« AnteriorContinuar »
during the present biennium. It was at the Boston meeting of the National Education Association in 1922 that the first public address on the subject was given by Mrs. Katharine M. Cook, chief of the Kural Division of the U. S. Bureau of Education. It was during the same year that a circular was issued on the subject, entitled "Principles in the Consolidated Rural School." This is Bureau of Education Rural School Leaflet No. 18, written by Mrs. Cook.
THE NURSERY-SCHOOL MOVEMENT
The nursery-school movement is one of great significance for early elementary education, since some of these schools are serving as laboratories for securing more adequate knowledge of young children's development. This movement is new in the United States. A few such schools were organized several years ago, that in the Waldin School, New York City, in 1915; in the Bureau of Educational Experiments in 1919; and in the Merrill-Palmer School, Detroit, in 1920. The movement received a great impetus in 1922 from a course of lectures on the subject given by Miss Grace Owen, one of the leaders of the movement in England, who had been brought to the United States by Teachers College for that purpose. One of the New York day nurseries was used as a demonstration school to illustrate the character of nursery school work. During the same year the Ruggles Street Day Nursery, of Boston, was made into a nursery school. Since that time nursery schools have been organized in several cities. Just how many could not be learned, since many of the 600 day nurseries in the country have adopted the name, sometimes without justification. Day nurseries as such are philanthropic in character, and as a rule lack the scientific and educational aspects that characterize the true nursery school. As far as could be learned, about 25 real nursery schools have been organized in 16 different cities. They are as follows: Boston, Cambridge, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Highland Park, Los Angeles, Missoula, Montclair, New Haven, New York, Philadelphia, Pocatello. Schenectady, and Washington, D. C.
These nursery schools are of different types and serve different purposes. Some are practically underage kindergartens, often in public schools. Although it may not be possible to provide all the nursery-school features under these conditions, the children have clean and wholesome rooms, opportunities for play and handwork, usually under the guidance of a trained kindergarten teacher, and medical inspection such as that given the older pupils. Whether the session is for a half day or the whole day, and whether sleeping facilities are provided, depends on the conditions. In some cases the work is so organized as to include instruction to the mothers. Kindergartens of this kind are to be found in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Washington, D. C, and several other cities.
Of a different type are the neighborhood cooperative nursery schools that have been established in several cities. As a rule these are organized and carried on by a committee of parents, under the guidance of or in cooperation with an expert in child care and training. Nursery schools of this type often serve as a laboratory for the mothers in a scientific study of the development of their own and their neighbors' children. It is in this type of work that the American Association of University Women is rendering a great service. The cooperation is of different types, sometimes financial and sometimes educational. The University Cooperative Nursery School of Chicago is conducted by the University Cooperative Nursery School Association, the university providing the room. In Missoula, Mont., the cooperation is between the parents of the children, the University of Montana, and the American Association of University Women. This organization has been instrumental in organizing 19 nursery schools of this type and 99 preschool study clubs. The participation of this organization in work of this type is very new, the resolution to do so having been made at the national meeting of 1923. The funds for this work are contributed by the Laura Spelman Memorial Fund.
The nursery schools of the types described doubtless contribute to the scientific training of a considerable number of parents, but this is but one of the purposes that the nursery school serves. One of the.se is the training of nursery school teachers. Since adequately trained teachers are essential to the progress of the movement, several institutions have organized courses and training facilities in these lines.
As far as known the institutions giving such training are the Merrill-Palmer School, Detroit; Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City; the Ruggles Street Nursery School and Training Center, Boston; the Cleveland Kindergarten Training School, Cleveland: Temple University, Philadelphia; and Southern Branch of the University of California, Los Angeles. It is evident that training for nursery school work must be based upon first-hand knowledge of children, and for this the nursery school furnishes one of the opportunities. The content of the courses must follow the lines in which knowledge is most needed. Most of the courses are still in the experimental stage, however, and need not be discussed here.
A number of nursery schools are serving as research centers for still another end. This is the securing of data concerning children's development in specific lines, for use as the knowledge of it may be needed, or for the formulating of general principles for the guidance of educational procedure. Very valuable work has been done in these and related lines in the Iowa Child Welfare Research Station, the Yale Psycho-Clinic, and the Bureau of Educational Experiments in New York City. Such books as Doctor Gesell's "Preschool Child," Baldwin and Stecker's " Psychology of the Preschool Child," and Johnsons "A Nursery School Experiment" are the results of such experiments and of great value to all students of childhood.
ADULT EDUCATION FOR FOREIGN-BORN AND NATIVE
By Charles M. Herliiiy
Contents.—Americanism and Americanization—Significant Federal census data on size of the immigrant education problem—Size of national illiteracy problem among the native born—A national survey of State programs of adult education in 1925—Federal leadership in adult education—References.
AMERICANISM AND AMERICANIZATION
Americanism embraces the ideals of the good citizen in political, social, economic, and cultural relationships. The definition and interpretation of these ideals determine the scope of one's understanding of the movement of Americanization; that is, those programs and activities that aim to promote Americanism.
It is commonly understood that Americanization work is restricted to education and social service for the foreign born. The school programs of English and citizenship for adult aliens are generally termed Americanization. The school supervisors and teachers in this new type of work, however, are the first to deny that the foreign born are the only group that need instruction and help in learning the principles and ideals that govern the conduct of the good citizen. Moreover, the experienced worker with the foreign born realizes that we can not Americanize immigrants until our native born practice in their daily lives those principles which are commonly understood to be the distinguishing marks of citizenship in the United States. Granting the aim of this work to be the promoting of better citizenship, then the correction of every un-American condition may properly be termed "Americanization work."
Consider our outstanding social problems in America to-day. Ignorance based on illiteracy, due in turn to inadequate school support, racial and religious prejudices and intolerance, poverty, dependency, and all types of social inadequacies are certainly not limited to immigrants. And the correction of these conditions is very definitely a part of our national Americanization problem.
In our political life we have the discomforting situation illustrated in the national election of 1924, when 30,000,000 citizens failed to vote. The percentage of nonvoters in the native-born group was larger in several sections of the country than that of the naturalized citizens. This neglect of the highest privilege of citizenship by 50 per cent of the eligible voters is a most serious phase of our Americanization problem.
The flood of trashy novels, magazines, motion pictures, and plays that is poured out annually to satisfy the low standards of the American public to-day deserves much more attention from parents, educators, and clergymen than is apparently given. Raising the general level of appreciation is obviously a part of our national problem of bettering citizenship.
The term "Americanization" is in disrepute among a large number of the intelligent leaders of the foreign groups in this country. This is due very largely to the utterances of those Americans who believe that the immigrant must conform absolutely to certain fixed standards of thinking and acting in the United States. Despite the fact that there is no agreement and obviously never will be any agreement as to the definition of these standards, it would be absurd for America to scrap the magnificent contributions which her immigrants have brought not only to our industrial and agricultural productivity, but more important still, to the spiritual and cultural life of America. As a Jewish mother in an English class in Chicago well said:
Some of the things taught me in the Old World which I want my children to preserve are respect for parents, tiie teacher, and old age. The tradition for thoroughness and honesty of purpose is also one that the people of the New World would do well to follow. The race for success may result in subordinating religion, high moral standards, and the fine arts, and in considering material gain as the height of achievement.
Are not the standards of conduct and the appreciation of the nobler things of fife as expressed by this immigrant mother valuable contributions to America?
John Daniels, in America Via the Neighborhood, states that Americanization does not mean rigid conformity or injection, but does involve the intelligent participation of native and foreign born in America's upbuilding.
The aim of any sound Americanization program is to promote an intelligent, loyal, united citizenry. The millions of immigrants who have come to America in the past, and those who will continue to come voluntarily in the future, have services to render and gifts to offer, if we but understand their motives and treat them fairly. The evolving of American life and the raising of our standards of citizenship depend on the joint contributions of native and foreign born working together in a spirit of friendly understanding and cheerful cooperation. Americanization applies directly to the immigrant, but the native American must see to it that his life exemplifies the Americanism which we wish the immigrant to emulate.