SCL EDSON OLB IOI DONO SESS RISES ¥a)] Sy. VOL. I, NO. 1 JANUARY, 1923 7 “7 he a a- yo? rE, Research Bulletin Tea oop OF THE : nS Tt National Education Association dws yA Bay. BRO. ™“ NESE SCL NSGE DSI DNL SEE LIL NGI SLE LSS 5S SRO “ Facts on State Educational Needs PASS se SR Wealth, Educational Expenditures and Productivity......... The States and the Americanization Problem. .. » The States and Educational Opportunity Zou Pou State Educational Needs and Illiteracy. State Tenure Laws and the Public School Public School Efficiency and Teacher Retirement Systems. . BS y= 25233 i“ PUBLISHED BY THE RESEARCH DIVISION OF THE NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 1201 SIXTEENTH STREET NORTHWEST, WASHINGTON, D. C BAGS SSB. Application pending for entry as second-class matter at the postoffice at Washington, D. C RESEARCH BULLETIN of the NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION Published five times each year in January, March, May, September, and November by the Research Division of the National Education Association of the United States. The payment of $5.00 membership dues entitles a member to attend all meetings of the Association, to receive the Journal, the Volume of Proceedings and the regular issues of the Bulletins of the Research Division. One dollar of each membership fee is for a year’s subscription to the Re- search Bulletin. Subscription to non-members is $1.00 per year; single copies 25 cents. Members are requested to report at once any change of address, giving old as well as new address. Application pending for entry as second-class matter at the postoffice at Washington, D. C. Executive and Editorial Offices, 1201 Sixteenth Street Herthwest, Wash- ington, D. C. [2] : : FOREWORD | Spesing 1923 has passed forty-three State Legislatures will have met. Most of them will not convene again until 1925. In the Legislative sessions of 1923 laws will be enacted and appropriations made that will vitally affect the efficiency of the public schools of the United States. This Bulletin, prepared under the supervision of John K. Norton, Director of Research, is issued by the National Education Association with the sessions of the State Legis- latures in mind. In it has been concentrated the latest available information bearing upon educational legislation. The facts presented should aid a citizen of a State in answer- ing for himself the following questions: 1. What is the ability of my State to support its public schools as evidenced by its wealth and income? 2. What effort is being made by my State to provide adequate support for its system of public schools? 3. What are the educational needs of my State? 4. How does my State compare with other States in wealth and income, adequacy of the support given its public schools, and need for a strengthened school system? In this time of confusion and unrest there is need for clear thinking in the shaping of educational legislation. It is the State Legislature that shapes the policies and work of the pub- lic schools. But, although education is a State controlled function, the welfare of the Nation as a whole is affected by the efficiency of its forty-eight school systems. Where State school systems are adequate they must be kept so; where they are inadequate they must be strength- ened if the National welfare is not to suffer. The fail- ure of any one State to meet its educational responsi- bilities lowers the whole Nation’s tone. Freedom of movement, made easier with each advance in transporta- tion, is guaranteed to all. No State can confine its educa- tional shortcomings to its own borders. The illiteracy, ignorance, and economic inefficiency that is the problem of one State today becomes, through the railroad and the automobile, the problem of other States tomorrow. Out of the vortex of the World War came a realization of the strength, as well as the weakness of our schools. The les- sons of that conflict must not be forgotten. The race between catastrophe and education, as Mr. Welis assures us, goes on in peace as well as in war. Will the State Legislatures make education or catastrophe the victor in America? J. W. CRABTREE, Secretary, National Education Association. [3] TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Wealth, Educational Expenditures and Productivity. .. Wealth of the States... rae Wealth and Educational Expenditures of ‘the State. pe Educational Expenditures and other Governmental Costs State Public School Expenditures 1900 to 1920.......... Growth of Public School Enrollment................. Selected References on Educational Finance............. Il. The States and Americanization Problem. . The States and the Foreign Born. . hat. ea ci The States and Foreign-Born Ikiterecy According 7" the C ensus........ The States and Foreign-Born Illiteracy. . ae The States and Non-English Speaking Population. . The States and the Americanization Problem iinces the Ni ative oiyg III. The States and Educational Opportunity. .........+...... Inadequacy of our Country Schools. . Inadequacy of our Rural Schools Revealed by I Diteracy je the Nativ e Ww hite The States and the One-Room Rural School. . The States and the Training of Teachers............ The States and Teachers’ Salaries................... IV. State Educational Needs and Illiteracy. . The States and the Problem of Illiteracy... The States and the Problem of Illiteracy Among. the N fstive Born . The States and the Problem of Native White Illiteracy. . . The States and Problem of Negro Illiteracy. . The States and the Problem of Illiteracy Among Mative- Born Minors. "a V. State Tenure Laws and the Public School................ RR Se a TE 6 Oh Ee OPE Pennsylvania Tenure Bill............................ VI. Public School Efficiency and Teacher Retirement Sysiems......... Sources of Information on Teacher Retirement Systems. ... [4] 56 ~~ 60 ee ae LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS Table 1.—National Income and Government Expenditures. . Chart I.—National Income, Public School, and Governmental Expenditures Chart II.—Percentage of National Income Expended for Schools lable 3.—States and Expenditures for Education and Ability to Support Educat Indicated by Wealth, Income and Savings Deposits Table 4.—The States and their Ability to Educate their Children Table 5.—The States and the Cost of the Public Schools Table 6.—The States, Per Capita Expenditures for Education and Per Capita We alth Table 7.—State Incomes, Taxes Paid and Expenditures for Education Table 8.—The States and Total Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Schools 1900, 1905, 1910, 1915 and 1920. Table 9.—The States and Enrollment in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools by Decades since 1870.... Table 10.—The States and the Problem of Foreign-Born Table 11.—Percentage of Illiteracy in Countries from which Nearly 14,000,000 Foreign-Born Come......... Table 12.—The States and the Problem Among the Foreign-Born White | Table 13.—The States and the Problem of the Illiterate Immigrant Table 14.—The States and Non-English Speaking White Population Table 15.—The States and the Americanization Problem Among Native-Born Adults Table 16.—The States and Educational Opportunity Table 17.—The States and Inequelity of Educational Opportunity Illiteracy in Rural and Urban Population Table 18.—The States and Inequality of Educational Opportunity as Indicated by Illiteracy Among the Native-Whites in Rural and Urban Communities Table 19.—The States and the One-Room Rural School. ......... Table 20.—The States and the Training of Teachers Table 21.—The States and Annual Salaries of Teachers... .. Table 22.—The States and the Illiteracy Problem—1920 Census Table 23.—The States and the Problem of Illiteracy Among the Native-Born Table 24.—The States and the Problem of Native-White Illiteracy. . . Table 25.—The States and the Problem of Negro Illiteraey—1920 Census Table 26.—The States and the Problem of Illiteracy Among the Native-Born Minors. . Table 27.—State Tenure Laws............. Table 28.—Tenure of Elementary Teachers in Oregon......... Table 29.—Transciency Among Teachers in Oregon. . Table 30.—State Teacher Retirement Laws. . our ition Shown OQ 30 a harbor a Wealth, Educational Expenditures and Productivity The outstanding educational problem at present is that of obtaining adequate financial support for the public schools. Education must compete with other governmental functions in obtaining its financial support, and all governmental expenditures must come out of the national income. Therefore the cost of education may best be studied when accompanied by figures both as to cost of other governmental functions and as to the amount of the national income. Table 1 gives the figures for national income, total governmental expenditures, and public school expenditures for each year from 1913 to 1921. The figures are represented graphically in Charts I and II, pages 8 and 10. The effect of the war was to increase all governmental expenditures, especially those of the Federal government, which was charged with the cost of maintaining our armed forces. Governmental expenditures grew more rapidly than national income and as a consequence there was an increase in the percentage of the national income spent by the government. In 1913, 9.24 per cent of the national income was spent for all governmental purposes; federal state and local; in 1921 this per cent was 16.73. TABLE 1.—NATIONAL INCOME AND GOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURES Per cent of national income Total Total Expenditures Year national governmental for Expended Expended income expenditures education for all for | governmental public I purposes schools eau 2 | 3 tae a 5 6 1913 | $34,400,000,000 | $3,179,559,000 | $521,546,000 9.24 1.51 1914 | 33,200,000,000 | 3,381,324,000 | 555,077,000 10.18 1.67 1915 | 36,000,000,000 | 3,565,797,000 | 605,461,000 9.90 1.68 1916 | 45,400,000,000 3,562,400,000 | 640,717,000 7.85 1.41 1917 | 53,90),000,000 4,991 ,393,000 | 702,197,000 | 9.26 1.30 1918 61,000,000,000 | 12,042,982,000 | 763,678,000 19.74 1.25 1919 66 ,000 ,000 ,000 | 18 ,637 ,904,000 895 ,000 ,000 28 .24 1.35 1920 | 70,000,000,000 | 9,920,766,000 | 1,036,151,000 14.17 1.48 1921 | 56,000,000,000 | 9,373,595,000 | 1,192,000,000 16.73 2.13 The figures in Column 2, from 1913 to 1919 inclusive, are those issued by the National Bureau of Economic Research in its publication Income in the United States, Mitchell, King et al. The figures for 1920 and 1921 are tentative estimates based upon the advice of reliable authorities. The figures in Column 3 are taken from Tazation and National Income, Research Report No. 55, page 14, issued by the National Industrial Conference Board, New York City. They represent governmental expenditures for all purposes; federal, state, and local, including education. The figures in Column 4, except those for 1919 and 1921, are taken from Statistics of State School Systems, 1919-20, Bulletin, 1922, No. 29, page 5, issued by the United States Bureau of Education. Those for 1919 and 1921 are independently estimated. They represent expenditures for all public elementary and secondary schools by school years; the expenditures given for 1913 being for the school year 1912-13, etc. T IS gratifying to know that in a time when public burdens have lain very heavy upon the people there has been everywhere a determined purpose to maintain education unimpaired, in order that the coming generation may be equipped, regardless of sacrifices in the present, for the increasing responsibilities which it must bear.. . . Only through a properly motivated and generously inspired process of education can this be accomplished.—President Harding, School Life, Dec. 1922, page 73. [7] CHART I.—NATIOQNAL INCOME, PUBLIC SCHOOL EXPENDITURES AND EXPENDI- TURES FOR ALL OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS 20 30 40 50 60 70 The total length of gach bar represents the mil | wealth eed, or National income in the 1915 | United tes for a gingle year. 1913 Represents expenditures for public ele- mentary and secondary echoole. —=4 Reprpsente al) Governmental exyenditures, Ej Federal, State, and local, excluding ex- 1914 == penditures fer education. is 195 1915 -——— }+____ ee 1916 1917 + 1918 1918 1919 | 1919 1921 tig ) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 BILLIONS OF DOLLARS Chart I is based upon the figures given in table 1. The first bar, for 1913, shows that the total National income in this year was $34,400,000,000. The black portion of this bar represents the amount expended for public schools the same year—$521,546,000. The shaded portion of the bar shows the amount expended for all governmental purposes, Federal, State, and local, excluding publie school costs. The black and shaded portion of the bar together represent the total governmental expenditures for 1913—$3,179,559,000. The other bars similarly represent the situation for the years indicated. [8] = The increase in the annual expenditures made for education during this same period was also rapid but not as rapid as the national income until 1921. The percentage of the national income expended for public elementary and secondary schools was considerably less in each of the years from 1916 to 1920 inclusive than it was in the pre-war years. It did not exceed the figures of the pre-war years until 1921. The figures presented justify the following conclusions: 1. Governmental expenditures required a rapidly increasing percentage of the national income following 1916. 2. During the war period the percentage of the national income used for the maintenance of public schools, however, was decreased—education went on short rations with the rest of the country, postponed school building programs, and put off other essential expenditures. 3. During the next few years our schools will require an increased proportion of the national income in order to provide for the postponed expenditures which normally would have been made during the war years. Chart II reveals the small percentage of our total governmental expenditures that education is claiming and also shows what a small fraction of the national resources is going for the support of our schools. This fraction could be doubled without entailing an undue burden. It should be realized that an increase in the expenditures for education does not represent a loss to the Nation’s productive resources. It merely represents a transfer of the Nation’s potentially productive resources from one object to another. These resources may be left in private hands to be translated into factories, farms, private dwellings, theater tickets, or other agencies capable of satisfying human wants, or they may be taken by taxation and spent by the public to provide for roads, school buildings or the maintenance of schools, which also satisfy human wants. In the long run probably no fraction of the national income either privately or publicly expended is as productive as that devoted to education. EDUCATION AND THE FARMER’S INCOME LTHOUGH THE education of the farmer is only one factor affecting financial success in farming, it is a very important factor. Education cannot overcome the handicaps of an unfavorable environment or the lack of practical experience. Neither is it an absolute guaranty of success. For any individual farmer, however, education improves the chances of achieving financial success. Farm management studies in this State and in other States have shown repeatedly that farmers with a high school education make more on the average than those without. In Tompkins county a survey of 769 farms showed that farmers with high schooi education were making nearly twice as much as those with only district school education, while those farmers with more than a high school education were making nearly three times as much as those with district school education. This was not due entirely to the advantage of greater capital as the farmers with more than district school education made considerably larger labor incomes than those with the same capital having only a district school education. Evidently, in spite of the extra time spent in school, the high school graduates, on the average, became tenants two years younger and owners four years younger than those farmers having only a district school education. At a lower average age, they had accumulated more than one-half larger capital and were making considerably larger labor incomes than those farmers with only district school education.—Education and Farm Profits, Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Ithaca, N. Y. [9] CHART II.—THE PERCENTAGE OF THE NATIONAL INCOME EXPENDED FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND FOR OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS The total length of each bar represents total wealth produced, | or National ineome in the United States for a single year, me WS ere ee er agen Represents per cent of Natioral in- Represents per cent of National in- come expended fer «11 Governmental _ come expended for public schools, functions except education, i) 20 1 ae Pitas) 2a 100 | 1913 | 1913 i 1916 1926 1917 31917 1918 1918 1919 1919 1920 1920 Oo ' te fe _ = : : : - TC. re 0 20 40 60 80 100 “ a u Chart II is based upon the figures in table 1. The first bar as a whole represents 100 per cent of the National income for 1913. The black portion represents the 1.15 oe contin! of income ee, ee be for the puplie schools in 1913. (Table 1, column 6.) the bar represents the percent expended for all other govern- mental fodiens The black and shaded eo together represent the 9.64 per cent of National income expended in 1913 all a purposes, Federal, State, and local, including education. (Table 1, column 5 [10] In the light of this fact, sound public policy points to the wisdom of maintain- ing an adequate school system, or rather adequate school systems, since in the United States we have 48 State school systems, each independent of all the others. State control of the public schools being a policy to which the country is wisely committed, National progress resulting from education is dependent upon the maintenance of effective State school systems. Where State school systems are adequate they must be kept in that condition; where they are inadequate they must be strengthened if the National welfare is not to suffer. The failure of any one State or group of States to meet its edu- cational responsibilities lowers the whole Nation’s tone. Freedom of movement, made easier with each advance in transportation, is guaranteed to all. No State can confine its educational shortcomings to its own borders. The illit- eracy, ignorance, and economic inefficiency that is the problem of one State today becomes, through the railroad and the automobile, the problem of other States tomorrow. In the World War no State wished to be classed as a “‘slacker.”” The National welfare in peace time demands that no State shall allow itself to be classed as an educational “‘slacker.”’ In order that a State may know its wealth, or its ability to support education, the tables given on the subsequent pages have been prepared. CERTIFICATION O SCHOOL system can be materially improved unless the teacher is continjally im- proving. One of the surest ways of securing improvement of the teaching personnel of the State would be for the State Board of Education to be authorized by law to require all teachers in the State to reach certain standards before they are permitted to enter the pro- fession. The question here is not so much a matter of the teacher herself or even for the profession as it is a matter of doing justice to the children who are to be our future citizens. The moulding of character and the training to meet life conditions is a very difficult task. The responsibility, while not appreciated by some, will be more forcibly impressed by requiring a longer period of training and more thorough and comprehensive scholarship of those who are to assume the responsibility of teaching the future citizen.—C. N. Jensen, Superintendent Utah. The Utah Educational Review, January 1923, page 25. (11) HERBERT HOOVER ON EDUCATION AND PRODUCTIVITY 6B Knew FIRST ideal of our democracy is to maintain a state where each individual shall have an equality of opportunity to take that position in the community to which his intelligence, ability, and ambition entitle him and that no forces shall continue in the Nation which may prevent this free rise. As a race we produce a considerable percentage of persons in each generation who have the intellectual and moral qualities for the moral and intellectual inspiration of others, for the organization and administration of our gigantic economic and intellectual machinery, and for invention and creation. - I believe that we lose a large portion of those who could join these ranks because we fail to find them, to train them rightly, to create character in them, and to inspire them to effort. Our teachers are necessarily the army of inspectors in our Nation who must find these individuals and who must stimulate them forward. Our standards of living and ‘the extras of life are the result of the great productive and distributing machinery of our country. Our standards will increase directly in ratio to its efficiency. This machinery requires a vast trained personnel. It also requires a vast army of leaders. The productive capacity of this machine can be increased more through improvement in the character and training of its personnel than through new invention. Wastes through accidents, sickness, bad management, and the like amount to five times the cost of our whole educational system.—Herbert Hoover, Journal of the National Education Asso- ciation, March, 1923, p. 79. [12]° ~~ A — en te The Wealth of the States The support given to its school system by any State is in the final analysis dependent upon its wealth. The expenditures for education must always be a fraction of the State’s income. Besides the wealth of a State the belief of its people in the value of education is the other important determinant of the sup- port of a State’s public schools. In table 3 there is given by States the expenditures for public schools in 1919-20, the last year for which complete figures are available. There are also given three indications of the relative wealth of the States, that is their ability to support their schools, as follows: Column 4 gives the total estimated wealth of the States in 1920 based on the Federal Census of wealth last made in 1912. The figures are in each case 3344 per cent greater than those found in the 1912 census of wealth. This has been given as a reasonable estimate of the increase of wealth between 1912 and 1920. The figures in this column are probably an underestimate of the increase in wealth measured in dollars between 1912 and 1920, especially if intangible wealth were completely enumerated. They also assume that the increase in all States has been uniform, which is but partially true. As they stand, however, they are reasonably indicative of the total wealth of the States in 1920. Column 6 gives the income of the States in 1919 as a second measure of their wealth or ability to support education. The fact that these figures are based on income for but one year should be kept in mind. This year in some States was an unusual one. For example, as the National Bureau of Economic Research points out, bad weather in Montana considerably reduced this State’s income in 1919. Similar anomalies probably exist among the estimates of income for other States. As the figures stand, however, they give a reasonably reliable index of the ability of the States to support their schools. Column 8 gives the amount of savings deposits by States as revealed by a recent investigation as a third indication of the relative wealth of the States. Do the figures given in table 3 as to the wealth of your State indicate that it is well able to afford its educational expenditures? HEN WE seriously ask ourselves why we do not remedy existing educational defects, we are forced back to one generic cause or reason, viz., lack of sufficient school revenue. If we go beyond our own schcol—be it small or large—and question the several State systems, the answer is the same.— John A. H. Keith, Principal State Normal School, Indiana, Pa. Pennsyloania School Journal, January, 1923. N OTHER words, the reason why our revenues are inadequate is because we are tinkering with an outworn and irremediably defective machine. You can’t patch it up. I don’t mean to say that there are not States in this country which are more agricultural in character than, let us say, New York or Massachusetts or Illinois, where for some time perhaps the gen- eral property tax will linger. But I do mean to say that the sooner we realize that the real basis of taxation, the real criterion of ability to pay has changed from property to produce, or yield, or earnings, or profits, or income, the better for all concerned.—Prof. Edwin R. A. Seligman, Financing: Public Education, p. 33. National Educational Association, Washington, D. C. IHE PLEA that expenditures for education or any other form of governmental activity for the benefit of the public must be curtailed for lack of funds cannot be treated seriously by those who know the facts.—Dr. David Friday, President, Michigan Agricultural College. [13] St 000 #00 FI RF ; Pt bP $F > ae aa 02 000‘ #69" 1ST i | eb oF See... of Poo: er: eae 6t 6t Lb 6h O8' £8e' I a ean rz 000‘ Z16‘ 021 ae i | 8 690° 08S 0% by ge ‘ OF | o00‘oer‘ 182 98 | o00' 110‘ FSF‘ £% Le9‘ 206‘ SI SAD, Bt. cin compel ec | cI Z ol | 000‘ Sz‘ Zz" T 6 | 000° Fee" S6e* Z gI ees. OR ee eidvemputne OF 000‘ #60‘ ¢ 1€ PE | O00‘ LPS‘ TPL‘ T It 962 FLF o ceases eee eee ce ees = BR OSOUUETY ZI 000‘ 109‘ ZF FI iI | 000‘ 109° ZZ0' 2 IT oe BRB Sikes bee. wamenetin 6 L ZI 000‘ 180‘ Z68' 9 9 €9L'E89' LF STN ¢ 900‘ 0z0‘ FEO‘ s x | 000‘ #26 9F9' 2 . 066‘ 806‘ OF Gis cite beaks ao a Or 000' O&F ‘ 622 SI ; 8% | 000‘ 829‘ 699‘Z €e les Ege ie aa en SI 000‘ ZFR‘ ZEz te 000‘ 901‘ SbF Le 000‘ £28‘ €Ze" T 68 LS gh RRR (ood SP SRA Re |) Lose. ae, ote eons ; tI | 000‘ 19¢‘ esz a 000‘ 922‘ 802‘ T rat 000° STF‘ 109‘9 or ee ee KE pers co 9 000‘ 208‘ 0F6 | £ 000‘ PRE‘ 296 F z 000‘ 996‘ L9F‘ 6I g eee Oe ee by oH 9° | 000°SZF Fz | ab 000‘ £99‘ 092 eh 000° 660‘ 882 ze Zb6' 1698 wp c% 090‘ ¢gE‘ SII cI 000‘ €96' TFI‘T 61 000‘ 86¢‘ $90‘ 1g eSh'920'6 rE, wc 33 cele « tees Vilace) Le | 000‘ 28°99 LE 000‘ £26‘ 90% 8 000‘ 082‘ Zee‘ I LE A aS ie a» on If | 000‘ £89' 6F RE 000‘ 626‘ 988 OF 000‘ 680‘ £20‘ I &b a? fae br bi Sn a) ef | 000° FIG‘ Ze OF 000° 169° 92T 6b 000‘ 629° 16E 8 Cet fk Si, eee Pipa Ol | 000‘ 61‘ SIS 0 000‘ 888‘ 066 &% 000‘ SFE‘ 128° 6I Ozh‘ STE‘ 9I et atid Ze 000‘ 296‘ ZOT ze 000‘ £8 ‘009 “0z 000‘ 6£9‘ SFO‘ £ 0z 91‘ 00Z' eT ight st les ks gn t 9 000‘ 266" 808'Z ¢ 900‘ £16‘ 629‘ OT ¢ a el usOTCC) tt 62 | 000'Z2L‘ £99 If 000° 628‘ She‘ Z 9f ae CO a ee ee yee ol cP rE | 000'S8Z' IZz oF 000‘ 99%* 6F9 OF | |, RRS Soehaaaper ub eben Pm 6e 9% 000‘ 92z‘OT8 92 000‘ oe‘ $eL'Z og 169‘ SI1‘'6 atv epitp Be 000‘ 109'zez'99 |" *"*"""** "| 900 86g" 226° ZEz 602° TST‘ 980" T ***"899UIg PORTAL [BIUOUTUOS 6 8 L 9 ¢ a g é I 5. 0261 uor}Bonpe 02-6161 syisodep I261 | 9uro9ut 6161 yyyeom yqyeom IO} Soin} uoryvonpe ssuraes syrsodaqy | Ur yuRyy aul0oUy payeuinse poyeurnse -rpuadxe 10} 807838 : s#uta: is. : b : ur yuBy MASS url yuBy [R30], ul yuey sain jIpuedxy | . SLISOdad SONIAVS ANV ‘AWOONI ‘HLIVIM AM GALVOIGNI SV NOILVONGT LuCddAS OL ALITIGV GNV NOILVONGG AOd SHANLIGNAdXA ANV SALVIS AHL—*f ATAVL [14] IoyyOUuv IO} ‘S61 *d ‘qyey 92s Z pus [z “dd “og pue sovig ‘yimoo1e yy ‘G}IOMpPOO M ABC OB] ‘ozo, ‘Arenuee ‘ypouinos jooyog viupapfisuuag ‘en OSTY “ZIG6I 410} YI[VeM JO SozBUIIJSA SNSsUSD) [eIepey_ 942 0} PiIy}-9u0 Surppe Aq p zor ‘Ame “U017D19088 A ‘saqzeyg Aq px "A 'N ‘Qosvosezy OTUIOMOOF JO nvoing feuoNneNy ouIe}qo siayung upossp ay7 fo pousnor ‘saqye3gQ Aq suIODUT JO UOTINGLIASICY ‘g uUINjoD ‘9 wUINlOD YINGLIASIP YITBOM 1840} JO oy eUITySO ASY [OOYIG 07 pozejey sv Ayrungsoddy yeuoyjwonpy “H “Vy ‘f Q10M } WUINJOD UI seansy sy y—'p uUIN[OH ‘ab “d “6Z ON ‘ZZ6T UNe[NG UoNvonpy jo nveing ‘g "Q—zZ UUINjoOH 9118 dap SSULABS ul yuRyy IZ61 sjtsodaq SSUIABG aulo00ur 6161 Ul yYUyYy sulODU] yy Bem po}BUIT}se ul UY WtANW OZ6I qye 1M pe yeuUullyss [999.L ‘ t uolTyBsonpe JO} sein} -Ipuedxe ul yuey -68° 266 6 906 22 ‘9S L9 E88‘ ZI LPT ‘SI . C Go 61€' StO* 90T G 02-6161 uorlyBonpe IO} sainjpIpucedx iy Burwi0d M UISUOOST AA BIUIITA ISOM UOPBUIYSE MA eossouua eulyoleg Yq yNog eurlpoley) qynog puss] espoyy eruBalAsuueg uo0ze1(¢) BIOYVd YON suyomey qe 894BI9 ‘HLTIVGM Ad GCaLVOIGNI penunu0d—SLISOdad SONIAVS AGNV ‘AWOONI SV NOILVONGA LUOddAS OL ALITIGV CNV NOILVONGHT AOA SAANLIGNAdXA AGNV SALVLS AHL—* ATAVL Table 4 gives a more exact measurement of the financial ability of the States to educate their children. The amount of wealth behind each child aged 5 to 20 is given in column 2. The annual income for each child aged 5 to 20 is given in column 4. Do the figures given in table 4 indicate that your State is well able to afford the expense of an adequate school system? r BIGGEST problem that America has to solve is that of equalizing the opportunities of life through giving every child a chance to grow in power as he ought while personal powers are still flexible. Our current wild faith in legislation as a cure-all for human failures, both individual and collective, is pathetic to the man who knows that America is a democracy of souls—a co-operation of free citizens who must be trained to develop and give their best. To attend thoughtfully to education is to attack the American problem at the roots instead of at the branches andleaves. I hold no brief for the perfection of education as it has been or is; merely for the right use of educational means adjusted to our national purpose. Without the educational system that we have had, imperfect as it has been, we should long ago have been saddened with the social and political chaos it has prevented. The state must see that school moneys are collected where wealth is to be found, and dis- tributed where the children and the need exist. All this regardless of locality. The truth is that this principle is not even approximately realized. Country districts suffer in comparison with the cities. Because the country teacher has to teach all subjects and all grades she ought to be best trained, most experienced, and consequently, the best paid elementary teacher. In fact, she is the youngest, the least well trained, the least experienced and the lowest paid teacher in the national service. The school organization, for purposes of finance and manage- ment, must depend on larger political units than are now used.—Henry Suzzallo, President, Uni- versity of Washington, Washington Education Journal, January, 1923, p. 138. ST AS soon as you begin talking about the rights of children—the proper sort of school building and school equipment and highly trained, well-paid teachers—somebody rises and in peeved tones inquires: “Why don’t you try to be practical? You're an impossible idealist. Tell us something we really can do or stop wasting the time of practical people.” I’ve iearned that to these people “practical” doesn’t mean something ‘‘that may or can be practiced.” Notatall. To them it means something cheap. ‘Cheap’ and “practical’’ are to them one and the same thing. To be of any use, the ideas one offers must be cheap as to thought. ‘Practical’ people never waste time thinking about a thing. ‘No, sir. When we’re going to do a thing, we just go and do it.” Let the lesser lights do the mopping up afterward. ‘ The only reason I can muster for the business man who cheerfully scraps a fortune in the form of obsolete machinery and sees clearly the gain ahead, yet foams at the mouth when a school man begs to have the obsolete school machinery scrapped for a modern outfit, is that he has experienced the results that come through handling outworn material things, but has no experience in using the machinery that shows intangible results such as grow out from handi- capped schools. Yet he must learn somehow that he is not practical at all when he shuts his mind and the public purse on being asked for better schools for the people’s children. It is the people’s children who suffer from the “practical” man. The chiidren of the wealthy and the intellec- tually keen go to private schools, where neither the building nor the instruction is handicapped by cheapness. The final result is that the “practical”? man makes the fortunate children of the world still more fortunate in that they are properly trained for their place in the world, while the less fortunate are made still more so by the systematic cheapening of their training. And that is a dangerous thing for a democracy like ours.—Angelo Patri in Our Children, Washington Post. [16] TABLE 4.—THE STATES AND THEIR ABILITY TO EDUCATE THEIR CHILDREN Estimated | Rank Income Rank | Expenditures | Rank wealth 1920 in 1919 in for education | expend! States per child | wealth| per child | income 1920 tures ages 5 to 20 per ages 5 to 20 per per child pel inclusive | child inclusive | child | ages 5 to 20 child inclusiv‘ 2 3 5 6 Continental United States $7 ,006 $1,992 $31.16 Alabama 3,019 44 895 49 0.07 4 Arizona 6,160 32 3 29 60 1 i Arkansas 8 } 99 16 11.60 14 California 12,819 3 7 3 58.79 { Colorado 0 ,964 7 159 21 47 .47 L4 Connecticut d SO 20 18 I2 41.98 Delaware f 62 3] 778 7 26 .38 District of Columbia 10 ,042 12 | 1 12.18 ) Florida 1,142 39 14 38 21.52 Georgia 2 75S 16 JPR 14 2 16 48 Idaho 5.501 36 R19 27 59 97 Illinois ) 319 10 63 9 36 .77 Indiana 7 ,663 18 976 2 { 2 22 lowa 13 ,687 2 343 16 51.53 ] Kansas 10,501 +S) 909 26 17 .06 Kentucky 134 43 42 9.71 } Louisiana 1,124 40 ) 10 17 .09 j Maine 6,311 30 ? 058 24 29 .41 l Maryland 6,063 34 2,270 17 8.72 399 Massachusetts 7,247 21 2,875 5 38.77 23 Michigan 6,573 29 162 14 45.48 17 Minnesota 9 ,427 ] l' , Sf 27 47 97 13 Mississippi 2,494 18 y 18 7.84 49 Missouri 7,129 22 1,757 31 27 .67 32 Montana 9 ,220 14 746 32 75.84 l Nebraska 587 5 2 19 19 61 12 Nevada ; 104 l », 566 2 75.02 2 New Hampshire 6,778 27 192 20 31.58 2 New Jersey 7,776 17 602 10 14.5 18 New Mexico 94 37 ,142 $1 32.14 28 New York 10,214 11 73 $ 37 .07 24 North Carolina 2,350 19 9 47 12.27 $2 North Dakota 11,656 4 1 ,428 36 55 .27 s Ohio 7,061 23 157 15 41.77 Oklahoma 7,640 19 137 35 30 Oregon 11,322 6 564 11 46.05 f Pennsylvania 7,045 24 126 18 27 .46 Rhode Island 6,864 26 > 508 13 27 .48 South Carolina 2,570 17 O89 43 9.81 4€ South Dakota 8,374 15 2 ,059 23 54.71 y Tennessee 2 ,904 45 01 45 12 .03 43 Texas..... 5,144 38 178 33 19.78 38 Utah 6,148 33 164 34 1.72 ) Vermont. 6,570 28 R49 rs 55.58 6 Virginia. 3,514 42 200 39 15.7 41 Washington : 10,916 8 857 6 | 7 West Virginia 5,642 i) ,272 37 2 2 16 Wisconsin 6,965 25 789 30 33 26 27 Wyoming 8,190 16 730 “ 66 .65 } Column 2.—Based on wealth figures given in table 3, column 4, and the 1920 Fed ral Census as to the number of persons ages 5 to 20 years. Column 4.—Based on income figures given in table 3, column 6, and 1920 Federal Census as to the number of persons ages 5 to 20 years. Column 6.—Based on expenditures for education given in table 3, column 2, and the 1920 Federal Census as to the number of persons ages 5 to 20 years B yiyeneegnas PINCHOT of Pennsylvania in his inaugural address pledged himself to use every power of his office “To give our children the best schools in America [17] The Wealth and Educational Expenditures of the States The figures given in table 5 show more exactly the relationship of the wealth of the States and their expenditures for education. A tax of four-tenths of one per cent of the national wealth as it is estimated in 1920 was sufficient to cover all public school expenditures. One and six-tenths per cent of the National income went to education. The cost of all the public schools in 1920 was but slightly more than six per cent of the savings deposits of 1921. Similar data are given for each of the States. Is _ Stale investing a sufficient percentage of its resources in education to guarantee its uture? IHE GENERAL property tax has been a failure wherever it has been tried. As a chief source of revenue it has no supporters among scientific writers and has been abandoned by every great nation except the United States, and in most of the United States it has been modified and supplemented. The Northwest States are among those most delayed in the solution of the problem, and the State of Washington has done least to attempt a reform of this unjust and inequitable system. This is not a happy thought, but the time has come when we must face the facts. The property tax was developed originally before the changes wrought by the industrial era under conditions very different from those that prevail today. It was used universally in the early history of our States. Ownership was then largely in land. It was at that time the intention to tax each person according to his ability, and tangible property was taken as the best measure of a man’s capacity. Since that time the economic life has been revolutionized until now more income flows from intangible securities and other forms of value than flow from property investment. Although such a change has come about we still in our State place almost the entire burden of expenditure upon the income that flows from property. I challenge you to show a single commission report where scientific treatment is given, con- taining a defense of the system, or a single student of repute who does not condemn it in unmeasured terms. Seligman says it is a failure historically, being unsuited to an industrial era, theoretically, because it is income and not property which is the index of taxpaying power, and practically, “the general property tax as actually administered today is beyond all doubt the worst tax known in the civilized world.” Lercy Beaulieus, the great French econcmist, says: “We have examined the general property tax in the United States. Modern taxation has seldom invented a more stupid instrument.” The United States Supreme Court has said: “A system which imposes the same tax on every species of property irrespective of its nature, condition or class, is destructive of the principle of — and equality in taxation.” (142 U. S. 351.) - «+ The income from intangible property can, together with income from other untaxed sources, be successfully reached by constitutional means and made to bear a just proportion of the burden.—Frank J. Laude, Washington Education Journal, January, /923, page, /33. barre THING that impresses me as most significant in our educational development of the last few years is the change in our objectives from one of individual gain to that of service. Ten years ago we believed in education for the help it gave to the individual; it enabled him to get ahead, to make money, to be come financially successful. It was talked by the parents to the child, by the teacher to the student. Now we do not say that nearly so much. The whole philosophy of the schools has been transformed. It has become socialized. Now we say, “If you get an education it will enable you to understand other people, to get the other person’s point of view; it makes you compassionate; you will be more helpful; you can serve better and work better with others in this service.””—Payson Smith, Slate Commissioner of Edu- cation, Boston, Mass. ... The Colorado School Journal, January, 1923. [18] TABLE s. THE STATES AND THE COST OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS Per cent Rank in Per cent Rank in Per cent Rank in of wealth per cent ol incon per cent ol savings ve! nt 1920 to wealth 1919 t income 1921 to savings States pay for 1920 pay for 1919 pay for 1921 education | expended | educat expended | education | expended 1920 lor 1920 for 1920 lo! education education ‘ cation 1920 1920 1920 l 5 6 Continental United States 6 6 2 Alabama ; 13 j 9 Arizona 17 2 Nf 5 25 .0 Arkansas 33 14 f 10 1 & California 16 23 22 1.3 Colorado ; 26 12 ~ Connecticut 7 11 f 27 Z Delaware 8 { 44 4.4 District of Columbia 29 2 8.7 Florida 2 16 24 10 6 Georgia 9 17 0.7 49 7 7 Idaho 1 ; Illinois 6 2 7 4 Indiana t 5 ) Iowa r 10 ; 7.8 Kansas 25 sf 9 23.8 Kentucky 28 18 . 16 7.3 Louisiana 4] 30 25 9.8 24 Maine +7 1 i 3] 0 4 Maryland 16 0.8 17 0 14 Massachusetts > 14 33 2 9 +f Michigan 69 6 re 20 76 2 Minnesota 1 ‘ r es & 7.5 Mississippi 2 15 0.8 18 10.3 Missouri 38 7 l 28 0.3 Montana 82 } } l 16.4 Nebraska 43 Zi » 2 l 17.0 Nevada 23 19 ] rn 10.4 New Hampshire 16 22 14 30 2.5 18 New Jersey 57 10 5 6 s New Mexico 62 8 g 6 19 F New York 6 41 } 3.0 North Carolina 2 _) y 36 1! .6 North Dakota 48 20) 3.87 4 12.6 , Ohio 9 9g 7 26 7.9 Oklahoma g 34 > | 14 0 0 Oregon 410 2 R() | [2 ? Pennsylvania 39 € 7 4.9 o Rhode Island 40 3 } 2.1 South Carolina 38 ) 0.9 4 7.6 South Dakota 67 i 2 66 7 10.0 Tennessee 4] l 1.19 aR 9.2 Texas 38 58 34 34 26 .6 Utah R4 ; 7 5 Vermont 54 ] ) 1g 26 Virginia 15 24 5) 7.3 Washington 50 18 1.9 17 15.7 West Virginia 39 5 1.74 23 2 6 , Wisconsin 48 19 86 19 i.e ( Wyoming 81 5 2.44 10 17.9 s Column 2.—Based on wealth figures given in table 3, column 4, and expenditures for education .—Based on education Column woe Based on education a Column > as given in table 3, column 2 income figures given in table 3, as given in table 3, column 2 savings figures given in table 3, as given in table 3, column 2. [19] column 6, and e column 8, and e Lor xpenditures xpenditures, for Table 6, based on the same data as table 5, gives the per capita expenditures for education in 1920. The three indications of State wealth are also given on the per capita basis by States. The figures generally show a close relationship between the per capita expendi- tures for education and per capita wealth. This tends to confirm the theory that under present conditions the educational opportunity that a child is given is largely accidental, the most important determining factor bei:ag the wealth of the community in which he happens to be educated. Considering its per capita wealth are the public schools receiving the support that your State can afford to give? Educational Expenditures and Other Governmental Costs Table 7 gives data as to the actual amount of taxes paid for all purposes in 1919, the last year for which figures are available, accompanied by State income figures. The figures in this table are arranged as follows: Column 2 gives the total income of the States in 1919. Column 3, the total amount paid in taxes, Federal, State and local, for all purposes in 1919; educational expenditures being included. Column 4, the per cent of the income in 1919 paid in taxes in 1919. Columns 5 and 6, the per cent of the income paid in Federal, State and local taxes, respectively. Column 7, the expenditures for public elementary and high schools during the school year 1919-20. Column 8, the per cent of the total taxes paid in 1919, as given in column 3, expended for public schools in 1919-20. Column 9, the per cent of the income in 1919 expended for public schools in 1919-20. There is considerable variation among the States as to the percentage of income paid out in taxes. Similarly the percentage of the money made available by taxation, expended for public schools, varies widely in different States. In the country as a whole less than 13 per cent of the total money raised by taxa- tion in 1919 was expended for the public schools in 1919-20. Is the percentage of the money raised by taxation in your State that goes to the schools sufficient considering the paramount importance of educatien to the future public welfare? gee INVESTIGATOR finds the richest nation on the earth denying multitudes of her children any educational opportunities and herding thousands upon thousands of others in dismal and insanitary hovels under the tutelage of wretchedly underpaid and proportionately ignorant, untrained, and negative teachers; finds hundreds of communities able to provide luxurious educational facilities with almost no effort while thousands upon thousands, despite heroic exertions, can not provide even the barest necessities.—Fleicher Harper Swift, U. S. Bureau.of Education, Bulletin 1922, No. 6, p. 54. [20] 28 1e ie TABLE 6.—THE STATES, PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES FOR EDUCATION AND PER CAPITA WEALTH ) . > | Per Rank Per Rank Per Rank Per Ran! capita In pe! capita in per | capita in capita In per expendi- capita esti- capita income per savings pita States tures expendi- mated esti- 1919 capita de- Savings for tures wealth | mated income | posits leposits educa- for 1920 wealt! 1921 tion educa- 1920 tion 4 7 Q Continental | United States || $Y SO $2 ) ee $157 Alabama SS f 64 { , Arizona 18.97 1: f Arkansas } 1 40 16 nm California | 14.29 8 ) } Colorad 14.0 6 »*) { Connecticut SZ ) 74 Delaware i. i f 8 District of Columbia 9 82 8 7 . 1 Florida ( .2t ‘ é { ] ( Georgia 4 ) 58 ‘ Idaho Y YO f rs9 Illinois 10.69 } ) P o 4m Indiana 12.20 ) 2x “ Iowa 15.53 0 14 } Kansas t 84 4 6 Kentucky | 36 Q Q , Louisiana f ) j 39 64 Maine ) 6 50) Maryland » H ) j & Massachusetts 10.62 7 7 , Michigan | UO 6 ‘ 5 Minnesota 14 OF 12 | 27 Mississippi | 3.06 17 8 is Missour1 13 ; Montana 22 .24 | ) 263 Nebraska 5 87 9 709 P Nevada | Ll? 34 60. . 7 New Hampshire 8 .60 ) 846 { 9 New Jersey | 12.96 ‘ 26: i. ~ 0 New Mexico | 11.49 856 \R 42 ; New York | 10.21 7 2.8 874 ? m North Carolina. .| 1.74 9 Ss 15 } North Dakota | 19 .92 ‘ } 57 - Ohio Bod 179 Q 17 12 Oklahoma 11.2 23 R4( 2 9 re Oregon 12.76 8 38 7 l 0] Pennsylvania 8.43 2 > 162 ) 68 2) 79 Rhode Island | 7.89 : 6° 8 ) 11 8 South Carolina 3.94 031 17 38 2 South Dakota 18.21 i 787 68 19 83 Tennessee 4.34 ri f r 17 17 Texas 7.2 ~ 274 e 21) 27 > Utah 18.33 6 158 34 04 f Vermont 10.18 28 S80 33 v4 Virginia 5.62 { 56 } 40 77 Washington 15.19 002 6 re West Virginia 7.79 } 8 iS 37 Wisconsin 10.35 26 6! By 29 ‘ Wyoming 19.25 4 } 6 . 6 07 Column 2.—Based on Column 4.—Based on lation. Column 6.—Based on lation. Column 8.—Based on lation. data of table 3, column 2, and 1920 Federal Census for population figures of table 3, column 4, and 1920 Federal Census for popu- figures of table 3, column 6, and 1920 Federal Census for popu- figures of table 3, column 8, and 1920 Federal Census for popu [21] Q'? ’ 9 a Ft 9°0 xoJY MON LL Lt 8 9 Cc ll : Z Aosiaft MON bP I ¢’¢ Lg @ Il 9F6' 6Z OS‘ $9Z onysduey MON 01's 8°9 l'¢ | 66 ¥99'°9 16L°°9 BpVaen 9% °Z ¢‘¢ 68 | 6 10° 98 8g¢*‘ 606 VysBIqeN | | ret LE°SE 16 Zz £ OfT* 18Z Soe 8s BB ROTA LI bb ZI 8 Ft 8 6FL‘ 0&Z 82h‘ ZZ8' I To UMNO SETA 18 226 £'F I 6S 120‘ 629 ; so Z LP SI ) ae z 18t' £61 B30 souUTY csi 62 ZI cv ¢ 208" LSE UBITYOTN se'l SF's £¢ 9 6 SI 688° Z8F Si ,OSNYOUSER LY €8 Irs y€ L z Ol 829‘ TOT bee 666 Je OO Beggs cates.” “ puspsrey Pl eh eI | Lt 6 9 OT 869° LP 901‘ Shr “OUTByY oF I 6¢ IT LY 0 LG £80 86 PIP 122 * SUBISINO'T 98" #28 $L0° L118 ra 7 Zz FOL 69‘ 86 Cee. PS SS ee eS a Ayonquey OF Z £6 &% 600* £9%' 9% I's 1¢ 2 01 912‘ 601 6€E'S90'T igh Ea Migk ths FE pe 02° % £9 $% LOT‘ bee‘ LE T¢ 8'¢ 68 98¢ IST lor 269 1 Mk op ee BMOT OZ 90° 22 SPL‘ POL'SE €F I's $6 9E1'Z9I SRS 8 ee he Cle a me ee vueripuy 6€°1 tg 11 ZZ0' SSE‘ 69 e+ 08 € Zl Leb’ S19 RRR hy Pein Se heralded te 2 siouty] 62 € ef Ze Zb6‘ 169°8 99 ce 1 ol Clg" 9% ee 2 eee eee ee a ousp] 6L° 12°6 « oh‘ 920'6 9% 09 9°8 696° 16 feel = a, tO TRA Sesh eee 8131004) €L I €¢° 91 €£6‘ 080° L I'¢ r¢ ¢ ol S@S' CP ae. ee ee et at ee Vpuo[y Itt ce’ eI $68‘ 262" F PZ 8°¢ 28 BBL‘ 1 eee, os eae BIquIN[OD JO IUIsIC, $6 s0'9 £0¢‘ 929° ¢'? Cc It 8 cl 9FL LZ TS ee a ee ee ee OIBMBIOCT col FL ZI OZF‘ STE‘ 9I 2 ¢ *8 9 eI B8e' FEI ee a er ee qnornoauu0d 61% 89° LT C9L* 00Z* EI 8'¢ ¢'9 € él 1¢9° FL eee ee eee opes0jog tL I ol 862 086‘ SF 8b L'°9 ¢iil 162‘ SZE 4. SERRE pee dite: Bi htt lee. - BrIUIO;YBS) 9 42 FI 129° 9OL‘ L Zt o'¢ 28 866‘ €¢ ee | eS ae ee 0s REY 98% LU Ie 882‘ 6EE 5 9°¢ cg 16 FEE’ 06 Gees. ET SS So ee ee Ses ee wuozuy a a +9 FI 169° SIT" + 2 ¢ 92 POL‘ 29 III eRe Rao ie ote susqely a | | 68 ZI 60Z‘ TST‘ 9e0' c+ 9L 1 Zl £0L* €g0°8 ae SOS Se91tIg peu peyueUNnUOD 6 8 l 9 ¢ t e Zz I asl a eo uonronpe SOXBY [BIO] SaxBy Sov} 6161 - J uolyvonpe 0z-6I6I pues a3849 [Biepay Iv SIB]JOp jo 6161 pepuedxe 103 uoTNRanpa | een wr. P aan euroour | Pepuedxe "10) | [890] pu’ o7%4s| spuRsNoY} WIG ~ 32 | ‘ RB - jo quao gag | S°X"F 17909) com arpuadxg | JO} pred euroour Jo quae Jag [e4opay pred 4 ers JO 9Ua0 Jaq) | ; SOXBy [BIO], NOILVONGA AOd SAANLIGNAdKA GNV CIVd SAXVL ‘SHWOONI ALVIS—'4 ATAVL [22] ‘cb a ‘6Z ON ‘ZZ6I BYVETNG ‘uoNvoN] a jo nveing » Bets 4 uUINyor) ‘I¢ puev gc ‘dd “XN ‘usdui0y {im jue ) 94] pivog CS l9JayUOT) [BIISNpPUyT [VUOTYENY “CG “OA 240d MY YILDaSay “BULOIUT POUOYD AT puvd UuoYyorD]—'g pues ‘Cc ‘fF “E UWUIN[Or z ‘d ‘yorvasayy oTMIOUMOT] JO NveIng [euOeN ‘ElE] ‘sagn7g fig awmoouy fo uowngiuysig —zZ wuInjoD Ik 62 £ Lt L’ + 8 88 ol LZ IZ z 9 € el I PL I cl ¢ 6 F c’9 t ut OF’! ‘ © a ¢ a t 6ZR* ¢ . ) I ’ t ; 0 | g Z é ‘ t PL Lrl O s 9°9 tO! Il 8% ‘Tl €'°9 io: 6 Ge O1 ‘9 tS I ¢'8 P89 “f a 6 1 91 te | 1 I “£2 .“4 Rg 6 OI c 62 PL ST ‘6 ‘ 9 TT C G )'t tT Ss I 69 Ct ¢ ; “2 ! © ae | Lg" g an el ve ‘cane as 92 8 OL Lt I RR 9 a Cal GS Li 6 6 8 l 9 ( t { z uoryBonpe SOXB} [BIO] SOXBY SOXB} 6161 10] uOoTI®B Nps oe puB a3yBig [BI Poy ITV SIB][Op jo 6161 oe 10J 0¢~ 6161 spuvsnoy} ut SIB]JOp so pepusdxa ail uol}Bon pe bas Sean np pect > a) ¢ € ‘ tf 3 {38 Ss 38 suIOOUI pepuedxe 1OJ | | pu 384 I ‘ | ‘jelapey pred ul sul0dU] SOXB} [8304 O 4JUu9e0 Jo SoINJIpUusax" O red suIOVUT JO jJueO Jo jo 4 d | 30 quao geg | SN NPUsdxG 10} pl jo 4 d SAXB} [BIO], BurusoA AM UISUODST AM BVIUIsILA WOM WOPSUIYSE M eossouue |, ByoyVeq YyINog vuloOIBy YINog pu ba | epo"uy 4 viuvalAsuuiedg u0794() BUOyBLAO oryO ByoyVd qVWon vuole) qWIoNn yAok MON 899BIG penuyu0)—NOILONGT AOd SAANLIGNAdXA ANV AIVd SAXVL ‘SHWOONI ALVIS—"4 aTavVL State Public School Expendit ures 1900 to 1920 Table 8, compiled by the Statistical Division of the U.S. Bureau of Education, gives by States the total expenditures for public elementary and secondary education for each fifth year beginning with 1900. The total expenditures for 1900 were $213,274,352; in 1920 they were $1,036,151,209. At first glance the increase in educational expenditures appears to have been very great. This is true only when this increase is measured in dollars. A more careful analysis of these figures reveals the fact that this increase is principally accounted for by two factors beyond the control of school officials; first, the depreciation of the dollar, and second, the increase in school attendance.’ The $1,036,000,000 of 1920, due to the depreciation of the dollar, would only buy as much as $352,240,000 would have purchased in 1900. At the same time the attendance in our schools between 1900 and 1920 increased 239 per cent. The public schools provided 1,098,232,725 days of school in 1900 and 2,620,- 210,865 days in 1920. When these two figures are considered there is not a great deal of the increase in school expenditures to account for. Practically all of it has been swallowed up by the decreasing purchasing power of the dollar and the increase in the number of the children who are attending our schools. The growing complexity of our civilization and the loss in influence of some of our most cherished insti- tutions have placed additional burdens upon our public schools that would have justified the appropriation of large sums for the single purpose of increasing the efficiency of the instruction received in our schools. Has the increase in the money provided for the public schools in your State been sufficient (/) to allow for the depreciation of the buying power of the dollar, (2) to provide for the increase in the school attendance, and (3) to guarantee the progress in general public school efficiency that our increasingly complex civilization demands? FIGURES about average days of schooling mean much for the community as well as for the individual. In the first place, the community must have been persuaded by experience with schools that they are a good investment of public funds. The critics may find many faults in public educational systems, but the increase in attendance on schools shows that fundamentally there is an abiding confidence in what they do. In the second place, the community is evidently prepared to delegate to the schools an increasing share in the control of the time and energy of the pupils. In short, the community is committed to expansion. Dr. Charles H. Judd, University of Chicago. [aeee IS a book called ““Who’s Who in America.” This book contains the names of those persons who are well known because of their good works. The person who cannot read and write has one chance in 150,000 to get his name into this book; the grammar school graduate one in 4,250; the high school graduate one in 1,600; the college graduate one in 180; the honor student in college one in three. Does education pay?— Mississippi Educational Advance, Sept., 1922. 1 See Bulletin No. 1 of the Research Division of the National Education Association, p. 4, for a detailed analysis of this question. [24] TABLE 8.—THE STATES AND TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR PUBLIC ELE- MENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS, 1900, 1905, 1910 AND 1920. TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR States 1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 l 2 3 4 5 f United States $213 ,274,352 | $291,616.66 $426 250,434 | $605,460,785 |$1,036 Alabama 923 464 1,475,000 104 .357 1,703 ,332 9,118, Arizona 299 ,730 157 ,354 0) ,628 2,574,484 } 5 Arkansas 1,369,810 955 .428 87 OR3 4 454.737 r 6, California 6,909 .35 9,770.70 747 31,691 ,961 ts S Colorado 2,793 ,648 § O84 967 186 6.778 ,503 Connecticut 3.189 249 779.732 106 9 ,238 ,489 ( 5 Delaware 75 , OO 539 957 604.796 366 , 189 67¢ District of Columbia 1.228.133 1 .676 .259 679 564 O41 ,24¢ Florida 765 ,777 945 ,047 73 72 . , 769 335 7,0: Georgia 1,980 ,016 327 603 i419 596 6,194,875 9 , 07% Idaho 100 .043 912.272 > 175.063 3. 828 462 8 Illinois 17-757 .145 2.223 6.195 39 .508 .058 69 Indiana 8.188.089 01.00 Or 20.597 . 55 f lowa 7,978 , 066 10,316,292 767.210 18,985 865 7 334,167 Kansas 4. 622 364 5.829.916 9 812 671 12,210,174 6 257 ,009 Kentucky 2 650,190 2 662 .863 648 644 7.435 ,382 s i r Louisiana J 1,135,125 2.169 Of 44 5,149,747 l 66 ,9 Maine 1,712,795 2,020,348 134 263 3.719.904 6.403 .67 Maryland 2.912 527 2.961 .373 792.424 5.190 ,227 8 24 Massachusetts 13 ,826 , 243 18,131,529 ) 745 26 . 806 , 296 10 908 , 94¢ Michigan Y 6.539.146 ) 630.696 { 4 219 9? 324 9 17 68 { Minnesota 5.630.013 8 469 902 127 19.8 230 ; ( Mississippi 1,306,186 1,868 ,544 f S 2.806 562 { t Missouri 7.816 OD 0.101 02 1 67 ) 19.700 ,626 28 .70 ) Montana 854 ,069 1 ,236 ,253 2, 21 5,782 ,133 12 , 2 Nebraska : 4,403 , 222 5,304 ,292 7 1,215 10,121 ,558 20 , 580 , 06! Nevada 224 ,622 257 ,501 619,268 741,355 83 | BAK New Hampshire 1,051 , 265 1,557 ,061 1 654,163 2,160 ,274 }. 810,669 New Jersey 6,142, 52( 9,598 ,446 17 ,064 ,990 25 ,416 ,263 40 ,909 ,8 New Mexico 343 ,429 162 ,225 793 ,202 1 542 ,534 4,139 New York 33 421,491 47 ,227 ,428 51,861 ,986 62,723,639 | 106,045 North Carolina.... 931,143 1,935,982 3 037 ,097 5,449 581 12,147 , 856 North Dakota 1.440 892 2.529.914 1.549 660 7 ,309 ,342 12,88 Ohio 13 .335,211 17 ,595 .091 25 500 , 216 36,611,410 67 ,426 Oregon 1,594,420 2 052.175 + 646 ,270 6,396 .915 9 ,997 ,89 Oklahoma . 686 ,.095 2 203 ,443 6,739,216 8,418 ,969 22 906 Pennsy lvania.. . 21,476,995 28 ,465 ,457 {9 ORR. 180 58 , 114,226 43,490 Rhode Island... 1,570,895 1.987 ,.750 > 486 757 3 336 ,386 1 766 South Carolina.. 894 ,004 1 304 ,630 1,951,945 3,207 ,256 6 ,62 South Dakota..... 1,598 ,757 2,379,775 } 825,273 5,065 ,508 11 , 592 , 89¢€ Tennessee we 1,751 ,047 2 ,933 .289 4,402 575 6,103 534 10,14 Texas 1,469 ,014 6 ,400 ,492 11,777 ,036 19 ,373 ,295 | 33 ,606 Utah ig latina ; 1 ,073 , 586 1 ,657 ,234 3,052 , 990 4 452 ,137 8,239 ,829 Vermont <<. 1 ,074,222 1 ,324 ,507 1.608 .996 2 . 265 ,966 , 588 COR Virginia 1 ,971 , 264 2,377 ,624 4,407 ,853 6,705 ,490 12,975,089 Washington ‘ 1.795 ,795 3 220.340 10,493 ,347 13 ,382 ,100 90 .595 .360 West Virginia... Fr 3,215,321 2,766 ,817 4 094 ,O92 6 ,932 ,378 11 ,402 , 488 ERS 4 . 040s 694 * 5.493 370} 8 , 240 ,352 10,789 , 236 15 ,455 ,668 27 255 ,056 Wyoming : es 253 , 551 387 ,681 796 ,021 1,416,405 3,741 ,79 1Approximately. * Includes figures for Indian Territory. *Exclusion of Wilmington. The data for this table were furnished through the courtesy of the Statistical Division of the Bureau of Education. The sums indicated are total expenditures, including outlays but excluding payments for bonds and other debt services. IXTY YEARS ago America was the fourthnation in the world in terms of education. Then it slipped to fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and finally ninth place. Prussia has one man in a thousand who cannot read or write. Denmark, Switzerland and Holland have one man out of four thousand who cannotreadorwrite. We have seven men in every hundred whohave acknowledged that they can do neither, and in the industrial centers, among the foreign-born, twenty out of every hundred are illiterate. We are still riding in an ox cart as far as rural education is concerned.—Newell Dwight Hillis, The Mississippi Educational Advance, February, 1923, page 2/. ’ Growth of Public School Enrollment One of the factors that increases the expenditures for our schools is the growth of school enrollment. Between 1870 and 1920 school enrollment nearly tripled. At the same time there was a steady increase in the length of the school term, necessitating greater school expenditures, as well as a very rapid growth in the enrollment in secondary schools in which the yearly educational cost per capita is larger than in elementary schools. Table 9 shows by States the total elementary and secondary school enroll- ment at the beginning of each decade since 1870. What do the figures in table 9 indicale as to the increase in the educational load that has resulted from the growth in enrollment in the public schools of your State? Selected References on Educational Finance ALEXANDER, CarTER. Publicity Work for Better Support of Rural Schools. Journal of Educational Research, January, 1923, pp. 1-13. Fitzpatrick, Epwarp A. How Wisconsin Finances Education. Wisconsin State Board of Education, Madison, Wisconsin, 44 pp. Frazier, George W. The Centrol of City School Finances. Bruce Publishing Co., Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1922, 132 pp. Haic, Ropert M. Available Sources of Additional Support for Pennsylvania Schools. Educational Review, October, 1920, pp. 216, 225. InuinoIs State Teacuers’ Association. Tax Reform in Illinois, 1920, 15 pp MancuesterR, ©. L. Tazation in Illinois. Illinois State Teachers’ Associa- tion, September, 1922, 62 pp. Nationat Epucation Association. The Department of Superintendence. Financing Public Education. Washington, D. C., May, 1922, 47 pp. NATIONAL Epucation Association. Research Division, Bulletins One and Two. Washington, D. C. SevigmMaNn, Epwin R. A. The Financing of Education. Educational Adminis- tration and Supervision, November, 1922, pp. 449 to 456. Stevens, E. B. Can We Pay for Education. Educational Review, October, 1922, pp. 183 to 195. Swirt, FuetcHer Harper. State Policies in Public School Finance. Bulletin, 1922, No. 6, U. S. Bureau of Education, Washington, D. C. Swirt, FtetcHer Harrer, and Det Puarine, F. K. Public School Finance in Minnesota. Minnesota Educational Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October, 1922, 59 pp. LARGE number of teachers in American Public Schools have neither the education nor the professional training necessary for efficient service. Uneducated and untrained teachers in any of the schools of the Nation are a national liability. It is estimated that there are thirty thousand teachers in the United States who have no education beyond that furnished in a one-room rural, elementary school. There are seven states in which forty per cent or more of the teachers hold licenses which require less than a high school education. For the whole of the United States, not more than twenty-five per cent of the teachers hold licenses which require two years of professional training beyond high school education, a standard which has been acknowledged as proper minimum preparation for teaching in elementary schools.—George D. Strayer, Southern School Journal, October, 1922. {26] TABLE 9.—THE STATES AND ENROLLMENT IN PUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS BY DECADES SINCE 1870 States 1870-713 1879-80 1889-90 | 1899-1900} 1909-10 1919-20 l 2 | 6 Continental United States 7 561,582 9 ,867 ,505 12,72 »S 503.110 17 .813 ,852 Alabama 141 ,312 179 ,490 } f 376 ,423 124 ,611 ( Arizona 0 4,212 7. 98! 16,504 31.312 Arkansas 69 ,927 81,972 22 r i 662 395 .978 California 91 ,332 158,765 22 f 69 ,736 368 39 { Colorado 4.357 11‘ 55 168 5 Connecticut 13.588 191 .694 126 55.298 190 ; Delaware 20 ,058 27 , 823 31,43 36 R95 35 .950 District of Columbia 15,157 26 ,439 56.906 16.519 55.774 Florida 14 , 00 39 315 92 ,472 8 874 148 ,O89 Georgia 19.578 | - 236,533 381 .297 129° 673 555.794 Idaho 906 R34 14 6 669 76,168 Illinois 672 ,787 704 ,041 778,319 958 ,911 1 ,002 ,687 ri , Of Indiana 450 ,057 283 512,98 564 ,807 531,459 6¢ owa 341 ,938 $26 ,057 193 , 267 166 , 223 510 66 Kansas 89 ,777 31 434 399 ,32 89 582 98 ,74¢ 16 8 Kentucky 78 ,457 76 ,000 399 ,66 500 , 294 194 ,86 Louisiana 57 ,639 77 ,642 120 ,25 196 , 169 63 ,617 Maine 52 ,600 149 ,827 139 ,676 ).918 44 278 68 Maryland 115,683 162 ,43 184 222 373 238 393 f Massachusetts 273 ,661 306 , 777 37 19: 174,891 535 . 869 f f Michigan 292 .466 362 .556 427 .O3% 04.985 541 5 H f Minnesota 113,983 180 . 248 280 . 96K 19 207 140 O83 50, 997 Mississippi 117 ,000 236 .654 334,158 86 .507 169 ] | 670 Missouri 330 ,070 482 986 620 ,314 719,817 707 ,031 672 , 4: Montana 1 ,657 4,270 16 , 986 39 430 66,141 f Nebraska 23 ,265 » 549 240 ,30 288 , 227 281 ,375 Nevada 3,106 9 045 7 ,387 6,676 10,200 New Hampshire 71.957 64 i] 9 8 65 .688 63 ,.972 64 New Jersey 169 ,430 204 ,961 234 ,07 322 575 $29 797 594 ,780 New Mexico 1,320 1,755 18 ,21 6,735 56 ,304 . New York 1 ,C28,110 1 ,G31 ,593 1 ,042 , 16 209 ,574 1 ,422 ,969 7 North Carolina 115,000 252 ,612 322 , 53% 100 ,452 520 ,404 691 ,3 North Dakota 1,660 13,718 35,54: 77 686 139 ,802 68 , 28 Ohio 719 ,372 729 499 797 ,489 829 , 160 838 ,O80 1 ,020 , 6€ Oklahoma . : : 19 602 $22 399 BY 25 Oregon. . 21 ,000 37 533 | 6 89 405 118,412 151,028 Pennsylvania ; 834 ,614 937 ,310 1 ,020 51 880 1 ,282 ,965 1 ,610 ,459 Rhode Island 34,000 40 ,604 5 67 ,231 80 ,06 93 , 5 South Carolina 66 ,056 134 ,072 201 ,2 281 ,891 340 ,415 478 ,0 South Dakota.. 3) ’ 78,0 98 ,822 126 ,253 t6 9 Tennessee. . , 140 ,OO( 300 ,217 447 ,950 485 ,354 521,753 619,38 Texas..... ‘ 63 ,504 1200 ,000 166 872 659 ,598 } 821 .631 1 ,035 ,648 Utah. 4 16 ,992 24 ,326 37 ,279 73 ,042 91,611 117 ,406 Vermont... bi 65 ,384 75 ,328 65 ,608 65 ,964 66 ,615 61,786 Virginia a ¥ 131,088 220 ,736 342 , 269 370 ,595 402 , 109 5 Washington : 5 ,000 14,786 115,104 315,688 291 ,0 West Virginia oe atl 76 ,999 142,850 232 ,343 276 ,458 346 , 25€ Wisconsin...... } 265 , 285 299 , 457 145,142 464 ,311 165 Wyoming. ... 450 2,907 14,512 24 ,584 3 iEstimated. *Figuresfor 1919. *Included with North Dakota Data for this table were taken from U. S. Bureau of Education, Bulletin, 1922, No. 29, p. 12. E CALL to the attention of the American people the fact that wise expenditures for schools are not to be thought of as gifts in aid of a worthy charity, but rather as an investment that will pay higher dividends than any type of public expenditure.— American Legion. OM THE very beginning, public education has been left mainly in the hands of the States. So far as schooling youth is concerned the policy has been justified, because no responsibility can be so effective as that of the local community alive to its task. I believe in the co-operation of the national authority to stimulate, encourage and broaden the work of the local authorities. But it is the especial obligation of the Federal Government to devise means and effectively assist in the education of the newcomer from foreign lands so that the level of American education may be made the highest that is humanly possible.—President Harding in his message to Congress, Dec. €, 1922. The States and the Americanization Problem The States and the Foreign-born There are now within the borders of the United States nearly fourteen million foreign-born residents. Some of these foreign-born have already become good American citizens. Millions of them, however, have not had the educational opportunity that is fundamental to qualification for citizenship in a democracy. At the present time more than one-half of our foreign-born residents come from Southern and Eastern European countries where education is at a low ebb, and where from 25 to 87 per cent of the population are illiterate. The seriousness of the double problem resulting both from the increase in numbers and the low educational status of many of our immigrants, has been recognized by Congress, which has passsd an Act which limits the number of immigrants who may enter the country each year to 358,000. If the Immigrant Act had come thirty years ago, the country would not now face the question presented by the great mass of unassimilated Southern and Eastern European aliens now within our borders. The door has been closed too late, however. Millions of these people are already with us, the majority of them from the Southern and Eastern European countries. We are face to face with the problem of making them good American citizens. If it is to be faced squarely, each State must recognize its responsibility to the country as a whole and assume its share of the burden. Table 10 showsthe problem which each State must meet as it is indicated by the number of its residents who are foreign-born, and the percentage of the popula- tion that is foreign-born. New York with 2,786,112 foreign-born residents within its borders has a greater problem in Americanization than any other State in the Union so far as numbers are concerned. Rhode Island with 28.7 per cent of its population foreign-born; ranks first among the States of the Union. What are the educational needs in your State as revealed by the number and percentage of the population foreign-born? The States and Foreign-born Illiteracy According to the Census The Federal Census enumerates 1,763,740 of the foreign-born as illiterate. This figure includes only those who confess that they have had no schooling whatever. It is probable that there are other millions whose literacy is so limited that they are wholly unfitted for intelligent residence in a democracy. Table 12 gives in column 2 the number of foreign-born illiterates by States. New York with 389,603 foreign-born illiterates ranks first. Column 4 gives by States the percentage of the foreign-born population who are illiterate. Texas, with 33.8 per cent of its foreign-born population illiterate, ranks first. Column 6 gives the total foreign-born population over ten years of age by States. What are the educational needs of your State as revealed by the number and per cent of its foreign-born population who are illiterate? The States and Foreign-born Illiteracy The draft figures on illiteracy awoke the country to the fact that the Federal Census was an understatement of this problem. In addition to the 1,763,740 foreign-born illiterates enumerated by the Census there are doubtless other millions who possess too low a degree of literacy for successful citizenship in a Democracy. This statement is supported by the figures of table 13, which gives [28] e nen OS TABLE 1o. 1920 CENSUS, VOL. Ill THE STATES AND THE PROBLEM OF THE FOREIGN-BORN States l Continental United States Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana lowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Mary land Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming. Total Rank in tot foreign-born | foreign-bort population popuilatio! 6 46 7 00 28 l 16 6R1 . 6F 7 116 4 () 5 ) ) 2 Q j O8 f f 38 , OF > 1.206 > RAN 4; 78 (0.780 } + 07 19 0 I ‘ } 4 726 .63: f i886 .164 ) ae | q) sf 6 O2 ¢ 19 652 ~ s ; : Q 33 296 7 Ff 5 29 ,OC4 38 2.786 2 i 00 iS O3 19 678 .697 , 3g OBR j 102 <4 j 84 SoU 7: 10 r 6 82 ‘ 5 } HU Qg ] 96 75) { 44 6 5 TRE 6 i) 73) 61 106 g 460 SS ) ) 1( Per cent of | Rank in per total cent of tetal population | population foreign-born | foreign-born 1 0 0.8 44 4 6 8 13 ,9 ) 2.4 t 2 9 ) 6 1.4 06 t 9 0 Ze) ik 6 13 5 6 ».4 § 2 } ‘ } 48) + 0 s 7 oO 32 ‘ 2 g () 8 ] 4 sy : i 7 16 5 26 ie | 12 20 .6 7 23.4 8.1 0 6.8 } '3 49 20 .3 y 11.8 25 2.U 1) 0 19 ) li 23 . 4 l 0.4 ig 0 Al 0.7 5 7 3] > 6 nN 6 22 3 41 8.4 14 4 2 38 7.5 15 QO 40 TABLE 11.- Per cent Per cent Country illiterate Country illiterate Russia 87 .3 R nania 61.2 Serbia 78.9 Spa 8 7 Mexico 70.7 Greece 57 .2 Portugal 68.9 * Hungary 33.3 Bulgaria. 65.5 Italy 37 .0 199) {29 |] PERCENTAGE OF ILLITERACY IN COUNTRIES FROM WHICH NEARLY HALF OF OUR 14,000,000 FOREIGN-BORN COME in column 2 the number of foreign-born residents by States coming from countries in which from 25 to 87 per cent of the population are illiterate. The great mass of people coming from countries in which education is at such’a low ebb are unqualified for citizenship ina Democracy. There are over eight million foreign born residents in the United States at the present time who came from countries in which these high percentages of illiteracy exist. New York, with 1,731,382 foreign-born residents from such countries, ranks first among the States of the Union. The percentage of the total foreign-born population made up of residents TABLE 12.—THE STATES AND THE PROBLEM OF ILLITERACY AMONG THE FOREIGN-BORN WHITE POPULATION 1920 CENSUS, VOL. III Foreign-born whites—10 years of age and over | States Number Rank in Percentage Rank in illiterate number illiterate percentage | Population illiterate illiterate 1 co 3 4 ears” Get 6 Continental United States. . .| 1, 763, 740 CET EPS ee 13.1 ‘er 13 ,497 ,886 OE Se 1, 893 40 10.9 23 17 ,393 ae pee 19 ,291 14 27.5 2 70 ,053 Arkansas......... ee 1,145 45 8.3 32 13 ,834 California.......... - : 69 , 768 9 10.5 24 664.983 REE. 14,224 18 12.4 18 114,285 Connecticut........... = 63,131 10 17.0 8 371 ,666 EE is ss oars 3.373 35 17.3 7 19541 District of f Columbia te bain | 1,728 42 6.1 41 28 , 292 Florida. . ee yd 2,657 36 6.3 38 42 057 ES —_ 861 47 5.4 44 16 ,028 OE rr | 2,501 37 6.5 36 38 379 RR, Lu ehs cue o0 131,996 4 11.0 22 1,194,979 SS 17 ,555 16 11.8 19 149 239 ie wicn's 9s shee ners 11,004 24 4.9 47 223 ,752 ee | 11,291 23 10.5 25 108 .006 0 AS ee eee 2,244 38 7.3 33 30 ,603 ENS 9,707 25 21.9 5 44,244 SS a 11,604 22 11.1 21 104585 Ee 13,575 20 13.4 14 01,155 Massachusetts............ : 135 ,720 3 12.8 16 063 ,572 Michigan. . Te 70 ,535 s 9.9 26 713 ,228 Minnesota............... 26 , 242 13 5.4 45 482 ,230 5 oe 1 ,057 46 13.3 15 7,918 issouri. . 17/669 15 9.6 27 84 394 Pi hiwcwcwccncclescs 5,178 30 5.6 42 91,729 Nebraska. 9 ,468 26 6.4 37 148 ,209 evada......... 1,241 44 8.5 29 14,586 New Zan. 13 ,746 19 15.4 10 89 ,472 New Jersey................ 111,595 6 15.3 11 729 ,799 New Mexico.. ae oe 7,250 27 27.1 3 26 ,786 389 ,603 1 14.2 12 2,752 ,055 474 48 6.8 35 6,981 7,238 28 5.6 43 129 ,951 84 ,387 7 12.6 17 669 ,924 5,456 29 14.0 13 39 ,020 COT, . Sabi, idles + odes 5,172 31 5.1 46 100 ,672 Pennsylvania.............. 258 ,812 2 18.9 6 1,371,402 Rhode Island.............. 28 , 169 12 16.5 9 171 ,032 South Carolina............ 391 49 6.2 40 6 ,327 South Dakota............. 3,848 33 4.7 49 81,781 NS Ser ere 1,263 43 8.3 31 15 ,297 | SR rr 112,417 5 33.8 l 332 ,955 Ne RE owe abe 3 an iD « 3,504 34 6.3 39 55 ,724 IN Det. ela lsns dia Wiis «6 4 ‘337 32 11.3 20 42,701 EE in ss & naiae civ + 2,150 41 7.1 34 30 ,325 Washington................ 11,630 21 4.7 48 244 ,881 West Virginia.............. 14,548 ae 24.0 4 60 ,679 ES 38 ,359 11 8.4 30 456 ,420 ES Ss ee ee 2,233 39 9.0 28 24,762 from countries in which over 25 per cent of the population is illiterate, is gi\ in column 4. Arizona with 86.6 per cent of its foreign-born population from such countries, stands first in this regard. Table 13 is a better indication of the Americanization problem than table 12 What are the educational needs of your State as revealed by the number of residents within its borders and the percentage of the population which come from countries in which 25 to 87 per cent of the population are illiterate? TABLE 13.—THE STATES AND THE PROBLEM OF THE ILLITERATE IMMIGRANT 1920 CENSUS, VOL. III Number of Rank in Per cent of Rank in foreign-born | number of | foreign-born} per cent of trom foreign-born from foreign-bo! n countries from countries from Total States where over countries where over countries foreign-born 25 per cent | where over | 25 per cent | where over | pop of popu- 25 per cent of popu- 25 per cent lation is of popu- lation 1s of popu- illiterate lation is illiterate lation is illiterat illiterate Continental States.. x 18 4 5G Q Alabama 7,900 { 1.7 7 , Gf Arizona 66 ,602 36.6 19 .rkansas 1 607 1G California ey 3 R Colorado 6 18 17 6 ¢ f Connecticut R08 1 j sf Delaware 728 6 District of Columbia 6 ; , Florida... . IS 9 } 3 Georgia... s ! 90.6 Idaho... 8 688 1] } 13 ii [ilinois 604 is ; 0.1 6 t Indiana. 68 ,77 { 15.6 2 lowa..... 780 { 16 18 Kansas. . 13 457 292 9.3 30 78 Kentucky g ! } 0.3 38 Louisiana 26 , 288 6 8.6 10 j Maine 13 67 34 12 8 49 7 19 Maryland 9 58 17 58.3 11 Massachusetts ISS 414 6 36.0 32 id : Michigan O02 .77¢ 7 11.6 28 726 ,¢ Minnesota 115.1 12 3 6 41 18 64 Mississippi 1.415 47 5 1 12 8 Missouri 73 ,807 ; 39.7 29 ¢ Montana 25,216 27 26 .9 40 Nebraska 19 753 20 33.2 54 +9 ,€ Nevada 7.050 14 17 .6 19 +.8 ¢ | New Hampshire 18,581 32 20.4 46 : New Jersey 145.176 } 60.3 8 Bf New Mexico 23 876 IS 82.1 4 ‘4 New York 1,731 ,382 1 62 .2 6 786 y North Carolina 3,104 49 13.7 29 ‘ 9 North Dakota 42 5 23 32.0 37 L ,503 Ohio $12 )4 5 60 .7 7 0/3 ,O94 Oklahoma 19 916 30 19.8 17 ) 90S Oregon 7 .OOR8 95 27 .3 39 { Pennsylvania 929 ,484 } 67.0 87,8 Rhode Island 63 ,533 16 36.6 ; 73,49 South Carolina } 242 is 50 6 1 6,401 South Dakota % SRS : 2 9 5 v Tennessee... 6 866 15 14.3 23 15,478 Texas..... 995 .679 9 29 () } 60 9 Utah.... 1] 37 9.7 +4 ( Vermont. . 9 ; 1) 290 9 15 +, 526 Virginia...... 15,342 33 19 8 18 0, 18 Washington. . 54 827 19 1.9 44 0 ,U West Virginia 16 886 21 75.7 t 61,906 Wisconsin... 157 ,374 10 34.2 > 16C 128 Wyoming 11,09 3 i3.1 26 25 ,25 The States and the Non-English Speaking Population One of the first essentials in qualifying for successful citizenship in the United States is the ability to speak English. Nearly one and one-half million of our foreign-born in 1920 were unable to speak English. Table 14 shows the educa- tional problem which each State must face if our non-English speaking popula- tion is to take the first step toward qualifying for citizenship. the number of foreign-born in each State who are unable to speak English. Column 2 gives New York, with 290,200 foreign-born who are unable to speak English, ranks first among the States of t he Union. Column 4 gives the percentage of the foreign- TABLE 14.—THE STATES AND NON-ENGLISH SPEAKING WHITE POPULATION 1920 CENSUS, VOL. III States 1 Continental United States District o of ‘Columbia. Florida. . SNES 6 6 54S hs0 ew eee Reutesky . Paes oe pare Seec:......... To a Oe Foreign-born| Rank in Per cent of unable to number | foreign-born speak unable to unable to English speak speak English English 2 3 4 ye ee eee 11.0 724 | 42 4.2 36, 352 12 51.9 | 697 43 5.6 end ,570 8 10.5 cal 10" 650 21 9.3 soa 38 ,068 11 10.2 sl 2,733 35 14.0 779 41 2.8 7,918 26 18.8 285 47 1.8 | 1,956 38 §.1 | 121,965 4 10.2 13/269 15 8.9 : 9,559 24 43 or 12,027 17 11.1 688 44 2.2 3,683 31 8.3 10,333 22 9.9 7.765 28 2 96 ,426 5 9.1 | 68 , 105 9 9.5 28 ,311 13 5.9 445 46 5.6 11,126 19 6.0 3,098 33 3.4 9,186 25 6.2 1,509 39 10.3 11,339 18 12.7 73 ,409 7 10.1 13,225 16 49.4 290 , 200 1 10.5 190 48 3.7 10,189 23 7.8 81,161 6 12.1 5,362 29 13.7 3,342 32 3.3 162,240 3 11.8 21 ,620 14 12.6 116 49 1.8 4,861 30 5.9 506 45 3.3 172 ,057 2 51.7 ,303 36 4.1 065 34 7.2 1,135 40 3.7 77 , 796 27 3.2 11,121 20 18.3 481 10 9.7 37 8.1 Rank in per cent unable to speak _E nglish Foreign-born white population 6 ,497 , 886 184 ,394 148 ,209 14 586 729 ,799 26 , 786 te ~~ _ wo to ee == ; } per y Sete born population who are unable to speak English. its foreign born population unable to speak En in this regard. What are the educational needs of your State as revealed by the number and percentage oj Arizona, with 51 + | glish, ranks first among its foreign-born population who are unable to speak the English language? T >< the ~~ + The States and the Americanization Problem Among the Native-born ; , , lod In 1920 there were over two and one-half million of our native-born population twenty-one years of age and over who were unable to read and writ TABLE 1s. NATIVE-BORN All ADULTS 1920 CENSUS, VOL. Ul ( ? THE STATES AND THE AMERICANIZATION PROBLEM AMONG States 1 i Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Col Florida . Georgia. . imbia Idaho Illinois. . Indiana owa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missour) Montana. . Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio..... Oklahoma Oregon... Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee... Texas Utah Vermont. . Virginia. Washington. . West Virginia Wisconsin. Wyoming Continental United States terate n twenty-one vears of as Percentage ne e ana ¢ ig Rank in illiterate percenta illit rat TABULAR STATEMENT OF TEACE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S Name of Member- Pension fund receives income Retirement allowances Disability | Consideration granted prior to time State and Method of | Expenses ship ——_—__—_—_——- — | 4& pension. date when | “adminis- borne optional B SiGe iene ~ aw tration by or com- . A . a — . ” R e B | became pulsory From the state From the teachers Paid by state | Paid by teacher equirements Allowances | A | _B effective | Death | Resignation ——— _—— ———— ee ae | Minn. pro- | Annuity Expenses | Compul- | State matches pay- | The teacher pays | The state pays | Teacher pur- | 15 years of ser- | In case of disa- In case of Death, Resignation or D posed plan | Board of | tobe paid | sory. ments of all teachers | $64.79 per year to ension o chases with her | vice are required | bility teacher | or the estate of the teacher will to become | from 5 to | out of who have served for | the Retirement fund. .00 per year | accumulated before adisabled | is to receive | accumulated with interest. Teacher effective as| 7 mem- | interest 25 years or more. life or gives the | savings an an- | teacher is eligi- | $250.00 pen- | 10 years’ teaching service to their cre of 1923 bers. earnings For teachers who teacher a 5% | nuity of $250.00 | blefordisability | sion increasing | the state in addition 25 per cent o on the as- have taught less than Certificate of | per annum for | benefits. $25.00 per year | deposits plus 5 per cent for each ye: sets in the 25 years the state Deposit in the | life or she may | for each year | years. The limit which the teacher | teachers’ matches only a per- amount of receive a 9 % in excess of 15 | state is 100 per cent of her own savii fund. centage of the teach- $3,634.00. Certificate of years. Limit | has 25 years of service. There is ers’ accumulations. Deposit in the $500.00. This plan of proportionately matchir to be no This percentage va- amount of $3,- in accordance with number of years direct ap- ries from 25% to 634.00; or the | recognizes the obligation of the state t propria- 100% as the service teacher may re- | in the state for less than 25 years and tion from varies from 10 years ceive her own | If the teacher who has taught 25 year the state to 25 years. moneys accumu- her full deposit matched the teacher of Min- Under 10 years of lated with inter- years is entitled to have 25 per cent nesota for service the state does est in cash. Note | deposits matched. expenses. not match any por- that the state's | Note that the States of Wisconsin a tion of teacher's portion is not the teacher’s deposit in full, should th savings. payable in cash. dismi or die. Mass. Teachers’ | State. Compul- | Annual appropriation} Board establishes | A pensionispaid} An annuity is feachers under | Anauity pur- | Case of death, | Case of resignation Retire- sory. for the payment of | percentage of teach- | by the State paid the teacher ores of age | chased by mem- | estate of teacher | teacher receives he 1914, ment incurred pensions. er’s salary each year. | whichisequalto | in such an | and having 20 | bers’ own accu- receives the total | total savings accu Board 3 These pensions are | This percentage must| the annuity to | amount as her | years’ service in | mulated contri- | savings of teach- | mulated with inter members equal to the annuity | not be less than 3% | which the teach- | accumulated sav-| Mass. Last 5 | butions with in- | er accumulated | est the teacher is able to | or more than 7%. | er is enti ings with in-/ years continu- | terest and the | with interest. purchase from her | Minimum $35.00. | from her own | terest will pur- | ous. pension from the | own accumula Maximum $100.00. | savings accumu- | chase. state based on contributions. Thus | Only one rate has | lated with in- service. Total the state’s portion of | been established since | terest. retiring allow- the pension paid to | organization, which ance cannot ex- the teacher is not on | is 5%. coed retiring al- an actuarial basis as lowance which no sinking fund is would created to meet fu- have received ture pensions of the had she remain- resent teaching ed in service un- orce. til 60 years of re age. Conn. Board of | State. Compul- | State appropriates at | Teachers pay 5% of | The state | An annuity is | Ten yearsofser- | Reduced pension | Accumulated Accumulated teach 5 mem- sory. retirement a sum | salary. inimum | matches the in- aid the teacher | vice. depending _in | teacher’s savings.| er’s savings. Nothing 1917. bers. equal to the aceu- | $25.00. Maximum | curred pensions i her accum- amount on term | Nothing from | from the state. mulated teachers’ | $100.00. id the teachers./ ulated deposits of service. the state. savings which is to be These payments | in an amount used to purchase a are made only to ual to that life annuity. Thus teachers who | which her accu- the state’s portion of have received | mulations will : the pension paid to annuity y- | purchase. the teacher is not on ments rom an actuarial basis as ir accumu- no sinking fund is lated savings. created to meet fu- ture pensions of the resent teaching oree. Vt. Board of | State. Optional. | State pays annually | Board establishes | State paysapen-| An annuity is | 6 years of con- | Amount paid | In case of death | After 6 years, both 5 mem- to annuity fund crea- | per centage of teach- | sion in an | paid teacher in | tinuous service. | disabled teach- | after 6 years the | state’s and teacher's 1919. bers. ating a sinking fund | er’s salary each year. | amount equiva- | such an amount ers is such anal- | estate of the | accumulated savings for annuities to be | Only one rate has | lent to what the | as the teacher's | lowance as the | teacher will re- | Prior to 6 years only paid to the present | been establis! teachers’ accu- | accumulated | accumula ceive both state’s | teacher’s savings. teaching force. The | since organization, | mulated savings | savings with in- savings of both | and teacher's ac- amount paid an-| which is 5% Min- | will purchase. terest will pur- state’s and | cum i sav- nually equals the | imum, $16.00. Maxi- c teacher’s sav- | ings. Prior to t the teacher | mum, $100.00. ings may pur- | 6 only s to the annuity c i plus "s savings. und. An actuari- an additional ally sound basis. amount which is determined by the Board. | N.Y. City | Board of | City’ of | Compul- | City payseach month) Teachers desiring to | City pays the | Teacher pur- | 10 yearscity ser-| 90% of average | Estate will re- | Teacher receives her 7 mem- | New York.) sory. ment a sum which | be reti on one- r @& pen- | chases an annu- | vice. salary from the | ceive teacher's | total savings with 1917. rs. is the actuarialequiva-| half salary pay © sion of \ of her | ity of \% of her city plus the an- | total savings | 4% compound in- lent of the monthly | the averem 6% of | av average 8 nuity earned by | with 4% com- | terest. contributions of those} salary. This varies | for last 10 years. | for last 10 years. teacher’s contri- | pound interest. | entering service since | in accordance with | Thus the city | Annuity pur- butions. 1917, the effective | age and service. matches the | chased from the ae of the law. AT teacher’s savings eneneted de- it 8 annually posits o e $1,000,000 on ac- teacher. count of liability for old teachers. N. J. Board of | State. Compul- | State pays annual | Teachers pay from paysapen-| Teacher pur- | 10 years of ser- | Annuity paid | In case of Death, Resignation or Dismi: 7 mem- sory. contributions which | 4% to 7% of salary. | sion of 1/140 of | chases an an- | vice. teacher is 1/70 | total deposits of the teacher accumu 1919. bers. are sufficient to cre- | Average 4%. Ac- | average nuity with her of average y | interest compounded annually are pay: ate a sinking fund | cumulated pay- | multiplied by | savings of 1/140 multiplied by | estate of the teacher, or to the beneficis from which is paid | ments are sufficient | number of years | of a 2 sal- number of years | or to the teacher herself. to teachers at retire- | to purchase an an- | of service. ary multiplied of service. Mini- ye eed | eg X salary or $300.00 of aver: a m per year. ol _ Serv- or UU. ary multiplies by tiplied by years of . Minim number of years of | service. $200.00 per an- service. num. Pa. Board of | State. Compul- The state pays an- pays from | State pays pen- | Teacher receives Teachers under Amount of disa- | Estate of teacher |} Teacher receives 7 mem- ng nually into the fund | 3% to 5% of her | sion to teacher | from her own | 62 years of 4 bility benefits | receives total of | total of her sav- 1917 bers. an amount which will into the an- | which is 1/160 contributions an and having 10 eng med mel teacher’s savings | ings—accumulated be sufficient to pur- | nuity fund. This | of her oe annuity which is | years of service | sions depending | accum with interest. Noth- a o percentage varies ac- salary for equal to 1/160 | are eligible for | upon term of | with interest. | ing from the state. 1/160 of the teach- | cording to age. The | last 10 years of her eves disability bene- | service. Nothing from er’s @ annual | amount paid by | service multi- | salary for fits when they the state. salary for the last 10 | teacher is plied by the | last 10 years me disabled. years of service, mul- | to purchase an an- | number of years | multiplied by tiplied by the total | nuity of 1/160 of her | of service. the number of of service. | average salary for years of service Thus the teacher who the last 10 years, t 40 years | multiplied by the will receive from the | number of years of state of her aver- | service. age for the last 10 years. Ohio State Teachers | Compul- | The local taxing dis- | Teacher 4% of | State pays a | Teacher receives | 10 years’ service | Teacher receives | Estate receives | Teacher receives her Board are as | sory. tricts of the te | her oe . | pension equal to | from theannuity | required. reduced pension. | total savi of | total savings with 1920. 5 mem- sessed not contribute 5.57% of | Maximum $80. that which the | fund to which Minimum 30% | teacher with ac- | accumulated interest. bers. to exceed the total of | per annum. teachers’ accu- | she has contrib- of her salary. cumulated inter- ‘ $1.00 per teachers. is es- mulated pay- | uted an annuity est. year. tablished as a sink- ments will pur-| in such an ing fund to be drawn chase. amount as her when paying accumulated — the ' teacher a pen- savings will be changed by the um $300.00 Actuary. Se years of ser- vice. Wis. Annuity | EB Compul- | An amount 5% of teacher’s sal- | The teacher re- | The teacher re- | Teachers must | Teacher re- | In case of death | In case of resignation of idfrom | sory for | dent on ee. ary to Retirement | ceives such 4 | ceives such an | have 5yearscon- aires 0 menthiy both the teach- | both sstate’s and 1921. 7 mem- tin- all teach- | deposit and term of | fund. pension as accu- | annuity as the | secutive service | annuity of $25. er’s and state’s | teacher's seposits are bers, also nt ers over | service. Maximum mulated state’s | teacher's accu- | before they are | and such ad- itsarepay-| payable to the three re- Fund. age 25. 200% of teachers’ deposits will | mulated sav eligible for disa- | ditional monthly tothe estate | teacher. The state’s tirement | Contin- ae plus $25.00. purchase. in the fund bility benefits. | benefit as her | of the teacher. Cepeda ave not pay- boards t Maximum amount purchase. accumulated ab until the teach- 5 mem- de- $325.00 anuum savings and er is 50 years of age rives its per —_— state’s deposits and are pay- income source of the state's ° will purchase. able as a life annuity from deposit is a surtax for such term of the state. oo above years as the teacher This has may elect. T; "8 more than deposits are payable a for immediately. FF TEACHERS’ PENSION SYSTEMS 5 ed prior to time teacher is eligible for 10 & penmen. Required Averag mite Member- - = —— aos Age of re- term of annus table and ship as Assets as of December 91 | tirement service salary as rate of yf 12-31-21] Cc of 12-31-2 interest Resignation Dismissal Resignation or Dismissal the teacher | 50 years }0 years Average t t Assets of Present Plan he teacher will receive her deposits | salary ned Plan Bonds $674 , 50C interest. Teachers having more than | | City and $395 Cash 20 965 ervice to their credit will receive from | lown. Total $695 , 46 on 25 per cent of their accumulated | Men cent for each year of service over 10 $1,728 hich the teacher will receive from the | Women t of her own savings after the teacher $1,158 ice. | Country ‘tionately matching teacher’s deposits | Men, number of years of service, financially $1,008 ition of the state to teachers who serve | Women, than 25 years and more than 10 years. $824 1as taught 25 years is entitled to have tched the teacher who has taught 10 have 25 per cent of her accumulated } | es of Wisconsin and Vermont match | t in full, should the teacher resign, be | | | | ase -— re slanation, | th case of dis- | Voluntary | No term $1,498.00 \ Ac Bonds $3,717 ,574 vacher receives her | missal teacher | at age of60. | of service Ex 5 638 Stocks tal savings accu- | receivesher total | Compulsory | required | Re vl Mortgages ulated with inter- | savings accumu- | at age 70 for re- | 1s Other collateral t lated ~vith inter- tirement Cash 75,457 .07 | est. | Accrued interest 49 3935.41 Total $3 842,384 60 | | | | | eoumuls ated teach- | Accumulated 60 years. | Minimum} Mea, McClin 5,694 Bonds s savings. Nothing | teacher’s sav- | 15 years. | 2,029.50 ck's Fe Teachers’ Annuity Fund $816,154.12 om the state. ings. Nothing | | Women, ile An State Pension Fund 350 , 199 .67 from the state. 1,355.70. titants | Total $1,166,353.79 able | ith | 9‘ € | | | | | | fter 6 years, both | After 6 years, | Men 65 30 vears Not av uil- | McClin- About 250.| ‘Tani $112,000.00 ate’s and teacher’s | both state’s and | Women 60 ble tock’s | Cash 182.91 cumulated savings. | teacher's accu- | | Table | Total $133,182.91 rior to 6 years only | mulated savings vith acher’s savings. Prior to 6 years | \terest | only teacher’s | t3K%%. | savings. | | | | | | | | i | | | ee * ae Sa Se ee | eacher receives her | Teacher receive 8 Optional at | 35 years’ $2,800.00 Mortality | 21.252 | Bond $9 ,950 ,000 .00 tal savings with | her total savings age 65 or | service tables de- | Other Collateral 1 ,289 ,778 .00 compound in- | with 4% com- | on35 years | for an- veloped Cash 269 ,949 .OV rest. pound interest. | of service, | nuity of from own | Total $11,509,727 .00 and compul-} \% aver- experience. sory at 70. | agesalary | at age 65 } | | | | — a i a | . signation or Dismissal of teacher, the | Age 62 or | 35 years. | $1, 400.00. Not 14,381. | Bonds $2,500,000.00 e teacher accumulated with 34% | after 35 given. annually are payable either to the | years of , or to the beneficiary of the teacher, | service. | | self | ~acher receives | Teacher receives | Optional at | 10 years. | $900.00 McClin- 16,582 Bonds $4 ,984 ,783 .28 tal of her sav- | total of her sav- | age 62. per year. | tock’s Other Collateral 2,016 ,199 .85 zs—accumulated ings only, accu- | Compul- Table Cash __ 102,336.23 th interest. Noth- | mula’ with | sory at 70 with in- Total $7 , 103 ,311 .36 z from the state. interest. Noth- | years. terest at ing from the %. state. | | | acher receives her | Teacher receives | 60 years of | 36 years | Not de- | MeClin- | 34,000. | Bonds $5 ,635 352.10 ‘al savings with | hertotalsavings | age or 36 | underage | termined. | tock’s Cash _ 259,912.54 cumulated interest.| with accumu- | years of 60. %,. Total $5,895 ,264 64 lated interest. service. i | ' | case of resignation | State’s and | Teacher There is | Not avs ail Not de- | About Retirement Funds th state’s and | teacher’s de- | may stop | no re- | able. termined, | 18,000. Bonds $880 ,000 .00 \cher’s seposits are | posits are pay- | teaching at | quired Stocks yable to the | able to teacher. | and time | time of Mortgages wher. The —_ State’s deposits | and get such) service. Other ‘Collateral ¢ sie ts are not p are not payable | a pension as/| See ans- Cash 107 ,988 .33 bunt the te = teacher is | heraccumu-| wer to Total : 987 ,988 .33 | is 50 years of age eare of age | lated de-| No. 9. Wisconsin may invest in such assets as d then are pay- hg od they posits and a life insurance company invests in, le as a life annuity | are _—— as | the state’s such as mortgage loans, bonds and such term of ife annuity | deposits loans on accumulated deposits of ars as the teacher | for ro term of i pur- teachers. yy elect. Teacher’s | years as the | c \ posits are payable | teacher may | State’s de- mediately. elect. ts are Mortality Cost to transfer to present solvent plan Ss the old teach- ire to give notes in an amount equal the funds they vould have accumu- lated had this teach- ers’ fund been in peration since the late they began to | teach; these old eachers will assist n financing their lia- bility and thus limit the financial assist- nee needed from the tate It estimated it will cost Minnesota $50,000 per year for i period of 20 years to transfer these old teachers to the pro- posed plan. is N Retiring stem prior to estab- shment of present State No transfer Present law first law in effect in Vermont. Including liability assumed by city for pensions and benefits of teaching force who are now drawing pen- and also the liability for those who will be drawing pen- sions at future date, the city assumed a liability exceeding $50,000,000.00. sions accurately | Sc 16 | Liability assumed by State in behalf of old teachers at date of transfer State ssumes lia- bility for members of present pension fund. Such teach- ers will give notes to cover deficiency. far as equitable these notes will be paid by the teach- ers. For teachers over 35 years of age material assistance will be given by the state in paying these | notes. Note under | item 15 that the estimated cost for this assistance will be $50,000 a year for 20 years. Mass. did assume liability for old teachers in at date of pension law. service present Not necessary as the first law was sound. Vermont did not assume any liability in behalf of old teachers. The city took over the old payroll of about $1,200,000 per This will 17 Contribution by) State to pension fund for th fiscal year end- ing in 1921 The cost to the state of Minne- sota for this pro posed plan will be about $300 000 a year with an additional cost of $50,000 er year for a period of 20 years. This latter amount will be used to transfer old teachers from present plan Pension to Mem- ners $177,072.57 Reimbursement to cities for pen- sions paid by cities $47,059.33 Expense of Ad- ministration $9,410.93 Total $233,542.83 $111,760.62. Not av ailable. City contributed in 1921 $2,913,- 994.92. sume liability for old teachers, estimated to cost the State $394,000 year during the fife of the teaching force who were teaching at the date of transfer. P enn. assumed lia- bility for old teachers when establishing the present pension aw. Amount of liability not deter- Cost not determined | No state wide re- tirement system prior to establishment of present system First State Law. mined. Ohio State pension | fund pays pensions for the various cities | which joined in the state fund. This liability is assessed against the cities and is not assumed by the state. annum produce for the fu- ture a liability of about 10 million dollars. New Jersey did as- | New Jersey paid $350,000 during 1921. Approximately $2,000,000 per year. Local taxing die tricts pay 5.57 9 of teaching pay- roll in that dis- trict to the fund. This amounted to $2,075,000.00 for 1921. It is estimated that it will cost the state $1,000,000. The sur tax provided Wisconsin with $1,- 300,000 in 1921. Wisconsin did as- sume liability in behalf of old teach- ers in the pension fund. It is estimated that the sur tax which produced $1,300,000 in 1921 will be sufficient to meet this obligation. Law effective in July 1921. It is estimated this law will cost the state $1,000,000 per year. these residents, being native-born, have the right of the ballot and, therefore, constitute a more serious Americanization probiem than our foreign-born illit- erates, who must go through the formalities of naturalization before qualify- ing as vote! Table 15, in column 2, gives the number of our native-born adult population that is illiterate by States. Georgia, with 260,399 illiterate adults, ranks first. Column 4 gives by States the percentage of the native-born adult population who are illiterate. Louisiana, with 25 per cent of its native-born adult population illiterate, ranks first in this regard. Column 6 gives the adult native-born population by States. What are the educational needs of your State as revealed by the number and percentage of its native-born adults who are illiterate? The States and Inequalities of Opportunity Equality of educational opportunity is still an unrealized ideal in our great, rich country. The opportunity that a child has to get an education is largely dependent upon the accident of birth. If he happens to be reared in one com- munity, he attends a school from 180 to 200 days a year, conducted in a modern fireproof, sanitary building, and is taught by a trained, experienced and com- petent teacher, who is supplied with the best textbooks and teaching material. If he is reared in another community, he attends a school which, at the best, is open but a few weeks each year, which is conducted in ill-adapted shacks, a menace alike to safety and health, and is taught by untrained, inexperienced teachers who lack the most necessary teaching material. Such inequalities exist to greater or less extent in every State in our Union. Table 16 gives figures indicative of the educational opportunity that the various States are offering their children. Column 2 gives the average number of days the schools of each State were in session in 1920. New Jersey ranks first since its children on the average have an opportunity to go to school 189 days each year. The children of South Carolina on the average have an opportunity to go to school but 109 days each year. Let us grant that the schools of South Carolina are equal to those of New Jersey in everything except the length of the term maintained. Then the child in South Carolina with 109 days of school has 58 per cent of the opportunity to attend school that the New Jersey child has with 189 days of school. If 58 per cent equals 100 per cent, then the children of those States have an equal educational opportunity. The mere maintenance of schools, however, does not guarantee that children are attending them regularly. In some localities enforcement of the attendance laws are so lax that thousands of children are missing the opportunity to attend school even when it is in session. In some States many children attend school but a small fraction of the term that is maintained, yet the Federal census, from which the figures in column 4 are taken, would list them as “attending school.”’ The census figures do not reveal the real situation. A number of recent surveys have made intensive studies of conditions in individual States. A study just completed for Kansas by M. L. Smith, director of school consolidation, Emporia Normal, may be selected as typical in its conclusion. It states: “‘more than 100,000 children of school age, or 52 per cent, did not attend schoo! last year... . Last year there were included in the census of one-room county schools of the [34] State, 214,928 children of school age. Of this number 103,520, or 48 per cent, actually attended school.”’ Yet in table 16 the Federal census ranks Kansas as seventh among the States as to the percentage of childre attending school. Is it vy wonder that 3,000,000 native-bo:n Americans reported in the last cens hat thev had had “no schooling whatever’”’ What are the educational needs of your State as indicated by the average length of the school session and the percentage of its children who attend school? TABLE 16.—THE STATES AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY \verage Per cent of 1umber of population States days schools Rank 5 to 1S Lan in session attending 1919-1920 scho Jt) Continental United States 61.9 Alabama 3.1 iT Arizona 62.6 ; Arkansas 26 .3 15 California 174.0 Colorado 167 .9 19 i Connecticut 183.5 Delaware 181.7 ; } District of Columbia 78.0 ~ s Florida } l +4 Georgia 15.0 +0 | 04 tS Idaho 172.7 15 80.7 i Illinois 170.9 17 . Indiana 155.8 4 16.1 28 lowa 174.0 14 Kansas 164.0 28 .5 79.9 Kentuck 123.0 47 Louisiana 148 .9 a8 y +9 Maine 169 .2 18 2 Maryland 179 .6 6 a Massachusetts 179.4 7 Michigan 72.0 16 ] Minnesota 160.0 } 7.4 Mississippi 122 0 ig RO R 4 Missouri 162.8 30 Montana 166.4 24 } Nebraska 64.0 28 .5 .. 5 Nevada 67.0 P| New Hampshire 174.0 12 77.1 New Jersey 189 .0 l 76.5 25 New Mexico 165.0 26.5 72.9 New York 188 .0 2 6.2 7 North Carolina 134.0 42 i ) North Dakota 166.9 21 6.8 26 Ohio gee ‘ 165.0 26.5 79. ] Oklahoma 166 .4 24 12 34 Oregon 152.0 37 7 8 Pennsylvania 176.8 9 t.4 Rhode Island 182.1 } 73.8 y South Carolina 109 6 49 2 S South Dakota 167 .0 20.5 i7.9 Tennessee » 133.5 43 4 j Texas 155.6 35 6.6 4 Utah 7 166.4 24 9 2 Vermont ; 162 .G 32 6.9 24 Virginia 147.0 3f f } +4 Washington : : 176.4 10 8.7 . West Virginia 138.9 41 i : Wisconsin , 175.3 11 s 8 Wyoming 152.0 36 17.8 } Figures in column 2 from U. 8. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1922, No. 29, | Inadequacy of Our Country Schools The population of the United States is almost equally divided between urban and rural communities. 54,304,603 people live in cities, and 51,406,617 live in country districts. The largest percentage of our immigrants, among whom the percentage of illiteracy is relatively high, is found in our cities. Yet there are nearly three million illiterates found in the rural population of the United States as compared with but two million illiterates found in our urban population. This is largely the result of the ineffectiveness of the rural schools. Reasonably adequate schools are maintained in most of our cities. Such is not the case in many of our country districts. Consequently, the number of illiterates and the percentage of the population who are illiterate is much higher in the country than in the cities. The existence of much of the illiteracy in the country districts is a direct result of the inadequacy of the rural schools. Such illiteracy as exists in our cities, is largely due to immigration, rather than to the non-existence of schools. The percentage of illiteracy in the rural districts of a State compared with that of the cities is indicative of the relative effectiveness of its rural and urban school systems. The figures of table 17 makes such a comparison possible in each State. Column 2 gives the number of illiterates found in the rural popula- tion of each State. This may be compared with the number found in the urban or city population, in the same State as given in column 6. Column 4 gives the percentage of the rural population which is illiterate, which may be compared with that found in the cities as given in column 8. What are the educational needs of your State as indicated by a comparison of the figures for illiteracy in the country districts with the figures for illiteracy in the cities? UR PROGRAM of admission and treatment of immigrants is very intimately related to the educational policy of the Republic. With illiteracy estimated at from two-tenths of 1 per cent to less than 2 per cent in ten of the foremost nations of Europe, it rivets our attention to a serious problem when we are reminded of a 6 per cent illiteracy in the United States. The figures are based on the test which defines an illiterate as one having no school- ing whatever.—President Harding in his message to Congress, Dec. 8, 1922. O LONG as school trustees continue to try to drive a sharp bargain in the employment of teachers—securing the one with the passable county certificate who will teach for the least wages—the boys will continue to run off to town for “jobs” and the parents will continue to “move to town” to educate their children.—From Farm Boys and Girls, McKeever. OTWITHSTANDING THE fact that nearly every state has put into its constitution the fundamental principle of the state’s obligation in public education, there is not a state in the Union which has yet complied with these plain provisions and given to the boys and girls an equality of opportunity in education. Those who live in the country districts have not been provided facilities for obtaining an education which are in any respect the equal of the facilities which have generally been provided in all populous centers.— Thomas E. Finegan, Journal of Education, November, 1922. [36] TABLE 17. SHOWN BY THE STATES AND INEQUALITY OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY AS ILLITERACY IN RURAL AND URBAN POPULATION 1920 CENSUS, VOL. III n n ; e \ges—10 years and over e S Rural p t U1 t Ss States ‘4 Ra I Rank R Num- in el in Num- 1 n ber num Y per ber nun ‘ e illit- ber t cent illit- t erate illit ute illit- erate n erat erate A 6 > Continental United f States 176.79 Alabama 7é ) } s Arizona 0 2 6.0 | Arkansas 2 1 l California 850 0 7 ' Colorado 4f 5 . l ‘ Connecticut 8 460 f ] Delaware 1,929 District of Columbia { 2 x Florida 56.129 0 t f Georgia 72.253 7 f R l Idaho 91 14 7 Illinois 19 38 7 - | Indiana 0,178 43 SHE Iowa 0,583 } 18 0 Of Kansas > 564 { 15 0 Kentucky 128 , 266 ) 8 13 r i Louisiana 952 523 f l 16.56 r Maine 1,509 " 97 X Maryland 33 441 16 » of Massachusetts 5,023 9 a} 1.58 Michigan 97 .606 { 33 60.4 Minnesota 18,649 - $1 S Mississippi 907 ,520 ; g j ¢ Missour1 18 , 84 5 6 4 Be 5 Montana 7,278 6 ( ; 2 26 f S Nebraska 7 068 Ig $7 6 Nevada , 563 16 17 r New Hampshire 3,727 14 30 16 1 New Jersey 24,764 6 ( 22 So New Mexico 38 ,021 } f 6 € New York 11.71: x 29 5 0) North Carolina 905 ,932 6 { 8 6 } North Dakota 8,916 35 36 0 +4 Ohio 36 ,135 20 7 1,8 Oklahoma 48 ,550 16 24 8 | Y : Oregon 1.316 12 16 5 cl Pennsylvania 107 .679 12 16 23 105 .020 + ¢ 22 ‘ Rhode Island 709 18 7 19 ) 60 . South Carolina 196 ,510 7 0 3 »4 ‘ South Dakota 7,186 ] 8 42 a9 . Tennessee 147 ,555 i) f 11 85 07 i Texas 215,511 } ) 14 80 333 f ‘ Utah + ,096 43 34 2,168 rf Vermont 4,973 40) i 32 ; y Virginia 156 ,538 Ss 0 9 38 ,62 8 ] _ . Washington 9,349 4 20 40 9.17 ry West Virginia 60,155 13 7.6 15 9 258 ae] : - Wisconsin 24 ,804 25 2.3 35 25 Pa) { . - Wyoming 2,191 17 > 1 39 958 6 = = er ae F WE could grapple with the whole child situation for one generation, our public health, our economic efficiency, the moral character, sanity and stability of our people would advance three generations in one.—Herber! Hoover. [37] Bir tienen Inadequacy of Rural Schools Revealed by Illiteracy Among Native Whites The existence of large numbers of illiterates among the native-white popula- tion of a State is a strong indication that the school system of that State is inadequate in at least some communities. When it is recalled that illiteracy according to the Federal census means no schooling whatever, the existence of white illiterates within a State means that in some localities in that State no schools whatever are provided for its children. It is partly in rural communities that such conditions exist. A State may maintain adequate schools in some communities and wholly inadequate schools in other communities. Whether a child receives even that elemental educational opportunity that makes it possible for him to read and write is then dependent upon the accident of where he happens to be reared. In such a State equality of educational opportunity is a myth. Table 18, based on the Federal census figures as to illiteracy among native- born whites, indicates by States, the ineffectiveness of the schools of their rural communities as compared with schools of their cities. Column 2 gives the number of native-white illiterates by States, who live in country districts. Column 4 gives the percentage of the native-white population living in country districts that are illiterate. Columns 6 and 8 give the same figures for urban communities, by States. By comparing rural and urban native-white illiteracy figures, one gets an indication of the equality of educational opportunity maintained in that State. In Louisia .a, 75,458 of its native-white population living in rural districts, is illiterate. It ranks first in the percentage of illiteracy among the native-white population in rural districts, 16.4 per cent being illit- erate. On the other hand, in Louisiana, 6,499 of its urban native-white popula- tion is illiterate, or 2 per cent. A similar difference exists in many other States between the percentage of native-white illiteracy found in the countrv and in the cities. What are the educational needs of your State as revealed by comparing the illiteracy figures of its rural native-white population with the illiteracy figures for its urban native-white popu- ation? QUALITY OF opportunity is a necessity of a free people; for the lack of such oppor- tunity brings citizens invariably under other rule and would create class distinctions impossible in America. Equality of opportunity can only be arrived at through equal oppor- tunity of education. This opportunity of education we are resolved to bring about for all the children of America.— Commander Alvin M. Owsley, American Legion. F COUNTRY people as a whole realized the extent to which their children are denied the privileges of other children in the matter of an education, there would be nothing short of an open revolt. The fathers and mothers of these cheated children would say: ‘‘We must have better schools for our children at any cost. Ifthe burden is greater than we can bear, the cities must help carry the load.”” As good schools in the country as in the city is the only safe course for any nation.—Henry Jackson Waier-, in The Weekly Kansas City Star. we | Vv een at reer nt Hi AS ey a aterm nS MM RID 880, TABLE 18. INDICATED BY ILLITERACY AMONG THE NATIVE-WHITES IN RURAL AND URBAN COMMUNITIES 1920 CENSUS, VOL. III THE STATES AND INEQAULITY OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY AS States Age 10 years and ove! Rural popul ition Urban } Rank Rank Rank t Num- in er in Num- in Per ber num- nt per ber num- cent illit- ber cent illit- ber l erate illit- illit- erate illit erat t erate erate erate ti 2 3 6 Continental United States 459 211,113 Alabama 60 , YUE 7 7 4,398 Arizona 2, 39 34 } 838 } Arkansas 8 ,67 1} 1] >. 739 f California 1,859 29 32 } 888 Colorado 6 ,609 26 2 2,015 | ( Connecticut 798 | 36 4 1,129 3 Delaware ,956 35 6 471 +5 District of Columbia 640 4 Florida 962 21 2 1,207 Georgia ),246 8 9 7, 5d Idaho 685 44 8 229 Illinois 619 18 65 11,288 Indiana 032 19 : 10,897 6 lowa.. 4,972 28 7 3 30 Kansas 4,776 | 30 ; 2.40 f f Kentucky 4,065 1 ~ 5 8,14 Louisiana 75,458 4 l 6,499 Maine. . 6.861 25 . 1' 53s Maryland 048 22 5 4,320 8 f Massachusetts 735 43 16 7.045 Michigan 8 23 0 5,79 Minnesota 3, 31 19 2 666 oF Mississippi 20, 17 13 1,700 f Missouri 38, 10 18 8,334 ) Montana 4 | 43 l 7 Nebraska 2 32 i 38 7 ‘ Nevada 48 4] j New Hampshire 42 33 ] 33 | } New Jersey 5 27 97 4 456 | h New Mexico 22 15 2 2,626 | New York 3 20 29 15,058 : 2 North Carolina 94, 2 +2 3 10,043 ’ North Dakota fe 39 } 44 179 4¢ Ohio. . - 2 16 25 12,910 Oklahoma 27 13 17 3,020 | | Oregon 107 40 { 42 88 Pennsylvania 603 14 1.2 28 15,267 Rhode Island 251 17 1 20 2,004 | 3 i 2 South Carolina 35,169 12 ] 6 3,573 | 2 f i South Dakota 1,347 37 (4 10 143 | 47 4 Tennessee 92 ,636 | 3 2 8 4 9,173 S Texas 66 ,685 | 5 4 14 13,868 | : 18 Utah. 514 45 0.4 16 411 | 43 { 38 Vermont 2,525 33 1.5 24 1,088 36 } Virginia 63 ,236 6 7.5 8 7,239 2 2 6 Washington , 1,338 38 G.4 47 1,041 7 : West Virginia 40,147 | 9 10 4,177 9 6 Wisconsin 7,704 | 24 0.9 31 2,745 4 } $ Wyoming. . 320 46 0.4 15 101 8 3 39 | oe, The States and the One-room Rural School One of the weakest links in the educational system of most of our States is the one-room rural school. Repeated studies have demonstrated the ineffective- ness of the instruction given in the one-room schools where one teacher has the responsibility of giving instruction to pupils of all ages and grades.! Educational authorities generally agree that the abolishment of the one-room school through consolidation is the first step toward increasing the efficiency of our public schools. Some States have already attacked this problem and have made encouraging progress. Many States have given it little attention. Table 19 gives, in column 2, the number of teaching positions by States Column 4 shows the number of teachers teaching in one-room schools. Column 6 shows the percentage of the teachers in each State who are employed in one- room schools. What are the educational needs of your State as revealed by the number and percentage of its teachers who are still employed in that relic of a bygone educational age, the one-room school? The States and the Training of Teachers The presence in the school rooms of our country of thousands of untrained teachers is the most serious educational problem of to-day. Many of these teachers have had no training whatsoever beyond graduation from the elementary schools, have had little teaching experience, and are often but eighteen or nineteen years of age. It has been estimated that less than one-fourth of the teachers of the Nation have an education equal to the standard of preparation recognized in all civilized countries as constituting the barest mininum for ele- * mentary school teaching. We require that all who vote must be twenty-one years of age, yet untrained teachers, eighteen and nineteen years of age, are often given a far greater respon- sibility than that of the ballot—the training of the children who are the citizens of to-morrow. HE STANDARDIZING of one-teacher schools and the maintenance of “Model Rural One Teacher Schools,” are misdirected effort and money which had much better be spent in creating sentiment for consolidated schools. This conclusion is reached after making a state-wide study of the rural schools during my two terms as State School Inspector, and after three years experimenting in the so-called “mode! one-room rural school,” in widely different sections or communities. The multiplicity of subjects and the numerous daily recitations after every device for reducing the number of daily recitations is exhausted, leaves a task beyond the physical ability of the best trained teachers. The weakness and inadequacy of the one-teacher schools as a plan of modern education is inherent and cannot possibly be ; remedied. A few unusual teachers have done very unusual work in the one-teacher schools. : To take such unusual cases as models and inspiration for the continuance of the one-teacher : school is a delusion and doomed to failure.—S. K. Mardis, Department of Rural Education, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio. The Ohio Teacher, May, 1919. 1 See Bulletin No. 2 of the Research Division of the National Education Association, p. 37 and following, for facts and figures to support this statement. [40] m ~J Ate oe nc TABLE 1o. THE STATES AND THE ONE-ROOM RURAL SCHOOL Total tank in Number Rank in Per cel number total ol number ol pel States ol number teachers of teachers O teaching ol in teachers I ch positions teaching yne-room in one-To¢ in 1919-1920 positions schools one-room scho one-rt 1919-1920 Schools Si ] j 5 Continental United States 657 ,646 89 ,227 2 Alabama >, 558 P8390 24 Arizona 955 | 65 4 Arkansas 10,476 oF l 15 California 19 343 10 66 28 Colorado 6,991 { ? ) Connecticut 7,52 8 £5 Delaware 34 ~ 6 14 f District of Columbia 2.0 16 , 19 Florida 6 ,651 6 1,770 34 f Georgia 15,921 j 2 6 Idaho } 982 78) 0 T f Illinois 36 , 599 ),14 ; ] Indiana 17 ,209 880 7 . Iowa 24,451 f 340 16 Kansas 16 ,989 7,624 s | Kentucky ig 6.500 f ( Louisiana & 966 ) R37 “ Maine 732 ~ 309 ‘ Maryland 6,675 602 35 f Massachusetts 19 ,085 787 40 Michigan 23 ,703 7 7,004 ) Minnesota 19 57 9 7.668 7 Mississippi 24 +. 371 22 c Missouri 2 8 8 066 6 s Montana 6 7 3,079 Zi Nebraska 14,253 6 , 284 12 { Nevada 675 50 i6 f New Hampshir 994 | 803 9 New Jersey 6,758 654 {2 t New Mexico 2,452 } 748 } New York 54,253 1 8 639 4 North Carolina 16 852 } 4.174 3 24.7 North Dakota.. 8 ,057 ; 4,372 2 ; Ohio ¥ 31.404 4 ‘8 090 5 4 Oklahoma , 15,337 18 4,426 20 23.3 Oregon 7,748 32 2 , 280 ) Pennsylvania 44,111 2 0,254 2 Rhode Island 793 } 62 +8 South Carolina 9 ,699 j 52 26 : South Dakota 7,830 ; 1,584 , 5 Tennessee 13,277 2 | 766 8 ~ Texas g OO] ; 490 13 Utah 3.781 10 137 +7 f Vermont 2 676 1.196 37 Virginia 14,271 19 786 2 f Washington 9,618 28 747 8 + West Virginia 11,22 25 >, 415 14 s Wisconsin. 6,210 16 6 606 10 Wyoming ‘ 2,217 45 1,289 36 8 2 Figures for 1918. *%Schools with enrollment of fe th 1 Includes 231 part-time teachers. ‘Figures for 1919. The data in columns 2 and 4 are from [ No. 29, pp. 18 and 20 S. Bureau of Education B illetin 1 Qg99 All educational progress is primarily dependent upon the competency of the class room teacher. No substantial improvement in the effectiveness of their publie school systems can be expected in many of our States until there has been a general lifting of the qualifications of their teachers. This problem has been neglected in most of our States up to the present time. In fact there is so little interest shown in the qualifications of their teachers in most of our States that it is impossible to obtain an exact statement of the training and qualifications of the present teaching personnel. The question of providing competent teachers for its schools must be faced squarely by each State, if it is to meet its responsibility to the Nation in maintaining an adequate school system. Table 20 has been prepared as an indication of the situation in the United States as it concerns the training of teachers. Column 2 gives the total number of teaching positions in the States in 1920. Column 4 shows the number of teachers without adequate training; that is, whose training is less than graduation from a four year high school, plus graduation from a two year normal school. Column 6 gives the percentage of teachers who have not had this amount of training. The figures in this table should be looked upon as suggestive rather than exact, although they are the latest and most accurate obtainable. Since they combine the results from a number of different studies in which the methods of determining the training of the teacher differ, it is probable that a good many minor inaccuracies have crept in and the figures for certain States may be inexact. The conditions under which the studics were made upon which this table is based were often such that the percentage of teachers qualifying as untrained was an understatement of the real situation. Two of the States for which no data are given in the table are located in the South, where the percentage of trained teachers is generally relatively low. The figures given, therefore, are probably a conservative estimate of the percentage of untrained teachers in the United States. If exact figures compiled on a common basis were available for all States, it is very likely that they would show that more than 56 per cent of the teachers of the country have training less than that given by the standard high school and Normal school. The figures given in column 4 are based upon the total number of teachers as given in column 2, and the estimated percentage of the teachers of the various States without adequate training as given in column 6. These percentages are based upon studies and reports dating from 1918 to 1923. They should be looked upon as representing the percentage of the teachers trained as indicated by available reports or studies dated as near to 1922 as could be obtained. The total number of teachers without adequate training in the United States as a whole, given at the top of column 4, is not a sum of the individual State figures given in this column. It represents 56 per cent of the total number of teachers in the country in 1920, given as 657,646 at the top of column 2. This is the per- centage of teachers who have inadequate training in the forty-three States for which data is given in column 4. This figure is assumed to be applicable to the five States for which no data are given. Has your State given proper attention to the qualifications of those into whose hands is given the teaching of its children? [42] Steen the heir een ent 1eir ent “he ely an ed er of an ey of ly is a] 10 re le or d aed Cola sth = Seles TABLE 20. THE STATES AND THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS States Continental United States Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Tot 1919 al number ol teaching positions 20 Rank in number of teaching positions 1s 16 36 Number ol teachers without idequate training ‘ > 68 282 7 9 68AR ; 76 ( f »s4 94 2,907 116 ) 854 O79 959 34 7 At i 2! 00) R08 2812 184 6 1.102 9 264 352 > O82 2b 1,766 }. 482 » Yo * 14 » 163 633 4,557 363 170 ‘ 186 19,141 1 179 900 8 563 + SOG 9.201 9 078 Rank in number of teachers without adequate training 0 Per cent ot teachers without adequate training Rank lI per cent oO teachers without ack quats training The sources of the data in Column 6 are based on the following: (1 Teachers in Different States, School and Society, March 18, 1922, p. 304, (2 of Recent State School Surveys, (3) Reports of State Superintendents, (4 naire sent out in 1922 to State School Commissioners and Superintendents The data in Column No. 29, p. 17. VV F4PONS WIN wars, but education wins in time of peace. 2 are taken from U American Legion, Enquirer, Oakland, California. 43 ] S. Brureau of Education, Education of A number A question- sulletin 1922, Alvin Owsley, Commander. The States and Teachers’ Salaries. Table 21 gives, by States, in column 2, the average salary paid teachers in all schools in 1920. Column 4 gives the median yearly salary paid teachers in the larger cities of each State in 1921-22.! Column 6 gives, by States, the estimated annual salary of teachers in one-room, rural schools. Column 8 shows the rela- tionship between the salary paid in city schools in the State and that paid teachers in one-room schools. In the country as a whole, the salaries paid to the teachers in the one-room schools is one half—52.2 per cent—that of the city school teacher. Column 9 ranks States as to the percentage relationship between the salaries paid city school teachers and teachers in the one-room schools. New Mexico ranks first, since the median salary of teachers in one-room schools in this State is 83.6 per cent of that paid teachers in the city schools. This table should arouse certain questions in the minds of those interested in maintaining adequate State school systems. First: Are the children in the cities and the rural districts of your State receiving an equal educational opportunity as indicated by the salaries paid city school and rural school teachers? It is hardly possible that on the average the teacher who is willing to accept a yearly salary of $774 is equal in competency to the teacher who received $1479 as an annual salary. The difference between the salary paid the one-room school teacher and the city school teacher is even greater than this in some States. Many rural teachers receive less than half the salary paid the city teacher. Consequently, nearly all the well-trained competent teachers soon migrate to the cities, where they are not only better compensated, but where they have to ‘teach but one grade at a time. Beginning teachers and those who are either untrained or incompetent stay in the country. As a consequence, city and country children are not given an equal educational opportunity. The second question that table 21 suggests is: Are the salaries being paid teachers in your State such that will guarantee that a sufficient number of young people will offer themselves for the teaching profession. It may be that the majority of those already employed as teachers will continue, even though inadequately paid. The question of larger importance to the welfare of the Democracy is: will there be a sufficient supply of teachers to meet the needs of our schools when the present generation has passed? The great mass of our class room teachers are women, and this condition is not likely to change. Teaching is no longer practically the only field that offers employment to the bright young woman. Women have already won places in the legal, medical, and other professional fields. Many opportunities are open to them for service at good salaries in the commercial field. This was not true a generation ago. Under the changed conditions existing to-day is it likely that large numbers of talented young people will be willing to prepare themselves for teaching with a prospect of a beginning salary of $500 to $1000 a year and the eventual chance of receiving a yearly salary of not over $1200 a year? Does table 21 indicate tha! the city and country children of your Slate are being taught by equally competent teachers and do the salaries paid in your State guarantee that a sufficient number of young people will be willing to undergo the training necessary to qualify as a teacher? * Fifty per cent of a group of teachers receive a salary equal to or above the median salary, and fifty per cent Sensis enleaies equal to or below the median. ("44 ] a : ; 4 TABLE 2r. -THE STATES AND ANNUAL SALARIES OF TEACHERS Average Rank Me- Rant Me- Rank Pet nit ri salaries in dian dian in that er cel teachers | ave! salaries salaries me- Sala salar all Lge teach- one- dian pala schools Saiary ers In Sa room salaries one one- States 1920 large schools one- roon room city scno 1922 room scnools to é schools schools is ¢ ~ : 1922 ea paid { ] 4 6 i Continental United States $87 7 $774 = . * Alabama 4s 159 119 40 Arizona 19 ,67 43 ; Arkansas 177 1,102 28 4 > California 1,272 1 879 57 l Colorado 129 1.89 R74 Connecticut 24 5 8 Delaware R48 7 689 District of Co lumbia 1,359 l 6 Florida . 1.202 399 " Georgia 26 ] 1,4 3C0 18 s Idaho 932 f 179 918 ‘ Illinois 8 1,913 781 24 Indiana 96 1.516 861 17 Iowa 827 f 1,4 768 Kansas 761 1,69 731 7 Kentucky $1 . 1,247 16 IS Louisiana " 1,580 659 1 7 Maine 603 ) 1,296 595 } Maryland 902 1,069 696 29 6 } Massachusetts 262 1,589 : Michigan 911 . R32 +s j Minnesota 882 2 1.6 R45 9 Mississippi 9] 19 929 328 47 8 Missouri 797 1.82 594 f Montana 958 1 ,638 966 ] § { Nebraska 765 1,731 869 } } , Nevada 1,163 3 1,436 988 6 68 New Hampshire 759 J 1 ,323 718 28 8 New Jersey 1.282 2 1,631 1,011 5 f New Mexico 803 1.297 1,084 j 5 New York 1.256 6 2.600 R83 11 ) North Carolina 164 15 1 ,206 383 15 6 North Dakota 728 33 1,395 867 14 6 q Ohio... 1.C&88 0 1,756 878 12 { Oklahoma 768 9 1 ,630 $26 22 2 : ‘ Oregon 870 ; 1 ,237 862 16 6 : Pennsylvania 920 1,966 655 34 £ Rhode Island 1,070 1,722 786 23 South Carolina 464 16 1,167 396 12 : South Dakota 696 5 1,41 928 9 6 . 1 ; Tennessee 194 12 1.096 365 16 : Texas 612 38 1, 520 671 32 } j Utah 992 13 1,392 844 2( 6U ‘ Vermont 667 6 1,01 674 31 66 2 Virginia 546 10 1.190 385 44 4 : Washington 1,229 7 1,780 1,104 3 6 ‘ West Virginia 639 37 1,415 574 37 } : Wisconsin 915 19 2,293 857 18 | Wyoming. 869 24 1,396 755 26 ) : 1Figures for 1919. *%231 part-time teachers included in com utation. * Indicates th s are approximate. ‘Indicates that reports were from less than 25 teachers. Data in Column 2 from U. S. Bureau of Education, Bulletin, 1922, No. 29, p. 19, and j Columns 4 and 6 from Facts on the Cost of Public Education and What they Mean, Bulletin of Research Department, p. 15. [45] State Educational Needs and Illiteracy The States and the Problem of Illiteracy Many of the enlightened nations of the world have developed educational systems that have removed the menace of illiteracy from their borders. _ Illit- eracy has been reduced to those who are suffering from mental and physical defects. ILLITERACY IN THE UNITED STATES AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES! Per- Country centage SS SS ee ee a 2 SEEGER ng SP EN 8 Ae ‘ 2 i. n Arkansas 360 1 1 G06 California 379 ) 280 R88 849 + Colorado 04 0.7 s Connecticut 615 0.276 QR . Delaware 374 0.9 } District of Columbia RH 0.40 O Florida OO 6 2 f Georgia 6 12 9 } a Idaho 2 0.17 49 88 964 e Illinois 8 0.286 6 Indiana 721 0 ; t lowa 977 0 +7 9 Kansas 914 0 t Kentucky 8 736 1 ; Louisiana 68 ,525 > .6 455 Maine 1,358 1.0 l f ’ j Maryland 77 g Q 0 Le Massachusetts : 0.234 54 e en _ Michigan 1,591 0 ; ( 628 ) r Minnesota 1,251 0.26 +7 r Mississippi 417 310 10.2 1 3 Missouri 647 OR 688 .029 “J i Montana 217 0.2 1 ) ¢ y Fo Nebraska 581 0.220 14 Pa ° Nevada 33 0.334 9 848 r . New Hampshire 29) 0 320 14 & New Jersey 580 0.29 678 & New Mexico 927 5.4 } . New York } 856 ) 0.232 1. 6¢ 4 5 H North Carolina 6.612 5 9 630 .4 y R North Dakota 332 0.24 . 6 ,848 ; bd Ohio 381 0.332 r 8 47 = Oklahoma 7,202 1.5 j : 6/ Oregon 87 0.2 6.069 Pennsylvania 85 6 0.336 ¢ 75 = Rhode Island 302 0.299 } 17 j S South Carolina 41,149 9.4 ; 138 85 , South Dakota 299 0 229 65 Tennessee 29 ,442 ) 3 & Texas i a0 6 , 6 ) O78 % Utah 10 f 02 f Q 525 & Vermont 71 0 62 , Yoo ris V'rginia 678 s 6.1 ), 074 ay 4 Washington 414 sf 0.18 S 6 ,50 4 West Virginia 7,457 2.3 822 , Wisconsin 1,398 6 0.270 7,910 Wyoming 76 8 0.222 $199 Educate Aliens Here Ee IS the duty of the Government to see that the eight or nine millions unnaturalized foreign- born residents of the United States are properly educated in the American language and the institutions of this Government. . . Not only for their own good, but for the welfare of America.— Secretary of Labor Davis, in an address before the Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association, Washington Times, Washington, D. C. [53] State Tenure Laws and the Public School The enactment of a sound teacher tenure law is a step in the direction of a better public school. A teacher who after a reasonable probationary period feels that. he is reasonably The welfare of the children of the State is protected by encouraging successful teachers of experience to continue in the profession, and by early weeding out those who are incompetent. The enactment of a sound tenure law is a step in accomplishing both these ends. sure of his position during continued efficiency is willing to make additional TABLE 27.—STATE TENURE LAWS State Application Proba- tionary peri Procedure for removal California..... District em- loying at east 8 teachers. 2 years Board gives 10 days’ written notice stating charges, and time of hearing. Teacher may have counsel and witnesses. If charges proved, dismissal on majority vote of Board. Colorado...... Maryland. poe State-wide 3 years 2 years Charges filed with Secretary of Board of School Directors. 30 days’ notice to teacher before hearing. If dismissal recom- mended by Superintendent or principal, teacher may be dis- mi without hearing on two- thirds vote of Board. Written charges by County Board on recommendation of County Superintendent. 10 days’ notice given to teacher Massachusetts Every town except Boston. 3 years Notice given to teacher 30 days prior to school committee meet- ing. Dismissal on two-thirds vote if Superintendent has recommended dismissal. Notice of charges against teacher to be given on request. State-wide 3 years Majority of Board gives written notice before May Ist. New Jersey... State-wide 3 years -Charges filed with Board of Edu- cation. When examined and found true, reasonable notice given teacher, who may be rep- resented by counsel. New York.... City School Systems. 1-3 years Hearing by Board of Education after reasonable notice. Dismis- sal by affirmative vote of major- ity of Board. May be repre- sented by counsel. Districts having population over 20,000. 2 years Written notice of charges given | If less than five teacher 10 days previous to hearing. Teacher may be repre- sented by counsel. f five of seven members of Board concur, | dismissal is final. Appeal Court of com- petent juris- diction on question o! fact and law ™ - . i State Superin- tendent if Board is not unanimous. None provided for. County Super intendent. Commissioner of Education, State Board of Education Commissioner of Education members of Board vote for dismissal, appeal may be made to three trial commis- sioners. Date of enact nent am reference + A | School Laws 1921, Sec 1609, Art ts pp. 129 to 134 1921 Public School Laws 1914 General Laws Relating to Education; 1921, Chap. 79, Sec. 42, pp. 39- 4 1915 School Laws 1910 School Laws 1914, Chap 243 Laws 1918, Sec 116 1917 Educa- tion Law, 1921, Sec 550-68 ; Sec. 872 1913 School Laws, 1921, Chap. 10, Sec 391-404 The data of Table 00 are a condensation of material given on State tenure laws in two other studies, one by Charles Kettleborough, Indiana Legislative Reference Bureau, the other by the Sub-committee on Tenure of the N. E. A. Committee on Salaries, Tenure and Pensions, . The latter table may be referred to in the printed report of the Sub-committee on Tenure, where it is printed in full, and gives in well arranged form a more detailed summary of state tenure laws. This report also contains the California Tenure Law “which has a number of excellent features, and a copy of a tenure bill prepared by the Ohio State Teachers Associa- tion in 1921.” [54] eee investments in training. He comes to have a vital interest in the community's welfare that permanent residence alone can bring. At the same time his capacity for service is enlarged because of his better knowledge of local conditions and needs. A sound tenure law also provides for the weeding out of the incompetent teacher. A fair and impersonal method is provided whereby Boards may dis- miss a poor teacher without criticism. Without an adequate tenure law the competent teacher is often discourag' d from continuance in the profession, and the poor teacher finds it easier to stay In the ranks—the children suffering as a result. The accompanying tables give the situation revealed by a recent tenure surve) in one State. It was found that forty per cent of the elementary teachers were new to the community in which they were teaching. One high school teacher in every three was in her position for the first year and fifty per cent of the superintendents had occupied their position for less than two years. The facts revealed by the Washington Survey are typical of those existing in all but a few of our States. A recent nation wide survey revealed that the average term of the superintendent of schools is three years.' A lawyer or a physician attains but a fraction of his ultimate effectiveness after three years’ TABLE 28.—TENURE OF ELEMENTARY TEACHERS IN OREGON, 1921-22 : Percentage of teachers in position for Size of community as to number of children in ;' average daily attendance | First Second | Third | Fourth Fifth | Over filth year year year year yeal yeal 1 —o 9 ; ; 4 5 6 Over 5,000 of s : 12.7 13.7 12.7 g 4 16.4 1,000 to 4,999.. . 27 .6 1.5 13.9 9.8 7.7 19.6 500 to 999...... 43.7 92.5 12.1 | . § l 5.1 250 to 400.......60- 47 .6 m5 9.7 5.3 7 i.4 100 to 249 A 54.9 26.3 8.4 4] 2 1 } Under 100 (3 or more teacher schools)... .. 54.9 23.6 12.6 | 3.3 1. 5 One and tworoom rural schools 76.9 17 .4 3.7 9 : © Total.... Pow ovate 40. 0 10 6 ' TABLE 29.—TRANSIENCY AMONG TEACHERS IN OREGON, 1921-22 Per cent in position for Group Concerned First | Second | Third Less than | Over three year year | year three years years 1 3 4 f Elementary teachers. . . 3 1 20 | 10 70 0 High school teachers. . 33 21 | 12 6¢ 4 Elementary principals... . 36 19 | 7 f + High school principals. . 30 26 | 15 29 Supervisors......... ‘ ; 19 i2 " 6 Superintendents... . 22 28 18 68 9 The data given in tables 28 and 29 are taken from Tenure in Washington, 1921-22. A Statewide Survey by the Executive Secretary, Washington Education Association, Washington Education Journal, May, 1922, p. 292. This survey listed 8182 teachers, approximately 80 per cent of all the teachers of the State. 1 First Year Book, Department of Superintendence, National Education Association, 1923. [55] residence in a community. Few would doubt that the same thing is true of a teacher or a superintendent. A transient teacher is likely to be an ineffective teacher and a community cannot expect to have a carefully thought-out, well- rounded educational system when it has a new superintendent every second or third year. Does your State have an adequate teacher tenure law to guarantee its children the continuance in service of competent teachers and the elimination of incompetent teachers? Teacher Tenure Laws Information is often desired concerning the provisions of the Tenure Laws now in effect. Table 27 gives the principal provisions of the Tenure Laws of eight States. The 1922 Annual Proceedings of the National Education Associa- tion, referred to below, contains a copy of the California Law now in effect and a Bill drafted by the Ohio State Teachers’ Association in 1921. On page 57 is given a Tenure Bill recently drafted by a sub-committee of the joint committee of the Pennsylvania State Education Association and State Teachers’ League composed of Oliver P. Cornman, Philadelphia, and Elizabeth Baker, Harrisburg. The Bill as given was reported with a favorable recom- mendation and without a dissenting vote by the committee on Legislation of the House of Delegates of the Pennsylvania State Education Association, December 27, 1922. This Bill is to be proposed for enactment at the coming session of the Pennsylvania State Legislation. The joint committee in reporting the Bill as drawn +o the Committee of Legislation, reported unanimous approval of the Bill as it stands, with the following exceptions: (1) There were two votes in the joint committee against retaining the word insubordination as a cause for dis- missal, in line 5, section 8. (2) The joint committee was not unanimous regarding the right of appeal from the decision of the Board, as provided in section 9. (3) There was one vote against necessary transfer in line 6, section 11. Bibliography of Tenure Derrensavuan, W.S. U. 8. Bureau of Education. Administration of Schools in the Smaller Cities. Bulletin 1922, No. 2, p. 50-53. A brief statement of the tenure situation in 528 cities of the United States. Haney, Exizasetu. Report of Chairman of Minnesota State Tenure Com- mittee. Year-book 1922-23. National League Teachers’ Association, p. 31-35. 45 Henry St., San Francisco, California. Summarizes results of a study of the question of tenure by a committee authorized by the Board of Minnesota Educational Association. NatTionaL Epucation AssociATION, 1201 16th St., N. W., Washington, D. C. See Addresses and Proceedings. Issued annually; see Tenure. Address the Secretary of the Association for current infor- mation concerning tenure laws. Uppecrarr, Harian, AND OtuHers. Report of Sub-committee on Tenure, Committee on Salaries, Tenure, and Pensions. Addresses and Proceed- ings, p. 279-286. National Education Ass’n, Washington, D. C., 1922. Contains table summarizing provisions of State tenure laws. Gives the provisions of the California Tenure Act and a proposed Ohio Tenure Law. Wiuuiams, Cuart 0. Report of the Committee on Tenure. Addresses and Proceedings, p. 145-155. National Education Association, Washington, D. C., 1921. Deals with tenure as to: History; need; length of probational term; removing agency ; public or private hearing; insuring professional improvement; danger of incompetence. [56] ener Pennsylvania Tenure Bill A Bill to Provide for the Employment of Teachers on Indefinite Tenure Amending Sections 1204 and 1208 The word teacher as used in this bill shall mean any person employed in the public school wi m of this Commonwealth as teacher, princip: > supervisor or director of a special subject supervising princip: al, county superintendent, district superintendent, assistant district superi tendent, assistant or associate superintendent, assistant county superintendent, and an) member of the instructional staff of the State Normal Schools. 2. The word Board as used in these sections shall mean the board of school directors of a school district, the board of trustees of a normal school district, or other committee by whic} the teacher is appointed. Re-employment of a teacher in any school By veges of the state who has been employed three consecutive years in that district, shall be for an indefinite term which shall continu until retirement as provided by law, resignation, or dismissal as hereinafter provided, except that any teacher who has been employed consecutively for four or more years in any district in the state at the date upon which this act shall become effective shall be thereafter on indefi- nite tenure in that district. 4. When any teacher shall have been placed upon indefinite tenure in any district and shall afterwards accept employment in another district of the state said teacher shall be upon indefinite tenure in said other district after one year if re-employed therein; provided, that the period of probabtionary service may be extended wi the Bo: ~ upon written recommendat ion of the superintendent for an ad litional period or periods nét to exceed one year, the total os ationary period not to exceed two years When a teacher, after an interim, is re-employed by a district in which said teacher had already served on indefinite tenure, said re-employment shall be upon indefinite tenure after one year if again re-employed therein; provided that the period of proba‘ionary service may be extended by the Board upon written recommendation of the superintendent for an additonal period or periods not to exceed one year, the total probationary period not to exceed two years 6. No teacher shall be placed upon indefinite tenure who does not hold a permanent state certificate issued by the Superintendnet of Public Instruction of this Commonwealth 7. The services of any teacher upon indefinite tenure who by reason of i!lness is unable to discharge his duties for a period of one school-year may be discontinued by the weg 8. Any teacher serving upon indefinite tenure may be dismissed at any ‘time by the Board upon proof that said teacher is physically or mentally incapacitated for discharging his duties, or upon proof of inefficiency, neglect of duty, insubordination or conduct unbecoming a teac a P, but no teacher shall be so dismissed until furnished with a written statement of the charg against said teacher signed by the superintendent or the proper officers of the Board, and given reasonable opportunity of refuting such charges at a hearing before the Bo: yo provided that the date of such hearing shall not be sooner than 10 days nor Is ater than 30 days from receipt by the teacher of said statement of charges. Pending a hearing on said charges and final determination thereof said teacher may be suspended by the am ea of the Board, but in ease the charges are not sstained, such suspension shall be without loss of salary 9. If after proper notification a teacher fails to make answer at the time and place set for the hearing, or after the teacher makes answer at the set time and place the Board may by a majority vote of its members dismiss said teacher from its service. Provided, however, the teacher shall have the right to make appeal from the decision of the Board to the State Superin- tendent of Public Instruction before whom a hearing of the case shall be held. The decision reached at such hearing shall be final. 10. Any hearing as hereinbefore provided shall be public or private, as the teacher against whom the charges are made shall elect. At any such hearing the teacher shall have the right to be represented by counsel. No member of the Board before whom a hearing is tried shall be qualified to vote who has not been present throughout the entire hearing 11. No teacher serving upon indefinite tenure shall suffer a decrease in salary without said teacher’s consent, except by reason of a salary revision affecting all teachers of the district holding positions of like character and grade. The necessary transfer of a teacher from one position to another having a lower salary shall not be considered a decrease in salary within the meaning of this paragraph. A teacher shall have the same rights to a hearing in regard to any such proposed transfer as are granted by this act in cases of complaint against a teacher. 12. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as limiting the right of a Board to release a teacher serving on indefinite tenure when an actual decrease in the number of pupils or the discontinuance of a particular kind of teaching service in a school district renders such action advisable. Provided, however, that release for said causes shall take place only at the close of the school year, and that any teacher so — shall be notified in writing not later than two months prior to the close of the school term that his services will not be needed the following school term with the reason therefor. Provided further, that in the case of decrease in teaching force due to said causes, the teacher or teachers dismissed shall be the teacher or teachers last employed by the district and engaged in the particular kind of teaching service suffering a reduction in teaching force. Any teacher dismissed under this proviso shall be given a state- ment of honorable dismissal and shall for one year be carried upon a preferred list for reemploy- ment to fill vacancies that may occur in the district in the type of service from which the teacher was released. [57] Public School Efficiency and Teacher Retirement Systems The outstanding reason why a State should enact a law providing for a sound teacher retirement system is that such a law makes for public school efficiency. It is the children of the nation who suffer most from the failure to provide annuities making possible the retirement of aged, infirm, and therefore incom- petent teachers. A retirement law attracts competent people to the teaching profession. If a State fails to guarantee protection in old age the most capable fail to enter the profession, or else leave it and accept employment in more remunerative occu- pations where they can assure themselves a competence for their old age. Retirement at a reasonable age makes possible sufficient promotions and advancements so that the morale of the rank and file of the teachers can be kept high. The enactment of an adequate retirement law, therefore, is a step in the direction of a better public school. The desirability of making proper provision for the retirement of teachers has been recognized by 34 of the States by the enactment of State teacher retire- ment laws. IHERE ARE fundamental social reasons why the State should establish pensions and annuities that have a far-reaching significance. They are essentially the reasons that lead to the establishment of fire protection, police protection and free schools—the welfare of the entire social group. P The first great social consideration is the necessity of attracting to the teaching profession the highest type of men and women. Not only must these men and women be possessed of the finest characters and the strongest intellects to be found among our citizens, but they must be thoroughly prepared professionally for the work before them. It is improbable that the financial returns will ever, in the long run, be as great as in many other lines requiring no more preparation, but the motive of service which has inspired so many great characters in the past will continue to draw the very highest type of manhood and womanhood if a future secure from the great risks of life can be assured. Butit is too much to expect men and women to make the sacrifices that have to be made, and face in addition the certainty of sickness, accident, disability and old age without adequate means of support. Men and women intelli- gent enough to be the leaders of the young, are intelligent enough to give consideration to this phase of the future. . . . To aftract to the profession men and women of the highest type and hold them through a lifetime of service, an annuity is an absolute necessity. But a consideration no less important from the standpoint of society is the necessity of a contented group of professional workers if efficient service is to be rendered in the training of the future members of the social order. With no assurance of definite tenure, with no assurance of an old age for which proper provision has been made, the mind of the worker becomes restless and discontented, hesitating this year to secure that additional training which will make him more efficient in his role as a preserver of society, debating next year whether he should continue in the profession at all or go into some other line where he sees opportunity on every hand. How, then, can he render that efficient service that must be ren- dered if the social structure of the future is to be built upon a solid foundation? No clearer conception of this aspect has ever been shown than that of the Rt. Hon. H. A. L. Fisher, author of that great English Education Bill bearing his name, who said in Parliament not long ago: “In every large profession you must rely on economic motives to some extent for your recruits, in the teaching profession less than elsewhere perhaps; but even teachers are human. I do not expect the teaching profession to offer great material reward—that is impossible; but I do regard it as a good scheme of education that teachers should be relieved from perpetual financial anxieties . . . . Am anxious and depressed teacher is a bad teacher; an embittered teacher is a social danger.”—Supi. H. P. Smith, Lawrence, Kansas. The Kansas Teacher, January 1923, page 14. N= TO our democratic form of government, I believe the American public school is the most important contribution to civilization we have made.—William B. Owen, Presi- dent, National Education Association. 58] Many of the existing State laws will eventually require considerable revision if they are to be put on a sound basis. During the last few years a number ol States have revised inadequate and unsound systems and have placed them on a Scientific and secure foundation. Sufficient knowledge and experience have already been obtained in the administration of teacher retirement systems so that the fundamental principles upon which these systems should be based are well understood. The enactment of a sound retirement law involves first a decision as to the type of law to be enacted and then the drafting of this law so that it is based upon sound principles. The insert at page 32, “Tabular Statement of Teachers’ Pension Systems,”’ was prepared for the Board of Trustees of the Minnesota Teachers’ Retirement Fund by R. B. Mothersill, Actuary. The tabulation was made in connection with the proposed revision of the Minnesota Teachers’ Retirement Law. The “Minnesota Proposed Plan” would replace the law now in effect. Below the Minnesota Proposed Plan is given information concerning eight retirement systems now in effect. The eight retirement laws listed should not be looked upon as a complete list of the sound retirement systems of the country. Other retirement laws than the ones included in the insert might have been selected for tabulation. TABLE 30.—STATE TEACHER RETIREMENT LAWS State Law State Wide Law not No State Law State Wide l 2 > Arizona Nevada Colorado Alabama North Carolina California New Jersey Delaware Arkansas Oklahoma Connecticut New York lowa Florida South Carolina Illinois North Dakota Kansas Georgia South Dakota Indiana Ohio Kentucky Idaho lennesset Maine Pennsylvania Louisiana Mississippi Texas Maryland Rhode Island Missouri New Hampshire | Wyoming Massachusetts Vermont Nebraska New Mexico Michigan Virginia Oregon Minnesota Wisconsin Utah Montana District of Washington Columbia West Virginia In some States having state wide laws there are local communities which hav: local retirement acts, independent of the state system. For example, New York City in New York State, Boston in Massachusetts, Chicago, in Illinois, etc. In those States having State laws that are not State wide, the teachers affected by the law are usually those employed in the larger cities. In some of the States with no State retirement law, there are local laws in effect. E NEED not review here the conditions the war revealed to complacent, go-as-you-please America. We know it revealed many splendid things of which we may be proud, but we know, too, that it revealed many things of which we must be ashamed, because they were the consequences of our own careless folly and lack of proper policy. These conditions were the result of a careless immigration policy and an equally careless policy with respect to the alien after he was admitted.—Frank Cody, Superintendent ef Schools, Detroit, Michigan. American Edu- cation, January 1923. [59] Sources of Information on Teacher Retirement Systems 1. General Sources of Information NaTIONAL Epucation AssocraTIon, 1201 Sixteenth Street, Northwest, Wash- ington, D. C. The National Education Association attempts to keep available the latest information con- cerning teacher retirement systems. Inquiries addressed to the Secretary of the Association will receive prompt attention. The Annual Proceedings of the Association contain reports of a number of Pension Committees. CARNEGIE FounDATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING, 522 5th Avenue, New York City. This Foundation has made the question of pension systems one of its principal interests and has issued several reports dealing with teacher retirement systems which may be obtained free of cost by addressing the Foundation. State Teacuer RetireMENT Funp Boarps. A number of States maintain teacher retirement boards which issue regular reports concern- ing State teacher retirement funds as well as occasional special pamphlets. 2. Selected References on Teacher Retirement Systems Carr, JoHN W. Preliminary Report of Committee on Pensions. Addresses and Proceedings, National Education Association, 1921, pp. 155 to 157. A statement of general principles and a report of progress. CARNEGIE FouNDATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING. 522 5th Avenue, New York City. —— Furst, Clyde, and Kandel, I. L. Pensions for Public School Teachers, Bulletin 12, 1918. This report was prepared for the Committee on Salaries, Pensions and Tenure of the Nationa | Education Association, Joseph Swain, Chairman. Discusses the social philosophy of pensions, and states the fundamental principles of pensions. A simple outline of a ‘‘model” pension law is included, drawn up with the special needs of Vermont in mind, accompanied by actuary tables, bibliography, and index. Fifteenth Annual Report, 1920, pp. 89 and 100. Contains critical review of Studensky’s Teachers’ Pension System in the United States, referred to below. Reviews pension legislation in the following States and cities: California, Connecticut, Indiana, lowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Washington, Wisconsin, Chicago, Minneapolis, New York State and New York City. Seventeenth Annual Report of the President 1922. This report will be available for free distribution about February 1923. It includes in addition to a discussion of recent retirement legislation five pages of questions and answers “For the guidance of teacher associations and committees that desire to play an intelligent part in the forming of pension systems.”’ Housman, Ipa E. A Teacher’s Version of the Pierson Law. 519 Garden Street, Hoboken, New Jersey. 25c. A simplified version of the New Jersey Teacher Retirement Fund Law arranged so that its provisions may be easily understood by laymen. StupEensky, Pavut. Teachers’ Pension Systems in the United States. D. Appleton & Co., New York, N. Y., 1920. 460 pp. $3.00. A comprehensive study and discussion of the theories back of retirement funds; traces the history of the development of retirement funds in detail in States and cities. Contains sug- gestions and information as to method of procedure for the adoption of pension fund laws. Summary of State and city laws. Bibliography. [60] yn- on of e, nd ee Hoop, WiiuiAM R. Review of Education Legislation 1912-20. U.S. Bureau of Education, Bulletin 1922, No. 13. On page 13 is a very brief review of the progress of teachers’ pension legislation during thx year 1919-20. Concludes that tendencies in pension laws are, in general, toward a large participation of public funds in the support of the system, clearer definition of terms, and financial soundness through the application of scientific actuarial data and more businesslike administration, and states that: ‘At the close of the year 1920 a survey of the country as a whole discovers few States that have made no beginning with the retirement of superannuated or disabled teachers.”’ tyan, W. Carson, AND Kina, Roperta. State Pension Systems for Public School Teachers. U.S. Bureau of Education, Bulletin 1916, No. 14, p. 46. Prepared for Committee on Teachers’ Salaries, Pensions and Tenure of the National Education Association, Joseph Swain, Chairman. Introductory statement followed by tabulation giving provisions of State pension funds vs they existed in 1915. Selected bibliography and typical retirement laws. Existing Inequalities of Educational Opportunity in Different States E CAN no longer close our eyes to the fact of vast inequalities in the educational oppor- tunities offered to boys and girls in the different states of the Union. Omitting Nevada from consideration, where it rises to the exceptional figure of almost $40,000, the amount of taxable wealth behind each pupil ranges from $19,377 in California to $2,561 in Mississippi. With the average for the entire country $9,610, there are eight states where that amount is over $14,000 and eight states where it is less than $5,000. The roll of the latter states is significant: Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Mississippi. In ten states of the Union the average number of days of school attended by each pupil enrolled was between one hundred and forty-one and one hundred and sixty-five days, while in fourteen others the average number was between sixty- one and one hundred: In three of these latter, the average annual attendance was 73.2, 73.6, and 78 days. Almost as many children were in attendance less than one hundred days a year as were in attendance more than one hundred and forty days a year. In six states of the Union fourteen per cent or more of the total public school enrollment was in high school; while in five others less than four and one-half per cent was in the high school In North Carolina, Arkansas, and South Carolina the figures were 2.8, 2.5 and 2.2 per cent respectively. The average for the country at large was 9.3 per cent, but there were twenty-eight states out of the forty-eight that did not have more than ro per cent of all pupils enrolled in the high schools. The average salary paid to elementary and the high school teachers was over $900 a year in five states and the District of Columbia, while in ten states, all of which were old southern states, it was less than $400. The average annual amount spent for the instruction of each pupil in school for the United States as a whole was in 1917-1918, $30.91. Twelve states spent more than $45 a year for each pupil, while ten spent less than $16, all of which again were southern states. Alabama, North Carolina, and Mississippi spent less than $10 a year on each pupil enrolled. And yet Virginia, Florida, Louisiana, Georgia, Texas, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Mississippi in 1912 paid more in support of the public schools for every $100 of taxable wealth than did Iowa, and within less than three cents a year of as much as did Rhode Island, North Dakota, New York, Kansas and Nebraska. Such educational statistics constitute a matter of immediate and pressing national concern. The nation may not rest until substantial equality of educational opportunity has displaced the present destructive inequality. . . . . the national problem is more than one of stimulating states to greater activity. It is a matter of equalizing through the national treasury if necessary, the educational opportunity of American boys and girls who will become American voters. It would seem that we have come to the day of that necessity.—Edward H. Reisner, Ph.D., Nationalism and Education Since 1789, p. 494. [61] Suggested use of figures given in this Bulletin, Ohio selected at random First: What is Ohio’s ability to support its schools as evidenced by its wealth and income? Consulting tables 3 to 8 inclusive Ohio is found to be one of the richest States in the Union. With an estimated wealth of over eleven billion dollars and an annual income of nearly four billion, it ranks fourth in both these items among the States. It ranks 23d and 15th respectively as to estimated wealth and annual income behind each child. Second: What efforts are being made to provide adequate support for its schools? Ohio ranks 4th among the States in its total expenditures for education. It ranks 21st however, in expenditures per child and 9th and 26th in the percentage of estimated wealth and income, respectively, expended for education. Accord- ing to the latest figures available, Ohio spends 1.61 per cent of its annual income for educational purposes as compared with 1.56 for the country as a whole. Third: What are the educational needs and conditions in Ohio? Tables 9 and following reveal that it has a foreign-born population of 678,697 11.8 per cent of the total. Of this number, 84,000 or 12 per cent are classed as illiterate according to the last census. Over 400,000 or 60 per cent comes from countries in which the standard of education is low, since from 25 to 80 per cent of their population is illiterate. In the foreign-born population 81,090 people can not speak the English language. Ohio has 43,000 native-born illiterates. Tables 20 and following show that Ohio ranks 26th as to the average number of days its schools are in session and 10th in the enrollment of its school children of school age. Of the rural population 2.2 per cent are illiterate as compared with 3.2 per cent in the cities. The country schools are less effective than the city schools when the native-white alone are considered. The per cent illiterate is nearly twice as high in the country as in the cities. It is immigration rather than inadequate schools which has created the illiteracy in the cities while the reverse is true of the country schools. According to the latest figures available, Ohio has 8,000 gne-room schools; one fourth of its teachers teach in one-room schools. ealiex4, States have a higher percentage of its teachers in this anti- quated type of school. Approximately stile in every five of Ohio teachers are normal school graduates. The salaries being paid Ohio teachers compare reasonably well with other States. There is great inequality between the salaries paid the country and city teacher. Teachers in the city generally receive a salary double that paid the teacher in the one-room rural school. Ohio has 131,000 illiterates, 46,000 of whom are native-born and 33,000 native-born whites. Having over 3,000 native-born minors who are illiterate indicates that practically no schooling is offered Ohio children in certain localities. Ohio has joined the majority of the States of the Union in adopting a State teacher retirement law, but as yet it is not listed among the States having an adequate tenure law, both of which are necessary for the highest educational efficiency. [62] Is This The Equal Oppor- tunity Guaranteed To All American Children? SOME ATTEND SCHOOLS 1. Open 200 days a year—well organized and carefully supervised. 2. Taught by trained, experienced, mature, well-paid, and competent teachers. 3. Conducted in mod- ern, fireproof, sanitary, and well-equipped build- ings. 4. Adequately sup- plied with the best text- books and teaching materials. 5. Which train for the great opportunities and responsibilities of twen- tieth century civilization. OTHERS ATTEND SCHOOLS 1. Open only a few weeks a year poorly Or- ganized and unsupervised. 2. Taught by untrain- ed, inexperienced, im- mature, underpaid, and incompetent teachers. 3. Conducted in ill- adapted, unsanitary shacks—a safety and health. menace to 4. Lacking suitable textbooks necessary teaching mate- and oth er rials. 5. Which train for life as it was in the days of the oxcart and spinning wheel. HE DRIVING force that makes either peace or war is engendered where the young are taught. The teacher—whether mother, priest, or schoolmaster—is the real maker of his- tory; rulers, statesmen, and soldiers do but work out the possibilities of coop- eration or conflict that the teacher creates. This is no rhetorical flourish; it is sober fact. The politicians and masses of our time dance on the wires of their early education.—H. G. Wells. *. 16 i) i 8) Cy Al G Oy gg a Ke Qi G oy SA a I S 7 > ae — % (2 - S—————— 2 5G FADES ‘& Sas Sai aa eS Ae + 2. = 6 A &: a> 33 ~~ as «a SES KAGE ne 6 =o ae Jay =z Be OSTs ST a KO | ~ SS “Gas FBS SES ASSO SASS = Ta afte 3 > -*