> I think that any sort of "standardized" education should include at least a class worth of teaching on how to interpret statistics. This is sort of a fantasy

> I think that any sort of "standardized" education should include at least a class worth of teaching on how to interpret statistics. This is sort of a fantasy of mine - having every public school teach a brief course on "not getting tricked". In my fantasy world, it's a several-week guide to common ways people lie and mislead the public. One section is on interpreting statistics. Another is probably on comparing scientific papers to the news stories they spawn. Another on 'paltering' and all the things a given statement doesn't say. The 'fun' section covers cold reads, famous hoaxes, and a general sense of how to not end up believing in every silly story you hear. You could use The Demon Haunted World as a readable source textbook for a lot of it. It's a pipe dream, of course. You'd need teachers who could teach it, which is a tall order to begin with, and then you'd need to find a way to give out examples without offending half the parents in the school when every examples (astrology, crystal healing, and so on) is going to cross somebody. But damn, even if it didn't take completely, wouldn't it be nice to at least have a shared framework to talk about this stuff?