Below is my column in The Hill on universities reporting soaring grade inflation and failing academic standards. Some of us have been writing about this trend for years, but there is little sign of commitment from departments that they are willing to take action to restore academic standards. Any solution will require a national compact of willing schools, a critical mass of institutions willing to adopt a standard curve and basic admission reforms.
Here is the column:
This week, a faculty report at the University of California San Diego found that one in eight of its students requires remedial math classes due to plummeting admissions standards at the school. This follows a similar disclosure at Harvard, where students are also being given remedial math training.
It is only the latest example of the dumbing down of education in America. The implications of this trend are dire for the nation as we march toward an economy with unprecedented challenges for the coming generation.
If we are to save higher education in the U.S., we will need a radical reboot. We need a national education compact to change admissions and grading in our schools.
For more than a decade, some of us have been writing about the decline of academic standards in higher education, from lowering admissions standards to increasing grading curves. Faculties have shown no willingness to address grade inflation or declining standards. That will not change. Most faculties have been purged of dissenting voices and most conservatives. The outrage being voiced outside of schools like Harvard is not being heard within this academic echo chamber.
Years ago, advocates for greater diversity in admission began to rail against the concept of meritocracy itself as racist. Others denounced the use of standardized testing as racist and a barrier to entry for many minorities in top schools. At the same time, the Supreme Court appeared to be moving closer to declaring the use of race in admissions to be unconstitutional — which it ultimately did in 2023.
I wrote about this effort in the California university system in 2021, when then-University of California President Janet Napolitano announced that the ten schools in the system would no longer base admissions on standardized tests. What was most striking about this announcement is that Napolitano went forward with the plan, even though the findings of her hand-picked study group did not support the change.
The final report concluded that at the University of California, “test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average, and about as good at predicting first-year retention, [University] GPA, and graduation.” To make matters worse for Napolitano, the panel also found that standardized scores were also better predictors of outcomes for non-white students within any given school.
Napolitano thanked them and proceeded to kill standardized testing anyway. Now, the system is dealing with a 30-fold spike in freshmen who can’t do remedial math.
Other schools have faced similar concerns after discontinuing standardized testing and have recently returned to using the tests. However, there remain objections that schools are circumventing the 2023 Supreme Court decision and finding less obvious ways to use race as a criterion for admissions.
A recent report in San Diego of the Senate-Administration Working Group on Admissions said precisely what some of us said years ago: “Admitting large numbers of underprepared students risks harming those students and straining limited instructional resources.”
One way to address the lowering of admissions standards is to inflate grades to erase differences in performance. And yes, that is happening.
Harvard is the most ridiculous example of this trend. Recently, then-Dean of Harvard College Rakesh Khurana gave his annual report to the faculty and noted that the average GPA at the school is now 3.8. Upon his announcement that Harvard now gives A’s to virtually everyone, Khurana and the faculty members reportedly broke out laughing at how they have made a premier institution into a bad joke.
When a recent report at Harvard noted that it is impossible to maintain academic integrity and excellence with such grade inflation, students reportedly rebelled. Most faculty are perfectly willing to keep the joke going. After all, giving mostly A’s makes grading easier, guarantees great student reviews, and avoids objections from any aggrieved students.
But in the long run, the joke is on the students. These degrees are becoming meaningless as employers have little basis to judge the comparative ability of these students.
In San Diego, the faculty study also found that grade inflation had contributed to the collapse of standards at the school.
Last week, I addressed a class at Harvard Law School, noting that the Trump Administration was correct about the lack of intellectual diversity at the school. For many of these students, the closest they get to a libertarian or conservative professor is through such guest lectures or occasional speakers.
But despite agreeing with the Trump administration, I disagree with some of its actions toward Harvard in seeking to dictate diversity. We do not want the government to play such a large role in higher education.
Instead, what we need is a voluntary National Education Compact. Donors, students, and others should encourage colleges and universities to join a national agreement between schools to implement some basic changes to restore excellence in higher education. First, schools should agree not only to utilize standardized testing but also to guarantee that the scores will be weighted at a minimum level. For example, the compact could specify that scores would represent at least forty percent of the points that go toward admission (and that the combination of those scores and their grade point averages (GPA) will be given a minimum of sixty-five percent of such points).
The specific percentage can be addressed, but participating schools would ideally assure students and employers that admissions will be driven in significant part by objective rankings while allowing, in the remaining points, for significant variables in other forms of achievement or distinction. Among broad bands of combined scoring, the difference can still be individual distinctions beyond mere tests and grades.
Second, a standard curve should be published with a B as the fixed mean. Individual department faculties often set the mean and inevitably inflate it as students complain that they are at a competitive disadvantage to more generous schools. It is an irresistible temptation just to repeatedly increase the mean to appease students. This can become a variation of the prisoner’s dilemma between schools, in which they come to the worst outcome as they anticipate what other schools will be doing to help their students.
By creating a standard curve among schools and establishing a standard testing mandate, we can establish an objective baseline for comparison. Schools will be listed as either joining the compact or being in non-compliance. Employers can then give greater weight to those schools committed to academic excellence and transparency. Likewise, donors can refuse to contribute to schools with administrators and faculty who refuse to take basic steps to maintain the standards at their school.
The compact still will not address the hiring practices of these schools or the loss of traditional courses. Schools will no doubt continue to offer courses in subjects such as “social advocacy.” However, those courses will no longer be able to give every social justice warrior an A. Students will be expected, as in real life, to distinguish themselves through merit and their work to secure higher grades.
This is admittedly going to be controversial. But what is clear is that we cannot continue on the current path. The dumbing down of higher education is now a national crisis. It is time for a National Education Compact.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the bestselling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Democrats do not want smarter people, particularly among their base. From 2014:
And neither do Republicans, that’s why they kicked you out.
Uh uh uh that is the body of the Republicans, you know it be like, no war with my body because I had a dream! And uh uh uh get your kicks on Route 66, is why beatniks !
If their the champions I can only imagine the losers.
This is an SNL skit RIGHT, it’s fake, RIGHT…right??? Bueller….Bueller….Bueller?
No, it is for real. And people wonder why Democrats don’t like debating with people like Charlie Kirk, or even engaging in conversation with them.
Debating Charlie Kirk was like playing cards with a cheater who brought a marked deck. At first it looks like there is considerable skill, but soon one figures out what the mechanic of the trick is and then it is boring.
Kirk just deflected any discussion to one of a few prepared traps, far from the initial discussion. I’ve watched about 50 of his “Change my mind” appearances and the gimmicks are quite obvious.
One of the more frequent was to demand someone prove something from the Bible, but Kirk did not bring one. This resulted in Kirk simply saying that the person didn’t read the Bible correctly no matter what the person said. With no Bible at hand, no one could expect Kirk to read the respondent’s passage himself. Since the typical topic did not start with a Biblical the person asking a question of Kirk would have no reason to bring one.
When one did manage to pierce that particular veil, Kirk just went to the next person, stopping before responding.
Debating Charlie Kirk was like playing cards with a cheater who brought a marked deck.
In reality, it was a simple, convincing display of what happens when emotionally overwrought Woke Democrat brainwashed, self-appointed intellectuals attempted to use their emotions to debate against anyone employing basic logic and reason.
In other words: “Facts don’t care about your feelings – including your belief that if you self-identify as a woman, then you can menstruate and get pregnant”
Can you produce video of you questioning Kirk and where he did as you claimed – deflected from answering by moving on?
Almost 20 years ago I taught a class at NYU law school. The school had a policy to grade on comparative basis, i.e., how well a student performed compared to the other students in the class. So, if you were a good student but had the bad luck of taking a class with together with geniuses, you would be lucky to get awarded a C-; but if the other students were just average that same exam would earn you an A+. Never understood the rationale for that system of grading. I taught earlier in Europe (where I received my education) and we used standardized answers to exam questions, containing the elements we wanted students to address in their answers. Grading thus was far more objective and honest. I also noticed the pressure from students to get a higher grade than they deserved. When the federal government started to involve itself in the student loan business (with good intentions for sure), it created more demand for educational services. Tuition fees of course went up and up (as supply remains about the same). Not all applicants were of the right caliber to go to college, but by lowering admission standards all could be admitted and the tuition income secured. Now, obviously, no college can afford to have a low retention rate because that reflects negatively on the college. However, when students are admitted based in lowered standards, more students will drop out. The logical response is then to lower the grading standards to keep the retention rate high. As a consequence, you have created a downward spiral in terms of educational quality.
I don’t think, colleges and universities are going to change voluntarily. Turley’s preference lacks realism. Administration and faculty are all left wing politically to make such a change since they believe that social justice demands a college degree for all (equality in outcome not opportunity). The change has to be forced top down. Although I think education is not included in the enumerated powers of the federal government and education should be the responsibility of the states under our federal system, fact is that the federal government subsidizes education with billions of dollars and can use the power of the purse to force the change needed to return colleges and universities to the high quality level of the past. K12 education has a quality and standard problem too. If we would indeed go to a voucher system under which parents can take their kid to whatever school is better, K12 would have no choice but to follow in raising quality, because a school that produces only underperforming students who fail admission tests, would soon be without students and thus income. The voucher system would introduce competition and competition works.
The voucher system you suggest would quickly close schools in low income areas and leave schools that are too far away to transport the low income students to them. Some have sort of tried, leading to those students spending up to 2 hours a day on the bus, time taken away from study and eliminating any chance in after school clubs or athletics.
That must be the goal – to ensure that inequality is maximized.
An aging school with decaying structures and systems will clearly lose students under this plan, leaving an increasing gap between maintenance costs and voucher income.
Recall that the main reason to have competition is to have a clearly defined group of losers and only a few winners. Voucher programs ensure that any lower class students will 100% be guaranteed to lose.
in contrast communist china is teaching their students very good english, so they can comment here in their attempt to take down america.
Sorry commie!
Whew….
“ Instead, what we need is a voluntary National Education Compact. Donors, students, and others should encourage colleges and universities to join a national agreement between schools to implement some basic changes to restore excellence in higher education.”
Voluntary. Sure. That will happen. What he really wishes would be the case, ideally, would be a socialist style national standard that every school should adhere to. Making it voluntary is a cop-out for what he really would like to happen. Unfortunately, Every state and every school has their own standards and admissions criteria. That is how they compete with other schools for students and of course, guaranteed student loans.
And speaking of purging libertarians and Conservatives, why don’t they make their case for inclusion into higher education. It seems the proffessor is not aware that meritocracy requires everyone to succeed based on merits including faculty. Conservatives have not made a convincing case that their views and ideas are worthy of consideration from students.
Professot Turley can’t seem to understand that younger people are NOT attracted to conservative ideas or points of view. A few might, but the majority of studetns don’t and Universities and Colleges offer classes that students find interesting, new. Conservative ideas and points of views are seen in a negative light because they see it outside of school all the time and clearly they do not like how conservatism or libertarianism wants them to behave.
“Conservatives have not made a convincing case that their views “…. But liberals have?
So whatever he writes, he’s hiding something you say? You got special power eh?
Gotta say pal, you write unconvincing BS.
Close. Not a socialist system, but a totalitarian system where a central planning committee dictates the lock-step education methods and required outcomes.
A supporting observation – if Conservatism and Libertarianism were so superior, then they would be producing the top quality graduates and attracting candidates in such great numbers they would be either turning them away or, because capitalism, expanding at a rapid pace to be able to accept them all. Such a move would take about a decade, to get the students through graduate school and become professors.
In addition, the hiring companies would be screening out graduates from any other source.
I wonder too at the possibility that decades of telling Conservatives and Libertarians that higher education is a swamp of Communists and Socialists might have had some influence over potential students with those values avoiding them, leading to further distillation.
Finally, it occurs to me that strident, tone-deaf arguing by Conservatives and Libertarians might be the reason that students don’t feel free to express opinions for fear of setting off the “God said so” powder keg that those who hew to terms like “TDS” and “feminazis” and “social justice warriors” carry around, ready to explode.
Institutions of higher education cannot make any fundamental change in the quality of the students who enter their doors as freshmen. Therefore, as compelling as the indictments of those institutions may be, any reform will prove useless unless it is preceded by drastic reformation of the public K – 12 education system in the US. Such a reformation would (among other things) necessitate curbing, or entirely eliminating, the power of the Marxist teacher’s unions to control the agenda and curricula in K -12. That, in turn, would require a tremendous amount of sustained political will that I am skeptical can be found or generated. So, I am pessimistic that any truly beneficial, long-term change is forthcoming. All we likely will see is the usual political posturing that seldom endures beyond the next election campaign.
American higher education has become an “educational/student loan complex.” The institutions want everyone coming out of high school funneled into their system, regardless of their suitability for higher education. They encourage them to take out student loans to pay for inflated tuitions, and then fail to deliver a meaningful education that prepares them to be productive citizens. For being a bunch of socialist/communists, they sure do care about money.
Car dealers want everyone to buy a car. Water is wet. However, most schools are very capitalist.
If Conservative schools can offer lower tuition and better outcomes, why aren’t they doing so?
If Conservative schools can offer lower tuition and better outcomes, why aren’t they doing so?
1. Why are Democrats and the powerful teachers’ unions that they grift with so desperate to block alternatives to unionized public schools, if those private alternatives would supposedly quickly fail?
2. Given the abject failure of the Democrat/union public school system, why would they be so obsessed with condemning the failure of those schools – while not pointing at examples of how charter schools in Chicago have supposedly worse outcomes than unionized public schools? Because there are none that are similar examples of failure similar to their schools?
I am saddened to hear this about Janet Napolitano, the former governor and HHS Secretary who I thought was far more qualified to be the first woman president than either Hillary or Kamala. Someone who had made her way in life without the aid of a charismatic Bill Clinton or Willie Brown.
“far more qualified to be the first woman president than either Hillary or Kamala”
Wow! Are you at all familiar with the phrase “damning with faint praise” ;?>
Had Hillary married anyone else that person would have been Mr. President. Bill Clinton is charismatic, Hillary Clinton is the flint hard politician who got him into office.
Infest the unjust and exclusionary high-ed system. Then parasitize and remake the system to serve the aims of ideology. The larvae can then mature sufficiently to see how the entire system must be overcome at every level. The graduated pupae then go into all industry and social institutions everywhere, so as to infect and attack the hosts and make them most amenable. A voluntary compact to slow the spread or make the swarming larvae more reflective on their insatiable, inevitable destiny to devour their hosts does not serve the purpose of the hive.
For the most part, I appreciate the Professor’s blog here, but his solution lacks teeth. At this point, it looks likely that the vast majority of schools would stonewall his proposal. The problem is well past being reformed from within.
I support the President’s efforts.
The Left, which now controls academia completely, is working to build a ruling class that is totally beholden to leftwing favoritism. That is why so many college graduates seem to lack the agency to see through the Left’s lies. I call it being “overeducated.” When someone can’t see the virtue in critical thinking at a college level, McDonald’s just needs to give her a day job. She’s already peaked.
I have a question please. Have you ever worked in the education industry, in any capacity?
Yes
Ok. prove it. I have to add, not partial to people who sound really really crazy here.
You can get McDonald’s employment number from their website.
Perhaps a merger would work. Join the compact to qualify for federal funds.
Many schools are real estate and investment management corporations that often run a sports franchise on the side. They may also have classrooms.
None of this is particularly Liberal, though for modern Conservatives Jesus Christ himself would be stoned to death or at least arrested and imprisoned for his support of the poor and the sick and his association with prostitutes. He’d likely be found talking to people in homeless camps and to drug addicts. All bad things to do in the Conservative handbook.
Professor Turley is a yes vote for government continuing give these iunivedsities tens of billions of taxpayer dollars each year. But he complains when Trump’s administration attaches conditions to those taxpayer dollars to eliminate their racism, bias in hiring and Woke agenda.
Concern for the civil rights of students, applicants, etc. takes a backseat to purity of Professor Turley’s academic theory!
I think that were the Professor to say what he really believes, he would be drummed out of academia like so many others who did speak up. He may be hoping that we say it for him and vote accordingly. He’s walking a fine line between reform and Trump support. The rest is up to us.
“I think that were the Professor to say what he really believes, ..” So you’re reading into his article that clearly states his opinion. Are you saying The Professor is lying?
What if we just agree that you are lying?
Lying about what? Would like to know about those super mental powers that allow you to detect lying.
“I think that were the Professor to say what he really believes, he would be drummed out of academia like so many others who did speak up. ”
I you are correct that he cannot summon the courage to write his actual opinions on a subject, perhaps he should entirely avoid writing about it at all.
What diogenes is saying, is that Turley has a secret place where he divulges his honest opinions only to a specially selected group of followers.
The public stuff is just a cover to appease the education gods.
The dumbing down of America in general, let alone in basic and higher education, will continue as long as liberals, quasi-Marxists and the Democrat Party make dumbing down a core component of their efforts to cripple the Republic. A National Education Compact will never succeed until people like Randi Weingarten, liberals and the Democrat Party itself are sidelined and defanged. Stated otherwise, and to quote the motto of the “Bad Joke”: Ve ri tas.
The proposed answer always seems to be a new, innovative methodology or a new set of standards. The actual solution is already known, proven and has been demonstrated as effective for years. It’s in the past. Yes, I know. The past is horrible. We must get beyond the past, I have heard for the last sixty years or so. But the past, before social engineering and federal control, gave us an academic excellence second to none. Of course, that’s when Progressives set out to reconstruct society into an entirely new and more enlightened model. A model where social outcomes were far more important than actual performance based contributory citizens. When I was five I learned how to read. Now, a UConn student reveals that she can’t read or write. Don’t reinvent the system. Enough damage has been done to our society. Simply adopt the model that made us the envy of the world. Get rid of federal control of our education system and return it back to the people. We knew what to do, we did it and we can do it again.
You must be reaching farther than 70 years ago for that past. The US Federal Government pushed a massive investment into science and technology studies when it looked like the Russians were gaining on the US in terms of the Space Race and nuclear weapons development.
The present problem is that the Republicans have pushed measures that discourage corporations from investing in America. When the top marginal rate was 90% the way to avoid paying those taxes was to invest in R&D and building factories and paying employees more. But 40 years ago the Republicans, under Ronald Reagan, said, nope, no need and slashed those tax requirements. Trump and the Heritage Foundation Project 2025 group are working to eliminate all corporate taxation.
Recall that Bell Laboratories developed a great many things, but it was spun off and, at one point, died. Nokia resurrected it, but look at how it is expected to run:
“The Nokia Bell Labs 10-story headquarters building, to be built in New Brunswick, New Jersey, had a groundbreaking ceremony on September 4, 2025. The construction is planned to be completed in 2027 and have 34,374-square-meters of space for optical communications, generative artificial intelligence, and quantum physics labs and offices. This building will be called the HELIX 2 building (Health and Life Science Exchange) and its’ location would allow academic talent from nearby universities for Nokia ventures and new startup partnerships.”
Academic talent from nearby universities. Instead of private industry doing the heavy lifting the Conservatives want Federal support via student loans and, until Trump, Federal grants to pay for industry breakthroughs.
The only social problems are from Conservatives insisting on telling people the limits to human experience. If they just said “Oh, you are trans? Um, OK?” and get on with their day rather than having an existential crisis because they cannot handle the knowledge that there are people different from them in the world. And before that “men invading women’s bathrooms” crap, full red-blooded men have been raping and murdering women and little girls long before anyone who is transsexual wore some different clothes in public. This includes rapes by top religious leaders.
But sure – if you want to stand in the woman’s bathroom and take down their panties and check to see if their genitals meet your approval – just say so.
BEHOLD THE GLORIOUS ANSWER:
Bring back “The Penguin” !
What ever happened to Cliff Notes?
Perhaps it is time to implement a university exit exam similar to the SAT’s or GRE’s to better compare the intellectual capabilities of the soon to be graduates.
An “exit exam” is a really great idea! As much as taking the SAT was as much fun as getting teeth pulled or having a spinal tap, I am so glad I had to take it, as it was uniform throughout the country. When different high schools have different grading standards, the uniform test was the only way colleges could really compare.
SAT’s or GRE’s, are entrance exams of course. An exit exam would test the meddle of everyone working towards a degree. I suspect a 70% failure rate.
Fact the time I spent in classes at college, I now know was insufficient to understand and discuss the materials the syllabus required. In class I learned little.
The US would be better off training young people at trade schools. At least they’d have the income later to pay off any school debts.
” An exit exam would test the meddle”
When did you last have your “meddle” tested? Were you found to be meddlesome enough?
When? Found? Um… looks like you tripped over a thesaurus getting to your computer. Nothing like the feeling of feeling feisty eh?
Otherwise the comments gets your approval? Thank you. From the bottom of my heart.
“mettle” you college failure.
Trade schools are already near over-producing. There isn’t enough work to utilize all the graduates at a wage that would make for a living. There will be people getting loans to pay for trade school and be unable to get jobs.
The economy is currently teetering on recession. The last time it happened the next door neighbor who was skilled at home construction could not get work and could not sell the house he had bought to flip. Tens of thousands of trade-school graduates had the same problem.
There needs to be a tax law that incentivizes corporations to employ people in the USA rather than building factories in East Asia. When the tax rates were high there were tax offsets for such investments. With low corporate tax rates there is little incentive to build here.
Sewanee requires students to pass a comprehensive exam in their major to graduate.
“Sewanee requires students to pass a comprehensive exam in their major to graduate.”
Is that test designed and administered by some arguably objective standards body, or by Sewanee (sp?) itself? If the latter, do you really think that a college would risk going against its financial and reputational interests by administering such a test without a foregone outcome?
It has already been exhaustively demonstrated that Academia will not correct itself. The institutional capture has been so complete, Professor, that no amount of principled tongue-clicking or brow-furrowing will fix it. Your naive plan could only work in an environment of honesty and integrity that does not exist. Higher education careens toward the edge of the abyss, even though it sees it plainly ahead, and deliberately accelerates towards it nonetheless. If the federal government does not get involved to correct it, the only correction will come after the collapse, when it will have to be rebuilt. That appears unavoidable at this point. But to quote Superintendent Chalmers: “I say lay back and enjoy it. It’s a hell of a toboggan ride.”
In the past, a degree from a four year higher education college or university was a guarantee to the middle class or even higher on the socio-economic scale. Now, many young people are questioning the value of a degree compared to the costs. The use of AI to do papers, grade inflation, universities pass students through to keep retention levels up, that degree no longer means the graduate has learned and mastered the skills that piece of paper says. The need for remedial classes points out the obvious problem is not just higher education but k-12 public education.
Colleges are also not preparing their students for the work force. Bosses are firing Gen Z workers in record time: ‘Yeah, checks out’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/consumer/article-13886905/bosses-firing-gen-z-workers-record-time.html
The upside is some are seeing the need for change and doing exactly that. Vo-Tech Education Is Taking Off, and It’s Not Your Dad’s Shop Class Anymore
https://realclearwire.com/articles/2024/08/22/vo-tech_education_is_taking_off_and_its_not_your_dads_shop_class_anymore_1052992.html
As a farmer, do you have a college degree? Or any sort of certification?
The land-grant universities were created to help farmers. Consider Texas A&M, Cornell, etc.
Doesn’t mean the anonymous Upstate farmer participated in any such entity.
I think you don’t understand anon’s comment?
I’m curious; he likes to cut-n-paste links a lot.
So what does Upstate Framer have for educational credentials? Simple question he refuses to answer.
I make a comment then use various links to back up my comment with evidence.
Just asking about you. As a farmer, do you have a college degree? Or any sort of certification?
Do you?
One word: Collage
“One word: Collage”
You made an assembly of random artifacts for display?
Another random set of words without coherence.
Nope. Self-taught. I read a lot of books. From slaughtering, butchering and processing livestock, composting manure, making cheese, making apple hard cider, crop rotation, mob-grazing, and much more. Of course, documentation, and book keeping. Gotta love spreadsheets.
Okay. Good answer. Don’t hit the apple cider too much ole timer.
No worries if you promise to stay off the cooking sherry…Skippy.
Pretty much the same as every farmer for the last 2000 years, except they did it without reading books and the spreadsheets were actual paper or parchment.
All around you, including that computer or cell phone you use, are the products of highly educated people who solve problems you cannot touch.
Go make a nail. Start with finding the iron ore and then finding the coal. No fair using maps or purchased tools.
The job of universities is to prepare students for the future. It is doing exactly that. An authoritarian government does not need a private sector, and will not tolerate dissent. The only logical course of action is to go along with what the powerful say and tell you to do. Do that, and everything will be fine. This is exactly what is being taught, and because it is easy, students go along.
The problem with admissions is K-12. We are failing kids even before they get to college. High schools are turning out kids educated to about the 8th grade level, if that.
DITTO -JG Gordon
K-12 is a Daycare Center – Not even the Basics, just foundational rudiments.
In the Mid 80’s, My mother (A seasoned public school curriculum Director) said, “Jobs for these Kids haven’t been invented yet.”
She was right, and we have been playing Dumb as a Nation ever since then.
A new Educational Conscription for (K-9) and (10-12) maybe a useful turning point. There are fewer roads to success today as Technology and Population increases squeeze the rising generations. Being smart helps but being Gifted is fortunate.
It’s not the fault of the schools, but of the parents who have increasingly abdicated responsibility for their children’s education. Fewer parents sit down with homework at the dinner table. Work through the problems and check that the work is well done. Instead, time with video games (some is fine, too much is not), time with social media, and expecting that one teacher is able to personally observe and teach 30 or more students in lock step and anyone falling behind can quickly get left behind.
Add to that the parents who don’t teach their children to sit still and not only be attentive, but moreover to not disrupt the education of others, and the challenge for teaching becomes not about information and learning to think, but discipline and trying to keep control.
The worst, when the few parents with out of control children demand that any discipline in unacceptable, that there can be no punishment.
Ah another good day as I have discovered one of the few advantages of being old( there aren’t many, but there are a few)…a good education without “grade inflation”. I get to be retired, live in a warm red state and enjoy the fruits of being educated when it meant something.
Funny thing is with all your comments here, you certainly don’t sound educated, grade inflation or not.
Unless that is Texas, which mainly depends on the value of the oil that happens to be there, most red states operate at a net negative and get more Federal funds courtesy of the blue states than they produce. Most of the red states have the worst educational outcomes.
I don’t think that a voluntary system would work at this time. Maybe after some systematic reform. I feel that the accrediting commissions for universities and colleges as well as grammar and high schools need to be reformed and given a clear goal and teeth. Once you get a “not accredited” review then that is a slap in the face and hopefully a wake up call demanding action. Heads should roll at any university or educational institution if they are not accredited.
I disagree that the students have been dumbed down. They are as bright or brighter than they ever were. It’s the education that is deficient and it has been dumbed down. But it is a system wide problem.
You have to hit the kids right from the first with the idea that education requires work and commitment and a love of learning. As they move into a reformed system they can then understand and learn that each further advancement will require more work and commitment. Some will drop by the wayside and that is ok because not everyone succeeds in these types of endeavors and those who don’t succeed in higher education need to be moved elsewhere. There is no shame in that.
Reinforce success, starve failure.
For 15 years until I retired, I had the privilege of mentoring Nurse Practitioner students. Those young ladies and 1 gentleman were fantastic and as sharp or sharper than many physicians. The pressure of their quest for knowledge and my experience kept me literally on my toes and made me even better as a physician. It was a wonderful experience. Don’t tell me the students are dumber because they are not but our present system fails them in so many ways. And the nation suffers as a consequence.
See folks, a well written argument. Too cutesy for my tastes, but he knows how to lure the dumb ones with his sweet talking.
Too bad its only this guy who understand the use of syntax.
Still got those geography books you wanted to send me?
Definitely. Ole GEB sure knows how to spin a good yarn.
Concept Addition: Corporations large and small would benefit from requiring applicant testing on site without AI to determine basic skills and knowledge to qualify for their job. From there AI can grade on a race and ethnic blind basis. This would be in addition to any entrance and exit exam process.
I believe the world has swallowed the industry hype about AI.
Tried an experiment regarding small claims cases I eventually filed. Although I knew what was I needed, but the responses were totally useless.
So I doubt a kid applying for college, or students have the smarts power to trick college departments. It might be redeeming in one way, it might sniff out AI authored theses.