Studies in development and learning : contributions from the Department of Psychology and Child Study in the Fitchburg Normal School / made by the advanced class of 1907, and edited by Edwin A. Kirkptrick.

Date:
1909
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Studies in development and learning : contributions from the Department of Psychology and Child Study in the Fitchburg Normal School / made by the advanced class of 1907, and edited by Edwin A. Kirkptrick. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    59/112 (page 51)
    TABLE XI 1st Trial Best Av. Last Av. Last Trial 1st Trial Last Trial At. of Test after Interval 1. General test 47.6 13.4 13.4 13.8 33.6 21 28.4 2. All test, one period 53.7 21.1 31.7 37.5 60.7 33.7 40.8 3. Four different periods. same day 44 14.9 17 15 45 28 31.4 4. Ten tests, two successive Saturdays 53.5 18.2 18.2 17.7 < 41 29 33.7 5. Two tests, twice a day. five successive days... 90.6 17.1 17.1 15 42.3 31 34.3 6. Children’s tests, 7th and < 8th grades, A. M 88.8 14.8 20.6 19.3 B 51.2 26.2 35.5 7. Children’s tests, 7th and O 8th grades, P. M 66.5 22.5 22.9 18 r*- 36 24.2 27.5 8. Children’s tests, 3d grade, A. M 23.9 24 25.9 24.5 68 33 42.8 9. Children’s tests, 3d grade, P. M 25.0 35.5 35.5 22 86.7 55.7 61.7 If we compare the averages after the interval with the last ones before the interval we may, I think, form a just estimate of how great a part the long interval played. Where all the tests were taken at one period, as well as where they were taken from different periods of the same day, it would be more accurate, it seems, to compare the best average of these two groups with the average after the interval. Considering the groups, of the normal school students, we find the loss caused by the interval to be rather more marked where the tests were taken all at one period, and less marked where the tests were taken daily. With the children’s tests we find that where the tests were taken in the afternoon by the seventh and eighth grade children the inter- val caused the least effect. With the little children who took the tests in the afternoon the interval caused the greatest effect. From observation of those taking the tests, as well as from written statements from many of them, some of the conditions which in- fluenced progress were made apparent. 1. Physical condition of subject, most noticeable in the nervous- ness which followed inability to find a certain letter in quick time; headache was accountable in several instances for lack of power to work quickly. 2. Temperature of the room—if the room was warm, work was much slower than usual; if too cold the same result was noticeable. 3. Interruption of any kind barred progress. This was especially true with the children. Once their minds were off their work, it was hard for them to concentrate themselves upon it again for some time.