Las Vegas daily optic. [volume] (Las Vegas, N.M.) 1880-1908, 1904-05-02
VALE TEACHERS vs.. FEMALE.

aroused In educational circles In this
country BY that portion OF the report
OF the MoseIy Educational commits
sion which deals with the question Of
the ~adYisability Of male or female
teachers for boys. The Mosely Edu.
cationai commission. Il viii be remem
bered. was d body or English educa
tional experts. chosen from Oxford,
Cambridge, London University and
other English institutions for the pur-
pose Of visiting America and making
an expert examination Of our educa
tionai system and a report on us
merits.
In the course Of this exhaustive re-
port they gave considerable attention
20 the decided preponderance Of wo-
men teachers In American public
schools. which they were incl.nei ~
regard AZ likely 70 impair the vitality
OF the masculine half 81 the rising
generation. All but tsb out Of the
itwentyrsix members Of he commits,
sion concurfsd in this expression.
Mr. Mosley himself was not opposed
70 the employment OF female teach
ers for boys up TO the age Of about
twelve years. as he recognized that
women better understand the work
ing OF the child mind and can more
readily win the chiIdren's sympathy.
But beyond this age. Mr., M0sley is
strongly In favor Of turning the boys
over to masculine teachers. Harper's
Weekly In a discussion 0f the Ques-
tion says that while there is some dif-
ference Of opinion, New York educs
tors. Including some woman. regard
with approval the views Of the British
commission. "A majority Of them are
moi unwilling TO admit that the pre-
ponderance on women teachers In
some Of cities, as for example,
Boston and Chicago does tend 10 exer-
else a feminizing influence IN. school
boys, They entertain no doubt that
manliness, Independence, Initiative
and leadership are best developed in
boys 81 than twelve years old who
have for their instructors robust and
virilc men. They believe that youths
who have over them women teachers
are likely to be more obedient and
courteous but they are also likely to
develop into ''goody-goody' youths, re-
latiyeIy unqualified for graphing with
the world.
According TO the Weekly. DR.. Luth.
er II. Guiick who Is director Of physi.
.cial training In New York schools,
says that the good hoy, In the aca.
demic sense, Is the obedient boy. Az
q rule he does not develop the power
or d leadership. The bad boy &C
cording to the school standard, is gem
orally n who Is evolving the capac-
Itys for Independence and leadership"
He would not for q moment deny that
boys ought to be trained in the court
esles OF life, but he sees no reason
why they should not acquire them in
q bracing atmosphere and under mas
culine influence.
DIR. Thomas s. o'Brien, an ASSOC
clate superintendent In New York. Ii
convinced that . boy Is harmed II.
during the years OF adolescence. he re.
mains exclusively under feminine
control.
With all due respect to the opinions
OF the eminent DR.. Guiick. and while
we agree with him In the conclusion
reached, we do not accept his pre-.
mise that the d~lsobedient or bad"
boy In school offers most promise Of
developing the elements OF success in
after life. Such a doctrine, II is true.
will be comforting 10 the parents and
teachers OF the bad" boys but the
general effect Of such d theory would
be d%emoralizing upon the boys, We
believe that In arguing for the theory
which he was supporting, the authori-
~ mentioned allowed his zeal to get
the better OF his Judgment. No edu-
Gator or parent or good citizen can
safely advocate q belief that the dis.
obcdicnt boy is the most promising
We believe that The disobedient youth
gives promise OF landing in Jail at an
early period and Of little else. The
lesson OF submission to authority ii
one Of the FIRST which much be in.
stalled into the youthful mind. The
boy who cannot learn this lesson ii d.
Ya#@