4 ms·

Agreed! This would be great! My guess would be in 2022 the math is harder but literature easier.

eesmith 4y ago
It would need to be done both ways. A 1923 student is not going to have read "The Gulag Archipelago" or "Things Fall Apart" or other works published after 1923, so would fail any modern questions which require having read those works. But even if you look to contemporaneous 1923 literature, I strongly suspect a modern Harvard student is more likely to have read black literature from 100+ years ago than a 1923 student. (For examples see https://histlit.fas.harvard.edu/files/histlit/files/america_3.pdf https://histlit.fas.harvard.edu/files/histlit/files/america_... with "Sample Oral Exam Questions" from a modern Harvard exam section on "Being Black After Reconstruction".) If the 1923 student didn't have to read 75% of what modern literature courses cover, and instead read a different 75%, perhaps with a stronger emphasis on British literature, then of course a 2023 student won't test so well on a 1923 test. But then, a 1923 student wouldn't test so well on a 2023 test. Even math has some issues. Here's a Harvard entrance exam from 1869: https://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/education/harvardexam.pdf https://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/education/harvard... You can see the math part requires details that aren't taught now: "Find the amount of £50 12s. 5d. at simple interest at 8 per cent., at the end of 5 years 2 months and 3 days." "From 1 sq. rod 5 sq. ft. subtract 7 sq yd. 139 sq. in." The Brits decimalized a half century ago, so kids aren't taught there are 20 shillings in a pound and 12 pennies in a shilling. Only surveyors use rods these days, and it's defined as 16 1/2 US survey feet - which is slightly smaller than the international foot defined in 1959. Or, "Find the cube root of 0.0093". By hand. We no longer consider that something worthwhile to teach. They aren't hard, but without that small bit of knowledge or training, modern students are very unlikely to get the right answer. Or, "State and prove the proportion which exists between the parts of two chords which cut each other in a circle. State what proportion exists when two secants are drawn from a point without the circle." I don't know about you, but my plane geometry isn't good enough to answer that question. That's due to post-war educational policy changes that de-emphasized classical geometry in favor of calculus.
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago
  In the History and Geography section of the 1869 test I'm struck by the emphasis on rivers. Rivers are still important for transportation of commodities, but not nearly as much. I can't see them being emphasized in a college entrance exam today. I might be able to bound the basin of the Mississippi, and state the source of the Amazon and Ganges (if I guess correctly, and have a labeled map). The rest, no chance.
  - eesmith 4y ago
    Geography seems to have been a more important topic then. The Sandhurst exam, 1890-ish, included "draw from memory a map of some country or other", quoting Churchill from https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.76347/page/n27/mode/2up?q=zealand https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.76347/page/n27... : > I also succeeded in passing the preliminary examination for the Army while still almost at the bottom of the school. This examination seemed to have called forth a very special effort on my part, for many boys far above me in the school failed in it. I also had a piece of good luck. We knew that among other questions we should be asked to draw from memory a map of some country or other. The night before by way of final preparation I put the names of all the maps in the atlas into a hat and drew out New Zealand. I applied my good memory to the geography of that Dominion. Sure enough the first question in the paper was: ‘Draw a map of New Zealand.’ I can well imagine that a military officer may need to have that knowledge at hand faster than consulting a map. ("I am the very model of a modern major general!" and all.) For upper-class U.S. Harvard students, trade knowledge may be more important, thought that doesn't explain needing to know the source of the Amazon.
    - int_19h 4y ago
      In any day and age, education for the elites is only in part about what's actually useful. The other part is there to segregate itself from the hoi polloi - and it actually makes more sense for it to be something not immediately useful precisely so that it's a clear marker of status: "I have time and money to learn this, of all things".

It would need to be done both ways. A 1923 student is not going to have read "The Gulag Archipelago" or "Things Fall Apart" or other works published after 1923, so would fail any modern questions which require having read those works. But even if you look to contemporaneous 1923 literature, I strongly suspect a modern Harvard student is more likely to have read black literature from 100+ years ago than a 1923 student. (For examples see https://histlit.fas.harvard.edu/files/histlit/files/america_3.pdf https://histlit.fas.harvard.edu/files/histlit/files/america_... with "Sample Oral Exam Questions" from a modern Harvard exam section on "Being Black After Reconstruction".) If the 1923 student didn't have to read 75% of what modern literature courses cover, and instead read a different 75%, perhaps with a stronger emphasis on British literature, then of course a 2023 student won't test so well on a 1923 test. But then, a 1923 student wouldn't test so well on a 2023 test. Even math has some issues. Here's a Harvard entrance exam from 1869: https://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/education/harvardexam.pdf https://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/education/harvard... You can see the math part requires details that aren't taught now: "Find the amount of £50 12s. 5d. at simple interest at 8 per cent., at the end of 5 years 2 months and 3 days." "From 1 sq. rod 5 sq. ft. subtract 7 sq yd. 139 sq. in." The Brits decimalized a half century ago, so kids aren't taught there are 20 shillings in a pound and 12 pennies in a shilling. Only surveyors use rods these days, and it's defined as 16 1/2 US survey feet - which is slightly smaller than the international foot defined in 1959. Or, "Find the cube root of 0.0093". By hand. We no longer consider that something worthwhile to teach. They aren't hard, but without that small bit of knowledge or training, modern students are very unlikely to get the right answer. Or, "State and prove the proportion which exists between the parts of two chords which cut each other in a circle. State what proportion exists when two secants are drawn from a point without the circle." I don't know about you, but my plane geometry isn't good enough to answer that question. That's due to post-war educational policy changes that de-emphasized classical geometry in favor of calculus.

anonymouskimmer 4y ago
In the History and Geography section of the 1869 test I'm struck by the emphasis on rivers. Rivers are still important for transportation of commodities, but not nearly as much. I can't see them being emphasized in a college entrance exam today. I might be able to bound the basin of the Mississippi, and state the source of the Amazon and Ganges (if I guess correctly, and have a labeled map). The rest, no chance.
- eesmith 4y ago
  Geography seems to have been a more important topic then. The Sandhurst exam, 1890-ish, included "draw from memory a map of some country or other", quoting Churchill from https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.76347/page/n27/mode/2up?q=zealand https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.76347/page/n27... : > I also succeeded in passing the preliminary examination for the Army while still almost at the bottom of the school. This examination seemed to have called forth a very special effort on my part, for many boys far above me in the school failed in it. I also had a piece of good luck. We knew that among other questions we should be asked to draw from memory a map of some country or other. The night before by way of final preparation I put the names of all the maps in the atlas into a hat and drew out New Zealand. I applied my good memory to the geography of that Dominion. Sure enough the first question in the paper was: ‘Draw a map of New Zealand.’ I can well imagine that a military officer may need to have that knowledge at hand faster than consulting a map. ("I am the very model of a modern major general!" and all.) For upper-class U.S. Harvard students, trade knowledge may be more important, thought that doesn't explain needing to know the source of the Amazon.
  - int_19h 4y ago
    In any day and age, education for the elites is only in part about what's actually useful. The other part is there to segregate itself from the hoi polloi - and it actually makes more sense for it to be something not immediately useful precisely so that it's a clear marker of status: "I have time and money to learn this, of all things".