Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

school does not give as good an education as the young people could get in the city. There are two things about it that I insist upon. In the first place, oftentimes the country school does give as good an education. Oftentimes we mix up the essential and the superficial. We look at the building, or the apparatus, or the course of study, and we say: No; there is no comparison there, and and there never can be. Probably there cannot be; in material equipment the city school will always be ahead. But the real test comes, after all, in the teaching, and the real question that we have here is whether we can have, and whether we can keep, in the teaching profession in these country schools, teachers whose personalities are such that they actually do lead these boys and girls, inspire these boys and girls, direct and stimulate these boys and girls of the countryside, so that they really get as good an education in all essential features as if they lived in the city. I know that is going to be a difficult thing. The other point is this, that unless in the long run the education given in the country schools is, to all intents and purposes, really as good an education as is given in the city schools, then there is something wrong. We cannot hope to develop a rural civilization that will meet the tests of American life in the 20th century unless, to a reasonable degree, at least, the essential aspects of a good education can be maintained for the country boy or girl. That is the first test. It is a rigid test. It is a difficult test, but it must be met. There are many ways of meeting it, and those, of course, I cannot give to you.

The second test is this: Does this country school help (I used that word "help" advisedly-do not leave that out) to keep those boys and girls in the country who really belong there? I do not say that we should keep all the boys and girls in the country who were brought up there. I would not have it that way if I could. I would not for the world deprive the cities of this stream of fresh life coming in from the country. That would be the worst thing that could happen to our American civilization, to have a school system or any other system that would keep all the country young people in the country. Also note that I do not ask the country school to keep the boys and girls there. I simply ask that the

school help to keep those boys and girls in the country who belong there. What do I mean by the boys and girls who should remain in the country? Those who are rural-minded, who like the country. I mean those who would really prefer to be there, but who do not stay because they do not get the right kind of an education. They are brought up to think there is nothing in the country for them. They get the notion that there is no chance for personal development and growth and enrichment in mind and spirit if they stay in the country. It is one of the tasks of the rural schools to show that those things are not so, that there are opportunities; that there is culture in the corn lot, that there is a chance to grow, that there is a chance for service and a reasonable financial reward, that, deeper than all these things and including them all there is the opportunity to live as human beings and to attain the full measure of the stature of man and woman. I believe it is absolutely true that conditions can be made such that human life can be developed in the country just as well as in the city and, for those that like the country, oftentimes far better than in the city. Now, I should want to see this country school help these people who are essentially rural-minded to find themselves in the country -help them to get possession of and develop those powers and capacities and get possession of those ideas and ideals that will give them a chance in the country.

Then, again, does the country school use the rural environment as organized material for education? Now, I appreciate the fact that the idea of using the environment of the child as a means of education can be carried altogether too far, although I think that if the word "environment" is given a sufficiently wide meaning there is no trouble, because, after all, the great thing that we want to do is to make men and women sensitive to their environment, appreciative of their environment, and make that as wide as the world and as broad as the universe. I take it that it is one of the ends of our education to make people understand the universality of matter, mind, and spirit that is around them. Just think of the great wealth of material that the country offers. Think of the soil as, not an insert, dead thing, but a thing of life, telling in

itself the story of the whole process of creation. Then we have the plant and its adaption to soil and climate, and the animal, particularly as it has been used by man, and how plants and animals have been developed by man for man's good. That gets us into the right sort of science. Although I do not like to put it quite that way, either, because I should want to see this material used not in too formal a way, not organized too well, as if it were chopped off in blocks, but handled so it will be recognized as vital.

This brings us to the farming industry itself, which leads us into the whole problem of industry. Farming, or agriculture, is the largest industry, or business, in America. Indeed it is the biggest business in the world. There are more people engaged in agriculture than in all other occupations combined, the world around. It is a primary industry. Men are completely dependent upon agriculture not only for their food, but for the raw materials of other industries. The problems that arise in agriculture can be utilized to bring the youth to an understanding of the problems of all human industry.

Thus country life in all its aspects can be utilized more easily than city life, because it is more easily understood; it is not so complex. It has absolutely all the human values and problems, and they are easily gotten out in the country, as compared with the city.

Then there is the country beauty-the art side of the matter. I suppose the majority of us go through the world, even those of us who live in the country, blind to the best there is and do not see the beauty of the country-side, and it is a serious flaw in our education that we are so. Of course, this material that I am speaking about is good material for the city child, as well as for those in the country, but it is at the disposal of the country school as it is not at the disposal of the city school.

Finally, is the country school a school of the whole community? You will say that it is not, and you may question whether it ought to be. I doubt if there is any one department of our educational system for the next generation that it is more important to keep in mind and to work for than this, to make the American school

a school of the community. It is vital to democracy that democracy shall be kept at school, and we must get over the notion that the Amerian school is only for the children and the youth. The American school must become the educational center of the community or neighborhood in which it is located. That is a big contract, but it has to be done. One of the tests, perhaps not quite fair to apply today to the country school, but which we must apply to an increasing extent, is whether the country school is a center of life and leading, of education, of development, of continued study and discussion, and adapted for the people of the community. The country school will never serve its community fully until it does this for the community.

I have just given you these tests of good farming and of a good rural school. Perhaps you would think of other tests and consider them more important; but these are important, if they are not most important. At any rate, I believe you will not have good farming unless that farming meets the tests that I have suggested; and I believe you will not have a first-rate country school unless it can meet, to a reasonable degree, these tests that I have named.

Notes From the Field-School Lunches

A CONDENSED REPORT OF ADDRESSES BY MRS. MARIAN W.

PARMENTER, NORTHBORO, MASS., DR. L. LOWELL BACON,
SOUTHBORO, MASS., AND MR. ARTHUR S. ROLLINS, LANCAS
TER, MASS., AT THE TENTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE ON RURAI,
EDUCATION, STATE NORMAL SCHOOL, WORCESTER, MASS.

T is to be regretted that the space available for the publication of the addresses at the Worcester conference will not allow the printing of the complete reports of the remarks of Mrs. Parmenter, Dr. Bacon, and Mr. Rollins on this very interesting and up-to-date subject-School Lunches. Out of her several years of experience in this feature of school work, Mrs. Parmenter gave many helpful and practical suggestions for the preparation and serving of school lunches. More than half of the pupils of the Center School of Northboro find it necessary to bring lunches to school or purchase food at the school. That the other teachers might be relieved of responsibility during the noon hour, arrangements were made for Mrs. Parmenter to conduct this branch of the work, taking her period of rest at a later time. At first the work consisted only in supervising the children while they ate the cold lunches brought from home. It was noticed that much of the lunch was wasted, and the reason was not hard to find. Through the kindness of the School Committee, room and equipment were furnished which made it possible, at slight expense, to prepare and serve to the children something hot to make their cold lunches more attractive to them. At the outset, cocoa and some kind of hot soup were furnished, but observation quickly showed that the children preferred the cocoa, and it was found advisable to serve cocoa and milk during the cold weather, beginning with milk alone in October and continuing it through April and sometimes into May. It

« AnteriorContinuar »