(2) academic work in their special departments, (3) professional training in their special departments.

Normal-school instructor's work centers in course of study of local public schools. Large possibilities.—It is highly important that the detailed concrete nature of the task of a normal-school departmental instructor be kept constantly in mind. The beginning and end of his endeavor should be the course of study in his particular subject in the community (usually a State or district) where the normal school is located. Specific growth in power to teach this course of study should be secured in his normal-school students. All materials and methods which are used should be definitely selected because they introduce students to practical teaching processes that they can carry out with classes of the size and type that they will have in the public schools. While this may seem to offer a narrow and unattractive outlook to the normal-school instructor, as a matter of fact it opens up such large possibilities in the way of preparing textbooks and materials for use in the grades that few instructors measure up to its possibilities. Many who hold normal-school positions consider themselves too big for this type of detailed work, and are inefficient as a consequence.

Best combination of characteristics for successful instructor.— There can be very little doubt that intimate contact with the problems of public-school teaching is the best possible training for the normal-school teacher. In general, such contact is more readily and satisfactorily obtained through teaching experience in the public schools. In some cases careful scientific observation of school practices may serve to give the requisite training, but in ordinary cases such observation is not adequate in duration or intimacy to give the preparation necessary.

Parallel with practical experience and no less important is thorough training in subject matter and in the fundamental principle of the science of education. There can be no doubt that the tests of intellectual competency have sometimes been neglected in the selection of normal-school teachers. It would be a mistake to omit contact with schools; it is equally a mistake at this time, when education is being studied from the point of view of science, to fall short in rigid scientific standards.

Salaries. Relative salaries most important.-As a final aspect of the faculties of normal schools, we shall consider briefly the matter of salaries. Here again the gross salaries paid are not so important as certain relationships between the salaries of different officers within the same normal school and certain matters of per capita cost, which will be taken up in the next chapter. However, in order to make concrete some of the relationships which we desire to discuss, we shall present certain data concerning the actual salaries paid.

Massachusetts salaries typical of well-developed system.-For the Massachusetts normal schools the situation with regard to salaries of instructors is discussed by Commissioner Snedden in his report for 1912-13 in the following paragraph (p. 35):

At the outset of their work in the normal schools their salaries have not been large about $1,000 per year for women and from $1,500 to $1,800 for men. The maximum salaries available-usually after many years of service-are $1,200 and occasionally $1,500 for women, and $2,000 to $2,500 for men.

The above salaries are probably for the regular academic year, not including summer instruction.

Idaho salaries typical of small young school.-A typical schedule for a small school is that for the State normal school at Albion, Idaho. It occurs in the report of the school for 1911-12 and does not include summer instruction. It is as follows (p. 30):

INSTRUCTORS' PAY ROLL, ALBION (IDAHO) STATE NORMAL SCHOOL, 1912–13.

It will be noticed that this faculty approximates roughly the theoretical minimum small faculty outlined earlier in the chapter. Michigan normal-school salaries average high.-As a third example the salary schedule of the State normal school at Mount Pleasant, Mich., is given. This seems to include summer instruction in the annual salaries. It is fairly typical of the salaries in the Michigan State normal schools and is printed along with those of the other schools in the 1912 report of the State board of education (p. 59).

Large salaries for principal officers at De Kalb, Ill.—A schedule that resembles the Michigan schedules in general range of salaries is that of the State normal school at De Kalb, Ill., except in the following special items, according to the report of the board of trustees for 1911-12 (p. 21) and a letter from the president: The president received an annual salary of $5,000; the supervisor of training, $4,500; and the professor of pedagogy, $3,450. One primary critic received a salary of $2,000, but the other critics received about $1,000 each.

An efficient president should have proportionately a very large salary. Perhaps the most important relationship within the salary budget of a normal school that is worth considering is the rela

tive amount of the president's salary as compared with those of the other officers. As indicated in our discussion of the control of normal schools, the president is usually the great dominant factor in determining the character of any school. In order to be a striking success, he must be a sort of universal genius as far as the work of elementary schools and normal schools is concerned. He ought to know all about the needs of the elementary schools of the State (as well as the high schools in a few cases), and he ought to be very well-informed concerning just what should be done in each department of the normal school. Furthermore, he ought to be able to select instructors who are competent to do their special tasks as described on page 42 and to see that they succeed. With the exception of the director of the training department, it would appear that the position of any other member of the faculty is relatively insignificant as compared with that of the president. In fact, in many schools, the vacating of the instructorships in some departments for several years would have little effect on the efficiency of the graduates of the school. In view of these facts, if the president of a normal school is the type of efficient person postulated above, he deserves a relatively large salary as compared with members of the faculty. As an educational officer he is a much more important leader than the president of a college or small university, although as a financial officer he may not be so important.

Good critic teachers highly important; should command good salaries. The other relationship between salaries within a given normal school which we shall consider is between the salaries of the critic teachers and the salaries of the departmental instructors or professors. The point of departure for our consideration here is the fact that every normal-school graduate who has had the good fortune to teach for 100 hours under the careful supervision of a superior critic teacher has probably profited more in terms of efficiency from this experience than from any 1,000 hours of departmental instruction in the normal school. This being the case, it is highly important that sufficient money be set aside in the budget for salaries of critic teachers to secure such superior supervision for all prospective graduates.

Good critic should receive superior grade-teacher's salary, plus training salary.—Just how this should be paid to individuals involves a variety of considerations which we can not carry through to their logical conclusion here. For example, to begin with, a superior critic who is teaching 40 children would probably receive $800 to $1,000 in a good city system simply for teaching the children. Hence, this item ought to be assumed as a part of fundamental training-school maintenance to begin with. The question then arises, How much should

she be paid in addition as a factor in the training of normal-school graduates? Since she can train only about 12 graduates a year, this becomes a question of how much the school is willing to pay for a service which, as postulated above, is more valuable than any other service in the school, but is rendered to only a few students. We shall not attempt to give a precise answer to the question which we have raised, but shall say in general that some normal schools would greatly increase their concrete effectiveness by subtracting money from the salaries of departmental instructors and using it to increase the effectiveness of the supervision of practice teaching.