Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-06-15
Educators Falling?

OOrOtfly thompson article
June 8 was a masterful state
ment of the case against pres
ent-day methods in education.
1t was a refreshing contrast
to the words of a junior high
principal (not locaD who
said. in essence: "The sooner
we learn that it is no more
necessary to teach every child
to read than it is to teach
every child to play a violin. the
better off we'll be. We've made
great strides, but we still have
a long way to CO."
This emphasis on keeping
the children happy, not requir-
ing them to do distasteful
work in the fundamentals, is
responsible for mediocrity and
delinquency. Those who do
make good, who will be a credit
to their country if it can sur
yive the crisis into which
progressive education" has
forced it. do so in spite of the
present system, not because of
it. They have been fortunate
enough to have inspiration at
home or to have come into
contact with those remaining
teachers who can and do really
teach.
Also, the letter from Nelson
Littell, jr., on June 9 was an
excellent criticism of both the
proposed change in methods OF
grading elementary pupils and
the release Of the proposal at
the conclusion of the school
year after groups interested
in high standards of education
had started their summer
recess.
Parents objected to report
cards based on individual
rather than competitive
achievement until. last year, a
new card was introduced which
afforded some Improvement
even though it did not meet
the demands.
What happened? No report
went home until the end of the
first semester: teachers had
to be instructed in its use." as
If they didn't have normal in
telligence. With the new cards,
parents got a letter inviting
them to complain If they didn't
like the new system, and it
would be changed. I remarked
to a school official at the time
that an effort was apparently
being made to get the old sys-
TEN back without giving the
new one a chance and the re-
cent proposal bears out that
prediction.
To grade on individual
ability" is to deceive both the
child and his parents in the
case of the child with low
ability and to stifie incentive
for the able child. The ulti-
mate failures of the weak
student will come as a ter
rife shock to him and his
parents and have far greater
psychological effect than any
grading system based upon
competition would impose.
In many college classes in
freshman mathematics, more
than half the students fail
most of them aspirants for the
engineering positions which
they have been told will be
available. Some even fail in
trigonometry, although they
have passed what should have
been the same course in high
school. This is a horrible
waste Of their time and money
and the schools facilities.
Many colleges have found
1t necessary to have remedial"
classes to prepare applicants
for college work. Why? Be-
cause our public schools are
not insisting upon sufficiently
high standards for promotion
and are not requiring students
to take courses which make
them think and which they
may find hard"
If the schools are going to
let the students get by" on
electives which cause them
little effort, then parents
should take a hand and insist
that their children enroll in
mathematics, physics. chemis-
try, foreign languages, etc.
They'll thank you later for
having held them to the So
called disciplinary courses.
If a child evidences weak
nesses which preclude his be-
ing able to keep up in college
or even high school. he should
early be guided into courses
which will nevertheless make
him a useful and necessary
member Of the community.
Others should be required TO
take a college preparatory
course with high standards, or
a commercial course with