CONCERNING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS By Rose G. Anderson Psychological Service Center, At
a
recent New York dinner
New York
City
meeting of the Association of
School Should Have the side of the from School Psychologist" was Percival Dr. school. the Symonds of psychologist and the side from officials school of number a and represented the psychologist the metropolitan area, the schools. It is significant that the discussion resolved itself into a debate in which the contribution of
Consulting Psychologists,
a
topic "Every presented both
the
the school-men consisted predominantly of a bombardment of arguments on the negative side, characterized by two trends, that the schools were quite self-sufficient in handling their own problems and that even when they had looked to the psychologist for help they had been disappointed. Some of the bombs of the school-men proved to be duds, but in spite of this their attack was forceful enough, so that there was some question as to the condition of the school psychologist. The result of the meeting was not a greater mutual basis for cooperation, but a raising of issues which must be met before a desirable quality of cooperation is possible. The school on the defensive. of meeting this situation. The school psychologist may uphold his ego by picking flaws in the arguments of the school-men. There were loop-holes enough in their criticism, if we turn our attention to them exclusively, to enable us to convince ourselves that a vigorous educational campaign for school people as to the value of the school psychologist is the fundamental
psychologist There
was
placed
are two ways
need. We can, for example, point out a number of things to the school who emphatically asserted that he had no need of us because he was more able to adjust his own problems than any clinic he had consulted. We can suggest that his whole argument convinced us that his inability to be helped by the psychologists or psychiatrists he had consulted lay in his own reaction patterns
principal
1
Read at the annual meeting of the Association of Consulting of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, May 6, 1933.
gists, University
41
Psycholo-
42
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC
rather than in their incapacity to help him. We could also explain that the case he cited?curing the sex-delinquent girl by reading the Bible to her?illustrates one of the fundamental differences between the approach of the lay person and the psychologist,
namely that he has treated the symptom rather than the cause and has been content when the socially unacceptable manifestation of the cause has been eliminated although the root of the difficulty has been untouched and may in fact be more firmly entrenched by the method of treatment. This same principal asserted that the number of problem cases in his school was so insignificant that they were hardly worthy of consideration. Yet he gave us the figures of problems coming to his attention over a period of two years from which we were able to deduce that these cases represented 3 per cent of his total enrollIf this 3 per cent were actually representative of all his ment.
problems is this number so insignificant? Let us compare it, for example, with another known problem group. Authorities variously estimate the proportion of feeble-mindedness as 2 to 4 per cent. There is no need to enlarge upon the magnitude of the problem which this group of individuals creates for schools, social agencies, feeble-minded, penal and corrective institutions, etc. We cannot wave
them aside because they may be
a
mere
3 per cent.
But
are
principal's problems represented by a mere 3 per cent? Wickman's2 study of Children's Behavior and Teachers' Attitudes has shown that teachers are most concerned over the types of problems which represent transgressions of their moral sensitivity the
authority and infractions of school regulations and class-room discipline. Teachers of 874 pupils listing their problems spontaneously mentioned shyness 8 times, over-sensitiveness only 2 times, and day-dreaming no times. When asked to specify the number of such problems, these same teachers reported that over onethird of these children, i.e., over 291 compared with 8, were shy, unsocial, and withdrawing, that one-fourth, 218 compared with 2, showed traits of over-sensitiveness, and nearly a third were dayand
dreamers. So we hesitate to accept the estimated per cent as representing the proportion of children in this school who need help in
making A
by
satisfactory adjustment. point is a high school boy recently referred for study tutor. This boy, submissive and retiring, is mal-adjusted a
case
his
more
in
2"Wickman, E. K., Children's Behavior and York, Commonwealth Fund Publications, 1928.
Teachers' Attitudes.
New
CONCERNING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
43
both educationally and emotionally. The tutor had visited the school to get information to help him in his work with the boy and had found that his teachers hardly know who he is. The school principal asserts that his experience in consulting with specialists on problem cases has been unsatisfactory because he has been able to get only a diagnosis with no help as to what can be done about the problem, whereas he already knew the diagnosis, and what he needed was help in remedying the situation. The example cited was a case of dementia praecox. "We might point out that we have been stressing for some time the need for preventive mental health and that, could we sensitize schools to the importance of such problems mentioned above, shyness, withdrawing, over-sensitiveness, etc., in the lower grades and the value of helping the child showing these and other unfavorable traits in the
earlier years,
we
could be
more
helpful
than after these traits have
morbid degree. A school official states that the solution of the whole problem is for every teacher to be a psychologist. No one deplores more than the psychologist the meagerness of this part of the teacher's train-
developed
to
a
ing. Where teachers lack such training, much of the value of the psychologist's work is lost because the teacher lacks the background to appreciate the significance of the interpretations of the child's behavior and to cooperate in carrying out the necessary remedial measures. Contrary to the implication that such training of teachers would make it possible to dispense with the services of the psychologist, our experience is that such teachers are on the whole most eager to utilize the help and suggestions which the psychologist can give and the readiest to recognize their own limitations to handle their
problems unassisted. This does not exhaust the possibilities of the suggested method of meeting the situation. But if we are primarily interested in our own growth and increased usefulness, is this approach the most profitable? And might we not be guilty of analyzing ourselves in ''vanity rather than in accuracy" as Dr. Lillien Martin indicates has often been the case in individuals who come to her for help. In her analysis of the individual an important requisite for progress is that he should become "fully aware of the handicapping quality of his reaction pattern." As a step toward this end a careful of his life history is necessary. Dr. Martin states that history narrative is at once diagnostic and therapeutic." Might it not be profitable to examine more closely into the life
analysis
"the life
44
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC
history of the school psychologist ? Are there handicapping qualities in his reaction pattern ? Might such an analysis prove to have diagnostic and therapeutic features? With exceptions, notably Dr. Witmer's clinic, the clinical psychologist was first employed in the institution for the feeble-minded, the first research centers in the development and use of intelligence tests. He was next used in the public schools where his function feeder for special classes for retarded children. About the time he was used by social agencies dealing with problem individuals of all kinds, and in corrective and penal institutions. In all of these cases the function of the psychologist was the identifi-
was a same
cation of the mental defective to provide special education or to determine mental responsibility. The few cases during the earlier period where children were selected for gifted classes did not counteract the idea that the psychologist was, as one individual has characterized him, a 'nut-pick.' We still have in many quarters this identification of the psychologist with the problems of subnormality, which in the lay mind is not distinguished from abnormality. And because the stock in trade of the psychologist was and is tests, and the distinctive result of the test is an I.Q., we have the concept of the psychologist as a 'tester' who attaches a label and passes on. In the earlier years of the development of intelligence tests, there was on the part of the psychologist himself and still is in many instances, an exaggerated importance attached to the purely intellectual factors, i.e., the general intelligence level or I.Q. as the basis for accounting for or solving individual problems. In those schools where the psychologist's function was or is a feeder for the special classes we find the tendency to refer a child presenting any kind of difficulty to the psychologist as a candidate for the special class. An analysis of 911 such referred cases showed that over a third of them were children whose intellectual capacity was above the level for special classes where this was placed at the arbitrary level of an I.Q. of 80. They represented disciplinary, personality, health problems, etc. These were the children on whom the psychologist should have concentrated his attention. Whatever his capacity or interest in working with these children might be, waiting lists and impatient principals necessitated his hurrying to the next list of potential eliminees. The examination reports of these
children have been returned to the teacher too often merely labelled 'transfer to special class' or 'remain in regular grade' those re-
CONCERNING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
45
maining in the grade continuing to be as active problems as previously. The chief result is an exasperated and thwarted teacher who naturally projects some of her irritation on the psychologist for failing to relieve her of such problems. "With the development of group-tests, testing has become the popular thing and since tests are relatively easy to administer after a course or two or "even observing a test or two," much of the hands of inadequately trained people the has fallen into testing who are mere 'testers' in fact and who are limited to attaching a label, often erroneous, to a child. Standards have not been established for the training of psychologists and these testers pass as school psychologists. The result has been a lack of respect for and a limited conception of the contribution which the psychologist can make to school problems. Inherent then in the development of the applications of psychology to school problems has been the tendency to stress diagnosis, and to put too exclusive reliance and emphasis on testing techniques. In instances where objective test results have been at variance with other known facts and these results have been dog-
matically upheld without attempting to relate them to or reconcile them with all phases of the situation, the attitude has arisen that the psychologist is in the clouds, that he is a theorist, that practical common sense and judgment will go further than the psychologist's findings. This same feeling has arisen when the child has been studied by a clinic outside of the school, not conversant with the intricacy and urgency of school problems. The school principal is right in demanding more than a diagnosis. The future of the school psychologist rests upon his demonstrated ability, to make a real contribution to the adjustment of the problem as diagnosed. In many instances the contribution of the testing techniques is a negative one, i.e., it shows where the difficulty does not lie. Although important and even in these instances indispensable, it is not sufficient. The psychologist must go further and inquire into the emotional, social, and physical factors as ascertained by himself and others, and their bearing on the problem. "Where a psychologist is most needed is in assisting in making adjustments which involve an orientation in all these fields, the integration of the information from these sources, its interpretation in terms intelligible and acceptable to the school, and helpful to both the school and the child. It has been emphasized that the psychologist must be able to interpret the test. He must go fur-
46
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC
interpret the child,?to his teacher, his parent, his associates, himself, and often the parents and teacher to the child. This means a greater breadth in training and experience which touches on another matter which needs emphasis. In addition to the high order of intelligence and the comprehensive psychological training, required for teaching or research, the clinical psychologist needs the orientation emphasized above and specific personality qualifications. I could best illustrate this by the statement made by four school-men in regard to psychologists employed by them, all incidentally members of this association. Time forbids my doing ther.
He must
this but the statements made indicate that the difference between the one failing outstandingly to make a contribution and another who has made a decided contribution is not one of level of intelliof
It is a difference in use of testing techniques. as theoretical and academic opposed to a practical approach, one oriented in the fields discussed; and a difference in personality, one which seeks ego-satisfaction through dominating others and arouses antagonism instead of cooperation, and one whose egosatisfaction comes from winning cooperation and adjusting diffi-
gence
or
adequate
one
culties. This raises another question, whether too large a part of the training of the clinical or school psychologist is not dominated by the academic viewpoint which has only a theoretical acquaintance with the practical problems which arise in such work and their solutions, and whether a larger part of the required training as well as the supervised experience should not be given through the kind of situation where work is to be done and where realities are dealt with rather than problematical situations and theoretical solutions.
Experience in supervising the prescribed practice work of students who had completed their required courses for the M.A. degree led me to the conclusion that they were well versed in the generalizations which can be made in many situations, but were quite unaware of the many exceptions to these generalizations and that the knotty problems in clinic practice are often the exceptions; that their verbal responses would indicate their adequacy to administer a test, but when the child on the other side of the table
proved not pectations,
to be
a
robot, responding according
to
pre-conceived
ex-
their lack of resources in adapting themselves would have been amusing had it not been appalling in view of the fact that these individuals after 30 hours of such practise work are
CONCERNING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
supposedly prepared
to go
out, and have
gone
out,
to do
47
independ-
ent work.
Summarizing briefly,
we
conclude that there
are
handicapping
qualities in the reaction pattern of the school psychologist. Some of these this association and the New York State Departments of Education and Mental Hygiene are undertaking to remedy in their of standards for the training and certification of psyalso this association, the Psychological Corporation, Institute of Child Guidance and others, in encouraging internships of trained but inexperienced psychologists under approved super-
sponsoring chologists;
vision. A "job-analysis" of the school psychologist both broadening his training and relating it more
challenges
basis for to the of and insist-
ence upon
as
as a
closely
he will meet in his work and an analysis the requisite personality qualifications are suggested likewise having fruitful possibilities in furthering this end.
a
recent New York dinner
New York
City
meeting of the Association of
School Should Have the side of the from School Psychologist" was Percival Dr. school. the Symonds of psychologist and the side from officials school of number a and represented the psychologist the metropolitan area, the schools. It is significant that the discussion resolved itself into a debate in which the contribution of
Consulting Psychologists,
a
topic "Every presented both
the
the school-men consisted predominantly of a bombardment of arguments on the negative side, characterized by two trends, that the schools were quite self-sufficient in handling their own problems and that even when they had looked to the psychologist for help they had been disappointed. Some of the bombs of the school-men proved to be duds, but in spite of this their attack was forceful enough, so that there was some question as to the condition of the school psychologist. The result of the meeting was not a greater mutual basis for cooperation, but a raising of issues which must be met before a desirable quality of cooperation is possible. The school on the defensive. of meeting this situation. The school psychologist may uphold his ego by picking flaws in the arguments of the school-men. There were loop-holes enough in their criticism, if we turn our attention to them exclusively, to enable us to convince ourselves that a vigorous educational campaign for school people as to the value of the school psychologist is the fundamental
psychologist There
was
placed
are two ways
need. We can, for example, point out a number of things to the school who emphatically asserted that he had no need of us because he was more able to adjust his own problems than any clinic he had consulted. We can suggest that his whole argument convinced us that his inability to be helped by the psychologists or psychiatrists he had consulted lay in his own reaction patterns
principal
1
Read at the annual meeting of the Association of Consulting of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, May 6, 1933.
gists, University
41
Psycholo-
42
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC
rather than in their incapacity to help him. We could also explain that the case he cited?curing the sex-delinquent girl by reading the Bible to her?illustrates one of the fundamental differences between the approach of the lay person and the psychologist,
namely that he has treated the symptom rather than the cause and has been content when the socially unacceptable manifestation of the cause has been eliminated although the root of the difficulty has been untouched and may in fact be more firmly entrenched by the method of treatment. This same principal asserted that the number of problem cases in his school was so insignificant that they were hardly worthy of consideration. Yet he gave us the figures of problems coming to his attention over a period of two years from which we were able to deduce that these cases represented 3 per cent of his total enrollIf this 3 per cent were actually representative of all his ment.
problems is this number so insignificant? Let us compare it, for example, with another known problem group. Authorities variously estimate the proportion of feeble-mindedness as 2 to 4 per cent. There is no need to enlarge upon the magnitude of the problem which this group of individuals creates for schools, social agencies, feeble-minded, penal and corrective institutions, etc. We cannot wave
them aside because they may be
a
mere
3 per cent.
But
are
principal's problems represented by a mere 3 per cent? Wickman's2 study of Children's Behavior and Teachers' Attitudes has shown that teachers are most concerned over the types of problems which represent transgressions of their moral sensitivity the
authority and infractions of school regulations and class-room discipline. Teachers of 874 pupils listing their problems spontaneously mentioned shyness 8 times, over-sensitiveness only 2 times, and day-dreaming no times. When asked to specify the number of such problems, these same teachers reported that over onethird of these children, i.e., over 291 compared with 8, were shy, unsocial, and withdrawing, that one-fourth, 218 compared with 2, showed traits of over-sensitiveness, and nearly a third were dayand
dreamers. So we hesitate to accept the estimated per cent as representing the proportion of children in this school who need help in
making A
by
satisfactory adjustment. point is a high school boy recently referred for study tutor. This boy, submissive and retiring, is mal-adjusted a
case
his
more
in
2"Wickman, E. K., Children's Behavior and York, Commonwealth Fund Publications, 1928.
Teachers' Attitudes.
New
CONCERNING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
43
both educationally and emotionally. The tutor had visited the school to get information to help him in his work with the boy and had found that his teachers hardly know who he is. The school principal asserts that his experience in consulting with specialists on problem cases has been unsatisfactory because he has been able to get only a diagnosis with no help as to what can be done about the problem, whereas he already knew the diagnosis, and what he needed was help in remedying the situation. The example cited was a case of dementia praecox. "We might point out that we have been stressing for some time the need for preventive mental health and that, could we sensitize schools to the importance of such problems mentioned above, shyness, withdrawing, over-sensitiveness, etc., in the lower grades and the value of helping the child showing these and other unfavorable traits in the
earlier years,
we
could be
more
helpful
than after these traits have
morbid degree. A school official states that the solution of the whole problem is for every teacher to be a psychologist. No one deplores more than the psychologist the meagerness of this part of the teacher's train-
developed
to
a
ing. Where teachers lack such training, much of the value of the psychologist's work is lost because the teacher lacks the background to appreciate the significance of the interpretations of the child's behavior and to cooperate in carrying out the necessary remedial measures. Contrary to the implication that such training of teachers would make it possible to dispense with the services of the psychologist, our experience is that such teachers are on the whole most eager to utilize the help and suggestions which the psychologist can give and the readiest to recognize their own limitations to handle their
problems unassisted. This does not exhaust the possibilities of the suggested method of meeting the situation. But if we are primarily interested in our own growth and increased usefulness, is this approach the most profitable? And might we not be guilty of analyzing ourselves in ''vanity rather than in accuracy" as Dr. Lillien Martin indicates has often been the case in individuals who come to her for help. In her analysis of the individual an important requisite for progress is that he should become "fully aware of the handicapping quality of his reaction pattern." As a step toward this end a careful of his life history is necessary. Dr. Martin states that history narrative is at once diagnostic and therapeutic." Might it not be profitable to examine more closely into the life
analysis
"the life
44
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC
history of the school psychologist ? Are there handicapping qualities in his reaction pattern ? Might such an analysis prove to have diagnostic and therapeutic features? With exceptions, notably Dr. Witmer's clinic, the clinical psychologist was first employed in the institution for the feeble-minded, the first research centers in the development and use of intelligence tests. He was next used in the public schools where his function feeder for special classes for retarded children. About the time he was used by social agencies dealing with problem individuals of all kinds, and in corrective and penal institutions. In all of these cases the function of the psychologist was the identifi-
was a same
cation of the mental defective to provide special education or to determine mental responsibility. The few cases during the earlier period where children were selected for gifted classes did not counteract the idea that the psychologist was, as one individual has characterized him, a 'nut-pick.' We still have in many quarters this identification of the psychologist with the problems of subnormality, which in the lay mind is not distinguished from abnormality. And because the stock in trade of the psychologist was and is tests, and the distinctive result of the test is an I.Q., we have the concept of the psychologist as a 'tester' who attaches a label and passes on. In the earlier years of the development of intelligence tests, there was on the part of the psychologist himself and still is in many instances, an exaggerated importance attached to the purely intellectual factors, i.e., the general intelligence level or I.Q. as the basis for accounting for or solving individual problems. In those schools where the psychologist's function was or is a feeder for the special classes we find the tendency to refer a child presenting any kind of difficulty to the psychologist as a candidate for the special class. An analysis of 911 such referred cases showed that over a third of them were children whose intellectual capacity was above the level for special classes where this was placed at the arbitrary level of an I.Q. of 80. They represented disciplinary, personality, health problems, etc. These were the children on whom the psychologist should have concentrated his attention. Whatever his capacity or interest in working with these children might be, waiting lists and impatient principals necessitated his hurrying to the next list of potential eliminees. The examination reports of these
children have been returned to the teacher too often merely labelled 'transfer to special class' or 'remain in regular grade' those re-
CONCERNING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
45
maining in the grade continuing to be as active problems as previously. The chief result is an exasperated and thwarted teacher who naturally projects some of her irritation on the psychologist for failing to relieve her of such problems. "With the development of group-tests, testing has become the popular thing and since tests are relatively easy to administer after a course or two or "even observing a test or two," much of the hands of inadequately trained people the has fallen into testing who are mere 'testers' in fact and who are limited to attaching a label, often erroneous, to a child. Standards have not been established for the training of psychologists and these testers pass as school psychologists. The result has been a lack of respect for and a limited conception of the contribution which the psychologist can make to school problems. Inherent then in the development of the applications of psychology to school problems has been the tendency to stress diagnosis, and to put too exclusive reliance and emphasis on testing techniques. In instances where objective test results have been at variance with other known facts and these results have been dog-
matically upheld without attempting to relate them to or reconcile them with all phases of the situation, the attitude has arisen that the psychologist is in the clouds, that he is a theorist, that practical common sense and judgment will go further than the psychologist's findings. This same feeling has arisen when the child has been studied by a clinic outside of the school, not conversant with the intricacy and urgency of school problems. The school principal is right in demanding more than a diagnosis. The future of the school psychologist rests upon his demonstrated ability, to make a real contribution to the adjustment of the problem as diagnosed. In many instances the contribution of the testing techniques is a negative one, i.e., it shows where the difficulty does not lie. Although important and even in these instances indispensable, it is not sufficient. The psychologist must go further and inquire into the emotional, social, and physical factors as ascertained by himself and others, and their bearing on the problem. "Where a psychologist is most needed is in assisting in making adjustments which involve an orientation in all these fields, the integration of the information from these sources, its interpretation in terms intelligible and acceptable to the school, and helpful to both the school and the child. It has been emphasized that the psychologist must be able to interpret the test. He must go fur-
46
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC
interpret the child,?to his teacher, his parent, his associates, himself, and often the parents and teacher to the child. This means a greater breadth in training and experience which touches on another matter which needs emphasis. In addition to the high order of intelligence and the comprehensive psychological training, required for teaching or research, the clinical psychologist needs the orientation emphasized above and specific personality qualifications. I could best illustrate this by the statement made by four school-men in regard to psychologists employed by them, all incidentally members of this association. Time forbids my doing ther.
He must
this but the statements made indicate that the difference between the one failing outstandingly to make a contribution and another who has made a decided contribution is not one of level of intelliof
It is a difference in use of testing techniques. as theoretical and academic opposed to a practical approach, one oriented in the fields discussed; and a difference in personality, one which seeks ego-satisfaction through dominating others and arouses antagonism instead of cooperation, and one whose egosatisfaction comes from winning cooperation and adjusting diffi-
gence
or
adequate
one
culties. This raises another question, whether too large a part of the training of the clinical or school psychologist is not dominated by the academic viewpoint which has only a theoretical acquaintance with the practical problems which arise in such work and their solutions, and whether a larger part of the required training as well as the supervised experience should not be given through the kind of situation where work is to be done and where realities are dealt with rather than problematical situations and theoretical solutions.
Experience in supervising the prescribed practice work of students who had completed their required courses for the M.A. degree led me to the conclusion that they were well versed in the generalizations which can be made in many situations, but were quite unaware of the many exceptions to these generalizations and that the knotty problems in clinic practice are often the exceptions; that their verbal responses would indicate their adequacy to administer a test, but when the child on the other side of the table
proved not pectations,
to be
a
robot, responding according
to
pre-conceived
ex-
their lack of resources in adapting themselves would have been amusing had it not been appalling in view of the fact that these individuals after 30 hours of such practise work are
CONCERNING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
supposedly prepared
to go
out, and have
gone
out,
to do
47
independ-
ent work.
Summarizing briefly,
we
conclude that there
are
handicapping
qualities in the reaction pattern of the school psychologist. Some of these this association and the New York State Departments of Education and Mental Hygiene are undertaking to remedy in their of standards for the training and certification of psyalso this association, the Psychological Corporation, Institute of Child Guidance and others, in encouraging internships of trained but inexperienced psychologists under approved super-
sponsoring chologists;
vision. A "job-analysis" of the school psychologist both broadening his training and relating it more
challenges
basis for to the of and insist-
ence upon
as
as a
closely
he will meet in his work and an analysis the requisite personality qualifications are suggested likewise having fruitful possibilities in furthering this end.
