Now, the other way in which I want you to regard the matter is from the

point of view of the interests of the people at large. Let me put it

like this: here is your body politic, the people of North Dakota,

600,000 strong, or, better yet, the people of the United States, some

hundred million in number, partners in ownership of our magnificent

country, co-laborers in its administration, and sharers in the work of

their own government and in the working out of their destinies--each

with a share and an influence and each expected to participate. But so

complicated are the matters needing consideration, so difficult of

solution many of the problems arising, and so infinitely vast the whole

undertaking that the great majority of the people, thru either

immaturity or lack of training, often do not know what is best to do.

And again, skilful manipulators, dishonest self-seekers, are ever at

hand with plausible theories calculated to befog the untrained, deceive

the unsuspecting, and to lead them all astray. Taking everything into

consideration, the situation is extremely difficult. In a plain word,

these untrained people, the product of the elementary schools, can not

see far enough ahead to know that oftentimes the policy that seems most

attractive is full of danger for the future. They are not qualified to

weigh, and estimate, and decide. But there is a class among them,

college-bred men and women, a small class, relatively, that is

qualified. Thru long years of study, and investigation, and reflection,

in institutions freely provided and generously maintained by the people

now in need, they have attained such a knowledge of affairs and such an

ability to cope with intricate problems as to make them efficient

leaders--leaders capable of guiding aright the noble ship of state thru

difficult and tortuous channels beset, on every side, by dangerous rocks

and calamitous whirlpools. And among that class of efficient leaders

you, young men and young women of the University of North Dakota, will

soon be numbered. How shall you respond to the call of duty? Your State,

by virtue of what she has done and is now doing for you, has a right to

expect unselfishness and unstinted service in her own interests and in

those of mankind. Shall she get it? Will you rise to the occasion and,

even at a sacrifice of personal comfort, ease, esthetic enjoyment,

money, give to her what is her due? Will you remember _Noblesse

Oblige_? Of course you will. For there is a well-established principle,

clearly stated in Holy Writ and sanctioned by the ages, that of those to

whom much hath been given, much will also be required. _Noblesse

Oblige_--your privileges compel you.

Because the theory of the old motto, "_Paucis vivat humanum genus_,"

"for the few live the many," is no longer maintained. The many do not

live for the few. The reverse is true. The few live for the many. But

yet, the service is not unrewarded--only a portion of the reward has

come first. In your equipment you are being paid in advance. David Starr

Jordan has happily clothed the thought in these words: "It is in the

saving of the few who serve the many that the progress of civilization

lies. In the march of the common man, and in the influence of the man

uncommon who rises freely from the ranks, we have all of history that

counts."

And here I might stop. But a general statement, more or less abstract,

needs practical illustration: the "how," the "when," and the "where" are

perfectly legitimate questions for you to ask. Let us then throw a hasty

glance upon some of the great activities that claim men's attention, and

discover some of the openings awaiting you.

_The teaching profession_ will draw heavily upon your ranks--that

profession, full and rich in opportunities for usefulness beyond any and

all others, is more and more looking for you, and waiting impatiently

for your full equipment and thoro readiness. All of the higher positions

must come to you and others like you. No others are, or will be,

adequately prepared. In nearly all of our states the legal requirement

for a high school teacher and, of course, for the high school principal

and city superintendent is the completion of a full four-year college

course including a certain specified amount of professional work. In

some of the states, indeed, the requirement is of a full year beyond the

undergraduate course, or the possession of a Master's degree, with the

emphasis of this added year thrown upon the subjects to be taught and

the manner of handling the same.

So the facts are borne upon us that the desk of the high school

principal, the office of the city superintendent, the chair of the

college professor, the position of college and university president, is

soon to be offered you. Are you ready for it? ready in academic

equipment? ready in professional attainment? And are you equally well

prepared in that even finer element--the possession of your soul by the

spirit of _Noblesse Oblige_?

I can not say, of course, to which of you here to-day a college

presidency is to be offered, nor the professor's chair, nor any other

specific position. Nor can I say just when the offer will come. But I

can say, and with assurance, that all these positions and all others of

leadership in the educational field will be offered to college men and

college women, and in all probability as soon as they are well ready for

them. Moreover, it can doubtless be said that they will be apportioned

fairly on the basis of merit and fitness. And then you will have in your

hands the shaping of the destinies of a great free people with all the

emoluments, the opportunities, and the responsibilities that should

accompany a work of such moment.

And _the Gospel ministry_ can no longer look elsewhere. If it is to

continue to wield its mighty influence for good, and to play its

magnificent rôle of leadership in our developing civilization,

especially among our rapidly increasing educated classes, it must more

and more come into its rightful inheritance, so long withheld, of that

broader conception of brotherhood and Christianity that forgets the

letter of the law in magnifying its spirit--that puts life before dogma

and character before creed. And this, fellow students, can never be

without the broad university equipment.

We have traveled far during these latter years. And no longer do we

consider it sufficient that the minister of the Gospel know merely his

Bible and his theology. In addition to these, aye, as a basis for these,

it is now demanded (that is, if he be accorded a position of real

leadership among thinking people) that he know as well his history and

his sociology, his psychology and his biology, and indeed that he be

acquainted with all the fields of human knowledge. Not only that, he

must know life as it is lived to-day, and the thoughts and emotions of

men as they are manifested in the give and take of actual life. And none

of these can be obtained within the narrow confines of the old

theological seminary. The modern university is the only institution in

which the minister of the future can get it all and get it in the right

order and in the correct admixture. In the laboratories, the libraries,

and the classrooms he will delve deeply into the realms of science,

literature, and art, and there and on the campus, in its varied

activities, touch hands and exchange thoughts with the future lawyer,

teacher, physician, engineer, business man, what-not, and thus gain

tolerance, humility, catholicity of spirit, and the spirit of true

democracy.

Thus circumstanced during his preparatory years, he will go out capable

of seeing things in their proper perspective. That's the kind of man

that the ministry is calling to-day, and the call will be louder and

more incessant as the years pass and the education of the people

progresses. That's the kind of man we already have in some of our

leading pulpits, and they are exerting a tremendous influence in all

departments of life. But the supply is limited. There's not enough to go

around. Many more are needed. Our universities must furnish them. Will

this institution do its share? Will some of you young men, with your

well-trained bodies, with your finely-disciplined minds, with your

highly-cultured natures, with that fine balance of powers that means so

much and that can accomplish so much for the world if thus used--will

you turn aside from the beaten path that would be sure to lead to fame

and power and worldly success and enter the more difficult but more

useful field of the Christian ministry for the simple purpose of serving

mankind? You are the kind of men we want, and I am sure that you will

not disappoint us.

And so I might go on, did time permit, and point out attractive and

responsible openings in many different activities--the fields of

engineering and journalism, the professions of medicine and law, the

great world of business, even politics (should I not say, rather, and

_especially_ politics?). It is not necessary to go farther into detail.

You catch my thought. In one and all of these, positions of leadership

are calling loudly for men and women of large knowledge, of trained

minds, of broad outlook, and of splendid visions; and these

characteristics are the fruitage of nothing less than the broad and

comprehensive foundations laid in the college and the university. And

you who have them are, by the very fact of possession, under obligation

to use them for the public weal. How is it, young man, young woman? Are

you going to mesure up to the twentieth century standard? Will you carry

with you from this hall when you leave to-day, and from this institution

when she honors you with her diploma, and out into the great activities

of life,--will you carry with you, I ask, and make the basis of your

actions in life, the thought of these two little words that have been

engaging our attention this morning--_Noblesse Oblige_?

VII

IMPROVEMENTS IN OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

_A Paper read before the Commercial Club of Grand Forks, North Dakota,

January 24, 1911, and printed in the Grand Forks "Daily Herald," January

29, 1911_

In accepting an invitation to speak upon the topic assigned,

"Improvements in Our Public Schools," I come not as a hostile critic,

not even as an impartial observer viewing and commenting upon something

belonging to another. Rather, I come as a sympathetic friend to talk

about an institution in which I am vitally interested and of whose good

work I am proud. Indeed, I am to discuss a great business industry, if

you please, in which you and I are joint stockholders and for whose

success we are alike responsible. And, too, I have been for so many

years a teacher and so closely connected with educational work that I

feel akin to every other man and woman engaged in that occupation.

Knowing how easy it is to make mistakes and thus fall short of attaining

our high ideals in this most trying and most difficult work, I am

temperamentally inclined to magnify the difficulties and to overlook the

shortcomings of educational workers. To be sure, in speaking upon

"Improvements," I am admitting that improvements are possible. But the

best friend of a person or an institution is one who talks frankly and

honestly, admitting weaknesses, if such there be, and suggesting

assistance. Such an attitude can not well be interpreted as a criticism

either of men or mesures.

A gentleman met me on the street a day or two ago and said, "I

understand that you are going to find fault with our schools next

Tuesday night. What for? I want you to understand that our schools are

all right. Let well enough alone." A few days ago one of the local

papers said of the schools, "The public schools of Grand Forks are

recognized as the finest in the Northwest and the school system is

up-to-date in every respect."

And that idea seems to be chronic. Such expressions are common in our

papers and from many of our people. The impression sought to be given is

doubtless that of "Let well enough alone," or "Hands off." Now, Mr.

Chairman, while this feeling clearly betokens a general confidence in

the management of the schools of which those directly in charge may well

take pride, nevertheless, it is not an altogether healthy condition of

affairs.

While I believe in a wise conservatism as against an unthinking

radicalism, I am in no sense of the term a "stand-patter." The

individual who has earned this picturesque title, I care not whether in

the halls of Congress or in the ranks of the educators, is a foe to

progress. A "stand-patter" is such because he is in a rut and either too

lazy or too corrupt to get out.

Things ought not to remain long as they are in any business, in any

enterprise, in any institution. Civilization never stands still. The

most dangerous attitude of mind that a man can hold is that of

complacency, that of perfect satisfaction with things as they are. The

good is always a foe to the best.

No, gentlemen, our schools are not "up-to-date in every respect," not

altogether the "finest" in the great Northwest. The Northwest, you

know, is a pretty big place and has some pretty enterprising towns. But

no individual town has, in all respects, the finest schools in the

Northwest, or in any other place. Our schools are, like those of other

cities, just a good strong average. Like every other system, it contains

some good teachers and some not so good; some up-to-date methods of

instruction are being used and some which should be improved; some

features there are to be strongly commended and some, doubtless, that

should be discontinued. And more than this, gentlemen, you have no right

to demand, or expect, from your Superintendent and your Board of

Education. They will be the very first to endorse all that I have

admitted above. Indeed, that they do not hold that exaggerated opinion

is clearly apparent from the fact that they are even now considering

improvements. And may the day never dawn when we shall see no needed

improvements for our public schools! Should such a time come, it would

simply mean that in matters educational our eyes have become dimmed and

that we are rapidly falling behind.

Had the men of this city been "stand-patters" touching the city, Grand

Forks would not be to-day what it is--the surprise and the admiration of

every intelligent visitor. Were you men here to-night, in your civic

relationship, "stand-patters," the promise of the future would be less

bright than it is. During my early connection with Grand Forks I often

wondered as to the secret of its enterprise. I was not long in

discovering, however, that it was found in the spirit of this Commercial

Club; a spirit, it is, of hope, of civic pride, of optimism, yet a

spirit of almost divine discontent. You have all the time been proud of

your city, but yet not satisfied with it; not satisfied, because you saw

visions of a finer city into which yours might grow. Your city was not

up-to-date--to help make it so you needed a street railway system; what

did you do? Worked for it and--got it. Not yet up-to-date? A great

auditorium was needed; you put your hand into your hip-pocket and lo! it

arises in, what was it, thirty days? The goal not even yet in sight? No,

because better pavement was imperative--and it came. Still something

lacking? An up-to-date street lighting system--you put some of your men

to work on it and it is now our pride and our neighbors' despair. And so

I might go on, I do not need to. Only let me say that it will be a sad

day for Grand Forks when we shall think that we have really reached the

goal--when there is not something toward which we are striving.

I am glad that, in this same spirit, you have now turned your gaze to

the school house. Let us apply there the same principle of free,

intelligent discussion and hearty, generous co-operation, each trying to

outdo the other in loyalty and generous support, hoping, eventually, to

make our schools the "finest in the Northwest," and "up-to-date in every

respect."

But this is a pretty big subject for treatment in an after-dinner talk

of from 15 to 20 minutes. It involves so much, embracing within its

scope, as it may, everything from finance to theology. The very function

of the school, in the large, might well be considered under such a

topic, and scores of details. I might well talk upon the education of

teachers as I do before my classes, or upon educational

psychology--vital subjects all, but scarcely appropriate here. It is,

indeed, a large and interesting subject, lots of places to catch hold.

Manifestly, I can treat it only superficially. All that I can do is

merely in the line of suggestion, trying to direct your attention to

some of the general features, somewhat objective in character.

The first suggestion I have to make is along this very line--the

greatness, the many-sidedness of the educational problem and the need of

general community intelligence in regard to it. Indeed, there are many

aspects of the school work, countless number of details touching books,

courses of study, immediate and remote ends, as well as the larger

philosophical bases, in which the public is deeply interested but

imperfectly informed. Many a parent is ignorant as to what the schools

are trying to do, and why? Not comprehending the end in view,

unintelligent as to the means being used, and with little time or

ability to investigate, friction often arises. The public and its

educational system, the homes and the schools, the teachers and the

parents, should in some way be brought closer together and an

opportunity given for their mutual understanding. There are various ways

in which this opportunity is given in different places: thru mothers'

meetings, in some; thru home and school societies, in others; thru the

establishment of what some call "visiting days," in others, etc. Great

good is sure to result from a systematic use of any one of them.

But we in Grand Forks are a very busy people; clubs and societies

without number claim our attention and secure our membership; public

meetings for the discussion of charities, health, morals, foods, etc.,

saying nothing about church and social demands, are already taking us

too often from homes in the evening, so that I hesitate to suggest

another such activity even in the interests of so important a matter as

the public schools. But believing very firmly as I do that the largest

success of our schools can be secured only thru a cordial co-operation

of the homes and the schools, and believing also that this co-operation

rests upon intelligence as to the aims of the schools and the means that

are being used, I am going to suggest a way of meeting the

difficulty--namely, the utilization of another educational agency of

large influence and philanthropic spirit--I refer to the Press. It is

not my purpose to present here an extended eulogy of the Press. That is

not necessary. You all know what a mighty factor it is in shaping public

opinion. I merely call attention to the fact that it is an _educational_

institution; that it appeals not, as do the schools, to the children,

but to the parents of the children: and then that in Grand Forks it goes

into almost every home in the city. I suggest that this agency be used

to bring about a frank, open discussion, and therefore a better

understanding, of the function and the work of our public

schools--local, state, and national. For our people, in addition to

being busy, are both intelligent and enterprising. They know the value

of the Press. They are great readers. I have been surprised, again and

again, at the large circulation enjoyed by both our enterprising

dailies. I have also been surprised to know how closely all our people

keep in touch with local happenings chronicled there. An educational

column in one or both of the local papers in which the work of the

schools, from taxation to lead pencils, could be discust, would be an

innovation of great value. An open forum, so to speak, it might be, in

which questions could be asked and answered, and also contributions made

from the larger field of educational effort. Of course I do not suggest

this as a place for the airing of personal feelings, of petty details,

of minor matters, rather, an opportunity for discussing with and for an

intelligent and enquiring people great educational questions,

fundamental principles, and broad, humanitarian policies. All such

matters, because fundamental in the development of civilization and

because of universal interest, should and could be handled with frank

simplicity. Such a discussion, constructive in character, could not fail

of doing great good--of being very helpful to teachers and parents

alike.

Another suggestion that I want to make and an improvement that I am

going to urge touches very closely the matter of efficiency of systems

of education. Now, the efficiency of an educational institution or of a

system of schools is often mesured by the success of those completing

its course of study--of those profiting, to the full, by all that it

offers. That is the point of view taken by those people who so greatly

praise the work of the old district school of our boyhood days, "back

East." They point to this man and that one, men who have achieved

eminent success, whose only "schooling," perhaps, was received in the

"little red school house" and therefore claim that it was a great

institution for the making of men. But therein lurks a fallacy. Great

men have issued from the "little red school house," it is true, but they

became great not because of, but in spite of, the fact that the school

house was "little" and was "red." In pointing to such men as these, as

products, they forget the great silent multitude of boys and girls who

were in the same "little red school house" but who were never heard of

after they emerged. The pathetic feature of the old district school was

the great number of children who fell by the wayside. And so, to-day, no

educational institution should be rated as to efficiency by considering

the success merely of those completing its courses. To form a correct

estimate we must consider as well all those who entered and dropt out

before completion.

No system of schools is really efficient in which any considerable

percentage of the children drop out before completing the elementary

course of study. No system of schools is satisfactorily efficient which

is so managed as to require, or even allow, any considerable percentage

of the children to repeat grades, that is, to fail of promotion, making

it necessary to go over the work the second time. Or, to put it in other

words, in which any considerable percentage of the children are doing

work in grades lower than their ages would suggest.

This is the matter of retardation of which we are hearing so much in

these days, and in regard to which Grand Forks, as well as other cities,

suffers. In my judgment, there are two main causes of retardation: poor

teaching and physical defects of the children. There are two ways by

which satisfactory teaching can be secured: in the first place, by

securing the best teachers available, and this, I am very sure, our

Board of Education and our superintendent always try to do. In the

second place, by improving the quality of work thus secured thru expert

supervision on the part of the superintendent and the principals of the

various schools. And this I am sure is not done to the extent that it

might be were matters differently arranged. If another suggestion that I

shall make later on is adopted, however, provision will be made for this

improvement.

Physical defects on the part of the children I named as the second cause

of retardation. And the remedy for the major portion of this cause is

found in my next suggestion--medical inspection of our school children.

Estimating the conditions in Grand Forks on the basis of what has been

discovered in many other places in which medical inspection is in

operation, from 25% to 80% of the children in our schools are suffering

from physical defects of some sort that interfere, to a greater or less

degree, with the work of the school. There is no doubt in the minds of

well-informed people that here is found a very fruitful cause of

retardation, as seen both in grade-failure and in early dropping out of

school. And very many of these defects are removable and, therefore, the

retardation preventable.

Now, the only seemingly valid reason that I have ever heard urged

against the employment of the school physician is that of expense. It

does cost something, I'll admit. All good things do. The necessary

expense, however, is often overestimated. But let us see if we are not,

even in hesitating at the expense, whatever it may be, wholly

illogical. The city assumes the duty of educating the young, but if

many of the young are not in a condition to receive that education,

should we not logically see that the hindrances are removed? We enact

compulsory attendance laws; should we not, where necessary, make it

possible for the physically defective as well as others, to profit by

such attendance? Otherwise, are we not wasting money?

On the Firing Line in Education · 第 10 / 14 段