EXCHANGE Studies of Mental Fatigue In Relation to the Daily School Program W. H. HECK, M. A. PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA AUTHOR OF "MENTAL DISCIPLINE AND EDUCATIONAL VALUES" SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA J. P. BELL COMPANY, INCORPORATED, PRINTERS 1914 LBlc TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 3 FIRST STUDY 5 Conditions 5 Material 6 Method 10 Grading 15 Kesults 17 SECOND STUDY 27 THIRD STUDY 33 CONCLUSIONS 37 STUDIES OF MENTAL FATIGUE INTRODUCTION American books on school management and hygiene 1 show a practical though not complete agreement as to the curves of fatigue in relation to the daily school program. Conclusions from German experiments on fatigue are the main bases for this American opinion, which is somewhat as follows: The child's efficiency, on the average, is greatest from about 9 :30 (after a period for settling down to work) to 11 A. M., and then declines until the noon intermission; the child comes back in the afternoon partially refreshed by the long recess and the mid- day meal, depending of course upon the length of the recess (usually one hour) and the quantity and quality of the food eaten ; the second high plateau of efficiency, which is lower than the corresponding plateau of the morning session, extends from about 1 :30 to 2 :30 P. M., and is followed by a decline to the lowest point of the day at the time of dismissal. Some writers believe that the second plateau occurs later in the afternoon than 1 :30 p. M. In a one-session school day the decline from the high morning plateau is interrupted to only a small degree by one or two short recesses, and extends to a point below that at the close of the morning session of a two-session day. Such text-book opinions are fast becoming guides for making daily school programs throughout the United States. Univer- sity departments of education, normal schools, summer schools, and teachers' reading circles are also urging reform in programs according to the following suggestions: The most difficult sub- jects in the curriculum, if they can be determined for a particu- lar class, should be placed, both for class recitation and for individual study, at the periods of greatest efficiency, with special emphasis upon the high morning plateau for arithmetic *For example: Arnold, School and Class Management, Vol. II, p. 33; Bagley, Educative Process, pp. 340-2, and Classroom Management, p. 57; Bolton, Principles of Education, pp. 274-5; Chancellor, Class Teaching and Management, pp. 122, 3; Colgrove, The Teacher and the School, p. 180; Cornell, Health and Medical Inspection of School Children, p. 193; Hellister, High School Administration, p. 254; O'Shea, Dynamic Factors in Education, pp. 286-290; Perry, Management of a City School, pp. 99, 100; Roark, Economy in Education, pp. 65, 94; Seeley, New School Management, p. 49; Shaw, School Hygiene, pp. 230, 1. 4 STUDIES OF MENTAL FATIGUE or language drill ; the less difficult subjects should be distributed appropriately along the curves of fatigue ; and recesses, relaxa- tion exercises, and alternations of recitation with study periods should be used to defer and lessen the decrease in efficiency. Thus the waste of the child's energy would be checked and more school work be accomplished in a given time. The purpose of this monograph is not to review the vast and bewildering literature on fatigue, or even that which has domi- nated American thought on the daily school program, but to re- port experiments testing the validity of the prevailing American opinion and the suggestions based thereon. 1 *I am greatly indebted to Dr. Edward L. Thorndike, Teachers' College, Columbia University, for many suggestions regarding this work. The sum- maries of experiments on Fatigue in his Educational Psychology, vol. iii, and in Offner's Mental Fatigue (English translation by Whjpple) render unnecessary any bibliographical discussion in this monograph. My second and third experiments were reported in the PsycJiological Clinic and the Journal of Educational Psychology. FIRST STUDY CONDITIONS. The tests were given during the session 1911-12 to forty classes, 1,153 children, in four New York City schools, repre- senting different nationalities and different grades of social and hygienic opportunities. On four days (each being four or five days apart) in December, 1911, four classes of fifth-grade girls, mainly Russian Jews, were tested in Public School 177 ; on four Fridays in January, 1912, eight classes of 5A boys, and on four Mondays eight classes of 5B boys, mainly Italians and Pol- ish Jews, were tested in Public School 83 ; on four Wednesdays in January four fourth-grade and four fifth-grade boys and girls, mainly Irish, German, and American, were tested in Pub- lic School 27; on two Wednesdays in March and two in April six fifth-grade and six sixth-grade boys and girls, mainly Ameri- can (with several negroes), were tested in Public School 3, Brooklyn. Fifteen of the forty classes tested were 5A classes and fifteen were 5B classes. Together they furnished the stand- ard for the work, but two 4A, two 4B, three 6A, and three 6B classes were chosen to represent other stages of advancement. The normal-aged and over-aged (E) sections of the half-grades in P. S. 177 and the high (a), middle (b), and low (c) sections of the half-grades in P. S. 3 were included, as were also the un- differentiated sections in P. S. 83 and 27. Of course the differ- ent ability of classes of different stages of advancement did not affect my results, because in any comparison of the work at the four periods of the school day the work of the same class would be represented at each period, and thus would be compared with itself and not with a less or more advanced class. The tests in P. S. 177, 83, and 27 came before the mid-session promotion; those in P. S. 3 came after, and therefore were given to some- what younger and less advanced children according to grade. Though more boys than girls took all four of the tests, the re- sults fairly represent both sexes. The December, March, and April tests were given in mild weather, the January tests in cold weather; and the ventilation of the classrooms was corre- spondingly varied, especially by the use of window ventilation. The ventilating and lighting systems were excellent in P. S. 27, good in P. S. 177, and fair in P. S. 83 and 3. Twenty classes were tested on Wednesdays, eight on Fridays, eight on Mondays, and four on different days in the week, thus repre- senting supposedly varied degrees of freshness in children in relation to the week's schooling. The children, tested were 6 STUDIES OF MENTAL FATIGUE under medical supervision and their most obvious physical defects, especially of a contagious kind, had been looked after ; but very few children had been given a general routine exam- ination by the school doctors. The daily school programs were not uniform, sometimes even in the same school, but showed a general tendency to give arithmetic in the early morning. In P. S. 83 a group system was used throughout^ about half of a class being grouped around the teacher for study while the other half carried out previous directions as to work at black- boards or desks. The differences as to social and hygienic condition of children and schools, and as to months and days, did not affect my com- parisons of the work of the classes at four periods of the school day, because the classes were tested and compared in groups of four, every class in a group having almost the same conditions and being tested on the same days. These variations in the groups as a whole were purposely sought to see if any conse- quent changes could be noticed in the work of the groups as com- pared with each other, but they were so slight as to be negligible. The differences in children and schools were representative of New York City school conditions, though the four schools selected were superior in supervision. MATERIAL. As my aim was to find out what decrease in efficiency re- sulted from the progress of the day and especially of the school work, I determined to test a large number of children at four different periods of the school day and compare the quantity and the quality of the work done. Xot the slightest change was to be made in the ordinary school routine except the in- terruptions for the short time necessary to give the tests. My desire was to select test material as nearly like the actual lessons of the children as possible and thus avoid the artificiality, at least for my purpose, of most of the physiological and psycho- logical tests so far made. I therefore chose, as most suitable for my purpose, the four fundamental operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division with whole numbers. Of course these operations could not represent all of arithmetic or all of the curriculum, but neither could any other test material; and as the basis of all number work they were as representative as any part of the elementary curriculum could be. In order to carry out my plan of testing children at four periods of the school day, and comparing the work done, I had MATERIAL 7 /to have four different tests so similar in quantity and quality that a certain proportion of correct and incorrect work in the first test would be as nearly equal as possible to the same pro- portion in any one of the other three tests. Only in this way could the work at the four periods be conveniently compared. Of course it was impossible to have four different tests exactly equal as to quantity and quality, but the reader can see from the third and fourth tests herein printed that this result was very nearly approached. As the Standard Tests in Arithmetic, by Mr. S. A. Courtis of Detroit, are widely recognized as well planned and graded, I obtained Mr. Courtis' kind permission to modify and use his Test No. 7, and also his imitation of it, which differed almost entirely by a shifting of the figures in each example. With my first and second tests thus furnished, I made out the third and fourth in imitation of these by a similar shifting of the figures. In the few examples where a figure was substituted by Mr. Courtis in the second test for one in the first, that figure reappeared in the fourth test but not in the third. Mr. Courtis' tests were not entirely suitable for my purpose in three particulars: (1) The required transfer by the child of the examples and of the answers could not be reduced to a propor- tionate measurement along with the work in the operations themselves. Consequently each example in my tests was printed in workable form with space underneath for the figures to be made by the child. (2) The arithmetical symbols were eliminated, and the operations necessary were designated by the words, "Add," etc., above the examples. (3) Example la, 2 a, 9, and 17 were omitted, thus making each test consist of three examples each in addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. The examples were printed in three parallel rows, each row with one example in each operation in the order just given. (These modifications were made by me without consulting Mr. Courtis, and he is in no way responsible for them.) The first row contained examples with no, the second with simple, and the third with advanced, borrowing and carry- ing. However advantageous it might have seemed for all the examples to have been of approximately equal difficulty, the wisdom of Mr. Courtis' three grades of difficulty was shown in the zest gained by the children in my tests from the rapid start with the easy examples of the first row. (The third and fourth tests are herewith given, the original size 8% x 11 inches and type being reduced.) p -< CO o OS Q os HH /M > t-1 w Q ~ CO CO Q o G ^ co _, (N . GO 05 CO H I ^ 0(M 2 *<- os GO r. O O O2 ^ CM ^ i O CO ij 1 143 (jjUt^ 2-tf j T. ^nn >f iftf*Qlri O JCp JoUOfPj OEC 1 ?, T9 f LD 21-95m-7,'37 YC 03655 305630 L > i ol 144- UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY