Are You Being Dumbed Down? Want to Take an 8th Grade Test From 1895 To Find Out?

It's still representative of current primary/secondary school teaching techniques today. They just require the students to be able to parrot back more than 50% of what they were taught in order to pass any particular grade. It seems agricultural themes were a big thing back then which isn't surprising really and they spent a lot of time writing and conjugating verbs.

Tertiary techniques get the student to think independently and do their own research to gain a thorough knowledge of the subject at hand.

[edit on 3/4/2008 by Pilgrum]

thats a very good point. independent thought is very very good.

I'm only 24, and I assure you there were no politcal agendas tought at my school. We were tought the different branches of government, what they were for, what they were supposed to do, et cetera. No where was there opinion driven political discussions tought to us, so I think your opinion of what is tought in ALL schools is flawed. We did, on occasion in our American Government classes have debates, but they were topics that were given to us to debate on, to hone your debate skills not argue your point of view with someone. They were fictional scenarios with fictional people in a fictional world. Nothing like you so authoritively declared all school systems have been in the last 20 years.

I've already stated that the posting of the 1895 test isn't very relevant to the OP question "are we being dumbed down", it just isn't an accurate measure relating to the OP's question. The test was obviously meant to compare our ability to answer the questions with 8th grade students of 1895. It's like comparing apples and cannonballs, just no relevance. Example, Give an 8th grader from yr. 1895 an exam from yr. 2008, how would they do?

A more accurate measure might be comparing IQ bell curve test results from differing time periods and comparing the scores, correlating this data and forming a chart to show if any upward or downward trends exist. Or perhaps standardized tests results like the SAT or the AP exam..

Would need to be careful however to somehow adjust for the different decades test were taken in..Something like that, something more scientific in approach, otherwise we are just entertaining ourselves with irrelevance.

[edit on 3-4-2008 by battlestargalactica]

That test is an urban legend.
Snopes

Continuing, can you answer these PRESENT DAY 7-8th grade exam questions?
Can a student from 1895 answer them?

Math:
edinformatics.com...

Science:
exam 8th grade

Algebra:
www.quia.com...


[edit on 3-4-2008 by battlestargalactica]

Well thanks, now I feel dumb.

Back to school for me, I guess.

I really don't see how you can say that we're being dumbed down or not if you compare those tests and those we have now.

Not knowing rules or geographical related questions are not indicators of being dumb.

Dumb is relative, though a more acceptable definition would be to make / perform silly or illogical decisions / actions, that result in utter failure or ineffectiveness.

Eg.: Smashing yourself on the head with a rock is dumb, as you can inflict lethal damage and you can kill yourself.

Not knowing what happened in 1800 is not dumb.

But then again, participating in an event in which knowledge about that is ESSENTIAL, it would be dumb to not learn about events in 1800 whilst knowing that you would risk your own performance.

Unless of course, you accept the fact that people can be dumb and smart at the same time, in which case you apply ''specific'' sections in which one can be dumb or smart.

reply to post by -0mega-


What's the point of knowing more technical information if you don't know the basics.

"I can fly a plane... now if only I knew where I was going..."

Well advanced civs are interesting, the more advanced a civ gets, the less each individual knows about detailed information.

For instance, a cotton farmer in the 1800's, he or she knows pretty much all there is to know (in order to farm cotton effectively and produce a profit, grow old and retire on it).

Let's advance into our near future, say 50 years, a farmer no longer really exists possibly, not in the traditional sense. We most likely will be farming genetically enhanced plants and crops not in the field (waste of resources) but in the lab where the perfect conditions can be maintained.

This farmer (more like a scientist really) most likely does not know how to build his 'molecular growth apparatus (or whatever doo-dad they are using for their crazy fast growing plants). He can certainly maintain it and utilize it for growing the crops, but can he build one?

Its akin to an aerospace engineer (pretty smart people right?) Give him a cell phone and ask him to replicate one for you from scratch..

[edit on 3-4-2008 by battlestargalactica]

im thinking about technical information, such as what is on the test, and i definitely agree that the amount of learned technical information a person has does nothing to inform us on how smart or stupid they are. ones ability to perceive and to comprehend is what we need to be looking at. how apt were students with their ability to analyze and understand, in comparison to that of todays students? THAT's what i want to know. not how much technical garbage can they regurgitate.

[edit on 3-4-2008 by ViolaCard]

Originally posted by sizzle
Here is the math portion: Not sure how we will accomplish #10. Just be inventive.

10. Write a Bank Check, a Promissory Note, and a Receipt.

I'll betcha almost no one will get this right.


A check moves money from one account to another.

A promissory note is proof the bank holds that the bank is owed something by a customer.

A receipt is proof of a transaction.

reply to post by thought


We had politics when I went to school, it was called civics. Now days public school systems don't teach children how to process knowledge, instead kids who do not learn are pushed along anyway.
All a person has to do is listen to many of these pro-sports figures who hold bachelors degrees, yet couldn't put two sentences together to save their life.

Another thing that may be going on here is the fact that it was rare in those days for people to graduate high school and rarer still for people to graduate college. Therefore, there was probably a lot of pressure to get as much education in as possible in a short time.

Originally posted by Kanati
reply to post by thought

 

All a person has to do is listen to many of these pro-sports figures who hold bachelors degrees, yet couldn't put two sentences together to save their life.

it's so depressing, and true.

Thanks for posting all those questions!
Now let me admit.. NO Im not smarter than a modern Day 5th grader!
Seen the show, and always seem to fail those 5th grade questions!

Now I can stand up and say no.. Im not smarter than an 1800's 8th grader!

Que music...

Edit-- See I even had to edit this little post.

[edit on 3-4-2008 by zysin5]

I couldn't get passed the first question

Yes its quite obvious that we are being "dumbed" down.

From Prozac to Celexa to Paxil to Zoloft to Effexor to Nardil to Adapin........are the reasons along with poor teaching and the downgrading of the educational system as a whole. If you cant learn, take a pill, if that pill makes it harder for you to learn, take another pill that makes the original pill work better. And this is supposed to help?

This is going on right in front of our faces....

Its just to slow of a process for us to notice the change....

Whatever powerhouse of tyranny controls this planet, their plan is operating without a hitch.

Its a good thing they cant take away one's acquired knowledge...... Or can they!


Just how dumb do "they" want us?

Dumber than sheep?

Dumber than lemmings?

Dumber than me?


Good thread my friend!
Star and Flag for the reality check!

reply to post by battlestargalactica

Yes, I can answer the questions posted. Why? Because education of self doesn't end with acceptance of the diploma. Intelligent people continue to read and learn, adjusting their opinions as necessary and revising what they've already learned as new information becomes available.

My caveat is that the new information is rational and supported by solid research. One huge example of an area where I constantly sit on the fence and simply listen without revising a great deal is medicine. Researchers in this field seem to contradict themselves every other week.

They can't even decide whether eggs are good or bad for a person. I've simply taken the Buddhist path with respect to eggs - moderation. They have their good points and their bad points, so I walk the middle ground.

reply to post by battlestargalactica


I disagree to some extent. Ask a contemporary musician to use a computer and he or she will more than likely know more about the ins and outs of the computer's OS than folks who sit in cubicles and use computers all day long. Chance's are in addition to being proficient on a traditional instrument such as a violin, cello, guitar, or drums the musician would also have developed decent audio engineering and recording skills, computer skills, and maybe even know a bit about computer programming languages.

What I'm saying is that today some otherwise traditional professions require greater proficiency and integrated knowledge of many would-be separate disciplines. Taking your farmer scenario, I could imagine that growers of the future would want to know as much as possible about the artificial environments that they choose to grow food in. That if they manufacture original foods they would also have strengths in chemistry and molecular biology/genetics, pathology and virology. As well as having a technical understanding of the hardware that they use. Also, they probably would design their own custom software programs to control that hardware so that it would meet the unique specific needs of those growers.

For producers the trend is toward knowing more, not less. For consumers the trend is toward knowing less and not more. This is readily apparent these days in technologically advanced societies.



[edit on 3-4-2008 by Areal51]

Originally posted by ianr5741

Originally posted by sizzle
Here is the math portion: Not sure how we will accomplish #10. Just be inventive.

10. Write a Bank Check, a Promissory Note, and a Receipt.

I'll betcha almost no one will get this right.


A check moves money from one account to another.

A promissory note is proof the bank holds that the bank is owed something by a customer.

A receipt is proof of a transaction.

Thats very nice but its not what the question asks...

Its asking you to physically write out a cheque, promissory note and a receipt. Ive seen this in movies where the kids are taught how to write out cheques properly to avoid confusion.


More broadly on the topic, as some people have said; kids from 1895 wouldnt be able to do a modern test because knowledge has changed in its nature.

I have no idea what a bushel is, the kid back in those days wouldnt know what a metre is.