Prognostic Tests and Teaching Success

Relationship Between Intelligence and Occupational Adjustment and Functioning: A Literature Review

“…In two such studies, Dearborn and Rothney (1938) and Lazarsfeld and Gaudet (1941) found no relationship between a youth's intelligence and success in finding employment. Furthermore, intelligence did not correlate with occupational success among business executives (Bingham & Davis, 1924), with being selected as a sales clerk (Anderson, 1929), or with high performance ratings among school teachers (Seagoe, 1945). In one of these studies, intelligence and sales ability even yielded a negative correlation (Bingham & Davis, 1924).…”

A Suggested Procedure for the Selection of Prospective Teachers at the End of the Sophomore Year of College

“…In "An Experiment in Teacher Prognosis", Shannon (31) observed that the ratings on oral interviews did not produce any higher percentage of agreeme~t with final marks than ratings based on brief visual inspection. Prediction studies have been reported by Martin (23), Seagoe (29,30), and Tudhope (34). Martin (23) found that, when using the average of four years' marks as the criterion, the following factors had great predictive value: entrance test scores in English, science, history, and mathematics; high school standings; and high school personality ratings.…”

“…In the use of twenty one tests for predicting teaching success at the elementary school level, Seagoe (29) found that the most selective factors were the linguistic factor in intelligence, general culture, knowledge of contemporary affairs, promises in educational courses, and general teaching aptitude. Seagoe (30) further computed correlations with a practice teaching rating scale and reported that teaching success did not correlate significantly with intelligence and special abilities, achievement, and interests or attitudes. However, a correlation of 0.63 was obtained with one personality measure.…”

Chapter III: Recruitment, Institutional Selection, and Guidance of Teachers

“…Thomas (23) studied grade point averages for 232 graduates and found them to be most significant by fields of specialization. Seagoe (20,21) furnishes two reports of a study of 125 student candidates for elementary teaching who were administered twenty-one tests and inventories at the freshman level. She found them to be at or above the seventy-fifth percentile on the manual for test used in the linguistic factor in intelligence, in general culture, in knowledge of contemporary affairs, in promise in professional courses, and in general teaching aptitude.…”

“…She found them to be somewhat less selected (between the sixtieth and seventy-fifth percentile in the respective manuals) in quantitative factor of intelligence, manipulative skill, musical talent, achievement in social studies, freedom from egoistic attachments, general mental health, self-confidence, general adjustment, femininity of personality (largely women), interest in teaching, political, social and religious values, and leadership in classroom situations. When these students later became student teachers (20) the California Rating Scale for Practice Teaching (reports of validity not found) was used to secure a series of ratings by the training teachers and supervisors. She reports low correlations between subsequent ratings of the same students by the same training teacher.…”