MEDICAL INSPECTION OF SCHOOLS 



The children were arbitrarily divided into dull, normal, 

 and bright groups, using as a standard, age in grade. For instance, 

 it was considered that the eleven-year-old child in the first grade 

 may as a rule be safely classed as dull, whereas the ten-year-old 

 child in the sixth or seventh grade may safely be considered bright. 

 Using the age-in-grade criterion as a basis, the records of the ten, 

 eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen-year-old children were re- 

 tabulated and assigned to the dull, normal, and bright classes. 

 Results are shown in Table 41 . 



TABLE 41. PER CENT OF DULL, NORMAL, AND BRIGHT PUPILS 



SUFFERING FROM EACH SORT OF DEFECT. AGES TEN TO 



FOURTEEN, INCLUSIVE. ALL GRADES. NEW YORK, IQO8 



Here we have figures which demonstrate that there is a real 

 relation between physical defectiveness and school progress. 

 In each case, save that of vision, a larger per cent of the dull 

 pupils is found to be defective than is the case among the normal 

 pupils, and these again are more defective than the bright 

 pupils. The fact that defective vision does not follow this same 

 rule is somewhat difficult of explanation. There can be no ques- 

 tion that seriously defective vision constitutes a real handicap 

 to the progress of the child. On the other hand, it has long been 

 a matter of common observation that the brightest and most 

 studious pupils are often afflicted with defective eyesight. It may 

 very well be that these two factors somewhat more than counter- 

 balance each other. That is to say, while defective vision is 

 undoubtedly a real handicap and is the cause of backwardness 

 among some children, there are found in the same classes unusually 

 bright children who have so injured their eyesight through undue 

 strain and use that they too have very defective vision. This 



.58 



