STILL AT RISK: What Students Don’t Know, Even Now

A report from Common Core by Frederick M. Hess

LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Senator Joseph McCarthy investigatedpeople who protested the war in Vietnam,better known as the Second World War.Fortunately, that war was over beforeChristopher Columbus sailed to America;otherwise, we might have neverexperienced the Renaissance.

A new survey of 17-year-olds revealsthat, to many, the paragraph abovesounds only slightly strange. Almost 20percent of 1,200 respondents to anational telephone survey do not knowwho our enemy was in World War II, andmore than a quarter think Columbussailed after 1750. Half do not knowwhom Sen. McCarthy investigated orwhat the Renaissance was.

It is easy to make light of such ignorance.In reality, however, a deep lack ofknowledge is neither humorous nortrivial. What we know helps to determinehow successful we are likely to be in life,and how many career paths we canchoose from. It also affects ourcontribution as democratic citizens.

Unfortunately, too many youngAmericans do not possess the kind ofbasic knowledge they need. When askedfundamental questions about U.S. historyand culture, they score a D and exhibitstunning knowledge gaps:

• Nearly a quarter of those surveyedcould not identify Adolf Hitler; 10percent think he was a munitionsmanufacturer

• Fewer than half can place the Civil Warin the correct half-century

• Only 45 percent can identify Oedipus

STILL AT RISK: What Students Don’t Know, Even Now

Written byFREDERICK M. HESS

OneLETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

ThreePREFACE BY ANTONIA CORTESE AND DIANE RAVITCH

FiveINTRODUCTION

SevenSECTION ONE: WHAT DO 17-YEAR-OLDS KNOW?

ThirteenSECTION TWO: THE IMPACT OF PARENTAL EDUCATION

NineteenCONCLUSION

Twenty-oneAPPENDIX AND ENDNOTES

Common Core would like to thank the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation for its support, RMA Research for conducting the study, and

Lauren Prehoda for her exhaustive contributions to the report. The author would like to thank Juliet Squire and Rosemary Kendrick

for their invaluable research and editorial assistance.

©2008 Common Core. All rights reserved.1016 16th Street NW, 7th Floor, Washington, DC 20036p: 202.223.1854 f: 202.223.9226 www.commoncore.org

ONE

COMMONCORE

A deep lack of knowledge is neitherhumorous nor trivial.

• A third do not know that the Bill ofRights guarantees the freedom ofspeech and religion

• 44 percent think that The Scarlet Letterwas either about a witch trial or a pieceof correspondence

There are parents all over America forwhom this is no surprise. They know thatthe focus of their child’s school day isincreasingly on preparing for basic skillstests, not on learning history or

geography, reading literature, orparticipating in the arts. And their child’steacher often shares in their frustration.

Another concern the survey identifies is aconsistent gap—the size of a letter-grade—between respondents who have atleast one college-educated parent andthose who do not. This is devastating forstudents who come from homes wherethe discussion of literature and history israre because if the school doesn’t impartthis knowledge, these students are notlikely ever to learn it. The burden onschools serving less-privileged students isgreat because they must somehow teachmore just to get their students to thestarting line. This survey shows that thatchallenge is not being adequately met.

When students graduate withoutknowing what Brown v. Board of

Education decided or who told them to“ask not what your country can do foryou,” they are being left behind in theworst way. Everyone’s children deserve toreceive a comprehensive, content-richeducation in the liberal arts and sciences.Of course they must be able to read andcompute. But they must also possess realknowledge about important things,knowledge of civics, biology, geography,art history, languages—the full range ofsubjects that comprise a completeeducation. Any reform idea thatdiminishes the ability of schools andteachers to provide students with such aneducation is narrowing children’s futures,not expanding them.

Lynne MunsonExecutive DirectorCommon Core

Letter from the Executive Director

TWO

Students are graduating without knowing what Brown v. Board of Education decided.

PREFACE

This report documents continuingweaknesses in our students’ knowledge ofhistory and literature. We think it likelythat similar surveys would show largegaps in our students’ knowledge of manyof the liberal arts and sciences, includingcivics, science, languages, and arts. Thisis unacceptable. We believe, as do mostconcerned citizens, that our schools mustteach our students the great ideas,controversies, and events that haveshaped our nation as well as the skillsneeded for life in our democratic society.We believe that such knowledge isessential in preparing for postsecondaryeducation, for the modern workplace, forinformed understanding, and for civicparticipation.

Today, the nation is in thrall with testingand basic skills. We think this is amistake. Common Core’s goal insponsoring this report and in launching anew organization devoted to promotingthe liberal arts and sciences is to set fortha richer vision of what education must befor all of our children.

Twenty-five years ago, the landmarkreport A Nation at Risk was published bythe federal government. The report calledfor “excellence in education” andrecommended a renewed emphasis on astrong curriculum for all students. Itspecifically proposed that all high schoolstudents seeking a diploma should studyat least four years of English, three yearsof mathematics, three years of science,three years of social studies, and one-halfyear of computer science; in addition,those who were college-bound wereurged to study at least two years of aforeign language.

In 1983, the report set off a nationaldiscussion and launched what was thencalled “the excellence movement.” Thismovement was devoted to strengtheningthe curriculum by ensuring that thecontent of what was studied wascoherent, substantive, and meaningful.For a time, there was extended discussionabout how to deepen the study of history,what literature to teach, how to relate thecurriculum to the nation’s changingdemography, and how to engage morestudents in the study of mathematics andscience. In response to this challenge, afew states developed solid, content-richcurriculum frameworks in history andliterature (notably California in historyand Massachusetts in both history andliterature). The history frameworks inthese states identified a sequence oftopics and ideas for teachers to follow,knowing that their work would build onthe previous year of study; the literatureframework in Massachusetts identifiedspecific classic and contemporaryauthors whose work was worthy of study.

However, a decade later, the excellencemovement was overshadowed byCongressional demands foraccountability in Title I legislation,beginning in 1994. Congress required allstates to create standards and testing, butonly in reading and mathematics. Almostovernight the emphasis in school reformchanged from “excellence” to “basicskills.” Without a funeral, and with nopublic notice, the excellence movementquietly faded away, and in its place rosethe test-based accountability movementtied only to basic skills. When No ChildLeft Behind was enacted in the fall of2001 and signed into law by PresidentGeorge W. Bush in January 2002, theexcellence movement was finally interredand forgotten.

Now we are certainly not in opposition totesting nor to basic skills. No one canlearn history or literature or sciencewithout literacy and numeracy. Certainlythese skills are necessary for success ineducation and in the workplace inmodern society. And far betterachievement in these basic skills wasclearly needed. One’s ability to participate

WHAT WE NEED ISAN EDUCATIONSYSTEM that teachesdeep knowledge, thatvalues creativity andoriginality, and thatvalues thinking skills.

THREE

The nation is in thrall with testing and basic skills.

in the arts is obviously enhanced bymastery of the fundamental skills ofcommunication. But the nation’seducation system, we believe, has becomeobsessed with testing and basic skillsbecause of the requirements of federallaw and that is not healthy. Suchobsessions are unhealthy for children,unhealthy for education, and toxic forthose who want all children to share inthe benefits of a balanced, rich, andcoherent liberal education.

Testing is important, of that we have nodoubt. But tests are not the be-all andend-all of education. They are animportant indicator, but they are onlyone indicator of educational progress.Some districts are now spending manyweeks of the school year preparing theirstudents to take high-stakes tests. This,we believe, is time that could be betterspent reading and discussing excitinghistorical controversies, scientificdiscoveries, and literary works. Indeed,reading in content areas, especially ifguided by a knowledge-rich, coherentcurriculum, would, we expect, producehigher test scores than endless test-preparation activities.

We have no doubt that the current maniafor testing and test-preparation hasnarrowed the curriculum and caused thelimiting or exclusion of such subjects ashistory, literature, civics, geography,science, and the arts. Some studies havedemonstrated that the curriculum hasnarrowed, although supporters of the NoChild Left Behind law contest thesefindings. But we agree with those whosee a narrowing of the curriculum,because the time available for teachingand learning is not elastic. There are onlyso many hours in the school day and onlyso many days in the school year. If moretime is given over to testing and test

preparation, then obviously less time isavailable to write essays, read novels,discuss history, conduct scienceexperiments, and debate civic issues.

Some say that the only way to restore thefull range of subjects into the curriculumis to test every one of them. Others saythat students will be overwhelmed by yetanother plethora of tests. We are notarguing here for any specific path. Ourpreference is to open a nationaldiscussion about what our studentsshould be learning. In particular, we hopeto encourage those who know thatsomething is currently terribly amiss inour nation’s cramped vision of schoolreform to speak up. We don’t believe thatschools should be evaluated and gradedsolely on the basis of reading and mathscores. We don’t believe that the currenttest-based accountability regimen willultimately produce either equity orexcellence.

We believe in the importance ofpreparing students to live and succeed ina global economy. We don’t think that themastery of basic skills is sufficient for thisgoal. What we need is an educationsystem that teaches deep knowledge, thatvalues creativity and originality, and thatvalues thinking skills. This, unfortunately,is not the path on which we are nowembarked. We believe that good schoolsnot only teach the basic skills but providea rich curriculum in the arts andsciences, one that offers not only thebasic skills but the full range of subjectsto all students. We know that we are farfrom this goal. We don’t have all theanswers about how to get there. Weinvite the participation and contributionsof others who share our hopes anddreams for the future. Together, we hope,we can move our nation’s educationsystem closer to these aspirations.

Antonia Cortese and Diane RavitchTrusteesCommon Core

Preface

FOUR

Test preparation has excluded such subjects as the arts.

This requires that students have theknowledge they need to be prepared forcivic responsibilities, further education,or the workforce, in addition tomastering basic skills such as reading andmathematics. To do this well, it is vitalthat schools familiarize students with thehistory and culture that form the sharedbonds of their national community.

In acquainting students with thehistorical narrative and culturaltouchstones that mark our nationalexperience, schools provide thevocabulary for a common conversationthat can render e pluribus unum morethan a pretty turn of phrase. Absentshared reference points, it may be moredifficult for young Americans and newimmigrants alike to find their commonidentity as citizens. This is of particularimport at a time when 12 percent of theAmerican population is foreign-born1

and 20 percent of the nation’s studentsspeak a language other than English athome.2

Recognizing the import of acomprehensive education is hardly a newor novel insight. Indeed, instilling thistype of education is what our nation’sfounders regarded as the purpose ofschooling. As Thomas Jefferson famouslyopined, “Enlighten the people generally,and tyranny and oppressions of body andmind will vanish like evil spirits at thedawn of day.”3 Jefferson was in good

company, with founders like BenjaminFranklin, George Washington, andBenjamin Rush repeatedly utteringsimilar sentiments.

Jefferson’s admonition that freedom andeducation are interconnected is especiallytimely in a world where religiousquestions are interwoven withinternational relations, where observerson the right and left worry about a coarseand fraying culture in which individualsuse the web to form virtual communitiesof the like-minded, and where debatesabout assimilation and cultural conflictroutinely lead the evening news. Thesedevelopments make nurturing theinformal ties that bond Americans intoone nation particularly pressing. This isdoubly true against a backdrop of civicfrustration, in which confidence inpolitical institutions is at generationallows.4, 5

FIVE

Freedom and education are interconnected.

INTRODUCTION: The firstmission of public schooling in ademocratic nation is to equip everyyoung person for the responsibilitiesand privileges of citizenship.

Introduction

The task of educating children inAmerican history and culture isparticularly pressing for those whosehomes are not steeped in these subjects.Some children grow up in homes wherebooks are part of the fabric of everydaylife, where newspapers are read anddiscussed, and where families watchdocumentaries and visit historic sites.Other children do not enjoy thoseadvantages, growing up in families whereparents are not conversant in questionsof history and culture or where thepressures of life render these anunaffordable luxury. It is for thosestudents, in particular, that schools areespecially crucial.

The question of how much our 17-year-olds know is particularly pressing givenbroader social trends. After all, thesestudents are less than a year away fromreaching legal adulthood, making themeligible to vote and serve in the nation’sarmed forces.

When students reach the end of highschool, are they literate in the currency ofour common civilization? Are schoolssuccessfully preparing students whosefamilies are less able to provide this kindof education on their own?

There is reason for concern on thiscount. As Emory Professor MarkBauerlein reports in his forthcomingbook The Dumbest Generation,American youth have more schooling,money, leisure time, and informationthan any previous generation, yet theydevote enormous quantities of time tosocial networking websites, television,and video games. Young people, onaverage, spend two to four hours dailywatching television or playing videogames; most cannot name their mayor,

governor, or senator, and 45 percent areunable to comprehend a sample ballot.6

Americans in almost every demographicgroup are reading less than they were 10or 20 years ago. The percentage of 17-year-olds who report reading for fun dailydeclined from one in three in 1984 to onein five in 2004. In 2006, 15- to 24-year-olds on the whole reported reading anaverage of seven minutes a day onweekdays and 10 minutes a day onweekends.7 Meanwhile, in the pastdecade, the amount of time that teensand preteens devote to television, videogames, and computers has increasedsteadily.8 In a culture suffused by instantmessaging and YouTube, leisure readinghas increasingly become an anachronism—a bit like polka or bowling leagues.

As state accountability systems haveincreasingly emphasized reading andmath skills, the amount of classroomtime devoted to history and literature hasdecreased. Author David Ferrero of theGates Foundation has noted, “Thetraditional liberal arts have been losingtheir voice over the last 20 years amongthe reform elites who shape publicdiscourse and policymaking abouteducation.”9 U.S. Department ofEducation data show that the amount ofweekly instructional time devoted tohistory and social studies in grades one tosix fell by 22 percent between 1988 and2004. The amount of time devoted to“English and reading arts” increasedsubstantially during these same years, butthere is reason to believe that most or allof this additional time was spent on basicreading skills, not literature.10

Two decades ago, in the aftermath of thefuror provoked by A Nation at Risk, theNational Assessment of EducationalProgress (NAEP) conducted a

pathbreaking study to determine whatAmerica’s 17-year-olds knew abouthistory and literature.11 Administered in1986, the results yielded thedisheartening answer: not enough. AsDiane Ravitch and Chester E. Finn, Jr.,gravely concluded in their 1987 book,What Do Our 17-Year-Olds Know? “It is

impossible to avoid the conclusion thatsomething is gravely awry… Oureleventh-graders as a whole are ignorantof much that they should know. Wecannot be certain that they were taughtit; but the evidence is unmistakable thatthey do not know enough of it.”12

Unfortunately, today there is no goodmeasure of how much our children knowabout American history and literature.While the NAEP evaluates twelfth-gradestudents’ knowledge of historyapproximately every five years, itexcludes youths who are not enrolled inschool and only one-third of thequestions test historical “knowledge andperspective”—with the Department ofEducation reporting that the other two-thirds test historical “analysis andinterpretation.”13 There is no ongoingeffort to assess knowledge of literature.This study seeks to determine just howmuch today’s 17-year-olds know abouthistory and literature.

While the findings here cannot be readilycompared to those collected in 1986—given substantial differences in how thetests were administered and how the datawere collected—they can offer valuableinsights into where we stand now.Moreover, because the data werecollected using a subset of the samequestions that were developed, vetted,tested, refined, and administered as partof the NAEP, they represent a carefullydesigned measuring stick.14

SIX

These students are less than a year awayfrom reaching legal adulthood.

“It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that something is gravely awry.”

“The traditional liberal arts have beenlosing their voice over the last 20 years.”

SECTION ONE: WHAT DO 17-YEAR-OLDS

KNOW?

In their analysis of the 1986 assessment,Diane Ravitch and Chester E. Finn, Jr.,proposed a grading system modeled onthe one that is widely used by America’sclassroom teachers, in which 100 percentis a perfect grade, below 60 percent is afailing mark, and letter grades are markedoff in ten-point increments.Consequently, 90 percent and upconstitutes an A, 80–89 percent a B,70–79 percent a C, and 60–69 percent a D.15

Overall, how did today’s 17-year-oldsfare? On the whole, students answered 67percent of the 33 questions correctly,earning a cumulative grade of D. On thehistory section, they earned a C,answering 73 percent of questionscorrectly. When it came to literature,they earned an F, correctly answering just57 percent of the questions.

More disturbing than these aggregateresults may be some of the items thatmany 17-year-olds did not know. Nearlya third could not identify “ask not whatyour country can do for you” as thewords of President John F. Kennedy. Athird did not know that the Bill of Rightsis the source of our rights to freedom ofreligion and speech. Just two in five couldplace the Civil War in the correct 50-yearperiod, and just half knew that TheFederalist Papers were written toencourage ratification of the U.S.Constitution. Nearly a quarter could notcorrectly identify Adolf Hitler. Less thanhalf could identify the literary figures ofJob or Oedipus, while barely one in twocould identify the plot of George Orwell’simmortal 1984.

SEVEN

Overall, students earned a D.

TABLE ONE:Complete Weighted Correct Results for History

The Civil War was between 1850 and 1900. 43%

The purpose of The Federalist Papers was to gain ratification of the Constitution. 50%

The controversy surrounding Senator Joseph McCarthy focused on Communism. 51%

The First World War was between 1900 and 1950. 60%

The Renaissance was the period in European history noted for cultural and technological advances. 61%

The guarantee of freedom of speech and religion is found in the Bill of Rights. 67%

President John F. Kennedy said, “And so my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask 70%what you can do for your country.”

In its Brown v. Board of Education decision, the Supreme Court ruled segregation unconstitutional. 71%

The Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created 73%equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

Japanese-Americans were forced into relocation camps during the Second World War. 73%

Christopher Columbus sailed for the New World before 1750. 74%

The Watergate investigations resulted in the resignation of President Richard Nixon. 74%

Adolf Hitler was the Chancellor of Germany during the Second World War. 77%

Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in North America. 77%

George Washington was the commander of the American army in the Revolutionary War. 77%

The idea that each branch of the federal government should keep the other branches from becoming too 80%strong is called checks and balances.

The major enemies of the United States during the Second World War were Germany and Japan. 82%

President Abraham Lincoln wrote the Emancipation Proclamation. 82%

Plato and Aristotle were Greek philosophers. 86%

Thomas Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence. 87%

The bombing of Pearl Harbor led to the entry of the United States into the Second World War. 88%

"I have a dream” speech was given by Martin Luther King, Jr. 97%

Average 73%

HISTORY. TABLE ONE presents theweighted results for the historyquestions. The questions assessedstudents’ knowledge of U.S. and worldhistory, with five questions involving U.S.presidents, four asking about otherhistoric individuals, three asking aboutthe dates of major historic events, twoasking about the design of the U.S.government, and the other eightincluding queries on topics such as theEuropean Renaissance and the U.S.Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown v. TopekaBoard of Education ruling. It’s importantto note that the questions asked are, byalmost any measure, basic. They are farmore similar, for instance, to the kinds ofquestions asked in a citizenship test thanto those posed by an AdvancedPlacement history exam.

How well did 17-year-olds collectivelyfare on the 22 history questions? Therewas just one question on which theyearned an A (with at least 90 percentcorrect) and just five more on whichstudents as a whole earned a B. Therewere 10 questions on which respondentsearned a C, with 70 percent to 79 percentanswering correctly, and two on whichthey earned a D (with 60 percent to 69percent answering correctly). Finally,there were four questions that fewer than60 percent of students answeredcorrectly.

FIGURE ONE identifies the five historyquestions on which students fared worst.One asked respondents to identify theEuropean Renaissance and anotherinquired about the intentions of theauthors of The Federalist Papers. Sixty-one percent of 17-year-olds correctlyidentified the Renaissance as a period of“technological and cultural advances.” Inreference to The Federalist Papers, just

half of the respondents answered thatthey were intended to gain ratification ofthe United States Constitution, whereas26 percent said that they were intendedto “establish a strong, free press in thecolonies,” 12 percent that they sought “towin foreign approval for theRevolutionary War,” and 11 percent thatthey aimed to “confirm GeorgeWashington’s election as the firstpresident.”

Two of the questions on which studentsperformed most poorly askedrespondents to identify the approximateperiod in which historic events tookplace, aiming to discover if young peoplehave any remote grasp of whenimportant events occurred. As it turnsout, not many do (see FIGURE TWO).Fewer than 60 percent could identify thecorrect period in which World War Ioccurred, and less than half could do sofor the Civil War. These questions didnot ask for an exact year; they offered

broad 50-year windows. Only 43 percentof respondents knew the Civil War wasfought between 1850 and 1900. Thirtypercent thought it had taken placebetween 1800 and 1850, 21 percent thatit happened before 1800, and six percentthat it happened after 1900. Respondentswere slightly less creative when it came toWorld War I, with 60 percent indicatingthat the war took place between 1900 and1950, 13 percent placing it between 1850and 1900, nine percent between 1800 and1850, 16 percent before 1800, and twopercent after 1950—placing it after theconclusion of the Second World War.

When asked when Columbus “sail[ed] forthe New World,” 74 percent ofrespondents answered that it was before1750, while 13 percent thought it wasbetween 1750 and 1800, and another 13percent indicated it was since 1800. Inother words, more than one-fourth of 17-year-olds believe that Columbus sailedafter 1750—more than 250 years after hisactual crossing in 1492. (In an interestingbit of alternate history, two percent ofrespondents reported that Columbus setsail after 1950!)

Two questions asked about particulardesign features of the U.S. government.When asked to put a name to the notion“that each branch of the federalgovernment should keep the other

SECTION ONE: What Do 17-Year-Olds Know?

EIGHT

FIGURE ONE:Five History Questions on Which

Students Fared Worst

D C B A

The Civil War was between 1850 and 1900.

43%

The purpose of The Federalist Paperswas to gain ratification of theConstitution.

50%

The controversy surrounding SenatorJoseph McCarthy focused onCommunism.

51%

The First World War was between 1900and 1950.

60%

The Renaissance was the period inEuropean history noted for cultural andtechnological advances.

61%

F

D C B A

The Civil War was between 1850 and 1900.

43%

The First World War was between 1900and 1950.

60%

Columbus sailed for the New Worldbefore 1750.

73%

FIGURE TWO: Dates of Major Events

F

More than 25 percent think Columbus sailed after 1750.

branches from becoming too strong,” 80percent correctly identified “checks andbalances.” The source of “the guarantee offreedom of speech and religion” inAmerican life was correctly identified asthe Bill of Rights by 67 percent. Freedomof speech and religion are foundationalprinciples in American culture, but athird of respondents haven’t a clue wherethese freedoms originate.

FIGURE THREE breaks out fourquestions that asked respondents toidentify historically significantindividuals. Seventeen-year-olds didrelatively well at identifying Plato andAristotle and Martin Luther King, Jr.They did significantly worse when askedto identify German dictator Adolf Hitler.Seventy-seven percent correctlyanswered “the Chancellor of Germanyduring the Second World War,” whilenearly a quarter answered either “theGerman munitions manufacturerbetween the two World Wars,” “TheKaiser during the First World War,” or“the Premier of Austria who advocatedunion with Germany.” And barely halfcould name the subject of thecontroversy that involved former SenatorJoseph McCarthy. Just 50 percentresponded with “investigations of individualssuspected of Communist activities.”

FIGURE FOUR breaks out the results forthe five questions that addressed U.S.presidents. Students did slightly better onthese questions than they did overall.More than 80 percent of students knewthat Thomas Jefferson was the primaryauthor of the Declaration ofIndependence, and 82 percent knew thatAbraham Lincoln wrote theEmancipation Proclamation. Students didless well naming the commander of theAmerican army in the Revolutionary War(77 percent answered GeorgeWashington) and naming the presidentwho resigned as a result of the Watergateinvestigations (with 74 percent namingRichard Nixon but more than 11 percentnaming Dwight Eisenhower and another11 percent naming Harry Truman). The

presidency question on whichrespondents fared worst asked them toidentify the president who said, “And somy fellow Americans, ask not what yourcountry can do for you; ask what you cando for your country.” Slightly over two-thirds, 70 percent,

NINE

FREEDOM OFSPEECH ANDRELIGION AREFOUNDATIONALprinciples in Americanculture, but a third ofrespondents haven’t aclue where thesefreedoms originate.

D C B A

The controversy surrounding SenatorJoseph McCarthy focused onCommunism.

51%

Adolf Hitler was Chancellor of Germanyduring World War II.

77%

Plato and Aristotle were Greekphilosophers.

86%

“I have a dream” speech was given byMartin Luther King, Jr.

97%

FIGURE THREE: Other Historic Individuals

F

D C B A

President John F. Kennedy said, “And somy fellow Americans, ask not what yourcountry can do for you; ask what youcan do for your country.”

71%

The Watergate investigations resulted inthe resignation of President Nixon.

74%

Washington was the commander of theAmerican army in the Revolutionary War.

77%

President Abraham Lincoln wrote theEmancipation Proclamation.

82%

Jefferson was the primary author of theDeclaration of Independence.

87%

FIGURE FOUR: Presidents

F

knew it was John Kennedy, but 21percent thought it was TheodoreRoosevelt, and another six percentanswered with Richard Nixon.

In the midst of a national election cyclein which Senator Barack Obama’srhetoric has frequently been compared toKennedy’s call to “ask not,” those familiarwith Kennedy’s statement were far betterpositioned to make sense of this coverageand to interpret the public debates. The30 percent of 17-year-olds unfamiliarwith Kennedy’s famous speech lackedthat reference point.

The only question that more than 90percent of students answered correctlyasked them to identify Martin LutherKing, Jr., as the speaker who declared, “I have a dream.” Other questions whichmore than 85 percent of respondentsanswered correctly were those askingwhat event directly led the United States

into World War II (88 percent knew thatit was the Japanese bombing PearlHarbor); who primarily authored theDeclaration of Independence (87 percentknew it was Thomas Jefferson); and thatrespondents identify Plato and Aristotle(86 percent knew they were Greekphilosophers). All four of these events (orpersonages), of course, are historicalicons that also make frequentappearances in popular culture—with theDeclaration of Independence garneringsubstantial screen time, for instance, inthe blockbuster movie National Treasureand the 1941 attack on Pearl Harborproviding the stage for a popular flick ofthe same name—possibly accounting forthe impressive performance on thesequestions.

On the whole, the history results suggestthat about 73 percent of 17-year-olds cancorrectly answer relatively basic

questions about major historical figures,dates, and developments in America’scommon background. Except for MartinLuther King, Jr.’s, iconic “I have a dream”speech, there is not a single historicalfigure or event—including Pearl Harborand George Washington’s service as headof the Continental Army during theRevolutionary War—that 90 percent of17-year-olds could accurately identify.

LITERATURE. Thinkers who maydisagree on much else have historicallyagreed that educated individuals shouldbe acquainted with humanity’s cultural

SECTION ONE: What Do 17-Year-Olds Know?

TEN

Students had trouble identifying major historical figures.

and artistic achievements. These worksspan many forms including visual art,music, architecture, and literature. Onemight survey 17-year-olds in a range ofareas, but this study inquired aboutstudents’ knowledge of literature, as it ismore commonly taught in schools than isthe history of art, music, or architecture.It is left to readers to judge how good aproxy literary knowledge may be forthese other realms of humanaccomplishment. If it is a good proxy,however, the results are more disturbingthan is immediately apparent.

TABLE TWO presents the weightedresults for the literature questions. Onthe whole, the performance ofrespondents on these questions was poor.There were just four questions that even60 percent of respondents were able toanswer correctly. Students failed seven ofthe eleven questions. As a whole, 17-year-olds collectively earned three Cs,one D, and seven Fs on the literatureportion of the assessment. Certainly,skeptics might suggest that literatureknowledge would be better measured bystandards drawn from contemporaryworks. But the purpose of this survey wasto measure 17-year-olds’ knowledge oftheir literary heritage, not their exposureto popular culture.

FIGURE FIVE depicts the five literaturequestions on which survey respondentsfared worst. When it came to GeorgeOrwell’s classic 1984, just 52 percent ofrespondents recognized it as a novelabout “a dictatorship in which everycitizen was watched in order to stampout all individuality.” Twenty-one percentthought it was a novel about thedestruction of the human race throughnuclear war, and 18 percent thought thatit was about time travel. It is indeedironic that 17-year-olds know so little

ELEVEN

TABLE TWO:Complete Weighted Correct Results for Literature

Geoffrey Chaucer wrote the Canterbury Tales, a poem written in Middle English and containing stories told 38%by people on a pilgrimage.

Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison is about a young man's growing up in the South and then moving to 41%Harlem.

Oedipus is the character in an ancient Greek play who unknowingly kills his father and marries his mother. 45%

In the Bible, Job is known for his patience in suffering. 50%

The novel 1984 is about a dictatorship in which every citizen is watched in order to stamp out all 52%individuality.

The Scarlet Letter is the story of a woman who was unfaithful. 56%

Dickens' novel A Tale of Two Cities took place during the French Revolution. 57%

Odysseus demonstrates his bravery and cunning during his long journey homeward after fighting in the 60%Trojan War.

Walt Whitman wrote the volume of poetry Leaves of Grass, which includes the line “I celebrate myself, and 72%sing myself.”

Uncle Tom’s Cabin helped the anti-slavery movement by depicting the evils of slavery. 77%

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee is about two children who were affected by the conflict in their 79%community when their father defended a black man.

Average 57%

Students failed 7 of the 11 literature questions.

about 1984 that many think it abackward-looking tale about time travelrather than a future-oriented work ofdystopian fiction. Students unfamiliarwith Orwell’s oeuvre or the history thatproduced it will be hard-put tounderstand public debates that reference“big brother,” much less the evocation oftwentieth-century experiences withcommunism and totalitarianism.

Two questions were asked about poetry.One asked about the author of theCanterbury Tales, described as a poemwritten in Middle English and containingstories told by people on a pilgrimage.This was the question on whichrespondents fared the worst, with just 38percent naming Geoffrey Chaucer. Theother poetry query required identifyingthe “American poet who wrote thevolume of poetry Leaves of Grass, whichincludes the line ‘I celebrate myself, andsing myself ’.” Faring much better withAmerican than with medieval poetry, 72

percent of respondents correctlyidentified the author as Walt Whitman.

Just 45 percent knew that Oedipus is thecharacter in an ancient Greek play who“unknowingly killed his father andmarried his mother,” with more than halfof the respondents naming eitherAgamemnon, Orestes, or Prometheus.That misinformation alone may wellrender incomprehensible manycontemporary references to Freudianthought. Finally, one question addressedthe Bible. Just 50 percent of respondentscorrectly identified Job as known for hispatience in the face of suffering.Apparently, and somewhatincomprehensibly, 20 percent think that“prophetic ability” is the point beingmade when they hear references to thetrials of Job.

Six of the eleven literature questions dealtwith novels. More than 70 percent ofrespondents correctly answered two ofthese questions, while fewer than 60percent correctly answered the otherfour. Just 41 percent knew that RalphEllison’s novel about a young mangrowing up in the South and thenmoving to Harlem was Invisible Man.Only 57 percent knew that CharlesDickens’ A Tale of Two Cities took placeduring the French Revolution, withnearly half of respondents incorrectlystating that it took place during theCrimean War, War of the Roses, orEnglish Civil War.

Respondents fared best when asked toidentify the plot of Harper Lee’s novel, ToKill a Mockingbird, for which 79 percentcorrectly identified the theme as “twochildren who were affected by theconflict in their community when theirfather defended a black man.” Theliterature question on which respondents

fared second best asked them to identifythe novel that “helped the anti-slaverymovement by depicting the evils ofslavery.” Seventy-seven percent correctlyidentified Uncle Tom's Cabin, by HarrietBeecher Stowe. Worth noting is theintriguing result that in the cases of bothhistory and literature, respondents postedtheir best scores on questions deeplyintertwined with the history of Americanrace relations.

A HALF-EMPTY GLASS. Theproblems that the above results pose forcivic discourse are neither murky norobscure. One need not search far to findattacks on anti-terrorism measures thatdraw upon imagery from 1984 or that usethe term “Orwellian.” Pundits, novelists,and journalists routinely wield referencesto Job or Oedipus in making points aboutthe trials of a public figure or thecomplexities of familial relationships.High school graduates unacquainted withthese terms are handicapped when itcomes to engaging in such publicdebates, perhaps recognizing the termsand phrases but lacking comprehensionof the assumptions and associations thatlend them meaning. Magazine andnewspaper articles are not infrequentlystrewn with allusions to a fallen figurebeing branded with a “scarlet letter” or toit being “the best of times and the worstof times”—rhetorical nods that presumefamiliarity and help readers navigate thenarrative. Those unfamiliar with termsand references that authors and editorspresume to be common knowledge mayfind themselves struggling to make senseof seemingly prosaic accounts. What’sworse is that these students lack theknowledge and wisdom that historicalinformation provides and that artisticworks contain.

In summarizing the results of the 1986study, Ravitch and Finn concluded that“the glass is almost half empty... Wecannot tell from a ‘snapshot’ assessmentof this kind whether today’s studentsknow more or less about history andliterature than their predecessors of ten,twenty, or fifty years ago. We do

SECTION ONE: What Do 17-Year-Olds Know?

TWELVE

FIGURE FIVE:Five Literature Questions on Which

Students Fared Worst

D C B A

Geoffrey Chaucer wrote the CanterburyTales.

38%

Invisible Man is about a young man'sgrowing up in the South and moving toHarlem.

41%

Oedipus is the character whounknowingly kills his father and marrieshis mother.

45%

In the Bible, Job is known for hispatience in suffering.

50%

1984 is about a dictatorship in whichevery citizen is watched.

52%

F

Students fared better when asked to identify To Kill a Mockingbird.

conclude, however, that they do notknow enough.”16 More than twenty yearslater, it is safe to say that the storyremains disheartening.

SECTION TWO: THE IMPACT OF PARENTAL

EDUCATION

History and literature can be absorbed inthe home as well as at school. Studentsborn into educated or affluent homeswhere books and cultural experiencesabound may have the opportunity tobecome culturally literate regardless ofwhat happens in their K–12 schooling.But for those without those advantages athome, school offers their only chance ofacquiring this necessary knowledge.

The next section compares results forrespondents who reported that they hadat least one college-educated parent(students were asked to base theiranswers on the parent with the highesteducational attainment). For purposes ofthis analysis, a parent reported as havinga college degree by their 17-year-old wasunderstood as “college-educated,”possessing either a bachelor’s degree oran academic associates degree. A 17-year-old with “non-college-educated”parents is one who reported that he orshe did not have a parent who had acollege degree (although some did haveparents that had attended, but notgraduated, college).17

HISTORY. Seventeen-year-olds with acollege-educated parent scored at leastone full letter grade, and sometimesalmost two, above those without acollege-educated parent on over 40percent of the history questions. Theyearned a D or an F on just threequestions, whereas those without college-educated parents earned three times asmany. Those less-advantagedrespondents earned an A or B on onlyfour questions, while respondents withcollege-educated parents earned twelve.

The biggest difference between the twogroups emerged on the questions that

THIRTEEN

TABLE THREE:History Correct Results by Parental Educational Attainment

Figures in pink show a difference of ten percentage points or more between the two scores.

College- No college-educated educated

parent parent

The Civil War took place between 1850 and 1900. 46% 41%

The purpose of the authors of The Federalist Papers was to gain ratification of the Constitution. 56% 47%

The controversy surrounding Senator Joseph McCarthy focused on Communism. 59% 47%

The guarantee of freedom of speech and religion is found in the Bill of Rights. 72% 64%

The First World War was between 1900 and 1950. 73% 54%

President John F. Kennedy said, “And so my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do 73% 69%for you; ask what you can do for your country.”

The Renaissance was the period in European history noted for cultural and technological advances. 74% 55%

The Declaration of Independence says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are 77% 72%created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

In its Brown v. Board of Education decision, the Supreme Court ruled segregation unconstitutional. 79% 67%

The Watergate investigations resulted in the resignation of President Richard Nixon. 79% 71%

Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in North America. 82% 74%

Christopher Columbus sailed for the New World before 1750. 83% 69%

Adolf Hitler was Chancellor of Germany during the Second World War. 84% 74%

Japanese-Americans were forced into relocation camps during the Second World War. 84% 68%

George Washington was the commander of the American army in the Revolutionary War. 85% 73%

The major enemies of the United States during the Second World War were Germany and Japan. 86% 79%

President Abraham Lincoln wrote the Emancipation Proclamation. 88% 79%

The idea that each branch of the federal government should keep the other branches from 89% 76%becoming too strong is called checks and balances.

The bombing led to the entry of the United States into the Second World War. 90% 87%

Thomas Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence. 92% 84%

Plato and Aristotle were Greek philosophers. 92% 83 %

“I have a dream” speech was given by Martin Luther King, Jr. 100% 95%

Average 79% 70%

SECTION TWO: The Impact of Parental Education

asked about the First World War, theRenaissance, and which ethnicpopulation the U.S. interned duringWorld War II (see TABLE THREE). Ineach case, the difference between the twogroups was between 15 and 20percentage points—nearly two lettergrades. The smallest differences emergedwhen respondents were asked about thetime period of the Civil War and thebombing of Pearl Harbor.

FIGURE SIX depicts the difference inperformance between respondents whohad a college-educated parent and thosewho did not on the five history questionson which all students fared worst.

Respondents raised by college graduatesearned Cs on the questions about theRenaissance and the First World War andscored substantially better than theirpeers on the question about SenatorMcCarthy (although it was still the casethat fewer than 60 percent answered thequestion correctly). Meanwhile,respondents who did not have a college-educated parent earned failing grades oneach of the five questions.

Approaching the end of their high schooleducation, students with a college-educated parent consistently fared betterin historical knowledge than thosewithout a college-educated parent.

LITERATURE. Even those students witha parent who had graduated collegemanaged a passing grade on just four ofthe 11 literature questions, while earningan F on seven. They posted an overallaverage of 63 percent across the literaturequestions. On the four questions wherethey earned a passing grade, they earnedtwo Bs (on the questions about UncleTom’s Cabin and To Kill a Mockingbird), aC, and a D.

Meanwhile, students who did not have aparent who graduated college compiledan overall average of 54 percent. Thisgroup could only manage three Cs, failingthe rest of the questions. This populationwas wrong more than half of the time onfive questions, and fewer than 40 percentcould identify Oedipus or the author ofthe Canterbury Tales.

The biggest differences between the twogroups emerged on the questions thatasked respondents to identify UncleTom’s Cabin, Oedipus, and GeoffreyChaucer (see TABLE FOUR). About poor

FOURTEEN

FIGURE SIX: Five history questions on which students fared worst by parental

educational attainmentDark bars represent students with a college-

educated parent; light bars represent studentswithout a college-educated parent. Bars highlighted

in red/pink show a difference of 10 percentagepoints or more between these two scores

D C B A

When was the Civil War?

46%

41%

The purpose of The Federalist Paperswas to gain ratification of theConstitution.

56%

47%

The controversy surrounding SenatorJoseph McCarthy focused onCommunism.

59%

47%

The First World War was between 1900and 1950.

73%

54%

The Renaissance was the period inEuropean history noted for cultural andtechnological advances.

74%

55%

F

For some, school offers their only chance of acquiring this necessary knowledge.

Oedipus, respondents with more-educated parents fared 21 percentagepoints better—although they stillidentified this character correctly lessthan 60 percent of the time. In fact,respondents from less educated familieswere more likely to name Prometheus asthe character in question than Oedipus.

On the other two questions, thedifferences between the two groups werebetween 10 and 15 percentage points.The two groups’ performance on the five

FIFTEEN

TABLE FOUR:Literature Correct Results by Parental Educational Attainment

Figures in pink show a difference of ten percentage points or more between the two scores

College- No college-educated educated

parent parent

Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison is about a young man's growing up in the South and then 41% 42%moving to Harlem.

Geoffrey Chaucer wrote the Canterbury Tales, a poem written in Middle English and containing 48% 34%stories told by people on a pilgrimage.

The novel 1984 is about a dictatorship in which every citizen is watched in order to stamp out 57% 50%all individuality.

Dickens' novel A Tale of Two Cities took place during the French Revolution. 58% 56%

In the Bible, Job is known for his patience in suffering. 58% 46%

Oedipus is the character in an ancient Greek play who unknowingly kills his father and marries 59% 38%his mother.

The Scarlet Letter is the story of a woman who was unfaithful. 59% 54%

Odysseus demonstrates his bravery and cunning during his long journey homeward after fighting 67% 57%in the Trojan War.

Walt Whitman wrote the volume of poetry Leaves of Grass, which includes the line “I celebrate 75% 71%myself, and sing myself.”

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee is about two children who were affected by the conflict in 84% 77%their community when their father defended a black man.

Uncle Tom’s Cabin helped the anti-slavery movement by depicting the evils of slavery. 86% 73%

Average 63% 54%

FIGURE SEVEN: Five literature questions on which students fared worst by parental

educational attainment.Dark bars represent students with a college-

educated parent; light bars represent studentswithout a college-educated parent. Bars highlighted

in red/pink show a difference of 10 percentagepoints or more between these two scores.

D C B A

Invisible Man is about a young man'sgrowing up in the South and moving toHarlem.

41%

42%

Geoffrey Chaucer wrote the CanterburyTales.

48%

34%

1984 is about a dictatorship in whichevery citizen is watched.

57%

50%

In the Bible, Job is known for hispatience in suffering.

58%

46%

Oedipus is the character whounknowingly kills his father and marrieshis mother.

59%

38%

F

literature questions on which therespondents fared worst is illustrated inFIGURE SEVEN. Respondents raised bycollege graduates fared substantiallybetter, although both groups earned Fson all five questions. The differencebetween the two groups was more than10 points on three of the five questionsand about eight points on a fourth.

While both groups fared poorly on theliterature questions overall, it is clear that17-year-olds born into more educatedenvironments are approaching highschool graduation with significantly moreliterary knowledge than theircounterparts. While aggregateperformance is mediocre, those 17-year-olds with a parent who graduated collegedid substantially better than their peers.In a nation concerned about socialdivisions and civic apathy, this is a

worrisome state of affairs and onedeserving careful attention. Now, let usturn to a final piece of data that may helpus understand a bit more clearly why thismight be.

CULTURAL EXPOSURE. One way tointerpret these results is to consider whatrespondents had to say about the extentof their participation in various culturalopportunities. Activities such asattending plays, visiting museums,

singing in choirs, and reading at schooland at home are important not only intheir own right, but also because theyoffer students access to the literature andhistory of our common culture.

FIGURE EIGHT shows that about two-thirds of all 17-year-olds have attended aplay or read a work of literature outsideof school and about half have visited anart museum or participated in a choir ororchestra. About three-quarters of thosewith a college-educated parent haveattended a play and have read at least onework of literature outside of school, whileabout half have visited an art museum orparticipated in a choir or orchestra. Ofthose young people without a college-educated parent, the figures are markedlylower. These teenagers were 16percentage points less likely to have readat least one work of literature outside of

SECTION TWO: The Impact of Parental Education

SIXTEEN

Respondents raised by college graduates fared substantially better.

school and 12 percentage points lesslikely to have visited an art museum.They were also eight to nine percentagepoints less likely to have attended a playor participated in a choir or orchestra. In

short, 17-year-olds with a college-educated parent appear substantiallymore likely to be exposed to literary andcultural opportunities.

FIGURE NINE shows that 90 percent of17-year-olds have read at least one novelin the course of their schooling, whilealmost half have read more than six.Those young people who have a college-educated parent are about 10 percentagepoints more likely to have read more thansix novels in school, and they are sixpercentage points less likely to have neverread a novel in school.

The disappointing overall performanceon literature, and particularly thesubstantial gap in literary knowledgebetween 17-year-olds with and withoutcollege-educated parents, raises the

question of whether elementary andsecondary schools are including classicliterature in the curriculum. FIGURETEN shows the percentage ofrespondents who reported reading fourclass novels “all the way through,” eitherfor school or on their own. About three-fifths of students report having readHuckleberry Finn in its entirety. Slightlyless than half report having done thesame with The Scarlet Letter, and onlyabout one in five claim to have readGreat Expectations or The Grapes ofWrath.

There is only one of these four novelsthat a majority of students report havingread by age 17. Perhaps even more tellingis the data which show that respondentswere highly unlikely to have read any ofthese texts on their own. In short, ifstudents are not reading these texts inschool, it is about 95 percent certain thatthey will not have read them by age 17.

It is certainly possible that of theminority of students who read thesenovels in school, some would have readthem on their own had they not beenassigned. However, given the datashowing steadily declining youth interestin reading and literature, skepticism onthis count is justified. There is also cause

SEVENTEEN

IF STUDENTS ARENOT READING thesetexts in school, it isabout 95 percentcertain that they willnot have read them byage 17.

FIGURE NINE: Number of novels read in course of K-12

schooling by parental educational attainment!= 0 books != 1-6 books

!= more than 6 books

College-educated parent

Without a college-educated parent

53%

44%

3%

42%

49%

9%

40 60 8020

FIGURE EIGHT: Participation in cultural activities by parental

educational attainmentDark bars represent students with a college-

educated parent; light bars represents studentswithout a college-educated parent. Bars highlighted

in red/pink show a difference of 10 percentagepoints or more between these two scores

Participated in a choir or orchestra.

49%

40%

Visited an art museum.

54%

42%

Read a work of literature outside ofschool.

77%

61%

Attended a play.

79%

70%

to wonder whether the self-reportedpercentage of students claiming to haveread these volumes is an overestimation.It is of course likely that young readersare more inclined to read J.K. Rowlingthan John Steinbeck, and thus are readingsome novels even if not the literature

asked about here; but the fact remainsthat the youths in question are notreceiving much exposure to the pillars ofour shared literary tradition.

One important wrinkle here is thequestion of how effectively schools can

promote reading. Perhaps schools areassigning classics like The Grapes ofWrath or Great Expectations, andstudents are simply not reading them.Unfortunately, the information needed toanswer such questions is not collectedtoday in any systematic fashion. Thereare scraps of evidence that give us someinsight into the question, however. In2004, about three-fourths of 17-year-oldsand four-fifths of 13-year-olds reportedbeing assigned homework, with morethan 80 percent of high schoolers andmore than 90 percent of middle schoolerssaying that they do at least some of thework that is assigned. About one-third ofboth middle schoolers and high schoolersreported that they spend an hour ormore per day on homework.18 There isthen some cause for confidence thatassigned texts are not simply ignored,which suggests that the simple act ofexpecting students to read moreliterature is a sensible place to start.

There is reason to believe that thesubstantial gap in knowledge is due to the

prevalence of books and literary materialin the home, parental interests andactivities, and the assignments given at

the schools that they attend. Any effort tountangle these various threads, however,and to determine their impact or relativeimportance, is beyond the confines ofthis analysis. What is clear is that allstudents need improved instruction inliterature and history—and that lessadvantaged students would benefit mostof all.

SECTION TWO: The Impact of Parental Education

EIGHTEEN

Seventeen-year-olds with a college-educated parent appear substantiallymore likely to be exposed to literary

and cultural opportunities.

40 60 8020

FIGURE TEN:Read the classics “all the way through” by

parental educational attainment and whetherassigned in school or read on their own!= in school and college-educated parent

!= in school and no college-educated parent!= on own and college-educated parent

!= on own and no college-educated parent

Great Expectations

18%

11%

5%

3%

Huckleberry Finn

49%

45%

16%

13%

Scarlet Letter

43%

36%

4%

4%

Grapes of Wrath

18%

14%

5%

5%

When it comes to familiarity with majorhistorical events and significant literaryaccomplishments, America’s 17-year-oldsfare rather poorly. When asked relativelysimple multiple-choice questions andgraded on a generous scale, teens on thecusp of adulthood earned a D overall.Moreover, there is an unsurprising butunfortunate gap between those childrenborn into homes headed by college-educated parents and their peers. Whenit comes to familiarity with the base ofknowledge that enables us to engage inconversations about policy and valuesand so much else, our 17-year-olds areonly barely literate.

Nearly a quarter of 17-year-olds did notknow that George Washingtoncommanded the American army in theRevolutionary War. Forty percent couldnot identify the proper half-century inwhich the First World War took place.

One-fourth thought ChristopherColumbus had landed in the New Worldafter 1750. More than a quarter did notknow that it is the Declaration ofIndependence that declares that all men“are endowed by their Creator withcertain unalienable Rights.” Barely half

know the setting of Dickens’ A Tale ofTwo Cities or the plot of The ScarletLetter. Just two in five could identify theauthor of the Canterbury Tales or theplot of Ralph Ellison’s seminal InvisibleMan.

Perhaps these results should not come asa great surprise. For all the attention paidto school improvement in recent years,particularly at the high school level, therehas been a focus on the essentialistquestions of reading, math, andgraduation. It appears likely that thisfocus has not served the broader aim ofensuring that our children are educatedin the liberal arts and sciences.

The responses to novels like TheAdventures of Huckleberry Finn and TheGrapes of Wrath strongly suggest that fewhigh school graduates will have readthese volumes unless they are assigned.For young people who are not pursuing apostsecondary education, their K–12education is the window of opportunityto acquaint them with these works. Andin too many cases, that opportunity isbeing squandered.

NINETEEN

CONCLUSION: The findings hereshould serve as a wake-up call toremind us that it is vital to addressmore than one educationalchallenge at a time.

Is No Child Left Behind stifling instruction in the liberal arts and sciences?

What should we take from thesefindings? For starters, it is essential thatparents, policymakers, and educatorsexamine what we are doing when itcomes to the teaching of history andculture. We must ask whether popularreform currents are delivering the results(and incentives) we wish, and what thatmeans for school reform going forward.Five specific recommendations deserveattention.

First, as the old management adage has it,“What you measure is what you get.” Wehave put that notion to the test ineducation in recent years, determinedlymeasuring reading and math skill levels,especially in grades three through eight.It should come as no surprise that ourtime, energy, and attention haveconsequently been absorbed by masteryof basic skills in reading and math. Thefindings here should serve as a wake-upcall to remind us that it is vital to addressmore than one educational challenge at atime. The first step in doing so is to moresystematically assess student learningbeyond math and reading, particularly inthe subjects of the traditional liberal arts.This does not mean adding newassessments into the No Child LeftBehind framework—in truth, it isprobably advisable not to do so—but itdoes suggest that states, school districts,foundations, and the NationalAssessment Governing Boards shouldthink hard about how we might moreregularly and more profoundly measurelearning in liberal arts and sciencesubjects at a variety of grade levels.

Second, as we debate the reauthorizationof No Child Left Behind and design stateaccountability programs, we would bewell advised to reassess whether thesesystems or district practices arepromoting or unintentionally stifling

instruction in the liberal arts andsciences. This survey makes clear thatstudents’ knowledge in these areas fallsfar short of where it needs to be. In lightof extensive efforts to promoteeducational accountability in recentyears, it is worth ensuring that measuressuch as NCLB are helping to address thischallenge and not somehow aggravating it.

Third, we must do a substantially betterjob of teaching the liberal arts andsciences. In the current policyenvironment, the vast majority of timeand energy are being devoted to researchthat addresses reading and mathinstruction. This work is essential andinvaluable, but it would behoove parentsand policymakers to encourageresearchers and educators to ensure thattheir enthusiasm for basic skills is notmarginalizing attention to questions ofcivic import. To this end, it may be usefulto consider the Core Knowledge, Latin,or International Baccalaureate programs,which may offer promising approachesand useful lessons on this count.

Fourth, we need to make sure ourteachers have the knowledge they need toteach science and the liberal arts well.Unfortunately, there is little energy orattention devoted to programs thatensure teachers are equipped to providesuch instruction. Teachers flock to thefew opportunities that do exist to steepthemselves in content-rich subject matter,such as the summer institutes offered bythe Gilder Lehrman Institute ofAmerican History and the NationalEndowment for the Humanities. So theanecdotal evidence strongly suggests thatteachers want to know more and be ableto offer that knowledge to their students.There is a need to research the state ofteacher mastery and to deviserecruitment, training, and supportprograms that will support robustteaching and learning when it comes tohistorical and cultural knowledge.

And finally, we note that promoting arich liberal arts and sciences educationfor all is an idea around which reformadvocates of various stripes can rally.Whatever reforms one believes

advisable in order to promote qualityschools and schooling, we can agree that“quality” includes a broad, rich, andchallenging liberal arts curriculum. Intruth, proponents of charter schools orvouchers, mayoral control or schoolboards, merit pay or career ladders, orany number of other measures all havereason to insist that these structuralstrategies be coupled with a richcurriculum that is provided equitably toall students. A successful coalition onbehalf of liberal education can and mustwelcome those who may otherwisedisagree on the particular shape ofreform.

In profound and essential ways, our civichealth and national cohesion depend onour ability to familiarize the risinggeneration with the touchstones of ourshared history and culture. Ensuring thatall citizens have a shared sense of MartinLuther King, Jr.’s, “I have a dream” speechand the attack on Pearl Harbor is astart—but only a very modest one. Alone,such scattered kernels of awarenessconstitute no more than a handful ofromanticized images flickering in thenational conscience. What we need isconfidence that all of our children will befamiliar with the highs and the lows ofthe compelling narrative that is ourcommon heritage.

Conclusion

TWENTY

A coalition on behalf of liberal education mustwelcome those who may otherwise disagree.

We must do a substantially better job of teaching the liberal arts and sciences.

APPENDIX

METHODOLOGY. Twelve hundredquestionnaires were completed in thefirst two weeks of January 2008 using atargeted sample base of 32,000 recordspurchased from Scientific TelephoneSamples (STS), the premiere telephonesampling organization in the UnitedStates. The targeted list was part of anationwide database of over 1.6 million17-year-olds compiled by STS. Based onthe sample size, the sampling margin oferror in this effort is plus or minus threepercent.19

RMA Research, a South Dakota-basedfirm, administered a test consisting of 33questions drawn from the 1986 NAEPtest. The survey included 22 questions onhistory and 11 on literature, all drawnfrom the 141 history and 121 literaturequestions administered in 1986.

All of the questions called for multiple-choice responses. Thirty of the questionsprovided respondents with four possibleanswers. The other three questions (allasking respondents to match an historicevent with the time period in which itoccurred) provided six possible answers.This multiple-choice format means thateven a respondent who guessedrandomly on every question could expectto answer about 25 percent of thequestions correctly.

While it is tempting to try to determinetrends over time, given that this studyuses questions from the 1986 assessment,the results from this research and thosecompiled by the 1986 NAEP should notbe directly compared. The NAEP wasadministered to a national sample of 17-year-olds enrolled in school and takingthe assessment under conventional testconditions as part of a federallysupported testing program, while this

effort relied upon telephone questioningof a representative sample. Thefundamentally different nature of thesedata collection exercises makes itinadvisable to compare the two sets ofresults in order to determine trends overtime.

First, asking 17-year-olds to answerquestions by telephone might serve tomake the test harder (because there aremore distractions when answering atelephone survey than under schooltesting conditions) or easier (becauseindividuals perform better when tests areread to them). In particular, researchershave determined that reading tests aloudto students frequently has a sizable,positive impact on performance—suggesting that the results reported heremight be higher than they would be ifstudents were tested using a writteninstrument.20 However, illustrating theuncertain nature of such considerations,a 2003 study by Brian McKevitt andStephen Elliot found that reading a test tostudents had no significant effect onperformance.21

Similarly, administering the test as atelephone survey rather than in school toa national sample of students posesparticular challenges of ensuring that thesample is nationally representative. Forinstance, the introduction of call-screening, multiple phone lines, andwidespread use of mobile phones havealtered the population sampled randomlyby RDD.22 Moreover, as of 2005, threepercent of the population in the UnitedStates did not have a working telephonein their household,23 and at least 12.8percent of Americans had cell phonesonly.24 This calls for caution in comparingresults collected using land-linetelephones to those obtained in adifferent fashion.

It is also important to note that thepopulation tested here included a fullersample of the nation’s 17-year-olds, as itpotentially included those who haddropped out of school, were suspended,or were home schooled, and thereforeassuredly would not have been includedin an in-school assessment of the kindadministered in 1986. This makes thecurrent effort a better gauge of the overallknowledge of the nation’s 17-year-olds.Of course, as with any telephone survey,the answers are being provided byrespondents who agree to participate.25

In the end, there is no clear or reliableway to sort out all of the potential effects,which is why these results should be readas a snapshot of what 17-year-olds knowin 2008 rather than as part of a trend.

Finally, note that the aggregate resultsreported in SECTION ONE of this reportare “weighted” to provide a nationallyrepresentative picture of what 17-year-olds know. Because sampling techniquesused in conducting phone, mail, or e-mailsurveys inevitably provide an imperfectrepresentation of the larger population,researchers typically weight the results sothat the findings account for the fact thatthe sample may have included adisproportionate number of individualsof a given gender, ethnicity, orsocioeconomic class.26 The general readercan largely ignore this caution, as theweighting here is no different from theadjustments routinely made in nationalsamples conducted by Gallup or the NewYork Times on all manner of questions.

TWENTY-ONE

Twelve-hundred 17-year-olds were polled.

Reading tests aloud frequently has a positive impact on performance.

Appendix

ENDNOTES

1 Luke J. Larsen, The Foreign-Born Population in theUnited States: 2003, Current Population Reports, August2004, http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p20-551.pdf(accessed January 24, 2008), 1.

2 National Center for Education Statistics, The Condition ofEducation: 2007, U.S. Department of Education, June2007, http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007064.pdf (accessedJanuary 17, 2008), 27.

3 Jefferson to Du Pont de Nemours, 24 April 1816 in TheWritings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. Albert Ellery Bergh(Washington, DC: The Thomas Jefferson MemorialAssociation, 1905), vii.

4 Gallup reported in June 2007 that just 14 percent ofAmericans had a “great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidencein Congress and that just 25 percent of Americans had a“great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in thepresidency.

5 Frank Newport, Americans’ Confidence in Congress atAll-Time Low: Confidence in Most Institutions Drops,Gallup News Service, June 21, 2007,http://www.gallup.com/poll/27946/Americans-Confidence-Congress-AllTime-Low.aspx (accessedJanuary 24, 2008).

6 Mark Bauerlein, The Dumbest Generation (Los Angeles,CA: Tarcher Press, 2008).

7 National Endowment for the Arts, To Read or Not toRead: A Question of National Consequence, ExecutiveSummary, November 2007, http://www.arts.gov/research/ToRead_ExecSum.pdf (accessed January 24,2008), 8.

8 While less than one in ten high school seniors watchedthree or more hours of television per day in 1992, almostone in three did so in 2004. U.S. Department ofEducation, Digest of Education Statistics: 2006, July 2007,http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/2d/78/63.pdf (accessed January 24, 2008), table 142, p. 219.

9 David J. Ferrero, “W(h)ither Liberal Education? A ModestDefense of Humanistic Schooling in the Twenty-firstCentury,” in Beyond the Basics: Achieving a LiberalEducation for All Children, ed. Chester E. Finn, Jr., andDiane Ravitch (Washington, DC: Thomas B. FordhamInstitute, 2007), 25.

10 Martin West, “Testing, Learning, and Teaching: TheEffects of Test-based Accountability on StudentAchievement and Instructional Time in Core AcademicSubjects,” in Beyond the Basics: Achieving a LiberalEducation for All Children, ed. Chester E. Finn, Jr., andDiane Ravitch (Washington, DC: Thomas B. FordhamInstitute, 2007), 45–61.

11 For the official report, see Arthur N. Apple, Judith A.Langer, and Ina V.S. Mullis, Literature & U.S. History: TheInstructional Experience and Factual Knowledge of HighSchool Juniors (Princeton, NJ: Educational TestingService, 1987).

12 Diane Ravitch and Chester E. Finn, Jr., What Do Our 17-Year-Olds Know? A Report on the First NationalAssessment of History and Literature (New York: Harper& Row, 1987), 200.

13 For instance, one question that tests no precise historicalcontext provides a table that lists household expenditureson various appliances in 1900 and in 1928. Appliancespurchased in 1900 include bicycles, wringer andwashboard, brushes and brooms, and a mechanicalsewing machine. Those purchased in 1928 include anautomobile, radio, washing machine, and vacuum cleaner.The question asks, “Create a thesis statement about theway the changes shown in the table above affectedeveryday life between 1900 and 1928” and “use theinformation in the table to help prove your thesis.” Asecond example of this type of question is one thatdepicts Lyndon B. Johnson clinging to a side of a gearlabeled “Vietnam War” as it rotates toward a gear labeled“1968 election.” The question posed is: “What is the mainmessage of this cartoon about Lyndon B. Johnson?”

14 Detailed descriptions of the criteria governing theselection of the initial items for literature and history canbe found in National Assessment of Educational Progress,Foundations of Literacy: A Description of the Assessmentof Basic Knowledge of United States History andLiterature, NAEP Description Booklet No. 17-HL-11,(Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, 1986).

15 Diane Ravitch and Chester E. Finn, Jr., What Do Our 17-Year-Olds Know? A Report on the First NationalAssessment of History and Literature (New York: Harper& Row, 1987), 45.

16 Diane Ravitch and Chester E. Finn, Jr., What Do Our 17-Year-Olds Know? A Report on the First NationalAssessment of History and Literature (New York: Harper& Row, 1987), 120.

17 Phone interveiws: 32.5 percent of respondents reportedthat their parent had “a college degree,” 63.5 percent thattheir parent did not, and 4 percent reported that they didnot know. Twenty-one percent indicated that their parenthad “some college.” These categories are obviously far lessprecise than one might prefer. Nonetheless, given thelimitations of collecting data about parents throughphone interviews with 17-year-olds, these simple proxiesfor educational attainment were deemed the most reliableindicators feasible.

18 National Center for Education Statistics, Digest ofEducation Statistics: 2006, U.S. Department of Education,July 2007, http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/ 2007017.pdf(accessed January 17, 2008), 177.

19 More information about STS can be found on theirwebsite (www.stssamples.com).

20 Linda Meloy, Craig Deville and David Frisbie, “TheEffects of a Reading Accommodation on StandardizedTest Scores of Learning Disabled and Non-LearningDisabled Students,” Paper presented at the annualmeeting of the National Council on Measurement inEducation, New Orleans, LA, 2000,http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_ 01/0000019b/80/16/34/8a.pdf (accessed January 15, 2008). Daniel Koretz andLaura Hamilton, “Assessment of Students withDisabilities in Kentucky: Inclusion, Student Performance,and Validity,” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis22, no. 3 (2000): 255–272.

21 Brian C. McKevitt and Stephen N. Elliot, “Effects andperceived consequences of using read aloud and teacher-recommended testing accommodations on a readingachievement test,” School Psychology Review 32, no. 4(2003).

22 Sturgis, Surveys and Sampling, 19.

23 U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Housing andUrban Development, American Housing Survey for theUnited States: 2005, August 2006, http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/h150-05.pdf (accessed January 15, 2008).

24 Stephen J. Blumberg and Julian V. Luke, WirelessSubstitution: Early Release of Estimates Based on Datafrom the National Health Interview Survey, July –December 2006, National Center for Health Statistics,May 2006, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless200705.pdf (accessed January 15,2008).

25 A total of about 12 percent answered the phone butrefused to take the quiz.

26 Results were weighted according to 2006 population datafrom the Center for Disease Control, which measuredthat 11.9 percent of the U.S. population in 2006 wasHispanic; 12.3 percent was Black, non-Hispanic; 71.1percent white, non-Hispanic; 4.6 percent other, non-Hispanic; 51 percent female and 49 percent male. Whilethe survey’s target population prohibited obtainingreliable data on family income, respondents were askedabout the extent of their parents’ educational attainment.These were weighted according to 2006 data from theU.S. Census Bureau, which measured that 13 percent ofadults between the ages of 30 and 74 had less than a highschool education, 32 percent had a high school degree, 22percent had some college, and 34 percent had earned anacademic associate’s degree or a bachelor’s degree.Students were asked whether their parent with thehighest level of educational attainment had no highschool degree, a high school degree, some college, or acollege degree. For purposes of this analysis, answerswere weighted according to the understanding that “somecollege” referred to those who attended but did notcomplete college as well as those who receivedoccupational associate’s degrees and that “college degree”referred to those who had earned an academic associate’sdegree, bachelor’s degree, or higher. Some respondentsmay have categorized a parent as having a college degreealthough that parent had completed an occupational,rather than an academic, associate’s degree. Thisinconsistency could skew the weighting of the sample.However, as only 5 percent of the population hadcompleted an occupational associate’s degree, thesubstantive effect would be minimal.

TWENTY-TWO

COMMONCORE