MR. JAMES H. BAKER said: "I wish to ask whether the question of economy of time, as suggested in a practical way by Miss Dutton's experience in teaching reading, may not be carried farther? In our refinements of method and exact application of ideal theories may we not waste time in all departments of elementary education? Do we recognize the full extent of knowledge and power which the pupil possesses when he enters school at the age of six. Might he not advance in essentials of education more rapidly? The report of the committee of ten showed that the various conferences recommended that certain studies usually confined to the high school should be taken up in the elementary school. The suggestion was not considered by the Council nor the committee of fifteen. Teachers reply: 'Crowded courses; no room for anything more.' Now, the inquiry is made all along the line, 'Can the whole period of general education be shortened?' and it is important that the question be answered for the elementary period by educators experienced in the work of that period. In Prussia three years, instead of eight, are given to elementary work, and at the age of nine high school work in method and organization begins. At the age of fourteen all the studies have been included which are recommended by the conferences, and it is agreed, that, in invaluable insight into leading subjects, the pupil is farther advanced than the American boy at the same age; and this results from economy of time in the ele mentary work and early introduction to other subjects. I hope members of the Council will give us the benefit of their views in the light of the experience of the last fifteen years."

MR. GILBERT.-Too much stress is put upon this question of saving time. What would be gained by putting pupils of primary grade into secondary work? The tendency of our times is to hurry through life. The true economy is to enrich the courses. It is a mistake to rush a child too soon into the college and university. What we should do is to give the child's mind all that it can use. Fill its curriculum with that which is worth while.

MR. COOK.-I deem it proper to refer to a case in Illinois. In Decatur the work below the high school is done in seven years, and the high school has become the most popular school in that city.

MR. B. A. HINSDALE. -How long has this been in vogue?
MR. COOK.-Several years.

MR. N. C. DOUGHERTY.-Are the graduates of the high school who are prepared to enter our best colleges younger than those of other high schools in Illinois?

MR. COOK.-Yes, by a year; and I regard the size of the Decatur High School as an unanswerable argument in favor of the plan.

MR. RICHARDS.-Life is short; art is long. I have made some calculations and have found that nearly two-thirds of our children in elementary schools do not go over five years. Is it not important to save all we can of the five years? Reading has been spoken of as a mere formal exercise; but reading is not simply a formality. It is educative. Let the children command the language.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON STATE SCHOOL SYSTEMS -UNGRADED SCHOOLS.

BY HENRY SABIN, DES MOINES, IOWA, CHAIRMAN.

This report has reference only to questions which concern schools in the rural districts and the smaller villages in which no attempt ist made at grading the pupils. The aim has been to make it strictly a business paper, dealing with facts and with theories which are both practicable and of immediate importance. Early in the spring your committee sent to each state superintendent a circular asking for information concerning revenues, organization, and preparation of teachers for ungraded schools. The plan of supervision, attendance, and the course of study were included, as incidental. Replies were received from twenty-five states, viz.: Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, New York, South Carolina, Florida, California, Nevada, Maine, Kentucky, Texas, Minnesota, Missouri, Michigan, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Nebraska, Mississippi, Delaware, Massachusetts, Montana, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin. In addition a large number of state reports have been consulted, as furnishing desirable information. The information thus gained is embodied in the report in the following order of subjects: Revenues and distribution of same; organization of schools; supply of teachers.

REVENUES.

The school funds are derived mainly from three sources, namely, permanent or invested funds, state tax, and local taxes imposed upon towns or districts by vote of the inhabitants. Local taxes are imposed in each of the forty-nine states and territories, including the District of Columbia; thirty-nine have what is termed a permanent school fund, the interest of which is distributed in support of the schools, but the principal remains inviolate. Thirty-one supplement the proceeds of this fund by state tax. Ten have no permanent school fund; seven of these support their schools by state tax alone, and three by local tax.

In preference to any attempt at tabulation we have made extracts from answers received to the circular and from state reports, as showing the trend of opinion in the different states.

It will be noticed, that, while the answers and suggestions differ in accordance with the civil organization of different states, there is 'substantial accord of sentiment in favor of a change in the method

of taxation, and that school district taxation especially meets with little favor. These quotations could be largely increased, if necessary, but the length of this paper will not admit of it. They look to some way of obtaining a remedy for the gross inequality which exists, not between the city and the country schools but between the ungraded schools in different districts of the same township.

The quotations are as follows:

Kentucky. As revenue to pay teachers and superintendents, we would prefer county taxation after, and as supplemental to, state taxation.

Missouri.-Revenues for the support of the ungraded schools are derived chiefly by a direct tax levied only by each district. I prefer a township tax.

Mississippi. I believe in a mixed revenue system; the state providing a certain proportion of the money necessary to maintain schools and distributing it to the county, township, or district, as the case may be, upon the basis of educable children. This to be supplemented by a county tax, distributed to the townships or districts on the basis of educable children; the townships or districts being permitted to levy such additional tax as they may see fit.

Texas. The revenues for the support of the ungraded schools derived from local sources are very small. I should very much prefer a good, liberal, county school tax to any other means of local support.

Florida. I would prefer a state levy, with county option to increase it.

Nevada.-I prefer the county tax.

Maine. I prefer a tax raised upon the entire township.

Montana.-Revenue is raised by county taxation. I prefer this method. Pennsylvania.-I incline to the opinion that a levy by the county would be more equable. Some townships in this state levy no tax. Others levy the maximum limit allowed by the law, namely, thirteen mills for building purposes and thirteen mills for maintenance.

Indiana.—We can make a levy anywhere from one to thirty-five cents on each one hundred dollars, and may go as high as fifty cents on the polls. We like the township system in this state, because it is so much cheaper.

Wisconsin. The revenues for the support of the ungraded schools are raised in part by the district, part by the county upon different townships, and in part by the state. It would seem more equable if raised by the township instead of the district.

South Dakota.-Under our constitution we cannot have state uniformity of school taxation, but for school purposes we can provide for county tax levies that shall relieve the weak districts from the greater part of their burdens. This would be much better than our present method of taxation, under which the local school tax in some districts has been at times as high as twenty mills, while in other districts having equally good school privileges the levy for the same years has been only five mills or less.

Massachusetts.-The Massachusetts Teachers' Association resolved, that, for the purpose of enabling the poorer towns of the coramonwealth to have the continuous service of trained teachers, adequate assistance should be afforded by the state, and for this purpose an enlargement of the state school fund should be made. Our revenues are wholly from town and state, principally from town tax. The low valuation of small towns makes it desirable to have a larger contribution from the state.

Minnesota. The taxation by districts is, in the highest degree, unequal and exceedingly burdensome to the smaller and weaker ones. In some, the tax is one

mill on the dollar, while in others it reaches twenty-nine or thirty. The districts that really need the best schools have the poorest, the school year is the shortest, and the poverty-stricken inhabitants actually pay the highest tax.

Wisconsin Report, 1893-94.-When taxation is made equal throughout the townships, the smaller districts will demand equal consideration with the larger ones in the selection of teachers and in the equipment of the schoolhouses.

Washington.-In my judgment, if the policy is to be continued of allowing the county commissioners to levy the school tax, they should be compelled to levy such a tax as will produce a specified amount for each child of school age in the county, and that amount should be such as, with the state apportionment, would provide for each district an ample fund to maintain a school for a reasonable length of time during the year.

Vermont.-If the town as a social unit provides the major part of the revenue for the public schools by an equal taxation, it should also disburse such revenue. It is a fallacy to think that equalization of taxes and the district system are compatible.

The spirit of our institutions is that of equality before the law. A system of schools which does not provide equal school facilities to all children within its limits is not an American system. To put this in different words: An American system of schools should seek to so equalize the burden of taxation that weak and impoverished districts with a low valuation should still be able to maintain a school equal in length of term and in its equipment to other schools of the same grade in that township or county.

Many excellent reasons can be advanced why the state should bear the entire burden of taxation necessary to the purpose of common school education. These reasons are, however, more than counterbalanced by the objection that it would remove the schools too far from the people, and would diminish the interest which they ought to have in providing means necessary to the rightful instruction of their children. It is the policy of our government to impress upon the people the fact that they are the government, and that everything which tends to strength and permanence comes from their united and intelligent action. While we believe that it is right that the state should provide a generous amount, either by a tax of a certain number of mills on each dollar of valuation or by a certain fixed sum in the aggregate, we also believe that local taxation is necessary to the healthful growth and prosperity of the schools. The question is, What would be the unit of taxation? Your committee are unanimous in the opinion that the system of district taxation in use in many states is both unjust and vicious. The argument is founded upon facts. Wherever there is a sparsely inhabited district, or one in which the valuation is low, the school interests suffer for want of sufficient support. Thus, in one district the children must put up with a cheap, incompetent teacher and six months' school, while across an imaginary line children have the advantages of a good

teacher and of nine months' schooling. This is not in accordance with the spirit of free schools. It is true that the same discrepancies may exist to a diminished extent between different townships, and hence there has arisen the thought that the county is probably the best unit of taxation. This question must be settled very largely by the civil organization of the state and by the character of its population. In the older states, where the population has some degree of permanency and where the township organization has a clearly defined relation to the state, probably the township furnishes the best unit. On the other hand, in the newer states, sparsely populated, or in states in which the population is largely transitory or engaged in occupations which do not encourage the owning of homes, the best unit is the county. If the point is raised, that it is unjust thus to tax the wealthier portions of a county or township to support schools from which they can derive no benefit, the only answer is, that we not only educate the child at the public expense for the child's sake but also for the sake of the civilization in which he is to live. The state as a state has an immediate interest in the future of every child who is to become a citizen. We reach these conclusions, then: That the unit should be the county or the township, and that the law should be mandatory, compelling the levying of an amount as a minimum, which, added to the revenue derived from the state, would furnish reasonable school facilities to every child living upon that territory. This, however, should not prevent any community from imposing additional taxes upon themselves, if facilities of a higher order are desired.

The ungraded schools need this protection. They are suffering from low wages, short terms, and incompetent teachers. The question of insufficient finances is at the foundation of the trouble. We have solved one equation of the problem when we have adopted the most equable and acceptable method of supplying funds.

DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUES.

A question of equal importance presents itself in the methods of distributing revenues. In most of the states the distribution is based upon the number of children of school age in the township or district. This offers the temptation to swell the number included in the school census to its utmost limit in order to obtain a larger share of money from the state funds. The injustice of it is more clearly seen in the fact that the number of residents between certain ages furnishes no criterion of the actual school necessities of the district. It is as far out of the way as it would be to base the distribution of school funds upon the assessed valuation of the territory in question or upon the number of the people of all ages.