Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1915-05-14

cases WIN emphasis, tne euucaJlOnal |
policy to which Vermont has been com
mitted for a number of years.
Both what was enacted and what
failed of enactment emphasize the fail
ure of the Carnegie survey. The failure
has been so manifest and complete that
statement of the causes of failure may
not be without value to future educa-
tional surveys and other common
wealths. They are causes of omission,
of commission and causes over which
the experts of the Foundation had no
control.
In the first place the Carnegie report
was unfortunate in some of its most
ardent supporters. The Governor who
proposed the educational survey of the
State became so unpopular before the
close of his administration that people
and Legislators alike feared to advocate
his reforms. All measures favored by
the chief executive were looked at
askance, whether they contained merit
or not. The Greek was feared, even
though bearing a gift from the Carnegie
Foundation. Likewise the report re-
ceived the praise and support of the
State superintendent of schools, a man
whose work as educator has often been
impaired by his activity in politics.
The two men, father and godfather of
the report, together entered upon an
educational propaganda throughout the
State, ostensibly in support of the re-
forms advocated by the Carnegie ex-
perts. Unfortunately for the report as
well as for the proponents their act was
interpreted by the people as being in
behalf of their own political interests.
Some of the newspapers of the State,
too, which undertook to support the
Carnegie report and the commission
bill appeared to get their inspiration
either because of personal interests or
from a policy of opposing measures
advocated by rival members of the State
press. Whether justly or otherwise,
the charge of insncerity was raised
against them. Another circumstance
that was prejudicial to the interests of
the proposed reforms was the conten-
ton advanced that the commission S
bill was made in New York. However
vigorously the advocates of the bill pro-
tested to the contrary they were unable
to dspel the feeling that a measure
created in another State was not what
Vermonters wanted The cry "made
in New York. needed only slight pub
licity to carry unshakable conviction to
the people of the State that outside
influences were debating the educational
policy of the State. These sew raj
factors helped to give an unfavorakta
reception to the work of the educational
experts, although they were factors for
which neither the experts nor the com
mission were responsible and over which
they had no control.
On the other hand the EDUCATIONAL eX-
perts might have harvested more abun-
dainty had they moved less extensively
Taken as a whole the Carnegie report is
a revolutionary not reform measure
1t attacked too many institutions of the
State. In its attempt to abolish tw o
normal schools it raised up earnest adj
vocates for the schools who opposed the
report in toto. To the three colleges of
the State it said that one should enlarge
its activities, that a second should I'M
dertake less, and that a third should
cease living altogether. There are men
and institutions that can be persuaded
easily to curtai their activities. 1t re-
quires greater diplomacy, however, to
convince one to assume greater respon-
sbilities; but to OsleriZe an educational
institution by external, suggestive treat
ment savors more of presumption than
Of sound sense So thought the Vermont
pubic after reading the Carnegie report
and they straightway refused to be-
come accessories to the murder of one
of their own colleges.
Doubtless the educational experts did
not realize what host of friends a small
college in the East can rally to its sup
port. The colleges in Vermont occupy
unique place in educational history
Two of them were established for work
before any State was admitted to the
Union from the Northwest Territory
Their existence has been almost coeval
with the State of Vermont. They have
taken deep root in the hearts of the
= people and to do them an injustice is to
inhict the same indignity upon Vermont.
They differ from the smaller colleges of
the Middle West in that they are re-
garded not so much in the light of pri-
vate institutions as an integral part of
the educational system of the State.
The experts failed to recognize that
these institutions, while holding little