Young Voters

[Ban Basketball]

2 minutes ago, BerniePragle said:

Data, schmata.  Everybody's got data to "prove" whatever they want to prove.  Everybody's the best and have the data to prove it.  Ford's got data to prove their cars are the best.  So do GM, Honda, Toyota, et al.  Every political administration conjures up data to prove what a wonderful job they're doing.  I take all data intended to prove something with a grain of salt, if that.  For (to me) obvious reasons.

"tricking my audience (older and middle-aged people) who also think that they were smarter than "the kids today."
I suspect that is exactly what you did.  At least you admit it.  I also suspect that is what your linked data has been intended to do for a number of years.  Not everyone is as gullible as your target audience was/is.  

"Unfortunately, our data shows that kids just keeping getting brighter and brighter."  I'm assuming that you are in some way connected to our educational system.  In light of that, I find your use of the word "Unfortunately" disconcerting at best.  If true (lol), shouldn't this be celebrated?

You do realize the first study you linked is 9 years old?  Not that that makes it meaningless, but...

For both of these studies, I would be extremely curious about the relationship between the sources of the data, analysis and presentation of the data, and anyone who would benefit from this data possibly looking better than it may actually be.  No, I'm not curious enough to dig around the internet to try to refute what I'm sure you'll say, the next "study" you'll quote.  Anyone who thinks our primary and secondary education in the US has not gone downhill for probably at least 40 years has been asleep that long.

I believe it is a well known fact that our primary and secondary teachers very much "teach to the tests" anymore.  This would at least partially invalidate the use of test scores to represent actual comprehension, and even more as an indicator of critical thinking ability.  Certainly the test scores would not be an indicator of "smarter".  There's a lot more to that than simply regurgitating something learned by rote in anticipation of canned testing.

I'm sure we could debate the actual quality of primary and secondary education in Mathematics and Reading ad nauseam.  However, the original topic of the thread was young voters.  This would much more involve education in Civics, which I very much question the quality of recently (if it even exists).  Also necessary for an enlightened electorate are Classical Logic, understanding and determining independence of sources of information, ie simply being able to separate the wheat from the chaff.  Before I retired, I worked with many young Engineers, most from the best universities in the country.  None of them had received a quality education in Civics, Government, the Civil Rights Movement, etc, at any level, even at what I'd call acceptable for hard science majors.   And, these young men and women were way above average intelligence.  I also would question their Math, Science, and Engineering education, a subject in which I am qualified to judge.  They sure were good (quick) at clicking a mouse, though.  I found that scary.

I usually don't do this, but when your post questions the older guys' intelligence, I'll make an exception.  I'll take a moment to correct your grammar:  "who also think thought that they were smarter than the kids today".  I think you need past tense here.  You have an "agreement problem".  Probably in my day about 7th grade .

A few pernts of clarification for you.

1.  So, you present me no data to counter what our data shows,  yet you're correct?  Again,  I'll welcome actual research that counters what we've known for decades, but simply showing up to the party with no data,  all the while proclaiming that you're right,  won't cut it in our circles,  my friend. 

2.  "Tricking my audience" was contained in the title of my research,  "The Stupidity Epidemic," which showed that we've ALWAYS, even in the 50's, believed that generations that follow us are more "foolish" than we were as students.  Again, the data has never borne that out. So,  the title was the only "trick."

3. "Unfortunately." I used that because,  unfortunately,  for older folks who believe they know more than younger generations, our data does not reveal that.  Keep in mind, I'm in my late 50's, so those fingers get pernted at me too.

4. Why, yes, my first link IS from nine years ago.  Why? Because I said,  longitudinally,  test scores have done nothing but improve over time. That data goes back to the 70's to show the longitudinal trends.  The second link brings us up to today,  where,  minus the COVID years,  the same trend of improved scores continues. 

5. Curious about the sources of data? I find THAT curious,  given your expertise in everything eggacashun, yet aren't familiar with everyone's go to source for edurkation data. Have at it! https://nces.ed.gov/

6.Civics!? Of course it's not taught,  nor has it been for decades.  Why,  you ask? Because it's been "replaced" by U.S. Gubment, U.S. history,  political science,  etc. Just a re-branding, just like we no longer call it Home Economics, but by a variety of new terms. 

[MPhillips]

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind

[BerniePragle]

5 hours ago, MPhillips said:

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind

 

[BerniePragle]

6 hours ago, Ban Basketball said:

A few pernts of clarification for you.

1.  So, you present me no data to counter what our data shows,  yet you're correct?  Again,  I'll welcome actual research that counters what we've known for decades, but simply showing up to the party with no data,  all the while proclaiming that you're right,  won't cut it in our circles,  my friend. 

2.  "Tricking my audience" was contained in the title of my research,  "The Stupidity Epidemic," which showed that we've ALWAYS, even in the 50's, believed that generations that follow us are more "foolish" than we were as students.  Again, the data has never borne that out. So,  the title was the only "trick."

3. "Unfortunately." I used that because,  unfortunately,  for older folks who believe they know more than younger generations, our data does not reveal that.  Keep in mind, I'm in my late 50's, so those fingers get pernted at me too.

4. Why, yes, my first link IS from nine years ago.  Why? Because I said,  longitudinally,  test scores have done nothing but improve over time. That data goes back to the 70's to show the longitudinal trends.  The second link brings us up to today,  where,  minus the COVID years,  the same trend of improved scores continues. 

5. Curious about the sources of data? I find THAT curious,  given your expertise in everything eggacashun, yet aren't familiar with everyone's go to source for edurkation data. Have at it! https://nces.ed.gov/

6.Civics!? Of course it's not taught,  nor has it been for decades.  Why,  you ask? Because it's been "replaced" by U.S. Gubment, U.S. history,  political science,  etc. Just a re-branding, just like we no longer call it Home Economics, but by a variety of new terms. 

I'm not sure I can make it any clearer than the first time, but here goes...

"5. Curious about the sources of data?"  Not in the least.  As noted by you in your "go to source", the only source of data on how well the government is educating our kids is the government (.gov).  Who would be stupid enough to believe what the government says about how well the government is doing in anything.  Oops, sorry.  I'm not going to ask the fox how well the henhouse is being guarded.  Obviously, some people will ask and believe what they are told.

You choose to disregard my observations and opinion because I'm not an "insider".  I choose to view that as I don't have a horse in the race.

During my career, I collected, analyzed, presented, and re-tested a lot of data.  If my data and analyses were wrong, either by my error or by my lack of honesty, machines and processes would fail, airplanes would fall out of the sky, etc.  The Gods of Physics are impossible to bullshit, unlike the vast majority of the American public.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is not part of the 80% we agree on.

[MPhillips]

@BerniePragle

Mr.P. I don't get it? Are you just brushing it off?

[MPhillips]

Just now, MPhillips said:

@BerniePragle

Mr.P. I don't get it? Are you just brushing it off?

And if you are...I really don't get it?

[GreatWhiteNorth]

13 hours ago, Ban Basketball said:

A few pernts of clarification for you.

1.  So, you present me no data to counter what our data shows,  yet you're correct?  Again,  I'll welcome actual research that counters what we've known for decades, but simply showing up to the party with no data,  all the while proclaiming that you're right,  won't cut it in our circles,  my friend. 

2.  "Tricking my audience" was contained in the title of my research,  "The Stupidity Epidemic," which showed that we've ALWAYS, even in the 50's, believed that generations that follow us are more "foolish" than we were as students.  Again, the data has never borne that out. So,  the title was the only "trick."

3. "Unfortunately." I used that because,  unfortunately,  for older folks who believe they know more than younger generations, our data does not reveal that.  Keep in mind, I'm in my late 50's, so those fingers get pernted at me too.

4. Why, yes, my first link IS from nine years ago.  Why? Because I said,  longitudinally,  test scores have done nothing but improve over time. That data goes back to the 70's to show the longitudinal trends.  The second link brings us up to today,  where,  minus the COVID years,  the same trend of improved scores continues. 

5. Curious about the sources of data? I find THAT curious,  given your expertise in everything eggacashun, yet aren't familiar with everyone's go to source for edurkation data. Have at it! https://nces.ed.gov/

6.Civics!? Of course it's not taught,  nor has it been for decades.  Why,  you ask? Because it's been "replaced" by U.S. Gubment, U.S. history,  political science,  etc. Just a re-branding, just like we no longer call it Home Economics, but by a variety of new terms. 

Efforts you've made claiming some level of expertise in education ... were wasted. Your post here is downright stupid.

You can't possibly be that stupid. Perhaps it's the translation - what country are you from?

[MPhillips]

5 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

You can't possibly be that stupid.

You disagree with 1-6? Or are you hung up on the spelling?

[Ban Basketball]

12 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Efforts you've made claiming some level of expertise in education ... were wasted. Your post here is downright stupid.

You can't possibly be that stupid. Perhaps it's the translation - what country are you from?

The data isn't mine; I just provide links to it. With that said, care to tell me what's stupid about their data, sir?   It's what is used as the go-to source for everything education, so I'd be curious what you know that those of us in da bidness don't know.

Thanks in advance for any work that you can do for me!.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

3 hours ago, Ban Basketball said:

The data isn't mine; I just provide links to it. With that said, care to tell me what's stupid about their data, sir?   It's what is used as the go-to source for everything education, so I'd be curious what you know that those of us in da bidness don't know.

Thanks in advance for any work that you can do for me!.

Sent you a PM.

[BerniePragle]

On 11/26/2022 at 7:25 PM, MPhillips said:

And if you are...I really don't get it?

Not directed at you, Amigo.  It was merely an indication of my view of the relative thought processes going on at that point.  I'll leave it at that.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

On 11/27/2022 at 6:54 AM, MPhillips said:

You disagree with 1-6? Or are you hung up on the spelling?

Neither.

I believe Ban and I worked through this earlier and we have moved on.

Edited November 29, 2022 by GreatWhiteNorth

[MPhillips]

15 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

 

I believe Ban and I worked through this earlier and we have moved on.

My bad. I posted right after you. Must have missed it...

[GreatWhiteNorth]

6 hours ago, MPhillips said:

My bad. I posted right after you. Must have missed it...

No problems. All good.

[Viratas]

On 11/15/2022 at 8:25 AM, Husker_Du said:

Are stupid. Discuss. 

 

 

The current generation, 18-30 IMO is a special kind of dumb. I have a daughter of this age whom several of you are familiar with from the old days. When it comes to the world and what is happening, they have zero clue. I mean, like dense. Just spend 10 mins on social or watch something like love island, and you will see. Side note FL is an extraordinary kind of Stupid! People here are a hot mess.

[Crotalus]

56 minutes ago, Viratas said:

The current generation, 18-30 IMO is a special kind of dumb. I have a daughter of this age whom several of you are familiar with from the old days. When it comes to the world and what is happening, they have zero clue. I mean, like dense. Just spend 10 mins on social or watch something like love island, and you will see. Side note FL is an extraordinary kind of Stupid! People here are a hot mess.

I fall between the young and the old. While I agree that young folks don't know how much they don't know, the old folks also don't realize that their experiences from the same age are largely irrelevant today. Let's call it "back in my day" syndrome. 

Edited December 1, 2022 by Crotalus

[Viratas]

4 minutes ago, Crotalus said:

I fall between the young and the old. While I agree that young folks don't know how much they don't know, the old folks also don't realize that their experiences from the same age are largely irrelevant today. Let's call it "back in my day" syndrome. 

You are not wrong. I agree that, to some extent, that is true; they may grow out of it, but maybe they won't. We have raised kids basically with two different generations. With our oldest (25), we were young parents. Now with our younger two (11) and (13), we are the older parents. This new group of parents are a massive pain in the ass, and they take helicopter parenting to a level I did not know was possible. We are not, and people think we are nuts, lol. It is fun. On a serious note, though, there is a vast paradigm shift related to culture and age, much like the late 60's into the 70's IMO. 

[BerniePragle]

@Husker_Du

I'm sure BB will have "data" to the contrary, but...

If you think they're stupid now, wait about 30 years and see what you think.  (I'm guessing about our age difference.)

Edited December 1, 2022 by BerniePragle

[Ban Basketball]

18 hours ago, BerniePragle said:

@Husker_Du

I'm sure BB will have "data" to the contrary, but...

If you think they're stupid now, wait about 30 years and see what you think.  (I'm guessing about our age difference.)

And you'll then call science,  "data schmata," won't you,  sir?

As Ronnie Trees Cause The Greenhouse Effect Reagan said,  "facts are stupid things. "

[BerniePragle]

1 minute ago, Ban Basketball said:

And you'll then call science,  "data schmata," won't you,  sir?

As Ronnie Trees Cause The Greenhouse Effect Reagan said,  "facts are stupid things. "

I thought I already splained the difference between Science and the government concocting "data" to spin what a wonderful job they're doing at anything.  I guess it didn't take.

An excellent book if you REALLY want to understand a lot of the stastical BS you're getting fed from wherever...."How Not to Be Wrong, the Power of Mathematical Thinking" by Jordan Ellenberg.

Less mathematical and probably more "funny":
"Trust Us, We're Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles with Your Future"
"Toxic Sludge is Good for You: Lies, Damn Lies, and the Public Relations Industry"
and others...
 by John Clyde Stauber, Sheldon Rampton

We have a pool and a pond.  The pond would probably be better for you.

[Ban Basketball]

1 minute ago, BerniePragle said:

I thought I already splained the difference between Science and the government concocting "data" to spin what a wonderful job they're doing at anything.  I guess it didn't take.

An excellent book if you REALLY want to understand a lot of the stastical BS you're getting fed from wherever...."How Not to Be Wrong, the Power of Mathematical Thinking" by Jordan Ellenberg.

Less mathematical and probably more "funny":
"Trust Us, We're Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles with Your Future"
"Toxic Sludge is Good for You: Lies, Damn Lies, and the Public Relations Industry"
and others...
 by John Clyde Stauber, Sheldon Rampton

We have a pool and a pond.  The pond would probably be better for you.

So,  there's no way to determine truth or any way to ascertain accurate information?

 

[BerniePragle]

5 minutes ago, Ban Basketball said:

So,  there's no way to determine truth or any way to ascertain accurate information?

 

Read the books and get back to me. 

[Ban Basketball]

6 minutes ago, BerniePragle said:

Read the books and get back to me. 

Ok.  There are no facts then.  Gotcha. 

[mspart]

When a fact is known and taken as one thing by one group and another thing by another group, the worth of facts becomes diminished and the search for truth much more difficult.

mspart

[BerniePragle]

3 hours ago, Ban Basketball said:

Ok.  There are no facts then.  Gotcha. 

Ok.  If reading a book is beyond your attention span, here is a relatively short article which addresses the state of scientific literacy in the US, which I would assume is the result of our government controlled education system that you are touting.  If reading this entire article is still too much, just read the first sentence in "Key Takeaways".  I hope that's not too much.

https://flip.it/K9rBXp