A dismal picture of adult literacy and numeracy in the UK

[johnny9fingers]

In the sixties, when we were prepared to spend our taxes on education, we had a literacy rate of over 99%

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jan/29/literacy-numeracy-skills

I quote from the article:

In 2001, the former Department for Education and Skills launched the Skills for Life strategy with the aim of helping 2.25 million adults by 2010. Two years later, it established by survey that 75% of the working-age adult population had numeracy skills below the level of a good pass at GCSE and 56% had similar literacy skills. At that time, the OECD ranked the UK 14th in international literacy and numeracy league tables.
In 2007, the government set a new target, to help 95% of the adult population achieve enough literacy and numeracy to get by in life by 2020.

Now according to United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Index released in 2008 the UK has a 99% literacy rate and is equal 20th in the table with some thirty other countries.

Obviously there is some discrepancy between the two figures. If GCSE English and Maths are the minimum standards 'to get by in life by 2020' were not going to be able to have a third-world-comparative education system. If the comparisons we make are with the developed world and the education systems therein we're a trifle lacking, I fear. 'Twas always thus. We can't educate the plebeians, else who would sweep the streets? Actually in the UK that question is normally answered by the influx of refugee engineers and academics from various places-of-unrest about the globe.

It is actually possible to beat education into children. It may not be moral, but it is possible. What may be impossible is for someone unlettered and unnumbered to exist properly in our complex society.
Strewth, who'd care to be unlettered? By the time they are thirty, anyway?

Comments

[tripinthehead33.livejournal.com]

It is a failure here as well. The fact that people with college degrees are seen as worthless in the eyes of companies who would prefer to have someone older with actual experience again is speaking volumes about this country. The days when these more experienced folks were being let go, and the companies were bringing in younger folks with their masters degrees is waning.

I believe, to be honest, it's partly, and there are many other reasons, but partly due to the fact these schools try to cram so much shit into 12 years of learning. So much shit that most people will never need to know in their lives. 7th and 8th grade science for me was roughly all I really needed to learn for the life I live. Basic Biology after that helps, but the average person doesn't need chemistry or physics beyond some basic concepts which can be taught for both in a matter of months. Who needs to use Calculus or Trigonometry aside from very narrow career paths? Your average cook, or retail worker or construction worker doesn't need to know these things. They aren't being taught what they need to know in order to do what they do in life.

Schools should focus more on things like really making sure people do understand to read and even basic life skills. Communication, and basic, daily economic related things like proper investment and financial things. Why go into world economics if those basic things such as personal finance aren't covered? Why teach someone how to square root 1,297 if they don't teach someone how to properly communicate their problems with others under stress?

[tripinthehead33.livejournal.com]

Part of the public school experience is simply socialization and learning how to learn when confronted with new information. That's a given, and frankly, the school systems do not support anyone outside of the mainstream for intelligence level. Nor does it support those who happen to view the world in a different way, or think in different ways than the average human being. Whether it be slower, faster, better, or worse, the systems screws the majority of these people.

Anyhow, it's not even just the "underlings" I am talking about. Unless you intend on becoming a historian, scientist, mathematician, or teacher, the school system is not designed to assist you in your chosen profession. 200 years ago, people were needed to take time off during the summer to tear through fields and help with the crops across the US. Some places it's still done in the country, but we have those things people call machines which help now. So, why is it that people are trained for the first portion of their life to expect that for 1/4 of the year, you don't have to work for anything if you don't want to? When you end up forced to work all year after getting out of school, you are then forced to adapt to not having that break from reality. That's ludicrous to put everyone through, generation after generation.

Not only that, but what good does it really do to insist on children learning some of the things they do, really? A lot of high school kids choose things which they think will just be easy, and while that's all well and good that doesn't help them in the future. A lot of others, the intelligent and ambitious ones choose the really advanced classes. In which case, neither help them out in life after they get their diploma.

Realistically speaking, the average, intelligent person in the US could get by on many jobs dealing with a 9th grade education if you truly paid attention and retained what you learned in school. Then stepped onto any number of jobs, was trained to do that job, and moved forward. The rest of the education for the next 3 years is simply preparation for college level courses. YET, you can't get jobs with just a 9th grade degree, can you? No. Why is that? Does that really make sense?

For those who sit in a cubicle, or office, doing data-entry, working at call centers, finance, etc, they could do the majority of the learning they would need for that job, right in those 27 months of education those last 3 years of high school represent. The could learn to work a computer, deal with specific programs, learn basic through advanced accounting, and take public speaking courses. Then they could be trained, directly in high school to step into those careers/jobs right away. In fact, you could fit all three into those 27 months and they now have a multi-career training program. You could still fit your standard English and History lessons in there too, that leaves you with 5 slots to fill beyond Lunch and Gym class.

There was once a time when only the rich and powerful could go to a higher learning university or academy. Now, it is that everyone is expected to, or they are a dolt. Now, you have to put yourself into debt for 15 years, or be rich enough to pay for it outright in order to get a "good education". It is counterproductive, to force the populace into debt in order to not be idiots. It is a system which is highly flawed on an economic basis as well as the educational basis. In an information age when the average person needs a multitude of various tools which were not needed 50, or 100, or 200 years ago, when the system was put into effect that spells doom for the next generation. Leading to generation after generation of people who are more and more inept at dealing with the reality of the world outside of their schools.