New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-10-23
DIssIPATING TECHNICALITIES
Mr.. Allen Elucidates Some Of Age
Rating Tangles of Schools.

To the Editor OF the Tribune.
Sir: Will you permit a comment on
your editorial OF this morning, headed
age Rating in Schools"7
Instead of being too technical for public
understanding, this over age matter Is
one Of the plainest Of all school ques-
lions. No subject on which the school
inquiry will report is less technical. IL
the public cannot think this out, 1t Will
be helpless with other reports. And
unless the public does think 1t out,
there is little chance OF help for needy
school children, for the school officials
have been told the facts over and over
again for years.
First-Take first the purpose Of over age
figures. The school officials say 1t Is
10 compare New York with other cities,
and 10 show whether New York is better
this year than last. Mr.. Bachman says
the chief purpose is TO locate the children
who are in need Of special attention
whether because OF previous failures or
late entrance, etc. Is this issue, so
sauarely raised, too technical for any
reader OF The Tribune7
Second-Mr. Bachman says that all, not
part. OF over age children should be
included in the count, l. e., that $500
children in special class for over age
children should not be excluded and that
tens OF thousands who drop out before
the last day Of school should not be ex-
cluded. Is this too technical for any
Tribune reader?
Thlrd-Ages and grades should be taken
OF the same day. and not ages for year
preceding and grades for next year, as
New York had done. This is another very
non-technical proposal Of Mr.. Bachmans
Does any Tribune reader disagree?
Fourth-Where promotions are made
twice a year. over age figures should give
facts for half years and not for whole
years. thereby catching half year failures
Surely this is not too technical.
Fifth-In order 10 find the child who
needs special attention in time 10 help
him get II, over age figures should be
taken at the beginning Of the year, not on
the last day OF school. Does any Tribune
reader disagree?
Sxth--If New York uses a ffteen-year
upper limit az its measure, II should STICK
TO that measure, and not depart from II
by including any child IN his fifteenth
year. II surely is not over technical 10
say that whatever method Is used should
be consistently used. Mr.. Bachman
shows positively that such has not been
done in New York
May I give an Illustration Five boys
were in school in 1911, the last year noted
by the school inquiry report. One aged
fifteen, June 30 graduated; one aged
fifteen, the day before June 90 was pro-
NOTED 10 the seventh grade; one aged fit-
teen. Juno 30, who had failed ten times,
was in a special class with children OF
ten and nine; another who was aged mr.
teen, June 30, left school June 20. from
the fourth grade. Is there anything tech
meal about this? Yet not one OF these
boys would appear in New Yorks total
OF over aged children!
Please do not make Il hard for New
York TO benefit from the school inquiry
by Joining those who perennially try TO
confuse the public by calling every school
question too technical for laymen 10
understand. Sincerely yours,
WILLIAM H. ALLEN, Director.
Bureau OF Municipal Research. New
York, Oct. Il, 1912