TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Could You Have Passed the 8th Grade in 1895? Take a Look

140 pointsby Scott_MacGregorover 14 years ago

33 comments

ughover 14 years ago
If I remember correctly I was tested on stuff that is just as hard or harder at the end of 8th grade. Maybe with less rote memorization and more thinking, more opportunity to demonstrate that I actually understood everything [0].<p>Consider also that they talked about all those things prior to the exam. Could you pass it right now? Maybe not. Could you pass it after a few weeks learning about the material? With flying colors.<p>It’s interesting to read the questions but certainly not at all indicative of any developments in the educational system. You need statistics and creative social scientists to find out something about that.<p>[0] I personally don’t like rote memorization. I recognize that rote memorization can sometimes be useful – I don’t need a calculator for simple multiplications – but I would much rather just understand something and develop from that understanding a clear picture of which facts are important enough to memorize.
评论 #1960328 未加载
achew22over 14 years ago
Here comes the flame war about how our educational system has declined in the past hundred years. In an attempt to head that off at the pass (Hey, if you're going to have a cliché argument I get to use a cliché) here is the problem with that. This is a test designed to review the material deemed important by one person in 1895 (If it is really from then). The class would have gone over what "epochs into which U.S. History is divided". This is the same thing with the stupid joke that I always heard when I was doing calculus and adults were around "When I was growing up, you didn't have to spell out your math homework". That is code for "I have no idea what's going on here" and let's be honest, that is fine.<p>I would bet that most people who read this could have answered almost all of these questions at some point in their life. We have to remember that the purpose of education is to teach you how to learn and how to adjust to your current situations. You learn what you need to get the job done and you relearn what you can't remember to complete the job.<p>EDIT: It's good to see that Snopes already did this. Thank you Snopes and thanks glhaynes for pointing us to it.
评论 #1959790 未加载
jerfover 14 years ago
<a href="http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&#38;_&#38;ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED119389&#38;ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&#38;accno=ED119389" rel="nofollow">http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_...</a>: "By 1918, all states had passed school attendance legislation, although until the 1930s, many were unsuccessful in enforcing their compulsory schooling laws."<p>Comparing compulsory education standards to non-compulsory education standards is unfair and unenlightening. The forces affecting the school are so different they can not be said to be the same thing except inasmuch as they share the word "schooling".<p>I say this as one who is carefully refraining from going any deeper because I have as rich an opinion on the topic as anyone else around here, one not friendly to current practices (to put my cards on the table), but this is a non-data-point, at least without a <i>lot</i> more context, so much as to dwarf this little tidbit anyhow.
评论 #1960300 未加载
glhaynesover 14 years ago
<a href="http://www.snopes.com/language/document/1895exam.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.snopes.com/language/document/1895exam.asp</a>
评论 #1959898 未加载
评论 #1959831 未加载
评论 #1959751 未加载
评论 #1959816 未加载
评论 #1959891 未加载
jluxenbergover 14 years ago
<i>A wagon box is 2 ft. deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft. wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold?</i><p>I like how the volume and weight of a bushel of wheat was common knowledge :)
评论 #1960064 未加载
评论 #1960004 未加载
评论 #1959929 未加载
评论 #1961700 未加载
评论 #1961719 未加载
M1573RMU74710Nover 14 years ago
I don't think this can provide any insight into our current education system, it wouldn't make much sense to compare them...<p>However it is a rather fascinating look at life in the late 1800's, and what the common concerns were.<p>The section on linguistics; back then there was no large (non-print) media and the US English dialects were more splintered. Additionally English hadn't become quite the lingua franca it is today; (educated) people generally knew several languages in order to communicate with people. If you read books written around that time, it's rather common for the author to quote French or Latin without translation, with the implicit understanding that the reader knows them.<p>The math questions also provide some really neat insight into what were considered "common practical tasks"...in my schooling most of the word problems were phrased in terms of buying things at the supermarket or for more advanced topics building skyscrapers and bridges etc... Here however it's all about bushels of wheat etc.<p>Really neat.
jpennyover 14 years ago
Could you have passed an 1869 MIT entrance exam?<p><a href="http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/exhibits/exam/algebra.html" rel="nofollow">http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/exhibits/exam/algebra.html</a><p>I suspect so, maybe in the 7th or 8th grade.
评论 #1961691 未加载
p_nathanover 14 years ago
I've seen another variant on this test -<p>What it boils down to is that:<p>(1) rote memorization is not an indicator of intelligence or skill.<p>(2) specialty datapoints regarding farm life are no longer required<p>(3) English grammar teaching is in a sad state. (A known aspect of today's public schools)<p>For a fair comparison, one should review the 8th grade requirements in a variety of today's schools (I did so once in a cursory fashion). In my opinion, today's students have to take in at least as much information, some of it also specialized, and spit it out.<p>Arguably today's requirements are not as focused on exact knowledge as late 1800s requirements. I leave that to the philosopher of education to evaluate for better/worse.<p>What should also be considered is not just the test itself, but how tests were graded - was passing the top 90%? 60%? How lenient were teachers? An issue today is some teachers giving "free As". Did that exist in 1890?<p>What can also be considered is the difference between Kanas 8th grade and Boston 8th grade. Was there one? What about different schools?<p>There is not a simple analysis here. There must needs be a careful data-driven reflection examining the subtleties of the educational system before someone pushes out the generalization - "today's students are all worse and we are all stupid". I see many examples of smart people. Admittedly, they anecdotally seem to have "beat the system" most of the time, so, well - there's another facet to the analysis.<p>Note - I hear occasionally about Dewey &#38; early 1900s educators setting up US education to optimize for factory workers and a compliant populace. Does anyone have any factual data/bibliographic sources asserting/refuting that?
jrockwayover 14 years ago
<i>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.</i><p>#1: Not "Parts of Speech" in #2.
评论 #1959900 未加载
ginsweaterover 14 years ago
This always makes me think of Isaac Asimov's classic essay, "Forget It!" in which he gets a hold of a hundred-year-old math textbook and writes about what's in there that isn't taught anymore. (A lot of stuff about computation using long-forgotten English units of measurement, for one.)<p>Anyone know if it's online? I have a print copy, but I can't find anything with a quick Googling.
Semiapiesover 14 years ago
I'd be curious to see the answers for someone who got an average grade on this test.<p>It's not much of a test by modern standards - it's more a few quizzes strung together with somewhat generous time limits. Some things stick out:<p>1) Math section is farming-centric, as people have pointed out; it ends on making examples of paperwork. The first question is obscure terminology for something we cover in second grade or so. No algebra. Especially generous time limit for these questions, though you have to remember your bushels.<p>2) "fane, fain, feign" Those days had a different fashion in popular homophones. Also, interesting the focus on indicating pronunciation and breaking words down into syllables - I remember doing that well before 8th grade.<p>3) The geography section mentions the rest of the world, huzzah. ...Well, to test memorization of a few names. Otherwise, a better section than the others.<p>4) No questions about the <i>Civil War</i> except to describe some famous battles and recognize the year it ended.
评论 #1961336 未加载
nategravesover 14 years ago
It's hard for me to feel inadequate when looking at this test—regardless of whether it's real or not—because tests are typically dependent on your retention of what you are taught. If you're an 8th grader whose teacher doesn't explain what elementary sounds are, it would have no impact on whether or not you could pass the 8th grade.
评论 #1959978 未加载
评论 #1960009 未加载
Groxxover 14 years ago
&#62;<i>2. A wagon box is 2 ft. deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft. wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold?</i><p>My, how far we've fallen.
jasonlotitoover 14 years ago
Ignoring the quality of the original question ("Could you have passed?"), an <i>equally good</i> follow up would be:<p>Could someone from 1895 have passed an 8th grade test today?
McPover 14 years ago
<i>6. Find the interest of $512.60 for 8 months and 18 days at 7 percent.</i><p>If this is a genuine question then I find it interesting that it was possible to answer back then. Now you'd have to know <i>which</i> months as the length of each month affects the answer.
评论 #1961698 未加载
muttover 14 years ago
Ask them to type, send a text message, use a digital calculator, my microwave, the internet (email, www, torrents), driving fast cars, etc etc..<p>People had far less to know.
评论 #1960098 未加载
gibersonover 14 years ago
Honestly speaking, could I pass this test if I sat down and took it right now? No.<p>However I do believe that, given a study guide (i.e my notes, and a test book) and a reasonable idea of what would be on the test, I could pass the test--just as I passed many tests during my own educational era. Of course, a couple of days later most answers would be gone from my memory.<p>I've always been that way when it comes to learning, I don't retain details, I retain general idea's. For mathematics and sciences--problem solving, and for literature and history--that rules exists and many important events have occurred, all of which I can research and reference such material when the need arises. I'll admit, I'd like to able to recall names, and dates, and formulas at will--but frankly, as I obstinately claimed as a child, I've never actually needed such detailed information in real life. Generalizations, or time willing, a quick reference to related material are all you need.
baddoxover 14 years ago
If I had attended school for 8 or 9 years prior to 1895, almost certainly. Many of these questions rely on knowing precise terminology no doubt used in that class or its textbook.<p>The time difference is the only thing that would hinder me. Heck, try asking a college student in 1895 a super easy question like how many states are in the United States in 2010.
Legionover 14 years ago
Had I <i>gone</i> to 8th grade in 1895, I would be familiar with all of the anachronisms.<p>Also, some of the questions are clearly lists that, were this "real", would be taught by rote memorization. The sort of thing you would be able to chant back without thinking if you were in the classroom where the lists were repeated over and over for you to "learn".
kingkilrover 14 years ago
I don't know. I do know that I could write essays several pages in length, do math up through algebra/geometry, know both American and European history, and have some knowledge of the sciences, which this totally ignores.
tomrodover 14 years ago
Could they have passed 8th grade in 1995? Doubtful: * Advances in Science * More (and more widely varied) history * Different economic and political regimes * Speaking a foreign language * Algebra II * Books (easily 90% drivel) which pass for great literature these days<p>Hard to compare when full information is not available. What is NIST standard for a bushel of wheat? What about rate of compounding at a bank (was that 10% apr or 10% per minute)?<p>This likely would be an easy test for most with today's level of education after a day of remedial education that covers the basics of this test.
lianover 14 years ago
In 1895 I would have been too busy being an immigrant farmer with the rest of my family to go to school at all, so I'm pretty ambivalent about what my standardized testing fate might have been.
SageRavenover 14 years ago
As a homeschooling parent, I always find this kind of stuff interesting. For reference, people should check out the following link (under "Practice Tests for State Exams") for relatively current standards tests for various states, grade levels, and subjects:<p><a href="http://quizhub.com/quiz/quizhub.cfm" rel="nofollow">http://quizhub.com/quiz/quizhub.cfm</a>
bluesmoonover 14 years ago
This is similar to the kind of tests we had in India when I was in the 4th-8th grade. We had world history instead of US history, and did not have Orthography, but those are the only differences that I can see. I might have aced it back then, but it would be hard to get about 50% if I did it today.
awtover 14 years ago
What was with the focus on events that happened at specific dates? I understand the importance of knowing when events happened relative to each other, but memorizing dates seems a bit much. Perhaps the lack of easy access to reference materials made that kind of knowledge more important.
KleinmanBover 14 years ago
The real miracle is that this teacher built a computer for her students to take an English test on in 1895!
madcaptenorover 14 years ago
I could have passed the 8th grade in 1895 if I was born in 1882. But I wasn't.
yreadover 14 years ago
There is certainly more republics in Europe now than it used to be back then
zoowarover 14 years ago
Kind of makes me feel real bad for those who can't pass High School today.
crenelleover 14 years ago
What is a passing grade for this test? Doesn't seem to say.
DFectuosoover 14 years ago
I know its fake but... Arithmetic 6 - Can't get the interest(at least any interesting one) without the capitalization period.
评论 #1959857 未加载
评论 #1959913 未加载
hcover 14 years ago
i dont know how to answer a single one of these questions.
HilbertSpaceover 14 years ago
Yes, there are many opinions on this thread, and this fact supports an observation:<p>The 'theory' or 'principals' of what 'education' should be are a MESS!<p>One of the posts mentioned Dewey: Yes he wrote:<p>John Dewey, 'Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education', The Free Press, New York, 1966.<p>although this is clearly not nearly the 'first printing'! Since my father was in education and had some influence from Dewey, I read that book. Dewey summarizes what 'education' actually is, and, really, is essentially forced to be, all other theories or principles aside, as just:<p>What the older generations pass down to the younger generations, with a lot of what was wrong and, hopefully, with some improvements.<p>So, here's an 'application': If have a broad 'public' education system where use essentially just a broad sample of the older generation to teach essentially everyone in the younger generation, then have to expect that what gets 'passed down' will have nearly all that was bad about society in the older generation and relatively little that is new and advantageous!<p>Here is a telling example: I was a college professor at Ohio State University. At one point I was asked to represent the faculty at a lunch for parents. Yes, many of the parents were quite skeptical of what was being taught or not taught. So, one question went:<p>"Why are you teaching my child calculus? I've never needed to know it."<p>I was a bit slow to see all the emotional, social, educational, and rational issues and, not wanting to say something wrong, said next to nothing. In a sense, it can be safer not to argue with 'the customer' or with a poorly informed and angry question. But here is what I might have said:<p>"We're trying to educate for the future, say, teach things that can be useful at some points over the next 50 years or so.<p>"Calculus is a pillar of Western Civilization: Although not everyone uses it, without it we would be in deep trouble in strength of materials, design of structures, electric power generation, distribution, and use, electronics and essentially everything involving electro-magnetic waves, engines of all kinds, airplanes, essentially everything in mechanical engineering, nearly all more advanced military technology, and in many subjects from more in math, all the physical and social sciences, statistics, finance, and more.<p>"We're not necessarily trying to teach what is already in very common usage but what is less well known and can give an advantage over the next 50 years. So, from its track record, calculus looks promising. That is, we believe that so few people know calculus well that more people could get an advantage from knowing it.<p>"For a specific example, before my graduate studies, I was in a new, rapidly growing company. At one point the Board of Directors wanted some projections of the revenue of the company. Many people could describe hopes, intentions, assumptions, dreams, etc., but there was a lack of anything with a more solid, objective, rational basis.<p>"While I didn't want to get involved, I thought for a while: What do we know? What do we want to know?<p>"Well we knew what our (daily) revenue was then. And, from our capacity planning, we knew what our planned, eventual daily revenue would be. So, for the projections the Board wanted, essentially we needed to 'interpolate' between these two revenue figures, that is, say how fast we would grow.<p>"So what could we observe about what was causing our growth? Well, broadly the growth was due to 'viral' effects, that is, happy customers talking to target customers not yet customers. So, each day in the future, the amount of this 'talking' by happy customers was proportional to the number of happy customers and, thus, to the revenue. And the number of potential customers hearing the talking and becoming customers was proportional to the number of potential customers.<p>"So, let t be time in days with the present day t = 0. Let y(t) be our revenue at time t. As in calculus, let y'(t) be the first derivative of y(t), that is, the rate of growth in y(t).<p>"Let b be the maximum daily revenue from our capacity planning.<p>"Then the rate of growth y'(t) is proportional to the current revenue y(t) and the capacity yet served b - y(t). So for some constant k, we must have<p>y'(t) = k y(t) ( b - y(t) )<p>"So, this is a non-linear ordinary differential equation initial value problem. With a little calculus, really just classic integration by parts, we can get a simple algebraic expression for the solution. This solution will have one constant c we so far do not know. But we have reduced the problem of projecting out to the future to selecting just one constant c. And we can estimate c from our growth over the past few months.<p>"So, on a Friday my SVP Planning and I selected a value for c and drew the graph of the growth. My SVP left on a business trip, and the Board meeting started the next morning.<p>"At noon I was in my office working and got a phone call to come to the Board meeting.<p>"The Board meeting was in disarray and no longer 'meeting'. Our two Board representatives from our main investor were unhappy and standing in a doorway to the hall with their bags packed.<p>"At about 8 AM the graph had been presented to the Board, and the two investor representatives asked how it had been calculated. For the next three hours or so, all the top management struggled to reproduce the graph and could not. The representatives then became angry, lost faith in and patience with the top management, made plane reservations back to Texas, returned to their rented rooms, packed their bags, and as a last chance returned to the offices for an answer.<p>"I arrived, reproduced a few points on the graph, and the investor representatives canceled their plane reservations, unpacked their bags, and stayed, and the company was saved. It is now a major company you know well and have used often; you value their work highly.<p>"This success was all because I knew calculus well and was about the only one there who did.<p>"So, we believe that in the next 50 years, calculus can be an advantage."<p>Yes, there is some question at how well even this answer would have been received!<p>Generally, then, in the real world of the broad population, it is difficult to know what to teach, how to teach it, or to get it learned!<p>Here's my take on the US 'way out': As we can tell, in K-12 and maybe more, the most important educational advantage is the family life of the student. So, in some families, education is understood and emphasized. So, education is really not just from the K-12 classrooms, not nearly!<p>Broadly, then, the secret to good education is to have parents who care do what they can at HOME. In extreme cases this solution can be just 'home schooling' and, at its best, can totally blow the doors off essentially anything from 'organized' education.<p>So, as in many things in the US, really good results are the responsibility of each individual, their family, their local community, etc. and much less well served by the county, state, or DC.<p>Topics with big advantages are essentially necessarily understood by at most only a tiny fraction of the population. Or, if a large fraction of the population understood, then much of the advantage would be gone. So, education with big advantages cannot be from the public school system! Sorry 'bout that!