One of the most significant of the newer movements in educational

procedure is that termed _educational mesurements_, perhaps better

called the _mesurement of intelligence_. About a generation ago it began

to be observed that many children did not pass thru the grades with the

regularity that was thought normal or desirable. Many were obliged to

repeat grades--they did not "pass," to use the language of the schools.

The more the matter was investigated, the more serious was it seen to

be. Investigation has gone on until at last carefully gathered

statistics tell us that almost, if not quite, one-half of all the

children in the schools fail to progress thru the grades at the expected

rate. For some reason, or for some combination of reasons, they are

retarded from one to three years. And of the $400,000,000 annually spent

to carry on the work of the schools it is estimated that from

$40,000,000 to $50,000,000 go every year in attempts to teach these

retarded ones what they have already tried but failed to learn. Here was

a double loss, a financial one of large proportions and a human one of

much more serious import. Why the retardation? And what could be done to

check it?

Thoughtful consideration was given to the matter with the following

revelation: it was seen that in educational procedure all matters of

grading, promotion, even choice of subject matter where there was a

choice, were being handled on the basis of results of tests of

information--possession of knowledge facts--rather than of ability or

intelligence. This might not be so bad if the knowledge sought in these

tests were knowledge necessary to have in order to function adequately

in the new or advanced environment. But usually no such relationship

could be traced. It was but another illustration of no present meaning

connected with the work of the school. A remedy was sought, and is being

sought, in trying to substitute for the information test a test of

intelligence. It is generally admitted that neither one is an adequate

mesure of the other. A child may have a very high grade of intelligence

and yet make a very poor showing in the ordinary schoolroom test for

knowledge, not that he has been unable to learn such facts but merely

that his interests and attention have not been thus focust. On the other

hand, it is entirely possible for one of low-grade intelligence to

receive a very creditable "mark" in a test for information since it is

frequently a test of verbal memory, that "great simulator of

intelligence," as Binet calls it.

One of the most interesting of the books bearing upon this new

educational movement is _The Measurement of Intelligence_ by Professor

Terman of Leland Stanford University. In the thoughts just exprest I

have used material found in this book.

So, for a few years now, educational psychologists have been trying to

work out a series of tests of intelligence, so that children may be

located on the basis of their general intelligence, or ability to

accomplish results. The results so far are very promising as tending to

eliminate much of the loss mentioned above. And out on our firing lines

the educational psychologist is being looked upon as a necessity in any

system looking forward to real efficiency. It is thought that thru the

saving he could effect in the two directions cited his regular

employment would be a matter of economic foresight. A few years ago it

was the school physician who was being fought for out in the front

ranks. He is now a fixture in every up-to-date school system, and it is

the psychologist for whom battle is now being waged. And it is only a

question of time when his position will be secure and the line pushed

forward for another attack.

I have discust with you briefly some of the interesting points of view

of the education of to-day. I have tried to place before you, first,

what I think to be its dominant motive--social betterment, made

effective thru discovery and development of the individual's tastes and

dominant interests. To show how this program is becoming established and

worked out, I have touched upon various new lines of activity in

sympathy with and contributing to the general movement. Thus I discust

briefly the great child-study movement having for its goal knowledge of

the individual child as a basis for its educational treatment. Following

this I spoke of physical education--its beginning in many places and the

great need for extension. Another activity named was the educational

survey by means of which a community may have its own educational

activity tested by impartial experts that its real efficiency may be

known. Then followed brief discussion of the new movement for vocational

guidance that is doing so much where being used to make the youth

efficient and happy in his chosen and appropriate field of activity. I

closed the discussion with a mention of a still newer movement having

the same great ends in view--the employment of the educational

psychologist. Firing-line activities all of these are, each vigorous and

active in the great movement for educational betterment.

II

THE RELATION OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY TO THE HIGH SCHOOLS OF THE STATE

_An Address delivered before the Annual Conference of the North Dakota

Superintendents and Principals at the University of North Dakota, May

18, 1916_

This is a topic of great interest to us all--to you in the field and to

us here on the campus. The work of the two institutions is so closely

related, each depends so much upon the other, that participation in the

activities of one bespeaks interest in the other. But before we can

discuss at all intelligently the matter of relationship it will be

necessary to look at the two separately--objectively, as it were--to

note the function of each and its place in the educational system of the

State. What is the university? What is the high school? And what is the

work of each? are questions that must first be answered.

In the first place, of course, the two are but parts of a still larger

whole, neither being an independent, self-sufficing entity. The larger

whole is the educational system of the State, of which there is one

other part equally important with the two named, even the elementary

school. And all three parts forming the whole are creations of the

State, devised, controlled, and maintained for a very definite

purpose--namely, the welfare and happiness of our people.

While it is true that the three parts are correlative, each

supplementing the others and the system incomplete without all three,

it is also true that they are co-ordinate, no one of the three being,

_per se_, in authority over any other, nor any one subordinate to

another. Let me put before you, very briefly, that we may all be

thinking together, the system in its outlines and then discuss each of

its parts, trying to discover its function and its node of work. Then we

shall pass to the matter of relationship.

The system as a whole covers and tries to provide for the entire school

life of the individual. The elementary period, or department, includes,

in the main, as now organized, the work of the first eight years of the

child's school life and ministers to it from the age of six to fourteen

years. The secondary, beginning where the elementary closes, carries on

the work for four years and is followed by the higher, the colleges and

the professional schools--the university.

It may clarify matters somewhat and thus give us a clearer perspective,

if, before, entering upon the discussion, I account for the system as we

have it to-day.

Our Colonial forefathers in the Old Bay State, back in the 17th century,

in providing to meet the situation that prest upon them, unconsciously

laid the foundations for an educational system that expanded with their

expansion and developed with their development. But before taking the

initial steps they did not wait to analyze the entire situation and upon

logical or philosophical grounds map it out in its entirety. They had no

such thought. They needed ministers of the Gospel and, since a knowledge

of Latin was the one sure gateway to that profession, they established a

Latin school almost as soon as they had set their own dwelling places

in order. This was in 1635, and Harvard College followed the very next

year to complete the preparation. It was an afterthought and came eleven

years later when they legislated for an elementary school. And even tho

we can see, in what they had then produced, the fundamental factors of

our present somewhat complicated system, the people who were responsible

for its organization were only dimly conscious of the significance of it

all. They builded better than they knew. The broad outlines can not be

improved. Details, of course, are ever changing as local conditions

change, but from the very nature of things, the elementary, the

secondary, and the higher schools have remained with us, each for a

quite definite purpose and all working together for a common end. Let us

look, therefore, for a moment, at each of the three and see for what it

stands and what it should attempt to do.

THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

The fundamental purpose of the elementary school in a democracy is well

stated in the first legislation on the continent touching elementary

education, tho not mentioning the elementary school. It was in the

Massachusetts colonies in 1642. The General Court passed an ordinance of

which the following quotation gives the substance:

"This Court, taking into consideration the great neglect of many parents

and masters in the training of their children in labor and learning, and

other employments which may be profitable to the commonwealth, do

hereupon order and decree that in every town the chosen men appointed

for managing the prudential affairs of the same shall henceforth stand

charged with the care of the redress of this evil ... and for this end

they, or the greater number of them, shall have the power to take

account, from time to time, of all parents and masters, and of their

children, concerning their calling and employment of their children,

especially of their ability to read and understand the principles of

religion and the capital laws of this country; and they shall have power

... to put forth as apprentices the children of such as they shall find

not to be able and fit to employ and to bring them up."

Here was compulsory elementary education, that children might know how

to read, might "understand the principles of religion and the capital

laws of the State," and also that they might be taught to work. And why?

For their own present and future welfare, and that they might be

"profitable to the commonwealth," the document reads.

It was for all the children of all the people. The same thought is with

us to-day and, analyzed and stated in our present-day terminology, may

be put about as follows:

The elementary school is for all the people and aims to do for all three

things: first, exercise a positive directive influence over the child's

physical development; second, carry on, in a more systematic, scientific

manner the training of the sense organs already begun by the home, thus

opening up the life to the beauties of nature, art, and other forms of

truth, and so providing for the development of the inner life of each in

accordance with inherent leaning and capability; and, third, equip them

with the tools of knowledge and give such knowledge facts and develop

such points of view as will enable each to become a self-directing,

constructive, and contributing member of his democratic community.

Attendance upon the elementary school should, in the interests of all as

individuals and of the State as an organization, be compulsory.

THE HIGH SCHOOL

The high school should likewise be for all, tho for a somewhat different

purpose. While attendance should not be compulsory, the aim should be to

make it universal. For a somewhat different purpose, I said; I should

perhaps have said for an added purpose, because I would have the three

ends of the elementary school kept constantly in view as fundamental

bases. But, assuming that these things have been well done, the chief

purpose of the high school should be to discover the child's latent

powers, his dominant interests, and then, so far as these are wholesome,

help him plan his education in their general direction. I might put it

briefly thus: the chief function of the high school should be to help

the child to become acquainted with himself and begin the planning of

his future. Let us look at it carefully and see if it is not sound.

At the conclusion of the elementary school, at the age of 14, the boys

and girls are still children; they are developing, not developed, in

either body or mind. They have not yet reached, in the main, the period

of rapid acceleration of physical growth, intellectual expansion, or

moral development; they are just reaching it; they are now in the early

stages of that wonderful period of adolescence when the boy is being

transformed into the man and the girl into the woman. They are neither

children nor adults, yet manifesting the characteristics of both. They

do not know themselves, nor does any one else know them intimately. How

can they? They are not yet formed. They are in the process of formation.

What will emerge as a result of the process, we know only in broad

outlines--not at all in minute detail. So many factors are at work and

there are possible so many combinations of factors that no one can tell;

for it is during the period of adolescence that hereditary

characteristics show themselves. Up to this time the child is a child of

the race; during this period it becomes the offspring of its parents.

And the factors of heredity--father, mother, ancestry--are mingling and

clashing and combining with the factors of environment, and what the

outcome is going to be, nobody knows, in specific cases, in advance.

This is the period when the heart, the lungs, and the brain are being

transformed, modified, whipt into shape for the performance of the

duties of adulthood. It is a period when, in the intellectual realm,

because of what is taking place in the physical, concepts are being

clarified, relationships traced, ideas formed, things seen in the right

perspective, and real reasoning begun. It is the period when, in the

moral field, because of what is being accomplished in the physical and

the intellectual, principles are being apprehended that will finally

enable the individual to distinguish between right and wrong, to

organize on principle rather than upon expediency his relationships with

his fellows, and eventually to become a free moral agent,

self-controlled and self-directed. It is the period, therefore, when

ideals are being formed, habits fixt, character shaped, life plans

matured, and professions chosen.

And so, with such an individual and during such a period, what other

function of the high school can begin to compare, either in importance

or in appropriateness, with the one stated?

It may be objected that I do not include in this function of the high

school that which has been during a large portion of its history its

foremost work--preparation for college. The seeming omission has not

been accidental. I say the _seeming_ omission because, even tho not

specifically stated, it is there, for all who should be encouraged to

prepare for college. But it has not been made prominent since, in my

judgment, it is of minor importance. Note again the function as

suggested--to help the child know himself, find out what he wants to do

and what he can do best, and then begin getting ready for doing it well.

If the specific form of future activity decided upon in a particular

instance should call for the contribution of the college, then of course

the plan mentioned would include appropriate preparation.

But from what point of view should the high school be regarded and for

whom should it be planned? Should it be for the relatively few who go

beyond, or for the great majority who do not? It is a fair question and

admits of but one answer. The high schools of the State must, of course,

give adequate preparation for entrance into the State university. Some

of them must--not necessarily every one. It must be the preparatory

school, since both are State institutions and the only ones occupying

the field. But it should do vastly more than that. Being of the people,

by the people, and for the people, it should be so handled as to serve

all, not merely a few, of the people. It is perfectly plain, therefore,

where the emphasis should be placed.

Please do not misunderstand me; I am not looking upon this from any

narrow point of view, I am not thinking merely of getting these children

ready for jobs--certainly not all of them. I am not advocating the

transforming of our high schools into trade schools--not at all. What I

am urging primarily is a different point of view--and so enlarging and

modifying our high school activities and equipment that all our

children, instead of only a few, may find there a congenial atmosphere

and activities suited to their tastes. If their tastes lie in the

direction of carpentering, or of plumbing, or of dress-making, well and

good; let them be thus developed and prepared to go out into their

community somewhat equipt for remunerative toil and for community

service. Why not? Are they not as worthy as those who have tastes and

ambitions or a more literary character and who, therefore, look forward

to the chair of the teacher, the office of the lawyer, or the practise

of a physician? And is not the community under as much obligation to the

one as to the other? Some fear that such a program would lessen the

number preparing for college, that work of this objective character

would be so attractive that all would choose it. These fears are

groundless. Children are not all built that way. At any rate it would

not lessen the number who ought to go to college--who are adapted to

that kind of work. It would, of course, greatly increase the number

attending high schools--holding those who now, because of lack of

interest in the work offered, drop out of school entirely and thus swell

the ranks of unskilled and unintelligent labor. And that is greatly

worth while. My own feeling is, too, that out of the greatly increased

attendance of the high school an even larger number than at present

would find their way to the university, and that they would be better

equipt in point of view and purpose than are many who enter under

present conditions. This suggestion is made not to keep boys and girls

out of the university, but to send them there with a purpose.

But there is oftentimes a misapprehension as to these two possible

programs for the high schools. Preparation for college and preparation

for life are by no means antagonistic. Preparation for college is the

only kind of preparation for life for him who goes to college. And for

him who, during his high school course, plans to go to college, but who

at its close, finds himself unable to do so, for economic or other

reasons, it should still be the best possible preparation for life that

he could have made, and it will be if, as I am urging, it has all the

time been based upon his own nature and seeking his normal development

in the direction of his dominant interests. And preparation for life

should be the very best kind of preparation for college, for him who

later changes his plans and goes to college as well as for him who does

not, since the college itself should be regarded as merely completing

preparation for life. But a great many, the majority, no doubt, will not

go to college, should not go to college, or to put it better, perhaps,

need not go to college. The activities of life, psychical as well as

manual, for which they are best adapted by native endowment, and in the

performance of which they will, therefore, be happiest, and thru which

they will, therefore, contribute most to the welfare of society, do not

need for their satisfactory performance school preparation beyond the

high school period. In other words, a great many boys and girls should

not be urged to go to college. They should not if they do not have

within them those characteristics of leadership which, developed, will

make them leaders. The college graduate who, in later life, is a street

car conductor, or a Pullman porter, or what-not, has largely wasted the

time and money spent in college. And this is not because these

occupations are not honorable, but because they do not call for that

kind of preparation. And the kind of an individual who is at home as a

street car conductor does not usually profit greatly by the work of the

college. I will not put it as David Starr Jordan is said to have done,

that "It does not pay to give a fifty-cent boy a five thousand dollar

education." It is not a question of dollars and cents--rather one of

fitness and of fitting. The so-called "fifty-cent boy" who may have been

given the "five thousand dollar education" and because of its

inappropriateness degenerated into a ten-cent man, might have been made

into a thousand dollar man if he had been given the right kind of

education. The boy who has the instincts of a blacksmith, who likes the

shaping of iron and the shoeing of horses and the smell of the forge,

will be a far happier and more useful member of society as a blacksmith

than, made over by the college, as a lawyer without clients, a

physician without patients, or a teacher always hunting a new position.

I have discust the high school, as you see, from the point of view of

the developmental needs of the children of the community. The outcome

would have been practically the same had I looked upon it from the

standpoint of the industrial needs of the community. I fully believe

that a high school should be to-day just what it was originally planned

to be back there in the first half of the nineteenth century--a school

higher than the elementary, controlled by the community, in co-operation

with the educational leaders of the State, serving the needs of the

community, fitting its boys and girls for service in the community and

discriminating, if at all, in the favor of the group of boys and girls

who are not going to college, since that group is much the larger. Since

boys and girls are nearer to us than industrial needs, I have chosen to

look at the problem from that angle.

I am well aware that my point of view in this entire matter is not quite

in accord with the present-day program. The American high school still

has preparation for college as the one dominant object. Its curriculum

is planned for that end. It is rated at first, second, or third class,

depending upon the degree in which it meets college entrance

requirements--not upon the degree in which it serves the community needs

or develops the community's children.

I realize fully that the change suggested would involve quite a decided

rearrangement of the ordinary high school program. With the time at my

disposal it will be impossible to discuss the matter in detail, but it

should be touched upon briefly to get the matter of relationship clearly

before us.

The first change would be in the matter of organization: instead of

having the elementary school, as now, covering eight years and closing

with the child at the age of 14, it should cover but six years, sending

the child to the high school at about the age of 12, at which time,

approximately, begin those physical and psychological changes earlier

spoken of, as belonging to adolescence. And that thought has taken root,

as we all know, in the junior high school movement. Six years is long

enough to do well all that the elementary school should be expected to

do. It certainly is as long as children can be held interested in the

kind of work thought necessary for the child, and as long as he can be

happy in the atmosphere of the ordinary elementary school. It is long

enough for the laying of foundations. It is time something else should

be taken up.

On the Firing Line in Education · 第 3 / 14 段