with good math skills who could be promoted into higher positions. They ONLY wanted someone who could fill the current low-level job.
And servants is exactly what Bill Gates is looking for when he goes on and on about our educational system. NOT the creative smart ambitious, ethical students...he imports them...but the servants who will do the work, no questions asked. Unfortunately our educational system is broken...and why? Parents don't want their kids to have to study or miss their social life or athletic endeavors. They will insist that the teacher change a C or B to an A. Also there are too many fundies and partisan folks who are parents and don't know their history either...so they ar offended if something is different than what they want to believe. Yes, the educational system is abit on the broken side...but you really should start with helicopter parents...hovering. And the colleges who accept them into their ranks where often they are still coddled. Expectations?
I don't know about your Bill Gates rant, but I certainly agree about the role of SOME parents in the educational debacle in our country, especially those who undermine logic and critical thinking with dogmatic teachings of unfounded faith. Also, the concept of "earning" something, anything, is often lost. I remember years ago when my son and I made a soap-box car for his Cub Scout race, and he came in second overall, and still got an award (as did every entrant).
I think his award was for "most creative car design" (not sure now), and on the drive home he asked what that was about. He was only 8, but I was proud that he was questioning the award. I simply responded that many believe kids should be encouraged to participate, so they advocate giving awards for effort. He looked puzzled, shook his head, snickered and said, "That's stupid." Then he said, "That makes it so it doesn't matter if you win, so why bother?" I was satisfied with this and merely said, "Maybe you're right, but winning isn't everything." I left it at that.
I'm not suprised. I remember American students studying in my university and they could not even begin to understand the work they were getting. Despite being from the supposedly best schools and achieving the highest grades, they came in with the level of education we had at thirteen or fourteen.
They were lost as the gap was so wide. They were very intelligent but obviously had never been challenged in school. I suspect that the coursework in the States is dumbed down to ensure that all children can achieve. Problem is, when the class retard can pass it, everybody else has been held back.
Interesting that also there is EXACTLY what the post is talking about there's a 'click here' pic of a topless Paris Hilton that links to a gossip site. and the bottom of the page the post appears on as of this date/time.
Kinda shocking and alarmist but think about this this goes back to the that 'vast right wing conspiracy'
in Calif. it all started with republican (and neocon evangelfundie) backed propostion 13 which pretty much dried up school funding and thus classes such as 'civics' were the first to be cut, and I'm sure in the other 49 states it could be traced back to similar actions. Thus the generation that will be replacing those who are retired will be uninformed about democracy and that's exactly what neocon evangel rethuglicans want.
A compliant un (and ill) informed populace, then they can advance their agenda by gutting the constitution, and you can bet the corporate globalized american played along since their goals are similar, kinda the reason why that media has been so dumbed down, evidenced by the moderators of the last democratic presidential debate.
JScott
Don't fool yourself into thinking this is just a "right wing" thing.
The Dems are in on gutting The Constitution as well.
Read the book HOSTILE TAKEOVER by David Sirota (who is a Democrat BTW)
An uninformed, dumbed down citizenry is easier to spoon feed. Hence the most effective marketing campaign since Coke vs. Pepsi: i.e. OBAMA '08.
You cite the lack of "facts" as the reason for functional illiteracy. In your post, you quote Gup:
"I teach a seminar called 'Secrecy: Forbidden Knowledge'. I recently asked (snip) how many had heard the word "rendition." Not one hand went up. This is after four years of the word appearing (snip)"
I would suggest that it isn't the lack of facts that leads to the problems "with our young", as you suggest, but the failure of the electorate to demand quaility leadership that comes from analytic thought applied to those facts, and demanding that the school system do likewise.
In your example above, you seem to want us to believe that snatch and torture was the brainchild of the current administration. However, by the time CheneyOilCo got their meaty little hands around "extraordinary rendition", escalated and expanded the practice, the CIA had been practicing torture by proxy for 5 years. Presidential directive "PDD 39" was devised and signed by Bill Clinton in 1995... allowing circumvention of the US ratified United Nations Convention Against Torture.
It's Bubba's baby. If you believe facts are important, please get them right. Then ask Hillary what her opinion is on the subject and put the answer on YouTube so those young computer literates will have something of value to watch.
alienated in Seattle
burnt,
I just read through available examples of this PDD 39 at 3 different Web sites and could not find anything to support your assertion that it allows "circumvention of the US ratified United Nations Convention Against Torture". Can you point me to a version that supports your assertion because I am genuinely interested in reading such support.
Reply part 1
a lot of info out there... I'll use wikipedia because they have extensive links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_Against_Torture#Optional_Protocol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_by_proxy
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd39.htm
In essence, PDD 39 allows US Government personnel to practice preemption by snatching any person on the planet who is suspected of "terrorism", no matter how that word is defined at the moment ("in all its forms") and to secretly transport those individuals to friendly territories outside of the US. They can then be delivered to any number of US Government contracted foreign agencies within those countries. Their personnel use "interrogation/torture" to extract "confessions" using procedures that have been given implicitly by US Government agencies. US Government agents add a non-interference deniability buffer (they don't want to know about torture extractions) for protection from prosecution or other actions (UN disclosure).
portions of PDD 39
"In doing so, the U.S. shall pursue vigorously efforts to deter and preempt, apprehend and prosecute, or assist other governments to prosecute, individuals who perpetrate or plan to perpetrate such attacks."
This phrase more than any other allows almost free reign to subject any individual to "questioning".
Reply part2
"We shall work closely with friendly governments in carrying out our counterterrorism policy..."
This phrase is used to justify contracting the "questioning" (torture by proxy).
"Furthermore, the United States shall seek to identify groups or states that sponsor or support such terrorists, isolate them and extract a heavy price for their actions."
This phrase is used to justify extreme measures of interrogation by foreign contractors.
"Return of suspects by force may be effected without the cooperation of the host government..."
This phrase is used to justify extraterritorial rendition without permission of any country.
"We shall have the ability to respond rapidly and decisively to terrorism directed against us wherever it occurs, to protect Americans, arrest or defeat the perpetrators, respond with all appropriate instruments against the sponsoring organizations and governments..."
This phrase gives further justification for extraordinary rendition and torture by proxy.
The Clinton administration knew exactly what they were doing when they set this up. The process was devised explicitly to circumvent any illegality as seen by the United Nations Convention Against Torture.
The current administration built upon PDD 39 and actively expanded the process by making decisions at the highest level to redefine certain practices commonly described as torture... as evidenced by the Yoo disclosures. In essence, the Clinton administration provided for torture, while the current administration redefined it to make it systemically easier to practice, especially for military personnel.
Our education system is a joke. It's focused so much on 'equality' that it drives expectations to the lowest common denominator. Forget that! Education should be about excellence. Allow those kids that overachieve to leave the masses behind. Allow those kids that underachieve to get into special classes geared to their pace. They could even implement this on a large scale, having entire schools dedicated to the best and brightest, and entire schools for the underachievers. Catering education to each child's abilities makes much more sense than forcing everyone to fit into the one lousy system we offer.
Perhaps that's not politically correct to say in this culture, but the current system clearly isn't working.
Mormondude:
"For the first time in the nation's history, workers retiring from the labor force are better educated than the ones coming in."
What you describe above is what the Country had when I went to school and "social promotions", allowing "Johnny to feel good about himself. even when he couldn't even read and write", and other "Equal opportunity" programs are the exact reason that the following condidtions exist.
That's why Microsoft and Apple Computer have to import Programmers and Engineers from other countries. American kids go to the Ivy League schools and get these feel good Liberal Arts degrees so they can think they are smarter than their Parents and and can get the "First Black President" elected just for the coolness of it.
UNICEF rankings of educational systems in the world's richest countries, indicating the percentage of 14 and 15 year olds scoring below a minimum level in literacy, math and science.
1. South Korea 1.4 percent
2. Japan 2.2
3. Finland 4.4
4. Canada 5
5. Australia 6.2
6. Austria 8.2
7. Britain 9.4
8. Ireland 10.2
9. Sweden 10.8
10. Czech Republic 12.2
- (tie) New Zealand 12.2
12. France 12.6
13. Switzerland 13
14. Belgium 14
- (tie) Iceland 14
16. Hungary 14.2
- (tie) Norway 14.2
18. United States 16.2
19. Germany 17
- (tie) Denmark 17
21. Spain 18.6
22. Italy 20.2
23. Greece 23.2
24. Portugal 23.6
Well at my College i have met 2 kinds of people in terms of politics, Obama supporters and people who have no knowledge of politics.
Aren"t they one and the same?
That's funny, I thought the Obama supporters were the ones who didn't even know the rules that had been in effect for over thirty years and spent the first portion of the election process trying to get them changed. Then when they were able to bribe and intimidate the superdelegates, fix the caucuses with strong-arm Mafia tactics, and move him ahead in the process by bashing his opponent, they were more than eager to cry for the rules to be inforced.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
