Nation's Reportcard

[monarch64]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

And that does not address the statistics noted above. So I assume you are fine with them correct?

I think it not only addresses them; it addresses the actual underlying cause of them.

 

[ksinger]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

OMG! Are you hanging out in Oklahoma perchance??

I seriously laughed out loud. Succinctness with razors.

And no need to worry about too much education catching on. Around here it's very much "don't be gettin' above yer raisin'", and the idea that too much learning is dangerous. Listening to my old boss hyperventilate at the prospect that her daughter might end up at a college on either coast where she might be exposed to things she doesn't want her exposed to, is a little amusing, but more sad.

 

[redwood66]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

Am I to assume that I am not one of the seven you have on ignore or did you just pop in to make your statement?

It would seem based on the DoE that the Dems have the same plan.

 

[monarch64]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

OMG! Are you hanging out in Oklahoma perchance??

I seriously laughed out loud. Succinctness with razors.

And no need to worry about too much education catching on. Around here it's very much "don't be gettin' above yer raisin'", and the idea that too much learning is dangerous. Listening to my old boss hyperventilate at the prospect that her daughter might end up at a college on either coast where she might be exposed to things she doesn't want her exposed to, is a little amusing, but more sad.

It's the same here. Education is not the priority outside of a few cities and beyond agriculture and engineering. I have a client who is a superintendent--this person was actually more concerned with how to get $1 million for new football field turf rather than the same amount so that every student could have a Chromebook. Having lunch with this person and listening to not only the manner in which they spoke about the students and parents, but the poor grammar and "whatever, I'm getting paid no matter how many we graduate" attitude has been a real eye-opener for me. Communicating via email and making edits to press release information from this person...well, it's rather easy to see why expectations are so low.

 

[redwood66]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

And that does not address the statistics noted above. So I assume you are fine with them correct?

I think it not only addresses them; it addresses the actual underlying cause of them.

Proof? I find it interesting when you look at the demographics of how people vote and their education or lack thereof.

 

[monarch64]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

And that does not address the statistics noted above. So I assume you are fine with them correct?

I think it not only addresses them; it addresses the actual underlying cause of them.

Proof? I find it interesting when you look at the demographics of how people vote and their education or lack thereof.

Proof of what? It's a perspective, a world view. Must we cite unbiased articles to reinforce or "prove" our opinions now?

 

[redwood66]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

And that does not address the statistics noted above. So I assume you are fine with them correct?

I think it not only addresses them; it addresses the actual underlying cause of them.

Proof? I find it interesting when you look at the demographics of how people vote and their education or lack thereof.

Proof of what? It's a perspective, a world view. Must we cite unbiased articles to reinforce or "prove" our opinions now?

Well if you say that this is the underlying cause I would assume that you have proof of this to make that statement. If it is just your opinion and that of VL then I will file it in the appropriate location.

 

[monarch64]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

And that does not address the statistics noted above. So I assume you are fine with them correct?

I think it not only addresses them; it addresses the actual underlying cause of them.

Proof? I find it interesting when you look at the demographics of how people vote and their education or lack thereof.

Proof of what? It's a perspective, a world view. Must we cite unbiased articles to reinforce or "prove" our opinions now?

Well if you say that this is the underlying cause I would assume that you have proof of this to make that statement. If it is just your opinion and that of VL then I will file it in the appropriate location.

Well, Red, can you prove that it's NOT the underlying cause?

And I am totally fine with you filing me and my opinion in the appropriate location of "*******s, everybody has one." Nice!

 

[redwood66]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

And that does not address the statistics noted above. So I assume you are fine with them correct?

I think it not only addresses them; it addresses the actual underlying cause of them.

Proof? I find it interesting when you look at the demographics of how people vote and their education or lack thereof.

Proof of what? It's a perspective, a world view. Must we cite unbiased articles to reinforce or "prove" our opinions now?

Well if you say that this is the underlying cause I would assume that you have proof of this to make that statement. If it is just your opinion and that of VL then I will file it in the appropriate location.

Well, Red, can you prove that it's NOT the underlying cause?

And I am totally fine with you filing me and my opinion in the appropriate location of "*******s, everybody has one." Nice!

I did not say that at all. I meant the round file like people say when they are filing something in an office. Geez lady.

At least now I know where you file my opinions!

 

[monarch64]

The Republican base would be lost without it's drone class. Their plan is to increase the drone class, but not the drone jobs, which keeps them angry. The religious thing keeps them focused on a reward they will never see in this lifetime, and gives them the illusion of a moral superiority, all the while ensuring the next generation of drones. The more drones doing more for less makes the rich richer.
An educated drone is a dangerous thing.

And that does not address the statistics noted above. So I assume you are fine with them correct?

I think it not only addresses them; it addresses the actual underlying cause of them.

Proof? I find it interesting when you look at the demographics of how people vote and their education or lack thereof.

Proof of what? It's a perspective, a world view. Must we cite unbiased articles to reinforce or "prove" our opinions now?

Well if you say that this is the underlying cause I would assume that you have proof of this to make that statement. If it is just your opinion and that of VL then I will file it in the appropriate location.

Well, Red, can you prove that it's NOT the underlying cause?

And I am totally fine with you filing me and my opinion in the appropriate location of "*******s, everybody has one." Nice!

I did not say that at all. I meant the round file like people say when they are filing something in an office. Geez lady.

At least now I know where you file my opinions!

No! I don't file anyone's there, yuck! Every time I think of you, though, I picture this wild woman with long red hair out in a forest of Redwoods carrying around a gun and driving a big black American made truck. It's all rather majestic and kind of scary at the same time.

What is this "round file?" I know hanging files, file folders, and, to tie back into this topic, a certain rage caused by some people's inability to accurately file things.

 

[redwood66]

No! I don't file anyone's there, yuck! Every time I think of you, though, I picture this wild woman with long red hair out in a forest of Redwoods carrying around a gun and driving a big black American made truck. It's all rather majestic and kind of scary at the same time.

What is this "round file?" I know hanging files, file folders, and, to tie back into this topic, a certain rage caused by some people's inability to accurately file things.

That is too funny! I do have guns and a black truck (DH's) and used to live among the beautiful redwoods. And of course my hair is long reddish brown. But I am not scary.


A round file is the garbage bin and it came from the round metal trash cans that were in offices and schools.

 

[monarch64]

No! I don't file anyone's there, yuck! Every time I think of you, though, I picture this wild woman with long red hair out in a forest of Redwoods carrying around a gun and driving a big black American made truck. It's all rather majestic and kind of scary at the same time.

What is this "round file?" I know hanging files, file folders, and, to tie back into this topic, a certain rage caused by some people's inability to accurately file things.

That is too funny! I do have guns and a black truck (DH's) and used to live among the beautiful redwoods. And of course my hair is long reddish brown. But I am not scary.


A round file is the garbage bin and it came from the round metal trash cans that were in offices and schools.

Awww, which is worse? Trash cans or rectums? Ok, ok. I will show myself out. (But seriously I have never heard "round file" before!)

 

[redwood66]

No! I don't file anyone's there, yuck! Every time I think of you, though, I picture this wild woman with long red hair out in a forest of Redwoods carrying around a gun and driving a big black American made truck. It's all rather majestic and kind of scary at the same time.

What is this "round file?" I know hanging files, file folders, and, to tie back into this topic, a certain rage caused by some people's inability to accurately file things.

That is too funny! I do have guns and a black truck (DH's) and used to live among the beautiful redwoods. And of course my hair is long reddish brown. But I am not scary.


A round file is the garbage bin and it came from the round metal trash cans that were in offices and schools.

Awww, which is worse? Trash cans or rectums? Ok, ok. I will show myself out. (But seriously I have never heard "round file" before!)

You are welcome everywhere because I was joking with the laughing emoji. I don't really like filing anyway. Too tedious.

 

[monarch64]

No! I don't file anyone's there, yuck! Every time I think of you, though, I picture this wild woman with long red hair out in a forest of Redwoods carrying around a gun and driving a big black American made truck. It's all rather majestic and kind of scary at the same time.

What is this "round file?" I know hanging files, file folders, and, to tie back into this topic, a certain rage caused by some people's inability to accurately file things.

That is too funny! I do have guns and a black truck (DH's) and used to live among the beautiful redwoods. And of course my hair is long reddish brown. But I am not scary.


A round file is the garbage bin and it came from the round metal trash cans that were in offices and schools.

Awww, which is worse? Trash cans or rectums? Ok, ok. I will show myself out. (But seriously I have never heard "round file" before!)

You are welcome everywhere because I was joking with the laughing emoji. I don't really like filing anyway. Too tedious.

Oh, I know! I was making fun of myself for that trash cans vs rectums comment. ha! Also, yeah, filing sucks.

 

[ksinger]

Yup, We need a change in our education system. Hope DeVos will do a good job as Secretary of Education.

I agree. I do hope so because I don't see how it can get any worse.

This issue is certainly more important to me than what Trump tweets or which bathroom someone uses. It will have much more far reaching consequences than those things for our country's future for sure.

If you don't understand where we've been, it's hard to make assessment of where we're going.

Here are the NEAP long term trends since 1971. It was worse, and now it's better. But if you just look at what amounts to a data point, it can be used as an outrage-stirring event and a justification for demolishing an educational system that has not actually gotten worse.

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ltt_2012/default_alt.aspx

 

[monarch64]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

 

[ksinger]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

Yep. And it’s not just rural America. I’ve encountered this fear right here “in town”, the whole state of Oklahoma being just a slightly large small town in most respects. It’s a bit more subtle than outright disdain of education, since more often there really is an expectation of more formal education after high school. But the anxiety is greater for that.

The first time I saw that attitude in high relief, was back in ’99, when Oklahoma attempted to insert Alabama’s (I think it was theirs) textbook disclaimer on evolution, into our science texts - “evolution is ONLY a theory”, blah blah. It ultimately didn’t fly in Alabama (I think), and it did not here for sure, thank goodness. At the time, despite being the good heathen that I am, I was attending one of the very very very few non-fundamentalist churches around here. They got a panel together to have a public debate on the issue - teachers, theologians, politicians. It was very instructive. The arguments pro and con were what you’d expect - we’ve all heard them I’m sure. What was really an eye-opener, were the teens that had been sent from other churches, and who asked questions with what was clearly a load of defensiveness and a bit of a ‘tude.

They lined up and read their little written statements before their actual question. One young man said essentially, “I really want to go into biology, but I’m scared it might destroy my faith.” There you have it in a nutshell. Too much learning is scary. Too much learning of things that might challenge what I was given as dogma. He was clearly taught that fear by people who were fearful - teens aren’t generally fearful of entertaining new ideas without a lot of training in how they should be scared.

Then there was my old boss, who has sent her daughter to parochial school. Catholic. I have no problem with this, but she would periodically fret aloud about what if her daughter goes to some university and gets indoctrinated with left-y ideas. I gently pointed out that at some point her daughter IS going to end up having some different ideas than mom. She just sighed and said, “I know, but….” I really love this gal, but let’s be honest, she’s exhibiting that “learning is scary/only good to a point” attitude. Mom is educated in a hard science, and isn’t scared of the idea of evolution or anything like that, but still, there is a level of “exposure” of her daughter to ideas that conflict with her own, that she frets about.

 

[bunnycat]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

Yep. And it’s not just rural America. I’ve encountered this fear right here “in town”, the whole state of Oklahoma being just a slightly large small town in most respects. It’s a bit more subtle than outright disdain of education, since more often there really is an expectation of more formal education after high school. But the anxiety is greater for that.

The first time I saw that attitude in high relief, was back in ’99, when Oklahoma attempted to insert Alabama’s (I think it was theirs) textbook disclaimer on evolution, into our science texts - “evolution is ONLY a theory”, blah blah. It ultimately didn’t fly in Alabama (I think), and it did not here for sure, thank goodness. At the time, despite being the good heathen that I am, I was attending one of the very very very few non-fundamentalist churches around here. They got a panel together to have a public debate on the issue - teachers, theologians, politicians. It was very instructive. The arguments pro and con were what you’d expect - we’ve all heard them I’m sure. What was really an eye-opener, were the teens that had been sent from other churches, and who asked questions with what was clearly a load of defensiveness and a bit of a ‘tude.

They lined up and read their little written statements before their actual question. One young man said essentially, “I really want to go into biology, but I’m scared it might destroy my faith.” There you have it in a nutshell. Too much learning is scary. Too much learning of things that might challenge what I was given as dogma. He was clearly taught that fear by people who were fearful - teens aren’t generally fearful of entertaining new ideas without a lot of training in how they should be scared.

Then there was my old boss, who has sent her daughter to parochial school. Catholic. I have no problem with this, but she would periodically fret aloud about what if her daughter goes to some university and gets indoctrinated with left-y ideas. I gently pointed out that at some point her daughter IS going to end up having some different ideas than mom. She just sighed and said, “I know, but….” I really love this gal, but let’s be honest, she’s exhibiting that “learning is scary/only good to a point” attitude. Mom is educated in a hard science, and isn’t scared of the idea of evolution or anything like that, but still, there is a level of “exposure” of her daughter to ideas that conflict with her own, that she frets about.

Yes- I grew up in a family like this. These ideas are very prevalent where I am at. The fear is also a symptom of a deeper issue- lack of control. If your beliefs are something other than what mine are, I can't control you. You are "other", "foreign".

 

[redwood66]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

We all know how Forsetti feels about his upbringing and his articles have been posted here quite a bit. If this helps you sleep better at night to take on his attitude then by all means do it. You can blame anyone you like for Trump and the poor numbers from the OP. I know plenty of fine people who are happy with their lives whether they went to college or not. They surely don't need your, or his, approval.

Edit - And we know your (collective) problem is religion so you should just stop right here.

None of that explains why people are graduating from high school if they are unable to read, write, and perform at least somewhat proficiently at math. Should they not be held back if they aren't? Why do schools graduate them?

 

[bunnycat]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

We all know how Forsetti feels about his upbringing and his articles have been posted here quite a bit. If this helps you sleep better at night to take on his attitude then by all means do it. You can blame anyone you like for Trump and the poor numbers from the OP. I know plenty of fine people who are happy with their lives whether they went to college or not. They surely don't need your, or his, approval.

Edit - And we know your (collective) problem is religion so you should just stop right here.

I guess I don't see this comment as seeking to give approval. ???

I'm glad you know plenty of people happy with their lives. I don't read the comment as trying to say they are unhappy with their lives, merely stating a fact of how some people do live. It's great if you've never been on the receiving end of this type of attitude posted in the comment, but that also doesn't negate that it happens, and it doesn't negate the feelings of those of us who have experienced it. For myself, almost my entire family (and I really do mean almost all...) have shunned me for not believing as they do, or allowing them to dictate my life to conform to their way of life and viewpoint. I don't exist to them anymore, precisely because I am seen as one of those "educated elites" who thinks they know everything and disrespects them (while at the same time looking down their nose at me for beign different... ). In reality, if they'd taken even a moment of time to actually get to know me, they'd know I mostly want to be left in peace, and don't care at all whether they believe as I do or not. Mostly, it appears to have been the other way around. They are offended I don't believe as they do.

 

[redwood66]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

We all know how Forsetti feels about his upbringing and his articles have been posted here quite a bit. If this helps you sleep better at night to take on his attitude then by all means do it. You can blame anyone you like for Trump and the poor numbers from the OP. I know plenty of fine people who are happy with their lives whether they went to college or not. They surely don't need your, or his, approval.

Edit - And we know your (collective) problem is religion so you should just stop right here.

I guess I don't see this comment as seeking to give approval. ???

I'm glad you know plenty of people happy with their lives. I don't read the comment as trying to say they are unhappy with their lives, merely stating a fact of how some people do live. It's great if you've never been on the receiving end of this type of attitude posted in the comment, but that also doesn't negate that it happens, and it doesn't negate the feelings of those of us who have experienced it. For myself, almost my entire family (and I really do mean almost all...) have shunned me for not believing as they do, or allowing them to dictate my life to conform to their way of life and viewpoint. I don't exist to them anymore.

The article by itself is a disapproval of a group of people. I am sorry that you have experienced something unfortunate in your life. It is terrible when families cannot find common ground to love each other.

 

[bunnycat]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

We all know how Forsetti feels about his upbringing and his articles have been posted here quite a bit. If this helps you sleep better at night to take on his attitude then by all means do it. You can blame anyone you like for Trump and the poor numbers from the OP. I know plenty of fine people who are happy with their lives whether they went to college or not. They surely don't need your, or his, approval.

Edit - And we know your (collective) problem is religion so you should just stop right here.

I guess I don't see this comment as seeking to give approval. ???

I'm glad you know plenty of people happy with their lives. I don't read the comment as trying to say they are unhappy with their lives, merely stating a fact of how some people do live. It's great if you've never been on the receiving end of this type of attitude posted in the comment, but that also doesn't negate that it happens, and it doesn't negate the feelings of those of us who have experienced it. For myself, almost my entire family (and I really do mean almost all...) have shunned me for not believing as they do, or allowing them to dictate my life to conform to their way of life and viewpoint. I don't exist to them anymore.

The article by itself is a disapproval of a group of people. I am sorry that you have experienced something unfortunate in your life. It is terrible when families cannot find common ground to love each other.

I'm sorry you view it that way. I have read this article in the past and didn't see it that way myself the last time I read it. More of another explanation of why the election happened as it did (and IMO, it is certainly not the only reason as the author seems to think- there were many more). Stating that the attitude exists (and it is very prevalent) is stating it exists. It is not inherently in itself disapproval, merely acknowledgement. When a person writes, their personal view may also be apparent in a piece of information, but that also does not negate the information itself, the objective part, which in this case is a certain attitude (certainly not limited to this country or this time period) of being dismissive of people who don't think like you do. In the deep south, where I am, having advanced education generally marks you as "other" among significant portions of a population over a certain age. Perhaps it is different where you are.

 

[redwood66]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

We all know how Forsetti feels about his upbringing and his articles have been posted here quite a bit. If this helps you sleep better at night to take on his attitude then by all means do it. You can blame anyone you like for Trump and the poor numbers from the OP. I know plenty of fine people who are happy with their lives whether they went to college or not. They surely don't need your, or his, approval.

Edit - And we know your (collective) problem is religion so you should just stop right here.

I guess I don't see this comment as seeking to give approval. ???

I'm glad you know plenty of people happy with their lives. I don't read the comment as trying to say they are unhappy with their lives, merely stating a fact of how some people do live. It's great if you've never been on the receiving end of this type of attitude posted in the comment, but that also doesn't negate that it happens, and it doesn't negate the feelings of those of us who have experienced it. For myself, almost my entire family (and I really do mean almost all...) have shunned me for not believing as they do, or allowing them to dictate my life to conform to their way of life and viewpoint. I don't exist to them anymore.

The article by itself is a disapproval of a group of people. I am sorry that you have experienced something unfortunate in your life. It is terrible when families cannot find common ground to love each other.

I'm sorry you view it that way. I have read this article in the past and didn't see it that way myself the last time I read it. More of another explanation of why the election happened as it did (and IMO, it is certainly not the only reason as the author seems to think- there were many more). Stating that the attitude exists (and it is very prevalent) is stating it exists. It is not inherently in itself disapproval, merely acknowledgement. When a person writes, their personal view may also be apparent in a piece of information, but that also does not negate the information itself, the objective part, which in this case is a certain attitude (certainly not limited to this country or this time period) of being dismissive of people who don't think like you do. In the deep south, where I am, having advanced education generally marks you as "other" among significant portions of a population over a certain age. Perhaps it is different where you are.

His views are opinion. I live in the state he is from and there are all kinds of people who live here. I don't spend time with people who are adamant that I agree with them or look on me with disdain because I do not. I also do not judge people for their views and lifestyle even if I do not agree with it. I think you are generalizing the south just as Forsetti generalizes his upbringing in my state.

But none of this has to do with my question up thread because we are talking about education and the numbers in the OP.

None of that explains why people are graduating from high school if they are unable to read, write, and perform at least somewhat proficiently at math. Shouldn't they be held back if they aren't? Why do schools graduate them?

 

[bunnycat]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

We all know how Forsetti feels about his upbringing and his articles have been posted here quite a bit. If this helps you sleep better at night to take on his attitude then by all means do it. You can blame anyone you like for Trump and the poor numbers from the OP. I know plenty of fine people who are happy with their lives whether they went to college or not. They surely don't need your, or his, approval.

Edit - And we know your (collective) problem is religion so you should just stop right here.

I guess I don't see this comment as seeking to give approval. ???

I'm glad you know plenty of people happy with their lives. I don't read the comment as trying to say they are unhappy with their lives, merely stating a fact of how some people do live. It's great if you've never been on the receiving end of this type of attitude posted in the comment, but that also doesn't negate that it happens, and it doesn't negate the feelings of those of us who have experienced it. For myself, almost my entire family (and I really do mean almost all...) have shunned me for not believing as they do, or allowing them to dictate my life to conform to their way of life and viewpoint. I don't exist to them anymore.

The article by itself is a disapproval of a group of people. I am sorry that you have experienced something unfortunate in your life. It is terrible when families cannot find common ground to love each other.

I'm sorry you view it that way. I have read this article in the past and didn't see it that way myself the last time I read it. More of another explanation of why the election happened as it did (and IMO, it is certainly not the only reason as the author seems to think- there were many more). Stating that the attitude exists (and it is very prevalent) is stating it exists. It is not inherently in itself disapproval, merely acknowledgement. When a person writes, their personal view may also be apparent in a piece of information, but that also does not negate the information itself, the objective part, which in this case is a certain attitude (certainly not limited to this country or this time period) of being dismissive of people who don't think like you do. In the deep south, where I am, having advanced education generally marks you as "other" among significant portions of a population over a certain age. Perhaps it is different where you are.

His views are opinion. I live in the state he is from and there are all kinds of people who live here. I don't spend time with people who are adamant that I agree with them or look on me with disdain because I do not. I also do not judge people for their views and lifestyle even if I do not agree with it.

But none of this has to do with my question up thread because we are talking about education and the numbers in the OP.

None of that explains why people are graduating from high school if they are unable to read, write, and perform at least somewhat proficiently at math. Shouldn't they be held back if they aren't? Why do schools graduate them?

That's true too. I'll return to topic now.

It's only my opinion, but probably some of the reasons why people are doing so poorly are precisely some of the ones I spoke of earlier.

1-Incessant obsession with grade school age testing and metrics. Teachers have to teach to get students to perform on a test so that the school is not penalized. Being able to perform on a test is by no means a verification that they have a broader understanding outside being able to perform as asked. They are trained to test, not trained to think. This drives GOOD teachers away to other fields and students don't actually learn how to think. I've worked inside this system, and so I know this is part of the problem.

2- Heavy reliance on only technology. Obviously, I am speaking from a math standpoint here, but more and more college age students are severely incapacitated when having to do even simple calculation without a calculator. I.e. students in a (college) math class on alegbra who can't even look at a simple equation like y=-x+1 and know what the graph looks like without using a graphing calculator. Why? Well, this may partly go back to what you said earlier about some people not having a bent for advanced learning. And in the real world, this is perhaps correct on the surface. They may never ever have to use the fact that this is a written model of a line pointing to the left with a slope of -1 and that intersects the y axis at 0 with a value of 1 and the x axis at 1 with a value of 0. Who cares, except perhaps another math nerd? But, as an intellectual concept, and as a way of training the brain to think abstractly and analytically, is this not the kind of thing we are asking for in kids? y=-x+1 is not some strange concept only a "smarty pants" should know. It's an idea that you look at this thing that is written in shorthand and knowing how certain logic rules work, and how our number system works and the logic behind it, you can make a picture with it. It isn't something to be "memorized". When you are taught HOW to think about it, it's merely another piece of information, and one that could be used to track something useful, like how temperature changes when cold front comes through, not something scary. The trouble here again, is there are many people who teach at below college and high school levels, their major was EDUCATION and not the actual subject in math/science they are teaching. They had to take a certain amount to satisfy their degree plan and that's it. So, if they've never had a number theory class, never had to do a proof or study group theory (which is studying the way our number system works and how we organize things like addition and subtraction and what rules apply to them) then how can they teach this concept if they themselves either didn't learn it or weren't interested? Not to mention the fact the pay sucks, so people who DO have an actual degree in the field aren't interested in the restrictions and mindlessness of the teaching field.

You'd also have to answer the question then of "what is the minimum a person ought to know at the end of high school"? How to add and subtract without a calculator? How to deal with fractions? What a fraction is without using a calculator? (These are the concepts math common core tries to address). And, I'm sure the debate on that could be endless.....

As I mentioned before at the beginning, school vouchers won't fix these problems. It's already been shown with studies.

 

[redwood66]

1-Incessant obsession with grade school age testing and metrics. Teachers have to teach to get students to perform on a test so that the school is not penalized. Being able to perform on a test is by no means a verification that they have a broader understanding outside being able to perform as asked. They are trained to test, not trained to think. This drives GOOD teachers away to other fields and students don't actually learn how to think. I've worked inside this system, and so I know this is part of the problem.

2- Heavy reliance on only technology. Obviously, I am speaking from a math standpoint here, but more and more college age students are severely incapacitated when having to do even simple calculation without a calculator. I.e. students in a (college) math class on alegbra who can't even look at a simple equation like y=-x+1 and know what the graph looks like without using a graphing calculator. Why? Well, this may partly go back to what you said earlier about some people not having a bent for advanced learning. And in the real world, this is perhaps correct on the surface. They may never ever have to use the fact that this is a written model of a line pointing to the left with a slope of -1 and that intersects the y axis at 0 with a value of 1 and the x axis at 1 with a value of 0. Who cares, except perhaps another math nerd? But, as an intellectual concept, and as a way of training the brain to think abstractly and analytically, is this not the kind of thing we are asking for in kids? y=-x+1 is not some strange concept only a "smarty pants" should know. It's an idea that you look at this thing that is written in shorthand and knowing how certain logic rules work, and how our number system works and the logic behind it, you can make a picture with it. It isn't something to be "memorized". When you are taught HOW to think about it, it's merely another piece of information, and one that could be used to track something useful, like how temperature changes when cold front comes through, not something scary. The trouble here again, is there are many people who teach at below college and high school levels, their major was EDUCATION and not the actual subject in math/science they are teaching. They had to take a certain amount to satisfy their degree plan and that's it. So, if they've never had a number theory class, never had to do a proof or study group theory (which is studying the way our number system works and how we organize things like addition and subtraction and what rules apply to them) then how can they teach this concept if they themselves either didn't learn it or weren't interested? Not to mention the fact the pay sucks, so people who DO have an actual degree in the field aren't interested in the restrictions and mindlessness of the teaching field.

You'd also have to answer the question then of "what is the minimum a person ought to know at the end of high school"? How to add and subtract without a calculator? How to deal with fractions? What a fraction is without using a calculator? (These are the concepts math common core tries to address). And, I'm sure the debate on that could be endless.....

As I mentioned before at the beginning, school vouchers won't fix these problems. It's already been shown with studies.

Which leads to these articles:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/2013/10/24/a-key-reason-why-american-students-do-poorly/#76d205bb2349

https://www.city-journal.org/html/why-johnny%E2%80%99s-teacher-can%E2%80%99t-teach-11928.html


And if one is going to college they should at least be able to do the things you listed. Going back to school has been interesting for my son who is 25. He spent 4 years in the military and is now in school for nursing. I have read some of the writings he critiques in class for other students and it is definitely discouraging.

 

[bunnycat]

1-Incessant obsession with grade school age testing and metrics. Teachers have to teach to get students to perform on a test so that the school is not penalized. Being able to perform on a test is by no means a verification that they have a broader understanding outside being able to perform as asked. They are trained to test, not trained to think. This drives GOOD teachers away to other fields and students don't actually learn how to think. I've worked inside this system, and so I know this is part of the problem.

2- Heavy reliance on only technology. Obviously, I am speaking from a math standpoint here, but more and more college age students are severely incapacitated when having to do even simple calculation without a calculator. I.e. students in a (college) math class on alegbra who can't even look at a simple equation like y=-x+1 and know what the graph looks like without using a graphing calculator. Why? Well, this may partly go back to what you said earlier about some people not having a bent for advanced learning. And in the real world, this is perhaps correct on the surface. They may never ever have to use the fact that this is a written model of a line pointing to the left with a slope of -1 and that intersects the y axis at 0 with a value of 1 and the x axis at 1 with a value of 0. Who cares, except perhaps another math nerd? But, as an intellectual concept, and as a way of training the brain to think abstractly and analytically, is this not the kind of thing we are asking for in kids? y=-x+1 is not some strange concept only a "smarty pants" should know. It's an idea that you look at this thing that is written in shorthand and knowing how certain logic rules work, and how our number system works and the logic behind it, you can make a picture with it. It isn't something to be "memorized". When you are taught HOW to think about it, it's merely another piece of information, and one that could be used to track something useful, like how temperature changes when cold front comes through, not something scary. The trouble here again, is there are many people who teach at below college and high school levels, their major was EDUCATION and not the actual subject in math/science they are teaching. They had to take a certain amount to satisfy their degree plan and that's it. So, if they've never had a number theory class, never had to do a proof or study group theory (which is studying the way our number system works and how we organize things like addition and subtraction and what rules apply to them) then how can they teach this concept if they themselves either didn't learn it or weren't interested? Not to mention the fact the pay sucks, so people who DO have an actual degree in the field aren't interested in the restrictions and mindlessness of the teaching field.

You'd also have to answer the question then of "what is the minimum a person ought to know at the end of high school"? How to add and subtract without a calculator? How to deal with fractions? What a fraction is without using a calculator? (These are the concepts math common core tries to address). And, I'm sure the debate on that could be endless.....

As I mentioned before at the beginning, school vouchers won't fix these problems. It's already been shown with studies.

Which leads to these articles:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/2013/10/24/a-key-reason-why-american-students-do-poorly/#76d205bb2349

https://www.city-journal.org/html/why-johnny%E2%80%99s-teacher-can%E2%80%99t-teach-11928.html


And if one is going to college they should at least be able to do the things you listed. Going back to school has been interesting for my son who is 25. He spent 4 years in the military and is now in school for nursing. I have read some of the writings he critiques in class for other students and it is definitely discouraging.

Lol- I like how they automatically make it a "liberal" problem. But try to leave that aside for a moment and ignore the slant and look at one of the basic issues that teachers aren't being trained properly to understand what they teach (because they don't actually major in it, but have to acquire education credentials). I see this less as a product of "progressive politicking" at the university level and more a problem of the continued compartmentalization of knowledge (eg, as the article states, the requirement for acquiring credentials). I think the author makes an erroneous conclusion that it is a "progressive" issue. It is an issue which has developed over time and decades as a continued response to our world becoming ever more specialized as it becomes more complicated. There's no need to place blame, especially with something as important as education. It is a problem, and as I see it has little to do with your political bent but YYMV and I wish the author had not done so.

 

[monarch64]

Just gonna leave this here: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/rural-america-understanding-isnt-problem

Excerpt:

"At some point during the discussion, they will say, “That’s your education talking,” derogatorily, as a general dismissal of everything I said. They truly believe this is a legitimate response, because to them education is not to be trusted. Education is the enemy of fundamentalism because fundamentalism, by its very nature, is not built on facts. The fundamentalists I grew up around aren’t anti-education. They want their kids to know how to read and write. They are against quality, in-depth, broad, specialized education. Learning is only valued up to a certain point. Once it reaches the level where what you learn contradicts doctrine and fundamentalist arguments, it becomes dangerous. I watched a lot of my fellow students who were smart, stop their education the day they graduated high school. For most of the young ladies, getting married and having kids was more important than continuing their learning. For many of the young men, getting a college education was seen as unnecessary and a waste of time. For the few who did go to college, what they learned was still filtered through their fundamentalist belief systems. If something they were taught didn’t support a preconception, it would be ignored and forgotten the second it was no longer needed to pass an exam."

We all know how Forsetti feels about his upbringing and his articles have been posted here quite a bit. If this helps you sleep better at night to take on his attitude then by all means do it. You can blame anyone you like for Trump and the poor numbers from the OP. I know plenty of fine people who are happy with their lives whether they went to college or not. They surely don't need your, or his, approval.

Edit - And we know your (collective) problem is religion so you should just stop right here.

None of that explains why people are graduating from high school if they are unable to read, write, and perform at least somewhat proficiently at math. Should they not be held back if they aren't? Why do schools graduate them?

My problem isn't necessarily religion. My problem is that it is valued over and above education, and I see it nearly every day. I saw it constantly growing up. I am ALL for students learning a trade. I am working right now with a superintendent of a group of schools in a historically D rated system on an education workforce initiative. My job is basically to create a buzz about it so that students have more of an incentive to stay in school and get a certificate that acts as a kind of job reference, because employers here refuse to hire students who don't bother to come to school, perform poorly when they do, and can't stay out of trouble. The superintendent was super happy to get the grant money and hire people to do the work involved, but the attitude was very much "hahaha, we'll see if this idea sticks, NBD if it doesn't!" That is the shit I'm dealing with. I will never take on a client in education again.

I posted this opinion piece because I thought it was a good summation of why one group of people is very closed off to outside influence, that's all. Most of it seems to be an observation. The thread is about education, and this ties into it. That's all.

Edited to correct typos.

 

[redwood66]

1-Incessant obsession with grade school age testing and metrics. Teachers have to teach to get students to perform on a test so that the school is not penalized. Being able to perform on a test is by no means a verification that they have a broader understanding outside being able to perform as asked. They are trained to test, not trained to think. This drives GOOD teachers away to other fields and students don't actually learn how to think. I've worked inside this system, and so I know this is part of the problem.

2- Heavy reliance on only technology. Obviously, I am speaking from a math standpoint here, but more and more college age students are severely incapacitated when having to do even simple calculation without a calculator. I.e. students in a (college) math class on alegbra who can't even look at a simple equation like y=-x+1 and know what the graph looks like without using a graphing calculator. Why? Well, this may partly go back to what you said earlier about some people not having a bent for advanced learning. And in the real world, this is perhaps correct on the surface. They may never ever have to use the fact that this is a written model of a line pointing to the left with a slope of -1 and that intersects the y axis at 0 with a value of 1 and the x axis at 1 with a value of 0. Who cares, except perhaps another math nerd? But, as an intellectual concept, and as a way of training the brain to think abstractly and analytically, is this not the kind of thing we are asking for in kids? y=-x+1 is not some strange concept only a "smarty pants" should know. It's an idea that you look at this thing that is written in shorthand and knowing how certain logic rules work, and how our number system works and the logic behind it, you can make a picture with it. It isn't something to be "memorized". When you are taught HOW to think about it, it's merely another piece of information, and one that could be used to track something useful, like how temperature changes when cold front comes through, not something scary. The trouble here again, is there are many people who teach at below college and high school levels, their major was EDUCATION and not the actual subject in math/science they are teaching. They had to take a certain amount to satisfy their degree plan and that's it. So, if they've never had a number theory class, never had to do a proof or study group theory (which is studying the way our number system works and how we organize things like addition and subtraction and what rules apply to them) then how can they teach this concept if they themselves either didn't learn it or weren't interested? Not to mention the fact the pay sucks, so people who DO have an actual degree in the field aren't interested in the restrictions and mindlessness of the teaching field.

You'd also have to answer the question then of "what is the minimum a person ought to know at the end of high school"? How to add and subtract without a calculator? How to deal with fractions? What a fraction is without using a calculator? (These are the concepts math common core tries to address). And, I'm sure the debate on that could be endless.....

As I mentioned before at the beginning, school vouchers won't fix these problems. It's already been shown with studies.

Which leads to these articles:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/2013/10/24/a-key-reason-why-american-students-do-poorly/#76d205bb2349

https://www.city-journal.org/html/why-johnny%E2%80%99s-teacher-can%E2%80%99t-teach-11928.html


And if one is going to college they should at least be able to do the things you listed. Going back to school has been interesting for my son who is 25. He spent 4 years in the military and is now in school for nursing. I have read some of the writings he critiques in class for other students and it is definitely discouraging.

Lol- I like how they automatically make it a "liberal" problem. But try to leave that aside for a moment and ignore the slant and look at one of the basic issues that teachers aren't being trained properly to understand what they teach (because they don't actually major in it, but have to acquire education credentials). I see this less as a product of "progressive politicking" at the university level and more a problem of the continued compartmentalization of knowledge (eg, as the article states, the requirement for acquiring credentials). I think the author makes an erroneous conclusion that it is a "progressive" issue. It is an issue which has developed over time and decades as a continued response to our world becoming ever more specialized as it becomes more complicated. There's no need to place blame, especially with something as important as education. It is a problem, and as I see it has little to do with your political bent but YYMV and I wish the author had not done so.

The second article is much more in depth on the problem.

 

[bunnycat]

One of the problems as I said, is also deciding what a person ought to know for college.

Most people in a college degree plans have a mathematic requirement. Every semester, my hubby Mr Bcat, who as Asst Dpt Chair also advises student on courses. Many students do not come out of high school with even the basic understanding to pass the lowest college level math course a person can take to satisfy their degree plan- college algebra. There is a math for non science majors class that he always encourages students not going on in science to take, which covers more "life applications" like understanding loans and mortgages and fulfills their requirements. Still, they sign up for CA, and fail. And fail. And fail....over and over til they are forced to go back to remedial math (that you don't get any college credit for) and they fail, and they fail. And the state (and I live in a SUPER conservative state, so I hope no one thinks to say to me that the "progressive" state and their mandates to the "progressive" universities is the problem as the article assumes- I assure you, the last time this state was blue was in the 70's).

So the state mandates to the colleges (and the college the hubbles teaches at is fairly progressive) what scores a student must have to take Coll Alg, and the hubbles has argued repeatedly that they have set the score too low, and people just are not prepared, and aren't going to pass. And after 25 years teaching at college level...I know who I believe when it comes to him or them! The state controls funding. The state and state school board (let me remind you this is a very very very red state) also regulates the curriculum that must be covered. I can assure you it is not a "liberal" issue, but as I said, reactions to the way our society has developed. The solutions aren't WORKING, but that is beside the point here.

BTW- that second piece was grossly opinionated, and not even by implication but by the author's own words, moreso than the article which you disliked and considered opinionated. Still, looking past that, let's look past the very very obvious finger pointing at "progressivism" which I'm not even sure they really understood. I'm not even sure if I do. The article was 20 years old, about from the same time period as when I was doing further education to consider becoming a teacher, and the problem was already seen back then. One of the ways I'm guessing was tried to combat it was more of a "feeling" or intutitive approach. I would agree with the author that is not a good approach. I disagree that a person who has no in depth knowledge of the education field should write dismissively of the idea that teachers who view standardized testing as irrelevant as if it is fact.

With further research (as opposed to researching just enough to be able to twist ideas to ride their obvious political hobby horse) they might have found that the issue is not the testing itself, but the testing as a be all and end all, to the point that it has become the basis for funding. Objective tests are fine, the show certain things that used correctly can be helpful. However, basing an education system around only those is how we got to where we are.

 

[bunnycat]

As an aside, I happen to think these issues about the disconnect and decline of contemporary education have been going on a very long time, since well before they became a partisan pet topic.

For example, here is a high school math book from 1968 I have. It covers abstract ideas like group theory and set theory which are math structure concepts that underly our system of mathematics. (Or, if you like, a concrete look at how the human brain organizes numbers and how we compute and why it follows the logic it does.) Even back in the day, there was "concern" people weren't learning properly, or thoroughly, and this would have been considered an attempt at "common core" back then. It's abstract conceptual (intuitive) learning, but this book is based in applying logic definitions as opposed to "how do you feel about x or y?". FWIW- this clearly didn't work either....