Smyrna times., 1905-07-12

The old question of special training |
in common schools has been raised |
again in an interesting and not un-
profitable way at the convention of the
National Educational Association. |
The New York Tribune says:-"The |
report of a committee on industrial ed
acation in schools for rural communi- |
ties discusses it in an earnest and
more than usually temperate spirit,
aud, there is good food for thought on
the part of educators and the patrons
of the public school system. Observ-
ing there are special schools for the ed
ucation of lawyers, preachers, engi-
neers, and indeed the followers of
nearly all other callings, the commit
tee not unreasonably urges that aca-
demic attention should equally be
paid to agriculture; wherefore in pub
lie schools of rural communities, there
should be specific, definite, technical
training, fitting them (the pupils) for
bAC aCAAfAbACo VI lAlCs 4udbg ~
seems to us, is a non sequitur, and we
cannot agree with it. The common
schools do not generally, if at all, fur
nish specific, definite, technical
training" for the law, for engineering.
or for any other profession or trade.
Such training is acquired in special
schools. The establishment and main
tenance of such special schools of agri-
culture may be most commendable,
but we can see no reason for giving to
the common school privi-
leges and advantages which are not
given to other callings-certainiy not
for doing so on the plea of equality be-
tween agriculture and the others.
''The soundest part of the commit
tees report is that in which it protests
against the too common tendency to
regard preparation for high school and
college as the prime purpose of the
common school, and in which il urges
that ''a system of rural schools should
plan its f'course of instruction with
reference to the ''needs of the 95 per
cent of the pupils who "attend them
and who attend no other school,
''rather than with reference to the
small remaining percentage who go on
TO more advanced school," Those
are words of pure reason, and the only
amendment we could suggest would be
that the same principle should apply
The mania for preparation" is un
doubtedly one of the grave evils of oul
entire educational system. The com
mon school seeks to prepare pupils fol
the high school The high school Of
seminary in turn seeks to prepar,
them for college, emphasizing tina
fact most conspicuously in its adver
tisements and especially vaunting it.
self upon the certainty with which it
graduates pass college entrance exa
limitations, or upon the less creditabl
fact that its graduates are admitted Il
certain colleges without examination
Even some colleges are infected wit
the same disease and paw particular at
tention to preparing students for uni
versity post graduate courses"
''"That is all wrong. 1t is viciou:
The fact is that the vast majority {
common school pupils go no further
but finish their education with th
common school. The vast majority {
high school pupils do not go to colleg'
but finish their academic studies wit
the high school course. The vast mi
iority of college graduates do M
enter postgraduate courses. -Obv
ously, then, every one of these course
should, in the main, be designed as
fnality, so as to serve the needs of IL
vast majority Of those who pursue
It should be as complete and as we
rounded and as perfectly balanced
itself as it is possible to make it. The
the youth who finishes it and goes
no higher school will be thorough
educated as far as he has gone, al
not merely prepared" for somethir
to which ne will never go on. o
viously, then, there can be no room
the common school, or in the big
school, either, for specific, defnit
technical training, whether in agricu
ture or law or engineering. The tin
available will all be needed for giyil
the pupils a thorough grounding
those general studies which are fuud