Monkey Trial

Hey, Larry — The lawyers got to strut their stuff on TV? In 1925? Literacy may not the only problem our educational system faces. . .

Roger W, at 9:13 am EST on December 20, 2005

How many people had TVs in 1925?How many broadcasting corps in 1925?

Radio was the way to go.

We’ve had the questions for years, but Mr. Phelps doesn’t seem to realize this. We need useful suggestions and answers; give us those.

Ben, A Grad Student, at 9:36 am EST on December 20, 2005

I feel your pain!

I, too, have just finished grading exams, essays, and portfolios. I see some of the same misguided answers, and limited depth of reflection about projects. What is more, I hear so many excuses as to why work is not submitted to me. My favorite this semester (from a student completing a graduate program in education) is as follows: “...after my family and work, I believe God comes first always. Therefore on Sundays, I always spend time in worship with Him and I’m obedient to my leader which requires me to attend more than one service on Sundays about half of the time. I’ve only had weekends to squeeze in my homework time, which is not enough time for the 2 courses I’m taking...” It goes on and on. This isn’t an isolated case: excuses abound.My syllabus is clear about such things: I only accept late work due to documented medical issues. Still the excuses arrive. What is more, my department chair attempts to hold the hands of these students and strongly urges us to accept any and everything from all students, no matter what the excuse. Combined with the issue of poor quality, and lack of study and preparation, missing work is right at the top of the list when we discuss the “lowering of higher education".

David, at 9:56 am EST on December 20, 2005

Answers

Funny how the previous writer requests “answers” rather than pondering the question. Ben’s response points to the problem with today’s students, the desire for the answer rather than immersing themselves in the process. Reading a book, really reading it, requires a process of engaging in a “co-creative” moment with the author—a process that is neither immediately satisfying nor productive of answers in the short term and asks for more than memorization.

One solution (here I become a part of the very problem) is to stop always supplying the answers and require our students to read. It is hard to do because we detest the silence when no one has read; we hate the lower grades when they have refused to read. We fear the lower evaluations if we “gasp” force students to read aloud.

In large part..our fear is the problem...

Maria, Assistant Professor, at 9:56 am EST on December 20, 2005

As to WHY this disturbing situation occurs. . .

Dennis Ruhl states:"High school education methods have also changed. The theory today is not to require rote memorization of facts but instead teaching people to think. Lacking a factual background they can neither cite facts nor think. An acquaintance of mine even studied Latin in high school in the 1930s. Times have changed.”

I know my response is anecdotal, but it does speak to the situation: My son is quite privileged—not so much in a socio-economic way (given that I’m probably no “higher” than solidly middle class) but because: 1) he has two parents who, even though divorced, both love learning and have shared that love with him 2) he went to a private K-8 school (to pay for which I had to teach a lot of overtime, in addition to the financial aid he received) whose focus was to instill the love of learning. That school stressed critical thinking skills from kindergarten on (and possibly even in their nursery school, which he didn’t attend because I couldn’t afford it). Yet, at the same time the students learned facts—not through rote memorization, but through activities and assignments that placed those facts in a meaningful (and often fun) context. 3) he attends a high school which offers Honors and AP classes (by the way, including Latin: next year he’ll be taking AP Latin, along with his AP Spanish, AP Physics, AP Calculus).

My son is not alone: many of his friends are like him (though most didn’t go to his private school). Yes, they do tend to be blessed with more raw intelligence; what’s most important, though, is the value that they see in education—not in grade fishing, but in a treasure hunt for knowledge and comprehension.

Besides classes in which debate (construction of solid arguments in which claims are supported by logic and proofs) is a feature, there are many debate clubs in high schools. Students who join these activities often (though I’m sure not always) do so because of their love of argumentation.

Yes, the educational system needs help—far beyond what many call the Every Child Left Behind Act can do. However, the problem doesn’t start in high school. It doesn’t even necessarily start in grade school. It starts in the home culture and in the larger culture (what value is placed on education rather than mere training).

cjo, at 12:38 pm EST on December 20, 2005

Why doesn’t any of the faculty mention the dependence of students on internet research, internet chatting, instant messaging, I-pods in their ears, obsession with banal reality shows about losers who never read anything other than fan magazines about Jennifer Aniston, when they speculate about the lack of core knowledge. Further, why don’t they mention anything about the lack of intellectual curiosity and aptitude displayed by high school teachers who know even less it seems than their students and teach only to the teachers’ guide?

Ruth Raisfeld, at 3:30 pm EST on December 20, 2005

More and Worse?

Perhaps we need to return to the ol’ quote from Kingsley Amis, which has finally come to pass — hopefully I remember correctly “More will inevitably mean worse.”

The democraticazation of education makes it inevitable that not only the very affluent will attend (as was the case when the use of the subjunctive was more in vogue) and the higher educational system catered exclusively to them. At one point, reputable newspapers were for the cocktail lounge rich; the poor read “rags” whose grammer was far worse than present newspapers.

It is inevitable that if you declare your mission to be educating all and not merely the already very privilaged and very intelligent (many sons and daughters of privilage were denied a place in the universities of that forgone age) but rather to help people in general and educate the nation as a whole than you will need to speak to the average intelligence of your demographic — not to the “intelligencia” with no consideration of those holding less elite positions. The complain is elitist and rather whining.

If you have public universities, not private closed clubs for the elite, or have newspapers for the average American not the affluent and influencial, you will have to choose to relate to them on their intellectual level — most people have better things to do with their time than memorize obscure verbage so they can understand their daily news.

Kevin, Undergraduate, at 8:43 pm EST on December 20, 2005

Wild Fantasies Indeed

“An outside observer might ascribe my student’s mistakes to the political culture of this Midwestern city, where barely a day goes by without a letter to the editor in the local paper from some self-appointed foot soldier of the religious right.”

“Conservatives, for their part, are prone to wild fantasies about totalitarian leftist domination of the campuses.”

These quotes are funny for what they say, and for what they imply. In an article about literacy, Phelps just can’t help being disdainful of those whose politics differ (even when the politics in question are irrelevant to the topic). And the editors (and other readers) of this site don’t even notice.

Steve

Steve, at 9:23 am EST on December 21, 2005

College is a full-time job!

Here’s an idea about what’s changed over the years: students now expect to work while they go to school—an not just work-study jobs where financial aid students get to sit behind the library circulation desk doing their homework or internships where they might actually learn something but lousy drudge work in the Real World, the very sort of jobs they’re going to college to avoid which occupy study time and eat their brains.

In most cases it is a matter of choice, by students and their parents: parents who can afford to give their kids a free ride won’t—not because they’re stingy but because it’s no longer the accepted norm and because quite a few have the bizarre idea that drudge work is somehow good for kids, character-building, etc. And kids won’t take loans or settle for student poverty.

They are also damn self-righteous about it. I’ve had kids try to get excused from tests because they had to work. Even more bizarre, I’ve had them complain about bad grades on the grounds that they were working full time off campus—they were virtuous, and hardworking, so they should be rewarded.

I tell students that if they have to work to make the money to go to the private college at which I teach they shouldn’t be there in the first place. They can get a better education at a community college followed by the local state university if they go there and don’t work then they can get at my place or, in my opinion, any place else if they do work.

What matters when it comes to getting a good education is not so much what happens in class, or the caliber of faculty, but the resources—the library, computer facililties, cultural events and lectures—and most importantly of all the leisure to soak in this stuff.

H. E. Baber, Dr. at University of San Diego, at 3:28 pm EST on December 21, 2005

Level

John, you will have to start off by speaking to people at a level they can understand, and as their level of understanding rises, you can raise the level of your vocabulary if you deem it necessary. Whining that people come into college not being able to speak the elaborate jargon of the fields they enter off the bat (and english literature should probably be counted as technical jargon just as engineering terms are) is simply immature.

Kevin, Undergraduate, at 4:03 pm EST on December 21, 2005

I find it ever so reassuring to learn that the ivory tower remains intact, replete with hubris and untouched by anything more troubling than misplaced commas and the loss of the subjunctive.

If, indeed, the teaching of our young is such a burden, take heart! McDonald’s is always hiring.

Patrica, postgrad, at 2:45 pm EST on December 24, 2005

Declining student literacy

So when was the Golden Age, when were the good old days when everyone could read and write?

In the 18th century, Jonathan Swift proposed an English Academy because the language was degenerating. In the 19th century, the President of Harvard University eliminated written entrance exams because they were being written so poorly (by the sons—daughters didn’t go to college, of course—of the elite). In the mid-1960s, when SAT scores were at their all-time high, Admiral Hyman Rickover, in American Education: A National Failure (or maybe the subtitle was A National Disgrace) cited a University of Pittsburg study claiming that only one in 100 American high school students could write a simple letter to a friend.

Pick a time, pick a culture, and you’ll find older people complaining that the younger generation can’t write worth a damn. The earliest extant piece of human writing is a shard of Sumerian cuneiform script from about 3000 B.C. Guess what it says?

You got it: Kids today can’t write.

Philip, at 4:08 pm EST on January 2, 2006

How can you expect the students to be able to write correctly when the faculty cannot. I cringe every time I read an email sent out to faculty, or read an official document with a myriad of errors. At one point I corrected letters sent home from the superintendent of schools and sent them back with my children.

Many “educated faculty” cannot distinguish between their, they’re, and there, two, too, and to, and other typical errors we find unacceptable in our students; I find them inconceivable coming from faculty.

I was reading an email today, referring to the “gamete” of suggestions (perhaps the person meant “gamut")? If I took the time to cut and paste spelling and grammatical errors from professors onto this site, it would astound you.

One person asked for a solution to the problem: we cannot expect our students to be able to learn how to read and write if we cannot offer them the correct information. If we want top quality educators, we need to pay our teachers a more acceptable salary. Too many good teachers have left the teaching profession to pursue jobs where they can earn a salary where they can actually pay the bills. This is not the only solution, but a good start.

A recent investigation was completed in our county into the ratio of administration to faculty (1:17) and faculty to students (1:40)at the high school level. School systems are top heavy, give the “bigger bucks” to the administrators, which maintains smaller salaries for the people actually responsible for teaching our children!!!

I believe a few of the comments already submitted concur with my position. We need to police ourselves before we police our students.

DT, at 2:10 pm EST on January 26, 2006