The supervised school system showed a larger range of grade-to-grade drawing progress (5.53 units from grade 1A to 8A) than the unsupervised system (2.44 units)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1915 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? System B, which had well-supervised drawing, showed a greater range of progress across grades than system A, which had no drawing supervisor that year. → Childs 1915

Evidence¶

Childs 1915¶

Childs, H. G. (1915). Measurement of the drawing ability of two thousand one hundred and seventy-seven children in Indiana city school systems by a supplemented Thorndike scale. The Journal of Educational Psychology, 6(7), 391-408. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0075575

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Comparison of the curves of progress of the two systems, one supervised and one unsupervised during 1913-1914. System B's range of progress exceeds system A's at both grade spans reported; the author states "Systematic supervision, no doubt, accounts for much of the difference found in the two curves of progress."

"The range of progress from the 1A to the 8A grades is 2.44 units as compared with 5.53 units in system B, and from the 1A to the 6A grades, 3.50 units as compared with 3.97 units in system B."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Drawing ability scores rise from grade IB to grade 8A, but the data support group norms rather than a distinctive norm for each grade — related