Good pupils average younger than poor pupils, by amounts ranging from equal age to two and a half years¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1917 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across the schools, good pupils were on average more than a year younger than poor pupils, with school-specific differences from none at Kennett to two and a half years at Westport. → Pyle 1917

Evidence¶

Pyle 1917¶

Pyle, W. H. (1917). A Psychological Study of Bright and Dull Pupils. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://psycnet.apa.org

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Descriptive age comparison of the selected good and poor groups across the four high schools. Overall the good pupils were "a trifle more than a year younger," ranging from equal ages at Kennett to two and a half years younger at Westport.

"A comparison of the ages of the pupils shows that the good pupils are a trifle more than a year younger than the poor pupils. At Kennett, the groups average the same age; at Hannibal, the good pupils average eight-tenths of a year younger; at Mexico, nine-tenths of a year, and at Westport High School, the good pupils are two and a half years younger."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Teachers' classifications of pupils as good, fair, or poor agree only weakly with digit memory-test standing — related
• Mental differences between bright and dull pupils can be ascertained by means of simple group tests — related
• Ink-blot test results show a negative relation to the other tests and are related to age — related
• Substantial overlap exists between bright and dull groups: 48 per cent of poor pupils match the lowest good-group record — related