The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1921-02-10
THE UNION DRY GOODS COMPANY

of an educational expert, he did not
defend in any direct way the Stearrs
bill. Educational experts, he said, are
not to be trusted because they are men
who have made failure OF conducting
their own institutions and then 90
about at a high price telling Others
what to do. DR. Thomas argument
turned against the University of Yer
mont the plain inference being that
the university has not made the most
of its opportunities He said that Mid
dlebury was turning out teachers from
its state assisted department OF peda-
gogy and that it was the only field
of state service that had been left open
to it.
NJ. 0. Maurice of Brattleboro defend
ed the Stearns bill, attacked the way
the school affairs of the state had been
administered They have come under
the deadening influence of the worst
of modern gasses. the 'HilleGas.' Yer
mont children. have been handed
mess of pottage," he said, "and have
not been getting the kind of education
YOU think they have He declared that
if the schools of the state were not i'm
proved he would secure private tutor
ing for his son.
Mr. Webber of Rutland, a member
of the state board of education, an
swered DR.. Thomas, saying that while
the Grafton of the former president OF
Middlebury had been very interesting
70 listen to, it had been a plea for
Middlebury rather than a discourse on
the merits of the two bills in question.
He said that the first suggestion of
state teachers college came from Mid
dlebury, then Middlebury had later
turned down the proposition. He de
clared that the statement of DR.. Thorn
as that it was drawn in all sincerity
for the expert was not so, because It
had been drawn by Mr.. johnson and
himself And that it was drawn in all
sincerity for the good Of the state,
He said the Stearns bill made no pro
vision for state control of any kind,
but simply demanded money from the
state for the support of the normal
schools and then allowed the state no
control of how the money shall be -.
pended. All that the state board of
education or the commission could do
under this bill would be to supervise
the courses to be taught and the Sc
curing of instructors.
Mr.. Webber declared he had nothing
against Middlebury or any other insti-
tuition. He vas simply looking to the
good of the state, The appropriation
for the department of pedagogy at
Nliddlebury (S24,00Ol had been left as
usual. he said.
Mrs. r. c. Ransome OF Castleton ia
yored the normal school and gave fig
ures and facts to support her state
ments. She said that the Castleton
schools served as a training school for
Young girls from many nearby towns
who wanted to teach. and that the
school had turned out many good
teachers.
Fred A. Rowland of Montpelier, re-
Gently appointed to the board of edu-
cation, quoted many reports OF former
boards of education and of governors
of Vermont, all fayoring the dropping
Of the normal schools and the estab-
lishment of a central training school
for teachers. These reports went back
as far as 1870 Mr. Rowland made
the point that teachers must be trained
in places where there are facilities for
practice teaching in the schools, and
there are no such facilities in John
son and Castleton as at Burlington and
nearby towns. Mrs. Ransome replied
briefly to this, giving the facilities for
practice teaching in schools in Castle
ton and vicinity.
President GUY w Bailey of the Uni
yersitv of Vermont, asked to be heard
at the next hearing on this bill, which
has been set for next Tuesday evening
at 1880 o'clock in representatives hall.
II is possible that another hearing viii
be held next Wednesday evening also.