To justify their campaign, ed reformers repeat, mantra-like, that U.S. students are trailing far behind their peers in other nations, that U.S. public schools are failing. The claims are specious. Two of the three major international tests—the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study and the Trends in International Math and Science Study—break down student scores according to the poverty rate in each school. The tests are given every five years. The most recent results (2006) showed the following: students in U.S. schools where the poverty rate was less than 10 percent ranked first in reading, first in science, and third in math. When the poverty rate was 10 percent to 25 percent, U.S. students still ranked first in reading and science. But as the poverty rate rose still higher, students ranked lower and lower. Twenty percent of all U.S. schools have poverty rates over 75 percent. The average ranking of American students reflects this. The problem is not public schools; it is poverty. And as dozens of studies have shown, the gap in cognitive, physical, and social development between children in poverty and middle-class children is set by age three.
Florence Dujardin on 28 Jan 12the JISC developing digital literacies programme recognises that digital literacies are always plural and are highly context-specific. They go well beyond the 'basic skills' mentioned in the Royal Society report. The digital world is not a single, homogenous space and, as a result, the literacies we require to traverse and interact in this space vary enormously. This does not make for an easy, one-size-fits-all knowledge transfer approach but it certainly recognises the diverse world in which we live, both online and offline.
