tive officer, for it was feared that this would result in defeating the distinct development of a system of real vocational education. On the other hand there were many people, including a large number of educators, who did not favor an organization of vocational education entirely separate from the general public-school system. For a long

time the problem of unified or separate control of vocational education had been debated in the National Education Association, the National Society for Industrial Education, and elsewhere.

When the bill was discussed in the House an amendment offered by Mr. Lenroot, of Wisconsin, was adopted, which made the four appointed members representatives of manufactures, commerce, labor

and agriculture, respectively, and provided that the board should annually elect one of its members chairman.

When the bill went to conference it was understood that President Wilson was opposed to a board entirely separate from the executive departments.

The final result was a compromise by which the Federal board was made to consist of the secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor, the Commissioner of Education, and representatives of manufactures and commerce, agriculture, and labor. This board, therefore, was put in control of representatives of the industries, including agriculture, but the public-school system was represented by the Commissioner of Education as a member of the board. In the States under this act the control of the funds for vocational education might be in a separate board of vocational education or in the general board or department of education as each State might determine.

The friends of home economics education were not satisfied with the provisions for that subject in the commission's bill, which were confined to the preparation of teachers. They therefore secured the addition of home economics to those sections of the bill which deal with the payment of the salaries of teachers in service, though not more than 20 per cent of the annual appropriation can be spent for the teaching of this subject.

Those who were opposed to the use of Federal funds by sectarian or private institutions obtained an amendment specifically stating that no portion of any moneys appropriated under this act shall be applied directly or indirectly "for the support of any religious or privately owned or conducted school or college." The bill passed the House January 9, 1917, and was sent to conference. The agreement reached by the conferees was adopted by both Houses, and the bill became a law through its approval by President Wilson February 23, 1917.

THE SMITH-HUGHES VOCATIONAL EDUCATION ACT

The passage of the Smith-Hughes Vocational Education Act practically created a system of vocational education of broad scope as a permanent part of the public-school organization throughout the United States. It provided funds for the immediate extension of the efforts of the States in this direction and by a gradual increase of the Federal aid helped to put this system on a sound and substantial footing within a few years. It would then remain for the States and local communities, with or without additional Federal assistance, to increase the strength and scope of vocational education to meet the development of the various local vocations.

The act also exemplified a new phase of Federal cooperation with the States in educational work. In the Morrill Land Grant Act of 1862 the Federal Government gave lands to the States for colleges without requiring them to account for the use of these lands. Later the Government gave money to the land-grant colleges for experiment stations and for instruction, with limited but increasing requirements for Federal supervision. In the Smith-Lever Extension Act the extreme limit of Federal union with the States in an educational

enterprise was reached. This act required cooperation between the Federal Department of Agriculture and the States as represented by the land-grant colleges, in providing funds and in planning and conducting extension work in agriculture and home economics. The plans adopted under this act have set up in the several States an organization representing both the State and the Federal Government. The work in each State is in charge of a director, who is a joint representative of the State agricultural college and the United States Department of Agriculture. He has the franking privilege, and his salary comes from Federal and State sources. In the counties the agents generally receive part of their salary from direct individual schools receiving the benefits of this act. The Federal commissions and the franking privilege. Officers of the department participate in the extension work in the State, and all the extension work of the department in the States is subject to the administration of the extension directors.

In the Smith-Hughes Vocational Education Act a more limited cooperation between the Federal Government and the States is provided for. In each State there is a board of vocational education, and the Federal board deals only with this State board and not with individual schools receiving the benefits of this act. The Federal funds are expended in accordance with plans submitted by the State boards and approved by the Federal board. The Federal authorities inspect the work and the expenditures in each State so far as to determine whether they come within the provisions of the law and entitle the State to reimbursement from the Federal funds. Beyond this the Federal board has only advisory functions and aids the work in the States by furnishing information through publications or otherwise and by conferring with State officials in charge of different lines of work.

SECONDARY AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION UNDER THE SMITH-HUGHES ACT, 1917-1925

THE FEDERAL BOARD FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

On July 17, 1917, President Wilson, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appointed the following members of the Federal Board for Vocational Education: For one year, as representative of manufactures and commerce, James P. Munroe, of Massachusetts, a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and secretary of its faculty for several years, and a prominent worker for many years in the movement for industrial education; for two years, as representative of agriculture, Charles A. Greathouse, of Indiana, who had been State superintendent of public instruction; for three years, as representative of labor, Arthur E. Holder, a machinist, who had been deputy commissioner of the Iowa Bureau of Labor and had represented the American Federation of Labor in national legislative matters. The ex-officio members were D. F. Houston, Secretary of Agriculture; W. C. Redfield, Secretary of Commerce; W. B. Wilson, Secretary of Labor; and P. P. Claxton, Commissioner of Education. The first meeting of the board was held in the office of the Secretary of Agriculture, July 21, 1917. Secretary Houston was elected chairman, Mr. Munroe vice chairman, and Commissioner

Claxton secretary. The board appointed Charles A. Prosser director of its administrative staff, with the following assistant directors: Agriculture, Layton S. Hawkins, of the New York State Department of Education; industrial education, Lewis H. Carris, of the New Jersey State Department of Education; home economics, Josephine L. Berry, head of the home economics division of the Department of Agriculture of the University of Minnesota; research, Charles H. Winslow, director of vocational research, Indianapolis. Cheesman A. Herrick, president of Girard College, Philadelphia, was appointed temporary agent for commercial education.

For administration and inspection the country was divided into five sections: North Atlantic, Southern, North Central, West Central, and Pacific. Headquarters for agents of the board were established in New York City, Atlanta, Ga., Indianapolis, Ind., Kansas City, Mo., and San Francisco, Calif. From August 17 to 28, 1917, the board held conferences with representatives of the boards charged with the State administration of the Smith-Hughes Act at which "the purpose of the law was discussed with particular reference to the general principles upon which it is based and the methods by which these principles should be taught into practice." The first bulletin of the board was issued in November, 1917, and was entitled "The Smith-Hughes Act: Policies of Federal Board for Vocational Education," (497).

Among the policies announced at this time were the following:

The Federal board believes that the following fundamental principles should govern the appropriations from the National Government to the States for Vocational education. The money is designed:

(1) To stimulate the States to undertake a new and needed form of servicethat for vocational education-which the National Government believes necessary to the public welfare.

(2) To equalize, in part at least, the inequalities of burden among the States in carrying on this service.

(3) To purchase for the National Government a reasonable degree of participation in the carrying on of this work in which the National Government is so deeply concerned.

(4) To establish standards of efficiency in vocational education and to set up minimums below which work in vocational education for which reimbursement from Federal moneys is desired can not be allowed to fall.

The Smith-Hughes Act does not provide for the education of "backward, deficient, incorrigible or otherwise subnormal individuals, but only for thorough vocational instruction to healthy, normal individuals."

The Federal board and its representatives will deal with the State boards for vocational education and not with individual schools.

By January 1, 1918, each of the 48 States had through legislative enactment or the governor accepted the provisions of the SmithHughes Act, had submitted plans which met with the approval of the Federal board, and had been certified to the Secretary of the Treasury for the allotment for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1918. In 14 States a special board for vocational education was created or utilized; in 32 States the general State board of education was designated to administer the Smith-Hughes fund; in Minnesota the State high-school board was utilized; and in Colorado, which did not have a State board of education, the State board of agriculture

had the administration of vocational education added to its duties as a supervisory board for the State land-grant college.

Meanwhile the United States had entered the World War, and the War Department and the Shipping Board had called on the Federal Board for Vocational Education to aid in training conscripted men for the vocations required for military purposes or for shipbuilding. The problem of training disabled soldiers and sailors was also being considered in cooperation with other branches of the Government. This led to the vocational rehabilitation act of June 27, 1918, under which the administration of this work was committed to this board and formed a large, difficult, and rapidly increasing feature of its work until it was transferred to the Veterans' Bureau on August 9, 1921.

The rehabilitation work was distributed among schools and colleges in the several States. It included instruction in many occupations, among which were many branches of agriculture.

Conditions growing out of the war intensified the interest of the people of the United States in vocational education, but also brought about unusual difficulties which for a considerable period prevented its most orderly and satisfactory development.

AGRICULTURAL WORK OF THE FEDERAL BOARD

The assistant director for agriculture, L. S. Hawkins, came into this work after several years' experience as a specialist in agricultural education in the State department of education in New York, which had developed under State laws both special agricultural schools and departments of agriculture in a considerable number of high schools. He had also received part of his education in the State normal school at Cortland, N. Y., and had been head of the department of science and agriculture in that school. He was thus familiar with administrative problems relating to State supervision of agricultural education and to the organization, equipment, and curriculum for secondary instruction in agriculture.

Charles H. Lane became a member of the agricultural staff of the Federal board by transfer from the Office of Experiment Stations of the Department of Agriculture, where for several years he had had charge of its work relating to agricultural education. He was therefore thoroughly familiar with the status of teacher training in agriculture and agricultural instruction in secondary schools throughout the country. Another member of this first staff was William G. Hummel, a graduate in agriculture at the universities of Illinois and California, who had taught agriculture in high schools in California and had been for seven years teacher of agricultural education in the University of California.

The board immediately undertook investigations on the organization of secondary schools in agriculture, including courses of study and supervision; materials and methods in secondary-school agriculture; and supervised practical work in agriculture, including the home-project method of instruction. The results of this work have been published in a series of bulletins.

Cooperation was carried on with the Department of Agriculture, through its division of agricultural instruction, on the subject matter