First I am not from the USA so I can't say stuff about how stupid the youth gets there (and ok USA hasn't the best reputation for theyre intelligence anyway in europe), but I can speak about the youth in my country.
One of my favorite quotes:
"Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers."
Do you know who has written this?
Sokrates who lived about 400 BC (so over 2400 years ago)
Also I think the OP is just (like a lot of teachers in my experience) oldfashioned, especially teachers in english and other languages.
We have a new time with new medias and we have other themes where people are interested in.
(I come back later to this point)
First here some facts (from the country I am from).
In school we have today the math teached is much higher then it was 40 years ago. You can see this in math books and when asking older people about math.
The most old teachers I (and others) had in gymnasium (school for 13-18 years old kids, but only kids with good grades), were NOT able to use a dvd or VHS recorder/player properly, and uf course they also couldn't use a computer.
Kids today (im my country) have to learn 3 languages, were some years ago they only learned 2 languages. And kids today can speak and read there second language WAY better then the parrent generation can theyr second language. (Some years ago in school as second language french was teached, but at most 50% of the adults today can speak french or even understand it, this isn't really much better in the youth but the youth CAN speak and understand english which most adults can't unless they learned it in the job)
So back to the new media and oldfashioned teachers.
We have used in school as medias mostly books sometimes, comics, movies or papers, or theater.
So what's wrong with that?
We only looked sometimes movies after we have read a book and we never talked a lot about the film. We discussed only the books.
Today the main medias are the internet movies and games. (Ok you can let the internet aside and look at it as poorly written books/papers since it is mostly)
Todays main themes people are interested are fantasy, criminals/action, and even science fiction.
So instead of trying to analyse and discuss the things which we are mostly confronted with, we discussed old literature which isn't relevant anymore and is for the today child/youth just boring.
I liked to read until I had to read only boring old stuff which I didn't had any relation to, now I hate books..
Of course it is a step to the right direction to show movies sometimes as it shows they are respect as some kind of art.
But there is only hate and incomprehension. We hear a lot that because of killer games the youth becomes dangerous and violent.
I never hear this about books. But why when this new medium has such a big influence to the youth it isn't threated in the class?
It is exactly the same it was about 50 jears ago (maybe it was also 60 I don't remember), when comics had their rise. Especially in Europa they were said to have a bad influence to the youth and are bad and no art and just stupid, and they tried to forbid them (at least for children).
But they didn't had any sucess, and now about 50 years later they are accepted, they are even used to be part of todays class and are discussed.
It is the same with games, someday (at least when all the oldfashioned people are dead) they will be a theme in school and be used, but it will be just a little bit too late.
But one thing will maybe never stopp, that teachers try to put theyre own taste into the children, they often just can't accept that, they children and todays generation just has a different taste, they think: "No this can't be they are too stupid, it is my duty to teach them what is good, I have to show them this old stuff which is a lot better then this stupid things today."
This is just arrogance, but it unfortunately sometimes work.
Just to show what I mean with this:
At the beginning all of us (in our class) disliked this "good" literature.
But after some years some people started to like it.
So why did they start to like it?
First they get better grades when they said they like it.
Second the people claiming to like this stuff, were exactly the same people which were easy to influence (they also changed their political opinion after in history our teacher had a verry clear opinion....).
Sorry but this just shouldn't be it is ok and necessary to show this old literature to the children/adolescence, but you should show them also other stuff and discuss the things which they like, which they are influented by, and not try to convinve them that this old stuff is better.
They are new books which aren't that bad (harry potter as an example) of course they don't learn some words anymore but first english has way too many words and second this words aren't needed today anymore. Languages evolve and even oldfashioned english teachers can't stopp that.
If you try to read some books they like they will in the end read much more then when you force them to read old boring stuff.
Also it would be good to discuss films games and comics to, since today the language is mostly presented by such stuff. And there are in every medium things which are worth discussing and have a good language.
(for comics questionablecontent.com has a really good vocabulair I often need to use some tool to translate some words to me)
For films I think you can find yourself enough good examples, which are worth looking and discussing.
And for games heavy rain, fahrenheit, prince of persia the sands of time, all have a good story telling and aren't too long and fahrenheit and prince of persia, the sands of time are also quite old so they should run on about every computer and they are cheap (as cheap as a book). Also the language in this games is reasonable good and you can discuss a lot of things about them and they aren't that violent like other games.
I think the youth today is lazy (but was it really better the last generations), but aren't stupid, they are just not threated the rigth way.
And they often just don't get a chance of showing what they can do, because theyre intelligence shows just in another way.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My new houserules:
1. Every player saing exiled or battlefield will be kicked out.
2. Not using you mana deals 2 points of manaburn.
3. Combat damage goes over the Stack and you can freely assign it.
4. Lifelinks does stack and doesn't safe you from dying.
5. Tokens are owned bye the one who has made them.
Everyone thinking M10 will not affect a lot of cards or Limited a lot, either has no clue about magic or has never played limited or is getting paid by wizards to do propaganda.
Me and a friend (Also a teenager. :P) were actually discussing this. We were discussing how not everyone really pays attention to politics and just bandwagon the parties or on votes for laws, propositions, etc, which is bad if it is so for democrats, which, sadly, probably does happen. I can't say that I'm a Republican... I'd be a liberal Republican (If one exists) at best, but, yeah. At the moment I'm leaning towards R rather than D until a very big portion of the population actually starts to pay attention to politics (And understands it; I honestly can't say I'm a big-shot when it comes to politics, but I DO pay attention to politics. That, and I want to learn more about it so I can further grasp it. I sometimes read up propositions and the like in the small books that my parents get a few days before voting day. I watch the CSPAN or something channel occasionally, that shows what actually happens behind the scenes.), then I'll go back to being a [Liberal] Democrat. I'd rather have a temporary Republic than a Democracy with uninformed people.
The only bad thing is that there's the possible cheats and Republicans that get away being in office even though they don't do a good job, but get voted in because of crowd "preference".
Which also sort of disappoints me of being a liberal/believing in liberalism. Some bandwagon because of the change it brings, etc, "change is always good" and crap that Obama started. Change IS good. Just... make sure it's good, legal, and helpful.
CSPAN is good, but it's not the be all end all. While I wouldn't recommend necessarily reading all the volumes of Das Kapital, you'd be hard pressed not to read some of Keynes works and his complete opposite in Hayek and von Mises.
I believe you might align yourself with these guys:
They have Hayek, von Mises, and other austro-libertarians (classical liberals). I would recommend reading some Ayn Rand and some of her students like Alan Greenspan's recent memoirs and Capitalism by George Reisman.
Capitalism by George Reisman is probably the ur-compendium right now for anarcho-capitalists. Do be sure to have wikipedia up for short explanations, but I think he does a fair enough job to lay his case out.
My one recommendation for an author, get up a few things up on youtube or some similar video site and watch it until you get a good grasp of history, law, and ect. in general. But always read opposing literature and listen to opposing intellectuals and laymen.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
I always like people talking about the decline of the next generation. It's not like it's never been said before.
Apparently everyone else in the previous generations have been such intellectual hot-shots. The funny thing is that most people here are probably just big pseudo-intellectuals.
Dont worry those people just realized the hills was fake so the Global IQ should go up a few points.
I just graduated high school. I finally escaped that portion. I know there will still be a fair amount of idiots in college, but...
People often voiced complaints on my method of speaking, essentially stating that I should speak in a more lay manner more often. Usually in casual conversation the following sentences show how I speak. Granted, I still say things like "Ain't," or I'll make up contractions like "there'll," but overall, I was getting complaints for speaking proper English.
Although it's not so much a decline in intelligence as it is an increase in ignorance. I've met plenty of smart students that just don't care. Intelligence is a result of evolution. Humanity isn't de-evolving per se, but instead society is de-evolving as more conveniences allow it. Technology is beginning to evolve for us.
OP: I whole heartedly agree with you. People are idiots and they disgust me.
However, reading does not equate to intelligence. Reading doesn't even translate into reading comprehension or correct use of our language. Just because someone choses not to read doesn't necessitate that they are uninformed trash. Some people (myself included), just don't find most literature all that interesting.
This actually reminds me a lot of religion. Some religions act like you can't be a good person if you don't believe. I can be a good person without prescribing to any religion. I can also be an intelligent and informed person without enjoying reading as a hobby.
So I'm getting laid off after teaching English at a Catholic high school. My position has led me to some downright frightening experiences, mostly with how educated the next generation will be.
For instance, teenage overall knowledge, basic reading and writing skills has declined!
Kids don't read. Plain and simple. Ask yourselves, how many youths ages 13-19 actually sit down with a book and read?....excluding Harry Potter and Twilight. Not many. In fact I believe technology has a negative effect on kids, especially the internet, texting, etc... Kids read more Facebook pages than they do pages of a book.
Another thing I have noticed is their overall writing skills. I graded the English regents, which New York State does every year and noticed some idiotic mistakes. For instance, a junior spelled the word "pretty" on the exam "pritty." That is just one of many that I've noticed.
The main thing I wanted to through out there was their urge to read. Most students are ambivalent about classic novels or authors.
One story I found remarkable was when I was observing a 12th grade Honors English class:
Mr. F: Ok, does anyone know who Jonathan Swift is?
not one student raises his/her hand. I raise mine...
Mr. F: well, its nice to know that the other English teacher knows.
Jonathan Swift: master of satirical writing and author of Gulliver's Travels and a Modest Proposal.
I taught freshmen English. Vocabulary was another mediocrity!
While doing routine vocab words in our workbook, one of the synonyms of the word in question was "acclaim." One student had the gall to ask me what it meant. At first I thought she was being funny, but my incense turned to astonishment when she was actually serious!
On a lighter note, I've noticed that many words we have done actually appear on or as Magic cards (Confiscate, rustic Clachan, Opt.....etc) I honestly considered telling my students to start playing MTG to enhance their vocab skills.
Anyways, perhaps I am being harsh, or even bias. But honestly, has anyone else experienced this?
Why is it important for students to read the classics?
I'll conclude on one final note:
Even though I will not be working at this school next year, I received the summer reading list. If I ever saw a bigger insult to an already injured youth, it is the foul make-up of the summer reading books put forth by my very own colleges!
In all honesty, the faculty made categories that would entice students to read. One was so aptly called "Chick Lit." The books included:
"The Beach Street Knitting Society and Yarn Club," by Gil McNeil
"The Girl Next Door," by Elizabeth Noble
"The Icing on the Cupcake," by Jennifer Ross
What kind of example is this to set for out youth? There are NO classical novels on the list whatsoever. The majority consists of mediocre contemporary fiction which have previously appeared on Best-Seller Lists. Is that what we have degraded ourselves to? Reading what sells as to reading what enhances our own cognition?
I think you should get off your high horse and stop being so judgmental. I'm sure their knowledge o certain things trumps yours by far, so why bother pointing out what a *select* few have trouble doing. Are these high level students? or just 'adequate' ones?
Currently at age 17, I suppose I should be feeling the effects of this decay, but I've always enjoyed reading, and in fact I'm currently reading Atlas Shrugged for the third time (outstanding read, official endorsement.) The few people in my age group that I associate with are less than stellar in the intelligence department. Through the help of another friend, I convinced one person that I was able to travel through time, and that a future version of myself had just walked past the room we were in. Funny at the time, but in retrospect it's just sad that someone could believe that even for a second, especially when the only proof is "well I say it happened."
It's even worse here on the internet, when you really don't have to care anymore. You don't have to base anything on what's true or right, and because of this, the stupidity really seeps through. I'll quote for you a little back and forth I had with someone on a chatroom. (please don't infract me for the spelling)
Them: "hy giz, my mum jst tld me tht im nt getin a car cuz my grdes r so lo."
Me: "I honestly have no idea what you just said, could you try to use proper words?"
Them: (insert misspelled expletive here) u dis ant skolo" (yes, skolo.)
Me: "I'm only assuming that means school, and if you think that school is the only place where proper spelling applies, you're in deep trouble."
Them: "wut"
Me: "Did you really not understand what I said?"
Them: "(another misspelled expletive) u"
Perhaps not the best indicator of someone who is..erm.. lacking something in the intelligence department, but it only shows how lazy people get (teens especially) when we don't think that we need to try. If school is the only place that we feel the need to seem intelligent, we do indeed have a very dark future waiting for us.
Technology is indeed one of the main reasons that children/teens/people in general have become lazy and make fewer efforts to develop some form of intelligence. Read? Why do that when I can watch the whole season of Family Guy on my laptop, or go "pwn sum n00bz" on the gaming console of my choice? Why study for a test when I can just look up key things that might show up on said test, then proceed to get an average grade?
I can not say that I am happy about it, but it will continue this way, probably getting worse as time goes. I do not want to say that technology should be removed to alleviate this problem, but that seems, to me, to be the best option, and even that is just terrible. I don't know.
Someone once said that when farming stopped being the main occupation of roughly 80% of Americans, that's when American teenagers stopped being able to think as far ahead as a year.
I don't know if this has anything to do with why Johnny can't spell or won't read, but it certainly seems to explain why Johnny can't balance a checkbook or live within a budget.
Blaming technology isn't productive. Before there was technology in the classroom, there were students who didn't care, didn't think ahead, had no social skills, etc. So why didn't we notice them before? They didn't stay in school.
I haven't had the time to go through this topic really but judging by the OP, it just seems like your students are the problem.
Just judging by college admissions, getting into college has gotten much harder even though more kids are going. The top schools have gotten extremely exclusive, and schools that once never had a reputation for selectivity are turning away qualified applicants. And its all because kids are smarter than they used to be so schools have to raise their admission standards accordingly.
I think just about every person who posted in this thread could learn a thing or two from reading "Flowers For Algernon" by Daniel Keyes.:rolleyes: Seriously, ive seen some sad lack of empathy in this thread. It makes me feel disgusted to be a human.
"I have no idea what it's like not to be a straight white male, and the experiences of others are irrelevant." -Conservative Motto
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
I used to really enjoy reading as a kid, but I discovered video games and computers and found them to be far more fascinating. I looked to other mediums for entertainment and enlightenment. That's how I ended up as a computer science major. I honestly couldn't care-less about the classics, yeah i respect them for what they are and I understand what others find in them, but i personally haven't read a novel in over 3 years and i really don't care to.
Wow, you just described my entire life.
Honestly, every English teacher I've ever had, high school or college, has been a giant douche. They all think they're better than everyone else because they took the time to read books no one cares about.
Don't get me wrong, I've read some of classics, the ones that actually interested me, but honestly most of the old 'classics' suck. Old Man and the Sea? A guy fishes for like three months. Sweet book. Moby Dick was like 1000 pages about the hunt for a whale. Perhaps the reason people are reading newer books is because they're better?
Them: "hy giz, my mum jst tld me tht im nt getin a car cuz my grdes r so lo."
Me: "I honestly have no idea what you just said, could you try to use proper words?"
Them: (insert misspelled expletive here) u dis ant skolo" (yes, skolo.)
Me: "I'm only assuming that means school, and if you think that school is the only place where proper spelling applies, you're in deep trouble."
Them: "wut"
Me: "Did you really not understand what I said?"
Them: "(another misspelled expletive) u"
Honestly, every English teacher I've ever had, high school or college, has been a giant douche. They all think they're better than everyone else because they took the time to read books no one cares about.
Don't get me wrong, I've read some of classics, the ones that actually interested me, but honestly most of the old 'classics' suck. Old Man and the Sea? A guy fishes for like three months. Sweet book. Moby Dick was like 1000 pages about the hunt for a whale. Perhaps the reason people are reading newer books is because they're better?
Apparently, it's a well documented fact that intelligence has in fact risen over the last 20 years.
English teachers, I'll have to agree that the majority I have found to have some level of hubris about their subject. The same is with mathematics teachers.
However, to completely disregard certain books is equally hubris. The mechanic to borrow ideas and alter them to create new content is quite necessary to build new material from. That is quite simply a utilitarian argument sure, but it is true.
Easter eggs in video games come from having a wide breadth of cultural knowledge. Ranging from the lich Goethe in Baulder's Gate 2 to more modern taunts in Starcraft 2 from popular culture. Weaving together a story is about taking the best bits of previous lore and tying them together to create a wider tapestry than without. This is essentially what the goal of synthesis is about. To create something new on another level than what previous material was out of.
The real question again is one to scale, I'd never suggest Montisquieu to an enterprising IT tech in common conversation, however to a lawyer I would and have.
As for your anecdotal evidence, I'll raise you a theory:
One of my favorite quotes:
"Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers."
Do you know who has written this?
Sokrates who lived about 400 BC (so over 2400 years ago)
Also I think the OP is just (like a lot of teachers in my experience) oldfashioned, especially teachers in english and other languages.
We have a new time with new medias and we have other themes where people are interested in.
(I come back later to this point)
First here some facts (from the country I am from).
In school we have today the math teached is much higher then it was 40 years ago. You can see this in math books and when asking older people about math.
The most old teachers I (and others) had in gymnasium (school for 13-18 years old kids, but only kids with good grades), were NOT able to use a dvd or VHS recorder/player properly, and uf course they also couldn't use a computer.
Kids today (im my country) have to learn 3 languages, were some years ago they only learned 2 languages. And kids today can speak and read there second language WAY better then the parrent generation can theyr second language. (Some years ago in school as second language french was teached, but at most 50% of the adults today can speak french or even understand it, this isn't really much better in the youth but the youth CAN speak and understand english which most adults can't unless they learned it in the job)
So back to the new media and oldfashioned teachers.
We have used in school as medias mostly books sometimes, comics, movies or papers, or theater.
So what's wrong with that?
We only looked sometimes movies after we have read a book and we never talked a lot about the film. We discussed only the books.
Today the main medias are the internet movies and games. (Ok you can let the internet aside and look at it as poorly written books/papers since it is mostly)
Todays main themes people are interested are fantasy, criminals/action, and even science fiction.
So instead of trying to analyse and discuss the things which we are mostly confronted with, we discussed old literature which isn't relevant anymore and is for the today child/youth just boring.
I liked to read until I had to read only boring old stuff which I didn't had any relation to, now I hate books..
Of course it is a step to the right direction to show movies sometimes as it shows they are respect as some kind of art.
But there is only hate and incomprehension. We hear a lot that because of killer games the youth becomes dangerous and violent.
I never hear this about books. But why when this new medium has such a big influence to the youth it isn't threated in the class?
It is exactly the same it was about 50 jears ago (maybe it was also 60 I don't remember), when comics had their rise. Especially in Europa they were said to have a bad influence to the youth and are bad and no art and just stupid, and they tried to forbid them (at least for children).
But they didn't had any sucess, and now about 50 years later they are accepted, they are even used to be part of todays class and are discussed.
It is the same with games, someday (at least when all the oldfashioned people are dead) they will be a theme in school and be used, but it will be just a little bit too late.
But one thing will maybe never stopp, that teachers try to put theyre own taste into the children, they often just can't accept that, they children and todays generation just has a different taste, they think: "No this can't be they are too stupid, it is my duty to teach them what is good, I have to show them this old stuff which is a lot better then this stupid things today."
This is just arrogance, but it unfortunately sometimes work.
Just to show what I mean with this:
At the beginning all of us (in our class) disliked this "good" literature.
But after some years some people started to like it.
So why did they start to like it?
First they get better grades when they said they like it.
Second the people claiming to like this stuff, were exactly the same people which were easy to influence (they also changed their political opinion after in history our teacher had a verry clear opinion....).
Sorry but this just shouldn't be it is ok and necessary to show this old literature to the children/adolescence, but you should show them also other stuff and discuss the things which they like, which they are influented by, and not try to convinve them that this old stuff is better.
They are new books which aren't that bad (harry potter as an example) of course they don't learn some words anymore but first english has way too many words and second this words aren't needed today anymore. Languages evolve and even oldfashioned english teachers can't stopp that.
If you try to read some books they like they will in the end read much more then when you force them to read old boring stuff.
Also it would be good to discuss films games and comics to, since today the language is mostly presented by such stuff. And there are in every medium things which are worth discussing and have a good language.
(for comics questionablecontent.com has a really good vocabulair I often need to use some tool to translate some words to me)
For films I think you can find yourself enough good examples, which are worth looking and discussing.
And for games heavy rain, fahrenheit, prince of persia the sands of time, all have a good story telling and aren't too long and fahrenheit and prince of persia, the sands of time are also quite old so they should run on about every computer and they are cheap (as cheap as a book). Also the language in this games is reasonable good and you can discuss a lot of things about them and they aren't that violent like other games.
I think the youth today is lazy (but was it really better the last generations), but aren't stupid, they are just not threated the rigth way.
And they often just don't get a chance of showing what they can do, because theyre intelligence shows just in another way.
1. Every player saing exiled or battlefield will be kicked out.
2. Not using you mana deals 2 points of manaburn.
3. Combat damage goes over the Stack and you can freely assign it.
4. Lifelinks does stack and doesn't safe you from dying.
5. Tokens are owned bye the one who has made them.
Everyone thinking M10 will not affect a lot of cards or Limited a lot, either has no clue about magic or has never played limited or is getting paid by wizards to do propaganda.
CSPAN is good, but it's not the be all end all. While I wouldn't recommend necessarily reading all the volumes of Das Kapital, you'd be hard pressed not to read some of Keynes works and his complete opposite in Hayek and von Mises.
I believe you might align yourself with these guys:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
You can find some pdf's here:
http://mises.org/
They have Hayek, von Mises, and other austro-libertarians (classical liberals). I would recommend reading some Ayn Rand and some of her students like Alan Greenspan's recent memoirs and Capitalism by George Reisman.
Capitalism by George Reisman is probably the ur-compendium right now for anarcho-capitalists. Do be sure to have wikipedia up for short explanations, but I think he does a fair enough job to lay his case out.
http://mises.org/resources/1006
Some decent videos on more modern academics here:
http://mitworld.mit.edu/
http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/conversations/chron.html
My one recommendation for an author, get up a few things up on youtube or some similar video site and watch it until you get a good grasp of history, law, and ect. in general. But always read opposing literature and listen to opposing intellectuals and laymen.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
Dont worry those people just realized the hills was fake so the Global IQ should go up a few points.
People often voiced complaints on my method of speaking, essentially stating that I should speak in a more lay manner more often. Usually in casual conversation the following sentences show how I speak. Granted, I still say things like "Ain't," or I'll make up contractions like "there'll," but overall, I was getting complaints for speaking proper English.
Although it's not so much a decline in intelligence as it is an increase in ignorance. I've met plenty of smart students that just don't care. Intelligence is a result of evolution. Humanity isn't de-evolving per se, but instead society is de-evolving as more conveniences allow it. Technology is beginning to evolve for us.
I am petitioning to get players to stop complaining about mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
However, reading does not equate to intelligence. Reading doesn't even translate into reading comprehension or correct use of our language. Just because someone choses not to read doesn't necessitate that they are uninformed trash. Some people (myself included), just don't find most literature all that interesting.
This actually reminds me a lot of religion. Some religions act like you can't be a good person if you don't believe. I can be a good person without prescribing to any religion. I can also be an intelligent and informed person without enjoying reading as a hobby.
I think you should get off your high horse and stop being so judgmental. I'm sure their knowledge o certain things trumps yours by far, so why bother pointing out what a *select* few have trouble doing. Are these high level students? or just 'adequate' ones?
point is: chill.
Trade thread!
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=556274
or
http://darjarri.com
It's even worse here on the internet, when you really don't have to care anymore. You don't have to base anything on what's true or right, and because of this, the stupidity really seeps through. I'll quote for you a little back and forth I had with someone on a chatroom. (please don't infract me for the spelling)
Them: "hy giz, my mum jst tld me tht im nt getin a car cuz my grdes r so lo."
Me: "I honestly have no idea what you just said, could you try to use proper words?"
Them: (insert misspelled expletive here) u dis ant skolo" (yes, skolo.)
Me: "I'm only assuming that means school, and if you think that school is the only place where proper spelling applies, you're in deep trouble."
Them: "wut"
Me: "Did you really not understand what I said?"
Them: "(another misspelled expletive) u"
Perhaps not the best indicator of someone who is..erm.. lacking something in the intelligence department, but it only shows how lazy people get (teens especially) when we don't think that we need to try. If school is the only place that we feel the need to seem intelligent, we do indeed have a very dark future waiting for us.
Technology is indeed one of the main reasons that children/teens/people in general have become lazy and make fewer efforts to develop some form of intelligence. Read? Why do that when I can watch the whole season of Family Guy on my laptop, or go "pwn sum n00bz" on the gaming console of my choice? Why study for a test when I can just look up key things that might show up on said test, then proceed to get an average grade?
I can not say that I am happy about it, but it will continue this way, probably getting worse as time goes. I do not want to say that technology should be removed to alleviate this problem, but that seems, to me, to be the best option, and even that is just terrible. I don't know.
Legacy
WW Death and Taxes WW
Modern
WBMartyr-Proc BW
I don't know if this has anything to do with why Johnny can't spell or won't read, but it certainly seems to explain why Johnny can't balance a checkbook or live within a budget.
Blaming technology isn't productive. Before there was technology in the classroom, there were students who didn't care, didn't think ahead, had no social skills, etc. So why didn't we notice them before? They didn't stay in school.
Just judging by college admissions, getting into college has gotten much harder even though more kids are going. The top schools have gotten extremely exclusive, and schools that once never had a reputation for selectivity are turning away qualified applicants. And its all because kids are smarter than they used to be so schools have to raise their admission standards accordingly.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
Wow, you just described my entire life.
Honestly, every English teacher I've ever had, high school or college, has been a giant douche. They all think they're better than everyone else because they took the time to read books no one cares about.
Don't get me wrong, I've read some of classics, the ones that actually interested me, but honestly most of the old 'classics' suck. Old Man and the Sea? A guy fishes for like three months. Sweet book. Moby Dick was like 1000 pages about the hunt for a whale. Perhaps the reason people are reading newer books is because they're better?
I only read the first couple pages of posts so this may or may not have already been answered, but a quick google search for something other than anecdotal evidence found this page: http://news.cnet.com/Are-we-getting-smarter-or-dumber/2008-1008_3-5875404.html
Apparently, it's a well documented fact that intelligence has in fact risen over the last 20 years.
This is the majority of the internet, lmao.
▲
▲ ▲
English teachers, I'll have to agree that the majority I have found to have some level of hubris about their subject. The same is with mathematics teachers.
However, to completely disregard certain books is equally hubris. The mechanic to borrow ideas and alter them to create new content is quite necessary to build new material from. That is quite simply a utilitarian argument sure, but it is true.
Easter eggs in video games come from having a wide breadth of cultural knowledge. Ranging from the lich Goethe in Baulder's Gate 2 to more modern taunts in Starcraft 2 from popular culture. Weaving together a story is about taking the best bits of previous lore and tying them together to create a wider tapestry than without. This is essentially what the goal of synthesis is about. To create something new on another level than what previous material was out of.
The real question again is one to scale, I'd never suggest Montisquieu to an enterprising IT tech in common conversation, however to a lawyer I would and have.
As for your anecdotal evidence, I'll raise you a theory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.