I have located the following links that represent what I believe to be fair criticism of Friedman’s work. Take a look and let me know what you think.

http://www.jeffvail.net/2005/10/surface-tension.html

http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/define/2005/0510polar.htm

http://www.cs.brown.edu/~sk/Personal/Books/Friedman-World-Flat/

Summary

The drop in average SAT scores is a statistical fluke. Thirty years ago, advantaged and over-achieving white students formed a disproportionate share of all those taking the test. Today, a growing share of minority and lower class whites are taking the test also, and they tend to score lower than advantaged whites. However, the scores of minorities have been rising over the last few decades, even faster than whites. Thus, everyone’s scores are generally rising, even though the average is dropping.

Google–SAT scores

Jeff: LOVED the show tonight. Great discussion and I look forward to hearing more from teachers. Keep up the great work.

“Lox lag brings bagel boom.”

This was the headline that Alistair Cooke cabled to his London newspaper describing how a New York fishmonger strike led to a surplus of unsold baked goods. The London newspaper responded complaining that they had no idea what he was talking about. That was true; they didn’t.

As readers, they did not have that shared body of knowledge with the writer that is so important to reading comprehension. Often much what is read can be understood only because the reader has background knowledge of the subject about which he is reading.

Want another example?

“Jones sacrificed and drove in a run.”

Although England is full of native English readers, few would have any idea of what is going on in this sentence. But an English reader from Japan would probably do just fine. Japanese and Americans know baseball, which is what this sentence is about.
Want another one?

“Over a period of weeks, the founding fathers gave birth to a new union.”

This sentence is not about plumbing parts or the latest science fiction movie, but I fear that many of today’s high school students might make such a guess.

Nearly all of reading and verbal communication depends on a large and unspoken body of common knowledge between the transmitter and receiver. Knowledge of the subject, history, the culture, its classic literature, its governance, its society are all critical for a reader to be able to comprehend what he reads. It is critical unless the writing is only what we would recognize as somewhat mindless drivel depicting only the events of everyday life.

It also enables one to speak to others in a manner and with a coherence that will garner respect. “Learning how to learn” these things will not help. They must be learned and internalized. There is neither time nor is there opportunity to look things up. Even Google will not help.

Facts are still important. Knowledge is important. A broad foundation of knowledge allows one to read, comprehend, build skills in communication, use logic, have some idea what to look up and when (as well has how), think about things (critically or otherwise) and sound like a reasonably intelligent and educated person. It also helps when a person attempts to “learn how to learn” even more.

My concern about today’s educational theories is that they de-emphasize the acquisition of knowledge far beyond what is reasonable or advisable.

Less is not more.