of superintendents, district superintendents, directors of special branches, board of examiners; Frank M. McMurry, professor of elementary education, Teachers College, Columbia University-Teachers and teaching in the elementary schools, together with the supervision of their schools by the principals, and elementary school course of study; Jesse D. Burke, director of the Bureau of Municipal Research, PhiladelphiaCompulsory attendance service; Herman Schneider, dean of the college of engineering, University of Cincinnati-Vocational schools; Frank W. Ballou, director of school affiliation and assistant professor of education, University of Cincinnati-High schools, organization and administration; Ernest C. Moore, professor of education, Yale University-Board of education and local school boards; Calvin O. Davis, assistant professor of education, University of Michigan, and inspector of high schools-Highschool courses of study (except commercial courses); Frank V. Thompson, assistant superintendent of schools, Boston, Mass.-High school of commerce, commercial high school, and commercial courses in high schools; Henry H. Goddard, director department of psychological research, New Jersey Training School for Feeble-Minded Boys and Girls-Ungraded classes; Stuart A. Courtis, head of department of science and mathematics, Detroit Home and Day School, Detroit-The Courtis tests in arithmetic for about 30,000 children in the 4A-8B grades of the elementary schools and in at least one high school. The committee's work included also an inquiry into the condition of the school plant and the business system and accounts of the board of education. The following were the specialists and their respective studies: William H. West, chartered accountant-Organization of the office of the secretary, and the organization and work of the bureau of audit and accounts, department of education; Marvyn Scudder, accountant-Investigation of complaints and the bureau of supplies of the board of education; E. W. Stewart, accountant-Janitorial compensation, and accounting methods of the bureau of supplies; W. A. Averill, investigator of the Bureau of Municipal Research-Organization and filing methods of the office of the city superintendent and board of associate city superintendents; Charles G. Armstrong, consulting engineer-The condition and efficiency of public-school buildings; Dr. Frederic C. Howe, director of the People's Institute The degree of utilization of the school buildings and plants; Prof. Charles Baskerville and Prof. C. E. H. Winslow, of the College of the City of New York-The air of New York City schools; joint investigation by Charles G. Armstrong and Francis J. Armstrong, consulting engineers, and William J. Knox, chemical engineer-The quality of air supplied to classrooms, and on the Baskerville-Winslow report; Charles G. Armstrong and Francis J. Armstrong-Delays in the location, design, and construction of New York public schools. The committee on inquiry filed with the board of estimate and apportionment on October 1, 1912, a special report stating the reasons for recommending the rejection of the report of Ernest C. Moore (vol. 3, 457–604).1 In lieu of this report the committee secured the services of the following specialists on the subjects named: Frank J. Goodnow, professor of administrative law, Columbia University, and Frederic C. Howe, director of the People's Institute-Joint report on the organization, status, and proceedings of the department of education, city of New York. 1 With the omission of the last chapter, the rejected report was printed in the (N. Y.) City Record. It has been published in full, with the title "How New York City Administers its Schools: A Constructive Study," World Book Co., 1913, as the first volume of the School Efficiency Series, edited by Prof. Hanus. The final and complete report of all the investigations under the committee of school inquiry was published in 1913. It comprises three volumes aggregating 2,573 pages. The total number of days' work on both the educational and the business and administrative branches aggregated 6,567.37 days. The total cost of the investigations was $95,131. (Including items not listed in the report (vol.1, p. 64), it is said the final cost aggregated about $125,000.) The method and scope of the educational investigation as summarized by Prof. Hanus (vol. 1, pp. 132-133) were based upon the following principles, stated in the plan adopted and approved by the committee on July 10, 1912: 1. The scope of the inquiry as a whole, and in its details, must be restricted to what is reasonable to expect can be accomplished in the time and with the staff at our disposal. (This principle does not exclude, however, the definition or statement of problems to be solved by further investigation. Such problems are, indeed, perennial; and the report states many of them and suggests the procedure for their progressive solution). 2. Within the limits thus set we should endeavor to obtain as satisfactory answers as possible to the following questions: (a) What instruction does the public school system of New York City provide, and is this instruction commensurate with the educational needs of the city in respect to (1) scope (2) quality (3) adjustment to individual needs (4) adjustment to social (including vocational) needs? (b) (1) Do the technical administration and supervision show professional insight and helpful leadership within and without the school system? (2) Do they actively encourage and promote the professional growth and practical efficiency of the teaching force? (c) Is the admission of competent and otherwise satisfactory new members of the teaching and supervisory staff properly safeguarded? (d) Are the general organization and administration of the school system such as to promote the satisfactory discharge of the city's educational responsibility by the board of education and the local school boards? (e) Further and in general: (1) Do initiative and cooperation under leadership, or do their opposites-passive conformity to instruction from above on the part of teachers, bureaucratic and chiefly authoritative control by the supervisory staff, and purely authoritative or arbitrary general direction and control by the board of educationprevail throughout the school system, and are the results of educational experience so gathered and used as to become effective guides for future effort? (2) Is there satisfactory provision for disinterested and adequate appraisal of results achieved, including experimental tests, to confirm or refute educational opinion within and without the school system? As stated in the introduction to the report, the purpose of the inquiry was constructive throughout. We have not failed to appreciate the merits of the school system, and they are many; but since our chief purpose was constructive criticism, we have devoted ourselves more particularly to such defects as we have been able to point out, and to suggestions and recommendations for removing or minimizing them. The method of the inquiry has been statistical, inspectorial (personal inspection by members of the staff), comparative (comparisons of New York City's schools and school system with those of other cities), and experimental so far as reliable experimental or scientific methods are available in education and could be employed; and we have made much use of conferences with officials and members of the teaching and supervisory staff. This method throughout aimed to ascertain the facts we needed for the purpose in hand, and to verify the facts and conclusions based on them so far as our time and opportunity permitted. We have been particularly careful not to make statements unsupported by facts where facts were needed; and we consistently objected, in spite of considerable pressure from without during the first months of the inquiry, to issue statements of findings, because we had not yet done all we could to assure ourselves of their validity. Moreover, we had no interest in setting forth defects in the school system until we were ready to make the constructive suggestions that we aimed at, and such suggestions (recommendations) could only be ready near or at the end of our work. Our method also aimed at the cooperation of officers of the board of education and of the supervisory and teaching force in getting facts and in reaching and verifying conclusions; and, as stated in the introduction to the report, it is a pleasure to say that the attitude of the entire staff was, throughout the period of the inquiry, courteous, responsive, and helpful. The scope of both the educational and administrative investigations is briefly indicated above in the list of special topics and problems assigned to the specialists, respectively. The findings and recommendations are extensively distributed throughout the entire report. In their most condensed statements these aggregate 175 pages, including the summary of Prof. Hanus "in the report as a whole." The committee on school inquiry itself— summarized the main conclusions and constructive suggestions upon which its investigators are in general accord. In presenting this summary the committee wishes it clearly understood that it is not in a position to pass final judgment upon the worth of those recommendations which deal with problems requiring treatment at the hands of those qualified by academic training and practical experience. They are listed herein in their logical order and in brief and conclusive form. All the suggestions which deal mainly with educational matters have financial significance. The more obvious facts of financial import are pointed out by the committee under the appropriate heads. 1. The course of study in all schools should be organized around human problems and made simple and elastic enough to permit of differentiation to meet the needs of different nationalities and groups. 2. The content of the course of study should be made as practical as possible, and special attention should be given to the development of commercial, industrial, and vocational subjects, emphasizing the larger and more important aspects of industrial and commercial activities. 3. The board of education should take necessary steps to effect the gradual elimination of teachers of special branches. 4. Each school as a neighborhood center should ally itself with neighborhood interests and take cognizance of local needs. 5. The board of education should make a careful investigation to ascertain whether cosmopolitan or composite high schools offering several different courses of study, or, small high schools with differentiated curricula, should be developed. 6. The board of education through the proposed bureau of investigation and appraisal or other bureau, should establish a fact basis for its educational, administrative, and financial work. 7. The board of education's attendance department should adjust its work so as to maintain discipline and control school attendance without resorting to police methods in checking truancy. 8. The educational administrative work of the department of education should be reorganized. 9. The board of education should carefully supervise the operation of heating and ventilating systems installed in the different public school buildings. 10. A comprehensive plan should be worked out for the wider use of school buildings for purposes of recreation, for public assemblage, and for civic and social gatherings. 11. The different administrative departments and bureaus of the department of education should be reorganized. 12. The accounting system of the board of education should be so adjusted as to make possible the fullest segregation of disbursement accounts along functional lines properly correlated with allied statistics, and their publication at least quarterly. 13. The board of education should provide for the collection and tabulation of all current data needed in order to enable it to know in advance what additional seating capacity is actually required throughout the city. 14. The permanent census board should be utilized by the board of education and should eventually be transferred to the board of education. 15. The board of education should be reorganized and its membership reduced from 46 to 8, with 16 votes as now distributed in the board of estimate and apportionment.1 1 A digest of the New York school inquiry was submitted to the New York Board of Education on July 17, 1913, by the Bureau of Municipal Research. In the printed report of this material (84 pp.) a summary of the findings and recommendations is offered. For the educational part of the survey this includes: 20 rediscoveries for New York's public schools, by the school inquiry and school board. 70 features of the New York schools were praised by 12 investigators. 57 defects were found in the method of examining and rating teachers and principals. 20 defects were found in the wasting of time of superintendents. 58 defects were found in the activity and supervision of elementary teachers. 10 defects were found in the age-grade reports. 59 defects were found in the reports on nonpromotion. 8 defects were found in the method used in estimating elementary teachers needed. 21 defects were found in the handling of truancy. 24 defects were found in the ungraded classes for feeble-minded. 28 defects were found in the teaching of arithmetic. 47 defects were found in the administration of high schools. 13 defects were found in the high-school course of study. 24 defects made commercial courses ineffective. 15 defects were found in trade and night schools. 27 defects were found in the methods of running buildings. 15 defects were found in the method of building construction. 7 defects were found in overheating in some schools. 221 recommendations are noted, of which 55 clearly require additional money. 22 are intended to save money. 137 per se neither add nor save money. 7 require State legislation. 38 further investigations were said to be necessary by 10 of the investigators. 35 subjects, not covered by the school inquiry were reported as suggested for investigation by teachers, principals, and parents through the school edition of The Globe. Similar treatment of the Goodnow-Howe report presents the following: 19 features in the administration, legal and financial, were praised. 139 defects in the organization were pointed out as needing correction. 61 recommendations were named in this report, of which 15 clearly required additional money. 28 neither directly add nor save money, but are intended to increase efficiency. 7 were intended to save money. 11 require State legislation. On September 1, 1914, a committee of eight district superintendents, of which William L. Ettinger was chairman and Joseph S. Taylor secretary, published "The reply of the association of district superintendents of New York to certain findings and recommendations of Prof. Frank N. McMurry and Prof. Edward C. Elliott" (116 pp.). This committee summarizes its discussion and reply in 29 statements (pp. 11-17), concluding with this statement: "The whole inquiry with reference to the teaching and supervision of elementary schools is a set of opinions backed by guesses and assumptions." NEWBURGH, N. Y. In June, 1913, the department of surveys and exhibits of the Russell Sage Foundation made its "Report of limited investigations. of social conditions in Newburgh, N. Y." These were undertaken at the request of the citizens and conducted under the general direction of Zenas L. Potter. Nine features of the civic life and organization were studied as follows: Public schools, public health, housing, delinquency, public library, recreation, charities, industrial conditions, and municipal administration. In the report (104 pp.) the section on public schools comprises 16 pages (5-20). As the purpose of the general survey was constructive, the attention given to the schools sought to find as much good as possible. The opportunities for improvement in the schools were found to be as follows: 1. Improvement of the physical provisions for children in the way of lighting, air space, ventilation, cloak rooms, toilet facilities, and fire protection in old buildings. 2. Placing the detailed work of school administration more largely in the hands of the superintendent. 3. More frequent and adequate advising with the teachers regarding textbooks, changes in the curriculum, daily and term programs, etc., and at the same time, more thorough oversight of their work. 4. Increasing teachers' salaries, and adopting better methods for their selection and promotion, and for studying and improving their efficiency. 5. Making continuous studies of school efficiency for the purpose of locating and correcting weaknesses in the system. 6. Making special provision for mentally and physically abnormal children. 7. Establishing evening schools for foreigners and others who need special opportunities. 8. Greater provision for the physical training of children. 9. Opening school buildings out of school hours for wider civic and social uses. The study, while confessedly limited, uses to advantage the comparative method of presenting certain features of the Newburgh schools with those of cities of approximately the same size. GRAFTON, W. Va. At the request of the board of education of Grafton, W. Va., a study of its schools and their supervision was made by Prof. J. N. Deahl, of West Virginia University, Supt. Joseph Rosier, of the Fairmont city schools, and Supt. Otis G. Wilson, of the Elkins city schools. The arrangement for the survey was made in April and the report was presented June 14, 1913. The report (29 pp.) was published as "The report of the survey of the Grafton city schools, by the West Virginia State department of free schools." The aim of the survey was suggestive rather than final with respect to utilizing the school funds in such a way as to provide for the city's needs to the best advantage. The points studied included the following: The educational needs of the community from an industrial standpoint; the profes 73226°-ED 1914-VOL 1-35 |