FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188  
189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   >>   >|  
y 1500 subjects shows that improvement with increasing mental age is steady and fairly rapid. Occasionally, however, one meets a high-grade performance with children of 6 or 7 years, and a low-grade performance with adults of average intelligence. Like all the other tests of the scale, it is unreliable when used alone. VIII, 2. COUNTING BACKWARDS FROM 20 TO 1 PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_You can count backwards, can you not? I want you to count backwards for me from 20 to 1. Go ahead._" In the great majority of cases this is sufficient; the child comprehends the task and begins. If he does not comprehend, and is silent, or starts in, perhaps, to count forwards from 1 or 20, say: "_No; I want you to count backwards from 20 to 1, like this: 20-19-18, and clear on down to 1. Now, go ahead._" Insist upon the child trying it even though he asserts he cannot do it. In many such cases an effort is crowned with success. Say nothing about hurrying, as this confuses some subjects. Prompting is not permissible. SCORING. The test is passed if the child counts from 20 to 1 _in not over forty seconds and with not more than a single error_ (one omission or one transposition). Errors which the child spontaneously corrects are not counted as errors. REMARKS. The statistics on this test agree remarkably well. It is plainly too easy for year IX, and no one has found it easy enough for year VII. The main lack of uniformity has been in the adherence to a time limit. Binet required that the task be completed in twenty seconds, and Goddard and most others adhere rather strictly to this rule. Kuhlmann, however, allows thirty seconds if there is no error and twenty seconds if one error is committed. We agree with Bobertag that owing to the nature of this test we should not be pedantic about the time. While a majority of children who are able to count backwards do the task in twenty seconds, there are some intelligent but deliberate subjects who require as much as thirty-five or forty seconds. If the counting is done with assurance and without stumbling, there is no reason why we should not allow even forty seconds. Beyond this, however, our generosity should not go, because of the chance it would give for the use of special devices such as counting forwards each time to the next number wanted. It may be said that counting backwards is a test of schooling, and to a certain extent this is true. It is reasonable to suppose that sp
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188  
189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

seconds

 
backwards
 

twenty

 
counting
 

subjects

 

thirty

 

forwards

 

majority

 

performance

 

children


strictly

 

adhere

 
Goddard
 

Kuhlmann

 

mental

 

improvement

 
nature
 

Bobertag

 
increasing
 

completed


committed
 

Occasionally

 

required

 

fairly

 

adherence

 

uniformity

 

steady

 

pedantic

 

devices

 

number


special

 

chance

 

wanted

 
reasonable
 
suppose
 

extent

 

schooling

 
generosity
 

deliberate

 

require


intelligent

 

Beyond

 

reason

 

assurance

 

stumbling

 
unreliable
 

asserts

 
Insist
 

starts

 

BACKWARDS