teachers. If an institution does not feel itself large enough to affiliate with national professional' organizations, there is always abundant room for local professional clubs. Not only are there immediate benefits to students who participate in such work, but attitudes are developed that tend to lead the future teacher to an easier approach to participation in the activities of the national, regional, and State professional organizations that are so influential to-day in forwarding the whole cause of education.

111490°-30-VOL II-12

Chapter X.-Curricula and Courses

The basis of curricular construction lies in the necessary changes to be made in the knowledge, skills, habits, and attitudes of prospective teachers. The activities of teachers in the public schools are determined by the life needs of pupils under instruction. As elsewhere shown, under the discussion of objectives of teacher training, many practical considerations cause the institutions that train teachers to forego the arduous scientific work and immensely detailed study necessary to establish their teacher-training curricula on a fundamentally sound basis.

Much of the curricular material utilized at present is, of course, already established by usage and tradition. Changes result from a process of growth that is frequently all too slow, and are determined by many social and institutional forces. Foremost among these are the needs of public-school employers of teachers, pronouncements of influential educational bodies, State department of education certification requirements, requirements of State plans for federally supported vocational education, State legislation, the mental status and abilities of students, demand by students, and subject-matter interests of instructors. A few outstanding factors that have a practical bearing on teacher-training curricular revision and construction may be pointed out.

Combination Subjects Taught in the High Schools

High-school teachers are commonly called upon to teach two, three, and even four subjects. Their major field of specialization in college is often not the field of teaching in which they are placed in high school. A trainee majoring in economics or sociology may find no positions available in these subjects and may be forced to teach science or mathematics. Inflexible arrangements in some institutions, whereby the teacher specializes in one subject with one minor largely in the same field, should be modified to fit the teacher to meet conditions as they actually exist in the public schools. The high-school instructor frequently teaches two, or more commonly three, different subjects. He should learn one subject well, but both he and the schools will profit if he learns enough to teach at least one or two other subjects.

Particular attention should be given to serviceable combinations of courses, such as English and history, language or science, and mathematics. Intensive study by the institutions of the local needs of the territory they serve will be necessary before adequate guidance of or requirements for prospective teachers may be confidently undertaken or prescribed. In any case specific and intensive training must be given in the main fields of subject matter for which teachers are most in demand from year to year. Needless to say, only officials of the institutions who are thoroughly acquainted with public-school needs can contribute very much toward effective institutional organization of curricula so that complex public-school conditions may be met.

The public-school authorities, of course, must do their part toward solving this complex problem. Suitable subject combinations should be arranged for new teachers and care be taken to select teachers specifically trained for the vacancies to be filled. There is a growing tendency for State departments of education to issue certificates that are good only for teaching specific subjects or combinations of subjects.

Among the States leading in this movement are Connecticut, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Virginia. In a number of other progressive States the granting of "blanket" certificates covering the teaching of any and all high-school subjects will, judging from present tendencies, eventually be largely modified or abondoned. Land-grant institutions may well cooperate and lead in this movement.

In general, teachers of vocational subjects are more fortunately situated with respect to distribution of high-school work. The trainee in vocational agriculture and in industrial education is rather sure of high-school employment in his field of specialization, as is also, to a slightly less degree, the teacher of home economics. Even these teachers, however, are often called upon for work in one or more other subjects, such as science; and they are often called upon to do also administrative and extracurricular work, for all of which the teacher trainer must give preparation.

Majors and Minors in Education

In 21 institutions the subject of education is offered as a major; in 17 it is a minor, and in 6 a second minor. A number of institutions report that education is not considered either as a major or minor. This tendency appears to be in the right direction. The term "major" or "minor" is most commonly used to refer to a body of subject matter in which the prospective teacher has specialized most and which he expects to use as actual teaching material. Undergraduate courses in education afford no more than preparatory training in general education for prospective college teachers of this

subject. College teachers "major" in education to best advantage in graduate work only. The terms "major" or "minor" appear more applicable to strictly subject-matter fields, such as English or science, that are actually taught in the high schools.

Institutional Participation in the Formulation of State Certification

Requirements

During the course of field work in land-grant institutions an attitude of extreme dependence upon State department regulations concerning the certification of teachers was frequently noted in curricular construction. Complaint was sometimes made by officials that certain requirements, such as those in professional education, were too high. In few, if any, cases, however, was the suggestion made that the requirements be made even higher.

Many State departments are handicapped by lack of financial support and adequate personnel in exerting adequate professional leadership. Much of the progress in developing modern education has come from our better schools and colleges of education. These teachertraining units are in a position to conduct research, develop professional leadership, and otherwise forward professional education to an extent that can not always be attained by the State departments of education. State departments, for instance, have no experimental schools in which to try out their requirements and check on their validity and value. It is extremely doubtful if any teacher-training unit worthy of the name should depend wholly upon the State department or State board of education for its minimum standards of professional attainment in the training of teachers. Rather, such units should lead the way in professional advancement and become, to the State departments, earnest collaborators and in many cases genuine leaders in setting standards of training. State department officials are in a position to know the needs of the public schools, and their requirements are worthy of thorough and whole-hearted trial. If mistakes are made, the officials of the institutions should be at all times in a position to assist in remedying such mistakes by virtue of superior professional leadership, intensive research, and thorough knowledge of publicschool needs. It is for such services, among others, that the State maintains its institutions of higher learning.

It is encouraging that 30 institutions report that they have in some measure been of assistance to the State departments in setting standards of training. The nature of the reports, however, leaves no doubt that possibilities in this respect are just beginning to be realized.

It is not assumed that the land-grant institutions can take over the function of the State in the certification of teachers; but it is believed that the higher State-supported institutions, that presumably are the keystones of the State's educational program, and that have been provided at large expense by the State with excellent provisions for research, study, and instruction, should contribute by a larger degree of professional cooperation in deciding upon the best practices possible to discover and realize in the public schools of the State. The problems involved in the certification of teachers afford some highly advantageous points of departure as opportunities for such services.

Special Requirements Made of Students in Teacher-Training Curricula

Of 44 institutions, 29 report that special qualifications are required, in one or more teacher-training units, of trainees as distinguished from other students; 15 institutions report no special requirements. Twenty-four institutions report farm experience required of students in agricultural education only; six institutions report special scholarship requirements. The amount of farm experience required ranges from one to four years, with two years as the typical requirement. Trade experience is reported as a definite requirement in three industrial education units, and homemaking or vocational experience in six home economics education units. Such experience, of course, is desired in most institutions.

Satisfactory personality and related traits, in so far as they may be determined, are required by four institutions, chiefly by the home economics education unit. Other requirements, reported once each, include satisfactory intelligence as determined by standard tests, motor ability (industrial education unit), and vocational experience. When the total number of trainees in all units is considered, by far the larger number meet no special requirements not met by the average student in fields other than teacher training.

Changes Contemplated in the Extent of Offerings in Teacher Training

Thirty-four institutions report definite plans to modify the extent of their offerings in teacher training in the near future. Twelve institutions make no report and express themselves as uncertain concerning future plans. A lack of definite knowledge concerning the exact needs of the State for trained teachers is responsible for much of the uncertainty existing. The amount of financial support which may be received in the future, changes which may come about as a result of future studies of the needs of public-school education, and perhaps a certain amount of inertia in thinking on the part of a few teacher-training officials make reasonably exact planning difficult in some institutions.

Of 137 teacher-training units in land-grant institutions reporting, 47 definitely plan increases in existing subject-matter offerings, usually in the form of