the dean of that engineering faculty told me not long ago that there is no preparation for a student of engineering equal to the oldfashioned classical course. In a bulletin on vocational training recently issued by the Association of Collegiate Alumnae, 206 institutions offering special and technical training to women are listed. Of these, 20 specify no entrance requirements; 25 ask a high school diploma or its equivalent; 77 base admission on the College Entrance requirement; 18 admit by special examination ; 38 require a bachelor's degree or its equivalent as shown by examination; 22 require one year or more of college work; 3 require normal training and 3 graduate degrees. So far as I can discover no vocational subjects are a required part of the preparation for admission to any of these schools. In some instances a minimum amount of vocational work is accepted. This seems to me to speak rather eloquently of the firmness of the foundation laid by traditional training.

These instances with others that we are meeting frequently would seem to indicate that to its other advantages a liberal educacation is adding a considerable commercial value. But, aside from the indications of the practical value of a liberal education, is it too much to hope that learning may be cherished for learning's sake in this great country of ours ? That culture for culture's sake may not be despised? And is not discipline a worthy end in itself ? Why is learning as represented by traditional training aristocratic? Surely not because it is confined to the rich and to the great. No one familiar with large public Secondary Schools will find any reason to question the absolute democracy of the personnel of the College preparatory courses and no one acquainted with the results of this training and the achievements of its product can question its usefulness, its value and its inspiring influence in lives otherwise blank, bleak and drab.

In the school I know best more than one-third of the enrollment is from choice in the college preparatory courses. No such proportion of the school will finally enter college, I regret to say, but they and their parents have faith that along this path of liberal education lies strength of mind and of heart. There are many such "seekers after light" the country over and in our eagerness to provide what we have labeled “the practical" and "the useful” there is danger that their claims may not receive fair consideration. There is sufficient evidence in the record of the achievements of these young women to explain why technical schools prefer a pretty thorough preparation in liberal studies and also sufficient evidence to indicate that careful preparation in liberal studies has its immediate practical value — for not a few of them have gone from the school room into the business world and have met with success becaused they have been trained to think — and the young woman who can think may be depended upon to do. And again, why must culture be mentioned with a sneer as if it were not a very real and a very important factor in the lives of individuals, of communities and of nations? While those of us who daily contemplate young America wending his happy way through pleasant educational pastures, browsing a little here and nibbling a bit there, and at the end proudly displaying a handsome diploma, will, I am sure, agree that disciplinary subjects shall forever be encouraged. And so, my plea is for the encouragement of liberal studies in high schools in recognition of their proved value to generations of boys and girls, for a just acknowledgment of the plain duty of high schools to prepare boys and girls for a larger life than mere wage-earning. Scholarship and culture must be preserved in any nation that is to be truly great.

The discussion is turning, the pendulum is coming to normal; we are reaching the very certain conviction that the past in education was not all bad, that the present is not all good and that real progress will be made only by taking the best from past and from present into the future as we go. There is plenty of room in the world for both forms of education and plenty of work for the adherents of both sides of the discussion. I cannot believe that what is being called "progressive" or "democratic” education will ever find itself firmly established until it lays its own foundation in the solid rock of discipline, of thoroughness and of concentration of thought and effort and gives over its apparent attempt to raise itself upon the ruins of traditional training. It has seemed to me an indication of weakness that much of the support of the “new” education has taken the form of condemning the old. I realize that much of the discussion has had for its object the drawing of public attention to the new cause---a trick of advertising entirely unworthy the magnitude and the importance of the problem. But the smoke of battle is lifting and soon we shall all see more clearly

and in better perspective. We shall recognize that preparation for wage-earning is only one part of preparation for life — and though — with a larger vision and a broader sympathy we shall provide for those whose circumstances limit their years of preparation we shall encourage, nay insist that, all who may shall acquire that larger, fuller, broader, preparation which makes for complete living.

Just now the public is inclined to charge the schools with the whole responsibility of preparing boys and girls for complete living and it is perfectly true that the schools' responsibility is and ought to be much larger than it was years ago when school-teaching was confined to the three R’s and living a very much simpler problem than it is today. More than that every one with a cause to exploit sees in the schools — particularly in the public schools — the proper medium for exploitation until that definite work for which schools are organized is crowded to the wall. An earnest woman much interested in a great and good cause and grievously disappointed that it could not be made a part of the course of study said to me not long ago "Are the schools never going to teach boys and girls life?” We never are. We never can. Life is taught by experience and the lesson learned by most of us unfortunately when the time has come to give it up. Schools cannot anticipate and so prepare boys and girls for all the experiences that life will bring to them. What they can do with the sympathetic cooperation of parents is to equip boys and girls with strong bodies, with trained minds, and with an ambition to give to the world the best that in them lies. To do this we must remember first that there are three vitally important factors in the education of boys and girls — their parents, their schools and their associations, and the school cannot do the work of all three without sacrificing its own peculiar function. It does seem too generally true that homes are not bearing their full share of the burden, and in our eagerness to give the child full measure we have made place in our school organization for many things which properly belong elsewhere. I make no plea for the shirking of one iota of its responsibility by the school; but I do protest against the growing tendency to hold the teacher responsible for the whole life of the child. Five hours of five days of perhaps forty weeks is the teacher's maximum time allowance per year with her class of forty or more pupils and she cannot do the work of mother, father, minister, physician and friend, and provide education at the same time, no matter how willing she may be nor how pressing the need.

And second, we must remember that preparation for successful living even in this very material age is more,

more, much more, than

preparation for wage-earning. Remembering this, we shall no longer hear that too common question—“Why should my boy study history if he's going to be a clerk, or my girl mathematics if she is going to be a dressmaker ?” There is absolutely no reason for it, if clerking and dressmaking are to be all of life for them. But are they?

Suppose, for the sake of argument, we swim for a moment with the current of this very practical age and grant that ability to earn a living — that is, ability to earn the wherewithal by which one may live — is preparation for life. What are the essential factors in earning one's living successfully today — it is not so simple as it once was. There are, I believe, five fundamental requirements

1. Good health.
2. A well trained and a well stored mind.
3. A genuine and a generous human interest.
4. A truly religious spirit.

5. Technical or professional equipment in the field in which one is to work.

It may seem to many that the first and the last are the only really important factors and that three and four, at least, are quite aside from the question. Surely a person in good health and trained to a given kind of work can earn a living. True he can earn food and shelter, but is it not also true that — even in this very material age — food and shelter are no longer a living. I believe that nothing short of these five factors is equipment for earning a living today and I am very sure that nothing short of them is equipment for life.

If this be true what do we mean by these five fundamental factors which are so essential. By good health I do not mean strength for a hammer throwing contest nor fleetness of foot for a marathon race nor skill to acquire the basket ball championship, glorious as all these things may be-but rather all round development attained through a knowledge of and obedience to the laws of hygiene and good common sense. Proper food, proper clothing, clean living, clean thinking, self-control and temperance in all things.

By a well-trained and a well-stored mind I mean a mind prepared to think and to act, ready to bring the forces of knowledge and of intelligence to bear upon the problems of life; a mind so furnished that leisure as well as working hours shall be spent worthily, happily, and profitably. Leisure hours are as many or more than working hours and preparation for them quite as important. More and more is the cultivation of the spirit a potent influence in real success.

A genuine and a generous human interest seems to me to be the application of the Golden Rule to daily life and obedience to the commandment “to love thy neighbor as thyself” while a truly religious spirit indicates a reverent recognition of the fatherhood of God and a sympathetic understanding of the brotherhood of man. With these four factors established it will be time to add technical or professional training which must always mean careful, systematic, specialized and concentrated study in a particular field of endeavor ability to bring to bear upon one's work the best thought and the best methods of the day and the highest skill of which one is capable.

And so once more my plea is for the encouragement of liberal studies because I believe they are the potent influence in such preparation as this — and because I believe that the product of such preparation as this must be self-reliant, self-respecting, highminded, strong hearted young men and young women with welltrained minds in strong and vigorous bodies and with the capacity for service to themselves, to the community, to the state and to the nation developed to its highest power.

[ocr errors]
« ForrigeFortsett »