examination. For the welfare of schools and the encouragement of teachers to do thorough preparation this system is excellent. It removes the marking of manuscripts to disinterested parties and avoids the local, political and social pressure sometimes brought to bear under the systems where the manuscript is marked by the county superintendent. It is the fairest system that can be devised to the school children." - H. A. Ustrud, Superintendent, South Dakota.

North Dakota. "Our present examination law is reasonably satisfactory, so far as it applies to county superintendents. The questions are prepared under the direction of the state superintendent and he appoints the persons who read and mark the examination papers written by the applicants. This obviates, to a great extent, favoritism and the bringing of pressure to bear upon the examiner by parties interested. It makes one standard for the entire state, which is something desirable."-W. L. Stockwell, Superintendent.

County Superintendents and the State System

An inquiry concerning the state system of examining teachers as compared with the county system was also sent to county superintendents in different states. The replies have been invariably favorable to the state system. The following are extracts from a few letters received:

"No county system of granting certificates can do justice to the teachers certified. Personal interests will creep in. The system now in use in New York weeds out the poor scholar, but not always the poor teacher. However, with a state board grading the answer papers and a competent board of inspectors it is possible to have teachers of ability both as to education and as to ability to instruct. This we are beginning to have in New York state." Pratt E. Marshall, Com. First Chautauqua District, Sherman, N. Y.

"Responding to your circular of July 9th, I would say first, that in general I prefer the state uniform system to any of the various county systems for the examination and certification of teachers. This conclusion has been reached after personal experience with the systems in vogue in Kansas, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, and after a careful study of the matter, as chairman of the committee on education in the House of Delegates, which passed our present uniform law. In my judgment,

the state system is preferable, first, because of its advantages to the teachers. By it the teacher has a standing throughout the state and the way is open before him for a broader view of educational interests. The consequent wider exchange of teachers and school ideas is a healthful stimulation to better work. Second, the state system is preferable because it prevents the unwise lowering of standards that always occurs in more or fewer instances under the county system. This system also takes the examinations and granting of certificates further out of the reach of political or other local influences."-M. P. Shawkey, County Superintendent and Editor West Virginia Educator, Charleston, W. Va.

"The present system of having the questions made out and the papers corrected by the state committee is entirely satisfactory. The uniformity thus brought about has raised the standard of the teaching profession and stimulated effort throughout the whole educational system. We would not willingly go back to the old way." Margaret E. Brown, County Superintendent, Grand Island, Nebraska.

"As county superintendent of schools of this county I have worked under the system of examinations by this office and am now working under the new plan of examinations by the state. Results prove conclusively that the present system gets better results in the school room."-W. F. Lorin, County Superintendent, Mandan, North Dakota.

There is hardly a teacher in the state who would like to revert to the old system of examination by questions prepared and graded by the county superintendent. This system has culled out the incompetent teachers, thus causing a scarcity of teachers throughout the state, hence an increase of wages and better teachers. Certificates granted under this system are valid throughout the state, hence doing away with the necessity of teachers taking the examination in different counties. Salaries have increased from a minimum of $28.00 to $40.00 per first grade certificates, and other grades in proportion. Taken as a whole this system is building up the schools of West Virginia rapidly and is a step far in advance of the old system of county examination.' Willis F. Evans, County Supt., Berkeley Co., Martinsburg, W. Va.

CHAPTER XXIV

APPOINTMENT, TENURE, PAY, AND PENSIONS

THE first article states clearly the need of an efficiency basis in granting increased salaries to teachers, and is followed by the Indiana minimum-wage law. The third attempts to lay down an acceptable basis for pensioning teachers in public schools.

I. CAN THE PRESENT EFFICIENCY OF THE SCHOOLS BE MAINTAINED?

[Cotton, Fassett A., in the 24th Bien. Rept. Supt. Publ. Instr. Indiana, 1908, pp. 73-81.]

(1) The Great School Problem is First and Last the Problem of Maintaining Efficiency

In the present agitation for better things in education there are a few fundamental propositions that teachers, citizens and legislators need to keep in mind if anything is to be accomplished. The first of these and the one that overshadows and conditions all the rest is that we have come to a stage in educational affairs in which the question of efficiency is involved. It is not a commercial question at all. It is not merely a question of securing more pay for teachers. That is a secondary proposition. Primarily it is a question whether we can any longer under the present conditions secure and maintain efficiency in our schools. The worth and progress of any calling depends upon efficiency. Its rank and dignity are determined by the competency of its men and women. The professional plane of any calling depends finally upon the quality of its own members.

Teaching is not a profession in Indiana. Almost anybody can still try to teach school. There is practically no professional test and the scholarship requirements are very low. Neither public opinion nor law has set up any barrier to the sacred precincts of

this calling. If a young man hasn't made up his mind what he wants to do in the world, he teaches school. If he fails at something else, he teaches school. If he is out of a position, he teaches school. If he wants to prepare for medicine, or law, or the ministry, he teaches school. From one cause or another a large percentage of our teachers drift into the calling. It is not to be denied that many of these classes do temporarily fair work and that some of them become permanently good teachers, but the calling cannot afford to take such risks, to say nothing of how much the schools have suffered in furnishing them raw materials to practice on. Despite all this, it ought to be said that thousands of competent men and women have deliberately chosen the calling and have prepared themselves to be teachers, and are doing efficient work; but the existing conditions make their work difficult, and even call their efficiency in question, so that the public is in danger of losing their services sooner or later.

There is an element in the teacher's calling that places it at a disadvantage when compared in the score of efficiency with other professions. In law and medicine and in the ministry the people sit in direct judgment and sooner or later put incompetence into its proper rank. In teaching it has been and is possible for one reason or another, through one influence or another, for incompetents to entrench themselves so securely that the children suffer for years before they are dislodged. This is made possible by the fact that the schools are still in the hands of politicians and that there are no qualifications, educational, intellectual, moral or otherwise, for members of school boards. However, no greater tribute could be paid to our people than to say that public opinion has done much to overcome this defect in our system. Paradoxical as it may seem, in the light of what has just been said, one of the worst defects in our system is to be found in the short average of the life of the teacher. This is particularly true in the district schools, where twenty-five or thirty per cent of the teachers every year are new. Having tried teaching without any forethought or definite purpose, many move on as aimlessly to try something else, or having taken the work without preparation, many fail. But the cause of education and the children suffer.

(2) Efficiency in School Work demands Competent Men and Women

So we have come to a time when something definite should be established in the teacher's work. There is a problem of teaching, or there is not. If there is such a problem every teacher who takes up the work should have studied it. Teaching should be put upon

a professional plane. Certain, definite requirements should be fulfilled before anyone is permitted to teach school. That is, a standard of efficiency should be established and maintained. There should be distinct tests of personality, scholarship, and professional ability. A date should be set, far enough in the future to be just, at which time the requirements should go into effect. The general assembly can help the cause of education and materially hasten the day of larger efficiency by putting the dignity of the law back of these provisions. This is the first step to be taken. Provide for efficient work by eliminating the unprepared and the incompetent from the ranks of the profession.

(3) Competent Men and Women command Good Salaries

But at the same time the state sets up new standards of efficiency for teachers it must hold out larger inducements in the way of salaries. The compensation for teaching has always been inadequate; and while it is true that real teaching cannot be paid for in dollars and cents, we have come to a time when the public must more nearly recognize its worth. The laborer is worthy of his hire, and the teacher is no exception to the rule. Teachers have hitherto seemingly been afraid that the public would think that they were teaching for money, and the kind public has saved them from this humiliating reputation. With the demands made upon their purse in keeping awake and alive it has been almost impossible for men and women who have no other source of income to remain in the calling. Somehow the public has gone on demanding that teachers appear as well as other people, that they travel and keep up with the times, that they buy books and pictures and magazines, and at the same time the public has not concerned itself about the funds with which all this is to be done. It would probably be a revelation to many good people to know that the average teacher must stop to consider whether he can afford to spend five dollars for books which he really needs in his busi

ness.

It is possible that the public would consider it a great joke to talk about teachers living as well as other people. But why is not this the proper basis? Teaching is difficult work; it takes skill and brains and vitality. Why should it not bring as much as writing briefs, or dispensing medicine, or selling dry goods? Why, indeed! Simply because teachers have not demanded it. The remarkable thing about it all is that we have gone on all these years with such miserable pittances and have accepted them like so much charity. Teaching has, as Dr. Van Dyke said, been