Entrance Examinations
One subject connected with college entrance requirements has peculiar importance in connection with the study of history, namely, that of entrance examinations. Higher institutions that admit students on the basis of certificates need have no administrative difficulty in giving large recognition to history as a preparatory subject, but in colleges and universities that can be entered only after passing examinations the problem is somewhat different. As has been emphasized elsewhere in this report, the utility of historical study lies not only in the acquisition of certain important facts, but in great measure in its indirect results in training the powers of discrimination and judgment; it will often happen that pupils who have profited largely from their study of history will, especially after two or three years have elapsed, show surprising lacunæ in their stores of historical information. While a course in history should be progressive and build steadily upon what has gone before, one stage does not depend so immediately upon the preceding, and involve so persistent a review of earlier work, as is the case in language and mathematics; and besides, growth in power of historical thinking is much harder to measure than progress in mathematical knowledge or in linguistic facility. These difficulties are present in some degree, even when the candidate is examined on work done in history in the last year of the secondary school; but they become exceedingly serious when the subject has been studied some years before, or when the course in history covers two, three, or four years of the period of secondary instruction.
The remedy, in our opinion, lies, not in the exclusion or unnatural restriction of history as a subject for entrance, but in the reform of methods of examination in history; if the present system of entrance examination does not-and it generally does not-properly test the qualifications of candidates in history, it is time to consider how it may be changed. Certainly nothing has done more to discredit history as a subject for college entrance than the setting of papers which demand no more preparation than a few weeks' cram. The suggestions which follow are offered in the hope, not that they will afford a final solution of the problem, but that they may prove helpful in bringing about a more just and adequate system of examinations in history. The complete adoption of them will naturally involve a larger allotment of time to history than is now given in examination schedules, and will impose a heavier burden upon those to whose lot the reading of papers in history falls; but it is not likely that the demands on time and energy will prove greater than in other well-recognized admission subjects, and it is not unreasonable to expect college authorities to make suitable provision in these regards.
The main element in entrance examinations in history must probably continue to be the written paper, but this should be set with the idea of testing to some extent the candidate's ability to use historical material, as well as his knowledge of important facts. The information questions should not demand the simple reproduction of the statement of the text, but should in large measure be so framed as to require the grouping of facts in a different form from that followed in the books recommended for preparation. There should also be questions involving some power of discrimination and some use of legitimate comparison on the part of the candidate. It is not to be expected that skill in utilizing historical material will be present in a high degree in the candidate for admission to college, but the student who has learned how to handle books and to extract information from them in the course of his secondary studies has the right, and the ability, to make this knowledge count for something toward college entrance. As suitable tests we may suggest comment on carefully chosen brief extracts from simple sources or modern works, analysis or discussion of more extended passages, supplemented perhaps by outline maps or concrete illustrations-anything, in short, that will show the student's capacity of taking up a fresh question in a way that indicates some development of the historical sense. Naturally, attainments in this direction will be expected chiefly of those who present history as an additional option.
Doubtless to many these tests will appear sufficient; but it must always be borne in mind that a written paper, even when the questions have been prepared with great care, can not yield such decisive results in history as it can, for example, in a subject like English composition. The examiner should always have an opportunity-and particularly in doubtful cases-of supplementing by other means the information gained from the paper. One excellent adjunct is the submission by the candidate of written work done in connection with his study of history in school. This may include notebooks, abstracts of reading, and prepared papers, none of which, however, should be accepted without proper guarantees of authenticity and independent preparation. Another supplementary test, which is largely used in European examinations and has commended itself to the experience of many American examiners, consists of a brief oral conference with the candidate. This should be quite informal in character, and should aim to discover, if possible, something concerning the personality of the candidate and the nature of his historical training, rather than to elicit brief answers to a few arbitrarily chosen questions.
The following analytical statement will show at a glance our recommendation concerning the organization of the history course.
Four Years' Course in History
First year
Ancient history to 800 A. D.
Second year
Mediæval and modern European history
Third year
English history
Fourth year
American history and civil government
Three Year's Course in History
- Any three of the above blocks.
- First or second year
Ancient history to 800 A.D.
Second or third year
English history, with special reference to the chief events in the history of Continental Europe.
Third or fourth year
American history and civil government. - First or second year
Ancient history to 800 A.D.
Second or third year
Mediæval and modern European history
Third or fourth year
American history, with a consideration of the chief events in the history of England - First year
Ancient history to 800 A.D.
Second year
English history, with reference to the chief events in later mediæval history (three times per week)
Third year
English history, with reference to the chief events in modern European history (three times per week)
Fourth year
American history and civil government - First year
Ancient history to 800 A.D.
Second year
Mediæval and modern European history
Third year
American history, with special reference to the development of English political principles and English expansion in connection with American colonial history (three times per week)
Fourth year
American history and civil government (three times per week).