Open Window Classes.
The Psychological Clinic Copyright, 1915, by Lightner Witmer, Editor. Vol. IX, No. 2. April 15, 1915 :Author: D. C. Bliss. Superintendent of Schools, Montclair, N. J.
Unfortunately for the development of educational science there is a strong tendency in the profession to govern practice by opinion, with little real scrutiny of facts. This attitude of mind is responsible for the establishment of many open window classes in various school systems in the country. To many who advocate the classes it seems a self-evident proposition that pupils working under such conditions will show increased physical gain and a more efficient mentality than those who sit in the customary well-warmed room. These enthusiasts argue somewhat as follows:
Fresh air is absolutely essential to good health; the evidence of its efficacy as a healing agent in tuberculosis is clearly established; sickly, anemic children in open air rooms have gained in health and at the same time have made progress in their studies equal to that of pupils in the regulation class room; the inference is that normally healthy children if placed under the same conditions will show a still greater improvement, due to their better physical status. In accordance with this natural assumption many classes have been established and extravagant claims have been made for remarkable results both physical and mental.
If the classes accomplish the good results alleged, it seems perfectly logical to assume that such a conclusion is capable of demonstration. With the hope of establishing some of the facts relative to such classes the following records were collected. It should be noted that the writer began the tests with the expectation that the results would fully corroborate the commonly accepted opinion. The natural result of this preconceived notion would be a tendency to interpret the collected statistics to the advantage of the open window class rather than against it. However, an attempt was made to reach a conclusion based upon the facts as they appeared, rather than upon the initial conviction. Whatever bias existed was in favor of, rather than against, current opinion.
It was clear at the outset that any valid conclusions from a study of such classes must be based upon a comparison with other groups and not upon a study of the open window children alone. The school conditions in Montclair were very favorable to such a study. It was possible to select groups for the open window and control classes from approximately the same type of children; an efficient medical department provided expert opinion on the physical condition of the children; and all mental tests were given by one person.
A second, a third, and a fifth grade class were selected for the test, no two of these classes being in the same building. Each was checked by a control group of equal number in the same school building. The children in the open window classes were placed there at the request of their parents, and in all probability whatever advantage accrued from this method of selection was rather in favor of the open window class, for only those parents who were believers in fresh air and so were inclined to supplement the school arrangement with favorable home precautions, were likely to make this choice. So far as could be determined superficially the classes were physically equal. The open window classes had one possible advantage over the control groups in a lunch provided at the expense of the parents; the second and third grades being given some warm food, such as a cup of hot soup or cocoa, about the middle of the forenoon session, while the fifth grade ate a light cold lunch which they brought from home. The rooms were kept at a temperature of about 50o ^ This was secured by raising all windows at the bottom and lowering them at the top so that the opening was about half the size of the window. These openings were covered with cheesecloth screens to protect the children from severe draughts, and the pupils were provided by the home with extra clothing and a shawl or rug in which to wrap the lower limbs.
A definite attempt was made to check all pupils in both open window and control classes on three separate lines: 1. Degree of nutrition, measured in terms of weight gained and weight lost.
2. General health, as indicated by the number of children absent because of illness and the total number of days lost thereby. 3. Mental condition, indicated by the comparative amount of fatigue in the two classes. This was determined by a comparison of tests, one given half an hour after the opening of school in the morning, and a similar one given to the same class late in the session. The weight tests cover the period from November to March. The rest of the year open windows are the rule in all class rooms, a fact which makes any comparison of weights useless. The great loss of time involved in any other method made it necessary to weigh the children with their clothing on, but previous experiments in weighing open air children both with and without clothing had shown that the increase in weight was fairly constant under either condition. The medical department of the school felt that while under the circumstances the weight figures were not scientifically exact, they were correct as far as relative values were concerned.
The following charts show the total number of pounds gained and the total number of pounds lost by the classes for each weight period.
riOV toDEC- DEC-to FEB- FEB toMARCH MAR-to MAY1 CHART I Presents the open window class, the second the control class. The entire height of the columns shows weight gain while the white portion records weight o?Sh’i A? NoveRber to December the pupils of the open window class gained 23 lbs. 5 oz. and lost 6 lbs. 4 oz making a net gain of 17 lbs. 1 oz., which is shown by the blackening of the upper portion of the columns. During the same period the pupils of the control class gained 23 lbs. 9 oz. and lost 1 lb. 9 oz., leaving a net gain of 22 lbs. In every time group the control class shows a
greater net gain than the open window class. .2423-IO -22-20-18-16-I* ?12-IO -8-6-2H 19-10 17-6 18-7 3-5 i 1-15 ? i-i 14-7 13-12 13-10 L 9-15 3-10 3-4 OCT- to MOV- NOV- to DEO DEC- to J ATI” JAM to MARCH
CHART II.
In the chart representing the comparative gain and loss in weight of the open window and control classes for Grade III there is less uniformity than in that for Grade V. From October to November the open window class gained 23 lbs. 10 oz. and lost only 1 lb. 3 oz. Thus the net gain is 22 lbs. 7 oz. as against a net gain of 14 lbs. 1 oz. for the control class. Again, in the period from December to January the open window class shows a greater net gain than the control class, but from November to December and from January to March the advantage is on the side of the latter. 19-10
4-1 15-4 9-15 6-14 W ? ^ T?, 6-1 ? 0-10 OCT- to MOV MOV- to DEC DEC- to JAM- JAM- to MARCH CHART III.
The chart for Grade II shows an unusual condition in the open window class record from October to November in that there is no weight loss but a total gain of 11 lbs. Nevertheless, the control class, in spite of a weight loss of 3 lbs. 5 oz. for the same period, surpasses the open window class in its net gain of 14 lbs. 1 oz. From November to December the difference in the net gain of the two is even more strongly in favor of the control class. From December to January, however, the advantage shifts, though it returns again to the control class in the period from January to March. In this last period the entire column for the open window class represents weight loss, so that instead of a net gain the record shows an actual net loss of 1 lb. as against a net gain for the control class of 11 lbs. 3 oz.
An examination of the charts shows a somewhat inconclusive result, though taken as a whole the classes held under ordinary conditions make more consistent gains and have fewer losses than the open window groups. Had the losses in weight of individuals during the year been confined to either one of the two classes, only one conclusion would have been possible. As a matter of fact, the number of different children losing weight is distributed about equally between the two groups. Sept.-Nov. 5 O. W 5 Control. 3 O. W. 3 Control. 2 O. W 2 Control. Total O. W. Total Control. Nov-Dec. Dec.-Feb. Feb.-Mar. Totals. 18 12 17 20 13 42 45 The above table indicates the number of children in each class actually losing weight during each period. The amount of loss is not taken into consideration. There are 42 instances of weight lost in the three open window classes and 45 instances in the control groups.
The element of weight gained is the one most commonly urged in support of the open window plan. It does not appear from this study that children will necessarily gain if required to sit in a room of that type. Even should a radical gain in weight be found, such gain is by no means conclusive evidence that the child is better off physically. The degree to which children are susceptible to the common ailments of cold and sore throat, or to contagious disease, would seem to be a reasonable criterion of physical condition and far more accurate than gain or loss in weight. Records showing absence from school for these causes were carefully kept and the tabulated records show no such variability as appeared in the weights.
HEALTH RECORD, 1913-1914. Colds Sore throat Contagious diseases. V. Open Window. No. of Children. 17 0 5 Days Absent. 76 0 80 V. Control Class. No. of Children. Days Absent. 48 G 30 HEALTH RECORD, 1913-1914. Colds Sore throat Contagious diseases. III. Open Window. No. of Children. 13 2 Days Absent. 52 2 123 III. Control Class. No. of Children. 13 1 7 Days Absent. 37 2 62 HEALTH RECORD, 1913-1914. Colds Sore throat Contagious diseases. II. Open Window. No. of Children. 12 2 12 Days Absent. 38 4 115 II. Control Class. No. of Children. 13 1 7 Days Absent. 37 2 62
At the beginning of the previous year, 1912-1913, a second grade open window class had been organized and the health records were preserved for this class as well as for a control group. These pupils were given no extra food and the temperature was allowed to go as low as it would. In extreme weather the room thermometer often registered below freezing. At the end of the year the unfavorable physical showing made by the class was thought to be due to lack of extra food and to the low temperature allowed. Consequently the next year the conditions were maintained as indicated for the three classes. In spite of these changed conditions there is a striking similarity in the health record of the 1912-1913 class and the three classes for 1913-1914.
OPEN WINDOW CLASSES. 35 HEALTH RECORD, 1912-1913. Colds Sore throat Contagious diseases. II. Open Window No. of Children. 11 7 0 Days Absent. 32 18 0 II. Control Class. No. of Children. Days Absent. 21 0 20
When we remember that these statistics are for four separate open window classes in three different school buildings and for two successive years, it is hardly conceivable that the close similarity in the records is merely a coincidence. It should not be forgotten that these classes represent groups maintained at a very low temperature and groups at a higher temperature; that we have children supplied with mid-forenoon lunches and children with no lunches. In fact we have included most of the variations likely to occur, and variation in conditions seems to make no difference. The resemblance in the records is noteworthy.
It was felt by those responsible for the classes that the experiment would not be complete unless some attempt were made to determine the effect of the difference in atmosphere upon the mentality of the pupils. The second grade, with its control class, was selected for the tests. Two of these were used, marking out ” A’s,” and simple computation. The “A” test as given in Whipple’s Manual was employed, the pupils being directed to mark out as many “A’s” as they could. The time was carefully kept by the examiner and all were required to stop promptly at the end of 60 seconds. The other test was based upon simple mental computation of the following type: Add 5-9-5-4: 8-6-6-7: 22, take away 3; 13, take away 5. These problems were dictated by the examiner and the percentage of accurate answers written constituted the score. The tests were given regularly, one a half hour after the opening of the school in the morning and a similar one either just before the closing of the morning session or just-before the closing of the afternoon session. The assumption was that both classes, with the development of fatigue, would make a poorer record on the second test, although the drop would be less decided in the case of the open window group. These tests were carried on for days and the results were a complete surprise. In the “A” test both classes made the poorer showing in the early morning, and both improved decidedly in the second period. This tendency was apparent not only at first but continued during the whole period of the experiment. The element of fatigue seemed to enter into the arithmetic test, since both classes, as a rule, showed the expected drop in power in the afternoon; but the anticipated difference between the two classes in the amount of fatigue was conspicuously lacking. The fact that both the control and the open window classes showed the same contradictory results with reference to the “A” test and the arithmetic test suggests a similar mental condition in both classes. As the following charts show, the results, to say the least, are inconclusive.
In marking out u A’s” the two groups start at approximately the same point and end together. The upward tendency of the line is apparently the effect of practice but is equally marked with both classes. The control group takes an unaccountable slump in one morning record but immediately recovers the lost ground. The two groups differ greatly in their initial ability to handle fundamental operations, but even here, though on different levels, the lines are practically parallel.
CHART IV.
A surprising feature of the whole experiment with the open window classes is the attitude of the parents. Almost without exception they are convinced that their own children greatly benefited by the plan. This conviction is so positive that it is not affected in the least by the statistics of the classes. These parents assert that the children are less nervous, and that they eat and sleep better than ever before. A possible explanation of the discrepancy between the results in Montclair and elsewhere is that the conditions are not identical. So far as Montclair is concerned the ordinary school ventilation is as so Grade H a;79.1 - oftev window i * control class a16’2” / / / w-r /?* / ‘1/.2. <69.? ?70.
CHART V.
good as can be secured. Large fans force quantities of warm, fresh air into all class rooms. Consequently the experiment resolves itself into showing the difference between warm, well-ventilated rooms, and cold, well-ventilated rooms. It is entirely possible that those schools in other communities, which have obtained excellent results from the open window plan, measure the difference between cold pure air and warm foul air. If this assumption is correct then the wide variation in the recorded results is not at all surprising. One conclusion, however, is unavoidable, and that is, the absolute necessity for basing our school policy upon well ascertained facts rather than upon mere opinion.
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.