Page images

the theory department; however, as has been noted, they are not sufficiently familiar with the work of the theory department to carry out its directions.

It seems impossible that there should be such a large percentage of waste in time, energy, and money as these data signify. Nevertheless it may be true that there are comparatively few intensively organized systems which aim to conserve the efforts of all concerned. Individualism is the policy in many struggling institutions. Very often teachers speak with considerable pride about the distinctive features of their theories or methods. In the same schools students must often discuss their profound confusion. Certainly organization and cooperation should provide for all that is distinctively strong and at the same time avoid confusion and waste. So long as only the students have to suffer from the losses reorganization may be long delayed. The passive conservative attitude of school authorities is shown by the fact that in twenty-one of the thirty-seven schools studied there is no special concern shown regarding the very apparent lack of coordination between thinking or memorizing and doing.




Your Committee begs to report as follows:

I. We tried to get at the attitude of normal-school presidents and principals toward national aid to institutions engaged in the preparation of teachers. A letter was sent to each. The replies received indicate that practically every one of them favors national aid for this purpose. A few are doubtful, fearing too great interference from the national government. Some questions were raised as to the particular way in which the aid was to be administered. It is safe to say, however, that over 90 per cent of the normal-school presidents and principals of the country are in favor of a reasonable plan of national aid to institutions engaged in the preparation of teachers.

II. Your Committee has cooperated in every possible way with the National Education Association Commission on Necessary Readjustments during and after the War. This Commission has been more than courteous to us; it has been genuinely and generously interested in our cause. It has invited us to share in its deliberations and has listened to our statement of the case. On invitation of the chairman of its subcommittee on the Preparation of Teachers, Dr. W. C. Bagley, we have prepared a brief, an expanded statement of the brief, and have compiled statistical data relative to the work of state normal schools and to the distribution of national aid to the several states, on the basis of certain assumptions that had been approved by the National Education Association Commission.

III. We are able to report that the bill prepared by the National Education Association Commission and ready for submission to Congress contains provisions regarding national aid to institutions engaged in the preparation of teachers which we believe will be acceptable to the normal schools of the country. These provisions, so far as they relate to teacher preparation, are substantially as follows:

1. A maximum of $15,000,000 annually is appropriatedto cooperate with the states in preparing teachers for the schools, particularly rural schools .... to encourage a more nearly universal preparation of prospective teachers, to extend the facilities for the improvement of teachers already in service, to encourage, thru the establishment of scholarships and otherwise, a greater number of talented young people to make adequate preparation for public-school service, and otherwise to provide an increast number of trained and competent teachers.


2. This sum is to be apportioned to the several states in the proportion which the numbers of teachers in the public schools of the respective states bear to the total number of public-school teachers in the United States, not including outlying possessions, said apportionment to be based on figures collected by the Department of Education, which is created as an executive department of the government with a secretary, who is a member of the President's cabinet, assistant secretaries, etc.

3. But this amount of money is not an untrammeled annuity. The amount spent by state and local authorities for teacher preparation in 1919 is taken as a standard base. If a state spends more in 1920


subsequent year than it did in 1919, the national government will match this additional expenditure dollar for dollar up to the limit of the allotment previously indicated. The fundamental purpose of the proposal is to encourage the states to do more in the matter of preparing teachers, and the encouragement consists in the offer to pay one-half of the additional cost up to the limit of a state's share in the $15,000,000 provided in the bill. But even this offered encouragement is further limited by excluding expenditures for the purchase, erection, preservation, or repair of any building, or for the purchase or rental of land, or for the support of any religiously or privately owned, endowed, or conducted school or college. And still further it is provided that funds apportioned under the act shall be expended "only for public institutions and agencies owned and controlled by the state, or county, or local authority, as may be provided under the laws controlling and regulating the public educational institutions and agencies of said state.”

4. The Secretary of Education is authorized to frame uniform rules and regulations for carrying out the provisions of the act, to prescribe a plan of keeping accounts of educational expenditures, and to appoint an auditor.

5. Since it is wholly futile to try to get young people to prepare for teaching unless the economic rewards of teaching are reasonable, the bill provides $50,000,000 "to cooperate with the states in the efforts to 'equalize educational opportunities." The expenditure of this money is limited as already indicated. It will therefore be expended on operating expenses, of which teachers' salaries is the large item. This amount is about oneseventh of the total paid to teachers in 1915-16. If it is met by an equal amount by the several states, salaries could be increast between 20 and 30 per cent. Such an increase would give teaching an economic status which it has never had in this country.

IV. It is, of course, impossible for your Committee to know how these provisions will appeal to Congress and to the country at large. It is evident, however, that our people are thinking nationally now instead of locally. It would be a great misfortune to create a bureaucracy that would destroy the autonomy of the states and reduce all public education to a fixt routine. On the other hand, it would be equally unfortunate to allow the self-interest of states and communities to prevent the development of individuals to the level at which participation in national life is possible. It is the old difficulty of “the devil and the deep sea." Your Committee believes that the proposals now embodied in the bill will secure the advantages of national aid and avoid the disadvantages.

V. We who are particularly concerned with the preparation of teachers in state normal schools must view this matter in its large aspects. Our schools are organically parts of the public-school systems of the several states, even tho they are not so designated in the statutes. And they are also integral parts of our national system of education, even tho we do not have a national system establisht by law. The national government has aided and is aiding public education in the several states. What is proposed, therefore, is only an extension of what we are now doing. Every normalschool man is interested in the removal of illiteracy, the Americanization of immigrants, the equalization of educational opportunities in the several states, the development of physical and health education, and the better preparation of more teachers. These things are not merely local and state matters; they are national concerns. Are we real Americans or just camouflaged aliens? Are our loyalty, our interest, our effort, and our insight bounded by state lines? If they are not so limited we should all be able to get behind a proposal that promises so much of national betterment.

The normal school stands for a professional preparation for teaching. Unfortunately, in nearly every state, the right to teach is controlled by statutes that set up an academic qualification. Law and medicine have been able to get the legal phraseology to include professional qualifications. That is what we need for teachers also. Your Committee believes that national aid for teacher preparation will establish professional qualifications for those who enter upon teaching in every state of the Union. We regard this as absolutely necessary to the realization of the democracy for whose preservation in the world we are pouring out so much of blood and treasure.






EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, D.C. “It is the business of the board of health to look after disease. It is the business of the board of education to look after education. It is nobody's business to look after the children."

I quote this statement from a recent letter written by a zealous and successful organizer of “school health work.” A shocking statement, is it not, and a trifle disconcerting? Have we not comforted ourselves with the idea that the chief concern of education is "looking after the children"? Particularly have the normal schools comforted themselves with this flattering assurance. Naturally we are shockt when we are told by one who observes and speaks dispassionately that we are fooling ourselves.

Such a statement, you say, expresses a sadly perverted view of the meaning of education. True, but does it not express a sadly true picture of education as it is frequently practist? In a mediaeval Latin book we read Johannem Latinam docet magister, “The master teaches John Latin.” It makes all the difference in the world whether the master teaches Latin to John (emphasis on Latin) or whether the master teaches John by means of Latin (emphasis on John). Is not our school practice very commonly teaching Latin to John rather than teaching John by means of Latin ? Academic results rather than human growth? Even in the matter of health-teaching and physical education formalism is not unknown. Is not my correspondent at least half justified in his conclusion that looking after the children is nobody's business?

Confession is good for the soul. It will be good for the normal-school soul to confess that the normal school has paid little attention to the fundamental problem of conserving and promoting health. There is a great deal of lip service-mens sana in sano corpore-repeated at frequent intervals; but the records show that when it comes to actual recognition of physical education and its functions in the normal development of human beings the normal schools are deficient.

Partial returns have been received from an inquiry on physical education in normal schools recently sent by the Bureau of Education to all state,



[ocr errors]



county, and city normal schools—145 out of about 250. Incomplete analysis of the returns from these 145 schools gives the following certain data: 1. Number requiring health certificate at entrance..

44 2. Number requiring medical examination...

68 3. Number requiring health certificate for graduation. 4. Number requiring physical exercise of all students.

124 Gymnastics. Dancing...

55 Athletics..

47 Games.. 5. Number requiring practice teaching: a) In calisthenics..

74 b) In gymnastics.

68 c) In dancing :

63 d) In athletics..

40 e) In games...

91 6. Number having special teachers of physical training: a) Male.....

53. b) Female... 7. Number having gymnasiums.. 8. Number having swimming pools.

23 Complete fulfilment of all the following conditions is necessary if teachers are to be prepared to promote the health and physical vigor of their pupils: physico-medical examination at entrance and annually, at least, during the course; health certificate for graduation; daily physical exercise, at least one hour, of an enlivening and joy-producing kind; practice teaching of such exercise for children; playgrounds and gymnasiums necessary for such exercise; practical study of hygiene as exemplified in school life and environment; instruction in normal physical diagnosis.

From the data given above and from other inquiries and observations I am persuaded that complete fulfilment of these conditions in normal schools is rare. A few schools meet all of the conditions with a considerable degree of thoroness, more meet some of the conditions well and are short on the rest or meet them inadequately, and others meet all these conditions inadequately or not at all.

There is light on the horizon. Since 1914 eight states have enacted compulsory, state-wide physical-education laws. Most of them contemplate physical education in the broad sense indicated above. Some of these, tho compulsory in form, are hardly more than permissive in substance; but they all point to a new emphasis on physical education in the normal schools. Several of them specifically include the normal schools in the application of the law. In New York, New Jersey, and California, at least, the vivifying effect of these laws is becoming evident. In some instances readjustment of programs and ideals will be necessary. Three things will be required: (1) time, (2) careful planning of the course of study in physical education, and (3) broadly prepared teachers.

« PreviousContinue »