Tuesday, July 08, 2003

Reading - Looking under the lamp for the lost keys - Time to look in the early years All our research tells us that the reading battle is won or lost in the first 6 years of life - mainly in the first 3 years. This compelling graph that shows the complete lack of progress in the US in spite of massive investments in the formal school system have not moved the bar at all. Follow the link for the results in the Early Years We're From The Government. We're Here To Help.. Over the weekend I watched a little bit of a CSPAN program that had Bill O'Reilly, Molly Ivins, and Al Franken on a panel. It was a rerun of some political meeting. I don't remember what. At one point O'Reilly and Ivins were arguing about taxes, government programs, etc. Franken, that font of economic knowledge and all-around supporter of spending other people's money, made the statement, "The idea that government programs don't help anybody is just BS!" Of course, it's true. Government programs generally DO help someone, just usually not who they were designed to help, and not in the way they were supposed to help them. Here's a little graphic from the US Department of Education introduction to the "No Child Left Behind" program. Here's the roll-over text for the graphic: "Chart shows that since 1965, when Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), through 2003, the federal government has spent more than $242 billion to help educate disadvantaged children. Yet, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the average reading score for 9-year-olds across the nation in 1975 is not significantly different from the 1999 score. During those years, the annual appropriation for ESEA increased six-fold -- from $2.3 billion in 1975 to $13.8 billion in 1999 -- while the average reading score for 9-year-olds was 210 in 1975 and 212 in 1999. ESEA appropriations for 1966-1974 and for 2000-03 are provided in the chart, but average reading scores for 9-year-olds are not shown because they are not available for all of those years. The president's 2004 budget request of $22.5 billion for ESEA is shown." "No Child Left Behind" may be a terrible program. Testing students to see if they can actually *do* anything at certain points in school may be a terrible idea. But it's also pretty clear that pouring billions into federal education programs is about as helpful as tits on a bull. If I were the Dept. of Education this is not a graphic I would display proudly. It is an indictment of every tax dollar spent on federal education mandates since 1965. [b.cognosco] 2:37:37 PM    comment []

The meta-message: Information sucks. Matt Richtel in the NY Times: The Lure of Data: Is It Addictive? Several people wrote pointing me to this piece. A sample: The ubiquity of technology in the lives of executives, other businesspeople and consumers has created a subculture of the Always On — and a brewing tension between productivity and freneticism. For all the efficiency gains that it seemingly provides, the constant stream of data can interrupt not just dinner and family time, but also meetings and creative time, and it can prove very tough to turn off. This is high-priced Orlowski stuff, lathering about yet another red herring issue, all but calling for a detox center for the overwired. BUT he said technology dependence could have its down side, Richtel snarks. Here's what's on TV right now: Nothing. Trust me. You can store it for later suckage off your TiVo, but it'll still be Nothing. Here's what's in your magazines right now: Lots of Something you're not interested in. Same with your newspapers. As for radio: Forget it, unless you're an amen-corner conservative, a sports junkie, an NPR addict, or in need of a traffic report in the next fifteen minutes. Yes, there's lots of stuff in all those media you might like or use. But you have to wait for it if it's on a broadcast outlet or root for it in a publication. And you're not in charge. They are. And to Them, you're still just a consumer. A gullet for gobbling "content" and crapping cash. (Thank you for that perfect metaphor, Jerry Michalski.) Even if They are NPR and the New York Times. On the Web, most of what you want, including informative friends and cyberneighbors, are right here, providing stuff you can learn in a time frame as close to Now as you're gonna get. Here on the Net, we get to inform ourselves, and each other. No, not all information is here. Is it a perfect system? Far from it. But it's a human one. And human beings are learning creatures, after all, even if they do like to watch television. Of course there will always be a need for libraries and conventional media of all kinds. Again, AND logic applies. But there's no substitute for learning stuff. Call it an addiction if you like, but consider the alternatives. [The Doc Searls Weblog] Doc is right - it is a year now since I have been blogging. I have almost stopped watching TV. I have stopped listening to the radio and hardly read the paper. I do spend a lot more time using my news aggregator but mainly to follow my new friends and less to pick up on News in the classic sense. I am becoming very fond of my little group of blogging friends and I wonder what our relationhsip wil be like in 10 years. Some of us will no doubt drift away but I am certain that some of us will become very close indeed. Real versus fake relationships - friendships aimed at mutual growth and learning! 2:17:43 PM    comment []