A Concrete Example of the Value of Individual Teaching
The Psychological Clinic Vol. II. No. 1. December 15, 1908. :Author: Elmer E. Jokes, Ph.D., Indiana University.
There is a type of child who sits under the ordinary class-room instruction and derives therefrom not the slightest benefit. lie appears listless and stupid, is not able to fasten his attention upon the. subject of the recitation, which may thrill his mates with interest, is wholly indifferent to the general school environment, and in no perceptible way is impressed by the teaching process, even though the character of the teaching may be excellent. Such a child is completely overshot by the traditional class instruction of the modern school, and sits there day after day wholly ignorant of what it all means. One or two children of this type can usually be found in almost every first year class of thirty or forty pupils. The modern school offers 110 solution to the problem of teaching such children, save in some of the more highly favored city systems, where there are special schools for defectives. Consequently, such pupils are allowed to remain with the class, objects of pity and regret. The teacher, not knowing the methods of dealing with such children, and even if she did know them not having the time at her disposal, eventually ignores the child, simply leaving him to his own hopeless destiny. Two or three years of such physical persecution and mental atrophy and the child is thrust from school a pronounced defective, doomed to a life of intellectual darkness and physical degeneracy. Society is burdened to-day with a small percentage of such individuals, who might have been trained to some form of usefulness and thus have been made contributors to the assets of society, instead of unwholesome consumers, giving nothing in return. Herein, doubtless, we find a serious defect in the general public school system which will eventu(195) ally be remedied by giving all such pupils the special training needed to bring about educative reactions.
It is my opinion that the great majority of such children are not at all abnormal, but are regarded as defective because the character of the teaching has not been adapted to their individual physical and mental needs. The teaching process is ordinarily adapted to the average child, with enough flexibility and adjustment in it to meet the needs of all children not too far above or below that standard. While the brilliant child probably suffers as much retardation under these conditions as the one who is considered defective, he fails to get the same sympathy and few schools have been especially established for him. The only method of reaching the child who manifests retardation, is to apply individual instruction to him. If he sits unmoved under group instruction, and if the process, which adequately instructs the class as a whole, fails to reach him, then he must be taken as an individual, and given the educational treatment which will bring about that mental and physical development of which he is capable.
The results of the present investigation were obtained while studying another problem undertaken the past year with children of the first grade of the Training School, in the State Normal School of Virginia. The subject was to study the learning process as shown in the reading exercises of these children. The investigation began after the children had been in school about two weeks and had become fully adjusted to their new surroundings. With the co-operation of the supervisor of the primary grades and some of her practice teachers, a series of tests were made upon the children, with a view to determining everything possible concerning the manner in which the children learned the words in the prescribed reading lessons. For each child a learning curve was worked out, which indicated the number of words learned, and the rapidity with which they were learned.
The tests were made in the following manner. As fast as words were added to the reading vocabulary of the child in the class-room, they were written on cards three by nine inches and given to me. At intervals of about a week apart the children were separately brought into my office by a student teacher and asked to name the words written on these cards in regular order. About ten words were added to the list each week, and the child was compelled to go over the whole list from the beginning each time he was tested. This was continued until in my judgment the tests became invalid, owing to the fact that the children reached a point eventually, when they could name almost any word presented, whether they had ever seen it before or not. This was due to the excellent system of phonetics used in this school, which very soon enabled the child to interpret the sounds of letters and combinations of letters in the pronunciation of the words learned. When this point had been reached it was obvious that the tests were no longer testing the child upon the words he had learned, but rather upon his ingenuity in grouping sounds and combinations of sounds into words. Consequently, when the child reached this stage he was excused from further tests. A complete record of all errors was kept throughout the long series, and a careful study of them reveals much of interest to the primary teacher.
Among the children tested was a boy who is the special object of study in this paper. He had been in the Kindergarten in connection with the Training School for two years before entering the first grade, and in that work had been pronounced rather stupid. Indeed it is doubtful if he had derived very much benefit from the Kindergarten training. Physically he appeared perfectly normal, save that he showed a great variety of muscular reactions to slight stimuli, and his eyes seemed rather expressionless. Upon the playground he played vigorously, showing a considerable desire to win, or to appear a hero. At times when he observed me watching him, he would go into the game with great vigor. In such a game as tossing a ball with the object of catching it, he appeared to have little co-ordination and control, becoming excited and distorting the face badly as the ball approached. He could run well and displayed some skill in tackling another runner in a game called “black man”. He talked fairly well, though he expressed himself too much in babytalk fashion for a child of his age. Some words he could pronounce only in the crudest sort of way, though I am inclined to believe that this was largely due to imitation either of his parents or of his playmates, who are colored children of his own age. In the schoolroom he was listless, had no ability to attend to the subject matter of the curriculum, loved to attract attention by all sorts of devices which were destructive to good order, molested his companions by pulling their hair, stuffing things down their neck, punching them with ruler and pencil,?in fact, he was regarded by them as a real nuisance. The teaching routine appeared to carry absolutely no meaning to him. When not a prey to the mischievous fits, he would fall into a sort of stupor, resting his head upon the desk. He was somewhat under size for his age, but his growth at present appears to be about normal. He increased in height one inch and a half during the time in which the tests were made, and gained in weight over two pounds. He has fair skin with usually a good color, light hair, and blue-gray eyes which rarely have the twinkle of childhood in them. At a casual glance he does not look stupid and there is nothing to indicate that he is of a mental type which cannot be stimulated by the ordinary teaching process. Nevertheless, for four months he sat under most excellent teaching, and it is doubtful if he gained a single idea. All this time the supervisor of the primary grade was studying the child, and giving him as much extra help in the class as her time would permit; the student teacher also, considering this boy an interesting problem, gave him a great deal of extra drill in the regular work of the class. Still he was not reached by all this effort, and during the whole time he actually learned only a few words, and the tests showed that even these were known only spasmodically.
TABLE I. Results Under Class Instruction. ‘D 03 T3 -M *-< CJ ?-i <S w 5 Eh $ & ^ 6?.2 MH O CCO o ?’5*0 <3 q ,Q ,o g ? & g a 6 o p s -.5 pa ? 1 10 0. . 2 20 2.. 3 30 3. . 4 40 3.. 5 50 0 G GO 4. . 7 70 4. . 8… …80 5., 9 90 10.. Words Known at each Test. 10 100 2 1 1 110 3 1 2 120 1 1 3 130 10 1 4 140 3 1 5 150 12 . .flower, doll. . .doll, orange, kite. ..doll, kite, father. ..doll, flower, kite, orange. . .doll, kite, father, Joss. . .doll, flower, you, Joss, kite. . .doll, purple, flower, Joss, kite, chickadees, butterfly, Kitty, May, mother. .. mother, chickadees. .. chickadees, May, kite. . .chickadees. ..mother, caterpillar, doll, kite, May, Will, purple, bred, seed, is. .. seed, bud, caterpillar. . .chickadees, flower, bred, caterpillar, goldenrod, sister, mother, doll, flower, kite, orange, father. 16 160 2 goldenrod, mother.
A very little study of Table I will suffice to show how much the ordinary class instruction had impressed him. The first column indicates the number of tests made, usually at an interval of a week apart; the second column shows the number of words which each member of the class was supposed to know at the time the test was made; the third column shows the number of words which this boy actually knew at the time of each test; the fourth column of the table gives the words which he knew at the time each test was made. Column three is the place of chief interest in this table, for Ave can see here precisely how rapid was his progress in getting a reading vocabulary. It cannot be said that he knew accurately a single word in the whole vocabulary. He knew “kite” nine times out of sixteen, and was equally certain of the word “doll.” But such a percentage of right cases does not warrant the conclusion that he had more than a fleeting memory of these words, not to mention such words as “you,” “Will,” “father,” “Joss,” and others which he knew only two or three times out of the sixteen trials. The table shows also that the words he appeared to know pretty accurately at the beginning of the series of tests, were forgotten toward the close. “Doll,” for example, was never recognized but twice after the ninth test; and the word “father” was known in the fourth and seventh tests, but not again till the fifteenth test. At this time the word occurred again in his reading lesson, which probably impressed it sufficiently upon his memory to cause him to recall it at the time of the test. The spasmodic character of his knowledge of these words is also brought out in this table. The ninth, thirteenth, and fifteenth tests were decidedly his best efforts. It should be said here that his success at these times caused great surprise, both to his teacher and myself. In all three instances he knew words which had only been presented to the class once, and not being considered very important in the context, had not been specially emphasized. This led us to believe that a way might be found of stimulating his mental development, for in some peculiar way these words had made an impression upon his mind that lasted. It is also remarkable that immediately after each of his most successful attempts there is almost a total failure. I am entirely unable to account for this, for at the ninth and fifteenth tests particularly, the words which he did know were known readily and there was no appearance of guessing. It is evident enough from the results here tabulated that this boy during the sixteen weeks had obtained scarcely a single lasting impression. The teaching was not at all adapted to his physical and mental condition, as is shown by the later results.
After sixteen weeks of this sort of failure the boy was placed under one of the best student teachers and started all over again. His teacher showed great tact in dealing with his case, by appealing to his meagre interests, and holding his attention for short intervals. The subject matter of the work did not differ materially from that which had been previously done with the class as a whole, but this boy was appealed to as an individual; and when it was found that his attention was wavering from the subject matter, TABLE II. . Results Under Individual Teaching. Words Missed at each Test. 2 a a as p p -oS p P ? ?.Sfl 1 10 10 2 20 18 green, roll. 3 30 27 green, yellow, has. 4 40 35 yellow, has, have, Joss, ball. 5 50 41 yellow, green, has, have, blue, will, see, seed, brown. 6 60 40 yellow, green, have, has, blue, brown, is, was, five, fly, did, saw, do, white. 7….. .70 68 do, did. 8 80 70 do, did, is, was, saw, white, blue, the, this, in. 9 90 76 did, and, is, was, it, in, white, blue, the, this, birds, come, dog, feed. 1 0 100 84 did, and, was, is, white, what, blue, purple, the, this, heads, aster, sister, fox, box, for. 1 1 110 100 and, was, is, what, white, find, purple, aster, sister, chicks. 1 2 120… .101 did, was, in, is, white, what, purple, cocoon, aster, sister, feed, find, them, stem, heads, clear, frog, do, has. 1 3 130 118 was, were, white, is, it, cocoon, aster, feed, find, fly, has, jump. 1 4 140 130 white, cocoon, in, am, feed, find, fly, had, has, were.
the work was changed in such a way that his interest was made continuous. To the delight of his teacher, and all who had observed him during the previous months, and even to his own great joy, it was found that he could learn. Under this method of treatment, he was not stupid at all, on the contrary his learning capacity was almost up to the average of the class. This is shown by a comparison of Tables I, II and III.
The third column of Table II, which gives the number of words known at each test, increases steadily from the first test, when he knew all of the ten words of the reading vocabulary, to the fourteenth test when he knew 130 out of 140 words. The words known at each test were so numerous that these have not been inserted in the fourth column of the table, but in their place are given the words missed at each test. A comparison of the results of Tables I and II demonstrates the efficiency of the individual teaching, in comparison with the utter ineffectiveness of class instruction. It should be said with reference to the results exhibited in Table II, that the tests were made in precisely the same manner as before. His teacher prepared the cards for the test and gave them to me as fast as the words became his reading vocabulary, and once a week he came into my office and tried to name them from the cards. He was perfectly delighted at his own success, and for about three months continued to learn at about the normal rate, when it became necessary to close the series of tests.
TABLE III. A Normal Child Under Class Instruction. O O ? O ? ? . o3 “g S?F3 “g Names of Words Missed at each Test. S?L< s a a 3., 4., 5. 6.. 7., 8. 9. 10., 11. 12., 13., 14. 15. 16. .10. .20 16. ? ?.5 p 1. 2. .30 27. .40 35. .50 42. .60 54. , .70 61. .80 77. .90 85. 100 91. 110 100. 120 116. 130 127. 140 132. 150 142. 160….154. .. hoop, now. .. how, little, orange, kite. .. did, and, you. .. little, orange, kite, you, did. ..little, kite, did, you, bad, have, has, stem. .. had, come, came, purple, Kitty, five. .. had, come, came, five, Kitty, chickadees, fly, do, it. .. had, fly, birds. . .brown, caterpillars, stem, them, hands. .. stem, them, it, is, box, fox, feed, sister, my. .. stem, feed, box, fox, aster, my, to, at, head, have. .. aster, sister, head, cocoon. .. aster, horses, feeding. ..horses, spun, his, is, it, girls, goats, Tom. ..horses, spun, goats, here, too, yes, sleep, sheep. ..here, sleep, glad, looking, brook, book.
In order to compare this boy’s learning capacity under individual instruction with that of a normal child under class instruction, the record of a little girl considered of average ability in the class is given in Table III. On the first test she knew eight words, and on the fourteenth test 132 words. She improved steadily from the first to the fourteenth test. The record of the supposedly defective boy, under individual training, is about as good as that of this normal child under class instruction. Indeed, he excels her in the number of words known in the first, second, and seventh tests, equals her in the third and fourth tests, and in the other tests he falls below her record by from 1 to 9 words. To represent this in a graphic and striking form, I have presented these results in three learning curves shown in Figure 1 on this page. The horizontal line indicates the number of tests from 1 to 16. The vertical distance above the horizontal line indicates the number of words from zero to 154. The heavy solid line at the bottom of the figure, which runs irregularly just above the horizontal line, is the learning curve of this supposedly defecFigure 1. Learning Curves. In the horizontal line is shown the number of the test in serial order from 1 to 16; in vertical distance, the number of words known from zero to 154. Heavy lower line, the learning curve of the retarded boy under class instruction; upper solid line, the learning curve of the same boy under individual teaching; broken line, the learning curve of a normal girl under class instruction.
tive boy under class instruction. It rises very little above the horizontal line, and there is no noticeable continuous rise in the curve from the beginning to the end of the tests. The lighter solid line is the learning curve of this same boy under individual instruction. It rises steadily from the first to the fourteenth test, and follows about the same course as the learning curve of the normal child under class instruction, represented by the broken line. A comparison of these two curves would seem to show that our supposedly defective boy is just about the average boy, so far as learning to read may be taken as an indication of intelligence. The question therefore seems to resolve itself into one of individual in contradistinction to class or group teaching. Class instruction, or even small group instruction, does not reach the child who manifests retardation. Tie must have a skillful teacher and must have her to himself. She must arouse his sympathies and interests and enter into them with enthusiasm. She must devote herself assiduously to the study of all his impulses and activities, and must find the method adapted to this individual child; for no two children will manifest the same form of retardation. This conclusion brings us directly to the economic problem. Should the public schools provide such expert instruction for the occasional case of retardation ? The question is being answered affirmatively in Baltimore, St. Louis, Kansas City, Omaha, Chicago, Buffalo, and elsewhere. But in the smaller cities, towns, and villages, it will doubtless be difficult to get the people to see that skilled instruction for the occasional case of retardation is in the end a great economy to the schools and an educational stimulus to social progress.
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.