to defectives is quite different from that of the teacher. It is not
so much to determine the child's precise mental level as to diagnose
the condition of his brain, and to discover, by analysis of all the
symptoms, the original responsible agent. That, however, is the second
part of the doctor's work, and is of scientific interest; whereas the
first part, which consists in diagnosing the ailments which co-exist
with the mental deficiency, is of immediate practical utility.
Let us note, in conclusion, the scientific trend of the present day. A
large proportion of medical work is of scientific interest rather than
of direct utility for the patient. A concrete example will explain our
meaning. A severe shivering, a sudden elevation of the temperature, a
dulness on one side of the chest, the presence in the same position of
crepitant rales, a rusty, sticky expectoration--such is the syndrome
by which a practitioner recognises an attack of acute pneumonia. He
knows its duration; he knows the relief which will be produced by the
application of poultices. To ideas such as these may be reduced all
that is indispensable for the doctor to know in order to exercise his
art. The post-mortem examination of the hepatised lung, its increase
in density, the histological study of the engorged air cells and
bronchioles, the researches upon the pneumococcus, its culture, its
vitality--all this constitutes a search into etiology and
pathogenesis, whose aim is quite different.
The same distinction may be made in the medical study of defective
children. And from this point of view the results which at first seem
of secondary importance reappear in the foreground. This is the case,
for example, with the stigmata of degeneration. It would be
unreasonable to attribute to them an individual value, and to utilise
them for arranging children serially in the order of their mental
deficiency; but in the work of synthesis they are decidedly
significant, since their study leads one to consider them either as
the effects of, and therefore as witnesses to, alterations in the
nervous system, or as the consequences of causes sufficiently powerful
to have modified that system.
One would not deny all practical bearing to such investigations of
pathogenesis. It is a mistake of Tolstoy to regard them as the pastime
of refined dilettantes. When the biological study of defectives leads
to this idea, that the mental weakness of the defectives, like the
peculiarities in the character of the ill-balanced, is the result of
degeneration--the result, for instance, of the alcoholisation of a
people--it will quickly result in measures of social hygiene.
The point is, however, that this second part of the work cannot, in
our opinion, be carried out under the same conditions as the first.
One would like to believe that, in making observations upon heredity
and stigmata, the doctors are collecting, in their daily work,
materials for a great scientific work which will be produced by
degrees. No doubt all their schedules may some day be extracted from
the drawers in the office where they will sleep for a long time; but
with what object will they be taken out, if not to compile statistics
of doubtful value? The truth is that scientific investigation cannot
be carried on automatically and collectively. There is always a
personal element which is independent of all administrative
prescription. What use can be made of observations which are often
merely a collection of paper? If we are some day to understand the
role of heredity, of alcoholism, of insanity, of poverty, in the
production of defective children, it will be necessary for someone,
who wants to do a really good piece of work, to set aside all these
equivocal documents, and go straight to the facts, collecting his
information at first hand and in a critical spirit. Scientific work
can be done in no other way. When it is done otherwise it is worth
nothing.
We therefore suggest the following schedule for the medical
examination of defective children. The schedule includes two
parts--one part optional, because it is only of indirect interest;
another part which is obligatory. None of the questions in this part
should be left unanswered, and the doctor will also give the
instructions which he thinks ought to be followed.
MEDICAL SCHEDULE.
Date of examination: Height:
Name and date of birth of child: Weight:
Part 1. Obligatory.
(i.) Has the child any mental symptoms other than mental
deficiency? Signs of alcoholism, etc.?
(ii.) Is there reason to think the child has any weakness,
congenital or acquired? Cretinism?
(iii.) Are there any (_a_) Sensory defects--sight?
hearing?
(_b_) Motor defects--paralysis?
tremor, etc.?
(iv.) Is the child epileptic? What symptoms are
present--convulsions, vertigo, loss of consciousness? Their
frequency, etc.?
(v.) Has the child adenoids?
(vi.) Is the child hysterical?
(vii.) Any other ailments?
(viii.) What directions are to be given to the schoolmaster?
Part II. Optional.
A. Cephalometry and stigmata of degeneration.
B. History: Birth.
Convulsions.
Age at commencement of dentition.
Age at commencement of control of bladder
Age at commencement of and bowel.
Age at commencement of walking.
Age at commencement of speech.
Infantile diseases.
C. Heredity.
Father--
Name:
Date of birth:
Place of birth:
{ syphilis.
Illnesses { alcoholism.
{ insanity.
Mother: _Ibid._
Brothers and Sisters--
Number:
Age:
Mortality:
Health of survivors:
Etc.
To sum up, we do not think that the doctor will often have to reject a
child, but he will often furnish indications which will help to direct
the efforts of the teacher. He will proclaim the opinion, at once so
just and so humane, that the symptoms of mental deficiency and want of
balance in abnormal children do not arise from laziness or
naughtiness, but require no methods of treatment except such as are
likely to relieve them. And this conviction which animates him he will
impress little by little on the teacher. He will accustom the latter
not to regard a defective child at fault like a normal, responsible
child, whom he is sometimes tempted to punish in anger, but rather as
a patient whose faults should be overcome by persevering patience.
FOOTNOTES:
[13] For the sake of greater completeness, let us refer to a type of
imbecile with very characteristic features--namely, the _Mongol_. A
little round head, chubby cheeks, rosy as if painted with rouge,
oblique eyes, a nose broad at the base and with a tip like a little
ball, skin slightly yellow--the whole appearance of the child is such
that one doubts his European origin, and thinks of a Chinese doll,
with limbs of india-rubber, so great is the looseness of the joints.
During his first year the Mongol is rather drowsy and quiet--too
"old-fashioned," as the mothers say. In the second or third year he
becomes lively. His countenance acquires a comic and jolly expression,
and his imitative instincts become curiously developed, and as a
general rule he is very sweet-tempered. They all resemble one another,
and all "promise much and achieve little," for they never cease to be
imbeciles.
CHAPTER V
THE EDUCATIONAL AND SOCIAL RETURN OF SCHOOLS AND CLASSES FOR
DEFECTIVES
=An Inquiry in the Hospitals.=--Two years ago one of us betook himself
to M. X., an important official in one of our ministries, in order to
ask him to join a Ministerial Commission which was going to pay a
visit to one of our asylum-schools. M. X. shrugged his shoulders, and
replied energetically: "No, no, no! I have had enough of such visits.
I will go neither to the Salpetriere nor to Bicetre. What would I see
there? An idiot who allows his saliva to collect in his open mouth;
another who has epileptic fits; a third who can say nothing but 'Ba,
ba!' What would that prove? The only way in which one can find out
whether a school for bad cases of mental deficiency is good for
anything, is to find out the mental condition of those who leave. How
many defective subjects are there who, after having been treated at
the Salpetriere or at Bicetre, are able to gain their own livelihood?
That is what one would like to know, and that is what no one ever
tells us!"
The listener to these incisive and sensible remarks replied, after a
moment's reflection: "I entirely agree with you. The information which
you desire is of the greatest importance for judging the value of a
school. I imagine that such information would be difficult to obtain.
But one can try. I am willing to make the attempt."
A few days later the two authors of the present work took the field.
The long preliminary conversations which they had had together about
this subject had convinced them that they would encounter opposition.
But they decided to treat the question as one treats a scientific
matter--with perseverance, with courage, and without _parti pris_ of
any kind.
Let us subdivide the question to make it more plain. We proposed to
discover the value of a school. To make such an inquiry really
complete, it would be necessary to consider the question from two
points of view--the one educational, the other social.
The educational return consists in the degree of instruction which the
institution succeeds in giving to its pupils, after so much time, and
with so much expense. In the case of an institution for the sick, the
return will take the medical form of a cure or improvement of health.
In order to estimate such various returns, it would evidently be
necessary to be in possession of various data: (1) A knowledge of the
state of instruction or the state of health of the subjects on their
admission to the school; (2) a knowledge of their state of instruction
or of health on leaving, so that one would be able to estimate by
comparison what they owe to the school; (3) a knowledge of the cost
for each pupil, whether for instruction or for medical expenses.
The social return consists in the place taken by the pupils in
society. This depends in part, it is clear, upon the educational
return, but only in part. One could imagine a school, and there are
some of the kind, which only cares about producing graduates, without
thinking of what will become of them in life, even if they go to the
dogs. Every class, every school, for defectives ought to aim at
rendering its pupils socially useful. It is not a question of
enriching their minds, but of giving them the means of working for
their living. This is an important question. Upon this depends our
complete and final judgment of the utility of special education.
And be it understood this is not a simple question. Nothing is simple
in the sphere of sociological phenomena, and one cannot get hold of an
atom of truth except by inquiries bristling with difficulties of all
kinds--inquiries whose rules, moreover, are not yet known, but which
will certainly be known some day. It is quite necessary.
In order to discover the social return of an institution, school, or
hospital, there are many data to be brought together. Here are some of
them. What is the number of those who are ultimately able to look
after themselves? For how long a time are they able to do so? To what
extent have they been assisted by what they acquired at school? And,
lastly, what becomes of the failures?
But whatever the social or educational return may be, it would be most
important to know what would have become of similar cases who had
received no such instruction, or, rather, who had been instructed or
treated by different methods.
A single example will show the importance of these reservations.
Recently an alienist wanted to prove that all the idiots, without
exception, who had been treated in his asylum had been improved. He
published copious notes upon these children, which had been taken during
several years by different people--the physician, resident doctor,
attendant, teacher, etc. On reading these observations one learned that
one child, who on admission was unable to walk, by-and-by began to do
so. He had grown; he had also begun to speak, etc. In all this there was
nothing surprising, and we imagine that, in spite of his optimism, the
doctor, who is the author of these observations, would not pretend to
credit an increase in size to his medico-pedagogical treatment. As to
the rest of the development of the faculties we know nothing. It is
possible that an idiot who has ceased to be dirty, or who has learned to
dress himself, would have done so in any case without object-lessons. It
would be necessary to understand the natural development of idiocy in
order to estimate exactly the service which had been rendered by the
medico-pedagogical treatment. Otherwise sceptics will suspect that
three-quarters of what is claimed to be the result of treatment is
really due to nature.
After these preliminaries, let us now turn to our inquiry.
=At the Salpetriere.=--Here we were received most kindly. The
superintendent of the hospital introduced us to a most excellent
woman, Mme. Meusy, who was at that time head-mistress of the school
for defectives at the Salpetriere. This is a little school with about
140 girl pupils. It is part of the clinique of Dr. Voisin. The school
is divided into four classes, each of which is under a lady teacher.
It is a modest school, and, we think, little known. Elementary
education is given there, and, be it understood, the teachers make a
point of object-lessons and the training of the senses. But this
education has no original feature. It simply follows what is done
elsewhere. There is a workshop where the patients skilfully
manufacture artificial flowers. Dr. Voisin has for a long time been
asking for a laundry, for the sake of the patients who require
physical exercise, but he has not been able to get it.
Mme. Meusy had prepared us to some extent for the work which she had
done in the school by intelligent organisation. It was a pleasure to
us to see with our own eyes the notes she had kept regarding each of
her pupils. All the schedules were in perfect order, regularly filled
up to the day. They contained all the medical information, as to
diagnosis and treatment, which Mme. Meusy had been able to procure
from the doctor by reiterated requests. They contained also full
particulars as to the state of instruction of the child, her
character, her aptitudes, and the amount of her school attendance.
Such notes were repeated periodically, so that it was easy to find out
approximately whether or not the child had progressed during her stay
in the school. Finally, her history after discharge was noted. It is
only just that we should here express once more to Mme. Meusy how much
we admired the care, the order, and the intelligence with which she
had kept these individual histories. It is an example to be followed.
Mme. Meusy readily placed before us one after another all these
documents, and allowed us to extract from them the notes which seemed
of most value for our work. While one of us was taking the notes, she
contributed much valuable information in a lively voice; for she knew
her pupils admirably, she followed them after they left school, and
often received visits from them. But, although she clearly understood
the importance of our inquiry, she could not keep to herself a
distressing thought, which was that a large number of these
unfortunate girls had obtained no benefit from the instruction
received at the school during a long series of years. The majority, on
leaving school, had been transferred to asylums for adults. It
saddened her to acknowledge such impotence officially. However,
neither she nor her devoted staff of teachers was responsible, for if
their educational success was restricted, that was due to the fact
that the administration had for some time been sending her the
epileptic defectives, while reserving for the Fondation Vallee the
privilege of having the non-epileptic defectives. Now, everyone knows
that when epilepsy, with repeated fits, is present, it produces a
mental decadence against which the best teacher is powerless.
The information which we have collected about the work of the school
of the Salpetriere bears upon 117 children, who had left the school
during the period of four years. Now, this is how these children are
distributed, if they are classified according to their condition on
leaving:
1. Children who had _improved_. Some of these had returned to their
families; they lived at home, and were employed, more or less, and the
directress states that they had improved in their mental condition.
These numbered eight. Others had become capable of following a
calling, either in the asylum as attendants, or outside as
seamstresses, ironers, laundresses, domestic servants, etc. These
numbered twelve. (None was employed in making artificial flowers, for
which there was a workshop in the school.) The total number who had
improved, therefore, was twenty.
2. _Doubtful_ cases--children who had returned to their families, but
concerning whose mental state and employment precise information was
lacking. These numbered twenty.
3. Those who had got _worse_. These are the cases who had been marked
"transferred." They are to be found in the lunatic asylums, where they
are destined to pass the rest of their existence. Of these there is a
formidable number--namely, sixty.
4. Those who had _died_, of whom there were seventeen.
From all these calculations we obtained a figure to remember, and also
an opinion.
The figure is that the school for defectives at the Salpetriere
returns to active life 12 per cent. of its pupils.
The opinion is what one might have known in advance, that in the
majority of these cases the education given was a waste of effort, for
none of the pupils who had acquired a calling had been affected by the
worst degree of mental deficiency, idiocy, or imbecility. Moreover, none
of these was epileptic as well as mentally defective. In other words,
the two worst degrees of mental deficiency do not permit any hope that
the child will be made capable of following any calling; and even a
lesser degree of deficiency--that is to say, feeble-mindedness--is
equally cut off from hope when the feeble-mindedness is complicated by
epilepsy.
Before drawing from this first inquiry any practical conclusions, we
should like to reach a comprehensive view of the question. We shall
give our conclusions after we have synthetised all our results.
After the Salpetriere, Bicetre.
=Bicetre.=--The reader would be wrong to imagine that in these visits
to the hospitals we are forgetting the school cases of mental
deficiency; we are at the heart of the question. Whether we are
dealing with hospital cases or school cases, there are details of
organisation which are the same for all, and there are similar
mistakes which we must try to avoid.
The asylum-school of Bicetre, which owes its origin, in 1892, to the
General Council of the Seine, and its organisation to Dr. Bourneville,
has a world-wide reputation. Dr. Bourneville has set himself to
demonstrate, by every possible means, that idiots can be improved if
they are treated methodically and progressively. It is thanks to his
initiative that the medico-pedagogical treatment of idiocy, a
treatment which has been much vaunted by the doctors, is now known
everywhere. His clinique has constantly been cited as a model. This
model has been imitated in France and more especially abroad. The
asylums of Saint-Yon, of La Roche-sur-Yon, of Clermont, of
Sainte-Gemme, and of Auxerre, have been inspired by the example of
Bicetre, and have followed its methods. The State supports 440 boys in
the asylum-school of Bicetre, and 230 girls at the Fondation Vallee.
We have no intention of describing here at length the organisation of
these establishments. All who are interested may join in the Saturday
morning visits, when Dr. Bourneville goes round the whole of his
clinique. We shall content ourselves by saying that the children in
the asylum-school of Bicetre are divided into three groups:
1. The group of _invalids_--children who are idiotic, dirty,
epileptic, demented. In this group are those who are regarded as
incurable, and some who, although completely idiotic, are capable of
some slight improvement. By means of a _swing_ or _see-saw_ their
limbs are strengthened, by means of a _go-cart_ they are taught to
walk, and by means of the _parallel bars_ they are taught to keep
themselves upright.
2. The _healthy_ children of the _little school_, all of whom are able
to walk alone. These undergo treatment for uncleanly habits. Special
chairs are kept for the dirty, who are placed at stated times upon
conveniences in order to regularise their functions. Then come
_strengthening exercises_, which are gymnastics of a very simple kind;
_toilet lessons_ to teach them to wash themselves; _table lessons_, to
teach them to feed themselves, with spoon, fork, and even knife; the
_training of the senses_; and, lastly, _training in speech_.
3. The third group includes children in the _big school_. These are
less defective than the preceding. They are fit and healthy. But, on
the other hand, there are found here a great many abnormal children
(perverse and ill-balanced) who are not wanting in intelligence. The
big school includes four classes, each under the charge of a
professor. The education, especially in the last class, is carried
pretty far, and many of the pupils possess their certificate of study.
For reasons upon which we will not insist, we were not so delighted
with the hospital of Bicetre as we had been with the Salpetriere. We
might have dispensed with this visit. The medical superintendent of
the school for defectives at Bicetre has taken the trouble for a long
time to publish regularly every year a volume of several hundred
pages, which contains the most diverse statistical information about
everything that goes on. We have studied the volumes bearing upon four
years only--the years 1899, 1901, 1902, and 1903. Moreover, we profess
that we have some knowledge of the school at Bicetre, having not only
joined several times in the Saturday visits, but having on several
occasions carried on there researches in cephalometry; and, in the
last place, we have had the pleasure of following in their inspection
two members of the ministerial commission, who had had the idea of
finding out how the teachers in the big school were fulfilling their
functions.
It will be remembered that we made a distinction between the
educational and the social return. This distinction is not recognised
by everyone, and many good people take into account only the social
return. There are those who would judge the school of Bicetre by one
thing only--the number of patients who are made useful to society.
This is a question of great interest, but it is wrong to think that it
is the only one to be considered. It would be unjust to confine
oneself to it. The injustice can be understood by supposing that one
is considering an institution which receives idiots only. Would one
judge such an institution by asking how many of its patients become
capable of winning their livelihood? Certainly not. It is possible to
be of real service to the patients without raising them to such a
level. The cure of dirty habits, for example, is not a thing to be
disdained. Not only does it result in an economy of linen and washing,
but it makes the patient less disgusting, less difficult to take care
of. Here we have material and moral improvement which, even for those
who consider expense only, cannot be considered negligible, for in the
end the result is pecuniary economy. But, having stated this
principle, it would be necessary to find out what is the value, what
is the duration, what is the frequency of such improvements. It would
be necessary to know what is their cost, and to compare the cost with
the results in order to find out where one was. This kind of
stock-taking, both financial and medical, has no place in the
publications of the Bicetre, and cannot be replaced by isolated
observations on the treatment and improvement of idiot children. There
is here, therefore, a first lacuna. We note also with regret the
absence of any inspection of the teachers in the schools, who are left
to themselves without any supervision but that of the doctor. Now, the
doctor is not usually an educationist, and it is to be regretted that
he does not himself recognise his incompetency in pedagogy, but that,
on the contrary, his nature, often prone to take offence, will not
submit to any collaboration in his work. Having said this, we are
going to confine ourselves to the social return of the school of
Bicetre, since it is affirmed that such a return exists.
We would like to know exactly how many boys and girls have been able,
after their discharge, to work at a trade and to maintain themselves.
Upon this point of capital importance the publications of Bicetre tell
us nothing--absolutely nothing. It is, therefore, impossible to find
out the real value of this institution, so richly endowed, where the
visitor perambulates palatial buildings, is saluted by a fanfare, and
admires museums of natural history which would be the envy of many a
public educational establishment. The publications give a number of
particulars as to the number of dancing lessons, the walks to the
Jardin d'Acclimatation, and the cost of laundry, etc.; but we are left
in entire ignorance as to what all this is good for, and what is the
practical tangible benefit which society receives from it.
Everyone knows, however, that the director of the school for
defectives at Bicetre is an enlightened philanthropist, who has
devoted himself with remarkable zeal and activity to procuring for his
old pupils situations which they are capable of filling. He has
understood, and was one of the first to do so, that the question of
the education of defectives will never be settled until one has
settled that of the social usefulness of these children.
We have even learned indirectly that he has made many endeavours to
induce employers to engage his defectives as workmen; but it is likely
that these suggestions have not met with the success they deserved,
for the employers, threatened by the new law regarding accidents at
work, hesitate to saddle themselves with workers who, being liable to
attacks of epilepsy, or affected by motor inability, would lay upon
them a very heavy responsibility. On the other hand, the school
education has had a good deal of success since it has happened, as we
have already remarked, that several of the pupils obtained their
certificates of study.[14] But the only publications which we have
consulted say no more about these certificates of study than about the
trades followed by the defectives after leaving school. This silence
is very significant. In spite of oneself, one puts a bad
interpretation upon it. One has an irresistible tendency to believe,
not that all the effort at Bicetre has been in vain, but that it has
been disproportionate in relation to the result achieved.
We have no difficulty in admitting that idiots have been improved, but
to what an extent this amelioration loses in importance if the
majority of these idiots are destined to pass the rest of their life
in an asylum, where they will be nourished in absolute idleness, and
where, consequently, the heedless administration will gain nothing for
what has been taught them at the price of such great efforts!
Let us try, however, to interpret the silence of the text. In four
years 240 boys have left the school at Bicetre. In studying the school
of the Salpetriere we distinguished three classes of children--the
_improved_, the _stationary_ or _doubtful_, and those who have got
_worse_. We have consulted the statistical tables of Bicetre, and we
have not found a single one marked _worse_, although one-third of the
entire contingent are epileptic. Now, this is very surprising, since
we know that epilepsy with repeated fits inexorably results in mental
decadence. It is an enigma, which we explain in the following manner:
Those who are really decadent have been marked _stationary_ by
medical or pedagogical optimism. If our interpretation is correct, it
recoils forcibly upon the expression _improved_, which is applied
frequently to those discharged. To the interpretation of this word
_improved_ we are, therefore, obliged to turn our attention.
What, then, must be understood by _improved_ when this word is found
in the publications of Bicetre? First of all we must subtract a
certain number of subjects who have been marked _transferred_. We know
what is meant by this little word _transferred_ when it is applied to
the children. It is lugubrious. It amounts to a sentence for life. A
subject _transferred_ is one who, his time at school come to an end,
is removed to an asylum for the insane, where, in all probability, he
will stay to the end of his useless existence. If we eliminate the
transferred, and if we keep amongst the improved only those who,
having been so designated, have returned to their families, we get a
proportion of 58 in 290--that is, 20 per cent. of boys.
This proportion seems to us too large, on account of the optimism
which these documents exhibit. It is to be noticed, however, that
children are sometimes marked _very much improved_, or _notably
improved_. If, for the sake of prudence, we consider as improved only
those who are designated in this way, we have only eighteen, or 7 per
cent.
This new proportion, if small in absolute value, still seems to us an
exaggeration, because it is reached only by including a certain number
of children affected with epilepsy. It must, therefore, be believed
that their epilepsy has improved. But the amelioration or cure of
epilepsy is not a matter of education; it cannot be considered as a
success to be credited to active medico-pedagogical treatment. Let us
therefore put the cured epileptics aside. There will then remain only
seven who have undergone a notable amelioration and have returned to
their families. What percentage is this? The total contingent upon
which we have been making our calculations numbered 290, but it is
right to exclude all the epileptics, for the reasons we have
mentioned. This brings the number down to 216, and the number of
children really improved, calculated upon 216, amounts, for the boys,
to from 3 to 4 per cent.
By similar calculations, into the details of which we will not enter,
we have shown that the improved amongst the girls are more
numerous--namely, 20 per cent. But Vallee contains relatively far
fewer epileptics than Bicetre. We do not know, also, how many of them
have become capable of working at a trade.
We therefore conclude with the following propositions:
1. _At the school of the Salpetriere, 20 per cent. of defective girls
improved, and 12 per cent. are able to work at a trade._
2. _At the Fondation Vallee, also, 20 per cent. of defective girls
have improved. No return has been furnished as to their future
employment._
3. _In the case of Bicetre, the number of defective boys improved is
from 3 to 4 per cent. It is not known how many of these defectives are
employed after leaving school._
* * * * *
=Some Conclusions.=--It seldom happens that one finishes an inquiry
without experiencing some disappointment. One starts with great
ambitions, intending to make everything plain, but on the way one is
forced to lower one's flag. The truth escapes one. Sometimes it is the
facts which conceal it from us, sometimes it is man who has an
interest in concealing it. But the disappointment which has attended
our inquiry would surpass the foresight of the most sceptical. On the
other hand, if the school for defectives at the Salpetriere has
enabled us to collect valuable information, we owe this good fortune
entirely to the intelligent initiative of a woman. It was the
directress of the school who, apart from all intervention, medical or
other, had had the idea of instituting these very complete schedules,
which enabled us to discover the economic return of her school. The
management deserved none of the credit. As to the school of Bicetre,
we have studied it only through its annual publications, and we have
managed with great difficulty to obtain only an infinitesimal amount
of information of very doubtful value.
What lessons are we to draw from these examples as to the future
organisation of our schools for defectives? We had hoped that the
study of these institutions would have provided us with ready-made
experience as to the measures to be taken for founding schools for
defectives under good conditions. The contrary has happened. The
example of these institutions has taught us one thing--the faults
which we ought not to repeat.
Every impartial mind ought to be with us when we express the view that
henceforth the activities of the schools and hospices should be made
plain by precise information. For this it would be necessary to take
the following measures:
1. That the definition of the grades of mental deficiency should not
vary from one doctor to another, but that one should know what is
meant by the word _idiot_, the word _imbecile_, and the word
_feeble-minded_. A purely conventional but precise definition would be
infinitely better than the present want of any; and we refer to the
convention which we have suggested above.
2. That upon entrance and leaving, the mental condition and the state
of instruction of the pupils should be precisely noted, so that by
comparison of such notes, rather than by arbitrary estimates, one
should be able to determine in what way the pupils have changed during
their stay in school.
3. That on leaving the institution, the children, whether they return
to ordinary life or are transferred to asylums for the insane, should
be followed up, and that particulars regarding their condition should
be transmitted to, and centralised in, the office of the school, so
that the masters may be able to judge the ulterior destiny of these
children whom they have surrounded with so much solicitude during a
period which often amounts to twelve or even fifteen years.
By such organisation one would at last know exactly, or at any rate
approximately, what are the services rendered by such an institution.
One would compare these services with the expenses, and one would see
whether the receipts were sufficient to justify the expenditure, or
whether, on the contrary, the money had been foolishly squandered, as
we have reason to fear may be the case. We would also see upon what
children educational effort should be directed, in order to obtain the
maximum return. It would be possible to find out, for example, whether
it is worth while continuing for five years, eight years, or more, to
give lessons in reading to a child who, after two years, is still
unable to spell. We will also consider very seriously whether a child
who is unfortunately subject to repeated attacks of epilepsy, which no
medical treatment has improved, and who is destined to descend
progressively and inevitably through all stages of mental decadence,
should be kept in his place in a class; and whether the teachers would
not be doing better to leave the child at peace than to teach him
laboriously the rules of arithmetic and grammar, which will certainly
be forgotten soon afterwards in the cloud which will obscure the
intelligence.
One day, when we were walking through a residential school, we were
struck by the spectacle of a poor epileptic. This was a little girl of
about fifteen years of age. She was wearing her school apron, and upon
her head was the little osier cap which epileptics are made to wear,
to avoid the danger of falls upon the head. It was lesson-time. Pale
and thin, the little patient was sitting quietly in her place,
listening to the lesson of her mistress, who was explaining the rule
of the agreement of the participle. Did she understand? We hope so,
since she belonged to one of the higher classes--the second, if we
remember rightly. In any case, she was making a great effort to follow
the grammatical explanation, and her forehead was thrown into
wrinkles. All at once she gave a slight sigh, slipped down in her
seat, and fell. The attendant took her in her arms and carried her
into a corner of the room. The lesson continued with general
indifference. The children pay little attention to such accidents,
because they are so used to them. Now one, now another, has her attack
of epilepsy. After a few minutes our little scholar came to herself.
She appeared quite dazed. The attendant spoke to her with kind
indifference. "Come, now, that is better. It is nothing. It is all
over." The child did not reply, but docilely allowed herself to be led
to her seat. She took up her former position, appearing to listen
vaguely; and on her pinched face, with its drawn features, the lesson
in grammar continued to fall. The people, visitors and professors, who
were present at that scene, and thought it quite natural, surely did
not understand the heart-break of it. Some time afterwards we made
inquiries about this pupil, being curious to know how she was, and
what she was doing. We were told: "She is a poor little thing, who has
forgotten a great deal. Formerly she was a bright child. Now she is
going back every day. By-and-by she will no longer be able to read.
This is nearly always the way with our epileptics!"
This sad story, which we have just recalled, we give as a striking
illustration of our statistical calculations regarding the ultimate
fate of these institution cases. Be it remembered, we had reached this
very important conclusion: that epileptics, whether feeble-minded, or
imbecile, or idiotic, never become capable of working at a trade. This
somewhat vague conclusion it would be of great interest to examine
more closely. Our little epileptic, who is gradually falling back, is
an example. She has already reached the height of her development; she
is fifteen years of age, and she is beginning to decline. We foresee
the time when she will no longer know how to read. Is there, then,
any use in wearying the poor thing by teaching her an abstract grammar
rule?
* * * * *
Let us turn now to our school cases. Our conclusions may be divined.
We expressly demand that the utility of the schools shall be
rigorously established, and that the teachers and inspectors shall be
bound to take exact notes of the mental condition and the state of
instruction of the pupils on entrance and on leaving. In this way one
will act like any good shopkeeper, who considers it one of his chief
duties to keep accounts of what he is doing. His system of
book-keeping shows his position in a way which is indispensable if he
is not to lose his money. He knows at what price he buys, at what
price and under what conditions he sells, and whether, in consequence,
his profits are sufficient to encourage him to continue to deal in
such and such articles.
In the same way, in a well-managed school for defectives, it is
necessary to know the exact details concerning the condition of the
pupils on entrance and on leaving, in order that one may be able to
judge the services rendered by the school; in order that one may be
able to find out whether the educational methods employed are good,
bad, or indifferent; whether they are better than those of another
school, where different methods are followed, and so on. Such control
is equally necessary in order to find out whether a particular
category of children gives greater degrees of success than another;
whether certain degrees of mental deficiency are capable of
improvement only to an infinitesimal extent. Such things cannot be
known in advance, and should not be decided lightly in credence of an
_a priori_ opinion, but should be determined by accurate scientific
methods, in the interest of the schools, in the interest of the
pupils, and also in the interest of the tax-payers, who bear the cost.
It will not do to content oneself with admiring _in abstracto_ the
goodness of the methods and the progress of the pupils, but it must
ever be remembered that the aim of the schools should be to fit the
defectives to take a useful place in society. The school should not
aim at turning out brilliant pupils, stars in competition, but
individuals capable of looking after themselves and gaining their own
livelihood. This should be the constant pre-occupation of the
teachers. They should not shut themselves up within the four walls of
their school, saying, "The life outside is no concern of ours." It is
their imperative duty to consider the school life as a preparation for
life outside. They ought, therefore, to pay attention to the needs of
the immediate school environment, in order to know what are the
industries which require workers, to take account of which of them are
accessible to defectives, and to direct their education accordingly.
Domestic service in the country, for example, which requires but
little initiative, would seem to be an excellent refuge for
feeble-minded girls with good instincts. Agricultural labour supplies
an excellent outlet for the boys, for in the country life is less
complicated, and adaptation is more easy, than in the towns. There is
a certain, practical, even easy way of finding out whether the teacher
has been trying to keep in contact with real life, and whether his
school for defectives is well managed. It is to find out what becomes
of the defectives on leaving school, and what percentage he has been
able to place in situations with a suitable salary.
Such measures of control are so logical that they only require to be
formulated to obtain the immediate assent of all sensible minds. Yet
one may ask whether, as a matter of fact, in the schools managed by
the State, the inspectors occupy themselves sufficiently with this
practical side of education, and do not even make the mistake of
judging the education by itself, according to a conventional,
literary, or scientific ideal. We are not speaking of public schools,
colleges, and lycees. These establishments are attended by normal
children, and it may be admitted that it is not, strictly speaking,
the business of the State to prepare these for social life. As a
matter of fact, that is not our own opinion, but that does not matter.
What is certain is that the duty of the State becomes more precise and
more pressing when it is a question of assuring the lot of the
defectives. Has it always been kept in mind that their education
should put them in the way of an occupation, and that one should teach
them nothing useless, so as not to make them lose their time? We do
not think so. We hope that the schools for the blind take care to know
whether the Braille which they teach their pupils is a method of
reading and writing which will be useful to them in life; whether the
manual arts, such as caning chairs, the making of brushes and
mattresses, are the best means which they can teach to the
non-musicians whereby to gain their bread. We equally hope that in the
schools for the deaf and dumb, which are teaching their pupils by the
oral method--with what effort, what expense, and what devotion one may
imagine--they have inquired what percentage of their pupils attained
the ability to communicate verbally with people other than their
teachers, and also what is the percentage of pupils who, ten years
after leaving school, still use that method and find it advantageous.
All these questions should be asked, and conscientious minds should
try to find an answer to them by impartial inquiry, in order to find
out whether the methods are useful, and whether the school is
directing its energies well. What is being done about this with
respect to the schools for defectives?
We must do this justice to the legislation at present projected with
regard to defectives, that it is not indifferent with regard to this
question of control. The Ministerial Commission, in which one of us
took part, heard many demands for guarantees of this kind. Its
mistrust was awakened, and it made a number of suggestions which have
been included in the Bill.
Thus, an elementary school inspector is trusted with the duty of
taking account of the educational progress of each child. A little
book must be kept recording full particulars of each individual case.
The principle of supervision by a Care Committee after leaving school
has been adopted. All this is excellent. The law cannot enter into
minute details. Administrative rules must be drawn up to provide
against the two causes of error, prejudice and negligence.
Let us consider this question from our own point of view, and
distinguish clearly between the educational and the social return.
=The Educational Return of the Special Schools and Classes.=--In the
first place, in order to gauge the advantages of special education, it
is necessary to find out what becomes of defectives when they are left
in the ordinary schools. It is quite clear that special education
should be condemned and suppressed if it does not do more than the
ordinary schools. We have seen that, in the latter, the defective is a
dead weight, and the ill-balanced is a nuisance. Nevertheless, one
must not jump to the conclusion that these children are in no wise
modified by the school influences, and do not profit in any degree by
the instruction. We have already pointed out some very touching facts:
a little defective girl has learned to read, thanks to the persevering
help of one of her normal companions. This proves, at least, that
association with normal children may be good for something, but let us
leave such anecdotes and attempt to reach a comprehensive view of the
situation.
We have been able to collect in the primary schools of Paris, thanks
to the kind assistance of M. Belot, particulars which are very
valuable, though restricted in amount. These particulars we have
examined in every possible way, and we always reach the same
conclusion: _the defective makes very slow progress in the ordinary
schools_.
Let us consider, for example, _en bloc_, forty-five defectives of
whom we possess records, and see to what extent they are behind at
different ages. We get the following table:
Age. Retardation.
7 2 years }
8 2 " } about 2 years.
9 1-1/2 " }
10 3 " }
11 3-1/2 " } about 3 years.
12 3 " }
13 3-1/2 " }
14 6 " }
15 5 " } about 5 years.
Thus, the amount of retardation increases with the years. It is at
first two years, then three, then five. But this augmentation in the
amount of retardation, which is the first fact to strike the
attention, ought not to conceal from us that there is real progress in
the mental condition and in the studies; in fact, we may remark that
if a defective child, in passing from the age of eight to eleven, has
an augmentation of retardation of one year with respect to his
companions, this proves that in the same time he has progressed two
years with respect to himself. It is like an omnibus which goes more
and more slowly, yet advances all the same. To be more precise, let us
say that, since the defectives reach, as an upper limit, the
intermediate course, and that in the proportion of two-thirds, one may
conclude that they make nearly half the progress of the normal
children. Be it understood, this is only roughly true, and many
reservations must be made with regard to details. But the indication
which these documents afford is, nevertheless, very instructive, for
it shows us that the majority, two-thirds at least, of the defectives
appear regularly to duplicate each class, or to take two years to pass
a stage which the normal child passes in one. It is important to
remember this, for the teachers do not always give the facts their
true value. They have a tendency to compare the slow progress of the
defective with the more rapid progress of the normal, and to conclude
from this comparison that the defective remains stationary. This is a
pure illusion, which may be compared to what one experiences when
looking out of the window of a train in motion. One sees another train
going in the same direction but more slowly, and imagines that the
second train is not moving. Let us retain, therefore, provisionally,
the following important idea: _Only half the defectives in an ordinary
school reach with difficulty the intermediate course, first year,
passing through the different stages in double the normal time._ No
doubt one would find many examples of slower progress still, three or
four times the normal. On the other hand, the teacher sometimes points
out a defective who has improved very rapidly, as if his intellect
awoke from a long sleep. Such cases exist, but they are very rare, and
they are open to the suspicion that an error in diagnosis has been
made, and that the child who has improved so greatly was wrongly
considered defective.
With regard to the ill-balanced, the success of the ordinary school is
much greater. A recent inquiry taught us that in the course of two
years half the children noted as ill-balanced were regarded by the
teachers as improved. This figure speaks for itself.
From this we may conclude in a general way that it is essential that
the special schools and classes should bring more than half of their
defective pupils to the level of the intermediate course, and improve
more than half of the ill-balanced, if they are to render public
services superior to those of the ordinary schools.
This must be the aim. How are we to know whether it is attained or
not? By supervision exercised in the most serious manner, by well-kept
individual records, in which are noted only facts which can be
controlled.
We remember, a dozen years ago, having turned over the records of
young defectives in an asylum-school which had the reputation of
perfect organisation, a reputation otherwise deserved, for everything
that was shown to the public on visiting days was perfect. But a
distinction must be drawn between what one sees and what one does not
see. The records were kept with surprising negligence. They were dirty
in appearance, torn, disordered, falling to bits. On reading them one
only met with vague estimations, loosely expressed, about children
who, as was repeated to satiety, "would make progress if they would
work better." The less we say the better about contradictory
diagnosis, such as one we noticed on a certificate of discharge:
"Complete idiocy--very much improved"; or the too optimistic
prognosis, really very naive, if the writer has not had the bad taste
to be ironical: "Vicious child--would make an excellent housemaid." If
documents could be kept in this way, it is quite clear that those who
so kept them felt pretty sure that nobody would ever read them.
We demand that the notes which show the educational progress of the
pupils should be written under the constant fear of control, in order
that they may be guaranteed against negligence and interested
optimism. The manner of control is very simple, and may be summed up
in three paragraphs.
1. The estimation of the progress of the children should be made by
the professors themselves, since they know each child well. The
professor will always keep in mind that his notes will be checked by
the inspector. With regard to instruction, notes will be kept with
regard to reading, writing, arithmetic, spelling, according to the
methods which we have indicated, and such remarks as "good," "very
good," "passable," each signifying absolutely nothing, will be
avoided. With regard to the manual work, it goes without saying that
the record would have to be made in a somewhat different way.
2. The inspector will examine a certain number of cases chosen
haphazard. He must carry out this control with an open mind and
without prejudice.
3. He will make use of methods of control of a strictly impersonal
nature.
=Social Return.=--We are surprised to find that abroad there have been
published very few particulars concerning the social return of the
schools, although they have been in existence for a long time, some of
them for forty years. Statistics are rare, without commentaries, and
some of them are apparently prejudiced. In order to find out what they
are worth, we think it would be necessary to live in the country, and
to observe carefully for oneself the work of the schools. The official
documents do not teach very much, and one may suspect that every
public service which is not supervised in the most intelligent manner,
and incited by competition, will slip into routine and empiricism. We
demand an inquiry on the two following points: How many defectives are
provided with a trade when they leave the special schools? How many
defectives are provided with a trade when they do not leave the
special schools?
Such an inquiry, we may be certain, has never been seriously
undertaken. Here are some statistics. Mme. Fuster, after a stay in
Germany, where she visited some _Hilfschule_ and _Hilfsclasse_
(literally, "help-schools" and "help-classes") made a communication to
the Societe de l'Enfant, from which it appears that in the case of 90
classes for defectives in Berlin, 70 to 75 per cent. of the defective
pupils who were there became able to carry on a trade; 25 to 30 per
cent. died in the course of study, or returned to their homes, or were
sent to medical institutions for idiots.
According to a more recent inquiry, made under the auspices of M. de
Gizycki at Berlin, and published in a book by Paul Dubois, 22 per
cent. of the children were sent home or to asylums; 11 per cent. were
apprenticed; 62 per cent. worked at occupations which required no
knowledge and yielded little pay (labourers, crossing-sweepers,
ragmen). If we add together these two last groups, we reach a
proportion of 73 per cent. of defectives who have been made, or who
have become, more or less useful.
We shall quote a last document, to which we attach more importance
than to the preceding, for we have full confidence in the author. Dr.
Decroly has kindly arranged at our request a few figures relating to
the occupational classification of the girls discharged from a special
class in Brussels. He states that the class was opened only in 1903,
that education in Belgium is not compulsory, that many of the pupils
leave the class too soon--all circumstances which explain the
smallness of the success. He firmly believes in the educational value
of special instruction, provided one does not expect miracles. He has
a good critical mind. We cannot publish here the whole table. We shall
summarise it thus:
Of three idiots, practically nothing is known; of eight imbeciles, one
is employed at home, one unemployed (?), and one is messenger to a
shoemaker. One can scarcely expect any real return in the case of
imbeciles and idiots, and the merit of Dr. Decroly's statistics lies
in the fact of distinguishing between such children and the
feeble-minded. Let us speak more fully of the latter. They are thirty
in number. Concerning nine there are no particulars. Two have entered
a Catholic school, and nothing more is known about them. If we
subtract these eleven, there remain nineteen. Some of these are "kept
at home," or "occupied at home"; of these there are five. We do not
know exactly what they are doing. There are others who "work," but it
is not stated whether this is outside, or whether the work deserves to
be taken into account. Four belong to this category. There remain the
apprentices (tailors, cigarette-makers, sewers, etc.), of whom there
are nine. Perhaps the last figure is the only one which deserves to be
taken into account. Finally, then, out of nineteen feeble-minded
subjects, regarding whom particulars have been supplied, one half, or
50 per cent., have been apprenticed; or more than half, 75 per cent.,
if we count the defectives who "work." We are not, therefore, very far
from the figures collected by Mme. Fuster for the special classes of
Berlin, nor from those published by Gizycki.
We do not think enough of the ordinary school, and of the service it
renders to the defectives; or, rather, we are too ready to assert that
it does nothing for them. Yet, all the defectives who leave it do not
turn out badly. There are journalists who try to attract the attention
of public bodies by declaring that defectives, left to themselves,
inevitably fall into mendicancy and crime. What do they know about it?
Absolutely nothing, since no serious inquiry has ever been carried
out. Even we, for several years, allowed ourselves to be influenced by
such suggestions, until the day when one of these journalists went
rather too far. We refer to an alienist who published in a morning
paper a series of articles on the defectives. After having estimated
their total number at 40,000, he called them "the madmen of
to-morrow," truly an excellent title for a sensational article. But,
little as one might think it, of all that was written nothing was
really proved. Those who think that the defectives are destined to
become lunatics are just as much in a dream as those who declare they
will become criminals. The fact is that we are in complete ignorance,
because one has always recoiled from an inquiry which promised to be
as long as it would be troublesome. And it is a disgrace, let us say
frankly, that no State has ever undertaken it.
Through the intervention of an inspector, M. Belot, we have inquired
of twenty heads of schools what has become of the defectives whom they
notified to us two years ago. We have made these inquiries with regard
to sixty-six children only. Poor figures, indeed, and we would not
give them, but that a little is better than nothing. These sixty-six
children may be classified thus: Thirty-five are defective,
twenty-six ill-balanced, and three both defective and ill-balanced.
Retardation is quite plain in the unstable, amounting to from one to
two years; it is very marked in the case of the defectives (one alone
has a retardation of two years, the others have a retardation of
three, four, six, and even seven years). We give these figures only
that it may not be imagined that we are dealing with cases of slight
feeble-mindedness with a retardation of one or two years. It is
necessary to understand these details in order to form a correct idea
of the value of the figures.
The particulars regarding the ultimate destiny of these sixty-six
children are as follows:
1. _No Return in the Case of Fourteen Children._--Some left the
district without giving an address. Some even left school with insults
from the parents directed against the teachers.
2. _Children still at School._--These number twenty-two. We have
already spoken about this little group, and have remarked that some of
them have improved.
3. _Children sent Home or placed in Asylums._--There are three who
have been sent to asylums. We know one of them, an imbecile, but he
had bad instincts, and who knows but that he might have been made
useful? With regard to the others, who have been sent home, we have
only very vague particulars, and the interpretation of their condition
is quite arbitrary. Some of them seem to be useful. Some girls help at
home. Some boys assist their fathers at their work, but are said to be
wanting in balance or to require constant supervision. We have thought
it well to include them in this third category, which stands for the
social waste. They number ten. We repeat that the limits of this group
are extremely ill-defined. With a little optimism one might have
passed three-quarters into the following group; with a little more
strictness, on the other hand, the present group would have been
larger. We emphasise the difficulty of limiting the frontier
impartially. It would be a good thing to make use of a criterion,
good or bad, but exact. One will, no doubt, be found, but in the
meantime we have none.
4. _Children who have become Useful._--These are they who have become
capable of following some calling. It is evident that one should take
account of the nature of the calling followed; many are misery in
disguise. A little time should also be allowed, for a child may not
find definite occupation immediately on leaving school. In fact, the
only particular we have regarding this last group of children is, that
they have entered on an apprenticeship. Girls are apprenticed to
dressmakers or laundresses. Boys are apprenticed as hairdressers,
tinsmiths, gilders, printers, carpenters, etc. These children number
seventeen. These results have impressed us rather favourably. We did
not expect that the majority of defectives from the ordinary school
would enter an apprenticeship; but, in fact, the majority did so. If
we abstract the two first groups, those about whom the particulars are
wanting, and those who have not yet left school, there remain
twenty-seven children, of whom seventeen have been apprenticed, or 76
per cent.
From these statements the following conclusion is reached--namely,
that, contrary to an opinion which attempts are being made to spread
abroad, the ordinary school does render real service to the defective
child. We have already seen, _a propos_ of the educational return,
that the ordinary school carries a proportion of the defectives as far
as the intermediate course. All these facts are mutually confirmatory.
Is it possible to go farther? We have just seen that the ordinary
school permits the occupational classing of 76 per cent. of the
defectives. Now, this proportion is, by an unexpected agreement,
identical with that obtained in the classes of Berlin and Brussels,
whence an opponent of special instruction would hasten to argue that
such instruction is useless, or that, at least, it could not prove
its usefulness except on the condition of insuring occupational
classing superior to 76 per cent. We do not think, after mature
reflection, that this proposition would be justified. All our figures
show is that the majority of defectives who pass through the ordinary
school had not entirely lost their time, since they reached the stage
of entering upon an apprenticeship. But it will not do to take account
only of the proportion of children classed as workers; it would be
necessary also to take account of the duration of such classing, and
especially of its quality. A defective enters upon an apprenticeship.
That is good, but how long does he retain it? Will he be discharged as
incapable at the end of a few months? If he is kept, will he remain in
the lowest employments--for example, unskilled labour? In connection
with all trades, there are minor occupations in which defectives
stagnate. Our figures do not take account of these differences, which
are of considerable interest, nor do they give any fuller ideas with
regard to the utilisation of the defectives. And it would be necessary
for the statistical method to be carried out with greater perfection
to enable us to measure the services rendered by special instruction.
It is probable that the special school would render greater services
than the ordinary school, because it has greater advantages: teachers
experienced in the training of defectives, a curriculum better fitted
to the aptitudes of the latter, and, most important of all, the
possibility of individual instruction.
Let us stop here. In the meantime this is all that we can say with
regard to the organisation and control of special education. If we
were to attempt to go farther we could do so only on _a priori_
grounds. The time has come for experiment. The new classes which are
being formed in Bordeaux, Paris, and elsewhere, must be carefully
watched. We shall grope, we shall make attempts, certainly we shall
commit mistakes, which will not matter very much if only we have the
mind to recognise them and the courage to put them right. The
essential thing is for all the world to understand that empiricism has
had its day, and that methods of scientific precision must be
introduced into all educational work, to carry everywhere good sense
and light.
FOOTNOTES:
[14] In trying to explain this success, one must, no doubt, take into
account the comparatively advanced age of the children, the probable
leniency of the examiners, and, above all, the fact that the
ill-balanced subject is a moral rather than a mental defective.
APPENDIX
[N.B.--Throughout the Appendix Roman numerals refer to
ages--_e.g._, IV. 2 = second test for children of four years.]
Part of the interest of this work on defective children consists in
the fact that in it we find the origin of those ideas and
investigations which culminated in the formation of the Binet-Simon
Scale of Intelligence, now so widely known throughout Europe and
America.
The ideal that Binet set before himself was the formation of a scale
which should measure intelligence in something the same way as the
foot-rule measures height. The first difficulty was the unit. If we
regard intelligence as the power to cope with a situation, we see that
this power in a general way increases with the experience of the
child, or, we may say, with his age. A child of nine should have more
intelligence than one of eight, a child of eight than a child of
seven, and so on. We may suppose, then, that there is a normal
intelligence for each age just as there is a normal height for each
age, although in the first case, as in the second, many children fall
below and many rise above the standard. It is clearly by no means so
easy to establish a norm for intelligence as for height, nevertheless,
the method should be the same; that is, we should begin by finding out
what the intelligence of children of different ages actually is, and
from these results we should derive averages which might be used as
norms.
In the course of his work with defectives, Binet, as we have seen,
had gathered a number of questions which he had found useful as tests
of intelligence. He now, in conjunction with Dr. Simon, proceeded to
extend the number of these tests and to assign each to its appropriate
age. The method he adopted was this: He tried each test on a great
number of normal children of the same age. If a large majority
answered satisfactorily, he set the test down as suitable for that
age; if a majority failed, he moved it to a more advanced age, and
tested it again on older children. When we consider his scale then, we
must remember that the arrangement is no arbitrary one, but has been
derived from actual experiment.
In 1908, after having been tried on over two hundred Parisian school
children, the tests were published in the form of a scale, giving a
measure of intelligence graded from three to thirteen years of age. By
this scale it was held a child's mental age, which, of course, was
often not the same as his chronological age, could be determined.
In 1911 there was published a revised scale in which, owing to the
results of further experiment and criticism, a considerable number of
alterations in the grading of the tests was made. This revised form of
the scale is given below. For convenience in use the _exact_ words to
be said to the child are placed first, the particular directions for
each test being given afterwards. General directions regarding the
tests and the method of marking will be found at the end of the scale.
Tests of Intelligence.
_Three Years._
1. "Show me your eyes." "Show me your nose." "Show me your mouth."
Count the child correct if he indicates in any way that he
understands.
2. "I am going to say two numbers. Say them after me--3, 7."--"Again,
6, 4."--"Again, 0, 5."
The examiner must say the figures slowly; an interval of half a second
should be allowed between the two. The child passes if he is
successful once out of the three trials.
3. "Here is a picture; tell me what you see."
The child passes at this level if he simply enumerates objects seen in
the pictures (Figs. 1, 2, 3).
4. "What is your name?"
For a pass the surname must be given, but if the child says his
Christian name only, the examiner may press him by asking "What else?"
5. "Say this sentence after me--'I am cold and hungry.'"
If the child is timid, he may be tried first with shorter sentences.
He is not allowed to pass unless his enunciation is perfect. A
sentence containing six syllables should be remembered at this level.
_Four Years._
1. "Are you a little boy or a little girl?"
If necessary, this question may be divided: "Are you a little boy?"
"Are you a little girl?"
2. "What is this?"--"And this?"--"And this?" The examiner shows the
child successively a key, a penny, and a knife.
3. "I am going to say three numbers. I want you to repeat them.
Listen. 2, 7, 5."--"Again, 9, 0, 4."--"Again, 3, 8, 1."
One success suffices.
4. "You see these lines. Tell me which is longer." See Fig. 7.
No hesitation or uncertainty is satisfactory.
_Five Years._
1. "You see these boxes. Tell me which is heavier."
The examiner places two boxes precisely the same in appearance, but
weighing respectively 3 grammes and 12 grammes, before the child. He
repeats the test with similar boxes, weighing respectively 6 and 15
grammes, and then the first pair is again presented. The boxes should
be arranged so that the heavier one is alternately at the right and at
the left side. Very young children nearly always indicate one of the
boxes by chance without testing them. In this case the examiner is
allowed to say, "You must take the boxes in your hand and weigh them."
2. "Copy this picture for me."
The examiner shows the child a card on which is drawn a square, the
side of which measures an inch and a half. The child is given pen and
ink, an unfamiliar instrument to him at this age. He passes if his
square can be recognised as a square.
3. "Listen to this, and repeat it after me: 'My name is Charlie. Oh!
the naughty dog!'"
Memory of a sentence containing ten syllables is required.
4. "You see these pennies. Now count them with your finger."
Four pennies are placed before the child. They are juxtaposed, but not
superposed. In order to pass, he must count them, touching each with
his forefinger as he says its number. Some little children begin to
count before they touch the first penny; thus they may reach five or
six or even more.
5. "Put these pieces together so as to make them look like this."
The examiner has two oblong cards--postcards do very well--one of
which is cut in two pieces along the diagonal. Before giving the
direction to the child, he places the intact card on the table, and,
nearer the child, the two pieces of the other card arranged so that
the two hypotenuses form a right angle.[A]
_Six Years._
1. "Is it morning or afternoon now?"
As many little children tend simply to repeat the examiner's last
words, it is better to reverse the terms "morning" and "afternoon"
when the examination takes place in the afternoon.
2. "What is a fork?"--What is a table?"--"A chair?"--"A horse?"--A
mamma?"
Three levels of intelligence may be distinguished in the responses.
The lowest is that of silence, or repetition of the term, or
designation by gesture. The second, which should be attained at the
age of six, is that of definition by use, as: "A fork is for eating
with." The third level is attained by the ninth year; the child at
this level attempts to describe the object or to say what it is made
of. The type of the majority of the definitions determines one's
judgment of the level attained.
3. "Copy this picture for me."
The examiner shows the child a card on which is drawn a diamond, of
which the side measures an inch and a half, and the acute angles 60
degrees. The drawing must be done with pen and ink.
4. "Count these pennies."
Thirteen pennies are placed on the table in a group (not in a line)
touching one another, but not superposed.
5. "Which is the prettier of these two faces?"--"And of these?"--"And
of these?"
See Fig. 4.
Three correct responses required.
_Seven Years._
1. "Show me your right hand."--"Show me your left ear."
2. "Here is a picture. Tell me what you see."
Description of picture required (Figs. 1, 2, 3.)
3. "Do you see this key? Go and put it on that chair. Then close the
door. Then take the box which is lying on the chair near the door and
bring it to me. First put the key on the chair, then close the door,
then bring me the box."
No help or suggestion by word or look must be given during the
execution of this task.
4. "How much money is there here altogether?"
Three pennies and three halfpennies are placed on the table before the
child.
5. "What is this colour?"--"And this?"--"And this?"--"And this?"
The examiner shows the child successively the four colours--red,
yellow, blue, and green.
_Eight Years._
1. "You know a butterfly?"--"And you know a fly?"--"Are they like one
another?"--"Well, in what way are they not alike?"
The same questions are asked about wood and glass, and paper and
cardboard. Two comparisons at least must be given correctly.
2. "You can count, can't you?"--"Well, will you count for me backwards
from twenty to nothing? Begin 20, 19...."
One error is allowed, but the task must be finished in twenty seconds.
3. "What is missing in this picture?" The child must not be allowed to
see the figure in the diagram until he has answered the questions
regarding the heads. Otherwise, when shown a head, he may say, being
influenced by suggestion, "It has no body." See Fig. 5.
The same question is put for each of the four pictures.
4. "Can you tell me what day it is?"--"And will you tell me the date
also?"
The year must be given; three or four days' latitude is allowed in the
day of the month.
5. "I am going to say five numbers. Listen and repeat them after me.
5, 8, 2, 9, 1."--"Again, 3, 7, 5, 2, 0."--"Again, 1, 3, 7, 2, 9."
One success suffices.
_Nine Years._
1. "Would you like to play shop? You be shopkeeper. I will buy from
you this box. It costs twopence." Here the examiner hands the child a
shilling. "Now, will you give me change out of this money here?"
In order to give the change the child is provided with one of each of
our current coins--sovereign, half-sovereign, crown, half-crown,
florin, shilling, sixpence, threepence, penny, halfpenny--and in
addition five halfpence and six pennies.
_Note._--Binet gives the child a franc for an article valued at 20
sous, and the child has to select his change from the following coins:
8 coins of the value 0 fr. 05, 4 of the value 0 fr. 10, and 1 of each
of the others--viz., 0 fr. 25, 0 fr. 50, 1 fr., 2 fr., 5 fr., 10 fr.,
20 fr.
2. "What is a fork?"--"What is a table?"--"A chair?"--"A horse?"--"A
mamma?"
For a pass three at least of the definitions must be given in a form
superior to the "use" type.
3. "What is the name of this coin?"--"And of this?"--"And of this?"
The examiner in this way goes through in irregular order all our
current pieces of money. Coins like one another should not be shown in
immediate succession.
4. "Will you tell me the names of the months in order?"
One omission or one inversion is allowed to pass.
5. "What would you do if you missed a train?"--"What would you do if
one of your playmates should hit you without meaning to do so?"--"What
would you do if you broke something belonging to someone else?"
For a pass two at least of these questions must be answered sensibly.
_Ten Years._
1. "You see these little boxes. They are not all the same weight. Some
are heavy and some are light. Place the heaviest one here, and at its
side the one which is a little less heavy, then the one still a little
less, and finally the lightest of all."
The boxes in question weigh respectively 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 grammes,
and all look the same. They are placed in a pile before the child, and
as the examiner gives the directions he indicates with his finger the
place he appoints for each box. Three trials should be given, the
boxes being mixed after each trial. In order to pass the child must be
correct at least twice. The time should not exceed three minutes. The
material for the test can be easily made from match-boxes.
2. "Now I am going to show you two drawings. You may look at them for
ten seconds, which is a very short time. Then I will ask you to draw
them from memory."
For the drawings see Fig. 6. The child is counted correct if he
reproduces the whole of one drawing and half the other.
3. "I am going to read you some sentences, each of which contains
something foolish. Listen attentively and tell me each time what is
foolish."
The examiner reads the sentences impressively, but without any special
emphasis on the part the child should comment on. Each time when he
finishes he changes his tone, and demands, "What is foolish in that?"
_Sentences._--(1) An unfortunate bicycle rider fell on his head
and was killed instantly; he was taken to a hospital, and they
fear he will not recover.
(2) I have three brothers, Paul, Ernest, and myself.
(3) The body of an unfortunate young girl, cut into eighteen
pieces, was found yesterday on the fortifications. It is thought
that she killed herself.
(4) There was a railway accident yesterday, but it was not a bad
one; the number of dead is only forty-eight.
(5) Someone said If I should ever grow desperate and kill
myself, I will not choose Friday, because Friday is an unlucky
day, and will bring me unhappiness.
Three satisfactory answers are required.
4. "What would you do if you were delayed in going to school?"--"What
would you do before taking part in an important affair?"--"Why is a
bad action done when one is angry more excusable than the same action
done when one is not angry?"--"What would you do if you were asked
your opinion of someone whom you did not know well?"--"Why should one
judge a person by his acts rather than by his words?"
Three sensible answers must be given.
5. "I am going to read you three words, and I want you to make a
sentence and use in it the three words. The words are Paris, fortune,
stream."
The expression "make a sentence" must not be further explained, but
the instructions may be repeated. The child is given a pencil and
paper, and, if necessary, should be urged to write something. For a
pass the sentence should be well co-ordinated. At this stage it may
contain two distinct ideas, but not three; at the higher level it must
contain only one idea (see XII. 2). One minute is the time allowed for
writing.
_Twelve Years._
1. "Which is the longer of these two lines?"--"And of those?"--"And of
those?"--"And of those?"--"And of those?"--"And of those?"
This test is aimed at the suggestibility of the child. For the
material see Figs. 8-13. The first three pairs of lines differ in
length, the longer being at the right hand; the last three pairs are
equal. It is sufficient if the child correctly judges two of the last
three pairs to be equal.
2. "I am going to read you three words. I want you to make a sentence
and use in it the three words. The words are Paris, fortune, stream."
For directions see XI. 5.
3. "I am going to allow you three minutes, and I want you to say as
many words as you can think of. Some children have said more than two
hundred. Let us see how many you can do. Ready? Start."
In order to pass the child must say over sixty words.
4. "What is Charity?"--"What is Justice?"--"What is Kindness?"
Two correct responses are required.
5. "Put these words in their proper order and find the sentence which
they make."
Three cards are successively presented to the child, on each of which
is very clearly written or printed one of the following sets of words
arranged in three lines.
(1) For--an--the--at--hour--early--we--country--started.
(2) To--asked--exercise--my--I--teacher--correct--my.
(3) A--defends--dog--good--his--master--bravely.
One minute is allowed for each sentence, and two correct answers are
required.
_Fifteen Years._
1. "I am going to say seven numbers to you, and I want you to repeat
them after me. Now, 5, 2, 7, 9, 1, 6, 0."--"Again, 6, 4, 1, 3, 9, 7,
5."--"Again, 8, 0, 4, 2, 7, 3, 6."
One success suffices.
2. "Do you know the meaning of the word 'rhyme'? Two words are said to
rhyme when they have similar endings, such as hour and flower, or
candy and dandy. Do you understand? Now, find all the words which
rhyme with day."
The child is required to find three rhymes in one minute.
3. "I am going to say some sentences to you, and I want you to repeat
them exactly after me. Ready? 'The other day I saw on the street a
pretty yellow dog. Little Maurice has stained his nice new apron.'"
The examiner is advised to have ready a series of sentences formed of
words easy to understand. He should begin with one somewhat shorter
than that suggested, which consists of twenty-six syllables--the
length required by Binet at this age.
4. "Here is a picture. Tell me what you see."
At this level interpretation of the picture is required. Mere
description of the activities represented is not sufficient.
5. "Listen to what I am going to read to you: A woman was walking
through a park in Chicago. Suddenly she stopped, dreadfully
frightened. She ran to the nearest policeman and told him she had seen
hanging to the limb of a tree"--after a pause--"a what?"
"Again: My neighbour has just received some singular visitors: one
after another a doctor, a lawyer, and a priest called. What is
happening at my neighbour's?"
Both problems must be solved satisfactorily.
_Adult._
1. "Here is a paper folded in four. Suppose that here" (pointing to a
small triangle that has been drawn in the middle of the edge which
presents a single fold) "I cut out this little triangle. Now, if I
unfold the paper, how would it look? Draw the paper as, it would
appear if unfolded and show how and where it would be cut."
The paper is square to begin with, and is folded twice so as to show a
square one quarter of the original size. The required drawing will
show two diamonds drawn in line with each other, and each in the
centre of one half of a square.
2. "Look at this card. Suppose I lift this lower part and place this
edge (tracing the edge _A C_ with the finger) on this edge (the
diagonal of the upper piece). Suppose also that this point (_C_) is
placed just on this point (_B_). Now I will take away the piece, and
do you draw the whole figure as it will appear when the proposed
change is made. Begin by drawing the upper part."
[Illustration]
A right angle must be represented at _B_, and the edge _A C_ be shown
shorter than the edge _A B_.
3. "What is the difference between laziness and idleness?"--What is
the difference between event and advent?"--"What is the difference
between evolution and revolution?"
Two correct answers required.
4. "There are three principal differences between a King and a
President of a Republic. What are they?"
Required answer: Royalty is hereditary, the tenure of office is for
life, and its powers are very great; the President is elected, his
tenure of office is for a limited time, and his powers are less
extensive.
5. "Listen to what I am going to read to you. When I have finished I
shall ask you to give me the sense of the passage: 'Many opinions have
been given on the value of life. Some call it good, others call it
bad. It would be more just to say that it is mediocre, for on the one
hand our happiness is never so great as we would have it, and on the
other hand our misfortunes are never so great as others would have
them. It is this mediocrity of life which makes it just, or rather
which prevents it from being radically unjust.'"
=Directions to Examiners.=--In the use of the Binet scale there are
various pitfalls that await the beginner. In the first place he is
almost certain to array himself on the side of the child and to
declare in some instances that the test is not a fair one--the child
could have passed had he understood what was wanted. One frequently
sees this attitude towards the puzzle test. (V. 5.) For example, the
examiner is dissatisfied when the child simply moves the pieces of
card about in a meaningless way, and he tries to explain more clearly
what is wanted. I have seen one examiner go so far as to show the
child the solution, and then give him a pass when he repeated it. The
examiner must always remember that a child who has reached the
required level of intelligence will himself see what is wanted. This
comprehension is indeed the very thing we are testing for.
Secondly, the examiner is apt to show by his manner when he is
dissatisfied with a child's answer. In some cases this may lead him to
correct himself--_e.g._, VII. 1. The examiner must bear constantly in
mind that _all answers are equally pleasing to him_; he is not there
to instruct the child, but to test him. When meaningless or absurd
responses are given, as they frequently are, the examiner must accept
them cheerfully, even in some cases with praise, and record a failure.
The record, of course, must never be visible to the child.
Again, the examiner must not suppose that the scale can be applied
mechanically. Both experience and judgment are necessary before the
results can be correctly gauged. In certain tests--_e.g._, the
absurdities--a child's manner tells as much as his words. The children
on whom I have tried this test nearly always laughed when they really
grasped the point. Before he lays much stress on his results an
examiner should have tested at least twenty children.
There is another factor which prevents any mechanical use of the scale
leading to satisfactory results, and that is the variability of the
child's responsiveness. With an unsympathetic examiner, or with an
unfortunate start, he will do himself less than justice. It is the
business of the examiner to keep the child in that state of mental
exhilaration which enables him to do his best. Words of encouragement
and praise should in some cases be freely used, but, of course, care
must always be taken to avoid, whether in word, tone, gesture, or
facial expression, the slightest suggestion of the correct solution.
The happy state of mind must be secured at the very beginning, and for
this purpose the choice of the first test is very important. I call to
mind a bright child of eight who was confronted first with a simple
puzzle test. For some reason, probably over-anxiety to do well, she
did not see the solution, and being too intelligent not to perceive
her own failure, she burst into tears. Such unfortunate accidents are,
however, rare. The children usually enjoy the interview.
To secure a good start one must begin with a test which the child will
regard as easy and pleasant. One soon knows almost at sight of the
child what it is best to try first. One usually begins with tests for
an age at least a year younger than that of the little subject, and
works upward.
The examiner should be alone with the child except for the presence of
someone whose business it is to make notes. In such tests as the
description of a picture, the definition tests, the questions of
everyday life, the child's full answers should be written down. The
examiner should, however, record his own judgment as to whether the
child has passed or failed _at once_, as there are various factors
which tend to make an immediate judgment both more certain and more
accurate than a delayed one.
So far as the actual testing is concerned, the examiner should confine
himself to the words given in the text. He will find himself tempted
sometimes "to draw the child out." For instance, in the picture test,
when the child has given him a brief enumeration of objects and then
stopped, he will find himself saying, "But what is this man doing?"
The child can probably tell; but he must not on this account be
accorded a pass on the descriptive level; he has already shown that
his level is that of simple enumeration.
Some of the tests (definitions, comparisons, suggestion) bring out a
tendency to automatism which is present in many children. Thus, a
child having replied correctly that a butterfly is bigger than a fly,
may go on to state that wood is bigger than glass, and paper than
cardboard; or having found that "It is a fork" is well received as a
definition of that implement, he may give similar replies to the other
queries in the definition test. This automatism should not be checked:
it should be recorded. The more intelligent children begin to exhibit
a certain dissatisfaction with their own answers, however readily they
are accepted.
It is not always easy to follow the working of the childish mind, and
it is not usually advisable to press for further explanation. Such a
course is apt to puzzle the child, and render the conditions less
favourable. If you are not certain that he should be allowed to pass,
you may be practically certain that he should not. Sometimes one gets
interesting glimpses into the subject's mentality. A little boy once
told me he had never seen a butterfly. Nevertheless, I asked the
comparison question, and he gave what is a very usual answer: "A
butterfly is bigger than a fly." "How do you know," I said, "if you
have never seen a butterfly?" "It's a bigger word," he replied.
Another time a little girl, who also declared she had never seen a
butterfly, gave another answer which is also very common: "A butterfly
is yellow, and a fly is black." The source of this knowledge was not
discovered; but one of my students told me later that a child whom she
questioned about a butterfly said: "I have seen one; it was blue, but
it _ought_ to have been yellow." On being asked why, she responded:
"Butter is yellow." The test, of course, is not for the knowledge of
the things, but for the power of making a comparison. Occasionally one
has to mark a child as doubtful. Thus, in defining abstract terms
(XII. 4) Binet records that out of forty-five nine-year-old children,
four passed, thirty-six failed, and five were doubtful. This test,
however, gives an unusually large percentage of doubtfuls.
=Method of Marking.=--The examiner should have a large sheet of paper
or a note-book with the names of the tests written in column at the
left-hand side. Opposite each in a second column he should enter a
sign indicating his judgment. Binet recommends the use of the
following signs: + ! excellent, + pass, + ? almost a pass, ? doubtful,
0 silence,-- ? almost a failure, -- a failure, -- ! a bad failure.
Later this record should be supplemented from the notes taken by the
secretary, also by information regarding the child's personal history,
and by comments on his behaviour during the examination. The mental
age assigned to him is determined in this way: one finds the age-level
at which he passes all the tests, and adds a year for every five tests
that he passes above that level. Thus, if a child of seven passes all
the tests for seven years, three of those for eight, and two of those
for nine, he has a mental age of eight years. Binet allows the use of
fractions, one-fifth of a year for every test passed, but he admits
that this gives an appearance of a degree of exactitude which is
probably not attained. Should a child's mental age show a retardation
of three years as compared with his chronological age, and should
there be no evident explanation of this, such as ill-health, neglect
of school attendance, etc., he is reckoned as deficient mentally.
Binet's scale has been criticised from various points of view.
Generally speaking, it seems to be found too easy at the lower end and
too difficult at the higher end. It seems certain that some of the
tests have not yet found their proper level, or, indeed, that the
proper level may vary from country to country, from school to school,
and from one social rank to another. Thus, the writer has found that
practically all the five-year-old children present in a certain school
during the past two or three years are able to pass the colour test
assigned by Binet to seven years of age. These children, however,
probably belong to a higher social class than the five-year-olds
tested by Binet. An examiner very quickly learns which of the tests
beyond his age it is advisable to put to the particular child he is
dealing with, and owing to the method of marking it does not matter
much if one or two tests are misplaced with reference to a particular
group of children. The important thing is that there is a general
consensus of opinion on the part of those who have tried the scale as
to its value as a mental probe and register of mental attainment.
Revisions and elaborations of it have already been published,[B] but
in view of its simplicity and brevity, and the valuable analytical
work of which it has proved itself capable, the 1911 form will
probably remain a standard for at least some years to come.
For the complete series of tests the examiner will require the
following material in addition to the diagrams:
Three suitable pictures.
Key, penny, knife. IV. 2.
Weights. V. 1 and X. 1.
Drawing of square. V. 2.
Drawing of diamond. VI. 3.
Rectangular card and divided rectangle. V. 5 and Adult, 2.
Colours. VII. 5.
Cards with mixed sentences. XII. 5.
Square of paper. Adult, 1.
FOOTNOTES:
[A] The directions for this test, given in 1908, are to arrange the
two triangles so that the _hypotenuses are as far distant as possible
from one another_. In the 1911 article the directions are as above. It
seems to the writer that both directions are ambiguous. In certain
experiments in which she followed the 1908 directions she placed the
triangles thus [Illustration: oblique triangle point up, oblique
triangle point down], so that the children had to lift one across the
other to effect a solution. A very small percentage of five-year-old
children succeeded. If the triangles are placed thus [Illustration:
oblique triangle point up, oblique triangle long side down] the task
would probably be easier.
[B] See _Journal of Educational Psychology_, 1912: "A Tentative
Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
Intelligence," by Terman and Child. For an excellent brief review of
the experimental work which has been done with the tests, see the same
volume, pp. 101-110. The 1911 scale, with detailed instructions for
the application of each test, appeared in the _Bulletin de la Societe
Libre pour l'Etude Psychologique de l'Enfant_, Nos. 70 and 71, April,
1911. This article has been translated by Clara Harrison Town
(_Chicago Medical Press_). See also Meumann, _Vorlesungen Z.
Einfuehrung in die experimentelle Paedagogik_, Leipzig, 1913.
DIAGRAMS
For the picture tests Binet used the following:
Fig. 1. Man and boy pulling a barrow with furniture.
Fig. 2. A poor old man and a young woman sitting on a seat outside on
a wintry day.
Fig. 3. A prisoner standing on his bed to look out of the window of
his cell.
The student should choose pictures which contain familiar figures and
objects, and which "tell a story" capable of sympathetic
interpretation. They should not be too childish.
The following pictures, all in the Tate Gallery, may be suggested:
The Doctor, by Luke Fildes.
The Blind Beggar, by J.L. Dyckmans.
The Wedding, by Stanhope A. Forbes.
A Hopeless Dawn, by Frank Bramley.
The Man with the Scythe, by H.H. La Thangue.
Mark the pictures chosen Figs. 1, 2, and 3.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.]
[Illustration: FIG. 5.]
[Illustration: FIG. 6.]
[Illustration: FIG. 7.]
[Illustration: FIG. 8.]
[Illustration: FIG. 9.]
[Illustration: FIG. 10.]
[Illustration: FIG. 11.]
[Illustration: FIG. 12.]
[Illustration: FIG. 13.]
INDEX
Abnormal children, 5
Abnormality, frontiers of, 92
Adenoids, 110
Alcohol, 102
Appendix, 146
Aptitudes, 23 _et seq._
Arithmetic, 58
Asylum cases, 74
Attendance, irregular, 50
Bicetre, 6, 123
Bromides, 106
Cretin, 104
Curriculum, 14, 26, 32, 131
Definitions:
_abnormal_, 5
_defective_, 7
_feeble-minded_, 78
_idiot_, 77
_ill-balanced_, 6
_imbecile_, 77
Distribution of defectives, 15, 43
Doctor, role of, 88 _et seq._
Dunces, 47
Employment, 126, 129, 134
Epilepsy, 7, 107
Examination:
_pedagogical_, 36, 65
_physical_, 91
_psychological_, 67
Feeble-minded, 78
Frontiers of abnormality, 92
Heredity, 99, 102
Hospital cases, 74
Hydrocephalus, 103
Hydrotherapy, 106
Hysteria, 110
Ill-balanced, 6, 8, 15, 21, 72, 138
Inspector, role of, 50 _et seq._
Instruction:
_scale of_, 54
_tests of_, 52
Intelligence, tests of, 28, 67, App.
Knowledge percentage, 64
Laboratory of pedagogy, 9, 27
Medical examination, 91 (Chap. IV.)
Medical schedule, 115
Mental deficiency, _v._ Definitions
Microcephalus, 103
Microgyria, 103
Mongol, 105
Moral deficiency, _v._ Ill-balanced
Pedagogical examination, 36, 65
Physical examination, 91
Physiognomy, 95
Picture tests, 30
Psychological examination, 67
utility of, 71
Psychology of defective, 19
of ill-balanced, 21
Reading, 55
Retardation, 16, 38
Salpetriere, 6, 120
Scale of instruction, 54
Schedules:
_instruction_, 65
_medical_, 115
_suspected mental deficiency_, 85
School, special, 7
_educational value_, 118, 136
_social value_, 118, 140
Spelling, 61
Statistics, 7
Stigmata, 93
Teacher, role of, 38 _et seq._
Tests:
_instruction_, 52
_intelligence_, 28, 67, 148
_marking of_, 162
_material for_, 164
_method of conducting_, 159
Unstable, _v._ Ill-balanced.
PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY BILLING AND SONS, LTD., GUILDFORD AND
ESHER
* * * * *
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Typographical errors corrected in text: |
| |
| Page 28: comparsion replaced with comparison |
| |
| The following words are correct: |
| Page 25: superposable |
| |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
* * * * *