* Nationa, Union oF TEACHERS-7’ HAMILTON HOUSE, LONDON, W.C.1. SPEAKERS" NOTES— No. 10. March, 1924. CLASSIFICATION BY AGE. DIFFICULTIES OF CLASSIFICATION. The saccesful clas: ia one of the moat diffenlt fication of the pupils in a Primary School problems that have to be solved. d attainments of Tt involves a close knowledge of the educability ame the education of every ahild in the school. Ita aim is tbe promotion of every child so as to fit him adequately tor— (q) citizenship, that is, to live his life in the moderm community and to this ond continue the. practice of self-education tobe able to approach the duties and oppor (8) industry, that is, ial life with intelligence and a wonse of tunities of indust responsibility ; (© further education, that 1s, to enable him to profit by any pro vision for higher education which he mayobtain, ua the attainment daring his Primary dard before leaving, Its immediate object carer of his appropriate class or stan industry or for further education. METHODS OF CLASSIFICATION.—Clasification ean be (a) mechanically, of (8) edueationally. ‘The mechanical method of classification is AGE Cl telligent educational classification involves: Ita ) educability, and .) attainments.LIBR ARY, SERVICES ld depends on cl ejocability OF Ly mg) soa * Srinandad.” a) pet a classifibation g homme ciceumsta® + mechaniedl. ep natural capacity eae @ : foal Secondary § hy AGE ALONE premises that tn thess four Aah cs Peis qual, The promises are well known to be falag, over ces) children eis i . a}elassification of seho Ee {oe ie J promotion as. far as this ein be seenred Rica eel cing esoeatial stages of mental exp oe retardation. ‘Tae B “4 1» PROMOTION v. RETARDATION.—Without Gy is possible for a teacher to make mistakes in [tis possible to promote too rapidly, as well as t9 retard | But the trend of some Education Authorities and ‘A well-known Director of Education has recently boported thug iat “The retention of children im the same class for two orm w years ago, a relatively rare Oscurrenes, and: concern tothe Head Teaeher ealled npon to To-day such retardation is lamentably frequenky Ror i paliey to quences of such retardation are not sufficiently recogeised” Ia ‘On the other hand, an equally well-known Direetor Of ri speciticy has said that “in 1983-- 6 percent. of all the children in schools followir Eogland sod Wales were in Standard I. or UL ; 16 per cent, had Standurd ITT; 17 per cent, Standard TV,; 40 por cent. 58 * fer cent, Standard VIL, and 026 per cent, Standard VIL" csi “thst 8 per cent, of the children in the schools who dL were Len years or over ; 25 percent, in Standard He “ver cent. in Standard ETL were nen of ove! Were ten or over.” Standard LY,ly imposed by Code and 1 ae Tha groater freedom of clamifcation af recent aa Seu ipecompanied by wo increasing umber of childees fitted for Scoudary School education, and x striking increase in the aumber of children who have gained @ place in Standards VILL . leaving age. ee THE EVIDENCE OF EDUCATIONISTS,—The best educational thought of to-day is oll agaiast Classification by Age alone, Here ane same extracts: — ‘Tae Boaup or Envcattos — “They (the Board) are well aware that the question of classifica: Hion by age is only onc of may considerations which determine promotion, and they would regard any system. of Promotion based on age aloue as fundementally unsound, The movement of children from class to clas in not ® matter for any arbitrary or uniform regulation. Its desirability can only be argived at after careful consideration of the mental, moral aad physical qualities of each individual child founded on that knowledge of his past history and future promise which the comscientious teacher alone possesses," (Circular 1148, Febraary, 1920.) From this statement the Board hare not sworved, It is still their policy to encourage intelligent as opposed to mechanical classification. In correspondence that has passed with the Board of Educatiom it i specifically stated that they sadbere to this circular, as shown by the following extrot from the “Class Teacher "for January, 1984 :— “loth November, 1038 “Iu reply to your letters of 28th October and 12th Norembor, I am directed by the Board to say that they adhere to the view expresied in Circular 1148, from which you quote. Tt certainly: cannot be assumed that when enquiries, which must necosstrily be detailed if they are tw be of any value, are made by 1M. Inapectors into the ages of scholars, they are actuated by any desire to make age the sole or principal basis of classification, (Signed) -L. A. Senex Bicoe (NNN 281316851Oran. Bons, inves ty of tho school chi Borough on tbs basis of T-yonr-olds in Standard 1, advanclag Per year, fosnd — Poe, in correct standard mecarding to age Pp, one year ix advance, @. more than one yearin advance, and IBS “back ward,’ = Mfoubd that in well-to-do mbools in Lodon, 60 pe. of the above Standard IV., while in the poor schools only 30 pe. are BuARD, 1.0.0. Tospector of Schools as usserted that great cumbers of ehildrea did! not progress Bt the normal! rate because they did not recolve normally Wood teaching, . . . The msult was a general ‘hustle, ind attcunpts wore mado 10 gut the uges right But HE was noon discovered that when the agés became right the tudes became rong. AY a tormal child should mally reach & certain standard at 4 miven age, it is quite reasonable to regard a wide mango of age in that rtandand os a mark of oither bad organisation or bad teaching, ‘This view is flatly at variance with statistical law. Aide mange of ages, far from being symptomatic of had onganiaation, i the daveriable sign and seal of good onpanisation," Dz, Baztaro bas also said that “half the ehildron im the London Elementary Schools were in Standards L and TE, and about halt the children left before they reached Standard ¥." A. Hicnaspsos and De. Gopraxy Tuowrson (P rofexwor of wm, Newe “Ta the past it was not folly realised how widely child difered from ber, to discover the quaslit ment, sine - Evidently it is most important ¢ child's notaral mental endow we shall then be able to educate him by the method moat suitable for enabling him to make the beat of the dogree of mental ability, superior, average or infer! he may happen ta possess,”Paxrace 10 Nartowat IstEcuoewee National Research Connell -— Tan a “The variation atnong children of any geade in their bility ta learn iscatimordinarily great, . Its obviously imponsble to tench fmuctions, for instance, elther in the same words op a tho same rate to children a0 different in ability and ta montal development.” ‘Dn, Taustax, Tnttod uetion to tho Otis Testa :— “Anyone who visita a typleal school... san emrcely avoid noting marked differesces between pupils in mxingle standard in che facility with which they assimilate knowledge af the subjects being taught.” ‘The reasons for these differences are pow being carefully and con- Uinually investigated, One of these is poverty and home conditions, A Report published by the Board of Education states -— “Clearly it must be concloded that paverty itself involving ma it 0 often does abort hours of sloop, irregular knbits, poor nutrition and little or na home oncourugement of study must retard the child's rate af progrosa through the sthool, no matter how intelligent or naturally gifted he may be.” Another is ill-health, apparest er i tent Says a M.O.H.— Active intelligence in the developing child is tom lange degree deponsdent upon physical fitnoss.” ‘There gre others, too, somewbat vaguely termed natural capacity, edity, mental endowment. ‘These are subjects of carefal reacarch hy peyehologists. The sum of the evidence is that peomotion is conditioned by a wide variety of circumstances most of which are beyond the control of the teaher. Tt is his task to endeavour to modify threo conditions and their results, But it is quite evident that the question of retardation cannot he solved by resort to the mechanical and arbitrary standard of “ages There are three main conclusions derivable from experiment and research in many directions, by many types of workers, and in different places, namely -— ; 1, Thethoory of annual promotion by age is fundamentally unsound ; is odneationally anworkable even if it were desirable