Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kattracks
Really, those must have been some talented High School Students in the 50's. How were their computer and bio-tech skills?

By picking the right metrics I can make todays college grads look dumber that 1900's seventh graders. So just how many ounces should one feed his plow horse?

2 posted on 12/19/2002 3:14:17 AM PST by MrNeutron1962
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MrNeutron1962
Really, those must have been some talented High School Students in the 50's. How were their computer and bio-tech skills?

----------------------

Mine were rather good.

4 posted on 12/19/2002 3:27:34 AM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
So just how many ounces should one feed his plow horse?

Yeah, but can a 1950s high school grad create an Excel spreadsheet to show population trends in Asia or determine how much additional RAM is required in a given computer to run Windows XP?

Comparing education now to the 1950s is meaningless. There were far fewer distractions for a student in the 1950s so it should come as no surprise that a student from that era has more "book knowledge." On the other hand, students of today tend to be more worldly. My sons regularly communicate with kids from around the world on computer and when they are doing homework, they literally have the world at their fingertips (via the Internet). A Google search will turn up far more information on an obscure subject than a textbook of the 1950s.

And what did the students of the 1950s end up doing with their lives? Smoking dope, protesting the war and listening to acid rock. Well, many of them did, anyway.

5 posted on 12/19/2002 3:30:13 AM PST by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
Really, those must have been some talented High School Students in the 50's. How were their computer and bio-tech skills?
By picking the right metrics I can make todays college grads look dumber that 1900's seventh graders. So just how many ounces should one feed his plow horse?

Are you a recent college graduate? Did you read the questions? Good grief, anyone who cannot answer all these questions is an ignoramous. When I tell people the main problem with this country is that most people stupid, they do no believe me. It is apparently worse than I thought.

1-Which is the largest lake in North America?
2-What is the national language of Brazil?
3-In what country was the Battle of Waterloo fought?
4-Who made the first non-stop transatlantic solo flight?
5-What professions do you associate with Florence Nightingale?
6-What is the capital city of Spain?
7-What composer wrote The Messiah?
8-Who wrote a play entitled. A Midsummer Night's Dream?
9-Which planet is nearest the sun?
10-What is the name of the decoration given to those in the armed forces who are wounded in action against an enemy?
11-What great scientist do you associate with the Theory of Relativity?
12-Which of the following states border on Canada?
Montana
Michigan
Minnesota
Maine
All
Not sure

Hank

9 posted on 12/19/2002 3:39:48 AM PST by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
By picking the right metrics I can make todays college grads look dumber that 1900's seventh graders.

Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary?

40 posted on 12/19/2002 4:57:45 AM PST by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
1962...

I dare say you did not read the story. In 1950, there were no computers. I think your statement reflects the Zogby poll.

45 posted on 12/19/2002 5:09:51 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
If you don't know what to feed a horse, you should not get an advanced degree in anything. You may be aware that thesis defenses were much more challenging, adversarial, and open-ended than they are now (I'd love to have been on Chief Moose's panel - did he even have to give a verbal defense?).

High school principals and police chiefs don't need advanced degrees. Cops shouldn't need college degrees at all. We are graduating fleets of dumbasses: They can make a spreadsheet do addition for them, but have no clue whether the curve-fitting a spreadsheet does is valid for their application or even to ask that question. That's lame.

70 posted on 12/19/2002 5:53:08 AM PST by eno_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
Re your # 2...

The achievements of today's college under graduates, in the hard sciences such as math, physics, and chemistry, is not worse or better than it was in 1950....true. We are talking here about the unchangeable basics of science that cannot be "dumbed down".....and the computer studies you infer are all based away from this fundamental and unchangeable scientific foundation.

Nonetheless, such things as English literature and the various social scineces, for example, are mere shadows of what was once required curriculum. Now we have the wonders of such things as Edridge Cleaver displacing Shakespeare and graduates in many fields nearly put out into the world nearly illiterate. As a result, many Universities have found it necessary to teach renmedial high school work to enable young people to "master" the most elemental of these non-science courses.

Sad

82 posted on 12/19/2002 6:09:20 AM PST by rmvh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
Really, those must have been some talented High School Students in the 50's. How were their computer and bio-tech skills?

I have a friend who graduated from Central High, Little Rock, in 1958 with the National Guard camped on the football field and patrolling the halls.

As a junior he hooked up his mother's stove so that a phone call home turned the oven on.

After college he was a jet pilot in the navy; landed jets on a moving ship.

After Viet Nam and 5 years in the navy his degree (EE)was obsolete (computers had become big) so he went to Georgia Tech for a Master's.

He retired last year (VP) from a major computer corp; has 7 patents used in computers.

His best friend in high school went on to a Ph D in bio-physics and retired from Brown University.

83 posted on 12/19/2002 6:09:22 AM PST by lonestar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
One thing about 1950's versus now: bad students were not encouraged to stick around in school, and so did not hold back the good students who were interested in learning. If you didn't have an aptitude for academics, you generally went from 8th grade to trade school (even in the 70's, in my old 8th grade class in NYC, a bunch of my classmates went to places like "Aviation High" to study to be mechanics).

The attitude then was "this is what you're expected to learn -- those who cannot keep up can drop out". The attitude now is "no child left behind -- we will dumb down the curriculum until ANYBODY can pass it, no matter how dumb"

87 posted on 12/19/2002 6:18:00 AM PST by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
LOL.
You must be a recent grad.
Thou protesteth too loudly.
96 posted on 12/19/2002 6:29:35 AM PST by Publius6961
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
MrNeutron,

While I agree you can manipulate results, there is little doubt in my mind that when it comes to civics and history, todays students knowledge pails compared to the pre cultural revolution. Because it was during that time that the schools started to become filled with counter counturalist teachers, or at least those sympathtic to the cause, and the "america is bad" philosophy entered the school systems.

General knowledge of american history, geopolitical impact, and social greatness let alone the unparalleled opportunities the sum of these things has offered us all, is abysmal at best by the products of government schools today.
110 posted on 12/19/2002 6:53:57 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
Me thinks your over-hyped, knowledge-deficient college degreed ego has been bruised by the truth, eh?
119 posted on 12/19/2002 7:11:36 AM PST by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
Part of the flaw in testing kids now as opposed to then, is differing values on what is important to learn. I know people who make a ton of money, who wouldn't be able to answer these questions, but have very good degrees in math, sciences, computer science.

You were expected to have a broader education back then, but for now, it can be a hinderance. If you are taking electives in humanities, while your potential competitor is loading up on the hard science classes, you may be more rounded, but they may have better real world tools to compete with you for a job.

Sure, your personality might suffer, but that is what the Liberal Arts grads in the Human Resources are there for to smooth out ;)

Btw, I knew all 15 answers, and yes, I was a liberal arts major.

138 posted on 12/19/2002 7:39:16 AM PST by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
On the other hand - todays grads are ignoramus'es when it comes to history and science and math - like the article says. Take a look at High school tests from that time - and you will see the college grads today are idiots. The real unfortunate part is that is the knowledge of history and the logic of math and the methods of science that are needed in the minds of a free people. When the citizens of a country are educated in emotional arts only - the republic has a real problem - its citizens can be controlled with emotional ploys.
157 posted on 12/19/2002 8:32:57 AM PST by artios
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
It is actually not surprising at all, and I doubt very much it is an artifact. First, because college is so non-selective these days, the natural abilities of a 50s high school graduate and that of a present college senior are probably quite similar. They are both equally "select" groups in the respective time periods. Second, because everyone knows our present public schools at the primary and secondary level are awful. So it should be no surprise it takes four years longer, and attendence at some other institution not run by the public teachers unions, to learn the same stuff.

In 1780, the entrance requirements for college, what was expected from a talented high school graduate, included - translate several Odes of Horace from Latin into English -verse-, translate a book of the New Testament from Greek into -Latin-, show expertise in mathematics, and have a blameless moral character. That is what was expected from someone coming out of high school. But only a few percent of the population was expected to go to college.

Lowering of standards has gone hand in hand with extending educational opportunities to more and more people over our whole history. And the big increase in access to higher education takes place between the 50s and today. These days, it is graduate or professional levels of education that correspond in selectivity to college degrees back then, and college degrees now are almost as common as high school diplomas were back then (when plenty of people dropped out after 8th grade to start work in a trade).

201 posted on 12/19/2002 12:15:05 PM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
This is just my thought. How many HS grads in the 50's new how to access FR? ;)
247 posted on 12/19/2002 5:52:09 PM PST by TankerKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
Really, those must have been some talented High School Students[sic] in the 50's. How were their computer and bio-tech skills?

Ha ha ha. Come on, bio-tech skills. Give us a break. I'm at one of the top universities in the world and I see the bio-tech skills of the cream of the crop coming here as undergraduates. A well-read student who does nothing on a computer is still the intellectual superior of someone who just spends all his time writing code (or surfing the web, the major portion of the time spent by those you would describe as having "computer skills"). Oh, those 1950's graduates also knew when and when not to capitalize.
264 posted on 12/19/2002 7:13:46 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
I beg your pardon! I had the dubious pleasure of working for the past two summers as a field botanist for the Forest Service with a couple of those college grads.

Personally I did graduate in the 50s and am acknowledged to be perhaps the second-best field botanist in this half of the State of Michigan. And, might I add, SELF taught.

One of these college grads could correctly adentify maybe 15% of the flora we encountered.

The other wonder boy only correctly identified ONE plant all summer!

Not only wasn't he able to identify plants, which is what he supposedly was getting paid for... He couldn't spell beyond the second-grade level.

For example, pretty was rendered pity and grass as gras.

When asked to write up a detailed description of a site, he comes up with "this is a very PITY place. Nuff said? I guess that nowadays you just pays your money and they hand you a diploma. Oh yeah, they were both fairly proficient with computers, especially the chat rooms.

266 posted on 12/19/2002 7:26:21 PM PST by MIgramma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MrNeutron1962
"By picking the right metrics I can make todays college grads look dumber that 1900's seventh graders.

At the rate the NEA has dumbed down it's students these days, make that 1900's fifth graders.

269 posted on 12/19/2002 8:12:47 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson