The Intercollegiate Studies Institute recently released a survey showing that college students don’t know much about American history, constitutional principles, and economics; and they hardly gain knowledge over their four years in university. The biggest gains are supposedly found at the least prestigious institutions. At fancy schools like Brown, Georgetown, and Yale, knowledge actually falls between freshman and senior year.

I was all set to praise and quote the report, because it draws attention to topics–civics and history–that I fear we overlook. The failure of prestigious schools to add value would confirm my suspicion that higher education is largely about conferring status–not educating students.

However, I have serious questions about the methodology of the report, which simply surveyed groups of freshmen and seniors and compared the differences. There is no mention of dropout rates. It is very likely that the less prestigious schools, where students apparently showed a lot of improvement, also have high dropout rates. Their seniors score higher than their freshmen because those who make it to senior year are the academically successful survivors of a winnowing-out process.

For example, the report praises Colorado State University for adding 11 points to its students’ knowledge scores. But Colorado State has a 6-year retention rate of only 63%, meaning that four in ten of its students leave without getting a degree. CSU seniors were probably better students back in their freshman year than many of their peers who left without graduating.

Continue reading →

I don’t mean to dwell too long on our new survey (described yesterday), but I find the press coverage an interesting study in subjectiveness. Based on the very same release and oral presentation …

Matt Stearns and Rick Montgomery wrote in the Kansas City Star: “Apathetic, detached? Not today?s young people. A study finds that 15- to 25-year-olds are more involved in their communities than expected.” Their lead is: “Turns out, the seminal rock band The Who was correct: Gloomy stereotypes about civic detachment to the contrary, the kids are all right.”

But David Alexander wrote in Reuters (picked up in the Boston Globe and elsewhere: “Few U.S. youths involved in civic life: study.” His lead is: “Nearly two-thirds of young Americans are disengaged from political and civic life and only a quarter regularly vote, a survey released on Tuesday showed.”

And the Philadelphia Inquirer printed Matt Stearns’ piece under this headline: “Younger folks do their civic duties, a study confirms; Involvement for those 15 to 25 in some cases neared elders’ levels.”

So which is it? All of the above, of course. It’s a mixed story, as we realized when we thought about how to pitch it. I did hope that the headlines would be positive (although I’m not at all surprised to see the negative ones). Perhaps there’s no one valid way to capture a complex picture in one short phrase, which is what a headline must be. But we think a positive summary is closer to the truth in this case.

I’m at the National Press Club, about to release the result of a major new survey of American young people. [It has been covered, so far, by Reuters, Fox News, the Scripps Howard wire, the Philadelphia Inquirer and other McClatchy Newspapers, the Kansas City Star, on p. 1, and the Washington Times. Coincidentally, John Bridgeland and I also have an op-ed in today’s Washington Times.] The report is available on the CIRCLE website. From the press release:

The Future of American Democracy: A Mixed Picture

More Young People Are Involved,

But Nearly 1 in 5 Are Civically and Politically Disengaged

African-American and Asian-American Youth Most Engaged

Washington, DC ? Conventional wisdom is challenged by a new report on the political and civic involvement of young Americans. Young people are working in many ways to improve their communities and the nation by volunteering, voting, protesting, and raising money for charity and political candidates. In addition, African-American and Asian-American youth are the most engaged, according to the study conducted by the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement (CIRCLE). But, the findings also show that a large group of young people are completely disconnected from civic life.

In the last year, more than 36 percent of young people aged 15-25 volunteered, nearly 20 percent have been involved with solving community problems, and almost a quarter had raised money for charity. Many of the civic and political indicators showed only small differences between this age group and those aged 26 and older.

Despite this higher-than-expected level of engagement, the study does show that nearly two-thirds of young Americans are considered disengaged, with nearly one in five not involved in any of the 19 possible forms of civic participation. ?Participating is good for kids? development. Our schools and communities need their contributions. And their civic development is crucial for the future of our democracy,? said CIRCLE director Peter Levine.

Continue reading →

My friend and former colleague David Luban effectively summarized the torture issue and achieved a blogger’s trifecta. First, he posted a strong piece–bitterly funny yet substantive–on Balkinization. Then Slate reprinted it virtually verbatim. And finally, Senator Dodd cited it on the floor of the US Senate. Dodd said, “There was an article written recently by Professor Luban, a professor at Georgetown University, titled ‘Forget Nuremberg–How Bush’s new torture bill eviscerates the promise of Nuremberg.’ I ask unanimous consent that the entire article be printed in the RECORD.” (There being no objection, the blog post was printed; but Dodd lost the vote.)

Luban begins:

The burning question is: What did the Bush administration do to break John McCain when a North Vietnamese prison camp couldn’t do it?

Could it have been “ego up”? I’m told ego up is not possible with a U.S. senator. That probably also rules out ego down. Fear up harsh? McCain doesn’t have the reputation of someone who scares easily. False flag? Did he think they were sending him to the vice president’s office? No, he already knew he was in the vice president’s office. Wait, I think I know the answer: futility?which the Army’s old field manual on interrogation defined as explaining rationally to the prisoner why holding out is hopeless. Yes, the explanation must be that the Bush lawyers would have successfully loopholed any law McCain might write, so why bother? Futility might have done the trick.

We know from Lew Friedland and Shauna Morimoto’s work (pdf) that many high school students believe they should volunteer in order to increase their chances of being admitted to college. Friedland and Morimoto note that this is even true of students who are not likely to apply to competitive colleges. The perceived need to volunteer for college admissions may partly explain the big increase in the volunteering rate.

Someone asked me today how many colleges actually consider applicants’ service records. I don’t think anyone knows for sure, but I suspect that it’s mainly the smaller, more selective, private colleges that pay any attention at all. A report from the National Association for College Admissions Counseling includes a survey in which colleges rated the importance of various factors in determining undergraduate admissions decisions. Only 8 percent gave “considerable importance” to the whole category of “work/extracurricularactivities,” of which service would be a subcategory. This compares to 73.9 percent that mentioned grades and 59.3 that mentioned standardized tests (p.30). The report adds: “Smaller colleges are more likely than larger colleges to consider an interview and counselor or teacher recommendations. They are also slightly more likely than larger colleges to consider a student’s essay and their work/extracurricular activities as important factors.” It appears (from table 32) that the most selective colleges pay the most attention to work and extracurriculars.

I find it interesting that the survey did not ask about volunteer service as a separate category. Service doesn’t seem very prominent on the agenda of college admissions people. Apparently, most high school students have no need to volunteer in order to improve their odds in the college-admissions game. If they volunteer, it should be to change society, to learn, and to help others.