William Cullen Bryant had failed in some of his ambitions. The future looked dark to him, and, as he crossed the country seeking a new situation, a solitary wild duck, with its form "darkly painted on the crimson sky," crossed before him. He mused upon "the Power" which guided its course, and his apostrophe to the bird, when it had entirely disappeared from sight, contains his unswerving faith in divine justice:

Thou'rt gone, the abyss of heaven

Hath swallowed up thy form; yet, on my heart
Deeply has sunk the lesson thou hast given,
And shall not soon depart.

He who, from zone to zone,

Guides thru the boundless sky thy certain flight,
In the long way that I must tread alone,
Will lead my steps aright.

The self-crucifixion of Enoch Arden for those he loved, in that beautiful story without sin, has made many a high-school boy and high-school girl live a more unselfish life.

The universal brotherhood of man, irrespective "of race, color, or previous conditions of servitude" is portrayed in "The Vision of Sir Launfal." Phoebe Cary's awakening in "Nearer Home," the nearness of the spirit world in "The Ancient Mariner," and Longfellow's return to faith in "The Bridge," are a few of the many illustrations which may be put into the hands of the pupils; and then, with the magic touch of the spiritual in the teacher, the young life reflects the moral reactions from the ethical concepts acquired.

When the teachers of America with uncovered heads stand within the threshold of the office, the recitation room, the laboratory, the gymnasium, before the pupils appear in the morning, and, no matter what creed they profess, petition the Great Jehovah for wisdom and power to do the work by example and by precept which is necessary to be done in order to make for universal brotherhood and fatherhood; and when, after the day's work is over and the children are gone, with the devotion of kinship they say: "Father, I thank Thee that I am permitted to be an American teacher and have a part in building and fortifying a great nation"; and when the children catch the master spirit, we will cease to be troubled about unpreparedness and inefficiency in national crises in this democractic government.

ROUND TABLE OF DIRECTORS OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

THE TWO PHASES OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND EFFICIENCY IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

GEORGE MELCHER, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF RESEARCH AND EFFICIENCY, KANSAS CITY, MO. For generations schools have been conducted on opinion. All other forms of business of great magnitude that involve the expenditure of vast sums of money and affect the welfare of thousands of people are being reduced to a basis of fact. The present tendency in the educational world is to substitute fact for opinion. Effective supervision must be based on fact, not on theory and opinion. In order to secure the necessary facts on which to base wise and efficient supervision, careful and scientific inquiries must be made and definite tests and standards must be established and used in measuring educational efficiency. By the application of such tests, we may reach facts-conclusions free from personal opinion or bias. Should not schools render accounts, both financial and educational, as trustworthy and systematic as the accounts of any other business? Professor Hanus, of Harvard College, one of the best authorities on school administration in America, says that efficient management of a school system depends upon "habitual and well

organized self-examination within the school system, including adequate appraisal by the staff of the results achieved, and well-conducted experiments to confirm of refute educational opinion within and without the school system."

The two important phases of research and efficiency in the public schools are the financial and the educational. Let us first consider the financial aspect of the question. From one-sixth to one-third of the current maintenance fund in the public-school system is devoted to other purposes than paying for the personal service of instruction and supervision. The expenditure of all this money should be supervised by the superintendent. These expenditures may be under the immediate direction of such officers as the chief engineer or superintendent of buildings, the architect, the purchasing agent, the chief attendance officer, and the secretary of the board of directors.

In order that the expenditure in these various departments may be wisely made, it is necessary that standards of cost be established. There are so many factors that enter into the determining of the cost of any item that it is not an easy matter to establish standards in school finances. For example, in studying the cost of heating school buildings in different school systems, or school buildings in the same system, cost may be compared on the basis of the cost per pupil, or the cost per thousand cubic feet of space to be heated, or the percentage of the entire cost invested in fuel. So many factors enter into the determining of this cost that any single basis of comparison may be unfair. Some of the factors that must be considered are: (1) the kind of fuel and the relative cost of the various kinds of fuel; (2) the amount of air space per pupil to be heated; this item will be greatly influenced by the presence in the school building, or the absence, of gymnasiums, auditoriums, and playrooms, and it must also be known whether these auditoriums are used full time or part time; (3) the character of the building; (4) the kind of heating plant; (5) in comparison with other cities, temperature and climate must be considered.

At a glance, one can see that comparisons based on the cost per pupil may be unfair, since one building may have playrooms, auditoriums, and gymnasiums to be heated, while others have only the schoolrooms. Again, one building may place 30 pupils in a room 24X30 feet and another may place 50 in a room of the same size. Comparisons based on the cost per thousand cubic feet of air space to be heated may be unfair because the kind of heating plants in the buildings may be entirely different or the amount of ventilation may vary from building to building. Furthermore, the percentage of the entire cost, a method of comparison often used in comparing one city with another, is a very unfair basis, since this percentage is apparently low in cities that pay high salaries for teachers. It costs just as much to heat a given room for a teacher receiving $500 per year as it does to heat the room when the teacher is receiving $1,000 per year. The cost per thousand cubic feet of air space to be heated is possibly the fairest of all means of comparison when a single basis must be used.

Not only should the cost of heating be carefully standardized, but also the cost of light and water, cost of janitor service, cost of janitor's supplies, and the cost of supplies for instruction. A school system should know the cost per pupil of writing-paper, pencils, drawing-material, pens, regular textbooks, and supplementary books. It is true that certain factors will cause variations in these items, but if it is known by the persons responsible for the expenditure that there will be careful checking on each item of expense, and that comparisons of the various buildings will be made, greater economy will be exercised in the use of materials. The economy brought about by the mere knowledge that the checking will be made pays several times for the expense of checking.

Furthermore, as regards the matter of cost accounting, a school system should know the cost of each subject of instruction. It should know the cost per pupil hour in the high school for each subject, the cost per pupil hour of elementary-school work, the cost per pupil hour of special subjects, such as manual training and domestic science, and the cost per pupil hour of kindergarten work. In the erection of new buildings, the cost per

room or the cost according to cubical contents should be known. The cost of repairs on buildings should be carefully checked and studied.

The second phase of research and efficiency relates directly to the department of instruction. The research work in the department of instruction may be considered under five heads: (1) measuring general school results in terms of school progress; (2) measuring and standardizing achievements in school subjects; (3) conducting experiments and making measurements to test the value of methods of teaching or plans of organization; (4) testing the suitability of the material suggested in courses of study for the various grades, and standardizing the subject-matter for each grade; (5) contributing to the educational world, as a final result of this other work, a body of scientifically tested educational principles.

Bureaus of efficiency are now engaged very largely in checking up general results and measuring school achievements objectively. It is probable that, in a few years, the most important work of these bureaus will be centered on the last three phases mentioned above. Up to the present time, however, so little work has been done along these lines that only this mention will be made of them here.

Under the first division are studied such topics as retardation, over-ageness, promotions, non-promotions, causes of retardation and over-ageness, causes of nonpromotion, and opportunity in the school for individual progress. Accurate data on these points can be obtained only when the school has a system of cumulative record cards so that the progress of pupils thru the various grades can be known accurately. For example, in Kansas City we have a seven-year elementary-school course. At the present time, cumulative record cards are used in the system, but they have been in use only two years. In June, 1915, it was desired to know the length of time required by the graduates of the elementary school to complete the course. In Part I of the Fifteenth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, pages 126 to 130, there is an account of the method used to determine this important point. The results of this investigation showed that 6 per cent of the class completed the elementary-school course in six years or less, and 40 per cent in seven years, making a total of 46 per cent who completed the course in seven years or less. Forty per cent required eight years to complete the course, and only 14 per cent required more than eight years. In the same Yearbook, page 143, Dr. Starch, of the University of Wisconsin, has suggested that one-third of the elementaryschool pupils should complete the elementary-school course in seven years, one-third in eight years, and one-third should require more than eight years. Assuming that our figures in Kansas City are practically correct at the present time, nearly one-half of our pupils complete the elementary-school course in less than seven years, and only one-seventh require more than eight years. This splendid showing is made with an elementary-school course of study that embraces an excessive amount of technical grammar, abstract arithmetic, and rigid work in other subjects, and would seem to indicate that, by the elimination of much useless, non-functioning material now in the elementary-school course, it would be possible so to organize the course of study that at least one-fifth of the elementaryschool pupils would complete the elementary-school course in six years, three-fifths in seven years, and one-fifth in eight years, or in an average period of seven years. Since the average time required to complete the elementary-school course in eight-grade systems is almost eight and one-half years, this organization would save one and onehalf years.

It is the consensus of opinion that there is generally too much retardation in the elementary schools. Hence, the subject of school progress is worthy of continued and careful consideration by school administrators. On pages 130 to 132, of the Fifteenth Yearbook, is found a discussion of opportunity for individuals in the Kansas City elementary schools. This study indicates that in the Kansas City as in other school systems too little opportunity is given the bright pupil for individual progress.

A study was made, during the past year, of the causes of non-promotion. This subject was studied from two angles: (1) for each case of non-promotion the opinion of the teacher was ascertained; (2) the regularity of attendance of the promoted and nonpromoted pupils was compared. According to the teachers' estimates, 52 per cent of the non-promotions were due to non-attendance. Assuming that a pupil cannot complete a given course satisfactorily unless he attends at least 80 per cent of the time, it was found that 60 per cent of the non-promotions were caused by non-attendance. Of the pupils who were not promoted, only 40 per cent had attended more than four-fifths of the time school was in session; but 60 per cent had attended less than four-fifths of the time, or had been absent more than 20 per cent of the time. Of the pupils who were promoted, II per cent had been absent more than 20 per cent of the time.

This study makes it evident that the most serious problem in non-promotion is nonattendance. This is a proper problem for solution, but it must be met by the co-operative efforts of the school, the home, and society. In fact, the chief burden falls upon society, for most of the causes of non-attendance are social or economic and cannot be overcome by the school alone.

As regards the second division of the subject, it may be said that only a beginning has been made in measuring school achievements objectively. Many types of school work lend themselves readily to objective measurement, and for some such types of school work scales have been devised. For other such types of school work, scales and standards are now in process of formulation and definition. However, many forms of school achievement do not lend themselves readily to objective measurement, since they are so highly spiritual and so elusive that it has not yet been possible to devise scales for estimating their value. Such achievements are often almost by-products of the educational processes, but, like the by-products of many manufacturing operations, these results are sometimes the most valuable part of the product. While many forms of school achievement cannot yet be measured objectively, it is confidently believed that in the future more scales will be devised, so that ultimately it will be possible to measure objectively, either directly or indirectly, most of the principal types of school achievement.

While only a few subjects have been measured, these measurements have revealed many valuable facts for the use of teachers and supervisors. The results of the measurements have shown that not only do the pupils in the same grade vary more than teachers and principals have realized, but also that rooms in the different schools in the city vary more than was believed possible before the application of such accurate scales. While it was known that rooms vary from building to building, the magnitude of this variation has been made clear by such measurements. Even in the same school, the variations between rooms is often greater than has been realized by the principal or teachers. For example, in Kansas City entire third-grade rooms were found that wrote better than seventh-grade rooms in other schools, and better than sixth-, fifth-, and fourth-grade rooms. In handwriting, some buildings made an average gain during the year of nearly two Thorndike points. However, other buildings made practically no gain. In accurate copying, some buildings were seven times as good as other buildings. Similar differences were found in spelling and arithmetic. In fact, it was found that almost one-fourth of the pupils of the city in the fourth grade did better in the fundamental operations of arithmetic, on exactly the same test, than did the poorest fourth of the seventh-grade pupils. Similar striking differences were noted in the results of the tests in the various subjects.

Some will properly ask: "Were not these differences due to variations in nationality, in community life, and in social conditions, etc.?" Some of them were, but the majority were not. For example, two schools of similar foreign population are about at opposite ends of the scale in certain of these tests. Of two schools consisting of similar American population, one stands in the highest group of schools and the other in the lowest group in certain tests. A school sometimes ranks high in one test and low in another. These

results are in harmony with the results that have been secured in every large city system that has been tested.

The more one studies the results at first hand, the more convinced he is that this great variation is largely a question of teachers and wise direction of teachers. When trained teachers are guided by clear and definite purposes, the teaching is most effective. School principals and school superintendents may render valuable service to the schools by giving definite purpose to each teacher's work. Many teachers already have a clear conception of the end to be attained and are securing valuable and tangible results. Many others are working just as earnestly, seriously, and industriously, and failing to secure satisfactory results. Why? I shall give Mr. Bobbitt's answer:

The taproot of effective teaching is to know in specific terms what one is after. The central cause of ineffective teaching is lack of knowledge of specific ends and a substitute conception that what one is to do is teach certain textbooks that somebody else has selected; to teach certain topics laid down in the course of study, also arranged by somebody else; to follow in unthinking fashion the dictates of others in all these matters; not to be guilty of living, responsible thought; and, in general, to grind away at the course of study and textbook machinery without any other thought as to the outcome than that pupils may be able to pass the examinations that belong with this type of school machinery.

The greatest service that principals and supervisors can render their teachers is to give them clear-cut specific ends to be reached in each grade in each kind of work. We have had too much generalization. The generalizations should be only the summaries of particulars and should not be given to teachers; but each teacher should make his own generalizations from the details that come under his observation and into his experience.

Accurate objective measuring of school results will aid materially in giving more definite and specific aims to our teachers in conducting their work. Some of the distinct advantages of the use of scales and objective measures are: (1) they eliminate personal opinion and bias and give impartial results; (2) they make possible an accurate comparison of the progress of each pupil from grade to grade; (3) they enable school principals and teachers to determine the progress made by groups of pupils as they pass from grade to grade thru the school; (4) they enable impartial comparisons to be made of the work of rooms in the same buildings, and also of rooms or grades in one building with corresponding rooms or grades in other buildings; (5) they enable comparisons of the work in the different buildings to be made; (6) they enable accurate comparisons of work in different cities to be made; (7) they give an accurate scheme for comparing the results of different methods of teaching given subjects and also of different plans of school organization; (8) they give the teacher a very accurate means of measuring his own pupils, which is possibly the most important result. Teachers are now learning that these new viewpoints enable them to improve very materially their classroom work.

Objective measurements bring out individual differences and class differences that are surprising. For example, in accurate copying, the best seventh-grade class in the Kansas City schools made only one-seventh as many errors per pupil as the poorest seventh-grade class. In the Courtis research tests in arithmetic, the best fourth-grade class had five times the medium speed of the poorest one, and seven times the median in accuracy. Such differences raise important questions in the minds of principals and teachers.

Our supervisor of writing has been collecting specimens of writing at the beginning of each year and at the end of each year. Until our bureau undertook the study of penmanship, he had not fully realized that some buildings actually made almost no progress in the quality of writing during the year, and that other buildings made a progress of two Thorndike points, and that as a result of this great variation in progress in the quality of handwriting there were several third-grade rooms in the city that last May wrote better than several seventh-grade rooms.