the same general rules and standards as to methods of making them. Such a procedure will, of course, involve the co-operation of all our forces, including that of students of research generally in the various institutions of the country and in our state departments.

The plan would seem further to require the establishment of a central governing committee by this body in whose hands should be entrusted the work of direction in carrying forward our project. In co-operation with such a central governing committee there should also be established in each state co-operating a definite representative or group of representatives whose work and co-operation, like that of the central committee, should be continuous as far as possible; for such a project, if it is to succeed, will likely require several years, possibly many years of effort, in order to accomplish worthwhile results.

In view of the magnitude of the enterprise and expenses that would necessarily go with such a plan if carried out with any completeness it seems to me that we should undertake, if possible, to create a committee on finance who should be vested with authority to plan a working scheme for financing our operations either through the co-operation of states alone or possibly in conjunction with aid which might be obtained from some of the established funds of the country dedicated to educational research and advancement.

The carrying forward of this work would call for a careful checking upon educational conditions in various states and in various types of schools in any given state in order to determine, if possible, what differences or defects in the systems of education represented will account for the wide variations in the results of tests; for such wide variations we are almost sure to find, as indicated by results of tests that have already been made.

It is believed that later, if such a plan were found to be workable to an extent that would enable us to establish reliable standards for determining levels of attainment and capability for the various grades of scholastic work involved, it would be possible for us to secure also the co-operation of college entrance committees and boards in finding bases for determining more accurately and adequately the fitness for college entrance, both

as to general ability and as to the type of college work to which the capabilities of the student might best be adapted.

It will readily appear, I am sure, that such a study might have a definite bearing also on determining the bases for curriculum construction and differentiation in our high schools and, indeed, in our colleges and universities, at least as far as junior work is concerned. Such an outcome would involve, of course, a study of results of psychological tests for determining mental types and adaptabilities. The promise in this particular field of research is already great; and it would seem that 't is readily within the range of possibility that by a procedure such as we are proposing, if carried through consistently, we might hope really to arrive at such a consummation.

We believe that the time has come for us to do less talking about tests of intelligence and tests of achievement and tests of adaptability as to mental types, and to proceed with the real business before us. This is an appeal rendered all the more emphatic at this time because of the evident universal demand that is coming for some type of secondary education and even also of higher collegiate attainment on the part of the masses of our people.

Some Results of Testing Intelligence of High School Pupils in Different States

(Abstract of a paper presented at the meeting of National Association of High School Inspectors and Supervisors, Chicago, February 28, 1922, by Dr. H. L. Camp, Assistant High School Visitor, University of Illinois.)

After five years or more of testing and discussing of intelligence tests what do we have now available to show levels of intelligence of the pupils of our high schools in different states and sections of our country? The answer to this important question has been determined by carefully analyzing signed statements from one hundred of the leading educators scattered here and there throughout the United States.

These statements came in answer to the following questionnaire:

1. What testing has been done to ascertain the intelligence of high school pupils?

2. What tests were used!

3. Where have results been tabulated and made available for use?

This questionnaire was sent to one hundred twenty-five members of the National Association of Directors of Educational Research and the National Association of High School Inspectors and Supervisors. The replies came from one hundred representatives of state departments, normal schools, colleges and universities, and city school systems in thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia.

In a few cities considerable testing has been done and generally the data are not available for use. The nearest approach to a state-wide survey of intelligence of high school youngsters is seen in Indiana where 6,188 seniors in 320 commissioned high schools were tested with the Indiana Intelligence Examination. And these data are available. But this test has not been used elsewhere. In other instances some other one or more of the twenty or thirty intelligence tests now on the market has been used. In some states as many as fifteen different intelligence tests have been used in the different localities. Consequently, even in the few states in which testing has been done, the results seldom being published or otherwise available, the data do not represent the state as a whole and are not comparable because they are the results gained by using different tests.

Where has testing been done? In the North Atlantic States a little testing has been done in Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania in only a few scattered city schools. Practically none has been done in Massachusetts or Maine and we have no report from Vermont or Rhode Island.

In the South Atlantic States, including the District of Columbia, there are no data as no testing has been done. In the recent survey of the Virginia public schools a few elementary school pupils were tested with General Intelligence Examination Delta 2 but no data were obtained to show the level of intelligence of pupils of high school grade.

In the North Central States, some data are available in scattered city school systems for various different tests given in different years in each of the states except North Dakota In

North Dakota some testing has been done in grades 1-8 in the training department of the Moorhead State Teachers College.

In the South Central States some testing has been done in a very few cities in Arkansas, Kentucky, and Oklahoma but none in Mississippi or Texas. We have no report from Alabama, Louisiana, or Tennessee. In the recent survey of public edacation in Kentucky by the Kentucky Educational Commission there was no testing of intelligence of high school pupils.

In the Wetsern States some scattered testing has been done in California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming but none in Oregon, Utah, or Washington. We have no report from Arizona, Nevada, or New Mexico.

The fact is that in more than half the states of our country there has not been any testing of intelligence of high school pupils and in those states where some testing has been done there are not sufficient data available to show levels of intelligence for a whole state or section of the United States. Is it not time now for some concerted action to obtain levels of intelligence for every state?

Differences and Similarities in Standards for Accrediting High Schools for the Purpose of Admission of Students to Higher Institutions

Inspector J. B. EDMONSON,
University of Michigan.

(A summary of report presented before the annual meeting of the National Association of High School Supervisors and Inspectors, Chicago, February 28, 1922).

AGENCIES DEFINING STANDARDS FOR ACCREDITING FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMISSION OF STUDENTS TO HIGHER INSTITUTIONS.

Five state universities maintain accrediting systems entirely separate from the state departments. These are the Universitis of California, Colorado, Illinois, Nebraska, and Wisconsin. The Universities of Minnesota and Missouri accredit private schools only.

Two state universities carry on inspection jointly or cooperatively with their state departments. These are the Universities of Michigan and Wyoming.

There are a number of state universities which, although they admit graduates of high schools accredited by the state department, still have considerable influence in standardizing public high schools in that a member of the university faculty inspects. for some general accrediting agency such as the North Central or Southern Associations. The Universities of Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio are in this group.

In the following sttaes, the state departments of education or the state boards of education have complete control of accrediting for all purposes whatsoever: Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesdta (public schools), Missouri (public schools), Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia. In the three states, Idaho, North Carolina, and Ohio the state department accredits, but it has as inspectors professors from the state university and the various other colleges of the state. It will be seen that this arrangement really amounts to co-operative inspection.

In Kentucky, the "Association of Kentucky Colleges" accredits for purposes of college admission, while in the state of Mississippi, this function is assumed by a committee of the State Teachers' Association on which each college is represented.

In Georgia it is done through the University and the state department and a university commission.

SUMMARY OF STANDARDS FOR FULLY ACCREDITED HIGH SCHOOLS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMISSION OF STUDENTS TO HIGHER INSTITUTIONS.

1. Number of teachers required.

In general, the different agencies require the equivalent of the following standard:

"There must be a faculty of not fewer than the equivalent of three teachers for the four years of work above the eighth grade. The superintendent may be counted one of the three teachers, provided he teaches the major portion of his time." -University of Michigan.

However, high schools with only two teachers will be accepted in Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, and North