GENERAL VALUE OF THE METHOD. In a former chapter we have noted certain imperfections of the scale devised by Binet and Simon; namely, that many of the tests were not correctly located, that the choice of tests was in a few cases unsatisfactory, that the directions for giving and scoring the tests were sometimes too indefinite, and that the upper and lower ranges of the scale especially stood in need of extensions and corrections. All of these faults have been quite generally admitted. The method itself, however, after being put to the test by psychologists of all countries and of all faiths, by the skeptical as well as the friendly, has amply demonstrated its value. The agreement on this point is as complete as it is regarding the scale's imperfections. The following quotations from prominent psychologists who have studied the method will serve to show how it is regarded by those most entitled to an opinion:-- There can be no question about the fact that the Binet-Simon tests do not make half as frequent or half as great errors in the mental ages (of feeble-minded children) as are included in gradings based on careful, prolonged general observation by experienced observers.[30] [30] Dr. F. Kuhlmann: "The Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence in Grading Feeble-Minded Children," in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1912), p. 189. All of the different authors who have made these researches (with Binet's method) are in a general way unanimous in recognizing that the principle of the scale is extremely fortunate, and all believe that it offers the basis of a most useful method for the examination of intelligence.[31] [31] Dr. Otto Bobertag: "L'échelle métrique de l'intelligence," in _L'Année Psychologique_ (1912), p. 272. It serves as a relatively simple and speedy method of securing, by means accessible to every one, a true insight into the average level of ability of a child between 3 and 15 years of age.[32] [32] Dr. Ernest Meumann: _Experimentelle Pädagogik_ (1913), vol. II, p. 277. That, despite the differences in race and language, despite the divergences in school organization and in methods of instruction, there should be so decided agreement in the reactions of the children--is, in my opinion, the best vindication of the _principle_ of the tests that one could imagine, because this agreement demonstrates that _the tests do actually reach and discover the general developmental conditions of intelligence_ (so far as these are operative in public-school children of the present cultural epoch), and not mere fragments of knowledge and attainments acquired by chance.[33] [33] Dr. W. Stern: _The Psychological Methods of Testing Intelligence._ Translated by Whipple (1913), p. 49.