Study: College students lack literacy for complex tasks

Friday, January 20, 2006; Posted: 4:29 p.m. EST (21:29 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- More than half of students at four-year colleges -- and at least 75 percent at two-year colleges -- lack the literacy to handle complex, real-life tasks such as understanding credit card offers, a study found.

The literacy study funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, the first to target the skills of graduating students, finds that students fail to lock in key skills -- no matter their field of study.

The results cut across three types of literacy: analyzing news stories and other prose, understanding documents and having math skills needed for checkbooks or restaurant tips.

Without "proficient" skills, or those needed to perform more complex tasks, students fall behind. They cannot interpret a table about exercise and blood pressure, understand the arguments of newspaper editorials, compare credit card offers with different interest rates and annual fees or summarize results of a survey about parental involvement in school.

"It is kind of disturbing that a lot of folks are graduating with a degree and they're not going to be able to do those things," said Stephane Baldi, the study's director at the American Institutes for Research, a behavioral and social science research organization.

Most students at community colleges and four-year schools showed intermediate skills. That means they can do moderately challenging tasks, such as identifying a location on a map.

There was brighter news.

Overall, the average literacy of college students is significantly higher than that of adults across the nation. Study leaders said that was encouraging but not surprising, given that the spectrum of adults includes those with much less education.

Also, compared with all adults with similar levels of education, college students had superior skills in searching and using information from texts and documents.

"But do they do well enough for a highly educated population? For a knowledge-based economy? The answer is no," said Joni Finney, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, an independent and nonpartisan group.

"This sends a message that we should be monitoring this as a nation, and we don't do it," Finney said. "States have no idea about the knowledge and skills of their college graduates."

The survey examined college students nearing the end of their degree programs.

The students did the worst on matters involving math, according to the study.

Almost 20 percent of students pursuing four-year degrees had only basic quantitative skills. For example, the students could not estimate if their car had enough gas to get to the service station. About 30 percent of two-year students had only basic math skills.

Baldi and Finney said the survey should be used as a tool. They hope state leaders, educators and university trustees will examine the rigor of courses required of all students.

The college survey used the same test as the National Assessment of Adult Literacy, the government's examination of English literacy among adults. The results of that study were released in December, showing about one in 20 adults is not literate in English.

On campus, the tests were given in 2003 to a representative sample of 1,827 students at public and private schools.

It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.


Link

---------------------------

What the hell has happened to education in this country???? Perhaps these students did not have enough art and music classes to sharpen their brains. More then likely they they didn't get the instruction they needed from grade one. After all the NEA doesn't give a sh!t about students. They control education for the money and power it brings to a select few in that organization. Screw the students as long as they have their power and money.

Nah, just too much "self esteem" and a lazy and decadent population.
The USA is a RAPIDLY DECLINING empire.
The only way for us to hang on is to IMPORT the BRAIN POWER of more disciplined societies.
The trick now is keeping the USA attractive enough to keep attracting them.

So the NEA is ruining education for everyone because they are greedy and are stealing all the money. Got it.



I would agree that education needs to be completely overhauled, starting with grade one - or even before. (although the NEA doesn't ...... never mind)

The Sky is falling! the sky is falling! The country is down the tubes. The country is down the tubes.

Why? Because there is a Republican under EVERY bed, and they are opposed to getting us more quickly to the Collectivist ideals. That's why, right TQ?

Ok, I have gone over this article several times and see no mention of the NEA. However, Nomad mentions this "august" body, so I suppose that you are replying to him and not the article, right?

And in typical youthful overreaction, you are making a point by being absurd here.

In truth, the NEA is a "TEACHERS ORGANIZATION", not an "EDUCATION ASSOCOATION", and the difference is significant. By the very nature of the name, the first thing of importance with this "association/union" is the welfare of the "Teacher", not the student. You DO see this simply by reading the name of the organization, don't you?

Now the purpose of the Education System in each individual state is to do what? If you say Provide for the Teachers, YOU LOSE!! It is for the education of the students. I think that you will agree with me here, will you not?

So, let's take a look at the participants in this issue. First there are the students. Then there are the teachers, and the rest of the wonderful bureaucracy that you Democrats love so dearly. And then there are the parents. We cannot forget them.

So, which is the most important here in descending order? If you say the Students, YOU WIN!! Now, which is more important, the teacher or the parent? If you look at it from a "tactical" POV, you will naturally conclude the teacher. However, if you look at it from a "strategic" POV, it is the parent who is most important. Why is this? because the parent is paying the freight, and the teacher is receiving part of the freight that the parent is doling out. Do you agree with that?

So, assuming that I am correct, and I honestly hope that you see this as I do, the order of importance should be 1) the student, 2) the parent, and 3) the teacher. Any other order is simply not practical and will ultimately fail.

And here is where the NEA comes in. What has happened is that the tail is leading the donkey, or better yet the tail is leading the Jackass! The NEA is gathering huge sums of money, and money equals power, especially when it is within the context of an organized group. Naturally the parents and students are not organized here. So, much of this money, from the NEA, goes to influence the politics that ultimately determines policy.

And since the NEA is seeking power, they are intent in gaining control of the ears of one party, which happens to be the Democrats. So naturally the Democrats are more inclined to dance to the tune of the NEA, which they in fact do. After all, they NEED their money, so they are willing to dance to the NEA tune.

And since the student is not ultimately as important as the teacher to the NEA, they are not as interested in their welfare: rather it is the teacher who is represented. And this is where the NEA is ultimately failing the system. Do you see my point here?

Now, assuming you do, and I hope you do, this means that the NEA has disproportinate power over the other two more importang groups: students and parents. This means that by default, the system will not be as productive as it can be, if the NEA is not reigned in.

This is why Nomad is so upset and determined to oppose the NEA. And I suspect that he is part of the group that is being neglected because of the disproportionally powerful NEA.

Now Expat, which of the Three are you willing to admit is most important, and which is the least important. Your answer here will determine how you view the education system, and how it should be "fixed".




Oh, BTW, just how would YOU overhaul the system? Would you give the teachers more money and power, or would you go back to giving the parent more? If you are going to overhaul the system, you must first take this into consideration, or no overhaul will work. It will simply be wishful thinking and more "good" money being thrown after "bad".

Well part of this problem is that taxes go to the state, instead of letting local communities decide more on the where and how their money should go.

We should be keeping an eye on our state legislators.

Wrong, JL.
The American empire would be in decline no matter what party is in power.
bush has sped it along quite nicely because of the hate and distrust he has inspired in former allies.
The see quite clearly now the empire is naked and IN DEEP DEBT, totally dependent on foreign oil, acting like a big bully relying only on military power not moral power, etc. etc.
But in any case, America has gotten too fat, too slow, too dumb, and too naive.
The hubris Americans feel won't save them in the long run.
Other nations are now stronger, more disciplined, and have better educational systems.

Please TQ, using your vast knowledge of history, economics, military strategy, and geopolitical power balances, explain to us just why and how the American empire is in decine.

In another attempt to get back on track AGAIN, after another TQ attention grab, here is the latest reason why students are in such a sad state of education. This time, the focus is on the institution that is set up to actually Train teachers. And guess what, if you are not acting in a "politically correct" manner, you may not be deemed worthy by the powers that be.

How much longer are people, including Republicans AND Democrats, going to continue to put up with this crap?

Educators vs. Education
By George F. Will
Newsweek | January 23, 2006

Jan. 16, 2006 issue - The surest, quickest way to add quality to primary and secondary education would be addition by subtraction: Close all the schools of education. Consider The Chronicle of Higher Education's recent report concerning the schools that certify America's teachers.

Many education schools discourage, even disqualify, prospective teachers who lack the correct "disposition," meaning those who do not embrace today's "progressive" political catechism. Karen Siegfried had a 3.75 grade-point average at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, but after voicing conservative views, she was told by her education professors that she lacked the "professional disposition" teachers need. She is now studying to be an aviation technician.

In 2002 the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education declared that a "professional disposition" is "guided by beliefs and attitudes related to values such as caring, fairness, honesty, responsibility, and social justice." Regarding that last, the Chronicle reports that the University of Alabama's College of Education proclaims itself "committed to preparing individuals to"—what? "Read, write and reason"? No, "to promote social justice, to be change agents, and to recognize individual and institutionalized racism, sexism, homophobia, and classism," and to "break silences" about those things and "develop anti-racist, anti-homophobic, anti-sexist community [sic] and alliances."

Brooklyn College, where a professor of education required her class on Language Literacy in Secondary Education to watch "Fahrenheit 9/11" before the 2004 election, says it educates teacher candidates about, among many other evils, "heterosexism." The University of Alaska Fairbanks, fluent with today's progressive patois, says that, given America's "caste-like system," teachers must be taught "how racial and cultural 'others' negotiate American school systems, and how they perform their identities." Got it?

The permeation of ed schools by politics is a consequence of the vacuity of their curricula. Concerning that, read "Why Johnny's Teacher Can't Teach" by Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute (available at city-journal.org). Today's teacher-education focus on "professional disposition" is just the latest permutation of what Mac Donald calls the education schools' "immutable dogma," which she calls "Anything But Knowledge."

The dogma has been that primary and secondary education is about "self-actualization" or "finding one's joy" or "social adjustment" or "multicultural sensitivity" or "minority empowerment." But is never about anything as banal as mere knowledge. It is about "constructing one's own knowledge" and "contextualizing knowledge," but never about knowledge of things like biology or history.

Mac Donald says "the central educational fallacy of our time," which dates from the Progressive Era of the early 20th century, is "that one can think without having anything to think about." At City College of New York a professor said that in her course Curriculum and Teaching in Elementary Education she would be "building a community, rich of talk" and "getting the students to develop the subtext of what they're doing." Although ed schools fancy themselves as surfers on the wave of the future, Mac Donald believes that teacher education "has been more unchanging than Miss Havisham. Like aging vestal virgins, today's schools lovingly guard the ancient flame of progressivism"—an egalitarianism with two related tenets.

One, says Mac Donald, is that "to accord teachers any superior role in the classroom would be to acknowledge an elite hierarchy of knowledge, possessed by some but not all." Hence, second, emphasis should be on group projects rather than individual accomplishments that are measured by tests that reveal persistent achievement gaps separating whites and Asians from other minorities.

Numerous inner-city charter and private schools are proving that the gaps can be narrowed, even closed, when rigorous pedagogy is practiced by teachers in teacher-centered classrooms where knowledge is regarded as everything. But most ed schools, celebrating "child-centered classrooms" that do not "suffocate discourses," are enemies of rigor.

The steady drizzle of depressing data continues. A new assessment of adult literacy shows a sharp decline over the last decade, with only 31 percent of college graduates able to read and extrapolate from complex material. They were supposed to learn how to read before college, but perhaps their teachers were too busy proving their "professional dispositions" by "breaking silences" as "change agents."

Fewer than half of U.S. eighth graders have math teachers who majored in math as undergraduates or graduate students or studied math for teacher certification. U.S. 12th graders recently performed below the international average for 21 countries on tests of general knowledge of math and science. But perhaps U.S. pupils excel when asked to "perform their identities."

Excellent points John. ANY union will look to the welfare of the union before it looks to the wefare of those it proports to represent and to hell with those that the rank and file provides goods or services to. This is particularly hienous with the NEA. If some dumb sh!t mussey on a Ford assembly line forgets to thighten a few bolts Ford has a warrenty to remedy that. However education does not have such a warrenty. If some dumb sh!t union teacher can't teach and wastes a year of your childs education a parent has no recourse and the child suffers. All one has to do is look at the NEA Website to see where their priorities lie. Worthless bastards.

aha! I figgured NEA was the National Endowment for the Arts.


I agree - student parent teacher.




First, I'd reform when stuff gets taught. languages should be taught from the gate. Start everything earlier. Reform the way we teach mathematics. There is a ton of evidence now that if you teach math from a creative problem solving point of view that not only do students perform better, they like it a lot more. Unfortunately, right now we teach it basically rote memory style. Just doesn't work as well.

There are a lot of things like that that ought to be changed that aren't because of inertia. Teachers be damned here - its a better way.

Then, marketize the school system so that children and parents have more say as to what the child takes, who they take it from, and where they take it. First things first - open up all public schools to whoever wants to get in, and bus 'em around.

Pay teachers bonuses based on the number of students they can attract to their classes, modified by how well they perform. (so if a teacher has 10 kids who all do well, they get a lower bonus than a teacher with 100 kids who all do well, but a higher bonus than a teacher with a 100 students who do poorly.) Make another bonus for when students graduate from college, and higher bonuses for even higher education.

If a teacher is doing badly, there ought to be automatic reprocussions - like they must work as a kitchen lady for 5 years at the same school. If the school is doing badly in general, there ought to be an automatic review, complete with transparant public input.

Any administrator who covers up a pee-touvcher of a teacher ought to be prosecuted for collaboration.

Things like that. I'm not caught up in 'power and control' - that whole perspective is doomed to petty fighting and is wholly sidetracked from the real issue - how should the schools get structured. (Like "Class Warfare" - why bother? just do it right without concern about those people with alterior motives. Those motives are wholly beside the point)