GENERAL STATEMENT
If a general statement be attempted on the basis of such data as the descriptions and these summaries afford, it might be to the effect that one third of these highly intelligent children (A, D, H, L) show notable signs of creativeness. Another third (C, E, I, J) show such indications to a moderate degree. In the remaining third (B, F, G, K) there is at least no indication of marked constructive originality provided by these descriptions.
Certainly these creative dispositions are more conspicuous in these cases than in the general population of children. How these very rare intelligences compare in this respect with those ranging from, say, 130 to 175 IQ we cannot know. Creativeness even at best is infrequent enough. In experiences of daily life of course such creativeness might be more often found in children in the middle range of high intelligences because there are so many more of these in the population.
On the other hand, it may be that creativeness in marked degree appears in these higher ranges only. Under any circumstances it is not an all-or-none phenomenon, and the problem of the correlation of originality with intelligence scores perhaps deserves more careful study than it has received. It seems suggested at least by these few cases that very high intelligence may in some instances become directed along wholly conventional channels, showing itself in the amount of work or the rate of progress, with little or no manifestation of creative originality. If this is the case, it should be important to discover what extent this is a reflection of the regimentation of the occupation of such children by organized educational projects and close parental supervision, and to what extent it is a characteristic that is native in the individual. If it should be true that creativeness is closely dependent on such a high range of intelligence as that shown by this group of twelve children, a social order that esteems creativeness should give serious thought to the conditions of its cultivation and its development.
In this connection it is of some significance that so far as these cases are concerned, the best adjustments appear to have been made in educational arrangements that required the devotion of only one part of the child's time to established curricula, thus leaving time and providing encouragement for individual initiative and enrichment.
[1] This chapter was written by H. L. H.
PART III GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND IMPLICATIONS
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN ADULT STATUS AND PERSONALITY RATINGS
Observation of such cases as those described in the foregoing chapters suggests that children of exceptionally high intelligence do not regress toward mediocrity as they mature but maintain their initial distinguished status. Studies by other workers (Kuhlmann, Baldwin and Stechner, Terman) confirm such a conclusion. A further study of this point was reported by Hollingworth and Lorge in 1936, in which the following questions were investigated:
1. To what extent is status in IER Intelligence Scale CAVD at maturity predictable from childhood scores in Stanford-Binet?