For Whom the Bell Curves
My good friend and occasional political counterpart Thomas Cook is opining about some recent recommended reading by Governor Mitch Daniels. At the last meeting of the Education Roundtable, Daniels handed out a copy of “Real Education” by Charles Murray.
According to a review at Amazon.com, the book stresses four major themes…
- Children have different abilities.
- Half of all children are below average.
- Too many children go to college.
- America’s future depends on the gifted.
Murray also states, according to Amazon,
“…there are only a limited number of academically gifted people and these are America’s future leaders, that only this elite can enjoy college productively and that the non-gifted shouldn’t be channeled by their high school counselors into training for that college chimera, which wouldn’t make them happy anyway”
My good friends on the left say this smacks of educational elitism. I say it’s just telling the honest truth. Let’s be frank, not everyone was made for a four year degree, but everyone needs post-secondary education. I have taught too long and seen too many students that a traditional four-year education was not in the cards and they would better served going another route.
And another unpleasant truth is that some people (kids included) really are just plain stupid and nothing is going to change that so give them a broom and point them in the direction they need to go. Now before the lot of you get your Calvin Klein boxer briefs in a bunch, really think about this.
The world has always been structured so that a handful of people really run the show. Think about any organization you belong to or have been a member of in the past. How many people really did all the work and how many people just showed up for fun?
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but not everyone was put on this Earth to achieve, they were just put here. And the scary part is in your heart, you know I’m right.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
“The world needs ditch diggers, too, Danny.” — Judge Smails, Caddy Shack.
The problem, I think, is the notion that somehow the lack of ability is inherent in the child. This will lead (or at least it has in the past) to excuses for not expending resources on low-income kids. If we conclude that it's nature and not nurture that makes these kids dumb, we can throw up our hands and say “why bother.” Fortuitously, this also leads to the wealthy being able to keep more of their stuff, pretending that they and their progeny are Superior Beings.
October 12th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
I do not know that you are right. In fact, I am quite sure you are wrong. And even if it was, what would you propose to do about it? Give kids IQ tests at a young age and kick the stupid ones out of school so that we wouldn't have to spend money on them? This book, and this way of thinking, is very dangerous.
October 12th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
The kooks are going to beat you silly on this one Abdul.
October 12th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
There is too much truth in what you've written, but there are other details which demand attention:
If more children need to be directed away form 4-year degreed programs, where DO we direct them?
President Bush proposed, and our stupid Congress agreed, to cut vocational education seven straight years. If we're not sending kids to college, we need to prepare them to do something. Vocational ed screams for attention and funding, and they hardly ever get enough.
In terms of “bang fo rthe buck,” voc ed is a home run.
Every single CNA, dental assistant and auto body repair person at my local voc school gets employed almost right after they graduate. They make decent salaries, and often seek additional training to improve themselves.
Our younger generation “gets” that learning is a life-long process. They just don't all need to be learning in the ivy halls. Nothing elite about that. I had my car worked on last week and paid a small independent mechanic almost $1,000 to do it. He had eight other cars there, a wait list of two or more weeks, and two younger helpers.
The skilled trades do a decent job of recruiting, when there are jobs.
And if you're right, colleges had better get used to the howl when they reject applicants. For public schools, legislatures have, rightly or wrongly, reduced funding, so additional students are neded to pay for the costs of higher ed.
As with most education arguments, there is truth in all camps. The rela trick is to get the parties to speak with one another intelligently and without undue emotion.
Good luck with that.
October 12th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
In education– of whatever type and at whatever level– the goal is progressing beyond what one brings to the table. A far larger point is the inefficiency and inequity of our current K-12 education system– largely, a set of government-run entities with somewhere between significant and complete monopoly power. Not good…
October 12th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
More often, the kids and parents who enjoy a free education react to it by throwing up their hands and saying “why bother”.
This shouldn't be construed as anybody's superiority trip, just opportunity lost.
October 12th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Reality material but some think every thing is supposed to be PC. A problem is that too many will not accept reality and this does nothing to help anyone. And TA is right about the government emphasis and unfortunately there are signs of the same points rapidily developing within the DOE of Indiana. Some very good “vocational” activities are not receiving the support (financial and otherwise) they need to enable them to serve in a changing work environment.
October 12th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Abdul, you may be correct on one level. Today, we have more unemployed English Literature graduates than unemployed plumbers or auto mechanics. But, if we were to adopt your world, who decides who gets to go to college? Is a liberal arts education as important as science or engineering? Should society pay equally for both? Given current testing, how do you explain achievement differences between racial groups? What impact would this have on our country?
October 12th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Abdul,
I’m gonna have to disagree with on this one buddy.
Education for the sake of education alone is reason enough for everyone to keep trying and striving for continuous improvement. If I understand you correctly, you’re saying, “Why try – cause some of you aren’t gonna make it anyway.” This reminds me of when Charles Barkley and other athletes said, “I’m no one’s role model and I didn’t ask for the job (I'm not a role model… Just because I dunk a basketball doesn't mean I should raise your kids Charles Barkley).
Well, yeah you did! Whether they wanted the job or not – they are someone’s hero and they have an obligation to try to live up to that standard regardless. When the Governor or any elected official chooses to cop-out on the advancement of education, they are saying my agenda is more important than making sure that students are educated appropriately given the precious few resources we have available. The Governor cannot take that approach. He is the leader of State Government. He does not get it on “this” issue and sadly neither do “you.”
Be mindful that many of the displaced workers involved in service sector layoffs and downsizing today are being told to go back to school and get additional training and education. These are the folks who were redirected to low skilled jobs a decade or two ago. In other words, educators and society gave up on them and now they’re saying you need more than what we originally thought to be competitive.
Consider this – A Christian chooses to continuously try to exhibit Christ-like qualities. Now we know they will never reach Christ-like perfection, but while seeking this ideal state, they will certainly make improvements in their relationships with others, in their business dealings, and how they live their lives in general.
Using a book like this – from an author like that – is an affront to the socio-economically depressed under-educated across the State and the people who have elected to do their best to educate them.
October 12th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Good article. Then why bother with giving ISTEPS to poor kids? I guess we can't bash IPS teachers anymore for “Non-performing” schools when they were probably doing as well or maybe even better than they should have. IVY Tech would hate it if public schools started to give vocation training.
October 12th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Good point. Why give an ISTEP test to poor kids. I guess we can't bash IPS teachers anymore because they were doing as well as they could. No more “non-performing” schools. IVY Tech would hate it if public schools had vocational classes.
October 12th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
If this meritocracy…no, aristocracy was in place at the time of your matriculation, Abdul, what do you think your chances would have been for moving up and out. Not good, I'll wager.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:07 am
Actually very good; honors student all my life.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:37 am
Abdul likely attended government schools of a different breed. The service schools actually do a good job, in part, because their instructors are graded on instructional performance and there are consequences for being a poor instructor. Not so, in Indiana. Meanwhile, I long ago recommended Murray's book on this blog and judging by the replies to Abdul's precis no one has bothered to read it preferring, I suppose, to indulge in their prejudices concerning where 60% of Indiana expenditures go to be wasted. Talk about a diabetic government would be more warrented since the legislators have busted government schooling.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:44 am
Ivy Tech wouldn't “hate it” if public schools had more/better voc ed classes. What a ridiculous comment.
Voc Ed classes at the Indy-metro-area regional schools are full. Ivy Tech is experiencing a record enrollment growth. They're actually turning away students.
I'm hoping this is the beginning, of a shift to emphasis on voc ed. It will give many kids a realistic alternative. But we can't limit colleg enrollment, while we're failing to adequately fund voc ed at all levels.
Because the children who choose voc ed, in disproportionate numbers, are statistically less-affluent, and therefore less-able to afford any more schooling.
We need more barbers, CNAs, mechanics, plumbers, computer service techs, etc. This, like traditional education, does not come free.
October 13th, 2009 at 8:37 am
Actually I am a product of Chicago Public Schools. I went to college in Europe. My younger brothers did the DoDDS education and two of them finished up in Lawrence Township schools. We all turned out okay, but one of them had a few twists and turns along the way.
October 13th, 2009 at 8:52 am
Why can't we limit college enrollments? And, wouldn't it be better for commentators on the thread to have actually read Murray's book? It wouldn't hurt to go on and read The Bell Curve as well and Banfield's Unheavenly City-at least the chapter on education. If I understand him correctly, all Mitch is doing is giving a homework assignment suggesting to those folks that they do a little new thinking instead of turf defending. Mitch is usually right. Murray is nearly always right even if the sacred cows he wounds were already dead on their hooves.
October 13th, 2009 at 8:52 am
Probably only tangentially relevant, but education starts at home. You need to have parents who value education and have time to impart that value to their children. I don't know how you instill the former, but as to the latter, you need (I believe) to have a parent who can stay at home with the kids. This would, in turn, require a return to the days when one parent's income could reasonably support the family.
It would be interesting to compare whether there was a close relationship between the decline of educational performance and the decrease in stay at home parents.
October 13th, 2009 at 9:54 am
I think it would be extremely interesting. I would bet there's a strong correlation between the liberals' attempt to destroy the family unit and educational performance among our young.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Most of you who have read my posts already know that I'm a square peg in a world of round holes. :) I'll frame my comments on the book with a little bit of a personal bio. You'll understand why when you get to my comments.
Based on my own experiences in schools a couple of decades ago (full disclosure – most were private schools), I was the kid who teachers could never figure out. I would go to class and do nothing, do no homework, but do well on tests. My teachers would occasionally ask “what's wrong with you?” etc but I had no clue other than the fact that I was utterly bored in class but too polite to tell them. My parents were both very successful but neither could figure me out because they had always studied hard etc so they thought I was very smart, but lazy.
I had read an entire encyclopedia set before I was 13 so I already knew more than was included in most of my curriculums. Instead of spending time at school learning, I spent my time waiting for classes to end – and trying to read without getting caught.
At the beginning of 11th grade we had 3 days of national apptitude testing that was scored from “0″ to “99″. A score of “0″ meant you were ahead of 0% of the other students and a “99″ meant you were ahead of 99% of other students. I scored a 99 at all levels despite having barely passed 10th grade. Within a week of getting test results I found myself placed in all AP classes. For the first 2/3's of that year I aced all of my tests and I did great. The change was good for me, but it wasn't formed correctly. Looking back I can say that I aced everything only to prove that AP classes weren't a challenge either. I did so poorly in the last 3rd of the year that I only advanced to 12th grade because of my earlier performance.
That year I also scored 1470 on my PSAT. Mail started arriving and I was invited to attend pre-enrollment weekends at dozens of colleges including Princeton, Yale, Duke, Columbia, Georgetown, and other prestigious schools. I didn't visit any of them because I knew that my grades didn't complement the incomplete picture presented by my test scores. After a dissapointing end to my junior year I was placed back in regular classes. I graduated by the skin of my teeth, with most of my attention focused on the beach and partying.
Since leaving the education “box”, I've travelled the world representing global corporations, I've had the opportunity to be head of R&D for a multi-billion dollar global manufacturer, I've consulted to NASA on space suits, Pfizer on manufacturing processes, and Ralph Lauren on fabric structures. I'm currently building out an engineering firm and have developed a need for at least 20 new full time engineers in the next 10 weeks, and I'm looking forward to much more in the future. I might even pursue a degree when my kids are older and I have spare time.
With that in mind, here are my comments on the four major themes of the book:
“Children have different abilities.”
This is true. No arguments.
“Half of all children are below average.”
Average what? I spent most of my education at the bottom of the grading curve, but I knew more than most of the kids with the highest grades. How do you define average? To me, that statement is a box that prevents kids from understing how to use their wings. It's also an excuse that allows educators to apply a label to a struggling kid rather than trying to understand what the kid needs. In my case, for example, I probably would have excelled if I was simply given a series of difficult problems to solve (or things to build/create), where the solution (or phased set of solutions) required absorpbtion of required curriculum material. There is no such thing as average when it comes to kids – it's a false measurement.
“Too many children go to college.”
If this is true, then too many jobs require a college education.
“America’s future depends on the gifted.”
I agree. I also believe that we all have gifts to offer. Our future depends upon all of us.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Of course, in a dust cover reading world or where posters gain all of their knowledge from a book review on Amazon it is a good thing to make a specific recommendation. Mitch did that. If you have ever attended a round table meeting you won't be impressed with the level of knowledge, discourse, or dia logos. So, for the dust cover posters trapped in their own limited experiences we offer the last dust cover quote, “Know the truth and the truth shall make you free: said a well known educator……Tell the truth, and the truth shall make you free of foolish, druel, and counterproductive educational policies”. That would be P. J. O'Rourke who might have added that the policies were composed by fools, idiots, dolts, hangers on, and compromised people.
October 14th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Man, that's too cynical. We're all wired differently & ideas about “success” are unique to each person. Regardless of “intent,” all testing is inherently, developer biased.
For all the educational shingling of those we call elected “leaders,” the compulsion to pack pounds on a morbidly proportioned & now illegitimate bureaucracy, is at extreme odds with the pretense of their “pedigree.”
Education is a parental responsibility which becomes individual responsibility; the concern but not the responsibility of government. Government threatens the cellular importance of individuals & families in favor of a destructive “nanny state.”
1) “Children have different abilities.” Thank God & may they / we make the most of them.
2) “Half of all children are below average.” By what meaningful measure?
3) “Too many children go to college.” If so, what does that say about “education?”
4) “America’s future depends on the gifted.” Ordained by who? No! America's future depends on vigilance, and appreciation, for the gift of liberty.
October 15th, 2009 at 11:29 am
On the off chance that folks might want to climb out of their particular sand box, http://www.melaniephillips.com/articles-new/ is of interest because the same problems they have in England were exported here and we have them. For the same reasons. Try this lady's thinking out and see if there isn't a mirror there. Incidently, that the future depends on the gifted was orginally the observation of Al Shanker, Union leader of the AFT, I think. Geez, and that half of children or nearly anything is below average is a basic truism of math, uh, math itself would be the meaningful measure. It points to the reality that abilities differ and a policy to fit all isn't going to work. But, if you don't read the book you won't see some light for IPS
October 17th, 2009 at 10:12 am
In case folks have forgotton, Charles Murray produced a controversial book called “The Bell Curve”. The point of the book according to Murray connected IQ and race (blacks have a lower IQ than whites) which by the way has/have been proved WRONG by a number of academics and academic research and just plain common sense. I have not read Murrays latest book, but Murrays “Bell” book relied on gross (and dangerous) generalizations and reckless stastically methodology. I would be very relucatant to support Murrays work. And the governor should have as well. Oh and by the way, I hope my comments/opinions/facts will not be edited,deleted or censored by Abdul.
October 17th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
In case folks have forgotton, Charles Murray produced a controversial book called “The Bell Curve”. The point of the book according to Murray connected IQ and race (blacks have a lower IQ than whites) which by the way has/have been proved WRONG by a number of academics and academic research and just plain common sense. I have not read Murrays latest book, but Murrays “Bell” book relied on gross (and dangerous) generalizations and reckless stastically methodology. I would be very relucatant to support Murrays work. And the governor should have as well. Oh and by the way, I hope my comments/opinions/facts will not be edited,deleted or censored by Abdul.