|
Dumbing
Down the Public: Why It Matters
by Diane Ravitch
On several occasions, I have found myself in a
familiar dialogue. When I complain about low
expectations in the schools, my opposite number
says, "So what? Our economy is doing well, we win
the lion's share of Nobel Prizes, and we have
enough qualified people to fill our most demanding
professions." In other words, even if a third of
our youngsters are not learning the most elementary
skills in school, even if a third of our college
freshman must get remediation on campus, there's no
cause for concern.
Behind this disagreement are two different
assumptions: I assume that our education system
should aim to educate everyone who comes to school;
the other side says that ability is distributed
along a bell-shaped curve and that we should not be
overly concerned about the laggards because we will
always need people to pick up the trash and sweep
the streets. I confess that I get confused at this
point because the current argument favoring low or
no standards is coming from people who claim to be
on the left.
Some evidence recently surfaced, which suggests
that a democratic society pays a price for
widespread ignorance. The Princeton
Review, best known for its test preparation
services, analyzed the vocabulary used by the
presidential candidates in the campaign debates of
2000 and compared it to the vocabulary levels used
in earlier campaign debates.
The Princeton Review obtained transcripts
of the Gore-Bush debates, the Clinton-Bish-Perot
debate of 1992, the Kennedy-Nixon debate of 1960,
and the Lincoln-Douglas debate of 1858. It analyzed
these transcripts using a standard vocabulary test
that indicates the minimum educational level needed
for a reader to understand a document. This test is
ordinarily used to evaluate textbooks and other
educational materials.
The results? In the debates of 2000, George W.
Bush spoke at a sixth-grade level (6.7); Al Gore
spoke at a high seventh-grade level (7.9). In 1992,
challenger Bill Clinton scored in the seventh grade
(7.6), President George Bush in the sixth grade
(6.8), and Ross Perot at a sixth-grade level
(6.3).
Our contemporary politicians, who found it
necessary to speak to us as sixth and seventh
graders, compared unfavorably with Kennedy and
Nixon, both of whom spoke in a vocabulary
appropriate for tenth graders. And they, in turn,
looked sophomoric when compared to Abraham Lincoln
and Stephen Douglas, whose scores, respectively,
were 11.2 and 12.0.
Is it the candidates who have dumbed down
their appeals or are they simply acknowledging that
the public has a limited vocabulary? Candidates
for public office, it is clear, must tailor their
arguments to what the public can understand. Even
though most Americans have completed at least
twelve years of education, our candidates for
president know that they cannot use big or unusual
words when they address the voting public. This is
what happens in a society that tolerates low
expectations in our schools.
Diane Ravitch is a research professor at New
York University; distinguished visiting fellow at
the Hoover Institution, and a member of Hoover's
Koret Task Force on K-12 Education.
Courtesy: Hoover
Institution
|