Opinion The Average College Student Is Illiterate - Spelling is atrocious, grammar is random, and the correct use of apostrophes is cause for celebration. Worse is the resistance to original thought.

1743679439807.png
Oxford undergraduates on a late night drinking spree, 1824. By Robert Cruikshank. (Photo by Hulton Archive.)

Link/Archive

I’m Gen X. I was pretty young when I earned my PhD, so I’ve been a professor for a long time—over 30 years. If you’re not in academia, or it’s been a while since you were in college, you might not know this: the students are not what they used to be. The problem with even talking about this topic at all is the knee-jerk response of, “yeah, just another old man complaining about the kids today, the same way everyone has since Gilgamesh. Shake your fist at the clouds, dude.” So yes, I’m ready to hear that. Go right ahead. Because people need to know.

First, some context. I teach at a regional public university in the United States. Our students are average on just about any dimension you care to name—aspirations, intellect, socio-economic status, physical fitness. They wear hoodies and yoga pants and like Buffalo wings. They listen to Zach Bryan and Taylor Swift. That’s in no way a put-down: I firmly believe that the average citizen deserves a shot at a good education and even more importantly a shot at a good life. All I mean is that our students are representative; they’re neither the bottom of the academic barrel nor the cream off the top.

As with every college we get a range of students, and our best philosophy majors have gone on to earn PhDs or go to law school. We’re also an NCAA Division 2 school and I watched one of our graduates become an All-Pro lineman for the NFL. These are exceptions, and what I say here does not apply to every single student. But what I’m about to describe are the average students at Average State U.

Reading

Most of our students are functionally illiterate. This is not a joke. By “functionally illiterate” I mean “unable to read and comprehend adult novels by people like Barbara Kingsolver, Colson Whitehead, and Richard Powers.” I picked those three authors because they are all recent Pulitzer Prize winners, an objective standard of “serious adult novel.” Furthermore, I’ve read them all and can testify that they are brilliant, captivating writers; we’re not talking about Finnegans Wake here. But at the same time they aren’t YA, romantasy, or Harry Potter either.

I’m not saying our students just prefer genre books or graphic novels or whatever. No, our average graduate literally could not read a serious adult novel cover-to-cover and understand what they read. They just couldn’t do it. They don’t have the desire to try, the vocabulary to grasp what they read, and most certainly not the attention span to finish. For them to sit down and try to read a book like The Overstory might as well be me attempting an Iron Man triathlon: much suffering with zero chance of success.

Students are not absolutely illiterate in the sense of being unable to sound out any words whatsoever. Reading bores them, though. They are impatient to get through whatever burden of reading they have to, and move their eyes over the words just to get it done. They’re like me clicking through a mandatory online HR training. Students get exam questions wrong simply because they didn’t even take the time to read the question properly. Reading anything more than a menu is a chore and to be avoided.

They also lie about it. I wrote the textbook for a course I regularly teach. It’s a fairly popular textbook, so I’m assuming it is not terribly written. I did everything I could to make the writing lively and packed with my most engaging examples. The majority of students don’t read it. Oh, they will come to my office hours (occasionally) because they are bombing the course and tell me that they have been doing the reading, but it’s obvious they are lying. The most charitable interpretation is that they looked at some of the words, didn’t understand anything, pretended that counted as reading, and returned to looking at TikTok.

This study says that 65% of college students reported that they skipped buying or renting a textbook because of cost. I believe they didn’t buy the books, but I’m skeptical that cost is the true reason, as opposed to just the excuse they offer. Yes, I know some texts, especially in the sciences, are expensive. However, the books I assign are low-priced. All texts combined for one of my courses is between $35-$100 and they still don’t buy them. Why buy what you aren’t going to read anyway? Just google it.

Even in upper-division courses that students supposedly take out of genuine interest they won’t read. I’m teaching Existentialism this semester. It is entirely primary texts—Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Camus, Sartre. The reading ranges from accessible but challenging to extremely difficult but we’re making a go of it anyway (looking at you, Being and Nothingness). This is a close textual analysis course. My students come to class without the books, which they probably do not own and definitely did not read.

Writing

Their writing skills are at the 8th-grade level. Spelling is atrocious, grammar is random, and the correct use of apostrophes is cause for celebration. Worse is the resistance to original thought. What I mean is the reflexive submission of the cheapest cliché as novel insight.

Exam question: Describe the attitude of Dostoevsky’s Underground Man towards acting in one’s own self-interest, and how this is connected to his concerns about free will. Are his views self-contradictory?
Student: With the UGM its all about our journey in life, not the destination. He beleives we need to take time to enjoy the little things becuase life is short and you never gonna know what happens. Sometimes he contradicts himself cause sometimes you say one thing but then you think something else later. It’s all relative.
Either that, or it looks like this:

Exam question: Describe the attitude of Dostoevsky’s Underground Man towards acting in one’s own self-interest, and how this is connected to his concerns about free will. Are his views self-contradictory?
Student: Dostoevsky’s Underground Man paradoxically rejects the idea that people always act in their own self-interest, arguing instead that humans often behave irrationally to assert their free will. He criticizes rationalist philosophies like utilitarianism, which he sees as reducing individuals to predictable mechanisms, and insists that people may choose suffering just to prove their autonomy. However, his stance is self-contradictory—while he champions free will, he is paralyzed by inaction and self-loathing, trapped in a cycle of bitterness. Through this, Dostoevsky explores the tension between reason, free will, and self-interest, exposing the complexities of human motivation.
That’s right, ChatGPT. The students cheat. I’ve written about cheating in “Why AI is Destroying Academic Integrity,” so I won’t repeat it here, but the cheating tsunami has definitely changed what assignments I give. I can’t assign papers any more because I’ll just get AI back, and there’s nothing I can do to make it stop. Sadly, not writing exacerbates their illiteracy; writing is a muscle and dedicated writing is a workout for the mind as well as the pen.

What’s changed?

The average student has seen college as basically transactional for as long as I’ve been doing this. They go through the motions and maybe learn something along the way, but it is all in service to the only conception of the good life they can imagine: a job with middle-class wages. I’ve mostly made my peace with that, do my best to give them a taste of the life of the mind, and celebrate the successes.

Things have changed. Ted Gioia describes modern students as checked-out, phone-addicted zombies. Troy Jollimore writes, “I once believed my students and I were in this together, engaged in a shared intellectual pursuit. That faith has been obliterated over the past few semesters.” Faculty have seen a stunning level of disconnection.

What has changed exactly?

  • Chronic absenteeism. As a friend in Sociology put it, “Attendance is a HUGE problem—many just treat class as optional.” Last semester across all sections, my average student missed two weeks of class. Actually it was more than that, since I’m not counting excused absences or students who eventually withdrew. A friend in Mathematics told me, “Students are less respectful of the university experience —attendance, lateness, e-mails to me about nonsense, less sense of responsibility.”
  • Disappearing students. Students routinely just vanish at some point during the semester. They don’t officially drop out or withdraw from the course, they simply quit coming. No email, no notification to anyone in authority about some problem. They just pull an Amelia Earhart. It’s gotten to the point that on the first day of class, especially in lower-division, I tell the students, “Look to your right. Now look to your left. One of you will be gone by the end of the semester. Don’t let it be you.”
  • They can’t sit in a seat for 50 minutes. Students routinely get up during a 50 minute class, sometimes just 15 minutes in, and leave the classroom. I’m supposed to believe that they suddenly, urgently need the toilet, but the reality is that they are going to look at their phones. They know I’ll call them out on it in class, so instead they walk out. I’ve even told them to plan ahead and pee before class, like you tell a small child before a road trip, but it has no effect. They can’t make it an hour without getting their phone fix.
  • It’s the phones, stupid. They are absolutely addicted to their phones. When I go work out at the Campus Rec Center, easily half of the students there are just sitting on the machines scrolling on their phones. I was talking with a retired faculty member at the Rec this morning who works out all the time. He said he has done six sets waiting for a student to put down their phone and get off the machine he wanted. The students can’t get off their phones for an hour to do a voluntary activity they chose for fun. Sometimes I’m amazed they ever leave their goon caves at all.
I don’t blame K-12 teachers. This is not an educational system problem, this is a societal problem. What am I supposed to do? Keep standards high and fail them all? That’s not an option for untenured faculty who would like to keep their jobs. I’m a tenured full professor. I could probably get away with that for a while, but sooner or later the Dean’s going to bring me in for a sit-down. Plus, if we flunk out half the student body and drive the university into bankruptcy, all we’re doing is depriving the good students of an education.

We’re told to meet the students where they are, flip the classroom, use multimedia, just be more entertaining, get better. As if rearranging the deck chairs just the right way will stop the Titanic from going down. As if it is somehow the fault of the faculty. It’s not our fault. We’re doing the best we can with what we’ve been given.

All this might sound like an angry rant. I’m not angry, though, not at all. I’m just sad. One thing all faculty have to learn is that the students are not us. We can’t expect them all to burn with the sacred fire we have for our disciplines, to see philosophy, psychology, math, physics, sociology, or economics as the divine light of reason in a world of shadow. Our job is to kindle that flame, and we’re trying to get that spark to catch, but it is getting harder and harder and we don’t know what to do.

Hilarius Bookbinder is the pseudonym for a tenured professor with an Ivy League PhD who writes Scriptorium Philosophia.

A version of this essay originally appeared in Scriptorium Philosophia.
 
I have a question: why the hate for Harry Potter? These are not bad books for kids. It's not a high-brow literature, but I am curious why do you think they are disastrous?
From my perspective it's just that it's not a thing kids, let alone high school kids, are really interested in anymore. It's still in the cultural zeitgeist as a hangover from it's original fame. Most of the people still actively into it are millennials who liked it as kids themselves, not zoomies or alphas.

I read it in 5th-6th grade which is the age it's actually written for thereabouts. So some boomer teacher trying to hello fellow kids into being interested in reading by pushing it is just out of touch. And the reading level is below what will get a high schooler more vocab. It at best sustains prior reading levels. But you want to grow that, not cap it off.
 
I have a question: why the hate for Harry Potter? These are not bad books for kids. It's not a high-brow literature, but I am curious why do you think they are disastrous?

I'm sure part of it now is the troon war on Harry Potter's author. But the other part of it is the modern intellectual disdain for anything too white and not woke enough.

He says that people are illiterate for not engaging with modern serious literature. But that isn't really true. The problem with modern literature is that it is niche and overwhelmingly made to alienate most readers. Its also often trash.

Going through his examples is somewhat interesting:

Barbara Kingsolver - Her big prize-winning book involved taking Oliver Twist and re-setting it in modern rural america. IMO, its entirely derivative and not particularly good. Its stealing someone's work and re-making it as a shallow novel updated for "modern times".

Colson Whitehead - One of his most famous books is just a boring cliche-ridden novel set back in "slave days" on the plantation. He also wrote a zombie novel.

Richard Powers - His most well known work involves several different people crying over trees in different historical eras.

In general the problem isn't that people are illiterate, its the modern literature is so woke and so badly written that it repels the vast majority of the adult population.
 
There was a kid who had to "google" how to spell Banana... And a day later when meeting with my academic advisor, I used the word "antithetical" to describe my relation to math class.... The teacher 20 years older than me didn't know what the word "antithetical" meant, I had to explain it to him.
Reminds me of the time in college when I was doing the intro to programming class everyone had to take. It was a vb.net course and the instructor kept getting basic programming concepts wrong - including ones that had definitions literally written on posters on the wall in front of him and did bizarre shit like tell people DIM stood for dimension rather than declare in memory while reading off a pre-prepared set of notes the department head had prepared for him to teach the class with. Guy was scary incompetent, forgot to mark final projects for multiple people which led to a shitshow where people technically failed the class cause they got a 0 on something worth 30% of the final grade cause he forgot to mark it (sidenote: he admitted he was playing the latest wow expansion at the time and lost track of time as his reason for not marking said projects, and also randomly failed to show up to class at all on days when new wow content dropped) and went on bizarre rants about how VIM was the best text editor ever written and that mice were unnecessary and obsolete in modern computing, like some usenet twit from the 80s

Needless to say he didn't get his contract renewed the next school year and quietly disappeared. Apparently fucked off to another province to teach another programming course from what I heard. Apparently the school tried to fight tooth and nail not to refund the cost of that particular course for people who got fucked over by not having their shit marked and so failed the course by now fault of their own under the rationale that they attended the course to the end. Well no shit they did the project in question was the final project for the course
 
Performing past the minimum in the classes doesn't really matter. If you ask anyone, college is all about the networking and resume building. Go to the social events, do extracurricular activities that generate resume talking points, do internships, build a portfolio if you are in a creative program. The author correctly identifies that the relationship is transactional but it's not as simple as money for a credential. The transaction is access to things that will help you get a job, and a lot of degree programs do not provide classes that for the bulk of the students will actually help with that. There aren't that many jobs that knowledge of existential philosophy will be a "wow factor" for when a recruiter sees it on the resume. Even the students who can do better in the class have no particular motivation to place the class as anything but last on their priority list.

But yeah, students are sometimes literally illiterate and use ChatGPT flagrantly undisguised. I've seen it combined into an illiterate student barely making it through a class presentation reading a report with words in it they could not come close to pronouncing and having to sound it out. If they had written the thing they might have pronounced the word wrong but they already would have some wrong pronunciation in their head, they wouldn't be sounding the word out like a first grader. If they had even familiarized themself with the ChatGPT output a bit by trying to read it once or twice ahead of time they could have at least had some wrong pronunciation in mind. But even that was too much work. Of course, they got a passing grade.

We are going to get more illiterate as a society. Brace for it. The written word is a technology. It is used because it serves a purpose in setting a message down in a recorded format. When oral culture was the only thing around, it was revolutionary. Now, we have recorded sound and video and YouTube. These will replace the written word. Fahrenheit 451 is way under-appreciated as a descriptor of the dystopian future we've found ourselves in. The average poster on this forum is significantly more literate than the average college student and I know a ton of people here are not college educated. It's just an age thing, people used to actually need and want to read some things even if it was never a novel. If you wanted to learn to do anything you couldn't just ask YouTube to tell you.

The author of the article should probably be telling 95% of his students to get into a degree program that has a better chance of getting them a job. He's okay with just being a well paid, comfortable cog in the big scam machine. When this is what education is, you get the results that we are getting.
 
Last edited:
I got into it with this guy more than once over facebook when he'd say that Harry Potter was perfectly fine--because as long as it gets kids to read.
High school kids.
That's nonsense for college-bound students, but I'm not surprised that a high school English teacher would be that desperate to get the other students to read something, anything. When I was in AP English 25 years ago, we'd be assigned a book and be required to finish it in a week. The regular English class was reading 8th grade books, 10-20 pages at a time. Most students in high school are undereducated and seem content with that.
The particular problem with philosophy programs at mid institutions like his is that nearly all the students are in those programs against their will and the classes grade very generously. There is often no incentive to try very hard.
Colleges still have delusions about creating a "well-rounded" student and force those classes on students who don't have a background in those subjects, aren't majoring in them, and don't care about them beyond getting a decent grade.

I went back to college as a grown adult, I was required to take two philosophy courses to graduate, and other students in those classes tended to regurgitate buzz words such as "epistemology" and "ontological" without real analysis (I'm pretty sure they didn't know what those words meant). I got chided by another student for doing philosophy wrong because I couched my response to a reading in plain English.
Even if they did being a good researcher doesn't make you a good educator
One of my worst professors in college was a math grad student who clearly didn't want to teach and had no idea how to teach undergrads. After I got a D on the first exam, I stopped going to lecture, just went to the once-a-week class taught by the TA, got As on the other two exams, and passed with a B.
 
It's a mixture of the public school education system for not having the guts to outright fail those who don't deserve it, and parents for failing to take any responsibility during a child's early years which results in them turning into the majority of Zoomers and Gen Alpha kids we have today.
 
What he didn't bring up is how K-12 education was utterly destroyed in the name of No Nigger Left Behind. You no longer are allowed to have courses niggers can't pass. Plus, colleges have dropped admissions standards to keep their student bodies growing, as their finances demand it.

For example, the SAT was criticized for using the following analogy RUNNER:MARATHON:

A) ENVOY:EMBASSY
B) MARTYR:MASSACRE
C) OARSMAN:REGATTA
D) HORSE:STABLE

This question was deemed "culturally biased" because the average negro has never been exposed to a regatta, and thus can't be expected to know what a regatta is... Never mind that rednecks from Appalachia also have never been exposed to a regatta and seem to do just fine with the same question.

I got this question right, despite not knowing what a regatta is, because the other three answers are clearly wrong.

100 bucks a course. How many courses in a year? Even when I was a student we knew they got rich off the textbooks, and they were expensive. Thankfully there were just five huge tomes for my degree (hullo Gilbert’s genetics aNd alberts biochemistry!)

In America, $100 for course books is pretty cheap. I paid more than that for some books decades ago. Typical price per credit-hour is $250 for in-state and $750 for out-of state. Typical course is 3 credit-hours. So $100 for books on top $750-$2250 for the course? Not really a big issue.
 
Barbara Kingsolver - Her big prize-winning book involved taking Oliver Twist and re-setting it in modern rural america. IMO, its entirely derivative and not particularly good. Its stealing someone's work and re-making it as a shallow novel updated for "modern times".
The only one of hers I’ve read is the poison wood bible, and that is a very good book.
 
I got this question right, despite not knowing what a regatta is, because the other three answers are clearly wrong.
I was going to say, you could solve it by process-of-elimination....

There were a few words I learned that way by not knowing what they meant? But knowing they were the answer because the other ones clearly weren't.

But logic like that is racist, dontchaknow? Shame on you for unfairly using your brain for abstract thought.
 
I was going to say, you could solve it by process-of-elimination....

There were a few words I learned that way by not knowing what they meant? But knowing they were the answer because the other ones clearly weren't.

But logic like that is racist, dontchaknow? Shame on you for unfairly using your brain for abstract thought.
It's why the SAT is a good proxy for IQ. It's not just a raw knowledge test. For example, in the reading comprehension section, whenever I wasn't sure, I just chose which answer seemed to obviously confirm the libtard worldview. Ace strategy.
 
I had to take some gay race studies class to graduate and I showed up exactly twice. Once on the first day and once for the final exam. I never bothered to turn in any assignments because the final was 75% of your grade. I just picked all the anti white answers and got a perfect score on the final and a C+ overall.
This sort of bullshit is also something that needs to go. Gen eds are largely horseshit, they should only be necessary if you fail some sort of admittance exam. I was required to spend an ungodly amount of money retreading shit I learned in high school to tick some boxes so the English and art departments didn't realize that they were near worthless. I already consider that stepping far over the bounds of what is reasonable.
Any curriculum that forces any sort of "social awareness" classes that center on race, sex, or any other sort of libtard bullshit should be illegal and the person that drafted them should be shot. Students shouldn't even have the option to pay for bullshit classes like that with government backed loans.
 
phones are a huge red herring

social media is generally having bad consequences for the kids but not paying attention in class is a retarded thing to blame on phones. somehow young men used to be able to pay attention in class when they were surrounded by the potential of seeing real boobies back in the day when you had to see real boobies if you were going to see boobies at all. phones are an easy out because the boomers and older gen xers still think they might go away, and hate them, and you can get an entire department to agree phones bad mmkay, but if you have motivated students and/or aren't hideously boring, the only people actually paying attention to their phones and not you are hiding in the back, and they wouldn't have been paying attention to you anyway.



it's also a distraction that this guy is a loser. not that he isn't a loser, he's teaching bullshit at bullshit u and he's full of aggravation that he isn't still at a fancy prestigious place, but you don't get a phd from an ivy, even in philosophy, without being functionally literate and of above average intelligence. he's plenty smart to fully realize that he is participating in evil.
 
Any curriculum that forces any sort of "social awareness" classes that center on race, sex, or any other sort of libtard bullshit should be illegal and the person that drafted them should be shot. Students shouldn't even have the option to pay for bullshit classes like that with government backed loans.
That would effectively destroy 99% of modern higher education. Which I fully support.
 
I agree with a lot of what he says, but I’m on the fence about the absenteeism stuff. If I’m paying the money, I have the right to skip. Most content is on the online portal anyway and a lot of professors just aren’t good lecturers. It’s getting easier and easier everyday to teach yourself.

It has not affected my ability to do my job because I understand the difference that I’m getting paid so I have the responsibility to show up.

The phone stuff though is spot on. I’ve been reading The Anxious Generation and my hatred for video games/tv/non productive uses of technology has been increasing.

Edit: If you’re a loan fag, you should be required to go to class because you’re a loan fag.
 
85% of univeristies would collapse overnight.
They would definitely need to trim a lot of fat but I think the legacy universities would survive it. Probably not the best take but I don't think college is or should be for everyone. I do think they should filter people out and society should accept the rejection and find another job/trade/or skill. As others have already pointed out a majority of degrees a university holds has no value in the real world; outside of engineering and some science degrees. Also, if they debloated the degrees universities could potentially tailor classes for degree paths. Instead of just Calculus for everyone why not Applied Calculus in Python? It even sounds more interesting. Calculus = Highschool 2 o'clock period but with an extra cost of $600 bucks.
 
A decade ago (yeesh) I went to a pretty big university in my state, starry eyed, always was a nerd
That experience shattered my worldview. I remember one class session distinctly, a shit liberal professor actually humoring students arguing that we shouldnt have to be able to read to get a degree. I felt I was in fucking la-la land. Most of the kids were on drugs. The admin lost my loan applications halfway through my semester too- and this wasnt some 2-bit bumfuck community college either.
Everyone in academia is so far up their own asses, they all need to be immolated, we can start over, its necessary at this point
 
Back