they run: H (51.8), 39, 46.4, 50.8; C (48.1), 60.6, 53.5, 48.5. Both of these tests tend to show that the discipline of the first year brings the two large groups gradually towards an equality.

(2) Ha Group. In the next place, an analysis of Ha and Hb shows that the former (or older) group is mostly responsible for the difference between H and C. Thus, comparing Ha and C by themselves, we find, for Test (a): Ha, 36, 57, 55; C, 50, 66, 50; exhibiting not only a greater relative improvement for Ha in the second year, but actually a superiority over C, by the third year. For Test (b) we find: Ha (25.2), 23, 23.7, 27.7; C1 (40.7), 53, 44.5, 41; in other words, Ha begins with only a slight deficiency and ends with an excess, while C, begins with a substantial excess and ends with a slight excess.

4

(3) C2 Group. But the curious result is that which is disclosed by an analysis of C2 and C. By Test (a) they stand: C2, 42, 73, 54; C4, 50, 66, 50; in other words, men with one or two college years made records in the second and third years substantially better than men with three or four college years. So, too, with Test (b), the same appears: C2 (7.4), 8, 9, 8; C1 (40.7), 53, 44.5, 41. This result is puzzling. The small number of C, men may give part of the explanation, but will not alone solve the anomaly, especially as the results of Table X show a similar difference.

On the whole, if we can regard Test (a) as the more significant, and if we can afford to ignore the first year as transitional, it would seem that the differences in the second- and third-year records (H, 54, 48+; C, 67, 51) do not by any means entitle us to treat the H group as relatively incompetent to attain goodto-excellent records, or relatively unlikely to develop their share of such individuals.

THIRD TEST.

TABLES Z 1, 2.

This test consisted in taking the number of A marks attained by the students in each class and group, arranging the first 10 in order, and thus ascertaining the number of such places at

tained by men of the respective groups. Table Z1 shows the A marks of the first 10 of each class, by years. Table Z 2 shows the number of such places attained in each class by each group, compared with the number of such places to which the size of the group would naturally have entitled it.

The results for the 10-year total are shown in Tables Z 1, 2. 1. Out of 10 first places, 2 were taken by Hb men, the others by C men. Out of 10 second places, the same occurred. Probably nothing can be generalized here.

2. Out of the total 100 highest places, the allotment to each group (taking the size of the group into reckoning) was: H. 17.6%; C, 40.5% (Table Z 2, lines 23, 26); and herein, Ha was 14%; Hb was 21.6%; C2 was 29%; C1 was 42.6%. In other words, the percentage of place-winners in the C1 group was twice as high as in the Hb group, and three times as high as in the Ha group.

Two inferences are here available:

(1) Four years of college develop the powers for highest legal scholarship twice as well as high school, and three times as well when the high-school training has become rusty.

(2) On the other hand, the high-school group do get into the first ten places in respectable numbers. Moreover, the college group does not get there in the majority of its members. This bears closely on the question of requiring college-years for entrance. Are we to require college-years on the ground of their utility for cultivating the highest powers, if, in fact, 60% will not show that result? Or (put in another way) shall we try to force the 82% of high-school men to go first to college, if, in fact, 60% out of that 82% will, after all, not develop those highest powers? This question becomes the more serious when the precise proposal now before our law schools is taken, namely, to require only one or two years of college. For the C2 percent

It may be added that in the next class, entering 1906 (just graduated), but not covered by this table, the highest man was again Hb; and that in the first-year class just completed, three of the six having a clear A record were H men.

TABLE Z 2.

Individual highest places attained in competition within each class.

age in this table is only 29 (line 24). So that the question at the present stage is: Shall we try to force 82% of high-school men to go first to college for one or two years to develop highest powers, if, after all, 71% in the 82% will not develop such powers? Obviously, in this paper we venture merely to put the question, because the number of C2 men here under test was too small for safely making broad generalizations. But we do put the question; because if these figures are verified on a larger scale, it seriously affects the utility of the proposed measureat least so far as the proposal rests on some assumed benefits to legal scholarship.

FOURTH TEST.
TABLES Q 1, 2.

This test consists in finding for each student a single figure representing his net percentage-grade of attainment, and then in arranging them according to decimal sections; thus, upon ascertaining how many of each group (H and C) fall into the several decimal sections, respectively, the median value appears. By transmuting these numbers of each section into an identical percentage-scale, and by plotting the numbers in a curve, the distribution can be appreciated graphically with more ease.

This method, it should be explained, has been publicly advocated as the most scientific by Dr. Winfield Scott Hall, Associate Dean of the Medical Faculty of Northwestern University, and Professor of physiology in that Faculty. In three articles published by him he has expounded the scientific basis and the utility of this test. Briefly stated, his articles remind us that the anthropological researches of Quetelet, Galton, and others, have shown that for relatively small numbers of observed instances in biological data the median value is more trustworthy than the average value. He exhibits researches of his own in confirmation.