Printable View
Yes, my bias is that most of the rest of the world does education better than we do these days, although I'm happy to see from your link that math scores for 9 to 13 year olds are getting nominally better. I wonder what happens by the time they turn 17? By that time they seem to be at the same point that they were 35 years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by benhyr
http://broadeducation.org/about/crisis_stats.html
But your statement was that we "took a dive." I see no dive on the charts I provided.Quote:
Originally Posted by alan
Additionally, the link you provided intermixes percentages and absolute numbers which, while entertaining, hardly make for relevancy.
So 1.2 million students drop out every year. Is that a high percentage or not a high percentage? How does that percentage compare to other countries with a similar makeup to the US? (not just industrialized, as we may have more immigrants, as a percentage, than some countries, and less than others). How does it compare to others that don't attract immigrants?
Our students rank 25th in math according to your link. First, is this a problem or not? Not every country can be first. Suppose they're basing test scores on an international test with an arbitrary 100 point scale. If the difference between the top 30 countries is, say, 5 points, then that might not be worth caring about. On the other hand, suppose on a force-fit bell curve, we end up just marginally better than non-industrialized nations and far behind the top 5 countries. That might be a cause for concern.
And, there's no history there. Have we been declining over the years or have we been static? That is, 30 years ago, were we in the same percentile, higher, or lower? And, are countries that were in our percentile 30 years ago still in our percentile? If not, we should examine why. If so, then again, maybe it's not a big deal or maybe it is.
I have some more fun statistics for you... I started college when I was 14 and never actually completed much of my high school curriculum, which we selected based on how I fared with the state's standardized placement tests (I was home-schooled). So, statistically, 100% of my class failed to finish high school.
Because your charts do not reflect the 30 or so years of educational decline, outside of math, that I originally mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by benhyr
See the United Nations report Human Development Research Paper, Graphical Statistical Methods for the Representation of the Human Development Index and its Components
Since it is a pdf document, I cannot pull out the graph showing the world educational rankings from 1970 to 2005 and post it here, although you can find it on page 21.
What it shows is a steady decline in the United States educational rankings from it's #2 spot in 1970 to #18 in 2005.
The reading graph on the same site also don't show a decline, at all. So, as far as readin' and addin' are concerned, it seems that, at worst, we've been static for the last 35 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by alan
Regarding the HDI report, page 41 is much more interesting. Statistically, there's really not much of a drop. Sure, we've moved from spot #2 to spot #18, but the standard deviation is so small that I'm not sure there's much cause for alarm.
Certainly, something we could stand to improve on greatly, but by the same charts we'd also do well to concentrate on factors the study references in regards to life expectancy as our decline has been fairly pronounced in that area as well.
Sort ofQuote:
Originally Posted by alan
Also, sort of.Quote:
Originally Posted by peggy
The start of the Declaration of Independence....
In this context, they're stating natural law (as opposed to common law) holds truth to be self-evident that we're all equal. It's a universal truth, not defended by man's law, it's just a fact that is... which drastically assaulted the aristocratic rule of the day. However, both in the first paragraph (Nature's God) and the start of the preamble, they do hold to a deist, monotheistic world view:Quote:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Here they're appealing to the higher authority and stating that those rights are endowed on everyone by their creator.Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Of course, though, the Declaration of Independence is a static document from a certain time period and it very much reflects people with a different worldview than any of us hold today. For instance, Jefferson, who framed much of the Declaration, was quite fine to continue as a slave owner (although, he did later make a case for repatriating slaves, even those born in the US, back to Africa as he largely felt free blacks would incite slaves to revolt). It's a bit tough to nail down Jefferson's thoughts as he was often cagey and ornery to get a reaction.
The Constitution, on the other hand, is a living document that grows and is shaped in response to how our country grows and is shaped (e.g., prohibition and then the lifting thereof). The Constitution, or more specifically it's amendments, goes out of its way to state that the government shall not establish a religion. It also states that no test of religion is required of any elected officials. Of course, the wording is vague and not necessarily actionable. In fact, one of the supreme court cases that tackled it does make for some interesting reading for anyone so inclined. The wikipedia entry on it is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_..._United_States
The judge that wrote the majority, Justice Brewer, has an interesting quote from a book he wrote on the case excerpted in that article:
Of course, while this case was argued a hundred years after the constitution was ratified, it certainly wasn't the first or last word on the debate. Again, that's the fun of living in a democracy with a well-established legal system and changeable Constitution; it changes as we change.Quote:
But in what sense can [the United States] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or the people are compelled in any manner to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that 'congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.' Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or in name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within its borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all. [...] Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions.
Well, knowing my mother's birthday is not going to help me compete in the global economy, but it's just one of those things I know. There are some basic facts that just seem like they should be common knowledge, but maybe I'm old fashioned in expecting that the American Revolution to be taught in schools. I think that fact that 1776 is not a date that comes trippingly off the tongue for a large majority of young people is appalling.Quote:
Originally Posted by benhyr
But I do agree that our values are surely speaking loud and clear, and that some day we might be in such bad economic shape the White House will be called the Kraft House, and the Mint will be called the Bank of America Mint, and the Smithsonian will be called the Sony Museum.
No wonder people get crotchety when they get old!
I'm sure it's taught... it's probably even remembered long enough for a test, but then that's about it ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
I find it appalling that I'm currently resorting to using an online calculator to to determine how long the hypotenuse on a triangle is given a side and two angles. I'm positive I learned this when I was 9 or 10 and I'm certain that there were some test questions on it and I would have been able to calculate the answer in my head.
I would be in favor of natural born inhabitants needing to pass a test before being granted citizenship; as long as there's no math involved and there aren't any trick questions like identifying a turning point in the European theater during WW2.
of course, there might be another reason test scores don't look so bad ;)
http://news.yahoo.com/americas-bigge...213734183.html
I am stunned. I had no idea. When I was teaching community college in upstate NY, I was increasingly irritated by students who figured it was okay to plagiarize, share answers, etc. Now I can see that the shortcut method when desperate is not just a thing that very young adults resort to. What are we teaching people? Thanks for the link. I am more shocked than I can actually say.
Get the Federal Government out of education. The States did it better.
Can you expand on that a bit? The federal government provides very little in the way of school funding (8.3%), which could certainly be lowered, but it's not like they're footing education. I suppose there is No Child Left Behind, but that was largely restructuring of current programs (replacing the Office of Education Research with the Institute of Education Sciences) and grants for schools in high-poverty areas (which I can see various positives and negatives)Quote:
Originally Posted by alan
Now, if you're talking about something like completely eliminating the department of education... well, that's been around since the 1860's and I'm not sure we have accurate information to quantitatively assess that schools performed better before then.
On education, I suspect that you'd see the great divergence you see in other parts of the society. The top tier of students are doing fabulously well, and as Jon Stewart would say "the bottom half not so much".