Out of a total population of 91,972,266 in the United States there
were, in 1910, 17,506,175 pupils enrolled. Few nations can show such a
high percentage of school students. The total number of teachers was
506,040. Educational efficiency on such a scale can be maintained only
by a large expenditure of money, and from the statistics of education I
find that the sum received from tuition fees was $14,687,192 gold, from
productive funds $11,592,113 gold, and from the United States
Government $4,607,298 gold, making a total of $70,667,865 gold.[1] I
question whether any other nation can produce such an excellent example
in the cause of education.
In every state there are very many schools, both public and private.
There are public schools in every town, and even the smallest village
has its school, while in some agricultural states, such as Wyoming,
where the population is very scattered, teachers are provided by the
government to teach in the farmers' homes wherever three or four
children can be gathered together. The public schools are free and
open to all, but in some towns in the Southern States special schools
are provided for the colored people. Having such facilities for
gaining knowledge, it naturally follows that the Americans, as a whole,
are an educated people. By this I mean the native American, not the
recent immigrants and negroes, but even as regards the latter a
reservation should be made, for some of the negroes, such as Booker T.
Washington and others, have become eminent through their learning and
educational work.
The distinguishing feature of the school system is that it is cheap and
comprehensive. In the primary and high schools the boys and girls,
whether they come from the wealthy or aristocratic families, or from
more straitened homes, are all studying together in the same
class-room, and it is known that a President sent his son to study in a
public school. There is, therefore, no excuse for even the poorest man
in America being an illiterate. If he wishes he can obtain a degree in
a university without difficulty. Many of the state universities admit
the children of citizens of the state free, while their tuition fees
for outsiders are exceptionally low, so that it is within the power of
the man of the most moderate means to give his son a university
education. Many of the college or university students, in order to
enable them to go through their courses of study, do outside jobs after
their lecture hours, and perform manual, or even menial work, during
the vacations. I frequently met such students in summer resorts acting
as hotel waiters and found them clean, attentive, and reliable. During
a visit to Harvard University, President Eliot took me to see the
dining-hall. Many students were taking their lunch at the time. I
noticed that the waiters were an unusually clean set of young men, and
upon inquiry was informed that they were students of the University,
and that when a waiter was wanted many students applied, as the poorer
students were glad to avail themselves of the opportunity to earn some
money.
Honest labor, though menial, is not considered degrading, and no
American of education and refinement is above doing it. In some of the
states in the East, owing to the scarcity of servants, families do
their own cooking and other household work. Some few years ago I was
on a visit to Ashburnham, Massachusetts, and was surprised to find that
my hostess not only did the cooking but also cleaned my room. I was
invited to a formal luncheon by a professor, and to my astonishment his
two daughters waited at the table. This is not unlike what occurs in
some parts of China in the interior. The members of families, although
in good circumstances, do their own household work. In some towns, not
far from Canton, wealthy farmers and country gentlemen hire out their
sons as menials, so that these youngsters, when they have grown up,
shall know the value of money and not squander the family wealth. I
cite a typical case of a millionaire who had only one son. In order to
make him appreciate the worth of money he took his boy to Canton, and
allowed him to be hired out as an ordinary servant. The boy was
ordered by his master to look after a certain part of the house, and
also to take care of a little garden. One day he carelessly broke a
valuable gold-fish jar much prized by the family. His master naturally
became enraged and reproached him for his negligence. The young man
coolly told him that if he would come to his father's house he could
replace the broken vessel by making his own selection from his father's
collection of gold-fish jars. This irritated the master, who thought
that the lad was adding insult to injury. However, ultimately, his
master was persuaded to go with him to his father's house, and to his
great astonishment he found there many gold-fish jars which were more
precious than that which the lad had broken. Household work, however
mean it may be, is not considered degrading in China, but the
difference between China and America is that in America the people are
compelled to do it from necessity, while in China it is resorted to as
a matter of policy to make the young men realize the value of money,
and not spend it wastefully.
The curriculum prescribed in the schools covers a wide range of
subjects, and the graduates are well equipped to face the battle of
life. Not only are drawing, sketching and other fine arts taught, but
also carpentry and other trades. I was once shown a fairly made box
which was the product of a very small boy. I did not at first perceive
the use of teaching a boy to do such work in school, but I learned that
its object was to instruct the pupil how to think and arrange his
materials systematically.
With the exception of those schools established by Christian societies,
or endowed by religious sects, all educational institutions, especially
those established by the state authorities, are secular. Religion is
not taught. Neither the Bible nor any other religious work is used in
the schoolroom. The presidents, professors, and tutors may be strict
churchmen, or very religious people, but, as a rule, they are not
permitted to inculcate their religious views on the students. The
minds of the young are most susceptible, and if no moral principles are
impressed upon them at school or college they are apt to go astray. It
should be remembered that men of education without moral principles are
like a ship without an anchor. Ignorant and illiterate people infringe
the law because they do not know any better, and their acts of
depredation are clumsy and can be easily found out, but when men of
education commit crimes these are so skilfully planned and executed
that it is difficult for the police to unravel and detect them. It has
been known that frauds and forgeries perpetrated by such unscrupulous
persons were so cleverly designed that they bore the evidence of
superior education, and almost of genius. The more a man is educated
the more is it necessary, for the welfare of the state, to instruct him
how to make a proper use of his talents: Education is like a
double-edged sword. It may be turned to dangerous usages if it is not
properly handled.
As there is no established church in the United States, and in view of
the numberless different sects, it is not advisable to permit any
particular phase of religion to be taught. But why not consent to
allow the cardinal principles of morality to be taught in every school?
The following may serve as examples:
(1) Honesty is the best policy.
(2) Honor thy father and thy mother.
(3) Universal brotherhood.
(4) Love of mankind.
(5) Charity to all.
(6) Purity in thought and action.
(7) Pure food makes a pure body.
(8) Happiness consists of health and a pure conscience.
(9) Live and let live.
(10) Respect a man for his virtues, not for his money or position.
(11) 'Fiat justitia, ruat coelum' (Let justice be done,
though the Heavens should fall).
(12) Bear no malice against anyone.
(13) Be equitable and just to all men.
(14) Liberty and freedom but not license.
(15) Do not unto others what ye would not that others should do unto
you.
I have jotted down the above just as they occurred to me while writing.
They can easily be amplified, and be made the basis of an ethical
instruction in all the schools. In any case, every nation should aim
at the highest standard of morals.
Co-education in the United States is not so unpopular as in some other
countries, and it is increasing in favor. In all the primary schools,
and in most of the high schools, boys and girls study in the same
class-room, and girls are admitted as students even in some colleges
and universities. This principle of admitting the fair sex to equal
educational privileges is slowly but surely being recognized
everywhere. In some universities the authorities have gone half-way;
lectures are given to the girl students in separate rooms, or separate
buildings, or halls, are provided for the girl students. With regard
to the teaching staff, in the primary schools nearly all the teachers
are women, and in the high schools their number is at least half, if
not more. In some of the universities there are lady professors or
tutors. It goes without saying that girls have the natural talent for
learning everything that boys can learn. The objections raised by the
opponents of co-education seem to rest chiefly upon the danger of the
intellectual or physical overstrain of girls during adolescence, and
upon the unequal rate of development of boys and girls during the
secondary school period. It is further alleged that in mixed schools
the curriculum is so prescribed that the girls' course of study is more
or less adapted to that of the boys, with the result that it cannot
have the artistic and domestic character which is suitable for the
majority of girls; but why should not the curriculum be arranged in
such a way as to suit both sexes? Is it not good for both to learn the
same subjects? That which is good for a boy to learn is it not equally
advisable for a girl to know, and vice versa? Will not such a policy
create mutual sympathy between the sexes? The opponents of the
co-education policy assert that it makes the girls masculine, and that
it has a tendency to make the boys a little feminine. It cannot,
however, be doubted that the system reduces the cost of education, such
as the duplication of the teaching staff, laboratories, libraries, and
other equipment.
It is objected that the system has done more than anything else to rob
marriage of its attractions, by divesting man of most of his old-time
glamour and romance. It is claimed that this early contact with the
other sex, on a footing of equality, and the manner in which the
majority of the girl students more than maintain their intellectual
standing with the boys, has tended to produce that contempt of the
much-vaunted superiority of man, that, as a rule, is reserved for those
post-nuptial discoveries which make marriage such an interesting
venture. But they forget that marriages are frequently contracted in
places where girls and boys are taught together, and where they have
had ample opportunities for knowing each other intimately, and that
experience proves that such marriages are happy and lasting unions. It
is interesting to observe, however, that as the number of educational
institutions has increased, the number of unmarried women has been
correspondingly augmented. It is easy to explain this by the fact that
a large number of women earn their own livelihood by going into
business and the professions. As they become more educated, and are
allowed to participate in many of the same privileges as men, it is
only natural that they should show their independence by remaining
single. The same thing would occur in any country, and we may expect a
like state of things in China as greater facilities for instruction are
afforded to women. I do not feel alarmed at the prospect; indeed, I
would welcome it if I could see my country-women acting as
independently and as orderly as their American sisters.
The games and sports sanctioned and encouraged in schools and
universities are useful, in that they afford diversion of the pupils'
minds from their school work. They should not, however, be indulged in
in such a way as to interfere with their studies. Take, as an example,
boat racing; several months of preparation are necessary before the
event takes place, and during a great portion of this time the students
do not think much of their studies; they are all mad with excitement.
The contest between the two rival parties is very keen; they have but
one thought, and that is to win the race. In this way, at least so it
seems to me, the main object of recreation is entirely lost sight of;
it becomes no longer an amusement, but labor and work. I am told that
the coxswain and the other members of the boat race generally have to
take a long rest when the race is over, which clearly shows that they
have been overworking. I favor all innocent games and sports which
mean recreation and diversion, but if it be thought that without a
contest games would lose their relish and their fun, then I would
suggest that the aim should be the exhibition of a perfect body and
absolute health. Let the students, when they come to the recreation
ground, indulge in any sport they please, but make them feel that it is
"bad form" to overstrain, or do anything which, even temporarily, mars
the perfect working of their physical organisms. Let each student so
train himself as to become healthy and strong both physically and
mentally, and the one who, through reasonable and wholesome exercises,
is able to present himself in the most perfect health should be awarded
the highest prize.
[1] There appears to be $39,781,262 missing from these figures.
Possibly Wu Tingfang's figures are incorrect, but it seems more likely
that he neglected to include expenditures by state and local
governments.--A. R. L., 1996.