It has been the aim of the preceding chapters of this volume to make it clear that the teacher of the future must be able to cope in a large and intelligent way with problems which are not discussed in courses dealing with the subject-matter ordinarily taught in schools. The compensations offered to the trained teacher are fortunately more adequate than formerly, and increasingly justify the demand that the teacher bring to his or her task a more complete professional training.
The proper content of a professional training is a matter on which there is no general agreement in the United States. For a little more than seventy-five years there have existed in this country normal schools for the training of elementary-school teachers. These institutions have in some cases required graduation from high school as a prerequisite for admission, but more commonly not. Their courses of study have in some schools consisted chiefly of reviews of elementary-school subjects supplemented by a modicum of methodology or discussion of how to teach the subjects. In other cases the courses of the normal school have been general, of the type commonly offered in colleges or high schools. Sometimes the normal school has given its students large opportunity to teach children in so-called practice schools or model schools. Sometimes, on the other hand, the students in normal schools have had no direct contact with classroom management, but have gone out into the schools equipped only with the theory of teaching.
The situation with regard to these institutions is set forth in the following paragraphs from a bulletin of the United States Bureau of Education:
Normal schools differ from each other very widely in organization, in admission requirements, in courses of study, and in modes of instruction. The explanation of this lack of uniformity is to be found in the fact that normal schools have never been a part of the system of higher education evolved in this country. Normal schools have grown up in isolation. While the colleges have been in the closest touch with each other through the organization of entrance examination boards and accrediting institutions, while high schools have been brought together by standard definitions of units, normal schools have stood apart. The typical normal school derives its financial support from legislative appropriations, receives its students without competition from a territory over which it exercises exclusive control, and has no difficulty in placing its graduates in positions which they regard as satisfactory. Furthermore, so urgent has been the demand in the country for teachers that school boards and superintendents have not been able to make rigid selections, with the result that standards of training have not been forced upon the normal schools from without.
In a situation where relative isolation has not compelled normal schools to define themselves to others there has been the largest opportunity for the play of personal influences. A strong president has often dominated the policies of a normal school to a degree that is almost unbelievable. The faculty sometimes has little or no voice in determining the courses or the modes of admission. There is no State authority in most of the States which is strong enough to determine what shall be done in normal schools. The result is that within a single State there are the widest variations. One president with the ambition to develop his institution into a degree-granting university goes on his way, while his neighbor uses the funds granted by the same legislature to develop a normal school which loudly announces its objection to granting degrees and limits its activities rigidly to the training of elementary teachers.
In recent years a number of causes have begun to break down the isolation of the normal school. First and foremost is the desire of normal graduates to enjoy the advantages of higher education in universities and colleges. The growth of summer schools at universities and the frequent transfer of normal-school graduates to college and graduate courses show with clearness the desire of teachers to enjoy the advantages of all kinds of higher education. Normal schools, drawn into the current of higher education, have been called upon to announce more definitely their requirements for admission and to describe the content of their courses. What is a course in methods of teaching arithmetic? Is it a review of the course given in an elementary school or is it a discussion of the pedagogical principles on which such courses are arranged? What is a course in practice teaching? Does such a course require of the student any study of material, and does it afford him any adequate critical discussion of his work? There has been a sharp and at times unfriendly clash between normal schools and colleges in the effort to secure answers to such questions. The normal school often takes the position that it administers only high-grade courses, while the colleges express a frank doubt as to the value of these courses for mature students.
Perhaps the disagreement between normal schools and colleges can best be illustrated by the widespread dispute regarding foreign languages. The normal school has been historically related to the vernacular school, and its officers have had little patience with classical or even literary courses. The traditions of the college are of a totally different type. So long as no students passed from normal schools to colleges the normal schools were at liberty to hold to the vernacular, but as soon as normal-school graduates sought admission to higher institutions the controversy was on.
A second reason why normal schools have been called upon to define themselves arises because colleges and universities have in recent years entered the field of teacher training through the organization of departments of education and colleges of education. In the State universities the demand for preparation of high-school teachers has been heard, and generous provisions have in many cases been made for the work of preparing such teachers. The normal schools have looked upon this organization of teacher-training courses as undesired competition. Conversely, the university authorities have been critical of the courses in the normal schools, and the issue has been sharply drawn. Incidentally it may be remarked that college departments of education have usually been subjected to the closest scrutiny and sometimes to violent criticism by other college departments because of their supposed inferiority. It may even be admitted that entrance requirements in the departments of education have sometimes been lower than those for other college departments in the hope of meeting the competition of normal schools, and courses of inferior standard in the college have been tolerated for like reason. All of these disputes and efforts at adjustment have aroused a general inquiry about teacher-training courses which a generation ago would have been without interest except to a small group of specialists. Now the problem is known to all who are interested in education, and the discussion must go on until some satisfactory conclusion is reached.93
If the situation with regard to the training of elementary-school teachers is chaotic, the situation with regard to secondary-school teachers is more so. Until very recently there was little or no effort in the state laws defining requirements for teachers’ certificates to distinguish between elementary teachers and teachers in high schools. The candidate for a position in Latin found himself taking the same examination that would have been required if he had been about to teach a third grade. Of course in practice the school officers who employed the Latin teacher took steps to assure themselves that he had studied that subject, but practice in this respect has never been standardized.
By way of setting up a contrast we may review the system which prevailed in Germany before 1914. The German system was the most highly developed system of training secondary-school teachers in the world.
Candidates for positions in the secondary schools must first of all have completed the course of one of the secondary schools. In the second place, the candidate must have attended a German university for at least six semesters. Here an exception is made in the case of those candidates who expect to teach in the sciences. They may take half of the university courses in one of the technical institutions rather than in university lectures.
After this preliminary training is completed, the candidate presents himself for an examination. Usually the period of training is much longer than the minimum above described. Indeed, in most cases candidates take the university doctor’s degree before they come up for the examination. The examination consists of two parts. First, there is a general examination covering those subjects which are supposed to be essential as training for all departments; and, second, there is a special examination given in the particular subject in which the candidate is preparing to teach. Both examinations include written and oral divisions....
The examinations are formidable ordeals. They are conducted by special commissioners. On these commissions are university professors, officers of the education department, and representatives of the secondary schools. The candidate is first required to present two elaborate theses, one on some phase of the general subjects and one in the subject in which he has elected to take a complete examination. At the discretion of the commission the candidate’s doctor’s dissertation may be substituted for one of these theses. A period of 16 weeks is allowed for their preparation, and they are intended to show the ability of the candidate to carry on independent research in his selected field, and his ability to formulate material in a clear and systematic fashion. After the presentation of these theses there follows a written examination, followed in turn by an oral examination.
After the examination the successful candidate now has before him two years of contact with the schoolroom before he can become a teacher with a regular position. The first of these trial years is known as the Seminar year and the second as the Trial year. During both of these periods the candidate is connected with one of the secondary schools and is under the general direction of the principal or director of this school....
After a candidate has been assigned to a particular school, it becomes his duty, first of all, to participate in the activities of that school in any way that he can. He is usually assigned to some teacher, whose reports he helps to prepare and whose classes he has to visit with regularity. In addition, he is expected to visit all of the classes in the institution, so as to observe different methods of instruction and class management. It is required that the candidate meet with the director two hours a week for special training. At this point in particular the greatest diversity of practice appears....
Sometimes the meeting is conducted as a demonstration lesson; sometimes it is a discussion; sometimes it is a series of reports by candidates; sometimes a lecture by the director or one of the teachers of the school....
After the candidates have gone through a part of the first year’s training and have become somewhat familiar with the methods of instruction in the classes which they visit and through the advice which they receive in the weekly meetings, they are allowed to give instruction. At first this instruction is limited to single class exercises under the immediate supervision of the regular teacher. The candidate is expected to prepare fully for such an exercise, so that he may carry on the work of the students in accordance with the general plan adopted by the regular teacher. The regular teacher remains in the class during the instruction given by the candidate, and after the class has been dismissed the teacher gives the candidate the benefit of such criticism as he has to make. Opportunity for these criticisms is presented by the school program, which is uniformly so arranged that 45 minutes of class work are followed by 15 minutes of recess. The criticisms are in some cases very helpful, especially where the teacher is interested in developing better methods of instruction upon the part of the candidate. On the other hand, the criticisms are often very severe and sometimes even caustic. In any case, the candidate learns through the comments given him by the teacher how far he has failed to conform to the expectation of the school....
Several weeks before the close of the seminar year each candidate is called upon to prepare a thesis on some concrete pedagogical or didactic problem set for him by the director. This thesis constitutes part of his preparation for the teaching profession and may be the outcome of his readings or the outcome of his observation. Not uncommonly the candidate makes an elaborate study of some of the pedagogical literature related to his subject. It is to be remembered that many of these candidates have already completed the work for the degree of doctor of philosophy in the university and are for that reason trained in the methods of research and in the preparation of theses, while all have prepared elaborate theses in connection with the examinations which admitted them to the seminar year.
At the end of the seminar year the director, with the coöperation of the other teachers who have observed the work of the candidate, makes a report to the school authorities, and if the work of the candidate has been satisfactory he is now advanced to a higher grade and enters upon the trial year.
During the trial year he is required to teach six to eight hours a week without compensation. If he is especially fortunate, he may receive some compensation for substitute teaching which is needed by the school. In the main, however, he is called upon to carry a heavy burden of work without any compensation from the school. The director may also use his services for other purposes, such as the preparation of reports, the checking of lists, and other duties which need to be attended to for the purpose of administering the school. During this trial year the regular teacher is not required to attend the classes conducted by candidates. The candidate, therefore, gradually acquires independence in his conduct of the classes.
At the end of this trial year another report is made of the activities of the candidate and the judgment of the teachers in the school with respect to his success. If this report is favorable the candidate is now put on the eligible list and may be appointed to a permanent position. The length of time which it is necessary for him to wait for this permanent appointment is determined wholly by the needs of the schools. If there are no vacancies, the candidate may wait a relatively long period of time, in some cases as long as four or five years. On the other hand, for some years past it has been possible in most cities for candidates to receive appointment almost immediately on completion of the trial year.94
The example of Germany is instructive as showing something of the amount of professional training which may be deemed necessary properly to qualify a teacher of secondary schools. It is not at all likely that the particular method adopted will be followed in the United States. Indeed, there is a rapidly developing movement in American colleges and universities to provide training for such teachers. The state universities especially have developed in recent years series of courses, both in subject-matter and in professional lines, designed to train secondary-school teachers. These, like the normal-school courses described above, are very little standardized, but are promising as a nucleus for the final organizations which will solve the problem.
The following paragraph indicates the existing conditions:
The significant fact is that 21 of 24 universities report teachers’ courses. This means that in some way the academic departments are professionally coöperating with schools or departments of education in furnishing to intending teachers the special methods and peculiar technique, as well as more fundamental educational principles and distinctive values of the actual subjects the students will teach when they take positions in the schools. The proper coördination of the university forces contributing to teaching efficiency is the curriculum problem for the immediate future in university administration. At present the solutions are about as numerous as the institutions concerned.95
The standardization of the requirements will require legislation or the action of central standardizing associations. This movement is now under way. The North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools sets as its standards for approval of high schools the following:
All teachers teaching one or more academic subjects must satisfy the following standards:
A. The minimum attainment of teachers of academic subjects shall be equivalent to graduation from a college belonging to the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools requiring the completion of a four-year course of study or 120 semester hours in advance of a standard four-year high school course. Such requirement shall not be construed as retroactive.
B. The minimum professional training of teachers of academic subjects shall be at least eleven semester hours in education. This should include special study of the subject matter and pedagogy of the subject to be taught. Such requirements shall not be construed as retroactive. (For the succeeding year the Board will interpret courses in education as the same courses are interpreted by the colleges or universities offering them.)
C. If a teacher, new to a given high school, does not fully meet the requirement of the above standards but, in the opinion of the inspector, possesses the equivalent of the training prescribed, the inspector shall submit, to the Board of Inspectors, a statement concerning the training, experience, and teaching efficiency of the said teacher, together with his recommendation. The Board shall, on each case presented, make a decision.96
The qualifications required by the State Board of Education in California are the highest required in any state. They are as follows:
REQUIREMENTS
High school certificates may be issued by county and city and county boards of education under the provisions of section 1519, subdivision 5 (a); section 1775, subdivision 1 (a), and section 1792 of the Political Code of California, to candidates who meet all of the following requirements, to wit:
(1) Requirement of Bachelor’s degree. Each candidate shall have received a Bachelor’s degree from a standard college requiring not less than eight years of high school and college training.
(2) Requirement of one year of graduate study. Each candidate shall submit evidence that in addition to the academic and professional courses required for the Bachelor’s degree, he has completed at least one year of graduate study, doing full regular work, though not necessarily a candidate for a degree, in an approved graduate school as hereinafter defined. Such graduate study shall include at least one full year course of advanced or graduate work in at least one of the subjects in which candidate expects to be recommended for certification.
(3) Requirement of fifteen units of work in education. Each candidate shall also submit evidence that he has completed in undergraduate or graduate standing, or the two combined, not less than fifteen units (semester hours) of work, in courses listed in the department of education in the institution in which the graduate work is completed, or courses in other departments of that or other institutions accepted as preparation for teaching by the department of education. These fifteen units of work shall include the several courses in education hereinafter prescribed.
Required work in education. The required fifteen units of work in the department of education shall include the following courses:
(a) A course in school and classroom management, or equivalent work—a minimum of one unit.
(b) Work in actual practice of teaching, with conferences—a minimum of four units.
(c) A teacher’s course in at least one subject in which the candidate expects to be recommended for certification, if such course be given in the institution and be accepted by or listed under the work in education—a maximum of three units for all such courses.
(d) A course in secondary education, presenting particularly the purpose and attainable goals of high school work—a minimum of two units.
(e) Such other courses relating to the theory, function and administration of public education, as are needed to complete the required fifteen units.
Practice teaching. The work in practice teaching shall be done under the general supervision of the department of education of the institution in which the year of graduate work is taken, and may be done in schools of elementary, intermediate or secondary grade, though preferably in secondary school work of the kind the candidate is preparing to teach, and under the direction of competent instructors in such work. The work in practice teaching may also be done in connection with the training school of any California state normal school.
Teachers’ courses. Each teacher’s course shall be a bona fide teacher’s course and shall be made as concrete and practicable as possible, and shall have for its purpose the preparation of teachers to give intelligent instruction in the subject in the high schools of this State.97
The requirements which have been discussed up to this point have to do with admission to the teaching profession. Beyond that point there is nothing that can be described as sufficiently common to be regarded as typical. There are voluntary and compulsory gatherings of every kind and variety intended to keep teachers intellectually alert and to inform them of progress in educational matters. There are institutes, so called, where teachers hear lectures. There are extension lectures, provided sometimes by boards of education, sometimes by teachers’ associations. There are meetings of teachers called by the superintendent or by the supervisor of a special subject or of a special grade.
The miscellaneous activities which are indicated by such a list as the above all recognize the necessity of continued study on the part of teachers in service, and many boards of education are requiring study in addition to success in teaching as an essential prerequisite to promotion or to increases in salary.
The most significant movement which has ever been witnessed in the training of teachers in service is the summer-school movement. All the leading institutions of learning in the country are filled during the long summer vacation with teachers who are pursuing courses in education or in the various subjects which they teach.
Two phases of continuation study on the part of teachers deserve special discussion. First, the form of promotion which carries a teacher into school administration, that is, into a principalship or superintendency, is being hedged about with very definite demands for advanced study on the part of candidates. This advanced study must take the form of readings or courses on administrative problems. Such problems have been exemplified in earlier chapters which have dealt with costs, promotions, and the like. It can be safely asserted that the time is not far distant when a special preparation will be required for entrance on administrative positions.
Second, the study of school problems by teachers in service has contributed powerfully to the creation of bodies of organized knowledge bearing directly on school matters. When education courses were designed chiefly for candidates for teaching positions, these courses survived even if they had no close relation to school work. To-day the situation is entirely different in character. Teachers in service come to the study of education with urgent problems to be solved. The abstract statements of the older courses will not satisfy such students. The impulses toward the development of scientific information about schools which arise out of a demand for efficiency and economy are powerfully reënforced by the demand within the teaching profession itself for definite and constructive studies of school problems.
EXERCISES AND READINGS
The training of teachers is so closely related to state legislation that this chapter suggests the possibility of introducing the student to the methods of looking up state laws. How does one go about finding school laws? Why is education a matter of state legislation rather than a matter of national legislation? What are some of the striking differences between the educational laws of different states?
Second, since the economic conditions which control teachers’ salaries are of importance in determining how much training teachers shall be required to secure, the question of salaries is an important one. This matter may be looked up in the two bulletins referred to below.
Coffman, L. D. Social Composition of the Teaching Population. Teachers College Publications, 1911.
The Tangible Rewards of Teaching. Bulletin No. 16, United States Bureau of Education, 1914.
A Comparative Study of the Salaries of Teachers and School Officers. Bulletin No. 31, United States Bureau of Education, 1915.