The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1917-01-08

I VERMONT SCHOOL LAWS
Analysis OF Their Operation BygCom-
ef s,lissIoner tiitIcgas.

a
/ Mohtl,elief Jan. GA digest ef the
report OF the State board OF education
TO be presented to the General AS
sembly has been prepared by State
Commissioner Milo B. saillegas.
For the sake of convenience sum
mary OF conclusions and recommen
dations is here presented. The topics
treated thus In brief form will be
found in detail in the body of the re
port.
During the past year attention in
school matters has centered in the op-
GRAFTON of the school laws enacted by
the Legislature of 1915. The admin
istration of these laws has not ex.
posed any serious defects. Many OF
the difficulties experienced during the
first year when school officials and
| others did not fully understand the
| meaning of the acts were not mani
fected at the beginning of the second
school year. In the future, the mean
| ing of the law will be greatly clarified
| by that part of the work OF the Com
missioner to Revise Public Statutes
which relates TO the school laws.
| which, after careful reading, the
Board gladly commends.
The feature of the law which has
| received greatest consideration is
that which deals with transportation.
Each child who lives mile and a
half or more from school Is now en-
titled to transportation II this is
| feasible otherwise the town is re-
tn arI
Some parents misunderstanding the
purpose of this law demanded and re-
ceived exorbitant prices for convey
ing their own children to school. The
abuses Of the law have quite natural
ly received greatest attention. 1t
should not be forgotten, however that
by far the larger number of parents
are acting in accordance with the
spirit of the law and are making
positive sacrifices in order that their
children may attend school with rea-
sonable comfort. In every case the
provisions of the law are adequate to
prevent abuses. School officials are
now generally aware of this fact and
the law is better administered. The
total cost of transportation and board
FOR the year ending June 80. 1916, was
$167 ,6S5.36. or this amount the
State paid SSs,163.36. The difference
in cost between carrying every child
who Is entitled to transportation un-
der the present law and the cost of
partial transportation such as existed
under the previous law is less than
$4,000 The average daily cost per
child for transportation in 1856
was eighteen cents. Reports from
various superintendents and school
directors indicate that the cost of
transportation for the present school
year will be somewhat less than it
was during 1856. The presents law
could now be devised, The State
Board of Education, therefore, recon-
mends that ii be retained until
adequate experience and careful
study Of its working shall indicate
the particulars requiring amendment.
The act which authorized the State
Board of Education to pay the sums
Of 81, SO or s4 per week to towns en-
ploying teachers OF requisite training
beneficial effects upon the schools.
These rebates cost the State s9S,312.-
30. In few towns the rebate was
used to lessen taxes and teachers and
schools were not benefited. That this
was not of common occurrence is
shown by the fact that the increase in
teachers salaries between the school
years 1914-15 and 1856 was more
than IL percent while the rate of in
crease for the several preceding years
was about per cent In addition to
the amount that the State gave, the
towns themselves increased the
teachers salaries by $4,000. The
increased salaries are attracting
teachers with improved training. The
number of permits has decreased
from 100 In 1914 to 3 in the present
fall term. The Board has been also
able to raise the requirements for
certification so that no one may now
begin teaching in Vermont without
at least one year of professional
training and even those unframed
teachers who have had successful ex-
perience in this State prior to July /, |
1916, are required to secure profes-
sional training II the towns employ
ing them are to receive State aid
The Board recommends that this
provision of the law remain I'M
changed.
In conformity with law the State |
Board of Education divided the State |
into convenient districts and ap-
pointed the requisite number of sup
erintendents. During the years that |
supervision was optional rs per cent |
OF. the towns having SO per cent of |
the schools and SO per cent of the |
school children of the State adopted |
supervision. In 1915, the last year
that supervision was optional, 1t cost |
s99,014.79. or this amount the State |
paid s6S,S906S The total cost in
1916 was $129,s65.54 and the States |
share was S110.99316. 1t appears, |
therefore that to place all of our
schools under supervision has In |
creased the total cost by only $780,
S5075. Looking at the cost Of sup
ervision from a different angle, the
Board paid on an average S1.87 per
child and $37.SS per teacher in the
districts where 1t appointed the sup
erintendents. This is less than the |
StafQ'o ohm ra NOR taaohn, In, tba a;t,o-