18 thoughts on “David Barton Says US Literacy Has Declined Since Prayer and Bibles Removed From Schools”

  1. Warren# ~ Sep 5, 2013 at 8:26 am
    Tom – As an academic, I am aware of the declines in comprehension and sophistication among students entering college. At my school, I think we have been spared much of that as our students are well prepared. However, I get it in general terms.
    However, that is not what Barton was talking about. He cited two questionable stats on literacy and linked his citations to lack of Bible reading in schools. That’s it.

    I said there was an argument in there “somewhere.” On some level you agree.
    As far as sorting through left-wing website accounts of what right-wingers have said, it’s too much work getting through the various filters. Upon further inspection, the batting average is mediocre at best, as it is with most advocacy websites. What Barton is wrong about is far more important than whatever kernel of truth he’s onto.
    What I will say from experience is that what the Bible “says” and what it actually says are often two different things.
    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/11/jay-carneys-not-only-one-misquoting-bible/44516/
    I’d settle for Biblical literacy as cultural literacy, per the Ronald Nash essay above. “Moral literacy” is beyond us now.

  2. The ‘declines in comprehension and sophistication’ (which I too sense have occurred) is IMO to do with the reduction in attention spans which I think evidence shows has occurred. It affects not only academic attainment, but also things like political discourse and even approaches to religion. Barton’s uncritical, simplistic, ‘Polly-put-the-kettle-on’ (and IMO false) religion is perhaps itself a symptom of this decline.

  3. Warren# ~ Sep 5, 2013 at 8:26 am
    Tom – As an academic, I am aware of the declines in comprehension and sophistication among students entering college. At my school, I think we have been spared much of that as our students are well prepared. However, I get it in general terms.
    However, that is not what Barton was talking about. He cited two questionable stats on literacy and linked his citations to lack of Bible reading in schools. That’s it.

    I said there was an argument in there “somewhere.” On some level you agree.
    As far as sorting through left-wing website accounts of what right-wingers have said, it’s too much work getting through the various filters. Upon further inspection, the batting average is mediocre at best, as it is with most advocacy websites. What Barton is wrong about is far more important than whatever kernel of truth he’s onto.
    What I will say from experience is that what the Bible “says” and what it actually says are often two different things.
    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/11/jay-carneys-not-only-one-misquoting-bible/44516/
    I’d settle for Biblical literacy as cultural literacy, per the Ronald Nash essay above. “Moral literacy” is beyond us now.

  4. The ‘declines in comprehension and sophistication’ (which I too sense have occurred) is IMO to do with the reduction in attention spans which I think evidence shows has occurred. It affects not only academic attainment, but also things like political discourse and even approaches to religion. Barton’s uncritical, simplistic, ‘Polly-put-the-kettle-on’ (and IMO false) religion is perhaps itself a symptom of this decline.

  5. Tom – As an academic, I am aware of the declines in comprehension and sophistication among students entering college. At my school, I think we have been spared much of that as our students are well prepared. However, I get it in general terms.
    However, that is not what Barton was talking about. He cited two questionable stats on literacy and linked his citations to lack of Bible reading in schools. That’s it.

  6. I suppose that Barton’s reasoning is as follows:
    In traditional Christian communities, the Bible was highly valued. Reading the Bible was over centuries the foremost incentive to learn reading at all, even for the underclass.
    In modern societies, the Bible has no value, but modernists have failed to find any ersatz incentive for the underclass to learn reading.
    From a logical point of view, that’s a sound argument. I can’t judge about its degree of verisimilitude.

  7. Tom – As an academic, I am aware of the declines in comprehension and sophistication among students entering college. At my school, I think we have been spared much of that as our students are well prepared. However, I get it in general terms.
    However, that is not what Barton was talking about. He cited two questionable stats on literacy and linked his citations to lack of Bible reading in schools. That’s it.

  8. There was a day when Christian Fundamentlists valued honesty and truth,

    Some did – but not for long. You can be one or the other. Honest or Fundamentalist, in the sense that it’s used in the USA today.
    I’m atheist, but I know many Christians who are both honest and who adhere to the Fundamentals of Christ’s message, rather than the Legalistic accretion. Being a Christian, even a committed and fervent Christian, is not incompatible with being a decent human being.

    I was a hardcore, right-wing Evangelical pastor for many years. My beliefs were narrow and absolute, but I would never have thought to lie to advance those beliefs.

    This must be some strange new definition of “hardcore, right-wing Evangelical” I wasn’t aware of. You may,like me, not believe in the existence of gods now, but you always were far too Christian to be a .”hardcore, right-wing Evangelical”, no matter how narrow and absolute your beliefs.

  9. I suppose that Barton’s reasoning is as follows:
    In traditional Christian communities, the Bible was highly valued. Reading the Bible was over centuries the foremost incentive to learn reading at all, even for the underclass.
    In modern societies, the Bible has no value, but modernists have failed to find any ersatz incentive for the underclass to learn reading.
    From a logical point of view, that’s a sound argument. I can’t judge about its degree of verisimilitude.

  10. There was a day when Christian Fundamentlists valued honesty and truth,

    Some did – but not for long. You can be one or the other. Honest or Fundamentalist, in the sense that it’s used in the USA today.
    I’m atheist, but I know many Christians who are both honest and who adhere to the Fundamentals of Christ’s message, rather than the Legalistic accretion. Being a Christian, even a committed and fervent Christian, is not incompatible with being a decent human being.

    I was a hardcore, right-wing Evangelical pastor for many years. My beliefs were narrow and absolute, but I would never have thought to lie to advance those beliefs.

    This must be some strange new definition of “hardcore, right-wing Evangelical” I wasn’t aware of. You may,like me, not believe in the existence of gods now, but you always were far too Christian to be a .”hardcore, right-wing Evangelical”, no matter how narrow and absolute your beliefs.

  11. I have come to the conclusion that people like David Barton will say most anything if it advances their agenda. There was a day when Christian Fundamentlists valued honesty and truth, but, it seems to me, that advancing a right-wing political agenda is more important than being an honest person.
    I was a hardcore, right-wing Evangelical pastor for many years. My beliefs were narrow and absolute, but I would never have thought to lie to advance those beliefs. I am now an atheist and I am finding, in my interaction with former Evangelical Christians, that people like Barton helped hasten their departure from Christianity. He and his ilk are doing a good job of helping people turn away from the Christian faith. While their reasons for deconverting are many and varied, most of them will agree that they got tired of the lies, distortions, and manipulations.
    While I no longer believe in your God, I do appreciate the work you do in exposing the David Barton’s of the world for what they really are…lying snakes in the grass.

  12. As usual, David Barton has an argument in there somewhere, but is not the right guy to be making it.
    http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/index.html?mainframe=/webfiles/antithesis/v1n5/ant_v1n5_illiteracy.html

    “This crisis of education is manifested in three levels of illiteracy: functional illiteracy, cultural illiteracy, and moral illiteracy.
    Typically, to say that a person is illiterate means that the person cannot read or write. But the word does have other senses. It is sometimes used of someone who is ignorant of the fundamentals of a particular art or area of knowledge. It is this broader meaning that is in view when, for example, we say that a person is musically illiterate. The word can also be used to describe a person who falls short of some expected standard of competence regarding some skill or body of information. In this last sense, a person who falls short of our commonly expected standard of competence in mathematics can be described as illiterate, even if he or she is quite competent in language skills.

    Writing in the monthly Commentary, Chester E. Finn, Jr., a professor at Vanderbilt University, cites the dismal findings of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. “Just five percent of seventeen-year-old high school students can read well enough to understand and use information found in technical materials, literary essays, and historical documents.” Imagine then how hopeless it is to get the other 95 percent to read Plato or Dante — or the Bible. “Barely six percent of them,” Finn continues, “can solve multi-step math problems and use basic algebra.” We’re not talking difficult math here but rather something as elementary as calculating simple interest on a loan.
    Illiteracy this extensive is virtually unprecedented in America’s history. Eighty years ago, in 1910, only 2.2 percent of American children between the ages of ten and fourteen could neither read nor write. It is important to remember that the illiteracy of 1910 reflected for the most part children who never had the advantage of schooling. The illiterates of today, however, are not people who never went to school; they are, for the most part, individuals who have spent eight to twelve years in public schools.”

    [By Ronald Nash, PhD in philosophy from Syracuse University]

  13. As usual, David Barton has an argument in there somewhere, but is not the right guy to be making it.
    http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/index.html?mainframe=/webfiles/antithesis/v1n5/ant_v1n5_illiteracy.html

    “This crisis of education is manifested in three levels of illiteracy: functional illiteracy, cultural illiteracy, and moral illiteracy.
    Typically, to say that a person is illiterate means that the person cannot read or write. But the word does have other senses. It is sometimes used of someone who is ignorant of the fundamentals of a particular art or area of knowledge. It is this broader meaning that is in view when, for example, we say that a person is musically illiterate. The word can also be used to describe a person who falls short of some expected standard of competence regarding some skill or body of information. In this last sense, a person who falls short of our commonly expected standard of competence in mathematics can be described as illiterate, even if he or she is quite competent in language skills.

    Writing in the monthly Commentary, Chester E. Finn, Jr., a professor at Vanderbilt University, cites the dismal findings of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. “Just five percent of seventeen-year-old high school students can read well enough to understand and use information found in technical materials, literary essays, and historical documents.” Imagine then how hopeless it is to get the other 95 percent to read Plato or Dante — or the Bible. “Barely six percent of them,” Finn continues, “can solve multi-step math problems and use basic algebra.” We’re not talking difficult math here but rather something as elementary as calculating simple interest on a loan.
    Illiteracy this extensive is virtually unprecedented in America’s history. Eighty years ago, in 1910, only 2.2 percent of American children between the ages of ten and fourteen could neither read nor write. It is important to remember that the illiteracy of 1910 reflected for the most part children who never had the advantage of schooling. The illiterates of today, however, are not people who never went to school; they are, for the most part, individuals who have spent eight to twelve years in public schools.”

    [By Ronald Nash, PhD in philosophy from Syracuse University]

  14. I have come to the conclusion that people like David Barton will say most anything if it advances their agenda. There was a day when Christian Fundamentlists valued honesty and truth, but, it seems to me, that advancing a right-wing political agenda is more important than being an honest person.
    I was a hardcore, right-wing Evangelical pastor for many years. My beliefs were narrow and absolute, but I would never have thought to lie to advance those beliefs. I am now an atheist and I am finding, in my interaction with former Evangelical Christians, that people like Barton helped hasten their departure from Christianity. He and his ilk are doing a good job of helping people turn away from the Christian faith. While their reasons for deconverting are many and varied, most of them will agree that they got tired of the lies, distortions, and manipulations.
    While I no longer believe in your God, I do appreciate the work you do in exposing the David Barton’s of the world for what they really are…lying snakes in the grass.

  15. As usual, David Barton has an argument in there somewhere, but is not the right guy to be making it.
    http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/index.html?mainframe=/webfiles/antithesis/v1n5/ant_v1n5_illiteracy.html

    “This crisis of education is manifested in three levels of illiteracy: functional illiteracy, cultural illiteracy, and moral illiteracy.
    Typically, to say that a person is illiterate means that the person cannot read or write. But the word does have other senses. It is sometimes used of someone who is ignorant of the fundamentals of a particular art or area of knowledge. It is this broader meaning that is in view when, for example, we say that a person is musically illiterate. The word can also be used to describe a person who falls short of some expected standard of competence regarding some skill or body of information. In this last sense, a person who falls short of our commonly expected standard of competence in mathematics can be described as illiterate, even if he or she is quite competent in language skills.

    Writing in the monthly Commentary, Chester E. Finn, Jr., a professor at Vanderbilt University, cites the dismal findings of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. “Just five percent of seventeen-year-old high school students can read well enough to understand and use information found in technical materials, literary essays, and historical documents.” Imagine then how hopeless it is to get the other 95 percent to read Plato or Dante — or the Bible. “Barely six percent of them,” Finn continues, “can solve multi-step math problems and use basic algebra.” We’re not talking difficult math here but rather something as elementary as calculating simple interest on a loan.
    Illiteracy this extensive is virtually unprecedented in America’s history. Eighty years ago, in 1910, only 2.2 percent of American children between the ages of ten and fourteen could neither read nor write. It is important to remember that the illiteracy of 1910 reflected for the most part children who never had the advantage of schooling. The illiterates of today, however, are not people who never went to school; they are, for the most part, individuals who have spent eight to twelve years in public schools.”

    [By Ronald Nash, PhD in philosophy from Syracuse University]

  16. As usual, David Barton has an argument in there somewhere, but is not the right guy to be making it.
    http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/index.html?mainframe=/webfiles/antithesis/v1n5/ant_v1n5_illiteracy.html

    “This crisis of education is manifested in three levels of illiteracy: functional illiteracy, cultural illiteracy, and moral illiteracy.
    Typically, to say that a person is illiterate means that the person cannot read or write. But the word does have other senses. It is sometimes used of someone who is ignorant of the fundamentals of a particular art or area of knowledge. It is this broader meaning that is in view when, for example, we say that a person is musically illiterate. The word can also be used to describe a person who falls short of some expected standard of competence regarding some skill or body of information. In this last sense, a person who falls short of our commonly expected standard of competence in mathematics can be described as illiterate, even if he or she is quite competent in language skills.

    Writing in the monthly Commentary, Chester E. Finn, Jr., a professor at Vanderbilt University, cites the dismal findings of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. “Just five percent of seventeen-year-old high school students can read well enough to understand and use information found in technical materials, literary essays, and historical documents.” Imagine then how hopeless it is to get the other 95 percent to read Plato or Dante — or the Bible. “Barely six percent of them,” Finn continues, “can solve multi-step math problems and use basic algebra.” We’re not talking difficult math here but rather something as elementary as calculating simple interest on a loan.
    Illiteracy this extensive is virtually unprecedented in America’s history. Eighty years ago, in 1910, only 2.2 percent of American children between the ages of ten and fourteen could neither read nor write. It is important to remember that the illiteracy of 1910 reflected for the most part children who never had the advantage of schooling. The illiterates of today, however, are not people who never went to school; they are, for the most part, individuals who have spent eight to twelve years in public schools.”

    [By Ronald Nash, PhD in philosophy from Syracuse University]

Comments are closed.