illiteracy - it's the end of the world as we know it

[ErlyRisa]

Just for that SMS kybrd tlk

Yeah us ozzies (or is it Aussies) we got some doozies aswell...

eg.

ain't --and that's how you'll (there is another one "yule" - technically your supposed to adhere to only taking out one letter, hence "you will" cannot be apostrophised - is that a word?)

aint

Sentence
aint it there?
aint ya working?
aint ya bought it yet?

etc

us Aussies (commonwealth spelling) replace isn't aren't haven't with just one word aint - it's easier!!

but Yanks are fairly kind with your spell checker software - a couple of Z's need replacing, some words like colour and mother are different - otherwise what's the diff? We wll all be tlkn sms in schlls soon anay, at the rate things are going...

For example the US spell checker dictionary is actually quite a bane on the education system. Recently the previous government tried to highlight just how bad it has gotten. Schools are being supplied by PC's that have been set up by Lazy Halfwit geeks that can't even be bothered changing the timezone on an Operating System setup. Then of course their is the teacher that can't spell properly themselves, and actually use the default setup in Ms Word as their guide to spell checking. Then there are people like me, that even after making it in Higher education still get they're their there, know now etc etc wrong (Although at least I know it - many a priamry educator doesn't in Australia - somehow they made it through the educators education system with a spell checker !!!).

It is strange that with technology things have gotten worse rather than better, but of course it can easily be blamed on apathy, in both the education system and society itself.

There is software out there that can teach you another language... step by step, and correct you. In under a couple of weeks you won't exactly be fluent, but you should be able to get by if you visited the country of the tongue that you have learnt(and my US firefox spell checker is telling me that LEARNT is wrong, I guess it's supposed to be LEARNED). I guess... teachers need a reason to exist.

On a side topic how about Math and Primary Science?

In Australia the kids here don't learn anything above the times tables untill they are 13 years old. Unlike most other countries we have adopted the mentality that it's better to be learning the hard stuff later, and just keeping the kid's emotional capabilities well trained. Which I personally think is the better way to go (Foreigners usually comment about Aussie kids as to "Why are they so happy, and just complacently laid back?).
Which brings me to another point - maybe to curb Columbine and Finish style school shootings - maybe kids just need to be kids for a little longer - and competitiveness shouldn't adopted so harshly. eg. in Australia we have no real competitive years until the absolute final year.
, uhh back to the point...
Math and science knowledge in Australia is very low. Most of us only know that H20 is water - ask anyone NaCl and they will be dumbfounded. Most kids will not learn Trigonometry (and you can tell just by looking at our typical Architecture - almost 3rd world rate design wise)
In Australia atleast we do have the advantage that the kids are learning in quite a healthy environment emotionally. The bullying, segregation, classification, competitiveness just doesn't exist (or at the least, not the levels at which it can exist in other countries). This in effect does provide for a society which is more concerned about people rather than goals. In effect most goals in Australia are quite socially based. The down side to this is that we are not very technologically apt, and anything outside a simple curriculum is tantamount to heresy.

[paigetheoracle]

Originally Posted by CraigD

The IES’s ALL survey is a good-quality survey. However, there are at least the following problems with using it to support the claim “that illiteracy is growing”:

• It samples only a single point in time, data gathered from 1/2003 to 6/2003. Although its website provides links to other studies that provide samples from different times (eg: the IEA’s TIMSS, which compares data from 1995, 1999, 2003, and soon, 2007) it makes no attempt to show trends in scores
• It is a broad test of academic and life skills, not simply a measure of literacy

A primary goal of the ALL survey appears to be to rank the US against several other industrialized nations, and compare general skills between different US ethnicities, not find change in literacy in the US or other countries.

You might find sources such as the IES’s National Assessment of Litteracy more useful. It presents literacy rates as reported by US census data since 1870.

The US literacy rate (literacy in this context is defined as the ability to read and write, not necessarily having acquired mathematical, scientific, technical, or other skills from having done so – what one might term “basic literacy”) was 80% in 1870, 89.3% in 1900, 95.7% in 1930, 97.8% in 1959, and 99.4% in 1979, the last data included in this study. Current US literacy is generally considered to be about 99%, little changed from the 1979 census-derived figure.

So, a claim that illiteracy correlates strongly with the collapse of society must account for the dramatic increase of literacy of the past century, and data indicating that basic literacy in the US and similar nations are at or near all-time highs.



This sort of data, no matter how heartfelt, must be considered anecdotal.

While statistics can be manipulated, short of outright fabrication of data, they can’t be made to truly lie if published adequately, as many people with skill in analyzing statistical data can detect such manipulation.

Anecdotes, on the other hand, can’t be objectively measured and verified in this way, so cannot be used to support scientific claims, only as a guide in obtaining data that can be. Yes, I consider the typical email and print and electronic spam as evidence of a fairly high literacy rate in their target audience, as most of it is not understandable to someone who is illiterate. Spam target toward an illiterate audience would use pictures, not text.

A good example of “illiterate spam” can be seen in the labeling of food products, which typically bear a picture of the food contained in the package.

One of my personal literacy anecdotes comes from stories of a college friend’s grandmother, a woman born ca. 1900 in Western West Virginia, who was illiterate. Occasionally, package labels that showed additional “serving suggestion” ingredients caused her to purchase foods she didn’t intend to. Knowing this, her grocer would often review her purchases with her at the check-out, to be sure she wasn’t fooled by such confusing graphics. This woman was not stupid or senile. In conversations I had with her, she showed an encyclopedic knowledge of wild plants and local farming and small livestock husbandry techniques (she was a rabbit rancher). She was, however, almost entirely illiterate, unable to identify all 26 letters of the Latin alphabet, and able to recognize only a small collection of printed words.

I'm sorry that you won't take 'I know' for an answer. America may have an increase in its literacy rate over the last 100 years but that is because it was a growing, industrialised nation. As for the figures, sorry but I don't buy the 'nearly 100%' quoted (I personally would rather trust my own experiences than someones else word because I have no way of knowing their motive for trying to convince me of something - the evidence could be third hand and biased: If people can lie, they can lie through statistics (Scientology's held down 7)).

You may believe I'm unscientific but you come across as naive in your belief in this particular form of the written word. I've never been to America but I have a cousin living in Las Vegas and my wife's eldest brother visited there regularly as part of his work with computers on oil rigs. His experience (anecdotal) of the people he met down South was that their Geography was totally inaccurate i.e. they thought England was a town down the road somewhere, not another country far off across the sea (A common phenomena if you'd like to research the internet, of American troops abroad or as tourists). If this is the same as your American literacy then its standard isn't very high compared to the rest of the world is it?

As for the rest of the world Michaelangelica and others have shown in my country (UK) and others illiteracy is growing and I thank them for this data. You seem focused on America - this is 'not' the world, only part of it. As for America's spelling vocabulary, it is simpler than Standard English used elsewhere.

As for your rabbit farmer this a non-sequiter. In other words I'm on about communication, not native intelligence (entrepeneurs do better without formal education to hamper them as apparently students are trained to see pitfalls, not opportunities: see Douglas Bannatyne etc). This is maybe why Americans do better than the British in business as well - closer to their gangster roots than us (We were robber barons once, a few hundred years ago but now have the veneer of respectability and the embarrassment of reformed drunks at our historically bad behaviour). Literacy is needed by society to ensure run of the mill office workers are there to handle its basic needs, while they creative can get by not needing it (unless they are writers of course).

Again referring to your rabbit farmer - how far would civilization got if it had, had to wait for verbal means of communication (telephones/ radio)and records (tape machines etc). Technological necessity meant visual commuincation had to come first - hence cave art, tally sticks and alphabets.

[paigetheoracle]

Originally Posted by ErlyRisa

Just for that SMS kybrd tlk

Yeah us ozzies (or is it Aussies) we got some doozies aswell...

eg.

ain't --and that's how you'll (there is another one "yule" - technically your supposed to adhere to only taking out one letter, hence "you will" cannot be apostrophised - is that a word?)

aint

Sentence
aint it there?
aint ya working?
aint ya bought it yet?

etc

us Aussies (commonwealth spelling) replace isn't aren't haven't with just one word aint - it's easier!!

but Yanks are fairly kind with your spell checker software - a couple of Z's need replacing, some words like colour and mother are different - otherwise what's the diff? We wll all be tlkn sms in schlls soon anay, at the rate things are going...

For example the US spell checker dictionary is actually quite a bane on the education system. Recently the previous government tried to highlight just how bad it has gotten. Schools are being supplied by PC's that have been set up by Lazy Halfwit geeks that can't even be bothered changing the timezone on an Operating System setup. Then of course their is the teacher that can't spell properly themselves, and actually use the default setup in Ms Word as their guide to spell checking. Then there are people like me, that even after making it in Higher education still get they're their there, know now etc etc wrong (Although at least I know it - many a priamry educator doesn't in Australia - somehow they made it through the educators education system with a spell checker !!!).

It is strange that with technology things have gotten worse rather than better, but of course it can easily be blamed on apathy, in both the education system and society itself.

There is software out there that can teach you another language... step by step, and correct you. In under a couple of weeks you won't exactly be fluent, but you should be able to get by if you visited the country of the tongue that you have learnt(and my US firefox spell checker is telling me that LEARNT is wrong, I guess it's supposed to be LEARNED). I guess... teachers need a reason to exist.

On a side topic how about Math and Primary Science?

In Australia the kids here don't learn anything above the times tables untill they are 13 years old. Unlike most other countries we have adopted the mentality that it's better to be learning the hard stuff later, and just keeping the kid's emotional capabilities well trained. Which I personally think is the better way to go (Foreigners usually comment about Aussie kids as to "Why are they so happy, and just complacently laid back?).
Which brings me to another point - maybe to curb Columbine and Finish style school shootings - maybe kids just need to be kids for a little longer - and competitiveness shouldn't adopted so harshly. eg. in Australia we have no real competitive years until the absolute final year.
, uhh back to the point...
Math and science knowledge in Australia is very low. Most of us only know that H20 is water - ask anyone NaCl and they will be dumbfounded. Most kids will not learn Trigonometry (and you can tell just by looking at our typical Architecture - almost 3rd world rate design wise)
In Australia atleast we do have the advantage that the kids are learning in quite a healthy environment emotionally. The bullying, segregation, classification, competitiveness just doesn't exist (or at the least, not the levels at which it can exist in other countries). This in effect does provide for a society which is more concerned about people rather than goals. In effect most goals in Australia are quite socially based. The down side to this is that we are not very technologically apt, and anything outside a simple curriculum is tantamount to heresy.

Sorry about my comments earlier. Yes it is nice to know Oz is more concerned about people than technological progress and as for your earlier post about Autism - well I is Aspie they tell me.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by paigetheoracle

I'm sorry that you won't take 'I know' for an answer.

It’s not really a matter of my not being willing to take “I know” as an answer – our forum rules include:

Statements like "I just know that this is the way it is" (especially when religion is being discussed) are considered ignorant and might be deleted.

There are many forums on the internet where unsupported statements of opinion are welcome – hypography is just not one of them. Claims made here are required to be backed up with scientific evidence.

Without such rules, and moderators to enforce it, this would not be a science forum, but an opinion forum.

Originally Posted by paigetheoracle

You may believe I'm unscientific but you come across as naive in your belief in this particular form of the written word.

I didn’t intend to give that impression. I’ve a fair amount of professional experience in specifically the branch of education concerned with the problem of illiteracy and Innumeracy: three years of writing remedial English and math educational software for a consortium of state educational agencies; and 2 years of teaching essentially remedial high school in the Virginia state prison system. While I consider myself “left leaning”, I don’t think it accurate to describe me as naïve.

I believe we’re experiencing some miscommunication in that I’m using a fairly old, conventional use of the word “literacy”, which I attempted to qualify as “basic literacy”. This is simply the ability to read and write sufficiently to understand and convey simple instructions using a language. More modern uses of the word apply it to a “continuum of learning”.

The ALL survey to which paigetheoracle refers, and related studies, such as the IALS are test of a broad range of skills. They’re complicated studies, intended to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the educational systems of the participating countries. They are, I believe, not intended and poorly suited for predicting the collapse of society.

On a more fundamental level, I’m skeptical that:

1. The average academic and practical life skills abilities of people in the US and/or other countries are decreasing (or increasing) significantly
2. Civilization is in danger of collapsing. This belief, which I called “the Chicken Little syndrome”, appears to be common at all times in history. Many people at many times in recorded history have felt that civilization was on the verge of collapse, yet even in the face of severe economic and political failure, it has not collapsed.

[Boerseun]

Originally Posted by CraigD

Civilization is in danger of collapsing. This belief, which I called “the Chicken Little syndrome”, appears to be common at all times in history. Many people at many times in recorded history have felt that civilization was on the verge of collapse, yet even in the face of severe economic and political failure, it has not collapsed.

...and that's a good thing! I think if the world were to relax, and not fear imminent disaster, and not worry about "Civilization collapsing" and the "End of Days", then maybe Civilization will collapse, and nobody would notice until it's too late...

I think this "Chicken Little syndrome" is good; it keeps us on our collective civilized toes, and helps protect the greatest product of evolution so far: Civilization.

[ErlyRisa]

You could argue that an Ant colony is civilisation too...

This "Doomsday" stuff is a freak of the western culture...
The proportion of Opinion Gestapo is actually very low in the X Communist block, and in practically every other country in the world.

Japan has always been an interesting case.
They have astounding leducational rates (and so they should for the amount of time they spend learning would drive a westerner crazy --but I think the worker ethic has finally changed there too)
The Japanese population are not overly zealous with mass opinion... they opinions are somewhat on par with say the Italians... but unlike the italians the Japs continue to work and adhere to government policy. (ie, you can't give an Italian a parking ticket - it just won't be paid... it's like the example of smoking being banned in French Cafe's --it just didn't work, the Fench would just look at the Ticket Gestapo and smirk)


Literacy rates could actually correlate to how much "agreeability" the population has. For example those that don't read much and may not be able to work (but I find that not to be the case in Australia, one of the richest men in Australia can't read) may feel that they are not a part of society, hence may be rebelious. These people are needed... if your population is more like let's say Sweden, where all are quite well "educated" (I like to call them half-educated), then you have the risk of having a population that only thinks as ONE... their is no riff raff to provide for another perspective.

So illiteracy is actually good!?

[Michaelangelica]

I would contend a couple main points:
Illiteracy is growing. Perhaps, but so is the world population. If you add a 100 million more people, then there will be more illiteracy by the numbers.
More people = more illiteracy.
The largest rate of pop. growth is in the 3rd world, which have higher illiteracy rates to begin with...

i don't know if you can make that assumption. There has been a big effort by the UN to give kids in the third world a primary education. That has been going on for at least 35 years.
Communist countries too. China now has a huge graduate population
A friend was opening a factory in Viet-nam. "WHY?" I asked. "They are the 5th? 6th?most literate society in SE Asia" he said. During the war everyone was taught to read. I think, even India, has compulsory primary education.
A report from the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) recently said that 50% of Australians cannot properly understand an average everyday magazine article. Which, I remember being told, were written for those with a reading age of 9 ?? The news reporter on the radio was shocked and surprised. I couldn't find the original research sorry
I think a lactk of literacy (reading and writing) disenfranchises and alienates people from their society.
Some time ago (20ys) I remember reading some reseach on gaol inmates- 90% had reading difficulties. That may be different now as we are cluttering up the jail system with drug addicts.

I don't understand this earlyrisa? Would you please explain?

Affluent Average Below
England 60% 50% 10% (thier are british kids that you would have a hard time understanding a single word because it's all TV giberish)
Canada 80% 70% 150% (Canadians are doing allright)
New Zeal 50% 50% 80% (Pretty much the same as the US, thier are demographics in New Zealand which speak in rap to approx levels as thier US counter parts)
Australia 50% 50% 60% (the only reason I place this lower than NZ is that the Rap scene isn't as big here, hence no avenue to develop a vocab)

There are other forms of literacy -computer, visual-film, listening, phone texting.

I fear that wordy web forums like this are doomed to the future-on line film.
At the end of Feb. Apple will make 1,000 films available to download onto their ipod.
That and the ready ability of so many to take and post film onto the net makes sites like this dinosaurs.

[ErlyRisa]

--Um

yeah the tabulation didn't work out so well!

It's just my opinion regarding what I perceive to be the vocabulary sets of countries with respect to the US population...

ie if US pop were 100%
than
AU pop
afluent 50, average 50, lowerclass 60

I think it has to do with billion channels of media that is available at to them, and the confident nature of the US population.

A simple comparison is to converse with a Yankee 9 year old and an Aussie 9 year old. he yank isn't all that shy, and can converse even with the latest media sound bytes. The Aussie probably is a little shier, and stumbles not being able to find the word they want to express what they want. It starts to level at at adulthood, and I have noticed that here in Australia it is starting to change. The soccer mum is "badgering opinion" into thier child with the aid of the schools's teachers, and you can today walk up to an Aussie 9 year old and ask them what they think about the environment and they will be able to quote each end every sound byte ever broadcast by 2ue.

I heard about that magazine thing too...
It's why I find it ironic that the Union makes it mandatory at work sites that "rest tables" must be big enough to be able to have a broadsheet newspaper unfolded on it (The Age) -and we wonder why Factories move over seas.

[Michaelangelica]

Originally Posted by ErlyRisa

Literacy rates could actually correlate to how much "agreeability" the population has. For example those that don't read much and may not be able to work (but I find that not to be the case in Australia, one of the richest men in Australia can't read) may feel that they are not a part of society, hence may be rebelious.

You are good at quoting your own "research"?

These people are needed... if your population is more like let's say Sweden, where all are quite well "educated" (I like to call them half-educated), then you have the risk of having a population that only thinks as ONE... their is no riff raff to provide for another perspectiv

e.
You are now confusing education with literacy. The ability to read does not give you an eduction (and sadly, vice versa?). I would imagine there would be many rich people in Australia who cannot read, it still does not mean they miss out on an awful lot that the culture has on offer.
US kids i have seen her tend to be exchange students and are verbally skilled; perhaps more so than many Oz kids. But then these days few teachers are prepared to put in the extra hours teaching debating etc.
"Educate" comes from the Latin and means "to lead out". True education should "lead out" and actualise the abilities of every kid/human. It should not make little clones of us all

So illiteracy is actually good!?

No its not good. Illiterate people follow demagogues too.
I would guess that those with an IQ of less than 70 or so would have many problems reading despite anyone's best efforts.

[ErlyRisa]

Teacher don't teach debating?

-it's practically all they do today....

most of them sacrifice real factual teaching for any opportunity to talk about "the issues". The 3 R's are a thing of the past - the teachers themselves don't know the 3 R's.
If you were to randomly walk into a primary school room tommorow, I could almost bet my house on the fact that you will walk in on a Debate or Issues class, rather than maybe the teacher teaching long division.
It's a cancer that has spread into our schools after Goth gave out education to the masses. Sadly everyone is only half educated ever since. -The institutions which that do the teaching of our educators are awash with those more concerned with preaching rather than teaching.
You could - walk into any university arts or even science class today, and find a lecturer going on about how to save the world, or what THEIR opinion is.. rather than providing the information for one to come up with thier own...
Hence Sweden - an over educated society, where there is no opinion just the one.
The left were very smart with thier agaenda on thiso one, in many ways they work like scientologists or other cults.

You see the left don't want educated people - otherwise they won't be regarded as the intelligentsia.

For example.. the Union movement. If you don't have the stupid to support to Union - then what? If everyone was their own boss - able to barter on any issue they wish, they would be smarter for that.
Amazingly enough you don't need fact to form an opinion.


(let's see how easy it is to load your gun)