In order to be thoroughly conservative in estimating this problem of maladjustment to school work, let us not only allow for two mental ages to be satisfactory for each grade, as indicated in the table, but in addition omit all cases which might be credited with an intellectual development above XII. This eliminates the objection to considering higher age tests, for nobody questions that tests XII or above indicate at least a 12-year-old intellect. After these extremely liberal allowances we still find 54 of the 104 boys in the detention home testing less than XIII who were in school grades the work of which was presumably not suited to their intellectual level. Seventeen of the boys (16%) were at least two years out of adjustment to their school work. If we disregard those who were trying to carry work too difficult for their capacity because placed a year or more ahead of their ability, we find 30 out of adjustment because at least one grade behind the class suited to their intellects. Over a quarter of our detention-home group was thus placed in school a year or more below grades attended by the pupils of corresponding intellectual development. It may be said that some of those behind their proper intellectual position in school may have been kept back because of instability, laziness, or other volitional characteristics which might fail to show in tests of intellectual performance. This is probably rare, and, when found, it often means merely that the pupil requires more attention to secure results. That our delinquents are not unique in their maladjustment to school as judged by their tested abilities, is indicated by the report of Ordahl on the school position of the special group of 341 delinquents in the state school at St. Charles, California. The median of their school positions, counting seven years as satisfactory for the first grade, fell a grade and a half below that which their tested mental development seemed to justify. He notes that “mentality is not alone responsible” for their low grades in school. Moreover, he believes that it shows the necessity for a more objective pedagogical method in dealing with them (_41_, p. 81).