EDUCATION for All American Youth Educational Policies Commission National Education Association of the "United States and the American Association of School Administrators 1201 Sixteenth Street, Northwest, Washington 6, D. C. The Educational Policies Commission Appointed by the National Education Association of the United States and the American Association of School Administrators Appointed Members ALEXANDER J. STODDARD, Chairman FRANCIS L. BACON EDWIN A. LEE JAMES BRYANT CONANT PAUL T. RANKIN PRUDENCE OUTRIGHT MAYCIE SOUTHHALL EDMUND E. DAY GEORGE D. STODDARD CHARLES B. GLENN * GEORGE D. STRAYER SIDNEY B. HALL PEARL A. WANAMAKER Ex-Officio Members N. L. ENGELHARDT F. L. SCHLAGLE WlLLARD E. GlVENS S. D. SHANKLAND BEULAH K. WALKER Advisory Members J. W. STUDEBAKER GEORGE F. ZOOK WILLIAM G. CARR, Secretary 1201 Sixteenth Street, Northwest Washington 6, D. C. Foreword VOLUME stems from a firm conviction on the part of -L the Educational Policies Commission that . the extension, adaptation, and improvement of secondary education is essen- tial both to the security of our American institutions and to the economic well-being of our people. Such a development in secondary education can and should be brought about within the framework of the 'local and state educational systems. If the federal government will help to finance and encourage such a development, and if the local and state leadership will do its part, it will be neither necessary nor desirable for the federal government itself to operate educational services for the youth of the nation. In the nearly three years in which it has been developing these policies for secondary education, the Commission has tried to dig beneath statements of general principles and to sug- gest in some detail how approved principles can be carried out in practice. It should be emphasized, however, that the programs of education described in this volume are not intended to be blueprints for local school systems. On the contrary, they are merely samples of the many different possible solutions to the problem of meeting the educational needs of all American youth. These samples are offered in the hope that they will stimulate and aid the planning and action which are already under way in many states and communities and which soon must be under- taken in all. Plans for postwar education are too complex to be improvised in a few months after the problems are already upon us. Now is the time, the one and the best time, for citizens and educators in thousands of American communities to join forces in plan- ning the kinds of schools which America needs and must have. [v] Acknowledgment SINCE FEBRUARY 1942, when the Educational Policies Com- mission voted to begin the preparation of this volume, many groups and individuals have contributed to its development as the document passed through a series of careful revisions. The Commission wishes to acknowledge here the valuable assistance that it has received in this process. First, and above all, it wishes to thank GEORGE L. MAXWELL, assistant secretary of the Commission: Under the direction of the Commission, he has drafted the larger part of this volume including the chapters on American City and Farmville. Noth- ing that the Commission can say in appreciation of his skill and untiring effort could be a greater tribute to him than the unus- ual combination of broad vision and practical common sense revealed in every page of these chapters. The opening and concluding chapters, constituting a frame- work around the document, were written by the secretary of the Commission, WILLIAM G. CARR, who has also been respon- sible for coordination of the efforts of the many individuals and groups who have contributed in one way or another to the development of this volume. In November 1942, the secretary and the president of the American Vocational Association, L. H. DENNIS and JOHN J. SEIDEL, met with the Commission in Washington to assist in reviewing a prospectus of the document. In January 1944, members of a committee of the National Association of Secondary-School Principals met to review the report. The membership of this committee included PAUL E. ELICKER, OSCAR GRANGER, E. P. GRIZZELL, E. R. JOBE, GALEN JONES, J. PAUL LEONARD, and HUGH H. STEWART. In April 1944, a committee of the American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation met in New York [vii] City to present the viewpoint of this group on the program in health and physical education. Members of the group were LAURENTINE COLLINS, WILLIAM L. HUGHES, BEN W. MILLER, JAY B. NASH, A. H. PRITZLAFF, C. H. McCLOY, JESSE F. WIL- LIAMS, and PAULINE B. WILLIAMSON. A draft of several extensive sections of the "American City" chapter was prepared by PAUL T. RANKIN. AUBREY A. DOUG- LASS wrote a draft of the chapter on "A State System of Youth Education." OLIVER H. BIMSON, C. L. CUSHMAN, F. F. EL- LIOTT, PAUL L. ESSERT, and R. H. MATHEWSON reviewed certain sections of the manuscript. The following persons reviewed the entire document in a pre- liminary form and prepared critical analyses of it for considera- tion by the Commission: WALTER F. DOWNEY, WILLIAM DUN- CAN, CLAUDE FUESS, CLINTON S. GOLDEN, ALONZO GRACE, H. P. HAMMOND, DABNEY LANCASTER, JOHN L. LOUNSBURY, ALEXANDER MEIKLEJOHN, ERNEST O. MELBY, HOWARD PILLS- BURY, MAURICE F. SEAY, JOHN J. SEIDEL, and HENRY M. WRISTON. With the cooperation of the National Association of Sec- ondary-School Principals, a short digest and interpretation of this volume has been prepared by J. PAUL LEONARD. This will be issued soon as a publication of the Association. Deeply grateful as we are to all the persons named above, the Commission assumes final responsibility for the document. [viii] Table of Contents PAGE Foreword v Acknowledgment vii CHAPTER I. Could It Happen? 1 II. For All American Youth 11 IIL The Farmville Community School 23 IV: Schools for Youth in American City 171 V. A State System of Youth Education 339 VI. The History That Must Be Written 383 Index 411 [ix] CHAPTER I Could It Happen? EDUCATIONAL CHANGE is bound to come, and to come swiftly. Only the nature and direction of change may be controlled. No one can surely foretell the future of American education, for no one knows what American educators, boards of educa- tion, and legislatures will do during this critical period. We can, however, foresee the alternatives. And, by a study of our past experience, we can predict the general consequences of each of the lines of action or inaction which the public schools may pursue. The alternative possibilities, very briefly stated, are these: 1. A federalized system of secondary education may be cre- ated, at first to compete with and ultimately to replace the tra- ditional American system of state and local control of education. 2. A wisely planned and vigorously implemented program for the improvement, adaptation, and extension of educational services to youth may be developed by the local and state educa- tional authorities. The Commission strongly and unanimously favors the second alternative and rejects the first. Nevertheless, the Commission firmly believes that if local and state planning and action are lacking, a federal systen} of secondary education is scarcely less certain to occur than the succession of the seasons. In order to compare and contrast the two possible lines of development, this volume contains two hypothetical histories. One "history/* constituting most of the remainder of this chapter, is written on the assumption that the first alternative occurs. The other "history," presented in Chapter VI of this volume, relates what can happen if we follow the second alternative. m In order that the reader may -be constantly aware that the two "histories" in this chapter and in Chapter VI are projections of the future, they have been printed in a type-face which sets them apart from the rest of this volume. The remainder of this opening chapter, then, consists of quotations that may possibly be found in the concluding pages of some standard history of education published some twenty years from now. This is a sequence of events which the Com- mission fervently hopes will not happen. But they will happen unless effective planning and action occur to direct educational developments in more desirable directions. Here, then, is: THE HISTORY THAT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN "The end of the second World War marked a turning point in the his- tory of youth education in the United States. 'The complete victory of the United Nations, after a long and bitter struggle, was followed by the demobilization of our armies and the rapid conversion of the bulk of the war industries to the pursuits of peace. Al- though the United States government made strenuous and, on the whole, successful efforts to administer the process in an orderly fashion, the de- mobilization and readjustment of some 30,000,000 persons placed a severe strain upon economic, social, and educational institutions that had been geared for years to the demands of a total war. Educational Needs Following the Second World War "Many of the demobilized soldiers were in their late teens or early twenties. Their civilian education had been interrupted by military serv- ice; few of them had enjoyed extensive experience in normal community living or in earning a livelihood by civilian pursuits,- all of them needed guidance and training in order that they might find a place in the ongoing life of the nation. They were grown men and women, yet they needed education in the attitudes and activities of civilian life. "Similar educational needs were found among the men and wonlen who had been employed in the war industries. In many cases their wartime vocational skills were no longer useful. For many of the younger workers, as for many soldiers, employment in a war industry had meant an inter- rupted educational career. [2] "The boys and girls in their middle teens who were still in school at the end of the war were greatly disturbed. They had been diligently pre- paring themselves, by means of preinduction training and vocational prep- aration, to take an active part in the armed forces or on the production fronts. With the end of the war, their vocational outlook was rendered profoundly different and difficult, their future status uncertain. While the war continued, their services had been desperately needed. They had been urged and assisted to prepare themselves as rapidly as possible for full- time employment in civilian or military pursuits. But now the opportunities for work in war industry were few, and the labor market was flooded with returning soldiers and displaced war industry workers, many of whom had priorities on jobs and previous working experience. Even the great pro- gram of P. W. P. W. (Postwar Public Works) at first gave preference to the war veterans and offered relatively little opportunity for youth em- ployment. "Youth were therefore urged to remain longer in school. This was cer- tainly sound advice, not primarily because it was one method of limiting the labor supply, but chiefly because the vast and complicated responsi- bilities of adult citizenship in the postwar world clearly required extended civic, vocational, and cultural education. "The secondary schools of the country, with the exception of those in a very few localities, had no comprehensive plan available to meet this situation. They had given little thought to what they ought to teach or how they ought to teach it, either to returning soldiers, to demobilized war industry workers, or to the young people already in their schools who now changed their objective from immediate wartime employment to ex- tended preparation for living in a strenuous period of national and world reconstruction. "The result of this situation, if we may compress the educational his- tory of nearly a decade into a single phrase, was the establishment and entrenchment of our present National Bureau of Youth Service (M B. Y. S.) as the only important agency of secondary education in this country. "This development is so important that the next few pages will be de- voted to a more careful review of its causes and consequences. Why the Schools Were Unprepared "We who live in the second half of the twentieth century may find it quite difficult to understand why the schools of an earlier day were so ill- prepared to meet the contingencies which must certainly have been ex- [3] pected, at least by the educational leaders of that time. But while we may be justified in regarding their failure with wonder, we should refrain from censure. Hindsight is always easier than foresight, and we must remember, as we review the history of those trying years, that there were at least four reasons for this apparent lethargy, this inability to cope with the new situation. "For one thing, the secondary schools had devoted themselves with amazing energy to a series of highly successful efforts to help win the war. In view of the extremely narrow margin which, at the outset of the war, separated victory from defeat, we can certainly approve their industry and understand their anxiety. 'The schools made some far-reaching changes in the very midst of war They showed themselves not only resourceful but flexible. The preinduc- tion training for young men and the programs which trained over five million workers for the war industries are but two examples. The locally- controlled public-school systems showed that they could react promptly, vigorously, and effectively when confronted by a national war emergency. This ability of the local schools to react to a national wartime crisis was not equally evident with respect to the long-range planning for the peace. "The published records of the professional meetings held in those years show us clearly how engrossed the schools were in the immediate war problems. Even a cursory examination reveals that while the records abound with eloquent references to postwar education and reconstruction, they are almost barren of specific suggestions as to how the educational system would be changed in order to accept the responsibilities which everyone knew would devolve upon it in the event of a victory for the United Na- tions. On the contrary, it seems to have been assumed that, when the war ended, the schools would simply collect the fragments of their prewar program which had been put in storage for the duration and fit these ele- ments back Into the familiar prewar pattern. No one seems to have noted that the pattern, too, was shattered and beyond repair; that the end of the war was the end of an epoch to which there could be no return, in edu- cation or in any other aspect of life. "We must remember also that many secondary schools were poorly organ- ized to meet a suddenly emerging national problem. There were at that time about 28,000 high schools in the United States. The median high school had only 140 students and six faculty members. Each of the thousands of smaller high schools was controlled by a local board of education which, within certain very general and broad requirements, acted as a law unto itself. [4] Many of the state departments of education were weak and not legally con- stituted to meet such a critical situation. Almost all of them were under- staffed and overworked. "In the third place, the local funds available to education, even when supplemented, as they were in a few states, by state school funds, were often quite inadequate to provide the buildings, equipment, and personnel neces- sary for complete educational service. The one agency that might have im- proved this fiscal situation, the government of the United States, failed to act effectively. "It must be said on behalf of the educational leaders in that day, that they used their utmost talents of persuasion and strategy to secure the appropria- tion of federal funds (pitifully small requests they now seem to us, by com- parison with our federal school expenditures) to equalize educational opportunities. They made vigorous representations before one Congress after another, both prior to and after the entry of the United States into the war. They called for action in the name of fair play and democracy; they engulfed the Congress in oceans of convincing statistics/ they could summon to their support all the logic, the evidence, the common-sense reasoning, and the appeals to high motives. Their efforts were hampered, not only by the active opposition of certain influential minorities and the lack of vigorous support from the current national Administration, but also by the relative disunity and weakness of the professional organizations of teachers as com- pared with other occupational groups in the population. They were, there- fore, unable to awaken the public from its apathy on the issue and to arouse widespread public support for federal aid to education. "Still, they might have succeeded in obtaining federal funds had it not been for a formidable psychological obstacle. That barrier was the now almost incomprehensible fear that harmful federal control of education would inevitably follow federal aid to the states for education. These fears seem strange to us at present, not only because the federal government now con- trols practically all of our secondary education, but also because we see clearly that failure to strengthen the financial basis of local education in- evitably led to federal operation and control of large segments of our school system. It was the lack of federal assistance to the local and state school sys- tems that created the necessity for our present system of federal control. But that fact, so obvious now to the historian, was apparently quite invisible to the contemporary statesman. "Meanwhile, the Congress and the Administration, hearing no strong demand for action from the American people as a whole, refused to grant I'] any funds whatever for education/ except certain earmarked emergency funds for wartime vocational training and other special purposes. "The fourth, and last, reason for the incapacity of education during post- war years was the tremendous pressure of the traditional educational pro- gram. We have seen in earlier chapters of this history that the American high school began as a means of preparing youth for college and for cultural pursuits. Although its enrolment doubled, redoubled, and redoubled again, during the first four decades of this century, and although its declared pur- poses had been broadened far beyond college preparation, equally funda- mental changes in the secondary-school curriculum and in the preparation of teachers were not made. The heroic efforts and revolutionary changes in procedure which the secondary schools made in the national crisis of war could not be sustained in the peace that followed. The slow prewar processes of minor piecemeal adjustment were quite inadequate for a situ- ation requiring extensive changes and prompt, unified action. "In times of peace, this profound discordance between educational pur- pose and program, between promise and performance, meant that nearly half of the youth of secondary-school age left school before graduation and many of those less adventurous spirits who remained on the rolls were able to profit but little by the instruction afforded. Once a young man or young woman left school, the school ordinarily took no further substantial interest in him. It was generally supposed that any youth who was not absolutely feeble-minded could, if he would 'apply himself/ learn the information and skills which had for generations been the substance of precollegiate edu- cation. It was assumed that in some way, not clearly understood, this knowl- edge would be useful to him in later years. And it was taken for granted that, even if the knowledge so acquired should be valueless or forgotten, the process of acquiring it was, in itself, a wholesome experience. It fol- lowed, therefore, that any young person who 'dropped out* of school was so clearly at fault that the school could only wash its hands of further re- sponsibility. 'This is a severe picture/ too severe, no doubt for even in those schools, there were multiplied thousands of devoted teachers who understood the needs of young people and who succeeded admirably in giving many of them an excellent education. Vet these and other adaptations, made by indi- vidual teachers or occasionally by an entire school system, were too slow and too 'spotty* in view of the heavy demands which a period of world reconstruction was bound to impose upon the secondary schools of the United States. [6] "The need for public education in the postwar period on the part of large groups of persons who could profit but little from the conventional 'courses' which were the chief peacetime offerings of most schools, together with the failure of the state and local school systems to meet the situation, led the federal government to move into the vacuum. The National Bureau of Youth Service "We have seen how the federal government experimented, in the decade 1 933-1943, with various youth-serving and youth-educating agencies. None of these agencies survived during the war, but their experience and prece- dent made it easy and natural for similar programs to be revived on an ex- panded scale. The National Bureau of Youth Service was at first created to provide employment for youth, largely on public works projects. To move from work to work experience, from there to vocational training, and from there to related instruction was a series of easy steps. Within a year, so rapidly did the new influence expand, citizenship training, health education, family-life education, and other aspects of comprehensive developmental programs were taken over by the National Bureau. These new national insti- tutions were, for the moment, relatively free from the dead hand of inertia. They announced themselves as ready and willing to provide an educational service to youth in terms of the demands of contemporary life. Being under federal control, these agencies enjoyed substantial federal support. This w.as an asset of no mean importance in the postwar years and, as we have seen, it was an asset stubbornly denied to the state and local school systems. 'The new N.B.Y.S. schools soon attracted many recruits to their wide- open doors. There were, besides young demobilized soldiers and war workers, many out-of-school youth, unable to find employment and often rejected or unwanted in their small local high schools. Even many of the 'regular* high-school boys and girls, especially those whose families had small incomes, shifted' over to the new federal institutions. Meanwhile, the local taxpaying groups rejoiced to think (as they erroneously supposed) that the school tax burden was correspondingly reduced, 'because the federal government paid the bill.' "For a short time, the local and state school systems did retain control of the remnants of the war production training program. This activity, which had successfully trained several million workers for the war industries, was converted, on a somewhat reduced scale, to retraining for the industries of peace and the vocational rehabilitation of wounded veterans. Two years after the end of the war, however, these two programs were transferred [7] by executive order to the N.B.Y.S., taking with them also the 'Smith-Hughes' program established in World War I. "In vain the then leaders of secondary education pleaded that the es- tablishment of these federal agencies resulted in the creation of class systems of education, that they involved federal control over curriculum, personnel, and teaching methods, and that they endangered the very existence of that system of universal secondary education which had so long been one of the characteristics of the American democratic way of life. They could point out all the defects of the new federal program, but they had, for the most part, nothing sufficiently definite to offer in place of it 'The public psychology that permitted and even encouraged these devel- opments would be a fruitful topic for extended discussion. There was a strange mixture of confusion, indifference, impatience with the slow adapta- tions of the local public schools, and inability to see the ultimate and in- evitable result toward which public policy in education was moving. The ordinary 'average citizen* wanted better education for young people. A federal system seemed to be an easy way to obtain what he wanted, quickly and painlessly. It made little difference to him, he said, how this education was controlled or 'administered. He was most confused with reference to the effect of federal financial aid on the local and state school systems. He was inclined to accept uncritically the glib slogan that 'federal aid means Federal domination of schools/ although, as we have already seen, just the opposite was really the case. He shrugged off the warnings of the educators by ascribing their opposition to simple professional jealousy. He wanted action in a hurry, and even though getting the job of educational change done with dispatch meant giving up things of great value, he was not inclined to protest. Indeed, he was not even able to see clearly just what the long-term values of local and state control of education were. Each added bit of fed- eral activity in education seemed desirable and, taken by Itself, quite harm- less. He was beset by many economic and political problems which seemed, at first glance, far more important than the issues of educational control. When federalization of education had run its full course, many of these same people were amazed that a series of small concessions could add up to such great and fundamental changes in the whole purpose and conduct of education and in the American way of life itself. Some Effects of Federal Control of Education "It is too early as yet to appraise fully the results of the development that has been described in the preceding paragraphs. Some contemporary [8] students of education belteve that great harm has been done to education and to democracy. These critics declare that, after the first short period of pioneering and flexibility, the federal youth program has assumed a rigidity of pattern and procedure that far exceeds the bad effects of traditionalism in the state and local system that it replaced. They say that the old system, with all its shortcomings, could be changed, improved, and adapted to local conditions by means of local experiments and local freedom to try out prom- ising innovations. It is certainly true that local freedorn cannot be permitted to exist within the vast and orderly reaches of a single federal educational system. "These critics also declare that the present system has created unfortunate class distinctions with respect to the education of youth and that it offers a constant and open temptation to the invasion of youth education for parti- san political purposes. They point to the alleged scandals of the presidential campaign of 1956 as one of many examples of this danger. They accuse the political party then in office of misusing the power which lay in its hands through control of the education of the majority of American youth. It is officially admitted that courses of study in all matters relating to history, government, and economics were quietly revised, immediately after the 1952 election, by the experts of the N.B.Y.S. in Washingtpn. These new courses were prescribed for nationwide use in the federal secondary schools, junior colleges, and adult classes in 1954. Strict inspection was established by the Washington and regional offices of the N.B.Y.S. to see that all teachers and youth leaders followed the new teaching materials exactly. Critics of this procedure were curtly informed that the preparation and prescription of such material is an entirely legitimate function of our federal government. It has, of course, been impossible for the teachers themselves to combat the trend of the times when the federal government prescribes their qualifica- tions, administers their eligibility examinations, and issues their pay checks. "As the closing pages of this history are being written, this'same group of critics is initiating a campaign to restore the former system of decen- tralized secondary education. It may not be the function of a historian to predict the future, but this writer believes that it is highly improbable that their endeavor will succeed. Great opportunities rarely return, and it would now require tremendous efforts to recover what the majority of educators, schoolboard members, and other citizens of that time let slip from their hands less than a generation ago. Furthermore, the few remaining local high schools of today have returned to their original function of preparing a selected minority of our youth for strictly cultural pursuits. The history of education, like that of all other social services/ is punctuated by the ruins of institutions that would not or could not adapt to new and urgent needs. It now appears almost certain that the locally administered high school, for so many years the center of the American dream of equal opportunity through education/ has joined the Latin grammar school of the seventeenth century and the academy of the nineteenth in the great wastebasket of history." The book from which the above paragraphs are quoted has -not yet been written. Whether such paragraphs ever will be written depends upon the effectiveness of educational planning and action, now and in the months immediately ahead. In no area of our life is leadership more greatly needed. It may be that the future historian will make an entirely different report. He may say that the schools of the nation had anticipated the youth needs of the postwar years; that they were ready to move to meet these needs as they developed; that every state and every lyrge locality had a definite plan for doing so; that the federal government was at last persuaded to supply adequate financial aid to make this service possible; that the teaching profession was prepared to make the necessary changes in curriculum and administration; that the local organization of education was sufficiently flexible to permit the establishment of secondary schools adequate to the tremendous educational job that waited to be done; and that the secondary schools of America, under state and local control, were transformed into agencies serving all American youth, whatever their educational needs, right through the period of adjustment to adult life. If, as this Commission firmly believes, the American system of education based on local control and initiative is worth saving, we must begin to save it now. We cannot successfully improvise a program when the war is over. We must plan and act at once or never. If we say to the challenge of the present moment "Not yet," we shall be obliged to say at some future time "It is too late now." [10] CHAPTER II For All American Youtk npHERE ARE two important facts to remember about all -L American youth. First, there are about 11,000,000 of them between the sixteenth arid twenty-first birthday, the group with whose edu- cation this document is primarily concerned. Second, no two of the 11,000,000 are identical. Here, by way of example, are brief descriptions of a dozen or so out of the 11,000,000. The number of these sketches is limited for practical reasons; a thousand such accounts would not exhaust their infinite variety. Here, to begin with, is Edith of Suburbia. She has about aver- age intelligence. Her family is well-to-do, with a tradition of college education. They have planned that she shall attend a rather expensive women's college. She has no definite vocational purpose, but she looks forward to college experience and feels sure she will have "a perfectly swell time." Here is Max, born in Metropolis and raised on the streets thereof, a boy of average intelligence and no special abilities as yet discovered. He has the capacity to learn and follow any one of the fairly skilled occupations. The family is respectable, living in moderate circumstances. The father and mother have little education themselves and no great appreciation of its value to others. There are several younger brothers and sisters who must be fed and clothed. Max left school at the end of the compulsory attendance period and got a job. He lost this job in a few months and is now unemployed, an economic liability to his family in- stead of an asset as they had hoped. Next, meet Gilbert who lives across the street from the post office in Farmville. He is somewhat above average in intelligence, fleet of foot and broad in the shoulders, the star athlete of the village high school. He has a knack with engines and is already working part time in the local garage. He is studying English, social studies, auto mechanics, and Spanish. Gilbert says he doesn't care much about going to college. His family can sup- port him in high school but could not afford tuition or even living expenses away from home. This is George, a Negro boy. In intellectual ability, George is superior. Given the interest, ambition, and opportunity, he would be likely to succeed in a professional school. But in George's small home town, employment for Negro boys is lim- ited almost exclusively to unskilled and low-paid jobs. George left school at fourteen. He has been doing odd jobs, and vaguely planning to move to Detroit or southern California to get factory employment at wages that seem very high as compared with his local standards. Yet, since these are faraway places and it is hard to find out exact information, George may settle down within the limitations of his own community. Gertrude tries hard to succeed in school, but she is not very popular among teachers or classmates. She always receives poor grades. Her father and mother both have irregular, unskilled, poorly-paid work by the day. They resent the fact that their daughter is prevented by the school attendance law from helping with the support of the family. Gertrude is rarely dressed at- tractively; she never has any spending money; she has never won any distinction or recognition in school or elsewhere. The school psychologist says she is just barely above the moron level of intelligence. She has applied for a work permit and, if she gets the permit, will probably accept the first job that is offered to her. Norman is gifted with distinctly superior intelligence. He is ambitious and industrious, successful and happy in the aca- demic high-school course. He wants to study medicine and is determined to do so, although he and his parents will have to struggle desperately to scrape together enough money to pay the full costs of college and medical school. Norman's sister, Norma, is two years younger and fully as intelligent and as industrious as her brother. Unfortunately, she contracted poliomyelitis in infancy and, although she had good medical and nursing care, she is badly crippled for life. She thinks she could succeed in certain phases of library work if there were some way for her to obtain the training. But if [12] Norman goes to college, the family cannot possibly send Norma as well. Herbert, too, is a brilliant and agreeable student. His father "owns" (subject to a heavy mortgage) a rather poor and run- down fruit farm. Herbert now attends a four-teacher rural high school. His assignments for homework this weekend are: English Julius Caesar, Act HI Algebra Deriving the formula for the rth term of a binomial expansion Latin Caesar, Book I, lines 65-72 American History The War of 1812. Mem- orize the principal battles and the names of the op- posing commanders. Herbert doesn't think he wants to go to college. Schoolwork, he says, is easy enough but "it doesn't get you anywhere." He will graduate next year and then help his father or get a job on another farm. James thinks he knows exactly what he wants to do; he wants to "go into aviation." He has fair mechanical abilities and average intelligence. His middle-class parents want their son to have "a better education than we did" and they think it would be nice if James could graduate from college and become a teacher, or a minister like his Uncle William. Russell and Victoria, brother and sister, live on a Kansas farm with their widowed father. Their mother died five years ago. By industry and good investments the father has built up 'a substantial estate and income. The two children are now his only interest in life; he is proud of their good looks and good school records; he wants to keep them living with him. Russell has no vocational plans except to help his father. Victoria looks forward to an early marriage, an arrangement of which her father is quite unaware. Martha is a Negro girl, daughter of a tenant farmer. Ignorant, cheerful, and improvident, she has. no' occupational plans, or plans of any other kind for that matter. Following the tradition in her community, Martha left school at an early age, will help [13] - at home for a few years, and will probably marry in her early teens. Here also is Leonardo, a quiet boy with marked artistic talent. Here is Harold, also an artist, but unfortunately an artist in petty larceny. The patrolman in his block and the juvenile court judge know well his sullen, indifferent face. Harold is convinced by now that crime doesn't pay unless it is organized on a large scale. Here is Gretchen who arrived in this country a few months ago on a refugee ship. Here is Jose, son of Mexican itinerant farm laborers. Here is Helen, daughter in the second American-born gen- eration of Japanese ancestry. Here is Helene, the most popular girl in town brilliant, beautiful, full of energy, a young genius in organization and leadership. Here is Lancelot, a young man with an unusually disagreeable disposition and a definitely low intelligence whose wealthy par- ents want him to go to law school. Is the task of providing education for all American youth a hopeless one? Can any program or series of programs be devised that will meet all, or even a majority, of these bewildering human neecls, complicated as they are by vast differences of economic circumstances? The task is indeed complex; it is not for that reason unman- ageable. It certainly cannot be performed by any one single organized form of educational experience. It cannot be met without the expenditure of money, effort, and time. It cannot be met by an educational policy which concludes that, because a given youth leaves a given kind of school, the youth is per se uneducable or wayward. The task can be met: first, by identifying the major types of educationally significant differences found among American youth; second, by noticing the equally significant characteris- tics that all or nearly all youth have in common; third, by de- [14] vising and inaugurating educational programs and organizations that provide for the. common needs of all youth and the special needs of each individual. How Youth Differ At least eight categories of educationally significant differ- ences are illustrated in the above descriptions of Max, Gilbert, Martha, and the others: 1. Differences in intelligence and aptitude will exist, regard- less of modifications in the environments of individuals. While certain portions of these differences are inherited, even these cannot be predicted from parentage. These differences require different educational procedures, content, and standards of speed and achievement. 2. Differences in occupational interests and outlooks are both desirable and necessary. They require guidance to match abilities against the requirements of the job, desires against opportunities. They require curriculum adjustments that provide the necessary preparation for thorough workmanship in all occupations. They require administrative arrangements that will remove or minimize undemocratic "social-status'* distinctions among oc- cupational fields and their corresponding educations. 3. There are differences in availability of educational facili- ties, differences caused either by location of residence or family economic status. The elimination of these differences is an entirely practicable matter of administration and finance, in- volving the proper organization and location of schools, and the provision of transportation and student-maintenance facilities, of state and federal equalization funds, and of public or private scholarship funds. 4. There are differences in the types of communities in which youth reside. Insofar as these differences are educationally sig- nificant, they can be met by a guidance program providing information and outlooks which transcend community barriers, and by curriculums which are adjusted to the needs and op- portunities of diverse communities. 5. There are differences of opportunity resulting from dif- ferences in social and economic status, often aggravated by dif- ferences in race. The removal of such inequalities is a difficult matter, often requiring basic social and economic changes in the community. Yet, even so, these differences can be measurably reduced by wise educational leadership and administration, and by the objective study of community problems in schools. 6. There are differences in parental attitudes and cultural backgrounds. In many cases, cultural differences can be utilized for valuable education purposes. In other cases, where differ- ences give rise to conflict or jeopardize the proper development of children and youth, the undesirable effects may be minimized through a program of home visitation and parent education. 7. There are differences in personal and avocational interests. Within reasonable bounds, these differences may well be en- couraged by a broad curriculum with opportunities for some selection of studies. 8. There are, finally, differences in mental health, emotional stability, and physical well-being. Extreme disabilities must be compensated for in special schools and classes. Other temporary or less serious deviations from normal health may be met by appropriate adjustments in curriculum and regimen and by remedial health instruction and school health services. What 'Youth Have in Common The common qualities of youth are fully as important to education as their differences. For example: All American youth are citizens now; all (or nearly all) will be qualified voters in the future; all require education for civic responsibility and competence. All American youth (or nearly all) are members of family groups now and will become members of other family groups in the future; all require an understanding of family relationships. All American youth are now living in the American culture and all (or nearly all) will continue to do so in the future; all require an understanding of the main elements in that culture. All American youth need to maintain their mental and physical health now and in the future; all require instruction to develop habits of healthful living, understanding of conditions which foster health, and knowledge of ways of preventing disease, avoiding injuries, and using medical services. All American youth will be expected to engage in useful work and will need to work to sustain themselves and others; all therefore require occupational guidance and training, and orien- tation to current economic conditions. All American youth have the capacity to think rationally; all need to develop this capacity, and with it, an appreciation of the significance of truth as arrived at by the rational process. All, American youth must make decisions and take actions which involve choices of values; all therefore need insight into ethical values. Particularly do they need to grow in understand- ing the basic tenet of democracy that the individual human being is of surpassing worth. When we write confidently and inclusively about education for all American youth, we mean just that. We mean that all youth, with their human similarities and their equally human differences, shall have educational services and opportunities suited to their personal needs and sufficient for the successful operation of a free and democratic society. These youth are created male or female, black or white, halt or hale. Birth and environment have tended to make some of them more alert or more shrewd or more bold than others. Environment and education have made them rich or poor, law- abiding or delinquent, employed or idle. Their names are Dumbrowski, Oleson, Cabot, MacGregor, Veschinni, Adamatoulous, Okada, Chin, Valdez, Descartes, Kerchevsky, Schmidt, Smith, and Smythe. [17] They reside in farmhouses, cabins, trailers, packing boxes, skyscrapers, tenements, hotels, housing projects, houseboats, dormitories, mansions, prison cells, and just plain houses. Among these youth are many of great potential talents. The American system of education has laid great stress on the de- velopment of these talents, wherever they may be found, for the benefit of the nation as well as of individuals. In the years to come, the nation will stand in even greater need of the leader- ship, the resourcefulness, and the creative abilities of its most capable citizens; and education must prize and cultivate their talents accordingly. These youth all of them are to be the heirs and trustees for all that is good or bad in our civilization. What humanity will achieve a generation hence depends largely on them and on their education now. Each of them is a human being, more precious than material goods or systems of philosophy. Not one of them is to be care- lessly wasted. All of them are to be given equal opportunities to live and learn. This Commission believes that, in the main, educators and lay citizens alike want the schools to extend their services so as to meet all the educational needs of all youth. Tradition, to be sure, and some vested interests impede change in education, as in every other institution. But, for the most part, these* impedi- ments do not arise from any active opposition to educational advancement. They will be largely swept away by a vigorous movement to shape education to the needs of all youth, when once that movement gains momentum. Given the proposition that secondary education should serve all American youth, the chief difficulties are practical. "We must plan education for youth in a greatly altered world, the charac- ter of which we cannot yet accurately foresee. And in this [18] partially unpredictable world of the future, we must plan to carry education into areas largely unexplored. Facing these un- certainties, we are tempted to postpone planning, to counsel waiting until the outlines of the postwar world become more clear. We must not wait, however. Events move too swiftly and on too vast a scale for us to be able to cope with them when they are almost upon us. Of some things we are already reasonably sure the needs of youth, for instance. Others we can predict with some confidence, such as the distribution of employment among the major occupational fields. On a few matters we shall have to hazard conjectures, for example, the volume of private and public employment available for beginning workers. Furthermore, a considerable body of tested educational ex- perience is available. Much of it is still scattered, to be sure, in pioneering schools throughout the land. But these experiences could readily be brought together and placed at the disposal of everyone. We will do well, then, to make our plans at once, using all that we know and all that can be reliably predicted; making conjec- tures now and then, when no better way appears; and revising our plans from time to time to accord with the changing course of events. Better by far to do this, tentative though it may be, than to keep on waiting for the certainty which never comes. Preview of the Next Three Chapters As a contribution to educational planning, we offer the next three chapters, in which we propose to describe school services for youth as we should like to see them in the postwar years. All three of the chapters will be written from the point of view of an observer who reports the conditions which exist jive years after the cessation of hostilities. [19] In the next two chapters, we shall describe the schools for youth in two selected communities in the state of Columbia in Farmville, a rural area with a country village at its center, and in American City, a city of 150,000, which is the industrial and commercial center of a larger region. In the chapter which then follows, we shall tell how the state of Columbia, as a whole, endeavors to assure opportunity for adequate education to all its young people. Farmville and American City are not regarded as typical of all American communities or of all American education. Even two hundred such descriptions could not wholly represent the great variety of American life. But there ^re thousands of com- munities much like Farmville; there are hundreds similar to American City; and the educational principles applied to Farm- ville and American City are applicable in any community. The state of Columbia is not considered typical of all Ameri- can states. Indeed, there is no such thing as a typical state. Some states already have many of the elements of the state system of education to be described in this chapter. Other states, in order to establish such a system, will have to make fundamental and far-reaching changes in their state departments of education, in their state school finance system, in their minimum educa- tional programs, in the organization of their school districts, and in their school laws. The important things are the principles embodied in the educational system of the state of Columbia. Diversity among the states in the details of organization and program is to be expected and encouraged, provided that the underlying principles are sound. 1 In a word, these descriptions are not blueprints; they are sam- ples. Let no one suppose that they are intended to be instructions or models handed down from "national headquarters." They 1 Scc also: National Education Association and American Association of School Adminis- trators, Educational Policies Commission. The Structure and Administration of Education in American Democracy. Washington, D. C: the Commission, 1938. Chapter m, "The Ad- ministration of Public Education: State School Administration." [20] are offered, rather, in the hope that they may stimulate and aid the planning and action which are already under way in many states and communities, and which must soon be undertaken by all These chapters contain some assumptions as to what may happen outside the schools during the first few years after the war, particularly in the fields of agriculture, industry, labor, government, and international relations. The Commission has endeavored to assume those changes which are not only possible but probable, in the judgment of authorities in these fields. When, as is sometimes the case, the authorities do not agree among themselves, the Commission has had to choose one of several possible assumptions. The point of view from which these three chapters are written may be summed up in a few sentences. Schools should be dedi- cated to the proposition that every youth in these United States regardless of sex, economic status, geographic location, or race should experience a broad and balanced education which will (1) equip him to enter an occupation suited to his abilities and offering reasonable opportunity for personal growth and social usefulness; (2) prepare him to assume the full responsibilities of American citizenship; (3) give him a fair chance to exercise his right to the pursuit of happiness; (4) stimulate intellectual curiosity, engender satisfaction in intellectual achievement, and cultivate the ability to think rationally; and (5) help him to develop an appreciation of the ethical values which should undergird all life in a democratic society. It is the duty of a democratic society to provide opportunities for such education through its schools. It is the obligation of every youth, as a citizen, to make fulLuse of these opportunities. It is the re- sponsibility of parents to give encouragement and support to both youth and schools. These plans for schools of the future contain many departures from common practices in schools. But the Commission has included only those additions and changes which, in its judg- [21] ment, are feasible from a financial point of view and practicable from an educational point of view* These are not the schools of Utopia, to be achieved in some remote, indefinite future. These are schools of the United States of America, as they can be in the fifth decade of the twentieth century. [22] CHAPTER HI The Farnrville Community School (Written five years after the cessation of hostilities) A GREAT MANY PEOPLE live in the Farmvilles of the United States more than in New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Los Angeles; more than in the nation's one hundred big cities put together; yes, more even than in all the five hun- dred cities with populations over 20,000. For the Farmvilles are rural America the 43.5 percent of our people who in 1940 lived in the open country, at the crossroads, and in villages and towns under 2500 in population. By comparison, 28.8 percent of our people lived in our larger cities, from 100,000 up, while 27.7 percent lived in medium and smaller cities, from 100,000 down to 2500. Farmville people raise many valuable products, without which the rest of us could not live corn, wheat, potatoes, soybeans, grapefruit, sugar cane, cotton, timber, hogs, cattle, and chick- ens. But by far the most valuable product of Farmville is chil- dren, and in producing children the people of Farmville quite surpass their city cousins. In 1940 the 40 percent of the nation's adults in rural areas actually had more children and youth (ages under twenty-one) than the 60 percent who lived in cities 23,956,983 as compared with 23,862,245. The Lean 'Years of the Thirties The years of the thirties were hard years for the people of Farmville. The markets for most farm products shrank with the worldwide depression. People in cities and people abroad could not buy all that the farmers were able to produce. So there were large surpluses of many crops, and the bottom dropped out of prices. Nature, too, seemed unfriendly during these years. [23] The droughts of 1934, 1936, and 1939, a succession of disastrous floods, and the destructive dust storms in the "West plagued large sections of the country. Farmers' incomes, never high in comparison with those of city dwellers, dwindled to the lowest point in many years. Farm debts mounted, and many owners lost or sold their farms. Tenancy, sharecropping, and day labor increased while the incomes of tenants and farm laborers fell. In many ways the federal government sought to better the lot of farmers. Some of its actions were directed toward depres- sion problems. Others were efforts to improve long-term agri- cultural conditions. These programs added to the long-stand- ing services of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, the state agricultural colleges, and the public schools unquestionably helped the farmers. But the basic problem of the thirties was still unsolved. Only a general economic recovery, which would restore markets and sustain prices, could supply the solution. It was not surprising, therefore, that many people left the farms during the thirties. The large-scale migrations from the "dustbowl" area to the Far West were the most spectacular, but everywhere people were moving from farms to towns and cities. More would have gone, no doubt, had there been better oppor- tunities for work in the cities. Under these conditions, it was impossible for the people who remained on the farms and in the villages to make many im- provements in education, sanitation, health services, housing, recreation, or library facilities, when these improvements meant increased expenditures. Strangely enough, the federal govern- ment, which spent billions in its economic programs for agricul- ture, did little or nothing apart from the work relief agencies to sustain and improve rural schools, libraries, and public health services. Yet in spite of adversity, the thirties were also years of prog- ress. One of the greatest values which they yielded was almost a byproduct. All over the nation, committees of farmers were organized and went to work to help carry out the federal agri- cultural programs in their own districts, and to plan other [24] ways of meeting their common problems. These years of ex- perience in community cooperation at the "grass roots" made it possible for the people of Farmville to act quickly and effec- tively for community improvement in the postwar years. Moreover, some rural communities made notable advances in educational and social services, despite the lack of funds thanks to the efforts of resourceful, persevering men and women. This decade saw the rise of some remarkable rural schools, dedicated to the betterment of the life of all the people of their communities, and operated at no more than the ordinary costs of rural schools because of the devoted and sacrificial serv- ice of principals and teachers. There were pioneer achievements in other fields as well. Bookmobile traveling libraries appeared in several states. Rural health clinics and public nursing services were established in some districts. Farmers' cooperatives multi- plied cooperatives for buying expensive equipment, for pro- ducing and marketing foods, for purchasing electric power, for canning and freezing food for home consumption, and many others. Many such enterprises were initiated or aided by rural schools. In many schools the students and teachers worked quietly but effectively to exterminate mosquitoes and rodents; screen the windows and doors of farm houses; build sanitary toilets; increase home production of vegetables, eggs, and milk; build and operate shops for repairing farm machinery; and transform woods and fields into recreation areas. These accom- plishments, scattered though they were, became widely known and influenced the thinking and planning of many people. Yes, the thirties were hard years for the people of Farmville. But during those years were sown seeds of progress which have come to fruition in the Farmville community of today. The Strenuous Years of the War The war brought great changes to Farmville. Its first demand, beginning in 1940, was for men to work in war industries and [25] to serve in the armed forces. It drew men and their families away from farms and villages to the cities. From 1940 to 1943, some 2,500,000 people moved away from the farms, to work in the cities and to enter the Army and Navy. 1 It was chiefly the young men who left the farms, but young women and older people went, too, in large numbers. Migration to the cities was well under way before a second war demand became insistent the demand for increased agri- cultural production, ^hen the United States entered the war, it became apparent at once that more food was needed than ever before in the nation's history, and that it was needed quickly. More agricultural products were needed in industry, too. And some crops, hitherto imported, now had to be grown at home. Here was a national problem of first' magnitude more farm products were needed to carry on the war, fewer workers were available to produce them. To the credit of the people of rural America, the problem was met with success. Workers were found to take the places of many who had gone to cities and entered the armed forces; and the production of farm workers was increased by greater use of labor-saving machinery and wider application of scientific knowledge. In both cases, educa- tion played an important part. It was not easy to replace farm workers. The armed forces, the war industries, and civilian industry and commerce all needed manpower, and pay in cities was well above the income of most people who worked on farms. 2 Rural America itself had to supply most of the workers. Older men returned to more active work. More women went into fields. People in towns and villages closed their shops and offices to help with the harvesting of perishable crops. And millions of boys and girls from the schools added their labor to that of older workers. Schools ad- z Data supplied by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. * As late as 1941, the cash income of half of the rural families f>f the United States was less than $760. (U. S. Department of Agriculture.) [26] justed their schedules to the seasonal needs of farming. Teachers helped to recruit and supervise the '"land army" of young workers. Combined study-and-work programs appeared in large numbers with schools giving credit for work on farms and in homes, supervised by teachers. Such things, to be sure, were not new. Rural boys and girls have always done some work on farms or in their homes; and in some schools especially in courses in vocational agriculture and home economics farm and home work has long been looked upon as a part of education. What was new was the scale on which work was conducted. In wartime, more students worked, and more of their time was given to work, especially at peak seasons. More teachers took part in organizing and supervising work programs. More schools recognized the educational values of work experiences for all students, developed study-and-work programs, and gave credit for supervised work. We shall see some enduring results of these wartime experiences when we look at the Farinville Secondary School today. Moreover, under the Victory Farm Volunteers program, several hundred thousand boys and girls from the cities often accompanied by their teachers went out to farms during their summer vacations to work where they were most needed, par- ticularly in harvesting perishable crops. The economic products of this work were not its only values. Many city youth gained an understanding of farm life and labor which no amount of book study could have produced. The experience left its mark on the programs of many city schools on that of American City, for example, as we shall see in the next chapter. Along with the recruiting of farm labor went the increased use of labor-saving machinery and improved farming methods. Fortunately, the manufacture of farm machinery and equip- ment was not greatly reduced during any of the war years save one, and the supply of parts for replacement was cut scarcely at all. A nationwide program of education was launched, [27] financed by the federal government and carried on through the public schools. In rural schools throughout the nation, farmers and farm youth were instructed in the uses of farm machinery and in its repair and maintenance. Under these con- ditions, the number of tractors and tractor-drawn machines in use increased slowly but steadily during the war, and has grown still more in the postwar years. Today in the Farmville Second- ary School we shall find the farm machine shop in a place of first importance. Scientific advances, too, were speeded up all along the agri- cultural line in processing and preserving f oo