US Officials Flunk Test On Civic Knowledge 334
A test on civic knowledge given to elected officials proved that they are slightly less knowledgeable than the uninformed people who voted them into office. Elected officials scored a 44 percent while ordinary citizens managed an amazing 49 percent on the 33 questions compiled by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. "It is disturbing enough that the general public failed ISI's civic literacy test, but when you consider the even more dismal scores of elected officials, you have to be concerned," said Josiah Bunting, chairman of the National Civic Literacy Board at ISI. The three branches of government aren't the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria?
I'd care more (Score:2, Insightful)
Constitutional Correction (Score:2, Insightful)
Misleading (Score:4, Insightful)
To make an accurate judgment, we really need to see the test, questions about economics for example can be largely opinion/philosophy based rather than factual. Though failing to correctly answer opponents in WWII is either blatant stupidity, or willful ignorance, a child raised by wolves could answer that 2 days after being 'rescued'.
Its also important to consider who might consider themselves elected officials. For example doesn't the US also elect local sheriffs?
Re:So that's what explains it... (Score:5, Insightful)
George Bush getting elected twice.
No, but it does explain why he got the PATRIOT act and PATRIOT II acts passed by congress.
Key Caveat (Score:5, Insightful)
the key caveat with this news item is that, when you RTFA, you find that they are culling the results from "self-identified elected officials." So, anyone could take the test and, for a laugh, identify themselves as an elected official.
In other words, it is not the case that the organizers of this test randomly selected a cross section of the populace, got complete demographic information about them (including occupation) then had them take the test.
See also self-selection [wikipedia.org] and selection bias [wikipedia.org].
Biden is a perfect example (Score:1, Insightful)
"Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article 1 of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that." - Joe Biden
Article 1 establishes the legislative branch not the executive branch.
Re:I'd care more (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're going to give them a hard time about that, you probably shouldn't confuse the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. :)
Re:Where's the test? (Score:3, Insightful)
So I took the test and scored 90.91% (30/33)
And I'm Canadian.
The 3 I missed...
I had no idea what Roosevelt threatened to do to the supreme court when they declared parts of the New Deal were unconstitutional. I didn't know what particular rights the first amendment gives. And I missed the one about the Scopes "Monkey Trial", which I'm not sure how I got wrong. I think I misread the correct answer as something to do with teaching evolution in private schools.
Of course, I got a few right that I made educated guesses on too, so it works out I guess. I had no trouble with the ones that were more 'general knowledge' but struggled with the real "Americana". Like the source of the phrase 'wall of separation' between church and state... I didn't actually know the answer was Thomas Jefferson's letters, but made it as an educated guess from the choices.
Overall, though I'm shocked that any elected official would score less than 80% on it... never mind less than 50%.
Re:I'd care more (Score:4, Insightful)
Because this "test" is a bit of right-wing propaganda, which seeks to conflate conservative doctrine with actual facts about our government. (Or is there an answer to "Free markets typically secure more economic prosperity than government's centralized planning because:" or "International trade and specialization most often lead to which of the following?" hidden somewhere in the Constitution that I've missed?)
The "Intercollegiate Studies Institute" evolved out of William Bennett's Madison Center for Educational Affairs and Irving Kristol's Institute for Educational Affairs [mediatransparency.org].
Semantics (Score:5, Insightful)
Forty percent of respondents, meanwhile, incorrectly believed that the US president has the power to declare war, while 54 percent correctly answered that that power rests with Congress.
But police actions, anti terrorism actions and a broadly, ill defined war on a noun like "terror" or "drugs" are all fair game.
Splitting hairs, they're different to "declaring war." In practice, they're all ways presidents have ensured they can declare quagmires, I mean wars, without actually needing to stop and ask congress.
It's kind of like asking a child, "Did your brother hit you?"
Crying, "Yes!"
Brother, "Ha! I only kicked you. You're wrong!"
Re:I'd care more (Score:5, Insightful)
Wrong answers to questions on central planning vs. free markets, however, are due to a devotion to a philosophy that is just wrong. I'm sure those elected officials were shocked that they got that one incorrect.
So yes, you would expect that no group could do worse than 25% when given 4 choices, but when the questions are chosen with misconceptions in mind, it becomes far more likely.
Re:Results from a Brit... (Score:3, Insightful)
Or perhaps that since the results were made public and reported on, smarter people, the people who read the news relatively currently, have actively looked for and taken the quiz. People who like to take little quizzes like this do it because scoring higher probably makes them feel a little better about themselves. Uninformed people probably don't seek out things that will, in all likelyhood, make them feel dumb.
Are these civics? Or is this a push poll? (Score:5, Insightful)
For what it's worth, I took the test [americanci...teracy.org] just now and got 100%, but I find a few things about it questionable: First, there are several questions that I'm not sure really fall under the definition civics. Second, several of the questions are of a theoretical rather than factual nature and I got the distinct impression that the test makers were pushing a specific (libertarian/conservative) ideological agenda. Maybe my impression was incorrect; I haven't had a chance to look up the group yet.
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines civics [merriam-webster.com] as, "a social science dealing with the rights and duties of citizens." Most of the questions deal with the structure of our government and the history of that structure, so they can reasonably be said to fall within civics. But consider the following questions:
Number 13 is a question of philosophy (or, if you like, history mostly far preceding US history). Questions 25, 27, 30, and 31 are questions of economics. I suppose you could include economics as part of civics, because it's important to governance, but on that rationale you could start including all sorts of things, like statistics. Also, the answers to the questions are largely theoretical in nature. While there may be a consensus view amongst economists, they don't really admit clear empirical answers due to the complexity of disentangling the various influences in macroeconomics. On the topic of how best to stimulate economic activity, there are various different schools of thought that advocate different approaches and have enjoyed popularity at different times.
The other point was more a vague feeling I got that the questions were pushing an agenda. The survey picks out "religion" as one of the constitutional rights, rather than "freedom of religion". It asks for the attribution of the phrase "wall of separation" between church and state, and highlighting that this is not from the constitution (even though it is from one of the framers) is a favorite past-time of those who advocate a larger role for Christianity in government. Questions 27 and 31 praise free trade criticize centralized economies. And answering one of the questions "correctly" points out that federal disaster aid is not guarantied by the constitution (relevant to disagreements over the aftermath of hurricane Katrina). It's not really pronounced and may be just coincidence, but I'm curious if anyone else got this feeling. I'll have to look up ISI and see if I've guessed correctly. In any case, it occurred to me that you could use the press release to get the general public to take it and use it as a push poll, stating your opinions as the "correct answer" or selecting factual information in such a way as to give the appearance for support of your argument.
Re:Where's the test? (Score:5, Insightful)
Some of the questions initially appear esoteric, but then I realized the way the questions are designed, it's not so much a test of if you know the actual historical event, but if you can, based on your civic knowledge, reason out the correct answer.
Huh? The questions were remarkably straightforward. They were not trick questions. They were not cases of multiple 'right answers and one best answer'. They were not multivalued : a,b,c then d is a and b types. They did not generally have deliberately misleading questions or answers. There were a couple that were slightly tricky... like the last question might trip you up if you don't know the difference between a debt and deficit, but seriously... you SHOULD.
It's not really a fair test for the general public.
I'm curious to see what you think a fairer test would be?
If questions on the same topics were asked in a more straightforward manner, you would get higher scores.
How could they be more generally straightforward?
I don't think many people could get 100% on it without at least a college education.
I think that says more about the american education system than the test. But seriously, the fact that the general public didn't get 100% isn't really the issue... the issue is that elected officials on average, FAILED it.
Its multiple choice with ~4 answers per question. A big enough collection of monkeys doing it randomly should score an average of 25%.
Plus, like most simple multiple choice tests, at least 2 of the answers can be easily eliminated with basic reasoning as being off topic or otherwise clearly wrong, reducing most questions to a 50/50 shot even if you don't have strong knowledge of the topic. So getting 50% on this test should pretty much be a freebie. If you know even a little bit, you should score >50%. And the average should probably be up in the 70's, at least.
I don't think you need college to get 100%, a high school education should be sufficient. But I will agree that the people who didn't go to college include the people who didn't do well in high school, so going to college would definitely be a predictor for higher scores.
Re:I'd care more (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Biden is a perfect example (Score:5, Insightful)
Biden is saying that Article 1 defines the role of the vice president of the United States, and that that role is part of the Executive Branch. The VP gets to break ties in the Senate so that the Executive branch can check and balance the powers of Senate.
Keep in mind that Cheney is pushing the idea that the Vice President is NOT a part of the Executive (while the President is) only so he can avoid federal disclosure laws. Cheney wants to advance the power of the unitary executive by co-opting in part the power of the legislative branch of government. It's pretty scary stuff.
Re:Constitutional Correction (Score:3, Insightful)
In other words the U.S.A has finally become an Idiocracy.
Re:Where's the test? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Semantics (Score:3, Insightful)
You're right...I think that's that's precisely why people should be educated on who exactly can declare war according to the Constitution. So that they can call out the things you listed as the bullshit power grabs that they are.
Re:Where's the test? (Score:2, Insightful)
Deficit would have been 100% correct, no question
Actually, it would have still been wrong, a deficit is just a form of debt. Different from most debt, sure, but it's still a debt of a sort.
The question made a premise and then asked what amounts to a math question based on it. It's very common in SAT type tests to test your ability to solve problems.
The question was, in math form: IF taxes = government spending THEN? D. taxes/person = spending/person.
The question itself had nothing to do with debt or deficit or anything like that. A deficit (a type of debt) occurs when taxes/person are less than spending/person. In other words, when government spends more than it takes in via taxes, the government has a deficit, or debt.
All that said, you did a heck of a lot better than I did, I got an 81% and was pretty disappointed with myself for it. :/
I'm not exactly a history buff though, and that's where I made my mistakes. Oh well :P.
P.S.: The ruckus around the 2nd ammendment only happens when you try to change what the 2nd ammendment says. If you take it at face value (like we have for almost 200 years now) there's no confusion. If people don't like it they aught to push for a new ammendment to alter it (or "clarify" it, if you like), not try to make laws that infringe uppon it.
Re:Are these civics? Or is this a push poll? (Score:1, Insightful)
With regards to:
13)Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas are some of the most well known philosophers that have defined much of modern "Western" thought. Although not part of civics specifically, knowledge of the general concepts that these individuals held is very important to how our society thinks and functions.
25, 27, and 31) These are basic economics questions. If you know what you are talking about, you either 1) know the correct answer or 2) are brilliant enough that you know what answer is expected.
30) Very basic economics. If you can't answer this correctly, you don't know how economics works.
Other than those, the question explicitly asks "what right or freedom is guarenteed..."; thus, "freedom of religion" instead of "religion" would be redundant (basic English comprehension here; come on, you can do better).
Re:Obama voters fail basic knowledge test too (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'd care more (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean the planned economy that starved tens of millions, and collapsed under its own weight only 40 years after WWII ended, surviving in the meantime only because of a black market and barter system? Yes, I call that a failure.
I'm afraid it's not at all clear that FDR's policies did anything to lift us out of the Great Depression. And if your thesis is that the kind of government spending that took place during WWII is a sustainable, feasible model for an economy in the long term and in peacetime, I have to wonder what you're basing that on.
Re:I'd care more (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope it's not, too. It has very little to do with civics. What is Sputnik? What's the definition of business profit? A lot of these questions are from Business Economics 101 and have absolutely nothing to do with civics.
Re:Where's the test? (Score:2, Insightful)
My wife has a college education and she missed 6.
Education isn't the entire defining factor. It's an interest in politics.
Re:Obama voters fail basic knowledge test too (Score:1, Insightful)
It is a sad fact, but we all know how uninformed the average American is. Is it because of the media? Maybe in part. Does that mean the media has a left wing bias? Absolutely not. It would be easy to name dozens of stories negative for republicans that haven't been covered. Stories aren't covered most of the time because media is profit driven and they wouldn't raise viewership.
As for the claim 'Survey finds most Obama voters remembered negative coverage of McCain/Palin statements but struggled to correctly answer questions about coverage associated with Obama/Biden' - I can practically guarantee you that the inverse is true as well.
Oh, and I also love the claim that these were 12 of the most informed Obama voters. It's not like they had an agenda in picking them or anything. . .
Re:I'd care more (Score:3, Insightful)
Yep. I'm an Aussie who answered 29 out of 33 correctly, 87.88%, without trying too hard.
One of the kids here (14yrs old) got 100%. Smug little bastard.
Re:Are these civics? Or is this a push poll? (Score:3, Insightful)
I took the quiz and got that too, especially that question about why free markets result in a better economy than planned economies. Any moron should be able to recognize the giant assumption in that question.
Uneducated title of TFA (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd be more interested in reading TFA if its title correctly spelled the word "American". I find it amusing that alleged professional journalists, who produce an article describing the alleged ignorance of Americans and American politicians, can't even manage to correctly spell the nationality of their subjects IN THE TITLE nor proofread it before it goes to press on an internationally available Web site.
Where's the credibility? Journalists are part of that same cross-section of (American) idiots.
Re:I'd care more (Score:2, Insightful)
Where I live, a rural area of Ohio, people are generally Republican because they are ignorant of the outside world and have knee-jerk emotional reactions to anything that contradicts their personal values or way of life (abortion, gay marrige, oil, Iraq, etc). People in larger urban areas are generally Democratic and have knee-jerk emotional reactions to the BS spewed by the media every day. (global warming, Iraq, etc).
I believe you are wrong. Democrats do indeed react based on emotion which is why they want to view the world as gray. They say we don't live in a black and white world but only because they don't want to view it that way and do what they can to add the gray. On the other hand Republicans are going to disagree on topics with Democrats because Republicans make decisions based on absolutes. The personal values they hold are based on absolute values which Democrats just choose to ignore and therefore view them as personally held by Republicans because they have to be if there isn't anything absolute. Having anything absolute means they wouldn't have the power to view/judge things how they need/want to view/judge them. Having absolutes, in a way, means you don't need to be all knowing of the outside world because, in a sense, you don't have control over certain aspects of that world anyway. What is right will always be right and what is wrong will always be wrong and people will get what they deserve in the end. This doesn't make them stupid and the Democrats smart. It means they know some things are considered above them but Democrats want to get their grubby little hands on anything that will put things in their favor.