cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/1006130
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/aboringdystopia by /u/Last_Salad_5080 on 2023-10-03 14:21:04.
Ironic that there’s a grammatical error in the headline… 6th-grade levels, surely
77% of Americans write below 9th grade-levels, and hyphens are taught as an elective.
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND!!!
You’re right, this is a glass-half-full situation.
The tables, they turn
The great journalism of “Homeless Romantic” has really been in decline.
This is all just a simulation.
That’s what the lizard people want you to think!
If it were a simulation or real what would be the difference? I mean if you could replicate the titanic down to the atom you effectively have the original. Same philosophical “problem” with teleportation of a human being.
The hyphen goes between grade and levels. Confidently incorrect.
How is the feet pics thing working out for you?
Quite a few pictures. Most of them troll pictures.
All that does is make it extremely poorly written because of “sixth” followed by a compound noun instead of the misplaced hyphenation for a compound adjective.
What you basically just said is “it’s not grammatically incorrect in that way, it’s even more grammatically incorrect to the point of being nonsensical in this other, more abstruse way.”
6th-grade levels
It’s not that hard
No shit. I was explaining to the person that thinks it should be “6th grade-levels” that would be even more nonsensical and grammatically incorrect.
For someone that seems to be critical of writing errors, you’re shockingly bad at reading comprehension. All you are doing is quite literally repeating the sentiment of the initial comment in this thread.
It’s not that hard.
You hyphenate the words acting as an adjective, I e. Two-gun kid, not two gun-kid
One might also hyphenate compound nouns. Depending on context, “two gun-kids” could be correct–though it seems unlikely.
Also, in this case you should use e.g. (not i.e.). No big deal though, I knew what you meant.
It’s really important for folks to understand what is being talked about here, because I run into folks even here that are like “that’s a wall of text, I’m not reading that”. And that’s kind of the behavior that’s being talked about. Like, if you find yourself in “read the headline, not the story” you might be in this group they are talking about in this article that is linked. And do not let me come off high and mighty here, I absolutely have issues with this some times because I get all kinds of caught up with life and do not have enough time to maintain my reading habits. It is a complex issue on why there is this deterioration of reading skills. And I will likely say something to the effect of “Internet BAD!” but do know it is more than just that, it is just that is the easiest go-to for a “short” comment.
So that said. Nice little sample question one would see on a test that would test this is:
In Lions of Little Rock, two girls form a dangerous and clandestine friendship, that is challenged by racial segregation. Name, in chronological order, the multiple episodes of racist threats and violence and how they increased the tension of the relationship between the two girls.
It’s not a question of “Can you read the book?” It is a question of, “Did you extract information from the book? Can you connect the dots asked in the question based on the information that you read?” Lots of people who identify themselves as literate have a lot of difficulty doing these kinds of things. So we have to understand that, this is not testing if a kid can read the word “onomatopoeia”, it is testing if a person can extract useful information from written words.
All of that is different from the “eighth grade reading level” where you are typically asked things like “extrapolate what you think the underlying theme the author is trying to present.” Sixth grade reading is mostly being able to put things back in the order that you read them, picking out the descriptive terms that were in the text, and identifying what the entire point was for this particular piece of work, among other things. One does not have to really get creative here, sixth grade reading is just “in slightly finer detail” being able to regurgitate what was just read. Now to get kids ready for higher reading, there is usually questions about “do you think this person at this point was feeling happy?” That kind of stuff that relies of extrapolating meaning which is usually above the “sixth grade level reading”.
And it is indeed shocking how many people cannot do this. But in order to be shocked, I think people need to understand what is being tested here. A lot of social media does indeed condition folks to allow this level of reading to atrophy. The number of people who toss around TL;DR is really high and some of that is because it does not interest them. That of course is fine, but some of it is because 50% of the way through their brain is tired of reading text. AND THAT, is problematic. And really I can only touch on so much of the issue in this comment without it feeling like it is going on forever.
There are all kinds of assessment tests online that folks can review and see exactly the kind of questions that are being asked. The whence and wherefores on this matter and the causes for it happening are indeed complex and obviously I cannot cover them all here. But one big one, in my opinion, is education and its intersection with technology. Technology does indeed make lots of things easier for us, but some of those things that technology unburdens us from we should probably reexamine that relationship. Perhaps we need better education with technology or maybe we need less technology with that education, they both have pros and cons to them. There are not easy answers in this for the kind of background American education presents, which that is also an addressable matter in all of this.
that’s a wall of text, I’m not reading that
Low-hanging fruit
A strawberry? watermelon? cucumber?
I’m not good at this game /s
can someone recap it using an emoji?
🤷♂️
🐱🏍
two emojis? im not here to read a novel.
It’s actually one, “stunt cat”, but it’s shown as two on non-supported platforms.
LOL
Dumb it down for me doc?
It’s not a question of “Can you read the book?” It is a question of, “Did you extract information from the book? Can you connect the dots asked in the question based on the information that you read?” Lots of people who identify themselves as literate have a lot of difficulty doing these kinds of things.
I’m really sorry if this comes across as a TL;DR, but there’s a name for that. I’m positive you already know, but for the benefit of those interested, it’s called “functional illiteracy.” And it’s wild, still blows my mind to this day. Like, if you’re functionally illiterate, that doesn’t mean you don’t know how to read…it means you can read but can’t understand language written beyond the basic level. There are a lot of variables involved and I’m oversimplying a lot, but that’s it in a nutshell. It’s fucking terrifying, to be honest, especially because it’s so widespread.
Read to your kids, folks! And talk to them about it afterwards!
I feel like I encounter this alot at work. Write an email describing the problem, asking for clarification or a decision, and get a response back that seemingly ignores what is being asked with a question that was already answered in the previous email.
And the other classic: Ask 2 questions, eg in an email or even one post here. Clearly marked, with 1. and 2.
You can only ever expect to get back one answer. Comprehension and attention span of a…
“SQUIRREL!!”
To be fair, on here I will sometimes intentionally cherry pick a single asked question out of several asked, because I’m not at work, and nobody is going to question my performance if I don’t answer the question I don’t give a fuck about.
Username checks out 😆
So many people like this where I have to repeat myself 3 or 4 times before they understand what I said
Even more wild that a functional illiterate was elected president of the most powerful country in the world!
Been that way since bush
Read to my kids? Why would I want to turn my kids gay with WOKE READIN BOOKS?!
/s
You’ve indirectly highlighted the biggest issue I have with referring to literacy as “x-grade reading levels”. Literacy skills stack on top of each other and, sometimes, in slightly different orders. Calling them by a grade level makes people associate these skills with certain educational levels in school when, in reality, you only learn these skills from repetition and growth. I wish there were (and maybe there are and I’m just not familiar with them) clearer distinctions for these types of skills that meant more than “x-grade” which is practically meaningless to most people and harmful for those struggling with reading and comprehension.
You’ve indirectly highlighted the biggest issue I have with referring to literacy as “x-grade reading levels”.
There are standards of complexity that are set by grade level.
Here’s a resource with a great breakdown
Combines these with reading standards for various grades, and the metric makes a lot of sense. To say someone reads at a 5th grade level means they are technically literate but struggle to find true meaning, subtle concepts, and likely have a limited vocabulary.
Well that sounds like semantics that you take exception with, on how particular educational groups define things. Your frustration is well founded but misplaced on me. Indeed all things build and in different orders for different people no doubt. However, in the context of educational reporting at the government level, these are the labels that are applied in the various reports. And as all things, those things roll down hill.
clearer distinctions for these types of skills that meant more than “x-grade”
There are, but politics being what they are, those labels are less meaningful labels to folks that arguably have the most power to change the course of things (that last part is strictly my opinion, sorry/not really sorry I injected it here). In short, I concur with your observation.
However, in the context of educational reporting at the government level, these are the labels that are applied in the various reports
Yes, but this is exactly my issue. And I don’t think it’s about semantics, per se, but rather more about usefulness. Educational reporting using these terms is great for that demographic but is entirely useless for the people upon which it’s reporting.
The amount of people on this very site who cannot parse comments they have an emotional reaction to is staggering.
Lots of people are going to laugh at this and not realize it is describing them.
Lots of people are going to laugh at this and not realize it is describing them.
Why not both lmao
“This”
wall of text
I’d just like to note for the record that your post wasn’t a wall of text. Not only does it have paragraphs, it is also well-structured in its information delivery and you use connectives well, constantly answering “why am I reading this sentence (or subordinate clause)” in the first couple of words. This is not only easy to do (if you’re used to it), it also takes enormous load off the reader by not having them divine erm “train of thought context”, and actually follows natural speech patterns. But it does require that your thoughts are organised, that you can write the whole thing in one go, or you will have to go back and massage everything down to size. Which brings me to
TL;DR
“I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead”.
Or, differently put: Writing skills are actually just as if not even more atrocious across the board. Another reason for tl;drs are people who are paid by word count.
I read your first paragraph then skipped the rest of whatever you’re going on about. It’s about saving your time in a world where there’s near infinite amount of content to be able to read, it’s a skill to know what’s worth reading.
Right. I find myself doing this, yet I’m still able to read and consume whole chapters at a time in university textbooks
I agree to some extent, but honestly the time spent on reading lemmy/reddit/Twitter/etc could almost certainly be spent on more important literature. I’m not going to pretend that a few minutes in a sea of wasted hours really makes a difference.
The other thing that needs to be acknowledged here is that literacy has overwhelming been trending upwards over time. As grim as this is, it’s actually fantastic news when we look at where we used to be.
My reading skills tell me this author has a profound sense of sorrow about the state of the world.
This author is now also aware that there is no comfortable place in your mouth to rest your tongue.
This author is reminding you that you are suddenly aware of your breathing.
And you can feel your toes.
Ugh I just toe pilled myself, fucking karma. I’m going to put some socks on.
Based and discomfort-pilled
but some of it is because 50% of the way through their brain is tired of reading text. AND THAT, is problematic.
Yep.
This reminds me of how often people mistake skill for “natural talent”.
“Natural talent” exists, but someone without any particular natural talent who still has spent thousands of hours doing a thing is going to run circles around someone with “natural talent” who never put time and effort into practicing.
And I think when that skill is “reading”, people don’t power through the moments when their brain rebels, gets frustrated, or gets tired. So they hit that block, and don’t push through to overcome it. They go do something else…but they go do something else every single time. So a block that would be frustrating but minor in the big scheme of things gets codified in one’s mental image of themselves.
And once you have this idea that you are or are not something–that conception can turn into a huge mountain to overcome.
(As an aside, our parents have huge influence on if we think we “are” or “are not” something. It’s very worth it when you think you “can’t” do something to go back and look at your life and check if that voice in your head is yours, or if it’s the internalized voice of a parent who didn’t know what the fuck they were talking about!)
(Both people who were belittled as “stupid” and those who were constantly called “smart” can end up kinda “malfunctioning” later on, thinking they can’t do something. The ones called stupid think they can’t do something because “they’re dumb”, while the one called smart has been conditioned to fear not being 100% perfect, so they don’t even start because minor, genuinely trivial failures loom as large as the destruction of the entire earth in their minds!)
I definitely feel that, especially when you see people define themselves as “readers” or “not readers”. There’s no way that there isn’t a book out there for every person, but we aren’t always great at connecting kids with what actually motivates them to read and reflect. The Grapes of Wrath is an incredible and ever-relevant book, but there’s no way I could’ve appreciated it as such in high school. I know the same is true for many others because it was notorious for being a drag at my school. It just takes time to develop the critical reading skills and life experience that make you appreciate something like that, and not everyone has that by 6th grade or even graduation. I just don’t know how you go about continuing that education.
Me: oh man, adults can’t read??
Also me: let me find a comment that sums up this article for me.
On a serious note, great summary, cleared a lot of things up.
I’m not convinced that social media causes a loss of reading skills. I suppose it is possible but I would want to see some studies on the topic. Anecdotally, I do find myself reading less than I used to. I took a number of English lit classes as electives purely for fun and enjoyed reading a number of fun works that I think would hopefully qualify me as reading above a 6th grade level. But that was many years ago. I haven’t done a lot of reading in the last decade except for news articles about everything going to hell. Of the few books I have read, I read them for pleasure and each was lightweight, not too much analysis and explication required, one rather challenging history book about the lead up to the first world war notwithstanding, though it’s difficulty is due more to more complex sentence structure and arcane vocabulary, and less to its erudite discussion of an already complex topic. Nevertheless, I don’t believe I have had any difficulties demonstrating far beyond mere functional literacy you described despite my infrequent reading of anything longer than a news article or Reddit post. Still, this is anecdotal and so I would be interested to see if any scientific evidence exists to connect a loss of reading skills with disuse and to what degree those skills are diminished.
I tried looking for any studies on this, and all I can find is info on kids. Nothing in adults, except one study that found cognitive benefits to older adults who used social media.
Appreciate your efforts! Interesting find about social media. Would not have expected that.
I read all of this. I am definitely guilty of looking for a TL;DR. I absolutely believe my overuse of technology has caused my reading and writing skills to deteriorate significantly and my memory as well. I struggle with remembering and analyzing. I have never been a good book learner though. I suspect I have a learning disability that wasn’t quite bad enough for intervention when I was in school aside from special reading training in grade two or three.
I am definitely guilty of looking for a TL;DR
In the context of social media, this isn’t really the same problem of not wanting to or being able to read longer stuff in general. There are countless screeds from any number of sources that you wouldn’t want to waste your time going through (not saying the above poster is one of them), so getting a general sense of a longer post is an important skill.
Being able to work through edited prose in detail is also important, but remember that it’s very different from what we all encounter online. In the immortal words of someone who probably wasn’t Twain or Pascal, “I did not have time to write a shorter letter.”
Bruh, I ain’t reading all that. You crazy?
A long time ago I reasoned that the poorest least educated of us would be functional illiterates for whom a separate glyph based language would be created. A smiley face does not require reading comprehension or analysis, nor does it produce a populace that asks questions.
I don’t think the landholders who run this shit want more than fifty percent literacy from the serfs who will be beholden to their grandchildren. Too many smart serfs would endanger their legacies, and too few would render the industrial collective serviced by their human capital uncompetitive.
The next few decades will be about them figuring out just how many smart motherfuckers they need, and how to keep those firecrackers too frightened to start a revolution. They’ll be minmaxing the hell out of us.
Hard tl;dr from me, dawg
I think you make some valid points. I like to imagine most of us have other interests and projects we are engaged with and my be less motivated in some areas when we engage with other things. This is almost always the cause if my headline hot take behavior or unwillingness to read a text wall. I’m primarily here for the inadequate dopamine hit of social media; not as much for the personal growth potential.
I think the primary issue is an education system that makes reading and learning a nuisance and chore. This is a problem that can be solved in the coming decade with the use of technology, but it will take a serious overhaul of the entire system. There is no room for proprietary software and exploitation in education. The entire system should be standardised on open source software, funding should be allocated to run a small independent and offline AI server and the teacher’s role should be divided between the AI system and a traditional group oriented role. This will allow individualized education without exploitation. An AI agent that is specifically designed for this task and paired with the teacher’s supervision makes it possible for each child to follow the path that best suits them. They can read any book they want that meets certain requirements. They can progress at their own pace. Issues can be identified long before any current teacher is capable of spotting. Most importantly, this is not about AI as a product or replacing the teacher in any way. This is making use of a tool, and doing so ethically. This kind of thing can not be done for profit or by contractors. The privacy of such a system should be of paramount importance that is not possible long term with any company focused on profitability. The only people with access to the AI should be the students, parents, and teachers. Even IT staff at the school should not have access to the AI logs and data, and there should be no persistent storage long term. It has to be a tool that is used by the teacher only.
To be clear, I am a hobbyist working on such a tool for my own self education with the computer science curriculum. This is about AI agents. This is not about a raw AI LLM. An agent is a collection of LLMs connected through a code base, and connected to databases. This does not rely on the model training alone for answers. This is a system where the final answer is checked and reviewed multiple times and verified against accurate sources before a final reply is made. Most people here are likely unfamiliar with this and what it is capable of doing.
This is the inevitable future, it is only a question of how long it takes people to adapt to the new potential. This level of individualized education has only been available to the ultra rich, but it is now possible for everyone at scale.
Hey go easy. Some of us have ADHD.
It’s not that I don’t want to read a wall of text, but simply that I’m incapable of doing so.
Read to your kids. Use big words around them.
Yeah, say things like “Oh how droll, your lexicon and command of the English language is quite lamentable. Perchance your parents taught you little and never thought to embiggen your vernacular?”
Also lmao iPhones don’t recognize that embiggen is an actual dictionary word 😂
That’s because it’s from the simpsons.
Actually, no! The Simpsons used the word and was the reason it was actually put into the dictionary, but originally the word was used in a book from some dude in 1884 by the name of C.A. Ward.
Ok, but if the Simpsons didn’t get the word from that book and came up with the concept independently, and then popularized it, it’s still valid to say that it came from the Simpsons.
Either way, it’s a perfectly cromulent word.
Of course
I use giga huge word sounds hella
Your unenlightened vernacular is apparent scoundrel. Face the folly of your simplistic lexicon.
My girlfriend accused me of being a pedophile. I said, “Hey, that’s a pretty big word for a 10-yr old.”
Bob Saget was funny
This was funny when Jimmy Carr told it.
As a former child this is nothing new to me. I remember how much I hated when the teacher had people read things out loud in English class. Hell honestly any class. The amount of people who read like every. Word. Had. A. Period. And the people who would read any word longer than 3 syllables like it was hy-phe-na-ted. It was fucking torture.
20 minutes to read one single page.
Yeah, this was torture in grade school. I figured it would get better in middle school.
Then it was torture in middle school and I thought it would get better in high school.
Then it was STILL torture in high school and I thought it would surely, surely get better in college.
Then I got to college and there were still mofos reading. like. this.
I am an engineer who oversees a team. Most of them can’t write more than a coherent sentence. Code and analyze data, sure, but put together a coherent paragraph? Not really.
There’s a weird ongoing thing in the programming world where about half of coders think code should be well-commented and the other half not only think that code shouldn’t contain comments but also think that comments are an indicator of professional incompetence (aka a “code smell”). I’ve long noticed that the anti-commenting crowd are also the ones that can’t write very well.
Almost like they don’t want anyone to figure out how dogshit their code is.
People who dislike code documentation are often overoptimizers, from my experience.
Optimizing like it’s the early 80s and every byte is precious? Or do you mean something else?
Exactly. Using 10 obscure instructions to save 1 clock cycle.
In my experience it is job security.
One way my code improves is by thinking what I need to comment. Then I refactor some and the comments become somewhat redundant.
I don’t think I would agree to work with someone who doesn’t comment their code.
I was basically driven out of my last job by someone who wouldn’t agree to work with someone (me) who did comment their code. Like I said, it’s a really weird dividing line in programming.
I am sorry that happened to you but it sounds like it was for the best. I work at a place where knowledge sharing is pushed for. Everyone shares what they know. It makes things so much easier even if we do “waste” time cross training.
My last job was me replacing the inhouse developer, I got it by demonstrating on the interview that I could reverse engineer his code. The versions he had put into production had all the comments stripped out and he had replaced every variable with random alphanumeric sequences about 8 characters long.
Shouldn’t have known right there and then what kinda workplace I was dealing with.
I have had to tell software engineers time and time again that is is totally okay to make error strings beyond one sentence or one word. It almost seems to me that they never realized that strings can hold multiple sentences and and don’t have relevant memory constraints.
I was shy-ish and didn’t participate much, but I would often volunteer to read aloud. It was easier for everyone that way, since one of the few things I was exceptional at was reading
I also couldn’t stand reading along with someone who couldn’t. It was too painful
I got in trouble for correcting other kids that didn’t grasp phonics. In first grade. I was a little asshole but I was just trying to help. Also it was painful as hell.
Hooked on phonics worked for me.
… I’m actually not cracking a joke. One of the few memories I have from when I was very young (under maybe 6 or so) was going through hooked on phonics material.
In my college years, while not focused on language or communication (I’m an IT technician, specializing in computer networking) I became obsessed with the English language and it’s been a long term study for me. I’m still learning new things all the time despite English being my only fluent language. The nuances of when to use what terms despite each term being roughly equivalent (such as: what is the difference is between “affect” and “effect”), and other such oddities and specifics. College didn’t really tell me anything new about the language I speak, but dealing with everyone’s terrible use of the language, and being misunderstood many times because of poor structure or word selection caused me to want to step up so I can reduce how many follow ups I have to deal with to clarify myself.
I find most people are almost unnecessarily terse, leaving out important context that they think is obvious and assume that everyone who receives their message will make the same observation, when it’s not an obvious thing at all to many; this assumption is extremely common and often it’s not something that even crosses into the minds of those doing it. Such assumptions often lead to misunderstandings and are the basis of more than a few ha ha funny jokes in sitcoms, all of which I find rather cringe.
As a society, we abuse language severely. By extension, otherwise mundane situations can turn hazardous or even lethal if a misunderstanding happens; and many leave a lot of the context, and a fundamental understanding of context, to the assumptions of the reader/listener. It’s really dumb IMO.
If the literal majority of people are reading at a 6th grade level, the society in which we live should be making efforts to improve that. Bluntly, I shouldn’t need to “read between the lines” to understand what you want me to do.
I ran your comment through a word analyzer, and you will be happy to know your text scored at a 12th grade level!
Unfortunately, that means that most Americans will be unable to comprehend what you wrote. Sort of a catch-22 I suppose, although it may provide a natural filtering device to filter out the idiots, I suppose.
Does it top out at 12th grade? Just wondering if there’s room for improvement on that tool alone.
nuances of when to use what terms despite each term being roughly equivalent (such as: what is the difference is between “affect” and “effect”)
Maybe it’s an effect of me having English as a 3rd language, but… what nuance? They’re two different words.
I find most people are almost unnecessarily terse, leaving out important context that they think is obvious and assume that everyone who receives their message will make the same observation
I shouldn’t need to “read between the lines” to understand what you want me to do.
I’ve been told that’s an aspect of being on the autistic spectrum, that “normal people” will have no trouble picking up on the missing context.
Always sounded to me like an excuse for being sloppy, like maybe the lazies are lowering the “autism” bar too low… but who am I to judge anyone, but a simple chap on the spectrum.
I can usually (about 98% of the time) pick up on the assumed context. I recognise that not everyone does, so I try not to make the assumption. For me that goes back to the curse of knowledge problem more than anything. It makes sense to me because I know the context and underlying information about the matter. I try not to make an assumption that everyone will know that when reading my notes/emails/documentation/etc.
Native English speakers use affect and effect fairly interchangeably, so most don’t know the difference because they haven’t opened dictionary.com in a decade or more.
I find most people are almost unnecessarily terse
no
I found this hilarious to read.
Take it from another would-be English major who found a career in IT infrastructure. We are the ones with the problem over-explaining things because we value having a full information set over being concise. The thing is I agree with you that people are overly terse, or maybe more directly people are unable to process long blocks of information. It’s frustrating, because I would rather have it all in one place to reference back to.
But I’ve found the flip side of that is that in my efforts to ensure there is no possible way to misconstrue my communication, I lose everyone in its length. Yes it would be nice if everyone was able to digest what amounts to a technical manual-cum-email so they have a full understanding. But the reality is that the vast majority of people cannot. They simply shut down and stop reading. Therefore it is my responsibility to adjust my delivery to be most effective for the intended audience. This includes fewer words, more direct points, and less supporting details unless asked for more.
I guess my point is, I see myself in your comment. And I wanted to share that I used to feel that way but time has softened my outlook and opened me to the idea that I’m definitely complicit in the overall lack of understanding by failing to account for my audience.
Look at that, there I go rambling again!
I understand. The way I’ve taken to structure my messages is to provide the terse summary up front then elaborate as I go, summarize tersely at the end and re-pose any pressing questions. This way the reader can mostly skip the middle of my email and go from the executive summary at the top and forward themselves to the last few sentences and hit reply. If they want more detail, it’s all there.
I try to keep away from any overly technical jargon, and kind of “dumb it down” aka, use non-technical language as much as I can while still keeping to the point and being accurate. If they want the technical jargon version, they can ask, but they never do.
I find it helps me since I can go back and reference the information if I need it, or point the client to it and go over it with them later if they ask at a later date.
I don’t know if that’s something that’s possible with your work, but it seems to minimize the follow ups and the end user seems to be happy most of the time. There’s always a few that will complain, but I’ve gotten more compliments on my communication style than anything.
I never had patience for that and would just read ahead and ignore the person speaking.
Kids read like that because they know if they make a mistake they will get a lower grade. Better to be slow and correct.
This happened all the way through highschool.
I don’t know in that case.
As much as I’d love to jump on the “stupid Americans” bandwagon, this seems to be a big problem not only in America. After the reddit exodus and before I had a good setup for lemmy, I used Facebook for a short period. Most of my stuff there is from US, UK and Norway, and the number of people in the comments who can barely put together a coherent sentance is astonishing. Far below 6th grade level by any standard.
A sentance? I wanna believe you did that on purpose.
I plead autocorrect, and that English is my second language 🤣
Sentance isn’t a word, so autocorrect is not to blame!
sentance isn’t a word, therefore autocorrect is to blame since it didn’t work
It looks like there’s at least some bias as they only counted English literacy.
This is basically a map of how many Mexican immigrants each state has. I agree the English bias is not great because not speaking English doesn’t make you dumb.
It would be interesting to see the same data, restricted to participants whose first language is English.
Not being able to read also doesn’t auromatically equate dumb though. It just highlights a systemic failure of the educations system. And arguably a country experiencing a language divide to this degree is a systemic failure of some kind as well.
Many countries have myriad languages in them, often because they contain myriad cultures. That’s not a failing at any level, it’s just diversity.
Yeah, but I’d argue those countries either have people being decently fluent in multiple languages (which is not what this graph implies) or they have evolved their institutions and society in a way where meaningful societal and political participation is possible regardless of what language you speak. I don’t think the US is at that level, and I think it being that way if this is lived reality for a lot of Americans IS a systemic failure.
The failure is not necessarily having multiple languages spoken, but the institutions not reflecting this reality. So you can either invest in people being fluent in a common language in addition to whatever languages they may speak OR redesign institutions and reshape society. Not doing any of the two is a systemic failure imo.
are you soft blaming this on the immigrants? Immigrants are more likely to speak, read, and write 2 or more languages fluently than it is that the average american can do any of that for 1
Not op but it’s pretty clear they’re not blaming it on immigrants. They’re just pointing out that the map has a bias because immigrants may not have as good English skills specifically.
Its an incredibly large thing to leap to on literally no evidence. Its pure fact that immigrants have far better language skills than the average american, as I said above. They may not know of the racism, but that doesn’t mean its there.
Is it racism to suggest that someone might not speak a second language as well as their first language? I’ll freely admit that I’m much worse at my second language than English.
Pinning the entire problem immediately on immigrants is racist. Immigrants are not a problem, they’re a scapegoat.
I never said they were the entire problem, it’s just one reason there’s such a gap between say California and Colorado.
To be clear I wasn’t trying to leap on, “haha Mexican immigrants can’t speak English”. I was pointing out proximity to a primarily Spanish speaking country is going to lead to a greater population whose native language is not English, and therefore less fluent English speakers.
I grew up in an area of the US with tons of immigrants, most of whom learned Spanish before English. Going the other way I learned Spanish after learning English, and as such I probably have a less than 6th grade reading level in Spanish because it’s not the language I learned from birth, nor the one I speak at home.
I also specifically mentioned Mexican immigrants because the other country we border also has a primary language of English, which is why our northern border has better English literacy rates.
It’s a pretty easy correlation to make, and doesn’t require a whole study to identify the trend. Spanish is also the second most spoken language in the country so naturally areas with low English literacy rates are likely to have higher populations speaking the second most spoken language in the country. Hell, if you look at a map of latinos in the US it’s almost identical to the above map.
Considering what article this comment is under I kinda have to ask now: is English your first language?
Because an understanding of the comment above yours should center on the word “bias”, not on the word “immigrant”.
deleted by creator
I want to look at the eyes of a person who set a white colour on the scale to 12% value.
well since america’s literacy is so bad it seems they had to put 12% as the baseline
It’s basically Americas official language, let’s not pretend it isn’t.
That doesn’t mean Spanish speakers are illiterate. They just read Spanish.
True, I totally agree.
However, if one is evaluating “functional literacy” that means determining if one reads well enough to function in society.
So to truly evaluate functional literacy for native Spanish speakers, it seems like one would have to somehow factor in two things.
First, English is the de facto language in the US. Second, Spanish language translations are provided for a number of written things (for example, our school district letters to parents).
One would be more functional being fluent only in English than only in Spanish, sure (and it depends on which part of the country even which part of a city). But one would surely be more function having some knowledge of English and fluency in Spanish.
If you go to school in America, you’re obviously going to learn and be taught in English. There’s a lot of immigrants that don’t know any English. I interact with a lot of them, and they’ll even have their 6 year olds translate for them. It actually impresses me, because the little kids act very mature when they have to translate, since I’m sure they are used to having to navigate their family around at a very young age.
Maybe if we actually paid teachers and gave funding to education this wouldn’t be a problem. Education in the US is god awful.
And yet “Terms Of Service” are supposed to be fair. When they’re written at a college level.
Not just college, but by lawyers, so a doctorate level.
That seems a little generous. While I know it’s challenging, I don’t think law school is quite the same thing as a PhD program.
I agree with your statement, but law school (in the US) gives you a literal doctorate. It’s not a PhD but JD stands for juris doctor.
Yes, I am aware of what JD stands for. Glad that we can agree that it’s not really equivalent to a PhD.
A little known fact is that provided one can pass their local bar exam, they’re still a lawyer/officer of the court, regardless of whether they attended law school or not.
It’s not really a thing anymore, but historically a lot of lawyers served a kind of apprenticeship in lieu of law-school.
Abraham Lincoln is a great example, for instance.
It’s not the terms of service’s fault that adults can’t read over a 6th grade level
No, but think about how we structure society.
We give people shit education, and they wind up not being able to read at a 6th grade level.
Then you basically have to navigate an entire world where you are required to pick how to sign away some of your rights/enter deals written beyond their comprehension.
This is a system that breeds suckers as sets them up as suckers, to screw them later.
On the other hand, always targeting the lowest common denominator has negative consequences also. There needs to be a balance, and equity to close the gaps.
The solution to that isn’t to dumb down everything, it’s to lift everyone else up. Mandate that adults be educated and provide remedial classes at community colleges for free. Failure to comply results in losing the ability to hold gainful employment or vote. Anonymize testing and tie test results to social security numbers.
It’s either do that, or allow civilization to collapse while other countries that do force their citizens to be educated flourish.
And many adults choose not to read. It is almost as if they are connected
This is the reason the GOP exists as it does. It is the fucking idiots party.
Which is exactly the goal. They want a large number of poorly educated people who are easy to manipulate. This is why they defund schools and ban reproductive health education as their very first steps when they come to power.
Large number of poorly educated, easily manipulated people? You mean like the illegal immigrants the left is letting in in droves?
I’ve never understood this conspiracy. Illegal immigrants can’t vote. How exactly is the left supposed to benefit?
Yeah, the argument makes literally zero sense, but if you bring it up to them, it opens the door for them to talk about other batshit crazy conspiracies. Like needing tighter controls on who can vote. Which are thinly veiled attempts to limit the opposition from voting.
One time someone made an argument that semi made sense.
“It’s their children! These immigrants come in here and liberals give them jobs and welfare and put their kids in schools and give them scholarships and then the kids grow up to vote for Democrats!”
And I’m like…that’s incredible! You’re really making the Dems sound like good guys here!
None of it makes sense unless you start from a baseline of racism.
The issue is those benefits like free healthcare, scholarships, and such is that they aren’t also given to actual US citizens, we treat illegals better than our own.
Fuck off.
My ancestors and maybe yours too for that matter, were poorly educated, not by choice. They migrated here bc they were desperate and it offered hope. And now many generations later, my parents’ and all subsequent generations in the family have been college educated with many success stories.
You just don’t like brown people. Fuck off.
Our ancestors didn’t drag their children through barbed wire and didn’t demote US citizens to 2nd class by receiving free healthcare and benefits over them. They also didn’t steal to such a degree that the police gave up on enforcing the law.
It might be, but I guarantee you that there’s a not insignificant number of people who align with the left who are dumb as rocks and just happened to fall into that party instead.
If there’s some study proving that uneducated or unintelligent people are only ever exclusively on the right and the left is just full of geniuses, I haven’t seen it.
Yes, in general those who have attained college degrees are more likely to vote Democratic and those who have attained just a high school diploma are more likely to vote Republican. There is a clear divide where the more educated cohort of society leans Democratic.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10659129221079862
Education isn’t 1 to 1 with intelligence, it’s mostly a wealth test in the US. Though I’d argue the phenomenon is more to do with being exposed to different people and wider cultural beliefs than raw intelligence, anyways.
Education also matters because it teaches critical thinking and epistemology. You can be highly intelligent, but if you don’t have any critical thinking skills and an understanding of the rules of evidence, you can still be easily misled and otherwise manipulated.
Orr maybe, you see what you want to see.
Why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?
Nuance.
Yup. And the map is pretty much what you’d guess, Mississippi is #1. That is, #1 for worst literacy rate in the nation. https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/How-Serious-Is-Americas-Literacy-Problem
California and New York being high on the list is a little surprising, however.
large, under-educated and recently arrived immigrant populations do contribute to it for sure
California has more Republicans than fill in state. The Central Valley is just littered with ignorance and po dunk pretend (and real) shit kickers. I know this because my family came from that area.
American’s have been going down the dumbass road for a long time. And you rarely meet someone who is well rounded like you meet in Europe. Not to say there aren’t dumbasses in Europe. There are many. But Americans don’t even seem to try. Not anymore.
Explains a lot
It feels like a low-blow but… Yeah.
I wonder that the standard used for 6th-grade reading level is. I know that the 6th grade reading level at the beginning of the century is higher than the 6th grade reading level now.
I remember being extremely disappointed when I was in 6th grade and they had arbitrarily moved a lot of books up a reading level. There were a few in particular that I was looking forward to reading while in 5th grade that were at a 6th grade level. Then in 6th grade, I grabbed one of those books to check out but was told that I could t read it because it was now considered 7th grade and that I had to choose from the 6th grade level (which was largely the previous year’s 5th grade level).
This is infuriating. No one should be denied borrowing a book because they’re not at their “grade level”. That’s the kind of shit that contributes to people losing interest in reading from a young age.
I didn’t have a single teacher or librarian who would discourage a kid from reading a book, unless a 6th grader tried checking out a clearly adult intended book like a harlequin novel or something.
I’m glad you had teachers like that. Not sure why mine were so dead-set on only reading in your grade level. Limiting lower level makes more sense, to encourage students to push themselves more. 6th grade was the last grade in the school, so the only people allowed to read the 7th grade level books were in the 6th grade Honors English class. It’s not like the library would run out of books if all 6th graders were allowed to pick out of that section of the library
I hope you got yourself a library card. The idea of limiting kids who are reading above the average level is insane to me. Why restrict everyone to the mean?
deleted by creator
Yeah that seems so unfortunate. I loved my elementary school librarian; she would flip to a random page and make sure you could read and understand it. As long as you could do that, you could check it out.
Lol as long as its not porn, we could rent any book
Never heard about age limitation
It wasn’t age locked per se. If you were in Honors English, they assumed you were reading at a higher level and could check out books one grade level higher than you and if you were in on-level English you were not allowed to read above “grade level”.
I can understand keeping a 6th grader from checking out a bunch of 1st grade level books, but discouraging kids from pushing themselves was weird
This honestly blows my mind.
pointedly doesn’t look at the numerous Lemmings he’s seen complain that relatively simple statements are grammatically confusing
I’ve absolutely had someone blow a gasket over asking for clarification when they wrote a few sentences where it was unclear from their statement whether they were progressive or a white power lunatic. I could have assumed but my level of certainty was hovering in the mid-50% range. Sometimes the author is an idiot and the questioner is justified. EDIT: from what I could figure out, the gasket blower has a habit of assuming you know their post history rather than letting each comment stand on its own. Which is not very smart.
We have people who think that ‘e-mail’ gets an s as a noun - ever - when ‘mail’ never has.
They will be confused that the sun keeps rising.
The term e-mail has been “neologized” into its own independent word, which may or may not take an s as a plural.
You must be a hit at parties.
