Atlanta Metro News

AJC.com > Blogs > Get Schooled > Archives > 2008 > February > 29 > Entry

Don’t know much about history or literature

By Laura Diamond | Friday, February 29, 2008, 08:34 AM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

You’d think teenagers would know who this country fought during World War II.

Not so. A survey of 1,200 17-year-olds found many students ignorant in history and literature. Common Core, a non-partisan group advocating for stronger liberal arts in school, commissioned the survey.

Here are some of the findings:

Nearly 25 percent couldn’t say who Adolph Hitler was.
Less than half knew the Civil War took place in the last half of the 19th century.
About 45 percent thought “The Scarlet Letter” was about correspondence or witch trials.
More than half didn’t know Oedipus was.

Why is this happening? Common Core and other groups say part of the blame rests with the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Teachers emphasize subjects tested under the law and other areas are pushed aside.

Do you think this survey represents what teenagers know? If so, how did we get here and what can we do to fix it?

Permalink | Comments (109) | Post your comment |

Comments

By jim d

February 29, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

While we may be able to pin a portion of this ignorance or lack of knowledge on NCLB I think we really must look at parents and their part in this. (don’t faint folks)

Let’s look at the dinner table. Does one still exist? does one exist where parents and children actually carry on a meaningful dialogue? Obviously not in many cases.

Let’s look at conversation in the home regarding current events after the evening news. Does this exist in these cases? Doubtful!

How about setting with the kids and watching the history channels? Do most parents do it and then talk to the children about what they just watched? Highly unlikely!

do most parents provide factual reading materials for their children regarding history or just assume the schools are teaching historical truth? I assume it is the latter and we all know how unbiased the history text books are—-Right?!

By cut kids some slack

February 29, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this

I think we should cut kids some slack. Some things you just don’t learn till you’re older and get out in the world. In high school (‘61-‘65) I was lousy in science (had to take chemistry in summer school because I flunked it the first time)and history but excelled in language - Spanish and English. I didn’t even learn to spell mortgage correctly until I had one, well into middle age. I think kids are generally smart and have a lot going for them, but not everyone learns things the first time they’re introduced in high school.

By Rollin Jackson

February 29, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

As a retired international pilot and college graduate, I am fearful of the plight the younger generation can lead us into. I have been amazed at how little the 25 and below age group know about our own country and history in general! It is that group that is supporting Barack Obama simply because they want change - yet they understand very little about how little he has done in his past life and his close ties to Africa and the Muslim life. I firmly believe the two youngest generations are more concerned about self-comfort, being endowed with electronic materialism and looking for ways to avoid a productive lifestyle which our country really needs in today’s economic environment.

By HS Teacher Too

February 29, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

cut kids, I think you’re missing the point. Kids these days are grossly devoid of what even 15-20 years ago we all took for granted as a basic cultural awareness. It’s not so much missing a few things here or there, but missing almost everything, everywhere.

jim d, I couldn’t agree with you more. The answer is exactly as you’ve said. My husband and I discuss at least once a week that our kids will attend each others’ functions, will sit and eat at the family dinner table, and will read, go to museums, etc. Our daughter is only 10 months old and already we eat every night as a family, she in her high chair pulled up to the table…

Laura, I hate to say it, but from having been in the high schools the answer is a resounding (and pitiful) yes, that this is truly and accurately reflective of what the kids (don’t) know. I am not sure of exactly how to fix it. Part of the problem is the social stigma attached to being smart, or even knowledgeable. Part of it, as jim d says, can probably be attributed to shifting focus in order to accomodate NCLB. But the fact is that even the young teachers today aren’t culturally/historically aware, and they were not products of NCLB. I’d suggest that one way to fix it is to re-introduce field trips. Take the kids to foreign restaurants, to art muesums, to history museums, even to the park … I’m sure there are many posters on this blog who will be able to offer other (and better) solutions. But jim d hit the nail on the head — the loss of family time is a tough loss to make up.

By SET

February 29, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

And this is news?

It is not an accident that the US Public School system, the educator of this country’s proletariat, has long since stopped “educating”. This is part of the federal takeover of society. One of the things you can do when you assume the power to regulate is to stop conduct you don’t like by creating rules that ty everyone up to the exclusion of protocols those in power want suppressed.

If the states were back in charge they would have an incentive to educate their young. They need them to compete against the other states for economic development. The feds have no such need because they are interested in power for themselves and the ruling class they represent. A class which does not attend public school.

The kids can’t, read, the kids can’t think, the kids can’t plan. They will happily follow Obama and all the other Obama candidates to be served up in the future.

By Blind Homer

February 29, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

Who cares? We would be better served by schools teaching subjects like personal finance, mate selection, child rearing, and moral and ethical philosphy rather than Oedipus and Robert E. Lee, knowledge that is generally only useful if you’re a contestant on Jeopardy!

By jim d

February 29, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this

Well at the risk of being repetative.

Here’s a book that belongs in the home library of every student in America.

By L.King

February 29, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this

This is a deep question with many answers. I agree with Jim when he said many parents are not reinforcing what is supposed to be taught in the schools with conversations at the dinner table or watching the history channel. Because of block scheduling, as a history teacher preparing students for the GHGT, I really can not go into deep detail with many historical subjects because the test is in March and I just received these students in January. Lastly, my students do not study the way they should so this leads to a lack of knowledge on their part.

By jim d

February 29, 2008 10:53 AM | Link to this

Homer,

Take the blinders off my friend and you’ll see that where we came from sets our course for the future. That a true understanding of the past prevents us from repeating the follies of the past.

By justine

February 29, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

I don’t fault kids for not knowing any history. History is no longer taught at the elementary or middle school level. Instead we have a very broad “social studies” course that attempts to cover history, civics, economics, anthropology, geography and a few other subjects in 40 minutes a week. Is there any wonder that the students emerge without any coherent knowledge?

By jim d

February 29, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this

King,

I’m not sure that your inability to teach detail is really a bad thing in this instance since you are required to teach by the book and the book is so often wrong or so extremely slanted that it teaches untruths that must then be un-taaught.

By jct

February 29, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

My son is in 11th grade. Oepidus Rex and The Scarlet Letter have not been part of his high school reading list. Why would he know what those books are about? The only reason he has any inkling about these books is because The Scarlet Letter is my favorite book and we have many discussions about Greek and Roman mythology.

From what I read in this blog, it seems that teachers only have the time to scratch the surface on these types of subjects. Parents have to reinforce what is learned at school. However, how does a parent reinforce if they were never introduced to these concepts?

I read Oepidus Rex and The Scarlet Letter in high school. We had field trips as well. I grew up in the Northeast so one of our field trips was to go to Massachusetts and visit Walden’s Pond (of course, we had to read Walden first), Hawthorne’s fabled House of Seven Gables (ditto), and visit Salem to see where the witch trials took place (The Scarlet Letter had to be read to be considered for this field trip.)

Teacher’s are way to busy with testing to have these type of reinforcing book/field trip tie ins.

What is amazing to me is that early in the 20th century masses of people emigrated to the US, sent their kids to public schools and this stuff was learned without parents reinforcing school work. What has happened?

By JustMe

February 29, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

SET Are you on that soap box, again???? As a teacher in this so-called evil federal take over, I can state that there is no federal requirement for me to not teach. Yes, there are (IMHO) stupid reqirements from the federal government that take my time away from what I consider true teaching. But I do not believe at all that there is any type of conspiracy. I feel that the federal government (NCLB) attempted to make an honest improvement that resulted in a mess. Does it need to stop? Yes. Was it intended to screw things up and to dumb down students? I just don’t think so.

By Mark

February 29, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

My 17 year old has read The Scarlet Letter and many other classics that I missed in the seventies. When I was in high school we read Beowulf every year and that was it! It has been enjoyable listening to my teenagers talk about various Shakespeare plays..I never had to read any.

On the other hand, I recently asked my 17 year old daughter why she didn’t know the capital of Montana. She is gifted and heading to a good college so I was a little surprised at her lack of geographical knowledge. Her response caught me off guard. She said, “Those are facts. You can look up facts. They don’t teach the smart kids things like that. Facts are a waste of time. They teach us to think and to solve problems.”

Hmmm….Nevertheless, she is always impressed with my vast knowledge of useless trivia..

By Laura C.

February 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

This is scary. I’m only 28, but I knew all of the examples listed before I graduated from high school. The whole time I was in school I remember being bored by history because it seemed like we never learned anything. Just the same old Revolutionary War and Civil War material year after year. Still, I loved the subject and became a history major in college. It wasn’t until I was taking upper level history courses in college that my eyes were opened to all I hadn’t been taugh at the high school level in AP classes. The high school history curriculum is dry and repetitive. Teachers can never cover everything they’re supposed to by the time the school year ends. Thus, you’ve got all these kids who never learn 20th-century history. What a shame.

By lyncoln

February 29, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

Well, everyone has expressed that the lack of knowledge is not a desirable situation. However, you can’t make the conclusion that this is better or worse than responses from a previous generation. The data presented only tells us what current 17-year-olds don’t know. I can’t tell you if this is better or worse than 17-year-olds from 10, 20, or 40 years ago because there’s no data. So, many of the students lack some knowledge. I find it sad that 1/4 of them didn’t even know Adolf Hitler and his place in history, but what’s the results if we ask the same questions to current 30-year-olds? I wish the poll had more information available so that we could make historical comparisons.

I don’t see the Oedipus and Scarlet Letter issues to be as horrible as lack of knowledge of Adolf Hitler. I read the Scarlet Letter as a junior, but Antigone rather than Oedipus Rex back in freshman HS English. So far, I’ve never needed knowledge of the most classic of Greek tragic characters nor my knowledge of Hester’s external/internal struggle and the use of light/shadow as symbolism within the novel. It’s just not useful knowledge to my everyday life.

I find it more tragic every time I see a post from some parent stating “now that little Timmy is taking Algebra I just can’t help him… I don’t know how to do the math”. From my perspective as an engineer I can’t imagine not being able to understand Algebra, Trig, Calculus, etc. I’m sure an art critic would feel that my complete ingorance and lack of interest in modern abstract art is similarly horrible. But that’s the way the world works.

It’s a common mention on this blog that the amount of information expected to be ‘introduced’ to students is so great that there’s no time for depth. However, this large amount of knowledge is what someone believes is required basic knowledge for modern society. Either knowledge of Oedipus Rex is not really needed for modern survival, or 50+% or all 17-year-olds are doomed for horrible failure within their lifetime. I expect that lack of Oedipus Rex knowledge will not hinder many of these young people during their lives.

By BlackGirl

February 29, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this

It is that group that is supporting Barack Obama simply because they want change - yet they understand very little about how little he has done in his past life and his close ties to Africa and the Muslim life.

Rollin Jackson how ignorant can you get? What difference does his religion make? I have family members that are muslim. You are an idiot and only spat these untruths because you are afraid that this man may very well be our next president.

The way in which history is taught is a huge reason students don’t know it. There needs to be an overhaul with the curriculum. Whether or not you choose to eat at a dinner table, how many of us would really discuss history. My father’s generation knows history quite well (he’s 63), but my generation not so well. I don’t think it’s just this generation so lighten up on them. Most kids don’t really get math either. What do we do?

By InfoLuver

February 29, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

This is truly disturbing, but not surprising. With dumbing down of schools by making teaching to the test; putting money behind the profitable areas (sports) instead of afterschool programs,music, etc; and downplaying the importance of libraries/school media centers and research, it’s no wonder education is in the state it is in.

Get rid of No Child Left Behind, support information literacy (media centers, libraries), and parents and community members get more involved with your kids/schools!

By blacksheep

February 29, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this

This goes way beyond the NCLB requirements. I have one acquaintance, a graduate of an SEC school, who thinks that WWI was the US vs Japan, and that WWII was the US vs Germany. Another, also a college graduate, believes that Hitler was a communist. Some of the commentators here have said that it’s all irrelevant anyway, but it’s not. It’s very difficult to understand the problems we have in the world today without having any historical context in which to view them. Personally I think this level of ignorance suits the powers that be just fine. If you’re too ignorant to have an informed opinion about things and to ask questions, you’re probably very easy to lie to and to acquiesce to whatever shenanigans these people want to pull in the name of religion or government or whatever else purports to keep us “free”. Ignorant people are not free, nor will they ever be.

By Jeff

February 29, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

BlackGirl:

FACT: 90% of Africa has been in a state of near-unending civil war since the European nations left.

FACT: The Middle East (home of Islam) is the bloodiest battleground of all time. More wars have been fought there than ANYWHERE else on the face of the planet, and 95% of those wars involved religion. Since roughly 900AD, the primary religion involved in those wars has been Islam.

Now, you tell me how someone who knows these historical FACTS can support an African Muslim running for President of this great country????

By Tom

February 29, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this

Hey, Jeff, if there’s ever “an African Muslim” running for president, we’ll let you know. As the present time, exactly no one fits the description. So for now, why don’t you just take your FACTS, go back to praying to your lily-white Jebus, and STFU?

By Janine

February 29, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this

Has anyone noticed that there is a significant difference in the way many, if not most, private schools deal with cultural literacy/history/geography?? I am constantly amazed at the breadth of knowledge of eveh the 10 and 12 year olds that I know who are in private school.

A few years ago when I was teaching in middle school, I was appalled at the Enlish/Language Arts approach. I researched several of the private school course outlines and found…they looked much like the courses I had ‘back in the day’ when grammar, composition, literature were the foundations! On the other hand, it seems that public schools are constantly getting on one bandwagon or the other.\

OH..and lots of important learning is basically boring!

By jim d

February 29, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Be thankfull this isn’t a political blog or you’d have to read me telling you not to concern yourself heavily with the mans heritage, it is of little consequence.

But do be very afraid of someone running on a platform of change when he has no specific plan or vision of what those changes need to be or how to accomplish them.

By Jeff

February 29, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

Tom:

Three words: Barack. Hussein. Obama.

Put them together, and you have a name you are FAR more likely to hear in SUDAN than AMERICA.

The man is an African Muslim to the core.

jim:

But do be very afraid of someone running on a platform of change when he has no specific plan or vision of what those changes need to be or how to accomplish them.

We couldn’t agree more on that one! Problem is that the only person running on a ‘change’ platform that has a specific vision and plan for accomplishing it is DR. RON PAUL.

By jim d

February 29, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I didn’t say we had much of a choice.

The problem with change barring a vison is that we’ve seen how well change for the sake of change has worked for decades now in the field of education. I personally would hope to never—Ever see that approach in a president. Well with the exception of looking for it 4 years ago. :-)

By jim d

February 29, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

Ahh yes,

It just occurred to me that this is not a new phenomena. Evidence exists that would indicate it’s been going on with our youth since my teen years and perhaps even longer.

By SET

February 29, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this

Just Me: Hello again.

It’s not that I’m on a soapbox railing about a conspiracy. Most people who see the term conspiracy assume it refers to clandestine meetings and signed contracts. That’s not my concern although I do wonder sometimes…

Our debate sometimes seems to be over the distinction between observing that “s** happens” as opposed to observing that “somebody let this s** happen” or instead taking the position that “somebody made this s** happen” or maybe the viewpoint that “I’m moving before this s** happens”. The list goes on.

You can look as my viewpoints as merely saying that “it smells in here”.

What would you have said 10 years ago if I told you that Gold is nearly at $1000, Gas is expect to reach $4 shortly, The Canadian Dollar & Euro are trading where they are, Home Foreclosures are where they are now, George Bush the 2nd got us into “another VietNam” and is at 19% approval (I greatly dissaprove of the man as a leader) and Obama is closing in on being front runner for President.

Could there be a correlation on our national school literacy and disconnection from US and World history by adolescents and this interesting time the US is in?

I don’t feel I’m so much as a conspiracy theorist as an observer who contends what there is so much movement in US Society (Economy & Political) that regardless of who has been working the rudder of this ship, there are factions at work (co-ordinated or not) that are pushing us towards a place we have never been to yet - ala Weimer Republic, the Fall Of Rome and 1939 Berlin.

Public School policy is taking us to a place the US had not seen in the last 100 years of public policy. And that place does not include “Education”. What we are seeing in the schools is not education. The occasionally confused musing I read in the education blog wonder why things aren’t getting better. Is it a conspiracy theory to opine that things aren’t getting better because they are not supposed to?

As far as the Obama candidacy goes I believe he is a Manchurian candidate. He makes Hillary look attractive as Presidential choice. 10 years ago that was inconceivable also. McCain is an invade the world, invite the world, politician. No matter who wins the US people & society are doomed and will be replaced by something else. The process has been underway for generations and the US of 2012 will not be recognizable from the US of 1950. Public School policy is integral to this process.

My beef with all this is the direction invariably includes a severe police state and a severe command economy probably with a heriditary aristocracy. We know from history what that looks & feels like. Not a happy place.

Brave New World.

By Tom

February 29, 2008 2:28 PM | Link to this

Well, Jeff, obviously where we’re likely to see “Jeff” is in blue cursive stitching over your left breast, with “Hahira QuikLube” and a Valvoline emblem over the right.

By SET

February 29, 2008 2:47 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Ron Paul couldn’t get elected Notary Public. I’m attracted to much of his platform, but only when a candidate such as him is the governor of an admired State are we going to have such a candidate as a viable presidential contender. Paul is too old and too obscure as an elderly Physician congressman.

Someone like Mitt Romney, were he a sitting governor of a modern State that rid themselves of much of the national social & economic ills be able to take his campaign national. Maybe some day that will happen from a state like Utah that doesn’t encourage left wing welfare policy and is strong on crime, infrastructure, self defense and self sufficiency. In this campaign Romney was just not ruthless enough.

For now we continue our march to economic and social disaster. When it all hits the fan you will more likely see the rise of a popularly elected populist facist, that’s how things usually end in a terminal-stage democracy. Think post-Weimar Republic.

He or she will probably come from CA or the entertainment business and will have a cult-like following - think a combination of Ann Coulter, Obama and the Ellen Show.

By JustMe

February 29, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

SET Hasn’t there always been some factions at work towards their own selfish best interests? Why should today’s world be any different?

Do you really think that in the past all Americans held hands and sang “Koom-By-Yah” (I know that I likely spelled it wrong) while all in agreement on what the US should do? Look at the Vietnam War - recall the large number of protests? Yet, there was some “faction” in the US that went forward with the war. And, the same could be said for any event in history.

That, my friend, is the good thing about the US. We are allowed to voice our opinion. We are allowed to work towards out beliefs. Sometimes we succeed, sometimes we don’t. Who is “right” and who is “wrong” can only be determined by history.

As a Democrat, I am also scared of Obama - I shutter to realize that GA voted for him. My reasons may be different from yours. I just feel that he is too inexperienced and naive to be President at this time. If he is elected, I can only hope that he surrounds himself with many good people that can give him good advice.

I don’t think that the US is doomed. Remember that the President is only 1/3 of the federal government power. He/she cannot make/enforce decisions in isolation.

By Blind Homer

February 29, 2008 4:07 PM | Link to this

Most of the members of my class of ‘69 wouldn’t have been able to identify Oedipus, although they would have done better with Hitler and the Civil War. Again, I say so what? Mark’s daughter makes a very valid point about facts, although in my experience today’s students aren’t being taught to think critically either. And I think the critical reasoning ability of the top 10% is much more important in shaping the future than a knowledge of the past. I just don’t think America as we’ve known it is doomed because the kids are weak on Greek mythology or B. Hussein Obama may be the next President!

By Kiki

February 29, 2008 5:20 PM | Link to this

So what exactly are they teachings kids in school nowadays? I graduated high school 8 years ago in a tiny town in MS, and even we read Oedipus Rex, as well as Hamlet, King Lear, the Odyssey and other great lit works. What is happening to our schools? And why has this blog turned into a political commentary?

By the way, I really wish all of you ignorant people would stop saying Obama is a Muslim when HE IS A CHRISTIAN!!! If you don’t want to vote for him, that’s fine, but at least give a valid and fact-based reason as to why.

By carrie

February 29, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this

Ah, Jeff. Thanks for proving your a redneck. First of all, Obama is not African. His father was Kenyan who went to school at the University of Hawaii. His mother is a white woman from Kansas. He has never lived in Africa. He visited Africa for the first time shortly after his father, who was an atheist, died. Hussein is actually an arabic word that means “good-looking” according to Baby Names World. When Obama was named in 1961, Saddam Hussein was completely unknown, so unless his parents were fortune-tellers, I doubt they named him in honor of Saddam. I’m not going to get into his religion. I state this, however, he is a member of Trinity Church of Christ. Obviously, since his wife walks around in skirts with her hair uncovered, she is not following the strict Muslim rules. I say that with a definite hint of sarcasm. I found my info on biography.com if you’d like to look it up. Oh, and I’m a conservative republican in case you were wondering.

Now, having said that, I’ll get on topic. I can tell you why our students know nothing about history. I teach 2nd grade, and we only do “social studies” for about 1/2 of the year. The other half we do science. Why, you ask? Well, because we have to make sure the kids are ready to go to third grade and pass the reading portion of the CRCT. Plus, my EIP math kids are pulled out during this time so they can get their double math. While we try to cover some topics in our reading during reading time, I have to do Guided Reading, which I love, but it makes it hard to make sure I find books at the kids reading levels that cover those topics. Oh, and part of my social studies time is used to cover a unit on Australia and one on Japan. While I feel that those are imprtant, I really think I need to spend a little time closer to home. Many of my kids think they live in the country of Georgia (or Atlanta!).

By SET

February 29, 2008 6:02 PM | Link to this

Just Me: I thought that Clarence Thomas was too inexperienced and naive to be a US Supreme Court Justice until that silly Anita Hill came forward. By the time he was sworn in I was satisfied. He has worked out well, at least as far as I’m concerned. Hope he’s happy.

If he actually wins I hope for the best, but historically this doesn’t smell right. Nothing adds up but that he is some kind of plant that even his patrons couldn’t have counted on to run the race this well. There are so many red flags in his background we can’t be so lucky that he isn’t a disaster about to occur. I do find him very appealing on a personal level but intellectually I have seen this movie before - not good.

I think you greatly underestimate the power of the executive branch. Even discounting the power of the appointments which is awesome, he would have the power of life and death and the ability to wage war using the assets of the US Military. He also would have the power to effectively abandon US territory, personnel and assets and cede US Power.

There is abolutely nothing in his background to trust him with that kind of supreme power. Of greater concern is the deliberate non-creation of a record of his belief system which indicates to me that anything goes.

For the proletariat voters of this country to jump on the bandwagon so uncritically I am concerned that such a candidacy is why they have been dumbed down. Perhaps it’s later than we thought. Obama appearing on the scene just at the time when the US economic house of cards is about to crash concerns me also. Still, I didn’t like Hillary (at all) until lately and now her time is over for this election cycle. McCain may not even be the lesser evil - he has made it clear that he will facilitate the Mexican occupation and colonization of the USA (amnesty = 20 million Mexican “American” voters by 2012?).

All in all a very interesting year and an Obama White House will be more exciting than an episope of “Commander In Chief” with Geena Davis. Or an episode of “I Claudius” with Michelle O in the Sian Phillips role.

By Lee

February 29, 2008 7:29 PM | Link to this

Oh my, where to begin…

Carrie, I think the correct term is mulatto.

I would almost rather public schools did not teach history if they can do no better than the politically correct propaganda they now spew. A few years ago, I was reading my middle school aged daughter’s history book about the Battle of San Juan Hill. A full two pages were devoted to the racial makeup of the American army - i.e., how many blacks were in the battle.

Ask any high schooler the cause of the War Between the States and I would venture to say the vast majority would respond “slavery.” That’s all they have been taught.

Actually, I was watching a Disney program a few years back in which they were showing several “teachers of the year” complete with video excerpts of them in their classroom. One young teacher actually got up on a chair and acted as though he were encouraging his troops to go forth and “free the slaves…”

As far as the next presidential election, about the best we can hope for is gridlock (one party controlling the executive branch, the other party controlling the legislative branch).

Personally, I don’t think we’ve seen this bad of a slate of candidates since Mondale / Nixon.

By catlady

February 29, 2008 7:44 PM | Link to this

They teach us to think and to solve problems.�

As the mother of 3 gifted kids, I don’t think even that is true. And for the average kids, I can tell you it is not. Solving problems takes too much effort. Students and parents want it spoon-fed, and an A even if it is not digested!

I can say that the education I got—IN ALABAMA—IN THE LATE 60’s—was FAR superior to what my kids got in high school. AP classes being the exception (we sure did not have them).

In order to understand stuff, YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE STUFF IS. Sadly missing in most classes now. Lowest common denominator.

I went round with math supervisors this week about teaching to mastery vs “exposing” kids to stuff in math. Seems so obvious to me that unless the kids have the basics firmly in hand, all the exposure in the world won’t help. I keep hearing “we have to let them see it before the CRCT” yet if they don’t know what they are looking at, how on earth will seeing it help? Like expecting someone who has not mastered Algebra I (or whatever it is called now) being exposed to Diff EQ (differential equations, a junior level college math majors kind of course, I think). I’d rather the kids get a few questions right than not be able to do the “easy” (several years below grade level) questions AND not be able to do the grade level ones either. Plus it seems obvious that you cannot build on a foundation of sand.

When I was in junior high and high school, we had to bring in current events articles from the newspaper (remember those things?) and summarize and discuss in front of the class each week. You had social studies every day for the 6 years you were in jr and sr high. We also (gasp) had to memorize and recite parts of the Constitution, etc., the capitals of states and countries (not so many countries back then, perhaps) and we were tested on them. We had to write names and dates of battles in war, with appropriate maps drawn showing placement of troops. We had to read and discuss (dead white men) literature.

My (then) five year old, when told someone important was going to be calling her, immediately guessed the name of a local candidate for state senate. She had seen his signs, and we had discussed the candidates. Actually it was a national TV personality, but I was please that she thought first of someone running for state office.

I fear for the future of our country more every day.

By luvs2teach

February 29, 2008 8:24 PM | Link to this

Do you want to know WHY they don’t know this stuff?

It’s because they don’t CARE to know this stuff. That simple.

Chances are many (probably not all) of the topics mentioned were taught at some point. Kids learned it for the test, and then promptly forgot it - just like their parents, and their parents’ parents before them.

But ask them about Britney Spears, Lindsey Lohan, or Paris Hilton and they will probably be able to tell you every sordid detail…because they care about that stuff.

They can’t recite the 14 line prologue to Romeo and Juliet or recite the Preamble to the Constitution (both things I learned and still remember to this day), but they can flawlessly rap some TI or 50 Cent…because they CARE about THAT stuff.

I could go on - you get the point.

Someone did a study that showed in the last 50 years, the five major influences on a child shifted from “family, church, school, peers, media” to “media, peers, family, school, church.”

That should scare us all. Brave New World, indeed.

By carrie

February 29, 2008 8:54 PM | Link to this

My 5:30 post should have read you’re instead of your. That’s what happens when you type with your 5 year old next to you bugging for the computer!

By em

February 29, 2008 9:42 PM | Link to this

The reason that Georgia students do not fare well in history is partly due to the fact that Social Studies has historically (no pun intended) been unimportant. It was traditionally reserved for the football coaches and while I know some very talented and dedicated teacher/coaches, I have known some who could care less about teaching. Another reason for the low scores can be attributed to emphasizing �fluff� projects over content. While the �fluff� teachers win accolades from administrators, the content teachers� students always fare better on the EOCT and GHSGT. A final reason for the low scores is the new focus on graduation rates. At my school, the faculty has been told in no uncertain terms that the number one priority is to graduate as many students as possible. What the student knows or learns is irrelevant.

By Teacher of Gifted

February 29, 2008 9:57 PM | Link to this

On a whim, yesterday I gave my 5th grade gifted students a little quiz about the order of the U. S. Presidents. They numbered 1-43, and I called out the names of the presidents. Boy, was I surprised!! I must add, this is a bright group - high I.Q.’s overall, etc. Probably all of them have all A’s. Well, I had one who surprisingly got sixteen correct, but then it was downhill. I think there was one twelve and maybe a couple of tens. I even had one who only had two correct - Washington and Bush! When I asked them why they couldn’t name the presidents during the wars they had been studying this year in their regular social studies class, they said that it was wasn’t really discussed in detail in the book. Then, for toppers, they turned the tables and said that the reason they didn’t know them was that no one had taught them about the U. S. Presidents!! I think they are right, too!! All I could say was, “I’m glad we are discussing them now.”

By Teacher of Gifted

February 29, 2008 10:10 PM | Link to this

Oh, one more thing, these same kids who don’t know their presidents do know the stock market and basic economics thanks to the “Stock Market Game.” The GA Council on Economic Education sponsors it for our state schools, although it is a national contest. My 5th graders loved it and did extremely well. Parents told me that their children would jump out of bed in the morning and hit AJC business section, Yahoo Finance, or The Street to check their stocks. Wish we had that same enthusiasm about all subjects!

By R Jackson

February 29, 2008 10:59 PM | Link to this

For BlackGirl and carrie: I used Senator Obama in my example because he is not qualified as presidential material - and neither is Senator Clinton. I served as a military officer with overseas duty, a top secret clearance with knowledge of military strategy and national policy. I have been exposed to the extreme slavery of peoples in the Middle East and the horrible treatment of women there, too - much in the Muslim world. Yes, BlackGirl, religion of our president elect is VERY IMPORTANT. I love my many black friends dearly and have no problem with a black being president. I love the abilities of Colin Powell, thinking he would be a much better presidential choice than Obama. Now, back to the necessity of history in our lives; it gives one a better perspective in making life’s choices - for ourself as well as for our nation. Now, as never before, we need the best qualified and proven leader as president as we have ever had. Our nation’s problems are immense and will need many highly qualified people in our government to lead - many will be appointed by our next president. Let us all let world history provide a better “decision platform” for each of us to make the right choices in the future.

By CCRider

February 29, 2008 11:36 PM | Link to this

Well, since this blog has turned somewhat political: It is pretty obvious that all three of the major candidates are sorely lacking in one way or another. What a choice we will have! However, if all the candidates would announce who would be in major positions [after all, that’s apparently where Bush got off track] Sec. of Defense, Sec. of State, the entire cabinet, advisors, etc. it might help voters make an intelligent decision.

By Jeff

March 1, 2008 6:23 AM | Link to this

carrie:

Hussein isn’t doing himself any favors by NOT definitively answering the allegations in a credible way.

Instead, he takes a trip to Africa - and allows a picture to be taken of himself in traditional SOMALI attire!! Can anyone say ‘Black Hawk Down!’????

Tears of the Sun was a fictional movie. But the basic actions of the Africans portrayed happens virtually every day.

Now, as R Jackson has said, I really would NOT mind a black in general in the White House, and I could name quite a few that I would trust there - though you wouldn’t recognize many of them, as they are men of honor that I have personally known. Some that you WOULD recognize: Will Smith. Bill Cosby. Colin Powell. Condeleeza Rice. Cowboy Troy. Carl Brashear. Herman Boone. Even though I might not agree with their policies, these men (and lady) have a strength of character that I could trust. Quite frankly, Hussein does not.

By WFC

March 1, 2008 8:25 AM | Link to this

It’s no surprise that students know very little about history since their teachers’ don’t either. Recently retired from Northview H.S. here. I’ll bet $1,000 that I could defeat the entire Social Studies faculty who graduated after 1990 in a test of knowledge. Nice people, little knowledge. Not their fault. The educationists who run colleges decided long ago that knowledge didn’t matter. It’s “let’s do critical thinkig about nothing” in today’s schools of education.

By Chris

March 1, 2008 8:52 AM | Link to this

The NCLB law has been interpreted to mean only math, science, social studies, and literature are tested. That is not the intention of the law, however, school systems are placing their resources where their test scores are lowest. Rod Paige, the former Secretary of Education, sent a letter to every superintendent in the country in 2004 cautioning them to make sure to include all subject areas. Honestly, the tested subjects are the focus of system I work in, with Math, Reading, Social Studies, and Science being the focus.

Chris

By James

March 1, 2008 9:50 AM | Link to this

As a recent high school graduate (Duluth High School, C/O 2006), I can safely say I knew the answers to all of those questions. However, I also know plenty of people who don’t. However, if you really want to be amazed at a lack of knowledge in a particular area, ask a teenager a geography question. Not even a hard geography question, one about the United States. It’s kind of ridiculous.

I think there are two factors at work here. One is No Child Left Behind. I know it doesn’t work, because it leaves every child behind. NCLB forces schools to teach the test to the lowest common denominator and that leaves every student lacking in their education. Thankfully I made it most of the way through Gwinnett Schools without the effects of NCLB.

The second factor is that parents are not doing their part to educate their children. My parents taught me how to read early on and instilled in me a love of reading and learning. Both my sisters were taught the exact same way. All three of us were good students all throughout school. We all know we can talk to our parents about what we are learning or about current events. We don’t sit around the dinner table because we usually don’t eat there, but we find time to talk and have actual conversations with each other. Maybe we are in the minority of families.

That’s my two cents plus a little extra for the road.

By Janine

March 1, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

IMO, you are overemphasizing the role of parents in history,geography education of children. Back in the day when parents NEVER set foot in schools unless there was some kind of catastrophic incident, when fathers worked long days and were allowed peace and quiet WITHOUT GUILT when the came home,when, G-d forbid, children were ‘to be seen and not heard’. Education in history and geography took place in the classroom. And history was huge, as was geogaphy. Almost all of the children of that generation are, at the very least, well versed in the history and geography of the USA, and most could locate states and major countries on a map by 6th grade. Parents did not go over Maps at home, nor did they discuss Lincoln’s or Patrick Henry’s emotional speeches at the dinner table. The coloization and wars of America were not a dinner table topic either. If such topics were brought up at home, it was likely because the child brought it up as a result of some classroom event. It is the public schools that have fallen victim to the “Cures du Jour” movement, to the nonsensical belief that what the children enjoy should guide education,to the idea that a classroom should be entertaining,a teacher a performer, that all learning should be stimulating like the video games that keep children on the edge of their seats and nothing should be boring, and that if the child isn’t learning, he/she bears no responsibility …it is the teacher’s fault.

By Janine

March 1, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

Just one more thing….IMO,what parents ARE responsible for is the grounding in common courtesy, appropriate behavior, and respect. Some of my very best students, both academically and socially, were children of parents who worked 2 or or more jobs,not for luxuries , but to put food on the table. He/she/they rarely spent time discussing history or geography with their children. Yet they had expectations, and had instilled standards of behavior and the value of education in their children. As one of my colleagues who teaches Math would tell parents: *”You don’t need to understand the math homework, you don’t need to help, you don’t need to be able to discuss it. All I ask you, as a parent, to do is make sure he/she DOES his/her homework AND make sure that your child understands that you EXPECT him/her to pay attention in class and behave appropriatey.

By dick carr

March 1, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this