From: Steve Davies (steve365@btinternet.com)
Date: Thu Aug 23 2001 - 14:17:13 MDT
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com>
To: extropians@extropy.org <extropians@extropy.org>
Date: 23 August 2001 15:29
Subject: Re: Paying for Schools (was: SOCIETY: Re: The privatizationofpublic
security)
>Miriam English wrote:
>>
>> At 07:55 PM 22/08/2001 +0100, Steve Davies wrote:
>> >This is true for other countries as well as the US - plenty of work on
the
>> >British case for example. Here we have just officially confirmed that
the
>> >under 35s have a lower standard of literacy than was the case before WW
I!
>>
>> I find that really hard to believe.
>
>Beleive it. The literacy rate here in the US has gone down markedly
>since the institution of widespread public education, and especially
>since the institution of Departments of Education in our universities as
>academic disciplines in their own right. They've taken a discipline that
>has worked very well for thousands of years and destroyed it in a
>century.
>
>> I couldn't agree more. Here is one of several reports on the study which
reveals the decline. I should say the journalist who wrote it has been a bit
sloppy - the figure of 2% in the 1912 Inspectors' Report refers to complete
illiteracy, not "functional illiteracy". However only 5% of children in 1912
were found to have "minimal ability" in reading and writing which
correspondes to our "functional illiteracy". It is worth pointing out that
the study finds a marked decline in literacy below the age of 35 as compared
to above it. This suggests that there is more afoot here than a simple
matter of "state schools bad, private schools good" (after all the literate
and numerate 40-60 year olds were mostly educated in state schools). There
has clearly been a major decline in educational attainment in Britain and
the US in the last 30-40 years, despite large increases in spending per
pupil over that period. What has caused this? I don't know for sure, I
suspect the process Mike Lorrey talks about is a major factor, as are daft
teaching methods and the "all must have prizes" attitude of so many parents
and teachers. I think the principal cause however is the impact of TV. Does
this matter ? I believe it does (and not just because I'm in the education
business). I'm a strong believer in the old Scottish idea of the "democratic
intellect", that a liberal and democratic society can only work properly
when there is a citizenry with a liberal education which gives everyone the
power to think critically. (I'm with Brian on this). In an age of moral
panics and pseudo-science this is more vital than ever. Steve Davies
Level of illiteracy among young is above that of 1912
EducationGuardian.co.uk
Tracy McVeigh, education editor
Observer
Sunday August 19, 2001
The reading and writing skills of Britain's young people are worse than they
were before the First World War, according to research released yesterday.
Despite the Government's efforts to improve the nation's literacy skills,
the study found that 15 per cent of people aged 15 to 21 are 'functionally
illiterate'. In 1912, school inspectors reported that only 2 per cent of
young people were unable to read or write.
The findings of the researchers, led by Professor Loreto Todd at the
University of Ulster, echo statistics produced by the National Skills Task
Force last year, which estimated that seven million adults were functionally
illiterate.
The study also found a high level of arrogance among the 15- to 21-year-olds
surveyed. Seven out of 10 believed they were 'pretty good' at getting words
right. But when they were asked to spot 14 mistakes in a piece of text, none
were able to identify them all. Girls did better than boys - as they have
been doing in exams for more than a decade - but were still unable to
pinpoint more than two-thirds of the mistakes correctly.
Boys only managed to spot 54 per cent of the mistakes. Despite this, men
were more likely to rate themselves as 'excellent' spellers than women.
With GCSE results - including those for English language - being published
next week, the findings suggest that there is a stubborn section of school
leavers left untouched by attempts to give them even the most basic skills.
The Government has promised to spend millions of pounds on improving adult
literacy, and the study showed that young people were aware of the damage an
inability to spell can do. Seven out of 10 said poor spellers were seen as
'careless, young, immature and unreliable'.
Despite this, the research - which was commissioned by Bloomsbury, the
publishing house - suggested that spelling skills are getting worse. When
presented with the same word spelt slightly differently three times, 90 per
cent of 41- to 50-year-olds got the right answer, compared with just 65 per
cent of 15- to 30-year-olds.
Older people were also unimpressed with the craze for mobile phone text
messaging, believing it caused spelling to deteriorate.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Education and Skills said: 'Last year
99 per cent of all 15-year-olds in schools who took GCSE English passed it
and have the equivalent of functional literacy or above.'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:10:01 MST