Evening star., 1925-01-25
PLATOON SYSTEM
NOW UP TO BOARD
Two Proponents of Plan See
Defeat as Hearings
Come to Close.


| 1ish the platoon system OF education
! In the District public schools was left
| to the board OF educa tion by its sd-
vocateS and opponents at the final
| public hearing OF the boards special
4 platoon investigating committee yes
! terday afternoon in the Franklin
! School The committee VIII begin at
! once to study the Voluminous mass of
! data presented at the three public
| hearings as well as that submitted
upon request by educational author
itte7 in more than 200 cities in the
United States
| Two Of the proponents virtually
| conceded at the closing hearing that
! the movement 10 install the platoon
! plan in the Washington schools had
been defeated, temporarily at least,
but predicted that the march of pro-
! gressive education would ultimately
| result IN the platooning of the Ma
tional Capitals schools. Miss Frances
s. Farley, principal of the Districts y
only platoon school. the Park View,
was one. Col =. NJ Anderson. one
OF the staunchest supporters of the
plan, was the other.
Ely Backs system.
The committee was given a little
surprise when Selden NJ. Ely. super
| visins principal of the NTH division,
| appeared as an advocate of the pla-
toon plan. He Is the only school Off
Ger who has not backed up the ad-
ministration officials at the hearings.
AS they lined up at the final hear
Ing the supporters OF the platoon
| plan were. I'm addition to Mr.. Ely,
Miss Farley, Col. Anderson, Miss
Eula Thomas and Miss Grace Meyer,
| both teachers at the Park View
| School, and Mrs F.. X. kalmbach OF
the Langdon Parent-Te acher Associa-
| tton. The opposition was represented
| by Miss Jessie La Sale, supervising q
principal of the second division and
head OF the department Of educational
| research and Measurement in the
schools: Mrs W. L. Hagen, president
| OF the Carbery Parent-Teacher Asso-
citation; James G. Yaden of the Pet
| worth Citizens Association: Miss r.
S. Netherland and Miss E. F. c. Mer-
ritt, director OF primary instruction
In the colored schools.
Cites Others Views.
Col Anderson advised the board
| that he had sent questfonnafres TO
| every superintendent OF schools in
| cities OF more than 1000 population
In the United States and also in cities
OF lesser population, where the
| platoon plan Is in operation, to ascer-
J tain the views of the educational ON
| ctals In regard to the system, and
| learned that mere than so per cent of
| those who had never tried the system
| favor II. Those who tried the plan,
with the exception of one, he said.
| approve 1t. The Questionnaires were
left with the committee to study.
AS he concluded Col Anderson re-
| minded the committee that there Is a
constant change in the personnel OF
1 IL to
| system is not adopted in Washington
now 1t will be eventually. IF turn
| Ing down the platoon plan will cost
the chairman his position on the
| board" replied Ernest Greenwood, Il
| will turn 1t down now"
Mr.. Ely presented IL points in favor
of the platoon school. Chief among
them were: That platoon instruction
by the limited departmental plan is
perhaps preferable to the method of
requiring one teacher to instruct in
all subjects: that the well prepared
and well conceived opportunities for
| special work provided by the platoon
| school are of great value; that
| platoon schools provide to better ad-
| vantage directed play and physical
| training so necessary to the develop
ment Of the child; that the limited
supervised study provided by the
| platoon school is better than what
| usually amounts to no supervised
study in tho traditional school; that
the platoon school provides for the
Observation-Disclosures of the work that
| the child needs from the third to the
| eighth grade, inclusive; that the
platoon school provides an oppor-
tunity and q plscs for the individual
child to develop It's native talents
and that the assembly hall of the
platoon school Ia a place for the
socfalization of the child.
Sees Virtue of System.
Mr.. Ely pointed out that he had
made an intimate study OF the Park
View platoon school since 1t had been
under his supervision and said that It
was his observation that the platoon
school whets the appetites Of the pu-
pills because Of the various physical
and Intellectual viands set before
them
Miss Thomas told OF the enthusiasm
OF the parents of the children attend
ing the Park View School over the
| platoon plan. The parents as we'll as
the pupils, she said, are desperately
| enthusiastic over it. and the teachers
are delighted with it" Her colleag que,
| Miss Meyer described the installation
OF the platoon plan at the school five
years ago. and concurred in Miss
Thomas statement that the commu-
nifty strongly indorses It.
After attending all three hearings.
! Mrs. Kalmbach told the committee that
! she had not heard "a single argument
that has convinced her that the pla-
toon plan is not feasible" and that the
patrons of the Langdon School want
the platoon system. Miss Farley sup
| plemented her arguments at previous
hearings with statements showing the
cooperation among the teachers at the
Park View School, which she attributed
to its success as q platoon school.
Asks Experts study
is sought from a physician, so the
boards committee should look to ex-
perts for its advice on the platoon
school plan was the summary OF Miss
La Salle's testimony. We have got
to study this thing from the stand
point OF experts and not to satisfy the
whims and caprices Of some people"
| she declared.
Miss La Sale contended that the
platoon system rs defeating it's own
| end" because of its definite time
schedule. The tendency Of modern
education" she said, lis to break
away from rigidity. All children dc
not need the same length of time to
study the same subjects. The Ques-
tion ia not how well informed Is the
child. We have ceased to> make that
the test of the progress of education
1t is how he reacts and what kind OF
a citizen he will make"
Says Papils Ask Transfer.
Miss La Sale pointed out that con-
dftfons at the Park View School ere