¿
N.
OO
(O
Cr，
I
-->
B
ichigan —
ity of Vl
ivers
Un
3 9015 OO327 g
§§
§§§
ĢģĞğ
§§žģż?
§§§§::::::：::::
:::：:：:
§§§§štº§§§§§§§§§-§§§§
、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、。- …*-§§§§§§§§§
§§§§§§§§§§-Tºraes！！！&*--§§§§§§§§§§
-§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
§§§§§
º
#
§
。-~
šķērſºšā~--~--~±±·™*：|-§§
§§§:35,-··-----§-3-*.*¿¿.*
3）№-§§§§§§§§§§§§|-。
-§§•.-----§§§§§§
·*«&&*）?$\！！！！！ș，5） --（.* -----* ¿ş§§§§§§§§
§§§§§§§§§
**************、、。--
§№
¿
§
###!
§
#
}}:{j
|
•、
jº
3 is
:::::::
#
t;
3
º:
4-i's

Iºd.
§§ſ '
‘2’snoe. As
| Z *
S.123;PIAI
“so. 3 p.mojAe D
N
8031
A
ſ—
º
Jº-
}}|||||||||I/IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
-
TTTTTTTTTTIſ:
GAN
rth
10H
t
#S.
$|
--Tº-
*ºtº-ºº:
--~~~~
%
}}]·· · ·
ſ
Å
}}\\-
\ſiÈųIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII[[]
§§§§§§
Ķī£?.
§:
§§§§§?
§§
≤
§§§
×
§§$$$$$$
（§§§5
§§
¿

/ A-
3 || O
State of Minnesota GENERAL LIRR
Public Education Commission.
FEB1719
Report to the Governor
December 1, 1914
Prepared and Published by the Commission.
A s

/?/4.
RY
c 3 ſc [] . .
State of Minnesota, Public Education Commission
z-
LA
3 O
, A3
| 9 |4.
Report to the Governor
DECEMBER 1, 1914
f
Prepared and Published by the Commission.
Usſuessrry of MICHIGAN
GENERAL LIBRARY
| At
3 /O
A3
14//
The Public Education Commission was created by act of the leg-
islature of 1913 to consist of seven members.
The Governor
appointed the following persons to serve:
W. G. Crosby, Duluth
J. A. DuBois, Sauk Center.
J. A. Hartigan, St. Paul.
Marie Lovsnes, Ada.
C. G. Schulz, St. Paul.
W. F. Webster, Minneapolis.
W. D. Willard, Mankato.
TO A. O. EBERHART,
Governor of Minnesota.
Sir :
I have the honor to submit to you the report of the Public Edu-
cation Commission as directed by act of the Legislature.
W. D. WILLARD,
Chairman.
December 1, 1914.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Letter of Transmittal to the Governor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-9
General Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12
Administration and Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
A. State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B. Local . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-12
Taxation . . . . . tº e º e s ∈ e º ºs e º s tº e º & e º e º e º 'º e º e º s is s is a s g º e º e º 'º e º 4 c & e 12
General Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-26
Principal Conclusions Reached . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
The State System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '• * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 14
The Normal Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
The High School Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
The Library Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Schools for Deaf and Blind. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
The University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Local Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
The Rural School Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
The Uneconomical District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Rural School Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *e e e e s e e s s e 17
Rural School Ideals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
The County Unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-20
A New Common School District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Local School Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Advantages of the Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Training of Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-21
Better Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Product of the Normals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
High School Training Course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
School Funds and State Aid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21-26
Distribution of School Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Effective Distribution of Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Efficiency and Salaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Efficiency and Attendance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Adjustment of State Apportionment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Adjustment of State Aid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Vocational Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Equitable Adjustment, the guiding rule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Recormmendations (State Aid) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-26
Rural School Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Consolidated School Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Graded School Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘. . . . . . . . . . . 26
High School Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Teacher Training Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Industrial Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Library Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27-32
Findings of Rural School Commission. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-28
Statistical Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Table I—Relation of Valuation and Taxation to Cost of Instruction. . 29
Table II—Relation of State Support to Total Cost of Maintenance... 30
Table III—Attendance and Salaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table IV—Relation of Enrollment per School to Attendance and Cost 31
Table V–Increase in Number of Schools Enrolling Less Than
TWenty Pupils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . © tº e s tº e º e g º e s º º e º 32
PREFACE.
At the annual meeting of the Minnesota Educational Association in St.
Paul in December, 1912, the following resolution was adopted:
“Resolved, that the committee on legislation be instructed to present to
the legislature at its next regular session a bill providing for the appointment
of a state School commission whose work shall be to study carefully the pres-
ent public School situation in Minnesota and to report a revised school code,
and a plan Whereby the parts of the public school system and the institutions
representing the same will be brought into close and intelligent relationship,
and whereby economy and efficiency in educational work in the state will be
effected, and that general constructive legislation for the schools of the
state be deferred until such time as this committee shall have reported.”
Just before adjournment the legislature the following winter passed a
bill authorizing an education commission of seven members. Within a month
the Governor appointed W. G. Crosby, Attorney, Duluth; J. A. DuBois, Physi-
cian, Sauk Center; John A. Hartigan, President of the Farm Mortgage Bond
Company, St. Paul; Marie Lovsnes, County Superintendent of Schools, Ada;
C. G. Schulz, State Superintendent; W. F. Webster, Principal of the East
High School, Minneapolis; W. D. Willard, Cashier of First National Bank,
Mankato. Early in June the Commission met and organized by electing W.
D. Willard chairman. Raymond A. Kent, superintendent of city schools,
Winona, Was chosen secretary. The Commission has held more than twenty
Tmonthly meetings and numerous conferences.
The work of the Commission extended over a limited field only. This
field was fairly well defined in the statute creating the Commission, and
includes state and local administration and Supervision of public education,
state and local support, and the relation of state support to public education.
The Commission decided not to enter upon a study of the methods of school
work or the content of the course of study. The general method of procedure
was to hold monthly meetings of the Commission to consider data pertaining
to the fields above mentioned. In the intervening time the secretary worked
on such matters as the Commission directed.
In everything undertaken, all Work was based as far as possible upon
original material. Data Was collected almost entirely from the fields and
institutions concerned. For example, the assessed valuation and special
school tax rate in mills for each district in the state for the year 1912-1913
was obtained directly from the county auditors of the several counties of the
state. From these figures Was Computed the amount of money raised by the
several districts, instead of taking these latter figures from reports. Informa-
tion regarding the amount distributed by the state in all kinds of special aid
and also in apportionment funds Was taken directly from records in the office
of the state superintendent. In finding the cost of high school education in
the several departments the reports made by the several high schools of the
state to the state high School inspector were furnished the Commission by
Mr. Aiton, high school inspector. Here again, the figures in these original
reports were the basis on Which the special state aid was distributed. In
ascertaining the distribution of classes taught by the several instructors in
these departments and the division of the time of the same instructor between
the work of two departments, lengthy correspondence was carried on with
the superintendents of the schools involved.
7
In determining the general effects of state aid upon education, rural
schools were first taken up. The Commission realized at once that it Would
be impossible to collect the necessary data for the seven thousand rural
schools in the state. The method therefore must be one of Selection. Four-
teen counties which were judged to represent fairly conditions in the entire
state were selected. These counties were Carlton, Dodge, Douglas, Fill-
more, Hubbard, Isanti, Kittson, Meeker, Norman, Pipestone, St. Louis,
Scott, Watonwan, and Wilkin. (The location of these counties is shown
by the map on page 10.) Information was then sought concerning eVery
rural school in these fourteen counties. The total number of districts Which
it was possible to include by reason of the data secured, numbered 1011.
These 1011 districts served as a basis for all the work and all the Specific
computations and conclusions of the Commission in the rural School field. In
the field of high and graded schools information Was sought from every One
of such districts. There were in the year considered 216 high schools and
217 graded schools on the state list. The Commission was able to secure
data. So that it could use 197 high schools and 206 graded schools in these com-
putations and conclusions.
In working out the data thus collected, in order to find the effect upon
school conditions of the money given by the state, two methods Were used.
The first one is called the “concurrent deviation method.” This was used
only as a trial or check method. The second One, Whose, results Served as
the basis for all conclusions drawn in this field, is the Karl Pearson coeffi-
cient of correlation.
Throughout the work experts in the several fields were consulted. E.
Dana. Durand, of the State University, late Director of the Bureau of U. S.
Census, assisted in classifying the data gathered for the rural schools.
Edward L. Thorndike, of Columbia University, and Willford I. King, of Wis-
Consin University, gave valuable suggestions in the statistical work under-
taken and pursued. George D. Strayer, of Columbia University, Edward C.
Elliott, of Wisconsin University, and David Snedden, Commissioner of Edu-
Cation for Massachusetts, rendered valuable assistance regarding definite pro-
posals for legislation.
The legal part of the work has been handled by Mr. Stanley B. Houck,
under the direct supervision of the Commission. The method here pursued
has been to consider very carefully each chapter of the law after it had been
drawn up in technical accordance with the provisions previously adopted.
The aim of this method has been to secure a bill in a form which would be
as non-technical as possible, simple, easily understood, and which would
include all of the provisions, both those which the Commission proposes, and
those now on the statutes, concerning public education.
At every step of the Work effort has been made to confer with institutions
and individuals particularly interested. When the matter of state organiza-
tion and administration was under consideration a joint conference was held
with the Normal School Board and with a committee representing the Board
of Regents of the State University. The conference resulted in a clear
understanding between the Commission and these two boards in regard to
the creation of a state board of education such as the Commission proposes.
Soon after the Commission began its work Governor Eberhart appointed
the State Economy and Efficiency Commission. Mr. J. A. Hartigan was named
as one of this commission, and Was later appointed chairman of their Educa-
8
tion Committee. Subsequently, several conferences were held between the
Education Committee of the Economy and Efficiency Commission and the
Education Commission as a whole, as well as between the entire Efficiency
Commission and representatives of the Education Commission, with the
result that those matters which came under the consideration of both com-
missions were thoroughly discussed and understood by both bodies, and the
reports Submitted by these representative bodies agree in every point.
From the beginning the Commission has desired publicity in all its pro-
ceedings and has worked toward that end. Not only have interested indi-
viduals been consulted, but the public also has been informed through the
press of the work which has been under consideration. As soon as an agree-
ment was reached upon the measures covering State organization and admin-
istration, the proposals were printed in a bulletin. This bulletin, with an
accompanying explanatory letter, has been sent to every newspaper in the
state, with the request that publicity of the facts contained in the bulletin
and editorial comment upon the same be made. Furthermore, this bulletin
was sent to every school board in the state and to all superintendents and
principals. After the Commission had agreed upon the proposals concerning
state aid, a preliminary report was issued in which was included the recom-
mendations concerning state aid and a second draft of the proposals concern-
ing state organization and administration. This preliminary report was in
turn distributed to school officers, school administrators, commercial organiza-
tions, women’s clubs, farm clubs, and to the public press. A series of ten
letters embodying the proposals of the Commission for re-organization of
the public schools has been sent to Some four hundred newspapers of the
state. In addition, the Commission has given hearings to all making request
to present any matter pertaining to education in which they were interested.
In conclusion it may be fairly said that an honest attempt has been made
to combine successfully two elements and make from them a harmonious
product. These two elements represent on the one hand the ideas and
desires of the public concerning education, and on the other hand that opin-
ion which results from patient study and investigation.
COOK
*
ROSEAU '; g
47/3 AP &-
| 2 C.
* g.
| BELTRAM) ſº-U^
^44. KOOCHICH ING
3% 44.9/?
•zc
2 % ST LOUIS
º LAKE
/73AP
ITAS CA % C 44
‘gº | *g Ž% Z//
A ſy g 6-
"7% MAHNOMEN ~ Af
º”
% *%g HUBEARD | CASS
& Zº
CLAY 8ECKER *34. A*3%
A/OAP A/2 Ap 26 3
G.
% 2. § 32// 8// ATKIN
3/ & Zy
WADENA CROW WING
OTTER TAIL zºg 4. CARLTON
WILM/A/ *4. A & 3.
72 ºr A// * g W ºf 3 º
3% 266/? £g. A //
7% %3 A /y PINE
3 % TODD
42/7 MILLE LAC5 ſo; g
GRANTT55JET`s- 3% MORRISON | 64/7 RANABEC 3 G
TRAVERS: 657/7 Sº AP A/ *gg º % 5.3/? 3//
43Zº #% C 3% ºf "Ee
2% Ay % 4%
3% º; POPE STEARNS BE §3.
AP A G. |SANTI CHISAGO
B16 3% 43 *gg A38 º Aſ Ay 63 AP !
# || 33 | }} # * iº. Tº
Ay
SWIF2 AP |KANDIYOH! 3 Aug. 3%
% C MEEKER %2f WASH
3. zoº. 4 |&gº "º, 32&
tººles. % 3. 3% 34: &A' Hºſo/P
*4% *% 2 // A/ 7& ſty. * #| ?
Gr
2 // A // Mg LEOD (CARVER % Af
RENVILLE zzg | 6
YELLOW MEDICINE /O//? £344 ſº 43 & AKOTA
& #% & **/º
LINCOLN |Lyon A/ G SIBLEY %: $%
72/' | 6.9/7 RED WOOD
#% Aſ C /07 AP LESUEUR GOOD HUB.
Af 2& Z NICOLLET AſO4% Wº RICE A644 AP
4// %3 G- 23 *gg Z % wºgs
3 & EROWN agg Ay 3%, Ay 25 §
PPESTONEMURRAY |CUTTONWO90 Jº Jºy B. Jº WASECA STEELE DODGE |OLMSTED *WNona
6% 47*gg *; |WATONWAN % & M2 432 747/7 | Zag G. *% º
% | #3 ||37 |* | *% |*| #| ##| 3% 4%
ROCK NOBLES JACKSON MARTIN FRIEAULTTFºrgon ouston
7//p 4'03, ſº AO4% Af //7/7 Æ22 AP Zºº AP "#2 "; "º AP
% #3 3/y .3 & % % #3; % 47 &
3% 3 ſy 32/ 4// 7// 3A/
ber
The above map of Minnesota, shows the counties and the number of pub-
lic Schools of the several classes in each county. R indicates rural schools,
C, consolidated schools, G, graded schools, and H, high schools.
cases a consolidated school may be also a graded or a high school.
of Schools of each class is:
Rural, 8,024; Consolidated, 80; Graded, 227; High, 216.
The number of grade schools in connection with each high School system
is not shown.
In some
The num-


GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
The following is a summary of the general recommendations made and
the changes in the plan of administration and support as the Commission
proposes them:
I. ADM IN | STRATION AND CONTROL.
A—STATE.
1. A State Board of Education—to replace the following boards and to exer-
cise all powers and duties now vested in these boards: (a) High
School Board; (b) Normal School Board; (c) State Library Com-
mission; (d) Board for the special schools for the deaf and blind.
Composition, etc.—Composed of seven members, appointed by the
governor, confirmed by the Senate, to serve for a term of six years.
Compensation, actual expenses and a per diem of $10 for time
actually Consumed in public service.
State Superintendent of Education, chosen by the Board to be its
executive Officer.
2. A Council of Education—composed of fourteen members—the State Board
of Education and the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota.
Duties of Council.—To meet at stated intervals to discuss matters
Of COmmon Concern and to prepare and Submit to the Governor the edu-
cational budget.
B—LOCAL.
1. By School District of three classes as at present, Special, Independent,
and Common.
Definition.—Special districts shall be those in the three cities of
first class, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth.
Independent districts shall include those now organized as inde-
pendent or special districts which contain a village, or a city not of
the first class, and independent districts which may hereafter be Organ-
ized.
Common districts shall contain all of the area in each County not
included in a special or an independent district, such area to constitute
one common district for each county, and to be administered by One
board.
2. School Boards.-Special districts shall be governed by the special laws
under which they are at present organized, and by their respective
boards without change.
Independent Districts shall be administered by a board of five
members, rather than six as at present, elected by the legal school
electors (men and women) of the district, at an annual school election
held the first Saturday in June, to serve for a term of three years each.
Common Districts shall be administered by a board of three mem-
bers elected by the legal School electors (men and women) of the Com-
mon district at large at an annual school election held the first Satur-
day in June, to serve for a term of three years each.
Powers and Duties of School Boards—Independent and Common.
(a) General management and control of public schools in their
respective districts; (b) Direction of tax levy for maintenance of pub-
lic schools; (c) *Issuance of bonds for sites, buildings, and equipment,
in an amount not to exceed two per cent of the assessed realty valua-
tion; (d) Employment of and making contracts with teachers, super-
visors, attendance officers, janitors; fixing the salaries of the said
servants; (e) Choosing of a superintendent for a fixed term, or with-
out term, as the executive officer of the school board.
NOTE: The school board of a common district shall in the man-
ner above indicated, choose a superintendent corresponding to the
present county Superintendent of schools.
11
3. The Minimum School Year shall be seven months instead of five, as at
present.
4. The minimum number of days attendance necessary to share in the in-
come on the permanent school fund shall be one hundred, instead of
forty days, as at present.
5. Annual School Election shall be on the first Saturday in June, in place
of the third Saturday in July.
Nomination for election on the school board to be by petition of at
least twenty-five electors, all such petitions to be filed with the clerk
of the school board at least fifteen days previous to the school election.
Ballots to be prepared, printed, and distributed by the clerk.
New Board to organize on or before the Third Saturday in June.
6. The County Treasurer shall be the treasurer of the common district.
7. Treasurer of independent district shall be elected by the school board
either from, or outside of, the board.
*A petition of ten per cent of the voters of a district may require the
Submitting of all bonding questions to a vote of the district. When the bond
issue exceeds two per cent of the assessed valuation the bond issue must be
decided by vote.
II. TAXATION.
The present plan of support provides on the part of the State: 1. A levy
of one mill, which is added to the income on the permanent school fund, and
termed “the current school fund.” This is paid to School districts on the
basis of forty days of attendance by each pupil between the ages of five and
twenty-one years; 2. Annual aid to the several classes of public Schools
(high, graded, consolidated, and rural) and to special departments (industrial
and teacher training.)
IT IS PROPOSED:
(a) To separate the state tax from the income on the permanent
school fund.
(b) To pay the income on the permanent school fund on the basis
Of the number of “scholars” attending school at leaSt One hundred days.
(c) To convert the district one-mill tax into a state one-mill tax
and combine this with the present state one-mill tax.
(d) To pay the proceeds of the state two-mill tax on two different
bases—one-half on the aggregate attendance in days by “scholars,” and
one-half on the basis of teachers’ salaries, counting no annual salary of
less than $400 and counting annual salaries in excess of $1,000 as $1,000.
(e) It is proposed to readjust the annual aid to the several classes
of schools and to the several special departments in accordance with
the plan outlined on pages 25 and 26.
GENERAL REPORT.
The interest which now most concerns Minnesota is the educa-
tion of its children. In general, half the public revenues, both state
and local, are devoted to it. In quantity of effort, in quality of
work, in standards of equipment, in the total of accomplishment,
Minnesota is easily among the leading states. Its invested school
fund is not approached by that of any other state.
In the supervision of public education, the state rightly takes
the leading part. It is only so that the guarantee of a common school
education which is essential to citizenship among a free people can
12
be maintained. The state, with the co-operation of the local com-
munity, and not the local community alone, furnishes a competent
agency.
It is furthermore the state’s duty to see that the guarantee of a
common school education to every child and the opportunity of fur-
ther schooling to those who can profit by it shall not be denied by
the narrowness or backwardness of any community where it may
happen that the standards generally prevailing in the state do not
obtain.
In recent years many experiments have been made in teaching
method, in subjects taught, in schemes of school organization, in
school support. The results, it is conceded, have been mainly bene-
ficial. Nevertheless, no deliberate attempt has been made until now to
measure their usefulness. At the same time, the country over, all
things educational have been subject to challenge. The purposes,
the means, the methods, the relative values, the sufficiency and the
framework of educational institutions in the nation, the state, and in
every community, have béen studied and debated by school men and
laymen as never before. -
In answer to the demand for a general review of Minnesota's
educational system, in the light of this universal agitation, and with
particular reference to the experimental measures adopted from
time to time by the state, the Education Commission was created by
the legislature in 1913, and was instructed to report December 1,
1914.
Agreeable to the duty imposed upon it by law, the Commission
has undertaken a study of the efficiency of the present organization
of the state school system, including the educational institutions
maintained by the state and the supervision of the public schools, the
efficiency of the local district organization, the efficiency of state aid
to public schools, and the efficiency of the teaching organizations so
far as it is determined by the state’s activity.
Principal Conclusions Reached.—From its studies and the in-
formation brought to it, the Commission comes to these conclusions:
State administration should be unified;
Rural school districts must be strengthened;
More trained teachers are needed;
State aid to schools should be re-adjusted.
These conclusions have been reduced to plans which are, in the
judgment of the Commission, a practical embodiment of the experi-
ence of teachers and school men, the observation of experts in other
states and in all states, and the common sense of laymen. For con-
13
sideration of the legislature, these plans have been formulated in a
bill, prepared under the direction of the Commission, which is made
a supplement to this report.
Besides the provisions for carrying these conclusions into effect,
the bill is a revision of existing law. It reconciles inconsistencies,
omits needless particulars, and very much abbreviates the language.
In many matters relating to school district procedure, school man-
agement, certification of teachers, standards of state aid and the like,
it lays down general rules to be worked out in its discretion by the
state board of education.
THE STATE SYSTEM.
The state deals with the entire educational field. It maintains
the university, it encourages the secondary schools, it requires com-
mon schools everywhere within its jurisdiction. From the beginning
the state has supervised common school education and assumed exclu-
sive control of the university. It furnishes training for teachers. It
has undertaken to standardize secondary education and to promote
vocational courses.
The Normal Board.—As the system has been built up piece by
piece, various agencies have been employed. Training of teachers is
handled in three ways. The normal schools are under a board of
directors, the institutes and summer schools are under the state
Superintendent, and the high school training departments are under
the high school board. When the normal schools were first estab-
lished their conduct was assigned to the normal school board. It is
conceded that this board, by the ability, earnestness, and special
interest of its members, has quickened the development of normal
schools and has given special emphasis to the value of training for
teaching.
While the schools were in their formative period there was much
to be said in favor of an independent board to administer them.
Now, however, the identification of the normals with the state school
system is more to be sought than their independence of it. An adjust-
ment that will bring them into direct contact at every point with
the general educational problem and completely attach them to other
units of educational administration is most to be desired.
The High School Board.—Some thirty years ago the secondary
schools were the weak link in the educational chain. To meet the
situation a grant was made from the state treasury of $400 to each
high school which should conform to certain modest requirements.
The award of this special aid, limited to $20,000 a year, was entrusted
to a provisional board at first composed of the governor, the presi-
14
dent of the state university, and the state superintendent, and after-
wards modified to consist of the president of the university, the state
superintendent, the president of the normal school board, and two
other persons. The high schools long ago overcame their feebleness
and crudeness and are now strongly established. State aid to high
schools has increased thirty-fold from that timid tentative allowance.
Thus abundantly justified, state aid has been extended to graded
schools, to rural schools and to schools of all degrees that maintain
special courses. The administration of aid to rural and consolidated
schools has been assigned to the state superintendent; of aid to high
schools, graded schools, and special courses, to the high school board.
This body administers vastly increased state funds yet is not in-
tegrated with the state educational administration.
The Library Commission.—More recently the importance of li-
braries as a factor in education has been recognized. They are
no longer treated as casual auxiliaries of school apparatus. Ap-
proved school library lists are now prepared by the high school
board. Circulating libraries are managed by the state library com-
mission. The fact has developed that both of these functions are
closely related to the conduct of the public schools.
Schools for Deaf and Blind.—The schools for the deaf and blind
are educational institutions maintained by the state. Formerly
associated with the school for the feeble minded, these schools are
now conducted by a special board under the supervision of the Board
of Control.
In all these arrangements the fault is repeated that co-ordina-
tion is lacking. There should be one administration of the state
school system, instead of several. The Education Commission rec-
ommends that a state board of education be created to take the place
of the normal board, the high school board, the library commission,
and the board of directors of the schools for the deaf and the blind.
THE UNIVERSITY.
The Board of Regents.—The status of the University is fixed
by the constitution, Article VIII, Section 4. The clause that estab-
lishes the University is commonly held to perpetuate the Board of
Regents as the body corporate controlling it. To avoid constitu-
tional difficulties, if for no other reason, its administration is left to
this board.
RECOMMENDATIONS.
State Board of Education.—Seven members, appointed by the governor,
confirmed by senate; overlapping six-year terms—entire control of state de-
partment of education, public schools, libraries, normal schools, and special
schools.
15
Superintendent of Education.—Elected by board—executive officer for
board of education. |
Board of Regents of the University.—Seven members, appointed by gov-
ernor, confirmed by senate; overlapping six-year terms—entire control of
University and its branches.
President of University, elected by Regents—executive officer for Uni-
Versity.
Council of Education.—Joint meeting of state board of education and
board of regents for discussion of common concerns and for the preparation
of the educational budget.
LOCAI, ADMINISTRATION.
Rural, graded, and high schools are governed by local school
boards, chosen by their districts. It is not proposed to diminish this
local control of the schools.
There are three classes of districts. Forty districts, organized
under special laws, are known as special districts. About four hun-
dred districts having high or graded schools constitute independent
districts. About seven thousand are common school districts, often
referred to as rural school districts.
There are also consolidated schools, associated schools, districts
comprising ten or more townships, and unorganized districts. These
phases of organization have been authorized to fulfill special pur-
poses or to meet peculiar situations.
A plan of local school government is sought that will be simple
and uniform, yet flexible enough to meet all the purposes and fulfill
all the needs for which those special devices are provided.
The Rural School Problem.—Approximately one-half the school
population of the state is found in the rural districts. In 1913 the
total enrollment in the state was 448,982, of which 218,007, or 48.4
per cent, was in rural schools. The true proportion is somewhat
higher, since many pupils from rural districts attend graded and
high schools; and further, since more children of school age are kept
out of school in rural districts than in cities and villages.
All agree that the rural school problem most demands consid-
eration. It is there the inexperienced teacher is most frequently
found. It is there that supervision is least. It is there that build-
ings are most often inadequate. It is there, if anywhere, that finan-
cial support is withheld. It is there that ordinary comforts are most
often absent. It is there that janitor service is casual or lacking.
It is there that the children of a community sometimes grow up with
no opportunity for receiving an English education. It is there, be-
cause of distances and difficulties, that enrollment is but partial, and
attendance is least regular.
16
The Uneconomical District.—Progress in educational methods
and advancement in standards of equipment make the comparatively
large school unit increasingly economical. Yet while the large dis-
trict offers many distinct advantages the number of small schools
shows a rapid increase. g
The number of schools having less than ten pupils increased in
ten years (1903-1912) from 189 to 373. The number having between
ten and twenty increased in the same ten years from 1,205 to 1,916.
Almost one-third of the rural schools in Minnesota are too small for
economy.
The small districts are usually financially weak. They cannot
have good buildings nor employ the best teachers. Uncomfortable
rooms and poor instruction result in poor attendance. So that not
only what is given the children is inferior, but they are not present
to get the little that is offered them. Table No. IV in the appendix
giving the main figures for 1,185 schools in 1,011 districts shows
conclusively that in the small schools the people pay a higher tax
rate for a smaller educational return. In the smaller schools the
pupils get less schooling measured in the average number of days
attendance. Fewer of them qualify for apportionment and the cost
for each pupil counted in the apportionment is treble or quadruple
that in the larger schools. The teaching cost in the smaller schools,
measured by the number of days’ instruction given to pupils, is
double or even three or four times as much as in the larger schools.
Taking the good rural schools with the poor, the average cost
for each day for each pupil is 22.9 cents. The average for each pupil
per day in the graded schools is 22.98 cents. The average for each
high school pupil per day is 24.3 cents. In general it costs nearly
the same in rural schools as in graded schools for every day’s in-
struction given a pupil. It costs the rural schools almost as much
as it does the well equipped high schools. The average cost, then,
in all rural schools, good and poor, on the basis of attendance, is as
much as in city and village schools with their better facilities and
more complete organization, while in the poorest schools the cost is
actually higher for inferior teaching.
Rural School Supervision.—Better teaching is the great need of
the rural schools. Better supervision is the key to better teaching.
Competent supervision brings out the best in a teacher, strengthens
the teachers who are capable of better work, weeds out the incom-
petent. Needing supervision most, the rural schools get it least.
The district provides no supervision. State supervision of rural
schools, except of those in the consolidated districts, is negligible.
17
County supervision is slight. Distances are so great, Schools are so
scattered, the staff is so limited, the supervision in general is so in-
direct, that it cannot be effective. At best it is far from the con-
tinuous, day-by-day supervision given teachers in village and city
schools.
Inadequate in quantity, county supervision of schools is often
unsatisfactory in quality. While popular election is the appropriate
method of choosing representatives, it is not a suitable process for
choosing persons for positions requiring special training. Village
and city districts get the best school superintendent they can find
anywhere. Rural districts must take what is offered them. The
county superintendent is never better than could have been chosen
by a committee of the citizens; he is often not as good. Conditions
are such that at best the county superintendent is not able to give
the rural schools the same sort of supervision that is provided in
village and city districts. At the poorest, his service is a negative
quantity or even a detriment.
Rural School Ideals.-The child in the rural district is entitled
to as good a school as the child in the village or city. Instruction in
the rural schools ought to be as good as anywhere in the state. Su-
pervision of rural schools ought to be as effective as supervision any-
where. -
The rural school ought not to be a copy of the city or village
school. It should be equal in equipment, teaching and supervision;
better in adaptation to purpose than it now is.
The rural school should offer every child on the farm a com-
plete common school education, and should bring to all who can
profit by it the opportunities of the high school and the vocational
COUITSéS.
This is not an empty ideal. Examples of what may be accom-
plished by associated management and supervision are found in
consolidated schools and in associated districts. A complete and
state-wide plan for organization of local school government will
give to every district the advantages which are now available to a
few. *
THE COUNTY UNIT.
A New Common School District.—Strong districts can be made
by the union of weaker ones. Experience proves it. In counties
where consolidated districts or “unorganized” districts are estab-
lished, there is a manifest tendency to extend the plan gradually
over the territory not included in village and city areas, although
this tendency is retarded by the necessity of negotiation and adjust-
18
ment of boundaries. By judicious legislation these hindrances may
be removed at once, and a foundation may be laid in every county
on which the people can build as high as they please.
This advantage is offered by the proposed common school dis-
trict, embracing all the area in each county not included in an in-
dependent or special district. This common school district will be
governed by a school board elected by the people of the whole dis-
trict, just as the school board is elected in a city or village. The
rural Schools will be managed by a superintendent chosen by the
rural board, as city or village schools are superintended by a person
chosen by the city school board.
Local School Areas.-It will not be necessary to gather all the
children of a common school district into one building, any more than
it is necesasry to gather all the children of a city or village district
into one building. It will not be necessary to close a single school
house that serves a useful purpose. The common school board will
decide in each case whether it is more economical, considering actual
cost and teaching results, to take the children to the school or to
bring the school to the children.
These local schools, corresponding largely to the present dis-
tricts, may be for the youngest children or for all the children of
the neighborhood. They will be like the districts into which cities
and villages are divided.
In each of these local school areas the people will elect one
trustee. He will represent the people of the local area in the con-
duct of the school. He will see that the needs are supplied and that
the school is properly maintained. He will assist in the adjustment
of grievances. He will aid the board in the larger district to carry
out its policies.
Advantages of the Plan.--This plan will put into operation over
the whole state, as fast as it is practicable, the benefits of the con-
solidated schools. It will not involve the abandonment of any schools
now maintained until the people desire it. It retains in the hands of
the people the control of their schools. It retains in each neighbor-
hood a voice in the school management.
It offers from the start supervision of the rural schools equal to
that given anywhere. It leads to the employment in all schools of
the best teachers obtainable. It sweeps aside the obstacles which
hinder the formation of consolidated schools.
It will enable every community to have schools just as good in
construction and equipment as it is willing to pay for. It will enable
19
the districts to be better financed, more equitably taxed. It will re-
lieve the poorest districts without unduly burdening any.
In addition to better supervision and better teachers, in addition
to the opportunity to establish complete common school courses and
high schools where they are needed, these common school districts
will bring social advantages—lectures, entertainments, contests,
clubs, co-operative enterprises, community meetings.
Their influence will be seen in checking the tendency to crowd
the cities. They will be an important instrument in the develop-
ment of country life on the happiest and most prosperous lines.
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Special Districts.--To be retained without change in the three largest
cities only.
Independent Districts.-The present independent districts and all but the
three large special districts; governed by a board of five members elected
by the district; no other material change.
Common School Districts.--All the territory in each county not included
in the independent or special districts; governed by board of three members
elected one each year, by the district.
Superinterident of the Common School District chosen by the board to
take the place of the county superintendent.
County Treasurer to be Treasurer of the common school district.
Local School Area as sub-district of the common school district in place
of existing Small districts; supervised by local trustee elected by the voters
in that local area.
TRAINING OF TEACHERS.
Better Teaching.—More trained teachers is, by common consent,
the greatest need of the schools. There are not enough trained
teachers to be had. The normal schools cannot turn out graduates
fast enough. The average teaching service is less than five years.
The rural schools take perhaps two thousand new teachers a year.
Product of the Normals.-While the number of teachers in rural
schools having first grade certificates has largely increased in the
last ten years, the graduates of the normal schools, broadly speak-
ing, do not occupy that field. The gap cannot be filled by the simple
expedient of increasing the number of normal schools. The normal
schools graduate about six hundred teachers a year. Independent
and special districts absorb fully that number and the requirement
of a normal diploma or college degree is so general that there is no
likelihood the demand bm, the normals will be relaxed. Moreover, so
long as teaching is a temporary shift for the majority, they cannot
be persuaded to put a long time in professional training. However
imperative the normal course may be upon those who are turning
20
|
seriously to teaching, most of the teaching is being done by young
people whom the normal schools do not and cannot reach.
High School Training Course.—The most successful device for
bridging this gap so far is the one-year training course in connec-
tion with the high schools. It is by no means a substitute for the
normal course but it does turn out graduates with at least elemen-
tary training for teaching who would otherwise have none. Begin-
ning with thirteen of these training departments in 1905, there were
in 1913 eighty, and in the last school year, one hundred six. The
number completing the course last June was 1,129, of whom 969 were
recommended for first grade certificates and 160 for second grade
certificates.
These training departments in high schools are in the way of
developing to a point where it will not be necessary for any rural
school to do without a trained teacher.
Recognizing the place of a one-year course in the training of
teachers for rural schools, it is provided at much less expense to the
state through the agency of the high schools than at the normals.
It is also much less expensive for the pupils. It accomplishes its pur-
pose as shown in the rapid increase in the number of these depart-
ments and in their enrollment.
The state now reimburses the high schools that maintain these
departments for their actual expense up to $1,000 each for salary
and certain incidental expenses. These departments should be
strengthened. Teachers of superior ability command more than
$1,000. To train the teachers on whom the country schools must
chiefly depend, the best should be available. As far as it goes, their
training should be equal to that given in the normal schools. Where
the classes are large enough to warrant it, one assistant, and in some
places, two assistants, should be engaged in the training depart-
ments. f
RECOMMENDATIONS.
State support of teacher training departments in high schools—for the
principal not to exceed $1,200; for the entire department not to exceed $3,000.
SCHOOL FUNDS AND STATE AID,
Minnesota's permanent school fund, to which no other state has
anything comparable, is now in round figures, $25,000,000, and is
expected to reach $100,000,000, or even $200,000,000, from the sale
of school lands and timber and the royalties on iron ore. The in-
come is approximately $1,000,000 a year. Under the constitution
this income is apportioned according to the number of scholars in
each district. Scholars are, by provision of law, those who have
21
attended school at least forty days, in a school that has been kept
open at least five months.
The state adds to the current school fund for distribution in the
same way, the proceeds of a one-mill tax, which now yields above
$1,250,000 a year.
The local one-mill tax, required by the state, is distributed lo-
cally without passing through the state treasury.
State aid to schools for special purposes, now amounting to
$2,000,000 a year, is distinct from the school funds and is given from
the general revenue fund.
Distribution of School Fund.—The income of the trust fund be-
longs to the children. It is their inheritance. The mode of appor-
tionment provided in the constitution, taking no account of the com-
parative merits of the schools, is suitable to an inheritance. One
fundamental condition, however, has changed in the last generation.
Forty days attendance at school does not satisfy present day ideas
of what constitutes schooling. The minimum should be advanced to
agree with prevailing standards.
The distribution of the state one-mill tax and the application of
the local one-mill tax do not, on the other hand, at all answer their
purpose. State taxes for the support of local schools are levied
either to equalize the burden or to provide a stimulus. The local
one-mill tax has no appreciable influence in either of these direc-
tions. The apportioned school fund, in which the state one-mill tax
is an item, is not adjusted to these ends.
The state school apportionment does not equalize the burden.
There are poor districts that tax themselves heavily. There are
richer districts that tax themselves lightly. Neither more nor less
is allotted from this fund for necessity or affluence. So far from
equalizing the burden, it may increase the inequality. It may serve
—and has done so—where a district is unwilling to do its share, as
a substitute for local taxation, instead of a supplement to it.
The apportionment does not act as a stimulus. From an analysis
of school expenditures and accomplishments it does not appear that
the apportionment affects the quality of the teaching or the support
of schools. No relation can be traced from it to the amount raised
by taxation, the scale of teachers’ salaries or the resulting educa-
tional product. It enables a willing district, it is true, to do more;
but it furnishes no incentive to the unwilling district.
If that is true of the apportioned school fund, it applies still
more to the local one-mill tax which is little more than a matter of
bookkeeping.
22
Effective Distribution of Funds.-Blanket equality of school
taxation is not to be attempted. Each community should be respon-
sible for its own performance. Substantially each community should
have what it is willing to pay for. Inequalities in the burden of
supporting the schools are to be corrected through the apportioned
school fund only in a limited way. At least it ought not to be a
bonus to civic indolence. It ought to take into account the willing-
ness and ability of the districts to help themselves.
This can be accomplished by adding the one-mill local tax to
the one-mill state tax and fixing new conditions for the distribution.
This will not alter the total raised for the support of the schools
and will but slightly affect the amount to be raised by each district,
and that in the direction of equality. The trust fund income, it is
agreed, should be applied on a per capita basis; the proceeds of this
augmented state school tax should be distributed on a basis that
takes into account the results accomplished.
Efficiency and Salaries.—One measure of efficiency is the salary
scale. Good teachers make good schools. To allot one-half the state
school tax in proportion to the amount paid teachers for wages will
furnish an incentive to employ capable teachers. If less than a rea-
sonable salary is offered, either the teacher is not competent or she
is paid less than she is worth. One is an imposition on the children,
the other is an imposition on the teacher. In order to prevent a pre-
mium upon unfairness, no allowance should be made in the calcula-
tion for any salary less than a reasonable minimum—say $50 a
month or $400 a year.
Efficiency and Attendance.—The surest sign of school efficiency
is attendance. Good teachers interest the children. Children who
are interested do not try to stay away from school; they beg to go.
To allot the remaining one-half of the state school tax in proportion
to the number of days’ attendance will furnish a premium to the
schools that do the best work. The state’s award will be measured
by the service actually rendered. And though the loss of schooling
is far more serious than a deduction from the apportionment, this
may possibly spur some parents to insist on their children going to
school in communities where money value is more appreciated than
the other sort. The benefit will go to the children as the state in-
tends. Instruction that is delivered to the children, and only then,
is profitable to the state.
In an analysis of the situation in fourteen typical counties the
figures show that there is a relation between salaries and attendance.
23
In schools where higher salaries are paid the attendance as a rule
is more regular and the enrollment larger. The following table il-
lustrates this relation:
County. Ave. Salary. Ave. Annual Attendance.
Carlton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50.15 110.5 days
St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64.50 117.6 days
Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.00 105.75 days
Hubbard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45.66 90.3 days
Fillmore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45.84 94.94 days
Norman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49.70 88.06 days
This plan does not penalize the small schools. They are, in fact,
penalized by being too small for economy. Under the district or-
ganization proposed, only those small schools will be retained which
serve a useful purpose; and attendance in those should be as regu-
lar as in any other.
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Adjustment of State Apportionment: e Q
Income of trust funds—continue on per capita basis; raise minimum
to one hundred days attendance.
Proceeds of one-mill state tax and one-mill local tax to be combined.
One-half to be distributed on the basis of teachers’ salaries with
condition noted; one-half to be distributed on basis of total days
attendance.
ADJUSTMENT OF STATE AID.
Special aid to schools is granted from the general treasury to
encourage excellence above the minimum requirements, to promote
special courses, and to compensate districts for assuming voluntary
burdens for the general benefit. The policy is firmly established.
High school aid, graded school aid, semi-graded and rural school
aid is given for maintaining standards above the minimum.
Aid for maintaining agricultural courses and manual training
and domestic science is a premium for furnishing special facilities.
Aid for training teachers has already been discussed as properly a
state function, carried out through local agency.
In either case, the asignment to particular schools or districts
of moneys raised by taxation of the entire state is justified on the
ground that the entire state is benefitted or that, like the state school
tax, it furnishes an incentive or equalizes the burden.
Vocational Aid. — In considering special aid for vocational
courses, the place given to commercial training parallel to that given
agriculture, manual training, and domestic science, is recognized.
In each case the compensation proposed is based on the ordinary
salary of teachers competent for those courses.
Equitable Adjustment, the Guiding Rule.—The amount for each
purpose should be governed primarily by the cost assumed by the
24 |
district. It should be modified by the principle of equalization of
the burden. Money should not be taken from one district, which
may be taxing itself to the limit, to be given to another which is
hardly doing its fair share toward the support of its own schools or
which is so fortunately situated that a trifling tax rate is sufficient
for the maintenance of its schools. On the other hand, additional
aid may well be awarded to districts that must tax themselves ex-
cessively to provide the ordinary school facilities.
From a study of fourteen typical counties, it appears that the
tax rate in rural districts averages 5.68 mills on the assessed valua-
tion. In graded school districts and high school districts it is 21.33
mills. From these figures the conclusion is drawn that rural dis-
tricts where the local school levy is less than five mills are either so
fortunate in assessed valuation that special aid given them would
impose an inequality on less fortunate districts, or else are so far
from bearing their own burdens that it would be an injustice to
lighten them at the expense of other districts.
The further conclusion is drawn that districts where the local
levy is above fifteen mills are either so limited in their means that
additional aid may be given them in the interest of the whole, or
else they are doing so much that special recognition is due them.
These modifications are therefore applied in the following rec-
ommendations:
RECOMIMIENDATIONS.
STATE AID.
RURAL SCHOOL AID.
Class “A” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $150
Class “B” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
This aid Will be granted to each rural school which complies with the
requirements, Within the several school areas of the common district.
Requirements for Class “A”—8 months terms, teacher with first-grade
certificate.
Requirements for Class “B”—8 months term, teacher with at least
second-grade certificate.
TWO-teacher or three-teacher rural school will receive annual aid based
On length of term and grade of certificate held by each teacher.
Rural Schools will not be classified as semi-graded for the purpose
of receiving annual aid.
CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL Al D.
Class “A” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000
Class “B” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500
Maximum annual aid to any school for trans-
portation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,000
State aid for building, one-fourth of the cost
up to an allowance of..................... 2,000
#y
These are to be the minimum amounts awarded to consolidated
schools during the first year for which aid is granted. The actual
amount of aid during any year will be determined by the cost of trans-
portation which will be computed on the basis of the daily cost per
mile per pupil.
GRADED SCHOOL AID.
Minimum Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 600
Additional aid for each graded teacher in excess
of four, including the principal as one of the
four . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Additional aid for each high school teacher. . . . 250
Maximum aid for a graded school. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,300
HIGH SCHOOL AID.
Minimum aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,800
Additional Aid will be granted rural schools, graded schools, and high
schools, provided that the tax levy for maintenance in the district
exceeds fifteen mills. The state will pay one-third of the excess cost
above fifteen mills until the aid for:
Class “A” Rural Schools reaches. ... . . . . . . . . . . . $ 225
Class “B” Rural Schools reaches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Graded Schools reaches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,800
High Schools reaches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,500
No school district will receive annual aid for any school of any class
unless the tax levy for maintenance exceeds five mills in the district.
TEACHERS’ TRAINING AID.
For principal teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,200
For assistant teachers, each. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900
Maximum aid for training departments. . . . . . . . . 3,000
(To any school).
|NDUSTRIAL AID.
For Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,250
For Home Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750
For Manual Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750
For Commercial Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750
Industrial aid is granted for each industrial department instead of re-
quiring a group of industrial departments in order to receive any part
of the industrial aid.
Industrial aid shall not exceed the amount paid annually for salaries
of industrial teachers.
LIBRARY Al D.
For each teacher, annually. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10
Maximum to any building. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
This aid is granted on condition that the school district makes an ex-
penditure for library purposes of not less than the library aid.
26
APPENDIX.
FINDINGS OF RURAL SCHOOL COMMISSION.
An independent investigation of the rural school problem was made be-
ginning last April by the Rural School Commission appointed by the Minne-
sota Educational Association, of which Mr. Forest Henry of Dover, who has
for many years been connected with the Farmers’ Institute service, was
chairman, and Miss Frances P. Lapham, of Caledonia, a rural teacher of
wide experience and for a number of years superintendent of Schools of
Houston County, was secretary. The other members of this Commission
Were :
Mrs. Bernice H. Irwin, Station F., Minneapolis;
Mr. J. F. Ingersoll, Crookston;
Mr. A. O. Nelson, Svea.
This Commission conducted its inquiry through superintendents and pa-
trons of rural schools and by personal interrogation.
It concludes that there has been great improvement in rural schools in
the last ten years. A larger proportion of the teachers are trained. In one
county, for example, the proportion of teachers having first grade certificates
has grown from twenty per cent to seventy. Still the needs recognized
everywhere as greatest are trained teachers and better supervision. Teach-
ers are wanted who are trained for country schools—not trained away from
them.
It is the consensus of opinion of this rural school commission that the
consolidated schools meet the rural school problem and the rural community
needs at the largest number of points and it is notable that the individual
reports embraced in the summary that recite marked improvements are
usually those that describe consolidated School districts.
The Commission summarized its findings as follows:
1. From the gist we find that although better teachers is the greatest
need, the better teachers are also given Credit for the great progress achieved
by the rural Schools.
In most communities where there is a lack of good rural schools, it is
not so much the indifference nor the opposition of the people, but some ag-
gravated misunderstanding which develops into a neighborhood quarrel.
This will ultimately work out and rural schools will come into their own.
2. That there is a great need of teachers especially trained for the
rural Schools. &
3. That since one of the greatest factors in the progress and efficiency
in the rural School has been the introduction of industrial work, agriculture,
domestic science and manual training, more and better opportunities for the
teachers to prepare for these special lines of work be provided in all sum-
mer schools as well as in normal and training schools.
That this work in rural schools be stimulated by contests, exhibits, en-
tertainments, noon lunches, demonstrations, Special day exercises, clubs in
and out of school, så far as possible.
4. Every child in the state of Minnesota has an unquestioned right to
equal school privileges regardless of wealth, social position or location.
That the State Aid at present only reaches the schools best able to help
themselves, and that the most needy schools not able to meet requirements
for aid are taxed to help the more fortunate, the county unit should be used
as a basis for taxation for school purposes and that the finances, length of
term, kind of teacher, etc., be in the hands of a county board of education,
elected at the annual school meeting, and consisting of one member from
27
each commissioner district, leaving each district intact for the details of its
OWn management.
5. That consolidation has been an unqualified success in nearly every
case and that it should be encouraged by every possible means at command,
Wherever conditions are such as to make it practicable.
6. Finally, this Commission has found that the rural schools have bet-
ter sanitation, better grading, better attendance, longer school year, better
Co-Operation, broader and more practical knowledge, better and more libra-
ries, more free text books, more attractive school rooms, better buildings,
more state aid, higher salaries, better teachers, better supervision, the train-
ing of the hand through industrial work, domestic science, agriculture,
manual training, better morals, and more loyal friends than ever before.
STATISTICAI, TABLES.
EXPLANATORY NOTES.
TJnless otherwise indicated, these figures and those in the tables follow-
ing apply to the school year 1912-1913. The Commission began its work in
the summer of 1913; therefore the data for the school year 1912-1913 were
the latest then available.
The sources from which the data for these computations were obtained
were: (1) annual reports of county superintendents to Department of Edu-
cation; (2) briefs on file in the office of the Tax Commission; (3) certified
statements from county auditors; and (4) records on file in the office of the
Superintendent of Education.
ENRO LLM ENT IN–
High School districts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196,752–43.8%
Graded school districts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,223— 7.8%
Rural School districts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218,007–48.4%
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448,982—100%
Proportion of high school pupils to total enrollment in high
School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22.65%
Proportion of expenditures for high school maintenance in
districts without special departments receiving State aid
to expenditures for maintenance of elementary School... 27.1 %
ATTEN DANCE.
Total days attendance in high school districts. . . . . . 30,571,941—53%
Total days attendance in graded school districts. . . . 5,131,076–8.9%
Total days attendance in rural school districts. . . . . . 21,865,741—38.1%
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....57,568,758–100%
28
TABLE I.
RELATION OF VALUATION AND TAXATION TO COST OF
INSTRUCTION.
Assesed valuation Average special tax rate Average expense in cents
COUNTY per pupil enrolled in mills per day of attendance
Rural High & Graded Rural High Graded Rural High Graded
1. Carlton . . . $1,067 $ 1,677 16. 12.2 39.2 23.5 22.8 28.1
2. Hubbard ... 1,577 816 16.03 21. tº e e 25.25 18.7 tº tº º
3. Kittson ... 3,099 1,134 6.04 25. 12.2 30.42 26.5 26.1
4. Norman . . . 2,217 1,127 5.34 28. 16.7 20.5 26.9 24.4
5. St. Louis . . 4,369 10,585 16.5 11.5 28.1 40. 81.8 5.2.1
6. Douglas ... 1,663 1,249 6. 19.1 12.2 17.7 27.8 17.7
7. Isanti . . . . .1,133 859 7.5 27.7 25.6 15.2 21.6 30.
8. Meeker . . . 2,426 1,229 5.27 19.9 13.6 19.08 25.9 24.8
9. Scott . . . . . . 2,427 1,483 4.13 18.8 s e e 21.33 29.8 37.6
10. Wilkin . . . . 3,489 1,112 7. 33.8 25.9 31.6 29.3 G G is
11. Dodge . . . . . 2,666 1,073 5.44 21.9 15.3 22.5 27.76 17.8
12. Fillmore . . . 2,728 996 5.6 26.8 19.7 24.08 25.3 20.9
13. Pipestone . 3,294 1,163 5.6
3.5
.62 23. 23.5 26.3 27.1 28.2
3 19. 17. 20.33 21.6 18.6
1
4
. Watonwan 3,317 1,212
VALUATION PER ENROLLED PUPIL FOR ENTIRE STATE.
High School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,186
Graded School districts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,269
Rural school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,995
AVERAGE SPECIAL TAX RATE IN M ILLS FOR ENTIRE STATE.
High School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.24
Graded school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.39
Rural School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 5.94
AVERAGE EXPENSE EACH DAY OF ATTEN DANCE PER PUPIL FOR
ENTIRE DAY.
High School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.3 c
Graded school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sº e º 'º e º a e s e e º e s e e s e e e e s e s e º e e 22.98c
Rural School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22.7 C
29
TABLE II.
RELATION OF STATE SUPPORT TO TOTAL COST OF MAINTENANCE.
(State Support is the sum of annual aid and apportionment.)
*—
te support each Annual cost per pupil en- Per cent of state sup-
consay *:::::::::: * **ś" "wº
Rural High Graded Rural High Graded Rural High Graded
Ct.S. Cts. Cts. PBr Cent Pär Cent Pär Cent
1. Carlton . . . . . 7.8 5.2 10.8 $28.40 $37.60 $42.40 35.72 23.3 35.7
2. Hubbard 6.6 8.1 . . . 30.90 27.70 . . . . 32.99 42.1 . . .
3. Kittson . . . . . 8.1 8.9 15.2 36.15 37.80 36.50 29.41 33.8 54.3
4. Norman . . . . . 7.8 8.3 8.6 22.50 40.60 34.20 38.64 32. 36.6
5. St. Louis . . . 7.5 4.6 6.2 51.60 139.00 86.40 16.49 - 6.3 10.7
6. Douglas. . 8.2 7.1 7. 19.00 38.30 28.00 48.84 33.4 39.9
7. ISanti . . . . . . . 7.5 6.9 7.5 18.19 33.70 43.40 44.99 32.2 25.2
8. Meeker . . . . . . 8. 10.4 7.6 21.30 40.60 36.60 40.99 39.7 30.7
9. Scott . . . . . . . . 8.1 12.2 . . . 19.70 50.60 . . . 42.28 39.8 . . .
10. Wilkin . . . . . . 8.1 8.5 11. 36.30 44.40 57.10 27.24 28.6 30.5
11. Dodge . . . . . . . 8.3 12.4 6.3 27.50 46.70 29.00 39.29 45. 30.5
12. Fillmore . . . . . 8.2 8.4 7.1 27.90 43.00 34.90 35.63 33.5 34.1
13. Pipestone . . . . 8.3 7.2 8.3 32.60 43.00 42.00 34.00 26.4 33.8
14. Watonwan . . . 8.1 7.2 6.1 21.30 39.00 30.60 39.24 30.25 33.
NOTE: One-fifth of the rural schools in these counties actually received
more from the state than they raised by local taxation.
STATE SUPPORT EACH DAY PER PUPIL FOR ENTIRE STATE.
High School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.7C.
Graded school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1c.
Rural school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.8c.
ANNUAL COST PER PUPIL ENTITLED TO STATE APPORTIONMENT.
High School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $41.00
Graded school districts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.53
Rural school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.00
(NOTE: It is obvious that this table is not a fair comparison inasmuch
as the attendance and the shorter school year in rural schools change condi-
tions so that it is impossible to compare the rural school with the high and
graded schools on a per capita basis.)
PER CENT OF STATE SUPPORT AS RELATED TO TOTAL COST FOR
ENTIRE STATE.
High school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.15%
Graded school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33.00
Rural School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * c e º e º e º e º e º 'º e º e º e
30
TABLE III.
ATTEN DANCE AND SALARIES.
Average days of Attendance Average monthly
COUNTY salary of teachers
Rural High Graded Rural
Days Days Days
1. Carlton . . . . . . . . 110.5 160 137 $50.15
2. Hubbard . . . . . . . . 90.3 139 ge tº e. 45.66
3. Kittson . . . . . . . . . 90.66 140 127 51.14
4. Norman . . . . . . . . 88.6 146.5 130 49.70
5. St. Louis . . . . . . . 117.6 153 144 64.50
6. Douglas . . . . . . . . 105.75 130 141 51.00
7. ISanti . . . . . . . . . . . 100.9 143 131 54.90
8. Meeker . . . . . . . . . 95.25 139 144 52.30
9. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . 89.8 140 tº e g 49.65
10. Wilkin . . . . . . . . . . 92.13 140 129 52.92
11. Dodge . . . . . . . . . . 101.2 143 148 50.76
12. Fillmore . . . . . . . . 94.94 148 140 45.84
13. Pipestone . . . . . . 101.5 146 121 52.80
14. Waton Wan . . . . . . 89.8 143 145 48.73
AVERAGE DAYS OF ATT ENDANCE FOR ENTIRE STATE.
High School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147.4 days
Graded School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 & &
Rural School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97.9 “
TEACHERS’ SALARIES FOR ENTIRE STATE.
High School districts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Max. $2,000 Min. $540
Graded school districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Max. 1,450 Min. 389
Rural School districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Max. 800 Min. 210
TABLE IV.
RELATION OF ENRO LLM ENT PER SCHOOL TO ATTEN DANCE
AND COST.
Mean annual Mean COSt
No Of Mean En- Mean days of
No. pupils in school Cases rollment AttenClance § º
Less than ten. . . . . 46 7 96.5 $59.00 50.7c.
Ten to tWenty. . . . . 282 15 95.6 34.40 30.4c.
Twenty to thirty. . . 478 24 101.7 26.00 22.3c.
Thirty to forty. . . . 281 32 104. 20.30 17.8c.
Forty and more. . . . 98 43 100.1 15.30 13.4c.
NOTE: In the fourteen counties used in the other tables, the 1,185
schools have been analyzed With respect to the number of pupils in each
school. The above table shows the number of schools with the number of
pupils in each group. The figures indicate that in the group of forty-six
schools with an enrollment of less than ten, and a mean enrollment of seven,
the days of attendance of each pupil is less, and the annual and daily cost
per pupil is higher than in schools With a larger enrollment.
31
TABLE W.
INCREASE IN NUM BER OF SCHOOLS ENROLLING LESS THAN
TWENTY PUPILS.
Number of less than ten pupil schools Number of ten to twenty pupil schools
1903–1912 1903—1912
For entire state For entire State
Number º - Per cent
c, i. Per cent gi Actual Numb d º
you, º, º, “º" ºr **ś" sº
1903. . . . . . . 189 1,205
1904 . . . . . . 228 39 20.6% 1,296 91 7.5%
1905 . . . . . . 237 48 25.5% 1,479 274 21.9%
1906 . . . . . . 252 63 33.3% 1,467 262 21.7%
1907 . . . . . . 258 69 36.5% 1,602 397 32.9%
1908 . . . . . . 278 89 47.1% 1,702 497 41.2%
1909 . . . . . . 335 146 77.2% 1,834 629 52.3%
1910 . . . . . . 346 157 83.1% 1,911 706 58.6%
1911 . . . . . . 360 171 90.4% 1,862 657 54.5%
1912 . . . . . . 373 184 97.3% 1,916 711 58.9%
Number of less-than-ten-pupil Schools.
County. 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1911
1. Hubbard . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6 5 4 4 9 11 13 17 14
2. Kittson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. 3 2 4 3 3 4 4 5
3. St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 0 1. 1. 0 0 1. 1 1.
Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7 8 7 9 12 14 18 22 20
4. Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 0 0 1 1. 1 1 1 2 2
5. Isanti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 1 1. 1 0 0 0
6. Kandiyohi . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 2 2 4 4 5 1. 5 3
Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 2 3 6 6 7 2 7 5
7. Dodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 2 2 1 0 2 1 7 5
8. Fillmore . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6 9 24 11 13 12 14 14 12
9. Waton Wan . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 4 3 2 1. 1 1. 0 4
Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 11 15 29 14 14 15 16 21 21
Number of ten-to-twenty-pupil Schools.
1. Hubbard . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 13 20 26 34 27 30 22 24 31
2. Kittson . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 9 12 13 18 21 20 17 19 18
3. St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 6 8 7 9 11 7 11 9
Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 27 38 47 59 57 61 46 54 58
4. Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 4 7 11 8 7 12 5 7
5. ISanti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 3 3 3 20 2 2 2 4
6. Kandiyohi . . . . . . . . . . . 12 11 13 15 15 14 15 22 19 22
Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 14 20 25 29 42 24 36 26 33
7. Dodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 19 17 17 16 17 17 28 27 31
8. Fillmore . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 40 45 62 46 44 51 46 53 56
6. Waton Wan . . . . . . . . . . 8 12 11 9 11 10 11 10 14 7
Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 71 73 88 73 71 79 84 94 94
32
。
§ ¶√≠√∞
§§
§§
¡¿
;：
{
·-ſae----·-¿ſ§§§），-§§ © ®）.、。、、。-* …， …· -…-、。、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、。
·±，±，±，±，±），№žżae*3 --·--≡3.№iae;*******№ae，№șae&&-1&&&&&&&&&§，，，，，，-~~·±，±，±，±，±，±，±，±，±,±，±，±，±，±，±
~º： …*… ~~*S-，*&***%，，，，Š，- ·*、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、;=<<№º:·~--- -¿¿.*¿¿№ssae！！！！！！！！！！！！！，，，。、、。、、。
***±,±，±，±，±，±，±，±），---&:§§§§§§§§§§§§§@₪· }:3. ***. ： º，·-…、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、
ș*！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！***
~:- * - 7 * * -- -*- *-~--~- * --~~~~.· ---- *§¶√∞; ∞， ∞;-&-&-&& ！$（***
:：:::：

ſae:， ！· -·§§§ſaeae·····---···- -、、、、。：~ ~ ~~~~ ~~§. 3：3№aeae
*******+，-，=，，=，i，+，·，≤）***--sae！«， »«，»~~~~--~•----·~|-··w.-、、 、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、、r|- s*， ** ** ** * · *
§©®°¶√¶→~~~~ ~~ ·§§§§·：،§§§§§§§§§§¶√Æ√¶
taeº，********=***********= * =:= *=~：=<-~~~~<<. ，，
ſae
§§2）ae
¤ ¤
§}
£
✉
§§§§
✉
ſº