1895 8th grade test

While I realize that educational standards were much higher way back when - hell, there was a time when an educated person would have been expected to know Greek and Latin at that age - I still call shenanigans on this one. That orthography section looks like it's lifted from a freshman linguistics survey in college, and most of the geography questions are pure nonsense.

 

Umm, snopes doesn't say the test is fake, just that you can't expect to pass it without having just studied, as well as that it leaves out a bunch. Unless I miss-read it. It also says this is not an indication of a failing education system, just a test.

 

On a similiar thought ... my dad's parents were both teachers back in the 30's-60's. Their house was full of old text books from a variety of courses. It amuses me to browse those books, the ones that I kept after they passed away and my dad sold the house, and compare those to the text books kids use today.

With all the pictures and graphs and maps and other stuff that make textbooks are supposed to make them more user friendly, the kids complain about how boring they are. The books I have from the 1930's are nothing but text. Maybe a map ever 50 pages or so but they have none of the attributes current textbooks have. It is amusing to think how kids today would perform with those textbooks from yesteryear.

 

You also have to compare the time periods. Kids today are bombarded with visual images, so a textbook, comparatively, is boring. Give a 30's kid one of today's textbooks, and he would probably be overwhelmed.

 

Look, there isn't a need for us to Google this test to see if it's true, or if education taught today in schools is worse then that of the 30's. You know why? It's because that test has a math question about bushels. Why is that a bad thing? It's bad because back then, kids needed to understand the importance of a bushel because there was a good chance that the only job they could get, had to deal with bushels. Today, kids don't need to care about bushels because they can go to school and get jobs that kids in that era could never dream of having. That's why our educational system is lightyears ahead of the system used in the 30's. There really shouldn't ever be a comparison. I'm sorry, but our generation isn't as tough as you guys like to say it is, and it's quite offending to have so many adults belittle our hard work. Aside from school work and chores around the house, what else did these kids have to do that makes them so much better?

 

i know its fake, but here goes.

anyone want to guess what the "Rebellion" in the history section really is. American Revolution or Civil War?

 

The Civil War? I think there were more "rebels" in the CW then the AR.

 

i was thinking Civil War too. seeing as it was supposedly from the late 1800s and from Kansas I would figure that is what it was.

 

I still think it's a hoax, though. As I said, a number of the questions are just total nonsense - "of what use is the ocean?", "tell what you can of the history of Kansas", and so forth. Not to mention the fact that most of the geography questions aren't geographical in nature at all, but deal with political science, economics, and astronomy/astrophysics.

 

All those questions seem to relate to geography. Even now, one of the first things you learn in geography is the about the rotation of the earth, and how it affects the seasons, etc. None of the geo questions look out of place, IMO.

 

This test is some pretty obvious BS. Wouldn't it have been spelled "bank cheque" at that time? But whether you buy it or not, I still don't buy the premise that education has declined in the US since... well, since any particular time period. It is a common assumption that the curriculum was more rigorous in the past, but I just don't know if that's true. You can't make a blanket statement like that. What are you comparing, really? An average junior high today with a one-room schoolhouse from the 1910's? An elite New York City private school of today with one from 1950? Also, how are you judging the difference? In difficulty of the curriculum? In outcomes? In egalitarianism of outcomes? Maybe a child in the 1890's could expound at length upon the rules of standard written English, but how many great authors would he have read and appreciated? Would he have a vocabulary for expressing an interpretation of a work of literature, or even know that he was entitled to his own interpretation? He might have memorized the Declaration of Independence, but would he have heard of the Trail of Tears?

 

I was thinking the same thing before I read your post. In a nutshell, that right there answers the question. No, education back there wasn't better then today's. Come on now. The question ends right away when you bring up the fact that many kids did not have the chance to go to school, for whatever reason it may have been (Thus the need for only ONE classroom...the number of students didn't for schools to build more then one classroom). Today, no matter who you are, unless you are 16 and older, you have to go to school.

 

I think the Rebellion would have to do with the Civil War or at least "Bleeding Kansas".

 

Re: whether or not this test is real...

Everything I've seen says that the original document is on file at the Smoky Valley Genealogical Society and Library in Salina, KS.

The web site of the Smoky Valley Genealogical Society and Library has a link to it on their web site.

Here's the link. http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/saline/society/exam.html

The bottom of the test says: "The following document was transcribed from the original document in the collection of the Smoky Valley Genealogy Society, Salina, Kansas. This test is the original eighth-grade final exam for 1895 from Salina, KS. An interesting note is the fact that the county students taking this test were allowed to take the test in the 7th grade, and if they did not pass the test at that time, they were allowed to re-take it again in the 8th grade. "

So, it is not, "in fact, an urban legend" by any means. It's legit... so El Jefe should probably have his own "Bullcrap detector" checked out by a good mechanic who specializes in old, worn out machinery from 1895.

NHRef... are you available to give him some tutoring in remedial reading?

 

Is it even possible to answer these questions? I don't think bushel is a measurement of volume. You need to know how often the money compounds or whatever. And how is width related, not to mention what need anyone would have for knowing the conversion to meters off the top of their head in Kansas.

They need to review their punctuation rules.

These questions are ridiculous.



The grammar and orthography sections were mostly inane questions that are pretty much useless today, were probably fairly useless then, but sound good.

For math, except for the insanity with units of measure and one or two questions, it's pretty similar to what it would be today. And kids need to know geometry today also. And it doesn't seem like the kids knew algebra.

In history the questions are marginally better than they might be today, except that they cover 100 less years of history and no non-American history, and no Native American or Black history.

As ElJefe's link pointed out, there are no foreign languages, arts, literature, or science other than geography.

Also remember that a lot of the kids in eighth grade then were probably a lot older than 13/14.

EDIT Now that I look at it again, would these kids have even known of the existence of slavery, any causes of the civil war? I'll give them a pass on Reconstruction since a lot of elementary school history today doesn't go past Korea or Vietnam.

 

That's a good point. It's impossible to answer that question unless you know how often the interest is compounded.

 

I think it is pretty obvious that educational standards have fallen pretty far from where they used to be. Just to witness that most of the people who have posted don't believe that education should be more rigorous shows that knowledge is no longer as valued as it should be. I've been through public, private and boarding schools and those who were smart enough could easily coast to getting A's. These standardized tests are nonsense as well, most of the curriculum now has to be geared solely for these tests which are far from difficult. It doesn't matter if you do poorly anyhow, they pass as many people as possible. Essays that lacked very little punctuation or correct spelling whatsoever are passed through the MCAS (Massachusett's state exam) constantly. Are we preparing kids for competition with other countries that do have better educational systems? No not at all.

 

I agree and disagree with your post. On the one hand, that exam did not show that academic standards have fallen. It showed that educational focus has shifted. In the late 1800's, education was all about making students experts on a select number of topics (such as grammar, geography, etc). The focus of education today is to introduce students to as many different topics as possible. They learn American history, but also European history and, increasingly, Asian and African history. They read a wider selection of texts. They still learn grammar, geography and such, but not to the degree that they once did. It's all about teaching them to learn and exposing them to as many different topics as possible so that they can then follow their own interests for a career (for many, that will be college, but there are plenty of programs for students who want to do an apprenticeship or gain work experience while in school). The focus of education has changed, and that is what this test shows.

I DO agree that standards have fallen a bit. I did a long term sub job to finish out this past school year. I taught 5 sections of freshman English (including 2 "team classes" where most of the students were failing). One of the last things I had to do was administer the Freshman English Final. When the scores came in, I was alarmed that so many people were getting a 40 out of 90 or lower on the (fairly easy) exam. I was even more shocked when I saw that based on the County's grading scale, that 40 out of 90 was considered a high D. A 45/90 was considered a C. This exam was worth 1/5 of their final grade. It really kind of put a damper on the end of the year for me. Students have very little worry about failing a grade. It's next to impossible in some areas.

 

Your post is a little contradictory but I understand you well enough. I believe that we should still be holding kids to a higher standard and getting involved in serious education at an early age. Parents need to be involved in their kid's education not just on the sideline. These kids who should be failing today are going to be parents in the future and probably won't fully grasp the point of a quality education. Outsiders call Americans stupid and I hate to say it, but to some degree they aren't that wrong.

By the way, Irvine has TWO books up for sale on amazon apparently.

 

Not contradictory at all. I agree that standards have fallen, but I do not agree that this is shown by that 1800's exam. I favor the current approach to education to that of the late 1800's. I like the fact that students are getting to see so many different topics. They can then choose from one of those topics and learn more for their future career. In the 1800's, an artist had little support. A writer had no classes to teach him how to write professionally. If your interests fell outside of the few topics that were taught in school, you were SOL. Those students would then be experts on things that they didn't care about at all. The current system allows students to find their interests and develop them.

I favor the modern approach. I just wish people could hold students to a more strict standard (which, in our lawsuit happy society, it a difficult thing to do).

Also, Irvine has a bunch of books for sale now (I think he's up to three or four at least). I put that link in my sig when the first one originally came out, and as it's my favorite of his books, I opted to keep plugging it.

 

But even today when you have an accounting class the standard assumption is that the interest is compounded anually- So I'd say that question is legit. The bushels question could easily be based on general knowledge/an earlier test classroom moment where they learned a standard volume for bushels.

Likewise the odd geography questions out of context sound rediculous but depending on what the teacher taught they are clearly referencing classroom knowledge.

 

The math questions are awful. The second test's first question is the worst. All rational numbers can be represented as fractions. Define root? The question is meaningless, as root can mean various things in mathematics- square root, zero of a polynomial,etc.