The Intercollegiate Studies Institute recently polled 2,500 people with questions from American history, government, and economics. These tests come up from time to time, of course, and the results are usually appropriately dismal.
In this case, random citizens scored an average of 49%. That's terrible, of course, but then we don't really honor history in a cultural sense anymore, and it's mangled, chopped up, and delivered in pre-packaged and propagandized pieces in public schools. (unless you had "that" awesome teacher, in which case you had something really valuable)
However, the more disturbing outcome of this was among elected officials, who on average scored lower, at 44%! Now, granted, the article lists these as "self-identified elected officials". That includes every level of responsibility, down to the nearly inconsequential. But to me the fact that people who seek out positions of authority are also those who (apparently) have even less knowledge of history than the average is both interesting and troubling.
I'd be curious to know if this holds true in federal office-holders as well as state, but given the remarkable tendency of senators to stay in office indefinitely, perhaps the test wouldn't have been challenging to them. For example, if we use 1776 as a general starting point for America as a nation, (I know, other years may be equally or more applicable, but work with me)
then America is 232 years old this year.
Senator Robert Byrd just turned 91. He has been alive for approx. 2/5 of America's national existence, and been a Senator for over 1/5 of it.
No doubt he would have gotten right (being in his 20's at the time) the question about WWII:
In this case, random citizens scored an average of 49%. That's terrible, of course, but then we don't really honor history in a cultural sense anymore, and it's mangled, chopped up, and delivered in pre-packaged and propagandized pieces in public schools. (unless you had "that" awesome teacher, in which case you had something really valuable)
However, the more disturbing outcome of this was among elected officials, who on average scored lower, at 44%! Now, granted, the article lists these as "self-identified elected officials". That includes every level of responsibility, down to the nearly inconsequential. But to me the fact that people who seek out positions of authority are also those who (apparently) have even less knowledge of history than the average is both interesting and troubling.
I'd be curious to know if this holds true in federal office-holders as well as state, but given the remarkable tendency of senators to stay in office indefinitely, perhaps the test wouldn't have been challenging to them. For example, if we use 1776 as a general starting point for America as a nation, (I know, other years may be equally or more applicable, but work with me)
then America is 232 years old this year.
Senator Robert Byrd just turned 91. He has been alive for approx. 2/5 of America's national existence, and been a Senator for over 1/5 of it.
No doubt he would have gotten right (being in his 20's at the time) the question about WWII:
Among the questions asked of some 2,500 people who were randomlyAbout 2/3 of the respondents knew the answer, 1/3 got it wrong. (and named an interesting list of countries they thought we had gone to war with. Britain, for example)
selected to take the test... was one which asked respondents to "name two countries that were our enemies during World War II."
But, then, some mistakes can be humorous:
Asked about the electoral college, 20 percent of elected officials incorrectly said it was established to "supervise the first televised presidential debates."
(emphasis mine)
Kind of makes you want to laugh and cry at the same time...
-()4|<.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment