Ivy admissions standards may continue to conform to the mean literacy level, if subtly and gradually.
The students described in the article would have been in the bottom-third of a prep school class in the 1990's. Their options would have been limited to State schools or lesser but expensive Liberal Arts colleges with lax admissions standards.
It doesn't square not to be able to read a better book, within a restricted period, and to have higher verbal intelligence. The former is the primary training method for the latter.
Literacy and verbal intelligence development requires training that can't be duplicated outside of book reading. Most quality students will have been devouring (any) books since primary school. The Calvin and Hobbes enjoyer in third grade, or earlier, is the LoTR enjoyer in seventh. Is then the Crime and Punishment reader in secondary. That type of literacy progression is generally impossible to skip.
Circling-back to the cited problem of the Op: the infant who is frequently read and spoken to is the early Calvin and Hobbes enjoyer.
I think that state-funded packages of age-appropriate books, annually delivered to all parents perhaps until their child is in pre-school, would be a better than normal use of welfare funds. As it would widely benefit society. A trick to the continuity of such a program would be to keep partisans away from demanding that the books be in any way politicized content.
Regarding your last paragraph: availability of books doesn't seem to be the bottleneck. San Francisco's public libraries are well funded (~$200 per resident per year). Popular children's books usually have plenty of copies available. The library even gives away brand new books, e.g. whenever there is a street fair or Halloween event ot whatever.
According to state standardized tests administered from grades 3 to 11, half the kids in San Francisco cannot read at grade level. The real proportion may be lower, as these tests are taken only for those who attend government-funded schools.
Children model the behavior of their parents. It is very hard to compensate for an unhelpful home environment. I think any effective intervention has to go far beyond simply making resources available.
Its interesting. Something is going on, obviously, yet you have Brandon Sanderson publishing 400k+ word books that are quite popular. So maybe it is partially a motivational issue?
Converging and possibly not unrelated, strictly speaking:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/11/the-eli...
Ivy admissions standards may continue to conform to the mean literacy level, if subtly and gradually.
The students described in the article would have been in the bottom-third of a prep school class in the 1990's. Their options would have been limited to State schools or lesser but expensive Liberal Arts colleges with lax admissions standards.
It doesn't square not to be able to read a better book, within a restricted period, and to have higher verbal intelligence. The former is the primary training method for the latter.
Literacy and verbal intelligence development requires training that can't be duplicated outside of book reading. Most quality students will have been devouring (any) books since primary school. The Calvin and Hobbes enjoyer in third grade, or earlier, is the LoTR enjoyer in seventh. Is then the Crime and Punishment reader in secondary. That type of literacy progression is generally impossible to skip.
Circling-back to the cited problem of the Op: the infant who is frequently read and spoken to is the early Calvin and Hobbes enjoyer.
I think that state-funded packages of age-appropriate books, annually delivered to all parents perhaps until their child is in pre-school, would be a better than normal use of welfare funds. As it would widely benefit society. A trick to the continuity of such a program would be to keep partisans away from demanding that the books be in any way politicized content.
Regarding your last paragraph: availability of books doesn't seem to be the bottleneck. San Francisco's public libraries are well funded (~$200 per resident per year). Popular children's books usually have plenty of copies available. The library even gives away brand new books, e.g. whenever there is a street fair or Halloween event ot whatever.
According to state standardized tests administered from grades 3 to 11, half the kids in San Francisco cannot read at grade level. The real proportion may be lower, as these tests are taken only for those who attend government-funded schools.
Children model the behavior of their parents. It is very hard to compensate for an unhelpful home environment. I think any effective intervention has to go far beyond simply making resources available.
Its interesting. Something is going on, obviously, yet you have Brandon Sanderson publishing 400k+ word books that are quite popular. So maybe it is partially a motivational issue?
[citation needed]