St. Paul daily globe., 1893-01-30
NORMAL SCHOOL PRODUCT.

To the Editor of the Globe.
In your editorial on normal schools
and their products in Saturday morn
ing'S issue you have at the outset fairly
stated the theory of the normal schools,
'that they will furnish trained teachers
for the schools of the state" but you
have been led into error as to the eX-
tent to which the normal schools are
fulfilling their mission by gross er-
rors in the summaries in the report of
the superintendent of public instruc-
tion. These errors are apparent in that
the numbers given in the summaries do
not correspond to,the totals in the tables
of the report from they are taken. They
were also acknowledged by the super
intendent, and areNSo numerous and eX-
tensIve that he is having new pages of
summaries printed to substitute for in-
accurate pages.
The total number of normal trained
teachers in the rural schools of the state
for 1892 was 1884. or 20 per cent OF the
entire number, with several counties
not reporting.
To determine the entire product of the
normal schools there should be added
both graduates and undergraduates of
teaching ia independent and special dis
tricts, amounting to 779 graduates and 304
undergraduates, or LOSE, which, added
to the 1881 in rural schools, makes over
2.40O, or about 80 per cent of the 5000
teachers of the state trained in normal
schools.
Instead of there being but 900 profes-
slonal students enrolled, the report of
the president Of the normal board shows
that 1,O69 were enrolled in normal
classes. The students enrolled in the
model schools all pay tuition to the
state, while they also serve the state as
a school of observation and practice.
The statement that but fifty-four
graduates were sent out is all error
similar to those above noted, for the re-
port of the normal board shows the
graduates to he 1877, while 11S were
graduated i'll 1898, instead of 81, as you
stated.
Granting that it is just to charge the
entire cost Of the school TO the gradu-
ates alone. the cost for each graduate
from the three and four years courses
would be S43S, instead of $500; but this
is manifeStiy unfair, for in 1892 55i un-
dergraduates went from the normal
school out to teach. whose training cost
the state nothing if the entire expense
is to be charged to graduates alone.
In your method of computing the cost
Of a high school graduate teacher. to be
consistent you should charge the $31, 900
OF state ali to the graduates who teach,
which is shown by the SuperintendentS
report to be less than One-third of the
entire NUMBER. This would make the
cost OF each high school teacher 5000,
instead of $500; and then it should be
remembered that the nigh school grad
uate has received no special training
whatever for the work of teaching.
Moreover, the .000 does not repre-
sent the cost to the state of q high
SC hOol graduate. nor, indeed, one-fourLh
OF that cost. 1t represents only the
bonus which the state grants to the
high schools to maintain university
preparatory class. The local cost of the
high schools is as really an Z Expense TO
the state as the bonus granted.
Without making any comparison be-
tween the professionally trained teacher
from the normal school and the profess
s!onaily unframed teacher fro IN the
high school, and the expense of edu-
eating each class, it can easily be shown
that the normal schools tyain teachers
at far less cost, and with far more eff
cheney, than can be done by any other
class of schools, or by any other means
The necessity for enlargement of
the normal schools is due to the fact
that the demand for nOImal-trained
teachers has increased far beyond the
ability of the schools, with their present
equipment, to supply. NORMAL.