« AnteriorContinuar »
cation, in the psychology of high-school instruction, in methods of teaching in high schools, and in high-school administration the time spent in professional study by the prospective high-school teacher will be largely wasted as far as improving his efficiency as a highschool teacher is concerned.
Academic high-school departments in normal schools tend to expand.—Some of the State normal schools that seem to be the most concerned about becoming colleges for training high-school teachers have themselves barely graduated from the rank of high schools; that is, approximately 50 per cent of their students are still of high-school rank. Moreover, some of the same schools have been least successful in developing the type of training courses for elementary teachers which are generally admitted to be of first importance, namely, carefully differentiated courses with extensive provision for carefully supervised practice teaching. Probably the fact that they have been largely high schools, providing a large amount of purely academic instruction, explains the fact that they want to become colleges doing the same type of work. If they ceased to be high schools (as they must when local high schools develop), and became strictly effective normal schools for training elementary teachers, they would have to abolish their departments of Latin, German, chemistry, physics, and probably certain other departments. Obviously, the teachers in these departments, many of whom have been connected with the school for years (giving courses of high-school grade), do not desire to seek high-school positions elsewhere; they would prefer to become college professors. Needless to say, the necessity of transferring these teachers to other positions in the State should not be permitted to interfere for a moment with the abolishing of their department if this process seemed best to unprejudiced expert central State authorities who were making plans to have the State institutions serve the State most economically and effectively.
Should investigate per capita costs before establishing new advanced academic courses.—Moreover, in any State where the problem of establishing in State normal schools new departments of foreign languages, advanced mathematics, physics, and chemistry was being considered, the central State authorities would do well to look into the probable registration and consequent per capita costs in such departments.
The above argument is not intended to show that normal schools should not undertake the training of high-school teachers. To do so may be part of the best plan to supply the State with such teachers. It is merely intended to point out that it involves just as special an assumption of new, extra, specific tasks by the normal school as is involved in the establishing of new courses in any higher educational institution.
Examples of discussions by State authorities of training highschool teachers.—In keeping with the discussion up to this point, reference will be made to three States in which the problem of training high-school teachers is being given serious consideration, namely, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Minnesota.
Massachusetts: Most high-school teachers are college graduates without professional training.—Massachusetts has been a leader in educational development generally, and has certainly taken high rank in the matter of training elementary teachers. It would not be presumptuous to infer that it will do equally well eventually in providing professional training for high-school teachers. The whole problem is discussed at length by Commissioner Snedden in his report for 1912-13 (pp. 36^1). A few quotations will present certain aspects of the situation. Concerning the present staff of high-school teachers of the State he says (p. 37):
In the main, the high schools of the Commonwealth find their teachers among the graduates of the private and endowed colleges, of which there are nearly a score in the State. These graduates vary greatly as to the kind and degree of their professional preparation for the work of teaching. The fact that high schools now rarely employ as teachers persons not possessing an academic degree insures that these teachers have a fair general education. In perhaps a majority of cases they have had considerable college instruction in subjects closely related to those which they are expected to teach in the high schools. A minority of them have had, in addition, college courses in such subjects as the theory and practice of teaching, the history of education, educational psychology, and principles of method given by the departments of education which, within comparatively recent years, have been established in various higher institutions of learning.
It must, however, be said that, in spite of the equipment described above, almost all college graduates employed as teachers in high schools are, in relation to the work they are expected to do, deficient in professional training. Even though they have had courses in the subjects which they intend to teach, and also some theoretical courses in education, they necessarily approach their work as learners, as apprentices, to whom practical means and methods of effectively teaching boys and girls are as yet almost wholly unknown.
Continue to rely on colleges for high-school teachers.—Concerning the desirability of the State organizing special facilities for training secondary teachers, Mr. Snedden says (p. 39):
In Massachusetts, however, it seems inexpedient for the State to enter upon such work until existing institutions shall have had full opportunity to demonstrate their capacity to deal with this problem. They have heretofore trained substantially all such teachers, and have met the demands of the State and local communities in so far as these have been expressed in law or through such formal requirements as certification standards.
Stimulate professional training by certification requirements.— In order to make sure that graduates of existing institutions shall have adequate professional training, Mr. Snedden recommends the development of a scheme of certification of teachers which will necessitate the organization of adequate professional courses in these institutions.
Supt. Morrison would not train high-school teachers in normal schools.—The general issues discussed earlier in this chapter are clearly expressed by State Supt. Morrison, of New Hampshire, in connection with the problem of training high-school teachers for that State. In his report for 1913-14 he writes as follows (p. 163):
The question will perhaps naturally suggest itself, Why not train highschool teachers in the State normal schools? There are several good reasons why this is not practicable.
In the first place, the normal schools have enough and more than enough to do in the training of teachers for the elementry schools.
Secondly, teachers in the secondary schools need four years of academic as well as professional preparation, and they need the ripening process which comes out of four years of study. The normal-school program calls for two years of strictly professional training. To provide for the academic training of high-school teachers would necessitate the duplication of every existing normal school faculty with an academic faculty.
Finally, even were this done, the normal schools thus enlarged could not hope to offer the general advantages of the larger institutions, and the result would necessarily be an inadequate enrollment of inferior material.
Minnesota: Cooperation of State authorities postponed framing of high-school teachers in normal schools.—In Minnesota we find an excellent example of the various educational forces of the State working together on the problem of giving degree courses in the normal schools as well as the matter of training high-school teachers. The State Normal School Board of Minnesota, of which the State superintendent is ex officio president, seems to cooperate with the presidents of the several State normal schools so as to develop efficiently the general normal-school situation. Moreover, the present president of the State university is an unusually broad-minded efficient educational and administrative expert. This situation makes it almost certain that any development in the training of teachers will be for the best interests of the State.
Attitude of the president of the Winona State Normal School.—As regards the training of high-school teachers, President Maxwell, of the State normal school at Winona, states that the Minnesota normal schools haVe no ambitions in this direction. The following paragraphs, quoted from his report for 1910-12, contain his statement (p. 105):
There is no ambition on the part of the Minnesota normal schools to direct their efforts toward the preparation of high-school teachers. Our field is the elementary school. The elementary school alone, with increased salaries, with demands for better-prepared teachers in all grades, teachers of departmental work, and trained specialists and supervisors sufficiently justifies the enlarged facilities. The 80 or 90 high-school normal-training departments are seeking their teachers from among the number of experienced normal-school graduates and have already created a demand which normal schools are unable to supply. Indeed, there is no field where the service of scholarship is more needed than in elementary education, rural and graded, none where the problems will continue to grow more as years go by, none whose solution will more fully minister to the welfare of the State. The normal school should regard these problems of elementary education as distinctly and quite exclusively its own and attack them with the enthusiasm and energy inspired by a great mission.
Four-year degree courses for elementary teachers considered.—A part of the history of the movement to develop four-year courses for elementary-school teachers and supervisors by the Minnesota State normal schools, and a description of the cooperative manner in which the problem Avas attacked are given in the following paragraphs quoted from the report of the president of the State normal school board for 1911-12: »
The harmonious relations between the normal schools and the State University and the unity which is characteristic of the State's educational institutions is evidenced by the arrangement made between the normal schools and the university, whereby advanced normal graduates receive credit for two years of study upon entering the college of education. Through this arrangement, by two years' additional work in the college of education, the advanced graduate may earn the degree of that college. It is thought that this will have the effect of encouraging a larger number of young men to enter the normal schools, teach for a period, and at the same time afford an opportunity for both men and women who complete the advanced normal course to apply their training toward the earning of a college degree.
At the last session of the legislature a bill was introduced which had the approval of this board aiming to extend the present normal-school course by two years, thus making it possible to give the normal students a more thorough and complete training, and to train principals for graded schools, teachers for the training departments in high schools, and make the normal schools more effective agencies in the leadership and direction of public-school work.
This act failed to pass largely because of the fear that it would make possible, in time, the conversion of the several normal schools into normal colleges. At Its meeting in August of the present year the normal board and the presidents, after a full discussion of this subject, decided to renew the request. In this connection a conference was held between the normal hoard and the presidents, with representatives of the State university, the private colleges, the members of the high-school hoard, and its inspectors. This conference developed a very friendly spirit and cooperative interest on the part of the educational institutions of the State and resulted in the normal board, upon the recommendation of the normal-school presidents, postponing for the present further activity in the effort to secure a law necessary to make the proposed extended course of study attractive to the students desiring to obtain the degree of bachelor of education.
Normal schools may soon give four-year degree courses for elementary teachers.—These quotations from the Minnesota reports illustrate the fact that (a) the training of high-school teachers and (b) the conferring of degrees by State normal schools may be separate problems. Several normal schools now give three-year courses
1 Report of Superintendent of Tublic Instruction for Minnesota, 1912, p. 95.
for high-school graduates who expect to teach in elementary schools, and it is quite conceivable that similar four-year courses will eventually prove necessary or desirable, and that bachelor's degrees should be conferred on the completion of such courses. These degrees should not be given for three-year courses, however.
Three-year degree courses discredit normal schools.—It is very unfortunate for normal schools that some of them have given or are giving bachelor's degrees for the completion of three years of work beyond high school. The fundamental reason for giving such degrees is not easy to ascertain, but the practice is probably related to the fact that it is difficult to get many students to attend most normal schools beyond the third year of collegiate work. They prefer to go to the State university. Even to get them to do three years of collegiate work in the normal school the degree must be offered as a special inducement. This has had the very bad effect of discrediting normal-school work in the estimation of many persons. They assume that since normal schools give a " cheap " degree, therefore all of the work of the normal schools is " cheap," unthorough, and incomplete. As a matter of fact, a normal school giving a bachelor's degree for three years of collegiate work may be superior to many standard colleges in the strength of its faculty and of its individual courses.