BBC news really have reached a new level of dumbing down today.

[TheWaiting]

Switched on News 24. Reporter outside polling station has just explain that you put a cross next to the name of your preferred candidate and if they get the most votes they become an M.P and represent you in Parliament. 🤨 We then go back to Christian Fraser in the studio who proceeds with a segment titled, ‘How to vote’ 🙄🙄🙄
I honestly thought they were running a Newsround episode.

@bridgetreilly Reading is tested by comprehension, not by ability to just 'read'. And I disagree that reading doesn't improve after age 11- of course it does!

I've just been to vote with one of the DC who is very politically aware, watches News 24, and came home from uni after lectures to vote tactically. They picked up their ballot paper then realised they didn't actually know what to do. They just asked but as PPs have said not everyone would feel comfortable asking.

If you think about it, about 3% of the electorate was under 18 at the last general election so will be voting for the first time. There will also be people who have taken British Citizenship since the last election or people who haven't ever exercised the right to vote before.

Well 11 year olds can read so how does reading really improve after that? Once you can read you can read. You may know more words the more widely you read but if you have learnt phonics etc you can probably have a good stab at most words

There's lots of aspects to reading: vocabulary, comprehension and fluency just to name af few. I read Wuthering heights for the first time age 10. I have read it many times since and I'm pleased to report my comprehension of its meaning has completely changed and improved since then. If someone's reading hasn't improved since primary school then that's very sad.

Voters need to have at least a basic knowledge of what each party stands for and their main policies

No they don't!

@Tangfastics, no, nowhere have I complained about, or called anyone stupid or uneducated.
I complained about a BBC news article that seemed to be aimed at 11yr olds. Some posters told me IWBU because lots of adults don’t understand our political process. I expressed (genuine) surprise and actually conceded that in that case I was probably BU. Nowhere did I ever suggest anyone was stupid.

I’m genuinely surprised that people reach adulthood without an awareness of our political system.

Why? There’s loads of things in life that to me are just common sense, but other people have no interest in or awareness of.

I haven't read the whole thread, but I have a friend, who is a professional (very highly qualified, finance type roll), runs his own successful business, involved in lots of local businesses groups, has actually MET THE LOCAL CANDIDATE...

He spent a very tedious hour carefully explaining to me that you get two votes on the paper, one for your local candidate, and one for the PM. So, he's planning on voting for a local indie candidate, and then a different party for PM!

I've been wondering a day what he thought when he saw the ballot paper

...And I don’t need to defend myself.

I’d like to be shown where I called people stupid? I’d also like to be shown what I’m too scared to come back and defend.

Its good they are telling people because if you put the wrong mark down or mark two or mess up the ballot paper it will be discounted.
When I was at the polling station today they were patiently explaining the process to an elderly lady who hadn't voted before. Making it simple and encouraging people to vote can never be a bad thing IMO.

@DonaldTrumpsChopper, that sounds like an American ballot paper. They can be ridiculously confusing.

Why? There’s loads of things in life that to me are just common sense, but other people have no interest in or awareness of.

It's hard to get through life without feeling the impact of the country's political choices, though, whether through taxes, NHS services, benefits (etc. etc.). You don't have to be interested in politics but people need at least a basic awareness of the political system. I'm not a meteorologist, but I still get wet when it rains.

I'm not blaming people who are ignorant because (it appears) this is not something routinely taught in schools. It should be, though.

You really can’t see how condescending your post was?

@TheWaiting This friend is 49 year old, lived in UK all his life. I can't believe he hasn't voted before. He was explaining it to me, very passionately! In the end, I gave up and just told him to vote for the local guy.

It wasn't taught at my school. I left in 2004. I didn't ever go with my parents to vote, don't remember them ever talking about politics. I think I asked my mum once and she said she votes green because she never knows who to vote for otherwise. I was about 22 the first time I voted as I'd been just too young the previous time.

@PowerHooper

We live in Germany now and my son's school has civics/politics as a subject, for all pupils from age 13 onwards. I think er makes a lot of sense and the German teenagers I've tutored in English are really switched on when it comes to politics - her have opinions on trump, brexit. I wouldn't have known the political goings in other countries at the age of 14-16.

Well, the (primary aged) kids and I have just watched the Hey Duggee election episode, and they were interested to link it with what they have been seeing on the news headlines the past few weeks. I realised that I’ve been referring to it as “voting”, rather than “the election”, so we all learned something tonight.

You really can’t see how condescending your post was?

You stated that I called people stupid and uneducated. I did neither. You stated that due to this you doubted I’d be back to defend myself. Well here I am asking you to show where I called anyone stupid or uneducated. I expressed a surprised opinion. Some posters pointed out that whilst they saw my POV, I was BU as a great many adults need this. I said I was surprised and accepted I may have been unreasonable.

At no point did I call anyone stupid.
But as per the times, it seems anyone can state an untruth without needing to back it up with evidence. 🤨

Reading age isn't just about reading, it's about the ability to comprehend and understand what it is you are reading.

This was raised as part of my work. We legally need to communicate quite complex information to our customers as part of important decisions they need to take such as deciding how to take a pension.

As part of work to make sure that people understand these complex messages, work has been done on making letters simpler. However it's difficult to ensure that the legal message is given in a way that people can understand and the letters even after work are still sitting at about age 14, that's obviously not good enough.

Anyway that's a bit of a digress.

My DCs reading age was assessed at primary school, not sure if that is universal or not.

I had a long chat with someone who has been a Returning Officer many times and the things he has seen rather shocked me. People circling the name of their preferred candidate instead of a cross in the box, striking out the name of other candidates as an indication of who they want to vote for etc.

Not everyone has voted before and not everyone is clear on what to do.

I know this is a bit of a derail, but I'm genuinely interested - how it it determined what the reading 'ages' are? Has someone surveyed children of different ages and measured how wide a reading vocabulary they have?

I'm struggling to get my head round the statement about UK adults having an average reading age of 11 - because if most adult have the reading age defined as 11, surely it should be redefined as the average adult reading age?

It's not so much about treating everyone as if they are a small child but I suppose it's making sure that everyone can access the information in order to participate.

I do understand where the Op is coming from but at the same time appreciate that there are people who need this information in order to feel more comfortable about going along and voting.

It was Ds2s first vote today and he is away at Uni so I have checked in to make sure he went along and he's confirmed he's managed. :)

Voters need to have at least a basic knowledge of what each party stands for and their main policies

The thing about universal suffrage is that every adult gets to decide and use their vote however they like. One person may choose to spend days analysing all of the minutiae of the different candidates and parties and then choose based on that; another person might close their eyes and randomly stick their thumb on the ballot to make their choice. Both of them have exactly one vote each, which counts equally.

The alternative is what we used to have not all that long ago - only rich white men people with a country estate of good social standing who could be trusted to have sufficient intellect to understand it were allowed to vote.

Everybody has to pay taxes of some sort or another (even if only VAT), so every adult therefore gets a say in the government that sets those taxes - whether they pay tax on earnings from being a research scientist, footballer, political journalist or glamour model.

My Dc did a reading and comprehension test (and various others) at age 10 in school. One had a reading age of 15 and the other of 15.5. Not sure exactly what it entails but it wont just be vocabulary and I could see a few scores on the teachers sheet that seem to be combined to get the final score. It was the usual reading upside down at parents night thing.

I suspect there will be a maximum age at which it doesn't assess beyond (16/18 maybe?) so there wont be "adult" reading ages to plot against.

To be honest I've only come across the point about the average UK adult in the last day or so so I've not read too much up on it other than a quick google check to see if it was in the right ball park.