A Comparison of Orthogenic Backward Children and Regular Grade Children at the Six-Year Performance Level
- Author:
Mabel R. F arson
Supervisor of Mental Examinations, Division of Special Education, Philadelphia Public Schools
The Problem
A question which is frequently put to members of the Division of Special Education of The Board of Public Education, School District of Philadelphia, by visiting psychologists and educators is an inquiry as to how placement of children in Orthogenic Backward Classes, i.e., classes for the education of children who can not function adequately in the regular classes, is determined. All too frequently the question takes the form, “What is the range of Intelligence Quotient in your Orthogenic Backward Classes?” or “With how low an Intelligence Quotient do you permit children to enter the Orthogenic Backward Classes and what is the upper limit ?’’
It has never been the belief of this Division that placement of children in these special classes, to which for convenience we shall subsequently refer as 0. B. classes, should be made upon so arbitrary and so narrowly definitive a basis as some particular psychometric measure. The selection of children for special educational treatment is made on the basis of a pre-analytic judgment on the part of their teachers and the principal of the school which they attend, plus an analytical diagnosis made by one of the examiners of the staff of the psychological clinic of the Public School System. Teachers, subject to the approval of their principals, select children who in the competitive event which school presents, display their relative inferiority by failure to gain adequate proficiency. The children are then given psychological tests and their performances are analyzed from both qualitative and quantitative points of view to determine their abilities and their defects. The examiners critically interpret and evaluate the performances of the children and make judgments as to whether or not their competency is so limited as to make special educational treatment advisable. Since it has never been the policy of this Division to use “Intelligence Quotients with a sooth-sayer’s finality,”1 no definite Intelligence Quotient limitations for children in 0. B. classes have ever been set. Placement has always been made on the basis of the pedagogical needs of the individual child. A survey of all 0. B. classes in the city would show the range of Intelligence Quotients to be great, including some cases of relatively high Intelligence Quotients in which some specific mental defect or defects in personality, motivation or adjustment was responsible for failure to gain adequate proficiency in school.
A desire to define in some way this group, which has been judged as having inferior competency to the extent of rendering its members incapable of profiting by the instruction offered in the regular elementary school grades, led to the present investigation. There were, according to the enrollment figures of January, 1931, in the Philadelphia Public Schools 8,068 children in 0. B. classes, 169,222 children in the regular grades of the elementary schools, and the total enrollment in the school system was 234,860. The children in the 0. B. classes then comprise 3.4 per cent of the total public school population and 4.2 per cent of elementary school children. Witmer’s method of estimating competency in terms of relative superiority or inferiority suggested the plan of defining the 0. B. group which has been eliminated from the regular grades by comparing it with the “normal” or regular grade group. The only previous comparative study of children in the regular grades and in the 0. B. classes of the Philadelphia Schools was embodied in McCaulley’s 2 study in which she compared the memory spans of regular grade children with those of children in the 0. B. classes.
The standards of performance which were available for purposes of comparison had to be taken into consideration. The Witmer Diagnostic Standards, compiled as the result of investigations of competency at different significant age levels, afforded the most satisfactory means of comparison. It was necessary, however, to limit this investigation to a comparison at one particular level, deferring comparisons at other levels for some future date. 1 L. Witmer, Psychological diagnosis and the psychonomic orientation of analytic diagnosis, Psychol. Clin., 1925, 16, 1-18. 2 S. McCaulley, A study of the relative values of the audito-vocal forward memory span and the reverse span as diagnostic tests, Psychol. Clin., 1928, 16, 277-291.
The six year level of competency presented a logical choice as a basis for the first comparison of the children comprising the 0. B. group and the regular grade group of children. Witmer has stressed the significance of this level which marks the child’s entrance into a new social and intellectual sphere, that of formal education, and has designated the six year level as “the competency level of literacy”3 and has claimed it is only when a child has reached this level that he is “fully born,” that “all the cards are on the table,” i.e., that his congenital competency has sufficiently developed to be displayed adequately. There was available at this level for purposes of comparison the results of Easby-Grave’s4 investigation which constituted the six year level of the Witmer Diagnostic Standards.
It was decided then to make this first attempt to define the 0. B. group by comparing with the six year Diagnostic Standards the performances of a group of children in 0. B. classes, selected on the same basis as that used by Easby-Grave in establishing the Diagnostic Standard.
Method of Procedure For this particular investigation, there were selected 500 children who were in the 1A and IB grades when they were referred for psychological examinations, and who as the result of such examinations were recommended for placement in 0. B. classes. In choosing the children whose records were to be used for this study, all cases were eliminated where a recommendation for placement in an 0. B. class with a view to restoration to grade was made or where in the recommendation or case report, the psychologist suggested the probability of eventual return to grade. Thus some of the more superior children at this level who are actually found in 0. B. classes were not included in this study, since there is the possibility that they constitute restoration rather than 0. B. cases. The restoration classes under the direction of the Division of Special Education are few in number because it is difficult to find in any locality enough children who need and can profit by this type of training. As the name implies, a restoration class is a class in which educationally retarded children are given specific teaching with the aim of speeding up their school accomplishments, thus enabling them to return to the normal grade for their age. Sometimes children who are real restoration cases are placed in 0. B. classes when no restoration class is available, are given particular attention and are returned to grade. All the first grade children who were given a psychological examination by the writer and recommended for placement in 0. B. classes during the school years 1928-1929, 1929-1930 and in September and October, 1930, were selected for this investigation. Additional cases to bring the number up to 500 were selected by going through the files of the psychological records of the Division of Special Education. One file was chosen from the first cabinet, another from the second cabinet, etc., and in any particular file every case which filled the requirements for this investigation and which had been examined in the years from September, 1927 to June, 1930 was used. A few earlier cases which had been examined by the writer and which were found in these files were also included.
Because of the method of assembling cases, children were culled from many different schools, and varied environmental conditions. When it was estimated that about 500 cases had been chosen, a count showed that this indiscriminate choice had resulted in a group composed of 229 IB children and 246 1A children. Since there was so nearly equal a division of the two sections of the first grade, the remaining number of cases were so selected as to make a final group of 250 1A children and 250 IB children. This group of 500 children included 339 boys and 161 girls. The preponderance of boys in this representative group of O. B. children is not surprising. The greater number of boys recommended for placement in O. B. classes does not warrant the assumption that boys are duller in school than girls. Boys as a rule are more active and less conformed in school than girls and consequently more frequently attract the attention of their teachers. The dull, but cooperative and well conformed, child of pleasing personality is not so likely to be referred for an examination with a view to placement in an O. B. class as is the more obstreperous child. Many teachers show a decided reluctance to recommend for special educational treatment the dull but infantile and winning, or the shy, timid and rather attractive little girl because of their belief that the O. B. classes of their particular community are not socially desirable for such little girls. It is not unusual to hear such remarks as, “She is too nice a child to be placed in an 0. B. class.” A classification of the group on a racial basis shows that 95, or 28 per cent, of the boys; and 53, or 32.9 per cent of the girls are negroes. There is a somewhat larger percentage of negroes in the 0. B. classes than in the total school population since 20.5 per cent of the total school population for Philadelphia are negro children.5 An inspection of the negro group shows that 23 of these children are overage children who have come from the rural South where they have had little or no school opportunities. Their chronological ages range from 7 years, 11 months to 13 years, 10 months. Fourteen of these cases were ten or more years old when examined. Obviously these cases contribute to the greater chronological age of the 0. B. group as compared with the regular grade group of the Easby-Grave study.
An analysis according to the nationality of the parents shows that 90 boys and 48 girls, a total of 138 children or 27.6 per cent of the group, are of foreign parentage. Particular nationalities are distributed as follows: Italy 77 Russia (Jewish) 27 Poland 11 Lithuania & Latvia 7 Germany 7 Ireland 3 Greece 2
Armenia, Ukrania, Hungary, Austria 1 each The percentage of children of foreign parentage is not so great in the O. B. group as in the regular grade children whom EasbyGrave used for her study. She took children from five Philadelphia schools, two of which were located in a neighborhood where the population is almost entirely Italian with the children being the first generation born in America. The children of the present investigation represent a random choice of city-wide distribution. The occupations of the parents of the children of the group studied for this investigation give some idea of their social status. In only 244 cases was it possible to get from the child some idea of the father’s occupation. Perhaps in some cases the occupations ranked a little high because there was no way of knowing, when a child said his father was a carpenter or a plumber, for example whether he was a skilled mechanic or merely a helper. The occus Figures of June, 1931. pations of the parents were classified as well as could be done from the descriptive terms used by the children according to Taussig’s 5 point scale. Percentage Class I?Laborers, unskilled and untrained manual workers … 83 34 Class II?Factory and mill workers doing the simpler operations and semi-skilled workers 94 38.5 Class III?Skilled workmen 55 22.5 Class IV?Clerks, salesmen, shopkeepers, etc 12 5
All twelve cases listed in Class IV were shopkeepers except one man, the father of twin boys, both of whom were included in this study, who was a druggist. While the source of these results is subject to error, there seems to be a preponderance of children whose parents are employed at unskilled and semi-skilled work. A comparison of the occupations of the parents of the children in the 0. B. group and in the regular grade group of Easby-Grave’s investigation indicates that the 0. B. group springs from a lower economic and social order. It must be taken into consideration that some of the backward children of professional people, the higher grade shopkeepers, etc., are sent to private schools when they encounter difficulty in keeping up to grade standards.
It is apparent that a large percentage of this typical group of 0. B. children suffer an environmental handicap. Not only do their homes fail to provide cultural advantages but they also in many cases do not furnish the opportunities for acquirement of even the minimum intellectual development necessary to build an adequate background for the introduction of school work nor for the development of satisfactory motivation patterns.
In the matter of language development many of the children are seriously handicapped. They enter school with greatly restricted vocabularies and consequently poor comprehension of English. Concepts of both concrete and abstract words which occur in school readers must often be developed before any attempt is made to teach the recognition of the printed word. The poor comprehension of language also influences the Binet I.Q.
The psychological examinations, the records of which were used for this study, were made with a view to determining the best educational treatment for the children involved. They represent the general run of cases of the psychological clinic of the Division of Special Education and when the examinations were made it was not planned to treat the results statistically. Consequently this study differs from the investigations made in establishing the age level norms in that there was no previous definite selection of a battery of tests to which every child was subjected. The children were given those of the available tests which would enable the examiner to make a judgment of their competency and permit such an analysis of their performance as would lead to definite recommendations for educational treatment.
The Division of Special Education maintains a central clinic to which children may be brought for examination by parents, teachers or interested parties; most of the cases, however, were examined in their own schools. The Witmer Cylinder Test is not included in the test material used in schools because of the difficulty of transporting it. The examining staff much prefer to use the Cylinder Test for young children and do so whenever possible. The method of procedure was the usual one employed by the examining staff of this Division. Each child is examined individually in an especially assigned room. Data is recorded on Form S 81?Individual Clinical Record?School District of Philadelphia, the Abbreviated Filing Record Card for the Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Test and Form S 80?Arithmetic Test, Lower Grades?School District of Philadelphia. The child’s school registration card furnishes his date of birth, the country of his birth, the birth place of his parents, the date on which he entered school, a record of repetitions of grade if any and term ratings. This information is transferred to the Individual Clinical Record Sheet as is also the data obtained from the medical card. The medical card shows the height, weight, the standard weight for the child’s height and age, and specific physical or sensory defects which have been noted by the school physician. Since the children coming to the central clinic do not bring their registration and medical cards, such information as seems pertinent is obtained from the person accompanying the child.
A brief social history is obtained from the child himself in the schools or from the person accompanying him to the central clinic. An effort is made to determine the members of the household, the occupations of the parents, and whether or not any social agency has contacts with the family.
The time which the child requires to do the performance tests is recorded on this Individual Clinical Record Sheet. His mental age, his I.Q., his memory spans, audito-vocal, visual and reverse and his proficiency in the various school subjects are also noted on this record. In addition this sheet contains a list of eighty-eight personality qualities and the particular qualities checked in each case give an indication of the child’s personality, the maturity level of his general orientation and his manner of response. The “Psychological Analysis” printed on this form consists of a list of twenty-nine capabilities covering with some further analysis the general categories of vitality, movement, attention and imagination, so designed as to give with a five point scale rating, a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the child’s performance although ratings are not always given for all the abilities listed. It is the customary practice of examiners of the staff of this clinic to give tests according to standard procedure, but it must be borne in mind that the examinations, the records of which were used for this investigation, were made not with the purpose of establishing any standards of performance, but with the idea of discovering the child’s abilities and defects with a view of recommending the most advantageous educational procedure. There were then in all probability some cases among the group where some variations of standardized procedure and directions were necessary in order to elicit the best and most significant performance from the child, variations necessitated by peculiarities in personality such as shyness and timidity, stubbornness, fear, etc., or by a language handicap or marked mental deficiency accompanied by limited comprehension, and so forth.
The usual procedure of the examiner is to begin the examination with the Witmer Form Board, because of the interest which it arouses, because it is usually easy enough to be successfully accomplished, and has been found to be a good means of establishing rapport with young children. Of the 500 children whose records were used for this study, 498 had two trials on the Witmer Form Board; two boys were not given this test for some reason which the examiner failed to state on the record; and 490 children had three trials on this test, as it is the customary procedure of this Division to give three trials on all so-called performance tests. The Form Board used differs from the usual Witmer Form Board in that the tray has been dispensed with in order that the test may be fitted into a brief case. It is customary to use the standard procedure except that the blocks are placed on the table where the tray would be in the regular formboard. For the reasons previously stated, only a limited number of children had the opportunity to do the Witmer Cylinder Test, 68 children, 38 boys and 30 girls, had one trial on this test, 67 children, 38 boys and 29 girls, had two trials and 61 children, 35 boys and 26 girls, performed the test three times. The test is usually given to younger children with the directions used for the Easby-Grave investigation, which differs from the standardized directions in calling attention to the smoothness of the top when the blocks are properly placed.
The Healy A test is presented in the following manner: the blocks are removed without permitting the child to see the completed test and are arranged so that they are not seen in the correct relationship for placing. Then the child is told to ‘’put all the blocks back so that they all fit in and there are no spaces left.’’ A time limit of three minutes is allowed. If he is successful he is asked to put the blocks back in the same places again and if he fails, he is taught how to do the test. Usually three trials are given on this test. Of the 500 cases used for this investigation, 464 had one trial on the Healy A, 460 had two trials and 450 three trials. In this clinic memory span tests are given as a separate unit of the battery of tests using the Humpstone series of digits to obtain the audito-vocal memory span. The standard method of procedure is used. The visual memory span or more properly the visualvocal-kinesthetic memory span is obtained whenever the children are able to recognize digits well enough to take this test. For the reverse memory span test, the digit series of the Binet Scale are used and the procedure is that used by Easby-Grave. The digit memory span tests, audito-vocal, visual-vocal and reverse, were given to all the 500 children who constituted this sampling of O. B. children.
Every child also was given the starred series of the Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests. No substitutions of tests were made as in the Easby-Grave study. Measures of school proficiency were obtained by the use of Form S 80?Arithmetic Test, Lower Grades, School District of Philadelphia, Detroit Word Recognition Test for Primary Grades, Gray Oral Reading Check Tests and a check on counting and recognition of phonic elements and their use. Results The results are shown in the Decile Tables following the discussion. To facilitate comparison with the results for the EasbyGrave regular grade group, these latter results are given in parentheses. Chronological Age The purpose of this investigation is to indicate what 0. B. children are like by comparing their performances with those of regular grade children at some particular functioning level. When the functioning level is defined somewhat loosely as competency to do school work, the O.B. group as the very term implies, will be slower to develop this competency and consequently will reach this level at a somewhat greater chronological age than the normal child. The chronological ages of the 0. B. group, ranged from 5 years, 10 months to 14 years, 10 months with a median age of 7 years, 11 months.
A comparison of the tables of the Easby-Grave investigation and the 0. B. group shows that the 0. B. group is older. The differences in the ages of two groups at corresponding decile levels, varies from 6 months to 46 months and the average difference in age for the decile levels is 17.5 months. The median chronological age for the regular grade group is 6 years, 7 months. Only 10.2 per cent of the 0. B. group at this level are as young as the median age for the regular grade group. In the Easby-Grave investigation 58.0 per cent of the regular grade children have chronological ages between 6 and 7 years whereas only 20.4 per cent of the 0. B. group fall within this chronological age limit. It is, however, significant of the advance in educational practise that even so large a percentage of children are now recognized in the first year of their school life as needing special teaching methods. The greater chronological age of the 0. B. group is attributable to several factors. The group included 23 negro children from the rural South who entered the first grade considerably over-age for grade and who because of their inferior ability to do the work of the grade, their size, or both, were referred for examinations as candidates for 0. B. classes. There were several older children who were transferred from parochial schools and who because of their lack of school proficiency, were placed in a first grade where it soon became evident that they needed special class treatment. Then too, in some quarters there is a reluctance to recommend children for special classes until they have been “tried out” in the grades, with the result that children who are not capable of profiting by regular grade instruction are permitted to waste several terms in the grade, forming bad habits of attention and work, before they are referred for examination. There is however a rapidly growing tendency on the part of first grade teachers to refer for psychological examinations their problem children in the first term of school, to determine whether they can be handled in the grade or whether they need special educational treatment. Early selection of those who need special pedagogical procedure is an economical measure for both the child and the school system.
Witmer Form Board
The Witmer Formboard is a significant test for the younger children in our group. It is of more importance from a diagnostic point of view than is apparent from the quantitative comparison of the 0. B. group and the regular grade group at the six year level. The Witmer Formboard has been standardized at the four year level, i.e., it is at this level that 50 per cent of children complete the test successfully in five minutes and 50 per cent fail. That it is not a test of intelligence for the 0. B. child at the six year level is demonstrated by the fact that only 3.6 per cent of this group fail on the first trial of the test. Intelligence as defined by Witmer is the ability of the individual to solve new problems and the criterion for an intelligence test is that at the particular level at which it is standardized “the number of individuals who succeed do not more than equal the number who fail.” 6 It is obvious that the Formboard test does not provide enough novel elements nor make great enough demands on the originality of this group to excite a display of intelligence.
A comparison of the results of the 0. B. group and the regular grade group of the Easby-Grave investigation shows that there is a more extensive distribution in time results for the 0. B. group, that the 0. B. group is generally poorer than the regular grade group, and has a greater percentage of failures. The differences between the 0. B. and the regular grade group increase as the lower deciles are reached; there is a consistent sex difference which is greater for the 0. B. group than for the regular grade group, and this difference also increases as the lower deciles are reached As is to be expected, the inferior children show the greatest deviation from the established norms. In the 0. B. group there are 3.6 per cent failures on the first trial as contrasted to 2.6 per cent failures in the regular grade e L. Witmer, Intelligence?a definition, Psychol. Clin., 1922, 14, 65-67 group. On the second trial, there is a one per cent failure in the 0. B. group and no failures in the regular grade group. On the third trial there are 1.2 per cent failures in the 0. B. group. (The regular grade children did not have a third trial.) The following table shows the differences between the regular grade and the 0. B. group at each decile level above the zero and one per cent points, where failures are recorded for both groups.
Table 1 Witmer Form Board. First and Second Trials First Trial Second Trial 100th percentile?Regular grade group? 3 sec. better? 2 sec. poorer 90th percentile?Regular grade group? 3 sec. better? 3 sec. better 80th percentile?Regular grade group? 5 sec. better? 5 sec. better 70th percentile?Regular grade group? 5 sec. better? 6 sec. better 60th percentile?Regular grade group? 4 sec. better? 8 sec. better 60th percentile?Regular grade group? 6 sec. better? 9 sec. better 40th percentile?Regular grade group? 6 sec. better?10 sec. better 30th percentile?Regular grade group?12 sec. better?12 sec. better 20th percentile?Regular grade group?16 sec. better?19 sec. better 10th percentile?Regular grade group?35 sec. better?32 sec. better The difference does not seem to be significant except at the lower decile levels. The first thought is that possibly the greater chronological age of the 0. B. group influences the time scores on the Form Board test and an analysis of the results shows this to be true. Young7 has said “there is an indirect ratio between age and formboard ability at least to the age of maturity.” Of our cases 110 complete the Form Board in 40 seconds or less. This group represents approximately the superior 20 per cent. Of these only 20, or 18 per cent are below the median in chronological age and 90, or 82 per cent are above the median. There is thus shown a relation between age and formboard ability which not even “backwardness” or inability to progress adequately in school is great enough to offset.
Many of these older children do the Witmer Formboard so easily and quickly that their performances throw little or no light on the cause of their difficulty in school. It can be noted for these children that though their performances are efficient for the sixyear level, a comparison with the standard for the ten-year level which strikes more nearly at their chronological age level, shows that if their chronological ages are considered, they are relatively inefficient. There are some younger children also whose perform7 H. H. Young, Physical and mental factors involved in the formboard test, Psychol. Clin., 1916, 10, 149-167. ances fall in the best 20 per cent group and for such children their performances provide a display of abilities which can be utilized in teaching them.
The children who encounter difficulties in solving the Formboard Test frequently reveal in their performances some of the specific defects which handicap them in school. In such cases an analysis of the performance is of value. For example, does he attempt to place the blocks in incorrect recesses because of inferior discriminability, limited distribution of attention or is he deficient in both these abilities ? Frequently, incidental errors on the test are obviously due to poor distribution of attention. A child attends to one small portion of the board at a time and tries to fit the block which he has chanced to pick up into one or more of the recesses within his range of attention without looking further. Obviously such a specific defect is a marked handicap in school and calls for definitely adapted pedagogical procedure. “With such children instructional material must be presented in small units. Sometimes errors in this test are due to inferior discriminability. Inferior analytic discriminability is one of the defects frequently cited in the reports of the psychological examinations of this group. The errors which occur most often are the confusion of the isosceles and equilateral triangles, the diamond and the hexagon, and the cross and the star, whose similarity lies merely in the fact that in both cases there are members which radiate from a center. This lack of adequate discriminability is found to be a marked handicap in school in learning to discriminate digits and letters. In presenting new material to a child so handicapped, definite characteristics and distinguishing differences in the material presented must be pointed out to him as he does not have the ability to detect these for himself. When both inferior distribution of attention and inferior discriminability are present, as is often the case, the problem obviously becomes one which can be dealt with adequately only in a relatively small group where the rate of progress can be adjusted to the capability of the child and does not need to be dictated by the arbitrary demands of a course of study.
Sometimes the child’s errors lead one to suspect inferior visual imagery, i.e., he does not hold the image of the block which he has picked up, while he is looking for the correct recess. Some of the children reveal poor muscular coordination in the difficulty they encounter in placing the blocks in their appropriate recesses. In such eases the necessity is indicated for blackboard work as the earliest work in writing because the larger size of the writing makes less demands on the coordination, and is an effective means of preparing the way for ultimately better writing on paper. Simple construction work as part of the activity program also should be given as an aid to the development of finer muscular coordination. Inferior persistent concentration of attention is a defect which also appears in a number of the reports of the psychological examinations for the group. This defect is sometimes shown in the child’s performance on the Witmer Form Board. The children whose attention is easily distracted while they are doing this test, those who stop to look about the room, to ask questions, to pick up other material lying about, etc., show marked defects in concentration since this test is usually interesting enough to hold the attention of the child. A grave defect from the standpoint of school instruction is thus shown and the need for specific efforts to build up better habits of attention as the first step in the learning process is pointed out.
Some knowledge as to the vitality, the degree of maturity and the personality of the child is gained from an observance of his performance on this test. Some of the 0. B. group show in their performance inferior energy, relatively great fatigability and a lack of initiative. Their very method of attacking the problem often gives some indication as to these defects as does also their lack of enthusiasm with however perfect willingness to do what is asked of them, their slow rate of movement, and in some instances, the increased time on the third trial.
A comparatively large proportion of the 0. B. group at this level are infantile in their general reactions and sometimes this trait is displayed in their manner of patting the blocks after they have been placed in the recesses, in their playful manner of executing the test with no attempt at speed even after suggestion or urging, or in their babyish dependence as they appeal to the examiner or the parent for help either by look or word. The shy and timid child, the poised child and the hyper-excitable child likewise reveal something of their personalities as they do this test. Witmer Cylinder Test
The norms established for the Witmer Cylinder Test by Paschall show that, as in the Formboard, there is a positive relation between chronological age and time required to do the test. The number of children in onr group who did this test is so small that the results are probably not very significant. Easby-Grave’s results show that 47.6 per cent of the regular grade group fail on the first trial of the Witmer Cylinder Test while 51.4 per cent of the 0. B. group of this investigation despite their greater age, fail on the first trial. “With the regular grade group 12 per cent fail to complete the test within the time limit on the second trial and in the 0. B. group there are 10.4 per cent failures on this trial. In the 0. B. group 11.4 per cent fail on the third trial of the test. However, since only 14 per cent of our 0. B. group took this test, these results probably mean very little. In the 0. B. group as in all other groups taking this test, the performance of the boys is somewhat better than that of the girls. The performance of children of the 0. B. group at this level on the Witmer Cylinder Test often reveals mental defects or defects of vitality or personality which are the fundamental causes of the displayed incompetency in school. A brief description of some of the typical performances of the 0. B. group on the Cylinder Test gives some indication as to the manner in which specific defects are revealed. Some children fail to pass the test because of their lack of comprehension of the problem. Early in their performance they place some of the small cylinders in the large recesses, perfectly satisfied as long as the cylinder will slip in and then later they are nonplussed by the problem of what to do with the large cylinders which remain. Others fail because they spend much time in trying to fit blocks into the few recesses which fall within their limited range of attention without even looking at the remainder of the board. Many children display real analytic discriminability when placing the larger cylinders but resort to trial and error for the placement of the small cylinders. The infantile children can usually not be hurried in their performance. Some of the children cease their efforts before the time limit has expired, saying, “It’s too hard” or “I can’t do it,” etc. “With some, a mere suggestion that they continue is enough to cause a resumption of effort whereas others must be urged to go on. It is not at all unusual for children at this level to appeal to the examiner for help. Healy Construction Test A
The Healy Construction Test A presents too difficult a problem to be a test of intelligence for children of the six-year level. Terman in his Revision of Binet-Simon Tests places the Healy A at 164 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC the ten-year level (Alternative Test 3?to be solved three times in five minutes). The Lowe, Shimberg, Wood Norms give median and quartile rankings for each chronological age from 9 to 17 years inclusive.
Of the 464 0. B. children at the six year level who took the Healy A Test, 348 or 75 per cent of them failed on the first trial. It is of some advantage, however, to observe a child’s reactions when he is working at a task which is obviously too difficult for him. Some children make good persistent efforts at a solution. Others at first try to solve the problem but when they continue to encounter difficulty, merely go on in an aimless trial and error fashion, making little real effort but continuing to do something because they realize that some activity is expected of them. Still other children soon accept and express their defeat and even when urged to continue, ask to be permitted to stop several times before the time limit has expired. Such performances contribute to an adequate knowledge of the child which is vital from an educational point of view.
The Healy A is particularly significant as a learning test for children of this level. There are 29.1 per cent failures on the second trial as compared to 75 per cent failures on the first trial. Only 10.4 per cent failed on the third trial. There were 24 cases (17 boys and 7 girls) who failed on the second trial and not on the first trial, and there were 2 cases who did the test successfully on the first and second trial, but failed on the third trial. There is a larger element of chance involved in the successful solution on the first trial of this test than there is with either the Formboard or the Cylinder Test. The cases of success on the first trial and failure on the second trial represent, generally, instances in which the test is solved by luck on the first trial and in which the child does not give enough attention to the completed test to gain a visual image or where the visual imagery is so inferior that an adequate visual image does not result from a visual percept. There are among this group children who even with three or four repetitions of instruction do not learn to do this test and such a performance gives some indication of the teaching problem the child will present in school. The Healy Construction Test A also provides a means of determining something of the child’s visual imageability. Since visual presentation is one of the most common mediums of school instruction, some knowledge of the child’s powers of visual imagery is important because of the part this ability plays in learning to read. A COMPARISON OF CHILDREN 165 Memory Span
The results of the memory span tests for this group show a negligible sex difference which concurs with the findings of other investigators. The performance of this representative group of 0. B. children at the six-year level with respect to the audito-vocal digit memory span is inferior to that of the regular grade group at this level. A comparison with the diagnostic tables established for the six-year level by Easby-Grave shows that the regular grade group has an auditory memory span one digit higher at each decile level except the 20th and 30th percentiles where the span is the same for both groups.
Another method of comparison, as shown in the following table, perhaps makes the difference in the audito-vocal memory span more apparent. The median and modal audito-vocal memory span for the regular grade group is 5, and for the 0. B. group it is 4. Of the regular grade group 33.2 per cent have an audito-vocal memory span of less than 5, while in the 0. B. group 72.4 per cent have less than 5. The range for the first grade children of the regular grades is from 3 to 9 digits while for the 0. B. group the range is from 2 to 7 digits. Table 2 Percentage in Regular Grade and O. B. Group Obtaining a Given AuditoVocal-Digit Memory Span Digits Reg. Grade O. B. 2 0 1.4 3 3.8 18.2 4 29.4 52.8 5 41.4 23.2 6 15.8 4.0 7 7.8 .4 8 1.6 9 2
The inferiority of the 0. B. group in auditory memory span is even greater than is apparent from an inspection of the comparative tables. All investigations with this test have shown that there is a direct relation between memory span and chronological age, and since the 0. B. children are older, they should be expected to do better.
This test measuring as it does the number of discrete elements which an individual is able to grasp in any one act of attention reveals one of the contributing factors to the demonstrated inability of the 0. B. group to make adequate progress in the regular grades. The experience of members of the Division of Special
Education has led to the belief that a memory span of 3 is not great enough to enable a child to do the work of a first grade in a regular first grade except in rare cases where some marked compensating ability is present. Of the group used for this study 18.2 per cent have an auditory memory span of 3 and 1.4 per cent have an auditory memory span of only 2. Considering the age and the repetitions of grade of many of the children, it seems probable that a still larger number may have had auditory memory spans of only 3 when they first entered school.
The results which have been outlined indicate that the auditory memory span test is highly significant from a diagnostic point of view and that it is of value in indicating pedagogical procedure. The child whose “ability to distribute his attention over a number of discrete perceptions” is limited, cannot compete with a group who can in a single coherence grasp a greater number of elements. When he enters first grade early in the term, too many new elements are presented at any one time for him to be able to grasp them. Soon he is unable to profit by the teaching offered because he has not fully grasped the preceding work and consequently does not have an adequate background or preparation for the new work. He becomes hopelessly lost and as he cannot comprehend the instruction, if he is an active, energetic child gets into mischief or if he is a dull stolid child, just sits paying no heed to the instructional efforts of the teacher and in either case develops poor habits of attention and work. If placed in an 0. B. class where his specific defect or defects can be taken into account, the teaching can be adapted and a very limited number of elements are presented at a time. Thus he can progress, though to be sure, he will not progress at the regular grade rate because of the small amount of work taken at any one time. The limitation imposed by a poor memory span must constantly be borne in mind, in giving directions for work, and in planning the teaching both as to amount to be covered and method of instruction.
Attention has frequently been called to the fact that it is probable that no one has a true memory span of more than 5, considering the true memory span as the number of discrete elements which an individual is able to grasp in a. single coherence. Some of the children of the 0. B. group and more than half of the regular grade group at the six year level repeated 5 digits or more. It is probable that many of these children had a true memory span of 3 and that none had a true memory span of more than 4. Their results on the memory span test (unless echolalia) were achieved by grouping. In such cases, each group becomes a unit and the individual constituents of the group lose their identity as discrete elements. This integration of a number of separate elements into larger units is indicative of a degree of intellectual complexity. That the 0. B. group possess this ability to a less degree than the regular grade group is one of the factors involved in their inferior ability to acquire an education. Because each element remains a separate and distinct unit to be grasped and because material is grasped in these elemental units rather than in complex units, their rate of progress is much slower. A teacher who is new to 0. B. work will frequently find at first that she presents too many new elements in a lesson to fall within the range of the limited memory spans of her class, not because she has not definitely tried to limit the elements but because what seems to her to be one step may in reality be two or three for handicapped pupils. In planning lessons the teacher finds it necessary to analyze the material into its most fundamental units, to avoid this difficulty.
For the visual-vocal memory span, Easby-Grave found that the median and the mode was 4 in the regular grade group, one less than the median and mode for the audito-vocal span. With the 0. B. group the median and modal visual memory span is also 4 which is the same as the median and modal audito-vocal span for this group. However, it must also be noted that an inability to give a visual span occurs almost as frequently as the modal span of 4. Table 3
Percentage in Regular Grade and O. B. Group Obtaining a Given VisualVocal-Digit Memory Span Digits Reg. Grade O. B. F 17.0 25.8 2 2 2.0 3 6.2 14.2 4 31.2 29.2 5 30.4 21.2 G 11.0 6.8 7 2.8 .8 8… … !-? 9 2 Though the median and the mode of the two groups are the same, 42 per cent of the 0. B. group have visual memory spans of less than 4, as contrasted with the 23.4 per cent who fall below this level in the regular grade group. The 0. B. group, however, is slightly less inferior in the visual than in the auditory memory span.
At the six year level the reverse memory span is not as significant a diagnostic test as it is at higher levels. A comparison of the frequency distributions of the two groups shows less difference in the scores for the reverse memory span than in the case of the forward memory spans. Table 4 Percentage in Regular Grade and O. B. Group Obtaining a Given Reverse Audito-Vocal-Digit Memory Span Digits Reg. Grade O. B. F 42.4 55.4 2 18.8 27.8 3 31.0 14.2 4 7.2 1.6 5 6 0
It is significant that for approximately half of the children both in the regular grade group and in the 0. B. group the reverse memory span is too complex a problem. It may be assumed that the degree of complexity which this test measures is greater than that which is necessary for beginning school work. Though when their age is taken into consideration the reverse memory spans of the 0. B. groups are inferior to the age level norms established by the Binet Scale, their inferiority in this respect cannot be held accountable for their lack of school success at the six year level.
The Binet Scale
The Binet Scale is included in the battery of tests given to children who are failing in school because it gives a quantitative measure of the child’s general proficiency level and if subjected to qualitative analysis is of diagnostic value in indicating specific abilities and attainments. An estimate of the child’s ability to comprehend and use language and of his ability to grasp situations which other children of his age comprehend can be gained by the use of this test. It also gives some indication of the child’s ability to acquire information, and to deal with ideational material. The quality of his response as well as its quantitative measure gives some idea of the child’s degree of intellectual complexity. From a diagnostic point of view, the information gained from an analysis of the child’s performance is of more value than the mere Intelligence Quotient. At the six year level the I.Q. is not in itself a reliable measure of competency any more than is any other single test used in this battery. In the discussion of the performance tests it was pointed out that there were some children who gave performances equal to or better than the average of the regular grade group, on these tests, who, however, showed marked defects in memory span and in intellectual ability which rendered them incapable of competing in the regular grades.
The diagnostic significance of the I.Q. and other test results may be illustrated by a few brief clinical studies of cases in our group. Elizabeth was 6 years of age, and had been in school only one month when she was referred for an examination. She achieved an I.Q. of 104. On the Witmer Form Board she required 65 seconds for the first trial, which ranked her inferior to 60 per cent of the 0. B. group and inferior to 70 per cent of the regular grade group. She attempted to place in incorrect recesses the circle, the hexagon and the cross. On her second trial of this test, she required 76 seconds and made errors with the star, the square, the hexagon and the triangle. Her second trial from the standpoint of time required placed her in a group of 10 per cent inferior to 80 per cent and superior to 10 per cent of the O. B. group and was inferior to that of 90 per cent of the regular grade group. Her third trial on this test required 72 seconds and she made errors with the triangle, the diamond, the rectangle and the star. It was significant that she attempted incorrect placements for forms which are not frequently confused. On the Healy A, Elizabeth failed on her first trial. She was taught how to do the test but failed again on the second trial. The third trial required 24 seconds and was accomplished with one error. The fourth trial took 22 seconds.
The child had an auditory memory span of 4, which was satisfactory for her age. The reverse memory span was too complex for her. On the Binet Scale she had a basal age of 6. At the 7 year level she passed the test requiring a description of pictures. It was noted that her response was slow and that her expression was dull. In the one month she had been in school, she had learned to recognize 3 digits?1, 5 and 3?which was the extent of her school accomplishment.
The significant items of Elizabeth’s performance were her inferior visual discriminability, her poor learning ability (as shown on performance tests and in the class-room) and her slowness of response. On the psychological analysis chart she was rated on a 5 point scale as follows: ability to profit by experience 2, ability to solve problems 2, discrimination 2, visual imagery 2, learning ability 2, and muscular coordination 2. The recommendation was: “Because of her slowness, her inferior discriminability, and her inferior learning ability, Elizabeth will not be able to make normal progress in a first grade. It is, therefore, advisable to place her in an 0. B. Class.”
Eleanor was 6 years 11 months of age and had an I.Q. of 98. She was spending her third term in a 1A grade. Her school proficiency consisted of being able to count to 29 and to recognize a few sight words. She knew no phonics, was of course unable to read and had not learned any number combinations. She had an auditory memory span of 3, a visual memory span of 3, and no reverse span. (Elizabeth and Eleanor were both placed in an isolated 0. B. class in which none of the children were doing work above the first grade. The type of class available is of some influence in making recommendations.) Recent experience has led the writer to beware of attaching too much significance to the high I.Q.’s attained by a child at the six year level. A survey was made of all the children in the 0. B. classes during the autumn of 1931. After the survey was completed some observation or a re-examination was made of all children with I.Q.’s above 80 who had not been recently examined. The writer made the check-up in two 0. B. Centers and found a number of cases of children 12 to 14 years of age whose I.Q.’s were listed as 100 or a high 90, who had been in 0. B. classes for a number of years and who still had very little school proficiency. Re-examinations showed that the I.Q.’s had dropped to the 60’s or low 70’s. Such a decrease in I.Q. is frequently found among our 0. B. children who have had re-examinations. Walter was examined by the writer in 1927. He had spent one term in a 1A grade, was completing his second term in a IB grade and was not being recommended for promotion. He had no school proficiency except being able to count to 49, and to count by 2’s to 12. He had not the slightest concept of number combinations, recognized no sight words and knew no phonic elements. At this examination “Walter achieved an I.Q. of 91. His memory spans were auditory 5, visual 4, reverse 2. His time on performance tests was as follows: Witmer Form Board (1) 45 sec., (2) 40 sec., (3) 28 sec. Ilealy A (1) Failure, (2) 18 sec., (3) 37 sec., (4) 27 sec. On the Binet he had a basal age of 6 years. At the seven year level he could tell how many fingers he had and copy the diamond. At the eight year level he passed the comprehension test (2nd degree) and gave similarities. He gained credit for defining 7 words. Walter’s performance on all tests at this time was within the limits of the 60 per cent median-modal group of first grade children. An attempt to teach him was made. He had no number concept but it was possible to teach him number combinations by developing them concretely. He also learned sight words with drill.
As a result of this examination, Walter was placed in an 0. B. class. An analysis of his performance, too lengthy to be reproduced here, was sent to the school. It was stated in this report that the boy was very slow to grasp any problem which was at all complex and that he needed considerable drill in order to learn.
Five years later, Walter was re-examined by the writer. He was now 12 years 8 months of age and was still in an 0. B. class. He was clean, polite, cooperative and well conformed, and displayed good social qualities. Walter had not done as well in school as one might have expected from his performance in his first examination. At the time of his re-examination he did inferior 2A work in reading though he made an obvious effort to do well. He comprehended what he had read. His spelling was inferior 2A-2B work. In arithmetic he did 4A addition, 3B subtraction, 3A multiplication and 2B division.
His record for performance tests was: Witmer Form Board (1) 23 sec., (2) 20 sec., (3) 17 sec. Healy A (1) 42 sec., (2) 9 sec., (3) 6 sec. Dearborn Form Board (1) 244 sec., (2) 97 sec., (3) 87 sec. His memory spans were auditory 7, visual 7, reverse 4. His I.Q. had decreased from 91 to 70. At seven years of age he received credit for 7 words on the vocabulary test and at twelve years of age he gave adequate responses for only 10 words. He had a basal age of 8 years; at the 9 year level he gave the date and sentences for three given words, and at the 10 year level named 28 words in one minute.
At Walter’s first examination, his performance from a quantitative point of view placed him in the median-modal group of first grade children. His subsequent school achievement, however, corroborated the diagnosis made in his case. His poor school progress cannot be blamed on inefficient teaching since in the same 0. B. class, there were other children whose original test performances were not as good as Walter’s, who made much greater progress in school subjects.
As further examples, there were Raymond, whose I.Q. dropped from 88 in 1925 to 73 in 1932, Freddie, whose I.Q. decreased from 90 in 1927 to 75 in 1932, and Bill, whose I.Q. was 87 in 1926 and 74 in 1931. Our experience leads us to believe that many of the cases used for this investigation would show a similar drop in I.Q. upon re-examination.
As Altmaier 8 pointed out, investigators have noted that the I.Q. decreases as children reach the higher chronological age levels. The consensus of opinion of those quoted by Altmaier was that the tests at different chronological age levels were not of equal difficulty for the children of the respective age levels and that at the five, six and seven year levels the age standards were too easy. However, these investigators reported drops of no more than 11 points in the median I.Q. from years 10 to 14. With the 0. B. group it is not uncommon to find a significantly greater decrease in I.Q.’s from the 6 year level to the 12 year level or from the 7 or 8 year level to the 14 year level. However, the significant factor is that with many 0. B. children, the drop in I.Q. is not only absolute but is also relative, i.e., children fall from a place near the median level at the age of 6 or 7 years to the poorest 20 per cent group at the age of 12 or 14 years.
A decrease in the I.Q. as a child gets older is in some measure inherent in the structure of the Binet Scale. Cases such as those cited, however, show a much greater decrease which obviously must be accounted for in some other manner. Judging from experience gained in the clinic of the Division of Special Education, the explanation seems to be that there are some children who display a normal, though not good, ability to acquire information up to the six year level, and that then they begin to slow up markedly in their development with the result that their retardation increases proportionately with their increase in age. It is possible that the explanation may lie in the fact that many of these children show normal or adequate ability to acquire social competency and that s C. L. Altmaier, The performance level of children in the sixth grade in two Philadelphia public schools, Psychol. Clin., 1931, 19, 233-257. it is only after they have enrolled in school that the element of intellect enters into the situation and that in the competition to increase intellectual development, their inferior ability is first displayed. This premise, however, would imply that such a differentiation in abilities measured was intrinsic in the tests of the Binet Scale. A marked slowing up of vocabulary development as cited in one case, could however not be explained on this score. In contrast to these cases, some of the children of foreign-born parents who enter school with a marked language handicap show an increase in I.Q. after some school training improves their language comprehension. A comparison of the tables for the regular grade and 0. B. groups shows that there is a greater difference in I.Q. in the two groups than in the scores on performance tests. The differences in I.Q. for corresponding decile levels range from 2 points at the zero level to 56 points at the 100 per cent level with an average difference for the decile levels of 26.7. On performance tests the greatest differences are at the lower decile levels, whereas with the Binet Scale the greatest differences occur at the upper decile levels, as the following table shows.
Table 5 Intelligence Quotient 100th percentile?Regular grade group?55.9 points better 90th percentile?Regular grade group)?30.9 points better 80th percentile?Regular grade group?28.3 points better 70th percentile?Regular grade group?27.9 points better 60th percentile?Regular grade group?27.0 points better 50th percentile?Regular grade group?26.2 points better 40th percentile?Regular grade group?25.1 points better 30th percentile?Regular grade group?24.4 points better 20th percentile?Regular grade group?23.1 points better 10th percentile?Regular grade group?21.1 points better 0 percentile?Regular grade group? 2.1 points better One factor involved in the greater difference shown between the two groups in I.Q. is that the I.Q. is a ratio between the child’s chronological age and his “mental age” with the result that in the score represented by an I.Q., he is not at an advantage because of his greater chronological age as is the case with the performance tests.
Another element which is an influence in the greater difference in I.Q. is that many of the children of the 0. B. group at the six year level labor under a handicap in taking the test. With those children whose comprehension of English is limited, the handicap is obvious. It has been shown that the 0. B. group is drawn from a social level in which the home training is negligible. In better homes children are taught at an early age to tell how many fingers they have, but a number of the children of this investigation have never had that question put to them before they encountered it in the Binet Test and they do not know unless they count, which makes their response a failure. Fond parents usually take great pride in teaching their children to count at an early age but in many homes of a lower social level, a child never has this experience until he goes to school.
Summary of Quantitative Results
Theoretically one might suppose that the quantitative results of the 0. B. group would be comparable to those of the lowest 20 per cent of the normal group with perhaps some exceptions. A comparison of the tables shows that: 1. Chronological Age. Slightly more than 70 per cent of the 0. B. group fall in the lowest 20 per cent of the regular grade group, considering high chronological age to represent inferiority. 2. Mental Age. More than 50 per cent of the 0. B. group fall in the lowest 20 per cent.
3. Intelligence Quotient. More than 80 per cent of the 0. B. group fall in the lowest 20 per cent and all the I.Q.’s fall below the median of the regular grade group. 4. Memory Span.
Auditory. 70 per cent of the 0. B. group are comparable to the lowest 20 per cent.
Visual. 40 per cent of the 0. B. group are comparable to the lowest 20 per cent. Reverse. Two groups show almost the same results. 5. Witmer Form Board.
First Trial. Only slightly more than 20 per cent of the 0. B. group fall in lowest 20 per cent of regular grade group. Second Trial. 40 per cent of the 0. B. group fall in the lowest 20 per cent of the regular grade group.
Summary of Qualitative Observations The qualitative analyses of the performances of the children whose records were used for this investigation, show that deficiencies of various types contribute to their inability to make adequate progress in school. These may be classified under the general headings of Social Factors, Physical Factors, Personality Defects, General Retardation and Specific Mental Defects. Social Factors. The classification of the occupations of the parents of the children of this group show that they belong to a relatively inferior social order which implies a degree of economic stress. In very few of the homes are there any luxuries and in many cases there are scarcely the bare necessities of life. Most of the homes offer nothing in the way of cultural advantages. In a great many cases, the children receive nothing by precept or training in the way of developing adequate motivation toward school and learning though with another portion of the group great stress is placed on academic education.
Some children in their comparatively brief school careers have had many changes of address which bespeaks a certain instability in the home life. In some cases it is noted on the record that the child is neglected or even mal-treated in the home. All too often the environment of the child is very poor from the standpoint of play facilities and the contacts offered him in his attempts to satisfy his gregarious tendencies.
Physical Factors. Immaturity is the most frequently occurring defect noted under this heading. This term is used to denote children who are small, thin and retarded in their physical development. Deficient energy ranks second in the defects in the physical category. Frequently this lack of energy is referable to a physical condition.
Some specific physical defects occur in the group. There are some orthopedic defects due to birth injuries and anterior poliomyelitis. One of these children has since been transferred to an Orthopedic Class but in the other cases, the defects were not considered grave enough by the Division of School Medical Inspection to warrant such placement. There are also among the group, some visual and auditory defects which are not severe enough to make placement in Sight-Saving or Deaf Classes necessary. Speech defects may be included under this heading for want of a better place to classify them. (In the schools this defect is recorded on the medical cards.) Most of the speech defects, of which there are a substantial number, are of an infantile type Defective phonation occurs most frequently. In conjunction with this defect one frequently finds that the speech is infantile in man176 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC ner and content. The child makes, with mutilation, snch remarks as, “Me like to play.”
In this sampling of 0. B. children at the six year level there occur two cases of hydrocephalus, two cases of microcephalus and one case of epilepsy.
Personality Defects. Infantilism is the most frequently occurring of the handicapping characteristics listed in the category of personality. An estimate that the child’s general orientation and emotional response is infantile is made in 20 per cent of the cases of the group studied. Nervous and emotional instability is shown in a small number of cases.
Other defects occurring in a small number of cases, listed in the order of their frequency of occurrence are: lack of initiative, shyness, dullness and lack of animation, restlessness, suggestibility, hyper-excitability, apathy, timidity, stolidity, negativism, uncontrolled and undisciplined behavior, temper-tantrums, lack of selfconfidence. General Retardation. The consistent inferiority of performance on all tests indicates the general retardation of the 0. B. group.
Specific Mental Defects. One of the most outstanding of the specific mental defects encountered in the 0. B. group is the limited memory span. As pointed out in the discussion, 72.4 per cent of the 0. B. group have memory spans less than the median of the regular grade group despite the greater age of the 0. B. group. Specific mental defects which the examiners believe to be contributing causes to the children’s inability to make adequate progress in school are listed in the order of their frequency of occurrence : slow rate of discharge; inferior analytic discrimination; inferior visual imagery; inferior distribution of attention; inferior muscular coordination; inferior auditory imagery; inferior concentration of attention; inferior persistence; high fatigability. These defects are variously distributed among the 0. B. group. There are a number of children who display an adequate degree of many of the abilities listed but who show limitations in one or another respect. Many children of this group have great difficulty in learning to read. Poor auditory imagery, which makes it very difficult for the child to learn by a phonic method; poor visual imagery, which causes the child to have difficulty in retaining a picture of the phonic elements, and in learning sight words; poor distribution of attention and inferior discriminability are specific defects which contribute to this problem. Sometimes the situation is further complicated by defects of attention. Training in good habits of attention is one of the primary problems in 0. B. classes. Conclusions
1. At the six year performance level, children selected for placement in 0. B. classes are older than the regular grade children functioning at this level. 2. On tests, both those employing concrete and language and ideational material, the performance of the 0. B. group is consistently poorer from both qualitative and quantitative points of view. 3. There is a definite relationship between age and ability to do performance tests and partly because of this fact, comparisons of quantitative results for the 0. B. and regular grade groups at the six year level, show a greater difference in I.Q. than in time results for performance tests. 4. In selecting children at the six year level, for placement in 0. B. classes, it is necessary to have a battery of tests varied enough to explore competency in diverse fields because children at this level fail to make adequate progress in school for different reasons. No single type of test is adequate to call forth a display of this diversity of abilities.
5. In order to determine whether children should be removed from the regular grade and placed in 0. B. classes, why they fail, and what are the best methods of teaching them, a qualitative analysis of their performance on tests is more important than the quantitative measures.
6. For purposes of analysis, the Witmer Form Board, Witmer Cylinder, Healy A, Memory Spans and Binet Tests are significant at the six year level. 7. It is possible to select upon their admission to school a certain number of children who can never function adequately in the regular grades.
8. Factors contributing to school failure at the six year level fall into the general categories of Social Factors, Physical Factors, Defects of Personality, General Retardation and Specific Mental Defects.
Orthogenic Backward Group?Six Year Level Total Cases % Chron. Age Mental Age I.Q. Memory Span Aud. Vis. Rev. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 No. Cases 14-10 (10-3) 9-8 ( 8-0) 9-0 ( 7-4) 8-7 ( 7-0) 8-2 ( 6-10) 7-11 ( 6-7) 7-8 ( 6-5) 7-3 ( 6-4) 6-11 ( 6-1) 6-6 ( 6-0) 5-10 ( 4-8) 500 500 9-1 (10-0) 7-6 ( 8-0) 7-0 ( 7-9) 6-9 ( 7-6) 6-9 ( 7-3) 6-3 ( 7-0) 6-0 ( 6-9) 5-9 ( 6-9) 5-3 ( 6-6) 4-9 ( 6-0) 3-6 ( 3-6) 500 500 104.1 (160.0) 92.9 (123.8) 88.7 (117.0) 85.6 (113.5) 82.4 (109.4) 79.2 (105.4) 76.3 (101.4) 72.4 ( 96.8) 67.3 ( 90.4) 61.4 ( 82.5) 47.3 ( 49.4) 500 500 7 (9) 5 (6) 5 (6) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (4) 4 (4) 3 (4) 2 (3) 500 500 7 (9) 5 (6) 5 (5) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (4) 3 (4) 3 (4) 0 (3) 0 (0) 0 (0) 500 500 4 (5) 3 (3) 2 (3) 2 (3) 2 (2) 0 (2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 500 500 % Witmer Formboard II III Witmer Cylinders II III Healy A. II III 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 No. 24 (21) 35 (32) 40 (35) 45 (40) 49 (45) 55 (49) 61 (55) 72 (60) 92 (76) 138 (103) F (F) 498 500 13 (15) 28 (25) 32 (27) 36 (30) 40 (32) 44 (35) 49 (39) 55 (43) 68 (49) 91 (59) F (259) 498 500 13 25 28 30 34 38 42 48 58 75 F 490 79 (21) 120 (112) 192 (146) 215 (184) 255 (225) F (278) F (F) F (F) F (F) F (F) F (F) 68 500 42 (25) 80 (71) 87 (90) 100 (102) 113 (118) 140 (135) 179 (158) 182 (192) 210 (255) F (F) F (F) 67 500 39 66 78 88 103 114 131 158 196 F F 61 51 144 F F F F F F F F 464 6 11 14 17 23 33 57 153 F F F 460 5 10 11 12 14 15 18 16 44 F F 450 Note: In these tables the figures in parentheses indicate the results for the regular grade group. A COMPARISON OF CHILDREN 179 Orthogenic Backward Group?Six Year Level Males Chron. Age Mental Age I.Q. Memory Span Aud. Vis. Rev. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 No. Cases 14-10 (10-3) 9-7 ( 8-0) 9-0 ( 7-7) 8-7 ( 7-2) 8-3 ( 6-10) 7-11 ( 6-8) 7-9 ( 6-5) 7-4 ( 6-3) 7-0 ( 6-1) 6-6 ( 5-11) 5-11 ( 4-8) 339 256 9-1 (9-4) 7-6 (8-3) 7-3 (7-9) 7-0 (7-6) 6-9 (7-6) 6-6 (7-3) 6-3 (7-0) 5-9 (6-9) 5-6 (6-6) 4-9 (6-0) 3-6 (3-6) 339 256 103.0 (147.7) 93.2 (123.7) 88.9 (117.5) 85.7 (113.5) 82.7 (109.7) 80.2 (105.6) 77.1 (102.2) 73.4 ( 97.9) 67.9 ( 90.4) 60.9 ( 82.8) 47.3 ( 49.4) 339 256 7 (8) 5 (6) 5 (6) 4 (6) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (4) 4 (4) 3 (4) 2 (3) 339 256 7 (9) 5 (6) 5 (5) 5 (5) 4 (5) 4 (4) 3 (4) 3 (4) 0 (3) 0 (0) 0 (0) 339 256 4 (5) 3 (3) 2 (3) 2 (3) 2 (2) 0 (2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 339 256 Witmer Formboard III Witmer Cylinders II III Healy A. II III 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 No. 24 (21) 35 (31) 39 (35) 43 (40) 46 (43) 52 (48) 58 (53) 66 (60) 84 (75) 128 (95) F (F) 337 256 13 (15) 28 (24) 31 (26) 35 (30) 38 (32) 42 (35) 47 (38) 53 (41) 65 (47) 86 (60) F (232) 337 256 13 24 27 30 32 37 40 45 55 67 F 330 74 (43) 118 (105) 175 (131) 194 (163) 237 (200) 300 (245) F (F) F (F) F (F) F (F) F (F) 38 256 70 (25) 82 (70) 93 (89) 97 (98) 108 (113) 145 (132) 163 (160) 174 (190) 210 (260) F (F) F (F) 38 256 61 68 83 95 113 116 150 174 196 F F 35 10 50 155 F F F F F F F F 318 7 5 11 10 14 11 17 12 21 14 30 15 54 17 125 24 F 44 F F F F 316 311 180 TEE PSYCEOLOG1CAL CLINIC Orthogenic Backward Group?Six Year Level Females % Chron. Age Mental Age I.Q. Memory Span Aud. Vis. Rev. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 No. Cases 13-10 (10-0) 9-9 ( 7-9) 8-11 ( 7-3) 8-6 ( 6-11) 8-1 ( 6-9) 7-11 ( 6-7) 7-6 ( 6-5) 7-2 ( 6-4) 6-10 ( 6-2) 6-4 ( 6-0) 5-10 ( 5-3) 161 244 8-3 (10-0) 7-3 ( 8-0) 7-0 ( 7-9) 6-9 ( 7-6) 6-6 ( 7-3) 6-3 ( 7-0) 6-0 ( 6-9) 5-9 ( 6-6) 5-3 ( 6-6) 4-6 ( 6-0) 3-10 ( 4-0) 161 244 104.1 (160.0) 92.3 (124.3) 87.4 (117.7) 85.3 (113.9) 80.5 (110.3) 77.5 (105.4) 74.6 (101.2) 72.8 ( 95.7) 66.7 ( 90.3) 62.2 ( 81.8) 50.4 ( 54.5) 161 244 6 (9) 5 (7) 5 (6) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (4) 3 (4) 3 (4) 2 (3) 161 244 7 (8) 5 (6) 5 (5) 4 (5) 4 (5) 4 (4) 3 (4) 0 (4) 0 (3) 0 (0) 0 (0) 161 244 4 (5) 3 (3) 2 (3) 2 (3) 2 (3) 0 (2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 161 244 % Witmer Formboard II III Witmer Cylinders II III Healy A. II III 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 No. 25 (27) 36 (33) 45 (37) 50 (41) 53 (46) 60 (50) 73 (55) 90 (62) 115 (80) 180 (110) F F 161 244 23 (16) 29 (25) 35 (27) 39 (30) 42 (33) 46 (37) 52 (40) 60 (45) 78 (50) 105 (60) F (259) 161 244 19 25 28 33 36 40 47 57 65 110 F 160 97 (21) 122 (105) 215 (128) 296 (165) F (208) F (255) F F F F F F F F F F 30 244 42 (36) 71 (72) 99 (90) 108 (107) 132 (120) 140 (137) 179 (160) 187 (200) 219 (255) F F F F 29 244 39 63 75 85 90 108 116 142 214 F F 26 64 125 F F F F F F F F 146 6 7 11 10 15 12 19 13 25 14 39 15 67 20 F 25 F 45 F 177 T? T? 144 139
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.