OK, so I'm going to kind of take some shit off my other journal and kind of use this as an "echo chamber" simply because I'd like to get a little bit more exposure.
Where else, but SG, would someone look for more exposure. (oh, i'm too much)
Slashdot linked to an article on CNN saying that college students (at least at some ivy league schools, and presumably elswhere) are lacking literacy skills to understand such things as credit agreements. The interesting thing is that there seems to be a disagreement (of course) about why this is. A lot of the slashdot "contributers" are saying that schools are simply a lot softer on kids because they have to try and just get them out the door. But I think that that is a blanket endictment of not only the schools but also the teachers.
In some areas, i'm sure the teachers don't really care all that much and just want to "teach the test" and get it over with and on to summer vacation. But I know that there are many teachers who also believe that they are teaching young minds about the world and they really do enjoy dealing with kids who want to learn and who think critically (I think of Mr. Olstad at my school and Mr. Clancy(? great books teacher) from Jenn's school in Ishpeming). I really think that a lot of it has to do with the fact that its the kids' own fault for failing to deal with "complex" documents, among other things. These are the kinds of kids who don't know the meaning of the word "commute" (ask Jenn for more details).
So, if I'm going to blame the kids for their own shortcomings (which I feel is perfectly reasonable) I may as well also blame the parents of these idiots. One of the posters on slashdot mentioned the fact that nowadays kids simply don't read as kids in previous generations, so their aptitude in reading has been diminished. The linguist in me also wants to argue that the way that people write and the way that proper grammar is used in writing are very different things. These kids write almost exactly what they experience and in the way that they normally speak. People, in general do not speak in prescribed ways. Anyone who takes a foreign language class will realize this as soon as they try and listen to native speakers.
However, one of the most interesting posts came from someone who is actually a teacher at a southern engineering school:
"My point is, I guess, that these kids are absolutely and systematically awful at "traditional" skills of reading, writing, and rhetoric. They seem to have compensated for these issues, however, by learning to visually unravel problems and to solve them through less traditional methods. I don't think this is taught in high school, and so I'm left wondering two things: where do they learn these "innovative" problem solving methods, and what the fuck ARE they learning in high school?"
Which would sort of complement the fact that traditional grammar does fit in with the way that these kids live their lives. Any teacher will agree that the more a students uses and applies what they learn in school, the more adept they will be at it. So, math? if they actually needed to use it, they would be better at it. reading? if they actually took the time to read books rather than just chatting with their persistent friends online, they would be better at it. Hell, i'd probably capitalize more if someone would insist that I do so.
But i still think that its a shitty situation when kids are unable to understand the language of documents that will dominate their adult lives.
Where else, but SG, would someone look for more exposure. (oh, i'm too much)
Slashdot linked to an article on CNN saying that college students (at least at some ivy league schools, and presumably elswhere) are lacking literacy skills to understand such things as credit agreements. The interesting thing is that there seems to be a disagreement (of course) about why this is. A lot of the slashdot "contributers" are saying that schools are simply a lot softer on kids because they have to try and just get them out the door. But I think that that is a blanket endictment of not only the schools but also the teachers.
In some areas, i'm sure the teachers don't really care all that much and just want to "teach the test" and get it over with and on to summer vacation. But I know that there are many teachers who also believe that they are teaching young minds about the world and they really do enjoy dealing with kids who want to learn and who think critically (I think of Mr. Olstad at my school and Mr. Clancy(? great books teacher) from Jenn's school in Ishpeming). I really think that a lot of it has to do with the fact that its the kids' own fault for failing to deal with "complex" documents, among other things. These are the kinds of kids who don't know the meaning of the word "commute" (ask Jenn for more details).
So, if I'm going to blame the kids for their own shortcomings (which I feel is perfectly reasonable) I may as well also blame the parents of these idiots. One of the posters on slashdot mentioned the fact that nowadays kids simply don't read as kids in previous generations, so their aptitude in reading has been diminished. The linguist in me also wants to argue that the way that people write and the way that proper grammar is used in writing are very different things. These kids write almost exactly what they experience and in the way that they normally speak. People, in general do not speak in prescribed ways. Anyone who takes a foreign language class will realize this as soon as they try and listen to native speakers.
However, one of the most interesting posts came from someone who is actually a teacher at a southern engineering school:
"My point is, I guess, that these kids are absolutely and systematically awful at "traditional" skills of reading, writing, and rhetoric. They seem to have compensated for these issues, however, by learning to visually unravel problems and to solve them through less traditional methods. I don't think this is taught in high school, and so I'm left wondering two things: where do they learn these "innovative" problem solving methods, and what the fuck ARE they learning in high school?"
Which would sort of complement the fact that traditional grammar does fit in with the way that these kids live their lives. Any teacher will agree that the more a students uses and applies what they learn in school, the more adept they will be at it. So, math? if they actually needed to use it, they would be better at it. reading? if they actually took the time to read books rather than just chatting with their persistent friends online, they would be better at it. Hell, i'd probably capitalize more if someone would insist that I do so.
But i still think that its a shitty situation when kids are unable to understand the language of documents that will dominate their adult lives.