year, at the beginning of the year, and at the close of the first term in January, but two years ago we changed our plan by admitting all pupils who would be eligible for admission during the year at the beginning of the year only. By so doing each teacher kept her own pupils and was advanced to the next grade with her class. We have found this plan satisfactory in every respect. The teachers are more in sympathy with the teachers in grades above them and they have been able to discover wherein their work in the past has been weak. We favor the plan of admitting all pupils who are beginners at the first of the year and thus saving the formation of a new beginning class at the middle of the year. Dayton, Ky., L. N. Taylor, superintendent.—Teachers should be changed from one intermediate grade to another often enough to give them a wide and full grasp of their duties as teachers and to keep them out of the ruts of self-satisfied habit, and to keep them on their mettle, but I find it objectionable to promote them regularly with their classes. More than that, I find advantages strongly favoring the semiannual promotion plan, each teacher having two classes doing work half-year apart. This is not consistent with the promotion of teachers with their pupils. Teachers become more flexible in the use of their powers when they change grades occasionally. But the occasional change of teachers as a child goes through the city school system seems to be the right of the child and to his advantage. Taunton, Mass., H. W. Harrub, superintendent.—We do not practice the advancement of teachers with their pupils. In some rooms we have done so, where conditions made that course most advantageous. The general practice would not be feasible. We regard the principle as a valuable one, and intend to use it where it can be applied to good advantage. Waltham, Mass., W. D. Parkinson, superintendent.—We have had no experience which justifies conclusions on the foregoing. In theory affirmations would be easy. But on the whole the question has many practical bearings and it reduces to the alternatives of exposing a child for a longer or a shorter period to the dominating influence of an individual, and consequently of decreasing or increasing the number and variety of such personalities to which he shall be exposed. Personally, I believe that in a fairly permanent and well-selected teaching force it would be better to have pupils continue three years with the same teacher; but if teachers change often anyway, and are comparatively inexperienced, it is probable that there would be more loss than gain in continuing the inexperienced teacher with a class covering new ground instead of letting her pilot a new class over ground she had become somewhat familiar with. Kalamazoo, Mich., S. O. Hartwell, superintendent.-We have done something of this sort occasionally, but have hardly carried it to the point of a plan. At present our emphasis in the lower grades is rather on the modified form of the Gary plan, which accomplishes the same results, so far as special teachers are concerned, but has not embodied this point regularly for the so-called regular teachers. The questions of the blank-at least, the later ones—are evidently framed from the point of good teachers. Now, I think we have our proportion of good teachers; but, like other places, we have at least a proportion of weak ones, and any plan of the kind must be made from that side also. Possibly the plan might bring a concentrated attention on weakness and thus work toward elimination. Kearney, Nebr., Roy E. Cochran, superintendent.-This whole thing depends on the individual teacher. Ideal teachers are few. A change is advisable where the teacher lacks in some qualities advisable to give the pupils. I think longer than three years at any time is an error. Concord, N. H., L. J. Rundlett, superintendent.—We tried it a number of years ago, beginning with the first grade and extending through four years. The experiment was tried with a class of retarded children, with the result that at the end of two years they were able to read any ordinary fourth reader and at the end of three years Cyr's Fifth Reader. I am considering trying the experiment again, and shall be glad to report at the end of that time. Bloomfield, N. J., George Morris, superintendent.-One of our chief reasons for using the plan is to locate teachers in the grade in which they can do the best work. For example, we study a third-grade teacher and think she would make a strong fourth-grade teacher. We have her go on with her class to the fourth grade, and in most cases find our judgment confirmed. Occasionally we feel that this same teacher would do well in departmental work, and only this year we have promoted one or two teachers to departmental work and feel pleased with the change. On the other hand, we frequently feel that a teacher would do better work in a lower grade, and experiment in that direction also. Hackensack, N. J., William E. Stark, supervising principal.-We have semiannual promotions throughout our schools, and many teachers would like to limit their fields to a single half year. We have, however, a definitely adopted policy of making a year the minimum period of consecutive work with a class for any teacher, except in unusual situations. I encourage our teachers to broaden the scope of their work still more, and occasionally a teacher goes on with her class for an additional half year or year. This practice, however, has been so rare that no generalizations can be based upon the matter. I feel that it would be an advantage to schools if more teachers were ready to broaden their range of work, and I hope to be able to use the results which you publish of experience elsewhere to convince the teachers that the proposed plan is practicable. Montclair, N. J., D. C. Bliss, superintendent.—We do not make this plan the regular practice. Rather, it is the occasional plan to fit a peculiar condition or to secure special results. New York, N. Y., William H. Maxwell, superintendent.-I have urged principals wherever it was feasible to advance teachers with their pupils from grade to grade and then to return to a fixed point. A great many principals are doing this. I have not obtained definite statistics as to how many are doing it. In some cases we have two grades for the year. The cycle includes only one year. In other cases it includes three or four years, and never more than six. Newbern, N. C., H. B. Craven, superintendent.-In order to keep teachers out of a rut, I usually change them after teaching a grade for two years, but seldom change a primary teacher to the grammar school or grammar school to high school. Bismarck, N. Dak., Charles C. Root, superintendent.-We have such frequent changes of teachers that the plan can hardly be used here. Kent, Ohio, H. L. Eby.-The greatest objection that I have to keeping the teacher stationary in the grade is the narrowing effect of the custom, both on the teacher directly and on the school indirectly. By that practice the teacher does not see enough of the process to be able to interpret it fully. By doing the same work from year to year the teacher does not acquire standards of value and comparison with which and through which to measure the work being done. A high degree of skill is acquired by limiting the program of the teacher to a single grade, or even a single subject, from term to term. But this custom makes the mistake of assuming the teaching process to be like the part a member of a baseball team plays and that the process of education is like that of a baseball game. All that is required of the individual teacher is to acquire a certain special skill within the limited program. The success of the plan is made to depend upon the degree of special skill each member of the teaching force can bring to the work. If the tools of learning could be controlled with the same precision with which a bat and ball are controlled in the hands of the player, and if the reaction of the pupil toward the subject matter of the curriculum could be as definitely determined as the reaction of the ball player toward the tools of the game, then the plan of keeping the teacher stationary in the grade would have better reason for its existence. But children are not as easily controlled as the inert baseball, nor can a boy's reaction toward the work of the school be as easily determined as can his reaction toward the bat and ball in a game. The two skills are not comparable. Again, the ideal of the factory system of industry, with its minute division of labor, controls the schools far too much. But here, as in the case of the baseball game, industry is dealing with inert material. Nor do the parts of the curriculum bear the same exact relationship to each other as do the many simple parts of manufacture to the completed article. It is not to be desired that they should. I think it is quite generally agreed that while industry is making more and better articles, yet it is unmaking men. The loss of the educative value of industry to society resulting from the highly divided forms of labor threatens the very quality of labor and its product. The problem of labor and industry is, How can highly specialized skill in an uneducative process and the human factor on which the quality of the work so much depends be conserved together? A similar problem confronts educators. Personally, I deplore that the ideal of the factory system has so gripped our schools. It seems to me that your plan of promoting teachers with their pupils is the proper solution of this problem. Alliance, Ohio, B. F. Stanton, superintendent.—I have not followed the general practice of advancing teachers. Where I have done so, in some cases at least, the teacher has been unusually strong, and very satisfactory results have followed. Hamilton, Ohio, Darrell Joyce, superintendent.—We made some trial of promoting teachers with their pupils from grade to grade. While we found that the plan saved some time, we are not now following it, because we also found that at least one-half of the pupils would change within three or four years; that is, a teacher starting with 40 first-grade pupils could expect to have only 20 of the same pupils by the time the fourth grade was reached. I believe, however, that it is not a bad plan if the teachers are efficient. Guthrie, Okla., F. D. Brooks, superintendent.—We promote teachers with pupils where we think it best. It is not a fixed part of the system that applies rigidly in any grades. We also transfer teachers sometimes from lower to higher and from higher to lower grades. When we send the teacher along with her pupils it is because we think she can handle that particular lot of pupils better than another teacher. A few times it has been especially for the teacher's good-she has discovered her weaknesses. Harrisburg, Pa., F. E. Downes, superintendent.-It has been our custom in Harrisburg, for 8 or 10 years at least, for teachers to hold their pupils two years before transferring them to another teacher. Work is arranged in cycles as follows: Second and third years, fourth and fifth years, sixth and seventh years, and eighth and ninth years. Recently we have changed from a ninth-grade elementary to an eighth-grade plan, and just as soon as our ninth grade is eliminated we will also have semiannual promotion. It is our purpose under the new plan to have each teacher, so far as possible, hold her pupils through four half years, or two full years, as at the present time. Of course it will not always be possible to do this. However, when not done, it will be the exception; the rule will be to do it. Our teachers, generally, prefer this method— in fact they have gotten to the point of objecting when they are required to be responsible to the next grade teacher if allowed to hold a class only one year. Logan, Utah, A. Molyneux, superintendent.-The first grade, I believe, partakes too much of specialization to warrant the change of teachers. The sixth, seventh, and eighth grades are segregated from the lower grades. In these grades we do departmental work. This prevents the adoption of this plan above the fifth grade. We have experienced much difficulty in preserving class unity. This is due to new entries and to shifting or changing of residence in the community. Richmond, Va., W. M. Adams, principal.—We are trying out cycles of two entire years and will reach the last term in the cycle with the term ending June, 1915. I am well pleased with the results so far. We shall extend the experiment throughout the primary grades and into the grammar grades (fifth and perhaps sixth years), beginning with February, 1915. Neenah, Wis., E. M. Beeman, superintendent.—We have an assistant in a seventh grade this year who has moved along with about 30 pupils from the fourth grade. There are 75 pupils in this seventh grade. She is so much more effective as a teacher with the 30 than with the strangers that I hope to plan regular promotions in this school and use the new teachers in third and fourth grades where possible. I have always been very particular in the selection of teachers for promotion with pupils and have therefore no record of any failures. I am of the opinion that only teachers of ability can adjust themselves to this plan. For strong teachers, I am convinced, after 11 years of experiment, that it is a wonderful advantage to all concerned. Laramie, Wyo., William M. Sinclair, superintendent.-The plan is in limited operation as yet. We have too many normal-school graduates who want to teach in second or third grades only. Out of more than 100 applicants for grade positions 70 were for second or third. OPINIONS OF TEACHERS. As a number of the superintendents of schools furnished the names of teachers who had had experience in advancement with pupils, and who would therefore be in the best position to judge of the merits of the plan, it seemed important to learn their opinions. Another reason for making inquiry of the teachers is that one could doubtless obtain from them an impression as to how the children responded to the plan. A questionnaire was accordingly sent to the teachers, and 97 replied. They represent 43 schools, in 12 States, and 18 cities. An examination of the list shows that these also are well distributed geographically. Table 2 is presented in three parts. To obtain complete answers for any one State, city, or school, therefore, it is necessary to refer to each part in turn. Thus Tampa, Fla., appears on pages 32, 38, and 44. |