Mental Testing and the Expansion of Educational Opportunity
Abstract
Ever since Arthur Jensen touched off the so-called controversy with his famous 1969 article in the Harvard Educational Review, most spokesmen for the educational aspirations of minorities and the lower classes have been highly critical of mental testing. Jensen's determination that 80 per? cent of the variability in IQ scores was due to innate, genetic factors and his suggestion that little could be done to increase a person's IQ substantially raised fears that support for compensatory education programs, such as Head Start, would be undermined. Consequently, critics began to challenge the assumptions of the testing profession and to explore the harmful effects of testing in the schools, concluding that these instruments restricted the educational opportunities of minority and underprivileged students.1 Numerous studies of the history of mental measurement in America, conducted in the wake of the Jensen controversy, came to the same conclusion. Historians have described how school systems quickly adopted intelligence testing in the 1920s in order to facilitate the establishment of tracking systems, and how the elitist, racialist, and hereditarian beliefs of the founders of the testing profession?H. H. Goddard, Lewis Terman, Robert Yerkes, and Carl Brigham?provided legitimacy to the underrepresentation of immigrants, blacks, and the poor in the upper tracks. They have also pointed out that a number of Americans were quick to attack the views of the testers and to charge that i…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Standardized testing was viewed as a more scientific way to determine children's likely occupational attainment and to allocate them into different educational channels.
“Standardized testing was viewed as a more scientific way to determine children’s likely occupational attainment and to allocate them into different educational channels (Ackerman, 1995).”
From An Historical Framework for Cohort Differences in Intelligence (2005) · cites this paper as Ackerman, 1995
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Historical Framework for Cohort Differences in Intelligence
Schaie, K. W., Willis, S. L., & Pennak, S. (2005) · Research in Human Development · doi:10.1080/15427609.2005.9683344 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ackerman, M.
- Corresponding author
- Ackerman, Michael
- ORCID
- Ackerman, Michael
- Venue
- History of Education Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1995
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 279
- ISSN
- 0018-2680 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1968224545
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- History of Education Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Historical Education Studies Worldwide
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Race Theory in Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Keywords
- intelligence testing, educational opportunities, educational tracking, hereditarianism, Arthur Jensen, compensatory education, Head Start, racial discrimination in education, lower-class students, minority students, Lewis Terman
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review