steadily raises the standard of living and develops a new market. It has been said that the obstacles to progress are in men and not outside of them. With equal or greater truth it may be said that the cause of progress is in men and not outside of them. Because education reaches the man first and awakens to a new world of power and possibility it becomes the source of all progress. The awakened man means a new world-a new market, and new conditions of life. Education is thus steadily bringing man to his own. Thru increasing intelligence, a better interpretation of the universe, a better knowledge of its laws and forces, a better control of his own powers, man is steadily achieving mastery and dominion and realizing his own freedom. The economic importance of this freedom realized in men merits an attention and appreciation to which the future will give more adequate recognition and expression.

One other feature may be mentioned-the relation of education to industry. We have revised our conclusions on this point. The time was when many believed education would relieve from work. The truth is now recognized that education leads into work. It is no mere coincidence that the educated people of the world are the busiest people. The most active people of the globe today are found in the governments where education has a free opportunity. Education if true leads to service-a service that shall not end in any private ambition, but in a genuine contribution to public efficiency. Education not only fits for service by developing power, skill, and efficiency, but by presenting the ideals that lead men on to duty and achievement. An educated idler is absurd if not unthinkable. Men are coming to distinguish between "working for a living," and "working as a calling," and living as the crowning glory of service. Education makes a man larger than his greatest deed, puts into him the ideals that lead to the glory of achievement. The atmosphere of every schoolroom is charged with the currents of industry; every scholar lives in a world of action. The idleness, indifference, and the vices that go with ignorance are cast out by education as so many devils, and the individual redeemed to industry, thrift, service, and character. This attitude of the educated man is of profound significance in determining the character of the world in which men may live. Educated men will not contemplate with satisfaction a world of idleness, indifference, or stagnation. The best families where education and wealth have flourished for generations manifest this high spirit and refuse to consider the possession of wealth a call to idleness, but regard the possession of talent as a call to service. This is the legitimate. outcome and may be accepted as the first fruits of the better harvest to which education is bringing us.

In summing up the economic relations of education we return to the teacher. He is the masterful personality in the presence of all these forces, who organizes, directs, and stimulates the uprising generation to achievement, mastery, and freedom. So the teacher, whether he be teacher of religion or of education, of philosophy or of science, of agriculture or of mechanic arts, of manual training or of domestic science, of language or of morals—in any or

all of these places the teacher is, indeed, the master who trains the men who make markets, commerce, and even civilization a possibility. What we do for education is not then a burden; it is rather an opportunity. The money we give is neither charity nor the payment of a debt; it is an investment to guarantee the perpetuity of man and of markets, of history and of literature, of our own achievements already made and of those of our children yet to be made; in a word, the money invested in education is an expression of both faith and desire that a progressive civilization shall not perish from the face of the earth.

DISCUSSION

T. A. MOTT, Superintendent of schools, Richmond, Ind.-The lateness of the hour, Mr. President, prevents an adequate discussion of this excellent paper. No one has dealt with the relation of education to wealth in a more masterly way.

Real education is, and must be, the foundation of civilization. Civilization, man's spiritual environment, is made up of man's art, his science, his literature, and his religious beliefs, together with his institutional life. Into one of these divisions we can put each of the results of human aspiration and human achievement. The education of any normal child destined to life in a free society must include a knowledge of, and a development in, each of these elements of social activity, as well as an insight into them all and a sympathy with them all.

Life in its fullness means much. It means youth and old age. It means one day and all days. It means the windows of the soul shall have been opened to the beautiful, the true, and the strong. It means that the body, mind, and heart shall be manly and strong.

Education is a unitary process. We cannot think of the end of the school being either art, literature, science, or religion. Neither can we think of the end being parenthood, economics, industrialism, or trade. But we must look on man in the full roundness of character, in all the beauty of body, of intellect, of heart and will, beneficent and strong as a worker, as the ideal product of the American common school. However, in this discussion we are dealing with the school as affecting economic conditions. These conditions include questions relating to capital and labor, production and distribution, supply and demand. In the military world it is recognized that the training of the man behind the gun, or the mind behind the gun, is the most effective element in military organization. The army of educated soldiers is the most powerful military force the world has known. The education of the mind and hand that guides the plow or directs the plane, the education of those who work in the mill, in the factory, or in the mine, determines to a large extent the amount and character of the output of these institutions.

For hundreds of years uneducated men have passed by unnoticed vast veins of precious metals and valuable ores hidden but slightly in the earth, while the educated man of today is opening mines in every part of the world whose products are to bless and enrich civilization. It is clearly recognized that the output of mineral wealth depends ultimately upon the man trained in mineralogy and engineering.

In agriculture the influence of the educated worker is no less apparent. The product of the field and garden can be increased many fold by the educated farmer. The millions of acres supposed to be worn-out lands in New England and Atlantic states are today lying idle because of the lack of knowledge on the part of the agriculture workers in those states. Millions of acres of supposed arid and desert lands between the Mississippi and the Pacific are today being developed into rich and valuable farms by the hand of skilled and intelligent labor.

The agricultural colleges thruout America are increasing the product of the land coming under their immediate influence to an extent that seems a little less than a miracle. The growth in production of the American farm and garden resulting from the work of the agricultural colleges will annually pay a hundred fold the cost of such education.

In every field of human activity, we will find it true that the education of the worker will largely increase the production of material in both quality and amount.

Again, as has been fully shown in the paper to which we have just listened, the demand for the best products coming from the hand of skilled labor is greatly increased by the education of the people, and the markets of a cultivated community tend always to be steady, and demands to be strong.

A few thousand dollars spent each year in any city in art education will result in an increased demand for those necessities of life which are beautiful and of a high grade. Technical education in domestic science, in any city, will result quickly in a demand by the homes coming under the influence of the school for better food-stuffs and a higher quality of the necessities of life.

This line of thought can be followed out into all the departments of modern life. The learning most needed by the community to develop its highest needs must find its basis in the courses of study of the common school. Childhood is always the gateway of the race, and the doorway of civilization. Those forces in civilized life desired by the state must find their foundations in the school. The highest element of national prosperity and growth as well as of life and character must always find their beginning in the common schools of the people.

THE BASIS OF GRADING TEACHERS' SALARIES

EDWIN G. COOLEY, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, CHICAGO, ILL. My topic is likely to be an unpopular one. It is associated in the minds of some with low salaries and increased demands upon the teacher. There is no such association in my mind. On the contrary, I believe the profession and the schools are suffering, financially and otherwise, from the competition of the incompetent teacher.

Everyone who has thought about the salary question, recognizes that the competent teacher is underpaid, whether we consider the value of her services to the community, or whether we compare the demands made upon her with those made upon other members of society. The teacher has not fairly shared in the prosperity which has seemed to overwhelm the country. She has been compelled to pay 20 per cent. more for what she buys, while receiving perhaps a 10 per cent. advance in salary. In some large and flourishing communities, it cannot be said that her salary has really advanced at all during the last ten years.

No relief-complete relief-can come to her without increased revenues. It is unwise, as well as unfair, to dispute or ignore this. We can, however, ask the question as to whether it is not possible so to distribute the sum available for teachers as to reward the faithful and efficient, as well as to arouse or drive out the incompetent. Their competition degrades and demoralizes the profession.

There is some confusion in the minds of civilized men today as to what is the proper basis on which to estimate the remuneration granted for services

rendered. There have been attempts made to justify the giving of an equal share to each man, regardless of the value of the services rendered. This method has little to recommend it except its simplicity. Sometimes it has been proposed to reward each man according to his wants, altho no one has ever been able to describe a common measure which we might safely use in comparing the wants of different members of society. Sometimes it has been proposed to reward each man according to his labor. This requires some common measure by means of which we may estimate and compare the exertions made by the workers, but universal commensurability of exertion is only a dream of the communist. If we follow the suggestions of some economic writers and use time spent in labor as our common measure, we fall into absurdities. It is difficult to estimate exertion, pleasure, or pain by the clock. "The Procrustean bed of time would distend and mutilate labor, and all liberty and equality would breathe its last upon it." Under a scheme of this sort, idleness would grow apace and productively disappear. If twice the reward were given for taking double the time for doing a piece of work the main motive for efficiency would die. Mankind seems on the whole compelled to act on the principle of distribution that each member of society shall be remunerated in proportion to the value of his services.

It seems fair to consider the question of teachers' salaries and promotion from the standpoint of services rendered the community, from the standpoint of the efficiency of the teacher. If the schools are to be carried on in the interest of the rising generation, if the welfare of the children in them is the fundamental consideration, we must be governed in fixing teachers' salaries by estimates of the value of the services rendered by them. Any consideration is invalid, except in so far as it affects efficiency. An increase of salary, based upon the length of service only, can be defended successfully, so far as it can be shown that length of service conduces to greater efficiency in the work of the schoolroom. Differences of salary, based on sex, can be defended only by showing that sex is a factor that of itself makes a man or woman more or less efficient as a teacher. Increases of salary, based upon zeal, scholarship, and student-like habits, must alike be tested by this criterion of efficiency.

It is believed that a teacher in a good school will increase in efficiency for four or five years even if she relies on her schoolroom experience for information and inspiration, but it is doubtful whether this increase will continue over a longer period unless the teacher is induced in some manner to study and prepare herself for better work. Unless she does this, the chances are that before the end of the decade a decline in efficiency will set in which will proceed steadily as the years go by. A schedule of salaries, then, may include a lower group making provision for yearly advances covering a period of four or five years. At the end of this time, if the teacher does not give evidences of continuous increase in efficiency, in professional zeal, and in student-like habits, she should be stopped. No teacher should be allowed to advance in salary after she ceases to advance in efficiency.

The efficiency of the teacher, as shown in her daily schoolroom work, is the first consideration to be taken into account. The second element, her intellectual and professional growth, as shown by her outside study and interest in her profession, is subsidiary to her schoolroom efficiency. They are, however, so closely related to each other that it is proper to consider both in estimating the fairness of the demands of the teacher for promotion. If she cannot and will not meet these demands, there is no valid reason, considering the question from the standpoint of the interests of the children, for promoting her and paying her a better salary. Teachers should not be encouraged to get into our school systems and then let the clock work.

Scholarship and habits of study are factors that must be considered in estimating the efficiency of a teacher. No teacher who is not a student can long remain really efficient. If a teacher wishes to impart a piece of knowledge she must, as Fitch says, not only have appropriated it herself, but she must have gone beyond it and around it. She must see it in relation to other facts and truths. She must know from what it originated and to what it is intended to lead. She must have an ample margin in reserve for dealing with unexpected questions and unexpected difficulties. The teacher must study educational processes and educational philosophy and methods; her study cannot cease with her preparation for entering her profession, but must be life-long. She must not lose her sympathy with the learner-a sympathy that she can retain only by continuing to be a learner herself. It is only in this way that she can avoid the depressing effect of constant association with immature minds and ideas. It is true that many good students of books are poor teachers and something more is required of a teacher than ability to absorb book knowledge. Still, the chances are extremely large that one who is a student and who has learned to use her mind in a systematic way will be a better guide for other students than the mere empiric.

It is, however, very important to estimate the relative value of schoolroom efficiency and advance in scholarship and professional zeal in such a way that they may not counteract each other. The teacher should not become so interested in academic study that she will forget her main business, which is the work of the schoolroom. The teacher may use up too much energy in carrying on outside study to the detriment of health, as well as schoolroom work. We must, therefore, in presenting any scheme for promotion, be careful not to emphasize mere academic scholarship too much.

In making up an estimate of a teacher's fitness for promotion, schoolroom efficiency should count for more than her academic study. We must arrange to put a constant premium on keeping up the work of the schoolroom for which the teacher is employed. Experience has shown that this is no imaginary difficulty. At the same time, we ought to offer some inducement to keep the teacher from mistaking purely mechanical efficiency in handling a schoolroom, mere control of pedagogic devices, for real pedagogical power and