More specifically, at the time of this exam the school was only ~8 years old and engineering wasn't considered the prestigious career it is today.
The round up of federal funding in the 1940's and 50's is really interesting to read about as it completely transformed the school and in a broader sense transformed higher education in the US as a whole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Massachusetts_In...
EDIT: well, maybe not blatantly ignoring our current input, but the concessions that they are making are too little too late in my opinion
(Note that they are not scanned in from an original document like the questions.)
Bismarck was already a world-historical personage by 1869, and anybody applying to MIT would have likely been able to identify him.
I thought we were all supposed to have been dumbed down compared to our illustrious forefathers?
Obviously, it was the men and women of the 1950s, who built computers and airplanes from nothing with little more than their wit, a grease pencil, and some twine, who were of the utmost in mental capacity and grit.
Since we're only 60 years from 1950, whereas 1869 is 81, we must be smarter than them. In fact, we're about as smart as people were in 1890. Ten years ago, we were as smart as people in 1900, but sadly such intelligence is ten years gone.
A corollary: in another 21 years, people will look back at this exam and just barely understand it. A few years after that, all hope is lost.
I loved how you wrapped it up! humor at its best.
Another issue to consider, though, is specialization. 100 years ago, even 50 years ago, people could master all the breadth of their subjects (in math/sciences). Who is the current Gauss or Einstein? Hard to tell, possibly no one can now have that effect alone.
Even 20-30 years ago, when Woz singlehandedly invented the personal computer, it was very different. (he says he had it all in his head at once, really amazing). You can read a beautiful interview here: http://www.foundersatwork.com/steve-wozniak.html
Conrad Wolfram recently gave a wonder TED talk on the subject. http://www.ted.com/talks/conrad_wolfram_teaching_kids_real_m...
http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/exhibits/exam/geometry.htm...
1. Construct a triangle ABC. Construct a line parellel to AB through C. Alternate angles and angle sum of triangle shows it is 180 degrees
2. Use congruent triangles
3. A number of ways doing this. I would cut it into two triangles
4. 360/6 = 60 degrees. Thus each sector is a equilateral triangle.
5. 100 pi
6. Basic algebra, let x be the length of the perpendicular. x = 12, solve for sides using Pythagoras. 20 and 15
7. x : x^2
Would expect to be year 7 or year 8 level.
It is only a bit harder than SAT I Math, in my opinion. I've always wondered why SAT I Math is so easy--a good middle school graduate in Asia would have aced it. If anyone here can comment/point to references on the matter, I will appreciate it.
I am from central Europe and have gone to schools here as well.
