The San Francisco call., 1897-08-01
PROF. BRADLEY SPEAKS,
He Defends. His Action in
BlaokHsting the. High.
..... Schools. .=.":. ..... "
II Trsns,lpires That Prof Gayley,. Heai
Of the Department, Also oondi- 81
toned "a Large Number. l. +"

:
BERKELEY, CAL. July 31.--Through
a leng thy open letter publish he'd In this
evening issue ofthe Advocate: Professor
C.::B. Bradley, to. whom was. charged the
ent responsibility for; the wholesale dis
crecfiting Of the High Schools i'll English,
makes bold defense of his position and
attempts 10 justify the standihe took with
referenee.to TO the schools. ~:
1t transpires that of the thirty mine
schools placed on. the conditinned list
only sixteen were SO placed by Professor
Bradley, the remaining TIVE nty three hay
ing been so placed by Professor Gayley
and other professors, each doing his " ork
without the knowledge OF the others
moves.
Professor Bradley has to say in part: s
1T is openly suggested or even assumed tim t
/ have availed myself of the alb. ence OF the
head OF nay department TO shape things ac-
cordnS to my own notions, and In particular
totchange the policy of the department, and
even OF the university itself, rs regards the
schools. On this point / am ready to affirm
that in TO particular have l de waited trt m
what | understand to be tha clear and settled
policy OF the department, determined upon
after full deliberation and d !scpsSion. A strfk-
ing confirmation OF this stateae Mt is found in
com patlson OF results as between Professor
Gayleys recent examination Of schools and
my own. OF the schools on the published list
exactly seventy we're visited this lest spring
by examiners from the English department..
Or the seventy, twenly-three were visited by
Professor Gayley, twenty-five by me and
TWEEN ty- two by otners.: OF twenty-three visited
by Professor Gayley fifteen were repor ted de-
hcient, as against sixteen similarly reported
out OF my lis OF twenty-five And neither OF
u.s. | may add, was aware of the nature of the
others report until both were com plete This
identity of results seems to me 10 indicate
nothing less than surprising identity both
incur standards and ia their applica ton 10
the schools: And the 1acs here cited should
al least effectually dispose of the stateme ii t
which has repeatedly appeared in pu blic; that
the discr editing of the long list OF schooIsi is
my worK alone: In reality all reports OF ex-
aminers are subject TO the consideration and
ratification of large co mnittee.
1t is claimed the standard has been quietly
raised, if not by the ner thei,
by an ambitious department, and has been
applied 10 the schools without warn ing. Here
reference to facts may prove Instructive
Two years ago. and without a dissen ting voice
the authorities OF the university voted to m ke
the subject of composition q separate re oilire-
ment, and to examine iii it all students who
apply for admission by examination and All
schools that seek accrediting This action was
but tardy recognition on our part of crvinp
need. which everywhere else in our country
has for years commanded the greatest atten.
lion. The separation of the subject from the
study of iiterature, with which II had hitherto
been loosely joined, was, of course, real in
crease in the requirement.
The new bJect was not only one Of prime
importance aud difficulty, but was one not gen