It isn’t bad about what it puts in, it’s awful about what it leaves out. Where’s the basic history? Didn’t students of that age know what had happened? How about the calculus? This is a high school exam, after all, and they don’t even have geometry beyond the elementary level. Yes, they might have paid more attention to the nice rules of grammar, but they didn’t do much with what that language actually meant. They didn’t ask for reading comprehension, they asked for mechanical rules and transformations. All in all, the teacher who wrote that exam ought to have been fired for not teaching even the basics of a real education.
More likely they were looking for “spinster” (ditto on the sexism lecture).
As for diagramming (parsing) sentences, I’m one of the unfortunates who actually had to do this in about the 4th grade. Gawd, what an awful waste of time and energy. The only thing that matches it is flowcharting computer programs (which I also had to do in intro to programming class).
Yeah, they were real smart back then. :rolleys: I would like to see them try these on for size: Quote & explain the basic meanings of Eisteins Theory of relativity. What is meant by the “uncertainty principal”? Explain “half-life”.
What metal do radioactive isotopes eventually decay into? Explain the importance of the “ozone layer”. OK, i know they did not know this back then, but most of what they DID is obsolete, unimportant, or pedantic.
In the earlier days, you could not graduate college without a firm knowledge of latin & greek. 99% worthless, now. But, still, a test given then would be very hard even for those of us with PhD, or even Nobel prizes.
Yeah, yeah, that’s why I gave you the smiley.
Good luck on finding a job in teaching. When you do, why not throw your kids this exam as a “pop quiz”? 
>> uncertainty principal?
This must refer to Danielinthewolvesden uncertainty about spelling certain words. No further proof needed that education has gone downhill.
Education, I think, has improved greatly since the Victorian Age. Mainly because we are being taught not only things that are actually useful, but we are being taught in various ways that are actually conducive to learning. Understand that in the Victorian Age rote memorization was prized far above comprehension. You were considered dull if you read anything because you were supposed to memorize it. Most of the best geniuses did things despite their schooling, or were schooled on their own far away from the accepted schools.
plnnr writes:
> My reprint is from Volume 66, Number 7 of The English
> Journal, published in October 1977. the author of the
> article were the test is reprinted is given as John Velz,
> a member of the English Department faculty at the
> University of Texas, Austin. The original test was given
> by Joseph Crosby, chief of Examiners for the Public
> Schools of Zanesville, OH.
Could you explain what you mean by saying that you have a reprint of this article? Do you mean that you personally copied the article from an issue of The English Journal, or do you mean that at some point you were given an n-th generation xerox of article which claimed to be from The English Journal? Furthermore, how did John Velz claim to have gotten a copy of this exam given 100 years earlier and 1000 miles away? Also, note that the test quoted in the snopes article claims that this test came from Salina, Kansas in 1895, while the article you cite says that it came from Zanesville, Ohio in 1877.
Let’s look at it another way. A med student, just graduated class of 2000, from a big medschool, would undoubtedly FAIL, big time, a med exam from 188o’s. Hell, not only would nearly all his answers be wrong (except when he was asked to name the nerves or bones), but the questions would be wrong, ie full of incorrect assumptions. Who would you rather have working on you, tho?
sailor: let’s see you type typo free with arthitus in YOUR fingers, bud.
I agree fully, Daniel. I shudder at the thought of pre-antiseptic medicine (doctors shoving their filthy hands right into your chest cavity, perhaps fresh from that TB patient who just died) and pre-antibiotic medicine (people died of simple bacterial diseases that now would be killed by Amoxillin or, at worst, Teracyclene (sorry about the spelling)). A doctor now would fail the exams of then, but not through ignorance. The same applies to most fields, I think, especially those impacted by computers (for example, drafting then compared to drafting with CAD programs) or advanced materials (plastics has done wonders in numerous fields).
I looked at the original article. The text of the exam, along with letters discussing their content, is from a manuscript collection in the Folger Shakespeare Library, with citation and photographic reproduction in the article.
You’re right that the Salina exam is (as far I as can tell) undocumented. The content of the documented Zanesville exam is similar in terms of difficulty level, and is circulated in similar urban legend fashion to make the similar point “aren’t we stupid?” The main point I want to stress is that the Zanesville exam is for people to qualify as teachers, NOT for high school graduation.
The New England capitals are:
Vermont: Montpelier.
New Hampshire: Augusta – nope, Concord
RI: Providence.
Mass: Boston.
CT: Hartford.
NY: Albany. – right capital but NY is not in New England
Maine: Augusta
In 19th century usage, I would expect the feminine form of bachelor to be spinster.
Swine is not specifically plural so its singular can also be swine.
Isn’t the plural of seraph seraphim?