Vernon County censor. [volume] (Viroqua, Wis.) 1865-1955, 1907-07-03
COMMON SENSE In
COMMON SCHOOLS

1 lHere Is no denying ttldl oui PlDhS
schools are doing too much overhead
shooting. This may have sensational, al
most heretieal ring, but believe that the
soundest educators IN the country VIII
confess to its truthfulness.
The great Huxley declared that "The
educational ladder should have one end
in the gutter and the other IN the uni
versity and so it should. But that
does not qualify the statement that our
high schools, for example, have been
closer to the colleges than to the peo-
/ ple-nor does it render the fact less
unfortunate. Probably this tendency
to overshooting in our public-school
educational system shows more Plainly
in our high schools than elsewhere.
But concrete example is far more
effective than abstract statement. Let
me give an instance of our present
high-school training, which, is so typical
that its truthfulness will be recognized
and admitted by any principal of large
city school. Recently | became in
terested in a bright boy WIZ was
graduated from one of our high schools
and whose circumstances made a col
lege training impossible. On inquiry |
found he was leaving the high school to
go into factory. What sort of pre-
paration,l | asked, had his schooling
given him for the life upon which he
was entering? His mother had helped
him to get his education by taking in
washing Such a sacrifice was worthy
of rich and practical results. And those
results were?- four years of Latin, two
years of Greek, two years of German,
one year of French, two years of
mathematics, minimum of English and
history, and no civics or political econ
omy! And the trouble was not with
the boyle had been placed at the
educational feast and had eaten what
was set before him, ''asking noquestion
for conscience sake" The curriculum,
the whole educational scheme of the
grade and high school, was responsible
for his educational misfit. He had
good start for college and a professional
career, but his equipment for making
his way in factory was about as
deficient as the imagination could well
suggest. And those who go the way
the streets are thousands to the tens
who persevere to the university class
room.
After all, utility should be the supreme
test in education. And this standard
should be especially applied in shaping
the course of study in the common
schools. The statement that the curri-
culums of the public schools viii not
generally stand the test may be a sur
prise to many parents; but such is the
lamentable fact. Until very recently
it has taken a courageous educator to
come out into the open and SQUARED
defend the utilitarian theory of e3dca-
ton and fight for vocational studies for
their own sake. On the other hand,
there has been no lack of champions
for the leisure-ciass theory of education.
1t has been fashionable to contend for
those lines of study whose advantages
must be mainly collateral rather than
direct, for general mental discipline
and broad liberation and harmonious
development of the faculties. as con-
trasted with a training calculated to fit
the pupil for the successful pursuit of
vocation although, perhaps hum
BILE one Those who have had the
hardihood to contend for the so-called
'tfads such as drawing, chemistry,
manual training and household arts
seem to have often felt it necessary to
make their defense along the line of
the leisure class theory of training by
arguing that these studies should be
pursued because they iberate the facul-
ties, put an edge on the powers of OBJ
servation and elevate the mind into
the altitude of clear and logical think
ing. For one, have no hesitation in
urging that the men who make the
curriculums of our public schools put
the emphasis on the elemental and the
vocational studies because a majority
of the pupils cannot hope to enter pro-
z. e. -. H..
trained by the shortest and most direct
cut to fit themselves for the life of
} labor in shops, stores and offices.
One of the most important develop
|, ments of modern education is the re-
. cognition that all the pupils are not
alike; that some are of the practical,
executive type, while others are of a
; receptive and scholarly bent of mind.
Under the old theory of education the
receptive boy made good showing n>
: his school career, while the boy of the
practical and executive turn. has poor
standing as a pupil. But keen OBJ
servers of educational currents could
not escape the fact that nigh percent
age of the boys who scored little short
of failure in school quickly outdist-
anced the ''studious" and scholarly"
bows in the serious and responsible
; struggle of practical affairs
Certainly the fact have taught us
that the restless, driving, executive
kind of boy is of as sornd and valu-
! able timber as the doci'e, studious and
receptive boy: that he is as likely to
cut Just as wide swath in the world s
affairs as the lad WHO Stands higher
t in class rank, and that he is as well
! worth educating as the natural
! scholar" And re are coming, too, to
E recognize that be is as much entitled to
I training which fits his special tenn
permanent and endowment as is the
y scholarly boy.
If / were to indulge in word OF
prophecy | would say that the high
: school of the future will be closer to
/ the people than to the college; that its
curriculum win do more for the children
of the plain people, that it will make a
broader and stronger appeal to, and a
better provision for, the boy who has
small interest in college, but feels he
must "quit and go to work.; that its
course will smack less of those studies
which tradition holds to be divinely ar
pointed agencies for mental Lip
line; tn It i will have less of the cast
2 iron program and viii less and less at
4 tempt to mould all pupils TO the same
= ,.r,u Give Pultin o tn those