My state (Pennsylvania) just barely misses out, at #22. Although I'm guessing my town has a higher rate than average (and also a high graduate degree rate than average) since it's home to Penn State University.
My Colorado teacher taught me that we were all fish in the beginning, then a couple of fish had a baby and that baby was different so it got to live and then that fish crawled out of the ocean with its mutant fish hands and made a frog squirrel that then had a baby and made a monkey fish frog and then that made me.
So happy to be from the 2nd best educated state :)
We have gone from a system which focused on "Liberal Arts" during the first years of University (concentrating on our major in the final years) to a system that bombards us with our chosen major (as if indeed, we can seriously commit to one at the age of 17 or 18) from the moment we walk into our first college "orientation". As a result, we have spawned a generation of college graduates who, rather than having an appreciation of the Arts and Literature know everything there is to know of a narrow field (their major course of study) and nothing about anything else!. Progress? or the dumbing down of a nation?
Don't worry, it doesn't matter what students study in college, since college students barely study and don't learn. I am inclined to agree with people who say that most universities are diploma mills. But that's okay. College is still a fun and fulfilling experience for those who have the privilege of attending. It also allows employers to choose people who they know are capable of jumping through hoops and living independently.
@divantilya, I'm curious as to what you mean. Every university around me, including large state schools with over 20,000 students, make all students take a core curriculum regardless of major. The core curriculum is liberal arts but is ideally spread out over four years with basic classes for the major in the first two and more intensive major classes in the last two. I was told that it was done this way so that the last two years aren't all classes in one subject so students continually think in different ways throughout their time in college.
In theory it's supposed to work that way, but some "general education" classes are tailored to specific majors. It is possible to take enough gen. eds. to get you to your 3rd year, and then pick a major which requires you to take alternative gen. ed. classes specific to that major. This is actually the case for most universities.
I love education for its own sake as much as anyone, but, at the outrageous cost of college, it really should ensure you are prepared for employment. Most people do not have the money to spend $140,000 honing their Jeopardy! skills. And if you go to an "elite" school, the cost can be more than double that. If you're going to demand that a teenager dig themselves into that kind of debt, it is irresponsible, frankly, if you don't do everything to ensure they can get a lucrative job as soon as they leave. I wish I had learned more practical skills like accounting in college. I was an English major and scrupulously avoided any courses that focused on practical skills. All I did was literature, philosophy, history, etc. (And yes, I know those can still be helpful, but you know what I mean.) The goal should ultimately be a college education that is affordable and emphasizes the liberal arts. But we don't have that.
with this quiz and the median income quiz, I'm getting a distinct feeling that the beltway has an influence on why Virginia and Maryland always seem to do better than one would otherwise presume.
Incoming rant... I personally am of the opinion that we should move as many government jobs out of Washington DC as possible. Money goes a lot further in Kansas or Alabama than in does in DC. Not only would moving jobs save money, but it could bring needed opportunities to underdeveloped parts of the country. It's sad how brain-drain has deprived many states of their most educated citizens. It's time to reverse the flow and send money and high-paying jobs back to the interior of the country.
I would think most DC residents would welcome that! With the horrendous traffic, high crime rate, and high cost of living, there are far better places in the country to live.
@Quizmaster, wouldn't that lead to more inefficiency since the government would be spread out over a greater area? I know the government is already incredibly inefficient but if one agency was in Topeka, one in Cleveland, one in DC, and one in Oakland, wouldn't the inefficiency go up? Also, wouldn't it cost a lot more to operate the government since new facilities would have to be built and everything would be spread apart? And, each time Congress wanted to have a hearing we'd have to fly people across the country and back instead of across a city. I agree that the interior is neglected but would moving the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs to Omaha really help Nebraska or would it create more gridlock?
The Department of Education doesn't need face-to-face meetings with the Department of Energy, etc... Having different departments in different cities would save money. Furthermore, it would establish a stronger connection between the federal government and the states.
I'd argue the concentration of it all in one place has increased the gridlock, not reduced it. You have groupthink and bureaucratic culture reinforced writ large.
And having worked in federal government, proximity of offices has absolutely no impact upon communication. It's not like staffers from the FBI are driving two hours in gridlock to meet with the EPA.
I was just going through some Census data and I decided to sort by cities with the fewest high school graduates.
The lowest was East Los Angeles, where only 53.3% of adults have a high school diploma.
But surprisingly there are a few Massachusetts cities with a poor record of high school educational attainment. Only 75.8% of adults in Lawrence, MA have a high school degree. In New Bedford, it's just 76.2%. Fall River is at 78%. So even in the "most educated state" there are pockets where things aren't that great.
On the other hand, 98.4% of adults in Auburn, Alabama have a high school degree which is 5th highest in the country.
It'll be interesting to see how education levels change as liberal states progressively lower the ceiling of curriculum in the name of "equality". I guess their fixation on equal outcomes across diverse groups of people has ensured that any students capable of exceeding will be anchored to the most rudimentary capability.
I wonder what the world will look like, when college graduates have a basic or inferior understanding of Math, Chemistry, Physics...
Maybe grading itself will be deemed too dangerous to society, and a high school diploma will be deemed a necessary basic human right, bestowed to anyone who turns 18.
lmao if a ceiling is being lowered in higher ed it has little to do with scary liberals talking about equality and probably more to do with colleges being run primarily like businesses instead of learning institutions. Widen the applicant pool, advertise the school more, and you'll get a lower acceptance rate while also being less and less able to analyze applications 'holistically' and more likely to just admit whoever. Maybe that has something to do with equality but nothing to do with the curriculum. Also the pandemic really messed with life as a student in the US. The world wouldn't look any different because we already live in a world where most college grads don't have more than an intro level understanding of math, chem, or physics unless they choose to major in one of those, and I'm pretty sure those are growing fields because jobs. I wonder what the world will look like when people stop giving a crap about the humanities, which is an actual problem in higher ed.
Grading has already become a bad word in many liberal communities. We have decided that letting kids experience failure is bad for them, so we make sure they can't fail. Then, when they experience it for the first time in the real world, they can't deal with it and end up failing miserably at life.
Did you look at any arguments for why people don't like grading and think about them at all, or just couldn't resist the urge to blame the liberal communities, shake your fist, and complain about today's snowflake kids who know nothing about the big scary 'real world'?
So happy to be from the 2nd best educated state :)
And having worked in federal government, proximity of offices has absolutely no impact upon communication. It's not like staffers from the FBI are driving two hours in gridlock to meet with the EPA.
The lowest was East Los Angeles, where only 53.3% of adults have a high school diploma.
But surprisingly there are a few Massachusetts cities with a poor record of high school educational attainment. Only 75.8% of adults in Lawrence, MA have a high school degree. In New Bedford, it's just 76.2%. Fall River is at 78%. So even in the "most educated state" there are pockets where things aren't that great.
On the other hand, 98.4% of adults in Auburn, Alabama have a high school degree which is 5th highest in the country.
I wonder what the world will look like, when college graduates have a basic or inferior understanding of Math, Chemistry, Physics...
Maybe grading itself will be deemed too dangerous to society, and a high school diploma will be deemed a necessary basic human right, bestowed to anyone who turns 18.