Exit, anyone?
 

Here is a sample undergraduate English major "exit exam" from Sewanee: The University of the South:

http://english.sewanee.edu/assets/up...hcomp08(1).pdf

It is interesting to note that absolutely no knowledge of anything written in the English language is the past 150 years or so - and possibly far longer - is required to "exit". As a matter of fact, there was only one (optional) question, covering possibly 3% of the test, which even involved the twentieth century, and that appeared to regard Virginia Woolf as a contemporary. Was this a "comprehensive" exam, Sam, or aimed at a more narrowly focused portion of a larger syllabus?

The poem for explication is by Mary Jo Salter, Michael.

I found it difficult.
I'd maybe have got 50%, possibly with the odd bonus point for some original thinking.
Would that be a passing grade?

20th. Century Questions (I didn't go back the full 150 years)

I. c, d, e, and x (4 out of 26)
II. o-s (5 out of 20)
III. g (1 out of 12)
IV. 1, 2, 4, 5, & 6 could include 20th C. authors (5 out of 6)
V. Poem by Mary Jo Salter, b. 1954 (1 out of 1)

Are we living in the same centuries, Michael?

You're right, Sam - I missed that one. It appeared contemporary (I didn't identify the writer) but I was reading too quickly and assumed that it was one of multiple choices. But I'm still surprised at the overall balance.

My overall point was not that there was zero contemporary influence in the questions, but that you didn't have to deal with anything written in the past 150 years to ace the test. I screwed up on Mary Jo because I confused V. with IV., but beyond that I believe I'm correct. All those questions you point to in IV that could include 20th century authors, also could not - and that was my point! There's nothing in the entire test, aside from V, which forces the student - gets the little squirt pinned and wriggling on the wall - to demonstrate any sense of 20th century literature.

(It might even be argued that Section V. - the Mary Jo Salter poem - does not necessarily drag the student into the 20th century. It requests an interpretive essay. The poem itself looks back, and is crammed with references to earlier periods. Betcha that somebody who had never seen the Salter poem before, and had never seriously read much post-1860 - but was good enough to do well on all the earlier sections of the exam - could write a decent interpretive essay on The Rebirth of Venus.)

Please note my breakdown above.

Sam,

Yikes!

Having to grade thirty bluebooks based on those questions would make me swear off teaching!

Forever!

Oh, wait... ;)

Thanks,

Bill

Michael, I think that if you look at the test as a whole you'll see that one could pass it by skipping other 150 year periods as well, say, 1750-1900. Excluding creative writing, I took only one 20th century course, modern poetry. I think it's a pretty impressive exam, all things considered.

Do the students bring a textbook, an anthology, or any book at all into the exam?

I took at least three 20th Century lit classes (aside from the survey courses) as an undergraduate, more if you count lit classes that included work from the period. And the 20th Century was little more than half over at the time.

Tough test. How many hours?

I could pass parts I & II but would have to, well, study to do much at all with III and IV. It would be a bear to grade.

PS.: I'm assuming it all has to come straight out of your head. I mean, I might talk about Don Juan and the Prelude for E2 but I'd have to know them pretty damn well to do it without the texts in front of me.

I would just leave.

Terese, the time limits are on the different sections. I don't know how well I would have done as an undergraduate major. Even now, there were several quotes I didn't recognize; one of them was from To the Lighthouse, which I've taught.

Interesting that Shakespeare pretty much does it for drama and that neither James nor Twain makes an appearance, though I suppose one could use them in one of the comparative essays. No Emerson or Whitman either, for that matter.

It's a test that looks more intimidating that it is. Lots of choices/options. But I shudder to think what it would look like to a senior in one of those departments where you don't have to read Shakespeare to fulfill requirements.

Yes, I assume that this is a bluebook and pen test--no supporting materials, including Google.

I am a good examinee. I could have done this when I finished my Oxford Englsh degree (second class) and I could do it now - better I think because now I can write on any damn thing whether I know about it or not. It's the journalism, folks. I am quite sure the average English student at a British university NOW could not do it. They are much more ignorant NOW for sundry weighty reasons. I agree with Sam. It is an excellent test. But then I guess he was a good examinee. My wife (English graduate Oxford First Class) could never have done it . She'd have run out of time. That's the problem with knowing a lot.

Personally, I'm not sure anything after 709 AD is necessary.

Mike, that would work fine, but it would be the exit exam for a different department. ;)

I agree that this looks plenty rigorous.

It's an impressive exam and a good refresher course in itself. I think I could have struggled through the first section (discussing Sam’s "Narcissiad" under mock-epics) but it'd be tough to fill two bluebooks with the alphabet, let alone 5 essays, in 100 minutes.

But what to make of the instructions for part IV: "Please write a detailed and literate essay on any ONE of the following topics." "Damn! The other essays didn’t have to be literate???"