A Study of the School Inquiry Report on Ungraded Classes
- Author:
Elizabeth E. Farrell,
Inspector of Ungraded Classes, New York City, N. Y. (Concluded.) What is Done for these Children.
With regard to the school progiam, the course of study, and the place of manual training in the program, the School Inquiry Report says:
“The usual program is the three R’s in the forenoon, and some form of handwork (manual training) in the afternoon. Nearly all of the experienced teachers and the principals are agreed that this bookwork is largely wasted upon these children; but they feel compelled to try to do this because it is the tradition of the system, and because the parents insist that their children shall be taught to read and write.” (Page 5.)
“That appropriate manual training be made the principal thing in all of these classes; such reading, writing, and numbers as are taught should be taught, so far as possible, in connection with the hand work.” (Page 23.) As stated in the report the facts upon which the above statements are based are these: “Most of the people who are familiar with the feebleminded child as he is found in institutions and in the Hilfsschulen of Germany and the Special Classes of London believe that the children in the ungraded classes of our city belong to the latter group; that is to say, they believe that it is wrong to attempt to teach such children any of these matters (reading, writing, number).” (Page 5.) “The experience with such children as these in institutions for feebleminded, the country over, is that manual training is the one thing that they can be taught.” (Page Q.)
?* * * ^at book work is practically useless for these children, and that our work with them, instead of being half manual, should be all manual and vocational.” (Page 18.)
Discussion.
It is a fact, though one not recognized in the report, that the child in the ungraded class has been the determining factor in the activities of his school life. It has been consistently held that the class must be small in order to secure opportunity for individual instruction. Not less, but more, must be given to the handicapped child. His opportunity is limited only by his own personality;? reading, numbers, history, water color work, chair caning, dressmaking, cooking, basketry, pottery making, are only a few of the means used to awaken dormant powers and latent interests.
To enrich the experiences of the handicapped child will do for him exactly what it does for a more fortunate one. The degree of enrichment will be less, the kind identical. As the handicapped child is nearer and dearer to his sorrow-softened parent, so he is to the school and to the teacher whose joy it is to fan into flame the spark of interest, to build longer the span of voluntary attention, to develop to its uttermost his power of good discrimination. The effort has been made to teach the higher type of backward child to read and to write. To attempt to teach these subjects to a child who is obviously defective would be evidence of bad judgment, but in what department of human effort may not bad judgment be found? The school principals and teachers followed established precedents in offering during the school day of ungraded class children, activities drawn from the different branches of human knowledge. In England the Education Act lays certain obligations on the local school authorities; in Germany the aim of the auxiliary schools (schools for backward children) is so clearly recognized that the subject matter of instruction must of necessity be broad, and in no sense narrowly special. The institution men of this country also recognize this fact. Quotations bearing precisely on this point follow:
“It (auxiliary school) aims to develop in its pupils a standard of conduct which shall not differ from that of a worthy and useful member of human society. To this end all those subjects of instruction should be introduced into the auxiliary school which tend to awaken and control the individual will and impulses to action. * * * Taking this, then, as our general aim, we can proceed to assign the scope of the several subjects:
“1. Religion. “2. By practice and observation, speaking, reading, and writing, he should be helped to understand and reproduce orally and in writing whatever he has seen, heard, or experienced. “3. History. “4. Drawing. “5. Manual labor. “6. Singing and gymnastics. “7. Home geography. “8. Arithmetic. “9. Natural history and nature study.”4 “The time table must provide? “a. Instruction in the elements of reading, writing, and arithmetic; “b. Singing and recitation; 4 Auxiliary Schools of Germany, page 84. A STUDY OF UNGRADED CLASSES. 101 “c. Object lessons; “d. Drawing; “e. Needle work for girls; “/. Physical exercises; “g. Manual instruction.”5 “I do not believe it is wise for us to discard the literary training entirely, as we have in the institution a number of children of the higher types of mental feebleness and I believe these children are capable of being benefited by the literary exercises.”6
“We endeavor to teach the salient points of the kindergarten, primary, intermediate, and grammar grades up to the sixth grade.”7 “Our educational work is very elaborate and cannot be described in words. The annual report which I am enclosing gives the best r6sum6 of the work we have ever printed.”8
A report made after visiting the Massachusetts School for the Feebleminded contains the following:?”At Waverley the whole morning was devoted to the teaching of reading, arithemtic, drawing and writing to the high grade mentally defective children.” From these quotations it will be seen that it is quite generally held that the child himself must determine what the school will do for him. Does it not seem likely that the point of view of institutional life would be such as would emphasize manual and vocational training? Children in an institution have their future clearly defined. They can be trained for one thing. With the great majority of ungraded class children in the public schools, it is not possible at this time to train for one and only one future, even if that seemed best. It is right here that the question arises,?is it manual training or motor training that these children need? If it is motor training then the author of the report must agree with our practice in giving the children physical training, rhythmic exercises, dancing, games, drawing, sense training, gardening, story telling, dramatization, and the many other activities which are motor in character. He must agree that the children need opportunity for gaining experiences of many kinds. “The time spent upon purely academic work has a value beyond its use to the child, and this is a point of view not recognized by those whose attention is focused upon children in institutions. By emphasizing the points of resemblance and minimizing the differences between the regular grade child and the ungraded class child, we foster the self-respect of the unfortunate one and sacrifice none of his opportunities for mental growth.”
‘ Elementary Education Acts, England, Defective and Epileptic Children. 6 George Mogridge, M.D., Iowa Institution for the Feebleminded. 7 D. F. Weeks, M.D., Epileptic Colony, Skillman, New Jersey. 8 Walter E. Fernald, M.D., Mass. State School for the Feebleminded. In this section, perhaps more than in any other, is the reader cognizant of a lack of definiteness in the use of terms. We do not know what is meant by a feebleminded child. We do not know whether he is always one and the same thing or whether there are infinite variations and differentiations demanding adaptations and modifications of educational treatment. It is impossible, therefore, to be specific in the discussion. The general theory and practice, here presented, would apply to any scheme of help for these children.
Increased Appropriations.
The School Inquiry Report recommends increased appropriations in the following terms:? “By greatly increasing the appropriations for the work in accordance with the needs, as determined by those in charge of the problem.” (Pages 21, 22.) A. “By the appointment of at least four associate inspectors of ungraded classes.” (Page 22.)
B. “By the appointment at once of five more examiners (psychologists and physicians), whose duty it should be to determine what children shall be placed in these classes. Additional examiners should be appointed as needed. All repeaters and over-age pupils, together with all pupils now in any of the special classes C, D, E, and ungraded, should be tested by the Binet-Simon scale in the hands of experts trained in its use (as is done in Rochester, N. Y., Cleveland, 0., and other places, with signal benefit to the system.” (Page 22.)
C. “By the appointment of a number of special assistants?six or eight? whose business it should be to follow up the history of these defective children after they have passed through the schools. After a few years such histories would throw much-needed light on the value of the methods used; and they would point the way to further steps toward protecting society from the future incubus of these irresponsible persons.” (Page 22.) Discussion.
Since September, 1906, the Department of Ungraded Classes has increased approximately 1100 per cent. The expenditure for maintaining this department has not changed except for an increase in salary granted to the Inspector of Ungraded Classes. From 14 classes in 1906, the number has increased to 175 classes in September, 1913. No addition has been made during that time to the staff of medical examiners. The inadequacy of the machinery of administration, though presented by the City Superintendent of Schools at different times, has never had consideration.
It is impossible to say at this time how many associate inspectors of ungraded classes should be appointed. It seems reasonable, however, when one considers the newness of this work in public education; the lack of trained teachers; the fact that we do not yet know just what constitutes mental defect in the so-called border line case, to grant at least the amount of supervision which is given to the much better understood problems in the regular grades of the elementary school. There could be no question about the wisdom of establishing a ratio of supervising officials to the number of ungraded classes, as has been established for assistants to principals in elementary schools. Any adequate scheme for the care of mentally defective children must provide not only for their examination but for their re-examination at regular intervals. This fact was recognized by the Board of Education when the by-laws regulating ungraded classes were adopted (1906). This fact, with others which are obvious, makes it impossible to say how many examiners should be appointed. To arrive at such information might be possible by an intensive study of two or more school districts. Such a study would call for the examination of all over-age children, all delinquent children, all special class children. Whether the information so gathered would be indicative of conditions all over the city would, of course, be questionable. The value of such information, however, cannot be gainsaid in considering the number of official examiners needed to carry on the work for mentally defective children.
All that has been said above is applicable to the recommendation with regard to the appointment of “special assistants.” The work done by Dr Anne Moore in this particular field in the Department of Ungraded Classes, showed conclusively the necessity for some such activity. Here, again, nothing but investigation will show whether we need “six or eight,” or sixty, or eighty special assistants.
Another item should be added as a reason for increased appropriations. This item is clerical assistance. Unless this is granted the maximum efficiency will not be possible even though a generous provision is made for special assistants, medical examiners, and associate inspectors. To oblige highly trained employees of the Board of Education to spend their days writing letters, sending out notices, etc., etc., is to pay a rather high price for such services. I earnestly recommend that this item be given careful consideration. To say that four associate inspectors should be appointed is to treat as stationary a problem which is constantly growing. Because Dr Goddard does not give a reason for his recommendation, argument is impossible. Again we deplore an investigation conducted without knowledge of documentary material.
Records. The following quotations from the School Inquiry Report relate to records:?
“The only way to solve this problem (three R’s) is to appeal to experience. Had a careful record been kept of every child who had been in the ungraded classes; his actual condition; what he had learned in the way of reading, writing, and counting; and then of his after history, and the extent to which he had been able to make a living because of his ability to use his knowledge of the three R’s, we might, by this time, have an answer to the question. As a matter of fact, no such records have been kept.” (Pages 5, 6.)
“Actual data should be accumulated as to what becomes of these children after they have left the ungraded classes, of the children in E classes, the C classes, and all others who show in their school work that they are not perfectly normal, to the end that we may know what effect our methods are having upon these children, and to what extent we have wisely judged them and treated them.” (Pages 15, 16.)
The above statements seem to be based upon the fact that,? “We have continually asked teachers * * (Page 6.) Discussion (Records).
To substantiate in fact the statement that “no such records have been kept,” it is again necessary to study the report for evidences of the use made of official material,?minutes of the Board of Superintendents, annual reports of the City Superintendent of Schools, records in the office of the City Superintendent of Schools,?and to search for indications that a critical study of methods of work, budget requests, etc., etc., had been made. There are no such evidences or indications.
Such a study of the minutes of the Board of Superintendents would have brought out the fact that a record blank for use in ungraded classes had been adopted in 1906. If this discovery was followed up by a study of the records on file in- the office of the City Superintendent it would have shown that four times each year each child in an ungraded class is rated. On this approved blank information is given as to “his actual conditions; what he had learned in the way of reading, writing, and counting.” In addition to the facts noted, the official records give information as to the condition at the time of discharge, at whose request he is discharged, for whom he is to work, and a prognosis as to his probable ability to succeed.
A study of the annual reports of the City Superintendent of Schools would have shown the attitude of the school authorities on A STUDY OF UNGRADED CLASSES. 105 the “after care” of children who left the ungraded class at sixteen years (none younger may leave) to enter industry. The City Superintendent of Schools recommended in 1909-10 “that social workers be appointed to visit the homes and work with the parents of mentally defective children.”9 A study of documentary material in the office of the City Superintendent of Schools would reveal the work in “after care” done under the auspices of the school authorities, and at their request by the College Settlement and the Public Education Association, whose investigator, Dr Anne Moore, followed up the industrial career of all children who had left the ungraded classes up to the time her investigation was finished in June, 1911. Had such a study been made it would have been apparent that the school authorities not only appreciated the value of such material but actually inaugurated and established on a working basis the first, and to this time the only, official after care of mentally defective children done in connection with American public schools. This was begun and has been continued since 1907, when the Department of Ungraded Classes was one year old.
The report says we must gather data as to what becomes of the 22,387 E class children; 2691 C class children; 2041 D class children; and the 15,000 children said to be feebleminded. The industrial career of these individuals is the point here. The implications in this suggestion are tremendous. The German system of registering at the police station all people sojourning in the country is a way to learn about the 42,119 individuals under discussion. This, however, does not seem feasible just now. Since,?”We have continually asked teachers” is the only fact presented as the basis of the statement that “no such records have been kept,” and since the method of recording the data relating to ungraded class children and the character of such data were not the material of critical study, this section of the School Inquiry Report does not appear to be conclusive.
The Report re-states conditions that have been put forward by the City Superintendent time and again,?children not examined, inadequate supply of trained teachers, inadequacy of the examining and supervisory staff, etc. etc. To bring these forward once more with all the prestige of the School Inquiry Committee will undoubtedly be of value. The report seems to have viewed the ungraded class problem as the work of a day,?a work without a past and with no future. It
Thirteenth Annual Report, City Superintendent of Schools, page 149. deals with conditions found at a given time with no consideration of the circumstances which brought them about and those which were in process of correcting them. Educational administration is not static, as one might gather from the report. Unless we discount this static quality we will fail to get the good intended. The force which has driven this particular problem since 1906 is dynamic. It has increasingly gathered momentum and is projected in a long vista ahead. These conditions, or some other condition equally undesirable, may exist five years from today. The thing which makes them significant is our attitude towards them.
Throughout the report the terms “mentally defective” and “feebleminded” are used interchangeably. With this usage in mind, the question of “mistaken diagnosis” referred to on page 5 is to be considered. There is no better way to show the inaccuracy implied in this section than to place in juxtaposition the statement of one of Dr Goddard’s colleagues in psychology: “Feeblemindedness in its correct usage, characterizes the individual whose mental development is retarded. It has no reference whatever to the matter of whether the condition is curable or permanent. Its literal meaning excludes all reference to causes and a child might be feebleminded at first and become normal later.” “A child might progress at a retarded rate at first and then improve with the removal of some physical handicap or other cause.”10
Those who looked to the School Inquiry Investigation as the logical means of solving the problems now troubling school administrators in the field of special education, will study the report in vain for a philosophy upon which to found their practice. They find, instead of the broad vision of the function of the school in this its latest problem, a series of doses prescribed for present ills; a dearth of positive knowledge which it would be reasonable for Dr Goddard to have provided, throws the atmosphere of opinion around the remarks made on organization, examination, “mistaken diagnosis,” number of feebleminded children, and vocationalized manual training,?to enumerate only a few items. The service given by Rousseau to general education, by Pestalozzi to the education of poor children, by Horace Mann to public education in the United States, is similar to that expected from Dr. Goddard for the education of mentally defective children when he was employed by the School Inquiry Committee to investigate the aim, methods, and results of ungraded class work. To be unable to see the forest for the trees is sad. To have missed the vision is sadder still.
10 Journal of Psycho-Asthenics-?Vol. XVII, No. 4.
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.