institutions. This type of activity seemed to appeal particularly to those who visited this country during the eighties and nineties. These critics argue that wealthy men would not give their money to endow schools if they did not thoroughly believe in the value of education. That business men believe in the work of the schools is shown in the fact that they are anxious to get university and highschool men to take positions with them. The day of the self-made man is passing, and the college and university graduates are in great demand. The business man feels that the schools are giving a training which helps to prepare his employees for their work.

Such belief in education is not confined to those who are wealthy. It shows itself as a general tendency in the remarkable fact that local communities are glad to vote generous taxes for school support. More remarkable still is the fact that men who own property and have no children are, nevertheless, willing to pay taxes in order to educate the children of other people. To many of our critics the free school system, especially the free secondary schools and universities based upon local taxation imposed by the people upon themselves, seem nothing less than a marvel. They argue that such a practice can be explained only upon the basis of a profound belief of all the people in the value of education.2

Our visitors are also strongly impressed by the sacrifices which are made by both parents and pupils in order that the latter may remain in school. The idea of parents willingly denying themselves the luxuries of life in order to provide for the education of their children is to them an enigma. Still more strange to them is the fact that boys and even girls will and can "work their way" while in school. Part of their bewilderment is of course due to the fact that the caste system is largely missing in this country. This makes it possible for boys and girls to wait upon tables, wash windows, and perform the types of unskilled labor which is performed in Europe only by the servant class and still retain the respect and even the admiration of their fellow students. The foreigners can explain this only in terms of a popular belief in education and the general principle of equality. Such a thing is unheard of in Europe, and therefore it is argued that it must be due to principles and beliefs which are unique. The interest of the young in education is shown also by the tremendous increase of attendance at high schools of all kinds and in the marked growth in the number of such institutions. The large attendance at evening schools is also mentioned in this connection.

"It is doubtless true that many of our visitors have not realized the long struggle which was necessary in order to bring this condition about. The policy of free education, particularly on the secondary level, has met with strong opposition. But even so, the battle has been won, and in this respect America is in advance of the nations of Europe.

Evidence of the general belief in education is also found in the attitude of the teachers. They are generally enthusiastic and in

A lim

dustrious in everything which leads toward improvement. ited amount of the criticism deals with our teachers' associations.

part it is favorable.

Barneaud

([3], p. 21) says:

For the most The work in the association [N. E. A.] presents an interest more lively because membership in it is optional only and because its work is not at all possible in any other country.

Fitch ([31], p. 104) says:

The American National Educational Association is the British Association

raised to the third or fourth power.

The strong influence of the American teachers' organizations upon school procedure and upon the public sentiment is thought to be due to the unusual educational interest in education of both teachers and general public.

A further example of such an interest is said to be furnished by the amount and character of our educational literature.3

The attendance of American teachers at summer schools is also a source of wonder in this connection. They consider the American teacher to be thoroughly awake and alive to every means of selfimprovement. Our visitors also note with much approval the evidences of educational interest which are shown in many of our daily papers. The existence of educational departments in such papers is looked upon as indubitable evidence of the general interest in education on the part of the readers.

The American people are not only interested in education, but they are interested in the public schools. The critics are impressed by the frequency with which parents visit the schools, and by the number of parent-teachers' associations. Such is the view of the majority of the observers. But there is a minority which is inclined to take an opposite point of view.

The criticism of Langlois ([51], p. 128 and ff.) is interesting in this connection. While he recognizes the fact that Americans spend a great deal of money upon education, he doubts that this is firstclass evidence of their interest. He points out that while America has some splendid schoolhouses, she also has many, particularly in the rural districts

which are far from satisfying the most modest requirements. Wealthy men give great sums to endow and build school palaces, but the teachers are poorly paid. Consequently, there is a shortage of teachers and many of the finest buildings are badly overcrowded.

If the wealthy men were really interested in education, he thinks, they would spend their money where it is most needed.

See also Chap. III, p. 61.

Having denied that the great educational endowments are due to the interest of the donors in education he involves a theory of his own to explain their motive in the matter. He thinks that America, being a young nation, is passing through a stage of development which Europe passed through during the latter part of the Middle Ages. Then great amounts were given to endow the various religious and educational foundations, and the motive was to provide for the future welfare of the donor. So in America in a similar stage of development we find large gifts which serve to construct a monument to the donor so that his name will be known and remembered by future generations.

He sees a similar parallelism from also another point of view. The time when the educational foundations of the Middle Ages were being established was also the time of beggar students who begged and worked for their living; so to-day in America, in the most richly endowed universities, poor students are compelled to work their way. University pauperism (among students) is not so much a sign of popular enthusiasm for science as the mark of a defective and barbarous education. For a student to work his way may be an honor to him, but not to the system which forces him to do it. The universities should provide scholarships for all

such students (p. 137).

The inference seems to be that the wealthy would provide such scholarships if they were really interested in education. He concludes that the practice of endowing schools is due partly to a desire on the part of wealthy men to imitate the nobility of Europe, partly to personal vanity, and mostly to obscure social forces which come to the surface and become the symptoms of a certain stage of social growth through which each nation must pass. He thinks that a day will come when the practice of endowing schools and the presence of pauper students will be only memory in America.

Such a point of view is of interest, coming as it does from a man of such high standing at Langlois, but it is hardly fit evidence for the case in point. It is rather fanciful to compare American civiliSome endow

zation with that of medieval Europe in such a manner. ments may have been due partly to personal vanity, but it is very doubtful if any of them are due to a desire to imitate the nobility of Europe. But even with these admissions, there is nothing to show that our wealthy men have not been interested in education. of The presence poor students is not good evidence, because many of these students prefer to work their way, and it may even be best for them to do so. In order to prove the point it would also be necessary to show that the wealthy men are unwilling to help such students. Langlois has clearly failed to understand the spirit of America in this connection. America believes that all who are really worthy of a higher education will possess the initiative and

energy to get it in spite of financial handicaps. In recent times, however, the unequal distribution of wealth and the rise in the cost of living are developing a new side to the question. The United States must soon face the question as to whether as a nation it can afford to allow highly intelligent young people to work under such a handicap. There is a growing feeling that such a policy involves a dangerous waste in the country's most precious resources. The day is surely approaching when worthy students will be educated at public expense.

Several critics call attention to what seems to be a curious anomaly in connection with American interest in education. Grasby ([37],

*

*

It is odd, I think, that in the National City, grand in its proportions, with its marble edifices, its palatial and sumptuous offices, unsurpassed by those of any capital in the world, the just pride of over 60 millions of the freest people under the sun that the Bureau of Education is permitted to be the worst accommodated of any Government department.

*
*

**

In regard to our lack of a national university, he says:

To disregard the fervent wishes and wise admonitions of noble men, while employing sculptors' aid to perpetuate their memories, to march in triumphal procession and listen to fervid orations in honor of their doings on the Fourth of July, and for the remaining 364 days of the year pay no heed to their advice is so unlike the usual practical wisdom of the American people that such an exception is the more remarkable.

Here again there is a lack of understanding on the part of the critic. The real cause of the condition which Grasby points out is the fear of bureaucracy and of domination by central authority. The American people are interested in education, but not in centralized control.

The conclusion growing out of the combined criticisms seems to be that the American people have a very general and very unusual interest in education, but that it manifests itself unevenly and in a manner that is unwise, or at least inequitable. The reason for this lack of equity is not suggested. Possibly it may be explained by the fact that the American people are not yet fully conscious of their educational philosophy. They have strong beliefs, but these beliefs have not yet reached the stage of rationalization. Public sentiment is not yet fully awakened, particularly in the rural districts. Doubtless there are still remnants of the laissez faire policy in some places. On the whole, America believes in equality of educational opportunity, but many of our people do not yet understand the full implications of that term. Interest in education is often present, while the knowledge of what to do and how to do it is still lacking. There is a more or less blind impulse to do the right thing, but rational aims and conscious guiding principles are needed.

American educational procedure is still in the making. It has many imperfections, but it is free to grow and improve. With growth in centralized control and improved means of communication, injus

tice in educational affairs will gradually disappear.

Assuming the existence of a profound interest in education, what are the causes which lie back of it? Langlois ([51], p. 99) suggests

the following:

(1) A general realization that a people who govern themselves must be educated.

(2) The necessity of education in the assimilation of foreign people. (3) The idea that each person has the right to make the most of himself. (4) The effort to prevent the rise of a caste system.

Hausknecht ([42], p. 1) in this connection mentions, (5) “The unbounded possibilities which each individual in America possesses.' Barclay, in the Mosely Report ([66], p. 398) gives, (6) “The desire to insure adaptability."

Buisson ([10], p. 1) mentions, (7) "The influence of Protestant

All of these causes fit in well with the outlines of American philosophy as given earlier in this chapter. The doctrine of equality involves universal suffrage, which in turn necessitates a general education for all, if it is to be safe. While the doctrine of individual perfectibility calls for provisions that will enable each person to make the most out of his opportunities, the "tendency to seek the reason of things in one's self and for one's self alone," is the essence

of Protestantism.

These causes are typical of those given by other critics and they imply all that is mentioned in this connection. Ravenhill ([72], p. 407) prefers to state the first one in terms of general welfare, which agrees more closely with the doctrine of positivism. The same critic states the third cause in the more modern term of "self-realization." Schmidhofer ([82], p. 46) summarizes American interest in educa

tion by saying:

The conviction has developed that for the schools and the youth the best is just good enough, while in many localities of the Old World the idea prevails that for the schools the worst is too good.

As a natural result of the American interest and belief in education, several critics notice an unusual type of energy and enterprise. Rathbone, in the Mosely Report ([66], p. 256), says:

I was much struck with the energy, enterprise, boundless hopefulness, consciousness of power, resourcefulness, adaptability, and above all rapidity and decision of the people with which they endeavor to supply deficiencies and meet modern requirements.

60979°-21-2