Are you smarter than Mrs. B's students?

Yeah, but you can break down a spoiler like nobody I know.
Seriously,? NO history after 10th grade? I would have died of the bends.

 

A lot of times, it's not up to the teachers to fail the students. My parents were both teachers for more than 30 years, and several times, my mom -- a kindergarten teacher -- recommended a student be left back, but the parents meet with the principal and decline the option. That happens in every grade, and I'll guarantee more times than you think. Oftentimes, it comes down to the school's economics, too.

There are probably many more reasons kids aren't held back as much as they should be, too. Besides, all you need to know is 65-percent of the material in most places, anyway.

 

I disagree with that. I add, subtract, multiply virtually every day.

I have never in my life had to know when the Gettysburg Address was or what years WWI and WWII were. Nor have I ever needed to know about the Louisiana Purchase.

 

Buck, that's my point. It should be required.
School can be fun, but the point is not to have a good time and just do what you want to do.

Mike, my wife is a teacher, so I know all about that. But I would think by the time kids get to junior high or high school, it doesn't matter what the parents think.
A kid who believes Lincoln (almost universally recognized as our greatest president and the most famous political assassination I can think of) was killed in a battle should not be able to finish high school.

 

To be fair, I do remember sometimes just putting a name down to avoid leaving a blank. Maybe Lincoln was all that was in that person's head.

 

Or football players ... or hockey players ... or ...

 

First of all, the mere fact that you know the phrases "Louisiana Purchase" and "Gettysburg Address" probably puts you well ahead of most of the people Scribe was talking about.
Secondly, how can you be a journalist if you have no sense of history? A lot of what we do is putting things in context. If you don't know the history of a certain person/issue/event, you have no context.
To me, that extends to how you vote, view the world around you, converse with people, etc.
Honestly, don't you think someone is dumb if they can't tell you who the first president was? Would you hire that person for a job, for example?

 

My wife is calling BS on the guerrilla comment, she says that no one is that stupid.

 

There are basic things like "Who's the first president" and "Who gave the Gettysburg Address" that are just basic knowledge.

And yes, I can say "Louisiana Purchase" but I have no idea what it is.

I know the history of my beat, to a point. But I really don't think anything's going to happen in that beat that I'm going to need to know when states were annexed for. And if so? I can look it up.

 

But that's a much more specific thing than knowing what guerilla warfare is, or about Lincoln's death, or 1776.
I'm not saying you or anyone else should be a history professor, but you have to know some basics.

BTW, the Lousiana Purchase was when Jefferson bought what is essentially half the country for something like three cents an acre. You've heard of Lewis and Clarke exploring? That was right after he bought it. I don't know the date off the top of my head, but I want to say 1802.

 

Nope. I haven't heard of Lewis and Clarke exploring. I've heard of Lewis and Clark in passing, but I couldn't tell you what they did.

And I have no idea what guerilla warfare is.

 

It was 1803, Okie.

I will say this: I think knowing how and where to look it up is more important in this job than knowing it off the top of your head. IJAG's right on that point.

That said, the more you know, the more you can incorporate what you know into what you do. Maybe you don't need to know it to do your job, but I bet if you did know it, you'd be surprised at where all you can find a place to use it.