FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80  
81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   >>   >|  
as to the manner in which intelligence is distributed is one of great practical as well as theoretical importance. One of the most vital questions which can be asked by any nation of any age is the following: "How high is the average level of intelligence among our people, and how frequent are the various grades of ability above and below the average?" With the development of standardized tests we are approaching, for the first time in history, a possible answer to this question. Most of the earlier Binet studies, however, have thrown little light on the distribution of intelligence because of their failure to avoid the influence of accidental selection in choosing subjects for testing. The method of securing subjects for the Stanford revision makes our results on this point especially interesting.[19] It is believed that the subjects used for this investigation were as nearly representative of average American-born children as it is possible to secure. [19] See p. 52 _ff._ for method used to avoid accidental selection of subjects for the Stanford investigation. The intelligence quotients for these 1000 unselected children were calculated, and their distribution was plotted for the ages separately. The distribution was found fairly symmetrical at each age from 5 to 14. At 15 the range is on either side of 90 as a median, and at 16 on either side of 80 as a median. That the 15- and 16-year-olds test low is due to the fact that these children are left-over retardates and are below average in intelligence. [Illustration: FIG. 2. DISTRIBUTION OF I Q'S OF 905 UNSELECTED CHILDREN. 5-14 YEARS OF AGE] The I Q's were then grouped in ranges of ten. In the middle group were thrown those from 96 to 105; the ascending groups including in order the I Q's from 106 to 115, 116 to 125, etc.; correspondingly with the descending groups. Figure 2 shows the distribution found by this grouping for the 905 children of ages 5 to 14 combined. The subjects above 14 are not included in this curve because they are left-overs and not representative of their ages. The distribution for the ages combined is seen to be remarkably symmetrical. The symmetry for the separate ages was hardly less marked, considering that only 80 to 120 children were tested at each age. In fact, the range, including the middle 50 per cent of I Q's, was found practically constant from 5 to 14 years. The tendency is for the middle 50 per cent to fall (approximate
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80  
81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

subjects

 

distribution

 

children

 
intelligence
 
average
 

middle

 

including

 

groups

 

method

 

representative


Stanford

 

investigation

 

accidental

 
selection
 
thrown
 

symmetrical

 
median
 

combined

 

UNSELECTED

 
retardates

Illustration

 

DISTRIBUTION

 

CHILDREN

 

symmetry

 

separate

 

remarkably

 
marked
 

tendency

 

approximate

 
constant

practically

 

tested

 
included
 

grouping

 
ascending
 

ranges

 

grouped

 

descending

 

Figure

 

correspondingly


secure

 

grades

 

ability

 

frequent

 

people

 
development
 
standardized
 

history

 

answer

 
question