Mental Capacity of Children and Paternal Occupation.

Haggerty, M. E.; Nash, H. B.

doi:10.1037/h0073569

Cited by 32 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the first four decades of the 20th century, few education researchers questioned how the ideologies and techniques associated with the new science of education facilitated the sorting of students for differentiated school experiences. Because the field was dominated by psychology, most ignored structural issues or how such policies largely reproduced existing class and race inequalities in the guise of objectivity and meritocracy (e.g., Collins, 1928; Goodenough, 1928; Haggerty & Nash, 1924; see also Cohen & Barnes, 1999; Fass, 1989; Kett, 2013; Mehta, 2013; Rury, 2005; Tyack & Hansot, 1982; Valencia & Suzuki, 2001). Only a small cadre of scholars critiqued the relationship between social class and educational outcomes.…”

Section: The Place Of Poverty In the New Science Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the Visible Invisible

Powers

Fischman

Berliner

2016

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The year 2016 marks the 100th anniversary of the American Educational Research Association and the 50th anniversary of the publication of Equality of Educational Opportunity, known as the Coleman Report. These key moments in the field’s history ushered in important paradigm shifts in the practice of education research; in how the relationships among poverty, inequality, and schooling were understood; and in the research-policy nexus. This conceptual synthesis of the history of education research in the United States is focused on poverty knowledge in both periods. The authors trace the rise of education as a field of study, the place of poverty in the emergent science of education, and the extent to which leading researchers have acknowledged, analyzed, or contested poverty. The Coleman Report advanced a new paradigm for analysis while being firmly rooted in earlier traditions. Coleman’s analytical approach has become common sense in educational policymaking in the form of the accountability movement. The report’s fundamental insights about the relationship between poverty and student achievement too often remain unacknowledged by U.S. policymakers.

show abstract

Section: The Place Of Poverty In the New Science Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the Visible Invisible

Powers

Fischman

Berliner

2016

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 If we limit ourselves in this section of our paper merely to those who have attempted only to discover the extent of variation in score with variation in social grouping-leaving for later consideration those who have tried to tease out the reasons for the relationship-we find that a list of the more important studies includes Decroly and Degand (18), Binet and Simon (6), Morle (44), Hoffman (32), Weintrob and Weintrob (56), Yerkes and Anderson (63), Terman et al (S3), Terman and Merrill (54), Bridges and Coler (8), Yerkes (Ed.) (62), Pressey and Ralston (45), Book (7), Dexter (19), Haggerty and Nash (30), Chapman and Wiggins (15), Sandiford (47), Bear (5), Collins (17), Goodenough (28), Duff and Thomson (20), Fukuda (25), Arlitt (1),. Jensen (33), Jordan (34), Russell (46), Chauncey (16), Stroud (52),.…”

Section: What Are the Facts?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the absence of a really precise and reliable instrument for measuring social status, this writer believes that an occupational hierarchy, of the type suggested by the U. S. Census classification, would afford the most objective means of indicating social level. Although it is "Representative here are those of Collins (17), Goodenough (28), Haggerty and Xash (30), Dexter (19), Book (7), Terman and Merrill (54), Duff and Thomson (20), and Russell (46). 7 It should be obvious that the position of an occupation on this scale represents nothing more than the pooled judgment of 30 men as to the amount of intelligence necessary for success at a particular occupation.…”

Section: Techniques Of Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Socioeconomic status and intelligence: A critical survey.

Neff¹

1938

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A notable exception to this generalization is afforded by Cattell (13). Using a test which he constructed himself, and which he claims is more *' saturated with g" and less affected by environmental variables than is the Stanford-Binet, Cattell reports a spread much greater than Terman and Merrill's data indicate. He finds a mean IQ of 78 for " factory workers," and, at the other extreme, a mean of 151 for secondary school teachers. That these figures do not merely represent a wider range of social differentiation in England is attested to by Duff and Thomson (20), who report a spread almost identical with Terman and Merrill's, using a test comparable to the Binet. Reasons for Cattell's finding will be indicated in a later section of this paper.* The difficulties standing in the way of a straightforward use of the productmoment correlation coefficient are various and will be discussed below.

show abstract

“…A widely quoted study by Haggerty and Nash, 17 using the Taussig classification of occupational groups, gave the following ranks: professional, business and clerical, skilled labor, semiskilled labor, farmer, and unskilled labor. Sandiford 84 secured identical results with children in British Columbia, and Collins 6 found a close relationship between paternal occupation and intelligence of offspring.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship of socioeconomic status to personality inventory and achievement test scores.

Hg¹

1946

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the fundamental problems of sociology and social psychology is to determine the effect of various social conditions on the personalities of the members of a society. The impress of social variables upon the individual can be observed and classified from a number of different aspects. One of the most important of these, especially in a mobile, industrial, and stratified society, is socio-economic status. It is the purpose of this paper to consider the relationship of socio-economic status to achievement test and personality inventory scores, as found among sixth-grade public school children in St. Cloud, Minnesota. Before reporting the findings of this study, a brief survey of the pertinent literature will be made.

show abstract

Mental Capacity of Children and Paternal Occupation.

Cited by 32 publications

References 0 publications

Making the Visible Invisible

Making the Visible Invisible

Socioeconomic status and intelligence: A critical survey.

The relationship of socioeconomic status to personality inventory and achievement test scores.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About