effect on a broader scale. During a recent campaign the students’
council in the Emerson School arranged a public meeting at which
prominent men of the city appeared and argued for their respective
parties. The meeting was entirely organized and managed by the pupils.
Such practical application seems far more real and instructive than the
usual play at self-government.
Student organization in the Gary schools grows out of real work.
Athletic teams and sports of various kinds are connected directly with
the gymnasium work and organized play. Glee clubs and orchestras grow
out of the music work. A monthly paper is conducted by the high-school
pupils as part of their English work, and printed by them in the school
printing-shop. There are, strictly speaking, no “extra-curricular
activities” in the Gary schools. The curriculum deliberately provides
for all wholesome activities, and the student interests grow out of it.
Problems of “fraternities” and of the control of school athletics, which
confront so many schools, are thus avoided. The students do not get into
the habit of thinking of their clubs and teams as something outside of
the school community life.
An example of how spontaneous organization may spring up is that of the
boys’ ninth-grade English class last year in the Emerson School, which
formed itself into the Emerson Improvement Association. It tries to
suggest civic improvements for the school community, and the speaking
and writing necessary to the conducting of the affairs of the
organization provide the basis for the English work.
[Illustration:
DRAWING FROM A MODEL AT THE EMERSON SCHOOL
Notice frieze on wall designed and painted by the children themselves
]
This illustrates the way that effort is made to take advantage of all
the spontaneity and initiative which pupils display in organization. The
moral effects of this active form of education are clearly great.
Professor Dewey thinks it is a mistake to consider that an interesting
and free school “makes things too easy for the child.” In the ideal
school the interests and needs of the child are identical. It is a
mistake, he says, to think that interesting things are necessarily easy.
They may be hard, but the interest overcomes the difficulty, and it is
in the overcoming that the moral value lies. Irksome tasks may be
valuable, but it is not in their irksomeness that their value lies. Work
that appeals to pupils as worth while, that holds out the promise of
resulting in something to their own or the school’s interests, involves
just as much persistence and concentration as work given by the sternest
advocate of disciplinary drill.
Most of the visitors to the Gary schools bear witness to the excellent
tone of the pupils, “the free and natural way,” to quote one
authoritative teacher, “in which pupils govern themselves without the
rigorous discipline found in other systems.” Dr. Harlan Updegraff, of
the Federal Bureau of Education, says, “The pupils of the Gary schools
seem to display greater self-control, more self-respect, and more
thoughtful consideration for others than the pupils of the same age in
most of the better school systems of to-day. I am inclined to think that
it comes largely from their games and play, but a part of it is due to
the organization of the school, and to the practices that have evolved
in its administration. No child in Gary has a single teacher who is the
object of his hero-worship, upon whom he tends to become more or less
dependent, or his arch-enemy whom he detests with a growing hatred. The
Gary pupil has several teachers, each of whom affects him in a different
way. He becomes more conscious of his individuality in this way, and
learns to determine for himself what he should do and become. Under such
a system the influence of fellow pupils becomes relatively stronger than
in the ordinary school. It is, therefore, highly important that care be
taken to further the development of right ideals in the student body.
Organized play has its great value here. Self-control, coöperation,
courage, self-respect, consideration for others, and a sense of justice
have been developed in the Gary youth to a noticeable degree, largely,
it seems to me, through the spirit that prevails in consequence of the
administration of the physical training department. Pupils who love
their school better than the streets, who have a good physical tone
through their play and physical exercises, and who have good
self-control and independence of thought, must naturally have a more
favorable attitude toward school work.”
Such a school will evidently train character as a by-product.
Self-activity, self or coöperative instruction, freedom of movement,
_camaraderie_ with teachers, interesting and varied work, study, and
play, a sense of what the school is doing, social introspection,—all
combine to give an admirable moral training and to produce those
desirable intellectual and moral qualities that the world most needs
to-day. Not obedience but self-reliance does such a school cultivate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII
CRITICISMS AND EVALUATIONS
THE criticisms directed against the Gary schools by superintendents and
teachers are criticisms rather of the whole educational philosophy
behind the institution than objections to the detailed working-out of
the philosophy. Those who follow Professor Dewey’s philosophy find in
the Gary schools—as Professor Dewey does himself—the most complete and
admirable application yet attempted, a synthesis of the best aspects of
the progressive “schools of to-morrow.”
Concrete criticisms almost all concern the alleged additional burdens
laid upon the public, the teacher, and the pupil. As far as the public
goes, the fact has been brought out that the Gary school is actually a
cheaper kind of a school than is the ordinary public school, even when
run in the most economical and scientific manner. The charge that the
Gary schools are aided by private corporation enterprise has already
been discussed. The facts are, of course, that the schools are all
supported in the usual way, by local and state appropriations. The city
of Gary is not overtaxed to support its schools, neither does the United
States Steel Corporation pay more than its proportionate share of the
local taxes. Nor is there any truth in the impression that the operation
of the Gary plan is confined to the two larger school plants of the
city. Although these two plants accommodate three quarters of the
children of the city, the Gary plan is in operation in all the schools.
In the two larger schools, Emerson and Froebel, the academic work
extends from the kindergarten through all twelve grades. In the other
schools there are no high-school students. Four of the other schools
have eight grades, one has six, one is only for children in the
kindergarten and first two grades. These schools have no high-school
department because they are too small and the schools with high-school
departments are easily accessible. All the schools have real shopwork,
though in not all of them is the apprentice-repair feature possible. All
the schools have play and recreation facilities. The smaller schools
lack swimming-pools, but the children use the well-equipped Y.M.C.A. All
the schools have “auditorium,” science, music, and expression work. All
the schools either contain a branch of the public library or else use
the main building near by. All the schools have an eight-hour day.
The charge that the Gary schools are too costly for imitation cannot be
sustained. We have seen the ingenious efforts of the various features of
the Gary plans to reduce costs, and there is a wealth of figures to show
in detail the greater economy of the Gary plan. Superintendent Wirt has
made an estimate that for an outlay of $6,000,000, “part-time” could be
wholly abolished in the New York City public schools by an adoption of
the Gary plan. The requisition of the board of superintendents in 1914
was for an appropriation of $40,000,000, simply for new buildings, which
would require large sums for operation and maintenance and lack the
equipments of the Gary plan. By the multiple use of facilities,
Superintendent Wirt has shown that the number of school plants in New
York could actually be reduced and yet the part-time of 132,000 children
abolished. At the same time that this was done, the school day would
actually be increased and the facilities more than doubled. A comparison
between the _per-capita_ costs of instruction in the Gary and New York
City schools, figured in average daily attendance for 1913-14, has been
made by Mrs. Alice Barrows-Fernandez. (The Jefferson School in Gary is
used for the comparison because it is more like the elementary schools
in New York than any other school in Gary.)
_Pupil per-capita cost for Jefferson School, $31.72
Gary_, including instruction and supplies
_Pupil per-capita cost for elementary schools 40.24
in New York City_, including instruction
and supplies
_Pupil per-capita cost for the two Gary
schools which have kindergarten, elementary
school, and full vocational shops_—
Emerson, with one third of the school 56.12
high-school pupils
Froebel, with twelve per cent high-school 32.85
pupils
_Pupil per-capita cost in New York City_—
Elementary schools 40.24
High schools 104.74
Vocational schools for boys 86.48
Vocational schools for girls 142.32
“In other words,” says Mrs. Barrows-Fernandez in her report, “in the
Froebel School, which is typical of the average school because only
twelve per cent of its pupils are in high school, twelve years in
elementary school and high school costs the city for one pupil twelve
times $32.85, or $394.20. In New York, eight years in elementary school
costs the city for one student eight times $40.24, or $329.92, and four
years in high school costs four times $104.74, or $418.96; or for the
twelve years, $748.88. In Gary for the $394.20, a student could also get
more vocational training than is given in a separate trade school. The
New York boy would get none of this in the elementary school. Even if we
make allowances for the fact that the average salary of teachers in
elementary schools and high schools in New York City is one third higher
than in Gary, it is obvious that the balance of economy is immensely in
favor of Gary as against a large typical city school system operated on
the conventional lines.”
It seems established that the Gary plan imposes no burdens upon the
public, either in Gary or in the communities who imitate the plan, but
rather provides increased facilities at reduced cost, besides immense
facilities for adults. As for the burden upon the teacher, much has been
said to the effect that the Gary plan is unpopular among teachers
because of the extra work it entails. In connection with this criticism,
it must be remembered that the Gary plan postulates an educational
philosophy different from that of the ordinary public schools. Teachers
trained in schools managed with rigid administrative and disciplinary
methods naturally find adjustment difficult in a system which repeatedly
calls upon them for initiative, alters their relations to their pupils,
and requires a more practical attitude of “application” toward the
subject-matter of instruction. Experience seems to show that many
teachers who at first found this adjustment burdensome have later come
to prefer the Gary plan. One teacher with a fine scholastic training,
who had taught for many years under the traditional form of
organization, is quoted by Dean Burris as saying, “I did not like it
when I came here a year ago, but I begin to like it and see what it is
all about, so I am going to stay.”
This attitude would seem to be typical of the intelligent teacher who
comes to appreciate what it is all about and the valuable educational
advantages which the system provides for the teacher herself. And
although the problem of securing teachers has been somewhat difficult in
Gary, owing to the newness of the town, the large factory population,
and the relative absence of organized social life, most visitors are
impressed by the unusual personal caliber of the head teachers.
It is difficult to see where the Gary plan involves extra burdens for
teachers. The teaching period is only four hours a day, with an hour for
“auditorium” and an hour for “application.” This is certainly no more
exacting than the five-hour teaching day of the ordinary teacher. All
“home work” and “paper work,” moreover, is supposed to be done by the
Gary teacher during school hours, so that her school day is over when
the bell rings. This makes her real school day actually shorter than
that of the teacher in the ordinary school, whose afternoons and
evenings must often be spent in correcting papers, etc. The Gary teacher
is supposed to have leisure and to behave in school and out of school as
a good citizen actively interested in the community welfare. The
Saturday school work, for which the teachers are called upon in turn, is
paid for at a rate of one dollar an hour. The care and work involved in
the “register-teacher” plan is certainly offset by its valuable
educational value for the teacher herself.
It should be clear that the various features of the Gary plan tend to
relieve the teacher of burdens and particularly of nervous strain. The
teaching of special subjects by special teachers relieves the grade
teacher of the obligation of teaching, under the exacting direction of
supervisors, subjects like music and drawing with which she may be
little acquainted. The departmentalizing of subjects down through the
lower grades gives a breadth to the teachers’ work, and enables them to
concentrate on the subjects which interest them, rather than diffuse
their attention among many. The absence of uniform standards, the
absence of formal term examinations for which a whole class must be
prepared, the promotion of children by subjects rather than whole
classes, as well as the division of grades according to rate of
progress,—all this makes for a great saving in the teacher’s nervous
energy. She does not have the strain of passing her whole class in every
subject, of finishing her course on schedule time, of cramming for
examinations. She has some freedom in the division of her time and a
voice in the making of the course and curriculum. The less experienced
teacher has in her classroom the assistance and advice of the senior
teacher, as well as of the head teacher of her subjects in the head
school. Teachers are not rivals, but colleagues as in a college faculty.
The freer methods of discipline are much to the teacher’s advantage.
When the ideal is no longer to keep the classroom in a rigid military
silence, a large part of the teacher’s energy may go into teaching which
formerly went into the maintenance of discipline. Where “interest” and
“application” and “learning by doing” are the keynotes, and where every
one—teacher and pupil alike—is at some time in the course both teaching
some one and learning from some one, the teacher is no longer interested
in “making the child obey,” or “commanding his respect.” No official
gulf is set between teachers and pupils. It is discipline that wears out
most teachers,—and children too,—and a greater flexibility makes for the
lessening of nervous strain on both.
The custom of “helpers and observers,” the emphasis on discussion rather
than formal recitation, even take a certain amount of actual teaching
out of the hands of the teachers. The teacher, as in the Montessori
method, becomes the guide and mentor rather than direct preceptor. She
is no longer so much concerned with predigesting subject-matter and
presenting it in logical form to the pupil, only to draw it from him
again in recitation and written examination. She is rather concerned
with directing the large amount of practical work which the Gary child
does in every course, and in devising methods of “application,” or in
turning the work into practical value for the school community. Those
classes where the “helper and observer” system obtains are, to a large
degree, self-instructing. The older child tells the younger what he is
doing in shop or laboratory, etc., and when the younger child comes to
take up the work, he is already familiar with materials and apparatus
and the significance of the course. Raw new classes thus do not have to
be constantly broken in by the teacher. This means a very large saving
of labor for the teacher, while it makes for the more thorough
understanding on the part of the pupil. In the physical education work
and in the organized play, the older pupils are enlisted as assistants
to the teachers. Superintendent Wirt’s new plans involve the employment
throughout the different departments as teachers’ assistants of a class
of older pupils, selected for their interest and ability. Such work not
only gives the student the best possible training for developing
leadership, initiative, and the ability to assume responsibility, but it
also relieves the teachers and makes possible many small classes without
extra teachers and without extra rooms.
From the teachers’ point of view, then, the numerous ways in which the
Gary plan relieves the nervous strain and actual responsibility of
teaching, and removes the pressure of outside work, more than compensate
for the slightly longer actual time during which the teacher must be in
the school plant. And since this longer time means increased salary, it
is clear that the teacher under the Gary plan is the gainer in every
direction.
The criticisms of the Gary plan on the ground that the long school day
and varied curriculum overload the pupil can scarcely be sustained in
view of the fact that the “school day” is not merely a lengthening of
the ordinary public school day, but an absorbing, in healthful
activities of play, exercise and manual work, of time which would
otherwise be spent in demoralizing street and alley or in idleness at
home. We have seen that this additional activity is not gained at the
expense of the academic studies, but comes from giving the children
interesting things to do in the surplus hours in which they are usually
left to take care of themselves. The freedom of the Gary schools, and
the constant passing back and forth between school and home, church,
etc., does not seem to make for truancy. The percentage of attendance in
November, 1914, was for boys 92.9, for girls, 91.6,—a remarkable record
when it is considered that boy truancy in most city schools is much the
greater. For the year 1913-14 the percentage of attendance was for boys
89.5, for girls, 89.2.
The criticism of the Gary school on the ground that the shopwork either
involves the risk of exploiting the pupil, or else introduces him to
manual activity at too early an age, ignores the fact that the manual
work is really unspecialized and is introduced so gradually into the
child’s life that it is scarcely felt as work. “Play” and “work” are
merged in “interesting activity,” and almost unconsciously the child
finds himself absorbed in work which may be his vocation later on.
Whether it is to be his vocation or not, the Gary school believes that
such work is a good thing in the education of all children. Many
educators believe that the novel form of shopwork in the Gary school
offers a solution for the problems of industrial training. There is
great risk, in schools where shopwork is introduced apart from the
academic work, as in special technical high schools, of an undemocratic
and invidious distinction between the manual worker and the brain
worker. In plans of organization, such as the Ettinger plan in New York
City, with a preliminary course of “prevocational training,” in which
the prospective industrial pupil in the seventh and eighth grades
discovers by hasty experimentation which trade his aptitudes fit him to
pursue, there is great danger that the vocational work will be left
unassimilated to the rest of the school work and the child trained into
a narrow specialist. Such “vocational training” deserves all the
criticism that has been directed against it by the opponents of a too
“utilitarian” education. The Gary type of vocational training keeps the
industrial work constantly in touch with the other activities, and makes
it a really “cultural” branch of the school community work. And because
the children lay their foundations of skill and interest so early and
work at real work under real workmen, their training from a practical
point of view is as good as, if not better than, the special trade
school is likely to give them. More shops are actually supported in the
Gary school than even the most elaborate special trade school can afford
to provide. The correlation of day courses with evening continuation
courses, the great attention to science, the emphasis on the social and
communal bearing of all activities,—all this means a higher type of
vocational training than has been worked out generally in the public
school. If he is intelligent, he will be better qualified for skilled
work than the more narrowly trained worker. “This is the age,” says
Superintendent Wirt, “of the engineer, of machinery, and of big
business. The school business enterprises offer a type of industrial and
commercial education facilities ... adapted to modern industry and
business. There are big business problems and machinery problems in the
school.” These problems evolved in the life of a school community give
an education, he holds, superior to what can be given even in schools
narrowly devoted to shop-training. And it can give the training in small
groups or even to individuals, where the special school has to give
instruction in large classes to make it pay at all. As Mrs.
Barrows-Fernandez puts it, “If you believe that vocational education is
confined to specific training for a trade, and that this must be carried
on in a separate trade school, and that general education has no
relation to it except as it may add a fringe of culture, then you will
think that there is no vocational education in Gary. But, on the other
hand, if you belong to the group that believes that what children under
sixteen need in the way of vocational work is not specialized trade
training on top of an inadequate elementary-school education, but
fundamental industrial training closely related to the science and
academic work, and made real and natural because it is one of the many
activities of the whole school,—then you will come away from Gary
feeling that the vocational work there represents the soundest point of
view and the best practical accomplishment in vocational work for
children under sixteen that can be found anywhere in the country.”
In New York City, where an extended experimentation is being carried on
with the Gary plan, considerable controversy is said to have arisen over
the provision of the Gary scheme which permits outside institutions,
including churches, to coöperate with the school and take children for a
few hours a week for any special work, amusement, or instruction which
the schools cannot give. The fear was expressed there that this
provision would mean the entering wedge of religion into the public
school.