Of distinctive status are the tests of ability presented by life itself and by the conventional institutions which compose the social environment. The processes of education, the rate of advance, the comparative readiness with which one or another discipline is absorbed and mastered: these are at once preparations for life and accredited tests of ability. For these reasons such "school" qualities are subjected to a special study; and fairly conclusive results indicate to what measure they must be supplemented, if not superseded, by the designed psychological test, to meet the conditions of actual selection and employment of men. At this point the several methods converge; for the vocations have a vital interest in the school, as has the school in vocational application of its discipline and training. The actual comparison of results, especially by the method of correlation, has already established the degree of relation--and eventually of coöperation--to be expected of the two. In all these ways has painstaking method supplemented and replaced impressionism, haphazard opinion been supported or overturned by accumulation of fact, and the scientific approach to the study of vocational fitness become firmly established. The road from theory to practice, if it is to be well built and enduring, must be laid on careful foundation. To such an end this volume is a worthy contribution.
No question of vocational fitness has been more eagerly discussed than the contrasted fitness of men and women, and the consequent basis of differentiation of career desirable or necessary for the two, both as wage-earners and in every other relation of life. A discussion of this problem from the point of view of this volume is wisely included, and in turn a definite negative conclusion reached. It is shown that in the main capacities tested--with several and significant exceptions--men and women, boys and girls, are comparable; individual differences outweigh sex differences. The interpretation of this result will not be uniform, even when due allowance is made for the range of tests responsible for the conclusion. The biologist will continue to insist upon the significance of fundamental differences; the experiences of life reinforce as they express the fact that men and women live with as well as upon a different perspective of psychological equipment; the psychologist may suggest that the tests and comparisons--based in large measure upon comparable and derivative facilities--naturally bring forth the parallel measure in which secondary qualities yield similar issues. It must be noted how largely a large share of conventional vocations call upon specialized and late varieties of intellectual traits; for these precisely, men and women may have comparable fitness, while none the less psychologically contrasted in realms closer to natural function. Women have proved that they are as fit to study--and, if you like, to vote--as are men; as fit to enter and succeed in vocations in terms of tested qualifications. How far the less measurable and collateral qualities make them fit and successful on a different basis, and still leave them contrasted in fundamental reactions, is a very different question. It is well to understand the bearing as well as the range of the ascertained facts of the case.