Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 222 posts

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#211

Post by dang »

vmception wrote: post #196
dang wrote: post #164

This submission has an egregiously editorialized title, which is against the site guidelines for good reason: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " As a result, we got a tedious, dumbed-down, inflammatory and supercilious discussion. Just what we don't want here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

clickbait works, actual title doesn’t, solution?

One way is to find a better article on the topic. If it's an important topic, there is surely more than one gateway into it. Conversely, if there's literally only one article available on a topic, the odds that it's both on topic for HN and has a clickbait title are maybe relatively low.

Another approach is to post a first comment to the thread, explaining what you think is significant in the article. That can help.

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#212

Post by romwell »

lazyasciiart wrote: post #208
romwell wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why would that statistic be important? Also, imagine running 5K being a requirement for admission to college.

God knows, dude, it was your analogy. If you want to argue that 6th grade literacy is a bullshit stat that shouldn't be relevant to college admissions, knock yourself out.

Yes, I'd argue that "literacy" that doesn't allow one to use a spell-checker is a bullshit stat that should not be relevant to college admissions.

Because by that metric, the commenter I was responding to would be deemed "illiterate" and not worthy of being admitted to college (in spite of being able to express their thoughts more clearly than most).

Again, I have a PhD in mathematics, and have taught college-level math 2010-2017.

I have taught hundreds of students (if not thousands), and have seen many of them hindered by bullshit stats like that in mathematics.

Mathematics in particular is an incredibly diverse field; yet people with dyscalculia feel that they "can't do math" — even though so much math has nothing to do with numbers or calculation, and would be accessible to them (had we only been allowed to teach it).

As it stands, we are judging fish by their ability to climb trees.

Now, you are free to have your own opinion (knock yourself out), but please have some respect for my experience in the field, if nothing else. I'm speaking as an educator.

And the above is something that many, many educators are well aware of, but feel powerless to change.

If you have qualified objections (i.e. based on something more than you just thinking that way), I'm all ears.

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#213

Post by romwell »

xupybd wrote: post #178
avianlyric wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All a "learning disability" is is a requirement for a different approach from the instructor than the one-size-fits-all nonsense that we push down poor kids' throats as "education". Tell that to my Dyslexia, I had many mentors growing up, and was taught by many people using many different approaches. I still can’t spell for shit, and my phonic processing is still garbage. No about of different teaching methods is g…

I've had similar problems with spelling but have never been diagnosed with anything. Sometimes I've memorized a words spelling but when I write it down it looks wrong to me. So I look it up or use a spell checker. The biggest problem for me has been noticing spelling mistakes in variable names. I can't find the bug yet it's just two letters swapped. Oh and the frustration some people have when they spot an error.

Question: would always sticking to verbose variable names address the first problem?

As in, ditching names like loc/iloc and adopting getValueByKey/getValueByIndex (hello, Pandas API!).

The bugs of that sort bite even the most experienced programmers. And by using verbose names, the typo would be much more likely caught by the compiler. (And you can wrap ungodly APIs with less typo-friendly names too).

That's one of the reasons verbose names are a coding standard e.g. in Google.

The people who get frustrated by either verbose names or small spelling errors are welcome to go and frustrate themselves, preferably in solitude and far from either of us. I'm sorry that you run into them.

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#214

Post by ClumsyPilot »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #186
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"capable of making a decision between usually only two candidates" This short sighted attitude is the peoblem. Do you know your representative? Have you ever spoken to them? How do the two presidential candidates come about? Have you ever been in a political party? There is a lot more to democracy than choosing a front clown

Yes I've called my Representatives I get someone answering the phone that says they'll take my concern or suggestion and that is the end. If you want to have a meeting with them then you have to pay for it and you usually need to draft the changes to the bills in advance if you want them introduced which takes entire teams to do, but even individuals can see where things are clearly wrong. The only special people in…

"Yes I've called my Representatives I get someone answering the phone that says they'll take my concern or suggestion and that is the end. If you want to have a meeting with them then you have to pay for it"

I am sorry to hear that, a few of my friends met their MP's and discussed their concerns, for however little that counts. This was in UK.

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#215

Post by xupybd »

romwell wrote: post #213
xupybd wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had similar problems with spelling but have never been diagnosed with anything. Sometimes I've memorized a words spelling but when I write it down it looks wrong to me. So I look it up or use a spell checker. The biggest problem for me has been noticing spelling mistakes in variable names. I can't find the bug yet it's just two letters swapped. Oh and the frustration some people have when they spot an error.

Question: would always sticking to verbose variable names address the first problem? As in, ditching names like loc/iloc and adopting getValueByKey/getValueByIndex (hello, Pandas API!). The bugs of that sort bite even the most experienced programmers. And by using verbose names, the typo would be much more likely caught by the compiler. (And you can wrap ungodly APIs with less typo-friendly names too). That's one of…

Oh yeah verbose names help heaps. But on legacy code bases or when using a library often you have to deal with someone else's naming.

I was first introduced to verbose syntax when I first used objective c. I loved it.

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#216

Post by mistrial9 »

mistrial9 wrote: post #57
rahimnathwani wrote: post #35

In California, Many schools in Califonia use an unproven/inferior method/curriculum for teaching literacy, based on the work of F&P.[1] [0] https://caaspp-elpac.cde.ca.gov/caaspp/DashViewReport?ps=tru... [1] https://www.apmreports.org/story/2021/11/19/fountas-pinnell-...

many people here have not gone to public school with people who do not learn to read and write at basic levels. Please let me inform you, its not due to "unfair testing" -- lack of adult literacy is very real.

USA related information:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29734146

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#217

Post by lazyasciiart »

romwell wrote: post #212
lazyasciiart wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

God knows, dude, it was your analogy. If you want to argue that 6th grade literacy is a bullshit stat that shouldn't be relevant to college admissions, knock yourself out.

Yes, I'd argue that "literacy" that doesn't allow one to use a spell-checker is a bullshit stat that should not be relevant to college admissions. Because by that metric, the commenter I was responding to would be deemed "illiterate" and not worthy of being admitted to college (in spite of being able to express their thoughts more clearly than most). Again, I have a PhD in mathematics, and have taught college-level m…

> Yes, I'd argue that "literacy" that doesn't allow one to use a spell-checker is a bullshit stat that should not be relevant to college admissions.

Your focus on your own 'experience' appears to be blinding you to the topic at hand, which does not involve spell checkers. Perhaps does not cover the area of literacy and how it is assessed?

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#218

Post by romwell »

lazyasciiart wrote: post #217
romwell wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'd argue that "literacy" that doesn't allow one to use a spell-checker is a bullshit stat that should not be relevant to college admissions. Because by that metric, the commenter I was responding to would be deemed "illiterate" and not worthy of being admitted to college (in spite of being able to express their thoughts more clearly than most). Again, I have a PhD in mathematics, and have taught college-level m…

> Yes, I'd argue that "literacy" that doesn't allow one to use a spell-checker is a bullshit stat that should not be relevant to college admissions. Your focus on your own 'experience' appears to be blinding you to the topic at hand, which does not involve spell checkers. Perhaps does not cover the area of literacy and how it is assessed?

>Your focus on your own 'experience' appears to be blinding you to the topic at hand, which does not involve spell checkers. Perhaps does not cover the area of literacy and how it is assessed?

You joined the thread well after its topic was set in place, and, frankly, I don't know what you think the topic is.

The comment I was responding to did specifically involve spell checkers; did you miss it?

Your last sentence seems to be missing a subject.

And if you thoroughly read the originally submitted Wikipedia article, you'll find out that:

* The notion of literacy (in the language sense) includes reading as well as writing (particularly, as assessed by NAEP). In fact, any notion of literacy mentions the ability to read and write.

* The notion of literacy, as assesed by NAAL, also includes quantitative literacy (something I have expertise in)

* The issue of (lack of) equity in literacy assessment has been particularly highlighted in the Wiki article

* Spell-checker is a way to achieve equity in writing assessments for people suffering from dyslexia

The commentor I was responding to would be deemed "illiterate" by these assessments for not remembering how to spell words like "through". Yet that person has very clearly demonstrated that they don't struggle with either understanding other people's points, nor clearly expressing their own.

Something that can't be said of most (ostensibly literate) people even on this forum, sadly.

>Perhaps does not cover the area of literacy and how it is assessed?

Would you mind rephrasing?

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#219

Post by lazyasciiart »

romwell wrote: post #218
lazyasciiart wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, I'd argue that "literacy" that doesn't allow one to use a spell-checker is a bullshit stat that should not be relevant to college admissions. Your focus on your own 'experience' appears to be blinding you to the topic at hand, which does not involve spell checkers. Perhaps does not cover the area of literacy and how it is assessed?

>Your focus on your own 'experience' appears to be blinding you to the topic at hand, which does not involve spell checkers. Perhaps does not cover the area of literacy and how it is assessed? You joined the thread well after its topic was set in place, and, frankly, I don't know what you think the topic is. The comment I was responding to did specifically involve spell checkers; did you miss it? Your last sentence s…

No, he would not be called illiterate by these assessments. That is why spell checkers are irrelevant to the utility of 6th grade literacy in college admissions.

Solid reading comprehension should allow you to make a reasonable guess at the intended value of the missing noun; it was "experience". I am not enjoying the experience of discussing literacy assessment with someone who has vastly overestimated their knowledge of the topic, so I will not continue.

Re: 54% of adults in the United States have prose literacy below the 6th-grade level

#220

Post by romwell »

lazyasciiart wrote: post #219
romwell wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Your focus on your own 'experience' appears to be blinding you to the topic at hand, which does not involve spell checkers. Perhaps does not cover the area of literacy and how it is assessed? You joined the thread well after its topic was set in place, and, frankly, I don't know what you think the topic is. The comment I was responding to did specifically involve spell checkers; did you miss it? Your last sentence s…

No, he would not be called illiterate by these assessments. That is why spell checkers are irrelevant to the utility of 6th grade literacy in college admissions. Solid reading comprehension should allow you to make a reasonable guess at the intended value of the missing noun; it was "experience". I am not enjoying the experience of discussing literacy assessment with someone who has vastly overestimated their knowled…

>Solid reading comprehension should allow you to make a reasonable guess at the intended value of the missing noun

I didn't say I didn't understand your point; just that clarity wasn't there (due to the sentence being ungrammatical). Quite ironic in a thread discussing literacy.

>No, he would not be called illiterate by these assessments.

This is a claim. For the benefit of the people reading this thread, would you please provide the basis for such a claim?

To be more specific, the claim implies that ability to spell is not measured by "these assessments" (which ones, specifically?).

The Wikipedia article indicates otherwise (as described in my previous comment), so everyone would benefit from learning about what your words are based on.

>I am not enjoying the experience [...], so I will not continue.

On the note of clarity in writing, that point could have been expressed in 0 words, by way of not leaving a comment.

In any case, if you're an educator, this is a chance for you to educate people who overestimate their knowledge of the subject.

And if not — well, I'm very sorry.

Post reply on HN