Advertisement

'Times' American History Survey A Farce

Students' Slapstick, Paper's Ignorance Mar Senate-Shaking Educational Drive

It all began last May when Allan Nevins, professor of History at Columbia University, wrote an article in the New York Times Magazine in which he called attention to what he called deficiencies in higher education regarding the teaching of American history. The Times then took up his crusade, discovered that only 82 per cent of the colleges in the country require students to take the subject, and waxed editorial. This poll is supposed to answer the argument that U. S. history is adequately treated in secondary school.

Psychologically...

Just how little the questionnaire did prove, and its deficiencies by every psychological standard, is described succinctly by O. Hobart Mowrer, of the department of Psychology, assistant professor of Education.

"Although American youth today have anything but an amused and facetious attitude toward their country and its role in world affairs, the New York Times has nevertheless managed in its recent inquiry to elicit some rather good humor. That the Times does not, however, fully appreciate the funny side of the results of its 'research' is indicated, for example, by its statement that references to 'William Lewis' and 'John L. Green' and to Samuel Gompers as "Samuel Goebbels' and 'Sam Grumpers' show a hazy or sloppy idea of correct spelling.'

"The fact that 1,500 student listed Casey Jones as a 'famous railway man' and that about half of the total of 7,000 suggested that William James was the brother of Jesse James was also apparently lost on the Times. I understand that the Times has informed the Crimson that only two per cent of all the replies to the questionnaire were not serious and that these were carefully excluded from consideration in the tabulation of the published results.

Advertisement

"The Time' conclusion that 'high school students now possess an insufficient knowledge of United States history' may be correct, but the evidence which is submitted in support of this thesis suggests even more strongly that the Times itself is 'astonishingly misinformed' concerning the legitimate and scientifically valid use of questionnaires.

"The Times' questionnaire was apparently presented to the students in such a way as to arouse suspicion as to the motivation behind it and to make them wonder how the results would be used. The circumstances were also apparently such as to annoy the students and to invite ironical and flippant answers (e.g., Portland, Oregon, was frequently said to be located on the Mississippi River or on the Atlantic seaboard, and Franklin D. Roosevelt was listed among the presidents who have been assassinated).

Ask a Silly Question

"Conscientious users of the questionnaire technique make sure, by personally interviewing an unselected sample of the persons covered by the questionnaire, that the written replies are truly representative and have been made without misunderstanding and in good faith. The way in which the Times' results have been presented suggests that sincerity and good faith were perhaps lacking on both sides in this instance. An irresponsible inquiry deserves irresponsible replies."

About the only concrete conclusion that can be drawn from the questionnaire and the answers published in Sunday's Times is that the country's class of 1946 has a mass sense of humor that the state of the world has been able to keep within reasonable bounds, but has not been able to kill. In fact, the survey set off a mass of spontaneous kidding all over the nation that might in some way be taken to show the essential unity of thought in the current "lost generation," if the Times and the many officials and editorialists who took this farce at its face value must draw a moral.

The Literary Digest poll can move over.

Advertisement