The Measurement of Intelligence | Page 4

definitions, 11,700 words) 324 2. Interpretation of
fables (score 8) 324 3. Differences between abstract terms 324 4.
Problem of the enclosed boxes 327 5. Repeating six digits reversed 329
6. Using a code 330 Alternative test 1: Repeating twenty-eight syllables
332 Alternative test 2: Comprehension of physical relations 333
CHAPTER XX
INSTRUCTIONS FOR "SUPERIOR ADULT"
1. Vocabulary (75 definitions, 13,500 words) 338 2. Binet's
paper-cutting test 338 3. Repeating eight digits 340 4. Repeating
thought of passage 340 5. Repeating seven digits reversed 345 6.
Ingenuity test 345

SELECTED REFERENCES 349
INDEX 359

FIGURES AND DIAGRAMS
1. Distribution of Mental Ages of 62 Normal Adults 55 2. Distribution
of I Q's of 905 Unselected Children, 5-14 Years of Age 66 3. Median
I Q of 457 Boys and 448 Girls, for the Ages 5-14 Years 69 4. Diamond
drawn by R. W.; Age 13-10; Mental Age 7-6 82 5. Writing from
Dictation. R. M., Age 15; Mental Age 9 83 6. Ball and Field Test. I. M.,
Age 14-2; Mental Age 9 84 7. Diamond drawn by A. W. 85 8. Drawing
Designs from Memory. H. S., Age 11; Mental Age 8-3 86 9. Ball and
Field Test. S. F., Age 17; Mental Age 11-6 88 10. Writing from
Dictation. C. P., Age 10-2; Mental Age 7-11 90 11. Ball and Field Test.
M. P., Age 14; Mental Age 10-8 91 12. Ball and Field Test. R. G.,
Age 13-5; Mental Age 10-6 93 13. Ball and Field Test. E. B., Age 7-9;
I Q 130 98 14. Ball and Field Test. F. McA., Age 10-3; Mental
Age 14-6 100 15. Drawing Designs from Memory. E. M., Age 6-11;
Mental Age 10, I Q 145 101 16. Ball and Field Test. B. F., Age 7-8;
Mental Age 12-4; I Q 160 102 17. Healy and Fernald Construction
Puzzle 279

THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
PART I
PROBLEMS AND RESULTS

THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE

CHAPTER I

THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS
INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF RETARDED SCHOOL CHILDREN.
Numerous studies of the age-grade progress of school children have
afforded convincing evidence of the magnitude and seriousness of the
retardation problem. Statistics collected in hundreds of cities in the
United States show that between a third and a half of the school
children fail to progress through the grades at the expected rate; that
from 10 to 15 per cent are retarded two years or more; and that from
5 to 8 per cent are retarded at least three years. More than 10 per cent of
the $400,000,000 annually expended in the United States for school
instruction is devoted to re-teaching children what they have already
been taught but have failed to learn.
The first efforts at reform which resulted from these findings were
based on the supposition that the evils which had been discovered
could be remedied by the individualizing of instruction, by improved
methods of promotion, by increased attention to children's health, and
by other reforms in school administration. Although reforms along
these lines have been productive of much good, they have nevertheless
been in a measure disappointing. The trouble was, they were too often
based upon the assumption that under the right conditions all children
would be equally, or almost equally, capable of making satisfactory
school progress. Psychological studies of school children by means of
standardized intelligence tests have shown that this supposition is not in
accord with the facts. It has been found that children do not fall into
two well-defined groups, the "feeble-minded" and the "normal." Instead,
there are many grades of intelligence, ranging from idiocy on the one
hand to genius on the other. Among those classed as normal, vast
individual differences have been found to exist in original mental
endowment, differences which affect profoundly the capacity to profit
from school instruction.
We are beginning to realize that the school must take into account,
more seriously than it has yet done, the existence and significance of
these differences in endowment. Instead of wasting energy in the vain
attempt to hold mentally slow and defective children up to a level of

progress which is normal to the average child, it will be wiser to take
account of the inequalities of children in original endowment and to
differentiate the course of study in such a way that each child will be
allowed to progress at the rate which is normal to him, whether that rate
be rapid or slow.
While we cannot hold all children to the same standard of school
progress, we can at least prevent the kind of retardation which involves
failure and the repetition of a school grade. It is well enough recognized
that children do not enter with very much zest upon school work in
which they have once failed. Failure crushes self-confidence and