News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
[dead]
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by zimpenfish on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @08:52AM (#15027040)
> university professors complain about standards worsening in their annual intake of students

They've been doing that since the 11th Century[1] - if this were even vaguely true, your current average student intake would be somewhere around the level of planaria or possibly tardigrades. It's demonstrable rubbish.

[1] http://www.medievalists.net/2015/09/the-long-history-of-teac...

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by Boothroid on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:01AM (#15027085)
Ah yes, the well-worn 'people have always been complaining about things getting worse' rebuttal.. But your argument is flawed - just because it might not always have been true does not mean it is not true now. As I said, I'm inclined to believe those at the chalkface. Here's one reference I was able to find easily: https://www.bjupress.com/resources/articles/t2t/declining-li...
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by icebraining on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @11:04AM (#15028003)
I find that article to be in need of review by someone with good literacy. It presents single datapoints and talks about "this decline", despite not actually presenting past data to compare with the current numbers. The largest timespan it shows is the literacy from '92 to '03, and they explicitly quote the report saying that "average prose and document literacy did not differ significantly".

They also fail to mention that the 2003 report showed no decline except for Hispanics. Maybe, just maybe, immigration by people with non-English backgrounds was the cause, not textbooks? It'd be nice to at least see that discussed.

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by zimpenfish on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @11:21AM (#15028160)
> they explicitly quote the report saying that [...]

Which ignored the part immediately before that citing an 8 point rise in quantitative literacy between '92 and '03.

Also blatantly ignored the following sentence showing +6 for prose and +8 for document literacy for POC. And the one about Asian/Pacific Islanders getting +16 from '92 to '03.

It is a shoddy piece of work picking only those points that bolster their existing conclusion.

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by zimpenfish on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:08AM (#15027128)
> bjupress.com

Would you consider them an unbiased source given their stated goal is to "support Christian educators by producing textbooks and materials that shape a biblical worldview"?

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by Boothroid on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:19AM (#15027189)
That's another logical fallacy. There are stacks of references available on this.
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by ivanbakel on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:33AM (#15027285)
Could you then find another one?
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by jcranmer on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @11:20AM (#15028152)
You could do better than a reference that lies about the contents of its citations. For example, there is no evidence that "over 50% of American adults over the age of 16 were functionally illiterate." The actual number is 14%, if I'm taking the cited source's statistic of "below basic prose literacy" as the definition of "functionally illiterate."

Actually, upon reading the whole article, this feels a lot more like the same millennium-old whining "kids aren't appreciating the same classics I did and therefore they're stupid idiots." Kids these days read and write a lot--text messaging, twitter, facebook, social media.

If you want to convince someone that it really is the case that people are getting dumber, you need to find references that don't read like the same age-old complaints: you need to show that it's dumber on an objective measure of intelligence, not "they don't show appreciation for the classics," which is what you usually find instead.

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by brudgers on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:07AM (#15027120)
Contemporary education eschews the use of passive voice. The passage would judged negatively in most contemporary classrooms in the English speaking world.
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by protomyth on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @11:56AM (#15028498)
What is the reason for rejection of the passive voice?
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by brudgers on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @12:47PM (#15028980)
My guess/speculation/opinion is that it is related to the common pedagogical premise that the primary purpose of writing is to present a convincing argument. And passive voice is viewed as "weaker" in the context of debate and argument by conventional wisdom. For what it's worth, I think the emphasis on writing to argue and convince is a significant contributing factor to the behaviors people exhibit once they discover text boxes on the internet.

An alternative approach to writing is as a tool to examine one's own thoughts...and perhaps explain them to others. That is, writing can be a tool by which the writer comes to understand the subject rather than a means of teaching it to others. This is a bit more at odds with the idea that education is about filling up the empty bucket of a student's mind.

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by m0nty on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:01AM (#15027084)
How is expressing your individuality incompatible with good writing?
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by Boothroid on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:06AM (#15027113)
a. are we really going to harm poor precious little Henry by making him rote learn grammar instead of expressing the minimal amount of individuality he might have by school age (we don't read books written by children because they don't have much interesting to say) b. by not giving children a proper grasp of language we are actually limiting their ability to express themselves, for God's sake
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by laumars on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:13AM (#15027157)
I think it's dangerous to assume that kids neither have individually nor anything interesting to say.

Just the other day my 3 year old was explaining to me how cars, tablet PCs and people all need different types of energy to function. I found that conversation to be far more interesting than half the discussions I have with peers of my own age.

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by Boothroid on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:23AM (#15027208)
OK, so what about point b - by prioritising children expressing their individuality we are actually limiting their ability to express themselves with eloquence?
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by laumars on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:35AM (#15027305)
I didn't really want to get into an argument about education but since you asked: honestly, I see no evidence to support your point. My wife is a primary school teacher and most of my extended family currently work or have worked in schools. Not one person I've spoken to has ever talked about kids being treated even remotely in the fashion you describe.

I am sure you could find some specific examples which support your theory but my experience would suggest those examples are the exception rather than the norm.

You could make the argument that it is easier for kids to express their individuality than it ever has been but I think the credit for that belongs to the Internet and changing social attitudes rather than schooling (though maybe schools have become more intolerant to bullying than when I was young? That would also certainly help).

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by Boothroid on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @05:35PM (#15031577)
Perhaps it doesn't fit your political viewpoint. Teaching is notoriously left wing. I know teachers myself, and they have told me that education has changed in the way I have described.

I'll just leave thus here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2815147/Why-trendy-t...

Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by laumars on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @07:27PM (#15032255)
Teaching isn't "notoriously left wing". Half the popular schools out there are religious schools and place a stronger bias on religious dogma than any left wing educator would be comfortable with.

But it is pretty clear your stance on this is pretty far right so anything is going to seem too left wing for your liking. Case in point: you read the Daily Mail and Christian publications and take them at face value. If the issues were are prevalent as you pretend then you wouldn't be scraping the barrel with 5 year old reports in papers that have a terrible reputation for inaccuracies.

Anyhow, I said before that I didn't really want to get drawn into a debate about education - I have to endure enough ranting about it from my wife each night - so this is the last I'm going to say on the subject.

[dead]
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by Boothroid on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @05:30PM (#15031548)
Oh yes I'm so destroyed. And your account is less than one day old.
Re:The Tottenham Station Railway Disaster of 1860 by DanBC on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @10:36AM (#15027777)
> by prioritising children expressing their individuality

It doesn't happen. You're wrong. You're being very firm with your assertions, but they're based on something that doesn't happen.

Have a look at common core standards for English. Most of them have nothing to do with "expressing their individuality", but about introducing a topic, making an argument, and supporting it with evidence.