These differences between the states point at once to a further fact

which has been characteristic of the American school system from the

very beginning. Responsibility for the schools rests at the periphery;

and in extremely happy fashion the authority is so divided that all

variations, wherever they occur, are adaptations to local conditions;

and nevertheless unity is preserved. A labile equilibrium of the various

administrative factors is brought about by harmonious distribution of

the authority, and this is, in all departments of public life, the

peculiar faculty of the Americans.

The federal government, as such, has no direct influence on education.

The tirelessly active Bureau of Education at Washington, which is under

the direction of the admirable pedagogue, Mr. Harris, is essentially a

bureau for advice and information and for the taking of statistics. The

legal ordinances pertaining to school systems is a matter for the

individual state, and the state again leaves it to the individual

community, within certain limits of course and under state supervision,

to build schools and to organize them, to choose their teachers, their

plans of education, and their school-books. And at every point here,

exactly as in the striking example of the federal Constitution, the

responsibility is divided between the legislative and the executive

bodies. The state inspector of schools is co-ordinate with the state

legislature, and the school inspector of a city or a country district,

who is elected now by the mayor, now by the council, now perhaps

directly by the community, is a sort of technical specialist with

considerable discretionary power; he is co-ordinated to the school

committee, which is elected by the community, and which directs the

expenditures and confirms all appointments.

The responsibility for the moral and intellectual standards, for the

practical conditions, and for the financial liabilities incurred by

every school, rests therefore immediately with the community, which has

to pay for their support, and whose children are to derive advantage.

And nevertheless, the general oversight of the state sees to it that

neither whimsicality nor carelessness abuses this right, nor departs too

widely from approved traditions. These authorities are further

supplemented in that the state legislature is more or less able to make

up for differences between rich and poor districts and between the city

and the country, besides directly carrying on certain normal schools in

which the teachers for the elementary and grammar schools are trained.

Very great and very diverse advantages are the immediate outcome

of this administrative system. Firstly, an interest in the

well-being of the schools is developed in every state, city, and

town, and the spirit of self-perfection is united with the spirit

of self-determination. Secondly, there is a good deal of free play

for local differences—differences between states and differences

within the state. Nothing would have been more unsuitable than in

this whole tremendous territory to institute a rigidly fixed

school system, as say by some federal laws or some interstate

agreements. If there were the same educational provisions for the

negro states of the South and for the Yankee states of New

England, for the thickly settled regions of the East and the

prairies of the West, these provisions would be either empty words

or else they would tend to drag down the more highly educated

parts of the country to the level of the lowest districts. The

German who objects to this on the ground of uniformity, does so

because he is too apt to think of the great similarity which

exists between the different sections of Germany. The only proper

basis for a comparison, however, would be his taking Europe as a

whole into consideration.

If now the outward unity of this system which we have described is

nevertheless to be maintained, it is absolutely necessary that this form

shall be filled with very different contents. And this introduction of

diversity is intrusted to the state legislatures and local authorities,

who are familiar with the special conditions. In this way the so-called

school year in the school ordinances of a rich state may be about twice

as long as in another state whose poorer population is perhaps not able

entirely to do without the economies of child labour. But the

differences between the schools take particularly such a form that the

attainments of the different schools, corresponding to the culture and

prosperity of the state in which they are, and of the community, are

consciously designed to be quite different. The remoter rural schools

which, on account of the poverty of their patronage perhaps, have to get

on with one badly trained teacher and have to carry on four grades of

instruction in one school-room, and other schools which employ only

university graduates, which bring their scholars together in sumptuous

buildings, afford them laboratories and libraries, and have all the

wealth of a great city to back them—these schools cannot seriously enter

into competition with each other. Two years of study in one place will

mean more than four in another; and there is no special danger in this,

since this very inequality has brought it about that the completion of

one grade in a school by no means carries with it the right to enter the

next higher grade of any other school. It is not the case that a scholar

who has passed through any grammar school whatsoever will be welcome in

every high school. This is regulated by an entrance examination for the

higher school, which will not accept merely the certificate of

graduation from a lower.

There are still other forms of this differentiation. In the first place,

the schools have shown a growing tendency to establish various parallel

courses, between which the scholars are allowed to choose. In the

simplest case there is, perhaps, on the one hand a very practical plan

of education, and a second course which is rather more liberal; or,

again, there may be a course for those who are not meaning to study

further, and another course for those who are preparing for the entrance

examinations to some higher school. The fiction of uniformity is

preserved in this way. The child does not, as in Germany, choose between

different schools; but he chooses between plans of education in the same

school, and every day the tendency deepens to make this elective system

more and more labile.

But the most modern pedagogues are not content even with this, and

insist, especially in the grade of the high school, that the make-up of

the course of study must be more and more, as they say, adapted to the

individuality of the scholars; or, as others think, to the whimsies of

the parents and the scholars. Since, in accordance with this, the

entrance examinations for the colleges leave considerable free play for

the choice of specialties, this movement will probably go on developing

for some time. It appeals very cleverly to the instincts of both the

Puritans and the utilitarians. The Puritan demands the development of

all individual gifts, and the utilitarian wants the preparation for an

individual career. Nevertheless, there are some indications of an

opposite tendency. Even the utilitarian begins to understand that he is

best fitted for the fight who bases his profession on the broadest

foundation—who begins, therefore, with his specialization as late as

possible. And the Puritan, too, cannot wholly forget that nothing is

more important for his personal development than the training of the

will in the performance of duty, in the overcoming of personal

inhibitions, and that therefore for the scholar those studies may well

be the most valuable which at the first he seems least inclined to

pursue. Further differentiation results from the almost universal

opportunity to pass through the schools in a somewhat shorter time. It

is also possible for a student to progress more rapidly in one branch of

study, and so in different branches to advance at different rates.

We have over and above all these things, and more particularly in the

large cities, a factor of differentiation which has so far been quite

left out of account. This is the private school. The goal for the

student who wants to advance is not the diploma of graduation, but

preparation for the entrance examinations which are next higher. This

preparation can perhaps be obtained more thoroughly, more quickly, and

under more fortunate social conditions, in a private school, which

charges a high tuition, but in this way is able to engage the very best

teachers, and able perhaps to have smaller classes than the public

schools. And such a private school will be able to extend its influence

over all education. Large and admirably conducted institutions have

grown up, often in some rural vicinity, where several hundred young

persons lead a harmonious life together and are educated from their

earliest youth, coming home only during vacation. In such ways the

private school has taken on the most various forms, corresponding to

obvious needs. They find justly the encouragement of the state.

This diversity which we have sketched of public and private educational

institutions brings us at once to another principle, which has been and

always will be of great significance in American material and

intellectual history—the principle that everywhere sharp demarcations

between the institutions of different grades are avoided, and that

instead, sliding gradations and easy transitions are brought about, by

means of which any institution can advance without any hindrance. This

is in every case the secret of American success—free play for the

creations of private initiative. The slightest aspiration must be

allowed to work itself out, and the most modest effort must be helped

along. Where anything which is capable of life has sprung up, it should

be allowed to grow. Sharp demarcation with official uniformity would

make that impossible; for only where such unnoticeably small steps form

the transitions, is any continuous inner growth to be expected. We have

emphasized the local differences. The grammar school in New York is

probably more efficient than the high school in Oklahoma, and the high

school in Boston will carry its students probably as far as some little

college in Utah.

The thousands of institutions which exist afford a continuous transition

between such extremes, and every single institution can set its own goal

as high as it wishes to. A school does not, by any act of law, pass into

a higher class; but it perfects itself by the fact that the community

introduces improvements, makes new changes, appoints better and better

teachers, augments the curriculum, and adds to its physical equipment.

In such ways, the school year by year imperceptibly raises its standard.

And the same is true of the private school. Everything is a matter of

growth, and in spite of the outward uniformity of the system every

school has its individual standard. If one were to require that only

such institutions should exist as had distinctly limited and similar

aims, then the American would look on this as he would on an attempt to

force all cities to be either of ten thousand, a hundred thousand, or a

million inhabitants. Of course, all this would have to be changed, if as

in Germany, certain school grades carried with them certain privileges.

In America no school diploma carries officially any privilege at all. It

is the entrance examination, and not the tests for graduation, which is

decisive; and if there is any question of filling a position, the

particular schools which the candidates have gone through are the things

which are chiefly taken into account.

We must mention one more trait which differentiates the American from

the German school system. The American public school is co-educational.

Co-education means theoretically that boys and girls are entitled to

common education, but practically it means that boys are also tolerated.

The idea that the school should not recognize differences of sex is most

firmly rooted in the Middle-Western States, where the population is

somewhat coldly matter of fact; but it has spread through the entire

country. It is said that family life lends the authority for such an

intermingling of boys and girls; that, through a constant and mutual

influence, the boys are refined and the girls are made hardy; and that,

during the years of development, sexual tension is diminished. It is one

of the chief attractions that the private school offers to smaller

circles that it gives up this hardening of the girls and refining of the

boys, and is always either a boys’ or a girls’ school.

Even more striking than the presence of girls in the boys’ schools is,

perhaps, the great number of women who figure as teachers. The

employment of women teachers began in the Northern States after the

Civil War, because as a direct result of the decimation of the

population there were not men teachers enough. Since that time this

practice has increased throughout the country; and although high schools

generally try to get men teachers, the more elementary schools are

really wholly in the hands of women. Men do not compete for the lower

schools, since the competition of the women has brought down the wages,

and more remunerative, not to say more attractive, situations are to be

found in plenty. Women, on the other hand, flock in in great numbers,

since their whole education has made them look forward to some

professional activity, and no other calling seems so peculiarly adapted

to the feminine nature. The merits and drawbacks of co-education and of

the predominance of women teachers cannot be separated from the general

question of woman’s rights; and so the due treatment of these conditions

must be put off until we come to consider the American woman from all

sides.

It is not difficult to criticise rather sharply the school system, and

any one living in the midst of American life will feel it a duty to

deliver his criticism without parsimony. A system which expects the best

it is to have, from the initiative of the periphery, must also expect

the ceaseless critical co-operation of the whole nation.

In this way, then, crying and undeniable evils are often pointed out. We

hear of political interference in the government of the schools, and of

the deficient technical knowledge of local authorities, of the

insufficient preparation of the women teachers, the poorness of the

methods of instruction, of waste of time, of arbitrary pedagogical

experiments, and of much else. In every reproach there is a kernel of

truth. The connection of the schools with politics is in a certain sense

unavoidable, since all city government is a party government. And the

attempts to separate elections for the school committee entirely from

politics will probably, for a long time yet, meet with only slight

success. Since, however, every party is able to put its hand on discrete

and competent men, the only great danger is lest the majority of those

concerned misuse their influence for party ends, and perhaps deal out

school positions and advancements as a reward for political services.

Such things certainly happen; but they never escape the notice of the

opposite party, and are faithfully exploited in the next year’s

election. In this way any great abuses are quickly checked. The secret

doings, which have nothing to do with politics, are a great deal more

dangerous. It is certain that the enormous school budgets of the large

cities offer the possibility for a deplorable plundering of the public

treasury, when it is a question of buying new land for school-houses, of

closing building contracts, or of introducing certain text-books. A

committee-man who in these ways is willing to abuse his influence is

able to derive a considerable profit; and so it may well happen that men

come to be on the school boards through political influence or through a

professed interest in school matters, who have really no other aim than

to get something out of it. It is very hard in such matters to arrive at

a really fair judgment, since the rival claimants who are unsuccessful

are very apt to frame the opinion that they have been so because the

successful man had “connections.”

This sharply suspicious tendency and spirit of over-watchfulness on the

part of the public are certainly very useful in preserving the complete

integrity of the schools, but they occasion such a considerable tumult

of rumour that it easily misleads one’s judgment as to the real

condition of the institutions. In general, the school committees

appointed in the local elections perform their work in all

conscientiousness. It is, of course, the fact that they are rather

frequently ignorant of things which they need to know; but the tendency

to leave all technical questions in the hands of pedagogical

specialists, and to undertake any innovations only at the advice of the

school superintendent and directors, is so general that on the whole

things do not go quite so badly as one might expect.

The preparation of the teachers leaves very much to be wished. Those

teachers who have been educated in higher seminaries are by no means

numerous enough to fill all the public school positions; and even less

does the number of college graduates suffice for the needs of the high

schools. The fact that the teaching profession is remarkably versed in

pedagogics only apparently relieves this defect; for even the very best

methods of teaching are of course no substitute for a firm grasp of the

subject which is being taught. In the elementary schools the lack of

theoretical training in a teacher is, of course, less felt. The instinct

of the teacher, her interest in the child, her tact and sympathy, in

short the personal element, are what is here most important. And since

all this, even in the superficially educated woman, springs purely from

her feminity, and since the energetic women are extraordinarily eager

and self-sacrificing, so it happens that almost everywhere the

elementary schools are better conducted by their women teachers than are

the high schools.

So far as method goes, a great deal too much stress is laid on the

text-book; too much is taught mechanically out of the book, and too

little is directly imparted by the teacher. The teacher submits

passively to the text-book; and the American himself is inclined to

defend this, since his democratic belief in the power of black and white

is unlimited. Before all, he regards it as the chief aim of the public

school to prepare the citizen for the independent reading of newspapers

and books. Therefore, the scholars are expected to become as much

acquainted as possible with the use of books. There is no doubt that the

American school children read more newspapers in later life than do the

European, and it must also be borne in mind that for the most part the

text-books are notably good. Perhaps, in regard to attractiveness, they

even go rather too far. In this way not only the books of natural

history, but also of history and literature, are crowded with

illustrations. The geographies are generally lavishly gotten-up volumes

with all sorts of entertaining pictures. The appeals to the eye, both by

means of the text-books and even more by the aid of demonstrations and

experiments, are carried really to excess. Even the blackboards, which

run along all four walls of the school rooms, encourage the teacher to

appeal rather more to the eye than to the ear.

Also the much-discussed experimentation with new pedagogical ideas is an

unfortunate fact which cannot be denied. A central authority, which was

held fully responsible for a large district, would of course be

conservative; but where the details of teaching are left entirely to

every local school inspector, then of course many shallow reforms and

many unnecessary experiments with doubtful methods will be undertaken.

The school inspector will feel himself moved to display his modern

spirit and to show his pedagogical efficiency in just these ways. And

many a private school, in order to make itself attractive to the public,

is obliged to introduce the latest pedagogical foibles and to make all

sorts of concessions, perhaps against its will. To-day the method of

writing will be oblique, to-morrow vertical, and the day after to-morrow

“reformed vertical.” The pupils to-day are taught to spell, to-morrow to

pronounce syllables, the next day to take the whole word as the least

unit in language; and a day later they may be taught the meaning of the

words by means of appropriate movements.

It is not quite easy for a professional psychologist, who lectures every

year to hundreds of students in that subject, to say openly that this

irregular and often dilettante craze for reform is encouraged by nothing

more than by the interest in psychology which rages throughout the

country. The public has been dissatisfied with teachers, and conceived

the idea that everything would be better if the pedagogues concerned

themselves more with the psychical life of their pupils. And since for

this purpose every mother and every teacher has the materials at hand,

there has sprung up a pseudo-psychological study of unexampled

dimensions. It is only a small step from such a study to very radical

reforms. Yet everything here comes back in the end to the independent

interests and initiative of the teacher; and although many of these

reforms are amateurish and immature, they are nevertheless better than

the opposite extreme would be—that is, than a body of indifferent and

thoughtless teachers without any initiative at all.

It is also not to be denied that the American school wastes a good deal

of time, and accomplishes the same intellectual result with a much

greater outlay of time than the German school. There are plenty of

reasons for this. Firstly, it is conspicuous throughout the country that

Saturday is a day of vacation. This is incidental to the Puritan Sunday.

The school day begins at nine o’clock in the morning, and the long

summer vacations are everywhere regarded as times for idleness, and are

almost never broken in on by any sort of work. Again, the home duties

required of the school children are fewer than are required of the

German child, and all the instruction is less exacting. The American

girls would hardly be able to stand so great a burden if the schools

demanded the same as the German boys’ schools. Herewith, however, one

must not forget that this time which is taken from work is dedicated

very specially to the development of the body, to sport and other active

exercises, and in this way the perfection of the whole man is by no

means neglected. Moreover, America has been able, at least so far, to

afford the luxury of this loss of time; the national wealth permits its

young men to take up the earning of their daily bread later than

European conditions would allow.

When the worst has been said and duly weighed, it remains that the

system as a whole is one of which the American may well be proud—a

system so thoroughly elastic as to be suited to all parts of the country

and to all classes of society. It is a system which indubitably, with

its broad foundation in the popular school, embodies all the

requirements for the sound development of youth, and one, finally, which

is adapted to a nation accustomed to individualism, and which meets the

national requirement of perfection of the individual.

The Americans(#56376) · 第 36 / 59 段