Haggerty: The Ahility to Read 



23 



half grade represented on the table. The children of any grade 

 would be essentially of the same ability, and the steps of difficulty 

 from grade to grade would be equal. Where we should place the 

 pupils of the first horizontal row could only be determined by 

 further testing. All that is clear is that they do not belong in 

 any of the classes already suggested. 



TABLE 6.— Visual Vocabulary 



Showing b}^ half-grades the number of children in 14 cities scoring 



each line.^ 



Line 



8A 



8B 



7A 



7B 



6A 



6B 



5 A 



5B 



4A 



4B 



3A 



3B 



Below 4 







1 



2 

 21 



3 

 7 



35 







12 

 28 

 134 



31 

 68 

 199 



47 

 101 



249 



79 

 169 

 285 



131 

 165 

 242 



259 

 206 

 217 



4 









28 

 73 







10 



79 



6 



20 



33 



45 



97 



108 



144 



200 



238 



259 



213 



146 



70 



7 



76 



125 



184 



260 



282 



245 



312 



240 



173 



98 



75 



33 



8 



77 



114 



115 



114 



139 



108 



94 



93 



74 



30 



16 



10 



9 



244 



215 



193 



185 



185 



96 



44 



35 



17 



10 



18 



3 



10.5 



113 



89 



85 



57 



85 



26 



16 



15 



15 



5 



8 



1 





530 



586 



646 



758 



878 



710 



840 



919 



935 



889 



801 



799 



TABLE 7.— Visual Vocabulary 



Showing percentage of children in half-grades scoring each line 



in 14 cities. 



Line 



8A 



8B 



7 A 



7B 



6A 



6B 



5A 



5B 



4A 



4B 



3A 



3B 



Below 4 







.002 

 003 



.004 

 .009 

 .05 







014 



.03 

 .07 

 .22 



.05 

 . 10 

 .27 



.09 

 . 19 

 .32 



. 16 

 .21 

 .30 



.32 

 .26 

 .27 



4 









.03 

 . 10 



.03 

 . 16 



5 





.02 



.03 



.09 



6 



.04 



.06 



.07 



. 13 



. 12 



.20 



.24 



.26 



.28 



.24 



. 18 



.09 



7. 



. 14 



.21 



.28 



.34 



.32 



.35 



.37 



.26 



. 19 



. 11 



.09 



.04 



8 



. 15 



. 19 



.18 



. 15 



. 16 



. 15 



. 11 



. 10 



.08 



.03 



.02 



.01 



9 



.46 



.37 



.30 



.24 



.21 



. 13 



.05 



.04 



.02 



.01 



.02 



.004 



10.5 



.21 



. 15 



. 13 



.08 



.10 



.04 



.02 



.02 



.01 



.01 



.01 



.001 



Against any such radical administrative readjustment as is 

 here suggested, it may be argued that the grounds for readjust- 



6. In computing these figures lines 10 and 11 were eliminated and the cliildren who 

 might have been credited with these Unes were distributed on the basis of then- highest 

 score on the other lines. The reason for this was the misscaUng of the words of these 

 two lines. See pp. 36 If. 



