« AnteriorContinuar »
graduation in well-defined, unequivocal terms, such as the highschool unit, or the quarterly credit hour, or the semester credit hour.
Percentages of graduation requirements from the tioo-year courses for highschool graduates in certain State normal schools. [Based on gross data shown in table.)
Requirements for graduation (percentages) from the two-year courses for highschool graduates in certain State normal schools.
[Gross data as derived from catalogues reduced to percentages in table.]
» Periods per week per term.
2 Periods per week per semester.
3 Requires some additional work in rhetoricals and essays, time not specified.
* Computed for course for teachers in upper grades, as given on page 53 of the normal-school bulletin issued by the State department of public instruction.
6 Unit of credit based on completion of term's work in subject.
• Requires additional work in school management from students expecting to become principals.
7 Additional requirements in music, penmanship, and physical training, time not specified.
8 A requirement in physical culture, time not specified.
9 Computed for course'for teachers in upper grades.
10 Education (page 24 of catalogue) is assumed to include 4 hours of required practice (page 30).
Requirements for graduation [percentages) from the two-year courses for highschool graduates in certain State normal schools—Continued.
Further discussion of practice teaching facilities.—As intimated a number of times in this bulletin, the organization of practice teaching probably constitutes the most important single phase of the actual training of teachers by normal schools. In view of the importance of the work, Chapter V was entirely devoted to the discussion of the facilities for practice teaching in any given community as a factor in determining and limiting the extent to which a normal school established there could -serve the State by training teachers. This involved an elaborate analysis of the amount of practice teaching to be required, the conditions under which it should be carried on, and standards for measuring the amount which a given number of children might afford. The essential points were (1) that a large part of the practice teaching should be done under regular school conditions and (2) that every prospective teacher should do from a minimum of 100 hours to a maximum of 90 half days of actual teaching. Again, in the chapter on normal-school faculties, the number and salaries of the critic teachers were discussed with emphasis on the very great importance of the latter in really improving the efficiency of prospective teachers.
Four factors to be considered in this chapter.—The present chapter will take up a consideration of the actual organization and conduct of practice teaching. The most important factors in this organization are (1) the director of the training school and his staff of critic teachers, (2) the detailed printed course of study of the training school, (3) the practical and differentiated character of the departmental courses in the normal school in relation to the course of study of the training school, and (4) a carefully standardized routine (described in mimeographed or printed form) for guiding the administration of the practice teaching.
1. THE DIRECTOR AND STAFF OF THE TRAINING SCHOOLS.
Director should be a master of elementary- and normal-school problems.—The director of the training school is the most important officer in a normal school excepting the president. He should possess many of the same qualifications as were described for the president on page 42. He should be thoroughly informed concerning all phases of elementary school work—that is, he should be able to make a good detailed course of study for all subjects in all grades and should have good critical judgment in the choice of methods. He should have broad training in education and be qualified to teach most of the courses in the department of education. He should have unusual administrative ability, including both- force and tact, in order that he might ably assist the president in securing efficient cooperation by all members of the faculty in training prospective teachers for the real concrete detailed tasks which they will undertake when they begin to teach.
Director should have full charge of training school and department of education.—If he is such a competent person as here described, he should be given full charge of the training school and of the department of education (including psychology), subject only to supervision by the president. In view of the importance of his position, if he is thoroughly competent every effort should be made to keep him for many years of service.
Director's salary should he larger than any other instructor's.— Hence his salary may justly be 50 per cent larger than that of any other instructor in the faculty, since the loss of a competent departmental teacher is not one-tenth as serious in the continuous efficient conduct of the training of teachers in the normal school as the loss of a competent director of the training school. In the chapter on salaries we noted one example of the recognition of the superior value and services of such a director of the training department, namely, in the State normal school at De Kalb, 111., where his salary was $4,500, compared with $5,000 for the president, $3,450 for the professor of pedagogy, and $2,530 for most heads of departments. The undoubted superiority of the organization of the practice situation at De Kalb certainly justifies this large salary. Some of the details of this organization will be discussed in later sections of this chapter.
Competent critics needed; each should supervise only eight practice teachers at one time.—The importance of the immediate assistants of the director of the training department, namely, the critic teachers, was emphasized on page 73 and the number needed in a typical faculty was discussed on page 69. It was estimated that under the best conditions for the children one critic teacher could supervise only 12 graduates a year if these did all of their teaching (100 hours) under one critic (see pages 68 to 73). This would mean 4 practice teachers a term for each critic. If each practice teacher taught only half of her 100 hours under one critic (5 hours a week for 10 weeks) and did the remainder under another critic, each critic could supervise during 1 week 4 practice teachers for each of the 2 groups of 20 pupils under her charge, making a total of 8 practice teachers per critic teacher. In normal schools, where the importance of practice teaching is recognized, critic teachers are not assigned more than 8 practice teachers at one time and in some places not more than 4. On the other hand, printed reports of some schools show as many as 15 to 20 practice teachers under the direction of 1 critic teacher at one time, and oral reports are occasionally given of critic teachers having charge of 25 to 30 practice teachers at one time. Obviously this is absurd, when one takes into consideration the needs of the children and of the practice teachers and the available energy of a critic teacher. The teaching of the children under these conditions must be far inferior to that in the best public schools and the supervision far inferior to that which a beginning teacher would receive under a good building principal in a good public-school system.
Competent supervision and criticism require unusual skill.—The greatest art in teaching is the skilled supervision of teaching. Hence competent critic teachers must be unusually well-qualified persons. They must be good teachers themselves, must be able to analyze teaching so as to describe it and discuss it with practice teachers, and must be able to direct young teachers under conditions of unusual nervous strain which call for the exercise of great tact and discretion.
Needless to say, the personal factor is such a large element in the matters discussed in this section of the chapter that examples from normal schools must be omitted. In the next section, on course of study, however, matters are so objective that examples can be safely given.
2. COURSE OF STUDY OF THE TRAINING SCHOOL.
Good printed course more necessary even than in city schools.— The second factor in determining the efficiency of the practice teaching in a normal school is the existence of a detailed printed course of study of the training school. The importance of such a course of study in improving the efficiency of State and city school systems is generally recognized. In such systems the teachings of a single group of children in the regular subjects is usually done by one teacher for a year. If a detailed printed course of study is important in such cases, it is obviously of much greater importance in a training school where a single group of children may have anywhere from 4 to SO different teachers in the regular subjects during a year. Apart from the efficiency of the training of the practice teachers, the welfare of the children demands some such definite guide for practice.
Welfare of the children emphasized in New Hampshire training schools.—This phase of the subject is well presented in the report of