A / B / C / D / E /  F / G / H / I / J /  K / L / M / N / O /  P / R / S / T / UV / W / Z

Annual Bibliography of Commonwealth Literature 2007
This paper argues that discourses of love in Ghanaian market literature for youth offer a view into complex negotiations of agency and empowerment. Drawing on Deborah Durham's notion of youth as "social `shifters'" and Francis Nyamnjoh's conception of the "interconnectedness" of agency, I take Ghanaian market literature as one specific case of how African literature for youth foregrounds questions of continuity and change as African societies enter into increasingly complex global relations. In this literature for youth, received notions of love, often constructed out of impressions from American pop and hip hop music, carry new notions of agency that compete with existing "domesticated" forms. Authors like Ike Tandoh and Evelyn Tay employ discourses of love to offer youth alternative avenues for empowerment in a context of socio-economic disenfranchizement. In a creative process of "straddling", this writing both reveals and reproduces the contradictions that obtain in youth configurations of agency.

The Measurement of Intelligence

L >> Lewis Madison Terman >> The Measurement of Intelligence

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28



Give the commissions always in the above order. Do not repeat the
instructions again or give any further aid whatever, even by the
direction of the gaze. If the child stops or hesitates it is never
permissible to say: "_What next?_" Have the self-control to leave the
child alone with his task.

SCORING. _All three commissions must be executed and in the proper
order._ Failure may result, therefore, either from leaving out one or
more of the commands or from changing the order. The former is more
often the case.

REMARKS. Success depends first on the ability to comprehend the
commands, and secondly, on the ability to hold them in mind. It is
therefore a test of memory, though of a somewhat different kind from
that involved in repeating digits or sentences. It is an excellent test,
for it throws light on a kind of intelligence which is demanded in all
occupations and in everyday life. A more difficult test of the same type
ought to be worked out for a higher age level.

Binet originally located this test in year VI, but in 1911 changed it to
year VII. This is unfortunate, for the three Stanford investigations, as
well as the statistics of all other investigators, show conclusively
that it is easy enough for year V.


V. ALTERNATIVE TEST: GIVING AGE

PROCEDURE. The formula is simply, "_How old are you?_" The child of this
age is, of course, not expected to know the date of his birthday, but
merely how many years old he is.

SCORING. About the only danger in scoring is in the failure to verify
the child's response. Some children give an incorrect answer with
perfect assurance, and it is therefore always necessary to verify.

REMARKS. Inability to give the age may or may not be significant. If the
child has arrived at the age of 7 or 8 years and has had anything like a
normal social environment, failure in the test is an extremely
unfavorable sign. But if the child is an orphan or has grown up in
neglect, ignorance of age has little significance for intelligence.
About all we can say is that if a child gives his age correctly, it is
because he has had sufficient interest and intelligence to remember
verbal statements which have been made concerning him in his presence.
He may even pass the test without attaching any definite meaning to the
word "year." On the other hand, if he has lived seven or eight years in
a normal environment, it is safe to assume that he has heard his age
given many times, and failure to remember it would then indicate either
a weak memory or a grave inferiority of spontaneous interests, or both.
Normal children have a natural interest in the things they hear said
about themselves, while the middle-grade imbecile of even 40 years may
fail to remember his age, however often he may have heard it stated.

Binet placed the test in year VI of the 1908 series, but omitted it
altogether in 1911. Kuhlmann and Goddard also omit it, perhaps wisely.
Nevertheless, it is always interesting to give as a supplementary test.
Children from good homes acquire the knowledge about a year earlier than
those from less favorable surroundings. Unselected children of
California ordinarily pass the test at 5 years.




CHAPTER XII

INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VI


VI, 1. DISTINGUISHING RIGHT AND LEFT

PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_Show me your right hand._" After this is
responded to, say: "_Show me your left ear._" Then: "_Show me your right
eye._" Stress the words _left_ and _ear_ rather strongly and equally;
also _right_ and _eye_. If there is one error, repeat the test, this
time with left hand, right ear, and left eye. Carefully avoid giving any
help by look of approval or disapproval, by glancing at the part of the
body indicated, or by supplementary questions.

SCORING. The test is passed if all three questions are answered
correctly, or if, in case of one error, the three additional questions
are all answered correctly. The standard, therefore, _is three out of
three, or five out of six_.

The chief danger of variation among different examiners in scoring
comes from double responses. For example, the child may point first to
one ear and then to the other. In all cases of double response, the rule
is to count the second response and disregard the first. This holds
whether the first response was wrong and the second right, or _vice
versa_.

REMARKS. It is interesting to follow the child's acquisitions
of language distinctions relating to spacial orientation. Other
distinctions of this type are those between up and down, above and
below, near and far, before and behind, etc. As Bobertag has pointed
out, the child first masters such distinctions as up and down, above and
below, before and behind, etc., and arrives at a knowledge of right and
left rather tardily.

How may we explain the late distinction of right and left as compared
with up and down? At least four theories may be advanced: (1) Something
depends on the frequency with which children have occasion to make the
respective distinctions. (2) It may be explained on the supposition that
kinaesthetic sensations are more prominently involved in distinctions of
up and down than in distinctions of right and left. It is certainly true
that, in distinguishing the two sides of a thing, less bodily movement
is ordinarily required than in distinctions of its upper and lower
aspects. The former demands only a shift of the eyes, the latter often
requires an upward or downward movement of the head. (3) It may be due
to the fact that the appearance of an object is more affected by
differences in vertical orientation than by those of horizontal
orientation. We see an object now from one side, now from the other, and
the two aspects easily blend, while the two aspects corresponding to
above and below are not viewed in such rapid succession and so remain
much more distinct from one another in the child's mind. Or, (4), the
difference may be mainly a matter of language. The child undoubtedly
hears the words _up_ and _down_ much oftener than _right_ and _left_,
and thus learns their meaning earlier. Horizontal distinctions are
commonly made in such terms as _this side_ and _that side_, or merely by
pointing, while in the case of vertical distinctions the words _up_ and
_down_ are used constantly. This last explanation is a very plausible
one, but it is very probable that other factors are also involved.

The distinction between right and left has a certain inherent and more
or less mysterious difficulty. To convince one's self of this it is only
necessary to try a little experiment on the first fifty persons one
chances to meet. The experiment is as follows. Say: "I am going to ask
you a question and I want you to answer it as quickly as you can." Then
ask: "Which is your right hand?" About forty persons out of fifty will
answer correctly without a second's hesitation, several will require two
or three seconds to respond, while a few, possibly four or five
per cent, will grow confused and perhaps be unable to respond for five
or ten seconds. Some very intelligent adults cannot possibly tell which
is the right or left hand without first searching for a scar or some
other distinguishing mark which is known to be on a particular hand.
Others resort to incipient movements of writing, and since, of course,
every one knows which hand he writes with, the writing movements
automatically initiated give the desired clue. One bright little girl of
8 years responded by trying to wink first one eye and then the other.
Asked why she did this, she said she knew she could wink her left eye,
but not her right! One who is resourceful enough to adopt such an
ingenious method is surely not less intelligent than the one who is able
to respond by a direct instead of an intermediate association.

It seems that normal people never encounter a corresponding difficulty
in distinguishing up and down. The writer has questioned several hundred
without finding a single instance, whereas a great many have to employ
some intermediate association in order to distinguish right and left. It
is the "p's and q's" that children must be told to mind; not the "p's
and b's." The former is a horizontal, the latter a vertical distinction.

Considering the difficulty which normal adults sometimes have in
distinguishing right and left, is it fair to use this test as a measure
of intelligence? We may answer in the affirmative. It is fair because
normal adults, notwithstanding momentary uncertainty, are invariably
able to make the distinction, if not by direct association, then by an
intermediate one. We overlook the momentary confusion and regard only
the correctness of the response. Subjects who are below middle-grade
imbecile, however long they have lived, seldom pass the test.

This test found a place in year VI of Binet's 1908 scale, but was
shifted to year VII in the 1911 revision. The Stanford statistics, and
all other available data, with the exception of Bobertag's, justify its
retention in year VI. It is possible that the children of different
nations do not have equal opportunity and stimulus for learning the
distinction between right and left, but the data show that as far as
American and English children are concerned we have a right to expect
this knowledge in children of 6 years.


VI, 2. FINDING OMISSIONS IN PICTURES

PROCEDURE. Show the pictures to the child one at a time in the order in
which they are lettered, _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_. When the first picture is
shown (that with the eye lacking), say: "_There is something wrong with
this face. It is not all there. Part of it is left out. Look carefully
and tell me what part of the face is not there._" Often the child gives
an irrelevant answer; as, "The feet are gone," "The stomach is not
there," etc. These statements are true, but they do not satisfy the
requirements of the test, so we say: "_No; I am talking about the face.
Look again and tell me what is left out of the face._" If the correct
response does not follow, we point to the place where the eye should be
and say: "_See, the eye is gone._" When picture _b_ is shown we say
merely: "_What is left out of this face?_" Likewise with picture _c_.
For picture _d_ we say: "_What is left out of this picture?_" No help of
any kind is given unless (if necessary) with the first picture. With the
others we confine ourselves to the single question, and the answer
should be given promptly, say within twenty to twenty-five seconds.

SCORING. Passed if the omission is correctly pointed out in _three out
of four_ of the pictures. Certain minor errors we may overlook, such as
"eyes" instead of "eye" for the first picture; "nose and one ear"
instead of merely "nose" for the third; "hands" instead of "arms" for
the fourth, etc. Errors like the following, however, count as failure:
"The other eye," or "The other ear" for the first or third; "The ears"
for the fourth, etc.

REMARKS. The test is one of the two or three dozen forms of the
so-called "completion test," all of which have it in common that from
the given parts of a whole the missing parts are to be found. The whole
to be completed may be a word, a sentence, a story, a picture, a group
of pictures, an object, or in fact almost anything. Sometimes all the
parts of the whole are given and only the arrangement or order is to be
found, as in the test with dissected sentences.

Further discussion of the completion test will be found in connection
with test 4, year XII. For the present we will only observe that
notwithstanding a certain similarity among the tests of this type, they
do not all call into play the same mental processes. The factor most
involved may be verbal language coherence, visual perception of form,
the association of abstract ideas, etc. To pass Binet's test with
mutilated pictures requires, (1) that the parts of the picture be
perceived as constituting a whole; and (2) that the idea of a human face
or form be so easily and so clearly reproducible that it may act, even
before it comes fully into consciousness, as a model or pattern, for the
criticism of the picture shown. The younger the child, the less
adequate, in this sense, is his perceptual familiarity with common
objects. In standardizing a series of "absurd pictures," the writer has
found that normal children of 3 years often see nothing wrong in a
picture which shows a cat with two legs or a hen with four legs. Such
children would, of course, never mistake a cat for a hen. Their trouble
lies in the inability to call up in clear form a "free idea" of a cat or
a hen for comparison with the perceptual presentation offered by the
picture. Middle-grade imbeciles of adult age have much the same
difficulty as normal children of 4 years in recognizing mutilations or
absurdities in pictures of familiar objects.

Binet first placed this test in year VII, changing it to year VIII in
the 1911 revision. In other revisions it has been retained in year VII,
although all the available statistics except Bobertag's warrant its
location in year VI.


VI, 3. COUNTING THIRTEEN PENNIES

PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in the test of counting four
pennies (year IV, test 3). If the first response contains only a minor
error, such as the omission of a number in counting, failure to tally
with the finger, etc., a second trial is given.

SCORING. The test is passed if there is _one success in two trials_.
Success requires that the counting should tally with the pointing. It is
not sufficient merely to state the number of pennies without pointing,
for unless the child points and counts aloud we cannot be sure that his
correct answer may not be the joint result of two errors in opposite
directions and equal; for example, if one penny were skipped and
another were counted twice the total result would still be correct, but
the performance would not satisfy the requirements.

REMARKS. Does success in this test depend upon intelligence or upon
schooling? The answer is, intelligence mainly. There are possibly a few
normal 6-year-old children who could not pass the test for lack of
instruction, but children of this age usually have enough spontaneous
interest in numbers to acquire facility in counting as far as 13 without
formal teaching. Certainly, inability to do so by the age of 7 years is
a suspicious sign unless the child's environment has been extraordinarily
unfavorable. On the other hand, feeble-minded adults of the 5-year level
usually have to have a great deal of instruction before they acquire
the ability to count 13, and many of them are hardly able to learn it at
all. So much does our learning depend on original endowment.

Binet originally placed this test in year VII, but moved it to year VI
in 1911. All the statistics, without exception, show that this change
was justified. Bobertag says that nearly all 7-year-olds who are not
feeble-minded can pass it, a statement with which we can fully agree.


VI, 4. COMPREHENSION, SECOND DEGREE

PROCEDURE. The questions used in this year are:--

(a) "_What's the thing to do if it is raining when you start to
school?_"
(b) "_What's the thing to do if you find that your house is on
fire?_"
(c) "_What's the thing to do if you are going some place and
miss your train (car)?_"

Note that the wording of the first part of the questions is slightly
different from that in year IV, test 5.

If there is no response, or if the child looks puzzled, the question may
be repeated once or twice. The form of the question must not under any
circumstances be altered. Question _b_, for example, would be materially
changed if we should say: "_Suppose you were to come home from school
and find that your house was burning up. What would you do?_" The
expression "burning up" would probably be much less likely to suggest
calling a fireman than would the words "on fire."

SCORING. _Two out of three_ must be answered correctly. The harder the
comprehension questions are, the greater the variety of answers and the
greater the difficulty of scoring. Because of the difficulty many
examiners find in scoring this test, we will list the most common
satisfactory, unsatisfactory, and doubtful responses to each question.

(a) _If it is raining when you start to school_

_Satisfactory._ "Take umbrella," "Bring a parasol," "Put on
rubbers," "Wear an overcoat," etc. This type of response
occurred 61 times out of 72 successes. "Have my father bring me"
also counts _plus_.

_Unsatisfactory._ "Go home," "Stay at home," "Stay in the
house," "Have the rainbow," "Stay in school," etc. "Stay at
home" is the most common failure and might at first seem to the
examiner to be a satisfactory response. As a matter of fact,
this answer rests on a slight misunderstanding of the question,
the import of which is that one is to go to school and it is
raining.

_Doubtful._ "Run" as an answer is a little more troublesome. It
may reasonably be scored _plus_ if it can be ascertained that
the child is accustomed to meet the situation in this way. It is
a common response with children in those regions of the
Southwest where rains are so infrequent that umbrellas are
rarely used. "Bring my lunch" may be considered a satisfactory
response in case the child is in the habit of so doing on rainy
days.

(b) _If you find that your house is on fire_

_Satisfactory._ "Ring the fire alarm," "Call the firemen," "Call
for help," "Put water on it," etc.

_Unsatisfactory._ The most common failure, accounting for nearly
half of all, is to suggest finding other shelter; _e.g._, "Go to
the hotel," "Get another house," "Stay with your friends,"
"Build a new house," etc. Others are: "Tell them you are sorry
it burned down," "Be careful and not let it burn again," "Have
it insured," "Cry," "Call the policeman," etc.

_Doubtful._ Instead of suggesting measures to put out the fire,
a good many children suggest mere escape or the saving of
household articles. Responses of this type are: "Jump out of the
windows," "Save yourself," "Get out as fast as you can," "Save
the baby," "Get my dolls and jewelry and hurry and get out."
These answers are about one seventh as frequent as the perfectly
satisfactory ones, and the rule for scoring them is a matter of
some importance. Under certain circumstances the logical thing
to do would be to save one's self or valuables without wasting
time trying to call help. There may be no help in reach, or a
fire which the child imagines may be too far along for help to
be effective. In order to avoid the possibility of doing a
subject an injustice, it may be desirable to score such answers
_plus_. We must not be too arbitrary.

(c) _If you miss your train_

_Satisfactory._ The answer we expect is, "Wait for another,"
"Take the next car," or something to that effect. This type of
answer includes about 85 per cent of the responses which do not
belong obviously in the unsatisfactory group. "Take a jitney" is
a modern variation of this response which must be counted as
satisfactory.

_Unsatisfactory._ These are endless. One continues to meet new
examples of absurdity, however many children one has tested. The
possibilities are literally inexhaustible, but the following are
among the most common: "Wait for it to come back," "Have to
walk," "Be mad," "Don't swear," "Run and try to catch it," "Try
to jump on," "Don't go to that place," "Go to the next station,"
etc.

_Doubtful._ The main doubtful response is, "Go home again,"
"Come back next day and catch another," etc. In small or
isolated towns having only one or two trains per day, this is
the logical thing to do, and in such cases the score is _plus_.
Fortunately, only about one answer in ten gives rise to any
difference of opinion among even partly trained examiners.

REMARKS. The three comprehension questions of this group were all
suggested by Binet in 1905. Only one of them, however, "What would you
do if you were going some place and missed your train?" was incorporated
in the 1908 or 1911 series, and this was used in year X with seven
others much harder. The other two remained unstandardized previous to
the Stanford investigation.[53]

[53] For general discussion of the comprehension questions as a test,
see p. 158.


VI, 5. NAMING FOUR COINS

PROCEDURE. Show a nickel, a penny, a quarter, and a dime, asking each
time: "_What is that?_" If the child misunderstands and answers,
"Money," or "A piece of money," we say: "_Yes, but what do you call that
piece of money?_" Show the coins always in the order given above.

SCORING. The test is passed if _three of the four_ questions are
correctly answered. Any correct designation of a coin is satisfactory,
including provincialisms like "two bits" for the 25-cent piece, etc. If
the child changes his response for a coin, we count the second answer
and ignore the first. No supplementary questions are permissible.

REMARKS. Some of the critics of the Binet scale regard this test as of
little value, because, they say, the ability to identify pieces of money
depends entirely on instruction or other accidents of environment. The
figures show, however, that it is not greatly influenced by differences
of social environment, although children from poor homes do slightly
better with it than those from homes of wealth and culture. The fact
seems to be that practically all children by the age of 6 years have
had opportunity to learn the names of the smaller coins, and if they
have failed to learn them it betokens a lack of that spontaneity of
interest in things which we have mentioned so often as a fundamental
presupposition of intelligence. It is by no means a test of mere
mechanical memory.

This test was given a place in year VII of Binet's 1908 scale, the coins
used being the 1-sou, 2-sous, 10-sous, and 5-franc pieces. It was
omitted from the Binet 1911 revision and also from that of Goddard.
Kuhlmann retains it in year VII. Others, however, have required all four
coins to be correctly named, and when this standard is used the test is
difficult enough for year VII. Germany has six coins up to and including
the 1-mark piece, all of which could be named by 76 per cent of
Bobertag's 7-year-olds. With the coins and the standard of scoring used
in the Stanford revision the test belongs well in year VI.


VI, 6. REPEATING SIXTEEN TO EIGHTEEN SYLLABLES

The sentences are:--

(a) "_We are having a fine time. We found a little mouse in the
trap._"
(b) "_Walter had a fine time on his vacation. He went fishing
every day._"
(c) "_We will go out for a long walk. Please give me my pretty
straw hat._"

PROCEDURE. The instructions should be given as follows: "_Now, listen. I
am going to say something and after I am through I want you to say it
over just like I do. Understand? Listen carefully and be sure to say
exactly what I say._" Then read the first sentence rather slowly, in a
distinct voice, and with expression. If the response is not too bad,
praise the child's efforts. Then proceed with the second and third
sentences, prefacing each with an exhortation to "say exactly what I
say."

In this year and in the memory-for-sentences test of later years it is
not permissible to re-read even the first sentence. The only reason for
allowing a repetition of one of the sentences in the earlier test of
this kind was to overcome the child's timidity. With children of 6 years
or upward we seldom encounter the timidity which sometimes makes it so
hard to secure responses in some of the tests of the earlier years.

SCORING. The test is passed _if at least one sentence out of three is
repeated without error, or if two are repeated with not more than one
error each_. A single omission, insertion, or transposition counts as an
error. Faults of pronunciation are of course overlooked. It is not
sufficient that the thought be reproduced intact; the exact language
must be repeated. The responses should be recorded _verbatim_. This is
easily done if record blanks used for scoring have the sentences printed
in full.

REMARKS. In this test and in later tests of memory for sentences, it is
interesting to ask after each response: "_Did you get it right?_" As in
the tests with digits, it is an unfavorable sign when the child is
perfectly satisfied with a very poor response.

It is evident that tests of this type give opportunity for different
degrees of failure. To repeat only a half or a third of each sentence is
much more serious than to make but one error in each sentence (one word
omitted, inserted, or misplaced). It would be possible to use the same
sentences at three or four different age levels, by setting the
appropriate standard for success at each age. If the standard is one
sentence out of three repeated with no more than two errors, the test
belongs in year V. If we require two absolutely correct responses out of
three, the test belongs at about year VII. The shifting standard is
rendered unnecessary, however, by the use of other tests of the same
kind, easier ones in the lower years and more difficult ones in the
upper.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28
Copyright (c) 2007. topboookz.com. All rights reserved.