_Ostrow_, twelve and a half years, replies correctly to questions 1, 2, and 3. At the fourth he hesitates and begins by multiplying 7 by 89, and obtains as answer 783, which is doubly inexact, because he ought not to have multiplied, and the multiplication is incorrect. Then he draws back, and tries a division of 89 by 7; he obtains an incorrect answer (11), which does not satisfy him. Finally, he tries a multiplication: says 7 times 10 makes 70. He next adds 7 several times to reach 89, but he becomes confused, and finishes by finding the number 13, which is almost correct. This child is therefore at stage 4; he does not clear it, but he attempts it. Look at the scale. We give him full points for Problems 1, 2, and 3, plus 2 points for Problem 4, or a total of 8, which puts him at the level of children of eight and a half years, which amounts to a r.e.t.a.r.dation of four years.

=Spelling.=--The test of spelling is a piece of dictation given individually or collectively. The scale contains the first phrases of the dictation. We reproduce them all here, pointing out the grammatical difficulties which they contain, and the scale for marking faults which seemed to us most fair. [We quote the phrases in French, as a translation would not indicate the real difficulties. It will be observed that in many cases correct spelling implies grammatical knowledge.--TR.]

_Phrase 1._--To write phonetically, without liaison, a phrase dictated in the ordinary vocabulary of the child.

_Example._--emile est un pet.i.t eleve bien sage; il ecoute son papa et sa maman; il va a l'ecole.

_Phrase 2._--To put the _s's_ of the plural to words chosen from the vocabulary of the child.

_Example._--J'ai une tete, deux bras, deux jambes, une bouche, vingt dents, une langue, et dix doigts.

_Phrase 3._--Plural of qualifying adjectives in simple cases; verbs to the third person plural, present indicative.

_Example._--Le soleil brille deja de ses plus _gais_ rayons. Les hommes _partent_ en chantant. Les bergers sont _heureux_ de la belle journee qui se _prepare_: ils suivent au paturage le _grand_ troupeau des vaches _pesantes_.

_Phrase 4._--Feminine of the qualifying adjectives without phonetic indication; verbs with the plural endings _ons_, _ont_, _ez_, _aient_.

_Exercise._--Le garcon de ferme, de son pas lourd, _entrait_ dans la grange encore _obscure_, ou nous _reposions_. Les boeufs _mugissaient_ tout bas. Dans la cour le coq, les poules, le chien, _allaient_ et _venaient_.

_Phrases 5, 6, and 7._--Finals of verbs in the singular of the different tenses of the four conjugations. Past participle with or without _avoir_. Infinitive in _er_, and past participle in _e_.

_Example._--Joyeux merle, ne _viens_ pas dans le bocage.

_Prends_ garde a ce mechant qui _veut_ te saisir et t'_enfermer_. Pendant que je te _parle_, tu _viens picorer_ les raisins que l'oiseleur a _disposes_ comme un piege. Ils sont _garnis_ de glu: si tu y _touches_, c'en est fait de ta liberte.

_Method of Marking Mistakes._

One mistake for a letter omitted.

One mistake for a letter too much.

One mistake for a letter subst.i.tuted for another.

There may therefore be several mistakes in the same word, but the number of mistakes for any word cannot be greater than the number of letters in the word. A word omitted counts as many mistakes as it has letters.

The liaison of two words counts for one mistake. Failure to join the two parts of a word also counts one mistake.

It is to be noticed that we do not speak of grades of spelling--that is to say, of different phrases which the children of each age should be able to write without mistake. No doubt such could be found. But we have been content to count the mistakes; it is by the number of mistakes that the children of each age are distinguished.

The dictation given in February by M. Vaney in his school and corrected by the teachers there has enabled us to draw up the following table, which shows the number of mistakes committed, counted by the method indicated above:[8]

---------------+------+---------------------+------------------------

Phrases.

+----+----+----+----+---- Children.

Cla.s.s.

Course.

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

5th ---------------+------+---------------------+----+----+----+----+---- 6 to 7 years

1

Preparatory

13

22

--

--

-- 7 to 8 years

2

Elementary (first

6

15

32

--

--

year)

8 to 9 years

3

Elementary (second

2

10

19

20

--

year)

9 to 10 years

4

Intermediate (first

0

2

6.6

6.9

17

year)

10 to 11 years

5

Intermediate (second

0

0

4

4

12

year)

11 to 12 years

6

Senior

0

0

0.6

0.7

5 ---------------+------+---------------------+----+----+----+----+----

To show how we cla.s.sify a child from the point of view of spelling, let us take an example. We shall choose _Ostrow_, the defective whom we have already tested in arithmetic. He writes the first phrase with one mistake, the second with one mistake, the third with eight mistakes; he is at the level of a child of nine to ten (_vide_ Table, p. 54). He has therefore a r.e.t.a.r.dation of three years. He must be reckoned as slightly feeble-minded.[9]

We now understand the manner of judging the capacity of a child in arithmetic, reading, and spelling. Which of all these tests is of the greatest value? We shall reply to this question by giving a summary in a few words of the tests we applied to twenty children in a special cla.s.s. The amount of r.e.t.a.r.dation varied considerably from one child to another, and for the same child from one test to another. On the average, the amount of r.e.t.a.r.dation was 3.3 years for spelling, 4 years for reading, and 4.5 years for arithmetic. These children did not do so badly in spelling; there was even one who was at the normal level.

It was especially in the problems that their deficiency was noticeable, because the problem requires not only memory, but some understanding. They have great difficulty in defining what is the proper arithmetical operation. When addition is necessary they have a tendency to subtract, and if they ought to divide they will more readily multiply. These mistakes lead to absurd results, which usually do not put them about, unless their attention is drawn to the absurdity. A defective will admit quite readily that if I have 604 apples, and sell 58, I shall have 662 left. These results show that in the ordinary school they do, we will not say too much spelling, but too little arithmetic in comparison to the amount of spelling.

Finally, we again insist upon the evidential value of methodical tests. We demand that the elementary school inspector should have these tests carried out without a.s.sistance to the pupils, without intervention to indicate the solution or the step to take. He must neither a.s.sist nor do the lesson, but simply note the result achieved.

He must therefore reduce himself to the easy role of a benevolent spectator.

=r.e.t.a.r.dation and Knowledge Percentage.=--We said above, in estimating r.e.t.a.r.dation, account should be taken of the course to which the pupil belongs--that is to say, the grade of instruction to which he has already attained. A child of nine years of age who has a r.e.t.a.r.dation of three years has learned absolutely nothing; on the other hand, a child of twelve years who has a r.e.t.a.r.dation of three years has learned something, since he has reached the intermediate course, first year.

The difference between the two pupils is apparent; probably it will increase still more as years go on. To understand the matter clearly, it is necessary to compare the amount of r.e.t.a.r.dation with the period of school attendance. The latter may be represented by the figure 100.

Thus, our child of nine, who has learned nothing, has a r.e.t.a.r.dation of three years in three years at school--that is to say, a percentage of 0; our child of twelve, who is in the "intermediate course, first year," has made in six years half the normal progress; he has therefore a "knowledge percentage" of 50. Such figures have evidently a quite different significance from those of the amount of r.e.t.a.r.dation. Our opinion is that it suffices to make use of the simple calculation of r.e.t.a.r.dation in selecting the defectives, for it is an easy and useful method; but when one is in the presence of a child, and desires to estimate his knowledge, not only for the actual moment, but with reference to his future and his capacity for learning, it is necessary to note also, and more especially, his "knowledge percentage."

We suggest the following schedule to be filled up after the examination of the child:

=Examination of Instruction of a Child proposed for Special Cla.s.s.=

Date of examination: Place of examination: Full name of pupil: Date of birth of pupil: This child has attended .......... school, ...... cla.s.s.

Attendance regular or irregular?

Has he been able to follow his cla.s.s?

What is the amount of his r.e.t.a.r.dation?

_Reading._ (Syllabic, hesitating, fluent, expressive, intermediate--_e.g._, fluent-expressive.) Observations on reading: _Arithmetic._ The pupil can do the problems noted without mistake: (Refer to scale.) Observations on arithmetic: _Spelling._ Phrase dictated: Number of mistakes: _Conclusion._ r.e.t.a.r.dation in reading (taking account of school attendance): r.e.t.a.r.dation in arithmetic (_ibid._): r.e.t.a.r.dation in spelling (_ibid._): Knowledge percentage: Name and position of examiner:

In spite of the lengthy details into which we enter, it is evident that all this work of examination can be done pretty rapidly. The arithmetic alone is a little long, because it is necessary to allow time to put the child at his ease. We may put the total examination at fifteen minutes. Often it will be possible to abridge the time. The inspector is now in a position to estimate the r.e.t.a.r.dation of the pupil and his knowledge percentage. He has several means at his disposal--the evidence of the teachers, the notes concerning the pupil, the examination of his copybook, observation of the att.i.tude of the child, his physiognomy, etc., and, above all, the exact and personal test which he has made.

Is this enough? When the inspector has established the r.e.t.a.r.dation and determined its causes, may he, should he, give his opinion immediately? In most cases, without doubt, a further inquiry is not necessary. But in other cases the need of further inquiry is felt.

Instruction is not everything, and there are some children who have difficulty in a.s.similating school knowledge owing to want of apt.i.tude, to inattention, to laziness, who are yet quite intelligent. It is the intelligence of these children that one would like to determine, and for this it is necessary to make use of some tests of intelligence. We propose, therefore, for the inspectors a last examination, a psychological one. Let no one accuse us of complicating the examinations. We do not impose them, we do not even advise them in all cases. But these tests are none the less very valuable tools to which one is very happy to have recourse when one feels embarra.s.sed.

PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION.

This consists in putting the following questions,[10] which have been grouped in such a manner that the four first can be answered by normal children at seven years of age, the five following by normal children at nine years of age, and the four last by normal children at eleven years of age.

Tests of Intelligence.

_Seven Years._

1. If you were late for school, what would you do?

2. If you lost a train, what would you do?

3. If one is lazy and does not want to work, what happens?

4. If you were tired and had not enough money to take an omnibus, what would you do?

_Nine Years._

5. If one needed sixpence, how could one get it?

6. Why should we not spend all our money, but put a little past?

7. If you break an object that does not belong to you, what should you do?

8. If a companion should strike you without meaning it, what should you do?

9. If you require some good advice, what should you do?

_Eleven Years._