University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The opposition to schools of education by professors of the liberal arts: A historical analysis

(USC Thesis Other)

The opposition to schools of education by professors of the liberal arts: A historical analysis

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content TH E OPPOSITION TO SCHOOLS O F EDUCATION B Y PROFESSORS O F TH E LIBERAL ARTS — A HISTORICAL ANALYSIS by Eugene C harles Auerbach A D is s e rta tio n P resen ted to th e FACU LTY O F T H E G R A D U A T E SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOU THERN CALIFORNIA In P a r t ia l F u lfillm e n t of th e Requirem ents fo r th e Degree D O C T O R O F PHILOSOPHY (E ducation) January 1957 UMI Number: DP24042 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI DP24042 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 U N IV E R SITY O F S O U T H E R N C A L IF O R N IA G R ADUATE S C H O O L U N IV ER SITY PARK LO S A N G E L E S 7 <Ph. p £ d '57 A 9/7 This dissertation, written by Eugene .C harles.. Auerbach.............. under the direction ofJdlJ&Guidance Committee, and approved by all its members, has been pre sented to and accepted by the Faculty of the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of D O C T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y Dean TA BLE O F C G N U S M T S CHAPTER PA G E I # T H E PROBIEM A M D SCOPE O F TH E STU D Y .................. 1 The p ro b le m ................................................ 1 S tatem ent of the p r o b l e m ............................... 1 Im portance of th e problem . . ...................... h D e fin itio n s of term s u s e d ................................... 6 D e lim ita tio n s of the p r o b l e m ........................... 10 Procedures used in the study . .................. 13 I I . REVIEW O F RELATED LITERATURE......................... . . 15 I I I . B A C K G R O U N D A M D EARLY OPPOSITION—T H R O U G H 1900 . . . 29 B rie f summary o f the e a rly development o f departm ents of p e d a g o g y ................. ..... • 30 Reasons T dhy schools and departm ents of ed u catio n were o r g a n i z e d .............................. 35 C ritic is m s through 1900 ....................................... * * 1 A nalyses of the p ro b le m ....................................... 51 C o n trib u tin g c a u sa l f a c to r s ..................... 56 Other m a n ife sta tio n s of the problem . . . . 57 Summary of th e p erio d r .. -; Lc. . v * • ♦ • 59 IV. TH E CRYSTALLIZATION OF CRITICISM—1901 T H R O U G H 1933 62 % Background of th e p e r i o d .................................... 62 iv CHAPTER PA® C ritic is m s — -1901 through 1933 ........................... 65 A nalyses o f the problem .• • • • • • • • • .91 C o n trib u tin g c a u sa l fa c to rs • ........................... 92 Other m a n ife sta tio n s of the problem . . . * 95 Summary of the p erio d • • • • • .................... 101 V. TH E A.A.U.P. L O O K S A T SCHOOLS O F EDUCATION . 10*f R equired co u rses in ed u c atio n — Committee Q • • • • • • • • • 107 C ollege and u n iv e rs ity teach in g . . . . . . 122 R ecent a tta c k s on schools of e d u c atio n . . 133 A synoptic p re s e n ta tio n ... .. .................. 1^9 V I. RECENT CRITICISM—193^- T H R O U G H 1955 ................. 153 C ritic is m s —193 ^ through 1955 . . . . . . . 15^ A nalyses of the p ro b le m ................................... . 199 Summary of the p eriod • • • •. •• • • • . 208 V II. T H E PRESENT BELIEFS OF LIBERAL ARTS PROFESSORS....................................... 210 Procedures and ta b u la tio n o f th e survey . * 210 R e su lts of the survey 223 C onclusions of the survey • • • • • « « • • 2**8 V II I. A BRIEF REVIEW OF PERTINENT RESEARCH . . . . 2?1 O verlapping and d u p lic a tio n ............................... 2?1 V CHAPTER PA G E Opinions of te a c h e rs r e la tiv e to p ro fe s s io n a l tra in in g • • • • • • • • • • 252 O pinions o f school su p erin ten d e n ts and u n iv e rs ity a d m in istra to rs in reg ard to p ro fe s s io n a l tra in in g • • • • • • • • 268 Summary . . . . ..................... 272, The c a lib e r of p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs . . . . 273 In te llig e n c e and achievem ent of p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs • • • • • • • • • 273 P e rs o n a lity of p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs . . . 281 S o c io lo g ic a l background o f p ro sp ec tiv e t e a c h e r s .................................. 281 Grading in schools of e d u c atio n . . . . . 282 P re d ic tio n of teach in g su ccess—academic co u rses v s . p ro fe s s io n a l courses . . . 289 M iscellaneous re se a rc h • • • • • • • • • 299 C onclusions th a t can be made on the b a sis of p e r tin e n t re se a rc h . . . . . . 307 IX. S U M M A R Y A N D CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . 311 Resume of the study ................................... . 3 H C o n c lu s io n s •• • • • .. .• 328 C onclusions concerning the hypotheses . 328 Supplem entary conclusions . . . . . . . 329 CHAPTER PA G E Recommendations • • • » • • • • • • • • * 335 BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................. . . . . 338 APPENDIX A - Page R eferences from th e A.A.U.P. B u lle tin Used fo r Figure 1 . . . . 36? APPENDIX B - Page R eferences from th e A.A.U.P. B u lle tin Used fo r F igure 2 . . . . 3^9 APPENDIX G - L e tte r M ailed With Q uestionnaire . . 371 APPENDIX D - S elected Comments Taken from th e Q u estio n n aire R eturns . . . . . . . 372 LIST O F TABIES TA BLE PA G E I . Q uestion One Responses • • • • • • • • • • 22*+ I I . Q uestion Two Responses • • • . • • • • • • 226 I I I . Q uestion Three Responses • • • • . • • • • 227 IV. Q uestion Four Responses • • . . * .................... 229 V. Q uestion Five Responses •••• ••••.. 230 V I. Q uestion Six Responses . . • • • • • • • . 231 V II. Q uestion Seven Responses . . • • • . . • • 233 V III. Q uestion E ig h t Responses • • • • • • • • • 23*+ IX. Q uestion lin e Responses . . . . . . . . . . 235 X. Q uestion Ten Responses • • • • • • • « . . 237 X I. Q uestion E leven Responses • • • • • • • • • 238 X II. Q uestion Twelve Responses • . . . . ♦ ♦ ♦ . 2*f0 X I I I . Q uestion T h irte e n Responses • » • • • • • • 2*+ 2 XIV. Q uestion F ourteen Responses • • • • • • • • 2 * + 3 XV. Q uestion F ifte e n Responses • • • • • • • • 2M + XVI. Q uestion S ix te en Responses •• •••... 2**6 XVII. Q uestion Seventeen Responses . . . . . . . 2*f7 X V III. Judgments by Teachers on th e Value of Courses in E ducation (from D avis) • . . . 25*+ v i i i TABIE PA G E XIX. The R eactions of 100 Alumni to the T re a t ment Accorded to th e 8 1*+ Topics of the P re sc rib e d Courses in E ducation fo r P ro sp ectiv e High School Teachers of Academic S u b jects ( I l l u s t r a t i o n from Peik*s Study) ............................... 257 XX. Opinions of Teachers on the R eo rg an izatio n of P ro fe ss io n a l Courses (from Cahoon and Maekay) ....................................... 260 XXI. Rank Order of Value of V arious F acto rs to E ffe c tiv e Teaching as Judged by High School Teachers in C a lifo rn ia (from B o n d ).............................................................• 261 XXII. Suggested Changes in th e C ollege T rain in g o f the High School Teacher Based on O pinions of Teachers (Adapted from Bond) • 262 X X III. The C o n trib u tio n of G eneral F acto rs to Teaching E ffe c tiv e n e s s —Based Upon Opinions of High School Teachers (Adapted from Bond) • • • » • • • • • • • 263 ix TABIE PA G E XXIV. Per Gent of P re sid e n ts In d ic a tin g th a t Courses in E ducation Should be R equired as a P re re q u is ite f o r the Appointment o f C ollege Teachers (from Thompson) 271 XXV. R ep lies of A d m in istrato rs on Whether or Mot Young In s tru c to r s W ho Have Taken P ro fe ssio n a l Courses are More E f f ic ie n t th an Those Who Have Not (Adapted from Reed) • • • • • • • . • • 272 XXVI. E stim ated Per Cent of R e g is tra n ts E qualing or Exceeding C r i t ic a l (P assing) Score on S e le c tiv e S ervice C ollege Q u a lific a tio n T est (Abridged from the E d u ca tio n al T estin g S ervice Summary) • • » .. • • • • • • • • • • 27*+ XXVII. Medians on A G CT Scale fo r H olders of A.B. Degrees and fo r Graduate and P ro fe ssio n a l S tudents (Adapted from W olfle) . . . . . . ........................... . . . 276 XXVIII. Grading Index of the Schools and C olleges of the U n iv ersity of G eo rg ia --F a ll Q u a rte r, 1950 (Abridged from M orris) . 283 X TABIE PA G E XXIX* P ercentage D is trib u tio n of Grades Received by S tudents a t the U n iv e rsity of M innesota; 1 $*+2-1952 (Abridged from , K e lle r and Void) * * ........................................ 28*+ XXX. A ll School, M ajor, and Minor Averages According to Schools of th e P ennsyl v an ia S ta te C o lleg e, 19^8 (from M asley) . 286 . w ' ' XXXI. Sem ester-H ours T rain in g in S u b ject M atter and E ducation in R e la tio n to R atings of Teachers by P rin c ip a ls (Adapted from Y o u n g ) ..................... 292 XXXII. I n te r c o r r e la tio n s of S u b ject-M atter T ra in in g , P ro fe ss io n a l T ra in in g , and V arious M easures of Success in Teaching (from Whelan) ............................................. 29^ XXXIII. I n te r c o r r e la tio n s D escribing the R e la tio n sh ip Between E stim ates of A ctual Teach ing Success and Other Measures (from B r o o m ) ........................................... 298 XXXIV. In te rc or r e la tio n s D escribing the R e la tio n ship Between In te llig e n c e and Other Measures (from Broom) •». .• • • • • • 299 x i TABIE PA G E XXXV. Number and Per Gent of A rts C ollege Teachers in V arious Teaching F ie ld s (from Reed) ........................................ 302 i LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE - PA® 1. T o tal A rtic le s and Pages in the A.A.U.P. B u lle tin D ealing w ith th e R e la tio n sh ip s Between L ib e ra l i A rts C olleges and Schools o f E ducation . .. .. 150 2 . T o tal A rtic le s and Pages in the A.A.U.P. B u lle tin in Which L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe sso rs C ritic iz e d Schools of E ducation ....................................... 151 3 . Survey R egarding Schools of E ducation . . . . . . 212 CHAPTER I TH E PB0BXEM AID SCOPE O F TH E STU D Y The not a lto g e th e r welcome th e s is of th is paper may perhaps be most d ip lo m a tic a lly in tro d u ced by suggesting th a t th e re are p ro v e rb ia lly two sid e s to every q u e stio n . Academicians are n e ith e r f o o ls , f o s s i l s , nor f a n a tic s , , ‘w ith n o tab le e x c e p tio n s .1 I s th e re n o t a p o s s ib ility th a t they re p re s e n t a p o in t of view which may eventu a lly coerce c o n sid e ra tio n ? Ho such o p p o sitio n has ever developed a g a in s t th e p ro fe s s io n a liz a tio n of law , m edicine, or e n g in e e rin g . W hy th e n , ed u catio n ? a The o p p o sitio n to schools of ed u catio n by l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u ltie s i s a m ajor problem in many c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s in the U nited S ta te s . Although th e o p p o sitio n sometimes appeared to be d e s tru c tiv e in n a tu re , i t may be assumed t h a t , by and la r g e , the o p p o sitio n was based on an h o n est and sin c e re d e s ire to improve the e d u c a tio n a l system . The c r itic is m s stu d ie d in t h i s d is s e r ta tio n a re n o t to be confused w ith a tta c k s on th e e d u c a tio n a l system which are designed to d e s tro y , r a th e r th an stre n g th e n , th a t system . I . TH E PROBIEM S tatem ent of th e problem . The h e a rt of the problem has been expressed in the above q u o ta tio n . W hy has % oss I». F inney, ”The P ro fe ssio n a l E ducation of E d u cato rs—A b s tra c t.” N atio n al E ducation A sso c ia tio n (h ere a f t e r c a lle d N .E.A .) Proceedings of th e 67th Annual M eeting, 1929, P . 2^5. i 2 ■ i i o p p o sitio n by l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u ltie s developed a g a in s t j schools of education? Is the o p p o sitio n ju s tif ie d ? Gould th e arguments advanced a g a in s t schools of ed u c atio n be used: i as a b a sis fo r im proving th e p re p a ra tio n o f te a c h e rs? How j i can the c o n f lic t between p ro fe sso rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s and! p ro fe s s o rs of ed u c atio n be re so lv e d so as to improve te a c h e r education? These a re th e b asic problem s. The p re se n t study was n o t so immodest as to attem p t to solve th e se tremendous problem s. In c a p a b ility as w ell as modesty p ro h ib ite d such an a tte m p t. True, th i s study did attem p t to throw some lig h t on th ese problem s; but to | solve them i s an o th er q u e stio n . B a th e r, th is study ,attem pted to lay a fo u n d a tio n —one of many fo u n d atio n s which must be la id before a s o lu tio n can be reached which w ill promote harmony and improve te a c h e r e d u c a tio n . The fo u n d atio n attem pted in th is study was one of p e rs p e c tiv e . ; In a d d itio n , th i s study attem pted to remove some of the , is s u e s from the realm o f h e a rsa y . This study attem pted to tra c e the e v o lu tio n o f th e o p p o sitio n by l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u ltie s to schools of e d u c a tio n , to p re se n t o b se rv a tio n s ’ i and c r itiq u e s which m ight be a c cep tab le to both p a r tie s involved in th e c o n tro v e rsy , to r e la te the argum ents o f l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u ltie s to re se a rc h s tu d ie s , and to a s c e r ta in the p re se n t b e lie f s of l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u l ti e s r e - i garding schools of e d u c a tio n . S p e c ific a lly th is study attem pted t© answer th e se j q u e stio n s: t 1. What were the c r itic is m s which l i b e r a l a r t s j f a c u ltie s have made in reg ard to schools o f ed u c atio n and the te a c h e r-tra in in g program? 2 . What p a tte rn s of i n t e r e s t and in te n s ity emerged j i when the c r itic is m s were g ath ered and viewed as a to ta lity ? j . | 3 . When did a p a r tic u la r c r itic is m appear fo r the i f i r s t time? j * + . What were th e b e lie f s of p ro fe ss o rs of th e t l i b e r a l a r t s on c e r ta in se le c te d is s u e s p resen ted in a q u e stio n n a ire ? : What was the n a tu re of the evidence (as p re sen ted in the l i t e r a t u r e ) on which the o p p o sitio n was ; based? 6 . Which of th e charges have been put to an | o b je c tiv e te s t? ! i C e rta in hypotheses served as g u id ep o sts fo r the stu d y . Because o f the s e le c tiv ity in h e re n t in a study o f j i t h i s ty p e , th e se hypotheses can not be co n sid ered as j la b o ra to ry h y p o th eses, The hypotheses 1 1 te s te d ” in th is i study were: ! 1. The o p p o sitio n to schools of ed u c atio n by p ro fe sso rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s has been p re se n t m ore-or- j i .le s s co n tin u o u sly sin ce th e in c e p tio n of schools of 1 ed u c a tio n . ! ! 2. The c r i t i c s , by and la rg e , have favored j p ra c tic e s u su a lly a sso c ia te d w ith 1 1 t r a d i t i o n a l ” e d u c a tio n , j 3 . The c r itic is m s have in creased in amount and in te n s ity in re c e n t y e a rs . I i * + . The m a jo rity of the c r itic is m s could not be v e r if ie d by o b je c tiv e ev id en ce. That i s , e s s e n tia lly th is j ; i s a co n tro v ersy of philosophy and © pinion. 5. At th e tim e o f w ritin g , p ro fe sso rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s , by and la r g e , were h o s tile to schools o f education. (This h y p o th esis was te s te d by a q u e s tio n n a ire .) 1 ; l : I I | Im portance of the problem . The im portance of the i I problem i s alm ost s e lf - e v id e n t. The keynote ad d ress to thei ; C ouncil on C ooperation in Teacher E ducation in 1952 con- ! ta in e d th ese words: 1 1 The major problem in te a c h e r ■ i | ed u catio n of th is m id -tw en tieth century i s the b rid g in g ' o j o f the gap between th e academic and p ro fe s s io n a l mind s . 1 1 In 19*4*8, one of the m ajor p o ssib le th r e a ts to th e adequate j 1 p re p a ra tio n of te a c h e rs was said to be 1 1 i n f l u e n ti a l academicians*1 who argued th a t su b je c t-m a tte r knowledge was s u f f ic ie n t p re p a ra tio n fo r t e a c h e r s . 3 In 1 9 * * 6 , a 2Agnes Snyder, “C o n flic tin g P o in ts of View and i C hallenges in th e E ducation of T eachers," Jo u rn al of Teacher E d u catio n . 3*2^+, December, 1952. j | 3G. D. McGrath, "Some P o ssib le T hreats to Adequate j I P re p a ra tio n of T each ers," School and S o c ie ty . 67:60-61, I .January. 2 M * , _19M3.„ : i 5 i .committee composed of p h y s ic is ts re p o rte d : ! I The committee seems unanimous in the fe e lin g th a t ] a major handicap to e f fe c tiv e fu n c tio n in g by scien ce | departm ents in th e p re p a ra tio n of te a c h e rs is the I ty p ic a lly n e g a tiv is tic a ttitu d e of th ese departm ents - toward departm ents of e d u c a tio n . Whether j u s t if ie d j or n o t, th is a ttitu d e is in i t s e l f impeding th e d is - , charge of one of the m ajor r e s p o n s ib ilitie s of the ! sc ie n c e s , nam ely, the p re p a ra tio n of te a c h e rs in t h e i r re sp e c tiv e f ie ld s F u rth er evidence of the im portance of th e problem i was seen by the w idespread i n te r e s t shown in re c e n t books i and a r t i c l e s in which sch o o ls o f ed u catio n have been cen - ! su re d . The g en e ral p u b lic , to o , has been g e ttin g an i !in k lin g of th e c o n tro v e rsy by re c e n t newspaper and magazine a r t i c l e s . i There can be l i t t l e doubt th a t th e o p p o sitio n of the l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u ltie s to th e work o f th e schools of educa tio n has been a n eg ativ e fo rc e in th e te a c h e r-tra in in g i 1 ,program . As one c o lle g e p re sid e n t put i t , ”The tro u b le i s , w hile we are f ig h tin g , the youn g sters a re s u ffe rin g the c a s u a l t i e s .’ 1^ The re s o lu tio n , or the a lle v ia tio n , of the i te n sio n s p re v a le n t in the problem would tend to in c re a se the u n ity of purpose in th e tra in in g of te a c h e rs . Such ^“ ’ ’R e s p o n s ib ilitie s of Science Departm ents in the P re p a ra tio n of T e a c h e rs,” Committee on Teaching of P hysics in Secondary S ehools, American P hysics J o u rn a l. iM-sll**, A p ril, 19^6. ^F. G. Holloway, rem arks on ’’Teacher E d u c a tio n ,” > E d u ca tio n al C onference of the A sso c ia tio n of American C ol- j I le g e s [New ‘I o rk : C o n so lid ated Reportin g Co., 1938), pT 110. ; 6 : u n ity of purpose would reduce the number of w c a s u a l t i e s .1 * F in a lly , any philosophy of ed u catio n b e f ittin g the J dem ocratic tr a d itio n should be c o n sta n tly re-exam ined and I re -e v a lu a te d . Continuous c r itic is m from s c h o la rly q u arte rs; i i s worthy of in v e s tig a tio n and c l a r i f i c a t i o n . A tr u ly dynamic philosophy of ed u catio n has no p lace fo r the rtdeaf , ear** in re g ard to c r itic is m and o p p o s itio n . ! I I . DEFINITIONS O F T EEM S U SED An in d ic a tio n of the d i f f i c u l t y of term inology ! 'involved in the co n tro v e rsy can be garnered from the follo w ing words by an academ ician who w re stle d w ith the co n tro v ersy fo r many y e a rs : I t is alm ost im possible to fin d a term which one or ' the o th e r p a rty w ill n o t co n sid er to be a q u e s tio n - ; begging e p ith e t. C onsider even the term , School of E ducation; lik e the term , Church of God, i f taken l i t e r a l l y , where does th i s le a v e n o n-conform ists? The o r ig in a l a p p ro p ria tio n of such terms probably m anifests; nothing worse than an innocent presum ption; but t h e i r use i s u n questionably a source of i r r i t a t i o n . 6 School of e d u c a tio n . School of e d u c a tio n was 1 co n stru ed to mean any sch o o l, departm ent, d iv is io n , or j i i c o lle g e of ed u catio n of a u n iv e rs ity or a l i b e r a l a r t s ! c o lle g e . ^Marten te n Hoor, M The Stake of the L ib e ra l A rts , 'C ollege in Teacher C e r t i f i c a t i o n ,1 1 A sso ciatio n of American , IC olleges B u lle tin . 39*61, March, 1953* i ; E d u c a tio n is t. E d u c a tio n ist in clu d ed p ro fe sso rs of 'e d u catio n , fe d e ra l and s ta te ed u c atio n o f f i c i a l s , su p er in te n d e n ts of s ta te and lo c a l school system s, and p rin c i p a ls . Although " e d u c a tio n is t1 1 has o c c a sio n a lly been used by c r i t i c s as a derogatory word, in th is study i t was always co n sid ered a le g itim a te word. Columbia U n iv e rsity co n ferred the d o c to ra te on Henry Barnard as an " e d u c a tio n ist" and he approved the t e r m . 7 Whenever e d u c a tio n is t" was used in the p re se n t study p ro fe sso rs of ed u catio n were included in th e meaning of th e term . P ro fe ss io n a l education,. P ro fe ssio n a l ed u catio n as ,used h e re in excluded c o n te n t, or su b je c t m a tte r, c o u rse s. P ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n , as u sed , meant a l l co u rses o ffe re d in the school of ed u c atio n —but w ith the above e x c lu sio n . P a r tic u la r ly p ro fe s s io n a l ed u c atio n meant courses such as 'methods, psychology of e d u c a tio n , e d u c a tio n a l a d m in istra - tio n , and guidance* L ib e ra l a r ts f a c u lty . L ib e ra l a r ts fa c u lty excluded p ro fe ss o rs of ed u catio n even in i n s t it u t i o n s where such p ro fe s so rs were under the ju r is d ic tio n of the c o lle g e of l i b e r a l a r t s . P re sid e n ts and deans of c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s were included in th e meaning o f th is term ! n 'Anna Lou B la ir , Henry Barnard (M inneapolis: E d u ca tio n al Publisher. s , _ I n c _ . 93"$) j" p._262*_______________ 8 ! I lunless otherw ise in d ic a te d . j i i i i L ib e ra l a r ts c o lle g e . L ib e ra l a r ts c o lle g e re fe rre d ! to independent c o lle g e s so d esig n ated and to l i b e r a l a r ts ! i u n its w ith in u n i v e r s i ti e s . ' i M ethods. Methods was used fo r courses in how to j te a c h a p a r tic u la r s u b je c t, grade le v e l, or g e n e ra l a r e a . ' i S u b ject m a tte r and academ ic. S u b ject m atter and academic were considered m utually ex clu siv e to p ro fe ssio n a l' e d u c a tio n . Academic. Academic d esig n ated the tr a d it io n a l 1 •fie ld s of the l i b e r a l a r ts and excluded such p re se n t-d ay f i e l d s as m usic, jo u rn a lism , commerce, drama, a r t , e tc . which are sometimes under th e ju r is d ic tio n of the c o lle g e of l i b e r a l a r t s . A ctu ally the problem under d isc u s sio n in ! t h is d is s e r ta tio n was the o p p o sitio n to sch o o ls of educa tio n by academ icians. I t was ra re th a t c r itic is m was s heard from th e music d epartm ents, fo r exam ple. However, the more in c lu s iv e term , l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u l t i e s , was ! s e le c te d inasmuch as th e se f a c u ltie s fre q u e n tly acted as • a group—and th is group a c tio n was deemed im p o rta n t. i P ro fe s s io n a liz a tio n of s u b je c t m a tte r. P ro fe s s io n - l ! a liz a tio n of s u b je c t m a tte r was used fo r cases when su b je c t' i i m atter_w as p a rtle.ular.ly_d.esigne.d_f.or_.teacher.s..__________ j I I | 9 i ! ( i M P ro fe ss io n a liz e d courses w may be o ffe red e ith e r in schools of ed u catio n or in the academic d ep artm en ts. An example of a p ro fe s s io n a liz e d course would be when a p ro fe sso r would d eto u r in h is trea tm en t of s u b je c t m atter to p o in t out how a p a r tic u la r p o rtio n of in fo rm a tio n could j be tau g h t to younger s tu d e n ts ; or when, say , a l i t e r a t u r e j course in c o lle g e would s p e c ia liz e in a d o le sc e n t lite r a tu r e ! The above d e f in itio n s do n o t, of c o u rse , apply to 1 quoted m a te r ia l. A ctu ally in th is e n tir e a re a th e re are j few c le a n -c u t d e f in itio n s of term s. For exam ple, th e I term s c o lle g e and u n iv e rs ity have only g e n e ra l meanings as used in the h is to ry of e d u c a tio n in the U nited S ta te s , I 1 Ohio Wesleyan U n iv e rsity would a c tu a lly be a l i b e r a l a r t s ! |c o lle g e by t r a d i t i o n a l meanings whereas th e (form erly) ;M ichigan S ta te C ollege was fo r many y e a rs a u n iv e rs ity by i t r a d it io n a l stan d ard s* i i F urtherm ore, i t was not w ith in the purpose of the p re se n t study to g e t involved in arguments over nomen c la tu re such as te a c h e r tr a in in g v s • te a c h e r e d u c a tio n , i sc h o la rs v s, schoolm en, p ro fe sso rs v s , pedagogues, to r ie s | v s , te c h n ic ia n s , and academ icians v s . e d u c a to rs. S u ffic e i i i t to say th a t no d erogatory im p lic a tio n s were intended j by th e use of any such term s. When courses in ed u c atio n j were d if f e r e n tia te d from su b je c t-m a tte r co u rses t h i s d id ; not mean th a t th e re was no s u b je c t m a tte r in courses in 10 ed u c atio n —and v ic e v e rs a . When e d u c a tio n is ts were d is tin g u is h e d from academ icians th is did n o t mean th a t no e d u c a tio n is ts were s c h o la rs —and v ic e v e r s a . The use of th e se term s is n o t a c o n fessio n of weakness on anybody 9s p a r t as some c r i t i c s im plied* I I I * EELIMITATIOHS OF TH E PRO BLEM In th is s tu d y , the fo llo w in g s itu a tio n s were deemed p e rtin e n ts 1* When sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n , per s e * were i attack ed * 2 . When sch o o ls of ed u c atio n were m entioned as !c o n tro llin g something co n sid ered to be u n d esirab le* For i in s ta n c e , L ife Adjustm ent E d u catio n was n o t considered u n le ss th is movement was lin k ed to schools of ed u c a tio n . 3* When well-known p ro fe s s o rs of ed u catio n were c r i t i c i z e d and the w rite r assumed t h a t th e p a r tic u la r p ro fe sso r was re p re s e n ta tiv e of schools of ed u c atio n or an im p o rtan t segment th ereo f* When g e n e ra l term s were used w hich, by the c o n te x t, included p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n . Such term s in clu d ed : e d u c a tio n a l t h e o r i s t s , p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a to rs, e d u c a tio n is ts , e d u c a tio n a lis ts , pedagogues, and schoolm en. The study was confined to the U nited S ta te s . The time span embraced the period from (roughly) 1850 to 1955* C ritic is m s d ire c te d a t normal schools and s in g le purpose te a c h e r-tra in in g i n s t it u t i o n s were not in clu d ed ; nor were c r itic is m s from academ icians and others attach e d to such i n s t i t u t i o n s . Thus th e w ritin g s of such well-known, i c r i t i c s as P aul Woodring and David Eugene Smith have been I i excluded from th is stu d y . The reaso n fo r t h i s d e lim ita tio n j was to co n fin e th e problem , as much as p o s s ib le , to an ! i in tr a - u n iv e r s ity or in tr a - c o lle g e problem . I t was assumed j ! th a t the co n tro v e rsy w ith in sin g le -p u rp o se in s tit u ti o n s wasj somewhat d i f f e r e n t —alth o u g h th e p h ilo so p h ic a l Issu e s were lik e ly toxbe s im ila r . This d e lim ita tio n could n o t, by the i n a tu re o f th in g s , always be fo llo w ed . P a r tic u la r ly was i t t | Im p o ssib le to s e p a ra te te a c h e rs c o lle g e s from ed u c atio n * d iv is io n s of l i b e r a l a r ts c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s in | re s e a rc h s tu d ie s . • The view points of p ro fe sso rs o f ed u c atio n i n answer j jto the charges were not p re se n te d in th is study except ^ o c c a sio n a lly fo r purposes of c o n tin u ity . A lso, c r itic is m s 1 of the te a c h e r-tra in in g program by p ro fe ss o rs of ed u catio n I were not p re se n te d . C ritic is m i n which p ro fe sso rs of e d u c a tio n were n o t I w s p e lle d o u t1 1 was n o t inclu d ed in th is stu d y . The fo llo w - i ■ i ling, w ritte n i n 1910 by a p ro fe sso r of L a tin L ite r a tu r e , i s ; i an example of m a te ria l th a t was o m itted ; 1 The P ro fesso r *s q u a rre l was w ith the s p i r i t of h ig h er e d u c a tio n . So long as you conversed w ith him on any o th e r to p ic , you m ight have supposed him s e n sib le and w e ll-b a la n c e d , though he was a c o lle g e ! p ro fe sso r: but the moment you m entioned the high school or the c o lle g e , h is e s s e n tia lly monomaniacal d is p o s i- < tio n became m a n ife st. He poured f o r th h is ro a rin g s 1 lik e the w a te rs. Now, of c o u rse , you w ill th in k th a t th e P ro fesso r 's ground of com plaint was th a t the conduct of high school; and c o lle g ia te e d u c a tio n was unfavorable to th e j c l a s s i c s . For did n o t prom inent e d u c a tio n is ts —th ere i s a d iffe re n c e between ed u cato rs and e d u c a tio n is ts — say th a t the a n c ie n t tongues were too h a rd , th a t they ; ru in e d the s tu d e n t's E n g lish , were im p ra c tic a l, 1 w retchedly ta u g h t, took to o much tim e, had no r e a l i connection w ith t e r r e s t r i a l e x is te n c e , were dead, dead, 1 j dead th in g s , and a f te r a few y ea rs would have to giv e ! p lace to something more^modern, more v i t a l , more ' m easurable—and e a s ie r? ^ .More th an li k e ly , th e author was ta lk in g about p ro fe sso rs 'of e d u c atio n ; however, he did not e le a r ly and d e f in ite ly say so . Thus th e above q u o ta tio n , and many o th er q u o ta- j I t jtio n s lik e th is were ex clu d ed . j ! P ro fe sso rs of ed u catio n were o fte n considered the |board of d ir e c to r s of a " t r u s t ” th a t c o n tro lle d p u b lic j i , j ed u c atio n —lo c k , s to c k , and b a r r e l. Thus any c r itic is m i i d ire c te d a g a in s t the p u b lic schools could be con sid ered ; c r itic is m a g a in s t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n . This would have I ; * I made the to p ic of th is d is s e r ta tio n unw ieldy. T h erefo re, i 1 ; only when p ra c tic e s in th e p u b lic schools were c le a r ly i ® Grant Shower man, With th e P ro fe sso r (New York: Henry H olt and C o ., 1910), pp. 260- 61. ia sso c ia te d w ith the work o f schools of ed u c atio n was the | i C r itic is m c o n sid e re d . | S p e c ia l e x c lu sio n s were e s ta b lis h e d fo r th e ques- i tio n n a ire study used in th is d is s e r t a t io n . F a c u ltie s o f 1 C ath o lic c o lle g e s , Negro c o lle g e s , and sin g le -p u rp o se te a c h e r-tra in in g c o lle g e s were not p o lle d in th e q u e s ti onnair e . , i I t should a lso be noted th a t th is study did n o t f tra c e the h is to ry o f id e a s . For exam ple, the Y ale fa c u lty j ap p a ren tly b eliev ed in 1829 th a t l i b e r a l ed u c atio n and ip ro fe s sio n a l ed u c atio n d id n o t "mix” —and they had many Q reaso n s fo r so b e lie v in g . However, th e development o f !id e a s was co n sid ered s u f f ic ie n tly d i s t i n c t to be excluded, 1 i i iin g e n e ra l, from th is stu d y . C ritiq u e s of the c r itic is m s were p re se n ted only i jwhen i t was co nsidered reaso n ab le t h a t the c r itiq u e s would I be ac cep tab le to both p a r tie s involved in the c o n tro v e rsy . 1 ; i IV. PROCEDURES USED IN THE STU D Y ' I The u su a l methods of h i s t o r i c a l re se a rc h were u sed , j In a d d itio n , a q u e stio n n a ire was u ti liz e d to a s c e r ta in the 9"O rig in a l Papers i n R e la tio n To a Course of L ib e ra l E d u c a tio n ,” R eport of the Yale F acu lty and R eport of the Committee of the C o rp o ra tio n , The American Jo u rn al of A rts ;and S c ie n c e s. 15*297-351, 1829. lb p re se n t b e lie f s of l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u ltie s on c e r ta in jse le c te d is s u e s . C e rta in Jo u rn als in which a r t i c l e s w ritte n by l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe sso rs were a p t to appear were perused in \ t h e ir e n t i r e t y . Included in th e se Jou rn als w ere: The E n g lish J o u rn a l. American A sso c ia tio n of U n iv e rsity I P ro fe sso rs B u lle tin . The Jo u rn al of Chemical E d u ca tio n . * !The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l. The American S c h o la r. The American , i M athem atical M onthly. The Header *s Guide to P e rio d ic a l ! I i Il i t e r a t u r e and the E ducation Index were u t i l i z e d . Card I i ;ca ta lo g u e s of th re e m ajor l i b r a r i e s were search ed . j The sources were w idely s c a tte re d as may be seen by ; ; i the docum entation. ! An a tte m p t, a t l e a s t , was made to avoid b ia s in th e ! i s e le c tio n of ev id en ce. The word "attem pt*1 i s used j a d v ise d ly . H is to r ic a l s tu d ie s in v o lv e g re a t s e l e c ti v i t y . In a study o f th is ty p e , where th e re a re probably no i " n e u tr a l1 1 w r ite r s , th is i s p a r tic u la r ly t r u e . The w rite r s 1 i of the N atio n al Survey of the E ducation of Teachers looked ; ‘ i ! i I fo r evidence of co o p eratio n between p ro fe sso rs of the 1 { l i b e r a l a r ts and p ro fe sso rs of e d u c a tio n —and o fte n they i found such ev id en ce. The w rite r of the p re se n t study A looked fo r h o s t i l i t y between th e two groups—so he found h o s t i l i t y . This is the danger in a h i s t o r i c a l study of ;th is ty p e. ! CHAPTER I I f J f REVIEW O F RELATED LITERATURE i D isregarding s ta tu s s tu d ie s (s tu d ie s which ta b u la te ! course o ffe rin g s etc*), th e re has been very l i t t l e g en e ral j re se a rc h concerning schools of e d u c a tio n . This can be seenl I by re fe re n c e to the a p p ro p ria te a r t i c l e in the re v ise d j e d itio n of th e E ncyclopedia of E d u ca tio n al R esearch .^ Re- i t garding the h i s t o r i c a l development of schools of education,! the la c k of in fo rm a tio n i s more m arked. There were only a ' I . i i few s tu d ie s of schools of ed u catio n in p a r tic u la r i n s t i t u - ; tio n s and only a h and ful of s tu d ie s which tre a te d th e i developm ent on a s t a t e , re g io n a l, or n a tio n a l b a s is . Re- ' garding the h is to r y of th e co n tro v ersy between schools of j \ * ed u c atio n and c o lle g e s of l i b e r a l a r t s , v i r t u a l l y n othing j j of a com prehensive n a tu re has been w r itte n . Almost a l l of : jthe an aly ses of th e c o n f lic t s tre s s e d th e contem porary s it-! i n a tio n and only o c c a sio n a lly touched upon the h is to r y of \ jthe c o n tro v e rsy . Even P ro fe sso r B estor did n o t u t i l i z e j j h i s t o r i c a l developm ent to any g re a t e x te n t. Evidence of l ;th e p au c ity of m a te ria l on the h is to ry of the c o n f lic t can ! ^A rchibald W . Anderson, r 1 Teacher -E d u catio n —O rgani z a tio n and A d m in istra tio n ,t # E ncyclopedia of E d u c a tio n a l R esearch , re v ise d e d itio n , W alter S. Monroe, e d ito r (New York: The M acmillan C o., 1950), pp. 1303- 86. |be seen from t h i s sta te m e n t, w r itte n in 19^7* by th e actingj ! d ir e c to r of the American C ouncil of Learned S o c ie tie s : j What is needed i s an o b je c tiv e d is c u s s io n by th o se I who have been more o r le s s in tim a te ly a s s o c ia te d w ith both tr a d itio n s and who, th e re fo re , are ab le to a p p re - 1 c ia te to some degree the s tre n g th s and weaknesses in each* An exam ination of t h i s co n tro v e rsy in h i s t o r i c a l and com parative term s i s a ls o in d ic a te d . Too many d i s c u ssio n s o p e ra te i n a vacuum, as i f the background o f th e d eb ate had no m eaning, and as i f the ex p erien ce of : o th e r p ro fe s sio n s had no re le v a n c y . C r i t i c a l s tu d ie s of the h is to ry of re c e n t r e la tio n s between th e a r t s and pedagogical t r a d i t i o n s , and com parative s tu d ie s of the ; r e la tio n s between academic and o th e r p ro fe s s io n a l f a c - : i u l t i e s , are c le a r ly c a lle d f o r . Anyone who attem p ts I th ese approaches w i ll , no doubt, fin d i t a th a n k le ss 1 I ta s k .^ i j I t was hoped th a t th e p re se n t study would s a t i s f y , in p a rt,, |th e c a l l f o r h i s t o r i c a l s tu d ie s of the c o n tro v e rsy . Educa- I t i o n a l l y , f o r th e w r ite r , th is approach has n o t been i i '“ th an k less.* 1 G eneral h i s to r i e s o f ed u c atio n in the U nited S ta te s p aid l i t t l e , or no, a tte n tio n to th e problem . Even ; i I h i s to r ie s of h ig h e r ed u c atio n have given only meager s i c o n s id e ra tio n to th e problem . For example, R. Freeman j B u tts , in The C ollege C harts I t s C ourse., p re se n ted only ■ i th e broad p h ilo s o p h ic a l p o in ts o f view w ith in h ig h e r educa-: i tio n which were s tr iv in g to c o n tro l th e co lleg e cu rricu lu m . Based on B u tts 1 h i s t o r i c a l a n a ly s is , th e re a p p a re n tly has ^R ichard H. Shryock, “Pedagogues and P ed ag ese,1 1 School and S o c ie ty . 65*3, January 19^7. j 17 ! been r a th e r sev ere co n tro v ersy between c o n se rv a tiv e s and i p ro g re ssiv e s in American c o lle g e s sin c e a t l e a s t the e a rly 1800*3. One p a r t o f the c o n f lic t has involved the i i p r a c tic a l v s . the c u ltu r a l co n cep tio n of l i b e r a l e d u c a tio n .! The c o n se rv a tiv e s have held th a t (1) the t r a d i ti o n a l i c la s s ic a l ed u c atio n was the b e s t fo r m an's s p i r i t ; ; (2) l i b e r a l ed u c atio n was an end in i t s e l f and would be j d estro y ed by u ti lit a r i a n is m ; <3) knowledge in a l l p r in c i- i p a l a re a s of thought should be m astered b efore s p e c ia liz e - i itio n was u n dertaken; and (b) th e A.B. degree should be j i i re se rv e d fo r the c la s s ic a l c o u rse --w ith no e le c tiv e s .^ B u tts tra c e d the e v o lu tio n of the c o lle g e co n se rv a- ( tiv e and the c o lle g e p ro g re ssiv e and a p p a re n tly concluded i th a t the T w entieth C entury s tru g g le fo r th e c o n tro l of the : (college cu rricu lu m was between M ew Humanism and E x p e ri- i * I im sntal N atu ralism . New Humanists were a s s e rte d ly concerned: • I w ith the p e rfe c tio n of the in d iv id u a l r a th e r th an th e e le v a tio n o f mankind as a w hole. The M ew Humanists favored! I * 1 i n t e l l e c t u a l d is c ip lin e ” to c o n tro l conduct; th e re fo re , lthey were opposed to " s p o n ta n e ity ,” n a tu ra lis m , and th e i e le c tiv e system . E x tre m ists among th e M ew Humanists were sa id to b e lie v e in th e dualism of man and n a tu re . Human n a tu re was b e lie v e d to be unchanging, u n iq u e, and p o ssessed i ^R. Freeman B u tts , The C ollege C harts I t s Course • ' L(New_York*_ McGraw-Hil l Book Co. , 1929)* PP« 21&-19 . ________; I 1 8 |w ith an " a b so lu te q u a lity 1 1 which tended to deny th e theory k i of ev o lu tio n * According to B u tts, the New Humanists jo in ed o th e rs a s s o c ia te d w ith 1 1 The G reat T ra d itio n 1 1 in b e lie v in g t h a t : ^ i (1) r e a l i t y , id e a s , and t r u th were e s s e n tia lly fix e d , i s p i r i t u a l , and a u th o r ita tiv e ; (2) the le a rn in g process was e s s e n tia lly r a t i o n a l i s t i c in the manner of P la to , j i A r is to tle , and Aquinas; (3) knowledge was an end in i t s e l f j and was divorced from the l i f e of a c tio n ; and (4) l i b e r a l j ed u c atio n should emphasize " c u ltu r e ” and de-em phasize j u t i l i t a r i a n ( p r a c tic a l) a c t i v i t i e s . i A goodly p o rtio n of the p re se n t study i s concerned w ith an a p p lic a tio n of the p h ilo s o p h ic a l p o s itio n of 1 1 The i j G reat T ra d itio n 1 1 as o u tlin e d by B u tts . B u tts d id not make : Isuch an a p p lic a tio n . Although he analyzed the w ritin g s of i i such persons as F o e r s te r , S horey, and McConn, B utts d id n o t ! i p o in t out t h e ir h o s t i l i t y to schools of e d u c a tio n . 1 i The Commission on F inancing H igher E d u catio n , spon- j ' i sored by the A sso ciatio n of American U n iv e r s itie s , I i i i n i t i a t i n g a re se a rc h program in 1949* found i t n ecessary j to develop th e ir own m a te ria l're g a rd in g the h i s t o r i c a l i developm ent of h ig h e r ed u c atio n in the U nited S ta te s . As ! i 1 1 ■ ...... ^ I b ld . . pp. 269-7b. I 5 lb id . , pp. 418-26. ] a r e s u l t , two independent '’e ssa y s1 1 were p u b lish ed i n one ] i volume under the t i t l e The Development and Scope of H igher ! E d ucation in the U nited S t a t e s . The au th o rs were R ichard J H o fs ta d te r, p ro fe s s o r of h is to r y , and C. DeWitt H ardy, a j member of the s t a f f of the Commission. Only fo u r pages in 1 ! t h is 239-page volume were devoted to th e h is to ry o f teac h er- tr a in in g in the U nited S ta te s . The fo llo w in g , by H of- | i s t a d t e r , was p resen ted re le v a n t to th e p re se n t stu d y : • ! In the l i g h t of t h is u rg e n t need f o r te a c h e rs , a rg u -1 I ments over d e ta il s o f teac h er tr a in in g seem to be a i lu x u ry , but they do go on. In th is f ie ld th e c o n te s t between l i b e r a l ed u c atio n and p ro fe ssio n a lism has tak en 1 th e form of a debate over th e r e la tiv e p la c e s of th e 1 study of s u b je c t m a tte r and th e study of p ed ag o g ical ; m ethod. Among reaso n ab le men th e re is disagreem ent c h ie f ly over d e t a i l s —few deny th a t th ere i s som ething | to be learn ed from e d u c a tio n a l psychology and k in d red | d is c ip lin e s , and no one claim s th a t good teach in g i s : ! p o ss ib le when the teac h er la c k s a decent m astery of 1 | s u b je c t m a tte r .6 The co n tro v e rsy in c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s between p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s and p ro fe sso rs o f ed u catio n | jhas had i t s c o u n te rp a rt w ith in normal sch o o ls, te a c h e rs c o lle g e s , and schools of e d u c a tio n . The group among educa- 1 ; 1 t i o n i s t s who tended to agree w ith th e p r o f e s s o r - c r itic s in , the l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u ltie s in clu d ed such noted ed u c atio n ists as B agley, Judd, and Henry C. M orrison. In The P re-S erv ice i E d u catio n of High School T eachers in U n iv e r s itie s , a ; % ic h a rd H o fsta d te r and C. DeWitt H ardy, The D evel- !opment and Scope of H igher E ducation in the U nited S ta te s (New York: Columbia U n iv e rsity P r e s s , 1952), p . 97* _ J 2 0 d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n by L indley J . S t i l e s , Henry C. M orrison served on a 1 1 Jury of e x p e rts 1 1 and had t h i s to say I have not thus f a r found a sin g le case in which schools of ed u catio n have any le g itim a te p la c e i n valid; u n i v e r s i ti e s . They a re ex ceedingly p re te n tio u s in what; they te a c h ; they are ad d ic te d to p seu d o -sc ien ce, and to» th e teac h in g of courses which have no v a li d i ty w hat- ' e v e r. A n o ta b le in sta n c e of the l a t t e r i s th e u n iv e r- ! s a l a d d ic tio n to t e s t s and m easurem ents, which r e s t s on a philosophy which was re p u d ia te d as f a lla c io u s alm ost ] 300 y e a rs ago, namely the C a rte s ia n dogma th a t whatever; e x is ts e x is ts as q u a n tity and can th e re fo re be measured j i The e r e c tio n of a movement f o r the s c ie n t i f i c study | o f ed u catio n s ta r te d w ell more th an f i f t y y e a rs ago, j but a f te r a g e n e ra tio n or so the th in g g o t more and more c h a o tic and i s now fo r the most p a r t m erely a m ess. I do not know w hether anything w ill ev er be done to c le a n i t u p . I t is c e r ta in ly n o t a u n iv e rs ity d is c ip lin e nor anything lik e i t . The crux of the m a tte r is th a t a t l e a s t th re e i n t e l le c tu a lly d i f f e r e n t th in g s a re tr e a te d under the name E d u c a tio n f—nam ely, E ducation as a n a tu r a l p ro c e ss; P u b lic I n s tr u c tio n ; T eaching. In my Judgment, E duea- , tio n i t s e l f should be made a s e c tio n in th e School of 1 Biology in th e C ollege of L ib e ra l A rts . P u b lic I I n s tr u c tio n , in c lu d in g a l l such th in g s as we now c la s s if y as A d m in istra tio n , and School H isto ry and the . C urriculum should be placed in the C ollege of Govern- t ment—or P o l i t i c s —as a School of P u b lic I n s tr u c tio n , i Teaching should be re le g a te d e n tir e ly to the Teachers C o lleg e, g re a tly stre n g th e n e d , both on the academic ; sid e and on the sid e of p r a c tic e .7 I t 1 C ritic is m s of th e te a c h e r-tra in in g program by the 1 above-m entioned group have re c e iv e d more a tte n tio n in ^Lindley Joseph S t i l e s , 1 1 The P re -S erv ice E ducation • of High School T eachers in U n iv e r s itie s 1 1 (unpublished D octor fs d i s s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity of C olorado, B oulder, ,19^5), PP. 57-58. :e d u c a tio n a l l i t e r a t u r e than c r itic is m s by p ro fe s s o rs of the l i b e r a l a rts * A lso, the h is to ry of normal sch o o ls and te a c h e rs c o lle g e s has been tr e a te d more ad eq u ately than the h is to ry of ed u c atio n u n its in c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s i t i e s . Iv en a h is to ry of th e c o n f li c t between academ ic and p ro fe s s io n a l in te r e s t s w ith in norm al schools and te a c h e rs jc o lle g e s has been w ritte n * This h is to r y , w ritte n by I Randolph in 192M-, c a rrie d the t i t l e The P ro fe s s io n a l j Treatm ent of Sub.iect M a tte r. Randolph concluded th a t j” . * * a t th e beginning of the normal school th e re was a i 1 A :sharp d iv is io n between th e o r is ts in the new i n s t i t u t i o n . ”0 The d iv is io n was over t h is q u e stio n : 1 1 . * . does th e ! r e s p o n s ib ility of the te a c h e r of te a c h e rs in a given s u b je c t d i f f e r e s s e n tia lly from t h a t of a teac h er of th e |same s u b je c t i n a l i b e r a l a r t s college?*1^ The e a r l i e s t M c le a r e x p re ssio n ” of the p ro fe s s io n a liz a tio n of s u b je c t jm atter—th e normal sch o o ls1 f i n a l answer to the above i ! q u e stio n —appeared in 1865. Randolph tra c e d the develop ment of th is 1 1 id e a ” and p re se n te d co n crete a p p lic a tio n in geography, l i t e r a t u r e , and a r ith m e tic . % dgar Dunnington Randolph, The P ro fe ssio n a l Treatm ent of S u b je c t M atter (B altim o re: Warwick and York, 192^), p. 21. 9I b id . . p. 2 9. In th e l8 2 0 's and 1830*s co n tro v ersy w ith in the j normal school c e n te re d in th e follow ing to p ic s according ] to R a n d o lp h :^ p r a c tic a l v ersu s c u ltu r a l e d u c a tio n , u t i l i - j i ta r i a n v ersu s d is c ip lin a r y aim s, s c i e n t i f i c v ersu s c l a s s i - i c a l knowledge, i n t e l l e c t u a l v ersu s m oral and p h y sic a l ;e d u c a tio n , in d iv id u a l v ersu s s o c ia l ends in e d u c a tio n , I ! i ;ed u c atio n as the a c q u is itio n o f knowledge v ersu s ed u catio n I ; i ias th e discipline of th e f a c u l t i e s , u n ifo rm ity v ersu s re co g - i i ' I !n itio n of in d iv id u a l d if f e r e n c e s , th e “c h ild c e n tr a l” ; | ' v ersu s tthe “knowledge c e n tr a l1 1 in m ethod, th in k in g versus knowledge in aim s, and so on. The s im ila r ity of the issu es. in th e e a rly n in e te e n th cen tu ry w ith in normal schools and the c u rre n t c o n f lic t between p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a rts ; ;and p ro fe s so rs of ed u c atio n was a p p a re n t—even though some ; i i of the e a r l i e r is s u e s now appear in “new d r e s s .” i R andolph's study d iffe re d from th e p re se n t study by j t lim itin g the problem to sin g le -p u rp o se i n s t it u t i o n s and by j i d e a lin g w ith only one a sp e c t of the problem —namely the in - i te g ra tio n of s u b je c t m a tte r and method• A f u r th e r d i f f e r - ! ence between th e s tu d ie s would be ap p aren t on com parisons the co n tro v e rsy w ith in th e normal schools and te a c h e rs | i c o lle g e s was c a rrie d on w ith o u t the contem pt and d e ris io n which has c h a ra c te riz e d much of the a n ti- e d u c a tio n is t i i 1QI b i d . . pp . 59-62. ! l i t e r a t u r e of tw e n tie th -c e n tu ry p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c s . j i Only two s tu d ie s were found which were lim ite d to j i th e g e n e ra l developm ent of u n iv e r s ity schools o f education*| The f i r s t , p u b lish ed i n 1924, and w ritte n by Leigh G. ! H u b b e ll,^ e a rrie d th e t i t l e The Development of U n iv e rsity Departm ents of E d u ca tio n , The second, p u b lish ed in 1941 |and w ritte n by Timothy F . O’L eary,*^ c a rrie d the t i t l e I n I In q u iry In to the G eneral P u rp o ses* F u n c tio n s* and O reaniza- r tio n of S e le c te d Schools of E d u c a tio n * H u b b e llfs study was| ! | ■confined to s ix s ta te s in th e Middle Wests Iowa, M ichigan, > ! 'W isconsin, In d ia n a , I l l i n o i s , and Ohio* I t was in th e ! I M iddle West where te a c h e r ed u c atio n in u n iv e r s itie s had i t s : ; I j I most a u sp icio u s beginnings* 0 ’Leary *s study was concerned j | i j w ith schools of e d u c a tio n a t H arvard, Columbia, M ichigan, i j Iowa, S ta n fo rd , and C a lif o r n ia . I ! | Both s tu d ie s combined s ta tu s m a te ria l and h is to r ic a l! ; i m a te ria l* Both s tu d ie s were d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n s p re - , i isented to C ath o lic U n iv e rs ity . Both s tu d ie s made only i js lig h t re fe re n c e to the problem of the p re se n t stu d y . j ^ L e ig h G. H ubbell, The Development of U n iv e rsity ■ Departm ents of E ducation (W ashingtons The C a th o lic U n iv e rs ity , 1924). i ^T im othy F . O’Leary, An In q u iry In to th e G eneral P u rp o ses* F unctions * and O rg an izatio n of S e le c te d S chools - iof E d u catio n (W ashingtons The C a th o lic U n iv e rsity , 1941). I ; F u rth e r evidence of the s c a rc ity of m a te ria l d ealin g w ith th e h i s t o r i c a l developm ent of sch o o ls of ed u catio n was provided by 0 1 L eary. In review ing p e r tin e n t l i t e r a t u r e , 0 'L eary could c ite only th re e s tu d ie s ; two of th ese were ! j s ta tu s s tu d ie s and the th ir d was H u b b e ll’s s tu d y . ! ' A d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n by C le m e n t,^ The E v o lu tio n i of Teacher T rain in g in C a lifo rn ia as 4 Phase of S o c ia l j Change t tr e a te d the developm ent of ed u catio n u n its in c o l- i j , .;-A | le g e s , u n i v e r s i t i e s , and sin g le -p u rp o se i n s t i t u t i o n s . As j ! i the t i t l e in d ic a te d , t h i s ,.study: emphasized th e e f f e c ts of ; ' . J J ’ . V - j s o c ia l fo rc e s on te a c h e r ed u c a tio n in C a lif o r n ia . Inasmuch, * * ? as s o c ia l fo rc e s can not- be e n tir e ly d iv o rced from p h ilo - j-' \ s o p h ic a l force's (and1 o th er f o r c e s ) , some, tout n o t a g re a t | 1 ' ! jdeal, of C ibm ent’s m a te ria l was p e r tin e n t to the p re se n t j 1 - * ;study. ; r | A d o c to ra l d i s s e r ta tio n by Borrowman, The L ib e ra l - and T echnical in Teacher E d u catio n , in te r p r e te d the i * f * * ! p h ilo s o p h ic a l assum ptions of four groups concerned w ith ih ' te a c h e r e d u c a t i o n . "Academic p u r i s t s 1 1 was the la b e l 1 r 1 given to th o se who co n sid ered p ro fe s s io n a l ed u c atio n j • ✓ 1 __________________________________ r' 1 r 1 ^ E v e ly n A. Clem ent, 1 1 The E v o lu tio n of Teacher i T ra in in g i n C a lifo rn ia as a Phase of S o c ia l ChangeM (unpublished D o cto r’s d is s e r t a t io n , U n iv e rsity of C a li- ! f o r n ia , B erkeley, 1936). ! ; ^ M e rle L. Borrowman, "The L ib e ra l and T echnical in 1 Teacher E ducation" (unpublished D o cto r’s d e s s e r ta tio n , ! T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rsity , lew York C ity , 1953)> pp . _?2-93. _ ........... ; ____________________________________ _ J d e trim e n ta l to l i b e r a l education* " P ro fe ssio n a l p u r i s t s 1 1 was th e la b e l given to th o se who would have no g e n e ra l ed u c a tio n in th e p ro fe s s io n a l sch o o l ex cep t fo r a b r i e f review of s u b je c ts needed in p u b lic -sc h o o l te a c h in g . "H arm onizers" was th e la b e l g iv en to th o se who b e lie v e d th a t th e cu rricu lu m " . . . could be fu n c tio n a lly o rie n te d to a s ig n if ic a n t degree and s t i l l be l ib e r a l i z i n g ." " In te g ra to rs " was th e la b e l g iv en to th o se who would p ro fe s s io n a liz e s u b je c t m a tte r. Borrowman tra c e d the changing view points o f th e se groups as m anifested p rim a rily in norm al sch o o ls and te a c h e rs c o lle g e s . The a n a ly s is was much in th e manner of B u tts who was th e chairm an o f Borrow- man*s com m ittee. The p re se n t study p a r a lle le d Borrowmanfs study only re g ard in g th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l assum ptions of th e group la b e lle d "academ ic p u r i s t s . 1 1 Monroe fs T eaching-L earning Theory and Teacher Educa t i o n . 1890 to 1950 covered th e h i s t o r i c a l development of te a c h in g -le a rn in g th e o r ie s , te a c h e r-e d u c a tio n p u rp o ses, and p r a c tic e s in te a c h e r e d u c a tio n . T his book was e d u c a tio n is t- o rie n te d and used e d u c a tio n is t l i t e r a t u r e alm ost e x c lu siv e ly as i t s source m a te r ia l. Only one c h a p te r was devoted sp e c i f i c a l l y to te a c h e r e d u c a tio n in c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s it i e s . Monroe found t h a t th e re was " . . . l i t t l e pu b lish ed evidence o f sy stem atic study of th e problem of o rg a n iz a tio n f o r ; . ” ■ " 2 6 " teacher education w ithin a u n iv e r s ity ." ^ Of a ttitu d e s tu d ie s , only two were found which -polled working p ro fe sso rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s . One such study was p re se n ted in Volume I I I of th e N atio n al Survey -of th e E d u catio n of T each ers. Put in th e term s of the j q u e stio n n a ire used in the p re se n t s tu d y , academic p ro fesso rs :in u n iv e r s itie s and l i b e r a l a r t s c o l l e g e s : ^ (1) m ild ly !agreed th a t s p e c ia l methods should be ta u g h t by s u b je c t- i i m a tte r p ro fe sso rs r a th e r th a n by p ro fe sso rs of ed u catio n ; (2) stro n g ly agreed to 1 1 a lim ite d p re sc rip tio n * 1 in educa tio n and psychology; (3) m ild ly opposed th e p r o f e s s io n a li z a tio n of p r a c tic a lly a l l s u b je c t-m a tte r co u rse s; i (*+) s tro n g ly opposed the c o n tro l o f the e d u c a tio n of te a c h e rs by p ro fe s s o rs of ed u c atio n and psychology; (5) s tro n g ly agreed th a t m astery of s u b je c t m atter was th e f i r s t e sse n t i a l in th e e d u c a tio n of te a c h e rs ; and (6) m ild ly agreed th a t th e te a c h e r - tr a in in g cu rricu lu m should be la rg e ly con cerned w ith th e s u b je c t m atter of the "m ajor.*1 In a l l of th e above sam ples (and o th e rs could be c i t e d ) , th e a t t i t u d e of th e ty p ic a l academic p ro fe ss o r was ^ W a lte r S . Monroe, Teaching -L earning Theory and Teacher E d u c a tio n . 1890 to 1950 (Urbana: U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s P re s s , 1952), p . 35*K ^ E a r l e U. Rugg et, 3l1. , "Teacher E ducation C u rric u la ," Volume I I I o f tBe N atio n al Survey of the Edu c a tio n of T each ers, U. S . O ffice of E ducation B u lle tin 19^3, No. 10, p . 5 1 0. I I s ig n if ic a n tly d iv e rg e n t from the a tt i tu d e of th e ty p ic a l i p ro fe s s o r of e d u c a tio n . Y et th e au th o rs of the N atio n al I i Survey alm ost always gave th e c a su a l re a d e r th e im p ressio n 1 th a t th e re was g en e ral agreem ent on is s u e s re g ard in g th e ed u catio n of te a c h e rs . Here i s sueh an example: These com parisons have been made to show (1) th a t the m a jo rity a ttitu d e s of c o lle g e and u n iv e r s ity i n - 1 s tr u e to r s were fav o rab le to co u rses in e d u c a tio n , to stu d e n t te a c h in g , to o b se rv a tio n , and to s p e c ia l m ethods; and (2) th a t in t h e i r o p in io n they approved ; or disapproved much the same as d id te a c h e rs c o lle g e I f a c u l t i e s , though u s u a lly th e te a c h e rs c o lle g e group I I was somewhat more decided in th e d ir e c tio n of ap proval ! i or d isa p p ro v a l toward which both tended; and (3) th a t : I the g e n e ra l c r itic is m th a t c o lle g e and u n iv e rs ity in - ! 1 s tr u c to r s have an a ttitu d e d ecid ed ly u n fa v o rab le to the! developm ent o f p ro fe s s io n a l work and p ro fe s s io n a l a t t itu d e toward th e ir fu tu re work on th e p a r t of 1 p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs i s not re v e a le d in th e se r e - ! ! a c tio n s .17 I i I | The a u th o rs of th e N atio n al Survey were able to make statem en ts such as the one above because they d id n o t ■ t i s u f f ic ie n tly se p a ra te the a tt i tu d e s of academic p ro fe s s o rs ! 1 in u n iv e r s itie s and l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s from o th e rs in ; 1 th e se i n s t i t u t i o n s : fu rth e rm o re , v ario u s groups in teachers! t 1 c o lle g e s and l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s were grouped to g e th e r by, i the language of the t e x t . Thus o p tim is tic sta te m e n ts about' 1 ' ag reem en t could be fre q u e n tly made. Moreover g e n e ra l agree- 1 ment could be claim ed inasmuch as most of the is s u e s were n o n -c o n tro v e rs ia l i n n a tu re . ' I 1 m . 17 lb id . . p. 2 5 7 . A study by the S outhern A sso c ia tio n of C olleges and Secondary S ch o o ls, The E ducation of Secondary School i ;T each ers. p re se n ted q u estio n s s im ila r to th o se of the N a tio n a l Survey and concluded t h a t H. * . no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s of o p in io n were found to e x is t between d i f f e r e n t groups of i n s t it u t i o n s or between d if f e r e n t ty p es of s t a f f members.1 * ^ Although the methodology and r e s u l t s o f the study were n o t d e ta ile d , i t i s lik e ly th a t the i S c ritic ism s p re v io u sly made of the N atio n al Survey q u e stio n n a ire -s tu d y would apply to th is stu d y . At any r a t e , th e co n c lu sio n of ” . . . no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s i . • . t 1 was com pletely o u t of agreem ent w ith th e evidence provided by the l i t e r a t u r e of the p e rio d . I In sum, th e p re s e n t study was r a th e r unique and l i t t l e c lo s e ly - r e la te d l i t e r a t u r e was found. i_____________________ _ 1 ^% he E ducation of Secondary School T each ers. J o in t Committee on Study of C u rric u la o f the S outhern A ssocia tio n of C olleges and Secondary S ch o o ls, Doak S . Cam pbell, D ire c to r (N a sh v ille : George Peabody C o lleg e, 1936), pp. 111-12. I CHAPTER I I I i i | B A C K G R O U N D A N D EARIX OPPOSITION—T H R O U G H 1900 I : I | The p a s t, c a rry in g th e t o t a l i t y of r a c i a l e x p e ri- j | | en ce, merges im p erce p tib ly w ith the p re s e n t. D em arcations j j | in h i s t o r i c a l p e rio d s a re always somewhat a r b it r a r y . With j | t h i s u n d erstan d in g the y ear 1900 was s e le c te d as the j term inus of a h i s t o r i c a l p erio d in t h i s stu d y . In r e t r o - , ! I , j s p e c t, i t becomes e v id e n t t h a t the tu rn o f th e cen tu ry j ! re p re se n te d a time of d e c is io n fo r l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s I ■ and u n i v e r s i t i e s . P rio r to 1900, g ra d u a tio n from such an ! i n s t i t u t i o n was c le a r ly co n sid ered as th e b asic q u a lif ic a - tio n f o r te a c h e rs in the secondary schools of the U nited ! S ta te s by most of the academic w o rld .^ S ince 1900, the j i ; ; l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s , unable to d is re g a rd th e demand fo r ! M arm ies 1 1 of te a c h e rs , have .attem p ted to keep th e i r i I t r a d i t i o n a l d ev o tio n to s t r i c t l y academic s u b je c ts w hile ; | t j compromising w ith the advance, and a c cep tan ce , of ! | p ro fe s s io n a l ed u c atio n fo r te a c h e rs . This study d e a ls i 1 p rim a rily w ith th o se p ro fe s s o rs in th e l i b e r a l a r ts | j c o lle g e s who have shown th e l e a s t tendency to compromise I « l } I W . D. A rm entrout, tfThe T eachers C o lle g e ,1 1 The ' I American C o lle g e . P . F . V a le n tin e , e d ito r (New York:; The ! I P h ilo s o p h ic a l L ib ra ry , 19^9)> p . 228$ G eneral E du catio n in j I a F ree S o c ie ty , H arvard U n iv e rsity Committee (Cambridge: . ; H arvard U n iv e rsity Pr e s s , 19^5) , P» 23. ______ ._J th i s is s u e . T h eir r e s is ta n c e , m an ifested by antagonism ! toward schools of e d u c a tio n , can he v is u a liz e d in i t s fo rm ativ e sta g e s du rin g the p e rio d p r io r to 1900. I . BRIEF S U M M A R Y O F TH E EARLY DEVELOPM ENT O F D EPARTM ENTS OF PE D A G O G Y T e a c h e r-tra in in g in sm all c o lle g e s in the U nited S ta te s can he tra c e d to p lan s made, h u t n o t c a rrie d o u t, | a t Amherst C ollege in 1826. During the n ex t th re e i decades attem p ts to t r a i n te a c h e rs were made a t the i i 2 ! fo llo w in g c o lle g e s* W ashington C ollege (P ennsylvania) 1831 Norwich U n iv e rsity 1835 L afay ette C ollege I 838 W esleyan U n iv e rsity I 8*tl Miami U n iv e rsity 18*+9 Mount Union Seminary 1850 A ntioch C ollege 1853 : The u s u a l p la n of o rg a n iz a tio n in th e se attem p ts was to e s ta b lis h a norm al departm ent of th e c o lle g e . L afay ette | C ollege went so f a r as to e s ta b lis h a 1 1 M od e l S chool1 1 in ► % lb e r t V. W ills , The Growth of American H igher E d u catio n (P h ila d e lp h ia : D orrance and Company, 1936), ; p p . 124-25; Jacob Meyer, Sm all C o lleg es and Teacher : T rain in g (Bloom ington, I l l i n o i s : P ublic School P u b lish in g Company, 1928), pp. 109-10. 31 ,3 This was planned as a la b o ra to ry sch o o l b u t, ! alth o u g h c h ild re n came to a tte n d , no p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs i i | e n ro lle d in th e pedagogical curriculum * The pedagogical i ! co u rses during th is p erio d were designed to p re p are ! 1 k j elem entary school te a c h e rs . Taken as a w hole, th ese i ; v en tu re s were s h o rt-liv e d * They f a ile d to accom plish th e I | purpose fo r which th ey were e s ta b lis h e d ; nam ely, to make t | pedagogy a c o lle g e s u b je c t. | I t appeared th a t th e p re p a ra tio n of te a c h e rs did j i n o t demand any s p e c ia l t r a in in g . In P en n sy lv an ia, fo r , exam ple, p rio r to 1843* le g i s la t iv e a p p ro p ria tio n s were ; made to c e r ta in c o lle g e s which agreed to p rep are elem en- i | ta ry te a c h e rs . A fte r $51*500 had been sp en t to t r a i n i 4 l4 p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs , none of whom had re c e iv e d any s p e c ia l tr a in in g , th e p la n was abandoned.? A pparently th e i | stan d ard l i b e r a l a r t s course was con sid ered s u f f i c i e n t . i j In e f f e c t t h is meant th a t the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s did n o t b e lie v e th a t th e re was anything of value in the study of e d u c a tio n . 3David Bishop S k illm an , The Biography of a C o lle g e , | V ol. I (E aston, Pennsylvania* L afay ette C ollege ,"~1932) , i p p . 118-25. j S peyer, lo c . c i t . ; ^W illiam S. T ay lo r, The Development of the P ro fe s- j s io n a l E d ucation of Teachers in P ennsylvania (P h ila d e lp h ia :! L ip p in co ttan d C o m p an y .r.^1935)^_pp*^177-7S.^!________________ I 32 i i ! In u n i v e r s i t i e s , e d u c a tio n as a s u b je c t had i t s * I ; beginnings as fo llo w s : 0 U n iv e rsity of the C ity of New York 1832 Brown U n iv e rsity 1850 In d ian a U n iv e rsity 1853 U n iv e rsity of Iowa 1855 U n iv e rsity of M issouri 1856 U n iv e rsity of W isconsin 1856 U n iv e rsity o f M ichigan 1858 U n iv e rsity of Kansas 1876 H arvard U n iv e rsity 1881 U n iv e rsity of Kentucky 1881 C o rn e ll U n iv e rsity 1886 U n iv e rsity o f M innesota I 887 U n iv e rsity of Utah 1888 T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rsity 1888 C lark U n iv e rsity 1889 N orthw estern U n iv e rsity 1889 ; ^ W ills, lo c . c i t .5 J* P . Gordy, "R ise and Growth of > ■ the Norm al-School Idea in th e U nited S t a t e s ,” U. S. Bureau | of E d u catio n C irc u la r of In fo rm a tio n * No. 8 , 1891> P . 99; : Hugh Graham, 1 1 The R ise and P ro g ress of the C ollege of Edu- ! ! c a tio n of th e U n iv e rsity o f M innesota,” School and S ociety,,' I 31*510-13, A p ril 12, I 93O5 Leigh G. H ubbell, The Develop- j | ment of U n iv e rsity D epartm ents of E ducation (W ashington: 1 | The C a th o lic U n iv e rs ity , 192*+), pp. 1-2 4 . j 3 3 These d a te s re p re s e n t the y ea r in which the f i r s t attem p t to in tro d u c e courses f o r te a c h e rs was made a t the v a rio u s ] j u n i v e r s i t i e s . A ctu ally Hew York U n iv e rsity d id n o t o ffe r j te a c h e r s 1 co u rses on a permanent b a s is u n t i l 1887; i t is j u n c e rta in w hether or not Dr. G allau d et d e liv e re d h is planned le c tu r e s in 1832. There were a p p a re n tly some co u rses in pedagogy a t M ichigan in 1858 according to the ca ta lo g u e of th a t i n s t i t u t i o n but such work was n o t tr u ly , e s ta b lis h e d u n t i l 1879. S im ila rly , the d a te of 1881 f o r ! H arvard was s e le c te d due to G. S tan ley H all* s le c tu re s in j th a t y e a r. At th is i n s t i t u t i o n i t was not u n t i l 1891 th a t ■ an a s s i s t a n t p ro fe sso r of th e "H isto ry and A rt o f Teaching1 1 ! ' i j was ap p o in ted . The program a t Brown U n iv e rsity which com- i menced in 1850 was term in ated in 185^# A s im ila r s itu a tio n I 1 ! o b tain ed a t In d ia n a , W isconsin, and elsew h ere. i In a d d itio n to sp o rad ic le c tu r e s on pedagogy, normal i or p re p a ra to ry departm ents to t r a i n elem entary school j te a c h e rs were th e opening means by which ed u c atio n as a j ! s u b je c t was in tro d u ced in to the u n i v e r s i t i e s . Such depart-! j ments were u s u a lly ab le to s ta y in e x is te n c e only a s h o rt j j tim e . When the s ta te s i n i t i a t e d a normal sch o o l program ! , in e a rn e s t, th e u n iv e r s itie s were happy to see th e se I ! ! | i n s t i t u t i o n s on se p a ra te cam puses. 1 | C hairs in pedagogics were slow in a r r iv in g . I t was ; | ( Lnot_.unti 1. .1873-th a t _ the S ta te U niversity.._of_Iowa_establishedj ;th e f i r s t p a rt-tim e c h a ir devoted to te a c h e r tr a in in g in any American u n iv e rs ity or co lleg e* The U n iv e rsity of j M ichigan c re a te d the f i r s t perm anent c h a ir devoted e x c lu - i s iv e ly to th e p ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g of secondary te a c h e rs | when P ro fe sso r W . H* Payne was app o in ted in 1879*'7 These ! a c tio n s sym bolized th e end of the norm al-departm ent type ofj work in u n iv e r s itie s and p u t te a c h e r ed u catio n on a h ig h e r ,p la n e . By 1890 the f i r s t School o f Pedagogy in th e U nited , o 1 S ta te s was e s ta b lis h e d a t C o rn e ll U n iv e rs ity . At t h i s 1 tim e, 11b out of **15 c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s itie s o ffe re d 1 ! te a c h e r s 1 c o u rse s —most of which were of se c o n d -ra te g ra d e . ^ By 1898-99 approxim ately o n e -h a lf of the c o lle g e s ; I and u n iv e r s itie s o ffe re d co u rses in pedagogy. ^ During 1 1 ! | th i s tim e , pedagogy was d e f in ite ly 1 1 . . . a wing of the i ! p h ilo s o p h ic a l d e p a rtm e n ts.1 1 *^ P ro fe sso rs of pedagogy were t under th e c o n tro l o f th e philosophy departm ents a t H arvard] 1 m m ■ ■ ■ " ■ ■ ■ " ■ ■ "» ! ?A llen S . W hitney, 1 1 The F i r s t C hair of E d u catio n in ' , an American U n iv e r s ity ,” School and S o c ie ty * 53*257-61, | March 1, 19*+1. 1 j % u b b e ll, 0£ . c i t . , p. 19. j ^W alter S . Monroe, Te aching -L earning Theory and 1 Teacher E d u catio n - -l8 9 0 to 1950 (Urbanat U n iv e rsity of ; I l l i n o i s P re s s , 1 9 5 2 ) ,p. 307. I 1 * * * °A . J . Kinnaman, H Pedagogy in Our C olleges and Uni-1 i v e r s i t i e s , ” The P edagogical Sem inary* 9*367? Septem ber, , 1902. , T1 * X A H ubbell, o p. c i t . * p . 9* j 3 5 i P en n sy lv an ia, M innesota, C olorado, I l l i n o i s , Iowa, C a lif o r n ia , and elsew h ere. I t should be re c a lle d th a t th e re was g e n e ra l c o n f lic t in h ig h e r ed u catio n in re g ard to te a c h e r p re p a ra - t tio n during th e p e rio d under d is c u s s io n . L ib e ra l a r t s j c o lle g e s opposed the norm al sc h o o ls. The sm all l i b e r a l | a r t s c o lle g e opposed th e u n iv e r s ity . Normal schools and | i i l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l ti e s both opposed u n iv e r s ity and c o lle g e ; departm ents of p edagogies. These c o n f lic ts w ere, in e s - i i sen ce, m otivated by p h ilo s o p h ic a l d iffe re n c e s and fa c to r s concerning i n s t i t u t i o n a l s u rv iv a l. i i j The d o c trin e of m ental d is c ip lin e was g e n e ra lly I i ' i accepted by academic f a c u l t i e s . The e le c tiv e system was j in i t s in fa n c y . An acq u ain tan ce w ith a l l p r in c ip a l a re a s : ; i of th in k in g p r io r to s p e c ia liz a tio n was demanded. Peda- , i gogy, when accepted a t a l l , was co n sid ered as som ething ! to be added upon the com pletion of th e stan d ard curriculumw i I I . REASONS W HY SCHOOLS AND DEPARTMENTS OF ! i ; ! EDUCATION WERE ORGANIZED ; I I | I I As p e r tin e n t background m a te ria l fo r t h i s stu d y , ' a b r ie f survey was made to a s c e r ta in , i f p o s s ib le , why ; 1 i | sch o o ls of ed u c a tio n came in to e x is te n c e . Dean H aggerty of th e U n iv e rsity of M innesota, a most a s tu te stu d e n t of i i | th e problem s of h ig h e r e d u c a tio n , c le a r ly r e la te d th e j ! 36 | I 1 m o tiv a tio n f o r th e study of ed u catio n in c o lle g e s and j i u n iv e r s itie s to th e problem under c o n s id e ra tio n in th is d i s s e r t a t i o n . H aggerty w rote? i I t would have been p o s s ib le to have developed a s a tis f a c to r y program fo r th e e d u c a tio n of te a c h e rs i w ith in th e p a tte r n of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e i f th e o rg a n iz a tio n of t h a t c o lle g e had been f le x ib le enough j to p erm it th e p ro p e r a tte n tio n to the needs of p ro s - i p e c tiv e te a c h e rs , and i f th e fa c u lty o f th a t c o lle g e ' had been bro ad ly sym pathetic . . . In o th e r w ords, we have done l i t t l e th a t i s u s e fu l in th e p re p a ra tio n i of te a c h e rs in America th a t m ight not have been done ; w ith in th e p a tte r n of a re g u la r c o lle g e o rg a n iz a tio n . The reason sch o o ls of ed u c a tio n have been fo rc e d in to our la rg e u n iv e r s itie s has been the u n en lig h ten ed and . u n y ield in g a ttitu d e of academic f a c u l t i e s . The unw ill-f ; ingness of e s ta b lis h e d groups to reco g n ize th e need fo r s p e c ia l p re p a ra tio n o f te a c h e rs has c re a te d th e se i s e p a ra te o rg a n iz a tio n s . . . . The fundam ental problem i s one of psychology r a th e r th an one o f o rg a n iz a tio n . I t i s a problem of c re a tin g the r ig h t a t t i t u d e . * ^ | The American dem ocratic movement, dem onstrated in i th e c lo s in g y e a rs of th e n in e te e n th century by th e P o p u lis t 1 R e v o lt, had as one of i t s components a philosophy of f,p ra c - * ; I t i c a l u t i l i t y . 1 1 This philosophy demanded a g r i c u l t u r a l, I i n d u s t r i a l , and v o c a tio n a l e d u c a tio n . There was, th e r e - I f o r e , a demand fo r te a c h e r-p re p a ra tio n in th e se f i e l d s . j C le a rly a b a s is fo r such p re p a ra tio n was n o t to be found , ; in th e cu rricu lu m of the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s . R ath er ! i ! th a n .g e t involved w ith co n ten t which was fo re ig n to the , E . H aggerty in "The O rg an izatio n o f T eacher- P re p a ra tio n in a U n iv e r s ity ,1 1 by H arry N. Irw in , Educa t i o n a l A d m ln istra tio n and S u p e rv isio n . 23 :**57, Septem ber, 1937- __ i 37 t r a d i t i o n a l m issio n of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e —g en e ral c u ltu r e —the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s agreed to se p a ra te sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n .^-3 1 In some cases th e in tro d u c tio n of te a c h e r - tr a in in g co u rses in u n iv e r s itie s and c o lle g e s was a r e s u l t of an :attem p t to f o r e s t a l l l e g i s l a tiv e a p p ro p ria tio n s d e stin e d t - f o r normal sch o o ls and to d iv e r t th ese funds to th e i 1 L l c o lle g e s . In o th e r e a s e s , i n s t i t u t i o n a l survival*—the s tru g g le to a t t r a c t s tu d e n ts —e n te re d th e p i c t u r e . In a d d itio n , th e b e l i e f th a t "th e u n iv e r s ity should probe the f r o n t ie r s o f knowledge in every f ie ld " appeared to have been an im p o rtan t stim u lu s f o r adding c h a ir s of educa tio n to u n iv e r s ity f a c u l t i e s. ^ This was p a r ti c u l a r ly tru e a t C o rn e ll U n iv e rs ity . S o c ia l fo rc e s were h eld to be re s p o n s ib le f o r th e developm ent of sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n in C a lif o r n ia . In ^T im o th y F . O 'L eary, Aq In q u iry In to th e G eneral P u rp o ses, F u n c tio n s. apd O rg an izatio n of S e le c te d Schools o f Bduc a t i on fWas h i ng tons The C a th o lic U n iv e rsity P re s s , 19^1), p . 6 . ^ A le x is Cope, H isto ry of th e Ohio S ta te U niver s i t y . V ol. I , Thomas C. M endenhall, e d ito r (Columbus: The Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1920), pp. 296-97? P aul H. Hanus, A dventuring in E d u catio n (Cambridge: H arvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1937), p . 110. I 1 ? ''Merle L. Borrowman, "The L ib e ra l and T ech n ical in Teacher E d u ca tio n ," (unpublished Doctor *s d i s s e r ta t io n , T eachers C o lle g e, Columbia U n iv e rsity , New York C ity , 1953), PP. 116-17. concluding a d o c to ra l d i s s e r t a ti o n , Clement s ta te d : ”As i has been shown throughout th e in v e s tig a tio n , the demand fo r e d u c a tio n a l o ffe rin g s has come p rim a rily , n o t from i | w ith in the schools th em selv es, but from s o c ie ty a t ; T f A l a r g e .” The U n iv e rsity of C a lifo rn ia was very r e lu c ta n t j j t o in tro d u c e s p e c ia l co u rses fo r te a c h e rs . Somewhat the same co n clu sio n s were reached in re g a rd to the l i b e r a l ! a r ts c o lle g e s in C a lif o r n ia . ! The program of te a c h e r e d u c a tio n in th e seven i | l i b e r a l a r ts c o lle g e s developed n e ith e r from p reced en t j j w ith in th e s t a t e nor through i n i t i a t i v e on th e p a r t of ‘ th e i n s t it u t i o n s them selves f o r t h i s p a r tic u l a r work, f R ath er the im petus came from the ra p id ly developing ! secondary schools which were being fo rc ed to modify t h e i r co u rses of study to meet the needs of c h ild re n j who were le g is la te d in to school and who were n o t in - j te r e s te d nor a b le to p r o f i t by the c o lle g e p re p a ra to ry ; work h ith e r to o f f e r e d .17 j I i I t should be r e c a lle d th a t th e average teac h in g i | 1 i l i f e fo r a l l te a c h e rs during th i s p e rio d was approxim ately j i fo u r y e a rs . Due to th is f a c t , su p e rin te n d e n ts p re fe rre d norm al school g ra d u ates to c o lle g e g ra d u ates inasmuch as ' i the normal school g ra d u ates were ready to te a c h when h ire d ! s ' ■and the c o lle g e g rad u ate had t o .l e a r n s t r i c t l y by t ! I ■^Evely n A. Clem ent, 1 1 The E v o lu tio n o f Teacher i T ra in in g in C a lifo rn ia as a Phase of S o c ia l C hange,” (un- j p u b lish ed D o cto r’s d i s s e r t a ti o n , U n iv e rsity of C a lifo rn ia , : B erk eley , 1936), p . 282. 17Evelyn C lem ent, ’’P ro fe s s io n a l Teacher E ducation |i n L ib e ra l A rts C o lleg es in C a li f o r n ia ,” E d u c a tio n . j j 58:H-23-2*+, March, 1938. j 39 J 1 | ex p e rie n c e ; t h i s took a few y e a rs and by th a t tim e th e | ! ' c o lle g e g rad u ate was ready to q u it te a c h in g . I t I s j p o s s ib le th a t the u n iv e r s ity study o f ed u c a tio n emerged j i when te a c h e rs began to stay in th e teach in g f i e l d lo n g e r. ' P rev io u sly i t was h a rd ly w orth the tro u b le to devote tim e ! in th e c o lle g e to te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n when te a c h in g i t - s e l f was such a tr a n s ito r y o c c u p a tio n .1^ j I P re ssu re from v a rio u s so u rc e s, p a r tic u la r ly te a c h - j e r s , s u p e rin te n d e n ts, alum ni, and some c o lle g e p re s id e n ts I ! I aided the movement. There can be l i t t l e doubt th a t th e I ' ? ; p e rsu a siv e n e ss of P re s id e n t E l i o t helped to b rin g P ro - i i I fe s s o r Hanus to H arvard in 1891 even though E l i o t was i i 1 somewhat s k e p tic a l of p ro fe s s io n a l co u rses fo r te a c h e rs a t I 1 th a t tim e. ^ Judd w rote in 1911 th a t the re aso n fo r i , | e d u c a tio n co u rses was 1 1 . . . th a t su p e rin te n d e n ts and , i o th e rs who employ te a c h e rs have found by long and b i t t e r e x p e rie n c e s th a t g ra d u ates of c o lle g e s and o th e rs are ; i b e tte r te a c h e rs a f te r they have th ought about l^F or f a c to r s involved in th is p o in t see Edmund j j J . Jam es, C h airs of P edagogics, in Our U n iv e rs itie s (P h ila 4 ; d e lp h ia : The P h ila d e lp h ia S o c ia l S cience A s so c ia tio n , 1887)^ pp. 20 and 35. ^% an u s, l o c . c i t . ; Henry W . Holmes, H The G raduate ! School of E d u c a tio n ,M The Development o f H arvard U n iv e rsity S ince th e In a u g u ra tio n of P re s id e n t E l i o t , Samuel E l io t . M orrison, e d ito r (Cambridge: The H arvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , : 11930), p. 519* | I ! bo te a c h in g * 1120 At Mount Holyoke C o lle g e , fo r exam ple, o u tsid e p re ssu re was e v id e n t: Mrs* Mead c a lle d th e a tte n tio n of the tr u s te e s to th e im portance of c re a tin g a departm ent of pedagogy. D espite the te a c h e r - tr a in in g t r a d i t i o n of e a rly days (^ le c tu re s given in 1881^], l i t t l e form al re c o g n itio n had as y e t been g iv en to the f i e l d of ed u c atio n . . . But no p ro v is io n f o r re g u la r in s tr u c tio n was made even a f t e r r e p re s e n ta tiv e s of the c la s s of *67 p ro posed th e r a is in g o f an endowment fund of $35,000 fo r a c h a ir of Pedagogy a t th e m eeting of th e N atio n al Alumnae A sso c ia tio n in June, 1892. This movement commended i t s e l f stro n g ly to stu d e n t o p in io n b u t led to no immediate r e s u l t s . . . . a t le n g th p ro v is io n was made f o r the e sta b lish m e n t of such a departm ent in 1899-1900.21 Other f a c to r s which aided th e movement to t r a i n te a c h e rs in c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s in clu d ed the in a b i l i t y of norm al sch o o ls in some p a r ts of th e co u n try to g rad u ate s u f f ic ie n t te a c h e rs to meet the demand and **. . . the reco g n ized in e f f ic ie n c y o f secondary school te a c h e rs . . . fl22 who had tak en the re g u la r l i b e r a l a r ts c u rric u lu m . In sum, th e n , i t was p re ssu re from w ith o u t th a t le d to the study of ed u c atio n in c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . 20C h arles H. Judd, wCorrespondence1 1 ( l e t t e r to the e d i t o r ) , The N atio n , 93*336-37, October 12, 1911# 2 ^-Arthur G. C ole, Jl Hundred Y ears of Mount Holyoke (New Haven: Y ale U n iv e rsity P re s s , 19^0), p . 234* 22fJE d u ca tio n , Academic, Study o f--U n ite d S t a t e s ,1 1 A C vclonedia of E d u c a tio n . P aul Monroe, e d ito r (New York: The M acmillan Company, 1911), p . *+06. I I I . CRITICISMS TH R O U G H 1900 l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e p r io r to the tw e n tie th cen tu ry w as, w ith r a r e e x c e p tio n , a male i n s t i t u t i o n . C ourses fo r te a c h e rs brought women in to th e 1 1 hallow ed p r e c in c ts .1 1 As e a rly as 1865, ed u c a tio n co u rses a t the U n iv e rsity o f W isconsin were opposed fo r t h is re a so n . H all-Q u est r e f e r s to t h i s a c tio n as nL ib e ra l A rts opposi tio n to co u rses in e d u c a tio n .1 1 ^ In d is c u ss in g th is pk s i t u a t io n , Luckey thought th a t o rg a n iz a tio n a l a sp e c ts I may have aid ed t h is o p p o sitio n . The e d u c a tio n co u rses a t W isconsin had been conducted in th e c o lle g ia te and p re p a ra to ry departm ents and n o t in r e la ti v e l y se p a ra te norm al d iv is io n s such as th o se a t Iowa and M isso u ri. The 1 1 academic p u r i s t ” was probably more c lo s e ly in v o lv e d . At ! ! any r a t e , presum ably due to t h i s o p p o s itio n , th e co u rses 1 I were ab o lish ed and i t was n o t u n t i l 1885 th a t co u rse s fo r j te a c h e rs were resum ed. A lik e s i tu a t io n (which could not ! be ex p lain ed on the b a s is o f o rg a n iz a tio n ) was evidenced j a t Columbia U n iv e rs ity . In 1892, the tr u s te e s o ffe re d to tu rn T eachers C ollege over to Columbia U n iv e rs ity . This 1 1 o f f e r was r e je c te d by the U n iv e rsity C ouncil because th is 23A lfred Lawrence H a ll-Q u e st, P ro fe s s io n a l E ducation in T eachers C ollege (Hew York: T eachers C o lle g e, Columbia ;U n iv e rs ity , 1925), PP* 11 and 15. bz | I body b e lie v e d th a t th e re was 1 1 . . . no such s u b je c t as j E d u catio n and moreover i t would b rin g in to th e U n iv e rsity women who a re n o t w a n t e d . T h i s h o s t i l i t y and o p p o si tio n was s a id to be o f twenty y ea rs s ta n d in g . For j p r a c t ic a l purposes t h i s c r itic is m ended b efo re the advent j of the tw e n tie th c e n tu ry . However, o c c a sio n a lly i t made : i t s appearance l a t e r . The h is to ry of the U n iv e rsity of C a lifo rn ia a t Los Angeles provided such an exam ple. U. C. L. A. developed from the s ta te norm al school which i was lo c a te d o r ig in a lly a t F if th and Grand (now th e s i t e of t the Los Angeles P u b lic L ib ra ry ); l a t e r the campus was moved to Morth Vermont Avenue (the p re s e n t s i t e of Los s A ngeles C ity C o lle g e ). When p lan s were made to move th e campus to Westwood in the l a t e 1920*s th e re was a p ro p o sal to se p a ra te the l i b e r a l a r ts c o lle g e and the te a c h e rs » c o lle g e —leav in g the te a c h e rs c o lle g e on Vermont Avenue. J p a 1 This p ro p o s itio n was f i n a l l y d e fe a te d . A fte r th e f i r s t j i g ra d u a tio n a t Westwood, P re sid e n t W . W . Campbell re p o rte d : j I f e e l im p elled to re co rd here the f a c t th a t the | Regents* d e c is io n of A ugust, 1928, to tr a n s f e r th e ; ^5James E a r l R u s s e ll, Founding T eachers C ollege (Mew York: T eachers C o lle g e, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1937)> P . 26. ^ D a v id M artin F l o r e l l , nO rig in and H isto ry of the School of E d u catio n , U n iv e rsity of C a lif o r n ia , Los A ngeles1 ’ (unpublished D o c to r’s d i s s e r t a ti o n , U .C .L .A ., Los A n g e le s ,, 19^6), pp. 182-86. j j 1*3 T eachers C ollege to the new campus was made i n th e face of the P re sid e n t *s continuous and u n allo y ed o p p o s itio n . One of the r e s u l t s of the d e c is io n , fo re se e n by the P re s id e n t, was s u b s ta n tia te d on th e Commencement Days of June 1929 and June 1930* of the 17*+7 stu d e n ts who re c e iv e d the bache l o r 1 s degree from the U n iv e rsity of C a lifo rn ia a t Los Angeles on th o se I two day s, 28 per c e n t or M -93* were men, and 72 per c e n t, or 125* + were women . . .27 ! ! I The most p e r s i s t e n t c r itic is m found i n t h i s in v esti-^ g a tio n was th a t schools of e d u c a tio n s u b s titu te th e how 1 f o r the what of ed u c atio n ; th a t i s , th ey s tr e s s how to 1 ! i j te a c h but not what to te a c h . This is s u e was th e s u b je c t o f i 1 len g th y co n tro v e rsy w ith in norm al sch o o ls from t h e i r v ery j I ! in c e p tio n . The p ro f e s s io n a liz a tio n of s u b je c t m a tte r |appeared to be the s o lu tio n most g e n e ra lly accepted in th e 1 ; norm al sc h o o ls. In the c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s th e prob-; i jlem i s much more d i f f i c u l t to so lv e due to t r a d i t i o n and j :d e p a rtm e n ta liz a tio n . When the f i r s t perm anent c h a ir o f I jth e "S cience and A rt of Teaching" was e s ta b lis h e d a t the i . ■ i 'U n iv e rsity of M ichigan in 1879, u n iv e r s ity p ro fe s s o rs j j i !d e c rie d th e move as a " f i f t h wheel to a wagon" and " . . . th e s u b s titu tio n of method fo r academic a tta in m e n t." 2^ j i w. C am pbell, "Annual R eport of th e P re s id e n t ; |o f th e U n iv e rs ity , 1928-1929 and 1929-1930*1 1 U n iv e rsity of i C a lifo rn ia B u lle tin * T hird S e r ie s , Volume 2*+, No. 7? 1931 > 1 iP. 27. ; 2^A llen S . W hitney, H isto ry of the P ro fe s s io n a l ■ T ra in in g of Teachers a t th e U n iv e rsity of M ichigan fo r th e • jF i r s t H alf-C en tu ry - -1^79 to 1929 (A nnA rbor: George Wahr !P u b lis h e rs , 1931)V P* 30* A lso see David Page, "Theory 1 At the same i n s t i t u t i o n and on the same o cc asio n , i c o lle g e p ro fe s s o rs se v e rly c r it i c i z e d the a c tio n of P re s id e n t A n g e ll, m ain tain in g th a t 1 1 . • . teach in g could n o t he ta u g h t through form al i n s t r u c t i o n .1 1 ^ The c o r o lla r y to j th is b e l i e f , namely th a t te a c h e rs a re born and n o t made, j jwas very w idely h eld p r io r to 1900.3^ On t h i s q u e stio n i t 'i s f i t t i n g to quote th e words of F re d e ric k A. P. B arnard. s !The fo llo w in g was w ritte n in 1881: i Among a l l th i s g re a t m u ltitu d e of e d u c a tio n i n s t i t u tio n s , n o t one seems to have made e d u c a tio n i t s e l f the s u b je c t of in v e s tig a tio n . . • . This is n o t because philosophy is in cap a b le of throw ing a s a lu ta ry l i g h t j upon the p ro c e sse s by which th e powers of the human 1 i i n t e l l e c t may be b e s t u n fo ld ed , or upon th e form and method in which g iv en s u b je c ts of knowledge may be m ost s u c c e s s fu lly p re se n te d ; nor i s i t because the p h ilo s o - , I phy of e d u c a tio n i s so sim ple th a t i ts p rin c ip le s may be iand P ra c tic e of T each in g ,1 1 p p . 22-2*f, quoted in Edgar W . K night and C lif to n L. H a ll, H eadings in American Educa tio n a l H isto ry (Mew York: A p p le to n -C e n tu ry -C ro fts, I n c ., i 1 1 9 5 1 )7 p. *+22. David Page, w ritin g about normal schoo ls I in l8*+7, s ta te d : w So much s tr e s s i s now p laced on method, 1 land th e th eo ry of te a c h in g , th a t th e re i s g r e a t danger of 'f o r g e ttin g the supreme im portance of sc h o la rsh ip and ,c u l t u r e .” : 1 > ! J a m e s Burr i l l A n g ell, The R em iniscences of James j iB u r r ill Inge 11 (Mew York: Longmans, Green and C o ., 1912;, !p. 2M -6. j ! exam ple, see George W ilson P ie rs o n , Y ale ; |C o lle g e . 1871- 1921. V ol. I of Y a le : C ollege and U n iv e rs itv r ;1871- 19^7 (Mew Haven: Y ale U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1952), I pp . 5 0 3 Also see G. S ta n le y H a ll, “C h airs of Pedagogy | in Our Higher I n s t i t u ti o n s o f Learning,*1 U nited S ta te s Bureau of E d u catio n C irc u la r of In fo rm atio n Mo. 2 — 1882 ; ;being the P roceedings of the Department of S uperintendence j o f the N a tio n a l E d u c a tio n a l A sso c ia tio n (W ashington: Gov- | lernm ent_Printing„O ffice.,_1882)_,_p._3& .___________________ J i f ? assumed to be i n t u i t i v e l y known* Y et th e l a t t e r i s the view which our h ig h er e d u c a tio n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s of le a rn in g g e n e ra lly seem in t h e i r p ra c tic e to accep ts . . .31 The th eo ry th a t i n t u i t i o n , fix e d by h e r e d ity , was the most im p o rtan t elem ent in d eterm in in g the su ccess of a p r a c t iti o n e r was n o t confined to the f ie ld o f e d u c a tio n . Two em inent members of the M edical F acu lty a t H arvard, D rs. Henry J . Bigelow and O liv er W endell Holmes, con s id e re d the p ra c tic e of m edicine as an a r t . In 1871, j D r. Bigelow argued f o r low adm ission req u irem en ts to the ! i m edical c u rric u lu m . He h eld th a t " . . . p h y sic ia n s a re ! b orn , n o t tr a in e d , and t h a t th e same a p p lie d more s tro n g ly j to su rg e o n s.1 ’32 j A thorough knowledge of s u b je c t m a tte r was u s u a lly | co n sid ered as s u f f i c ie n t p re p a ra tio n fo r high school teach - i in g . This view point was w idely accepted p r io r to 1900 a n d : i i t rem ains r a th e r stro n g i n u n iv e r s ity c i r c l e s to d ay . Thej N. E . A. Committee of Ten (189^) r e f le c te d th is g e n e ra l ' I s p i r i t . Edmund J . James ( l a t e r p re s id e n t o f th e U n iv e rsi ty of I l l i n o i s ) spoke in 1887 of the "g e n e ra l p rev alen ce" ! i i ______________________ i ^ W illia m F . R u s s e ll, e d it o r , The R ise of a U niver- ! s i t v . Y ol. I —The L ater Days of Old Columbia C o lle g e , from th e annual re p o rts of F re d e ric k A. P. B arnard, P re s id e n t o f Columbia C ollege 186N— 1889 (lew Yorks Columbia U n iv er- ' s i t y , 1937), p . 289. 3%[enry Jam es, C h arles W illiam E l i o t T Y ol. I i (Bostons Houghton M iflin C o ., 1930), p . 278. t | of t h i s b e l i e f ,33 Those who h eld the view point th a t | i t j knowledge of s u b je c t m a tte r was s u f f ic ie n t p re p a ra tio n i fo r teac h in g n e c e s s a rily viewed p ro fe s s io n a l co u rses in e d u c a tio n w ith contem pt. Such was the a t t itu d e o f a "conr ] s id e ra b le m in o rity ,M a t l e a s t , of th e H arvard F acu lty in ; 1891.^ When methods co u rses were co n sid ered of v a lu e , su ch ' ' co u rses were h eld to be w ith in th e domain of th e s u b je c t 1 | 1 jm a tte r p ro fe s s o r. Henry B arnard, who had tr ie d u n su c c e ss-j \ I f u ll y to promote departm ents of ed u c atio n (or p ro fe s s o r- I j s h ip s ) a t Brown, Y ale , T r in ity , and elsew here in th e ' 18*K) *s re c e iv e d a 16t t e r from Noah P o rte r on the s u b je c t ' of methods co u rses i n 1876. The l e t t e r , in p a r t, re a d : j w. . . I am convinced th a t s p e c ia l in s tr u c tio n upon 1 | methods o f teach in g would come w ith th e b e s t e f f e c t from t ; P ro fe ss o rs in th e s e v e ra l d a p a rtm e n ts—as L a tin , G reek, I ^ * 5 I ! M athem atics and the s e v e ra l p h y s ic a l S c ie n c e s. \ P re s id e n t E l i o t c o n c u rred . I n 1891 he w rote: The fa c u lty of H arvard in common w ith most te a c h e rs 1 in England and the U nited S t a t e s , f e e l but s l i g h t i n t e r e s t or co n fid en ce in what is o r d in a r ily c a lle d 33Edmund J . Jam es, C h airs of. Pedagogies in Qqz j U n iv e r s itie s (P h ila d e lp h ia : P h ila d e lp h ia S o c ia l S cience A s s o c ia tio n , 18Q 7)9 p . 16. 3**Hanus, lo c . c i t . j I I 3?Anna Lou B l a i r , Henry B arnard (M inneapolis: j E d u c a tio n a l P u b lis h e rs , I n c ., 1938), p . 257.________________ j 1 * 7 i 1 pedagogy: but they b e lie v e th a t s k i l l f u l te a c h e rs would be ab le to give some account of t h e ir methods f o r the b e n e f it of th o se who are beginning to teac h ; . . . The f a c u lty b e lie v e , however, t h a t th e work to be p r o f ita b le , must be d ep a rtm e n ta l; th a t the accom p lis h e d te a c h e r o f la t i n m ust show how to te a c h L a tin : the accom plished te a c h e r of C hem istry, how to teac h c h e m istry , and so f o r th ; or a t l e a s t , th a t th e re must be se p a ra te te a c h in g of th e s e v e ra l methods a p p lic a b le in the p r in c ip a l groups of s u b je c ts —lan g u ag e, h is to r y , s c ie n c e , and m ath em atics.36 ! The q u e stio n n a ire used in th is study showed th a t t h i s i s s t i l l the dominant p o s itio n of the p re s e n t l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s . P ro fe s s io n a l co u rses were co n sid ered by some c o lle g e I p ro fe s s o rs to be harm ful to th e f u lf illm e n t o f th e l i b e r a l ! a r t s ’ o b je c tiv e s . In 1889 i t was m aintained t h a t ” . . . ! any a tt e n t io n given to p ro fe s s io n a l ed u c a tio n could only ■ t d i lu te the s tu d e n t’s i n t e r e s t i n knowledge f o r i t s own ( s a k e .”37 w ith th e g ra d u al acceptance of p ro fe s s io n a l < c o u rse s , th is p o s itio n has s h if te d to the q u e stio n of j i em phasis; i . e . t h a t re q u ire d hours in e d u c a tio n a re to o h ig h and co n sequently d e tr a c t from th e p ro sp e c tiv e i te a c h e r ’s knowledge of s u b je c t m a tte r. I n c id e n ta lly , the i au th o r of th e above q u o ta tio n p u t a 1 1 re v e rse tw is t” on th e | 3 % e p o rt of th e U. S . Commissioner of E d u ca tio n — j 1890-91, p . 1076, quoted i n Kinnaman, c>£. c i t . , p . 370. ; 1 3 7 j# p # S ew all in the A ddresses and P roceedings of j th e New England A sso c ia tio n of C o lleg es and P re p a ra to ry j S ch o o ls, 1889, pp. 22-2 7 , quoted in Borrowman, o p. c i t . . j P. 125. I charge by e d u c a tio n is ts th a t many of the pure sc h o la rs were very bad te a c h e r s . He s ta te d : As th e good te a c h e r i s a perm anent o b je c t lesson* so i s th e p o o r. Men remembering th e ir own d i f f i c u l t i e s and needs and how th e ir te a c h e rs f a i l e d to see them . . . have s u c c e s s fu lly stu d ie d to be to th e ir own p u p ils what t h e ir te a e h e rs were n o t to them. 3 o Is th e re a scien c e of ed u catio n ? The answer to th i s q u e stio n depends, of c o u rse , on th e d e f in itio n of term s employed. S cience can be d e fin e d from th e sta n d p o in t of p re d ic tiv e a b i l i t y , from th e sta n d p o in t of an org an ized body of d e f in it e ly v e r if ie d know ledge, or from the sta n d p o in t o f a methodology c h a ra c te riz e d by o b je c ti v i t y , te s tin g of proposed s o lu tio n s and so f o r t h . R egard le s s of th e sem antics in v o lv ed , th e tendency in th e l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s p r io r to 1900 was to answer th e proposed q u e stio n in th e n e g a tiv e . Jo s ia h Royce, though n o t tr u ly a n ta g o n is tic to p ro fe s s io n a l c o u rse s , w ro te: To sum i t a l l in one word, teac h in g i s an a r t . T herefore th e re i s no scien c e of e d u c a tio n . . . . B ut, on th e o th e r hand, i f th e te a c h e r w ants a id from the s c i e n t i f i c s p i r i t , and co u n sel from s c i e n t i f i c e d u c a tio n , th e re sta n d s ready to h is hand such a s s i s t ance a s , above a l l , psychology has to o ffe r to the ed u cato r who d e s ir e s to become a liv in g o b serv e r of the minds of c h ild re n , and such a s s is ta n c e , to o , as e th ic s may su g g est to th e man who i s stro n g enough to g rap p le w ith deeper problem s.39 3 % b id . 3 9 jo sia h Royce, “I s There a S cience of E ducation?" P a rt I I , E d u c a tio n a l Review. 1:132, F eb ru ary , 1891. The p o s s i b i li t y of a n e g a tiv e v alu e in th e study of j , i 1 e d u c a tio n was n o t o v erlo o k ed . One u n id e n tifie d a n ta g o n is t j i s quoted as fo llo w s: j j There i s a n o th e r incubus upon us t h a t may be noted j in a word, and th a t i s pedagogical l i t e r a t u r e . . . . ! Of books.on g e n e ra l pedagogy, alm ost a l l should be j eschewed: th e a tte m p t to read them i s p u re ly i n j u r - i io u s .W : I A somewhat s im ila r p o s itio n was tak en by P ro fe sso r i i Hugo M unsterberg who was c a lle d from Germany to fo llo w ! W illiam James in the D iv isio n of P hilosophy a t H arv ard . j M unsterberg was a member of th e a d m in is tra tiv e board of 1 | the G raduate School of A rts and S c ie n c e s. In t h is p o s itio n |h e e f f e c tiv e ly p ro h ib ite d stu d e n ts from ta k in g ed u c a tio n i co u rse s fo r c r e d it tow ard the A. M. d e g r e e M u n s t e r b e r g ' I ■ | com plained of u t i l i t a r i a n i s m in pedagogy and shallow ness ! in th e s c h o la rs h ip of te a c h e rs . Nor was he a l o n e ^ when , | he w rote the fo llo w in g on the p o s s ib le n e g a tiv e v alu e of i | psychology and pedagogy: ' i i From w hatever s ta n d p o in t I view i t , th e tendency to base the school on e le c tiv e s tu d ie s seems to me a m is-* ■ t a k e ,- - a m istake f o r w hich, of c o u rse , n o t a s p e c ia l ^ S . G. W illiam s, "Value to T eachers of the H isto ry | ; of E d u c a tio n ," N.E.A. , Jo u rn a l of P ro ceed in g s—1889. p. 224-.' I ^ H a n u s , o p . c i t ,., p . 1^5. 1 ^ F o r exam ple, see W illiam S . S u tto n , Problems in Modern E d ucation (B oston: Sherman, F rench and C o ., ;1 9 1 3 ), P* 102; and G. M. G rant, "Some of Our M istak es," ; ■H.E.A. Jo u rn a l of P roceedings and A ddresses—1901. p . 123. ; sc h o o l, but the s o c ia l co n scio u sn ess i s to be blam ed. I I cannot th in k much b e tte r of th a t second tendency of j which I sp o k e ,—the tendency to improve th e sch o o ls by j a p e d a g o g ic a l-p sy c h o lo g ic a l p re p a ra tio n o f the teac h ers. I s a id t h a t , ju s t as I had no r i g h t o f e le c tio n over | my c o u rse s, my te a c h e rs had no id e a of pedagogy and I psychology. I do n o t th in k th a t th ey would have been j b e tte r te a c h e rs w ith such wisdom th an w ith o u t i t . I d o u b t, even, w hether i t would n o t have changed th in g s j fo r the w orse. I do not b e lie v e in l y r i c s which a re ! w r itte n a f t e r th e p r e s c r ip tio n s of a e s th e tic s ; I have th e f u l l e s t r e s p e c t f o r th e s c h o la r in p o e tic a l theory* b u t he ought n o t to make th e p o ets b e lie v e th a t they j need h is ad v ice b efo re th ey d are to s in g . Psychology j i s a w onderful s c ie n c e , and pedagogy, as so o n .as we s h a ll have i t , may be a w onderful s c ie n c e , to o , and very im p o rtan t fo r sch o o l o rg a n iz e rs , fo r s u p e rin te n d e n ts and c i t y o f f i c i a l s , b u t th e in d iv id u a l te a c h e r has l i t t l e p r a c tic a l use f o r i t . . . . 1 have t r i e d to show how conscious o ccu p atio n w ith p edagogical r u le s i n te r - • f e r e s w ith i n s tin c tiv e views o f r ig h t p ed ag o g ical I means; and, above a l l , how the a n a ly tic tendency o f th e p sy c h o lo g ic a l and p ed ag o g ical a t t i tu d e i s diam et r i c a l l y o p p o site to th a t p r a c tic a l a t t i t u d e , f u l l of t a c t and sym pathy, which we must demand of the r e a l te a c h e r; and th a t the tr a in in g in the one a ttitu d e i n h i b it s freedom in the o th e r . . . . I do n o t th in k th a t i f te a c h e rs go through psycho- ; lo g ic a l and p ed ag o g ical s tu d ie s they r e a lly w ill su ffe r very much; they w ill do w ith them what they do w ith most s t u d i e s ,—th ey w ill f o r g e t them. And i f they f o r g e t them , what harm, th en ,--w h y a l l th i s fig h tin g a g a in s t i t , as i f a danger were in q u estio n ? This b rin g s me f i n a l l y , to my l a s t b u t c h ie f p o in ts I th in k , in d eed , t h a t g re a t dangers do e x i s t , and th a t the psychopedagogical movement does se rio u s damage, n o t so much because i t . a f f e c t s the te a c h e r, but because i t , to g e th e r w ith th e e le c tiv e s tu d ie s , tu rn s the a tte n tio n of the p u b lic from the only e s s e n tia l and im p o rtan t 1 p o in t, upon w hich, I f e e l deeply convinced, the tru e reform of our sch o o ls i s d ep en d en t, —the b e tte r in s tr u c tio n of our te a c h e r s . T hat was the s e c r e t, I s a id , in our German sch o o ls; th e most elem entary te a c h in g was given by men who were e x p e rts in t h e i r I f i e l d , who had th e p e rsp e c tiv e of i t , and whose s c h o la rly i n t e r e s t f i l l e d them w ith an enthusiasm th a t in s p ire d th e c l a s s . To b rin g th a t c o n d itio n about ; must be the aim o f every f r ie n d of American school l i f e . _ That i s th e one g re a t reform _w hich_is_needed, j 5 1 ! and t i l l t h i s burning need i s removed i t i s u s e le s s to p u t forw ard unim p o rtan t changes. These l i t t l e pseudo reform s become, in d eed , a wrong, i f they make the p u b lic f o rg e t th a t tru e h e lp and tru e refo rm a re d e manded. I f a c h ild i s cry in g because i t is i l l , we may keep i t q u ie t f o r a w hile by a p ie c e of candy, b u t we do not make i t w e ll; and i t i s a wrong to q u ie t i t , j i f i t s s ile n c e makes us om it to c a l l th e p h y s ic ia n to ! cure i t . The e le c tiv e s tu d ie s and th e p ed ag o g ical co u rses a re such sw eetm eats fo r the sc h o o l. The schools were bad, and th e p u b lic was d i s s a t i s f i e d ; now th e e le c tiv e s tu d ie s r e lie v e th e d isco m fo rt of th e j c h ild re n , in th e p lace of the old v e x a tio n they have a » good tim e , and the p a re n ts a re glad t h a t th e drudgery j i s o v er. And when, n e v e rth e le s s , a com plaint a r i s e s , and the p a re n ts d isc o v e r th a t the c h ild re n do n o t j le a r n an y th in g and th a t they become d is r e s p e c tf u l, th en th e re comes th e chance fo r the man w ith th e psycho- 1 lo g ic a l—and p ed a g o g ic al—tr a in in g ; he i s n o t a b e tte r , te a c h e r, b u t he can t a l k ab o u t th e purposes of the new ; e d u c a tio n t i l l a l l i s covered by b e a u tif u l words; and th u s p a re n ts and c h ild re n are h ap p ily s a t i s f i e d fo r a j w h ile , t i l l the tim e comes when the n a tio n has to pay 1 fo r i t s n e g le c t in f a i l i n g r e a l ly to cu re the s ic k c h ild . J u s t as i t has been said th a t war needs th re e th in g s , money, money, and a g a in money, so i t can be s a id w ith much g re a te r tr u th th a t e d u c a tio n needs n o t fo rc e s and b u ild in g s , n o t pedagogy and d em o n stra tio n s, b u t only men, men, and a g a in m en,—w ith o u t fo rb id d in g th a t some, n o t too many o f them, s h a ll be women.^ * 3 j IV* ANALYSES OF THE PROBLEM No len g th y a n a ly s e s , made by co n tem p o ra ries, were encountered p rio r to 1900. Some w r ite r s , how ever, d id j i i advance reaso n s fo r the o p p o sitio n to sch o o ls o f I ^H ugo M unsterberg, "School Reform , 1 1 A tla n tic M onthly. 85:666-67* May, 1900. ! 5 2 j e d u c a tio n .1 *1 * ' T ra d itio n and co n serv atism were said to be . i c h a r a c te r is ti c o f l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u l t i e s . Any s u b je c t j i th a t was ^new1 1 was c e r ta in to be opposed. C la s s ic a l j t ed u c a tio n was co n sid ered by l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u lti e s to be ' i b e s t f o r man *s s p i r i t . A lso , l i b e r a l e d u c a tio n , however d e fin e d , was conceived to be an end in i t s e l f ; u t i l i t a r i a n ism and v o c a tio n a lism , embodied in p ed ag o g ical c o u rse s , ! i would tend to d e stro y the l i b e r a l t r a d i t i o n . ! i The e a rly p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n in c o lle g e s and i ;u n iv e r s itie s attem p ted to meet t h i s h o s t i l i t y by making jth e s u b je c t of e d u c a tio n ex trem ely th e o r e tic a l and academ ic.**5 They hoped, th e re b y , to achieve academic i 1 r e s p e c t a b i l it y . This hope was n o t r e a liz e d as f a r as the ! l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u l tie s were concerned and th e em phasis on ‘ th eo ry was opposed, as i s the u s u a l c a s e , by working te a c h e rs as w e ll as p ro fe s s o rs i n th e norm al s c h o o ls. I 1 i _ i ; The la c k o f c le a r ly d e fin e d purposes was a problem j i i fo r th e p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n p r io r to 1900. T his weak n e s s , coupled w ith an ap p a ren t in frin g em en t on the ^T iuckey, op. c i t . , pp. 152-53; Hanus, p p . c i t . , ! ; pp. 230, 2*4-8, e t passim ; Edmund J . Jam es, p p . c i t . , 16-23. | A lso see R. Freeman B u tts , The C ollege C harts I t s Course ’ 1 (Mew Yorks McGraw-Hill Book C o ., 1939), PP. 216>-19* ^O bed J . W illiam son, P ro v isio n s fo r G eneral Theory C ourses in the P ro fe s s io n a l E d u ca tio n of T eachers (Hew* Y ork: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1935)> PP. * 4 - 2-** 3 . | 5 3 t e r r i t o r y of the o ld e r d epartm ents of the u n iv e r s ity , was sa id to s tre n g th e n th e o p p o s itio n . The p o s s i b i li t y th a t sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n a re faced w ith a f,b u i l t - l n n problem was p re se n te d by E . E . Brown. Speaking b efo re th e M. E . A. in 1899 he sta te d * i I t i s f a i r to presume th a t every p ro fe s s io n p ro p e r ly so c a lle d w ill u ltim a te ly have i t s own u n iv e r s ity sch o o l of p ro fe s s io n a l tr a i n i n g . E d u catio n as a p ro fe s s io n o c c u p ie s, however, a p e c u lia r p o s itio n . For the u n iv e r s ity i t s e l f , in c lu d in g i t s p ro fe s s io n a l sc h o o ls , i s an i n s t i t u t i o n o f e d u c a tio n . When, th e r e f o r e , th e s u b je c t of e d u c a tio n is pursued as a u n iv e r s ity stu d y , we have th e u n iv e r s ity lo o k in g a t i t s e l f , as i t w ere—becoming f u l ly conscious of i t s own p ro c e ss e s , a s w e ll as of th e p ro c esses of o th e r i n s t i t u t i o n s in which i t s stu d e n ts may be p re p a rin g to te a c h . T his f a c t , I th in k , e x p la in s a p a r t, a t l e a s t , of the c u rre n t d i f f i c u l t y i n the ad ju stm en t of u n iv e r- | s i t y d epartm ents o f e d u c a tio n to th e o th e r u n iv e r s ity I a c t i v i t i e s . U n c e rta in tie s and m isu n d erstan d in g s a re i unavoidable in making such ad ju stm en t. . . i The d e s ig n a tio n of the new departm ent as a norm al departm ent sometimes produced u n fav o rab le c o n n o ta tio n s . i ! L ikew ise, th e u se of the term s 1 1 did a c t i c fl and 1 1 pedagogy ^ tended to p lace the e a rly te a c h e r - tr a in in g program s on th e d e fe n siv e as th e se term s were s a id to arouse sco rn and i ( j r i d i c u l e . F in a lly , ignorance of th e work of the d e p a r t- i I laments of e d u c a tio n was held to be la rg e ly re s p o n s ib le fo r i 1 th e antagonism . The above view p o in ts are th o se of w rite r s ^ % lm e r E . B row n, 1 1 The S tu d y o f E d u c a t i o n i n t h e U n i v e r s i t y , M N. E . A. J o u r n a l o f P r o c e e d in g s and A d d r e s s e s | — 1899, p . 828. 1 who a n a ly z e d t h e p ro b le m p r i o r t o 1 9 0 0 . ' * ( One n o n - c o n te m p o r a r y a n a l y s i s o f t h e c o n f l i c t s t r e s s e d t h e p o i n t t h a t t h e r e was no s o u r c e f o r a s u p p ly o f t r a i n e d p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n ; h e n c e th e e a r l y d e p a r t m e n ts o f p e d ag o g y w e re d i r e c t e d by men who w ere s u c c e s s f u l j p r a c t i t i o n e r s b u t n o t d e e p s c h o l a r s . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e s e | t 1 p r o f e s s o r s h a d no o r g a n i z e d body o f k n o w le d g e i n t h e i r ! i ' f i e l d u p o n w h ic h c o u r s e s o f s t u d y c o u ld be b a s e d . T e a c h - I i ! I ! i n g m a t e r i a l s h a d t o be c r e a t e d d u r i n g t h e a c t u a l p r o c e s s t o f t e a c h i n g . From t h i s s i t u a t i o n , H i l l c o n c lu d e d ; = Many m i s t a k e s w ere m ade. E n t h u s i a s t s , a lw a y s on i th e d e f e n s i v e , made w i l d an d e x t r a v a g a n t c la im s f o r | t h e i r d e p a r t m e n t s and s u c c e e d e d i n c r e a t i n g a p r e j u - ; d i c e w h ic h p e r s i s t s i n t h e m in d s o f th e i g n o r a n t t o j t h i s good h o u r .^*8 P a r e n t h e t i c a l l y i t s h o u ld be n o te d t h a t t h e a u t h o r , : j a p r o f e s s o r o f e d u c a t i o n a t Y a l e , w as w r i t i n g a b o u t th e 'p r e j u d i c e o f a c a d e m ic ia n s a g a i n s t p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g fo r, j t e a c h e r s . When he w ro te l,o f t h e ig n o ran t* * he w as w r i t i n g j i a b o u t t h e l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . A lth o u g h H i l l , no d o u b t , m ean t t h a t t h e s e p r o f e s s o r s w ere i g n o r a n t o f t h i s ; | !p a r t i c u l a r b i t o f h i s t o r i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n , a l i b e r a l a r t s j , i p r o f e s s o r m ig h t i n t e r p r e t s u c h s t a t e m e n t s i n a n o th e r i • ^ C l y d e M. H i l l , ,fThe C o lle g e P r e s i d e n t and th e Im p ro v em en t o f C o l le g e T e a c h i n g , 1 1 E d u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and S u p e r v i s i o n . 15s212-22, M a rch , 1929# ^ I b i d . , p . 213. m anner. He m ight b e lie v e th a t the p ro fe sso r of e d u c a tio n has c a lle d the academ ician ,fignorant*1 —in th e g e n e ra l se n se . S tatem en ts such as th e se have only h eig h ten ed the I c o n tro v e rsy . Another a n a ly s is of th e p ro b le m ,^ concerning i p a r ti c u l a r ly th e p erio d p rio r to 1900, em phasized th e j fo llo w in g reaso n s (not h e re to fo re m entioned) as in f lu e n - i I t i a l in c re a tin g o p p o sitio n to schools of e d u c a tio n : i 1. The new departm ents were a s s o c ia te d w ith normal : r sch o o ls in th e minds of u n iv e r s ity p ro fe s s o rs . The u n iv e r- !s i t y would s u ffe r from norm al school s ta n d a rd s . E d u catio n i ,co u rses would be rev iew c o u rse s , lik e many of th e norm al i i |sc h o o l c o u rse s, and would n o t be of u n iv e r s ity grade* ! 1 2 . The c h a ra c te r of th o se a t tr a c te d to te a c h in g i : .'was n o t s a tis f a c to r y to u n iv e r s ity p eo p le. j 1 | 3 . The u n iv e r s ity was in te r e s te d in the * a d u lt j ’mind” and could n o t be tro u b le d w ith problem s in v o lv in g i 1 1 c h ild r e n . i * + • There were no tech n iq u es o f re s e a rc h in i e d u c a tio n . j i l I ! D esp ite th e se a n a ly s e s , perhaps P re s id e n t Griswold ; was c o r r e c t when he d e sc rib e d th is c o n f lic t as 1 1 . . . an i ; i , **%velyn A. C lem ent, "The Antagonism A g ain st th e I D epartm ents of E d u c a tio n ,1 1 S chool and S o c ie ty . b6t 659-62, [ November 20, 1937* 1 h i s t o r i c case of spontaneous com bustion .* * ^ 5 V. CONTRIBUTING CAUSAL FACTORS As e a rly as 1872, th e te a c h in g p ro fe s s io n had ' }r \ asked th e u n iv e r s i t ie s and c o lle g e s to pay some a tte n tio n i to th e study o f e d u c a tio n . The N. E . A. Normal Departm ent ] * r e p o r t fo r th a t y ear advocated a p ro fe s s o r o f e d u c a tio n ! or d id a c tic s in every c o lle g e and some exposure to pedagogy •fo r every s tu d e n t. ^ By 1891, when only some 6 per c e n t ,o f the c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s it ie s had c h a irs in pedagogy and i |many of them were s t i l l 1 1 on p a p e r,* * an e d u c a tio n is t was a lre a d y proposing co u rse s in pedagogy fo r c o lle g e p ro - 1 | f e s s o r s . L e a d e r s h i p in th is movement by e d u c a tio n is ts , |a lth o u g h u n s u c c e s s fu l, has always fanned th e flam es of th e , l ; jo p p o sitio n to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . F urth erm o re, w hile S | s t i l l in th e ir in fa n c y , departm ents o f pedagogy were |anxious and determ ined to e n la rg e the scope of t h e i r f i e l d ; 5°A. wiaitney G risw old, f,What W e Don*t Know W ill H urt U s,1 1 H am er *s M agazine. 209s81, J u ly , 195*+. | a more com plete d is c u s s io n of th is p o in t see 'C lem ent, 1 1 The E v o lu tio n o f Teacher T ra in in g in C a lifo rn ia 'a s a Phase of S o c ia l C hange,” op. p i t . , pp. 126-27, 70. . F . F is k , 1 1 The Im portance of P edagogical T ra in - ; in g fo r C ollege P r o f e s s o r s ,1 1 N. E . A. J o u rn a l of Proceedings and A ddresses—1891. pp. 673-77; and J . G. Schurman, r,T each- in g —A Trade or a P rofession?*1 The Forum. 21:171-85* A p ril, 1896. I |in o th e r ways. P ro fe s so rs o f ed u c a tio n wanted th e | i |fo llo w in g s u b je c ts , fo r p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e r s , to be in clu d ed in the work of th e departm ent of p e d a g o g y *^3 (1) a l l s t r i c t l y ped ag o g ical s u b je c ts ; (2) P o l i t i c a l and E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n ; (3) H isto ry and Economic ’ S cien ce; (40 L ite r a tu r e in E n g lish ; and (5) P hilosophy and P sychology. That th e re w ere, and a r e , sound argum ents fo r j the p r o f e s s io n a liz a tio n of s u b je c t m a tte r can n o t be i i d e n ie d . However, s t r i c t l y from the s ta n d p o in t of dim inish-j ;ing te n s io n s betw een academ icians and e d u c a tio n is ts , i t I : 'm ust be concluded th a t a c tio n s such as th e se were id e trim e n ta l. i i * i | V I. O TH ER MAHIFESTAT I O H S O F THE PROBLEM < . ! i ; The p r in c ip a l m a n ife s ta tio n s o f th e problem under i i c o n s id e ra tio n in t h i s d i s s e r ta t io n were 1 1 ta l k 1 * on campuses s ' 1 i ; and l i t e r a r y e f f o r ts which tended to h in d er th e work of departm ents o f pedagogy. In th is p e rio d , probably the 'form er was more im p o rta n t. There were a ls o o th e r m ani- ! f e s ta tio n s of the a t t i tu d e of l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s which i , 'h elp ed to produce ta n g ib le r e s u l t s . The c o n c lu sio n of < ! :C lem ent, namely t h a t 1 1 . . . the in d iffe re n c e of th e s ta te I 53"Scope and C h ara cter of P edagogical Work in U n iv e r s itie s ,1 1 R eport of the Committee on P edagogics, C has. I Be Garmo, Chairm an, N.E .A. Jo u rn a l of P roceedings ana ; ' A ddresses—1892, pp . 772-77•_____________________________ j > u n iv e r s ity a c te d as a pow erful fo rc e which throughout the -pioneer p erio d Q l8^-9-1390] delayed the developm ent of p ro fe s s io n a l p re p a ra tio n fo r teach in g * • . *,l^If was supported by th e p re s e n t re se a rc h * In some c a se s a b o litio n , r a th e r th a n d e la y , of p ro fe s s io n a l co u rses re su lte d * Such was th e s i tu a t io n a t 'De Pauw U n iv e rsity : I n d ic a tiv e of P re s id e n t Jo h n ls h ig h e d u c a tio n a l aims was h is a t t i tu d e toward th e Normal S chool. T his school had a t t r a c te d a s u b s ta n tia l e n ro llm e n t, and th e re were e x c e lle n t reaso n s fo r i t s continuance* The p r e s id e n t, how ever, f e l t th a t i t s s p i r i t was n o t in harmony w ith th a t of the L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g e , and I in s p ite of o p p o sitio n he urged i t s a b o litio n . This was in 1890, and th e sch o o l w as, in f a c t , d is c o n - ; tin u e d .5 5 At De Pauw, as in p r a c tic a lly a l l of the c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s , the movement to in c lu d e p ro fe s s io n a l co u rse s i n .th e cu rricu lu m could n o t be stemmed and by 1905 Rufus B. Ivon KleinSmid had been app o in ted p ro fe s so r of pedagogy and ' p r in c ip a l of the Academy. I Other m a n ife s ta tio n s of th e problem appeared in I e a rly s tru g g le s over th e a u th o rity fo r c e r tif ic a tio n * At 'M ichigan i n 1891 th e c e r tif y in g power was given to the I C ollege of L ite r a tu r e , S c ie n c e , and th e A rts and th is ^ C le m e n t, f,The E v o lu tio n of Teacher T ra in in g i n C a lif o r n ia as a Phase of S o c ia l C hange,1 1 o p. c i t . * p . 117* 5?W illiam W arren Sw eet, In d ian a Asbury - De Pauw !U n iv e rsity (New York: Abingdon P re s s , 1937)9 P* 15&* 5 9 ■ " . . . was used as a club to fo rc e stu d e n ts in to c e r ta in academic c o u r s e s /1^ A lso, c r e d its earn ed in pedagogy, w hether earned in th e same i n s t i t u t i o n or elsew h ere, were fre q u e n tly not a c c e p ta b le f o r d eg rees g ra n te d by c o lle g e s of l i b e r a l a r t s . ^ V II. S U M M A R Y O F TH E PERIOD In e v a lu a tin g the m a te ria l in t h i s c h a p te r, the re a d e r should r e c a l l c e r ta in c o n d itio n s th a t p re v a ile d in th e p u b lic sch o o ls d u rin g t h i s p e rio d . The high sch o o l e n ro lle d a h ig h ly s e l e c t s tu d e n t body, th e m a jo rity of which was d e s tin e d to go to c o lle g e . Teaching was c le a r ly a v o c a tio n ; only 2 p er c e n t of th e sch o o l te a c h e rs p o ssessed a c o lle g e d e g re e . S a la r ie s were low and te a c h ing was a tr a n s ito r y o ccu p atio n fre q u e n tly used as a 1 1 s te p p in g -s to n e . 1 1 The prim ary job o f th e te a c h e r was to m a in tain o rd er and to te a c h d i r e c tly from th e adopted t e x t s . 56w hitney, H isto ry of th e P ro fe s s io n a l T rain in g of T eachers a t The U n iv e rsity of M ichigan fo r th e F i r s t H a lf- C en tu ry —T579 to 1929. op. ci t . . p . 19**-. 5 ?0 scar U. W illiam s, “L ib e ra liz e d v s . P ro fe s s io n a liz e d S u b je c t-M a tte rs How Can the A rts C ollege Supply B oth?1 1 E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 16s532, November, 1930. 5 % o n ro e, op,, c i t . . p . 260. I n r e g a r d t o th e c o l l e g e , i t s h o u ld be r e c a l l e d I I t h a t t h e c l a s s i c a l e u r r i e u l u ® w as s t i l l su p rem e and , i t e c h n i c a l s u b j e c t s h a d made b u t fe w i n r o a d s on t h i s c u r r i - I i c u lu m . W itn e s s t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s I g rew u p i n th e g o ld e n a g e o f a c a d e m ic s n o b b e r y . I c a n rem em ber- w hen i n t h e m o s t r a r i f i e d c o l l e g e c i r c l e s i t was c o n s i d e r e d j u s t b a r e l y r e s p e c t a b l e t o be a n e n g i n e e r . As f o r th e o t h e r t e c h n i c a l c a l l i n g s , so f a r a s th e y h a d a c q u i r e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a n d i n g a t a l l , th e y w ere w i t h th e e x c e p t i o n o f m e d i c i n e , b ey o n d j ! t h e p a l e . C o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s h a d , t o be s u r e , a l r e a d y b e g u n t o m a i n t a i n d i v i s i o n s d e v o te d t o a g r i c u l t u r e o r d e n t i s t r y o r p h a rm a c y , b u t t h e y t r e a t e d ; t h e s e p a r t s o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n l i k e s t e p c h i l d r e n . j A cadem ic p r e s t i g e w as e n jo y e d c h i e f l y by th e l i b e r a l 1 j a r t s , t h e o l o g y , an d la w . . . .5 9 M o re o v e r, u n l i k e Germany w h e re t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l f a c u l t i e s i {of t h e u n i v e r s i t i e s i n i t i a t e d t h e s tu d y o f th e t h e o r e t i c a l i | a s p e c t s o f t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n , t h e m ovem ent f o r t e a c h e r ! { e d u c a ti o n i n t h e U n ite d S t a t e s h a d i t s o r i g i n p r i m a r i l y I ‘ j |o u t s i d e t h e w a l l s o f c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . H o ra c e . i 'Mann an d H en ry B a r n a r d w ere " a c a d e m ic o u t s i d e r s . * 1 A t t h e ! tim e o f t h e i r l i v e s w hen t h e y a g i t a t e d f o r th e e s t a b l i s h m en t o f t h e f i r s t n o rm a l s c h o o l s , n e i t h e r was a t t a c h e d t o a c o l l e g e o r u n i v e r s i t y . "T his f a c t , i n i t s e l f , show s th e 1 r e l u c t a n c e o f c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s i n t h e U n ite d ! S t a t e s t o u n d e r t a k e t h e t a s k o f p r e p a r i n g t e a c h e r s f o r th e 5 9 sa m u e l P . C a p e n , " C o n n e c t i c u t S t a t e C o l l e g e , The S t a t e C o l l e g e , and H ig h e r E d u c a t i o n , " A m e ric a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f U n i v e r s i t y P r o f e s s o r s ( h e r e a f t e r c a l l e d A .A .U .P .) B u l l e t i n . 1 6 :3 1 1 , A p r i l , 1 9 3 0 . p u b lic sc h o o ls. | T his c h a p te r has developed th e fo llo w in g p r in c ip a l \ p o in ts : i i 1. The study of e d u c a tio n in c o lle g e s and u n iv e r- | s i t i e s was in s tig a te d by fo rc e s w ith o u t, r a th e r th an from w ith in , th e se i n s t i t u t i o n s . . 2 . The a t t i tu d e of the l i b e r a l a r ts f a c u lti e s p rio r, 1 to 1900 delayed th e in tro d u c tio n of co u rses fo r te a c h e rs in I 1 c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . 1 ! t 3« C ritic is m s of departm ents o f pedagogics were made when th ey were e s ta b lis h e d and b efo re th e se d e p a rt ing n ts had an o p p o rtu n ity to f u n c tio n . 1 'l ; 4 . Most of the c r itic is m s of t h i s p erio d are s t i l l j used a t th e p re s e n t tim e by p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s . I 5. L ib e ra l a r t s f a c u l ti e s in th is p erio d is o la te d : < 1 ! [them selves from the p ro fe s s io n a l a s p e c ts of te a c h e r ■ e d u c a tio n . 1 CHAPTER IV TH E CRYSTALLIZATION O F CRITICISM—1901 TH R O U G H 1933 I . B A C K G R O U N D OF TH E PERIOD H it from above and below by what academ icians a re i p le a se d to c a l l " u t i l i t a r i a n i s m and v o c a tio n a lis m ," th e , l i b e r a l c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s it i e s went through a d i f f i c u l t p e rio d from 1900 to 1933. From below, th e p u b lic h ig h ! j ; sc h o o l, faced w ith g r e a tly in c re a se d e n ro llm e n ts, attem ptedj to meet new needs* The c o lle g e -p re p a ra to ry c u rric u lu m , so 1 co n v en ien t and a c c e p ta b le to th e l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s was lo s in g ground. From above, th e in ro a d s o f p ro fe s s io n a lism were being f e l t to th e e x te n t th a t l i b e r a l a r t s ic o lle g e s were becom ing, more and m ore, a 1 1 s e rv ic e ” sch o o l lfo r fe ed in g s tu d e n ts in to th e p ro fe s s io n a l s c h o o ls . D egrees g ran ted in the l i b e r a l a r t s cu rricu lu m outnumbered | jth e p r o fe s s io n a l d eg rees g ra n te d in 1900 but by 1913 the i re v e rs e was t r u e . The h e a v ie s t lo s s to the l i b e r a l a r t s 'c o lle g e in r e g i s t r a t i o n was occasioned by the expansion of 1 sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n .* ! *W . M. Smallwood, "The F ate of the L ib e ra l A rts i C ollege in American U n iv e rs itie s ,'* School and S o c ie ty . j 10:2*4-1-50, August 29 , 1919; A llen S . W hitney, H isto ry of , th e P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g of T eachers a t th e U n iv e rsity o f ' M ichigan fo r th e F i r s t Ha I f -C en tu ry - -1879 to 1929 (Ann i A rbors George Wahr P u b lis h e rs , 1931)> PP. 107, 131; Hugh j Graham, "The R ise and P ro g ress of the C o llege o f _____ j ! I t was d u rin g th is p e rio d th a t norm al sch o o ls and j l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s began assuming some s im ila r c h a racter* I ! i s t i c s . Many norm al sch o o ls became te a c h e rs c o lle g e s , s ta te i te a c h e rs c o lle g e s , and f i n a l l y s t a t e c o lle g e s* By 192?, th e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s were s e r io u s ly immersed i n th e l i b e r a l a r t s f i e l d . L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e s to o , d e s p ite th e oppo- ! ! i s i t i o n of c e r ta in segm ents of t h e i r f a c u l t i e s , had a lte r e d j t h e i r p u rp o se s. By 1933* the fo llo w in g could be re p o rte d I i i I in the N a tio n a l Survey of th e E d u catio n o f T eachers: There i s re v ealed . . . an u nm istakable d r i f t on th e p a r t of th e s e l i b e r a l a r t s i n s t i t u t i o n s tow ards th e te c h n ic a l and s p e c ia liz e d ta s k of p re p a rin g stu d e n ts fo r the f i e l d of te a c h in g . This i s a marked d e p a rtu re j I from th e o r ig in a l o rg a n iz a tio n and purposes of th e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s . I f th e tendency c o n tin u e s , th e tim e i s ( n o t f a r d i s t a n t when such c o lle g e s w il l need to be i looked upon as being e s s e n ti a l ly i n s t i t u t i o n s f o r th e ! p re p a ra tio n of te a c h e r s .2 I j In 1905 th e re were only fo u r te a c h e rs c o lle g e s o r I jsch o o ls of e d u c a tio n in u n i v e r s i t i e s . They w ere*3 , E d u ca tio n of the U n iv e rsity of M in n eso ta,1 1 School and | S o c ie ty . 31*510-11, A p ril 12, 1930* I ! ^Edward S . Evenden e t a l . , 1 1 Teacher P erso n n el in 1 'th e U nited S t a t e s , M V ol. I I of th e N atio n al Survey of th e j iE ducation of T each ers, U. S . O ffic e o f E d ucation B u lle tin ;1 2 H , Ho. 10, p . 139. ! 1 | E dw ard C. E l l i o t e t a l . , 1 1 The E d u catio n and T ra in in g o f Secondary T e a c h e rs,1 1 P a rt I of th e F o u rth { Yearbook of th e N a tio n a l S o c ie ty f o r th e S c ie n tif ic Study o f E d u ca tio n , 1905, p . 69* I ' 6b j Teachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rsity 1 S chool of E d u c a tio n , U n iv e rsity of Chicago T eachers C o lle g e , U n iv e rs ity of M isso u ri ■ C ollege o f E d u c a tio n , U n iv e rsity of Texas | » On th is b ase , sch o o ls of e d u c atio n expanded r a th e r \ r a p id ly . This was shown by a study of e ig h t u n i v e r s i t i e s j i which in 1879 employed fo u rte e n in s tr u c to r s who o ffe re d a j i t o t a l o f 8? co u rse s in education* By 1907, e ig h ty - f iv e » * [in s tru c to rs were employed and 182 co u rse s were o f f e r e d . i i , t [All e ig h t u n i v e r s it ie s had fre e d th e i r e d u c a tio n d iv is io n s j from th e c o n tro l of the philosophy departm ent by 1907 * w hereas in 1897> fo u r o f th e se d iv is io n s were c o n tro lle d [ by the p h ilosophy d ep artm en t. The g e n e ra l exp an sio n of e d u c a tio n as a u n iv e r s ity s u b je c t was aided by th e r e p o r t j of th e Committee of S eventeen in 1907 and th e re c o g n itio n I giv en to co u rse s in e d u c a tio n by the Worth C e n tra l A sso ci- j a tio n in 1912. In a d d itio n , prom inent e d u c a tio n is ts were ap p o in ted to p re s id e n c ie s d u rin g t h i s p e rio d ; e . g . , Coffman a t M innesota, S uzzalo a t W ashington, H i ll a t M isso u ri, [Neale a t Id ah o , and Von KleinSm id a t A rizona. | i | One se tb a c k fo r th o se d e s ir in g autonomous sch o o ls of! > | e d u c a tio n was noted d u rin g th is p e r io d . The U n iv e rsity of i I II— I I, ■ ■ — I I I . I . — I I I . . I . | , . l | I I . * ^C h arles Hughes Jo h n sto n , tfT endencies in C o lleg e ! D epartm ents of E d u c a tio n ,1 1 E d u c a tio n a l ReviewT 3 8:186, [September, 1909* iChicago d isc o n tin u e d i t s S chool o f E d u ca tio n i n 1931? |e d u c a tio n was made a departm ent in the d iv is io n of s o c ia l !/ s c ie n c e s . I I . CRITICISMS—1901 TH R O U G H 1933 1 In 1903, th e preponderance o f women in the te a c h e r- I tr a in in g program was r id ic u le d by Columbia U n iv e rsity 1 p ro fe s s o rs who pinned the la b e l "H a irp in A lle y 1 1 on 120th S t r e e t (T eachers C o lle g e ). At th e same i n s t i t u t i o n the appointm ent of norm al sch o o l men*1 to p ro fe s s o rs h ip s was i denounced by l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs who a ls o m aintained ! 1 t h a t th e u n iv e r s ity a d m in is tra tio n was H co d d lin g ” the j te a c h e rs c o ll e g e .5 j f,S o ft p e d a g o g ic s,1 1 p re v io u sly charged by M unster- j 1 . 'b e rg , was a g a in la id a t the door of e d u c a tio n is ts . A H arvard p ro fe s s o r of E n g lish had t h i s to say in 190*+: ; ! T eachers of pedagogics have much to say about I d e lig h t i n work. For my p a r t , I b eg in to th in k th a t I was r ig h t in ch ild h o o d , when I h e ld such d e lig h t to | be nrim a f a c ie evidence t h a t a boy needed m e d ic in e .6 1 ' In th e same v e in a p ro fe s s o r of philosophy w ritin g i n 1911 j tra c e d " s o f t pedagogics** to th e o rie s propounded in colleges} ■ .. . . . . . . .I.. -1 ■■ 1 1 . 1 1 . 1 . . . ......... 5James E a rl R u s s e ll, Founding T eachers C ollege j j(New Yorks T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1937), , j p p . 6H ,*65# I £% 1 I ° B a r r e tt W endell, 1 1 Our N a tio n a l S u p e r s t i tio n ,1 1 I N orth American Review . 179*369, Septem ber, 190*4-. o f e d u c a t i o n * '7 F u r t h e r e v i d e n c e o f t h i s c r i t i c i s m c a n be s e e n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g q u o t a t i o n : I n n o o t h e r w ay , p e r h a p s , t h a n i n t h e i r a d v o c a c y o f t h i s p e r n i c i o u s d o c t r i n e o f i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r e s t h a v e t h e m o d e r n i s t s m ore s e r i o u s l y u n d e rm in e d so u n d s c h o l a r s h i p , p r o p e r h a b i t s o f s t u d y , and th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f v i r i l e , r u g g e d c h a r a c t e r . Of a l l t h e l a t e s t e d u c a t i o n a l n o s tr u m s t h a t h a v e b e e n f o i s t e d u p o n u s , t h i s i s one o f th e w o r s t . . . . W h ere, p r a y , a r e we t o and w h e re end i n t h i s . . . h e e d in g an d c a t e r i n g t o t h e i n t e r e s t s o f y o u t h ? 8 | i T h ese q u o t a t i o n s h a v e w i t h i n them th e g e n e r a l " f l a v o r 1 1 o f i i f o r m a l d i s c i p l i n e — r e g a r d l e s s o f how t h i s te r m may be , d e f i n e d . T h is " f l a v o r 1 1 i s a p p a r e n t i n many o t h e r c r i t i - i f c is m s p a r t i c u l a r l y i n r e g a r d t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f t r a n s f e r j i o f t r a i n i n g . E d u c a t i o n a l t h e o r i s t s w ere c h a r g e d m ore t h a n | o n c e w i t h t h e " e r r o r " o f d e n y in g g e n e r a l p o w e rs o f t h e m in d .^ ! The s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n p ro g ra m fro m th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro g ra m h a s a lw a y s e n c o u n t e r e d i o p p o s i t i o n fro m many a c a d e m i c i a n s . P r e s i d e n t Van H is e made, t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n i n ^W arn er F i t e , " P e d a g o g y and t h e T e a c h e r ," The N a tio n : 93*207-08, S e p te m b e r 7 , 1911 • I o ! I ^ A l f r e d E . S t e a r n s , "Some F a l l a c i e s i n t h e M odern E d u c a t i o n a l S c h e m e ," A t l a n t i c M o n th ly . 118:650, N ovem ber, i \ ! % o r e x a m p le s e e H . C . N u t t i n g , " L a t i n and M e n ta l i T r a i n i n g ," The C l a s s i c a l J o u r n a l , 18 :91-99, N ovem ber, A lready I have heard murmurs of d is c o n te n t from p ro fe s s o rs o f th e c o lle g e of l i b e r a l a r t s of o th e r u n iv e r s i ti e s where th e movement fo r the p re p a ra tio n of te a c h e rs has been in th e d ir e c tio n o f d ls I n te g r a - i ti o n r a th e r th an i n te g r a tio n , the sta te m e n t being made t h a t th e o rg a n iz a tio n of a c o lle g e of e d u c a tio n had ! a lre a d y in ju re d th e c o lle g e of l i b e r a l a r t s by i n t r o - j ducing to o e a r ly th e p ro fe s s io n a l a sp e c ts of th e su b - I j e e ts ta u g h t.10 j T his was a ls o in harmony w ith the g e n e ra lly -e x p re sse d ! ! o p in io n o f l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs t h a t i f th e re m ust be ' S . co u rse s in e d u c a tio n , such co u rse s should be p re se n te d d u rin g th e s tu d e n tfs g rad u ate y e a r s , ^ i The com plaint t h a t h ig h sch o o l g ra d u a te s of one j i g e n e ra tio n a re i n f e r io r to th o se o f a p rev io u s g e n e ra tio n !i s o fte n heard in c o lle g e c i r c l e s . As e a rly as 1837 th e U n iv e rsity of N orth C aro lin a ( th is i n s t i t u t i o n re g a rd s i | i t s e l f as th e o ld e s t American s t a t e u n iv e r s ity ) o f f i c i a l l y j 1 com plained of th e low ering sta n d a rd s of c o lle g e p re p a ra - , t i o n , ’ * ’^ In more re c e n t tim e s, l i b e r a l a r ts p ro fe s s o rs have lin k e d in ad eq u ate c o lle g e p re p a ra tio n w ith a lle g e d d e f i c ie n c ie s in the te a c h e r e d u c a tio n program . S p e c if ic a lly , i th e p h ilosophy o f p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n who promoted i t I ^ C h a r le s R. Van H ise , “The T ra in in g of T eachers for! th e Secondary S c h o o ls, 1 1 N a tio n a l A sso c ia tio n of S ta te U ni- ' v e r s i t i e s T ra n sa c tio n s and P ro c e e d in g s. No. 6 , 1908, p . 2 3 •; ^ R a le ig h and N orth C a ro lin a G a z e tte , A p ril 18, ! 1837, quoted i n A rth u r Palmer Hudson, “The P e re n n ia l Prob lem of th e 111 P re p a re d ,1 1 E n g lish Jo u rn a l—C ollege E d itio n ^ 27*723, November, 1933* je le c tiv e s tu d ie s and the 1 1 en rich m en t1 1 o f the h ig h -sc h o o l I icurriculum was h eld re s p o n s ib le f o r low ering the q u a lity of th e s c h o la rs h ip o f th e h ig h sch o o l g ra d u a te . Such was 1 2 th e s i t u a t io n as e a rly as 1910. L ikew ise, e le c tiv e s tu d ie s and "en rich m en t1 * in th e c o lle g e have o fte n been under a tta c k by a r a th e r s u b s ta n tia l group of l i b e r a l a r t s i p r o f e s s o r s . F re q u e n tly i n th e se a tta c k s th e o rie s of educa-; i Itio n propounded by e d u c a tio n is ts were g iv en c a u s a l s t a t u s , j A c o n tro v e rsy betw een th e C ollege of A rts and th e C o lleg e ! jOf E d u catio n a t Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity in 191*+, w ith th e ! 1 i i p re s id e n t of the u n iv e r s ity fa v o rin g th e C ollege of E duca- j t i o n , rev o lv ed around th is i s s u e . ^ • During t h i s p e rio d , beginning as e a rly as 1910, | p ro fe s s o rs of ed u c a tio n were accused of being incom petent, u n ed u cated , ig n o ra n t, c o n c e ite d , and meddlesome. A p h ilo s - I | o p h er, d ir e c tin g h is rem arks a t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n , i w ro te : "Most of the methods and th e o r ie s of th e s c i o l i s t s | ,a re f a l l a c i e s of ignorance and p e rso n a l c o n c e it—what 'Bacon e a ll s id o ls of th e C ave.t,llf An anonymous p ro fe s s o r I ! ^G eo rg e H obart Libby, "D angers of the Modern Trend ! ■of E d u c a tio n ," The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l* 6 :116-22, December, | j1910. ! | 3 2# P o lla r d , The H isto ry of the Ohio S ta te ’U n iv e rsity (Columbus: Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1952J, 1 p . 22 1. C h arles M ills G ayley, Id o ls of E d u catio n (Hew -XPr K :_Doubleday, Page , and C o ., 1 9 1 0 ), P* 137« ______ I who would w. . . sh u t th e mouths and v acate th e c h a ir s of Ithe p ro fe s s o r of pedagogy, 1 1 w ro te; j • \ , Here i s an e x tra o rd in a ry f a c t : of the innum erable | c o lle g e men w ith whom I have ta lk e d , n o t one has ever j ex p ressed anything but contem pt of th e departm ent of | pedagogy as an e d u c a tio n a l f u t i l i t y , and abhorrence of i t as a m eddling n u isan ce .3-? | i Such was th e g e n e ra l te n o r o f m ost of th e c r itic is m s * j O thers were more v i t r i o l i c * B ernard De V oto, le a v in g h is j i ' p o s itio n as p ro fe s s o r of E n g lish a t N o rthw estern U n iv er- i js ity , had th is to say : ! In any o th e r p ro fe s s io n th e incom petent and th e b r a in le s s s e t t l e to the bottom , where they a re im- i p o te n t: and im p o sto rs, c o n ju ro rs , and c h a rla ta n s are : soon p laca rd ed as such so th a t t h e i r c o lle a g u e s may , d e a l w ith them. But in pedagogy they do n o t fa re th a t way. They become P ro fe s s o rs o f E ducation* Then, in due tim e, because members of th e ir b rotherhood are in c o n tr o l, th ey become chairm en of the com m ittees t h a t I c o n tro l th e c o lle g e and th en they become D eans, and j th en they become P r e s id e n ts . : | I am convinced th a t the g r e a te r p a r t of th e p re s e n t ! i p lig h t of the c o lle g e s is due to th is group of unedu- > ! ea te d f a n a t ic s , crazed e n th u s ia s ts , or w ilf u l c h a r la - | ta n s who have, i n th e l a s t f i f t e e n y e a rs , rid d e n in to j pow er.1® ' . . . to improve the c o lle g e s , g e t r i d of the fo o ls 1 who roam among them . Begin w ith P ro fe sso rs o f , E d u c a tio n .17 | 15t#If j Were a C ollege P r e s id e n t,1 1 Anonymous, The U npopular Review, 5:6*4-, January-M areh, 1916. I i A U B ernard DeVoto, w F arew ell to Pedagogy,T 1 H arper *s M agazine. 156:185, Jan u ary , 1928. . 1 7 I b id . . p . 1 9 0 . I 7 0 The a lle g e d em phasis on method was ag ain s u b je c t to heavy a tta c k —the f i r s t c r iti c i s m encountered a f t e r 1900 ion t h i s sc o re was in 1910* I t was h eld t h a t tim e devoted to methods took needed time away from th e m astery of j i s u b je c t m atter* Schools of e d u c a tio n were chided f o r ! prom oting a “ s h o rt and ea sy ’1 method which p reten d ed to \ ! 1 produce “a q u a lity no le s s p e rso n a l th a n v i r t u e . 1 1 Methods j » t t i were s a id to be m echanical; they denied th e p e r s o n a lity o f th e te a c h e r. M ethods, i t was m a in ta in e d , co u ld be obtained; from one *s own e x p e rien ce as a s tu d e n t. F u rth erm o re, in I ; i lone a r t i c l e , th e au th o r claim ed th a t sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n | were saying th is to th e te a c h e rs : I t is no lo n g er n e c e ssa ry fo r you to go deeply j in to your s u b je c t, or to have broad and v a rie d c o n ta c t ; I w ith l i f e . P ick up enough term inology to a p p e a l^ in te l- I lig e n t b e fo re your c la s s e s . A ll you r e a l ly need i s our methods of t e s t i n g and g ra d in g . H en c efo rth , you are i n o t a te a c h e r; you are a la b o re r in an e d u c a tio n a l I f a c to r y , v en eerin g th e human raw p ro d u ct which p asses ! through your d ep a rtm e n t. You a re n e ith e r an a r t i s t or I a c ra ftsm a n . Your to o ls a re a watch and an adding | m achine. Your b u sin e ss i s volume p ro d u c tio n . . . * . . W e could n o t tak e such quackery ^ p h ren o lo g y , p a lm is try , p seudo-psychology] s e rio u s ly u n t i l i t in - ! vaded ed u c a tio n where i t e s ta b lis h e d i t s e l f as ‘The i I D epartm ent of E d u c a tio n .*19 j ' i ; P ro fe sso r F ite (p h ilo so p h y ), w ritin g i n 1911 > con- | tended th a t co u rse s i n pedagogy brought in to th e u n iv e rsity , 18e . W. W hicker, “R ack e te erin g on P a rn a ssu s, “ N orth American Review . 235:532, Ju n e, 1933* | 1 9 I b i d . , p . 5 3 1 .________________________________ ;a e la s s of s tu d e n ts to whom “ th e id e a of a u n iv e r s ity 1 1 was [foreign* The re fe re n c e h ere was to norm al-sch o o l stu d en ts who were co n sid ered i n f e r i o r to c o lle g e s tu d e n ts . E n tran ce b a rs were sometimes low ered, F ite a s s e r te d , to accomodate i th e se s tu d e n ts . This c r iti c is m was fre q u e n tly encountered i n the l i t e r a t u r e , p a r tic u l a r ly in more re e e n t a r t i c l e s w here i t was combined w ith a charge o f “easy grading* in i sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . The c a lib e r of stu d e n ts a tt r a c te d ; to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n has alw ays been looked upon w ith ; u n frie n d ly eyes by l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . [ The q u a lity of e d u c a tio n a l l i t e r a t u r e has been often* i c r i t i c i z e d by p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a to rs . Of c o u rse , w ritin g s ; from t h i s source can n o t m atch th e vehemence of th o se who have a p r e d is p o s itio n a g a in s t th e f i e l d of e d u c a tio n . In 1911* F i t e , a lth o u g h allo w in g fo r two or th re e e x c e p tio n s 1 c h a ra c te riz e d a l l p ro fe s s io n a l l i t e r a t u r e as “ b an al and 01 I i n a n e . A n o t h e r p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c (anonymous), w ritin g j !in 1916, d e c la re d : I 1 | Not m erely i s t h i s l i t e r a t u r e co n sp icu o u sly la c k in g i j in a l l the p e rso n a l q u a l i t i e s o f genius and s ty le ; n o t ! m erely i s i t s t e r i l e i n id e a s ; but i t b ears alm ost ] ! th ro u g h o u t th e mark of being w r itte n by th o se who a re ! i j _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ^ F i t e , op. c i t . , p . 207; and “Hard Words About Pedagody,* unsigned rev iew , The D ia l* 51:2*40, O ctober 1 , j 1911 • j 21*Hard Words About Pedagogy,* c i t . , p # 239# 1 I only s u p e r f ic ia lly ac q u ain te d w ith th e e d u c a tio n a l | s u b je c t-m a tte r* 22 i ! F le x n e r f e l t much th e same way about p ro fe s s io n a l l i t e r a - j t u r e . ‘ ’N onsense,1 * he a s s e r te d , 1 1 i s a lso p u b lish e d i n o th e r f i e l d s —even in th e s o -c a lle d ’e x a c t s c ie n c e s ; 1 but i t c a r r ie s no w eight and soon d is a p p e a rs . I t s a u th o rs do n o t u s u a lly become p ro fe s s o rs in le a d in g u n i v e r s i t i e s . " 23 i t should be no ted th a t th e c r i t i c s , in t h e i r own o p in io n s, were n o t ta k in g is o la te d exam ples o f p r o fe s s io n a l l i t e r a tu re on which to v e n t t h e i r s c o rn . I n f e r io r w ritin g was I s a id to be r e p r e s e n ta tiv e . I t has been a r a th e r c o n s is te n t view p o in t of l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs t h a t s tu d e n ts were opposed to c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n . F re q u e n tly i t was th e "m ajor p ro fe s s o r" of th e s tu d e n t to whom the stu d e n t a lle g e d ly com plained. While i t ,is tru e th a t s tu d e n ts do co n fid e i n th e "m ajor p ro fe s s o r" l i t i s a ls o g e n e ra lly conceeded th a t s tu d e n ts do c u rry th e fa v o r of th e ir "m ajor p r o f e s s o r ." W hile t h is a sp e c t o f th e problem should n o t be o v erlo o k ed , th e re i s more th a n h e a rsa y evidence as to how stu d e n ts f e e l ab o u t c o u rse s in i e d u c a tio n . (This i s ta k e n up l a t e r i n t h i s s tu d y ). One ! 22,1 The P ro fe ss o r o f Pedagogy— Once M ore," anony mous , The Unpopular Review. 5*60, A p ril-J u n e , 1916. 23Abraham F le x n e r, U n iv e r s itie s —A m erican. E n g lis h . 'German (New Yorks Oxford U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1930)> P# 109. i j c r i t i c had t h i s to say in 1916s i i On th e p a r t o f the te a c h e r h im se lf th e re i s l i t t l e or no enthusiasm fo r th e se 'p r o f e s s io n a l s t u d i e s , 1 in I marked c o n tr a s t to the a t t i t u d e tow ards p ro fe s s io n a l s tu d ie s of men in o th e r p r o f e s s io n s , • • • The p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e r looks upon th e p ed ag o g ical c o u rse s as ! a r a th e r d re a ry form al n e c e s s ity . In the te a c h e r o f e x p e rie n c e , who ta k e s th e co u rses as a c o n d itio n of. prom otion, they e x c ite only r id ic u le and co n tem p t.2^ Furtherm ore i t was fre q u e n tly h e ld th a t stu d e n ts in th e se j c o u rse s r e a l l y d id n o t "swallow® th e p ro ffe re d m a te ria l ; i ! b u t 1 1 . . • would slough o ff th e g r e a te r p a r t of t h e ir !p ed ag o g ical g ro w th s."2 ^ j j I f s tu d e n ts opposed c o u rse s In e d u c a tio n why d id ! (they do so? The l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o r had an answ er. ! I ; The te a c h in g in th e se co u rses was th e "w orst" and th e l i 'm a te ria l was t r i v i a l and in c o n s e q u e n tia l. What everybody j 'knew was p u t in to language th a t nobody u n d e rsto o d . Thus | l I I spoke r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s of the l i b e r a l a r t s . W itness t h i s 1 jstatem en t w r itte n i n 1911—a g a in by P ro fe sso r F ite * j ! In th e u n iv e r s ity g e n e ra lly , m ention of th e d e p a rt- j ment of pedagogy i s very lik e ly to be accom panied by ' a sm ile . P edagogical co u rses a re everyw here reg ard ed as snap co u rse s and the p ed a g o g ic al methods of teach in g ' I 2 > + H The Prol 'e s s o r o f Pedagogy—©nee M ore," o p , c i t . , ! ,p. 6 6 . Also see Howard Mumford Jo n e s, "B e tra y a l in 1 American E d u c a tio n ," S c rib n e r *s M agazine. 93*366, June, 1933* "H alf th e g ra d u ates of the tr a in in g c o u rs e s ," he w ro te , "are in r e v o lt a g a in s t th e 't r a i n i n g . ,w 2^"Hard Words About Pedagogy," o p . c i t , . p . 239* 26 a re u s u a lly th e w o rst. Sometimes s a t i r e was the te c h n iq u e used to d e sc rib e co u rse s in e d u c atio n s ! Those who are in te n d in g to te a c h ta k e them Le due a t io n courses]] because th e y a re re q u ire d and th o se who a re n o t in te n d in g to te a c h ta k e them because a c e r t a i n number of hours a re re q u ire d fo r g ra d u a tio n and t h i s i s th e e a s i e s t way of p ro c u rin g them . I t m ust be a d m itted t h a t among th e drudge work c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of some re q u ire d s u b je c ts and p e rio d s of s o lid c o n c e n tra t io n c h a r a c t e r is ti c of o th e r s , a few m inutes o f i n t e r m issio n f o r l e t t e r - w r i t i n g or napping a r e a b s o lu te ly n e c e ssa ry . 27 W ith t h i s g e n e ra l e v a lu a tio n i t lo g ic a lly follow ed t h a t c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n w ere n o t e q u iv a le n t to c o u rse s in th e academ ic s u b je c ts fo r e le c tiv e purposes and su ch , in f a c t , 28 was th e p o s itio n of many l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . Hundreds of books and a r t i c l e s have been w r itte n which a tte m p t to d e lin e a te th e philosophy of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e or 1 1 th e id e a of a u n i v e r s i t y .1 1 I t i s n o t w ith in the realm o f t h i s stu d y to analyze th e s e w r itin g s . However, a p p a re n t in a l l o f th e s e w ritin g s i s th e thought th a t l i b e r a l e d u c a tio n is concerned w ith g e n e ra l c u l tu r e , and g e n e ra l c u ltu r e should precede and accompany ^ W arn er F i t e , quoted in “Hard Words About Peda gogy, o£. c i t . , p . 2hO (u n d e rlin e s in s e r te d ) . 2?Anna B is s l e r , “Teacher T ra in in g in the L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g e ,1 1 School and S o c ie ty . 26:**7, Ju ly 9 , 1927* 2&Jno. M. M ecklin, “The Problem of th e T ra in in g of the Secondary T e a c h e r,1 1 School and S o c ie ty , if* 6 * 4 — 67* Ju ly 8 , 1916. s p e c ia liz a tio n * In l i b e r a l e d u c a tio n th e em phasis i s on i n t e l l e c t u a l developm ent. In h e re n tly t h is v iew p o in t i s n o t h o s t ile to p r a c t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s . In f a c t , H utchins has s a id th a t 1 1 . . . The b e s t p r a c t ic a l e d u c a tio n i s th e m ost t h e o r e ti c a l one . ‘ *29 gut ‘‘p ra c tic a l* 1 e d u c a tio n in t h i s sense frow ns upon im m ediate, ready-m ade te c h n iq u e s and d e v ic e s; i t i s opposed to “low -grade” u t i l i t a r i a n i s m land m a te ria lis m . L ib e ra l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs tend to a s s o c i a te th e study of e d u c a tio n as developed in th e U nited S ta te s w ith 1 1 low -grade” u t i l i t a r i a n i s m and, as su ch , sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n have been o p p o s e d . 30 j In some c a s e s , p r o f e s s o r - c r it ic s who used th e con v e n tio n a l meaning of “p r a c t i c a l i t y 1 1 —t h a t i s , tr a in in g j |c le a r ly and im m ediately ca p ab le of being tu rn ed in to ja c tio n —admonished sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n fo r la c k of ^‘p r a c t i c a l i t y . ” Theory c o u rse s in th e h is to r y and p h ilo s o phy o f e d u c a tio n , though approved by p r o f e s s o r - c r it ic s i more o f te n th a n o th e r co u rses in e d u c a tio n , were th e I t a r g e t . This q u o ta tio n i l l u s t r a t e d th e p o in t: i O ther s ta p le a r t i c l e s of tra d e a re the h is to r y and philosophy o f e d u c a tio n . I have a lre a d y in d ic a te d my re s p e c t fo r the h is to ry of e d u c a tio n as a s u b je c t f o r j s c h o la rs h ip . The h is to r y of any form of e d u c a tio n 2^R obert Maynard H u tc h in s, E d u ca tio n and th e S o c ia l Order (Los A ngeles: The Modern Forum, 1936), P * 28’. 3 °S u n ra. p . ^ 9 . 76 r e la te d to our p u b lic sch o o l i s , how ever, ex ceed in g ly j b r i e f , and th e ’p r a c t i c a l 1 v alu e fo r th e te a c h e r of a j study of m ediaeval u n i v e r s i t i e s or a d is c u s s io n of P l a t o ’s arrangem ent of m usic, g y m n astics, m athem atics, | and s t o r y - t e l l i n g i s very d i f f i c u l t to se e —e s p e c ia lly I under a regim e w here, thanks to pedagogy, the freedom o f the te a c h e r i s ever more r e s t r i c t e d .31 The o th e r c o u rse s i n e d u c a tio n were more b i t t e r l y ' a tta c k e d on p h ilo s o p h ic a l grounds. H olding t h a t ag en cies l iin clu d in g sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n had 1 1 b e tra y e d ” American , | I e d u c a tio n , Howard Mumford Jo n es, p ro fe s s o r of E n g lis h a t j i i [Michigan and H arv ard , found th e ro o t o f th e 1 1 b e tr a y a l” i n j i i I th e p h ilosophy of e d u c a tio n a l t h e o r i s t s — > ! . . . Ho one who has n o t k e p t up w ith th e v a s t o u t- i ; p u t of e d u c a tio n ’th e o ry 1 can be aware how i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n te n t fo r i t s own sake i s d isa p p e a rin g from the c u r - ( ric u lu m . A n c illa ry s u b je c ts which once le d in th e I d ir e c tio n of a p h ilo s o p h ic a l tr a in in g have been ’im p ro v e d ’ and e n fe e b le d . There i s alm ost no room f o r rig o ro u s tr a in in g i n mere id e a s . 32 j . . . They have b etray ed us by a fra n k s u rre n d e r to th e n a tio n a l im pulse tow ard, and ad m ira tio n o f , te c h - j n iq u e s, when th e purpose o f a sound e d u c a tio n a l i ! p h ilosophy i s , or should b e , to c o n sid e r e n d s.33 j | This ,fs u rre n d e r” was s a id to be a r e s u l t of American i pragm atism . The is s u e of pragm atism (seldom la b e le d as su c h ), w hile l a t e n t i n alm ost a l l o f th e c r itic is m s d u rin g j [the p e rio d under d is c u s s io n , d id n o t re c e iv e th e a tte n tio n I . i 1 i 32-pite, ”Pedagogy and th e Teacher o£. e l t . , p . 209. 3 2 jo n es, o p . c i t . , p . 3 6 1 . 33i b i d . . p . 360. 77 ! g iv en to i t i n more re c e n t d ay s. The u s u a l manner o f j s ta tin g the o b je c tio n was sim ply th a t v o c a tio n a l e d u c a tio n i ■ j had been s u b s titu te d f o r l i b e r a l ed u c a tio n i n th e tr a in in g j o f te a c h e rs ; and, o r , th a t th e re was no r e a l p h ilo so p h y o f i t e d u c a tio n in th e sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . P h ilo s o p h ic a l i is s u e s , i t was h e ld , were tr e a te d i n an £c| hoc manner and j ”f a d s M were the r e s u l t . P robably the c r i t i c s m eant such j th in g s as th e s h o r t- liv e d v e r t i c a l penmanship movement i when speaking about 1 1 fa d s 1 1 in th e se tim e s . Som etim es, as j a t M ichigan i n 1908, the e n tir e p ro f e s s io n a l tr a in in g i program was denounced as a ,ff a d .1 1 3^ i [ R e la te d to th e above was th e charge th a t e d u c a tio n i s t s had no a p p re c ia tio n of th e p a s t . A c l a s s i c i s t , who j h eld t h a t e d u c a tio n a l re q u ire m e n ts were l i k e ”a sp h y x ia tin g ’ g a s ,1 1 m ain tain ed th a t p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n follo w ed th is! Jprem ise of T hucydides: ! *. . . judging from the evidence which I am a b le to ] t r u s t , a f t e r most c a r e f u l in q u iry , I should im agine th a t form er ages were n o t g r e a t in t h e i r wars or i n : an ything e l s e *35 T his c r iti c is m has managed to hang on as s o c ia l em phasis i land a cu rricu lu m b u i l t around contem porary problem s became i .in c re a s in g ly em phasized. I 3*+Whitney, o p. c i t . , pp . 88-89* 3?Louis E . L ord, t!G la s s ic s and th e A sphyxiating Gas •of th e E d u c a tio n a l R eq u irem en ts,” School and S o c ie ty . : 5:3 3 6 , March 2 M * , 1917* ! The b e lie f t h a t th e p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n of iteach e rs was fo re ig n to th e l i b e r a l a r ts c o lle g e was im p lied in many o f th e c r itic is m s * Sometimes th i s was openly s t a t e d . A fte r th e d e a th of th e founder of th e Colle*ge of T eachers a t Johns Hopkins U n iv e rs ity in th e l a t e ’tw e n tie s , c e r t a i n l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs . . . c a lle d on P re s id e n t Ames to p o in t o u t th a t th e time was opportune to abandon th e whole a p p a ra tu s ; of in s tr u c tio n f o r te a c h e rs as som ething f o re ig n to th e o r ig in a l purpose of th e U n iv e rsity and in c o n s is te n t w ith i t s c h ie f aim of s c h o la rly r e s e a r c h .3® At ab o u t th e same tim e , th e p re s id e n t of th e U n iv e rs ity of C a lif o r n ia , r e f e r r in g to te a c h e r tr a i n i n g , re p o rte d th a t 1 1 . . . i t i s n o t th e fu n c tio n of th e u n iv e r s ity to t r a i n f o r t h is s e r v i c e .1 * In a d d itio n , he o b je c te d to th e fo llo w in g s itu a tio n s ! The U n iv e rsity of C a lif o r n ia , S o u th ern B ranch, ! sta n d s alone among th e sta n d a rd u n i v e r s i t i e s of j A m erica, and I su sp e c t of the w o rld , i n having as an ! in tim a te p a r t of i t s e l f a c o lle g e fo r th e tr a in in g of elem en tary and k in d e rg a rte n t e a c h e r s . 3 7 The d e p re s s io n du rin g th e ’t h i r t i e s and th e r e s u l t a n t su rp lu s of te a c h e rs brought f o r th an o th er su g g e stio n 3^John C. F rench, A H isto ry o f th e U n iv e rsity Founded by Johns Hopkins T B altim ore: The Johns Hopkins !P r e s s , l9*+6), pp. 1?7-!?S. i 37w. W. C am pbell, 1 1 Annual R eport of the P re s id e n t of the U n iv e rs ity , 192^-1925 and 1925*1926,1 1 U n iv e rsity of C a lif o r n ia B u lle tin . T hird S e r ie s , Volume 2 0 , No. 7> 1 January 1927, p . v i . th a t th e tim e was apropos fo r l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s to ] r e lin q u is h te a c h e r - tr a in in g p r o g r a m s . P re d e c e sso rs of | th e H utchins v iew p o in t th a t p ro fe s s io n a l sch o o ls in c lu d in g | sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n should be co m p letely d iv o rce d from the c o lle g e s were a lre a d y i n e v i d e n c e . 39 The g e n e ra l n o tio n th a t te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n was a li e n to th e l i b e r a l i ia r ts was co n sid ered 1 1 n o t uncommon** i n academic c i r c l e s — ' )| A p a r ti c u la r ly in th e h u m a n itie s .^ j In th e p e rio d p r io r to 1900 th e a s s e r tio n was made J i t h a t th e re was no sc ie n c e o f e d u c a tio n . In the p e rio d under d is c u s s io n , th e c r itic is m in t h i s a re a was m odified 1 \ i ‘ I somewhat to s a y , i n e f f e c t , t h a t th e s c i e n t i f i c a sp e c ts of , j e d u c a tio n were n o t as y e t e s ta b lis h e d and th e p ro fe s s o rs ! 3 8*. Monroe Stow e, f,L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g es and th e J P ro fe s s io n a l P re p a ra tio n o f High School Teacher s , fl School < and S o c ie ty . 38:^35-37> Septem ber 3 0 , 1933* O f. Edmund D. , S o p er, tfThe R e s p o n s ib ility of th e L ib e ra l A rts C ollege and ! • th e C ollege of E d u catio n i n Teacher T r a in in g ,1 1 A sso c ia tio n j of American C o lle g es B u lle tin . 19s117-18, March, 1933* The 'v ie w p o in t, t h a t l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s should r e lin q u is h .te a c h e r tr a in in g program s, was n o t w ith o u t o p p o sitio n w ith - jin the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e . Soper w rote? flW hy should a , c o lle g e o f l i b e r a l a r ts ac c e p t th e r e s p o n s i b i li ty to t r a i n 1 te a c h e rs ? May I answer fo r many l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e men | by say in g th a t they a c c e p t t h i s r e s p o n s i b i li ty w ith e n th u - : siasm because they b e lie v e th e l i b e r a l a r ts c o lle g e s can t r a i n te a c h e rs b e tt e r th a n i t can be done in c o lle g e s of ed u catio n .* 1 However, t h i s type of comment was found to be . th e e x c e p tio n . OQ I -’"For exam ple, see Max McConn, C o lleg e or K in d erg ar— ten ? (Hew York: The Hew R e p u b lic , I n c . , 1929), p . 37* o f e d u c a tio n a c te d as though th ey w ere. This c r it ic is m som etimes took th e form of a sim ple statem en t such as one a t tr i b u te d to P re s id e n t B urton—"You E d u catio n men ex ag g er-' t a te th e im portance o f your work."****' Other sta te m e n ts were more to the p o in t. Gay le y , i n 1910, w rote ab o u t p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n who preached " . . • s o -c a lle d law s, p rin c ip le s , m ethods, n o t y e t concurred in by the w ise , n o t y e t p o s s ib le b2 to be d e riv e d from f a c t s n o t y e t a s c e r ta in e d . . . ." P aul S horey, em inent c l a s s i c i s t , had th is to say i n 1917« The seem ingly in v id io u s 'p s e u d o -sc ie n c e , ’ th e n , i s in ten d ed only as a f a i r c h a r a c te r iz a tio n of th e mon s tro u s d is p ro p o rtio n betw een th e p re te n s io n s o f p ed a g o g ical psychology, or th e sc ie n c e of e d u c a tio n , and i t s v e r if ia b le ach iev em en ts. I t would be ung en er ous and i l l i b e r a l to p re s s t h i s p o in t i f the a d e p ts of th e sc ie n c e fra n k ly ad m itted th a t th ey are p io n e e rs on th e f r o n t ie r s of p h y sio lo g y and psychology, te n ta tiv e ly w orking i n g ra d u ate la b o r a to r ie s and sem inars toward a p o s s ib le sc ie n c e of th e f u tu r e . But they f a l l back to th a t bombproof only when h ard p re sse d in th e open. They make very d i f f e r e n t claim s when th e y app ear b efo re l e g i s l a t u r e s , p a r e n ts ' m eetings and te a c h e r s ’ a s s o c i a tio n s , or in the c o m p ila tio n of th e tex tb o o k s which th ey compel a l l te a c h e rs to study .^*3 S horey, lik e P ro fe ss o r F ite in 1911, c r i t i c i z e d the s t a t i s t i c a l methods employed i n th e f i e l d of e d u c a tio n . He a ls o brought up one o th e r o b je c tio n which has had some ^ W h itn e y , op. c i t . , p . 9b. up ^ G a y le y , p p . c i t .« p p . 136- 3 7. ^ P a u l S horey, "The A ssa u lt on Humanism (1 1 )," The A tla n tic M onthly. 120s98, J u ly , 1917. 8 1 re o ccu re n ce; humans were being used f o r e x p e rim e n ta l purposes* Inasmuch as th e p h ilo so p h y and methodology of John Dewey has been h e ld re s p o n s ib le fo r 1 1 tam pering w ith the so u ls of c h il d r e n ,1 1 th e fo llo w in g o b s e rv a tio n w r itte n by S ir Joshua F itc h in 1901 i s p e r tin e n ts There i s no u n ifo rm ity in the methods or m achinery o f e d u c a tio n in th e s t a t e s . But in i t s s te a d th e re p r e v a ils much o f the lo c a l p a tr io tis m , which makes each of th e le a d in g com m unities proud of i t s own i n s t i t u t io n s , and k een ly s o lic ito u s to produce such exam ples o f good work as may prove w orthy o f im ita tio n in o th e r s t a t e s and c i t i e s . . . . Hence America may be regard ed as a la b o ra to ry i n which e d u c a tio n a l experim ents are being t r i e d o u t on a g re a t s c a le . . I t would app ear th a t exp erim en ts in v o lv in g 1 1 humanstf a n te d a te d th e em inence of John Dewey. This i s , o f c o u rse , | n o t subm itted as ,fp ro o fM th a t John Dewey d id not in flu e n c e ■the ex p e rim e n ta l movement. i A nother charge was added In 191*+. S chools o f e d u c a tio n were accused of being a n t i - r e l i g i o u s o r , a t - le a s t, i r r e l i g i o u s . J A lthough, in fre q u e n t re fe re n c e s or Im p lic a tio n s were made on t h i s s c o r e , t h i s charge has never re c e iv e d much backing from l i b e r a l a r t s p ro f e s s o r s . Lay c r i t i c s , w ritin g fo r mass consum ption, a re more prone ^ S i r Joshua P itc h , quoted in I . L. K andel, "TJni- v e r s ity Study of E d u c a tio n ,1 1 Tw enty-Five Y ears o f American E d u c a tio n , I . L. K andel, e d ito r (New Y ork: The M acm illan iC o., 192*0, pp. 3 1 -3 2 . **5W . A. H arp er, 1 1 The M istakes of Pedagogy,M E d u c a tio n . 3*+*366, F eb ru a ry , 191^• 8 2 to b rin g th is q u e stio n to th e f o r e f r o n t, p a r ti c u la r ly when d e a lin g w ith th e cu rricu lu m o f th e p u b lic s c h o o ls . The charge th a t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n used su p e r- flu o u s te c h n ic a l term s was en countered a s e a rly as 1917* T his c r itic is m has been alm ost alw ays p re s e n t in more re c e n t a tta c k s on sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . ,# Pedagese*,f was s a id to a r is e from th e la c k of genuine c o n te n t in th e f i e l d o f e d u c a tio n ; i t served as a co ver-up fo r th e t r i v i a l n a tu re of the stu d y o f e d u c a tio n and to im press the g e n e ra l p u b lic . Are p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n the only ,fe x p e rts ” in th e f i e l d o f ed u catio n ? A n e g a tiv e answer was a p p a re n t !when academic f a c u l t i e s viewed 1 1 . . . w ith je a lo u sy any ■attem pt on th e p a r t o f the departm ent o f e d u c a tio n to give c o u rse s in m ethods in s p e c ia l s u b je c t s . ” * * 7 F u rth erm o re, kfl S horey, a tta c k e d th e assum ption o f the e d u c a tio n is ts th a t th ey were ”e x p e rts 1 1 in c e r ta in s u b je c t-m a tte r a r e a s . H is ta r g e t was F lex n er whose w ritin g s p r i o r to 1917 had e x e rte d in flu e n c e toward de-em phasizing th e c l a s s i c s . T h is, by th e way, i s an o th er charge th a t was placed a g a in s t p ro fe s s o rs ^ S h o r e y , op. c i t . , p . 98. ^ F r e d e r ic k E . B o lto n , ”The O rg a n izatio n of the D epartm ent of E d u ca tio n in R e la tio n to th e O ther D ep art m ents in C o lleg es and U n i v e r s i t i e s ,1 1 Jo u rn a l o f Pedagogy. 19s1^9, December, 1906--M arch, 1907* **%horey, p p . c i t . , p . 9^. o f e d u c a tio n . I t was sa id in p la in language th a t they had ho M . . . s l a i n th e c l a s s i c s d ep a rtm e n t. ”^ 7 j A nother a l le g a tio n , made i n 1916, was found in th e C la s s ic a l J o u rn a ls The f a c t i s th a t a t the p re s e n t tim e th e re i s a wide sp read tendency to i n s i s t upon w hat, by oxymoron, may be term ed th e s u p e r io r ity o f th e m ed io cre. The dean o f a c e r ta in school o f e d u c a tio n has even d e c la re d in p r in t th a t m ediocre s tu d e n ts make th e b e s t te a c h e r s :5® T his a s s e r tio n has n o t been re p e a te d to any g re a t e x te n t. To th o se in the f i e l d o f e d u c a tio n , th e charge i s p a te n tly 'f a l s e . L i t e r a ll y ream s and reams of p ap e rs have been .w ritte n which a re d ir e c te d tow ard a t t r a c t i n g th e b e s t :s tu d e n ts to th e f i e l d of te a c h in g . The e r r o r of th e t c r i t i c s —s e le c tin g a n o n -re p re s e n ta tiv e u tte r a n c e and im p u tin g to i t ”w idespread tendency”—has appeared much too o fte n in th e c r itic is m s made by l i b e r a l a r t s p ro f e s s o r s . Among o th e r charges to g a in prom inence d u rin g th is p e rio d was the charge of o v erlap p in g in c o u rse s of e d u c a tio n . I t appeared from th e p re se n t se a rc h th a t the ^ D e V ote, ®&. c i t . , P . 187. ^ G i l b e r t G. S co g g in , "Old Schools f o r Hew," The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l, 12286, November, 1916. ^ B e s t o r , how ever, did make an alm o st i d e n t i c a l c h a rg e . See A rthur E . B e sto r, E d u c a tio n a l W astelands (Urbanas U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s P re s s , 1953)) pp . Il8 -1 9 * 2 2 0, 221. m- e d u c a tio n is ts had c r i t i c i z e d them selves on t h i s sc o re much b e fo re th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs made th i s p a r tic u l a r c r it i c i s m a p a r t of t h e i r sta n d a rd " a r t i l l e r y This c r iti c is m became "w ell-u sed " in th e e a r ly 't h i r t i e s . P re s id e n t C. C. L i t t l e p u t i t t h i s way: The a t t i t u d e of one w ise C hinese s tu d e n t, who, on coming to one of our u n i v e r s i t i e s , e n te re d th e C ollege of E d u catio n w i l l e x p la in th e s itu a tio n * He s a id , *1 tak e E d u ca tio n 72 , I tak e E d u ca tio n 73> I ta k e Educa t i o n 107, I ta k e E d u catio n 108, I tak e E d u ca tio n 3^2, I tak e E d u ca tio n 3^3; a lle e samee th in g * I q u i t * 1 The g e n tle O rie n ta l h ad, in a few w ords, punctu red the la rg e and w ell-know n bubble o f 'padded* co u rses and o f d u p lic a tio n * 53 There seems to have been g e n e ra l agreem ent th a t th e re was c o n sid e ra b le o v e rla p p in g in sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . W hether or n o t th is was u n d e s ira b le was som etim es debated b u t, on th e w hole, i t was acknowledged as a weakness by th e e d u c a tio n is ts . The problem i s s t i l l w ith u s . S chools o f e d u c a tio n a re a tte m p tin g to m eet the problem by fu sio n of c o u rs e s . However, when o v erla p p in g i s s a id to be "dear to the h e a r t of th e p ed ag o g ical sp e c ia lis t" ^ 1 * * the c r itic is m 5^For exam ple, see C h arles Hughes Jo h n sto n , "Tend e n c ie s in C ollege D epartm ents o f E d u c a tio n ," E d u c a tio n a l Review* 38*189, S eptem ber, 1909* 5 3 ciaren ce Cook L i t t l e , The Awakening C o lleg e (Hew Y ork: W. W . Morton and C o ., 1930), p . 1 ^ . I t should be noted th a t P re s id e n t L i t t l e was h o s ti le to th e academ icians as w e ll. ^ F r e d e r ic k P. R obinson, "Some Problem s in Teacher T ra in in g ," P ro ceed in g s o f th e N in eteen th Annual M eeting of th e A s s o c ia tio n of Urban U n iv e r s itie s , Tenth R e p o rt, 1932, p . 1H-2. 85 i s s u re ly overdraw n. Nowhere in e d u c a tio n a l l i t e r a t u r e or p r a c tic e could th is be s u b s ta n tia te d . S ta te laws which re q u ire d "hours in e d u c a tio n 1 1 fo r c e r t i f i c a t i o n were a tta c k e d d u rin g t h is p e r io d . An educa tio n a l b u re au cra cy , headed by p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n , was h eld re s p o n s ib le fo r th e se re q u ire m e n ts. Comments on re q u irem en ts in e d u c a tio n were found as e a rly as 1916 when one c r i t i c proclaim ed th a t i n one s t a t e no p erso n was lic e n s e d to te a c h i n a h ig h sch o o l who had ". . . not pursued th re e y e a rs of p ed ag o g ical s tu d ie s ."5 5 E x a c tly what was meant by " th re e y e a rs 1 1 was n o t made c le a r but th e [requirem ents were la b e le d an " a b s u rd ity 1 *—and t h i s " a b s u r d ity ," i t was a s s e r te d , p re v a ile d in o th e r s t a t e s . In 1917* 2jord d e c la re d t h a t th orough m astery of th e s u b je c t to be ta u g h t, th e s in e qua non of e n th u s ia s tic and e ffe c tiv e te a c h in g , was menaced " . . . b y re c e n t e d u c a tio n a l r e q u ir e ments com pelling a te a c h e r to know how to te a c h a s u b je c t, b u t n o t p ro v id in g fo r any knowledge of th e s u b je c t ta u g h t."^ 6 (The q u e stio n o f th e la c k o f s u b je c t-m a tte r re q u irem en ts in c e r t i f i c a t i o n laws is tak en up l a t e r in t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n .) A com m ittee of th e American Chem ical S o c ie ty re p o rte d th a t th e u s u a l req u irem en t f o r high school 5 5 "If I Were a C o lleg e P r e s id e n t," op,, c i t . . p . 6^-. ^ L o r d , o£. c i t . , p . 3 3 5. 8 6 te a c h in g was tw e n ty -e ig h t hours of p r o f e s s io n a l c r e d i t . T his com m ittee found t h a t : 1 1 W hile s t a t e laws a re n o t a l l a lik e y e t n e a rly everyw here th e demands of th e p r o fe s s io n a l c r e d its en croach on p ro p e r p re p a ra tio n i n th e m ajor sub j e c t x p 7 Most o f the c r itic is m s co n cern in g e d u c a tio n a l req u irem en ts were p re se n te d in a s im ila r v e in ; th a t i s , in a s tra ig h tfo rw a rd , m a n n e r-o f-fa c t m anner. Borne, however, p re se n te d a s s e r tio n s i n an o v e r-g e n e ra liz e d m anner. Here i s such an exam ple: “No e d u c a tio n a l system can s u rv iv e , i t s te a c h e rs load ed w ith tw enty to s ix ty h o u rs of e d u c a tio n as a g a in s t te n of th e s u b je c t to be ta u g h t.M ^8 The c e r t i f i c a t i o n p ic tu re in th e U nited S ta te s has alw ays been v a rie d and complex as th e a u th o r ity f o r c e r t i f i c a tio n has moved from c ity a u th o r it ie s to county a u th o r i t i e s and f i n a l l y to s t a t e departm ents o f e d u c a tio n . S p l i t a u th o r ity ( e .g . c o u n ty - s ta te ) in some l o c a l i t i e s co n trib u ted to t h i s confused p i c t u r e . There are s t i l l hundreds of k in d s of te a c h e r s 1 c e r t i f i c a t e s th a t are iss u e d th ro u g h o u t th e c o u n try . I t would seem from g e n e ra l ac q u ain ta n ce w ith ^ “P re lim in a ry R eport of th e Committee on E d u c a tio n a l S tan d ard s f o r High School C h em istry , 1 1 Committee of the Am erican Chem ical S o c ie ty , Prank B. Wade, chairm an, Jo u rn a l of Chem ical E d u c a tio n . 3*1181, O ctober, 1925# ^Raymond H older W heeler, “The C r is is in E d u c a tio n ,1 1 S chool and S o c ie ty . 3 8 :7 5 8 , December 9, 1933» 87 c e r t i f i c a t i o n re q u ire m e n ts t h a t many a s s e r tio n s of e x c e ssiv e re q u irem en ts in e d u c a tio n (such as th e one quoted above) were based on a d is to r t e d p ic tu r e of the le g a l s ta tu s of c e r t if ic a t i o n * However, i t was im p o ssib le to e s ta b l is h th i s th e s i s inasm uch as th e c r i t i c s d id n o t document or d e t a i l t h e i r claim s* The most fre q u e n t c r it ic i s m t h a t emerged d u rin g th e p e rio d from 1900 to 1933 was t h a t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n , th ro u g h p o l i t i c a l m eans, had assumed to o much pow er. They were d e sc rib e d many tim es as th e d ir e c to r s of a M t r u s t " which co m p letely c o n tro lle d the p u b lic sc h o o ls . $9 W ithin u n i v e r s i t i e s th ey were fe a re d "a s one of th e powers behind th e t h r o n e " ^ as e a r ly as 1916* F re q u e n tly sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n were charged w ith g e ttin g to o la rg e a p o r tio n o f the u n iv e r s ity b u d g e t .^ T his was accom plished th rough th e su p p o rt of a w e ll- o ile d p o l i t i c a l machine which 59j?or exam ple, see John R o b ert Moore, "The Menace of th e T e a c h e rs1 C o lle g e ," C u rre n t H is to r y * 36*298-301, Ju n e, 1932. C f. W illiam C. B agley, " P ro fe s s o rs of E d u catio n and T h eir Academic C o lle a g u e s," The M athem atics T each er* 23*277, May, 1930. "An o u tsta n d in g f e a tu r e o f the p re s e n t educa ti o n a l s i t u a tio n i n th e U nited S ta te s i s th e alm ost e x c lu s iv e c o n tro l of e d u c a tio n a l p o lic ie s and program s i n th e low er sch o o ls by what I may c a l l th e E d u c a tio n a l g e n e ra l i s t s . 1 These com prise the p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n in our u n i v e r s i t i e s , c o lle g e s , and te a c h e r - tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s , to g e th e r w ith a d m in is tr a to r s , s u p e rv is o rs , and re s e a rc h - w orkers in th e p u b lic -s c h o o l s e r v ic e ." 6 0 » if 1 Were a C ollege P r e s id e n t," op. c i t . , p . 6N-. 6lQe V oto, op. c i t . , p . 155; G. Wakeham, " ^Educa t i o n 1 and th e C ollege P ro fe s s o r ," S chool and S o c ie ty , 2 6 :8 1 3 , December _ 2 M > , 1927. _ . ... in clu d ed te a c h e r s , p r in c ip a ls , and s u p e rin te n d e n ts acco rd in g to th e c r i t i c s . T his s i t u a t io n a s s e r te d ly r e s u lte d in h ig h e r s a la r ie s f o r p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n ; a ls o , i t 1 1 s ta rv e d 1 1 the academ ic d ep artm en ts and i n t e r f e r e d w ith re s e a rc h p r o je c ts in o th e r d e p a r tm e n ts .^ C r itic is m was p a r ti c u l a r ly p o in te d to th e summer s e s s io n s where p r o f e s s io n a lis m 1 1 (due to c o n tro l by sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n ) was s a id to be ram pant. C onnected w ith th e supposed p o l i t i c a l power of p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n was th e charge t h a t th e y d e l i b e r a te ly s t i f l e d c r i t i c i s m and su p p ressed i n f o r m a tio n ,^ F u rth erm o re, they were a tte m p tin g to e n la rg e t h e i r powers by fo rc in g p ro fe s s o rs in o th e r f i e l d s to ta k e c o u rse s in i [e d u catio n , A c r i t i c who would give sch o o lm asters a c h a n c e --1 1 to hang them selves*1--h a d th is to say* The s e c r e t i s o u t, and by adm issio n of th e i n te r e s te d p a r t i e s , v i z , , th o se who p r o f i t from bending th e knee to the god o f members of e d u c a tio n d ep a rtm e n ts, ju n io r c o lle g e s a re being encouraged and used by d epartm ents of e d u c a tio n i n o rd e r to fu r n is h p ro fe s s io n a l sch o o lm asters an e f f e c tiv e e n try in to the f i e l d of h ig h e r e d u c a tio n , w hich th ey d e s ire to dom inate i n th e same manner i n which th ey now c o n tro l the prim ary and secondary realm s,®1 * ^ L i t t l e , on. c i t . , p . 155$ Wake ham, l o c . c i t . ^3paul S horey, 1 1 The A ssau lt on Humanism, I,*1 The A tla n tic M onthlyT 119*799, Ju n e, 1917; Jo n e s, o p . c i t . , p . 360. ^ C h a r le s Roger. H ick s, r,Give the S choolm asters a Chance,*1 School and S o c ie ty . ^8sVfr2T Septem ber 9, 1933* 89 L ib e ra l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs were d e f in i t e l y concerned about t h is movement inasm uch as two la n d -g r a n t u n i v e r s i t i e s a c tu a lly had s e t up fix e d re q u ire m e n ts f o r employment w hich in clu d ed co u rses in e d u c a tio n .65 One q u o ta tio n from an answ er to a q u e s tio n n a ire s e n t o u t by th e Morth C e n tra l A s s o c ia tio n i l l u s t r a t e d th e ty p ic a l a t t i t u d e of th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o r on th is m a tte rs W e tr y to g e t men who have n a tu r a l te a c h in g t a l e n t , and we ex p e ct them to develop t h a t each in h is own way. W e d o n ’t w ish a lo c k -s te p p ed a g o g ic al system , but w ish each man to develop acco rd in g to h is own g e n iu s. I f he f a i l s to d evelop a s u c c e s s fu l method of h is own we drop him , but we keep him as f a r as p o s s ib le from a l l ’sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n , 1 which have done more to debase th e s ta n d a rd s of s c h o la rs h ip i n t h i s country th a n any o th e r s in g le a g e n c y . 66 During th e c lo sin g y e a rs of th is p e rio d , s e v e ra l is o la te d c r itic is m s appeared in th e l i t e r a t u r e . In clu d ed were ch arg es th a t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n : (1 ) lack ed i d e f in ite aims and o b je c tiv e s f o r the 1 1 v a rio u s le v e ls ” of e d u c a tio n and were in c o n s is te n t i n t h e i r sta te m e n ts on such m a t t e r s $ ^ (2 ) ru in e d the v alue of th e 65c. D. Bohannan, ”Improvement o f C ollege I n s tr u c t i o n , ” The P hi D elta Kannan. 10:161, A p ril, 1928. ^ ^ u n id e n tifie d p ro fe ss o r of h is to r y and departm ent h ea d , quoted in "The P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g of C ollege T e a c h e rs,” r e p o r t p rep ared by M. E . H ag g erty , The Morth C e n tra l A sso c ia tio n Q u a rte rly . 2 :1 1 6 , Ju n e, 1927. 67L i t t l e , o p . c i t . , pp. 152-53 and I 6O5 a ls o see R o b ert Gordon S p ro u l, "The R e la tio n of th e U n iv e rsity to Problem s and P r a c tic e in E d u c a tio n ,” C a lif o r n ia Q u a rte rly o f Secondary E d u c a tio n . 6 :1 ^ 0 . Ja n u a ry , 1931* 90 Ph.D . d e g r e e ; ^ (3) promoted 1 1 new t e s t s ” which were, u n s a t i s f a c t o r y ; ^ (4) p aid to o much a tte n t io n to ad m in is t r a t i o n and ro u tin e s of sch o o l m anagem ent;'70 and (5) e s ta b lis h e d them selves as th e 1 1 so le judge” o f what 7 1 c o n s titu te d p r o f e s s io n a l t r a i n i n g / By 1933, o p p o s itio n to sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n appeared to be g a in in g s t e a d i l y . The e d u c a tio n is ts responded w ith a mammoth e f f o r t to an aly ze t h e i r own p o s itio n . T his was p re se n te d in th e N a tio n a l Survey of th e E d u catio n of T e a c h e rs. A lthough th e re were many com m ittee e f f o r t s by academ icians which d e a lt w ith th e problem of te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n , th e ta s k of c r y s t a ll i z i n g th e o p p o s itio n to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n was l e f t to the American A ss o c ia tio n of U n iv e rsity P ro f e s s o r s . The r e p o r t of ”Committee Q— R equired C ourses i n E d u ca tio n ” was th e most im p o rtan t group ^^W hicker, o p , c i t . , p . 533* This charge had p re v i o u sly been made by F ite T op, c i t . , p . 207) who, in 1911, hung th e la b e l ”Ph.D. m i ll s ” on sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . There was a ls o o p p o s itio n to th e use of th e A.B. degree by sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . An a r t i c l e i n 1920 attem p ted to m eet th is o p p o s itio n by showing th a t th e A.B. d e g re e , from i t s in c e p tio n in th e l a t e M iddle Ages, was a t e a c h e r 's d e g re e . See F le tc h e r H. S w ift, ”The T e a c h e rs’ B a c c a la u re a te ,” T eachers C ollege R ecord. 2 1 :2 5 -5 0 , Ja n u a ry , 1920 and Jacob M eyer, Sm all C o lleg es and T eacher T ra in in g (Bloom ington: P u b lic S chool P u b lish in g C o ., 1928), pp. 111-112. 6% eV oto, pp. c i t . . pp. 187-88* ? ° L i t t l e , op. c i t . . p . 152. ^ J o n e s , op. c i t . . p . 36M -. 91 e f f o r t d ire c te d tow ard th e r e a l i z a t i o n of g o als im p lied by academ icians in t h e i r c r it i c i s m . The r e p o r t of Committee Q i s handled in the n ex t c h a p te r o f t h i s s tu d y . I I I . ANALYSES OF TH E PROBIEM The only im p o rtan t a n a ly s is found i n th e l i t e r a t u r e o f t h i s p e rio d (by P ro fe sso r B en n ett) i s d e sc rib e d in C hapter V. M ention should be made, how ever, of an a d d ress by C. H. Judd a t a n a tio n a l co n v en tio n of th e Am erican A s s o c ia tio n of U n iv e rs ity P ro fe s s o r s . The a t t i t u d e of th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs was e s s e n t i a l l y ro o te d i n th e em otions acco rd in g to th i s p s y c h o lo g is t. Using p rim itiv e people as a b a s is f o r com parison Judd s ta te d : i F a c u ltie s o fte n a c t c o l l e c t i v e l y in a fa s h io n w hich t m ust be d e sc rib e d as b lin d fu ry a g a in s t newcom ers. O utside th e f i e l d s of t h e i r s p e c ia liz a tio n th ey show a l l th e marks o f im m a tu rity . They grow re d in t h e i r f a c e s , thus e x h ib itin g a su re mark o f r e v e r s io n to the p r im itiv e . They use v io le n t lan g u ag e, w hich r e lie v e s th e i n t e r n a l te n s io n s r e s u ltin g from th e e x c e ssiv e a c t i v i t y of t h e i r d u c tle s s g la n d s . They mix t h e i r egos w ith t h e i r th in k in g , th u s d e s tro y in g th e lo g ic a l b alan ce which i s o th e rw ise c h a r a c t e r is t i c o f t h e i r m ental l i v e s . 72 How much of th is was w r itte n "w ith a tw in k le i n th e eye1 1 i s , of c o u rse , unknown. However, Judd m ust have been s e rio u s about th e fo llo w in g words Inasmuch as he was 72c. H. Judd, "Psychology o f th e le a rn in g P ro ce sse s a t H igher L e v e ls," A.A.U .P. B u l le tin . 18:116, F ebruary, 1932. d i r e c tl y concerned w ith e d u c a tio n a l ex p erim en ts a t th e c o lle g e le v e l in which i t was found t h a t th e s iz e of th e c la s s had no b e a rin g on s tu d e n t achievem ent in many su b je c ts* These fin d in g s were se v e re ly c r i t i c i z e d by l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . Judd s a id : . . * our m ature but frig h te n e d member b eg in s to b e a t th e a i r . U su ally . . . a f t e r th e f i r s t spasm, he begins to deny th e f a c t s . His n ex t lin e of a tta c k i s to c a l l th e in v e s tig a to r s who conducted th e ex p erim en ts by names d e riv e d from the c l a s s i c a l la n g u a g e s. At a l a t e r sta g e th e v e rn a c u la r i s drawn upon, w ith some a p p a re n t r e l i e f to th e em o tio n al s u f f e r e r . 73 I t is n o t n e c e ssa ry to p re s e n t a sem antic a n a ly s is of th e l i t e r a t u r e of th is c o n f li c t to conclude t h a t em otional f a c to r s have been in v o lv ed to a g r e a t d e g re e . IV . COMTRIBUTING CAUSAL FACTORS In 19C5, A.Ross H i l l , Dean of th e T eachers C ollege 1 of th e U n iv e rsity of M isso u ri, proposed a sch o o l of e d u c a tio n which would in c lu d e such s u b je c ts as manual tr a in in g and freeh an d drawing in i t s curriculum . Such pronouncem ents w idened th e n u m erical base o f th e o p p o si t i o n . Many p ro fe s s o rs who would n o t o b je c t t o , s a y , a 73i b i d . . p . 117. 7*+Albert Ross H i l l , "Should C h airs o f Pedagogy A ttach ed to C ollege D epartm ents Be Developed in to P ro fe s s io n a l C o lleg es fo r th e T ra in in g o f T ea ch ers, C o -o rd in a te w ith th o se o f Law, M edicine, and E n g in e e rin g , Or Should They Be A b o lish e d ,1 1 N.E.A. Jo u rn a l of P ro ceed in g s and A d d resses—1905. pp. 512-15. 93 co u rse in sch o o l management, would h aIk a t p la c in g manual tr a in in g in th e c o lle g e . P ro fe s s o rs firm ly opposed to p r o f e s s io n a l c o u rse s stre n g th e n e d t h e i r d e te rm in a tio n to keep the in flu e n c e of th e sch o o l o f e d u c a tio n a t the minimum. Other sta te m e n ts d id n o t h e lp th e s i t u a t io n . For exam ple, th is sta te m e n t by a le a d in g p ro fe s s o r o f ed u catio n , w r itte n in 1916, c e r ta in ly aro u sed th e antagonism of th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe e s o rs : I t seems very e v id e n t t h a t th e alm ost u n iv e rs a l o p p o s itio n of c o lle g e s th ro u g h o u t the land to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n and the o th e r newer sch o o ls which have been se p a ra te d from th e c o lle g e s i s due to th e f e a r oh the p a r t of th e l a t t e r t h a t soon th e re w ill be n o th in g l e f t f o r them to d o . 75 The o p p o s itio n to sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n was k e p t l iv e l y when p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n c r i t i c i z e d the te a c h in g methods o f th e ac ad em ician s. R e g a rd le ss of the t r u t h or f a l s i t y o f such c r it i c i s m s , te n s io n s could only be in c re a se d when bad penm anship, c a r e le s s n e s s , and i n a b i l i t y to e x p la in s u b je c t m a tte r was s a id to be c h a r a c t e r is t i c o f the l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe sso r The same h eld when p ro f e s s o r s o f e d u c a tio n c r i t i c i z e d th e l i b e r a l a r t s cu rricu lu m ?^W ill G rant Chambers, 1 1 The P ro fe s s io n a l School v s . th e C ollege i n th e Teaching o f Secondary T e a c h e rs ,1 1 School and S o c ie ty . *+:657, O ctober 28, 1916. 7^B olton, o p , c i t . , pp. l?2 -?3 * 9^ as tr a in in g ”to memorize u s e le s s f a c t s ab o u t b u rie d c i v i l i z a t i o n ^ 1 1 ^ About 1905 th e norm al sch o o ls assumed th e re s p o n s i b i l i t y fo r tr a in in g secondary te a c h e r s —presum ably because the c o lle g e s would n o t give p r o f e s s io n a l t r a i n i n g . This developm ent was a m ajor c o n trib u tin g f a c to r to th e poor s c h o la rs h ip of th e secondary sch o o l te a c h e rs acco rd in g to « F i t z p a t r i c k ^ —and m ost of th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs o f th e 1920 *s would su b sc rib e to F itz p a tr ic k *s a n a ly s is . More th a n e v e r, th e n , th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs were determ ined to keep '‘norm al sch o o l in f lu e n c e s ,1 1 i . e . educa tio n d iv is io n s , o u t of the c o lle g e * From 1900 to 1920, c o lle g e academ ic departm ents were in c lo s e to u ch w ith t h e i r c o u n te rp a rts in th e h ig h schools* The chem istry p r o fe s s o r, f o r exam ple, c o n tro lle d methods 1 and m a te ria ls used in th e h ig h school ch em istry co u rse th ro u g h p e rs o n a l acq u ain ta n ce w ith , and in flu e n c e on, th e h ig h sch o o l ch e m istry te a c h e r. In th e 'tw e n tie s th e ^ C h a r le s A. P ro sse r and C h arles R. A lle n , Have W e Kent th e F a ith ? (Hew Y ork: Mew Y ork-C entury C o ., 1929), p . 130. ?% dward A. F i tz p a t r i c k , The S c h o la rsh ip of T eachers in Secondary S chools (Mew York: The M acm illan C o ., 1927), pp. 6 ^-6 5 . 95 c o lle g e p ro fe s s o r l o s t t h i s c o n t r o l . M o r e th a n lik e ly the growing com plexity of our s o c ie ty , th e grow th of p o p u la tio n , the em phasis on s p e c ia liz a tio n and r e s e a rc h , and th e g re a t in c re a s e in th e number of h ig h sch o o l te a c h e rs d e stro y e d t h i s p e rso n a l r e la ti o n s h i p . The ch em istry p r o f e s s o r s , how ever, tended to f i x the blame f o r t h e i r lo s s of c o n tr o l over th e h ig h sch o o l co u rse on p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n and th e 1 1 t r u s t . ” V. OTHER MANIFESTATIONS OF TH E FROBIEM When Henry Johnson was c a lle d to T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity in 1906 he found members of o th e r f a c u l t i e s of the u n iv e r s ity whose a t t i t u d e tow ard T eachers C o lleg e was much th e same as th e a t t i t u d e o f s c h o la rs tow ard norm al s c h o o ls . 1 1 The re was th e o ld f a m ilia r eo n- Q a f l i e t betw een e d u c a tio n and s c h o la r s h ip ,1 1 he w ro te . Johnson reco rd ed th e fo llo w in g in c id e n t which shows how t h i s c o n f lic t som etimes reached the e a rs of s tu d e n ts —in v i o la t io n of any sta n d a rd of p ro f e s s io n a l e t h i c s . On the opening day o f r e g i s t r a t i o n I step p ed in to th e o f f ic e o f P ro fe s s o r Dunning, head of th e G raduate Departm ent of H is to ry , Columbia U n iv e rs ity to pay my ^ j a c k P. Montgomery, 1 1 Does th e C o lleg e Teaeher in G eneral C hem istry Need T ra in in g i n Education?** Jo u rn a l of Chem ical E d u c a tio n . 7*2150, Septem ber, 1930. ^ H en ry Johnson, The O ther S ide of Main S t r e e t (New.York: Columbia U n iv e rsity P r e s s ,_ 19?3)> P . 200. 96 re s p e c ts to him . He ro se from h is desk to shake hands 4 and in th e m id st of a w aitin g group of s tu d e n ts asked w ith a tw in k le : f3e you th e guy what te a c h e s them m ethods in T eachers C ollege? W ell, . . . I recommended you but d o n 11 you ev er d are to say pedagogy o r peda g o g ic a l to m e .1 I knew from o f o ld th a t behind h is mockery was s e rio u s q u e stio n in g o f th e r i g h t o f an i n s t i t u t i o n lik e T eachers C ollege to e x i s t ; I met o th e r s c h o la rs whose d isap p ro v in g comments lack e d th e g race of humor. The m uch-lauded 1 1 f i f t h y e a r1 1 in C a lif o r n ia , fre q u e n t ly p ra is e d by e d u c a tio n is ts as th e u ltim a te in te a c h e r e d u c a tio n in t h i s p e rio d can be tra c e d to th e o p p o s itio n o f l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs acco rd in g to M onroe. He w ro te : The a t t i t u d e and s tre n g th of the l i b e r a l - a r t s group v a rie d . At th e U n iv e rs ity of C a lif o r n ia (B erk eley ) i t was s u f f i c ie n t l y pow erful to add a f i f t h y e a r to th e p re s e rv ic e e d u c a tio n of secondary te a c h e rs th u s p ro te c tin g i t s u n d erg rad u ate p r o g r a m . °2 When academ ic p ro fe s s o rs ta u g h t sp ec ia l-m e th o d s c o u rs e s , an a n ti- e d u c a tio n is t a t t i t u d e fre q u e n tly re v e a le d i t s e l f . One p r o f e s s o r , s a id to be ty p ic a l, i s a lle g e d to have begun h is co u rse i n t h i s m anner: I may as w e ll t e l l you a t th e s t a r t th a t I d o n 't b e lie v e in t h i s modern nonsense c a lle d pedagogy. What th o se of you who are going to te a c h in h ig h sch o o ls need i s n o t methods but to know your s u b je c t. The only re a so n I am g iv in g t h is co u rse is because th e s t a t e law re q u ir e s i t . « 3 8l I b i d . “ W alter S . Monroe, T eaching-L earning Theory and T eacher E d u c a tio n . 1890 to lg>50 (U rbana: U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s P re s s , 195 2 ), p . 321. ^ F l e t c h e r H. S w ift, 1 1 Co lie g e C ourses i n Methods o f Teaching H igh-S chool S u b je c ts ,1 * School and S o c ie ty . 6:691* December 15 , 1917* 97 C o u r s e s t a u g h t b y s u b j e c t - m a t t e r p r o f e s s o r s and l a b e l e d 1 1 A m e ric a n H i s t o r y f o r T e a c h e r s 1 1 and so f o r t h , d i f f e r e d fro m th e s t a n d a r d 1 1 A m e ric a n H i s t o r y 1 1 c o u r s e i n name o n l y , gh. a c c o r d i n g t o J u d d . T h ese c o u r s e s w ere l a b e l e d 1 1 f o r t e a c h e r s 1 1 o n ly t o s a t i s f y s t a n d a r d i z i n g a g e n c i e s ( s u c h a s t h e N o r th C e n t r a l A s s o c i a t i o n ) o r s t a t e r e q u i r e m e n t s . O c c a s i o n a l l y t h i s 1 1 s u b t e r f u g e 1 1 w as n o t c o n f i n e d t o c o u r s e s i n s p e c i a l m e th o d s . J u d d h a d p e r s o n a l k n o w le d g e o f one c o l l e g e w h ic h c la im e d t h a t a c o u r s e i n F r e n c h l i t e r a t u r e s a t i s f i e d t h e r e q u i r e m e n t f o r h i s t o r y o f e d u c a t i o n . The b a s i s f o r t h e c o l l e g e fs c l a i m w as t h a t B o u s s e a u w as d i s c u s s e d s u f f i c i e n t l y i n th e c o u r s e t o g iv e s t u d e n t s a n 1 1 i n s i g h t 1 1 i n t o t h e h i s t o r y o f e d u c a t i o n . ^ ? L i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s c o n t i n u e d t o d e l a y t h e p ro g ra m s w h ic h p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w is h e d t o e n a c t . T h is was c l e a r l y show n a t M ic h ig a n , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h P r o f e s s o r W h itn e y ’s e f f o r t s t o e s t a b l i s h 36 a M odel S c h o o l . D e la y in g t a c t i c s w e re t h w a r t e d by s t a t e o r r e g i o n a l r e q u i r e m e n t s . The h i s t o r y o f th e C o l l e g e o f C h a r l e s t o n r e v e a l e d t h i s : » — ■ - 1 - X -- au. C h arles H . Judd, 1 1 The School of E d u c a tio n ,1 1 H igher E d u catio n in A m erica. Raymond A. K ent, e d ito r (B ostons Gwinn and C o ., 193°)* P* 173* 8^ I b id . 8^W hitney, ojs. e i t . . pp. 112 and 128. W ith some re lu c ta n c e d id th e C ollege make p ro v is io n s fo r co u rse s i n ed u catio n * Only a f te r th e S o u th ern A s s o c ia tio n had ru le d i n 1927 t h a t te a c h e rs i n sch o o ls on i t s a c c re d ite d l i s t m ust have a p re s c rib e d amount of p r o fe s s io n a l tr a in i n g was th e s u b je c t added to th e c u rric u lu m . I t was n o t u n t i l 1930 th a t c o u rse s in < *‘ accep ted f o r c r e d i t toward th e bache- A rfs c h iz o p h re n ic 1 1 c o n d itio n c h a ra c te r iz e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y fo r th e g e n e ra l c o n tro l and guidance o f p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e r s . I n only tw elve o u t of s ix ty c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s s tu d ie d by H utson in 1927 did th e departm ent o f e d u c a tio n have any c o n tro l o r in flu e n c e over th e e le c tio n of academ ic s u b je c ts by p ro s p e c tiv e t e a c h e r s .88 C o n tro l by th e 1 1 m ajor p ro fe s s o r1 1 p red o m in ated . T his was c o n sid e re d u n s a tis f a c to r y by H utson inasm uch a s h is stu d y , and o th e r s tu d i e s , showed t h a t te a c h e rs were fo rc e d to te a c h many d i f f e r e n t s u b je c ts ; h en ce, undue em phasis on the m ajor s u b je c t (a s u s u a lly happened) d id n o t a d e q u ately p re p a re th e p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e r. H utson found the g e n e ra l s i t u a t i o n to be much lik e t h a t a t th e U n iv e rs ity of M ichigan Trfhere th e C ollege of L i te r a t u r e , S c ie n c e , and th e A rts c o n tro lle d th e c u rric u lu m and c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f many 8 ? j # H. E a s te rb y , A H is to ry of the C ollege o f C h a rle sto n (C h arle sto n s T ru ste e s of th e C ollege of C h a rle s to n , 193 $ ), P* 200. 8 8 p e rc iv a l W. H utson, The S c h o la rs h ip of T eachers i n Secondary S chools (Hew Yorks The M acm illan C o ., 1927)> 99 o f th e p ro s p e c tiv e t e a c h e r s . ^9 H utson s ta te d : . . . i t seems th a t th e s tu d e n ts who a re going to te a c h fo llo w th e p r e s c r ip tio n of the c o lle g e o f l i b e r a l a r t s and in c lu d e th e n e c e ssa ry co u rse s i n pedagogy as p a r t of t h e i r f r e e e l e c ti v e s . But even when c o lle g e s of e d u c a tio n s e t up s u b je c t-m a tte r re q u ire m e n ts d i s t i n c t from th o se o f th e l i b e r a l - a r t s c o lle g e , th e re i s f re q u e n tly no assu ra n c e t h a t th e p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs w i l l ta k e them . They may g rad u ate i n l i b e r a l a r t s in s te a d , ta k in g as much pedagogy as they need to s a t i s f y s t a t e re q u ire m e n ts f o r a lic e n s e . . .90 Monroe, in a s im ila r v e in w ro te : In th e N a tio n a l Survey i t i s s ta te d t h a t in 76 p er c e n t of th e i n s t i t u t i o n s having a c o lle g e o f e d u c a tio n p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs m ight e n r o ll in o th e r c o lle g e s , ta k in g e d u c a tio n c o u rse s a s a means o f m eeting lic e n s in g and a c c re d itin g re q u ire m e n ts . In o th e r w ords, a f t e r tw e n ty -fiv e y e a rs of th e c o lle g e - o f - e d u c a tio n developm ent, th r e e - f o u r th s o f th e s e i n s t i t u tio n s m ain tain ed two a d m in is tr a tiv e o rg a n iz a tio n s fo r te a c h e r e d u c a tio n .91 The wide d iffe re n c e in o p in io n on t h i s m a tte r was shown in th e N a tio n a l Survey of the E d u ca tio n of T e a c h e rs. The fo llo w in g r e p l i e s were re c e iv e d to the s ta te m e n t, 1 1 The e d u c a tio n o f te a c h e rs should be under th e c o n tro l o f th e p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n and psychology” : ^ Academic in s tr u c to r s Y es: 2b% No: 77% E d u c a tio n in s tr u c to r s Y es: 90% No. 10$ ^ % h itn e y , op. c i t . . , p p . m - l - M f . 90H utson, o p . c i t . . p p . 132-33* 9lM onroe, op,, c i t . . p . 338. 9 2 g a r le U. R ugg, e t a l . , ”T eacher E d u ca tio n C u r r ic u l a , ” V o l. I l l o f th e N a tio n a l Survey o f th e E d u ca tio n o f T e a ch e r s, U. S . O ffic e o f E d u ca tio n B u lle t in 1933> No. 10, p p . 2J6-57* W ith com peting a d m in is tra tio n s and c o n f lic tin g v iew p o in ts i t i s no wonder t h a t L i t t l e d e sc rib e d the 1 1 commonest ty p e 1 1 o f r e la tio n s h ip betw een c o lle g e s of l i b e r a l a r t s and c o lle g e s o f e d u c a tio n as “ open o r g u e r i l l a w a rfa re . 1 1 ^3 C e rta in ly th is c o n d itio n m ust have in c re a se d c o n fu sio n on th e p a r t of the s tu d e n ts in t h e ir g e n e ra l approach to the stu d y of e d u c a tio n . I t would be im p o ssib le to fin d a s im ila r s i t u a t i o n fa c in g a s tu d e n t p re p a rin g f o r any o th e r f i e l d of end eav o r. The f a m ilia r “c r e d i ts and hours to be a rra n g e d ” was a n o th e r m a n ife s ta tio n o f th e o p p o s itio n . By a c tio n of the s ta te l e g i s l a t u r e in 1891, the Teacher *s Diploma g ra n te d by the U n iv e rs ity of M ichigan was g iv e n le g a l s t a t u s . Many s tu d e n ts sought t h i s diplom a because i t fre e d a p p lic a n ts fo r te a c h in g p o s itio n s i n M ichigan from a l l c e r t if y in g e x a m in a tio n s. Academic p r o f e s s o r s , through th e power of recom m endation, c o n tro lle d th e aw arding of th e T e a c h e r’s Diplom a. They were sa id to u se th i s power as a “c lu b ” to fo rc e p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs in to academ ic co u rse s w hich had l i t t l e a p p lic a tio n fo r h ig h -sc h o o l te a c h in g . The s i t u a t i o n g o t so bad th a t th e f a c u lty f i n a l l y ru le d i n 1901 * th a t tw e n ty -fiv e sem ester h ours was th e maximum t h a t any d e p a rt ment could r e q u ir e fo r a t e a c h e r ’s diplom a. Some academ ic i 9 3 L i t t l e , O P . C i t . , p . 152. 1 0 1 dep artm en ts circum vented th i s r u lin g by l i s t i n g many c o u rse s in th e c a ta lo g u e w ith ’ ’c r e d i ts and hours to be a rra n g e d . 1 1 Thus th e s tu d e n t could be 1 1 a d v ise d ” to ta k e more th a n the re q u ire d hours f o r th e T eacher fs Diplom a. The ex c ess would co u n t f o r g ra d u a tio n but n o t, su p e r f i c i a l l y a t l e a s t , f o r th e T e a c h e r’s Diplom a. The F a c u lty a tte m p te d to n u l l i f y t h i s d e fia n c e by p a ssin g more e x a c tin g r e s o lu tio n s in 1906. These r e s o lu tio n s lik e w ise f a i l e d to p r o te c t the s tu d e n ts from undue re q u ire m e n ts. F in a lly , in 1909, the power of recom m endations fo r th e T e a c h e r’s Diploma was v e ste d i n a com m ittee which c o n s is te d o f th e P re s id e n t of the U n iv e r s ity , th e Dean of th e L ite ra r y o h C o lle g e , and th e head of th e D epartm ent of E d u c a tio n . 7 V I. S U M M A R Y OF THE PERIOD A lthough the l i t e r a t u r e d id n o t p ro v id e com plete evid en ce of th e o p p o s itio n of l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n i n th e f i r s t decade o f th e 20th c e n tu ry , enough has been re c o rd e d to conclude t h a t th e e a r l i e r o p p o s itio n (p rio r to 1900) c o n t i n u e d .^ T hat t h i s jc o n clu sio n i s v a lid was a ffirm e d by th e f a c t th a t Judd, an ^ % h itn e y , op. c i t . . pp . 19^ - 9 6. ^M onroe would pro b ab ly d is a g re e w ith th is s t a t e m ent. He would p robab ly say t h a t th e common a t t i t u d e o f 1 l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs toward sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n was one o f in d if f e r e n c e . See Monroe, p p . c i t . , p . 209. # 1 0 2 e d u c a t i o n i s t , w r o te a n a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d “A t t a c k s o n D e p a r tm e n ts o f E d u c a tio n * 1 (he c o u ld h a v e a d d e d "By L i b e r a l A r t s P r o f e s s o r s ” ) i n 1911. D uring th e p e rio d 1910-1933 th e o p p o s itio n p e r s is te d and new elem en ts were b rought in ; e .g . e d u c a tio n c o u rse s were “ s n a p s ,” p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n had no a p p r e c ia tio n of the p a s t, e d u c a tio n is ts used su p e rflu o u s term in o lo g y , and th e re was o v e rla p p in g of co u rses in schools o f e d u c a tio n . From the language used by th e c r i t i c s , th e c o n te n t of th e c r it i c i s m s , and the freq u en cy of th e c r i t i c i s m , i t was a p p a re n t th a t the i n t e n s i ty of th e c o n f li c t had n o t d im in ish ed —in f a c t , th e re v e rs e appeared to be t r u e . By the end of th e p e rio d th e c r itic is m s had made t h e i r way in to th e pages of th e A .A .U .P . B u lle tin (see C hapter V ). The o p p o s itio n was c r y s t a ll i z e d w ith th e fo rm a tio n of Committee Q of th e Am erican A s s o c ia tio n of j U n i v e r s i t y P r o f e s s o r s . The c h a r g e t h a t p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n h ad g a in e d t o o m uch p o l i t i c a l p o w er i n th e u n i v e r s i t y a n d i n t h e e d u c a t i o n a l w o r ld a t l a r g e w as g i v e n t h e m o s t a t t e n t i o n by „ ■ p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d fro m 1901 t o 1933* P r a c t i c a l l y a l l o f t h e c r i t i c i s m s m ade i n t h i s i p e rio d have p e r s is te d to th e p re s e n t tim e . 96C. H. Judd, “A ttack s on D epartm ents of E ducation,*1 The E lem entary S chool T each er. 12:138-*+0, November, 1911 • 103 B ecause o f th e s u b j e c t iv e n a tu re o f s e l e c t i o n o f m a te r ia l and o th e r f a c t o r s i t was im p o s sib le t o * * p ro v etf th a t th e c r i t i c i s m s p r e se n te d in t h i s ch a p te r (and o th e r c h a p te r s ) were r e p r e s e n t a t iv e or common. N e v e r t h e le s s , a str o n g c a s e , by im p lic a t io n , can be made t h a t th e s e c r i t i c i s m s w ere n o t u n u su a l. T h is c a s e i s based on th e f o llo w in g s 1 . The c r i t i c s fr e q u e n tly a s s e r te d th a t t h e i r c o lle a g u e s agreed a lm o st unanim ously w ith them . I f t h e ir c la im s were n o t a t l e a s t somewhat p la u s ib le , th e p r o f e s s o r s , who were th e consum ers o f t h i s l i t e r a t u r e , would la u g h the c r i t i c s 1 1 ou t of c o u r t .1 * F urtherm ore, th e c la im • o f w id esp read su p p o rt to th e c r i t i c s was r a r e ly , i f e v e r , I c h a lle n g e d by th e e d u c a t io n i s t s . t 2 . The e d u c a t io n i s t s , when d e a lin g w ith t h i s 'problem , fr e q u e n tly acknow ledged t h a t th e o p p o s itio n was common. The same can be s a id about th o se who m a in ta in ed a n e u tr a l p o s it io n on t h i s m a tte r . (More l i t e r a t u r e by I I m id d le -o f -t h e - r o a d e r s 1 * w i l l be p r e se n te d l a t e r . ) 3* M a te ria l g a th e re d in the re s e a rc h fo r t h i s stu d y but n o t c ite d due to space lim ita tio n s and to avoid d u p lic a tio n tended to show th a t th e o p p o s itio n d u rin g t h i s p e rio d was w id esp re ad . P e r tin e n t l i t e r a t u r e , w r it t e n by l i b e r a l a r t s p r o fe s s o r s (en co u n tered in the se a r c h but n o t c i t e d ) r a r e ly had a n y th in g fa v o r a b le _ to _ s a y about s c h o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . CHAPTER V THE A.A.U.P, LO O KS AT SCHOOIS OP EDUCATION The o f f i c i a l p u b lic a tio n of th e American A sso c ia tio n of U n iv ersity P ro fe s s o rs , the B u lle tin * provides a v is io n of u n iv e rs ity thought and a c tio n . Among o th e r th in g s , the B u lle tin re p o rts th e o f f i c i a l proceedings of the A.A.U.P, and serves as a IT sounding board1 1 f o r the membership. A ll is s u e s of the B u lle tin were p erused. Two assum ptions were made in reg ard to the fin d in g s of t h i s se a rc h . F i r s t of a l l , the A,A,U,P, was assumed to be re p re s e n ta tiv e of the la rg e m a jo rity o f c o lle g e and u n iv e r s ity f a c u l t i e s o f the U nited S t a te s , A second assum ption, th a t the m a te ria l in the B u lle tin was re p re s e n ta tiv e of the outlook of the membership of the A,A,U,P, may w ell be open to more se rio u s q u e stio n than the f i r s t assum ption. I t i s no doubt tru e t h a t th e e d i t o r i a l p o lic ie s of such a p u b lic a tio n as the B u lle tin are la rg e ly c o n tro lle d by a sm all group of men. In n a tio n a l p u b lic a tio n s of t h i s ty p e, the e d i t o r , in p a r ti c u l a r , has much d is c re tio n a r y power as to what s h a ll be p u b lish e d . However, i t may be presumed t h a t th e A,A,U,P, membership would not t o l e r a t e fo r any le n g th of time a jo u rn a l which published m a te ria l which was out of harmony w ith the view points of the members. The B u lle tin was f i r s t p u blished in 1915. As fa r as the B u lle tin was concerned, th e re was no evidence of th e e x is te n c e of the problem under c o n s id e ra tio n u n t i l 1928. The f i r s t re fe re n c e , an address rendered a t th e in a u g u ra tio n of M. Lyle Spencer as p re sid e n t of the U n iv e rsity of W ashington, was frie n d ly to p ro fe ss o rs of education* On t h a t occasion Gordon A. Laing of th e Uni v e r s i t y of Chicago had th is to says But the papers th a t I have always o b jected to most stro n g ly and lis te n e d to w ith the g r e a te s t im patienee a re th ese in which s p e c ia l i s t s in o th er f i e l d s have a tta c k e d the p ro fe sso rs of education* For w ith very few ex cep tio n s the speakers have shown with the utm ost c le a rn e s s t h a t they were not in touch w ith th e l a t e s t th e o rie s of ed u catio n and were h o p elessly ig n o ra n t of what educators were try in g to d o .i The f i r s t a tta c k on schoo ls of ed u catio n appeared 1 o s h o rtly t h e r e a f t e r . In a r e p r i n t of an a r t i c l e which f i r s t appeared in the Wake F o re s t B u lle tin i t was a lle g e d 1 t h a t th e re were many Hfa k e rs 1 1 and ,fs h y s te rs ” in th e schools of ed u c a tio n . This was p a r t i a l l y excused, as seemed to be the fa sh io n of t h i s p e rio d , on the grounds th a t p ro fe s s io n a l edu catio n was a new f i e l d . Summer se ssio n was lab eled ni n t e l l e c t u a l in d ig e s tio n .” Dogmatic a s s e r tio n s of unproved d o c trin e s were a t t r i b u t e d to p ro fe sso rs of ^Gordon A. Laing, tfThe F unction of the U n iv e r s ity ,” A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 1M -S3H-9, May, 1928. ^Hubert McNeil P o te a t, 1 1 An E du catio n al C redo ,” A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . I1 * :513? November, 1928. 1 0 6 ed u c a tio n . The com plaint was lodged th a t high school grad u ates were not as w ell educated as they had been twenty y ears p re v io u sly and th is was a lle g e d ly due to the emphasis on method and v o c a tio n a l ism. The au th or saved h is most b itin g remarks to la s h out a g a in s t "fa d s1 1 in the tr a in in g o f te a c h e rs : And n ex t time they a tte n d summer s e s s io n they are confronted w ith an e n tir e ly new bag of t r i c k s , informed t h a t the r e p e r to ir e of a year ago has been consigned to the tra s h -h e a p , and made to b eliev e t h a t t h i s sp ecies of p re s tid ig ita tio n , t h is now you see a th e o ry , now you don *t, t h i s here today, gone tomorrow, t h i s irre s p o n s ib le and en d less tam pering w ith the so u ls of l i t t l e c h ild re n through the medium of a lle g e d new d is c o v e r i e s —they are made to b e lie v e , I say—th a t a l l th is jumble of n o v elty and n escience i s p ro g ress in educa t i o n . I t i s p re c is e ly the same s o r t of p ro g re ss as th a t made by the engine of an autom obile before the c lu tc h is engaged.3 The f i r s t a n a ly s is of the q u estio n appeared in k O ctober, 1929* In a m id d le -o f-th e -ro a d a r t i c l e which urged understan din g and c o o p e ra tio n , the author a sc rib e d the c o n f lic t to : 1. The charge, u s u a lly le v e le d a g a in s t any new movement, of low u t i l i t a r i a n i s m and an 1 1 appeal to the m u ltitu d e . n In t h i s case i t was a s s e rte d th a t the u su al h o s t i l i t y to new movements was strengthened by p ro fe sso rs 3I b i d . . p . 513. L. L. J . B ennett, 1 1 The Department of E ducation in the L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g e ,1 1 A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 15**4-53“57> iOctober, 1929. 107 o f ed u catio n who had too much enthusiasm fo r reform* 2 . The o u tsid e p re ssu re of s ta te le g is la tio n * This l e g i s l a t i o n , in f a c t , sa id to the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s th a t they must t r a i n te a c h e rs or lo se s tu d e n ts . 3 . The t h e o r e tic a l in c o m p a tib ility (held by many l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs ) between l i b e r a l and v o ca tio n al ed u c atio n . 4 . The fre q u e n t postponem ent, by s tu d e n ts , of the d e c isio n to e n te r the teach in g f i e l d u n t i l they were in t h e i r f i n a l c o lleg e y e a r. This led to a sudden in tr u s io n on academic c o u rse s. 5# The tr a in in g of academ icians. Extreme s u b je c t- m atter s p e c ia liz a tio n w ith emphasis on re se a rc h c re a te d a d i s lik e fo r d isc u ssio n s of methods of te a c h in g . 6 . The f a c t th a t most of th e p ro fe sso rs of j ed u catio n had form erly been high school te a c h e rs . The l i b e r a l a r ts p ro fe s so rs assumed **. . . th a t th ese people have a tta in e d no more th an th e low le v e l of sc h o la rsh ip t h a t is supposed to be the p o ssessio n o f the average p u b lic high school te a c h e r .1 1 I . REQUIRED COURSES IN EDUCATION—COMMITTEE Q Beginning w ith a m eeting on February 1, 1929, the Tulane C hapter of the A.A.U*P. launched a f r o n t a l a tta c k Jon schools of e d u c a tio n . C onsidering th e meager a tte n tio n 1 0 8 p re v io u sly given to the problem by the A .A .U .P., the in te n s ity of the a tta c k was ra th e r s u r p r is in g . With the h elp of a committee c o n s is tin g of th ree l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs , the ch ap ter passed re s o lu tio n s which purported to give c u rre n t opinion and c o n v ic tio n on th e m a tte r. In a d d itio n , a n a tio n a l study was proposed and a d esig n fo r t h i s study was su g g ested . This p ro p o sal re s u lte d i n the form atio n of Committee Q --Bequired Courses in E d u catio n . The follow ing o p in io n s and c o n v ic tio n s , s a id to be M c u rre n t among members of the F a c u ltie s of C olleges of I ;A rts and Sciences and of P ro fe s s io n a l C o lle g e s, o th e r than C olleges of E ducation1 * were o ffe red s That the im portance of p ro fe s s io n a l co u rses i n E d u c a ti o n ,1 e s p e c ia lly co urses i n *methods, 1 i s o v e r-ra te d . . . That the s ta tu te s and law s, passed by s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s , p re s c rib in g re q u ire d work in such c o u rse s, tend to overemphasize the im portance of such co u rse s and in flu e n c e p ro sp ec tiv e te a c h e rs to take such co u rses to the n e g le c t of courses in the su b je c ts which they expect to te a c h , e s p e c ia lly because o f the f a c t th a t i n most s t a t e s th e re are no laws p re sc rib in g the amount of work te a c h e rs must take i n s u b je c t-m a tte r or so- c a lle d ‘c o n te n t1 c o u rse s. ^ That the enactm ent of l e g i s l a t i o n of t h i s ty p e, under the d ir e c tio n of Departments and Schools of E d ucation, w ithout c o n s u lta tio n of those who are r e sponsible f o r in s tr u c tio n i n ‘content* c o u rse s, i s a grave m istake i n e d u c a tio n a l p o lic y . That the emphasis placed upon tr a in in g i n methods and o th er p ro fe s s io n a l E d u c a tio n 1 c o u rse s, in s p ite of the f a c t th a t le g a l requirem ents have been in fo rc e fo r some tim e, has not improved the teach in g in secondary sc h o o ls, as i s evidenced by the f a c t th a t 109 c o lle g e e n tra n ts are no b e tte r prepared now than they used to be, th is being e s p e c ia lly tru e of th e ir p re p a ra tio n in M athematics and E n g lis h . That i t i s a t p re se n t im possible fo r young men and women w ith the Master fs or D o c to r’s degree . . . to procure teaching p o s itio n s in secondary schools u n le s s they have devoted the le g a lly p re sc rib e d time to . courses i n methods and o th er p ro fe s s io n a l 'education* s u b je c ts . That in many i n s t i t u t i o n s the appointm ent m achinery, the purpose of which is to p la c e te a c h e rs in s t a t e secondary sch o o ls, i s c o n tro lle d by the Departments or Schools of E ducation, and th a t th ese appointm ent o ffic e s consequently show a d is p o s itio n to r e f u s e , i f they do not a c tu a lly r e f u s e , to recommend f o r p o s itio n s ca n d id a te s who have n o t met th e s p e c ia l requirem ents of such Departments and Schools o f E d ucation. That such in d iv id u a ls and i n s t i t u t i o n s as are of the opinion th a t too much time i s re q u ire d fo r p ro fe s s io n a l 'e d u c a tio n ' co urses are a b s o lu te ly h e lp le s s to attem p t to bring about any m o d ific a tio n , sin ce the s ta te second ary e d u c a tio n a l system s are e n ti r e l y under the c o n tro l of te a c h e rs , p r in c ip a ls , and su p e rin te n d e n ts who are * graduates of p ro fe s s io n a l 'Schools of Education* and sin ce i t i s through th is o rg a n iz a tio n th a t enactm ent of ed u c a tio n a l l e g i s l a t i o n i s in flu e n c e d and c o n tr o lle d .5 The fo u rth paragraph i n the above q u o ta tio n (" th a t th e emphasis placed upon tr a in in g i n methods . . ." ) showed t h a t the Tulane Chapter co nsidered th e achievement of ✓ co lleg e e n tr a n ts as a d i r e c t ex p re ssio n and r e s u l t of the tr a in in g of te a c h e rs . M o m ention was made of o th e r f a c to r s th a t might have in flu en ce d p u p il achievem ent. 5"Tulane U n iv e rsity , P roposal fo r In v e s tig a tin g Value of P ro fe ssio n a l Courses in E d u catio n ," A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 15*558-62, November, 1929* I t s h o u ld a l s o he n o t e d t h a t a s f a r a s t h e p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h was c o n c e r n e d , t h e r e h a v e b e e n no s t u d i e s w h ich h a v e s u b s t a n t i a t e d o r a t t e m p t e d t o s u b s t a n t i a t e t h a t s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n h a v e h a d s u c h u n l i m i t e d c o n t r o l o v e r th e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s o r s t a t e d e p a r t m e n t s o f e d u c a t i o n i n r e g a r d t o r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n . The l i t e r a t u r e i s s i l e n t o n th e m a t t e r . P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n s h o u ld f e e l c o m p lim e n te d , i n a w a y , t h a t one se g m e n t o f th e a c a d e m ic w o r l d , a t l e a s t , c o n s i d e r e d th em p o w e r f u l e n o u g h t o c o n t r o l s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s a t w i l l . C e r t a i n o f t h e s u g g e s t i o n s made by t h e T u la n e ^ C h ap ter f o r t h e d e s i g n o f a s t u d y w h ic h t h e y p r o p o s e d w ere ;i n t e r e s t i n g • F o r e x a m p le , t h e T u la n e C h a p te r s t a t e d : H as n o t t h e tim e a r r i v e d f o r a c a r e f u l s tu d y o f th e v a l u e o f m e th o d s c o u r s e s a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g i n g e n e r a l ? I f a c a r e f u l i n v e s t i g a t i o n w e re made i n a s t a t e w h ic h h a s f o r a t l e a s t t e n y e a r s h a d a la w r e q u i r i n g a c o n s i d e r a b l e am ount o f p r o f e s s i o n a l t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g , s h o u ld i t n o t be p o s s i b l e t o d e t e r m ine i f t h e c o l l e g e e n t r a n t s fro m t h e s e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s o f s u c h a s t a t e show im p ro v e m e n t i n p r e p a r a t i o n o v e r c o l l e g e e n t r a n t s o f t e n y e a r s p a s t , w hen no t r a i n i n g i n m e th o d s , o r a t l e a s t n o t n e a r l y so m uch, w as r e q u i r e d o f t e a c h e r s i n s e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s ? ° By m a k in g a p r o p o s a l s u c h a s t h i s , t h e T u la n e C h a p t e r ishow ed a l a c k o f a w a r e n e s s o f th e d i f f i c u l t i e s i n h e r e n t i n s u c h a n i n v e s t i g a t i o n . E s t a b l i s h i n g c o m p a ra b le g r o u p s o f t e a c h e r s and s t u d e n t s on a c o n te m p o r a r y b a s i s i s d i f f i c u l t ^ I b i d . , p . 5 6 1 . ,1 1 1 enough but to attem p t to e s ta b lis h comparable groups of te a c h e rs and stu d e n ts w ith a te n -y e a r time d i f f e r e n t i a l and to i s o la te f a c to r s beyond the c o n tro l of "methods* seemed to be asking the Im possible* As a p a r t i a l r e s u l t of the r e s o lu tio n s passed by the Tulane C hapter, Committee Q—R equired Courses in E d u catio n —was o rg an ized . No p ro fe s so rs of ed u c atio n were appointed to the committee which c o n siste d e n tir e ly of l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs . This was more or le s s i n keeping w ith A.A.U.P. t r a d i t i o n ; th e re has been a p au c ity of re p re s e n ta tio n from schools of edu catio n among the o f f i c e r s , the c o u n c il, and th e committees during the e n tir e | fo rty -y e a r h is to r y of t h i s o rg a n iz a tio n . i ! I The committee made a b r ie f r e p o r t a t the annual i meeting of the A.A.U.P. in December, 1929. A r e s o lu tio n was passed on th a t occasion in s tr u c tin g the o f f ic e r s of the A.A.U.P. to ask the N ational S o ciety of C ollege Teachers of E ducation and the American C ouncil on E d u catio n to jo in i n the in v e s tig a tio n '7 but a p p a ren tly -nothing re s u lte d from th ese in s t r u c t i o n s . Among o th e r i th in g s , the committee s a id : Whatever the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n th e way, only by an o b je c tiv e dem onstration can the re p re s e n ta tiv e s of E ducation hope to d is p e l the sk ep ticism w ith which ^"Required Courses in E d u c a tio n ,1 1 Annual Meeting R ep o rts, A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 16:101, F ebruary, 1930. re q u ire d work in t h e i r departm ent is now regarded by the v a s t m ajority® of co lleg e and u n iv e rs ity te a c h e rs in o th er f i e l d s . The requirem ents on the secondary le v e l were never imposed by the consent of the governed ( i . e . , the te a c h e rs them selves) nor by the wish of co lleg e or u n iv e rs ity f a c u l ti e s (a p a rt from p ro fe sso rs of Educa t i o n ) . They are c h ie f ly due to p o l i t i c a l c o n tr o l.9 The f u l l r e p o r t of Committee Q was rendered a t th e annual m eeting i n December, 1932. The re p o rt was r a th e r e x te n s iv e . Twenty-seven pages were involved in the published a b s t r a c t . A major p a r t of the r e p o r t of Committee Q was based on a q u e stio n n a ire subm itted to high school te a c h e rs . (P ractice te a c h in g , methods, and e d u c a tio n a l psychology were 'con sidered to be the most u s e f u l p a r ts of th e ir tr a in in g by the t e a c h e r s . T h e average number of sem ester hours devoted to th ese courses was: p r a c tic e te a c h in g , 3 .2 ; 8 i A pparently to prove the c o n ten tio n th a t th e " v a s t ; m ajo rity " of c o lle g e te a c h e rs re g a rd the work of schools of ed u catio n w ith sk ep ticism , the follow ing c i t a t i o n was given a t th is p o in t: "School and S o c ie ty . XXIX (1929)> 6 6 2 f." Checking t h is c i t a t i o n re v ealed t h a t no proof of th is c o n ten tio n was made. %oy C. F lic k in g e r, "Required Courses in E d u catio n ," A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 16:370, 372, May, 1930. ^ " R e q u ire d Courses i n E d u catio n ," Committee Q of th e j A .A .U .P., A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 19*190, March, 1933* A *1 independent study conducted a t the same time found s im ila r r e s u l t s . See W . E . P eik , The P ro fe s sio n a l E ducation o f High School Teachers (M inneapolis: The U n iv ersity of iMinnesota P r e s s , 1930), p . 80. 113 m ethods, 5.8; and e d u c a tio n a l psychology, 5 .8 . The t o t a l hours involved in th ese M most u s e fu l1 1 s u b je c ts was 1M-.2 which was approxim ately o n e -h a lf of the average t o t a l hours (28.8) of p ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g . The committee im plied th a t th e tfmost u s e f u l1 1 s u b je c ts were not s tre s s e d enough and a lso questioned the "ab so lu te value or n e c e s s ity " of th ese c o u r s e s . ^ In reg ard to p ro fe s s io n a l c o u rse s, the committee asked the te a c h e rs to in d ic a te the number of sem ester hours they thought were adequate and the number of sem ester hours they thought had been p r o f i t a b l e . The r e s u l t s were ;ta b u la te d u sin g groupings of te a c h e rs w ith A.B. d eg rees, 'te a c h e rs w ith A.M. d eg rees, te a c h e rs of s p e c ia l s u b je c ts , i :and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s : ^ A.B. A.M. Spec. Adm. Mean of adequate hours 1^.7 15.2 15.8 17.8 Mean of p r o f ita b le hours 19.1 17.8 2 2 . 2 2 . 0 i From th is and o th e r in fo rm a tio n , the committee concluded th a t 70 per cent of the academic te a c h e rs wanted le s s th an seventeen hours of ed u catio n co u rses (the average 4 s t a t e requirem ent a t the tim e) and th a t approxim ately bO per cen t of th ese te a c h e rs " .. . put p r o f ita b le hours | • ^ " R e q u i r e d C o u r s e s i n E d u c a t i o n , 1 1 C o m m itte e Q, ;o p. c i t . , p . 198. ^ I b i d . , p . 1 8 2 .___ ll* f as le s s than s e v e n te e n ." ^ Courses in ed u catio n did n ot show in a good l i g h t under such co n c lu sio n s. Another fin d in g was more d i f f i c u l t to i n t e r p r e t . The re p o rt s t a t e d , "The amount t h a t was p r o f ita b le i s p ut by h a lf the A.B. group a t 8 l per cen t or l e s s , by h a lf the A.M. group a t 55 per cent or l e s s , by h a lf the te a c h e rs of s p e c ia l s u b je c ts a t 85 per ce n t or l e s s , by h a lf the admin i s t r a t o r s a t 60 p er cent or l e s s . " ^ As s ta te d , courses in ed u catio n appeared to be u n s a tis f a c to r y and i n f e r i o r . But by p u ttin g th i s i n more o p tim is tic term inology the committee could have s a id , fo r example, th a t the average te a c h e r w ith an A.B. degree considered 81 per c e n t of h is p ro fe s s io n a l co u rses as p r o f i t a b l e . This might have been above " p a r " if the same q u estio n had been asked about c o n te n t c o u rse s. P a r tic u la r ly i s th is fe a s ib le i f i t is re c a lle d th a t a t t h i s very time the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s were under severe a tta c k on p re c is e ly th i s p o in t; namely, t h a t a c o lle g e ed u catio n was v a lu e le s s . Three fo u rth s of the r e p li e s " a s s e rte d unequivocally" th a t th e re was a g re a t amount of d u p lic a tio n and overlapping in ed u catio n courses in comparison to su b je c t-m a tte r c o u rse s . The committee c r i t i c i z e d schools of ed u catio n ^ I b i d . . p . 192. 115 f o r f a i l i n g t o p r a c t i c e -what t h e y p r e a c h e d — o r g a n i z a t i o n . T h is a p p e a r e d to be a j u s t i f i a b l e c r i t i c i s m . B u t t h e c o m m itte e d id n o t s t o p a t t h a t p o i n t . They p r o c e e d e d a s f o l l o w s : The e x i s t e n c e o f th e o v e r l a p p i n g and t h e d u p l i c a t i o n s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e i s n o t e n o u g h s o u n d , w h o le so m e , t r u l y v i g o r o u s m a t e r i a l t o make c o u r s e s t h a t w i l l t o t a l t h e h o u r s r e q u i r e d . A s a r e s u l t t h e r e i s a r t i f i c i a l i t y an d p a d d i n g , th e o b v io u s and e v e n th e t r i v i a l b e co m in g l a b o r e d a s i f i t w ere p r o f o u n d . S u c h a r t i f i c i a l i t y i s s t r o n g l y c h a r g e d by th e t e a c h e r o f E n g l i s h who s a y s t h a t i f m e a n in g l e s s p h r a s e s w e re a b o l i s h e d , t h e s u b j e c t o f m e th o d s c o u ld be c o n d e n s e d i n t o tw o w e e k s . 1 ? D u p l i c a t i o n c o u ld be c a u s e d by t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f e d u c a t i o n ; t h a t i s , i t m ig h t be m a i n t a i n e d t h a t c e r t a i n a r e a s o f s tu d y a r e o r g a n i c a l l y r e l a t e d t o o t h e r s and o n ly a p a r t i a l s e p a r a t i o n i s p o s s i b l e . T h is p a r t i a l s e p a r a t i o n may be c o n s i d e r e d s u f f i c i e n t t o w a r r a n t a new ic o u rs e t i t l e and a d i f f e r e n t e m p h a s i s . R e g a r d l e s s o f t h e v a l i d i t y o r i n v a l i d i t y o f t h i s v i e w p o i n t , 1 1 p a d d i n g 1 1 c a n n o t be i n f e r r e d fro m d u p l i c a t i o n , p e r s e . an d d u p l i c a t i o n , p e r s e . w as t h e o n l y g e n u in e f i n d i n g o f t h e c o m m itte e c o n n e c te d w i t h * * p a d d i n g . 1 1 I n i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e r e s p o n s e s t o a q u e s t i o n o f t h e ’flG r e a t T e a c h e r 1 1 v a r i e t y , th e c o m m itte e c o n c lu d e d t h a t p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w ere n o t s u p e r i o r t o s u b j e c t - m a t t e r t e a c h e r s . T h i s w as a l o g i e a l c o n c l u s i o n i f t e a c h e r o p i n i o n I i ! . , p. 193. 116 w as c o n s i d e r e d a v a l i d c r i t e r i o n * The r e p o r t , h o w e v e r, p r o c e e d e d i n t h i s m a n n e r: I f s u c h s u p e r i o r i t y d o e s n o t e x i s t , i t c a n h e c o n c lu d e d t h a t t h e p r a c t i c a l p a r t o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l c o u r s e s c o n s i s t s f o r a l a r g e p a r t o f f a c t s t h a t a r e o b v i o u s , o r so s i m p le t h a t t h e y c a n b e a c q u i r e d w i t h a s m a ll am ount o f f o r m a l i n s t r u e t i o n .1 6 The c o n c l u s i o n t o b e v a l i d m u s t h a v e a ssu m e d t h a t p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w ere i n i t i a l l y e q u a l i n a l l w ays t o p r o f e s s o r s i o f t h e l i b e r a l a r t s — a n a s s u m p t io n t h a t p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s d id n o t make o n m o s t o c c a s i o n s * A s s u m in g , f o r t h e m om ent, t h a t t h e o n ly d i f f e r e n c e b e tw e e n t h e tw o g r o u p s o f p r o f e s s o r s w as t h a t one g r o u p h a d p u r s u e d th e s t u d y o f e d u c a t i o n , t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e show ed o n ly t h a t t h e f o r m a l . s t u d y o f e d u c a t i o n d i d n o t p r o d u c e a b e t t e r p e r f o r m a n c e o f c l a s s r o o m t e a c h i n g i n t h e c o l l e g e * The s t u d y d i d n o t w a r r a n t d r a w in g a n y f u r t h e r c o n c l u s i o n s i n t h i s r e g a r d . The f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n w as p u t t o p r i n c i p a l s o f p r i v a t e s e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s ; H ave t h o s e o f y o u r t e a c h e r s who h a v e h a d e x t e n s i v e s p e c i f i c p e d a g o g i c a l t r a i n i n g p r o v e d , i n y o u r ju d g m e n t, m ore s k i l l f u l i n a c t u a l l y i m p a r t i n g k n o w le d g e , o r m ore s u c c e s s f u l i n s t i m u l a t i n g i n t e r e s t a n d s t u d y t h a n t h o s e who h a v e h a d n o , o r l i t t l e , s u c h t r a i n i n g ? The r e p l i e s w e r e : 1? n o , ¥ 2 ; n o t t o a g r e a t e x t e n t , 16} a n d y e s , 13# l 6 I h i d . T p . 19>+. 1? I b i d . . p . 1 8 0 . A n o th e r q u e s t i o n p u t t o t h e same g ro u p r e a d , 1 1 When s e l e c t i n g new t e a c h e r s . • • a r e y o u i n f l u e n c e d by t h e am ount o f 'p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g ' . . . t h e p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r h a s h a d ? " O nly t e n o u t o f s e v e n t y - t w o a t t a c h e d an y im p o r t a n c e t o s u c h c o u r s e s . Of t h e s e v e n t y - t w o , t h i r t y - s e v e n saw " n o v a l u e " and -tw e n ty -fiv e saw " l i t t l e v a l u e " i n c o u r s e s i n e d u c a t i o n .* 1 *^ T h is was a n i n t e r e s t i n g f i n d i n g b u t , i n a s e n s e , i t w as n o t p e r t i n e n t . A lth o u g h i t w as n o t s p e c i f i c a l l y s t a t e d , t h e p r i n c i p a l s o f p r i v a t e se c o n d a ry s c h o o l s w e re p r o b a b l y s e l e c t e d a s a n e u t r a l p a r t y in a s m u c h a s t h e y w e re f r e e fro m s t a t e c e r t i f i c a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s . * 9 A c t u a l l y t h e y s h o u ld n o t h a v e b e e n c o n s i d e r e d n e u t r a l . P r i v a t e s e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s i n 193 2 w e r e , i n e f f e c t , m i n i a t u r e c o l l e g e s . T hey s e r v e d a s e l e c t g r o u p — a g ro u p t h a t was d e s t i n e d t o go t o c o l l e g e . The c u r r i c u l u m o f t h e s e s c h o o l s w as p o i n t e d a t c o l l e g e e n t r a n c e r e q u i r e m e n t s . T h e se s c h o o l s t a u g h t many o f t h e c o l l e g e s u b j e c t s b u t a t a l e s s c o m p le x l e v e l . A p r i n c i p a l o f s u c h a s c h o o l c o u ld f e e l r e l a t i v e l y s a f e i n h i r i n g a s u b j e c t - m a t t e r s p e c i a l i s t in a s m u c h a s t h e e d u c a t i o n a l p ro g ra m c o n s i s t e d , t o a n i m p o r t a n t d e g r e e , o f s t r i c t m a s te r y o f s u b j e c t m a t t e r and l 8I b l d . . p . 1 9 0 . ^ ° I t s h o u ld be p o i n t e d o u t , h o w e v e r, t h a t t h e r e p o r t d id d i s c u s s th e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f p r i v a t e s c h o o l s t o r e g i o n a l a c c r e d i t i n g a g e n c i e s . 1 1 8 r o t e l e a r n i n g . A q u e s t i o n c a n be r a i s e d , t h e n , a s t o th e v a l u e o f th e o p i n i o n s of t h i s s e l e c t g ro u p in a s m u c h a s t h e j r e p o r t was c o n c e r n e d a lm o s t w h o l l y w i t h p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n . The e g r e g i o u s m an n e r o f d ra w in g i m p l i c a t i o n s and m aking i n f e r e n c e s was f u r t h e r i l l u s t r a t e d w hen t h e !c o m m itte e d i s c u s s e d c o u r s e s i n t h e h i s t o r y a n d p h i l o s o p h y o f e d u c a t i o n . T h e s e s u b j e c t s r e c e i v e d lo w v a l u e r a t i n g s ■by t h e t e a c h e r s . T h e c o m m itte e i m p l i e d t h a t s u c h i c o u r s e s w e re n o t t a u g h t by f,f i r s t r a t e 1 1 s c h o l a r s a n d t h i s w as o f f e r e d a s th e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e low r a t i n g s . 2 1 ; ■ i | A n o th e r s t a t e m e n t o f t h e c o m m itte e w a s : The f a c t t h a t i n h a l f t h e s t a t e s t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g r e q u i r e d i s u n r e s t r i c t e d a s t o p a r t i c u l a r c o u r s e s t e n d s t o c o n t r a d i c t a c l a i m t h a t a n y s p e c i f i c I c o u r s e i s e s s e n t i a l . . . . p r e s e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e e x c e s s i v e when ju d g e d o n t h e b a s i s o f a g r e e d v a l u e . I 2^In a study conducted a t the U n iv e rsity of ‘M innesota sim ila r r e s u l t s o b ta in e d . See P eik , op. c i t . , pp. 32-33 and 6^-65. ' I pi , M R equired Courses in E d u c a tio n ,1 1 Committee Q ., I 0£. c i t . , p. 19^. j 22I b i d . , p. 189* Also see Thomas E l i o t Benner, j 1 1 T eacher-T raining and the L ib e ra l C o lle g e ,1 1 School and j S o c ie ty . 353577-82, A p ril 30? 1932. This w r i t e r , tak in g d a ta from p relim in ary r e p o r ts of the N ational Survey of 'tiae E ducation of T eachers, showed th a t the same lack of agreem ent was evident i n the E n g lish departm ents i n the b e st c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . Only two s im ila r courses 1 in E n g lish were tak en by as many as 20$ of the p ro sp e c tiv e -teach ers of E n g lis h . The co n clu sio n was t h a t th e re was ,no agreement i n th e E n g lish departm ents as to what 's p e c ia liz a tio n the p ro sp ec tiv e teach er of E n g lish should ■ have. | 119 * This statem ent c a r r i e s the assum ption th a t what 1 1 i s 1 1 i s "what should b e .1 ’ This i s a c r itic is m th a t has f r e - i |q uently been made of schools of e d u c atio n —p a r tic u l a r ly when the techniques of C harter and B o bbitt were in v o lv e d .^3 A lso , in the h i s t o r i c a l development of c e r t i f i c a t i o n j requirem ents i t i s li k e l y th a t course la b e ls were not used j in e s ta b lis h in g le g a l requirem ents because la b e ls a tta c h e d to co lleg e courses are n o to rio u sly inadequate to in su re s im ila r c o n te n t a t d i f f e r e n t i n s t i t u t i o n s . I f the ^reasoning of the committee were a p p lie d to s u b je c t-m a tte r ■ * \ ieourses the committee might have s ta te d s inasmuch as most ; of the s t a t e s do not re q u ire a course in h is to ry fo r a !te a c h e r of h i s to r y , t h i s would tend to c o n tr a d ic t a • I | claim t h a t a course i n h is to ry was e s s e n t i a l fo r a teac h er i j I of h is to r y . , ' p k i Other co n clu sio n s of the committee w e r e : ^ I 1. t h a t w. . . the amount o f p ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g ; ! | should be as r e s t r i c t e d a s p o s s ib le , fo r i t does n o t in c re a se the teach er *s knowledge of the s u b je c t he a c tu a lly ! 23For example, see W illiam B ennett Munro, "Quack- Doetoring the C o lle g e s ,w Harper 1 s M agazine. l 5 ? : i+78-82, Septem ber, 1 9 2 8 ; and Howard F ra n c is S e e ly , "Com position Work in Teacher T raining C o u rses,1 1 E n g lish Jo u rn a l- - C ollege E d itio n . 1 9 * 2 3 3 , March, 1 9 3 0 . ph 1 ^ " R e q u ire d Courses i n E d u catio n ," Committee Q, c .it. . pp. 189-98. ‘te a c h e s . 1 1 ; 2. th a t the r e p lie s ” . . . give stro ng evidence th a t p re se n t p ro fe s s io n a l requ irem ents are d i s t i n c t l y too h ig h , and a c tu a lly r e s u l t in many cases in low ering the q u a lity of secondary te a c h in g , by com pelling p ro sp ec tiv e | I te a c h e rs to spend time p r o f i t l e s s l y , when i t might have j i been employed in studying th a t which would be t r u ly j ; I v a lu a b le .” j i 3* th a t tw elve hours of ed u catio n co u rses provided 1 i , 1 i ample p ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g ; i 1 ! *+. th a t the p re se n t system of tr a in in g was j i ■ expensive inasmuch as much of the m a te ria l of ed u c atio n * i courses was so sim ple th a t i t could be l e f t to the ; i n te llig e n c e of the te a c h e r. i i 5. t h a t th e re was too much p r o f e s s io n a liz a tio n in i jthe tr a in in g of a d m in is tr a to rs . They, to o , should have ! i jmore su b je c t-m a tte r c o u rse s. j ! 6 . th a t schools of ed u catio n should not be * p erm itted to e n te r the a re a of p re p a ra tio n fo r teach in g i n ;the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s . | ! ' 1 j 7* t h a t s u b je c t-m a tte r ed u catio n was d i s t i n c t l y 1 > jsu p erio r to p ro fe s s io n a l ed u c atio n . In a d d itio n , Committee Q recommended t h a t th e re j ! ' I should be a c o n sid erab le low ering i n the p r o fe s s io n a l requirem ents fo r c e r t i f i c a t i o n , th a t twelve sem ester-hours I 1 2 1 in ed u catio n should be the maximum re q u ire d fo r c e r t i f i c a t io n , th a t the g en eral p ro fe s s io n a l courses should be moved to the Graduate School, and t h a t procedures for' renewing teaching and a d m in is tra tiv e c r e d e n tia ls should give more emphasis to the academic s u b je c ts .2^ i The r e p o r t of Committee Q was unanimously approved j i 1 1 in p r in c ip le 1 1 by the annual convention of th e A.A.U.P. in | December, 1932. The re p o r t was r e fe rr e d to the C ouncil | fo r more d e f in ite a c tio n . The l i t e r a t u r e was s i l e n t as to :whether or not any p ro fe s so rs of ed u catio n atten d ed the annual convention. The committee r e p o r t was we11-re c e iv e d • i by those who could be expected to have a p r e - d is p o s itio n j i I in the m a tte r. With good re a so n , p ro fe sso rs of e d u c atio n ^ I b id ., p . 198. Also see 1 1 Indiana U n iv e rs ity , Re- 1 q u ired Courses in E d u c a tio n ,1 1 in Local and Chapter N otes, j ■A.JL.U.P. B u lle ti n . 19:295-9o, December, 1933# A l e t t e r was! s e n t to th e Governor of Indiana and th e S ta te Board of Edu-! .c a tio n by "members of the f a c u l t i e s of u n i v e r s i t i e s and ! 'c o lle g e s in In d ia n a .1 1 The conclusions of the r e p o r t by 1 iCommittee Q were su p p o rted . In re g ard to the tr a in in g of i a d m in is tra to rs th e l e t t e r s ta te d : " . . . we b e lie v e t h a t th e p re se n t ex clu siv e s p e c ia liz a tio n in a d m in is tra tio n and su p e rv isio n i s unw ise. Some form al study of a d m in is tra tiv e m a tte rs i s d e s ir a b le . An in s p e c tio n of textbooks d e a lin g j w ith a d m in is tra tio n and su p e rv isio n r e v e a ls , however, th a t they c o n ta in much t h a t must be alre ad y known to anyone who j is a t a l l s u ite d to be a h ig h -sch o o l p r in c ip a l, and th a t n o t uncommonly pages are devoted to m a te ria l which i s merely commonplace and t r i v i a l . 1 1 They lik ew ise suggested th a t th e re should be more emphasis on s u b je c t m atter i n the t r a in in g of a d m in is tr a to rs . 1 ! 26por example see " P ro fe s sio n a l Requirements*1 ( e d i- 1 t o r i a l ) , The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l. 29*56^-65, May, 193^5 * J . H. Simons, ftQual i f i c a t ions fo r Teachers of C h em istry ,1 1 | Jo u rn al of Chemical E d u ca tio n . 1 5 :18-23, January.,__193 8 .____ 1 ! 122 » * ( c r itic iz e d th e re p o rt on the b a s is of the percentage of 're tu rn s of the q u e s tio n n a ire . E igh teen hundred q u e stio n - ! n a ire s were sen t to high school te a c h e rs . Only *+25 i r e p lie s were re c e iv e d and only 391 r e p li e s were used i n the s t a t i s t i c a l tre a tm e n t of the r e p o r t.^ ? For p r a c t ic a l p u rp o ses, the r e p o r t ended the work of Committee Q. The committee was not d isch arg ed , how e v e r. In 1938 the name of the committee was changed to M P re p a ra tio n and Q u a lif ic a tio n of T eachers1 1 and th re e 'p ro fe sso rs of e d u c a tio n were in clu ded in th e com m ittee. (Although a new r e p o r t was supposedly in the making i n the jearly 19*K) *s, no th in g f u r th e r has emerged from the jcom m ittee. The l i t e r a t u r e was s i l e n t as to i t s p re se n t i .e x is te n c e .2^ I I . COLIEGE A N D UNIVERSITY TEACHING i I I t 1 1 i In the e a rly 1930 *s, th e re was much re fe re n c e In ; 1 t •the l i t e r a t u r e of h ig h er ed u catio n d e a lin g w ith th e s ta te 1 of teac h in g i n American u n iv e r s i t i e s and c o lle g e s .^ ; 1 ^"Required Courses i n E d u c a tio n ,1 1 Committee Q, op. ! (c i t - T p . 181. Also see W. R. Sm ith. F. P. O 'B rien. and ; iE. E . B ayles, 1 1 The Value of P ro fe s s io n a l T raining in Educa-: t i o n , 1 1 U n iv e rsity of Kansas B u lle tin of E d u c a tio n . S p e c ia l (Number, December, 1933* 1? pp. This pamphlet u t i l i z e s evi-i dence from the complete mimeographed r e p o r t of Committee Q . to show b ias and f a u lty handling of s t a t i s t i c s . < 2% n answer to a l e t t e r from the p re se n t w rite r reg ard in g the s ta tu s of Committee Q, George Pope Shannon, ; p re s id e n t e d ito r of th e A.A.U.P. B u lle tin re p lie d : ” 1 doubtj j 123 P ro fe sso rs of ed u c atio n were among those who c r i t i c i z e d ,the manner of teac h in g in i n s t i t u t i o n s of h ig h er le a rn in g . Perhaps the focus of the argument was on the fu n c tio n of the u n iv e r s ity —was the prim ary fu n c tio n of the u n iv e r s ity re se a rc h or in s tr u c tio n ? However, an im p o rtan t p a r t of ! the q u e stio n involved the c o n te n tio n th a t courses in 'ed u catio n would a id in the s o lu tio n of the problem . As i n j i th e case of Committee Q, the Tulane C hapter in tro d u ced j |th is a sp e c t of the is s u e to the pages of the B u lle ti n . In I a s e r ie s of r e s o lu tio n s , the Tulane Chapter went on re co rd as **. . . stro n g ly opposed to th e movement to re q u ire 1 * 'courses in ^ e d u c a tio n 1 of p ro sp e c tiv e c o lle g e and u n iv e r- ; s i t y teach ers.* 1 The follow ing o b serv a tio n s and judgments i 1 | iwere the b a s is fo r t h is p o s itio n : i \ (1) . . . ed u catio n co u rses are o fte n poorly organ iz e d , w ith meager s u b je c t m a tte r, and low academic 1 | s ta n d a rd s. ; i (2) E d u c a tio n is ts have in th e p a s t a l l too o fte n , ! made p ro p o sals w ithout adequate in v e s tig a tio n , and t h e i r methods o f re se a rc h have a l l too o fte n been f a u l t y , y ie ld in g conclusions of l i t t l e permanent value., i 1 (3) Almost complete c o n tr o l of elem entary and secondary ed u catio n has been in th e ir hands f o r a co n sid erab le p e rio d , and the r e s u l t s of th is c o n tr o l ! have been d isap p o in tin g * , I 0+) E d u c a tio n is ts have o fte n used t h e i r c o n tro l of u n iv e r s ity appointm ent o f f ic e s to spread e d u c a tio n is t t h a t th is committee was ev er form ally d isch arg ed ; I t iprobably merely became inactive.** i 12b I \ ! propaganda, and to in c re a se enrolm ent in ed u c atio n ; co u rses; and have d isc rim in a te d a g a in s t c a n d id a te s who a re p a r ti c u l a r ly w e ll q u a lifie d in th e i r re s p e c tiv e f i e l d s , in favor of ca n d id a te s whose q u a lif ic a tio n s > c o n s is t la r g e ly of courses in e d u c a tio n . (5) I t i s our o p in io n t h a t , vfoatever m e rits courses in methods of teach in g may have fo r te a c h e rs in elemen-: t a r y sch o o ls, such methods courses are of c o n sid erab ly 1 le s s value to te a c h e rs of co lleg e s u b je c ts , who need p rim a rily a thorough grounding i n th e s u b je c t m atter of; th e ir s p e c ia l f i e l d s . i | (6) F in a lly , i t is our (judgment th a t the departments; of s p e c ia liz a tio n a re th e ones b e st q u a lif ie d to im- j prove c o lle g e te a c h in g , and t h a t any courses in methods' or problems of teaching should be given by the d e p a rt- ; ments them selves, not by the departm ents of educa- j I tio n .2 9 In December, 1932 , & permanent committee of the jA.A.U.P.--Committee U, C ollege and U n iv e rsity Teaching— i i 1 !issu ed a p ro g ress r e p o r t. A fte r reco g n izin g th a t academic ' i ; te a c h e rs lacked f a i t h i n e d u c atio n c o u rse s, the re p o rt j 1 i I s ta te d , M The Committee has n o t deemed i t p o s s ib le to re con - j ! jc ile th ese d iffe re n c e s of o p in io n s or even a t p re se n t to ;su g g est a reaso n ab le compromise among them .1 1 C ooperation iwas urged. Academic p ro fe sso rs were counseled to take up th e study of teach in g methods and r e la te d problems or they ; jwould be fo rced to y ie ld to the departm ents and schools of \ j i ^education by d e f a u lt. The r e p o r t did advocate th a t th ere ishould d e f in i t e l y be prom otion of b e tte r teaching methods 2 9 ” T u l a n e U n iv e rsity , R eso lu tio n s in Regard to Courses i n Education,** in Local and Chapter N otes, A.A.U.P* B u l le tin . l S s M ^ - ^ , O ctober, 1932. ! ! 125 w ith in a departm ent, such prom otion to be organized around t one member of the departm ent.30 In the same iss u e of the B u lle ti n , a p ro fe sso r of h is to r y -with a n a tio n a l re p u ta tio n viewed schools of edu catio n w ith d isfa v o r i n an a r t i c l e dealing w ith c o lle g e ! te a c h in g , W illiam B. Munro w rote: • , . i t i s n o to rio u s t h a t the i n s tr u c ti o n given by I te a c h e rs in departm ents of ed u catio n i s nowhere r e garded by the stu d e n t body, nor has i t been demon- j s tr a te d by any v a lid o b je c tiv e t e s t s , to be o f b e t t e r ; q u a lity th an th a t given in th e g en eral run of academic : ! co u rses by te a c h e rs who have had no tr a in in g in ; e d u c a tio n a l psychology, e d u c a tio n a l tech n iq u e, methods of teach in g and so f o r t h . Various answers have been given to t h i s q u estio n by the e d u c a tio n is ts but they | are not a l l - s a t i s f y i n g . 3J- I While Committee U was engaged in making i t s stu d y , j i l the A sso ciatio n of American U n iv e r s itie s issu ed a r e p o r t on II T rain in g of Graduate S tu d en ts fo r C ollege T each in g .1 1 T his1 ■report, w r itte n by Fernandus Payne who was a lso s e c re ta ry I i - i ,of Committee U of the A .A .U .P ., was given much p u b lic ity |in the B u l le tin . The r e p o r t was somewhat adverse to p ro - i jfe sso rs of ed u catio n but was le s s a n ta g o n is tic than the r e p o r t of Committee Q . In t h i s r e p o r t the follow ing ' : i suggestions were made to schools of ed u catio n : ' 30tfc o lle g e and U n iv e rsity T eaching,1 1 P rogress ! 're p o rt of Committee U of the A .A .U .P., A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . ! ! 18:5^2, December, 1932* ^ W illia m B. Munro, 1 1 A S elf-S tu d y of C ollege Teach- ; !in g ,” A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 18*551, December, 1932. 1 2 6 1. That they t r a i n te a c h e rs of e d u c a tio n in | accordance w ith th e ir p re s c rip tio n s f o r o th er teac h ers.) W e are th in k in g o f such th in g s as b read th and c u l t u r e . | < 1 •2 . That they discover whether co u rses i n ed u catio n . a c tu a lly c o n trib u te to b e t t e r te a c h in g , and whether j te a c h e rs of e d u c a tio n stand out as e x c e p tio n a lly good | te a c h e rs . j i 3. That in th e ir re se a rc h e s they fu rn is h su ffic ie n t^ d a ta to j u s t i f y th e ir conclusions even in th e minds of ; laymen, z o o lo g is ts , m athem aticians, and a r e h e o lo g is ts . 1 I b. That they dem onstrate to us how much of the i m a te ria l they wish to in clu d e i n t h e i r co u rses f o r ! c o lleg e te a c h e rs they a c tu a lly use i n the classroom . j 5. That they keep i n mind th a t the s u b je c t m atter acq u ired in th e f i e l d s of the major and a l l i e d s u b je c ts can not be m a te ria lly reduced, and t h a t the stu d e n t ! does not have an u n lim ite d amount of time and money to \ spend i n t r a in in g . i 6. That they remember th a t re se a rc h in education | is t h e i r f i e l d . W e expect th e re fo re more from them th an a mere statem ent th a t our teach in g i s poor, and a I demand t h a t we b e t t e r i t . I i 7* That they reco g n ize th e danger of lo sin g s ig h t . o f the big th in g s one i s try in g to do by becoming i involved in th e d e t a i l s of how to do them. 8. That they keep in mind t h a t those of us who | a re te a c h e rs of s u b je c t m a tte r courses can not overlook the f a c t t h a t i t i s our in te n s e i n t e r e s t i n our sub je c ts which h e lp s to make us good te a c h e rs . Such i n t e r e s t does n o t mean th a t we have no i n t e r e s t in teac h in g or i n stu d e n ts . 9. That they w rite more books on methods, the problems of the c o lle g e , exam inations, psychology of le a rn in g a t the c o lleg e le v e l , and any o th e rs they th in k of v a lu e , and remember th a t te a c h e rs can le a r n ‘ by re a d in g . Such books should be w r itte n in c l e a r , : understandable language and c o n ta in e s s e n t ia l s o n ly . ! 10. That they acknowledge th a t but few e d u c a tio n is ts have given s e rio u s study to the problems of c o lle g e j te a c h in g , and t h a t i f the u n i v e r s it i e s g e n e ra lly were i : 127 to ask fo r such c o u rse s, the r e s u l t s would be d i s - j ! a s tr o u s . i ! 11. That re c o g n itio n be given to the f a c t th a t I much poor teac h in g i s due to causes which courses in j edu cation can not remedy. 32 j The r e p o r t of Committee U was pu b lish ed in May, j 1933* A major p o rtio n of t h i s r e p o rt was devoted to I r e la tio n s h ip s between schools of ed u catio n and the r e s t of : i the u n iv e r s ity —p a r ti c u l a r ly l i b e r a l a r ts c o lle g e s . The i committee did n o t engage in re s e a rc h of a q u a n tita tiv e , 'n a tu re . The re p o rt i s simply the considered judgment and i 'o p in io n , based on g e n e ra l and s p e c if ic ex p e rien ces, of |eig h t l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe ss o rs and one p ro fe sso r of educa- tio n --C h a rle s H. Judd.33 The g re a t s tre n g th of th e r e p o r t , i i s i t s s p i r i t . F a ir - p la y , o b j e c t i v i t y , and a q u a lity of i i , I |co o p eratio n permeated th e r e p o r t. i i Methods of e d u c a tio n a l re s e a rc h were cen su red . 1 ; i IQ uestionnaire s tu d ie s in p a r ti c u l a r were ch a lle n g e d . Also ! | i the ,fcommittee approach1 1 where one p ro fe sso r a c tu a lly does j 3 "R eport of the Committee [A s so c ia tio n of American j U n iv e rsitie s ]] on T rain in g of Graduate S tu d en ts fo r C ollege j T eaching," r e p o r t prepared by Fernandus Payne, A.A.U.P. ! B u lle ti n . 19s138-39, F ebruary, 1933* i ; 3 3 it should be pointed out th a t Judd*s view point was; claim ed to be i d e n t ic a l to th e philosophy of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s in re g ard to t e a c h e r - tr a in in g . See the r e - : view of Ju d d 's book "P re p a ra tio n of School P ersonnels Re p o rt of the R e g e n ts1 In q u iry in to the C h aracter and Cost of P ublic E ducation in the S ta te of New Y ork," by E rn e st V. .H o llis , A.A.U.P. B u lle ti n . 2?s*+6l-63, O ctober, 1939. i i 1 128 j a l l the work and subm its h is fin d in g s to the committee fo r j review and approval was c r i t i c i z e d . 3*+ The committee would not recommend any course in ed u catio n as a q u a lif ic a tio n fo r c o lle g e te a c h in g . R a th e r,; : 1 they held e s s e n t i a l ly th a t the improvement of teach in g i w ith in a departm ent should be th e r e s p o n s ib ility of the departm ent. C e rta in concessions were n o n eth eless made to schools of e d u c a tio n . I t was recommended th a t the i c o lle g e s 1 1 . . . sa n c tio n a sem inar on problems of American ! ! ed u c a tio n , w ith s p e c ia l re fe re n c e to the c o lle g e , to be j given by th e school or departm ent of ed u catio n alone or i n ; c o o p e ra tio n w ith the academic departm ents, th is sem inar to 'be o p tio n a l fo r stu d e n ts who a re p rep arin g to become j i | j c o lle g e teach ers .* * In re g ard to the study of methods by | 1 i [departm ents, the r e p o r t s ta te d , " I n such m atter the co u n sel i and c o o p e ratio n of members of departm ents and schools of I e d u c a tio n can be of r e a l value . !|36 Teaching c r e d e n tia ls , in clu d in g work in e d u c atio n , ■had alre ad y made th e ir appearance as p a r t of the , l i 1 j —------- ... ....— — I 3IHiRep0 rt of th e Committee on College and U n iv e rsity iT eaching,ff W illiam B. Munro, chairm an, A.A.U.P. B u lle tin , t 19s11-139 May, 1933* Inasmuch as t h i s re p o rt was p u b lish ed as a s p e c ia l s e c tio n , a l l page numbers r e f e r to the s p e c ia l s e c tio n o n ly . 3? I b id . . p . 2b. 3 6 Xbid. . p . 6 3 . t ! 129 F requirem en ts fo r ju n io r co lleg e s t a f f s • There was f e a r i n iacademic c i r c l e s t h a t th is was ju s t an opening wedge and th a t c e r t i f i c a t i o n would soon be a requirem ent fo r teach in g in the p u b lic u n i v e r s i t i e s . The committee ! attem pted to a l l a y th ese fe a rs by p o in tin g o u t th a t most d o c to ra l ca n d id a te s have to teac h i n th e secondary schools ( sometime in th e ir c a re e rs and th e re fo re they d id , in f a c t , i take co u rses in ed u catio n in order to g e t c e r t i f i c a t e d . In o th er words, i t made l i t t l e d iffe re n c e whether or not i |ed u catio n courses were re q u ire d fo r the Ph,D, because the •candidates took such courses anyhow. The committee then ! posed th is q u estio n s j i Gan work i n the departm ent or school o f ed u catio n be so planned th a t i t w ill not only q u a lify fo r a secondary school c r e d e n tia l but w il l a ls o be of r e a l ; 1 value i n case the te a c h e r who takes such work ( ; e v e n tu a lly fin d s h is way in to a c o lle g e fa c u lty ? 3 7 ; i ! 1 The above q u estio n r e a l ly was not answ ered. However, th re e view points were found which concerned the is s u e . The i , ! f i r s t view po in t, t h a t of the e d u c a tio n is t, ap p aren tly i assumed th a t the ed u catio n courses of the day were adequate! iw ithout m o d ific a tio n fo r tr a in in g c o lle g e te a c h e r s . The j I e d u c a tio n is t h eld t h a t everyone who teac h es should have , i | taken courses in e d u c a tio n . Among o th e r evidence to ! i » 'support th is p o s itio n the committee quoted the r e s u l t s of a < ; 37i b i d . T p. 62. j 130 q u e stio n n a ire s e n t o u t by the A sso c ia tio n of American i C olleges to p re s id e n ts of 185 s e c ta r ia n c o lle g e s in 'which t h is q u e stio n was p re se n te d : M Do you p re fe r to have c o lle g e te a c h e rs w ith e d u c a tio n a l tr a in in g ? 1 1 One hundred seventeen of th e p re sid e n ts responded w ith an unequivocal ‘’Y es, 1 1 only twenty-two gave a s t r a i g h t neg ativ e and the ;balance answered w ith q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . ^ i The second v iew p o in t, the t r a d i t i o n a l academic p o in t |of view, was sa id to be re p re s e n ta tiv e of the 1 1 g re a t im ajority 1 1 of te a c h e rs in the s u b je c t-m a tte r d ep artm en ts. iThese p ro fe s so rs were very h o s tile toward e n te r ta in in g any 1 jthoughts t h a t co u rses in ed u catio n would be h e lp fu l in the < i i (tra in in g of a c o lle g e te a c h e r. The reasons given fo r t h i s J I | la ttitu d e were th e u su a l ones—th e re were to o many e d u c a tio n { c o u rse s, the courses were r e p e t i t i o u s , and the s u b je c t > (matter was t r i v i a l . The tr a d itio n a lly - o r ie n te d group m aintained t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n in ed u c atio n should be b e tte r than academic i n s tr u c t io n . The p re v a ilin g o p in io n of t h i s i ! I group i n t h i s re g ard was expressed as fo llo w s: : . . . th e re a re many i n s t i t u t i o n s i n which the j stu d e n ts are in c lin e d to s in g le out the courses in ed u c atio n as examples of what good i n s tr u c tio n ought not to be. T heir testim ony i s o fte n to the e f f e c t that: what they g e t in the p ro fe s s io n a l courses given by the i departm ent of ed u catio n c o n s is ts m ainly of p la titu d e s about te a c h in g , c l a s s i f i e d f i r s t under the heading 3% b id . . p . 63. •methods,* th en re p eated as ‘P rin c ip le s of E d ucatio n, 1 and f i n a l l y g l o r i f i e d in to a course e n t i t l e d ’The Philosophy of T e a c h in g .*39 The t h i r d view po int, t h a t of moderate o p in io n , jemphasized s u b je c t m atter as the in d isp en sab le p a r t of th e I » !te a c h e r - tr a in in g program . This group was sym pathetic to the work of the e d u c a tio n is ts . However, th e sympathy was j o f f s e t by the f e e lin g t h a t schools o f e d u c a tio n were to o i ag g ressiv e in g e ttin g t h e i r co u rses " r e q u ir e d .” The committee recognized t h a t th e q u estio n of who c o n tro lle d l e g i s l a t iv e enactm ents d e a lin g w ith c e r t i f i c a t i o n was a moot p o in t, b u t the committee was c e r t a i n t h a t academ icians placed the r e s p o n s ib ility f o r th ese enactm ents on schools of e d u c a tio n .1 4 '0 The committee observed t h a t se v e ra l p la n s and p ro je c ts gave evidence of p ro g re s s . Mention was made of the work of the 1 1 1 -U n iv ersity Committee on E d u ca tio n al R esearch a t the U n iv e rsity of M innesota. At th e U n iv e rsity of Delaware th e Department of Mathematics held m eetings every o th er week devoted to problems and methods of te a c h in g . Summer s e s sio n s f o r en g in ee rin g te a c h e rs were atten d ed by c o lle g e te a c h e rs . The se ssio n s were sponsored by th e S o ciety f o r th e Prom otion o f E ngineering E ducation 39 r b ia . . pp. 6*f-65 ^ I b i d . , p . 66. ' 132 | I w ith the avowed purpose of improving te a c h in g . | The committee suggested th a t s a b b a tic a l leav es m ight be sp en t in studying teach in g a t d i f f e r e n t i n s t i t u t i o n s . Like the A sso c ia tio n o f American U n iv e rsitie s * r e p o r t on the same s u b je c t, Committee U favored good books on the s u b je c t of methods r a th e r th a n c o u rse s . Moreover, they advocated a j o in t approach: Members of one c o lle g e departm ent do n o t r e l i s h | being to ld how to te a c h by men from o th e r dep artm en ts. | j Above a l l , p erh ap s, they d is lik e being to ld how to do j i t by a committee made up m ainly of p ro fe ss o rs from j i the departm ents of ed u c atio n and psychology.*+1 1 The r e p o rt of Committee U provoked w idespread ,d isc u s s io n in u n iv e r s ity c i r c l e s . Almost a l l o f the I p u b lished re a c tio n s to the r e p o rt were la u d a to ry , a t l e a s t > U -P I in some a s p e c t. ^ Prom the sta n d p o in t of the p ro fe s s o rs |of ed u catio n the re p o rt was w e ll-re c e iv e d . I f Committee : \ i U was the c r i t e r i o n , schools of ed u c atio n were f i n a l l y " a c c e p te d .1 1 O ccasionally the q u e stio n of the pro per p re p a ra tio n i 1 of th e co lleg e te a c h e r and th e ro le of ed u c atio n courses ; ! in t h i s p re p a ra tio n was rev iv ed in the pages of the i B u l le ti n . In 1950, Pernandus Payne, P ro fe sso r of Zoology i ^ I b i d . . p . 97. U.O ^"Som e R eactions to the R eport on C ollege and Uni v e r s i ty Teaching, Committee U,,f Annual Meeting R ep o rts, A.A.U .P. B u lle tin , 20:163-72, March, 193^. 133 ! ; I a t the U n iv e rsity of Indiana and an im portant member of | i I Committee U in 1933> addressed h im se lf once a g a in to th i s j t problem . Although he would s t i l l re fu s e re q u e s ts fo r | cou rses in e d u c atio n h is tone was one of genuine c o n c ilia t i o n . In th is a r t i c l e P ro fe sso r Payne w rote: A fter fo r ty y e a rs of e x p e rie n c e , I presume I should be wise enough to t e l l how scien ce should be tau g h t i n c o lle g e and how a scien ce te a c h e r should be ed u cated , j but the longer I liv e the l e s s sure I am of the answers to such questio ns and the su re r I am th a t no one e ls e has f i n a l answer s . ^3 I I I . RECENT ATTACKS O N SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION In 19*+9 H arold L. C lapp, a p ro fe sso r of Romance / Languages a t G rin n e ll C o lleg e, rltrig g e re d ” a wave of i jo p p o sitio n to schools of e d u c a tio n which has continued to i Sthe p re se n t tim e. The t i t l e of the a r t i c l e , ”The S tran g le-; i ~ 1 ihold on E d u c a tio n ,” served n o tic e of the v i t r i o l i c n atu re 1 of the co n ten t of the a r t i c l e . P ro fe sso r Clapp s ta r te d |the a r t i c l e by d ea lin g w ith e d u c a tio n a l re s e a rc h —an a re a j ! t which was a ls o fre q u e n tly c r i t i c i z e d by p ro fe s s o rs of j e d u c a tio n . A 24-year study on e f f e c tiv e teach ing made in j i a la rg e s t a te u n iv e r s ity was s e le c te d ”alm ost a t random” I fo r purposes of i l l u s t r a t i o n . In the f i r s t paragraph i below, P ro fesso r Clapp quoted from the study: ^ F e rn a n d u s Payne, ”Teaching of Science a t the Col lege L e v e l,” A.A.U.P. B u l le tin . 36:509, Autumn, 1950. 13* | ’A f i n a l ran king of te a c h e rs on the b a sis of per j c e n t e ffic ie n c y was a rriv e d a t by assig n in g double | v alu es to the mean p e r c e n t e f f ic ie n c y and s in g le i v alu es to the sigma and r per c e n ts of e f f ic ie n c y . : This f i n a l ran king of te a c h e rs , c o rre la te d w ith the , 2 -2 -1 summation, y ie ld e d a Rho of 0 .8 8 7 5 -0 .0 2 5 . This I shows about an o9% agreement between th e two methods ! of ra n k in g . 1 i That form ula i s an adm irable i l l u s t r a t i o n of one of the e s s e n t ia l t r a i t s of ’E d u catio n * : i t s dehumanizing mania fo r ’o b j e c t i v i t y , 1 fo r ’ex p erim en tal e v id e n c e ,’ fo r ’t e s t i n g , ’ and a l l the concom itant ja rg o n . C losely r e la te d is i t s se rio u s concern fo r proving the obvious.j At one time or a n o th e r, w ith bated b re a th and r h e t o r i - ! c a l f l o u r i s h , every p la titu d e in the f i e l d o fp ed ag o g y ! has been th e s u b je c t of weighty d e l i b e r a t i o n . ^ 1 " Going on, P ro fesso r Clapp had t h is to says U n fo rtu n a te ly , ’E d u c a tio n ’ i s not ju s t th e p riv a te j e c c e n t r ic i ty of a sm all group of co lle g e p ro fe s s o rs . I t is the fo rc e which c o n tro ls p u b lic e d u c a tio n . The E d u c a tio n is t s e ts the stan d ard s of American ed u catio n by e s ta b lis h in g the req u irem en ts of te a c h e r t r a in in g . ! S ince th ese requirem ents are la rg e ly i n term s of the j courses tau g h t by the E d u c a tio n is ts th em selv es, th is j approaches the d e f i n i t i o n of a r a c k e t. Thus, any ; improvement in e d u c a tio n a l stan d ard s must be accom- ; p lis h e d through the E d u c a tio n is t, or over h is dead ' body. *5 1 ^^^Harold L. C lapp, ’’The S tran g leh o ld on E d u c a tio n ,” ! A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 35*33o> Summer, 19^9. ^ I b i d . , p # 3 3 7. In connection w ith t h i s statem ent ’ and o th e rs which fo llo w i t should be noted t h a t courses in j e d u c atio n did n ot comprise th e ’’l i o n ’s sh a re ” of the ; re q u ire d c o u rse s. This was tr u e , g e n e ra lly sp eakin g, in |th e U nited S t a t e s . I t was tru e th a t courses i n ed u catio n were s tip u la te d in c e r t i f i c a t i o n laws more th a n c o n te n t , c o u rse s. When c e r t i f i c a t i o n c a lle d f o r an A.B. plus c e r t a i n hours in ed u catio n the academ icians a p p a re n tly only saw the s tip u la te d hours in e d u c a tio n . A ctu ally about 5/ 6th s of the p ro sp e c tiv e t e a c h e r ’s time in p re p a ra tio n was .spent i n courses o th e r th an those in e d u c a tio n . See Edwin ;H. R eeder, ’ ’The Q u arrel Between P ro fe sso rs of Academic j S u b je c ts and P ro fe sso rs of Educ a tio n : A n________ t 1 3 5 I i P r o f e s s o r C la p p t h e n to o k up t h e p ro b le m o f | I im p ro v in g s t a n d a r d s i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n and c e r t i f i c a t i o n t o f t e a c h e r s . One c r i t i c i s m , th e t r u t h o f w h ic h m u st be i a ck n o w led g ed by a l l , was t h a t c e r t i f i c a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s were m e c h a n i c a l . The v a lu e o f t h e c o u r s e , who t a u g h t i t , : w hat was t a u g h t — p o i n t s s u c h a s t h e s e w e re n o t c o n s i d e r e d . . C o n s i d e r a t i o n was g i v e n o n ly t o th e q u e s t i o n ; Were th e ! 'c o u r s e s t a k e n ? I n e f f e c t , t h e r e s u l t i s rt. . . a s e t o f m e a n i n g l e s s , m e c h a n i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , w h ic h a r e i n no s e n s e a m e a su re o f t e a c h i n g a b i l i t y o r g e n e r a l f i t n e s s f o r ! th e p r o f e s s i o n . . . . t h e l a z i e s t , m o st s t u p i d g r a d u a t e i !o f F r e s h w a t e r M u n i c i p a l C o l le g e i s c e r t i f i e d f o r t e a c h i n g i t • i ) ■ Z l ion th e s t r e n g t h o f t h e number o f c o u r s e s he h a s p a s s e d . * * > I P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w ere a c c u s e d o f m a i n t a i n i n g and | I s t r e n g t h e n i n g t h i s s y s te m . i I 1 M e n tio n s h o u ld be made a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t s t a t e j l e g i s l a t u r e s and s t a t e d e p a r t m e n t s o f e d u c a t i o n h ave a c t e d j I on t h e a s s u m p t io n t h a t th e u n i v e r s i t y o r c o l l e g e w i l l I e x e r c i s e c o n t r o l and g u id a n c e i n t h e m a t t e r o f t h e ; ; ■ j A n a l y s i s , M A .A .U .P . B u l l e t i n . 37*511, Autum n, 1951. I t s h o u ld a l s o be n o t e d t h a t a m a jo r c o m m itte e o f th e A m erican' C o u n c il on E d u c a t i o n recommended i n 19^^ t h a t o n ly 15 p e r c e n t t o 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e p r e p a r a t o r y e d u c a t i o n f o r j t e a c h e r s s h o u ld be i n p r o f e s s i o n a l c o u r s e s . See W. E a r l A rm stro n g e t a l . , The C o l le g e and T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n (Wash i n g t o n : A m erican C o u n c i l on E d u c a t i o n , 1 9 ^ ) , p p . 305*06. ^ C l a p p , o£ . c i t . . p. 3^*0. J ! 136! :q u a lity of i n s t r u c t i o n . I t was f i t t i n g and proper th a t they did so . To do otherw ise would no doubt bring the j charge of in te rfe re n c e w ith academic freedom. The same i assum ption can be r e la te d to the f a c t th a t su b je c t-m a tte r courses are r a r e ly s tip u la te d as p a r t of the c e r t i f i c a t i o n re q u ire m e n ts. When an A.B. d eg ree, fo r example, i s l i s t e d i i as p a r t of the c e r t i f i c a t i o n re q u irem en ts, i t i s assumed j th a t th e re has been ample emphasis on s u b je c t m a tte r. The ! i • I ^u n iv ersity i s given freedom by the use of a g en e ral r e - j quirem ent such as an A.B. Furtherm ore, i t would be a most , ( d i f f i c u l t , i f not im p o ssib le , job to determ ine and l i s t i the s u b je c t-m a tte r courses to th e s a t i s f a c ti o n of the s p e c ia liz e d i n t e r e s t s in th e academic w orld. P ro fesso r Glapp prom ulgated the id e a t h a t th e j i | system 1 1 . . . a c tu a lly o p e ra te s to the advantage of poor i ■teachers and i n f e r i o r e d u c a tio n , and a c tiv e ly d isco u rag es i I * t (good te a c h e rs and high stan d ard s of i n s t r u c t i o n .1 * 1 *^ As j evidence he used a b u l l e t i n from another larg e u n iv e r s ity ' which advised stu d e n ts p rep arin g to be te a c h e rs to i i s p e c ia l i z e i n s u b je c ts fo r which th e re was a demand. This : i r e s u lte d in inadequate p re p a ra tio n fo r c e r ta in su b je c ts ■for which th e re was l i t t l e demand, according to Clapps ^ I b i d . I i ; i 137 The theory seems to be th a t i n f e r io r tr a in in g i s adequate fo r any teach er whose su b je c t i s not stu d ied by every s tu d e n t. By t h is lo g ic , te a c h e r tr a in in g would be determ ined by enrollm en t s t a t i s t i c s , w ith no concern fo r the d i f f i c u l t y , n a tu re , or im portance of a f i e l d of stu d y , and only in the most popular su b je c ts would my c h ild re n have the r ig h t to expect adequate in s tr u c tio n . More o fte n , E d u c a tio n f i n t e r f e r e s w ith r e a l educa t i o n in ways le s s d i r e c t . For one th in g , no d y e d -in - | the-w ool E d u c a tio n is t r e a l ly seems to b e lie v e th a t i ! knowledge of a s u b je c t has much to do w ith teach in g i : th a t s u b je c t. S u b je c t-m a tte r req uirem ents fo r te a c h e rs are p i t i f u l l y in ad eq u a te , and cannot w e ll be otherw ise.] There is much to o l i t t l e time to study th e su b je c t one i is to teach when so much time i s taken up by co u rses in how to te a c h , and so , a l l too o fte n , a m ak esh ift p ro - i gram of c o lle g e courses i s b u i l t around the re q u ire d ] ’p ro fe ssio n a l* c o u rse s. M oreover, most c e r tif y in g ] I boards, composed of or in flu e n c e d by E d u c a tio n is ts , ' j demand th a t s u b je c t m atter study be d iv id ed among two or th re e f i e l d s . They f e e l , a p p a re n tly , t h a t i t i s s a fe r to have te a c h e rs poorly tra in e d to teach two or th re e u n re la te d th in g s th an to have them w e ll tr a in e d to te a c h one th in g . . . C onsequently the ! ! a p p a llin g f a c t i s th a t our most poorly educated college' i gradu ates are our t e a c h e r s | i I j A fter s t a t i n g th a t textbooks and co u rses in ed u c atio n c o n ta in 1 1 oceans of p i f f l e 1 1 which d is g u s t the ; i , 'b e tte r stu d e n ts and d rive them in to more c h a lle n g in g f i e l d s , P ro fe sso r Clapp had t h i s to say: And so , under the p re se n t system , the s a t i r i c a l , adage about te a c h e rs comes uncom fortably c lo se to th e t r u t h : ’Those who can, do; those who c a n ’t , t e a c h . ’ To which my d is g ru n tle d c lassm ates i n ’Education* j courses used to add: ’And those who c a n ’t te a c h , teach te a c h e r s . ’^9 ^ I b i d . . pp. 3lK>-¥l. * * 9 lb id • • p. 3^ 6. __I I t was n a tu r a l th a t an a r t i c l e c o n ta in in g such in v e c tiv e would not go unanswered. A p ro fe sso r of e d u c atio n from W isconsin S ta te Teachers C ollege ro se to the o ccasio n . His re p ly was, s tra n g e ly enough, a defense of the t h e s is th a t methods deserved more emphasis than s u b je c t m a tte r; how one teach es was said to be more im portant than what one te a c h e s . The a r t i c l e was s k i l l f u l l y w r itte n and was in good t a s t e . The id e a s were re p re se n te d in a sim ple and c le a r manner. Malcolm, the author who r e p lie d to C lapp, w rote; I sometimes ask stu d en ts in my c la s s e s i f i t i s p o s sib le to te a c h a c h ild th a t 5 * ^ - 10. The q u e stio n p u zzles them. Some say t h a t i t i s , some say t h a t i t is n o t. The t r u t h i s , of co u rse, t h a t both answers a re c o r r e c t. I t Is p e r f e c tly p o s sib le to te a c h a c h ild t h a t 5 t ^ « 10 i f you g e t him when he i s f i r s t in tro d u ced to the s u b je c t and i f you follow ' the a u th o r ita r ia n methods commonly used in to d a y fs classroom s. . . On the o th e r hand, i f your teach in g method c o n s is ts of h elping the le a r n e r to c re a te s itu a tio n s out of which he may d isco v er e x is tin g r e la tio n s h ip s through p erso n al e x p e rie n c e s, then you cannot p o ssib ly o b ta in t h is p a r ti c u l a r r e s u l t . The d iffe re n c e is i n method, i n how the te a c h in g i s done.50 There was an alm ost u n b eliev ab le lack of communica tio n between the two groups involved in th i s argum ent. A p e r f e c t example of th is f a e t was provided i n the next issu e of the B u lle tin - A p ro fe sso r of speech who was ?°David Donald Malcolm, 1 1 The S tra n g le h o ld on E ducation--A R e p ly ,1 1 A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 35*509, Autumn, 19^9. 139 I opposed to the schools of e d u c a tio n in g e n e ra l, s tr e s s e d J the lack of a proper frame of re fe re n c e between th e two j groups and th e consequent la c k o f communication. He then j proceeded, u n w ittin g ly , to show t h a t he did n o t have an j u n d erstan d in g of the basic th eo ry of the a r t i c l e he was j c r i t i c i z i n g . He said s i Now P ro fesso r Malcolm i n s i s t s t h a t h o n est s c ru tin y makes inescap able the co n clu sio n t h a t how one teaches i s more im p o rtan t th a n what one te a c h e s . This seems , p a te n tly too s i l l y to r e f u t e , but suppose a c a s e . A j teac h er using th e how method most approved by P ro fe sso r I i Malcolm teaches h is stu d e n ts w ith g re a t s k i l l and su e- | cess th a t m in o rity groups w ith dark sk in s are i n f e r i o r ' ! and deservedly d isc rim in a te d a g a in s t. I s how then more, j im portant than w hat?51 j I t should have been c le a r ly ev id en t th a t under the i Imethod d escrib ed by P ro fesso r Malcolm, I t would have been ' ■ I i I im possible to teach anything of t h is s o r t . I t was c le a r ly ; s ta te d by P ro fe sso r Malcolm th a t the stu d en ts would d i s co v er, fo r them selves, through ex p e rie n c e , the f a c t s and | i make v alu e judgments th erefro m . F urtherm ore, P ro fesso r i Malcolm had d e c la re d th a t the r e a l 1 1 s tra n g le h o ld 1 1 on educa t i o n was a u th o r ita r ia n m ethods. I t must be concluded th a t i on even r e l a t i v e l y sim ple m a tte rs th e re i s sometimes la c k of communication between the p ro fe s s o rs of ed u catio n and 1 ; p ro fe ss o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s . 51paui B e a ll, lfThe S tran g leh o ld T ig h te n s ,f S iA.A.U.P. B u lle ti n . 35*676, W inter, 19^9* 140 P ro fesso r Malcolm was charged by the au th o r of the above q u o ta tio n w ith declaim ing a g a in s t a u th o r ita r ia n ; i methods w h ile , a t the same tim e, making a u th o r it a r i a n J i sta te m e n ts. Malcolm had said th a t th ere was one method j I of ed u catio n whieh would save democracy. Malcolmfs opponent p u t a * * th e lf in f r o n t of f,one method*1 which made the s t a t e - ; ment re a d , in e f f e c t , th a t th ere was one and only one I 'method. 4 c a re fu l review of Malcolm, s a r t i c l e showed th a t j i .Malcolm did n o t p ro fe s s to have the f i n a l word on the j m a tte r of methods nor did he advocate u n iv e r s a l, e te r n a l jacceptance of h is th in k in g . ! i | This exchange a lso provided an e x c e lle n t example of ! lone source of co n fu sio n : the f a ilu r e of both ^ p arties to i ; r e la te th e ir thoughts to a stag e of le a r n in g . The academic p ro fe s s o r is fre q u e n tly ta lk in g about h ig h er ed u catio n when i I he ta lk s about methodology. The p ro fe s so r of ed u catio n i s 1 i fre q u e n tly ta lk in g about elem entary or secondary ed u catio n \ 1 when he ta lk s about methodology. In a l l too few eases did the p a r ti e s to th is co n tro v ersy s t i p u la te the le v e l of ed u catio n to which t h e i r remarks were d ir e c te d . ■ Two more answers to M The S tra n g le h o ld 1 1 appeared. Both of th ese a r t i c l e s were re se rv e d in t h e i r language and | v iew p o in ts. One of the a r t i c l e s gave a consensus of b e l i e f s held by members of th e Department of E du cation of : m-i -Lewis and C lark C o lle g e .^ 2 The o th e r a r t i c l e s e t out to prove th a t ed u c atio n was a s c i e n c e . ^ A most v ic io u s a tta c k on th e schools of e d u c a tio n , clo th e d in the th in n e s t veneer of s a t i r e was published in j 1950. A m ythical A n ti-E d u catio n al R esearch Bureau, con- ■ s i s tin g of se v e ra l departm ents, was the instrum ent fo r th e , s a t i r e . Some random q u o ta tio n s show the tone of th e 1 a r t i c l e s j I might remark p a r e n th e tic a lly th a t a l l members of j Department I are given a s p e c ia l tr a in in g in Educanto 1 (sometimes known as Pedaguese). They le a r n to read i t ; ! f lu e n tly and to understand the spoken language and • tr a n s la te i t in to id io m atic E n g lish . The language i s : q u ite easy to m aster once you overcome th e i n i t i a l 1 nausea. The ru le s are sim ple. Never use the r ig h t ; word i f a wrong one w ill do. Never say a th in g in one word t h a t you can say in f i v e . Never use an a c tiv e verb i f you can : -manage a p a s s iv e . Above a l l , avoid 1 the p re p o s itio n o f . The w r ite r of Educanto is judged j by h is a b i l i t y to p ile noun on noun. (This i s known ; j as h is Noun Achievement R atio or NAAR.) i Members of Department I I I are tra in e d i n Logic, w ith 1 | s p e c ia l a t t e n t i o n to f a lla c ie s and th e o rie s of c a u sa- ' t i o n . They w ill s t r i p o ff the p la titu d e s th a t obscure the is s u e . They w i l l d is tin g u is h between p o st hoc and p ro p te r hoc. Above a l l , they w i l l l i e i n w ait fo r the | w ild leap from the s t a t i s t i c a l evidence to the G reat ' 1 T ru th . The evidence perhaps shows th a t French has : been badly ta u g h t. The E ducator leap s to the co nclu sio n th a t French s h o u ld n ^ be ta u g h t a t a l l . , 521 1 What Does a Department of E ducation B elieve ? 1 1 1 Department of E d u catio n , Lewis and C lark C o lleg e, A.A.U.P. ! ■ B u lle ti n . 3 6 s75-80, S p rin g , 1950. 53Francis c . Z a k o lsk i, wIn R eference to n sducation ,*1 1 jA.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 35:673. W inter, 19^9# : lb 2 i ' j In the old days an exam ination was one of many I in stru m en ts i n the r e la te d p ro cesses o f teach in g and i le a rn in g . According to the New Pedagogy the purpose i of exam inations i s to provide m a te ria l f o r s t a t i s t i c a l re s e a rc h . No one can doubt th a t the purpose is being amply f u l f i l l e d . But a t what c o s t to th e v ic tim s.1 . . . The new dogm atist t e l l s us t h a t i t i s n ft knowledge u n le ss i t can be reduced to m u ltip le choice j and scored by a m achine. Already we have no t m erely j stu d e n ts but te a c h e rs , re a re d from infancy on o b jectiv e t e s t s , who have no co n cep tio n of any o th er"k in d of j knowledge. j For an o th er example of th e o rie s and consequences take the D octrine of the Discouragement of I n t e l l i gence. . . . What about the S u p erio r C hild? The r ig h t answer i s 2 The o th e r c h ild re n d o n ft lik e him. What i s ; the duty of the te a c h e r? The duty of th e teac h er i s 1 1 to make the B right C hild r e a l iz e th a t in te llig e n c e is | a s o c ia l h and icap. There are courses in E d u catio n j th a t teach the te a c h e r how to teach the B right C hild to be as dumb as everybody e l s e . 5 * + C o n t r ib u ti o n s 1 1 of t h i s type have served no c o n s tru c tiv e | purpose. ' | | In 195l> P ro fesso r Edwin H. R eeder, a p ro fe sso r of I ! .education a t the U n iv ersity of I l l i n o i s where th e o p p o si- 1 jtio n to schools of ed u catio n was perhaps the most in te n s e , ■ (presented an a n a ly s is of the problem . 55 j n t h i s a r t i c l e the l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s were accused of 1 1 sc a p e g o a tin g . 1 1 ! t Another a r t i c l e d e sc rib e d th e work of the Department of , ^ ^ l i z a b e t h Jackson, 1 1 P ro je c t in E d u c a tio n a l R e se a rc h ,1 1 A .A .u.P. B u l le ti n . 36*512-1*+, Autumn, 1950. 5%dwin H. R eeder, !1 Th@ Q uarrel Between P ro fe sso rs of Academic S u b jects and P ro fe sso rs of Educations An Analy s i s , 1 1 A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 37*506-21, Autumn, 1951* E ducation a t the U n iv e rsity of C h ic a g o .^ One o f the common reasons p o s tu la te d as a cause of the argument was ignorance on the p a r t of the l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe sso rs reg ard in g the work of schools of e d u c a tio n . This a r t i c l e attem pted to a l l e v i a t e t h is s i t u a t i o n . 1 1 The E n g lish P ro fesso r and His N atu ral E nem ies,” an a r t i c l e i n th is same p e rio d , threw some f u e l on the f i r e . A fter lam enting the disappearance of L a tin from the schools and B ib le -re a d in g from the homes, the a r t i c l e i s ta te d : i . . . the schools of E du cation have earned a s i n i s t e r p o s itio n among the n a tu ra l enemies of the ! E n g lish p ro fe s s o rs . . . in many s t a t e s i t i s now v i r t u a l l y im possible fo r a high school te a c h e r to take | a m aster *s degree w ith E n g lish as a major s u b je c t. ! The major must be in E ducation and the r e a l reason fo r | th is req uirem ent i s to provide a s u b s ta n tia l i f r e lu c ta n t c la s s e n ro llm e n t.57 P ro fesso r A rthur E. B e sto r, J r . e n te re d the arena w ith an a tta c k on th e L ife Adjustment movement. He spoke fo r the most p a r t about " p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a to rs .” I t was c l e a r , however, th a t p ro fe s so rs of ed u catio n were included 1 5% agar Z. F ried en b erg . "E ducation as a S o c ia l S c i e n c e ,” A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 37:o72-92, W in ter, 1951-52. 57R0ger P. McCutcheon, ” The E n g lish P ro fe sso r and His N atural Enemies, ” A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 37s666, W inter, 1951-52. I t i s in t e r e s t in g to note th a t W illiam James s ta te d th a t "the n a tu r a l enemy of any s u b je c t is th e p ro fe s s o r th e r e o f ." He had in mind the danger o f o v e rsp e c ia l i z a t i o n . See Glenn Frank, "The R evolt A gainst E d u ca tio n ," The N atio n . 122*57^-76, May 26, 1926. Ikb i in th a t t e r m . ^ The a r t i c l e , which l a t e r appeared as p a r t , i of P ro fe sso r B e s to r fs book, E d u ca tio n al W astelands. was | ! la rg e ly confined to a s s e r tio n s and d eductions which j attem pted to equate p ro fe s s io n a l ed u cato rs w ith a n t i - \ i n te lle c tu a lis m . A re p ly was soon forthcom ing. A member 1 of th e l i b e r a l a r t s s t a f f of S outhern I l l i n o i s U n iv e rsity ' 'took ex cep tio n to B e s to rfs remarks and defended Educa tio n .^ ^ i I t was r a r e th a t wholesome humor was encountered in j the B u lle tin i n connection w ith the problem . A "m iddle- ! j ------------- ! I o f- th e -r o a d e r," an E n g lish i n s t r u c t o r , provided t h is 1 ! jweleome r e l i e f . I t appeared ev id en t t h a t w ritin g s such j t I |as th e fo llo w in g were d e s p e ra te ly needed and would be most ! i ! ie ffe c tiv e re g a rd le ss of the view point: i i ! I am a te a c h e r of E n g lish . I have never stu d ied ; methodology except during my s ta y in the Army, when I j was ordered in to a two-week course c a lle d 'Methods of | | I n s t r u c t i o n . * The stu d e n ts c a lle d i t , lig h th e a r te d ly • | and w ith d e r is io n , fCharm S chool. 1 I learn ed a g re a t d e a l. Some of i t was simply n o t t r u e , but th e n , some of i t was. I le a rn e d , fo r example, a method of framing: 'sh o rt-an sw er q u estio n s 1 which re q u ire d th a t the I s tu d e n ts r e f l e c t upon acq u ired f a c tu a l knowledge and ! sy n th e siz e a ju d ic io u s r e p ly . I am persuaded th a t th is, was worth le a rn in g and I am fo rced to admit th a t I learn ed i t from a P ro fesso r of E d u ca tio n . I am now ; ^ A r th u r E . B esto r, J r . , 1 1 'L ife -A d ju stm e n tf Educa tio n : A C r itiq u e ," A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 38:*-K33“35 * Autumn, '1952. 5 % o b e rt T. H a r r is , "The Aims of the P ublic Schools," j A.A.U.P. B u l le tin . 39:2*4-3-53* Summer, 1953. I r e a d y t o a d m it t h a t he may h a v e so m e th in g e l s e t o t e l l ! me and t h a t I may p r o f i t fro m l i s t e n i n g to i t . I am j a b l e t o a d m it t h i s o n ly b e c a u s e I fo u n d m y s e l f ( s u r - ! p r i s e d a t f i r s t , t h e n a l i t t l e r e s e n t f u l , t h e n i n s u f f e r j a b l y c o n d e s c e n d i n g ) s t a n d i n g w i t h him on common g ro u n d .j . . . i f we c a n a l l f i n d t h i s common g ro u n d ( t h e I P r o f e s s o r o f P s y c h o lo g y fo u n d i t lo n g a g o ) t h e n p e r - I h a p s we c a n a l l p r o f i t . I i To b e g i n w i t h , l e t u s a l l — b o th s i d e s — a d m it t h a t i t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f f a t - h e a d e d i d i o t s i s a b o u t a s h ig h in! t h e t e a c h i n g p r o f e s s i o n a s i t i s i n any o t h e r p r o - j f e s s i o n . S e c o n d , l e t u s a d m i t — a g a i n , b o t h s i d e s — t h a t any man t e n d s , h o w s o e v e r l i t t l e , t o n o u r i s h a : s e c r e t c o n v i c t i o n t h a t h i s own f i e l d i s b a s i c a l l y im - j p o r t a n t , and t h a t th e o t h e r s , th o u g h n d e d f u l i n t h e i r j w a y s, e x i s t m e r e ly t o h e l p him e i t h e r d i r e c t l y o r i n - * d i r e c t l y . L e t u s f u r t h e r a d m it t h e s e two c o n c e s s i o n s j w i t h o u t m u t t e r i n g t h a t m o st o f t h e s e o f f e n s e s o c c u r on . th e o t h e r s i d e o f no man*s la n d .60 j The a u t h o r t o l d a b o u t p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n who j rl. . . know a l l a b o u t how t o t e a c h b u t n o t h i n g o f w h at t o j t e a c h . What s h o u ld y o u t e a c h ? N o t h i n g , j u s t t e a c h . T h a t ; i s w h at th e y seem t o say . . . ” t C o u n s e l was o f f e r e d to p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g m anners What m ig h t t h e E d u c a t i o n i s t do t o h e l p t h e A c a d e m ic ia n w i t h t h e t a s k o f t e a c h i n g . . . F i r s t he m ig h t be a b i t more t a c t f u l a b o u t t e l l i n g t h e Academ ic P r o f e s s o r t h a t he i s i m p a r t i n g l i t t l e o r n o k n o w le d g e — e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e th e a c c u s a t i o n i s u s u a l l y d e m o n s tr a b ly f a l s e . (I h a v e m et no P r o f e s s o r s o f E d u c a t i o n who do ' t h i s , b u t I u n d e r s t a n d fro m r e a d i n g th e p a p e r s t h a t t h e r e a r e q u i t e a number o f th e m . We A c a d e m ic ia n s , o f , c o u r s e , n e v e r do s u c h t h i n g s . ) John B. Lord, ttThe Tumult and the S h o u tin g ,1 1 A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 39*^52-53? Autumn, 1953• Second, having behaved him self so b e a u tif u lly th a t I a t l a s t he is asked fo r a s s is ta n c e , he might in q u ire (not a s s e r t) what problems the Academician fin d s most i tro u b lin g . He m ight, fo r example, le a r n from th e i P ro fesso r of Physics th a t no concept i s so d i f f i c u l t to e x p la in to undergraduates as t h a t of en tro p y . fW e ll,f he might say, *what is entropy? Go ahead and teach m e .’ And having learn ed what entropy is and how ! the p ro fe s s o r goes about ex p la in in g i t , he might very w ell o ffe r a number of e x c e lle n tly e f f e c tiv e sugges tio n s fo r e x p lain in g i t to u n d e rg ra d u a te s. Or, of i co u rse , he might n o t, depending on how wise a man he * is* But the E ducator would have adm itted t h a t he had , to know what en tropy was before he could teac h i t , the 1 Academician would have adm itted t h a t sim ply knowing what entropy i s w ill no t s u ffic e to communicate i t to s tu d e n ts , and the two men would stand on common ; ground—perhaps even lunch to g e th e r, p u b lic ly .61 i • P ro fesso r C lapp, who had been e le c te d to the A.A.U.P: i i # C ouncil a f t e r h is f i r s t th r u s t a t schools o f ed u c a tio n , ; ■again en tered the f r a y . He elaim ed th a t l e t t e r s to him self; i I |and o th er au th o rs who wrote on the same s u b je c t supported ; i I him. He said th a t he had u n d e rsta te d th e c a se . Many of i S , the l e t t e r s t h a t P ro fesso r Clapp had re ceiv ed to ld of r unusual p ressu res a p p lie d by p ro fe s so rs of e d u c a tio n i n an : :e f f o r t to s t i f l e , r a th e r than r e f u t e , c r i t i c i s m . However, t h i s a r t i c l e did not approach 1 1 The S tra n g le h o ld 1 1 i n vehemence. There were s e v e ra l in d ic a tio n s th a t the 1 i ^negative stag e of the c u rre n t disagreem ent was coming to ! an end. P ro fesso r Clapp acknowledged th a t he was d ea lin g i w ith a ste re o ty p e of an e d u c a tio n is t; he acknowledged th a t ; 6 l I t a d . , p. 4-51 *. I ,some of h is evidence was not s c i e n t i f i c a l l y determ ined. ,He made c o n s tru c tiv e su g g estio n s i n support of B e s to r rs i p lan fo r a Permanent S c ie n t i f ic and S ch o larly Commission 62 on Secondary E d u catio n . In 195^j the Dean of A rts and Sciences a t the U n iv e rsity of Alabama, wrote a p e n e tra tin g and c o n s tru c tiv e a n a ly s is of the e n tir e problem . Human f a il i n g s and t h e i r r e l a t i o n to the problem were d is c u s s e d . The p rin c ip le 1 t h a t le s s dem onstration means more dogmatic a s s e r tio n was !r e la te d to the co n tro v e rsy . Emotions and the f a c t t h a t !M . . . i t is more d i f f i c u l t fo r a man to change h is mind 'in p u b lic than in private*1 were covered by the a r t i c l e . ! The problem was said to have two g e n e ra l a re a s : 1 ;1 1 the id e o lo g ic a l and the a d m in is tra tiv e or the c o n f l i c t of j id e a s and the s tru g g le f o r pow er.1 1 From the sch o lar *s ■standpoint in the id e o lo g ic a l a re a , th e p ro fe sso rs of |e due a t io n had: j 1. de-em phasized th in k in g w ith the d o c trin e of ; I 1 1 le a rn in g by l i v i n g . 1 1 2 . discouraged d is c ip lin e d , th e o r e tic a l study of [Subject m atter. ! 3« emphasized contem porary l i f e and f a ile d to study the p a st s u f f i c i e n t l y . ^ H a ro ld L. C lapp, lfThe S tran g leh o ld R e v is itie d ,*f .A.U.P. B u lle tin , **0:300? Stammer, 195*f.__________________ _ j ! 1^8 ! 4 . been g u ilty of bad exp erim ental p ra c tic e s * Experim ents lacked c o n tin u ity ; they were not connected j w ith p a s t r e s u l t s or w ith o th er experim ents d ea lin g w ith | the same s u b je c t. T heories were propounded w ithout f a c tu a l evidence. In the a d m in is tra tiv e area the o b je c tio n s by the sc h o la rs were reduced to one: " . . . the schoolmen have j used p o li ti c a l- - a n d th e re fo re u n p ro fe s sio n a l—means and i methods to g a in c o n tr o l over elem entary and secondary . I I \ e d u c a tio n .” i i The schoolm en's o b je c tio n s to th e academ ician were j j analyzed in a s im ila r manner. Both p a r t i e s were se v e re ly j c r i t i c i z e d . The follow ing q u o ta tio n was i l l u s t r a t i v e of j i the tone of th e a r t i c l e : j E ducation i s not an e x a c t sc ie n c e , as is c le a r ly ! dem onstrated by the t a c t i c s of the c o n te s ta n ts . Both i ; p a r ti e s have to a la rg e e x te n t based th e ir dogmatism and a u th o rita ria n is m on commitment to e d u c a tio n a l ends , which they wish to r e a l iz e ra th e r than on e v id e n c e . which su p p o rts the procedures which they advo cate. Dean M arten te n Hoor who wrote th is c o n c ilia to r y j \ [ a r tic le in 1954 was one of the p ro fe s s o rs on th e committee i ‘of th e Tulane C hapter which compiled charges a g a in s t schools i of ed u catio n i n 1929. ^ M a rte n te n Hoor, "S cholars and Schoolmen1 1 A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 40:389-90, Autumn, 1954. IV. A SYNOPTIC PRESENTATION j ! Two graphs were prepared to provide a q u a n tita tiv e | base fo r t h i s stu d y . F igure 1 shows the number of pages j and the number of a r t i c l e s pu b lish ed in th e B u lle tin which ‘ were d i r e c tl y concerned w ith th e problem ( " a r t i c l e 1 1 does n o t n e c e s s a rily mean a com plete a r t i c l e ) . EXgure I , p . 150 , ' i jin clu d es a r t i c l e s which were c l a s s i f i e d as " h o s tile to ‘ i ;schools of e d u c a tio n ," "fa v o ra b le to schools of e d u c a tio n ," 1 and " n e u tr a l." A ll of the a r t i c l e s were concerned ! ; ' ! jd ire c tly w ith the r e la tio n s h ip s between schools of educa- \ Itio n said l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s . F igure 1, th e r e f o r e , ! \ jprovides an index of g e n e ra l i n t e r e s t in the problem . *Page re fe re n c e s fo r the a r t i c l e s used in com piling th is jgraph w i ll be found in Appendix A, p . 367* F igure 2, i jp. 1?1, i s of the same type but i s confined to a r t i c l e s 1 Iwhich were c l a s s i f i e d as " h o s tile to e d u c a tio n ." The 1 'sources fo r a r t i c l e s so c l a s s i f i e d are given in Appendix B, P« 369« 3?he v e r t i c a l axes of the graphs are used fo r both 1 . 1 ■pages and a r t i c l e s and the same d iv is io n s a re employed; ; t h a t i s , two pages and two a r t i c l e s c o in c id e . 1 ' These graphs were com piled w ith a c le a r re c o g n itio n of c e r t a i n in h e re n t weaknesses in t h i s pro ced u re. F i r s t 1 of a l l , th e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of each a r t i c l e was p u rely ,s u b je c tiv e . Moreover, a h y p o th esis was proposed in th is 1 I ’ d iss_ ertat ion which_i_s_re_late.d_to_Jbhe_mater.ial_presented_in J to a ? rH O •H -P F h o t f F * < 3 > -9 B lack - Pages Red - A r tic le s 20 to < D C s O 05 P, O 10 -V V 0 L. (1939) (1929) FIGURE 1 TOTAL ARTICLES A N D PAGES IN THE A.A.U.P. BULLETIN DEALING WITH THE RELATIONSHIPS BETW EEN LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES A N D SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION t-to < Num ber o f pages and a r tic le s . 151 P ages A r t i c l e s B la c k Red 20 1 0 20 1315 (1 9 2 9 ) (1939) FIGURE 2 TOTAL ARTICIES A N D PAGES IN THE A.A.U.P. BULLETIN IN W HICH LIBERAL ARTS PROFESSORS CRITICIZED SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION 152 t h e g r a p h s . B e c a u se t h e p e r s o n a l b i a s of t h e r e s e a r c h e r w ould e n t e r i n t o d e c i s i o n s o f how t o c l a s s i f y c e r t a i n a r t i c l e s , a r t i c l e s o f a b o r d e r l i n e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n w ere ! n e v e r c l a s s i f i e d a s ” h o s t i l e t o e d u c a t i o n , w A l s o , one r a u th o r c a n s a y i n one pag e w h a t i t t a k e s a n o t h e r a u t h o r t e n p a g e s t o s a y . I n t h e s e g r a p h s , b o t h w e re g i v e n e q u a l i v a l u e . One a r t i c l e may c o n t a i n o n ly o n e - h a l f o f a page d e a l i n g w i t h t h e p ro b le m w h i l e a n o t h e r a r t i c l e may d e v o te : t e n p a g e s t o t h e p r o b l e m . I n t h e s e g ra p h s b o t h w e re g i v e n e q u a l v a l u e . I t was assum ed t h a t s u c h d i s c r e p a n c i e s w ould i . . t e n d t o c a n c e l o u t d u e t o t h e s i z e o f t h e s a m p le . The B u l l e t i n c a r r i e d a r e l a t i v e l y c o n s t a n t number of p a g e s p e r i s s u e d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d c o v e re d by t h e g r a p h s . The g r a p h s sh o w t h a t t h e r e w ere tw o w aves o f i n t e r e s t ; a ro u n d 1933 and d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d 19l+9-195L > - * H o s t i l i t y t o s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n f o l l o w e d a s i m i l a r p a t t e r n . T h e re was a d e c i d e d d e c r e a s e i n i n t e r e s t and h o s t i l i t y i n 1955* T h is d e c r e a s e may h a v e r e s u l t e d fro m t h e f a c t t h a t a new e d i t o r o f t h e B u l l e t i n assum ed o f f i c e i n 1955 du e t o t h e d e a t h o f t h e p r e v i o u s e d i t o r . The new e d i t o r m ig h t h a v e b e e n c a u t i o u s a b o u t a c c e p t i n g h i g h l y c o n t r o v e r s i a l a r t i c l e s f o r h i s " d e b u t , !t On th e o t h e r h a n d t h e d e c r e a s e m ig h t have s i g n i f i e d a t r u e d e c r e a s e i n h o s t i l i t y and t h e e m e rg e n c e o f a p o s i t i v e p e r i o d i n t h e c o n t r o v e r s y . f CHAPTER VI j i RECENT CRITICISM--I93I+ TH RO U GH 1955 | | In C hapters I I I and IV of the p re se n t study a "rough** c h ro n o lo g ic a l approach was used. C ritic is m s were p re se n ted as they were f i r s t encountered in the l i t e r a t u r e j -and- when n ecessary for purposes of e x p o s itio n , a d d itio n a l in fo rm a tio n , in c lu d in g c r itic is m s made a t a l a t e r d a te , j was p resen ted even i f a r a th e r ra p id time change ensued. 1 ! ( C hapter V, which covered approxim ately the same y e a rs as 1 'the p re s e n t c h a p te r, was p resen ted as a running account of 1 th e co n tro v ersy as recorded in the pages of the B u lle tin of 1 — — —— — t 'th e American A sso c ia tio n of U n iv e rsity P ro fe s s o rs . The , j 1 ;purpose fo r doing th i s was to give a v e r t i c a l (lo n g itu d i- j i n a l) p ic tu re of th e c o n tro v e rsy ; t h a t i s , to fo llo w throughj i _ (on th e v e rb a l exchanges. In the p re s e n t c h a p te r, a |s t r i c t e r c h ro n o lo g ic a l arrangem ent of c r itic is m s was used i to give h o riz o n ta l c o n tin u ity . A d d itio n a l in fo rm atio n (but not f u r th e r c r itic is m ) has been p resen ted in the 1 p re se n t ch a p te r w ithout re g a rd to c h ro n o lo g ic a l o rd e r. ! This has been done in accordance w ith the p ro v isio n s s ta te d i n C hapter I ; th a t i s , c r it i q u e s have been made only when i t appeared reaso n ab le th a t th e c r it i q u e s would be a c c e p ta b le to both p a r tie s inv olved in the c o n tro v e rsy . 1 5 1 * 1 ! I I Due to the abundance of m a te r ia l, emphasis was j : placed on p o in ts of view th a t were novel; hence, much | t i m a te ria l which rep eated previous c r it ic i s m s was om itted j i from th is c h a p te r• j I . CRITICISMS—193^- THROUGH 1955 i i C ritic is m s —1.9V k Does the school of ed u c atio n j attem p t to do too much? Is i t attem p tin g to do an ; i im possible task ? One c r i t i c answering th e se q u estio n s t i n the a f f ir m a tiv e , sa id th a t e d u c a tio n is ts were ”groping fo r the s t a r s . " P ro fe sso rs of ed u catio n were said to be jwholly inadequate to d e a l w ith t h e i r two main a re a s of i i a t t e n t i o n - s o c i a l r e c o n s tru c tio n and p e r s o n a lity a d ju s t- ; ! jment. M oreover, the ta s k was too larg e and they were I : 'w asting th e ir tim e. In a d d itio n , the same c r i t i c main ta in e d th a t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n had e lim in a te d th e classroom te a c h e r s 1 c o n trib u tio n —a necessary one—to the i development of a science and philosophy of e d u c a tio n . F in a lly , p ro fe s s o rs of ed u c atio n were a tta c k e d fo r prom oting " c o lle c tiv is m .1 1 While p ro fe s s o rs of ed u catio n were being a tta c k e d fo r promoting " c o lle c tiv is m " another segment of the l i b e r a l a r t s group a s s e r te d t h a t schools of ed u catio n were i ! ^N athaniel P e f f e r , "E ducators Groping f o r the ! S t a r s ," H arper fs M agazine. 1 68: 2^ 1 -2 ,_ January!,_X93^*________ - ! 155 i i u n w i t t i n g l y a c c e p t i n g fls o c i a l c o n c e p t i o n s and p u r p o s e s i n h e r i t e d fro m t h e p a s t .* 1 O b s e s s io n w i t h 1 1 f o r m a l i s t i c m e th o d o lo g y ’* was a t t h e r o o t o f t h e p r o b le m . The m ore f u n d a m e n ta l p r o b le m s o f p u r p o s e , v a lu e and c o n t e n t h ad • b e e n n e g l e c t e d . S u c h was t h e v i e w p o i n t o f th e C om m ission , j o n th e S o c i a l S t u d i e s o f t h e A m e ric an H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i - 1 a t i o n . ^ The C o m m issio n , w h ic h i n c l u d e d p r o f e s s o r s o f j ! 'e d u c a t i o n , r e c o g n i z i n g th e c o n t r o v e r s y u n d e r d i s c u s s i o n i n ; th e p r e s e n t s t u d y , c a l l e d f o r a new a p p r o a c h t o t h e iproblem s The C o m m issio n , r e f u s i n g t o ta k e s i d e s i n t h i s ! s t r u g g l e o f v e s t e d i n t e r e s t s i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , p r o p o s e s : ( a ) a v i g o r o u s s e a r c h i n g o f h e a r t s by \ , s p e c i a l i s t s i n s u b j e c t m a t t e r and i n m e th o d o lo g y ; j j (b) a r e u n i o n i n b o t h i n s t a n c e s o f s p e c i a l t y w i t h th e | l i v i n g t r e e o f k n o w le d g e and t h o u g h t ; and ( c ) a r e - i v a l u a t i o n o f s u b j e c t m a t t e r and m e th o d o lo g y w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o s o c i a l p u r p o s e r a t h e r t h a n i n t e r m s o f a b s t r a c t l o g i c and schem es o f o r g a n i z a t i o n . I ' I n p r a c t i c a l o u tc o m e , t h i s w i l l m ean: (a ) a d r a s t i c j r e d u c t i o n i n t h e num ber of h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d c o u r s e s i n h i s t o r y , p o l i t i c s , e c o n o m ic s , and s o c i o l o g y o f f e r e d i t o t e a c h e r s i n c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s ; (b) t h e ; ! e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f g e n e r a l and b a la n c e d c o u r s e s i n t h e s e I ; s u b j e c t s f o r t e a c h e r s ; ( c ) t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f s e m in a r s ; i n w h ich t e a c h e r s may r e c e i v e r i g o r o u s t r a i n i n g i n j t h o s e m e th o d s of r e s e a r c h , b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l o p e r a t i o n s , ; a n a l y s i s , v e r i f i c a t i o n , s y n t h e s i s , an d c r i t i c i s m i n - j d i s p e n s a b l e t o t h e a d v an cem en t o f l e a r n i n g and ' e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n * ^C o n c l u s i o n s and H ecom m endations o f th e C o m m issio n * C om m ission o f t h e S o c i a l S t u d i e s o f t h e A m e ric a n H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n (Hew Y o rk : C h a r l e s S c r i b n e r *s and S o n s , 193*0, !PP. 69-73. i 156 In the f i e l d of te a c h e r tr a in in g t h i s w i l l means (a) a d r a s tic c u rta ilm e n t i n the number of c o u rse s— o fte n t h i n , a r i d , and d u p lic a tin g —o ffe re d in the p r in c ip le s and methods of ed u catio n ; (b) an in s is te n c e t h a t persons engaged in tr a in in g te a c h e rs i n v ario u s branches of le a rn in g s h a l l , f i r s t of a l l , be competent sc h o la rs in th ese f i e l d s ; and (c) th e abandonment of the co n cep tio n of a d i s t i n c t ’scien ce of education* and the reu n io n of e d u c atio n w ith the g r e a t stream s of human knowledge, th o u g h t, and a s p i r a ti o n —e m p iric a l, e t h i c a l , and a e s th e tic * These p ro p o sals Imply the dominance n e ith e r of th a t anomalous p ro fe s s io n known as ’s u b je c t-m a tte r s p e c ia l is t s * nor of t h a t e q u a lly anomalous group c a lle d ’e d u c a tio n a l s p e c i a l i s t s ’; . . .3 ( !Although the c r itic is m s of the te a c h e r - tr a in in g programs I were in the l i b e r a l a r t s ’’t r a d i t i o n ” (except f o r the charge ith a t e d u c a tio n is ts had accepted s o c ia l conceptions and i purposes from the p a s t ) , the p ro ffe re d s o lu tio n probably d id not re c e iv e much support from academ icians* i In 193*+ the C la s s ic a l A sso c ia tio n , i n co n v en tio n , i endorsed the fin d in g s of Committee Q. In a d d itio n they ;o ffe re d f u r th e r op in io n as fo llo w s :1 * " 1. There was no r e li a b l e evidence t h a t ” ♦ . . pro f e s s io n a l req u irem en ts have r e s u lte d in an improvement in secondary i n s tr u c ti o n a t a l l commensurate w ith the amount of th e req u irem en ts* ” ! 3l b i d . . pp. 110-12. ^ " P ro fe s s io n a l Requirem ents" ( e d i t o r i a l ) , The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l, 29*56*+-6?, May, 193*+* j 157 , 2 . 1 1 G eneral co u rses" in ed u c atio n should be taken \ a f t e r the s tu d e n t has had two o r more years* e x p e rie n c e — i . e . , many courses should be moved to the graduate sch o o l, j 3 . The curriculum fo r a d m in is tra tiv e c e r t i f i c a t e s J and renew als of o th e r c e r t i f i c a t e s should not unduly i :s tr e s s p ro fe s s io n a l courses but should in clu d e academic stu d y . There should be a c o n sid e ra b le low ering of I p ro fe s s io n a l requirem ents; tw elve sem ester-hou rs were j ^considered ample. The r e s u l t a n t economy should be devoted ! 1 1 jto p u r s u it of s u b je c t-m a tte r e o u rs e s . j i I The q u e stio n of balance between academic and j ■ { (p ro fe ssio n a l s tu d ie s was tak en up (in 19^2) by a J o in t j i !committee of the F aculty of Harvard C ollege and the | Graduate S c h o o l'o f E d u catio n . Although no one is tr u ly . (" n e u tra l1 * in th is c o n tro v e rsy , most o b serv ers would agree i ’ ;th at th is committee a t l e a s t approached " n e u tr a lity " and ^ o b je c tiv ity of th o u g h t. This committee d ir e c te d i t s remarks p rim a rily to the f ie l d of E n g lis h , b u t the same a n a ly s is could be ap p lied to o th e r academic bran ch es. The ; t jp rin e ip a l purpose of th e co lleg e E n g lish departm ent was i i jSaid to be . . the d isse m in a tio n of knowledge about th e j i i p a s t and p re se n t of l i t e r a t u r e and the in c u lc a tio n o f ta s te and in s ig h t in c u ltu r e , human n atu re and the world. . . . " i i The E n g lish departm ent, according to the com m ittee, was | ; i$8 ; i , . ■ ! th e only e d u c a tio n a l agency f u l f i l l i n g th is adm irable .p u rp o se. The committee c o n tin u ed : ^ 1 . . . the E n g lish fa c u lty cannot be asked m a te ria lly I to a l t e r i t s cu rricu lu m in o rd er th a t high school : teac h in g of the contemporary and the s o c io lo g ic a l s h a l l I go forward in c re a s in g ly . . . . The E n g lish departm ent j which i s honorably tru e to i t s aims w i l l continue to i n s i s t th a t a wide acqu aintan ce w ith l i t e r a r y c la s s ic s ] i s e s s e n t i a l to the p re p a ra tio n of te a c h e r s , w hile a t i the same time th e scho ol of ed u catio n and th e secondary j school world seem to be le s s and le s s in te r e s te d in such an ac q u ain ta n ce. In sum, the p re s e n t demands in j j te a c h e r - tr a in in g seem to be a t c ro ss-p u rp o ses w ith the ; ! p re se n t aim of E n g lish departm ents, and i t i s t h is j j profound d iffe re n c e i n e d u c a tio n a l philosophy which j i re n d ers the ta s k of the committee so d i f f i c u l t . ? ; : O th ers, of co u rse , d id not look on th e q u estio n of balance |a s a p h ilo s o p h ic a l problem; they considered e d u c atio n t i cou rses simply as an im p o sitio n and an attem p t to g e t poweri C ritic is m s —19^5. A Commission of the M athem atical i I A sso c ia tio n of America, composed e n tir e ly of u n iv e r s ity .p r o f e s s o r s , p re fe rre d a guided reading program to courses , i in ed u catio n fo r those p re p a rin g to teach in c o lle g e . Where le g a l requirem ents were concerned, no recommendations were ■ i f imade as to which co u rse s in ed u catio n should be taken ; i i because, they s a id , th e re were no stan d ard s in th e se ; co u rse s; a ls o , th e re was so much d u p lic a tio n , a j 1 K i The T raining of Secondary School T eachers—S s n e c ia l- ! l X w ith R eference to E n g lis h . R eport o f a J o in t Committee of |th e F acu lty of Harvard C ollege and of the Graduate School of ‘E du cation (Cambridge: Harvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 19*+2), j _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ :_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - J [ ' “ ■ “ - ” ~~........ ”1 5 9 ’ | recommendation would be m eaningless. As to courses in ■ | ed u catio n which touched on m athem atics, the committee j | . 1 ' re p o rte d : I j i I . . • from the stan d p o in t of a major stu d e n t of j I m athem atics, the s t a t i s t i c a l content and o th e r theory 1 | of a m athem atical nature involved i n the cou rses is , sometimes p re se n ted on such a low le v g l th a t the j ; s tu d e n tfs time i s i n e f f i c i e n t l y u se d .^ ! I ! I j | A p ro fe s s o r of French, in comparing the p re p a ra tio n j j of te a c h e rs i n France and the U nited S ta te s , claim ed th a t j , 1 j the French system produced th in k in g in d iv id u a ls among j ; secondary school stu d e n ts whereas the American system , with- 1 j i t s use of the p ro je c t method, did n o t. The d e f ic ie n c ie s ! in American secondary edu catio n were a tt r i b u t e d to one i ! cau se—1 1 the ty ra n n ic a l ru le of schools of education.*1 < t ; S o c i a l i z e d e d u c a tio n ,1 1 promoted by schools of ed u c atio n , j was se v e rly c r i t i c i z e d : I t a l l goes back, I b e lie v e , to the i n i t i a l f a lla c y f j of m aintaining t h a t the ro le of ed u catio n i s to f i t the j ; in d iv id u a l f o r s o c ie ty , th a t i s to say, fo r the s t a tu s j j quo. Free th in k in g is thus nipped in the bud; p r o g r e s s 1 ; becomes im p o ssib le. I fo r one, urge a r e tu r n to the ! | o ld e r form ula which p la c e s a premium on knowledge p er I j s e .^ ! In only fo u r in sta n c e s was the charge th a t schools of I i I ed u catio n p e rp e tu a te th e s ta tu s quo encountered in t h is j M B M M M f J I j ; 1 - - T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . j ! ^*!B eport on the T rain in g of Teachers of Ma them atic s,*l 'Commission of the M athem atical A sso ciatio n of America, < American M athem atical M onthly. *4-2:275, May, 1935. | ! ^Douglas W . Alden, * * A Franco-American H eresy ,1 1 j 'School and S o c ie ty , * 4 -2 :511* October 12, 1935.________________ I i I !stu d y . The d e p re ssio n and the g e n e ra l atmosphere ! i jfa v o rin g change in th ese y e a rs was, no doubt, r e f l e c t e d j j i n th ese v iew p o in ts. j i I i C r itic is m s —19^6. A committee o f the American ! 8 1 I Chemical S o ciety endorsed the fin d in g s of Committee Q. • I This committee a ls o opposed ffu n r e s tr ic te d c e r t i f i c a t i o n 1 1 j j and suggested t h a t th e sequence in p ro fe s s io n a l ed u c atio n j |sh o u ld be completed w ith in one academic y e a r. The j committee r e p o r t was adopted and endorsed by the A.C.S. in ! ! 1 co n v en tio n . ! I I ! One of the e a r l i e s t pronouncements o f R obert Maynard H utchins d ea lin g w ith the ed u c atio n of te a c h e rs was made in ; t h i s y e a r. Although H utchins is fre q u e n tly c r e d ite d w ith J t jholding the b e l i e f th a t schools of ed u catio n have no r e a l !purpose he has a c tu a lly played a very unim portant r o le in : |th e co n tro v ersy between c o lle g e s of l i b e r a l a r t s and ! 5 schools of e d u c a tio n . His name was only r a r e ly encountered ! ; in the l i t e r a t u r e d ea lin g w ith t h i s c o n tro v e rsy —probably j j because h is w ritin g s assume th a t the u s u a l o rg a n iz a tio n of j i h ig h er ed u c atio n should be abandoned. H u tc h in s1 id eas on ! I the s u b je c t a t hand were p re se n te d i n th is manner: < . ~ | 1 ”The High School Teaching o f C h em istry ,” Committee |o f the American Chemical S o c ie ty , School and S o c ie ty . • ! M -3 i 60*f-06, A p ril 13, 1936. j 161 ~ The p ro sp e c tiv e teach er 1s g e n e ra l e d u c a tio n would he i d e n tic a l w ith th a t of the law yer, d o c to r, and c le rg y man * With a good ed u catio n in the l i b e r a l a r t s , which ! are grammar, r h e to r ic , lo g ic , and m athem atics, he has | learn ed th e b a sic ru le s of pedagogy. The l i b e r a l a r ts I a r e , a f te r a l l , the a r t s of reducing the i n t e l l e c t fromi j mere p o t e n t i a l i t y to a c t . And t h is i s what teach in g i s j ! The l i b e r a l a r t s t r a i n the te a c h e r in how to teach , j \ t h a t i s , i n how to o rg an ize, e x p re ss, and communicate | ■ knowledge. In the u n iv e r s ity he should le a r n what to ' | te a c h . He should study under a l l th re e f a c u l t i e s j i [jn etap h y sics, s o c ia l s c ie n c e , n a tu r a l science!]? and j j e s p e c ia lly under th a t o f m etap h y sics. I f i t th en ! I appears t h a t he i s d e stin e d fo r in v e s tig a tio n or fo r i v o c a tio n a l in s tr u c tio n he may le a rn th e techniques of | in v e s tig a tio n or p r a c tic e in a re se a rc h or te c h n ic a l | i n s t i t u t e . 9 |A s h o rt time l a t e r H utchins added: ; Most of the argument about te a c h e r - tr a in in g Is be- ; sid e th e p o in t. The argument rev o lv es around the j q u e stio n whether a p ro sp ec tiv e teac h er should take a ! : ' l o t of co u rses in the school of ed u catio n or take a l o t 1 i of courses in the s u b je c t-m a tte r d ep artm en ts. The answer is th a t the teac h er should understand h is s u b je c t and should u n derstand ed u catio n ; b u t, f i r s t of a l l , he ; should h im self be ed u c ated . He should have a good I g e n e ra l e d u c a tio n .3-0 I • By promoting re q u ire d hours in e d u c atio n , ed u c atio n i s t s were c o n tra d ic tin g them selves according to Dean j • i ! V irg in ia G ild e rsle e v e of Barnard C o lle g e .3 -3 - R igid r e q u ir e -I 1 ! jments f o r co lleg e adm ission were being challenged by the * i i % o b e rt Maynard H u tch in s, The H igher Learning in America (lew Haven: Yale U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1936), 'p p . 114-15. i ^ R o b e r t Maynard H u tch in s, No F rie n d ly Voice i (Chicago: U n iv e rsity of Chicago P re s s , 1936)) p . 12*+. j -^ V irg in ia G ild e rsle e v e , w And Sadly T each,1 1 The ' American S c h o la r, 5 :^2^- 30? Autumn, 1936._________________ ! 162 I " E i g h t - Y e a r S tu d y " w h ile , a t t h e same t i m e , r e q u i r e m e n t s i n j e d u c a t i o n (w h ic h s im p ly m e a n t " e x p o s u r e " to t h e i n s t r u c t i o n ! o f f e r e d ) w e re a c c e p t e d w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e | r e q u i r e d c o u r s e s ". .. d r o v e t h e h e s t young s c h o l a r s t o j o t h e r f i e l d s o f w ork, . . . " T h is s i t u a t i o n s u p p o s e d l y j made i t i m p o s s i b l e f o r some o f th e b e s t g r a d u a t e s o f l i b e r a l a r t s c o l l e g e s t o t e a c h i n t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s . j C r i t i c i s m s — 1 9 ^ 7 . P r e s i d e n t Norm an F o e r s t e r ! ] ! : c r i t i c i z e d t h e " t h i n l i t e r a l n e s s " o f men i n e d u c a t i o n who i w e re " p r a c t i c a l u n t o i m p r a e t i b i l i t y ." T h is r e s u l t e d f r o m j t h e d o m in a n c e o f s c i e n c e p l u s s c i e n t i s t i c i n d o c t r i n a t i o n I : I ; i n a l l f i e l d s — b u t p a r t i c u l a r l y i n e d u c a t i o n . The e d u c a - i ! ■ i j t i o n d e p a r t m e n t was i n t e r p r e t e d a s a b o o m e ra n g — a r e s u l t o f! | s c i e n t i s m , m a t e r i a l i s m , an d e x tr e m e s p e c i a l i z a t i o n w h ic h | i < I h a d i n v a d e d t h e e n t i r e u n i v e r s i t y — a n d m a t e r i a l i s m w as ! 1 ;r e a p i n g i t s own r e w a r d . H o w e v e r, p a r t o f th e c o n t r o v e r s y i was d u e t o t h e f e e l i n g among p r o f e s s o r s i n g e n e r a l t h a t i . 'J t h e y w e re " e x p e r t s " i n e d u c a t i o n a s w e l l a s i n t h e i r j j 1 !s p e c i a l t i e s . T hey w o u ld n o t b e so p r e s u m p tu o u s a s t o o p i n e : | ! io n m a t t e r s o f a s tr o n o m y o r h y d r a u l i c s b u t e d u c a t i o n was a i ' ■ 1 I ' d i f f e r e n t m a t t e r — i t was a n a r t and t h e y w e re c o m p e te n t i n , 't h e f i e l d by v i r t u e o f t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e i i p r o f e s s o r s b e l i e v e d t h a t th e b e s t m in d s w e re n o t g o i n g i n t o th e s c h o o l o f e d u c a t i o n — t h e r e w e re no r e a l l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d i ( p r o f e s s o r s i n e d u c a t i o n fro m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f s c i e n t i f i c 1 6 3 I a b i l i t y . ^ F o e r s t e r p r o p o s e d g o in g b a c k t o c e r t i f i c a t i o n by e x a m i n a t i o n . I n s o d o in g he a c c u s e d e d u c a t i o n i s t s o f a c o n t r a d i c t i o n : Why s t a t e c e r t i f i c a t i o n i s made t o d e p e n d u p o n h o u r s s p e n t i n c o u r s e s i s a m y s t e r y o f t h e f i r s t o r d e r , i n v ie w o f t h e u n e v e n q u a l i t y o f su c h c o u r s e s i n th e i n s t i t u t i o n s o f t h e s t a t e and t h e h i g h v a l i d i t y s a i d t o h a v e b e e n r e a c h e d b y o b j e c t i v e e x a m i n a t i o n s j ( ’s c i e n t i f i c m e a s u r e m e n t ’ ) . Why do n o t e d u c a t i o n i s t s i u r g e t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a u n i f o r m S t a a t s e x a m e n ? Why? An i n t e l l i g e n t s t u d e n t c o u ld i n d e p e n d e n t l y p r e p a r e f o r 1 a n e x a m i n a t i o n i n a sum m er— a h i g h l y i n t e l l i g e n t \ s t u d e n t i n much l e s s t h a n a sum m er.1 3 I j Some c l a r i f i c a t i o n i s n e c e s s a r y r e g a r d i n g t h e a b o v e | ^ q u o t a t i o n . F i r s t o f a l l , a l t h o u g h r e s e a r c h w a s b e in g d o n e \ j i i n t h e a r e a o f t e a c h e r p r e p a r a t i o n an d th e p r e d i c t i o n o f | t e a c h i n g s u c c e s s , fe w c l a i m s o f ” h i g h v a l i d i t y 1 1 i n t h i s 'a r e a w e re made by e d u c a t i o n i s t s S e c o n d l y , th e e d u c a t i c n - i a l s i t u a t i o n i n Germ any w h ic h F o e r s t e r u s e d f o r c o m p a r is o n j 'w as v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t fro m t h a t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . A i ! common c u r r i c u l u m i n Germ any m ade u n i f o r m t r a i n i n g . p o s s i b l e . JL n a t i o n a l r e s p e c t f o r p u r e s c h o l a r s h i p 12 ! Norm an F o e r s t e r , The A m e ric a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , I ( C h a p e l H i l l : The U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o l i n a P r e s s , ; 11 9 3 7 ) , P P . 1 2 5 - 2 6 . ' ^ ib ia .. pp. lo o -o i. F o r e x a m p le , s e e S t e p h e n M. C o r e y , "T he P r e s e n t j S t a t e o f I g n o r a n c e A bout F a c t o r s E f f e c t i n g T e a c h e r S u c c e s s ,” E d u c a t i o n a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n a n d S u p e r v i s i o n . 1 8 : ^ 8 1 - 9 0 , ; O c t o b e r , 1 9 3 2 . 1 t I s t r e n g t h e n e d t h e a c c e p t a n c e o f r i g i d e x a m i n a t i o n s f o r i i 't e a c h e r s . I n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s t h e c u l t u r a l p a t t e r n h a s o f t e n s t r e s s e d lfknow -how tf a b o v e 1 1 k n o w -w h a t. tf A l s o , o u r t r a d i t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y , m a n i f e s t e d i n e d u c a t i o n by l o c a l i • i c o n t r o l , w o rk s a g a i n s t a S t a a t s e x a m e n . B u t m ore i m p o r t a n t j j t h a n t h e s e f a c t o r s i s t h e q u e s t i o n o f who w o u ld w r i t e t h e e x a m i n a t i o n . F i t z p a t r i c k , i n 1 9 2 7 , s u g g e s t e d t h a t i c o m p r e h e n s iv e e x a m i n a t i o n s i n u n i v e r s i t i e s c o u ld h a n d l e | jth e s i t u a t i o n . I f t h e s u b j e c t - m a t t e r p r o f e s s o r s and I t i p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n c o u l d a g r e e , t h e p l a n m ig h t be ;f e a s i b l e ; b u t i f t h e s e tw o g r o u p s c o u ld a g r e e t h e r e w o u ld j ;p r o b a b l y be no r e a s o n f o r th e e x a m i n a t i o n . I f t h e r e w as 1 | ! | a g re e m e n t a s t o th e c o n t e n t o f t h e c u r r i c u l u m f o r t e a c h e r s j i s u r e l y m a s t e r y o f t h a t c o n t e n t c o u ld be a c h i e v e d w i t h o r 1 |w i t h o u t a c o m p r e h e n s iv e e x a m i n a t i o n . P r o p o s a l s f o r a I ■ S t a a t s e x a m e n i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s p u t th e c a r t b e f o r e t h e h o r s e — a g re e m e n t b e tw e e n l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s and p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n b e in g t h e “ h o r s e ” i n t h i s c a s e . I i ! i I C r i t i c i s m s - - 1 9 1 8 . The l i b e r a l c o l l e g e w as i i t h r e a t e n e d w i t h e x t i n c t i o n b e c a u s e o f t h e p r e v a l e n c e o f . ' i |Dewey fs p h i l o s o p h y ; s u c h was t h e th em e o f a b o o k by P r e s i - j jd e n t F o e r s t e r ♦ P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n i n g e n e r a l w ere I ------------------------ ----------- i ^^E dw ard A. F i t z p a t r i c k , The S c h o l a r s h i p o f T e a c h e r s i n S e c o n d a r y S c h o o ls (New Y o rk s The M a c m illa n Co., 1192 7), P P . 5 ^ - 5 6 . 165 c r i t i c i z e d , b u t F o e r s t e r fs s p e c if ic ta r g e t was the au th o rs of *ffae E d u catio n al F r o n ti e r ,. D iscu ssin g A r is to tle *s R e a l i s t i c 1 1 co n c lu sio n th a t th e problems of s o c ie ty are always fundam entally due to the wickedness of human n a tu re , i F o e rs te r w rote: . , , we are w ell su p p lied today w ith e d u c a tio n is ts who assu re us th a t they can change human n a tu re , i f we w i l l but give them enough power—fo r example, the s au th o rs of a re c e n t book e n t i t l e d The E d u ca tio n al | F r o n t i e r . most of them p ro fe s s o rs i n Teachers C o lle g e, , | Columbia, d is c ip le s of John Dewey and K arl M arx.^° j ‘S o c ia l emphasis and esp o u sal of a planned so c ie ty by •e d u c a tio n is ts were scored: j ! I The g r e a te s t ed u catio n fo rc e , they remind u s , i s j s o c ie ty i t s e l f . I t follow s th a t i f ed u c atio n , i n the f u l l sense, is to be d if f e r e n t from what i t now i s , 1 ! s o c ie ty w ill f i r s t have to be d if f e r e n t: the s o c ia l ; I re v o lu tio n thus becomes th e b u sin ess of p ro fe s s io n a l I , e d u c a tio n . 1 Using examples (a c h ild *s i n t e r e s t i n p r in tin g and the use ! of v o tin g booths) from the book he was b e ra tin g , F o e rs te r i w rote: ! ; The c h ild s t a r t s w ith a piece of type; he ends w ith so c ia lism . . . The c h ild s t a r t s w ith a b a l l o t ; he ends w ith s o c ia lis m . Thus i t w i l l come about th a t l i t t l e c h ild re n , t a c t f u l l y in v e s tig a tin g the methods used by our ( ! b o u rg eo isie i n th e c o n tro l of in d u stry and p o l i t i e s , j i w ill c a tc h a v is io n of the kingdom of Planned S o ciety 1 th a t is to be. Thus w i l l ed u catio n lead the way to xuNorman F o e r s te r , The F uture of the L ib e ra l Co l i e ge (Mew York: Apple ton-C entury C o., 1938), p . *+ . •^Ib id . ? p. 33. 1 8 the s o c ia l r e v o lu tio n in America. . . . !P re s id e n t F o e rs te r claim ed th a t in d o c tr in a tio n would r e s u l t [ (from the th e o rie s of e d u c a tio n is ts . F urtherm ore, educa t i o n i s t s were accused of Hsco rn in g 1 1 s u b je c t m a tte r and :over-em phasizing in d iv id u a l i n t e r e s t . A ll t h i s was due to i nsen tim en tal hum anitarian!sm !t which F o e rs te r d efin e d as the |e q u iv a le n t of fre e in g humans from p h y sic a l s u f f e r in g —not !to be confused w ith th e humanism he advocated. A p ro fe ss o r of chem istry blamed schools of e d u c a tio n ;fo r not weeding out i n f e r io r s tu d e n ts . In a d d itio n , he charged th a t people who f a i l e d in o th er departm ents d r i f t e d in to th e sch o o l of e d u c a tio n . I t was suggested t h a t schools of ed u catio n r e s t r i c t t h e i r e n ro llm e n ts.* ^ In th e same a r t i c l e , i t was a s s e r te d t h a t th e q u a lity of h ig h -sch o o l g ra d u ates and h ig h -sc h o o l teach in g had d e c lin e d . This d e c lin e had p a r a lle le d th re e f a c to r s and a c a u s e -e f fe c t r e la tio n s h ip was h in te d . These th ree 20 f a c to r s w ere: (1) the in c re a s e in le g a l requirem ents of cou rses in ed u c atio n ; (2) the acceptance of th e theory t h a t m ental tr a in in g i n one s u b je c t was w ithout v alu e in o th er s u b je c ts ; and (3) the s u b s t i tu t i o n of amusement f o r d r i l l l 8 I b i d . . p . 3 7 . H. Simons, Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r Teachers of C hem istry. n Jo u rn a l of Chemical E d u catio n . 15:18. Jan uary. 1938. — : ---------- “ ----------------- 2QI b i d . . p . 21. 1 6? work in the s c h o o ls • P re sid e n t V alentine *s p o s itio n was th a t flsideshow s” th re a te n e d to swallow "th e main t e n t . 1 1 Debates over guidance, c h ild psychology, e x tr a - c u r r ic u la r a c t i v i t i e s , and a u d io -v is u a l aid s were occupying the a t t e n t io n of te a c h e r - tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s to an e x te n t which hindered the development of the proper c u l t u r a l background necessary fo r e f f e c tiv e te a c h in g . T est r e s u l t s were amassed which i had l i t t l e p r a c t i c a l use except to enhance p e rso n a l | |r e p u ta tio n s . The e n tir e - te a c h e r - t r a i n i n g program was said f to be too narrow and te c h n ic a l. Emphasis on method might have a negative v a lu e . Speaking of the e x c e lle n t te a c h e rs in co lle g e who had never tak en a course in e d u c a tio n , j ' I ;V alen tin e said s "Form alized i n s t r u c t i o n in teac h in g methods ! ■* ' jmight have robbed them of the very o r i g i n a l i t y which makes j | them e f f e c tiv e . l1 ^ i | ! C r itic is m s —1939. The q u e stio n of the n e c e s s ity of I | a te a c h e r 's co lleg e was s t i l l b ein g d ebated . A fte r j I i analyzing the e n tir e q u e stio n i n a p h ilo so p h y -lad en a r tic le ^ i 1 !C arm ichael concluded: i I | j The aims of ed u catio n and l i f e are not in the t I custody of te a c h e rs c o lle g e s . So fa r as they are in I the custody of any c o lle g e , i t i s the l i b e r a l a r t s 23-Alan V alentine , "Teacher T raining v ersus Teacher E d u c a tio n ,1 1 The Ed u c a tio n a l R ecord. 19s3^2, J u ly , 193$. 1 6 8 c o lle g e or w hatever c o lleg e i s concerned w ith sc ie n c e , l i t e r a t u r e , h is to r y and ph ilo so p h y , sin ce i t i s in th a t kind of co lleg e th a t the fin d in g s of the g re a t s p i r i t s o f a l l tim e s, on t h a t s u b je c t, a re preserv ed and ( stu d ied * One may hazard th e op in io n t h a t i f the j p ed ag o g ists had co n su lted those departm ents of know- ! led g e, they would have saved them selves much p a in and j a good p a r t of the h o s t ile c r iti c is m which they c o n s ta n tly re c e iv e . This in tu rn su ggests t h a t the i s o lu tio n to the te a c h e rs c o lle g e problem i s , as observed b e fo re , the a b so rp tio n of what th ere is d i s t i n c t i v e in t h a t c o lle g e by th e g e n e ra l c o lle g e , and the in te g r a tio n of th is w ith the e x is tin g program fo r the e d u c atio n of the mind and s p i r i t . What was i l e f t over could be e lim in a te d w ithout e d u c a tio n a l lo s s j i to anyone. The ro o t of our ed u c a tio n a l e v ils would ' ! then have been c u t, and a b e t t e r p la n t would have a j chance to grow th e r e . A professor-m em ber of Phi Beta Kappa w rote th a t the j te a c h e rs c o lle g e was w. . . the p o o re st of a l l th e d e p a rt- ’ ; ? ;ments of h ig h e r e d u c a tio n ; they were poor in money, poor ] j ! ' in the thought and p lan n in g th a t went in to t h e i r d evelop - i \ i 1 m ent, poor in the b ra in s and d i s t i n c t i o n of t h e i r 1 l i f a c u l ti e s and s tu d e n ts . These departm ents were s a id to | be an fl. . . open dumping ground fo r the d u l l and s t u p i d .f^3 C r itic is m s —194-0. A c r it i c - p r o f e s s o r took up the • s u b je c t of term inology i n e d u c a tio n . Schools o f e d u c a tio n , i I he s ta te d , depended upon in v e n tio n of new words fo r th e ir i jv ery e x is te n c e ; th e re simply w asn1t enough th eo ry fo r the ^ P e t e r C arm ichael, “Are Teachers C o lleg es Weeded?1 1 School and S o c ie tv . 50:4-4-3-4-4-, September 30, 1939* « ^E d w in b . Embree, “The E ducation of T e a c h e rs,1 1 | The American S c h o la r. 8*4-25* Autumn, 1939* hundreds of te a c h e rs c o lle g e s to give thousands of c o u rse s. i Using a statem en t from th e T h irty -e ig h th Yearbook of the i ' i N atio n al S o ciety fo r the Study of E d ucation, he p o in ted | out how the obvious was tr e a te d as im p o rtan t. The s t a t e ment: ”Sexual m atu ratio n is an im portant f a c to r in re a d in e ss fo r c e r t a i n s o c ia l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . ” At l e a s t some humor was in tro d u ced in to the c o n tro - j jversy by th is w r i t e r . He concluded: j • To sum up the m atter sim ply, i n the language of j i e d u c a tio n is ts , one might say t h a t the r e s p o n s ib ility j 1 of the schools of ed u catio n fo r the p re se n t ch a o tic d is o rg a n iz a tio n in the c u r r ic u la of prim ary and secondary e d u c a tio n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s is due to th e ir | h y p e rtro p h ic a l co m p licatio n of pedagogic ed u catio n j ! through the d u p lic a tio n of i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a te ria ls I under v a rio u s d iv e rg e n t i n d e f i n i te p o ly s y lla b ic i 1 t e r m i n o l o g ie s .^ | C r itic is m s —19^1. Jargon was developed by ”quacks” , j l j (p ro fe sso rs of ed u c atio n ) to hoodwink p a re n ts of p u b lic i i I I school p u p ils —thus charged P ro fe sso r Waterhouse in a ! i i ‘lengthy book which ran the gamut of charges a g a in s t sc h o o ls ( of e d u c a tio n . Prom inent among the charges were th e s e : j ! 1. / ’P edagogical te r m ite s ” and ’ ’pedagogical New- j 1 I I D e a le rs” were g u ilty of a n t i - i n t e l l e c t u a l i s m . They catered! i I to ”i n c u r i o s i t y ” by try in g to make ed u c atio n e a sy . They i had acquired ”a v ested i n t e r e s t in the m aintenance of i G. P o rtw e ll, “Mumbo Jumbo i n E d u c a tio n ,” The American M ercury. 50:^29, August, 19*+0. 1 7 0 i g n o r a n c e J j 2. Methods courses were designed fo r the purpose j i I of making the te a c h e r fs work in v o lv e a minimum of p erso n a l 1 !e f f o r t . 26 j i I 3 . Like 1 1 f i f t h colum ns,” the pedagogues had ru in ed the A.B. degree as a c e r t i f i c a t e of i n t e l l e c t u a l d i s t i n c t i o n . 2^ j j M -* Teachers had to take ”hours” in e d u c atio n as a I po I b a sis fo r prom otion. ° j 5. Schools were regarded not as tr a in in g grounds • I i I f o r the p u p ils but as la b o r a to r ie s where th e o r i s t s could j j j I tr y out t h e i r p e t i d e a s .2^ > I ! 6 . There was no "danger of d e te c tio n ” when a ; ! | :p ro fe s so r of e d u c a tio n was incom petent; in o th er f i e l d s , ! I jla c k of knowledge would make incompetency ap p aren t to ' l a l l . 30 I ' 2?F rancis A. W aterhouse, Our E ducation Racket (Boston: Meador P u b lish in g C o., 19^ lT , pp. 198, 103. ! 26I b i d . , pp. 86-87. While t h i s may be a b y -p ro d u ct, 1 c e r ta in ly methods courses were designed p rim a rily to f u r th e r more e f f e c tiv e te a c h in g . | 2?I b i d . . p . IO3 . ! > 28I b i d . . pp. 19^ - 95. 29 lb id . , p . 83. 3^1b i d .. p . 1 9 6 . 171 7 . "Big s p e c i a l i s t s ’* who served on the summer s e s s io n f a c u l t i e s made the te a c h e rs take t h e i r co u rse s or f o r f e i t p re ferm en t. In a d d itio n , Waterhouse a s s e r te d th a t th e e d u c a tio n i s t s claim ed, in substance i f n o t in w ords, t h a t they could ;H . . . a u to m a tic a lly transform a d u l l , h eav y -w itted fe llo w i n to an in s p ir in g , b r i l l i a n t p e r s o n a lity . . . . tf32 What the b a s is was fo r th is sta te m e n t was n o t g iv e n . Waterhouse *s "proof" of th e s u p e r f lu ity of courses in e d u c a tio n was th a t te a c h e rs in o th er p ro fe s s io n a l schools d id not tak e co u rses in e d u c a tio n and saw no need f o r such c o u r s e s . 33 This argument had much th a t was sound in i t , b u t the analogy was perhaps overdrawn. There was l i t t l e evidence t h a t th e p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c s were aware o f the g e n e ra l agreem ent among p ro fe s s o rs of ed u c atio n t h a t th e p sy c h o lo g ic a l order and th e lo g ic a l order (as d efin e d by John Dewey) are one and th e same in th e h ig h er le v e ls of le a r n in g . F o e r s te r , f o r exam ple, d id not re co g n ize t h i s when he mentioned t h a t p ro fe s s o rs of ed u catio n f a i l e d to p r a c tic e what they p r e a e h e d . ^ * 4' 3 1 lb id ., p . 195. 32I b i d . . p . 87. 3 3 lb id ., pp. 196-97. B ^ o e r s t e r , The American S ta te U n iv e r s ity , o j d. c i t . , ^ pp. 12^-25. The f i r s t a r t i c l e i n the C la s s ic a l Jo u rn a l to make a f r o n t a l a tta c k on sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n was encountered in the issu e of June, 19^1* Many a r t i c l e s p re v io u sly p rin te d i n t h is jo u rn a l had an u n d e rc u rre n t of h o s t i l i t y toward p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n but most of th e a r t i c l e s s tre s s e d the p r a c t ic a l v alu e o f the c l a s s i c s and t r i e d to p o in t out t h a t th e re was a place fo r c l a s s i c a l stu d ie s w ith in modern (p ro g re ssiv e ) e d u c a t i o n . 35 i t was d i f f i c u l t fo r th e c l a s s i c i s t s to a tta c k schools of e d u c a tio n when the c l a s s i c i s t s had some*1 f r i e n d s ,* * such a s W illiam C. B agley, i n sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . The au th o r of the f i r s t a r t i c l e i n the C la s s ic a l Jo u rn a l which made a f r o n t a l a tta c k on schoo ls of ed u c atio n was P ro fe s so r Eugene Tavenner, e d ito r of the jo u rn a l. Tavenner complained of the c o n tro l of American ed u c atio n by p ro fe ss o rs of Teachers C o lleg e, Columbia U n iv e rs ity . These p ro fe sso rs and t h e i r d is c ip le s were charged w ith b e l i t t l i n g th e study of lan guages. A lso, the a lle g e d f a i l u r e of high sch o o l g ra d u ates to th in k s t r a i g h t , n to use language p ro p e rly , and t o c a lc u la te a c c u ra te ly was a t t r i b u t e d to th e in flu e n c e of the Teachers C ollege group. * 3?An in d ic a tio n of how c l a s s i c i s t s had attem pted to f i t th e ir s u b je c t in to th e e d u c a tio n a l programs of the day can be o b tain ed by c o n su ltin g t h i s b ib lio g ra p h y 5 * * A rtic le s on the C la s s ic s in Jo u rn a ls of Education,*1 The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l, 35 s185-92, December, 1939* 173 j Tavenner c r i t i c i z e d a committee of th e American ! C ouncil of E ducation -which had made pronouncements about -what the hig h schools ought to te a c h . In d is c u ss in g th is com m ittee, Tavenner s ta te d : . . . n o t one champion of the h u m an itie s, not one r e p r e s e n ta tiv e of the p a re n ts of the n a tio n as d i s t i n guished from p aid e x e c u tiv e s, not one advocate of e d u c a tio n fo r c u ltu re or le a d e rs h ip has a p lace on t h is com m ittee. In p la in E n g lish , the committee was ■ j 'lo a d e d 1 so th a t.n o unbiased r e p o r t could p o ssib ly be ! expected of i t . 36 | t That the q u estio n of re p r e s e n ta tio n on committees j , d ea lin g w ith e d u c a tio n a l problems i s a d i f f i c u l t one was 1 ev id en t from the l i t e r a t u r e d e a lin g w ith t h i s problem . J ! The re c e n t White House Conference on E ducation was attacked! i I 1 on t h i s score by Dean H ild ebrand, p re sid e n t of the American I Chemical S o c ie ty .37 Likewise in th e numerous com m ittees ! | of the American C ouncil on E ducation i t appeared t h a t ; i i l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s had been s lig h te d . Of th e t h i r t y - ! 1 odd members of the Commission on Teacher E ducation and i t s : 1 3 ; s t a f f , not one was a s u b je c t-m a tte r p ro fe s so r in a c o lle g e ’ ! of l i b e r a l a r t s . Yet the re p o rts of the commission | ; E u g e n e Tavenner, "What the High Schools Ought to j I T each ,1 1 The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l. 36:513 , June, 19*4*1 • ; 3 7 jo e l H. H ildebrand , "E ighteen Hundred Persons 1 Confer on E d u c a tio n ,1 1 Chemical and Engineering H ews. I December 12, 1955, PP. 535*+-55 3&The Improvement o f Teacher E d u c a tio n . P in a l R eport by the Commission on Teacher E d u catio n , K arl W . Bigelow, d i r e c to r (W ashington: The American C ouncil on E d u catio n , L19M ) pp_._ 13-19,_ 2 7*^76._____________________________________ J i 1 7 ^ seemed to make a f e t i s h of wide r e p re s e n ta tio n in clu d in g l i b e r a l a r ts r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . ^ | At the U n iv e rsity of M innesota, where committee ! ! work was u t i l i z e d e x te n s iv e ly (and w ith a s s e r te d su ccess) i n secu rin g u n d erstan d in g between academ icians and educa t i o n i s t s , t h i s o rg a n iz a tio n a l p a tte r n was follow ed? As these committees have been formed they have u su a lly co n tain ed one or two men from e d u c a tio n and psychology and from th re e to ten in s tr u c t o r s from j j o th er departm ents of the U n iv e rsity , the m a jo rity : | always ly in g w ith the non-education fa c u ltie s.^ * 0 | i i Moreover, many of the books p u b lish ed under the au sp ices of i M innesota *s A ll-U n iv e rs ity Committee on E d u c a tio n a l He- 1 sea rch were w r itte n by l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs . In a f i e l d 1 i j j of endeavor sometimes c h a ra c te riz e d by * * p u b lish or p e r i s h ,1 1 j i a u th o rsh ip and the 1 1 g lo ry 1 1 tak e on r e a l meaning. I j Whether the committee i s a u n iv e r s ity committee or I |a g e n e ra l com m ittee, the M innesota approach would be, of j c o u rse , more su c c e s s fu l from the sta n d p o in t of re so lv in g I I 3 9 ib ia # ? pp# 18-19. I t was tru e t h a t two p re sid e n ts jo f l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s , one of whom was an e d u c a tio n is t, iwere on the commission. I I E . H aggerty, 1 1 The Improvement of C ollege I n - ; s tr u c t! o n Through E d u c a tio n a l R esea rch ,1 1 The E d u c a tio n a l | R ecord. 12:46, Jan u ary , 1931. C f. E. S. Evenden and ! R• Freeman B u tts, Columbia U n iv e rsity C ooperative Program f o r th e P re -S e rv ic e - E ducation of Teachers (New York: Teachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e r s ity , 19^2). Although t h i s book claim ed to be a " re p o rt of the e n t i r e s t a f f 1 1 of ‘ the u n iv e rs ity (p. 3 ) a c tu a lly the m ajo rity of those p a r t i c i p a t i n g were e d u c a tio n is ts (pp. 111-1?). j 'th e co n tro v ersy under d is c u s s io n in t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n . ! C r itic is m s —19*+2. R eports on te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n ! jby su b je c t-m a tte r com m ittees seemed somewhat le s s h o s t ile to schools of ed u c atio n than p r e v io u s l y O n e committee^2 which recommended only twelve sem ester-hours in ed u catio n ialso suggested a d i f f e r e n t type of th e s is for an advanced j d eg ree. The t h e s i s , to be under the j o i n t su p e rv isio n of j |th e s u b je c t-m a tte r and ed u catio n d ep artm en ts, was to c o n sis t i * |o f la b o ra to ry re s e a rc h . Since th is r e p o r t, th e q u estio n of !a re se a rc h paper fo r advanced degrees in ed u catio n has come! ! iup from time to tim e . The charge was sometimes made th a t | i * schools of ed u c atio n had eliminated*~~this req u irem en t, or j i t I s u b s titu te d m aster *s and d o c to r fs p r o j e c ts , in order to j j a t t r a c t stu d e n ts by making the requirem ents e a s i e r T h a t , i I I th e re has been more than a "tendency" to e lim in a te th is I req u irem en t, a t l e a s t fo r the m a s te r's degree, was e v id e n t. U - 1 i For example s e e , "R eport of the P ennsylvania Com- 1 m itte e f o r the Promotion of Science in Secondary Educa- | | t i o n , H M. H. T ry tte n , chairm an, S c ie n c e . 96:185-86, August j ■ 21, 19*+2; and "The P re p a ra tio n of High School Science ! T each ers," The C ooperative Committee on Science Teaching, School Science and M athem atics. * + 2 : 636- 50, O ctober, 19*+2. j ^ " R e p o r t of the Committee on the Teaching of j [P hysics in Secondary S ch o o ls," K* L ark-H o rovitz, chairm an, I American Jo u rn al of P h y s ic s . 10:60-61, F ebru ary, 19*+2. j ^ p o r example see Roger P. McCutcheon, "The j M aster fs Degree and the Teacher R eq u irem en ts,1 1 School and I | S o ciety y 7*+2l77-8l, September 22, 1951* ] 1 7 6 In 195*+ only one graduate out of twenty in the la r g e r i schools of ed u catio n was re q u ire d to w rite a "perm anently— f i l e d " paper; a t Teachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , in i 1952, of 2*+65 persons awarded the m a s te r’s d e g re e , only tiiVt 5 wrote permanent p a p e rs. The e d u c a t io n i s t ’s c o n te n tio n th a t what has been s u b s titu te d fo r the w r i tt e n requirem ents i s more p r a c t i c a l i s , of co u rse , a n t i t h e t i c a l to the 1 l i b e r a l a r t s ’ c u l t u r a l o u tlo o k . j 1 ; i A committee of Harvard U n iv e rs ity , composed of both : 1 1 , f a c tio n s in th is c o n tro v e rsy , made a s c h o la rly and con- , i I ! s tr u c ti v e a n a ly s is of te a c h e r e d u c a tio n . One unique j |c r i t i c i s m was p re se n te d . The wisdom of a p p o in tin g • 1 i n s t r u c t o r s fo r su b je c ts in which they had done no \ re s e a rc h —or were not in ten d in g to do re s e a rc h —was if i ■ 1 q u estio n ed . Summer v a c a tio n was the time held to be b e s t j fo r re s e a rc h , and p ro fe s s o rs of ed u c atio n sp en t every j summer teaching.*4 ^ The summer s e s s io n was a so re sp o t in i o th e r ways. The whole n a tu re and atmosphere of the summer j : I s e s s io n was said to be d i f f e r e n t from the re g u la r se ssio n ; stan d ard s of s c h o la rsh ip were lowered during t h is s e s s io n 1 I | ■ ! ■ ■ ■ II . I l l | » I j ^Tom A rthur Lamke, "M a ste r’s R esearch i n E ducatio n," ■ The High School J o u rn a l. 38*39, November, 195*+. i * * ^The T rain in g o f Secondary School Teachers — E s p e c ia lly w ith R eference to E n g lis h . R eport o f a J o in t !Committee of the F acu lty o f Harvard College and of the Graduate School of E ducation (Cambridge* Harvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 19*+2), p . 56. 1 and th e re was i n s u f f i c i e n t tim e to accom plish the e q u iv a le n t of what was accom plished d u rin g th e re g u la r s e s s io n . Elsewhere a Harvard p ro fe s s o r of E n g lish had t h i s to say: W e have in th e U nited S ta te s c e r t a in ly the most e la b o ra te and expensive e d u c a tio n a l system in th e w orld, and p erh ap s, in p ro p o rtio n to the m achinery, the most i n e f f e c t u a l . I t i s i n e f f e c t u a l , or w orse, because in re c e n t decades i t has been more and more com pletely c o n tro lle d by the w e ll-o rg an ized army of p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n and t h e i r o ffs p rin g and a l l i e s . T h eir s o c io lo g ic a l, p sy c h o lo g ic a l, and g e n e ra lly p ro g re ss iv e and cheaply u t i l i t a r i a n n o tio n s have, e s p e c ia lly i n th e Middle and Far West, s te a d ily under mined old id e a ls of i n t e l l e c t u a l d is c i p l in e and s o l i d i ty of s u b je c t m a tte r .1 ^ A tte n tio n i s d ire c te d to th e p h rase ”in re c e n t decades” in the above q u o ta tio n . S im ila r words were o fte n used by p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c s during t h is p e rio d . They s a i d , in e f f e c t , t h a t th e school system used t o be s a t i s f a c to r y but in re c e n t y e a rs i t had d e t e r io r a t e d . Another p ro fe s so r of E n g lish who proposed 1 1 e x t i r p a t i o n —ro o t and branch” f o r schools of education* claimed th a t sch o o ls of ed u c a tio n were o p e ra tin g in a clo sed system —much lik e the Schoolmen of th e Middle Ages. He a ls o av erred t h a t sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n were in c re a sin g th e ”re g im e n ta tio n ” of th e stu d e n ts under t h e i r c o n tr o l w hile i+6 Douglas Bush, "E ducation but n o t E d u c a tio n a lism ,” The Key R e p o rte r. 7?1-2, Autumn, 19^2. 1 7 8 advocating more 1 1 s e lf - e x p r e s s io n ’1 and more 1 1 ad hoc1 1 | te a c h in g > 7 | A somewhat d if f e r e n t s la n t on e d u c a tio n a l r e q u ir e - i ments was p resen ted in th i s y e a r. Mary E lle n Chase a s s e rte d th a t th e se requirem ents were s a tis f a c to r y fo r th e m ediocre stu d e n t but fo r th e s u p e rio r stu d e n t they were U Q ! nothing but a w aste of time and an i r r i t a t i n g experience.^"0 j I Another c r i t i c a s s e rte d t h a t e d u c a tio n is ts picked ! i iup a new word and overused i t in the manner o f a fa d . Such; ja word was "dichotom y” and h ere is what happened on one :occasions \ I t i . . . I s h a ll never f o r g e t the look on th e face of j one of my e d u c a tio n is t frie n d s a t the N.E.A. m eeting I | in Boston l a s t June, when a f t e r tak in g a sh o t a t me I i w ith 1 d ich o to m y ,1 p eerin g meanwhile a t me to see i f he 1 had me on the i n t e l l e c t u a l ro p e s, I countered w ith ! fB ut, Doctor (some of th ese boys d e a rly love to be ! addressed as ’d octor 1) are you sure we have a tru e ! dichotomy here? I s n ’t i t ra th e r an in s ta n c e of sy m b io sis? 1 As he had l i t t l e biology (a p p a re n tly he | had lim ite d h im self to human physiology and ’h e a l t h 1 c o u rse s, th ere b y a n tic ip a tin g the recommendation of j j ’What the High Schools Ought to Teach1) and of course • i even le s s Gredc, ’sy m b io sis1 l e f t him g asp in g, and a l most ’o u t . ’ He l e f t the rin g w ith a g la ssy look in ■ h is e y e s, bound, I ’l l wager, fo r the n e a re s t d ic tio n a ry J+9 ^ D a n i e l G ib s o n , ” P e d a g o g u e s an d P e d a g e s e , ” The A m e ric a n S c h o l a r . 12:10!+ , W i n t e r , 1 I ^ ^ a r y E l l e n C h a s e , A G o o d ly F e l l o w s h i p (Mew Y o r k : I ■ The M a c m illa n Co., l $ + 2 ) , p p . 5 $ - 5 9 . ! ^ % e n r y G r a t t a n D o y le , ”A New S t e r e o t y p e ? ” S c h o o l and S o c i e t y . 5 5 : 2 9 6 , M arch In-, 19*+2. 179 | C ritic is m s — 19*+^. Mark Van Doren, who occupied a ! i p o s itio n comparable to P re s id e n t H utchins in t h i s c o n tro - ■ 1 v e rs y , s tre s s e d the im portance of the l i b e r a l a r t s (in th e j G reat Books manner) in th e e d u c a tio n o f teach ers* In h is j o ft-q u o te d book, L ib e ra l E d u ca tio n * n ot much was said about1 !schools of e d u c a tio n per se although Van Doren did make a ■ few p e r tin e n t statem en ts such as the fo llo w in g : f,E d u catio n - |a l re se a rc h in the f i e l d s of ja n ito r se rv ic e and r e a c tio n i i i icounting might sw itch to the q u e stio n of what c h ild re n [ ;ought to remember.” ^ i ! P ro fe sso r Stim m el, who was more or l e s s fo r a tr u c e , i accused p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c atio n as fo llo w s: And why did you i n s i s t upon everyone being norm al, . a lik e ; and why are your w ritin g s so a lik e ? You seem to us to assume th a t the average c h ild i s th e g r e a te s t of | problem s, averageness i t s e l f the g r e a te s t of o b je c - j tiv e s * I t i s i n u n iv e rs a l sameness of mind t h a t Fascism can b e s t p ro s p e r.51 In a somewhat s im ila r v e in , a c l a s s i c s p ro fe s s o r in te r p r e te d the philosophy of 1 1 p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n is ts 1 1 , in t h i s manner: I . . . in a tru e democracy a l l c i tiz e n s enjoy th e j same ad v an tag es, and th e re fo re the e d u c a tio n a l system ! must be so planned i n i t s i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n te n t th a t every c h ild can share i n each p a r t of i t , from the 5$Mark Van Doren, L ib e ra l E ducation (Hew York: Henry H olt and C o., 19*+3) > P« 95. ^ L . H. Stim m el, ttA Perhaps Too Open L e t t e r , 1 1 !Jo u rn a l of H igher E d u c a tio n * lh t2 7 , Jan u ary , 19*+3♦ low est sta g e to the h ig h e s t. I t i s the communistic argument a p p lie d to the realm of the m ind.52 I t Is d i f f i c u l t to re c o n c ile th ese view points w ith the hundreds of books and a r t i c l e s w r itte n by e d u c a tio n is ts which s t r e s s the maximum development of each in d iv id u a l to th e p o in t of a p l a t i t u d e . However, the l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs may have d isco u n ted the l i t e r a t u r e of e d u c a tio n i |as one did when responding to the q u e stio n n a ire used in I f [th is stu d y : "Words are cheap," he w ro te. i C r itic is m s —19M*. Among the d i f f i c u l t i e s in i " "b reaking the academic lo c k -ste p " through the in tro d u c tio n of honors courses a t Swarthmore were th e requirem ents of th e v a rio u s p r o f e s s io n a l sc h o o ls. Law schools and m edical schools were more w illin g to waive some of t h e i r under g rad u ate req u irem en ts in order to adm it the most prom ising * |stu d e n ts but undergraduate requirem ents (a p p a re n tly le g a l |req uirem ents) i n e d u c atio n were s t r i c t l y e n fo rc e d . i Regarding e d u c a tio n courses P re sid e n t A ydelotte w rote: | These re q u ire d ’hours* of e d u c a tio n are a poor I s u b s titu te fo r p o stg rad u a te p ro fe s s io n a l t r a i n i n g . I I t would be hard to prove th a t a few co u rses £ u n d er- I g ra d u a te ] in ed u c atio n (which are o fte n m ediocre In i them selves and which are su p p lied in many p la c e s by i n o n e -to o -c re d ita b le s u b te rfu g e s ) add-much to the ! e f fe c tiv e n e s s o f the young te a c h e r 's work, w hile i t i s 52 x L e tte r w ritte n by Bayard Quincy Morgan in "An I n v it a t i o n to F ig h t" ( e d i t o r i a l ) , The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l. 3 3 :2 5 8 , F eb ru ary , 19**3. 1 8 1 ; c e r ta in th a t sounder and more thorough t r a in i n g in h is j s p e c ia lty would do so* I t i s not s u f f i c i e n t th a t a young te a c h e r be a few s te p s ahead of the c la s s so f a r as s u b je c t m a tte r i s concerned. A w e ll- tr a in e d mathe m a tic ia n w i l l te a c h elem entary a rith m e tic o r a lg e b ra in; a way which i s im possible fo r the te a c h e r who has him - ( s e l f explored only the elem ents of the s u b j e c t . 53 1 C r itic is m s - - ! 9^5. A narrow o u tlo o k , caused by 1 1 in breeding,*1 was sa id to be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of te a c h e rs c o lle g e s and schools o f e d u c a t i o n .^ This came up in t comments concerning the a c tio n of W estern R eserve TJniver- , >sity which abandoned i t s school of ed u c atio n and p laced thej c o n tr o l of the s u b je c t o f e d u c a tio n i n the hands of i t s llib e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s . A "running" argument on t h i s ! ^development ensued i n School and S o ciety but most of the j l e t t e r s and a r t i c l e s were by e d u c a tio n is ts ; hence om itted j ■from t h i s stu d y . j Jacques Barzun, i n h is Teacher in Am erica, commented; on what he was p lease d to c a l l "De s p e ra n to ."55 C e rta in i p h r a s e s , s a id to be m astered in te a c h e rs f c o lle g e s , such asj I * 1 in term s o f , 1 1 were sin g le d out fo r c r it i c i s m . **Desperan- j t o ” was s a id t o embody a d i s i n c l in a tio n to th in k . ^ F ra n k A y d e lo tte , Breaking the Academic Lock Sten j '(New Yorks Harper and B ro th e rs, 1 9 ^ ) * P . 31* ^*Jam©s J . Johnson, "F u rth e r C ritic is m of P ro fe s s io n a l Schools f o r Teachers" ( l e t t e r to th e e d i t o r ) , School and S o c ie ty . 62: 1**2, September 1 , 19L **5. • Jacques Barzun, Teacher i n America (Garden C ity , •New York: Doubleday and C o ., 19$k- —f i r s t pub lish ed i n ! 119^5) 9 pp* 5^-55•_____________________ J _____________________ J 1 1 8 2 I Barzun in tro d u ced a new c r itic is m - - e d u e a tio n is ts had not been concerned w ith 1 1 r e a l l i f e . " He used as h is evidence an ex p e rim e n ta l p r o je c t which aimed " . . . fto develop stu d e n ts toward e f f e c tiv e m a tu rity through p u rp o s e fu l, c o n s tru c tiv e and i n t e l l i g e n t liv in g i n a p lace where a c t i v i t i e s are r e a l , not d ra m a tiz e d .’" Commenting on t h i s p r o j e c t, Barzun wrote? This d o u b tle ss persuades many a p a r e n t, but th in k of the a p p a llin g c o n fe ssio n im p lic it in t h a t s h o rt se n te n c e . This p r o je c t being an o ffs h o o t of an e s ta b lis h e d tr a in in g school fo r te a c h e r s , i t s n o v elty im p lies t h a t h i t h e r t o th e re has been no e f f e c tiv e i m a tu rity , no p u rp o se, no c o n s tru c tiv e n e s s , no i n t e l l i gence; t h a t suspended anim ation has re p la c e d •liv in g * ; and a r t i f i c i a l a c t i v i t i e s r e a l ones, a l l in a manner now re p u d ia te d as •dram atized.* Since in good tim es . new o u tp o sts of •method* are c o n tin u a lly being p la n te d j here and th e r e , the w orth of the prev iou s ones can be ! gauged by th e claim s made fo r the l a t e s t . Or r a th e r , the whole b u sin e ss may b e.d ism issed as w ell-m eant and s e lf-d e c e iv in g b a l l y h o o . 5 6 jBarzum/was in e r r o r when be s ta te d ".. . i t s n o v elty i im p lies . • ." in the above q u o ta tio n . H is i n t e r n r e t a t i o n jof the sentence may w ell "imply" t h i s and t h a t and the |o th e r th in g . A ll of us see what we want to see in i sen ten ces such as t h i s . I f Barzun*s "im p lic a tio n " i s c o r r e c t, c e r ta i n ly th e re must have been a b e t t e r way to r i l l u s t r a t e h is b e l i e f . "Im p lic a tio n " has a le g itim a te ,use— but only when th e re is a d e f i n i t e , c l e a r , or stro ng ! h i n t in v o lv ed . Such was n o t the ease h e r e . F urtherm ore, 56I b i d . . p . 1 8 2 . : 183 i i f we were to make im p lic a tio n s of th is n a tu re from , i e d u c a tio n a l l i t e r a t u r e we could w imply*1 most an y th in g i [because most anything ean be found in e d u c a tio n a l l i t e r a - ! ■ t u r e • This i s , p erh ap s, i t s main weakness, ! C r itic is m s —19M-6« P ro fe ss o rs of e d u c a tio n took ' t 'unw arranted l i b e r t i e s w ith language according to a modern 'language p ro fe s s o r. C e rta in words (he used f,a t t i t u d e w as i * i ;one example) were given meanings which d isre g a rd e d th e ! j h is to r ic a l development of th e words and which were a t odds i jwith la y d e f in i t i o n and use of th e word* A lso, t h i s c r i t i c [Charged p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c atio n w ith c re a tin g to o much of a, i !q u estio n in g a t t i t u d e on the p a r t of youth* The 1 1 q u e stio n - jing attitude** was involved in s tu d e n t e v a lu a tio n and ! I j prompted t h i s s ta te m e n t: ; [ i | A re c e n t a r t i c l e in the B u lle tin of th e A sso c ia tio n ! i of American U n iv e rsity P ro fe sso rs T s ic I I urged w ith ] s e r r ie d arguments t h a t the d e s tin y of p ro fe s s o rs should i be determ ined by the e v a lu a tio n s of th e ir s tu d e n ts ; and i i t was n o t n ecessary to look up the s ta tu s of th e author 1 to r e a l iz e t h a t he was a r e p re s e n ta tiv e o f p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n . With much more of such w ritin g r e c o n c ile - i raent between the ed u c atio n and l i b e r a l a r t s camps w i l l j be d e f i n i t e l y im possible*?? i I ! P* S . C. N orthrop, p ro fe s so r of philosophy and jMaster of S illim a n C ollege of Y ale, s ta te d t h a t a m is- conceived pragmatism led to c ro ss-p u rp o ses i n e d u c a tio n . ; ^ A . M. W ith ers, 1 1 For E d u ca tio n al A ccord,1 1 Jo u rn a l ipf Higher E d u c a tio n * 17*251, May, 19M-6. Schools of e d u c a tio n and sch ools of law both indulged in | i p r a c tic e s based on a f a u lty i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of pragmatism* i N orthrop wrote t \ . . * John Dewey, in conveying the t r u s t of pragma- , tism , t h a t the th e o r e ti c a l elem ent i n s c i e n t i f i c ! knowledge i s given h y p o th e tic a lly w ith only i n d i r e c t ! v e r i f i c a t i o n and hence never w ith a b so lu te c e r t a i n t y — j r a th e r th an c a te g o r ic a lly and w ith ab so lu te c e r ta in ty ■ as Kant m ain tain ed —e rre d le s s in t h i s re s p e c t th an d id James; and C harles P e irc e e rre d le s s than e i t h e r ; James or Dewey. But even Dewey*s le s s o r e r r o r was n o t ! s u f f i c i e n t l y s lig h t to p re v en t h is fo llo w e rs in the departm ents o f ed u catio n and law from g e ttin g th e erroneous su g g estio n s i n h is w ritin g s and from f a i l i n g ! . t o grasp h is le s s a r t i c u l a t e t r u t h . j What Dewey's fo llo w ers acq u ired was not h is c o r r e c t : I th e s is t h a t th eory and i t s t h e o r e t i c a l problems are as ; I n ecessary a p a r t of s c i e n t i f i c in q u iry as e m p iric a l ; i evidence and ex p erim en tal m ethods— the theory being | m erely i n d i r e c t l y r a th e r th an d i r e c t l y and a b s o lu te ly 1 ; confirm ed by experim ent—but th e erroneous assum ption I th a t ex p e rim e n ta tio n and an ap p eal to what happens in I p r a c tic e , w ith o u t guiding t h e o r e ti c a l p r i n c i p l e s , are j alone what m a tte rs both in scien c e and in l i f e . Thus | | th e n o tio n g o t abroad, n o t w ith o u t su p p o rt from Dewey j and h is a s s o c ia te s , th a t people facin g the b asic * j t h e o r e ti c a l problems of s c ie n c e , philosophy, and c u ltu re , were e i t h e r a n tiq u a te d old mossbacks or sp e c u la tiv e arm -chair th in k e rs d ea lin g w ith ir r e le v a n t pseudo problem s. The people who found th in k in g d i f f i c u l t , or who lacked the lo g ic a l or m athem atical tr a in in g n eces sary to enable them to pursue i t e f f e c t i v e l y , lik e d t h i s s u g g e stio n , sin c e i t l u l l e d them in to the com p la c e n t f o o l 's p a ra d ise in which they were the , s c i e n t i f i c and e f f e c tiv e people; and th e t h e o r e t i c a l l y i d ir e c te d , lo g ic a lly d is c ip lin e d minds were the e v i l s p i r i t s . P ro fe sso rs in departm ents of ed u c atio n lik e d i t a ls o , because i t fre e d them from the need o f knowing any s p e c if ic s u b je c t which they ta u g h t; in s te a d they learn ed the ex p erim en tal 's c i e n t i f i c ' method of teach in g a n y th in g .58 5 % . S . G. N orthrop, The M eeting of E a st and West !(Mew Yorks The M acmillan C o., 1 9^6), pp. 151-52._________ 1 8 ? ! C r i t i c i s m s — 19^+7. F r a n k M. S n ow den , J r . , p r o f e s s o r I o f t h e c l a s s i c s , m ade a s e r i e s o f c h a r g e s a g a i n s t ; i p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n . O nly tw o w e re r e l a t i v e l y n o v e l . , F i r s t , p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w e re c h a r g e d w i t h f r e q u e n t l y ; * d i s s e m i n a t i n g f a l s e i d e a s — i n t h i s c a s e a f a l s e i d e a o f > t h e v a l u e ( p r a c t i c a l a n d o t h e r w i s e ) o f t h e c l a s s i c s . i r i ;S e c o n d , t h e d e v e lo p m e n t and e n d o r s e m e n t o f o b j e c t i v e t e s t s I i w 1 l iby p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n h a d l e d t o bad r e s u l t s i n t h e i I i I p u b l ic s c h o o l p ro g ra m a n d e l s e w h e r e . Snow den w r o t e : | ! 1 ; I t i s t h e e d u c a t i o n i s t s t h e m s e l v e s , i n my J u d g m e n t, , s who m u s t s h a r e a l a r g e p a r t o f t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r j j t h e p o o r r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g h a b i t s o f t o d a y ’s s t u - i • d e n t s . A lm o st c a l a m i t o u s i n i t s e n e r v a t i n g e f f e c t u p o n ] t h e s t u d e n t s a b i l i t y t o e x p r e s s h i m s e l f h a s b e e n th e ! w i d e s p r e a d a d o p t i o n o f t h e ' e i r e l i n g s , ' ’m a t c h i n g s , * a n d ’c o m p l e t i o n s ’ . . . I c a n c o n c e iv e o f a s i t u a t i o n i n w h ic h a s t u d e n t may 'c h e c k ' h i s way o u t o f many 1 c o u r s e s w i t h o u t h a v in g e v e r w r i t t e n a s e n t e n c e . . .59 , ! i ! C r i t i c i s m s — 19M-8. 19*+9. N o th in g t h a t h a d n o t i a l r e a d y b e e n s a i d many t im e s w as e n c o u n t e r e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e f o r t h e s e y e a r s . M o rtim e r S m i t h 's b o o k , And M adly T e a c h , was p u b l i s h e d i n 1 9 ^ 9 b u t , in a s m u c h a s S m ith w as a I p r o f e s s i o n a l J o u r n a l i s t who a p p a r e n t l y h a d n o c o n n e c t i o n ; w i t h a c o l l e g e o f l i b e r a l a r t s , h i s d e n o u n c e m e n ts o f i s e h o o ls o f e d u c a t i o n h a v e b e e n e x c l u d e d fro m t h i s s t u d y . 59pra n k M. Snowden., J r . . "The C la s s ic s and the E d u c a tio n is ts ,” E d u c a tio n . 67: 03*+, June, 19^*7 • C r itic is m s —195Q. A b l i s t e r i n g a tta c k on schools of e d u c atio n was d e liv e re d by H arry J . F u lle r , b o ta n is t > i and P re sid e n t of the U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s C hapter of Phi Beta Kappa. P ro fe sso rs of e d u c a tio n were charged w ith h olding f a ls e b a sic a s s u m p tio n s .^ Among th e se f a ls e assum ptions were: < / i i 1. E d u catio n i n the p a s t had been a f a i l u r e . > 2. Teachers in the p a s t were poorly tra in e d and j were s a d i s ti c in n a tu re whereas the p re s e n t te a c h e rs u n d er stood a l l the problems of c h ild re n and oozed 1 1 sw eetness \ t land l i g h t . ” < . ' ^ v 1 3. E ducation i n the p a s t was concerned only w ith jknowledge fo r the sake of knowledge. M * . Home and fam ily l i f e in America were v i r t u a l l y e x tin c t and? . . . as a consequence, the e a rn e s t, young, mimeograph-equipped neophytes of our c o lle g e s of e d u c atio n , who, in an e a r l i e r and h ap p ier time would ; t probably have been p rim itiv e e v a n g e lis ts b eatin g th e shrubbery fo r b a re -fo o te d h eath en , must now become wet n u rs e s , in s tr u c to r s in sex ed u c a tio n , m edical | a d v is o rs , c o n s u lta n ts to the lo v e lo rn , um pires in the ! b a t t le of th e v e r t i c a l v ersu s th e h o riz o n ta l stro k e in to o th -b ru s h in g , and p ro fe ss o rs o f m o to r-v eh icle ; o p e ra tio n . , ?. E ducation i s a p ro c ess of f u l f i l l i n g needs and ; < only those th in g s needed to a d ju s t the in d iv id u a l to society should be ta u g h t. 187 ' P u l l e r a t t a c k e d t h e p o l i c y o f a u t o m a t i c p r o m o tio n I a s s e r t i n g t h a t t h e f e e b l e - m i n d e d p u p i l r e c e i v e d a n "A" f o r d o i n g h i s maximum. C a l l i n g s u c h p o l i c i e s tfi n c r e d i b l e s t u p i d i t i e s ," h e s a i d t h a t t h e r e s u l t w as t o u n p r e p a r e s t u d e n t s f o r a d u l t l i v i n g . P u p i l s d e v e l o p e d a w o r l d - o w e s - m e - a - l i v i n g a t t i t u d e and l o s t t h e i r t e n a c i t y t o a c c o m p l i s h : ' 1 d i f f i c u l t a c a d e m ic t a s k s . S ound k n o w le d g e h a d b e e n r e p l a c e d b y " d r i v e l 1 1 - - t h e w h o le p ro g ra m w as a n t i - i n t e l l e c t u a l . F u r t h e r m o r e , F u l l e r c la im e d t h a t ". . . c o n f u s i o n s a n d i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s • • • d o m in a te t h e t h i n k i n g , t h e u t t e r a n c e s , a n d t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f e d u c a t i o n p r o f e s s o r s . " S e v e r a l e x a m p le s , n o n e o f w h ic h w e re d o c u m e n te d , w e re g i v e n t o c l i n c h t h i s p o i n t . T e rm in o lo g y w as t a k e n u p and t h i s r h e t o r i c a l q u e s t i o n w as a s k e d ? I s i t a b r a v e an d r o c o c o f a c a d e , d e s i g n e d t o h i d e a b l e a k n e s s o f t h o u g h t , a p a u c i t y o f i d e a s , a n e n v y o f p e o p le who r e a l l y h a v e s o m e th in g t o t a l k a b o u t , a g n a w in g f e e l i n g o f i n f e r i o r i t y ? ^ 2 C r i t i c i s m c o u l d b e made o f F u l l e r ' s " s t u d y " w h ic h was c a r r i e d o u t b y i n f o r m a l q u e s t i o n s on " t r a i n s , a n d i n p l a n e s , h o t e l l o b b i e s , b a r b e r s h o p s a n d s o d a f o u n t a i n s . . . . " He c l a i m e d t h a t h i g h - s c h o o l s t u d e n t s o f 1 9 5 0 w e r e i n f e r i o r t o t h o s e o f t w e n t y - f i v e y e a r s e a r l i e r . The " s t u d y " w as r e a l l y a b s u r d i n i t s m e th o d o lo g y b u t m ore t h a n l i k e l y i t 6 2 I b i d . . p . M-0. \ 1 8 8 was n o t intended to be taken s e r io u s ly . A fte r a l l , F u lle r was making a d in ner-m eetin g speech. A lb e rt Lynd p re se n ted a fo re ru n n e r to h is book, Quackery i n the P ublic S ch o o ls, i n an a r t i c l e w ith the same t i t l e . ^3 Lynd, who had unkind words to say about schools of e d u c a tio n , was n o t in cluded in t h i s stu d y . I t is tru e t h a t Lynd d id serve fo r a s h o rt time as an i n s t r u c t o r in h is to ry a t S ta n fo rd , b u t he can not p ro p e rly ,be co n sid ered a re p re s e n ta tiv e of a c o lle g e of l i b e r a l a r t s . N o n eth eless, l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs d id agree w ith him .61’- C ritic is m s —1951. P ro fe ss o rs of e d u c a tio n were c r i t i c i z e d fo r "m issing the mark" when answering charges I 6 * 3 jplaced a g a in s t them. W illiams and L a u r its , 7 both p ro fe s so rs of ed u c a tio n , who answered F u l l e r 's a r t i c l e were used 66 ias an example. According to W alco tt, th ese p ro fe sso rs I ta lk e d about many th in g s but n o t about F u l l e r 's argum ents. ^ A l b e r t Lynd, "Quackery in the P ublic S ch o o ls," The A t l a n ti c . 185*33- 3 8 , March, 1950. >ee "R epartee" ( l e t t e r s to the e d i t o r ) , The :A t l a n t i c . 185:18-19, June, 1950. ^S im o n W illiam s and James D. L a u r its , " S c ie n tis ts and E d u ca tio n ," S c i e n t i f i c M onthly. 72*282-88. May, 1951. Gregory D. W a lc o tt, "Worlds A p art," S c ie n tif ic M onthly. 73:89, J u ly , 1951* 189 j As has been shown elsew here in the p re s e n t s tu d y , both j ! sid e s in t h i s c o n tro v e rsy , too o fte n , were r e a l l y n o t j communicating w ith one a n o th e r, j The Bean of the Graduate School of Tulane U n iv e rsity i suggested t h a t th e re was no proof th a t co u rses in e d u c a tio n had any v a lu e . He c a lle d f o r an undergraduate major i n a ! s u b je c t f i e l d fo r every p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e r and suggested ■ t h a t e d u c atio n should have 1 1 mi n o r1 1 s t a tu s only i n the j graduate sc h o o l, ^ i ' C r itic ism s— 1952, The con troversy over the Ford Foundation’s Arkansas Experiment (o r ig in a lly in terp re ted — — - ; jP rofesso r B estor began a s e r ie s of a r t i c l e s which were l a t e r to be in c o rp o ra te d in to h is book, E d u c a tio n a l i W astelands. In one of th ese a r t i c l e s an unique charge was jmade. The g ra n tin g of advanced deg rees in e d u c a tio n was 'sa id to have encouraged the g ra n tin g of lik e degrees in h o te l management, l i b r a r y s c ie n c e , b u siness e d u c a tio n , and p h y s ic a l e d u c a tio n , ! ; ^M cCutcheon, o p. c i t . , pp, 180-81, I 6 % . M. C la rk e , ,fThe Ford Foundation—Arkansas E x p erim en t,1 1 Jo u rn al of Teacher E d u c a tio n . 3*260-6*+, 1 'December,, 1952, | ^ A r th u r B esto r, J r . , tfL ib e ra l E ducation and a j L ib e r a l N a tio n ,1 1 The American S c h o la r. 21:l*+3-M+, S p rin g , \ 1 9 5 2 ._____________________________________________________________1 I th e p re sid e n t of Kenyon C ollege p re se n te d many of (the c r it i c i s m s p re v io u sly d is c u s s e d , th e approach was s c h o la rly and p h ilo s o p h ic a l. One new item emerged in h is c r itic is m ; the philosophy which governed the tr a in in g of te a c h e rs did not p ro p e rly handle th e r o le of th e im ag in atio n in ed u catin g c h i l d r e n . His view point of te a c h e r ed u c atio n in g e n e ra l was t h a t te a c h in g was an a r t , not a sc ie n c e . ! C r itic is m s - - 195^. In a c o n c ilia to r y a r t i c l e , Dean M arten te n Hoor p o in te d out th ese extreme s i t u a t io n s which i 72 [heightened the c o n tro v e rs y :' 1. C e rta in p ro fe ss o rs of e d u c a tio n held the b e lie f th a t a l l knowledge must be o rie n te d toward s o c ia l u s e fu ln e s s . | 2 . Some schools o f e d u c atio n re fu se d to perm it l i b e r a l a r t s stu d e n ts to take cou rses in ed u c atio n ; hence, c e r t i f i c a t i o n was lim ite d to those e n ro lle d in th e school of e d u c a tio n . j ^ G o rd o n K eith Chalm ers, The R epublic and The Person (Chicago: Henry Regnery C o., 1952), p . 1^3# | p . 195. ? M arten te n Hoor, "The Stake of th e L ib e ra l A rts C ollege in Teacher C e r t i f i c a t i o n ," A sso c ia tio n of American C olleges B u lle tin . 3 9:88-89, March, 1953. 191 3. Some e d u c a tio n is ts (one dean of a school of j i e d u c a tio n was given as an example) o b je c te d to the use o f j the word e d u c a tio n 1 * in any course t i t l e not o ffe re d by th e 1 i school of e d u c a tio n , *+. In a t l e a s t one c a se , l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe ss o rs i were not p e rm itte d to a tte n d an o r a l exam ination of a j can d id ate fo r an advanced degree in ed u c a tio n . i 5. E d u c a tio n is ts sometimes claim ed th a t te a c h e rs ' c o lle g e s gave a b e tte r g e n e ra l ed u c atio n th an the c o lle g e s i ] i of l i b e r a l a r t s . i 6 . C e rta in e d u c a tio n is ts , w ritin g of t h is c o n tro v e rsy , m isrep re sen ted the view point of the. l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s . ! j In re g a rd to the l a s t item i t must be s ta te d th a t jthe l i t e r a t u r e of th i s co n tro v ersy re v e a le d th a t both sid e s were fre q u e n tly g u ilty of s im ila r p r a c tic e s . C er ta i n l y enough has been quoted th u s f a r in the p re s e n t study to adm it the co n clu sio n th a t p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s too i o fte n put words, or i n t e r p r e t a ti o n s , which were not re p r e s e n ta tiv e or a c c u ra te , " in the mouths1 1 of p ro fe ss o rs jof e d u c a tio n . | P ro fe sso r C a i r n s , 73 U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s m athe- m a tic ia n , a s s e r te d th a t the power of e d u c a tio n is ts 73 stew art S c o tt C a irn s , "M athematics a n d ,th e E d u c a tio n a l O ctopus,t# The S c i e n t i f i c M onthly. ?6:231-**0, Ap r i l , 1953.______________________________ ___________________ t .extended i t s e l f in to the f e d e r a l le v e l of government; j i \ ith a t i s , in to the F ed eral S e c u rity Agency and the U. S. j O ffice of E d u ca tio n . The l a t t e r was o fte n c r i t i c i z e d during th is p e rio d fo r f o s te r in g the L ife Adjustm ent movement. C ollege e n tra n ce requirem ents were said to hamper the " l i f e a d ju s te r s 1 1 and th ey were determ ined to do i away w ith even the w eakest of th ese req u irem en ts according ; to C airns* He a ls o p o in ted out t h a t p ro fe s s o rs of J .mathematics were r a r e l y co n su lted on q u e stio n s d e a lin g ! 1 w ith th e te a c h in g of m athem atics. Furtherm ore, he s ta te d ; f t h a t th e re had been re p o rts of e f f o r t s by e d u c a tio n is ts to suppress c r it ic i s m re g a rd in g schools of e d u c a tio n --b u t , !th e re was no evidence of t h i s a t h is u n i v e r s i t y . On t h i s | i ip o in t, evidence was encountered elsew here t h a t showed th a t some p ro fe s s o rs of ed u catio n d id e x e rt p re ssu re to sto p : vk. I p u b lic a tio n of some of B estor *s a r t i c l e s . | Dean J o e l H ild eb ran d , p re s id e n t of the American Chemical S o c ie ty , s e le c te d and p re se n ted the follow ing d e s c r ip tio n o f a su p e rin te n d e n t—d esc rib ed by a te a c h e r: 'My own s u p e rin te n d e n t's academic equipment i s ty p ic a l; i t is only roughly th a t of a c o lle g e freshm an. The rem ainder of h is 200 c r e d it hours are in co urses ; in a d m in is tra tio n and th e o ry . He is a Ph.D .; h is d o c to ra l t h e s i s , an imposing p iece of s c h o la rs h ip , examines in to the 'Optimim Window Area fo r a Classroom of Twenty-Five P u p ils i n the Ju n io r High School* ' He j 7**Bobert W hite, "Ho Iro n C u rta in fo r Teacher Educa t i o n ," School and S o c ie ty . 78:170-71* November 28, 1953. 193 ; knows nothing about E n g lish , the lan g u ag es, the human!-j t i e s , or s c ie n c e s . But he can and does t e l l us j te a c h e rs e x a c tly what methods to use in teach in g a l l i th ese s u b je c ts . How many of us would employ a p h y si c ia n who had spent one y ear stu d y in g the d is e a s e s of the body and s ix more on How to Approach the P a tie n t? How can my a d m in is tra to r, so tr a in e d , be expected to examine c r i t i c a l l y , to e v a lu a te i n t e l l i g e n t l y , the j newest movements in education? He d o e s n 't; he c a n ’t . ’75 i This i s the kind of t r a i n in g a t t r i b u t e d to c e r t a i n sch o o ls ; t of e d u c a tio n by H ild eb ran d . I t must a ls o be p o in ted out j t h a t H ild ebrand, now p ro fe sso r e m e ritu s, did not appear to ] j jhave a p erso n a l "axe" to g rin d . Furtherm ore, h is w ritin g s show a deep knowledge of modern e d u c a tio n a l m ethodology.' i ! The p re sid e n t of Alabama C o lleg e, i n d is c u ss in g |sta n d a rd s had t h i s to say: ! I W e could leave the d is c u s s io n o f sta n d a rd s here i f i t had n o t now become th e p re v a ilin g p ra c tic e in some | I p u b lic schools to ignore m e rit and to make 's o c ia l p ro - | m o tio n s ,' and i f more and more p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n t i d id n o t p u b lic ly oppose any system of g ra d e s. W e co u ld 1 ■ concede th a t i t i s not the l e t t e r grade which i s im p o r ta n t, and th en proceed to d ev ise a b e t t e r system of ; r e p o r tin g , and of prom otions, i f only th e se r a d ic a ls t did not d is p la y such a b lith e d efia n ce of alm ost any attem p t to m ain tain s ta n d a rd s . Many of them are so 1 im p a tie n t w ith any system of form al i n s t r u c t i o n , and so b i t t e r l y convinced th a t high sch o o ls and u n i v e r s i t i e s can be re g u la te d by the pedagogy of th e k in d e rg a rte n , ? 5 jo e l H. H ild eb ran d , "The P ro d u ctio n of S c ie n tis ts ," Chemical and E ngineering Hews. 3 1 : 5 0 8 7 , December 7 , 1 9 5 3 * 76 For exam ple, see "H ildebrand O ffers P hilosophy of : o f Teaching as Remsen L e c tu re r," Chemical and E ngineering Hews. 27s 1722, June 13, 19^9• More in fo rm a tio n w i l l be a v a ila b le to s u b s ta n tia te t h is o pin io n ; Yale U n iv e rsity j w i l l soon r e le a s e a volume of H ild e b ra n d 's w ritin g s on t e d u c a tio n . t h a t they award every s tu d e n t an A . . . P ro fesso r B estor*s book, E d u catio n al W astelands. was ip u b lish ed in t h i s y e a r. Depending upon d e f in i t io n s ©m- j i ployed, some t h i r t y to s ix ty s e p a ra te charges a g a in s t schools of e d u c atio n could be d e lin e a te d in t h i s book. ■ The g re a t m a jo rity o f B estor *s charges were made by o th e rs I i p re v io u sly and have a lre a d y been in c o rp o ra te d in to the ! p re s e n t s tu d y . To r e - s t a t e them would serve l i t t l e i p u rp o se. The fo llo w in g c r it i c i s m s , th en , re p re s e n t i i : ir e la t iv e ly new charges and are not to be co n stru ed as ; I * iBestor *s major c r iti c is m s : j I 1. E d u c a tio n is ts erro n eo u sly hold the b e l i e f t h a t ! ‘a school which s t r e s s e s i n t e l l e c t u a l tr a in in g i s an ! j a r i s t o c r a t i c school and i s not * * f u n c tio n a l1 1 f o r a i d em o cratic s t a t e . ^ i I 1 \ ! j 2 . E x p erts in pedagogy (p ro fe sso rs of e d u c atio n ) : I : I have no r i g h t to determ ine the curriculum of the p u b lic ! s c h o o ls . The q u e stio n of what s h a l l be tau g h t i s u ltim a te and p h ilo s o p h ic a l. D eterm ination o f what s h a ll be tau g h t \ i - i s a ta s k f o r the whole le a rn e d w orld. : 77p. Edward Lund, H Pedant v s . Pedagog: The Cold War, ,f Improving S tandards f o r th e Teaching P ro fe ss io n (W ashington: N .C .T .E .P .S .-W .E .A ., 1953) , P. 29. n Q 'A r t h u r E . B esto r, E d u c a tio n a l W astelands (Urbana: U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s P re s s , 1953), PP. 26-27, 3^* 79 ib id . , pp . 41-N-2.____________________________________ i 19? | 1 3 . P ro fe sso rs of ed u c atio n co n sid er them selves the j only a u th o r i ti e s in the f i e l d of e d u c a tio n and co n sid er e d u c a tio n a l views of t h e i r c o lleag u e s in o th er u n iv e r s ity j departm ents as im perttencies * j b. P ro fe sso rs of e d u c a tio n m isre p re se n t them selves | to the p u b lic as r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s of the e n t i r e u n iv e r s ity . 1 i This happens p a r t i c u l a r l y when school surveys are u n d e r- Q l ta k e n . j ! 5* E d u c a tio n is ts fav o r e lim in a tin g a l l the sc h o la r-, 1 82 1 ly d is c ip lin e s from th e high school c u rricu lu m . j ! • j ; 6 . P ro fe sso rs of e d u c a tio n c re a te the im p ressio n 1 among stu d e n ts t h a t fu tu re employment w i l l he the reward jfor th o se s tu d e n ts who adhere s t r i c t l y in c la s s 1 1 . . . to ; I 8o ’th e e d u c a tio n is t p a rty l i n e . 1 1 ^ < 7 . 1 1 In i t s r e la tio n s h ip w ith the u n iv e r s ity of which i t i s a p a r t , th e ty p ic a l departm ent of e d u c a tio n i ^hows no r e a l i n t e r e s t in i n t e r d i s c i p li n a r y c o -o p e ra tio n ak. , and no sense of academic p a r tn e r s h ip .1 1 I..- . 8°I b i d . . p . 4-2. j 8l I b i d . ! 82I b i d . . p . 58. '’ E d u c a tio n is ts " i n t h i s case meant II up-and-coming p u b lic school e d u c a tio n is ts .* 1 However, i t i s very lik e ly (on th e b a s is of th e 1 1 in te rlo c k in g d i r e c t o r a t e 1 1 ) t h a t B estor did n ot r u le out p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n when d is c u s s in g t h i s c h a rg e . 83I b i d . . p . 113. !________8 1 *Ibld._______________________________________________________ 196 8 # E d u c a tio n is ts e r r i n b e lie v in g t h a t l i b e r a l ed u c atio n is 1 1 . . . m erely the communicating of f a c tu a l in fo rm a tio n ." H is to ry , fo r example, is not mere su b je c t m a tte r but a s c h o la rly d i s c i p l i n e - - a way of th in k in g and 9* E d u c a tio n is ts use a u d io -v is u a l a id s i n c o r r e c t l y . ^ j C r itic is m s —195M-. 1955. P ro fe sso r B estor appeared i i to have assumed a more moderate p o s itio n . This was I :evidenced by h is ad dress a t Teachers C o lle g e, Columbia U n i v e r s i t y ; 8? a ls o , to some e x te n t by the 1 1 new” ch a p te rs in The R e s to ra tio n of le a r n in g . F urtherm ore, i n a s o r t of :apology to some "in n o c e n t1 1 e d u c a tio n is ts who were caught in th e c r o s s - f i r e , B estor w rote: " I f , lik e Ham let, fI have sh o t mine arrow o*er the h o u se, And h u r t my b r o t h e r , 1 I 83 wish to make a l l the amends w ith in my power." This was most g en ero u s. But i t also rev ealed a d i f f i c u l t y connected w ith c r it i c i s m , and the a n a ly s is of c r it i c i s m , in the f i e l d ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I ^ I b i d . , pp. 17-18. ^ I M d . , p p. 50-51. ^ A r th u r B e s to r, "Hofa Should America *s Teachers be E d ucated," Teachers C ollege R ecord. 56:16-19? O ctober, 195^. 88 t 1 A rthur B e sto r, The R e s to ra tio n of Learning (Hew | York: A lfred A. Knopf, 1955)» P* x i . ! I o f e d u c a t i o n : w r i t e r s i n t h i s f i e l d a p p a r e n t l y b e l i e v e th e y m u st o v e r - g e n e r a l i z e t o m ake a p o i n t . The p r e s e n t s t u d y , o f c o u r s e , c a n be c r i t i c i z e d f o r t h e same r e a s o n . B e s t o r a c c u s e d p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n o f e n c o u r a g in g 1 1 d e l u s i o n s o f c o m p e te n c y 1 1 i n t e a c h e r s . The r e f e r e n c e w as t o p s y c h o lo g y a n d m e n t a l h e a l t h . ' A s a r e s u l t , t e a c h e r s Iw ent b e y o n d t h e i r l i m i t s i n p r e s c r i b i n g i n t h e s e a r e a s |a c c o r d i n g t o B e s t o r . I I P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w e re a c c u s e d by B e s t o r o f sh a v in g a c o n te m p tu o u s a t t i t u d e to w a r d c l a s s r o o m teachers.^ ® I 1 C r i t i c s o f p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w e re sh o w e re d i Iw ith " v i t u p e r a t i o n a n d p e r s o n a l a b u s e , " a c c o r d i n g t o i !B e s t o r . B e s t o r c r i t i c i z e d t h e u s e o f t h e s e te r m s by p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n i n d e n o u n c in g t h e i r c r i t i c s : " a | p e r i p a t e t i c h a t c h e t m a n ,1 1 " a dem agogue r a t h e r t h a n a j j s c h o l a r , 1 1 " a m a s t e r o f th e p o i n t e d p h r a s e r a t h e r t h a n a [ s c h o l a r , 1 1 " s l i p p e r y , " " s h o w - o f f . " B e s t o r c o n t i n u e d : | T h a t a p r o f e s s o r o f e d u c a t i o n s h o u ld c h o o s e t o e x p r e s s h i m s e l f i n t h i s m an n e r i s p e c u l i a r l y s h o c k i n g , c o n s i d e r i n g t h e i n f l u e n c e w h ic h , i n a p r o f e s s i o n a l c a p a c i t y , h e i s bound t o e x e r t u p o n y o u t h f u l m in d s . . . T h is way o f m e e t i n g c r i t i c i s m — by v i t u p e r a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n a r g u m e n t— i s a n o f f e n s e a g a i n s t m o re t h a n good t a s t e . I t i s p a r t o f a p a t t e r n o f i n t i m i d a t i o n , 8 9I b i d . . p . 32. 198 Q 1 e s s e n t i a l l y t o t a l i t a r i a n in co n cep t . . . 7 P a r e n th e tic a lly i t must be s ta te d th a t th e term s j i s e le c te d by B estor (and no doubt he s e le c te d examples whichj would b e st su p p o rt h is c o n te n tio n s) are r e l a t i v e l y m ild j i compared to the examples of v itu p e r a tio n on the p a r t of j l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s which could be s e le c te d from the m a te ria l p re se n ted thus f a r in the p re s e n t study* I f ^ I ;B estor *s t h e s i s , p re se n ted above, i s c o r r e c t, then the ! j i , u tte ra n c e s of l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s are more th an H sh o ck in g .f,92 They, to o , were answering c r it i c i s m or i th r e a ts to t h e i r i n t e r e s t . They, to o , have t r a d i t i o n a l l y j a tte m p te d to b u ild c h a ra c te r in y o u th fu l m inds. A n e u tra l , !o b serv er of th is a sp e c t o f the co n tro v ersy could very w ell i 1 1 . ! end up w ith th e co n c lu sio n , 1 1 A plague on both your h o u se s.1 1 i 1 Other c r itic is m s t h a t were somewhat novel were j subm itted in response to the q u e stio n n a ire used in the i I I ip re se n t stu d y . These in clu d ed th e follo w in gs i I 1. **. . . e d u c a tio n a lis ts have pre-em pted the ! f i e l d of fo u n d a tio n g ra n ts , both as to in d iv id u a l fe llo w sh ip s and as to i n s t i t u t i o n a l g r a n ts .1 1 I \ "M UJL _ IJ--W— - - - - T ' 91I b l d . . pp. 181-82. i Q O ' ! 7 One l i b e r a l a r ts p ro fe s s o r i s a lle g e d to have i i n i t i a t e d a co nference w ith a s tu d e n t i n th e s e words: 1 M Academ ically the f i e l d of e d u c a tio n , i f not the education-! l i s t h im s e lf, i s a kind of b a s t a r d .1 1 See Roger M. Shaw, 1 1 Lo^ the Lowly E d u c a tio n is t,rt School and S o c ie ty . 62:399* December 1 5, 19^ 5 * 2 . "R esearch p ro je c ts Q e^ n catio n ] in g rad u ate schools tend to be r e p e titio u s * I have known th e same 'study* to be made over and over by su ccessiv e M.A. c a n d i d a te s 3. Basie psychology co u rses are o ffe re d i n schools of e d u c atio n by " . * . people who do n o t have a major o r even a minor requirem ent i n the f i e l d of psychology.*1 ! I j h. "As a m a tte r of f a c t th e re a re e n t i r e l y to o | many p ro fe sso rs o f ed u catio n who went out in the f i e l d i and t r i e d high school or secondary school teach in g and , f a i l e d (o fte n because of i n a b i l i t y to keep d i s c i p l i n e ) . 1 * ! ' 5* I t is only in e d u c a tio n th a t a d o c to ra l candidate Jean tak e courses a t the ju n io r and se n io r le v e l and re c e iv e ! c r e d i t . (This a p p a re n tly a p p lie d to the re sp o n d e n t's ! i i n s t i t u t i o n . ) 6 . In reg ard to d o c to ra l o r a l ex am in atio n s—" I ■deplore the a t t i t u d e of p ro fe ss o rs of E du cation toward I I t h e i r graduate stu d e n ts which im p lies th a t the l a t t e r have | c e r t a i n answers to give to c e r t a i n q u estio n s as though th e j stu d e n ts were young c h ild r e n who have to r e c i t e th e ir i ! ■ catech ism c o r r e c tly ; a b e rra n t answers are tr e a te d as jo k e s.1 * I I . ANALYSES OF THE PROBIEM George Morgan, J r . , P ro fe s so r of P hilosophy, :Hamilton C o lle g e, analyzed the c o n f l i c t i n 193&• in so 200 doing he w ro te : I tak e i t as an axiom t h a t the e n e rg ie s sp en t on technique and on c o n te n t of i n s tr u c tio n should vary in roughly in v e rse p ro p o rtio n as one moves up or down th e sta g e s of e d u c a tio n . In the elem entary school the s u b je c ts are sim ple, the p u p ils d i f f i c u l t . At the u n iv e r s ity . . . the s u b je c ts are i n f i n i t e and never com pletely m a s te re d .93 i i This was not a new id e a but i t i s an id e a th a t has been j fre q u e n tly overlooked in th is c o n tro v e rsy . ^ Almost a l l j a n a ly s is in the s o c ia l scien c es i s based to a c o n sid e ra b le : ,e x te n t on the ex p erien ce of the person making the a n a l y s i s . ! !The l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r ’s ex p erien ce and t r a i n i n g , i concerned p rim a rily w ith advanced s u b je c t m atter and the ■ ; i lo g ic a l o rd e r, tend to deny value to the p sy c h o lo g ic a l 1 i o rd e r. A lso, th e f i e l d of study e n te rs in to the p ic tu r e . j lA ll p a r ti e s to t h is co n tro v e rsy have s in g u la rly f a il e d to 1 i !analyze the problem w ith due re g ard to the a re a of study ; j u s t as they have overlooked the le v e l of e d u c a tio n . This |q u e s tio n has been unexplored: Do c e r ta in s u b je c t-m a tte r !f i e l d s a t c e r ta in le v e ls ( e . g . , co lle g e ch em istry ) demand jo n ly , or p rim a rily , the lo g ic a l order? I f th e answer i s !in the a f f ir m a tiv e , th e n s u b je c t m atter tr a in in g i s the ^G eorge Morgan, J r . , ,fCan Teaching Be T aught, n Commonweal. 2h-:209, June 19, 1936. i I ^ T h e only way t h i s Id e a has n o t been overlooked i s i n c r i t i c i s m . P ro fe ss o rs of e d u c atio n have been charged 'w ith try in g to apply th e ir id eas of elem entary ed u c atio n to I the co lleg e s i t u a t i o n when they advocated methods courses jfo r co lle g e prof e s s o r s . ________________ ______ j 201 itra in in g needed fo r te a e h e rs in th ese f i e l d s . Assume fo r |a moment th a t the a ffirm a tiv e answer is the c o r r e c t answ er. i Then the chem istry p ro fe s s o r, basing h is view points on h is ex p e rie n c e , w i l l decry courses i n e d u c a tio n —u n le ss he i s p a r ti c u l a r ly broadminded or has had ex p erien ces and t r a i n - ; ing n o t common to the u su a l p ro fe ss o r of ch e m istry . He w ill do th is u n le ss i t is c le a r ly shown th a t h is f i e l d i s d i f f e r e n t i n kind from o th er f i e l d s . Whether h is f i e l d i s j i or i s not d i f f e r e n t in kind i s c o n je c tu re —but the p o s s i- s b i l i t y e x i s ts and t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y has n o t been ad eq u ately ■ ex p lo red . Dean H. M. Ogden analyzed the co n tro v ersy from the j s ta n d p o in t of the graduate school in 1936. tfThe graduate s c h o o ls ,1 * he s a id , M have been to o ready to s h i f t the r e - js p o n s ib ility fo r the graduate tr a in in g of p ro sp ec tiv e jte a c h e rs , and te a c h e rs alread y i n s e rv ic e , to th e schools ! QK |o f e d u c a tio n .1 * " He f u r th e r s ta te d th a t the work in the i \ (graduate school was to o s p e c ia liz e d f o r te a c h e rs . S u b je c t- i jm atter departm ents were r e l u c t a n t , g e n e ra lly speak ing , to ic re a te s p e c ia l c o u rse s , a t the graduate l e v e l , fo r \ 1 ! 'te a c h e r s . In c e r t a i n f i e l d s c r e a tio n of such cou rses | i |would n e c e s s a rily mean a low ering o f s ta n d a rd s . Even so , I i i 9 % . M. Ogden, M The R e la tio n o f U ndergraduate to Graduate S tu d y ,1 1 School and S o c ie ty . 43*139, February 1, 1936. 202 sometimes when they have attem pted to do t h i s they have f a i l e d . This i s what happened a t W isconsin: ; W e have fo r about e ig h t y ea rs o ffe re d co u rses in j the Summer S essio n e x p re ssly f o r high school te a e h e rs j of m athem atics. They a re e n t i t l e d Foundations o f | A rithm etic and Foundations of A lgebra. W e had believed! t h a t as time went on th ese co u rses would a t t r a c t an ! in c re a sin g c l i e n t e l e , but the c la s s e s rem ain sm all | w hile hundreds of te a c h e rs go nex t-d o o r f o r co u rses in I the P rin c ip le s o f E ducation . . .9© | » Why such courses f a il e d might be r e la te d to th e fo llo w in g j 1 ! » which appeared l a t e r i n the same a r t i c l e from which th e 1 ( \ above was e x tra c te d : | . . . I assume th a t th o se high school te a c h e rs of m athem atics who take work i n m athem atics i n summer ; se ssio n s are among the b e s t and most e n th u s ia s tic in the high school f i e l d . But most of them are n o t very ; | good s c h o la r s . They are not as good as our run-of-m ine I ju n io r s . Probably th ey once w ere, but a f t e r being out | o f the atmosphere fo r a few y e a rs they have d e t e r i - i o ra te d . What th e o th e rs are lik e I hate to t h i n k .97 ! In 19Mfr P re sid e n t Conant analyzed the c o n tro v e rsy . I |Ignorance of the s ta tu s and problems o f the p u b lic schoo ls : I was said to be ty p ic a l of the c r i t i c s of sch ools of eduea- ! i ;t i o n . Conant s a id : I I am alm ost tem pted to g e n e ra liz e th a t the more educated th e p erso n , th e l e s s h is knowledge o f secondary | school e d u c a tio n . C e rta in ly the la c k of knowledge of ! | p u b lic schools among the p ro fe s s o rs of a r ts and s c i - \ I ences in our c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s i s p ro v e rb ia l. C. M acduffe, nTeacher E ducation in A lg e b ra ,1 1 American M athem atical M onthly. 60:372, J u ly , 1953* ! 97 ib i d . . p . 371 *. 203 1 And w ith la c k of in fo rm a tio n goes la c k of u n d er- ! stan d in g and la c k of sympathy . . .9 8 i Conant h eld t h a t the l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s l o s t c o n tro l i of the tr a in in g of te a c h e rs by d e f a u l t. D iscussing the problems faced by the p u b lic schools i n meeting g re a t j ! in c re a s e s in en ro llm e n t, Conant w rote: Do we fin d th a t the f a c u l t i e s o f a r t s and scien ces in our c o lle g e s were a c tiv e in th is m atter? Do we fin d I ; they endeavored to t r a i n te a c h e rs and su p e rin te n d e n ts ! I who would w re stle w ith th ese v a s t problems? Do we find! p ro fe s s o rs of s c ie n c e , l i n g u i s t i c s , and th e s o c ia l ! scien ces s i t t i n g up n ig h ts th in k in g how b e st to answer i | th ese e d u c a tio n a l q u estio n s of so much moment to the country? Hot so f a r as I have been able to d is c o v e r, i ! w ith a few notew orthy e x c e p tio n s. On the c o n tra ry , a l l ; the evidence in d ic a te s t h a t the f a c u l t i e s o f a r t s and scien c es i n our c o lle g e s stood around and bemoaned the s i t u a t io n and wrung t h e i r hands . • .99 !Conant f u r th e r m aintained t h a t i t was u n f a ir fo r l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs to judge the e f f e c tiv e n e s s of secondary e d u c a tio n only on the b a sis of academic s t a n d a r d s . M a n y ;o th e r f a c to r s were in v o lv ed . There was more to secondary e d u c atio n th a n t h i s a lo n e . i To e d u c a tio n is ts , Conant suggested th a t b rig h t i 1 stu d e n ts should be "d isco v e red ” a t an e a r l i e r age and they !should be provided w ith a g r e a te r m o tiv a tio n f o r i n t e l l e c t u a l c u r i o s i t y 5 a ls o , th is group should be provided w ith James B ryant Conant, M A Truce Among E d u c a to rs ,” I Teachers C ollege R ecord. M-6:158, December, 1 9 ^ . 99ifoid., p . 160. j 100Ibid.. , p . 161. 20^ b e t t e r form al instruction.^*®*** R obert H. M orrison, A s s is ta n t Commissioner f o r H igher E ducation in Mew J e rs e y , suggested t h a t the c o n tro v ersy could be eased by:***®^ ( 1) u rg in g s u b je c t-m a tte r t s p e c i a l i s t s to teach co u rses in m ethods, to share in th e I su p e rv isio n of stu d e n t te a c h in g , and to serve on committees concerned w ith te a c h e r e d u c atio n ; (2 ) encouraging stu d e n ts to take more graduate work in s u b je c t m a tte r in s te a d of ed u c atio n ; and (3 ) re p la c in g c o lle g e te a c h e rs of e d u c a tio n j who r e s ig n or r e t i r e by e le c tin g those who have s c h o la rs h ip ( in one s u b je c t-m a tte r f i e l d and competence in one or more I branches of p r o fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n . ! P re s id e n t W riston to ld how the e n tir e e d u c a tio n a l j world has been b esieged by 1 1 co ld w a rs.” One i s tempted to |conclude from W risto n fs rem arks t h a t b a rra g e s of c r iti c i s m ;a re an o cc u p atio n a l hazard of anyone in the te a c h in g p ro - if e s s io n . He concluded w ith th e se words: 1 j ! • . . th e e d u c a tio n a l world has always pretended t h a t the key to peace was i n someone e lso *s p o ck e t. I . | su g g est th e tim e has come t o reaeh in to our own pockets! and th e re fin d th e key to e d u c a tio n a l p e a c e . j ! i : i I 101I b i d . . p. 1 6 3. | i 1 ^*®%obert H. M orrison, "The C o n flic t Between Subject* M atter S p e c ia lis t s and P r o fe ssio n a l E ducators," School and I S o c ie ty . 6 8: 3 6 2 -6 3 > November 27* 19^*8. i ^ ^ H en ry w . W riston, "L et Us Have P eace," V ita l I Speeches. 2 0 :5*+2-M*, June 15, 195*+« ! I P re s id e n t Lund su g g ested th a t th e c o n tro v e rs y was J a c t u a l l y b e tw e e n e x t r e m i s t s i n b o th f a c t i o n s . He m a in t a i n e d t h a t t h e l i b e r a l g ro u p o f t h e l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s a n d t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e o r c o n c i l i a t o r y g ro u p o f p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n ws p o k e t h e sam e la n g u a g e The H a r v a r d C o m m itte e on G e n e r a l E d u c a t i o n h a d t h i s t o sa y a b o u t t h e c r i t i c s a n d t h e i r c r i t i c i s m s : i . . . c r i t i c i s m , th o u g h w e l l f o u n d e d , m eans l i t t l e ! when i t com es f r o m t h o s e who h a v e n e i t h e r s e r i o u s l y c o n s i d e r e d n o r t h e m s e l v e s e x p e r i e n c e d t h e k i l l i n g w e ig h t o f n u m b e rs , t h e lo w p a y , t h e p o l i t i c a l i n t e r f e r e n c e , j | th e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t b ad b a c k g r o u n d s a n d i n f l u e n c e s , th e ' i m p e r s o n a l i t y i m p l i c i t i n an y b i g s y s t e m , t h e dem and s | , on n e r v o u s e n e r g y an d s h e e r p h y s i c a l s t r e n g t h , t h a t ; i c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e l i f e o f t h e p u b l i c - s c h o o l te a c h e r . 105 ; |The above statem en t was made i n 1 * 5 . I t is q u ite probable, 1 \ | t h a t t h e s i t u a t i o n h a s n o t im p ro v e d i n t h e l a s t d e c a d e . j From a l l q u a r t e r s , t h e o p p o s i t e a p p e a r s t o be t r u e . ; i | The J o i n t C o m m itte e o f t h e F a c u l t y o f H a r v a r d C o l l e g e and th e G r a d u a te S c h o o l o f E d u c a t i o n b e l i e v e d t h a t i t h e d e v e lo p m e n t o f s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n c o i n c i d e d w i t h | I “ . . . a d e e p a n d g e n e r a l d e s p a i r a b o u t t h e p o s s i b l e h e l p w h ic h t h e o l o g y , p h i l o s o p h y , a n d t h e o t h e r h u m a n i t i e s c o u ld ! b r i n g t o o u r m o d e rn p o p u l a t i o n i n i t s a t t e m p t a t , i !r e a d j u s t m e n t t o t h e n e c e s s i t i e s o f o u r i n d u s t r i a l | Lund, o p . c i t . , p . 3 1 . j I ^°?G eneral E ducation in a Free S o c ie ty . Harvard j jU n iv ersity Committee (Cambridge7 Harvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , J P . J * 1 * . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ era.” As a r e s u l t the schools of ed u c atio n d id not u t i l i z e the methods of the hum anities but adopted the methods of the n a tu r a l s c ie n c e s —p a r ti c u l a r ly i n re g a rd to re s e a rc h . This le d to a kind of nn a tu r a l p o s itiv is m .1 1 Sometimes t h i s p o in t was put in th e se term s: schools of j ed u c atio n tr y to solve p h ilo so p h ic problems by s c i e n t i f i c ( q u a n tit a t i v e ) means• j I I M arten te n Hoor analyzed th e e v o lu tio n of the I i ;co n tro v e rsy as fo llo w s: f i r s t a period of n eg ativ ism j i ' |c h a ra c te riz e d by in d if f e r e n c e ; second, a p erio d of n e g a tiv ism c h a ra c te riz e d by o p p o sitio n ; t h i r d , a p erio d of :a tta c k in g th e problem through c o o p e ra tio n . D espite the ; - l j f a c t th a t 1 1 . . . th e re c u r r e n tly seems to be an in c re a s e j : in scope and tem perature . . #«1^7 of the argum ent, te n * ! I |Hoor thought the t h i r d sta g e had been reached in 1953* He i !a ls o suggested t h a t th e re were c e r t a i n removable o b s ta c le s \ I jto the s o lu tio n of the c o n tro v e rsy . These were: ! ! . . . m utual m isunderstanding of one another 1s e d u c a tio n a l purposes and p r a c t i c e s , a m isunderstanding j stim u la te d and nourished by an e x c ite d and p a r tis a n ] im ag in atio n ; the s u b s t itu ti o n o f power won by p o l i t i c a l means fo r p ro fe s s io n a l a u th o r ity based on a s s e n t and agreem ent; g e n e ra liz a tio n on i n s u f f i c i e n t d a ta ; th e s u b s titu tio n o f claim s fo r f a c t s ; commitment to the *philosophy of e i t h e r - o r , 1 w ith i t s im p lic a tio n of th e i i i * i ! ^®^The T rain in g of Secondary School T eachers— E s p e c ia lly w ith R eference to E n g lis h , op. c i t . . p . 51. 1^7te n Hoor, o p . c i t . , p. 80. 207 c a te g o r ic a l condemnation of one or th e o th e r a lt e r n a - tiv e .1 0 8 ! i P re sid e n t B u s s e ll lik ew ise co n sid ered th re e s ta g e s : j ig n o re , r i d i c u l e , and a t ta c k . He f e l t t h a t C onant1s j i " tr u c e ” had f a i l e d and spoke of the ”. . . p re se n t b i t t e r j war over te a c h e r education."^® ? This was a ls o in 1953* S t in n e tt i n d isc u s sin g the charge of over-em phasis j on methodology to the e x c lu sio n of s u b je c t m a tte r s a id : !"This charge has been growing in in te n s ity lik e the mounting boom-boom of a g ia n t drum ."11® I i ■ ' - I I I Douglass, in 1955* r e f e r r e d to the a tta c k s as "A j i Mew E ra in C ritic is m of Teacher E d u ca tio n ." His re fe re n c e 1 t |was to the i n t e n s ity and c h a ra c te r of the o p p o s itio n . In i t h i s re g ard he spoke of the p re s e n t p erio d as being marked | by " . . . th e making of charges w itho ut su p p o rtin g evidence! i | ! —coming to be c a lle d McCarthy ism by many p e o p le ." i i ' Im m ediately follow ing t h i s , Douglass mentioned such c r i t i c s I i as B e sto r, Woodring, and F u l l e r . The im p lic a tio n was c le a r i I i' i l o 8I b i d . , p . 9 2. ' i ^ ® % illiam F . B u s s e ll, "Tlie Truce That F ailed ,* 1 iImproving S tandards f o r the Teaching P ro fe ssio n (Washing- tons H .C .T .E .P .S .-N .E .A ., 19& )» P. 21. ' ^® T . M. S t i n n e t t , "The Backward Look, The Forward lo o k ," Improving S tandards f o r the Teaching P ro fe ss io n (W ashington: M.C .T.E .P .S . -W.E .A ., 195'3)V P* 3-3 . j i i l l X sL H arl R. D ouglass, "C urrent C ritic is m o f Teacher , E d u c a tio n ," The E d u c a tio n a l Forum. 19s3^?> March, 1955* 1 208 th e se c r i t i c s were a k in to McCarthyism. E d u c a tio n is ts could c e r ta in ly n o t be proud of t h i s 1 1 c o n tr ib u tio n 1 1 of one of t h e ir c o lle a g u e s , Douglass was g u ilty of the very ' p r a c tic e s which he c r i t i c i z e d . However, Douglass did p o in t o u t an elem ent which had been n e g le c te d by those who ; 112 1 analyzed the co n tro v e rsy in t h i s perio d s m ethods, which i i are so o fte n the p r in c ip a l b a sis f o r c r it i c i s m , a c tu a lly j c o n s titu te only a minor p a r t of contem porary te a c h e r j ! e d u c a tio n . Some c r i t i c s of schools of e d u c a tio n gave the j ! im pression t h a t methods courses were the only co urses i ; o ffe re d in te a c h e r e d u c a tio n . 1 i I I I . SU M M A R Y OF THE PERIOD : At the beginning of the p e rio d , c r it i c i s m appeared i I to be a t a r a th e r high le v e l and r a th e r w idespread. During! i I , the war y ears and the immediate p ost-w ar y e a rs o p p o sitio n | jappeared to ta p e r o f f c o n sid e ra b ly . This seemed to be j ; 1 ‘tru e d e s p ite the f a c t th a t in 19^7 Kandel w ro te, “The need | jfo r a tru c e i s now g r e a te r th an e v e r . 1 1 In th e perio d I 3-12£>O U gXass was not th e f i r s t one to p o in t t h is o u t.' *Many y ears b e fo re , Dean Holmes had s ta te d t h a t teach in g i 1 te a c h e rs how to teach was a minor p a r t of u n iv e r s ity work in !e d u c a tio n . See Henry ¥ . Holmes, “The Graduate School of Ed-; ;u c a tio n ,fl The Develonment of Harvard U n iv e rsity Since the i iIn a u g u ra tio n of P re s id e n t S T io t. "Samuel E l i o t M orrison, ' e d ito r (Cambridge: Harvard U n iv ersity P re s s , 1930), p . 523#: ! ^* 3 l. l . Kandel, “E ducators and E d u c a tio n ists,1 1 School and S o c ie ty . 66:196, September 13* 19*+7• C f. James Bryant i !C onant. E d u c a tio n in a Divided WorId (Cambridge: Harvard Uni4 ;v e rs ity P ress, 1 9^8F p.lW . Conant s a id , “C o nditions may have i improved somewhat in the l a s t few y e a rs , but the need fo r a i 1tru c e among e d u e a to rs 1 sti11_seem s a p p a re n t. “_______________ i 2 0 9 1 9 5 0 -1 9 5 5 ? o p p o s i t i o n t o s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n by l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s a p p e a r e d t o be a t a new h i g h . T h is s t a t e m e n t , b a s e d o n q u o t a t i o n s f r o m t h o s e i n v o l v e d i n t h e c o n t r o v e r s y , was i n h arm o n y w i t h t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s made i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r . P r e s i d e n t F o e r s t e r , P r o f e s s o r B e s t o r , an d B e an H i l d e b r a n d e m e rg e d a s t h e l e a d i n g c r i t i c s d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d . P r e s i d e n t s C o n a n t an d W r i s to n e m e rg e d a s l e a d i n g m e d i a t o r s . T e a c h e r s C o l l e g e , C o lu m b ia U n i v e r s i t y , e m e rg e d ;a s t h e c h i e f i n s t i t u t i o n a l t a r g e t . The U n i v e r s i t y o f :I l l i n o i s e m e rg e d a s t h e " h o t s p o t " o f t h e c o n t r o v e r s y . 1 C o m m itte e s co m p o sed o f l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s Iw h ic h made p r o n o u n c e m e n ts on t h e c o n t r o v e r s y w e r e , by and l a r g e , h o s t i l e t o p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n . 1 CHAPTER V II j THE PRESENT BELIEFS OF LIBERAL ARTS PROFESSORS i I . PROCEDURES AND TABULATION OF THE SURVEY A q u e s t i o n n a i r e w as d e v i s e d t o a s c e r t a i n w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s w e re t h e r u l e o r t h e e x c e p t i o n , i I A n o th e r p u r p o s e o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e w as t o p r o v i d e some f a c t u a l e v i d e n c e a s t o t h e “d i s t a n c e * 1 b e tw e e n p r o f e s s o r s o f t h e l i b e r a l a r t s a n d p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n o n s e l e c t e d i s s u e s o f c o n c e r n t o t h e t e a c h e r - e d u c a t i o n c u r r i c u l u m . I t .was t h o u g h t t h a t t h i s m ig h t be o f v a l u e t o t h o s e “ a t t e m p t i n g t o b r i d g e t h e g a p b e tw e e n t h e a c a d e m ic a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l m i n d . 1 * I t w as n o t t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o j e s t a b l i s h “ t r u t h b y c o n s e n s u s . 1 1 Some o f th e q u e s t i o n s 'w ere d e l i b e r a t e l y w o rd e d i n a “ d o u b l e - b a r r e l e d * 1 m a n n e r i in a s m u c h a s t h e c r i t i c i s m s f o u n d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e made s u c h i m p l i c a t i o n s . Some q u e s t i o n s w e re s t a t e d i n g e n e r a l i t i e s f o r th e sam e r e a s o n . O nly i n f r e q u e n t l y w as t h e ! “ d o u b l e - b a r r e l e d * 1 w o rd in g o f c e r t a i n q u e s t i o n s o r t h e u s e i jof g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s c h a l l e n g e d by t h e r e s p o n d e n t s . T h is ! * 1 ■was p r o b a b l y d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t th e l e t t e r 4- w h ic h a c c o m p a n ie d t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t a t e d t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n s 211 were based on c r itic is m s made of scho ols o f e d u c a tio n . A p i l o t study was s e n t out in the summer of 1955* |Seven c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s whose sum m er-session j ca ta lo g u e s were the f i r s t to a r r iv e a t the Los Angeles * P u b lic L ib rary were used in the p i l o t s tu d y . These I f i n s t i t u t i o n s w ere: 1 N orthw estern U n iv e rsity , ! U n iv e rsity of M innesota, Duluth Branch I i Washington U n iv e rsity (S t. Louis) U n iv e rsity of Hawaii j U n iv e rsity of Denver ; U n iv e rsity of W isconsin ! 1 Augustana C ollege I I ! M ew York U n iv e rsity I In a d d itio n th re e q u e s tio n n a ire s from the U n iv ersity , jof S outhern C a lifo rn ia were u sed . ! The p i l o t study re p o rte d here p o lle d only p ro fe s s o rs 2 i o f the l i b e r a l a r t s . S ev en ty -fiv e mimeographed q u e s tio n - , i |n a ire s were se n t out and f o r t y - s i x , or 61 per c e n t, were !re tu r n e d . ! I The f i n a l q u e s tio n n a ire , p re se n ted in F ig ure 3> jd iffe r e d from the p i l o t study i n the fo llo w in g ways: i 1 2 Five q u e stio n n a ire s re c e iv e d from p ro fe s s o rs of : e d u c a tio n i n th e p i l o t study have been o m itted . * » , w*i ' i * IP zxz OPINION SURVEY REGARDING SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION Please check the appropriate blank. (Leave blank if you have no opinion or if the wording of the question makes an answer meaningless). 1. In teacher training, the importance of educational methods has been greatly overplayed by schools of education at the expense of subject-matter mastery. Strongly agree........... ..''M ildly agree............. N eutral.............. M ildly disagree........... Strongly disagree............. 2. Subject-matter professors, rather than professors of education or high school teachers, should be selected to conduct classes dealing with teaching methods (secondary) for their specialty. Strongly agree............. M ildly agree............. N eutral.............. M ildly disagree........... Strongly disagree............. 3. Judged by the profundity and exactness of their writings, professors of education are not inferior in scholarship to the average college professor. Strongly agree............. M ildly agree............. N eutral............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree............. 4. State certification requirements prescribe too many semester-hours in education. Strongly agree............. M ildly agree............. N eutral.............. M ildly disagree........... Strongly disagree............. 5. Courses in education are as thorough and difficult as the average liberal arts course. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree , Strongly disagree............. 6. Professors of education place sufficient emphasis on the value of intellectual activity and the ability of high school pupils to profit by such endeavor. Strongly agree...J M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree .. 7. Recent high school graduates are not well-prepared in regard to academic skills and the responsibility for this lies, to a great degree* with schools of education. Strongly agree M ildly agree............. N eutral.............. M ildly disagree Strongly disagree.............. 8. Professors of education have pre-empted the right of others to determine the curriculum for the training of teachers. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree............. 9. There is an “interlocking directorate” of educationists (consisting of professors of education, state educational officials, superintendents, principals, etc.) which controls public education. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree.............. 10. Education courses overlap and duplicate one another unnecessarily. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree.............. 11. O ther things being equal, a teacher who has had courses in education will be a more effective classroom teacher than one who has not taken such courses. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree.............. 12. Courses in guidance should be tdught by a professor of psychology. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree... Strongly disagree.............. 13. History of education should be taught by a professor of history. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree.............. 14. Educational statistics should be taught by a professor of mathematics. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree...':......... 15. Educational psychology should be taught by a professor of psychology. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree.............. 16. Educational administration and supervision should be taught by a professor of business administration. Strongly agree M ildly agree............. N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree.............. 17. T he responsibility for the success or failure of public education can be traced, to a great degree, to the theories and prac tices of schools of education. Strongly agree M ildly agree............ N eutral.............. M ildly disagree............. Strongly disagree.............. 18. W hat is your special field?......................................................... ......................................................................................... 19. Years you have taught in institutions of higher learning ...................................... 20. Your institution—-check one. public university...-:..................................... private liberal arts college . private university ..... other (indicate)................................................. 21. Do you have any criticisms or comments regarding schools of education that are not included in the above? (Use reverse side.) Signature (optional) 2 1 3 1. One s e c tio n in the p i l o t study which asked fo r i resp o n ses to hours and s u b je c t allo tm en t of a "model1 1 | i t e a c h e r - tr a in in g program was d e le te d because to o many j respond en ts did not answer t h i s p a r t. i i 2 . A few minor changes in term inology were made i n a few q u e s tio n s . However, the substance rem ained the same. 3 . An a d d itio n a l q u e stio n (seventeen) was added in the f i n a l q u e s tio n n a ire . i i 1 | In the f i n a l q u e stio n n a ire a " h is to r y sample" was ; t i !u se d . The h is to r y sample d if f e r e d from th e re g u la r (la rg e )! i sample i n one way o n ly . Through the c o o p e ra tio n of P ro - ! i f e s s o r R u s se ll C aldw ell of the U n iv e rsity of S outhern i !C a lif o r n ia H isto ry Departm ent, h is name and departm ent j i were used f o r the r e tu r n a d d re s s . A ll o f th e o th e r ! i i jq u e stio n n a ire s u sed , f o r the r e tu r n a d d re ss , the name of | i |P ro fe sso r R obert Brackenbury of the U n iv e rsity of Southern i i C a lif o r n ia School of E d u ca tio n . P ro fe sso r Brackenbury was ! chairm an of the committee su p e rv isin g t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n . ! i ,The purpose of u t i l i z i n g the h is t o r y sample was to d e t e r - ; mine whether or n o t th e r e tu r n ad dress "School of Education" c re a te d a b ias in the number, or k in d , of r e tu r n s . ! | In th e f i n a l q u e stio n n a ire e ig h ty i n s t i t u t i o n s were j i : in v o lv e d . A random sample was drawn from American U niver s i t i e s and C o lle g e s . S ix th E d itio n , 1952, p u b lish ed by the j iAmerican C ouncil on E d u ca tio n . Every te n th i n s t i t u t i o n was! I p l a c e d i n t h e s a m p le * I n s t i t u t i o n s i n v o l v e d i n t h e p i l o t j 's t u d y , C a t h o l i c c o l l e g e s , N e g ro c o l l e g e s , t e a c h e r s c o l l e g e s , s i n g l e - p u r p o s e s t a t e c o l l e g e s , an d t e c h n i c a l s c h o o l s w e re n o t c o n s i d e r e d i n d r a w in g t h e s a m p le . The c o l l e g e s and uni-: i i v e r s i t i e s p l a c e d i n th e s a m p le f o l l o w s NORTHEAST (NEW ENGLAND AND MIDDIE ATLANTIC) ■ T r i n i t y C o l l e g e D i s t r i c t o f C o lu m b ia I G o u eh er C o l l e g e I U n i v e r s i t y o f M a ry la n d i ' M a s s a c h u s e t t s A m h e rs t C o l l e g e M ount H o ly o k e C o l le g e N o r t h e a s t e r n U n i v e r s i t y R u t g e r s U n i v e r s i t y New Y o rk B a rd C o l l e g e C o l g a t e U n i v e r s i t y E l m i r a C o l le g e Q u een s C o l l e g e R u s s e l l S ag e C o l l e g e S y r a c u s e U n i v e r s i t y 2 1 5 P e n n s y l v a n i a E l i z a b e t h t o w n C o l l e g e F r a n k l i n an d M a r s h a l l C o l l e g e L a f a y e t t e C o l l e g e P e n n s y l v a n i a C o l le g e f o r Women S u s q u e h a n n a U n i v e r s i t y W a s h in g to n a n d J e f f e r s o n C o l l e g e R h o d e I s l a n d U n i v e r s i t y o f R hode I s l a n d V erm o n t U n i v e r s i t y o f V erm ont SOUTH AND SOUTHEAST A lab am a | H ow ard C o l l e g e | A r k a n s a s 1 A r k a n s a s A g r i c u l t u r a l a n d M e c h a n ic a l C o l l e g e i ' F l o r i d a ! F l o r i d a S t a t e C o l l e g e i G e o r g ia M e rc e r U n i v e r s i t y j A g n es S c o t t C o l l e g e I | L o u i s i a n a C e n t e n a r y C o l l e g e • S o u t h w e s t e r n L o u i s i a n a I n s t i t u t e 1 M i s s i s s i p p i i ! B e lh a v e n C o l l e g e M i s s i s s i p p i C o l l e g e N o r t h C a r o l i n a E l o n C o l le g e G r e e n s b o r o C o l l e g e U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r th C a r o l i n a O klahom a A g r i c u l t u r a l a n d M e c h a n ic a l C o l l e g e U n i v e r s i t y o f O klahom a S o u t h C a r o l i n a ; L im e s to n e C o l l e g e - U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u th C a r o l i n a I T e n n e s s e e L i n c o l n M e m o ria l U n i v e r s i t y U n io n U n i v e r s i t y I T e x a s | H ow ard P a y n e C o l l e g e ! S o u t h w e s t e r n U n i v e r s i t y | T r i n i t y U n i v e r s i t y i H am p d en -S y d n ey C o l l e g e I M a d is o n C o l l e g e I !W est V i r g i n i a I W est V i r g i n i a U n i v e r s i t y i ! NORTH CENTRAL | I l l i n o i s j C a r th a g e C o l l e g e i I l l i n o i s C o l l e g e M acM urray C o l l e g e B u t l e r U n i v e r s i t y I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y • . W a b a s h _ C o lle g e _______ G r i n n e l l C o l l e g e i U p p er Io w a U n i v e r s i t y i !K a n s a s M c P h e rso n C o l l e g e K e n tu c k y G e o rg e to w n C o l l e g e M ic h ig a n i 1 Alm a C o l l e g e I M ic h ig a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y M in n e s o ta H a m lin e U n i v e r s i t y M i s s o u r i D r u r y C o l l e g e P r i n c i p i a C o l l e g e T a r k i o C o l l e g e W e s t m i n i s t e r C o l l e g e N e b r a s k a N e b r a s k a W e s le y a n U n i v e r s i t y i { N o r t h D a k o ta U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h D a k o ta | O h io H e i d e l b e r g C o l l e g e O hio W e s le y a n U n i v e r s i t y W e s te r n C o l le g e ( f o r Women) I S o u t h D a k o ta ■ U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u th D a k o ta 218 WEST C a l i f o r n i a C la r e m o n t G r a d u a te S c h o o l M i l l s C o l l e g e O c c i d e n t a l C o l l e g e 1 U n i v e r s i t y o f R e d la n d s W e s te r n S t a t e C o l l e g e | C o l l e g e o f I d a h o I M o n ta n a M o n ta n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y I U n i v e r s i t y o f O re g o n ' I * W a s h in g to n i I C o l l e g e o f P u g e t S ound ; W hitm an C o l l e g e ! I Wyoming I s i U n i v e r s i t y o f Wyoming | i j I n t h e l a r g e s a m p le w e re s i x l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s | i n e a c h o f t h e e i g h t y i n s t i t u t i o n s . One p r o f e s s o r o f i e d u c a t i o n i n e a c h o f t h e e i g h t y i n s t i t u t i o n s w as p l a c e d i n , t |t h e e d u c a t i o n s a m p le . I n a d d i t i o n , o n e l i b e r a l a r t s | p r o f e s s o r i n e a c h i n s t i t u t i o n w as i n c l u d e d i n t h e h i s t o r y ! s a m p le . Marnes w e re s e l e c t e d fro m th e a p p r o p r i a t e c a t a l o g u e s ! s t a r t i n g , a l t e r n a t e l y , fro m t h e f r o n t , c e n t e r , and b a c k . j : 219 \ Only one p ro fe s s o r p e r dep artm en t in each i n s t i t u t i o n was | in c lu d e d i n th e sam ple. Banks o f p ro fe s s o rs were co n - i i s id e re d i n t h i s manners when th re e p ro fe s s o rs o f e q u iv a - 1 l e n t ra n k were p la c e d in th e t o t a l sam ple, th e sam ple was t c o n sid e re d c lo se d to t h a t ra n k . I n s t r u c to r s were n o t in c lu d e d . , i In th e la r g e sam ple, th e n , If8d; q u e s tio n n a ire s were :m a ile d . S ix q u e s tio n n a ire s were re tu rn e d by th e p o s t 'o f f i c e . Of th e q u e s tio n n a ire s to l i t e r a l a r t s jp ro fe s s o rs w hich were presum ably d e liv e r e d , 3 0? were \ Ire tu rn e d . T his was a re sp o n se of ap p ro x im ately 6b p er cent! i which was in d ic a tiv e o f the i n t e r e s t in the problem of t h i s i [ d is s e r ta tio n . F ive q u e s tio n n a ire s a r r iv e d to o l a t e to ! i ; t a b u l a t e . > I i Of the 80 q u e s tio n n a ire s m ailed In th e h is to r y j |sam ple, 52 answ ers were re c e iv e d and 1 q u e s tio n n a ire was re tu rn e d by the p o s t o f f i c e . T his was a r e tu r n o f j I ;ap p ro x im ately 66 p er c e n t. S e v e n ty -e ig h t q u e s tio n n a ire s were m ailed to p r o f e s - ! I s o rs o f e d u c a tio n - tw o i n s t i t u t i o n s d id n o t l i s t a ' 1 p ro fe s s o r o f e d u c a tio n in t h e i r c a ta lo g u e . Of th e s e 78, < 61 answ ers were re c e iv e d and 2 q u e s tio n n a ire s were re tu rn e d j by th e p o s t o f f i c e . T his was a re sp o n se of ap p ro x im ately 1 80 p e r c e n t. Three q u e s tio n n a ire s a r r iv e d to o l a t e to 'ta b u la te . i p l As in d ic a te d p re v io u s ly , th e resp o n se to th e p i l o t stu d y was ap p ro x im ately 61 p er c e n t. Most o f th e q u e s tio n n a ire s w ere s ig n e d . Through s ig n a tu re s and postm arks ( a l l b u t two q u e s tio n n a ire s c a r r ie d th e postm ark o f a ^ c o lle g e town1 1 ) th e q u e s tio n n a ir e s were a ssig n e d to r e g io n s . For th e la rg e sam ple, the re sp o n se by re g io n s was (a p p ro x im a te ly ): N o rth e a s t, 69 p e r c e n t; South and S o u th e a s t, 5 * + c e n t; N orth C ent r a l , p e r c e n t; W est, 77 p er c e n t. 1 | I n th e la r g e sam ple, 30 p er c e n t o f th e re tu rn e d |q u e s tio n n a ire s c o n ta in e d comments.^ T his does n o t in c lu d e 1 1 comments1 1 of one o r two w ords. The av erag e 1 1 comment1 1 !was i n th e n a tu re o f a seventy-w ord p a ra g ra p h . T his was a g a in in d ic a tiv e of th e i n t e r e s t i n the s tu d y . ; The r e s u l t s of the surv ey are shown in T ab les I to ! ix V II, p p . 221+-4-7. I P ro fe s s o rs were c l a s s i f i e d i n the fo llo w in g academ ic I I g ro u p s: 1 I H u m a n it i e s a n d M o d ern L a n g u a g e s 1 E n g lis h L ite r a tu r e F o re ig n Languages i C la s s ic s P h ilo so p h y 1 ! ■— ................................... 1 .......1 ....................................... ^ S e le c te d comments a r e p re s e n te d in Appendix D, P . 3 7 2 . !P h y s ic a l S cien ce s C hem istry P h y sic s M athem atics Geology M ineralogy Astronomy B io lo g ic a l S cien ce s Zoology i Botany B iology B a c te rio lo g y P la n t P ath o lo g y P h y sio lo g y B ioch em istry S o c ia l S c ie n c e s P o l i t i c a l S cien ce Economics A nthropology S o cio lo g y Psychology Geography H isto ry A rt Music T h eatre B ib le and R e lig io n A d m in is tra to rs Did n o t s t a t e The assig n m en t o f each q u e s tio n n a ire to "ty p e of i n s t i t u t i o n " was d eterm in ed by the d e s ig n a tio n s e le c te d by th e re s p o n d e n t. A sm all number were p la c e d i n th e group marked " o th e r ." T ra n s fe rs to o th e r i n s t i t u t i o n s , f a i l u r e to check any d e s ig n a tio n , and the f a c t t h a t two o f th e i i i n s ti t u t i o n s . p o lle d _ w e re _ a p p a re B tly _ n o t_ _ th e _ tra d itio n a l___ M iscellan eo u s t y p e o f l i b e r a l a r t s c o l l e g e a c c o u n t e d f o r t h i s g r o u p . \ [ The " o t h e r 1 1 g r o u p w as to o s m a l l t o w a r r a n t t a b u l a t i o n b y ; p e r c e n t a g e b u t t h i s g r o u p f o l l o w e d t h e g e n e r a l p a t t e r n r a t h e r c l o s e l y . ■ i I n t h e t a b u l a t i o n ^ t h e h e a d i n g 1 1 By t e a c h i n g e x p e r i - , e n c e " h a s r e f e r e n c e t o t h e num ber o f y e a r s o f e x p e r i e n c e i n I c o l l e g e o r u n i v e r s i t y t e a c h i n g . i A " s p e c i a l r a t i o " w as p l a c e d i n th e t a b u l a t i o n s t o , } ' ■ ! g iv e t h e r e a d e r a r a p i d e v a l u a t i o n . The " s p e c i a l r a t i o " d i s r e g a r d s " n e u t r a l " an d " n o a n s w e r " r e s p o n s e s . The f i r s t f i g u r e o f t h e " s p e c i a l r a t i o " i s t h e sum o f t h e p e r c e n t a g e s |f o r " s t r o n g l y a g r e e " and " m i l d l y a g r e e " ; t h e s e c o n d f i g u r e t I is t h e sum o f t h e p e r c e n t a g e s o f " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e " an d |" m i l d l y d i s a g r e e . " The " s p e c i a l r a t i o " t h u s show s " a g r e e " : v s " d i s a g r e e " — i n t h a t o r d e r . j Any r e s p o n s e t h a t was q u a l i f i e d by t h e r e s p o n d e n t \ t h r o u g h i n s e r t i o n o f one o r m ore w o rd s i n t h e q u e s t i o n w as j i c o n s i d e r e d a s " n o a n s w e r ." • The q u e s t i o n n a i r e - s t u d y s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d s im p ly ; i a s a n i l l u s t r a t i v e s t u d y . The r e a d e r i s c a u t i o n e d t h a t i n ! ( c a s e s w h e re s u b - g r o u p s show " o n e p e r c e n t , " t h e t o t a l may i show " z e r o p e r c e n t " in a s m u c h a s p e r c e n t a g e s w e re c a r r i e d o n l y t o t h e n e a r e s t w h o le p e r c e n t . F o r t h e sam e r e a s o n t h e t o t a l s o f r e s p o n s e s t o i n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n s d i d n o t i , jalw ay s ad d u p t o 1 0 0 p e r c e n t . j i 223 Mo s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s w as i n t e n d e d * F u r t h e r m o r e , I j u d g i n g by i n s p e c t i o n o f t h e r e s p o n s e s , s t a t i s t i c a l ! a n a l y s i s w o u ld s e r v e l i t t l e p u r p o s e * A lth o u g h some c a s e s I o f m a t h e m a t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s w e re a p p a r e n t b y ( i n s p e c t i o n , t h i s d i f f e r e n c e w o u ld h a v e l i t t l e p r a c t i c a l j a p p l i c a t i o n b e c a u s e t h e r e s p o n s e s i n g e n e r a l w e re s o , c l e a r l y h o s t i l e t o s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . I t m akes l i t t l e j d i f f e r e n c e o f p r a c t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e , f o r e x a m p le , i f 80 j p e r c e n t o f one g r o u p and 90 p e r c e n t o f a n o t h e r g r o u p 1 t h i n k s t a t e c e r t i f i c a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e t o o h i g h . i ' I I . RESULTS OF THE SURVEY i 1 As show n i n T a b le I t h e r e w as o v e rw h e lm in g a g re e m e n t: i r by p r o f e s s o r s o f t h e l i b e r a l a r t s i n r e s p o n s e t o t h i s s t a t e m e n t s M I n t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g , t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f e d u c a - j i v j ;t i o n a l m e th o d s h a s b e e n g r e a t l y o v e r p l a y e d by s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n a t t h e e x p e n s e o f s u b j e c t - m a t t e r m a s t e r y . ” The ; s p e c i a l r a t i o f o r l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s w as 9 0 -3 and t h e t y p i c a l (m o st n u m e ro u s ) r e s p o n s e w as 1 1 s t r o n g l y a g r e e . ” 1 1 . P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n d i s a g r e e d w i t h t h e s t a t e m e n t b u t in ; ! a m ild m a n n e r . The s p e c i a l r a t i o f o r p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a - i t i o n w as 3 8 - 5 ! an(i t h e t y p i c a l r e s p o n s e f o r t h i s g r o u p was L . The p i l o t s tu d y an d t h e h i s t o r y s a m p le a r e n o t i n c l u d e d u n l e s s s p e c i f i c m e n tio n i s m ade o f t h e s e g r o u p s . I O O Il TABLE I QUESTION O N E RESPONSES j QUESTION: tfIn te a c h e r t r a i n i n g , th e im portance of ed u catio n ? a l m ethods has been g r e a tly o v erp lay ed by sc h o o ls o f ed u ca t i o n a t th e expense of s u b je c t- m a tte r m a s te ry .1 1 P e F c e ni t a * e S fe A m g © U / P •H © Q ) b e * 3 © F h c t 5 o G F h 0 ) b O to •H O b O < D © •H (X « * * to Q © u b O •H 3 5 © c d > » < 4 Q > » I* r — 1 rH rH iH to b f l > > © > » b O © f H G G < H F h rH G Q 3 <aj O + > T 3 O O P F h rH j3 rH © O -P •H < p •H •P P. jl is; C O J 3 5 5 3 C O C O L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs T o ta l 300 2 68 22 5 2 1 90-3 By re g io n s N o rth e a st 91 3 74 18 2 2 1 92-3 S outh and S o u th e a s t 78 1 63 27 4 4 1 90-?; N orth C e n tra l 80 1 70 20 8 1 0 90-1 : West [By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 51 2 65 25 6 2 0 90-2 t 1 -1 0 y e a rs 113 1 69 23 5 1 1 92-2 11-20 y e a rs 90 2 67 21 4 4 1 88- 5, 21 o r more y e a rs Unknown 88 9 1 68 24 5 2 0 92-2 By academ ic g ro u p s: H u m an ities-lan g u ag e s 76 3 82 13 1 0 1 95-1 S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 1 58 27 8 4 1 85-5 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 1 74 19 b 1 0 93-1 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s M iscellan eo u s By ty p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n : 36 24 3 69 25 3 0 0 9*+-0 l P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 4 67 22 5 2 0 89-2 P riv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 6 60 26 6 0 3 8 6 -3 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e ! O ther 167 13 0 72 21 4 2 0 93-2 H is to ry S am de 52 4 71 21 2 2 0 92-2 P i l o t Studv 46 7 63 28 0 0 2 91-2 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 53 5 10 28 5 29 22 38-5t |" m ild ly d i s a g r e e .1 1 As shown in fa b le I I , p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c l e a r l y ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: " S u b je c t-m a tte r j p r o f e s s o r s , r a th e r th a n p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n or h ig h j sch o o l te a c h e r s , should be s e le c te d to co n d u ct c la s s e s ; d e a lin g w ith te a c h in g m ethods (seco n d ary ) f o r t h e i r s p e c i a l t y .1 1 The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 60-22 and th e ty p ic a l I re sp o n se was 1 1 s tro n g ly a g r e e .1 1 G reat d i v e r s i t y was n o tic e -; i 'a b le betw een th e re sp o n se s of p ro fe s s o r s o f th e h u m a n itie s ' and p ro fe s s o rs of th e ^so cial s c ie n c e s on t h i s i s s u e . The is p e c ia l r a t i o fo r th e form er was 8 1 -? in fa v o r of agreem ent w hereas th e l a t t e r ag reed by a s p e c ia l r a t i o of *4-6-35* : i P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n c le a r ly d is a g re e d w ith th e s t a t e - i m ent. The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s group was 16-67 and th e i i ty p ic a l re sp o n se was " s tro n g ly d is a g r e e .1 * I r S As shown i n T able I I I , p . 227* p ro fe s s o rs o f th e ! • li b e r a l a r t s d is a g re e d w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: "Judged by th e : I j p ro fu n d ity and e x a c tn e s s of t h e i r w r itin g s , p ro fe s s o rs o f j I e d u c a tio n a re n o t I n f e r i o r in s c h o la rs h ip to th e av erag e I \ c o lle g e p r o f e s s o r ." The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 25-^1 and th e t y p i c a l re sp o n se was "m ild ly d is a g r e e ." Of t h i s g ro u p , 21 p e r c e n t to o k a " n e u tr a l" p o s itio n and 13 p er c e n t d id i : i n o t answ er. P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n c l e a r l y ag reed w ith the s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s group was 71-15 i and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was " s tro n g ly a g r e e ." TAB IE I I QUESTION T W O RESPONSES QUESTION: w S u b ject-m atter p r o fe ss o r s , rath er than p r o fe s - j so rs of ed u cation or high sch o o l te a c h e r s, should be j s e le c te d to conduct c la s s e s d ea lin g w ith teach in g methods ( (secondary) for th e ir s p e c ia lt y ♦ 11___________________ < P e r e € l NL-t^a.-JLjB. s ! © b p © m < d f - 1 *H © © t x O * T 3 © IH ctf O p m © « © w « h O 6 u 0 © <6 *rl -P p< << U w Q a S W *H Pd © © Q > > ( 4 J 3 S rH rH rH rH W M > > ( 6 > > b p cS f-t P p rH rH C *H © O 73 +* O O pQ h H 0 rH 14 © 0 © + » «H © *H -P P i p S d C O S S S a S l S J C Q CO 5 2 5 .. ........................................................ .... ..................... ............................. I L ib eral A rts P ro fesso rs i t o t a l 300 5 33 27 13 17 'By re g io n s s 1 N o rth e a s t 91 8 32 30 12 12 7 62-19 ; S outh and S o u th e a st 78 3 37 28 12 17 4 - 65-21 1 N orth C e n tra l 80 b 26 31 18 20 1 57-21 ; W est 51 8 37 16 12 20 8 53-28 I By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e s I-1 0 y e a rs 113 b 28 27 16 22 3 5 5-25 I I - 2 0 y e a rs 90 6 30 27 16 16 7 57-23 21 or more y e a rs 88 6 * * 3 25 8 12 6 68-18 Unknown 9 |By academ ic g ro u p s: H u m an ities-lan g u ag e s 76 8 ^9 32 7 * » ■ 1 81-5 S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 2 19 27 16 25 10 »t6-35 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 * * • 29 31 11 22 3 60-25 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 36 8 b7 .11 17 17 0 58-17 M iscellan eo u s 2b I By ty p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n s i P u b lic u n iv e r s i t y 85 7 27 23 13 22 7 50-29 P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 6 26 3^ 9 lb 11 60-25 l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e 167 b 35 29 I 1 * 15 2 6^— 17 O ther 13 52 6 27 37 15 13 2 6^-15 P i l o t S tudy M -6 b 20 ^3 13 15 b 63-1 9 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 10 9 7 7 19 ^8 16-67 227! QUESTION THREE RESPONSES I QUESTION: "Judged by th e p ro fu n d ity and e x a c tn e s s o f t h e i r j w r itin g s , p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n a re n o t i n f e r i o r in \ s c h o la rs h ip to th e av erag e c o lle g e p r o f e s s o r .” j p Q e ri t a g e S © 0 © 0 fn < D o > b u O r& 0 * 4 0 O a F h a ) & o C O •H © 1? < D c v j •H ■ P a. J h to < 0 « u t » 0 •H P S C D < D > » < * } > » P S rH rH rH rH m C t O > > cti b o 0 } F h 0 c rH U rH 0 o •H M o m T3 »H *P P TJ i— 1 O (D 0 o -p C D •H -P Pb 1 2 5 t o £3 5 s e j C O t o iL ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs | T o ta l 300 13 12 13 21 25 16 25-H-l By i re g io n s : N o rth e a s t 91 15 11 13 20 2b 17 l 24--4-11 i S outh and S o u th e a st 78 9 15 13 26 20 17 28-37; N o rth C e n tra l 80 P 11 lb 17 2^- 19 2 5 -% West 51 lb 8 12 22 35 10 20-4-5, 1 By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1-10 y e a rs 113 12 9 13 23 27 17 1 1 22-44- 11-20 y e a rs 90 17 13 lb 17 2b 19 20 27-39 1 1 21 o r more y e a rs 88 10 13 12 28 13 25-41 |By 1 Unknown academ ic g ro u p s: H u m an ities-lan g u ag e s 9 7 6 16 n 16 12 22 28 t ! 23-50 1 S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 10 1^* l*f 23 30 9 28-39 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 16 8 11 25 26 lb 19HO, B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 36 17 19 8 25 17 Ik 27-31 By i M iscellan eo u s ty p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 2b 85 12 8 13 26 22 19 1 21H-3J P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity P 20 11 17 17 23 11 28-34 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 167 13 12 13 19 28 15 2 5— 4-3 O ther H is to rv Samnle 13 52 6 b 17 21 35 17 2 1-52 P i l o t Study 4-6 9 0 15 20 33 2b 15-?7 .E d u catio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 5 52 19 9 12 3 71-15| 228 ! i As shown in T able IV, p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l ! a r t s overw helm ingly ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: “S ta te | i c e r t i f i c a t i o n re q u ire m e n ts p re s c rib e to o many s e m e s te r- j j h o u rs i n e d u c a tio n .1 1 The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s group was ; 79-5 and th e t y p i c a l re sp o n se was 1 1 s tro n g ly ag ree.* 1 P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n c le a r l y d is a g re e d w ith th e s t a t e - j i m ent. The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s group was 21-65 and th e t y p i c a l re sp o n se was 1 1 s tro n g ly d is a g r e e .“ 1 As shown in Table V, p . 230, p ro fe s s o rs o f th e | i l i b e r a l a r t s overw helm ingly d is a g re e d w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: i ;"C ourses in e d u c a tio n a re as th o ro u g h and d i f f i c u l t a s th e av erag e l i b e r a l a r t s c o u r s e .w The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 8-80 and th e t y p ic a l re sp o n se was “m ild ly d is a g r e e .1 * P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n c l e a r l y ag reed w ith th e s ta te m e n t. The sp e c ia l j r a t io f o r t h i s group was 6 1 -2 7 and the t y p i c a l re sp o n se was I 1 1 ,1 mi Id ly agree.** ; As shown in T able V I, p . 231* p ro fe s s o rs of th e | i l i b e r a l a r t s d is a g re e d w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: “ P ro fe s s o rs |of e d u c a tio n p la c e s u f f i c i e n t em phasis on th e v a lu e of I ( i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y and th e a b i l i t y o f h ig h sch o o l pupils^ i to p r o f i t by such endeavor.** The s p e c ia l r a t i o was I 1 * — * + 9 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was “m ild ly disagree.** Of th i s j g ro u p , 21 p e r c e n t to o k a “neutral** p o s itio n and 1? p e r i c e n t d id n o t an sw er. P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n ag reed w ith i j :th e s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 63-21 f o r t h i s group I TABLE IV QUESTION FOUR RESPONSES 2 2 9 QUESTION: f* S t a te c e r t i f i c a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s p r e s c r i b e t o o m any sem es t e r - h o u r s i n e d u c a t i o n . * 1 X ...P — fl a JL A -X -JL-S H O « •H * 8 0 0 1 C O C D « S-l C D fO C D C D C D ft C D C D H O Q ) U « S o u < D HO C O H O C D e s 5 •H -P < * s W m c tf u HO •H p rj > > « a j Q >? 5 * rH rH rH rH W J ho >* c c j > > HO c tf a a rH IH rH a < H O TJ •P o O rH j3 rH C D O • P •rl Q •HI - P P. a m 23 £5 53 co CO (L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs ! T o ta l 300 6 57 22 9 3 2 79-5 iBy re g io n s : 1 N o rth e a st 91 10 56 23 8 1 2 79-3 ! S outh and S o u th e a st 78 5 50 2b 10 6 7*f-!G ! N orth C e n tra l 80 h 66 18 10 1 1 8* f-2 | West 51 b 57 25 10 * * 0 82-b jBy te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1 1 -1 0 y e a rs 113 * 55 26 12 * f 1 8 1 -5 1 11-20 y e a rs 90 52 28 11 0 * f 80 Hi- i 21 or more y e a rs i Unknown 88 9 9 66 12 6 6 l 7 8 -7 c By academ ic g ro u p s: Humani t i e s -la n g u a ge s 76 3 7 H - 16 5 0 3 2 90-3 S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 2 5b 2b 13 4 7 8 -6 P h y s ic a l sc ie n c e s 73 12 52 23 7 3 3 7 5 -6 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s M iscellan eo u s 36 2b 6 50 31 6 8 0 81-8 By ty p e of i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 9 I 2 26 1 3 6 0 0 78-0 P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 6 b f 4 - 29 0 6 8 3 -6 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e O ther 167 13 62 20 7 5 2 82-7 i H is to ry S am de 52 b 62 25 6 2 2 87H- P i l o t Study N -6 7 50 35 7 0 2 85-2 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 3 7 lb 10 31 3^ 21-65 TABLE V QUESTION FIVE RESPONSES QUESTIONS " C o u r s e s i n e d u c a t i o n a r e a s t h o r o u g h a n d d i f f i c u l t a s t h e a v e r a g e l i b e r a l a r t s c o u r s e . " b£ > C • X 3 m o ( X Vi Q > « U Q > rQ 5 2 ? P e r c e n t a s e s i < D O J W fH < 1 ) © bO 0 ) u c d O J H a> bO to •H bO < D c d •H - P t- t C Q C d bO •H P S , a ; > ? *3* > * ■ ■ 1 > rH1 r-H rH rH j c o bO S > > c d b p c d & S3 rH f-t rH •H <aj O T 3 + 3 T J O O fH rH rH f-i (U O - P •H < 1 > •H - P P ( 1 £25 C Q 3 3 £ 5 C Q C Q 1 L i b e r a l A r t s P r o f e s s o r s T o ta l !By re g io n s : 300 5 2 6 6 33 27 8-80 1 1 1 __ N o rth e a st 91 8 1 7 22 56 8-78 S outh and S o u th e a s t 78 3 *+ 8 6 36 Mf 12-80 N orth C e n tra l 80 5 5 6 35 M -5 9-80 , West By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e s 51 6 © 6 6 ^3 39 6 -8 2 i \ j 1 -1 0 y e a rs 113 3 3 7 if 33 50 10-83 11-20 y e a rs 90 6 b 7 6 28 50 11-78 21 o r more y e a rs Unknown jBy academic groups? 88 9 6 0 3 10 bO 4-1 3- 8I 1 1 1 • H u m an ities-lan g u ag e s 76 5 3 5 3 59 8- 8M ; ' S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 2 3 8 8 36 ¥3 11-79 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 7 0 7 3 33 51 7-8b B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s M iscellan eo u s 36 2h 8 3 3 11 39 36 6 -7 5 By ty p e of i n s t i t u t i o n s ; P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 8 2 2 0 35 51 >f-86; ! P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 11 0 6 9 29 b5 6 -7b L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e O ther 167 13 2 2 8 9 3^ Mf 10-78 H is to ry Sample 52 6 0 10 b 37 Mf 10-81 P i l o t Study * * 6 b 0 7 13 Zb 52 7 -7 6 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 2 28 33 10 22 5 6l-27i ! TABIE VI 231 QUESTION SIX RESPONSES ! QUESTION: " P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n p la c e s u f f i c i e n t empha s i s oh the v a lu e o f i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y and th e a b i l i t y o f h ig h sc h o o l p u p ils to p r o f i t by such e n d e a v o r.1 1 P e r c e n t a g e s b p a > p < D © •H C D © © J H too O | P < D t o O c d *H O W > < D c d C Q P i F h in •H c d C Q t o Q •H a 0$ < D > £ »H - • 1 rH C Q >* c d g? P P h p rH F n r - i •H 1 © 0 'O +3 TJ 0 O | J 3 i *4 rH 25 rH p-f © m 0 4 -> •H < D •H •P P i j P { 5 5 C O & 5£ C O C O |L ib e ra l t r t s P ro fe s s o rs i T o ta l 300 17 4 10 21 30 19 14-49, 'By re g io n s : N o rth e a st 91 20 4 7 16 30 23 H -5 3 » S outh and S o u th e a s t 78 13 1 17 28 24 17 18-41 1 N orth C e n tra l 80 17 4 5 20 35 19 9- 5^; West 51 16 6 14 18 31 16 20-47, By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1-10 y e a rs 113 12 4 9 20 29 25 ! 13-5ft; 1 11-20 y e a rs 90 20 2 9 14 20 29 20 11-49 21 or more y e a rs 88 17 5 23 30 12 19-42 By Unknown academ ic g ro u p s: H u m an ities-lan g u ag e s 9 76 16 5 9 17 29 24 1 14-53; S o e ia l s c ie n c e s 91 13 3 15 22 31 15 18— 46 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 12 1 3 2? 36 23 4 -5 9 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 36 31 6 11 17 25 11 17-36 By M iscellan eo u s ty p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 24 8? 15 2 6 22 28 26 1 1 8-54: P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity P 26 6 9 11 37 11 15-48 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 16? 16 4 11 23 31 15 15— 46' O ther H is to ry Sample 13 52 10 4 15 29 27 15 19-42; P i l o t Studv 46 20 2 15 15 26 22 17-48 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 3 34 29 12 16 5 63-21 232 | I and th e ty p ic a l resp o n se was " s tro n g ly agree*" | As shown in T able V II, p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c le a r ly ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: "R ecent h ig h sch o o l g ra d u a te s are n o t w e ll-p re p a re d i n re g a rd to a c a - ] demie s k i l l s and th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h i s l i e s , to a j g r e a t d e g re e , w ith sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n * 1 1 The s p e c ia l I i r a t i o was 64-13• Both " s tro n g ly a g re e ” and "m ild ly a g ree" ' were checked by 32 p er c e n t of th e p ro fe s s o rs o f l i b e r a l ! a r t s . In c lu d in g th e h is to r y sam ple and th e p i l o t s tu d y , | t "m ild ly ag ree" was th e t y p ic a l re sp o n se of th e l i b e r a l , 'a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n c l e a r l y d isag reed ! w ith the s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o f o r t h is group was 1 i 1 19-64 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was " s tro n g ly d is a g r e e ." j ! As shown i n T able V III, p . 234, p ro fe s s o rs of th e j .l i b e r a l a r t s overw helm ingly ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: i " P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n have pre-em pted th e r i g h t o f others to d eterm in e th e c u rric u lu m fo r th e tr a in in g o f te a c h e r s ." ! ! The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 70-7 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was " s tro n g ly a g r e e ." Of t h i s g ro u p , 14 per c e n t to o k a ; " n e u tr a l" p o s itio n and 9 p er c e n t d id n o t resp o n d to t h i s j s ta te m e n t. P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n c le a r ly r e je c te d the j s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s group was 26-60 and | th e t y p i c a l re sp o n se was " s tro n g ly d is a g r e e ." ' As shown in T able IX , p . 235, p ro fe s s o rs o f th e l I [ l i b e r a l a r t s overw helm ingly ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: 1 QUESTION SEVEN RESPONSES j QUESTION: ,f Re c e n t h i g h s c h o o l g r a d u a t e s a r e n o t w e l l - p r e - | p a r e d I n r e g a r d t o a c a d e m ic s k i l l s a n d t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ; f o r t h i s l i e s , t o a g r e a t d e g r e e , w i t h s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . T , i P e r c e n t s e e s " " a > S’ © © P i < 3 > © t i O © P i © O p P i © f c u O © •HI o t * 0 © c d • H - P P i P t C O Q © C O © u 3 ? J > > % • H Q > > p a £ i H H r H r H t o g ? K * > © > > t t O © P i p « H P i i— l C • H © < 1 * O T ? - p T J O O , j Q P i r H P r H P i © o - P * H C D • H - P P i & tsa C O S 2 J 3 3 CQ CQ L i b e r a l A r t s P r o f e s s o r s T o ta l 300 11 32 32 12 8 5 6U -I3 By re g io n s : N o rth e a st 91 13 36 26 13 7 b 62-11. S outh and S o u th e a st 78 10 28 33 12 13 * + 61-17: N orth C e n tra l 80 11 37 ? 1 13 5 3 68-8 ■ West 51 8 23 U-l 10 8 10 6U--18 By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1 1 1-10 y e a rs 113 8 35 7 6 65- 3 .5; 11-20 y e a rs 90 11 28 30 lb 12 b 58-16 21 o r more y e a rs 88 13 U -2 27 9 6 3 6 9 -9 ! Unknown 9 * By academ ic g ro u p s: Human! t ie s - lahgua ge s 76 13 38 31 * 11 b 0 7 2H. S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 10 ?■* 31 19 13 9 50-22 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 10 by 7 b 1 78-5 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 3.6 8 28 b2 8, 8 6 70-lV M iscellan eo u s 2b . By type o f i n s t i t u t i o n : } 1 P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 8 3^ 35 11 9 2 69-11 P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity P lU - 23 37 1 U - 6 6 60-12 l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e 16 7 11 33 31 13 8 U - 6^-12 O ther 13 H is to ry samnle 52 b 21 U -2 17 13 2 63-15 P i l o t S tudy b6 7 20 35 15 17 7 55-2b E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58. 3 2 17 1 U - 16 U8 19- 6V TABIE V III 2 3 ' QUESTION EIGHT BESPONSES QUESTIONS " P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n h a v e p r e - e m p t e d t h e r i g h t o f o t h e r s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e c u r r i c u l u m f o r t h e t r a i n i n g o f t e a c h e r s . 1 1 L i b e r a l A r t s P r o f e s s o r s P e r c e ri t a g e S ! © s? © © F h •H © < D © f H b O a S © J h © & 0 m O © © • H P (X f H © Q o S m u b p fS | q ) © > * P S £ rH rH rH iH m Sf o © 5 P C T 3 I u 3 rH f H |H cf •H © T J •P T 5 o O I & u rH rH u © j o •p •H < D •rl - p fX 1 M !s; co X 5 3 5 C Q m i T o ta l 300 9 44 26 14 5 2 70-7 1 By re g io n s : N o rth e a s t 91 42 29 13 2 1 71-3 S o u th and S o u th e a st 78 42 30 14 5 3 72-8 ! N orth C e n tra l 80 6 51 23 13 6 1 7**-7 i ; West 51 10 37 23 20 8 2 60-10 |By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1-10 y e a rs 113 8 35 30 21 5 1 65-6 1 : 11-20 y e a rs 90 10 47 21 14 7 1 68-8 1 1 21 or more y e a rs Unknown 88 9 7 56 25 7 2 3 81-5 i By academ ic g ro u p s: H um anitie s -lan g u ag e s 76 5 58 21 11 4 1 79 -5 ! S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 10 36 25 19 8 2 61-10 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 5 45 33 11 4 1 78-5 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s M iscellan eo u s 36 24- 17 39 25 17 3 0 64-3 By ty p e of i n s t i t u t i o n s 1 P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 11 8 29 16 7 © 65-7 P r iv a te u n iv e r s i ty P 11 29 11 6 3 69-9 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 16 7 7 4-9 25 13 4 2 74-6 O ther t H is to ry samnle 52 6 50 33 10 0 2 83-2 P i l o t S tudy 4-6 11 39 28 11 11 0 67- I I i jE d u catio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 3 J T ^ 19 10 24 36 26- 60! i Q U E ST IO N N IN E R E SPO N SE S i QUESTION: “ There i s an ’in te r lo c k in g d i r e c t o r a t e ’ of eduea-l • t i o n is ts (c o n s is tin g o f p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n , s t a t e edu c a tio n a l o f f i c i a l s , s u p e rin te n d e n ts , p r i n c i p a l s , e t c . ) j w h ic h c o n tr o l s p u b lic e d u c a tio n .”_______________ 1 P e r c e n t a g e s t*o a •H o a. m © m u J S »25 iL ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs i j T o ta l By R egions: j N o rth e a st 91 South and S o u th e a s t 78 N orth C e n tr a l 80 West 51 i ily te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : , Under 10 y e a rs 113 11-20 y e a rs 90 1 21 o r more y e a rs 88 ! Unknown 9 i I By academ ic g ro u p s: J H um anitie s-lan g u a g e s 76 1 S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 : B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 3) M iscellan eo u s |By ty p e of i n s t i t u t i o n : , P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 P riv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 1 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 167 O ther 13 H is to ry Sample 52 P i l o t Study k-6 [ E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 © © * 1 © Pi 1 © © hn ! © Pi © o Pi © HO m * H j C l O © © • H Pi W © Pi HD • H © >* Q 3 * rH rH r H i H ! xn S 3 t t S © Pi > » i H t f - S ! • H < « ! O + > O O Pi rH rH F h © | O - P • H © + 3 P . < 3 5 C O a < 2 5 C Q C Q .1 b2 31 11 b 2 73-6 16 * * 3 2 5 12 1 2 68-3 t 5 28 12 9 3 72-12 10 ^5 35 6 3 1 80-^ ; 10 33 m lb 2 0 7^-2 ! i 7 P 36 15 3 1 71- 7 ! 11 b? 27 8 7 1 7*f-8 ; 11 b9 30 8 1 1 7 9 -2 , ! 9 9 * p 8 3 1 79-m - : 7 29 bO 15 5 b 6 9 -9 12 b8 29 10 1 0 77-1 l*f b7 28 8 3 0 75-3 ; [ 9 Mf 2 8 13 9 b 1 72-6 1* * ^fO 29 11 6 0 69-6 11 k -2 33 10 1 75-5 ' 10 9* 27 8 2 0 81-2 11 30 28 20 9 2 58-11: 5 9 17 7 21 * * 1 26-62| 1 1 There i s an ‘in te r lo c k in g d ir e c to r a te * o f e d u c a tio n is ts | (c o n s is tin g of p r o fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n , s t a t e e d u c a tio n a l j o f f i c i a l s , s u p e rin te n d e n ts , p r in c ip a ls , e t c . ) w hich I ' ^ i c o n tr o ls p u b lic e d u c a tio n . 1 1 The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 73-6 , and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was “ s tro n g ly a g r e e .*1 Of th is « g ro u p , 11 p er c e n t to o k the " n e u tr a l * 1 p o s itio n and 11 p er ! c e n t did n o t re sp o n d . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n c le a r ly j d is a g re e d w ith the s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s group was 26-62 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was " s tro n g ly ! I 1 d is a g r e e ." As shown i n T able X, p ro fe s s o rs o f th e l i b e r a l a r t s i |overw helm ingly ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: "E d u c atio n , ^courses o v e rla p and d u p lic a te one a n o th e r u n n e c e s s a r ily ." jThe s p e c ia l r a t i o was 8M — 0 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was 1 ^‘s tro n g ly a g re e ." P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n a ls o ag reed w ith th is s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s group was - '6* 1 — 35 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was “m ild ly a g r e e ." As shown i n T able X I, p . 2 3 8, p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c l e a r l y ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: “ O ther | 1 i th in g s being e q u a l, a te a c h e r who has had c o u rse s i n : e d u c a tio n w i l l be a more e f f e c tiv e classro o m te a c h e r th an ^one who has n o t tak en such c o u r s e s ." The s p e c ia l r a t i o j was 69-17 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was "m ild ly a g r e e ." T his sta te m e n t was worded so t h a t only th e extrem e c r i t i e s iwere l i k e l y to d is a g re e or tak e a " n e u tr a l" p o s i t io n . I t I 237! TABIE X i QUESTION TEN RESPONSES j QUESTION: E d u c a tio n c o u rse s o v e rla p and d u p lic a te one ! a n o th e r u n n e c e s s a r ily .” P e r c e n t a g e s ! C D 'g C S 0 0 1 < D m Q > u 1 m G J < D © h O £ 3 O o > u 6 0 1 — 1 c t f F - 4 -P C D C D F l t x Q C d C O •H Q r-f C D u f c u O a s to •H Q r — f & 0 o i 1 O t •H ■ p c d j i i fH c d •H O L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs T o ta l P is 300 © S 2 3 9 F * * P so 57 r H I s 27 P * © • 2 ; 7 r H I •H s 0 P i •P 0 3 0 ( D a* 0 3 'l 84-0 By re g io n s : I N o rth e a st 91 15 53 25 7 0 0 78-0 1 S o u th and S o u th e a st 78 8 56 27 8 0 1 83-1 1 N orth C e n tra l 80 5 61 26 6 1 0 87-1 j West 51 b 59 29 8 0 0 88— 0 By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e s 1-10 y e a rs 113 7 52 28 12 0 1 80-1 11-20 y e a rs 90 8 62 23 6 1 0 85-1 i 21 o r more y e a rs Unknown 88 9 8 60 28 3 0 0 88— 0 i By academ ic g ro u p s: H um anitie s-la n g u a g e s 76 9 66 18 5 0 1 84-1 S o c ia l sc ie n c e s 91 b 55 32 8 1 0 87-1 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 10 4-7 33 11 0 0 80— 0 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 36 11 61 25 3 0 0 86-0 , M iscellan eo u s 24 t By ty p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n : 1 P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 8 i*7 32 12 1 0 79-1 : P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity P 11 66 14- 9 0 0 80-0 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 16 7 8 59 29 5 0 0 88— 0 ; O ther H is to ry Samnle 13 ?2 8 56 29 8 0 0 85-0 P i l o t Study b6 9 59 28 b 0 0 87-0 : E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 0 21 4-3 2 21 lb 64-3 5| T A B IE XI QUESTION EXEVEN BESPONSES QUESTION: H O ther th in g s being e q u a l, a te a c h e r who has had c o u rse s i n e d u c a tio n w i l l be a more e f f e c t i v e classro o m te a c h e r th a n one who has n o t ta k e n such co u rse s.*1 P e r c e n t a & e _S © 50 S 3 < 0 © F h •H < d a ) 50 T J o > u c d O a F < < D 50 in ♦ H o 50 0 ) c d • H 4 3 (X f n U 3 0 3 V ) < D C D > > 50 •rl > » P 4 P 4 > r-i r-f i H ■ H C Q e d > » 50 0 $ m r-J S h H £ S < D < * j o •o 4 3 n 3 O O W Q rH 0 H U < 0 g S o 4 > * H © • H 4 3 a J3 a C O 5 2 3 C Q C Q L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs T o ta l 300 b 26 b$ 10 10 7 69-171 By re g io n s : N o rth e a st 91 9 21 37 8 13 12 58-25 S outh and S o u th e a st 78 1 35 b7 5 o b 82-12 N orth C e n tra l 80 3 26 if if 16 6 5 70-11 West By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e s 51 b 22 b3 12 lb 6 65-20 1-10 y e a rs 113 2 26 b2 12 2.3 5 68-18: 11-20 y e a rs 90 6 32 b l 8 8 6 73-1^ 21 o r more y e a rs Unknown By academ ic groups s 88 9 5 23 b5 9 7 16 11 68-18: Human!ti@s-1 anguages 76 5 13 b5 12 9 58-25: S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 2 32 M -3 10 8 5 75-13 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 3 33 ko 11 8 5 73-13 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s M iscellan eo u s By ty p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n s 36 2b 11 17 50 0 11 n 67-22 1 P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 8 25 b? 5 9 6 72-15 P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 6 lb 60 9 ib 6 6 7^-12; L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e O ther 167 13 2 28 38 12 7 66-19! H is to rv Samole 52 6 23 12 8 8 67-16 P i l o t Study b6 9 28 b8 0 9 7 76-16: E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs ’ 58 0 72 26 2 0 0 98— 0 ■ 239 | i s i n t e r e s ti n g to n o te t h a t 17 p e r c e n t of the l i b e r a l I < ' ' j a r t s p ro fe s s o rs d id d is a g re e and 10 p er c e n t to o k a ,fn eu - j t r a l M p o s itio n . I t i s l i k e l y , th e n , t h a t 27 p e r c e n t o f } th e l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs saw no p r a c t i c a l v alu e ( c la s s room te a c h in g v a lu e ) in e d u c a tio n c o u rs e s . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n overw helm ingly ag reed w ith th e s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o f o r t h i s group was 93-0 and th e ty p i c a l ! re sp o n se was 1 1 s tro n g ly a g r e e .1 1 , 1 1 As shewn in Table X II, p ro fe s s o rs o f th e l i b e r a l ; i a r t s ag reed w ith t h i s sta te m e n ts * * C ourses in g u id an ce should be ta u g h t by a p ro fe s s o r of p sy ch o lo g y . ” The s p e c ia l r a t i o was *4*7-13 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was 1 1 mi Id ly a g r e e .1 1 Of t h i s g ro u p , 29 p e r c e n t took a “n e u tr a l” p o s itio n and 11 t 1 p er c e n t d id n o t answ er. Those who d id n o t answ er f r e - | i | ;quently commented t h a t a re sp o n se to t h i s sta te m e n t depend ed e n t i r e l y on th e in d iv id u a l who m ight te a c h such a c o u rse i i jand h is d e p a rtm e n ta l a f f i l i a t i o n was of l i t t l e im p o rta n c e , j Those who made such comments u s u a lly a p p lie d th e s e comments to th e o th e r q u e s tio n s o f t h i s type (q u e stio n s t h i r t e e n , f o u r te e n , f i f t e e n , and s i x t e e n ) . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n I d is a g re e d w ith th e s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r t h i s I group was 21-**3> and th e t y p i c a l re sp o n se was “m ild ly , d i s a g r e e .1 * Of t h i s g ro u p , 29 p e r c e n t took th e “n e u tra l* 1 p o s itio n and 7 p er c e n t d id n o t re sp o n d . TABLE X II QUESTION TW ELV E KESPONSES QUESTION: ‘ ‘C ourses i n guidance should be ta u g h t by a t« P e r c e n t a g e s © 8 © © © t H < 0 0 f n © to C O • H to © a S •P m c d 0 to P 3 © «*3, % & i H H rl r — 1 C O t x O 0 > » & C O d 0 H I H i P • H O ' d ■ P O O 0 rH ■ S 3 H P © O ■ P • H © • H t P P i 5 3 C Q • s s r * 2: CQ C Q | LI 1 8 29 29 9 b i ^7-13! H is to ry Sample P i l o t Study i ! .E d u catio n P ro fe s s o rs to 0 •H I S O p . 1 0 o > (0 u & 91 78 L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs I "" " ' " T o ta l !By re g io n s : ! N o rth e a st 1 S outh and S o u th e a st N orth C e n tra l West t By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : I-1 0 y e a rs I I - 2 0 y e a rs 21 o r more y e a rs Unknown i By academ ic g ro u p s: ; H u m an ities-lan g u ag e s S o c ia l s c ie n c e s P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s I B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s ! M iscellan eo u s By type o f i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 8? P riv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 1§7 O ther 13 113 90 88 9 91 73 3 1^8 58 23 14 32 36 7 9 11 15 35 22 14 51 10 24- 27 33 4 7 3 3 2 6 22 33 2? 12 13 18 29 31 6 14 15 25 34 8 12 7 7 30 22 9 23 26 32 10 16 31 36 14 19 33 8 6 8 2 1 0 11 22 25 34 7 17 14 17 37 11 17 35 24 9 0 0 52 10 17 44 25 11 13 35 41 4 0 45-14: 46-12: 50-17' 51-6 ; 2 5 5 -l4 : 3 4 7 -9 ! 5 40-13 48-17, 49-12 lij* ^ 33-6 1 4 7 -8 : 3 31-14, 5 52-14 61— 4 7 9 12 29 26 17 21-43| ! 2h l As shown in T able X I I I , p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s were alm o st ev e n ly d iv id e d i n resp o n d in g to th is s ta te m e n t: ’ ’H is to ry o f e d u c a tio n should be ta u g h t by a p ro fe s s o r o f h i s t o r y . ” The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 32-30 in fa v o r o f agreem ent; how ever, th e t y p i c a l re sp o n se was " n e u tr a l ." P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n c l e a r l y d is a g re e d w ith j th e statem en t* The s p e c ia l r a t i o f o r t h i s group was 12-53 ' I and b o th "m ild ly d is a g r e e ” and " s tro n g ly d is a g re e ” were i i checked by 29 p e r c e n t of th e e d u c a tio n p ro fe s s o rs * i | As shown in T able XIV, p . 2*+3, p ro fe s s o rs of th e i l i b e r a l a r t s ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: "E d u c a tio n a l s t a t i s t i c s should be ta u g h t by a p ro fe s s o r of m ath em atics* ” iThe s p e c ia l r a t i o was ¥+-21 and the ty p ic a l re sp o n se was j i i "m ild ly a g r e e .” P ro fe s s o rs of th e s o c ia l s c ie n c e s and th e j group resp o n d in g to th e p i l o t stu d y d isa g re e d w ith th e ( i statem en t* In c lu d in g th e h is to r y sample and th e p i l o t ; i ;s tu d y , the ty p ic a l re sp o n se o f l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs was " n e u t r a l .” P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n c l e a r l y d is a g re e d w ith ' ;the statem en t* The s p e c ia l r a t i o fo r th is group was 15-6? i I I | and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was "m ild ly d i s a g r e e .” j i As shown in T able XV, p . 2¥+, p ro fe s s o rs of th e I ;l i b e r a l a r t s e le a r ly ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: "E duca- I t i o n a l psychology should be ta u g h t by a p ro fe s s o r of 1 p sy c h o lo g y .” The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 61-8 and th e ty p ic a l !re sp o n se was "m ild ly a g re e ." Of t h i s gro u p , 21 p e r c e n t i - - - 2M -21 i TABIE X III I QUESTION THIRTEEN RESPONSES j QUESTION: “H isto ry o f e d u c a tio n should be ta u g h t by a p ro fe s s o r of h is to r y * 1 * R j f t j E A J a , J L j h - g - . e - S . C P fk O a C D C P f -t •H C D 0) bO c C D J h cd o C D C l D C Q o n o C D cd •H •P Q. U m Q cd (a J h C x O *H < « C P a > s > » < * * >* £5 !* •H iH r H rH C Q b o >» 0 $ > > bO cd a a o r — 1 * H r-C P •H C D < S | J - P T S o o F - » r — 1 r — 1 f H C D 1 O S B ! « P CQ •H * C P £ 5 a - p m P . CQ 1 L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs T o ta l m 300 7 13 19 31 22 8 ■ 32-30; By re g io n s : N o rth e a st 91 10 16 20 33 13 8 36 -2 1 S outh and S o u th e a s t 78 5 12 15 27 29 12 27-Ml N orth C e n tra l 80 b 8 2b 32 22 10 32-32 West 51 8 18 16 31 25 2 3^-27, By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1 -1 0 y e a rs 113 1 19 21 31 22 5 * M-0-27; 11-20 y e a rs 90 11 9 19 29 21 11 27-32 21 or more y e a rs 88 7 10 16 3^ 23 10 26-33 Unknown |By academ ic g ro u p s: H u m an ities-lan g u ag e s 9 76 b 16 28 22 13 17 M M — 30' S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 b lb ib 25 33 9 28— M -2 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 7 8 21 b2 19 3 29-22 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 36 17 8 11 b2 22 0 1 9-22 M iscellan eo u s 2b By type of i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 5 19 lb 31 25 7 33-32! P riv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 lb 9 26 17 31 3 35-3b L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 16 7 6 11 20 3b 20 10 31-30 O ther H is to ry Sample 13 52 6 13 23 38 13 6 3 6- 19, P i l o t Study b6 9 b 9 b8 2b 7 13-31 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 2 2 10 28 29 29 12-58 ----rr—- . ................. 1 . 1 TABIE XIV QUESTION FOURTEEN RESPONSES QUESTION: "E d u c a tio n a l s t a t i s t i c s sh o u ld be ta u g h t by a p r o f e s s o r of m athem atics*1 1 b O a •H r r j j G o a, m < D P S u C D G a j3 P e r c e ni t a g e j 5 ! < D j C D ! C D G a > C D b o 0 } G c d . © ! F h C D b O C O * H j t u O < D c d •H * P < 4 t o Q c d J h b O •H f f * $ ! * H I rH H rH I t o b p t t f > > S P c d a G H f - « H G • H , O T 5 4 - 3 T 3 o O 1 f H rH G < D H I h © o - P •H •H 4 J O * J ! 3 3 c o J 2 5 a s G O c o ! L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs ! T o ta l 300 9 17 27 26 14 7 4 4-21 i i |By re g io n s : ; ! N o rth e a st 91 15 18 27 22 11 7 4-5-18 S outh and S o u th e a st 78 4 19 27 20 22 8 4£-30 I N orth C e n tra l 80 6 10 29 32 14 9 39-23: West 51 10 25 22 31 8 4 1+7-12 1 i i ,By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1 1-10 y e a rs 113 4 14 24 29 24 14 5 53-19, ; 11-20 y e a rs 90 12 27 28 11 8 39-19 21 o r more y e a rs 88 9 16 22 28 16 9 38-25, 1 Unknown 9 i By academ ic g ro u p s: Humani t i e s -lan g u a ge s 76 8 4 18 25 25 13 11 53-24- S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 13 18 31 21 13 0 3 1-3^ P h y s ic a l sc ie n c e s 73 11 22 37 22 8 59-8 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s 36 17 14 28 33 8 0 4-2-8 M iscellan eo u s 24 By type o f i n s t i t u t i o n : I P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 11 21 22 25 15 6 4-3-21 P r iv a te u n iv e rs ity 35 20 17 23 29 9 3 40-12' L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 167 6 14 30 27 14 8 4-4-22 H is to ry Samole 52 12 13 19 37 12 8 3 2 -2 0 P i l o t Study 46 7 9 13 37 26 9 22-35 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 3 3 12 14 36 31 15-67 - ' TABIE XV j QUESTION FIFTEEN BESPONSES QUESTION: ^ E d u c a tio n a l psychology sh o u ld be ta u g h t by a p r o f e s s o r of p sy c h o lo g y .1 * P e r c e n t a g e s il l i b e r a l A r t s P r o f e s s o r s I T o t a l 'By r e g i o n s : i N o r t h e a s t l S o u t h an d S o u t h e a s t ! N o r t h C e n t r a l W e st i By t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e : I 1 - 1 0 y e a r s j 1 1 - 2 0 y e a r s ! 2 1 o r m ore y e a r s j Unknown jBy a c a d e m ic g r o u p s : | H u m a n i t i e s - l a n g u a g e s S o c i a l s c i e n c e s P h y s i c a l s c i e n c e s i B i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e s ' M i s c e l l a n e o u s By t y p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b l i c u n i v e r s i t y ; P r i v a t e u n i v e r s i t y H i s t o r y S am p le P i l o t S tu d y E d u c a t i o n P r o f e s s o r s taaber Responding u W a o * 8 5 Strongly Agree 1 | Mildly Agree i rH 0 8 U 4 - > a ? * 2 5 Mildly Disagree Strongly Disagree i i Special R atio 300 9 30 31 21 6 2 i ! 6 1 -8 1 i \ 91 10 36 27 19 5 2 63-7 78 8 31 27 22 10 3 58-13 80 9 22 38 2b 6 1 60-7 51 10 31 35 22 2 0 < 6 6 -2 ; 113 h 35 36 19 M - 3 71-7 ' 90 13 20 3b 23 7 2 5H--9 = 88 9 9 38 20 23 10 0 58-10 \ 76 5 3^ 33 22 3 3 6 7 -6 | 91 5 27 32 21 12 2 59-11 * 73 10 30 3b 21 b 1 6M--5 i 36 2b 19 28 22 31 0 0 50-0 1 1 1 85 6 28 3b 2b 7 1 6 2 -8 1 P lb 29 31 17 9 0 60-9 ' 16 7 10 29 32 22 5 2 61-7 52 10 31 37 21 2 0 68-2 he 7 2 > + 28 33 9 0 52-9 58 3 16 12 28 29 12 2 8 H 1 ; 2k-5 I I I to o k a "n e u tra l* 1 p o s itio n and 9 p e r c e n t d id n o t answ er. ! P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n d is a g re e d w ith th e s ta te m e n t. i The s p e c ia l r a t i o f o r t h i s group was 28-1 !* ! and th e ty p ic a l answ er was "m ild ly d is a g r e e ." Of t h i s g ro u p , 28 p er c e n t ! ! took a " n e u tr a l" p o s itio n and 3 p e r c e n t d id n o t answ er. : i As shown i n T able XVI, p ro fe s s o rs o f th e l i b e r a l i i a r t s d isa g re e d w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: "E d u c a tio n a l a d m in is- ! t r a t i o n and s u p e rv is io n should be ta u g h t by a p ro fe s s o r of b u sin e ss a d m in is tr a tio n ." The s p e c ia l r a t i o was 17-N-? ! i and th e t y p ic a l re sp o n se was "m ild ly d is a g r e e ." Of t h i s g ro u p , 25 p er c e n t to o k a " n e u tr a l" p o s itio n and 11 p e r I c e n t d id n o t answ er. P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n o v e r- < Iwhelmingly d is a g re e d w ith the s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o < j f o r t h i s group was 5-38 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was j " s tro n g ly d is a g r e e ." ’ t i < j As shown i n T able X V II, p . 2M -7, p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s c le a r ly ag reed w ith t h i s s ta te m e n t: "The ^ r e s p o n s i b i l i t y fo r th e su e c e ss or f a i l u r e of p u b lic ! e d u c a tio n can be tr a c e d , to a g r e a t d e g re e , to the th e o rie s : ' i |and p r a c tic e s of sc h o o ls of e d u c a tio n ." The s p e c ia l r a t i o j was 65-13 and th e ty p ic a l re sp o n se was "m ild ly a g r e e ." Of t h i s gro u p , 12 p e r c e n t to o k a " n e u tr a l" p o s itio n and ■11 p er c e n t d id n o t an sw er. P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n d is a g re e d w ith th e s ta te m e n t. The s p e c ia l r a t i o f o r th is i [group was 36-50 i n fa v o r o f d isag re em en t; how ever, th e 1 TABIE XVI QUESTION SIXTEEN RESPONSES 2 * 4 -6 QUESTION: “E d u c a tio n a l a d m in is tr a tio n and s u p e rv is io n should he ta u g h t by a p ro fe s s o r of b u sin e ss a d m in is tra tio n ." P e r c..e. bO £3 •H d 0 £ X 0 3 © u © 1 * 2 5 C D C D C D u 4 C D C D C D 6 0 1 £ - 1 eg O i Pi C D b O C Q *H W > C D c d •H 4 - 5 ! U 03 Q c d u C D b O P C S > » > » \ > r H rH rH rH 1 03 b O > » C C S b $ > C d j O H Pi rH n •H T 3 4 - > o O ! U rH S3 rH Pi © ' © + > •H C D •H 4- 5 C X j J25 C Q * 525 s : C Q C Q L ib eral A rts P ro fesso rs T o ta l 300 11 b 13 25 26 21 17-V7j By re g io n s : N o rth e a st 91 15 1 13 29 20 22 l* 4 --* 4 -2 S outh and S o u th e a s t 7 3 8 6 9 23 27 27 15-5b N orth C e n tra l 80 9 1 12 28 35 15 13-50 West 51 lb 8 18 20 23 18 26-*+1 By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1-10 y e a rs 113 b 6 12 31 26 20 j 18H 6 11-20 y e a rs 90 12 3 11 26 23 2 * 4 - 14-4-7 21 or more y e a rs 88 16 1 1 * 4 - 19 32 18 15-5Q i * Unknown academ ic g ro u p s: H uraanitie s-la n g u a g e s 9 76 12 5 13 28 20 22 t 18-4-2 1 S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 b 1 10 25 31 29 11-60 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 11 * 4 - 16 22 3 b 12 20-4-6 B io lo g ic a l sc ie n c e s 36 22 3 8 28 17 22 11-39 By M iscellan eo u s ty p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 2b 85 11 6 12 25 26 20 1 18-4-6' i P r iv a te u n iv e r s ity P 1b 0 9 26 26 26 9-52 L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e 167 11 if 12 27 28 .19 16-4-7 O ther H is to ry Sample 13 52 10 6 15 * 4 0 17 12 21-29 P i l o t Study * 4-6 9 1 * 4 - 13 17 33 2 * 4 - 17-57 E d u cat io n P ro fe s s o rs 58 0 0 5 7 21 67 5-88 T A B IE XVII Q U E ST IO N S E V E N T E E N R E SP O N SE S Q U ESTIO N ! "The resp on sib ility for the success or failure of public education can be traced, to a great degree, to the theories and practices of schools of education." P e r_ c e ri t a g e s © 6 t 0 e s 0 ) a > F - t •H < D < u G O o Tf < D F h c d & u < D t t O to •H o GO < D a s *H •P fX < a j F t ra c d ra F-t GO •H P d < D < D > * Q > > rH e d 3 * rH rH rH m W > > > 0 $ C t O c d F h a G rH m rH a o •H < D < a j O * * 3 -p T 3 o h rH S 3 rH F - » C D & o -P *H a > •H ■P Pr s S 3 to 3 2 S25 to C O L ib e ra l A rts P ro fe s s o rs T o ta l 300 11 28 37 12 10 3 65-13 By re g io n s : N o rth e a st 91 10 29 33 37 15 9 4- 62-13 S outh and S o u th e a st 78 10 28 8 14- 3 65-17 N orth C e n tra l 80 11 29 k2 10 5 3 7 1 -8 West 51 12 23 35 16 12 2 58-Hi- By te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e : 1 -1 0 y e a rs 113 8 2b k2 14- 9 14- 7 4 - 66-13 11 -20 y e a rs 21 or more y e a rs Unknown 9 12 9 28 32 2 S 11 10 k 1 58-18 7 2 -8 By academ ic g ro u p s: ; . Humani t ie s -lan g u ag e s 76 9 3.6 8 11 9 1 7 0-10 S o c ia l s c ie n c e s 91 10 Ik 12 11 7 6 0 -1 8 P h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s 73 8 37 31 12 10 1 6 8 -1 1 B io lo g ic a l s c ie n c e s M iscellan eo u s Ik 17 31 25 17 8 3 5 6-11 By type o f i n s t i t u t i o n : P u b lic u n iv e r s ity 85 ? lM - 35 28 12 13 5 63-18 P riv a te u n iv e r s ity 35 20 11 20 3 6 f i r * L ib e ra l a r t s c o lle g e O ther 113 11 26 10 9 2 68-11 H is to ry Sample P i l o t Study 52 8 17 k2 12 19 (Q u estio n n o t In c lu d e d ) 2 59-21 E d u c a tio n P ro fe s s o rs 58 5 3 33 9 19 31 3 6 -5 0 t y p ic a l re sp o n se was "m ild ly ag ree ." I I I . CONCLUSIONS OF THE SURVEY P ro fe sso rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s and p ro fe sso rs o f e d u c a tio n both showed a h ig h i n t e r e s t in the su rv ey . In g e n e ra l, i t can be sa id th a t the p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s had th e backing of t h e i r c o lleag u e s and th e re was g re a t " d is ta n c e 1 1 (when considered as t o t a l groups) between p ro fe ss o rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s and p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n . I The r e tu r n ad d ress "School of E ducation" ap p a re n tly !induced no b ia s in the number, or k in d , of resp o n ses when !compared to the r e tu r n ad d ress "Department of H is to ry ." i ' No p a t te r n of d iffe re n c e s was d is c e r n ib le i n r e g io n a l, i n s t i t u t i o n a l , or te a c h in g -e x p e rie n c e g ro u p in g s. Among academic groups, hum anities and languages |showed the g r e a t e s t o p p o sitio n to schools o f e d u c a tio n . i 'Using the p ercen tag es fo r "s tro n g ly " a t the o p p o site end i of th e e d u c atio n p r o f e s s o r s ’ dominant b e l i e f , th e humani- i jtie s-la n g u a g e s group was h ig h e s t (in o p p o sitio n to p ro fe s s o r s of e d u c a tio n ) on tw elve of the sev en teen is s u e s p re se n ted in the q u e stio n n a ire and second h ig h e s t on the rem aining f i v e . An approach to agreement between p ro fe s s o rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s and p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c atio n was seen i n the respon ses to the fo llo w in g sta te m e n ts: E d u catio n co u rse s o v erlap and d u p lic a te one another u n n e c e s s a rily . Other th in g s being e q u a l, a te a c h e r who has had courses in e d u c a tio n w i l l be a more e f f e c t i v e c l a s s room te a c h e r th a n one who has n o t taken such c o u rse s. E d u ca tio n al a d m in is tra tio n and su p e rv is io n should be ta u g h t by a p ro fe s so r of b u sin e ss a d m in is tr a tio n . ^ ; The f i r s t two sta te m e n ts were accepted by b o th groups and { the l a s t statem en t was r e je c te d by both g ro u p s. The wording o f th e second sta te m e n t and the c o n te n t of the l a s t statem en t were such t h a t only th e extreme c r i t i c s would fin d them selves out of agreem ent w ith the p ro fe s s o rs of educa t i o n . Hence, i t was very d o u b tfu l i f "agreement** by groups— w ith any v a lid meaning—can be claim ed even in th ese c a s e s . The only c l e a r agreem ent betw een th e groups was i n the case ; of d u p lic a tio n and o v erlap p in g of co u rses in e d u c a tio n . There was a r a th e r s u b s ta n tia l m in o rity of e d u c a tio n p ro fe s s o rs who agreed w ith the dom inant p o s itio n of th e p ro fe s s o rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s . A very sm all m in o rity of l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs agreed w ith the dom inant p o s itio n of p ro fe s so rs of e d u c a tio n . The p i l o t study and th e h is to r y sample follow ed the larg e sample of p ro fe s so rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s r a th e r c lo s e ly in r e s u l t s . This tended to s u b s ta n tia te th e r e s u l t s of th e la rg e sam ple. P ro fe sso rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s , as a group, b e lie v e t h a t s u b je c t-m a tte r p ro fe s s o rs should teac h c o u rse s , fo r te a c h e rs , in t h e i r s p e c i a l i t i e s . There i s an im p lic a tio n in the resp onses th a t p ro fe s s o rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s want a more a c tiv e p a r t in the te a c h e r ed u c atio n program—both in planning and executing the program. P ro fe sso rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s , as a group, co n sid er the success or f a i l u r e o f p u b lic ed u catio n to be la r g e ly a r e s u l t of the th e o rie s and p r a c tic e s of schools o f i e d u c a tio n . i In sum, th ose concerned w ith M bridg ing of th e gap between the academic and p r o fe s s io n a l minds1 1 are fa c in g a d i f f i c u l t ta s k . P ro fe sso rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s were found i jto be very h o s ti le to schools of e d u c a tio n . In only one 1 case d id the p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s , as a group, s fa il to show h o s t i l i t y to scho ols of ed u c atio n when given i such an o p p o rtu n ity in the q u e s tio n n a ire . C H A P T E R VIII A BRIEF REVIEW OF FERTINENT RESEARCH Due to the n atu re o f many of the s tu d ie s p re se n te d in th is c h a p te r, the fin d in g s fre q u e n tly apply to s in g le - purpose te a c h e r - tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s as w ell as to schools of e d u c atio n w ith in c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . I . OVERLAPPING AND DUPLICATION Judging from e d u c a tio n a l l i t e r a t u r e and the response of p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n to the q u e stio n n a ire used in the p re s e n t stu d y , the charge of o v erlap p in g and d u p lic a tio n i n th e p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n cu rricu lu m i s acknowledged. S tu d ie s by Peik,*^ Law,^ and B o lto n ,3 among 14- o th e r s , bore out the c o n te n tio n . H unsieker, however, % . E . P e i k , The P r o f e s s i o n a l E d u c a t i o n o f H ig h S c h o o l T e a c h e r s ( M in n e a p o lis ? The U n i v e r s i t y o f M in n e s o ta P r e s s , 1930) , p . 4 3 . ^Reuben D. Law, "C ontent and C r i t e r i a R e la tin g to P ro fe s s io n a l Teacher E ducation" (unpublished D o c to r’s d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n iv ersity of Southern C a lif o r n ia , Los Ange le s , 19^1) > PP. ^1-42. ^F re d e ric k E . B olton, "O verlapping of Courses in E d u c a tio n ," E d u ca tio n al A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv isio n . lM -s 610-23, December, 1928. **L. H u n siek er, "Concerning O verlapping of P ro fe s s io n a l Courses in T each er-T rain in g I n s t i t u t i o n s , " School and S o c ie ty . 29*776-78, June 15, 1929. I 252] re p o rte d t h a t she found the charge of d u p lic a tio n to be f a l s e . In a sim ple experim ent which she conducted i n h er i own c o u rse , a p r e - t e s t was given to a new c la s s in m ental j measurements* The p r e - t e s t was th e f i n a l t e s t of th e I previous y e a r . The sco res on th e p r e - t e s t were much lower ; th an the sco res on th e f i n a l t e s t of the previous year* This r e s u l t was said to show th a t the charge of d u p lic a tio n ; was fa ls e * A c tu a lly , H unsieker was m easuring achievem ent and not d u p lic a tio n . Acknowledged t h a t th e re i s d u p lic a - 1 t i o n , the e x te n t to which t h i s i s harm ful or u n d e sira b le 'has not been e s ta b lis h e d . However, the g en eral op in io n on .the m a tte r was th a t d u p lic a tio n , per s e , was u n d e s ira b le , j As to the e x te n t of d u p lic a tio n , P eik , by Job- !a n a ly s is techniques which d e a lt w ith the to p ic s covered i n j i [the v a rio u s p ro fe s s io n a l ed u catio n c o u rse s, found 1 1 . . . I only 57 of the B IN - to p ic s were tr e a te d e x c lu s iv e ly e i th e r 1 ! re g u la rly or in c id e n ta lly i n a s in g le c o u r s e . T h i s ! j study was conducted a t the U n iv e rsity of M innesota i n 193^*i I 1 ! I I . OPINIONS OF TEACHERS RELATIVE TO I PROFESS IONAL TRAINING i i In 191M-, a committee of the New England A sso c ia tio n , of Teachers of E n g lish found t h a t te a c h e rs expressed ! ^P eik, l o c . c i t . I 253 M g e n e ra l disappointm ent*1 in co u rses in pedagogy. These co u rses were said to fee too t h e o r e t i c a l . The committee a ls o s ta te d : i Almost w ith o u t ex c ep tio n th e teach ers urge t h a t such a course Qt course designed e s p e c ia lly fo r te a c h e rs of E n g lis h J should fee given fey some one j from the Department o f E n g lish r a th e r th an from the ; Department of E ducation . . j In 191?) a committee o f the n a tio n a l C ouncil of i Teachers of E n g lish , asking in which departm ent a course designed e s p e c ia lly f o r E n g lish te a c h e rs should be ta u g h t, i found th a t fo rty -tw o respondents p re fe rre d the E n g lish [department and ten respondents p re fe rre d the e d u c a tio n i departm ent. i i ! In response to a q u e stio n which asked i n what ways jed u catio n al courses had been h e lp f u l, th e same committee I re p o rte d th e fo llo w in g :'7 Theory 33 G eneral T rain in g 11 I Methods 20 No Help 39 ^ Although the s t a t i s t i c a l p re s e n ta tio n was u n i n t e l l i g i b l e |in some p a r ts of the r e p o r t , i t may be presumed t h a t i n ! ! answ ering the above q u e stio n a respondent m ight have "The T rain in g of E n g lish T e a c h e rs,1 1 R eport of the Committee of th e New England A sso c ia tio n of Teachers of E n g lis h , E d u ca tio n . 34:585-86, A p ril, 1914. 7 " P re p a ra tio n of H igh-School Teachers of E n g lis h ,H R eport of a Committee of the N a tio n a l C ouncil o f Teachers of Engli*sh, The E n g lish J o u rn a l. 4:327-28, Jan u ary , 1915. checked a l l of the f i r s t th re e resp o n ses; th a t i s , he may have received h elp in th e o ry , m ethods, and g e n e ra l t r a i n in g . Even i f t h i s assum ption t ^ tq f a ls e and each respondent i checked only one of the f i r s t th re e re sp o n se s, cou rses in i ! e d u c atio n d id n o t re c e iv e a vote of co n fid e n c e . Using j th i s most fav o rab le (to ed u c atio n departm ents) assum ption, ; 38 per een t (N .equals 103) said th a t th ey had re c e iv e d no j t help from co u rses in e d u c a tio n . j ! In 1922, Davis^ made a study in v o lv in g th e judgments: 1 of 2*+,363 te a c h e rs . Table XVIII shows a reaso n ab ly fa v o r- 1 ! iable group judgment o f courses in e d u c a tio n . 1 ! TABIE XVIII 1 | i ' ■ JUDGM ENTS BY TEACHERS O N THE VALUE OF COURSES IN ' EDUCATION (FROM DAVIS) \ -—I I - ------------------ , ' T - "if I TIT----I T 1 ------------------- ---------11 . -j -- - — - - T - - - — --------- -- — - - 1, ,■ ■ 1 .1 1 . „ w i . i i , . — ~1 | - ....................................................................HU I ■■!■■■— I l l .I — 1 Number of P ercen tag es e s tim a tin g | Type o f Course Teachers the v alu e as 1 ______________________ R eporting . Large HfiSUML— !l. H is to r ic a l 9,786 $2.b 3 I .9 35.7 ! 2 . P rin c ip le s of Teach- i ing (Methods) 11,188 60.5 30.3 9.2 ! 3 . P sy ch o lo g ical 11.360 65.9 2 8.5 5.6 | H -. A d m in istrativ e 6,680 **3.1 3 8 .8 18.0 i 5. S o c io lo g ic a l 3,187 U-6.7 M-0.3 13.0 - 6. T ests and Measurements 5,813 27.0 3 8 .8 3 ^.1 ! 7* V ocational and j I n d u s t r i a l M-,128 30.7 31.0 38 .3 ; 8. P rin c ip le s o f E d u catio n ; (P h ilo so p h ic a l C ourses) 9,3*+0 **2.5 *4-0.0 17.5 q 1 C. 0 . D avis, 1 1 The T ra in in g , E x p erien ce, S a l a r i e s , and E d u catio n al Judgments of 2*f.3§3 of the High School Teachers in North C e n tra l A ccredited S chools. M P a rt I , P roceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual M eeting of th e 1 iNbfth C #hf?al A sso c ia tio n of C olleges and Secondary Schools,1 [March,. 1922,_ p . 3 3 ._____________ — ~ An e x c e l l e n t e x a m p le o f t h e i m m a t u r i t y o f e d u c a t i o n a l r e s e a r c h was p r o v i d e d by H o l t o n , ^ p r o f e s s o r o f e d u c a t i o n a t K a n s a s S t a t e A g r i c u l t u r a l C o l l e g e . I n h i s s t u d y o f 1927? t h e f o l l o w i n g s i n g l e q u e s t i o n was p u t t o a t e a c h e r - a l u m n i g r o u p s ,fI n w h a t d e p a r t m e n t o f t h e c o l l e g e o r u n i v e r s i t y w as t h e t e a c h e r y o u r e c a l l a s t h e b e s t t e a c h e r y o u e v e r h a d ? 1 * P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n r e c e i v e d t h e m o s t 1 " v o t e s . " P r o f e s s o r s o f agronom y w e re s e c o n d h i g h e s t w i t h n i n e t y - s e v e n " v o t e s . I T P r o f e s s o r s o f s o c i o l o g y w e re l a s t i n th e f i e l d o f tw e n ty - o n e w i t h t h r e e " v o t e s .1 1 B a se d on t h e s e s t a t i s t i c s , H o l t o n w r o t e s " C e r t a i n l y t e a e h e r s i n t h e d e p a r t m e n t s o f e d u c a t i o n s h o u ld be t h e b e s t t e a c h e r s . These d a t a f u r n i s h c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e y a r e . 1 1 The f a l l a c y , o f c o u r s e , w as t h a t t h e r e w as n o d a tu m on how many c o u r s e s e a c h i n d i v i d u a l h a d t a k e n i n e a e h s u b j e c t . A som ew hat s i m i l a r s t u d y o f " G r e a t T e a c h e r s , " made b y K e l l y , h a s b e e n f r e q u e n t l y q u o te d t o s u p p o r t th e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n a re i n f e r i o r t e a c h e r s . K e l l y *s s t u d y , a l t h o u g h h e d i s c l a i m e d a " s c i e n t i f i c %!. L. H olton, " In What Departm ents in C ollege Do W e Find the B est Teachers?" School and S o c ie ty . 26s847-48, December 31, 1927# ^ R o b e r t L . K e l l y , " G r e a t T e a c h e r s an d M e th o d s o f D e v e lo p in g T hem ," A s s o c i a t i o n o f A m e ric a n C o l l e g e s B u l l e t i n , 15*49-67, a n d 214-20, M a rc h , 1929. a p p ro a c h ,” was erro n eo u s i n th e manner of H o lto n . In 1927, B e tts 11 re p o rte d a p o ll o f approxim ately 555 n o rth w estern U n iv e rsity s tu d e n ts . Courses in ed u c atio n i were judged to be more d i f f i c u l t th a n the average u n iv e r- i s i t y c o u rse . The courses were judged to be in te r e s tin g and only M-.8 p er cen t of the stu d e n ts ranked th e courses below average in g e n e ra l e f fe c tiv e n e s s — average having re fe re n c e jto o th e r u n iv e r s ity c o u rse s. In 1928, C oale12 found th a t te a c h e rs gave hig h r a tin g s to " P rin c ip le s of E d u catio n ” and E d u c a tio n a l Psychology” fo r th e i r p ro fe s s io n a l u s e fu ln e s s . These were the only two o p p o rtu n itie s i n t h is study fo r e x p re ssio n about courses i n e d u c a tio n . In 1929, Yeager p o lle d 771 * - elem entary te a c h e rs in P ennsylvania w ith t h is q u e stio n : 1 1 Did th e course h elp you i n your classroom te a c h in g ? ” For p ro fe s s io n a l c o u rse s , th e r e s u l t s w ere:13 1 1 G eorge H . B e t t s , “C o l l e g e S t u d e n t s * R e a c t i o n t o E d u c a t i o n C o u r s e s , ” S c h o o l and S o c i e t y . 25*L » -9 1 +-96, A p r i l 23? 1927* 12 W illis Branson C o ale, The P ro fe ss io n a l Heeds of Teachers of E n g lish (Hew York: Teachers C o lleg e, Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1928), pp. 37, ^7* ^ W illia m A llis o n Y eager, S ta te C e r t i f i c a t i o n as n, F a c to r i n the T rain in g of Elem entary T eachers- In -S e rv ic e (Kutztown, P ennsylvania: Kutztown P ub lish in g Company, 1929), P. 231. 25? No h elp 9) L i t t l e h elp 26) P ercentages Much help 65) In 1930, P eikllf found t h a t 56 per cen t of beginning te a c h e rs c r i t i c i z e d the E ducation Department f o r d u p lic a t i o n . However, he held t h a t th ese te a c h e rs , g e n e r a lly speaking, were not d i s s a t i s f i e d w ith t h e i r p ro fe s s io n a l c o u rse s, This p o s itio n was taken on the b a sis of the trea tm en t accorded recommendations fo r o m ittin g to p ic s from the p ro fe s s io n a l course of stu d y . P eik s ta te d t h a t not one to p ic was recommended fo r om ission by the m a jo rity of te a c h e rs; t h i s d e s p ite the f a c t t h a t 322 to p ic s of th e 811 * to p ic s had receiv ed no endorsement from th e m a jo rity fo r p o ssessin g t h e o r e t i c a l or p r a c t ic a l v a lu e . This apparent c o n tra d ic tio n was due to the manner i n which P eik handled recommendations fo r om ission. Table XIX i s an e x a m p le .^ TABIE XIX THE REACTIONS OF 100 ALUM NI TO THE TREATM ENT ACCORDED TO THE 8l*f TOPICS OF THE PRESCRIBED COURSES IN EDUCATION FOR PROSPECTIVE HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS OF ACADEM IC SUBJECTS (ILLUSTRATION FROM PEIK fS STUDY) Topic ■ n P r a c tic a l R e c a ll Value T h e o re ti c a l Value Would _ Omit S e c u la r iz a tio n of Schools in P ru ssia 63 2 23 ko llfP eik , on. c i t . , p . 75* ^ I b i d . . p . iM f. T h e se f i g u r e s r e p r e s e n t p e r c e n t a g e s * The o n l y l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t c a n be p l a c e d o n t h e s e f i g u r e s i s t h a t o u t o f one h u n d r e d ju d g e s o f t h e t o p i c , s i x t y - t h r e e r e c a l l e d t h e t o p i c ; o f t h i s s i x t y - t h r e e , tw o saw p r a c t i c a l v a l u e i n t h e t o p i c , t w e n t y - t h r e e ( i n c l u d i n g t h e tw o who saw p r a c t i c a l v a l u e i n t h e t o p i c ) saw t h e o r e t i c a l v a l u e i n t h e t o p i c , a n d f o r t y w o u ld o m it t h e t o p i c f ro m t h e t e a c h e r - t r a i n i n g c u r r i c u l u m . P e i k , i n c l a i m i n g t h a t n o t o n e t o p i c w as recom m ended f o r o m i s s i o n by t h e m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s u s e d , i n e f f e c t , t h o s e who d i d n o t r e c a l l th e t o p i c a s f a v o r i n g th e r e t e n t i o n o f t h e t o p i c i n t h e c u r r i c u l u m . I t w o u ld h a v e b e e n m ore r e a l i s t i c t o b a s e t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f 1 1 w o u ld o m i t 1 * o n t h e t o t a l who r e c a l l e d t h e t o p i c . T hen t h e a b o v e r e s u l t s w ould h a v e b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d a s f o l l o w s : Out o f s i x t y - t h r e e who r e c a l l e d t h e t o p i c , a p p r o x i m a t e l y tw o - t h i r d s w o u ld recom m end t h a t t h e t o p i c b e o m i t t e d f ro m t h e c u r r i c u l u m . L o o k in g a t t h e f i g u r e s fro m a s t i l l l e s s f a v o r a b l e ( t o e d u c a t i o n ) p o i n t o f v i e w , t h e t h i r t y - s e v e n who d i d n o t r e c a l l t h e a b o v e t o p i c m ig h t h a v e b e e n lo o k e d u p o n a s p r im a f a c i e e v i d e n c e t h a t th e t o p i c s h o u l d h a v e b e e n o m i t t e d . T hen t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w o u ld h a v e b e e n a s f o l l o w s : Out o f o n e h u n d r e d j u d g e s , s e v e n t y - s e v e n w o u ld h a v e o m i t t e d t h i s t o p i c f ro m t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l c u r r i c u l u m . T h is i s a f a r c r y fr o m t h e s t a t e m e n t t h a t n o t one t o p i c w as recommended fo r om ission by the m a jo rity of the teachers* In 1933, Committee Q of th e American A sso c ia tio n of i 1 £ U n iv e rsity P ro fe s s o rs , d iscu ssed i n C hapter V of the p re se n t stu d y , found te a c h e rs d i s s a t i s f i e d w ith t h e i r • p ro fe s s io n a l c o u rs e s . However, as d isc u sse d p re v io u s ly , th ese fin d in g s could have been given o th e r i n t e r p r e ta t i o n s . In 193^, an unpublished re p o rt of a commission on the teaching of m athem atics was mentioned by C a i r n s . I n a 1 1 broadly d i s t r i b u t e d 1 1 q u e s tio n n a ire , 50 per ce n t of the secondary school te a c h e rs of m athem atics responded th a t p r o fe s s io n a l ed u c atio n courses had been of l i t t l e , or no, value to them. In 193*+* Cahoon and MacKay re ceiv ed 216 r e p lie s ( t o t a l se n t out not in d ic a te d ) from te a c h e rs w ith two y e a r s 1 e x p e rien ce. The opinions re p o rte d i n t h i s study re g ard in g changes in the p ro fe s s io n a l cu rricu lu m appear in Table XX.18 ^ " R e q u ire d Courses In E d u c a tio n ,” R eport of Committee Q of the A .A .U .P., A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 19*190-9*+, March, 1933* 17W . D. C a irn s, 1 1 A Conference of the O ffic e rs and Committee Members of th e N atio n al C ouncil of Teachers of M athematics and the M athem atical A sso ciatio n of A m erica,1 1 American M athem atical M onthly« *+1*139, March, 193*+. l ft A O G r. P. Cahoon and M innette MacKay, 1 1 A Follow -up Study of the T eacher-T raining Program a t the U n iv e rsity of C a l i f o r n i a ,1 1 U n iv e rsity High School J o u rn a l. 13*135* Ju n e , 193*+. 2 6 0 T A B IE X X OPINIONS O F TEACHERS O N THE REORGANIZATION OF PROFESSIONAL COURSES (FROM CAHOON A N D M ACKAY) T o n ic M ore No C h a n g e _ L e s s P r i n c i p l e s o f S e c o n d a r y E d u c a t i o n 19 133 30 E d u c a t i o n a l P s y c h o lo g y 8*f 93 15 H i s t o r y o f E d u c a t i o n 7 109 30 G ro w th and D e v e lo p m e n t o f t h e C h i l d 77 101 17 P h i l o s o p h y o f E d u c a t i o n h i 95 38 In 1937, Stansbury re p o rte d as follow s? The testim ony of te a c h e rs seems to in d ic a te re a so n able s a t i s f a c t i o n w ith our p re se n t graduate c o u rse s . The d iffe re n c e s of op in io n were more c le a r ly d efin ed in the ta b u la tio n according to departm ents than according to u n i v e r s i t i e s . I t was i n t e r e s t i n g to observe the e x te n t to which p ro fe s s io n a l ed u catio n co u rses drew fa v o ra b le comment from th e re sp o n d e n ts. Their score stood c o n s is te n tly high in com parison to o th e r co u rses . . . x^ In 1937, Bond p o lle d a la rg e number of C a lif o r n ia secondary school te a c h e rs reg ard in g the c o n trib u tio n s to teac h in g e f fe c tiv e n e s s of c e r ta in broad f a c t o r s . Bond*s fin d in g s are p re se n ted in Table XXI. The number to the l e f t (number 1 in d ic a te s h ig h e s t v alu e) re p re s e n ts the o rd er of value as in d ic a te d by a l l te a c h e rs ; the number to the r ig h t a p p lie s to te a c h e rs w ith l e s s th an fiv e y e a r s 1 . W. S tan sb u ry , "Teacher Opinion of C e rta in Phases of the Graduate Work fo r th e M a ste r's D egree," Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting o f the A sso c ia tio n of Urban U n iv e r s itie s , 1937, pp. lfe-i+3. T A B IE XXI RANK ORDER OP VALUE OF VARIOUS FACTORS TO EFFECTIVE TEACHING AS JUDGED BY HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS IN CALIFORNIA* (FROM BOND) A l l T e a c h e r s T e a c h e r s w i t h l e s s t h a n f i v e y e a r s * e x p e r i e n c e 1 L e a r n in g by t e a c h i n g 1 2 I n d e p e n d e n t s t u d y 2 3 N a t u r a l a p t i t u d e f o r t e a c h i n g 6 b D e s i r e t o w ork w i t h y o u n g p e o p le 3 5 T o t a l u n d e r g r a d u a t e c o l l e g e c o u r s e s 5 6 T o t a l g r a d u a t e c o l l e g e c o u r s e s 7 7 S t i m u l a t i o n o f p u p i l s 8 8 S t u d e n t t e a c h i n g 9 O p p o r t u n i t y f o r s e l f - e x p r e s s i o n 9 10 D e s i r e t o i n f l u e n c e t h e p r o g r e s s o f c i v i l i z a t i o n 11 11 E x p e r i e n c e w i t h one fs own c h i l d r e n 10 12 T r a v e l l b 13 B u s i n e s s e x p e r i e n c e 13 l b S t i m u l a t i o n o f p r i n c i p a l an d o t h e r t e a c h e r s 12 15 P e r s o n a l i t i e s o f c o l l e g e i n s t r u c t o r s 15 16 E x p e r i e n c e i n o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n s o r s e m i - p r o f e s s i o n s 16 17 n e c e s s i t y o f e a r n i n g a l i v i n g 18 18 P r o f e s s i o n a l e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s 17 19 O th e r p r o f e s s i o n a l m e e t i n g s 21 20 S o c i a l l i f e i n c o l l e g e 20 21 A id o f s u p e r v i s o r s 19 22 T e a c h e r s i n s t i t u t e s 22 23 D e s i r e f o r l u x u r i e s 23 ♦Number I i n d i c a t e s h i g h e s t v a l u e . 262 • 20 ,e x p e rie n c e . From the same stu d y , the number and per cen t of te a c h e rs who f e l t t h a t c e r t a i n suggested changes in th e te a c h e r tr a in in g program would bring s l i g h t or much im provement in teach in g is re p o rte d i n Table XXII > (a d a p te d ):23* TABIE XXII SUGGESTED CHANGES IN THE COLIEGE TRAINING OF THE HIGH SCH O O L TEACHER BASED O N OPINIONS OF TEACHERS (ADAPTED FROM BOND) S lig h t im provement Much im provement No* Per ce n t No. Per cent Spend more time studying s p e c if ic academic m a te ria l he w ill be c a lle d upon l a t e r to te a c h to high school stu d e n ts 370 3 0 .6 567 *+6.9 Become more f a m ilia r w ith b e tte r rounded and r e la te d academic f i e l d s 12? 10.6 806 67.1 As a p a r t of h is c o lle g e tr a in in g he should be assig n ed major problems which, in s o lv in g , would n e c e s s ita te a c o n trib u tio n from s e v e ra l d e p a rt m ental academic f i e l d s 189 17.8 53“ + 50.3 More p ro fe s s io n a l ed u catio n courses should be re q u ire d 808 69.2 160 13.7 20 Jesse A lb ert Bond, A c tiv itie s and E ducation of High School Teachers in C a lifo r'n ia (Los Angeles: Suttonhouse L td ., 1937), 171-72. 21Ibid.. p. 214-. Of fo u rte e n suggested changes, the item above d e a lin g w ith more p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n co u rses had the low est r a tin g in 1 1 much improvement1 1 by approxim ately 30 p ercentage points* Other evidence unfavorable to p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n was found i n Bond’s stu d y . This i s p resen ted i n adapted 22 form i n Table X X III. In th is ta b le the n e u tr a l opinions have been excluded. Eleven hundred C a lifo rn ia te a c h e rs responded to Bond’s q u e s tio n n a ire . TABIE XXIII THE CONTRIBUTION OF GENERAL FACTORS TO TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS —BASED UPON OPINIONS OF HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS (ADAPTED FROM BOND) Percentage of te a c h e rs who thought the con tr i- b u tio n was: S lie h t High T o ta l undergraduate courses 13.2 6 2 .6 T o tal graduate cou rses 17.3 59.1 P ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n co u rses 37.1 3 3 .5 S o c ia l l i f e in co lle g e 46.0 25.4 Learning by teac h in g 6*7 79.5 Independent study 8.1 74.8 I b i d . , p. 160. Bond p u b lish ed th e se d a ta elev en y e a rs l a t e r in an a r t i c l e which made no m ention of the time when th ese d a ta were com piled. The a r t i c l e co n ta in in g these d a ta (fo r the second tim e) had a l l the in d ic a tio n s of c u r re n t re s e a rc h . C f. Jesse A lb ert Bond, ’’C o n trib u tio n of G eneral F acto rs to E ff e c tiv e Teaching in Secondary S c h o o ls,” E d u ca tio n al A d m in istratio n and S u p e rv isio n . 34:481, December, 19^8* ~ 26k In 19kO, B elcher re p o rte d the follow ing which concerned te a c h e rs in the w estern p a r t of Texas? F i f t y - s i x p er c e n t of high school te a c h e rs re p o rt th a t i f they could take th e ir co lleg e work o v er, they would e l e c t more s u b je c t m a tte r co urses (such as m athem atics, E n g lis h , h is to r y , e t c , ) w hile only 9 per cent would e l e c t more courses in e d u c a tio n . Twenty- th re e per cent of th e elem entary te a c h e rs r e p o r t t h a t they would take more su b je c t m atter co u rses and a lso 23 per cen t would e l e c t more courses in ed u c a tio n .23 In 19^1, opinions of te a c h e rs in the North C e n tra l S ta te s were fa v o rab le toward co urses in ed u catio n according to P a tte rs o n . In th e fo llo w in g q u o ta tio n , r a t i o s of more th an one to one in d ic a te d a fa v o ra b le respon se; ten to one meant te n fav o rab le to one unfavorable? . . . sch o o l su rv ey s, the study of m ental hygiene, co u rses in a d o le sc e n t psychology, v is u a l e d u c a tio n , the o b se rv a tio n of te a c h in g , guidance, and ra d io e d u c a tio n , re c e iv e d fa v o ra b le r a t i o s h ig h er than the r a t i o of l*f to 1. Such p ro fe s s io n a l ex p erien ces as in te rn e te a c h in g , s tu d e n t te a c h in g , re s e a rc h , and courses in e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c t i v i t i e s , e d u c a tio n a l psychology, and e d u c a tio n a l biology re c e iv e d fa v o rab le r a t i o s of more th an 6»k to 1. Lowest m e rit was found in courses on g e n e ra l and s p e c ia l m ethods, school ad m in is tr a tio n , in tro d u c tio n to te a c h in g , and the h is to ry of e d u c a tio n . [F ig u re s not given fo r the l a s t group.J2 * + 23g. L. B elcher, tfE v a lu a tio n of P ro fe s s io n a l Courses fo r T ex as,” Texas O utlook. 21 +?48-l+9, O ctober, 19^ 0 . 2 k Helen DeWitt P a tte rs o n , nIm p lic a tio n s of Newer School P r a c t i c e s ,” North C e n tra l A sso ciatio n Q u a rte rly . 15*250, Jan u a ry , 19^-1. * 265 In 19**3» over 3,000 p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs in th e West were p o lle d by Je n se n .2^ These stu d e n ts r a te d th e r e l a ti v e worthwhile n e s s1 1 of th e i r f i r s t course in educa ti o n w hile they were e n ro lle d in said c o u rse . The co n c lu sio n was t h a t stu d e n ts were ^ w e ll- s a tis f ie d 1 1 w ith t h e i r f i r s t course in ed u catio n as taught i n v ario u s te a c h e r - tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s . Only 2b out of 3 *21** stu d e n ts ra te d th e i r f i r s t course below th re e on a n in e - p o in t s c a le whereas 500 ra te d the f i r s t course a t “g re a t v a lu e 1 1 on the s c a le . In 1952, Graham in v e s tig a te d d iffe re n c e s in the c r itic is m s of e d u c a tio n and academic c o u rse s. The i n v e s t i g a tio n was concerned w ith te a c h in g , course c o n te n t, and course o rg a n iz a tio n . In a l l cases where s i g n i f i c a n t d iffe re n c e s ap peared, the judgments favored the academic d ep artm en ts. The academic departm ents c le a r ly 1 1 b e a t1 1 the e d u c atio n departm ents in the l a t t e r * s own s p e e ia lt y - - teach in g and o rg a n iz a tio n of c o u rse s . However, Grahamfs assum ption t h a t th e re would th e o r e ti c a lly be as many c r i t i c i z i n g the academic d e p a rt ments as would c r i t i c i z e the ed u c atio n departm ents was open ^ H a r r y T. Jensen, 1 1 Three Thousand S tu d en ts E valuate an E du cation C o u rse,1 1 E d u catio n al Forum, 12:127- 28, Jan u ary , 19^3* 266 to s e rio u s q u e s tio n . Graham w rotes I t was assu m ed t h a t a t e a c h e r , o r a s t u d e n t i n a t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m , w o u ld h a v e t a k e n w o rk b o t h i n a c a d e m ic a n d e d u c a t i o n f i e l d s . H o w e v e r, a s t h e t e a c h e r w as a s k e d t o r e s p o n d o n l y t o o n e s p e c i f i c c o l l e g e , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t he t o o k o n l y o ne t y p e o f w ork a t t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n ; and w o u ld n o t be q u a l i f i e d t o c r i t i c i z e b o t h s e g m e n ts o f t h e c o l l e g e . W ith t h i s i n m in d , th e r e s p o n d e n t s w e re i n s t r u c t e d t o c h e c k th e c r i t i c i s m s o n l y w h e re th e y f e l t t h e y w e re q u a l i f i e d t o do s o . I n o t h e r w o r d s , I f a t e a c h e r t o o k o n l y e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s a t th e c o l l e g e , a l l t h e c h e c k s w o u ld a p p e a r i n t h e 1 c o lu m n . A t a b u l a t i o n o f t h e p e r s o n a l , b a c k g ro u n d s o f t h e 1 1 0 t e a c h e r s r e s p o n d i n g i n t h e f r e e r e s p o n s e s tu d y show ed t h a t f o u r t e e n p e r c e n t o f t h e t e a c h e r s w e re r e p o r t i n g o n ly th e e d u c a t i o n p i c t u r e , w h i l e two p e r c e n t w e re c r i t i c i z i n g o n l y a c a d e m ic c o u r s e s . H o w e v e r, f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s c h a p t e r i t w as a ssu m e d t h a t t h e r e w o u ld be a s many c r i t i c i z i n g o n l y th e e d u c a t i o n d e p a r t m e n t s . I n l i g h t o f t h e f i n d - ;* " p a r i s o n , t h i s a s s u m p t io n seem s The a b o v e a s s u m p t i o n , w h a te v e r i t m ea n t (an d i t w as n e x t t o i m p o s s i b l e t o f a th o m w h a t i t d i d m ean) c l e a r l y d i s r e g a r d e d w hen t h e s e c o u r s e s w e re t a k e n . A g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s w e re t a k i n g e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s a n d t h e o t h e r s p r o b a b l y h a d r e c e n t l y ta k e n e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s . I t w as l i k e l y t h a t m o s t o f t h e a c a d e m ic w o rk o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s h a d b e en t a k e n s e v e r a l y e a r s p r e v i o u s l y — and tim e may w e l l d i m i n i s h c r i t i c i s m . T h is f a c t o r was c o m p l e t e l y d i s r e g a r d e d i n t h e s t u d y . B u t h e r e t h e s c h o o l o f e d u c a t i o n ^ ^ R a lp h W il l ia m G raham , !,S e c o n d a r y S c h o o l T e a c h e r s 1 C r i t i c i s m s o f T h e i r C o l le g e P r e p a r a t i o n f o r T e a c h i n g ” ( u n p u b l i s h e d D o c to r fs d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a , L os A n g e l e s , 1 9 5 2 ) , p p . 1 0 1 - 0 2 . (In t h i s ease the School of E ducation of the U n iv e rsity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia ) is faced w ith an " e ith e r - o r " p ro p o si t i o n . E ith e r the r e s u lts are v a lid or th e re se a rc h is f a u l t y —in th is case due to fa u lty assum ptions. In e i t h e r c a s e , in th is in s ta n c e , one charge of the l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l ti e s was v e r i f i e d . A study by W illiam s^? in 1953? as w ell as a study pQ by Beaty in 1950, were too b ia se d , e i t h e r in th e s e le c tio n of th e sample or th e wording of the q u e s tio n s , to b e of much value fo r the purposes of the p re se n t stu d y . However, in both s tu d ie s , the te a c h e rs were c le a r ly in fa v o r of p ro fe s s io n a liz e d s u b je c t m a tte r, said courses to be o ffe re d in the school of e d u c a tio n . This im p lied , a t l e a s t , s a t i s f a c t i o n w ith the work of the schools o f e d u c a tio n . In sum, stu d ie s by the Hew England A sso c ia tio n of T eachers, th e N atio n al C ouncil of Teachers of E n g lish , C a irn s , Bond, B elcher and perhaps Graham could be c l a s s i f ie d as u nfavorable to schools of e d u c a tio n . S tu d ie s ^ J o s e p h Edward W illiam s, " Opinions of S e le c te d T eachers Concerning the F i r s t Year of Advanced P ro fe s s io n a l Teacher Education'* (unpublished D o c to r's d i s s e r t a t i o n , In d ian a U n iv e rs ity , Bloomington, 1953)# ^^Harper F u lto n Beaty, "Suggested Improvement of Teacher E ducation a t the U n iv e rsity of Houston Based on a Survey of Opinions of S e le c te d S tu d en ts and G raduates" (unpublished D o c to r's d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rsity of Houston, H ouston, 1950). 268 ;by D a v i s , B e t t s , C o a l e , Y e a g e r , C ah o o n and .M acKay, S t a n s b u r y , P a t t e r s o n , a n d J e n s e n c o u ld b e c l a s s i f i e d a s f a v o r a b l e t o s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . S t u d i e s by H o l t o n , C o m m itte e Q o f t h e A m e ric a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f U n i v e r s i t i e s P r o f e s s o r s , P e i k , i W i l l i a m s , a n d B e a ty d i d n o t l e n d t h e m s e lv e s t o t h e a b o v e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s o r w e re o b v i o u s l y i n v a l i d . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e d i d n o t a p p e a r t o b e a s a t i s - i f a c t o r y i n s t r u m e n t , a s u s e d , t o e v a l u a t e s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . i No c h r o n o l o g i c a l p a t t e r n o f f a v o r a b l e o r u n f a v o r a b l e r e c e p t i o n t o s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n w a s f o u n d . The t o t a l e v i d e n c e a p p e a r e d t o b e i n c o n c l u s i v e a n d c o n t r a d i c t o r y . T h is c o n c l u s i o n , i n i t s e l f , d o e s n o t s p e a k w e l l f o r s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . The e v i d e n c e s h o u l d b e c o n c l u s i v e and f a v o r a b l e . I I I . OPINIONS OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS AND UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATORS IN REGARD TO PROFESSIONAL TRAINING I n a s t u d y m ade i n 1899 by H i n s d a l e q£ a l . u n i v e r s i t y p r e s i d e n t s a p p e a r e d t o f a v o r c o u r s e s i n p e d a g o g y A. H i n s d a l e , C h a r l e s De G arm o, a n d E lm e r E . B ro w n , "T he C e r t i f i c a t i o n o f C o l l e g e a n d U n i v e r s i t y G ra d u a t e s , " S c h o o l R e v ie w , 7*331-71* J u n e , 1899. 2 6 9 fo r te a c h e r s . This co n clu sio n was reached on the b a sis of l e t t e r s which H insdale had re c e iv e d from p re s id e n ts and which he p u b lish ed in th e stu d y . D a w s o n ^ 0 found, i n 1908, t h a t 123 su p e rin te n d e n ts gave stro n g approval to cou rses in e d u c a tio n , 17 gave q u a lif ie d ap p ro v al, 11 were non-com m ittal, and 1*+ were opposed to th ese c o u rse s. H o rn e ^ found, in 1908, 11 co lleg e p re s id e n ts in fa v o r of ed u catio n courses fo r c o lle g e in s tr u c t o r s and 7 dubious or i n d i f f e r e n t . In 1927? S tu a rt* ^ re p o rte d a p o ll of heads of modern fo re ig n language departm ents i n c o lle g e s as to which departm ent should c o n tro l methods courses and p r a c tic e te a c h in g . Three hundred th ir ty - s e v e n of the respond en ts favored e n tru s tin g th ese courses to the language departm ent, 110 favored the departm ent o f e d u c a tio n , and 89 favored a s p l i t a u th o r ity . 30(}eorge E . Dawson, "The P ro fe ss io n a l T rain in g of Teachers in C ollege Departments o f E d u ca tio n ," School Review. 16:171-72, March, 1908. 31h . H. Horne, "The Study of E ducation by P rospec tiv e C ollege I n s tr u c to r s : The Views of Some C ollege P r e s id e n ts ," School Review. 16:162. March, 1908. 3^Hugh S tu a r t, The T rain in g of Modern F o reig n Language Teachers f o r the Secondary Schools in the U nited S ta te s TNew York: Teachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rsity , 1927), p . 52. I n 1 9 2 9 , H ill3 3 p o lle d p re s id e n ts and deans of u n iv e r s i ti e s and l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s . To the q u e stio n , l1 Are courses in e d u c atio n re q u ire d o f a l l s t a f f members?*1 the answers were as fo llo w s: Yes, 1*+; No, 85. To H i l l fs second q u e stio n , 1 1 I s p referen ce given to a can d id ate fo r appointm ent who has taken courses in ed u catio n ?1 1 the 1 r e p l i e s w e r e : Y e s , 63; N o, 3 2 . In 1929? K elly asked c o lle g e o f f i c i a l s (p re sid e n ts i and deans) th is q u e stio n : 1 1 Do you p re fe r to have c o lle g e t e a c h e r s w i t h e d u c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g ? 1 * The r e s u l t s were:^1 * U nequivocally yes 117 E q u iv o cally yes 20 E q u iv o cally no 3 U nequivocally no 22 Thompson fs study35 of 1933* summarized in Table XXIV, gave f u r th e r in fo rm atio n on the b e lie f s of c o lle g e p r e s i d en ts concerning co urses in education* 33QXyde M. H i l l , 1 1 The C ollege P re s id e n t and th e Improvement of C ollege T each ing,1 1 E d u c a tio n a l A dm inistra ti o n and S u p e rv isio n . 15*21*+, March, 1929. 3 ^ o b e r t I». K e lly , ^G reat Teachers and Methods of Developing Them,1 1 A sso ciatio n of American C o lleges B u l l e t i n . 15*59* March, 1929. ^ C h a r le s H. Thompson, 1 1 Some A d m in istrativ e Re quirem ents Governing the Appointment and Prom otion of C ollege T e a c h e rs,1 1 School and S o c ie ty . 38:351* September 9* 1933. 271 TABLE XXIV PER CENT OF PRESIDENTS INDICATING THAT COURSES IN EDUCATION SHOULD BE REQUIRED AS A PREREQUISITE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF COLIEGE TEACHERS (FROM THOMPSON) P re se n t D esirab le ______________________ p r a c tic e p ra c tic e U n iv e rsity c o lle g e s 3 32 S eparate c o lle g e s 22 62 Teachers c o lle g e s 51 90 Ju n io r c o lle g e s 76 90 A ll c o lle g e s 3^ 80 In 193*+> Brandenburg and T rim ble, answering a c o n te n tio n of Committee Q, asked the follow ing q u estio n of p u b lic school a d m in is tra to rs : ” In s e le c tin g and recommend ing te a c h e rs • • • are you in flu e n c e d by the amount of p ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g . . . th e p ro sp e c tiv e teach er has had?1 1 The r e s u l t s w ere:*^ 9*+*06 per c e n t made use of p ro fe s s io n a l t r a in in g ; *+.33 per c e n t did not make use of p ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g ; 1 .6 per cent did not r e p ly . Table XXV i s adapted from R eed’s study of 1935.3? 3^g. g. Brandenburg and 0 . C. Trim ble, ”What the P u blic School A d m in istrato r Thinks of P ro fe s s io n a l T rain in g in E d u c a tio n ,” School and S o c ie ty . *+0:851, December 22, 193*+. 3?Anna Y. Reed, e t a l . , The E ff e c tiv e and the I n e f f e c tiv e C ollege Teacher (New York: The American Book C o., 1935), P. 175. 272 T A B IE X X V REPLIES OF ADMINISTRATORS O N W HETHER O R NOT Y O UN G INSTRUCTORS W H O HAVE TAKEN PROFESSIONAL COURSES ARE M O R E EFFICIENT THAN THOSE W H O HAVE NOT (ADAPTED FROM REED) \ Reply A rts C ollege A d m in istrato r s Number Per cent Teachers C ollege A dm inistrator s Number Per c e n t Yes 10 7 Ho . 8H * 86 82.69 Q u a lifie d yes 20 7.63 8 7 .6 9 Noncommital 21 8 .0 1 b 3.85 No 75 28.63 6 5.77 Q u a lifie d no 39 lH-,89 0 0 .0 0 In the same study i t was re p o rte d th a t approxim ately 7* + per c e n t of the a r ts - c o lle g e a d m in is tra to rs thought graduate study i n p ro fe s s io n a l courses was e s s e n t i a l or d e s ira b le fo r co lle g e i n s t r u c t o r s ; 26 p e r cen t were in d i f f e r e n t or saw l i t t l e value i n such c o u rse s .3^ Summary. No re c e n t re s e a rc h involving opinions of co lle g e and school o f f i c i a l s on co u rses in e d u c a tio n was found. The a v a ila b le evidence was fav o rab le to schools of ed u c a tio n . 38I b i d . . p . 112. IV. THE CALIBER OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS In te llig e n c e and achievem ent of p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e r s . The two major s tu d ie s d e a lin g w ith t h is to p ic were the C arnegie Foundation study o f 1928-1932 and the S e le c tiv e S ervice C ollege Q u a lif ic a tio n T est o f 1951; the form er was sta te -w id e and the l a t t e r was n a tio n a l. In both s tu d ie s , p ro sp ec tiv e te a c h e rs made i n f e r i o r showings. Although p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs in the a r t s c o lle g e s made a more c r e d ita b le showing in the C arnegie study th an did stu d e n ts in the te a c h e rs c o lle g e s , the fo llo w in g re p re s e n ts a good g e n e ra liz a tio n of the p e r tin e n t fin d in g s : In so f a r as those ex p ectin g to te a c h a re con cern ed , th e r e s u l t s of the P ennsylvania exam inations are d is a p p o in tin g . And th ere i s no good reason fo r b e lie v in g th a t the co n d itio n s d e sc rib e d are confined to P ennsy lvania. The m a jo rity of the group are most a t home in the lower h a lf of t o t a l c o lle g e d i s t r i b u tio n s ; they e x h ib it i n f e r i o r i t y in c o n tr a s t w ith the n o n -teach ers i n n e a rly every departm ent of stu d y ; and they show up badly when compared i n the same t e s t s w ith stu d e n ts four y e a rs below them who re p re s e n t th e ed u c a tio n a l problems w ith which they must be prepared to d e a l . . .39 The e x te n t o f i n f e r i o r i t y dem onstrated i n the S e le c tiv e S erv ice T est can be shown by comparing the p ercen tag es of p ro sp ec tiv e te a c h e rs who passed the t e s t 39iAfiiiiam S. Learned and Ben D. Wood, The Student and His Knowledge (Hew Yorks The C arnegie Foundation fo r the Advancement o f Teaching, 1938), p . 6b. ( i . e . , re ceiv ed deferx^nent) to th o se from a l l f i e l d s who were s u c c e s s fu l. This i s shown i n Table XXVI, abridged kn from the S elective S erv ice T e s t s ^ TABIE XXVI ESTIMATED PER GENT OF REGISTRANTS EQUALING O R EXCEEDING CRITICAL (PASSING) SCORE O N SEIECTIVE SERVICE COLLEGE QUALIFICATION TEST (ABRIDGED FROM THE EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE SU M M A RY ) Freshmen Soohomores Ju n io rs S en io rs E d u catio n 27 39 T T 20 A ll f i e l d s 53 62 71 50 Of nine major f i e l d s of stu d y , ed u catio n had the low est average sc o re s. However, the r e p o r t acknowledged a b ias a g a in s t th e f i e l d of ed u c atio n inasmuch as an in d e t e r m inable number of p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs w ith academic m ajors were not included in th e ed u catio n group. Other s tu d ie s have shown th a t the p ro sp ec tiv e academic te a c h e r e n ro lle d in the school of e d u c atio n w i l l make a h ig h er score in in te llig e n c e and achievem ent t e s t s th an the non- academic ed u catio n s tu d e n t. The b ia s was f u r th e r re v ealed **^4 Summary of S t a t i s t i c s on S e le c tiv e S erv ice C ol lege Q u a lific a tio n T est of May 26, 1951s '" June l 6 . 1951; June 30. 1951s July 1 2 . 1951. E d u c a tio n a l T esting S erv ice (P rin c e to n : The E d u catio n al T estin g S e rv ic e , 1952), p . 16. tfl Ib id . . pp. 13- 11 *. 275 k o by th e l i s t of 1 1 m a jo rs1 1 in c lu d e d u n d er e d u c a tio n . W olfle i n 19?+ used the Army G eneral C la s s if ic a t i o n . T e s t. His fin d in g s are summarized in Table XXVII i f " 3 (a d ap ted ). In a d d itio n to th e fin d in g s re p o rte d in Table XXVII, W olfle used high school grades as the c r i t e r i on and found t h a t c o lle g e g rad u ates in ed u catio n (g en eral) . ) t t i were j u s t about average. IlX E lsew here, W olfle and Oxtoby ' re p o rte d th a t 17 p er ce n t of the graduate stu d e n ts in ed u catio n were in the top f i f t h of a l l graduate stu d e n ts but M -6 p er cen t of the graduate stu d e n ts in ed u catio n were in the bottom f i f t h . These fin d in g s were a lso based on A.G.C.T. s c o re s . k x S te w a rt, u sin g Army o cc u p a tio n a l groupings and Army G eneral C la s s i f i c a t io n Test s c o re s , found accou ntants to be th e top group among Army e n li s t e d p erso n n el w ith an average score of 129. Teachers averaged 12^- and th is was equal to the only o th er comparable p ro fe s s io n a l group— ^ Ib id . . pp. 4-7-4-8. ^3Dae1 W olfle, A m erica's R esources of S p e c ia liz e d T a le n t—The R eport or th e dhmmTssion on Human R esources and M vaneed^T raining (W ew“T ork: Harper and1 Hr o the r s . 199+) • PP.1 9 5 ^ 9 ? , 199, 200, 319-22. I b i d . , p . 206. ^ D a e l W olfle and Toby Oxtoby, " D is trib u tio n s of A b ility of S tu d en ts S p e c ia liz in g in D iffe re n t F i e l d s ,1 1 S c ie n c e . 116s313, September 26, 1952. ^N aom i S te w a rt, * A.G.C.T. Scores of Army P ersonnel Grouped by O ccupation,!t O ccupations. 26s9> October, 19^7. 276 i T A B IE XXVII MEDIANS ON AGGT SCADS FOR HOLDERS OF A .B . DEGREES AND FOR GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL STUDENTS (ADAPTED FROM WOLFIE ) H o l d e r s o f A.B* d e g r e e s G r a d u a te an d p r o f e s s i o n a l s t u d e n t s P h y s i c a l s c i e n c e s 127 P s y c h o lo g y 132 C h e m is tr y 125 P h y s i c a l s c i e n c e s 131 E n g i n e e r i n g 12** H u m a n itie s 131 Law 12*f C h e m is tr y 129 E n g l i s h 123 E n g l i s h 129 F o r e i g n la n g u a g e s 123 A g r i c u l t u r e 127 P s y c h o lo g y 123 M e d ic in e 127 E c o n o m ic s 122 F o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s 126 E a r t h s c i e n c e s 121 E n g i n e e r i n g 126 B i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e s 121 B i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e s 126 F i n e a r t s 121 E c o n o m ic s 125 N u r s in g 120 E a r t h s c i e n c e s 1 2 *4 - H i s t o r y 120 H i s t o r y 1 2 * 4 - A g r i c u l t u r e 119 S o c i a l s c i e n c e s 12*f B u s i n e s s an d Commerce 119 E d u c a t i o n - g e n e r a l 122 H u m a n itie s 118 D e n t i s t r y 121 E d u c a t i o n - g e n e r a l 118 B u s i n e s s an d Commerce 121 S o c i a l s c i e n c e s 118 Home E c o n o m ic s 116 Home e c o n o m ic s P h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n 113 112 P h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n 11? A l l f i e l d s 121 A l l f i e l d s 12*f 277 law y e rs—in the stu d y . Webb1 *? s tu d ie d g ra d u ate s tu d e n ts a t Emory U n iv e rsity in 1951 and found t h a t n o n -e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts made h ig h e r sc o re s th a n e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts on a l l p a r ts of a b a tte r y of achievem ent t e s t s . Summaries o f com parisons betw een s tu d e n ts in te a c h e rs c o lle g e s and s tu d e n ts in l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s based on th e Am erican C o u n cil on E d u c a tio n P sy c h o lo g ic a l Exam ina tio n showed t h a t s tu d e n ts in te a c h e rs c o lle g e s averaged .36 sigma below th e a r t s c o lle g e s tu d e n ts . Such s tu d ie s were made by T r a x le r ,1 ^ Welborn,*4 ^ H a r r is o n ^ and Jo rd a n . In h is stu d y T ra x le r found the d if f e r e n c e to be about 3 .8 I.Q . p o in ts and concluded t h a t s tu d e n ts in te a c h e rs ^ S a m C. Webb, “ P re d ic to rs o f Achievement in G raduate S c h o o l,“ Jo u rn a l of A pplied P sy ch o lo g y . 35*265-71* A ugust, 1951. ^ A r th u r E . T ra x le r, 1 1 Are S tu d e n ts in T eachers C o lle g e s G re a tly I n f e r i o r in A b ility ? 1 1 School and S o c ie ty . '6 3 :1 0 5 -0 7 , F eb ru ary 16, 19* 4 * 6 . ^ ^ I r n e s t L. W elborn, ‘ ‘The Q u a lity of S tu d e n ts A tten d in g T eachers C o lle g e s , 1 1 Jo u rn a l o f E d u c a tio n a l R e se a rc h . ^9s663-70. Mav. ^M ary R. H a rris o n , “I n te llig e n c e S cores of P ro sp e c tiv e T eachers in a L ib e ra l-A rts C o lle g e ,“ S chool and S o c ie ty . 56:*fl6?> 20, O ctober 31* 19*4-2. V. Jo rd a n , “The I n te llig e n c e o f T e a c h e rs,*1 The E lem entary School J o u rn a l. 33*195-20*4*, November, 1932. / c o lle g e s were ”n o t g r e a tly ” i n f e r i o r to o th e r stu d e n ts* In th re e s tu d ie s a t s in g le i n s t i t u t i o n s , re p o rte d by E c k e r t , ^ S c h n e id le r and B e r d i e ,^ and W h e e le r ,^ p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs proved to be i n f e r i o r in achievem ent s a n d /o r in te llig e n c e to th e average c o lle g e s tu d e n t. In e le v e n s tu d ie s a t s in g le i n s t i t u t i o n s , re p o rte d by G a n d e rs,5 5 K i e l y , 5 6 E ld r e d ,5 7 B u sw e ll,5 8 H u n t,5 9 52R uth E * E c k e rt, 1 1 G raduate S tu d e n ts in E d u c a tio n ,” A U n iv e rs ity Looks a t I t s Program * R uth E* E c k e rt and R obert J . K e lle r , e d ito r s ^ M in n ea p o lis: The U n iv e rsity of Minne s o ta P re s s , 1 9 5 * 0 ? PP. 1 6 9 - 7 5 ; R uth E . E c k e rt, “P re p a ra tio n of T eachers a t th e U n iv e rs ity of M in n eso ta,1 1 S tu d e n ts of M innesota L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g e s . R o b ert J . K e lle r and C. Raymond C a rlso n , e d ito r s (M inneapolis s The U n iv e rs ity of M innesota P re s s , 1 9 5 0 ) , p p . 2 7 1 -8 1 * 53Gwendolen G * S c h n e id le r and R alph B e rd ie , “E d u c a tio n a l A b ility P a t t e r n s ,1 1 The J o u rn a l of E d u c a tio n a l Psychology * 3 3 * 9 2 -1 0 lf , Ja n u a ry , 19*+2. 5**Lester R. W heeler, “Summary of a Study of th e I n te llig e n c e of U n iv e rs ity of Miami F reshm en,” Jo u rn a l of E d u c a tio n a l R e se a rc h * *+ 3*3°7-08, December, 19*t-9. 55iiarry S . G anders, “Q u a lity in E d u c a tio n ,” School and S o c ie ty * 4-5:83 9-V3, June 19? 1 9 3 7 . 5&Margaret K ie ly , Com parisons of S tu d e n ts of Teach e r s C o lie g es and S tu d en ts o f L ib e r a l- A rts C o lle g es (New Yorks T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e r s ity ? 1931 ), pp* 138-^2* 57 Lewis E ld re d , “T r a its of a Group of P ro s p e c tiv e T e a c h e rs ,” S chool and S o c ie ty * 50sH -77-80, O ctober 7 , 1 9 3 9 . ^ G . T. B usw ell, “E d u c a tio n a l R esearch and S t a t i s t i c s , ” S chool and S o c ie ty * 2 5 : 7 3 0 - 3 6 , June 18, 1 9 2 7 . ^T h elm a H unt, "M easuring T eacher A p titu d e ,” Educa t i o n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 15:33**— May, 1 9 2 9 . 279 C a r te r ,60 A u lt,61 Keys and H eed,62 T h ied e,63 W illia m s ,6^ and S chool and S o c ie ty ,6? the re v e rs e was tru e * When s tu d e n ts in e d u c a tio n were found to be s u p e r io r , t h i s could be in te r p r e te d as re p re s e n tin g th e upper p o rtio n s o f . a d i s t r i b u t i o n of means i f a l l s tu d ie s were n o t p u b lish e d . T hat i s , th e re i s a p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t s tu d ie s a t s in g le I i n s t i t u t i o n s were not r e p r e s e n ta tiv e . I t i s l i k e l y th a t i , l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs would use t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Many of the s tu d ie s re p o rte d above were b ia se d a g a in s t e d u c a tio n (g e n e ra l) s tu d e n ts inasm uch as th e s e s tu d ie s , by and la r g e , in clu d ed p h y s ic a l e d u c a tio n m ajors 60^. M. G a r te r , " C ritic is m o f R ecent C r itic is m of T eacher T ra in in g ," S chool and S o c ie ty . ^*9s21 4 f-lf8 , F ebruary 25, 1939. 6 l j # W. A u lt, " S e le c tio n as a F a c to r i n T each er- E d u c a tio n ," S chool and S o c ie ty . 52 :3 0 9 -1 2 , O ctober 5* 191 +0. 6 % o e l Keys and E rn e s t R eed, "The I n te llig e n c e of Summer as Compared W ith R egular S e ssio n S tu d e n ts ," Jo u rn a l o f A pplied P sy ch o lo g y . I**:o00-08, No. 6 (u n d a te d ), 1930. 6 3 w ilso n G. T h ie d e , "Some C h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f J u n io r s E n r o lle d in S e le c te d C u r ric u la a t th e U n iv e r s ity o f W iscon- s i n ," J o u rn a l o f E x p erim en ta l E d u c a tio n . 19*1-62, Septem ber, 1950. 6k E . I . F . W illia m s, "C oncerning S tu d e n ts in th e E d u c a tio n C ourses of a L ib e ra l-A rts C o lle g e ," S chool and S o c ie ty . 55:620, May 30, 19^2. 6 5" Do S u p e rio r C o lleg e S tu d e n ts P rep are fo r P u b lie - S chool T each in g ," S chool and S o c ie ty . 5*+*298, O ctober 11, 19*4-1. i n the "e d u catio n " group. Such was the c a s e , fo r exam ple, w ith th e S e le c tiv e S e rv ic e t e s t s . S tu d ie s by th e C arnegie F o u n d a tio n ,^ S ch n eid er and B e r d ie ,^ 7 A u l t , ^ L a n d s k o v , ^ H artso n ?^ and o th e rs c o n c lu s iv e ly showed th a t p h y s ic a l e d u c a tio n m ajors were a t the lo w est rung i n c o lle g e ac h ie v e ment and in i n t e l l i g e n c e . D esp ite sem antic d i f f i c u l t i e s , i t would be s a fe to conclude from th e t o t a l ev id en ce t h a t p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs as a group are below th e average c o lle g e stu d e n t i n achievem ent and in te llig e n c e ; to what e x te n t th ey a re below i s p ro b le m a tic a l. ^ L e a rn e d and Wood, on. c i t . , p . 33^. ^ S c h n e id e r and B e rd ie , o p . c i t . , p p . 96-97. ^ A u l t , oj d. c i t . , p . 12. ^ % o rv in L. Landskov, "S uggested S tu d e n t S u rv iv a l T echniques T rie d Out a t th e U n iv e rs ity of M in n eso ta," C ollege and U n iv e r s ity . 23*23^-*+1, Ja n u a ry , 19M3. D. H a rtso n , "Does C o lleg e T ra in in g In flu e n c e T e s t I n te llig e n c e ? " The Jo u rn a l of E d u c a tio n a l P sychology. 2 7 * W l-9 1 , O cto b er, 1935.------------------------------------------- ^ I t should be noted t h a t th e term " p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e r" p re s e n ts many sem antic d i f f i c u l t i e s and i s used only i n a v ery " g e n e ra l" s e n s e . A lso , i t would be i n t e r e s t in g to know the p e rc e n ta g e of te a c h e rs who would n o t have been c l a s s i f i e d as " p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs " d u rin g t h e i r u n d e rg ra d u a te y e a r s . P e rs o n a lity of p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e r s . E c k e r t ^ found t h a t p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs a t th e U n iv e rs ity of M innesota showed more te n d e n c ie s tow ard m alad ju stm en t th a n th e ty p ic a l c o lle g e s tu d e n t. B l u m ? 3 found th e o p p o site to be t r u e . Ryan?1 * tended to agree w ith E c k e rt. S o c io lo g ic a l background of p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e r s . K ie ly compared s tu d e n ts of te a c h e rs c o lle g e s w ith s tu d e n ts ; of l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s in 1931 and re p o rte d : The e n ti r e study in com parisons shows t h a t i n s o c ia l and economic background, te a c h e r s - c o lle g e stu d e n ts and a r ts - c o lle g e s tu d e n ts d i f f e r m arkedly, w ith th e m a te r ia l advantages fa v o rin g th e a r t s - c o lle g e group. McKibben made a com parative survey of th e p o p u la tio n s of th e C o lleg e o f E d u ca tio n and th e C o lleg e of A rts and S cience a t th e U n iv e rsity of M isso u ri i n 1951 and found th e groups to be g e n e ra lly s im ila r i n socio-econom ic s ta tu s as w e ll as in many o th e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . ? 2E c k e rt, " P re p a ra tio n o f T eachers a t the U n iv e rsity of M in n e so ta ,1 1 op. c i t . , pp. 275-76. ^ L aw ren ce P h ilip Blum, "A C om parative Study of S tu d e n ts P re p a rin g fo r F ive S e le c te d P ro fe s s io n s * In c lu d in g T each in g ," The J o u rn a l o f E x p erim en tal E d u c a tio n . 1 6 :3 1 -6 5 , S eptem ber, 19*?7. C arson Ryan, M ental H ea lth Through E d u c a tio n (Hew Y ork: The Commonwealth Fund'J 1938), PP. 23-2 4 , 121. 282 ' D iffe re n c e s t h a t d id e x i s t were the r e s u l t o f d if f e r e n c e s betw een the sexes r a th e r th a n d if f e r e n c e s betw een th e sam ples. McKibben concluded: In so f a r as th e sam ples a re co n cern ed , no su p p o rt can be giv en to the charge t h a t s tu d e n ts in te a c h e r- tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s a re i n f e r i o r to s tu d e n ts in l i b e r a l a r t s c o l l e g e s . 76 V . GRADING IN SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION W ebb^ found t h a t s tu d e n ts in th e d ep artm en t o f e d u c a tio n a t Emory U n iv e rs ity ( in 1951) re c e iv e d h ig h e r av erag e g ra d es and low er sc o re s on academ ic a p titu d e t e s t s th a n d id s tu d e n ts in any o th e r d e p a rtm e n t. M cCulloch?^ re p o rte d in 1955 t h a t ”A ” and f,B” were the c h a r a c t e r is t i c g rades in g ra d u a te co u rse s in e d u c a tio n i n te n i n s t i t u t i o n s ; ’ ’C” and below were r a r e ly g iv e n . M orris s tu d ie d fo u rte e n d iv is io n s of th e U n iv e rsity of G eorgia i n 1950 and found t h a t th e e d u c a tio n d iv is io n 7 R o b ert T. McKibben, H A C om parative Survey of Sam ples from th e J u n io r and S e n io r P o p u la tio n of th e C ollege o f E d u ca tio n and th e C ollege of A rts and S c ie n c e s , U n iv er s i t y o f M is so u ri, W inter S e m ester, 1950-19 5 l . M D is s e r ta ti o n A b s tra c ts (Ann A rbor, M ichigan: U n iv e rs ity M ic ro film s, 1952), V o l. 12, No. *+ , p . 517. ^W ebb, o p . c i t . , p. 271. ^ R o b e r t W. M cCulloch, ’’The Im pact of P u b lic School T eachers on G raduate S c h o o ls ,’1 A .A.U .P. B u l l e t i n . *+1:721- 3 2 , W in ter, 1955. graded h ig h e r th a n a l l o th e r d iv is io n s e x c e p t jo u rn a lis m , home econom ics, and v e te r in a r y m e d ic in e . A sam ple (a b rid g e d ) from M o rris 1 study i s shown i n T able X X V III:^ TABIE XXVIII GRADING INDEX OF TH E SCHOOLS A N D COLIEGES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA—FALL QUARTER, 1950 (ABRIDGED FRO M MORRIS) S chool or C o lleg e P erc en tag e of A ’s and B*s P ercen tag e of Dfs . E rs . and F fs B io lo g ic a l S cien ces 3P b2 P h y s ic a l S cien ces 3 * + 38 Languages and L ite r a tu r e 39 33 S o c ia l S cien ce 33 25 E d u c a tio n 69 5 A rts and S cien ce s ^*0 29 A ll- u n iv e r s ity 1*9 19 K e lle r and Void s tu d ie d g rad in g p r a c tic e s a t the U n iv e rs ity o f M in n eso ta, 19^2-1952. They found t h a t g rad es in the C ollege of E d u c a tio n were h ig h e r, f o r u n d e r g ra d u a te s , th a n i n th e r e s t o f th e u n iv e r s it y . For g ra d u a te s , th e g ra d in g p r a c tic e s were f a i r l y e q u iv a le n t. A sample (a b rid g ed ) from th is study i s shown in Table X X IX .^ 79 Van C leve M o rris. lfHigh Grades and Low G rades, n C o lle g e and U n iv e r s ity . 2 8 :3 1 8 , A p r il, 1953. SORobert H. K e lle r and George B. V oid, 1 1 G rading P r a c tic e s a t th e U n iv e rs ity o f M in n eso ta, n A U n iv e rsity Looks a t I t s Program . R uth E . E c k e rt and R o b ert J . K e lle r , e d i t o r s (M in n eap o lis: The U n iv e rsity of M innesota P re s s , 195*+), P . 33. 284- T A B IE X X IX : PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OP GRADES RECEIVED B Y STUDENTS A T TEE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: 194-2-1952 (ABRIDGED FR O M XELIER A N D VOLD) E d u c a tio n (® *2,7b6) S c ie n c e , L ite r a tu r e and the A rts -(N*26f 8 5 I ) ....... A ll-U n iv e rs ity ( n » 7 9 , 5 0 7 ) U ndergraduate A 17 13 13 B b6 28 29 G 33 kb ^ ■ 2 D b F 1 11 * * 12 k E d u c a tio n (N=3923 S c ie n c e , L ite r a tu r e and th e A rts ..........I lE i >.66.11............. A ll-U n iv e rs ity (N=3 > 90M *) A 3 * + 4-5 B b6 34- 34- S 14- 12 14- C 6 8 9 D 0 1 1 F O 0 0 M asley s tu d ie d s c h o la s tic av erag es a t P en n sy lv an ia S ta te C ollege in 19^-8. H is fin d in g s a re shown in T able X X X in w hich th e c o n v e n tio n a l c o lle g e grade p o in t system was ' u s e d . 83- P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n appeared to g iv e h ig h e r g ra d es th a n d id th e p r o fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s . I t should be no ted t h a t , in th is ta b le , th e b e s t b a s is fo r com paring s c h o la s tic achievem ent of s tu d e n ts in th e v a rio u s sc h o o ls i s th e "m inor" a v e ra g e . Use o f th e "m inor" average e lim in a te s b ia s eaused by g ra d in g p r a c tic e s in th e "m ajor" sch o o l and i t s co nsequ ent e f f e c t on th e " a ll- s c h o o l" a v e ra g e . A lthough some allow ance must be made fo r th e ch o ice of s u b je c ts in th e "m inor" f i e l d , i t was e v id e n t from th e ta b le th a t e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts made a fa v o ra b le showing i n com parison to th e r e s t o f th e s tu d e n ts . M asley, who was D ire c to r o f th e P h y s ic a l E d u ca tio n R esearch la b o r a to r y , a ls o had th i s to says By an a ly z in g th e m ajor and m inor av e rag es i t was observed th a t s e v e ra l im p o rta n t d iffe re n c e s e x is t e d . The m ajor av e rag es o f th e S chools of A g ric u ltu re and E d u c a tio n were s i g n i f i c a n t l y g re a te r th a n the m ajor average of th e sam ple. This would seem to in d ic a te t h a t th e se people were more ad ep t in t h e i r own p a r t i c u l a r a re a of s p e c ia liz a tio n and were th e r e f o r e a b le 0 * 1 °*Mohn W. Mas le y , "S tudy o f S c h o la s tic A verages of S tu d e n ts in th e V arious S chools o f th e P en n sy lv an ia S ta te C o lle g e ," C oliegq and U n iv e r s ity . O ctober, 19N-8. T A B IE X X X ALL SCHOOL, MAJOR, A N D M INOR AVERAGES ACCORDING TO SCHOOLS OP THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE COLIE SE, 194-8 (PROM M A S IE Y) A ll School M ajor : ^Minor Mean S .D . Mean S .D . Mean S.D . A g ric u ltu re (N-66) 1.51 .53 1.83 .* 5 1 .2 0 .62 C hem istry and P h y sic s (N-50) 1.4-6 .71 1 .3 2 .82 1.57 .70 E d u c a tio n (N-77) 1.55 .4-8 1 .8 0 .57 1.^3 .5 9 E n g in e e rin g (N-120) 1.4-5 .62 1.57 *66 1 .3 5 .6 ? The L ib e ra l A rts (N-168) 1 .3 ^ .60 1.36 .61 1.33 .77 M in eral I n d u s tr ie s (N-26) 1.4-1 .69 1 .7 9 .5 7 1.23 .73 P h y s ic a l E d u ca tio n (N-17) 1.30 .70 1.84- .5 5 1.08 .7 9 Qp to e a rn s i g n i f i c a n t l y h ig h e r m a rk s,0 How t h i s c o n c lu sio n was a r riv e d a t i s u n fath o m ab le. The l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o r w ould, of c o u rs e , p o in t to what he would p ro b ab ly c a l l “ e a sy 1 1 g ra d in g p r a c t i c e s . At H e id e lb e rg C o lle g e , th e e d u c a tio n dep artm en t gave low er average g ra d es th an d id th e o th e r c o lle g e d e p a r t m en ts. W illia m s, who conducted a stu d y a t th is i n s t i t u t i o n re p o rte d as fo llo w s : D uring t h e i r fo u r y e a rs in c o lle g e , th e g rad es o f th e e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts in th e c la s s o f l^M-l averaged 1 ,767; th e n o n -e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts av eraged 1 .7 6 1 . In th e c la s s o f 19M -2 f o r th e th re e y e a rs ending Ju n e, 19^1» average g rad es a r e : fo r e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts , 1,8725 f o r n o n -e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts , 1 . 638. The d i f f e r ence in sta n d in g i s n o t due to h ig h e r g rad in g in e d u c a tio n a l s u b je c ts . A com parison o f th e g rad es g iv en by members of th e f a c u lty i n th e e d u c a tio n d epartm ent and th o se in th e academ ic d ep artm en ts d u rin g th e f i r s t sem ester of th e ju n io r y e a r , th e f i r s t y ea r in w hich s tu d e n ts were ta k in g both groups of s u b je c ts , shows t h a t th e dep artm en t of e d u c a tio n gave g ra d es av erag in g 1 .8 w hile th e o th e r d ep a rtm e n ts gave g ra d es av erag in g 1 .8 5 .8 3 R e la te d to p r a c tic e s in g ra d in g a re c o lle g e m o r ta lity s tu d i e s . M cN eely^ s tu d ie d w ith d raw als in v a rio u s c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s and found th e g ro ss 82I b l d . . p . 56. 83b . I . F . W illia m s, o p. c i t . . p . 620. ^ J o h n H. McNeely, “C ollege S tu d en t M o r ta lity , “ U. S . O ffic e of E d u c a tio n B u l le ti n . 1937, PP. 2 7 -2 9 . m o r ta lity to be 6 7 .0 p e r c e n t f o r a r t s and s c ie n c e and 52*9 p e r c e n t fo r ed u catio n * A more a c c u ra te com parison c a lle d " n e t m o r ta lity 1 1 produced **5*5 Pe r c e n t fo r a r t s and sc ie n c e and M-2.3 p er c e n t fo r ed u catio n * Hunger s tu d ie d 1 1 p e r s is te n c e ” of p ro b a tio n a ry s tu d e n ts a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Toledo and concludeds I t . . . ap p ears t h a t s tu d e n ts in th e C o lleg e of E d u c a tio n g ra d u ate more fre q u e n tly th an i s su g g ested by th e th e o r e tic a l d i s t r i b u t i o n . . . . The C o lleg e o f E d u c a tio n seems to be th e m ost c o n g e n ia l f o r G eneral D iv is io n Q jro b a tio n a ry J stu d e n ts* sin c e p r o p o r tio n a lly more o f i t s s tu d e n ts g ra d u ate from th e group which rem ains f o r e ig h t o r more s e m e s te rs . The C o lleg e o f A rts and S cien ce and th e C o lleg e o f B usiness A d m in istra tio n seem le s s c o n g e n ia l However, c o lle g e m o r ta lity s tu d ie s were n o t good c r i t e r i a f o r th e p u rp o ses of th e p re s e n t s tu d y . There was very low m o r ta lity in sch o o ls of law and m ed icin e, among o th e r s , because of s t r i c t s e le c tio n of s tu d e n ts . The s e le c ti o n as w e ll as the aims of the c o lle g e m ust be known b e fo re th e f ig u r e s have much m eaning. F u rth erm o re, 50 p e r c e n t of th e c o lle g e s tu d e n ts who w ithdraw , do so f o r ^P aul F ra n c is H unger, "F a c to rs R e la te d to P e r s i s t ence in C o lleg e o f S tu d e n ts Who Were Adm itted to th e U n iv e rs ity o f T oledo from th e Lower T h ird o f T h eir Re s p e c tiv e High School C la s s e s ," a b s tr a c t on m ic ro film , U n iv e rs ity of M ichigan, D o cto ral D is s e r ta tio n S e rie s P u b li c a tio n 769^, Ann A rbor, U n iv e rsity M ic ro film s, 195**, p p . 128, 138. mriknown re a so n s ac co rd in g to McNeely 2 8 9 V I. PREDICTION OF TEACHING SUCCESS—ACADEM IC COURSES VS. PROFESSIONAL COURSES "R esearch in g th e r e s e a r c h e r s ” i n th is a re a proved to be a m ost im p en etrab le a f f a i r . S tatem en ts o f tw en ty - odd y e a rs ago by Corey,® ^ K night,® ? and Cox®® to th e e f f e c t t h a t we know l i t t l e , or n o th in g , ab o u t th e p r e d ic tio n of te a c h e r su cc ess a r e a p p a re n tly s t i l l v a lid to d a y . One i s alm ost fo rc e d to ag ree w ith what Je w e tt has w r itte n : Any re a d e r of th e l i t e r a t u r e i n t h i s f i e l d i s d i s couraged a t th e la c k of agreem ent among th e w r ite r s as to f a c to r s w hich c o n d itio n te a c h in g s u c c e s s . Almost th e o n ly agreem ent to be found among them i s t h e i r c o n v ic tio n th a t we m ust d eterm in e what c o n s t i tu te s te a c h in g e f f ic ie n c y and m ust d e v ise m easures of i t s e le m e n ts. No s in g le f a c to r has c o n s is te n tly been found to be c lo s e ly r e la te d to what we c a l l te a c h in g s u c c e s s . ® S tep h en M. C orey, ”The P re s e n t S ta te of Igno ran ce About F a c to rs E f f e c tin g Teacher S u c c e s s ,” E d u c a tio n a l Ad m in is tr a tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 18:^-81-90, O cto b er, 1932. ® ?Fredric B u tte r f ie ld K n ig h t, Q u a litie s R e la te d to S uccess i n T eaching (New Y ork: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e r s ity , 1 9 2 2 ), tp.. 3 0 ,. ^® P hilip W. L. Cox, ”Should T eachers Be C e r tif ie d on C re d its E arned o r a s a R e s u lt o f E x am in atio n s?” New York S ta te E d u c a tio n . 2 6 :3 1 -3 3 , O cto b er, 1938. ^ I d a M. J e w e tt, "Summary of S tu d ie s on Teacher S e le c t io n ,” B e tte r S e le c tio n o f B e tte r T e a c h e rs, by M. M arg aret S tro h , Id a M. J e w e tt, and Vera M. B u tle r (W ashing to n : D e lta Kappa Gamma S o c ie ty , 19^*3) * P . 87* The charge under a n a ly s is in th e ensuing s e c tio n is t h a t th e p r o f e s s io n a l e d u c a tio n program i s ” to p -h ea v y 1 1 i n fa v o r of re q u ire d c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n . The approach in th e p r e s e n t stu d y was to fin d re s e a rc h b ea rin g on th e b alan c e betw een academ ic c o u rse s and p r o f e s s io n a l c o u rse s i n th e te a c h e r e d u c a tio n program and th e e f f e c t of th e amount of tr a in in g in each a re a on teac h in g s u c c e s s . The re a d e r m ust be c e r t a i n t h a t , i n th e fo llo w in g d is c u s s io n , 1 1 academ ic H c o u rse s or 1 1 s u b je c t-m a t t e r 1 1 c o u rse s were c o n sid e re d d i s t i n c t from Knowledge of s u b je c t m a tte r. I t was assumed t h a t a te a c h e r m ust have knowledge o f s u b je c t m a tte r and th e more of such knowledge th e b e t t e r . But knowledge of s u b je c t m a tte r , lik e knowledge o f how to te a c h , can be a c q u ire d away from th e c o lle g e h a l l s . In th e numerous s tu d ie s d e a lin g w ith th e p r e d ic tio n o f te a c h e r s u c c e s s , th e amount of academ ic a n d /o r p r o f e s s io n a l c o u rse s was only in f r e q u e n tly c o n s id e re d . For exam ple, when B esto r c h a lle n g e d th e e d u c a tio n is ts to produce e x p e rim e n ta l ev id en ce to show th a t c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n c o n trib u te d to good te a c h in g , only one a c c e p t ab le stu d y which had a n y th in g to do w ith th e amount o f c o u rse s i n e d u c a tio n ta k e n by te a c h e rs was a p p a re n tly 291 90 c a lle d to h is a t t e n t i o n by e d u c a tio n is ts . However, some s tu d ie s were found ( in th e p re s e n t se a rc h ) which d e a lt 'w ith th e e f f e c t of th e amount of academic a n d /o r profession* r a l co u rse s in th e te a c h e r e d u c a tio n program . These s tu d ie s fo llo w . Young s tu d ie d 1 ,5 2 1 h ig h sch o o l te a c h e rs in Texas in 1937* The c r i t e r i o n fo r good te a c h in g was p r i n c i p a l s 1 r a t i n g s . Young found t h a t th e more d eg rees a te a c h e r h ad , th e b e t t e r h is chance to be a s u p e rio r te a c h e r; the more s u b je c t-m a tte r t r a i n i n g , th e b e t t e r h is chance to be a s u p e rio r te a c h e r ; th e more e d u c a tio n c o u rs e s , th e b e t t e r h is chance to be a s u p e rio r te a c h e r . The r e s u l t of com paring c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n to s u b je c t-m a tte r c o u rse s i n Young’s stu d y i s shown in T able XXXI ( a d a p t e d ) .^ Young a ls o c o n sid e re d th e e x p e rie n c e f a c t o r and f i n a l l y concluded t h a t . . s u b je c t m a tte r tr a in in g i s 92 of f i r s t im p o rta n c e .” C ourses in e d u c a tio n ra n a c lo s e seco n d , how ever. ^ A r th u r E . B e s to r, E d u c a tio n a l W astelands (Urbanas U n iv e rs ity of I l l i n o i s P r e s s , 1953)> PP. 21 9 -2 0 . ^ F r a n k Young, ’ ’E ff ic ie n c y of High S chool T eachers as M easured by P r i n c i p a l s ’ R a tin g s ,” Texas O u tlo o k . 21*2*f, Ja n u a ry , 1937. 92I b i d . . p . 2 5 . 292 T A B L E X X X I SEMESTER-HOURS TRAINING IN SUBJECT M ATTER A N D EDUCATION IN RELATION TO RATINGS OF TEACHERS E£ PRINCIPALS (ADAPTED FROM YOUNG) S u p e rio r Average Below Average ___________________ T eachers T eachers T eachers S em ester h o u rs tr a in in g i n s u b je c t m a tte r (m edian) 3 3 .9 7 3 2.56 2^.63 S em ester hours tr a in in g in e d u c a tio n (m edian) 2 7 .^ 5 2 6 . lb 2 ^.6 7 Whelan te s te d the h y p o th e sis h e ld by a com m ittee o f c o lle g e p ro fe s s o rs o f m ath em atics: nam ely, H th e g r e a te r amount o f c o lle g e m athem atics th a t a te a c h e r h a s , the b e tt e r w i l l be th e te a c h e r .w The s tu d y , a d o c to ra l d i s s e r t a t i o n , to o k p la c e i n Ohio i n 1938. T his was th e most e x h a u stiv e and p e r tin e n t stu d y en co u n tered in review ing th e re s e a rc h re g a rd in g th e p re s e n t d i s s e r t a t i o n . Whelan approached th e problem w ith two (of th r e e ) c r i t e r i a e s p e c ia lly d esig n ed to s a t i s f y th e l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . These c r i t e r i a , an aly zed s e p a r a te ly , were used to t e s t the e f f ic ie n c y of th e te a c h e r s : 1 . R e s u lts of s t r i c t s u b je c t-m a tte r achievem ent t e s t s i n a lg e b ra and geom etry taken by 65>553 h ig h seh o o l p u p ils . 2 9 3 2 . Gains mad© by a la rg e group o f th e above p u p ils who took th e t e s t a second tim e , 3 . R a tin g s by tr a in e d o b se rv e rs from th e s t a t e departm ent of e d u c a tio n . The stu d y exten d ed over a f iv e - y e a r p e r io d . No s p e c ia l t e s t s were d e v ise d ; t e s t r e s u l t s f i l e d w ith th e s t a t e dep artm en t o f e d u c a tio n were u se d . Backgrounds of some 1 ,1 ?0 a lg e b ra and geom etry te a c h e rs (some te a c h e rs and some s tu d e n ts were 1 1 d u p lic a te s ” ) , f i l e d by the s t a te departm ent of e d u c a tio n , were u s e d . A ta b le o f i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s was p re s e n te d . I t i s reproduced on the fo llo w in g page as Table X X X I I . ^ In th e p u b lish e d a b s t r a c t , Whelan co n c lu d e d i . . . i t I s found t h a t th e c o r r e la tio n o f s u b je c t- m a tte r tr a in in g in the tr a in in g of a c tu a l te a c h e rs of m athem atics w ith v a rio u s in d ic e s o f re p u te d su ccess i s i n d i f f e r e n t , n e g lig ib le , and fre q u e n tly s l i g h t l y n e g a t i v e . ^ Q-3 ^James F ra n c is W helan, ‘ ’C o rre la tio n o f the P ro fe s s io n a l and S u b je c t-M a tte r T ra in in g in th e P re p a ra t io n o f T eachers of H igh-S chool M athem atics” (u n p u b lish ed D o c to r’s d i s s e r t a t i o n , Ohio S ta te U n iv e r s ity , Columbus, 1 9 3 8 ), p . 17b. oL y James F ra n c is W helan, ”C o rre la tio n o f the P ro fe s s io n a l and S u b je c t-M a tte r T ra in in g in th e P re p a ra t io n o f T eachers of H igh-S chool M ath em atics,” Ohio S ta te U n iv e rs ity A b s tra c ts of D o cto ral D is s e r ta tio n s No. 27, S p rin g Q u a rte r, 193$, p . 198. 29^ T A B IE XXXII INTERC O K R E LATI O H S OF SUBJECT-MATTER TRAINING, PROFESSIONAL TRAINING, AND VARIOUS M EASURES OF SUCCESS IN TEACHING (FROM W HELAN) P ro fessio n al tra in in g Index 1* algebra Index 1* geometry Index 2*.* algebra * * >* C M u 4 - 3 M 2 © 0 T J o m © M b o Supervisor *s ra tin g Years of teaching S alary S u b je c t m a tte r t r a in in g - I *>.06 -O .O l +0 .0 1 - 0 .0 1 - 0 .0 1 - 0 .1 2 -0 .0 3 - 0 . 0* * P ro fe s s io n a l tr a in i n g - +0 .0 2 - 0 .0 2 - 0 .0 1 -0 .1 5 H H • 9 +0.39 +0.23 Index 1* a lg e b ra - - +0.**6 - 0 . 0* * +0 .0 1 -0 .1 3 +0.05 + 0 . 0 6 Index 1* geom etry - - - C O o ♦ 0 1 + 0 . 0 8 - 0 . 2 0 + 0 . 0 8 H o • o 4 Index 2 * * a lg e b ra - • - - C M • 9 { N C M • O * + 0 . 0 8 -0 .0 9 Index 2 ** geom etry - • - - m m -0 .2 3 - 0 .0 6 — 0.04* S u p e rv iso r *s r a ti n g - - - - - - -0 .0 3 -0.24- Y ears o f te a c h in g - - - - - - - ♦0 .5 2 *Index 1 - A verages o f m edian p e r c e n tile o f c la s s * **Index 2 - A verages o f d if f e r e n c e s i n m edian p e r c e n t i l e s , i* e « , gains* I t should a ls o b e n o ted t h a t p r o f e s s io n a l tr a in in g fa re d no b e t t e r th a n s u b je c t-m a tte r tra in in g * However, Whelan d id not c o n s id e r th e p r o f e s s io n a l e d u c a tio n c o r r e l a t i o n s a “finding*1 fo r two re a s o n s : 1 . The c r i t e r i a were s a ti s f a c to r y to l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs b u t n o t t o p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n .^5 2 . P ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g had changed c o n sid e ra b ly in th e tw enty or t h i r t y y e a rs p receed in g th e stu d y \fo ile s u b je c t-m a tte r tr a i n i n g in m athem atics had n o t changed. A lso , many of th e te a c h e rs must have re c e iv e d t h e i r p ro f e s s io n a l tr a in in g i n th e norm al sch o o ls and t h i s was c o n sid e re d s i g n i f i c a n t . 7 T his seemed tbcbesa r a th e r weak argum ent and u n q u e stio n a b ly p ro fe s s o rs in th e c o lle g e s o f l i b e r a l a r t s w ould be dism ayed a t Whelan*s f a i l u r e to c o n s id e r th e p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n c o r r e la tio n s as a “fin d in g .* 1 ^ W h elan (u n p u b lish ed D octor *s d i s s e r t a t i o n ) , o r. c i t . , p p . iiH ~ l5 . 97 A stu d y by S c h u n e rt, made i n 1951* p ro v id ed f u r th e r backing to W helan’s c o n e lu s io n s • S ch u n ert used s tu d e n t achievem ent t e s t s in a lg e b ra and geom etry as the c r i t e r i o n o f a s u c c e s s fu l te a c h e r and found t h a t the amount o f th e t e a c h e r ’s c o lle g e tr a in i n g in m athem atics d id n o t a f f e c t p u p il achievem ent. Nemec s tu d ie d i n f e r io r te a c h e rs (th o se d en ied perm anent c e r t i f i c a t e s ) in W isconsin in 19*+6 and co n clu d ed : Having a s u f f i c i e n t knowledge o f s u b je c t m a tte r was a problem b u t t h is was n o t n e a rly so im p o rtan t as th e f i r s t fo u r [" fa c to rs in c lu d in g p e r s o n a lity , a b i l i t y to c o n tr o l a c l a s s , e tc .] ] and would p ro b ab ly n o t have caused tro u b le f o r th e se people i f t h e i r o th e r d i f f i c u l t i e s had not been so a p p a re n t. H ughes, i n 1925, made w hat appeared to be a re a s o n ab ly sound s tu d y . However, only t h i r t y te a c h e rs were in v o lv ed in a r r iv in g a t th is c o n c lu sio n : When th e achievem ent o f p u p ils i n sch o o ls f a i r l y homogeneous in s i z e , in t e l li g e n c e o f the p u p ils , equipm ent, e x p e rie n c e of th e te a c h e r s , c o n te n t and tim e a llo tm e n t to d if f e r e n t d iv is io n s , b u t n o t homogeneous w ith r e s p e c t to th e tr a in in g o f te a c h e rs in c o lle g e p h y s ic s , was compared on th e b a s is of th e last-n am ed f a c to r the fo llo w in g r e s u l t s were o b ta in e d . ^ J i m S c h u n e rt, "The A s so c ia tio n o f M athem atical Achievement w ith C e rta in F a c to rs R e sid e n t i n th e T each er, i n the T eaching, in the P u p il, and in the S c h o o l," Jo u rn a l o f E x p erim en tal E d u c a tio n . 1 9 :2 1 9 -3 8 , M arch, 1951* ^ L o i s Gadd Nemec, " R e la tio n s h ip s Between Teacher C e r t i f i c a t i o n and E d u ca tio n in W isco n sin ," Jo u rn a l o f E x p erim en tal E d u c a tio n * 1 5 :1 2 8 , December, 19^6. The p u p ils who were ta u g h t by te a c h e rs who had m ajored i n p h y sic s e x c e lle d i n average achievem ent th e p u p ils who were ta u g h t by te a c h e rs who had n o t m ajored in c o lle g e p h y s ic s . T his s u p e r io r ity was e v id e n t on every t e s t . I t was 2 .9 p o in ts L out o f 30 q u e s tio n s j, 4 .2 p o in ts Tout of 35 q u estions^) in m agnet I§m and e l e c t r i c i t y , and H-.6 p o in ts Lout o f 36 q u e stio n s j in sound and l i g h t . 99 However, p u p ils of te a c h e rs w ith no c o lle g e p h y sics were s u p e rio r to p u p ils whose te a c h e rs had ta k e n one y ea r and two y e a rs of c o lle g e p h y s ic s . (A y e a r was d e fin e d as 1 a co u rse pursued f o r fo u r or f iv e p e rio d s p er week fo r one y e a r .) A lso in v o lv ed was th e f a c t th a t th e re was a d i r e c t r a t i o betw een th e amount o f p h y sic s ta k e n and th e amount of p r o f e s s io n a l e d u c a tio n ta k e n . However, i f th e fin d in g s w ere ta k e n l i t e r a l l y , i t could be s a id th a t any amount o f t r a in in g in p h y sic s below heavy c o n c e n tra tio n (m ajor) d id n o t produce e f f e c t iv e te a c h in g r e s u l t s but heavy concen t r a t i o n d id produce e f f e c tiv e te a c h in g r e s u l t s . Wey, in 1951, in te rv ie w e d many begin n in g te a c h e r s , g ra d u a te s of a s t a t e e o lle g e , and r e p o rte d : I t was found t h a t , a lth o u g h many beginning te a c h e rs knew t h e i r s u b je c t m a tte r on a c o lle g e le v e l and were a b le to p ass advanced c o u rse s i n t h e ir f i e l d s , th e y were o fte n n o t p r o f ic ie n t in t h e i r s u b je c t m a tte r a t th e h ig h -s c h o o l l e v e l . For exam ple, a begin n in g 99 j # m. H ughes, 1 1 A Study o f I n te llig e n c e and o f th e T ra in in g o f T eachers a s F a c to rs C o n d itio n in g th e Achievem ent of P u p i ls ,” P a rt I I , S chool Review T 33*301-02, A p r il, 192?. te a c h e r m ight have known c a lc u lu s , b u t he d id n o t know enough p la n e geom etry to te a c h i t i n h ig h sch o o l . . *100 Broom101 s tu d ie d th e r e la tio n s h ip of th e amount of p r o f e s s io n a l tr a in in g and e f f e c tiv e te a c h in g (based on s u p e r v is o r s ' r a ti n g s ) a t San Diego S ta te C o lleg e i n 1932* H is f in d in g s , u sin g ap p ro x im ately two hundred f o r ty p a ire d s e r ie s o f m easu res, are p re se n te d in Table XXXIIX and T able XXXIV. TABIE XXXIII INTERCORRELATIOHS DESCRIBING THE RELATIONSHIP BETW EEN ESTIMATES OP ACTUAL TEACHING SUCCESS A N D O TH ER M EASURES (FROM BRO O M ) I n te r c o r r e la ti o n s betw een e s tim a te ( r a tin g ) o f a c tu a l te a c h in g su c c e ss and: e s tim a te of p r a c tic e te a c h in g su ccess grade i n p r a c tic e te a c h in g g rad es in e d u c a tio n c o u rse s e x c lu d in g p r a c tic e te a c h in g g rad es fo r a l l c o lle g e c o u rse s Thorndike I n te llig e n c e T e st number of u n its in e d u c a tio n c o u rse s 100H e rb e rt W * Wey, " D i f f i c u l ti e s o f B eginning T e a c h e rs," S chool R eview * 59s3 7 , Ja n u a ry , 1951• 101M * E . Broom, "A Note on P re d ic tin g T eaching S u c c e ss," E d u c a tio n a l A d m in is tra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 18:655 Ja n u a ry , 1932* .2 9 *26 .19 .1 9 .17 *01 T A B IE X X X IV INTERCOHRELATIONS DESCRIBING THE RELATIONSHIP BETW EEN INTELLIGENCE A N D O TH ER MEASURES (PROM BRO O M ) I n t e r c o r r e la ti o n s o f I.Q . w ith : The l a s t item can be p a r t i a l l y e x p la in e d on th e b a s is of fin d in g s by E c k e rt; g ra d u a te s w ith m ajo rs i n p h y s ic a l e d u c a tio n , m usic, elem en tary e d u c a tio n , and n u rs e ry -s c h o o l e d u c a tio n earn ed a t l e a s t double th e amount o f p r o f e s s io n a l c r e d i t as d id e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts w ith an academ ic major* When segm ents of th e l i b e r a l a r t s group w anted to e lim in a te u n d erg rad u ate p r o f e s s io n a l t r a i n i n g , th ey were e s tim a te o f a c tu a l te a c h in g su cc ess e s tim a te o f p r a c tic e te a c h in g su cc ess g ra d es in p r a c tic e te a c h in g g ra d es i n e d u c a tio n c o u rse s ex c lu d in g p r a c tic e te a c h in g g ra d es i n a l l c o lle g e co u rse s u n its ta k e n i n e d u c a tio n c o u rse s minus 17 .36 .*+ 9 .55 .23 V II. MISCELLANEOUS RESEARCH 1 1 P re p a ra tio n of T eachers a t th e U n iv er s i t y o f M in n e so ta ,1 1 o n * c i t *, p . 276 som etim es met w ith the argum ent th a t p ro fe s s io n a l t r a i n i n g , to ach iev e maximum r e s u l t s , m ust extend over a lo n g e r p e rio d of tim e* F re d e ric k and Bookheim, i n 1933* used p r a c tic e te a c h in g marks as a c r i t e r i o n and re p o rte d t h a t ”. . . n o th in g seems to be g ain ed by sp read in g p ro f e s s io n a l tr a in in g ." S e v e ra l s tu d ie s have been made in v o lv in g th e p o l i t i c a l and s o c ia l b e li e f s o f te a c h e r - tr a in in g f a c u ltie s * G en e rally speaking th e s e s tu d ie s , l i k e one by R a u p ^ ^ in 1934-* showed th a t p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n were more " l i b e r a l 1 1 ( " lib e r a l" d e fin e d as one w illin g to move away from th e s ta tu s q u o ) th an l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . There was no evidence i n such s tu d ie s t h a t p ro fe s s o rs o f educa tio n b e lie v e d in s o c ia lis m , c o lle c tiv is m , o r communism as ch a rg ed . These s tu d ie s were g e n e ra lly o f l i t t l e v alu e due 105 to sem antic d i f f i c u l t i e s as Bagley has so ab ly p o in te d o u t. F u rth erm o re, i t d id n * t h e lp th e s o lu tio n of th e ^ 3 R o b e r t W . F re d e ric k and A rnold Bookheim, "A Study of th e E f f e c ts of C o n cen trated and S c a tte re d P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g on S uccess i n T each in g ," S chool and S o c ie ty . 38:684*, November 18, 1933• Bruce Raup, "What T e a c h e r-T ra in in g F a c u ltie s B e lie v e ," E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 20:34*1-59, May, 193V. 10*W. C. B agley, l e t t e r to th e e d i t o r , E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 20:351-55* May, 1934-. " 301 , c o n tro v e rsy fo r one p a r ty to be M judge" and f in d h im self s u p e r io r . A study (by M artz) re p o rte d by P a in te r showed la c k o f agreem ent and g r e a t d i v e r s it y o f c o n te n t i n t e x t books used fo r in tro d u c to ry c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n a t v a rio u s u n i v e r s i t i e s in 1937* R eed, in 1935, re p o rte d a stu d y w hich concerned th e charge th a t the w o rst te a c h in g in th e u n i v e r s i t i e s was done i n the sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . Based on s e le c tio n s by a r ts - c o lle g e o f f i c i a l s i t was e v id e n t t h a t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n had more th a n t h e i r chance number o f e f f e c tiv e te a c h e rs and j u s t ab o u t t h e i r chance number o f in e f f e c tiv e te a c h e r s . In com parison w ith o th e r f a c u l t i e s , p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n showed up v ery w e ll. The same was tru e in te a c h e rs c o lle g e s . Table X X X V (from Reed) a p p lie d only to l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s .^ 0? *| J T V Q A su rv e y , p u b lish e d i n 1936 and a p p lic a b le only to th e S o u th , re v e a le d t h a t p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n d id lO ^W illiam I . P a in te r , 1 1 The In tro d u c to ry C ourse i n th e E d u c a tio n C u rric u lu m ,1 1 S chool and S o c ie ty . **6:612-17, November 13, 19**1. 107RQ e d , oj>. c i t . . p . 2**3* lO&pfre E d u c a tio n o f S econdary S chool T e a c h e rs. J o in t Committee on Study o f C u rric u la of th e S o u th ern A s s o c ia tio n of C o lle g es and Secondary S c h o o ls, Doak S . C am pbell, d i r e c t o r (N a s h v ille : George Peabody C o lle g e , 193&), PP* **5-**6, 58-60. T A B IE X X X V H U M B E R A N D PER CENT OP ARTS COLLEGE TEACHERS IN VARIOUS TEACHING FIELDS (FROM REED) 30,951 E f f e c tiv e I n e f f e c tiv e A rts C o lleg e A rts C o lleg e A rts C o lleg e T eachers T eachers T eachers T eaching F ie ld Number c l t ? Number e l l ? Number G el? E n g lis h 3,073 991.93 102 15.00 21 18.92 Modern language 2,699 8.72 ¥+ 6 . 1 * 7 13 11.71 C hem istry 1,755 5 .6 7 57 8.38 7 6 .3 1 E d u c a tio n 1,656 5.35 66 9.71 6 5 .^ 1 M athem atics 1,566 5.06 57 8 .3 8 9 8 .1 1 E n g in e e rin g M-.31 15 2 .2 1 5 “ +.50 H is to ry 1,089 3 .5 2 71 10.¥* 8 7 .2 1 B iology 1,068 3 .^ 5 58 8.51* 2 1 .8 0 P h y sic s l,0>+9 3 .3 9 26 3 .8 2 7 6 .3 1 C la s s ic a l Language 879 2.8M- 23 3 .3 8 5 i*.50 Econom ics 860 2 .7 8 23 3 .3 8 2 1.80 P h ilo so p h y 579 1 .8 7 16 2 .3 5 5 i*.50 B ib le and Theology 529 1 .7 1 12 1.76 5 M-.50 Psychology b'fa 1.53 23 3 .3 8 1 0 .9 0 Zoology 350 1.13 10 1 .4 7 - — S o cio lo g y 1 .0 1 19 2 .7 9 - - M iscellan eo u s 11,678 37.73 58 8 . 5 1 * 15 13.51 T o ta l 30,951 100.00 680 100.00 i l l 99.99 re c e iv e h ig h e r s a l a r i e s th a n d id p ro fe s s o rs of th e academ ic s u b je c ts ; th e d if f e r e n c e in medians was $ 2 ,755 to $ 2 ,2 7 0 ( in s t a te u n i v e r s it ie s ) * The study a ls o showed t h a t p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n o u t-ra n k e d th e academ ic p ro fe s s o rs * I n e d u c a tio n , 59 p er c e n t of th e i n s t r u c t i o n s t a f f were f u l l p r o f e s s o r s , w hereas in th e academ ic f i e l d s ^-5 p er c e n t had ach iev ed t h a t rank* However, th e s t a f f i n e d u c a tio n averaged f iv e y e a rs o ld e r th a n th e academ icians* I n 19*+5> Stiles***^ re p o rte d t h a t of the u n iv e r s ity sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n w hich he s tu d ie d , f o r ty - e ig h t ad m itte d a l l s tu d e n ts who so u g h t ad m issio n and t h i r t y - f i v e ad m itted s e le c te d s tu d e n ts only* Adm ission to sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n u s u a lly re q u ire d ju n io r sta n d in g and th e ad m issio n r e q u ir e m ents were i n a d d itio n to th e u n iv e r s ity ad m issio n r e q u ir e m ents . W atson,1’ * ’ 0 in 1952, re p o rte d on s tu d ie s which con cern ed th e com plaint t h a t te a c h e rs were te a c h in g c e r t a in s u b je c ts i n w hich th e te a c h e rs had n o t ‘ ♦m ajored." This h as been a p a r t i c u l a r ly touchy s u b je c t w ith p h y s ic a l ^0 ^L indley J . S t i l e s , " P re -S e rv ic e E d u c a tio n o f High S chool T eachers i n U n iv e r s itie s " (un p u b lish ed D octor *s d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv e rs ity of C o lo rad o , B oulder, 19*+5)* P* 66. 110F le tc h e r G. W atson, "S cien ce T eaching in the Secondary S c h o o ls," S c ie n c e * 1 1 6 s2 6 l-6 3 , Septem ber 5> 1952* s c i e n t i s t s . W atson re p o rte d th a t h a lf th e h ig h sch o o ls i n th e co u n try e n r o lle d few er th a n two hundred s tu d e n ts . The ty p ic a l s t a f f f o r t h is group of high sch o o l numbered seven o r e ig h t. F u rth e r, h a l f of th e p u p ils i n g ra d es n in e to tw elve were in sch o o ls w hich had e n ro llm e n ts below fo u r hundred and had a ty p ic a l s t a f f of n o t g re a te r th a n f i f t e e n . T e a c h e rs, under th e se c irc u m sta n c e s, were fo rc e d to o p e ra te i n a v a r ie ty o f f i e l d s . E spy, i n 1951 > s tu d ie d th e r e l i g i o n o f c o lle g e te a c h e r s . The q u e s tio n n a ire was th e in stru m e n t used in th e s tu d y . Espy compared a group o f p ro fe s s o rs which had ta k e n u n d erg rad u ate co u rse s in e d u c a tio n and a group which had n o t. He concluded t h a t 1 1 . . . th e re was no dom inant e d u c a tio n a l or r e lig io u s im pact one way or a n o th e r th ro u g h u n d e rg ra d u a te c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n which i l l th e stu d y has been a b le to i s o l a t e . M In re g a rd to g ra d u a te c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n Espy s a id t h i s : Thus th e 169 te a c h e r s , te s t e d f o r v a rio u s p o s s ib le f a c to r s which m ight have in flu e n c e d t h e i r an sw ers, show no s e rio u s d is p ro p o rtio n s i n t h e i r c o m p o sitio n , and may be c o n sid e re d as b ro a d ly r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f a l l th e M+0 te a c h e r s , e x c e p t t h a t th e y took g ra d u a te work i n e d u c a tio n . T h e re fo re , i n any m easure t h a t th e view s w hich th ey e x p re ss d i f f e r s i g n i f ic a n t ly from th e view **R . H. E sp y , The R e lig io n o f C o lleg e T eachers (New Y ork: The A s s o c ia tio n P re s s , 19$1) , p . 126. of th e te a c h e rs as a w hole, th e re may he a re a so n a b le presu m p tio n t h a t th e s e d if f e r e n c e s are a t l e a s t p a r tly a t t r i b u t a b l e to the e f f e c t of t h e i r g ra d u ate stu d y in ed u catio n * W hile we m ust t r e a t th e v a r ia tio n s w ith c a u tio n , c e r t a i n b ro a d tre n d s a re c le a r • . ' The 160 te a c h e rs a re much more read y to d is c lo s e t h e i r r e li g i o u s c o n v ic tio n i n t h e i r te a c h in g th a n are the r e s t of th e te a c h e r s . C o rre sp o n d in g ly , th ey a re le s s f e a r f u l o f dogmatism a s a r e s u l t o f d i s c lo s in g o n e 's r e lig io u s views i n te a c h in g , and a re more convinced t h a t church membership i s n e c e ssa ry to th e C h r is tia n l i f e . They le a n s l i g h t l y tow ard th e o p tim is tic view o f man and th e c o m p a tib ility o f d iv in e r e v e la tio n w ith human re a s o n , though in n e ith e r case s i g n i f i c a n t l y . On c e r ta in p r a c t i c a l r e lig io u s q u e s tio n s , how ever, they show im p o rta n t d e v ia tio n s . A la r g e r p ro p o rtio n c o n sid e r i t a p a r t of t h e i r r e s p o n s i b il ity to a s s i s t s tu d e n ts in th e developm ent of th e i r s p i r i t u a l l i f e , and by n e a rly th e same m argin th ey fa v o r th e type of stu d e n t r e lig i o u s o rg a n iz a tio n w hich has commended i t s e l f h i s t o r i c a l l y as th e p a tte r n f o r v o lu n ta ry s tu d e n t C h r is tia n e x p re s s io n in th e c h u rc h -re la te d c o lle g e s , namely a f r e e a s s o c ia tio n o f s tu d e n ts u n ite d by a common C h r is tia n purpose and program b u t in c lu d in g in te r e s te d n o n -C h ris tia n s tu d e n ts i n i t s m e m b e r s h i p . The group w hich had tak en g ra d u a te c o u rse s i n e d u c a tio n a ls o ex p ressed a s tro n g e r f e e lin g f o r f a c u lty r e lig io u s fe llo w s h ip s and, though th ey b e lie v e d th a t the c o lle g e a d m in is tr a tio n should re q u ire i t s f a c u lty members to be C h r is tia n i n c h a r a c te r and c o n v ic tio n , they r e je c te d (lik e th e e n t i r e group) t e s t s o f church membership o r d o c tr in a l c o n fo rm ity . 112I b i d . . p p . 127-28 306 Espy siammed up a s follow s* In sum, th e r e f o r e , th e r e s u l t s o f th is e x te n s iv e a n a ly s is of the e f f e c t of g ra d u ate work in e d u c a tio n would he g r a tif y in g to th o se who are concerned fo r th e in t e g r a t io n of r e li g io n i n h ig h e r e d u c a tio n , and e q u a lly to th o se whose r e li g io u s i n t e r e s t may he meager h u t who a re concerned f o r good te a c h in g . The ev id en ce does n o t d is c lo s e a s g r e a t a s u p e r io r ity r e s u l ti n g from g ra d u a te e d u c a tio n as one m ight d e s i r e , h u t i t c l e a r l y in d ic a te s t h a t th e e f f e c t o f such tr a in in g i s in th e d ir e c tio n o f g r e a te r a le r tn e s s to th e is s u e s w ith which both r e l i g i o n and e d u c a tio n presum ably a re concerned.**-^ Much o f th is i s , of c o u rs e , s p e c u la tiv e * Among o th e r re a so n s f o r c o n sid e rin g the c o n c lu sio n s s p e c u la tiv e i s th e l i k e l y p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t , d e s p ite what th e a u th o r s a id , th o se who took g ra d u ate co u rse s in e d u c a tio n m ight have had p e rso n a l q u a l i t i e s and e x p e rie n c e s n o t d isc o v e ra b le by th e q u e s tio n n a ire m ethod. Lamke, in 1951 ** s tu d ie d t h e s is req u irem en ts f o r th e m aster fs d eg ree in e d u c a tio n in many u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o lle g e s* He founds 1 . In 29 p e r c e n t o f th e c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s i t i e s , a perm anent paper was alw ays r e q u ir e d . 2 . In 5 p er c e n t of the c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s , a perm anent paper was never r e q u ir e d . 1 1 3ibid.. p. m . l l U - ^ Tom A rth u r Lamke, " M a s te r's R esearch i n Educa t i o n , 1 1 The High S chool J o u rn a l. 3 37-^3* November, 1951 *# 3* In 66 p e r c e n t o f the c o lle g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s , a perm anent pap er was o p tio n a l. *+. In la rg e u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o lle g e s , only one grad u ate o u t of tw enty w rote a ' perm anent p a p e r, w h ile i n th e sm a lle r i n s t i t u t i o n s , one ou t of s ix d id s o . V I I I . CONCLUSIONS THAI CA N B E M A D E O N THE BASIS OF PERTINENT RESEARCH D u p lic a tio n and o v e rla p p in g in sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n was v e r if ie d by re s e a rc h fin d in g s and acknow ledgm ent. Surveys of te a c h e r o p in io n re g a rd in g sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n were in c o n c lu s iv e and c o n tr a d ic to r y . The charge by l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s , u s u a lly s ta te d w ith g r e a t c e r t a i n t y , t h a t te a c h e rs were g r e a tly d i s s a t i s f i e d w ith c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n was n o t s u b s ta n tia te d . N e ith e r was th e re ev id en ce o f g r e a t s a t i s f a c t i o n . Surveys o f o p in io n s from c o lle g e o f f i c i a l s and s u p e rin te n d e n ts o f sch o o ls showed a fa v o ra b le r e a c tio n to sc h o o ls of e d u c a tio n . The w eight o f ev id en ce showed th a t p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs were i n f e r i o r in in te llig e n c e and achievem ent to th e average c o lle g e s tu d e n t. However, i f e d u c a tio n m ajo rs in u n i v e r s i t i e s and l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s had been c o n sid e re d s e p a ra te ly from p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs in g e n e ra l, th e n th e ev id en ce on th i s p o in t would be f a r from c o n c lu s iv e . A lso, i f p h y s ic a l e d u c a tio n m ajors had been tr e a te d s e p a r a te ly , e d u c a tio n (g e n e ra l) m ajors p ro b ab ly would have made a re s p e c ta b le showing i n compara tiv e t e s ts * F i n a l ly , th e i n f e r i o r i t y of p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs was n o t c l e a r enough to w arran t any sta te m e n t th a t s tu d e n ts in sc h o o ls o f e d u c a tio n were " d u ll and s tu p id .* * A c tu a lly , th e s tu d ie s review ed h e re showed th a t p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs were f a i r l y c lo s e to th e average c o lle g e s tu d e n t. P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n appeared to give h ig h e r g rad es th an d id p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s . The m ost com prehensive s in g le re s e a rc h stu d y en co u n tered in ” re se a rc h in g th e r e s e a r c h e r s ” showed t h a t more tr a in in g i n s u b je c t m a tte r d id n o t r e s u l t i n a more e f f e c tiv e te a c h e r . The same could be s a id o f p ro fe s s io n a l c o u rs e s . N othing was found to d isp ro v e P ro fe s s o r B esto r fs s ta te m e n t: The ir o n - c la d req u irem en t o f p e d a g o g ic a l c o u rse work as a p r e r e q u is ite f o r te a c h in g i s j u s t i f i e d by no e x p e rim e n ta l evid en ce w h atso e v er, and by no s t a t i s t i c a l ev id en ce th a t i s s i g n i f i c a n t , te n d in g to show th a t i t c o n tr ib u te s to th e making of a good t e a c h e r .11? 11?A rthur B e s to r, The R e s to ra tio n o f le a r n in g (New Y ork: A lfre d A. K nopf, 195F7, p* 16 5 . As a g ro u p , the l i b e r a l a r t s p r o fe s s o rs s a id t h a t ed u ca- . i t io n a l r e s e a r c h , in c lu d in g s tu d ie s d e a lin g w ith th e p r e d ic tio n o f te a c h in g su c c e s s, were in v a l i d . Then, some j of th e se p ro fe s s o rs c o n sid e re d th e s tu d ie s v a lid and u sed I th e s e s tu d ie s to su p p o rt t h e i r c o n v ic tio n s . More th a n l i k e l y re s e a rc h in th e f i e l d o f p r e d ic tio n o f te a c h in g su c c e ss has n o t y e t reach ed th e p la c e where i t has much I j v a lu e . I t th e re fo re should n o t have e n te re d th e c o n tro - i v e rsy as i t d id —in a h ig h ly s e le c tiv e m anner. I f th e j i fin d in g s of re s e a rc h in th e p r e d ic tio n of te a c h in g su ec ess a re c o n sid e re d v a l i d , th e n th e c o n c lu sio n must be: THERE IS N O PROOF THAT COURSES IN EDUCATION O R COURSES IN SUBJECT iM A TTER CONTRIBUTE TO EFFECTIVE TEACHING. T his i s n o t to j 1 say t h a t knowledge o f s u b je c t m a tte r , or knowledge o f how i to te a c h --b o th of which can be a c q u ire d o u ts id e c o lle g e h a l l s - - a r e n o t im p o rta n t to e f f e c t iv e te a c h in g . R egarding co u rse work, B esto r was c o r r e c t. How e v e r, so was C a rte r when he w rote t h a t 1 1 . . • no one h as y e t shown t h a t w hat i s le a rn e d i n co n n e ctio n w ith the stu d y of e d u c a tio n i s any l e s s v a lu a b le th an w hat i s le a rn e d i n th e more t r a d i t i o n a l s u b j e c t s T h e l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s , how ever, have alw ays p la c e d the burden o f p ro o f i n t h i s m a tte r on th e e d u c a tio n is ts . 1-^ C a rte r, o n . c i t . , p . 2b? _ . . . _ 1 The charge t h a t th e w o rst te a c h in g was done i n j sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n was not su p p o rted by e v id e n c e . j P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n appeared to be a t l e a s t a v e ra g e , 1 i and p o s s ib ly above a v e ra g e , in te a c h in g a b i l i t y . ! 1 The consequences of tr a in in g in sch o o ls o f educa- I t i o n d id n o t show th e developm ent o f an a n t i - r e l i g i o u s a t t i t u d e . The re v e rs e was found to be tr u e by one i r e s e a r c h e r . I i The m aster fs t h e s i s h as been g r e a tly de-em phasized j r e c e n tly i n sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . j P erhaps th re e o r fo u r o f th e many ch arg es le v e le d i a g a in s t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n were c l e a r l y s u b s ta n tia te d I t iby re s e a rc h f in d in g s . Only a few of th e ch a rg es co u ld i f \ jbe den ied by re s e a rc h f in d in g s . T his p a r t i a l l y r e s u lte d i 'from th e f a c t t h a t th e c o n tro v e rsy was la r g e ly a c o n tro v e r s y of p h ilo so p h ie s and a c o n tro v e rsy o f o p in io n s . How- i e v e r, th e c r itic is m s were u s u a lly n o t made i n th e tfp h ilo so p h ic a l rt m anner. The c r itic is m s w ere most o f te n ex p ressed as ”f a c t s . ” A c tu a lly , as has been shown, th e re a re v ery few ” f a c t s ” in v o lv ed i n t h i s argum ent as y e t . ; i a CHAPTER IX SU M M A R Y A N D CONCLUSIONS I . RESUM E OF TH E STUDY i i i The problem . T his study in v e s tig a te d th e o p p o sitio n j i to sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n by p ro fe s s o rs o f th e l i b e r a l a r t s . The prim ary approach to u n d e rsta n d in g t h i s o p p o s itio n was i * l to tr a c e i t s h i s t o r i c a l developm ent. In a d d itio n , an j i l l u s t r a t i v e q u e s tio n n a ire -s u rv e y was u n d e rta k e n and a i rev iew was made of p e r tin e n t re s e a r c h . < > 1 T his stu d y was in ten d ed to g iv e p e rs p e c tiv e to th e i c o n tro v e rsy betw een p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s and j 1 * p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n and to remove some of th e c o n tro - . v e rsy from th e realm of h e a rs a y . S p e c if ic a lly t h i s stu d y ! lattem pted to answer th e s e q u e s tio n s ; I ! 1 . What were th e c r itic is m s which l i b e r a l a r t s t f a c u l t i e s have made in re g a rd to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n and j i : ;the te a c h e r - tr a in in g program ? i 2 . What p a tte r n s of i n t e r e s t and i n t e n s i ty emerged when th e c r itic is m s were g a th e re d and viewed as a to ta lity ? ; I 3 . When d id a p a r t i c u l a r c r it i c i s m ap p ear f o r th e f i r s t tim e? *+. What were th e b e l ie f s o f the p ro fe s s o rs o f th e : l i b e r a l a r t s on c e r t a i n s e le c te d is s u e s p re se n te d in a ; 312 5 . What was th e n a tu re of th e evidence (as presented, in th e l i t e r a t u r e ) on w hich th e o p p o s itio n was based? 6 . Which of th e ch arg es have been p u t to an j i i o b je c tiv e t e s t ? j 11 School o f e d u c a tio n was co n stru e d to mean any sc h o o l, d e p a rtm e n t, d iv is io n o r c o lle g e o f e d u c a tio n of a u n iv e r s ity o r a l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e . In t h i s s tu d y , th e l i t e r a t u r e was analy zed when th e j fo llo w in g s i t u a t io n s o c c u rre d : 1 1 . When sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n , p er s e , were ia tta c k e d ♦ ! i i i • 2 . When sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n were m entioned as t Ic o n tr o llin g som ething c o n sid ered to be u n d e s ira b le . For i iin s ta n c e , L ife A djustm ent E d u c a tio n was n o t c o n sid ered i i u n le s s t h i s movement was lin k e d to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . j 3 . When w ell-know n p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n were j c r i t i c i z e d and th e w r ite r assumed t h a t th e p a r ti c u l a r i |p r o f e s s o r was re p r e s e n ta tiv e of sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n or an jim p o rta n t segm ent th e r e o f . I *+ . When g e n e ra l term s were used w hich, by th e c o n te x t, in c lu d e d p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n . Such term s ! i |in c lu d e d : e d u c a tio n a l t h e o r i s t s , p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a to rs , e d u c a tio n is ts , e d u c a tio n a lis ts , pedagogues, and schoolm en. The stu d y was c o n fin e d to th e U nited S ta te s and embraced th e p e rio d from (ro u g h ly ) 185© to 1955. 313 C ritic is m s o f, and by, f a c u l ti e s of s in g le -p u rp o s e te a c h e r - tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s were excluded from t h i s s tu d y ; Review of r e la te d l i t e r a t u r e . A lthough much has been w r itte n ab o u t th e c o n tro v e rs y , th e approach in o th e r ! i w ritin g s s tr e s s e d th e contem porary sc e n e . V ir tu a lly no l i t e r a t u r e o f a com prehensive n a tu re which showed th e h i s t o r i c a l developm ent o f th e c o n tro v e rsy was fo u n d . The | p re s e n t s tu d y , th e r e f o r e , was th o u g h t to be u n iq u e . | • I A lthough th e re appeared to be much h i s t o r i c a l m a te r ia l re g a rd in g the developm ent o f norm al sc h o o ls and , ! te a c h e rs c o lle g e s , l i t t l e h as been w r itte n about th e h i s t o r i c a l developm ent of sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . ■ ! j i As to a t t i t u d e s tu d ie s s im ila r to th e one p re se n te d j ! jin t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n , two r e la te d ones were e n c o u n te re d . ;Both o f th e se s tu d ie s were made over tw e n ty -fiv e y e a rs a g o .j i i Background and e a r ly o p p o s itio n — th ro u g h 1900. The j i fo llo w in g c o n c lu sio n s r e le v a n t to t h i s p e rio d were r e a c h e d .; i 1 . The stu d y of e d u c a tio n in c o lle g e s and u n iv e r - ; I ; s i t i e s was in s tig a te d by fo rc e s w ith o u t, r a th e r th a n from w ith in , th e se i n s t i t u t i o n s . i 7 ; 1 I 2. The a t t i t u d e of l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s d elay ed I i i i < th e in tr o d u c tio n o f co u rse s fo r te a c h e rs i n c o lle g e s and i u n i v e r s i t i e s . j I 3 . L ib e ra l a r t s f a c u l t i e s is o la te d them selves from 1 I ■ 1 th e p r o f e s s io n a l_a s p e c ts of t ea ch er edu c a t i on._______________ b. C ritic is m s of d ep artm en ts of pedagogies were made when th e s e d ep artm en ts were e s ta b lis h e d and b e fo re th ey had an o p p o rtu n ity to f u n c tio n , 5 . Most of th e argum ents of th e p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c s used in t h i s p e rio d a re s t i l l used to d a y , Among th e c r itic is m s of t h i s p e rio d (and t h e i r d a te s o f ap p earan ce) were th e follow ing:*^ 1 , C ourses f o r te a c h e rs brought women and o th e rs of a lle g e d ly n o n -u n iv e rs ity c a lib e r in to th e u n iv e r s it y , (186?) 2 , There was no such s u b je c t as e d u c a tio n ; i . e . , no c o n te n t, no re s e a rc h te c h n iq u e s . (1872) 3 , C ourses in e d u c a tio n s u b s titu te d th e how o f edu c a tio n f o r th e wfaat of e d u c a tio n ; i . e . , m ethodology was over-em phasized a t th e expense of s u b je c t-m a tte r t r a i n i n g . (1879) b m Teaching c o u ld n o t be ta u g h t by fo rm al i n s t r u c t i o n . T eachers were b o rn , n o t made; i n t u i t i o n , fix e d by h e r e d ity , determ ined w hether or n o t a te a c h e r would be s u c c e s s f u l. (1879) 5. Knowledge of s u b je c t m a tte r was s u f f i c ie n t p re p a ra tio n f o r te a c h in g . (1887) " I A No s p e c ia l e f f o r t was made to fin d th e e a r l i e s t occT^reijce of a p a r t i c u l a r c r i t i c i s m . 6 . C ourses in e d u c a tio n had a n e g a tiv e v a lu e — they tended to h in d e r the te a c h e r* (1889) 7 . P ed ag o g ical l i t e r a t u r e was of no v a lu e ; i n f a c t i t was harm ful* (1889) 8* P ed ag o g ical co u rse s were a n t i t h e t i c a l to a l i b e r a l e d u c a tio n . P ed ag o g ical c o u rse s d ilu te d th e s t u d e n t’s i n t e r e s t i n knowledge* (1889) 9* There was no sc ie n c e of e d u c a tio n . (1891) 10. T eachers were sh allo w in s c h o la r s h ip . (1900) 1 1 . P ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n f o r te a c h e rs was u t i l i t a r i a n . (1900) 12 . P ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a tio n f o r te a c h e rs f o s te r e d " s o f t" pedagogy. (1900) 13. P e d a g o g ic a l-p sy c h o lo g ic a l language was u sed by e d u c a tio n is ts to f o o l p a r e n ts . (1900) The c r y s t a l l i z a t i o n o f c r i t i c i s m —1901 th ro u g h 1933. The o p p o s itio n p e r s is te d and new elem en ts were b rought i n . From th e language used by th e c r i t i c s , th e c o n te n t of th e c r i t i c i s m s , and th e freq u en cy of th e c r i t i c i s m s , i t was a p p a re n t t h a t th e in te n s i ty of th e c o n f l i c t had n o t dim in is h e d —in f a c t , th e re v e rs e appeared to be t r u e . By th e end of th e p e rio d , th e c r itic is m s had made t h e i r way in to th e pages o f th e American A ss o c ia tio n o f U n iv e rsity P ro fe s so rs B u l le tin . The o p p o s itio n was c r y s t a ll i z e d w ith th e fo rm a tio n of Committee Q of th e American A s s o c ia tio n of U n iv e rs ity P ro fe s s o r s . The charge t h a t p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n had gained to o much p o l i t i c a l power in th e u n iv e r s ity and in th e e d u c a tio n a l w orld a t la rg e was g iv en th e m ost a t t e n t i o n by p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c s d u rin g t h i s p e rio d . P r a c ti c a ll y a l l of th e c r itic is m s made i n t h i s p e rio d have p e r s is te d to th e p re s e n t tim e . Among the c r itic is m s en co u n tered d u rin g t h i s p erio d (and t h e i r d a te s of ap p earan ce) were th e s e : 1 . P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n were ,ff a d i s t s . f 1 The whole te a c h e r - tr a in in g program was a H f a d . 1 1 (1908) 2 . The s c i e n t i f i c a s p e c ts of e d u c a tio n , i f th e re were any, were n o t y e t e s ta b lis h e d and p ro fe s s o rs o f educa ti o n a c te d as though th e f i e l d of e d u c a tio n had ach iev ed e x a c t know ledge. (1910) 3 . High sch o o l g ra d u a te s were i n f e r i o r in s c h o la r sh ip to p re v io u s g ra d u a te s and th e r e s p o n s i b il ity f o r t h i s la y w ith th e sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . (1910) b. P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n were ig n o ra n t and m eddlesom e. (1910) 5 . Almost a l l n o n -e d u c a tio n p ro fe s s o rs were opposed to co u rses in e d u c a tio n and p ro fe s s o rs of ed u c atio n (1910) 6 . Methods co u rse s were m ech an ical; th ey fo s te r e d re g im e n ta tio n in te a c h in g and d en ied th e p e r s o n a lity o f th e te a c h e r . (1910) 7 . Methods o f te a c h in g co u ld be o b tain ed by o n e ’s e x p e rien ce as a s tu d e n t. (1910) 8 . S chools of e d u c a tio n low ered adm ission sta n d a rd s to accom odate i n f e r i o r s tu d e n ts . (1910) 9 . E d u c a tio n a l l i t e r a t u r e was ’ ’b an a l and in a n e .” (1911) 10. The w o rst te a c h in g in u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o lle g e s was done in sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . (1911) 11. S chools of e d u c a tio n were ’’Ph.D . M ills ” ; th ey had a ls o ru in e d th e v alu e of th e A.B. deg ree as a symbol o f i n t e l l e c t u a l ach iev em en t. (1911) 12. C ourses in e d u c a tio n were ’ ’snap” c o u rs e s . (1911) 13. S chools of e d u c a tio n were a n t i - r e l i g i o u s , (191*0 l*f. Too many ho u rs in e d u c a tio n were re q u ire d f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n . (1916) 15 . S chools o f e d u c a tio n f o s te r e d th e ” s u p e r io r ity o f th e m ediocre” ; th e y d id n o t b e lie v e th a t th e v ery b r ig h t e s t c o lle g e s tu d e n ts would become good h ig h -sc h o o l te a c h e rs . ( 1916) 16 . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n had to o much p o l i t i c a l power in the u n iv e r s ity and in th e e d u c a tio n a l w orld a t l a r g e . (1916) 17. E d u c a tio n a l th e o ry propounded in sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n s tr e s s e d in d iv id u a l i n t e r e s t s to o much. (1916) 18. P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n s t i f l e d c r i t i c i s m and su p p ressed in fo rm a tio n . (1916) 19* S tu d e n ts opposed co u rse s in e d u c a tio n . (1916) 20 . S chools o f e d u c a tio n fo s te r e d th e use of su p e rflu o u s term in o lo g y . (191?) 21 . P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n had no a p p r e c ia tio n of th e p a s t . (1917) 22 . E d u c a tio n is ts used human beings f o r e x p e r i m en tal p u rp o se s. (1917) 23* S t a t i s t i c s were badly handled in e d u c a tio n a l r e s e a rc h ; e d u c a tio n a l re s e a rc h was to o q u a n tita tiv e in n a tu r e . (1917) 2*f. E d u c a tio n is ts f a ls e ly assumed t h a t th ey were " e x p e rts " in s u b je c t-m a tte r a r e a s . (1917) 25* E d u c a tio n is ts ex a g g erated th e im portance o f t h e i r w ork. (1920) 2 6 . E d u c a tio n is ts "had s l a i n th e c l a s s i c s d e p a rtm e n t." (1929) 27. E d u c a tio n a l th e o ry and p r a c tic e were to o p ra g m a tic . (1933) 2 8 . There was a trem endous amount of o v erla p p in g and d u p lic a tio n in th e sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . (1933) 29 . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n had e s ta b lis h e d them se lv e s as s o le judges of what c o n s titu te d tr a in in g f o r te a c h e r s . (1933) The A .A .U .P. looks a t sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . A ru n n in g acco u n t of th e c o n tro v e rsy as seen in the pages of th e American A s so c ia tio n o f U n iv e rs ity P ro fe s s o rs B u lle tin was h ig h lig h te d by th e r e p o r t o f Committee Q—R equired C ourses in E d u c a tio n . The use o f im proper in fe re n c e s and im p lic a tio n s in th e r e p o r t d em o n strated a c le a r b ia s a g a in s t sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . In a d d itio n , th e r e p o r t was based to a la rg e e x te n t on f a u lt y s t a t i s t i c s . Two waves o f i n t e r e s t in th e c o n tro v e rsy and o p p o si t io n to sc h o o ls o f e d u c a tio n were found; one c e n te re d around 1933 and th e o th e r embraced th e p e rio d from 19*+9 to 195M-. The fo llo w in g somewhat new ch a rg es (w ith t h e i r d a te s o f ap p earance) were made: 1 . Some p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n were ftf a k e r s ” and ” s h y s t e r s .” (1928) 2 . S chools o f e d u c a tio n c o n tr o lle d s t a t e l e g i s l a tu r e s a t w i l l . (1929) 3♦ E d u c a tio n is ts had n o t proved by re s e a rc h th a t c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n le d to im proved te a c h in g . (1929) b . B e c a u se o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n l a w s , t h e b e s t s t u d e n t s c o u l d n o t t e a c h i n t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s . ( 1929) 5 . C ourses in e d u c a tio n were p o o rly o rg a n iz e d . (1932) 6. E d u c a t i o n i s t s made p r o p o s a l s w i t h o u t a d e q u a te i n v e s t i g a t i o n ( t h i s w as i n r e f e r e n c e t o p r o p o s a l s t h a t c o l l e g e i n s t r u c t o r s s h o u ld t a k e e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s ) . ( 1932) 7 . The m o st u s e f u l p a r t s o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l p ro g ra m ( p a r t i c u l a r l y p r a c t i c e - t e a c h i n g ) w e re r e l e g a t e d t o a s e c o n d a r y r o l e i n t h e t e a c h e r - t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m . ( 1933) 8. E d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s d e a l t w i t h t r i v i a an d w e re d e l i b e r a t e l y “ p a d d e d . “ ( 1933) 9 . T h e re was t o o m uch p r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n an d p r a c t i c a l l y no s u b j e c t m a t t e r i n t h e t r a i n i n g o f a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . ( 1933) 1 0 . P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n p ro m o te d u n s a t i s f a c t o r y p o l i c i e s i n r e g a r d t o c o m m itte e w o rk . ( 1933) 1 1 . C e r t i f i c a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s w e re m e c h a n i c a l and t h i s s i t u a t i o n w as m a i n t a i n e d an d s t r e n g t h e n e d by p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n . ( 19^ 9) 1 2 . E d u c a t i o n i s t s b e l i e v e d t h a t i t was s a f e r t o h a v e t e a c h e r s p o o r l y t r a i n e d t o t e a c h i n tw o o r t h r e e f i e l d s 3 2 1 ! ( th a n to have them p ro p e rly tr a in e d in one f i e l d , (19^9) 13. E d u c a tio n is ts d is re g a rd e d th e r u le s o f form al lo g ic . (1950) 1H-. E d u c a tio n is ts d e lib e r a te ly d isco u ra g ed i n t e l l i gence 5 “There a re c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n t h a t te a c h the te a c h e r how to te a c h th e B rig h t C h ild to be as dumb as everybody e l s e . 1 1 ( 1950) 15. I t was " ■ v i r t u a l l y im p o ssib le 1 1 f o r te a c h e rs to tak e m aster *s d eg rees w ith a n o n -e d u c a tio n m ajo r. ( 1951) R ecent c r i t i c i s m —19^*+ th ro u g h 1955. At th e b eg in n in g of th e p e rio d , c r it i c i s m appeared to be a t a r a th e r h ig h i n t e n s i t y . D uring th e war y e a rs and th e » im m ediate p o st-w a r y e a rs , o p p o s itio n appeared to ta p e r o ff c o n s id e ra b ly . In th e p e rio d 1950-1955? o p p o sitio n to sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n by l i b e r a l a r t s f a c u l t i e s appeared to be a t a new h ig h . T his s ta te m e n t, based on q u o ta tio n s from th o se in v o lv ed in th e c o n tro v e rs y , was in harmony w ith the q u a n tita tiv e a n a ly s is p re se n te d in C hapter V o f th e p re s e n t s tu d y . P re s id e n t F o e r s te r , P ro fe s s o r B e sto r, and Dean H ild e brand emerged as le a d in g c r i t i c s d u rin g th i s p e rio d . P re s id e n ts Conant and W riston emerged as le a d in g m e d ia to rs . T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e r s ity , emerged as the c h ie f i n s t i t u t i o n a l t a r g e t . The U n iv e rs ity of I l l i n o i s emerged as th e 1 1 h o t s p o t1 * o f th e c o n tro v e rs y . Among the somewhat new c r itic is m s (and t h e i r d a te s of ap p earance) were th e s e : 1 . S chools o f e d u c a tio n attem p ted to do to o much. (193*0 2 . P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n e lim in a te d th e c o n trib u t i o n o f classroom te a c h e rs to th e developm ent of a sc ie n c e ! and p h ilo so p h y o f e d u c a tio n . (193*0 3* P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n promoted c o lle c tiv is m and s o c ia lis m . (193*0 b m P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n p ro te c te d th e s ta tu s quo. (193*0 5 . The e d u c a tio n a l system prom oted by p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n d id n o t produce th in k in g in d iv id u a ls . (1935) 6 . P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n were fo llo w e rs o f K arl Marx. (1938) 7 . Schools o f e d u c a tio n d id n o t weed out i n f e r i o r s tu d e n ts ; f a il u r e s in o th e r d ep artm en ts d r i f t e d in to schools o f e d u c a tio n . (1938) 8 . P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n fo s te re d a n t i - I n t e l le c tu a lis m . (19*+1) 9 . T eachers had to ta k e e d u c a tio n c o u rse s fo r p ro m o tio n . (19**-1) 323 10. S u b je c t-m a tte r p ro fe s s o rs were n o t re p re s e n te d on com m ittees d e a lin g w ith e d u c a tio n a l p o l i c i e s . (19^1) 1 1 . E d u c a t i o n i s t s m is u s e d w o r d s . (19**2) 1 2 . S t a n d a r d s o f s c h o l a r s h i p w e re lo w e re d i n th e summer s e s s i o n . ( 19^ 2) 13* P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n a c te d l ik e F a s c is ts in I em p h asizin g th e t!a v e r a g e 1 1 in d iv id u a l and s t r e s s i n g u n i fo r m ity . (19**3) l*f. P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n encouraged th e movement to l e t s tu d e n ts 1 whims determ ine th e cu rricu lu m and m ethodology of th e c o lle g e and th e p u b lic s c h o o ls . (19*+6) 15* P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n m is in te r p re te d th e p h ilo so p h y of John Dewey. (19*+6) 16. P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n prom oted th e use of o b je c tiv e t e s t s to th e p o in t t h a t p ro p e r w ritin g s k i l l s were l o s t . (19^7) 17* P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n used f a ls e b a s ic assu m p tio n s; f o r exam ple, th e y b e lie v e d t h a t e d u c a tio n in th e p a s t was concerned only w ith knowledge fo r th e sake of know ledge. (1950) 18. P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n were re s p o n s ib le f o r low ering th e s ta n d a rd s in th e p u b lic sch o o ls by encouraging au to m atic p ro m o tio n s. (1950) 19* E d u c a tio n is ts m is-re p re s e n te d th e p o s itio n of l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs in re g a rd to p h ilo s o p h ic a l is s u e s in ed u catio n * (1953) 2 0 . E d u c a tio n is ts d id n o t c o n s u lt s u b je c t-m a tte r p ro fe s s o rs in re g a rd to e d u c a tio n a l problem s; p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n had no r i g h t to d eterm in e th e c u rric u lu m f o r th e p u b lic schools* (1953) 2 1 . E d u c a tio n is ts fa v o re d e lim in a tin g a l l th e s c h o la r ly d is c ip lin e s from the h ig h -sc h o o l c u rric u lu m . (1953) 2 2 . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n rew arded th o se s tu d e n ts who fo llo w ed the e d u c a tio n is t 1 1 p a rty l i n e . ” (1953) 2 3 . S chools o f e d u c a tio n had v i r t u a l l y e lim in a te d th e th e s is as a re q u irem en t f o r th e m aster *s d e g re e . (195^) 2 * 4 * . P ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n encouraged ”d e lu sio n s o f com petency” i n te a c h e r s —p a r ti c u l a r ly in the f i e l d s of psychology and m en tal h e a lth . (195*+) 25* E d u c a tio n is ts had pre-em pted the f i e l d of fo u n d a tio n g r a n ts . (1955) 26. Many p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n had t r i e d to te a c h i n the h ig h sch o o l and had f a i l e d . (1955) 2?• The same stu d y was made ”over and o v er” by su c c e ssiv e c a n d id a te s fo r the m aster *s degree in e d u c a tio n . (1955) 325 The p re s e n t b e l ie f s of l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s . A q u e s tio n n a ire was s e n t to l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs and p ro fe s s o r s of e d u c a tio n to a s c e r ta in t h e i r view s on c e r t a i n s e le c te d is s u e s . The q u e s tio n n a ire was in te n d e d sim ply as an i l l u s t r a t i v e s tu d y . A p i l o t study (mimeographed) p o lle d 75 l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs and ach iev ed a resp o n se of 61 p e r c e n t. In th e f i n a l s tu d y , q u e s tio n n a ire s presum ably reach ed 471 * p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s and 6b p e r c e n t resp o n d ed . Q u e stio n n a ire s presum ably reach ed 76 p ro fe s s o rs of educa t io n and 80 p e r c e n t resp o n d ed . In a d d itio n , a " h is to r y 1 * sample was s e n t o u t w hich d if f e r e d from th e o th e r q u e s tio n n a ire s by having a r e tu r n ad d re ss of a p ro fe s s o r o f h is to r y r a th e r th a n a p ro fe s s o r o f e d u c a tio n . Q u estio n n a ir e s In th e " h is to ry " sample presum ably reach ed 79 p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s and 66 p er c e n t resp o n d ed . In g e n e ra l, i t was found th a t the p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s have the backing o f t h e i r c o lle a g u e s and th e re i s g r e a t " d is ta n c e " (when c o n sid e re d as t o t a l gro u p s) betw een p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s and p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n . However, th e re was a r a th e r s u b s ta n tia l m in o rity o f e d u c a tio n p ro fe s s o rs who ag reed w ith the dom inant p o s itio n o f th e p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s . A v ery sm all m in o rity o f l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs agreed w ith th e d o m in a n t p o s i t i o n o f p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n . The r e t u r n a d d r e s s 1 1 S c h o o l o f E d u c a t i o n 1 1 a p p a r e n t l y in d u c e d no b i a s i n t h e n u m b e r, o r k i n d , o f r e s p o n s e s i n c o m p a r is o n t o t h e r e t u r n a d d r e s s 1 1 D e p a rtm e n t o f H i s t o r y . 1 1 Ho n o t e w o r t h y d i f f e r e n c e s w e re d i s c e r n i b l e i n r e g i o n a l , i n s t i t u t i o n a l , o r t e a e h i n g - e x p e r i e n e e g r o u p i n g s . Among a c a d e m ic g r o u p s , h u m a n i t i e s a n d l a n g u a g e s show ed t h e g r e a t e s t o p p o s i t i o n t o s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . C o n s i d e r e d a s a t o t a l g r o u p , l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s c a n be c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s b e in g h o s t i l e t o s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . A b r i e f r e v i e w o f p e r t i n e n t r e s e a r c h . D u p l i c a t i o n an d o v e r l a p p i n g i n s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n was v e r i f i e d by r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s and a c k n o w le d g e m e n t. S u r v e y s o f t e a c h e r o p i n i o n r e g a r d i n g s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n w e re i n c o n c l u s i v e a n d c o n t r a d i c t o r y . The c h a r g e by l i b e r a l a r t s p r o f e s s o r s , u s u a l l y s t a t e d w i t h g r e a t c e r t a i n t y , t h a t t e a c h e r s w e re g r e a t l y d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h c o u r s e s i n e d u c a t i o n w as n o t s u b s t a n t i a t e d . N e i t h e r was e v id e n c e o f g r e a t s a t i s f a c t i o n f o u n d . \1 S u r v e y s o f o p i n i o n s fro m s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s o f s c h o o l s an d c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s show ed a f a v o r a b l e r e a c t i o n t o y s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . 327 The w e ig h t o f e v i d e n c e show ed t h a t p r o s p e c t i v e i ; t e a c h e r s w ere i n f e r i o r i n i n t e l l i g e n c e and a c h ie v e m e n t t o t h e a v e r a g e c o l l e g e s t u d e n t * T h is i n f e r i o r i t y w as n o t c l e a r e n o u g h t o w a r r a n t an y s t a t e m e n t t h a t s t u d e n t s i n s e h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n w e re M u l l a n d s t u p i d * 1 1 A c t u a l l y , t h e s t u d i e s show ed t h a t p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r s w e re f a i r l y c l o s e t o t h e a v e r a g e c o l l e g e s t u d e n t i n a c h ie v e m e n t an d i n t e l l i g e n c e . I f p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n m a jo r s a r e d i s c o u n t e d , s t u d e n t s i n s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n a p p e a r e d t o a p p r o a c h e v e n m ore c l o s e l y th e a v e r a g e c o l l e g e s t u d e n t . The m o st c o m p r e h e n s iv e and p e r t i n e n t s t u d y e n c o u n t e r e d f a i l e d t o f i n d t h a t m ore t r a i n i n g i n s u b j e c t m a t t e r r e s u l t e d i n a m ore e f f e c t i v e t e a c h e r * No p r o o f w as fo u n d t h a t c o u r s e s i n e d u c a t i o n o r c o u r s e s i n s u b j e c t m a t t e r c o n t r i b u t e d t o e f f e c t i v e t e a c h i n g . The c h a r g e t h a t t h e w o r s t t e a c h i n g was done i n s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n was n o t s u p p o r t e d by e v i d e n c e . P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n a p p e a r e d t o be a t l e a s t a v e r a g e , and p o s s i b l y a b o v e a v e r a g e , i n t e a c h i n g a b i l i t y . The c o n s e q u e n c e o f t r a i n i n g i n s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n d i d n o t show t h e d e v e lo p m e n t o f a n a n t i - r e l i g i o u s a t t i t u d e . The r e v e r s e w as fo u n d t o be t r u e by one r e s e a r c h e r . The m a s t e r ’s t h e s i s h a s b e e n g r e a t l y d e - e m p h a s iz e d r e c e n t l y i n s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . 328 There appeared to be v ery few tlf a c t s , H r e le v a n t to th e c o n tro v e rs y , which have b een e s ta b lis h e d by e m p iric a l e v id e n c e . » I I . CONCLUSIONS C onclusions concerning th e h y p o th e se s. The fo llo w in g hyp o th eses were s u b s ta n tia te d w ith th e l i m i t a tio n s e x p re sse d in C hapter I : 1 . The o p p o s itio n to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n by p ro f e s s o r s of th e l i b e r a l a r t s has b een p re s e n t m o re -o r-le ss c o n tin u o u sly s in c e th e in c e p tio n of sc h o o ls o f e d u c a tio n . 3* The c r itic is m s have in c re a se d in amount and i n t e n s i ty i n r e c e n t y e a rs . *f. The m a jo rity of th e c r itic is m s co u ld n o t be sub s t a n t ia t e d by o b je c tiv e d a ta . T h at i s , e s s e n t i a l l y t h is i s a c o n tro v e rsy of p h ilosophy and of o p in io n . 5 . At the time of w r itin g , p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s , by and la r g e , were h o s t i le to sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . The fo llo w in g h y p o th e sis was n o t v e r if ie d : 2 . The c r i t i c s , by and la r g e , have fa v o red p r a c tic e s u s u a lly a s s o c ia te d w ith nt r a d i t i o n a l ” e d u c a tio n . I t was planned to e s t a b l i s h a d e f in i t i o n f o r M t r a d i tio n a l" e d u c a tio n i n o rd e r to t e s t t h i s h y p o th e s is . T his was n o t done becau se th e elem en t presupposed f o r te s tin g t h i s h y p o th e s is —a re a so n a b le d eg ree of p h ilo s o p h ic a l un an im ity among th e c r i t i c s —could n o t be e s ta b lis h e d . The o p p o s i t i o n was e s s e n t i a l l y n e g a t i v e i n n a t u r e * T h u s , w h at th e p r o f e s s o r - e r i t i c s d i d n o t b e l i e v e was e s t a b l i s h e d b u t w h a t t h e y d i d b e l i e v e c o u ld be e s t a b l i s h e d , i n g e n e r a l , o n ly by i m p l i c a t i o n . T h ere w a s , i t i s t r u e , a s t r o n g i m p l i c a t i o n t h a t t h e p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s w e re p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y a k i n 2 t o t h e E s s e n t i a l i s t M ovem ent a s d e f i n e d by Gwyrm. H ow ever, t h i s k i n s h i p , i f i t d o e s e x i s t , c a n be e s t a b l i s h e d fro m t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y o n l y by i m p l i c a t i o n . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e m a n i f e s t a t i o n s o f t h i s a ssu m e d l i b e r a l a r t s p h i l o s o p h y w e re s o m e tim e s a t v a r i a n c e . T h u s , f o r e x a m p le , p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n w ere a c c u s e d o f m a i n t a i n i n g t h e s t a t u s quo and p r o m o tin g s o c i a l i s m an d com m unism , o f h a v in g a n i n f e r i o r i t y c o m p le x anfl a s u p e r i o r i t y c o m p le x , o f b e in g t o o p r a c t i c a l a n d n o t b e in g p r a c t i c a l e n o u g h ( ,fp r a c t i c a l 1 1 m e a n in g c a p a b l e o f b e in g t u r n e d t o u s e ) , o f t e a c h i n g a s u b j e c t w h ic h h a d no v a l u e o r a n e g a t i v e v a lu e an d t e a c h i n g a s u b j e c t w h ic h h a d some p o s i t i v e v a l u e , and o f h a v in g t o o m uch c o n t r o l o v e r t e a c h e r s and b e in g u n s u c c e s s f u l i n g e t t i n g t e a c h e r s t o f o l l o w t h e i r l e a d e r s h i p . S u p p le m e n ta r y c o n c lu s i o n s . 1. P r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s d i d n o t a p p e a r t o a c c e p t t h e t h e s i s t h a t t h e c u r r i c u l u m o f t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s i s s h a p e d 2J . M in o r Gwynn, C u r r i c u l u m P r i n c i p l e s M S o c i a l T re n d s ( r e v i s e d e d i t i o n ; Hew Y o rk s The M a c m illa n C o . , 19?0), pp. la r g e ly by s o c ia l and economic fo rc e s* For exam ple, when p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c s blamed p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n f o r 1 1 s la y in g ” th e c la s s i c s d ep artm en t, th ey a p p a re n tly b e lie v e d th a t s o c ie ty , m o tiv ated by th e 1 1 c a sh ” o u tlo o k , d id n o t have a hand in d e-em phasizing the c la s s ic s * L ik ew ise, blame fo r th e in tr o d u c tio n o f d r iv e r e d u c a tio n i n th e p u b lic sch o o ls was p laced on p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n w ith o u t re g a rd to any demands in t h is re s p e c t from s o c ie ty . The n e g le c t to con s id e r th e im pact of s o c ie ty on the p u b lic sch o o l cu rricu lu m may be due to a b e l i e f of th e p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s t h a t p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n , i n f a c t , can o p erate i n a manner r e l a t i v e l y f r e e from s o c ia l f o r c e s . More l i k e l y , how ever, th e f a i l u r e of sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n to ta k e an a c tiv e p a r t i n com bating “p ro fe s s o rs of motor v e h ic le o p e ra tio n ” and so f o r th has le d p r o f e s s o r - c r it i c s to b e lie v e th a t sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n have been re s p o n s ib le fo r th e in tr o d u c tio n of such s u b je c ts as d r iv e r e d u c a tio n (and th e de-em phasis of t r a d i t i o n a l s u b je c ts ) i n the p u b lic s c h o o ls . 2 . Many p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s , in commenting on the emphases of th e te a c h e r - tr a in in g program , have n o t ad e - 1 q u a te ly co n sid ered th e p o s itio n ( s itu a tio n ) of th e p u b lic - sch o o l te a c h e r . T eachers a p p a re n tly want (o r as th e c r i t i c s sa y , th ey are fo rc e d ) to ta k e a d d itio n a l c o lle g e c o u rse s. S chools o f e d u c a tio n o f f e r co u rse s when te a c h e rs a re ab le t o a t t e n d ; t h a t i s , o n S a t u r d a y m o r n in g s , a f t e r s c h o o l h o u r s , a n d d u r i n g t h e sum m er. S u b j e c t - m a t t e r c o u r s e s h a v e b e e n , u n t i l r e c e n t l y , r a r e l y o f f e r e d a t t h e s e t i m e s . I n r e g a r d t o t h e c h a r g e t h a t t e a c h e r s do n o t t a k e g r a d u a t e s u b j e e t - m a t t e r c o u r s e s , t h e c r i t i c s a p p a r e n t l y d o n o t c o n s i d e r t h a t p r o m o ti o n i n t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s m eans p r o m o ti o n o u t o f t h e c l a s s r o o m . L ik e p r a c t i c a l l y a l l o f c o n te m p o r a r y s o c i e t y , t e a c h e r s d e s i r e p r o m o ti o n . The m a in a v e n u e s o f p r o m o ti o n a r e i n t h e a r e a s o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , c o u n s e l i n g , h e a l t h , c u r r i c u l u m d e v e lo p m e n t, and a t t e n d a n c e ( r e g i s t r a r ) . U n t i l th e c o n c e p t o f t h e m a s t e r t e a c h e r , a l m o s t c o o r d i n a t e w i t h t h e p r i n c i p a l i n s a l a r y and p r e s t i g e , becom es a r e a l i t y , c r i t i c s who b lam e p r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n b e c a u s e t e a c h e r s do n o t t a k e g r a d u a t e c o u r s e s i n s u b j e c t - m a t t e r f i e l d s a r e n o t b e in g r e a l i s t i c . F u r th e r m o r e t e a c h e r s r e f l e c t t h e m a t e r i a l i s m o f o u r s o c i e t y when th e y p u r s u e c o u r s e s i n e d u c a t i o n i n th e g r a d u a t e s c h o o l t o th e e x c l u s i o n o f s u b j e c t - m a t t e r c o u r s e s . I n many c a s e s , d u e t o c e r t i f i c a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s , t e a c h e r s h a v e a l r e a d y c o m p le te d some o f t h e w o rk f o r th e m a s t e r fs d e g r e e i n e d u c a t i o n when t h e y becom e c e r t i f i c a t e d . They a r e u n l i k e l y , t h e r e f o r e , t o th r o w away t h e s e c r e d i t s and b e g i n w o rk f o r a m a s t e r * s d e g r e e i n a s u b j e c t - m a t t e r f i e l d . A lik e f a i l u r e to c o n sid e r th e te a c h e r fs s i t u a t i o n can be seen by exam ining th e charge th a t o b je c tiv e t e s t s have been overused* R eg ard less of th e d e s ire of a te a c h e r to give e s s a y -ty p e t e s t s , he w i l l be d e te rre d from such a c tio n by the f a c t t h a t h is s tu d e n t-lo a d i s so severe* T eachers a re cau g h t i n the ra p id pace of modern l i f e lik e th e r e s t o f s o c ie ty * The p u b lic -s e h o o l te a c h e r who fa c e s two hundred s tu d e n ts d a ily i s l i t e r a l l y unable to a ffo rd the tim e and e f f o r t to c o r r e c t a w eekly e ssa y -ty p e exam ination* 3* Bean H aggerty^ was e o r r e c t in c a llin g t h i s e n tir e c o n tro v e rsy f,d is g r a c e f u l1 * —on both sid es* Very l i t t l e of a c o n s tru c tiv e n a tu re has r e s u lte d from th e c o n tro v e rs y . Both p a r tie s used v itu p e r a tio n and the l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs appeared to be more g u ilty of th is p r a c tic e th a n p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n . N e ith e r s id e has flprovedtf i t s ca se b u t b o th a c te d as though t h e ir p o s itio n su p p o rted by co n c lu siv e e m p iric a l e v id e n c e . Many p ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r ts c le a r ly v io la te d p r o f e s s io n a l e t h i c s . On many o c c a s io n s, both s id e s appeared to p u t w ords, w hich were not r e p r e s e n ta tiv e or a c c u ra te , H in E . H ag g erty , 1 1 The Improvement of C ollege In s t r u c t io n Through E d u c a tio n a l R e s e a rc h ,ft The E d u c a tio n a l R eco rd * 1 2 :lf3> Ja n u a ry , 1931* t h e m o u th s 1 1 o f t h e i r o p p o n e n ts . I n g e n e r a l , th e d i s p a s s i o n a t e a p p r o a c h , c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f s c h o l a r s , g a v e way t o p a r t i a l i t y and l a c k o f o b j e c t i v i t y . P r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s , i n g e n e r a l , f a i l e d t o d o cu m en t c h a r g e s w hen s u c h d o c u m e n ta t io n s h o u l d , and c o u l d , h a v e b e e n p r o v i d e d . B o th s i d e s f a i l e d t o r e l a t e t h e i r s t a t e m e n t s t o a l e v e l , o r a s u b j e c t f i e l d , o f e d u c a t i o n . T h is i n c r e a s e d t h e l a c k o f c o m m u n ic a tio n b e tw e e n th e g r o u p s w h ic h w as c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f th e c o n t r o v e r s y . One b e n e f i t e m e rg ed fro m th e c o n t r o v e r s y : a c a d e m i c i a n s a r e b e i n g f o r c e d t o t a k e a g r e a t e r i n t e r e s t i n t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n . b m I n a d d i t i o n t o w h a t h a s b e e n s t a t e d i n t h e c r i t i c i s m s , t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s l i k e l y c o n t r i b u t e d t o th e t e n s i o n s b e tw e e n t h e tw o g r o u p s : a . V e s te d i n t e r e s t s o f b o th g r o u p s . b . L ack o f a g r e e m e n t among e d u c a t i o n i s t s »r e g a r d i n g t h e p r o p e r t r a i n i n g f o r p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r s . c . The im m e d ia te p r e s s u r e o n e a c h g r o u p . P r o f e s s o r s o f e d u c a t i o n f e e l m ore s t r o n g l y t h e im m e d ia te dem ands f o r " f u n c t i o n i n g 1 1 t e a c h e r s ; a c a d e m ic i a n s f e e l th e h i g h - s c h o o l p r o d u c t " i n th e raw " and h a v e t o t e a c h w h a t t h e y b e l i e v e o t h e r s h a v e f a i l e d t o t e a c h . 33^ d . An a p p a r e n t t r a n s i t i o n a l p e r i o d i n -which t h e c l a s s r o o m t e a c h i n g s i t u a t i o n l a g s b e h in d e d u c a t i o n a l t h e o r y . T h a t i s , much o f th e t h e o r y , h o w e v e r s o u n d , p ro p o u n d e d i n s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n f a i l s i t s own p r a g m a t i c t e s t i n o v e rc ro w d e d p u b l i c s c h o o l s . I f th e l a g b e tw e e n t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e c o u ld be c l o s e d , much c r i t i c i s m w o u ld p r o b a b l y n o t e x i s t . B e s t o r , f o r e x a m p le , was q u i t e p l e a s e d w i t h h i s own " p r o g r e s s i v e " e d u c a t i o n w h ic h was c a r r i e d o u t i n a s c h o o l w i t h s m a l l c l a s s e s , e x c e l l e n t t e a c h e r s , and f i n e f a c i l i t i e s . e . T r a d i t i o n an d c o n s e r v a t i s m . f . M i s u n d e r s t a n d in g and i g n o r a n c e o f t h e w ork o f s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n . g . The i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e s t u d y o f e d u c a t i o n i n th e U n i t e d S t a t e s by " a c a d e m ic o u t s i d e r s . " h . The f o r c e d i n t r u s i o n o f e d u c a t i o n , by i t s v e r y n a t u r e , i n t o s u b j e c t - m a t t e r f i e l d s . T h is h a s a p a r t i c u l a r l y bad e f f e c t w hen e x t r e m i s t s (o r " c r a c k p o t s " a s th e c r i t i c s m ig h t c a l l th e m ) a r e c o n s i d e r e d . E x t r e m i s t s i n n o n - e d u c a t i o n f i e l d s a r e u s u a l l y c o n f i n e d t o t h e i r own f i e l d s and may e s c a p e n o t i c e o u t s i d e o f t h e i r f i e l d s w h e re a s e x tre m is ts in e d u c a tio n come i n c o n ta c t w ith p ro fe s s o rs o u ts id e o f the f i e l d of e d u c a tio n . i . The narrow , s p e c ia liz e d tr a in in g of academ icians. They f e e l , as a r e s u l t , th e im portance o f depth in p re p a ra tio n f o r any c a llin g w hereas the p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n f e e l t h a t th e te a c h e rs have a unique need f o r b re a d th in t h e i r p re p a ra tio n fo r te a c h in g . I I I . RECOM M ENDATIONS 1. F u rth e r s tu d ie s o f: a . Prom ising p la n s f o r c o o p e ra tio n betw een educa t i o n i s t s and academ icians such as th e d u a l p ro fe s s o rs h ip p la n developed a t S yracuse U - U n iv e r s ity . b . The e d u c a tio n is ts 1 v iew p o in ts on th e c r itic is m s which l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs have made re g a rd ing sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n . c . The te a c h e r - tr a in in g program s in o th e r c o u n trie s w ith em phasis on th e r e la tio n s h ip betw een pedagogy and s u b je c t m a tte r. A F u n c tio n a l Program o f Teacher E d u c a tio n . C u rric u lum Committee of th e S chool of E d u catio n , S yracu se U n iv e rsi ty (W ashington: The Am erican C ouncil on E d u c a tio n , 19^1)> p p . 21- 2 2, 28- 3^ d . The e f f e c t s of d i f f e r e n t emphases in th e te a c h e r- tr a in in g program . Such s tu d ie s should fo llo w th e d e sig n of Whelan*s r e s e a rc h . 2 . I t would he w orthw hile to re-exam ine the p o s s i b i l i t y th a t the "ro a d 1 1 to p ro fe s s io n a lis m in e d u c a tio n is e s s e n t i a l l y u n lik e th e “ro a d ” to p ro fe s s io n a lis m in o th e r f i e l d s . 5 3 . E d u c a tio n is ts should c o n s titu te a m in o rity on com m ittees d e a lin g w ith e d u c a tio n a l p o lic ie s re g a rd in g te a c h e r e d u c a tio n . This should be done i f e d u c a tio n is ts i p la c e th e ea sin g o f te n s io n s betw een them selves and academ icians s u f f i c i e n tl y h ig h in a h ie ra rc h y of e d u c a tio n a l v a lu e s . Under th e s e c irc u m sta n c e s, p a r tic i p a ti o n and le a d e rs h ip by e d u c a tio n is ts w i l l have to be b e t t e r , and perhaps d if f e r e n t i n k in d , th an i t h as been i n th e p a s t . P ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n should a c tiv e ly encourage more s u b je c t-m a tte r study, by p ro s p e c tiv e te a c h e rs . 5. P ro fe s s o rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s should be more c o n s tru c tiv e in t h e i r c r itic is m o f sch o o ls o f e d u c a tio n i f th ey a re s e r io u s ly in te r e s te d in im proving te a c h e r e d u c a tio n . < ^For an e la b o r a tio n o f t h i s v iew p o in t see Ross L. F in n ey , 1 1 The P ro fe s s io n a l E d u catio n of E d u c a to rs—A b s tra c t,1 1 N .E.A . P ro ceed in g s of the 6? th Annual M eeting, 1929, pp. 2¥*HjOI * 337 6 . J o in t re s e a rc h (in v o lv in g p ro fe s s o rs of educa t i o n and p ro fe s s o rs of the l i b e r a l a r t s ) on e d u c a tio n a l m a tte rs should be encou rag ed . 7 . A ll- u n iv e r s ity c o u n c ils on e d u c a tio n should be encouraged and s tre n g th e n e d . 8 . P ro fe s s o rs of th e l i b e r a l a r t s should be giv en \ a more a c tiv e r o le i n th e te a c h e r - tr a in in g program . T his would ten d to le s s e n the c o n tro v e rsy and ease th e trem en dous load now c a r r ie d by p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n . 9* A ll d o c to ra l com m ittees f o r e d u c a tio n m ajors should in c lu d e a t l e a s t one p ro fe s s o r of th e l i b e r a l a r t s . 10. A ll p ro fe s s o rs of e d u c a tio n should g iv e s e rio u s th o u g h t to some of the charges made by p ro fe s s o rs o f th e l i b e r a l a r t s . A p p aren tly a s u b s ta n tia l m in o rity of p ro fe s s o rs o f e d u c a tio n agree to some e x te n t w ith the p r o f e s s o r - c r i t i c s . T his was e v id e n t from the re sp o n se s to th e q u e s tio n n a ire used in th i s s tu d y . As a b eg in n in g , s e rio u s th o u g h t should be given to th e fo llo w in g c h a rg e s: a . T hat c o u rse s in e d u c a tio n a re bad ly o rg a n iz e d . b . That th e re i s to o much " p r o f e s s io n a liz a tio n 1 1 in the tr a in in g o f a d m in is tr a to r s . c . T hat the l i t e r a t u r e , term in o lo g y , and re s e a rc h in e d u c a tio n needs g re a t im provem ent. d . T hat sch o o ls of e d u c a tio n a tte m p t to do to o much. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A. B O O K S A n g e ll, James B u r r i l l . The R em iniscences of James B u r r i l l A n g e ll. New Y ork: Longmans, Green and Company, 1912. 258 pp. A y d e lo tte , F ran k . B reaking th e Academic Lock S te p . New York: H arper and B ro th e rs , 1 9 ® . 1H 3 p p . B arzun, Ja c q u e s. Teacher in A m erica. Garden C ity , Mew Y ork: Doubleday and Company, 1951 * * . 280 pp. B e s to r, A rthur E . E d u c a tio n a l W astelan d s. U rbana: U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s P re s s , 1953* 226 pp. ______ . The R e s to ra tio n o f L e a rn in g . M ew York: A lfred A. Knopf, 1955. * + !? 9 PP. B l a i r , Anna Lou. Henry B arn a rd . M in n eap o lis: E d u c a tio n a l P u b lis h e rs , I n c ., 1938* 29*+ pp. Bond, Je sse A lb e r t. A c tiv itie s and E d u ca tio n of High School T eachers in C a lif o r n ia . Los A ngeles: S uttonhouse L td ., X937I 2> *3 pp. B u tts , R. Freem an. The C ollege C h arts I t s C o u rse. New York: M cGraw-Hill Book Company, 1939. pp. C halm ers, Gordon K e ith . The R epublic and the. P erso n . C hicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1952. 2S3 pp. C hase, Mary E lle n . A Goodly F e llo w sh ip . M ew York: The M acm illan Company, 19*+2. 305 PP* C o ale, W illis B ranson. The P ro fe s s io n a l Meeds o f T eachers of E n g lis h . New York: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1928. 85 PP. C o le, A rthur C. A Hundred Y ears of Mount H olyoke. New Haven: Y ale U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1 9 ^ 6 .^ 0 1 pp. C onant, James B ry a n t. E d u catio n in a D ivided W orld. Cambridge: H arvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 19h - o. 235 PP. C o p e , A l e x i s . H i s t o r y o f t h e O h io S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . V ol. I . E d ite d by Thomas C . M endenhall. Columbus: The Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1920. 58b pp. E a s te rb y , J . H. A H isto ry of the C ollege of C h a rle s to n . C h a rle sto n : T ru ste e s of th e C ollege of C h a rle s to n , 1935. 379 PP. E spy, R. H. The R e lig io n of C ollege T ea ch ers. New York: The A sso ciate d P re s s , 1 9 5 ll 216 pp. Evenden, E . S . and R. Freeman B u tts . Columbia U n iv e rsity C o operative Program f o r th e P re -S e rv ic e E d u ca tio n of T e a c h e rs. New York: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 19*+2. 120 pp. F i tz p a t r i c k , Edward A. The S c h o la rsh ip of T eachers i n S e c o n d a r y S c h o o l s . New Y o rk : The M a c m illa n C o ., 1927. 105 PP. F le x n e r, Abraham. U n iv e r s itie s —^American, E n g lis h . German. New York: Oxford U n iv e rs ity P re s s , 1 9 3 0 ~ 3 & 1 pp. F o e r s te r , Norman. The American S ta te U n iv e r s ity . C hapel H i l l : The U n iv e rsity of N orth C a ro lin a P re s s , 1937. 27? PP. . The F u tu re of th e L ib e ra l C o lle g e . New York: A ppleton-C entury Company, 1938. 91 PP. F r e n c h , J o h n C . A H i s t o r y o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y F o u n d e d by J o h n s H o p k in s . B a l t i m o r e : The J o h n s H o p k in s P r e s s , 19b6. *+92 pp. Gwynn, J . M inor. C urriculum P r in c ip le s and S o c ia l T rends. R evised e d itio n . New York: The M acm illan Company, 1950. 768 pp. H a ll-Q u e s t, A lfre d Lawrence. P ro fe s s lo n a l Ed u c a tio n in T eachers C o lle g e . New Y ork: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1925. 125 PP. H anus, P aul H. A dventuring in E d u c a tio n . Cam bridge: H arvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1937. 2*+3 PP. H o f s t a d t e r , R i c h a r d a n d C . D e W itt H a r d y . The D e v e lo p m e n t a n d S c o p e o f H ig h e r E d u c a t i o n i n t h e U n ite d S t a t e s . New Y ork: Columbia U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1952. ' 239 PP. H u b b e ll, Leigh G. The Development o f U n iv e rsity D ep art m ents of E d u c a tio n . W ashington* The C a th o lic U n iv e rs ity , 1924. 125 pp. H u tc h in s, R o b ert M aynard. E d u ca tio n and th e S o c ia l O rder. Los A ngeles: The Modern Forum, 1936. 32 p p . _______. The H igher L earning in A m erica. New Haven: Y ale U n iv e rsity P r e s s , 1936. 119 PP. __. No F rie n d ly V oice. C hicago: U n iv e rs ity of C hicago P re s s , 1936. 197 PP. H utson, P e rc iv a l W. The S c h o la rsh ip of T eachers i i | Secondary S c h o o ls. New Y ork: The M acm illan Company, 1927. 201 p p . J a m e s , Edmund J . C h a i r s o f P e d a g o g ic s i n Our U n i v e r s i t i e s . P h i l a d e l p h i a : The P h i l a d e l p h i a S o c i a l S c i e n c e A s s o c i a t i o n , 1887. * * 8 P P . Jam es, H enry. C h a rle s W illiam E l i o t . V ol. I . B oston: Houghton M iflin Company, 1930. 382 pp . Johnson, H enry. The Otl^er S ide o f Main S t r e e t . New York: Columbia U n iv e rsity P re s s , lW 3 . 263 PP. K ie ly , M arg a ret. Com parisons o f S tu d en ts o f T eachers C o lleg es and S tu d e n ts of L ib e ra l-A rts C o lle g e s . New Y ork: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e r s ity , 1931. l*+7 PP. K n ig h t, Edgar W., and C lif to n L. H a ll• R eadings in American E d u c a tio n a l H is to ry . New Y ork: A p p leto n - C e n tu ry -C ro fts , In c . , 1 9 5 1. 781 pp . K n ig h t, F re d e ric B u t te r f i e l d . Q u a litie s R e la te d to Success in T eaching. New Y ork: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1922. 67 PP. L earned, W illiam S ., and Ben D. Wood. The S tu d e n t and His Knowledge. New Y ork: The C arnegie F oundation f o r the Advancement o f T eaching, 1938. 392 p p . L i t t l e , C la re n d e lC o o k .c :ThdnAwakening?C o lle g e . New York: W. W. N orton and Company, 1930. 2o2 p p . Luekey, G. W . A. The P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g of Secondary T eachers i n the U nited S t a t e s . New Y ork: The M acm illan Company, 1903 . 391 p p . MeConn, Max. C o lleg e o r K in d e rg a rte n ? New Yorks The New R ep u b lic, I n c . , 1929. 275 PP. Meyer, Jac o b . Sm all C o lleg es and T eacher T ra in in g . B loom ington, I l l i n o i s : P ublic School P u b lish in g Company, 1928. 162 pp. Monroe, W alter S . T eaching-L earnlng Theory and Teacher E d u c a tio n . 1890 to 1950. Urbanas U n iv e rsity of I l l i n o i s P re s s , 1952. *+20 pp. N o rth ro p , F . S . C. The M eeting o f E a s t and W est. New York: The M acm illan Company, 19*+6. 509 pp. 0 'L e ary , Timothy F . An In q u iry In to the G eneral P u rp o ses. F u n c tio n s, and O rg a n iz a tio n of S e le c te d Schools of E d u c a tio n . W ashington: The C a th o lic U n iv e rs ity , 1941. ^ p p . P e ik , W . E . The P ro fe s s io n a l E d u ca tio n of High School T ea ch ers. M in n eap o lis: The U n iv e rs ity of M innesota P re s s , 1930* pp. P ie rs o n , George W ilson. Y ale C o lle g e . 1871-1921: V ol. I Y a le ? C o lleg e and U n iv e r s ity . 1871-19^7. New Haven: Y ale U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1952. 773 PP. P o lla r d , James E . The H isto ry of th e Ohio S ta te U n iv ersity . Columbus: Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1952. 402 pp. P ro s s e r, C h arles A. and C h arles R. A lle n . Have W e Kent the F a ith ? New Y ork: New Y ork-C entury Company, 1929. I*29 pp. R andolph, Edgar D unnington. The P ro fe s s io n a l T reatm ent o f S u b je c t M a tte r. B a ltim o re : Warwick and Y ork, 1924. 186 pp. R eed, Anna Y ., e t a l . The E f f e c tiv e and the I n e f f e c tiv e C ollege T ea ch er. New Y ork: The American Book Company, 1935. 332 PP. R u s s e ll, James E a r l. Founding T eachers C o lle g e . New Y ork: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e rs ity , 1937. 106 pp . 3**3 Ryan, W. C arson. M ental H e a lth Through E d u c a tio n . Hew i Yorks The Commonwealth Fund, 1938. 30*+ PP. i Showerman, G ran t. With th e P ro f e s s o r . Hew Y ork: Henry H o lt and Company, 1910. 360 pp. 1 S k illm a n , David B ish o p . The B iography of C o lle g e . V ol. I . E a sto n , P en n sy lv an ia: L a fa y e tte C o lle g e , 1932. *+01 p p . S tro h , M. M arg aret, Id a M. J e w e tt, and Vera M. B u tle r . I B e tte r S e le c tio n of B e tte r T e a c h e rs. W ashington: D e lta Kappa Gamma S o c ie ty , 19*+3. 110 pp. S tu a r t, Hugh. The T ra in in g of Modern F o re ig n Language T eachers far th e Secondary S chools in th e U nited S t a t e s . Hew Yorks T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U niver s i t y , 1927. I l l pp. S u tto n , W illiam S . Problem s in Modern E d u c a tio n . B oston: Sherm an, F rench and Company, 1913. 237 pp. Sw eet, W illiam W arren. In d ia n a Asbury - De Pauw U n iv er- , s i t y . New Y ork: Abingdon P r e s s , 1937. 29o p p . T a y lo r, W illiam S . The Development o f the P ro fe s s io n a l E d u catio n o f T eachers in P e n n sy lv a n ia . P h ila d e lp h ia : L ip p in c o tt and Company, 1 9 2 5 .2 9 3 PP. Van Doren, M ark. L ib e ra l E d u c a tio n . Hew Y ork: Henry H o lt and Company, 1943. 17$ p p . W aterhouse, F ra n c is A. Our E d u c a tio n R a c k e t. B oston: Meador P u b lish in g Company, 19*+1. 37o pp. W hitney, A llen S . H is to ry of th e P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g o f T eachers a t th e U n iv e rsity of M ichigan f o r th e F i r s t H a lf-C e n tu ry —1879 to 1929. Ann A rbor: George Wahr P u b lis h e rs , 1931. 202 p p . W illiam son, Obed J . P ro v is io n s f o r G eneral C ourses in th e P ro fe s s io n a l E d u ca tio n o f T ea ch ers. Hew Y ork: T eachers C o lle g e , Columbia U n iv e r s ity , 1936. 185 PP. W ills , E lb e r t V. The Growth of American H igher E d u c a tio n . P h ila d e lp h ia : D orrance and Company, 1 9 3 6 • 2 2 2 pp. j 3^+ Y eager, W illiam A llis o n . S ta te C e r t i f i c a t i o n as §, F a c to r in th e T ra in in g o f E lem entary T e a c h e rs -In -S e rv ic e . K utztow n, P en n sy lv an ia: Kutztown P u b lish in g Company, 1929, 329 PP. B. PUBLICATIONS OF TH E GOVERNM ENT, IEARNED SOCIETIES, i A N D O TH ER ORGANIZATIONS A m erican U n iv e r s itie s an d .C o lle g e s . S ix th e d i ti o n . W ashington: Am erican C ouncil on E d u c a tio n , 1952. 110? pp. A rm strong, E a r l W., jsst a l . The C ollege and Teacher E d u c a tio n . W ashington: American C ouncil on E d u c a tio n , I'M -. 311 p p . Brown, Elm er E . 1 1 The Study of E d u ca tio n in the U n iv ersity ,” N.E.A. Jo u rn a l of P roceedings and A d d resses—1899. p p . 828- 3*+ . C am pbell, W . W. 1 1 Annual R eport of the P re s id e n t of the U n iv e rs ity , 192*+-1925 and 1925-1926,” U n iv e rsity of C a lifo rn ia B u l le ti n . T hird S e r ie s , Volume 20, No. 7 , Ja n u a ry , 1927* olp PP* . ” Annual R eport of the P re s id e n t of th e U n iv e rs ity , 1928-1929 and I 929- I 93O ,H U n iv e rs ity o f C a lifo rn ia B u l le tin . T hird S e r ie s , Volume 2 4 , No. 7 , 1931* 88*+ pp. ”C ollege and U n iv e rs ity T ea ch in g .” P ro g ress R eport of Committee U of the A .A .U .P ., A .A .U .P. B u l l e t i n . 19*533*^8, December, 1932. C onclusions and Reeommendations of th e Commission. Commission o f th e S o c ia l S tu d ie s of th e American H is to r ic a l A s s o c ia tio n . New Y ork: C harle s S c rib n e r *s and S ons, 193*** 168 pp. D av is, C. 0 . ” The T ra in in g , E x p e rie n c e , S a l a r ie s , and E d u c a tio n a l Judgments of 2*+,363 of th e High School T eachers in N orth C e n tra l A cc red ited S c h o o ls ,” P ro ceed in g s of th e Tw enty-Seventh Annual M eeting of th e N orth C e n tra l A sso c ia tio n o f C o lleg es and Secondary S ch o o ls, P a r t I , M arch, 1922, p p . 2*+-6l. A 3 ^ 5 The E d u catio n of Secondary School T ea ch ers* J o in t Committee on Study of C u rric u la of th e S o u th ern A sso c ia tio n of C o lleg es and Secondary S c h o o ls, Doak i S . C am pbell, d i r e c t o r . N a s h v ille : George Peabody C o lle g e , 1 9 3 6. 205 pp. ! E l l i o t , Edward e . , e t a l . “The E d u catio n and T ra in in g o f Secondary T e a c h e rs,1 1 P a rt I o f th e F o u rth Yearbook of ■ th e N a tio n a l S o c ie ty f o r th e S c i e n t i f i c Study of E d u c a tio n , 1905'. 117 pp. Evenden, Edward S ., j^t a l . “Teacher P erso n n el in th e U nited S t a t e s , 1 * V ol. I I of the N a tio n a l Survey of the E d u catio n of T each ers, U. S . O ffice of E d u ca tio n B u lle tin 1233.* * 0 . 10. 258 pp. F in n ey , Ross L. “The P ro fe s s io n a l E d u catio n o f Educa t o r s — A b strac t,* 1 N.E.A. P roceedings of th e 67th Annual Mee t i n g , 1929 * p p . 2 W -^0 . F is k , 1 . F . “ The Im portance o f P edag o g ical T ra in in g fo r C ollege P ro fe sso rs,* 1 N.E.A. Jo u rn a l o f P roceedings and A ddresses—1891, pp. 701-68. it F u n c tio n a l Program o f Teacher E d u c a tio n . C urriculum Committee of th e School of E d u c a tio n , S yracuse U n iv e rs ity . W ashingtons The American C o u n cil on E d u c a tio n , 19^1. 259 PP« G eneral E d u catio n in a F ree S o c ie ty . H arvard U n iv e rsity C om m ittee. Cambridge: H arvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 19^5. 267 PP. Gordy, J . P . “R ise and Growth of th e N orm al-School Idea in th e U nited S t a t e s , “ U. S . B ureau of E d u ca tio n C irc u la r of In fo rm a tio n * No. 8, 1891. 1^5 PP. G ra n t, G. M. “Some o f Our Mistakes,** N.E.A. J o u rn a l of P roceedings and A ddresses —1901* pp. 118-2^. H a ll, G. S ta n le y . “C h airs of Pedagogy in ©ur H igher I n s t i t u t i o n s of L e a rn in g ,” U nited S ta te s B ureau of E du catio n C irc u la r o f In fo rm a tio n No. 2—1882 bein g the P roceeding of th e Departm ent of S u p erin ten d en ce o f th e N a tio n a l E d u c a tio n a l A s s o c ia tio n . W ashington: Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1882, pp. 3 5-M+. 3^6 H i l l , A lb e rt B oss. 1 1 Should C h airs of Pedagogy A ttached to C ollege D epartm ents be Developed in to P ro fe s s io n a l C o lleg es fo r th e T rain in g of T each ers, C o -o rd in ate w ith th o se o f Law, M edicine, and E n g in e e rin g , or Should They Be A b o lish e d ,” N.E.A* Jo u rn a l of P roceedings and A ddresses—1905. p p . 512-1*?. H ollow ay, F. G. Remarks on “Teacher E d u c a tio n ,” Educa tio n a l C onference of th e A sso c ia tio n of American C o lle g e s . New York: C o n so lid a te d R ep o rtin g Company, 1938, pp. 109- 1 2. The Improvement of Teacher E d u c a tio n . F in a l R eport of th e Commission on T eacher E d u ca tio n , K arl W . B igelow , d i r e c to r . W ashingtons The American C ouncil on Educa t io n , 19^6. 283 pp. Lund, F . Edward. 1 1 P edant v s . Pedagog: The Cold W ar,” Im proving S tan d ard s fo r th e T eaching P ro fe s s io n . W ashington: N .C .T .E .P .S .-N .E .A ., 1953. Pp. 2?~33. McNeely, John H. “C ollege S tu d en t M o r ta lity ,” U nited S ta te s O ffic e o f E d u catio n B u lle tin 1937. 112 pp. “ P re lim in a ry R ep o rt of th e Committee on E d u c a tio n a l S tan d ard s fo r High School C h em istry .” Committee o f th e American Chem ical S o c ie ty , Frank B. Wade, c h a ir man. Jo u rn a l of Chem ical E d u c a tio n . 3 :1 1 7 8 -8 1 . O ctober, 19251 ---------- “P re p a ra tio n of H igh-S chool T eachers o f E n g lis h .” R eport of a Committee of the N a tio n a l C ouncil of T eachers of E n g lish , The E n g lish J o u rn a l. *f:323~32, Jan u a ry , 1915. “ The P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g of C ollege T e a c h e rs .1 1 R eport p rep ared by M. E. H aggerty, The N orth C e n tra l A sso c ia tio n Q u a r te rly . 2 :1 0 8 -2 3 , Ju n e, 1927. “R eport of the Committee on C o lleg e and U n iv e rsity Teach i n g .” W illiam B. Munro, chairm an, A .A.U .P. B u lle tin . Y ol. 19* S p e c ia l S e c tio n . 122 pp. “R eport of the Committee on th e Teaching of P h y sics in Secondary S c h o o ls .” K. L ark -H o ro v itz, chairm an, American J o u rn a l of P h y s ic s . 1 0 :6 0 -6 1 , F eb ru a ry , 19^2. 3^7 ffR ep o rt of th e Committee [[[A ssociation of American U niver s itie s ! ) on T ra in in g o f G raduate S tu d en ts f o r C ollege T ea ch in g .1 1 R eport p rep ared by Fernandus Payne, A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . 19:127-l*0, F eb ru ary , 1933* “R ep o rt of th e P en n sy lv an ia Committee f o r the Prom otion of S cience in Secondary E d u c a tio n .“ M. H. T ry tte n , chairm an, S c ie n c e . 96:185*36, August 21, 19*+2. “R ep o rt on th e T ra in in g of T eachers of M ath em atics.1 1 Commission of th e M athem atical A sso c ia tio n of Am erica, American M athem atical M onthly, **2:263-77, May, 1935. “R equired C ourses in E d u c a tio n .“ Committee Q of th e A .A .U .P ., A .A .U .P. B u l l e t i n . 19:173*200, M arch, 1933. R obinson, F re d e ric k P . “Some Problem s in Teacher T r a in in g ,1 1 P roceedings o f th e N in e te e n th Annual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of Urban U n iv e r s itie s , T enth R e p o rt, 1932, PP. 1 3 ^ 5 . Rugg, E a rle U ., ert a l . “T eacher E d u ca tio n C u r r ic u la ,1 1 Volume I I I of th e N a tio n a l Survey of the E d u catio n of T each ers, U. S . O ffice of E d u c a tio n B u lle tin 1933. No. 10, 5**7 PP. R u s s e ll, W illiam F . “The Truce th a t F a il e d .“ Improving S tan d ard s f o r th e T eaching P ro fe s s io n . W ashington: N .C .f.E .P .S .-N .E .A ., 1953. Pp. 21- 26. “Scope and C h a ra c te r o f P edag o g ical Work i n U n i v e r s i t i e s .1 1 R eport o f th e Committee on P edag o g ics, C h arles De Garmo, chairm an, N.E.A. Jo u rn a l of P roceedings and A d d resses— 1892, pp. 772*77. S e e le y , L ev i. “P edagogical T ra in in g in C o lleg es Where There I s No C hair of Pedagogy,” N.E.A. Jo u rn a l of P roceedings and A ddresses—1890. pp. 673*77. S ta n sb u ry , P aul W. “Teacher O pinion of C e rta in Phases o f th e G raduate Work f o r th e M aster*s D egree, “ P ro ceedings o f th e Tw enty-Fourth Annual M eeting o f th e A ss o c ia tio n of Urban U n iv e r s itie s , 1937, pp. 16-2 3 . S t i n n e t t , T. M * “The Backward Look, The Forward L ook,“ Im proving S tan d ard s fo r th e Teaching P ro fe s s io n . Wash- in g to n s H .C .T .E .P .S .- hTe .A ., 1 9 5 3 . Pp. 5 -2 1 . A Summary Q f S t a t i s t i c s on S e le c tiv e S e rv ic e C ollege ““ Q u a lif ic a tio n T e st of May 26. 1951; June 1 6 f 1951; June ^ 0 . 1951: Ju ly 12, 1951. E d u c a tio n a l T estin g S e rv ic e . P rin c e to n : The E d u c a tio n a l T e stin g S e rv ic e , 1952. 71 PP. 1 1 The T ra in in g of E n g lish T e a c h e rs.” R ep o rt of th e Committee of the New England A sso c ia tio n o f T eachers o f E n g lis h , E d u c a tio n . 3*** *+73-90, A p ril, 191**. The T ra in in g o f Secondary School T each ers—E s p e c ia lly w ith R eference to E n g lis h . R eport of a J o in t Committee o f th e F a c u lty o f H arvard C ollege and of th e G raduate School o f E d u ca tio n . Cam bridge: H arvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 19^2. 173 PP. Van H ise , C h arles R. "The T rain in g of T eachers f o r th e Secondary S c h o o ls," N a tio n a l A sso c ia tio n o f S ta te U n iv e r s itie s , T ra n sa c tio n s and P ro c e e d in g s. No. 6 , 1908, p p . 16-^3. W illia m s, S . G. "Value to T eachers of th e H is to ry of E d u c a tio n ," N .E.A . Jo u rn a l of P roceedings and A d d resses-« ? l8 8 9 . pp. 223-31. W o lfle, D ael. America fs R esources of S p e c ia liz e d T a le n t— The R eport of th e Commission on Human R esources and Advanced T ra in in g . New York: H arper and B ro th e rs , 1 9 ^ . 322 pp. C. PERIODICAL LITERATURE A lden, Douglas W. "A Franco-A m erican H eresy ," School and S o c ie ty . **2:509-11, O ctober 12, 1935. " A r tic le s on th e C la s s ic s in Journals o f E d u c a tio n ," The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l, 35*185-92, December, 1939. A u lt, J . W . " S e le c tio n as a F acto r in T each er-E d u catio n ," School and S o c ie ty . 52:309-12, O ctober 5 , 19*K). B ag ley , W . C. L e tte r to th e e d i t o r , E d u c a tio n a l Adm inis t r a t i o n and S u p e rv is io n . 20:351-55, May, 193**. B ag ley , W illiam C. " P ro fe s s o rs of E d u catio n and T heir Academic C o lle a g u e s ,1 1 The M athem atics T each er, 23s27H38, May, 1930. ! B e a ll, P aul R. "The S tra n g le h o ld T ig h te n s ,1 * A .A .U .P. B u lle tin . 3 5*67*+~77, W in ter, 19**9. B e lc h e r, G. L. "E v a lu a tio n of P ro fe s s io n a l C ourses f o r T e x a s,1 1 Texas O utlook. 2l+:L i-8-H-9, O ctober, 19*+0. B enner, Thomas E l i o t . "T e ach er-T rain in g and th e L ib e ra l C o lle g e ," S chool and S o c ie ty . 35*577-82, A p ril 30, 1932. B e n n e tt, L. J . "The Departm ent of E d ucation in the L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g e ," A .A .U .P. B u lle tin . 15*^53-57, O ctober, 1929* B e s t o r , A r t h u r . "How S h o u ld A m e r ic a 's T e a c h e r s be E d u c a t e d ," T e a c h e r s C o l le g e R e c o r d . 56:1 6 -1 9 , Oc tobe r , 195ft*. ______ . " L ib e ra l E d u catio n and a L ib e ra l N a tio n ," The American S c h o la r. 21:139-*+9, S p rin g , 1952. . " 'L i f e -A d ju s tm e n t* E d u c a t i o n : A C r i t i q u e , " A .A .U .P . B u l l e t i n . 39**+13-i* l, A utum n, 1952. B e tts , George H. "C ollege S tu d e n ts ’ R eactio n to E d u c a tio n C o u rses," School and So c ie ty . 25*^9**— 96, A p ril 23, 1927* Blum, Lawrence P h ilip . "A C om parative Study of S tu d en ts P re p a rin g fo r Five S e le c te d P ro fe s sio n s In c lu d in g T each in g ," Jb u rn a l o f E xperim en tal E d u c a tio n , 1 6 :3 1 -6 5 , S eptem ber, 19^7* Bohannan, C. D. "Improvement of C ollege I n s tr u c tio n ," The P hi D elta Kappan. 1 0 :161-73, A p ril, 1928. B o lto n , F re d e ric k . "The O rg a n iz a tio n of th e D epartm ent of E d u catio n in R e la tio n to th e O ther D epartm ents in C o lleg es and U n iv e r s itie s ," Jo u rn a l of Pedagogy. 19*137-76, December, 1906—M arch, 1907* _ _ _ • "O verlapping of C ourses in E d u c a tio n ," E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 1 ^:610-23, December, 1928; Bond, Je sse A lb e rt. “C o n trib u tio n o f G eneral F a c to rs to E ff e c tiv e Teaching in Secondary S c h o o ls.” E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 3 * * *^79-87, December, lg W T . B randenburg, G. C ., and 0 . C. T rim ble. “What th e P u b lic School A d m in istra to r Thinks o f P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g in E d u c a tio n ,” School and S o c ie ty . *4-0:850-56, December 22, 1931 *. Broom, H. E . 1 1 A Note on P re d ic tin g Teaching S u c c e s s,1 1 E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 18:64— 67, Jan u a ry , 1932. B ush, D ouglas. “E d u ca tio n b u t n o t E d u c a tio n a l!sm ,” The Kev R e p o rte r. 7s 1 -2 , Autumn, 194-2. B u sw ell, G. T. “E d u c a tio n a l R esearch and S t a t i s t i c s , 1 1 S chool and S o c ie ty . 258730-33, June 18, 1927. Cahoon, G. P . and M innette MacKay. “ A Follow -up Study of th e Teacher -T ra in in g Program a t th e U n iv e rsity of C a l if o r n i a ,” U n iv e rsity High School J o u rn a l. 13:126- 4-2, Ju n e, 1934*. C a irn s , S te w a rt S c o tt. “M athem atics and th e E d u c a tio n a l O ctopus,” The S c ie n t i f i c M onthly. 76:231-4-0, A p ril, 1953. C a irn s , W. D. “A C onference of th e O ffic e rs and Committee Members of th e N a tio n a l C ouncil of T eachers of Mathe m atics and th e M athem atical A sso c ia tio n o f A m erica,” American M athem atical M onthly. 4-1:137-39, M arch, 1934*. Capen, Samuel P . “C o n n ecticu t S ta te C o lle g e , The S ta te C o lle g e , and H igher E d u c a tio n ,” A.A.U.P. B u l le t i n . 16:309-13, A p r il, 1930. C arm ich ael, P e te r A. “Are T eachers C o lleg es Needed?” School and S o c ie ty . 50:4*38-44-, Septem ber 30, 1939. C a r te r , T. M. “C ritic is m of R ecent C ritic is m of Teacher T ra in in g ,” School and S o c ie ty . 4-9*244— 4-8, F ebruary 25, 1939. Cham bers, W ill G ran t. “The P ro fe s s io n a l School v s . The C ollege in th e Teaching o f Secondary T e a c h e rs ,” S chool and S o c ie ty . 4*: 64-7-58, O ctober 28, 1916. 351 C lapp, H arold I*. "The S tra n g le h o ld on E d u c a tio n ,1 1 A.A.U.P* B u lle tin . 3 5 :3 3 5 -5 8 , Summer, 1959. . 1 1 The S tra n g le h o ld R e v is ite d ," A.A.U .P. B u l le tin . 50:291-307, Summer, 1955. i C la rk e , G. M. "The Ford F o u ndation—A rkansas E xperim ent," Jo u rn a l of T eacher E d u c a tio n . 3 :2 6 0 -6 5 , December, 1952. C lem ent, E velyn A. f,The Antagonism A gainst th e D epartm ents of E d u c a tio n ,” S chool and S o c ie ty . 5 6 :6 5 9 -6 2 , November 2 0 , 1937* i . 1 1 P ro fe s s io n a l Teacher E d u catio n i n L ib e ra l A rts C o lleg es in C a li f o r n i a ,” E d u c a tio n . 53:519-26, March, 1938. G onant, James B ry a n t. ”A Truce Among E d u c a to rs ,” T eachers C ollege R ecord. 5 6 :1 5 7 -6 3 , December, 1955. C orey, Stephen M. "The P re s e n t S ta te of Igno ran ce About F a c to rs E ffe c tin g Teacher S u c c e s s,” E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and Su p e r v is io n . 18:5 8 1 -9 0 , O ctober, 1932. ~ : Cox, P h ilip W . L. "Should T eachers Be C e r tif ie d on C re d its Earned or as a R e s u lt of E xam inations?” New York S ta te E d u ca tio n , 26:31-33* O ctober, 1938. Dawson, George E . "The P ro fe s s io n a l T rain in g o f T eachers in C ollege D epartm ents o f E d u c a tio n ,” School Review. 16:171-81, M arch, 1908. De V oto, B ern ard . "F arew ell to Pedagogy," H arper *s M agazine. 156:182-90, Ja n u a ry , 1928. "Do S u p e rio r C ollege S tu d e n ts P rep are f o r P u b lie -S ch o o l T ea ch in g ,” S chool and S o c ie ty . 55:298, O ctober 11, 1951. D ouglass, H arl R. "C u rre n t C ritic is m of T eacher Educa ti o n ," The E d u c a tio n a l Forum. 19:355-53* M arch, 1955* D oyle, Henry G ra tta n . "A New S te re o ty p e ? " S chool and S o c ie ty . 55:295-96, March 15, 1952. E ld re d , Lewis* ♦ ‘T r a its of a Group of P ro sp e c tiv e T e a c h e r s School and Socie t y * 50**4-77-80, O ctober 7, 1939. Em bree, Edwin R. “ The E d u catio n of T e a c h e rs,” The American S c h o la r. 8 * * 4 - 22- 3 0 , Autumn, 1939. F i t e , W arner. ” Pedagogy and th e T e a c h e r,” The N a tio n . 93:207-09, Septem ber 7 , 1911* F lic k in g e r , Roy C. “R equired C ourses in E d u c a tio n ,” A .A .U .P. B u l le tin . 16:369-72, May, 1930* F rank, G lenn. ” The R ev o lt A g ain st E d u c a tio n ,” The N a tio n . 122:57*4-76, May 26, 1926. F re d e ric k , R o b ert W., and Arnold Bookheim. ”A Study o f th e E ff e c ts o f C o n cen trated and S c a tte re d P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g on Success i n T e a c h in g ,” S chool and So c ie ty . 3 8: 683- 8* 4 -, November 1 8 , 1933* F rie d e n b e rg , Edgar Z . “E d u catio n as a S o c ia l S c ie n c e ,” A.A.U.P. B u l l e ti n . 378672-93, W in ter, 1951-52. F u lle r , H arry J . ” The Em peror1 s New Clothes, or P riu s D em entat,” S c i e n t i f i c M onthly. 72:32-*+l, May 10, 1950. G anders, H arry S . “Q u ality in E d u c a tio n ,” School and S o c ie ty , *f5*839-*+3, June 1 9 , 1937* G ibson, D a n ie l. “ Pedagogues and P ed ag e se,” The American S c h o la r. 1 2: 92- 10* 4 -, W in ter, 19* 4 - 2-** 3 . G ild e rs le e v e , V ir g in ia . “ And S adly T each ,” The American S c h o la r. 5s* 4 - 25- 3 0 , Autumn, 1936. Graham, Hugh. ”The R ise and P ro g re ss o f th e C ollege o f E d u catio n of the U n iv e rsity of M in n eso ta,” S chool and S o c ie ty . 3 1 s510-13, A p ril 12, 1930. G risw old, A. W hitney. “What W e Don*t Know W ill H urt U s,” H aruer *s M agazine. 209:76-82, J u ly , 195*4-. H ag g erty , M. E . “ The Improvement of C ollege I n s tr u c tio n Through E d u c a tio n a l R e se a rc h ,” The E d u c a tio n a l R ecord. 1 2* * 4 - 3 - 7 0 , Ja n u a ry , 1931* 353 . In 1 1 The O rg a n iz a tio n o f T e a c h e r-P re p a ra tio n in a U n iv e r s ity ,” by H arry N. Irw in , E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra- tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 2 3 :4 5 1 , Septem ber, 1937* “Hard Words About Pedagogy.” U nsigned re v ie w , The D ia l, 51:239-^1, O ctober 1 , 1911. H arp er, W. A. 1 1 The M istakes of P edagogy,” E d u c a tio n . 3 ^ :3 6 5 9 F eb ru ary , 191^. H a r r is , R obert T. “The Aims of the P u b lic S c h o o ls ,“ A.A.UJP. B u l le ti n . 39s243-53, Summer, 1953* H a rris o n , Mary R. “I n te llig e n c e S cores of P ro sp e c tiv e ! T eachers in a L ib e ra l-A rts C o lle g e ,” School and S o c ie ty . 5 6 :4 1 6 -2 0 , O ctober 31 > 19* + 2 . H a rts on, L. D. “Does C o lleg e T ra in in g In flu e n c e T est I n te llig e n c e ? ” Jo u rn a l of E d u c a tio n a l P sychology. 27:481-91» O ctober, 1936. H ick s, C h arles R oger. “Give th e S choolm asters a C hance,” School and S o c ie ty . 3 8 :3 4 2 , Septem ber 9, 1933* “The High S chool Teaching of C h e m istry .” Committee of the American Chemical S o c ie ty , School and S o c ie ty . 4 3 :6 0 4 -0 6 , A p ril 13, 1936. H ild eb ra n d , J o e l H. “E ig h te e n Hundred Persons C onfer on E d u c a tio n ,” Chem ical and E n g in eerin g News. December 12, 1955, PP. 5 3 ^ - 2 * e t se q . _______. “The P ro d u ctio n of S c i e n t i s t s , ” Chemical and E n g in eerin g News, 31:5084-90, December 7 , 1953. “H ildebrand O ffe rs P hilosophy o f Teaching as Remsen L e c tu r e r ,1 * Chem ical and E n g in eerin g News. 27:1722, June 13, 15^91 H i l l , Clyde M. “The C ollege P re s id e n t and th e Improvement of C ollege T ea ch in g ,” E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 15:212-22, M arch, 1929. H in sd a le , B. A ., C h arles De Garmo, and Elmer E . Brown. “The C e r ti f i c a t i o n of C ollege and U n iv e rsity Gradu a t e s ,*1 School Review . 7 :3 3 1 -7 1 , Ju n e, 1899. 35*+ H o llis , E -n e s t V. Review of ffP re p a ra tio n o f S chool P erso n n els R ep o rt of th e R e g e n ts' In q u iry In to the C h a ra c te r and C ost o f P u b lic E d u catio n i n th e S ta te of ; Hew Y o rk ," A .A .U .P. B u lle tin . 25:*+6l-63, O ctober, 1939. H o lto n , E . L. "I n What D epartm ents in C ollege Do W e Find th e B est T eachers?1 1 School and S o c ie ty % 26:8^7-M 3, December 31 , 1927. H orne, H. H. 1 1 The Study o f E d u catio n by P ro sp e c tiv e College I n s tr u c to r s s The Views o f Some C ollege P r e s id e n ts ,1 1 S chool Review. 16s162-70, M arch, 1908. Hudson, A rth u r P alm er. 1 1 The P e re n n ia l Problem of the 111 P re p a re d ," E n g lis h J o u rn a l—C ollege E d itio n . 27*723- 3 3 , November ,1 9 3 8 . Hughes, J . M. "A Study of I n te llig e n c e and o f th e T ra in in g of T eachers as F a c to rs C o n d itio n in g th e Achievement o f P u p ils ,1 * P a rts I and I I , School Review. 33s 191-200. March, 1925 and 33*292-302, A p ril, 192?. H u n slc k e r, L. "C oncerning O verlapping of P ro fe s s io n a l C ourses in T ea ch er-T rain in g I n s t i t u ti o n s ,* * School and S o c ie ty , 2 9 :7 7 6 -7 8 , June 15, 1929. H unt, Thelma. "M easuring Teacher A p titu d e ," E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv isio n . 1 5 * 3 3 * * - May, 1929. " I f I Were A C ollege P re s id e n t." Anonymous, The Unpopular Review, 5:51-65* January-M arch, 1916. 1 1 In d ia n a U n iv e rs ity , R equired C ourses in E d u c a tio n ," in Local and C hapter N o tes, A .A.U .P. B u l l e t i n . 19:*+95-96, December, 1933. Irw in , H arry N. "The O rg a n izatio n o f T e a c h e r-P re p a ra tio n In a U n iv e rs ity ," E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n . 23:M 5^-6o, Septem ber, 1937. Jack so n , E liz a b e th . " P ro je c t in E d u c a tio n a l R esea rch ," A.A.U .P. B u l le ti n . 36:511*15, Autumn, 1950. Je n se n , H arry T . "Three Thousand S tu d en ts E v a lu a te an E d ucation C o u rse," E d u c a tio n a l Forum. 1 2 :1 2 7 -3 2 , Jan u a ry , 19*+3. 3 55 Johnson, James J . " F u rth e r C ritic is m of P ro fe s s io n a l S chools fo r Teachers** ( l e t t e r to the e d i t o r ) , S chool and S o c ie ty . 62:1*4-2, Septem ber 1 , 19*4-5. Jo h n sto n , C h arles Hughes. "T endencies in C o lleg e D ep art ments o f E d u c a tio n ,1 1 E d u c a tio n a l Review. 3 8:186-90, Septem ber, 1909# Jo n e s, Howard Mumford. "B e tra y a l in American E d u c a tio n ,1 1 S c rib n e r* s M agazine. 93*360-6*+, Ju n e, 1933* Jo rd a n , B. V. "The I n te llig e n c e o f T e a c h e rs," The E lem entary School J o u rn a l. 33*195-20*+, November, 1932. Judd, C. H. "A ttack s on D epartm ents o f E d u c a tio n ,1 1 The E lem entary S chool T each er. 12:138-*+0, November, 1911* . "C orrespondence1 1 (L e tte r t o the e d i t o r ) , The N atio n . 93*336-37, O ctober 12, 19U * _____ , "Psychology of th e Learning P ro cesses a t H igher L e v e ls," A .A .U .P. B u lle tin . 1 8 :109-18, F eb ru ary , 1932. K andel, I . L. "E ducators and E d u c a tio n is ts ," School and Socle t y . 6 6:196, Septem ber 13, 19*4-7 • K e lly , R obert L. "O reat T eachers and Methods of Develop ing Them," A sso c ia tio n of American C o lle g es B u lle tin , 15**4-9-67 and 21*+-20, March, 1929. K eys, N oel, and E rn e s t R eed. "The I n te llig e n c e of Summer as Compared w ith R egular S e ssio n S tu d e n ts ," Jo u rn a l o f A pplied P sychology. 1*+:600-08, No. 6 (u n d a te d ), 1930• Kinnaman, A. J . "Pedagogy in Our C o lleg es and U n iv e rsi t i e s , " The P edag ogical Sem inary. 9*365-73, Septem ber, 1902. L aing, Gordon A. "The F u n ctio n of th e U n iv e rs ity ," A.A.U .P. B u l le ti n . 1*+: 3*4-8-5*4-, May, 1928. Lamke, Tom A rth u r. "M aster*s R esearch in E d u c a tio n ," The High School J o u rn a l. 38*37-^3, November, 195*+. Landskov, N orvin L. "S u g g ested ,S tu d en t SurvI& aiglfethM ques T ried Out a t th e U n iv e rsity o f M in n eso ta," C ollege and U n iv e r s ity . 2 3 * 23*4— *4-1, Ja n u a ry , 19*4-8. L ibby, George H o b art. "Dangers of the Modern Trend o f E d u c a tio n ,1 1 The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l. 6 :1 1 6 -2 2 , December, L ord, John B. 1 1 The Tumult and th e S h o u tin g ,1 1 A.A.U.P. B u l le tin . 39*^52-56, Autumn, 1953* L ord, Louis E . " C la ssic s and th e A sphyxiating Gas of the E d u c a tio n a l R e q u i r e m e n t s School and S o c ie ty . 5*335- 3 9, March 2*+, 1917. Lynd, A lb e r t. 1 1 Quackery in th e P u b lic S c h o o ls ,” The A tla n tic . 185*33-38, M arch, 1950. M acduffe, G. G. "Teacher E d u catio n i n A lg eb ra," American M athem atical M onthly. 60s367-75> J u ly , 1953. Malcolm, David D onald. "The S tra n g le h o ld on E d u ca tio n — A R e p ly ,” A.A.U .P. B u l le ti n . 35*50^-11, Autumn, 19*+9. M asley, John W . "Study of S c h o la s tic Averages o f S tu d en ts in th e V arious Schools o f th e P ennsylvania S ta te C o lle g e ," C ollege and U n iv e r s ity . 2h -: 51-58, O cto b er, 19 M cCulloch, R obert W . "The Im pact of P u b lic School T eachers on G raduate S c h o o ls," A .A.U .P. B u lle ti n . >+1:721-32, W in ter, 1955. McGutcheon, Roger P. "The E n g lish P ro fe sso r and H is N a tu ra l E nem ies," A.A.U.P. B u l le tin . 37*665-71) W in ter, 1951-52. "The M aster fs Degree and th e T eacher R eq u ire m en ts," S chool and S o c ie ty . 7 * + * 177-81, Septem ber 22, 1951. M cGrath, G. D. "Some P o s s ib le T h re ats to Adequate P re p a ra tio n of T e a c h e rs," School and S o c ie ty . 67*60- 61, January 2*+, 19^8. M cKnight, Thomas. "The T e a c h e rs1 •B o ss ,1 " N orth American Review . 23^*269-7^r Septem ber, 1932. M eeklim, Eno. M. "The Problem of th e T ra in in g of the Secondary T ea ch er," School and S o c ie ty . *+:6l+-67) Ju ly 8, 1916. 357 Montgomery, Jack P. "Does the C ollege Teacher in G eneral C hem istry Need T ra in in g in E ducation?" J o u rn a l of Chem ical E d u c a tio n , 7 s2150-52, Septem ber, 1930. Moore, John R o b e rt. "The Menace of th e T eachers* C o lle g e ," C u rre n t H is to ry . 3 6 :298-301, Ju n e, 1932. Morgan, Bayard Q uincy. L e tte r w r itte n in "An I n v ita tio n to F ig h t" ( e d i t o r i a l ) , The Cl a s s i c a l J o u rn a l. 38:2 5 7 -5 9 , F eb ru ary , 19*6 • Morgan, G eorge, J r . "Can Teaching Be T au g h t," Commonweal. ; 2**: 209-11, June 1 9 , 1936. M o rris, Van C lev e. "High Grades and Low G rad es," C ollege and U n iv e r s ity , 2 8 :3 1 7 -2 9 , A p r il, 1953# M o rriso n , R obert H. "The C o n flic t Between S u b je c t-M a tte r S p e c ia lis ts and P ro fe s s io n a l E d u c a to rs," S chool and S o c ie ty . 6 8 :3 6 1 -6 5 , June 1 5 , 195*** Munro, W illiam B. "A S e lf-S tu d y o f C ollege T each in g ," A.A.U .P. B u l le ti n . l8:5**9-52, December, 1932. ________. " Q u a c k - D o c to r in g t h e C o l l e g e s , " H a r p e r fs M agazine. 1572**78-82, Septem ber, 1928. M unsterberg, Hugo. "S chool R eform ," A tla n tic M onthly. 85:656-69, May, 1900. Nemec, Lois Gadd. "R e la tio n sh ip s Between T eacher C e r t i f i c a tio n and E d u catio n in W isconsin," Jo u rn a l .of E xperim ental E d u ca tio n , 15:101-32, December, 19**6. N u ttin g , H. C. " L a tin and M ental T ra in in g ," The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l. 1 8 :9 1 -9 9 , November, 1922. Ogden, R. M. "The R e la tio n o f U ndergraduate to G raduate S tu d y ," School and S o c ie ty . **3:137-**3, F ebruary 1 , 1936. " O rig in a l Papers in R e la tio n to a Course of L ib e ra l Educa tio n ." R eport o f th e Y ale F acu lty and R ep o rt of the Committee of th e C o rp o ra tio n , The American J o u rn a l of A rts and S c ie n c e s . 15:297-351, 1829. P a in t e r , W illiam I . "The In tro d u c to ry Course in th e Educa tio n C u rricu lu m ," S chool and S o c ie ty . **6:612-17, November 13, 19**1. 358 : P a tte rs o n , H elen D eW itt. " Im p lic a tio n s of Newer School P r a c tic e s ," N orth C e n tra l A sso c ia tio n Q u a rte rly , 1 5 :2*+8-52, Jan u a ry , 19^1• Payne, F ernandus. "Teaching of S cience a t th e C ollege L ev e l," A .A .U .P, B u lle tin , 36:*+97-5lO, Autumn, 1950, Peffer, N a th a n ie l. "E ducators Groping f o r th e S ta r s ," H am er*s M agazine, 168:230-33, Jan u ary , 193*+# P o rtw e ll, B. G. "Mumbo Jumbo in E d u c a tio n ," The American M ercury. 50: *+29-^ 2. A ugust, 19**0. P o te a t, H ubert M cN eil. "An E d u c a tio n a l C redo," A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . I1 !-:512-17, November, 1928. "The P re p a ra tio n o f Hig^i S chool S cience T e a c h e rs." The C ooperative Committee on S cien ce T eaching, School S cience and M athem atics. *+2:636-50, O ctober, 19^2. " P ro fe s s io n a l R equirem en ts." E d it o r ia l in The C la s s ic a l J our n a l . 29:56*+- 65, May, 193^* "The P ro fe sso r o f Pedagogy—Once M ore." Anonymous, The 1 Unpopular Review. 5 :5 8 -7 2 , A p ril-J u n e , 1916. Raup, R. B ruce. "What T each er-T rain in g F a c u ltie s Be li e v e ," Sduc a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv isio n . 2 0 :3i+ l-59, May, 193***. R eed er, Edwin H. "The Q u arrel Between P ro fe s s o rs of Academic S u b je c ts and P ro fe s so rs of E d u ca tio n : An A n a ly sis," A .A .U .P. B u lle tin . 3 7 :5 0 6 -2 1 . Autumn, 1951* "R ep artee" ( l e t t e r s t o the e d i t o r ) , The A tla n tic . 185:18- 19, Ju n e, 1950. "R equired C ourses in E d u c a tio n ." Annual M eeting R e p o rts, A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 16:101, F eb ru ary , 1930. " R e s p o n s ib ilitie s o f S cience D epartm ents in th e P re p a ra tio n of T e a c h e rs." Committee on T eaching of P hysics in Secondary S ch o o ls, American P hysics J o u rn a l. 1*+:11*+- 15, A p ril, 19*+6. R i s s l e r , Anna K. "T eacher T ra in in g in th e L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g e ," S chool and S ociety,, 5:*+6-*+7, Ju ly 9, 1927. Royce, J o s ia h . 1 1 I s There a S cience o f E d u catio n ?1 1 P a rts I and I I , E d u c a tio n a l Review , 1 :1 5 -2 5 , Jan u ary , 1891 and 1 : 121- 3 2 , F eb ru ary , 1891. S c h n e id le r, Gwendolen G ., and R alph B e rd ie . ,fE d u c a tio n a l A b ility P a tte rn s ,* 1 Jo u rn a l o f E d u c a tio n a l P sychology. 33 * 92-10W, January ,194*2. ______ . "E d u c a tio n a l H ie ra rc h ie s and S c h o la s tic S u r v iv a l,1 1 E ournal of Ed u c a tio n a l P sychology. 33:199-208, March, 194*2. S c h u n e rt, Jim . "The A sso c ia tio n of M athem atical A chieve ment w ith C e rta in F a c to rs R e sid e n t in the T eacher, i n th e T eaching, in th e P u p il, and in th e S ch o o l," Jo u rn a l of E xperim ental Ed u c a tio n . 19*219-38, March, i s t f l . Sehurman, J . G. "T eaching—A Trade or a P ro fe ssio n ? " The Forum. 21:171-85* A p r il, 1896. S eoggin, G ilb e rt C. " Old Schools f o r New," The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l. 1 2 :8 2 -8 7 , November, 1916. S e e ly , Howard F r a n c is . "C om position Work in Teacher T ra in in g C o u rses," E n g lish J o u rn a l—C ollege Ed i t i o n . 19*233-4*2, March, 1930* Shaw, Roger M. "Lo, th e Lowly E d u c a tio n is t," School and S o c ie ty T 6 2:388-90, December 15, 194*5. S horey, P a u l. "The A ssau lt on Humanism, I , " The A tla n tic M onthly. 119*793-801, Ju n e, 1917. . "The A ssa u lt on Humanism, I I , " The A tla n tic M onthly. 120*94— 105, J u ly , 1917. S hryock, R ichard H. "Pedagogues and P edagese," School and S o c ie ty . 65*3-5, January H -, 194-7. Sim ons, J . H. " Q u a lif ic a tio n s fo r T eachers of C h em istry ," Jo u rn a l of Chem ical E d u c a tio n . 15*18-23, Jan u a ry , 1938. Smallwood, W . M. "The F ate of th e L ib e ra l A rts C ollege in American U n i v e r s i t i e s School and S o c ie ty . 10:2^1-50, S m ith, W . R ., F . P. O Brien, and E . E* B a y le s. f,The Value of P ro fe s s io n a l T ra in in g in E d u c a tio n ," U n iv e rsity of Kansas B u lle tin of E d u c a tio n * S p e c ia l Humber, December 1933. l i PP. Snowden, Frank M., J r . "The C la s s ic s and the E d u ca tio n i s t s , 1 1 E d u c a tio n * 6 7 *631- 3 6 * Ju n e, 19^7. S nyder, Agnes* C o n f l i c t in g P o in ts of View and C hallenges in th e E d u catio n of T e a c h e rs," Jo u rn a l of T eacher E d u c a tio n . 3 *2lf3 -lf8, December, 19?2. "Some R eac tio n s to th e R eport on C ollege and U n iv e rsity T eaching, Committee U." Annual M eeting R e p o rts, A .A .U .P. B u l le ti n . 2 0:163-72, March, 193^. S o p er, Edmund D. "The R e s p o n s ib ility of the L ib e ra l A rts C ollege and th e C ollege of E ducation in Teacher T ra in in g ,1 1 A sso c ia tio n o f American C o lle g es Bu l l e t i n * 19:117-19, M arch, 1933. S p ro u l, R obert Gordon. "The R e la tio n of th e U n iv e rsity to Problems and P ra c tic e in E d u c a tio n ." C a lifo rn ia Q u a rte rly of Secondary E d u c a tio n , os 127-32, Jan u a ry , 1931. S te a m s , A lfre d E. "Some F a lla c ie s in the Modern Educa tio n a l Scheme," A tla n tic M o n th ly . ll8 :6 * fl-5 3 , November 1916. S te w a rt, Naomi• "A .G.C.T. S cores of Army P erso n n el Grouped by O ccup ation," O ccu p atio n s. 26:5-*+!, O ctober, Stim m el, L. H. "A Perhaps Too Open L e t t e r ," J o u rn a l of H igher E d u c a tio n . l*f: 25-28, Jan u a ry , 19*+3. Stow e, A. Monroe. " L ib e ra l A rts C o lleg es and th e P ro fe s s io n a l P re p a ra tio n of High School T e a c h e rs," School and S o c ie ty . 3 8 :^ 3 5 -3 7 , Septem ber 3 0 , 1933. S w ift, F le tc h e r H. "C ollege C ourses i n Methods of Teaching H igh-School S u b je c ts ," S chool and So c ie ty * 6 :9 1 -9 9 , December 15, 1917. "The T e a c h e rs' B a c c a la u re a te ," T eachers C ollege ~ R ecord. 2 1 :2 5 -5 0 , Ja n u a ry , 1920. 361 T avenner, Eugene. "What th e High Schools Ought to T each ,1 1 The C la s s ic a l J o u rn a l, 36:513-17* June, 19**1* te n Hoor, M arten. "S ch o lars and Schoolm en,” A.A.U.P. B u lle tin . IfO :375-92, Autumn, 195*+. . "The S tak e of th e L ib e ra l A rts C ollege in T eachers C e r t i f i c a t i o n ,” A sso c ia tio n of American C o lleg es B u l le ti n . 39*30-96, March, 1953* T h ied e, W ilson G. "Some C h a r a c te r is tic s o f Ju n io rs E n ro lle d in S e le c te d C u rric u la a t the U n iv e rsity o f W isco n sin ,” Jo u rn al of E x p erim en tal E d u c a tio n . 19*1-62, Septem ber, 1950. Thompson, C h arles H. "Some A d m in istra tiv e R equirem ents Governing th e Appointm ent and Prom otion of C ollege T e a c h e rs,” School and S o c ie ty . 33*3^7-52, Septem ber 9* 1933. T ra x le r, A rth u r E . "Are S tu d en ts in T eachers C o lleg es G reatly I n f e r io r in A b ility ? ” S chool and S o c ie ty . 6 3:105-07, F ebruary 16, 19^6. "Tulane U n iv e rs ity , P ro p o sal f o r In v e s tig a tin g Value o f P ro fe s s io n a l C ourses in E d u c a tio n ,” A .A .U .P. B u l le tin . 15*553-62, November, 1929. "T ulane U n iv e rs ity , R e so lu tio n s in Regard to C ourses i n E d u c a tio n ." In Local and C hapter N o tes, A.A.U.P. B u l le ti n . 1 8 :^ 63- 6^ , O cto b er, 1932* V a le n tin e , A lan. "Teacher T ra in in g v e rsu s Teacher E d u c a tio n ,” The E d u c a tio n a l R ecord. 19*332-^*5, J u ly , 1933. Wakeham, G. ” ’E d u c a tio n f and th e C ollege P r o f e s s o r ,” School and S o c ie ty , 26*812-1^, December 2H-, 1927. W a lc o tt, Gregory D. "W orlds A p a rt,” S c ie n tif ic M onthly. 73*69, J u ly , 1951. W atson, F le tc h e r G. "S cience Teaching in th e Secondary S c h o o ls ,” S c ie n c e . 116*261-63, September 5, 1952. Webb, Sam C. " P re d ic to rs of Achievement in G raduate S ch o o l," Jo u rn a l of A pplied P sychology. 35*265-71, A ugust, 195ft. W elborn, E rn e s t L# 1 1 The Q u a lity of S tu d en ts A tten d in g T eachers C o lle g e s ,1 1 Jo u rn a l of E d u ca tio n al R esea rch * 39*668-70, May, 19*+6. W endell, B a rre tt* fl0ur n a tio n a l S u p e rs titio n ,* 1 N orth American Review* 179*388-^01, Septem ber, 190b9 Wey, H e rb e rt W # " D if f i c u l ti e s of B eginning T ea ch ers," School Review* 59*32-37> Jan u a ry , 1951* "What Does a D epartm ent of E d u catio n B eliev e?" Departm ent o f E d u catio n , Lewis and C lark C o lle g e, A .A .U .P. B u lle tin * 36*75-80, S p rin g , 1950* W heeler, L e s te r R* "Summary o f a Study of th e I n t e l l i gence of U n iv e rsity of Miami F reshm en,1 1 Jo u rn a l of E d u c a tio n a l R esea rch * *+3*307-08, December, 19*+9* W heeler, Raymond H o ld er. "The C r is is i n E d u c a tio n ," School and S o c ie ty * 38*756-60, December 9* 1933* W hicker, W . W. "R ack eteerin g on P a rn a ssu s," N orth American Review* 235*529-36, June, 1933* W hite, R o b e rt. "No Iro n C u rta in f o r Teacher E d u c a tio n ," School and S o c ie ty * 78*170-71, November 28, 1953* W hitney, A llen S . "The F i r s t C h air of E d u catio n in an American U n iv e rs ity ," S chool and S o c ie ty * 53*257-61, March 1 , 19*+1 • W illiam s, E . I . F , "C oncerning S tu d en ts in th e E d u catio n C ourses of a L ib e ra l-A rts C o lle g e ," S chool and S o c ie ty * 55*620, May 30 , 19^2. W illiam s, Oscar H. " L ib e ra liz e d vs* P ro fe s s io n a liz e d S u b je c t-M a tte rs How Can th e A rts C ollege Supply Both?" E d u c a tio n a l A d m in istra tio n and S u p e rv is io n * 16*581-90, November, 1930. W illia m s, Simon, and James D » L a u r its . " S c ie n tis ts and E d u c a tio n ," S c i e n t i f ic Monthly * 72*282-88, May, 1951. W ith e rs, A. M. "For E d u c a tio n a l A ccord,1 1 Jo u rn a l o f H igher E d u c a tio n * 17*2»+9-52, May, 19*+6. 363 W o lfle, D ael, and Toby Oxtoby. " D is trib u tio n s of A b ility o f S tu d en ts S p e c ia liz in g in D iffe re n t F i e l d s ,1 1 S c ie n c e , 116:311-1*+, Septem ber 26, 1952. W riston, Henry W. "L et Us Have Peace,*1 V ita l S peeches. 2 0 :5*+2-¥+, June 15? 195*+* Young, F rank. " E ffic ie n c y o f High School T eachers as Measured by P r i n c i p a l s 1 R a tin g s ," Texas O utlook. 2 1 :2 ^ -2 5 , Ja n u a ry , 1937* Z a k o lsk i, F ra n c is G. " In R eference to E d u c a tio n 1 , M A .A .U .P. B u l l e t i n . 35*665-73, W inter, 19*+9. D. ESSAYS A N D ARTICLES IN COLLECTIONS A nderson, A rch ib ald W. "T eacher E d u ca tio n —O rg an izatio n and A d m in istra tio n ," E ncyclopedia o f E d u c a tio n a l R esearch , re v is e d e d i ti o n . W alter S . Monroe, e d i to r . New York: The M acm illan Company, 1950. Pp. 1383-86. A rm entrout, W. D. "The T eachers C o lle g e ," The American C o lle g e . P . F . V a le n tin e , e d i t o r . New York: The P h ilo so p h ic a l L ib ra ry , 19*+9. Pp* 22^-51. E c k e rt, Ruth E . "G raduate S tu d en ts in E d u c a tio n ," j | U n iv e rsity Looks a t I t s Program . R uth E . E c k e rt and R obert J . K e lle r , e d i t o r s . M inneapolis: The U niver s i t y of M innesota P re s s , 195*+* Pp. 169-75* _______. " P re p a ra tio n of T eachers a t th e U n iv e rsity of M innesota," S tu d en ts of M innesota L ib e ra l A rts C o lle g e s. R o b ert J . K e lle r and C. Raymond C a rlso n , e d it o r s . M inn eap o lis: The U n iv e rsity o f M innesota P re s s , 1950. Pp. 271-81. "E d u catio n , Academic, Study o f —U nited S t a te s ," unsigned a r t i c l e in A C yclopedia of E d u c a tio n . P aul Monroe, e d it o r . New Yorks The M acm illan Company, 1911. Pp. *+06-09. Holm es, Henry W. "The G raduate School o f E d u c a tio n ," The Development o f H arvard U n iv e rsity S ince th e In au g u ra tio n of P re s id e n t E lio tT Samuel E l i o t M orrison, e d i t o r . Cam bridge: The H arvard U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1930* Pp. 518-32. 36* t J e w e tt, Ida M. 1 1 Summary of S tu d ies on Teacher S e le c tio n ,1 1 B e tte r S e le c tio n of B e tte r Teachers by M. Margaret ; S tro h , Ida M. Je w e tt, and Vera M. B u tle r, e d ito r s . ; Washingtons D elta Kappa Gamma S o c ie ty , 19*4*3* Pp. 82-95* : Judd, C harles H. 1 1 The School of E d u ca tio n ,1 1 Higher Edu c a tio n in America. Raymond A. Kent, e d i t o r . Boston: Gwinn and Company, 1930. Pp. 157-91. K andel, I . L. "U n iv e rsity Study o f E d u c a tio n ,1 1 Twentv- Five Years of American E d u catio n . I . L. Kandel, ed ito r. Hew York: The Macmillan Company, 192*4*. Pp. 29-5*4*. ! K e lle r , R obert H ., and George B. Void. ltGrading P ra c tic e s a t the U n iv ersity of M innesota,” A U n iv ersity looks a t I t s Program. Ruth E. E ck ert and R obert J . K e lle r, e d ito r s . M inneapolis: The U n iv ersity of Minnesota P re ss , 195*4*. Pp. 31*36. McKibben, R obert T. "A Comparative Survey o f Samples from the Ju n io r and S enior P op ulation of the College of E ducation and the College of Arts and S ciences, U n iv ersity of M issouri, W inter Sem ester, 1950-1951*1 1 D is s e rta tio n A b s tra c ts . Ann A rbor, Michigan: U niver s ity M icrofilm s, 1952, Vol. 12, No. * 4 * , pp. 516-17. R u s s e ll, W illiam F. ( e d .)• The R ise of a. U n iv e rsity . Vol. I —The L ater Days of Old Columbia C ollege, from the annual r e p o r ts of F red erick A. P. B arnard, P r e s i d en t of Columbia College 186*4— 1889. New York: Colum b ia U n iv e rsity , 1937* 395 PP. Whelan, James F ra n c is , 1 1 Cor r e la ti o n of the P ro fe ssio n a l and S u b ject-M atter T raining in th e P re p a ra tio n of Teachers of High-School M athem atics,” Ohio S ta te U n iv ersity A bstracts of D octoral D is s e rta tio n s No. 27, Spring Q u arter, 1938. Pp. 193*98. E . UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS B eaty, Harper F u lto n . ”Suggested Improvement of Teacher E ducation a t the U n iv ersity of Houston Based on a Survey of Opinions of S elected Students and G raduates.” Unpublished Doc to r* s d is s e ri& tio n , U n iv ersity of Houston, Houston, 1950. 199 PP. 36? Borrowman, Merle L. "The L ib e ra l and Technical in Teacher E d u catio n .1 * Unpublished Doctor *s d is s e r ta tio n , Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rsity , 1953* 326 pp. i Clement, Evelyn A. **The E v o lu tio n of Teacher T raining in C a lifo rn ia as a Phase of S o c ia l Change.** Unpublished , Doctor*s d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n iv ersity of C a lifo rn ia , B erkeley, 193&. 301 pp. F l o r e l l , David M artin. 1 1 O rigin and H istory of the School j of E ducation, U n iv ersity of C a lifo rn ia , Los A ngeles.” Unpublished Doctor*s d is s e r t a t i o n , U n iv ersity of C a lifo rn ia a t Los Angeles, 19^6. **85 pp. Graham, Ralph W illiam . "Secondary School Teachers * C ritic ism s of T heir College P re p a ra tio n f o r T eaching.1 * Unpublished Doctor *s d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , Los A ngeles, 1952. 167 PP. Law, Reuben D. "Content and C r i t e r i a R elatin g to Pro fe s s io n a l Teacher E d u c a tio n .* * Unpublished Doctor *s d is s e r t a t io n , The U n iv ersity of Southern C a lif o r n ia , Los A ngeles, 19^1. *+08 pp. Munger, Paul F ra n c is . "F acto rs R elated to P e rsiste n c e in College of S tudents Who Were Admitted to the U n iv ersity of Toledo from the Lower Third of T heir R espective High School C la sse s." A b stract on m icrofilm , U n iv ersity of M ichigan, D octoral D is s e rta tio n S e r ie s . P u b lic a tio n 769^ . Ann Arbor: U n iv ersity M icrofilm s, 195^* 139 pp. S t i l e s , Lindley Joseph. "The P re-S ervice E ducation of High School Teachers in U n iv e r s itie s ." Unpublished Doctor *s d i s s e r t a t io n , U n iv ersity of Colorado, B oulder, 19^5. W PP. Whelan, James F ra n c is . " C o rre la tio n of the P ro fe ssio n a l and S u b ject-M atter T raining in the P re p a ra tio n of Teachers of High-School M athem atics." Unpublished Doctor *s d i s s e r t a t i o n , Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity , Colum bus, 1938. 19^ PP. W illiam s, Joseph Edward. "Opinions of S elected Teachers Concerning the F i r s t Year of Advanced P ro fe ssio n a l Teacher E d ucatio n." Unpublished Doctor*s d i s s e r t a t i o n , Indiana U n iv e rsity , Bloomington, 1953* 3T1 PP* APPEH1IGES A P P E N D IX A PAGE REFERENCES FROM THE A .A J J .P . BULIETIN USED FOR FIGURE 1 Volume Page R eference Pages Graphed 15 ^53-57 5 16 >+05-07 2 18 27-28 1 18 5lK > u *3 3 18 5^9-52 3 18 566-70 3i 18 56>+-65 i 19 11-13)'* 15 23-26) 61- 7 0) 19 ilfO— * + > + h 518 i 167-69 l i 21 3^3 i 21 179 i 22 1M +-M -5 i 22 k03 i 23 3> + 2->+3 l i 23 3^7 i A P P E N D IX A (continued) Volume P ag e R e f e r e n c e P a g e s G rap h ed 25 236 i 25 591 i 25 4 61-63 3 27 206,208-09 1 29 126-28 1 31 572-73 3 /4 33 518 £ 35 665-73 8 i 35 5Q4--11 7 i 36 7 5-80 6 36 4-97-508 11 36 508-09 l£ 37 506-21 1 5 i 37 672-92 20£ 39 24-3-53 U 39 4-52-56 5 40 375-92 1 7 i 41 575-83 8£ P l u s a l l o f A p p e n d ix B* ^ In d ic a te s pages of s p e c ia l s e c tio n , T ol. 19, ^ o # 5* S e c tio n 2* A P P E N D IX B PAGE REFERENCES FRO M TH E A.A.U.P* BULLETIN USED FOR FIGURE 2 Volume Page R eference Pages Graphed lb 512-17 5 15 558-62 4 - 16 101 i 16 300-05 H 16 369-72 31 17 325 i 18 4-63 1 19 128-29, 3 i 131,13^, 137-39 19 173-200 27 19 107,110 i 19 4-95-96 1 20 172-73 l i 20 163-66 3/4- 20 4-66 i 20 504- i 21 186 i 21 4-24-25 i 21 567-69 i 370 A P P E N D IX B (continued) Volume P age R e f e r e n c e P a g e s G raphed 21 610 i 22 126 i 22 203-05 l i 22 M -72 -7M - l i 23 686 i 23 690 i 32 67M--76 3 i 33 70-85 15. 3/M - 33 25M - i 35 335-M -8 1 3 i 35 6 7M — 77 3i 36 5H -15 H 37 666- 67 1 38 289 i 38 M -1 3 -M -1 28.3/M- M O 2 M - 5 i M O 291-307 I 6 i M O 663 i if : !■ - I g | S g | m ^ % h ^'ifSi)i ' University of Southern California University Park Los Angeles 7, California To the Professors of Letters, Arts, and Sciences: I am making a historical study of the relationships between liberal arts colleges and schools of education. The study is being conducted at the University of Southern California under the guid- I ance of Professor Robert Brackenbury. A small part of the study involves the contemporary scene. An accurate "opinion poll" would greatly clarify the present situation. Your help— involving only a few minutes of your time— is solicited. The questionnaire deals with issues about which you have probably given much thought. Only your opinion is needed. You will recognize that the questions were formulated on the basis of charges made against schools of education. The questionnaire may be returned unsigned. There is no "coding" of any kind. Complete anonymity is assured. In order that the results of the study may be sent to you, your mailing address is needed. A separate post card is provided for this purpose. Euge|ie Auerbach Thank you, A P P E N D IX D SELECTED COMMENTS TAKEN FROM THE QUESTIONNAIRE RETURNS From a p r o f e s s o r o f p h i lo s o p h y a n d h i s t o r y : . . . As lo n g a s e d u c a t i o n c l i n g s t o a p h i lo s o p h y w h ic h l o o k s t o Dewey an d h i s c o h o r t s e d u c a t i o n w i l l c o n t i n u e t o he a m e a n in g l e s s a c t i v i t y w i t h l i t t l e v a l u e and m uch p o s i t i v e h a rm . D ew ey1 s b a s i c e p is te m o lo g y and m e t a p h y s ic s ( i f he h ad a n y ) l e a d t o tw o c o n c l u s i o n s . T h e re i s no r e a l i t y l i k e a hum an b e in g t o t e a c h an d t h e r e i s n o t h in g w o r th t e a c h i n g h im . H is v ie w o f man r e d u c e s h im t o a s t a t e u n w o rth y o f b e in g t a u g h t a n d h i s m e th o d s an d h i s v ie w o f T r u t h l e a v e n o t h i n g w o r th t e a c h i n g . D ew ey1s p o s i t i o n i s n i h i l i s t i c and i n v i t e s c o n f u s i o n and h a v in g i n v i t e d i t , n u r t u r e s i t t o f u l l grow n e d u c a t i o n a l , s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , eco n o m ic an d c u l t u r a l c h a o s . He r e n d e r s e d u c a t i o n a l e g a l l y p r o t e c t e d f r a u d , a m onopoly w h ic h w ould n o t be t o l e r a t e d u n d e r t h e S h erm an and C l a y t o n A c ts i f i t w e re i n p r i v a t e h a n d s . I t i s a f a r m ore d a n g e r o u s m o n o p o ly t h a n t h a t o f G.M. o r an y o t h e r s u c h c o r p o r a t i o n f o r i t i n v o l v e s t h e hum an m ind and s o u l and t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l d e s t i n y o f t h i s c o u n t r y . I t i s now e n g a g e d i n d e b a s i n g man an d d e p r i v i n g h im o f a n y k n o w led g e o f h i s c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e a n d , t h e r e f o r e , o f a n y r e a l i n s i g h t i n t o t h e many p ro b le m s o f h i s c h a o t i c p r e s e n t . . . . F e d e r a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n s w i l l n o t o n ly n o t rem ed y t h i s b a s i c d i s e a s e , b u t t h e y may a c t u a l l y make i t p o s s i b l e f o r th e s c h o o l s t o do m ore harm t h a n th e y h a v e y e t b e e n a b l e t o i n f l i c t o n a n u n s u s p e c t i n g p u b l i c . From a p r o f e s s o r o f b o ta n y : . . . Many ( i f n o t a l l ) o f my s t u d e n t s m a j o r in g i n B o ta n y who h a d t o t a k e some e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s i n th e s c h o o l o f e d u c a t i o n i n o r d e r t o g e t t e a c h e r c e r t i f i c a t e s , w e re a s fc r u e l l y f c r i t i c a l o f t h e s e c o u r s e s a s A P P E N D IX D (continued) 373 I am . H o w ev er, I f e e l t h a t t h o s e p e o p le i n t h e s c h o o l o f e d u c a t i o n a r e f o r e e d t o do t h a t i n l i n e w i t h o u r c u r r e n t p h i l o s o p h y o f 'e a s y s h o r t - c u t s ' t o e d u c a t i o n , w isd o m , u n d e r s t a n d i n g , e t c . F o r some r e a s o n o r o t h e r , many o f th e 'e d u c a t i o n a l i s t s ' a r e n o t t o o w e l l e d u c a te d i n l i t e r a t u r e , a r t s , p h ilo s o p h y * They a r e v e r y n a rro w and do n o t h av e t o o r i c h a b a c k g r o u n d . Of c o u r s e , u n f o r t u n a t e l y , many o f t h e y o u n g e r s u b j e c t - m a t t e r p r o f e s s o r s a r e a l s o v e r y p o o r l y t r a i n e d o u t s i d e o f t h e i r s u b j e c t m a t t e r . From a p r o f e s s o r o f G erm an: S in c e th e U n ite d S t a t e s h a s assu m ed a p o s i t i o n o f l e a d e r s h i p i n th e c o n te m p o r a ry w o r l d , th e c o n ti n u e d o p p o s i t i o n t o m o d ern f o r e i g n la n g u a g e s i n m o st s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n i s u n r e a l i s t i c , s h o r t - s i g h t e d , a n d e v e n d a n g e r o u s f o r o u r n a t i o n a l w e l f a r e . Our t a s k o f m a in t a i n i n g c o r d i a l r e l a t i o n s w i t h f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s i s made m uch m ore d i f f i c u l t by a 'L e t 'em l e a r n E n g l i s h ' a t t i t u d e i n g e n e r a l and t h e l i n g u i s t i c i g n o r a n c e o f o u r m i l i t a r y , d i p l o m a t i c , and c o m m e rc ia l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s i n p a r t i c u l a r . From a p r o f e s s o r o f E n g l i s h l i t e r a t u r e : U n f o r t u n a t e r e s u l t s on c h i l d r e n e n r o l l e d i n a n 'e x p e r i m e n t a l ' s c h o o l , a u s p i c e s o f a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . S u ch t h i n g s a s u s e of s e v e r a l s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s a t one t i m e , c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g e d d u r i n g t h e s e m e s t e r . E x c e s s i v e u s e o f a u d i o - v i s u a l a i d s . E x c e s s i v e f r e e d o m . Ho d i s c i p l i n e . L ack o f c o m p e t i t i v e g r a d i n g s y s te m . From a p r o f e s s o r o f S p a n i s h an d F r e n c h : I r e s e n t th e way p r o f e s s o r s i n t h e s c h o o l s o f e d u c a t i o n c a lm ly assum e t h a t th e y know e v e r y t h i n g i n A P P E N D IX D (continued) ed u catio n , th a t te a c h e rs in other f i e l d s are ‘laymen*5 we educate ju s t as much as they do and o fte n b e t t e r . Opinions d i f f e r , but they assume th a t because they majored in education th a t they are r i g h t . Prom a p ro fesso r of E nglish l i t e r a t u r e : . . . I am impressed by the d is p o s itio n of education schools to p r o lif e r a te and c re a te 'b u s in e s s , 1 and by th e ir p ra c tic e of p o l i t i c a l o p e ra tio n s w ith le g is la tu r e s and su p erin ten d en ts to in crease the demand upon stu d en t time and the q u an tity of r e q u ir e m ents. They may or may not be resp o n sib le fo r the id e a , c u rre n t o u tsid e academic c i r c l e s , th a t ed u catio n i s a sum of a l l o th er le a rn in g s . I b e lie v e , to o , th a t the tra in in g o f e d u c a to rs, w ithout s u b je c t-m a tte r, leads to t h e i r d iscounting su b je c t-m a tte r in the c u rric u la of the seh o o ls. L a stly , I wish t h a t educators more g en erally used and valued good E n g lish expre ssio n . From a p ro fe sso r of biology: I cannot take s e rio u s ly any of your q u estio n s; they d e a l w ith s u p e r f ic ia l asp e cts of the r e a l problem and sound lik e the w orries of a person w ith a f r i g h t f u l fe e lin g of i n f e r i o r i t y , who craves to be thought very w ell of or to be soundly damned. How the uneducated can be expected to educate is the larg e m ystery of the day. Won't some of you put your minds to the serio u s c o n sid e ra tio n of the adequacy and v a l i d i ty of the B ach elo r's degree in Education? I do not th in k the 'G a llu p in g ' approach w ill provide the d a ta . Prom a p ro fe sso r of m athem atics: W e have been w aiting fo r years fo r someone in a school of education w ith an open mind who w ill l i s t e n to such c r itic is m s . A P P E N D IX D (continued) 375 . . . I t r u s t th a t the processing of th is d ata does not f u l f i l the requirem ents of the doctor *s degree in education* From a p ro fesso r of E nglish: I do not f e e l th a t those i n ed u catio n are*—as a w hole--w ell q u a lifie d a t a ll* Too many—because of a c tu a l i n a b i l i t y and lack of discernm ent—have been unable to cope w ith M athem atics, E n g lish , and the sciences and have gone in to ed u catio n and g o tte n along as w ell as any of th e ir c o lle a g u e s. From a p ro fesso r of fo re ig n language: A fter a l l i s said and done, th e teach er is going to teabh su b je c t m a te ria l, be i t a r ith m e tic , h is to ry , R ussian language, biology, or what you p le a se , be i t on whatever le v e l i t may be* I p re fe r the p la n talk ed about here and th ere now, namely, th a t no ed u catio n , i . e . methods or th e o rie s be perm itted on the undergraduate l e v e l . Give a l l prospective teac h ers from primary to C ollege a good a l l around s e t of courses lead in g to B.A. or B .S .; then in a s p e c ia l school give them education co urses—no th e o rie s , but approved methods. I t i s the th e o rie s , or changing of th e o rie s b iennually t h a t is la rg e ly respon s ib le fo r the poor teac h in g . They have no p o s itiv e norm. . . . Furtherm ore, such a thing as guidance would be tau g h t by o ld e r, we11-experienced te a c h e rs, w ith good horse sense and wisdom—not goofy temporary th e o r ie s —and p re fe ra b ly people who have r a is e d children of th e ir own to adulthood and have learn ed from them . . . and have a big dose of the m ilk of human kindness in place of egotism in th e ir system s. 376 A P P E N D IX D (continued) From a professor of English and American literature: . . * I th in k some courses in e d u c atio n a l method may be u s e fu l, though perhaps not worth the time spent in them i f i t could have been sp ent in a course in l i t e r a t u r e , the a r t s , or sc ie n c e . But also I th in k a good many of the methods courses are p o s itiv e ly bad and do a good d ea l of harm and no good. For example: courses on the teaching of reading do enormous damage. And so do o th e rs . From a p ro fe sso r o f American h is to r y : . . . Obviously B estor, Lynd, H utchins, Mortimer Smith e t a l . are a s tu te in t h e ir c r itic is m s , b u t— r e g r e tta b ly p ro fe s s io n a l e d u c a to rs, lik e p r o s titu te s and drunkards, probably w ill be a p eren n ial burden on s o c ie ty . From a p ro fe sso r o f psychology: Schools of education a re of a l l degrees of competence and q u a lity . They should be improved, not e lim in a te d . They must draw from a v a ila b le supply of s tu d e n ts; and are not to blame i f the c u ltu r a l co n tex t i s such th a t second-rate minds go in to ed u catio n . From a p ro fe sso r o f p o l i t i c a l scien ce: Since the b e s t stu d en ts do not major in E ducation, one would not expect the average grades of ed u catio n m ajors to be a B p lu s , as i t i s in the co lleg es of ed u catio n in the Big Ten. From a p ro fesso r o f sociology: Methods as su b ject m atter p ro p erly belong to Schools of E ducation. S u b ject m atter (co n ten t) p ro p er ly belongs elsew here. In many in s ta n c e s , needless d u p lic a tio n e x is ts because Schools o f E ducation attem pt 377 A P P E N D IX D (continued) to o ffe r A rts courses in edu catio n —a s , ed u c a tio n a l s t a t i s t i c s , psychology of le a rn in g , sociology of education, etc* I t seems to me th a t education majors are disadvantaged by th e ir being re q u ire d to take so many hours of e s s e n tia lly w o rth less and r e p e titio u s m a te ria l i n v ario u s methods c o u rse s. W e are c o n sid e r ing an Ed.D. program h e re , and are searching the curriculum fo r s u ita b le c o u rse s. The upshot is th a t many courses given a t a ju n io r and sen io r le v e l w ill be accepted fo r d o c to ra l c r e d i t, on the assum ption th a t th is is a f a i r t e s t of the c a n d id a te 's c a p a c itie s be cause he has not had courses in the area before J . . . Not a l l of the blame l i e s w ith the 'e d u catio n i s t s . ' Some is w ith the r e s t of the f a c u lty fo r allow ing such th in g s , because they hope to g ain stu d e n ts, or are f e a r f u l of the a d m in istra tio n , or see th is as a wedge to th e ir own expansion. From a p ro fesso r of s o c ia l s c ie n c e s : . . . I t seems to me th a t schools of education and those working in the su b je c t-m a tte r f i e l d should both s tr iv e to do a b e tte r job than they are doing. . • . schools of education have been h e lp fu l in many ways; s tr e s s in g in d iv id u a l d iffe re n c e s , b e tte r methods of te a c h in g , p rogressive id eas in le a rn in g , a b e t t e r psychology of le a rn in g , e t c . I have done work i n both f ie ld s and a p p re c ia te the work of both. I do not see th a t schools of education are re sp o n sib le fo r the so -c a lle d d e fic ie n c ie s in the f i e l d s of s u b je c t-m a tte r. From a p ro fe sso r o f p hy sics: . . . The attem pt to curb com petition among stu d en ts as p o ssib ly y ie ld in g harm ful p sy ch o lo g ical r e s u l ts i s i t s e l f o fte n harm ful. C om petition in a t h l e t i c s y ie ld s some good f r u i t s . I do not see why i t should do le s s in s c h o la s tic p u r s u its . A P P E N D IX D (continued) From a professor of music: . . . I th in k there is some tr u th to many of the charges a g a in s t the teach ers c o lle g e s , hut I am most d istu rb e d by the a ttitu d e of edu catio n m ajors—th e ir lack of re s p e c t fo r th e ir own courses and in s tr u c to r s . From a dean of a co lle g e of sc ie n c e , l i t e r a t u r e , and a r ts : . . . I b eliev e you w ill fin d many schools of E ducation are attem pting to re q u ire more Education than i s re q u ired fo r s ta te c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Each school blames some neighboring s t a t e , saying th a t the re q u ire ment is to meet c e r t i f i c a t i o n in th a t a re a . From a p ro fe sso r of chem istry: . . . I t i s my fe e lin g t h a t in the p a s t th ere has been no i n t e r e s t i n secondary school education by c o l lege p ro fe sso rs in the sc ie n c e s. At the p re se n t time . . . I have found schools of ed u catio n w illin g and eager to cooperate in solving the mutual problem s. I f the high school graduate i s not as w ell tra in e d in science and mathematics as p re v io u sly , and i f th is is due to poor in s tr u c tio n a t the secondary le v e l, the blame should not be placed on schools of ed u catio n and th e ir p h ilo so p h ie s. Other f a c to r s involved a re : (a) the tr a n s f e r during the war of many q u a lifie d science te a c h e rs to defense work, and th e ir re te n tio n by in d u stry a f t e r the war. (b) the low income and la c k of opportunity fo r f in a n c ia l advancement in teaching (as compared to in d u stry ) fo r stu d en ts w ith science backgrounds. A P P E N D IX D (continued) 3 7 9 From a professor of chemistry: Although fundam entally opposed to much of the ed u catio n al process which seems to s u b s titu te ’fam ily l i v i n g 1 and ’basket w eaving’ type of courses fo r language, E n g lish , scien c e, and m athem atics, i t is not so simple to blame the e d u c a to rs. I have found s tu dents who have taken the p re sc rib e d co llege entrance op tio n in high schools of reasonable size to be g e n e ra lly w ell prepared fo r co lleg e work (according to th e ir c a p a b i li t i e s ) . However, too few stu d en ts and p aren ts seem to be aware of the importance of follow ing th is o p tio n and I continue to receiv e stu d en ts from larg e schools who took no language, l i t t l e m athem atics, and only biology as a sc ie n c e . A fter such inadequate p re p a ra tio n they decide to become d o c to rs, or engineers, and then u su a lly f a i l my course in chem istry . . . From a p ro fe sso r of E n g lish l i t e r a t u r e : . . . I f p u blic education is f a ilin g a t p re s e n t, the r e a l cause of the f a ilu r e must be t h a t the p u b lic a t la rg e , re g a rd le ss of fin e words to the c o n tra ry , does not b elieve th a t edu cation in a serio u s sense m atters very much. As has been said about p o l i t i c s , people g e t p re tty much the kind of government they deserve and work f o r . From a p ro fe sso r of E n g lish : '_________ College is fo rtu n a te in th a t our Depart ment of E ducation i s headed by an unusually broad minded person. He was educated in a tr a d i t i o n a l l y l i b e r a l a r t s type of i n s t i t u t i o n in which he had not one course in educatio n during h is undergraduate s tu d ie s . This probably accounts fo r the f a c t th a t he is not ’n u t s ’ on these m atters covered in your q u e stio n s. A P F E H D IX D (continued) From a professor of history: On the whole schools and departm ents o f E ducation do a good jo b . Of course the E ducation fa c u lty i s le s s 'in te lle c tu a l* than the fa c u lty in o th er f i e l d s , but th is is as i t should be* I t does not take as much 'in te llig e n c e * to t r a i n te a c h e rs .o f high school physics as i t does to t r a i n Ph.D 's in physics; some what d if f e r e n t q u a litie s are re q u ire d . Of course the Education fa c u lty tends to m u ltip ly courses in i t s own f ie ld ; every departm ent does. The r e a l lead e rs in the f i e l d try to keep the s itu a tio n from g e ttin g o u t of hand. M y p rin c ip a l c r itic is m of teac h er tr a in in g programs in C a lifo rn ia is th a t they are more su cc essfu l in elim in a tin g p o te n tia lly poor te a c h e rs than in a ttr a c tin g the la rg e numbers of p o te n tia lly good teach ers th a t are re q u ire d . E ducation requirem ents seem to be designed to screen the u n f i t and help the middle range of stu d e n ts . They ta x the p a tie n c e of the a b le s t stu d en ts and cause too many of them to tu rn to o th er f i e l d s . From a p ro fe sso r of E nglish l i t e r a t u r e : . . . some of the sch o larsh ip ex h ib ite d by pro fe s s o rs of ed u catio n i s a b so lu te ly overwhelming, though one i s perm itted to wonder whether i t i s worth doing so much on some m iniscule s u b je c ts . . . . The in c re a se in hours o f p ra c tic e teaching re c e n tly demanded by th is s ta te fo r c e r t i f i c a t i o n has meant th a t stu d e n ts are absent from the u n iv e rs ity h a lf the spring term of th e ir sen io r y e a r. Thus they are unable to take many of the courses even as e le c tiv e s th a t are thought to crown an academic c a re e r; in ste a d they must have courses tailo r-m ad e to f i t in to h a lf of the l a s t sem ester and s t i l l give 3 hours c r e d i t. One such m anufactured course is 'Problems in C itiz e n sh ip * : the 'major o b je c tiv e of the course is to awaken the stu d e n t to the challenge of a c tiv e c i t i z e n s h i p . ' This seems to me a g re a t d e a l of nonsense. 381 A P P E N D IX D (continued) , . , Courses given here e n t it le d 1O rie n ta tio n to E d u c a tio n ,* ‘Seminar in E d u c a tio n ,* ‘P rin c ip le s of E ducation, * and ‘Philosophy of Education* seem to invite! some com bination, i f only w ith the purpose of taking the load o ff education te a c h e r s 1 backs* Some of them are re sp o n sib le fo r four d if f e r e n t courses each sem ester (one man Indeed runs fiv e ) besides h elping out in courses la b e lle d ‘s t a f f , * of which there are b in the f a l l and 6 In the sp rin g . From my own e x p e ri ence, I would guess th a t the c o n te n ts of the course are lik e ly to be slim i f one i n s tr u c to r i s to handle b d if f e r e n t c o u rse s, guide a graduate stu d en t in re se arc h , and do h is share of s ta f f - r u n course work. From a p ro fe sso r of economics : With a ra th e r in tim ate knowledge of the d iv is io n of edu cation here over s ix y e a rs , my c h ie f Im pression is th a t of g re a t v a ria tio n , among ed u catio n people them s e lv e s . Hence my re lu c ta n c e to g e n e ra liz e . . . From a p ro fesso r o f h is to ry : Your questions seem to be weighted to assig n too much in flu en ce to ;sc h o o ls of ed ucation and th e i r fo llo w in g . I th in k the l a t t e r r e f l e c t as w ell as d ir e c t ed u c atio n a l philosophy in g e n e ra l. While I fin d my answers to in d iv id u a l questions the same on recheck in g , I do not subscribe to a d e v il theory w ith p ro fe s sors of edu catio n c a s t in the lead in g r o le . They are victim s in the same way as o th er te a c h e rs . From a p ro fesso r of p o l i t i c a l scien ce: . . . The problem of r e la tio n s h ip between Schools of E ducation and L ib e ra l A rts C olleges is due to a lack of understanding on each s id e . Both have s ta te d t h e i r own strong p o in ts w ithout knowing what the o th er i s doing. The sm aller the co lleg e the le s s the problem as f a c u ltie s from each co lle g e can know and re sp e c t each o th e r . A P P E T O IX D (continued) 382 From a professor of Romance Languages: S ubject m atter p ro fe sso rs are too o fte n incapable of p resen tin g methodology in th e ir f i e l d a t any but t h e ir own le v e l of in s tru c tio n ; and even th e n , I be lie v e , could do l i t t l e more than teach about t h e i r p erso n al techniques* . * . The problem i s , le s s one of the c o n tro l by the ’d i r e c t o r a t e 1 p er se, but ra th e r the p o s s i b i lit y (sometimes, c e r ta in ly , a r e a l i t y ) of those concerned c a te rin g to p ressu re groups pushing fo r u ltim a te ly unwise p o lic ie s* From a p ro fesso r of m athem atics: I hold two g en eral secondary l i f e c re d e n tia ls . . • I had le s s ed u catio n courses than are now re q u ired but too many from my standpoint* I do not f e e l any of the education courses I took c o n trib u ted to th e q u a lity of teac h in g . W e are tu rn in g out elem entary te a c h e rs each year w ith ed u catio n c r e d its to spare and no r e a l t r a i n ing in a r ith m e tic . They have been tau g h t how to teach but not how to c le a r f ra c tio n s nor convert fra c tio n s to decim als. One of my f i n e s t te a c h e rs —my e ig h th grade p r in c ip a l—s ta r te d a t 15 w ith no ’e d u c a tio n 1 c o u rse s. I learned more from him—and s t i l l know i t —than from any th ree o th er p eo p le. From a p ro fesso r of geology: . . . I took two courses in ed u catio n . . . and in both courses the su b je c t m atter was of high school le v e l, d u ll, u n in sp irin g and of a b so lu te ly no use in my teaching e a re e r. . . . As a r e s u l t of the secondary school system being dominated by follow ers of the school of ed u catio n p a rty lin e s in th is s t a t e , we are e n ro llin g a le s s e r percentage of stu d e n ts w ith a proper background in sc ie n c e . A P P E N D IX D (continued) From a professor of art: G e n e ra litie s or g e n e ra liz a tio n s such as in th is q u e stio n n a ire , are n o t, to my way of th in k in g , v a lid statem ents in ed u c atio n . I th in k th a t g re a t te a c h e rs , perhaps even good te a c h e rs, are horn not made and a c re a tiv e philosophy in education i s more im portant than methodology. From a p ro fe sso r of E n g lish : . . . fhe tone of th is q u estio n n aire r e f l e c t s the defensiveness of Schools of E ducation. One must be e ith e r f o r or a g a in s t them as they a re ; they are un w illin g to s i t down as equals w ith th e i r colleagues and give and take r e s p o n s ib ility . , From a p ro fe sso r of economics: I th in k schools of education are not n early as bad as most l i b e r a l a r ts p ro fe sso rs p a in t them. U nfortu n ately they are too o fte n out of touch w ith the l i b e r a l a r ts co lleg es o fte n because of the snobbish a ttitu d e of the su b je c t m atter p eople. From a p ro fe sso r of p o l i t i c a l scien c e: M y c r it ic i s m , a f te r looking a t the o ffe rin g s of v ario u s schools of E ducation, is th a t I cannot help but f e e l th a t many of th ese have ended up by p lacin g the i n s t i t u t i o n before the cause. Much of th is can probably be a ttr ib u te d to the many ex cessiv ely v o ca tio n alize d m e n ta litie s t h a t have captured v ario u s schools of ed u catio n . I have no c r itic is m of v o c a tio n a l tra in in g when i t i s implemented in i t s p la c e —however on the u n iv e rs ity le v e l i t has led to d i s t o r t io n of the p rin c ip le s on which a u n iv e rs ity is based. Or, more s p e c if ic a lly , i f p ro fe sso rs of ed u catio n want to t r a i n v o c a tio n a lly as a trad e school would t r a i n a w elder— then a tra d e school i s the place fo r such tra in in g and fo r most of the p ro fe sso rs of ed u catio n I have met. A P P E N D IX D (continued) From a professor of physics and chemistry: I th in k surveys of th is type are p r e tty much a waste of everybody *s time although I ap p reciate the enthusiasm s which give r is e to them. . . . M y own opinion of the work of schools of x - education can be summarized by saying t h a t i f a person needs courses in education to help him te a c h , he is not the kind of person we need in the teaching p ro fe s sio n . This r e f e r s to th e kind of schools of ed ucation we now have, in most p la c e s. From a p ro fe sso r of economics: G enerally, I d is lik e a M aster’s degree th a t merely re p re se n ts a f i f t h y ear of b a s ic a lly undergraduate work. . . . U nfortunately most M. E d ’s seem to reduce to t h i s , and they should be reduced to B. E d. for stu d en ts not taking courses in undergraduate B.A. or B.S. d eg rees. The M. Ed. o r M. S. in E ducation is a mighty cheap degree a t most i n s t i t u t i o n s . From a p ro fe sso r of geography: I am concerned by ill-c o n c e iv e d p h ilo so p h ies which come out of some education schools which hold or teach such ideas a s: (a) I t is bad to f a i l a stu d e n t. (b) learn in g should be fun, th e re fo re , we w ill cut out d r i l l work. (c) Emphasis on making the p u p il a good member of so c ie ty a t the expense of b asic fundamentals and to o l s u b je c ts . (d) The lim ita tio n of work a t a p a r tic u la r le v e l. ’W e c a n 't add numbers above 1 0 --th a t comes in the th ird g ra d e. ' ■ t f A P P E N D IX D (continued) 335 (e) The tre n d to cut the number of so lid su b jects in high school fo r such th in g s as ra d io broad c a stin g and auto d riv in g . From a p ro fe sso r of biology: I t seems ev id en t th a t th e d e fe c ts in p ublic ed u catio n can be a ttr ib u te d to se v e ra l cau ses. There is f a r too l i t t l e money spent to provide adequate numbers of teac h ers and adequate f a c i l i t i e s fo r those te a c h e rs; th e re i s a general a n t i - i n t e l l e c t u a l a ttitu d e engendered by the p re se n t p o l i t i c a l clim ate; th e re i s a p re v alen t m isconception th a t i t is the p ossessio n of a diploma and not the amount of knowledge which d efin es an educated man; and there is the f a r from adequate tra in in g of the te a c h e rs . Your q u estio n n aire undoubt edly d eals only w ith the l a s t . The f i r s t p o in t (inadequate funds) governs the l a s t (inadequate t r a i n ing) to a g re a t e x te n t. However, i t is my opinion, th a t more funds would not com pletely remove the d i f f i c u l t i e s which public ed u catio n faces a t the presen t tim e, sin ce the expenditure of these funds would be governed la rg e ly by the fp ro fe ss io n a l e l i t e 1 which has grown up in the a d m in istra tio n of the public schoo ls. I t i s my fe e lin g (and m y colleagues concur, I am su re) th a t th e re i s much g re a te r need fo r su b je c t m atter tr a in in g on the p a r t of scien ce teach ers (I do not f e e l q u a lifie d to comment on o th er f i e l d s ) . W e see an in c re a sin g ly poor tra in in g on the p a r t of stu d en ts coming to us from the pu b lic schools in the areas of sc ie n c e ; and these stu d en ts are supposedly the b e s t. I f our graduates decide to go in to the teaching p ro fe ssio n , they must reduce th e ir course load in science to take education courses (no stu d en t can go to school in d e f i n i t e l y ) . The r e s u l t i s inadequate prepara tio n fo r co lleg e and inadequate tra in in g in c o lle g e . Thus the problem can only become w orse. From a p ro fe sso r of languages and l i t e r a t u r e : I have y e t to fin d a high grade stu d en t (e sta b lish e d by performance in h is g en eral stu d ie s) who, a f te r tak in g the required courses in education, A P P E N D IX D (continued) d id not regard them as a waste of tim e. P e rso n a lly , I f e e l th a t, given the shrinkage of time and space on th is p la n e t today . . . i t behooves educators to s t a r t re-d esig n in g the c u r ric u la of our schools from the bottom up. Par to o l i t t l e time is devoted to the study of fo re ig n language. In the S oviet Union, on ' ' the c o n tra ry , over 11 per ce n t o f the time in the f i £ s t 10 grades i s devoted to fo re ig n language stu d y . Let our 'e d u c a tio n is ts 1 take c a re , l e s t they sabotage our Western dem ocratic i n s titu t i o n s in th e ir p ro fe ssio n a l b lin d n ess. W e can be is o la te d l i n g u i s t i c a lly from the r e s t of the world by the next 10 years u n less something d ra s tic is done in the grade and high school c u r ric u la about language stu d y . Prom a p ro fe sso r of c la s s ic a l l i t e r a t u r e : One major c r itic is m which i s untouched by the q uestions you ask is th a t schools and p ro fe sso rs of education e x h ib it a t o t a l want of fundamental s e l f - c r itic is m . This 'in te rlo c k in g d ire c to r a te * of which you speak, and which c e r ta in ly does e x i s t, has ap p aren tly never faced up to the q u estio n , Can anyone be tau g h t to teach? Teaching, before anything e l s e , is an a r t ; and everyone who has ever been taught by a r e a l te a c h e r knows t h a t what goes in to i t has got to include a liv in g sense of r e la tio n s h ip w ith those who le a rn and an honest re sp e c t fo r the value of what is ta u g h t. . . . Now those th in g s can be got only from the example of a good te a c h e r, no m atter what h is s u b je c t; and in comparison with them no o th er lesso n th a t a school of education can pretend to teaeh w ill even weigh so much as an o n io n -sk in . I t may be tru e th a t a teacher who has had courses in education w ill (other th in g s being equal) be no worse a teacher than one who has n o t. But other th in g s are not a p t to be e q u a l. I t takes time to take courses In ed u catio n , and during th a t time a man might have been te a c h in g , or he might have been o u ts trip p in g the man you compare him w ith by fu rth e r study of h is s u b je c t . . . Two th in g s are needed to save our school system from c a ta stro p h e : A P P E N D IX D (continued) (1) The hold of the schools of ed ucation must be broken, and the academic q u a lif ic a tio n fo r p o sts in t h e ; public schools must be a degree in u n d ilu te d l i b e r a l a r ts * (2) Teaehers in the public schools must be very much b e tte r p a id . These reform s might mean lean y ears fo r the schools of ed u catio n . P a in fu l and s e l f - c r i t i c a l y e a rs . But i f these people have a u se fu l c o n trib u tio n to make—in the : psychology of le a rn in g , or in the h isto ry and sociology of ed u catio n —they w ill be a l l the b e tte r able to make i t when they have freed them selves, or been fre e d , from the clogs of t h e i r p re se n t attem p t—an in to le ra b ly impudent a tte m p t—to b u re a u c ra tiz e ed u c atio n . Your own p ro je c t, i f conducted w ith an im p a rtia l mind, s tr ik e s me as being a f r u i t f u l one. The schools of education have been an im portant s o c ia l fo rce in th is stage of American h is to r y , and the e v a lu a tio n of what they have done is a ta sk to engage the s k i l l and judgment of a s o c ia l h is to r ia n . But I beg you, ju s t d o n ft count up the opinions of those who respond to your q u e stio n n a ire . The ju s tic e of an opinion is not a fu n c tio n of i t s p o p u la rity . . . From a p ro fe sso r of h is to ry and philosophy of education: Without making any plea fo r what my colleagues in o ther f ie ld s are doing, the most se rio u s concern th a t I have about programs of p ro fe ssio n a l p re p a ra tio n of teach ers is the tendency to s lig h t the t h e o r e ti c a l * areas in favor of the more immediately fp ra c tic a l* a re a s . C losely connected w ith th is is a co nsiderable f a ilu r e of f a c u l ti e s of education to promote t h e i r con cerns in a s u f f ic ie n tly i n t e l le c t u a l l y rig o ro u s fash io n . . . From a p ro fe sso r of ed u catio n al psychology: There seems to be a b a r r ie r between c o lle g e s of E ducation and the p ro fe sso rs in them and the people who teach in our p u b lic sch o o ls. Theory seems to be too A P P E N D IX D (continued) f a r removed from the a c tu a l classroom . From a p ro fe sso r of elem entary educations I hope t h i s is n o t going to be a study th a t s e ts up u n re a l dichotom ies. Most of the problems in teacher education can be and should be solved jo in tly by p ro fe sso rs of education and p ro fe sso rs in o th er f i e l d s . N either group can ’go i t f alo n e. From a p ro fe sso r of h is to ry and philosophy of educations The q uestion of methods is a d i f f i c u l t one. What most c r i t i c s mean by ’methods* is ’techniques*—and these the l i b e r a l a r t s co llege edu catio n departm ents are not lik e ly to emphasize. Method, to them, r e f e r s to g en eral p rin c ip le s of le a rn in g , such as P la to ’s Divided Line, A belard’s Sic e t Non, h is to ry and development of the le c tu re method, H e rb a rt’s method of 1 A pperception, Dewey’s Steps in R e fle c tiv e Thinking, and the l i k e . . . . P ro fesso rs of education e ith e r have a body of knowledge s u f f ic ie n t to warrant su b je c t-m a tte r courses or they have n o t. W e who are in the business are committed to b eliev e th a t th e re i s : but by example we must prove i t , and th is c a ll s fo r e lim in a tin g much v erb iag e, nonsense, e t c . and g e ttin g to the core of our own su b je c t m a tte r. . . . P ro fesso rs of education on the whole e x h ib it in f e r io r s c h o la rsh ip . They f a l l in to a jargon (betrayed in the mass production of t e x t s ) , Including undefined use of ’s h a ll,* ’m u s t,’ ’o u g h t,’ and im p erativ es, a l l w ith u nderlying assum ptions th a t remain l a t e n t . From a p ro fe sso r of human development (psychology): . . . I f any c r itic is m is to be made of anyone l e t i t be made of our communities, in clu d in g a l l ed u catio n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , which s i t on t h e i r hands ra th e r than ’attack* the major problems of ed u catio n —one of which A P P E N D IX D (continued) 389 i s n o t l i b e r a l a r t s v e rsu s c o lle g e of e d u c a tio n , e t c . Prom a p ro fe sso r of ed u catio n al psychology: I th in k some p ro fe ss o rs, perhaps some departm ents of ed u catio n , have underemphasized i n t e l l e c t u a l values in education and have emphasized ’in te re s t* and have neglected ’e f f o r t.* I t is my opinion th a t B estor e t al. are p ic tu rin g the w orst as ty p ic a l. C e rta in ly i f we p ic tu re d the w orst h is to r y teach ers as ty p ic a l, Bestor would o b je c t, and ju s tly so. . . . C e rta in ly nam e-calling w ill not solve the problem, even though I f e e l lik e c a llin g a few names when I read some of these th in g s w ritte n by men w ith no concept of what p u b lic education should be. From a p ro fesso r of science education: Many c r i t i c s of schools of educatio n and educators are not aware t h a t : (1) F aculty psychology and ’mind t r a i n i n g ’ are not accepted by p sy ch o lo g ists today. (2) The p u b lic schools are now: a) Attempting to t r a i n a l l stu d en ts in s te a d of te n per c e n t. b) try in g to take a l l stu d en ts through high school in ste a d of l e tt in g them q u it a f t e r ¥ th grade. (3) In s p ite of the above o b s ta c le s , schools are keeping standard s above those s e t by the ten per c e n t. i n t e l l e c t u a l l y e l i t e of the p a s t. (This has been proven in many c i t i e s re c e n tly by using t e s t s of 50-100 years ago again today—to d a y ’s stu d en ts do as w ell or b e tte r I) (H -) The p u blic has req u ested , then demanded, the ’f r i l l s * condemned by some c r i t i c s of the A P P E N D IX D (continued) schools today. (?) The g re a te s t m istake made by the schools of the p a s t i s evidenced by the c a re le ss c r i t i c s they produced. These c r i t i c s open t h e ir mouths and yap irre s p o n s ib ly , and w ithout understanding, in v e s tig a tin g , or thoroughly observing th a t which they shout a g a in s t. I only hope today*s schools tu rn out people who th in k before they speak, and then o ffe r con- s tr u c tiv e c r itic is m . From a p ro fe sso r of education and E nglish: I f e e l the term ’Education* i s one of our tro u b le s . I t is so presuming. ’Pedagogy* i s a r e spectable word. . . . To use an a l l in c lu siv e term fo r one d is c ip lin e is p sy ch o lo g ically as w ell as l i t e r a ll y in a c c u ra te . From a p ro fesso r of ed ucation and s o c ia l scien ce: The p ra c tic e of education must not be separated from the A rts and S ciences. They can supplement and stre n g th e n each o th e r. Some educators and some schools of education have made th is m istake. From a p ro fesso r of education: . . . The academicians v s . the e d u c a tio n a lis t is a r e a l problem on any campus. What we need is educators who w ill m aintain a balance between the two. I have had e d u c a tio n a lis ts (the term I use fo r the ex tre m ist) s ta te th a t even E nglish courses need not be given the p ro sp ectiv e te a c h e r. 391 A P P E N D IX B (continued) Prom a professor of education: . . . Schools of education a re ju s t as prone to overemphasize th e ir su b je c ts as are other schools and departm ents. For example, the A.C.S. p r a c tic a lly r e q u ires 45 to 50 hours in chem istry, or n early on©-half of a co lleg e co u rse. What is needed i s to g et the l i b e r a l a r t s professor and the p ro fe sso rs of education to g eth er. L ib e ra l a r ts c o lle g e s are abrogating t h e i r r ig h t to t r a i n teac h ers by refu sin g to take p a r t in plannin g, ' e v a lu a tin g , and implementing teacher tra in in g programs. As one p rin c ip a l s ta te d re c e n tly , fI w ill have nothing to do w ith l i b e r a l a r t s p ro fe s s o rs —they never h e lp — only c r i t i c i z e .* Prom a p ro fesso r of h is to ry and philosophy of education: P ro fesso rs of education teach in g th ese courses should be w ell tra in e d in the r e la te d academic f i e l d — e .g . psychology, h is to r y , e t c . Frequently p ro fe sso rs of education lack th is tr a in in g . Immediate ste p s should be taken by such p ro fe s s io n a l a ss o c ia tio n s as the N ational S o ciety of College Teachers of E ducation to deny a c c re d ita tio n and recog n itio n to i n s t it u t i o n s h irin g such people. Prom a p ro fesso r of education and psychology: In general I am not opposed to any departm ent teaching a course so long as i t i s tau g h t w e ll. The h is to ry department might w ell teach a course on methods of teaching s o c ia l s c ie n c e . In my ex p erience, however, I fin d th a t such courses u su ally include very l i t t l e methodology. They are merely another course in su b je c t m a tte r. A P P E N D IX D (continued) T h e re h a s b e e n c o n s i d e r a b l e o v e r l a p p i n g i n e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s — a s I n many o t h e r f i e l d s * Some o f t h e o v e r l a p p i n g s h o u ld be e l i m i n a t e d . T h ere h av e a l s o b e e n t o o many s p e c i a l i z e d c o u r s e s i n e d u c a t i o n . The r e c e n t te n d e n c y t o i n c l u d e a w id e r a n g e o f l a b o r a t o r y e x p e r i e n c e i s a good t r e n d . d i v e r s i t y o f S ou thern CalifOHBSfe

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An evaluation of personnel services in twelve liberal arts colleges

PDF

Planning of higher education in Nepal: An analysis of resource allocation at Tribhuvan University

PDF

Characteristics of leadership of selected historical leaders in higher education in the United States with an exploratory study of the applicability of these characteristics to modern educational...

PDF

The effect of Kohlberg's theory of moral development in the parochial secondary classroom on levels of moral judgment and dogmatism

PDF

Systems analysis and the development of management information systems in California community colleges

PDF

An analysis of the position of dean of students in selected institutions of higher education

PDF

Higher education in Israel

PDF

Higher education and development in Indonesia: The viability of the multi-purpose function of the community college at the undergraduate level of the university system

PDF

An Analysis Of The Campus Environment Of A Church-Related Liberal Arts College, With Student Enrollment Implications

PDF

Educators' attitudes toward goals and theories of art education

PDF

A survey of the attitudes of school teachers toward problems in education

PDF

The validity of cognitive and affective variables in the prediction of achievement in a small religiously oriented liberal arts college

PDF

Print materials in higher education: Selected issues, resulting changes, "fair use" in the 1976 Copyright Act

PDF

Career/employment possibilities and goals of American doctoral students majoring in international education programs at major United States universities

PDF

The secularization of American higher education: The relationship between religion and the university as perceived by selected university presidents, 1867-1913

PDF

Teachers' and administrators' beliefs about the use of corporal punishment in California public schools

PDF

The emerging structures of mass higher education and the community college concept: Their implications for Brazilian higher education

PDF

The role of the American university in the diffusion of ideologies of development to Latin America: A case study of the University of California at Los Angeles

PDF

The trend of progress in the light of new educational concepts in a group of American colleges dominated by religious influences

PDF

Towards a definition and codification of the concept of "violation" as it occurs in the context of the counseling and psychotherapy interview situation

Asset Metadata

Creator Auerbach, Eugene Charles (author)

Core Title The opposition to schools of education by professors of the liberal arts: A historical analysis

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, higher,education, history of,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c26-426864

Unique identifier UC11246137

Identifier usctheses-c26-426864 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier DP24042.pdf

Dmrecord 426864

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Auerbach, Eugene Charles

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA