The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-05-25
TURBULENT MEETING OF SCHOOL BOARD ON MERIT SYSTEM RESULTS IN PARTIAL
 SURRENDER TO DEMANDS OF TEACHERS

 pect school.
 There's been no standard of mark tng,' said MT. Bell, tsas that instance shows. So far as I know the prtnd cipals were never told whethersa pass-9 ing mark was 75, 90 or 90.''
 Yes, they were, too,'' shot back pr. Deane with some heat. He brought out the book of rules to show that the principals were to mark teachers on a scale prescribed by the board or by tho superintendent.
 MT. Hurley then suggested that the teachers had been punished enough. He thought they shouldn't be depr1v- < ed of the advance voted them last fall. Future Iaxity, he said, could be corrected by a fine.
 He was ready to submit g. motion restoring the advance to the teachers when someone inquired as to who would be included in the revised re- port. That started things again.
 I'm in favor of that" said Mr. Bell, tsbut I'd go 8, step further. With those teachers who have attained the nex maximum, would hold them li- able to a reduction if their work does not come up te the standard here afber.''
 Then pr. Ryan obtained the floor and caused something of sensation by his remarks. He had nanaes and facts and dates and spoke right out in meeting.
 Some of you members doubtless will remember that we recently paid to Dr. J. H. Van Sickle, of Spring field the sum of $2,5OO for investigat-Y ing our school s5steIn. In his report he said our teachers were notably good and loyal and praised the staff in the highest terms
 How did it come that pr. Van l Sickle, an expert overlooked these 80 or 40 teachers who are now deprived Of an advance of in salary because a supervisor says they're defieienta"
 How. does 1t come that ttflis com nnittee on schools would overthrow, in 30 or 40 cases, the action of this whole board, last January, in voting in creases of $50 to the grade teachers?
 T have 9 few cases in particular that I'm going to place before this board as they were placed before me. The first is that of Evelyn K: Rock, who has been deprived her increase. She has been teaching for about 10 years Her principal marked her above 80 on 2er years work The su- October and was in her classroom about l5 minutes. Supervisor sWendt, she says, has never visited her room. No one has criticised or commented upon her work to her.
 .Another case is that of Augusta Mendel- This girl was never required to take an examination while in the grade or high schools, such was the standard of her scholarship. She won ave special diplomas for exceptional scholarship ability. Her average for four years in High school was 92 IA She passed the Regents examination in New York. Her work in the schools here hasn't been criticised. Yet she is deprived of her regular increase, be-. cause her rating as a. teacher is low
 "A third case,'' Dr. Ryan continued, t.is that of Margaret McGuiness. This | girl says she has never been tardy and has been out but two weeks in seven years service She has not been visited by the supervisor or by pr. Deane. On May Il, she asked Supervisor Wendt for her marks and she was told that l they were not all in. A few days later she was told by him that her mark was over 80.
 "I would also call your attention pr. Ryan called the attention of the board to the case Of a west end school teach CT who had been dropped, as the report says, because her marks were not high enough.
 When pr. Ryan finished, Mir. Hurley wanted to know when sthis marking system was started :,
 Five years ago. said President Ha- yeps.
 we never heard of it before said | Ryan. Why wasn't some mention ever made of it in the monthly reports of \ the superintendent2
 ! 1 Miss McGuiness, her room was con- tinuaIly broken up by requests of par I ents that pupils be transferred. Her principal, said MT. Bell, thought Miss 1 McGuinness' work was satisfactory. I ssHCw did Dr. Van Sickle come to loverlook these deficient teachers" Dr.. Ryan persisted, directing his inquiry straight at Dr. Deane
 1 "He didn't vis2 all the teachers or all the schools said the superinten- dent.
 'He didn't? How did he get his pr. Deane didn't know.
 Inquiry was. then raised as to why Supervisor Wendt was recommended for a raise of s2o0 and the supervisors of drawing and sining got none | President Ravens said that was be- cause the singing and draVtng super visors had been given assistants. 1 pr. Osborne then marked back to the system of averaging marks.
 Do you think it is fair,'' he asked for the supervisors mark to be made equal in weight with that of the prin- cipalP A principal is in continual touch with the teacher. The super visor isn't. I should think the prin- cipaPs mark should be worth four times as much in computing a final average
 What we ought to have" suddenly linterjected MT Bell, 'is someone to Supervise the supervisors
 MT. Challenger said he noted that among those slated for a raise is "one teacher who passed but seven out of a class of 70 to a higher grade
 Dr. DeaEe then explained that he had instructed the principals to mark on these phases of school work: 1. Attention to study in classes.
 9. Diligence in study hours.
 3. Cooperation in class work.
 A. General order of classroom.
 g.. Accuracy of instrEction.
 6. Logical order of instruction | 2. Thoroughness.
 We