American Civic Literacy Quiz

[Don]

Has anyone else taken this (http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/resources/quiz.aspx) quiz?

This article (http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/resources/content/our_fading_heritage_11-20-08.pdf) has some rather sad stats about the average success on the test.

More than 2,500 randomly selected Americans took ISI’s basic 33 question test on civic literacy and more than 1,700 people failed, with the average score 49 percent, or an “F.” Elected officials scored even lower than the general public with an average score of 44 percent and only 0.8 percent (or 21) of all surveyed earned an “A.”

Elected officials scored even lower? What's up with that?

[Williebee]

Yup, I seem to remember doing ok on it. We talked about it awhile back. (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122691&highlight=civic+literacy)

[sulong]

You answered 27 out of 33 correctly — 81.82 %

At least I'm not a lowly elected official.

[nighttimer]

Ditto.

You answered 27 out of 33 correctly — 81.82 %

Dang. I'm a bit off my game.

Guess I need to spend some time in Civics 101 Training Camp. :e2Order:

[MacAllister]

You're not off your game. There's a number of those questions, especially the economic-theory questions, that are very much push-poll written.

[benbradley]

You're not off your game. There's a number of those questions, especially the economic-theory questions, that are very much push-poll written.
What? What's "push-poll written?"

[rugcat]

I got all 33. Sorry.

There were a couple I wasn't sure of, but I'm pretty good at guessing the "right" answer by how the answers are worded.

[Kurtz]

72.23% but I'm not American.

[Don]

I wasn't gonna brag, rc, but since you did... :)

ETA: And I'd forgotten that, Williebee. Old age and drugs play hell with the memory. :D

[Don]

What? What's "push-poll written?"
That's marxist for "not according to dogma."

:ROFL:

[Albedo]

You answered 27 out of 33 correctly — 81.82 %

I know more about American civics than the average American. Be scared.

[Perks]

I got 84.85% with a tequila and percoset hangover.

Damn. I'm better than I thought.

[ColoradoGuy]

You're not off your game. There's a number of those questions, especially the economic-theory questions, that are very much push-poll written.
Indeed. #27 gives the game away.

[Don]

Indeed. #27 gives the game away.
Damn straight! Number 27 was proven to be so much rhetorical bullshit by the tremendous success of the planned economy of the USSR over the relatively free-market economy of the US.









Oh, wait...

[Kurtz]

The USSR is the only country on earth to have ever had state involvement in the economy.

[Don]

Read the question:
Free markets typically secure more economic prosperity than government’s centralized planning because:
Perhaps North Korea would be a better example of centralized planning?

Scale economic freedom vs. growth in standard of living. It's a no-brainer.

[Williebee]

Hey, 30 this time.

I went back and looked, I got a 26 last time. Guess I can be taught, after all.

Probably could have done better if Perks hadn't been hoarding the study aids.


And btw -- suddenly her username becomes all too clear, doesn't it? :)

[Don]

Top 10 (http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking.aspx) countries in economic freedom:

Hong Kong
Singapore
Australia
Ireland
New Zealand
United States
Canada
Denmark
Switzerland
United Kingdom

Bottom 10:

Sudan
Liechtenstein
Iraq
Afghanistan
North Korea
Zimbabwe
Cuba
Burma
Eritrea
Venezuela

Any questions?

[Selah March]

30 out of 33. Must be a fluke. I'm certain I'm not that well-informed.

[ColoradoGuy]

Damn straight! Number 27 was proven to be so much rhetorical bullshit by the tremendous success of the planned economy of the USSR over the relatively free-market economy of the US.









Oh, wait...
My point, of course, is that opinions about the proper ordering of the economy don't belong in a "civic literacy quiz."

[Don]

It's not opinion, CG. It's basic economic fact, easily verified, and one of the basic tenants of the Austrian school. The very complexity of billions of individual decisions made every day cannot be reasonably reduced to a model that would be adequate for economic planning. Countries that deny that basic truth are at the bottom of the scale for both economic freedom and standard of living, John Maynard Keynes to the contrary.

An economy with 300 million players, each making hundreds or thousands of economic decisions every day, can no more be predicted and controlled with success than the weather. Even if the static case could be handled, planning ignores the dynamics of the next new creation. (Internet anyone?)

[Diana Hignutt]

You answered 31 out of 33 correctly — 93.94 %

I is smart

[ColoradoGuy]

It's not opinion, CG. It's basic economic fact, easily verified, and one of the basic tenants of the Austrian school. The very complexity of billions of individual decisions made every day cannot be reasonably reduced to a model that would be adequate for economic planning. Countries that deny that basic truth are at the bottom of the scale for both economic freedom and standard of living, John Maynard Keynes to the contrary.

An economy with 300 million players, each making hundreds or thousands of economic decisions every day, can no more be predicted and controlled with success than the weather. Even if the static case could be handled, planning ignores the dynamics of the next new creation. (Internet anyone?)
As you know, I do not agree with the Austrian School economists, and I am not alone in that opinion. "Civic literacy" of the sort the test questions begin with is important stuff for Americans to know -- things like the branches of government, what Lincoln said at Gettysburg, etc. The virtues (or not) of capitalism are not an American civic virtue.

[Haggis]

I only missed one last time around. I ain't chancing screwing it up by taking the test again.

Yeah, and it was # 27 I missed.

[AMCrenshaw]

30/33: I guessed on some questions (including the last one).

I've always been a decent test-taker.


AMC

[DavidZahir]

You answered 30 out of 33 correctly — 90.91 %

Got three economic questions wrong.

[dclary]

30 of 33,

missed: 13, 26, 33.

Feel stupid about 26, too.

[Don]

Yeah, Paul Krugman doesn't think much of the Austrian school either, and I'm sure he'd find some fancy-pants words to explain away post number 18.

Oh, wait, isn't he the Nobel-winning economist who was calling for (http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/02/opinion/dubya-s-double-dip.html) a housing bubble in 2002, to recover from the Dot-Com mess? And one of those who thought Cash for Clunkers would be our salvation?
To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.
Oh, and it was Keynesian theory that predicted these figures too, right?

(The maroon dots are actual performance)
http://michaelscomments.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/stimulus-vs-unemployment-may-corrected.gif

I like baseball better than economics. At least in baseball, after three strikes you're out, and after three outs another team takes the field. Keynesian theory would be in the cellar by now.

How long is the emperor going to dance around without any clothes before people actually start noticing he's naked?

[rugcat]

Yeah, Paul Krugman doesn't think much of the Austrian school either, and I'm sure he'd find some fancy-pants words to explain away post number 18.

My point, of course, is that opinions about the proper ordering of the economy don't belong in a "civic literacy quiz." This is a controversial statement?

And I "got" the answer not by knowing it, but by understanding from the wording what the test makers believed it to be.

[Don]

The virtues (or not) of capitalism are not an American civic virtue.
You can say that with a straight face? I don't believe any founding father would have agreed with that statement. Not even Alexander Hamilton, the uber-statist.

Power over a man's subsistence amounts to a power over his will.

[ColoradoGuy]

You can say that with a straight face?
Yes, quite easily. As I'm sure you will agree, we don't have unfettered capitalism now as our economic model. Yet we are a functioning republic. Capitalism is not an American civic virtue -- it is an opinion regarding how the economy ought to function.

[ColoradoGuy]

This is a controversial statement?
I would not have thought so, but apparently it is.

[ColoradoGuy]

Oh, and it was Keynesian theory that predicted these figures too, right?
The recovery plan wasn't Keynesian -- it was a half-assed, neither fish nor fowl thing. An actual Keynesian plan would have been better, just as the WW II expansion (the ultimate Keynesian experiment) improved on the New Deal.

[veinglory]

72.23% but I'm not American.

72.73% and also not American although I have lived there for a few years.

[Don]

Yes, quite easily. As I'm sure you will agree, we don't have unfettered capitalism now as our economic model. Yet we are a functioning republic. Capitalism is not an American civic virtue -- it is an opinion regarding how the economy ought to function.
From Wiki's entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civic_virtue) on Civic Virtue, discussing various ideologies in the 19th to mid-20th centuries:

Liberalism combined republicanism with a belief in progress and liberalization based on capitalism. Civic virtues were very important. These were mainly aimed at individual behaviour. The evolution theory had a huge impact on liberals. People would do good if they were allowed to be free. Many liberals turned into socialists or conservatives in the end of the 19th century and early 20th century. Others became social liberals, combining a belief in progress and capitalism with a strong government to protect the poor. Civic virtue was not only aimed at the individual anymore, but also at groups of people.

[veinglory]

Top 10 (http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking.aspx) countries in economic freedom:
Hong Kong
Singapore
Australia
Ireland
New Zealand
United States
Canada
Denmark
Switzerland
United Kingdom

Oh, look--aren't many of those the evil socialist countries trying to destroy the US health care system with their free market hating ways...?

[Don]

Oh, look--aren't many of those the evil socialist countries trying to destroy the US health care system with their free market hating ways...?
Oh, look -- aren't every one of those rated at the top of the scale of economic freedom, as opposed to those craptastic countries at the bottom of the list that have little or no economic freedom and rigidly "planned" economies?

Economic freedom works; planned economies do not. It's not rocket science.

ETA: And note that even among that list, those countries with the fastest-growing, most dynamic societies are at the top of the list, while those toward the bottom are suffering the most.

[IdiotsRUs]

What has economics got to do with with civic literacy? Bugger all, I suspect

But I still scored higher than most of the Americans in the original test. And I'm totally crap at economics. I got all the actual civic stuff right though.

[ColoradoGuy]

Economic freedom works; planned economies do not. It's not rocket science.

On the contrary -- mixed economies work. It's not rocket science.

We did the unfettered economic freedom experiment during the Guilded Age, and it did not go well for society.

[veinglory]

Oh, look -- aren't every one of those rated at the top of the scale of economic freedom, as opposed to those craptastic countries at the bottom of the list that have little or no economic freedom and rigidly "planned" economies?

I was making an ironic statement about how the US propaganda floating around at the moment paints countries with socialised medicine as oppressive "big government" nations.

Being a Kiwi I love and support the free market because we make plenty of stuff that is the best on the world and so want the world to be free to buy it ;) (I also love and support taxing the hell out of the profits that it generates for the benefit of citizens.)

[Selah March]

Irony is not a US civic virtue.

Propaganda on the other hand...

[Delhomeboy]

On the contrary -- mixed economies work. It's not rocket science.

We did the unfettered economic freedom experiment during the Guilded Age, and it did not go well for society.

Not an Adam Smith fan, I reckon.

[Don]

The period when politicians were turning their buddies' corporations into eternal beasts, granting them freedom from liability by allowing them to hide behind the corporate structure, eliminating the historic requirement that corporations answer to the public good and have their charter regularly reviewed to prove they are providing that good, constructing barriers to entry to prevent others from competing with them, and handing out huge parcels of land and huge sums of money for various public works? That period of unfettered economic freedom?

Government built the beasts that roam the land today. Calling them the product of unfettered economic freedom is a joke, right? Corporations are a legal construction empowered by political decisions.

[Bird of Prey]

The whole thing is a mess. I took it but there were all kinds of problems. Some of questions I couldn't answer by virtue of links running through the page.. When I went to have it scored, the site said it was having problems with the server or something like that. Oh well. . . .

I have to agree with CG. It really wasn't about "just the facts." It was biased. . . .

[Fran]

I got 63.64%, despite being a Brit, and only understanding every third word in most of the questions :). So I must confess to my score being more luck than judgement...

[Don]

I have to agree with CG. It really wasn't about "just the facts." It was biased. . . .
Let's take Mac out back and beat her for starting such a biased thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122691&highlight=civic+literacy). :D

[robeiae]

Personally, I found the "What famous dead poet are you?" quiz to be more enlightening.

But yes, this quiz is not wholly a civics quiz.

And yes, some of the questions are not well-written.

And yes, some of them are based on assumptions that are not exactly facts.

All that said, a fully managed economy--beyond the personal economy of the individual--is a dead end. Question 27 is--in fact--very much related to the American experience, insofar as it reflects an essential tenet of Madison's approach in writing the Constitution. Imo.

The test is still weak, however.

[DavidZahir]

Yeah, I wasn't that impressed with the test, especially as a U.S. civics test.

Methinks there are some huge issues involved in how to define certain words. "Economic Freedom" means different things to different people. Ditto "Planned economy" or "Mixed" same.

[benbradley]

This post from the original thread:
how depressing is this?

http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/2008/additional_finding.html
reminds me of an idea I've had, only partly tongue-in-cheek.

The House of Representatives is supposed to be "The People's House" (someone long ago called it something like that) because the representatives were elected by the people to represent them to the Federal Government (as opposed to the Senate which pre-17th-Amendment were elected/appointed by State congresses and/or governors, and so represented the interests of the individual States).

It seems to me that if they are to be truly representative (as opposed to "reps" being selected from the available pool of local politicians who WANT the job), they should be selected at random from among the population of the represented district. This would be somewhat like the military draft, it's a job you can't turn down except for specific and spelled-out hardship conditions.

I see many advantages to this - representatives would likely be more honest, more knowledegable, and less likely to stick pork into bills solely to benefit their district ("bringing home the bacon") as they're in for a fixed term and won't be re-elected. It could also cause problems in that so many members would have no experience in politics, and be unable or unwilling to compromise, keeping many bills from being passed. Hmm, actually, that would be yet another good thing...

[dclary]

I see many advantages to this - representatives would likely be more honest, more knowledegable, and less likely to stick pork into bills solely to benefit their district ("bringing home the bacon") as they're in for a fixed term and won't be re-elected. It could also cause problems in that so many members would have no experience in politics, and be unable or unwilling to compromise, keeping many bills from being passed. Hmm, actually, that would be yet another good thing...

Are you sure about these "advantages," Ben?


a) Why would they be more honest?

What's most likely:


Only dishonest people run for office.
All honest people who run for office are turned dishnest.
Everyone's dishonest-- we just "see" the ones in office as being so, because they're in the spotlight.


There's no evidence anywhere that congressmen are any more or less honest than the rest of humanity. Power may corrupt, but the solution to that is term limits, not randomness.

b) Why would they be more knowledgeable? And what would they be more knowledgeable about?

Picking randomly means we'd get people who know nothing but who they voted for at American Idol. Who know nothing about the American legislative process, our governmental model, or even the rules of decorum. Random means gang members, illiterates, and so many people who would slow the process of legislation due to simple ignorance that it would be better to simply have no legislative body whatsoever. That was the whole purpose for staggering the Senate's votes: to ensure that there would always be people there who knew what the hell was going on, and how to get things done.

c) Why would they be less interested in sending money to their own home regions? Would the process of randomness somehow ensure that only altruists were representatives? We're talking people who associate so fully with their home sports teams that they're willing to fight over beers over the better team. People who've never left their home states and couldn't tell you anything about other states but what they've seen on TV. It seems to me that as long as a person has the power to help his home city, community, or state, that person's going to try to do that.



I would have to strenuously disagree with your idea here, for the reasons detailed above.

What I would suggest, in lieu, is a 5-term lifetime limit on Representatives. No person should be allowed to spend more than 10 years in the house.

[GeorgeK]

Elected officials scored even lower? What's up with that?


American English is not the native language of the Goa' Uld.

[Haggis]

What I would suggest, in lieu, is a 5-term lifetime limit on Representatives. No person should be allowed to spend more than 10 years in the house.

And then another two or three terms in the Senate? Or as Governor? That's a career.