Re: Soapbox Time

[Jane Bergen <janeber -at- CYBERRAMP -dot- NET>]

Bob Maxey writes:

> the UK a similar situation exists.  Over the past few years
> there has been much tinkering with the education
> system and people generally bemoaning
> dropping standards.
>
> I experience this daily, and it frightens me. We seem to
> have a difficult time getting qualified people.
> We occasionally have jobs open and posted
> that go unfilled because most applicants do not have either
> the education or the experience working in the
> high technology industry.

(snipped)

Usually when people speak of "dropping standards" they are talking
about the basics: "reading writing, and arithmetic," not education in
high technology fields. The two are, of course, connected in that if
the Johnnys (or Janes) of today can't read, they cannot succeed in
college either. And that's where they learn the high tech skills they
need for today's economy.

I don't think it's so much a "dropping of standards" in the course
material as it is a problem with schools and the way they set
priorities, performance standards, etc. For example, I went back to
school as a non-traditional student (AKA "older"). In 1991-93 I was in
graduate school in the English program and was horrified by the
grammar skills of many grad students (usually English literature
majors, I admit). They could not even identify passive versus active
verbs or isolate the elements in sentences. It was very sad.

On the other hand, many of them were very bright and really had a wide
range of interests and knowledge, sometimes in fields that didn't
exist when I graduated from high school (1965). So, I think the answer
is that priorities have shifted away from the basics (which explains
the poor grammar and spelling skills), to the more "vocational" (not
exactly the right word), such as computer science, business, and other
science courses. These courses are tough, academic, and require good
analytical and problem-solving skills, but the computer science
professors don't care if the papers are riddled with grammar/spelling
errors unless the papers are just plain unreadable.

The basics should have been taught early on. In the elementary through
high school levels, too many schools pass students to the next grade
without requiring the students to be competent in the basics. One
reason I've seen cited is that they don't want to impose a social
handicap on the child by holding him/her back a year to repeat a
grade. Hmmm. I wonder if they've considered this: what kind of
self-esteem builder is it to allow non-readers to flounder in the
business world? To lose on interviews because they can't spell or put
together a decent resume?


> So what has happened? Is it our fate to 'dummy down' the
> quality of our writing, to pander to the lowest common
> intelligence level?

Alas, we are indeed often left with trying to reach/teach the poor
readers. Yes, we probably do have to pander to the lowest common
intelligence level so long as these readers are the consumers.
Otherwise, the best thing to do is to work toward overhauling the
education systems to ensure that the lowest level is indeed
acceptable.

Jane


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=