Psychological Tests in the First Grade
- Author:
Richards
Formerly Clinic Teacher, The Psychological Clinic, University of PennsylIn order to increase the usefulness of the Witmer Diagnostic Standards begun in 1923,1 the Psychological Clinic has been interested recently in determining further standards of test performance at different levels, and in obtaining additional norms for first grade children. We shall present here the results of the first grade study and certain interpretations of the data which seem to be suggested by them.
In securing the first grade standards, a procedure was used similar to that described by Easby-Grave.2 The Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Scale, auditory, visual and reverse memory spans, and two trials each on the Witmer Form Board and Witmer cylinders were used. All other tests in the Easby-Grave battery were eliminated. In the use of one test, the Witmer cylinders, the directions for the test were definitely modified. Easby-Grave’s directions were as follows:
“The examiner gives the following directions: ‘Do you see how nice and smooth all these blocks are on top, and how tight they fit? I’m going to take them all out and put them in the middle, and I want to see how quickly you can put them back just where they belong.’ While giving these directions the examiner runs his hand over the top of the cylinders to indicate their smoothness, and attempts to rattle the block in its hole, an impossibility if the blocks are correctly placed.” In the present study, nothing was said to the child beyond the words, ‘’ I am going to take these blocks out and I want you to put them back where they belong. Use both hands and work as fast as you can.” As in the Easby-Grave group, a five minute period was 1 Learning, Rebecca E.: Tests and Norms for Vocational Guidance at the Fifteen Year Old Performance Level. Psychol. Clin., 1923, 14, 193-220. 2 Easby-Grave, C.: Tests and Norms at the Six Year Old Performance Level. Psychol. Clin., 1924, 15, 261-300.
allowed, and the child who failed the first trial was taught how to complete the test before the second trial was begun. In the present investigation a group of 399 children was used. The cases were distributed as shown below with respect to school, grade and sex. Schools: K B L S 35.00% 21.00% 19.00% 25.00% Grade: 1A IB 50.13% 49.87% Sex: Male Female 49.87% 50.13%
The four schools from which the children were selected were chosen by the Department of Educational Research of the Philadelphia Public Schools as representative of the school system as a whole as far as demonstrated ability to succeed in school was concerned. Unfortunately, Schools K and S, from which about 60 per cent of the cases were chosen, represented the section of the city having the largest foreign population, and which would seem on the surface to represent a lower degree of ability on tests involving language ability. Below appear the data relating to nationality of parents. Native born. Native and foreign. Foreign One parent certain. Uncertain White. Negro. Italian. Russian. Others.. Native. Foreign. 18.75% 10.50% 24.75% 18.25% 8.25% 1.00% 3.25% 29.25% 13.50% 51.25% 4.25% 1.75%
In Tables I, II, III and IV appear the results for the Intelligence Quotient, chronological age, mental age, memory spans and performance tests. Table V presents the percentile scores for all tests and for chronological and mental age.
Table I l.Q. 40- 49 1 50- 59 4 60- 69 14 70- 79 29 80- 89 78 90- 99 99 100-109 106 110-119 44 120-129 13 130-139 8 140-149 3 N 399 Av 97.07 S.D 14.14 Table II Months C.A. M.A. 36- 40 2 41- 45 1 46- 50 1 51- 55 7 56- 60 1 16 61-65 2 12 66- 70 23 39 71- 75 89 98 76- 80 112 50 81- 85 72 95 86- 90 47 38 91-95 19 18 96-100 15 12 101-105 9 7 106-110 3 0 111-115 2 3 116-120 4 121-125 1 N 399 399 Av 81.71 78.9 S.D 9.65 10.77 238 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Table III Memory Span AuditoryVisual Reverse 36 82 145 33 2 1 54 3 33 110 113 66 19 1 158 77 150 12 2 N. . Av.. S.D. 399 4.964 .81 399 399 Table IY Witmer Form Board 1st Trial 2d Trial Witmer Cylinders 1st Trial 2d Trial 15- 44. 45- 74. 75-104. 105-134. 135-164. 165-194. 195-224. 225-254. 255-284. 285-F. . 202 148 23 11 3 3 1 1 0 6 266 112 12 2 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 7 9 26 7 14 17 19 24 276 3 41 72 72 47 30 24 20 9 81 N. . Av.. S.D. 398 54.21 41.78 398 399 399
Note: Time in seconds. Comparison with Easby-Grave Group Reference to the Easby-Grave report will provide interesting comparison with our own data. She used a group of children of approximately the same distribution with respect to sex and grade. Basing her statistics only on the nationality of the father she found her group to be children of native born parentage to far greater extent than is indicated in the data of the present survey. Of her group 58.4 per cent were of native born or English-speaking fathers, as compared with about 40 per cent in our own group. Statistical comparisons between the Easby-Grave distribution and our own were made for chronological age, Intelligence QuoPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS IN THE FIRST GRADE 239
Table V Percentiles?First Graders (Richards) Chron. Age Mental Age I.Q. Aud. Vis. Rev. W.F.B. 1 W.F.B. 2 W.Cyl. 1 W.Cyl. 2 100% 99% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 1% 0% 4- 9 5- 6 5-11 6- 2 6- 4 6- 5 6- 7 6- 9 7- 0 7- 4 7-10 9- 9 10- 1 3- 3 4- 2 5- 6 5-11 6- 1 6- 3 6- 6 6- 9 6-11 7- 1 7- 7 9- 1 9- 4 143.8 138.8 116.4 107.9 105.1 101.4 97.4 93.4 89.2 84.1 77.2 57.5 47.5 23 23 23 26 32 38 44 52 60 68 85 F F 22 22 22 23 28 32 37 41 48 59 69 166 F 63 63 132 224 280 F F F F F F F F 30 45 72 89 106 123 147 169 215 285 F F F
tient, mental age, auditory memory span and first trial of the Witmer Form Board. These data were selected as those most amenable to statistical treatment. The material regarding these differences is found in Table VI. The Easby-Grave (E-G) group is shown to be more variable on each distribution.
No significant difference appears in chronological age. There is a slightly significant difference between averages for the Witmer Form Board, favoring the present (R) group, but the greatest and most significant differences, those between the averages for Intelligence Quotient and auditory memory span, favor the Easby-Grave group. It is interesting to note that they appear for those tests which would seem to be of a more intellectual nature. The method of differences between averages for groups was not used for the cylinders, due to the fact that a score of F or DNC cannot be dealt with satisfactorily in a statistical fashion. It is interesting to note the degree of failure for the Easby-Grave and R distributions for each trial.
1st Trial 2d Trial E-G 47.6% failure 20.3% failure B 65.9% failure 12.0% failure 240 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC Table VI Differences between Easby-Grave 500 First Grade Children, and R Group of 399 First Grade Children Average S.D. Variability Difference a diff. “DifT Intelligence Quotient E-G R 104.98 ? .83 97.07? .71 ?16.64 ?14.14 15.85 14.57 7.91 ?1.09 (E-G) 7.26 Chronological Age E-G R 82.23 ? .458 81.71 ? .483 ?10.25 ? 9.65 12.47 10.52 .52 ? .67 (E-G) .78 Audito-Vocal Memory Span E-G R 5.49? .047 4.96? .041 ? 1.05 ? .81 19.12 16.32 .528 ? .062 (E-G) 8.5 Witmer Form Board (1) E-G R 60.83 ?2.375 54.21 ?2.094 ?53.10 ?41.78 87.29 77.07 6.62 ?3.166 (R) 2.09
Likewise because of the large number of “0” scores, the results for visual and reverse memory span were not treated.
The difference here indicated, favoring the Easby-Grave group, we believe, can hardly be accounted for on the basis of difference in intellectual ability as evidenced by score on the Binet test, since, as the author has attempted to indicate in another study,3 the evidence is lacking for the relation of abilities involved at this level in successful performance on the cylinders test to those involved in the Binet test. We feel, on the other hand, that on this test, obviously a problem for six year old children, the change in directions for administration which was made for the present investigation might well account for the apparent increased difficulty in performance. It is interesting to note that our own group was as competent, if not more so, to perform the Witmer Form Board, another performance test.
s Richards, T. W.: The Relationship of Psychological Tests in the First Grade to School Progress: A Follow-up Study. Psycliol. Clin., 1932, 21, 137171. To summarize the comparisons made here we may say that differences between the present group and the Easby-Grave group appear on the intellectual tests, though the groups are similar in grade, sex, and age. These differences may be due to schools, language handicap, race, though the efficacy of any one of these factors in determining the differences is not demonstrated. A difference is not clearly demonstrable for the Witmer Form Board, but if it does exist it favors the present (R) group. The Easby-Grave group was definitely more successful in performance on the Witmer cylinders. An alteration in directions for the administration of the test may or may not be held accountable. We are inclined to believe that it is a factor in increasing the difficulty of the test.
Comparison of Easby-Grave Group and Present Group with Other Distributions Found in the Literature Distributions of Intelligence Quotients for first grade children were found in the literature, and placed on a percentage basis. Strachan’s 4 group of 7,604 white and colored Kansas City children, Dickson’s5 group of 4,293 Oakland children, Wentworth’s6 group of 1,001 suburban Boston children and the Philadelphia Public Schools 7 group of 1,197 1A children were used.8 Chart 1 presents the graphic distribution for each study. It is interesting to note that the Strachan Kansas City children, the Wentworth Boston suburban children and the Dickson Oakland children distribute in a similar way, though they differ slightly in variability. The R curve seems to fit the general tendency of these curves, while the two other Philadelphia curves, the group of 1,197 1A pupils, and the Easby-Grave group of 500, skew to the left, and are apparently much higher than those for the other cities. The fact seems to be suggested from the curves that the R group, though 4 Strachan, L. S.: Distribution of Intelligence Quotients of 22,000 Primary School Children. J. Educ. Res., 1926, 16, 169-177. 5 Dickson, Y. E.: Mental Tests and the Classroom Teacher, 1923, World Book Co., Yonkers-on-tlie-Hudson, N. Y. e Wentworth, M. M.: Individual Differences in the Intelligence of School Children. Harv. Stud, in Educ., 1926, 7, Cambridge. 7 Beport, June 1929, Division of Special Education, Board of Public Education, School District of Philadelphia. s The author took the liberty to reduce the data presented in each study to percentages in step-intervals so as to afford the best possible graphic comparison. He is grateful to Dr M. M. Wentworth for the numerical distribution of scores in her study. it does not resemble the Philadelphia groups, is more representative of groups of children in Kansas City, Oakland, California, and suburban Boston.
Summary
Although no definite conclusions can be reached from the results of this study, certain facts are indicated.
1. The group of 399 first grade children appears to be lower than the Easby-Grave group of 500 in Intelligence Quotient and auditory memory span, but not in performance with the Witmer Form Board.
2. In performance with the Witmer cylinder test, the EasbyGrave group was definitely more successful. This may be due to a modification in the directions for giving the test. No mention was made in the present study of smoothness or of fitting the blocks to the holes, as was made in the Easby-Grave study.
3. The present group seems to resemble in graphic distribution groups from Kansas City, Boston suburbs and Oakland, California, more nearly than it does two groups of Philadelphia school children. Di5TdE>UTc?Ai3 of ftBST GcADt LQ. s (Stanford Eevisioai)
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.