“A Farce, or a Tragedy, or Perhaps Both.”

Why Trump Won

The making of the electorate Trump just won, and thusly the United States we have now, started decades ago in school. The Conservative Takeover of America was not secret, it was worse than secret; it was boring and bureaucratic. The conservatives worked slowly, patiently, and persistently to not merely change our institutions, but to hobble the next generation, and the next after that. This effort maybe started in Texas, but it had metastasized all over the country years before the first early ballot was cast in 2024. It was massive, and coordinated, but not by any overt conspiracy. Instead it was a persistent and ideological effort to destroy schools in America.

Education was always key to the American Experiment. Back when the founders were trying to figure out how to make this democracy thing work Jefferson said: “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves: and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is, not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.” But over the later 20th century and the beginning of this one, our commitment to an educated electorate faltered. We stopped seeing it as a process to create citizens, and started seeing it only in terms of creating workers.

The Reivisionaries Movie poster

It’s a good and painful watch

There’s a documentary movie that I’ve been recommending to people since the election. Made by PBS in 2012, The Revisionaries tells a story of some of the people who laid the groundwork for shift to ignorance: the Texas Board of Education.

You can see if here, and it’s well worth your time. In this story a Young Earth Christian dentist named Don McLeroy fights science education. He battles textbook publishers, sometimes sentence by sentence, to shape the education of Texas children, and by extension much of America. (Texas is a big enough market to drive enough sales that places like Delaware or Montana don’t get as much influence.) In this story he is dogged and effective, and it’s both painful and impressive to watch him fight. He’s not alone — the Christian Right has been fighting for years to reshape science, history, and all aspects of education for all American children, and they’ve largely succeeded. Along the way, they have wrecked so many American minds.

The story of the Revisionaries fits into a broader story of how destroying education has destroyed an electorate, and possibly now, a nation. These last decades have seen concerted attacks on education. Nowhere was this more obvious than the state of Texas, as The Revisionaries documented. But it also took the form of chronic under-investment in education all over the nation. Under-investment that went on for decades, as well as charter and private school scams perpetrated by the Right Wing against American children. School vouchers promised to let kids attend better schools than the public schools America was once so rightfully proud of, further degrading the resources for public education. A lack of supervision at private and charter schools that accepted vouchers has meant that they often lag even behind their underfunded public rivals. The American Right knew that if you capture the children, you capture the future, and they worked on that.

It was also our bad luck that this under-investment in education coincided with one of the greatest media revolutions in history, if not the greatest: the invention and popularization of the Internet. Social media, online publishing, endless information are amazing; they are superpowers. Our smartphones are like the wands in the Harry Potter universe, opening up endless possibilities, and the chance to see the world as a whole in a way we never have before. Ideas and media can romp around the world in the time it takes to make a cup of coffee. But there’s no Hogwarts for the internet: we just gave everyone superpowers and hoped for the best.

It has been a disaster on many levels, but most painfully it has been a human rights disaster. The first genocide organized on Facebook killed Rohingya in Myanmar in 2016, while hundreds of thousands fled to Bangladesh. Russian political interference all over the world capitalized on the internet and its terrible security. Various crashes of cryptocurrency bankrupted people too confused to know what they’d bought, all just to name a few notable internet driven catastrophes. To talk about them all would take books, but you can probably think of your own; anything from Enron to Pets.com to Bored Apes.

The statistics of our electorate are discouraging. After these decades of under-investment in schools, communities, and ESL resources, more than half of adults can’t read at a level required for a healthy democracy. A Gallup study of Department of Education data found that 54% of U.S. adults, aged 16 to 74 years old, have 6th grade or lower reading comprehension. That’s 130 million people who cannot read at a high school level. They are not up to the technical challenge of reading George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, or Octavia Butler’s Parable of the Sower. But they are now on the internet hours a day, interacting with algorithmic content that increasingly creates the whole context of their lives without many of these citizens ever knowing how any of it works, or works on them.

Math Might Be Even Worse

We're way down in the PISA math rankings internationally.

Math education in America: it’s not going well.

Math literacy and education are in even worse condition. Understanding the issues we face living in an informational internet landscape requires numeracy — especially in statistics. Our news stories, and even this very article requires some understanding of probability, ratios, and change over time. We need to know whether a number being reported is small, large or even meaningful. We live on the internet now, and the internet is mathematical in nature. Media reports in statistics every day, whether it’s studies, or the effects of policies, or even the weather, which is becoming increasingly dangerous. We need to be able to interpret statistics and other numbers on the fly to even understand headlines, like 54% of people can’t read Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.

In this election the case that broke me wasn’t Trump. It was Proposition 6 in California. In the alleged greatest left-leaning bastion of the nation, people were voting on convict slavery. And they voted, by a clear majority, for slavery. One of the reasons given for this dumbfounding and reprehensible loss was that the language of the proposition was too complicated. The proposition was about Involuntary Servitude, which the campaigners realized too late many people would not understand was a fancy term for slavery. In Nevada, where the term slavery was used, a similar measure passed. It could be that Californians are just far more right wing and pro-slavery than we ever realized, but there’s another explanation.

California voters didn’t know what the phrase “Involuntary Servitude” meant and couldn’t work it out while filling out a ballot.

The Only Way is Through

Founded in 1980.

We knew that our system required universal literacy and education for voters from the beginning of the American experiment. James Madison said “A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce, or a tragedy, or perhaps both.” The founders focused on creating an education system for their voters. As the definition of voter widened, so did the need for universal public education. There was a time when our particular universal public education system was the envy of the world, despite its flaws. Particularly in the first half of the 20th century, the post war period, and the Civil Rights era, we focused on universal literacy and basic math and science education. We brought more people than ever into a culture of knowledge, and standards rose. It was never good enough, but for a time, we lead the world’s march towards universal literacy.

But by the end of the 20th century, that system was failing. Several studies and reports such as the 1983 ‘A Nation at Risk‘ showed that literacy wasn’t keeping up with the population. Math skills were increasing, but there were always questions about the curriculum, and whether it was fit for purpose. It might be that Americans are bad at math because American schools are bad at teaching math, but there’s also no real movement for reform.

This election is a disaster that will take many years to unwind. But the key is education. Without fixing education, we can’t fix our country. But we have also been trained by our media to demand quick fixes, and there might not be any quick fixes available here. Rebuilding an educational system is the work of many, done over decades. But it’s also the only way to have, or possibly one day regain, a democracy.

image_print
103 replies
  1. ToldainDarkwater says:

    Speaking as a math guy – Americans are bad at math because Americans hate math. Also, Americans hate math because the first thing they learn about math in school is that they are bad at math. It’s a vicious cycle.

    Math has the property that there are wrong answers. Your answer can be creative and original, but still wrong. There is a sort of authoritarian streak here, something that triggers the rebel that is part of any American’s makeup. Also, it is a normal human thing to not like or want to be wrong.

    The willingness to be wrong is a cornerstone of learning, and not just math. It certainly applies to all science, and even to creative fields. Some things just don’t work, and you have to be willing to accept that they didn’t/don’t work.

    Meanwhile, guys like Don McLeroy want an authoritarian version of truth. Truth is what they say it is, and if you dispute it, there will be consequences.

    I think one part missing from your analysis is the influence of Big Oil and how it has worked ceaselessly to undermine any authority that might describe it as damaging the Earth. It has turned into a full-out assault on all science and academics. This is keenly relevant to what’s happening today.

    However, the oil will run out, and the Earth will get warmer. Each year, it’s harder to ignore. People can look at mountains that were once snow-capped and are now bare. And so on.

    • Quinn Norton says:

      Thanks for this, and you’re right about the Big Oil piece for sure, as well as the “Finding out” part of the “F*cking around” we’re doing now. I do think that accepting something not working, and being wrong, has to be separated from the student being bad — which is too often where we are now in normal classrooms. Reaching a little past your ability is too often punished in our 30+ student classrooms, and doing what you need to learn in a classroom is too risky right now, especially for underprivileged students. We definitely need ways to separate “You’re not correct here” from “You’re bad,” and risking leading to people giving up on themselves, especially in reading and STEM.

    • Peterr says:

      Former math and econ guy here . . .

      Yes, math is very rigorous (what a lovely mathematical term of art!) in separating right answers from wrong answers. But how math gets used? That’s where things get tricky.

      Models of anything make assumptions, and the resulting results are only as good as the assumptions. When pollsters get something wrong, it’s generally because their assumptions about “who is a likely voter?” are wrong. When weather forecasters get something wrong, somewhere there’s an assumption in there that is wrong. When engineers make a prototype of something that doesn’t do what they thought it should, it’s usually an assumption at the heart of the problem. “We didn’t take X into account . . .”

      Which brings us to climate change.

      The old assumptions about the weather (narrowly speaking) and climate (more broadly) are no longer working. NOAA and IPCC understand this, and are working to craft better models with more accurate assumptions. But for those who have economic incentives to disbelieve climate change (Hi, Big Oil!), attacking these assumptions is their way of undermining the science. That was the model of the tobacco industry, which worked for decades until the evidence became too damn obvious. On the religious end of things, Creationists (of various stripes) attack the science around climate change, evolution, and the age of the earth by going after the assumptions, and then demand that they get equal time in schools because “you should teach the controversy.”

      In each of these cases, those attacking scientific analysis give math a very bad name.

      Charlie Pierce’s book Idiot America is very good on this.

      • Quinn Norton says:

        I think there’s also just a simple dearth of decent math education, and not a lot of updating on how we teach math in America. Then, not many people feel confident and comfortable, so they don’t go into math education, and the gap grows. My kid simply didn’t have math classes for a while in middle school because they couldn’t hire math teachers. She’s still struggling, in college, because she’s behind her European cohort in math skills. Maybe the Right is part of why we never picked up on teacher it better, but the downward spiral is also an honest one.

        • Jim Luther says:

          My personal opinion is that the emphasis on “confidence” over “competence” has done much damage. It’s almost like encouraging Dunning-Kruger. I would encourage anyone interested in math education to take a look at Grant Sanderson’s 3Blue1Brown website/channel or Wolfram Education. I think the math education tools available today are far superior to the painful education process I experienced.

        • st_croix_wis says:

          First day of High School Geometry class, the teacher introduced us to the subject by drawing the Mona Lisa on the board using simple geometric forms. That was 61 years ago but, obviously, it made an impression on me. I loved Math even before that but I assume the rest of the class didn’t share my predilection. Maybe that bit of creativity sparked some interest in other students. Difficult to teach.
          To quote Barbie “Math is tough”.

    • M.Ella_23NOV2024_0427h says:

      There was this insightful skeet (lol) on bluesky this last week which talked about how even math textbooks have far fewer numbers and operations now, just in a misguided attempt to be more accessible and friendly and non-intimidating. The way to stop people being terrified of math is not to strip away the math but to strip away the fear, which comes from ignorance and bad teaching and sad experiences!

      [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We have adopted this minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is too short it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • Matt Foley says:

      I’m a big fan of Temple Univ.’s John Allen Paulos since reading his book Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and its Consequences back in 1988.

  2. Matt Foley says:

    This aligns with Isaac Asimov’s “A Cult of Ignorance” essay from 1980.
    https://www.openculture.com/2016/10/isaac-asimov-laments-the-cult-of-ignorance-in-the-united-states.html

    Nowadays I would probably change it to “A Cult of Willful Ignorance.”

    One symptom is the religious right’s attempts to discredit evolution in favor of creationism/intelligent design. I’ve been following this issue in PA since the early 2000s.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

    And more generally, their attempts to discredit science in favor of faith. Not only that but they want to impose their faith on me. Nope.

    • Ithaqua0 says:

      Various religions have been trying to discredit evolution since On the Origin of Species was published in 1859; this is nothing new or unique to the American religious right.

      See also Hofstadter’s “The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” first published as an essay in Harper’s in 1964 (BBC radio lecture in 1959.)

      If one reads the first 200+ pages of Battle Cry of Freedom, the best book ever written on the Civil War, one will realize that little has changed since 1840-1860; even the geographical location of various attitudes remains quite similar to what it was nearly 200 years ago. From the anti-immigrant attitudes of the Rust Belt (west of Philadelphia to the Mississippi, excluding the trading cities along the Great Lakes) to the “God made White Men superior” religious views of the South (the emphasis has shifted somewhat from “White” to “Men” over the last 150 years) to the “everybody should be free and treated fairly” views of the Northeast and Yankee settlements along the edges of the Great Lakes and west to Minnesota, there are remarkable similarities between then and now. Even the anti-public school movement of today was present, and strongly so, in 1850.

  3. Krisy Gosney says:

    Thanks for this article! I think what those like Joe Rogan and other dis and mis information peddlers do for their readers/listeners is a feeling of ‘getting it.’ Sadly what they are getting is manipulated. Anecdotally, I’ve found those who have experienced that feeling of ‘getting it’ become angry to have that feeling challenged. Is it because of a poor education. Maybe? Going from not feeling too smart/wordly to finally ‘getting it’ seems to be intoxicating.
    PS- MSNBC is reporting right now that the TX Board of Education is voting on including Christianity into K-5 daily lessons. Talk about grooming!

    • Matt Foley says:

      There’s no hate like MAGA Christian love.

      1 John 4:20
      Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.

    • Buzzkill Stickinthemud says:

      They’re going to get it alright, as H.L. Mencken said:

      Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

      Trump and Co.: Tough times ahead. Sacrifices will be made. Just not by us.

    • Quinn Norton says:

      Arg, that Texas news dispiriting, if not surprising.

      We all want to get it, we all want to be on the inside track to some degree. I suspect when your ‘getting it’ moment is built on sand, you may cling to that place all the more, because admitting your wrong is ego destroying. I hope we put some resources and research into deprogramming and esteem building soon, especially for young men and boys. The meme are literally killing them.

  4. bidrec-gap says:

    Said Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “If you would improve your state’s math scores, move your state closer to the Canadian border!”


    He continued:

    “On to the Congressional Budget Office! Please, I asked, get me the correlation between math scores and distance of state capitals from the Canadian border. Back came the answer. A negative 0.522 — which may be the strongest correlation known to education, and which means that the further a capital is from the border, the lower its test score. By contrast, the correlation between expenditures and math tests is a paltry 0.203.”

  5. Error Prone says:

    I did a word search of the main post for “Harris” and the word was absent.

    How can you write of why Trump won, without mention of Harris? It seems negligent.

    • ExRacerX says:

      Doing a word search rather than reading the post seems kinda negligent to me, but what do I know?

      Context is everything.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Maybe, and I am just spit-balling here, maybe Trump’s victory had more to do with long-term trends, with his mysteriously persuave magical propaganda, and its effects on the sort of educated, than it had to do with Kamala Harris.

      • Ithaqua0 says:

        Yes… and this is the first time that *every* first-world country that had an election saw the incumbent party lose vote share (years with >= 5 elections only.) (I’ve searched for the link and cannot remember where I saw it; my apologies.)

        Also, VPs usually lose elections – five wins out of 18 tries since the start of FDR’s first term (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/01/most-us-vice-presidents-in-recent-decades-have-sought-the-presidency-but-relatively-few-have-won/ .) Two of those wins were by VPs who became presidents after the death of the former president (Truman and LBJ), so they were quasi-incumbents when the election came about (LBJ far more so than Truman.) Two of the remaining three did not win until at least one election after their vice presidency had ended; only George H. W. Bush ran while VP and won.

  6. Bugboy321 says:

    A closely related topic that goes hand in hand with the race to the bottom in education: the campaign by Big Tech to convince consumers they can’t live without their products. In doing so, they convinced consumers that computers are somehow “smarter” than humans, even though it is humans that created them.

    I see the current VC stampede to throw money at AI in a similar fashion: under the guise of fostering creativity, AI proponents are selling us all “mental crutches”.

    • Matt Foley says:

      “But I found it on Google!”

      The first answer isn’t necessarily the right answer. See availability error. Also, just because you find an answer doesn’t mean you asked the right question.

    • Quinn Norton says:

      The crisis in tech literacy may soon rival and drown the climate crisis. My main comfort is that basically something quite analogous swept through Europe after the invention of the printing press, and we got through that. However that was basically wound up by the 30 years war, which does not bode well for us now.

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      I saw on LinkedIn reports from companies saying that people are trying to BS their way through interviews using ChatGPT.

  7. Harry Eagar says:

    As often happens to me here, I’d like to agree and disagree with just about everything in this post, but let’s just stick to who was going to school in the ‘goodish’ times around 1950.

    About one-quarter of American kids were in Roman Catholic schools. As a victim of 14 years of that, I assure you that those schools were bad beyond belief of anyone who never experienced them.

    Another group, whose size I don’t know, went to even worse Christian schools, like Tennessee Temple in my hometown, which taught nonsense from kindergarten through Ph.D. all under one roof. That one, thankfully, went broke after a couple of generations, but there were (and are) plenty nearly as bad.

    Like the brat school where trump was sent. My uncle was headmaster of one of those, and the stories he told about lost boys dumped by rich parents who did not love them were heartbreaking.

    I could go on but I hope I’ve made a point.

    • Benji-am-Groot says:

      Harry Eagar – point made but consider that while one size fits most it does not fit all. I disagree with the “those schools were bad beyond belief of anyone who never experienced them.” portion of your post.

      I was that kid who couldn’t sleep the night before the first day of school – not butterflies from dread but rather from anticipation – I liked going to school. So much better company than my birth family.

      From 3rd through 8th grade at OLQM in Beverly Hills, MI I received a top-notch elementary/middle school education apart from the religious aspects.

      Having never been indoctrinated (brainwashed?) prior to age 8 it was culture shock to say the least to be amongst the faithful and I do credit that experience with curing me of organized religion and cementing the aggregate base of my current atheism.

      Agree to disagree but a one size fits all statement doesn’t cut it. Take the christerism out of some catholic schools and there is a solid cadre of teachers. At least there was in my experience.

      Thanks.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      You really haven’t made your point. Your anecdote is not data. Many parochial schools, for example, provided an excellent education.

      The 1950s were also “goodish” times for white middle class families and their large corporate employers. That was before the era of Milton Friedman and the Powell memo, and before the demise of the corporate culture that gave back to the communities through which they made their profits.

    • Quinn Norton says:

      I’m not saying it was good, but people could read ok after getting out of those school. The majority can’t read now.

      • Memory hole says:

        Also, in defense of your excellent post, you were comparing the American education system to others around the world at the time.

    • PeteT0323 says:

      I was going to post tangential thoughts to all of this, but this is a good invite.

      5 years of Parochial school with (mostly) Dominican Nun teachers. I have the scarred knuckles to prove it.

      5th grade “lay” teacher was the final straw and mom had me in public school before mid year.

      I was ahead of grade level in math and reading based, in hindsight, on the wrote memorization of math tables and phonics. This landed me in advanced math from the get go. This was the later 50s through the 60s.

      Youngest daughter was good in school – child of 80s-90s. Older brothers – my sons – didn’t get it and struggled.

      My comments are about the way fundamental math, reading, and spelling are taught now.

      I help my daughter’s two daughters – my grand daughters 8 and 10 – with math. They appear to be good spellers and readers though phonics is apparently not a thing anymore.

      My point – yes there is one – is that fundamental math is taught way different and throws my daughter thus my help.

      I admit that the way core math is taught today is weird to me. I suppose wrote memorization is not the be all end all it appeared to be for me. I can logically reason why/how math is taught the way it is today. But the parents – and me – don’t get to see the lessons taught and just get to help with homework that vaguely alludes to the methods taught. You can see the dilemma I hope.

      All good I think. At least religiosity has not made it to SW Florida elementary schools – yet. The high school history subjects have been mucked with, but we are not there yet.

      Pete

      • Harry Eagar says:

        I do not understand the pedagogical concepts behind the arithmetic lessons my grandchildren are getting, either. But as a victim of Yales’ New Math in the ’60s, I reserve judgment.

        My grandkids get DEI propaganda, such as admonitions to be kind. That seems good to me.

        They also get leftist antihistorical nonsense like the greatness of Mansa Musa, but compared to the fantasies of Catholic school, that pales.

        As a side note to my side note, yesterday’s local paper carried a half-page screed from a liberal retired librarian descrying. among much else, the failure of the schools to teach civics. But all my grandkids here (in 5th, 7th and 8th grades) are getting a steady diet of civics.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          DEI propaganda? Yeah, cross-cultural education is a bitch, but it’s not “antihistorical.” By definition, it’s not your history, but it might be the history of the child sitting next to you.

          Teaching of civics has declined, and is the subject of much criticism. For starters, teaching less of it avoids debate over what civics lessons to teach. Not teaching it produces citizens less likely to know about and fight for their civil and civic rights. Corporations and billionaires love that.

          Like the teaching of sociology, the right hates it because it inevitably leads to questions about why society organizes itself as it does, and why some benefit while many lose. The right would prefer that children be taught that such things are a function of natural laws, and not choices that, if changed, would produce different outcomes.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          The much-derided new math from the mid- to late-1950s was a reaction to American leadership’s view that the US was losing the space race to the Ruskies. Math and science education was meant to be the means through which we caught up and exceeded them.

          Spending on it went through the roof, which also ushered in an unprecedented intrusion of the federal govt into the traditional state monopoly over schooling.

      • P J Evans says:

        earlofhuntingdon says:
        November 23, 2024 at 7:00 pm
        I had New Math (SMSG) for four years (7th through 10th grade). It taught concepts, and from what I can tell, everyone I knew who had it was comfortable in math. (We learned about non-decimal numbers in 7th grade, along with basic slide rule. It’s stuck with me.) The last time I had to memorize a multiplication table, it was 8th grade and the squares of the numbers from 1 to 25 – and that also has been useful.
        It beats the heck out of handing kids calculators before they learn what the operations are. If you don’t understand addition and subtraction, the answers are going to be wrong most of the time.

  8. boloboffin says:

    Wow, speaking of the Texas Board of Education:

    https://www.texastribune.org/2024/11/19/texas-sboe-bible-christianity-curriculum/

    “A majority of the Texas State Board of Education gave final approval Friday to a state-authored curriculum under intense scrutiny in recent months for its heavy inclusion of biblical teachings.

    “Eight of the 15 board members voted to approve Bluebonnet Learning, the elementary school curriculum proposed by the Texas Education Agency earlier this year.

    “The curriculum was designed with a cross-disciplinary approach that uses reading and language arts lessons to advance or cement concepts in other disciplines, such as history and social studies. Critics, which included religious studies scholars, say the curriculum’s lessons allude to Christianity more than any other religion, which they say could lead to the bullying and isolation of non-Christian students, undermine church-state separation and grant the state far-reaching control over how children learn about religion. They also questioned the accuracy of some lessons.

    “The curriculum’s defenders say that references to Christianity will provide students with a better understanding of the country’s history.”

  9. John Herbison says:

    I am glad that literacy tests for voting are no longer a thing. However, if they were, and if I were charged with writing test questions, I would ask “How old is the planet Earth?” Any answer less than four billion years would be disqualifying.

    • -mamake- says:

      Anyone can game a question like that. I’d go with reading comprehension – basic, not too complicated but able to discern the intent and meaning of a text.

      • GlennDexter says:

        I’d consider myself fairly literate. I’ve had to study a couple of ballot questions a few times. This year we in Arizona had one of the longest ballots I’ve ever seen. 13 statewide propositions plus judges, state office holders, local amendments and the main event.

  10. Inner Monologue says:

    The problem with public education is that there’s no money in it. Controlling curriculum (producing, selling, mandating) is a cash cow. That is the end goal we’ve been facing for a long time. It’s accelerating is all.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      The point of Quinn’s piece is that money is only a piece of the action. NOT educating the vast majority of people is the bigger aim. That makes a lot of people more susceptible to the 24/7 propaganda from Fox News, Trump and others.

      The complement to that is the significantly higher cost of higher education, with states drastically reducing their share of the cost off public universities. Education is no longer a public good, it’s a private benefit that you ought to pay through the nose for. The facts and logic are wrong and entirely self-serving, but it’s become a dominant theme in American culture. The ability to make it so is the holy grail. From there, you can elect a dictator.

  11. Molly Pitcher says:

    Until 1978, California had the best public schools in the country. We also had the #1 public university, UC Berkeley, which was also in varying positions in the top 3 or 4 in the world.

    Then came extreme right-winger,Howard Jarvis and Proposition 13 which amended the state constitution to restrict increases in property tax.

    From that time onward there has been a steady and marked decline in funding and the quality of education in the state. It has been the state equivalent of Citizens United, in the damage done. And because property values here are so absurdly high, there is no impetus to do away with Prop 13, and no other way to try to reverse the damage.

    We decided to move into the town that had ‘the best public schools’, only to find that they were absolute crap, and the citizens knew it, but no one said it out loud, because then their property values would decline.

    So, we moved to another town and drove miles and miles to put our children through private school. It was a major sacrifice, but we are very grateful we could do what we did. They interact with the ill informed now, and regularly thank us for making their education our priority over vacations and non-necessities.

    As I have said before, I feel like I am chained to a boulder on the beach, watching the tsunami heading towards us.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Raising millionaires was more important than raising educated kids.

      Warren Buffett famously said he paid more property tax on his modest home in Omaha than he did on his beachfront mansion in California, an echo of his remark that his secretary’s net tax rate was higher than his.

    • Quinn Norton says:

      As a product of those Prop 13 schools, it’s probably even worse than you think. I totally get going private, but that’s also meant that no one with money or power is advocating for California schools, except for the some of the frickin’ saints who work in them. I’m so glad my daughter encountered a few really fantastic teachers in what was otherwise a lot of trying to piece some kind of learning together for her while her schools were in constant meltdown.

    • Peterr says:

      This was part of why we left CA when The Kid was nearing school age. Not the only reason, mind you, but it was one more reason making it easier to leave.

        • CaboDano says:

          Amen, Quinn. I have ocassion to visit my hometown of San Diego fairly often, and other than being the home of the world’s very best Mexican food, they can have the place. Too many of everything.

    • P J Evans says:

      When I look at propositions on the CA ballots, I check to see which side the Jarvis people are on. And then vote the other way.

  12. ChesterM says:

    Once again, Quinn, you nailed it. Ignorants need a hero. And they got him.

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You attempted to publish this comment as “ACompleteUnknown,” your fifth username, triggering auto-moderation; it has been edited to reflect your most recent username. Make a note of your established username and check your browser’s cache and autofill; future comments will not publish if username does not match because of your history of sockpuppeting. /~Rayne]

  13. HCGorman says:

    I don’t see anyone mentioning Reagan. That was one of his big causes —cutting education spending. And like trump the masses loved his stupid ass.

    • Quinn Norton says:

      I just don’t think it’s useful to talk about the presidents, most of the damage has been done bottom up rather than top down. I think that’s exactly why we end up not really fighting back, because we’re always focusing on the celebrity in the far away office and not the functionary trashing the system at the county level, etc.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Yes, and his positions were always about gaining political advantage. Education never entered into it, except for the emphasis on the “right” education.

  14. Skillethead says:

    Will Rogers, in the 1930’s once said, “The schools ain’t what they used to be, and they prob’ly never was.”

    There are achievement results that paint a negative picture of American education, but others (such as NAEP) that show results very similar or slightly above performance in the early 70’s. Pretty much the same thing with SAT scores since the 1970s. International comparisons look worse to much worse, but then, you have to believe that all the other countries are playing fairly, and I have my doubts along those lines. So, yeah, maybe we haven’t really increased over the past 50 years, but perhaps not really a disaster.

    Also, when looking for reasons for any perceived decline, it is critical to remember that we are a very different country than we were in the 1950s (when I was in elementary school!). There were far more families that spoke English at home and where homes had two parents. It was a time of children being seen and not heard.

    Additionally, this was before the women’s movement. If you were a bright and talented female who wanted a professional career, teaching was often the most attractive alternative. With the liberation of women in the workforce (which I’m certain we all are 100% behind), teaching took a hit in terms of getting the best and brightest.

    So, lots of things to take into consideration.

      • Skillethead says:

        Not sure over what. The achievement data are running record, as are the demographics, which have caused schools to (appropriately) allocate resources to issues that were less of a factor in the 1950s. Maybe about women in the workforce? For example, according to the ABA, from 1950 to 1970, 3% of all lawyers were women; today that figure is 41%. And that is great. But there is no question that the quality of the teaching force suffered as a consequence.

        If we want to understand a situation, it’s always helpful to look at the data and potential underlying causes.

        • Rayne says:

          Let’s just make huge swags ignoring other major socio-economic changes, like the transition from family farms and small businesses in which women worked but weren’t necessarily documented as workers. Or no-fault divorce which allowed women to escape shitty marriages, drove down women’s suicide rate, but increased women’s need to work outside the home.

          Let’s ignore how the right-wing has steadily attacked both teachers’ compensation and funding for public education. Or No Child Left Behind and other state-level initiatives which have increased focus on documentation and testing to standards rather than on education.

          For starters.

        • Quinn Norton says:

          I think you’re being unfair; men have their limitations, sure, but they are capable of being competent school teachers. There’s nothing that naturally limits them from either learning or teaching, whatever the Joe Rogans etc of the world may claim.

        • Skillethead says:

          Again, I’m afraid I’m not sure what your point is. My point with regard to women as teachers is as that women were able to join many more high status jobs after the 50s and 60s, which reduced the number of highly talented women becoming teachers. The issue is not that there weren’t people to take the jobs (both men and women), but that the talent pool declined.
          With regard to being able to get out of bad marriages, that’s great, but the suicide rate for women is the same as it was in 1950 (roughly 5.6 per 100,000). So hard to see how that would influence educational achievement in US.
          With regard to SES influence, that has been documented since the Coleman Report in the 60’s (somewhere around 70% of the variation in test scores is attributable to SES factors). But as poverty levels haven’t changed much since 1950, it’s hard to attribute test score changes to that. It was, and is, the biggest factor here, but it doesn’t explain differences over time.
          The right wing has definitely influenced education, and not in a positive fashion. They hate the teachers’ unions and will do anything to make them look bad. No Child Left Behind didn’t help, but most states already had mandatory school testing before NCLB.
          With regard to the Gallup study Quinn mentioned, that’s actually a summary of a federal study called PIAAC. What is particularly interesting about that study is that people in their 20’s and 30’s have substantially higher means than people in their 50’s and above. This would suggest an improvement in recent years instead of a decline.
          To sum:
          1. Yes, achievement isn’t where we would like it to be, and that affects our democracy, but the situation is probably not as bad as many believe, and the notion of a huge decline over recent years (or even decades) is on shaky ground statistically.
          2. The biggest factor in school achievement is the economic and educational status of the home (SES). But poverty was a problem in 1950 and still is today, so hard to attribute any change in achievement to that.
          3. Schools face more challenges today than in the 50s. For example,there are many more kids who are not native English speakers (and thus have to have extra resources allocated to them, which drains funds overall).
          4. Education is underfunded and teaching is not a high status job in the US. This has been exacerbated by the (otherwise wholly and highly positive) ability of women to take high status jobs.
          5. The right wing doesn’t help (although you could probably say this about any issue in the US today).
          To me, the solutions lie in looking at increasing the lives of the bottom quarter of our population, and greatly increasing teacher salaries to attract more talented workers. Also, generally funding education more.
          Sorry for the length.

        • Rayne says:

          Reply to Skillethead
          2024/11/23 at 8:57 pm

          I get it. You’re wholly sold on the idea that more women in the workplace are the source of all evils in K-12 education.

          Bullshit. That’s literally a far-right talking point.

          Women in the workplace didn’t fuck up the quality of public education. If it was such a great career path with adequate pay and benefits, there’d be a lot more qualified men in those jobs, but no — it’s still majority women because men have denigrated jobs requiring any amount of emotional labor and women still carry the burden of needing careers which allow them to manage childcare. You’re also uninformed about requirements for K-12 teachers; they need a bachelor’s at a minimum, student teaching, and certification along with continuing education; they’re not walking onto the job untrained and uneducated. Most graduates are carrying a metric shit ton of tuition loans for crappy pay which is constantly under pressure by the right-wing, adding to a stressful job requiring regular fire, weather, and mass shooting drills.

          Gee, I wonder if mass shootings also affect education outcomes…nah, it’s the women.

        • P J Evans says:

          Dude, women aren’t limited to teacher, nurse, clerical worker, retail clerk.
          Men aren’t limited to doctor, lawyer, merchant, engineer, either.
          Ger off that pillar, and rejoin reality, where people can get jobs they enjoy, and SHOULD be able to do so, even if they aren’t conforming to the gender/sex ideas of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

        • Skillethead says:

          I did not say nor imply that women were somehow the problem of American education. Quite the contrary; they are the heart and soul of American education, particularly at the K-6 level.

          What I said was that as career opportunities in high status jobs became more open to women in American (in the 60s and 70s and beyond), many took up those opportunities, and did not go into teaching. Thus teaching lost a lot of talented women that previously had taken up teaching. I’ve provided evidence of that. It’s an unfortunate consequence of an otherwise incredibly positive set of circumstances.

          Many talented men also take up other career opportunities; the only difference is that those opportunities have always been available to men. Thus no change over time.

          The problem is not women (or men); it is that teaching is a dramatically underpaid and undervalued profession. And many people, of both sexes, who might want to become teachers do not do so because of that status and pay inequity.

          And why do you say I’m uninformed about requirements to become a teacher? I don’t believe I’ve said anything about initial teacher education requirements and I know them quite well.

          And PJ, please actually read what I am saying. I said nothing of what you wrote.

        • P J Evans says:

          Men were teaching in grade schools in the 60s. I had several. Rethink your premises.
          (My mother had a math education and worked in an oilfield lab for every years. My *grandmother* worked in an aircraft plant. You think the guys wanted those jobs? My mother gave SIX MONTHS notice and they couldn’t find a replacement.)

        • Skillethead says:

          PJ: My premises are fine. Even today, according to NCES, 89% of elementary school teachers in the US are female.

        • Rayne says:

          Reply to Skillet head
          2024/11/24 at 7:28 pm

          Why are so many K-12 teaching jobs filled by women even after all this time?

          Why aren’t there more men?

          You still haven’t addressed this because you are so wholly focused on blaming women for failures in education.

    • Pick2orPass says:

      At the public high school I went to in the late 1980s I was very lucky to be enrolled in a writing class from one of the first women to receive her doctorate from the Jesuit university nearby- years and years before. When she told the story it was clear she had little to no support there, as she was put through an even more rigorous standard than the men who were in the same program. It was obvious, blatant discrimination. In spite of this she succeeded and felt it was an absolute imperative to teach, at universities, colleges -and somehow my high school- throughout her life.

      Her lessons guide me to this day. I’m forever grateful.

  15. Kent_23NOV2024_0000h says:

    True

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We have adopted this minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is too short and common it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  16. Memory hole says:

    This post addresses just one slice of the laser like focus the right wing brings to every issue. It’s weakening education to create a more easily manipulated populace. It’s removing the “burden” of taxes on the extremely wealthy, or regulations that prevent the wealthy and their corporations from stealing money from the citizens or poisoning their food water, and air. Just to make more money or shift their costs to someone else.

    On the political front, even when they lose power, they change laws in the lame duck period. Before Governor Evers took office in Wi, they removed much of his authority along with the incoming Attorney General. Now N. Carolina just did the same.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/us/politics/north-carolina-bill-governor-elections.html

    They push to get their desired results whether the public supports it or not. And they do not stop or accept defeat, as they have billionaires willing to fund the efforts through generations.

  17. Thaihome says:

    The most successful political slogan that’s never said out loud and is the key to conservative electoral sucess is “no free shit to black people”. This especially applies to public schools.

  18. newbroom says:

    If ‘we’ can teach that it is pleasurable to learn, that would be a big help in motivation.
    I hated memorization. It was work. I suppose there in no escape. Learning to love work is what we are doing. If you don’t work, you’re broke.
    We live in denial in order to survive the real horrors that are facing us and our attention span is given over to A. I.
    We’re marked for harvest.

    • Jonur says:

      There has been a strong move away from memorization in my lifetime, to the point that, as I understand it, kids don’t even learn multiplication tables any more (“they’ll learn by doing”).
      However, I think having certain core data in your head and accessible without any effort is the bedrock on which you build more critical skills. Also, being able to memorize is a brain skill in itself. If kids don’t have those assets, they are slow readers who don’t have basic mathematical data at their fingertips, all resulting in poorer outcomes as they get older and advance through school.

      [FYI — See Moderator’s Note at your comment 3:42 a.m. /~Rayne]

  19. Randy_23NOV2024_0215h says:

    iirc, in 1973, the california board of regents stated that the primary
    purpose of the educational system was custodial care. i remember
    reading that, as i graduated from high school, and thinking it explained
    a lot.

    i’m self taught in most areas where i’m not a complete idiot. in 10th grade,
    in the 1970’s, how they scored reading comprehension was you needed to
    read at the 8th grade, 4th month reading level on their standardized testing.
    the scale went to 18th grade, 9th month. they tested you in tenth grade, so
    they’d know if they had to shove you in remedial classes to get you out the
    door.

    i dunno if you can fix stupid at this time. it doesn’t look good.

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We have adopted this minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is too short and common it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Ronald Reagan was California’s governor 1967-1975. That report came out during his tenure, and after he’d already had six years to transform California’s once stellar educational system.

      Emphasizing custodial care is a political framing. It avoids dealing with what’s being taught by whom and to whom – the guts of education. It downgrades the importance of education, rationalizes lowering taxes, and justifies cutbacks and privatization. That movement is stronger today than ever.

      • Quinn Norton says:

        For all my structural talk, I do kind of personally blame Ronald Reagan for a good portion of my terrible childhood. :D

  20. Jonur_23NOV2024_0342h says:

    For insights into what went wrong with reading skills in the US, check out this podcast: https://features.apmreports.org/sold-a-story/ In this case, the culprits seem to be progressives rather than “regressives”, unfortunately. There are transcripts there too, if you prefer to read.
    Incidentally, as a fast reader (age 65), the only use I find for podcasts is when I’m driving. I can absorb the same information in a fraction of the time if it’s available in written form.

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We have adopted this minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is too short it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • Rayne says:

      First wrt your comment 3:47 a.m.: memorization isn’t learning. It’s comparable to loading an LLM for use by AI. Without understanding means and methods by which data is acquired, there’s only regurgitation and with poor query, bad output. Forced memorization as a benchmark for learning has been a source of abuse; someone has mentioned scarred knuckles which I wouldn’t be surprised were linked to failure to burp out memorized data.

      Second, if sites accommodated your preference for acquiring information — you may be a visual learner rather than an auditory or kinesthetic learner — are progressives dumbing down to meet you? Or are they simply responding to your personal learning type?

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      “If you prefer to read?” Part of the problem might be the assumption that listening is as effective a learning tool as reading and writing.

      Most of what we hear goes out the window, unless reinforced visually. Reading conveys more information. Needing to write it up is how a reporter learns and passes it on, because you need to understand it before you can help someone else do the same. Might be one reason even reading Ken Dilanian helps no one’s understanding.

      • Quinn Norton says:

        As someone with spinal problems that made it nearly impossible to read a book for more than 10 years, I can confirm you can learn from spoken words. Seems to have worked ok for Socrates and Aristotle’s students, and it worked ok for me. I also wrote with dictation software for years. It was definitely harder than normal typing, but normal typing wasn’t an option.

        After surgery I’m very nearly a normal girl again, but I still like audio learning and dictation for writing sometimes. I’m happily multi-model, and having been there and back, think people should pay attention to what works for them and do that.

  21. Critter7 says:

    Kudos to Quinn for a well written and thought provoking post that also rings a bell, rings true with what many of us – myself included – have observed.

    Yes, there are many problems with public K-12 education. Among them are teacher compensation, which in many parts of the country is woefully low compared to other professions. The money allocated to public education, of course, reflects the value that we place on it collectively, societally.

    But my main point is to praise the many dedicated K-12 public school teachers who have stuck it out, who put up with the education bureaucracy and classroom restrictions as well as the modest-to-low pay. I know several in my community. Their days are not easy. Yet, they come alive when talking about their experiences with students. Clearly, they are dedicated and doing what they can for their students’ education. I admire and appreciate them.

    I know that every K-12 teacher is not an admirable person. But many are, probably most, and they put their hearts, souls, and lives into doing what they can to educate the next generation. Thank you.

  22. SelaSela says:

    The crisis in education is real, and everything you wrote about it is true. The importance of education can’t be overstated. Yet, I’m not convinced about the direct causal relationship between the results of the current elections and the troubles in education.

    I’ve spent a lot of time in different places, trying to dispel disinformation and fight propaganda. I’ve been talking to highly educated people, people who had all the analytical tools that they need, who should know better. But more often than not, it didn’t help. Well-reasoned arguments were just willfully ignored, going through one ear and out of the other.

    I think, as of now, education just doesn’t have the tools to deal with the online crisis of over information and the collapse of old information authorities and gatekeepers, and the emergence of a new class of information merchants who learn to manipulate it for various needs. And we need something new to be handle it all better. Not indoctrination, of course, not a system the would tell us what to think, but better analytical tools that would help us deal with this new reality.

    • Savage Librarian says:

      I tend to agree. I’ve always thought education is important and I still think that. But now I’m more inclined to think the cognitive nature of how beliefs are formed may be independent of the influence education has.

      For example, my brothers and I all had the same fundamental education as children. But we also had very different outlooks on life. By the time I was 11, I knew my belief system was aligned with the Democratic Party. One of my brothers was the same, but he was always negligent when it came to voting. My other 2 brothers were always rightwing, chauvinists. I know that cultural influences and life experiences played a big role in how these belief systems developed. It had very little to do with education.

Comments are closed.