| Little brown baby wif spa'klin' eyes, Come to yo' pappy an' set on his knee. What you been doin', suh--makin' san' pies? Look at dat bib--You's ez du'ty ez me. Look at dat mouf--dat's merlasses, I bet; Come hyeah, Maria, an' wipe off hi... Read more of Little Brown Baby at Martin Luther King.ca | InformationalPrivacy |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IntelligenceGiving The Family NameDescription Of Pictures Distinguishing Right And Left Binet's Experiment On How Teachers Test Intelligence Nature Of The Stanford Revision And Extension Naming Familiar Objects Dull Normals (i Q Usually 80 To 90) I Ntelligence Of The Different Social Classes Intelligence Tests For Vocational Fitness Alternative Test 2: Writing From Dictation Defining Abstract Words Alternative Test 2: Repeating Twenty To Twenty-two Syllables Personality Of The Examiner The Necessity Of Standards Comprehension Second Degree The Influence Of Coaching The Validity Of The Individual Tests Comparison Of Weights Other Conceptions Of Intelligence Finding Mental Age |
General Value Of The MethodIn a former chapter we have noted certain imperfections of the scale devised by Binet and Simon; namely, that many of the tests were not correctly located, that the choice of tests was in a few cases unsatisfactory, that the directions for giving and scoring the tests were sometimes too indefinite, and that the upper and lower ranges of the scale especially stood in need of extensions and corrections. All of these faults have been quite generally admitted. The method itself, however, after being put to the test by psychologists of all countries and of all faiths, by the skeptical as well as the friendly, has amply demonstrated its value. The agreement on this point is as complete as it is regarding the scale's imperfections. The following quotations from prominent psychologists who have studied the method will serve to show how it is regarded by those most entitled to an opinion:-- There can be no question about the fact that the Binet-Simon tests do not make half as frequent or half as great errors in the mental ages (of feeble-minded children) as are included in gradings based on careful, prolonged general observation by experienced observers. All of the different authors who have made these researches (with Binet's method) are in a general way unanimous in recognizing that the principle of the scale is extremely fortunate, and all believe that it offers the basis of a most useful method for the examination of intelligence. It serves as a relatively simple and speedy method of securing, by means accessible to every one, a true insight into the average level of ability of a child between 3 and 15 years of age. That, despite the differences in race and language, despite the divergences in school organization and in methods of instruction, there should be so decided agreement in the reactions of the children--is, in my opinion, the best vindication of the _principle_ of the tests that one could imagine, because this agreement demonstrates that _the tests do actually reach and discover the general developmental conditions of intelligence_ (so far as these are operative in public-school children of the present cultural epoch), and not mere fragments of knowledge and attainments acquired by chance. It is without doubt the most satisfactory and accurate method of determining a child's intelligence that we have, and so far superior to everything else which has been proposed that as yet there is nothing else to be considered. The value of the method lies both in the swiftness and the accuracy with which it works. One who knows how to apply the tests correctly and who is experienced in the psychological interpretation of responses can in forty minutes arrive at a more accurate judgment as to a subject's intelligence than would be possible without the tests after months or even years of close observation. The reasons for this have already been set forth. The difference is something like that between measuring a person's height with a yardstick and estimating it by guess. That this is not an unfair statement of the case is well shown by the following candid confession by a psychologist who tested 200 juvenile delinquents brought before Judge Lindsey's court:-- As a matter of interest I estimated the mental ages of 150 of my subjects before testing them. In 54 of the estimates the error was not more than one year in either direction; 70 of the subjects were estimated too high, the average error being 2 years and 7 months; 26 of the subjects were estimated too low, the average error being 2 years and 2 months. _These figures would seem to imply that an estimate with nothing to support it is wholly unreliable, more especially as many of the estimates were four or five years wide of the mark. Criticisms of the Binet method have also been frequently voiced, but chiefly by persons who have had little experience with it or by those whose scientific training hardly justifies an opinion. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that eminence in law, medicine, education, or any other profession does not of itself enable any one to pass judgment on the validity of a psychological method. Next: Dependence Of The Scale's Reliability On The Training Of The Examiner Previous: Is The I Q Often Misleading?
Viewed 852 |
||||||||||||||||||||