Retardation as Indicated by one Hundred City School Reports.1
- Author:
Hilda Volkmor and Isabel Noble,
Stanford University, Cal.
This paper is a survey of the school reports of one hundred cities, made with a view to finding out what has thus far been done by the city schools, to study and to solve the problem of retardation. Its purpose is not to supplement the excellent studies of retardation made by Ayers, Strayer, and others, but to see to what extent school practice has actually been affected by the past decade of investigation and discussion in this field. These hundred cities were selected at random from the reports available in the library of the department of education at Stanford University. The distribution of the cities as to size and locality is indicated in table I. It will be seen that they vary in size from 7000 to over 500,000 population, and that they are well distributed over the entire country. The showing should be suggestive of the practical consideration which has been given to the problem thus far. Not enough of the 1913 reports were yet available for this study, hence it closes with the year 1912.
Of the hundred cities reviewed, 26 made no reference whatever to the problem. Table I shows that these 26 cities are of all sizes, and table II, that they are scattered throughout all sections of the country. That is, size of city and locality are not the factors which TABLE I. Population of Citie3 7,000 and under 15,000 15,000 ” ” 25,000 25,000 ” ” 50,000 50,000 ” ” 100,000 100,000 ” ” 500,000 500,000 and over Total 26 27 Number of Cities in New Eng. Mid. Atl. South West. 1 3 3 1 4 Cent. 4 1 6 5 12 27 100 Total 15 11 22 20 25 7 Retardation Not Mentioned 26 Referred to 3 5 6 5 4 23 Statistics Given 6 6 10 12 14 3 51 1 This study was made at the suggestion, and under the direction of Prof. J. B. Sears, of Leland Stanford Junior University.
have determined the spread of this movement. Twenty-three made some reference to the problem, but offered inadequate statistics, and to all appearances had not treated the question seriously, i.e. school practice had not been materially affected by it. In 51, either careful studies had been made, or fairly complete statistics were Section of United States Retardation Not Mentioned Referred to Statistics Given New England. . Middle Atlantic. Central Western Southern 14 17 13 4 3 Total. 26 23 51
presented, from which the amount of retardation could be computed. The distribution of these 51 cities as to size and locality as seen in tables I and II again shows that the movement is not local, and that it is not confined to large cities alone.
The movement began in 1904 in New York City, and the annual report of the superintendent for that year is the pioneer document. By chart I the rapidity with which the schools over the country began to concern themselves about the problem may be seen. This chart includes all the 74 cities which had touched upon the problem at all, and shows the number beginning the study each year, from 1904 to 1912. By 1909, 43 cities had made some reference to the problem, and after that the movement slackened somewhat. It is to be remembered that we are dealing with only one hundred cities. The question whether the next hundred would show the same tendency is not answered here. The history of the 51 cities which have dealt more systematically with the problem, is shown in chart II. Here the height is not reached till the year 1911, when 18 per cent of the 100 cities examined made definite studies of their laggards.
The amount of retardation shown by these reports may not add to what is commonly known from other sources, but it does show what one can find on the subject in city school reports, and it also shows some interesting facts in the way of difference between maximum and minimum retardation in the same city, and differences in average retardation in various cities and in different years. Because various definitions of retardation have been used in different cities, and by the same city in different years, the amount of retardation in the schools of one city as shown by its report, can not fairly be compared with the corresponding figures given in the report of another city. There are two general definitions used: the one based on normal age, and the other on progress. Normal age for grade one is in some cases, 6-7 years, in others, 6-8, and at least in one case, 6-9. This makes comparison difficult if not impossible.
The amount of retardation is shown in some form, as average retardation for all the grades, or maximum, or minimum, and often all three. In some cases the amount was computed from the statistics given. These are shown in tables III, IV, V, VI and VII. Table III shows figures from 46 cities. Ten of these cities offered figures for two different years, and one city offered figures for three different years. Thus we have 59 statements, from 46 city reports, I 1 I I I 1 1 1.1 I) NtO 51 oooooo^^rr o) ff>0)c)(no(ri<n0i CHART I.?SHOWING DATE OF BEGINNING OF STUDY OF RETARDATION (includes all c ITIES [74] MAKING ANY REFERENCE TO THE PROBLEM). I I 1 I I I I 1 I t Wi ^ i? tx> ?r> o ^ w <T> C) G> B B. C) Cl 01 CD CHART II.?SHOWING WHEN FIRST STUDY OR STATISTICS WERE FURNISHED (INCLUDES 51 CITIES). CHART II.?SHOWING WHEN FIRST STUDY OR STATISTICS WERE FURNISHED (includes 51 cities).
of the average retardation for all grades. These reports appear within the interval studied (1904-1912). As the record for no city appears more than once in any one year this chart shows the history of the movement very well. The studies were well under way in 1910, and twenty cities reported on this item in 1911. Why the number should drop to eleven in 1912 does not appear. The range in the amount of retardation is an interesting item on this table. TABLE III.?SHOWING PER CENT AVERAGE RETARDATION FOR ALL GRADES. INCLUDES 59 RECORDS FROM 46 CITIES. IN SOME INSTANCES THE ITEM WAS NOT GIVEN BUT WAS COMPUTED FROM STATISTICS PRESENTED. 1904 39.0 1905 1900 21.6 26.3 49.6 1907 7.5 10.6 21.4 37.1 51.3 1908 28.5 32.0 1909 13.8 31.1 31.5 1910 7.5 8.0 9.0 9.2 10.0 10.4 11.7 15.5 16.7 28.0 30.2 32.8 35.0 36.0 1911 5.0 6.6 7.3 10.6 11.1 14.0 14.8 16.0 23.3 24.0 27.3 28.0 29.0 29.2 33.3 34.0 37.0 37.8 47.4 62.7 1912 8.2 15.0 25.0 28.0 29.0 29.8 30.0 42.0 43.0 46.5 63.1
In 1904 there is one case only, New York City, with a retardation of 39 per cent. In 1906 the range, with three cities, is between 21.6 and 49.6; in 1907, with five cities, between 7.5 and 51.3; in 1910, with fourteen cities, the range is between 7.5 and 36.0; in 1911, with twenty cities, between 5.0 and 62.7; and in 1912, with eleven cities, between 8.2 and 63.1. To what extent this great range may be due to the use of different standards of measurement is hard to say, but it is evident that there is yet no settled standard of what is a reasonable amount of retardation to expect. At least no such standard is being used, else this wide variation would not exist.
TABLE IV. SHOWING PERCENTAGE OF MAXIMUM RETARDATION (NO CITY INCLUDED MORE THAN once). 1909 1910 1911 12.4 3.0 17.0 40.2 14.0 25.0 21.8 30.0 24.6 34.4 52.0 40.0 42.8 43.0 44.6 45.0 46.0 50.0 53.0 54.0 55.0 71.6 TABLE V.?SHOWING PERCENTAGE OF MINIMUM RETARDATION. (NO CITY INCLUDED MORE THAN ONCE.) 1909 1910 1911 1912 1.8 19.3 0.0 4.2 5.8 6.0 19.0 2.4 7.0 7.7 8.0 8.0 10.1 12.0 13.0 13.0 14.0 18.0 18.0 27.9 47.4 10.0 12.0 13.0 17.5 32.0 37.0 37.9
Table IV shows thirty records, from thirty cities, within the years 1909-12. The variation in amount is much the same as in table III. Table V shows the range of the minimum retardation in a similar way. The city with 0.0 per cent minimum retardation says there is no retardation in its schools. (It is excluded by definition only.)
Where this maximum and minimum retardation appears, is of some importance, and is shown in table VI, which includes each city but once, but covers the years 1904-12 inclusive. It will be
TABLE VI.?SHOWING THE NUMBER OF CITIES IN WHICH THE MAXIMUM AND THE MINIMUM FALL IN A GIVEN GRADE. Grade VIII VII VI V IV III II I No. Cities Max. 2 4 8 12 3 1 5 No. Cities Min. 25
seen that the minimum retardation falls most frequently in grade one, and only five of the thirty-one cities reporting have found the minimum above grade six. The maximum falls heavily in grade five, and probably if elimination could be figured out, it would appear quite as often in grade six.
One more item of interest is the difference between the maximum and the minimum in the same city, and for the same year. Table VII shows twenty-four such cases, mostly given in the reports for the last two years studied. Whether the ratio of minimum to maximum is more constant in these twenty-four cities than mere chance would make it, is a question.
TABLE VII.?24 CASES FROM 24 CITIES, SHOWING PERCENTAGE OF MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM RETARDATION. (NO TWO REPORTS FROM SAME CITY.) 1909 Max. 12.4 40.2 Min. 1.8 19.3 1910 Max. 21.8 24.6 52.0 Min. 4.2 5.8 19.0 1911 Max. 7.7 14.0 17.0 25.0 30.0 34.4 42.8 44.6 45.0 50.0 53.0 55.0 Min. 4.3 4.0 2.4 7.0 8.0 8.0 13.0 10.1 12.0 18.0 18.0 27.0 1912 Max. 39.0 44.0 44.0 48.0 62.3 64.0 78.2 Min. 10.0 12.0 13.0 17.5 37.0 32.0 37.9
It is also possible to show for eleven cities what the average retardation was in two different years. In ten of the cities the amount shown in the later report was lower than that shown in the earlier one. There is no way of knowing that this was due to lowering of standards, to different methods of making up the study, to better teaching, or to what. It is interesting that in only one case was the second percentage higher than the first. In one case it dropped from 9 per cent to 5 per cent in one year. It is probably correct to assume that when the problem was defined by the first inquiry, definite steps were taken to meet it, and the result is a lowering of the proportion of pupils retarded.
The causes for retardation mentioned in the reports are thirtyeight in number, only nineteen of which are mentioned more than RETARDATION INDICATED BY SCHOOL REPORTS. 81 once, and only nine of which are mentioned more than four times. Some of the most prominent causes are “absence,” mentioned by 26 cities; “mental dulness,” mentioned by 19 cities; “physically defective,” by 18 cities; “illness,” by 13; “race,” by 13; “late entrance,” by 10; “change of school,” by 8; “crowded school room,” by 7. “Poverty” is mentioned but once. Very general causes, which may mean almost anything or nothing, are often mentioned.
Thirty different solutions of the problem were proposed, only 12 of which were proposed by more than 4 different cities. “More frequent promotions” was used or proposed by 14 cities; “ungraded classes,” by 30; “special schools for special classes of dull or bright,” by 7; “individual help for slow pupils,” by 11; “continuation schools,” by 14; “medical supervision,” by 8; “summer school,” by 8. “School nurse” is proposed as an aid by only one city; “departmental teaching,” by one; “enforce child labor law,” by one.
Aside from this rather bare collection of facts, the reports show many indications that the principles of scientific management are rapidly being introduced into the administration of schools, that actual standards of measurement are being developed by men in the practical field, and that they are not only applying their standards, but that they are also relying upon the results of their application. The early expert studies were so frequently mentioned and made use of by the reports, that one is convinced that the money which the United States Commissioner’s office and the Sage Foundation have spent in trying to establish standards in this field, has been many times returned in actual saving of the cost of repeaters. In brief, the educational historian of the future will find the city school documents of the past decade a fruitful source on the subject of retardation.
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.