- Mar 2023
For us the rule of brawn has been broken, and intelligence has become the decisive factor in success. Schools, railroads, factories, and the largest commercial concerns may be successfully managed by persons who are physically weak or even sickly. One who has intelligence constantly measures opportunities against his own strength or weakness and adjusts himself to conditions by following those leads which promise most toward the realization of his individual possibilities.
I think intelligence has always been a determining factor of success. When someone is smart or intelligent we tend to assume that they will be successful in life. I think this is important to the history of psychology because we have been determined on trying to understand intelligence and then we were grading intelligence based off the score they were getting. We were discussing how intelligence differs across people and that people that were feeble-minded were potential criminals. We discussed how superiors become leaders and lead civilization.
Another important use of intelligence tests is in the study of the factors which influence mental development.
Intelligence testing can be used to determine mental development. I think this is important to the history of psychology because we started trying to understand mental development while looking at intelligence. There is a slight correlation to intelligence testing and the influence for mental development.
Industrial concerns doubtless suffer enormous losses from the employment of persons whose mental ability is not equal to the tasks they are expected to perform. The present methods of trying out new employees, transferring them to simpler and simpler jobs as their inefficiency becomes apparent, is wasteful and to a great extent unnecessary. A cheaper and more satisfactory method would be to employ a psychologist to examine applicants for positions and to weed out the unfit. Any business employing as many as five hundred or a thousand workers, as, for example, a large department store, could save in this way several times the salary of a well-trained psychologist.
I think this is interesting because they are saying that intelligence testing could be used to determine job positions. I agree that employing a psychologist to examine applications for positions would be beneficial because the employer doesn't have to worry about certain things the psychologist would look for. I agree that using a psychologist to weed people out of decision of employment could be effective because many people are applying, but the employers only want certain people for that job. I think this is relevant to the history of psychology because there are some companies who use people to determine who is deemed fit for the company, and this is what they wanted to start doing so they could find the best employees for that particular job.
The pupil who enters one school system from another is a case in point. Such a pupil nearly always suffers a loss of time. The indefensible custom is to grade the newcomer down a little, because, forsooth, the textbooks he has studied may have differed somewhat from those he is about to take up, or because the school system from which he comes may be looked upon as inferior. Teachers are too often suspicious of all other educational methods besides their own. The present treatment accorded such children, which so often does them injustice and injury, should be replaced by an intelligence test. The hour of time required for the test is a small matter in comparison with the loss of a school term by the pupils.
I like how they stated that the pupil suffers a loss of time. When I changed schools, I lost about a week of instruction because of the registration process. I noticed that the material was different from my other school. I had an easier time at the school I transferred to than the original school. I think intelligence testing could be a way for students to pick which school fits them the most. I think this can relate to the history of psychology because there were probably times where psychologists had suffered a loss of time because of an incident that occurred or something had changed the way they thought of something.
In order to throw light on the question whether exceptionally bright children are specially likely to be one-sided, nervous, delicate, morally abnormal, socially unadaptable, or otherwise peculiar, the writer has secured rather extensive information regarding 31 children whose mental age was found by intelligence tests to be 25 per cent above the actual age. This degree of intelligence is possessed by about 2 children out of 100, and is nearly as far above average intelligence as high-grade feeble-mindedness is below. The supplementary information, which was furnished in most cases by the teachers, may be summarized as follows: -- Ability special or general. In the case of 20 out of 31 the ability is decidedly general, and with 2 it is mainly general. The talents of 5 are described as more or less special, but only in one case is it remarkably so. Doubtful 4. Health. 15 are said to be perfectly healthy; 13 have one or more physical defects; 4 of the 13 are described as delicate; 4 have adenoids; 4 have eye-defects; 1 lisps; and 1 stutters. These figures are about the same as one finds in any group of ordinary children. Studiousness. "Extremely studious," 15; "usually studious" or "fairly studious," 11; "not particularly studious," 5; "lazy," 0. Moral traits. Favorable traits only, 19; one or more unfavorable traits, 8; no answer, 4. The eight with unfavorable moral traits are described as follows: 2 are "very self-willed"; 1 "needs close watching"; 1 is "cruel to animals"; 1 is "untruthful"; 1 is "unreliable"; 1 is "a bluffer"; 1 is "sexually abnormal," perverted," and "vicious." It will be noted that with the exception of the last child, the moral irregularities mentioned can hardly be regarded, from the psychological point of view, as essentially abnormal. It is perhaps a good rather than a bad sign for a child to be self-willed; most children "need close watching"; and a certain amount of untruthfulness in children is the rule and not the exception. Social adaptability. Socially adaptable, 25; not adaptable, 2; doubtful, 4. Attitude of other children. "Favorable," "friendly," "liked by everybody," "much admired," "popular," etc., 26; "not liked," 1; "inspires repugnance," 1; no answer, 1. Is child a leader? "Yes," 14; "no," or "not particularly," 12; doubtful, 5. Is play life normal? "Yes," 26; "no," 1; "hardly," 1; doubtful, 3. 1s child spoiled or vain? "No," 22; "yes," 5; "somewhat," 2; no answer, 2. According to the above data, exceptionally intelligent children are fully as likely to be healthy as ordinary children; their ability is far more often general than special, they are studious above the average, really serious faults are not common among them, they are nearly always socially adaptable, are sought after as playmates and companions, their play life is usually normal, they are leaders far oftener than other children, and notwithstanding their many really superior qualities they are seldom vain or spoiled.
The data shows that children who are more superior are seen as healthy. I think children that are superior are seen as more healthy because they have a more positive outlook on life.
Teachers should be better trained in detecting the signs of superior ability. Every child who consistently gets high marks in his school work with apparent ease should be given a mental examination, and if his intelligence level warrants it he should either be given extra promotions, or placed in a special class for superior children where faster progress can be made. The latter is the better plan, because it obviates the necessity of skipping grades; it permits rapid but continuous progress.
I agree that teachers should be able to identify the superior ability in children. Teachers are around children for 8 hours of the day if in elementary, see them everyday, and have interactions with the students. They should be able to identify which students are superior and which students are feeble-minded. Many children that are superior are misunderstood in schools. I think a mental examination is efficient for superior children that way they can advance faster if they are superior. I think this is important to the history of psychology because it was stated "Teachers should be better trained in detecting signs of superior ability" and we now have teachers able to identify which students are superior and put them in GT classes. GT classes are called the gifted and talented. Students with high intelligence that are superiors are put into those classes which provide benefit to them because the classes are matched with their intelligence. We have advanced to understanding superior ability and have started putting children in special classes where they can continue to make progress.
Psychological tests show that children of superior ability are very likely to be misunderstood in school.
I think this is a good observation. Many students who have superior ability are interested in many different things. They can misunderstood because they operate differently than the majority of other kids who might be feeble-minded. I was reading that gifted students or superior students need a different learning environment that caters to their needs such as individual strength, interests, and pace of learning (Oak Crest Academy, 2023). Since superior children have different needs they can become misunderstood in schools. I think this is important to the history of psychology because everyone is different and everyone has different needs. There are many people who have probably been misunderstood because they were superiors.
Whether civilization moves on and up depends most on the advances made by creative thinkers and leaders in science, polities, art, morality, and religion. Moderate ability can follow, or imitate, but genius must show the way.
From my understanding civilization moves up when the creative thinkers and superior children make advances. Superior children and genius children are what makes civilization move up because they are thinking creatively and doing what needs to be done to make civilization better. This is important to the history of psychology because children that are considered superior or genius will be able to make decisions for the world so civilization can improve. If we look back into history, psychologists can be considered genius because of how they have evolved the science of psychology which could mean they were superior children.
But why do the feeble-minded tend so strongly to become delinquent? The answer may be stated in simple terms. Morality depends upon two things: (a) the ability to foresee and to weigh the possible consequences for self and others of different kinds of behavior; and (b) upon the willingness and capacity to exercise self-restraint. That there are many intelligent criminals is due to the fact that (a) may exist without (b). On the other hand, (b) presupposes (a). In other words, not all criminals are feeble-minded, but all feeble-minded are at least potential criminals. That every feeble-minded woman is a potential prostitute would hardly be disputed by any one. Moral judgment, like business judgment, social judgment, or any other kind of higher thought process, is a function of intelligence. Morality cannot flower and fruit if intelligence remains infantile.
I like this explanation because it gives some insight as to why feeble-minded people become delinquents. I like that it stated not all criminals are feeble-minded because there are some criminals that are very intelligent. The unabomber for example, Ted Kaczynski was a mathematics professor, and retired to later became a bomb maker. He wasn't caught for a good while which shows that he was intelligent. I think this is important to the history of psychology because we now have developed knowledge that feeble-minded people aren't always criminals, but have some potential of becoming a criminal.
Some of these findings are as follows:-- Miss Renz tested 100 girls of the Ohio State Reformatory and reported 36 per cent as certainly feeble-minded. In every one of these cases the commitment papers had given the pronouncement "intellect sound." Under the direction of Dr. Goddard the Binet tests were given to 100 juvenile court cases, chosen at random, in Newark, New Jersey. Nearly half were classified as feeble-minded. One boy 17 years old had 9-year intelligence; another of l5½ had 8-year intelligence. Of 56 delinquent girls 14 to 20 years of age tested by Hill and Goddard, almost half belonged either to the 9- or the 10-year level of intelligence. Dr. G. G. Fernald's tests of 100 prisoners at the Massachusetts State Reformatory showed that at least 95 per cent were feebleminded. Of 1186 girls tested by Miss Dewson at the State Industrial School for Girls at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 28 per cent were found to have subnormal intelligence. Dr. Katherine Bement Davis's report on 1000 cases entered in the Bedford Home for Women, New York, stated that there was no doubt but that at least 157 were feeble-minded. Recently there has been established at this institution one of the most important research laboratories of the kind in the United States, with a trained psychologist, Dr. Mabel Feniald, in charge. Of 564 prostitutes investigated by Dr. Anna Dwyer in connection with the Municipal Court of Chicago, only 3 per cent had gone beyond the fifth grade in school. Mental tests were not made, but from the data given it is reasonably certain that half or more were feeble-minded. Tests, by Dr. George Ordahl and Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, of cases in the Geneva School for Girls, Geneva, Illinois, showed that, on a conservative basis of classification, at least 18 per cent were feeble-minded. At the Joliet Prison, Illinois, the same authors found 50 per cent of the female prisoners feeble-minded, and 26 per cent of the male prisoners. At the St. Charles School for Boys 26 per cent were feeble-minded. Tests, by Dr. J. Harold Williams, of 150 delinquents in the Whittier State School for Boys, Whittier, California, gave 28 per cent feeble-minded and 25 per cent at or near the border-line. About 300 other juvenile delinquents tested by Mr. Williams gave approximately the same figures. As a result of these findings a research laboratory has been established at the Whittier School, with Dr. Williams in charge. In the girls' division of the Whittier School, Dr. Grace Fernald collected a large amount of psychological data on more than 100 delinquent girls. The findings of this investigation agree closely with those of Dr. Williams for the boys. At the State Reformatory, Jeffersonville, Indiana, Dr. von Klein-Schmid, in an unusually thorough psychological study of 1000 young adult prisoners, finds the proportion of feeble-mindedness not far from 50 per cent.
These are some of the findings that show what feeble-mindedness individuals have participated in a study. This is relevant to the history of psychology because because it goes over the finding in the study that were done by psychologists. Most of the studies findings are about how most of 1/3 of the sample of each study was feeble-minded. I like that findings of each study is listed because it helps give information about delinquents.
The physical abnormalities which have been found so, common among prisoners are not the stigmata of criminality, but the physical accompaniments of feeble-mindedness. They have no diagnostic significance except in so far as they are indications of mental deficiency.
Lombroso wasn't able to find a connection between physical attributes and criminality. He was able to find physical attributes with feeble-mindedness. This is important to the history of psychology because physical attributes do not have a correlation with criminal behavior. Many people think that there is a connection with physical attributes and criminals, but there is no correlation.
The criminologists have been accustomed to give more attention to the physical than to the mental correlates of crime. Thus, Lombroso and his followers subjected thousands of criminals to observation and measurement with regard to such physical traits as size and shape of the skull, bilateral asymmetries, anomalies of the ear, eye, nose, palate, teeth, hands, fingers, hair, dermal sensitivity, etc. The search was for physical "stigmata" characteristic of the "criminal type."
I think this is very interesting because it revolves around physical attributes instead of intelligence. This is important to the history of psychology because Lombroso was focused on physical attributes instead of intelligence. Lombroso would measure physical traits and then determine if they fit the characteristics of being the "criminal type". This is still used to this day which is called stereotypes. Stereotypes are oversimplified image or idea of a particular person or thing. A perfect example of a stereotype is girls are more docile and want to please others. Not every girl wants to please other or be docile.
It is safe to predict that in the near future intelligence tests will bring tens of thousands of these high-grade defectives under the surveillance and protection of society. This will ultimately result in curtailing the reproduction of feeble-mindedness and in the elimination of an enormous amount of crime, pauperism, and industrial inefficiency. It is hardly necessary to emphasize that the high-grade cases, of the type now so frequently overlooked, are precisely the ones whose guardianship it is most important for the State to assume.
I think it is interesting how they say it is safe to predict in the future intelligence tests will bring thousands of high-grade defectives. The result they have predicted is interesting because they think the results will eliminate crime, pauperism, and industrial inefficiency. This relates to the history of psychology because they predicted the future. Since we are the future, I don't think there has been a decrease in crime, pauperism which is poverty, and industrial inefficiency. I think we are on the rise of crime and pauperism.
Wherever intelligence tests have been made in any considerable number in the schools, they have shown that not far from 2 per cent of the children enrolled have a grade of intelligence which, however long they live, will never develop beyond the level which is normal to the average child of 11 or 12 years. The large majority of these belong to the moron grade; that is, their mental development will stop somewhere between the 7-year and 12-year level of intelligence, more often between 9 and 12.
I think this is interesting that mental development will stop at 7-year and 12-year old level of intelligence. This is relevant to the history of psychology because children at those ages were believed that their mental development stops at 7-years to 12-years of intelligence. This is relevant to the history of psychology as well because it was a study that was conducted that could have probably changed overtime as we have gathered more resources. The 2 per cent might have gone down or it could have increased. I think that mental development continues as we grow older and so could our intelligence instead of being limited our whole lives.
Every child who fails in his school work or is in danger of failing should be given a mental examination. The examination takes less than one hour, and the result will contribute more to a real understanding of the case than anything else that could be done. It is necessary to determine whether a given child is unsuccessful in school because of poor native ability, or because of poor instruction, lack of interest, or some other removable cause.
I agree with this statement because if someone is failing there is a reason behind why they are failing. There could be many causes as to why someone fails something. This is important to the history of psychology because failure has happened many times throughout history and there are probably some underlining factors as to why some psychologists failed at certain things. Some causes of failure are lack of interest, poor instruction, poor self-esteem, and things happening at home that are distracting.
When instruction must be repeated, it means that the school, as well as the pupil, has failed.
I agree with this statement because the student failed because they couldn't understand the material, but it is the school's fault for not providing the tools for the student to be successful such as tutoring or help make course work easier to understand. I think this is important to the history of psychology because we have more resources now that are being used to help students not fail. Back in history there probably wasn't many resources to make sure someone would pass a class or understand material. There are many resources now that are being used to help improve intelligence and prevent failure.
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 destroys the spirit of work. It is a sad fact that a large proportion of children in the schools are acquiring the habit of failure. The remedy, of course, is to measure out the work for each child in proportion to his mental ability.
I agree that failure crushes self-confidence and destroys the spirit students have. I think that trying to prevent children from failure is the best thing someone can do because no one likes to fail at anything. I think this can relate to anyone but, I will use a psychologist as an example, for example, a psychologist does an experiment, but the experiment fails, it might make the psychologist not want to do another experiment. When I failed a reading assessment I felt like crying and that I would always be bad at reading. I think failure is important to the history of psychology because there were probably many failures when trying to acquire knowledge about different things. They overcame failure by understanding their mental abilities which is being used to help prevent children from failing because they are trying to measure each children's mental ability so they can be taught correctly and will possibly won't fail. This is important to history as well because everyone is different and so they can't hold children to the same standard of school progress.
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.
I think this would be the best approach to help children that are slower than "normal" children. I stated earlier that the best way to help children learn is to see how they learn such as being hands on, visual, or auditory learning. Everyone doesn't learn stuff at the exact same time, it may take some people longer to understand the concept than other people. Everyone learns differently. This is important to the history of psychology because it helps us understand that children who are slower than other children can develop intelligence at their own speed. I think another reason this is important to the history of psychology is because we now understand the grade of intelligence is different for everyone, but people can build intelligence at their own progressive rate and that we can't force someone who is slower at learning to be at normal speed.
Instead, there are many grades of intelligence, ranging from idiocy on the one hand to genius on the other.
I think this is interesting because they had thought that under the right conditions that children would be equally, or almost equally, capable of making satisfactory school progress, but they made a discovery that not all children are equal or almost equal. There are different grades of intelligence depending on the person because everyone is different. This is important to the history of psychology because there has now been a discovery of different grades of intelligence. They used to think that children had an equal intelligence or almost equal but there are many different grades of intelligence grading from idiocy to average to genius. We still utilize the grades of intelligence today, but the grades are categorized differently such as idiocy being extremely low on the intelligence scale and genius being very superior. We have changed the name of the grades of intelligence.
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.
I think this information is interesting because we are being told that more than 1/3 of school children fail to progress to the next grade. I think we need to incorporate different learning styles because what if the individual doesn't understand the concept the way it is being taught. Many people learn in different ways such as hands on learning, auditory learning, and visual learning. I think the reason 10% of $400,000,000 is going into teaching children what they have learned but have failed to learn is because there maybe something up head in learning that they might need to understand for the future. I have been retaught certain things when I moved up to the next grade level and I think it is to help refresh memory. I think another reason 10% goes to reteaching is because the students didn't understand the concept and needs to be retaught so they can understand for future uses.
The Uses of Intelligence Tests
I think this is interesting because we have used intelligence testing back then to try and understand how intelligence is measured. Today we still use many different types of intelligence testing such as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence scale and the IQ test which are used to measure intelligence. I was thinking that the STAAR test is a way to measure intelligence, but when I looked it up, it states "No, STAAR tests do not measure a student's intelligence the way they should" (Breuer, 2020). The use of intelligence testing can help diagnose intellectual disabilities or someone's intellectual potential.
- different schools
- physical accompaniments of feeble-mindedness.
- Learning technique
- children with superior abilities
- Superior children move civilization
- superiors misunderstood
- intelligence testing for jobs
- Feeble-minded individuals become delinquent
- prediction they made
- mental development
- school and student failure
- data on bright children
- influence mental development
- causes of failure
- intelligence determine success
- statistics of school children fail
- Feeble-minded samples of delinquents
- grades of intelligence