Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing magical about that timeframe. Literacy increased over the years, as it should have, with increasing standards of living. The question is why was there a downturn in both literacy and numeracy after that.

OP here. Yeah, I get why literacy continued to improve over the years - just wondering what happened on the opposite end.

I think it was the expansion of entertainment options. I’m Gen X. As a child, I had access to 5 tv channels and it was mainly adult programming. I learned to read at age 3 and read constantly throughout my childhood. My Millennial and Gen Z kids read so much less. They consume a lot of online content. Some of which is just video or montages of images.

But they are way more computer literate and do few jobs require writing.

Anonymous wrote:Teacher and 80s baby here.

I think teachers lost their authority in a lot of ways. We're expected to act in ways that are similar to a customer service representative where the parent or external body is always right. We also shifted to a homogeneous approach where "every child is gifted." We say "we're meeting every child where they're at," but we're really appealing to the lowest common denominator. We also treat education like a right and not a privilege, and we continue to devalue it every time we allow someone to remain in the classroom if they refuse to do any work, become completely disruptive, or assault a teacher. To cap it all off, the entire system has shifted to quantifying success in the form of test scores instead of tracking how our graduates fair in life 2, 4, 6 years after graduation.

Born in ‘77 and I agree with this. My parents both worked, never read to me, rarely paid for extracurriculars, but I got a really solid public school education with some excellent teachers. The expectation set at home was that I would go to school and listen to my teachers. My parents never looked at my homework or questioned a grade on a test. Teachers were allowed to just teach and kids were given the space to develop self-sufficiency.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing magical about that timeframe. Literacy increased over the years, as it should have, with increasing standards of living. The question is why was there a downturn in both literacy and numeracy after that.

OP here. Yeah, I get why literacy continued to improve over the years - just wondering what happened on the opposite end.

I think it was the expansion of entertainment options. I’m Gen X. As a child, I had access to 5 tv channels and it was mainly adult programming. I learned to read at age 3 and read constantly throughout my childhood. My Millennial and Gen Z kids read so much less. They consume a lot of online content. Some of which is just video or montages of images.

We got rid of lead gas in 1973 and lead paint in 1978.

Current high school teacher here, born in ‘80.

I am sure there are many factors, but one that really stands out to me is rising inequality and increasing instability in families. Many are just trying to survive. In my rural area, addiction is also a huge issue in families, contributing to above.

Another is a lack of reading. My AP students from just 5-6 years ago were much more prepared than they are now. My current students, kids who are wonderful and motivated and work SO hard, don’t know medium-complex vocabulary and can’t spell. Many of them can’t spell words like “cheerfulness.” Not kidding. They just have not read a lot of books in their lifetime and it shows. Again, these are smart kids, no less intelligent than students of years past...it is a skills/exposure thing.

Can’t discount the influence of tech, at least in recent years.

Life is very complex now and kids feel pressure to go to college from a young age. That wasn’t the case in my high school, in the 90s. Adults were also waaay more hands off back then and far fewer students were in Special Ed. It is mind boggling how much school resources and time are used for about 10-20 students per 500, just trying to get them to attend school or do any work, ever. Not saying those students don’t deserve help, they do!

As professionals we are asked to spend more and more of our time addressing social and emotional needs, despite not being therapists. You can bet that academics takes a back seat as a result. And the kids ARE more troubled, more helpless, etc. it is not made up.

Sorry to ramble. It is so complicated. I think about this all the time...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it really comes down to the fact that there were far fewer kids. GenX is way smaller than the boomers. Just an easier system and better outcomes when less kids to deal with.

And life was in general much cheaper, so maybe both parents worked, but the second job was like a teacher and the breadwinner was always home for dinner.

Probably the end of holding kids back and mainstreaming has made elementary harder, but kids are differentiated by middle and high school in most places so that isn't that different.

Except that most babies born in stated period are not Gen X. Date ranges vary, but most sources say Gen X ended between 1978 and 1982. The highly literate group is he older millenials.

I do think that a big factor is that a relatively high percentage of American mothers had college degrees at that point, but most still worked in family-friendly professions and took years off to stay home before kids started school. Also, preschools were widely available, but they were mostly part-time programs, not full-time day care substitutes. By 1987, women had more professional options, but fewer had the option to stay home with babies or get home by 4 to prepare dinner. A higher percentage of babies born after 1987 spent their early childhood years in centers, and their elementary school years in aftercare.

So it's working moms fault.

Projecting much?

I don’t think PP was saying it’s mom’s fault by any sense of the imagination. If anything I feel as though the worsening economic climate for the middle class has bred this issue, and it really is an economic issue much more than a parenting one. A lot of people need to work a LOT in order to get their kids the things they need that cost money — health insurance, saving up for college, saving for retirement so they’re not a burden to their kids, and of course basic things like putting food on the table. I teach elementary school and a lot of my students don’t get picked up until 6 every night. Assuming you want your kids to get to bed at a decent time, that doesn’t leave a whole lot of time for parents to do things like read to their kids or play games and cook together that are all really, really important to children’s development. And aside from just the lack of time, I imagine that many parents are just exhausted at the end of the day and need mental space to recover for the next busy work day.

Let me be clear: I do NOT fault parents who do what they need to do in this economic reality. This is not me saying it’s working parents’ fault at all (and I am one). But I think it’s a bit naive to think that this has no affect on kids.

I think you and pp you are defending have a very myopic view of the world.

So then enlighten us.

Anonymous wrote:This is why we chose what is now called a "traditional" education for DC. By that I mean: recess, p.e., music, art, phonics (and more phonics), handwriting, and math literacy. Worked for me, working for the kid.

What school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it really comes down to the fact that there were far fewer kids. GenX is way smaller than the boomers. Just an easier system and better outcomes when less kids to deal with.

And life was in general much cheaper, so maybe both parents worked, but the second job was like a teacher and the breadwinner was always home for dinner.

Probably the end of holding kids back and mainstreaming has made elementary harder, but kids are differentiated by middle and high school in most places so that isn't that different.

Except that most babies born in stated period are not Gen X. Date ranges vary, but most sources say Gen X ended between 1978 and 1982. The highly literate group is he older millenials.

I do think that a big factor is that a relatively high percentage of American mothers had college degrees at that point, but most still worked in family-friendly professions and took years off to stay home before kids started school. Also, preschools were widely available, but they were mostly part-time programs, not full-time day care substitutes. By 1987, women had more professional options, but fewer had the option to stay home with babies or get home by 4 to prepare dinner. A higher percentage of babies born after 1987 spent their early childhood years in centers, and their elementary school years in aftercare.

So it's working moms fault.

Projecting much?

I don’t think PP was saying it’s mom’s fault by any sense of the imagination. If anything I feel as though the worsening economic climate for the middle class has bred this issue, and it really is an economic issue much more than a parenting one. A lot of people need to work a LOT in order to get their kids the things they need that cost money — health insurance, saving up for college, saving for retirement so they’re not a burden to their kids, and of course basic things like putting food on the table. I teach elementary school and a lot of my students don’t get picked up until 6 every night. Assuming you want your kids to get to bed at a decent time, that doesn’t leave a whole lot of time for parents to do things like read to their kids or play games and cook together that are all really, really important to children’s development. And aside from just the lack of time, I imagine that many parents are just exhausted at the end of the day and need mental space to recover for the next busy work day.

Let me be clear: I do NOT fault parents who do what they need to do in this economic reality. This is not me saying it’s working parents’ fault at all (and I am one). But I think it’s a bit naive to think that this has no affect on kids.

No projection that is in fact what pp stayed or rather implied.

I happen to think it's a leap to conclude longer working hours, kids in daycare equals an illiterate generation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it really comes down to the fact that there were far fewer kids. GenX is way smaller than the boomers. Just an easier system and better outcomes when less kids to deal with.

And life was in general much cheaper, so maybe both parents worked, but the second job was like a teacher and the breadwinner was always home for dinner.

Probably the end of holding kids back and mainstreaming has made elementary harder, but kids are differentiated by middle and high school in most places so that isn't that different.

Except that most babies born in stated period are not Gen X. Date ranges vary, but most sources say Gen X ended between 1978 and 1982. The highly literate group is he older millenials.

I do think that a big factor is that a relatively high percentage of American mothers had college degrees at that point, but most still worked in family-friendly professions and took years off to stay home before kids started school. Also, preschools were widely available, but they were mostly part-time programs, not full-time day care substitutes. By 1987, women had more professional options, but fewer had the option to stay home with babies or get home by 4 to prepare dinner. A higher percentage of babies born after 1987 spent their early childhood years in centers, and their elementary school years in aftercare.

So it's working moms fault.

Projecting much?

I don’t think PP was saying it’s mom’s fault by any sense of the imagination. If anything I feel as though the worsening economic climate for the middle class has bred this issue, and it really is an economic issue much more than a parenting one. A lot of people need to work a LOT in order to get their kids the things they need that cost money — health insurance, saving up for college, saving for retirement so they’re not a burden to their kids, and of course basic things like putting food on the table. I teach elementary school and a lot of my students don’t get picked up until 6 every night. Assuming you want your kids to get to bed at a decent time, that doesn’t leave a whole lot of time for parents to do things like read to their kids or play games and cook together that are all really, really important to children’s development. And aside from just the lack of time, I imagine that many parents are just exhausted at the end of the day and need mental space to recover for the next busy work day.

Let me be clear: I do NOT fault parents who do what they need to do in this economic reality. This is not me saying it’s working parents’ fault at all (and I am one). But I think it’s a bit naive to think that this has no affect on kids.

I think you and pp you are defending have a very myopic view of the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it really comes down to the fact that there were far fewer kids. GenX is way smaller than the boomers. Just an easier system and better outcomes when less kids to deal with.

And life was in general much cheaper, so maybe both parents worked, but the second job was like a teacher and the breadwinner was always home for dinner.

Probably the end of holding kids back and mainstreaming has made elementary harder, but kids are differentiated by middle and high school in most places so that isn't that different.

Except that most babies born in stated period are not Gen X. Date ranges vary, but most sources say Gen X ended between 1978 and 1982. The highly literate group is he older millenials.

I do think that a big factor is that a relatively high percentage of American mothers had college degrees at that point, but most still worked in family-friendly professions and took years off to stay home before kids started school. Also, preschools were widely available, but they were mostly part-time programs, not full-time day care substitutes. By 1987, women had more professional options, but fewer had the option to stay home with babies or get home by 4 to prepare dinner. A higher percentage of babies born after 1987 spent their early childhood years in centers, and their elementary school years in aftercare.

So it's working moms fault.

Projecting much?

I don’t think PP was saying it’s mom’s fault by any sense of the imagination. If anything I feel as though the worsening economic climate for the middle class has bred this issue, and it really is an economic issue much more than a parenting one. A lot of people need to work a LOT in order to get their kids the things they need that cost money — health insurance, saving up for college, saving for retirement so they’re not a burden to their kids, and of course basic things like putting food on the table. I teach elementary school and a lot of my students don’t get picked up until 6 every night. Assuming you want your kids to get to bed at a decent time, that doesn’t leave a whole lot of time for parents to do things like read to their kids or play games and cook together that are all really, really important to children’s development. And aside from just the lack of time, I imagine that many parents are just exhausted at the end of the day and need mental space to recover for the next busy work day.

Let me be clear: I do NOT fault parents who do what they need to do in this economic reality. This is not me saying it’s working parents’ fault at all (and I am one). But I think it’s a bit naive to think that this has no affect on kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it really comes down to the fact that there were far fewer kids. GenX is way smaller than the boomers. Just an easier system and better outcomes when less kids to deal with.

And life was in general much cheaper, so maybe both parents worked, but the second job was like a teacher and the breadwinner was always home for dinner.

Probably the end of holding kids back and mainstreaming has made elementary harder, but kids are differentiated by middle and high school in most places so that isn't that different.

Except that most babies born in stated period are not Gen X. Date ranges vary, but most sources say Gen X ended between 1978 and 1982. The highly literate group is he older millenials.

I do think that a big factor is that a relatively high percentage of American mothers had college degrees at that point, but most still worked in family-friendly professions and took years off to stay home before kids started school. Also, preschools were widely available, but they were mostly part-time programs, not full-time day care substitutes. By 1987, women had more professional options, but fewer had the option to stay home with babies or get home by 4 to prepare dinner. A higher percentage of babies born after 1987 spent their early childhood years in centers, and their elementary school years in aftercare.

So it's working moms fault.

Anonymous wrote:No, it really comes down to the fact that there were far fewer kids. GenX is way smaller than the boomers. Just an easier system and better outcomes when less kids to deal with.

And life was in general much cheaper, so maybe both parents worked, but the second job was like a teacher and the breadwinner was always home for dinner.

Probably the end of holding kids back and mainstreaming has made elementary harder, but kids are differentiated by middle and high school in most places so that isn't that different.

Except that most babies born in stated period are not Gen X. Date ranges vary, but most sources say Gen X ended between 1978 and 1982. The highly literate group is he older millenials.

I do think that a big factor is that a relatively high percentage of American mothers had college degrees at that point, but most still worked in family-friendly professions and took years off to stay home before kids started school. Also, preschools were widely available, but they were mostly part-time programs, not full-time day care substitutes. By 1987, women had more professional options, but fewer had the option to stay home with babies or get home by 4 to prepare dinner. A higher percentage of babies born after 1987 spent their early childhood years in centers, and their elementary school years in aftercare.

More ELL students now.

People born 1978-1987
Had computers as children

Played video games

Watched a ton of television

Had cellphones.

We're the generator that started participation trophies.

The vast majority of these people grew up in the 90s. I assure you we were spoiled AF.

This is prime "Bridger" territory or "Gen Y". It's a bit of a micro-generation, but it feels fairly distinct. It's the transition generation, who grew up without computers, had beepers in HS, and then got Encyclopedia and a dial up in HS. Basically that last segment to have a fairly tech-free childhood, but to adapt ok-ish.