The first criterion referred only to those who were pronounced as failures and dropped from college for inability to do college work, or placed on probation as doubtful students with two thirds of the regular programme. The second criterion had reference to the whole class, including the good students. A letter was sent to all members of the faculty asking them to indicate the student’s general ability as compared to the general ability of the class. A list of names, with ten numbered spaces after each name, was appended. The tests which agreed fairly well with the pooled judgment of the faculty were retained. The tests which failed in this regard were either improved or cancelled. When the returns were complete the instructor’s estimate was determined for each student and was used as a criterion for the tests. The tests were analyzed both by correlation methods referring to the group as a whole, and by inspection of scatter diagrams referring to individual students. By devising a critical score it was possible to arrive at a mental-test rating. The results of this system of rating indicated, according to Prof. L. L. Thurstone, of the Carnegie Institute, that: (_a_) Seven out of eleven failures could have been eliminated at the beginning of the year. (_b_) Eight out of seventeen students placed on probation for poor scholarship should have been eliminated at the beginning of the year. (_c_) Not one of the students who were below the critical mental-test rating was acceptable as a student. All of them should have been spared the discouragement which comes from failure and should have been advised to take up some other work. (_d_) None of the acceptable students scored below the lower critical mental-test rating. (_e_) All of the freshmen rated high by the faculty were above the average in the mental-test rating. (_f_) Mental tests have been demonstrated to constitute a useful criterion for admission to college. In October, 1918, first-year men in Brown University were given two series of psychological tests, an interval of several days separating the administration of Series I and II. Emphasis was placed upon thought and accuracy, rather than upon speed. Two hundred and ten students of the same University took the Alpha test of the Army in January, 1919. Of these men, 103 also had taken the Brown University tests, Series I and II. This made a comparison possible.