Part 2 (2/2)

_R. A. Boy, age 17; mental age 11; sixth grade; school work ”nearly average”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ Test plainly shows this child to be a high-grade moron, or border-liner at best. Had attended school regularly 11 years and had made 6 grades. Teacher had compared child with his 12-year-old cla.s.smates.

_H. A. Boy, age 14; mental age 9-6; low fourth grade; school work ”inferior”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ The teacher blamed the inferior quality of school work to ”bad home environment.” As a matter of fact, the boy's father is feeble-minded and the normality of the mother is questionable.

An older brother is in a reform school. We are perfectly safe in predicting that this boy will not complete the eighth grade even if he attends school till he is 21 years of age.

_F. I. Boy, age 12-11; mental age 9-4; third grade; school work ”average”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average”; social environment ”average”; health good and attendance regular._ Intelligence and school success are what we should expect of an average 9-year-old.

_D. A. Boy, age 12; mental age 9-2; third grade; school work ”inferior”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ Teacher imputes inferior school work to ”absence from school and lack of interest in books”; we have yet to find a child with a mental age 25 per cent below chronological age who _was_ particularly interested in books or enthusiastic about school.

_C. U. Girl, age 10; mental age 7-8; second grade; school work ”average”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ Teacher blames adenoids and bad teeth for r.e.t.a.r.dation. No doubt of child's mental deficiency.

_P. I. Girl, age 8-10; mental age 6-7; has been in first grade 2 years; school work ”average”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ The mother and one brother of this girl are both feeble-minded.

_H. O. Girl, age 7-10; mental age 5-2; first grade for 2 years; school work ”inferior”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ The teacher nevertheless adds, ”This child is not normal, but her ability to respond to drill shows that she has intelligence.” It is of course true that even feeble-minded children of 5-year intelligence are able to profit a little from drill. Their weakness comes to light in their inability to perform higher types of mental activity.

THE INTELLIGENCE OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN USUALLY UNDERESTIMATED. We have already mentioned the frequent failure of teachers and parents to recognize superior ability.[7] The fallacy here is again largely due to the neglect of the age factor, but the resulting error is in the opposite direction from that set forth above. The superior child is likely to be a year or two younger than the average child of his grade, and is accordingly judged by a standard which is too high. The following are ill.u.s.trations:--

[7] See p. 13 _ff._

_M. L. Girl, age 11-2; mental age ”average adult” (16); sixth grade; school work ”superior”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ Teacher credits superior school work to ”unusual home advantages.” Father a college professor. The teacher considers the child accelerated in school. In reality she ought to be in the second year of high school instead of in the sixth grade.

_H. A. Boy, age 11; mental age 14; sixth grade; school work ”average”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ According to the supplementary information the boy is ”wonderfully attentive,” ”studious,” and possessed of ”all-round ability.” The estimate of ”average intelligence” was probably the result of comparing him with cla.s.smates who averaged about a year older.

_K. R. Girl, age 6-1; mental age 8-5; second grade; school work ”average”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”superior”; social environment ”average.”_ Is it not evident that a child from ordinary social environment, who does work of average quality in the second grade when barely 6 years of age, should be judged ”very superior” rather than merely ”superior” in intelligence?

The intelligence quotient of this girl is 140, which is not reached by more than one child in two hundred.

_S. A. Boy, age 8-10; mental age 10-9; fourth grade; school work ”average”; teacher's estimate of intelligence ”average.”_ Teacher attributed school acceleration to ”studiousness” and ”delight in school work.” It would be more reasonable to infer that these traits are indications of unusually superior intelligence.

OTHER FALLACIES IN THE ESTIMATION OF INTELLIGENCE. Another source of error in the teacher's judgment comes from the difficulty in distinguis.h.i.+ng genuine dullness from the mental condition which results sometimes from unfavorable social environment or lack of training.

_V. P. Boy, age 7._ Had attended school one year and had profited very little from the instruction. He had learned to read very little, spoke chiefly in monosyllables, and seemed ”queer.” The teacher suspected his intelligence and asked for a mental examination. The Binet test showed that except for vocabulary, which was unusually low, there was practically no mental r.e.t.a.r.dation. Inquiry disclosed the fact that the boy's parents were uneducated deaf-mutes, and that the boy had a.s.sociated little with other children. Four years later this boy was doing fairly well in school, though a year r.e.t.a.r.ded because of his unfavorable home environment.

_X. Y. Boy, age 10._ Son of a successful business man, he was barely able to read in the second reader. The Binet test revealed an intelligence level which was absolutely normal. The boy was removed to a special cla.s.s where he could receive individual attention, and two years later was found doing good work in a regular cla.s.s of the fifth grade. His bad beginning seemed to have been due to an unfavorable att.i.tude toward school work, due in turn to lack of discipline in the home, and to the fact that because of the father's frequent change of business headquarters the boy had never attended one school longer than three months.

Another source of error in judging intelligence from common observation is the tendency to overestimate the intelligence of the sprightly, talkative, sanguine child, and to underestimate the intelligence of the child who is less emotional, reacts slowly, and talks little. One occasionally finds a feeble-minded adult, perhaps of only 9- or 10-year intelligence, whose verbal fluency, mental liveliness, and self-confidence would mislead the offhand judgment of even the psychologist. One individual of this type, a border-line case at best, was accustomed to harangue street audiences and had served as ”major” in ”Kelly's Army,” a horde of several hundred unemployed men who a few years ago organized and started to march from San Francisco to Was.h.i.+ngton.

BINET'S QUESTIONNAIRE ON TEACHERS' METHODS OF JUDGING INTELLIGENCE.[8]

Aroused by the skepticism so often shown toward his test method, Binet decided to make a little study of the methods by which teachers are accustomed to arrive at a judgment as to a child's intelligence.

Accordingly, through the cooperation of the director of elementary education in Paris, he secured answers from a number of teachers to the following questions:--

[8] See p. 169 _ff._ of reference 2, at end of this book

1. _By what means do you judge the intelligence of your pupils?_ 2. _How often have you been deceived in your judgments?_

About 40 replies were received. Most of the answers to the first question were vague, one-sided, ”verbal,” or bookish. Only a few showed much psychological discrimination as to what intelligence is and what its symptoms are. There was a very general tendency to judge intelligence by success in one or more of the school studies. Some thought that ability to master arithmetic was a sure criterion. Others were influenced almost entirely by the pupil's ability to read. One teacher said that the child who can ”read so expressively as to make you feel the punctuation” is certainly intelligent, an observation which is rather good, as far as it goes. A few judged intelligence by the pupil's knowledge of such subjects as history and geography, which, as Binet points out, is to confound intelligence with the ability to memorize.

”Memory,” says Binet, is a ”great simulator of intelligence.” It is a wise teacher who is not deceived by it. Only a small minority mentioned resourcefulness in play, capacity to adjust to practical situations, or any other out-of-school criteria.

<script>