October 17, 1912] 



NATURE 



in detail. A Standard III. boy in one school would 

 be found to have greater knowledtje and skill than a 

 Standard III. boy in another. But the important point 

 is that the phrase '• a Standard III. boy " came to have 

 a definite meaning apart from any particular school. 

 It began to be used absolutely, and not merely relatively. 

 Further, if a boy were found to be in a standard lower 

 than his years warranted, people had no diflidence in 

 drawing their own conclusions regarding his ability. 

 It will be remembered that Binet tells us, somewhat 

 \aguelv, that if a boy is a j-ear behind others of t'ae 

 same age who have had the same opportunities, it 

 indicates that he is duller than the others, but not 

 necessarily permanently so. If, however, the pupil is 

 two vears' behind the normal test for his age there is 

 a presumption in favour of his being inherently and 

 permanently duUer than his fellows. All this is very 

 familiar and indeed commonplace to the elementary 

 teachers who were brought up under the code examina- 

 tions bv standards. To'tell the truth, M. Binet "s tests 

 are regarded with much suspicion by such elementary 

 teachers as have been induced to give them attention. 

 Thev have the feeling that here we have a university 

 professor working out .as something new a belated 

 scheme that has had its day, and in that day done a 

 great deal of damage. They are afraid that the prestige 

 given to the intelligence tests may encourage the re- 

 establishment of The rigid individual examination 

 system from which they have escaped. All the same, 

 experienced elementary teachers do not deny that the 

 old system did at least have the effect of establishing 

 a generally recognised standard. Their belief is that 

 the standard was not worth what it cost. 



It is left for Binet 's successors to invent a better 

 scheme than he was able to produce, and in this way 

 to establish an objective standard, at least in respect 

 of intelligence. Such a standard is needed in many 

 connections, but there is one special department of 

 educational administration where such a standard is at 

 present urgently required. Nothing better illustrates 

 the groping of education after a scientific basis than 

 the present demand for some means of determining 

 which children are "defective" and which merely dull. 

 So imperative is the need for an objective standard here 

 that it must be satisfied at any price, with the result 

 that the decision is being more and more left to the 

 doctors instead of to the teachers. The cause is not 

 difficult to find. Physiology has already an objective 

 standard, and the doctors are evidently expected to 

 get their results by physical examination. No other 

 explanation is admissible, since they are not only not 

 superior to teachers in their knowledge of the mental 

 reactions of the child, but obviously inferior. At pre- 

 sent the argument moves backwards and forwards. 

 Some say : Give the teachers a tincture of physiological 

 knowledge, and then they will manifestly be the best 

 persons to determine the defective stage. Others 

 reply : Give the medical men some httle experience of 

 school conditions and the working of the immature 

 mind, and they cannot but be the proper authorities on 

 all questions of intelligence. The important point in 

 this competition for power between the two professions 

 is the implied recognition of the need for an objective 

 standard, and the admission that, at present, such a 

 standard does not exist. Much investigation, experi- 

 menting, and verification are necessary before the 

 truth on this particular subject can be reached. But 

 the recognition of the existence of the problem is in 

 itself an indication of progress, and the need for 

 scientific method in working it out is being more fully 

 recognised. From our point of view it is important 

 to note that we are here dealing with a problem that 

 is distinctlv educational, and the bringing in of men 

 from another profession does not make it less so. If 

 the doctor acquires the power of dealing with delicate 

 NO. 2242, VOL. 90] 



questions of intelligence, it is because he has learnt 

 to be an educationist if not an educator. Medical men 

 who specialised in this matter would no doubt very 

 soon attain to high skill, since their previous training 

 gives them a very suitable preparation to begin the 

 study of education. Doctors are consulted regarding 

 "defectives " mainly for two reasons. First, these de- 

 fective children are naturally classed in the popular 

 mind with the mentally deranged, and these have 

 always been regarded as peculiarly suitable subjects 

 for the doctor. Further, there exists, without doubt, 

 the implicit feeling in the public mind that the doctor 

 has definite standards while the teacher has only 

 general impressions. But it has to be noted that this 

 invasion of the field of education by men from another 

 realm of study does not in any way affectthe claims 

 of education 'to rank as a nascent science with 

 needs and methods of its own. If the doctors can 

 supply education with an objective standard, education 

 should be verv grateful, but need not abdicate in favour 

 of medicine. ' Education may use the results of both 

 psychologv and physiology without in any way sur- 

 rendering'its clain-.s to be an independent science. _\Ve 

 must not, of course, make too much of the distinctions 

 among the sciences. Nothing but error can result 

 from seeking to make each of them rigidly self-con- 

 tained. So far as education is concerned, what we have 

 to seek is that objective standard that we have con- 

 ceded to be essential to the recognition of a study as 

 a possible science, and this without falling back on the 

 standards of either pure psychology or pure physiology 

 We may learn something from what we have foiind 

 out about the results of the individual examination 

 system. The general tendency of quantitative methods 

 is to eliminate the subjective element. Even in the 

 case of marking examination papers experience shows 

 that the use oi numerical marks tends to objectify 

 results, and to get rid of some at least of the difficulty 

 involved in the personal equation of the examiners. 

 Marking by general impression of a whole paperis 

 much less free from subjective variation. _ Every in- 

 dividual number set down as a mark implies a fresh 

 exercise of the critical power, and when there are many 

 questions there is a compensating principle at work, 

 inasmuch as each impression is recorded as it is made 

 and the addition of the marks produces a balancing in 

 which the latest impression has not the determining 

 influence it too frequently has when a paper is marked 

 as a whole. If an examination includes many subjects, 

 many examiners, and a great body of examinees, the 

 subjective element in the marking is, to a large extent, 

 eliminated, and we can deal with the results in accord- 

 ance with what is practically an objective standard. 

 We must not, of course, neglect the fact that after 

 all the whole basis of the results is the judgment of 

 the individual examiner on the material submitted 

 to him. This corresponds to the application to real 

 life of anv of the physical sciences. Here, as in many 

 of the other sciences, we have a surd of subjectivity 

 that can never be got rid of entirely. But its disturb- 

 ing influence can be minimised by the counteracting 

 influences of other forces in the quantitative manipu- 

 lation of the data. 



Of late the quantitative method of dealing with 

 educational problems has been greatly developed. Karl 

 Pearson's product-moment formula has enabled us to 

 make an accurate arithmetical statement of the amount 

 of correlation that exists between series of quantitative 

 data. By the application of this formula, and the 

 simpler formula; of Professor Spearman, it is now 

 possible to correlate a great many facts that were 

 formerlv treated as having only a problematic connec- 

 tion with each other. If these formula; produce really 

 trustworthy results, we have at our command a means 

 I of answering definitely and definitively a great number 



