Evening star., 1934-05-22
BALLOU REJECTS
HISTORY REPORT
Social Sciences Teaching
Study Destructive, D. c.
School Head Says.

Having refused to sign the nationally
publicized report on conclusions and
recommendations of the commission
on the investigation of history and
other social studies of the American
Historical Association" DR.. Frank w.
Ballou, superintendent of schools here
and a member of the reporting body,
has explained his action on the
grounds of INADEQUATE investigation,
destructive criticism and failure of the
report to advance a constructive pro-
gram for improvement of instruction
in the social studies.
Dr. Ballou's objections are con-
tanned in a formal statement issued
from his office. 1t follows, in part:
"On the one hand. in my judgment,
the report is destructively critical Of
current educational practices, which
the commission did not adequately in
vestigate and dispassionately ap-
praise; on the other hand, the report
does not present a reasonable. def
mite, constructive program for the i'm
provement of instruction in the social
studies, which program, in my judg-
ment. should have been the main fea-
ture of the report.
Protests Ignored.
THE final volume on conclusions
and recommendations, in my judg-
ment, does serious injustice to the
scientific movement of education as
described in the chapter on Tests and
Testing This chapter is not based
on any thoroughgoing investigation
of testing in general or on any con-
clusions reached in the discussions
of the commission. The vigorous pro-
tests made by me and some of my
colleagues against the chapter have
been to large extent ignored In the
final revision as published. Moreover.
the chapter itself is not based on
conclusions and recommendations de-
veloped in the volume prepared by
Messrs Grey and Kelley and sched-
uled to be published by the commits
sion.
In my judgment. the destructive
criticism of the teacher and methods
of teaching and training in
Stitutions is bound to arouse antag-
onism rather than to promote unity
and improvement in American edu
cation.
The chapter on Selection and Or
ganization of Materials of 1nStruc-
ton is a disappointment. In my
judgment, it should have been the
heart of the volume and should have
included vital statement in specific
terms outlining subject matter now
being taught and the changes and
improvements in subject matter
which the commission thinks should
be made. This the chapter does not
do. The discussion is SO general that
frequently one cannot determine
whether the discussion has to do
with elementary schools, the secon-
Diary schools or colleges and univer-
sites.
Report Inadequate.
"As a member of the commission
and superintendent of schools, it was
my hope that the final volume would
be the basis on which constructive
improvement Of teaching the social
studies might be based. In my judg-
ment, the report is inadequate in this
respect"
In the report DR.. Ballou points
out tnat he recently asked George
j. Jones, head of the department of
history and the social studies in the
junior and senior high schools of the
District. for his reaction to the re-
port. In his reply, Jones said:
1T seems to me that able scholars
after five years study and five years
of consultation with teachers should
give us specific recommendations for
our program Instead. these scholars
say the programs should be made
by competent teachers in the social
sciences in consultation with able
scholars"
DR.. Ballou's three fellow dissenters
from the report include some of the
most eminent educators in the coun-
try and their protests are expected
to be made momentarily. They are
Prof. Charles E. Merriam of the Uni
versity of Chicago, Prof. Ernest Horn
of the University of Iowa and DR..
Edmund E. Day, formerly of Har-
ward University.