THE DISPOSITION MADE OF THE SCHOOL FAILURES
Repeat School Exam. Contin. Both Total No. the Final or Regents" Discon. or No Repeat Failures Subject Spec. Exam"s. Subst.i.tution Repet. and or Exam. Exam.
8348 B. 3695 821 1333 2471 259 231 9612 G. 5001 1025 1752 1929 249 344 Per Cent of Total 48.4 10.3 17.2 24.5 2.8 3.2
It is obvious from these percentages that school practice puts an inclusive faith in the repet.i.tion of the subject, as 48.4 per cent of all the failures are referred to this one remedy for the purpose of being rectified, although one school made practically no use of this means (see section 5 of this chapter). We shall proceed to find how effectively it operates and how much this faith is warranted by the results. The cases above designated as both repeating and taking examination (3.2 per cent) have been counted twice, and their percentage must be subtracted from the sum of the percentages in order to give 100 per cent.
1. REPEt.i.tION AS A REMEDY FOR FAILURES
We already know how many of the failing pupils repeat the subject of failure, but the success attending such repet.i.tion is ent.i.tled to further attention. Accordingly, the grades received in the 8,696 repet.i.tions are presented here.
GRADES SECURED IN THE SUBJECTS REPEATED
GRADES Total Repet.i.tions A B C D INC.
3695 Boys 63 547 1863 1003 219 5001 Girls 83 724 2510 1337 347 ----------------- Per Cent of Total 1.7 14.7 50.3 33.3
Less than 2 per cent of the repeaters secure A"s, while only about 1 in 6 ever secures either an A or a B. The first three are pa.s.sing grades, with values as explained in Chapter I, and D represents failure. Of the repeated subjects 33.3 per cent result in either a D or an unfinished status. It is a fair a.s.sumption that the unfinished grade usually bore pretty certain prospects of being a failing grade if completed, and it is so treated here. There is a difference of less than 1 per cent in the failures a.s.signed to boys and girls for the repeated subjects.
The hope was entertained in the original plan of this study to secure several other sorts of information about the repeaters, but these later proved to be un.o.btainable. The influence of repeating with the same teacher as contrasted with a change of teachers in the same subject, the comparative facts for the repet.i.tion with men or with women teachers, the varying results for the different sizes of cla.s.ses, and the apparent effect of supervised study of some sort before or after failing, were all sought for in the records available; but the schools were not able to provide any definite and complete information of the sorts here specified.
_a. Size of Schedule and Results of Repeating_
It would seem plausible that the failing pupils who were permitted and who possessed the energy would want to take one or more extra subjects to balance the previous loss of credit due to failure. Then it becomes important at once for the administrative head to know whether the proportion of failures bears a definite relationship to the size of the pupil"s schedule of subjects. A normal schedule for most purposes and for most of the schools includes, on the average, four subjects or twenty weekly hours. In this study the schedule which each individual school claimed as normal schedule, has been accepted as such, all larger schedules being considered extra size and all smaller ones reduced. For instance, in one of the schools five subjects are considered a normal schedule even though they totaled 24 points, which is not usual. But in the other schools a normal schedule includes the range from 18 to 22 points irrespective of those carried in the subjects outside of the cla.s.sification included in this study; while above 22 points is an extra schedule and below 18 a reduced schedule in the same sense as above. For the most part this meant that five or more of such subjects form an extra schedule, and that three form a reduced schedule. In this manner all the repeated subjects are cla.s.sed as part of a reduced, a normal, or an extra sized schedule as follows.
SIZE OF SCHEDULES FOR PUPILS TAKING REPEATED SUBJECTS
Total Reduced Normal Extra
3695 Boys 132 1762 1801 5001 Girls 164 2684 2153
Per Cent of Total 3.4 51.1 45.5
This distribution indicates that relatively few of the pupils take a reduced schedule in repeating. For the succeeding comparison with the grades of extra schedule pupils, those having a normal or reduced schedule are grouped together.
GRADES FOR SUBJECTS REPEATED BY FAILING PUPILS WHO CARRIED A REDUCED OR NORMAL SCHEDULE
Total Repet.i.tions A B C D ..
1894 Boys 34 259 894 541 166 2848 Girls 44 361 1319 840 284 ---------------- Per Cent of Total 1.6 13.1 46.7 38.6
In this distribution are the grades for 4742 instances of repet.i.tion.
Of these, 38.6 per cent fail to pa.s.s after repeating. It is not possible to say definitely how many of these pupils actually determine their schedule by a free choice, and how many are restricted by school authorities or by home influence. But certain it is that a policy of opposition exists in some schools and with some teachers to allowing repeaters to carry more than a prescribed schedule; and in most schools at least some form of discrimination or regulation is exercised in this matter. It will appear from the next distribution that a rule of uniformity in regard to size of schedule, without regard to the individual pupils, is here, as elsewhere, lacking in wisdom and is in disregard of the facts.
GRADES FOR THE SUBJECTS REPEATED, WITH AN EXTRA SCHEDULE
Total Repet.i.tions A B C D ..
1801 Boys 29 288 969 462 53 2153 Girls 39 363 1191 497 63 ---------------- Per Cent of Total 1.7 16.6 54.5 27.2
Out of the 3,954 repeated subjects in this distribution, 72.8 per cent secure pa.s.sing grades, 27.2 per cent result in failures. This means that the repeaters with an extra schedule have 11.4 per cent fewer failing grades than the repeaters who carry only a normal or a reduced schedule. They also excel in the percentage of A"s and B"s secured for repeated subjects. In only one of the eight schools was the reverse of these general facts found to be true. In one other school the difference was more than 2 to 1 in favor of the extra schedule repeaters as judged by the percentages of failure for each group. It seems that at least three factors operate to secure superior results for repeaters with heavier schedule. First, they are undoubtedly a more highly selected group in reference to ability and energy. Second, they have the advantage of the spur and the motivation which comes from the consciousness of a heavier responsibility, and from which emanates greater earnestness of effort. Third, it is probable that some teachers are more helpful and considerate in the aiding and grading of pupils who appear to be working hard. It is, at any rate, a plain fact that those who are willing and who are permitted to take extra work are the more successful. Excessive emphasis must not be placed on the latter requirement alone, as willingness frequently seems to be the only essential condition imposed.
_b. Later Grades in the Same Kind of Subjects, Following Repet.i.tion and Without It_
Next in importance to the degree of success attending the repet.i.tion of failing subjects is the effect which such repet.i.tion has upon the results in later subjects of the same kind. By tabulating separately the later grades in like subjects for those who had repeated and for those who had not repeated after failure, we have the basis for the following comparison of results. It should be stated at this point that by the same kind of subject is not meant a promiscuous grouping together of all language or of all history courses. But for languages a later course in the same language is implied, with the single exception that Latin and French are treated as though French were a mere continuation of the Latin preceding it. Certain other decisions are as arbitrary. Greek, Roman, and ancient history are considered as in the same cla.s.s; so are modern, English, and American history. The general and the biological sciences are grouped together, but the physical sciences are distinguished as a separate group. The various commercial subjects are considered to be of the same kind only when they are the same subject. All mathematics subjects are regarded as the same kind of subjects except commercial arithmetic which is cla.s.sed as a commercial subject. All the later marks given in what was regarded as the same kind of subject, are included in the two distributions of grades which follow.
LATER GRADES IN THE SAME KIND OF SUBJECT, AFTER FAILURE AND REPEt.i.tION OF THE SUBJECT
Total A B C D
2788 Boys 28 308 1441 1011 3489 Girls 33 307 1748 1401
Per Cent of Total .9 9.8 50.8 38.4
This distribution shows a marked tendency for failures in any subject to be accompanied by further failures (38.4 per cent), not only in the subjects for which it is a prerequisite but in subjects closely akin to it. If this tendency to succeeding failures is really dependent upon thoroughness in the preceding subject, then the repet.i.tion of the subject should offer an opportunity for greater thoroughness and should prove to be a distinct advantage in this regard. When we compare the percentage of failures above with that in the following distribution, we fail to find evidence of such an advantage in repet.i.tion. The continuity of failures by subjects and the ineffectiveness of repet.i.tion are pointed out by T.H. Briggs[42] as found in an unpublished study by J.H. Riley, showing that after repeating and pa.s.sing the subjects of failure, 33 per cent of those who continued the subject failed again the next semester.
LATER GRADES IN THE SAME KIND OF SUBJECTS, FOLLOWING FAILURE BUT WITH NO REPEt.i.tION
Total A B C D
1269 Boys 5 102 639 523 1191 Girls 8 147 669 367
Per Cent of Total .5 10.1 53.1 36.2
Here the same p.r.o.nounced tendency is disclosed for the occurrence of other subsequent failures in the subjects closely similar. But for this distribution of grades, secured without any preceding repet.i.tions, the unsuccessful result is 2.2 per cent lower than that found for those who had repeated. This group is not so large in numbers as the one above, and undoubtedly there is some distinct element of pupil selection involved, for it is not easy to believe that the repet.i.tion should work a positive injury to the later grades. Nevertheless, our faith in the worth of unconditional repet.i.tions should properly be disturbed by such disclosures.
_c. The Grades in Repeated Subjects and in the New Work, for the Same Semester and the Same Pupils_
If it is granted that the teachers of the repeaters are equally good as compared with the others, then the previous familiarity with the work that is being repeated might be expected to serve as an advantage in its favor when compared with the new and advanced work in other subjects. But the grades for the new and advanced work as presented below, and the grades for the repeated subjects as presented earlier in this chapter (section 1), deny the validity of such an a.s.sumption and give us a different version of the facts.
THE GRADES SECURED IN NEW WORK, AT SAME TIME AND BY SAME PUPILS AS THE GRADES SECURED IN THE REPEATED SUBJECTS