CHAPTER XX

FIXING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE NEW

PROGRAM

Responsibility of Government

The ultimate responsibility of the state to provide vocational as well as general education has been fully recognized by recent legislation and by executive decisions. National aid for vocational education is an accepted fact and seems likely to be greatly extended in scope and amount. The functions of the state are to set up minimum administrative requirements, to train and certify teachers, and to equalize local differences in willingness and ability to give suitable training by spreading the burden of taxation over a larger area. The sphere of national authority and control ought to consist in determining desirable and attainable goals and in equalizing opportunities and resources. Both state and national control are advantageous so long as they combine provisions for necessary uniformity with sufficient active encouragement and latitude to enable the local community or individual factory to meet its peculiar needs and preserve a proper initiative.1

Responsibility of Industry

The economic disadvantages of throwing the whole responsibility for training on the shoulders of manufacturers was stated more than a decade ago by Alfred Marshall in his "Principles of Economics." After referring to the small number

1 For a discussion of the principle of state responsibility for education and of the advantages and disadvantages of state control in general education, the majority of which apply here, see Cubberly's "Public School Administration," Chapters I-III.

of employers who are willing to appropriate funds for the education of employees, he continues:

And even they cannot always afford to carry the investment of capital in the training of their men as far as they would have done, if the results of the investment accrued to them in the same way as the results of any improvements they might make in their machinery. Even they are sometimes checked by the reflection that they are in a similar position to that of a farmer who, with an uncertain tenure and no security of compensation for his improvements, is sinking capital in raising the value of his landlord's property.

Again, in paying his workpeople high wages and in caring for their happiness and culture, the liberal employer confers benefits which do not end with his own generation. For the children of his workpeople share in them, and grow up stronger in body and in character than otherwise they would have done. The price which he has paid for labor will have borne the expenses of production of an increased supply of high industrial faculties in the next generation; but these faculties will be the property of others, who will have the right to hire them out for the best price they will fetch; neither he nor even his heirs can reckon on reaping much material reward for this part of the good he has done.

Drawing the Line

Education in technical and general vocational subjects for younger pupils is already well supported. The moot questions in financial support and executive control of industrial training center about specific occupational preparation, and training on a part-time basis for promotion. In the majority of cases it appears to be wise to divide the financial responsibility. Schools or classes for younger students, such as continuation schools, general industrial schools, part-time schools, or evening classes, where the training is sufficiently broad in scope to enable the worker to utilize it in several different lines, should be free to the pupil and supported entirely at state or federal expense. For older students or

for training useful to only one concern, the burden should be divided between the public and the individual firm, the proportion to be contributed by the firm varying according to the character of the instruction. For classes for advanced students, such as minor executives, employment managers, or foremen, a fee may well be paid by the student, the amount in some cases to be refunded by the firm after a certain period of service.

Possible Resources

The possibilities of special forms of taxation are suggested by the fact that our manufacturing industries in 1914 represented a capital investment of $22,790,980,000. The year's pay-roll was $5,367,249,000. A half of one per cent of the amount paid in wages would have placed a fund of $26,836,000 at the disposal of the management in these firms to use for training employees, employment management, or health, sanitation, and housing projects. Many firms spent several times this percentage, but because of the lack of concerted action and public support, their efforts were largely wasted.

The Small Firm

For thousands of small firms, very little training is necessary and, because of the small numbers employed in any given occupation in a restricted locality, formal instruction under public supervision is impracticable. What is urgently needed is a realization on the part of such employers of the possibility of improving their methods of supervision and inspection, and of induction of new employees. This can only be accomplished effectively by concerted action and by a pooling of resources under a system of government assistance which provides money subvention and expert advice based upon research.

The British Experiment

The British government has undertaken an experiment which may serve as an appropriate model. It has set aside a fund of a million pounds sterling to be used by an industrial research department. The appropriation is to be expended on a co-operative basis in the form of contributions to special associations of manufacturers to be established for research purposes. Each co-operating firm is assessed an amount to be determined by the size of the plant, and enjoys the following privileges:

1. It will have the right to put technical questions and to have them answered as fully as possible within the scope of the research organization and its allied associations.

2. It will have the right to recommend specific subjects for research, and if the committee or board of the research organization of that industry consider the recommendation of sufficient general interest and importance, the research will be carried out without further cost to the firm making the recommendation, and the results will be available to all the firms in the organization.

3. It will have the right to the use of any patents or secret processes resulting from all researches undertaken, either without payment for licenses, or at only nominal payment as compared with firms outside the organization.

4. It will have the right to ask for a specific piece of research to be undertaken for its sole benefit at cost price, and, if the governing committee or board approve, the research will be undertaken.

"Unit" versus "Dual" Control

Discussion of the administrative control of vocational education has created two strongly opposing factions. One group maintains that the existing school authorities are not interested in specific training and that their experience unfits

them for dealing with factory matters. They contend that schoolmen have disregarded the advice of advisory boards composed of manufacturers and business men and have been unwilling to employ capable staff experts to organize and supervise vocational classes. The more radical members of this group recommend a system of separate boards and administrative officers as the only means of gaining headway against academic traditions.

The opposing attitude was well stated by Dr. Charles A. Prosser in an address which he delivered in New York City in 1914.

Whatever may be our individual opinions with regard to the proposal that the states and local communities establish separate and independent systems of schools for vocational education, every indication seems to show that the American people are not ready for this step and that they want first to give the regular school system a chance to deal with the task. The American people do not want, if it can be avoided, two different systems of education in the same community competing for the same children; competing for the same funds out of the same public treasury. ...

Whatever may be the situation elsewhere, a dual system of vocational education for New York City is unthinkable. Everybody recognizes that the magnitude and complexity of the task make it impossible under the conditions which obtain in New York City to handle the matter in any other way than under the regular Board of Education. The schools of New York City are going to be called upon to deal with this subject of vocational education. If they fail, if they make that education academic instead of practical, if they fail to serve the interests of those who ought to be prepared for their work in life, if they do not secure and use this information that the practical man has to contribute, if a distinctive management is not established which will enable these schools to grow up and realize their aim unhampered by traditions, then we shall have a demand for an independent system for vocational education.