BIRTH RATES OF COEDUCATIONAL GRADUATES 391 



discovered 8 for women in Who's Who is not conclusive, inasmuch as many- 

 mothers are more interested in pushing their children than themselves into 

 places of recognition such as Who's Who. 



Grades in college were examined by five separate methods, all of which 

 split up the women into smaller groups. In four groups out of five, and 

 even in such small groupings, the same tendencies were shown: the most 

 mating at an age to affect fertility was done by the dullest women, but 

 the bright women who did marry early had so many children that they 

 brought up to the average the per capita for clever women both married 

 and single. In the two largest groupings studied they did yet better. 

 Their per capita exceeds notably the general average. The only deficient 

 per capita for the banner students is in the smallest, heterogeneous, non- 

 significant grouping (table 3E) of all those who took no mathematics but 

 are here graded in a science, usually physiology or botany. 



Several minor divergences are seen (table 3D) in those who voluntarily 

 took mathematics after the college no longer required it. The best of them 

 are very deficient in marrying before 35 and the worst of them, perhaps 

 studying mathematics merely for the sake of meeting the engineering stu- 

 dents, have few children after all. 



The women grading B had usually the lowest per capita. They seemed 

 to be caught between two fires (tendencies). That is, the mediocre, like 

 the best, did not marry greatly and when they did, they hesitated to plunge 

 boldly as regards progeny. 



Table 3A places every girl in the first 10 classes according to the average 

 of all her course marks received during her stay at college. At this point 

 in history the college changed its bookkeeping notation. By this, table 3B 

 benefits, as it allows weight to be given to the quantity as well as the quality 

 of mental work accomplished. As a result the range of difference is much 

 greater than in table 3A where general averages almost never went below 

 70 nor above 96. In 3B, the range was from 200 to 591, won by a girl 

 who was said to be a washerwoman's daughter and is now the mother of 

 four. 9 



The impetus to construct the remaining tables (3C, 3D, 3E) arose from 



8 Ibid. (Huntington and Whitney) p. 340. Also Persis M. Cope, Jour, of Social Forces, 

 VII, 1928, p. 212-23. 



9 Specifically, 3B places every girl in the latter seven classes according to the average 

 of all her term marks, each mark weighted by the weekly "hours" consumed by each 

 course, and the whole adjusted by the addition of "credits" brought on entering college. 

 Thus if a girl earned 400 points in college and had brought 10 credits, her 400 was multi- 

 plied by 120 and divided by 110, increasing her mark to 436. A mark under 240 was 

 considered to be D, but there were only 3 instances; 240 to 360 = C; over 480 = A. 



