Could you pass this 8th grade exam from 1895? | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 258955 Netherlands 07/02/2007 07:15 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
chef (OP) User ID: 259429 United States 07/02/2007 07:22 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
AniMeyhem! nli User ID: 148033 United States 07/02/2007 07:30 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The Arithmatic question #9 gave me some trouble, as I couldn't remember how many rods to an acre. Also, the caret 'u' question. I came up blank on that one. I probably missed a few things associated with the dates question in US history. Other than that, I feel I could pass 8th grade. Of course, I have a slight advantage in that I have actually read some of the old schoolbooks; so I know what school was like back then. The difference between education then and education now is like night and day. |
chef (OP) User ID: 259429 United States 07/02/2007 07:33 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Wow. What happened to education in America? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 258955To answer that question requires homework of its own. John D. Rockefeller would be a great place to start. Quite the humanitarian he was. "We don't need thinkers, we need workers" |
BeijingComm NCCCPC
User ID: 245126 United States 07/02/2007 07:50 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
chef (OP) User ID: 259429 United States 07/02/2007 08:08 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "How do you account for the extremes of climate in Kansas?" Quoting: BeijingComm NCCCPCLOL This question is very relevant today and some of you can answer this. My thought when posting this was to show how young minds were made to think back then. Students today do not face a strict demanding teacher and stern yet loving parents. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 08:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You all realize that the world has seen an enormous leap in knowledge since 1895, don't you. None of the children taking that test knew anything about genetics, antibiotics, the structure of the atom, the age of the universe, several planets, not to mention all the history. It's stupid and inane to try to compare the so-called eighth-grade test. An 8th grader from 1895 couldn't do the algebra, physics, biology or history of any random 8th grade test from 2007. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 258514 United States 07/02/2007 08:30 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You all realize that the world has seen an enormous leap in knowledge since 1895, don't you. None of the children taking that test knew anything about genetics, antibiotics, the structure of the atom, the age of the universe, several planets, not to mention all the history. It's stupid and inane to try to compare the so-called eighth-grade test. An 8th grader from 1895 couldn't do the algebra, physics, biology or history of any random 8th grade test from 2007. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 204901Apparently you don't have kids in public school. Most Eigth graders couldn't tell you what Algebra is. I doubt 5% could complete the math word problems. Physics? Give me a break. Live in the real world for a few years, it might help. |
epic (OP) User ID: 259429 United States 07/02/2007 08:31 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You all realize that the world has seen an enormous leap in knowledge since 1895, don't you. None of the children taking that test knew anything about genetics, antibiotics, the structure of the atom, the age of the universe, several planets, not to mention all the history. It's stupid and inane to try to compare the so-called eighth-grade test. An 8th grader from 1895 couldn't do the algebra, physics, biology or history of any random 8th grade test from 2007. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 204901What 8th grade are you talking about? The one on the starship enterprise? Physics, in grade school? Oh, they would definitely have trouble with our modern history, because crystal balls were not common back then. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 246545 United States 07/02/2007 08:48 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 242473 United States 07/02/2007 08:51 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
chef (OP) User ID: 259429 United States 07/02/2007 09:00 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
chef (OP) User ID: 259429 United States 07/02/2007 09:05 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
AniMeyhem! nli User ID: 148033 United States 07/02/2007 09:12 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You all realize that the world has seen an enormous leap in knowledge since 1895, don't you. None of the children taking that test knew anything about genetics, antibiotics, the structure of the atom, the age of the universe, several planets, not to mention all the history. It's stupid and inane to try to compare the so-called eighth-grade test. An 8th grader from 1895 couldn't do the algebra, physics, biology or history of any random 8th grade test from 2007. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 204901You do realize that the Arithmatic section is all algabraic/geometry formulae, don't you? We have had enormous technological advances, but have we advanced mentally? No. Quite the opposite, in fact. If we had, we should easily be able to answer questions from an education system over 100 years old; as we would have advanced far beyond their mental level. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 09:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You all realize that the world has seen an enormous leap in knowledge since 1895, don't you. None of the children taking that test knew anything about genetics, antibiotics, the structure of the atom, the age of the universe, several planets, not to mention all the history. It's stupid and inane to try to compare the so-called eighth-grade test. An 8th grader from 1895 couldn't do the algebra, physics, biology or history of any random 8th grade test from 2007. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 258514Apparently you don't have kids in public school. Most Eigth graders couldn't tell you what Algebra is. I doubt 5% could complete the math word problems. Physics? Give me a break. Live in the real world for a few years, it might help. Maybe you need to pay higher taxes to improve you local education and get involved in your child's education. Don't be so passive. And I would imagine that the proportion of 8th graders in 1895 would could actuallly pass that exam is less than the proportion of 8th graders who could pass an analagous exam today. You're so naive. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 09:20 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ya'll are just lame. THe percetnage of Americans who are literate is much, mcuh higher now than it was in 1895. In 1895 MOST AMERICANS sdi not even go to school to the 8th grade. Yes, our public education system is not as good as other systems in the world TODAY. But don't compare it to 1895. You're all actually showing your ignorance and lack of education by making this STUPID comparison. |
TheresaEL User ID: 209321 United States 07/02/2007 09:27 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83201 United States 07/02/2007 09:27 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 09:30 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | In 1895 -- Poor people did not go to school, most could barely sign their name. -- Gilrs were less likely to go to school than boys. -- Black people were prohibited from going to school WAKE UP YOU DINGBATS!! LEARN SOME HISTORY!!! AMERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION SUCKS FOR WHAT IT COULD BE. YES, INDEED. BUT IT'S BETTER THAN IT WAS IN 1895!!! AND I GUARANTEE THAT ALL YOU WHINERS OUT THERE DON'T WANT YOUR TAX DOLLARS RAISED ONE PENNY TO IMPROVE THE EDUCATION SYSTEM YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT SO BITTERLY. YOU DON'T FIGHT FOR BETTER TEACHER SALARIES, BETTER TEACHER BENEFITS. AND YOU SIT IDLY BY WHILE YOUR GOVERNMENT SPENDS 400 BILLON ON AN ILLEGAL WAR. HYPROCRTIES ALL!! |
chef (OP) User ID: 259429 United States 07/02/2007 09:30 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ya'll are just lame. THe percetnage of Americans who are literate is much, mcuh higher now than it was in 1895. In 1895 MOST AMERICANS sdi not even go to school to the 8th grade. Yes, our public education system is not as good as other systems in the world TODAY. But don't compare it to 1895. You're all actually showing your ignorance and lack of education by making this STUPID comparison. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 204901I would appreciate any link you can provide pertaining to literacy rates then and now. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 09:31 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 09:32 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ya'll are just lame. THe percetnage of Americans who are literate is much, mcuh higher now than it was in 1895. In 1895 MOST AMERICANS sdi not even go to school to the 8th grade. Yes, our public education system is not as good as other systems in the world TODAY. But don't compare it to 1895. You're all actually showing your ignorance and lack of education by making this STUPID comparison. Quoting: chef 259429I would appreciate any link you can provide pertaining to literacy rates then and now. [link to books.google.com] You have to actually read a book. Do you know what a book is? A book is generally longer than a Web site homepage. And better researched. |
AniMeyhem! nli User ID: 260280 United States 07/02/2007 09:36 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The point is that education has been on a downward slide from standards that required the student to put forth his best effort to "no child left behind". In 1895 you would not have had graduates who could not read! Education is not for everybody, but when students want to learn, they are being held back because of "government standards" in education. |
jlazarus
User ID: 185585 United States 07/02/2007 09:41 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Here's some good info about this test: [link to www.snopes.com] I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. ~ Robert Heinlein |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 234226 United States 07/02/2007 09:41 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | For example, in 8th grade today: 1. through what process is the sun powered? 2. how does an internal combustion engine work? 3. explain the basic capabilities of a personal computer. you could go on and on with this. dipshits. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 09:42 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Literacy Rates in the United States, by Race, 1870-1979 Total White Black & Other 1870 80.0 88.5 20.1 1880 83.0 90.6 30.0 1890 86.7 92.3 43.2 1900 89.3 93.8 55.5 1910 92.3 95.0 69.5 1920 94.0 96.0 77.0 1930 95.7 97.0 83.6 1940 97.1 98.0 88.5 1952 97.5 98.2 89.8 1959 97.8 98.4 92.5 1969 99.0 99.3 96.4 1979 99.3 99.6 98.4 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970. National Center for Education Statistics. U.S. Department of Education. "Literacy from 1870 to 1979: Illiteracy." National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Retrieved March 21, 2002 from [link to nces.ed.gov] Notes: Data for 1969 and 1979 "Black & Other" include only the rate for Blacks. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 09:44 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The point is that education has been on a downward slide from standards that required the student to put forth his best effort to "no child left behind". In 1895 you would not have had graduates who could not read! Quoting: AniMeyhem! nli 260280Education is not for everybody, but when students want to learn, they are being held back because of "government standards" in education. Students aren't learning becasue AMERICANS DON'T WANT TO FUND EDUCATION AT THE LEVELS REQUIRED!!!! Pure and simple. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 259703 United States 07/02/2007 09:50 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | In 1895 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 204901-- Poor people did not go to school, most could barely sign their name. -- Gilrs were less likely to go to school than boys. -- Black people were prohibited from going to school WAKE UP YOU DINGBATS!! LEARN SOME HISTORY!!! AMERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION SUCKS FOR WHAT IT COULD BE. YES, INDEED. BUT IT'S BETTER THAN IT WAS IN 1895!!! AND I GUARANTEE THAT ALL YOU WHINERS OUT THERE DON'T WANT YOUR TAX DOLLARS RAISED ONE PENNY TO IMPROVE THE EDUCATION SYSTEM YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT SO BITTERLY. YOU DON'T FIGHT FOR BETTER TEACHER SALARIES, BETTER TEACHER BENEFITS. AND YOU SIT IDLY BY WHILE YOUR GOVERNMENT SPENDS 400 BILLON ON AN ILLEGAL WAR. HYPROCRTIES ALL!! If anyone needs to go back and do some research, some REAL research, not just parrotting what Hitlary Clinton tells you, you would find that: By 1895, the vast majority of children went to school. This included the children of the poor both in cities and in the country. Programs were in place in which young teachers would go into depressed areas and teach for a year or so. One can read of such programs in books like "Christy" and in "Having Our Say", written by the sisters Delany. Oh, that reminds me. Regarding how "blacks were prohibited from going to school", while they may have been prohibited from attending schools with white children, they most certianly had their own schools. Unlike today, education was prized in the black communities. The Delany sisters, were schooled at one of the top Negro prep schools of the day. Both of their parents taught there and both women could have passed that 8th grade test with ease. They in turn earned money towards college by enrolling as teachers in a program that brought education to the poor blacks in the deep south. Oh, and for your information, should you trouble yourself to read other books than those written by the far left, you would see that in reality, GIRLS were more likely to attend grammar school, that's first through tweleve. Boys were more likely to NOT attend at they were needed to help the family make money. In the country, they would be gone for harvest and planting. In the cities and mid size cities, they would have gone to factories. The only area where boys outnumbered girls was in higher education of college and university levels. You really do need to get out more. |
AniMeyhem! nli User ID: 260280 United States 07/02/2007 09:54 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The point is that education has been on a downward slide from standards that required the student to put forth his best effort to "no child left behind". In 1895 you would not have had graduates who could not read! Quoting: Anonymous Coward 204901Education is not for everybody, but when students want to learn, they are being held back because of "government standards" in education. Students aren't learning becasue AMERICANS DON'T WANT TO FUND EDUCATION AT THE LEVELS REQUIRED!!!! Pure and simple. Incorrect again. You can fund education all you want; if you lower the standards you will just be pumping out dumber students. In my experience students will learn no matter what the funding level is; there will just be fewer students who excel. The true difference comes in when the parents choose to educate their children, take an active role in their education and require that their child put forth his best efforts. The point is that when you lower the standards, you get an inferior product. I have in my possession a textbook for high school algebra from the 1940s. My college level algebra textbooks didn't even come close to the level of teaching that old textbook did. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 204901 United States 07/02/2007 10:00 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |