Check this out - Eighth grade final exam from 1895 in Salina, Kansas

[KIN]

I thought some of you might enjoy this!! :)

 

This is the eighth-grade final exam from 1895 in Salina , Kansas , USA .. It was taken from the original document on file at the Smokey Valley Genealogical Society and Library in Salina , and reprinted by the Salina Journal.

 

8th Grade Final Exam: Salina , KS -1895

 

 

Grammar (Time, one hour)

 

1. Give nine rules for the use of capital letters.

2. Name the parts of speech and define those that have no modifications.

3. Define verse, stanza and pa ragraph.

4. What are the principal parts of a verb? Give principal parts of 'lie,''play,' and 'run.'

5. Define case; illustrate each case.

6. What is punctuation? Give rules for prin cipal marks of punctuation.

7 - 10. Write a composition of about 150 words and show therein that you understand the practical use of the rules of grammar.

 

Arithmetic (Time,1 hour 15 minutes )

1. Name and define the Fundamental Rules of Arithmetic.

2. A wagon box is 2 ft. deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft. wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold?

3. If a load of wheat weighs 3,942 lbs., what is it worth at 50cts/bushel, deducting 1,050 lbs. for tare?

4. District No 33 has a valuation of $35,000. What is the necessary levy to carry on a school seven months at $50 per month, and have $104 for incidentals?

5. Find the cost of 6,720 lbs. coal at $6.00 per ton.

6. Find the interest of $512.60 for 8 months and 18 days at 7 percent.

7. What is the cost of 40 boards 12 inches wide and 16 ft. long at $20 per metre?

8. Find bank discount on $300 for 90 days (no grace) at 10 percent.

9. What is the cost of a square farm at $15 per acre, the distance of which is 640 rods?

10. Write a Bank Check, a Promissory Note, and a Receipt.

 

U.S. History (Time, 45 minutes)

 

1. Give the epochs into which U.S. History is divided.

2. Give an account of the discovery of America by Columbus .

3. Relate the causes and results of the Revolutionary War.

4. Show the territorial growth of the United States .

5. Tell what you can of the history of Kansas .

6. Describe three of the most prominent battles of the Rebellion.

7. Who were the following: Morse, Whitney, Fulton , Bell , Lincoln , Penn, and Howe?

8. Name events connected with the following dates: 1607, 1620, 1800, 1849, 1865.

 

Orthography (Time, one hour) [Do we even know what this is??]

1. What is meant by the following: alphabet, phonetic, orthography, etymology, syllabication.

2. What are elementary sounds? How classified?

3. What are the following, and give examples of each: trigraph, subvoca ls, diphthong, cognate letters, linguals.

4. Give four substitutes for caret 'U.' (HUH?)

5 Give two rules for spelling words with final 'e.' Name two exceptions under each rule.

6. Give two uses of silent letters in spelling. Illustrate each.

7. Define the following prefixes and use in connection with a word: bi, dis, mis , pre, semi, post, non, inter, mono, sup.

8. Mark diacritically and divide into syllables the following, and name the sign that indicates the sound: card, ball, mercy, sir, odd, cell, rise, blood, fare, last.

9. Use the following correctly in sentences: cite, site, sight, fane, fain, feign, vane , vain, vein, raze, raise, rays.

10. Write 10 words frequently mispronounced and indicate pronunciation by use of diacritical marks and by syllabication.

 

Geography (Time, one hour)

 

1 What is climate? Upon what does climate depend?

2. How do you account for the extremes of climate in Kansas ?

3. Of what use are rivers? Of what use is the ocean?

4. Describe the mountains of North America .

5. Name and describe the following: Monrovia, Odessa, Denver, Manitoba, Hecla, Yukon, St. Helena, Juan Fernandez, Aspinwall and Orinoco .

6. Name and locate the principal trade centers of the U.S.

7. Name all the republics of Europe and give the capital of each.

8. Why is the Atlantic Coast colder than the Pacific in the same latitude?

9. Describe the process by which the water of the ocean returns to the sources of rivers.

10. Describe the movements of the earth. Give the inclination of the earth.

 

Notice that the exam took FIVE HOURS to complete.

[JFSinIL]

After reading the Little House books and the bit were Laura had a test to get her first teacher certificate - I can believe this. Back then an 8th grade diploma MEANT something!

 

But the teachers could also wallop a recalcitrant scholar.

[Gretchen in NJ]

Neat!

 

I wonder how many adults could answer these questions today. They can't seem to get past 5th grade.;) I am thinking about the Fox show Are you Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?:D

[sdWTMer]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

[Gretchen in NJ]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

Really. That is a downer.:glare:

[KIN]

Ooops! I'm sorry everyone! I never even thought about checking there.:blushing:

[Gretchen in NJ]

That is okay. I never check there either. It was fun to read.

[Michelle in MO]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

 

urban legend.

 

However, in defense of higher education standards, the teacher's exam that Laura Ingalls Wilder had to take was real. Even though students then were not studying advanced trigonometry and computer systems, I think many high school students today could not diagram a simple sentence. In addition, students admitted into Harvard and Yale in the 1600's and 1700's had to be pretty conversant in Latin, and this is fairly well documented. Now, they probably couldn't operate a computer, although I really like what Tracy Lee Simmons said in Climbing Parnassus, and I may be paraphrasing here: "Show me a man who knows Latin, and I'll show you a man who can build bridges."

 

P.S. SdWTMer, I know you weren't arguing for lower standards! I think one reason I see this story crop up occasionally is because many people believe that educational standards aren't what they used to be.

[Gretchen in NJ]

Nice point. I still might print it out as a guide. There are some good things listed there.

[Pamela H in Texas]

Educational standards are NOT what they used to be. The readers (McGuffey and others) are so incredibly beyond what the average student could master at the same ages these days. What was 3rd grade level in 1935 is considered, on the readability scales, 6th grade level now. RIDICULOUS.

 

I'm afraid I've fallen into some of the dumbing down also. I know my kids haven't been held to high standards of the past. I mean, sure, my daughter is accelerated and bright by today's standards but what on earth does THAT really say? And I've allowed just that to be true.

 

I wish I had done more....and better.

[Renee in NC]

Educational standards are NOT what they used to be. The readers (McGuffey and others) are so incredibly beyond what the average student could master at the same ages these days. What was 3rd grade level in 1935 is considered, on the readability scales, 6th grade level now. RIDICULOUS.

 

I'm afraid I've fallen into some of the dumbing down also. I know my kids haven't been held to high standards of the past. I mean, sure, my daughter is accelerated and bright by today's standards but what on earth does THAT really say? And I've allowed just that to be true.

 

I wish I had done more....and better.

 

School started at a later age. Children weren't in school at 5 or 6, but rather at 8 or 9.

 

The McGuffey 3rd Reader was not "3rd Grade", but simply Level 3. Some students never got any farther than that. Students were usually done with school at 14 or 16 - the 6th reader would have been the very last book, so not 6th grade, correct?

 

I won't disagree that standards have been lowered, but there is more than just "dumbing down" going on. Childhood has been extended to much older ages due to a variety of reasons - some good, some bad. Instead of going to school for 6-8 years total, students now go for 13.

 

My grandmother taught in a one-room school in Missouri in the 40s. She herself lived in town and attended a more modern type of school. All of those who graduated 8th grade went on to high school and the majority graduated. However, in her rural one-room school, most of her students stopped after the 8th grade. What was taught in the one-room school was different than what was taught in her school in town due to different needs.

 

My last point - education today has gotten so complicated! The sheer amount of information that students are expected to master has grown until it really dilutes the education (in my opinion.) In some respects, school in the past was simpler and that made for a better overall education.

[Pamela H in Texas]

What was 3rd grade level in 1935 is considered, on the readability scales, 6th grade level now. RIDICULOUS.

 

When I wrote this, I was talking about even "fluff" literature like the Bobbsey Twins. The old ones from the original series have different sentence structure, richer vocabulary, etc. The subject level is what 8 and 9 yos would enjoy but few 8yos today could read the old ones. And they place well into 5th and 6th grade reading levels using Fry's and other readability programs. OF course, now you can buy the dumbed down ones for your 8yo which is on the level of today's 3rd graders, but YUCK!

[Renee in NC]

When I wrote this, I was talking about even "fluff" literature like the Bobbsey Twins. The old ones from the original series have different sentence structure, richer vocabulary, etc. The subject level is what 8 and 9 yos would enjoy but few 8yos today could read the old ones. And they place well into 5th and 6th grade reading levels using Fry's and other readability programs. OF course, now you can buy the dumbed down ones for your 8yo which is on the level of today's 3rd graders, but YUCK!

 

I understand now! I hadn't thought about that.

[She]

Um, I just read through this and the exam was NOT false. The idea that schoold have dumbed down there curriculum because most adults can't pass this exam is what they consider false. They use the example that there is no literature, algebra, geometry, etc. on the exam. And that most adults taking the test have not recently been drilled on the facts that are used in these tests.

 

I'm not sure the curriculum in schools is really dumbed down. (Don't throw virtual tomatoes; I am a homeschooler) My opinion is that the schools are trying to give too many little snippets of information instead of any real meat. And they're spending too much time disciplining, being politically correct, teaching about birth control, assigning busy work, and trying to decipher each new teaching idea that comes along.

 

Since Laura's time there has been more history, technology, new scientific discoveries, etc. etc. Teachers also don't have free reign to teach. They are told which books, subjects etc. They are not allowed to handle a classroom the way they see fit. Most parents will not take a child over their knee for being a problem in the classroom, but instead blame and argue with the teacher (it could be his/her fault).

 

Personally I don't see how kids make it through public school anymore. There are just too many distractions.

 

Just my $.02

[Faithr]

Yeah, I found the Snopes article a little over the top. First of all it had to premise its argument about how education isn't dumbed down by treating this as a high school exam, not an 8th grade one. Which was it in reality?

 

Secondly, I don't care how long I've been out of school, I should still be able to figure out the rules for capitalization or how to figure the area of a wagon. That is just basic every day knowledge you should know! Some of the stuff was dated and obviously you had to specificically study for it, but to tell you a story my aunt learned from the McGuffey readers and she's in her 80's. A few years ago she came across an unfamiliar word and used the phonetics rules she learned in McGuffey to sound out the word! So that stuff sticks with you throughout your life.

 

It is true the test was narrow but not for 8th graders! If it was high school, well, it was obviously teaching to the needs of its students who were Kansas farmers!

 

If you read literature that was supposedly children's lit a long time ago (one of my father's favorite authors was Dickens. He read The Pickwick Papers at age 12 that was before he devoured everything that Sir Walter Scott wrote.) and compare it to children's lit now you can see a real difference. There is a dumbing down of literacy in America in lieu of stuffing lots of information into kids. Maybe the subjects were narrow in 1895 but I think nowadays the general approach is a mile wide and an inch deep. I think they might have had the right idea in 1895. Kind of like less is more.

[Michelle in MO]

Um, I just read through this and the exam was NOT false. The idea that schoold have dumbed down there curriculum because most adults can't pass this exam is what they consider false. They use the example that there is no literature, algebra, geometry, etc. on the exam. And that most adults taking the test have not recently been drilled on the facts that are used in these tests.

 

I'm not sure the curriculum in schools is really dumbed down. (Don't throw virtual tomatoes; I am a homeschooler) My opinion is that the schools are trying to give too many little snippets of information instead of any real meat. And they're spending too much time disciplining, being politically correct, teaching about birth control, assigning busy work, and trying to decipher each new teaching idea that comes along.

 

Since Laura's time there has been more history, technology, new scientific discoveries, etc. etc. Teachers also don't have free reign to teach. They are told which books, subjects etc. They are not allowed to handle a classroom the way they see fit. Most parents will not take a child over their knee for being a problem in the classroom, but instead blame and argue with the teacher (it could be his/her fault).

 

Personally I don't see how kids make it through public school anymore. There are just too many distractions.

 

Just my $.02

 

I agree to a great extent; many schools spend too much time with busy work and having to teach broad rather than deep. Teachers' hands are tied as to what they can teach; in our area teachers are drilled that they must "teach to the test" (here in Missouri, the MAP test). And, there is so much more to learn.

 

I think the only thing I would disagree with is that I have seen some pretty dumbed-down curriculum. Maybe that's because p.s. do have to teach so much. I've seen the Cord Algebra A & B books that our local p.s. tries to pass off as a typical algebra class, and it's not a pretty sight. It's probably the worst algebra textbook I've ever seen.

 

But, with everything else you said----ITA. Schools seem to have taken over the role that parents should play. Sorry state of affairs!

[Gretchen in NJ]

Um, I just read through this and the exam was NOT false. The idea that schoold have dumbed down there curriculum because most adults can't pass this exam is what they consider false. They use the example that there is no literature, algebra, geometry, etc. on the exam. And that most adults taking the test have not recently been drilled on the facts that are used in these tests.

 

I'm not sure the curriculum in schools is really dumbed down. (Don't throw virtual tomatoes; I am a homeschooler) My opinion is that the schools are trying to give too many little snippets of information instead of any real meat. And they're spending too much time disciplining, being politically correct, teaching about birth control, assigning busy work, and trying to decipher each new teaching idea that comes along.

 

Since Laura's time there has been more history, technology, new scientific discoveries, etc. etc. Teachers also don't have free reign to teach. They are told which books, subjects etc. They are not allowed to handle a classroom the way they see fit. Most parents will not take a child over their knee for being a problem in the classroom, but instead blame and argue with the teacher (it could be his/her fault).

 

Personally I don't see how kids make it through public school anymore. There are just too many distractions.

 

Just my $.02

:iagree: I would like to know who is checking that snopes is correct. Anyone know?

[She]

I would like to know who is checking that snopes is correct. Anyone know?

 

I've wondered that myself sometimes. But that would be another thread entirely.

[PariSarah]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

 

The snopes article explains why we shouldn't read this as "proof" that our schools are failing.

 

But it doesn't say that this wasn't an actual test from Kansas in the 1890s. At least, I couldn't find it.

 

I think they're saying that the implication is false, not that the test itself is an urban legend. Are other people reading what I'm reading?

[Michelle in MO]

The snopes article explains why we shouldn't read this as "proof" that our schools are failing.

 

But it doesn't say that this wasn't an actual test from Kansas in the 1890s. At least, I couldn't find it.

 

I think they're saying that the implication is false, not that the test itself is an urban legend. Are other people reading what I'm reading?

 

I think you're right. I don't think the article actually disproves that there was such a test in Kansas.

[Kris]

And that most adults taking the test have not recently been drilled on the facts that are used in these tests.

 

I remember when the Trivial Pursuit game first came out. It was pretty much accepted that, generally, a high school student would win over an adult simply because they were still in high school.

 

I'm not sure the curriculum in schools is really dumbed down. (Don't throw virtual tomatoes; I am a homeschooler) My opinion is that the schools are trying to give too many little snippets of information instead of any real meat. And they're spending too much time disciplining, being politically correct, teaching about birth control, assigning busy work, and trying to decipher each new teaching idea that comes along.

 

I don't have any virtual tomatoes. Perhaps I should stock up for situations like this? :D

 

Actually, I quite agree with you. It's amazing what they are *not* teaching, and why. My son's fourth grade teacher did tell me during a parent-teacher conference that she spent about half her time trying to get the kids to sit down and shut up so they could get their work done. I have another friend who is a teacher in Houston who usually leaves school about 7:00 p.m. -- she is there that late doing paperwork. She *does* work with special needs kids, so I don't know if this is a big factor or not.

 

The other factor was the standardized test they had to take each year. They spent their time studying for that. Period. And, I don't know how long this was going on, but I've recently learned that they offer the families of kids who do not do well on the test (and who are past the age of mandatory attendance) $500 to quit school. Gotta keep those numbers UP!

[sdWTMer]

The snopes article explains why we shouldn't read this as "proof" that our schools are failing.

 

But it doesn't say that this wasn't an actual test from Kansas in the 1890s. At least, I couldn't find it.

 

I think they're saying that the implication is false, not that the test itself is an urban legend. Are other people reading what I'm reading?

 

Okay, I admit it. I stand corrected. :tongue_smilie:

[Kris]

Here you go:

 

http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/ottawa/exam.html

[Faithr]

So, Kris, your link states again that this was an 8th grade exam. Snopes' article bases its argument against this test showing that schooling is dumbed down on the fact that it is a high school exam! I think the Snopes article is more of an opinion piece than actually refuting an urban legend. I think they went outside their own self-prescribed jurisdiction here when they responded to this 1895 Graduation Exam thing. They are not refuting an urban legend, they are arguing for the usefulness of public schools today.

 

This makes me wonder about the validity of Snopes' expertise. First of all did they get the 8th grade/high school test level wrong? And secondly, why are they arguing opinion when they should be investigating facts?

[Renee in NC]

So, Kris, your link states again that this was an 8th grade exam. Snopes' article bases its argument against this test showing that schooling is dumbed down on the fact that it is a high school exam! I think the Snopes article is more of an opinion piece than actually refuting an urban legend. I think they went outside their own self-prescribed jurisdiction here when they responded to this 1895 Graduation Exam thing. They are not refuting an urban legend, they are arguing for the usefulness of public schools today.

 

This makes me wonder about the validity of Snopes' expertise. First of all did they get the 8th grade/high school test level wrong? And secondly, why are they arguing opinion when they should be investigating facts?

 

I wonder how many high schools were there in KS in 1895?

 

Everything I have found on-line says it really is an 8th grade test, but is that 8th grade equivalent today (ages 13-14) or in the past (ages 15-16.) Is that where the confusion comes from?

[Kris]

So, Kris, your link states again that this was an 8th grade exam. Snopes' article bases its argument against this test showing that schooling is dumbed down on the fact that it is a high school exam! I think the Snopes article is more of an opinion piece than actually refuting an urban legend. I think they went outside their own self-prescribed jurisdiction here when they responded to this 1895 Graduation Exam thing. They are not refuting an urban legend, they are arguing for the usefulness of public schools today.

 

This makes me wonder about the validity of Snopes' expertise. First of all did they get the 8th grade/high school test level wrong? And secondly, why are they arguing opinion when they should be investigating facts?

 

Hi, Faith!

 

My intention in posting the link was only to provide more information. The important part of it, to me, is that the genealogical society that transcribed and posted it has nothing to do with homeschooling, and therefore, has no agenda. It's a pity that the link to the society's page, itself, returns a 404 error, but my purpose was served by finding the transcription in the first place, and then people can make their own decision on what they think that information means.

 

As far as Snopes -- I can't answer your questions! I don't know why they're doing what they're doing. Yes, I agree that they should be arguing facts, and not addressing an issue that is one of opinion.

 

I use Snopes all the time to send information to my Dad, who copies me on every piece of . . . -- well, he sends me a lot of "forwards" and thinks something is wrong with his email if he doesn't have at least a dozen of them every day from his friends. :D

 

In this particular case, I think Snopes *has* stepped beyond the stated purpose of their site. :)

[Faithr]

Well, Snopes sounds like it is talking about today's high schoolers which would mean graduation at age 17 or 18. So it still doesn't do much for its defense of public school ed today.

[Kris]

Well, Snopes sounds like it is talking about today's high schoolers which would mean graduation at age 17 or 18. So it still doesn't do much for its defense of public school ed today.

 

The very first sentence: "This item, purportedly a final examination for graduating eighth grade students . . ." (emphasis added). While it's probably not significant to the point they are trying to make, I found the transcription in about five seconds on Google. True, they are addressing this type of message, in general, but if they are going to address this particular test -- which they did -- there should be no "purportedly" about it.

 

The fact that it's labeled an eighth-grade test might be misleading to the immediate discussion. I haven't done much research in that area of Kansas, but, as we already know, the educational system in 1895 wasn't much like the one we have today. The fact that the students were in eighth-grade really doesn't tell us anything about how old they were, or at what point they were in their education. Eighth-grade might have been "it" in that area at that time.

 

It seems to me (and I've just skimmed the Scopes article) that their point is no matter how educated you are, if you haven't studied for a test, you probably won't pass it. In that respect, the Scopes "analysis" really has nothing to do with the OP, which seems to me to be about what was expected of eighth-graders at the time.

 

To make a valid comparison between "then" and "now" you would have to know what the contemporary equivalent of that 1895 eighth-grade class was and then compare the test given today's students of similar age and, more importantly, educational background, since grade levels weren't so much separated by age as they were by previous schooling.

[Mississippi Missy]

wow, thats neat, thanks for sharing. :)

[greta_elisif]

Not only do I have another 8th-grade test of similar difficulty, “What 8th-Graders Were Expected to Know in 1910,” I have also sample 1901 SAT questions, in Advanced Latin Composition and Physics (does anybody know where to get entire tests and grading instructions?).

 

Furthermore, I submit for review: the chapter entitled, “Preparing for Oxford—Reading for Scholarships,” in Oxford: Its Life and Schools, which has study recommendations, for classics and math and science, and advice on Latin translation, as done in the 1901 SAT; and the Cambridge Mathematics Department preparatory reading list.

 

I am planning to adapt the 8th-grade tests to Ohio (where we live) in the state geography sections and to modern units in measurements (maybe metric is most suitable for advanced math) and to test Inga on them at the end of 7th, and 8th grade if necessary (apparently that’s how it was originally done). I plan to use the Oxford math preparation recommendations and at least some of the classics ones and to have her get the entire contents of the Cambridge reading list. I want to start now with histories and biographies since they are stories and non-technical, so she’ll be familiar with them later. I’m going to wait and see about advanced Latin composition and so on because I know no Latin so far.:confused:

[greta_elisif]

School started at a later age. Children weren't in school at 5 or 6, but rather at 8 or 9.

 

The McGuffey 3rd Reader was not "3rd Grade", but simply Level 3. Some students never got any farther than that. Students were usually done with school at 14 or 16 - the 6th reader would have been the very last book, so not 6th grade, correct?

 

I think they started school whenever their parents decided they wanted to send them, based on their maturity, a system I endorse. In McGuffey’s 3rd Eclectic Reader there is a story about a boy who first goes to school at 10. And when my grandpa was young (1920s), in Mylo, North Dakota, he got sent to school first at 6, but got to be in 3rd grade because he had already taught himself the 1st- and 2nd-grade things (writing, adding, subtracting, & some reading). It seems 8–9 was probably the average.

 

I hadn’t thought at first the grade-level of the Readers could be different from their numbers. I found 6 levels and a high-school McGuffey Reader, so I think the 6 readers were probably for the first 8 grades. I’m going to see if any of the stories might be in the Lexile database and try the Lexile Analyser on others.

 

Here are links to the e-book versions that I’ve been able to find.

 

Primer

Revised Eclectic

 

1st

Revised Eclectic

New

New Eclectic

 

2nd

Revised Eclectic

New

 

3rd

Revised Eclectic

New

Alternate

 

4th

Eclectic

New

New Eclectic

Revised Eclectic

Newly Revised Eclectic

Alternate

 

5th

Revised Eclectic

New

Alternate

 

6th

Revised Eclectic

New Eclectic

 

High-School Reader (No simple way to download this one. I’m going to download each image (tedious!:glare:) to a folder, compress it until we need it, be on the look-out for a print edition, and if I don’t find it, use Windows Picture & Fax Viewer to page through it on the computer.)

 

* * *

 

Here are some more tests. I want my daughter and myself to be able to do well on all the old tests. :) We’ll see how far we can get.

 

1898 Birmingham, England, Test for 11-Year-Olds

 

1954 8th-grade Civics Test

 

High-School Entrance Exams/8th-Grade Final Exams

1885 Jersey City High-School Entrance Examination

1890 British-Columbian High-School Entrance Examination

1918 Kansas 8th-Grade Final Examination

 

1900 Teacher’s Licence Examination

Edited July 10, 2009 by greta_elisif
grammar, broken code

[greta_elisif]

-

Edited July 10, 2009 by greta_elisif
accidental duplication

[Orthodox6]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

 

See here, also: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/a/1895exam.htm

 

Another point which always has persuaded me that this is, indeed, urban legend is that nobody ever posts an exam from any other school, city, or year. This is the ONLY example which runs the internet circuit. That influences me not to place any stock in the legend.

 

P.S. I guess I can't teach, since I can't read . . . didn't stop to read some of Greta's links ! . . . Even so, the 1895 Kansas piece still is the ONLY example running the computer tracks. I must have been sent it, or read it posted, nearly twenty times in the past few years.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Orthodox6
correct an "oops"

[Susan in KY]

I've wondered that myself sometimes. But that would be another thread entirely.

 

FWIW, DH recently told me he never looks at Snopes, citing a stong bias in things that can be subject to opinion. He uses TruthOrFiction.com

 

:)

[LibraryLover]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

 

 

i was just going to post that.

[Kathy in MD]

urban legend.

 

However, in defense of higher education standards, the teacher's exam that Laura Ingalls Wilder had to take was real. Even though students then were not studying advanced trigonometry and computer systems, I think many high school students today could not diagram a simple sentence.

 

Even though many engineers I know could benifit from diagramming (the value of which is debated even on these boards), I'd much rather they had a much better grasp of higher level maths and the ability to spot an engineering error than be able to diagram a sentence. Especially after seeing the experts' variations in diagraming the same thing.

 

In addition, students admitted into Harvard and Yale in the 1600's and 1700's had to be pretty conversant in Latin, and this is fairly well documented. Now, they probably couldn't operate a computer, although I really like what Tracy Lee Simmons said in Climbing Parnassus, and I may be paraphrasing here: "Show me a man who knows Latin, and I'll show you a man who can build bridges."

 

Only after he returns to school for an AWFUL lot of training. Latin may train the mind, but there are other ways to do that, including geometry which is required for future engineers. But Latin does not train an engineer. Chances are the Latin learner will be able to master math, but not always. Adeptness in laguages, even precise ones like Latin doesn't always coorespond to the skills needed for engineering and science

 

P.S. SdWTMer, I know you weren't arguing for lower standards! I think one reason I see this story crop up occasionally is because many people believe that educational standards aren't what they used to be.

 

Michelle, I agree that people love to gripe that things aren't the way they used to be. I love learning for the sake of learning, and I can see the advantages for a classical and rigorous education. But modern education is trying to do several things that educators didn't do in the past. And the rest of this post is more directed at people who constantly grip about how poor today's education is to the *idealized* image we have of education of a hundred, two hundred and more years ago. And I want to stress that it's an idealized view.

 

First, today they are trying to educate everyone. Even in the late 1800's, an individual with an 8th grade education was highly educated and was the exception and not the rule. That level of education took dedication, availability, the parents' willingness to support education and an ability to learn fairly easily. My grandfather dropped out of school because math gave him problems. Today my ds WILL master algebra and other higher level math. My ds would have been considered an idiot, and would have sat in the corner with a dunce cap a hundred years ago. (Thomas Edison's teacher gave up on him) Today my ds gets the therapy and specialized training he needs.

 

Second, there is so much more to learn. When you combine increasing what must be learned with many children not being as academically inclined, education must take longer. And somethings must be dropped from the basic curriculum.

 

Thirdly, I have a feeling that people first started complaining about lower standards as soon as the next generation came along. I know that letters have been found at least 2000 years old complaining about the younger generation. And I have a feeling that those complaints will still be made 2000 years from now.

 

I went to school with a kid who flopped miserably in the humanities, but was a genius in the sciences. He even helped teach the science classes, which included some true brains. But he didn't get to college to ustilize his abilities because he didn't match the standard college profile. These days with so many jobs and fields "requiring" college degrees, it's probably better that we DON'T require Latin or diagramming for everything. Now just to convince the colleges that my ds doesn't need calculus to major in history. :tongue_smilie:

[KingM]

I trust Snopes on these things.

 

However, I was recently at the old village schoolhouse that has now been converted to a co-op and found a 6th/7th grade reader on an old bookshelf from the 1930s and was amazed at what was being taught to kids back then. Real grammar and logic and the writing was at a level you'd expect for an educated adult. I wanted to take it home and read it both for its information and the insight into the education system of the time.

 

Nobody to talk to there about "checking it out," however.

[Michelle in MO]

It's really odd to see this discussion popping up again after so many months. Looking at the original date, this thread was posted almost a year ago. It's very odd to see myself quoted after almost a year. What brought the interest back?

 

Plus, PariSarah typically does her homework pretty well; the Snopes article does not actually state that there was not such a test, does it? Whether or not one should trust Snopes is immaterial; there was an issue about Tiger Woods that Snopes debunked---after my father did additional research on his own, Snopes was incorrect. I prefer independent research.

 

I do think many of us can agree that standards in schools are not what they used to be.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Michelle in MO

[astrid]

Cozy Burgers!

Forget the exam----

Gimme a sack o' cozies! :-)

 

astrid

[theresatwist]

I think the problem is that much of the material on that test simply ISN'T taught in public schools today. Whether adults are able to recall/ should be able to recall the material they were taught, in my mind, should be a separate question.

 

Also, the idea that this one test does not encompass many of the subjects that students are taught today and that therefore it is somehow unfair to use this test to critique our modern day education system, I think, is a really weak critique. Certainly they covered additional material--this is only ONE test!

 

That said, I do think we are perhaps too easily awed by what was expected of students a hundred years ago or more. Remember at that time a far smaller proportion of the population finished elementary school, let alone middle school or high school. I think it's probably far to say that the average person today is better educated than the average person of that time. However, it does seem like the standards regarding what a fifth-grader or an eighth-grader or a high school graduate should know have slipped considerably.

 

I think it's interesting to listen to the BBC (even if you don't agree with their politics) and compare the difficulty of the language used on their shows to the news shows we have (either on TV or on the radio). The British media, it seems, still caters to the educated elite. In the US, our media is intended to be accessible to everyone. I think as a result the average educated person from Britain has a larger vocabulary than the average educated person from the US, but a larger percentage of Americans graduate from college. (Words that we call "SAT words" or "GRE words" are used in their reporting all the time--not true or NBC, CBS, or FOX!) Yes, ideas about education have changed in critical ways. But I think our education system and standards have also been shaped by our (American) populist spirit. If we didn't attempt to educate everyone it would be easier to better educate a smaller number.

 

I think the question is, can you have it both ways?

Edited July 10, 2009 by theresatwist
typo!

[greta_elisif]

I corrected myself on those reading levels. See this new thread, please.

[LibraryLover]

I think the problem is that much of the material on that test simply ISN'T taught in public schools today. Whether adults are able to recall/ should be able to recall the material they were taught, in my mind, should be a separate question.

 

Also, the idea that this one test does not encompass many of the subjects that students are taught today and that therefore it is somehow unfair to use this test to critique our modern day education system, I think, is a really weak critique. Certainly they covered additional material--this is only ONE test!

 

That said, I do think we are perhaps too easily awed by what was expected of students a hundred years ago or more. Remember at that time a far smaller proportion of the population finished elementary school, let alone middle school or high school. I think it's probably far to say that the average person today is better educated than the average person of that time. However, it does seem like the standards regarding what a fifth-grader or an eighth-grader or a high school graduate should know have slipped considerably.

 

I think it's interesting to listen to the BBC (even if you don't agree with their politics) and compare the difficulty of the language used on their shows to the news shows we have (either on TV or on the radio). The British media, it seems, still caters to the educated elite. In the US, our media is intended to be accessible to everyone. I think as a result the average educated person from Britain has a larger vocabulary than the average educated person from the US, but a larger percentage of Americans graduate from college. (Words that we call "SAT words" or "GRE words" are used in their reporting all the time--not true or NBC, CBS, or FOX!) Yes, ideas about education have changed in critical ways. But I think our education system and standards have also been shaped by our (American) populist spirit. If we didn't attempt to educate everyone it would be easier to better educate a smaller number.

 

I think the question is, can you have it both ways?

 

 

To me, the US equiv of BBC is NPR. NPR does use SAT and GRE words. :001_smile: British TV can be just as vapid as anything on here. But Yeah for BBC! For that matter, thank heavens for NPR!

[theresatwist]

To me, the US equiv of BBC is NPR. NPR does use SAT and GRE words. :001_smile: British TV can be just as vapid as anything on here. But Yeah for BBC! For that matter, thank heavens for NPR!

 

Yes, very true! I'm a huge NPR fan as well. I'm sure you're right on the British television point. I know nothing about British television.

 

Wasn't relevant to my last post so I didn't mention it, but I'm one of those old-fashioned folks who still prefers to get her news from a newspaper...

[kalanamak]

I did school in Kansas in the 60's, and I remember learning bushels and long tons, and the gestation of various farm animals (3 months, 3 weeks, and 3 days for pigs), and the parts of an engine as well as a tractor. Field trips to the bull barns. Tornado and nuclear explosion drills deep in the basement.

[Liz CA]

I did school in Kansas in the 60's, and I remember learning bushels and long tons, and the gestation of various farm animals (3 months, 3 weeks, and 3 days for pigs), and the parts of an engine as well as a tractor. Field trips to the bull barns. Tornado and nuclear explosion drills deep in the basement.

 

And evidently it prepared you well for the rigors of medical school...we should copy that test and teach until our dc can master it!

I was blown away by the depth of the material - I doubt most HS grads could score a passing grade.

[skaterbabs]

I remember when the Trivial Pursuit game first came out. It was pretty much accepted that, generally, a high school student would win over an adult simply because they were still in high school.

 

 

.....

 

I have another friend who is a teacher in Houston who usually leaves school about 7:00 p.m. -- she is there that late doing paperwork. She *does* work with special needs kids, so I don't know if this is a big factor or not.

 

The other factor was the standardized test they had to take each year. They spent their time studying for that. Period. And, I don't know how long this was going on, but I've recently learned that they offer the families of kids who do not do well on the test (and who are past the age of mandatory attendance) $500 to quit school. Gotta keep those numbers UP!

 

 

I remember playing trivial persuit with my IL's during hurricane Isabel - and I beat my FIL. Granted, it was a question about seatbelts, but he was alive when the event occurred and I wasn't. ;)

 

As for the tests, our county schools are considered among the best in the country - and they are, if by "best" you mean the kids uniformly pass teh SOL tests. :tongue_smilie:

[Erica in PA]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

 

No, that's actually not what Snopes says! Snopes does not claim that this was not actually an exam from back then... instead, the author of that article on Snopes is saying that it's not fair to compare this test to what kids today learn in schools, and that therefore it can't be concluded that the state of education is inferior today. I disagree with that author, and think that kind of article doesn't really belong on Snopes-- this is more of an opinion piece about education, rather than debunking a myth, which is what Snopes usually does.

[gardening momma]

I hate to be a downer, but this is FALSE. Check out Snopes.Com

Ah! We were both taken in! (dh and I). I was reading it to him, and we were commenting on it and our experiences in school. :glare:

[Guest Oldpatriot2]

OK, you Snopes people. Re-read the Snopes report. The test is real. The snopes statement is "An 1895 graduation examination for public school students demonstrates a shocking decline in educational standards."

 

THAT statement is what Snopes says is "false." Not the test itself. The Snopes writer (probably the liberal Canadian) goes on ad nauseam how the test does not demonstrate such a decline and makes excuses for those of us who could not pass the test.

 

She (the Snopes writer) goes on to say, "To pass this test, no knowledge of the arts is necessary..." Sounds like current day liberal education think to me. Football, painting and learning about Marilyn Monroe have replaced the three R's. She doesn't consider that a downgrade. I do. What do you think?

 

In defense of the Snopes evaluation, after reading that test from time to time for some 10 years, I did come to the realization that it really was not that difficult. You just had to be taught the stuff. Any eighth grader could do it!

 

One last comment: I have in my files a century old 1911 8th grade test from Kewanee County, Wisconsin (I am from Racine). I will post it on our website at RacineTaxpayers.com. The questions are quite similar in nature and difficulty.

 

Let's face it: that was the standard. Just "being a good citizen" was not enough to pass.

[Halcyon]

 

4th

Eclectic

New

New Eclectic

Revised Eclectic

Newly Revised Eclectic

Alternate

 

These are wonderful-thank you for the links. I particularly like the Alternate, The New Fourth, and the Eclectic Fourth--my son will enjoy the stories from them. :)