A Report on the Examination of one Hundred 6b Children in Philadelphia Schools
- Author:
Mabel R. Farson
Supervisor of Mental Examinations, Department of Special Education, Philadelphia
Purpose of Investigation
In the autumn term of 1926, Dr Philip A. Boyer, the director of the bureau of Educational Research of the Philadelphia Public School System asked Dr Gladys G. Ide, Director of Special Education, if one hundred 6B children might be given the Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests in order to determine the correlation of this test with the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability. Accordingly a supervisor of mental examinations was assigned to the task. In Philadelphia schools in the 6B grade, i.e., the second half of the sixth grade, the children are given the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability. In the following term, when these pupils enter the junior high school, they are grouped according to ability on the basis of the scores achieved on this test. The instigation of this investigation was, therefore, an attempt to determine the correlation between these two tests.
In addition to this aim, the study served another purpose of particular value to the Division of Special Education, in that it afforded a sample of the performance of normal sixth grade children. Every year there are referred to the psychological clinic of this division, thousands of children who are doing unsatisfactory work in the grades. It is of value to know how the performance of these children compares with that of those who are not selected from the normal group. The study of a relatively large number of children of about the same age affords a standard to which individual children may be compared. In the psychological clinic of the Division of Special Education, high school students and apparently normal children from twelve years of age and upwards, have been given a Morgan Mental Test as part of their examination. The test has been used to gain some idea of the child’s ability to follow written direction and to work without supervision. This study afforded an opportunity to determine the correlation between the Stanford-Binet Tests and the Morgan Mental Test.
Group Chosen
It was decided that for this investigation “average schools” should be chosen and that the entire 6B group should be given the tests. Accordingly schools were selected in a district where there was no undue preponderance of foreign parentage, where the school population had not been affected to any extent by the influx of negroes from the South, and where the children on the whole came from homes in which their physical welfare was considered but which offered nothing unusual in the way of intellectual opportunities. Two schools in North Philadelphia were chosen for the purpose. Eveiy child in the 6B grade in those two schools was given the examination. These schools provided ninety-three children and the remaining seven children were selected from a West Philadelphia School. In order not to overweight the group at either end of the scale, these seven children were chosen on the basis of their performance on the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability. The children with the two highest scores, the two lowest scores and three from the medium group were selected.
The group included fifty-three males and forty-seven females. There were five negroes and sixteen Jews, all of whom were Russian Jews except one boy who was an Austrian Jew. There were eighteen other children whose parents were foreign born; five were born in Germany, three in Italy, two in Hungary, one in Austria, two in Poland, one in Scotland, one in Sweden, one in Ireland, one in Canada, and one in England. This formed a fairly representative Philadelphia School group. The occupations of the parents of the children give some idea of the social level of the group. There was one doctor, one teacher, one bookkeeper, one stenographer and seven salesmen. A number of the parents maintained the neighborhood stores. The following trades were represented,?machinist, printer, carpenter, painter, plumber, tailor, barber, butcher, steam fitter. There were some employees of a well known steel corporation, some hosiery mill operators, electrical workers, shippers, two firemen, a shoe repairer, a cement finisher and several laborers. Every class of Taussig’s five point classification scale of occupations was represented, but there was a predominance of classes of four and three of this scale on which five represents the highest group.
Tests Used
The Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability was given to the pupils under the direction of Dr Philip A. Boyer as part of the regular procedure in the 6B grade. As part of this special investigation the group of 100 children were given the starred tests of the Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests, because, as has been said, the original purpose of the study was to determine the correlation between these two tests. The use of the Binet-Simon Series furthered the purpose of attaining standards of comparison since this series of tests is a part of the battery of tests used in the routine examinations of children referred to the division of Special Education for examination. For the same reason, memory spans were also taken. Time would not permit of the use of the entire battery of tests usually given to the children referred to this clinic, but an effort was made to select representative tests and those which tested some specific abilities.
The Dearborn Formboard No. lc was selected as the performance test, which was because of its grade of difficulty, the best intelligence test for children of this age. The use of this test afforded a sample of tEe child’s performance on tests of this type. Additional performance tests were not used because of the time element involved.
The Morgan Mental Test, which employs the medium of written directions was also used so that its correlation with the BinetSimon Test could be determined. The impression which had been gained after using the Morgan Mental Test as an additional diagnostic measure in individual cases for several years, was that the “mental age” achieved on this test, on the whole correlated closely with the “mental age” as determined by the Binet Scale. In individual cases however, a great discrepancy had been noted. This seemed to be due to the fact that some subjects worked better under the stimulation of the individual attention of the examiner as when the Binet tests were being administered, while others gave a better performance when permitted to work by themselves and when they were not conscious of the attention of the examiner being directed upon them. The use of this test on a relatively large group and the subsequent correlation with the Binet Test was an attempt to verify or disprove statistically the impressions, relative to this test which had been gained. With this series as with other tests, it was desired to have records of the scores actually made by 6th grade children in Philadelphia Schools in order to have some evidence of the range of the scores, to determine whether Morgan’s norms fitted our children, and to give again some standards of comparison. Reading and spelling were the only school proficiency tests given and these were given for the purpose of checking the 6th grade proficiency tests in these subjects which are used by this department.
Method of Procedure
The class room teachers administered the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability, scored the test?forwarded the results together with the child’s age and present school monthly report to Dr Boyer’s office.
All other tests were given by the one examiner. The children came to the examination room one at a time. The child’s date of birth, parents’ names, birthplace of child and parents and school history were obtained from his registration card. The school history consisted of the date of admission to public schools, the number of terms in each grade, and the rating received for each term’s work in the last two years. Information concerning the grades he had received on his report for the present term was obtained from the child himself.
A brief social history was also obtained from the child. By questioning it was determined of what members the household consisted, which incidentally brought out the facts as to whether the child lived with one or both parents, and the size of the family. The father’s employment, the mother’s employment outside the home, if any, and the employment of any children of the family were other facts noted. Thus some idea of the social status of the family was gained.
After this preliminary information was recorded, the Dearborn Formboard lc was given. Errors in analytic discrimination were noted so that it might be determined what errors, if any, were made by the median modal group. Notes were made concerning the method of working or of any difficulties encountered which tended to produce failure or lengthen the time required.
The method of procedure used for the Dearborn Test was that which is followed in the Psychological Clinic of the University of Pennsylvania. The four long blocks were removed and the pieces remaining in the board were arranged so as to leave four short spaces. On the second trial, the board was turned so that the former top row of recesses was now the bottom row.
Following this test the memory spans,?auditory, visual and reverse were given. Then the Binet-Simon Test was administered. A record was kept of the child’s interpretations of fables and of his responses on the similarities test at the twelve year level. Any response which seemed of especial note was recorded.
An estimate of the child’s physiological development was made by the use of the terms adolescent, pubescent, child. ‘’ Adolescent’’ was used to designate children whose physical appearance, voice and general response obviously indicated that they were definitely post-pubescent. “Pubescent” was the term applied to those in whom the changes characteristic of adolescence were just beginning to occur. Neither the terms adolescent or child applied satisfactorily to this group who were in a state of transition from one stage to the other. “Child” was used to designate a group whose physical appearance and whose attitude was still that of a child. During the examination, the subject’s personality traits were also checked as they were noted. Under this general heading, the following items were listed: alert, placid, apathetic; ambitious, contented, flaccid; animated, stolid; bold, poised, shy, repressed; charming, pleasant, colorless; conformed, sociable, mischievous asocial; co-operative, bidable, suspicious, un-co-operative; courteous, civil, rude; fast, deliberate, slow; frank, evasive; friendly, suspicious, unfriendly; gregarious, lonely; industrious, indolent; inquiring, interested, indifferent, loquacious, silent; vivacious, spiritless; well trained, untrained, winning, dull. Only such characteristics as seemed particularly applicable to each child were checked and the number of characteristics checked varied with the personality of the child. If a foreign language was spoken in the home, this was noted on the record. Any significant bit of a child’s behavior or any reaction which would tend to throw an additional light on his performance was also recorded.
After the Binet Test was completed, the child was asked to copy a diamond, to read a selection, reproduce the thought of it and then to write some sentences from dictation. The individual examination of each child required from one hour to one hour and twenty minutes.
After the individual examinations were completed the Morgan Mental Test was given as a group test, administered by the same examiner. The tests were scored and their correlation with the Stanford Binet determined.
Discussion of Results
The attitude of the children toward the examinations was interesting. They were very eager to come in for the examination. The children were told at the beginning that it would be unfair if anyone who had had the examination discussed it with another child who had not yet had the tests. They entered into the situation with a sportsmanlike attitude. At recess time the girls who had been given the examination talked with one another having considerable fun evading the other children and having a secret from them. The boys told some imaginative tales to their fellows concerning the nature of the tests. Their behavior served to increase the curiosity of those who had not had the examination. Neither the teachers nor the examiner discovered any evidence that the actual test questions had been discussed.
Dearborn Formboard
With the Dearborn Formboard lc a ten minute time limit was used, though we have been accustomed in the Division of Special Education to using a five minute time limit. Four years ago it was decided in this division to use a five minute time limit for this test, which we then considered to be a test at about the fifteen year level. Judging from our records the ten minute interval was too long and made the test too easy so that it was not really an intelligence test at this age level. We then reduced the time limit and began to use the test at lower age levels. In testing these 6B children, a ten minute time limit was used to determine, with a group of presumably normal children, whether there was any advantage in permitting the additional five minutes’ work on the test. Seventy-four per cent of this group, which represented approximately the twelve year level, succeeded in completing the Dearborn Formboard in five minutes. All but 5 per cent completed the test in ten minutes. If we accept Dr Witmer’s premise that an intelligence test is standardized at that age level at which 50 per cent of children are able to do it, then obviously a ten minute time limit is too great at the twelve year level for this test.
A survey of the results obtained in this group indicated that Table 1. Results C. A. M. A. Percentile I. Q. Percentile Distribution M.S. Aud. M. S. Vis. M. S. Rev. Dearborn F. B. I Dearborn F. B. II Morg. Morg. M. T. M.T. M. A. Score 10-6 9-0 100% 137.9 10-8 10-0 99% 132.0 11-4 10-5 90% 122.1 11-6 11-3 80% 115.7 11-9 11-5 70% 111.2 12-0 12-0 60% 104.9 12-5 12-3 50% 99.2 12-9 12-8 40% 93.7 13-2 13-2 30% 89.6 13-10 13-7 20% 84.0 14-5 14-3 10% 75.7 15-11 16-9 1% 65.7 16-3 17-4 0% 65.6 10 10 9 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 5 43 62 88 138 156 178 203 230 278 344 500 F. in 600 F. in 600 31 35 58 71 80 92 113 133 156 202 312 not given Second trial 16-8 105 15-7 104 15-7 98 14-6 87 14-0 81 12-9 70 12-4 65 11-3 57 11-3 55 10-7 52 9-8 44 9-2 32 8-5 23 the additional five minutes was of little value. In every case in which more than six minutes was required, the records show that the method used was trial and error. Typical comments on these records are ‘’ A purely trial and error method “; ‘’ Did not grasp the problem at all”; “Trial and error without any regard to form”; “Failed to comprehend the problem.” In each of these cases a great many errors in analytic discrimination were noted. In some cases there was no attempt to discriminate between the forms and to associate the shape of the insert with the proper recess. The child was confronted by a problem which he could not grasp, so he merely tried to place any block in any recess which happened to fall within the range of his attention at that particular moment.
In all of this group of cases, i.e., those requiring between six minutes and ten minutes, nothing which would be of additional value in making an analytic diagnosis was discernible in the last five minutes. The child’s ability to grasp the problem which the test presented, his ability to make analytic discriminations, his ability to make deductions, his concentration and his distribution of attention were adequately displayed in the first five minutes. By the end of this time he had ceased to make any effort to solve the problem intelligently but simply carried on in an aimless trial and error fashion. The additional five minutes served only as a further test of his persistence.
There were seven cases which required between five minutes and six minutes to do the test. One boy at first simply failed to comprehend the problem so that at the end of four minutes he had not succeeded in placing a single one of the four long pieces removed when the test was given him. Then he seemed to see the method of solution and in 638 seconds succeeded in solving the test. In the other six cases the length of time required was due to the confusion of the diamond and the hexagon and to difficulty in placing the two smaller triangles and the two smaller halves of the hexagonal shaped piece.
Eighty-four per cent of the 100 children examined confused the diamond with the hexagon. Obviously then it is normal for children of this age to make this error. This is a significant fact to be taken into account when rating the child for analytic discrimination. As has been said, the ability to distinguish between the diamond and the hexagon constituted by far the most difficult prob136 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC lem presented by the test. The next greatest point of difficulty was found to be the placing of the two smallest triangular pieces. Frequently they were placed with the second long triangular piece. Very often when an attempt was made to place them in the same recess with a short triangular piece, one of the small pieces would be fitted in and then the other could not be placed because the child was attempting to place the hypotenuse of the second small piece in juxtaposition with the vertical of the small piece already placed. It was necessary only to turn over the small block in order to fit it into the remaining space but very few saw that this was the necessary step until they had worked at this problem some time. Usually after the subject found difficulty in placing the two smallest triangles in this position, he would believe he was attempting a wrong placement and would again place the two small triangles with one of the long triangular pieces, only to find that the problem could not be solved in this manner so that he was again brought to face with the original problem.
When blocks were tried in recesses of an entirely different shape, as, for example, the rectangle and the ellipse, the error was apparently not due to an inability to distinguish between these forms as was the case with the diamond and hexagon but was due rather to a lack of adequate comprehension of the problem. A lack of comprehension was evident in the cases where a purely trial and error method was used?where blocks were simply tried in every recess. There were, however, other children who had some comprehension of the problem but who did not make deductions well. They at first attempted to fit two long pieces and two short pieces together and would, for example, try to place a long rectangular and a long elliptical piece in a rectangular recess or make a similar error with the short pieces. Frequently a child made an error with the other long pieces after he had succeeded in placing the triangles or ellipses since the problem is solved in these cases by placing the two long pieces together.
Some children had difficulty on the second trial because the turning of the board confused them.
The record of the time required on the second trials on this test shows considerable reduction from the time required on the first trial. The records thus give an indication of the degree of trainability which normal sixth grade children display in working with concrete material and therefore furnish standards of comparison. It has been frequently stated that Jewish children on the whole do inferior work on performance tests. This assertion held true in so far as the performance of this particular group of 100 children was concerned. Sixteen per cent of the group were Jewish children, but 30.7 per cent of the failures on the Dearborn Formboard (those not completing the test in five minutes) were made by Jewish children. Fifty per cent of the Jewish children represented in the group failed on Dearborn Formboard as contrasted to 26 per cent of failures for the entire group. The Jewish children were a representative group ranging in school work from failures to the best children in the class. In one school where the children were grouped according to ability, five of the Jewish children were in Group I or the best ability group.
That the Dearborn Formboard tested different abilities than did the Binet Tests was evidenced by the lack of correlation between the tests. The I.Q.’s of the children failing on the Dearborn Formboard ranged from 65.7 to 132. Ten of the twenty-six failures had I.Q.’s above 100.
It was not possible to estimate from a child’s performance on the Dearborn Formboard his ability to do school work. Sixteen of the twenty-six children who failed on this test were making passing grades in school while some children who were successful on the Dearborn Formboard were failing in school. Five of the failures on the Dearborn Test had a grade of 8 on their monthly report cards and it was interesting to note that four of these children were Jewish; three of whom had I.Q.’s above 100. The child’s performance on the Dearborn Formboard revealed personality traits as well as specific abilities and disabilities. On this test a child displayed his intelligence, his originality or his lack of this ability, depending on whether he was able to grasp the problem, make the necessary deductions, and solve it quickly or whether he had to resort to a trial and error method. His analytic discriminability was shown by his ability to distinguish between the inserts and to place them in the correct recesses. He also displayed his trainability and an ability to grasp the principle of the test and apply it to a slightly changed situation on the second trial of the test. The child’s concentration of attention was evinced as he worked on this test. Some personality traits were displayed while the child did this test. Some children were very persistent, if their attempted solution failed they thought out another plan, showing at no time any slackening of effort but displaying a determination to succeed. Others displayed a pseudo-persistence, i.e., they continued to work on the test though they ceased making intelligent efforts to solve it and simply continued with a half-hearted, trial and error method. Others, when they saw that the problem was apparently too difficult, simply put down all the blocks and said “I can’t do it,” and could only with urging be prevailed upon to continue their efforts.
Memory Span
With a number of children who were referred to the Division of Special Education for mental examination, a limited memory span was found to be one of the factors contributing to their retardation. A child who, in a single coherence, can grasp only a very small number of discrete elements, is handicapped. He cannot learn at the same rate as a child who is able to grasp a greater number of elements at a time, and, therefore, in regular grade, he falls behind because the teacher is presenting too many new elements in any one lesson for him since she is adapting her teaching to the attention spans of the majority of the members of the class.
In this group of 6B children, the modal and the median auditovocal-digit memory span was six. The Humsptone series of digits was used with the group. There were two children with auditory memory spans of four and two with spans of nine.
It has been frequently pointed out that while a short memory span is so decided a handicap as to prove a diagnostic measure, a long memory span is not significant. The experience gained in testing hundreds of Philadelphia school children would lead any member of our staff to suspect that a child with an auditory memory span of four would not do successful sixth grade work. The school history showed that such was the case with the two girls whose auditory memory spans were four.
Katie, one of these girls, had repeated the 2A and the 2B grade, had spent three terms in the 3A grade and then had made passing averages till she reached the 5B grade. She was given a “red ink promotion” to 6A. (When a child has really failed in the work of a grade but is promoted on trial because of age or because of some necessary adaptation to the school organization, this promotion is registered in red ink.) In the 6A grade she had a term average of 5, but, because of an overcrowded 6A grade, she was placed in a 6B class where her general averages for both September and October were 5. Katie was not recommended for an Orthogenic Backward Class as a result of the examination because she was going to be sixteen years old before the next term and she did not intend to return to school. She failed on the Dearborn Formboard. She had an I.Q. of 65.7. She displayed very poor language ability. To be sure she was handicapped by the fact that Italian was spoken in her home. However, the fact that her younger sister, who was in the same class, showed greater proficiency in the language field, indicated that Katie’s lack of acquirement of language was at least partially due to a lack of innate ability. Katie passed the Binet vocabulary test at the eight year level. In reading she had 3A proficiency, which also represents the eight year level. In spelling she had 3B proficiency. Her spelling was so peculiar as to make one wonder what determined the choice of the particular letters she used to represent a word. On the Morgan Mental Test, Katie achieved a score which was the average for age 9.2. She was a very well conformed child, who always had a rating of E or G for conduct and effort. Her great conformity explains the fact that she was not recommended for an O.B. class long before this time because her teachers agreed that she was very dull.
Constance, who also had an auditory memory span of four, was a big adolescent girl of Scotch descent. She had spent three instead of the customary two terms in every grade since she entered school. She was doing unsatisfactory work in her present grade. She, too, did not intend to return to school the next term. Constance did the Dearborn Formboard in 186 seconds on the first trial and 53 seconds on the second trial. She had an I.Q. of 72.9 and a reverse memory span of three.
There were two children with memory spans of nine, who were in different schools. Both of these pupils were rated “child” on the physiological development scale. They both did superior school work, having had ratings of 8 or 9 throughout their school career. The boy did the Dearborn Formboard without a single error in analytic discrimination and only one false move, made with the small triangle, but he immediately saw that it was necessary to turn over the piece. He required 75 seconds on the first trial, and 92 seconds on the second trial. His I.Q. was 137.9. He had a reverse memory span of seven.
Dorothy, who also had an auditory memory span of nine, had a visual span of ten and a reverse span of six. She had an I.Q. of 132.0. She required 311 seconds for the first trial on the Dearborn Formboard and 179 seconds for the second trial. Dr Grave, in her study of the proficiency of six year old children, and Dr Learning, in her study of the performance of children at the fifteen year level, pointed out that a long memory span has no value as a diagnostic measure. The results obtained with this one hundred 6B children indicated that the probability of success in school work was not influenced by the increasing length of memory span above the mode. Whether the memory span was equal to the mode or below was the significant factor in determining the influence of the memory span on the ability to do school work. In determining the relation between memory span and school success, the rating given on the last monthly report of the child was used as the measure of success. With the group having an auditory memory span of nine, there were no failures; in the group having an auditory memory span of eight there were 20 per cent of failures; in the group having an auditory memory span of seven, 25 per cent failed; in the group having an auditory memory span of six, which was the modal group, there were 16% per cent failures; but in the group having an auditory memory span of five, which was below the mode, there were 42% per cent of failures and in the small group with an auditory memory span of four, there were 100 per cent of failures. Apparently a memory span below the median mode for a particular age-grade level decreases the probability of school success, while a memory span which is equivalent to or better than the mode increases the probability of success. Any increase of length in the memory span above the mode is not significant. The mode and the median of the visual memory spans were both eight, two higher than the mode and the median of the auditory memory spans.
According to Terman, a reverse memory span of five is the average at the twelve year level. With this group, which represented approximately the twelve year level, the mode and the median for the reverse memory span was five.
A number of the children who were referred to the psychological clinic of the Division of Special Education because of failures in high school and junior high school have been found to have had reverse memory spans below the average even though they possessed an average forward span at their age level according to the Stanford Binet standards. Then, too, many of the children, who, after an examination, were recommended for placement in orthogenic backward classes, had decidedly inferior reverse memory spans. These facts led to the assumption that the reverse memory span was a significant diagnostic measure.
In this group of 100 children, nine had a reverse memory span of three. Four of these children, i.e., less than 50 per cent, were failing in school work at the time of the examination. None of the children, however, had a rating of higher than 7, so that not any of them fell in the group who were doing good school work; six of these nine children had a history of repetition in the grades, but three of them had never repeated a grade and were doing satisfactory work in the present grade. The I.Q.’s of the group having a reverse memory span of three ranged from 65.7 to 102.8. Thirty-seven per cent of the twenty-six children having reverse memory spans of four, had failed on their last monthly report. In this group also there were no ratings of 8. Twenty-four per cent of the fifty-four children who had a reverse memory span of five failed on their last monthly report. One of the nine children, or 11.1 per cent of the children with a reverse memory span of six, failed. In the small group with reverse memory span of seven, the children had 8 and 9 on their reports.
It appeared, therefore, from these results, that the probability of doing successful school work decreased with a decrease in the reverse memory span, but that a poor performance in this field was not so great a handicap that other compensating abilities would not enable a child to achieve success in school.
The reverse memory span differed from the forward memory span in that the probability of doing successful school work continued to increase with the increase of the reverse span while with the forward memory span the only significant difference was noted in the success of those having a span equal to or superior to the median mode as contrasted to the success of those who fell below the median mode.
Binet Tests
The Terman Revision of the Binet-Simon Scale was given each child. As has been said, the initiating purpose of the investigation was to determine the correlation between this scale and the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability. The Binet Tests have been frequently criticized, but whatever adverse criticism may be made, the fact remains that the performance of this scale bears a close relation to the child’s ability to do school work. The criticism is often made that these tests stress language ability unduly, but language ability is a very necessary factor to school progress. Instruction is given through the medium of language, school proficiency is tested through the medium of language, and, in fact, all abstract thinking employs the same medium. The child’s ability to handle language becomes increasingly more important as a factor in his ability to do successful school work as he advances in school. Furthermore, many of the child’s personality traits, characteristics which may have considerable influence on his ability to progress in school are frequently revealed in these tests as well as on performance tests. It is not uncommon to find a child interested in the performance tests which make use of something novel in the way of material, to find him alert, interested, and a willing worker on these tests?only to find out that when the Binet Tests are presented he is uninterested, makes little effort, preferring to say “I don’t know’’ to trying to answer a test which is somewhat difficult, is slow in response, or has difficulty in expressing his replies clearly, any one of which traits may explain to some extent his inability to progress normally in school. While certainly the Binet Test could never be recommended as a test to be used exclusively it does have a relatively important part in a battery of tests, especially when the object of the examination is to estimate the child’s ability to do school work. Then, too, it is so widely used that the results serve as a means of comparison with other investigations. In this group it was found that on the whole the children with high I.Q.’s were doing the best work in school. There were some exceptions to this general rule which will be treated individually. The I.Q.’s ranged from 65.6 to 137.9 with 98.9 as the median. The children composing this group possessed varying degrees of intelligence and of intellectual ability, but all were normal children in that they had not been taken out of the group.
A comparison of the I.Q.’s with the chronological ages showed that the higher I.Q.’s clustered about the lower end of the chronoEXAMINATION REPORT OF 6B CHILDREN 143 logical age scale, as the following table indicates. The highest I.Q. was made by a girl in the second decile of chronological age distribution.
Table 2. Decile Range of C. A. Range of I.Q. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 yr. 6 mo. to 11 yr. 4 mo. 11 yr. 4 mo. to 11 yr. 6 mo. 11 yr. 6 mo. to 11 yr. 8 mo. 11 yr. 9 mo. to 12 yr. 12 yr. to 12 yr. 4 mo. 12 yr. 5 mo. to 12 yr. 9 mo. 12 yr. 9 mo. to 13 yr. 1 mo. 13 yr. 2 mo. to 13 yr. 9 mo. 13 yr. 10 mo. to 14 yr. 4 mo. 14 yr. 5 mo. to 16 yr. 3 mo. 110.9 to 123.6 102.9 to 137.9 4 I. Q.’s below 110 88.9 to 132 1 I. Q. below 100 90.7 to 120.4 3 I. Q’s below 100 83.7 to 118.4 5 I. Q.’s below 100 84.7 to 115.7 5 I. Q.’s below 100 68.7 to 102.5 9 I. Q.’s below 100 81.1 to 123.4 8 I. Q.’s below 100 71.4 to 91.2 10 I. Q.’s below 100 65.2 to 109.1 9 I. Q.’s below 100
There was one child in the eighth and one child in the tenth deciles who stood out as superior to their group in so far as the I.Q. was concerned.
The “mental ages” achieved on the Binet Scale covered a greater range than did the chronological ages of the group but there was little difference in the medians. The median chronological age was 12 years 4 months while the median “mental age” was 12 years 3 months. The “mental ages” ranged from 9 years to 17 years 4 months as contrasted to the range in chronological age from 10 years 6 months to 16 years 3 months. It was evident therefore that the group was less homogeneous from the standpoint of intellectual ability than from the standpoint of chronological age. Certainly these findings corroborated the impressions gained while working with the children.
Dr Witmer in his seminar stresses the fact that a comparison of the performance of one individual on a specific test to a mere mathematical average of a number of performances on this test is of little value. Accordingly, on the basis of a number of examinations of children at particular and significant age levels, the Witmer Diagnostic Standards have been developed whereby it is possible to tell not only whether a child’s performance falls in the 50 per cent group above the average or the 50 per cent group below the average, but to make a finer comparison so that his performance may be equaled to that of a group of 10 per cent superior to or inferior to the remaining 90 per cent or superior to some and inferior to others of the remaining 90 per cent. It is possible by comparison with these tables of norms to tell whether a child’s performance is comparable to the 60 per cent median modal group which comprises what is commonly meant by “average individuals. ‘’ In comparing the I.Q.’s of this group of children with the Witmer Diagnostic Standards for the six year and the fifteen year levels, it was noted there was a smaller range of I.Q.’s in this group of 6B children than there were in the tables at either the six or the fifteen year levels. The results of the examinations of these 6B children showed I.Q.’s neither as low as the minimum nor as high as the maximum on the tables. This lesser range was to be expected since, as it has been said, an ‘’ average group’’ was selected for the purpose of this investigation. There was, however, little difference in the range of the I.Q.’s for the median modal group and in the median I.Q. For the 6B children the median modal group ranged from an I.Q. of 84.0 to an I.Q. of 115.5 as compared to the Witmer Diagnostic Standard for boys at the fifteen year level where the median modal range in I.Q. is from 85 to 117.5 for girls of the fifteen year level where the median modal range is from 81 to 110 for boys of the fifteen year level, and to the tables for the six year level for boys where the range is 90.4 to 117.5 and for girls at the six year level where the median modal range is 90.3 to 117.7. There is correspondingly little difference in the medians of the group of 6B and the groups used in preparing the statistical tables, as a glance at the results will show.
According to Terman’s standards, there were five children of the entire group who were ‘’ definitely feeble-minded,’’ and seven who were in the group of “border-line deficiency.” If a diagnosis were made on the basis of the possibility of intellectual achievement such as Barr’s classification, some of the children in this group would be considered high grade imbeciles. However, in the Division of Special Education, a social point of view is the basis of diagnosis and from this viewpoint none of the children were feeble-minded. They were children who were succeeding in holding a normal place in the school society and who could ultimately earn a living for themselves. They all had good enough social orientation to be able to care for themselves.
Every child was given the starred tests at the twelve year level on the Binet Scale. More than 50 per cent of the children passed every one of these tests. The dissected sentences test proved to be the most difficult of this group of tests as there were fifty-four successes and forty-six failures. The interpretation of fables was the easiest test of the group, showing eighty-three successes and seventeen failures. This was due to the fact that fables are taught as part of the English course of study in Philadelphia schools. On the vocabulary test there were sixty-six successes and thirty-four failures; on the picture interpretation test, seventy-four successes and twenty-six failures; on the similarities test there were seventysix successes and twenty-six failures. The lowest I.Q. was that of a negro boy who was sixteen years, three months old. The mental age he achieved, however, fell in the second decile so that he did pass more tests than eleven other children in his grade. Robert was a tall adolescent boy. He was pleasant, friendly, clean, co-operative and well conformed. He showed no physical stigmata other than that his teeth were widely spaced and the lower teeth had slightly serrated edges. He had come to Philadelphia from the South and after eight terms in Philadelphia schools returned to Virginia for a time and then came back to Philadelphia again. His registration card gave a history of two or three terms in every grade. During the present term, his first in a 6B grade, he had succeeded in making a 7 on his report each month. The boy was ambitious, in fact ambitious beyond his power of achievement as he wished to go to junior high school. He had decided that his future occupation would be that of a photographer or an electrician. He was industrious, working (illegally) after school from 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. at a drug store and studying between his tasks. This boy had four sisters and five brothers living at home. The father and this boy were the only ones in the family working. In most cases the mothers of the negro children in our schools work also, but this mother evidently had too large a family of young children to do so as Robert was the oldest child.
Robert did the Dearborn Formboard, on the first trial in seventy-two seconds, confusing only momentarily the diamond and hexagon and making no other false move. On the second trial he required 136 seconds but reduced the time required to fifty-six seconds on the third trial, a performance which indicated trainability. His memory spans were auditory five, visual five, reverse three. On the Binet Scale, Robert had a basal age of eight years. At the nine year level he failed to give four digits in reverse order; at the ten year level he named only twenty-five words in one minute, fifty-four in three minutes, thus failing on this test. At the twelve year level he failed on the vocabulary test, the mixed sentences and the reverse memory span. He did not succeed in passing any test at the fourteen and sixteen year levels. There was nothing about Robert to suggest that he was feeble-minded. He was already demonstrating his ability to earn money. His school conformity indicated his ability to adapt himself to his environment. He showed ability to grasp practical situations and some ability to understand general situations. He was industrious and had a feeling of responsibility and a sense of family obligations. The next lowest I.Q. was that of Katie, the case discussed in connection with the memory span. She was the daughter of an Italian cement finisher. She was a friendly, polite, clean and very well conformed child who was attractive and likeable. She will be able to support a normal existence in her own social environment. Two of the six negro children were in the group of five whose I.Q.’s fell below seventy. A third negro child came just above this group and her I.Q. represented the sixth percentile, inferior to 94 per cent; the fourth negro child represented the thirteenth percentile inferior to 87 per cent; the fifth negro child represented the fifteenth percentile inferior to 85 per cent of the group, while the sixth negro child represented the seventy-third percentile inferior to 27 per cent of the group. All but one of the six negro children fell in the poorest 20 per cent group in so far as the I.Q. was concerned. Only one of the negro children, therefore, fell within the median modal group.
In one school there was a double class, i.e., since there were too many 6B children for one grade, a 6A and a 6B had been combined to form another class. To form this double class the “best” of the 6A and 6B children were picked by their teachers. There were eleven 6B children in this group, which included no adolescents. The children composing the group were, on the whole, rather pale, little, thin, eager, hyper-active, somewhat frail looking children. The mere physical appearance of this 6B offered a decided contrast to the other 6B grade in the school. Naturally, when the teacher made her selection of the children she was consciously or unconsciously influenced by their conformity. The best class was a group of children, eager, alert, displaying initiative and interest. At the first glance at the poorer class, one was impressed by the fact that it was adolescent. Closer inspection showed that there were many pre-pubescent children in the class, that some of them had as good or better ability than some of the children in the higher group, but the presence of the adolescents was the most obvious distinction between the two classes.
There was a most marked difference in the attitudes of the children and in their personalities. The children who did the best work on the tests and in the classroom were pre-pubescent children. They were smiling, alert, animated children eager to pit their wits against the problems set by the tests in which they showed great interest. Many were vivacious and loquacious. Practically all used language well. They were noticeably quick in response. Many of this group were inquisitive and displayed initiative. Some asked what was the usual time required for the Dearborn Formboard, whether their second performance was better than the first, etc. The Jewish children inevitably asked seriously, “Did I pass?” or “What mark did I make?” The selected superior group i? one school waylaid the examiner whenever possible to ask when s I ? was going to give them their marks so that they would know where they stood in relation to the other children of the class. The duller children just as eagerly peeped under the curtain of the examination room as the line passed to go to recess, were just as insistent on having their turn in order and seemed just as eager to come in for the tests, but once they slarted on the tests a most noticeable difference was evident. The,?,- children were less vivacious, displayed less of that restless, nervous energy so characteristic of the better group. Their response was characterized by a slow rate and a lack of persistence in the face of difficulties. They were not sure of themselves. don know” or “I can’t do that” were characteristic responses. Several said, after directions had been given, “Will you say that again, please, I didn’t get what you said.” One child asked in awed tones before starting, “Is it hard?” On the whole this group displayed inferior concentration ?f attention to the other group. There were several boys who had once been in orthogenic backward classes. They were among the worst offenders as far as saying “I don’t know” before they had made any real effort, or “I can’t finish that” when a task was difficult. This lack of self-confidence may have been caused by the many failures they had encountered in their school careers, or, on the other hand, it may have been that their lack of persistence and their lack of effort was one of the contributing factors to their failures.
In the school where there was the double grade, one 6B group contained children who had been picked by their teacher as displaying superior ability. In this superior group, the I.Q.’s ranged from 89.6 to 132.0 In the 6B group of lesser ability in the same school, the I.Q.’s ranged from 65.6 to 123.4. In the better group only one of the eleven children had an I.Q. below 100, while, in the poorer group, only thirteen of the thirty-seven children had an I.Q. above 100.
Harry, the boy in the high group with an I.Q. of 89.6 was twelve years, ten months old. He was a victim of infantile paralysis and had formerly been in an orthopedic class. He had lost and still does lose time at school because of the necessity of going to a hospital for treament. He had shown some artistic ability and therefore attended art school. Harry did the Dearborn Pormboard in eighty-eight seconds on the first trial without any error in analytic discrimination. On the second trial he confused the diamond and hexagon but did the test in fifty-three seconds, a performance which showed learning ability for concrete material. His memory spans were auditory six, visual eight, and reverse five, all of which were equivalent to the mean for the group. On the Binet Scale he had a basal age of ten years. At the twelve year level, he failed on the vocabulary, the mixed sentences and the similarities; at the fourteen year level he passed only the arithmetical reasoning test; at the sixteen year level he failed on all the tests. Harry was classed as a “pubescent” boy. The following personality traits were checked: alert, animated, clean, conformed, co-operative, courteous, frank, friendly, good-natured, sociable. In spite of his failures on tests involving primarily language ability, his v( , -ises were rather well expressed. After he had finished the ? he accompanied the next child to the room and laughingly .marked, “Here’s your next victim,” which was typical of tee altitude of those who had the tests toward those who had n< In the 6B grade Harry had received only 7 on his report though he had had a term average of 8 for the 6A and 5B grades. He attributed his present poorer marks to the fact that his “tongue was wagging too much.” The boy was interested in school work and prepared his work. Because of his physical defects many fields of normal boyish activity were cut off from him.
The boy who had the highest I.Q. in the lower group of this school did not appear nearly as alert as Harry. Donald showed little animation, was not interested in school and expected to leave and go to work as soon as he had finished the 6B grade. Donald’s school history showed erratic work. He skipped the 2B grade, but spent two terms in the 4A and was in the 6B grade for the third term. He had a term average of 8 in the fifth grade, 7 in 6A and 6 for the first and second terms in the 6B grade. He was making an average of 7 the third term in the grade.
The boy’s parents had separated and Donald lived with his mother, who earned a living as a janitor’s assistant, a sister and a brother. The boy himself seemed to have no ambition except to go to work as soon as possible. He was slow in comprehending the problem presented by the Dearborn Formboard. He did not succeed in placing a single long piece in four minutes then seemed to understand the problem and solved the test in 338 seconds. On the second trial he required only forty-eight seconds, which showed good trainability. His memory spans were: auditory eight, visual nine, reverse seven, all of which were two above the median. His good memory spans seemed to be due not to ability to organize but to excellent visual imagery, if his untrained power of introspection could be depended upon. He said he saw the numbers and simply read them off forward or backward. On the Binet Scale, Donald had an I.Q. of 123.4. He failed on the language tests, vocabulary and dissected sentences, but these failures were to some extent due to an environmental handicap. At the fourteen year level he passed the arithmetical reasoning test; at the sixteen year level the interpretation of fables, the problem of the enclosed boxes and the reverse memory span; at the eighteen year level he passed the forward and reverse memory span tests. Thus his high I-Q. was the result largely of his good memory spans. The impression gained was that Donald could have done better work had he been willing to make a greater effort. The greatest difference between these two boys, Harry and Donald, was a difference 111 motivation.
An interesting case was the boy who, in the last decile of chronological age distribution had an I.Q. of 109.1. He had the highest “mental age” of the group, seventeen years, four months. He had a serious case of strabismus. His eyes had turned in and rolled up. As the result of several operations, his eyes no longer turned up but his left eye still turned very markedly inward. He had continued to suffer severe headaches. He also frequently had a sore throat so that his attendance at school had always been irregular. Judging from his description of his difficulties, he apparently formerly had double vision. He had stopped wearing glasses, which had not brought about correction but which he stated resulted in increased frequency of headaches. He had been attended by some of the city’s foremost eye specialists. When he wrote, he threw his head back in a peculiar position and then attempted, with apparent difficulty, to look over his lower eyelids. All writing was accompanied by movements of the chin. Harry was an adolescent boy who, from the standpoint of his interests, was too mature for a sixth grade. From the point of view of his interests and his ability, he belonged in a high school group. He had intellectual interests which he furthered by study on his own initiative. On the vocabulary test, Harry gave qualitatively good definitions and his diversified interests were first apparent on this test. He showed some knowledge of simple chemistry and when questioned as to the source of his information he replied, “I was interested in chemistry so I read on it, in the library.” A frequent response was, “I learned that from a book.” His interests covered a wide range. He went to Leary’s where he bought a simple German text with a German-English vocabulary, with the aid of which he translated the text. He then sought out a German family in the neighborhood and began to converse with the children. He had a Latin grammar in his school desk and whenever he finished any class work early, he studied from this. He bought a “self instructor” and thus began his study of the violin which he later continued with a teacher. He took a correspondence course in drawing. Thus he provided himself with extracurricular activities. He had a critical attitude toward his work and analyzed his own performance. He was getting only a 7 on his school report because, as he said, he was never in school for the recitation of a lesson which he had heard presented. His teacher attributed the fact that Harry did not make better marks to his very frequent absence. Harry has repeated the 3A, 3B, 4B, 5B, and 6A grades. For a time he was in an Orthogenic Backward and then in a Restoration Class. He was placed in these classes because of his inability to read and to spell. His failures in these fields were due largely to his poor vision. The repetitions of grades were due to poor reading and spelling and to irregular attendance. During the examination Harry read aloud very poorly. He was, however, able to reproduce accurately the thought of a paragraph read. In spelling he had 5A proficiency. Harry did the Dearborn Formboard in forty-three seconds on the first trial and sixty-two seconds on the second trial. His memory spans were: auditory eight, visual eight, and reverse six. On the Binet Tests he had a basal age of fourteen years. At the sixteen year level he failed on the vocabulary test; at the eighteen year level he failed on the vocabulary test and the reverse memory span.
Reading
As a reading test Haggerty Reading Examination?Sigma I, page 7, was used. While this test is designed to be used as a group test for grades 1 to 3, page 7 makes a satisfactory test at higher grade levels. The child was asked to read the paragraph, the text was removed and the child was asked to tell what he had read. Sixty-seven 6B children read the paragraph satisfactorily, nineteen were rated only fair, while fourteen failed entirely. This paragraph has been found a satisfactory reading test for fifth grade children and was fairly satisfactory for 6B children. The spelling test consisted of sentences composed of words taken from the course of study for particular grades. The child who read well did not always spell well, and sometimes a good speller was not a good reader. Seventy-seven children were doing satisfactory work in spelling.
The correlation between the Stanford Binet-Simon Test and the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability was determined by the Otis Correlation Chart. The coefficient of correlation was ? .70, and the probable error of the coefficient was ? .035. The correlation between the Morgan Mental Test and the Stanford Binet Simon Test was determined by the Pierson Product Moment Method. The result was a positive correlation of .677. ?ftugg, in “Statistical Methods Applied to Education,” says, in discussing the definition of “high” or “low” correlation, “With the present limitation on educational testing few correlations in testing will run above .70 and it is safe to regard this as a very high coefficient.” Therefore, there is a high positive correlation between the Morgan Mental Test and the Stanford Binet-Simon.
Conclusions
1. There is a high correlation between the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability and the Stanford Revision of the BinetSimon Test. The Stanford Binet-Simon Test has in other investigations been shown to correlate closely with the ability to do successful school work. Therefore, the Philadelphia Group Test of Mental Ability is a relatively satisfactory measure for use in grouping children according to ability. It is at least as satisfactory as the Binet Test, and, since it is a group test, requires considerably less time than the administration of individual examinations.
2. The Morgan Mental Test has a high correlation with the Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests. Because, as a group test, it requires a comparatively short time to give it, it could be satisfactorily used for whole classes, and thus to single out children who needed an individual examination. 3. In the 6B grade, the last grade of elementary school, the group presents great diversity in so far as chronological age, anatomical and physiological development, school proficiency and mental ability concerned. 4. The older children in the grade on the whole do inferior school work and give an inferior performance on the tests. 5. Motivation is a factor of prime importance in school success. 6. A forward memory span which is equal to or superior to the median-mode increases equally the probability of school success, while there is less chance for school success with a forward span inferior to the median mode.
7. A reverse memory span which is inferior to the median mode to the extent of being poor (reverse span of three for 6B children) has a limiting effect on school success, i.e., children with a limited reverse span do no better than fair school work. “While some of the least successful pupils are found in this group, a poor reverse memory span does not necessarily mean failure.
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.