Special "corn trains" and "dairy trains" have traversed near

Produced by Tom Roch, Marcia Brooks and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This

file was produced from images produced by Core Historical

Literature in Agriculture (CHLA), Cornell University)

Riverside Educational Monographs

EDITED BY HENRY SUZZALLO

PROFESSOR OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION

TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

NEW IDEALS IN RURAL SCHOOLS

BY

GEORGE HERBERT BETTS, PH. D.

PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY

CORNELL COLLEGE, IOWA

[Illustration]

HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY

BOSTON, NEW YORK AND CHICAGO

The Riverside Press Cambridge

COPYRIGHT, 1913, BY GEORGE HERBERT BETTS

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

CONTENTS

EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION v

PREFACE ix

I. THE RURAL SCHOOL AND ITS PROBLEM 1

II. THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE RURAL SCHOOL 25

III. THE CURRICULUM OF THE RURAL SCHOOL 57

IV. THE TEACHING OF THE RURAL SCHOOL 92

OUTLINE 121

EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION

In presenting a second monograph on the rural school problem in this

series we register our sense of the importance of rural education. Too

long have the rural schools suffered from neglect. Both the local

communities and the State have overlooked the needs of the rural school

system. At the present hour there is an earnest awakening of interest in

rural life and its institutions. Already there is a small but certain

movement of people toward the country and the vocation of agriculture. A

period of agricultural prosperity, the reaction of men and women against

the artificialities of city life, the development of farming through the

application of science, and numerous other factors have made country

life more congenial and have focused attention upon its further needs.

It is natural, therefore, that the rural school should receive an

increased share of attention.

Educational administrators, legislators, and publicists have become

aware of their responsibility to provide the financial support and the

efficient organization that is needed to develop country schools. The

more progressive of them are striving earnestly to provide laws that

will aid rather than hamper the rural school system. In his monograph on

_The Improvement of the Rural School_, Professor Cubberley has done much

to interpret current efforts of this type. From the standpoint of state

administration he has contributed much definite information and

constructive suggestion as to how the State shall respond to the

fundamental need for (1) more money, (2) better organization, and (3)

real supervision for rural schools.

It is not so clear, however, that rural patrons, school directors, and

teachers have become fully aware of their duty in the matter of rural

school improvement. To be sure much has been done by way of experiment

in many rural communities; but it can scarcely be said that rural

communities in general are thoroughly awake to the importance of their

schools. The evidence to the contrary is cumulative. The first immediate

need is to reawaken interest in the school as a center of rural life,

and to suggest ways and means of transmuting this communal interest into

effective institutional methods. To this end, Professor Betts has been

asked to treat the rural school problem from a standpoint somewhat

different from that assumed by Professor Cubberley; that is, from the

point of view of the local community immediately related to, and

concerned with, the rural school. In consequence his presentation

emphasizes the things that ought to be done by the local

authorities,--parent, trustee, and teacher. Its soundness may well be

judged by the pertinent order of his discussion. Having stated his

problem, he initiates his discussion by suggesting how the social

relations of the school are to be reorganized; only later does he pass

to the detail of curricula and teaching methods. It is a clear

recognition of the fact that the community is the crucial factor in the

making of a school. The State by sound fiscal and legislative policies

may do much to make possible a better country school; but only the local

authorities can realize it. The trained teacher with modern notions of

efficiency may attempt to enlarge the curriculum and to employ newer

methods of teaching, but his talents are useless if he is hampered by a

conservative, unappreciative, and indifferent community. When the school

becomes a social center of the community's interest and life, there will

be no difficulty in achieving any policy which the State permits or

which a skilled teacher urges. Scattered schools will be consolidated,

and isolated ungraded schools will be improved. Given an interested

community, the modern teacher can vitalize every feature of the school,

changing the formal curriculum into an interesting and liberalizing

interpretation of country life and the pedantic drills and tasks of

instruction into a skillful ministry to real and abiding human wants.

PREFACE

No rural population has yet been able permanently to maintain itself

against the lure of the town or the city. Each civilization at one stage

of its development comprises a large proportion of rural people. But the

urban movement soon begins, and continues until all are living in

villages, towns, and cities. Such has been the movement of population in

all the older countries of high industrial development, as England,

France, and Germany. A similar movement is at present going on rapidly

in the United States.

No great social movement ever comes by chance; it is always to be

explained by deep-seated and adequate causes. The causes lying back of

the rapid growth of our cities at the expense of our rural districts are

very far from simple. They involve a great complex of social,

educational, and economic forces. As the spirit of adventure and

pioneering finds less to stimulate it, the gregarious impulse, the

tendency to flock together for our work and our play, gains in

ascendancy. Growing out of the greater intellectual opportunities and

demands of modern times, the standard of education has greatly

advanced. And under the incentive of present-day economic success and

luxury, comfortable circumstances and a moderate competence no longer

satisfy our people. Hence they turn to the city, looking to find there

the coveted social, educational, or economic opportunities.

It is doubtful, therefore, whether, even with improved conditions of

country life, the urbanization of our rural people can be wholly

checked. But it can be greatly retarded if the right agencies are set at

work. The rural school should be made and can be made one of the most

important of these agencies, although at the present time its influence

is chiefly negative. With the hope of offering some help, however

slight, in adjusting the rural school to its problem, this little volume

is written by one who himself belongs to the rural community by birth

and early education and occupation.

G. H. B.

CORNELL COLLEGE, _February_, 1913.

NEW IDEALS IN RURAL SCHOOLS

I

THE RURAL SCHOOL AND ITS PROBLEM

_The general problem of the rural school_

The general problem of the rural school is the same as that of any other

type of school--to render to the community the largest possible returns

upon its investment in education with the least possible waste. Schools

are great education factories set up at public expense. The raw material

consists of the children of succeeding generations, helpless and

inefficient because of ignorance and immaturity. The school is to turn

out as its product men and women ready and able to take up their part in

the great world of activities going on about them. It is in this way, in

efficient education, that society gets its return for its investment in

the schools.

The word "education" has in recent years been taking on a new and more

vital meaning. In earlier times the value of education was assumed, or

vaguely taken on faith. Education was supposed to consist of so much

"learning," or a given amount of "discipline," or a certain quantity of

"culture." Under the newer definition, education may include all these

things, but it must do more; it _must relate itself immediately and

concretely to the business of living_. We no longer inquire of one how

much he knows, or the degree to which his powers have been "cultivated";

but rather to what extent his education has led to a more fruitful life

in the home, the state, the church, and other social institutions; how

largely it has helped him to more effective work in a worthy occupation;

and whether it has resulted in greater enjoyment and appreciation of the

finer values of personal experience,--in short, whether for him

education spells _efficiency_.

We are thus coming to see that education must enable the individual to

meet the real problems of actual experience as they are confronted in

the day's life. Nor can the help rendered be indefinite, intangible, or

in any degree uncertain. It must definitely adjust one to his place, and

cause him to grow in it, accomplishing the most for himself and for

society; it must add to the largeness of his personal life, and at the

same time increase his working efficiency.

This is to say that one's education must (1) furnish him with the

particular _knowledge_ required for the life that he is to live, whether

it be in the shop, on the farm, or in the profession. For knowledge lies

at the basis of all efficiency and success in whatever occupation.

Education must (2) shape the _attitude_, so that the individual will

confront his part of the world's work or its play in the right spirit.

It must not leave him a parasite, whether from wealth or from poverty,

ready to prey upon others; but must make him willing and glad to do his

share. Education must (3) also give the individual training in

_technique_, or the skill required in his different activities; not to

do this is at best but to leave him a well-informed and well-intentioned

bungler, falling far short of efficiency.

The great function of the school, therefore, is to supply the means by

which the requisite _knowledge_, _attitude_, and _skill_ can be

developed. It is true that the child does not depend on the school alone

for his knowledge, his attitude, and his skill. For the school is only

one of many influences operating on his life. Much of the most vital

knowledge is not taught in the school but picked up outside; a great

part of the child's attitude toward life is formed through the

relations of the home, the community, and the various other points of

contact with society; and much of his skill in doing is developed in a

thousand ways without being taught. Yet the fact remains that the school

is organized and supported by society to make sure about these things,

to see that the child does not lack in knowledge, attitude, or skill.

They must not be left to chance; where the educative influences outside

the school have not been sufficient, the school must take hold. Its part

is to supplement and organize with conscious purpose what the other

agencies have accomplished in the education of the child. The ultimate

purpose of the school is _to make certain of efficiency_.

The means by which the school is to accomplish these ends are (1) the

_social organization_ of the school, or the life and activities that go

on in the school from day to day; (2) the _curriculum_, or the

subject-matter which the child is given to master; and (3) the

_instruction_ or the work of the teacher in helping the pupils to master

the subject-matter of the curriculum and adjust themselves to the

organization of the school.

These factors will of necessity differ, however, according to the

particular type of school in question. It will therefore be necessary to

inquire into the special problem of the rural school before entering

into a discussion of the means by which it is to accomplish its aim.

_The special problem of the rural school_

Each type of school has not only its general problem which is common to

all schools, but also its special problem which makes it different from

every other class of schools. The special problem of any type of school

grows out of the nature and needs of the community which supports the

school. Thus the city school, whose pupils are to live the industrial

and social life of an urban community, confronts a different problem

from that of a rural school, whose pupils are to live in a farming

community. Each type of school must suit its curriculum, its

organization, and its instruction to the demands to be met by its

pupils. The knowledge taught, the attitudes and tastes developed, and

the skill acquired must be related to the life to be lived and the

responsibilities to be undertaken.

The rural school must therefore be different in many respects from the

town and city school. In its organization, its curriculum, and its

spirit, it must be adapted to the requirements of the rural community.

For, while many pupils from the rural schools ultimately follow other

occupations than farming, yet the primary function of the rural school

is to educate for the life of the farm. It thus becomes evident that the

only way to understand the problem of the rural school is first to

understand the rural community. What are its industries, the character

of its people, their economic status, their standards of living, their

needs, their social life?

The rural community is industrially homogeneous. There exists here no

such a diversified mixture of industries as in the city. All are engaged

in the same line of work. Agriculture is the sole occupation. Hence the

economic interests and problems all center around this one line. The

success or failure of crops, the introduction of a different method of

cultivation or a new variety of grain, or the invention of an

agricultural implement interests all alike. The farmer engaged in

planting his corn knows that for miles around all other farmers are

similarly employed; if he is cutting his hay or harvesting his grain,

hundreds of other mowing machines and harvesters are at work on

surrounding farms.

This fund of common interest and experience tends to social as well as

industrial homogeneity. Good-fellowship, social responsiveness and

neighborliness rest on a basis of common labor, common problems, and

common welfare. Like-mindedness and the spirit of coöperation are after

all more a matter of similar occupational interests than of nationality.

Another factor tending to make the rural community socially more

homogeneous than the city community is its relatively stable population,

and the fact that the stream of immigration is slow in reaching the

farm. It is true that the European nations are well represented among

our agricultural population; but for the most part they are not

foreigners of the first generation. They have assimilated the American

spirit, and become familiar with American institutions. The great flood

of raw immigrants fresh from widely diverse nations stops in the large

centers of population, and does not reach the farm.

The prevailing spirit of democracy is still another influence favoring

homogeneity in the rural community. Much less of social stratification

exists in the country than in the city. Social planes are not so clearly

defined nor so rigidly maintained. Financial prosperity is more likely

to take the direction of larger barns and more acres than of social

ostentation and exclusiveness.

America has no servile and ignorant peasantry. The agricultural class

constituting our rural population represents a high grade of natural

intelligence and integrity. Great political and moral reforms find more

favorable soil in the rural regions than in the cities. The demagogue

and the "boss" find farmers impossible to control to their selfish ends.

Vagabonds and idlers are out of place among them. They are a

hard-headed, capable, and industrious class. As a rule, American farmers

are well-to-do, not only earning a good living for their families, but

constantly extending their holdings. Their farms are increasingly well

improved, stocked, and supplied with labor-saving and efficient

machinery. Their land is constantly growing in value, and at the same

time yielding larger returns for the money and labor invested in it.

The standard of living is distinctly lower in farm homes than in town

and city homes of the same financial status. The house is generally

comfortable, but small. It is behind the times in many easily accessible

modern conveniences possessed by the great majority of city dwellers.

The bath, modern plumbing and heating, the refrigerator, and other

kindred appliances can be had in the country home as well as the city.

Their lack is a matter of standards rather than of necessity. They will

be introduced into thousands of rural homes as soon as their need is

realized.

The possibilities for making the rural home beautiful and attractive are

unequaled in the city for any except the very rich. It is not necessary

that the farmhouse shall be crowded for space; its outlook and

surroundings can be arranged to give it an æsthetic quality wholly

impossible in the ordinary city home. That this is true is proved by

many inexpensive farmhouses that are a delight to the eye. On the other

hand, it must be admitted that a large proportion of farmhouses are

lacking in both architectural attractiveness and environmental effect.

Not infrequently the barns and sheds are so placed as to crowd the house

into the background, and the yards for stock allowed to infringe upon

the domain of the garden and the lawn. All this can be easily remedied

and will be when the æsthetic taste of the dwellers on the farm comes to

be offended by the incongruous and ugly.

No stinting in the abundance of food is known on the farm. The farmer

supplies the tables of the world, and can himself live off the fat of

the land. Grains, vegetables, meats, eggs, butter, milk, and fruits are

his stock in trade. If there is any lack in the farmer's table, it is

due to carelessness in providing or preparing the food, and not to

forced economy.

While the farming population in general live well, yet many tables are

lacking in variety, especially in fruit and vegetables. Time and

interest are so taken up with the larger affairs of crops and stock,

that the garden goes by default in many instances. There is no market

readily at hand offering fruit and vegetables for sale as in the city,

and hence the farm table loses in attractiveness to the appetite and in

hygienic excellence. It is probable that the prosperous city workman

sits down to a better table than does the farmer, in spite of the great

advantage possessed by the latter.

The population of rural communities is necessarily scattering. The

nature of farming renders it impossible for people to herd together as

is the case in many other industries. This has its good side, but also

its bad. There are no rural slums for the breeding of poverty and crime;

but on the other hand, there is an isolation and monotony that tend to

become deadening in their effects on the individual. Stress and

over-strain does not all come from excitement and the rush of

competition; it may equally well originate in lack of variety and

unrelieved routine. How true this is is seen in the fact that insanity,

caused in this instance chiefly by the stress of monotony, prevails

among the farming people of frontier communities out of all proportion

to the normal ratio.

Farming is naturally the most healthful of the industrial occupations.

The work is for the greater part done in the open air and sunshine, and

possesses sufficient variety to be interesting. The rural population

constitutes the high vitality class of the nation, and must be

constantly drawn upon to supply the brain, brawn, and nerve for the work

of the city. The farmer is, on the whole, prosperous; he is therefore

hopeful and cheerful, and labors in good spirit. That so many farmers

and farmers' wives break down or age prematurely is due, not to the

inherent nature of their work, but to a lack of balance in the life of

the farm. It is not so much the work that kills, as the _continuity of

the work_ unrelieved by periods of rest and recreation. With the

opportunities highly favorable for the best type of healthful living, no

inconsiderable proportion of our agricultural population are shortening

their lives and lowering their efficiency by unnecessary over-strain and

failure to conform to the most fundamental and elementary laws of

hygienic living, especially with reference to the relief from labor that

comes through change and recreation.

The rural community affords few opportunities for social recreations and

amusements. Not only are the people widely separated from each other by

distance, but the work of the farm is exacting, and often requires all

the hours of the day not demanded for sleep. While the city offers many

opportunities for choice of recreation or amusement, the country affords

almost none. The city worker has his evenings, usually Saturday

afternoon, and all day Sunday free to use as he chooses. Such is not the

case on the farm; for after the day in the field the chores must be

done, and the stock cared for. And even on Sunday, the routine must be

carried out. The work of the farm has a tendency, therefore, to become

much of a grind, and certainly will become so unless some limit is set

to the exactions of farm labor on the time and strength of the worker.

It separates the individual from his fellows in the greater part of the

farm work and gives him little opportunity for social recreations or

play.

One of the best evidences that the conditions of life and work on the

farm need to be improved is the number of people who are leaving the

farm for the city. This movement has been especially rapid during the

last thirty years of our history, and has continued until approximately

one half our people now live in towns or cities. Not only is this loss

of agricultural population serious to farming itself, creating a

shortage of labor for the work of the farm, but it results in crowding

other occupations already too full. There is no doubt that we have too

many lawyers, doctors, merchants, clerks, and the like for the number of

workers engaged in fundamental productive vocations. Smaller farms,

cultivated intensively, would be a great economic advantage to the

country, and would take care of a far larger proportion of our people

than are now engaged in agriculture.

All students of social affairs agree that the movement of our people to

towns and cities should be checked and the tide turned the other way. So

important is the matter considered that a concerted national movement

has recently been undertaken to study the conditions of rural life with

a view to making it more attractive and so stopping the drain to the

city.

Middle-aged farmers move to the town or city for two principal reasons:

to educate their children and to escape from the monotony of rural

life. Young people desert the farm for the city for a variety of

reasons, prominent among which are a desire for better education, escape

from the monotony and grind of the farm life, and the opportunity for

the social advantages and recreations of the city. That the retired

farmer is usually disappointed and unhappy in his town home, and that

the youth often finds the glamour of the city soon to fade, is true. But

this does not solve the problem. The flux to the town or city still goes

on, and will continue to do so until the natural desire for social and

intellectual opportunities and for recreation and amusement is

adequately met in rural life.

Farming as an industry has already felt the effects of a new interest in

rural life. Probably no other industrial occupation has undergone such

rapid changes within the last generation as has agriculture. The rapid

advance in the value of land, the introduction of new forms of farm

machinery, and above all the application of science to the raising of

crops and stock, have almost reconstructed the work of the farm within a

decade.

Special "corn trains" and "dairy trains" have traversed nearly every

county in many States, teaching the farmers scientific methods.

Lecturers on scientific agriculture have found their way into many

communities. The Federal Government has encouraged in every way the

spread of information and the development of enthusiasm in agriculture.

The agricultural schools have given courses of instruction during the

winter to farmers. Farmers' institutes have been organized; corn-judging

and stock-judging contests have been held; prizes have been offered for

the best results in the raising of grains, vegetables, or stock. New

varieties of grains have been introduced, improved methods of

cultivation discovered, and means of enriching and conserving the soil

devised. Stock-breeding and the care of animals is rapidly becoming a

science. Farming bids fair soon to become one of the skilled

occupations.

Such, then, is a brief view of the situation of which the rural school

is a part. It ministers to the education of almost half of the American

people. This industrial group are engaged in the most fundamental of all

occupations, the one upon which all national welfare and progress

depend. They control a large part of the wealth of the country, the

capital invested in agriculture being more than double that invested in

manufactures. Agricultural wealth is rapidly increasing, both through

the rise in the value of land and through improved methods of farming.

The conditions of life on the farm have greatly improved during the last

decade. Rural telephones reach almost every home; free mail delivery is

being rapidly extended in almost every section of the country; the

automobile is coming to be a part of the equipment of many farms; and

the trolley is rapidly pushing out along the country roads.

Yet, in spite of these hopeful tendencies, the rural community shows

signs of deterioration in many places. Rural population is steadily

decreasing in proportion to the total aggregate of population. Interest

in education is at a low ebb, the farm children having educational

opportunities below those of any other class of our people. For, while

town and city schools have been improving until they show a high type of

efficiency, the rural school has barely held its own, or has, in many

places, even gone backward. The rural community confronts a puzzling

problem which is still far from solution.

Certain points of attack upon this problem are, however, perfectly clear

and obvious. _First_, educational facilities must be improved for rural

children, and their education be better adapted to farm life; _second_,

greater opportunities must be provided for recreation and social

intercourse for both young and old; _third_, the program of farm work

must be arranged to allow reasonable time for rest and recreation;

_fourth_, books, pictures, lectures, concerts, and entertainments must

be as accessible to the farm as to the town. These conditions must be

met, not because of the dictum of any person, but because they are a

fundamental demand of human nature, and must be reckoned with.

What, then, is the relation of the rural school to these problems of the

rural community? How can it be a factor in their solution? What are its

opportunities and responsibilities?

_The adjustment of the rural school to its problem_

As has been already stated, the problem of any type of school is to

serve its constituency. This is to be done through relating the

curriculum, the organization, and the teaching of the school to the

immediate interests and needs of the people dependent on the school for

their education. That the rural school has not yet fully adjusted itself

to its problem need hardly be argued.

It has as good material to work upon in the boys and girls from the farm

as any type of schools in the country. They come of good stock; they

are healthy and vigorous; and they are early trained to serious work and

responsibility. Yet a very large proportion of these children possess

hardly the rudiments of an education when they quit the rural school.

Many of them go to school for only a few months in the year, compulsory

education laws either being laxly enforced or else altogether lacking. A

very small percentage of the children of the farm ever complete eight

grades of schooling, and not a large proportion finish more than half of

this amount.

This leaves the child who has to depend on the rural school greatly

handicapped in education. He has but a doubtful proficiency in the

mechanics of reading, and has read but little. He knows the elements of

spelling, writing, and number, but has small skill in any of them. He

knows little of history or literature, less of music, nothing of art,

and has but a superficial smattering of science. Of matters relating to

his life and activities on the farm he has heard almost nothing. The

rural child is not illiterate, but he is too close to the border of

illiteracy for the demands of a twentieth-century civilization; it is

fair neither to the child nor to society.

The rural school seems in some way relatively to have lost ground in

our educational system. The grades of the town school have felt the

stimulus of the high school for which they are preparing, and have had

the care and supervision of competent administrators. The rural school

is isolated and detached, and has had no adequate administrative system

to care for its interests. No wonder, then, that certain grave faults in

adjustment have grown up. A few of the most obvious of these faults may

next claim our attention.

_The rural school is inadequate in its scope._ The children of the farm

have as much need for education and as much right to it as those who

live in towns and cities. Yet the rural school as a rule never attempts

to offer more than the eight grades of the elementary curriculum, and

seldom reaches this amount. It not infrequently happens that no pupils

are in attendance beyond the fifth or the sixth grade. This may be due

either to the small number of children in the district, or, more often,

to lack of interest to continue in school beyond the simplest elements

of reading, writing, and number. It is true that certain States, such as

Illinois and Wisconsin, have established a system of township high

schools, where secondary education equal to that to be had in the

cities is available to rural children. In other States a county high

school is maintained for the benefit of rural school graduates. In still

others, arrangements are made by which those who complete the eight

grades of rural schools are received into the town high schools with the

tuition paid by the rural school districts. The movement toward

secondary education supplied by the rural community for its children is

yet in its infancy, however, and has hardly touched the larger problem

of affording adequate opportunities for the education of farm children.

_The grading and organization of the rural school is haphazard and

faulty._ This is partly because of the small enrollment and irregular

attendance, and partly because of the inexperience and lack of

supervision of the teacher. Children are often found pursuing studies in

three or four different grades at the same time. And even more often

they omit altogether certain fundamental studies because they or their

parents have a notion that these studies are unnecessary. Sometimes,

owing to the small number in attendance, or to the poor classification,

several grades are entirely lacking, or else they are maintained for

only one or two pupils. On the other hand, classes are often found

following each other at an interval of only a few weeks, thereby

multiplying classes until the teacher is frequently attempting the

impossible task of teaching twenty-five or thirty classes a day.

Children differing in age by five or six years, and possessing

corresponding degrees of ability, are often found reciting in the same

classes. That efficient work is impossible under these conditions is too

obvious to require discussion.

_The rural schools possess inadequate buildings and equipment._ The

average rural schoolhouse consists of one room, with perhaps a small

hallway. The building is constructed without reference to architectural

effect, resembling nothing so much as a large box with a roof on it. It

is barren and uninviting as to its interior. The walls are often of

lumber painted some dull color, and dingy through years of use. The

windows are frequently dirty, and covered only by worn and tattered

shades. There is usually no attempt to decorate the room with pictures,

or to relieve its ugliness and monotony in any way. The library consists

of a few dozens of volumes, not always supplied with a case for their

protection. Of apparatus there is almost none. The work of the farm is

done with efficient modern equipment, the work of the farmer's school

with inadequate and antiquated equipment.

While the length of the school year is increasing in the rural

districts, _the term is yet much shorter than in town and city schools_.

Many communities have not more than six months of school, and few more

than eight. This shortage is rendered all the more serious by the

irregular attendance of the rural school children. A considerable amount

of absence on the part of the younger ones is unavoidable under present

conditions when the distance is great and the weather bad. After all

allowance is made for this fact, however, there is still an immense

amount of unnecessary waste of time through non-attendance. Many rural

schools show an average attendance for the year of not more than sixty

per cent of the enrollment. Going to school is not yet considered a

serious business by many of the rural patrons, and truant officers are

not so easily available in the country as in the city.

_In financial support the rural school has of necessity been behind the

city school._ Wealth is not piled up on a small area in agricultural

communities as is the case in the city. It would often require square

miles of land to equal in value certain city blocks. But making full

allowance for this difference, the farmers have not supported their

schools as well as is done by the patrons of town and city schools. The

school taxes for rural districts are much lower than in city districts,

in most instances not more than half as high. It is this conservatism in

expenditure that is responsible for many of the defects in the rural

school, and particularly for the relatively inefficient teaching that is

done. The rural teachers are the least educated, the least experienced,

and the most poorly paid of any class of our teachers. They consist

almost wholly of girls, a large proportion of whom are under twenty

years of age, and who continue teaching not more than a year or two. Not

only is this the case, but effective supervision of the teaching is

wholly impossible because of the large area assigned to the county or

district superintendent of rural schools. In no great industrial project

should we think of placing our youngest and most inexperienced workers

in the hardest and most important positions, and this without

supervision of their work.

The rural school has not, therefore, yet been adjusted to its problem.

It has a splendid field of work, but is not developing it. Our farming

population have capacity for education and need it, but they are not

securing it. There is plenty of money available for the support of the

rural school, but the school is not getting it. Enough well-equipped

teachers can be had for the rural schools, but the standards have not

yet required adequate preparation, nor the pay been sufficient to

warrant extensive expenditure for it.

In the rural school is found the most important and puzzling educational

problem of the present day. If our agricultural population are not to

fall behind other favored classes of industrial workers in intelligence

and preparation for the activities that are to engage them, the rural

school must begin working out a better adjustment to its problem. Its

curriculum must be broader and richer, and more closely related to the

life and interests of the farm. The organization of the school, both on

the intellectual and the social side, must bring it more closely into

touch with the interests and needs of the rural community. The support

and administration of rural education must be improved. Teachers for the

rural schools must be better educated and better paid, and their

teaching must be correspondingly more efficient. The following pages

will be given to a discussion of these problems of adjustment.

II

THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE RURAL SCHOOL

Every school possesses two types of organization: (1) an _intellectual_

organization involving the selection and arrangement of a curriculum,

and its presentation through instruction; and (2) a _social_

organization involving, on the one hand, the inter-relations of the

school and the community, and on the other the relations of the pupils

with each other and the teacher.

_The rural school and the community_

The rural school and community are not at present in vital touch with

each other. The community is not getting enough from the school toward

making life larger, happier, and more efficient; it is not giving enough

to the school either in helpful coöperation or financial support.

In general, it must be said that most of our rural people, the patrons

of the rural school, have not yet conceived education broadly. They

think of the school as having fulfilled its function when it has

supplied the simplest rudiments of reading, writing, and number. And,

naturally enough, the rural school has conceived its function in the

same narrow light; for it is controlled very completely by its patrons,

and a stream cannot rise higher than its source.

Because of its isolation, the pressing insistence of its toil, and the

monotony of its environment, the rural community is in constant danger

of intellectual and social stagnation. It has far more need that its

school shall be a stimulating, organizing, socializing force than has

the town or city. For the city has a dozen social centres entirely

outside the school: its public parks, theatres, clubs, churches, and

streets, even, serve to stimulate, entertain, and educate. But the rural

community is wanting in all these social forces; it is lacking in both

intellectual and social stimulus and variety.

One of the most pressing needs of country districts is a common

neighborhood center for both young and old, which shall stand as an

organizing, welding, vitalizing force, uniting the community on a basis

of common interests and activities. For while, as we have seen, the

rural population as a whole are markedly homogeneous, there is after

all but little of common acquaintanceship and mingling among them.

Thousands of rural families live lives of almost complete social

isolation and lack of contact with neighbors.

This condition is one of the gravest drawbacks to farm life. The social

impulse and the natural desire for recreation and amusement are as

strong in country boys and girls as in their city cousins, yet the

country offers young people few opportunities for satisfying these

impulses and desires. The normal social tendencies of youth are

altogether too strong to be crushed out by repression; they are too

valuable to be neglected; and they are too dangerous to be left to take

their own course wholly unguided. The rural community can never hope to

hold its boys and girls permanently to the life of the farm until it has

recognized the necessity for providing for the expression and

development of the spontaneous social impulses of youth.

Furthermore, the social monotony and lack of variety of the rural

community is a grave moral danger to its young people. It is a common

impression that the great city is strewn thick with snares and pitfalls

threatening to morals, but that the country is free from such

temptations. The public dance halls and cheap theaters of the city are

beyond doubt a great and constant menace to youthful ideals and purity.

But the country, going to the opposite extreme, with its almost utter

lack of recreation and amusement places, offers temptations no less

insidious and fatal.

The great difficulty at this point is that young people in rural

communities are thrown together almost wholly in isolated pairs instead

of in social groups; and that there are no objective resources of

amusement or entertainment to claim their interest and attention away

from themselves. They are freed from all chaperonage and the restraints

of the conventions obtaining in social groups at the very time in their

lives when these are most needed as steadying and controlling forces.

The result is that the country districts, which ought to be of all

places in the world the freest from temptation and peril to the morals

of our young people, are really more dangerous than the cities. The

sequel is found in the fact that a larger proportion of country girls

than of city girls go astray. Nor is the rural community more successful

in the morals of its boys than its girls. In other words, the lack of

opportunities for free and normal social experience, the consequent

ignorance of social conventions, and the absence of healthful amusement

and recreation, make the rural community a most unsafe place in which

to rear a family.

But the necessity for social recreation and amusement does not apply to

the young people alone. Their fathers and mothers are suffering from the

same limitations, though of course with entirely different results. The

danger here is that of premature aging and stagnation. While the toil of

the city worker is relieved by change and variety, his mind rested and

his mood enlivened by the stimulus from many lines of diversion, the

lives of the dwellers on the farm are constantly threatened by a deadly

sameness and monotony.

The indisputable tendency of farmers and their wives to age so rapidly,

and so early to fall into the ranks of "fogyism," is due far more to

lack of variety and recreation and to dearth of intellectual stimulus

than to hard labor, severe as this often is. Age is more than the flight

of the years, the stoop of the form, or the hardening of the arteries;

it is also the atrophy of the intellect and the fading away of the

emotions resulting from disuse. The farmer needs occasionally to have

something more exciting than the alternation of the day's work with the

nightly "chores." And his wife should now and then have an opportunity

to meet people other than those for whom she cooks and sews.

But what has all this to do with the social organization of the rural

school? Much. The country cannot have its theaters, parks, and crowded

thoroughfares like the city. But it needs and must have _some_ social

center, where its people may assemble for recreation, entertainment, and

intellectual growth and development. And what is more natural and

feasible than that the public school should be this center? Here is an

institution already belonging to the whole people, and set apart for the

intellectual training of the young. Why should it not also be made to

minister to the intellectual needs of their elders as well, and to the

social needs of all? _Why should not the public school building, now in

use but six hours a day for little more than half the year, be open at

all times when it can be helpful to any portion of the community?_

If young people are to develop naturally, if they are to make full use

of their social as well as their intellectual powers, if they are to be

satisfied with their surroundings, they must be provided with suitable

opportunities for social mingling and recreation in groups. This is

nature's way; there is no other way. The school might and should afford

this opportunity. There is not the least reason why the school building,

when it is adapted to this purpose, should not be the common

neighborhood meeting place for all sorts of young people's parties,

picnics, entertainments, athletic contests, and every other form of

amusement approved in the community.

Such a use of the school property would yield large returns to the

community for the small additional expense required. It would serve to

weld the school and community more closely together. It would vastly

change the attitude of the young toward the school. It would save much

of the dissatisfaction of young people with the life of the farm. It

would prove a great safeguard to youthful morals. It would lead the

community itself to a new sense of its duty toward the social life of

the young, and to a new concept of the school as a part of the community

organization. Finally, this broadened service of the school to its

community would have a reflex influence on the school itself, vitalizing

every department of its activities, and giving it a new vision of its

opportunities.

The first obstacle that will appear in the way of such a plan is the

inadequacy of the present type of country schoolhouse. And this is a

serious matter; for the barren, squalid little building of the present

day would never fit into such a project. But this type of schoolhouse

must go--is going. It is a hundred years behind our civilization, and

wholly inadequate to present needs. Passing for later discussion the

method by which these buildings are to be supplanted by better ones, let

us consider further the details of the plan of making the school the

neighborhood center.

First of all, each school must supply a larger area and a greater number

of people than at present. It is financially impossible to erect good

buildings to the number of our present schools. Nor are there pupils

enough in the small district as now organized to make a school, nor

people enough successfully to use the school as a neighborhood center.

Let each township, or perhaps somewhat smaller area, select a central,

well-adapted site and thereon erect a modern, well-equipped school

building. But this building must not be just the traditional schoolhouse

with its classrooms and rows of desks. For it is to be more than a place

where the children will study and recite lessons from books; it is to be

the place where all the people of the neighborhood, _old and young_,

will assemble for entertainment, amusement, and instruction. Here will

be held community picnics, social entertainments, young people's

parties, lectures, concerts, debating contests, agricultural courses for

the farmers, school programs, spreads and banquets, and whatever else

may belong to the common social and intellectual life of the community.

The modern rural school building will therefore be home-like as well as

school-like. In addition to its classrooms it will contain an assembly

room capable of seating several hundred people. The seating of this room

may be removable so that the floor can be cleared for social purposes or

the room used for a dining-room. One or two smaller rooms will be needed

for social functions, club and committee meetings. These rooms should be

made attractive with good furniture, rugs, couches, and pictures. The

building will contain well-equipped laboratories for manual training and

domestic science, the latter of which will be found serviceable in

connection with serving picnics, "spreads," and the like. The entire

building should be architecturally attractive, well heated and

ventilated, commodious, well furnished, and decorated with good

pictures. In it should be housed a library containing several thousand

well-selected books, besides magazines and newspapers. The laboratories

and equipment should be fully equal to those found in the town schools,

but should be adapted to the work of the rural school.

New Ideals in Rural Schools · 第 1 / 6 段