A study of mental fatigue in relation to the daily school program / [by] W. H. Heck.

  • Heck, W. H. (William Harry), 1879-1919.
Date:
1913
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A study of mental fatigue in relation to the daily school program / [by] W. H. Heck. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the Augustus C. Long Health Sciences Library at Columbia University and Columbia University Libraries/Information Services, through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the the Augustus C. Long Health Sciences Library at Columbia University and Columbia University.

    25/36 (page 21)
    of the four classes in each group was not disturbed by this com- bination, which tended, however, to neutralize whatever chance variations may have occurred in the single groups. In quantity of ivork done (sum of right and wrong figures) as compared with the first period of the school day, the ten groups together showed a respective increase of 1.57, l.dJf., and 2.36 per cent at the second, third, and fourth periods; and in quality of work done (per cent of sum right) a respective decrease of 1.51, l.Jf-1, and 2.28 per cent at the second, third, and fourth periods. For comparison with these results, obtained hy the detailed method of grading, a similar total table was made with the class aver- ages by the gross method of grading, and the following per cents ivere calculated: In quantity of work done (sum of right and wrong points) as compared with the first period, the ten groups together showed a respective increase of 1.92, 1.31, and 2.21 at the second, third, and fourth periods; and in quality of work done (per cent of sum right) a respective decrease of 5.7Ji., 4^.56, and 6.66 at the second, third, and fourth periods.^ The per cents of increase in quantity in the two tables are sur- prisingly similar; the per cents of decrease in quality in the second table are a little over three times as large as those in the first table, but are still very small. This difference is probably due to the greater weight given errors by the gross method of grading, one error in the answer to any example making wrong one point out of a total of sixteen points for the entire test. This seems to me a defect natural to any gross method of grading for purposes of scientific study. (Notice the difference in the per cents of decrease in quality in the practice results on page 26.) However, it would be inevitable that any two, or any three, methods of gTading would show some differences in results. The two total tables are given herewith. The one for the gross method of grading contains, of course, all the class averages necessary to make out the single table for each group; but this extra work was not needed and therefore was not undertaken. ^Subtracting the four classes of P. S. 177, as suggested on page 12, we have for thirty-six classes, by the detailed method of grading, an increase of 1.35, 1.68, and 2.24 per cent, respectively, in quantity, and a decrease of 1.39, 1.26, and 2.17 per cent, respectively, in quality; by the gross method of grading an increase of 1.70, 1.52, and 1.97 per cent, respectively, in quantity, and a decrease of 6.31, 4.41, and 6.59 per cent, respectively, in quality.