New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-12-06

IS the proposition OF the Longer schooi
day"
So far no one appears TO have ex-
aotly defined what is meant by the
term "longer school day" =.
The average citizen, possessed OF
business instincts, looks at the ques-
ton in just the same manner IN winch
he would view a factory problem. Wlth
him it is largely a question Of how 10
use the school plant TO its greatest
capacity, having in mind, OF course,
the amount Of public money invested
therein.
The teachers, at least some Of them,
evince uneasiness, because mention OF
the longer school day causes them to
anticipate additional burdens and new
demands upon their time and upon
their energies.
mat the pupils think about the mat
ter no one knows, but 1t may be sur
missed that the little people Will not
wish any extension Of time 10 be de-
voted to the pursuit of education, for
the reason-if the truth be stated
that children usually go to school be-
cause they have to and not because
they want to 20 there. Notwithstand-
ing the many legends and stories about
good little boys and good little girls
stories which are frequently related
for obvious reasons-the average child
would far rather play than study.
The citizens idea of the greatest use
OF the school plant is proper and leglt,.
innate, provided that the function OF
education can be so administered as 10
produce better results than are now
being produced, and provided that TINS
is done by accelerating the educational
process, as well as by afording
both nnanf1fa-
lively and qualitatively. As plain
business proposition, devoid Of any
false notions as TO the sacredness and
exclusiveness of the sehoolhouse, and
divesting the question Of the assumed
rights and privileges of all individuals
connected with the schoolhouse itself,
is it not right, from an economic stand
point. that the school plant should be
available for use at all times, not only
for purposes of education, but also for
social activities of kindred nature?
The next phase of the problem IS as
TO whether or not il is possible to sue
oessfully increase the volume OF educa-
ton so that the child will have the OPP
portunity to absorb more material
within a given time and thus to shorten
its school life with advantage to itself.
Nearly all educators will agree that 1t
is only possible to implant instruction
lust so long as the mind of the student
is receptive. Beyond that point IN
structional effort fails Of Its purpose
and thus is wasted
The regular school curriculum com
prising the common branches becomes
monotonous if administered IN too
large or in too frequent doses. Is 1t
possible, therefore, TO extend the school
day with profit to the student? If we
adhere TO the curriculum containing
only the actual essentials OF education,
those subjects which form the basis
upon which the superstructure may be
placed, then IT is not possible 10 eX-
tend the school day with proht to the
student.
IL has been demonstrated that in the
early stages and forms of education
suitable for young children day OF
five or six hours is unnecessary and
even wasteful. The same or even bet
ter results could be obtained in much
less time. At this point the citizen
could suggest with marked propriety
the advisability of using the school
house twice, instead of once day. The
saving in buildings and in plants by
occasioning such modification IN the
administration of educational ahalrs
right at the base and at the point OF
greatest congestion would be large.
How large a saving could be made 1t Is
rot practicable to say. but it is obvious
that many millions of dollars now re-
ouired TO be invested annually in
sehoolhouses would be saved TO the
city. On the other hand, there would
he many who would deplore so radical
departure from established custom.
These educators would point out the
dangers to which young children are
exposed through playing in the streets.
They would also call attention to the
inadvisability of children coming 10
school late in the day instead OF IN
the morning. :,
The answer TO the first point would
be that it would be profitable for the
city to establish a system OF play
grounds. Anyhow, where are the chill
dren before and after school and on
Saturdays and other holidays? Are
they not either in the streets or else
confined within their homes?
An answer TO the second point raised
would be that the periods of instruc-
ton should be so arranged in regard
TO time as TO provide for the children
by alternating weekly, monthly OF
otherwise. This answer would proba-
bly, call forth from educators plea on
behalf of the family, such as that this
rangements. This is the point where
the educational function joins with
that of paternalism.
There is nothing new about this
phase of the 'longer school day" Dur
ing the last few years or moro th'
Board of Education has tried, unsatis
factorily, several times 10 effect. such
a plan. These plans, although rejected
in former years by the City OF New
York, are now coming back 70 US, II
a modified form, with new labels, suct
as "made in Germany" or Gary
Indiana" All such plans are better
appreciated at this juncture, because
they now cost money; before, they
merely represented local initiative and
therefore, were considered TO be worth
less.
Some Of the New York public school
teachers are exercised, mentally, be
cause they fear the imposition Of add
tional labor. The City Of New York
has been fair, and even generous, 70
it, public school teachers. IL demands
efficiency. bat II has always been will
ing 70 pay for N. Because the trend