Florence L. Goodenough and Dale B. HarrisFlorence L. Goodenough and Dale B. Harris

Draw-A-Man TestDraw-A-Man Test

By: Alexandria Graziano and Chelsea Nabors

Florence Laura Goodenough• Born August 6, 1886 in

Honesdale , PA• Youngest of 9 children• Parents were farmers• Never Married• Died at the age of 73

after having a stroke

Goodenough’s Education• 1908

– Bachelor of Pedagogy: Millersville, PA, Normal School• 1920

– Bachelor of Science: Columbia University• 1921

– Master of Arts with Leta Hollingworth: Columbia University• 1924

– Doctor of Psychology: Stanford University

Goodenough’s Accomplishments• 1921 - helped Lewis Terman conduct

studies with the Stanford-Binet I.Q. test for children he had developed

• Contributed to Terman’s book Genetic Studies of Genius.

• 1924 - relocated to Minneapolis, Minnesota and worked in the Minneapolis Child Guidance Clinic

• 1925 - appointed an assistant professor at the University of Minnesota (During this time she wrote her first book, Measurement of Intelligence by Drawings)

• 1931 - appointed full professor (During this time she published Anger in Young Children)

• 1933 - wrote her Handbook of Child Psychology

• 1942 - appointed president of the National Counsel of Women Psychologists

• 1946 - became president of the Society for Research in Child Development

• 1947 - Retired early due to a degenerative disease which eventually caused her blindness

Draw-A-Man Test

Florence L. Goodenough

“The nature and content of children’s drawings are dependent primarily upon intellectual development.”

Nature of the Draw-A-Man Test• Goodenough believed that the

drawings of young children present a close relationship between concept development and general intelligence.

• For children, drawing is a way to express themselves and they are more likely to draw from what they know than from what they see.

• In their drawings, what they see as more important or interesting they draw bigger.

• Her test was developed to test a child’s intellectual maturity.

• This would distinguish their intellectual state of maturity as separate from their behavioral maturity.

• Goodenough’s experimental basis for the test relies upon the belief that the child’s intellectual development determines the nature and content of their drawings.

Developing the Goodenough Scale• Was developed through much trial and error.• 1926 - current scale was finished.• Age and school grade were used to establish

norms.• Standard subject matter and instructions were

developed.

Dale B. Harris

“Of the many tests of intelligence, the Goodenough Draw-a-Man Test is perhaps the most unusual in

basic conception, brevity, and general convenience.”

-Harris

Dale B. Harris• Harris worked with Goodenough on the completion of

his book: Children’s Drawings as Measures of Intellectual Maturity.

• His purpose was to revise, not change, Goodenough’s scale, put certain uncompleted aspects of Goodenough’s research in order, and extend the knowledge of the psychology of children’s drawings.

How Harris Extended Goodenough’s Scale

• Harris expanded Goodenough’s scoring scale to include adolescent years making the scale range from 3-15 year old children.

• He added items like the drawings of a female figure and the drawings of the self to be accomplished in that order with the man coming first. This increased the reliability and validity of the scale by having three drawings to sample in order to gain further knowledge of each child’s cognitive ability.

• He developed extended or alternative forms of the scale. For example, different scales are assigned to the boys and girls and included tables that relate the raw score and chronological age to a standard score for the Draw-A-Man and Draw-A-Woman Tests.

• Harris’ new scale included 73 elements that are included in the scoring rather than Goodenough’s 51 elements.

Research Question

Will the scores of a random group of 4th graders and the scores of a random group of 6th graders reveal the same differences as

indicated in Goodenough’s scale?

Hypothesis

We hypothesize that the scores of the 4th and 6th graders will be similar to each other and will NOT reflect the differences indicated in the

Goodenough scale.

Setting• Holy Family School• Date: March 24th • The 4th graders were in their music class. Each student

was sprawled out on the floor sitting next to whomever he/she wanted. Students made their drawings while in this position.

• The 6th graders were in P.E. Students sat outside the gym in a room with several round tables. Students made their drawings while they sat at these big round tables with about 2 to 3 to a table.

Administering the Test - Sixth Grade• We started with a group of 12 6th grade students ranging in

ages from 11 to 13.• We passed out a pencil and a sheet of blank white printing

paper to each child.• Then we gave them theses directions. “We need your help

today. Would you mind helping us? We need you to draw a picture of a man for us. Please draw a whole man from head to toe. Draw the best man that you can. When you are done write down whether you are a boy or a girl, and raise your hand and your paper will be collected. You have ten minutes. Go.”

Administering the Test - 4th Grade

• Next we went to a class of 9 4th grade students ranging in age from 9 to 10

• Again we handed out the materials, and gave them the same exact directions.

• Some of the fourth graders became very emotional about their drawing.

• Upon leaving we decided to randomly select 8 drawings from each group to score, to make up for the children who were upset after our experiment. A few of the boys became discouraged and said that they could not draw a man as well as the rest of their fellow students.

Scoring the test1. Head present2. Neck present3. Neck, two dimensions4. Eyes present5. Eye detail: brow or lashes6. Eye detail: pupil7. Eye detail: proportion8. Eye detail: glance9. Nose present10. Nose, two dimensions11. Mouth present12. Lips, two dimensions13. Both nose and lips in two dimensions14. Both chin and forehead shown15. Projection of chin shown; chin clearly differentiated from lower lip16. Line of jaw indicated17. Bridge of nose18. Hair I19. Hair II20. Hair III21. Hair IV22. Ears present23. Ears present: proportion and position24. Fingers present25. Correct number of fingers shown

26. Detail of fingers correct27. Opposition of thumb shown28. Hands present29. Wrists or ankle shown30. Arms present31. Shoulders I32. Shoulders II33. Arms at side or engaged in activity34. Elbow joint shown35. Legs present36. Hip I (crotch)37. Hip II38. Knee joint shown39. Feet I: any indication40. Feet II: proportion41. Feet III: heel42. Feet VI: perspective43. Feet V: detail44. Attachment of arms and legs I45. Attachment of arms and legs II46. Trunk present47. Trunk in proportion, two dimensions48. Proportion: head I49. Proportion: head II50. Proportion: face51. Proportion: arms I

52. Proportion: arms II53. Proportion: legs54. Proportion: limbs in two dimensions55. Clothing I56. Clothing II57. Clothing III58. Clothing IV59. Clothing V60. Profile I61. Profile II62. Full face63. Motor coordination: lines64. Motor coordination: junctures65. Superior motor coordination66. Directed lines and form: head outline67. Directed lines and form: trunk outline68. Directed lines and form: arms and legs69. Directed lines and form: facial features70. Sketching technique71. Modeling technique72. Arm movement73. Leg movement

4th grade 6th grade

20 20

21

22

27 27

30

31

32 32

34

35

36 36

38 38

Raw Score

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

4th Grade6th Grade

Raw Score

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

4th graders

6th graders

Was our Hypothesis correct?

YES!! With our result from the 4th and 6th grade

students at Holy Family, we found that both groups of student had scores similar to each

other and did not reflect the differences indicated in the Goodenough scale.

What We Would Do Differently

• We would have liked to have used a larger group of children; with more children we would have a better understanding of Goodenough’s theory with possibly a vast difference in the outcome.

• Even numbers of boys and girls.• We would like to regulate the setting in which the test

was administered.

Common Errors

• Not one child in either of the grades tested drew knees on their man, nor did any of the children’s men display leg or arm movement.

• Only on child out of the 16 test used drew elbows on his man.