Debate Now The Dumbing Down of America

[Foxfyre]

Admittedly this is from a decidedly libertarian site that supports a specific point of view and the article quotes from another site that also has a specific point of view, but can anybody rebut what is said here?

. . .Americans are only just now waking up to a quiet but devastatingly effective effort to replace the teaching of traditional American history in our high schools with a new, centrally controlled, and sharply left-leaning curriculum.

The College Board, the company that issues the SAT and the various Advanced Placement (AP) exams, has created an elaborate new framework for the AP U.S. History Exam that will effectively force nearly all American high schools, public and private, to transform the way they teach U.S. History.

The traditional emphasis on America’s founders and the principles of constitutional government will soon be jettisoned in favor of a left-leaning emphasis on race, gender, class, ethnicity, etc.

There are serious questions about the legality of the new AP U.S. History Exam, insofar as it may conflict with existing history standards in a number of states. These questions, however, as well as public debate over this massive and tremendously controversial change, have been largely suppressed by the stealthy way in which the College Board has rolled out the new test.

The new AP U.S. History Exam has been issued under the authority of David Coleman, president of the College Board and, not coincidentally, architect of the Common Core. We are witnessing a coordinated, two-pronged effort to effectively federalize all of American K-12 education, while shifting its content sharply to the left. . . . The Left is Secretly Trying to Change How American History is Taught to High School Students​

 

[Ravi]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

 

[Ravi]

Can we teach that Jefferson not only had slaves while conceding it was wrong and in fact used them to secure loans, or is that anti~PC?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Unless there is new evidence to sustain a change in historical view, then revisionist history is simply that

and since it is usually motivated by a specific political agenda, then should be evaluated by considering the source.

In one specific case, an entire people has been created since I was born, complete with an alternate history. In many cases, this contradicts what I have seen on the nightly news as a kid, and I have actually been told that the atlases I viewed as a child were conspiracies of propaganda.

If people were able to engage in critical thinking, they would realize that large numbers of people believing in something does not make it true. Unfortunately, most are incapable, and so fall victim to the fallacy of popularity.

If you were to put 10 blue people into a room with 100 purple people, the stories told afterwards by the 100 purple people would drown out that of the 10 blue. The same hold true when you put 16 million of one people in a world with 1.5 billion of another and then watch the influence of the 1.5. billion infect untold billions of others.

 

[Foxfyre]

Unless there is new evidence to sustain a change in historical view, then revisionist history is simply that

and since it is usually motivated by a specific political agenda, then should be evaluated by considering the source.

In one specific case, an entire people has been created since I was born, complete with an alternate history. In many cases, this contradicts what I have seen on the nightly news as a kid, and I have actually been told that the atlases I viewed as a child were conspiracies of propaganda.

If people were able to engage in critical thinking, they would realize that large numbers of people believing in something does not make it true. Unfortunately, most are incapable, and so fall victim to the fallacy of popularity.

If you were to put 10 blue people into a room with 100 purple people, the stories told afterwards by the 100 purple people would drown out that of the 10 blue. The same hold true when you put 16 million of one people in a world with 1.5 billion of another and then watch the influence of the 1.5. billion infect untold billions of others.

But is there not a contradiction, perhaps unintended, here? Why would the 10 blue people not be able to influence the 100 purple people if the 16 million people have such influence over 1.5 billion people?

The motive for this thread was to encourage basic knowledge of and critical thinking about our history, economics, government, and civics so that people would be less gullible and less susceptible from influence of people who do not have their best interests at heart.

And, IMO, how much one group is able to influence another is my primary reason for the motive.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

But is there not a contradiction, perhaps unintended, here? Why would the 10 blue people not be able to influence the 100 purple people if the 16 million people have such influence over 1.5 billion people?

The motive for this thread was to encourage basic knowledge of and critical thinking about our history, economics, government, and civics so that people would be less gullible and less susceptible from influence of people who do not have their best interests at heart.

And, IMO, how much one group is able to influence another is my primary reason for the motive.

Are you sure you didn't intend this thread for the conspiracy theory section?

Tell me why you think this small ethic group has undue influence over the teeming masses that control over 1000 times the territory?

 

[Foxfyre]

But is there not a contradiction, perhaps unintended, here? Why would the 10 blue people not be able to influence the 100 purple people if the 16 million people have such influence over 1.5 billion people?

The motive for this thread was to encourage basic knowledge of and critical thinking about our history, economics, government, and civics so that people would be less gullible and less susceptible from influence of people who do not have their best interests at heart.

And, IMO, how much one group is able to influence another is my primary reason for the motive.

Are you sure you didn't intend this thread for the conspiracy theory section?

Tell me why you think this small ethic group has undue influence over the teeming masses that control over 1000 times the territory?

Please do not use 'you', 'your', or otherwise address members personally in posts in this thread--see Rule #3.

I did not refer to any ethnic group nor was one referenced in the post addressed. I read the post to mean that one group was influencing another while the larger group was not. My post was intended to enter into a discussion on that point as I believe it is pertinent to the thread topic.

 

[Foxfyre]

Thomas Sowell, PhD in economics, has devoted much of his professional career as educator and historian to researching and writing about the state of education in America and how perceptions and beliefs are being manipulated and directed by people with motive to manipulate information and control people.

A full list of his published books is here:
Thomas Sowell | Complete Writings

I have tried but have never been able to fault his research. I am still unsure whether I agree with his conclusion that the motive behind all the historical, economic, government revision is calculated. Living in the real world with mostly un-academic types, my gut feeling is that no harm is intended and that it is mostly a product of flawed and faulty education rather than some kind of underlying scheme. But I have to agree that leftist politicians definitely use the under educated and 'brainwashed' for their own purposes. Perhaps the jury is still out on that one.

 

[flacaltenn]

Moderation Message:

Different forums have different rules. The OP sets the rules in this forum. And the rules that were set for this thread are not really much different than the USMB rules in politics.

If having content in every post and NOT PERSONALIZING comments to other posters is something you just cannot do --- find another thread. If these rules WERE followed -- there would be much more focus on the TOPIC -- and less focus on the posters (or your preconceived notions of them)..

Try it ---- Or not... I'll leave this up for a bit. So that no one can claim they weren't warned..

Thanks..

 

[flacaltenn]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

 

[Foxfyre]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

 

[flacaltenn]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

Comparing my kids textbooks to mine -- every curriculum, not just history, has become "messaging" expanded with attempts to "illuminate" on concepts that are politically sensitive. Which I actually SUPPORT at some level for "an advanced placement" version of the course -- but it comes at the price of EXPANDING the curriculum to the point where the BASIC facts are lost in the process.

I followed the National Testing program in detail for years. When they were still publishing actual NATIONAL results of the NAEP test. Today -- it's nothing but a bureaucratic summary of the "bad news" that your kids "is" failing to learn anything.

And in the later years of the NAEP testing, as the politicians got more involved, there were less FACTUAL questions in the History section and more written responses to fluffy questions like (and I'm not making this up) -- Why did African Americans view WW2 as an opportunity to advance the cause of Civil Rights?

REALLY? The answer was IN THE QUESTION !!!! And STILL less than 1/2 of the students gave an adequate answer to the "question"..

(Because it was too embarrassing to ask the "old question" of who fought who in WW2? and see 2/3 the students fail that challenge? ) At that point -- ya gotta ask --- What GOOD IS IT if Afro-Am students know that WW2 was an opportunity to advance Civil Rights -- If they don't know a WHIT about the war?

So --- we are literally doomed. Because with any national problem --- you need metrics. And the big blow-up over National Testing pitted and polarized the process to the point where -- I can actually say -- We don't NEED a Fed Dept of Education -- if you are not gonna them to MEASURE the "dumbing" of the students. Because you can't SOLVE problems until you can show the MAGNITUDE and DISTRIBUTION of the problem..

 

[Foxfyre]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

Comparing my kids textbooks to mine -- every curriculum, not just history, has become "messaging" expanded with attempts to "illuminate" on concepts that are politically sensitive. Which I actually SUPPORT at some level for "an advanced placement" version of the course -- but it comes at the price of EXPANDING the curriculum to the point where the BASIC facts are lost in the process.

I followed the National Testing program in detail for years. When they were still publishing actual NATIONAL results of the NAEP test. Today -- it's nothing but a bureaucratic summary of the "bad news" that your kids to failing to learn anything.

And in the later years of the NAEP testing, as the politicians got more involved, there were less FACTUAL questions in the History section and more written responses to fluffy questions like (and I'm not making this up) -- Why did African Americans view WW2 as an opportunity to advance the cause of Civil Rights?

REALLY? The answer was IN THE QUESTION !!!! And STILL less than 1/2 of the students gave an adequate answer to the "question"..

(Because it was too embarrassing to ask the "old question" of who fought who in WW2? and see 2/3 the students fail that challenge? ) At that point -- ya gotta ask --- What GOOD IS IT if Afro-Am students know that WW2 was an opportunity to advance Civil Rights -- If they don't know a WHIT about the war?

So --- we are literally doomed. Because with any national problem --- you need metrics. And the big blow-up over National Testing pitted and polarized the process to the point where -- I can actually say -- We don't NEED a Fed Dept of Education -- if you are not gonna them to MEASURE the "dumbing" of the students. Because you can't SOLVE problems until you can show the MAGNITUDE and DISTRIBUTION of the problem..

Great post packed with a lot of pertinent info!!

I don't have kids in school anymore, but I did have occasion to look through a modern high school history book recently. Like you, I found many more pages focused on ideological concepts than were focused on historical fact. The more comprehensive effect of historical events on the population in the years following--what used to be really basic stuff--was lacking. In the history I learned, for instance, most of the New Deal programs were short term emergency measures never intended to be a permanent fixture. And with the depression ended and the war over, the people of my generation didn't really look to the central government for much of anything but counted on themselves to improve their situations. Now the thrust seems to be to use the New Deal as justification for more government programs to 'fix' things.

 

[flacaltenn]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

Comparing my kids textbooks to mine -- every curriculum, not just history, has become "messaging" expanded with attempts to "illuminate" on concepts that are politically sensitive. Which I actually SUPPORT at some level for "an advanced placement" version of the course -- but it comes at the price of EXPANDING the curriculum to the point where the BASIC facts are lost in the process.

I followed the National Testing program in detail for years. When they were still publishing actual NATIONAL results of the NAEP test. Today -- it's nothing but a bureaucratic summary of the "bad news" that your kids to failing to learn anything.

And in the later years of the NAEP testing, as the politicians got more involved, there were less FACTUAL questions in the History section and more written responses to fluffy questions like (and I'm not making this up) -- Why did African Americans view WW2 as an opportunity to advance the cause of Civil Rights?

REALLY? The answer was IN THE QUESTION !!!! And STILL less than 1/2 of the students gave an adequate answer to the "question"..

(Because it was too embarrassing to ask the "old question" of who fought who in WW2? and see 2/3 the students fail that challenge? ) At that point -- ya gotta ask --- What GOOD IS IT if Afro-Am students know that WW2 was an opportunity to advance Civil Rights -- If they don't know a WHIT about the war?

So --- we are literally doomed. Because with any national problem --- you need metrics. And the big blow-up over National Testing pitted and polarized the process to the point where -- I can actually say -- We don't NEED a Fed Dept of Education -- if you are not gonna them to MEASURE the "dumbing" of the students. Because you can't SOLVE problems until you can show the MAGNITUDE and DISTRIBUTION of the problem..

Great post packed with a lot of pertinent info!!

I don't have kids in school anymore, but I did have occasion to look through a modern high school history book recently. Like you, I found many more pages focused on ideological concepts than were focused on historical fact. The more comprehensive effect of historical events on the population in the years following--what used to be really basic stuff--was lacking. In the history I learned, for instance, most of the New Deal programs were short term emergency measures never intended to be a permanent fixture. And with the depression ended and the war over, the people of my generation didn't really look to the central government for much of anything but counted on themselves to improve their situations. Now the thrust seems to be to use the New Deal as justification for more government programs to 'fix' things.

That it in a nutshell Foxy.. In the "panic" to pack the social studies/history curriculum with "debate and commentary" -- they've eased out the basics. I'm not opposed to the "debate and the commentary", but that should start in 10/11/12 grade. And MAYBE -- only at the "advanced placement" level. Because you are EXCLUDING kids from succeeding at those levels by CHEATING them out of comprehensive BASIC knowledge of the topics.. Less kids will make it to those levels if you start the "indoctrinary" stuff in Middle School.

 

[Foxfyre]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

Comparing my kids textbooks to mine -- every curriculum, not just history, has become "messaging" expanded with attempts to "illuminate" on concepts that are politically sensitive. Which I actually SUPPORT at some level for "an advanced placement" version of the course -- but it comes at the price of EXPANDING the curriculum to the point where the BASIC facts are lost in the process.

I followed the National Testing program in detail for years. When they were still publishing actual NATIONAL results of the NAEP test. Today -- it's nothing but a bureaucratic summary of the "bad news" that your kids to failing to learn anything.

And in the later years of the NAEP testing, as the politicians got more involved, there were less FACTUAL questions in the History section and more written responses to fluffy questions like (and I'm not making this up) -- Why did African Americans view WW2 as an opportunity to advance the cause of Civil Rights?

REALLY? The answer was IN THE QUESTION !!!! And STILL less than 1/2 of the students gave an adequate answer to the "question"..

(Because it was too embarrassing to ask the "old question" of who fought who in WW2? and see 2/3 the students fail that challenge? ) At that point -- ya gotta ask --- What GOOD IS IT if Afro-Am students know that WW2 was an opportunity to advance Civil Rights -- If they don't know a WHIT about the war?

So --- we are literally doomed. Because with any national problem --- you need metrics. And the big blow-up over National Testing pitted and polarized the process to the point where -- I can actually say -- We don't NEED a Fed Dept of Education -- if you are not gonna them to MEASURE the "dumbing" of the students. Because you can't SOLVE problems until you can show the MAGNITUDE and DISTRIBUTION of the problem..

Great post packed with a lot of pertinent info!!

I don't have kids in school anymore, but I did have occasion to look through a modern high school history book recently. Like you, I found many more pages focused on ideological concepts than were focused on historical fact. The more comprehensive effect of historical events on the population in the years following--what used to be really basic stuff--was lacking. In the history I learned, for instance, most of the New Deal programs were short term emergency measures never intended to be a permanent fixture. And with the depression ended and the war over, the people of my generation didn't really look to the central government for much of anything but counted on themselves to improve their situations. Now the thrust seems to be to use the New Deal as justification for more government programs to 'fix' things.

That it in a nutshell Foxy.. In the "panic" to pack the social studies/history curriculum with "debate and commentary" -- they've eased out the basics. I'm not opposed to the "debate and the commentary", but that should start in 10/11/12 grade. And MAYBE -- only at the "advanced placement" level. Because you are EXCLUDING kids from succeeding at those levels by CHEATING them out of comprehensive BASIC knowledge of the topics.. Less kids will make it to those levels if you start the "indoctrinary" stuff in Middle School.

Whoops, no harm no fowl;, but Rule #3 prohibits addressing members personally no matter how innocuous or complimentary. (A rule I have inadvertently violated myself at least once up there somewhere including my response in Post #193 I just now noticed. Sigh. It is a hard rule to follow, but I still think is worthwhile.)

I agree with this post completely however.

 

[flacaltenn]

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

Comparing my kids textbooks to mine -- every curriculum, not just history, has become "messaging" expanded with attempts to "illuminate" on concepts that are politically sensitive. Which I actually SUPPORT at some level for "an advanced placement" version of the course -- but it comes at the price of EXPANDING the curriculum to the point where the BASIC facts are lost in the process.

I followed the National Testing program in detail for years. When they were still publishing actual NATIONAL results of the NAEP test. Today -- it's nothing but a bureaucratic summary of the "bad news" that your kids to failing to learn anything.

And in the later years of the NAEP testing, as the politicians got more involved, there were less FACTUAL questions in the History section and more written responses to fluffy questions like (and I'm not making this up) -- Why did African Americans view WW2 as an opportunity to advance the cause of Civil Rights?

REALLY? The answer was IN THE QUESTION !!!! And STILL less than 1/2 of the students gave an adequate answer to the "question"..

(Because it was too embarrassing to ask the "old question" of who fought who in WW2? and see 2/3 the students fail that challenge? ) At that point -- ya gotta ask --- What GOOD IS IT if Afro-Am students know that WW2 was an opportunity to advance Civil Rights -- If they don't know a WHIT about the war?

So --- we are literally doomed. Because with any national problem --- you need metrics. And the big blow-up over National Testing pitted and polarized the process to the point where -- I can actually say -- We don't NEED a Fed Dept of Education -- if you are not gonna them to MEASURE the "dumbing" of the students. Because you can't SOLVE problems until you can show the MAGNITUDE and DISTRIBUTION of the problem..

Great post packed with a lot of pertinent info!!

I don't have kids in school anymore, but I did have occasion to look through a modern high school history book recently. Like you, I found many more pages focused on ideological concepts than were focused on historical fact. The more comprehensive effect of historical events on the population in the years following--what used to be really basic stuff--was lacking. In the history I learned, for instance, most of the New Deal programs were short term emergency measures never intended to be a permanent fixture. And with the depression ended and the war over, the people of my generation didn't really look to the central government for much of anything but counted on themselves to improve their situations. Now the thrust seems to be to use the New Deal as justification for more government programs to 'fix' things.

That it in a nutshell Foxy.. In the "panic" to pack the social studies/history curriculum with "debate and commentary" -- they've eased out the basics. I'm not opposed to the "debate and the commentary", but that should start in 10/11/12 grade. And MAYBE -- only at the "advanced placement" level. Because you are EXCLUDING kids from succeeding at those levels by CHEATING them out of comprehensive BASIC knowledge of the topics.. Less kids will make it to those levels if you start the "indoctrinary" stuff in Middle School.

Whoops, no harm no fowl;, but Rule #3 prohibits addressing members personally no matter how innocuous or complimentary. (A rule I have inadvertently violated myself at least once up there somewhere including my response in Post #193 I just now noticed. Sigh. It is a hard rule to follow, but I still think is worthwhile.)

I agree with this post completely however.

Don't worry -- I reported myself.. It is too hard to comply with..

 

[Foxfyre]

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

Comparing my kids textbooks to mine -- every curriculum, not just history, has become "messaging" expanded with attempts to "illuminate" on concepts that are politically sensitive. Which I actually SUPPORT at some level for "an advanced placement" version of the course -- but it comes at the price of EXPANDING the curriculum to the point where the BASIC facts are lost in the process.

I followed the National Testing program in detail for years. When they were still publishing actual NATIONAL results of the NAEP test. Today -- it's nothing but a bureaucratic summary of the "bad news" that your kids to failing to learn anything.

And in the later years of the NAEP testing, as the politicians got more involved, there were less FACTUAL questions in the History section and more written responses to fluffy questions like (and I'm not making this up) -- Why did African Americans view WW2 as an opportunity to advance the cause of Civil Rights?

REALLY? The answer was IN THE QUESTION !!!! And STILL less than 1/2 of the students gave an adequate answer to the "question"..

(Because it was too embarrassing to ask the "old question" of who fought who in WW2? and see 2/3 the students fail that challenge? ) At that point -- ya gotta ask --- What GOOD IS IT if Afro-Am students know that WW2 was an opportunity to advance Civil Rights -- If they don't know a WHIT about the war?

So --- we are literally doomed. Because with any national problem --- you need metrics. And the big blow-up over National Testing pitted and polarized the process to the point where -- I can actually say -- We don't NEED a Fed Dept of Education -- if you are not gonna them to MEASURE the "dumbing" of the students. Because you can't SOLVE problems until you can show the MAGNITUDE and DISTRIBUTION of the problem..

Great post packed with a lot of pertinent info!!

I don't have kids in school anymore, but I did have occasion to look through a modern high school history book recently. Like you, I found many more pages focused on ideological concepts than were focused on historical fact. The more comprehensive effect of historical events on the population in the years following--what used to be really basic stuff--was lacking. In the history I learned, for instance, most of the New Deal programs were short term emergency measures never intended to be a permanent fixture. And with the depression ended and the war over, the people of my generation didn't really look to the central government for much of anything but counted on themselves to improve their situations. Now the thrust seems to be to use the New Deal as justification for more government programs to 'fix' things.

That it in a nutshell Foxy.. In the "panic" to pack the social studies/history curriculum with "debate and commentary" -- they've eased out the basics. I'm not opposed to the "debate and the commentary", but that should start in 10/11/12 grade. And MAYBE -- only at the "advanced placement" level. Because you are EXCLUDING kids from succeeding at those levels by CHEATING them out of comprehensive BASIC knowledge of the topics.. Less kids will make it to those levels if you start the "indoctrinary" stuff in Middle School.

Whoops, no harm no fowl;, but Rule #3 prohibits addressing members personally no matter how innocuous or complimentary. (A rule I have inadvertently violated myself at least once up there somewhere including my response in Post #193 I just now noticed. Sigh. It is a hard rule to follow, but I still think is worthwhile.)

I agree with this post completely however.

Don't worry -- I reported myself.. It is too hard to comply with..

No it isn't. It just requires putting some thought into the posts and most are able to do that with a bit of practice. That is why I would never report somebody who just made an inadvertent slip or is obviously learning the technique to avoid it. Mostly it is just habit.

 

[Ravi]

This thread has been very instructive as to what constitutes the dumbing down of America: talking in an echo chamber with valid points being deleted.

 

[theliq]

Literacy rates have improved over the years. So, yeah, public school works. Except in Texas.

Not working at all according to National Testing at the Dept of Education. Majority of kids rank BELOW the basic level of understanding History (for example) by 12th grade. Performance is POOR at best..

So this is MEASURED and acknowledged. See post at Debate Now - The Dumbing Down of America

Don't need media clips to "sample" it.. It's been comprehensively measured. Year after year with VIRTUALLY no improvement. The Dumbing down exists.

Whatever it means to have "increased literacy" does not really impress any one. That's a really low bar..

I recently was in a conversation with a close family member who just graduated from an accredited four-year university. I can't remember exactly how we got into the discussion, but she acknowledged that she did not know the difference between the federalists and anti-federalists and couldn't recall ever hearing those terms. (She isn't involved on message boards and such.) That is scary to me. (As is the previously posted videos of well dressed, bright, lovely young people who did not know anything about the Revolutionary War or our hard won independence from England. That is also scary to me.)

Also the social promotions are rampant almost everywhere. Too often the student is not required to know much of anything in order to be advanced the next grade level. Another family member was given a highschool diploma without being required to complete all requirements for it. She did eventually complete college but she had a really rough time of it.

All this IMO is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

It has become a worldwide problem Foxy,Starting from the base of poor quality teachers(or should I say poorly educated teachers),the basic 3R's are glossed over but without them how do children achieve more,without these skills......................I blame the Government......they over the years have reduced a Profession(Teaching) into just a Job......basic Salary but a Curriculum.,totally inadequate for today and sadly lower than the past.......you only have to read on USMB just how uneducated some folk are,and it's not just in the United States,but throughout the Western World.

Foxy,It all comes down to priorities.....America spends an extrordinate amounts of money on Arms yet neglects Education and even more Health Issues etc,.You have not been served at all well by any Governments in general, in living memory.....as is clearly shown in Americas DEBT Factor.......moreover with all this Dumbing down,children have become less Respectful(to others and themselves) and lacking in any form of Disipline.......just saying,I just think People in General have become THICK and are so apathetic.....they are incapable of Motivation......................................steve.....nice to speak to you again Foxy,I trust you are happy and well.

 

[theliq]

Comparing my kids textbooks to mine -- every curriculum, not just history, has become "messaging" expanded with attempts to "illuminate" on concepts that are politically sensitive. Which I actually SUPPORT at some level for "an advanced placement" version of the course -- but it comes at the price of EXPANDING the curriculum to the point where the BASIC facts are lost in the process.

I followed the National Testing program in detail for years. When they were still publishing actual NATIONAL results of the NAEP test. Today -- it's nothing but a bureaucratic summary of the "bad news" that your kids to failing to learn anything.

And in the later years of the NAEP testing, as the politicians got more involved, there were less FACTUAL questions in the History section and more written responses to fluffy questions like (and I'm not making this up) -- Why did African Americans view WW2 as an opportunity to advance the cause of Civil Rights?

REALLY? The answer was IN THE QUESTION !!!! And STILL less than 1/2 of the students gave an adequate answer to the "question"..

(Because it was too embarrassing to ask the "old question" of who fought who in WW2? and see 2/3 the students fail that challenge? ) At that point -- ya gotta ask --- What GOOD IS IT if Afro-Am students know that WW2 was an opportunity to advance Civil Rights -- If they don't know a WHIT about the war?

So --- we are literally doomed. Because with any national problem --- you need metrics. And the big blow-up over National Testing pitted and polarized the process to the point where -- I can actually say -- We don't NEED a Fed Dept of Education -- if you are not gonna them to MEASURE the "dumbing" of the students. Because you can't SOLVE problems until you can show the MAGNITUDE and DISTRIBUTION of the problem..

Great post packed with a lot of pertinent info!!

I don't have kids in school anymore, but I did have occasion to look through a modern high school history book recently. Like you, I found many more pages focused on ideological concepts than were focused on historical fact. The more comprehensive effect of historical events on the population in the years following--what used to be really basic stuff--was lacking. In the history I learned, for instance, most of the New Deal programs were short term emergency measures never intended to be a permanent fixture. And with the depression ended and the war over, the people of my generation didn't really look to the central government for much of anything but counted on themselves to improve their situations. Now the thrust seems to be to use the New Deal as justification for more government programs to 'fix' things.

That it in a nutshell Foxy.. In the "panic" to pack the social studies/history curriculum with "debate and commentary" -- they've eased out the basics. I'm not opposed to the "debate and the commentary", but that should start in 10/11/12 grade. And MAYBE -- only at the "advanced placement" level. Because you are EXCLUDING kids from succeeding at those levels by CHEATING them out of comprehensive BASIC knowledge of the topics.. Less kids will make it to those levels if you start the "indoctrinary" stuff in Middle School.

Whoops, no harm no fowl;, but Rule #3 prohibits addressing members personally no matter how innocuous or complimentary. (A rule I have inadvertently violated myself at least once up there somewhere including my response in Post #193 I just now noticed. Sigh. It is a hard rule to follow, but I still think is worthwhile.)

I agree with this post completely however.

Don't worry -- I reported myself.. It is too hard to comply with..

No it isn't. It just requires putting some thought into the posts and most are able to do that with a bit of practice. That is why I would never report somebody who just made an inadvertent slip or is obviously learning the technique to avoid it. Mostly it is just habit.

Yes I have noticed how the Mods have become somewhat sanitizing of late......and does not improve the site...in my opinion.steve