We as educators must also know when and how to guide the student in appropriate directions. Based on the findings in this research, I would strongly recommend that all students be evaluated periodically for learning style, using the Jungian model, as, I believe, it more completely encompasses the real differences in learning found in 50 plus years of research, than other models which have been investigated. The Jungian model is able to detect significant differences in student achievement by group membership, and to achieve real differences in student accomplishment with type specific techniques. This is the proof of the model. Students should also be tested periodically for general academic ability, ability to recall, to read with comprehension, to reason logically, and to solve problems.
Ability here is taken separately from accomplishment.
We have tested students on basic skills, and on skills in mathematics which have specifically been taught, and we must continue to do so, and not permit promotion until each level of competence in skills is demonstrated. But we must also regularly test basic ability, as this must be used in ratio with tests of competence in skills to measure efficacy of the educational process. A student of high intelligence, whose skill levels are just at grade level, is performing inadequately. A student of low intelligence, whose skill levels are at grade level is performing exceptionally well. The teacher may be judged on student achievement only when the ratio of a measure of competence in skills with a measure of intelligence is used.