Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from Microsoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/appointmentofteaOOballrich HARVARD STUDIES IN EDUCATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE DIVISION OF EDUCATION VOLUME II THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES A DESCRIPTIVE CRITICAL AND CONSTRUCTIVE STUDY BY FRANK WASHINGTON BALLOU, Ph.D. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL INVESTIGATION AND MEASUREMENT, BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS tjfl CAMBRIDGE HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON: HUMPHREY MILFORD Oxford University Press 1915 COPYRIGHT, 191 5 HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS * PREFACE This study was made possible by the generous response of busy Superintendents to my requests for information and for help in the correction of statements of fact. Not a city was added to or taken from the list of seventy-three cities originally selected for study, and every city replied to my letters except one. It is a pleasure to bear witness to the willingness of Superintendents of Schools to contribute to the detailed study of educational problems. From the planning of this book to its completion I am indebted in various ways to the members of the Division of Education at Harvard University, under whom my work was done; and especially to Professor Paul H. Hanus, whose sympathetic interest and incisive criticism have been an invaluable guide and stimulus. Frank W. Ballou. 328628 CONTENTS Introduction page The Nature of the Study xv Descriptive, Critical, and Constructive. Its Implications. Special Attention Given Agencies which do the Appointing. Scope and Limits of the Study xvi Initial Appointment of Regular Teachers. Selection of Cities: First Class Cities, Second Class Cities, Third Class Cities. The Relative Importance of the Teacher xviii What is Involved in Providing Education. Enrolment and Teachers. Operating Expenses and Teachers' Salaries. The Teacher the Centre of the Problem. To What Extent is this Study Representative? xx Population. Enrolment. Number of Teachers. Operating Expenses. Salaries of Teachers and Supervisors. Method of the Study xxii Sources of Information. Necessity of Securing Co-operation of Superintendents. Confirmation of Facts by Superintend- ents. PART I METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS IN REPRESENTATIVE CITY SCHOOL SYSTEMS CHAPTER I The Evolution of the Present Appointive Agencies. His- torical Survey 3 Selection of Teachers by: the Town Meeting; the Select- men; the Prudential Committee; the School Committee; and the Superintendent of Schools. Summary. CHAPTER II Present Methods of Appointing Teachers in Cities 8 Purpose and Scope of this Chapter 8 This Study based on Rules. What a Study of Rules does not Show. What a Study of Rules Shows. X CONTENTS How Data were Prepared n Rules not always Clear. Use of Terms not Uniform. Need of Clearer Definition of Procedure. Methods Used to Minimize Possibilities of Misstatements. Tabulation of Facts Concerning Appointment 13 (a) First Class Cities, (b) Second Class Cities, (c) Third Class Cities. Types of Procedure in Appointing Teachers 16 The Method in Each City Classified as a Unit. Classes De- fined: C, B, and A. Types defined: 1 to 9. Classification of Cities according to Classes and Types of Procedure 18 Class C 18 Types 1, 2, 3. Class B 23 Types 4, 5, 6. Class A 37 Types 7, 8, 9. CHAPTER III The Significance of the Methods of Appointing Teachers . . 42 The Relative Number of Cities under Each Class and Type of Appointment 42 The Significance of the Arrangement of Classes and Types of Appointment . . 45 (1) Classes of Appointment are Arranged according to their historical Evolution 48 (2) Difference between the most Extreme Types 49 (3) Transition from One Type to Another not Difficult ... 50 (4) Conclusions 52 What Each Appointive Agency officially Does in Making Appointments 52 (1) The Board of Education 53 (2) The Committee on Teachers . 54 (3) The Superintendent of Schools 57 (4) Summary and Conclusions 58 CHAPTER IV Eligibility Qualifications and Methods of Determining Them in Selected Cities 60 Conditions Met with in Making a Comprehensive Study 60 Study of Eligibility Requirements in Selected Cities: Boston, St. Louis, Portland, Me., Cincinnati, and Worcester 63 CONTENTS xi (i) Eligibility Requirements for Teachers in (a) Elementary Schools; (b) High Schools. (2) Examinations for Testing the Fitness of candidates for (a) Elementary Schools; (b) High Schools. (3) The Board of Examiners (or Other Agency) that Con- ducts the Examinations. (4) The Merit List of Eligible Candidates. Comparative Tabulations of Phases of Eligibility Require- ments 77 (1) Amount of Schooling and Teaching Experience .... 77 (2) Subjects of Examination 77 (3) Membership of Board of Examiners 80 (4) The Merit List 80 Summary of Conclusions „ 81 PART II THE CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION CHAPTER V The Authority of Boards of Education in Cities 87 Education not a Federal Matter. Education a Function of the State. The State Discharges its Responsibility through the State Legislature. Agencies of State Educational Ad- ministration. Agencies of Local Educational Administration. Cities are Creatures of the State. City Board of Education a State Agency. Summary. CHAPTER VI City Boards of Education: Their Size, Membership, and Com- mittee Organization 92 The Size of City Boards of Education 92 The Membershd? of City Boards of Education 101 (1) Term of Office 102 (2) Compensation 104 (3) Methods of Selection 105 (4) Qualifications of Members 106 (a) Age. (b) Residence, (c) Exclusion from Holding Certain other Offices, (d) Other Qualifications. The Committee Organization of City Boards no Most Boards Organized into Committees. Transacting Busi- ness through Committees. Some Boards which have no Standing Committees. Varying Conceptions Shown in Or- ganization of Standing Committees: xii CONTENTS (a) The Number of Standing Committees into which the Boards are Divided 112 (b) The Average Size of Standing Committees .... 114 (c) The Irresponsibility of Standing Committees in General, and of the Committees on Teachers in Par- ticular 115 (d) Summary 121 CHAPTER VII Changes in the Size of Boards of Education, in Methods of Selecting Members, and in Their Terms of Office, in Twenty-eight Cities, from 1893 to 1913 . . . .123 The Size of Boards of Education 124 Size of Boards in 1893 and in 19 13. Reduction in Size of Boards in General. Reduction in Size Contemporaneous with Increased Responsibility. How much the Size of Boards has Changed: (a) Increases; (b) Decreases; (c) No Changes. Summary. The Methods of Selecting Members 130 (1) Methods of Selecting Members in 1893 and in 1913 compared 131 (2) Specific Changes that have Taken Place 133 (a) How Members are Chosen and by Whom .... 134 (b) Chosen from the City at Large or by Wards . . . 137 The Term of Office of Members 139 Term of Office in Years in 1893 and in 19 13 Compared. Charts Showing Increased Length of Term. How much Change there has been: (a) Increases; (b) Decreases; (c) No Changes. Conclusions 142 (1) Concerning the Size of the Board of Education .... 142 (2) Concerning Methods of Selecting Members 143 (3) Concerning the Term of Office of Members 143 PART III THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS CHAPTER VIII The City Superintendent of Schools: Selection, Tenure, and Salary 147 How the Superintendent is Selected 147 The Superintendent's Term of Office 151 (1) The Length of the Term of Office 153 (2) How the Term of Office is Fixed 155 CONTENTS xiii The Superintendent's Salary 157 (1) The Amount of the Superintendent's Salary 157 (2) How the Superintendent's Salary is Fixed 159 Changes in the Length of the Superintendent's Term of Office and his Salary 160 (1) Changes in Length of the Superintendent's Term of Office 161 (2) Changes in the Amount of the Superintendent's Salary . 163 Changing of the Superintendents 164 Summary of Findings 165 PART IV CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER IX Summary and Conclusions — A Constructive Plan for Appoint- ing Teachers 169 Concerning the City Board of Education 171 Concerning the City Superintendent of Schools .... 175 The Appointment of Teachers: A Constructive Plan . . 178 (1) Eligibility Requirements of Candidates 179 (2) Methods of Determining Qualifications 179 (3) The Board of Examiners to Grant Certificates of Quali- fication 181 (4) The Merit List of Eligible Candidates 182 (5) The Procedure in Making Appointments 183 Appendices 189 Bibliography 191 Appendix A 195 Appendix B 198 Appendix C . 202 INTRODUCTION The Nature of the Study Descriptive, Critical, and Constructive. This study is de- scriptive, critical, and constructive. It describes the present methods of appointing teachers in representative city school systems. It shows whether the superintendent of schools, a standing committee of the board of education, or the board itself, or what combination of these three, partici- pates in the formal procedure of appointing a teacher. It shows also, in a general way, the part which each legally plays in making an appointment. It criticises the present methods in the light of prevailing practice and of general principles of school administration. On the basis of such description and criticism it suggests better methods. Its Implications. But the appointment of a teacher means more than the formal administrative act by which a teacher is selected for a position. The appointment in- volves the important consideration of rinding a person with the qualifications necessary to be a teacher. Hence, eligi- bility qualifications must be established by every board of education. To determine whether a candidate possesses those qualifications requires some kind of an examination of the candidate. Hence, some agency must be instituted to conduct the examination. Therefore, a study of the appointment of teachers involves, among other things, some consideration of (a) eligibility qualifications, covering such topics as age, teaching experience, and scholastic and pro- fessional training; (b) the examinations, both oral and written, by which the scholastic and professional fitness of the candidate is judged; (c) the board of examiners, xvi INTRODUCTION or similar agency, which conducts the examination; and (d) the merit list of qualified candidates which usually grows out of an effort to appoint teachers according to merit. Special Attention Given Agencies which do the Appointing. Naturally a study of the appointment of teachers concerns itself also with the agencies which do the appointing. Hence, special attention is given to the board of education and to the city superintendent of schools. These agencies are studied critically to determine what qualifications each possesses for discharging the important function of ap- pointing teachers. The descriptive and critical study of (a) the present procedure in appointing teachers, and (b) the agencies which now do the appointing, will form the basis for the constructive suggestions. Scope and Limits of the Study Initial Appointment of Regular Teachers. This study covers the initial appointment of regular teachers in public day elementary and public day secondary schools in seventy- three representative cities of the United States. Initial appointment means a teacher's first appointment in a school system, as differentiated from subsequent or annual appointments. Further, this study has to do only with the appointment of teachers in city school systems and not in rural communities. The appointment of kindergarten teachers, of teachers of special branches in the elementary school, of teachers of special subjects in the secondary school, of principals, and of other administrative officers has not been covered in this study. The study is also con- fined to public day schools, excluding from consideration private and evening schools. Selection of Cities: First Class Cities. Even with the INTRODUCTION xvii above exclusions, it was impossible to include all cities of the country. It was necessary, therefore, to select repre- sentative cities whose methods of appointing teachers were to be studied. The first group of cities, called throughout this monograph first class cities, contains all cities in the United States having a population of 300,000 or over. The cities 1 are: Boston, New York, Buffalo, Newark, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Washington, New Orleans, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, Detroit, Mil- waukee, Minneapolis, St. Louis, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Total 18. Second Class Cities. The second group of cities, called throughout this monograph second class cities, contains all cities in the United States having a population of from 100,000 to 300,000. The cities are: Cambridge, Fall River, Lowell, Worcester, Providence, Bridgeport, New Haven, Albany, Rochester, Syracuse, Jersey City, Pater- son, Scranton, Richmond, Atlanta, Louisville, Memphis, Nashville, Birmingham, Columbus, Dayton, Toledo, In- dianapolis, Grand Rapids, St. Paul, Omaha, Kansas City, Mo., Denver, Seattle, Spokane, Portland, Ore., and Oak- land. Total 32. Third Class Cities. The third group of cities, called throughout this monograph third class cities, is a more heterogeneous group. It is made up of cities that have a population ranging from about 11,000 to nearly 100,000, and was made up in the following manner. After the first class and second class cities had been selected, it was found that several states were not represented in either selection, because they have no cities with as many as 100,000 people. Therefore, in order to make this study representative of 1 The order of the cities here and elsewhere always follows their classification by divisions of the country: the divisions are those regularly made by the United States Bureau of Education. For a list of the cities and the population of each (in thousands) classified by divisions, see Appendix A. XV111 INTRODUCTION every state in the Union, a third group of cities was made up, consisting of the largest cities in each state not repre- sented in either of the other two groups. Obviously none of these cities has a population of 100,000, although some nearly reach that number. On the other hand, the largest city in one of our states has less than 12,000 people. As a result, the group of third class cities is not as homogeneous as the other two groups. The cities are Portland, Me., Manchester, N. H., Burlington, Vt., Wilmington, Del., Wheeling, W. Va., Charlotte, N. C, Charleston, S. C, Jacksonville, Fla., Meridian, Miss., San Antonio, Tex., Little Rock, Ark., Oklahoma, Okla., Des Moines, la., Fargo, N. D., Sioux Falls, S. D., Kansas City, Kan., Butte, Mont., Cheyenne, Wy., Albuquerque, N. M., Tucson, Ariz., Salt Lake City, Utah, Reno, Nev., and Boise, Ida. Total 23. Every dot represents a City covered by our study. The Relative Importance of the Teacher What is Involved in Providing Education. The problem of providing public education, whether in a rural district INTRODUCTION xix or in a city, involves three fundamental elements, namely, finding a suitable teacher, providing the teachers pay, and furnishing a place for the teacher to work. Our study has to do only with the appointment of a suitable teacher, and not at all with salary or with the school building and its equipment. A brief consideration of relative magnitude of some factors will indicate to some extent the importance of the teacher. Enrolment and Teachers. The enrolment in the public day elementary and day high schools in the cities of the United States of over 5,000 in 1911-12 was 6,141,866 pupils. 1 This number by itself is incomprehensible. Its significance can be realized or appreciated in part when it is pointed out that this vast army of school children is more than 6 per cent of the total population of the United States. If all pupils attending school in rural communities and smaller cities were included in the above enrolment, the per cent would be more than twice as large. To teach these 6,000,000 pupils in our public schools necessitated the employment in 1911-12 of 154,815 teachers. 2 Operating Expenses and Teachers' Salaries. The total operating expenses (exclusive of new buildings, sites, equip- ment, interest, and other indebtedness) in the city school systems which have been organized to educate these pupils were $177,393,567.2 Of this amount for operating ex- penses, $128,433,819,2 or over 72 per cent, were paid in the salaries of principals, teachers, and supervisors. 3 The Teacher the Centre of the Problem. The teacher is the centre of the problem of providing education. The supervision by principals, by assistant superintendents, or 1 Data taken from the Report of the United States Commissioner of Education for 1 912, vol. ii, pp. 22-29. 2 Ibid. 3 Report of the United States Commissioner of Education does not segregate the salaries of teachers. xx INTRODUCTION by superintendents, the assistance of special teachers, the material equipment of the school, and every other educa- tional function or resource is for the purpose of improving the instruction which it is the teacher's duty to give. From the standpoint of the pupil also, the teacher is the largest factor in his education. The teacher often largely deter- mines the pupil's attitude toward school and hence toward his own education. When one realizes that the instruction given in our city schools alone directly affects annually over 6 per cent of the total population of the United States; that to give this instruction required 154,815 teachers; that the cost of this instruction and its supervision is over 72 per cent of the total operating expenses of our city school systems; that the community's effort to provide instruction for its youth and the pupils' attitude toward school and education centre in the teacher — when one realizes these facts, then one can begin to understand the significance and importance of appointing suitable teachers. To what Extent is this Study Representative? It is important to consider to what extent this study is representative of all cities of the country. For this pur- pose a comparison is made between certain important edu- cational factors in the cities covered in this study and those same factors in all cities of the country. These factors are population, enrolment, number of teachers, operating ex- penses, and salaries of teachers and supervisory officers. 1 Population. The total population of the United States in 1910 was 91,972,266. Of this number 42,623,383 lived 1 Data taken from the Report of the United States Commissioner of Education for 1912, vol. ii, pp. 5, 22-29. Data for a few cities were missing. See Appen- dix B. INTRODUCTION xxi in cities of over 5,000 people. Of this total number living in cities in 1910, 21,353,705, or 50.9 per cent, lived in the cities included in this study. Enrolment. The total enrolment in the public day schools in all cities of over 5,000 in 191 1 was 6,141,866. Of this number 3,212,151, or 52.2 per cent, were enrolled in cities covered by this study. Number of Teachers. The total number of teachers em- ployed in all cities of over 5,000 in 1911 was 154,815. Of this number 76,955, or 49.7 per cent, were employed in the cities covered by this study, and hence were directly af- fected by the systems of appointment which are to be considered. Operating Expenses. The total operating expenses for all cities of over 5,000 people in 191 1 were $177,393,567. Of this amount $92,476,845, or 52.1 per cent, were expended by the cities which are covered in this study. Salaries of Teachers and Supervisors. The total amount expended in the cities of over 5,000 in 191 1, for salaries of principals, teachers, and supervisors, was $128,433,- 819. Of this amount $60,411,771, or 51.7 per cent, were spent in the cities within our study for teachers' salaries alone. The cities which we are studying include: (a) 50.9 per cent of the total urban population in the United States. (b) 52.2 per cent of the total enrolment in cities. (c) 49.7 per cent of the total number of teachers em- ployed in cities. (d) 52.1 per cent of the total operating expenses in cities. (e) 51.7 per cent of the total amount of salaries paid to principals, teachers, and supervisory officers in cities. xxn INTRODUCTION Method of the Study Sources of Information. Besides the general literature of the subject and the educational laws of the states, the sources of information for this study were the school docu- ments issued by city boards of education. Chief among these documents were, first, the rules and regulations governing the activities of the boards of education and those governing the city schools, and, second, the annual reports of boards of education. The rules and regula- tions were obtained largely through direct correspondence with superintendents. The annual reports of the boards in most of the larger cities were consulted by the writer in the library of the division of education. Necessity of Securing Co-operation of Superintendents. Because the rules and regulations are not printed every year, and in some cities have not been printed for several years, it was impossible to know whether the rules govern- ing the appointment of teachers had remained the same since the rules were last printed. Several facts were also needed about the board of education and the superintendent of schools which are seldom stated in the annual reports or in any other school documents. Such facts are the quali- fications of school board members, the tenure of office of the superintendent of schools, and how that tenure is fixed. Practically the only feasible source of information for these facts was the superintendent of schools or some one con- nected with the city school system. In order to be sure that the facts secured were up to date, and in order to secure data not easily obtained from any other source, the following plan was adopted. Confirmation of Facts by Superintendents. After utilizing all the available sources of information at hand, the writer INTRODUCTION xxiii tabulated 1 what information he had secured concerning each city — sometimes it was complete, sometimes very incomplete — and sent it to the superintendent of schools with a personal letter asking him to confirm or correct the statement of facts and to add any information which the writer had thus far been unable to obtain. The writer desires to express his sincere appreciation of the assistance thus rendered by busy superintendents, without whose co- operation this study could not have been as complete or as accurate as it is. The information which was secured in this manner is largely presented in the three basic tables of the study. 2 1 For memorandum blank used, see Appendix C. 2 Namely, those on appointment, pp. 13-16; those on the board, pp. 93- 98; and those on the superintendent, pp. 148-150. PART I METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS IN REPRESENTATIVE CITY SCHOOL SYSTEMS • a * THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES CHAPTER I THE EVOLUTION OF THE PRESENT APPOINTIVE AGENCIES x Historical Survey Although this monograph is intended to be descriptive and critical, a brief review of the historical stages through which the appointment of teachers has passed seems nec- essary and hence justifiable. Such a review will furnish a basis for a better understanding and interpretation of the present practices in appointing teachers. Selection of the Teacher by the Town Meeting. The simplest method of providing education for any community in this country was that practiced in the typical early New England town meeting. The community, feeling that "the good education of children is of singular behoof and benefit to any Commonwealth/ ' 2 proceeded to provide for the education of its children. The provision was made through the town meeting, in which was expressed the composite will of the community. Educational adminis- tration and control was thus exercised by the direct vote of the community. The two essential duties for the town meeting to discharge were (a) the selection of a teacher who could instruct the children, and (b) the raising of 1 With the exception of the last paragraph, this chapter is based on Suzzallo's The Rise of Local School Supervision in Massachusetts. References to Suzzallo's monograph are given by pages only. 2 Quoted by Martin in his Evolution of the Massachusetts Public School System, p. 9. 3 4 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES money with which to pay for his services. "Not only did the town as a whole contribute support to the school, which in many cases meant direct contribution to the schoolmaster, but the town meeting elected the teacher in most places in the thirties and early forties of the seven- teenth century.' ' l This is the simplest, most direct method of providing education for a community that is to be found in our educational history. This is democratic control of education in its purest form. The voters of the commu- nity, directly by and for themselves, decided to have a school, employed a teacher, and raised the money with which to pay him. Selection of the Teacher by Selectmen. The second stage of evolution is marked by the delegation of the commu- nity's responsibility for education. "Not until 1693 did the General Court lay the responsibility ' for the settlement and maintenance of such schoolmaster and masters' any- where else than upon the inhabitants of the town in general. In that year it divided the responsibility, or, at least, laid it in two places — upon ' the selectmen and the inhabitants of such towns.'" 2 The town meeting continued to vote the school funds, as it still does in most New England towns to-day; but the matter of finding a teacher and of agreeing on compensation were matters to which the town meeting could not advantageously attend. 3 If the teacher could not be procured from the immediate community, the town meeting found it necessary to select some agency to which could be delegated the duty of finding one. The select- men had been provided to look after the political business of the town during the time when the town meeting was not in session. Consequently it was a natural step for the community, through the town meeting, gradually to dele- gate more and more of the administration of school affairs 1 Page 9. * Page 13. * Page 126. EVOLUTION OF THE APPOINTIVE AGENCIES 5 to the selectmen. 1 This does not necessarily mean a les- sening of the community's responsibility for education: it means rather that the community is merely asking a group of men, organized for another purpose, to serve the com- munity in the transaction of its educational business. The selectmen continued to be largely responsible for the ap- pointment of teachers until 1789. 2 Selection of a Teacher by a Prudential Committee. The third stage of development is marked by the delegation of the selection of the teacher to the prudential committee in 1827. Although Boston had a permanent school committee in 1822, the first of its kind in Massachusetts, for the care and superintendence of the public schools, yet in most towns this care and superintendence covered only certifica- tion and inspection of teachers and did not include their appointment. 3 The selection of a teacher was placed by law (1827) in the hands of the so-called prudential com- mittee, consisting of one person who was a resident of the district where chosen, and who was charged with the duty "to select and contract with a school teacher for his own district." 4 Here originated the district system of school administration and the ward method of representation on the school committee of later times. Selection of Teachers by the School Committee. The fourth stage is marked by the general introduction of a permanent school committee or board of education to bear the educa- tional responsibility of the community. As has been said, the law of 1822 created a permanent school committee for Boston. Towns in New England and later cities generally followed Boston's lead in this respect, so that to-day every city of importance in the country except Buffalo, N. Y., has a legally authorized school committee or board of edu- 1 Page 36. 2 Page 136. 3 Page ai. 4 Quoted by Suzzallo, p. 130. 6 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES cation. With the establishment of this permanent board to direct and manage school affairs, responsibility for such matters as the certification, appointment, and supervision of teachers, the course of study, and the building of school houses came to be centralized in the school committee or board of education. Selection of Teachers by the Superintendent of Schools. The fifth and present stage to be noted in this evolution of the appointment of teachers is the delegation of more or less of the board's responsibility for the appointment of teachers to the superintendent of schools. For the same reasons which prompted the town meeting, and later the selectmen, to delegate this function, the board has found it necessary or desirable to delegate those functions which are technical, and also those which demand continual at- tention, to properly qualified executive and administrative officers. In order to discharge the functions directly per- taining to instruction, the office of superintendent of schools has been created. The movement for the establish- ment of this office followed the educational renaissance of the time of Horace Mann and began in Buffalo, 1 N. Y., in 1837. Such offices were created in widely scattered sec- tions of the country, until now the office of city superin- tendent of schools is found in every city of importance in the United States. To the superintendent has been dele- gated varying degrees of the board's responsibility for the appointment of teachers. Summary. The preceding sketch is a brief story of the efforts of the people of a community to provide ways and means of selecting suitable teachers for the instruction of their youth. The passing from one stage to the next marks 1 Chamberlain, The Growth of Responsibility and Enlargement of Power of the City School Superintendent, pp. 374, 375. See also Dexter, History of Education in the United States, p. 193. EVOLUTION OF THE APPOINTIVE AGENCIES 7 the failure or the outgrowing of one method of selection and the adoption of another which in turn is to be succeeded. This historical evolution reveals, throughout, the working of the principle of differentiation of functions and the dele- gation of the performance of those functions by a large body to a smaller body or to a single individual. In early times the community as a whole dealt with the teacher directly. Now the community creates a board of educa- tion to assume the common responsibility for providing education. This board in turn, either voluntarily or as required by law, delegates the discharge of particular func- tions to committees of its own members or to executive or administrative officers whom it selects. From the selection of teachers by the community there has been evolved in most cities a system of selection by standing committees of the board of education, by the board itself, or by the superintendent of schools, or by some combination of these three. Thus, in the appointment of teachers the community has relinquished its direct participation to a board of education, which also in many cities has in part turned that responsibility over to the superintendent of schools. Thus, through an evolutionary process of trial and failure our present methods of appointing teachers have been gradually developed. It will be interesting and profitable to keep in mind the above process of evolution when considering the methods of appointing teachers dis- cussed in the next chapter. CHAPTER II PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS IN CITIES Purpose and Scope of this Chapter It is the purpose of this chapter to show the methods of appointing teachers in seventy-three representative cities of the United States. The study will show how generally the board of education directly discharges this function, and how generally the board voluntarily, or as required by law, delegates it either to a standing committee of its own mem- bers, or to the superintendent of schools, or to both. This Study Based on the Rules. 1 The data for this chapter have been prepared from the rules and regulations of the board of education in each city. The state laws 2 or the city charter 3 give the city board of education the authority to make such rules and regulations for its own government and for the government of the schools as it deems necessary or desirable. When these rules are properly promulgated 1 The term rules is used throughout the monograph to mean the rules and regulations adopted by the board of education for its own government and for the government of the schools. 2 "The Board shall have power to make all needful rules and regulations for the organization, grading and government in their school district. . . ." — Revised Statutes of Missouri, 1909, sec. 10785. ' "Every such Board of Education . . . shall have power to fix the time of its meetings and proceedings, for the government, regulation and management of the public schools and school property in such city, for the transaction of its business, and the examination, qualification and employment of teachers, which rules and by-laws shall be binding on such Board of Education and all parties deal- ing with it until formally repealed, . . ." — Charter of the Board of Education of the City of St. Louis, 1897, sec. 3. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 9 they have the force of law, not only over the board of edu- cation, but also over those dealing with the board. That these rules may have stability and may control the busi- ness activities of the board, provision l is usually made in the rules themselves whereby more than a bare plurality vote is necessary to set them aside. To some extent the rules are based on state laws; they are, however, largely the result of the board's deliberate action, for which the board alone is responsible. As such the rules embody the board's general conception of its functions: of how the school system ought to be run, of the function of each of the administrative agencies, and of principles of school administration in general. From this it becomes clear that a study of the rules of the board of education is a study not only of the laws made by boards of education governing the conduct of their business, but also of the philosophy of educational administration which the boards entertain. What a Study of Rules does not Show. Obviously a study of the rules alone cannot show the spirit according to which the rules are administered. Neither can such a study show how far practice deviates from the prescribed regulations. Such a study cannot show how much unofficial authority, or influence, or power is exercised by the superintendent, by a committee of the board (if there be one), or by the board of education itself in the appointment of teachers. When a rule provides, for example, that the superintendent nominate candidates, we do not know how much weight that nomination has with the board or its committee. Further, when a rule provides that a committee of the board "shall make its choice from the proper eligible list, or from the nominees of the superintendent of schools," 1 "All rules and regulations of the Board or any portion thereof, may be sus- pended at any time by a two-third vote of the Board." — Rides, Columbus, 1913, sec. 36. 2 Hand-Book, Philadelphia, 191 2, By-Law xv, sec. 3. IO THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES we do not know whether the practice is to accept or to ignore the nominations of the superintendent. Again, in case the superintendent's nomination has to be approved by the committee of the board before the board takes action, we do not know how much significance the com- mittee's approval has with the board. These are all im- portant matters, but they are outside the limits of our study. They could be determined only after personal in- vestigations in each city, and obviously we have not under- taken to make such investigations. What a Study of the Rules Shows. This study of the rules has been for the single purpose of showing how generally the board of education is itself discharging its legal re- sponsibility for appointing teachers, and how generally it is delegating that function to a committee of its own mem- bers or to its executive officer, the superintendent of schools. This is the kernel of our study. For our purpose, there- fore, it is not necessary to determine how much weight the board gives to the recommendations either of its standing committee on teachers or of the superintendent; it is im- portant to know that each does or does not participate in the appointment of teachers. All other considerations are secondary to the one question, whether the highly professional and technical function of appointing teachers is being discharged directly by a board of education consisting of laymen, or whether it is being delegated by the board to the superintendent of schools, who is presumably selected by the board because he pos- sesses superior knowledge of such educational matters as the qualifications of good teachers. In spite of the fact that the rules cannot reveal the spirit in which the appointment of teachers is performed, nevertheless they do show the educational philosophy of the board, as well as the formal method of procedure legally approved by the board for PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS II appointing teachers. This method of procedure is the important feature of our study. How Data were Prepared Rules not Always Clear. The rules do not always show logically or clearly what the procedure in appointing teach- ers really is. Consider the following: Subject to the approval of the Board, the Committee on Instruc- tion, Teachers and Curriculum shall make all nominations of teach- ers in writing to the Board after hearing recommendations from the Superintendent and the principal of the school in which the nominee is to serve. 1 What does "subject to the approval of the Board" mean? Does it mean that the committee nominates teachers when the board is willing to have it do so? Or does it mean that the nomination constitutes an appointment when approved by the board? Nowhere in the rules does the term appoint (or any synonymous term) appear. I assume that a recommendation by the superintendent and a nomi- nation by the committee of the board, "subject to the ap- proval of the Board," constitute the process of appointment. Use of Terms not Uniform. The terms nominate and recommend do not appear to have any distinctive signifi- cance, for they are used differently in different cities. For example, in Cambridge, Mass., the superintendent recom- mends candidates, a committee of the board nominates them to the board, and the board approves the nomina- tions. 2 In Paterson, N. J., the superintendent recommends candidates to a committee of the board, which committee in turn recommends them to the board. 3 In Syracuse, 1 Rules, Cambridge, Mass., 191 2, sec. 610. 2 See rule previously quoted. 8 "The Committee shall recommend to the Board from time to time for ap- pointment, promotion or transfer in the schools under its supervision, any duly licensed persons who are recommended by the City Superintendent, and who are in its judgment duly qualified." — Rules, 191 1, sec. 26. 12 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES N. Y., the superintendent nominates candidates, a com- mittee of the board recommends them to the board, and the board appoints them. 1 Need of Clearer Definition of Procedure. It appears from the foregoing illustrations (many more could be cited) that there is need of a clearer definition of the procedure in ap- pointing teachers, and also need of a more consistent use of terms. For example, where the board, a standing com- mittee, and the superintendent participate in the appoint- ment, it does not seem reasonable to think that the superintendent and the committee perform the same func- tion as in some cases the phraseology of the rules would lead one to believe. Methods Used to Minimize Possibilities of Misstatements. These illustrations have been cited to show some of the difficulties involved in interpreting the rules and classifying the methods of appointing teachers in various cities. Every effort has been made to represent accurately the method in each city. Except where specially noted to the contrary, statements of fact have been verified by the superintendents concerned. This has made it certain that the rules have been correctly interpreted, and also that the present prac- tice is in agreement with those rules. Further, to avoid misinterpreting the terminology of the rules, the identical phraseology of the rules has been employed in stating facts in the following tables. The words nominate, recommend, approve, appoint, et al., are used as and when they were used in the rules and regulations defining the procedure of appointing teachers. Also the rules have been quoted ver- batim in any discussion where matters of technical detail are of importance. By these precautions it is hoped that 1 "He [superintendent] shall nominate in writing all officers and teachers. . . . The Committee shall . . . , upon the nomination of the Superintendent of Schools, recommend to the Board . . . ," etc. — Statutes, By-Laws, and Rules, Depart- ment of Education, 1913, sec. 8. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 1 3 both the letter and the spirit of the procedure in each city are correctly represented in the tabulation of facts and in the subsequent discussion. Tabulation of Facts Concerning Appointment The following tabulations show the part officially played by the superintendent of schools, by a committee of the board of education, 1 and by the board of education 2 itself in the appointment of teachers in the cities indicated. Cities are grouped as first class, second class, and third class, as previously defined. 3 They are also separated in the lists to show divisions of the country. 4 (a) First Class Cities Cities Superintendent Committee of Board Board of Education Boston Appoints No committee Approves 6 New York Bd. of supts. nominates Recommends Appoints • Buffalo Appoints No committee No board Newark Recommends Recommends Appoints Philadelphia Recommends Selects Approves 7 Pittsburgh Recommends Takes no action Appoints 8 1 This general term covers that committee which participates in the appoint- ment of teachers in each city: such as the committee on teachers, committee on instruction, committee on examination and certification, etc. 2 This term covers school committee, board of school directors, board of school inspectors, and other titles by which this agency is known for different cities. 8 See Introduction. 4 See Appendix A. 6 "In an original appointment of subordinate teachers, he [superintendent] shall consult the principal of the school or district and the Assistant Superintend- ent in charge thereof." — Sec. 105. 6 "For all purposes affecting the appointment, promotion or transfer of teach- ers in any school, the district Superintendent assigned to the district in which such school is situated, the principal of such school, . . . shall have seats in the Board of Superintendents, with votes on such proposition." — Charter, 1901, sec. 1090. 7 The committee is not required to select a teacher whom the superintendent recommends; it may select one from the eligible list without or disregarding his recommendation. 8 "No teacher shall receive an appointment in the schools of Pittsburgh who is not recommended to the Board by the Superintendent of Schools." — Art. vii, sec. 14. 14 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Cities Superintendent Committee of Board Board of Education Baltimore Nominates Takes no action Appoints l Washington Nominates Approves Appoints New Orleans Nominates Recommends Appoints Cleveland Appoints Approves Approves Cincinnati Appoints Approves Approves Chicago Nominates Recommends Appoints Detroit Recommends Recommends Appoints 2 Milwaukee Recommends Employs Approves Minneapolis Nominates Approves Appoints St. Louis Recommends Approves Appoints San Francisco Takes no action Employs 3 Los Angeles Recommends Recommends Appoints (b) Second Class Cities Cambridge Recommends Nominates Approves 4 Fall River Takes no action Nominates Elects Lowell * Recommends Approves Appoints Worcester Recommends Appoints Approves Providence Nominates Examines into Appoints 5 Bridgeport Recommends Recommends Appoints New Haven Appoints Takes no action May reject 6 Albany Recommends No committee Appoints Rochester Nominates No committee Appoints 7 Syracuse Nominates Recommends Appoints Jersey City Reports candidates Recommends Elects Paterson Recommends Recommends Appoints Scranton Recommends Approves Appoints * Data not confirmed by the superintendent. 1 The board of superintendents approves the nominations of elementary school teachers. 2 The mayor approves the appointment of teachers. 3 The superintendent is a member of the board of education, and hence has a part in the employment of teachers. 4 The rules require that the committee on instruction nominate candidates "after hearing recommendations from the Superintendent and the principal of the school in which the candidate is to serve." — Rules, 1912, sec. 610. 6 There is a different committee on teachers for the elementary and high schools, each examines into the qualifications of teachers for its respective schools. * 6 "Any appointment by the Superintendent may be rejected by a vote of five members of the Board, but not later than the time of the next regular meeting after such appointment." — Rules, 1910, Sec. 41. 7 Superintendent and principal act jointly in nominating teachers. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS IS Cities Superintendent Committee of Board Board of Education Richmond Recommends Nominates Elects Atlanta Nominates Approves Confirms * Louisville Recommends Recommends Appoints Memphis Nominates Recommends Appoints 2 Nashville Takes no action Takes no action Elects 3 Birmingham Nominates Approves Elects Columbus Appoints Examines into Confirms Dayton Appoints Inquire as to Confirms Toledo * Appoints Confirms 4 Indianapolis Appoints Takes no action May reject Grand Rapids Nominates Nominates Appoints 5 St. Paul Recommends Appoints Confirms Omaha Recommends Nominates Appoints Kansas City Nominates Reports on Appoints Denver Nominates Appoints 6 Seattle Recommends Takes no action Appoints Portland Nominates Takes no action Appoints 7 Oakland Compiles list Selects Approves (c) Third Class Cities Portland Nominates Approves Appoints Manchester Nominates Recommends Appoints 8 Burlington Appoints Advises Approves 9 Wilmington Nominates Advises Appoints Wheeling Takes no action Chooses teachers Confirms * Data not confirmed by the superintendent. 1 "Superintendent of Schools is supposed to nominate applicants. During the last three or four years the Superintendent was not allowed to have the teachers he wished." — Letter of January 16, 1914. 2 It is not clear whether the superintendent and committee act jointly or consecutively. 8 A board member nominates, and the board elects. 4 The appointment of teachers is not mentioned under duties of committee on education. 6 The superintendent and the educational committee act jointly. 6 Data incomplete; correct as far as stated. 7 Any member of the board may also nominate a teacher. 8 Superintendent says in letter: "Superintendent by rule nominates; in prac- tice the sub-committee may recommend anybody. They are not confined to the Superintendent's nominee." • Superintendent says: "Superintendent appoints with advice of Committee on Teachers and Instruction." 16 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Cities Superintendent Committee of Board Board of Education Charlotte Takes no action Nominates Appoints ■ Charleston Takes no action Furnishes a list Elects 2 Jacksonville Nominates No committee Appoints Meridian Recommends No committee Appoints San Antonio * Recommends Approves Appoints Little Rock Nominates Appoints Approves Oklahoma Recommends Approves Appoints Des Moines Recommends Approves Appoints Fargo Nominates No data Appoints Sioux Falls Recommends No committee Elects Kansas City Nominates Recommends Appoints Butte Recommends Nominates Appoints Cheyenne Recommends Recommends Appoints 3 Albuquerque Nominates Takes no action Appoints 4 Tucson Nominates No committee Appoints Salt Lake Nominates Approves Appoints Reno Recommends No committee Appoints Boise Nominates Approves Appoints * Data not confirmed by the Superintendent. Types of Procedure in Appointing Teachers The Method in Each City Classified as a Unit. Since boards, voluntarily or as required by law, delegate varying degrees of their authority for making appointments to com- mittees of their own members and to superintendents, it is impossible, within the limits of this study, to determine the precise amount of authority exercised by each appointive agency. For our purpose the most feasible method of classi- fying methods of appointment is one based on the method of procedure in each city considered as a unit. This basis of classification obviates the necessity of considering the 1 "The Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent are advisory members of the Committee." — From a letter. 2 The superintendent as such takes no action; he is a member of the examin- ing board which furnishes a list of candidates. 3 The superintendent and a committee act jointly in recommending teachers. 4 Data as furnished by superintendent; rules provide for committee action. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS I J relative amount of official authority exercised by the agen- cies involved, and considers the method of procedure in each city as a complete process. Classes Defined: C, B, and A. The different methods of procedure can be classified into three large classes, accord- ing to the apparent extent of the superintendent's official participation in the procedure of making appointments. In Class C the superintendent does not participate in the appointment of teachers. In Class B the superintendent takes the initial step in making the appointments by nomi- nating or recommending candidates. In Class A the superin- tendent makes the appointments, subject to varying degrees of supervision by the board and one of its committees. Types Defined: i to g. In each of the above classes three distinct types of procedure are distinguishable. These types are based on the apparent extent of the board's or the committee's official participation in the making of ap- pointments. The following statements will make clear the definition of the three classes and of the nine types. CLASS C The superintendent does not officially participate in the ap- pointment of teachers. The board, or a committee of the board and the board, make the appointments. Type i. The board makes the appointments. Type 2. A committee of the board takes the initial step and the board makes the appointment. Type 3. A committee of the board makes the appoint- ments, subject to approval by the board. CLASS B The superintendent takes the initial step in making an appointment, and the board, or a committee of the board and the board, complete the appointment. 1 8 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Type4. 1 The superintendent takes the initial step, and the board makes the appointment. Type 5. The superintendent takes the initial step, a com- mittee of the board approves the action, and the board makes the appointment. Type 6. The superintendent takes the initial step, a committee of the board makes the appointment, subject to approval by the board. CLASS A The superintendent makes the appointment, and a committee of the board and the board consecutively confirm it, or the board alone approves it, or the appointment is effective without confirmation. Type 7. The superintendent makes the appointment and the board approves it. Type 8. The superintendent makes the appointment, a committee of the board approves it, and the board confirms it. Type 9. The superintendent makes the appointment, subject only to rejection by the board. Classification of Cities according to Classes and Types of Procedure class c The superintendent does not officially participate in the appointment of teachers. The board, or a committee of the board and the board, make the appointments. The distinctive feature of the cities in Class C is that the boards do not voluntarily, nor are they required by law to, 1 For convenience in discussion, the types of appointment are numbered con- secutively from 1 to 9. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 19 delegate any authority to the superintendent of schools in the appointment of teachers. It is possible that by com- mon consent the superintendent has some influence in the selection of teachers. The rules which establish the legal procedure of the board do not mention the superintendent in the appointment of teachers, hence he cannot officially and legally participate in such appointments. In the cities in Class C appointment is made exclusively by a lay board of education, or by a committee of the board consisting of lay members. Following is a classification of cities in Class C according to Types 1, 2, and 3. Type 1. The board makes the appointments. NASHVILLE Nashville is the only city covered by our study which practices this method of appointment. The rule on ap- pointment of teachers is as follows: Applicants for positions as teachers shall be placed in nomination by a member of the Board. Members of the Board may from the floor, state anything for or against an applicant; but it shall not be in order for anyone, directly or indirectly, to solicit the vote of a member for an applicant while the Board is in session. 1 The rules defining the duties of the superintendent do not mention the appointment of teachers. The rules do give him the authority to "nominate his clerk, and janitors to the board.' ' Further, the rules give to the superintendent the thankless task of suspending "teachers from service for neglect of duty or violation of prescribed rules." A logical distribution of authority and responsibility requires that the power to suspend teachers be lodged in the same agency which exercises the power to appoint teachers. Then the allegiance of teachers is not divided, and the 1 Rules, 191 1, chap, v, sec. 6. 20 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES public can hold the proper agency accountable for the kind of teachers appointed. With the board responsible for the appointing of teachers and the superintendent responsible for discharging ineffective ones, there is no way of holding either to account. The prevailing tendency in American cities is to hold the superintendent responsible for the instruction in the schools; but to do this in Nashville would be a grave injustice to the superintendent, who is in no way responsible for the kind of teachers who are appointed. Type 2. A committee of the board takes the initial step l and the board makes the appointment. The following cities employ this method: Fall River, Charlotte, N. C, and Charleston, S. C. FALL RIVER The rules of the school committee do not mention the superintendent of schools in describing the appointment of teachers. Under "examination and election of teachers " is the following 2 : A majority vote of the whole Board shall be necessary to elect or remove a teacher, and each sub-committee on visitation shall have the power to nominate teachers for its respective schools. The board consists of nine members and is divided into "three sub-committees on visitation of three members each." To "each of the three committees on visitation" is assigned "a section of the schools for visitation and general care." These sub-committees nominate teachers to the school committee. 1 /.«., the committee nominates, or recommends, or takes some other similar action. * Rules, 1009, sec. 36. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 21 CHARLESTON, S. C. In Charleston the examining board consists of the chair- man of the board of education, the superintendent, and two principals in rotation, and at least one member of the standing committee on examination. This board reports only the first three competitors who have attained a general average of seventy-five per cent or over, and one from the said three shall be chosen by the Board to fill the vacancy. According to the superintendent the above provision applies only to the grade schools. In the high school, the appointment of a teacher is left practically to the Superintendent of Schools, the Principal of the School and the Commissioner of the School, such appointment being subject to confirmation by the Board. 1 The rules do not provide for this arrangement. The superintendent, as a member of the examining board, in an indirect way participates in making the appointment. The rules give him no official authority other than as a mem- ber of the examining board. Historically boards of education have always found it difficult to perform executive functions and have been com- pelled by force of circumstances to delegate the discharge of such functions. The boards in the cities of this type have thought it desirable or have found it necessary to delegate to a standing committee of their own members the functions of nominating candidates for teaching posi- tions. Since ordinarily such nominees are appointed by the board without discussion, it is clear that a nomination by a committee virtually means an appointment. The fore- going is an early form of delegating executive functions to executive officers chosen by the board. 1 In a letter dated April 25, 1913. 22 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Type 3. A committee of the board makes the appointments, subject to approval by the board. WHEELING, W. VA. The only city operating under this method of appoint- ing teachers is Wheeling, W. Va. According to the super- intendent, 1 "Appointments are made ordinarily by the Commissioners of sub-districts/' subject to confirmation by the board. The board consists of twenty-one members elected by the people from sub-districts which do not exactly coincide with the wards of the city. There is a standing committee of the board for each sub-district. It is this committee which appoints the teachers for the schools within its district. The foregoing makes it clear that teachers are not appointed in Wheeling by a central author- ity which is at least theoretically responsible for education in the city, but they are appointed by a small committee which is in charge of the schools within a district. The board of education in each city in Class C has em- ployed a superintendent of schools. In its rules each board has charged the superintendent with the supervision of the schools, with assisting teachers in their work, and with the promotion of educational progress in the city; and yet the board has made it impossible for the superintendent to be much more than a clerk of the board, by denying him any participation in the appointment of teachers. The boards have charged the superintendents with large responsibilities and have not given them the logical and necessary authority for discharging those responsibilities. They have made the superintendents responsible for in- struction, and have given them no authority to exercise any control over instruction except after teachers are ap- 1 In a letter dated July 1, 19 13. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 23 pointed. The most effective method of securing good teachers is to be sure that none but good teachers are employed in the first instance. A superintendent cannot justly be held responsible for the character of work done by teachers whom he would not have appointed. A superintendent who is qualified to be charged with the responsibility of maintaining a high grade of instruction in the schools is certainly better qualified to appoint teachers than is a board of education of laymen or a committee of such a board. This has been the experience of cities gen- erally. Most cities have long passed out of the historical stage in which these cities are found to-day in respect to appointing teachers. These cities are not far removed from the old system of appointing teachers by a prudential committee which prevailed generally a little less than a century ago in New England. CLASS B The superintendent takes the initial step l in making an appointment, and the board, or a committee of the board and the board, complete the appointment. The cities in class B are characterized particularly by the fact that the superintendent takes the initial step in the process leading to the appointment of teachers. This class differs from Class C in the fact that in Class C the superintendent does not officially participate in the ap- pointment of teachers. Cities in Class B are similar to cities in Class A (discus- sion of which is to follow) in the fact that the superintendent initiates the process of appointment in both cases. Cities in Class B differ from those in Class A in the fact that in Class B the superintendent only nominates or recommends 1 I.e., the superintendent nominates or recommends candidates, or takes some similar action. 24 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES candidates and the board does the appointing, while in Class A the superintendent appoints the teachers. Following is a classification of the cities in Class B ar- ranged according to Types 4, 5, and 6. Type 4. The superintendent takes the initial step, and the board makes the appointment. The following are the cities: First Class Second Class Third Class Pittsburgh Albany- Jacksonville, Fla. Baltimore Rochester Meridian, Miss. Seattle Albuquerque, N. M. Portland, Ore. 1 Sioux Falls, S.D. Tucson, Ariz. Reno, Nev. PITTSBURGH The superintendent shall, when a vacancy occurs in the teaching force, recommend to the Board a person for such vacancy, and he shall fill such vacancy temporarily, from some source of supply, until appointment thereto is made by the Board. 2 This is a clearly defined procedure, and fixes definitely on the superintendent the responsibility for recommending candidates, and on the board the responsibility for making the appointment. The procedure is further defined by the following rule : No teacher shall receive an appointment in the Schools of Pitts- burgh who is not recommended to the Board by the Superintendent of Schools. 3 By this provision the superintendent is made responsible for the appointment of every teacher who enters the school 1 It is uncertain whether Portland, Ore., should be classified here or under Type 1. 2 Rules (no date), art. viii, sec. 15. ■ Ibid., art. vii, sec. 14. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 25 system. The board alone cannot select teachers; the superintendent must take the initiative. The board could force the superintendent to appoint its candidates by con- tinuously refusing to appoint the persons recommended by the superintendent. However, few boards would be will- ing to bear so grave and so definitely fixed a responsibility. ROCHESTER The Superintendent and the principal of the school constitute a Board on nomination of teachers for such school from the first twenty- five names on the eligible list for teachers, . . . The Board of Edu- cation must consider such nominations and upon approval appoint the person so nominated. 1 The principal is thus properly recognized as the respon- sible head of his school, and is given authority in the ap- pointment of teachers so that he can be held to account for the instruction given. In Meridian, Miss., as in so many of the smaller cities, the Manual of Government of the schools does not define the procedure of appointing teachers. According to the superintendent, teachers are appointed to positions in the Meridian Public Schools by the Board of Trustees on the advice of the Superintendent based upon the application and endorsements of candidates. 2 The classification of the other third class cities under this type is based on similar information obtained from school documents or the superintendent. In any case my state- ment of facts has been confirmed by the superintendent. This type of appointment has a distinct advantage over any preceding type, because the superintendent has some control over the appointment of teachers for whose work he is inevitably held more or less responsible. Further, in the larger cities, the board is required to consider the super- 1 Provision of City Charter, chap. 755, sec. 400. 8 In a letter dated April 28, 1913. 26 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES intendent's nominations. This type of appointment is not very different from Type 7, discussed later, in which the superintendent makes the appointments, subject to approval by the board. With the superintendent exclu- sively making the nominations, they practically constitute appointments. Type 5. The superintendent takes the initial step, a com- mittee of the board approves l the action, and the board makes the appointment. This type is similar to Type 4, except that in this case a committee of the board is introduced into the procedure, which committee approves the nominations or recommenda- tions of the superintendent. In this type the board still appears to exercise officially the more important function of appointing the teachers. In this type, as in the former, boards are, in many cases, enjoined to consider the nomi- nations or recommendations of the superintendent. In such cases we may legitimately raise the question, Of what value is it to have the nominations pass through the hands of a committee for approval? Especially should this question be considered in such a case as Kansas City, Kan., where the superintendent is held strictly to account for every nomination made. More cities belong to this type than to any other. They are as follows: First Class Second Class Third Class New York 2 Cambridge Portland, Ore. Newark Lowell Manchester, N. H. Washington Providence Wilmington, Del. New Orleans Bridgeport San Antonio, Tex. Chicago Syracuse Oklahoma, Okla. Detroit Jersey City Des Moines, la. 1 Includes nominates, recommends, examines into, reports on, and all similar action taken by a committee. 2 The superintendent is chairman of the board of superintendents which make the nominations. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 27 First Class Second Class Third Class Minneapolis Paterson Fargo, N. D.i St. Louis Scranton Kansas City, Kan. Los Angeles Richmond Butte, Mont. Atlanta Cheyenne, Wyo. Louisville Salt Lake, Utah Memphis Boise, Ida. Birmingham Grand Rapids Omaha Kansas City, Mo. Spokane Obviously it will be impracticable as well as unnecessary to analyze the rules in each of the above cities. The cities selected for consideration illustrate the type or some special feature to which it seems desirable to call attention. NEWARK All appointments, promotions and transfers of teachers shall be made by the Board on recommendation of the Committee on In- struction and Educational Supplies and by them from a list of eligi- ble candidates presented by the City Superintendent, who shall make definite recommendation from the list for each appointment, pro- motion or transfer. The Superintendent's recommendation shall be based upon experience, merit, and fitness, to be ascertained so far as possible from the official records in possession of the Board of Education. 2 The above is one of the most complete definitions of the method of making an appointment to be found in the rules which have come within our study. The parts played by the board, by the committee, and by the superintendent are clearly stated. Responsibility is definitely fixed. WASHINGTON No appointment, promotion, transfer or dismissal of any director, supervising principal, principal, head of department, teacher or any 1 There is a committee on teachers, and it is assumed that it participates in the appointment, although the facts at hand do not necessarily prove that fact. 2 Rules, sec. 17, p. 341. Annual Report, 1910-11. Also Rules, sec. 19, p. 301. Ibid. 28 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES other subordinate to the Superintendent of Schools shall be made by the Board of Education, except upon the written recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools. 1 The rules provide that nominations made by the Superintendent for the appointment . . . of . . . teachers . . . shall, unless otherwise ordered, be referred to said Committee, 2 which shall report the same to the Board of Education with recommendations as to approval or disapproval. 3 The superintendent is exclusively charged by law with the power of recommending candidates for teaching posi- tions, and the board is prevented by the same law from selecting teachers without his recommendation. In such cases the superintendent's recommendation practically means an appointment. Just what significance the committee's approval has with the board is largely a matter of conjecture, because such a matter could be determined only by personal investigation. In view of the law it is difficult to see what the legal func- tion of the committee can be. The law requires the board to make the appointments, and in so doing to consider the recommendations of the superintendent. Whether the board can by rule delegate either of the above functions to a committee of its own members is a legal question which it is not within our province to settle. At any rate, the board does not escape responsibility and accountability by delegating the discharge of such functions. In the dele- gation of such functions the danger is that the board will become merely a rubber stamp, and will not supervise the acts of the superintendent or of the committee closely enough to insure their best action. 1 Laws, 1906, sec. 2, no. 254. 2 I.e., committee on elementary and night schools; the same provision is made for committee on the high schools in the appointment of high school teachers. 8 By-Laws (not dated), art. vi, sec. ii. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 29 CHICAGO The Superintendent shall make nominations in writing for all vacant positions in the Education Department to the Committee on School Management, which shall report the same to the Board for approval. 1 The function of the committee seems to be merely a means of transmitting the nomination of the superintendent to the board of education. It is to be noted that the rule does not provide for any action, either of approval or dis- approval, by the committee. According to a statement 2 in a communication from the superintendent, the committee plays practically no part in making appointments. JERSEY CITY (c) Whenever any position becomes vacant, or a position has been created, the Superintendent shall, on the request of the Committee on Teachers and Salaries, report to this Committee the name of the person who shall be first on the list of those eligible to appointment to such position. . . . This Committee shall recommend the person so reported to the Board for appointment. The Board shall there- upon elect such person to the position which has become vacant or which has been created. 3 This is another clear definition of procedure. The fol- lowing facts should be noted: (a) the committee asks the superintendent to nominate a candidate; (b) the superin- tendent reports the name of the first person on the list; (c) the committee is required to recommend this person to the board for appointment; (d) the board is required to elect such a person. This procedure makes inevitable the appointment by the board of the person reported by the superintendent to be at the head of the list of eligible candidates. Two matters are to be especially observed: 1 Rides, 1910, chap, ii, art. ii, sec. 10. 2 "The Board elects those recommended by the Superintendent." 8 From Abstract of the Rides, 1913, art. liii (c). 30 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES (i) that the committee acts only as an intermediary and plays no vital function, and (2) the preparation of the merit list of candidates becomes of more significance than the procedure in making appointments. GRAND RAPIDS The Educational Committee shall have general supervision of the schools and together with the superintendent shall: (a) Examine candidates for teachers. . . . (b) Nominate teachers and recommend salaries to be paid. 1 The exceptional provision is that the superintendent and the committee are required to act jointly instead of con- secutively in nominating teachers. MANCHESTER, N. H. When an additional teacher is required . . . the Superintendent shall nominate to the sub-committee of that school . . . one or more persons qualified for the position or positions to be filled, which sub-committee shall report to the Board such person or persons as it deems best fitted for the position . . . and the Board shall then proceed to a choice by ballot if more than one candidate is nominated. . . . 2 In this city the committee is a sub-committee of a school, and not a committee on appointments for all schools. Responsibility for the appointment of teachers in this city is distributed between the superintendent of schools, twenty-one sub-committees of three members each (one for each school in the city), and the board of education. The superintendent states that the sub-committee does not always approve the superintendent's nominees; it selects candidates on its own initiative. This procedure is a fine illustration of undesirable dispersion of authority in the appointment of teachers and the concomitant result of no one being accountable. 1 Rules, 1913, sec. 31. 2 Rules, 191 2, chap, iii, sec. 3. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 31 KANSAS CITY, KAN. Under the duties of the committee on teachers and salaries, the rules provide, among other things, as follows: They shall recommend to the Board for appointment all said employees, provided that no person shall be elected as supervisor, supervising principal, teacher, census taker, teachers' examiner, or office assistant of the Educational department, except upon the initiative and the written recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools to the Chairman of the Committee on Teachers and Salaries. 1 Further, under duties of the superintendent, we find this interesting provision: The Board shall hold the Superintendent directly responsible for all nominations made by him, and in the selection of teachers and other employees, he shall be guided strictly by the merits and by the By-Laws and the "Rules and Regulations" of the Board, and shall hold himself absolutely free and independent from all influences to the contrary. 2 The rules make it the duty of the superintendent to initiate the process of appointing teachers by making written recommendations of candidates; no doubt many boards try to hold the superintendent responsible for his nominations, but few have defined that responsibility in such specific and unmistakable terms as has this city. Type 6. The superintendent takes the initial step, a com- mittee of the board makes ,the appointment, subject to approval by the board. This type differs from the preceding type in this impor- tant respect: the committee and not the board selects the teachers. The centre of gravity in making appoint- ments has passed from the board to a committee of its members. 1 Rules, 1908-9, sec. xi (2). 2 Ibid., sec. vii (8). 32 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES The cities are as follows: First Class Second Class Third Class Philadelphia Worcester Little Rock, Ark. Milwaukee St. Paul Oakland PHILADELPHIA Under duties of committees the rules provide : Whenever it shall become necessary to elect a supervising prin- cipal, principal or assistant teacher in any of the elementary schools other than those named in By-Laws III, Section 8, 1 kindergartner, teacher of sewing or cooking, or other official named in By-Laws III, Sections 5 & 7, 2 the Committee shall make its choice from the proper eligible list (see Rule XXV, Eligibility of Election), or from the nominees of the Superintendent of Schools, and shall report the same to the Board for its approval. 3 The committee selects the teachers and merely reports the same to the board. The above rule also clearly gives the committee the option between choosing candidates from the proper eligible list or from the nominees of the superintendent. But to confirm the practice in this, the following question was addressed to the superintendent: "May the committee disregard the superintendent's nomination?" The answer was "Yes." Under duties of the superintendent the rules provide: He shall keep in his office eligible lists of certified teachers and principals arranged as nearly as possible in the order of rank or standing; and no person shall be appointed to any educational posi- tion, other than those specified in the school law, whose name does 1 By-Law iii covers the duties of the superintendent of schools. Sec. 8 pro- vides that the superintendent "shall nominate to the Committee on Special Schools" suitable persons for teachers in the trade schools and evening schools and of so-called special subjects. 2 Sec. 5 refers to the superintendent's nomination of associate and district superintendents, directors of special branches, et al. Sec. 7 defines the superin- tendent's duty in nominating elementary school teachers. 3 Rules, 191 1, xv, sec. 2. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 33 not appear among the three highest names upon the proper eligible list. 1 The new school law 2 referred to does not require that principals or teachers in either the normal or high schools be selected from eligible lists. The provision for the appointment of high school teach- ers needs some preliminary explanation. There are two separate committees in charge of the high schools: the committee on normal school, high school for girls and clas- sifications of teachers, and the committee on the central high school, and manual training high schools for boys. They act jointly in selecting teachers, as the following rule indicates: The Committee [on Normal School, etc.] shall act in conjunction with the Committee on Central High School and Manual Training High Schools for Boys in all the following named matters, and such action as may be taken shall be the joint action of the two Commit- tees, subject to approval by the Board, viz., (a) the election of prin- cipals, members of the teaching force . . . , etc. 3 The duty of the superintendent in the appointment of high school teachers is denned as follows: He shall inform the Committee of his views in relation to the qualifications of the persons who may apply to the respective Com- mittees for election as teachers in said schools, and shall indicate the choice that, in his judgment, should be made by the Committee or Committees. He shall be invited to all meetings of all such Com- mittees for the purpose of affording advice and counsel. 4 From the above it is clear that the board has gone only as far as the law required it to go in giving the superin- tendent authority in the appointment of teachers. His real authority is limited even in the nomination of elemen- tary school teachers, because the committee may ignore his nominations. Clearly the official authority of the 1 By-Law Hi, sec. 14. * New School Code, 191 1, sec. 2229. » By-Laws xix, sec. 5. * By-Law iii, sec. 16. 34 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES superintendent in the appointment of high school teachers is small. His influence in either case will depend largely on his personal force and tact, and on the character of the committees with which he has to deal. If the committees are willing to take his advice and counsel, he may partici- pate in making the appointments. If, however, for any reason, the committee choose to ignore the superintendent, they are protected in their action by the rules of the board. Instead of the rules protecting the superintendent in the discharge of an important professional function, they de- fend the independence of the committee. Further, such dispersion of authority for the appointment of teachers among several different committees of the board makes the maintenance of satisfactory professional standards extremely difficult, and also makes the fixing of the responsibility for appointments almost, if not quite, impossible. MILWAUKEE The employment, classification, transfer and promotion of teach- ers, shall be done by the Committee [on Examination and Promo- tion] upon the recommendation of the Superintendent, subject to approval by the Board, special consideration being given to merit and length of service. 1 The rules also provide that the appointments shall be "on a strict basis of eligibility and fitness." The examination of teachers shall be conducted by the Superin- tendent of Schools and his assistants, and the results presented to the Committee for their action. WORCESTER The Committee on Teachers shall appoint teachers in the primary and grammar grades in the day schools, and make such transfers as it may deem advisable, subject to the approval of the School Com- mittee. . . . 2 The Committee on High Schools shall have general charge of the 1 Rules, 1909, art. xiv, sec. 3. Also in Laws of 1907, chap. 459, sec. 9. 2 Rules, chap, iv, sec. 2. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 35 day High Schools. It shall be the duty of this Committee to recom- mend for appointment all teachers in these schools. All transfers of teachers in these schools shall be made by this Committee, subject to the approval of the School Committee. All certificates of qualifica- tion in these schools shall be given by this Committee. 1 Under duties of the superintendent the rules provide that He shall keep a list of applicants for schools and a record of such facts as may be known to him respecting their character, experience and qualifications, and shall recommend to the proper committees teachers for nomination. 2 According to a statement made by a member of the Worcester school committee, in a public address, The City employs between seven and eight hundred teachers, most of whom teach in the elementary schools. In sheer self-defence the Committee has had to adopt rules governing the appointment of this more numerous class. Positions in the elementary schools are now upon a strictly civil service basis. . . . But a very important department remains to be accounted for, — the high schools. The rules of the School Committee give to the sub-committees on high schools practical control of all matters pertaining to those schools. . . . Now, in the selection of teachers the Committee on High Schools has an absolutely free hand. It has not even made rules for its own governance. If it chose to recommend an inmate of a home for the feeble minded it would have a perfect right to do so. 3 ST. PAUL It shall be the duty of the Committee on schools to appoint all teachers in the public schools, and to fill all vacancies, except as heretofore mentioned, 4 giving consideration to the recommendations of the Superintendents of Schools, and to report the same to the Board for confirmation at the first regular meeting thereafter. 5 1 Rules, chap, iv, sec. 12. 2 Ibid., chap, ii, sec. 4. 3 Sixth Annual Report, 1911, the Public Education Association of Worcester, pp. 14-15. * This refers to the authority given to the superintendent to fill temporarily any vacancies. Sec. 62. 6 By-Laws of the board of school inspectors, in Biennial Report for 1908-10, p. 302. 36 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES OAKLAND The Committee on Teachers, from the lists compiled by the Su- perintendent, shall select the teachers who are in the judgment of said Committee, best qualified to fill positions in the Oakland School Department. 1 It is made the duty of the City Superintendent of Schools to gather full and complete information, so far as possible, in reference to each and every applicant for a position in the Department. ... He shall make his recommendations to the Committee on Teachers. . . . 2 Boards of education in cities in Class B have found it desirable or necessary to delegate in part the discharge of the responsibility for the appointment of teachers. In some cities in Class B the board has voluntarily, or as required by law, delegated to the superintendent of schools the authority to nominate candidates. It has been provided, in some cases, that a committee shall approve the nomina- tions of the superintendent before the board makes the appointments; in other cities the committee appoints the teachers on the superintendent's nomination, subject to approval by the board. By far the most common method of appointment found in this investigation is one in which the superintendent nominates candidates, the committee on teachers approves, and the board appoints the candidates. In most cases it is difficult to see what beneficial or essen- tial function the committee performs by approving the nominations of the superintendent. For example, what is the importance of the committee's action, (a) when the board is required by law to consider the nominations of the superintendent 3 ; (b) when the committee neither approves nor disapproves the nominations, but acts only as an in- termediary for transmitting the nominations of the super- intendent to the board 4 ; (c) when the board is required by 1 Circular on rules governing the selection of teachers, 1909, sec. 8. * Ibid., sec. 7. ■ For example, see Washington, p. 55. 4 For example, see Chicago, p. 57. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 37 the rules or by law to appoint the first candidate on the appropriate eligible list 1 ; (d) when the board is not per- mitted to select teachers unless they are nominated or recommended by the superintendent? 2 The appointment of teachers by a committee of the board cannot be justified according to any reasonably effective principles of successful school administration. The division of authority and the accompanying dispersion of responsi- bility which it entails make strict accountability impossi- ble. This is well illustrated by the situation in Philadelphia already described. CLASS A The superintendent makes the appointment, and a com- mittee of the board and the board confirm it, or the board alone approves it, or the appointment is effective without confirmation. The chief characteristic of the methods of appointment in the cities in Class A is that the superintendent makes the appointments, subject to varying degrees of approval by the board, or by its committee, or by both. The centre of gravity in making the appointments has been transferred from the board to the superintendent. This transfer of authority for appointment has been so complete in the case of Type 9 that the board has no positive authority in ap- pointing teachers; it can only reject appointments made by the superintendent. The board's authority is negative, not positive. Following is a classification of cities in Class A arranged according to Types 7, 8, and 9. Type 7. The superintendent makes the appointment and the board approves it. Of the seventy-three cities covered in this study, Boston and Toledo are the only ones belonging to this type. 1 For example, see Jersey City, p. 58. ■ For example, see Pittsburgh, p. 50, and Kansas City, Kan., p. 60. 38 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Under the definition of the duties of the superintendent, the Boston rules provide: He shall, subject to the approval of the Board, appoint, reappoint, and remove all members of the supervising staff and teachers: provided that in the original appointment of subordinate teachers, he shall consult the principal of the school or district and the assist- ant Superintendent in charge thereof, or the director of the special department, if the appointment is in that department. 1 It is to be pointed out that in these two cities no commit- tee action intervenes between appointment by the superin- tendent and approval by the board; also that in Boston the subordinate administrative officers are consulted in making original appointments to service. The superin- tendent is responsible for every appointment made, be- cause he makes them. Type 8. The superintendent makes the appointment, a committee of the board approves it, and the board con- firms it. This type differs from the preceding one in that a com- mittee approves the appointments of the superintendent before they go to the board for confirmation. This method of appointment is found in the following cities: First Class Second Class Third Class Cleveland Columbus Burlington Cincinnati Dayton Four of these cities are in Ohio. Obviously this uni- formity in methods of appointment is due to the provisions of the state law, 2 defining the duties of the superintend- ent of schools. In view of this agreement in methods of appointment, the rules of only one city in Ohio will be presented. 1 Rules, 191 2, chap, vi, sec. 105. 2 School Laws, 191 2, chap, iii, sec. 7703. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 39 COLUMBUS Under duties of the superintendent the rules provide: He shall appoint, subject to the approval and confirmation of the Board, all teachers, and may for cause suspend any person thus ap- pointed until the Board or a Committee of the Board considers such suspension, but no one shall be dismissed by the Board except as provided by Statute. 1 The Board may, by a three-fourths vote of its full membership, reappoint any teacher whom the Superintendent refuses to appoint. 2 Under duties of committees on teachers the rules provide: This Committee shall inquire carefully into the character and qualifications of each person appointed by the Superintendent for a position as teacher, and must have a list of appointments at least two weeks before their confirmation. 3 Type 9. The superintendent makes the appointment, sub- ject only to rejection by the board. This type differs from all others in the fact that the board has no positive authority in the appointment of teachers. It can only exercise the power of rejecting ap- pointments made by the superintendent. New Haven and Indianapolis use this method. NEW HAVEN Under duties of superintendent the rules in New Haven provide: He shall appoint from those eligible under the rules of the Board, all principals, assistants, and teachers necessary to fill positions authorized by the Board. (b) He shall report at each meeting of the Board all appointments and dismissals made by him since the previous meetings. 1 I.e., dismissal can be only on basis of written charges, and after the teacher has been given an opportunity for defence before the board or its committee, and only on a majority vote of the full membership of the board. — Laws of 1912, sec. 7701. 2 Rides, 1913, sec. 213. 3 Rides, 1912, sec. 96. 40 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES (c) Any appointment by the Superintendent may be rejected by a vote of five members of the Board, but not later than the time of the next regular meeting after such appointment. (J) In order to acquire full knowledge affecting . . . appoint- ments, it is the wish of the Board that the Superintendent shall give to each member of the Board one week's notice in writing before such appointment . . . shall become effectual. 1 INDIANAPOLIS In Indianapolis, under duties of the superintendent, the rules provide: He shall make all appointments of . . . teachers and report the same to the Board at the next regular meeting, and from the date of such appointment as announced the same shall be in full force sub- ject to the disapproval of the Board by a four-fifths vote of all its members: such vote to be taken not later than the regular meeting next succeeding the regular meeting at which said appointments shall have been reported. 2 The feature of the appointment in these two cities is the amount of authority given the superintendent. Appoint- ments are effective without the approval of the board. The board may reject the appointments at its first meeting after they were made, but only by five out of seven votes in New Haven and four out of five votes in Indianapolis. Thus the board has sufficient supervisory authority to protect itself and to see that the superintendent does his duty. On the other hand, the superintendent has authority in the appointment of teachers commensurate with his responsibility for the character of the instruction in the schools. Denver, Col., Buffalo, N. Y., and San Francisco, Cal., have not been classified under any of the above types for the following reasons: The information furnished by the superintendent in Denver was incomplete, and it came so 1 Rules, 1910, sec. 41. 2 Rules, 191 1, art. x, sec. 14. PRESENT METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS 41 late that there was not time to supplement it. The rules do not define the part played by the superintendent in making appointments; they do define the parts played by the board and by its committee. Buffalo has no board of education. Appointments are made by the superintendent of schools from merit lists. San Francisco also has an exceptional arrangement. The superintendent of schools is a regular member of the board of education and is elected by the people. The other members of the board are appointed by the mayor and are paid to give all their time to the service of education. The board elects the teachers. The rules do not define any particular function which the superintendent performs in the appointment of teachers other than as a member of the board. CHAPTER III THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE METHODS OF APPOINTING TEACHERS In the previous chapter we presented the detailed facts concerning each of the three classes and each of the nine types of appointment and classified seventy cities accord- ingly. Each classification was based on rules similar to those quoted, or on information confirmed or furnished by the superintendent. It is the purpose of this chapter to consider the significance of these classes and types of ap- pointment from a larger point of view. For this purpose we shall consider some summary tables and graphs which will show (i) the relative number of cities under each class and type of appointment. Following this we shall con- sider (2) the significance of our arrangement of classes and types of appointment, and (3) what each appointive agency officially does in making appointments. The Relative Number of Cities under Each Class and Type of Appointment The following summary table shows the total number of cities in each class of appointment (C, B, and A), the total number of cities by types (1 to 9 inclusive), and the dis- tribution of those cities according to our classification of first, second, and third class cities. 42 SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 43 Classes of Appointment Total No. of Cities by Classes Types Total No. of Cities by Types No. of Cities by Classes (Size) First Second Third I I O I O c 5 2 3 O I 2 3 1 O O I 5 O 2 3 4 12 2 4 6 B 56 5 3* 9 17 12 6 6 2 3 1 56 13 24 19 7 2 I 1 A 9 8 5 2 2 1 9 2 O 2 9 3 5 1 Summary of Totals C 5 o B 56 A j9 Totals 70 1 13 _3 16 2 24 _5 3i 3 19 1 23 The three graphs at the left on the following page show the distribution, according to classes and types of appoint- ment, of sixteen first class cities, of thirty-one second class cities, and of twenty-three third class cities. The large graph at the right is a summary of the other three graphs on the same page, and shows the relative number of cities classified under each class and type of appointment. Each graph shows a striking preference on the part of all classes (sizes) of cities for the Class B method of appointment, and particularly for Type 5 in that class. 1 Buffalo, San Francisco, and Denver are not included in these or subsequent graphs or tables in this chapter. 44 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES "lasses C B A Classes Types c B A rypes 123456789 123456789 10 9 40 8 39 7 38 6 37 5 36 4 35 3 34 2 33 1 32 3i 17 30 16 29 IS 28 14 27 13 26 12 25 11 24 10 23 9 22 8 21 7 20 6 19 5 18 4 17 3 16 IS 2 .III 14 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 S 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 ~i n 1 _L1 SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 45 The graphs show: (1) That there are no first class cities which belong under Class C; i.e., the superintendent participates in the appoint- ment of teachers in all first class cities. (2) That with one exception there are no third class cities which belong under Class A; i.e., the superintendent does not appoint teachers in third class cities, he nominates candidates. (3) That, with the above exceptions, each type of ap- pointment is found in practically every class of city; i.e., no one type of appointment predominates, for example, in large cities or in small cities. (4) That the most common type of appointment in cities of each size is one in which the superintendent nomi- nates the candidate, the committee on teachers approves the nomination, and the board appoints the candidate named. The Significance of the Arrangement of Classes and Types of Appointment The following diagram presents a general view of the various methods of appointing teachers. Classes C, B, and A show, from left to right, increasing authority of the superintendent. The types under each class are arranged from left to right according to the decreasing authority of the board of education. In the type at the left under Class C the board appoints the teacher; in the next type the board shares the process of making appointments with a committee and the superintendent; and in the type at the right the board approves the appointments of the com- mittee. As far as the board is concerned, the arrangement of types in Class B is identical with Class C, and the same general arrangement prevails in Class A. 46 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Class C s' Five Cities \. Superintendent does not officially participate \ No committee action Committee recommends Committee appoints Board appoints Board appoints Board approves Type i i City Type 2 3 Cities Class B Type 3 1 City yS Fifty-six Cities x. \ Superintendent nominates candidates y No committee action Committee recommends Committee appoints Board appoints Board appoints Board approves Type 4 12 Cities Type 5 38 Cities Class A Type 6 6 Cities y/ Nine Cities n^ Superintendent appoints teachers S \ No committee action Committee recommends No committee action Board confirms Board confirms Board may reject Type 7 2 Cities Type 8 5 Cities Type 9 2 Cities SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 47 The following diagram shows at a glance the general arrangement of the preceding detailed diagram. The inside line bounds the board's responsibility. The outside solid line bounds the board's accountability. The dotted line bounds the accountability of the superintendent of schools. Class C Class B Class A 1 r^* - r 1 "^Sa Superintendent's • ^^V> accountability • Board's accountability ^<- ( 1 >,> , . 1 1 ^^« Types 1.2,3 Types 4,5,6 Types 7,8,9 In general the preceding detailed diagram is so arranged that Classes C, B, and A show a progressively increasing amount of official authority exercised by the superintendent in the appointment of teachers. In the five cities in Class C the superintendents do not officially participate in making appointments, because neither the boards nor the law dele- gates to them any authority for so doing. In the fifty-six cities in Class B the superintendents have the authority to nominate or recommend candidates, but in most cases the boards retain by far the larger responsibility by officially making the appointments. In the nine cities in Class A the superintendents have the authority for making the appoint- ments, the boards retaining only a supervisory capacity over them. On the other hand, considered from the standpoint of the board, the diagram shows from left to right a progres- sively decreasing authority exercised by the board in the discharge of its responsibility. This is the converse of the arrangement to show the authority of the superintendent 48 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES which has just been described. In the cities in Class C the boards, voluntarily or as required by law, delegate no au- thority for making appointments, whereas in Class A they delegate complete authority for so doing. In general the two considerations are complementary to each other: as a board increasingly delegates or is required to delegate its authority to the superintendent its own active authority necessarily decreases. (i) Classes of appointment are arranged according to their historical evolution Although the exact place of each class of appointment has not been determined by a detailed historical study, nevertheless in general the arrangement of Classes C, B, and A is according to the historical development, as shown in chapter i. This general development shows clearly the working of the evolutionary principle of differentiation and specialization of functions. Whereas in earlier times the board of education felt qualified and competent to deal directly with all matters connected with school work, now most boards see the need of a proper delegation of most functions for which they are responsible to agencies better qualified than the board to deal with them. The boards in cities under Class C have not delegated any of their authority to the superintendent, whereas all boards in cities in Classes B and A have voluntarily, or as required by law, delegated more or less of their authority to the super- intendent. This delegation of functions has been brought about, on the one hand, by a tremendous increase in the functions for the discharge of which the board is primarily responsible, and, on the other hand, by an insistent demand for more efficient education and more efficient methods of supplying it. In general the three classes of appointment represent different stages of progress in the historical evo- SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 49 lution of a system of appointing teachers. Those types at the left represent earlier stages in that evolution, and those at the right the advanced or progressive types. If the classes are arranged in correct historical sequence, then the future development of the methods of appoint- ment will be from the lower (Types 1-3) toward the higher types (Types 7-9). The view which one should take of the summary graph on page 44 is that in early times all cities belonged under Type 1, that the development has been toward the right of the graph, that a great majority of the cities have reached Types 4 and 5, that several pioneer cities have gone far beyond those types, that cities under Types 1,2, and 3 are in a stage of evolution long passed by most cities, and that in due time the mode in this distribu- tion will be found under Class A instead of under Class B. (2) Difference between the most extreme types As one views the preceding table on page 46, the difference between any two contiguous types of appoint- ment is not striking. But if one takes a larger view, and considers the difference between the types in Class C and those in Class A, the differences are more marked. In Class C the superintendent does not officially participate in appointing teachers, while in Class A the superintendent makes the appointment subject to varying degrees of super- vision by the board and its committee on teachers. The most striking difference may be seen by contrasting Type 1 with Type 9. The appointment of teachers in the one city in Type 1 is made by the board without the partici- pation of either a committee of the board or the superin- tendent. In other words, the board exercises its authority for making appointments directly and does not delegate any portion of that authority to any subordinate agency whatsoever. In the two cities in Type 9 the board does SO TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES not exercise any positive authority in making appointments; it may only reject the appointments made by the super- intendent. In these cities the board has been deprived by law of all authority for appointing teachers. The board still retains its responsibility to the public for the character of the appointments made, because the superintendent does not act as an independent officer, but as an agent of the board which appointed him. The board is protected in its responsibility for the appointment of teachers by having veto power over the superintendent and by holding him accountable for his appointments. Whether a city is in Type i or in Type 9, the responsi- bility of the board to the public is the same. But radically different conceptions of the proper methods of discharging that responsibility are shown. In one case the board itself seeks to discharge its responsibilities directly; in the other case, in the discharge of a professional function, the board has been succeeded by a properly qualified executive officer. The centre of gravity in the appointment of teachers has passed in some cities, and is passing in others, from the board of education to the superintendent of schools. (3) Transition from one type to another not difficult In several instances the various types in the different classes of appointment do not materially differ. Hence, transition from one type to another is not a difficult matter. For example, the procedure in making appointments in Type 5, Class B, differs largely in name and not in fact from Type 7 in Class A. This similarity is brought about by the rules and regulations governing the procedure in making appointments, all of which increase the authority and responsibility of the superintendent, and correspond- ingly decrease the direct activity of the board. The fol- lowing rules will illustrate this. SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 51 For example, in Pittsburgh the rules provide that No teacher shall receive an appointment in the schools of Pitts- burgh who is not recommended to the Board by the Superintendent of Schools. 1 Further, in Atlanta the rules provide that All . . . teachers . . . shall before their election to any position in the schools, be recommended by the Superintendent, . . . sub- ject to their confirmation or rejection by the Board. If any recom- mendation is rejected by the Board the Superintendent shall, in like manner as above provided, make other recommendations to take the place of any one so rejected, until one is made that shall meet the approval of the Board. 2 Also in Kansas City, Kan., the rules provide that the com- mittee shall recommend employees to the board, and con- cludes with the significant provision that No person shall be elected ... as teacher . . . except upon the initiative and the written recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools. . . . 3 The above illustrations show that the rules enjoin the board to accept or reject the nominations of the superin- tendent and prevent the board from selecting teachers on its own initiative. In all such cases the nomination of the superintendent is virtually an appointment. The step necessary for such a city under Type 5 to take to make it possible to classify itself under Type 7 is a short one indeed. In view of the fact that historically the trend is in that direction, we may confidently expect that some of the cities now classified in Type 5 will be transferred eventually to the Type 7 or Type 8 groups. The resulting increase in the authority of the superintendent in the appointment of teachers as shown in Types 7 to 9 is entirely in accord with the present tendency toward the increased responsibil- 1 Rules (no date), art. vii, sec. 14. a Rules, in Annual Report, 191 2, sec. 27, p. 88. 3 Rules, 1908-9, sec. 11. 52 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES ity and enlargement of powers of the city superintendent of schools. 1 (4) Conclusions The preceding exposition has made conspicuous the fol- lowing facts: 1. Historically the tendency is toward the types of appointment in Class A. 2. The transition from one type of appointment to another is not difficult, because the difference in many cases is one of name rather than of fact. 3. According to the evolutionary principle of differentia- tion and specialization of function, the centre of gravity in the appointment of teachers is passing from the board of education to the superintendent of schools. 4. This increased responsibility and authority of the superintendent in the appointment of teachers is but a part of the enlargement and extension generally of his responsibilities and powers. 5. The decrease in active participation by the board in the appointment of teachers does not mean a decrease in its primary responsibility for the appointment of teachers; it merely means the transferring of the discharge of that professional function from the board to the board's execu- tive officer and professional adviser. What Each Appointive Agency Officially Does in Making Appointments Thus far we have given attention largely to explaining the significance of types of appointment and to consider- ing the number of cities using each type. In the course of our analysis it has been shown that there are three agencies 1 Chamberlain, The Growth of Responsibility and Enlargement of Power of the City School Superintendent. University of California Press, Berkeley. SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 53 which participate in the appointment of teachers: the board of education, a committee of the board, and the superintendent of schools. We shall now turn our atten- tion to these appointive agencies to consider the part officially played by each. The most striking fact shown in the tabulation of the methods of appointing teachers is that the authority of each of these participants in the process of appointment ranges from complete authority in some cities to no authority in others. Concerning each agency we shall answer this question: What are the dif- ferent ways in which each agency officially participates in the appointment of teachers in the different cities? (1) The board of education In most cities the board of education is the source of all authority over the appointment of teachers. In some cities the laws place the responsibility for the appointment of teachers on the superintendent. But in such cases the board still exercises some supervision over appointments. In other cities the boards adopt their own rules governing the appointment of teachers. The natural result is a great variety of methods of appointment. In the different cities the board's participation ranges from complete and exclu- sive authority in Nashville to no positive authority in New Haven and Indianapolis. In Nashville the board has dele- gated no authority. Like the prudential committee of early times which the board has succeeded, it nominates and elects its teachers without the official participation of either a committee of the board or the superintendent. This is the oldest historical type of appointment which comes within our study. In fifty-three of the seventy cities under consideration (over 75 per cent) the board, either voluntarily or as re- quired by law, has delegated to the superintendent or to a 54 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES committee of its own members the authority to initiate the process of making an appointment. In fourteen of the seventy cities (or 20 per cent) the authority for making the appointments is in the hands of others, and the board exercises a supervisory function over those appointments. In New Haven and Indianapolis the boards do not exer- cise any positive authority in making appointments. The law gives that authority to the superintendent and gives the board veto power over his appointments. Hence, the board has no positive, but only negative authority. This is the most extreme case of relieving the board from the exercise of this important function. Nevertheless, the increased responsibility now being everywhere conferred on the superintendent and the marked tendency to delegate all executive functions to officers, both indicate that this may ultimately become a much more common type of appointment. The following table summarizes the different ways in which the board participates in the appointment of teachers and the number of cities in each case. 1. The board appoints on the recommendation of others . . 53 cities 2. The board approves the appointments made by others . . 14 " 3. The board, exclusive of others, appoints 1 city 4. The board does not participate 2 cities Total 70 cities (2) The committee on teachers The committee on teachers of the board of education is a creation of the board. 1 No statute provides for such a committee. The board is exclusively responsible for its creation and for the rules under which it does its work. The committee is made up of members of the board and is 1 Bard, The City School District, p. 63. SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 55 responsible to the board. It has no inherent authority: all its acts are subject to the approval of the board. The committee form of organization is an undesirable inheritance. It has been retained so long because boards have recognized the necessity of delegating to others the discharge of certain functions for which they are responsi- ble; the present need is that boards should delegate the discharge of those functions to officers and not to committees of their own members. The committee can never be an effective means of secur- ing well qualified teachers. It cannot, as has been already pointed out, be held responsible for its selections. It affords abundant opportunity for the exercising of unprincipled means in the selection of teachers. It is easily influenced by the appeal of home-bred girls, of self-seekers, and of other agencies that have little real interest in the education of children. The variety of activities performed by the committee in the appointment of teachers shows that there is less general agreement among boards of education on the part which a committee may properly play in the appointment of teachers than on the proper functions of either the board of education or the superintendent. The diversity of con- ceptions held by boards of education considering how best to appoint teachers is well illustrated by the variety of ways in which the committee participates in such appointments. In seven of the seventy cities the committee appoints teachers subject to the board's approval. This is the most authority which the boards confer on the committee on teachers. This practically amounts to complete authority, because the board's approval is usually merely a formal matter. The committee exercises this authority because the board has by formal rules delegated such authority to the committee. 56 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES In three cities the committee initiates the nomination or recommendation leading to an appointment. In such cases, unfortunately, the superintendent takes no part in the appointment. In forty-three cities the committee approves the nominations of the superintendent, who originates the process leading to an appointment. The committee acts largely as an intermediary between the superintendent and the board. This provision for the com- mittee's approval of the superintendent's nominations serves no necessary or beneficial purpose. In many cities the board is enjoined by law to consider the nominations of the superintendent. Of what use is it to have a com- mittee act on them before the board considers them? With a suitable merit list, and with a board of reason- able size, this act of the committee has become a use- less inherited appendage which could advantageously be severed. In seventeen cities a committee does not participate in making appointments: the appointments are made by the board and the superintendent directly. In eight of these seventeen cities there are no committees. In the nine other cities there are committees of the board, but they take no action in making appointments. The fact that seventeen cities can appoint teachers without the aid of standing committees is sufficient proof that committees are not indispensable. The following table summarizes the different ways in which the committee on teachers participates in the ap- pointment of teachers, and the number of cities in each case. i. The committee appoints subject to approval of board . . 7 cities 2. The committee originally nominates candidates 3 " 3. The committee approves nominations of the superintendent 43 " 4. The committee does not participate 17 " Total 70 cities SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 57 (3) The superintendent of schools The superintendent is an executive and administrative officer selected by the board to perform professional serv- ices. One would naturally expect to find him playing a large part in the performance of such a technical and pro- fessional function as the appointment of teachers. But the extent of the authority officially exercised by the super- intendent varies as much as does the authority of the board or of the committee. In spite of the fact that the city superintendent is a school officer found in every city in the United States, nevertheless many boards of edu- cation still retain features of the old forms of doing busi- ness which were in operation before a superintendent was known. In two cities the superintendent exercises complete authority in making appointments. There is no action by a committee. The board has by law been shorn of all power in making appointments. The board has veto power over the appointments of the superintendent. In seven cities the superintendent appoints teachers, and his appoint- ments must be approved by the board before they are effective. In fifty-six cities the superintendent nominates candidates, and his nominations are approved by the com- mittee, and appointments are made by the board. In only five cities the superintendent has no official part to play in making appointments. The following table summarizes the different ways in which the superintendent participates in the appointment of teachers, and the number of cities in each case. 1. The superintendent appoints subject only to veto .... 2 cities 2. The superintendent appoints subject to approval .... 7 3. The superintendent nominates 5^ 4. The superintendent does not participate 5 Total 70 cities 58 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES (4) Summary and conclusions Concerning the appointive agencies, the following sum- mary shows in how many cities each agency officially (a) does not participate in making appointments, (6) origi- nates the appointments, (c) approves the nominations or appointments of others, and (d) makes the appointments. (a) Does not participate Board 2 cities Committee 17 " Superintendent 5 " (b) Originates the appointments Board 1 city Committee 4 cities Superintendent 65 " (c) Approves the nominations or appointments of others Board 14 cities Committee 46 " Superintendent o city (d) Makes the appointments Board 54 cities Committee 7 " Superintendent 9 " The following facts may be deduced from the preceding analysis: 1. The board is the agency which is seldom left out of the procedure in making appointments; it rarely originates an appointment; it sometimes approves the appointment of others; and finally the board is the agency which by far most often officially makes the appointments. 2. The committee of the board is the agency most often omitted from the procedure of making appointments; it seldom originates an appointment; it occasionally makes appointments; and finally by far the most frequent duty of the committee is the approval of nominations or appoint- ments made by the superintendent. 3. The superintendent is occasionally left out of the SIGNIFICANCE OF METHODS OF APPOINTMENT 59 procedure in making appointments; he frequently makes appointments; he never approves the nominations or ap- pointments of others; the superintendent is the agent who by far most frequently originates the process which leads to an appointment. CHAPTER IV ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS AND METHODS OF DETERMINING THEM IN SELECTED CITIES Those who appoint teachers must consider the qualifications of the candidates. Therefore, the eligibility qualifications of teachers logically form an integral part of this study. However, to work out the details of the eligibility qualifica- tions for appointment in each of the seventy-three cities covered in this study is an elaborate and important study in itself, and cannot be undertaken in this monograph. Conditions Met with in Making a Comprehensive Study i. The eligibility qualifications for appointment in some cities are undefined and hence are not stated in school documents. In Worcester the committee on high schools of the board of education has general charge of the high schools. The following is the only reference to the qualifi- cations of high school teachers in the rules of the school committee. "All certificates of qualification for teachers in these schools shall be given by this Committee.' ' l Obviously the only source of information concerning the eligibility qualifications for high school teachers in Worcester is the committee on high schools. 2. The eligibility qualifications in some cities are partly or largely contained in the state laws. In Newark, candi- dates for any certificate from the city board of examiners 1 Rules, 1908, chap, iv, sec. 12. 60 ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 6l shall be required to hold an appropriate license in full force and effect, issued by the State Board of Examiners, and in addition thereto, a certificate of qualification for appointment under the rules and regu- lations of the Board of Education of the city of Newark. 1 Hence, in a detailed study of the eligibility qualifications in such cities, the state laws must be examined. 3. Again, the eligibility qualifications are classified in such different ways in different cities that the facts can scarcely be reduced to a comparable basis. In Paterson the rules provide that the board of examiners shall issue twenty-two distinct licenses to various classes of teachers and principals in the public schools. For each license there are special qualifications. In any one of many other cities the same classes of teachers would be certificated by one- fourth that number of licenses. 4. Likewise, when clearly and definitely stated, some- times the eligibility qualifications are so limited and modi- fied by qualifying clauses, or there are so many alternatives offered, that no significant generalizations can be made, even on the basis of a complete and correct tabulation of the facts. As an example of alternatives, note the follow- ing: in New York City, to be eligible to take the teachers' examinations to qualify as a teacher in grades 1 to 6 in- clusive, one of the several qualifications reads: Five years' successful experience in teaching, together with the passing of an academic examination set by the City Superintendent of Schools for admission to training schools, or by the State Com- missioner of Education for a State Life Certificate, given since 1892, or by the College Entrance Examination Board of the Middle States and Maryland for admission to college, or the passing of other aca- demic examination approved by the Board of Examiners. 2 Further, the tabulation of the eligibility qualifications for elementary school teachers in the first class and second 1 Annual Report, 1910-11, xi, p. 336. 2 Manual of the Board of Education, 191 1, sec. 71 (E), p. 151. 62 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES class cities, as stated in their printed documents, does not show a single item of regular school education that is uni- formly specified as a requirement. One might expect that all candidates who qualify to become teachers in the ele- mentary schools would have to be high school graduates, but such is not the case. For example, how much school training must a teacher have had to meet the above re- quirement in New York City? 5. Finally, and possibly most significant of all, is the fact that school documents give little or no information concerning the present practice under the eligibility re- quirements. To be of most significance, a detailed study should indicate, at least in general, what proportion of the teachers qualify under each possible eligibility requirement. Then one would know something of the character of the teachers who are being appointed. For example, in Cin- cinnati there are two separate lists of candidates eligible for appointment in the elementary schools. 1 On the first list there are two classes of candidates: (a) those who are college graduates and have taken in college at least twenty- four college credits in education, and (b) those who are col- lege graduates without the work in education, but who instead have had two years' experience in teaching. On the second list are (a) those who are high school graduates and who in addition are graduates of a two year normal school course, and (b) those who are high school graduates with two years' experience in teaching. Merely to present the above facts is to tell the truth, but the truth in such a case is likely to be misleading. It is necessary to explain that candidates are never taken from the second list until the first list is exhausted, and there are usually enough candidates on the first list to fill the vacan- cies and new positions. From this it becomes clear that 1 Circular of Information, 191 2. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 63 the teachers who are appointed to positions in the elementary schools in Cincinnati are usually college graduates who have had nearly one complete year of work in education or two years' teaching experience. To state the above eligibility requirements without making the above explanation is misleading; to make such explanations for each city would occupy too large a part of this monograph, even if the time to make them were at our disposal. In the foregoing there is no implied criticism of cities because they do not state their eligibility requirements in uniform terms. The single purpose of the above explana- tion is to show what the conditions are. To generalize without working out the detailed requirements is unsci- entific; to attempt to state the detailed requirements in this monograph would lead us too far from our subject and could bring no desirable results. Therefore, instead of trying to make a comparative study of the eligibility qualifications in the seventy-three cities, it will be more advantageous for our purpose to study intensively the eligibility require- ments in a few city school systems and discuss these as types. Study of Eligibility Requirements in Selected Cities The more important eligibility requirements are usually stated in terms of amount of academic education, profes- sional training, and teaching experience. These require- ments are fixed by state law or by the rules of the board of education. In some cities age requirements are fixed. In various cities candidates are required to furnish certificates of moral character, of health, of birth, of vaccination, and of normal school or college graduation. We are chiefly concerned, however, with the academic and professional requirements in selected cities, and with the methods used 64 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES in these cities to determine whether candidates possess the prescribed qualifications. To study eligibility qualifications and the methods of determining them requires that we consider: (i) eligibility requirements for teachers in (a) elementary schools and (b) high schools; (2) the examinations for testing candidates who want to teach in (a) elementary schools and (b) high schools; (3) the board of examiners (or other agency) that conducts the examinations; and (4) the merit list of eligible candidates. BOSTON I. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHERS (a) Elementary schools The eligibility requirements for teachers in the elementary schools in Boston are: Evidence of two years' successful experience in teaching and gov- erning regular graded day schools, or graduation from the Boston Normal School. 1 In addition candidates must present satisfactory evidence of possessing good character, health, and scholarship, and satisfactory and documentary evidence of the date of birth. . . . 2 It is interesting to observe that no amount of schooling is prescribed for elementary school candidates. (b) High schools The eligibility requirements are: A diploma from a college or university approved by the board of superintendents, or from an institution of as high a grade: evidence of three years' successful experience in teaching and governing regular graded day schools. 3 1 Rules, 191 2, chap, vii, sec. 138, viii. 8 Ibid., sec. 138. * Ibid., sec. 138, iv. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 65 2. EXAMINATIONS FOR TESTING THE FITNESS OF CANDIDATES (a) Elementary schools A candidate for the elementary school certificate . . . will be examined in the following subjects. The examination may include the method of teaching the same: 1. English language and grammar. 2. English and American literature. 3. Essay. 4. Psychology and principles of education. 5. Drawing. 6. Theory of music; singing. 7. English and American history with civil government. 8. Arithmetic or algebra or plane geometry. 9. Physical and political geography, or botany, or zoology, or physiology. 10. Latin, or German, or French, or physics, or chemistry. 1 The graduates of the Boston Normal School are entitled to receive certificates of qualification without examinations. (b) High schools Elementary Examination 2 A candidate for the high school certificate will be examined in each of the following subjects: 1. English and American literature. 2. One foreign language (Latin, French, or German). 3. Psychology and principles of educa- tion. 4. Essay. 5. General history. Advanced Examination A candidate for the high school certificate will also be examined in one major and two minor subjects that he shall elect from any one of the following groups. Both major and minor subjects must be selected 1 Circular of Information, no. 32, 1913, p. 21. 2 Circular of Information, no. 32, 1913, pp. 18-19. A recent regulation states that the degree of Master of Arts in Education will be accepted in lieu of two years' experience in the requirements for high school certificates, provided certain requirements as to academic and professional education, including practice teaching, are fulfilled by the holder of the degree. 66 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES from the same group. The major subject must be chosen from those marked i; one minor subject must be chosen from those marked 2; the second minor subject must be chosen from those marked 3. Both an elementary and advanced examination in the same subject may be taken, but a subject taken as a major may not also be taken as a minor. Group I Major Subject First Minor Subject Second Minor Subject I. English and Ameri- can Literature. 2. English History. Group II 3. Composition and Rhetoric. I. Latin Language and Literature. 2. Greek. 2. German. 2. French. Group III 3- Ancient History. I. I. I. I. French Language and Literature. German Language and Literature. Spanish Language and Literature. Italian Language and Literature. 2. German. 2. Latin. 2. French. 2. Spanish. 2. Italian. Group IV 3- Mediaeval and Mod- ern European His- tory. I. American History. 2. English History. Group V 3- 3. Ancient History. Mediaeval and Mod- ern European His- tory. I. I. Bookkeeping and Commercial Arith- metic. Phonography and Typewriting. 2. Economics. 2. Bookkeeping and Commercial Arith- metic. 2. Phonography and Typewriting. Group VI 3. Commercial Law and Commercial Geog- raphy. I. Trigonometry and Analytics. 2. Algebra. 3- Geometry. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 67 Major Subject i. Physics. 1. Chemistry. Group VII First Minor Subject 2. Physiology. 2. Physical Geography. 3. Physics. 2. Algebra. Second Minor Subject 3. Chemistry. 1. Botany. 1. Zoology. Group VIII 2. Botany. 2. Zoology. 2. Physiology. 3. Chemistry. 1. Household Science and Arts. Group IX 2. Physiology. 2. Botany. 2. Zoology. 3. Chemistry. 1. Free-hand Drawing. Group X 2. History of Art. 3. Composition and 2. Mechanical Drawing. Design. 2. Manual Training. 1. Manual Training. Group XI 2. Mechanical Drawing. 3. Composition and 2. Free-hand Drawing. Design. Gr0«/> XII 1. Musical Composition. 2. History of Music. 3. Biography of Musical Composers. 1. Economics. 2. Industrial History. 3. Commercial Law and Commercial Geog- raphy. 3. THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS In Boston the board of examiners is the board of super- intendents, consisting of the superintendent of schools and the six assistant superintendents. The assistant superin- tendents are elected by the school committee for a term 68 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES of six years. In the discharge of their duties they are the personal representatives of the superintendent. The examinations are designed to test the training, knowledge, and aptness for teaching of the candidates. In general, the marking for day school and supervisory certificates is on a scale of one thou- sand points, of which six hundred points may be obtained by ex- amination, and four hundred points may be allowed for amount and quality of previous experience in teaching and governing schools. 1 4. THE MERIT LIST Candidates eligible for permanent positions in either the elementary or high schools are placed on the appropriate eligible lists, and an appointment must be made from among the first three names on the proper list. 2 The noteworthy and commendable features of the Boston system are: a system of examinations which includes aca- demic and professional subjects to test general education as well as the special preparation for teaching in either the elementary or the secondary schools; a board of examiners consisting of the highest professional officers in the school system; and a merit list of candidates for both the elemen- tary and the secondary schools. ST. LOUIS 1, 2. Eligibility Requirements for Teachers and the Examinations for Testing the Fitness of Candidates (a) Elementary schools Graduates of the St. Louis Teachers College, and those who have been assigned as apprentice teachers and have done successful work, may be placed on the eligible list without written examinations. Also the superintendent is 1 Circular of Information, no. 32, 1913, p. 6. J Rules, 191 2, chap, vii, sec. 144, 1. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 69 authorized by the rules to list for employment, without written examinations, persons whom he deems qualified for service, and who have recently been graduated from the Missouri State University, Washington University, or from other colleges of national standing, or the state normal schools. 1 Applicants who are not graduates of State Normal Schools, col- leges, or universities of national standing, will be required to take a written examination in the following subjects: Reading, Grammar, Composition and Penmanship, Arithmetic, Geography, and History of the United States. But no person is entitled to take this examina- tion who has not had experience in public school work for at least two years immediately preceding the time of such examination. The personal qualification of the candidate, her education, her profes- sional experience, and her general information shall be considered in an oral examination. 2 (b) High schools For admission to the examination the presentation of a diploma of some first-class college or Normal School is required. 3 . . . The branches required in the written ex- aminations are Algebra, Geometry, Latin, English Literature, History and Grammar of the English Language, General History, Natural Science, and Theory and History of Education. An oral examination is added to afford an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the personality, general information, and general ability of the applicant. The Superintendent may allow the substitution of equivalent studies for some of those in the list. 4 3. THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS The city charter 5 provides that the "examination for ap- pointment shall be conducted by the Superintendent under regulations to be made by the Board." 1 Abstract from the Rides, 1910, regulation iv, sec. i and ii, pp. 35-36- 2 Ibid., sec. iii, p. 37. 3 Ibid., regulation ii, sec. ii, p. 26. 4 Ibid., sec. iii, pp. 26-27. 6 City Charter, 1897, sec. 7. 70 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES The rules l of the board of education provide: The Superintendent of Instruction, the Assistant Superintendents, the principals of the high schools, and such supervisors, principals, and teachers as the Superintendent may select shall constitute a Committee of Examiners. 4. THE MERIT LIST There is a merit list of elementary and high school can- didates. The board announces in the rules its intention "to call in rotation on the persons placed on the eligible list, when their services are needed," but "it does not enter into any obligation to employ any applicant on the list." 2 The board "reserves the right to discontinue at its discre- tion, any or all the names on such eligible list." 3 The noteworthy and commendable features of the St. Louis system are: the recognition which is given to certif- icates of graduation from reputable institutions; the exclu- sive authority conferred on the superintendent to conduct the examinations and to select such of the supervisory officers and teachers as he may desire to assist; the merit list of candidates for elementary and high schools. PORTLAND, ME. I. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHERS (a) Elementary schools Teachers in the grammar and primary schools of the city shall be graduates of an accredited normal school or training school; or hold a teachers state certificate authorizing the holder to teach in the elementary schools of Maine for a period of not less than five years. 4 (b) High schools Teachers in the high schools shall be graduates of reputable col- leges, universities, or scientific schools, or hold a teacher's state cer- 1 Rule 44 (2), 191 1, p. 69. 2 Rules, 1910, regulation iv, sec. 1, p. 36. 8 Ibid., sec. 5, p. 37. 4 Rules, 191 2, chap, vi, sec. 614. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 71 tificate authorizing the holder to teach for life in the public schools of Maine. 1 2, 3. EXAMINATIONS FOR TESTING THE FITNESS OF CAN- DIDATES GIVEN BY THE SUPERINTENDENT The law 2 provides as follows: II. On satisfactory evidence that a candidate possesses a good moral character and a temper and disposition suitable for an instructor of youth, he shall examine him in reading, spelling, English grammar, geography, history, arithmetic, civil government, bookkeeping, and physiology, with special reference to the effects of alcoholic drinks, stimulants and narcotics upon the human system; and the elements of the natural sciences, especially as applied to agriculture, and such other branches as the superintending school committee desire to in- troduce into public schools, and particularly into the school for which he is examined; also as to his capacity for the government thereof. III. He shall give to each candidate found competent, a certificate that he is qualified to govern said school and instruct in the branches above named, and such other branches as may be necessary to be taught therein, or he may render valid by endorsement any graded certificates issued to teachers by normal school principals. No cer- tificates shall be granted any person to teach in the public schools of the state who has not passed a satisfactory examination in physi- ology and hygiene, with special reference to the effects of alcoholic drinks, stimulants and narcotics upon the human system. 4. THE MERIT LIST There are no provisions in the rules for a merit list of candidates, although the superintendent states that in practice there is such a list. The features of the Portland system to be noted are: the specifically stated requirements for teachers in the elemen- tary and high schools; the provision in the law that the superintendent shall examine candidates for teaching posi- tions; and the acceptance in the city of certificates issued by the state. 1 Rules, 1912, chap, vi, sec. 614. 2 Quoted in Rules, 191 2, p. 29. 72 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES CINCINNATI* I. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHERS t (a) Elementary schools All candidates must be high school graduates and must have had a two year normal school course or two years' successful experience in teaching. They must have certificates from the Cincinnati board of examiners or the Ohio state board of examiners, and must have done practice teaching for inspection by the Cincinnati authorities. (b) High schools College graduation is required of all teachers of academic subjects. Candidates must have specialized in college in the subjects which they desire to teach. 2. EXAMINATIONS 2 FOR TESTING THE FITNESS OF CANDIDATES (a) Elementary schools All candidates must be examined in theory and practice of teaching. This examination covers Psychology, Methods, and the History of Education in the last two centuries. The other subjects are: Reading, Literature, English Grammar and Composition, Spelling, History of the United States and Civil Government, Geography, Arithmetic, Hy- giene and Narcotics, Writing, Music, and Drawing. "The examination involves questions occurring in the elementary course of study, except in Literature in which the examina- tion is based upon the high school course in English." Graduates of the College for Teachers are exempt from examination, except in theory and practice. 1 The following exposition is based on a Circular of Information issued in 191 2. 2 Examinations are practically as prescribed by state law. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 73 (b) High schools In addition to the examination in theory and practice explained under elementary school requirements, candidates for high school positions must pass examinations in the following subjects: General History, Literature, Algebra, Physics, Physiology, and four branches selected from Latin, German, Rhetoric, Civil Government, Geometry, Physical Geography, Botany, Chemistry. 3. THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS According to the state law, 1 the board of examiners con- sists of three members selected by the board of education for a term of three years, the term of one member expiring each year. The law further provides that two of the mem- bers "must have had at least two years' practical experience in teaching in the public schools.' ' The compensation is fixed by the board of education at $400. The present board consists of the superintendent of schools, a newspaper man, and a practicing physician. "An average of at least seventy-five with no grade below seventy in any branch is required for a certificate, but in order to be ranked for appointment in the first or preferred list, an average of not less than eighty is required." 4. THE MERIT LIST (a) Elementary schools There are two lists of candidates: list one consists of those who are college graduates, and who have taken work in education or have had two years' experience in teach- ing. Their place on the list is detennined by the average of their college record, their examination record, and their grade for practice teaching under inspection. 1 Laws of 191 2, sec. 7838. 74 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES List two consists of those who are high school graduates with two years of normal training or two years' experience. Their rank is determined by their examination record and the mark in practice teaching. Candidates are appointed invariably in the order of rank. Teachers are not appointed from the second as long as there are candidates on the first list. (b) High schools Appointments are usually made from the elementary schools, although this is not an invariable rule, as it is the intention to select the best candidate for a position. Can- didates for high school positions are listed according to subjects which they are qualified to teach. Their rank is determined by their teaching ability as shown by their work in the elementary school or in the high schools out- side the city. Their college records in the subjects they wish to teach, the amount of undergraduate and graduate work they have taken in those subjects, the amount of profes- sional work in education they have taken, and their records in the city examination are also taken into consideration. Candidates are invariably appointed from the head of each appropriate merit list. The commendable features of the Cincinnati system are: the exceptionally high academic and professional standards established for elementary and high school teachers; the strictness with which appointments are made from the head of the merit list; and the first and second list of ele- mentary school candidates. The undesirable features of the Cincinnati system are: the antiquated requirement established by state law that a teacher must pass an academic examination in almost every subject in the high school curriculum before he is eligible to teach any one of them, and the board of examiners con- ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 75 sisting of two laymen, who may or may not be good judges of the qualifications of the teachers. WORCESTER I. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHERS (a) Elementary schools No one shall be entitled to take an examination for a certificate in the graded schools who has not taken the equivalent of a high school course, and who has not graduated from a normal school which has a full three years' course, including one year's apprenticeship; or, if a graduate of another normal school, has not had an experience regarded by the committee as equivalent of a year's apprenticeship. 1 No teacher shall be employed, except in the high schools, evening schools, kindergartens, or as a special teacher, who has not received a certificate from the committee on teachers. 2 (b) High schools The committee on high schools shall have general charge of the day high schools. "All certificates of qualification for teachers in these schools shall be given by this committee.' ' 3 The qualifications for appointment to the high schools are not defined by the school committee in its regulations. No examinations are specified. The whole matter of determining the qualifications for appointment, and the examination for testing those qualifications, are left to the committee, with- out any special supervision by the school committee. 2. EXAMINATIONS FOR TESTING THE FITNESS OF CANDIDATES No person shall receive a certificate to teach in the public schools of the city, except in the high schools, evening schools, kindergartens, and as a special teacher, who has not passed a satisfactory examina- tion, under the direction of the committee on teachers, in the following subjects: arithmetic, grammar, geography, history, civil government, physiology, psychology and principles of teaching, drawing and music. 4 x Rules, 1908, chap, iv, sec. 2. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid., sec. 12. 4 Ibid., sec. 2. 76 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES The rules do not define the examinations for high school teachers; these are left to the committee on high schools. 3. THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS The committee on teachers shall annually, and at such other times as it may deem expedient, examine persons desiring to teach in the primary and grammar grades of the day schools, and shall give certificates of qualification to such persons as it shall consider entitled thereto. No certificate shall be granted until after a personal examination by the Committee on Teachers. 1 The committee on high schools determines the eligibility requirements, and inasmuch as they are not defined, we can only assume that the committee likewise conducts such examinations as it deems necessary. 4. THE MERIT LIST The rules do not contain any information concerning a merit list. However, the superintendent states that there is a merit list of elementary school candidates, and the high school teachers "are generally chosen by confirming the nominations of the Superintendent." One wonders how much emphasis should be placed on the word generally. The system in Worcester is to be condemned in most respects: the eligibility qualifications are defined for can- didates for the elementary schools, but they are not defined for high school teachers; with no defined eligibility re- quirements for high school positions, the examinations to test those qualifications cannot be stated; lay committees of the board conduct examinations and issue certificates, in both cases without any supervision by the board or superin- tendent. A merit list is not officially provided, in the case of either the elementary or the secondary school candidates, although it exists in practice in the case of the former. 1 Rules, 1908, chap, iv, sect. 2. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 77 Comparative Tabulations of Phases of Eligibility Requirements In order to bring together some of the results of the pre- ceding detailed study of selected cities, we present here some comparative tabulations which, because of the preceding exposition, carry their own explanations. Blank spaces in the following tabulations mean that such information is not contained in the school documents consulted. I. AMOUNT OF SCHOOLING AND TEACHING EXPERIENCE (a) Elementary school candidates Boston St. Louis Portland Cincinnati Worcester Amount of schooling None Normal school pre- X X X 1 X College or university scribed Teaching experience 2 yrs. 2 yrs. None X 2 None Additional examination Yes No Yes Yes Yes (b) High school candidates Amount of schooling Normal school X College or university X X X X None Teaching experience 3 yrs. 2 yrs. specified Additional examination Yes Yes Yes 2. SUBJECTS OF EXAMINATIONS (a) Elementary school candidates The following table is a summary of the examinations required of elementary school candidates in each city: 1 Minimum requirement; such candidates are not appointed as long as there are college graduates on the first preferred list. 8 Inexperienced candidates serve at least two months as cadets, or substitutes, in the Cincinnati schools before being appointed to regular teaching positions. 78 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Boston St. Louis Portland Cincinnati Worcester Academic Subjects Required i. English language X . . . and grammar X X X X X 2. Eng. literature X X and Am. literature X . . . 3. Essays X . . . 4. Drawing X X X 5. Music X X X 6. Eng. history and X • • Am. history X X X X X civics X X X X 7. Arithmetic . . * X X X X or algebra )» or plane geometry * * * 8. Physical and political geography . . . X X X X or botany or zoology X or physiology X X and narcotics X • • 9. Latin or German " or French or physics X or chemistry 10. Reading X X X 11. Composition and X X penmanship X X 12. Spelling X X 13. Bookkeeping X 14. Agriculture X 15. Hygiene and X narcotics X Professional Subjects Required 16. Psychology and X X X prin. of education X 17. Methods X . . . X X 18. History of education X X ... ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS (b) High school candidates 79 In each column, under the name of the city, is given a list of the subjects in which candidates for high school positions are examined: Boston St. Louis Cincinnati Portland, Worcester Elementary Examination i. Eng. and Am. lit- i. Eng. literature 1. Literature None erature defined 2. Latin or French or 2. Latin 3. Algebra in these German cities 3. Essay 4. General history 3. General history 2. General history 4. Algebra 3. Algebra Advanced Examination 5. Geometry A major and two mi- 6. History and 4. Physics nors in a given field grammar of 5. Physiology of study Eng. literature 6. Four out of 7. Natural science eight other high school subjects Professional Subjects Psychology and prin. History and theory Psychology of education of education History of educa- tion, methods (c) Exemptions from examinations The exemptions from the regularly prescribed examina- tions for elementary school candidates are as follows: Boston. Graduates of the Boston Normal School. St. Louis. Graduates of the St. Louis Teachers College, and such graduates of colleges and normal schools as the superintendent deems qualified. Portland. Graduates of state normal schools may be certified by the superintendent without examination. Cincinnati. A state life certificate is valid without further examination. Graduates of the College for Teach- ers of the University of Cincinnati may be excused from all examinations except that in theory and practice. 80 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Worcester. No exemptions. The exemptions from the regularly prescribed examina- tions for high school candidates are as follows: Boston. None. St. Louis. None. Portland. No examinations required. Cincinnati. A state life certificate is valid without fur- ther examination. Worcester. No examinations prescribed. Boston St. Louis Portland Cincinnati Worcester 3. MEMBERSHIP OF BOARD OP EXAMINERS Who they Are Superintendent and six assistant superintendents Superintendent and the assistant superintendents, and such supervisors, principals, and teachers as the superintendents may select Superintendent Superintendent, a newspaper man, and a physician For elementary schools: committee on teachers For high schools: committee on high schools 4. THE MERIT LIST The following tabulation shows whether there is an official merit list of eligible candidates for elementary schools and high schools, and how appointments are made from it. For Elementary Schools For High Schools How Appointments are Made Boston St. Louis Portland Cincinnati Worcester Yes Yes Unofficial one Yes Unofficial one Yes Yes No Yes No From first three names In rotation No data First name No data ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 8 1 Summary of Conclusions We have passed in review the eligibility requirements and the methods of determining them in selected cities. The variations in requirements and methods in these five cities are typical of the variety of standards of eligibility of candidates in cities generally. While each of the five cities is, of course, an object of much general interest, yet each city was selected for study for particular reasons. Boston represents the larger cities. It was selected particularly to illustrate that type of city which has a board of examiners consisting of the profes- sional leaders in the school system, namely, the board of superintendents. St. Louis belongs to the same class of large cities, but it illustrates a different method of organizing a board of ex- aminers. The superintendent is given large authority and much discretionary power in accepting credentials of can- didates in lieu of examinations, and also in selecting the members of the committee on examinations. Portland represents the small cities, and it illustrates how the examination of teachers is centralized, by law, in the superintendent's office. Cincinnati is among the larger cities and shows how a state imposes on a city school system an archaic system of exami- nations. It also shows how a large local board of educa- tion can be equally non-progressive in constituting a board of examiners of three members, two of whom are laymen. Worcester is among the second class cities in size and was selected to illustrate an undesirable method, too commonly employed, of placing the discharge of the highly techni- cal and professional function of examining teachers in the hands of a committee of the board of education consisting of laymen. 82 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Concerning eligibility requirements we find: i. At least a normal school course is specified as the amount of schooling required of elementary school candi- dates in four of the cities. Boston does not fix as a standard any amount of schooling. 2. College or university graduation is fixed as the amount of schooling required of high school candidates in three cities. Worcester does not define any amount of schooling. St. Louis may accept normal graduates. 3. Boston and St. Louis fix as a prerequisite two years' successful experience for elementary school candidates. Boston fixes three years for high school candidates and Cincinnati two years. Concerning the examinations required of elementary school candidates, we find: 1. Only English grammar and American history are re- quired of candidates in all five cities. 2. Arithmetic is required in four cities, but algebra or plane geometry may be substituted for it in Boston. Civics and geography are likewise required in four of these five cities. 3. Drawing, music, and reading are required in three of the five cities. 4. Most of the academic subjects are required of candi- dates in only one or two cities. 5. The professional subjects, psychology and methods of teaching, are required in three out of five cities. 6. In general there is great variety in the subjects con- stituting the examination in various cities, as shown by the fact that there are thirty-two different subjects offered in only five different cities. Concerning the examinations required of high school candidates, we find more variety than in the requirements of elementary school candidates. ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS 83 1. In Worcester no examinations for high school candi- dates are denned in the rules. 2. In Portland only one series of examinations is denned by law, and it is presumable that these examinations are for elementary school candidates only. 3. English literature and general history are the only sub- jects that are specifically required in the three other cities. Concerning exemptions from the prescribed examinations, we find: 1. The graduates of the local teachers' training schools are usually wholly or partially exempt from the regular examinations. 2. Exemptions from the examinations for elementary school candidates are more frequent than from those for high school candidates. Concerning the board of examiners to test the fitness of candidates, we find: 1. In Boston, St. Louis, Portland, and Cincinnati the superintendent participates in the examination of candidates for teaching positions; in Worcester the superintendent does not, according to the rules, exercise such participation. 2. In Boston and in St. Louis the other members of the board are members of the profession within the school system; in Portland the superintendent acts alone. 3. In Cincinnati the members of the board consist of the superintendent of schools, a newspaper man, and a practic- ing physician. 4. In Worcester the committee on teachers, of five mem- bers, examines candidates for the elementary schools, and the committee on high schools, of nine members, does like- wise for the high schools. Concerning a merit list of eligible candidates, we find: 1. In Boston, St. Louis, and Cincinnati there is a list for both the elementary and the high schools. 84 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES 2. In Portland there is a merit list in use, although it is not officially provided for in the rules. 3. In Worcester there is a merit list of elementary school candidates in use, although such a list is not provided for by the rules. There is no merit list of high school candidates. 4. In Boston the election of teachers from the merit list is from among the first three candidates; in Cincinnati the first candidate is invariably selected. In St. Louis the rule is to select the first person named on the list, although the board reserves the right to pass over a name. • PART II THE CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION CHAPTER V THE AUTHORITY OF BOARDS OF EDUCATION IN CITIES Education not a Federal Matter. Education in the United States is a state and not a federal matter. It is not men- tioned in the national constitution. 1 The United States bureau of education has no authority in educational mat- ters. Its chief function is the dissemination of information. Its influence is limited to the voluntary acceptance of its suggestion, for it has no authority either to direct in any way educational procedure, or to require even the slightest consideration of its suggestions. Education a Function of the State. The states have always viewed education as an object of their special concern. The earliest constitutions adopted by the various states contain sections relating to education. 2 The states recog- nized their duty or obligation toward education in such terms as these: The people have a right to the privilege of education, and it is the duty of the state to guard and maintain that right. 3 The State Discharges its Responsibility through the State Legislature. To carry out its responsibility for education, the state customarily requires the state legislature to make suitable provision for public school education. The first constitutional command to a state legislature to establish a complete system of free public schools, ranging from the 1 Draper, Functions of the State Touching Education, Ed. Rev. vol. xv, pp. 105-120. 2 Hinsdale, Provision Concerning Education in the State Constitutions, Report of the United States Commissioner of Education, 1892-3, vol. ii, pp. 1312-1414. 8 Art. i, sec. 27, Constitution of North Carolina, adopted 1876. Hinsdale, ibid., p. 1385. 87 88 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES primary school to the university, was contained in the con- stitution of Indiana, 1 as follows: It shall be the duty of the general assembly, as soon as circum- stances will permit, to provide by law for a general system of educa- tion, ascending in regular gradation from township schools to a State university, wherein tuition shall be gratis and equally open to all. 2 Since that time states generally through their constitu- tions have made it the duty of the state legislature to pro- vide suitable free public education for the people. Agencies of State Educational Administration. While every state in the Union has established some kind of a central state educational agency, the amount of authority delegated to it differs greatly among the different states. In Massachusetts, for example, the state board of education and its executive exercise comparatively little direction over education in the state: "The chief function of the Board has been to advise, enlighten and arouse, but not to compel."- 3 In New York, 4 on the other hand, the board of regents through its state commissioner of education exer- cises extraordinary authority — legislative, executive, and judicial — over all phases of education in the state. Ob- viously each form of state control affects the character of the local achninistrative control. Agencies of Local Educational Administration. For pur- poses of local school administration the county, the town- ship, and the city are the most common units. 5 The county system is most common in the Southern States, and the 1 Hinsdale, Provision Concerning Education in the State Constitutions, Report of the United States Commissioner of Education, 1892-3, vol ii, p. 1320. 2 Art. ix, sec. 2, adopted December 11, 1816. Hinsdale, ibid., p. 1319. 8 Whitten, Public Administration in Massachusetts, p. 24. 4 Fairlie, The Centralization of Administration in New York State, p. 39. Dutton and Snedden, Administration of Public Education in the United States, p. 67, Edu- cation Law of 1910, in Report of Education Department, New York, vol. ii, 1910. 6 Dutton and Snedden, ibid., p. 73. AUTHORITY OF BOARDS OF EDUCATION 89 township system in the Middle West. The city system is, as the name indicates, the usual means by which the state legislature undertakes to provide education in cities. Each of these local administrative units bears a direct relation to the state, and usually little or no administrative relation- ship to one another. Cities are Creatures of the State. Cities are created by acts of the state legislatures, and In the absence of constitutional provisions, the control of the state through its legislative assembly is absolute. A state legislature may, in the absence of such provisions, legislate with regard to cities as it will. 1 The city has no vested rights; it has no powers not granted to it by the state legislature. 2 The city is an authority of enumerated powers, and can exercise only such powers as are explicitly granted to it. 3 Goodnow says, the city is not only an organ for the satisfaction of local needs: it is in many cases a most important agent of the state government, and municipal officers are not infrequently called upon to attend to matters which interest the citizens of the city only as they are citizens of the state, — matters which do not directly interest municipal government proper at all. 4 It is clear, therefore, that except in so far as that authority is limited by the state constitution, the state is absolute in its authority over the city, and that that authority is exer- cised through the state legislature. City Board of Education* a State Agency. The state 1 Bard, The City School District, p. 21. 2 "City corporations are emanations of the supreme law-making power of the state, and they are established for the more convenient government of the people within their limits." — Darlington vs. Mayor of New York, 31 N. Y. 164. Quoted by Bard, p. 21. 3 Bard, p. 21. 4 Goodnow, Municipal Problems, p. 63. 6 Board of education is here used to cover the central school authority of the city, whether it is called locally the school board, the school committee, board of school directors, board of public education, or some other similar name. 90 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES legislature, through provisions in the city charter and by special or general laws, creates local agencies for the ad- ministration of education and defines their powers and responsibilities. The agency thus created for the city, as we shall see later, is the city board of education. By thus delegating power and responsibility to the local board the state does not relieve itself of responsibility: it merely thereby establishes a method of administration. In educa- tional affairs "the city is charged with important duties, but in the discharge of such duties it acts exclusively as the agent of the state." 1 Also concerning the city school district, which is the unit of educational administration, Bard says, Unlike the city, it is in no instance recognized as having duties of its own in the discharge of which the state need not interfere. The city school district is exclusively an agent of the state created for the discharge of state functions. 2 Further, the educational officers of the city are state and not municipal officers, because they are acting in that capacity as agents of the state. 3 Every important city in the United States, except Buffalo, N. Y., has a board of education. 4 The state has conferred on the board large responsibilities and powers. One of its important responsi- bilities is the appointment of suitable teachers. Conse- quently a study of the methods of appointing teachers must take into consideration the board of education as the au- thority charged with that responsibility. Summary. From the foregoing exposition it will be seen that education in the cities is a state function; that cities are creatures of the state; that the state through its legis- lature has absolute control over the cities, subject only to state constitutional provisions; that the state legislature, 1 Bard, p. 23. 8 Ibid., p. 20. » Ibid., p. 23. 4 Rollins, School Administration in Municipal Government, p. 21. AUTHORITY OF BOARDS OF EDUCATION 9 1 either through charter provisions or other legislation, es- tablishes a city board of education and confers on it large responsibilities and powers; that among these powers and responsibilities is the appointment of teachers. It is to be observed, further, that to study a problem of local school administration, such as our problem is, it is necessary to consider the city from the standpoint of (a) its charter pro- visions as they relate to education, (b) the general state educational laws applicable to the city, and (c) the special educational laws referring to the city. In these sources are to be found the extent of state direction or control of edu- cation in the cities. Local provisions for education are to be found largely in the rules and regulations of city boards of education. CHAPTER VI CITY BOARDS OF EDUCATION: THEIR SIZE, MEMBER- SHIP, AND COMMITTEE ORGANIZATION In the previous chapter the authority of the board of educa- tion in cities was considered. In this chapter I shall discuss (i) the size of city boards of education; (2) the member- ship of city boards, covering term of office, compensation, methods of selection, and the qualifications of members; and (3) the committee organization of city boards. The facts which form the basis of this exposition were gathered in part from school documents, and in part were furnished by superintendents. Except when specifically noted, the facts tabulated below are given as stated by the superin- tendents or as verified by them. The tabulations cover boards of education in the seventy-three cites considered in this monograph. As before, cities are classified as first class, second class, and third class. The Size of City Boards of Education The tabulations on pages 93 to 98 show that there are small boards in all classes of cities, and that there are like- wise large boards in all classes of cities, although the larger cities, on the whole, do have larger boards of education. Also there is no section of the country which has a monop- oly of either the large or the small board. There are large boards in New England and also in the Middle West; there are likewise small boards in these two sections of the coun- try. The graphs on pages 99 to 101, based on these tabu- lations, will bring out these and other facts. CITY BOARDS OF EDUCATION 93 No. of Mem- bers on Committee on Teachers 1 o o t^.00 t^. co »o CO fc Average Size of all Commit- tees § - vO vO t^. CO ^fr fO ss •si* 0) 8 ^* CO OO co t>. cs TT o a a «j .O M H K N >» cn J2 J3 Jj M i 3 to g #9 -° bO bO &0 l-c (-1 >-« ctf ctf c3 < «j X +j -i_> +-> *-> *-> 4-> < PQ <<< << < 4) i S o Ph S a 5 U >-i a a too * a <3 « « -*-> -t~> •8 M .3 .3 .S .3 .3 0) u 1 3 & 0,0,0, aa 2 o -£ a O O O a o u m W< <<< << W a o 1 I o> o> vo Ov »0 u-> Ox Ov to 6 6 Tf M M 2J c3 (3 en 1 1 llllil pq £ pq Jz; pl, p., it PQ £ 13 o I 94 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES . of Mem- bers on mmittee Teachers CO »o m to to CO CO CO co 0M Rll CO to to ^ to CO CO 0» CO M >. of nding nmit- ees vO CO 00 vO co Tf t^ vO *lcS £ &S to ) o> "d -. c3 |? rt rt rt 8> H «J >»J3 r-^ 1—4 <* w3 X* to" 5 vN ^ -*j >% -i_> +j ,i_> •*-> ■*-> to o» < pq<<< << § V O JH J£ JS ^ >> a "3, S(*E M 0) <* Ph Ph Pui Ph SI T3 T3 V • fl O -t-> -*-> *j -*-> q, <-> o o o 8.3 1 o u Q a,H K w W fl ss w §s Is i a o o o o # o o fe fc ££ ££ CO a ll t . O* M M to t^ *J3 V ifl hill •—1 (1) ••-4 Its -if » 2 ■sa a fe 9 a -fl E Jg m c a H H H CITY BOARDS OF EDUCATION 95 U B O d d CO «) lfl u> io to W) o O "S^VXO rfvO « <0 ro 1*5 CD d d co WJIOIOIOOIOO 5 ^^"J^ COVO C* CO c*5 <0 »o aoo i H £ bObobObObObCbObO I- B XJ •6 £ >> >> pq pq Oj oj £fea> & & &&& as I la a I o o 8 8* * X) XJ X* 73 X) T3 X) w w • d .d a> a> -h .d a) *-> +j +j o o -^ -*-> o o -*-> pS MM S S J3 jj s Sij x> x) XJ X> X X W W 7} w d d sisll^ills s s d ci o o o * o o ££ fc ££ rOO «OrJ-vO rJ-Tj-c* co *0 co to •<* Tf co to On to O <0 M co <0 m N wj viN O^ 0< 0» 0> <* to to Ov to ■I ft* 8 ti I is £ -a k «5 o u ^O 3 3 1 9i|| : S|i^£i?8 x) d Si «> w « J3 1 1 a 1 il II ! S. a 4-> 4-< +J +-> f | cd Xi CO Ov en co !3 ^^ W H en ft! ca XI CO W 1 CU ! ft a 1 cu 1 8 8,3 8 8 Ph (3h & Pn Ph CU CU CU cu CU 'a'a'E'E'E CU CU cu cu CU Ph fit PL, Ph Ph u | 1 t 6 W 1 w w Elected Elected Appointed Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected Elected a o J 1 1 1 CU CO 1) CU cu s fi fi c s CU cu cu cu fi fi fi £ ^ IsSiSsS" 4 «■ ** Th ^t CO CO COvO VO co co io t H VO H io to to to r» 1 1 I 3 ! 1 Indianapolis Grand Rapids St. Paul Omaha Kansas City Denver Seattle Spokane Portland Oakland Total 32 cities CO U ■8 ^ 8 a e 1-. 8. 1 3 Q -0 1 H S CITY BOARDS OF EDUCATION 97 No. of Mem- bers on Committee on Teachers CO CO CO «4> •*• V) co T3 CU O co co Average Size of all Commit- tees CO CO co ^ rj- to co CO eu 0*0*0 5 No. of Standing Commit- tees M *0 ON t->- vO W M cu g VO vo < cej ,0 CO o to en PP PQ - |5 2 ^ h mPQPQ W PQ eu cu 42 42 i 5 I i n 42 Ph CU cu o o cu « o a> jy jj _a> ^ g'ju W W W vo rf-W % -a | 8 cu <— i <% W I <3 eu 1 cu 4) cu eu -§ o o o o *-* * eu eu 1 1 c* M J 1 s« a 1 ll " 1 fcJ | s 8 i S o 2 . +-• o mbe ards me ght il me ith w e for ire e Ills 8: B.si5 § 1 1 c 1 >> s i 8^g rt ^ 2 s §•§ 111"? s-S-ts g "O o a rt fl'C u h e» * U R .s M 11 cr cu eel jQ !1 1 a O 4> 11 d i f ' - | & w 3 1 I|l 1 . . "8 * 8 slisi^ S a 8 ^ S i2 5 ce) .2 h fi * confirmed by or is ex-officio ident of board n Antonio. — ulated here. ' selected is not ■m >» «i ee? ^3 ^S^"^ * ~ « w o 2 H "^ a> III a 98 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES 5 No. of Mem- bers on Committee on Teachers CO 2 CO «0 " ^iw) O * < < U> W) U) bO )-, 1-1 %-, l_ cd rt d cd +-> -i_> +-> ~t-> <<<< a> a> a> b© bO bO bO S be bO i_ u, »_ m g s-H u. d d d d ;J cj d 4-> -*j -♦-> -*-> >. -*-> +J < < < < pq < < 1 Ah £ JZ J£ JZ Cu Ph Cl, Pi, cu cu 0) *j 4-> •*-> -♦-) O <_> O O o cu cu cu WW WW ■rt n3 *0 *T3 ^J *C? n3 D U 0) U D 5J 1) o o o o o o o cu cu cu cu cu cu cu w W0 w w w w 1 1 9 1 cu cu cu * ^ lOVO t^vO >fl too IOVO M '0 I o ill J § 1 d c d <* u £ £ S W o ^ m s &£ 8*. § J 3 PhU At large Philadelphia Appointed Judges By wards St. Louis 2 Elected People Yz at large % by wards Boston Elected People At large Baltimore Selected Council By wards San Francisco Elected People At large Cincinnati Elected People By wards Cleveland Elected People At large New Orleans 2 Selected % council % state board of education By districts Pittsburgh Selected District boards By districts Allegheny Elected People By wards Washington Selected Comm'rs of D. C. By districts Detroit Elected People By wards Milwaukee Selected Council By wards Minneapolis Elected People At large Jersey City Appointed Mayor By wards Louisville Elected People By wards Omaha Elected People At large Rochester Elected People By wards St. Paul Appointed Mayor At large Kansas City Elected People At large Providence Elected People By wards Denver Elected People At large Indianapolis Elected People By districts Newark Elected People By wards 1 Approved by the city council. 2 Considered as having two methods of selecting members, as indicated. 132 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES 1913 Cities How Chosen By Whom At Large By Wards New York Appointed Mayor By boroughs Chicago Appointed Mayor 1 At large Philadelphia Appointed Judges At large St. Louis Elected People At large Boston Elected People At large Baltimore Appointed Mayor At large San Francisco Appointed Mayor At large Cincinnati Elected People At large Cleveland Elected People At large New Orleans Elected People At large Pittsburgh Appointed Judges At large Washington Appointed Judges At large Detroit Elected People By wards Milwaukee Elected People At large Newark Appointed Mayor At large Minneapolis Elected People At large Jersey City Appointed Mayor At large Louisville Elected People At large Omaha Elected People By wards Rochester Elected People At large St. Paul Appointed Mayor At large Kansas City Elected People At large Providence Elected People By wards Denver Elected People At large Indianapolis Elected People At large Of the 27 cities in 1893 6 appointed 16 elected 6 selected The following is a summary of the table on page 131 on the methods of selecting members of the board of education J ■? of Inrtxp y y 1 1 by wards 1 by mayor and city council 1 at large 1 by city judges 1 by wards y " p I 8 by wards or districts 3 by council 2 3 by wards 1 by commissioners of D. C. 1 by wards 1 by district boards 1 by districts 1 by state board of education 1 by districts 1 Approved by the city council. 2 New Orleans had two methods of selecting board members: two-fifths by council and three-fifths by the state board of education. CHANGES IN BOARDS OF EDUCATION 133 The following is a summary of the table on page 132 on the methods of selecting members of the board of education in 1913 6 by mayor f 5 at large 1 1 by boroughs Of the ' 10 appointed 1 by mayor and council 1 at large 25 cities' 3 by judges 3 at large 1111913 . 15 elected 15 by people f 1 2 at large 1 3 by wards Summary. In 1893 sixteen cities elected school board members by direct vote of the people, while by 19 13 this number had been decreased by one. In 1893 the mayor appointed school board members in five cities, while in 1913 this number had been increased to seven cities. In 1893 twelve cities selected members from the city at large and fifteen cities from wards or districts. By 19 13 twenty-one cities were selecting members from the city at large and only four cities from wards or districts. Viewing the above tabulations as a whole, it will be seen that there were ten distinct methods of selecting school board members in 1893, and that in 19 13 there were only six different methods. Selection by city council, by district boards of education, by the state board of education, and by commissioners of the District of Columbia has been eliminated during the past twenty years in these twenty-seven cities. (2) SPECIFIC CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE Thus far we have considered the number of changes which have taken place in the methods of selecting board members during the last twenty years in the twenty-seven cities under consideration. We shall now consider the actual changes which have been made. For example, it is desirable to know not only that changes have been made, but also whether, for example, changes are from appointment by 134 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES the mayor to election by the people or vice versa. If an analysis of the changes show a well defined trend, we may be able to establish a basis for determining what method of selection is most likely to become general or approximately so. The changes will be considered under two heads : (a) how members are chosen and by whom, and (b) whether they are chosen from the city at large or by wards. (a) How members are chosen and by whom Of the twenty-eight cities in 1893, two ! have lost their identity, twenty have undergone no changes in respect to the method of selecting board members, and six have ex- perienced changes. The cities and the changes are indicated in the following table. i893 1913 Cities From To Baltimore Election by city council Appointment by mayor Milwaukee Election by city council Election by people San Francisco Election by people Appointment by mayor Newark Election by people Appointment by mayor Washington Election by D. C. commissioners Appointment by judges Pittsburgh Election by district boards of education Appointment by judges The result of these changes from the standpoint of the methods employed can best be indicated by the table on page 135. In the first column are indicated the various methods of selection involved; in the second column the number of cities gained for each method during the twenty year period; and in the third column the number of cities lost to each method. The methods are arranged in the order of greatest growth. 1 Brooklyn and Allegheny. CHANGES IN BOARDS OF EDUCATION 135 Methods Gained Lost Appointment by mayor 3 2 1 Appointment by judges O Election by people 2 Election by district boards Election by D. C. commissioners Election by city council I I 2 Selection by City Council Eliminated. The facts in the above tabulation need some detailed consideration. In the first place it should be noted that in these cities, as far as the board of education is concerned, the city council has lost its former power as an agency in school affairs. Chicago is the only one of the twenty-five cities that permits the city council to have anything whatever to do with the selection of members of the board of education. And in Chicago the city council only approves the appointments made by the mayor. The abolition of the city council from participation in the selection of board members indicates progress, and this progress is entirely in accord with the decreased participation of the city council generally in the administration of city affairs. 1 Increased Selection by Judges Probably Exceptional. The selection of board members in Washington by the com- missioners of the District of Columbia, and in Pittsburgh by district boards of education, were special methods of selection, and hence need not demand our special con- sideration. The significant fact in the changes in these two cities is that appointment is now placed in the hands of judges. Whether appointment by judges is likely to be- come a more common method of selecting board members is a difficult question to answer. In 1893 Philadelphia was the only city in which this method existed. By 1913 Washing- 1 See Goodnow, Municipal Government, chap. x. 136 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES ton and Pittsburgh had been added. Apparently the most significant reason for the adoption of this method of selec- tion is a political one. In its effort to get the schools out of politics and to keep them out, each city has lodged the power of appointing board members in that agency of our local government which is most generally recognized as being farthest removed from local politics, namely, the courts. Assuming that any administrative agency in our democratic form of government feels responsibility to the source which created it, the fundamental objection to this method of selection is that it makes the board of education responsible to the court rather than to the people for whom schools and education are provided. Inasmuch as these are the only cities in the United States, of those covered in this study, which have adopted this method of selection, it is fair to assume that this method is likewise an exceptional one rather than one which is likely to be generally adopted. Election by People Loses; Appointment by Mayor Gains. Election by the people as a method of selection has lost ground during the past two decades, and appointment by the mayor has made the greatest gains. Whether this is indicative of the most likely future development is also difficult to say. Taking into consideration the fact that, in the second class and third class cities considered in this study, a decided preference is shown for the method of elec- tion by the people, one would be justified in concluding that our experience in the application of these two methods has not been sufficient to determine the advantage of the one over the other. The tendency indicated during the past twenty years does show that these are the two most common methods of selection, and with a corresponding future development during a similar period, these two methods will practically, if not exclusively, occupy the field. Which of them will ultimately be the solution of the problem, CHANGES IN BOARDS OF EDUCATION 1 37 if one method is to be the solution, will have to be determined after more experience. Summary. Concerning how and by whom members of the board of education are selected, the following facts are significant: the comparatively few changes in the methods in use during the twenty year period; the relatively few methods now in use; the increase in the method of appoint- ment by the mayor; the small loss in the method of election by the people; the increase in the method of appointment by judges; and the elimination of city council as a direct agency in selecting board members. (b) Chosen from the city at large or by wards In 1893 members of the board were selected by wards or districts in sixteen cities and from the city at large in only twelve cities. 1 In 19 13 members were selected by wards or boroughs in only four cities and at large in twenty-one cities. The changes which have taken place have all been from ward or district selection to selection from the city at large, except in the two cases of Omaha and New York. In Omaha in 1893, according to Draper, members were elected by the people from the city at large, but in 1913 the mem- bers were elected by the people by wards. Here is one case of a deliberate change during the past twenty years from a method which is apparently gaining in popularity to a method which is becoming obsolete. That the change has proven unsatisfactory is shown by information obtained from a former superintendent of schools in Omaha 2 and from a business man of the city 3 who knows what the results 1 St. Louis selected members partly by wards and partly at large, so that this city is counted with both groups of cities. 2 Mr. Carroll G. Pearse, now president of the state normal school at Milwaukee, letter of January 6, 1914. 3 C. S. Hayward, president of the Hayward Brothers Shoe Company, Omaha, letter of January 16, 1914. 138 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES have been. The law was changed to provide for the election of school board members by wards as a democratic political measure. 1 At the time the change was made the legislature and the state admimstration were Democratic, although usually Republican. 1 The measure did not, at the time, meet with the approval of the people whose opinions were of most value concerning school matters in Omaha. 2 "It is certain that the schools have not been better managed since than they were before; there are many people in the city who think that the methods of management and the quality of the membership of the Board has very greatly deteriorated. ,, 2 The results of the change as viewed by Mr. Hayward can best be presented in a paragraph taken from his letter: The result of electing members by wards has been to place the Board of Education in the worst kind of ward politics. Under the old law of electing members at large it was possible to get good rep- resentative business men each year to consent to become members of the Board of Education. In the case of New York the local situation explains the change from selection at large to selection by boroughs. The amalgamation of Brooklyn, Long Island City, and Richmond with New York into greater New York made it seem desirable to adopt a method of selecting members which would give each borough distinct representation. Aside from these two cases, it is a striking fact that all changes have been from the method which emphasized district representation to a method which emphasizes the city as the unit of representation. It can be said that selection from the city at large will undoubtedly come ul- timately to be the basis of selecting members of the board of education in practically all cities. 1 Mr. Carroll G. Pearse, now president of the state normal school at Mil- waukee, letter of January 6, 1914. 2 Mr. Carroll G. Pearse, ibid. CHANGES IN BOARDS OF EDUCATION The Term of Office of Members 139 Term of Office in Years, in 1893 and in 191 3, Compared. The following table shows the term of office in years of members of the board of education in the cities indicated in 1893 and in 1913. Cities 1893 1913 Cities 1893 1913 New York 3 5 Newark 2 3 Brooklyn 3 Minneapolis 6 6 Chicago 3 3 Jersey City 2 2 Philadelphia 3 6 Louisville 2 4 St. Louis 4 6 Omaha 5 3 Boston 3 3 Rochester 2 4 Baltimore 4 6 St. Paul 3 2 or 3 2 San Francisco 2 4 Kansas City 3 6 Cincinnati 2 4 Providence 3 6 Cleveland 2 4 Denver 2 6 Buffalo Nobd. 4 Nobd. 4 Indianapolis Totals 3 4 New Orleans 85 108 Pittsburgh 3 6 Average term Allegheny- 1,2,3! in years 2-93 4.30 Washington 3 3 Detroit 4 3 Milwaukee 3 6 The preceding table shows that the average term of members in 1893 was 2.93 years, or practically two years and eleven months, while in 19 13 it had increased to 4.30 years, or four years and three months. During the twenty years under consideration the average length of term of members has increased by one year and four months, or an increase of over 45 per cent. Charts Showing Increased Length of Term. The following table shows how the terms of members were distributed from one to six years in 1893 and from two to six years in 19 13. 1 In Allegheny some members were elected for one, some for two, and some for three years. These were treated as though they were in three different cities. 2 In St. Paul members are appointed for two or three years. These were treated as though they were in two separate cities. 140 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Terms in Years Number of Cases 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 1893 29 1 I 9 13 4 1 I 1913 26 " O 2 7 7 1 9 The following graph will show these same facts in clearer form. Term in Years 1234567 IS 14 13 12 11 1913 IO : 1893 Median, 1893 = 3 Median, 19 13 =4 How much Change there has Been. The further consid- eration of the changes which have taken place in the length of term of members of boards of education will be accord- ing to the following headings, (a) increases, {b) decreases, and (c) no changes. (a) Increases. Out of twenty-five cities, there are six- teen cases of increasing the term of members. The fol- lowing table shows the amount of the increase in each case. 1 These are cases, not cities. For explanation, see notes on page 139. CHANGES IN BOARDS OF EDUCATION 141 From To From To Years Years Years Fears Newark 2 3 New York 3 5 San Francisco 2 4 Philadelphia 3 6 Cincinnati 2 4 Pittsburgh 3 6 Cleveland 2 4 Milwaukee 3 6 Louisville 2 4 Kansas City- 3 6 Rochester 2 4 Providence 3 6 Denver 2 6 Baltimore 4 6 Indianapolis 3 4 St. Louis 4 6 The following considerations should be noted: in all cases except Newark the change has resulted in a term of four, five, or six years; six years is the most common term to which changes have been made, with almost as many cases of four year terms; and two cities advanced from a term of four years to one of six years. (b) Decreases. In three cities, Detroit, Omaha, and St. Paul, the term of members has been decreased during the twenty years from 1893 to 19 13. The term in Detroit was reduced from four to three years, in Omaha from five to three years, and in St. Paul a part of the members are now elected for a term of two years instead of three years, as formerly. It is clear from the above facts that these cities are reactionary, as these changes are not in harmony with the marked changes which are taking place throughout the country. (c) No Changes. In seven cities there has been no change in the term of office of members. It will be interest- ing to note the term of office in each of these cities. In Jersey City the term is two years; in Chicago, Boston, Washington, and for part of the members in St. Paul the term is three years; in New Orleans the term is four years; and in Minneapolis the term is already six years. From the tendency shown during the past twenty years to lengthen the term to four or six years, it may be confidently expected 142 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES that, in any of the cities with a term of three years or less, changes will ultimately be made to a term of at least four years, and more likely to a term of six years. Superintend- ents often express themselves as decidedly in favor of a longer term for members of the board, in order that there may be fewer interruptions in the pursuance of a general policy, interruptions due to frequent changes in the mem- bership of the board. 1 Conclusions The summary at the close of the discussion of each sep- arate topic makes unnecessary a repetition here of the facts which the study of this topic has brought out. However, it will be profitable to state in general terms the conclu- sions concerning certain features of the board of edu- cation, which can be deduced from the facts presented in the preceding pages. These conclusions are presented by topics, in the same order in which the topics were discussed. (i) CONCERNING THE SIZE OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION i. From the numerous but differing changes in the boards of education which have taken place during the past twenty years, it seems clear that society has not yet demon- strated by experience what the size of the board should be. From the tendency shown, however, it is clear that the board must be a small one, probably five members, or at most not more than seven members. 2. The changes which have taken place fail to indicate that a large city needs any larger board of education than a small city. 1 For illustration, see Preprint of Report of the Superintendent of Schools, Chi- cago, for 19 13, p. 29. CHANGES IN BOARDS OF EDUCATION 143 (2) CONCERNING METHODS OF SELECTING MEMBERS i. The tendency which the past twenty years has shown in the matter of selecting board members is toward either appointment by the mayor or election by the people, other methods having been practically eliminated. 2. Assuming that there is one best method which will survive, as yet there is no evidence to indicate which method is ultimately to prevail over the other. 3. The selection of members at large is so nearly the only basis now that there can be no doubt that this is to be the prevailing basis. (3) CONCERNING THE TERM OF OFFICE OF MEMBERS i. The lengthening of the term of office has been so universal and so marked that there can be no doubt that the longer term has come to stay. 2. Experience does not indicate whether the term should be four or six years, as the number of increases to each of these terms has been about equal. Finally, the standard board of education toward which boards of education generally have been developing in these twenty-eight cities during the past twenty years is a board of five members (or at most not over seven mem- bers), either appointed by the mayor or elected by the people from the city at large, who shall serve for a term of four or six years. PART III THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS CHAPTER VIII THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS: SELECTION, TENURE, AND SALARY As has already been stated, the office of superintendent of schools has been established in every city of importance in the United States. In previous chapters I have also shown that in a large majority of the cities under consideration the superintendent participates in the appointment of teachers. It is the purpose of this chapter to consider the selection, tenure, and salary of the superintendent. These will indicate, in a general way, to whom the superintendent is responsible, the stability of his position, and the impor- tance of his office as viewed by the community. The facts in the several tables were gathered from various sources; except when noted to the contrary, they have been con- firmed by the superintendents concerned. How the Superintendent is Selected The city superintendent is an officer of the city board of education and in most cities is elected by that board. There are a few conspicuous exceptions. In Buffalo and San Francisco the superintendent is elected by the people at a general election. The superintendent in Jacksonville, Fla., a county superintendency, is likewise elected by the people. In Richmond he is selected by the state board of education. Aside from these exceptions, the superintendent in each city covered by our study is chosen by the city board of education. As an officer of the board, the superintendent's duties and 147 148 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES (a) First Class Cities Tenure Salary Cities How Chosen Term in Years How Fixed Amount How Fixed Boston By board l 6 By law $10,000 By board 2 New York By board 6 By law I0,000 By board Buffalo Elected by people 4 By charter 7,500 By city council Newark By board Indef. By board 7,000 By board Philadelphia By board 1 By board 3 9,000 By board Pittsburgh By board 4 By board 9,000 By board Baltimore By board Indef. By board 5,000 By board Washington By board 3 By congress 6,000 By congress New Orleans By board 4 By law 5,000 By board Cleveland By board 3 4 By board 6,000 By board Cincinnati By board 4 By board IO,000 By board Chicago By board 1 By board IO,000 By board Detroit By board 3 By board 6,000 By board Milwaukee By board 3 By law 6,000 By board Minneapolis By board 3 By board 5,5O0 By board St. Louis By board 4 By law 8,000 By board San Francisco Elected by people 4 By law 4,000 By law Los Angeles By board 4 By board 6,000 By board 1 " By board " means by city board of education. 2 With approval of the mayor. 3 By law the superintendent in Philadelphia may be elected for a term of four years, the same as in Pittsburgh. The board fixes the term at one year. 4 The law fixes the maximum at five years after the first term; the board fixes the term as indicated. 8 First appointment, one year; second may be for five years. 4 By board of estimate and apportionment. 6 Law fixes $2,370 as salary; city council adds $2,230. 6 By law not to exceed five years. 7 By rules of board, superintendent cannot be elected for more than three year term. 8 By law not to exceed three year term. Note. The salary of the superintendent in Denver is $6,000. This correction was received too late for me to refigure the computations based on this table. How- ever, the changes would be slight. THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 149 (b) Second Class Cities Tenure Salary Cities How Chosen Term in Years How Fixed Amount How Fixed Cambridge By board I 1 By board $5,000 By board Fall River By board I By board 3,500 By board Lowell (No data) Worcester By board 3 By rules 4,250 By board Providence By board i 2 By rules 5,000 By board Bridgeport By board 3 By rules 4,IOO By board New Haven By board i 3 By charter 4,5O0 By board Albany- By board Indef. (No data) 3,000 4 Rochester By board 4 By charter 5,000 By board Syracuse By board 4 By law 4,000 By board Jersey City By board Indef. By board 6,500 By board Paterson By board i 2 By law 3,600 By board Scranton By board 4 By law 5,000 By board Richmond By state bd. of ed. 4 Bylaw 4,6oo 5 By law Atlanta By board 1 By rules 3,600 By board Louisville By board i 1 By law 5,000 By law Memphis By board 2 By board 3,600 By law Nashville By board 3 6 By board 3,600 By board Birmingham By board 5 By board 5,000 By board Columbus By board 4 6 By rules 4,000 By board Dayton By board 5 By law 5,ooo By board Toledo * By board 5 By law 5,000 By board Indianapolis By board 4 By law 5,5oo By board Grand Rapids By board i 7 By board 3,750 By board St. Paul By board 2 By law 5,ooo By law Omaha By board 3 8 By board 5,400 By board Kansas City By board 1 By board 4,500 By board Denver* By board 1 By board 5,000 By board Seattle By board 3 8 By law 7,5oo By board Spokane By board 3 8 By board 4,5oo By board Portland By board 1 By board 4,5oo By board Oakland By board 4 By law 4,000 By board * Data not confirmed by the superintendent 1 First appointment, one year; second, five years. 2 First appointment, one year; second, during good behavior (Balance of notes on of pposite page) 150 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES (c) Third Class Cities Tenure Salary Cities How Chosen Term in Years How Fixed Amount How Fixed Portland By board I By law $2,600 By board Manchester By board 2 By charter 3,000 By board Burlington By board I By charter 2,400 By board Wilmington By board 2 By rules 3,000 By board Wheeling By board 2 By board 3,000 By board Charlotte By board I By law 2,I00 1 By board Charleston By board 4 By rules 2,500 By board Jacksonville Elected by people 4 Bylaw 3,600 2 Bylaw Meridian By board I By board 2,875 By board San Antonio * (No data) 2 (No data) 2,250 (No data) Little Rock By board I By rules 3,000 By rules Oklahoma By board 3 By board 3,600 By board Des Moines By board I (No data) 4,000 By board Fargo By board i By board 3,250 By board Sioux Falls By board i By rules 3,000 By board Kansas City By board i 3 By rules 3,500 By board Butte By board 3 By law 4,000 By board Cheyenne By board i By board 2,500 By board Albuquerque By board i By rules 2,250 By board Tucson By board 2 By law 3,000 By board Salt Lake By board 2 By law 4,800 By board Reno By board 4 4 By board 3,000 By board Boise By board 3 5 By board 4,000 By board powers, except when prescribed by state law, are denned by the rules and regulations of the board. The official responsibility of the superintendent is to the board of edu- * Data not confirmed by the superintendent. 1 In addition a residence is furnished the superintendent. 2 Minimum by law; board may pay more. 3 Law permits board to elect for one or two years. 4 Law permits board to elect for four years after one term. 6 One year first appointment; three years second. TEE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 151 cation, which elects him to office and which also largely defines his duties and powers. The Superintendent's Term of Office The length of the term of office of the superintendent shows the general stability of his position. If his term of office is too short (say one year), in our large cities and to a somewhat lesser extent in all cities he can scarcely begin his work before he must be re-elected. On the other hand, if his term of office is of reasonable length (say from three to five years), and if he is protected in serving that term by the state law, then the conditions make it possible for him to assume that educational leadership in city affairs which the public is coming more and more to expect of him. It can be assumed that innovations in the schools will bring more or less adverse criticism on the superintendent. Obviously the more progressive and active a superintendent is, the more likely he is to bring such criticism on himself. Every school man knows that if the superintendent ignores this criticism or is oblivious to it, he stands a good chance of not being re-elected. The most progressive and efficient superintendents are likely to create so much opposition in the course of a few terms of service that they cannot be re-elected. The best superintendents may literally work themselves out of a position through the performance of the most efficient service. Unfortunately for the schools, superintendents generally have found it by far the safer policy for them to proceed cautiously in the introduction of progressive ideas into the school system. By following this policy their positions are more secure, and the public complacently accepts the lack of legitimate criticism as an indication of marked success. But the pursuance of this policy by the superintendent 152 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES tends to keep the schools in a static and non-progressive condition. Progress is made only by the adoption of prom- ising innovations and the retention of those which are good. In reality the adoption of this policy by a superintendent, or the adoption of a progressive policy, marks the difference between keeping the schools running and keeping them running at their greatest possible efficiency. It is altogether likely that this conservatism, largely forced on the superintendent by the conditions under which he works, has been the most potent single factor in keeping our practice in educational affairs so far behind our theory. School administrators are kept from putting many of their promising theories to work in the school system, partly because of the insecurity of their positions and partly be- cause of their subordination to the leadership of the board of education. Changes are already taking place which look toward the enlargement of the powers and responsibilities of the superintendent. There is need also of increasing the stability of the superintendent's position by increasing the length of term for which he is elected and by fixing that term by law. As has been shown, the board of education selects the superintendent of schools in most cities. But so long as his term of office also is left to the discretion of the board, the superintendent is placed in a position of subordination in which it is extremely difficult for him to adopt any other attitude than one of conservatism. In most cases this means that he fails to make himself the educational leader of his city; he either shares that leadership with the lay board or else is willing to let the board march in the front ranks while he takes a position well back in the procession. The chances of the possibility and probability of the superin- tendent assuming the desirable position of educational leader in his city will be materially increased when his term THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 1 53 of office is of reasonable length (say from three to five years), and when that term is fixed by state law so that he cannot be deposed by the board for inconsequential acts or for assuming that leadership which he ought to assume. Human nature must be considered as it is, and the super- intendent ought not to be and cannot be expected to be active and aggressive in his direction of educational affairs when by that very activity and aggressiveness he is working himself out of a position. The superintendent must be protected in the exercise of the leadership which we expect of him. (i) THE LENGTH OF THE TERM OF OFFICE The following table shows by classes of cities the length of the superintendent's term of office and the number of cities under each term. Term 1 2 3 4 5 6 Indef- inite Average * 18 first class cities 31 2 second class cities 23 third class cities 2 II II I 2 6 4 6 3 6 7 3 1 3 2 O O 2 2 O 3.56 years 2.62 " 1.91 " The preceding table and the accompanying graphs on page 154 make it clear that there is a direct relationship between the size of city and the length of term of office of the superintendent of schools. This is shown by the aver- age term, the median, and the mode in the distributions for the three classes of cities. The following tabulation brings these facts into prominence. 1 Average does not include those cities which have indefinite terms. a Lowell missing. 1 54 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Average Term Median Mode First class cities Second class cities Third class cities 3.56 years 2.62 " 1.91 " 4 3 2 4 1 1 Terms of Superintendents Terms z 2 3 4 5 6 7 Indefinite 6 18 First Class Cities 5 4 3 Median, 4 yrs. Mode, 4 yrs. 2 1 II 31 Second Class IO Cities 9 Median, 3 yrs. 8 Mode, 1 yr. 7 • 6 5 4 3 2 1 11 23 Third Class 10 Cities 9 Median, 2 yrs. 8 Mode, 1 yr. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 II IO 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Terms Indefinite I234S 6 7 Total, 72 Cities Median, 3 yrs. Mode, 1 yr. In each case the length of term decreases as one passes from the larger to the smaller cities. For example, the average term in first class cities is 3.56 years, in second TEE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 1 55 class cities it is 2.62 years, and in third class cities it is 1. 9 1 years. Further, the longest fixed term of the superintendent varies with the size of the city. In the first class cities the longest term is six years, in second class cities it is five years, and in third class cities it is four years. The shortest term is uniformly one year in all classes of cities. It is interesting to observe also that two cities among the first class and two among the second class cities select super- intendents for indefinite terms, i.e., during the period of satisfactory service. It is difficult to understand why cities like Chicago and Philadelphia should continue to appoint superintendents for one year terms. Perhaps the wonder really is that com- petent superintendents are willing to assume the responsi- bilities of the position under such conditions. If a six year term is good for New York City and for Boston, and also if at least a three or four year term is found desirable in most other cities, why should Chicago and Philadelphia subject a superintendent to an annual re-election? What other reason can there be than a desire on the part of the board of education to remind the superintendent of schools constantly of his subordination to and dependency on the board? Obviously this prevents the superintendent from becoming the real educational leader that he should be, and is an attempt to establish the board as the educational leader, a role which the board is not qualified to assume and which it is, therefore, undesirable for it to attempt to assume. (2) HOW THE TERM OF OFFICE IS FIXED Obviously, if the term of office of the superintendent is fixed by law, his position is more secure than if it is fixed 156 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES by the rules of the board or left to the discretion of the board. The following tabulations show how the term is fixed in the different classes of cities. In the tabulation "by law" means, of course, by state law. "By charter" means by the city charter granted to a city for its local government. "By rules" means that the board has defined in its rules and regulations the term of office of the super- intendent. "By board" means that the term is left to the discretion of the board and is fixed when the board elects a superintendent. Tabulation Showing how the Superintendent's Term of Office is Fixed 18 first class cities By law By charter By board 7 cities 1 city 10 cities 30 second class cities By law By charter By rules : By board 12 cities 2 " 5 " 11 " 21 third class cities By law By charter By rules By board 6 cities 2 " 6 " 7 " Total 69 cities Summary Bylaw By charter By rules By board 25 cities 5 " 11 " 28 " 36.2 per cent 7-3 " 15.9 " 40.6 " The instability of the position of the superintendent is strikingly shown by the fact that the term is largely left to the discretion of the board. A change in the member- ship of the board or any local passing storm of protest may altogether too easily terminate his services. It is slightly THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 1 57 better that the term should be fixed by the rules, because it takes more than a majority vote to set aside the rules. The most stable term is that denned by the city charter or by the state law, in which cases the length of term is beyond the interference of the local board. The length of term of office is not properly a local matter, but a matter of importance to the state. Hence, the state is justified in fixing the length of that term in such a way as to protect the superintendent in the discharge of his proper functions, and at the same time to conserve the state's interests in education. However, there are only thirty cities (about 43 per cent) of those under consideration in which the term is fixed by law or by the city charter. Before the superintendent will be able to bring to his position the highest degree of efficiency, he must be allowed a reasonable term of office during which he may make such readjustments in educational administration as he deems desirable. His term of office must be so protected by law that the first storm of popular disfavor which always or usually accompanies changes or innovations will not de- prive him of office before the results of such innovations become evident. Hence, the term of office of the super- intendent of schools should be fixed by state law. As in the case of several cities now, his first term may well be a short one of one or two years, depending on the size of the city, after which his term should be from four to six years. The Superintendent's Salary (i) the amount of the superintendent's salary One index of the public's conception of the importance of the office of superintendent of schools is the amount of salary it is willing to pay the person who holds that office. The following graphs show, by classes of cities, the range in salary and the number of cities paying the different salaries. 158 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Salaries of Superintendents m in t- 'O c « >o s s s n op op 00 00* o o o a H (*) p) *0 <0 ^ 0>OQ«^0>OQ>^0>OQ«00 *? ^ 1" 10 10 10 « € o* id rCtCtC to O >o O >o O >o 00 00 00 d o*> & & 6 5 4 3 2 1 n lln , n n n n 1 J First Class Cities. Average Salary, $7,222; Median, $6,376; Mode, $5,876. 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 n r 1 1 n n n 31 Second Class Cities. Average Salary, $4,596; Median, $4,376; Mode, $4,876. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 Itl- L ±f n 23 Third Class Cities. Average Salary, $3,096; Median, $2,876; Mode, $2,876. Note. — The averages in the above cases were figured from the exact salaries given in the table at the beginning of this chapter. The following table shows some interesting facts ob- tained from the previous tables and graphs. Lowest Salary Highest Salary Average Salary Median Salary Mode Salary First class cities Second class cities Third class cities $4,000 3,000 2,IOO $10,000 7,500 4,800 $7,222 4,596 3,096 $6,376 4,376 2,876 $5,876 4,876 2,876 THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 1 59 In the matter of salary also, there is a direct relationship to the size of the city. In each of the columns of figures on the preceding page the salary decreases from the larger to the smaller cities. However, the lowest salary paid among first class cities is only about one-half as large as the highest salary paid among second class cities. The same is true in comparing the lowest salary among second class cities with the highest salary among third class cities. The salaries of superintendents are beginning to reach a more satisfactory level. It may be confidently expected that, as men prepare themselves better for the important responsibilities of the superintendent's position, the public will compensate them in proportion to what such service is worth. (2) HOW THE SUPERINTENDENT'S SALARY IS FIXED The method of fixing salaries of superintendents is shown by the following tabulations. 18 first class cities By law 2 cities By city council 1 city By board of education is cities 31 second class cities 22 third class cities By law 4 cities By board of est. and app. 1 city By board of education 26 cities By law 1 city By rules 1 " By board 20 cities 71 cities Summary By law By board By rules By other methods 7 cities 61 " 1 city 2 cities The salary of the superintendent is largely a local and not a state matter. The city must pay the salary, and each 160 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES city is entitled to as efficient a superintendent as it is will- ing to engage and pay. Hence, the amount of the salary is properly fixed, not by state law, but by the local board of education. Further, when the amount of salary is left to the board, it is possible to increase the salary and thus re- tain a superintendent when his election by another city is under consideration. This is practically impossible if the salary is fixed by law, because to change the law is a slow process and could not be done in time to retain such a super- intendent. On the other hand, if the board is allowed com- plete freedom in fixing the superintendent's salary, it is in a position to adjust the amount of salary to meet any circumstances. Changes in the Length of the Superintendent's Term or Office and his Salary A comparison between the terms of office in 19 13 and in 1893 in representative cities will show whether the term of office is increasing or decreasing in length. This comparison will be made between data which I have collected for 19 13 l and data published by Draper for the year 1893. 2 Draper does not give the salaries of superintendents. Neither does the United States Bureau of Education publish salaries before 1907. Therefore, the comparison of salaries will be made between those of 19 13 and those of 1907, a period of only six years. The complete data on terms and salaries of the super- intendents are given in the following table. 1 These data have been confirmed by the superintendents concerned. 2 Educational Review, vol. vi, pp. 1-16. THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 161 Term in Years Salary 1893 1913 1907 ■ 1913 New York 2 1 « Brooklyn 3 $10,000 $10,000 Chicago I 1 10,000 10,000 Philadelphia I 1 7,500 9,000 St. Louis 3 4 7,000 8,000 Boston 2 6 6,000 10,000 Baltimore 4 Indefinite 5,000 5,000 San Francisco 4 4 . 4,000 4,000 Cincinnati 2 2 6,000 10,000 Cleveland Unlimited 3 6,000 6,000 Buffalo 3 4 5,000 7,5O0 New Orleans 4 4 4,000 2 5,000 Pittsburgh 3 l * 6,000 Allegheny 3 9,000 Washington Unlimited 3 5,000 6,000 Detroit 3 3 6,000 6,000 Milwaukee 2 3 6,000 6,000 Newark 1 Indefinite S,SOO 2 7,000 Minneapolis 3 5 5,250 5,5O0 Jersey City 3 Indefinite 6,000 6,500 Louisville 3 1 5,000 5,000 Omaha 3 3 5,000 5,400 Rochester 2 4 5,000 5,000 St. Paul 2 2 4,500 5,000 Kansas City 1 1 4,5O0 4,500 Providence 1 1 5,000 5,000 Denver Unlimited 1 5,000 5,000 Indianapolis 1 4 5,000 5,500 Total 60 70 $149,250 $170,900 Average 2.4 3 -04 5,740 6,573 (i) CHANGES IN THE LENGTH OF THE SUPERINTENDENT'S TERM OF OFFICE The graphs on the following page are based on the infor- mation given in the preceding table and show the length of term of the superintendents in 1893 and in 19 13. 1 Report of the United States Commissioner of Education, 1907, vol. i. 8 For 1908. 1 62 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Changes in the Length of Term of the Superintendents Years 3 4 5 6 7 1893 Unlimited 25 Cities (3 Unlimited omitted) Average 2.4 yrs. Median 3. " Mode 3. " 1013 23 Cities (3 Indefinite omitted) Average 3.04 yrs. Median 3.5 " Mode 4.0 " Indefinite The following facts are worthy of special notice: (1) In no city in 1893 was there a superintendent with a fixed term of more than four years; in 19 13 there was one with a term of five years and two with terms of six years each. (2) The average length of term of the superintendent increased from 2.4 years in 1893 to 3.04 years in 1913. (3) There were nine cases of increase in length of term of the superintendent, ten cases of no change, and one case of decrease in the twenty year period. The one decrease is in Louisville. The first appointment of a superintendent is for a term of one year, and after that the law fixes the term at four years. In 19 14, therefore, the term would be for four years. THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 163 If one limits the comparison of terms to the eighteen first class cities, the average increase in length of term during the twenty year period is just one year. (2) CHANGES IN THE AMOUNT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT'S SALARY The following graphs are based on the information given in the table on page 161 and show the amount of the annual salary of superintendents in 1907 and 19 13. Changes in Amount of Salary of Superintendents 1907 1913 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Salary 8 8 8 8 8 8 T^-TflOlOVOv© N N 00 00 OO^O 26 Cities Average.. $5,740 Median . . 5,250 Mode 5,000 26 Cities Average . . $6,573 Median . . 6,000 Mode 5,000 I 1 One at $5,250 included. 2 " " 5,400 164 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES The following important facts are worthy of special notice: (1) The average salary has increased from $5,740 in 1907 to $6,573 m IQI 3> or an average increase of over $833 among all cities in six years. (2) There have been fourteen cases of an increase in the annual salary, twelve cases of no change, and no cases of a decrease. Among the cities giving increases in salaries, the amount of the average increase during the six year period is $1,546. This striking average increase is calculated from the fol- lowing tabulation, which shows the amount of increase in each case. 2 cities increased salaries $4,000 3 cities increased salaries $4,000 1 city " " 3,000 3 " " " 500 1 " " " 2,500 1 city " " 400 2 cities " " 1,500 1 " " * 250 Changing of the Superintendents One of the striking facts pertaining to the office of su- perintendent of schools is the constant shifting from one position to another of the men who hold the office. This changing is due to two main causes: (1) the lack of a tenure of reasonable length in many cities, which makes it convenient for a board to change superintendents at fre- quent intervals; and (2) the rapidly rising salaries, which tempt superintendents to leave one place to accept a higher salary in another. Out of the seventy-three cities we are studying, twenty- one cities (28.8 per cent) had the same superintendent in 1913 that they had in 1907. Out of the twenty-six largest cities in the United States in 1893, only seven cities (26.9 per cent) had the same superintendent in 19 13 that they had in 1907. THE CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 165 Summary of Findings We find that: (1) The superintendent, with few exceptions, is chosen by the board of education. (2) The term of office of the superintendent is compara- tively short, but is increasing in length. (3) The term is fixed in about 55 per cent of the cases by the board and in about 45 per cent of the cases by law. (4) The salary of the superintendent is increasing rapidly and is beginning to reach a reasonable level. (5) The salary is fixed largely by the board of education. (6) Those who hold the office of superintendent change positions frequently. PART IV CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER IX SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS — A CONSTRUCTIVE PLAN • FOR APPOINTING TEACHERS It is the hope of the writer that the present methods of appointing teachers in the various cities have been so presented, interpreted, and characterized that the better methods may eventually be substituted for the archaic methods now in use in some of our city school systems. In order that the essential results of this study may be readily accessible, I shall present in this final chapter a condensed summary of the entire monograph, together with a constructive plan for appointing teachers. This plan is not theoretical, but practical, inasmuch as it includes no feature that is not found in actual practice in some city included in the foregoing study. It is purposely also a progressive plan, because it embodies the best features that have been found in any school system. To illustrate: if one feature of the method of appointing teachers in one city is considered superior to that feature in any other city, it is incorporated in the constructive plan herein presented. If another feature of a different system is considered better than the corresponding feature in any other system, that feature is likewise made a part of the plan. Thus I have built up a complete plan for the ap- pointment of teachers. In so far as the practice in any city deviates from the pro- cedure recommended in this plan, the reader may rightly conclude that the practice is just to that extent adversely criticised. On the contrary, just to the extent that any 169 170 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES city's method of appointing teachers conforms to this con- structive plan, the reader may rightly conclude that just to that extent it is approved. I do not wish to be understood as overlooking the fact that there may be danger in wrenching one particular feature of a school system from its setting in the system and from its manifold relationships. To consider a single administrative function may lead to the commending of a worthy feature of a generally bad school system, or it may lead to condemning a bad feature of a school system in other respects commendable. The appointment of teach- ers, however, is an administrative procedure which is largely independent of other administrative activities of the school officials. Further, I have considered the whole process of appointing teachers in each city as a unit, and have consid- ered to some extent the other administrative factors related directly to the matter of appointment. In view of these considerations it seems fair to segregate this one administrative function from the others and to characterize the process of appointing teachers as good or bad, as the facts warrant. However, in commending or condemning any feature of the appointive process in a given city, I am not commending or condemning that school system as a whole. My criticisms apply only to the fea- ture of the system under special consideration. Inasmuch as any method of appointing teachers depends for its operation on, and is conditioned by, the kind of ad- ministrative agencies established, it is desirable to reverse the order of treatment in this final chapter and to consider first the agencies which do the appointing, namely, the board of education and the superintendent, and then to consider the methods of making the appointments. It should be borne in mind that the board of education is an older and more fundamental institution than the city SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 171 superintendent of schools. Hence, the board's functions, responsibilities, and powers have been more completely worked out and denned than have those of the superin- tendent. Hence, also, while it is possible and fairly easy to define rather clearly a typical board of education (which is in most respects a satisfactory board), the office of the superintendent of schools cannot be so easily characterized. Consequently, in the characterization of the superintendent, I shall have to assume what the present tendencies indicate to a greater extent than I have had to in the case of the board. Concerning the City Board of Education 1. The city board of education is the local administrative agency in the city charged by the state with the responsi- bility of providing education for the children of the city. The city board is a state agency for the discharge of a state )_- function. The state defines, in general laws and charter provisions, the larger functions of the board of education, or delegates to the board general authority over education. The board may adopt any administrative regulations not inconsistent with the established laws. 2. There are small boards and large boards of educa- tion in cities of all sizes and in all sections of the country. Although there are some large boards in the cities under our consideration, the average size is less than ten members, the median size is seven members, and the most common V~ size is five members. Almost 70 per cent of the cities under . our consideration have boards of less than ten members. 3. During the past twenty years, in twenty-seven of the largest cities studied, the average size of the board of education has been reduced from twenty-two members to eleven members. The decrease in size of boards has been, in most cases, from boards of twenty or more to boards of 172 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES l nine or less. The number of members to which boards ~\were most commonly reduced was five. During the past twenty years not a single one of the twenty-seven cities has changed from a small board to a large board. 4. The length of term of office of board members ranges / from two to six years, with an average term of a little less " ^ than four years. In the first class cities the most common term is six years; in the second class cities the tendency is decidedly in favor of a term of three or four years; and in third class cities the variation is largely from two to four years. As a rule, the smaller the city the shorter the term —L of office of school board members. 5. During the past twenty years the term of office of the board members has changed from an average of 2.93 years , in 1893 to 4.30 years in 1913, or an increase of nearly 47 per cent. Among twenty-five cities there are fifteen cases of increasing the term of office and only three cases of de- creasing it. The most common increases have been from two or three year terms to four or six year terms. / 6. In most cases members of the board serve without I financial compensation. In only nine out of the seventy- one cities are members paid for their services. Com- pensation varies from $4 per meeting to $1,200 per year for members who do not give all of their time to educational service. In San Francisco, members of the board devote all their time to this office and are paid $3,000 per year. Thus, it is seen that most cities do not compensate school board members, and that among the nine cities that do, the compensation varies greatly in amount. Except in San Francisco and Rochester, the compensation is small. 7. The most common methods of selecting members of the board of education are appointment by the mayor and election by the people. The mayor appoints board mem- bers in only ten cities, as compared with fifty-two cities in f SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 173 which the people elect members. Appointment by the ) mayor is confined to the larger cities. Members are elected from the city at large in forty-eight cities, as compared with fourteen cities in which they are selected from wards or districts as such. The courts, the city council, and the city commissioners select the school board members in a few cities. 8. Comparatively few changes have taken place in the methods of selecting school board members during the past twenty years in the twenty-seven largest cities. Those changes have tended to reduce the number of methods to/ two, namely, appointment by the mayor and election by the people. In 1893 there were ten distinct methods of selecting board members, namely, election by the people, by wards or at large, appointment by the mayor, from wards or at large, by mayor and city council, by the city council, by the court, by city commissioners, by district boards of education, and by the state board of education. By 19 13 the number of methods had been reduced to six, namely, election by the people, by wards or at large, ap- pointment by the mayor, by boroughs or at large, by the mayor and city council, and by the court. In these twenty- seven cities selection of members from wards or districts has been almost entirely displaced by selection from the city at large. 9. In most of the cities members of the board of educa- tion are laymen who are specifically selected to serve on that board; only four of the cities have ex-ofncio members. ) Members are required to be residents of the city (if selected from the city at large, and of a district or ward if selected by that method) from a period of a few months to five years, with three years the most usual time. They are required to be twenty-one years of age or over, and in some cases at least thirty years of age. In several cities the law pre- ( ( 174 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES vents members of the board from holding any other office. Women are eligible to membership on the board in all cities where they have the right to vote for school board members. 10. Boards of education usually organize standing com- mittees. The number of such committees varies from none in six cities to twenty-seven in one city. Some of the smaller boards do not have standing committees. The average number of committees for all cities is six. Standing com- mittees most often are made up of three members, although there are committees of fifteen members. The average size of all committees in the sixty-three cities is less than four members. The committee on teachers is slightly larger than the average committee of the board. In over 80 per cent of the cases each standing committee consists of a minority of the board members. n. The committee system of organization of the board is wrong for the following reasons: (1) the small standing committee is likely to play a disproportionately large part in the transaction of the board's business; (2) the committee form of organization increases materially the opportunities for the exercise of pernicious influences; and (3) the com- mittee system of organization violates four fundamental principles of effective school administration: (a) the duties of standing committees of the board cannot be so defined that overlapping of authority is avoided; (b) therefore, the responsibility of each committee cannot be adequately fixed; (c) hence, the accountability of each committee cannot be insisted on; and (d) the committee system tends to confuse lay control with professional and executive management. In view of the foregoing facts, the typical and satisfac- tory board of education, toward which boards have been developing, may be characterized as follows: The typical or ideal board of education consists of five SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 175 or seven members, elected by the people or appointed by the mayor from the city at large. Its members are required to be at least twenty-one years of age and are often required to be thirty years or over. They are required to be bona fide residents of the city for at least three years preceding the time of selection. They serve without financial com- pensation for a usual term of four or five years. While most boards still organize standing committees, there is a tendency to do away with standing committees and to delegate to executive officers of the board the discharge of those functions which have customarily been assigned to standing committees. There is also a well defined tendency looking toward the incorporation in state laws of the above features of the board of education, instead of leaving them to the discretion of the local board or to the community. Concerning the City Superintendent of Schools In view of the several summaries at frequent intervals throughout the chapter on the city superintendent of schools, it is unnecessary to make a detailed summary here. Instead I shall characterize the present status and probable future development of the office of superintendent of schools as shown by the facts brought out in chapter viii. The city superintendent of schools is an officer of the city board of education. As such the superintendent's official responsibility is to the board of education, which selects him and which also largely defines his duties and powers. Except as provided by state law, the superintendent has no authority aside from that conferred on him by the board of education. In the past, because the board selected him, fixed his salary and length of term, and largely defined his powers, 176 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES the tendency has been to subordinate unduly the superin- tendent's office to the board of education, and thereby to make it impossible, or at least extremely difficult, for the superintendent to develop in his office the highest degree of efficiency. r At present there is a well defined tendency to increase the importance of the superintendent by enlarging his powers and responsibilities. This tendency is seen in the increased length of the superintendent's term. The lengthening of his term will abolish the frequent re-elections which have been a menace to the superintendent's work. Frequent re-elections have made, or have tended to make, the super- intendent devote a portion of his thought and energy to "building fences" to insure his re-election rather than to constructive work in the school system. A longer term makes that unnecessary because it gives the superintendent an opportunity to introduce such changes as he deems desirable, and to secure some results before his work is judged, as it naturally is and should be, when he is re- elected. With a term of reasonable length, the board can and should judge the success of a superintendent by the results of his labor. This tendency is also seen in the fact that the term is com- ing to be fixed by state law rather than by the local board of education, as in the past. By fixing his term of office by law, the state protects the superintendent in his position, so that the first storm of popular disfavor which always or usually accompanies his innovations will not sweep him out of office before the results of such innovations become evident or can be measured. The fixing of the length of term by law is justifiable because education in the city is a state function, and because it is of importance to the state that the superintendent be so established that he can fill his position with the highest degree of success. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 177 This tendency is further seen in the increased salary which the superintendent is receiving. The highest salary is $10,000. The average salary in first, second, and third class cities is respectively about $7,000, $4,500, and $3,000. ) The average annual salary in twenty-six representative cities has increased $833 during the past six years. There have been fourteen cases of increase in salary, twelve cases of no change, and no cases of decrease. By increasing the salary of the superintendent, it may be confidently expected that more and better men may be tempted to enter the educational profession. Also with higher salaries generally, superintendents will not be so inclined to leave one place to go to another because of salary. Finally, this tendency is seen in the definition of the larger functions of the superintendent's office by state law rather than by the local board of education. As we have seen, in a number of cities the state law or the city charter defines the part played by the superintendent in the appointment of teachers. The final result of this tendency to increase the impor- tance of the superintendent's office will not be to make the superintendent independent of the board. As its officer, the superintendent will always be responsible and account- able to the board of education, just as the board in turn is responsible and accountable to the people. The results should be the firmer establishment of the superintendent of schools on a higher plane of usefulness, adequate provision for the possibility of judging the superintendent by his work, and further provision for making it possible for the superintendent to devote himself exclusively to the work of his office. 178 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES The Appointment of Teachers. A Constructive Plan Thus far in this chapter I have characterized the present status and the probable future development of the board of education and of the office of superintendent of schools. This characterization has been based on a study of the present status of the board and of the superintendent in seventy-three representative cities, and on the changes in the organization of the board and of the office of superin- tendent in twenty-eight of the largest cities in the United States during the past twenty years. In presenting a con- structive plan for the appointment of teachers, I shall as- sume such a board of education and such a superintendent of schools as I have characterized or described. I make this assumption because in this monograph I am not concerned chiefly with a reorganization of the board or of the office of superintendent, but with a reconstruction of the methods of appointing of teachers. Even though the appointment of teachers is one of the most important functions for which the board and the superintendent are responsible, a reorganization of either appointive agency cannot be properly recommended on the limited basis of this study. Such a reorganization should properly come only after a detailed study of all the functions which each performs or should perform. Hence, I have made a de- tailed study of the board and of the superintendent only in order to be able to characterize each properly. The only changes which I recommend in the board or the superin- tendent relate to the proper functions of each in appointing teachers. In view of the previous detailed characterization and summation of the methods of appointing teachers, 1 the significance of those methods, 2 and the eligibility qualifica- 1 Chap. ii. 2 Chap. iii. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 179 tions of teachers, 1 it is unnecessary to make further summary of those topics here. Instead, I shall offer a constructive plan based on the facts brought out and the conditions revealed in this monograph. This plan will cover not only the formal procedure of making the appointments, but also the other administrative functions or factors necessarily associated with making appointments, namely, eligibility requirements of candidates, the methods of determining their qualifications, the board of examiners, and the merit list of eligible candidates. (i) ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS OF CANDIDATES In every city the minimum eligibility requirements for each teaching position should be defined in a direct, com- prehensive statement, covering (a) age, (b) academic edu- cation, (c) professional training, (d) teaching experience, and (e) other credentials required, such as certificates of birth, health, vaccination, moral character, and graduation. Whether these requirements are fixed by state law or by the local authorities, they should be defined and stated in j the published documents of the board of education, so that teachers and others may obtain information on the above topics. Anyone who has tried to make a comparative study of the above facts for a group of cities appreciates how incomplete such information is even in those school docu- ments which profess to give it. (2) METHODS OF DETERMINING QUALIFICATIONS Should all candidates be required to take examinations in prescribed subjects, or should candidates holding certif- icates of graduation from approved institutions be granted certificates of qualification without such examinations? 1 Chap. iv. 180 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES This question is answered in various states and in different cities according to the relative value placed on examinations and on records of work in school. Under present condi- tions it is clearly possible to require either an examination or a prescribed amount of schooling of an approved charac- ter. The real question is, Which is a better measure of the qualifications of a candidate for a teaching position? In Worcester all elementary school candidates must take an examination in the prescribed academic and professional subjects, regardless of their school record. On the other hand, in St. Louis the elementary school candidates who are graduates of approved institutions may be certified and appointed on the basis of their school work. Lack of agreement as to what subjects should form the basis of the examinations is strikingly shown by the systems of examinations in the five cities * especially studied. There are thirty-two different subjects prescribed by name for candidates for an elementary school certificate. Of this extraordinary number, only two subjects, English grammar and American history, are uniformly required in the five cities! The variety of academic subjects allowed and the fact that only a small number of subjects are prescribed seem to indicate that there are exceedingly few, if any, subjects which are considered indispensable in testing a candidate's fitness to teach. On the other hand, all candidates for teaching positions in our cities may be expected, and indeed required, to have had a reasonable amount of satisfactory schooling in ap- proved institutions. If education in the city is a state func- tion, why should the city expend considerable sums of money annually for the examination of candidates who have been graduated from state normal schools or state univer- sities and who have thereby been approved by the state 1 Boston, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Worcester, and Portland, Me. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 181 as qualified to teach? In this respect the St. Louis system is commendable. The superintendent of schools is given large discretionary power to grant certificates to teach to graduates of approved institutions without examination. If graduates of certain schools fail frequently, the superin- tendent has the authority to refuse to grant further cer- tificates. If graduates from certain schools usually succeed, he may adopt a policy of drawing largely on that source of supply. In view of the foregoing, a system of certification of can- didates should be based on the following general plan. i. There should be an arrangement for accepting certif- icates of graduation from reputable and approved insti- tutions. The approving of institutions should be done by the proper school authorities and should be based on an examination of the adequacy of the institution to give the amount and character of the instruction indicated in the eligibility requirements or in the prescribed examinations. 2. There should be a system of examinations for those who cannot, for any reason, qualify under the certificate system. The examination should test the fitness of the candidate to teach, and should include academic and pro- fessional subjects. The academic examination should test the candidate's knowledge of the subject or subjects which he or she wishes to teach, and such other allied subjects as may be considered essential. The professional examina- tion should test the candidate's ability to teach, as shown by his or her knowledge of principles and methods of teach- ing and his or her work in the classroom. (3) THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS TO GRANT CERTIFICATES OF QUALIFICATION That candidates possess the necessary qualifications to teach in a given city should be certified to by a board of 1 82 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES examiners consisting of professional men and women, of whom the superintendent should be the chief. This board should grant certificates to properly qualified candidates for such positions in the school system, whether they qualify by certificate of graduation from an approved in- stitution or by passing a prescribed examination. The board of examiners should be the authority to approve in- stitutions and to conduct the necessary investigation of institutions for that purpose. (4) THE MERIT LIST OF ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES Whether candidates are certified on the basis of their school records or as the result of a prescribed examination, there will still be differences in quality among them. Even though all candidates meet the fixed minimum require- ments, some candidates will barely meet them, while others could meet a much higher standard. For example, the minimum requirement for passing the examinations may be 60 per cent. One candidate may obtain exactly 60 per cent, and another may obtain 90 per cent. If the examina- tion is a fair means of testing the teaching ability of candi- dates, then we must assume that the candidate who obtained 90 per cent is likely to be a better teacher than the one who obtained only 60 per cent. Inasmuch as a city has a right to the best teachers that the established salaries will pro- vide, some way should be found to insure the appointment of those candidates who appear to be best qualified. The best method yet found is a merit list of eligible candidates. On the basis of their scholarship records in school, or as the result of a prescribed examination, or both, together with such other considerations as may be deemed essential, qualified candidates for the various positions in a school system should be listed according to their qualifications. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 183 There should be as many lists for the elementary schools as there are kinds or ranks of position. In the case of the high school there should be a list of candidates qualified to teach each subject. The names should be accompanied by the ratings of the candidates. (5) THE PROCEDURE IN MAKING APPOINTMENTS The board of education is a lay body; it is a deliberative and not an executive body. Its function is to consider edu- cational policies and decide, for example, what kinds of schools the public needs and how much the public can afford to pay for them. In considering these matters it should obtain the advice and counsel of its professional adviser, the city superintendent of schools. Because the board of education consists of laymen, and because its functions should be deliberative and not executive, the board should not directly discharge the important tech- nical and executive function of appointing teachers. The city superintendent of schools is the board's chief professional executive. It is his chief function to carry into execution the policies of the board and to perform the executive functions for which the board is officially re- sponsible. As an officer of the board, he has no authority except that delegated to him by the board or conferred on him by law. Inasmuch as the appointment of teachers is a professional and executive function, it should be performed by the superintendent of schools, subject, as are all his acts, to the board's approval. The following recommendations are based on the best practices found in the seventy-three cities. References are given in footnotes to the pages in the preceding monograph where such practices are described. 1. When a regular teacher is to be appointed to fill a 1 84 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES vacancy in the teaching force or to occupy a new position, such teacher should be appointed by the city superintendent of schools, subject to confirmation or rejection by the board of education. 1 2. The authority of the superintendent to make such appointments should be defined by law, 2 and not left to the discretion of the board. 3. The board should be enjoined by law from participat- ing in the appointment of teachers in any way except to confirm or reject the appointments made by the superin- tendent. 3 The board should have the unquestioned right to obtain full information from the superintendent concerning the qualifications of those whom he appoints. 4. An appointment made by the superintendent should go directly to the board for confirmation, and not pass through the hands of a standing committee. 4 5. The board should state in its rules the fact that it holds the superintendent responsible for the character of the appointments which he makes. 5 6. The appointment should always be made from among the first three names on the appropriate eligible list. 6 7. The superintendent should be required by the rules of the board to consult the principal of the school before making an appointment, or the director of a special de- partment when the teacher is to give instruction in a special subject. 7 1 The nine cities in Class A illustrate this method of making appointments. See pp. 37-40. 2 See, for example, Rochester, p. 25; Washington, pp. 27-28; and Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, p. 39. 3 See, for example, Washington, pp. 27-28; Rochester, p. 25. Pittsburgh and Kansas City, Kan., make the same provision in their rules. * See, for example, Boston, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New Haven, Albany, Rochester, Nashville, Indianapolis, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Jackson- ville, Fla., Meridian, Miss., Sioux Falls, S. D., Reno, Nev., pp. 13-16. 6 See, for example, Kansas City, Kan., p. 31. 6 See, for example, Boston, p. 68. 7 See, for example, Boston, p. 38. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 185 In the foregoing study I have maintained that the teacher is the central factor in the problem of providing education. The supervisory officers, the special teachers, the educa- tional equipment, and all other educational resources are for the purpose of improving the instruction which it is the teacher's duty to give. I have shown that annually 6 per cent of the total population in the United States is directly affected by the character of this instruction. I have shown that over 72 per cent of the total operating expenses of our city school systems is for the salaries of teachers, principals, and supervisors. To the pupil, the teacher is the school. Hence, in a city school system the importance of the teacher cannot be over- estimated. The most important single asset which any school system can possess is a corps of efficient teachers. The difference between mediocre teachers and efficient teachers accounts largely for the difference between merely keeping the schools running and keeping them running at a maximum of efficiency. In securing efficient teachers, the method of making ap- pointments becomes of supreme importance. If from year to year only the best teachers procurable are appointed, a progressively high standard of teaching efficiency can be developed and maintained. If, on the other hand, mediocre teachers are given positions, in time the whole school sys- tem becomes permeated by mediocrity. Obviously the best method of securing efficient teachers is one which makes inevitable the appointment of those who are best qualified, and which prevents the appointment of those who are not well qualified. Almost any reasonable method of appointing teachers will work satisfactorily when conditions are favorable. However, our democratic control of education by means of a lay board established by the composite will of the com- 186 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES munity is continually fraught with the danger that an indifferent or misinformed or misguided community may allow the control of education to pass temporarily into the hands of petty politicians, self-seekers, or others whose chief interest is not the proper education of children. Self-seeking politicians have ever sought to secure the politi- cal patronage which the school system might provide. The plan of appointing teachers should be one which will, as far as possible, minimize such dangers. It should be one which is most likely to work under unfavorable condi- tions, one which is not dependent for its success on ideal conditions which are seldom found. To work reasonably well under all conditions, the plan for the appointment of teachers must recognize the proper functions of each participating agency. The functions of each participant must be clearly defined, so that the re- sponsibility of each is fixed, and hence accountability can be insisted on. There should be no opportunity for mis- understanding of duty or for evasion of responsibility or accountability. In this chapter I have attempted to formulate such a plan for the appointment of teachers. The plan is a com- posite of the best features of the methods of appointing teachers in seventy-three representative cities in the United States. While every feature of this plan is in actual prac- tice to-day, the combination of these features is not found in any city. Several cities, however, now approximate to the plan. In view of the great variety of methods of appointing teachers in the cities studied, it is clear that the adoption of the proposed plan will necessitate some reorganization in many city school systems. In some cases new state laws must be made or old ones modified; in others only local rules and regulations need be changed. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 187 Inasmuch as state legislatures are charged by their re- spective state constitutions with the responsibility for passing the laws necessary to promote public education, they are usually willing to make those educational laws which cities ask them to make. To secure the needed legis- lation for a city, therefore, becomes largely a local matter. It is necessary for the people of a city to evince sufficient interest to seek the required legislation. Obviously, to secure changes in the local rules, it is likewise necessary to convince the people and the board of education of the need of the adoption of such a plan for the appointment of teach- ers as is here proposed. This can be done only by the con- tinual and persistent efforts of those who believe that the teachers are the most important single factor in the schools, that the schools are for the children, and that the children are entitled to the best teachers that the community can provide. APPENDICES BIBLIOGRAPHY The literature on most phases of educational administration has in- creased marvelously during the past decade and is now rather exten- sive. Several of the books on school administration contain fairly large lists of references. Much of this educational literature is to be found in such periodicals as the Educational Review, Education, American Education, and the American School Board Journal. The School Review and the Pedagogical Seminary sometimes contain articles on school administration. Undoubtedly the two largest sources of general information on educational administration are the Reports of the United States Commissioner of Education and the Proceedings of the National Education Association (Department of Superintendence). Because of the prominence of the board of educa- tion and of the superintendent of schools in the administration of city school systems, the references and articles on these two subjects in these sources are especially numerous. During my study of the problems of educational administration I have prepared, from time to time, lists of references on various topics. I have prepared a bibliography of sixty-five titles covering city school organization, administration, and supervision; one of nearly a hun- dred titles, mostly references to periodical literature, covering the city board of education; and one of one hundred and twenty-five titles on the city superintendent of schools. As I read these articles I annotated each reference, indicating its value to me in my study of the problem of appointing teachers. However, it does not seem to me desirable that I should submit this annotated bibliography as a part of this monograph. In the first place, little or no direct use is made of these secondary sources in the preparation of this thesis. The nature and purpose of my study precluded any extensive theoretical discussion in which I might have made use of some of these sources. In the second place, many really important articles are annotated to show only their value to one particularly interested in the appoint- ment of teachers. The annotation does not show what other topics are 191 192 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES discussed in them. To print such annotations is unfair both to the author of the article and to the user of the bibliography. To the former it does not give the credit due the article, and to the latter it does not give complete information. The bibliography accompanying this monograph gives only a list of the references quoted and a few references to the more important articles on which discussions are based. It is my intention at an early date to publish in some convenient form an annotated bibliography on city educational administration in general and on the city board of education and the city superintendent of schools in particular. Such a study as I have made in this monograph is naturally based on primary and not secondary sources of information. The main sources of the facts have been the rules and regulations of the boards of education. From them chiefly I have obtained information con- cerning the methods of appointing teachers in the various cities. In many cases, likewise, I have obtained information concerning the board of education and its committee organization. Inasmuch as I have referred specifically to a school document wherever a quotation has been made or a fact asserted about a city, it is unnecessary to repeat here a list of the rules consulted. Following is a list of the articles quoted in this monograph and a few of the more important articles which form the basis of this study. Bard. The City School District. A Study of the "Statutory Provisions for Organization and Fiscal Affairs in Cities." Columbia University Contributions to Education, No. 28, pp. 118. 1909. The author describes the purpose of the monograph as follows: "(1) to point out the relation of the city school district to the city, (2) to determine its relation to the state, (3) to show the nature of the control the state exercises over it, (4) to show the provisions the state has made for the city school district with reference to its organization and fiscal affairs" (p. 7). One of the best sources of information. There is a bibliography of sixty-one titles. Burnham. Principles of Municipal School Administration. Atlantic Monthly, vol. xcii, pp. 105-112. 1903. Discusses the following ten principles of city school administration: "Any system of school administration should be (1) Economical; (2) free from politics; (3) of such a character as to stimulate and not check the local feeling of interest and responsibility for education; (4) free from artificial limitations, — limitations as regards sex, race, religion, or election of officers; (5) adapted to the community where it exists; (6) independent of the municipal government; (7) the School Board should be small; (8) the executive officers should be experts; BIBLIOGRAPHY 193 (9) civil service principles should prevail; (10) there should be concen- tration of power and responsibility" (pp. 108-109). Chamberlain. The Growth of Responsibility and Enlargement of Power of the City School Superintendent. University of California Press. 1913- The best article on this subject. Traces the tendencies which have brought about the increased power and responsibility of the superin- tendent. There is a long bibliography, pp. 426-441. Draper. Functions of the State Touching Education. Ed. Rev., vol. xv, pp. 105-120. 1898. Maintains that education is a state function, as shown by the state constitutions and court decisions; that the state must not only organize and maintain public schools, but also must prevent educational quack- ery. A vigorous article. Draper. Plans of Organization for School Purposes in Large Cities. Ed. Rev., vol. vi, pp. 1-16. 1893. An excellent resume of current practices in the organization of city school systems. Contains a table showing several facts pertaining to the board and the superintendent in all cities of over 100,000. Fairlie. The Centralization of Administration in New York State. Colum- bia University Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, vol. ix, No. 3. 1903. Chap, ii, Public Education, pp. 22-77. Gives an account of the development of state aid and state control. Discusses local school authorities, including city boards of education. Goodnow. Municipal Problems. The Macmillan Co. 1904. Chap, iv, The Relation of the City to the State, pp. 62-89. Does not deal specifically with educational administration, but does discuss the city as an agent of the state. Hinsdale. Provisions Concerning Education in the State Constitutions. Report of the United States Commissioner of Education, vol. ii, pp. 1312-1414. 1892-3. The article is historical; it quotes the sections of all state constitu- tions relating to education. A valuable source of information covering the period from 1776 to 1865. Moore. How New York Administers its Schools. World Book Co. 1913. An illuminating discussion of the methods of work of the large board of education of forty-six members in New York City. A fine analysis of the legal relation of the department of education to the municipal government and to the state. Rollins. School Administration in Municipal Government. Columbia University Contributions to Philosophy, Psychology, and Education, vol. xi, No. 1, pp. 106. 1902. "The method of this study has been to obtain and record a body of 194 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES facts; to collect and compare expert opinions relating to the facts and their results, and to draw such general conclusions as seemed warranted." — Preface. Discusses the relation of the city to the state; presents a table show- ing size, method of selection, term, and other facts concerning the board; also discusses the functions of business manager, superintendent of schools, principals and teachers as administrative agencies. Also the school and the community. Contains a bibliography of sixty-three titles. Suzzallo. The Rise of Local School Supervision in Massachusetts. Colum- bia University Contributions to Education, vol. i, No. 3, pp. 154. 1906. Deals historically with the evolution of the school committee in Massachusetts from 1635 to 1827. Traces the evolution from the town meeting, through the selectmen, special committees, to the organization of a permanent school committee in Boston in 1827. Discusses the functions of the school committee in 1827. The best article dealing with this subject. Webster. Recent Centralizing Tendencies in State Educational Adminis- tration. Columbia University, Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, vol. viii, No. 2. Shows by what methods the state discharges its responsibility for the education of the children of the state. The best treatment of this subject. Whitten. Public Administration in Massachusetts. The Relation of Cen- tral to Local Activity. Columbia University, Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, vol. viii, No. 4. Chap, ii, Public Schools, pp. 19-39. Gives an account of the evolution of public school administration, showing the extent to which the state exercises control over localities. Educational Organization and Progress in American Cities. A Symposium on Present Educational Conditions and Needs. Ann. Am. Acad., vol. xxv, pp. 157-188. 1905. The introduction gives a digest of school laws, covering executive organization, executive duties, and finance. Then follows an account of the powers of the board over the matters suggested. The article covers the following cities: New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston, Baltimore, Cleveland, Buffalo, Cinncinati, Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Milwaukee, Washington, D. C, Providence, Kansas City, Grand Rapids, Seattle, and Duluth; each city is discussed by a local man. APPENDIX A Tables showing, by divisions of the country and by states, the cities studied, classified as first class, second class, or third class cities, and the population of each in iqio (given only in thousands). South Central Division Cities First Class Second Class Third Class Kentucky Louisville 223 Tennessee Memphis 131 Nashville no Alabama » . . . Birmingham 132 Mississippi .... Meridian 23 Louisiana New Orleans 339 Texas San Antonio 96 Arkansas Little Rock 45 Oklahoma Oklahoma 64 North Central Division States Cities First Class Second Class Third Class Ohio Cleveland 560 Columbus 181 Cincinnati 363 Dayton Toledo 116 168 Indiana Indianapolis 233 Illinois Chicago 2,185 Michigan Detroit 465 Grand Rapids 112 Wisconsin Milwaukee 373 Minnesota Minneapolis 301 St. Paul 214 Iowa Des Moines 86 Missouri St. Louis 687 Kansas City 248 N. Dakota Fargo 14 S. Dakota Sioux Falls 14 Nebraska Omaha 124 Kansas Kansas City 82 19s 196 TEE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES North Atlantic Division Cities States First Class Second Class Third Class Maine Portland 58 New Hampshire Manchester 70 Vermont Burlington 20 Massachusetts Boston 670 Cambridge 104 Fall River 119 Lowell 106 Worcester 145 Rhode Island .... Providence 224 Connecticut Bridgeport 102 New Haven 133 New York New York 4,766 Albany 100 Buffalo 423 Rochester 218 Syracuse 137 New Jersey Newark 347 Jersey City 267 Paterson 125 Pennsylvania Philadelphia i,S49 Scranton 129 Pittsburgh 533 South Atlantic Division Cities First Class Second Class Third Class Delaware Wilmington 87 Maryland Baltimore 558 Dist. of Col. Washington 331 Virginia Richmond 127 W. Virginia Wheeling 41 N. Carolina Charlotte 34 S. Carolina Charleston 58 Georgia Atlanta 154 Florida .... Jacksonville 57 APPENDIX A 197 Western Division Cities States First Class Second Class Third Class Montana Butte 39 Wyoming Cheyenne 11 Colorado Denver 213 New Mexico Albuquerque n Arizona Tucson 13 Utah Salt Lake 92 Nevada Reno 10 Idaho Boise 17 Washington Seattle 237 Spokane 104 Oregon Portland 207 California San Francisco 416 Los Angeles 319 Oakland 150 Summary Divisions No. of First Class Cities No. of Second Class Cities No. of Third Class Cities Summary North Atlantic South Atlantic South Central North Central Western 6 2 I 7 2 13 2 4 8 5 3 5 4 4 7 22 9 9 19 14 Totals 18 32 23 73 APPENDIX B Tables showing the population (Federal Census 1910), the number of teachers, the enrolment, and the salaries paid in the public day schools; the total operating expenses, exclusive of sites, equipment, indebtedness, and interest on the same, in 1911-12, in the cities cov- ered by this study. Compiled from data in the Report of the United States Commissioner of Education, 191 2, vol. ii, pp. 31, 69, 106. First Class Cities Teachers in Enrolment in Salaries in Total Expenses l iQii-12 Cities Population IQIO Public Day Schools 1011-12 Public Day Schools iQii-12 Public Day Schools 1911-12 Boston 670,585 2,699 114,165 $2,945,572 $4,621,245 New York 4,766,883 17,854 783,245 20,566,996 30,203,613 Buffalo 423,715 1,649 57,827 No data No data Newark 347,467 i,473 63,024 1,565,252 2,43i,73i Philadelphia 1,549,008 4,517 220,584 3,878,011 6,134,966 Pittsburgh 533,005 1,903 75,888 1,337,202 2,072,1752 Baltimore 558,485 i,793 72,105 1,268,016 1,916,807 Washington 331,069 1,694 56,784 No data No data New Orleans 339,075 i,i33 42,110 774,180 1,112,167 Cleveland 560,663 2,319 76,610 2,165,471 2,982,283 Cincinnati 363,591 1,043 56,082 1,219,566 1,729,311 Chicago 2,185,283 6,615 307,281 No data No data Detroit 465,766 1,561 63,758 1,432,553 2,081,123 Milwaukee 373,857 1,277 5i,75o 1,100,851 1,798,978 Minneapolis 301,408 1,224 46,779 1,237,187 1,834,585 St. Louis 687,029 2,097 94,925 2,108,894 3,425,523 San Francisco 416,912 1,088 45,497 1,312,177 1,865,634 Los Angeles 319,198 1,718 62,647 1,943,922 2,627,488 Totals 15,193,899 53,657 2,291,061 $44,945,850 $66,837,629 1 Exclusive of sites, equipment, indebtedness, and interest on same. 2 For 1910-11. 198 APPENDIX B 199 Second Class Cities Teachers in Enrolment in Salaries in Cities Population IOIO Public Day Schools Public Day Schools Public Day Schools Total Expenses l 1911-12 iQii-12 1911-12 1911-13 Cambridge 104,839 433 16,833 $356,426 $542,126 Fall River II9.29S 519 16,913 304,695 5",3I7 Lowell 106,294 327 13,049 248,710 432,947 Worcester 145,986 694 23,539 541,788 828,456 Providence 224,326 839 35,398 653,271 1,094,135 Bridgeport 102,054 327 15,019 198,005 316,663 New Haven I33i605 624 25,590 465,488 664,676 Albany- 100,253 324 12,384 253,324 411,604 Rochester 218,149 707 27,648 701,256 998,571 Syracuse 137,249 568 21,201 381,056 659,000 Jersey City 267,779 826 38,016 777,201 1,221,312 Paterson 125,600 500 2I,2o6 375,645 546,552 Scranton 129,867 569 23,070 No data No data Richmond 127,628 45i 17,488 253,922 377,623 Atlanta 154,839 45o 22,147 350,150 422,316 Louisville 223,928 690 29,601 484,874 772,941 Memphis i3 I » I oS 422 17,584 301,649 479,728 Nashville 110,364 346 17,079 256,708 380,845 Birmingham 132,685 537 23,474 279,774 449,707 Columbus 181,511 683 25,648 596,050 962,527 Dayton "6,577 418 15,931 342,141 5",594 Toledo 168,497 670 25,131 519,447 818,814 Indianapolis 233,650 924 34,204 No data No data Grand Rapids 112,571 495 16,584 397,110 637,210 St. Paul 214,744 727 28,708 519,762 775,661 Omaha 124,096 507 19,553 382,953 693,282 Kansas City 248,381 962 37,937 771,473 i,3i7,590 Denver 213,381 930 38,312 920,095 1,328,679 Seattle 237,194 922 32,592 1,111,330 1,562,903 Spokane 104,402 457 17,433 461,762 728,885 Portland 207,214 761 30,102 779,919 1,165,852 Oakland i5o,i74 517 21,722 625,211 895,483 Totals 5,108,237 19,126 761,096 $14,611,195 $22,508,999 1 Exclusive of sites, equipment, indebtedness, and interest on same. 200 THE APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN CITIES Third Class Cities Teachers in Enrolment in Salaries in Total Expenses * Cities Population 1910 Public Day Schools Public Day Schools Public Day Schools 1911-12 1911-12 igii-12 Portland, Me. 58,571 295 10,077 No data No data Manchester, N. H. 70,063 184 8,006 $85,048 $186,953 Burlington, Vt. 20,468 IOO 3,000 No data No data Wilmington, Del. 87,411 No data No data <( «« Wheeling, W. Va. 41,641 154 5,613 «« «< Charlotte, N. C. 34,Oi4 108 5,595 «« a Charleston, S. C. 58,833 131 5,784 62,498 105,190 Jacksonville, Fla. 57,699 160 8,207 No data No data Meridian, Miss. 23,285 9i 4,035 u (i San Antonio, Tex. 96,614 323 14,434 << << Little Rock. Ark. 45,941 171 7,487 100,113 168,519 Oklahoma. Okla. 64,205 385 13,683 No data No data Des Moines, la. 86,368 495 17,659 380,233 647,670 Fargo, N. D. I4,33i 70 2,436 No data No data Sioux Falls, S. D. 14,094 83 2,833 61,032 122,866 Kansas City, Kan. 82,331 349 14,593 272,6582 384,059 Butte, Mont. 39,i65 235 7,o74 212,617 354,527 Cheyenne, Wy. 11,320 49 1,844 33,027 60,292 Albuquerque, N. M. 11,020 5o 1,998 31,098 56,283 Tucson, Ariz. 13,193 No data No data No data No data Salt Lake, Utah 92,777 562 19,561 461,825 7i5,7o8 Reno, Nev. 10,867 5i 1,856 48,440 64,372 Boise, Idaho 17,358 126 4,219 106,137 163,758 Totals 1,051,569 4,172 159,994 $1,854,726 $3,030,197 Totals for all Cities Studied Cities First class Second class Third class Population 1910 15,193,899 5,108,237 1,051,569 Teachers in Public Day Schools^ 1911-12 53,657 19,126 4,172 Enrolment in Public Day Schools 1911-12 2,291,061 761,096 159,994 Salaries in Public Day Schools 1911-12 $44,945,850 14,611,195 1,854,726 Total Expenses ' 1911-12 $66,837,629 22,508,999 3,030,197 Totals 21,353,705 76,955 3,212,151 $61,411,771 $92,376,825 1 Exclusive of sites, equipment, indebtedness, and interest on same. 2 For 1910-11. APPENDIX B 20I COMPARISONS The following comparisons show the relation of the cities covered in this study to the cities of the country in respect to the items in the table above. Data taken from the Report of the United States Com- missioner of Education, 191 2, vol. ii. 1. Population Actual Population and Distribution in 1910 Total population 91,972,266 Urban population 42,623,383, or 46.3 per cent Rural population 49,348,883, or 53.7 per cent (a) Total urban population, 1910 42,623,383 (6) Total for cities studied, 1910 21,353,705 (c) Per cent latter is of former 5°-9 2. Teachers (a) Total for cities of country, 191 1 154,815 (b) Total for cities studied, 191 1 76,955 (c) Per cent latter is of former 49*7 3. Enrolment Total for cities of country, 191 1 6,141,866 Total for cities studied, 1911 3,212,151 Per cent latter is of former 5 2 « a 4. Salaries (a) Total for cities of country, 19 1 1 $128,433,819 (b) Total for cities studied, 191 1 ....... 66,411,771 (c) Per cent latter is of former 5 X «7 5. Operating Expenses (a) Total for cities of country, 191 1 $177,393,567 (6) Total for cities studied, 1911 92,476,845 (c) Per cent latter is of former S 3 - 1 APPENDIX C Memorandum Concerning the City of. I. On the appointment of teachers. Who nominates or recommends candidates? Who appoints? Who approves the appointments? Is there a merit list of candidates? II. On the board of education. Number of members Term of office in years Compensation How members are chosen By whom At large or by wards Number of standing committees Average number of members on standing committees Number of members on the committee on teachers Qualifications of board members III. On the superintendent of schools. How chosen? Tenure of office, First appointment Second appointment No difference made How tenure is fixed, By law By rules of the board Left to discretion of board Amount of salary How salary is fixed, By law By rules of the board Left to discretion of board Qualifications required Conditions of removal of superintendent during term Signed THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THP T a.. 10V 4 1933 -ggths?us3s_ *°^^ L *> 21-ioo m - 7 ,'33 YC 57548 (