given slightly more trouble to girls than to boys. Mathematics seems also to have been a slightly stronger factor in the elimination of girls than in the elimination of boys. When we compare the relative achievements of the girls with those of the boys, we find that the girls have done decidedly better in language and English than they have in mathematics, history, and science. However, if measured by ability to achieve, mathematics is about as well suited to girls as are history and science."

d. Frailey-Crain Data. In their investigation discussed in this chapter, Frailey and Crain found data that in the main confirm Minnick's. Their conclusions follow: (1) the average girl is as good a student in algebra and geometry as the average boy,-in fact, perhaps slightly better; (2) the average girl student excels the average boy student in Latin to a greater degree than in any of the subjects selected; (3) the average girl seems to be slightly more intelligent than the average boy or perhaps she goes less into outside activities and, therefore, gives more time to the preparation of her studies; and (4) in none of the six subjects does the average boy excel the average girl.

But in the scale of general attainments these authors found "that (1) boys are more likely to rank at the top of the grade scale and (2) that they are also more likely to rank at the bottom of the grade scale. In short, the generally accepted theory that the chances for either exceptional ability or exceptional dullness are greater among boys than among girls is borne out by our group."

General Conclusion. In the light of the foregoing data representative of many others - it is hardly wise to draw any conclusion as to the relative abilities of boys and girls. What differences there are are so small and so easily reversed

that it would be hazardous to base any reorganization of class procedure on the ground of sex alone. Abilities, it may be said, differ among individuals, not between the sexes. Probably it is unnecessary, in the light of present data, to have groups in classes segregated on the ground of sex. Boys and girls may well work together in all groups.

II. INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN IMAGE TYPES

1

Quite recent investigations point to the fact that people differ from one another in the way they receive mental impressions. In school pupils do not receive instruction or suggestions by similar mental reactions. Colvin discusses at length the nature of the various kinds of images and calls attention to the fact that there is at present a tendency to abandon the doctrine of image types. As will be seen later in this chapter, however, there is evidence that high school pupils possess a greater vividness of imagery in one sense department than in others," although it is highly probable that most persons belong to a mixed type "with predominating types for certain classes of sensory or verbal material.”

The significance of this condition becomes clearer by a simple classification or analysis. People who learn and recall experiences by a distinct mental picture of them are called visuals. They possess a photographic mind. In school such pupils can see the picture of the page from which they are reciting. Whatever is written on the blackboard is remembered with comparative ease. But other persons recall only with difficulty what they have read or seen. They find it easier to remember what has been said or read to them.

1 "The Nature of the Mental Image," Psychological Review, Vol. XV, 1908, pp. 158-168, and The Learning Process, 1911, pp. 105-115.

E

Their type of mind might be called phonographic. There is a third group of individuals who depend less upon vision and hearing and principally on "muscle memory," on subtle impressions that are reproduced by muscle feeling. They are the moteurs, the motor minded.

Persons depending on visual memory find it easy to remember colors, forms, position of objects with considerable accuracy. They can vision the location of words on a page, lists of names, numbers, etc. Written examinations and book work are easy for this type. The auditiles or ear minded retain sound impressions and reproduce them readily in sound, in form, or by some other means. Others, again, learn by doing, by acting out for themselves what they have read or have been told. The last named employ principally kinæsthesic imagery, i.e. muscle images.

1

William Chancellor 1 reports an investigation on image types among school people. A study of the following parallel outline shows some of his results:

The table shows that children under twelve learn more easily by hearing or by being told, while high school pupils learn more readily by reading or by seeing the data to be learned. Chancellor refers to the case of his oldest daughter. He says:

"She always did well the second time she went through a subject, which occurred in unhappily numerous cases, and especially where the teacher was a good expositor and did not rely upon books. In college work, she secured the highest kinds of marks with the brilliant lecturers, and by no means such marks with the men who gave immense amounts of reading to do. She got on well in quizzes, and but poorly in written examinations. She plays the violin. And that was the key to the case. She was discovered to be highly auditory and notably non-visual.”

Another case cited by Chancellor illustrates a second type:

"My next case to be closely studied was that of a newspaper reporter. In two days' examinations, I proved to his city editor that he ought to be considered a criminal in employing him to report oral interviews. This reporter was an almost perfect visualist and extremely rapid writer. But he could not remember a sentence of eight words thirty seconds after hearing it. On the other hand, in one hundred and twenty seconds, he could easily memorize thirty words of either prose or verse. He admitted that he never dreamed conversations nor hummed tunes."

These illustrations, interesting for the information they contain, are suggestive of what is necessary in the high school. Block or mass teaching cannot give sufficient attention to varying mental types. It should be noted, however, that the employment of two kinds of teaching, for example, the visual and, the oral, is less effective than using only one. It has been found, to be more specific, that the teacher makes a mistake if using the blackboard and employing the oral

method during the same period and for the same group. Chancellor, in the study already discussed, suggests reorganizing the class into at least three groups: the visual, the auditory, the mediocre or worse in both types, and giving each group the kind of instruction best adapted to its type of mind. This can be done in the supervised study period discussed in another chapter.

Attention should be called to the fact already hinted at, that probably there are no pure mental types. On the other hand, there are what Meumann classifies as object types, including minds readily stimulated by any sense organ, and word types with the combinations of verbal-visual, verbalacoustic, verbal-tactile, and kinæsthetic types. Colvin 1 cites as illustration of the object type the reviving of the appearance of a rose a concrete visual image; recalling its odor a concrete olfactory image; recalling the sensation of touching its petals-a concrete tactile image. To recall the movement of drawing away from the thorns on a rosebush would be a concrete motor or kinæsthetic image. But if one thinks simply of the word "rose," there is a verbal image; to remember the exact place on the page where " rose is printed is a verbal-visual image. If one recalls the name "" rose as having been spoken by some one, the experience is called a verbal-acoustic image. Again, a verbal-motor image consists of recalling the word "rose" in the terms of throat movements used in pronouncing it or the terms of muscle movements used in writing the word on the blackboard or on paper. Some people think of a word as they would write it. This is a verbal-motor image. Colvin suggests that the latter kind of images usually arise in company with verbal 1 Op. cit., pp. 107, 108.

66