IP: Well-Informed Citizens Increasingly Rare in Information Age

[Dave Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu>]

>
>
>>Monday, July 17, 2000
>>
>>Well-Informed Citizens Increasingly Rare in Information Age
>>
>>By Gary Chapman
>>
>>Copyright 2000, The Los Angeles Times, All Rights Reserved
>>
>>Last month, the National Science Foundation released its report "Science 
>>and Engineering Indicators 2000" 
>>(<http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind00/>) 
>>, which revealed some data about Americans' understanding of the world 
>>that are strikingly at odds with the ubiquitous hype about our "Age of 
>>Information."
>>
>>"Most Americans," the report says, "know a little, but not a lot, about 
>>science and technology." Given some of the findings, even that may be 
>>generous.
>>
>>While more than 70% of the people the NSF surveyed knew that the Earth 
>>revolves around the sun and not the other way around, and that humans and 
>>dinosaurs did not coexist, only 16% could define the Internet and only 
>>13% could accurately describe a molecule. At least those numbers are 
>>going up, the report's authors noted diplomatically -- five years ago, 
>>only 11% could define the Internet and only 9% could describe a molecule.
>>
>>"Science literacy in the United States [and in other countries] is fairly 
>>low," says the report with typically measured understatement. Only about 
>>a fifth of the Americans surveyed could describe what it means to study 
>>something scientifically.
>>
>>In a classification of the level of interest in science and technology 
>>among Americans, the NSF study used a category labeled "the attentive 
>>public," meaning people who "express a high level of interest in a 
>>particular issue, feel well-informed about that issue, and read a 
>>newspaper on a daily basis, read a weekly or monthly news magazine, or 
>>read a magazine relevant to the issue." A mere 10% of Americans fit this 
>>description, according to the report.
>>
>>About 40% of the survey population reported being very interested in 
>>science and technology, but only 17% thought they were personally 
>>well-informed. About 30% thought they were poorly informed.
>>
>>These discouraging data fit with other patterns in Americans' knowledge 
>>about things, like current events. In 1997, researchers at the Pew 
>>Research Center for the People and the Press in Washington said, "An 
>>analysis of public attentiveness to more than 500 news stories over the 
>>last 10 years confirms that the American public pays relatively little 
>>attention to many of the serious news stories of the day."
>>
>>Last month, the Pew Research Center reported that 84% of people surveyed 
>>"are not paying a lot of attention to the Microsoft breakup," perhaps the 
>>most important antitrust case of the last 80 years. Over 70% were unaware 
>>that there is a federal budget surplus, and 56% had "no idea who Alan 
>>Greenspan is." (Greenspan is chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.)
>>
>>Ten years ago, Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Center, said, "The 
>>ultimate irony of [our] findings is that the Information Age [has] 
>>spawned such an uninformed and uninvolved population." There doesn't 
>>appear to be sufficient reason to change this assessment even five years 
>>into the boom of the Internet.
>>
>>Such surveys of American knowledge seem to paint a picture of us that is 
>>reflected in many of our more popular political leaders: optimistic, 
>>generally untroubled by the world's woes, but manifestly ill-informed. We 
>>have tended to accept this because of our faith in native pragmatism and 
>>common sense. But with the world getting increasingly complex, 
>>technologized and competitive, such faith may verge on the delusional.
>>
>>"After a steady series of breakthroughs in information technology," wrote 
>>David Shenk in his 1997 book "Data Smog," "we are left with a citizenry 
>>that is certainly no more interested or capable of supporting a healthy 
>>representative democracy than it was 50 years ago, and may well be less 
>>capable."
>>
>>Improving education is the most common knee-jerk plan of action for 
>>perceived deficits in American understanding and knowledge, especially in 
>>math and science. No doubt there is vast room for improvement in U.S. 
>>education. But as political philosopher Benjamin Barber of Rutgers 
>>University has pointed out, young people tend to learn what society 
>>teaches them to value.
>>
>>The simple truth is that deep study of science, math, history, 
>>literature, art or familiarity with current events cannot compete with 
>>celebrity gossip and scandals, large calamities, TV and video games, 
>>voyeurism, consumerism, instant fortunes, advertising and popular but 
>>ephemeral fascinations.
>>
>>University educators, like me, are constantly astonished at the depth and 
>>breadth of students' knowledge about popular culture and consumer 
>>products and by the weakness of their grasp on valuable and vital 
>>subjects. They are learning, but not what we usually think of as 
>>"learning." Too many are learning answers to the questions on the runaway 
>>hit TV quiz show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire," instead of the answers 
>>to life's most important questions.
>>
>>Studies have shown that U.S. parents have much lower expectations of 
>>their children and much higher opinions of their children's educational 
>>achievements than parents in other countries. It's very common for 
>>American parents to mistake their child's deep knowledge of some 
>>idiosyncratic fixation for general educational competence.
>>
>>This is perhaps the true ultimate irony of the Information Age: As 
>>high-tech leaders persistently, almost desperately, call for more 
>>educated workers, the "info-tainment" business that is rapidly absorbing 
>>the Internet and all other media makes well-informed citizens even more 
>>rare and unusual. The constant "dumbing-down" and vulgarization of the 
>>culture industry, driven by mass marketing and profits, is clearly at 
>>odds with educational excellence, but few high-tech leaders can bring 
>>themselves to admit their role in this depressing decline.
>>
>>Until we sever education from beeps, clicks, dancing cartoons, games, 
>>celebrities, ads, trivia and marketing hype, the idea of living in an Age 
>>of Information will continue to be something of a cruel joke.
>>
>>Gary Chapman is director of the 21st Century Project at the University of 
>>Texas. He can be reached at >>Texas. He can be reached at gary.chapman@mail.utexas.edu.
>>
>>    ------------------------------------------
>>
>>To subscribe to a listserv that forwards copies of Gary Chapman's 
>>published articles, including his column "Digital Nation" in The Los 
>>Angeles Times, send mail to:
>>
>>         listproc@lists.cc.utexas.edu
>>
>>Leave the subject line blank. In the first line of the message, put:
>>
>>         Subscribe Chapman [First name] [Last name]
>>
>>Leave out the brackets, just put your name after Chapman.
>>
>>Send this message.
>>
>>You'll get a confirmation message back confirming your subscription. This 
>>message will contain some boilerplate text, generated by the listserv 
>>software, about passwords, which you should IGNORE. Passwords will not be 
>>used or required for this listserv.
>>
>>Mail volume on this listserv is low; expect to get something two or three 
>>times a month. The list will be used only for forwarding published 
>>versions of Gary Chapman's articles, or else pointers to URLs for online 
>>versions of his articles -- nothing else will be sent to the list.
>>
>>To unsubscribe from the listserv, follow the same instructions above, 
>>except substitute the word "Unsubscribe" for "Subscribe."
>>
>>Please feel free to pass along copies of the forwarded articles, but 
>>please retain the relevant copyright information. Also feel free to pass 
>>along these instructions for subscribing to the listserv, to anyone who 
>>might be interested in such material.
>>
>>Questions should be directed to Gary Chapman at 
>>>>gary.chapman@mail.utexas.edu.