"shrewd," "repose," ""conscientious," or many others hardly more difficult. Some of the results of this test were so incredible that in the next few weeks I devoted about twenty hours to a further study of the case, applying a large assortment of standardized educational and mental tests. In a half dozen intelligence tests his mental age scores all ranged from 12 to 13 years. In the educational tests his scores ranged from median for grade 5 (arithmetical reasoning) to median for grade 9 (spelling). Average achievement in the subject-matter tests was not far from grade 7. It is not surprising that "X" failed in all his work and was dismissed. His mid-term examination in psychology had included such questions as "Distinguish between (a) philosophy and psychology, (b) sensation and perception, (c) mind and soul"!

"X" had good clothes, fair manners, and a high-powered automobile. He was therefore promptly initiated into one of the Greek letter fraternities! When he was leaving the university, after failing, he came to my office to bid me goodbye and told me he was glad it was all over. He said he had continued in high school under protest and had not wanted to go to college; that he had done his best and failed; that he never could learn out of books, but knew he could go back home and sell groceries and hardware in his father's general store.

For various reasons it may not be feasible to make the passing of an intelligence test a prerequisite to matriculation at Stanford. The difficulties in its practical administration would perhaps be too great. It would be awkward, for example, to call several hundred women to Stanford to take the examination when, because of our 500 rule, only a few score could be admitted. The plan of holding such ex

aminations in many places throughout the country at stated intervals would hardly be more practicable. For the present it would perhaps be wiser merely to require students to take the test at the time of matriculation, and to record the results on their registration cards for such reference and use as occasion might give rise to. If this were done the records would soon be regarded as indispensable.

It might also be desirable to allow the exceptionally able candidate who is short in some of the usual academic entrance requirements to enter the university by the test route. Columbia permits this. Properly safeguarded, the plan involves no risk whatever of lowering academic standards. Instead, it puts the emphasis on ability, where it belongs. The candidate who can earn an exceptionally high test score in spite of inadequate training is the best possible bet as regards university promise. Besides, as Thorndike has pointed out, this plan would advertise the fact that the university is willing to concede to intellect; the best would be attracted and the weakest discouraged from entering.

Certain Federal Board men have recently been admitted to Stanford with sub-standard credentials, some of these on the strength of a high score in an intelligence test.

J. P. M. left school at end of the fifth elementary grade. Alpha score, 157, which is equal to that of the average Yale freshman. His record thus far is as follows:

E. H. A. Two years of high-school work. Alpha score 170. Grades: 3 units elementary accounting, A; 5 units elementary Spanish, B; 5 units European history, B.

F. E. 0. Four years of high school. Alpha score, 108; a score that usually spells failure at Stanford. Grades: applied mechanics, 5 units, D; elementary design, 3 units, +; pyro metallurgy, 3 units, D; heat engines, withdrawn. As might have been predicted from the Alpha score, this student has made a poor record, notwithstanding his more extensive preparatory training. Except in certain courses, it appears that scholastic success probably depends more upon native ability than upon the extent and kind of previous training.

As a member of a university committee which has the task of awarding undergraduate scholarships, I feel in almost every case that comes up the need of more objective data than are available regarding the candidate's ability. Such mistakes are inevitable under the present system. One can never know by what hook or crook a weak student may have been able to secure high enough marks to place him in the list of eligibles. Nor is there at present any sure means of identifying the exceptionally able student whose marks have suffered because of some kind of handicap.

An important function of the university is to locate students of exceptional intellectual superiority who may be encouraged to enter the field of research or university teaching. At present we have no information about the average quality of these recruits. No one knows whether the average is rising or falling. Some seem to fear that the worst is happening. It is reasonable to believe that a continual search for talent, coupled with vocational

counsel and a little material encouragement in the way of assistantships or fellowships, would finally bring results. At any rate the National Research Council has decided to see what can be done. Plans are now under way for a nationwide survey of universities for the discovery of intellectually gifted senior students. Formal action has been taken looking toward this end, and it is probable that both intelligence tests and professor's pooled estimates will be utilized.

Another interesting use of intelligence tests is in the comparison of student groups, as fraternity versus non-fraternity men, men versus women, majors in various departments, etc. Such a comparison is perhaps more enlightening than the usual comparisons based on class marks. Table VII., for example, indicates that in a given college certain departments may attract considerably abler students than certain other departments.

Another use to which the tests are being put in several universities is in the sectioning of large classes into groups of more homogeneous ability. Of course it is not proposed that test scores should be made the sole basis for such grouping.

At George Peabody the tests are regularly referred to in granting permission to carry extra hours, students with Alpha score below 155 being refused this privilege.

In short, the tests are found useful in all sorts of unexpected ways. For example, Murchison (Miami University) showed that intelligence is one of the important factors in causing students to drop out of college when various other alleged reasons are given. His data are shown in Table IX.

Univ. of Chicago, students eliminated in 3 mos.

51% 28% 10% 11%

One of the present admission requirements of Stanford University is that the candidate must have reached the age of 16 years. This raises a question of fact as regards the relation between age and intellectual or scholastic ability in a given school grade. I have collected over a hundred correlation arrays between age in a given grade and scores in intelligence. tests. Every one of these shows a negative correlation, running usually between .20 and -.40. That is, the younger the pupil the more likely he is to exceed the average in intelligence.

The negative correlation of Terman Group Test scores with age, in the case of 587 senior students in some fifteen high schools is typical.

20 or

30

40

50

60

70

80

Over

In a survey of 6,188 high-school seniors in Indiana, Books found that the average percentile ranking was as follows for those graduating at various ages:

Age at Graduation

Jones

reports the following per cents.

5 W. F. Book, "Preliminary Report on the State-Wide Survey of High-school Seniors," Bulletin of the Extension Division, University of Indiana, 1920, Vol. 6, No. 1. (The percentile values given above have been read from a graph on p. 54 of the report, and may not be perfectly exact.)

6 Adam LeRoy Jones, "College Standing of Freshmen of Various Ages," SCHOOL AND SOCIETY, May 13, 1916, Vol. 3, pp. 717-720.

The

For 499 Stanford students the correlation between scholarship index and age of entrance was computed and found to be .18. Of the 499, two, by special permission, had been allowed to enter before the age of 16. Both stood in the top 10 per cent. of the group in marks earned after entrance. Age comparisons have also been made between our "preferred list" and "numbered list" women. former, selected on the basis of superior scholarship, are found to average about nine tenths of a year younger than women of the numbered list. For 1914 the average ages of the two groups were 17.9 years (preferred list) and 18.62 years (numbered list). For 1915 the figures were, respectively, 18.06 years and 18.89 years. The younger, preferred group also makes a very much better scholarship

showing at Stanford than the older, numbered group. For 1914-1915 first-year matriculants the respective scholarship ratings for six semesters were 85.4 (preferred list) and 77.7 (numbered list). For the 1916-1917 women matriculants the difference in scholarship records was nearly 10 points in favor of the younger, preferred group. For For 1919-1920 the difference was 7.4 points in the same direction.

This negative correlation between age and ability in a given grade is practically universal. Hundreds of examples could be collected from the literature of mental tests, and so far as I know a positive correlation has never been reported. In proportion as public schools come to grade their pupils more nearly according to mental ability, as they are now beginning to do with the help of mental tests, this negative correlation will become larger and the number of pupils graduating from high school before the age of 16 will materially increase. At present the number we are shutting out of Stanford by this rule is not large, but it is the cream of the available material. Such a rule would deprive us of the Lord Kelvins, the James Thompsons, the John Stuart

Mills, the Sir William Hamiltons, the Thomas Youngs, and the Francis Galtons. Instead of barring out candidates below 16, I would seriously propose that we offer a $250 scholarship to any boy or girl who is ready to enter Stanford University before the age of 16 and has ranked in the top ten per cent. of his or her graduating class in the high school. We could afford to make it $500 for those able to meet this requirement before 15.

In closing I would like to urge the desirability of establishing a personnel bureau at Stanford, as a number of colleges and universities have already done.

The personnel bureau has already proved its worth in many large industrial establishments, and it is likely to prove of still greater value in the study of the far more important material with which colleges and universities have to work. The functions of such a bureau would include the following:

1. Preparing and administering tests of general intelligence, and analyzing the results so that they could be used in the study of failures, in the comparison of student social groups and student ability in the various departments, in the vocational guidance of students, and in the selection of promising students for scholarships and assistantships or for encouragement toward advanced study.

2. To conduct research with tests of special aptitude, as in mathematics, science, literature, mechanical engineering, music, art, etc. In one of these lines (music) reasonably successful tests of native ability have already been devised. This entire field is without doubt one of the most promising in applied psychology. 3. To work out, with the assistance of professors in the various departments concerned, "achievement" tests for determining the progress students are making

in mastering the subject matter of their courses. Tests of this kind are probably feasible in a majority of university subjects and they should in time largely replace the usual examinations, as they are already rapidly doing in elementary and high schools.

4. To make a systematic study of the methods of securing trait ratings of students by their instructors. The first problem here would be to ascertain by experiment what human traits are most amenable to accurate rating. The next task would be to find out what traits correlate