CHAPTER I. PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION 1
Speculation Concerning the Nature of Ability. Results of Quantitative Investigation.
II. THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG CAPACITIES 11 The Coefficient of Correlation. General Intelligence _vs._ Special Aptitudes. Correlation of Abilities in Various Groups. Studies of Disorganizing Minds. Is Intellect Inherited as a Unit? Can an Intellect Be Trained as a Unit? The Hierarchy of Abilities. Present Status of the Problem. Measurement of General Intelligence: The IQ. Measurement of Special Ability. The Psychographic Picture of Individuality. At What Age Is Mental Endowment Evident? The Frequency of Marked Special Talents and Defects. Possible Origin of the Dissociation of Certain Capacities.
III. CONSIDERATION OF THE NEURAL BASIS 49 The Physiological Mechanism of Mental Life. Attempted Localization of Mental Functions. Theory of Congenital Lesion or Atrophy Criticized. Regeneration of Function without Regeneration of Structure in Injured Brains. Attempts to Establish a Neural Basis for the “Two Factor Theory” and the “Two Level Theory.” Present Status of the Problem.
IV. READING 57 Relation between IQ and Capacity for Reading. The Mechanics of Reading. Comprehension in Reading. Word Blindness. Psychological Studies of Special Defect in Reading. Nervous Instability and Special Defect in Reading. A Four-Year Study of a Non-Reader. Summary of Studies of Non-Readers. Cases of Special Ability in Reading. The Significance of Literacy.
V. SPELLING 98 Coherence among Linguistic Functions. Analysis of Learning to Spell. Psychological Examination of Poor Spellers. Can Special Defect in Spelling Be Overcome? Does Reading Teach Spelling? Illustrative Cases.
VI. ARITHMETIC 114 Relation between IQ and Capacity for Arithmetic. Distinction between Arithmetic and Mathematics. The Psychology of Arithmetical Calculation. The Organization of Arithmetical Abilities. Psychological Studies of Special Deficiency in Arithmetic. Methods of Detecting Wrong or Incomplete Habits. Nervous Instability and Special Deficiency in Arithmetic. Arithmetical Prodigies. Arithmetical Ability of Two Children of IQ 184 and IQ 187 (Stanford-Binet). The Inheritance of Arithmetical Abilities. Implications for Education.
VII. DRAWING 141 The Various Kinds of Drawing. Ramifications of Drawing through the Curriculum. Psychological Analysis of Talent in Drawing. Relation between Aptitude in Drawing and General Intelligence. The Color-Blind. Illustrative Cases. Inheritance of Talent in Drawing. General Summary.
VIII. MUSIC 164 What Is Music? The Various Kinds of Music. The Analysis of Musical Talent. Relation among Various Elements of Musical Talent. Relation between Musical Talent and General Intelligence. Absolute Pitch. Tone Deafness. Range of Individual Differences. Can Musical Capacity Be Increased by Education? The Inheritance of Musical Talent. Psychographic Study of Individuals. Capacity to Appreciate Music.
IX. MISCELLANEOUS 183 Special Functions Which Have Not Been Long Studied. Left-Handedness. Mirror Writing. Mechanical Ability. Ability to Lead and Handle People.
X. INDIVIDUALITY AND EDUCATION 196 The Values of Individuality. Compulsory Education. The Importance of General Intelligence for School Progress. Special Abilities and Disabilities as Determinants of School Progress. Experimental Attempts to Individualize Education. The Cost of Fostering Individuality. The Probable Rewards of Individualizing Education.
TABLE OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE 1. Distribution of ability to discriminate among intervals of time, the subjects being adults. (From Seashore’s _The Psychology of Musical Talent_. Reproduced by courtesy of Silver, Burdett and Company, and of the Columbia Graphophone Company.) 8
2. Flight of birds, illustrating distribution in ability to fly. (Schematic.) 9
3. The psychograph of a schoolboy, showing his standing in various mental functions; illustrating use of the horizontal line to denote typical performance. (From Hollingworth’s _Judging Human Character_. Reproduced by courtesy of D. Appleton and Company.) 39
4. The psychographs of three schoolgirls, showing their standings in various mental functions, measured to determine mathematical ability; illustrating use of the vertical line to denote typical performance. (From _Tests of Mathematical Ability and Their Prognostic Value_. Reproduced by courtesy of Agnes L. Rogers.) 40
5. The psychograph of a schoolboy, showing his standing in various mental functions; illustrating use of the circle as a diagram, the median circumference denoting the typical performance of his age 41
6. Showing how X improved as measured by Trabue’s “Language Scale A,” from Feb., 1918, to Dec., 1921 77–81
7. Showing X’s improvement in silent reading, from April 15, 1921, to Dec. 2, 1921, as measured by Thorndike-McCall “Reading Scale,” Form I 82–83
8. Showing X’s ability to get meaning from printed words, in May, 1922, as tested by Haggerty’s “Sigma 1,” for grades 1 to 3 84
9. Showing an account written by X of his week’s reading 86
10. Composition written at school by X in December, 1920, showing deficiencies in spelling 107
11. Letter written by X showing how he could spell by use of dictionary 108
12. Showing efforts to spell of a 14-year-old schoolboy, of IQ 93, after eight years of school instruction. Illustrating extreme dissociation of spelling ability from general intelligence 110
13. Showing spelling of a 12-year-old girl, of IQ 59, after six years of instruction. Illustrating extreme dissociation of spelling ability from general intelligence 111
14. Showing spelling of a child 9 years 10 months old, with IQ 143, after three years of instruction. Illustrating dissociation of spelling ability from general intelligence 112
15. Showing D’s calculations on Test 2, Army Alpha, Form 5, at the age of 10 years 11 months, five minutes being allowed for the performance 132
16. Showing D’s calculations on Test 6, Army Alpha, Form 5, at the age of 10 years 11 months, three minutes being allowed for the performance 133
17. Showing R’s calculations on Test 2, Army Alpha, Form 5, at the age of 7 years 6 months, five minutes being allowed for the performance 135
18. Showing R’s calculations on Test 6, Army Alpha, Form 5, at the age of 7 years 6 months, three minutes being allowed for the performance 136
19. Showing the psychograph of a stupid child, who has a special ability in representative drawing. (From Manuel’s _A Study of Talent in Drawing_. Reproduced by courtesy of The Public School Publishing Company.) 155
20. Showing special ability in drawing of a 14-year-old boy, of IQ near 70 156
21. Showing special ability in drawing of a 14-year-old boy, of IQ near 70 157
22. Showing the special ability to cut silhouettes, of a feeble-minded man, inmate of an institution for mental defectives 159
23. Charlie Chaplin pursuing a gentleman, and pursued by a policeman. Showing the special ability to draw, of a feeble-minded man, in an institution for mental defectives 160
24. Showing attempts by two distinguished university professors to cut silhouettes of an elephant 161
25. Psychograph of G, showing special ability in music and drawing combined with mediocre intelligence 177
26. Psychograph of M, showing special defect in music combined with very superior general intelligence 179
27. Showing mirror writing by public school pupils. (From Beeley’s _An Experimental Study of Left-Handedness_. Reproduced by courtesy of the University of Chicago Press.) 189
EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION
When the writer of this introductory note began teaching, it was popularly believed that a pupil who showed special excellence in intellectual work or in some particular study owed his superiority to a faithful and energetic will which held him to his tasks until he had mastered them thoroughly. It was generally believed, also, that marked deficiency in school work as a whole or in a special subject was due principally to a lethargic or indifferent will which could not resist distractions and temptations to self-indulgence. In those days, pupils were upbraided and even physically chastised if they failed to prepare the lessons which were prescribed for them in any study. The writer has often seen pupils whipped because they failed in their spelling, arithmetic, reading, history, or grammar. When punishment was administered in the school it was frequently repeated in the home, since parents quite generally entertained the view that failure to perform intellectual tasks satisfactorily was due to negligence or laziness, and it was thought that the best way to correct such delinquency was to arouse the will, usually by means of dermal stimulation. In his early experience as a teacher, the writer never heard, either in training classes or in teachers’ institutes, that pupils possessed special talents or defects which were certain to be manifested in their school work because they were established by native endowment which could not be modified to any large extent by rewards or penalties.
But we are gradually abandoning the view that either brightness or dullness in general or in special directions is due primarily to volitional control or the absence of it. During the last few years, experimental studies have impressed the principle that individuals differ in their inheritance of special capacities. Dr. Hollingworth shows in this volume how far we have gone in the detection of special talents and defects, with particular regard to the work of the school. She shows in preliminary discussion what notions people have entertained regarding the nature of ability, and then she discusses methods of measuring ability, alike of a general and of a special sort. She discusses the bases for differences among individuals in ability in respect to various intellectual traits or functions. Then she presents in detail what is known to-day regarding special talents and defects as revealed in the more important subjects taught in the schools.
We believe in these times that the school should to the fullest extent provide opportunities for each pupil to develop his talents as completely and as rapidly as possible. It is still required in most public schools, though, that pupils in any group should be kept quite close together in their educational progress, even when they show marked differences in ability in particular subjects or in the entire work of the school. But the pressure is becoming constantly greater to arrange school programs so that pupils may go forward as rapidly as their abilities, either general or special, will enable them to do, while those who are deficient may receive help according to their needs. There are already a number of experimental schools and school systems in which the principle of individual differences in ability is recognized and applied to a greater or less extent. One may safely predict that we shall find a way in time so that the principle may be recognized and applied in all public schools.
Dr. Hollingworth’s book lays a sound foundation for the differentiation of pupils in a school or classroom according to special abilities or deficiencies. It can be read by teachers who have not had extensive study of educational psychology or statistical methods of investigating such problems as are treated in this volume. The book is written in a graceful style, and technical matters are discussed in an unusually clear, simple, and attractive way. It may be confidently asserted that any teacher who has charge of thirty or forty pupils—or a smaller or larger number—will be helped to understand individual traits of excellence or deficiency if she will read what Dr. Hollingworth has presented in this volume. It may be safely stated, also, that a teacher will be more sympathetic toward pupils who experience difficulty in mastering special subjects of study if she will become familiar with the facts and conclusions which this book contains.
M. V. O’SHEA
THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN May, 1923
SPECIAL TALENTS AND DEFECTS