Drink water, get plenty of sleep and take your weekly quiz.
Quiz me!
Aha! I got 7. Unbelievablly good guesses and I saw the 60 minutes interview with Sarko.
And I sewed a button on my lumberjack shirt on the way in to work.
What a great day!
Of course, I did not beat Bill, merely tied him.
So here's the tie breaker for all of you aces, Civic literacy.
Here are your benchmarks, in birth order; America's future, the Graham boys, and me. Bill will need to submit his in the comments.
Lamar = 90% (54)
Eric = 83.3% (50)
Scott Fares = 80% (48)
High school seniors =53.2% (32)
Gripes: I disagree with their answer for #58 and I totally mismarked the Monroe doctrine.
Aha! I got 7. Unbelievablly good guesses and I saw the 60 minutes interview with Sarko.
And I sewed a button on my lumberjack shirt on the way in to work.
What a great day!
Of course, I did not beat Bill, merely tied him.
So here's the tie breaker for all of you aces, Civic literacy.
Here are your benchmarks, in birth order; America's future, the Graham boys, and me. Bill will need to submit his in the comments.
Lamar = 90% (54)
Eric = 83.3% (50)
Scott Fares = 80% (48)
High school seniors =53.2% (32)
Gripes: I disagree with their answer for #58 and I totally mismarked the Monroe doctrine.
posted by MrFares at 12:09 PM
4 Comments:
88.3% on the civics thing... not too shabby
Five on the quiz, and, er... between Scott and seniors on the civics. I've never been good at civicity.
Six on the quiz. It was a good week for guessing.
Lemony
I had 57 out of 60 for 95% on that civics quiz. Some other Eric had 50/60. I missed the "just war" question, but I knew something was fishy with that "no civilians casualties" since I remembered the answer should have been "minimized civilian casualties," but I forgot the bit about the authority of a legitimate sovereign. A tyrant, by definition, is incapable of involving a nation in a just war. Question #58 on the effect of federal reserve bank purchase of government bonds was the only item I guessed on, and I guess wrongly. And then, oddly enough, I missed the question on the definition of federalism.
The question on income trends among the American classes is very misleading. The question asks about households, and it's true that lower class and middle class households saw gains in real money income between 1965 and 2005 ("the past 40 years"), but the gains were almost entirely earned in the period between 1965 and 1975. Real money income for lower and middle income households has increased only very slightly in the past thirty years, with most gains coming in the late 1990s. And, the correct answer was misleading because the word "households" did not appear in it. In fact, the incomes of *individuals* in the lower and middle class have not increased in real dollar terms over the past thirty years. Household income increases are almost entirely due to increased workforce participation (more women are working in 2005 than in 1965). Also, annual income gains for individuals in the lower and middle classes are due to an increase in hours worked, because there has a been a real money decrease (for men) in hourly wages for the lower and middle classes, and that holds if you divide salaried workers' annual pay by their annual hourly work effort.
I knew the answer the test-designers wanted for that question, but I'm not surprised that only 24% of everyone who has taken the test ever gets that item "correctly" as the answer is misleading.
- Eric (Hadley-Ives)
Post a Comment
<< Home