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."
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.
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 | | | +-----------------------------------------------------------+
* * * * *