Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1907-10-05

tnarhi,(, ~ Tho b;',Lostor{ar a,,1 ,.ot
naradnyiaaIy ,.o ta,. tba Iaa,+ f'r -
Possibly thn Tnr.pIti = ,,,,,r,. !. ,,,+
:. Arc av-ra,,a,., ,,,,,i,,,, o,i,1,,',L ,rt,
lie adncatinn9I VIA - H., ,,a1itp ~
venture anotber-., Are rho taxas .Iready
raid for srbooi ,,,,r,l,,, f,,,Ji',;,'.i,. ~.
npnded - For instonceSand ~ :.
tupuestad Inv fine RnalI Higb SchonI ON.
roimept nrintad in same isena If JoI-pX.
A.. we find that the Hiob. school denart-
mnpt has G3 nuniIs and 2 taa,.bars whose
salaries annr6ximata - poo while in tho
Grammar denartm4nt there ara ~ mn.
pills and 9 teachers whose salaries reach
nearly S3 600 Tins one teacher in tbe
High School DEPARTMENT has u nnnils
while one teacher in the Grammar de-
partmeut has 81 to saw nothing of the
uuiouelv fortunate 10Th grade with its
+ minis Arain norb nn,7iI j., tla ui,,b =.
School Grade, if these fignres are arnr0v.
imately correct. costs rs SO a wear in
salaries. while in the Grammar school
each costs MS about So - and tn say
nothing again of the siuruIarlv forth.
nate 10th grade. each puDil of which
costs Ms about Sl31. 80 i'm salaries y vaar
To those of us whom the stress of hnsi.
ness will not permit t6 90 into deenrr
Investigation. all this seems grossly m
lust to the great mass of people.
Another apparent discrimination"
also comes into yiew-why should a
Grammar-school teacher receive only
S3l5 TO $3.50 n wear. AS against $500 to
$500 for High School teacher. and
81 900 for a principal? Is there so much
difference between qualifications and
work? A different thing hv-tho- Inv
from saving that any get foo murh
Again, the COMPLAINT of ..otfiriaI dis.
elimination" which sdiscredits State
Normal School traiuiug.' coming as if
does. seems worthy of attention nv
way of parenthesis. we shonId indeed
much dislike to think there is not hearty
cooperation between the Normal School
and county authorities. and that snecial
training for teaching is not given IFS dine
yalue.)
There are various other consider.
atiOns. too. such AS adeuuate school
houses. enrichment of the ,.,,rr,c,,I,u,
corporation of the community. rstab
lshmcnt of Public Night Schools. svs-
tematic promotion of meritorious teach
ers, etc, etc, the mere hint at which
points Significantly to the fact tn 1T there
is at least gyou,i for the nrrsumptiou
that our schools can be materially bet
tered. and that progress is. after all
speaking comparatively, mighty slow,
1t We're folly to cOmplacently console
ourselves with the reflection that the
fault is only with those whom we dele
gate to look after our schools, A little
delving NAV uncover to us the conscious
ness that it NAV be also because of our
own indifference and remissness that
our schools lack much that thev should
be Nav not one, then venture the hint
that an excellent way of overcoming
these short -comingS and of making for
ultimate betterment is by Investigation
and study of school problems. by serious
consideration, and bv public discussion
of them, not only bv those who are
closely associated with the work itself.
but even by mere lavmen?
OF course, if conditions were more
ideal and we placed eXpcrts in author
itv, it is rather likely that we should nut
our confidence in them and their plans {;
but as long as present -dav methods pre-.
vail and those in authority can Law no
SPECIAL claim to eXpertness, we NAV be
excused. perhaps, if we reserve the right
to call attention to apparent shortcom-
ings. even though we ourselves NAV not
be peculiarly qualified. recall that on
one or two occasions men in school au-
thOrity have deprecated the idea of
criticism of Public Schools. and we catch
an echo of this sentiment more than
occasionally. Indeed, one is almost con-
strained to think that among the pro-
fession, at least, it is taken to be a sort