SQL Server 2022 Revealed: A Hybrid Data Platform Powered by Security, Performance, and Availability 1st Edition Bob Ward Instant Download
SQL Server 2022 Revealed: A Hybrid Data Platform Powered by Security, Performance, and Availability 1st Edition Bob Ward Instant Download
https://ebookmeta.com/product/sql-server-2022-revealed-a-hybrid-
data-platform-powered-by-security-performance-and-
availability-1st-edition-bob-ward/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/pro-sql-server-2022-wait-
statistics-a-practical-guide-to-analyzing-performance-in-sql-
server-and-azure-sql-database-3rd-edition-thomas-larock-2/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/pro-sql-server-2022-wait-
statistics-a-practical-guide-to-analyzing-performance-in-sql-
server-and-azure-sql-database-3rd-edition-thomas-larock/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/expert-performance-indexing-in-
azure-sql-and-sql-server-2022-fourth-edition-edward-pollack/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/teaching-women-s-studies-in-
conservative-contexts-considering-perspectives-for-an-inclusive-
dialogue-1st-edition-cantice-greene-editor/
Official ABCs of Love 1st Edition Georgia Coffman
https://ebookmeta.com/product/official-abcs-of-love-1st-edition-
georgia-coffman/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/electrode-materials-for-energy-
storage-and-conversion-1st-edition-mesfin-a-kebede/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/translating-cultures-an-
introduction-for-translators-interpreters-and-mediators-third-
edition-david-katan/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/cracks-in-the-windshield-after-i-
do-1st-edition-bree-weeks/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/automated-guided-vehicle-systems-a-
guide-with-practical-applications-about-the-technology-for-
planning-2nd-edition-gunter-ullrich/
Colored Television American Religion Gone Global 1st
Edition Marla Frederick
https://ebookmeta.com/product/colored-television-american-
religion-gone-global-1st-edition-marla-frederick/
SQL Server 2022
Revealed
A Hybrid Data Platform Powered by
Security, Performance, and Availability
—
Bob Ward
Foreword by Rohan Kumar
SQL Server 2022 Revealed
A Hybrid Data Platform Powered
by Security, Performance,
and Availability
Bob Ward
Foreword by Rohan Kumar
SQL Server 2022 Revealed: A Hybrid Data Platform Powered by Security,
Performance, and Availability
Bob Ward
North Richland Hills, TX, USA
Acknowledgments�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xvii
Foreword����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xix
Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xxi
viii
Table of Contents
x
Table of Contents
xi
Table of Contents
Monitoring��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 450
Azure Monitor���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 451
Virtual Machine Metrics and Logs��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 451
Azure Insights���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 452
Azure Is the Best Cloud for SQL Server������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 452
Index��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 475
xii
About the Author
Bob Ward is a principal architect for the Microsoft Azure
Data team, which owns the development for all of SQL and
Azure SQL. Bob has worked for Microsoft for 29 years on
every version of SQL Server shipped from OS/2 1.1 to SQL
Server 2022, including Azure SQL and Azure Arc. He is a
well-known speaker on SQL Server and Azure SQL, often
presenting talks on new releases, internals, and specialized
topics at events such as the PASS Summit, SQLBits, Azure
Data Conference, VSLive, Microsoft Build, Microsoft Inspire,
Microsoft Ignite, and many other events. You can follow him
on Twitter at @bobwardms or LinkedIn at https://linkedin.com/in/bobwardms.
Bob is the author of Apress books Pro SQL Server on Linux, SQL Server 2019 Revealed,
and Azure SQL Revealed.
xiii
About the Technical Reviewer
Erin Stellato is a senior program manager on the SQL
Experiences team, helping advance tools that customers
use daily with Azure SQL. She is passionate about data and
chocolate, not always in that order. She previously worked
as a consultant and was a Data Platform MVP and has been
an active member of the SQL Server community as both
a volunteer and speaker. Her areas of interest within the
engine include Query Store, Extended Events, statistics, and
performance tuning, and she also enjoys helping accidental/
involuntary DBAs figure out how SQL Server works.
xv
Acknowledgments
I want to first thank God for sending his one and only son, Jesus, for the forgiveness of
my sins, the immersion of the Holy Spirit, and the promise of everlasting life. Without my
faith, I am nothing.
I want to thank my wife, Ginger, so much for her love and dedication to me for all of
our years together but especially during the writing of this book. You patiently allowed
me to work crazy hours and situations even on some of our vacation time to bring this
book to life. I also want to thank my sons Troy and Ryan, and Ryan’s wife Blair, my
daughter-in-law. You all give me hope for the future as I see you all grow and exhibit
grace and truth in everything you do.
This is my fourth book with Apress, and I want to personally thank Jonathan Gennick
from Apress. Jonathan gave me my first chance at authoring when many publication
companies turned me down. Thank you, Jonathan, for always supporting me and letting
me “write my way.” I also want to thank Jill Balzano from Apress whom I’ve never met in
person but who always is so kind and professional despite all the crazy deadlines we try
to meet.
I asked Erin Stellato to be my technical reviewer because she is one of the deepest
experts on SQL and just an incredible person. Turns out it was a blessing when she
joined Microsoft during the writing of the book as we could discuss confidential
information. Erin, thank you for your thoroughness and great attitude as we all put
immense pressure on you to review so many chapters late in the cycle.
There were so many people at Microsoft who supported my work on this book.
But, first, I want to thank Joe Sack, Pedro Lopes, and James Rowland-Jones who no
longer work at Microsoft but were a huge part of helping me craft the story of
SQL Server 2022, which you see in this book.
At Microsoft I want to thank my leaders who support all of my efforts including
Rohan Kumar, Peter Carlin, Asad Khan, and Sanjay Mishra. The true heroes of this
book are all the people at Microsoft in the engineering team who helped me with all
my questions and the review of complex topics and for giving me some great quotes.
This list is long, but I have to call out everyone who helped because each of them
xvii
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
The work out of which this monograph grew was begun through the
encouragement of Judge Edward F. Waite of the Hennepin County
Juvenile Court. His earnest co-operation and my interest in the field
of mental testing has led me to continue the study. Judge Waite's
insight into his court problems resulted in the early organization of a
Juvenile Court clinic (153, 170) in Minneapolis. The clinic is in charge
of Dr. Harris Dana Newkirk, who has contributed materially to this
study by his thorough medical examination of each of the cases
brought to him. To the staff at the probation office I am also much
indebted.
The earnest help of Superintendent D. C. MacKenzie, of the Glen
Lake Farm School for the juvenile delinquents of Hennepin County,
made a close study of our most interesting group of boys much
more profitable personally than I have shown here. For detailed
expert work in tabulation and in examinations I wish to express my
thanks to my advanced students, a half dozen of whom have
contributed materially to the data of this book.
James Burt Miner.
Carnegie Institute of Technology
Pittsburgh, Pa.
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
2. Those concerned with other features of the Binet scale will find an admirable
bibliography by Samuel C. Kohs, Journal of Educational Psychology, April,
May and June, 1914, and September, October, November, and December,
1917. Other references are contained in the Bibliography by L. W. Crafts (9).
PART ONE
PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
CHAPTER II. THE FUNCTIONS OF A SCALE IN
DIAGNOSIS
The first broad conclusion that impresses those who try to use mental scales
for diagnosing feeble-mindedness is that the lower types, the idiots and
imbeciles, can be detected with great accuracy by an hour's testing. The
difficulties pile up as soon as the individual rises above the imbecile group. The
practical experience of those in institutions for the feeble-minded here
becomes of fundamental importance. They are able to supply the history of
exceptions that should make us cautious about our general rules. Certain
people whom they have known for years to be unable to adjust themselves
socially because their minds have not reached the level of social fitness will yet
be able to pass considerably beyond the lower test limit for mature minds. The
mental scales can only detect those feeble-minded who cannot succeed with
our present tests. This is the basal principle in using any system of tests.
Stated in another way, this first caution for anybody seeking the assistance of a
mental scale is that tests may detect a feeble-minded person, but when a
person passes them it does not guarantee social fitness. The negative
conclusion, “this person is not feeble-minded,” can not be drawn from tests
alone. Mental tests at present are positive and not negative scales. This fact
will probably always make the expert's judgment essential before the discharge
of a suspected case of mental deficiency. When a subject falls below a
conservative limit for tested ability a trained psychologist who is familiar with
the sources of error in giving tests, even without experience with the feeble-
minded, should be able to say that this person at present shows as deficient
development as the feeble-minded. To conclude however that any subject has
a passable mind requires in addition practical experience with feeble-minded
people who pass the tests. It is very much easier to state that the tests do not
detect all forms of feeble-mindedness than it is to give any adequate
description of the sort of feeble-mindedness which they do not as yet detect.
This distinction between the feeble-minded who do well with test scales and
those who do not, is well known in the institutions for the feeble-minded. Binet
sought to distinguish some of the feeble-minded who escaped the tests by
calling them “unstable,” or “ill-balanced,” individuals as Drummond (77)
translates the term. To use the historical distinctions of psychology, their minds
seem to be undeveloped more on their volitional and emotional sides than on
their intellectual side. Weidensall (59) has described another type as “inert.”
She found that quite a number of the reformatory women might slide through
the tests but fail socially from the fact that “their lives and minds are so
constituted that they feel no need to learn the things any child ought to know,
though they can and do learn when we teach them.” Again, it seems to be a
disturbance of will through the feeling, rather than an intellectual deficiency.
Many of the so-called “moral imbeciles” are probably able to pass intellectual
tests lasting but a few minutes. Like the unstable or inert they are not failures
because of a lack of intellectual understanding of right and wrong, but because
of excess or deficiency of their instinctive tendencies especially in the
emotional sphere. Such weakness of will may arise either from abnormality of
specific instinctive impulses or inability to organize these impulses so that one
impulse may be utilized to supplement or inhibit another. We may call all this
group of cases socially deficient because of a weakness in the volitional, or
conative, aspect of mind.
The discrimination of mental activities which are predominately emotional and
conative from those in which intellect is mainly emphasized is also well
recognized by those who have been making broad studies of tests in other
fields than that of feeble-mindedness. Hart and Spearman (123), for example,
call attention to the fact that tests passed under the stimulus of test conditions
represent what the subject does when keyed up to it rather than what he
would do under social conditions. We cannot be sure that speed ability as
tested will represent speed preferences. The subject may be able to work
rapidly for a few minutes, but in life consistently prefer to work deliberately.
Regarding the eighteen tests which they studied with normal and abnormal
adults they say: “These tests have been arranged so as to be confined to
purely intellectual factors. But in ordinary life, this simplicity is of rare
occurrence. For the most part, what we think and believe is dominated by what
we feel and want.” Kelley (130) finds by the regression equation that the factor
of effort amounts to two-thirds of the weight of that of the intellectual factor in
predicting scholarship from teachers' estimates. Webb (217) thinks that he
finds by tests a general conative factor comparable to Spearman's general
intellective factor.
With the change in point of view that has come from the adoption of the
biological conception of the mind the discrimination of the different forms of
feeble-mindedness must be recognized as a distinction in the emphasis on
intellectual, emotional and conative processes, not a distinction between
actually separable forms of mental activity. On account of the organic nature of
the mind it is well established that various mental processes are mutually
dependent. Any disturbance of the emotional processes will tend to affect the
thinking and vice versa. Even if we believe that emotions are complex facts,
involving vague sensations as well as feelings, and that terms like emotion,
memory, reasoning and will are names for classes of mental facts rather than
for mental powers, it still remains important to distinguish between feeling,
intellect and will, as well as to recognize the interdependence of the mental
processes. Common sense seems to agree with psychological descriptions in
regarding mind as a broader term than intellect, and feeble-mindedness as a
broader term than intellectual feebleness.
Since tests at present tend to reach the intellectual processes more surely than
the emotional, we describe those who fail in them as intellectually deficient.
The term “intellect” seems to be better than “intelligence” because the latter
seems to include information as well as capacity, while the aim of measuring
scales has been to eliminate the influence of increasing information with age.
To be thoroughly objective, of course, one should talk about “feebleness in
tested abilities;” but we would then fail to point out the important fact about
our present scales that they detect mainly intellectual deficiency, that they do
not reach those forms of feeble-mindedness in which the weakness in such
traits as stability, ambition, perseverance, self-control, etc., is not great enough
to interfere with the brief intellectual processes necessary for passing tests.
Intellectual deficiency will be used hereafter to refer to those social deficients
whose feebleness is disclosed by our present test scales.
In the opinion of Kuhlmann these cases of disturbed emotions and will which
shade off into different forms of insanity should not be classed as feeble-
minded at all, although he recognizes that they are commonly placed in this
group. He regards them as an intermediate class between the feeble-minded
and the insane. He says: “They readily fail in the social test for feeble-
mindedness and because of the absence of definite symptoms of insanity are
often classed as feeble-minded. In the opinion of the present writer they
should not be so classed, because they require a different kind of care and
treatment, and have a different kind of capacity for usefulness” (140). So long
as this group of what we shall term “conative cases” is discriminated from the
intellectually deficient it matters less whether they be regarded as a sub-group
of the feeble-minded or as a co-ordinate class. In grouping them with the
feeble-minded we have followed the customary classification. An estimate of
the size of this group will be considered later in Chapter III.
Conative forms of feeble-mindedness are perhaps the most serious types in the
field of delinquency. They are the troublesome portion of the borderland group
of deficient delinquents about which there is so much concern. It is important
to remember that it is just among these cases that the test judgment is least
certain. In this dilemma one principle seems to be sound enough
psychologically to be likely to meet with acceptance. I should state this
principle as follows: A borderline case which has also shown serious and
repeated delinquency should be classed as feeble-minded, the combination of
doubtful intellect and repeated delinquency making him socially unfit. This will
relieve the practical situation temporarily until tests are perfected which will
detect those whose feebleness is specialized in those phases of volition
centering around the instinctive passions, control, balance, interest and
endurance. The principle recognizes that mental weakness is sometimes
emphasized in the volitional processes of the mind.
The principle is apparently in conflict with the rule advocated by Dr. Wallin.
Referring to the mental levels reached by individuals, he says: “We cannot
consider X-, XI-, or XII-year-old criminals as feeble-minded because they
happen to be criminals and refuse to consider X-, XI-, and XII-year-old
housewives, farmers, laborers and merchants as feeble-minded simply because
they are law abiding and successful” (214, p. 707). At another place he insists
“that the rule must work both ways” (215, p. 74). Logically it would seem at
first that it was a poor rule which did not work both ways. Further
consideration will show, I believe, that there has been a confusion of feeble-
mindedness with tested deficiency. If all the feeble-minded tested deficient
intellectually then the tested level should determine whether or not they were
feeble-minded. This, however, is not a correct psychological description of the
facts. I prefer, therefore, to allow for those in a defined narrow range of weak
intellects to be classed as deficient provided their weakness also manifests
itself pronouncedly in the conative sphere.
The principle that all mental deficients need not show the same low degree of
intellectual ability is clearly recognized in perhaps the most important legal
enactment on deficiency which has been passed in recent years, the British
Mental Deficiency Act of 1913. It states regarding “moral imbeciles” that they
are persons “who from an early age display some permanent mental defect
coupled with strong vicious or criminal propensities on which punishment has
had little or no deterrent effect.” It specifically distinguishes them from the
group of feeble-minded which require guardianship because of inability to care
for themselves.
3. In Great Britain the term is restricted to those above the imbecile group.
CHAPTER III. THE PERCENTAGE DEFINITION OF
INTELLECTUAL DEFICIENCY
A. The Definition.
Population Ages
5-14 15- 25- 35- 45- 55 &
24 34 44 54 over
Gen'l—U. S. 1,897,492 6.1% 9.6% 12.8% 13.0% 13.6% 44.9%
in death
registration
area
F. M. 1910 840 26.6 33.0 18.9 9.1 45 &
in over
Institut'ns 12.3
in U. S.
F. M. British 997 34.3 41.1 10.4 6.5 3.5 55 &
(Earlswood) over
4.2
F. M. British 613 34.7 46.8 9.5 35 &
(Barr) over
9.0
F. M. 982 27.6 38.0 16.1 8.6 3.5 55 &
Faribault over
Minnesota 6.2
Table II. Mortality of Institutional Deficients in the United States Compared with
the General Population, Showing its Possible Effect on the Frequency of
Deficiency at Different Ages.
Ages
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
General population 1000 983 972 956 934 903 872 835
Deficients in Institut'ns 1000 795 696 606 503 428 349 290
If most of the feeble-minded for whom society should provide were of the type
which is only conative and not detectable by our present objective tests, a
quantitative definition would be abortive. We must, therefore, study our
assumption that it is worth while to direct our attention to those who are
intellectually deficient. We shall attempt to discover how frequent are the
primarily conative types.
Before examining the quantitative evidence we may note that it is in
conformity with two prominent recent tendencies in psychology to subordinate
specialized abilities, as compared with abilities which function commonly in
many situations. The first of these tendencies is represented by the
fundamental researches of Hart and Spearman (123) (185). This is not the
place to set forth the technical work on which their conclusions are based. It
may be said, however, that, with 17 different psychological tests, they were
unable to discover any important specific mental weakness which distinguished
adults who were suffering with any one of various mental abnormalities,
including imbecility, manic-depressive insanity, dementia praecox, paranoia,
and general paralysis of the insane. This may have been the fault of the tests,
but it seems to be more likely that the fault lies in the custom of emphasizing
special abilities and disabilities, at least from the point of view of tested
capacities. On the other hand, all of these mental abnormalities showed a
weakness in general intellectual ability. This is true whether this general ability
be regarded, as it is by Hart and Spearman, as due to a general fund of brain
energy, or whether general ability be taken to refer to the common recurrence
of many specific abilities in much of our mental life. Its significance for this
study is that a series of varied tests, such as that of Binet, may be expected to
give a good estimate of general ability, and its failure to disclose specific
disabilities is thus less important.
The second influence in psychology tending to emphasize average tested ability
is the establishment of the biological conception of the mind which recognizes
the mutual interdependence of the mental processes, organically united
through the activity of the brain. So long as intellectual, emotional and
volitional processes are all mutually dependent, a disturbance of one aspect of
mental life is bound to affect the others. In considering the mutual dependence
of the mental processes, it is important to weigh carefully the striking examples
which Bronner[4] has brought together, illustrating special abilities and
disabilities. She has made an admirable start toward a differential diagnosis of
special defects in number work, language ability and other mental activities.
The degree of special deficiency which results in social failure could be placed
upon an objective basis, but the rarity of special deficiencies as compared with
general deficiency will make this a slow task. In the meantime we may rely
upon the mutual dependence of the organic processes as a point of view which
emphasizes the common spread of deficiency to many activities. Knowledge of
a single case of specific disability is sufficient to make us recognize that such
cases do occur. On account of the rarity of those cases and the absence of
objective criteria, it seems necessary to leave the further differentiation to the
future, considering here only those cases which may be grouped together as
conative, as contrasted with those detected by our general intellectual tests.
Whether the group of primarily conative cases is of any considerable size can
be only very roughly estimated at present, since the diagnosis of such cases of
feeble-mindedness rests at present almost exclusively on the subjective opinion
of the examiner. Before their diagnosis is put upon an objective basis we must
have a different form of test directed at such traits of will as initiative,
perseverance, stability and self-control. These probably center on the mental
side around the instinctive emotional background of interest and the passions,
while, on the physical side, they raise the question whether the subject's
energy is adequate to endure the strain of competition or whether it shows
itself only in sudden bursts.
If the diagnosis of conative cases could be determined objectively, it is possible
that most forms of social unfitness would be found highly correlated with
intellectual deficiency. On the other hand, when the diagnosis of unfitness for
school or social life depends merely upon the opinion of experts or teachers,
the inaccuracy of the diagnosis may show a wide discrepancy between the so-
called conative and intellectual types of deficiency. Binet, on the basis of his
acquaintance with the pupils in special classes, suggested that the number of
unstable children is probably equal to the number of those who are
intellectually unsuited for the ordinary schools or institutions (77). Since he
then places the total number of the two classes at four or five per cent., it is
apparent that he is discussing a higher type of ability than is usually included
under the term feeble-minded. We can get somewhat better evidence on this
question by studying the results of Binet tests applied to children cared for in
special classes or in institutions for the feeble-minded. Chotzen (90) presents a
table of 280 children in the Hilfsschule in Breslau, only 201 of whom, however,
he himself diagnosed as feeble-minded, i. e., debile or lower. Of these only 51
were intellectually deficient as indicated by the Binet tests when we include the
doubtful cases according to the criteria we have adopted in this study. If we
suppose that, in addition to those in the special classes, there would be one
intellectually deficient child in an institution for feeble-minded for every child
testing deficient, we would then guess that only 40% of the feeble-minded
children in Breslau were intellectually deficient. This sort of estimate seems to
agree with Binet's belief that half of the children requiring special care, at least
during school ages, are cases which are primarily conative.
Pearson has approached the same problem in another way (164) (167). He has
used the results of the psychological tests applied by Norsworthy to children in
New York in special classes and institutions for feeble-minded compared with
those in the regular school classes, and the results of Jaederholm obtained
with the Binet tests applied to 301 children in Stockholm in the special classes
compared with 261 others selected from the regular classes. He found that
“70.5% of normal children fall into the range of intelligence of the so-called
mentally defective; and 60.5% of so-called mentally defective children have an
intelligence comparable with that of some normal children” (167, p. 23). On
the statistical assumption that those in the normal classes would distribute
according to the Gaussian normal probability curve he estimates that, with the
Binet tests, among those in the special classes “10% to 20%, or those from 4
to 4.5 years and beyond of mental defect, could not be matched at all from
27,000 children” (164, p. 46). Another 20 to 30% could be intellectually
matched by those in the regular classes having from 3 to 4.5 years of mental
deficiency, but they would be matched very rarely. On the assumption that 1%
of the children were feeble-minded, not more than about two children in a
thousand of this regular school population would be expected to be 3 or more
years retarded and thus overlap those of like deficiency in the special classes
(167, p. 30). Considering the results of Norsworthy's study he says on similar
assumptions: “It seems, therefore, that a carefully planned psychological test,
while not sufficing to differentiate 50 to 60% of the mentally defective from the
normal child, would suffice to differentiate 40 to 50%” (164, p. 35). Again we
come back to the estimate that psychological tests may well be expected to
select nearly half of the children at present found in special classes for retarded
pupils. Moreover, a considerable part of the overlapping of intellectual
deficiency in the regular classes with that in the special classes which he found
may be accounted for by the inadequate methods of selection of pupils for the
special classes by teachers or examiners who have used no objective tests.
Some who were left in the regular classes should undoubtedly have been
transferred to special classes and vice versa. There seems to be nothing to
indicate that less than half of those properly sent to special classes would be of
clear or doubtful intellectual deficiency. If the tests served to select even a
smaller proportion of those assigned to special instruction, the “school
inefficients” as Pearson calls them, their value as an aid to diagnosis would be
demonstrated.
Among groups of delinquents, where we would expect the purely conative
cases to be more common, we find that a careful diagnosis of feeble-
mindedness on the basis of test data, medical examination and case history
indicates that conative cases without serious intellectual deficiency are much
rarer than intellectually deficient delinquents. At least this is the evidence of
one study where such information is available. Kohs at the Chicago House of
Correction found among 219 cases over 16 years of age, which he diagnosed
as feeble-minded, only 28 tested XI and there were only 52 who did not test
either presumably deficient or uncertain intellectually according to our criterion.
Another bit of evidence is that collected at the Clearing House for Mental
Defectives in connection with the New York Post-Graduate School of Medicine,
where 200 consecutive cases (108 males) were examined by Miss Hinckley. Her
graphs show that only 15% tested X or above with the Binet revised scale, i.
e., above those presumably deficient in intellect. The cases were from 13 to 42
years of age. The clearing house provides an opportunity for social workers to
have suspected deficients examined and the few cases over X seems to
indicate that the purely conative type is not very commonly met with among
the social workers.
When we turn to the institutions for the feeble-minded we find that they are
today caring for few solely conative cases. Although I can find no tables which
give both the life ages and mental ages of the individual inmates, we can at
least be sure that few test so high as X, or above with the Binet scale. This
means that only a few have as yet reached the threshold for passable adult
intellects, which should be attained by 15 years of age. At the Minnesota state
institution for the feeble-minded in Faribault among 1266 inmates, excluding
epileptics, 41 tested X; 28, XI; 12, XII; and 8, XIII, a total of 7% (154). At
Vineland, N. J., Goddard reported among 382 inmates, 14 tested X; 5, XI; and
7, XII, about 7%. Some of the children who were under 15 in life-age might
later develop above the limit for intellectual deficiency. Of the 1266 at the
Minnesota institution, however, 508 were 15 or over at the time of their
admission, so that at least 82% of the 508 were clearly intellectually deficient.
Eight per cent. more tested X and were in the doubtful group in intellectual
ability according to the criteria we have adopted. This suggests that not more
than about 10% of those who are at present isolated in institutions are there
for feebleness of will alone. It seems to confirm our presumption that the
intellectually deficient discovered by tests form the great majority of the social
deficients who need prolonged care or assistance.