[Morgana]

FYI

[GeronL]

bump

thanks

[2ndDivisionVet]

Take this 1931 8th grade test (you will probably flunk)
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/history/take-this-1931-8th-grade-gradu.html

Examination for Common-School Diplomas.

RURAL SCHOOLS.

Saturday, April 6, 1918.
http://www.kansasheritage.org/orsh/library/final_exam.html

1912 Eighth Grade Examination for Bullitt County Schools
http://www.bullittcountyhistory.com/bchistory/schoolexam1912.html

[MaxMax]

The comparison is astounding. The old books were written in such a way as to intrigue the reader
and to stimulate the imagination. The new books are nothing but John meets Jane. Simplistic and stale.

How this generation will communicate meaning will be a problem.

[GrootheWanderer]

Leave aside for a second questions about which list is better from an educational perspective. That earlier list just looks like it would be so much more interesting to a boy in his early teens. Maybe to a girl as well, but I can’t speak from experience there.

[Vinylly]

I was a substitute teacher once for a middle school reading class. I was told to pass out comic book for the kids to read. I was appalled. My mother was a teacher and she had a copy of MacGuffie's Fifth Reader for fifth graders. What they taught then and what they teach now is unbelievable. Not only that but just about every other story was from the Bible and they included Shakespeare and other classic literature.

[DJ MacWoW]

In 8th grade, (1963/64) I was reading Girl of the Limberlost and Freckles by Gene Stratton Porter for book reports. I think one was written about 1904. I’d have to check.

[Jane Long]

Good article. The comments, following the article, are rather heated and quite entertaining.

[P.O.E.]

Thanks.

I had the "Readers Digest" books for kids set as a young'un read plenty of classics, albeit abridged.

Later in life, I went back and re-read the unabridged for several of them

Also had this set: