Real Education by Charles Murray

[Janice in NJ]

Real Education by Charles Murray

 

Has anyone read this? My library just received a copy. I picked it up today. I'm about 1/2 way through it and will probably finish it before I nod off tonight.

 

If you happen to see it at your library, I would love to chat about his propositions as put forward in the text:

 

1. Ability varies

2. Half of the children are below average

3. Too many people are going to college

4. America's future depends on how we educate the academically gifted.

 

Peace,

Janice

 

Enjoy your little people

Enjoy your journey

[Janice in NJ]

He says, When reading an argument in favor of special attention for the academically gifted, wariness is appropriate. The gifted disproportionately come from homes in which they already have everything going for them - loving parents, a big house in a peaceful neighborhood, good schools, money for college. I hope it is clear that this argument for special treatment of the gifted has nothing to do with providing yet more advantages for the little darlings. Since they include the people who will end up running the country, it is time for the educational system to start holding their feet to the fire.

[Nan in Mass]

What does he mean by "holding their feet to the fire"? What happens if they don't perform? And what about the difference between accellerated and gifted? And what about the fact that the gifted are often not uniformly gifted in all areas? Or just plain don't learn well in a school setting? I guess "fire" sounds rather ominous to me.

[Carol in Cal.]

[i1. Ability varies

2. Half of the children are below average

3. Too many people are going to college

4. America's future depends on how we educate the academically gifted.

 

 

 

1. Yes, ability varies. What does he think we should do about it? The multiple intelligences argument comes into play here, I think. If someone has great hands on ability, to what extent do you focus on that, and to what extent do you insist on a general education? To me, the biggest pitfall to focussing on variations in ability is the way that that has been used in the past as a code for focussing on variations in race, gender, class, ethnicity. I grew up on stories of girls being discouraged from taking advanced math. I distinctly remember muttering answers in high school, only being too shy to shout them out, and having guys next to me yell them out for extra credit. I had friends in college who were black who were discouraged from taking physics because the professor thought that they were not smart enough. I know blue collar white men who were focussed into vocational education tracks because they were assumed to be unable to learn to write well--one of whom later got a teaching credential from a university with a 4.0 average. Nothing wrong with vocational ed, but tracking does have a bad history.

 

2. Yes, half of children are below average. So what? What is a required minimum education for ALL children?

 

3. Too many people are going to college--nope. It's not that. It's that too may of the wrong people are going to college, and that there is not very much perceived dignity or get up and go in a non-college-educated life. And too many dillettants (sp) that don't deserve spots are going to legacy schools because of family connections--our current president comes to mind. And prestigious educations cost too much. And vocational education has fallen by the wayside without an obvious substitute.

 

4. Academically gifted--not sure, have to think about that one.

 

I would think that reading a book like this side by side with the latest edition of "The World is Flat" for career guidance would be a great choice. I also think that having more of an economic and social safety net would go a long way toward moving the focus of college from career training to education, and that to a large extent that would be a great thing.

[PamJH]

I read quite a bit during different visits to Barnes & Noble. I think the author makes some valid points.

 

Not everyone is cut out for college or even wants to go. I don't see why a gifted mechanic who is just itching to open a garage should bother. She could obviously make a very good living doing what she loves without college.

 

Yes, not everyone is gifted, though perhaps we'd all like to be. My kids aren't going to Harvard, Yale, Princeton or U-M. We're shooting for colleges that have at least a 75% acceptance rate, because that's where my kids could go. Yet, I meet people all the time who have kids who aren't any brighter than mine telling me their kids are applying to the Ivies and other hard-to-get-into places. Why? It's a waste of money and emotion.

 

I liked the book and think the author told some hard-to-tell truths. The trouble is, very few people are brave enough to listen. I'm glad you're enjoying it.

Pam

[Colleen in NS]

Real Education by Charles Murray

 

Has anyone read this? My library just received a copy. I picked it up today. I'm about 1/2 way through it and will probably finish it before I nod off tonight.

 

If you happen to see it at your library, I would love to chat about his propositions as put forward in the text:

 

1. Ability varies

2. Half of the children are below average

3. Too many people are going to college

4. America's future depends on how we educate the academically gifted.

 

I'm pretty sure I did read this, only it was in article format on the internet - someone on the boards linked it a few years ago. I was fascinated by it and printed it out! It's in a notebook somewhere.

 

He says, ...Since they include the people who will end up running the country, it is time for the educational system to start holding their feet to the fire.

 

What I remember thinking about this is that he meant that gifted, advantaged, high IQ people have a heavier responsibility to society. So when they get educated at higher levels, it should be an education that promotes moral responsibility.

[Janice in NJ]

... so it's not really "fair" for me to clip it and throw it out there on its own.

 

But he spent the chapter talking about how we aren't really challenging our brightest kids - the top 10%. And he argues that these kids are going to grow up to run our companies, our media, and our government. He even talks about the difference between being good and being nice. And he laments that virtue has been essentially been removed from these leaders' education. Because they have not been introduced to the classics, they do not know about the body of knowledge that is available to them to explore the issues of the human condition. And he laments that even our brightest no longer have the reading skills, the attention span, or the desire to study these texts.

 

I really shouldn't summarize his thoughts too much... He has a lot to say.

I was hoping that some of you had read his book. ;)

 

If you see it at your library, give it a flip-through. It was a quick read for me. I'd be interested in your thoughts.

 

Peace,

Janice

[Janice in NJ]

Carol,

 

I think that you would really enjoy this book. It is obvious to me that you have thought a lot about these issues. I hesitate to answer your questions - see if your library has the book. I think that it would be fun for you to argue and agree with the author. 'Cause it sounds like the two of you would have a TON to talk about. :001_smile:

 

It's an easy read. He addresses most of your questions. And I would hate to misrepresent him by attempting to summarize his answers. As I said, an easy read - I buzzed through it before and after dinner last night.

 

Peace,

Janice

[Janice in NJ]

Pam,

 

Brave enough to listen. I think that's what I did 10 years ago when I started this home-ed project. I guess it's just weird for me to be living a life where these issues have driven (and continue to drive) my choices. I've lived with an awareness of so many of these issues for so long that it's odd to think that others have not.

 

You said, "a waste of emotion" - that really struck me. Yes, I need to mature into a place where my emotions are not up for grabs any more. My kids are old enough that my emotions are the wild card here. THEY KNOW how I feel when things don't go "right." And my emotions are NOT important when it comes to their education.

 

Thanks for throwing that out there, Pam. Great food for thought on this quiet Saturday morning.

 

Peace,

Janice

[Janice in NJ]

Hmmm.... sounds like the same notions, Colleen. But the book was published in August. Maybe he's been trumpeting this stuff for a while.

 

Peace,

Janice

[Myrtle]

Real Education by Charles Murray

 

Has anyone read this? My library just received a copy. I picked it up today. I'm about 1/2 way through it and will probably finish it before I nod off tonight.

 

If you happen to see it at your library, I would love to chat about his propositions as put forward in the text:

 

1. Ability varies

2. Half of the children are below average

3. Too many people are going to college

4. America's future depends on how we educate the academically gifted.

 

Peace,

Janice

 

Enjoy your little people

Enjoy your journey

 

Is this the same Charles Murray that cowrote Bell Curve?

[Nan in Mass]

so that it will be still going when I come back from an early Thanksgiving GRIN. In my personal exerience? Our ps high school is educating the top 10% and abandonning the rest. Which I think is a shame. And a does a diservice to the next top 10%, which is where my oldest landed. Sigh.

[at the beach]

... so it's not really "fair" for me to clip it and throw it out there on its own.

 

But he spent the chapter talking about how we aren't really challenging our brightest kids - the top 10%. And he argues that these kids are going to grow up to run our companies, our media, and our government. He even talks about the difference between being good and being nice. And he laments that virtue has been essentially been removed from these leaders' education. Because they have not been introduced to the classics, they do not know about the body of knowledge that is available to them to explore the issues of the human condition. And he laments that even our brightest no longer have the reading skills, the attention span, or the desire to study these texts.

 

I really shouldn't summarize his thoughts too much... He has a lot to say.

I was hoping that some of you had read his book. ;)

 

If you see it at your library, give it a flip-through. It was a quick read for me. I'd be interested in your thoughts.

 

Peace,

Janice

 

Hmm, I find this really interesting. I think some kids who appear to be in the bottom 10 percent can sometimes end up soaring in the "real world" and be in the top 1 percent. Many, many people who have amassed fortunes and been leaders weren't viewed as being in the top ten percent or anywhere near that level.

 

I would like to ask John Taylor Gatto what he thinks of this man's book. Or how about Marva Collins? What would Charlotte Mason say?

 

Why are *all* our children not being exposed to more great literature? Why aren't all our children reading Shakespeare and poetry, listening to classical music and appreciating art history? I think all kids can appreciate beauty. I have no qualms with kids who want to follow their passions whether that is fixing cars or woodworking or researching a cure for diabetes. But good golly, assuming that the top ten percent (whoever they are) are going to run the world because the rest of us aren't up there in ability, that reeks of elitism. I may be missing something here as I have not read this man's book, so forgive me if I am misinterpreting and flying off the handle prematurely.

 

Also, I want to know who decides who's going to be the leader, who decides who's in the cream of the crop? I hope it's not a standardized test or a school? Aren't leaders people who emerge on their own? Aren't leaders people who push themselves to learn and do and then draw other people to them?

 

I think I will have to get this book from interlibrary loan, so I will have a better understanding of what he says. I probably shouldn't be making comments without having read the book.

 

Anita

[Janice in NJ]

Yes. It looks like it.

I know NOTHING about this guy and NOTHING about his other book. :001_smile: I'm coming to all of this "green" as usual. So forgive me if this guy has a reputation of being an elitist or something. I didn't read about this guy. I just read his book with an open mind toward his ideas.

 

And I'm still not sure what I think.... that's why I was wondering what ya'll think about his propositions and his support for his arguments. Because they seem reasonable to me on a "global" level, but I'm not sure that I would have the guts to hold to them on a case-by-case level. Because I DO believe that each child can reach for more. I do believe in the power of opportunity.

 

But I do also suspect that he is right about a lot of things.

I did a quickie search. Here are a couple of his ideas in isolation - although they don't make as much sense without the complete argument that they book presents as a whole.

 

Peace,

Janice

 

http://www.american.com/archive/2008/september-october-magazine/are-too-many-people-going-to-college

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/magazine/21wwln-Q4-t.html

[Beth in SW WA]

Many, many people who have amassed fortunes and been leaders weren't viewed as being in the top ten percent or anywhere near that level.

 

 

 

My dh would fall in this category. He has amassed a small fortune through hard work and sacrifice. Ds is average intelligence -- but strong work ethic and drive to succeed. His parents provided a secure, nurturing environment where education was valued. They showed him, by example, what hard work and focus can potentially provide. Work trumps education.

 

Ds thought high school was a joke. College was OK, but not nearly stimulating enough. Real life experience (meeting payroll, 80 hour work weeks when wife home w/ sick babies, etc.) has been his best education. A degree in Business Management w/ a minor in Finance was a necessary "hoop" to jump through -- but not paramount, nor guarantee of success.

 

High IQ does NOT mean success in life, financially, emotionally or socially. The smartest people I know IRL have made the worst life choices and are not "succeeding," in terms of emotional prosperity.

 

Not all students should attend college. I think the govt. push for "every kid to have the opportunity to attend college w/ the help of public money" is a scandal.

 

I know I'm rambling this morning. I'm barely through my first cup a' joe.

 

Janice, I will check this book out. Sounds like a fascinating read. Thanks for sharing!! I love conversations like this.

[Colleen in NS]

Hmmm.... sounds like the same notions, Colleen. But the book was published in August. Maybe he's been trumpeting this stuff for a while.

 

Peace,

Janice

 

I just found the articles in my notebook - it is him, and it is the same ideas. It was a three part series and each is titled: Intelligence in the Classroom, What's Wrong with Vocational School (and from what I can tell, he thinks it's a great thing), and Aztecs vs. Greeks. I really enjoyed reading them because they are well thought out, but not so lofty in language that I had a hard time understanding his ideas. It sounds like, from what you wrote and from the links you posted, that his book must be an expansion of these articles.

 

I didn't have a college/university education and I didn't find his ideas to be elitist.

 

In one part of the Aztecs vs. Greeks article, he talks about how it's unfashionable to talk about special responsibilities of being gifted (intellectually, I think he means, with a high IQ), for fear of being elitist. And because of this silence, kids who do have more intellectual ability might think they are superior, if they are not told that their gifting is a gift that brings obligations to obtain wisdom, not just academic accomplishment. He goes on to talk about how to do this - my take is that it's basically a classical style education, with grammar, logic, thinking skills, etc. so they can learn from the past and go on to lead with good in mind in the future.

 

I think basically he is recognizing, as is talked about a lot here on the boards, that every person is different, and should be guided according to our strengths and weaknesses. If your kid isn't Harvard material, find another college that will be a better fit. If your kid isn't college/university material, find a vocation that will fit. None is better or worse and each person has his own unique set of talents and gifts no matter what the IQ. But for those with potential to go on to leadership positions, lets make sure we give them the thinking tools they'll need to lead wisely (although I think all of us can benefit from obtaining thinking tools and wisdom).

 

My family is waiting for me to get out the door now for the afternoon, and I don't think I can do these articles justice and my thoughts are scattering to the wind now - but little ole' non-degreed me thought the articles were great and now I want to go find that book, Janice, to see what more he adds to the articles I read! Thanks for the rec.

[Janice H]

Is this the same Charles Murray that cowrote Bell Curve?

Yes. I own the Bell Curve book if there's anything specific somebody would like me to look up.

 

Here's a link to a negative review of the new book, Real Education, from the Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121936528440062155.html

 

 

Here's a link to the Aztecs vs Greeks, part 3 of 3 articles http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116909586869079981.html (Please tell me if these do not work; I subscribe to the WSJ but a lot of stuff is accessible to everyone.)

 

I've seen that many people disagree with Murray's conclusions or what they think are the implications of his research. I would appreciate any links or resources wherein someone "takes on" Murray's number crunching, data collection, etc. in a reasoned manner.

[Janice in NJ]

Me 2. Would love to see a solid but contrary argument.

[Colleen in NS]

Here's a link to the Aztecs vs Greeks, part 3 of 3 articles http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116909586869079981.html

 

Halfway down are links to the other two articles I mentioned.