Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1917-06-15
MENT FOR A SMALL SCHOOL BOARD
1t Increases Efficiency Concentrates Responsibility
Elected the Interest of the People in Educational
Affairs Becomes More Intimate
WHY should Philadelphia have a smaller

INIHY should Philadelphia have a smaller
w school board?
First. Because a small board can and
does work more effectively and expedi-
tiously, dealing with large problems of
policy and giving heed to the broader
needs and purposes of the public school
system.
Second, Because the change will break
up the system Of committee admlnistra-
tion, inherited from the early times when
paid experts were unknown. The commit
tee system is largely responsible for the
cumbersome administrative methods that
have held back and are still Eolding back
the Philadelphia schools from the posi-
tion in the educational world that should
be attained by the third city in the coun-
try
Third. Because in a small board re-
spoasibility Is centralized and fixed. Less
of the personal element is brought into
administrative affairs, and there is less
opportunity for a small group of members
to become the dominant influence in the
board
Why should the board be elected at large
rather than appointed, as at present?
First. Because the appointment of such
officers Is incompatible with the primal
idea of the functions Of the judiciary.
Second Because a body of men
disbursing a quarter Of the citys entire
revenue should be directly responsible to
the people who are taxed to raise this
money and in the interest of whose chill
dren it is to be expended.
Third. Because the school comes nearer
TO the homes and to the real interests of
the people than any other public instl-
tuition, and therefore the people should
have direct share in the choice of those
who manage IT.
Under the present form of organization of
the Philadelphia School Board the duties
performed by its numerous committees are
occasionally of large Importance and con-
cern the policy of the school department
Such matters should be handled by the en-.
tire board. More often, however, the mat.
ters handled by committees consist of details
that should be disposed of by principals
superintendents and heads of departments
without reference to the board or its COM
niittees. In either case the intervention OF
the committee is a hindrance rather than a
help.
The word committee" appears $50 times
In the rules and bylaws Of the board.
The record of every meeting of the board
consists largely of long recitals of admin.
istrative matters, approval of the acts OF
committees and other trivial items that IN
any city of 100000 inhabitants would never
come TO the boards attention, but could be
disposed Of by the boards paid administra.
tive officers.
Experience of Other Large Cities
In recent study Of the largest fifty
cities in the country the Public Education
Association of Philadelphia finds thai
thirty-four have school boards of from three
to nine members, the commonest number
being FIVE, Twenty-eight elect them al
large, and in every case report satisfactory
results, Among. cities having boards of
five to nine members;
Louisville reports five members elected
at large for four years VERY satisfactory
Cleveland has seven members, elected al
large, Formerly had large board elected
by wards"
Reports from cities having boards OF
from twelve TO thirty members follow:
ST. Louis has twelve members elected fol
six years at large. The strong point claime6
is; Representation Of the whole votine
population"
Providence has thirty members, elected
by wards. Weak points-"Scatters respon.
sibility, obstructs effectiveness, does not in.
sure election Of those best qualified"
Detroit has twenty-one members elected
by wards. Strong points-"There are none.
Weak polnts--"obviously the impossIbiiit,
Of having the city properly represented
The people have voted TO abolish the pres
ent method and establish a board OF sever
members elected at larg6"
brh9 negie'aiira ~ NeGE lsork ttlnsth.