Are We Getting Stupider? Or Just More Stupid?

Patricia D

Fanfare! 50 Authors from 50 States Blog

  • Patricia D
  • Replies: 1
L

Salman Rushdie & Sherlock Homeboy

  • Litopian
  • Replies: 1
Status
Not open for further replies.
Diamond said:
My kids (ages 12 and 14) are getting a public education here in the USA. I just asked them the questions posed to the Cal Tech students on the first video.

The 14-year-old got all of them right except two. She didn't know the name of vice president or who Brad Pitt married. In fact, she didn't even know who Brad Pitt is. Boy, does that make me feel old! But, she knew Snookie was on Jersey Shore. So did the 12-year-old.

The 12-year-old didn't know the year we gained our independence, who Brad Pitt is and who he married, or the name of the Vice President. But he breezed through the other questions. BTW, he was gaming online with a classmate who is 11-years-old. He knew most of the anwers as well.

This makes me suspicious of the video. I'm imagining that the majority of students knew the answers. The producer chose only the most ignorant ones to highlight . . . because there wouldn't be much of a story if college kids were actually somewhat knowledgable of history.[/QUOTE

What´s scary is that all of those kids on the video somehow made it in to college.
Click to expand...
 
J. Rook said:
Absolutely right. And if we're to be successful we should try to bring back the extended family contact. Due to our live's little ways (I refuse to use the word "exigencies") I see my boy and his children once every three weeks for a whole day. I do my best. The grandchildren know it's a no-tech but talk day and they seem to enjoy it. A favourite topic (ages 11 and 13) is the existence of the deity. During the last visit I found myself telling both children and parent about James Baldwin. But once every three weeks isn't very much, is it?
Click to expand...

It´s enough of they love and respect you enough to pass it on.
 
AgentPete said:
In the first decade or two of the C20th, education was a highly-prized thing among many ordinary British people. Yes, as a means of self-advancement - but also in a purer sense, knowledge for its own ennobling sake.

You can get a feeling of this from things like the Association to promote the Higher Education of Working Men... and from books such as the voluminous Harmsworth Self-Educator (“A Golden Key To Success In Life”).

I’m wondering when, where and how education became so devalued that it’s now cool to be dumb. My own theory: young people have been ruthlessly conned by a media apparatus that simply wants to farm them...
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I went to primary school in the developing world -- it was cool to be clever. Started going to school in the UK aged 12 - massive culture shock. Kids just wanted to do drugs and be crass. I found it bizarre -- and lonely. I think the situation's changing in many parts of the country, but not all - a full change to the way education is perceived may require a culture shift on the part of parents and in many cases teachers too (many teachers are great, but in my experience, at least some were/are part of the problem). The media could help -- if they wanted to.
 
I have two gifted kids, both of whom have skipped a grade and could use to skip another one, academically. I have learned not to mention this except in my local gifted parent support group. If my children were spectacular at sports, I could brag all day about them, but heaven forbid a kid be smart...
 
Robinne Weiss said:
I have two gifted kids, both of whom have skipped a grade and could use to skip another one, academically. I have learned not to mention this except in my local gifted parent support group. If my children were spectacular at sports, I could brag all day about them, but heaven forbid a kid be smart...
Click to expand...

I have two of those as well, and an athlete,and you are absolutely right. Unfortunately, the school system seems to feel the same way. My kids really suffered through junior high and high school.
 
It was actually once suggested to me, by a former publisher of mine, that I "dumb down" my writing. I was told it was too sophisticated for this publisher's average reader, whatever the heck that means. I refused to do it. I mean seriously, give me a break. I write romance. I'm not tossing around complex scientific or medical jargon in my books. I don't even want to think about the reading comprehension skills of someone who finds this post, for example, too "sophisticated" to be in an erotic romance novel. I'd be up all night in a cold sweat, terrified for the state of the world.
 
You get a Panda too. Still no idea what it means. Hopefully not 'you are about to go extinct because you are unwilling to mate'o_O:D
 
Marc Joan said:
You get a Panda too. Still no idea what it means. Hopefully not 'you are about to go extinct because you are unwilling to mate'o_O:D
Click to expand...

Oh dear, i think you gave her a negative rating! That's what that symbol was for. Lol ...i was racking my brains who would dare give Carol a negative rating...and i've hunted you down @Marc Joan innocently playing with icons! Lol
 
I don't know..lol but am so tempted to play with the icons...just because they're so cute and colourful...and they're icons. Like a game :D
 
panda just says panda- doesn't that leave it up to the sender and receiver to decide its implications? From observing pandas at the zoo, I think sleeps 20 hours a day is a good definition.
 
Cool hearts and more. Less posting? Nar, not gunna happen :D
 
AHA! I finally found the thread where people realized there were new options and were playing around with them! I came in late working on a hot deadline, and was like,
"what... happened to Litopia? There are high-rises now and flying cars."

Yeah, I wondered why Panda was negative, but I have the distinct feeling that was discussed on the forum like a year ago, shortly after I arrived.
 
As a working teacher, I know just how clueless students can be. It is usually a mix of parental influence and relative popularity with peers that determines a child's level of engagement with the external world. In the school where I teach, in the same class, I have children who can barely name David Cameron and others who can debate the likely winners and losers in the next cabinet reshuffle. Once we meet parents, it is fairly easy to tell which families are cultured/educated/engaged and which are too busy with their own immediate concerns. That shouldn't be mistaken for a sign of academic prowess though. Some kids can jump through the hoops easily, and still know absolutely bugger all. Others can be well-informed but useless at tests and exams. Am still baffled after 20+ years in classroom as to why we do so much testing and why we are so obsessed by it. It is only ever a snapshot of ability and skills, not a true image.
 
I'd like to do a LAD on this topic, esp our current obsession with testing. Who might make good guests?
 
One possibility is Professor Joan Freeman, educational psychologist specialising in the identification / management of gifted children. She's not a teacher, so she would bring a different perspective -- but I'm not sure how interested she is in tests of achievement as opposed to tests of potential, if you see what I mean.But if you brought her on, you'd probably want a teacher as well. The extent to which the education system fails outliers at both ends of the spectrum might be a useful theme to develop?
 
She looks good. Invitation duly sent - thanks Marc!

Any other suggestions very welcome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Patricia D

Fanfare! 50 Authors from 50 States Blog

  • Patricia D
  • Replies: 1
L

Salman Rushdie & Sherlock Homeboy

  • Litopian
  • Replies: 1
Back
Top