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.
 
what the actual fuck
Thing is, my school was in a fairy affluent area. This wasn't some underfunded inner city ghetto school. It was upper middle class white suburbs. She had a stick up her ass and some really stupid curriculum. Like reading Bible verses/Greek mythology every week and having to sum the whole thing up in 100 words, analyze it in 50 words, and write a conclusion in 25 words. It cannot be overstated just how much she fucked up my writing.
 
He complains about original thought, but I will bet you he doesn’t allow his students to have it, even if they were capable.
Universities now do not allow original thought. Students are told that there is an opinion that’s sanctioned and they are shown that any deviation from that will result in being mobbed and destroyed.

He actually wrote an entire essay related to that subject. He holds that people are not entitled to have an opinion. That all opinions are either "true" or "false". That to hold a "false" opinion is to be the enemy of "truth" and therefore working against the greater good.

It was a rather incredible view IMO for a professor of philosophy to hold. He didn't explain how one would test all opinion for truth, but I imagine his view would be that the "expert consensus" on any issue is the truth. I strongly suspect that he does not allow any original thought in his classroom.
 
Even mandating you go back to hand-typed or written papers wouldn't do it - it would just incentivize the creation of an auto-pen that can do a whole essay.

When I took standardized tests, the administrator of the test handed you a #2 pencil. Make class attendance mandatory, spend ½ the class discussing the material that you were supposed to read the night before and then a quick writing assignment (with that #2 pencil) that must be turned in at the end of the hour based on what was discussed.
 
He actually wrote an entire essay related to that subject. He holds that people are not entitled to have an opinion. That all opinions are either "true" or "false". That to hold a "false" opinion is to be the enemy of "truth" and therefore working against the greater good.

It was a rather incredible view IMO for a professor of philosophy to hold. He didn't explain how one would test all opinion for truth, but I imagine his view would be that the "expert consensus" on any issue is the truth. I strongly suspect that he does not allow any original thought in his classroom.
Sounds like a guy who mostly marinates in idealist philosophy. Reading Kant all day or whatever.
 
He actually wrote an entire essay related to that subject. He holds that people are not entitled to have an opinion. That all opinions are either "true" or "false". That to hold a "false" opinion is to be the enemy of "truth" and therefore working against the greater good.
Sounds like the kind of academic that makes Pol Pot seem right.....


So, what's his opinion (heh) of my opinion that "peas don't taste good to me" ?
 
That all opinions are either "true" or "false". That to hold a "false" opinion is to be the enemy of "truth" and therefore working against the greater good.
That’s an incredibly depressing look at modern university education.
Even in my pleb, bog standard, comprehensive I had an english lit teacher who delighted in telling us that we could argue whatever we wanted, regardless of how he felt about it, as long as you justify from the text, miss otterly! We had a teacher who challenged us to think whatever we wanted, and showed us how to argue crazy viewpoints, the wilder the better, by looking at a text and interpreting it. Same guy brought every flavour left and right newspaper in for a week and made us read the same story covered from different angles .
Uni student are getting worse tuition than a northern sink school in the eighties. It’s no wonder everything’s fucked.
 
That’s an incredibly depressing look at modern university education.
Even in my pleb, bog standard, comprehensive I had an english lit teacher who delighted in telling us that we could argue whatever we wanted, regardless of how he felt about it, as long as you justify from the text, miss otterly! We had a teacher who challenged us to think whatever we wanted, and showed us how to argue crazy viewpoints, the wilder the better, by looking at a text and interpreting it. Same guy brought every flavour left and right newspaper in for a week and made us read the same story covered from different angles .
Uni student are getting worse tuition than a northern sink school in the eighties. It’s no wonder everything’s fucked.
I still remember in junior high we had to give short persuasive presentations about any topic. After we picked the topic, we were told he had to present our argument from the opposite side. It was a really good exercise and I still remember it all these years later.
 
All the cool kids get their reading skills from Kiwi Farms.
It's probably not too far from the truth. A bunch of my friends growing up attribute their reading skills to nerdy interests, and fantasy/TTRPG/game authors having a compulsion to use increasingly arcane verbiage. Anyone who read one of the Vampire: The Masquerade books learned what an "antediluvian" was, and that's straight up off the GRE (grad school SAT test thing).
Even in my pleb, bog standard, comprehensive I had an english lit teacher who delighted in telling us that we could argue whatever we wanted, regardless of how he felt about it, as long as you justify from the text, miss otterly! We had a teacher who challenged us to think whatever we wanted, and showed us how to argue crazy viewpoints, the wilder the better, by looking at a text and interpreting it. Same guy brought every flavour left and right newspaper in for a week and made us read the same story covered from different angles .
It's depressing how rare these teachers are. Isn't that supposed to be the foundation of learning, of critical thinking, of developing a robust intellect? Have a class debate but draw straws to see who is on what side of the issue, and FORCE them to reason through an argument that would support it. No, Soyboy Jones, I don't care that you personally are a feminist ally and love abortion, what if you had to defend it with everything you had? Increasingly, I find myself just disregarding the opinions of anyone who is incapable of that much, it's the sign of a profoundly underdeveloped mind.
 
All the cool kids get their reading skills from Kiwi Farms.
And if you cannot write well here you get blown out of the board.

Believe the overall standard of writing, least here at A&N, is pretty high. See many well-reasoned, well-presented posts here. Folks here know if you want to make a credible post you have to write accordingly - proper spelling, proper grammar, or as best you can if your native language isn't English.

On KF, just like on the redboards, what you write here is YOU. And most posters come across here pretty well, even if one may not agree with what's written.

Since nearly everyone else here is far younger than myself, that gives me confidence in the younger generations' ability to read and write competently.
 
He actually wrote an entire essay related to that subject. He holds that people are not entitled to have an opinion. That all opinions are either "true" or "false". That to hold a "false" opinion is to be the enemy of "truth" and therefore working against the greater good.

It was a rather incredible view IMO for a professor of philosophy to hold.
Particularly astonishing given that philosophers have been debating "What is truth?" for millennia! He probably has a co-worker right in his own department whose job is literally to advocate a different definition of truth from his.
 
Like reading Bible verses/Greek mythology every week and having to sum the whole thing up in 100 words, analyze it in 50 words, and write a conclusion in 25 words. It cannot be overstated just how much she fucked up my writing.
That actually sounds kind of fun, leaving aside your other complaints.
It could be fun and a good exercise if the purpose was to learn how to write concise, easy to remember summaries. If it was a writing assignment that was little more than busy work, then I can understand why @My cravat doesn't flutter disliked the assignment and why it messed up their interest in writing.

I had similar experiences with a junior high literature teacher whose quizzes weekly asked questions on the most obscure/irrelevant details about the novel we were reading and a high school literature teacher who shamelessly berated nearly every student in her class before semester's end. It's no wonder my own interest in reading took a hit during those years.

Universities now do not allow original thought. Students are told that there is an opinion that’s sanctioned and they are shown that any deviation from that will result in being mobbed and destroyed.
Times have changed and not for the better. I think I've shared the story elsewhere, but the university staff members who led my freshman orientations consistently said something along the lines of, "You're going to be exposed to different opinions. You might disagree with them, and that's okay," because part of the college experience was being exposed to other ideas and perspectives. Now, the message seems to be, "You can have whatever opinion you want as long as it's the correct one." As such, any professor criticizing the lack of original thought needs to look in the mirror first before criticizing.

When you can't get a good job without a worthless piece of paper, and you can get the paper basically by just giving the school money and then doing nothing...
When traditional colleges simply give out pieces of paper to anyone paying the money and falling into lockstop with the on-campus groupthink, they're no better than fly by night diploma mills who do the same thing more brazenly.
 
I really despise The Great Gatsby for similar reasons. It's a book that manages to feel twice as long as it actually is.
The author's antics are more entertaining. He one time was scared his penis was too small, so he showed it to Earnest Hemmingway. Also was worried about being gay and married a crazy woman with BPD.
 
I only ever had to take the first semester writing class in my college, but man reviewing some of the other student's essays was grim. Like I remember reading a persuasive essay whose intro was along the lines of: "I was on twitter the other day, and saw a guy said 'a 70 year old can't work a job but can drive a car'. Isn't it crazy, In this essay Ill make the argument that we need a maximum driving age in 3 arguments. Firstly..." and these were essays we spent at least 3 weeks on at this point and got feedback from the professor already.

As for the substance, most people just wrote the argument that was expected to get the best grade. I don't blame them, that is what they are incentivized to do. There was a funny phenomenon where the worse writers would make the more original arguments just because they were so batshit insane like saying the government should make an education camp for teen mothers.

Feel like there's a dozen people to blame. The government wants nobody to fail high school. The government is okay giving loans to garbage students. Colleges want to have lower standards so they can get the tuition money from the garbage students. High school teachers mostly don't give a fuck and just put on movies. The few who try are often inept regardless and will give bad and dogmatic writing advice. The kids didn't listen anyway and spent all of highschool watching propaganda on their phones. Companies hiring grads didn't care about standards lowering until they were already at rock bottom
 
This is so common, and I don't understand it. Is it for the money?
I have no idea. I assume they make friends with other students and use their notes and that they have no choice but to skip because they have to work.
The thing you have to keep in mind is that it's the only assertion he's allowed to make. Any time there is any problem at all, it must be caused by "the system" by which they inevitably mean, "white people oppressing everyone else."
That's not at all what he's saying. Most of these students he's talking about are white; I know it because I see it.
The overlooked truth of the value of college is that it was a simple preselection of the best and brightest. You could sit in a pit of clay and talk shit and it would become better than lesser people sitting in a well funded and air conditioned auditorium studying literature.
You only think this because you don't have the mental tools to sit in an auditorium studying literature, which makes me think you're one of the people the author is complaining about.
I don’t think public educators even teach grammar anymore. Pretty sure it’s discriminatory towards AAVE speakers.
That's been the case since No Child Left Behind and the 3 Rs were instituted. They made expectations minimal so the lowest-performing and average kids can fit into the system and the higher-performing kids can be segregated via autism diagnoses. This is because it would be too expensive and disruptive to the system to hire teachers that can teach math proofs or literary analysis or anything above the bare minimum.
I was going to comment on all three authors but Richard Powers actually seems to write reasonable books. Point being though, I'm not surprised students don't want to read these trash books and analyse them. I sure as fuck wouldn't have read any of that garbage.
It's not so much that they don't want to, but that they can't. These books being promoted as "serious adult novels" are another example of what the author bemoans. There is nothing very deep or engaging about these, but teachers and professors assign them because the average iDrone can't read the classics. Both historical context and sharp analytical skills are necessary to succeed in a classic literature class, and this modern slop cuts out the historical context and makes the possible analysis much more shallow. It's not because of woke; it's because students would fail if they had to read something more challenging.
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.

High School.

HIGH SCHOOL.
YA slop is terrible. Liking Harry Potter as an adult or teenager is fine, but how about a little Tolkien or Heinlein as well?
The only reason a person could possibly be illiterate is because society has convinced them that intelligence is bad,
A&N and Republicans sure are doing a good job of that, by the way.
Wanna fix chronic absenteeism? "Every day you miss unexcused will cost you a grade"
Every class I've seen has had mandatory attendance with consequences in your participation grade. That still doesn't fix things.
Does everyone remember how the requirement to take the SAT / ACT was eliminated during the pandemic by the "most prestigious" institutions? What ever happened with that? Oh, right, universities quickly realized that without that absurdly low barrier to entry the students they were admitting were even more retarded than usual, and failed out in record numbers.
Now they're requiring AP classes instead. In the US, even the districts with the lowest standards will require one AP exam for graduation. APs are the new SAT/ACT, and they're more rigorous than the SAT/ACT ever were.
This is one of the reasons why I don't have a smartphone.
You get used to the thing correcting everything for you and being able to look things up at any time that you don't learn anything yourself anymore.
Smartphones create dumb people.
Gen Z and Alpha are being demolished by smartphones.
I don't even text on principle of opposition to this.
professors generally aren't there to educate anymore. professors are there to do research for the university first and foremost.
That's not a bad thing. If you're at university, you should want to learn yourself, and no professor should have to change a bunch of undergrad diapers.
 
Watch the Q&A sections of Jared Taylor's university speeches. The students can barely even ask coherent questions to him and Mr T has to reword them.

"So when you was using words to manipulate thinking, I was wondering and wanting to ask you, do you want to change our perceptions based on false words or do you think that what you is thinking comes from a place of truth?"

I believe you're asking 'Am I sincere or not?'
 
It's not so much that they don't want to, but that they can't.
When I don't want to do something I tend to make it look like I can't do it so I won't get asked to do it. I'm not saying that's the case here but it is a thing people do.
These books being promoted as "serious adult novels" are another example of what the author bemoans. There is nothing very deep or engaging about these, but teachers and professors assign them because the average iDrone can't read the classics.
That's not necessarily true. Teachers don't always have a choice about that kind of thing. Universities have to follow curriculums as well. I had more than one teacher on more than one occasion bitch about stuff they were forced to teach us. There's also the fact that the teachers themselves might be too retarded to teach classic literature properly.
Both historical context and sharp analytical skills are necessary to succeed in a classic literature class, and this modern slop cuts out the historical context and makes the possible analysis much more shallow. It's not because of woke; it's because students would fail if they had to read something more challenging
I only skimmed through the wiki articles to be honest. I wasn't even commenting on the wokeness of them, just the shittiness based on the titles and small summaries. Classical literature is really not something the majority of people will be able to sit and read and analyse. Even in the past that really wasn't the case. Courses like that tend to attract people who choose it either as a requirement or because it seems like it'll be easy. A very small minority of the students in those types of courses will care about the material. I gave absolutely zero fucks about the required ethics course and few other ones, I can't even remember now, that I was forced to take and did barely enough to pass them. I'm sure those teachers would probably bitch about me being retarded too.

All that being said, American schools seem fucking horrifyingly atrocious and I wouldn't doubt there's an entire generation that's too retarded to read even trash fiction. But, I try to give the benefit of the doubt because I've noticed a lot of younger people aren't as dumb as they seem at first glance.
 
When I took standardized tests, the administrator of the test handed you a #2 pencil. Make class attendance mandatory, spend ½ the class discussing the material that you were supposed to read the night before and then a quick writing assignment (with that #2 pencil) that must be turned in at the end of the hour based on what was discussed.
Nigguh you finna tell me I took yo damn pencil?! You racist POS!!! *Teacher shot dead*

Game Over
 
They're doing nothing wrong. The litfag wants them to give the "correct" answer, they use ChatGPT (so, Markov chain) to get the statistically most likely correct answer.
This reminded me of a passage from The Last Psychiatrist, now very nearly 10 years old. The "Harvard cheating scandal" was mostly notable for how retarded it made everyone look: students in an introductory course had been colluding and sharing answers in a take-home, open book exam.
Last year there was a large cheating scandal at Harvard, over a hundred students were accused of plagiarism in a government class, and amidst the usual self-aggrandizing criticisms of the college kids as entitled, lazy, or stupid, what no one wondered is why, in an introductory survey course predicated on institutionalized grade inflation and no wrong answers, did the students feel compelled to cheat when they were all going to get As anyway? The terrifying answer is that they weren't cheating to get the right answer, there was no right answer, they were forced to cheat to concoct the answer the professor wanted-- because that's the system.
Just google it.
Prof is at least baste for this.

Edit:
And if you cannot write well here you get blown out of the board.
Lol, KF is clearly graded on a curve. Do we need to raise standards for our French Canadian posters, or are their viewpoints valuable enough to give them a little affirmative action?
 
Last edited:
Back