_ 124 .C5 1920 :opy 1 REPORT ^•~! A t H XI- ^ Special Legislative Committee on Education A8 Authorized by Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 21 By the Forty -third Session of the Legislature of California 'Q'irvS^ California State Printing Office SACRAMENTO, 1920 Qass. Book. iLJ_24i- ^ £.0 1 REPORT Special Legislative Committee on Education '<{ I As Authorized by Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 21 By the Forty-third Session of the Legislature of Culifornia California State J^rintinc Office j. m. cremin, superintendent sacramento, 1920 77()y- t> LIBRARY OF CONGRESS nsrEfVED JAN251921 DOCUMENTS DtVJSION A') TABLE OF CONTENTS. o^ INTRODUCTION TO THE KKl'ORT, BY THE COMMITFEE 1 ^'^^"5 Chapter I. STATE EDUCATIONAL OlUiANIZ.VTION H California Development Before 1913. — Recent American Practice and Tlu'- ory.— Powers and Duties of the State Board of Education.— I'roper Functions for a State Board of Education. — Tlie California Development Since 1913. Further Lack of Good Educational Organization. — Reasons for Such La( k of Educational Organization.— Desirable Educational Reorganization in This State. — An Adequate State Department of Education. — Principles TTnderlying State Educational Control.— 8unnnai-y of Findings and Recommendations. Chapter II. COUNTY EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION Early California Development. — Tendencits in Our American States. The Situation in California. — A Fundamental Reorganization Needed. — The Con- solidation of Schools.— A County-Unit Plan of Organization.— General Con- trol.— Business and Clerical Control.— Educational Control.— Function of the Superintendent of Schools.— Combination of Counties trr Counties and Cities.— How to Institute Such a Reorganization. — Summary of Findings and Rec- ommendations. Chapter III. THE PROBLEM OF TEACHER TRAINING ,-3 The California Development.— The Recent Crisis in Teacher-Training — Pay of Normal School Instructors.— Recent Studies of the Problem.— R-asons and Remedies.— The Creation of Teachers Colleges.— Normal School Control and Development in California.— Ultimate Teachers' College Control.— The Examination and Certification of Teachers.— Better Plan for the Certification of Teachers Needed. — Summary of Findings and Recommendations. Chapter IV. HIGH SCHOOL AND JUNIOR COLLEGE ,;7 Our High School Development.— Special Features of Our High School Development.— Secondary School Needs for the Future.— Junior Colle-o Development in California.— The New Interest in Higher Education —A Pro- gram for California Development.— Advantages of Such a Plan.— Control of Such Development.— State Aid for and Support of Junior College Work.— Summary of Findings and Reconmiendations. Chapter V. A BETTER EQUALIZATION OF FUNDS 34 I. Possible County-Unit Economies S4 II. Apportionment of the Elementary School Fund Sy III. Apportionment of High School Fund 90 IV. Summary of Findings and Recommendations 94 Appendix. SUMMARY OF NEEDED LEGISLATION. nr . . "'J 1. Constitutional Amendments. II. New or Revised Laws. LIST OF CHARTS AND TABLES. I. Charts and Maps. PAGE Fig. 1. Index Numbers of States at Four Periods S Fig-. 2. Map: How Chief State School Officer is Obtained 10 Fig. 3. Chart : The Present Double-IIeaded State Educational Organization in California IS Fig. 4. Chart : Showing the Present Lack of Organization and Unified Plan in the Handling of the Educational Functions in California 21 Fig. 5. Chart : A Reorganized and Unified State Department of Education for this State 25 Fig. 6. Map : Administrative Unit for Schools Used by our American States 35 Fig. 7. Chart : Present Triple-Headed County Educational Organization and Control in California c9 Fig. 8. Map: Showing San Mateo County Before Reoi-ganization 42 Fig. 9. Map: Showing San Mateo County After Reorganization 43 Fig. 10. Map : Showing How Chief County Educational Officer is Secured in Our American States 4(.» Fig. 11. Chart : Proper County-Unit Educational Organization 4S Fig. 12. Map : Showing Location of State Normal Schools and the Percentage of Trained Teachers in the Counties of California 54 Fig. 13. Map : Showing High School Development in California by 1920 68 Fig. 14. Chart : Actual and Estimated Growth in High School Enrollment in Calif oi'uia 70 Fig. 15. Chart : Actual and Estimated Future Growth of the Colleges at Berkeley 75 Fig. 16. Chart: Showing Proposed Reorganization of Our School System 77 II. Statistical Tables. Table I. Showing the Number of Small Schools in each County in tht> State__ 37 Table II. Increase in College Enrollment 74 Table III. Showing Results of County-Reorganization Studies in California 86 Table IV. Showing Relation of Teachers Allowed to Teachers Employed, by Counties 88 Table V. Apportionment of High School Funds, Present Plan 92 Table VI. Apportionment of High School Funds, Revised Plan 93 INTRODUCTION TO THE REPORT. To the Fort ij-fou rill Session of the Legislature of California. The report whieli follows is the report of the Special Legislative Committee provided for by Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 21, approved by both houses of the Forty-third session (1919) of the Legislature of California, and which read as follows: Chapter 49. Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 21 — Relative to a legislative investigation of the problem of meeting the needs of and furnishing support for the schools and educational institutions of the state. [Filed with Secretary of State April 20, 1919.] Whereas, The cost of maintenance of the educational system of this state forms the greater part of the public expense and is increasing year by year ; and Whkreas, The increased attendance at elementary schools and other institutions of learning presents to the people of the state a constant problem of increased support and ever broadening educational demands ; and Whereas, It is the policy of this state that schools and the means of education shall be encouraged, and is the desire of the citizens to afford to the children and young people of the state educational facilities of the highest order; and Whereas, It is desirable that a sound, permanent and comprehensive system shall be devised and established by which the schools and other educational institutions of the state may be conducted ; now, therefore, be it Resolved hy the Senate, the Assemhhj concurring. That three members of the Senate shall be appointed by the President of the Senate and three members of the Assembly by the Speaker of the Assembly, who shall constitute a committee, whose duty it shtill be to investigate the matters contained in these resolutions, and the plan of education in this state and the relations of schools, high schools, junior colleges, normal schools, technical schools, colleges and universities, and the cost of education, and to report their findings in full to the forty-fourth session of the Legislature, and to make such recommendations in connection therewith as they deem of permanent benefit to the state ; and be it further Resolved, That the Chief of the Legislative Counsel Bureau be directed to act as secretary of said committee, that said committee shall have power to employ such assistance as may be necessary and that the expenses incurred in such investigation, not to exceed the sum of three thousand five hundred dollars, shall be paid equally by the Senate and the Assembly out of their respective contingent funds. In pursuance of the above resolution the President of the Senate appointed : Senator Herbert C. Jones, of San Jose, Senator William J. Carr, of Pasadena, and Senator M. B. Harris, of Fresno; and the Speaker of the Assembly appointed: Assemblywoman Elizabeth Hughes, of Oroville, Assemblyman AValter Eden, of Santa Ana, and Assemblyman N. J. Prendergast, of San Francisco. ^ These comprised the membership of the special committee provided for. This Committee met and organized at Sacramento, at which meeting ^Assemblyman Prendergast died on April 14, 1920, took part in but three hearings of the Commission, and had no part in the formulation of the final report. At the hearings which he attended he was deeply interested in the work of the Committee and in full sympathy with the findings here expressed. 6 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. Senator Jones was elected Chairman, and afterwards lield three meeting's in Berlveley, and one each in Los Angeles, Fresno, Riverside and San Jose. An effort was made at the hearings to secure the attendance of representatives of taxpayers' associations, labor unions, and laymen, as well as those directly interested in public education. During the earlier portion of its work it was aided by Mr. Arthur P. Will, Chief of the Legislative Counsel Bureau, who acted as secretary until he left the service of the state, and throughout its work it has been materially assisted by the helpful cooperation and wise counsel of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, jNIr. Will C. Wood. In the preparation of the final report the Committee has availed itself of the assistance of Professor Ellwood P. Cubberley, Dean of the School of Education at Stanford University, who has taken the findings and conclusions of the Committee and drafted this Final Report. Many others, too numerous to mention here, have given assistance to the committee by appearing at its hearings, and some have submitted writ- ten statements for its information and guidance. To all of these here- unmentioned friends of education the Committee herewith extends its sincere thanks. DELIMITATION OF INVESTIGATION. From its first organization the Committee felt that it c^uld not attempt an exhaustive survey of the educational needs and resources of the state. This would recpiire time, money, expert assistance, and a degree of professional ability which were beyond the resources of the Committee. It was felt, too. that the resolution creating the special committee did not intend that it should deal with any such highly professional questions as curricula or the nature of the instruction provided, but rather that it was intended that the Committee should consider only the larger features of our administrative organization, with a view to making recommendations for the strengthening and more economical and effective operation of the state's educational system. It was also felt by the Committee that any recommendations which might be made by it ought to deal with principles of action and reasons therefor rather than with legislative details, and that the Committee should offer a constructive program for improvement which might be worked out over a period of perhaps the coming decade, rather than one so limited in character that it could all be accomplished at a single session of the Legislature. The Committee has also felt, more and more as it worked along, that in dealing with a state school system that has had such a steady and consistent development from its lieginnings, any reconunendations made lX'lKOni:CTK)N TO THE KEPOKT. t shiiul:! he in h.uinony with tlio nature and direction of tlie historical development which has taken place during the nearly three-cpiarters of a century of our state's history, as well as also be in harmony with the best American experience in state educational organization and admin- istraticn. Accordingly, your Committee has familiarized itself with the more important steps in the evolution of the California state school system, and in framing its report has tried to so shape its recom- mendations that what it i)roposes for the future will be but a further and a natural development of what has already been evolved. To a similar purpose the Committee has studied, briefly, the more important lines of recent educational evolution elsewh(^re, with a view to utilizing in this state the best educational experience and practice worked out in other states. With the above guiding principles in mind, the Committee tinally settled upon five main topics upon which to concentrate its hearings, and upon which it would formulate its report and recommendations, and tliese form the subject matter of the five chapters which follow. They are: 1. The present state educational organization, and the need for certain changes that will give this state a sound, comprehensive, and more modern and more effective state educational organization. 2. The present form of combined district and county educational organization, the weak points in this organization, and the changes needed to produce an efficient, effective, and economical administration of our town and rural schools and the educational business of our counties. 3. The state's educational needs in teacher training, both before and after the teacher begins teaching, and the desirability of providing a more rational system for the certification of teachers in this state. 4. The need for a better organization and administration of our secondary schools, and a more general extension upward of the higher education provided by the state through the organization of a system of regional junior colleges, and their organization and control. 5. Problems relating to the cost of education, and the possibility of a further eciualization of the advantages and the burdens of education without increasing materially the costs. OUR CALIFORNIA DEVELOPMENT. Admitted to the Union, in 1850, as the thirty-first state, the develop- ment of California in people and resources was relatively slow for almost half a century. Early conceiving of education as an important function and duty of the state, and early establishing the principle that the wealth of the whole state should be called upon to educate the children of the state, California has for long held a position of importance and 8 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. 1390 1900 1910 1918 D. C. 48.63 -^.,^__.__-— Mass. 49.52 \^ /Wash. 61. 21 \ >• Mont. 75 79 Mass. 45.86— ^^'^''^.^ NY 46.57 \^\^^Cal. 60.44 —N" -pA-Q&\. 7121 Csl. 43 79'--;y<::Cl^ P- ^- ^ ^Q JV""^^'"'^ ^ ^- ^^^-^ ""^Os/ /^'^- ^^'^ N. Y. 40.92''''^^ Cal. 43.80 --"X^ /^ Mass. 56.32 v^?^^,^/ N J 65.93 R.I. 39.27-—-^ — ^Conn. 43.13 \ \/..^Nev. 56.01 \JV--''''^r- D C. 64 24 Coiiu. 38.90- — — R. I. 43.05 N\^--^^r/N. J. 54.47 ^J^'n^ /^ Wash. 63 67 Colo. 37.83 -~--,____^^Nev. 42 37 '^^\^''^>^^Mont.53.50 A. NV ilowa 61.85 N.J. 37 49— --Zlr^''^ Colo. 4I.59n^^^^<;^'''^N. Y. 51 87 \\^JjW 61.39 Mont. 36 34 -~~_/^7~ — - N. J. 40.26 '■^<7\><-' ^^a^ 50 92 -^sST/ r ^'^''- ^' ^ Penn. 34 70k/'^ ■ •Mont.39.51 -^O^^^-^V^ R. I. 50.84 » ^y //Mich. 60.43 Nev 34.47 '^X^ /Utah 37.51 -^ XV- lU. 49 86 A ^_JW-^ Conn. 59 77 Md. 33.30 V J\.-,-^Obio 37.34 --/^----'X^ Conn. 49.31 ^'''/A^ 59.72 Ohio 33.09 --V'''NrX--IU. 37.18 -T^--^^/^ Colo. 49.23 -\j(::;;;7Sr\ N Y 59 35 Ariz. 32.75\ V^----'^s(y' Wash.37 14 ' ^Ohio 48.68 ■-■''iT/'^fV-- Colo. 59 23 lU. 3187Y'\. /^ Penn. 36 97 -~-______^ #Ore. 47.81 sA/ / \/N D59 17 Mich. 31.86 -\ \/ /Ind. 36 33 — I^^^^^^"-"-^ Pcnn. 47.25 s?A^ / A Nev 59 05 Wis, 30.99 \\>>0\// Neb. 36.11 v "" T^ Ind. 45.95 n\\J / " I"d 58 80 Iowa 30.96 oY/ f/T ^^^^- ^^-^^ ^\r^^/ /^^^- ^^-^ / ^^t^/''^ ^'^^^^ ^^^"^ N. H. 30.95 vX^ / / A Md. 35.49 y N^T^^ M'ch- 45 19 ^,^.^/^S^- ^^'^^ 58 43 Wash-SOSO-^^V/ A^Vt. 35.44 A y,^^^/ ,Uaho ^A.bl '■''^^J^^S^Ore 57 81 Kans. 30.64 \ \X>^y ^I'i"> 35.41 -\ / )(V Minn. 44.51 """'^ / \\^ Penn 57.65 Wyo. ^027\J\^Kj'S.D.34ms\ / / ANeb. 43.99 U — V^^*^*^ ^^^'* Vt. 30.22 -^^ V\X '°^* ^^^ \^k>6--/7^ ^ '^- "^3 23 \ / \\ IlawaiiS? 07 Maine29.88 N^{7V^\A Wis. 34.31 -Vy^T/ /Kans. 43 06 vW V ID 56 75 Ind. 29.82 -Q^^V/VS D. 33.99 Ol/yV// Wyo. 42 59 /T'v. V Wyo 56.71 Minn. 29.45 7 /v^kAN- H. 33.82 -^T^J^^^S. D. 42 57y7\ ^\^^R I. 56 33 Dei. 29307 / )(A^Mainp33.70 "/^"t^K^ ^Kans 55.16 Utah 28.64'\( M^^Ore. 32.04 /NiVV^N. H 42.47 -j' C Z 55.11 Fla. 28.52 v/X^^^'NX^ Wyo. 31.91 -^/y^ 42 1 1 ys^^^~""^~<^^/^ S D 55.03 Ore. 27.9\ fT/yK V^^^- ^^^^ "^sC ^k/^ ^owa. 4 1 45 ' ^\^ Y^ N H 54 37 Neb. 2&i3'X/ Jl><^ Kans. 31.54 y/"'""^-«,.V^Maine39 68 -v ^\\/ N M. 53 01 S. D. 26 06 ^/V''''''^ \ Wiz. 30.17'/ ^^Mo. 38 SO -- Mo. 49.64 Ky. 23 39-— ,.^V-'/W.Va.27.07 — -____^ v'OkJa. 35 97 ---iO. "^^^ W.Va.32.87 \^ /X^^sT- OkJa. 44.44 Idaho 22.81 ''■'^^--<\^ /N.M. 24.86 —i:^^^^---- Texas 32.34-^^^ \/^Md. 4322 Va. 22.25 .^Ky. 30.44 \\ \^Fla. 37.77 Tenn. 21.01 — -V— 9^— Tenn. 22.23 \^^S<-- ^a. 29.70 --^^^''''^^W.Va. 37.73 Ark. 20.07V. V/ \Va. 21.69 -;^\![j^ Fla. 29.69''^^^-..,,^^^ P. R. 35.79 La. 18.40 ^SC;\ La- 21.55-^ ^*"^ Tenn. 29.49 ■ — -^T^Va. 35.26 Ala. 18.16 k /'V.j^Ga. 21.54 Ga. 29.12\^ ^^r~ Tenn. 35.14 N. C. 17.80 n/X,;-'-'^\" Ark. 20.99 ^AJa. 26.93 s/\,^^^ Y Ky. 34.98 Ga. 15.73--^y^\\ \ Miss. 20.89 — IZ^^^Ark. 26.70 \\^^\\ La. 33 86 S. C. 12.46 / ^^Ov ^- ^- 20.75--^^^^^'^ ^ Miss. 26.39 \\\v ^Ga. 32.60 N. M. 10.02' XO^Ala. 19.50 ^^^;;^::::*,;C—N. C. 25.71 ^OOs. N. C. 30.59 ^N. C. 17.51- ' ^S. C. 24.87 v^ \\OAJa. 30.58 ■Ark. 30.28 •Miss. 30.04 •S.C. 29.39 Fig. 1. Index Numbers of States at Four Periods. (Reproduced by permission, from Leonard P. Ayers' An Index Number for State School Systeiiis, p. -}3. ) The 1918 Index Number for California was made up of the following Items and Scores: Score Rank 1. For per cent of school population attending school daily 70.85 4th 2. For average days attended by each child of school age 61.10 3d 3. For average number of days the schools were kept open 86.00 13th 4. For per cent of total attendance in the high schools 58.79 1st 5. For per cent of boys in total high school attendance 77.82 14th 6. For average annual expenditure per child attending school 79.41 4th 7. For average annual expenditure per child of school age 56.26 2d 8. For average annual expenditure per teacher employed 72.04 2d 9. For expenditure per pupil for other than salaries 61.76 16th 10. For expenditure per teacher for salary only 88.06 1st INTRODUCTION TO THE RKPORT. 9 leadership among the states in the matter of public education. In many important features of its school system California has been first or among the first of the states to make such provision. Especially in the matter of school finance has California been a leader, no state having done more to equalize the burdens for maintenance and to extend the advantages of education throughout the state. In a recent ranking of the different American states and territories, based on ten items relat- ing to attendance, length of term, liigh school advantages, teachers' salaries, and total annual and per capita expenditures,^ California was shown to have for long held a liigh position among the states. Based on the ten items used, five of wliieh were financial, an index number for each of the forty-eiglit states, Porto Rico, Hawaii, the Canal Zone, and the District of Columbia was worked out, and these index numbers, witli the relative positions and changes in position, are shown, for the four periods studied, in the chart on the opposite page. With the adoption of Constitutional Amendment No. 16, at the recent general election, which materially increases both the state and county support for both elementary and high schools, California has stepped forward to a new position of importance in educational finance, and undoubtedly would occupy first place among the vstates on a similar ta])le constructed for 1921. Within the past two decades California has experienced a very remarkable development, and the future of the state seems especially, bright. In one aspect of our future educational development, though, the problem has become complicated and difficult, and promises to become more difficult with time. The development of California in population is not primarily by the increase of people of native English speech or Anglo-Saxon ideas as to law, government, sanitation, or the promotion of the public welfare. On the contrary, California stands M'cll toward the top of the states having high percentages of the foreign born among its population, and very high in the percentage of the foreigTi born coming from Spain, Southern Italy and Sicily, the Balkans, parts of Asia Minor, and the Orient. Of all our immigrants these l'?oples are furthest removed in governmental conceptions from those for which our government stands, and the problem of assimilating these peoples into our state and national life is a difficult one, and one that must be accomplished largely through education. There is every reason, too, in our climate, agriculture, horticulture and industries why Mediterranean and Oriental peoples should want to come to California, and large numbers of these peoples are today settled in the rural districts, where our educational system is weakest. Charged as tlie Legislature is by the Constitution of the state to 'The ten items ai-e given on page 8, beneath the chart showing state Index Numbers. 10 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. "encourage by all suitable means the promotion of intellectual, scien- tific, moral, and agricultural improvement," it is important that it see that the state 's educational system be as sound in organization, compre- hensive in scope, and effective in results as the highest needs of a state of such large future demands. The financial structure of the California school system is and for long has been good ; the important needs of the state's school system have seemed to your Committee to be rather along the lines of better administrative organization, the provision of a mucli better type of schools for rural people, the establishment of Junior Colleges, and the further extension of certain parts of the public school system. It will be the purpose of this report, in the chapters which follow, to set forth these needs as the Committee came to see them, and the recommendations it was led to formulate. Respectfully submitted. William J. Carr, M. B. Harris, Elizabeth Hughes, Walter Eden, Herbert C. Jones, Chairman ; Committee. Final report approved December 14, 1920. STATi': ki)1ic;ati()n.\l organization. 1] Chapter I. STATE EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. CALIFORNIA DEVELOPMENT BEFORE 1913. The fii*st Constitution of California provided for tlie election, liy the people, of a State Superintendent of Public Instruction, for a term of three years. In 1863 the Constitution was amended to provide for four- year terms, and this i)rovision has ever since remained. In the first real school law, enacted in 1852, the main outlines of the present state school system, modeled largely after conditions then existing in the state of New York, were laid down. An ex officio State Board of Educa- tion also was early created hy law, largely to look after the school lands given the state by Congress, and in 1860 the power to select textbooks was given this board also. Ex officio connty superintendents of schools also were provided for by designating the county treasurers to so act, and in 1855 the office of County Superintendent of Schools was also cre- ated, the superintendent to be elected also by popular vote. The law of 1852, as well as an earlier law of 1851, provided for the subdivision of the "counties into school districts and the election of three trustees for each, and in 1855 city school organization, with cit}^ boards of education and city superintendents of schools, also was added. In 1860 a State Board of Examination was provided for, to examine teachers and to grant teachers' certificates; in 1862 the first state normal school was created: in 1863 state aid for teachers' institutes was begun; in 1867 the "rate bill," a tax on the parents of children attending the schools, was abolished and the schools were made free ; and in 1869 the State Uni- versity was established to crown the state's educational system. In 1879 a new and quite reactionary State Constitution was adopted which abolished the State Board of Education and the State Board of Examiners, and decentralized the school system then developing by establishing county boards of education and giving to them the power to adopt textbooks and to examine and certificate teachers previously possessed by the State Board of Education. Five years later, however, the Constitution was amended by vote of the people, the State Board of Education Avas recreated, and power was given it to prepare and edit and publish a state series of textbooks for the schools of the state. The board thus created was an ex officio body, composed entirely of state school officials.' This board in time not proving .satisfactory, the people 'It consisted of the following- niil)lic officials and school officers, ex officio : The Governor, the Superintendent of Public Instrviction, the President and Professor of Education in the State University, and the presidents of all state normal schools in this stat^. 12 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. ill 1912 abolished it by further ameudmeut of the Constitution, and directed the Legislature to provide by law for the creation of a new State Board of Education, and with power to do this in any manner that the Legislature might deem wise. This the Legislature did in 1913, and the plan then adopted has not been changed since. RECENT AMERICAN PRACTICE AND THEORY. Wliile no uniform plan for state educational organization has as yet been evolved, and a number of different plans are in use in the different states, certain tendencies nevertheless, as an outgrowth of experience, have become clearly manifest during the past ten to fifteen years. Summarizing these it may be said that the best American experience and theory today indicate that a State Board of Education should be constituted about as follows : 1. It should be composed of not less than five nor more than nine mem- bers, with seven as the most desirable number, and with terms of service so distributed that only one member should go out of office each year. It is not regarded as desiral)le that any Governor should have power to completely change the composition of the board during one term in office. 2. The board should be composed of la^'men. should represent the public interest, and should have in its membership no ex officio members. 3. The members should be appointed by the Governor, and in making the appointments he should be free from all restrictions as to residence, party affiliation, race, religion, or sex. The Governor should also fill vacancies, for the unexpired term, and should have power to remove any member for immorality, malfeasance in office, incompetency, or continued neglect of duty. 4. No salary should be attached to membership, but necCvSsary travel- ling expenses and a small per diem, or a small annual honorarium, should be paid each member. The present State Board of Education for California (§ 1517 of the Political Code) meets the.se requirements in all particulars except as to length of term, the California Constitution prohibiting a longer appoint- ment than for four years. It would be well if the term of all members could be extended to seven years. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. It was the evident intent of the law of 1913, creating the present State Board of Education, and strengthened by subsequent legislation, to create for California a State Board of Education which should in time evolve into a real board for the administrative control of the educational STATE EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 13 service maintained by this state. The constitutionally older Superin- tendent of Pulilie Instruction was directed by the law to act as secretary and chief executive officer for the board; the board was given power to appoint three assistant superintendents who should be known as commissioners ; power was given the board to make rules and regulations not inconsistent with law for the government of the schools of the state; it was empowered to study the educational needs of the state, and to propose plans for improving the school system ; it was authorized to conduct investigations, employ additional educational and business experts to assist it, within the limits of its appropriations; the power of the old state board to issue teaching credentials and life diplomas was confirmed and extended ; it was authorized to create a committee on credentials to pass on the cases of applicants ; the old power to compile, or adopt, and to order printed the text books for the schools of the state was continued to it; it has been given authority to standardize the normal schools of the state, and prescribe the standards of admis- sion and graduation therefrom; it has been given similar power to approve all courses of study for the high schools and junior colleges of the state; the administration of the retirement fund for teachers has been placed in its hands ; and the organization and administration of a program for physical education in the schools has been assigned to it. The Legislature of this state, in conformity with an act of the Congress of the United States, has further materially increased the powers and the importance of the State Board of Education by designat- ing it as the official state bod}^ to administer the funds granted to this state by Congress for vocational education, under the Smith-Hughes law of 1917, and also, still moi'c recently Congress has designated it to control the funds granted to this state for the reeducation of persons crippled in industry. The Smith-Towner bill, now before Congress, providing for rather liljeral aid to the states for specific forms of public education and teacher training,- proposes to still further increase the importance of the State Board of Education by making it the agent of the Federal Government in expending all aid to be granted to the state. It is evident then that it was the intention of the Legislature of 1913, and still further emphasized by subseciuent legislation, to create for ^The Smith-Towner bill, now before Congress, while leaving all educational control to the different states, provides for the granting of .$100,000,000 annually to the states, for the following purposes : $7,500,000 for the removal of illiteracy; $7,500,000 for Americanization work; $20,000,000 for work in physical education; $15,000,000 for the preparation of teachers; and $50,000,000 for the equalization of educational opportunities and aid in the pay- ment of the salaries of teachers. 14 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE OX EDUCATION. California a state board of control, after the best American models, for the eduejitional system supported hy the state. This intent has been given still further emphasis b}- the acts of Congres.s. Still more, the Avisdom shown by the new State Board of Education in the execution of the functions entrusted to it has awakened confidence that the state has finally obtained an important coordinating and directive agency which is capable of much further expansion, that it may render still hirger service in the future. PROPER FUNCTIONS FOR A STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. AVhat has taken place in California has also taken place in a number of other American states, during the past ten to fifteen years. Old and ex officio State Boards of Education have been abolished, and new State Beards of Education have been created in their stead. The Smith- Hughes Act of 1917 virtually required a State Board of Education of some type in every state. In addition to acting as agents of the Federal Government in the administration of federal funds, granted as aid to the states, these new State Boards of Education have been entrusted by the legishitures creating them with new powers, naturally differing somewhat in the ditferent states. Though probably no two boards have exactly the same powers and duties, and an examination of this recent legislation gives evidence that we are still in a period of experiment, nevertheless certain tendencies are evident and the probable direction of state school control is each year becoming more and more clear. Briefly these tendencies may be summarized, as follows: — 1. The creation of a Department of Education in the state government which shall exercise, through an appointed State Board of Education, supervisory oversight and control over the entire system of public instruction supported by the state. 2. The aljolition of the elective office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, which represents an earlier stage in our educational evolu- tion, and the substitution therefor of an appointed Commissioner of Education, to be appointed by and responsible to the State Board of Education, and who shall act as the chief executive officer of the board and its representative before the people. The Commissioner of Education thus becomes somewhat analagous to a superintendent of city schools in a large city, chosen by and responsible to a city board of education. 3. In the selection of such a Commissioner of Education the State Board of Education should be free from restrictions as to politics, sex. and residence, and should be able to fix the salary and determine the tenure. Under the same conditions the board should appoint as many STATE EDUCATIOXAL ORGANIZATION. 15 Assistant CoiiiniLssioiiers as may be provided fur by law, to act a.s lieads of the diit'ei-eiit divi.sions of the state educational department. 4. The State Board of P^dueation .should have power to determine, subject to legislative regulation, the educational policies to be pursued in the state, and to have power to inspect, require reports from, and to coordinate the educational work of the different educational institu- tions supported by the state, and with a view to securing economy of operation, efficient educational administration, and a sound, compre- hensive, and well-coordinated state system of schools. 5. The State Board of Education should exercise regulatory control over all institutions engaged in the training of teachers; control the examination, certification, and retirement of teachers; supervise the educational work done in all charitable, penal, and reformatory institu- tions maintained by the state ; direct the program for physical training and health work in the schools; exercise a supervisory control over school buildings, see that sanitary conditions are maintained, and that new buildings conform to proper standards ; see that the educa- tional laws of the state are enforced, and the educational rights of children protected; and conduct investigations as to the progress and needs of the schools of the state, and report the results and their recommendations to the Legislature. 6. The State Board of Education should be the body, subject to direc- tion by the Legislature, to determine questions of policy in the manage- ment of the school system, pa.s.s on new proposals, and vote official instructions, but all execution of such decisions and the taking of action in the name of the state to be done by and through its executive officers, that is, by the Commissioner of Education and his assistants, or other persons instructed to act in the name of the board. 7. In a few states the state library has been conceived of as a part of the state's educational service and placed under the control of the State Board of Education, and as a division of the State Education Department, and the county libraries have been placed under the direc- tion of the county boards of education ; in a few other states the manage- ment and investment of the permanent state school fund has been placed under the State Board of Education. What is outlined above is perhaps best found in the state educational organizations of New York, New Jersey, and Indiana, though a number of other .states have recently conferred upon their State Boards of Education somewhat analagous powers. Within the past fifteen years, too, and as a part of the same tendency to create an effective and rational state educational organization, a number of states have changed 16' REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. ■»» •cJ • c a d n © bJ 05 © R c +» a ■¥> o c +» C -H •H O O CO O P. J3 -^ to P< © © 6 n1 > -P 1 t «) U T» •g ^It .T) O ^ C ^ © P. +^ P. n ^ q © •H 03 m M •d Ej P M STATE EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION'. 17 from au elective Superiuteiidont of Pul)li(; Instruct ioii to an appi)iiited (.'oiumissioner of Education. The map opposite shows where the chief educational oi'tlcer of the state is elected by popular vote, and where lie is appointed. It will be seen, from the map, that the eliange has been most comninii in those eastern and nortliern states of rather dense population antl containing a large foreign element, while the less densely populated and more native agricultural states to the west and south have not as yet felt the necessity for educational reorganization. In a few states, such as Wyoming and Idaho, where eonstitutional provisions have been hard to change, a Commissioner of Education lias been created, to be appointed by the State Board of Education and to act as its executive officer, while retaining the older elected Superintendent of Public Instruction for the clerical and statistical duties. Such an organization, while at times necessary, nevertheless is fraught with possibilities for discord and friction. THE CALIFORNIA DEVELOPMENT SINCE 1913. When we turn to California we find that, since 1913, a partial evolu- tion in the direction of good educational organization has been taking place. What has been done since the abolition of the old ex officio State Board of Education, in 1912, measured by good standards as estal)lished by American state action, has been in the right direction, so far as it has gone. Tlije next eight to ten years should see a much further development in the same general direction, so that California too, a decade from now, may have evolved a State Department of Educa- tion that will be capable of rendering large educational service amid the new educational conditions that we shall by that time be called upon to face, and the new educational pi'oblems that we shall In- then be called upon to solve. The present stage in our California state educational development is well shown in the chart on i)age eighteen. As in a number of other states which have experienced a recent development toward a rational form of state educational organization, and where eonstitutional provi- sions requiring an elected State Superintendent of Public Instruction stood in the way of a complete and adequate reorganization, we find in California also a double-headed form of state educational organiza- tion. To the older office of Superintendent of Public Instruction certain t-arlier functions of a supervisory and clerical and statistical nature are given by law, while to the newer State Board of Education a num- ber of new functions relating to policy and educational control have been given, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction has been directed to act as its executive officer and secretary. So long as the 2— 77C9 18 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. u o a -A^ •H O -H >Tt*> [ u ai rt ^5 ca H o ? ^ — X < 1^ a o d « •HtH ,H \ Q H ?. ? STATE EDUCATIOXAL ORGANIZATION. 10 present Superiuteiident of Public Instruction remaias in office, and so long as the State Board of Education continues to pui-sue its present policy, harmonious relations between tlie two divisions of our state department are likely to continue, l)ut the situation nevertheless is fraught with danger and sooner or later is destined to cause trouble. It will be seen from the chart that that part of the state educational organization represented by the State Board of Education is clearly responsible to the Governor and the Legislature for its acts, while that part represented l)y the Superintendent of Public Instruction remains independent of l)Oth State Board of Education and Governor, and largely independent of the Legislature as well, and may work with the State Board of Education or against it. according to the character of the official elected to the office of Superintendent. Only a policy of friendly cooperation between the State Board of Education and the Superintendent, or. where this is not possible, a policy of inactivity or resignation on the part of either the State Board or the Superintendent can prevent friction, to the disadvantage of the school sy.stem. with the state school office organized as it now is in this state. The temptation of a weak State Superintendent to play politics against the State Board of Education, and seek for cheap public notoriety to secure reelection, wculd be both possible and natural. Over such a Superintendent the State Board could exercise no control whatever. Still more, an antagonized or antagonistic Superintendent might at some time raise the constitutional question as to the right of the State Beard of Education to do anything whatever in the nature of supervi- sion, claiming that it has no power other than regulatory power. In sup- port of this he could claim that the superintending function, in its very nature, is an integral and indi\Tsible function — that there cannot be two superintending agencies. The Legislature, in a way. recognized this in organizing the State Board of Education in 1913, when it provided that the three Commissioners should rank as Assistant Superintendents of Public Instruction, and that their work should be directed by the Superintendent, under such general regulations as the State Board of Education might adopt. The supreme courts of North Dakota and Wyoming have held that since the Superintendent of Public Instruc- tion is a constitutional officer whose powers are implied generally in his title, it is not competent for the Legislature to a&sign these powers to any other officer or commission. That the Superintendency is a key pasition, and that an obdurate Superintendent could almost completely check the work of the State 20 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. Board of Education except in regulation and investigation, should not be lost sight of. Undoubtedly, then, the present California educational organization must l)e regarded as temporary and transitional, and dan- gerous for the future, and it should l)e superseded at the earliest oppor- tunity by a more rational form of state educational organization. Such a form will be proposed a little further on. FURTHER LACK OF GOOD EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. The chart given on page 18, reveals but a part of the lack of rational educational organization in tliis state. Examining further into the plans now employed for the organization and control of what the state has so far assumed as its educational functions, we get the next chart, given on the opposite page. This shows the many different educational func- tions and institutions which this state has up to now assumed and is in whole or in part supporting, and at the same time reveals the number of more or less unrelated boards, commissions, and other agencies having charge of some part of the educational work of the state. Briefly, these unrelated agencies may be summarized as follows : — 1. Tlie Coninhon Schools. Under the general control of the State Board of Education and the Superintendent of Public Instruction. 2. The State University. This institution, unlike in most other states, is not included as a part of the public school system, but exists separate and apart. It has no legally-conferred power to in any way control the public schools, though it has in the past exercised large control over the high schools. Conversely the public school authorities have no power to control any function of the university. The only legal connection existing at present between it and the public school system lies in that the Superintendent of Public Instruction is ex officio a member of the Board of Regents for the University. 3. The State Normal Schools. Seven normal schools are maintained by the state. They are a part of the public school system. Each is under the control of a Board of five Trustees, appointed by the Governor, with the Governor and the Superintendent of Public Instruc- tion members ex officio. In financial matters they are subject to the State Board of Control, and in most educational matters to the State Board of Education. 4. California Polytechnic School. Located at San Luis Obispo. Under the control of a Board of Trustees, organized in a manner similar to a normal school board. The State Board of Education has no power to direct its work, or to bring it into any close relation to the state school system. 5. Schools for Juvenile Delinquents. These are located at "Whittier, STATE EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 21 -^ o - administrative principle. Such a haphazard organization will inevi- tably be uneconomical in administration and inefficient in action. REASON FOR SUCH LACK OF EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. The reason for such a lack of any rational organization in the educa- tional work of the state is not hard to find. Up to very recently the principle of decentralization has been a fundamental guiding principle in our democratic form of government. The Constitution of 1879 gave special emphasis to this idea. The old State Board of Education, too, *\'as composed of bu.sy school men. and hardly able to organize an educational department or take on any additional educational functions. Neither was the state educational office able to act efficiently. The result was that, before 1913, whenever the need for the discharge of a new educational function arose, the work was assigned to some other board or commission, or a new body to take charge of it was created. The result is th^it today we find the educational work supported by the state scattered, in its supervision and control, among twenty-three boards or commissions, with a membership of about one hundred and sixty persons, and these acting with little relation to one another. DESIRABLE EDUCATIONAL REORGANIZATION IN THIS STATE. To harmonize and make more effective the work of the different edu- cational institutions supported in whole or in part by this state, to bring them into a properly coordinated and comprehensive whole, to 24 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCxVTION. reduce the number of persons at work on the educational problem, to promote efficiency and economy in our educational service, and to create for California a sound and intelligent educational administration for all parts of the public school system, the Committee feels that there should be created a comprehensive and unified State Department of Education, through which the educational control to be exercised by the state should be discharged. The present double-headed state educa- tional control should be unified, the different educational functions of the state given their proper place in a logical State Department of Education, and this Department should also be so broadly conceived and so framed that every new educational function hereafter developed may be assigned naturall}' to it for purposes of supervisory control, and may find in it its natural place. To this new Department educational functions now being exercised elsewhere should gradually be reassigned. While preserving the principles of democratic government, it should be frankly recognized that efficiency and economy can only be secured by an organization which recognizes the importance of expert profes- sional service, in which there is proper responsibility for the use of authority, through which related functions are brought together for administrative control, and by means of which the interests of the state in education can be promoted intelligently and effectively. To this end the Committee recommends that the Legislature propose a constitutional amendment to the people, to take the place of the present section 2 of article IX of the Constitution, which requires the election by tlie qualified electors of the state of a Superintendent of Public Instruction at each gubernatorial election, and the substitution tlierefor of a new section 2 to read substantially as follows : Sec. 2. The Legislature shall provide for the appointment, by the State Board of Education, of a Commissioner of Education, w^ho shall act as the chief executive officer of said board and shall execute, under its direction, all educational policies decided upon. Once such a constitutional change has been effected it will then be possible for the legislature to create, under the headship of the State Board of Education, a State Department of Education capable of prop- erly coordinating the different parts of the state's educational service, insuring harmonious relations in all its parts, and rendering large serv- ice to the schools of the state. In the meantime the Legislature can proceed with the creation of a State Department of Education, but there will always be danger of serious friction until such a constitutional change gives authority for a proper relationship of all its parts. AN ADEQUATE STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. The type of reorganization the Committee has in mind for ultimate development in California is shown in the diagram on the opposite page. STATE EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 25 m +> « C O-H 1 ^ o K P. ^ ^ rS o ^ » OTsnji uojgonpa •Afa 'OTipj t^-f09ds_ c • ® o • a p«> ^3^8*3 P-^-H. H © e aJ -H o c ei CO o q -H o 9 > jfe[i- control. California has already gone so far in superimposing county control that it could easily pass from its present form of organization to a pure county-unit tyjje. as is today found in Maryland. Utah, or a number of other state-s. As a unit for school administration, the district rendered its greatest service in the past. As population increases, urban conditions spread throughout a state, foreign elements enter it, and modem methods of transacting business come into practice, the defects of the district unit for school organization and administration become more and more evident. As a means for providing for the establishment of schools the district system has rendered its service, and there is today little call for the continuation, in any large number, of the kind of schools which this .system brought into existence and nourished through the critical period of the infancy cf our state educational systems. To have a fully organized board of school trustees for everj- little school in the county — a board endowed by law with corporate rights and important financial, legal, and educational powers — is now generally recognized as no more necessary, either from a business or an educational point of view, than it would be to have a special school board to employ teachers and janitors and to manage the financial affairs of every individual school house in our cities. In fact, it may be stated as generally recog- nized among educational authorities today that it is ju.st such minute organization, with the scattering of authority and responsibility, that increases the expenses of our schools, makes them ineffective as rural institutions, and stands in the way of proper educational organization and much needed educational progress. The district unit is too small an area in which to provide modem educational facilities, and the difficulty of securing cooperative action by the trustees of a number of adjacent districts to form a larger and better school is a difficulty that is almost insuperable. Even with the best of intentions on the part of the local boards of school trustees, they earrj^ on their work with so little unity of purpose and so little conception of the real meaning and importance of effective educational .service, that the schools they oversee too often are limited in scope and outlook, poorly adapted to modem COUNTY EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 3» 36' REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. educational needs, poorly taught and still more poorly supervised, and far more costly than there is any reason for their being. Experience everywhere has clearly demonstrated that the district system is expensive, inelBcient, short-sighted, and unprogressive ; that it leads to an unnecessary multiplication of small and inefficient schools, utterly unable to minister to the larger rural-life needs of the present ; that under it country boys and girls do not have equivalent advantages with the boys and girls who live in the cities ; and that it stands today as the most serious obstacle in the way of a needed consolidation and improvement of our rural schools. With the growth of modern educa- tional needs, the slirinkage of the rural families and the introduction of much machinery which ha.s displaced "hands," and the coming of large foreign elements who need to be cared for in a good school and who can not be trusted to Americanize themselves and their children, the old district form of school administration has broken down and can no longer provide schools suited to the needs of country children and the demands of modern life. In consequence intelligent parents every- where are leaving the country and moving to town, and leasing their farms to foreign-born tenants, and largely to provide better educational facilities for their children. THE SITUATION IN CALIFORNIA. California has 58 counties, and the last report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction gives the number of school districts as 3403, for the year 1919-20. Of these 2366, or 70 per cent, employ but one teaelier, and 83 per cent do not employ over two teachers. The table on the opposite page gives details for each county in the state. How many districts are town and city schools is not stated, but if the 301 districts employing 5 or more teachers be subtracted for town and eity schools, a. number of which operate under a board of education and have a supervising principal or city superintendent, we shall probably include all that should be included. For the 57 counties, not counting San Francisco, we elect 57 county superintendents of schools,^ appoint 228 members of county boards of education, and the people elect approxi- mately 10,250 school trustees. That there is any educational need for over ten thousand school officials to manage the affairs of our rural and small village schools can not be maintained. To conduct the educational business of our counties with this number of often uninformed and not infrequently uninterested school officials requires an expenditure for Un four oountips, operating unrier county charters, the county superintendent of schools is appointed by the supervisors in two, elected by a special county board of education in one, and elected by a convention of the school trustees in one. San Francisco city and county has also ,iust voted (Charter Amendment No. 37) to substitute an appointed city superintendent of schools for the elected county superin- tendent, it being the last city in the United States to give up this now obsolete method for selecting a city superintendent. COUNTY EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 37 TABLE I. Showing the Number of Small Schools In Each County in the State. (Data for 1919-20.) Number of schools in county having but Alameda . Alpine ... Amador . Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno ... Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen f OS Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada . Orange _ Placer _- Plumas - Riverside Sacramento San Bonito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba The State 38 REPUKT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. clerical help, bookkeeping, printing, postage, and time that is both large and wholly unnecessary. Of the fifty blank report-fonns listed by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction as printed and supplied by the state, one-fifth are for reports from these boards of district school trustees. Any county superintendent of schools will testify to the necessity for the careful scrutiny of these reports, and often the necessity of returning them for correction— sometimes more than once. To try to educate these boards of trustees to some understanding and appreciation of their work, the state has provided for an annual trustees institute, to be held in each county, and to which each district board is expected to send one of its members, the board paying him his ex- penses for attendance. For the co.st of these institutes w^e have no accurate record, but we know that the attendance upon them has not been large. For 1919-20 thirty comity superintendents report such institutes as held, and at an expense of $4,876.03. If only one-half of the boards complied with the law and sent a representative, and we estimate an average expense of only $5 for each, $8,750 additional must be counted. In other words, at least $13,500 a year are spent today in trying to give to one trustee in three some better conception of his educational duties. The bonding of school districts for small amounts for additions and new buildings is another large economic waste. To vote bonds for $3,000, as is not uncommonly done, will cost not less than $350 for legal expenses, printing, and advertising, and the bonds to sell must bear at least a 1 per cent higher interest rate than would county school bonds, issued for a similar i)urpose. Were the whole matter of school- house construction and maintenance handled by one county educational board, and for the county as a unit, cities under boards of education excepted, and with an annual tax for buildings and repairs, practically all of the present waste for elections, bonding, and interest would be saved and better results at the same time obtained. When we add to these expenses the very large expense incurred by the maintenance of large numbers of small, inefficient, and wholly unnecessary schools, the cost of the district system runs up to a very large total. Due to increased salaries paid teachers, to increasing costs for everything bought and used, but largely to the small size of the schools maintained, a school of 10 to 15 children often costs more, and usually as much, provided an ecjual length of term is considered, as does a city school of 35 to 40 children, whereas the education offered is not nearly so good. Experience in other states has clearly demon- strated that, under a county-unit form of educational administration, from one-fourth to one-third of the teachers in the rural schools of any COUNTY EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 39 t4 o o o <{ bO •H O (0 r-l at Pi •H o •H H ID H a> o a o N 8 S 1^ o O O w o CQ s s E^ c5 >»^ •sa :^ n o^ o^ ^ a ^ o >» O-H +> -P ::i n o o aj ji o cd >» -♦^ ca c CO p » +3 « a «J ::! EH o o iH o >» o > a:^ o o nq CO 40 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. county can be dispensed with by means of that consolidation of schools which inevitably ensues when their administration is directed by one county educational board, the per capita cost for education is decreased, and the quality of the education provided rural children can be at the same time very materially improved. Counting the boards of supervisors, who possess some educational functions, we have in California the triple-headed educational organ- ization for our counties shown by the chart on the preceding page. A FUNDAMENTAL REORGANIZATION NEEDED. What is needed is a fundamental reorganization and redirection of rural and small village education, and along lines which will transform such schools into more useful educational and social institutions. This, however, can be accomplished onlj" by some authority of larger scope and insight than the district school trustee, and by the application to the problem of a larger type of administrative experience than that represented by district control. To provide properly for the adminis- tration of our rural and village schools, to increase their efficiency, to decrease their expense, to provide them with ade pate professional super- vision, and to enable children in them to enjoy some of the special educational advantages which city children today enjoy, demands that the administrative experience of our city school systems be applied to our counties as well. This would mean the abolition of the small school district as a corporate administrative unit, as was done by the cities everywhere long ago; the erection of the county, outside of cities, into one County-Unit School District: and the management of the schools of each county, outside of included cities having boards of education and a city superintendent of schools or a supervising prin- cipal, as a single financial and educational unit, just as the schools of our cities are now managed. Such a fundamental reorganization, care- fully worked out for San Mateo County,- is shown in Figures 8 and 9. The chief differences between a county-unit sj^stem of schools, such as today exist in Maryland, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, or Utah, or as is shown in Figure 9, and a city school system such as that of Sacra- mento, Stockton, or Fresno, would be that the schools would be smaller, probably more numerous and farther apart, and that they would be organized with special reference to educational efficiency and to the needs of rural and village life. Nowhere else in our political organization do we retain so small a governmental unit as the school district. In the assessment of property. =Made by Dr. J. Harold Williams, in 1915, and published by the United States Commissioner of Education, as Bulletin 16, 1916, under the title of "Reorganizing a County System of Schools." Washington, 1916. COUNTY EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION. 41 taxation, rocordino- of deeds and contracts, payment of taxes, building of hinhways and bridges, provision of hospital service and poor relief, supervision of agricultural work, enforcement of traffic laws, mainten- ance of libraries, etc., wt- today use the county or the large city as our smallest administrative unit. In some of these matters we are finding the county too small, and are transferring certain functions to the state to secure bettor administration. There is no reason why the admin- istratirn of .so imjiorlant a subject as public education should not be conducted en the basis of a unit large enough to ensure educational efficiency. The coming of the paved highway and motor transportation have given new emphasis to the need for such educational reorganization. A transfer to the county-unit for school control could be made in California by legislative action, each county, cities under boards of education excepted, being declared by law to be one school district and, as such, placed under a county board of education for administrative control. The present districts would then become attendance sub-dis- tricts, capable of being combined and altered by the county board of education as the educational needs of the county might seem from time to time to require, just as city boards of education alter the attendance lines for their different schools. The corporate powers of the present districts would be taken from them and transferred to the county boards of education, which would assume title to the school property and charge of the rural and small town schools of the county. The boards of district school tru.stees would disappear, being replaced, perhaps, by one appointed attendance-district trustee, or director, with few and simple duties, while all educational and financial powers now possessed by the 3102 boards of school trustees for the small districts would be transferred to the 57 county boards of education and their executive officers, the county superintendent of schools, the secretary of the county board, and the special supervisors employed to visit and supervise the schools. THE CONSOLIDATION OF SCHOOLS. An attempt has been made in many of our states, during the past twenty-five to thirty years, to provide a remedv for the defects of the district system by permitting of the consolidation of two or more school districts to form a union school, and the transportation of the children from the abandoned schools to the larger and better-organized and better-taught central school. Here and there in a few progressive com- munities some remarkable results have been attained by this plan. Where good consolidated schools can be formed they are very desirable. 42 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMiMlTTKK ON EDUCATION. SANAATEOCOUNTT 3K0WIN6 LOCATION OF SCHOOLS UNDER PRESENT SYJItn ONE-TETACHER RURAL SCHOOL 6 TWO-TEACHER RURAL SCHOOL ^THREE-TEACHER RURAL SCHOOL ^ ELEMENTARX 5CH00J VJITH PRINCIFAL A HICH 2CH0OL @ UNION HISH SCHOOL PuOkic Road* ■^AlLROAOJ Fig. 8. Showing San Mateo County Befoke Reorganization. (From Williams' study, made in 1915, and published by the United SLatt-s Bureau of Education.) This shows a county having 37 elementary schrxil districts and three high school districts. COUNTV EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIOX. 43 (SOUTK ftAN F S •H o o p. 1 ID C H ■3 P.01 •H nS f) m S lr< •H £ Id a (S t serious phases of the prol)lem of providing trained teachers for the scliools lies in the continual loss of those wlio represent 56' REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. the best trained and experienced members of the teaching profession. In this California has suffered as have other states. The war directed new attention to the teacher as an organizer and an executive, and this business executives have been quick to recognize. Within recent years hundreds of our best educated and best trained teachers have been drawn from the work of the school by reason of much better positions in the business world. In consequence, the teaching profession has been steadily losing its best trained and most competent teachers, as well as failing to attract an adequate supply of new material to its training institutions. PAY OF NORMAL SCHOOL INSTRUCTORS. Our normal schools, too, on the wholly inadequate salary schedule they have been forced to maintain, also can not retain their best instructors or replace their losses with persons of the proper grade of training. In California, the salary schedules in our normal schools have been so low that they have scarcely been able to compete for instructors, during the past half dozen years, with our middle-rank high schools. When one considers that the normal school is training teachers for the future, and that the character of our teachers and schools ten or fifteen years from now will be largely determined by the character of the instructors in our normal schools today, the seriousness of the situation will be evident. All in all, it is not surprising that practically no men are longer attracted to our normal schools for training as teachers, or that the best types of women prefer to go to college where they may find a larger outlook and better instruction. RECENT STUDIES OF THE PROBLEM. A nation-wide survey of the situation, made during the present year, with replies from 34 states, gave the following as reasons and remedies : Reasons for the teacher shortage. 1. Low salaries and poor working conditions. 2. Better opportunities in other lines than teaching. 3. Both men and women prefer to study in a college, where they find better instructors and a wider range of instruction from which to choose. 4. Pligh school teachers are usually college graduates, and they, consciously or unconsciously, deflect students to the colleges. 5. Lack of discrimination in electing and paying teachers by boards of school trustees. 6. Outside of the larger city school systems, and the high school, no career for men in educational work. Remedies for the situation. 1. Better salaries and working conditions. The teacher-shortage problem at bottom is economic and social, THE PROBLEM OF TEACHER TRAINING. 57 2. Improvement in educational organization and administration that will better open up educational service as a career. 3. Better teaching facilities, and broader opportunities for study in the teacher-training schools. 4. Collegiate status for the normal schools, with power to grant a degree. 5. Materially higher pay for normal school teachers, and the employment of a much better type. 6. More rigid and better organized certification laws, to weed out incompetents and place more ])remium on training. There also appeared, within the past six months, the long-awaited study of "The Professional Preparation of Teachers for American Public Schools," made by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advance- ment of Teaching.^ This study was begun six years ago, at the request of the Governor of Missouri, and was based primarily on a study of the tax-supported training schools of that state. The study, though, was extended to cover the teacher-training problem in the United States, and the principles laid down in this report are intended to be generally applicable elsewhere. The state was found to maintain five state normal schools, two large city training schools in St. Louis and Kansas City, and a school of education at the University of Missouri. Each was under the direction of a separate board of trustees; each worked without reference to the work of the others, or to any state plan ; there was practically no state oversight or control ; there was duplication of effort and lack of extensions into new lines; the standards maintained varied greatly, and for the normal schools were lower than they should be; the instructors lacked in education and professional preparation; and the type of teachers sent out was much below what the present-day needs of our public schools demand. The situation in Missouri was felt to be typical, and not essentially ditferent from that found in other than a few of the better situated of our states. To meet the situation in Missouri, and elsewhere, the report recommends a unification and centralization of control of all teacher- training institutions in the state, and under one central board; the extension of the normal schools into four-year Teachers' Colleges, that they may give a better type of training for teaching; the unification of the organization and work of these Teachers' Colleges with the work of the School of Education of the University of IMissouri, the Teachers' Colleges being regarded as branches of the University; and the ultimate fusion of this unified control with that of the State Depart- ment of Education, after it has been better developed. The report recognizes that individual states must solve the problem of control ^Bulletin No. 14 of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 475 pages. The Carnegie Foundation, 576 Fifth Avenue, New Yorlt City. 58 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. in accordance with local development and conditions, but stresses the importance of better teaching staffs for the normal schools, a lengthen- ing of the course of instruction to four years, the granting of a profes- sional degree to those who complete it, and a unified control and coordi- nation of the work of the teacher-training institutions of the state. THE CREATION OF TEACHERS' COLLEGES. The Report devotes much space to pointing out that the change in the character of American education, which has been taking place slowly during the past two decades, and which has been greatly accelerated by the World War, is a change that involves primarily the teacher. This fact the American people have up to now largely failed to grasp. We have said much about education, and measured school success in terms of new school buildings, costly equipment, and totals expended, but have failed to grasp the fact that our teachers are the key to educational progress. Expenditures for education are largely meaningless except as expresed in the superior quality and skill of individual teachers. One result of the war we have .just ended has been to call new attention to the importance of the teacher in our national welfare and progress. If the billions we have spent to preserve democracy abroad are not to be wasted, millions must now be spent at home to improve the character of the teachers in whose hands the future of this nation largely rests. To attract the best minds to the teaching service, men and women "fully informed as to what the rising generation may become and dedicated to such achievement, ' ' we must train them thoroughly for the teaching service and offer to them "the opportunity to attain to dis- tinguishing rewards of success through teaching careers." To train them as the future demands that our teachers should be trained calls for the contact, during the period of their training, with well-educated and large-visioned instructors, and to attract them to the training insti- tutions the schools must offer a type of education suited to the new needs of a rapidly changing world. The calling, too, must offer eco- nomic rewards comparable with other fields of public and private serv- ice. A new type of teacher-training institution and a materially increased salary schedule for teachers are the immediate needs. It seems to be generally admitted, by students, of the subject, that the older type of two-year normal school has passed its maximum period of usefulness. Technically considered it was a trade school, giving a short vocational preparation for but one line of service. The new conditions we face and the new needs in our national life in the decades to come demand a new type of teacher-training institution — one that will give a much broader and more extended type of professional prepa- ration, and better fit young people for the educational service of the THE PROBLEM OF TEACHER TRAINING. 59 state. The experience in such states as Iowa and Colorado, where the state normal seliool was transformed a decade or more ago into a four-year Teachers' College, has been clearly on the side of such extended training. The experience of Ohio, where two old state colleges were transformed into combined teachei's' colleges and colleges otter- ing a cultui-al education, lias been equally convincing. Today it may be said to be an accepted ]n-inciple of action that the normal schools, in states which can afford a salary schedule for teachers which will warrant such an extension of training, should gradually but soon be transformed into four-year institutions, offering a degree to their graduates, and known as Teachers' Colleges. This transformation has already been made in the city normal schools of most of our larger north- ern cities, city Teachers' Colleges being the term now generally used, and the possession of a collegiate degree is rapidly becoming a prerequi- site for a position as teacher in our larger city elementary school sys- tems. The movement for such a transformation is also well under way in a dozen or more of our states. It may also be said to have recently come to be accepted as a belief on the part of students of the subject that the only hope of again filling our normal schools with students, attracting to them any men students, or drawing into teaching in the elementary grades that superior class of M'omen who now go to the colleges, lies in the expansion upward and outward of the normal school work so as to offer a four-year course for elementary teaching, leading to a professional degree, and parallel with it at least a two-year Junior College course of general training that will be ecjually open to those who intend and who do not intend to teach. The ultimate development probably will be a full four-year college, with a nundier of parallel lines of work but with preparation for teaching as the central idea, somewhat after the Colorado, Iowa, and Ohio plans. Such a development for California, as we shall point out in the next chapter, would possess very decided advantages for this state, and would extend Junior College and collegiate education to our l)eople in a broader way and under conditions far more favorable than ever could be done by depending on one central institution at Berkeley. NORMAL SCHOOL CONTROL AND DEVELOPMENT IN CALIFORNIA. Assuming that this state decides to expand our normal schools, gradu- ally, into four-year Teachers' Colleges, and to give them power to con- fer a collegiate degree, which is what this Committee recommends, the (|uestion of authorization and control, as well as grounds, buildings, and finance, will need to be considered. It has seemed to your Com- mittee that such a development ought to take place gi-adually, ought to be approved at each step by some central board, and that the ulti- 60 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. mate form of control brought about probably should be different from that for the earlier stages of the process. The development which the Committee came to conceive of as possible and desirable for this state may be summarized, briefly, about as follows : Assuming that it is decided that the normal schools of California should be developed gradually into four-year Teachers' Colleges, with degi^ee-grantiug powers, it has seemed to your Committee very desirable that uniform legislation should not be enacted, transforming the nor- mal schools of the state into Teachers' Colleges, and also that the differ- ent institutions should not be allowed to go to the Legislature and engage in a scramble for funds with which to make such development. The beginnings of control have already been made for this state by giving the State Board of Education power to regulate the admission requirements, the courses of instruction, and the standards for gradu- ation of the normal schools of the state. This power, your Committee feels, should be extended, and the State Board of Education should be given authority to control the gradual expansion of the normal schools of the state. In making this expansion, possibilities and needs in laud and buildings and in teaching equipment, as well as finances, must be taken into consideration. The development, too, need not be and probably should not be uni- form, nor should the final results be uniform either. On the con- trary there is much to be gained by a partial specialization of the future Teachers' Colleges of this state. For example, San Francisco, as well as San Jose and Los Angeles, might be developed into institu- tions primarily designed to train a high grade of kindergarten and ele- mentary teacher for the city school systems of this state; Fresno and Chico might emphasize agriculture and training for work in the consolidated county schools which should be developed under a county- unit system of school administration ; Areata might give special atten- tion to the needs of the small school, and develop a less specialized type of teacher; some one, or possibly two, of the schools should specialize on the preparation of teachers for atypical children, and of teachers for special types of education, etc. Other specializations could be worked out, from time to time, as needs, equipment, and teaching force would permit. The Committee feels strongly that the normal schools or Teachers' Colleges of this state should be parts of a broadly- conceived state system, and not a series of local and largely unrelated schools, each pursuing its own way, and that there is no need for unnecessary duplication or for uniformity. To this end the Committee recommends that the State Board of Edu- cation be given control by law over the further development and organi- THE PROBLEM OP TEACHER TRAINING. 61 zation of the uonnal schools of this state ; that it be given authority to recommend expansions in the budgets for these schools; and that it not try to develop all at the same time, or at the same speed; that it be given authority to approve specializations of the profCvSsional work; that the schools ordinarily should be advanced to three-year schools first, and to four-year institutions only as the character of the faculty and their salaries, the lil)rary and laboratory equipment at hand for collegiate work, and the needs of the situation warrant such develop- ment; and that the State Board of Education be given authority to say when such development shall warrant the granting of professional collegiate degrees. ^ To guide the State Board in this development and to supervise it there would need to be created a Commissioner for Teacher Training, as a part of the State Department of Education (Division 5), as recommended in Chapter I, page 27. ULTIMATE TEACHERS' COLLEGE CONTROL. The above development will require some time, probably six to eight 5'eare, and possibly a decade, though a beginning should be made now. When this evolution is complete we shall have a series of eight regional colleges— this counts the institution at Los Angeles, as it seems to the Committee that it should be included, unless it is to be developed into a second state university — each primarily professional in purpose, but each capable, as we shall point out in the next chapter, of serving the state as Junior Colleges and institutions of collegiate rank as well. That California will have need for this number of Teachers' Colleges, to supply the state with trained teachers, there can be little question; that each of these institutions could do Junior College work, to the mutual advantage of the communities in which they are located and to themselves, we shall point out later on ; and that a state with the future of California, possessed as it is of few private colleges,-^ could also utilize this number of institutions for collegiate work in part, there can also be but little question. By the time this development has been brought about, if not before, some very definite relationship should either be established between the State University and these colleges, or they should be given independent organization and control. The State University now is not a part of the state's school system, being provided for in a separate section (article ^The State Board of Education would thus occupy a position somewhat analogous to the Railroad Commission, granting "certificates of public convenience and necessity" as evidence of need, and ability to meet such need, could be produced. 'California's increase in population during the past decade (44.1 per cent) was exceeded by but two states in the Union. By 1930 this state should have a total population of over five millions of people, and approximately a million school children. Ohio, with a total population of but little more, contains 42 colleges and universities. The State of New York, with a population, outside of Greater New York, about equal to the present population of California, has 24 colleges and universities, not counting any in New York City or Brooklyn. 62 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. IX, section 9) of the state's Constitutidn, and not enumerated in article IX, section 6, as one of the parts of the public school system of the state. Had the provision proposed for nuiversity support been added to the Constitution by the voters at the last general election it would have increased still further the independence of the State University from both the public school system on the one hand and the Legislature on the other. The State University, as now organized, in a sense con- stitutes "a state within a state." Though not organically related to the public school system, it has in the past exercised an excessive conti-ol over the high schools, and has shown ))ut little disposition to cooperate with the normal schools. Two ])lans for future Teachers' College control liave seemed ])()ssiblo to the ('ommittee. From one point of view it has seemed to your Com- mittee that this organic separation ought before long to cease; that, the Constitution of this state should ultimately l)e so amended as to make the State University a part of the state's public school system; that the state normal schools, when developed into Teachers' Colleges, should be definitely related to the School of Education in the State University ; that the degrees conferred in all state institutions should be by authority of one common l)oard ; and that the higher education of this state should be placed in closer, cooperative relations with the public school system of the state. Just how^ this should be done the Commit- tee does not attempt to say, leaving such a relationship to the future for detailed working out. In Montana, the entire public school system, from kindergartens to universities, has been placed under the control of the State Board of Education, but the experiment has not been par- ticularly successful and the plan is not generally favored by those who have given most study to the subject. In Kansas one board for all the higher institutions was created, with still less satisfactory results. In Idaho the appointed State Commissioner of Education and the State Board of Education control all the higher institutions of the state. The whole Us W h do o .11 C5 CM ^P- O Fig. 16. Showing Proposed Reorganization of Our School System. The present public school system, including one year of Kindergarten, is 13 years long, and the University covers seven years, including the professional work, it is proposed gradually to extend the public school system two years by adding to it the thirteenth and fourteenth years of work, taking these from the University. Then, by changing the University into a group of professional schools, beginnmg at the Junior Year, general college work would end at 20 and professional work be completed at 23 or 24, thus getting the student into life work one to two years earlier than now. 5. The concentration of all graduate work, for teachers as well as for other professional lines, at the one central State University, there to be gathered the most expensive equipment in libraries, laboratories, and faculty. 6. The development in connection with the high schools of a serirr- of supplemental Junior Colleges, in addition to those in connection with ^Thirty years ago the colleges of this country went through a similar upward evolution. Then every college and state imiversity maintained a two-year Prepara- tory School, covering the present eleventh and twelfth years of the public high schools. Today practically all except a few of the church colleges have abandoned their preparatory departments, and rely upon the public and private high schools for the training of their students. 7 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. the Teachers' Colleges, at a number of well-located points in this state, these also to give Lower Division work, and their students to pass to the Teachers' Colleges or to the State University for further collegiate or professional work. 7. The present time, when the people have refused lo approve Constitutional Amendment No. 12, which proposed a large tax for the State University, and the crowded conditions there, makes this a critical time in our higher educational development, and the immediate formu- lation of a definite state policy for the future is demanded. By developing the Junior Colleges, as is recommended in this Report, a large and expensive and largely unsatisfactory development in buildings and teaching staff at Berkeley can be avoided, and Lower Division education in this state can at the same time be carried to different parts of the state and to more young people by the development of a number of smaller and less expensive units. This Committee therefore recom- mends that the Legislature, at the coming session, decide this question of state educational policy, that the lines of future development may be determined and educational and financial Avaste be avoided. ADVANTAGES OF SUCH A PLAN. The many advantages of such a comprehensive plan for the develop- ment of professional and higher education in this state will be evident. Briefly stated, they are : 1. It would relieve present and prevent a future congestion of immature young people at Berkeley, and would substitute smaller classes under closer personal supervision for the mass instruction of Lower Division students now given at the State University. 2. It would give a new spirit to the work of the Normal Schools, by introducing new subjects of study, better prepared faculties, and new groups of young people, of both sexes, who have new interests. The mutual reaction of these different groups would improve the quality of both the professional and the collegiate work, and the mingling of the different groups would serve to attract manj' to teaching who now have no opportunity to become acquainted wdth the work. 3. By carrying Junior College, and eventually collegiate instruction nearer to the homes, it would make possible the extension of a college education to a much larger number of our people. 4. It would permit of the transformation of the State University into a real university in all its parts, and of its becoming what a state university should become — a group of professional schools beginning largely at the Junior year. 5. It would enable Stanford University, which is a valuable supple- ment to the higher educational resources of this state and which must HIGH SCHOOL AND JUNIOR COLLEGE. 79 be considered as having a semi-state relationship.' also to reduce its first and second years to a preparatory status, and, hi consequence, to concentrate its resources more and more on the higher and more expen- sive types of education which the state Avill need more and more in the years to come. 6. It would ultimately provide the children of this state with an economically arranged system of public instruction, and one based on better. pedagogical grounds than tihe one we now have, as is shown in the chart given on page 77. Under such a plan our young people would practically complete their general collegiate education at twenty, instead of at twenty-two, as at present, and- be able to enter business life or professional study two years earlier than now, a saving both to themselves and to the state of no small importance. 7. While any extension of educational advantages will naturally cost additional sums, it is more than probable that the gradual development of such a state-wide plan for higher education, with less expensive units, would result in lower per capita costs, while it is certain that it would result in very much better instruction, and a much more economical utilization of equipment and the services of more capable professors. CONTROL OF SUCH DEVELOPMENT. The control of the expansion of the Normal Schools into Teachers' and Regional Colleges should be placed with the State Board of Educa- tion, as \vas outlined and stated in the preceding chapter. In cities in which State Normal Schools are located the school should take over the Junior College work from the high school, unless the State Board of Education grants permission, for good cause shown, to the city school department to continue the work or to maintain a parallel development. The development of Junior Colleges elsewhere in this state, either by the expansion of existing high schools or the foundation of union- district or county junior-college-districts, should be under the provi- sions of general state law. To this end the Committee recommends that the existing law on the subject (Section 1750& of the Political Code) be revised and expanded, and made to include, in addition to what is already required by this law, the following new provisions : 1. To prevent the formation of Junior Colleges without proper financial backing, and where not needed, the assessed valuation of the high school district required ($3,000,000) should be raised to from three to four times that amount, and a population limit also added. In the absence of carefully gathered figures, an assessed valuation of not ^Stanford University's creation by .state law and its endowment were safeguarded by the people of this state through an amendment to the State Constitution ; the trustees are required to make an annual report to the Governor of the state ; and the institution renders valuable service to the state in the training of teachers and professional leaders and without cost to the state. 80 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. less than $10,000,000 and a total population in the district of not less than 15,000 people, might well be established as a tentative minimum for new Junior Colleges. 2. Junior College districts should be organized in the same manner as are county high schools now, as provided for in section 1738 of the Political Code, and might be formed by a city school district, a coimty school district, or a union of high school districts. 3. The governing board for the Junior College should be the high school board in cities, the county board of education for county-unit Junior Colleges, and for union district Junior Colleges should be formed on some representative basis from existing high school boards. For Junior Colleges in connection with a Normal School or a Teachers' College, or the State University, the board of trustees or regents for such institution would form the board of control. 4. All courses of instruction in the Junior Colleges, as now, should be subject to general approval bj^ the State Board of Education; the courses should have the same counting value as Lower Division work at the State University; and day and evening, and cultural and voca- tional courses, should be permissible. 5. The inspection and accrediting of Junior College courses and work, as well as all high school courses and work, should be by representatives of the State Department of Education, and as a proper function of the state. To this end the State Board of Education should be directed to take over, from the State University, the high school inspecting staff and records, and give to this staff such additional service as may be needed to inspect and approve the Junior Colleges as they develop. For a time the State University might be designated to act as agent for the State Board of Education. The State University might retain a visiting relation to the high schools and Junior Colleges, if it saw fit to do so, but their official inspection, accrediting of work done, and approval of money grants is a proper state function, and should be exercised by representatives of the State Board of Education. 6. The degrees to be granted, when the Teachers Colleges have been developed, should be under the authorization of one central board. As was pointed out in the preceding chapter, this should be either the University of California, meaning thereby something larger than the institution at Berkeley, or the State Board of Education acting as a board of trustees for the Teachers' Colleges of California. When the University of California becomes an integral part of the public school system of the state, and a corporation representing the higher educa- tional interests of the state, it would be proper that it should control the conferring of degrees in all its collegiate branches. AVhen this HIGH SCHOOL AND JUNIOR COLLEGK. 81 stage of development has been reached, it may be that the separate boards of trustees for the Normal Schools eonld largely or entirely pass out of existence. Until such a transformation has been effected, though, it will be best that control remain with the State Board of Education. STATE AID FOR AND SUPPORT OF JUNIOR COLLEGE WORK. Such a development as has been sketched, covering a period of perhaps the coming decade, shoidd give to California one of the best and most satisfactory systems of secondary and higher education to be found in the United States, and one that would carry collegiate education to the young people of this state in a manner and to a degree that could not otherwise be done. The Committee feels that California has now arrived at a stage in its educational development that warrants such a further extension of educational advantages, and that the rapid growth of and the resulting congested condition at the State University makes such a development very desirable. It accordingly recommends that a begin- ning of such development be authorized now by making provision for Junior College courses in the State Normal Schools, and by a revision of the Junior College law to include the features and conditions enumer- ated above. The Committee also feels that the time has arrived, in this state, when the state should more fully assume, as it did earlier in the case of the high school development, the state's proper share in the cost of main- taining the Junior Colleges. Under Amendment No. 16 these Junior Col- leges would now be entitled to $30 of state aid for each student in average daily attendance the preceding j^ear. As the cost for maintain- ing instruction in the Junior Colleges will probably approximate the cost of Lower Division work at the State University, and as the state will not need to spend money for instruction there for all students who would have gone there and instead attend a Junior College elsewhere, it would- seem fair that the state should assume a materially larger share of the cost of Junior College instruction. The Committee therefore recommends that this be assumed, and, as a tentative basis, until experience demonstrates that other sums are more desirable, recommends that the Legislature create a separate Junior College Fund; that the state grant for Junior College students be increased to $100 per pupil in average daily attendance the preceding year ; and that this grant be contingent upon the approval of the instruc- tion as now, and the levying and expending locally of not less than $150 additional per pupil in average daily attendance.^ Pupils coming =At the University of Washington, which has one of the best cost-record systems of any American university, the cost of Freshman and Sophomore instruction has been found to be almost even $250 per student per year. &— 7769 82 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCxVTION. from high school districts not iiiaiiitainiug a Junior College, and attend- ing a Junior College maintained by a Junior-College district, a State Normal School or Teachers' College, or the State University, shall be admitted to the instruction only upon the district from which they come agreeing to pay to the Junior College receiving them $150 per pupil per year. This last provision is necessary to insure that com- munities in which state schools are located, or which do not maintain a Junior College, shall assume their proper share of the cost for Junior College instruction. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. In summary form, the findings and recommendations of the Com- mittee are as follows : — 1. California ranks with the New England states in the early interest in secondary schools, though this early interest was for a time checked by the reactionary attitude taken toward higher schools by the Consti- tution of 1879. Since 1891 the interest has grown steadily and rapidly, and today California is fairly well supplied with a high grade of second- ary schools and secondary school teachers. 2. Distinguishing features of the California high school system have been separate financing, a separate teacher's certificate required, and adequate finance. To these features are due much of the present excel- lence of the California high school system. 3. The needs of secondary education in this state consequently lie in the extension of the high school, both along vocational lines and up- ward to form Junior Colleges. 4. The new interest in higher education is world wide, and promises to be permanent. In consequence the State University, in common with colleges and universities everywhere, is crowded, and bids fair to be- come more so with time. A University attendance at Berkeley alone of 16,500 by 1930 seems proable, and of 20,000 by 1935. The c-ongrega- tion of this number in one city institution is neither wise, economical, or desirable. 5. A program for future California development, in keeping with needs in both teacher-training and collegiate expansion, involves the addition of Junior College work to the State Normal Schools, and in time the development of these into a series of regional state colleges combining teachers' college work and collegiate instruction. 6. In addition. Junior Colleges should be permitted to be developed elsewhere, and to that end a revision of the Junior College law is recom- mended. HIGH SCHOOL AND JUNIOR COLLEGE. 83 7. To finance properly such a development it is recommended that a State Junior College Fund be created, and increased state aid to com- munities maintaining Junior Colleges be granted. To the same end, all school districts not maintaining Junior Colleges and sending pupils to them should be required to contribute the cost of their education in addition to the state contribution. 8. The advantages of sneh a plan are numerous and evident. It would transform the Normal Schools into a good grade of professional and collegiate institutions and restore them once more to favor, carry collegiate education closer to the peo])le of the state, relieve a very undesirable congestion at Berkeley, and enable the State ITniversity to concentrate its work on Upper Division and graduate work of real university grade. The plan would in all probability reduce per capita costs, save large additional plant outlays at Berkeley, and better utilize both equipment and faculty. 9. During the process of such a development, the State Board of Education should be given general control, and the inspection and accrediting of both high schools and Junior Colleges should be trans- ferred from the State ITniversity to the State Board of Education. After the development has been aceomjilished, sonic type of unified control of all higher institutions should be worked out and applied, a control tliat will insure harmonious cooperation with the public school system of the state. 84 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COAxivUTTEE ON EDUCATION. Chapter V. A BETTER EQUALIZATION OF FUNDS. The Committee had neither the means at its disposal nor the time to make a full report on questions of cost. Certain facts, however, were brought out at the hearings which seem worthy of mention in a final chapter of this Report. The prime purpose in educational administration, it must always be remembered, is but to plan how to spend the money available in the most satisfactory manner. If saving money were the purpose in school work, it would be better at once to curtail all educational effort and ultimately to abandon education as a public function, leaving the pro- vision of educational opportunities to private schools and the churches. Such is neither the desire nor the purpose of our American people, and they have so expressed themselves and in no undecided manner many times since the first agitation for free public schools began. Instead, our people look upon a good education at public expense as "a productive expenditure which is not only an investment but an insurance," and for which they can not afford not to spend the needed money. The real questions are, Are we getting the largest possible returns for the money we are spending? and, Could we, by following any other plan or plans, secure even larger returns for the money we are now spending and in the future will spend? There is but one general recipe for better schools, and that is to spend more money in a better way. The hearings and the subsequent study and discussion seemed to indicate that some improvement might be made along two lines, and to these the Committee wall confine its statement in this the final chapter of its Report. They are : 1. In the substitution of the county-unit form of educational admin- istration for that of the school district. 2. In the apportionment of the state and county school funds. (a) The elementary school fund. (h) The high school fund. I. POSSIBLE COUNTY-UNIT ECONOMIES. The Committee was convinced by its study that the district system of school administration is unnecessarily expensive, in addition to being one under which progress is both slow and difficult. Still more, with the salary increases and larger maintenance costs that will follow from the increased state and county aid which Constitutional Amend- ment No. 16 will bring, the district system will become more expensive to this state in the future than it has ever been before. In Chapter II A BETTER EC^UAr.IZATION OF FUNDS. 85 we indieatid a number of the smaller unnecessary expenses which it occasions, and there stated that, on the experience of other states, writ'i's on the subject confidently assert that from one-sixth to one-fifth of t.'O teachers of a county could be dispensed with under a well organized county-unit form of school consolidation, and from one- fourth to one-third under consolidation if 3:0 better educational facil- ities were provided. Assuming this to be tlk case, it is probable that, if our schools were reorganized as county-unit schools and properly administered, as mueli as ^1,000,000 a year could be saved in this state for better purposes, as well as the time and services of some 10,000 minor school officials, who after all are not needed. The Committee would not have anyone infer that if this were done the expense for education in this state could, in consequence, be reduced $1,000,000. Such a change would necessarily have to be gradual, and the money saved would be at once called to meet the educational needs of a constantly increasing school population. What would be accom« plished would be a better use of the money at hand, and the cost, when the schools were reorganized under the county-unit plan, would be $1,000,000 or so less than it would have been under the district system. A number of studies, both in California and elsewhere, bear out this belief. Confining our statements to California, we would cite seven county reorganization surveys made by graduate students at Stanford University, under the direction of Professor Cubberley. These were careful studies, upon which each student spent a year of personal investigation, and at the close formulated a report in writing. These reports were typewritten, bound, and are in the Stanford University library. To these the Committee has had access. The first of the reports made was considered so good a study of the type of educational reorganization needed in our counties that it was accepted for publica- tion by the United States Commissioner of Education, and issued as a public document.^ The other studies were similar, and covered the counties of Sonoma, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Orange, and Riverside. These counties represent quite different educational conditions, and are fairly typical of reorganization possibilities in tRis state. Each graduate student working on the problem visited every school in the county, studied the roads and distances and the natural com- munity boundaries, calculated the transportation routes needed, obtained cost figures at the county court house, and planned, under direction, an educational reorganization of the schools of the county under a county-unit form of government, with consolidated schools where possible. He also provided in the reorganization for a better and 'Williams, J. Harold. "Reorganizing a County System of Rural Schools." Bulletin No. 16, 1916, of the United States Bureau of Education. 52 pages. Washington, 1916. 86' REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. a more efficient type of school system, with longer terms, uniform teachers' salaries, better supervision, and general high-school advan- tages. Even after doing this, and often providing transportation routes for small numbers of children, the costs for the much superior county-unit school System frequently were less than for the existing district system. As these studies were made in 1915 and 1916, repre- sent pre-war costs and salary schedules, and were mostly based on horse- drawn transportation wagons, the differences in favor of reorganization now, with salaries based on Amendment 16 appropriations and auto- mobile transportation, would be considera])ly more marked than those calculated even a few years ago. For five of the counties the figures were worked out with much care, and they show the following results : TABLE III. Showing Results of County-Reorganization Studies in California. (Data for the year 1915-16.) County Sonoma Matec Santa Clara Santa Cruz Orange Number school districts Number one-room schools Consolidation data- Possible centers Schools not possible to 147 115 32 . 4 37 23 13 84 40 28 2 346 310 -36 $548,570 475,900 54 45 15 5 141 1.S9 50 11 21 5+ 5* Teachers needed— Before consolidation After consolidation - - 280 211 —69 $33,3,759 299,729 130 107 —23 $218,099 199,575 247 224 Change after reorganization. Cost for two plans- Cost preceding year Cost after reorganization- —2 —23 $209,426 i $482,595 246,302 396,612 Gain or loss in costf —$34,080 —$18,523 -$72,670 -}-$36,876** !— $85,951 *Five schools could not be consolidated, and five 2 to 3 teacher schools were left as they were as being satisfactory. **The increased cost h!*re was largely due to a 40 per cent increase in salary this investi- gator thought was necessary for all teachers in the county, and to the difficulty of transportation in a mountainous county at that time without hard roads. f.\ resurvey of these same counties, excepting San Mateo, where the investigator provided for automobile transportation and larger school units, made today with the better roads and the larger school units now possible, would result in further decreases in number of consolidating centers, larger schools, fever teachers, and larger differences in costs. II. APPORTIONING THE ELEMENTAY SCHOOL FUND. Under existing laws both the state school fund and tax and the county school tax are apportioned on the combined basis of the num- ber of teachers needed, as determined by an artificial method, and the number of pupils in average daily attendance during the preceding school year. Instead of determining the number of teachers needed by the number actually employed, as is done in practically all other states using a teacher basis for the apportionment of funds, the number of teachers supposed to be needed in California is determined, for A BETTER EQUALIZATION OF FUNDS. 87 each county, by the county superintendent of schools by allowing each school district one teacher for every 35 pupils in average daily attend- ance the preceding year, or fraction of 35 not less than 10. This num- ber is reported to the Superintendent of Public Instruction and forms the basis for the teacher apportionments made by the state to the counties, and by the counties to the districts. The state grant, in the past, when the total state aid set aside by law recjuired to equal $17.50 ])er pupil in average daily attendance in the vState, was at the rate of $350 per teacher so determined, and the county grant was at the rate of $800 per teacher on the same basis. Constitutional Amendment No. 16 has raised the state grant froni $17.50 to $30 per pupil, and the minimum county tax has similarly been increased to an amount not less than that received from the state. The effect of such a basis of apportionment, under the old law, as it relates to the teacher quota part, is shown in Table IV on page eighty-eight. From this it will be seen that the total number of teachers so calculated for the state was 13,401, and the number actually employed was 15,319. This gives a ratio of employment to the calculated num- ber of 114.3 per cent ; that is, for every 100 teachers calculated as needed there were employed, averaged over the state, 114.3. The table shows, for each county, the number calculated as needed for the school year 1919-20, the number that should have been employed on the state ratio, the number actually emplo^^'ed this same year, and the gain or loss. An inspection of the table shows that, when we balance the city counties, with their many special teachers, against the more rural count- ties Avith their complete lack of any such special instruction, it is the rural counties that lose under this arrangement. It also works distinctly against good education in our small schools. Eight grades, every one recognizes, are too many for one teacher. The cities easily, due to numbers, specialize their instruction so that no teacher handles more than one grade, and seldom more than an average daily attendance of 35 children. Due to the many schools and classes, it is easy in the city to shift any surplus to some other room and teacher. The rural school, however, must maintain a yearly average daily attendance of 45 children before it can be allotted funds for a second teacher, though the need for a division of the grades between two teachers is great. A yearly average daily attendance of 45 children means an enrollment of 50 to 55 children — a number entirely too large for one teacher to handle. The result is that the crowded rural school is forced to get along with one teacher, because the burden for an additional teacher would fall entirely on the district. The effect of the present teacher apportionment plan is to penalize the rm-al coiinties, and to make poorer than necessary the schools that REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. TABLE IV. Showing Relation of Teachers Allowed to Teachers Employed. (Data for 1919-20.) County Number of teachers On state ratio Employed Employed The State Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino . San Diego San Francisco ... rfan Joaquin San Luis Obispo. Sau Mateo Santa Barbara .. Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus Sutter Tehama _. -.. Trinity -. Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba 13,401 1, 114.3% 195.7 ! 1,366.6 3.0 3.5 56.2 64.2 151.0 172.6 54.3 62.0 50.4 57.2 244.3 278.9 19.0 22.7 59.9 ! 68.4 654.1 724.6 69.9 80.0 202.0 230.1 178.0 203.5 36.0 41.1 291.0 : 332.6 115.3 ! 131.4 40.6 46.6 53.0 60.6 ,007.4 3,438.3 86.2 98.5 106.3 121.5 31.1 ; 35.4 158.0 : 180.6 137.1 156.8 49.0 55.9 8.0 1 9.2 155.3 177.2 87.4 99.8 66.0 75.4 257.7 294.4 m.9 114.0 33.C 37.6 218.8 250.2 332.2 379.5 51.8 59.2 302.1 345.1 400.0 457.2 .347.0 l..S'^9.6 3;^.5 380.8 138.0 157.7 170.0 194.3 160.7 183.6 398.1 4.55.1 122.8 140.4 121.0 138.3 14.0 16.0 IfM.O 153.1 130.3 148.4 278.7 318.4 220.4 255.4 52.0 59.4 83.3 95.2 25.0 28.4 308.6 352.8 51.1 58.5 133.2 152.2 81.1 92.6 59.0 66.3 15,319 1,419 3 59 166 56 57 280 21 60 667 79 224 211 41 330 122 42 59 3,641 92 119 31 162 149 54 9 154 89 68 324 98 38 255 434 50 359 479 1,579 352 152 183 190 422 138 122 17 136 135 290 231 02 95 27 322 52 162 Ffi 65 .5 5.2 6.6 j 6.0 j .2 .1 1.7 8.4 57.4 1.0 6.1 .1 V.5 2.6 9.4 4.6 1.6 .196.3 6.5 2.5 4.4 18.6 7.8 1.9 .2 23.2 10.8 7.4 16.0 9.2 13.9 21.8 39.4 27.8 7.7 11.3 1.. i 6.4 all .. 2.4 .. 16.3 .. 1 1.0 17.1 13.4 28.4 24.4 2.6 .2 1.4 30.8 6.5 9.8 6.6 1.3 A BETTER EQUALIZATION" OF FUNDS. 89 supply education to our country' boys and girls. This condition will be further aggravated as a result of the adoption of Amendment 16. Were the basis of apportionments changed from such an artificial method for calculating teachers needed to records of actual emplojinent, many crowded one-teacher schools would at once add a second teacher, and small town schools would add some of that special instruction which the cities today even."where enjoy, but which is now almost entirely absent from our town and rural schools. This would tend to a better equalization of educational advantages throughout the state, and the Committee recommends that such a change in basis be made. "With the larger funds that will be available under the provisions of Amendment 16, it has seemed to the Committee that other items than teachers and attendance should be included in making both the state and county apportionment of funds. It is wise state policy to place as many premiums on local effort as can be done. To stimulate a community to new educational activity is more important than reduc- ing its taxes. To that end, the state, in apportioning funds to the counties, and the counties to the districts while we retain the district system, should place as many "baits" in the law for local school improvement as may be needed. Some of those that might well be added, it has seemed to the Committee, in addition to the employment of extra teachers for the rural schools which would be covered by the change in basis for calculating teacher apportionments, are: The con- solidation of schools : the emplo^Tnent of supervising principals for each school, with time free for supervision ; the employment of school nurses : and a premium on longer school terms. The state fund, under the provisions cf Amendment 16, will be almost doubled, and hence the apportionments under the present law will be almost doubled. Instead of doing this the Committee would suggest amending the law. after some such plan as the following, as the basis upon which the state school fund should in future be apportioned to the counties : $ for every full-time teacher - actually employed in a day or evening elementary school or kindergarten, and to include special teachers, school nurses, and parental school teachers. $ for every such half-time teacher, or full-time teacher em- ployed for half the school year. $ additional for every teacher employed in the seventh, eighth, or ninth grades and teaching under a departmental or inter- mediate form of organization. $ additional for every supervising principal employed who has at least half his time free for school supervision, and for every city or county special-subject supervisor. The amounts to be apportioned per teacher are left blank, subject to determination later on. after careful calculations have been made. 90 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. The remainder of the fund to be apportioned on the basis of the average daily attendance of pupils. After the money has reached the counties, and while retaining the district system of school administration, the above grants to be doubled in making the county apportionment to the districts. After the county-unit has been put into force, both state and county funds to be divided between any separate city school districts in the county, and the county school district, on the above bases. In addition, in apportioning the county fund, the following additional items to be added : $ for every full-time attendance officer employed. $ for every school physician employed. $ for every regular transportation route maintained' to carry pupils from an abandoned district school to a consolidated or union school, when the contracts for such are as provided for by general regulation of the State Board of Education, ancl have been approved by the county superintendent of schools. $1.50 per day per teacher for all time taught each j^ear beyond 160 days. The State Board of Education to lie given power to define, by general rule, the conditions under which the above grants are to be made. Some such basis as the above, the Committee feels, would not only be more equitable than the present apportionment law, but would do much to stimulate our counties and school districts, outside of the cities, to desirable new activity that would be of much value to education in this state. The Committee accordingly recommends that such a change be made in the existing state and county apportionment laws. In keeping with the above provision, relating to length of school term, the Committee further recommends that section 1859 of the Political Code be amended to make the minimum term of school in this state eight, instead of six months.* III. APPORTIONMENT OF HIGH SCHOOL FUNDS. When we pass from the apportionment of funds for elementary schools to the apportionment of funds for high schools we find a more satisfactory condition, though the California plan seems to the Com- mittee to have one defect which ought to be remedied. Under existing laws the state high school fund is divided into two portions, one of one- third, and one of two-thirds. The one-third part is apportioned equally to all the high schools of the state, regardless of size, and at present ^This item would of cour.se disappear after the institution of tlie county unit, as all county school funds would be in one budget. ^Tliis would involve but little addition, even with the district system, as nearly all schools now run 7^ to 8 months. Under the county-unit plan a uniform term of 8 to 9 months ought to become general A BKTTKR EQITAIJZATION Of FUNDS. 91 amounts to about $1,100 a year per school.' The two-thirds part is apportioned to the higli schools of the state on the basis of the average daily attendance in each the preceding year, and amounts to approxi- mately $10 per pui)il. Tlieso amounts i^o, thi'ou^li tlie county treasurer, to the individual high schools for which they were allotted. Under the provisions of Constitutional Amendment 16, increasing the state aid to be so apportioned from $15 to $30 per pupil in average daily attendance, these grants under existing law will he d(»ul)l('d in tlie future. A county high school tax must also be levied to supplement the sums received from the state, the minimum levy of which is $00 per pupil in average daily attendance. The basis for the apportionment of this county tax is somewhat different, being $250 per teacher employed, up to a maximum of four teachers, and the balance on average daily attendance alone. This practically apportions all the county high school fund to the high schools on the basis of their average daily attendance the preceding year. While the number of pu})ils in a high school is perhaps a somewhat more important factor in maintenance costs than in elementary educa- tion, the Committee, nevertheless, feels that it is given far too much importance in the California apportionment plan. It places entirely too much of a premium on pupil attendance, and neglects the more important factors of unit costs for maintenance, teachers employed, and expense of different courses provided. After the establishment of a high school, which in itself represents a continuing administrative unit of cOvSt, the real unit of further cost is not so much the addition of more pupils as the addition of more teachers. The present apportion- ment plan offers no incentive whatever to communities maintaining high schools to put in additional teachers or to broaden the courses of instruction in their high schools to meet the needs of different classes of pupils and the changing needs of modern life. Rather it places a premium on conservatism and inaction. The school with a few teachers receives too much ; the school with an adequate teaching staff and a broad curriculum too little. This may be seen from the follow- ing table, which has been calculated on the basis of the doubled appor- tionment that will follow for the future, and on perhaps a conservative estimate as to maintenance costs. The last column, showing what per-, centage 'of the estimated cost the new state apportionment on the old •"'This sum has been slowly increasing' since it was fii-st pro\ided for. In 1911-12 it amounted to .$794.78; by 1916-17 it had increased to $1,022.88; and for 1919-20 it was $1,108. .38. After applying tiie doubled sum provided for by Amendment 16 it would be about $2,22.^1, and with the county grant for 4 teachers per .school would amount to about $3,22.5. Under the revised plan proposed it would always be $2,000, with a new teacher grant added which would vary with the number of teachers employed. 92 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. basis will provide, shows the penalty it would place on supplying an adequate teaching staff for any size of school. The cheapest thing for a community to do, Table V shows, is to pro- vide as meager a four-year course of instruction as possible. Up to an average daily attendance of 50 or 60 pupils, the requirements of the state will be met by maintaining book-stud}^ instruction, with two or three overworked teachers employed. The languages, history, English, TABLE V. APPORTIONMENT OF HIGH SCHOOL FUN DS— PRESENT PLAN. Showing the Value of the State Aid, as It Will Be If the Present High School Apportiorment Law Remains Unchanged. Value of State Grants for Different Sizes of High Schools. School Average daily attendance Number of teachers employed Estimated cost for maintenance state aid received Per School grant at $2,200 Av. daily attendance grant at $20 Total state grant cent of cost paid A B C D E r G 25 2 3 4 2 3 4 5 3 4 5 6 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 14 20 22 25 40 50 $7,500 9,000 10,500 8,000 9,500 11, ceo 12,500 101,000 12,.500 10,000 18,000 13,000 16,500 20,000 23,000 25,000 29,000 32',000 35,000 55,000 59,000 65,0CO 110.000 130,000 $2,200 $500 $2,700 36 30 26 50 2', 200 1,000 3,200 40 34 29 1 25 75 2,200 1,500 3,700 37 30 2.^ 20 ICO 2.20O 2,000 4,200 32 26 21 18 250 2,2O0i 5,000 7,200 29 25 22 20 * 500' 2:,20O 10,000 12,200 22 20 19 1,000 2,200 20,000 22,200 20 16 mathematics, and a little science will answer, and be at the same time relatively cheap. A room, a stove, some desks, a few books, and a teacher will meet the requirements for instruction. The case of schools B, C, D or E, in the above table, when employing the lowest number of teachers, will illustrate such a condition. The state here pays the maximum percentage for support, and the school gives in return the minimum quality of education. Still more, the state offers no incentive to such a community ever to remedy such a situation. A BETTER EQUALIZATION OF FUNDS. 93 After experimenting with a number of different calculations, and trying to derive fractional quotas based on an estimate of the present nuinl)cr of schools, teachers, pupils, and funds, the Committee finally worked out a plan of unit grants, similar to that recommended for elementary schools, which gave the best results, when reduced to a table, of any tliat were worked out. Table VI, showing the working of the revised plan for the same group of high schools, gives the result, and a comparison of the percentage of total cost paid by the state grants, TABLE VL APPORTIONMENT OF HIGH SCHOOL FUN DS— REVISED PLAN. Showing the Value of the State Aid, As It Would Be If the Apportionment Law Were Revised As Is Suggested In This Chapter. Value of State Grant for Different Sizes of High Schools. Avfirage Number of daily teachers ittendancei employed 25 50 75 100 250 50O l.OOO Estimated cost for maintenance $7,500 9,000 10',50O 8,000 9,500 11,000 12,500 laooo 12,500 16,0CO 18,000 13,000 16,500 20.C03' 2'3,CC0 25,000 29,000 32',000 35,000 55,000 50,000 65,000 110, COO 130,000 state aid received School grant at $1,000 Teacher grants at $30n to $100 $1,000 1,000 1,000- 1,0C0 1,COO 1,OCO 1,000 $600 900 1,200 60O <5C0 1,200 1,500 900 1,200 1,SC0 1,700 1,200 1,500 1,700 1,900 2,1C0 2, .5001 2,700 2,900 3,500 3,700 4,000 5,500 6,500 Av. daily attendance grant at $13 $325 650 £75 1,300 a2'50 6,500 13,000 Total state grant $1,926 2,225 2,525 2,250 2,550 2,850 3,150 2,875 3,175 3,475 3,675 3,500 3,800 4,000 4,200 6,.350 6,7.50 6,950 7,150 11,000 11,200 11,500 19,500 21,500 Per cent of cost paid 26 24 21 28 27 26 25 29 25 22 20 27 23 20 18 27 24 22 20 20 19 18 18 16 under the two plans (comparing the last column of each), for any school and teaching staff on the list, will show how much more ecjuitable the new plan would be than to continue on the old basis. The new plan, as worked out, is based on the following items and amounts : 1. A uniform school cpota to all schools, regardless of size, of $1,000 a year. 94 REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. 2. A teacher grant, to be given on records of actual full-time employment, and one-half grants for one-half-time teachers or teachers emploj'ed for one-half the year, as follows : (a) For the first five teachers employed, $300 each per year. (b) For the second five teachers employed, $200 each per year. (c) For all additional teachers employed up to .40, or a total of 50 teachers per school, $100 each per year. No teacher quota for more than 50 teachers in any school. 3. All remaining money, after setting aside the above school and teacher quotas, to be apportioned to the different high schools on the basis of their average daily attendance the preceding year. This amount had to be estimated, and on the basis of probable funds was calculated would be about $13.00 per pupil per year. 4. All state grants to be duplicated in making the county appor- tionments before making any distribution on average daily attendance. Such an apportionment plan the Committee believes would be a decided improvement over the one now in use, because it places a pre- mium on the two most desirable factors in good school work — teachei's and attendance, recognizes unit administration costs, and is far more equitable than the present plan. If a still better plan can be worked out, well and good, but if not, the Committee recommends that the Legislature revise the present apportionment plan to make it eml)0(ly the above principles and conditions. The Committee also can see no reason why the plan in use for apportioning the county high school tax should not embody the same principles, and accordingly recommends that it be also revised to require a duplication of the state school and teacher quota grants before apportioning any of the funds on average daily attendance. As the county high school tax must not be less than $60 per pupil in average daily attendance in the high schools of the county the preceding year, instead of $30 as with the state funds, this would still leave a liberal fund remaining for apportionment on the average daily attendance basis. Assuming that both state and county apportionments are made on the plan here submitted, each school would receive from the state and county funds combined a unit grant as a school of $2,000 ; a grant of $600 per teacher for the first five, $400 per teacher for the next five, and $200 per teacher for all additional teachers up to a total of 50; with a further grant for each pupil in average daily attendance which would vary with the productiveness of the county high school tax, but whicli would probal)ly range between $80 and $40 per pupil. A BETTKR EQUALIZATION OF FUNDS. 95 IV. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. In summary form the findings and recommendations of the Committee are as follows: 1. The prime purpose in educational administration i.s to spend the money at hand in the most intelligent manner possible. 2. Perhaps a million dollars a year could be saved by a substitution of county-unit oroanization for the district system, this sum to be applied in providing more and better schools. 3. The plans now in use for apportioning both state and county funds, and both elementary and high school funds, are in need of revision to provide a more equitable distribution of the money and to stimulate conservative communities to new educational activity. 4. The adoption of Amendment 16, greatly increasing the state aid for education, practically necessitates a revision of both the elementary and high school apportionment laws. 5. Plans for such revisions are given, and it is recommended that the present Legislature so revise both the elementary school and the high school apportionment laws. 96 report op legislative committee on education. Appendix. SUMMARY OF NEEDED LEGISLATION. To put the reeommeudations of the preceding pa<,'es of this Report into effect the following legislation will be needed : I. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS. 1. State Superintendent of Public IiLstruction ; abolition of the ofli'' A rewording of article IX, section 2 of the state Constitution, as oui lined on page 24. 2. County Superintendent of Schools; change from election to appointment by a county board of education. A rewording of article IX. section 3, of tlu' State Constitution, as outlined on page 51. II. NEW LAWS. OR REVISION OF EXISTING LAWS. 1. A County-riiit L;i\v, ;is dfscrilxMl on pages 44-50. 2. A law for the gradual expansion of the Normal Schools of the state into Teachers' Colleges, under the control of the State Board of Education, as described on pages 59-63. 3. A revision of the teachers' certification laws, as indicated on pages 64-65. 4. Revision of the Junior College Law (section 1750&, Political Code), to embody the suggestions contained on pages 79-81. 5. Revision of the Apportionment Law (sections 1532 and 1858 of the Political Code) for elementary school funds, as suggested on pages 89-90. 6. Revision of the Apportionment Law (sections 1760-1764 of the Political Code) for high school funds, as suggested on pages 93-94. 7. Amendment of section 1859 of the Political Code, as recommended on page 90, to cliange the miuimnin term of school from six to eight montlis. 121 tiM LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 021 494 754 7