|
This summary has drawn freely from several sources including Dr.
Tim Redman's Chess as Education: Character Assassination or Life of the
Mind and Robert Ferguson's doctoral dissertation. The following
studies will be reviewed briefly in this paper.
- Chess and Aptitudes by Albert Frank
- Chess and Cognitive Development by Johan
Christiaen
- Developing Critical and Creative Thinking Through
Chess by Robert Ferguson
- Tri-State Area School Pilot Study by Robert
Ferguson
- The Development of Reasoning and Memory Through
Chess by R. Ferguson
- The Effect of Chess on Reading Scores by Stuart
Marseilles
- Comparative Study of 5th Grade Math Curricula by
Louise Gaudreau
- Playing Chess: A Study of Problem-Solving Skills
by Philip Rifner
[Webmaster's note:
Additional studies documenting the dramatic effects of chess playing
on academic success can be found at the following
links:]
[Chess and Problem
Solving]
[Research Study
III]
Historically, chess has been used as a research tool by many
psychologists. Alfred Binet, who in 1893 researched memory in blindfolded
chessplayers, was one of the earliest psychologists to use chess to study
memory (Hearst, p. 22, 1969). Freud was the first psychoanalyst to mention
the game of chess, when in 1913 he stated the steps required to master
chess were like learning the psychoanalytic techniques.
In 1925 Djakow, Petrowski, and Rudik studied grandmasters to determine
the underlying factors of chess talent. The researchers determined that
high achievement in chess is based on exceptional visual memory,
combination power, speed of calculation, power of concentration,
and logical thinking (Djakow, Petrowski, and Rudik, 1927; bold
italics by Ferguson).
Several have felt that chess not only demands these characteristics but
also develops them. John Arouse in Chess and Education states: "Visual
stimuli tend to improve memory more than any. other stimuli;... chess is
definitely an excellent memory exerciser the effects of which are
transferable to other subjects where memory is necessary." The following
studies offer some hard evidence to support the claims of
Artise and others.
The Zaire study, Chess and Aptitudes, was conducted by Dr. Albert Frank
at the Uni Protestant School (now Lisanga School) in Kisangani, Zaire. The
experiment was conducted during the 1973-74 school year.
Ninety-two (92) students, 16-18 years of age, were selected from the
fourth year humanity's class and distributed at random into two groups
(experimental and control) of 46 students each. Ali of the students were
given a battery, of tests which included the Primary Mental Abilities
test (PMA) m the French adaptation, the Differential Aptitude Test
(DAT), the General Aptitude Tests Battery (GA/B), and a Rohrschach
test. The tests were administered to all of the students both before
and after the school year, except for the DAT which was
administered only before the school year and the Rohrschach which was
given only after the school year. At the end of the first semester, a
partial retesting was made. The experimental group was given a required
chess course of two hours each week with optional play after school and
during vacations.
The study was intended to confirm two hypotheses about the affect of
various abilities on chess skill and also about the influence of learning
chess on the increase of certain abilities.
Frank wanted to find out whether the ability to learn chess is a
function of a) spatial aptitude, b) perceptive speed, c) reasoning, d)
creativity, or e) general intelligence. To play chess well must certainly
involve a high level of one or more of these abilities.
Secondly Frank wondered whether learning chess can influence the
development of abilities in one or more of the above five types. To what
extent does chess playing contribute to the development of certain
abilities? If it can be proven that it does, then the introduction of
chess into the programs of secondary schools would be recommended, as it
already has been in some countries. This hypothesis had not been the
subject of any experimental study up to that time.
The first hypothesis would be confirmed by examining the results of the
experimental group on the tests given at the beginning of the school term
and correlating them with the level of chess skill at-tamed. The second
hypothesis would be proven by using whether significant differences exist
between the results of the experimental group and the results of the
control group in the aptitude tests at the end of the study.
The first hypothesis was confirmed. There was a significant correlation
between the ability to play chess well. and spatial, numerical,
administrative-directional and paper work abilities. Other correlations
obtained were all positive, but only the above were significantly so. This
finding tends to show that ability in chess is not due to the presence in
an individual of only one or two abilities but that a large number of
aptitudes all work together in chess. Chess utilizes all the abilities of
an individual.
The second hypothesis was confirmed for two aptitudes. It was found
that learning chess had a positive influence on the development of botch
numerical and verbal aptitudes. The authors of the study were
puzz1ed by the latter result. They wondered how chessplaying could
influence the development
of verbal ability
As mentioned earlier, this second hypothesis had not been the subject
of previous experimental study, and it is highly significant in the
current attempt by the American Chess School and the United Sates Chess
Federation to establish educational value in chess. The results of this
experiment are very impressive. After only one year of chess study,
the students participating in the chess course showed a marked
development of their verbal and numerical aptitudes. This positive
development was true for the majority of the chess students-not just for
the better players! From this it is possible to conclude that the
introduction of chess as a regular elective course in our high schools
would be of positive benefit (correspondence from Harry Lyman, 1981).
The Chess and Cognitive Development research was directed by Johan
Christiaen. The experiment was conducted during the 1974-76 school years
at the Assenede Municipal School in Gent, Belgium.
The trial group consisted of 40 fifth grade students (average age 10.6
years), wino were divided randomly into two groups, experimental and
control, of 20 students each. All of the students were given a battery of
tests that included Piaget's tests for cognitive development and the
PMS tests. The tests were administered to all of the students at
the end of fifth grade and again at the end of sixth grade. No pretest was
given. The experimental group received 42 one hour chess lessons using
Jeugdschaak (Chess for Youths) as a textbook.
Christiaen's goal was to use chess to test Jean Piaget's theory about
cognitive development, or intellectual maturation. Since the students were
an average of 10.6 at the project beginning and 11.9 years at its
completion, they, were expected (according to Piaget theory) to be at the
concrete level of operational thought The purpose of the "posttest only"
study was to see if the test group had progressed further towards the
formal stage than the control group.
Christiaen queried: Can an enriched environment (chess playing)
accelerate the transition from the concrete level (stage 3) to the
formal level (stage 4)? At stage 4, the child begins hypothesizing
and deducing-developing more complex logic and judgment. So the real
question is: "Can chess promote earlier intellectual maturation?"
A first analysis of the investigation results compared the trial and
control groups using ANOVA. The scholastic results showed significant
differences between the two groups in favor of the chessplayers. The
academic results at the end of fifth grade were significant at the .01
level. The results at the end of sixth grade were significant at the .05
level. The subtest DGB relations and PMS total were
significant at the .1 level.
Dr. Adriaan de Groot, noted psychologist and chess master, ranks the
Belgium study as the best experiment he has seen in educational research
concerned with the differential effects of chess instruction on the mental
development of school children:
The mastery of the rules (of chess)... mastery of standard mating
procedures... and knowing something about a few opening systems... are
easily defined knowledge objectives that are attainable by almost all
pupils. In addition, the Belgium study appears to demonstrate that the
treatment of the elementary, clearcut and playful subject matter can have
a positive affect on motivation and school achievement generally (de
Groot, 1977)
Dr. Gerard Dullea (1982) states that Dr. Christiaen's study needs
support, extension, and confirmation. In regard to the research, he also
maintains: "... we have scientific support for what we have known all
along--chess makes kids smarter!" (Chess Life, November, p. 16)
Ferguson’s first study, Developing Critical and Creative
Thinking Through Chess, extended the support Dullea referenced. His ESEA
Title IV-C federally funded research project was approved for three years
(1979-82). It was amended for one school year (82-83) at local expense for
a combined total of four years. The primary, goal of the study was to
provide challenging experiences that would stimulate the development of
critical and creative thinking.
The Tide IV-C project was an investigation of students identified as
mentally gifted with an IQ of 130 or above. All participants were students
in the Bradford Area School District in grades 7 through 9. The
individuals sampled in this study could not be randomly assigned to groups
because the students' individualized education plans prescribed activities
based on interests.
The primary, independent variables reviewed in this summary are the
chess treatment, the computer treatment, and all nonchess treatments
combined. Each group met once a week for 32 weeks in the gifted resource
room at Bradford Area High School to pursue its interest area under the
leadership of the Coordinator of Secondary Gifted Education (Robert
Ferguson). Most groups spent a total of 60-64 hours pursuing their
preferred activity.
The dependent variables were the differences in the means of the
posttests from the pretests. Data were collected from the Watson-Glaser
Critical Thinking Appraisal and the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking.
The chi square test and the t test were applied to determine the level
of statistical significance.
 FIGURE 1. A comparison of the pre and
posttest scores for the chess group on the Critical Thinking
Appraisal Results and Data Analysis
The average annual increase in percentile score for the chess group was
17.3%. Nationally, students who take this test at yearly intervals do not
show a gain in percentile ranking. This comparison shows that the Bradford
chess group significantly outperformed the average student in the country
four years in a row!
A 50% score means the student is average in the country for that grade
level on the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. A score of
99% means the student is one of the best critical thinkers in that grade
for the skills assessed by the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal. A Student who scores in the 50th percentile in 1979 and who
continues to perform in average fashion, will score in the 50th percentile
in 1980. An increased percentile score indicates an above average
performance.
Percentile scores are inappropriate for statistical analysis. In order
to have an appropriate metric, the percentile scores were converted to
equivalent raw scores.
The t test was used to test statistical significance of the gains on
the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. The t test measures
the quantity, of the gain to assess whether it is significant. The data
were also evaluated using a nonparametric, or distribution-flee, test of
significance. The chi square test of statistical significance was used to
evaluate the gains/losses on the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal. The chi square test evaluates the significance of the
number of chessplayers demonstrating gains on the CTA compared to the
number of nonchessplayers showing gains. Because the chi square test is
nonparametric, it is insensitive to the size of gains; it considers a gain
of one point in the same manner as a gain of 30 points or 100 points.
The chess group was compared to the nonchess group, the computer group,
and the nonparticipants. The chi square test results ranged from
marginally significant at .072 to very significant at 002. A listing of
the t test and chi square test results may be found in Table 1.
TABLE 1. Statistical summary, for the Critical Thinking
Appraisal

The second aspect, tested in this study is that of creative thinking.
Creativity is a major aspect of chess at the master level, but can chess
influence creativity at the amateur level? Figure 2 and Summary Table 2
shed some light on this question. It would appear from the data collected
and the statistical test results listed in the table on page 7 that there
can be little doubt that chess does enhance creativity in gifted
adolescents. Dr. Stephen Schiff's claim that creativity can be taught
through the art of chess has been confirmed.
Robert J. Eaton, CEO of Chrysler, states: "... we know that our future
depends on the creativity of our people. We are also convinced that
creativity, must be nurtured in our young people if we are to continue to
be leaders in the global economy." (U.S. News & World Report,
115(25): A2, 1993).
 FIGURE 2. A comparison of the chess
group gains to the nonchess group gains
While the entire chess group made superior gains over the other groups
in all three areas, the aspect that demonstrated the most significant
growth was originality. It should be noted that several researchers
have found that gains in originality are usual for those receiving
creativity training, whereas gains in fluency are often slight or
nonexistent. The fact that the chess group's gains in fluency were
significant beyond the .05 level when compared to the national norms is an
important discovery.
Based on the data in Figure 2 and Table 2, it appears that chess is
superior to many currently used programs for developing creative thinking
and, therefore, could logically be included in a differentiated program
for mentally gifted students.
TABLE 2. Statistical summary of t
tests on Creativity
It is evident from the above tables and data that chess had a definite
impact on developing both critical and creative thinking skills. Because
the sample size of the treatment group was only 15 students, Ferguson
encourages replication of this study, using a larger N.
It was also evident that there were significant gains in the
participants' chess skills. Six of the pupils involved m this study
participated in the annual Pennsylvania State Scholastic Championship
beginning in 1980. Three of those six excelled. Two of the boys became
candidate masters and one of the girls made the top 50 list for all women
chessplayers in the United States.
Sternberg (1985) lists five reasons for the surge of interest in
teaching critical thinking. His fourth reason is that the '...
Ministry for the Development of Intelligence in Venezuela showed that the
teaching of critical thinking can be implemented on a massive scale with
some success" (Sternberg, 1985, p. 194). For additional information about
the Venezuela experiment, this researcher wrote several letters and
scoured a variety of sources. The following paragraphs share these
findings.
On August 25, 1984, the Federation Internationale des Eches (FIDE--the
international chess federation) Commission for Chess in the Schools met to
review the value of chess as a part of the school curricula. Some of the
benefits of chess cited in the report of the meeting included: developing
memory, increasing creativity, cultural enrichment, and mental
development. The commission discussed preparing documents to persuade
governments to introduce chess into schools (FIDE Report, 1984, p.
74).
Also discussed at the above meeting was the massive research study made
in Venezuela. (This author has tried several times to obtain a copy of
this research, but apparently it has not yet been translated.) The
Ministry for the Development of Intelligence trained 100,000 teachers to
teach thinking skills. The initial project involved a sample of 4,266
second grade students.
The Venezuela experiment, Learning to Think Project, tested whether
chess can be used to develop intelligence of children as measured by the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.
Both male children and female children showed an increase of
intelligence quotient (IQ) after less than a year of studying chess in the
systematic way adopted. Most students showed a significant gain after a
minimum of 4.5 months.
The general conclusion is that chess methodologically taught is an
incentive system sufficient to accelerate the increase of IQ in elementary
age children of both sexes at all socio-economic levels. It appears that
this study also includes very interesting results regarding transfer of
chess thinking to other areas of study. (FIDE Report, 1984, p. 74)
B.F. Skinner, an. influential contemporary psychologist, wrote: "There
is no doubt that this project in its total form will be considered as one
of the greatest social experiments of this century" (Tudela, 1987).
Because of the success of the study, the chess program was greatly
expanded. Starting with the 1988-89 school year, chess lessons were
conducted in all of Venezuela's schools (Linder, 1990, p. 165). Chess is
now part of the curricula at thousands of schools in nearly 30 countries
around the world (Linder, p. 164).
The Tri-State Area School Pilot Study, designed and directed by Robert
Ferguson in 1986, focused on developing a personalized thinking system.
Mentally gifted students at Bradford Area High School in grades 10-12
self-selected one of two options: SAT preparation or chess. An equal
number of nongifted pupils in grades 9-10 participated in the chess
treatment. Both treatments demonstrated short term gains that were
statistically significant (SAT p>. 024; chess p>. 004).
In this pilot study both experimental groups achieved significant
gains, but it should be pointed out that the chess group was tested in
actual competition. Every game was real and different. The SAT group
repeated the same practice test (on the computer) that they had already
taken. There were no new or different problems to think about or solve.
Students in Ferguson's second and third studies were encouraged to
use the same thought processes on real life problems to promote the
transfer of problem solving skills.
According to a two year study conducted in Kichinov under the
management of N.F. Talisina, grades for young students taking part in the
chess experiment increased in all subjects. Teachers noted improvement in
memory, better organizational skills, and for many increased fantasy and
imagination (Education Ministry of the Moldavian Republic Kichinov,
1985).
During the 198%88 Development of Reasoning and Memory Through Chess,
all students in a sixth grade self-contained classroom at M.J. Ryan School
(a rural school about 18 miles from Bradford, PA, with a student
enrollment of l16 in grades K-6) were required to participate in chess
lessons and play games. None of the pupils had previously played chess.
This experiment was more intensified than Ferguson's other studies because
students played chess daily over the course of the project. The project
ran from September 21, 1987 to May 31, 1988.
The dependent variables were the gains on the Test of Cognitive
Skills (TCS) Memory subtest and the Verbal Reasoning subtest from the
California Achievement Tests battery. The differences from the pre
and pottests were measured statistically using the t test of significance.
Gains on the tests were compared to national norms as well as within the
treatment group. The differences between males and females on the tests
were also examined
The mean IQ of the class participants was 104.6. All students were
required to take basically the same chess course (the USA Junior Chess
Olympics Training Program) used in Ferguson's first two studies. A
total of 14 pupils (9 boys and 5 girls) completed both the pre and
posttests (TCS Memory test and Verbal Reasoning test).
Generally, students received chess lessons two or three times each week
and played chess daily. Many students competed in rated chess tournaments
outside of school. Seven competed in the PA Scholastic Chess Championship,
and two went on to Nationals.
Table 3. Statistical summary of t tests for
the Test of Cognitive Skills
It is evident from the above table that chess had a definite impact on
developing both memory and verbal reasoning skills. The effect of the
magnitude of the results is strong (eta2 is .715 for the Memory test gain
compared to the Norm). These results suggest that transfer of the skills
fostered through the chess curriculum did occur, and that the treatment
was more effective among the more competitive students. Because the sample
size of the treatment group was only 14 students, the author would
encourage replication of this study.
It was also evident that there were significant gains in the
participants' chess skills. Seven of the boys involved in this
study participated in the March 1988 Pennsylvania State Scholastic
Championship. After having played chess for only five months, they
finished second (only half a point behind Steve Shutt's nationally famous
team from the Frederick-Douglass School in Philadelphia). One pupil even
made the top fifty list for his age group.
The New York City Schools Chess Program (NYCHESS) was founded in 1986
by Faneuil Adams, Jr. and Bruce Pandolfini. The NYCHESS program sends an
experienced chess instructor to the schools to establish a chess program.
The NYCHESS instructors teach five lessons and help a teacher in the
building develop an ongoing program. The instructors are assisted by high
school chessplayers and students from the local school who excel in chess.
The youths serve as assistants and work with the pupils between visits
from the NYCHESS instructor (Palm, 1990, pp. 4-5).
More than 3,000 inner-city children in more than 100 public schools had
participated in the program between 1986 and 1990. The program continues
to motivate young people in some of the poorest neighborhoods in the
city.
Christine Palm (1990) writes:
In its four-year existence, NYCHESS has
proven that:
- Chess instills in young players a sense of
self-confidence and self-worth;
- Chess dramatically improves a child's ability, to
think rationally,
- Chess increases cognitive skills;
- Chess improves children's communication skills and
aptitude in recognizing patterns, therefore:
- Chess results in higher grades, especially in English
and Math studies;
- Chess builds a sense of team spirit while emphasizing
the ability, of the individual;
- Chess teaches the value of hard work, concentration and
commitment;
- Chess makes a child realize that he or she is
responsible for his or her own actions and must accept their
consequences;
- Chess teaches children to try. their best to win, while
accepting defeat with grace;
- Chess provides an intellectual, competitive forum
through which children can assert hostility, i.e. "let off steam," in an
acceptable way;
- Chess can become a child's most eagerly awaited school
activity, dramatically improving attendance,
- Chess allows girls to compete with boys on a
non-threatening socially acceptable plane;
- Chess helps children make friends more easily
because it provides an easy., safe forum for gathering and discussion;
- Chess allows students and teachers to view each other m
a more sympathetic way;
- Chess, through competition, gives kids a palpable sign
of their accomplishments, and finally,
- Chess provides children with a concrete, inexpensive
and compelling way to rise above
the deprivation and self-doubt
which are so much a part of their lives (Palm
1990, pp. 5-7).
The New York City Schools Chess Program Report is impressive, but it is
based primarily on academic and anecdotal records. No statistical methods
or tests were cited in the thirty-seven-page report. For statistical proof
for the NYCHESS Program, one must review Margulies' (1991) The Effect
of Chess on Reading Scores: District Nine Chess Program Second Year
Report.
This report evaluates the reading performance of 53 elementary pupils
who participated in the chess program and compares their results to 1118
nonparticipants. Margulies used the paired t-test to evaluate the
significance of reading gains within the chess group. He further compared
the nonparticipants to the chess participants by using the Chi Square
test.
Dr. Margulies concluded that chess participation enhances reading
performance. The results of the pa/red t-test were significant beyond the
.01 level. The Chi Square test of the results of chessplayers in the
computer-enhanced and high-scoring nonparticipants were significant at the
.01 level. The comparison of results of chessplayers in the
computer-enhanced program and all nonparticipants resulted in a Chi Square
= 5.16, which is statistically significant at the .05 level.
Margulies' study conclusively proved that students who learned chess
enjoyed a significant increase in their reading skills. Inside Chess
(February 21, 1994, p. 3) states: "The Margulies Study is one of the
strongest arguments to finally prove what hundreds of teachers knew all
along--chess is a learning tool."
Dianne Horgan has conducted several studies using chess as the
independent variable. In "Chess as a Way to Teach Thinking," Horgan (1987)
used a sample of 24 elementary children (grades 1 through 6) and 35 junior
high and high school students. Grade and skill rating were correlated
(r=.48). She found elementary players were among the top ranked players
and concluded that children could perform a highly complex cognitive task
as well as most adults.
Horgan found that while adults progress to expertise from a focus on
details to a more global focus, children seem to begin with a more global,
intuitive emphasis. She deduced: "This may be a more efficient route to
expertise as evidenced by the ability of preformal operational children to
learn chess well enough to compete successfully with adults" (Horgan, p.
10). She notes that young children can be taught to think clearly and that
teaming these skills early in life can greatly benefit later intellectual
development. Former U.S. Secretary of Education Terrell Bell agrees. In
his book Your Child's Intellect, Bell encourages some knowledge of
chess as a way to develop a preschooler's intellect and academic readiness
(Bell, 1982, pp. 178-179).
The thinking behavior in reflective inquiry, or reflective thought and
the thinking behavior needed to evaluate a chess position are analogous.
Dewey's five stages of inquiry are 1 ) awareness of perplexity, 2)
definition of the problem, 3) entertainment of suggestions or hypotheses,
4) reasoning out the consequences of each hypothesis, 5) select hypothesis
for the solution of the problem (Dewey, 1938). Dewey first identified
these stages of reflective thought, ht in his book How We Think
(1910).
These same steps are used when a chessplayer analyzes a position to
select the best move. The chessplayer first makes a preliminary survey of
the position (awareness of perplexity). In the second stage, the player
evaluates the material situation, the position, and considers threats
(definition of the problem). Thirdly, the competitor looks for alternative
solutions to any problems (threats) and considers different variations
(entertainment of suggestions or hypotheses). In this stage of analysis,
the chessplayer will become involved in what de Groot calls 'progressive
deepening." Hearst (1969) describes de Groot's concept of progressive
deepening as a situation in which a chessplayer examines the ideas of
specific moves, rejects the move, and later reinvestigates the same move
again and again but more deeply and with different objectives and ideas in
mind. Hearst (1969) asserted:
- This process of progressive deepening may be a feature
of the research strategy of scientists and mathematicians, as well as
the chessplayer. Experimental psychologists, for example, often return
to a specific laboratory that originally seemed unimportant, or
re-examine some old hypothesis again ,and again-with an attempt to apply
new ways of thinking each time (p. I8, bold emphasis by.
Ferguson).
Etude Comparative sur les Apprentissages en Mathematiques 5e
Annee by Louise Gaudreau (30 June 1992) has not yet been
translated but offers some of the most exciting news yet about chess in
education. The study took place in the province of New Brunswick from
September 1990 through June of 1992.
Three groups totaling 437 fifth graders were tested in this research.
The control group (Group A) received the traditional math course
throughout the study. Group B received a traditional math curriculum in
first grade and thereafter an enriched program with chess and problem
solving instruction. The third group (Group C) received the chess enriched
math curriculum beginning in the first grade.
There were no significant differences among the groups as far as basic
calculations on the standardized test; however, there were statistically
significant differences for Group B and C in the problem solving portion
of the test (21.46% difference in favor of Group C over the Control
Group) and on the comprehension section (12.02% difference in favor
of Group C over the Control Group). In addition, Group C's problem
solving scores increased from an average 62% to 81.2%! Not only is this
statistically significant, but also the addition of chess to the math
curriculum has exploded scholastic chess in New Brunswick.
With the inclusion of chess in math, a provincial grade school chess
championship was established. In 1989, 120 pupils participated. By 1992,
19,290--yes, 19,290!! pupils competed!
Playing Chess: A Study of Problem-Solving Skills in Students with
Average and Above Average Intelligence by Philip R/finer was conducted
during the 1991-1992 school term. The study sought to determine whether
middle school students who learned general problem solving skills in one
domain could apply them in a different domain. The training task involved
learning to play chess, and the transfer task required poetic analysis.
The study was conducted in two parts.
The first part of the study was a quasi-experiment designed to test
whether transfer of training would appear in the form of enhanced
performance on twelve dependent variables associated with achievement. The
one of primary interest was the rated quality, of the subjects' solutions
to the transfer task. Others included grades and nine sub-scores and the
Total Battery score from the CTBS/4 Achievement Battery.
The second investigation was a quantitative-descriptive study conducted
to determine which aspects of problem solving behavior were related to the
effects found in the first part. Think-aloud protocols, taken as the
subjects solved the transfer problem, were analyzed and coded for problem
solving behaviors. Results indicated several variables of interest: the
number of search methods used, the number of goals set, the number of
lines considered, the incidence of guessing, the number of unresolved
negative evaluations, and the percentage of goals achieved. Both pre and
post measures were obtained for all variables in both studies, and the
results were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance.
Results of the quasi-experiment indicated treatment effects only for
the transfer task. Results of the quantitative-descriptive study indicated
treatment effects for all variables among gifted subjects but only on the
number of methods used for students of average ability. Data indicated
that inter-domain transfer can be achieved if teaching for transfer is an
instructional goal and that transfer occurs more readily and to a greater
extent among students with above avenge ability.
Summary and
Interpretation
We acknowledge that there is a need to improve critical and creative
thinking skills in our nation. Heidema at the 1983 Conference of the
Mind stated: "Recent research indicates that one of the most neglected
areas in today's educational system is instruction aimed at developing
logical reasoning and critical thinking." (Thinking in Elementary
School Mathematics, Mathematics and Science for the K-12
Curriculum, p. 104)
Langen (1992) claims that "children who learn chess at an early age
achieve more in the traditional maths and sciences. Chinese, European, and
American research all find significant correlational values after just one
year of systematic chess exposure." Langen also states: "The most striking
benefits are those associated with problem-solving and creativity."
Langen goes on to say: "University symposia, like the Chess and
Mathematics conference at Forli, Italy, in September 1992, now take
the chess and math relation as established." Chess was integrated into the
French Canadian school systems beginning in 1984. The New Brunswick
research showed that problem solving skills increased an average of 19.2%
after the chess in math program was introduced.
Why does chess have this impact? Why did chessplayers score higher on
the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking as well as the
Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal?. Briefly, there appear
to be at least seven significant factors: 1) Chess accommodates all
modality strengths. 2) Chess provides a far greater quantity of problems
for practice. 3) Chess offers immediate punishments and rewards for
problem solving. 4) Chess creates a pattern or thinking system that, when
used faithfully, breeds success. The chessplaying students had become
accustomed to looking for more and different alternatives, which resulted
in higher scores in fluency and originality. 5) Competition. Competition
fosters interest, promotes mental alertness, challenges all students, and
elicits the highest levels of achievement (Stephan, 1988). 6} A learning
environment organized around games has a positive effect on students'
attitudes toward learning. This affective dimension acts as a facilitator
of cognitive achievement (Allen & Main, 1976). Instructional gaming is
one of the most motivational tools in the good teacher's repertoire.
Children love games. Chess motivates them to become willing problem
solvers and spend hours quietly immersed in logical thinking. These same
young people often cannot sit still for fifteen minutes in the traditional
classroom. 7) Chess supplies a variety and quality of problems. As
Langen (1992) states: "The problems that arise in the 70-90 positions of
the average chess game are, moreover, new. Contexts are familiar, themes
repeat, but game positions never do. This makes chess good grist for the
problem-solving mill."
Billings (1985) wrote: "The most important skill a gifted student can
learn is how to THINK more CREATIVELY and EFFECTIVELY." This reviewer
concurs wholeheartedly with both Billings and Dr. Stephen M. Stiff'
(1991), who wrote: "... the study of chess is one of the most critically
important additions to the curriculum that schools can offer to our
pre-adolescent gifted and talented student population." Based upon the
studies examined in this brief paper, this researcher urges the
inclusion of chess to augment the skills of both the gifted and the
nongifted.
The USA Junior Chess Olympics Training Program used in each of
Ferguson's studies demonstrated effectiveness in bringing about the
desired growth in the participating students. This author would strongly
recommend the adoption or adaptation of the USA Junior Chess Olympics
Training Program within the school curriculum throughout the
country.
Since Binet's studies one hundred years ago demonstrated that chess
players had superior memory and imagination, it is not totally unthinkable
that these characteristics might, in some way, be the result of continuous
exposure to chess rather than being prerequisites of the game. Certainly
the Republic of Kichinov's chess experiment noted improvement in memory
and imagination. Holding (1985) also concluded that chess could
help develop memory. Ferguson's studies appear to confirm this conjecture,
in as much as the chess treatment groups significantly increased in both
memory and imagination (creativity).
Pfau (1983) found that tests of verbal knowledge correlated highly with
chess skill. The New York City School research showed that chess
participation enhances reading performance. Margulies (1991) cited four
possible reasons for the significant transfer from chess to reading: 1)
the enhancement of general intelligence (as demonstrated in the Venezuela
study); 2) increased self-esteem; 3) peer acculturation; 4) similarity of
skills and cognition for both chess and reading. Additional arguments
might include the ongoing verbal thought process that auditory learners
employ when calculating chess moves or the fact that many chess players
become motivated to read chess books to improve their game. By reading
more, their reading skills improve. Undoubtedly a combination of these
factors affect the growth of the students. In Ferguson's third study,
which included rnany poor readers, the students showed significant growth
in verbal reasoning skills. After only one year of chess study in Zaire,
the students participating in the chess course showed a marked development
of their verbal and numerical aptitudes.
A wide variety of sources in the literature point to the logic of chess
being an effective vehicle for teaching thinking skills, but none offered
any statistical basis. The Bradford ESEA Title IV-C Project appears to
have broken significant new ground in this area. The study found that the
chess treatment demonstrated the greatest growth over all other activities
four years in a row. Since critical thinking is crucial in all aspects of
life, it is imperative to disseminate the effects of this study and to
implement a chess curriculum in the schools.
Why should we teach chess? What are the hard facts about chess and
academic achievement? Chess has been proven to enhance creativity,
concentration, critical thinking skills, memory, academic achievement,
problem solving, cultural enrichment, intellectual maturity, self-esteem,
standardized test scores, and a score of other qualities that every
administrator, school board director, parent, and teacher
desires.
For Those Who Haven't Studied
Statistics
"Tradition holds that the level of significance must be expressed as
the probability that a true mull hypothesis is being rejected. That
means that the lower the significance level, the higher is our
confidence that the effect we have observed is real." (Phillips,
Statistical Thinking: A Structural Approach. p. 85,
1973)
A significant difference is less than .OS (often, written p>.
05). A very significant difference is one for which the probability
of having occurred by sampling error is less than 1% (.01) and is
frequently written p>.O1. In each of the statistical summaries (Tables
1,2, 3), the significant levels have been bolded.
For Additional
Information
For additional information about the studies reviewed in this summary,
please contact the United States Chess Federation by calling 914-562-8350
or by writing to: to:
U.S. Chess 186 Route 9W New Windsor, NY
12550
For additional information about the Challenging Mathematics
Program, please contact the publisher in Canada by calling
800-561-2371 or by writing to:
Mr. Michel Solis
Mondia
Editeurs Inc. Boulevard Industriel
Laval, Qu6bec H7S 1P6
For additional information about the USA Junior Chess Olympics
Program, please contact the Junior Chess Olympics by calling
814-368-4974 or by writing to:
USA Junior Chess
Olympics 140 School Street Bradford,
PA 16701
[Webmaster's note:
Additional studies documenting the dramatic effects of chess playing
on academic success can be found at the following
links:]
[Research Study
III] |