« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
tution. But athletic contests are coming to be regarded more and more as an end rather than a means. Questionable methods have become lamentably common. Players early are taught that skill in disregarding rules is a prime requisite of a successful athlete. And the worst feature of this lamentable situation lies in the fact that it is largely graduates of our leading colleges and universities who are engaged in this demoralizing business.
In the secondary school this evil is most insidious and most to be deplored. To the average schoolboy the college athlete is a veritable hero. His word is law. And this man, often, I regret to say, passes his time in instructing his pupils in the arts of deceit and dishonesty. I have seen many a college athlete coach devoting his time to teaching his young followers how they may cleverly disobey the rules of the game without risk of detection, and I think that I am safe in saying that the majority of coaches are more or less given to this business.
There is another demoralizing phase of the present athletic situation. The athlete has come to occupy altogether too important a position in the eyes of his fellows. He is led to overestimate his real worth. The preparatory school is the greatest sufferer in this respect. In their eagerness to attain success, the colleges early canvass the secondary schools for material. The various college representatives yie with one another in offering to young and susceptible boys all sorts of attractive inducements to lead them to choose given colleges. Arguments are advanced to show the uselessness of completing the regular preparatory courses, when entrance to college can be earlier and
more easily secured. So persistent and widespread has this practice become that it is often extremely difficult for any school of good standing to hold boys of athletic ability to the full completion of its regular course. The college should unite with the school in putting a stop to the demoralizing practice of proselytizing.
I have no patience with those who most loudly protest against the physical dangers of football, who busy themselves with the framing of eligibility rules whereby scores of honest, deserving students are debarred from the privilege of representing their school or college on the diamond or gridiron; who regard summer ball playing as a horrible crime and who would restrict American athletics to an aristocratic or leisure class. The gravest dangers are of another sort. Certain elements of roughness should and no doubt will be eliminated. The real professional element must be debarred. But the present agitation has sadly missed its mark, and while I sympathize with the motive of some of these would-be reformers, I am getting to sympathize less and less with their methods and even with the end they have in view.
Existing conditions furnish strong temptations to boys to deceive and to misrepresent. The restrictions are felt to be in a large measure unjust. And boys are taught that undetected deception in games is a conimendable thing. Hence they are not likely to adopt a wholly different standard when their own personal interests are involved. One or two simple rules by way of understanding may be desirable, perhaps necessary, but the fewer the better. If we consider our rival a worthy foe, surely we can trust him to do the square thing. The senseless and disgraceful wran
gles which are constantly taking place between our higher institutions of learning over the question of their athletic relations are a disgrace to the institutions theinselves and a menace to their influence. We need less “red tape" and more common sense and mutual confidence.
ETHICAL ELEMENTS IN EDUCATION.
E. HERSHEY SNEATH, PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY,
The æsthetic element in human culture has not received and is not receiving the attention on the part of educators that it deserves. This has been due undoubtedly to the fact that in the development of man the physical, social, political, intellectual and moral needs come first. Again, the utilitarian character of our civilization has not failed to affect our educational work and the surface at least the æsthetic does not seem to make for utilitarian ends to a very great extent. But in the third place, this neglect of the æsthetic has been and is due to a failure to appreciate fully its importance as a factor in human nature and human unfolding. A little careful examination will show that this element is one of the most important and most powerful factors in the complex nature and life of man.
In the first place man is constitutionally æsthetic. The universality of the æsthetic as manifest in the history of man testifies to this. A true psychological analysis also reveals it.
In the second place the aesthetic is a very influential factor in the unfolding of human nature. It plays a prominent part in the unfolding and development of the physical, social, industrial, political, intellectual, moral and religious life of man. [This point was developed at length.]
In the third place, the æsthetic is a very important factor in its relation to the daily life of man as measured from the standpoint of joy and sorrow, happiness and misery. It is a prolific sense of enjoyment. The beauty of nature and the fine arts testify to this fact. It also alleviates human suffering.
An element in human nature so conspicuous and important as the æsthetic calls for careful recognition and attention on the part of the educator.
PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS.
HON. CHANNING FOLSOM, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF
PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, CONCORD, N. H.
The educational problems of northern New England are those linked with the rural school and are incident to the changed conditions since our schools were established and our method of management inaugurated.
The changes in our industrial conditions, the shifting of our population, the segregation of wealth and population resultant from the establishment of the factory system have brought into prominence certain questions not heard of by our forefathers.
Though the school has been always demanded by the state for the welfare of the state, its management and
its financial support have been left to local decision. This plan originally worked well for the reason that wealth and population alike were evenly distributed. The economic and industrial changes of the last century, however, have brought about marked inequalities.
The aim of educational legislation in this state for the last twenty years has been the correction of these inequalities. The legislature has constantly sought to place country children, as far as practicable, on an equality with those growing up in the villages and cities.
Note some of the more noticeable of these inequalities still existing in New Hampshire. In 1903 the taxable valuation of the town of Ellsworth for every child of the average attendance at its schools was $1,358; that of Dublin was $18,639. One was nearly fourteen times as able to educate its children as the other. But the school tax in Dublin during the same year was $1.95 on $1000; in the district of West Lebanon, $10.62 or nearly six times greater. In considering the ability of any community to support its schools, we must take into account its other burdens. When we take into consideration the additional fact, that oftentimes the towns having the shortest schools and paying the lowest salaries are among those that are the most heavily taxed both for school and general purposes, we are forced irresistibly to the conclusion that the revenue for the support of the public schools must ultimately come from the state treasury. The school tax must be levied by the state on all property and distributed in direct proportion to the number of children in average attendance and in inverse proportion to the valuation