GITY SCHOOL SUPERVISION EDWARD C ELLIOTT i-^i=s>TA -, i r ! t.r-J'^ 1 i^^?* i ; - - SCHOOL EFFICIENCY SERIES PAUL H.H ANUS Class _Xiii£l^ Book -E C> Copyright }^° COPTOIGHT DEPOSIT. tsMiX iv'. i THE School Efficiency Series comprises about ten volumes by as many educational experts on Elementary School and Kindergarten, High School, and Vocational Instruction, Courses of Study, Organization, Management and Supervision. The series consists of monographs — with additions plainly indicated in each volume — constituting the report of Professor Hanus and his associates on the schools of New York City, but the controlling ideas are applicable as well in one public school system as in another. Among the authors contributing to these volumes are Professor Paul H. Hanus, Professor of Education, Harvard University, who is also general editor of the series; Dr. Frank P. Bachman, formerly Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Cleveland; Dr. Edward C. Elliott, Director of the School of Education, University of Wisconsin; Dr. Herman Schneider, Dean of the College of Engineering, University of Cincinnati; Mr. Frank W. Ballou, Joseph Lee Fellow for Research in Education, Harvard University (formerly Assistant Professor of Education, University of Cincinnati); Dr. Calvin 0. Davis, Assistant Professor of Education, University of Michigan; Mr. Frank V. Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Boston; Dr. Henry H. Goddard, Director Department of Psycho- logical Research, New Jersey Training School for Feeble-Minded Boys and Girls; Mr. Stuart A. Courtis, Head of Department of Science and Mathematics, Detroit ■ Flome and Day School (Liggett School), Detroit; Dr. Frank M. McMurry, Professor of Elemen- tary Education, Teachers College, Columbia University; Dr. Ernest C. Moore, Professor of Education, Harvard University (formerly of Yale University) . SCHOOL EFFICIENCY SERIES City School Supervision SCHOOL EFFICIENCY SERIES Edited by Paul H. Hanus City School Supervision A constructive study applied to New York City By EDWARD C. ELLIOTT Professor of Education and Dirbctor of the Course for the Training of Teachers :n the University of Wisconsin YONKERS-ON-HUDSON, KEW YORK WORLD BOOK COMPANY 1914 Copyright, igi4, by World Book Company. All rights reserved. SES : ECSS — I .E6 .^AR 20 j 9 14 ©CLA362966 EDITOR'S PREFACE SCHOOL supervision is one of the most important phases of the work of city school systems; and one of the most difficult. Though firmly and widely established in the school systems of the country, it is generally admitted that school supervision is far from being as effective as it ought to be. This is not due so much to lack of intelligent and conscientious supervisory officers as to lack of a clear recognition of the complex nature of supervision; and in our great cities partly, at least, to faulty organization of the system of supervision and to hampering restrictions imposed on the supervisory staff by Boards of Education. Sometimes all these causes together tend to make super- vision mere administrative oversight of the convention- ally established routine. As Professor Elliott points out, " There is a great difference between merely keeping the schools in operation and keeping the schools in operation so as to produce tangible results of high value." To secure such results is the supreme duty of the supervisory staff. This volume contains Professor Elliott's contribution to the report submitted by me to the Committee on School Inquiry of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment of the City of New York — with a few changes, most of them unimportant, and all clearly indicated by the author (footnote p. i). This book, like the other volumes of this series, neces- sarily deals with a large number of descriptive details ; but, as in the other volumes, these details are organized with a view to constructive criticisms based on fundamental prin- ciples that underlie satisfactory achievement. In the time available Professor Elliott did not attempt to cover fully the viii Editor's Preface whole field of general supen- ision within the school system ; but his inquiry was comprehensive, and includes the func- tions of the city superintendent, the associate superintend- ents and the board of superintendents, the district superin- tendents, and, incidentally, the elementary school principals (dealt with in detail by Professor McMurry) ; and the no less important functions discharged by the board of exami- ners. He was able to give some attention also to the di- rectors and assistant directors of special branches. Professor Elliott's method, like that of all my associates in the New York School Inquiry, was, first, to secure the facts required to gain a clear conception of the organization and activities of that part of the school system under ex- amination ; and then to proceed to the criticisms and recom- mendations which the facts demanded. The large number of significant facts systematically presented in this volume, and the theory of supervision on which the criticisms and recommendations are based, lead us to hope that the book will provoke further discussion, and hence that it will prove useful outside of as well as within the City of New York. Two of Professor Elliott's important recommendations affect so vitally the future welfare of school administration and supervision that I venture to single them out here for special mention. They are, first, that a Division or De- partment of Investigation and Appraisal be established as an integral part of the school control; and, second, that steps be taken to establish a Supervisory Council consisting of supervisory officers and members of the teaching staff. The first of these recommendations is based on the evidence presented by the New York school system (and other large school systems as well) that it is impossible to secure the school facts needed and to utilize them fully for the benefit of the school system without a regularly constituted agency for collecting and interpreting them — that, in short, such an agency is essential to the progressive development of sound educational and financial policies and methods, and to placing educational procedure progressively on a scien- Editor's Preface ix tific basis; and the second recommendation recognizes the fact that while centraHzation of authority and responsibility- is essential in administration, cooperation under leadership is the fundamental principle of effective supervision. It is a pleasure to note that the first of these recommendations has been adopted, in part at least, since the report v^as submitted. Paul H. Hanus. Hakvaed University. AUTHOR'S PREFACE MY decision to publish in its present form material originally designed to meet a specific end is based, in part, on the country-wide interest in the School Inquiry which gave rise to the report constituting the greater part of this volume, and, in part, on the consideration that the wider circulation thus secured for the report would afford larger opportunity to submit the general principles of con- trol advocated and the methods of investigation herein described to further criticism and refinement. Effective school direction must more and more be organ- ized according to principles the validity of which is gen- erally recognized by the profession of education. Its opera- tion must be constantly checked by methods that provide proper tests of the value of educational machinery. Unless these come to pass, school control will remain in its pres- ent state of uncertain experimentation. Consequently, the author's hope is that this volume will promote constructive criticism of the principles formulated and a betterment of the methods employed. By some such principles of action and some such methods of evaluation will the agencies for the control of public education in our cities become efficient factors for the real democratization of the school. It is proper that a record should here be made of the valuable assistance rendered to me in collecting the new material presented in Chapter X, on the rating of teaching efficiency in other American cities, and in arranging the several outlines of school organization. In particular, I am under obligation to the following school officials: Super- intendent F. A. Soper, of Baltimore; Superintendent F. B. Dyer, of Boston, and his Secretary, Mr. George S. Burgess ; xii Preface Superintendent H. P. Emerson, of Buffalo; Assistant Su- perintendent C. D. Lowry, of Chicago; Superintendent R. J. Congdon, of Cincinnati; Superintendent J. M. H. Frederick, of Cleveland, his Secretary, Mr. F. C. Beyer, and his Statistical Clerk, Miss Hazel B. Bonfield ; Superin- tendent Charles E. Chadsey, of Detroit; Superintendent E. O. Holland, of Louisville ; former Superintendent C. G. Pearse, and Acting Superintendent A. E. Kagel, of Mil- waukee; Superintendent C. M. Jordan, of Minneapolis; Superintendent A. B. Poland, of Newark; Superintendent J. M. Gwinn, of New Orleans ; Superintendent F. E. Spaul- ding, of Newton, Massachusetts; Superintendent M. G. Brumbaugh, and Associate Superintendent George Wheeler, of Philadelphia ; Assistant Superintendent J. P. O'Hern, of Rochester; Superintendent M. C. Potter, of St. Paul; Su- perintendent Ben Blewett, his Secretary, Mr. F. L. Urley, and Assistant Superintendent W. J. S. Bryan, of St. Louis ; Superintendent D. H. Christensen, of Salt Lake City ; Super- intendent J. H. Van Sickle, of Springfield, Massachusetts ; and Superintendent W. M. Davidson, of Washington. I desire especially to acknowledge the great value of the assistance rendered throughout the preparation of this material for publication by Miss Elizabeth M. McKee, Mr. F. L. Clapp, and Mr. H. G. Hotz, of the University of Wisconsin. Edward C. Elliott. UNIVERSITY or WISCONSIN. CONTENTS Page Editor's Preface vii Author's Preface xi Chapter I. Introduction i II. The Nature of School Control 7 III. The New York City System of School Control 14 IV. The School as the Unit for Supervision ... 30 V. The District Superintendents 5 a VI. Directors and Assistant Directors of Speclal Branches 64 VEI. The City Superintendent, the Board of Superin- tendents, AND THE ASSOCLATE SUPERINTENDENTS 73 VIII. The Board of Examiners 93 IX. Methods and Standards for Determining Teach- ing Efficiency 116 X. The Rating of Teaching Efficiency in other Cities 136 XI. Recommendations for Reorganization .... 168 APPENDICES A. By-Laws Governing the Organization of Elemen- tary Schools 185 B. Salary Schedules: Supervisory Staff of Elemen- tary Schools 190 C. Form for Monthly Report of District Superintend- ents 195 xiv Contents Page D. Minutes of the Board of Superintendents, Janu- ary 19, 1911 196 E. Minutes of the Board of Superintendents, Octo- ber 26, 1911 210 F. Examination Questions — License No. i 227 G. Forms for Approval of Service: Renewal of Tem- porary Licenses 242 H. FoRMSFOR Approval OF Service: Advance in Salary 248 Index 253 City School Supervision CITY SCHOOL SUPERVISION CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION PRELIMINARY WITHIN the following pages a complete discussion of the many-sided and intricate subject of the super- vision of public schools has not been attempted. The pe- culiar and, in many respects, notable circumstances of the origin of the book will account for its limited scope. It contains but a partial presentation of the more important characteristics of the organisation of the system of super- vision of a single school system. There is, nevertheless, a firm conviction that the analysis of the larger features of the problem of public school supervision in the City of New York, together with the accompanying arguments concern- ing reorganization, is fundamental for the effective devel- opment and control of the public school system of other American cities.^ THE AIM OF SUPERVISION The more pressing and distinctive problems of contempo- raneous education, especially in the rapidly expanding and * My contribution to the original report submitted by the Committee on School Inquiry of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment has been revised in a few particulars for the present publication. These revisions consist for the most part of slight modifications in form and phraseology. The several Exhibits presenting in analytical outline the administrative and supervisory organization of the public school sys- tems of the larger American cities, and Chapter X on the Rating of Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities are the principal additions. 2 City School Supervision increasingly complex urban communities of the United States, center in the social and political necessity of bringing children in mass under the influences of the public school. The conscious endeavor is to cause these influences to operate directly and immediately, with such uniformity and with such discrimination as to produce an outward semblance of equality in the distribution of educational facilities and opportunities. The situation created by the effort to supply equal educational opportunities to masses of individuals of widely varying abilities and to social and economic classes of widely differing needs has supplied us with the underlying social motive for the public schools; viz., to resist through the school those ever-present forces that tend to submerge the personal child within the imper- sonal social organization. The democratic motive of American education has been a natural product of the mass of the school. The machinery of American education is likewise an invention due to the necessities of the mass school. It is becoming more and more evident that the successful adjustment of this ma- chinery to the educational motive is a general social and political problem of no small magnitude. Furthermore, that the effective and economical control and development of education through this machinery is a special social and professional problem of far-reaching consequence. It may be safely asserted that in no one of our govern- mental areas of education — city or state — has there been found as yet a way of properly conserving for the benefit of the children in school the available profes-- sional resources and personal powers of teachers. Yet the development of these resources and the larger utilization of these powers are the chief aim of school supervision, what- ever may be its form of organization. Tiie teaching staff constitutes the working capital of the school as a productive institution. The extent to which organized school super- vision maintains and increases the productiveness of this capital through professional stimulation, personal encour- Introduction 3 agement, and technical guidance should be the measure of public support of and confidence in such supervision. The social ideal of public education is a striving for the preservation and for the enlargement of the human iden- tity of each child unit. The ideal of supervision of the public school should be a striving for the preservation and for the enlargement of the professional identity of each teaching unit. It is service to children through service to teachers. The betterment of the latter makes for the real betterment of the former. THE SCOPE OF TREATMENT This study concerns itself chiefly with the agencies that have immediate responsibility for, and direct oversight of, the organization and standards of accomplishment of the teaching staff; the agencies that determine, ultimately, the character of the programs of study (curricula), and hence the extent to which the school instruction is adapted to the capacities and needs of the children of the city. It will, therefore, review more or less critically the activities and methods of those individuals whose principal attention is assumed to be devoted to directing and elevating standards of teaching and to gauging the efficiency of teachers and pupils ; that is, principals, directors of special branches, dis- trict superintendents, associate superintendents. City Super- intendent, and the Board of Superintendents.^ The important influence exerted by the Board of Exam- iners in the establishment of the initial qualifications of ^ The circumstances have made quite impossible a comprehensive study and treatment of all the important features of the situation. This work has endeavored to bring into proper perspective some of the most important items that seem to demand critical attention, with special reference to the elementary schools. Only the more fundamental as- pects of the place of the principal in the supervisory organization are included. The details of the supervisory work of elementary school principals have been discussed in Professor McMurry's book in this series, Elementary School Standards. 4 City School Supervision teachers necessitates a consideration of its methods and standards, as these impose responsibiHties that must be met by the organized plan of the supervision of schools. THE METHOD OF TREATMENT The arguments, conclusions, and recommendations pre- sented in the following chapters are based on evidence pri- marily derived from : Documentary material: including the annual reports of the City Superintendent of Schools, since 1899, together with the accompanying departmental reports; the minutes of the meetings of the Board of Superintendents for the past four years; the by-laws of the Board of Education; records of schools, teachers, and supervisory officers, filed in the record office of the City Superintendent of Schools. Special information and data: furnished by the members of the supervisory and teaching staff in response to requests from us. The character of such special information and data is described in those sections of the report to which they pertain. Numerous individual and group conferences with the members of the supervisory staff} Visitation of schools.^ A critical examination of the methods, of work of the various hoards^ and individuals constituting the supervis- ory staff. The principal effort has been to analyze into its leading factors the systematic supervision of the public schools of * One formal conference of district superintendents was held on the afternoon of April g, 1912. Twenty of the twenty-six district super- intendents were present. A similar conference of directors of special branches was held on the afternoon of April 16, 1912. Eight of the nine directors and two assistant directors were present. ' Twenty-one elementary schools were visited. ' Including the Board of Superintendents and the Board of Examiners. Introduction 5 the city, and to judge these factors according to their own demonstrated merits. Contrary to the usual procedure, no detailed comparison of the supervisory organization and methods followed in New York with those of other large cities has been attempted.^ Even with adequate opportunity and facilities for such comparison there is grave doubt as to the worth of the conclusions to be drawn from such com- parative study. A solution of the problem of effective supervision of schools in New York requires a treatment as distinctive as is the problem. From the beginning the Inquiry has aimed at construc- tive schemes for the betterment of the organization and operation of the supervisory staff, rather than at criticisms of existing plans and practises. Nevertheless, constructive effort is closely linked to criticism ; the character of the former is largely dependent upon the nature of the latter. The main current of the recent public criticism of the school system has been directed against the defined author- ity, the competency, and the spirit of the supervisory staff, individually and collectively. A fair investigation of the organization and methods of the supervisory direction of a school system of the origin, magnitude, and complexity of that of New York City requires more than the analysis of foiTnally prescribed duties or the criticism of elaborated modes of procedure, for the worth of this direction is largely conditioned by certain indefinite and intangible per- sonal factors. The real duties of a superintendent, prin- cipal, or any other supervisor cannot be accurately defined in rules and regulations ; the real accomplishment cannot be exhibited by statistical facts. Bey-ond question, the issues of real moment to the school system have been con- fused and distorted, and the community confidence has been undermined by the extraordinary volume of trivial discus- ^ See Exhibits I, p. 26, II, p. 28, and III, p. 112, for analytical out- lines of the administrative and supervisory organization of the public schools of American cities of three hundred thousand population and over. 6 City School Supervision sion and criticism growing out of ignorance and bias, and in- spired by certain organized self-interests. Public criticism, to have value, should be based on sound evidence and bul- warked by personal responsibility for its utterance. Every- where in New York one encounters criticism; but in few places and in small quantity is testimony of worth volunteered. CHAPTER II THE NATURE OF SCHOOL CONTROL LEGISLATION, ADMINISTRATION, SUPERVISION, AND INSPECTION N order that certain basic conceptions as to the essential functions of the supervision of schools may be set forth, it is appropriate here to distinguish the four fundamental forms of control to which the schools of a modern metro- politan public school system are, and must be, subject.^ Legislative Control is that form of regulation exerted by the authority possessing final governmental jurisdiction. In the case of schools belonging to a public educational sys- tem this control is usually centered in the state legislature. The restrictions and obligations of legislative action are those defined by the fundamental laws — the state and fed- eral constitutions.^ * For a further treatment of the several forms of control here indi- cated, see Edward C. Elliott, Instruction: Its Organization and Con- trol. In High School Education, edited by C. H. Johnston (Chas. Scribner's Sons, New York, 1912). * " The laws controlling the local government of the school systems of the several cities of the State are quite generally incorporated into the charters which define the municipal powers and duties of such cities. This is fundamentally wrong and is not productive of sound school admitiistration. The schools of a city are established for the purpose of providing educational facilities for the children residing therein. The authority which makes it necessary for such city to pro- vide schools is the State Constitution. The Constitution does not pro- vide that such schools shall be local schools, but, on the contrary, provides that they shall be a part of the common school system of the State. Under the same authority the Legislature has established a State system of common schools. The Legislature annually appropri- 7 8 City School Supervision Administrative Control is that vested in the agents cre- ated by legislative action, or recognized as such by an im- ates large sums of money for the support and maintenance of such sys- tem. These sums of money are annually apportioned among all the schools. The State provides for the general direction and control of its schools. The schools, wherever located, are State schools and not local schools. This educational policy of the State is sound. It has been repeatedly upheld by our courts. The courts have even held that where a locality may fail or refuse to set in operation the established machinery for the maintenance of schools the State may not only step in and open and maintain such schools, even at the expense of the locality, but that it becomes the duty of the State to take such action. " The maintenance of schools is therefore a State function. In mak- ing provisions for the operation of such schools, the State may utilize the machinery already created in a community for the exercise of any of the powers necessary to the maintenance of local government. This may be done as a matter of economy of administration or for serving such other convenience as appears necessary. The work of the schools of a city and their management and control were intended to be entirely independent of the usual municipal affairs which are incident to the government of a city. The custom, however, of including in a city charter the law relating to the local management of schools has often resulted in regarding the schools as purely municipal affairs. This custom has also in many cases caused municipal officers and local political organizations to look upon school positions as places to be controlled in the same manner as municipal positions are generally controlled. Moreover, the mere fact that this law is in the charter presents the temptation to modify such law for political or personal reasons whenever a city charter comes before the Legislature for gen- eral consideration. The political vicissitudes of our day lead to much legislation affecting the purely political side of our city affairs. When one party is in power, the charters of cities will often be modified so as to give such party a distinct advantage in the municipal affairs of the cities of the State. When the opposite party regains power, it will make similar changes in city charters and for the same purpose. This action invariably leads to legislation modifying the law governing the schools and very generally to the disadvantage of the school interests. This was notably true of the proposed legislation on this subject be- fore the Legislature of 191 1. The chief illustration was the proposed charter of New York City. There was no demand from those charged with the responsibility of the supervision and management of the schools of that city for any material modification of the law relating to the local management of such schools. The proposition to modify The Nature of School Control 9 plied legal sanction. Boards of education, boards of trus- tees, superintendents, inspectors, etc., are common types of such law came from those charged with no official responsibility in the general control of such schools. The legislation suggested was opposed not only by the city officials charged with the responsibility of the gen- eral direction of such schools but by all prominent men throughout the country who were best entitled to speak upon sound principles of school administration. The attention of school officers and the teaching staff was for several months diverted from the work in the schools to the necessity of protecting their interests and the interests of the schools. All this was bad and was a direct loss to the schools. New York was not the only city whose school interests were affected in this way. Pro- posed general amendments to the articles on the schools in the charters of seven other cities were before the Legislature. " All this embarrassment to the schools may easily be remedied. The law regulating the local control and management of the schools of the several cities of the State should be taken out of the city charters and should be incorporated in the Education Law. This action may be taken without confusion and without decreasing in the slightest the powers now conferred upon local superintendents or boards of educa- tion. Three additional articles might be incorporated into the Educa- tion Law, one for each class of cities. " The present appears to be an opportune time to inaugurate a move- ment to effect such action. A commission employed by the Governor is engaged in drafting a uniform charter for cities of the third class. If this commission should recommend uniform laws for the management and control of the schools in these cities, such laws should be incor- porated into the Education Law instead of the uniform charter for cities of the third class. The law already enacted in relation to the schools in the cities of the second class should be transferred from the charter for such cities to the Education Law. The laws now govern- ing the school systems of New York and Rochester are similar in many respects. A law could be drawn to meet the local necessities of each of the cities of the first class. If this is not feasible, separate provisions for each of such cities could be made a part of the Education Law. So long as the laws governing the local management of the schools are continued as a part of the city charters, just so long will the school systems of the cities be subject to the interference and con- fusion which several have recently experienced. " In the preparation of a law to govern the local management of the schools of our cities, sound business principles and pedagogical stand- ards must be respected, to the end that our city schools shall meet more completely and efficiently the constantly increasing demands which are 10 City School Supervision such agents. Administrative activities have, however, cer- tain special characteristics which distinguish them from made upon them. The following fundamental principles must be observed : " I. The absolute diTorcement of all school affairs from the other municipal and political activities of the city. " 2. The professional direction of the school system should be under the charge of the superintendent of schools. This should include the right to nominate assistant superintendents, supervisors, directors and teachers, and to determine qualifications of teachers, courses of study, etc. " 3. The purely business administrative features of the system should be under the management and direction of the board of education. "4. Boards of estimate and apportionment or common councils should be required to include in the tax budget annually a specified minimum amount for the maintenance of the schools. They should have discretion to include a greater sum. " 5. The funds set apart for the schools should be under the direct control of the board of education and should be expended on the order of the board only. " 6. The sites selected for buildings and the plans and specifications for repairs or additions to present buildings or the construction of new buildings should require the approval of the board of education. " 7. The board of education must be composed of a number sufficient to make it a strong, representative, workable body. It should not be so small in numbers that one or two may dominate its action. It should not be so large as to make it cumbersome and unwieldy. A board of seven members is suggested. "8. The method of electing the members of a board of education is important. Members should not be chosen at a general election. When members are so chosen, the interests of the schools are involved in the political issues of the city and men are often chosen upon the determi- nation of the political issues involved instead of their special fitness to serve in such capacity. The best men in a city will often decline to' allow their names to be used at a popular election involving municipal politics when they would willingly accept an appointment from the mayor and render the schools of their city valuable services. In a com- munity desiring the members to be chosen directly by the people, the election should be a separate school election and not at the same time as the municipal election. The method of selecting members of a board of education, therefore, should be either by appointment by the mayor or by election by the people at a date specifically set for such election." — Commissioner A. S. Draper in Eighth (1912) Report of the New The Nature of School Control ii those which are legislative, supervisory, or inspectorial. They are, first of all, general and executive in their nature, in that they do not depend upon technical knowledge for their ready and successful performance. Furthermore, the powers, duties, and responsibilities of administrators are usually defined and imposed directly by law, or prescribed by an authority established in law for this purpose. Competent administrative direction requires a broad ap- preciation of the function of public education in modern community life, a readiness and promptness of action for the establishment and preservation of those conditions that guarantee equality of educational opportunity, and a ready executive capacity for performing the customary duties of effective control, and for meeting new needs as they develop. It depends for its effectiveness upon methods that are gen- eral, clerical, and mechanical, rather than upon those re- quiring special, technical skill. It is non-technical, non- professional ; it operates impersonally, and is, for the most part, regulated by the provisions of the educational code, the municipal charter, and the local regulations and by-laws. This is the variety of control properly exercised by the Board of Education and lay officials. Its attention centers in establishing and supporting schools, in providing ade- quate accommodations and equipment, in securing a suffi- cient number of properly qualified teachers, and in observ- ing the restrictions and requirements of the higher state authority. Supervisory Control depends for its effectiveness upon agents who possess technical and expert knowledge of edu- cational processes, and who are capable of employing that knowledge for the development and advancement of the institutions coming under their control. York State Education Department, pp. iS ff., " The Law Governing City School Systems." See also in this connection E. C. Moore, How New York City Ad- ministers Its Schools, especially Chapters I to IV (World Book Com- pany, 1913). 12 City School Superinsion Stipenasory control is concerned .with zvhat should be taught, and when it should be taught; to zvhom, by whom, how, and to what purpose. It is professional and technical. It aims to establish and to maintain for the individual teacher and the individual pupil standards of v^orth and attainment. It is concerned, primarily, not with the ma- chinery of education, but with the character and worth of its products. It centers its ejffort upon individuals. It is emphatically constructive, rather than merely executive. For its best results it demands the completest cooperation between the members of the teaching and supervisory staffs. For the proper exercise of this form of control superintendents, directors, and principals should be held directly responsible and should be given entire freedom of action. Supervisory control does not lie within the legiti- mate province of the Board of Education or of other municipal boards and officers. Inspectorial Control is similar in nature to supervisory control, yet to be distinguished from it. It is, also, special in character, and is based upon expert knowledge of the conditions and technique of successful and efficient in- struction. It differs from the supervisory activity in that its primary purpose is not personal, constructive service. Its aim is toward an impersonal, objective measurement of the results and worth of the school. It serves to appraise the products of administrative organization and supervisory direction, and on the basis of this appraisal to propose new standards, and new methods. Thus, narrowly interpreted, an inspector's special function is to pass upon worth and efficiency. A supervisor must do this and more; he must raise the worth and increase the efficiency. There has not been, up to the present time, any wide- spread recognition in American education of the great im- portance of the inspectorial form of control. Yet, as the public schools have expanded and have become more intri- cate in their organization, so much greater has become the necessity of means whereby the essential operations may be The Nature of School Control 13 subjected to a checking and valuating process. The schools have lacked an audit that would exhibit how well that which is being attempted is being done ; an audit that would reveal the degree to which the machinery of organization is adapted to its purpose; an audit that would display the essential facts of census, attendance, and rate of progress of pupils, the accomplishments of teachers, and an analysis of the real cost in money of the several and numerous ac- tivities that enter into school education. Inspectorial control should be exercised by duly consti- tuted agencies distinct from those agencies or individuals that are primarily responsible for administrative and su- pervisory direction. Otherwise, there will be no imper- sonal judgments of worth founded on actual results and accomplishments. Strictly speaking, each one of the several matters enter- ing into the make-up of the school is subject, in some degree, to each one of the different forms of control indi- cated. There is legislative control of ideals, finance, build- ings, teachers, instruction, discipline, and, indeed, of all the different features of organized education. There is like- wise an administration, a supervision, and an inspection of each. All of the evidence considered has emphasized the impor- tant fact that there seems to be nowhere, at least within the school system, a clear and conscious discrimination between those activities of control that are administrative in charac- ter and those that are supervisory or inspectorial. The ab- sence of this distinction in the minds of those charged with the main responsibility has been, it is believed, an important factor in retarding the progress and complicating the devel- opment of the public school system. CHAPTER III THE NEW YORK CITY SYSTEM OF SCHOOL CONTROL AND ITS GENERAL RELATIONS TO THE SUPERVISORY ORGANIZATION HISTORICAL A BRIEF review of the recent historical development of the existing plan of school organization and con- trol will serve as a basis for an understanding of many of the characteristic features of the educational system of the city. The Greater New York charter (chapter 387 of the Laws of 1897) united and consolidated into one municipality the former City of New York, comprising what is now the Borough of Manhattan and the Borough of The Bronx; the former City of Brooklyn, which is coincident with Kings County; the County of Queens, which is now the Borough of Queens; and the County of Richmond, which is now the Borough of Richmond.^ In this large territory, covering about 320 square miles, and containing at the time a population of three and a quarter millions,^ there were ^ " All the municipal and public corporations and parts of municipal and public corporations, including cities, villages, towns, and school dis- tricts, but not including counties within the following territory, to wit : The County of Kings, the County of Richmond, the City of Long Island City, the Towns of Newtown, Flushing, and Jamaica, and that part of the Town of Hempstead, in the County of Queens, which is westerly of a straight line drawn . . ., are hereby annexed to, united, and consolidated with the municipal corporation known as the Mayor, Aldermen, and Commonalty of the City of New York, to be hereafter called 'The City of New York.'" — The Greater New York Charter, 1897, sec. I. ' 2,507,414 (1890); 3,437,202 (1900). U. S. Census. 14 New York City System of School Control 15 three city school systems : that of the former City of New York, that of the former City of Brooklyn, and that of the former City of Long Island City. In addition to these regularly organized city school systems, there were thirty- five school districts in the County of Queens and twenty-nine school districts in the County of Richmond, each under an independent school board or board of trustees. Quite ob- viously, the variation in the forms of administrative pro- cedure, in the plans of supervisory and inspectorial control, in the programs of study, in the standards of teaching, and in the methods of selecting teachers was as great as the number of school boards. Indeed, the widest differences often prevailed between schools within the same city. The chief problem sought to be solved by the Greater New York charter was the administrative organization of these many radically different school units into one harmonious school system.^ * " The method of administering the schools in the various communi- ties now consolidated into a single city were as various as the schools themselves. In the old City of New York (now the Boroughs of Man- hattan and The Bronx) there was a Board of Education, consisting of twenty-one members, vested with powers chiefly legislative, and a Board of Superintendents, consisting of a City Superintendent and fifteen assistant superintendents, charged with the general supervision of the schools and the licensing and nomination of teachers. In addition, the city was divided into thirty-five inspection districts, for each of which the Mayor was authorized to appoint five inspectors, whose duty it was to visit and inspect the schools of their several districts and report the results of their investigations. In the City of Brooklyn, there was a Board of Education, consisting of forty-five members, which possessed not only legislative powers, but, through local committees, — a local committee of three members being appointed for each school, — the power to nominate and appoint all teachers; and a Superintendent of Schools and two associate superintendents, whose duty it was to super- vise schools and to license teachers. In what is now the Borough of Queens, in addition to the Board of Education of Long Island City, there were thirty-five school districts, each having an independent school board or board of trustees. In what is now the Borough of Richmond, there were twenty-nine school districts, each under an inde- pendent school board or board of trustees." — First Annual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools, 1899, p. 3. 1 6 City School Supervision The charter of 1897, which went into effect in February, 1898, provided for four borough school boards for the five boroughs as organized.^ Each of these school boards had practically entire control of the schools within its own borough. Each borough had its own superintendent of schools and a staff of assistant (associate) superintendents. There was a board of education for the consolidated city, composed of nineteen representatives from the borough school boards.^ This " central " board of education, as it soon came to be known, had authority chiefly over fiscal affairs and physical matters, the most important of which were, (a) the distribution of the funds provided by the charter for the payment of teachers' salaries; (b) the rec- ommendation of school sites to the city authorities and the erection of school buildings; (c) the establishment of mini- mum qualifications — academic and professional — for teachers' licenses. This board also appointed a city super- intendent of schools, whose chief powers consisted in (a) nominating to the Board of Education, from a list pre- pared by the Municipal Civil Service Commission, the four members of the Board of Examiners; (b) reporting upon the condition of the schools of the city, without, however, any real authority to remedy defects; (c) presiding over meetings of the Board of Examiners and voting on the granting of licenses. Each borough school board was authorized to appoint ^ Manhattan and Bronx, twenty-one members; Brooktyn, forty-five members ; Queens, nine members ; Richmond, nine members. ^ The Borough of Manhattan and the Borough of The Bronx con- stituted a single unit, having eleven representatives (including the chairman) in the central board of education, one borough superintend- ent of schools, and sixteen associate superintendents. The Borough of Brooklyn had six representatives (including the chairman) in the cen- tral board of education, one borough superintendent of schools, and eight associate superintendents. The Borough of Queens and the Bor- ough of Richmond each had one representative (the chairman) on the central board of education, a borough superintendent of schools, and two associate superintendents. New York City System of School Control 17 teachers, but only on the nomination of the borough board of superintendents, except in Brooklyn, where, by the terms of the charter, the old method of appointment through a local committee for each school was continued.^ THE REVISED CHARTER The early experiences under the first charter were suffi- cient to demonstrate that the possibility of securing under its provisions any effective unification or direction of the schools of the city was very remote.^ The Revised Charter of 1 90 1, which, as regards the school system, became effec- tive in February, 1902, endeavored to correct the weak- ness of the former charter by increasing, to a marked de- gree, the centralized control of the public schools. The reorganization, under the Revised Charter, abolished * For a discussion of the method of appointing teachers in Brook- lyn, see First Annual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools, 1899, pp. 86-88. * (a) " The system adopted in 1898 was a compromise, and, like many compromises, failed to work satisfactorily. Under it there was difficulty in fixing responsibility; there was more or less duplication of labor; there was a lack of uniformity in educational work; conflicts of authority between the central board and the school boards occurred. Especially was there a lack of harmony between the Brooklyn School Board and the Board of Education, which the Manhattan-Bronx School Board, by virtue of selecting eleven of the nineteen members, practically controlled. The peculiar ' Brooklyn idea,' — the local committee sys- tem, — which differentiated that borough absolutely from the rest of the city in the appointment and promotion of teachers, was a potent cause of friction. The strong demand for unity in educational ad- ministration was heeded by the Commission appointed to revise the Charter; and the amended charter passed by the legislature in 1901 radi- cally changed the administrative machinery and introduced a new sys- tem." — Palmer, The New York Public School, pp. 298-299. (b) " The plan of school administration led to constant confusion and misunder- standing, and even litigation between the central authorities and the borough authorities, so that but little progress was made in the schools between 1898 and 1902, when the charter was modified to assume its present form." — City Superintendent Maxwell, Communication of Sep- tember 6, 191 1, 1 8 City School Supervision the several borough school boards and provided for one board of education for the entire city, consisting of forty- six members, appointed by the Mayor — twenty-two for the Borough of Manhattan, fourteen for the Borough of Brooklyn, four for the Borough of The Bronx, four for the Borough of Queens, and two for the Borough of Rich- mond. As a safeguard against the imwieldy size of the board of education, provision was made for an executive committee of fifteen, " for the care, government, and man- agement of the public school system of the city." Each borough was to be represented on the committee, to which the board was authorized to depute any of its administra- tive powers. By far the most significant feature of this revised plan of school control was the centralized organization of the scheme of supervision. The powers of the City Superintendent of Schools were greatly extended. For the first time in the history of the Greater New York territory, the City Super- intendent became the real, responsible, professional head of the school system,^ and in many respects the most im- portant agency in its development. The offices of borough superintendent and associate borough superintendent were abolished. A Board of Superintendents was provided for, consisting of the City Superintendent and eight associate city superintendents. To this board extensive powers were given. The practical initiative in all matters purely educa- tional was committed to it. It was authorized to recommend to the Board of Education grades and kinds of licenses, and the qualifications therefor; to establish, subject to the ap- proval of the Board of Education, rules for the gradation, promotion, and transfer of pupils ; to recommend text- books, apparatus, and other scholastic supplies; to recom- mend courses of study; to prescribe regulations relative to methods of teaching, and make syllabuses of topics in the various subjects taught; and to nominate tO' the Board of * As limited by those powers given to the Board of Superintendents. LE =< OF EDUCATION (46) At 30L(7J Special Schools (7) Vocational Schools (s) Studies and Text-books is) Lectures and Libraries (7) H The Board or Examiners (s) Superintenocnt " Libraries Supervisor or Lectures tf-dfkTt rORMS (I) RECORDS Vocational School stn J Directors or Special Branches (9) SuPEI^INTENOENT OF NauTICAU ScHOOL JK^I9II Administrative and SopeRvisoRv Orcanization THE BOROUGH PRESIDENT BOARD- ESTIMATE PEOPLE THE MAYOR I THE BOARD i the executive commi ttee qs) i OF EDUCATION (46) I Finance (s) Supplies w Buildings f9) AuoiroR SuPERINrtNOENT «■ Supplies Care o' Buildings (7) SuPERINTENOtNT OF BuiLOINCI AND GROI/NDS C O M M Sites o) ATHLEriCSte)BYLAWS(5) Supervisor o' JANITORS TEES Elementary Schools O) High *nd' Training Schools 0) Nautical School (?) Special Schools (?) Vocational Schools (s) Studies and Text-books is) Lectures *nd Libraries (7) CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS PERMANENf Census Board (3) Board »' Retirement (7) MCMBCRS Nominationo) School (3) Management -| BOARD 0^ SUPERINTENDENTS nTc"p"M'"MTT"T"rj_EV_E"s" r ' iTEXr-BOOK^THicH fJlTTRAINlNG IIiTEvENING (lilVACAnON (llJC Ywl LibrarieJI Schools I Schools! Schools | Schools! (9) Course Stuoyw Compulsory EoucArioN The Board <>' Examiners (s) Superintendent '" Libraries Supervisor op Lectures reWrtJ FORMS W RECOROS INSPECTORS (4) DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS (26) PRINCIPALS (450) Assistants ro Principals HtADSor Departments Vocational School Sill Directors or Special Branches (9) SuPfrflNTENOENT OF Nautical School I TEACHERS O^^sej The Control of the Public School System of the: City of New York -1911 New York City System of School Control 19 Education persons to fill all vacancies in the teaching force. Nominations (except principals of high schools, and prin- cipals and teachers of training schools) were required to be made from eligible lists prepared by the Board of Ex- aminers, the Board of Superintendents having liberty to select from the first three names on the list. Teachers were to be appointed, as far as practicable, for districts within the boroughs in which they resided. All the borough and associate borough superintendents were continued in office, either as associate city superintend- ents or district superintendents. THE GENERAL SCHEME OF CONTROL The accompanying diagram attempts to represent the re- lation and interdependence of the several boards, officers, and other instrumentalities that constitute the organized scheme of public school control. It further exhibits the complexity of this organized scheme due to the increasing division of control and the resulting specialization. THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF THE EXISTING PLAN OF CONTROL The City Superintendent of Schools, in his fifth annual report for the year ending July 31, 1903, the first complete year of the operation of the Revised Charter, set forth the essential principle underlying the revised scheme of educa- tional control. " During the entire period covered by this report the public school system of the City of New York has been operated under the plan laid down by the Revised Charter, which became effective, as far as the schools were con- cerned, on February 3, 1902. By August i, 1902, when the period covered by this report begins, what properly might be called the period of transition from the old plan of school management to the new centralized method of control had 20 City School Supervision passed. By that time the new Board of Education, of forty-six members, was fully organized, and was discharg- ing, without hesitancy, all the functions of administrative control exercised formerly by a central Board of Education and four borough school boards. The Board of Superin- tendents, consisting of eight members, appointed as Asso- ciate City Superintendents, and the City Superintendent, as chairman, similarly had succeeded to functions distrib- uted formerly among four borough boards of superintend- ents and the City Superintendent. Some of these func- tions formerly distributed among the borough, but now vested in a single Board of Superintendents, are as follows : Nomination of teachers, the recommendation of scholastic supplies and text-books, the suggestion of courses of study, the direction of school organization and methods of instruc- tion, and in general the performance of all duties arising under those sections of the charter which place the initiative in all matters purely educational in the hands of the Board of Superintendents, subject to the approval of the Board of Education. Under the old plan the several boards of borough superintendents had been free to act without uni- formity, with the result that there existed in the City of New York four school systems, all differing in aims and in standards. " By this time, too, the city had been divided into forty- six school districts. To each pair of these districts had been assigned a district superintendent, who, thereby, was made the local supervising officer, and, as such, was held respon- sible for the schools entrusted to his care. Under the old plan these superintendents, of whom there are tvv^enty-six, had been compelled to devote much of their time, as mem- bers of boards of borough superintendents, to preparing suggestions for administrative legislation. Under the new system these men were released from this unnecessary work and made free to give their time to actual supervision in the schools, a most important branch of school administra- tion, which, heretofore, had been too much neglected. New York City System of School Control 21 Under the plan now in effect the district superintendent is absolutely responsible for the scholastic welfare of each school in his territory. This responsibility malvcs it neces- sary that he should be thoroughly familiar with the inner workings of each school. At the same time this plan puts into each neighborhood an officer to whom the citizen can go for the righting of grievances — a fact which brings the administration of the schools into more intimate personal contact with the people. " The districting of the schools was a necessary prelimi- nary to the appointment by the borough presidents of the forty-six local school boards. These boards consist each of five members, appointed by the borough presidents; one member of the Board of Education, assigned by the presi- dent of the Board of Education; and a district superin- tendent, who, by virtue of his office, becomes the educa- tional adviser of the local boards within his territory. The creation of these local school boards, and the manner in which they have discharged their functions, have brought the administration of the schools very much closer to the people. In the first place, the local school board, which represents the people, has direct representation in the Board of Education through the member of that body who is, ex officio, a member of the local school board. In the second place, through the district superintendent, the local board and the people secure the presentation of their views to the Board of Superintendents. " The system of representation, moreover, works in an- other direction. The Board of Superintendents has its representative member, the City Superintendent, in the Board of Education, and that body, through him, as well as through its individual members, can express its views to the local school boards, and to the district superintendents. . " A careful study of the workings of the system in the several districts soon convinced me that responsibility among members of the Board of Superintendents must also be determined and definitely fixed. Such a plan, moreover, I 22 City School Supervision felt would give the teachers and the people a more direct representation in the Board of Superintendents than the charter contemplated. To bring about this improvement I introduced a scheme of grouping several school districts into a division, and assigned to the care of each division one of the Associate City Superintendents. This plan, while not prescribed by the charter, is entirely in consonance with its intent, and certainly is in no way prohibited. I found it expedient to constitute seven of these divisions among the elementary schools, and to place the high schools of the entire city in the eighth division. Under this plan the district superintendents and, through them, the schools in their respective districts, are made directly responsible to an Associate City Superintendent, who, in turn, is respon- sible for the educational welfare of his division of the city. The Division Superintendent, under this plan, is supposed to represent directly in the Board of Superintendents the interests of the schools under his charge. " There remained three District Superintendents not needed for district work among the elementary schools proper. One of these was assigned to the care of summer schools and playgrounds; the second to the supervision of the evening schools, and the third to the inspection of high schools. The Associate City Superintendents also were ap- pointed to committees, each of which is charged with the development of some important phase of public education. This scheme of supervision throughout the city, as can be readily seen, is one which fixes responsibility, instead of scattering it. Under such a system it becomes a simple matter to lay one's finger on the man responsible when aught goes wrong. When the responsibility has been fixed, the correction of defects is comparatively simple. So defi- nite is this responsibility that some one person is made responsible for the welfare of each child in school, and culpable of neglect if any child of school age is allowed to be out of school. . . . " Under the new charter the City Superintendent was New York City System of School Control 23 required to assume many new duties. He was required, for the first time, to take an active part in the actual man- agement of the schools. The inhibition in the charter against his ' interference in the actual conduct of any school ' was annulled. He assumed the educational func- tions that naturally belong to his office. The full control of the department of truancy was placed in his hands, in- stead of being divided among several school bodies. " The Board of Examiners, under the new charter, con- tinued practically its old duty, with the welcome exception that a single standard of licenses was substituted for the old condition, where each borough had different require- ments for the same licenses. " That this system of cross-representation from the people to the Board of Education, and to the Board of Superintendents, and the City Superintendent, has worked smoothly is established by the fact that there has been no demand for any material change in the charter. Each ele- ment of the system has moved harmoniously for the interest of the schools, and has demonstrated its usefulness in the particular field to which the charter assigned it. As far as the schools themselves are concerned, the effect of the Revised Charter during this period is to be determined most accurately by the year's record of actual accomplish- ment. A statement of what has been done follows, and on this I am willing to found my assertion that centralized control of education has been of material benefit to the schools." ^ The extent to which this system of supervisory organiza- tion has, after a decade of practise, been successful in establishing those conditions that underlie the effective activity of teachers and the best welfare of children is a fundamental question discussed in this volume. * Fifth Annual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools, pp. ii-iS- 24 City School Supervision THE GENERAL NATURE OF THE EXISTING PLAN OF CONTROL On the administrative as well as the supervisory side, the present organization is the result of a compromise, rather than of a carefully devised plan to meet specified ends. The consolidation act of 1897, and the Revised Charter of 1901, were obliged to recognize the practises and organization of public schools as they then existed in the several cities and boroughs. The obligations of the differ- ent municipalities entering intO' the Greater City needed to be carried out; the rights of individuals already possess- ing a status must be protected. A decade and a half of compromise would seem to be sufficient. It is now impera- tive that compromise give way to some plan established for the single purpose of directly meeting the educational needs of the children of the city. It is relevant at this point to indicate one of the principal conclusions of the present study: That, under the existing organization and mode of operation, the schools of the city are under the continued necessity of reacting to a maxi- mum amount of external administrative control, are influ- enced by a minimum amount of competent expert and con- structive supervision, and do not receive the benefits of regular inspection, and of unbiased estimates Of the value of their methods and products. The major energies of the supervisory staff, including the City Superintendent, asso- ciate superintendents, district superintendents, supervisors, directors, as well as principals and assistant principals, are consumed by the general administrative and routine, cleri-. cal duties. Altogether too little genuine and progressive leadership influences the work of the teachers or the accom- plishment of pupils. This general situation is in large meas- ure due to the previously mentioned failure to distinguish between the essential administrative, supervisory, and in- spectorial forms of control. In this connection the mere business of external organization and operation of a system of public schools for a rapidly expanding city of a diverse New York City System of School Control 25 population of five millions has been, it must be admitted, a disturbing factor of no small influence. The schools have been maintained under a form of con- trol that is distinctly administrative and mechanical ; a form of control that has not kept a single eye on the real sub- stance and worth of teaching and education. The schools have not been kept under the influence of that effective su- pervision and inspection which gives unity, purpose, and high standard of attainment to the work of teachers. There is a striking lack of consciousness within the school system of the radical difference between merely keeping the schools in operation, and keeping the schools in operation so as to produce tangible residts of high quality. The organisation of the school system has been from the top down, rather than from the bottom up, — a procedure as obstructive to progress and real grozvth in education as it is in other human institutions. 26 City School Supervision EXHIBIT I. THE BOARD OF SCHOOL CONTROL City Population Name of Board Selection No. of Members Term New York 4,766,883 Board of Education By Mayor; from the sev- eral boroughs as apportioned by city charter 46 5 years Chicago 2,185,283 Board of Education By Mayor, with advice and consent of council; from city at large 21 3 years Philadelphia 1, 549,008 Board of Public Education By judges of Courts of Com- mon Pleas; from district at large IS 6 years St. Louis 687,029 Board of Education Popular election; from city at large 12 6 years Boston 670,585 School Committee Popular election; from city at large s 3 years Cleveland 560,663 Board of Education 7 4 years Baltimore 558,485 Board of School Com- missioners By Mayor, with approval of Second Branch of city council; from city at large 9 6 years Pittsburg 533,905 Board of Public Education By judges of Courts of Common Pleas; from district at large 15 6 years Detroit 465,766 Board of Education Popular election; one mem- ber from each ward 18 4 years Buffalo 423,71s Schools under control of the Common Council; the president of the Board of Aldermen appoints a standing School Committee of 7 members which reports to council San Francisco 416,912 Board of Education By Mayor; from city at large 4' 4 years Milwaukee 373,857 Board of School Directors Popular election; from city at large IS 6 years Cincinnati ' 363,591 Board of Education Popular election; 3 from city at large and 24 from the several sub-districts II 4 years Newark 347,469 Board of Education By Mayor; from city at large 9 3 years New Orleans 339.075 Board of School Directors Popular election; from city at large S 4 years Washington 331,069 Board of Education By judges of Supreme Court of D. C; from district at large 9 3 years Los Angeles 319,198 Board of Education Popular election; from city at large 7 2 years Minneapolis 301,408 Board of Education Popular election; from city at large 7 6 years 1 The Superintendent of Common Schools, ex officio a member, without right to vote. New York City System of School Control 27 (CITIES OF 300,000 POPULATION AND OVER) Compen- sation Vacancies each year No. of Wo- men Members Citation Local and Visiting Boards None g or II S (1912) City Char- ter, Sec. 1061 46 local boards of 7 members, who are the district superintendent, one member of the Board of Education, and $ members appointed by president of local borough None 7 I (igii) Acts, 191 1, relating 1 Free Schools, Sec. 128 Sub-committee of 3 from Board of Edu- cation for each of the 14 districts None S every a years None (1912) Act of May 18, 1911, Art. I and 2 None 4 every 2 years None (1912) Act of March 23, 1897, Sec. i, 2, and 4 None I, 2, or 3 None (1912) Acts 1905, Chapter 349, Sec. i None Varies Revised Statutes, Sec. 3897 None 3 every 2 years None (1913) City Char- ter, Sees. 25, 99 Board of Commissioners appoints at least one resident of each school com- munity as a school visitor None S every 3 years 3 (1912) Act of May 18, 191 1, Art. 1 and 2 None 8 or 10 every 2 yr. None (1912) City Charter, 1904, Sees. 593, 614 City Char- ter 1908, Ti- tle, XII Mayor appoints a Board of Examiners — 5 citizens to visit and inspect the schools and conduct teachers' examinations $3000 per yr. I I (1910) Charter of City and County of San Francisco, Art. VII, Ch. I, Sec. I None S every 2 years 2 (1911) School Law of Wis. 1911, p. 275, Sec. I A Citizen Committee of 5 appointed by Pres. of Board of School Directors to ad- vise Board concerning Trade Schools None Varies I (1912) Revised Statutes, Sec. 3897 None 3 None (igii) 1911, Ch. 233 None S every 4 years None (1909) Acts of 1912, No. 214, Sees. 70, 73 None 3 3 (1912) Organic Law, Sec. 2 None 7 every 2 years None (1909) Charter of city as amended 1907, Art. 7, Sec. 69. Art. 9, Sees. 195-6 2 every 2 yr. 3 every 6th yr. I (1911) City Charter, Ch. 2, Sec. 2, as amended up to 1905 ' Cincinnati board reorganized, Jan. i, 1914, with seven members. 28 City School Supervision EXHIBIT n GENERAL SUPERVISORY ORGANIZATION (Cities of 300,000 Population and Over) CITY SUPERINTENDENT Selected How Term (years) Salary Citation New York Board of Education 6 $12,000 Charter, Sec. 1067 Chicago Board of Education I 10,000 Rules, 1910, Ch. II, Art. II Philadelphia Board of Education I 9,000 By-laws, 1910, Art. I, Sec. I St. Louis Board of Education 4 8,000 Rules, 191 1, Rule 3 Boston School Committee 6 10,000 Rules, 1912, p. 7, Sec. s Cleveland Board of Education Not longer than s 6,000 Statutes, Sec. 4017a Baltimore Board of School Commissioners No rule S.ooo Rules, igo7. Art. VI Pittsburg Board of Education 4 9,000 Act of May 18, 1911, Sec. 2223 Detroit Board of Education 3 6,000 Charter, Sec. 598 Buffalo Popular election 4 7,500 Charter, 1896, Sees. 45, 330 San Francisco Popular election 4 4,000 State constitution. Art. IX, Sec. 3 Milwaukee Board of Education 3 6,000 Laws, 1907, Ch. 459, Sec. 9 Cincinnati Board of Education 5 10,000 Rules, 1911, Rule 54 Newark Board of Education No rule 7,000 Rules; Rule 8 New Orleans Board of Directors 4 S.ooo Act 214, 1912, Sec. 70 Washington Board of Education 3 S.ooo Organic Law, Sec. 3 Los Angeles Board of Education 6,000 Charter, Art. VII, Sec. 71 Minneapolis Board of Education 3 S.Soo Rules and Regulations, 1910, Sec. 10 New York City System of School Control 29 EXHIBIT II GENERAL SUPERVISORY ORGANIZATION (Cities op 300,000 Population and Over) BOARD OF SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATE DEPUTY OR ASSISTANT StJPERINTENDENTS Composition Selected How Number City Superintendent and eight associate superintendents Associates by Board; District by Board upon recommendation of Board of Super- intendents Associate 8 District 26 Assistant and District Super- intendents Board Assistant 2 District 12 City Superintendent and four associate superintendents Board, upon recommendation of Super- intendent Associate 4 District 10 Board, upon recommendation of Super- intendent Assistant 4 City Superintendent and six assistant superintendents Board Assistant 6 Board Assistant 4 City Superintendent and six assistant superintendents Board Assistant 6 Board, upon recommendation of Su- perintendent Associate Assistant District Superintendent Assistant 14 Superintendent Deputy 4 Board, upon recommendation of Su- perintendent Assistant 3 Board, upon recommendation of Su- perintendent Assistant i Board of Education Assistant 3 Board Assistant 2 Board, upon recommendation of Su- perintendent Assistant 2 Board Deputy I Assistant i Board, upon recommendation of Su- perintendent Assistant 2 CHAPTER IV THE SCHOOL AS THE UNIT FOR SUPERVISION THE PRINCIPAL AS A SUPERVISOR WHATEVER may be the theory by which a school system is organized and operated, the single school must be taken as the working basis for the calculation of the educational worth of organization, methods, and re- sults. The center of gravity of supervisory control, in so far as supervision fulfils its legitimate functions, is the principal. The time-worn epigram, " As is the teacher, so is the school," has lost, through the complexities, magni- tude, and regimentation of public education in the modern city, most of its practical significance and force. " As is the principal, so is the school " more nearly represents the truth. Upon the independence, skill, and qualities of leader- ship of the principal depend primarily the ideals, standards, and achievements of teachers and pupils. In fact, if the already indicated characteristic of effective school super- vision be accepted as fundamental — that supei^vision is dominantly and constantly personal in its methods and objects in order to attain its constructive ends — then, in the office of the principal will be found the measure of the real, as well as the potential, value of the supervisory organization.^ * See F. M. McMurry, Elementary School Standards (School Effi- ciency Series, World Book Co., 1913) for a detailed presentation of the work of elementary school principals as supervisors. 30 The School as the Unit for Supervision 31 SUPERVISORY ORGANIZATION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS The evident intention of the existing practise is to regard each fully provided and permanent school building as the unit for school organization and supervision. A principal is the responsible head of such a unit. The separate organi- zation, of boys' and girls' schools, or of grammar and pri- mary schools, within the same building, which formerly obtained, especially previous to 1897, has for the most part been discontinued.^ The policy of consolidating into one school, under one principal, separate school organizations housed in one build- ing has been justified by the City Superintendent of Schools by the following arguments of unquestionable soundness. " On behalf of the policy of placing all the teachers and their classes assembled in one building under one administrative head, the following claims may justly be made : " First, there is economy in expenditure for super- visory purposes — a very important matter when, owing to the marvelously rapid growth of the public school system, there is considerable doubt at the begin- ning of each year whether the annual appropriation will be sujfficient. " Second, there is economy in space ; that is, each * " There was a strong tendency during the period under review (1890- 1897), and for several years previously, in favor of consolidating schools and departments, where practicable, in the interest of eflficiency and economy, and repeated recommendations on this head are to be found in the annual reports of the City Superintendent. The Board adopted many of these. Consolidations were rendered easier by the abolition, in 1897, of the separation between grammar and primary schools. The primary schools (forty-eight in all), which had been numbered by them- selves, were thereupon renumbered, to follow in consecutive order the grammar schools, and since that time, all the schools, without reference to the grades taught in them, have been designated simply as public schools." — Palmer, The New York Public School, pp. 192-193. 32 City School Supervision building may be made to accommodate a larger num- ber of pupils with one organization than with two or- ganizations — a consideration of paramount impor- tance when the necessity for reducing the number of children on part time is concerned. When there is only one school organization in a building, it is easier to keep every seat occupied through the consolidation of small classes than when there are two organizations, " Third, the character of the supervision is, as a rule, improved, because there is a better opportunity to unify and coordinate the work of teachers and pupils. A school reaches its highest efficiency when it is so organized that all teachers cooperate to reach a com- mon purpose, and when the efforts and the experience of all teachers are made to reen force the efforts and experience of each teacher. Such a result is most easily attained under the influence of one directing mind."i Under the by-laws now governing the organization of elementary schools the following provisions for the super- vision of such schools are made : ^ a. Less than six classes — Senior teacher. Teaches a class. b. Six to seventeen classes ; grades belozv yA — Teacher in charge, i. e., assistant to principal (head of depart- ment), or person holding higher license. May be required to teach a class. c. Six to seventeen classes ; any grades above 6B — Head teacher or assistant to principal (head of depart- * Seventh Annual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools, pp. 41-42. .... * See Appendix A for these by-laws. For the purpose of indicating the recent tendencies, the by-laws, as they existed prior to January i, 1912, are presented in addition to those now in force, and adopted to make the adjustment thought necessary on account of the 1912 salary schedules. The School as the Unit for Supervision 33 ment), or person holding- higher license. Relieved from teaching a class. d. Eighteen or more classes — Principal. No teaching. The by-laws provide for supervisory and clerical assist- ance as follows : a. Tzvelve or more classes — Additional teacher. b. Twelve to twenty-seven classes — One assistant to prin- cipal when school has high school department and elementary school has twelve or more classes. c. Tzventy-eight or more classes — One assistant to principal. d. Forty-eight or more classes — Two assistants to prin- cipal. e. Fifty-eight or more classes — Two additional teachers. The following distributions of elementary school organi- zations, according to the above classification, have been com- piled from the official directory of schools, issued February I, 1 91 2. The data of this table show that the problem of supervision is the supervision of large schools. Man- hattan Bronx Brook- lyn Queens Rich- mond a. Less than six classes ....... b. Six to seventeen classes, below 7A c. Six to seventeen classes, above 6B d. Eighteen or more classes .... I 5 I 153 3 25 74 57 34 2 5 37 5 IS 20 9 5 3 16 5 144 13 66 76 26 6 16 18 18 33 42 68 15 2 I 14 4 46 lO a. Less than twelve classes .... b. Less than twenty-eight classes c. Twenty-eight to forty-seven classes d. Forty-eight or more classes . . . e. Fifty-eight or more classes . . . 20 29 5 34 City School Supervision In effect, the new by-law, as formulated to correspond with the provisions of the 1912 salary schedules, (a) in- creases the number of classes necessary for " principal " schools from twelve to eighteen; (b) adds an additional teacher for schools having twelve to forty-eight classes ; (c) diminishes from three to two the number of assistants to principal in schools of sixty-seven or more classes. SUPERVISORY STAFF OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS : STATISTICAL Certain distinctive features of the problem of supervision of the elementary schools of the city are exhibited in the following tables (I and 11). To select, to organize, and to maintain on a high level of effectiveness and cooperation a staff of nearly nine hundred supervisors in five hundred schools are tasks the successful performance of which de- mands the best of civic and educational ability. The pro- portion of supervisors in elementary schools — i. e., prin- cipals, heads of departments, and assistants not teaching — to regular teachers, as shown by Table II, would seem to be an adequate one ; providing that these supervisors are com- petent, and free to devote themselves chiefly to those mat- ters that should have first claim upon time, energy, and skill.i SUPERVISORY STAFF OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS: SALARIES A detailed, critical discussion of the complicated and widely debated question of the compensation of teachers and supervisors in the New York public school system, how- ever fundamentally related to quality of service, is not pos- sible here. The schedules of salaries of those occupying supervisory positions in the elementary schools of the city are presented ^ as the basis for the expression of a general * As a matter of fact, this freedom for supervisory work does not obtain. See F. M. McMurry, Elementary School Standards. * See Appendix B for the old (prior to January i, 1912) and the new schedules. The School as the Unit for Supervision 35 TABLE I Showing the Number of Supervisory Officers in Elementary Schools — Principals, Heads of Departments, and Assistants Not Teach- ing — FOR Each Year during the Five-year Period, 1907-1911, Inclusive ^ 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 (p. 31) (P-35) (p. 41) (p. 40) (p. 36) Manhattan 33^ 339 3S6 354 354 Bronx . . 64 71 77 79 84 Brookljoi . 276 276 302 316 316 Queens . . 61 68 77 80 81 Richmond . 19 63 22 24 23 Totals . 751 817 834 853 858 TABLE II Showing the Ratio of the Number of Supervisory Officers to the Number of Regular Teachers in Elementary Schools for Each Year during the Five-year Period, 1907-1911, Inclusive ^ 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 (P- 31) (P- 35) (P-4i) (p. 40) (p. 36) Manhattan 18.3 18.5 17.6 18.0 18.1 Bronx . . 18.9 18.6 18.1 18.8 18.8 Brooklyn . 16.6 17.8 17.1 17.1 17.4 Queens . . 17-5 17.2 16.1 16.0 16.3 Richmond . 17.1 iS-7 17.2 15-8 16.7 * Compiled from the annual reports of the City Superintendent of Schools. The number in parentheses under each year refers to the page of the report from which the data are taken. 36 City School Supervision conclusion regarding the financial attractiveness of these positions as compared with the financial attractiveness of supervisory positions outside of the City of New York. It must be clearly understood that in making this comparison there is no implication that the existing salaries for elemen- tary school principalships and related positions in the school system are either too high or too low. This statement, though, seems to have ample foundation: that, speaking generally, New York City is paying for supervisory service according to a standard equal to, and perhaps above, that of other cities. Reliable and comprehensive information as to the existing salary schedules of elementary principals of other cities is not available; even though this informa- tion could be obtained, it is doubtful if it could be here employed for comparative purposes. If, however, the sal- aries of city superintendents of schools of other cities are compared with those of elementary school principals of New York City, it may be concluded that in so far as com- pensation serves to attract ability, the City of New York should be able to compete to a fair advantage for compe- tent men and women to supervise schools. The following tables (III and IV) are self-explanatory. The median annual salary of the city superintendents in one hundred and three cities of fifty thousand population and over (Census 19 10) is between $3,750 and $4,000; in ninety- four cities of between twenty thousand and one hun- dred thousand population, in the North Atlantic States, the median annual salary is between $2,750 and $3,000. Under the old schedules the initial salary of men prin- cipals of New York elementary schools was $2,750, increas- ing by an annual increment of $250 until the fourth year of approved service, when the maximum amount, $3,500, was reached. By the provision of the new schedule, the initial salary is $2,300, with an annual increment of $240, until the sixth year of service, when the maximum, $3,500, is reached. The School as the Unit for Supervision ^y TABLE III Showing Distribution of Salaries of Superintendents of Schools in Cities of 50,000 Population and Over (Census 1910) ^ $2,ooo-$2,25o 2 2,251- 2,500 6 2,501- 2,750 2 2,751- 3,000 16 3,001- 3,250 o 3,251- 3,500 . 7 3,Soi- 3,750 18 3,751- 4,000 15 4,001- 4,250 2 4,251- 4,500 4 4,501- 4,750 o 4,751- 5,000 15 5,001- 5,250 o 5,251- 5,500 I 5,501- 6,000 9 6,001- 7,500 4 7,501-10,000 2 Total 103 Median, $3,75o-$4,ooo It is fair to assume that the cities included in Tables III and IV maintain, for their chief educational office, standards of personality, education, training, and experi- ence at least equal to those in force in New York for ele- mentary school principals. selection of elementary school principals : training ; experience; age A thorough study of the existing requirements and methods of selection of principals and assistants to principal has not been made. Certain features of the system now in operation are selected for brief consideration. * Compiled from Annual Report of U. S. Commissioner of Educa- tion, 191 1, pp. 620-643. Five cities, no data. 38 City School Supervision TABLE rv Showing DiSTRiBtrxioN of Salaries of Sxn>EEiNTENDENTS of Schools in Cities of 20,000 to 100,000 Population (North Atlantic States) (Census 1910)1 $i,4oo-$i,soo I i>5oi- 1,75° o 1,751- 2,000 15 2,001- 2,250 4 2,251- 2,500 19 2,501- 2,750 6 2,7Si- 3.000 18 3,001- 3,250 o 3,251- 3,500 12 3,Soi- 3,750 S 3,751- 4,000 6 4,001- 4,250 I 4,251- 4,500 3 4,501- 4,750 o 4,751- 5,000 4 Total . • • 94 Median, $2,75o-$3,ooo The following- table (V), relating to the education and experience of elementary school principals appointed during 1908-1909, 1909-1910, 1910-1911, and 1911-1912 (Feb- ruary i), has been prepared from the official records in the City Superintendent's office. It reveals the significant fact that approximately three-fourths of those appointed to elementary school principalships during recent years not only have received their entire education and training within the schools of New York, but also have had the whole of their teaching experience within the school system. Less than 10 per cent of those appointed have had any profitable experience in schools outside. Admitting that the system * Compiled from Annual Report of U. S. Commissioner of Educa- tion, 191 1, pp. 620-643. Six cities, no data. States included: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey. The School as the Unit for Supervision 39 TABLE V Relating to the Education and Experience of Elementary School Principals Appointed during 1908-1909, 1909-1910, 1910-1911, and 1911-1912 (Feb. i) Men Women Total Number of Appointments Education and Training — Entirely within the city Partly within the city Entirely outside the city Previous Experience — Entirely within the city Outside of the city 43 27 10 6 32 II 41 30 3 8 29 12 84 57 13 14 61 23 of selection of principals now controlled by the Board of Examiners results in the appointment of the most capable of those presenting- themselves as candidates, the marked tendency of this system toward inbreeding should not be permitted to continue unheeded. Every school system re- quires for its progressive development the infusion of new blood — both teachers ^ and supervisors, whose attitudes and standards of value have not become conventionalized, * " It will be noticed that during the last three or four years the number of persons trained in schools and colleges, other than those of the City of New York, has been diminishing. The diminution is prob- ably due to the fact that teachers' salaries have been generally increased throughout the villages and cities of this state and neighboring states. These increased salaries, though seldom, if ever, equal to those paid in New York, are really quite as large, if not larger, because in smaller places the cost of living is less. Hence of late there has been little financial incentive to seek positions in New York. In view of the in- crease in the salaries of our women teachers, however, after January i, 1912, it may be expected that the number of teachers coming from the outside will again increase. This is an effect greatly to be desired, as nothing is more deadening to a school system than continually filling 40 City School Supervision and whose influence, therefore, counteracts the narrowness and provincialism which are inevitable characteristics of the highly organized life of a great city. New York City has become a great center of industrial, commercial, civic, intellectual, and artistic activity; hence it offers unusual opportunities for persons of ability, am- bition, and energy. If ,New York is to maintain a public school system equal to the tremendous task imposed upon it, some way must be found to attract to its educational ser- vice men and women of mark from outside. At the same time the stimulus of promotion must operate for the best of those within the school system. A Chinese wall about the public schools may protect them from invaders; but the gates should be open to those who bring new ideals, fresh ideas, new modes of action. Only thus will the schools be safe from the blight of isolation and self-sufhciency. One other question presents itself from a consideration of the data given in Table VI. The principal's office is one that requires enthusiasm, qualities of leadership, plasticity, training, study. Are these qualities best conserved through a system by which, gen- erally speaking, appointment is postponed until the age of thirty-six, in the case of men, and until forty-four, in the case of women ? The issue here raised is a complicated one, one concerning which it is easy to develop controversy. Nevertheless, it is in place to suggest that persons beyond the age of forty, appointed to principalships, unless they have had more or less extended opportunity for close contact with the entire range of elementary school work, or unless, they are endowed with conspicuous merit, are not likely to render that quality of service which the welfare of teachers and pupils demands. Only the exceptional individual could vacancies in the ranks of teachers from those trained in its own schools. The frequent introduction of teachers with diverse training and diverse experience is ever necessary to healthy growth and vigorous vitality." — Thirteenth Annual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools, page i6i. The School as the Unit for Supervision 41 TABLE VI Showing the Age of Elementary School Principals at the Time of Appointment: Principals Appointed during 1908-1909, 1909-1910, 1910-1911, 1911-1912 (Feb. 1)1 Age at Number Number Appointment of Men of Women 26 I 27 28 I 29 30 2 31 I 32 3 I 33 I 34 6 2 35 3 z 36 4 I 37 2 I 38 3 3 39 40 6 3 41 I X 42 I I 43 2 44 4 45 I 4 46 I 4 47 I 2 48 2 49 2 5° SI 52 2 No Record S s Total, 43 41 Median Age, 36 44 * The by-laws of the Board of Education (sec. 66, sub. 2) provide for age limits for licenses as elementary school principals : men, 25 to 45 years of age ; women, 25 to 40. However, " In the case of applicants who have been ten years in the supervising or teaching force of the public schools of the City of New York, the maximum age for hcenses 42 City School Supervision serve as class teacher or departmental head for a consider- able number of years, and develop or retain those charac- teristics essential to the principalship. Teachers at forty- five may, as is frequently alleged, be rich in altruistic mo- tives and social influence. But those powers and habits of mind that underlie the fruitful supervisory direction of schools are likely to be lacking, unless they have been con- sciously cultivated. POWERS AND DUTIES OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS The Revised Charter does not, naturally and properly, specify the details of the organization and control of the several classes of schools constituting the public school sys- tem. However, it is not without significance that the only duty and responsibility of moment prescribed by the charter for principals emphasizes the supervisory functions of this office.^ Principals are, under the by-laws of the Board of Educa- tion, " the responsible administrative heads of their respec- tive schools." Thie chief duties and functions of principals, as enumerated by these by-laws, are as follows : a. To instruct heads of departments and teachers in all matters pertaining to discipline and teaching. (Sec. 43-1.) b. To carry out the by-laws, rules, regulations, and reso- lutions of the Board of Education; and the instructions of the City Superintendent of Schools, and the Board of Superintendents. (Sec. 43-1.) c. To establish standards of teaching for their schools through the organization of the work of teachers, through as director of a special branch and as principal of an elementary school shall be, for a man, 55 years, and for a woman, 50 years, and for li- censes as assistant to principal (women only), 50 years." ^ " Subject to regulations prescribed by the Board of Superintendents, and under the supervision of the district superintendent in charge, the principal of each school shall direct the methods of teaching in all classes under his charge." — Revised Charter, sec. 1086. The School as the Unit for Supervision 43 inspection and examination of class work, through model lessons in the presence of teachers, and through conferences with teachers, (Sec. 43-2.) d. To give special attention to newly appointed, substi- tute, and unsuccessful teachers ; and to keep a record of assistance rendered to such teachers. (Sec. 43-3.) e. To rate teachers according to their efficiency. (Sec. 43-3-) f. To report upon the work of teachers holding tempo- rary licenses. (Sec. 39-14 d.) g. To submit reports to the City Superintendent of Schools, and to the district superintendent. (Sec. 43-4.) h. To prepare requisitions for text-books and apparatus. (Sec. 43-5; sec. 32-11.) i. To keep records of class inspections and examinations, and to require heads of departments to keep similar records. (Sec. 43-6.) j. To direct the work of heads of departments. (Sec. 43-7-) k. To exercise care that no injury is done to school prop- erty, and to report injuries and repairs needed. (Sec. 43-8.) 1. To supervise the janitor as to operating and protect- ing the heating and ventilating apparatus ; and to instruct teachers in the regulation of the temperature of class rooms. (Sec. 43-9.) m. To keep record of absence and lateness of members of the supervising and teaching force. (Sec. 43-11.) n. To exercise pupils and teachers in rapid dismissal. (Sec. 43-13) o. To engage in no other occupations that will interfere with duties ; to give no private lessons for pay in any pub- lic school. (Sec. 43-14.) p. To prepare pay-rolls (Sec. 58-2) accompanied by spe- cial report of school sessions. (Sec. 43-16.) q. To require pupils of all grades, except those of the first two years, to devote one half-hour each day to study in 44 City School Supervision the class room under the direction of the class teachers. (Sec. 43-17.) r. To report to the district superintendent inefficient and incompetent teachers. (Sec. 43-18.) s. To report to the City Superintendent teachers absent without leave of absence properly granted. (Sec. 43-18.) t. To report to the district superintendent boys to whom employment certificates have been issued. (Sec. 43-20.) u. To report weekly to the district superintendent names of pupils leaving school for the purpose of engaging in any emplo5Ament. (Sec. 54-5.) v. To provide the district superintendent, when the school is visited for examination, with a written statement of facts. (Sec. 41-14.) w. To oversee the ratings of pupils. (Sec. 49-4.) X. To keep records of pupils. (Sec. 55-16.) While the literal expression of the by-laws makes the principal " the responsible administrative head " of his school, the spirit of the by-laws places upon him a large supervisory responsibility. He is, under the obligations of the above prescriptions, especially items a, c, d, e, f, i, r, v, and w, the potential supervisory head of his school. In fact, however, he has no real supervisory independence or initiation. Practically all of the constructive features of his work are under the immediate control of the Board of Superintendents, the associate superintendent, or the dis- trict superintendent. In the last analysis, the ineffectiveness of the elementary schools of the city may be measured by the extent to which the principals fail to perform, or are prevented from performing, those activities that are the rightful functions of their offices. Professor McMurry ^ has pointed out some of the hindrances to the proper per- formance of the supervisory duties of the elementary school principal. I express entire agreement with the con- * See Elementary School Standards, pp. 185-21 1. The School as the Unit for Supervision 45 elusions he has presented, especially with regard to the detrimental influence of the number of clerical and ad- ministrative duties demanded of the principals, consuming, as these duties do, the major amount of time and energy. In addition, I would emphasize the importance of the waste that now takes place in elementary schools through the system of appointing so-called additional teachers for clerical service — persons neither trained nor adapted to render efficient and economical service of the sort required ; and also the waste that takes place from the number and character of the various monthly, annual, and special sta- tistical reports that must be submitted by principals. •'• * It has not been possible to make a careful and detailed examina- tion of all of these reports, with reference to their form and final util- ity. I have, however, gone over practically all of the statistical reports that are now prepared by elementary and high school principals. On the basis of this, and the information given me by principals, I feel justified in saying that there is not only a large opportunity for the simplification of the statistical reports, but also a necessity of finding out the actual cost of the statistical reporting. Apparently the authori- ties of the Department of Education have permitted this feature of the work of the schools to grow without special reference to the ends to be served. The following typical statements, (a) by a principal of an elemen- tary school, and (b) by a principal of a high school, represent fairly the general attitude of principals toward this feature of their work : (a) " It would be an excellent thing, as you suggest, to have the clerks selected from a list of persons specially trained and qualified for clerical work instead of from the teacher's list. Such persons should have re- ceived special training for the particular work of a clerk, and when in service their work should be inspected by a specialist representing the school authorities. It is most important to secure uniformity in the matter of methods of keeping records and making out reports. "There should be a central office of statistics; and information de- sired by building department, supply department, superintendents, or others should be secured from this bureau. The school clerks are kept busy in making out different reports for different authorities, and there is always just enough difference in each request to require the work to be done over. " All statistics to be called for should be planned in advance, so that 46 City School Supervision From the evidence gathered during my own personal inspections and visitation of schools, supplemented by the records should be made in accordance with that aim, and properly pre- pared cards or other blanks should be furnished at the beginning of the recording. " When new records, or reports, or even separate items, are required, there should be unification of the entire system. Today too many anti- quated records are kept. " Records and reports should be arranged in a proper series, day, week, year, etc., so that each higher report would be a summary of the lower. " Special statistical investigation of all the schools never should be made without experimenting in several schools, so that complete direc- tions can be supplied to the city and uniformity secured." (b) " Monthly Report to the Superintendent. — More labor and useless matter than in any monthly report in any other school system in the country. "Annual Report to the Superintendent. — Too complex; too insistent upon data not kept in the school. "Report of Teachers Absent Two Weeks or More. — Practically a worthless report, because no action is taken on it. "Application to Visit Schools. — A fine example of unnecessary com- plexity and waste of time. "Report of School Visits. — Mostly a matter of form. No instances known of any use being made of the reports. . . . "Request for Permission to Invite Address. — This I gain from principals' meetings is a cause of much useless irritation. "Inventory of School Supplies. — This is required by the charter of the city. It is a maximum of work with a minimum of profit. " Record of Telephone Messages Sent. — This is a waste of time. The telephones cannot be locked up. There is no means of compelling the persons using the telephones to record the messages. " Program Reports. — This is the program of daily recitations copied and sent to the district superintendent. This means a cost of from ten to sixty dollars' working time of teachers or substitutes for each school. . . . "Report to Permanent Census Board. — The amount of expense connected with this work, for the benefit of the Permanent Census Board, and not appearing in the Budget of expenses because taken from the expense account of the various schools, is several hundred dollars a year for each high school. "Records of Regents' Examinations. — The amount of clerical work, The School as the Unit for Supervision 47 findings of Professor McMurry, there would seem to be two general classes of elementary school principals: (a) those who are competent to act as supervisors and make a conscious effort to subordinate the routine administrative tasks, and (b) those who are content to confine their ac- tivities to the mechanics of school operation and control. Before the elementary schools of the city are individually properly supervised, there must be a considerable increase in the number of the first group, and the chief educational authorities must find a way of placing a premium on super- visory capacity by providing freedom of action to every principal in accordance with his competency. That super- vision is best which controls and is controlled least. RATED EFFICIENCY OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS At the end of each school year the several district super- intendents submit to the City Superintendent of Schools ratings of the efficiency of principals, and other persons in charge of independent schools in their respective districts; and also ratings of similar character relative to assistants to principals.^ In rating principals the following gradu- ated scale is employed: Meritorious: H (highest grade), G, F. Non-Meritorious: E (inferior); D (deficient). To each principal is given a so-called " general rating." This general rating, expressed by the letters H, G, F, etc., is amplified by a " detailed rating." This detailed rating con- sists of thirteen points, as follows : (i) Effect of examinations and inspections. (2) Character and effect of conferences with teachers. reduplication, fuss and fiddle over these semiannual wastes requires a personal investigation by some of your experts. . . . "Record of Graduation Attainments. — Required of all the elemen- tary school principals. They submit them to the district superintendent. I hear the most pronounced complaints as to the uselessness of this work." ^ See p. 127 ff., for the forms upon which these ratings are submitted. 48 City School Supervision (3) Guidance and assistance of weak teachers. (4) Judgment in assigning teachers to classes, (5) Discrimination in ratings of teachers. (6) Character of record kept (including statistics). (7) Interpretation of course of study and selection of text-books. (8) Grading and promotion of pupils. (9) Influence on school discipline, and supervision of truancy. (10) Supervision of janitor's work. (11) Supervision of recesses, games, athletics, etc. (12) Cooperation with other principals using school premises. (13) Manners, conversation, conduct. The reliability and usefulness of the scheme now em- ployed for determining fit and meritorious service of mem- bers of the instructional staff are discussed elsewhere.^ The intention here is to direct attention to certain features of this rating system bearing upon the quality of service of prin- cipals. The following table (VII) exhibits the " General Ratings "of elementary school principals by district super- intendents, in June, 1911.^ It may be that, during the year 1910-1911, there was but one inferior principal in the elementary schools of the city; that forty only (8.7 per cent) of the four hundred sixty- four principals were non-meritorious; that sixty per cent of the principals rendered service of the highest grade; that ninety-one per cent of the principals possessed meritori- ous competency. If these ratings represent the true super- visory values of the staff of elementary school principals, there are reasons for concluding that these values have not been fully and wisely capitalised for the progressive devel- ^ See Chapter IX. Methods and Standards for Determining Teach- ing Efficiency, p. 116 ff. * The exhibition of this table is typical. Distribution and study of the general ratings of other years reveal the same degree of variation and the same absence of standards. The ScJiool as the Unit for Supervision 49 TABLE VII General Ratings of Elementary School Principals by District Super- intendents, June, 1911 District Superin- tendents Number of Prin- cipals Ratings Not Rated Total Per Cent Rated H H G F E D A B C D E F G H I J K L M N P Q R S T U V w IS 18 23 23 19 20 19 20 37 27 24 38 30 20 14 14 IS 14 13 16 13 16 16 13 8 S 22 7 12 17 16 30 IS 2 14 s II 10 14 12 7 7 13 7 IS II 2 10 10 I 8 8 2 4 7 II 19 13 19 7 3 I 6 3 3 6 1 2 8 4 2 II 6 2 I 3 3 I I I I 1 IS 18 23 23 19 20 19 20 37 27 24 38 30 20 14 14 IS 14 13 16 13 16 16 86 44 22 9S 37 60 90 80 81 56 8 37 17 SS 71 100 80 50 54 81 S4 94 69 Totals . 464 273 146 40 I 4 464 Per Cent S9-3 31-7 8.7 .2 •9 opment of the elementary schools, nor for the greatest bene- fit of the children attending these schools. A school system that possesses such a very large proportion of superior prin- cipals should not lack means for the accomplishment of results of the highest order. Either an inflated value has 50 City School Supervision been given to the performance of principals, or the school organization has been such as to prevent the largest utiliza- tion of the capacity of these principals. The internal evidence of Table VII justifies the doubt as to the real worth of these annual principals' ratings as measures of the quality of service. The wide variations between the different supervisory districts can be accounted for only upon the assumption of a wide variability of stand- ard. The schools of certain districts, according to the data presented in the table, appear to be favored far above the schools of other districts. District Superintendent P, for instance, had in his two districts fourteen principals, all of the highest grade. All but one of the twenty-three prin- cipals in the district supervised by District Superintend- ent D were regarded as of " H " grade. District Superin- tendent V was, likewise, fortunate in having principals of the highest rank. District Superintendents K, M, and C, for example, would be justified in being somewhat envious of their associates, P, D, and V, for they were obliged to carry on their schools with the assistance of eight, seven- teen, and twenty-two per cent, respectively, of high-grade principals. Further detailed comparisons of this sort are unnecessary. Testimony from other sources than Table VII — the ac- tual visitation and inspection of schools, and a critical ex- amination of the basis upon which the several district superintendents formulate the ratings of principals — clearly indicates that the work of the principals of elemen- tary schools is not subjected to that cautious, objective ex- amination that should constitute the foundation of the rat- ings, if the ratings are worth making at all. Vague gen- eral impressions should not be, as they undoubtedly are, the chief elements of these ratings. While recognizing clearly that, in the present state of edu- cational organization and practise, it is extremely difficult to establish definite, concrete standards by which the service of principals may be evaluated, and while recognizing, with The School as the Unit for Supervision 51 equal clearness, that it is impossible to eliminate the influ- ence of the intangible factor of the personal equation, yet one must conclude that the majority of the district super- intendents have regarded the important inspectorial function of rating principals as merely a formal procedure. A com- parison of the reports of principals' ratings submitted by certain district superintendents during several years shows that the ratings of one year are merely copied from the report of the preceding year. Appointment to a principalship means permanency of tenure. The temporary license of the principal is practically certain to be made peiTnanent after three years of service.-^ Increase of salary, according to the schedule, is practically automatic. The standards for " fit and meritorious ser- vice " are too uncertain and variable to guarantee the selec- tion, retention, and reward of those principals most fit and meritorious, or to prevent the establishment of a low level of service that may be easily reached by those of mediocre ability. GENERAL SUMMARY It appears, from the more important of the foregoing considerations, that : (a) The number of supervisors (principals, etc.) pro- vided for elementary schools is entirely adequate for effec- tive supervision. (b) The salary schedules are such as to attract men and women of competence. (c) The tendency is to appoint men and women whose education, training, and experience have been too exclu- sively within the city. (d) The position of the principal is primarily adminis- trative, rather than supervisory. (e) The system of rating the efficiency of principals is not such as to distinguish the competent from the incompetent. * See Table XIII, p. 119. CHAPTER V THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS ORGANIZATION, POWERS, AND DUTIES BY the provisions of the Revised Charter of 1901 (Sec. 1079), the four borough superintendents, by virtue of their office, became associate city superintendents ; and four of the associate borough superintendents were designated as associate city superintendents. The remaining associate borough superintendents, twenty-six in number, were given the rank of district superintendents. The term of office was fixed at six years. The charter provided (Sec. 1078) that the City Superintendent should assign the district superintendents, subject to the by-laws of the Board of Education (Sec. 41), " such duties as, in his judgment, will be conducive to the welfare of the public schools of the City of New York." The charter further provided that twenty-three of the district superintendents should be as- signed by the City Superintendent to the work of super- vision in the local school board districts (forty-six) in such manner that one district superintendent should be assigned to each two of the districts. The assignments were to be made for one year; at the end of which period the City Superintendent had power " to change such assignments as he may deem best for the interests of the school sys- tem. . . ." The remaining three district superintendents were to be assigned " to such other professional duties as the welfare of the school system may require." During the year 1910-1911 these three district superintendents were as- signed as follows: One to vacation schools, playgrounds, 52 The District Superintendents 53 and evening recreation centers; one to high schools, and one to evening schools. The chief powers and duties of district superintendents, as enumerated by the by-laws of the Board of Education, are as follows : a. To attend meetings of local school boards, and to make reports to these boards. (Sec. 41-4, 18.) b. To keep records of the district. (Sec. 41-3.) c. To make recommendations to the City Superintendent as to the proper accommodation for all children of school age in their districts. (Sec. 41-5.) d. To report on all matters connected with the schools, and in such form as the City Superintendent may require. (Sec. 39-7; sec. 41-6, 20.) e. To encourage, advise, and assist pupils, teachers, and principals for the securing and maintenance of a high stand- ard of education. (Sec. 41-8.) f. To hold conferences of teachers and principals. (Sec. 4I-9-) g. To inspect, examine, and report upon the condition of schools, and the work of pupils, teachers, and principals. (Sec. 41-10, II, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17.) h. To rate principals and teachers at least once each year. (Sec. 39-14- ) i. To suspend teachers for gross misconduct, or insubor- dination, neglect of duty, or general inefficiency. (Sec. 41-19.) j. To enforce the compulsory education law, under the direction of the City Superintendent of Schools. (Sec. 41- k. To assign teachers of special branches in the schools of their districts. (Sec. 41-22.) 1. To approve, disapprove, or modify requisitions of prin- cipals for supplies. Sec. 43-5; sec. 32-11.) (High schools, Sec. 52-17, 20.) m. To investigate complaints. (Sec. 41-13.) 54 City School Supervision The district superintendency, according to the general theory of the plan of organization/ was to be, as it properly should be, a position of great supervisory importance. These officers were to constitute the direct connecting links between the City Superintendent and the Board of Super- intendents, and the principals, teachers, pupils, and people of the community. Through them was to come a unifica- tion and elevation of educational standards. The evidence which has been collected and considered leads to the general conclusion that, in practise, the soundness of the theory for the city as a whole has not been fully demonstrated. The more important of the bases for this conclusion will be briefly presented. SIZE OF SUPERVISORY DISTRICTS At no point in the charter is the spirit of compromise more evident than in the provisions relating to the number and powers of the district superintendents. All persons oc- cupying superintendents' positions under the former char- ter were continued in office, either as associate or district superintendents. The number of district superintendents (twenty-six) was one of the accidents of the compromise. * " The districting of the schools was a necessary preliminary to the appointment by the borough presidents of the forty-six local school boards. These boards consist each of five members, appointed by the borough presidents ; one member of the Board of Education, as- signed by the President of the Board of Education; and a Dis- trict Superintendent, who by virtue of his office becomes the edu- cational adviser of the local boards within his territory. The creation of these local school boards, and the manner in which they have dis- charged their functions, have brought the administration of the schools very much closer to the people. In the first place, the local school board, which represents the people, has direct representation in the Board of Education through the member of that body who is, ex officio, a member of the local school board. In the second place, through the District Superintendent, the local board and the people secure the pres- entation of their views to the Board of Superintendents." (Fifth An- nual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools, pp. 12-13.) The District Superintendents 55 The vested status of individuals, rather than the obvious supervisory needs of the schools, appears to have received the first attention of the charter makers. There is no hint in any of the official reports of the school system that the number of district superintendents provided for in 1902 was in excess of the need. On the contrary, the duties and re- sponsibilities with which they were charged were regarded as near the maximum assignment. These duties and respon- sibilities have greatly increased during the past ten years. At the same time, the rapid growth of the school system has multiplied the administrative and supervisory problems of the schools. The following table (VIII) shows the number of school organizations, the number of class rooms, and the register of pupils on September 30, 191 1, for each of the supervisory districts. A detailed examination of Table VIII gives weight to the argument that it is futile to expect a district superintendent to be " absolutely responsible for the scholastic welfare of each school in his territory," when that territory includes five hundred or more class rooms, and twenty-five thousand or more pupils, — which is the case in twenty out of twenty- three of the supervisory districts. Granting a moderate supervisory skill on the part of principals, assistants to prin- cipals, and heads of departments — and more than this can- not be granted — and assuming a high degree of super- visory power on the part of the district superintendents, and their freedom to give their whole time to the " actual super- vision of schools," the responsibility placed upon them is beyond complete and satisfactory fulfilment.^ When one recalls the constant shifting of teachers and pupils, the situ- ation appears even more difficult. A reasonable way out would seem to be to transfer to the principal many of the items of administration and supervision now belonging * Nevertheless, at a conference of district superintendents, held at the request of the Committee on School Inquiry on April 9, 1912, not one of the twenty superintendents assented to the proposition that the supervisory districts were too large. S6 City School Supervision TABLE VIII Data for the Several Supervisory Districts (Elementary Schools) Divisions Division Supts. District Supts. Dis- tricts Number of School Or- ganizations Number of Class Rooms Register Sept. 30, 1911 I . . . Strauben- miiller Richman Jenkins Davis Wade 2-3 4-5 6-7 1-9 14 14 15 21 581 632 737 638 22,195 27,236 31,533 24,682 Total. . 8 64 2,588 105,646 II . . . Shallow Granger Franklin Jameson 8-12 13-15 16-17 14 16 16 553 562 724 21,264 22,013 32,974 Total. . 6 46 1,839 76,251 in . . O'Brien O'Shea Schaufl&er lO-II 14-18 13 13 403 450 15,176 17,469 Total . . 4 26 853 32,645 IV . . . Edson Elgas Lee Dwyer Taylor 19-22 20-21 23-24 25-26 17 14 19 27 647 638 849 872 28,174 27,581 37,168 38,625 Total. . 8 '/7 3,006 131,548 V . . . Meleney Griffen McCabe Strachan Veit 27-29 31-34 33-35 32-36 24 20 20 19 761 697 787 735 30,804 29,574 33,290 31,571 Total. . 8 83 2,980 124,239 VI . . . Walsh Campbell EdsaU Lyon 28-30 37-38 39-40 19 37 28 575 1,003 1,120 25,541 43,746 51,762 Total. . 6 84 2,698 121,049 VII . . Haaren Stewart Shimer Ettinger 41-42 43-44 45-46 33 53 34 633 749 389 24,444 28,277 13,744 Total . . 6 120 1,771 66,465 Grand Tol ,als 46 500 15,735 658,843 The District Superintendents 57 exclusively to the district superintendent or divided between the principal and the superintendent. This proposal as- sumes, however, the competency and reliability of the principal. In any event, the need is not so much more supervision of teachers and schools by district superintend- ents, but better supervision by principals. SELECTION AND QUALIFICATIONS OF DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS The staff of district superintendents is noticeably inert. This condition is due in part to the character of the staff itself, and in part to the circumstances of the hierarchic or- ganization of the system of school control. More than half of the district superintendents (during 191 1 ) belong to the group automatically given supervisory status under the terms of the Revised Charter. It is freely admitted by those who have had long experience in the schools now comprising the New York public school system that under the old borough organizations professional quali- fications and competency were not always the sole tests for the selection of superintendents. And while a slow process of selection and survival has eliminated most of those who succeeded to a district superintendency by the right of in- heritance alone, the existing standard followed is too low. As far as can be ascertained from the official records, all the district superintendents, except two or three, are prod- ucts of New York education, training, and experience. If inbreeding is detrimental to the teaching force, as is ad- mitted by the City Superintendent in his Thirteenth Annual Report (p. 161) ; if the inbreeding process influencing the selection of principals produces a neutral and non-progres- sive character in the supervision of elementary schools, as has been contended in this section of the report; then the inbreeding as it reaches the district superintendency is not a negligible factor of weakness. The opinion has been freely expressed by principals and district and associate super- 58 City School Supervision intendents that it is impossible to secure through the Board of Education the selection of district superintendents from without the school system; that to those promoted from within the system, other standards than those of fitness and of competency are applied in approving the nominations of the Board of Superintendents. This is not to say that en- couragement and opportunity for the promotion of those of power and performance within the school system should not be given in the fullest measure. At the same time, any plan for the selection of those who are to be the construc- tive leaders in the public schools, that is founded exclusively upon the policy of New York schools for New York people, establishes an arbitrary and unfortunate limitation to educa- tional progress. The Board of Superintendents itself does not appear to have any well-established standards of qualifications for nomination of district superintendents, other than the for- mal standards of education and experience prescribed in the charter and the by-laws. In other words, if the recently erected standard of " superior merit " is valid in its applica- tion to high and training-school teachers, it is even more valid with reference to the staff of district superintendents as a condition for appointment and retention. Parentheti- cally, it might be suggested that not only new blood and better blood but also some proportion of younger blood should be considered among the factors that make for move- ment and progress. More important than any of the foregoing considerations is that of the freedom, initiative, and responsibility of the district superintendents. As supervisory officers, the district superintendents are, by specification and implication of char- ter and by-laws, deputies of the City Superintendent of Schools. Their position is, however, an anomalous one. Responsible to a high degree for the general administration and effective supervision of the schools within their dis- tricts, they have, as a body, but slight influence upon the determination of those general policies that finally fix the llie District Superintendents 59 quality and quantity of educational performance.^ As at present constituted, the office of district superintendent can- not be an altogether satisfactory position for the energetic, progressive, and constructive individual, whose primary interests are in education and its adaptation to the needs of children. SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES OF DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS ^ Each district superintendent is required to submit monthly a written report of his work.^ An examination of a con- siderable number of these reports recently submitted indi- cates that they are made out in a most formal manner, and consequently could not be utilized as exhibiting the kind and amount of the supervisory performances of the dis- trict superintendents. On September 26, 191 1, the following questions were sub- mitted to each of the district superintendents: I. a. What studies or reports have you been asked, offi- cially, to submit to the Board of Superintendents or to the Board of Education, during the last five years, on the scope and method of your work as a district superintendent? b. What studies or reports of this kind have you made voluntarily ? * An examination of the prescribed duties of district superintend- ents, as well as a study of the procedure under which their activities are carried on, justifies this statement. The relation of the district super- intendent to the Board of Superintendents is that of a suppliant rather than that of an adviser. A review of the minutes of the Board of Superintendents for several years past, conferences with members of the Board, and attendance upon a regular meeting of this Board, have offered abundant evidence upon this point. * See Chapter IX, p. Ii6, of this report for certain observations of the work of district superintendents in passing upon the merit of teachers for renewal of license and approval of service under salary schedules. ' See Appendix C, p. 195, for the form of this report. 6o City School Supervision 2. a. What use was made of such required or voluntary studies or reports? b. Are any such studies or reports on file ? 3. a. How often in a term, or in a year, do you assemble your subordinates, collectively or in groups, for conferences on the educational problems involved in their work, as well as on routine details ? b. Are any programs of such conferences on file? 4. a. What phase of your work consumes most of your time — constructive educational activities, in- cluding supervision, or administrative routine? b. About what proportion of your time is devoted to the latter? c. What proportion, if any, of routine details could be delegated to subordinates? 5. a. Do your subordinates study the significance of the reports which they make to their superiors? b. Are these reports satisfactory as to accuracy and completeness ? 6. What means do you employ to influence public educational opinion in your community? The written replies submitted by twenty-one of the dis- trict superintendents are illuminating, not only as to the activities of these officers, but also as to the conceptions held concerning the functions of their office. Of the replies to Question i, not more than four indi- cated an understanding of what was meant by " the scope and method of your work as a district superintendent." With the exceptions noted, the replies concerned themselves with a mere mention or an enumeration and description of regular routine and statistical reports. On the basis of this testimony it must be concluded that neither the Board of Superintendents nor the Board of Education has required or stimulated the district superintendents to appraise and criticize the range, the methods, and the results of their own work. A very few (5) of the superintendents had pre- The District Superintendents 6i pared and submitted, on their own initiative, reports and recommendations affecting in a fundamental way their su- pervisory activities. The rephes to Question 2 reflected only a very small de- gree of effective cooperation between the district superin- tendents and the City Superintendent, or the Board of Superintendents. Frequently it was noted that the reports or recommendations were " considered " by the City Super- intendent or the Board of Superintendents. In a few in- stances reports had been utilized and recommendations adopted. More frequently, however, the comment was made that it was not known what became of the reports and recommendations. Question 3 was submitted for the purpose of discovering the extent and the character of the endeavor of district superintendents to create a positive attitude on the part of teachers and principals toward the problems of modern edu- cation. The general practise seems to be that meetings of principals are held approximately once each month; in some districts oftener. In a few instances only are the whole number of teachers gathered together — once or twice each year. Frequent meetings of special groups of teachers are held for special purposes. The striking feature of the exhibit produced by these answers is the absence of any carefully projected and consecutive programs of action. Practically all of the meetings — of principals as well as of teachers — are given over to the publication of administra- tive announcements, or the presentation of matters of local or transitory importance. The conception of utilizing these meetings as a means for the exercise of educational leader- ship does not seem to have developed. The replies to Question 4 emphasize the fact that very few of the district superintendents are able to make any very clear distinction between administrative routine and super- vision. While the great majority of replies state that the most of the time goes to constructive and supervisory ac- tivities, it is to be noted that several of the district super- 62 City School Supervision intendents, who are generally recognized as belonging to the group of the most competent, say frankly that their major energies are consumed by clerical labor and ofhce routine. It was generally admitted that the present method of admin- istering the compulsory education law involved the expendi- ture of too much time and energy. The estimates of the time consumed by the non-supervisory duties vary from ten to seventy-five per cent. One half of the superintendents fix the limit at one third. If the staff of district superin- tendents, as a whole, is inert educationally, this may be ex- plained in large part by the fact that the established policy of administrative and supervisory control of the school system does not recognize that performance feeds upon responsibility. The creation of a so-called " Supervisory Council " would open new avenues of usefulness and serv- ice for the district superintendents.^ GENERAL SUMMARY It appears, from the more important of the foregoing considerations of the supervisory position and function of the district superintendent, that: (a) While the general theory of the plan of the district superintendent in the supervisory organization is a sound one, this theory is not, as to its essential elements, carried out in practise. (b) The supervisory districts are too large to permit the district superintendents to fulfil properly their responsibil- ities as supervisors. Many of these responsibilities should be transferred to the principals of schools. (c) The existing method of selecting district superin- tendents too narrowly confines choice to those whose edu- cation, training, and experience have been entirely within the city. (d) The absence of a definite and high standard of quali- * See p. 171. The District Superintendents 63 fication for selection and retention of district superintend- ents has limited the supervisory usefulness of these officers. (e) The relation between the Board of Superintendents and the district superintendents is such as to restrict unnec- essarily the freedom, initiative, and responsibility of the latter with respect to matters of fundamental educational importance. Provision should be made for the larger par- ticipation of the district superintendents in the making of educational policies. CHAPTER VI DIRECTORS AND ASSISTANT DIRECTORS OF SPECIAL BRANCHES 1 POSITION IN THE SUPERVISORY ORGANIZATION THE charter (Sec. 1079) authorizes the Board of Edu- cation, upon the nomination of the Board of Superin- tendents, to appoint such directors of special branches as it deems necessary. It is also provided that such directors shall be under the supervision and direction of the City- Superintendent; and (Sec. 1085) that they shall act as ad- visers to the Board of Superintendents, to district superin- tendents, and to principals with regard to the special branches they supervise; and, further (Sec. 1085), that they shall examine the work in their several branches, re- port upon the same, and instruct special teachers and class teachers in the teaching of their several subjects. The Board of Superintendents, with the advice of the directors of the respective special branches, assigns to the several school districts such teachers of drawing, music, physical culture, manual training, cooking, sewing, and other special branches. The special teachers are assigned by the district superintendents to their duties in the schools. The by-laws of the Board of Education emphasize the supervisory functions of directors, assistant directors, and teachers of special branches : * While not, strictly speaking, a special branch, the kindergarten is included here. From the standpoint of supervisory policy, the kinder- garten has been regarded as similar to the special branches. 64 Directors and Assistant Directors 65 . 3. " Directors of special branches shall act as advisers to the Board of Superintendents, to the district superintend- ents, and to the principals, with regard to all matters re- lating to the special branches they supervise. Under the direction of the City Superintendent, and subject to his assignment, directors and assistant directors of special branches shall examine the work in their several branches, report upon the same, and instruct special teachers and class teachers in the teaching of their several branches." (As amended December 23, 1903.) 6. " Subject to the general supervision of the district superintendents, and to the immediate supervision of their respective directors, the teachers of special branches shall visit the classes in the schools to which they are assigned, shall inspect their work, give model lessons, and, in coop- eration with the principals, shall direct the methods of in- struction employed therein." 7. " It shall be the duty of all directors and assistant directors of special branches to report to the City Super- intendent twice in each year upon the general efficiency of each of the special teachers under their supervision, or oftener, if required." (As amended December 2^, 1903.)^ The teachers of special branches are employed to aid the regular class teachers, except in the matter of foreign lan- guages, cooking, and shop work; in these branches they teach the pupils directly. Naturally, the kindergartens be- long to this same general group. NUMBER AND INCREASE The following tables summarize the data for the past ten years relative to the number and kind of directors, assistant directors, and teachers of special branches. * By-laws of the Board of Education, section 42. 66 City School Supervision TABLE IX Showing Number of Directors and Assistant Directors of Special Branches for the Ten Years 1902-1912I 1902 1903 1903 1904 1904 190S 190S 1906 1906 1907 1907 1908 1908 1909 1909 1910 1910 1911 1911 1912 Music: Directors 3 3 I 2 2 I 3 2 3 I 2 2 I 3 2 3 I 3 3 I 2 2 3 I 3 2 I 2 2 3 I 3 2 I 2 2 3 I 3 2 I 2 I I I I I 3 2 I 2 I I I I I I 3 2 I I I Assistant Directors . . Drawing: Director (H. Schools) . Director (Ele. Schools) Manual Training and Drawing: Directors I I I Assistant Directors . . Shop Work (Ele. Sch.): Directors Physical Training: Director I I I Assistant Director . . Sewing: Directors 3 2 Cooking: Director I Kindergarten: Director I Assistant Directors . . 2 Total 16 IS 14 14 14 14 14 13 13 16 * The change in the number of directors and assistant directors has been due, for the most part, to the policy of centralizing and unifji-ing the supervision of each of the special branches through a single direc- tor, with assistant directors, instead of directors for the different bor- oughs. The several classes of inspectors have not been included. Directors and Assistant Directors TABLE X 67 Showing Number of Teachers of Special Branches (Including Kinder- gartens) FOR the Years 1902-1911 1902 1903 1903 1904 1904 1905 1905 1906 1906 1907 1907 1908 1908 1909 1909 1910 1910 1911 Music Manual Training a Drawing . . . Drawing .... Physical Training Sewing .... Cooking .... Shop Work . . German .... French .... Penmanship . . inc 1 49 SI 21 55 36 37 59 10 I 50 51 21 55 46 41 57 10 I 49 51 22 61 48 44 60 8 I 51 51 30 59 80 59 58 7 I 5° SI 28 62 95 71 55 6 I 5^ 53 31 62 "5 68 SO 6 I 53 49 33 62 132 81 48 6 53 '48 32 60 135 100 45 6 Total Per cent Increase . . 305 4.09 319 4-59 332 3-91 344 3-61 396 15.12 419 5.81 437 4-3 464 6.18 479 3-23 Per cent Increase . . 299 32.30 419 40.14 460 9.78 532 15-65 570 7.14 660 15-79 743 12.58 786 S-79 823 4.71 Total Average Attend- ance (thousands) . Per cent Increase over Previous Year . . 440 4.6 467 6.1 487 4.38 506 3-86 523 3-41 545 4.21 575 S-42 587 2.09 603 2.86 THE SPECIAL BRANCHES: GENERAL SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL POLICY By their nature the effective development of the special branches presents not only numerous special problems of instruction and supervision, but in addition certain complex 68 City School Supervision issues of general social and educational policy. Notwith- standing the years of their testing, the special branches have not yet succeeded in attaining a recognized and guaranteed place in the program of studies of public schools. Their introduction has come only after an energetic and insistent campaign by those who have been convinced of their essen- tial worth in popular education. Their further extension, after introduction and recognition, has been dependent upon various fortuitous circumstances, such as varying available financial resources and the extent to which public interest has been aroused. Even with these things in mind the fundamental fact must not be overlooked that the suc- cessful incorporation of the special branches into the pro- gram of studies of elementary schools especially will take place only as the branches are in the hands of teachers and supervisors of training, skill, merit, and balance. The conspicuous problem of the special branches in New York City, as well as the country over, is to be found in the dearth of qualified and competent teachers. Until such teachers are the rule, rather than the exception, the road of progress of the special branch in the school, and outside of the school, is certain to be filled with obstacles. There are ample grounds for the judgment that, under existing conditions, the number of directors arid assistant directors, excepting in the case of the kindergartens, is suffi- cient to meet the demands for effective direction and super- vision. (A reduction in the number of special teachers as indicated in the next section would make necessary a certain additional number of assistant directors.) No attempt has been made to pass upon their supervisory methods and results.^ * These methods as they are influenced by their general relation to principals and district superintendents were the subject of careful dis- cussion at a special conference of directors and assistant directors held on April i6, 1912. It was clearly developed that the principal difficul- ties arise from the absence of a clear definition of the responsibility of the directors for their particular subjects. Directors and Assistant Directors 69 SPECIAL TEACHERS As a matter of large importance in the general educa- tional policy of the city it is pertinent to inquire into the justification for special teachers; that is, those who teach these branches directly to the pupils and who therefore must be considered as belonging to the teaching, rather than the supervisory, staff. With respect to certain subjects more or less technical in character, and demanding a degree of spe- cial skill — as, for instance, sewing, cooking, and shop work — there can be no argument ; regular class teachers cannot be expected to give effective instruction in these subjects. A question of different character arises with reference to music, drawing, and physical training. Competency in these subjects is a requirement for License No. i, and has been for a considerable number of years. These subjects consti- tute an important part in the course of instruction in the training schools. Is it not reasonable to suppose that these subjects should be taught effectively by the regular teachers ? The presentment of the City Superintendent of Schools, in his Twelfth Annual Report (pp. 132-133), undoubtedly represents the situation : Curtailment of the Force of Special Teachers Made Necessary " Owing to the fact that the Board of Estimate and Apportionment has cut down the Board of Education's estimate for the payment of special teachers during the year 191 1 to a sum very much less than is required to pay the existing corps of special teachers at pres- ent rates of salary, it will be necessary to save about $150,000 during the year 191 1. This may be done either by reducing the salaries of the teachers at pres- ent in the service, or by abolishing a certain number of positions. If the latter plan is adopted, the ques- tion will arise whether, in view of the fact that the 70 City School Supervision teaching of German and French is not pursued in the elementary schools for a sufficient length of time to give the pupils a mastery of these tongues, the teach- ing should not be eliminated altogether. Even if this action were taken, however, it would still be necessary to economize to the extent of $75,000 in the matter of teachers for the other branches. A special committee of your board has this very important subject under consideration at the present writing. I am strongly of the opinion that, whatever else is done, the work in shop work for boys, and cooking for girls, should not be curtailed. These are subjects which must be taught, if taught at all, by specialists. The economic and eth- ical value of teaching every girl to cook, and of giving every boy the use of his hands by the manipulation of the carpenter's tools, cannot be overestimated. In the other branches in which the work of the special teachers is largely supervisory, possibly some curtailment may be made, though it is greatly to be regretted that the necessity is forced upon us. It must be said, however, that the class teachers are now in a better position to do the work with reduced assistance than they were ten, or even five, years ago. A large proportion have been trained, and are able to accomplish results, though certainly not the best results, without assistance. " The fact is, on the other hand, that, though we are better prepared than we were for this service, the majority of class teachers are not yet fully equal to the demand that will presently be made upon them. Had it been deferred five years longer, it is probable that the special teachers of singing, sewing, physical train- ing, and drawing might have been dispensed with with- out serious injury to the schools. Your board has protested vigorously against any reduction in any of these activities. For whatever evil results may follow, therefore, the Board of Estimate and Apportionment must be held directly responsible." Directors and Assistant Directors yi It seems clear that steps should be taken at once to render unnecessary the majority of the special teachers in music, drawing-, and physical training, and to facilitate and hasten the effective qualijfication of regnlar class teachers. Those teachers who are qualified should receive an appropriate salary bonus. As long as the teaching of these subjects is chiefly in the hands of a special group of teachers, not only will the public continue to have reservations as to the right- ful place of such subjects in elementary education, but the regular teachers themselves will not be ready to assume responsibility for this special instruction, nor will principals consider it as among the objects of necessary attention. SUPERVISION OF THE KINDERGARTENS During the year 1910-1911 there were 823 kindergarten teachers. For the special supervision of these teachers there were two directors, one for Manhattan, The Bronx, and Richmond, and one for Brooklyn and Queens. As far as constructive supervision is concerned the great majority of the elementary school principals practically disregard the kindergarten. In consequence, the supervisory influence over the work of the 823 kindergartners is exerted by the one director and two assistant directors.^ Assuming an equal division of responsibility, this means one supervisor to 275 teachers. It further means that there is but slight possible relation between the " direction " and the " super- vision " of the kindergarten. The remedy for this situation may be either a reasonable increase in the number of assist- ant directors, or, what is of more importance, a far greater emphasis upon a knowledge of kindergarten ideals and technique than now obtains among those who become eli- gible for 'appointment to elementary school principalships. Ultimately, the educational service of the kindergarten must be measured in terms of its contributing influence upon the * For 1911-12. ^2 City School Supervision later social and educational progress of the child. This is a desideratum for the maintenance of the kindergarten as a part of the public school system. If the kindergartens of the city are to be adopted as an essential part of a balanced and coherent scheme of elementary education, their intelli- gent supervision must be regarded as belonging to the proper province of the principal, acting as a supervisor. GENERAL SUMMARY It appears, from the more important of the foregoing considerations, that: (a) Under existing conditions the number of directors and assistant directors, excepting for the kindergarten, is sufficient to secure proper supervision of the special subjects. The relation of the director to the principal and the district superintendent is in need of clearer definition, and his re- sponsibility for the scope and method of his subject should be recognized. (b) Special teachers in certain of the special subjects should be made unnecessary by requiring competency on the part of regular teachers. (c) More adequate provisions should be made for the supervision of the kindergarten by the appointment of addi- tional assistant directors, and by making elementary school principals responsible for the supervision of the kinder- gartens to the same degree as they are for the other classes. CHAPTER VII THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT, THE BOARD OF SUPERINTENDENTS, AND THE ASSOCIATE SUPERINTENDENTS ^ CURRENT CRITICISM BY far the most insistent and frequently expressed criti- cisms of existing educational conditions in the city are directed against the City Superintendent of Schools and the two bodies of which he is the principal member — the Board of Examiners and the Board of Superintendents; more particularly the latter. These criticisms have been developed from many quarters, within and without the school organization, from disinterested as well as interested individuals. In this, as in other aspects of the School In- quiry concerning which there have been strong personal differences and considerable public controversy, an endeavor has been made to discuss impersonally the issues raised, and to regard them exclusively from the standpoint of the ulti- mate effectiveness of the city's school system. It is pertinent to indicate here one very significant aspect of the whole general problem of supervisory control. Ob- viously, by far the most useful information and evidence relating to the methods and effectiveness of the work of supervisory officers of a complex school system can be obtained only from judicially tempered individuals within the system itself. We have been brought into contact with many such persons who, as teachers, principals, or super- * For a treatment of the more general aspects of the subject of this chapter see A. H. Chamberlain, The Grotvth of Responsibility and Enlargement of Power of the City School Superintendent (University of California Press, 1913). 73 74 City School Supervision intendents, were willing to bring forward unbiased and sub- stantiated testimony bearing directly upon the objects of investigation. These persons, however, were, except in the case of a few negligible and minor matters, expressly un- willing to permit themselves to appear as witnesses of record. The explanation invariably given was that any expression of critical judgments would militate seriously against their professional standing and advancement. This attitude of those within the schools, indefensible though it appears to be, has been so marked as to warrant this special mention, since it points to a condition of affairs wholly detrimental to the progressive development of the best interests of the schools. Those primarily responsible for school organization and its operation appear, intentionally or unintentionally, to have discouraged competent criticism and to have permitted incompetent triticism to undermine an intelligent public confidence. This must be regarded as unfortunate from every point of view. The capacity of a school system to produce results is determined, in the first instance, by its readiness to adapt itself to new problems and demands and by the completeness with which it undergoes this adapta- tion. In other words, this capacity is to be measured by the growth of the school system from the inside. The rate and quality of this growth are conditioned by the character of the scrutiny to which the workers within the system are encouraged and expected to submit the methods and aims, not only of their own activities, but those of their co- workers. The assumption by those in authority of attitudes other than of such encouragement and expectation means the maintenance of system for the sake of system, and not as a means to effective education of children.^ * In passing this judgment, there has been kept fully in mind the de- structive and negative influence of much of what passes as " disinter- ested criticism," which too frequently is but the expression of a narrow, querulous, and selfish discontent. In a great cosmopolitan population a certain amount of this is inevitable, inside and outside of the schools. City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 75 THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT AND HIS POWERS The City Superintendent of Schools is elected by the Board of Education for a term of six years ; he may be re- moved, for cause, at any time by a vote of three-fourths of all the members of the board ; and he may be suspended by the board pending trial of charges. (Charter, sec. 1067.) By the provisions of the Revised Charter, and of the general school laws of the state, the office of the City Super- intendent is the key to supervisory organization and opera- tion of the educational system of the city. It is intended to be the connecting central link by which the various offices, institutions, and activities are brought into a working rela- tionship. The principal powers and duties of this officer, as prescribed by the charter and by the by-laws, are as follows : (a) He has a seat on the Board of Education, and the right to speak on all matters before the board, but not to vote. (Charter, sec. 1077.) (b) He has the right of visitation and inquiry in all the schools of the city. (Charter, sec. 1077.) (c) He reports to the Board of Education on the educa- tional system of the city, and upon the condition of any and all the schools thereof (Charter, sec. 1077) ; he submits an annual report (Charter, sec. 1078). (d) He is chairman, ex officio, of the Board of Super- intendents. (Charter, sec. 1079.) (e) He assigns, subject to the by-laws of the Board of Education, the duties of the associate and district super- intendents of schools. (Charter, sec. 1078.) (f) He assigns twenty-three district superintendents, each to two districts, for one year; reassigns as he deems best for the interests of the school system; assigns three district superintendents to special duties — one to high schools, one to evening schools, and one to vacation schools, playgrounds, and recreation centers. (Charter, sec. 1078.) 76 City School Supervision (g) He assigns to duty, and supervises and directs the work of, directors and assistant directors of special branches. (By-laws, sec. 42.) (h) He holds conferences of associate and district super- intendents. (Charter, sec. 1078.) (i) He is chairman, ex officio, of the Board of Exam- iners, and nominates the members thereof for appointment by the Board of Education. (Charter, sec. 1089.) (j) He issues teachers' licenses; renews these licenses, and makes them permanent. (Charter, sec. 1089.) (k) He keeps in his office eligible lists of teachers. (Charter, sec. 1089.) (1) He is a member of the Permanent Census Board (Consol. Laws, chap. 16, art. 24, sec. 650), enforces the compulsory education law, nominates attendance officers, and directs their work. (Charter, sec. 1078.) (m) He prescribes suitable registers, blank forms, and regulations for making reports. (Charter, sec. 1078.) (n) He reports misconduct, insubordination, neglect of duty, or general inefficiency of any associate superintendent or district superintendent. (Charter, sec. 1078.) (o) He empowers an associate superintendent to execute the duties of his office during absence or disability, (Char- ter, sec. 1078.) (p) He appoints and dismisses members of the clerical force of his office, subject to confirmation by the Board of Education. (Charter, sec. 1078.) (q) He nominates teachers for schools maintained by the Department of Public Charities and Department of Correction. (Charter, sec. 1092.) (r) He is a member of the Board of Retirement. (Char- ter, sec. 1092.) The above enumeration is indicative of the number and direction of the lines of responsibility and influence of the City Superintendent. They do not, however, completely represent his real power. This cannot be delimited by stat- City, Board, and Associate Superintendents yy utes or formal regulations, which define, principally, the extent of his administrative authority. His power as the chief supervisory officer of the school system can be meas- ured only in terms of his personal force and integrity, and his readiness or adroitness in responding to that multitude of unforeseen and unorganized situations which constantly emerge from our modern civic and political life. The fundamental, personal characteristic of supervision ^ means the assumption by him of an authority that is for him and for the school system both necessary and dangerous. The limitations of this Inquiry make it impossible to do more than to express a series of general judgments and recommendations regarding the office of the City Superin- tendent as at present constituted. Concerning one impor- tant feature of the particular issue, there is a general agree- ment: that the centralization of large administrative and supervisory authority in the City Superintendent, as pro- vided for by the Revised Charter, was absolutely necessary for the creation of a scheme of responsible school direction free from those prejudices and partisanships that have so often disorganized the institutions and public service of the city. That the schools of Greater New York have, during the past decade, been consolidated into a coherent whole is due, without question, to the perseverance, foresight, and wisdom of the present City Superintendent. His unyielding loyalty to certain of the fundamental principles of school control has brought the policy of centralization to a suc- cessful end. No serious study of the facts and circum- stances of the development of the school system could lead to any other conclusion. The City Superintendent has achieved distinguished suc- cess in protecting the school system and the teaching staff from the selfish influences that are always found in the pub- lic service of a great city — and this is conspicuous service. Through his long term of office, he has naturally aroused * See discussion of the meaning of Supervisory Control, p. ii. 78 City School Supervision strong personal and organized opposition to his policies; but no competent and principled man could do otherwise. No other educational leader of this generation has had a task of such magnitude and complexity. It is improbable that another man could have succeeded as he has succeeded in unifying the school system and harmonizing the educa- tional forces of the city. Through his service and perform- ances, the office of city superintendent of schools in this country has been greatly magnified. He has made the New York public school system one of nation-wide significance. Mechanical consolidation, with the resulting standardi- zation of aims and values, has been effected. The next epoch of educational control will need to be dominated by the idea of establishing a scheme of decentralized, coopera- tive, expert supervision. Military standards of authority and organization cannot be permanently adapted to the en- terprise of education. Education, particularly public edu- cation, is a great cooperative undertaking, and must there- fore make provision for the initiative, independence, and creative activity of every individual charged with respon- sibility. The administrative efficiency of a great, complex school system demands a high degree of centralization of administrative power. On the other hand, the supervisory efficiency of the school system is conditioned by a degree of cooperation which has not yet been fully comprehended by the City Superintendent.^ Machinery stifles individual- ity; cooperative effort expands individuality. The teach- ing of children and the direction of their education are de- pendent, ultimately, upon freedom, not repression. The preeminent difficulty of the existing situation arises, as has already been pointed out,^ from the failure to dis- tinguish clearly between effective administrative control and effective supervisory control. In so far as the City Super- intendent is an administrative officer, his powers should be broad and direct. As a supervisory officer, he should be * See pp. 175-176. ' See p. 13. City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 79 the executive agent of the supervisory and teaching staff. In several respects his administrative authority should be enlarged. This is especially true with regard to many ac- tivities now under the control of the Board of Superintend- ents. The scope and method of his supervisory functions need to be submitted to thorough study and investigation. Consequently, it has been recommended that the Bureau of Investigation and Appraisal ^ undertake to define the legiti- mate functions of the City Superintendent as a supervisory officer, with the end of securing to the schools the benefits of the great amount of productive power which, under the present organization, must be latent. The proposed plan of reorganization of the supervisory staff and the creation of the Supervisory Council is merely suggestive of the idea of efficient, cooperative organization. THE BOARD OF SUPERINTENDENTS : ORGANIZATION AND POWERS The important questions concerning the Board of Su- perintendents that present themselves are the following: Has this body the proper constitution, powers, and methods of procedure to enable it to render to the city the maximum of educational service? In other words, is it an effective instrument for the development and maintenance of edu- cational standards, and does it serve to bring about a desir- able degree of unity, harmony, and cooperation within the school system? The general practise throughout the country of super- visory or quasi-supervisory control of schools by a special board or committee, composed of the City Superintendent of Schools and his deputy, assistant, or associate superin- tendents, had been generally followed in New York ^ and * See pp. 179-180. * " The City Superintendent or his assistants shall visit every school at least once each year, and shall examine the same in all matters pre- scribed by subdivision i, section 1040, Consolidation Act of 1882." (By- 8o City School Supervision « Brooklyn ^ prior to the consolidation of 1897. To this spe- cial board or committee were given, in greater or less amount, those powers, duties, and responsibilities which, in small communities, and in the earlier stages of the histori- cal development of our municipal school control, belonged to the office of the City Superintendent alone, or were exer- cised in part directly by the Board of Education. The charter of 1897 extended the application of the prin- ciple involved to the four borough organizations.^ laws, Board of Education, 1895, sec. 36, par. I ; also, By-laws, 1897, sec. 31, par. 5-) " It shall be the duty of the Board of Superintendents to meet at least twice in each month during the school year for the purpose of consultation, interchange of views, assignment of duties, consideration of reports, and all other matters relating to the efficient management of the schools, in accordance with the provisions of the law relating thereto." (By-laws, 1897, sec. 32, par. 2.) ^ " The associate superintendents (2) shall cooperate with the Super- intendent in carrying out the rules of the Board. They shall report to him at such times and in such manner as he shall direct, the results of their several examinations, which shall be subject at all times to the inspection of the members of the Board. The Superintendent shall designate one of his associates to act in his place whenever he is unable to discharge the duties of his office. Should he fail to do so, the Teachers' Committee shall designate the associate." (By-laws and Rules of the Board of Education of the City of Brooklyn, 1896, sec. 12.) * "A school board shall have power, by a vote of a majority of its members in office, to appoint a Borough Superintendent of Schools for six years. It shall have power to appoint, for a like term, not more than one Associate Borough Superintendent of Schools for the first seven hundred teachers in the schools under its charge, and not more than one additional Associate Borough Superintendent for every addi- tional three hundred fiJty teachers, or fractional number thereof, greater than one-half; provided, however, that there shall be, in any event, two associate Borough Superintendents in the Boroughs of Queens and Richmond respectively." (The Greater New York Char- ter, 1897, sec. 1 102.) " A Borough Superintendent and the Associate Superintendent therein shall constitute the Board of Superintendents for the Borough, to be known as the Borough Board of Superintendents. . . ." (The Greater New York Charter, 1897, sec. 1107.) "The Borough Superintendents and the Associate Superintendents City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 8i The evident intention of the Revised Charter of 1901 was to bring about such a degree of centraHzation of control as would permit the establishment of uniform standards throughout the entire school system, and at the same time remove those petty differences of policy that had hindered the logical development of available educational opportu- nities for the people of the city. At the same time, the framers of the educational sections of the charter recog- nized the necessity of compromise and of gradual adapta- tion to new conditions. The eight associate superintendents of schools, together with the City Superintendent, as chairman, constitute the Board of Superintendents. These associate superintend- ents are elected by the Board of Education for a term of six years. (Charter, sec. 1079.) Like the City Superintend- ent, they may be removed for cause at any time by a vote of three-fourths of the members of the Board of Education, and also may be suspended by this board pending a trial of charges. (Charter, sec. 1067.) Each associate superintendent fulfils two sets of duties; first, as a member of the Board of Superintendents, and, second, as an assistant to the City Superintendent, by whom he is assigned to duty. (Charter, sec. 1078.) The principal powers and authorities of the Board of Superintendents, as prescribed by the charter and defined by the by-laws of the Board of Education, are : shall visit every school in their respective Boroughs, and shall inquire into all matters relating to the government, courses of study, methods of teaching, discipline, and conduct of such schools, and the condition of the school houses and of the schools generally, and shall examine classes when necessary. The Borough Superintendents shall report the results of such inspection and examinations to the School Board and to the City Superintendent, who shall transmit such parts of said re- ports as he may consider necessary or proper to the Board of Educa- tion of the City of New York, and they shall also report to the City Superintendent at such times, concerning such matters, and in such form as said Superintendent shall require. . . ." (The Greater New York Charter, 1897, sec. 1108.) 82 City School Supervision a. Recommending for approval by the Board of Educa- tion the kinds and grades of Hcenses, and the academic and professional qualifications therefor. (Charter, sec. 1089.) b. Nominating from eligible lists for appointment, trans- fer, or promotion, all members of the teaching and super- visory staff. (Charter, sec. 1090.) c. Determining the fitness and merit of principals and teachers for increase of salary. (Charter, sec. 1091.) d. Nominating to the Board of Education district super- intendents and directors of special branches. (Charter, sec. 1079.) e. Recommending to the Board of Education the adop- tion and modification of courses of study. (Charter, sec. 1084.) f. Issuing syllabuses of the courses of study. (Charter, sec. 1086.) g. Prescribing regulations for principals for the direc- tion of the methods of teaching. (Charter, sec. 1086.) h. Recommending to the Board of Education the estab- lishment of schools, kindergartens, and special features in schools. (Annual Report, 191 1, p. 13.) i. Recommending to the Board of Education, for ap- proval, text-books and other scholastic supplies. (Charter, sec. 1083.) j. Recommending to the Board of Education changes in the grades and classes of all schools. (Charter, sec. 1084.) k. Establishing, subject to the approval of the Board of Education, rules and regulations for the admission, promo- tion, transfer, and graduation of pupils. (Charter, sec. 1082.) 1. Keeping records of principals and teachers. (Charter, sec. 1 08 1.) m. Assigning of special teachers to the several school dis- tricts. (Charter, sec. 1085.) n. Excusing absences of teachers with pay, and granting leave of absence to teachers without pay. (Charter, sec. 1088.) City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 83 To carry on its work the Board of Superintendents is organized into appropriate committees. During the year 1910-11 these committees were as follows: 1. Committee on the nomination, transfer, and assign- ment of teachers. (Three members.) 2. Committee on school management. (Three mem- bers.) 3. Committee on course of study. (Three members.) 4. Committee on text-books, libraries, and supplies. (Three members.) 5. Committee on high schools. (Three members.) 6. Committee on training schools. (One member.) 7. Committee on evening schools. (One member.) 8. Committee on vacation schools, playgrounds, and rec- reation centers. (One member.) 9. Committee on compulsory education. (One member.) 10. Committee on records, forms, and reports. (One member. ) 11. Committee on vocational schools and classes for de- fectives. (One member.) Each member is chairman of at least one committee, and is a member of one or two other committees. The number of the committees has been increased since the first organi- zation of the board — from six, in 1902-3, to the present number (eleven). Through this means the board has en- deavored to meet the newer problems growing out of the increased magnitude and complexity of the school system. THE BUREAUCRACY OF THE BOARD OF SUPERINTENDENTS On September 25, 191 1, replies to the following questions were requested from the City Superintendent and each of the associate superintendents : I. a. What studies have been made by the Board of Superintendents of its organization, powers, and 84 City School Supervision duties, and what reports have been made by it to the City Superintendent, or to the Board of Edu- cation, based on such studies? b. Have any such studies or reports been made by you as a member of the board? c. Are any such studies or reports on file? 2. a. What phase of your work as an associate superin- tendent consumes most of your time — construc- tive educational activities, or routine details? b. About what proportion of your time is devoted to the latter ? c. What proportion, if any, of these routine matters could be delegated to subordinates ? 3. What amendments to the by-laws have been passed during the past five years on the recommendation of the Board of Superintendents pertaining to that board? An analysis of the replies submitted by the City Super- intendent of Schools and six of the eight associate super- intendents exhibits significant problems and points of view. It is plainly evident from the testimony of the replies to the first question that the Board of Superintendents has un- consciously, or otherwise, permitted itself to remain static, both as to form and function, and in consequence thereof to become, to an unnecessary degree, a body exercising bureaucratic functions.^ It has contented itself with carry- ^ The following statements in answer to Question 2 are typical : (a) " Most of my time is taken up by routine work." (b) " It is, in fact, quite difficult to determine just what portion of my work maj' be termed routine detail and what of a constructive na- ture. There is very little of what I do that could be delegated to subordinates." (c) " Probably routine duty takes most of my time. With a suffi- cient force, half of my routine duty could be delegated to subordinates." (d) " The only routine details that I recall are the passing on the renewal of teachers' licenses, and the approval of the service of teachers. These involve a careful investigation of the work of the City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 85 ing out the prescriptions of the Revised Charter. Appar- ently neither the board nor any of its members has sub- jected its organization and prescribed powers and duties to that process of inner evaluation that opens the way for progressive development and ready adjustment.^ " Its powers and duties are clearly specified in the law, and have not, therefore, been made a subject of study " ^ reflects both the theory and the fact. The constitution, powers, and duties of this board, under the provisions of the Revised Charter, were the results of recognized compromise. It was, at the time of its organi- zation, perhaps the best instrumentality that could be de- vised to accomplish the task of bringing about a necessary homogeneity and coherence in the school system of the city. But to assume that, under the multiplying complex needs and rapidly altering conditions of the schools of the metro- politan city, it represented either as to form or function the most serviceable agency for the execution of new edu- cational policies and the development of progressive stand- teacher, as reported by principal and district superintendent. Fre- quently such a detail makes necessary a conference with a teacher, or an observation of her work in the class room by the associate superin- tendent in charge of the division. The proportion of time devoted to this routine in my office is comparatively small." (e) " It is difficult to say how much work may be regarded as rou- tine. More or less of it may become routine and be done through the clerical force." (f ) " Clerical work has consumed much of my time. . . . Most of the routine details have a constructive educational aspect; yet most of them might be delegated to faithful subordinates." * In a supplementary reply dated September 25, igii, the City Super- intendent furnished a list of the recommendations made by the Board of Superintendents to the Board of Education during the period 1906- 191 1 for the amendment of the by-laws. With one or two minor ex- ceptions, these recommendations deal with matters of administrative detail. In no instance is there apparent an issue fundamental to the Board of Superintendents itself. * Communication of the City Superintendent of Schools to School Inquiry, September 26, 191 1. 86 City School Supervision ards is fatuous. Nevertheless, it appears that an effort to modify the organization, or to redefine its functions, has always encountered the strenuous opposition of the mem- bers of the board. For the ready execution of administrative duties the Board of Superintendents is an unwieldy and unnecessarily complicated organization. Since the time of its organiza- tion it has tended to become more and more involved in its own operation. Fully three-quarters of the matters now brought before and considered by the Board of Superin- tendents could be cared for independently by a city super- intendent of schools, acting in an administrative capacity. Every page of the minutes of the meetings of this board bristles with trivial items, or with matters that could be handled directly by a single competent executive or regu- lated automatically by a general rule. The remaining quar- ter pertains to matters of educational detail and supervisory policy that should be determined upon by those whose ac- tivities bring them into constant actual contact with the work of teachers and pupils. Appendices D and E, which reproduce the official min- utes of the Board of Superintendents for two of its regular meetings ^ during 191 1, are representative. These particu- lar minutes were selected at random from the published annual volume by an entirely disinterested person. They fairly represent the various types of matters engaging the attention of the board. While it may be argued that all of these items necessitate action by the Board of Superin- tendents, in compliance with legal requirements, the conten- tion that the machinery of the Board of Superintendents is unnecessary to secure proper administrative control and is too complicated to secure prompt and well-considered action ^ " The Board of Superintendents shall meet at least twice in each school month during the year. It shall keep minutes of its meetings, which shall be printed, and a copy thereof shall be mailed to each mem- ber of the Board of Education." (By-laws, Board of Education, sec. 40-5- ) City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 87 on matters of moment affecting the welfare of schools is still upheld. The usual order of procedure, whereby a mul- titude of routine matters must go from the school to the district superintendent, from the district superintendent to the Board of Superintendents, there referred to one of its committees for investigation and report back to the board, then from the Board of Superintendents to the Board of Education, there referred to one of its committees for con- sideration, from the committee to the Board of Education, thence back to the Board of Superintendents, is one that would not be tolerated by a well-organized industrial or commercial establishment. Indeed, such establishments could not be maintained under such a policy of multiplex checks and balances. The public educational system is one of the city's largest business undertakings. There is no reason why it should not be brought under that general regime of control that has been found necessary for the effective control and economical direction of commercial institutions. Using as an illustration the minutes of the Board of Su- perintendents for January 19, 1911,^ it may be urged that practically all of the numerous matters relating to the leave of absence of teachers (Items 3, 4, 5, 8, 13, 18, 19, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, and 51), to the assignment of teachers (Items 9, 22, 29, 46, 47, 48, 53, 54, 56, and 59), to the transfer of teachers (Items 15, 37, 38, 39, 41, and 43), to the nomina- tion of teachers (Items 16, 17, 20, 24, 27, 40, 44, and 45), could better be regulated by general rules or by a single responsible individual. So also with Items 6, 12, and 21. Similar conclusions may be drawn from a review of the items contained in the minutes of the meeting for October 26, 191 1. The Board of Superintendents has failed to meet, in any complete manner, the obligations laid upon it. The primary cause is to be found in the disinclination of the members frankly to appraise their own usefulness as the center of * See p. 196. 88 City School Supervision constructive influence, and in their reluctance to weigh the more or less frequent criticisms of the methods and powers of the board. THE ASSOCIATE SUPERINTENDENT AS A SUPERVISOR OF SCHOOLS By the provisions of the charter the City Superintendent of Schools has the power to assign the eight associate super- intendents, " subject to the by-laws of the Board of Edu- cation,^ to such duties as, in his judgment, will be conducive to the welfare of the public schools of the City of New York." As members of the Board of Superintendents, the associate city superintendents are responsible for the direc- tion and administration of those numerous activities directly and indirectly related to the supervision of instruction. The bearing of these activities upon the performance of the supervisory functions of the associate superintendents has already been discussed. The system of divisional or geo- graphical supervision,^ which has been in operation since * " The Associate City Superintendents shall perform such service in connection with the duties of their office as the City Superintendent of Schools may direct." (By-laws, Board of Education, sec. 40-4.) * " A careful study of the workings of the system in the several dis- tricts soon convinced me that responsibility among members of the Board of Superintendents must also be determined and definitely fixed. Such a plan, moreover, I felt would give the teachers and the people a more direct representation in the Board of Superintendents than the charter contemplated. To bring about this improvement I in- troduced a scheme of grouping several school districts into a division, and assigned to the care of each division one of the Associate City Superintendents. This plan, while not prescribed by the charter, is entirely in consonance with its intent, and certainly is in no way pro- hibited. I found it expedient to constitute seven of these divisions among the elementary schools, and to place the high schools of the entire city in the eighth division. Under this plan, the District Super- intendents, and through them the schools in their respective districts, are made directly responsible to an Associate City Superintendent, who, in turn, is responsible for the educational welfare of his division of the City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 89 1902, whatever may have been its original utility, now quite obviously yields a service of doubtful worth to the schools of the city.^ The Board of Education and the City Superintendent of Schools were, without doubt, fully warranted in employ- ing the divisional plan of assignment as an expedient to bring about that necessary, though at best partial, adjust- ment between the demands of a complex and rapidly devel- oping educational situation and the capacities of the indi- viduals whose ofificial position in the school organization was acquired by status rather than by specific fitness for the new service. Nevertheless, it requires an extremely liberal and uncritical estimate of the requisite effectiveness of the city. The Division Superintendent under this plan is supposed to rep- resent directly in the Board of Superintendents the interests of the schools under his charge." (Fifth Annual Report, City Superintendent of Schools, 1903, pp. 13 and 14.) ^ " The assignment of the Associate City Superintendents to the supervision of divisions of the city was first made in 1902, v^rhen several different school systems were brought together under a uniform ad- ministration. Supervision by geographical divisions seemed at that time to be the only feasible plan. The division superintendents have done good work in bringing the many diverse interests then existing under one harmonious working system. I am convinced, however, that that method of supervision has now rendered the highest service it is calculated to yield, and that the time has arrived when it ought to give place to a system more in harmony with present conditions. Such a plan I hope to put into execution at an early date. It will require each of the associates to devote his time and energy to some particular kind of work throughout the entire city, instead of devoting them to all kinds of work within a limited area." (Twelfth Annual Report, City Superintendent of Schools, 1910, pp. 18 and 19.) " In my Twelfth Annual Report I stated my intention of changing the assignment of the Associate City Superintendents, so that each of these officers should be assigned to some particular kind of work throughout the entire city, instead of devoting himself to all kinds of work within a limited area. I have deferred making this change, which I still consider desirable, pending the conclusion of the investigation of our city school system, now in progress by direction of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment." (Thirteenth Annual Report, City Su- perintendent of Schools, 191 1, p. 18.) 90 City School Supervision system of supervision through the division superintendents to justify its continuance through an entire decade. It may be fairly assumed that the annual reports of the division superintendents contain pertinent evidence as to the quality of educational, as contrasted with executive or administrative, direction to which the schools of the division are subjected. Chance alone would tend to place in these reports the more significant performances and accomplish- ments rather than those of a minor or trifling nature. Nevertheless, a systematic survey of the contents of these reports for the past four or five years exhibits in conclusive form the absence of a constructive and projected program for the solution of the many problems confronting schools and teachers. With a few scattered exceptions,^ these re- ports are characterized by casual observation of matters of trifling importance, by a lack of comprehensive scientific insight into the problems of education and of school in- struction, by opinionated and unsupported conclusions and recommendations, by unnecessary repetition, and by discon- nected and conventional commentaries upon the accomplish- ments of schools. If these reports reflect even faintly the directive and constructive efflciency of the division super- intendents upon the work of the schools, and certainly the reports, which comprise practically one-tenth of the bulky annual report of the City Superintendent, should do this if they are to become a part of the most important public educational document of the country, we must come to the conclusion that the supervision of schools by the division superintendents is ineffective, unwise, and uneconomical. ^ The results of the Inquiry would support the intention of the City Superintendent of Schools to change the method of assignment to duty of the associate superintendents so ^ For instance, Straubenmuller's reports on " Retardation and Over Age Problems," in the Twelfth Annual Report of the City Superintend- ent of Schools, pp. 225-238; and Thirteenth Annual Report, pp. 235- 240 ; also Edson's report on " Savings in Expenditures," Ninth Annual Report, pp. 179-180. City, Board, and Associate Superintendents 91 that each of these officers would devote himself to some particular work throughout the entire city, instead of to the whole problem of instruction within all of the schools of a limited area. Nevertheless, under the conditions represented by the personnel of the body of associate superintendents and the constitution of the Board of Superintendents, the only way toward greater supervisory as well as administrative effi- ciency is through a complete reconstruction of the super- visory organization, and a redistribution of the duties of the members of the supervisory staff. ^ GENERAL SUMMARY It appears from the more important of the foregoing considerations, that : (a) The attitude of the City Superintendent and the associate superintendents, acting either in an individual official capacity, or collectively as the Board of Superintend- ents, toward the members of the teaching and supervisory staff has discouraged competent criticism of the methods and effectiveness of the school system, and has prevented the development of a necessary spirit of cooperation within the school organization. (b) The accomplishment of the administrative consoli- dation of the public school system since 1898 has been due to the constitution of the office of the City Superintend- ent and to the skill and leadership of the present City Superintendent. (c) The present machinery of control represented by the City Superintendent, the Board of Superintendents, and the associate superintendents is too complicated for effect- ive administration, and too bureaucratic for effective supervision. (d) A larger concentration of authority over matters of * See Recommendations I, II, and III, pp. i68 fif. 92 City School Supervision routine and administrative character in the City Superin- tendent, and a reorganization of the supervisory control so as to provide for a wider, responsible participation of the members of the teaching and supervisory staff in the making and oversight of educational policies, are necessary. CHAPTER VIII THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS THE establishment of the Board of Examiners in 1898 represented the first effective step taken for the uni- fication of the school system of the city. The powers con- ferred upon this board by the Revised Charter of 1901 have enabled it to exercise a deep and far-reaching influence. The board consists of the City Superintendent of Schools, together with four persons appointed by the Board of Edu- cation for a term of six years, upon the nomination of the City Superintendent.^ In accordance with the academic qualifications designated by the Board of Education, and on the recommendation of the Board of Superintendents, the Board of Examiners holds such examinations as are prescribed by the City Superintendent of Schools and pre- pares all eligible lists for principals, branch principals, su- pervisors, heads of departments, assistants, and all other members of the teaching staff. " Except as City Superintendent, or associate city super- intendent, or district superintendent, as director of a special branch, as principal of or teacher in a training school, or as principal of a high school, no person shall be appointed to any educational position whose name does not appear upon the proper eligible list." ^ * Charter, sec. 1089. ' Charter, sec. 1089. " I. The Board of Examiners shall consist of the City Superin- tendent of Schools and of four persons appointed in accordance with Section 1089 of the Charter. The City Superintendent of Schools shall preside over the Board of Examiners. It shall be the duty of the Board of Elxaminers to conduct the examinations of all applicants re- 93 94 City School Supervision All licenses to teach are issued in the name of the City- Superintendent. Legally, the Board of Examiners has no right to fix the subjects of the examinations, or to determine the percentage for passing an examination, or to determine the conditions upon which examinations may be taken, or to propose re- quirements for licenses, or to designate the kinds of licenses required. Moreover, its members are dependent for elec- tion to office upon the City Superintendent, who has the right of nominating them. The broad functions of the board, as described by one of its members, are : " To supply to the schools a sufficient number of the best teachers available, keeping out as many as possible of the relatively unfit, and as few as possible of the relatively fit; to encourage those who are licensed to strive for promotion on merit, and to improve their work and themselves in every way possible; to lead the training schools, and other institutions preparing candidates for our quired to be licensed as teachers in and for the City of New York. Such examinations shall be conducted in accordance with the require- ments fixed by the Board of Education, and at such times as the City Superintendent may direct. "2. The City Superintendent of Schools shall prescribe the subjects in which candidates for licenses shall be examined, and shall determine the percentage which shall be required in order to constitute a success- ful examination, and also the conditions upon which the examination may be taken. " 3. Graduates of colleges and universities recognized by the Regents of the University of the State of New York, who have pursued for not less than one year pedagogical courses satisfactory to the City Superintendent; graduates of schools and colleges for the training of teachers, approved by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction ; and teachers holding a State certificate issued by the State Superin- tendent of Public Instruction since the year eighteen hundred and seventy-five, or holding a college graduate's certificate issued by the same authority, or persons who on the first Monday of February, nine- teen hundred and two, were Associate Borough Superintendents of Schools in any Borough of the City of New York, may be exempted, in whole or in part, from such examination, at the discretion of the City Superintendent." (By-laws of the Board of Education, 1911, sec. 68.) The Board of Examiners 95 examinations, into the most profitable lines of study and practise, the standards and procedure of the Board of Ex- aminers being, naturally, watched with the greatest care by all the ' feeders ' of the system ; and, in general, to admin- ister the merit system in such a way as to minimize its in- herent disadvantages and to gain the full benefit of its, in m}^ judgment, overwhelming advantages." ^ For the readier accomplishment of its many and complex duties, the board is organized into twenty-eight committees : Standing Committees " Section 7. There shall be the following standing committees : 1 . A Committee on Appeals. 2. A Committee on Approval of Courses. 3. A Committee on License as Assistant to Principal. 4. A Committee on By-laws. 5. A Committee on Licenses to Teach Cooking in Ele- mentary Schools. 6. A Committee on Licenses as Teacher of the Deaf. 7. A Committee on Evening Recreation Center Licenses. 8. A Committee on Evening Elementary and Evening High School Licenses. 9. A Committee on Extension of Licenses. 10. A Committee on Licenses to Teach German in Ele- mentary Schools. 11. A Committee on High School Licenses. 12. A Committee oil Licenses to Teach Italian in Ele- mentary Schools. 13. A Committee on Kindergarten Licenses. 14. A Committee on License No. i. 15. A Committee on Licenses to Teach Manual Train- ing in Elementary Schools. * Communication of Examiner Walter L. Hervey, October 24, 191 1, in response to a series of questions submitted by the Committee on School Inquiry. 96 City School Supervision 16. A Committee on Licenses to Teach Music in Ele- mentary Schools. 17. A Committee on Outside Experience. 18. A Committee on Licenses to Teach Physical Training in Elementary Schools. 19. A Committee on License as Principal in Elementary Schools. 20. A Committee on Promotion and Graduating Class Licenses. 21. A Committee on Replacing and Renewal of Licenses. 22. A Committee on Licenses to Teach Sewing in Ele- mentary Schools. 2;^. A Committee on Licenses to Teach Shop Work in Elementary Schools. 24. A Committee on Licenses to Substitute in Elementary Schools. 25. A Committee on Training School Licenses. 26. A Committee on Truant School Licenses. 27. A Committee on Ungraded Class Licenses. 28. A Committee on Vacation School arid Vacation Play- grourid Licenses." " Section 8. The Committee on Appeals shall consist of four examiners ; each of the other committees shall consist of two members." " Section 9. The chairmanships of the several committees shall pass in rotation, annually, from examiner to exam- iner, the work being apportioned by mutual agreement, with approximate equality. The second member of each com- mittee of two shall be the examiner who was chairman of that committee for the preceding year." " Section 10. (a) It shall be the duty of the chairman of a committee, in consultation with his colleague, to conduct the work referred to such committee, and to report thereon to the board. " (b) In the case of those examinations which are an- nounced in one school year and held in the following school The Board of Examiners 97 year, the committee scheduled to conduct the examination shall take charge of matters pertaining to the examination as soon as the announcement is issued." ^ The plan of rotation of committee assignments is calcu- lated to equalize the labor, to keep each member of the board in immediate touch with the entire range of its work, and to subject the conduct of the affairs of the board to pro- gressive revision. It is plain that the methods employed and the standards maintained by the Board of Examiners not only influence in a very direct manner the quality of teaching in the schools, but also fix the requirements for supervision.^ ^ By-laws of the Board of Examiners, 1907. * " The work of the Board of Examiners is more vital to the spread and progress of sound public education than that of any other depart- ment of public school administration. Their function is to provide eligible lists of efficient teachers, and to exclude from the schools those who fail to pass ' the required tests of character, scholarship, and gen- eral fitness.' The most rigid investigation, if fairly conducted, would demonstrate that the examiners have performed this arduous and deli- cate task with thoroughness and impartiality. Every influence, how- ever, that would restore the appointment of teachers to the domination of political influence, every institution for the training of teachers in which weak and inefficient work is done, every rejected applicant who can imagine or invent a plausible reason for his failure, is apt to be arrayed against the Board of Examiners. The gentlemen who com- pose that board, however, as long as they hold office, will not cease to maintain, and, if possible, to elevate the standard for entrance to the teaching profession in this city, and will reject with all necessary firm- ness the delusion which seems to have taken possession of so many minds, that the examiners may be expected to overlook ignorance and to condone professional inefficiency. " It is worthy of note that the plan of licensing teachers after tests conducted by an independent Board of Examiners, and of appointing teachers in order of merit from eligible lists prepared by such a board — a plan which has done so much to raise the standard of teaching in our city, and to eliminate political, social, and sectarian influence from the appointment of teachers — has been adopted, and is now followed in Chicago, 111., in Buffalo, N. Y., and in Newark, N. J. When a city has reached such a size that the selection of teachers has grown too great 98 City School Supervision Methods and standards that result in the eligiblHty of fully qualified teachers reduce the necessity for supervision. a task for a superintendent to undertake, then appointment as a result of competitive examination is the only plan as yet invented that meets the exigencies of the situation. " As far as I am able to learn, the application of competitive exam- ination to the selection of teachers was first proposed by the late George William Curtis, when he was Chancellor of the University of the State of New York. His eloquent words still remain its best justification and defense : " ' Is not every argument for the appointment of the great body of ministerial officers of the government by fitness and character wisely ascertained infinitely stronger when applied to the selection of school teachers? And if the selection of those officers by methods which secure their independence, promote their self-respect, and stimulate their interest and zeal, instead of destroying it, greatly increases the efficiency of the public service, elevates the tone of pubHc employment, and removes a reproach from the national name, is it to be apprehended that similar care would harm the character and efficiency of the public schools? In other branches of the public service, whatever objections may be urged against the reformed system of appointment, it is unde- niably better than the system which it supplants. Whatever foolish questions may be asked, whatever possible frauds practised in an ex- amination, they are wholly insignificant when compared to the unspeak- able folly and the certain fraud of appointment by patronage or mere personal and partisan favor. There could not be a worse system of selection in all the other branches of the public service. Is it the best one for the great department of primary education? "'Yet is it not substantially the present method? Teacherships in the schools are not popularly regarded as subjects of patronage. But are they not so practically, and is it wise that they should remain so? What is the present system? I believe that the requirement of certifica- tion or license before appointment is universal in all the States of the Union. The examination upon which the certificate or license issues is, then, the cardinal point. What are the vital, essential conditions of ef- fective examination? To be properly effective the examinations must be uniform, entirely competent, and wholly independent of the appointing power. The examiners must be sincerely interested in education, fa- miliar with the duties of a teacher and with the requirements of the art of teaching, and capable of conducting an examination to ascertain both the scholastic attainments and the specific professional fitness of the candidates. Wherever these conditions do not exist the public school system, and therefore the whole community, suffers. It is a The Board of Examiners 99 Methods and standards that result in the eligibihty of par- tially fit or unfit teachers increase the burden of responsi- bility placed upon the supervisory staff. THE WORK OF THE BOARD ^ Tlie Board of Examiners does not merely supervise the conduct of examinations; its members personally direct all written tests, and personally intei-view all applicants who pass such tests ; prepare all question papers ; actually read a large proportion of answer papers, especially for the more important grades of licenses; supervise and in many cases review the reading of all other answer papers ; or- ganize the conduct of all kinds of practical tests in special subjects ; carry on in person class-room tests of certain large groups of applicants; pass upon the eligibility of applicants under the by-laws of the Board of Education ; vote upon all matters of licensing and upon the adoption of all eligible lists; conduct hearings, and consider written appeals of all dissatisfied applicants who demand such consideration ; fix salary allowances for outside experience ; renew and extend expired or limited licenses ; grant or withhold approval of courses of study offered in lieu of certain examinations ; recommend to the Board of Superintendents proposed changes in the by-laws of the Board of Education ; weigh and, when advisable, institute changes in the policy, organi- zation, and methods of the board, with respect to the scope and conduct of examinations for any grade or grades of licenses.^ common wrong, a common injury. The people of this country tax themselves heavily enough for the support of schools and teachers to entitle them to the best, and to the adoption of all means plainly neces- sary to secure the best.' " (From Seventh Annual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools, pp. 80-82.) * In connection with this section careful consideration has been given to the report of the Special Committee appointed to investigate the methods, etc., of the Board of Examiners, submitted in 1905 (Minutes of the Board of Education, November 22, 1905). * Communication of Examiner G. J. Smith, September 28, 191 1, 100 City School Supervision The following table (XI), showing the total number of persons examined for the various grades and kinds of li- censes, the number passed and placed upon eligible lists, and the number failed, is indicative of the volume of work com- mitted to the Board of Examiners : TABLE XI Showing Number of Persons Examined, Number Licensed, and Number Failed, 1905-1911 ^ Niunber Number Number Examined Licensed Refused 190S 12,181 7,810 4,371 1906 11,673 8,126 3,547 1907 13,494 10,086 3,408 1908 13,522 9,906 3,616 1909 13,074 9,536 3,538 1910 13,657 9,163 4,442 * 1911 14,626 10,226 4,400 * 52 pending. Table XII, on pp. 102 and 103, shows for the years 1909, 1910, and 191 1 the number of those who passed the examinations for the various grades of licenses and had their names placed upon the proper eligible lists, and the number of those who failed. A detailed examination of Table XII reveals the extent to which the methods and standards of the Board of Examiners select and reject candidates for the several grades of licenses. Particular attention is called to the high percentage of rejections in the case of candidates- for licenses as high school teachers, as principals of elementary- schools, for promotion, and for the several special branches. Tables XI and XII likewise represent the magnitude of the responsibility committed to the Board of Examiners. The handling of a total of forty-one thousand cases during three years has required a degree of skill, ingenuity, and * Compiled from the reports of the City Superintendent of Schools. The Board of Examiners loi foresight not required of any other controlling body in the school system.^ THE METHOD OF THE BOARD It is manifestly impossible for this Inquiry to consider in detail the prescribed preliminary qualifications for eligibility for the various kinds and grades of licenses issued for ser- vice in the public schools of the city.^ Such consideration should be undertaken in any complete study of the effective- ness of the Board of Examiners, since these preliminary qualifications constitute the first stage of the process of selec- tion of those fitted for the educational service.^ It has been assumed that the prescribed conditions of age, education, training, and experience for eligibility for licensing have been established as the best workable balances between the supply of and demand for teachers. Furthermore, it is not possible to pass upon the scope and detailed characteristics of the examinations for the various grades of licenses. Certain matters of important general policy with respect to these examinations do, however, re- quire brief consideration. These matters include the writ- ten examinations in the so-called professional subjects (history and principles of education, psychology, general method, methods of teaching special subjects, school man- agement), the oral examinations, and practical tests. The questions used, and the scope of the written exam- * " Let me point out the interesting fact that though the work of the board has increased remarkably in thirteen years, . . . the cost of the examination system remains about the same, the increase, if any, being very slight." (Communication of Examiner J. A. O'Connell, October 3, 1911.) * By-laws of the Board of Education, sec. 66. * " Although the Board of Superintendents, under the Charter, pro- pose to the Board of Education the qualifications for each grade or kind of license, the present by-laws setting forth such qualifications were, with few exceptions, prepared by the Board of Examiners in 1902." (Communication of Examiner J. A. O'Connell, October 3, 1911.) I02 City School Supervision TABLE XII Showing the Number and Percentage of Licenses Granted, 1909 1910 Grade -2 1 •a 1 •T3 1) s 6 Pi 1 p^ Training Schools: Model Teachers Assistant Teachers Critic Teachers Clerical Assistants Substitute Teachers First Assistant Teachers High Schools: Principals 5 II 5 I 13 3 20 Qi 34 I 3 250 I I 91 i',268 99 15 2 24 I I IS 8 5 2 1,64s I 3 3,339 I 4 7S4 1,817 I I I I I 200 IS4 16^ 3 17 587 137 29 ■48 8 3^6 22 4 14 S 331 3 4 848 3 IS 349 543 6 12 S 3 13 2 21 291 188 I 7 411 3 I 108 i^Sss 236 44 2 72 9 10 SI 30 9 16 9 1,976 4 7 4,187 4 19 1,103 2,360 6 8 4 I S ■■'6 248 131 II 10 203 12 I 125 1,296 79 29 2 3 29 5 S II I 1,341 2 S 3,073 728 1,78s 39S 301 16 6 i6s 39 202 ■48 S09 70 ■fe 2 19 37 "6 12 I 1,796 120 322 Assistants Laboratory Assistants Elementary Schools: Principals Assistants to Principals Graduating Class Licenses Promotion Licenses S2 Kindergarten Licenses Special Branches: Insp. and Asst. Insp. Athletics .... Director and Asst. Dir. Physical Training Manual Training and Drawing .... Sewing Ungraded Class Licenses Teachers of Deaf Teachers in Truant Schools Teachers in Vocational Schools . . . Teachers in Vacation Playgrounds and Evening Recreation Centers .... Inspectors, Classes for Blind Principals, Vocational Schools .... Evening Schools: Evening High School Teachers .... Evening Elementary School Teachers . Substitute Licenses Total 9,S36 3,538 13,074 9,165 4,442 52 Per Cent 72.9 27.1 67.4 32.6 In the computation of the percentages the The Board of Examiners 103 TABLE XII Refused, and Pending during the Years 1909, 1910, and 191 i 1911 Totals Granted Refused Pendiag Total Number V. •0 to kl a kl a M "Ta a 3 a ••3 "rt Q U J3 c5 e2 2 I g ^ 8 ;z; u 1 l-l (2 6 7 1 8 18 90.0 2 lO.O 30 8 6 2 8 25 89.3 5 10.7 28 4 9 lOO.O 9 I 3 "a 4 80.0 I 20.0 5 5 2 I 2 I 19 I 3 9S.O lOO.O I SO 30 I 2 "6 36 96.3 I 3-7 27 643 19s 298 493 534 37.4 893 62.6 1,427 432 104 294 398 369 36.4 749 73-6 1,018 27 I I 13 44.8 16 55-2 29 16 3 IS 17 15 37-5 25 62.5 40 368 164 98 263 617 59-3 424 40.7 1,041 SI 4 6 10 17 26.6 47 73-4 64 254 53 13 66 S3 19.8 315 80.2 S3 320 I 37 37 39 lOO.O 29 173 71 44 IIS 387 72.5 109 27-5 396 25 63 87 25 28.7 63 713 87 i>8os 1,191 392 1.583 3,755 71.6 1,488 28.4 5,243 149 74 45 119 353 IS 3 50.0 34-1 lOO.O 353 29 50.0 65-9 504 44 2 '89 42 33 7S 95 40-3 141 59-7 236 4 I I 3 4 26.7 II 73-3 IS 22 13 13 25 16 38.1 41 71.9 57 66 29 34 63 73 40.6 107 59-4 180 S 13 37-2 22 62.8 35 II 9 13 32 19 4S-2 23 54-8 42 23 14 »S 29 27 39-7 41 60.3 68 I 8 4 13 13 59-1 9 40.9 22 1,657 1,143 3SS 1,497 4,138 80s 1,002 19-5 S.I30 3 6 6 3 25.0 9 750 12 6 "46 107 153 54 32.S 113 67.S 166 4,869 3,578 1,277 4,855 9,990 I 4 71.8 25-0 21. 1 3,921 3 15 38.3 750 78.9 13,911 4 19 848 l,oS9 260 1,319 2,541 77-7 729 32.3 3.270 2,107 2,23s 909 3,144 5,837 76.7 1,774 233 7,611 122 103 225 122 54-2 103 45-8 225 13.659 10,226 4,400 14,626 28,927 70.0 12,380 30.0 52 41,359 699 30.1 70.0 300 pumber of licenses pending has been disreftarded, 104 City School Supervision inations for License No. i, may be regarded as typical of the methods and standards of the board. ^ No examination system can be depended upon to select, with absolute accuracy, those best fitted for the service to which the examination pertains. A knowledge of the so- called professional subjects has come to be regarded as an essential element in the preparation of the teacher. And, while a difference of judgment might readily obtain as to the appropriateness of certain of the questions used in the written examinations, and their relationship to the method and aims of effective teaching, a knowledge of the prevail- ing methods and standards of American institutions for the training of teachers leads me to express general approval of the questions used in the recent examinations as fair tests of professional preparation, and confidence in them as a positive factor in the group of devices employed for the selection of fit teachers. For the reading and rating of the answer papers of the written examination it is the practise of the Board of Ex- aminers to employ, as assistants, a considerable number of principals and teachers in service. Such an expedient, how- ever necessary under the conditions, must be regarded as introducing numerous elements of unreliability; and steps should be taken for the reading and rating of these papers by persons not immediately connected with the school system. One other aspect of the whole scheme of formal written examinations has not received from the authorities of the school system the serious attention it deserves. This study does not attempt, with the evidence at hand, to do more than to emphasize the dangers arising from the system of cramming and coaching for examinations that has grown up in the city. This " forced " professional preparation is most frequently in the hands of individuals whose skill and ^ See Appendix F, pp. 227 fif., for typical questions used in the written examinations for License No. i. These questions have been examined and weighed in detail as the basis for the conclusions here expressed. The Board of Examiners 105 adroitness serve to vitiate the purposes of the examination. The situation becomes all the more aggravated when such preparation is attempted by those belonging to the active supervisory or teaching staff. Quite properly, the tests of eligibility and the written ex- aminations are supplemented by the oral and practical tests. In the case of License No. i, the relative value of the writ- ten to the oral and practical tests is shown by the following : Scope of Examination* "IV. The scope of the professional examination for License No. i, and the passing conditions therein, are as follows : — Minimum Required — Maximum Women Men Group I — Written Examination: Credits Jan., 191 2- June, 191 2 (a) History and Principles of Education . 60 (b) English (including Methods in English) 60 (c) Methods of teaching 90 Total, Group I 210 145 150 160 Group II — Oral and Practical Tests: (d) Drawing ao (e) Physical Training 10 (f) Music 10 (g) Sewing (women only) 10 (h) Oral English and Personality .... 20 14 14 15 (i) Record 20 14 14 15 Total, Group II "90 58 60 68 Grand Total 300 210 216 228 Since men are not examined in Item (g), one- fourth of the ratings received in Items (d), (e), and (f) will be added to the total in Group II. Written tests will not be included in Items (e) and (f). In Item (h) the applicant's use of English and general personal fit- ness for the position of teacher will be estimated. In Item (i) a rating of the applicant's character and record as a student and teacher will be given. Successful experience in teaching for one half-year or more will receive credit when proved by original documents. Experience in practise teaching, or in clerical work, will not receive credit. Substitute teachers in the New York City public * Circular of November 15, 1911. io6 City School Supervision schools who have actually taught as substitutes for eighty days or more should, within five days following the examination, file their substitute licenses, properly filled out and certified. Each applicant must show in the written and oral examinations a satisfactory use of English and a satisfactory knowledge of the sub- jects embraced in the elementary school course." The following marking slip is a typical illustration of the general basis of the oral examinations: BOARD OF EXAMINERS Marking Slip Oral Examination f Assistant to Principal, Elementary Schools Date. Name. Candidate's Niunber Mark Out of Remarks Ability in teaching and supervi- sion as evidenced by official record and special reports . Ability in teaching and supervi- sion as evidenced by class- room test and answers to questions thereon .... Personality 40 40 20 Whatever limitations these oral examinations may have, and notwithstanding the numerous objections that have been raised on account of the influence of indefinite subjective standards of judgment of the examiners, a careful inquiry into the methods by which these oral examinations are con- ducted gives warrant for the judgment that the Board of Examiners has caused the oral examination system to be an important and valuable factor in the selection of candi- dates for the eligible lists. If any criticism were to be made, it would be against the leniency of the board in passing persons of doubtful personal and linguistic qualifications. The Board of Examiners 107 The fact that there are in the schools at the present time so many teachers possessing an inadequate and imperfect command of Enghsh points not only to a weakness in the examination system, but also to a laxity in the supervision by the principals and district superintendents who permit the renewal of the licenses of these persons. Some detailed attention has been given to the class-room tests as applied to those qualifying for principal's license for elementary schools. This class-room test consists of two main parts: (a) A written criticism of a certain assigned class exercise, and (b) the conduct of a recitation upon which an examining officer, principal, district superintend- ent, or member of the Board of Examiners presents a writ- ten estimate. The candidate has no opportunity for any special preparation. Such a practical exercise can hardly be a valid test of either teaching or supervisory capacity. Not only is the test conducted under abnormal teaching con- ditions, but the standards of judgment applied are, in most instances, wholly unreliable measures of the candidate's real efficiency. For the important office of principal of an ele- mentary school such a teaching and supervisory test should be applied, but it should be continued over a sufficient period — a week at least — under more or less normal conditions, and be subjected to the critical judgment of those of dem- onstrated competency. THE GENERAL EFFICIENCY OF THE BOARD Aside from the City Superintendent of Schools, no agency related to the direction and control of the public school system has been the subject of criticism and contro- versy more than the Board of Examiners. This was an' in- evitable consequence of the revolutionary changes that came about with the establishment of the board in 1898, and es- pecially after the enlargement of its powers by the Revised Charter in 1901. Prior to 1898 each of the several school organizations now within the metropolitan area had its own methods for the certification and appointment of teachers. io8 City School Supervision Historically, no feature of the development of public edu- cation in the United States has offered a more difficult problem than that of removing the selection of teachers from the realm of personal, partisan, and political influence. New York has shared with the rest of the country, especially with the cities, the difficulties arising from this problem. The Board of Examiners has proved to be a most effec- tive instrumentality for the accomplishment of the principal ends for which it was created ; that is, to place the appoint- ment of teachers upon a merit basis, and thereby isolate the schools from the self-interest of individuals, classes, and parties. This judgment is expressed in spite of any of the inadequacies in the constitution and operation of the board indicated later. Any agency that has protected the teaching force, as has the Board of Examiners, from the influence of forces and motives wholly unrelated to efficiency is entitled to commendation. Unquestionably, mistakes have been made, and individual cases of injustice and maladjustment can be pointed out. But the fundamental policy of this board has contributed to the sound development of schools. On September 26, 191 1, the following questions were sub- mitted to each member of the Board of Examiners : 1. What studies, during the past five years, have been made by the Board of Examiners, or by you, as an indi- vidual member of the board, of its organization, powers, duties, and methods, with a view to recommending possible improvements in the efficiency of the board ? 2. (a) What recommendations have been made to the City Superintendent, to the Board of Superintendents, or to the Board of Education, based on such studies ? (b) What use was made of such studies and reports? (c) Are any such studies or reports on file? The carefully prepared replies to the above questions, when supplemented by other pertinent evidence, warrant the conclusion that the Board of Examiners has exercised its functions in a singularly effective and progressive man- The Board of Examiners 109 ner. Since its establishment in 1898 this board has had to create an examination system which would enable the schools to have a sufficient number of teachers of actual or poten- tial efficiency. That the procedure of the board in dealing with the thousands of applicants for teachers' licenses has, in rare instances, resulted in the rejection of qualified candi- dates would perhaps be difficult to disprove ; that the same procedure has also resulted in the rejection of a multitude of unfit teachers would be equally difficult to disprove. The methods and results of the teaching staff in the schools of the city today undoubtedly are open to criticism. But the burden of this criticism cannot be shifted to the Board of Examiners. The peculiar political, social, and racial con- ditions obtaining in New York City have rendered the pub- lic schools peculiarly liable to party, class, and personal ex- ploitation. That the extent of this exploitation is as limited as it is may be ascribed to the resistance of the Board of Examiners. A study of the evolution of the methods and standards of the board indicates that it has devoted a large share of its energy and attention to the improvement of its methods and the elevation of its standards. No one of the agencies for school control has more consciously attempted to ad- just its performance to the changing needs of the school system. In practically every instance the examination re- quirements for the several kinds of licenses, as they have been developed, exhibit a decided trend in the direction of establishing higher and juster standards of qualification. CRITICAL STATEMENT Three items relative to the Board of Examiners call for special consideration : a. The Size of the Board The present Board of Examiners is too small to accom- plish in the most satisfactory manner the extensive and no City School Supervision divers duties now devolving upon it. For practical purposes there are but four active members — the City Superintend- ent, for obvious reasons, not being able to assume any ap- preciable share of the examination work. The enlargement of the board proposed in Recommendation IV (p. i8i) sug- gests a way for the extension and improvement of the activ- ities of the board. h. The Permanency of the Board One of the most forceful objections to any examination board, such as the Board of Examiners, centers in the ten- dency of such boards to become isolated from the actual working conditions of the institution to be served. The examination system tends to become an end in itself. While it is conceded that the general effectiveness with which the board has carried forward its work is marked, nevertheless, the plan of rotating membership described in Recommenda- tion IV would improve that effectiveness, for it would en- able the members of the Board of Examiners to be kept in closer and more vital contact with the schools and their teaching needs. c. The City Superintendent as the Dominating Member of the Board of Examiners No inconsiderable amount of the criticism of the Board of Examiners has been directed against the membership of the City Superintendent of Schools and his right to nomi- nate the members of the board. Careful consideration has been given to this important issue, and, while it is difficult with the means at hand to examine all of the questions raised, our survey and scrutiny of the methods of the board have convinced us that the membership of the City Super- intendent of Schools is desirable from the point of view of securing that very necessary correlation of the controlling agencies. The question of the dependency of the members of the board upon the City Superintendent for nomination. The Board of Examiners iii and consequently for appointment, does not appear to be of great moment. This power, in the hands of a selfish or autocratic superintendent, might prove to be dangerous. On the other hand, the great importance of the public schools in the civic economy and progress, together with the M'idespread public interest in all matters vitally affect- ing the welfare of the schools, presents a certain guarantee that the City Superintendent of Schools will be an indi- vidual whose own professional standing would compel the nomination of examiners having a single interest in the establishment and maintenance of high standards of quali- fication for teachers. A modern city superintendent of schools must, necessarily, have a jealous regard for the efficiency of the teaching staff. GENERAL SUMMARY It appears, from the more important of the foregoing considerations, that: (a) The Board of Examiners, by its methods and stand- ards, determines the character of the demands made upon the supervisory staff. (b) The Board of Examiners has a tremendous annual task in conducting the wide variety of examinations of many thousands of candidates for the teacher's license. (c) The methods and standards of the Board of Exam- iners have been such as to select the more fit of those pre- senting themselves for examination. (d) The Board of Examiners has sought constantly to adapt itself in a progressive way to the changing needs of the school system. (e) The constitution of the Board of Examiners so as to include the City Superintendent is to be desired. (f) The enlargement of the Board of Examiners would contribute to its effectiveness. 112 City School Supervision EXHIBIT III EXAMINATION, CERTIFICATION, AND APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS (Cities of 300,000 Population and Over; Examining Authority City Name Selection and Composition Number Term (Years) New York Board of Exami- ners Board of Educa- tion upon nomina- tion of City Superin- tendent 4 and City Super- intendent 6 Chicago City Examiner Board of Educa- tion upon nomina- tion of City Superin- tendent I and assistants Perma- nent (see Sec. 6, Rules) Philadelphia City Superintend- ent ex officio St. Louis Committee of Ex- aminers City Superintend- ent, Assistant Super- intendents and Prin- cipals of high schools ex officiis and other principals or teachers selected by Superin- tendent Boston Board of Superin- tendents City Superintend- ent and Assistant Su- permtendents ex of- ficiis Cleveland City Board of School Examiners Board of Educa- tion 3 3 Baltimore City Superintend- ent and Assistant Superintendents ex officiis 7 No rule Pittsburg Examining Board City Superintend- ent and Associate Su- perintendents ex of- ficiis with such others as Sup>erintendent may select and Board of Education ap- proves Detroit Committee on Teach- ers and Schools President of Board of Education 5 with City Su- perintendent and other professional help as deemed nec- essary I References are to Sees., etc., in docu- The Board of Examiners 113 EXmBIT III EXAMINATION, CERTIFICATION. AND APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS (CmEs OF 300,000 Population and Over) Certification » Qualifications Citation Appointment > College or Uni- versity graduate with s years experi- ence, or state certifi- cate and 10 years experience City Charter, Sec. 1089 By City Super- intendent. Sec. 1089 By Board of Education from eligible lists, upon rec- ommendations of Board of Su- perintendents. Sec. 1090 Left to Superin- tendent Rules of Depart- ment of Education, 1910. Sec. 40 By Board of Education (State School Law, Sec. 134) By Board of Education from eligible lists, upon rec- ommendation of City Super- intendent and Committee on School Management. Sec. 10 Handbook of Board of Education, 1909-10. Rule XXIII By Board of Education. Rule XXIII By Board of Education from eligible list prepared by City Superintendent. Rule Rules and Char- ter of Board of Edu- cation, 19H. Rule 44, Sec. I By Board of Education, upon recommendation of City Superintendent and Commit- tee on Instruction. Rule 41, Sec. II School Document No. 7, 1912. Rules of Committee, Ch. 7, Sec. 136 By Board of Su- perintendents. Ch. 7, Sec. 138 By School Committee, upon recommendation of City Su- perintendent. Ch. 6, Sec. los Two years of teaching experience and otherwise com- petent R. S. Ohio. Sec. 7838 By Board of Ex- aminers By Board of Education from eligible list, upon recom- mendation of City Superin- tendent Rules of Board of School Commission- ers, 1907. Art. VI By Board of Su- perintendents By Board of School Com- missioners upon recommen- dations of City Superintend- ents and Assistant Superin- tendents. Art. IX Rules and Regu- lations of the Board of Public Education, I0I3. Art. IX By Board of Education, upon recommendation of City Superintendent. Art. VIII The s must be members of the Board of Education Manual Board of Education, 1912- 13. Rule 16 By Board of Education, upon recommendation of Committee on Teachers and Schools. Rule 43 ments referred to under "Citation" column. 114 City School Supervision EXHIBIT in EXAMINATION, CERTIFICATION, AND APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS (Cities of 300,000 Population and Over) Examining Authority City Name Selection and Composition Number Term (Years) Buffalo Board of School Examiners Mayor 5. City Superin- tendent prescribes the subjects for the examinations but is not technically a member of the Board S San Francisco Board of Educa- tion* Mayor 4 and the Super- intendent of the City and County of San Francisco 4 Milwaukee Committee on Ex- amination and Ap- pointment » President of Board of School Directors 4 and President of Board of School Directors I Cincinnati Board of Exami- ners Board of Educa- tion 3 3 Newark Board of Exami- ners City Superintend- ent ex officio; three assistant superin- tendents, and two se- lected by Board of Education 6 No limit fixed New Orleans Board of Directors or a Committee Popular election S 4 Washington Board of Exami- ners City Superintend- ent ex officio and two heads of departments from the schools for whites and two from the schools for blacks selected by Board of Education J and City Super- intendent for each of the two boards I Los Angeles Teachers Commit- tee, City Superin- tendent, Deputy Su- perintendent and As- sistant Superintend- ent ex ojjiciis 3 members of Teachers Commit- tee and the 3 super- intendents as in column 3 No limit fixed Minneapolis City Superintend- ent 1 Conducts civil service examination to determine entrance to elementary and grammar grades; applicants writing these examinations must hold certificates valid under the state law. The Board of Examiners 115 EXHIBIT III EXAMINATION, CERTIFICATION, AND APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS (Cities of 300,000 Population and Over) Certification Qualifications Otation Appointment Citizen of Buf- falo City Charter, 1896. Sees. 331-333 By Chairman and Secretary of IBoard of Exami- ners. Sec. 339 By Superintendent of Edu- cation from eligible list. Sec. 330 Rules of Board of Education, 1905. Sec. 14, Rule 9, p. 7 By Board of Education, p. 6 Members of Board of School Di- rectors Rules and regula- tions of Board of School Directors, .1911. p. 36 By Committee on Examination and Appointment. P-36 By Committee on Examina- tion and appointment upwn recommendation of City Su- perintendent subject to ap- proval of Board of School Di- rectors, p. 36 Rules of Board of Education, 191 1, p. 21 By Board of Education upon recommendation of City Superintendent, pp. 13, 30 Secretary to be an exi)erienced school man Rules of Board of Education. Rule 10 (SSth Annual Re- port, 1910-11) By Board of Education on recommendation of Commit- tee on Instruction and Edu- cational Supplies and by them from an eligible list presented by City Superintendent, p. 335 Act 214, 1912. Sec. 72 By Board of Di- rectors or a special committee. Sec. 72 By Board of Directors on nomination of City Superin- tendent from eligible list. Sec. 72 Heads of depart- ments in the respec- tive schools Handbook of Board of Education, 1912. Organic Law. Sec. 6 By Boards of Ex- aminers. Rule 20 By Boards of Education upon recommendation of City Superintendent. Sec. 2 _ Rules and regula- tions of city schools. Rules 47, 48, 49 (An- nual Report, 1905- 06) See note (s). Rule 48 By Board of Education upon recommendation of City Superintendent and Teachers Committee. Rule 47 Rules and Regu- lations for the Gov- ernment of Schools. (Annual Report, 1910) By President of Board of Educa- tion and Superin- tendent of Schools. Sec. 67 By Board of Education upon recommendation of City Superintendent and Commit- tee on Education. Sec. 17 ' The actual examinations are conducted by the City Superintendents and their assistants, but the results must be presented to the Committee for approval. CHAPTER IX METHODS AND STANDARDS FOR DETERMIN- ING TEACHING EFFICIENCY THE PROBLEM^ ONE of the greatest issues confronting the public school system of the city is the maintenance of a competent and permanent teaching force in the face of social and other conditions that tend naturally to favor incompetence and to encourage impermanence. By far the greater propor- tion of the expenditures of the Department of Education is for the salaries of teachers. The organization and opera- tion of the school system must be such as to retain and to reward the fit, and to select and reject the unfit teachers. This work requires the highest form of educational skill on the part of supervisors, especially in this city, with its many thousands of teachers, its many grades of positions, and its many scales of compensation; for the supervisory staff exists, primarily, to establish and to elevate standards of teaching performances. It is, therefore, pertinent to scruti- nize the methods employed and the standards set up for de- termining the fitness of those who are to constitute the body of fully qualified teachers and supervisors. ELIGIBILITY FOR LICENSE AND FITNESS FOR TEACHING The tests applied by the Board of Examiners are tests of probable fitness. In reality, the work of this board con- ^ Consult in this connection the excellent article by District Superin- tendent J. S. Taylor, "Measurement of Educational Efficiency," Edu- cational Review, vol. 44, p. 348 — November, 1912. 116 Determining Teaching Efficiency 117 stitutes but the first step in the process of selection. The real fitness of teachers must be finally determined under conditions of actual service. The continuation of the selective process begun by the Board of Examiners, through the preparation of eligible lists, is provided for through the insurance of temporary licenses, v^hich are renewed without examination, in case the service of the holder is satisfactory to the City Super- intendent, for two successive years. At the close of the third year of continuous successful service the City Super- intendent is authorized to make the license permanent.^ In other words, the initial license granted to any teacher or principal is a probationary license, which does not become permanent until after three years of successful service. The responsibility of the Board of Examiners for the char- acter and fitness of the teaching force is thus, after ap- pointment, transferred to the supervisory staff — district superintendents, directors, and principals. The examiners and the supervisors become jointly responsible for those who acquire the important status represented by the permanent licenses. The following table (XIII, p. 119), showing the number of licenses renewed, number refused, and number made per- manent for the three years 1909, 1910, and 191 1, and also the number of teachers whose services were approved or dis- approved for the years 1909 and 19 10, furnishes the basis for conclusions that bear indirectly upon the performances of the Board of Examiners and the supervisory staff. From Table XIII it appears that a very few of the tem- porary licenses fail of renewal in due course. Roughly, 5 per cent of these licenses are renewed a third time before being made permanent; one-half of i per cent of the li- censes are renewed four or more times. For the three years under consideration approximately only i per cent of those licensed had their permanent licenses refused. * Charter, sec. 1089. Ii8 City School Supervision Several assumptions may be brought forward in expla- nation of the above conditions : First: It may be assumed that the tests applied by the Board of Examiners were such as to select only those who were certain to prove successful. On the average the licensee has ninety-nine chances out of a hundred of securing a permanent license ; Second: It may be assumed that the standards of effec- tive service applied by the supervisory staff are not high, and thus permit practically all to reach the status of perma- nent tenure ; Third: It may be assumed that, with the assistance and under the stimulus of competent supervision, those of medi- ocre or less ability were trained and developed to a point justifying permanent retention; Fourth: It may be assumed that the demand for teachers so nearly approaches the available supply as to render neces- sary the permanent licensing of practically all of those ap- pointed from the eligible lists of the Board of Examiners ; or Fifth: It may be assumed that those who foresaw failure resigned, thereby not raising the question of final refusal to renew the license. An extended examination of the data of the past five years, relative to the renewal of License No. i, in connec- tion with the data of Table XIII, is sufficient to eliminate the fifth assumption. A certain limited force may be at- tached to the fourth assumption. The rapid growth of the school system has produced a demand for teachers that has taxed to the limit the available supply.^ That the third ^ " Permit me to say further, and in conclusion, that in the light of our experience in sifting out the relatively fit from the absolutely unfit (both the fit and the unfit oftentimes presenting identical academic and professional credentials) nothing could be more disastrous — nothing could be more absurd — than to use the fact of a temporary dearth of Determining Teaching Eificiency 119 TABLE XIII Showing Licenses Renewed, Refused, and Made Permanent for the Three Years 1909-1910-1911, Inclusive; also Number of Teachers Whose Services Were Approved or Disapproved for the Years 1910 and 1911^ Grade Training Schools: Critic Model Teacher First Assistant Assistant High Schools: Principal First Assistant Assistant Junior Teacher Elementary Schools: Principal Assistant to Principal . . . Head of Department . . . Graduating Class Promotion License No. i Kindergarten Drawing Direct, of Phys. Training Asst. Direct, of Phys. Training Music Sewing Cooking Shop Work German [ Physical Training Teacher of Deaf Inspector of Blind Inspector of Ungraded Classes Teacher of Ungraded Classes As. Teacher Ungraded Classes Inspector of P. S. Athletics . Asst. Inspect. P. S. Athletics Truant School: Principal Assistant Teacher Vocational School: Principal Totals 1909 X910 1911 Licenses Renewed and Made Permanent First Renewal 8 16 9 32 S 44 347 70 68 40 94 52 4 3.213 3g6 12 14 67 46 10 14 16 16 1,557 1.367 1,578 Second Renewal 17 8 33 S SI 341 23 66 67 28 47 3,337 28s 13 IS 70 47 9 17 1,680 I,SI2 1.338 Thu-d Renewal 191 228 Fourth Renewal and Over 2S Made Perma- nent 4 32 329 3 62 24 30 29 3,26s 260 14 4,267 1,273 1,556 1,438 Re- fused Total 26 44 26 73 14 127 1,040 C8 ig6 133 1 54 128 4 io,oS9 8S4 39 29 43 190 140 31 46 38 14 30 I3,S9S 4,614 4,563 4,418 1910, Number of teachers whose services were approved 1,587 Disapproved, 162 1911, Number of teachers whose services were approved 1,57s Disapproved, 180 Totals 3,162 342 ' Compiled from Reports of City Superintendent of Schools and the Minutes of the Board of Superintendents. I20 City School Supervision assumption has a certain validity is borne out by the un- doubted efforts made by district superintendents and prin- cipals to prevent a teacher from becoming a complete fail- ure. In view of recognized limitations of all examination systems to select with accuracy those fit for efficient service, the second assumption, as to the standards whereby service is approved, requires attention. The renewal of temporary licenses of teachers and prin- cipals appointed for service is based upon the reports made to the City Superintendent by the several supervisory offi- cers. These reports presumably represent the result of a critical and complete examination of the performances of the holder of the license. The examinations upon which these reports are made are shown in Appendix G:^ (a) Elementary Schools; (b) High and Training Schools; (c) Special Teachers ; and (d) Principals and Assistants to Principals. Many hundreds of these reports for recent years, as filed in the office of the City Superintendent, were examined in detail. In addition, many personal inspections have been made of the methods used by district superintendents and principals in passing upon the qualifications of teachers whose licenses were to be renewed. On the basis of the evidence developed the following conclusions seem to be warranted : (a) That the reports of service for the renewal of tem- porary licenses are, in the great majority of cases, purely formal, on the part both of the principal " and the district teachers, due to ascertained and removable causes, as a pretext for a general letting down of the bars." (Examiner W. L. Hervey, Ninth Annual Report to the City Superintendent, p. 399.) ^ See pp. 242 ff. for these forms. ^ The by-laws of the Board of Education (sec. 43, sub. 6) contain the excellent provision that " Principals shall keep a record of all class inspections and examinations, of conferences with teachers. . . ." In not a single one of twenty-one elementary schools visited was I able to discover such a record which as to form or content would serve as a Determining Teaching EMciency 121 superintendent. The terms " excellent," " good," " poor," " satisfactory," " unsatisfactory," representing, as they do, the general form in which the judgments are expressed, are too indefinite, vague, and subjective to have reliability. Tlie multitude of duties that must be performed by the district superintendent practically preclude any but very brief and superficial examinations of the methods or the success of teachers as represented by the progress of the pupils.^ (b) That these reports should be in such form as to oblige both the principal and the district superintendents to present detailed positive evidence in support of the renewal of licenses. The reports should also show the number and duration of visits and the variety of work inspected, to- gether with other pertinent supplementary evidence. (c) That the supervisory authorities should aim to unify the standards according to which the work of probationary teachers is approved. It is plainly evident that in various parts of the city radically diverse standards are employed by supervisory officers in determining the renewal of a teacher's license. (d) That the approval of the first year of service should rest entirely with the principal, or, in the case of teachers of special branches, with the director; that the second re- newal should be based upon a careful examination of the basis for making a reliable report upon the work of the teachers. In many instances the principal apparently had no conception of what such a record might contain. These principals preferred to make their estimate of the teacher on the basis of a "general impression." In other instances principals frankly said that they had no time for the record- ing of the results of their observations of the teacher's work. * Six district superintendents permitted me to accompany them dur- ing times when they were engaged in passing upon teachers whose licenses were up for renewal. In some instances a whole day was de- voted to this, and in others a half-day. With almost no exception a superintendent's decision was founded upon a very brief visit, of from five to fifteen minutes, to the class room. Sometimes, though not al- ways, this inspection was supplemented by a brief conference with the principal. 122 City School Supervision teacher's work by the district superintendent ; that the third and final renewal should be made as a result of an inspec- tion of the teacher's work by an independent inspector ; ^ that the recommendation of the division superintendent, as now provided for — since it is by the condition of things purely formal — be eliminated. Only after the work of those holding temporary licenses Is subjected to a closer and more rigid scrutiny than now obtains, and only after there is a greater centering of indi- vidual responsibility for approval of probationary work, will the fitness and competency of those who become mem- bers of the permanent teaching staff be fairly guaranteed. APPROVAL OF SERVICE AS FIT AND MERITORIOUS The relation of compensation to quality of service has been, and will continue to be, one of the perplexing issues confronting those immediately responsible for the improve- ment of the teaching corps. Beginning with the passage of the Ahearn Law (1899) an endeavor has been made by legislative measures, the Davis Law (1900) and the Grady Law (191 1 ), to establish such graduated schedule of com- pensation as seems to be consistent with grade, quality, and duration of service. It is not proposed here to enter into any discussion of a difficult, and still unsettled, question of the proper compensation for the various classes of teachers in the different grades of schools. It has, however, been considered to be within the immediate responsibility of the Inquiry to pass upon certain general practises which vitally influence the workings of the salary schedules. Prior to January i, 191 2, the salaries of principals and * It is contemplated that the proposed Bureau of Investigation and Appraisal contain a certain number of individuals, whose time shall be spent in such service as is herein indicated. See Recommendation IIT, p. 179- Determining Teaching Efficiency 123 teachers were based upon the graduated minima estabHshed by the so-called Davis Law and incorporated in the charter.^ This law provided that no one of the specified members of the supervisory or teaching staff in elementary schools should receive a salary greater than that fixed for the sev- enth year of service, nor for the tivelfth year of service, " unless and until the service of any such member shall have been approved, after inspection and investigation, as fit and meritorious by a majority of the Board of Superintendents/' This law also provided that no member of the supervisory and teaching staff of any high or training school should re- ceive a salary greater than that fixed for the fourth year of service, nor a salary greater than that fixed for the nijith year of service, until a similar approval of service as fit and meritorious had been made. The theory of the Davis Law was that salaries should be regulated by merit, grade taught, length of service, and ex- perience in teaching. The salary schedule adopted by the Board of Education on May 17 and May 24, 191 1, which became the basis of the amendment to the Davis Law, as incorporated into the charter (Chapter 902, Laws of 1911), besides readjusting and equalizing the salaries for men and women, emphasized the principle of merit by providing that no teacher in an elementary school should receive a salary greater than that fixed by the third year of service, nor a salary greater than that fixed for the sijirth year of service, nor a salary greater than that fixed for the ninth year of service, nor a salary greater than that for the tzvelfth year of service, nor a salary greater than that fixed for the fifteenth year of ser- vice, until the service of such teachers shall have been ap- proved as fit and meritorious by a majority of the Board of Superintendents.^ The forms for the special reports on the work of elemen- * Charter, sec. 1091. * By-laws of the Board of Education, sec. 65, subsec. 14. 124 City School Supervision tary school teachers, whose service is to be approved for advance in salary, are given in Appendix H.^ The general criticisms already presented of the methods and standards of supervisory officers in preparing reports upon the work of teachers whose licenses are to be renewed will also hold as applying to the approval of service as " fit and meritorious." The relatively few disapprovals of service (see Table XIII, p. 119) can scarcely be interpreted as signifying a uni- formly high level of teaching performance. On the con- trary, it means, in all probability, the employment of a very lenient standard by approving officers. THE RATED EFFICIENCY OF TEACHERS As a logical development of the machinery for the con- trol and improvement of the teaching staff there has been built up a more or less elaborate system of regular reports upon the performances of teachers. The principal forms upon which these ratings are recorded are presented in the following pages. a. Annual Rating of Teachers by District Superintend- ent, p. 125. b. Semiannual Rating of Teachers by Principal, p. 126. c. Annual Rating of Principals by District Superintend- ent, p. 127. d. Annual Rating of Assistants to Principals by District Superintendent, p. 128. The ratings presented on these forms by the several supervisory officers become a part of the teacher's perma- nent record. Certain observations have already been made with regard to the ratings of elementary school principals by district superintendents.^ As a means of studying the general * See pp. 248 fF. * See Chapter V, The District Superintendents, p. 52. Determining Teaching Efficiency 125 CO a s s 8 S r ^ T^T^ Q 2 •2 -a + 3 Si m ■?. 3 ^ 3 ts o" .Ja -s| tm -.£fa ■K^ 4) ni~*5 (/) — tn tt, (D ^ e3 .2 ^ 126 City School Supervision a Ph to ft. H S w.S a SO O m SI ^ 9 S S o ot> C3 4j C C o =« o ■" . 2 ■" 3 K 9 (3 o ~ ^ p. o S •rr w M 2 o T3 u 3 , > O u IUJ3 (U 4-) ■*-> »H -^J^H M aj ,/■ (3 *H 0.£3 »li O 2 C rti =^ V u .2 .H H=j sru S S u ^ .S .8 .8 -§ '£ '£ £ ts Q O O - ^ It ^ "o « 8 8 8 8 .^ a 13 a .g Oh "^ "^ "^ "^ J3 9 =< w =^ 2 c S-9 S « 3 n! In «J ") nJ — -d •^^^.s ^ ^ ° ■"if:- >'2 c^ be O C3 =3 ^'".tj .S'E.S'C 2 S ^ tt M 2^-0 Si ' ^-^ u'C t« „ 2 t. tfl .5 3 g 2-3: 10 CO ''l- samp JO laqum^ juasq'B sX^p JO SUOpD'BJJ pUB sk'BQ; fO g I— ( P 10HU03 -JPS SS313 JO ioj;uo3 X^ijBuosjaj n iz; h-t H H ^josa dtqsjBpqDg ^lynqv SurqD-Baj, M 6 P^ f-' 9ur[dpsi(i uoponaisuj GRADE AND SEX OF CLASS xag ap^JO I < en iiic L(j uc wiiLUdii in aipua- betical order, surnames first, and without regard to the grade of class taught. Determining Teaching EiHciency 127 fa fa w o w u w H O l-H H < Pi O fa O fa d CO g o H O P .. w I ^ (^ w Q ^ •J* o ^2 "T:? iifH 15 O (3 •S3 s a .2 ° Sh- 01 'S' "! as .2 o 3.S ^ c o -J13AU03 'SJaUU'BJ\[ S9SllU9J,J poqos 2uisj;][ qiiM uopBJ3dgo3 •313 'sopaiqiv 'S9UIBQ 'S9SS339^ JO uoisiAjadng 5[jo^ Sjjoira-Bf JO uoisiAjadng XouBnjx JO uoisiA -jadngpuB aui^dpsiQ joonog uo aouanguj sjidn J JO uopoui -oa J pu'B Suip-BJf) sjjooq-ixax JO uopoapg puB Xpnig JO 3Sjno3 JO UOIl'B:>3ldj35Ul (sopsp'Big Sutpnpuj) id3-^ pjOD9^ JO J91D'BJ-Bq3 saaqo'Bax Jo sSupB^j ui uopBuirauosiQ S9SSB^3 05 sa9 -qD'B9X SuraSissv UI 5U9raSpnf SJ9llD'B9X ^■E9jW JO 90U'B1SISSY pu-B aou'epinQ SJ9q3'B9X V[11M. S90U9J9J -udo JO ?D9ga pOB J93D'BJBq3 suopogdsuj puB saop'BUT -xn-exg jo P9jja ONixvH ivaaNao a is S j2 -§ .i o lOOHDS .S-^ 128 City School Supervision S u 'B 15 o (-1 u o 5 >> tn .3 o I "^ ^--c ■a "« « s ^ § § '=^. •^ 1 ■§ fe! c^^ J^ Ot3 S -o.a ^ ^ gs o a '""a +^ >.*o S-Q CI _Sc^ 9 Ah a a •. j-i o'C-^ <; 3^ S •D;3 ir 'Sgra-BQ 'S3SS3D3-a M JO uoisiAjgdns ^ Aou'Bnjj^ JO uois _o -saiddng puB auiydp ^ ^ -siQ JO 9DU9ngui C3 sjaqD'Bax paouau 3 Q -adxguj jo aDUB^sis a -sy pU'B 9DU'BpinQ 13 < sagqDBaj, i\v.^ 1 S9DU9a9JU03 JO ;09J -J3 pU-B J9^D'BJ'Bq3 § suoipgdsuj • • • • • rt pU'B SUOp'BU § -iraBxa JO p9Ba d ONixvH ivsaNao 4-» .u U-, a s o-s ^ fe.y 2 T) is O.S2 ^'c) » 2-a S C ee (u a i ^^1 ■s td i> is y time during the period; consequently, in his annual report which is submitted in June, '>; prmcipai rates twice a year, in February and in June, all teachers who have been in his school during each tcr : always rated together with the other teachers by the dis I teacher rated in a particular school who has resigned 01 Determining Teaching Efficiency 129 character of these ratings as measures of teaching efficiency, the data of Table XIV were assembled. This table shows the ratings of elementary and high school teachers as made by district superintendents and principals in June, 191 1. It is evident that the ratings of all of the teachers in the school system could not be included; therefore, by an arbi- trary method of selection, every tenth elementary school and every other high school in the several boroughs were selected. An examination of Table XIV brings to light certain im- portant facts: First: The insignificantly few teachers who are regarded by principals and district superintendents as rendering non-meritorious service. Of the 1984 elementary school teachers rated by district superintendents, but 11 (.6 of i per cent) were rated as non-meritorious in discipline. Of the 2235 elementary school teachers rated by principals, but II (.5 of I per cent) were rated as non-meritorious in in- struction; of the 2217 teachers rated on discipline, but 19 (.9 of I per cent) were regarded as non-meritorious. But one teacher out of these 2217 was rated as wholly deficient in discipline. A similar situation exists with the ratings of high school teachers. Second: The wide variation between the ratings of prin- cipals and the ratings of district superintendents cannot be passed by without mention. The tendency seems to be for the district superintendent, as a matter of form, to dis- count the ratings given teachers by principals. The figures presented in colunms 18 and 19 (elementary schools), and columns 19 and 20 (high schools), bear directly upon this point. In these columns is recorded the number of teachers rated by the district superintendents and the principals, respectively, as A in discipline and A in instruction. In 23 Manhattan schools, 31 per cent of the teachers were rated A-A by their principals. The district superin- 130 City School Supervision tendents so rated but 16.2 per cent of the teachers. In 5 schools in the Borough of The Bronx, principals rated 59 teachers as A-A, whereas the district superintendents re- duced this number to 8. In 17 Brooklyn schools, the 149 A-A teachers, in the estimation of the principal, were re- duced to 57 by the district superintendents. In 10 schools in the Borough of Queens, 173 teachers were rated A-A by the principal; but one-tenth of this number were so rated by the district superintendent. In the case of the high schools this variation is all the more marked. Of the 877 teachers rated in 10 high schools in the city, 345 (40.2 per cent) were rated A-A by the principals. But one-sixth only of this number (58) were rated as A-A by the district superintendent. Third: The very wide variation between the quality of service of teachers of the different elementary schools, and high schools also, as represented by the ratings of the prin- cipals of these schools, must be accounted for either by dif- ference in standards or difference in principals. In any event, the exhibition of Table XIV is such as to raise the question as to whether the rating system as now pursued affords any sound and just basis for according salary increases. Fourth: The distinction between " instruction " and " dis- cipline " is purely arbitrary and artificial. To an impartial judge the founding of a rating scheme for the teaching force of a metropolitan school system upon such a tradi- tional convention as this is ample evidence that the super- visory authorities have not assumed a scientific attitude of mind toward the complicated teaching process. The general conclusions as to the existing methods and standards for determining " fit and meritorious " service are that there is no method other than that of the personal idiosyncrasy of supervisors, and that there are no standards that bear intimate and valid relation to the quality of service rendered. Determining Teaching Eificiency 131 SUPERIOR MERIT The salary schedules that became effective on January i, 19 1 2, in accordance with the revision made under the so- called Equal Salary Law, introduced another important fac- tor into the question of determining the relative fitness of the members of the permanent teaching force of high schools. This new factor is now familiarly known as " su- perior merit." ^ It is not proposed to engage in a discussion of a question that is still of a controversial nature. However, it is within the reasonable province of this study to express unqualified approval of the fundamental principle involved in the su- perior merit provisions, and also to express the judgment that its careful application will probably result in a more intelligent and more just procedure to be followed in ap- proving the service of teachers for renewal of license, and in determining service that is " fit and meritorious." ^ " No one shall advance beyond the salary of the ninth year unless, after investigation and inspection, he is declared, on the report of a committee consisting of an Associate City Superintendent, a District Superintendent, and a principal, by a majority vote of all the members of the Board of Examiners (the District Superintendent and principal having a right to vote), to be a teacher of superior merit. " No one shall advance beyond the salary of the twelfth year unless, after investigation and inspection, he is declared, on the report of a committee consisting of an Associate City Superintendent, a District Superintendent, and a principal, by a majority vote of all the members of the Board of Examiners (the District Superintendent and principal having a right to vote), to be a teacher of superior merit." (Board of Education — By-laws — Supplement, sec. 65, sub. 17, p. 11.) 132 City School Supervision FORMS FOR RATING TEACHING EFFICIENCY Superior Merit, 191 1 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION The City of New York High School 191 Mr. William H. Maxwell, Chairman, Board of Examiners. Dear Sir: We, the iindersigned committee appointed to report upon the claims of teachers in the above high school to be adjudged teachers of " superior merit," after the gth and after the 12th salary year, beg leave to present the following report upon r Assistant \ t Vi f \ First Assistant / who is in the year of High School service: (Ninth or subsequent) 1. (a) Describe the results of this teacher's work diuing the past three years in advancing his students in the subject or subjects he teaches. (b) State the data on which you base your answer, giving in general terms results of his pupils' examinations, proportion of his pupils promoted, extent to which such pro- moted pupils sustained themselves in the advanced work. In case of poor results, state any modifying circumstances that should be taken into consideration. 2. Give the strong and the weak points of the claimant's method of conducting a lesson as to the following: (a) Teaching new matter. (b) Teaching students how to study (including method of attacking the prob- lems peculiar to the teacher's subject). (c) Drill (fixing in mind points already taught). (d) Interest of entire class. 3. (a) Success in rapid advancement of bright pupils. Give details, (b) Success in bringing up backward pupils. Give details. 4. Describe h influence on students as to the development of habits as to Honor Orderhness Self-rehance Self-control Courtesy Good physical posture Determining Teaching Efficiency 133 5. (a) Describe the teacher's attitude toward the pupils, (b) The pupils' attitude toward the teacher. 6. (a) Does the teacher maintain and increase his proficiency in subject-matter? If so, specify the means. (b) Is he still improving as a teacher? (c) In what respects? 7. Characterize the teacher's habitual use of the English language. State defects, if any. 8. Accuracy in keeping records and making reports. 9. State any notable deficiencies in personal habits or in temperament and disposi- tion (including readiness to cooperate with the principal and with other teachers in the work of the school). 10. State any service he has rendered to the school or to its students outside of class-room work. {To be answered only in case of First Assistants.) 11. Describe the results of the First Assistant's work in (a) organizing and unifying the work of Assistant Teachers in h subject. (b) influence in methods of teaching. (c) ability in the performance of executive and administrative assignments. Other comments. Date 191 Date 191 Date 191 Principal. District Superintendent. Associate City Superintendent. Pursuant to section 65 of the by-laws of the Board of Education, declaration of this claimant as a teacher of superior merit for the year of service as assistant . , . high school c .. \. was made l ^i. t. j r- . ■ . ^ teacher m a . . . , , for teachers , , ..,1. u by the Board first assistant traimng school has been withheld •' of Examiners. Date: Secretary Board of Examiners. 134 (^'^^y School Supervision It is certain that the comprehensive special report on the work of high school teachers who became subject to the provisions of the superior merit requirements reflected in a striking manner the widely divergent standards exist- ing among principals of high schools as to what consti- tuted conspicuous performance.^ The New York high schools will not have superior merit teachers until New York principals have genuine superior merit standards.^ GENERAL SUMMARY It appears, from the more important of the foregoing considerations, that: (a) The determination of the fitness or unfitness of teachers for continuance and promotion in the school system represents the chief task of the supervisory staff and tlie best test of its service to the schools. (b) The certainty with which the initial probationary license is renewed to permanency may be largely accounted * These divergent standards have become well recognized during the numerous discussions that have been developed since the application of the principles of superior merit. My own personal evidence upon this point was gathered at a meeting of the High School Principals' Asso- ciation, at which the principals themselves discussed the elements that should enter into the superior merit. These elements varied from that of the number of pupils of a teacher who passed the Regents' Exami- nations to that of mere subjective impression of the teacher's worth in the school room. See also the Official Bulletin of the High School Teachers' Association (April-May, 1912) for a series of interesting dis- cussions of what constitutes the teacher of superior merit. ^ Attendance upon several sessions of the Board of Examiners dur- ing which superior merit cases were being determined showed the large importance of the annual and semiannual ratings of teachers. One of the weakest points in the first application of the principle of superior merit, during the early part of 191 1, consisted in basing this new stand- ard of teaching attainment very largely upon the already existing, but inadequate and unreliable, system of rating teachers. Determming Teaching Efficiency 135 for by the formality that characterizes the inspections and reports upon service. (c) The approval of service as " fit and meritorious " does not depend upon thorough and impersonal inspections necessary for obtaining any true measure of a teacher's efficiency. (d) The means and methods for the regular annual and semiannual ratings of teachers and principals are not such as to produce results commensurate with the labor involved or calculated to raise the level of teaching performance within the schools. (e) The principle of " superior merit " for teachers in high schools introduced by the salary legislation of 191 1 is a valid one, capable of serviceable extension to the teachers in elementary schools. CHAPTER X THE RATING OF TEACHING EFFICIENCY IN OTHER CITIES 1 THE well-defined and noteworthy movement of the present day aiming to select the teaching staff of the public schools according to standards of personal fitness and professional preparation and to maintain this staff on a basis of meritorious performance finds its best illustra- tion in the public school systems of our larger cities. Not- withstanding conspicuous exceptions, it is here that the re- moval of teachers from self-seeking influences, whether of a personal, party, or partisan nature, has come to be re- garded as an essential condition for educational efficiency. This freedom from such external interference is, however, but one of the conditions for this efficiency. Others are the devising of plans for the more accurate determination of the relative working power of individual teachers in service, and the organization of supervisory measures for the better- ment of the service of teachers, individually and collectively. The following general propositions represent, it is be- lieved, the primary factors of the major problem of teach- ing efficiency as related to supervision : ^ * Consult in this connection my articles on the Appointment, Pro- motion, and Salaries of Teachers in the Encyclopedia of Education (edited by Paul Monroe), Vol. V. See also New York City Teachers' Association, Report of the Committee on the Promotion of Teachers (1907). " See my " Tentative Scheme for the Measurement of Teaching Efficiency" (Madison, 1910), for a detailed outline based upon these 136 Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 137 1. Is it possible to devise and to apply to the teaching- process, impersonal, quantitative standards whereby the relative worth and efficiency of teachers may be determined more justly and with greater precision than under the ordinary practises of the day? 2. As fundamental factors in successful teaching- and in effective school organization, is not every teacher entitled to receive the benefit of direct, constructive criticism and of skilful, non-interfering supervision? 3. Does not the effective organization, administration, and supervision of public schools require that the conditions and results of the teacher's work be sub- jected to measurements- of an objective rather than of a subjective nature? 4. Does not the general elevation of educational stand- ards finally depend upon, (a) the analysis of the complex teaching process into its essential ele- ments ; and (b) the possession of these elements by teachers ? 5. Is it possible for the present generation to make any reliable and satisfactory conclusions concerning the direction and rate of educational progress with- out standards of value resting upon a quantitative basis ? As supplementary to the discussion contained in the pre- ceding chapter with reference to New York City, the fol- lowing brief description of the plans and methods for de- termining relative teaching efficiency in certain typical American cities is pertinent. They are presented here without comparison or critical comment. The form and content of the records employed emphasize the tendency of the day to subject teachers' work to a more systematic propositions. Also, Superintendent J. H. Clement, " A Measuring Rod for Teaching Efficiency" (Kansas School Magazine, March, 1913), for an interesting account of practical experiences of a superintendent of schools of a small city. 138 City School Supervision inspection and to require from supervisors a larger con- tribution of constructive service to teachers.^ BOSTON In brief, the situation is as follows : Graduates of the Boston Normal School are rated upon the printed eligible list and if not previously appointed are allowed to remain on this list for six years. Pending regular appointment, they are called upon as needed for temporary service. They are re-rated each year by the Board of Superintendents on * In contrast to the several plans, the outlines of which are shown here, is that of Newton, Massachusetts, likewise typical of the most efficient smaller cities : " I would say briefly that our plan is this. I make no use of any printed blanks or forms on which principals and supervisors are re- quired to express their opinion of the efficiency and the salary that should be paid to individual teachers. I have tried this in the past, but gave it up because I found from experience that it is much more satisfactory to talk informally with principals and supervisors regard- ing each teacher under their supervision. Our plan is to pay each teacher what we consider that teacher worth to us so far as our finances will permit. We have no schedule whatever except that we have estab- lished what we call a 'regular' — which is really a minimum salary — and we will employ no one permanently who is not worth at least this minimum salary. We determine the worth of a teacher by the market value, or what in our experience we know we would have to pay to secure a teacher of equal efficiency. To put it concretely: if we are discussing the merits and the salary which we are to pay to a teacher next year now getting $700, we consider the matter something like this : * Teacher is very good and efficient in such and such direc- tions. Is she worth more to us than we are paying her? * If we find that we have secured during the past year teachers at $600 or $650 who are equally efficient and give more promise, we decide that there is no reason why the salary of the $700 teacher should be increased. If, on the other hand, we find that we as a rule are not able to secure equal service at $700, we then increase the salary, perhaps to $750, it may be to $800, or even $850. " It almost never happens that there is any radical disagreement be- tween the principals, supervisors, and myself regarding the relative efficiency of teachers. Whenever there is some disagreement we find out the points on which we disagree and leave the matter open until we have all looked into the teacher's work further. Then, without excep- Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 139 the basis of the estimate of the principals of the schools in which they serve as temporary teachers and of the depart- ment of practise and training. About a dozen of the Nor- mal School graduates at the top of the list are appointed to regular positions during the year following their gradu- ation. Most of the other regular appointments to elemen- tary schools are made from what is known as the prior list, a list made up of the pupils who have been out of the Normal School one or more years and who have been re- rated as aforesaid. In addition to this, examinations are held annually in January by the Board of Superintendents. Those who pass these examinations successfully are placed upon a separate eligible list, but not re-rated. Their certificates are valid for six years. They are not re-rated because in most cases the examined candidates are teachers holding regular posi- tions outside of the city and are, therefore, not available for substitute or temporary service in Boston. The foregoing plan covers elementary schools only. All high school appointments are made from lists of examined candidates. These candidates are placed on high school lists separated according to the branch of work they elect for their major subjects. A copy of the eligible list sent here- with shows you the different divisions that are made. tion that I can recall, we have always been in substantial accord. As superintendent I am responsible for the recommendation which goes to the board. This recommendation has always, without exception, been adopted by the board. " Placing the whole salary plan on the individual merit basis, and actually carrying it out in this way, seems theoretically a very risky thing to do. We have had really no difficulty with it whatever, and I am confident that no other administrative measure has done so much to improve the efficiency of our corps of teachers." — Superintendent F. E. Spaulding, May 2, 1913. On the other hand, numerous school superintendents and principals are now making a careful study of the elements of successful service by public school teachers, and formulating systematic efficiency plans. One of the most interesting and suggestive of these is that prepared by Superintendent J. A. Doelle, of Houghton, Michigan, in 1912. 140 City School Supervision The plan of promotion of teachers already in the service has not yet been fully developed. A first promotional ex- amination is required of all teachers at the end of the sec- ond year of service, and a second promotional examination must be taken before a teacher may be placed on the seventh year of the salary of her rank. A teacher who fails to pass the first promotional exami- nation remains on the second year of her salary for another year, when she may then be re-examined. If she fails a second time, her service ceases on the last day of August or the last day of December, whichever next follows her sec- ond examination. The failure to take the second promo- tional examination, however, does not eliminate a teacher from the service. The promotional examinations consist of three parts: (i) Success in school during the preceding year; (2) pro- fessional study; (3) academic study in some one line. Col- lege courses and certain other substitutions for the profes- sional and academic examinations may be made. The rec- ord of such promotional examinations, shown on page 141, is kept. CHICAGO * The plan of promotion, in brief, is this : Teachers enter the system in what is called the second group. In this group they are advanced in salary annually to the limit of the group — seven years for elementary teachers. At that time they may be promoted to the first group, which means simply a higher schedule of salaries. Any teacher whose marks for one year previous to promotion have been " Good " or higher is eligible to promotion. Promotion is based, first, on efficiency in teaching; second, upon having passed a promotional examination in certain subjects or through having filed five credits for work done either in ^ For a detailed description of the plan of promotion, see C. D. Lowry, in the Seventh Year Book of the National Society for the Sci- entific Study of Education, 1908. Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 141 .as U W s s fl •1 ^ rt rt u cd c4 c3 4^ Q !zi P^ U 1^ 1) ^ o ^ o 1) 4) •43 U ^ o g ^ P tn Ci •- O .■tJ 60 < W O K I-) !z; [2; 142 City School Supervision Normal Extension or with some degree-giving institution. Five credits are equivalent to about one-third of a year of work in college. Nearly all of the promotions are by means of credits. The main purpose of the examination is to encourage the student habit in teachers and principals. The reports upon teaching efficiency are made according to these forms: BOARD OF EDUCATION CITY OF CHICAGO OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS School PRINCIPAL'S REPORT OF TEACHERS' EFFICIENCY Term Ending 191 ... Name (give full name with initials) Grade now teach- ing Estimate of Efficiency- Times tardy during Term Times absent during Term Remarks Hd. Asst. Kinderg'n Teachers Special Teachers ^igned . Principal School Date Principals are requested to make this report at the close of the second week of the school months of January and May and to send it promptly to the Superin- tendent of Schools. Teachers are classed as regards efficiency in five groups, namely: Superior, Excellent, Good, Fair, Inefficient. (See Proceedings of Board of Education, Sep- tember 22, 1909, § 1 1967.) Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 143 Board of Education city of chicago REPORT ON WORK OF CADETS AND SUBSTITUTES Reports on cadets to be made on last school day of December, May and June, and at such other times as may be necessary. Reports on substitutes to be made at close of period of substi- tuting. When a substitute is employed at the end of any school term, a report should be made of her work up to that time. School, Chicago, 19 To the Superintendent of Schools: M served as in this school, from 19. . . (Cadet or Substitute) to 19 • • • ) period of days, and her efl&ciency in such work was (Use the words Good, Excel- lent, Superior, Fair, Inefficient, as in the rating of regular teachers.) The above reported (substitute) work was in grade. Is this teacher proficient in the teaching of Drawing? Music? Physical Culture? In what subject or subjects is she specially prepared for instruction under the departmental plan? Total length of time this cadet or substitute has served in this school,. months. Grades best qualified to teach General character of work: H work has been satisfactory. (Principals will remember that under the rules a satisfactory report will be understood as an expression of willingness to have the cadet or substitute assigned as a teacher in the school from which such report is received.) Signed Principal School 144 City School Supervision CINCINNATI '■ There are two possible applications of a system of rating promotion in this city : First: Teachers who have received the maximum salary of $950 per annum may receive a promotional salary of $50 per year additional upon the completion of what is termed credit work to the extent of 8 credits. A credit is given for the completion of a course in the University or a summer school or a reading circle pr other work approved in advance by the Superintendent of Schools to the extent of at least 24 hours per year. Teachers are not granted more than two credits a year and are discouraged from attempting to do more than that amount. Having received the maximum salary of $1000, teachers continue upon that schedule, doing at least sufficient work to receive one credit every other year. This work is reported annually at the close of each school year by the principals upon the form shown below, which is then rated by the Superintendent and salaries adjusted accordingly. The instructors in charge of the courses submit also vouchers of enrolment and attendance directly CINCINNATI PUBLIC SCHOOLS Report of Professional Work of Teachers in School for Year Ending June, 191 .. . , Principal Name of Teacher Course Where Given Leader No. Times Present Is Voucher Attached * See John W. Hall, " Supervision of Beginning Teachers in Cin- cinnati." Twelfth Year Book, National Society for the Study of Education. Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 145 to the Superintendent, which serves as a check upon the statements of the teachers submitted through the principals. Second: Promotions to administrative positions are open for men in accordance with the quahfications laid down under Regulation 11, Page 40, of the Rule Book. Evidence of college credits required under this regulation is secured directly from the official of the Institution. CLEVELAND At the beginning of the school year, when the first pay-roll is completed, a list of teachers who are likely to be entitled to promotion under the salary schedule is made up. This list gives the salary and grade of the teacher. These lists are submitted to the supervisors and assistant superintend- ents, who mark them. About six weeks before the close of school the promotion blanks are sent to the supervisors and principals of the various buildings. These blanks are filled out and returned to the Superintendent's Office, after which the list for pro- motion is made up by the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendents. PROMOTION OF TEACHERS Office of the Superintendent of Schools Cleveland, Ohio to the principal: Please answer the question below concerning Grade, Present Salary, School and return this blank to the Superintendent's Office. Date blank sent 19 . . . Answer received 19 . . . Length of service, total Length of service in your school Please make the answers straightforward and unequivocal. (The principal wiU show this promotion sheet to teachers, individually, be- fore it is filled out.) Superintendent of Schools. 146 City School Supervision B£PORT trPON PROMOTION OF TEACHERS I Teaching Power a. Does she make regular and thoughtful daily preparation for her work? b. Is she definite in her instruction? Thoughtful? c. Does she awaken and develop power in her pupils? d. What kind of results does she secure? e. Do outside pleasures or duties or her health interfere with her work? 2 Executive Power a. Do you consider her successful in discipline? b. Does she secure a responsive working spirit in her school? c. Does she maintain satisfactory relations with the principal's office in matters of reports, care of property, discipline of pupils, etc.? d. What relations does she establish with the patrons of the school? e. What are her weakest points? 3 Personal Influence a. Does she inspire her pupils and develop enthusiasm in work? b. Does she train her pupils to independence in work? , c. Does she influence her pupils for good beyond the time they are in her presence? d. Is her relation with other teachers in the building wholesome? 4 Professional Sincerity a. Is she sincere and earnest in her work? b. Does she thoughtfully measure the outcome of her practise? c. What attitude has she toward the large interests of the profession which she has chosen? d. Is she frank and candid in her dealings with pupils? c. In what spirit does she receive the suggestions of the principal and super- visors; does she regard them as personal or professional? 5 General Culture a. Is her scholarship and general information accurate and adequate? Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 147 b. Is her refinement of manner, control of voice and use of English satis- factory? c. Is she dynamic and progressive, alert and open minded to new ideas? . . . d. What are her special interests? e. Is the teacher's work or personality sufl&ciently faulty to require serious criticism? Have you made such criticism? How often? With what effect? Principal, Date ig. . . Leave this space for the Superintendent. {a. Promoted to Class b. Not Promoted. Remains in Class, c. When the Teacher was notified PROFESSIONAL GROWTH To aid in determining as to promotion the teacher will please record below any of the following or other means of growth that she has utilized during the past four school years, noting those that have been especially helpful: Travel, summer classes, extension classes, lectures, concerts, special studies in literature, history, music or art. DETROIT The following report is filled out each year by the prin- cipal of the school. Similar reports are made by the super- visors of the various subjects when called for by the Super- intendent. The graduates of the Detroit Normal Training School teach a probationary term of one and one-half years. Reports from the special supervisors of the Normal Train- ing School concerning the work of these cadets are made each semester, and their promotion from class to class and their final contract depend upon the satisfactory character of these reports. 148 City School Supervision DETROIT PUBLIC SCHOOL REPORT Name of Teacher Class Grade. Practise period ending 19 . . Grade. I. Management: — 1. Handling of classes and dismissals 2. Distribution of material 3. Physical bearing of children I. Lesson { I 2. n. Instructions: — Form Thought 2. Daily preparation 3. Power of adapting work to needs of children. 4. Power of holding attention through interest.. 5. Questioning definiteness and purpose 6. OriginaUty in devices and illustrations 7. Board work: legibility and neatness 8. Desk work: originaUty and adaptability 9. Results: m. spirit: — 1. Attitude toward work. . . , 2. Attitude toward criticism. IV. Personal Items: — Points to be considered; animation; withusiasm; manner; voice; self-con- trol; dignity; punctuaUty; language; (grammatical accuracy); state of health; Degree of improvement Is the teacher adapted to the work of this grade? How do you rate this year's work considered as a whole? Remarks Date 19 . . . , Principal. Note. — In marking, use the following symbols: E (excellent); G (good); F (Fair); U (unsatisfactory). Use the space under Remarks for such sugges- tions as will tend to help the student to strengthen her work where it has shown weakness. This space may also be utilized for any explanation that may be necessary to a full and clear understanding of the marks. Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 149 MILWAUKEE All the plans of promotion are merely matters of usage. Substantially all of them are made upon the recommenda- tion of the superintendent of schools. In the case of prin- cipals and supervisors, he bears the entire responsibility for the recommendation. In the case of assistant teachers and minor positions, he bases his recommendation chiefly upon information supplied to him and recommendations made by the assistant superintendents, supervisors, principals, etc. There is nothing in the school law at present which requires any such plan as this to be followed. It is entirely a matter of the school board rules and custom. The board, if it chose, might promote to any position, except to that of assistant superintendent or supervisor, without obtaining or heeding in any way the recommendation of the super- intendent, the most incompetent or unqualified person in its employ or from outside. The law at present gives the schools no protection. (For specimen records see pages 150-153-) 150 City School Supervision J3 en u o o o §1 k-i K: m 0) ^ CO § "^ .y 'Cut! g- 55 a. -4-> ^ rj 1) -."In -CI 3 ■^ O (5 o . o .22 « a « M 53 3 ci "Xj D -< lU f-i s •- i .^ "O ti ii -r! _■ w >i .s -^ •=; &:0 o Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 151 > a CO 3 -a '> 1 a in tn a. 3 a a v to M 1 < 6 B in a a "^ 1 M n 1 1 CO w a 53 a £! a 2 Ph s 1 s 1 S2 w PL, 8 i 1 CO 4 g to a .a, tn =3 in T3 vd "a 1 •3 a CO a •Z! u 3 ii 1 06 3 M in _g CO 1 a c3 ii cS a Ph d 1 i Si M 1 in a bo S M 2 2 H p< 152 City School Supervision tn hJ c; O W u C/J C5 ?; U 1— 1 M PQ f3 en CM W w Y, t^ f^ & P< <: S m bo -^ o b CI aj a o ^ (u > c o 4) .:: ■ O Cl 1) 1) ni H c! 73 i-i .s§ els O :^ m cj 5 03 o Teaching Efficiency in Other Cities 153 1 < H a XI .S 1 s i-i tn a a § a ij > a 6 C cd "o fcO tn 3 a 3 T3 '> u u M tn 'a, a 'cl ■> •-3 C! a (U fl a> 3 c 1— 1 00 1 43 -d 1 ■a -§ c3 u OJ tn s^ V, ■^ a >.^ :d C3 < M tn -d c3 0) 1 'rt (U "0 tn tn 'a 3 a _d 'eS 0) tn (U & i-i a -n d Cj a XI CJ tn < PQ W a H t/) w H t t el- 's c 2 8 2 (3 tn 1 tn a u 3 W 4 1 "0 tn a nl u a ri C! m 2 a, tn d 1> 'a, tn _d d cti <: vd cS <0 d u !> in cS d l-c 00 -s U c S2 Ph d> ,d "a ■^ ■w tn v-> ^ 1 d tn 1 3 X3 1 M H 1 1 CJ 3 i3 tn d •2-S 11 §-« N CJ V d 3 2 'a d >-^ ^ M M rO ■* 10.2 "§ .2 u o.g eg g:: 3 s s ^ 3 o cu o u o .tl o C?-0 rf > ^ c fli X :3 c3 •55 S t < -§ IS c! P hi en •* (U Ul H 1 s hi Q^ SR w c/: -0 d Teaching E-fficiency in Other Cities 159 PHILADELPHIA The form on page 160 is used by the principals to report to the district superintendents twice a year. The District Superintendents use the same form in reporting to the cen- tral office, but they report only those who are applicants for some higher position or who are not rendering satisfactory service. In this office the rating of the district superintend- ent (which, by the way, is given numerically) is combined with other elements to determine the final rating, but the efficiency rating given by the district superintendent is always the chief element in determining the teacher's stand- ing. The chief supplementary element is that of advanced study. Certificates from reputable institutions are accepted as evidence of this study. There are no promotional exami- nations in the usual sense of this term. Some positions re- quire special certificates, for which, of course, examinations are held. i6o City School Supervision s. .•5^ 4in. Also a handy table in reduced size to paste in pupils' books, 2s. Hachette . . . Brentano Vietor, Lauttafeln Deutsch und Franzosisch, 3 farbig ... 100 : 130 cm. auf Leinen mit Staben . . . M.4,00. Elwert, Marburg . . . Stechert, N. Y. PLANS AND PICTURES OF PLACES Gehhardt, Plan von Berlin, 170 : 130 cm. . . . M II, 25 Koehler, Leipzig . . . Brentano, Stechert. Holzel, Paris, Serie III, No. 9. 140 : 93 cm. Minutes of Board of Superintendents 213 Leinwand mit Staben . . . M8, 20. Stechert. Holzel, Berlin, Serie V, No. 17, 140:03 cm. Leinwand mit Staben . . . M8, 20. Images Geographiques de la France 22 tableaux muraux (Im. 06 X Om, 75) en couleurs P. P. Foncin . . . Delagrave, Paris. Jenkins, N. Y. Le Mont Blanc, glacier des Alpes (good for German also). Holzel, Geographical Pictures The Rhine, etc. Hachette . . . Jenkins. Soide or Perry: Pictures of Cologne Cathedral Strasburg Cathedral Heidelberg Schloss Rhine Castles Soide or Perry: Pictures of Louvre Tuileries Pantheon Notre Dame de Paris Tour Eiffel et Trocadero Sacre Cceur Boulevards Bourse Opera Hotel de Ville Cathedrals of Rouen Tours Amiens Rheims El Escorial Versailles Alhambra Palace of Madrid 214 City School Supervision MAPS OF COUNTRIES Kiepert's France. Rand, McNally & Co. Kiepert's Germany. Rand, McNally & Co. Kiepert's Switzerland. Rand, McNally & Co. Kiepert's Spain. Rand, McNally & Co. Adopted. 8. (3) Recommending the approval of the assignments of certain persons to take charge of the annex of the Bush- wick High School located in Public School 69, Brooklyn, in the absence of the principal. The resolution attached to this report was adopted, 9. The Committee on Training Schools submitted a re- port recommending the approval of the assignments of cer- tain pupil teachers in the Brooklyn Training School for Teachers to substitute duty in the public schools. The resolution attached to this report was adopted. The Committee on Nomination, Transfer, and Assign- ment submitted the following reports: 10. (i) Recommending the reassignment of a certain teacher of French, with the following resolution attached : Resolved, That the Board of Superintendents hereby reassigns the following-named teacher of French, as indicated below : Present Assignment Proposed Assignment Naivtf, Districts Districts Julie Terpant 13. 14 14, 17 II. (2) Recommending the assignment of a certain teacher of cooking, with the following resolution attached: Resolved, That the Board of Superintendents hereby assigns to duty the following-named teacher of cooking, as indicated below : Name Districts Mary E. Tripp 43. 44 Adopted. Minutes of Board of Superintendents 215 12. (3) Recommending the termination of the assign- ments of certain substitutes as additional teachers, with the following resolution attached : Resolved, That the assignments of the fol- lowing-named substitutes as additional teachers be, and they hereby are, terminated from the dates given: Name District School Date Helen I. Williams 2i 39 P. October 16, 191 1 Frances F. Joseph 25 2 November i, 1911 Adopted. 13. (4) Recommending the assignment of certain sub- stitutes as additional teachers, with the following resolution attached : Resolved, That the following-named substitutes be, and they hereby are, assigned as additional teachers, as indicated below, to take effect on the dates given, and to continue during satisfactory service, but not beyond January 31, 1911; sub- ject, however, to cancellation by this board prior to that date : Name District School Date Natalie Waldstein 20 159 October 20, 1911 Marie N. Sheridan 25 2 November i, 19 11 Philip V. Van Arsdale 26 32 October 23, 19 11 Grace A. Hatfield 39 144 October 19, 191 1 Adopted, 14. (5) Relative to the request for the assignment of a substitute teacher of physical training to the office of the assistant director of physical training in Brooklyn. Referred to Mr. Walsh to investigate as to the necessity for this assignment. The Committee on Evening Schools submitted the follow- ing reports : 15. (i) Recommending the nomination of certain per- sons for service in Evening Elementary Schools. 2i6 City School Supervision The resolution attached to each of these reports was adopted. 1 6. (2) Recommending the nomination of certain per- sons for service in Evening High Schools. The resolution attached to each of these reports was adopted. 17. (3) Recommending the authorization of additional classes in Evening Elementary Schools. The resolution attached to each of these reports was adopted. 18. (4) Recommending the authorization of additional classes in the East Side and the Morris Evening High Schools. The resolution attached to this report was adopted. 19. (5) Recommending the authorization of the nomina- tion of a general assistant for service in Evening School 145, Brooklyn. The resolution attached to this report was adopted. 20. (6) Recommending a change in the hours of session of an Evening Elementary School, with the following reso- lution attached : Resolved, That the Committee on Special Schools be, and it is hereby, requested to permit Evening School 158, Brooklyn, to begin its ses- sions at 7.45 P. M. and to close at 9.45 p. m. Adopted. 21. The Committee on Compulsory Education submitted a report upon the services of a certain attendance officer, with the following resolution attached: Resolved, That the service of Edward J. Mc- Manus, attendance officer, be approved for the sixth year, to take effect October 26, 191 1, Adopted. 22. The Committee on Course of Study submitted a form of letter explaining the ratings appearing on pupils' Minutes of Board of Superintendents 217 report cards, and recommended that 100,000 copies of this letter be printed and distributed to certain parents. This matter was very carefully considered and the rec- ommendation of the Committee was disapproved. 23. The Committee on School Management submitted reports of Division Superintendent Haaren upon the ser- vices of certain teachers in the public schools, pursuant to the provisions of Section 1091 of the Charter. The following resolutions were adopted : (a) Resolved, That the Board of Superintend- ents hereby disapproves, without prejudice, the services of the teacher whose name is given be- low, for the year indicated : Borough of Richmond School Name Year 16 Ida M. Eglinton 7th (b) Resolved, That the Board of Superintend- ents hereby approves the services of the teachers whose names are given below as fit and meritori- ous, for the years indicated : Borough of Queens School Name Year 4 Josephine Potter 12th 83 Clara A. Dreyfoos 7th 83 Cornelia J. Heyse 12th 86 Maude B. Van Keuren 7th II Grace Bellinger 7th II Laura D. Vores 12th 84 Cornelia E. Gayler 12th 34 Grace L. Clark 12th 49 William L. Swayer 7th 79 Emily A. Nelson 7th 39 Daisy E. Wikoff 7th 56 Angela G. Grady 12th 57 Henrietta Bergen 7th 75 Jennie L. Potter ist 90 William E. Hendrie 7th 2i8 City School Supervision The Committee on School Management submitted the following reports : 24. ( I ) Recommending the denial of an application from a certain teacher for a leave of absence without pay. The resolution attached to this report was adopted. 25. (2) Recommending the excuse with pay of certain absences during the current year of teachers in elementary schools. The resolution attached to each of these reports was adopted. 26. (3) Recommending the disapproval of the action of certain Local School Boards in approving applications from teachers to be excused with pay for certain absences. The resolution attached to this report was adopted, 27. (4) Recommending the granting of leaves of absence without pay to certain teachers. This report was carefully considered. Mr. Walsh moved that the report be divided and that the leaves of absence for restoration of health, as indicated in the report, be granted. This motion was duly seconded and adopted. Mr. Walsh moved that the applications for leaves of ab- sence for purposes of study be referred again to the Com- mittee. This motion was duly seconded and adopted. 28. (5) Relative to the suggestions of the Association of Women Principals with reference to " Teachers' Visiting Days " and " Teachers' Visits to Home." After some discussion it was decided to lay this report over for further consideration at a subsequent meeting. 29. The Committee on Vacation Schools and Play- grounds and Recreation Centers submitted a report recom- mending the nomination of certain persons for service in Evening Recreation Centers. The resolution attached to this report was adopted. Minutes of Board of Superintendents 219 New Business Mr, Straubenmuller submitted the following reports: 30. (i) Recommending the resumption of the evening sessions in Public School 120, Manhattan, with the follow- ing resolutions attached : Resolved, That the Board of Education be re- quested to approve the recommendation of the Board of Superintendents that two evening school sessions be held each week in Public School 120, Borough of Manhattan, beginning on Thursday, November 9, 191 1, said sessions to begin at 8 p.m. and to end at 10 p. m., on the evenings of Monday and Thursday of each week ; and that said sessions shall be in charge of a person holding the license of an 8B teacher, or a higher license, or license as principal of a recreation center. Resolved, That four teachers be assigned to teach in such evening sessions. Resolved, That the principal of Public School 120, Borough of Manhattan, Olive M. Jones, be authorized to hold one other evening session in each week, the holding of such extra session to be optional with Miss Jones, and such session to be under her general care and direction; no remu- neration to be given to Miss Jones or any of her assistants in connection therewith. Resolved, That the Committee on Care of Buildings be requested to provide janitor service for Pulolic School 120, Borough of Manhattan, during the evening sessions. Resolved, That the evening sessions in Public School 120, Borough of Manhattan, continue until such date as the Board of Superintendents may determine. Adopted. 220 City School Supervision 31, (2) Recommending the designation of certain per- sons for service in the evening sessions in Public School 120, Manhattan, with the following resolutions attached : Resolved, That the Board of Education be re- quested to approve the recommendation of the Board of Superintendents that Robert B. Brodies be designated to take charge of the evening ses- sions of Public School 120, Borough of Man- hattan, and that he be paid $5.00 for each evening of actual service, to take efifect November 9, 191 1. Resolved, That the Board of Education be re- quested to approve the recommendation of the Board of Superintendents that the following teachers be assigned to assist in the evening ses- sions of Public School 120, Borough of Manhat- tan, to give instruction in the subjects indicated after their respective names, and that said teachers be paid at the rate provided for teachers in the evening elementary schools ($3,000), to take effect November 9, 191 1 : Name Subject A. Benjamin Martin "j Shop work Patrick H. Gallagher 1 I Jacob Holman f Physical training, including games, athletics, William Jansen J apparatus work, etc. :^2. (3) Recommending the reassignment of certain teachers in Public Schools 2 Primaiy and no, Manhattan. Approved. 33. (4) Recommending changes in the number of classes in certain schools, with the following resolution attached : Resolved, That the principals of the following schools be, and hereby are, authorized to change the number of classes in their schools, as indicated below : Minutes of Board of Superintendents 221 Borough of Manhattan Number of Classes Changed Additional Classes P. S. FROM TO Classes Discontinued 2 P. 40 41 I C 42 51 52 I I A 113 22 22 I E 13B It was regularly moved and adopted that the foregoing resolution be amended by striking therefrom, the line relat- ing to Public School 2 Primary. The Chairman put the question upon the resolution as amended and it was decided in the affirmative. 34. The Chairman called attention to the large num- ber of pupils on part time in Public School 144, Brooklyn, and to the number of vacant sittings in Public School 167, Brooklyn, and suggested three plans for reducing this part time. District Superintendent Lyon was present and was heard with reference to the plans proposed by the Chairman, and also suggested other means for reducing this part time. The matter was referred to Mr. Walsh for report at next meeting. Mr. O'Brien offered the following: 35. (i) Resolved, That the principal of Public School 69, Manhattan, be, and he hereby is, di- rected to discontinue one 4B class, thereby reduc- ing the total number of classes in that school to thirty-eight. Adopted. 2,6. (2) Resolved, That the application to es- tablish a fourth kindergarten class in Public School 17, Manhattan, be, and hereby is, denied. Adopted. 222 City School Supervision Mr. Walsh offered the following : 37. (i) Resolved, That the principals of the following schools be, and they hereby are, author- ized to change the number of classes in their schools as indicated below : Borough of Brooklyn P. S. 102 124 Number of Classes Changed from to 36 38 24 24 Additional Classes I D, I E I ungraded Classes Discontinued I 1A-6B Classes Discontinued I 1A-6B Number of Classes Changed Additional P. S. from to Classes 144 66 65 160 29 30 I 1A-6B 167 46 51 3 1A-6B, 2 kdgn. Adopted. 38. (2) Whereas, The authorities of the He- brew Orphan Asylum are willing to supply two rooms for the instruction of some of their chil- dren now attending Public School 144, Brooklyn, Resolved, That the Committee on Buildings be requested to supply for each room a teacher's desk, a book closet, and blackboards. Adopted. 39. (3) Resolved, That the principal of Public School 153, Brooklyn, be permitted to change the rating of Anna V. Curtis from C to B. Adopted. 40. (4) Whereas, There are now two teachers of cooking in excess in Districts 2 and 3, and one teacher in excess in Districts 6 and 7, Resolved, That the Committee on Nomination, Transfer, and Assignment be empowered to make the necessary transfers to any existing vacancies. Adopted. Minutes of Board of Superintendents 223 Mr. Straubenmuller requested to be recorded as vot- ing in the negative upon the foregoing resolution. Mr. Shallow submitted the following reports: 41. (i) Recommending the removal of certain fences between the yards of Public School 49, Manhattan, etc., with the following resolution attached: Resolved, That the Board of Superintendents recommends to the Committee on Buildings that the wooden fences dividing the boys' yard from what was formerly a girls' yard, on the East 38th Street side of Public School 49, Manhattan, be removed so as to make one large yard for the boys, and that four settees on the west side of the platform of the Assembly Room on the fourth floor of Public School 49, Manhattan, be removed. Adopted. 42. (2) Recommending changes in the number of classes in certain schools, with the following resolution attached : Resolved, That the principals of the following schools be, and they hereby are, authorized to change the number of classes in their schools, as indicated below : Borough of Manhattan Number of Classes Changed Additional Classes P. S. from to Classes Discontinued 18 43 42 I 4A 49 39 37 I iB, I 6A 109 65 66 I lA Adopted. 43. (3) Recommending the equipment of certain rooms in Public School 59, Manhattan, as offices for the principal and her assistants, with the following resolution attached: 224 City School Supervision Resolved, That the Committee on Buildings of tlie Board of Education be notified that the Board of Superintendents approves of the fitting up of two unused class rooms in Public School 59, Manhattan, as offices for the principal and her assistant, and that the small offices heretofore in use be fitted up for use as teachers' rooms. Adopted. 44. (4) Recommending the reassignment of a teacher in Public School 59, Manhattan. Approved. Mr. Haaren offered the following : 45. (i) Resolved, That the principals of the following schools be, and they hereby are, author- ized to change the number of classes in their schools, as indicated below : Borough of Queens Number of Classes Changed Additional Classes P. S. FROM to Classes Discontinued 34 10 II I lA-iB 45 14 15 I 1A-6B 58 32 36 4 1A-6B 59 35 33 2 kdgn. 64 II 92 kdgn. 4 1A-6B 66 13 14 I kdgn. Adopted. 46. (2) Resolved, That the Committee on By- laws and Legislation be requested to render an opinion as to the right of the Board of Superin- tendents to continue in service as teacher-in- charge of Public School 37, Borough of Queens, Catherine M. Sheehan, when the school has 12 classes, and when such teacher-in-charge thereby Minutes of Board of Superintendents 225 becomes entitled to the rank and pay of a principal. Adopted. Mr. Edson submitted, on behalf of Mr. Meleney, a report containing the following resolution: 47. Resolved, That the principal of Public School 147 Girls, Brooklyn, be, and she hereby is, authorized to establish one additional special grade E class, thereby increasing the total num- ber of classes in that school to fifty-seven. Adopted. Mr. Edson offered the following : 48. (i) Resolved, That the principals of the following schools be, and they hereby are, author- ized to increase the number of classes in their schools, as indicated below : Borough of Manhattan Number of Classes Changed Additional P. s. from TO Classes 52 10 II I iB Borough OF The Bronx 4 64 65 I lA 23 71 72 I lA 29 49 SO I lA Adopted. 49. (2) A report recommending the following apportion- ment of rooms in the new building (Public School 102) to be erected on the site on 113th Street, east of Second Avenue, Manhattan : I room for kindergarten boys and girls. 14 rooms for boys and girls of the ist and 2d years. 12 rooms for boys and girls of the 3d and 4th years. 10 rooms for boys and girls of the 5th and 6th years. 226 City School Supervision I room for an ungraded class. I room for an anaemic class. Auditorium on the ground floor; gymnasium (2 units); bath; playground; roof playground. Approved. 50. Mr. Straubenmijller moved the nomination of Albert W. Garritt as Assistant Director of Shop Work. It was regularly moved and adopted that the motion offered by Mr. Straubenmuller be referred to the Com- mittee on Nomination, Transfer, and Assignment. The Board adjourned at 5.50 o'clock p. m., to meet on Thursday, November 2d, at 2 o'clock p. m, Thomas E. Bussey, Secretary. APPENDIX F EXAMINATION QUESTIONS — LICENSE NO. I Examination for License No. i January, 19 id History and Principles of Education Time, Two hours. Candidate's No. . . . 1. (a) Name five habitual motor-reactions which children should acquire in school. (5) (b) With reference to penmanship, show how a teacher may properly inculcate a habit. (5) 2. (a) Name five practises or procedures on the part of teachers which commonly lead to inattention. (5) (b) Show how interest promotes attention, and how attention conduces to interest. Illustrate. (6) 3. Explain and illustrate a teacher's use of the following principles in the subject, or subjects, indicated: (a) Visualization — Spelling. (b) Apperception — Drainage of New York State. (c) Generalization — Forming the plural of nouns. (9) 4. Explain and exemplify two of the following terms as employed in logic : (a) Inference. (b) Syllogism. (c) Method of agf cement. (10) 5. State the main subjects of study in the case of two of the following: (a) The schools for the Athenian youth. 227 228 City School Supervision (b) Monastic schools. (c) Schools of the Jesuits, (d) Eton or Rugby. 6. Outline Spencer's discussion (a) as to what knowledge is of most worth; or (b) as to proper modes of punishment. (lo) Examination for License No. i January, 1910 Methods of Teaching Time, Two hours. Candidate's No. . . . 1. (a) What is meant by a unit of measure? (3) (b) State and solve a problem in which the number 3 may be used as a unit. (8) 2. Show by the aid of lettered diagrams that multiplier and multiplicand (when neither is concrete) can be interchanged without altering the product. (10) 3. (a) Explain, as to a class, "borrowing" in subtrac- tion. (8) (b) Find the difference between 178 and 342 by the Austrian method, and explain briefly each step of the process. (8) 4. State a practical problem (a) in discount, (b) in com- mission, (c) in percentage (to find what per cent one number is of another). (9) 5. Choosing any decisive battle, describe a proper method of treating it as a topic in history. (12) 6. Show how to lead children to interpret contour lines on a map. Illustrate with a diagram. (8) 7. Specify the topics which should in general be comprised in the study (a) of a river; (b) of a city. (12) 8. Give the topics to be covered in a lesson (for pupils about 13 years old) on the structure and func- tions of the skin. (12) Examination for License No. i 229 Examination for License No. i January, 191 i History and Principles of Education Time, Two hours. Candidate's No. . . . 1. "All nervous centers have then, in the first instance, one essential function, that of * intelligent ' action. . . . Like all other organs, however, they evolve, . . . the lower centers passing downward into more unhesitating automatism, and the higher ones upward into larger intellectuality." — James. (a) Define and illustrate the meaning of nervous centers, lower centers, higher centers. (6) (b) Illustrate " the lower centers passing downward into more unhesitating automatism." (2) (c) Illustrate " the higher ones (passing) upward into larger intellectuality." (2) 2. Explain the following, and illustrate them from prob- able class-room experience : (a) Impulse; (b) Association of ideas; (c) Motivation; (d) Self-activity; (e) Apperception. (10) 3. (a) What is meant by objective teaching? (7) (b) Show how it may properly be employed in teaching the multiplication of a fraction by a fraction. (8) 4. (a) Explain and exemplify the following terms as em- ployed in logic : Method of difference, hypothesis, immediate inference. (9) (b) Criticize, with reasons, the following as a definition : (4) " A square has four sides and right angles." 5. Respecting the dictum, " Things before words," give an application advocated (a) by Comenius; (b) by Pestalozzi; (c) by Rousseau. (12) 230 City School Supervision Examination for License No. i January, 191 i Methods Time, Two hours. Candidate's No. ... 1. (a) State (in the order in which they should be taken up in class work) the types of examples in division which involve one or more decimal numbers^ Give reasons for the order chosen. (6) (b) Upon what principle should the explanation of the process of dividing an integer by a decimal be based? (5) (c) Give an example of this kind, and show how it should be worked. (6) 2. (a) Supposing a pupil finds difficulty in remembering the product of 7 by 9, suggest a way by which he may be helped to derive it. (4) (b) Suggest a device for helping a pupil to remember what 17 — 8 is. (4) 3. (a) What should constitute the introduction, and the first lesson, on Alaska, in a fifth-year class ? Give reasons. (10) (b) Give, in the correct order, the topics of the succeed- ing lessons required to complete the subject with this class. Justify the order of your topics. (6) 4. (a) Describe the position of the pen, the right hand, the left hand, the body, and the feet in practising free-arm movement penmanship, (5) (b) What are the " elements " of which script letters are formed? (3) (c) Using for each a single line on the paper, execute free-arm-movement penmanship drills on the let- ters m, o, and r. (3) 5. (a) Set forth fully what is meant by " teaching " a sub- ject. (10) Examination for License No. i 231 (b) Illustrate the answer to (a) by describing how the teaching of a topic in history, such as the causes of the American Revolution, may best be carried on. (10) " Horace Mann laid hold of the spirit of the inductive method of teaching." — Hinsdale. (a) What is the gist of the inductive method? (6) (b) Instance topics in arithmetic, grammar, and nature study to which this method is naturally applicable, and show how the inductive process is involved in the teaching of each topic. (12) Examination for License No. i January, 1911 English Time, Two hours. Candidate's No .... 1. Eternal spirit of the chainless mind! 2. Brightest in dungeons, Liberty, thou art. 3. For there thy habitation is the heart — 4. The heart which love of thee alone can bind; 5. And when thy sons to fetters are consigned — 6. To fetters, and the damp vault's dayless gloom — 7. Their country conquers with their martyrdom, 8. And Freedom's fame finds wings on every wind. 9. Chillon ! thy prison is a holy place, 10. And thy sad floor an altar, for 't was trod 11. Until his very steps have left a trace, 12. Worn as if thy cold pavement were a sod, 13. By Bonnivard! — May none those marks efface! 14. For they appeal from tyranny to God. — Byron. (a) Give the syntactical relationship of each subordinate clause in the second sentence. (3) (b) Give the syntactical relationship of brightest (line 22^2 City School Supervision 2) ; alone (line 4) ; tell the object of can bind (line 4). (3) (c) Give the meaning in its connection of consigned (line 5) ; efface (line 13) ; appeal (line 14). (3) (d) Point out, in this passage, an example of periodic construction; also one of loose construction. (3) (e) Write with diacritical marks : dungeons, vault, efface, tyranny, God. (Give the key for your use of diacritical marks.) {2}^) 2. Correct two errors in each of the following sentences, and give a reason for each correction: (6) (a) One cannot help but admire that sort of a man. (b) I don't know as I will be admitted. (c) Last night's performance was as bad as the night before. 3. (a) Give the plural of wharf, solo, spoonful, court- martial, t (i. e., the letter t). (2i/^) (b) Give the possessive, singular and plural, of hero, baby, it, son-in-law. (4) 4. The terms " objective," " etymological," " inductive," are used to designate methods of teaching the meaning and use of words. Describe briefly each of these methods, giving one or more words to which the method is adapted. (9) 5. Describe four distinct types of exercises (or drills) that may profitably be employed in teaching beginners to read. Tell the purpose of each exercise de- scribed. (12) 6. (a) Name three types of exercises in composition suit- able for a seventh-year class. (b) Give two appropriate subjects under each type. (c) Describe how the material for the composition under each title is to be gathered, developed, or pre- sented. (12) Examination for License No. i 233 Examination for License No. i June, 191 i History and Principles Time, Two hours. Candidate's No. . . . 1. (a) What is an instinct ? ( i ) (b) Name eight instincts. (2) (c) Of what use in the disciplining of pupils is a teacher's knowledge of instincts ? Illustrate. (3) (d) Illustrate how, in a matter of class instruction, a teacher may appeal to a lower instinct; how, in the same case, the teacher may appeal to a higher instinct. (4) 2. Explain the following and illustrate them from probable class-room experience : (8) (a) Arousing a motive by giving " an idea of the end." (b) Direct interest; indirect interest. (c) Deliberation. (d) Visualization. 3. What is meant by generalisation as a " step " in teach- ing? Illustrate from a lesson in fractions. What is the value of this step? (9) 4. Give three psychological reasons for using the black- board in the class room. (9) 5. (a) State the rules of logical division. (2) (b) Distinguish, with the aid of examples, " distributed predicate " and " undistributed predicate." (4) (c) Throw the following into the form of a syllogism and criticize as reasoning: (4) " Dogs, not being cats, cannot climb trees." 6. (a) Name any point of similarity that is to be found in the educational ideas of Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Herbart, Froebel ; and show how Herbart and Froebel applied the point in question. (6) (b) Name one distinguishing feature of the doctrine of each. (8) 234 City School Supervision Examination for License No. i June, 191 i Methods of Teaching Time, Two hours. Candidate's No, ... . 1. (a) Make and solve a practical problem in each of the following types : Finding what fractional part one number is of another; finding a whole when a fractional part is given. (8) (b) Explain, as to pupils, the solution of the first prob- lem given in answer to (a). (4) (c) What is one of the types not mentioned under (a) ? Illustrate it. (4) 2. (a) Show graphically that 3/5 (of i) is equal to 3-7-5. (6) (b) Describe how pupils should be taught the reduction of a common fraction to a decimal. Illustrate. (10) 3. State and solve a practical problem (a) in finding the cost of goods that have been sold at a per cent of loss; (b) in finding the rate of interest; (c) in finding the area of a trapezoid. Use a drawing to illustrate (c). (12) 4. (a) What is climate? (2) (b) State the conditions which affect or determine cli- mate. (8) (c) Show how pupils may be led to make correct infer- ences regarding the climate of two of the fol- lowing countries : England, Mexico, British Columbia, Brazil. (6) 5. (a) What may be three legitimate purposes of reviews in the class room ? ( 3 ) (b) Describe three good methods of reviewing in his- tory. (6) (c) With reference to the history of the Civil War, show Examination for License No. i 235 how these three methods of reviewing may prop- erly be used. (9) 6. On each of two of the following topics plan a lesson, giving materials, experiments, and observations to be made from nature: (12) (a) The relation of sunlight to plant life. (b) The propagation or transmission of heat. (c) The structure, functions, and care of the teeth. Examination for License No. i June, 1911 English Time, Two hours. Candidate's No .... Note. — For each error in spelling or grammar half a credit will be deducted from the total obtained on this paper. I. Yes ! let the rich deride, the proud disdain. Those simple blessings of the lowly train; To me more dear, congenial to my heart. One native charm, than all the gloss of art. 5 Spontaneous joys, where nature has its play, The soul adopts, and owns their first-born sway ; Lightly they frolic o'er the vacant mind, Unenvied, unmolested, unconfin'd. But the long pomp, the midnight masquerade, 10 With all the freaks of wanton wealth array 'd, In these, ere triflers half their wish obtain, The toiling pleasure sickens into pain; And even while fashion's brightest arts decoy, The heart, distrusting, asks if this be joy. — Oliver Goldsmith. (a) Give the syntactical relationship of each subordinate clause in the selection. (5) 236 City School Supervision (b) Give the syntactical relationship of disdain (line i) ; charm (line 4) ; gloss (line 4) ; unenvied (line .8). (4) . (c) Give the' meaning of deride (line i) ; train (line 2) ; congenial (line 3) ; gloss (line 4) ; spontaneous (line 5) ; owns (line 6) ; wanton (line 10) ; - proval, 242 ff.; reports of, 120 ff.; standards for, 121. Sewing. See under Special branches. Shop work. See under Special branches. Smith, G. J., commvmication of, 99. Spaulding, F. E., quoted, 138, 139. Special branches, approval of service of teachers, forms for, 244; assignment and appointment of directors, 64; directors, assistant directors and teachers, 3, 4, 65-67, 68; curtailment of force of teachers, 69; fimdings and recommendations, 72; justification of special teachers for, 69; nmnber of teachers of, 68; place of, in pro- gram, 68; relation of director to dis- trict superintendent, 65; reports by directors, 65; salary, bonus for, 71; social and educational policy, 67; supervisory duties of directors, 65; supervisory methods, 68; teachers of, 65. Springfield, promotion of teachers, 166; rating of teachers, 164; records of teaching efficiency, 167. State, relation of, to school control, 8. Statistics, 129; need of central office, 45; required of principals, 45; super- vision, elementary schools, 34, 35. Straubenmiiller, Gustav, associate city superintendent, 90. Summary of findings, associate super- intendents, 91-92; board of exam- iners, in; board of superintendents, 91, 92; city superintendent, 91, 92; district superintendents, 62; elemen- tary school supervision, 51; special 258 Index branches, 72; teaching efficiency, 134, 135- Superintendent, city, in American cities, 28, 29. Superintendent, city, New York. See under City superintendent of schools. Superintendents, associate city, 52, 80, 86, 88; assignment, 22, 89; powers and duties of, 81; reports of, 90; siunmary of findings, 91-92. Superintendents, board of. See imder Board of superintendents. Superintendents, borough, 19, 52. Superintendents, district, 52; assign- ment, 52; character of supervision by, 55 ; conferences of, 55; coopera- tion with, 61; discrimination of ad- ministrative and supervisory duties, 61, 62; findings concerning, 62; free- dom, initiative and responsibility of, 63; inertness of, 62; initiative of, 61; method of work of, 61; monthly re- port of, 195; non-supervisory duties, 62; of New York, 3, 4, 22; powers and duties, 53; qualifications of, 58; ques- tions submitted to, 59; reports and studies by, 60; rating of principals, 48-51; relation to board of superin- tendents, 59; relation to directors of special branches, 65; selection of, 57; summary of finchngs, 62; super- visory duties of, 59; teachers' meet- ings held by, 61. Superintendents, division, 22, 56. Superior merit, 131; forms for rating, 132, 133- Supervision, aim of, i; constructive, 24; cooperative, 78; decentraUzed, 78; elementary schools, ZZ\ expert, 78; ideal of, 3. Supervisor, principal as, 30. Supervisors, appointment, 51; number of, 51; salary schedules, 51. Supervisory control, 169; failure to dis- tinguish, 78. Supervisory coimcil, 62, 79, 168; recom- mendation for creation, 171. Supervisory districts, data, 54; table of, 56; size of, 54. Supervisory divisions, 56. Supervisory organization, American cities, 2S-29. Supervisory staff, salaries, 190 ff. Taylor, J. S., cited, 116. Teachers, appointment, 17; associa- tions, 174; cooperation of, 171; ex- amination, certification and appoint- ment in American cities, 112; inade- quate command of English, 107; participation of, in determining edu- cational policies, 171. Teachers, promotion of, Boston, 138; Chicago, 140; Cincinnati, 144; Cleve- land, 145; Detroit, 147; Milwaukee, 149 ff.; New Orleans, 154 ff.; New- ton, Mass., 138; Philadelphia, 159- 160; St. Louis, 161 ff.; Salt Lake City, 165; Springfield, Mass., 166. Teachers, rating of. See under Effi- ciency; also under Teachers, promo- tion of; also under Records. Teachers, special. See under Special branches. Teaching efficiency. See under Ef- ficiency, Teaching, methods of, examination questions, 228, 230, 234, 238. Teaching service, reports of, 120; de- fects of, 121; standards for, 121. Training school, forms for approval of teachmg service, 243. Unit, supervision, 30. Washington, board of school control, 26, 27; examination, certification and appointment of teachers in, 114, 115; supervisory organization, 26, 27. \ ^^f* LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 021 345 898 A