Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
A thousand students were given 10 questions drawn from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services item bank. Candidates for U.S. citizenship must answer six questions correctly in order to become citizens... Only about 3 percent of the students surveyed would have passed the citizenship test.
Most impressive was the fact that only 23% of them were able to name the first President of the United States.
Doesnt surprise me having graduated just a few short years ago. However i dont think the percentages would be much higher for people 30-40. The school systems since the 80s have been more about memorizing things than learning them.
-When I Hear My Name -Dead Leaves and the Dirty Ground -Blue Orchid -Passive Manipulation -Red Rain -Death Letter -My Doorbell -Hotel Yorba -Same Boy You've Always Known -Lovesick -Little Ghost -We're Going to Be Friends -The Hardest Button to Button -Black Math -The Nurse -I Just Don't Know What to Do With Myself
Encore: -Ball and Biscuit -Seven Nation Army -Screwdriver
Doesnt surprise me having graduated just a few short years ago. However i dont think the percentages would be much higher for people 30-40. The school systems since the 80s have been more about memorizing things than learning them.
And it certainly doesn't help that No Child Left Behind testing focuses on reading, science and math.
But still... not even 1 in 4 of those kids were able to name George Washington? I can understand your average American slipping up on knowing the number of justices on the Supreme Court or something like that - but not knowing George Washington was the first president? That's a shame.
I know there's probably some constitutional issues that would have to be worked around, but I'd be all for tying the right to vote to passing a citizenship test.
Post by steveternal on Sept 24, 2009 8:43:51 GMT -5
^^^That I would disagree with. One's pursuit of education should be left out of the equation-- I think a citizenship test much more logically applies to the exercise of voting. In other words, one is directly related to governmental and national affairs, and therefore it makes sense. But education goes along with lifestyle and work as things that should largely be free to the individual's choice, as it is consistent with the inherent spirit of freedom in America.
I understand it's better used in relation to voting rights. I was just trying to see if the naysayer would agree with me on a measure of a lesser degree.
As I said, I'd be all for tying voting rights to passing the citizenship test. Mojoworks is right, though - that is a huge can of worms to be opening. That doesn't necessarily tell me that it couldn't be done. Or shouldn't.
Steve, I think you're a bit off the mark describing school curriculum as a matter of personal choice. Didn't you have requirements when you went to school? I know I had some flexibility in choosing which courses to take, but I still had to take a certain number of semesters in classes on math/reading/etc... but I still had to fulfill those requirements one way or another.
I don't think the situation has changed with No Child Left Behind. Most likely worsened. There's a lot more emphasis on math/science/reading skills after NCLB, and classes are increasingly taught towards test performance. Yet there's no civics portion of that test, and civics is being increasingly left by the wayside.
Which is why we have flashes of brilliance like the article I posted.
Post by steveternal on Sept 24, 2009 15:48:03 GMT -5
^^^Sorry, perhaps what I said needed clarification. What I meant by the word "personal" was that, for good or ill, each individual has freedom over how much education they pursue-- no one is bound to finish even elementary school in order to have full citizenship. I think it makes sense to have it that way, although of course I hope for each person to work towards their potential.
I'm in favor of making this test a requirement. If not to vote, at least before high school graduation. It's not like someone would even have to go out of their way to acquire this knowledge.
I don't know about most districts, but I had a required Government class freshman year. Everyone had to take it anyway. I figure there's not really much of an undue burden if you're asking them to know what was taught in a required class to begin with.
Because seriously... are these questions really that hard?
Question (% of Students Who Answered Correctly)
What is the supreme law of the land? (28) What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution? (26) What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress? (27) How many justices are there on the Supreme Court? (10) Who wrote the Declaration of Independence? (14) What ocean is on the east coast of the United States? (61) What are the two major political parities in the United States? (43) We elect a U.S. senator for how many years? (11) Who was the first President of the United States? (23) Who is in charge of the executive branch? (29)
I don't think so, personally... and I'd be all for mandating civics tests for those who wish to exercise certain democratic privileges. Some of the ignorance of basic governing procedures kind of astounded even me. It goes beyond comments like "get your government hands off my MediCare." Somehow, there were teabaggers who showed up at these things were irate that this bill had to be reconciled.
And they teach that at the School House Rock level.
Post by nitetimeritetime on Sept 24, 2009 23:45:23 GMT -5
So if 100% of voters knew the name of our first President, then we would see better political candidates elected? Really? Disenfranchisement isn't the answer.
I'm not saying that knowing Washington was first is necessarily going to be make someone a better decision maker. But I don't think it's expecting too much to have people who know what the House & Senate are deciding who gets elected to the House and Senate.
Disenfranchisement in this country has historically been more about immutable characteristics like race and gender. I'm not suggesting a route like that. I'm suggesting disenfranchisement of the willfully ignorant. Trust me, they aren't doing the rest of us any favors.
Remember back in campaign 2000, when a reporter gave George W. Bush a pop quiz on world leaders and he failed miserably? And wouldn't you know? Oklahoma was real fucking red that election night. Think about that in light of what I'm saying...
I already admitted there were some constitutional issues with which there would have to be compliance in order for this to work. Not to mention the fact that English is not (nor has it ever been) the official national language.
I do not believe equal application of such a test to all citizens would be discriminatory, however. I don't think you have the 14th Amendment issues you'd have with implementing that as opposed to something like Jim Crow laws.
I'm sure it can be demonstrated that there is a compelling state interest in having a more informed electorate.
Ignorant people are our best consumers. Look at all the "hippies" who shop Wal Mart !
And who cares if they can recognize our two main political parties. Voting either of those two routes has gotten us where we are. PLENTY of stupid people pull the lever for "the lesser of two evils" or other various stupid reasons for electing someone.
Last Edit: Sept 25, 2009 7:07:48 GMT -5 by red - Back to Top
Doesnt surprise me having graduated just a few short years ago. However i dont think the percentages would be much higher for people 30-40. The school systems since the 80s have been more about memorizing things than learning them.
And it certainly doesn't help that No Child Left Behind testing focuses on reading, science and math
No Child Left Behind is one of the worst possible ideas for education. I worked in a school as a teachers assistant for a while last year and it was amazing how far behind some of the kids were. How do you get to grade 10 when you can't read? And I mean, CAN'T READ. They'd have issues reading the words CAN'T READ. Sure, failing a grade (especially grade 1 or 2) can be damaging to a childs self-esteem, but so is being illiterate
Do you guys really think that, as a group, people who care so little about the government to even bother to learn the name of the first president are going to vote anyway?
I'm all for testing to graduate. We were all required to take American History and Government classes in high school. We are already required to pass the 12th grade proficiencies, right? (or is that still just a time-waster to generate statistics?) Why not add citizenship to it?
Do you guys really think that, as a group, people who care so little about the government to even bother to learn the name of the first president are going to vote anyway?
People who don't understand the legislative process and MediCare showed up to town hall meetings... so yes, I think it is entirely possible. Voting takes less time and effort than attending a representative's town hall, does it not?
I bet you a Bonnaroo ticket that more Oklahoman students than the three percent who passed the citizenship test will go on to become adult voters. Youth voters aren't exactly the best at getting to the polls on election day, but you can't tell me that only the three percent of them passing the test will be showing up to the voting booth. Six percent is still probably a low turnout estimate for that age group... meaning that if every student who actually passed the test showed up to vote, they'd still be outnumbered by the test-failing peers in their age group.
You don't need the entire group... you need, at best, 4% of the test-failing group to show up to the polls to outnumber 100% of the test-passing group. That is not only entirely possible and plausible, but probably the reality of things.
Do you guys really think that, as a group, people who care so little about the government to even bother to learn the name of the first president are going to vote anyway?
People who don't understand the legislative process and MediCare showed up to town hall meetings... so yes, I think it is entirely possible. Voting takes less time and effort than attending a representative's town hall, does it not?
I bet you a Bonnaroo ticket that more Oklahoman students than the three percent who passed the citizenship test will go on to become adult voters. Youth voters aren't exactly the best at getting to the polls on election day, but you can't tell me that only the three percent of them passing the test will be showing up to the voting booth. Six percent is still probably a low turnout estimate for that age group... meaning that if every student who actually passed the test showed up to vote, they'd still be outnumbered by the test-failing peers in their age group.
You don't need the entire group... you need, at best, 4% of the test-failing group to show up to the polls to outnumber 100% of the test-passing group. That is not only entirely possible and plausible, but probably the reality of things.
This is the best explanation I've heard yet of how gwb got elected twice.
