HoUinga: Corp. pH8.5 The Ages of Pupils and Their Progress Through the Elementary Grades FIRST STEPS IN STATEWIDE EDUCATIONAL ACCOUNTING, SECOND PAPER. APRIL 1918 BY W. A. AVERILL, A. B., CONSULTING OFFICE-ORGANIZER AND STATISTICIAN Formerly Inspector in Elementary Education, New York State Education Department, and Expert in School Investigation, New York Bureau of Municipal Research A hand-book showing the statistical technique, tabulation and graphic presentation of the salient features of Age- Progress problems in elementary schools. The first paper of this series of educational accounting reports was pubUshed in October 191 7 in order to have ready for distribution such returns from a request sent to the schools of the State in May 19 1 7 as were compiled at the time of the 19 17 Convocation of The University of the State of New York. The limited edition of the first paper was soon exhausted and to meet the subsequent demand for copies, this second paper will contain the salient features of the first. For the study of age and progress conditions of elementary school pupils, the cities, villages and union free school districts of the State are divided into nine groups, the basis of which division is the size of the elementary school enrolment, reported in this case on May 21, 19 17. The groups of communities are: 6 cities enrolling over 5000 elementary pupils 8 cities enrolling 3000 to 4999 elementary pupils 7 cities and i village with 2000 to 2999 elementary pupils 16 cities and 8 villages with 1000 to 1999 elementary pupils 4 cities, 16 villages and 28 union free school districts with 500 to 999 elementary pupils 3 villages and 61 union free school districts with 300 to 499 elementary pupils I village and 76 union free school districts with 200 to 299 elementary pupils 153 union free school districts with 100 to 199 elementary pupils 175 union free school districts with less than 100 elementary pupils 563 communities reporting data, including 41 cities, 29 villages and 493 union free school districts. TTri..».,,..».ii'r^ u^ \\ <^5 Table i Progress percentages of 286,207 pupils in 41 cities, 29 villages and 493 union free school districts PUPILS PER CENTS Rapid Normal Slow Total Rapid Normal Slow Total Less than lOO 987 I 078 864 1 271 2 217 3 123 2 681 4 483 10 424 6 724 II 090 II 574 13 674 17 566 18 118 10 937 18 361 66 375 3 732 6 183 6 541 7 104 9 96s 9 691 6 071 8 389 26 984 II 443 18 351 18 979 22 049 29 748 30 932 19 689 31 233 103 783 8.62 5.82 456 5-77 7.3 10.09 i3-6i 14-35 10.04 58. 76 60.8 61. 62. 59.3 58.57 55-5 58.79 63.96 32.62 33-352 34.44 32.23 33-4 31.33 30.83 26-86 26. 100 100 200- 299 100 100 100 100 100 100 Over sooo 100 Total '. . . 27 128 174 419 84 660 286 207 9.48 60.94 29-58 100 Figure i Each column represents 100 per cent of the entire enrolment in each group of school systems. The groups themselves vary in size but this variation is not shown in the figure which shows only the relative percentages of rapid, normal and slow-progress pupils in each group and not the actual number of pupils. Late reports received after figure was drawn reduce the slow progress in the second column to 34 per cent. The blank which was sent to the schools of the vState in May, 19 17, requesting the information on which the tables in this paper are based, called for the number of years of schooling assignable to the pupils in each grade and the number of pupils in each grade who had attended each different period of schooling. For example, the report in the fifth grade as sent out called for the number of pupils who had to their credit 4-A^ea^jpf»^hooling, 5 years of schooling, 6 APR 28*-*i91i> years of schooling, etc. In the fifth grade those who reported only 4 years of schooling were called rapid-progress pupils, those reporting 5 years were called normal and those, who reported a total attendance of more than 5 years, including the school year ending June 19 17, were reported as slow-progress pupils. On this basis the tables in this pamphlet have been prepared, except where otherwise specified. Table i gives the total results for 286,207 pupils in 563 communities throughout the State. This figure does not represent the entire elementary school enrolment of the State, as New York City is omitted together with several of the smaller communities whose reports for various reasons could not be used. Note that these tables do not refer to overage but to progress alone. In this respect they are incomplete in that they present only one phase of retardation, namely the time-in-school factor, whereas the complete statement of the retardation situation requires along with this time factor, the age factor expressed in three subdivisions for underage, normal age and overage. A glance at the slow-progress percentages of table i shows that they are, as a whole, unusually low. They are in all probability about 4 per cent lower than the percentages which would be obtained by an analysis of the situation in which both age and time in school are considered, and compiled to show conditions either at the beginning or after the close of the school year. The figures were reported as of May 21, 19 1 7 and do not include in the slow-progress element those pupils who were not promoted in June 191 7. Pupils who left school prior to May 2 ist do not appear on the reports, which again tends to understate the slow-progress number. A third factor tending to reduce the stated amount of slow progress was the date of the collection of the data, late in the school year, at which time many communities were obliged to gather the figures hurriedly; it is probable that a portion of the time in school for some of the pupils was omitted. The difference between the reported slow progress in September 19 16 and May 19 17 is shown in table 2 for ten cities which col- lected figures at both times, the total of which shows the slow- progress percentage to be 4.4 higher in the report at the beginning of the school year, which is the best time to assemble age and progress data. For purposes of comparison outside New York State, superin- tendents making these surveys as per September 1 9 1 8 or February 19 1 9 should deduct at least 5 per cent from their total slow progress percentage. This does not apply to tables 16 and 17, on pages 31 and 32, nor to figure 10 and table 29. In other words, September Table 2 Progress reported by ten cities by two methods, September 1916 and May 1917 PUPILS PERCENTAGES Rapid Normal Slow Total Rapid Normal Slow I 13 49 291 379 380 237 684 665 1.9 7-4 42.5 57- 55.6 35.6 Sept. May 1916 1917 77 133 689 766 514 359 I 280 I 258 6.1 10.6 53.8 60.9 40.1 28.5 Sept. May- 1916 1917 3 i6s 216 731 645 289 223 I 185 I 084 13.9 19-9 61.7 59. 5 24.4 20.6 Sept. May 1916 1917 '4 i6s 159 623 666 540 479 I 328 I 304 12.4 12.2 46,9 51. 1 40.7 36.7 Sept. May 1916 1917 5 144 196 S5I 661 375 207 I 070 I 064 13.4 18.4 51.4 62.1 35.2 19. 5 Sept. May 1916 1917 6 210 133 521 532 302 398 I 033 I 063 20.3 12.5 50.4 50. 29.3 37.5 Sept. May 1916 1917 7 44 30 I 349 I 251 860 902 2 253 2 183 2. 1.3 59.9 57.4 38.1 41.3 Sept. May 1916 1917 8 112 121 608 731 362 203 I 082 I 055 10.3 II. 5 56.2 69.3 33.5 19.2 Sept. May 1916 1917 42 30 263 259 199 186 504 475 8.3 6.2 52.2 54.6 39. 5 39.2 Sept. May 1916 1917 10 17 25 423 337 194 227 634 589 2.7 4-3 66.7 57.2 30.6 38.5 Sept. May 1916 1917 Total 989 I 092 6 049 6 227 4 015 3 421 II 053 10 735 9. lO.I 54.7 38.0 36.3 31.9 Sept. May 1916 1917 or February figures are directly comparable with tables 16, 17, 29 and figure 10; the slow progress percentages obtained in September or February will be about 5 per cent greater than the figures of May 191 7, shown in the other tables. For example, if a superin- tendent should prepare a table similar to table 16 in September or February for a system containing between 500 and 999 elementary pupils finding a total slow progress of 35 per cent, the position of that city in table 7 on page 10, would be 30 per cent slow progress approximately at the first quartile instead of 35 per cent at the median. City totals Tables 3 to 11 show the progress figures and percentages reported by individual cities and villages in the various groups, beginning with cities enrolling more than 5000 elementary pupils. Attention is called to the fact that the total or average of any group actually conceals the conditions which exist in the separate components of the group. Table 3 Progress reports from six cities enrolling more than 5000 elementary pupils CITY RAPID NORMAL SLOW TWO OR MORE YEARS SLOW' TOTAL A 613 3 SOS I 86s 3 363 74S 9 887 8 737 IS 634 26 171 2 926 3 020 2 006 3 286 5 172 12 324 I 768 2 428 333 698 831 4 089 391 792 12 SO6 IS 528 22 671 41 858 5 439 5 781 B c D E F.. Total 10 424 66 375 26 984 7 134 103 783 Total . Corresponding percentages 4-90 79.06 16.04 2.66 22.57 56.26 21.17 4.49 8.23 68.96 22.81 3.66 8.03 62.53 29.44 0.76 13.69 53.79 32.52 7.18 5. 76 52.24 41.99 13.70 10.04 63.96 26.00 6.87 From table 3 it is seen that the slow-progress percentage of 26 for the group of cities with over 5000 elementary pupils in table i represents a range of slow-progress percentages from 16 to 42. In the same manner, the percentage of pupils reported two or more years slow ranges from 2.6 to 13.7. When a niimber of measurements of any sort are arranged in any given order, as in this case, in the order of slow-progress percentage, the entire number of measurements is called a series or an array, and it is customary to locate the middle member or midpoint of the series and call it the median (Md) and to use this median in many instances in place of the average. The median of this series of six measurements is the average between the third and fourth members, which is 26.13 per cent. The average of the six percentages is 28.16 per cent, while the average figured from a total of all six cities is 26 per cent. Superintendents will find the median the most convenient measure both to determine and to use in making comparisons with other cities of the same group. ' Included in '"slow"; total equals the sum of rapid, normal and slow in all tables. Table 4 Progress reports from cities enrolling 3000 to 4999 elementary pupils CITY RAPID NORM.'VL SLOW TWO OR MORE YEARS SLOW TOTAL A 561 639 821 773 669 470 136 414 2 071 2 143 2 461 2 998 2 146 1 720 2 814 2 008 453 586 827 I 196 894 993 I 805 I 635 109 100 186 317 207 223 523 527 3 085 B '. 3 368 C 4 109 4 967 3 709 D E F 3 183 G 4 755 H 4 057 Total 4 483 18 361 8 389 2 192 31 233 Percentages corresponding to above figures A 18.17 18.97 19-98 15.65 18.03 14.77 2.93 10.51 67.13 63.62 59.88 60.35 57.8s 54-04 59-17 49-49 14.7 17.39 19.34 24.00 24.10 31.19 37.90 40-. 00 3.533 2.969 4.520 10.275 5.581 7 .000 16.142 17.082 B C D E F G H Total 14.35 58.79 26.86 7.01 This table shows a range of reported slow progress from 14.7 to 40 per cent. In this series there are eight members and the median is the average between the fourth and fifth measures, or 24.05 per cent. Table 5 Progress reports from seven cities and one village enrolling 2000 to 2999 elementary pupils CITY RAPID NORM.-VL SLOW TWO OR MORE YEARS SLOW TOT.\L A 728 000 693 166 394 534 30 136 1 278 2 127 I 112 I 626 I 416 I 174 I 353 851 361 465 649 795 806 918 861 I 216 106 104 213 197 193 274 275 379 2 367 2 592 2 454 2 587 ^ 616 B c D E F -> 626 G 2 244 2 203 H Total 2 681 10 937 6 071 I 741 19 689 Percentages corresponding to above figures Total . 30.75 00.0 28.23 6.41 15.06 20.33 1.33 6.17 13-62 53-99 82.06 15.25 17.93 45-31 62.8s 26.44 30.73 54-12 30.81 44-7 60.29 38.62 34.9s 38.36 55. 2 30.83 4.47 6.53 8.67 7.61 7.37 10.43 12.25 17 .20 8.76 r>E'RCtnTA^Er AF- SL6W J>fe0^fet5S '« iZZ ettME-MTAfeY SYST&MS *o 50 LLINO ht-TW6-6-N 300-500 MlrblArH-34 500-1000 M&blANl-SSo/ 1000-3000 ME-blAh- 3000 E'blAM-ZI-o/j SOOO MCBe-Twe&M 5C»00 •/. zsy. AMO Ak&IM/!.M~5^6stem3 With Less Than lOO Element^sry pupils Each Percen+3 Twt? or More Vear^ 5/o\*/ Figure 4 ^7 Slow-progress Figures not Basis for Criticism Thus far in tables 3 to ii inclusive we have arranged the city and village communities of the State in nine groups according to the size of the elementary enrolment and within each group we have placed the members in a row in the order of their reported slow- progress for the purpose of seeking out the^jxiiddle member of each row and the two members which are located in the one-quarter and three-quarter points in the series. These points are indicated in the preceding tables and by means of them each superintendent may' detenhine his relative standing with reference to the other com- munities of his particular group. As is indicated in the first paper of this series, there is no actual nor inferred criticism of those systems which happen to have reported large slow-progress conditions. The problem of retardation is one which exists throughout the State and • the relative number of slow-progress pupils is a very precise measure of that problem and its difficulty for the local superintendent, prin- cipals and teachers. But when it comes to criticizing the efficiency- of the schools on the basis of reported slow progress, so many other conditions may enter into this complex problem as to render the mere' position of the school system on a progress-percentage list a very unsafe criterion for drawing conclusions about the character of the. work carried on in the schools. Some of these other features which influence the " standing " of a school system with respect to retar-' dation are: . - ..; a The late entrance of pupils into the first grade b Varying practice in promoting children into and out of the first grade c Different standards of promotion from grade to grade d Differences in the health of pupils while at school e Varying degrees of regularity of attendance / Different degrees of familiarity with the English language g Differences in the mentahty of normally intelligent children h The presence of mentally subnormal children in regular classes 7 Physical defects of children k Differences in the maturity of children / Differences in the home environment of children ni Differences in the amount of time which children may devote to the preparation of lessons outside of school • n Circimistances incident to the moving of families from place to place i8 The transfer of pupils from one school to another and from parochial to public schools within a city p Differences in the type of pupil left in the system when others have been removed q Differences in the extent to which communities offer inducements for pupils to leave school Some of them are so general as to affect nearly all schools alike and others, while affecting different classrooms, will not materially change the result throughout city and village systems as a whole, and they are presented by no means as excuses for retarded conditions. If a superintendent finds that his reported rating places his schools in front of the first quartile in the series, or above the median, a brief account of any features of his organization, plan of supervision and methods of teaching which in his opinion many have contributed to the success of his system and resulted in the low slow-progress percentage, might be of service to other superintendents by way of suggestion. If a sufficient number of memoranda are received on this point, they will be assembled into a bulletin, returned to the contributing superintendents and distributed to all the communities participating in this research. While as a general rule throughout the State it may be probable that the better organized systems will be found in the schools above the median, a relatively high position in the series does not neces- sarily mean a superior school system. The reverse of this proposition is even more true because we know from other sources that in many cases some of the very best work in the State is being done in com- munities where circumstances apparently beyond the control of the schools militate against the achievement of a normal amount of successful progress through school. Medians and Quartiles for Nine Groups of Communities A single table showing the slow-progress percentages reported by these 563 communities in detail would be confusing rather than illumi- nating. For the sake of brevity it is customary to describe the con- ditions shown in a whole series of these measurements by tabulating five figures, the two extremes, the two quartiles and the median. This condensed table is shown for the nine groups of cities and villages which have been reported in the foregoing tables. 19 Table 12 Extreme, median and quartile percentages of slow progress in communities grouped according to elementary enrolment ELEMENTARY ENROLMENT SLOW-PROGRESS PERCENT.\GES Lower extreme First quartile Median Third quartile Higher extreme Quartile range Quartile deviation 0\eT 5000. . . 3 000-4 999. 2 000-2 999 . I 000- I 999 . 500- 999 . 300- 499 ■ 200- 299 . TOO- 199- Below 100 . . . 16 14 15 5 1 1 6 4 7 25 8 19.13 18.36 22.18 21.275 28.5 27. 24-5 29. 26.13 24 . 05 30.05 28.05 35. 5 34- 32. 35. 32. 34 35 36 36 40 40 39 44 42 89 4 6S 45 75 42 40 55 84 63 72 70 90 76 2 15 17 14 IS 12 13 14 IS 20 76 04 47 17s 25 5 7 8 7 7 6 6 7 10 88 52 24 S8 125 5 25 5 The two columns of extremes show that the greatest variation in slow progress occurs in the very small systems, the range being from 4 to 70, from o to 90 and from 2 to 76 per cent, while the total range for the two highest groups of cities is from 16 to 42 and 14.7 to 40 per cent. Since extremes are very unsafe criteria, it is customary to charac- terize a series of measurements by indicating the two percentages between which the middle half of the measures lie, that is, the range in per cent between the two quartiles, the object being to find how large a distance on the scale contains the middle half of the series. This is known as the interquartile range and is given in the next to the last column of the table. The two columns of extremes show that the total range increases as the systems grow smaller. This last column but one shows that the position on the scale of the middle half of the measures does not bear this inverse ratio to the size of the systems but that the least variation among the middle half of the measures occiurs in the two adjacent groups of systems from 300 to 499 and 500 to 999, in which groups the difference between the communities which stand one- quarter of the way from the top and the systems three-quarters of the way toward the bottom is only thirteen percentage points. This means that more uniform conditions of retardation are to be found in these two groups of communities than in the other seven groups of the above table, in which the middle half of the measures are scattered over a wider range of percentage points. In statistical tables it is customary to express this variation by dividing the quartile range by two in order to show the amount of deviation from the midpoint or median. This distance on the 20 scale between the quartiles divided by two is called the quartile deviation or semi-interquartile range and is given in the right-hand column of the table. In general, when a nurnber of large groups of measurements are tabulated for comparison, the groups with the least quartile deviation are supposed to represent more uniform conditions than those groups which show large deviations and the general inference is that this uniformity means probable similarity in organization and administration. Median May Not Be Proper Measure Attention should again be called to the fact that the slow-prog- ress percentages reported by these 563 communities are based on their own local standards of promotion and teaching and we can only assume that in the uniform course of study pursued throughout the State and in the high character and ability of superintendents and principals, which we confidently believe is likewise statewide, we have the assurance that these tables present fairly reliable estimates of superintendents, principals and teachers who are doing all in their power for the welfare of the children in the schools. On the other hand, the fact that the median point of a group of 24 cities is 28 per cent slow progress and the median point of 77 villages is 32 per cent slow progress, is no proof that these points indicate what the amount of slow progress actually ought to be. Certainly no one would suggest that in the group of 24 cities the 12 above the median with slow-progress percentages less than 28 per cent should begin increasing their retardation until the median was reached. With reference to the school systems in the lower half of any series, we can not say that the median is the goal toward which that city should work, because we know practically nothing about the character of the school work repre- sented by this median and we have no reason to believe that what happens to be the reported achievement of the middle community in a list of a score or a hundred is any where near the proper measure for the entire group. To be content with obtaining these median retardation rates would indeed be following a line of least resistance to the neglect of much that ought to be done for the progress of the school children. The scrutiny with which many superintendents in various parts of the country have subjected their systems to the most thoroughgoing examination has revealed both praise- worthy features and remedial and preventive defects in their schools, often in their own offices, to such an extent that we can no 21 longer conclude that the average attainment-results of any number of different localities represents all that ought to be expected from most of them. Appraising the work of a school system by such a standard is akin to the rather widespread but quite precarious procedure of figuring the school budget on the basis of what happened to have been spent the year before rather than on the basis of the modern budget carefully analyzed by function, character, object and location. Some retardation will of course always be present, and from these figures we can not determine the extent to which school systems might reasonably be expected to reduce their slow-progress per- centages. As already pointed out, the percentage of slow progress which actually exists in the schools is probably 4 or 5 per cent higher throughout the State than the figures reported by the schools of the State in May 19 17 here presented. These tables constitute merely the first general statewide state- ment of conditions showing what the schools of the State say about themselves, and enabling each city and village superintendent and union school district principal definitely to locate the place which his schools occupy among all the other self-reported ratings of the State and in particular among the school systems which enrol about the same number of elementary pupils. All this is of course only the first of a half dozen or more steps in the direction of securing for all the schools of this State definite and reliable infor- mation about the conditions of the pupils and the results of educational effort, the information finally obtained being of such a character as to be a help rather than a burden to the superintendents and principals who contribute it. The next step is to determine by much more carefully collected data exactly what the rapid, normal and slow progress conditions are when measured by the latest methods of modern statistical research. This second step has been in progress in a number of cities and villages during the present school year. The first results of this investigation will be' to show the difference in conditions reported in May 19 17 and those found to exist in September 19 17 and February 19 18. A third step in this program of educational accounting after the schools have been rated by their own standards is the measure- ment of these school systems by the common measure of the standard classroom tests by means of which the school ability of the pupil can be definitely appraised in addition to his general condition of retardation or acceleration, as determined by his age and promotion 22 from grade to grade. In addition to the many uses which progressive superintendents and principals have found for these now thoroughly tried and permanently established standard tests in the regular program of supervision throughout the school year, these definite measurements constitute a most valuable appraisal of local school and classroom standards which are particularly applicable in the analysis of the children of a school system considered in the nine standard age and progress groups in which these children find themselves placed by reason of their past school life and their apparent success or failure with local teachers. At present it is planned to send to the superintendents and principals of the State shortly after the opening of schools in the fall of 19 18 the results of an amount of research work sufficient to illustrate adequately the complete correlation of age and progress locally found with the corresponding abilities of pupils as shown by standard class- room tests. The titles of 84 tests for elementary grades are here included for reference.^ Tests for Elementary Grades Arithmetic Guhin's Bobbit's Courtis's B Monroe's Starch's A Woody's National busi- Thompson's ness ability tests Gray's Kansas Starch's Gray's Monroe's Brown's Starch's English vocabulary Boston fractions Stone's fundamental Courtis's reasoning Bonser reasoning Silent reading Courtis's research Thorndike's visual Haggarty's visual Oral reading Cleveland survey Stone's reasoning Rice's reasoning Buckingham's reasoning Courtis's series A Haggarty's Jones's Courtis's series R 2 Thorndike's understanding Minnesota scale Beta Fordyce's achievements Price's Spelling Buckingham's Ayres's Courtis's Monroe's timed lists Iowa dictation Nebraska Rice's Starch's National business ability Jones's concrete Writing Gray's Breed & Downs Ayres' (children) Ayres Gettysburg Ayres' (adults) Thorndike's Courtis's Freeman's Johnson's & Stones Zaner & Blossom 1 Details of procedure and addresses for obtaining these tests are given in full in " Educational Tests and Measurements " by Monroe, Kelley and De Voos (Houghton Mifflin Company) and in part 2 of the 1 7th Year Book of the National Society for the Study of Education (Public School PubHshing Company, Bloom- ington. 111.). See also an article, " Measurement and Diagnosis as an aid to Supervision," by Haggarty, in " School and Society," volume 6, September 1917, page 271. 23 Nassau county Willi -g's Breed & Frostic National busi- ness ability Language Hillegas Courtis's Trabue completion Buckingham grammar Charter's grammar Starch's grammar Thompson's research Boston Thompson's standardized Geography Buckingham Hahn-Lackey Thorndike's extension Harvard-Newton Haggarty's grammar Starch's grammar scales Starch's punctuation Boston copying Witham's standard Starch's series A History Buckingham Boll & McCollum's Harlan's information American history Starch's American history Drawing Thorndike's Music Seashore's talent chart After a school system has been properly measured by the age- progress record of the pupils and this measure checked with the standard classroom tests as indicated in the preceding types of measurement, a fourth step is the correlation of the pupils' age- progress ratings and tested abilities with their individual health and physical records. A very limited amount of research along this line is under way and will be distributed when completed. A corollary to this work with physical and health records is the application of actual intelligence and psychological tests to small groups of children found markedly deficient in all the preceding tests. Necessarily on a still smaller scale at the present time, this phase of work has already been undertaken and a limited quantity of data will be forthcoming when the schools open in the fall of 1918. Pupils Schooled Locally and Elsewhere When a superintendent or principal is confronted with a retardation table of his system, he naturally seeks an explanation at least for a portion of the retardation among the conditions listed on page 1 7 . Neither the head of a school system nor the teachers are responsible for all the schooling of all the pupils, since the local system always contains a very considerable number of pupils who come to that system after previous schooling elsewhere. In accordance with this idea, 88 school systems with elementary enrolments ranging from 25 to 500 pupils, reported progress figures at the close of the school year 19 16-17, both for all pupils who had been educated exclusively in the public school system in which they were enrolled when this canvass was made, and those who had been partially educated elsewhere. The results are shown in the following tables: 24 Table 13 Total earolment and pupils schooled locally in eighty-eight communities with slow-progress percentage of each COMMUNITY 3- 4- S- 6. 7. 8. 9. ■TO. I I . 12 . 13- 14- 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21 . 22 . 2-1. 25. 26, 27. 28, 29. 30 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 SO 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 S8 59 60 .61 62 63 64 TOTAL PUPILS KNROLI.ED 54 2S1 St 95 55 281 117 212 123 49 28s 279 192 568 .130 28 83 304 139 lor 82 500 320 62 268 204 14s 206 67 IIS 108 3'73 222 299 131 149 45 218 168 269 547 464 307 290 432 SO 180 214 147 238 197 254 96 79 28 476 292 368 124 552 332 314 31 96 PUPILS SCHOOLED LOCALLY 32 263 34 81 34 223 71 156 71 168 174 122 426 277 10 59 236 93 78 34 318 253 62 175 139 77 141 41 64 72 290 207 168 79 78 26 146 107 238 490 292 233 194 314 26 ISI 124 88 162 146 213 66 49 15 311 177 234 84 318 232 175 12 ■ S8 PER- CENTAGE SCHOOLED LOCALLY 59 94 67 85 62 79 65 74 58 57 59 62 64 75 64 36 71 78 67 77 41 64 79 100 65 68 53 68 6i 56 67 78 93 56 60 52 58 67 64 89 90 63 76 67 72 52 84 58 60 68 74 84 69 62 54 66 61 64 68 58 70 56 44 60 PERCENTAGES OF SLOW PROGRESS Among all pupils enrolled Among pupils locally schooled 25 Table 13 (concluded) Total enrolment and pupils schooled locally in eighty-eight communities with slow-progress percentage of each COMMUNITY 6S . 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 70 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 Total TOTAL PUPILS ENROLLED 97 322 126 66 55 30 243 189 156 39 59 88 439 41 208 109 257 107 40 56 183 183 126 105 PUPILS SCHOOLED LOCALLY 03 200 67 66 44 19 243 JIG 126 23 48 63 330 41 i6t 77 23 s 62 24 27 iSi 380 PER- CENTAGE SCJiOOLED LOCALLY 62 53 100 80 63 100 58 81 59 81 72 75 100 77 71 91 58 60 48 83 63 67 95 PERCENTAGES OF SLOW PROGRESS Among all pupils enrolled Among pupils locally schooled 27 38 o 42 32 SO 44 21 31 30 48 45 45 48 32 44 37 37 45 S3 42 68 90 It will be noted that in the case of some of the small schools there is a greater percentage of retarded pupils among those schooled entirel}^ in that school than among the entire enrolment. This apparent impossibility is due to the chance advancement of the pupils schooled in part elsewhere, who are sufficiently advanced to reduce the retardation of the entire school below that of the pupils who have never been elsewhere. This is of course exceptional. Table 13 shows that of 17,104 pupils enrolled in 88 schools, 12,380, or 72 per cent, were schooled exclusively in the school where they were enrolled at the time the tabulation was made. The schools in this table are listed in the order of the reported percentage of slow-progress pupils, hence any relation between retardation and the percentage of pupils locally schooled is not apparent. As it is possible to arrange a given table in the order of but one factor at a time, this was chosen as the most important. Table 14 shows the retardation reported in each case for the entire school listed according to the per cent of pupils locally schooled. 26 P^F^CE-hTAGE OP SLOW P^I^OGt>E'SS f^VP^ILS pjE-r^Of^TE-b BY 88 COMMVNITIErS- ALL F>UP>ILS tnfeOLL&b PE-ffC&MTAOe- OF- £>tOW PKOOR&SS IP Zo 30 40 SC 60 TO ao 90 lOO QVAfiT^li' ^5 ME-b AN '/o - 54-yJ aa Ql/AftTILE- 4Zo/, Figure 5 Each horizontal hne represents the slow-progress percentage among all pupils enrolled in one elementary school system. The schools in this figure are the same as in figure 6. 27 SLOW i::>t>OG[>B'SS r>tfeCE'riTAGe5 OP tAJt>\lS bChOOltb tXCLUSIVE-LY Ih OhB- WbUC SCHOOL SYSTtM- 88 COMnV/MITIES feer^fetSEMTEb P&RCtMTAGeS OP- SLOV/ PROCRtSS — • IP lo 3o 40 60 SO TO 8$ 25 Ljo STOl'AtJTILEr- /AlrblA 35«>ov//^fiTll,e' 3(Wo ri-27 o/o I90J0 Figure 6 Each horizontal hne represents the percentage of slow-progress pupils in one elementary school system. The. four systems at the top represent no slow progress pupils or zero per cent. These are the same school systems shown in figure 5. Note that in the case of these pupils who have received all their schooling in the local pubHc system in which they were found when this survey was made, the slow-progress percentages are lower than those shown m figure 5. 28 Table 14 Slow-progress percentages arranged according to the per cent of pupils locally schooled PER CENT OF ALL PUPILS SCHOOLED LOCALLY 30-39 . . 40-49 . . 50-59. . 60-69. . 70-79. . 80-89. . 90-100 . 88 schools. ALL PUPILS ENROLLED Percentages of retardation Lowest 1st quart ile Median auartile Highest 50 49 56 48 50 88 In table 15 the progress percentages reported by schools are arranged in four wa^^s, each in a double column of figures in which the first figure is the per cent of slow-progress pupils and the second figure is the number of villages reporting the percentage represented by the first figure. Age-progress and School Locations It is of course expected that those pupils who have not moved about from place to place will make more satisfactory school progress than those who have done any considerable amount of moving. The division of the pupils of a public school system into groups for the study of retardation on this basis of locations is not so simple and is by no means limited to the two groups representing pupils who have been schooled elsewhere and those who have not. When we go into this matter of the location of pupils' schooling we encounter the following groups of pupils which have to be analyzed separately as to rapid, normal and slow progress: 1 Pupils who have never been to school in any other building except the one in which they were found at the time of the age-progress survey 2 Pupils schooled entirely in two or more schools of the local pubhc system 3 Groups I and 2 combined, constituting all pupils schooled within the local public system 4 Pupils partly schooled in local parochial and other private schools 5 Pupils partly schooled in any type of schools in other cities 6 Pupils partly schooled in foreign countries 29 Table 15 Slow-progress percentages reported by villages Reading across the top of the page, the first Hne items in this table means that 9 per cent retardation among all pupils enrolled was reported by one village; o per cent retarded two or more years was reported by six villages; o per cent retarded at all among pupils exclusively schooled locally was reported by 3 vil- lages; and o per cent of two-year retardation among pupils locally schooled was reported by 9 villages. The "first figure in each double column is the reported percentage of slow progress and the second figure is the number of villages which report each particular per cent. ALL PUPILS ENROLLED TOTAL RETARDATION Per cent 9 II 14 I . . . . 17. . .. 18 19 20. . . . 21 ... . 22 ... . 23 24 25-Q. . 26. . . . 28 29 30 31 33 34-Md 35- • • • 36.... 37 38.... 39 40 41 42-Q3 . 43 44- ■ ■ 45 ■ ■ ■ . 46... 47 • • • 48... 49 . . . 50 54 .56.. . Fre- quency N=88 TWO YEARS RETARDATION Per cent -Qi 3- 4- 5- 6. 7. ... 8-Md 9. .. . 10. . . . 12. . . . 13-Q3 . 14. .. . 15. .. . 16 18. .. . 20. . . . 23 Fre- quency N=88 PUPILS SCHOOLED LOCALLY TOTAL RETARDATION Per cent o. . . . •3 — 5 7 8 . .. . 9 II ... . 12 ... . 13 14 16. . . . 17 18 19-Q1 . 20. . . . 21 . . ; . 22 . . . . 23 25 26. . . . 27-Md 28. . . . 29 30 31 32 35 36-Q3 . 37 38.... 39 41 42 44 45 48 ... . 50 53 68 90 Fre- quency TWO YEARS RETARD.\TION Per cent 0. . . . 1 . . . . 2. . . . 3-Q. ■ 4. .. . 5-Md 6 7 8 9-Q3. 10. . . . II ... . 12 ... . 13- •- • 14. .. . 15. .. . 16 17 18 20. . . . Fre- quency 6 13 II 12 6 I 5 3 3 I 3 2 3 I I 3 30 As it is not worth while to make an analysis in this detail without securing complete information about pupils, the record of each pupil's age was secured, as well as a record of his progress through school. As a pupil may be young, normal or overage and may make rapid, normal or slow progress through school, the following well-known arrangement of nine age-progress groups is necessary to tell the whole truth about any group of pupils under consideration. In point of age, the pupil is classified according to whether he is young, normal or old with reference to the standard which is as follows for heeinninv the work of each grade: I B, 6 ^■ears hut less than 7 1 A, 6r 2 B, 7 2 A, ^h 3 B, 8 3 A, 8^ 4 B, 9 4 A, 9h I vears 1\' " lO 5 B, lo vears but less than ii 5A, lor " III 6B, II " 12 6 A, III " 12^ 7 B, 12 " 13 7 A, I2| « 13I 8 B, 13 " 14 8 A, 13I " \\\ years It is important to note that " being in a grade " is not an accurate measure for determining progress. The circumstances of age and progress result in nine categories of pupils : 1 Underage and rapid progress 2 Normal age and rapid progress 3 Overage and rapid progress 4 Underage and normal progress 5 Normal both as to age and progress 6 Overage and normal progress 7 Underage and slow progress S Normal age and slow progress 9 Overage and slow progress These are best shown in the following arrangement of the groups : UNDERAGE AND RAPID PROGRESS NORMAL AGE AND RAPID PROGRESS OVERAGE AND RAPID PROGRESS UNDERAGE AND NORMAL PROGRESS NORMAL BOTH AS TO AGE AND PROGRESS OVERAGE AND NORMAL PROGRESS UNDERAGE AND SLOW PROGRESS NORMAL AGE AND SLOW PROGRESS OVERAGE AND SLOW PROGRESS According to this plan the results of the statistical research in the cities undertaking this work during 19 16-17 are given. 31 Under A^e Normal Over A0e Total Rapid ® © (2) © Normal :■■ ..\;\;s:^i'sis;\:^s.:,\K>^ Progress ^^1^^ ^^^^^^ci^:^y'^^v< Slow Progress ^^^^^^^^^^1 lE^I Jz6.J K -34.' jj Totil @ ( 44.M ( \00% Figure 7 Age and progress of elementary pupils This age-progress percentage chart represents the nine groups of pupils shown in the text just preceding table 16. The figures show percentages alone and not the actual number of pupils and correspond to table 16, to which additions were made after the figure had been drawn, which slightly changed the decimals in some of the percentage figures. The total of 100 per cent is the sum of the nine groups, not of the 15 other circles in the figure, 6 of which, 3 at the right and 3 at the bottom, are subtotals. Table 16 46,000 pupils in twenty-two cities in New York State NUMBERS PERCENTAGES PUPILS Under- age Normal age Over- age Total Under- age Normal age Over- age Total Rapid progress. . . . Normal progress . . . Slow progress 1 356 2 710 315 I 195 16 220 3 148 820 7 921 12 338 3 371 26 851 15 801 2.9 5.9 .7 2.6 35.3 6.8 1.8 lei 7.3 58.4 34-3 Total. 4 381 20 563 21 079 46 023 9.5 44-7 45 8 100 32 Table 17 Age-progress analysis of 3665 elementary pupils by school location Table A — All pupils enrolled NUMBERS PERCENTAGES PUPILS Under- age Normal npie Over- age Tot.al Under- age Normal age Over- age Total Rapid nrogress Normal progress . . . Slow progress 120 370 119 96 641 353 lOI 431 I 43-1 317 I 442 I 906 3-3 10. 2.6 17.5 9.6 2.8 II. 8 39 I 8.7 39.3 50 Total 609 I 090 I 966 3 665 16.6 29 7 53-7 100 Table B — 228^ pupils schooled entirely in local public schools Rapid progress . . . Normal progress . Slow progress . . . . Total. 95 323 100 59 500 275 35 208 694 189 I 031 I 069 4.2 14. 1 4-4 2.6 21.8 12 1.5 9.1 30.3 8.3 45 46.7 518 834 937 2 289 22.7 36.4 40.9 100 Table C — 836 pupils schooled entirely in two or more local public schools Rapid progress . . Normal progress . Slow progress .... Total. 19 82 60 II 148 98 8 lOI 309 38 331 467 2.3 9.8 7.2 1.3 17.7 II. 7 I.O 12.2 36.9 4.6 39.6 55.8 161 257 418 836 19.2 30.7 50.1 100 Table D — • 1453 pupils schooled entirely in one school Rapid progress. . Normal progress . S}ow progress . . . . Total. 76 241 40 48 352 177 27 107 38s ISI 700 602 5 17 3 3 24 12 2 7 27 10 48 42 357 577 519 I 453 25 39 36 100 Table E — /S^ pupils schooled partly in local nonpublic schools Rapid progress . . Normal progress . Slow progress . . . . 5 24 9 14 66 45 42 133 447 61 223 501 .6 31 1 . 2 1.8 8.4 5-7 5.3 16.9 57 63.9 38 125 622 785 4.9 15.9 79-2 100 Table F — 45S pupils partly schooled in other cities Rapid progress Normal progress . . . Slow progress 18 20 10 21 66 29 21 66 207 60 152 246 3-9 4-4 2.2 4.6 14.4 6.3 4.6 14.4 45.2^ 13-1 33.2 53-7 Total 48 116 294 458 10.5 23-3 64. 2 100 Table G — 133 pupils partly schooled in foreign countries Rapid progress . . Norma! progress . Slow progress . . . . Total . 2 2 3 7 2 2 3 9 24 36 2 6 18 4 86 90 3 65 5 15 113 133 4 II 85 33 ^e-r^Ce-MTAGeOP t>Vi:>IL5 horn oveji-ACE- a 5Low-prifltfee6!> 3 > ALL PVf'lCS E-MI»OLLf-b 4-407. A7o/„ ^30/ >>\/6l.lC SCHOOLS C4 3 »>V(»1L* SCHOOL&b 6-HTit»ErLY IH LOCAL P>VM,lC SCHOOLS f>VI»ll,S SCHOOLE-b S-NTIR6-LY >K ON6- OvbL>C SCHOOL 30o/, Figure 8 This figure should not be misinterpreted as showing the relative number of pupils who have been schooled entirely in the local system or have come into it from the outside. It represents groups of pupils based on the location of their previous schooling, ranging in size from 133 pupils partly schooled in foreign countries to the grand total of 3665 found in the public schools at the time of the survey. Each circle represents 100 per cent of its own group and the black sector shows the percentage of these that are retarded. There are three points in each of these tables which should interest the local superintendent. These are (i) the percentage of overage pupils; (2) the percentage of slow-progress pupils; (3) the per- centage of pupils who are both old and slow for their grade. In this particular total group of 3665 pupils, the overage situation may be stated as follows: Overage, for all pupils enrolled 53.7 per cent For pupils schooled entirely within the local public system 40 . g per cent 34 For pupils who have moved from school to school within the local public school system 50. i per cent For pupils who have always attended the same public school 36 per cent Pupils who have come into the system from parochial or private schools 79. 2 per cent Pupils entering from other cities 64.2 per cent Pupils entering from foreign schools 85 per cent The corresponding percentages for slow progress and for both overage and slow progress are: GROUP OF PUPILS All pupils enrolled Schooled locally in public schools . . In two or more local public schools. In one school only Partly parochial Partly out of town Partly foreign PER CENT SLOW PROGRESS PER CENT BOTH OVERAGE AND SLOW PROGRESS 52 39-1 46. 7 30.3 55. ,8 36 -9 42 27 63. 9 57 53 • •7 45-2 68 65 This table shows that at the very start, there are three types of location factors which have to be analyzed quantitatively before the superintendent can even Ijegin to interpret his own age-progress figures: (i) changes within his system, (2) the combination of public and parochial schooling, and (3) the combination of local and out-of-town schooling. The great difference between the number of pupils who are over- age, who are slow and who are both old and slow shows the inadequacy of either age or years-in-school alone as a measure of retardation, and the handicap under which those superintendents are working who have not the aid and support of a complete system of individual permanent record cards, so essential to the demands of modem supervision considered locally and entirely apart from any collective research such as this discussion. Even this sevenfold table does not tell the complete story of local and outside retardation, to determine both of which requires the correlation of each pupil's progress with the proportion of his total schooling received in the local public system and obtained elsewhere, a task which, while somewhat involved, is quickly accomplished by means of the mechanical tabulation of these statistics with electrical 35 machines. The detailed data for this type of correlation are already assembled for a number of cities in New York State and will doubtless be given to the superintendents early in the fall. Analysis of Progress by Grades The tables and discussions thus far presented in this paper refer to the progress percentages reported by communities in the form of one figure representing the per cent of all the pupils in one com- munity who were reported by that community as having made retarded or slow progress at the time the figures were collected. In tables 2 to 6 each community reported three figures, one for rapid progress, a second for normal progress and a third for its slo^^' progress per cent. The remaining tables have presented slow progress alone giving one percentage figure for each community with reference to the total retardation in that system and another per- centage figure with reference to the retardation which amounted to two or more years and were likewise for the entire school system. As the total slow-progress percentage of 32.4 for union free school districts with less than 100 elementary pupils gives no idea of the variety of conditions shown in the first column of table 11 where the slow progress ranges from 2 per cent to 76 per cent, so do all the slow-progress percentages for school systems as a whole fail to give any notion whatever of the variety of retardation conditions which exist within each of these 563 communities. The reports received from all these cities and villages had the information contained in them arranged separately by grades. On the basis of this division of each school system into the eight regular grades of the elementary schools, the tables which follow have been prepared, showing first for the State as a whole and subsequently for each of the nine groups based on the size of the elementary enrolment, the nimibers of pupils and per- centages of rapid, normal and slow progress, likewise separately tabulated for each grade. For example, the figures for the first grade in table 18 were obtained by adding together the figures for the first grades in all the 563 communities reporting. In the same manner the first grade figures in the nine tables reporting the nine groups of cities were obtained by adding first grade figures reported by the cities in each group. Figure 9 represents pupils in elementary schools arranged in eight coltmms to correspond to the eight regular grades. The shading in the columns indicates the relative amount of rapid. normal and slow progress in each grade, expressed in per cents. Each column represents loo per cent for each grade. The columns are of equal length to bring out the relative proportions of rapid, normal and slow progress in the different grades at a glance. This figure does not show the relative size of the different grades, as it is concerned with percentages alone and not with the ntunbers enrolled in each grade. There is no rapid progress reported in the first grade, but, beginning with the second grade, the rapid progress is seen to increase with each succeeding grade, through the eighth. The solid black shading indicating normal progress is affected by the increasing rapid-progress, and the slow-progress elements which increase from the start and reach a maximum in the fifth grade. The decrease in slow progress in the sixth, seventh and eighth is due to the withdrawal of retarded pupils from these grades as well as to improved school conditions, but the relative weight of these factors has not been studied in this research. The chief purpose of the diagram is to bring out the fact that there is a wide variation in the amount of rapid, normal and slow progress from grade to grade which is not revealed in an average or median figure for a community as a whole, and the careful determination and inter- pretation of these differences by the local superintendent are essential to the intelligent and effective analysis of the situation in each community. Table i8 Progress percentages of 286,207 pupils in 41 cities, 29 villages and 493 union free school districts GRADE RAriD NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL 38 112 28 026 24 796 21 599 18 81S 16 402 13 875 12 798 7 SOI 8 900 8 120 9 247 8 990 7 963 6 126 4 709 841 2 108 2 325 2 964 3 109 2 684 I 693 I 298 154 357 631 923 I 053 801 416 274 19 83 180 296 306 217 67 72 10 24 41 84 58 28 II 6 8 10 19 14 12 I 8 531 II 479 II 309 13 533 13 222 II 609 8 314 6 355 46 643 41 730 39 018 38 905 36 497 32 579 27 043 23 792 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 225 2 917 3 773 4 152 4 568 4 854 4 639 Total.. 27 128 174 419 61 556 16 925 4 608 I 240 259 70 84 660 286 207 Percentages 81.69 67.16 63-54 55-51 51-55 50.34 51.31 53-77 16.07 21.31 20.81 26.09 24-63 24-44 22.65 19-79 1.8 5-OS 5-95 7-62 8.52 7-94 6.26 5-46 .33 .852 1. 617 2.372 2.885 2.458 1-53 I. IS -047 .198 .461 .76 .838 .666 .247 .300 m-7 .012 .019 .025 .049 .038 .036 .004 18.3 27-51 28.98 34-78 37-07 35-63 30.74 26.71 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5-33 7.47 9.67 11-37 14.02 17-94 19.49 057 105 215 158 088 04 08 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total.. 9.48 60.94 21. 51 5-91 1.608 ■ 433 .091 .025 29-58 100 37 Rapid, Normal & Slow Progress Percentages Reporfed By 5€>3 School S^itejA^ In New York ^tate Representing o.To^'al of 2.66,207 Elementary Pupils More Than Progress Grades ~*1 I I I Two ^BArs -SO One. Vceetr 5 l6>vl/ -50 Rapid 4 5" 6 Figure 9 8«-GrQdes Table 19 Progress percentages of 103,783 pupils in six cities with an elementary enrol- ment of over 5000 GRADE RAPID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YE.\RS SLOW 6 YE.\RS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL IS 296 10 604 9 615 8 181 7 078 6 150 4 950 4 501 2 044 2 769 2 040 3 019 3 021 2 982 2 268 I 706 197 483 437 906 I 070 981 672 424 47 75 112 302 354 311 155 109 8 18 23 87 III 91 29 42 I 6 7 26 24 6 2 I 4 2 5 4 3 I 2 297 3 354 2 621 4 345 4 584 4 374 3 127 2 282 17 593 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I 041 I 302 I 492 I 576 I 638 I 814 I 561 14 999 13 538 14 018 13 238 12 162 9 891 8 344 Total.. 10 424 66 375 19 849 5 170 I 464 409 73 19 26 984 103 783 38 Percentages 86.94 70.69 71 .01 58.36 54-15 50-56 49 63 53-94 II. 6 18.46 15.07 21. IS 22.92 21.94 20.41 15-87 i-iS 2-97 4-05 5 -24 6-27 4.81 3-36 2-28 .302 .508 .885 2.15 1.94 I . II .578 -455 .078 .113 -170 -550 .431 .316 .070 .109 .009 .011 -055 . 106 .101 .014 .011 .011 .047 .013 13-05 2I-36 19-36 30.98 34-11 35 96 31-87 27-34 100 2 3.. 4 5 6 7 g 7-94 9-62 10.64 11.72 13-46 18.48 18.71 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total.. 10.04 63.96 19-10 4-97 1-4 -393 .070 .018 26 100 Table 20 Progress percentages of 31,233 pupils in eight cities with an elementary enrol- ment from 3000 to 4999 GRADE RAPID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL I 3 873 3 136 2 862 2 374 2 068 I 544 I 417 I 087 736 890 I 004 988 935 814 484 346 79 243 286 283 3SS 249 104 75 10 30 6S 86 91 68 19 19 2 8 27 19 18 25 3 3 3 3 8 3 3 I I I 2 828 I I7S I 386 I 386 I 402 I 159 610 443 4 701 3 4 5 6 276 416 60s 747 771 904 764 4 587 4 664 4 365 4 217 3 474 2 931 8... 2 294 Total.. 4 483 18 361 6 197 I 674 388 lOS 20 5 8 389 31 233 Percentages 82-04 68-36 61-36 54-38 49 04 44-44 48-34 47-38 15-65 20.05 22.20 23-SS 22-26 24-88 17-68 iS-28 1-787 5-66 6-63 7.01 8-8r 7-61 3-55 3-26 .235 .637 1-475 2-193 2.36s 1.983 .73S -845 .047 . 196 .653 .487 •474 .781 .116 .148 .023 .073 .073 . 204 .079 -097 .023 .024 -024 -osi 17-613 25-621 29-716 31-752 33-246 33-362 20.8t2 19. 311 100 2 3 4 5 6 6.01 8.91 13.86 17-71 22-19 30.84 33-30 100 100 100 100 100 100 8 100 Total. . 14-35 58-78 19-84 5-36 1.242 .336 .064 .016 26.86 100 Table 21 Progress percentages of 19,689 pupils in seven cities and one village with an elementary enrolment between 2000 and 2999 GRADE R.A.PID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 00 323 337 400 393 492 424 312 2 645 I 824 I 610 I 167 I 229 985 843 634 493 624 734 646 634 523 382 294 49 121 214 260 198 177 112 94 6 22 76 84 74 46 42 21 I 9 21 21 29 13 4 8 I 3 9 8 6 2 I I I I 4 2 551 780 I 054 I 020 945 763 S4I 417 3 196 2 927 3 001 2 587 2 567 2 240 I 808 I 363 Total.. 2 681 10 937 4 330 I 225 371 106 30 9 6 071 19 689 39 Percentages I 82.8 56.52 15.43 21.32 I -534 4-136 .188 -753 .031 .375 031 103 .031 -034 17.245 33.46 100 2 10. 100 3 11.23 53.7 24-45 7-14 2-532 .700 300 35.122 100 4 IS. 46 45.15 24-97 10. OS 3-247 .813 309 ■ 039 39.428 100 s 15.31 47.84 24.7 7-72 2.885 I. 13 234 -156 36.82s 100 6 21.95 44. 23.34 7.91 2.053 .581 089 .089 34.062 100 7 23-45 46.6 21 . 12 6.20 2.322 .221 05 s 29.918 100 8 22.90 46.50 21-57 6-89 1-54 .587 . . - 30.587 100 Total.. 13.62 55-55 21-99 6.22 1.884 -539 152 .046 30.831 100 Table 22 Progress percentages of 30,932 pupils in sixteen cities and eight villages with an elementary enrolment between 1000 and 1999 pupils GRADE RAPID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW S YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 000 234 376 434 462 546 510 S6i 3 87s 2 971 2 476 2 269 2 025 I 845 I 429 I 228 900 I 001 983 I 02s 964 788 620 447 143 261 386 332 362 292 179 140 24 62 114 120 143 8S 52 23 4 13 40 61 44 II II 3 5 5 17 14 3 I I 3 6 2 I I 072 I 342 I 531 I 561 I 529 I 180 863 613 4 947 4 547 4 383 4 264 4 016 3 571 2 802 2 402 Total.. 3 123 18 118 6 728 2 095 623 187 45 13 9 691 30 932 Percentages I 00.00 5. IS 8.58 10.17 11.50 15.28 18-20 23-35 78.38 65-33 56.47 S3. 21 50.40 51.68 51.00 51.13 18.19 22.02 22.41 24.04 24.00 22.06 22. 12 18.61 2.89 S.74 8.81 7.79 9.02 8.18 6.39 5.83 .485 1.363 2.601 2.815 3.564 2.380 1.8SS .957 .08 .286 .913 1.430 1.095 .308 .392 .125 .000 . no .114 .399 .349 .084 .036 .000 020 21.62 29.52 34.95 36.62 38.10 33.04 30.80 25.52 100 3 4 5 6 7 8 068 141 050 028 000 000 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total. . 10.09 58-57 21.75 6.772 2.014 .6m .145 .042 31.33 100 Table 23 Progress percentages of 29,748 pupils in four cities, sixteen villages and twenty- eight union free school districts with an elementary enrolment between 500 and 999 GRADE RAPID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YE.'i.RS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL I 3 732 2 787 2 689 2 222 I 804 I 708 I 427 I 197 I 126 I 036 877 I 054 994 808 6S4 532 151 279 266 447 353 256 178 146 24 36 100 137 138 102 43 28 4 12 29 SO 30 28 5 6 6 4 6 2 I 3 2 I I 313 I 368 I 282 I 696 I SI7 I 196 881 712 5 045 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 100 160 316 381 418 433 409 4 255 4 131 4 234 3 702 3 322 2 741 2 318 Total.. 2 217 17 566 7 08 1 2 076 608 164 27 9 9 965 29 74S 40 Percentages 74 65.2 6s.i 32. 5 48.7 SI. 3 52.1 31.7 22.3 24.3 21 .2 24.9 26.8 24-3 23-9 23 3 .48 I. 31 2.42 3.24 3.72 3.06 1.37 I. 21 .08 .28 .70 I. 18 .81 .84 .18 .26 26 32.5 30 -5 40.1 41. 1 36.2 32.1 30.7 3 4 5 6 7 8 2.3 3.9 4.7 10.2 12. 5 15.6 17.6 6 6 10 9 7 6 6 5 4 5 7 9 5 7 .09 .17 .14 .03 .06 .04 .02 .06 .05 .03 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total . . 7-3 59-3 23.6 7 2. II .55 .09 .03 33.4 100 Table 24 Progress percentages of 22,049 pupils in three villages and sixty-one union free school districts with an elementary enrolment between 300 and 499 GR.\DE R.^PID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW S YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL I 2 690 2 155 I 799 I 778 I 530 I 299 I 131 I 292 729 719 750 801 758 549 504 202 86 213 235 244 275 204 155 126 17 37 51 78 94 87 33 16 7 17 28 38 22 4 3 I I I 8 5 2 I I 833 977 I 05s I 160 I 172 864 696 347 3 523 3 179 2 961 3 IIO 2 89s 2 416 2 040 I 925 2 3 4 5 6 47 107 172 193 253 213 286 8 Tr.taL. I 271 13 674 5 012 I 538 413 119 18 4 7 104 22 049 Percentages 76 A 20.70 22 .60 25.32 25.74 26.20 22.72 24.70 10.48 2.44 6.70 7.93 7.8s 9.50 8.45 7.60 6.53 .48 1. 16 1.72 2.51 3.25 3.60 1 .62 .83 .22 .57 .90 1.31 .91 . 196 .156 .028 .031 .034 .257 .173 .083 .034 .032 .069 23.648 30.711 35.618 37.289 40.50 35.763 34.116 17.996 2 3 4 5 6 7 1.48 3.61 5-53 6.67 10.47 10.44 14.84 67 60 57 52 53 55 67 8 8 2 9 8 5 100 100 100 100 100 8 Total.. 5.77 62 22.71 6.98 1.87 .54 .082 .018 32.20 100 Table 25 Progress percentages of 18,979 pupils in one village and seventy-six union free school districts with an elementary enrolment between 200 and 299 GRADE RAPID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YE-iVRS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOT.\L I 2 293 I 759 I 542 I 481 I 277 I 178 I 059 985 740 675 686 644 690 624 495 . 452 81 213 180 171 193 150 122 125 9 37 39 38 42 35 26 25 830 931 914 867 937 816 644 602 3 123 2 741 2 503 2 449 2 334 2 no I 896 I 823 -, 51 47 101 120 116 193 236 6 7 10 II 5 ■ I 3 4 5 6 7 2 3 I 2 I 8 Total.. 864 II 574 5 006 I 235 251 40 8 I 6 541 18 979 , 41 Percentages T 1.86 1.87 4.12 5 -14 S-S 10.18 12.94 73-5 64.2 61. 5 60.4 54-7 55-9 55-9 49.1 23.7 24.6 27.4 28 29-5 29.6 26. 1 24.8 2-59 7.77 7.18 6.98 8.27 7.12 6.44 6.86 2.88 1-35 1.56 1-55 1.80 1.66 1-37 1-37 26.257 33-946 36 . 498 37.10 30.085 38.682 33.963 33 -03 -> .219 ■ 279 .408 -472 -237 .053 3- 4- 5- 6. .079 . 122 .043 -095 -04 100 100 100 100 8. To tr.' . 4-S6 61 26.4 6.18 6. SI .132 .042 .005 41-057 100 Table 26 Progress percentages of 18,351 pupils in 153 union school districts with an elementary enrolment between 100 and 199 GR.-VDE RAPID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOT.-*L I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 000 76 63 120 154 193 222 250 2 428 I 774 I 367 I 304 I 008 981 972 I 256 337 820 694 613 632 543 450 441 14 205 215 200 199 182 104 95 45 48 55 82 48 30 16 7 15 12 16 18 9 3 2 7 I 4 7 5 I I I 6 351 I 080 979 882 934 804 598 555 2 779 2 930 2 409 2 306 2 096 I 978 1 792 2 061 Total . . I 078 II 090 4 530 I 214 324 80 26 9 6 183 18 351 Percentages 2.34 2.6x 5-21 7-35 9-76 12.39 12.13 87-4 61 .4 56.75 56-6 48-15 49-65 54-25 60.8 12 . 12 27 .20 28.8 26.57 30.15 27.45 25.12 21.4 -54 7-29 8-93 8.68 9.50 9.21 5-81 4.61 12.66 35-777 40.675 38.437 44-553 40.658 33-381 26.915 2. . . . 3 4..-. 5- • - ■ 6.... 7.... 8 I I 2 3 2 I 55 99 58 91 43 67 •76 387 623 521 754 911 502 041 290 043 191 354 279 042 042 043 048 303 100 100 100 100 100 -ri^ Total 5.82 60.8 24.44 6.5 1-78 .442 . 140 -05 33-352 100 Table 27 Progress percentages of 11,443 pupils in 175 union free school districts with an elementary enrolment below 100 GRADl : RAPID NORMAL I YEAR SLOW 2 YEARS SLOW 3 YEARS SLOW 4 YEARS SLOW 5 YEARS SLOW 6 YEARS SLOW TOTAL SLOW TOTAL 1. . . . 2. . . . 3.-.. 4.... 6.'.'.'. 7.--. S.... 77 109 133 126 141 141 260 I 280 I 016 832 823 796 712 647 618 396 366 352 457 362 332 269 289 41 90 106 121 104 96 67 73 17 13 26 23 35 19 16 17 3 I 8 9 4 I 4 I 7 2 I I I 456 472 487 616 510 453 354 384 I 736 I 565 I 428 I 572 I 432 I 306 I 142 I 262 Total 987 6 724 2 823 698 166 30 12 I 3 732 II 443 42 Percentages I 2. . . 3... 4... 4-92 7.6l 8.47 8.8 10.8 12. 35 20.6 ■70 S 2 ^ s co

o * O o -3 -3 "^ - ' _ W i - i- 55 ti- IT) 3 \r » . ^ o - £ ' - fs r- ci — ^ . - ^ i - i- h o- cr lo >o ♦S - . § s - s < 2| il Sg 1 ^ J - - 4 i > z ^ o - ~ - - - - - 2 = = = : : : ^ ■ - 2 s = S s _± = < XxdV oaa ^ jo lAlS - ' tr 3SV« 3X^3 »<" Bno '"' rf o» no 7H3S '° tuvi A-jn »M "■ S IS'S 5 ?i S ■ 'd-^'^ 2 IS 5 ni c o o ^ ^fe'sy.2 ^ u, d 14-1 " ^ ■^ <-i--i .^ ^ f2 -■ . O O C-^Ph /!) M , rt ^ 'C ^ B. 46 Individual Age-progress Slip The blank shown on page 44 has been found to be the most con- venient among several forms used during 19 17-18 in several cities and villages in New York State for collecting the original information from the schools. Note- that this blank is not a pupil's permanent record card. It is merely a form for gathering at one particular time all salient features of the pupil's schooling just previous to his entry into or immediately after his completion of a given grade. The normal age for beginning each grade as adopted by the super- intendents of New York State has already been indicated on page 30. These ages are figured as of the pupil's nearest birthday as follows: Age — September 75, iqiS Dates of birth used in com- puting ages 6-15-1913 to 12-14-1913. . 12-15-1912 to 6-14-1913.. 6-15-19T2 to 12-14-1912. . 12-15-1911 to 6-14-1912.. 6-15-1911 to 12-14-1911.. 12-15-1910 to 6-14-1911.. 6-15-1910 to 12-14-1910. . I 2-1 5-1 909 to 6-14-1910.. 6-15-1909 to 12-14-1909. . 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 6-15- 12-15- 908 to 6-14- 908 to 12-14- 907 to 6-14- 907 to 12-14- 906 to 6-14- 906 to 12-14- 905 to 6-14- 905 to 12-14- 904 to 6-14- 904 to 12-14- 903 to 6-14- 903 to 12-14- 902 to 6-14- 902 to 12-14- 901 to 6-14- 901 to 12-14- 900 to 6-14- 909. 908. 908. 907. 907. 906. 906. 905- 905- 904. 904. 903- 903- 902. 902. 901 . 901 . Example: Any pupil whose date of birth falls between June 15, 1913 and December 14, IQ13 is considered 5 years of age, etc. 5 years 5^ ■ 6 61 7 7i 9\ 10 io| II III 12 12I 13 13I '4, 14! 15 15I 16 i6i 17 17I Conclusion From the nimiber of years in school reported by the superintendents and supervising principals of the State as of May 21, 19 17 for pupils we may conclude that the schools as a whole report that 30 per cent of the pupils at the time of the survey had been going to school one or more years longer than the time usually required to place _ them in the grades in which they were found. 47 When examined separately for groups of schools based on elementary enrolment, these years in school reports show that 1 The extra time in school affects the greatest percentage of the total niimber of pupils in the union free school districts having an elementary enrolment between 200 and 299 pupils where the percentage of pupils thus reported to have spent more time in school than the normal period, is 34 per cent. 2 City school systems enrolling over 5000 elementary pupils report the least number of pupils having spent extra time in school, the proportion of the total number of pupils being 26 per cent. Because the data were collected near the close of the school year before the June promotions, the figures submitted by the super- intendents and principals do not include two classes of pupils: (i) those who dropped out of school for various reasons and in particular those who gave it up as a bad job before May 21, 19 17, and (2) those who were not promoted in June as a result of the fact that they were not prepared to enter the next higher grade in Sep- tember 19 17. These features^ together with other less important statistical discrepancies such as the omission of age data and reporting the schooling of midyear entrants by numbers representing whole school years, make it impossible to consider these reported extra years in school and the resulting percentages of the total ntimber of pupils affected as synonymous with actual retardation. Measured in a manner reliably to determine actual retardation, ten cities found that this condition affected 4.4 per cent more of their total enrolment than the proportion of pupils reported to have received extra schooling according to the method used throughout the State. While for these reasons the statewide years in school figures can not be used for exact comparison with communities throughout the country, they constitute, owing to the large number of communities reported and to a certain degree of uniformity which may safely be assumed in these reports, a valuable measure for superintendents and principals in locating the position of their local systems among others of comparable size in New York State. Reported retardation and intelligence. Applying a very loose construction to the reported number of years in school in excess of the number normally required to place a pupil in a given grade as indicating a proportionate amount of retardation, we should obtain a self-made picture of the pupils in the elementary schools of the State which would take the form of figure 11. In this diagram the great mass of the children are making normal progress (6 1 per cent) and at the bottom of the high column there are two short columns 48 at the right representing about 9 per cent of the pupils who are making rapid progress. To the left of the center normal-progress column four columns represent pupils who have made one, two, three, four, five and six years slow progress through the elementary grades as far as they had gone at the time of the survey. After considering the 2 1 and 6 per cent represented by the i year-slow and 2 year-slow, columns, we might regard the small proportion of the total pupils who are reported three to six years slow as practicabh^ negligible so far as being a cause of any " alarm " about the welfare of the entire pupil body. The schools then say that of every ten pupils in the elementary schools one is ahead of his grade, six are progressing normally and three are behind the procession. In general terms, the schools may be said to have their pupils in these proportions. Let us glance at a similar diagram representing the distribution of " 1000 unselected children " according to the Stanford revision and extension of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale, figure 12. Here we find the minds of the children themselves represented in quite a different looking distribution than the arrangement in figure 11, based on where the schools " have " the children. On this particular basis of supposedly measurable intelligence we find a center area of 55.5 per cent of the total represented as possessing normal intelli- gence. This column is flanked on the left by areas representing, respectively, relatively low intelligence in the proportions 20 per cent, 8.6, 2.3 etc., based on so-called "inteUigence quotas" or the ratio of mental age to physical age. The groups indicated at the bottom of the figure signify: 14.35^ per cent dull but not feeble-minded, 5.45 per cent borderline cases, 1.48 per cent definitely feeble-minded, or 21.28 per cent below normal. Note that these percentages of something the matter with the children's minds are much smaller than those in figure 1 1 expressing something the matter with their progress through school. Many students of these problems question the validity of this intelligence scale, and this paper emphatically questions the vahdity of the reported years in school and the resulting progress per cents shown in figure 11. But the objectors to the intelligence scale tend to reduce the number of mentally defective children, while the cor- rection of the progress scale would increase the number of children retarded in the schools. In other words, there appears to be less trouble with their minds and more trouble with their schooling than these figures would indicate on their face value. 1 Figures obtained by taking halves of adjacent columns. 49 61% 7Yr. Sfow Progress Rapid 2.Yr5. ; Over Rop/d ; avri. ' Rapid Figure ii Rapid, normal and slow progress of 286,207 elementary pupils in 563 public school systems in New York State This figure shows where the schools have the children located with reference to the normal advancement of one grade a year. Note that relatively a larger number of pupils are found on the slow side of the normal than in the portion of the diagram representing rapid pupils. 50 Proceeding to the right-hand part of the diagrams, we have in the school -progress figure but lo per cent of the total who are accelerated, while the intelligence diagram shows three gradations, two of which are of very considerable relative dimensions: 16.05^ per cent of superior intelHgence, 5.92 -per cent of very superior intelli- gence, .28 per cent "near genius" and genius, 22.25 above normal intelligence. However little one may care for this alleged intelligence scale or whatever opinion of its reliability is entertained, it is more in keeping with hundreds of other studied factors of biological 75 70 80 Definite Bor- DuW- Feeblemind- der- r)ess edness line. 1 .48% 5.45 14.35 90 Mormal Intelligence 55.5 Figure 12 lis 126 Super- m H5" I or 16.5 If Very Superior Near- Intel licence 5.92 Gen/us .28 Intelligence distribution of 1000 unselected children This figure should be examined in connection with figure 11. Note that so far as the children's minds are concerned: (i) the number below normal is con- siderably less than the proportion of children whose progress through school is below normal as shown in figure 11, and (2) that the number of children who appear in any way to be mentally slow is more than counterbalanced by the number of children of corresponding degrees of mental superiority. This is in marked contrast to the relatively few children who are making rapid progress through school. This figure is a modified form of a diagram in " The Measure- ment of Intelligence " by Lewis M. Terman, published by the Macmillan Com- pany and reproduced here with the permission of the author and the publishers. Together figures 11 and 12 would appear to show that there is consderably more trouble with the children's schooling than there is with their minds and that whatever is the matter with their schooling is quite out of proportion to anything wrong with their minds. 1 Figures obtained by taking halves of adjacent columns. 5' research for the "intelligence quota" to be normal in the " middle half " of all the children and then to be higher in a few groups, rapidly decreasing in one direction with an almost equal proportion of low quotas in a few groups rapidly decreasing in the opposite direction, than the exceedingly irregular distribution of the school-progress diagram with only one-tenth of the children exceptionally favorably situated, an excess of normal progress and at least one-half again as many behind in school as are backward in intelligence. Reported retardation and physical defects. A report from a single village school system with 518 pupils in grades i to 6 inclusive shows the following table which, while "proving nothing because it is only one village," is interesting in demonstrating that physical defects are present among retarded pupils but are by no means limited to that group. Table 29 Under, normal and overage and physical defects WITHOUT PHYSICAL DEFECTS WITH PHYSICAL DEFECTS TOTAL PERCENTAGES GROUP OF PUPILS With- out defects With defects Total 22 69 21 79 258 69 lOI 327 90 4.2 133 4 15.2 50 13-3 19.4 63.3 17-3 Total 112 406 518 21. S 78.5 100 The above table shows the distribution of physical defects among underage, normal and overage pupils. Note that in this particular school system there are more children with- physical defects among those who are underage than among the overage children both numerically and relatively. Note further that of 406 pupils with defects, 337 or 83 per cent, are of normal age or young for their grades. The actual significance of physical defects as influencing retardation is of course not brought out at all in this table. The proper statistical correlation requires a detailed examination of individual school-progress and physical record^ cards. The problem is further complicated b}^ the fact that while each pupil has but one rating with reference to progress, he may have several different physical defects. This is, however, readily accomplished by means of mechanical tabulation and it is hoped that a limited research of this type will be ready for dis- tribution in the fall. 52 The achievements of pupils with standard classroom tests would result in still other distributions of the children. In school systems where these tests are used, the results when diagrammed show the large columns of average ability with shorter columns of superior and low ability tapering off in either direction from the center normal. We appear to have this general form of distribution in about every- thing that we subject to definite measurement both in physical and in mental growth. The place where we find children in school, however, appears to depart radically from any form of distribution which could be called normal and there are surely plenty of factors contributing to this resulting statistical discrepancy, that is, to the 30 per cent slow-progress group as opposed to the 10 per cent rapid-progress element. Absence from school, late entrance, trans- ferring back and forth between public and parochial schools, physical defects, often the demands of the curriculum itself and other causes already enumerated in this paper continue to reduce the rapid- progress element and augment the slow-progress groups. As already stated, there is no criticism expressed or implied in the general slow-progress conditions in which a superintendent happens to find the children in his public schools. The first step in the solution of any problem of this sort is to determine just how large a problem it is and whether the situation in a given locality differs materially from the situation throughout the State, particularly in the group of comparable sizes, to see the direction in which the difference tends and finally to examine the local system with such scrutiny, as time and available clerical help will permit and as far as possible to apply the known standards so far as that relatively recent branch of science has been developed. Preventive and Remedial Measures The query naturally arises, now that we have this information about nonpromotion. What is to be done about it? In several places, notably in Rochester, N. Y., considerable attention has been given to the preventive and remedial measures used by ele- mentary teachers against retardation. It is significant to note that where teachers have reported in detail their efforts to reduce re- tardation, they have enumerated measures all of which should be employed by every good teacher in her regular work with normally successful pupils as well as with those in danger of nonpromotion. There is indeed little doubt that the most effective way to reduce retardation ig to improve the teaching itself, and this is already the superintendent's constant problem. 53 Many cities have certain features in their organization, which, entirely apart from the effort to improve the effectiveness of the instruction in the regular classroom, make it easier to grapple with the retardation problem and have been of material assistance in reducing its effects. These special features in the organization of the school and of the whole local system do not apply to pupils who are making normal or rapid progress, but to retarded pupils and those in danger of nonpromotion, and for this reason they may be called preventive and remedial measures with more propriety than those which ought to be a feature of the effective and success- ful teaching of all pupils. It is planned to make these measures the subject of a later bulletin. A tentative list of some of these measures is given by way of illustration. 1 Primarily concerning the teaching a Those which allow the pupil repeating the grade to remain with the class which is regularly taking the grade for the first time. The remedial work is "performed by the teacher in the course of her regular instruction, and the retarded pupil is supposed to have the chance of finishing the grade with the rest of the class. b Those which involve the services of an assistant working in the classroom with the regular teacher. c Those which involve a temporary transfer to a special class and a prospective return to the regular grade in time to complete it with the class at the close of the term. d Those which involve a transfer to a special class with a return to regular work some time after the class from which the transfer was made has completed the work of that grade. (i) Ungraded classes (4) Classes for atypical pupils (2) Foreign classes (5) Open-air classes (3) Special catch-up classes e Those which involve the substitution of a modified, though regu- larly graded, course of study in place of the regular elementary curriculum. / Those which involve a transfer to another sort of school or institution which substitutes a special curriculum for that of the graded school. 2 Primarily concerning the administration of the school Those which relate to the principal's office and to the school district as a unit rather than to the instruction in the classroom. The keeping and actual use of special individual records of scholar- ship, health and standard test results; special features of organiza- tion within the school and of cooperation with the home. 54 3 Primarily concerning the administration in the entire local school system Those which relate to the department as a whole and to coopera- tion with other city departments and organizations. Analysis of retardation records of schools and use of data in the supervisory program. Employment of clerk or estabhshment of a bureau of research and educational measurement. Cooperation with all city departments having to do with children. Study of the methods used in other cities of comparable size. REF£R£f/C£ BURE/tU RECORDS ffEse/iifcH RCcOMKmmms Figure 13 SCHOOL /?rrr/?rNC£- /ind /^£5r/jRCH bure/iu SCHOOLS or THE COUNTRY LOCRL PUBLIC Figure 14 55 The functions of such a reference and research bureau, as suggested in figures 13 and 14 and as given in greater detail in the following outline, may in small systems be carried out with the aid of a clerk without any additional formal organization in the superintendent's office. In any case, such a bureau should be either part of the superintendent's office or under his direction and should serve the board through the superintendent, to whom as Chief Executive Officer of the Board of Education all other officers and employees, excepting only the board members themselves, are subordinate. RESEARCH AND EFFICIENCY BUREAU EDUCATIONAL DIVISION A PROPOSED PLAN Why an educational division of the proposed research and efficiency bureau is needed: I. School board members need to have in the briefest summary form the contents, significance and trustworthiness of all reports issued by employees of the board. I . School board members need to know what is going on in schools throughout the country as presented in current literature and reports of other cities. 3. School board members frequently need information already collected and in the files but not published in any report, or a presentation of data from some standpoint not used in any report. 4. The board wishes all directing employees to keep in touch with what is being done by the schools in other parts of the country, public and private, and also with best foreign practice. 5. The board wishes to protect all employees from unnecessary clerical work in answering requests for information from officers within the system and from out-of-town inquirers, whom the board nevertheless wishes to oblige. 6. The board wishes local schools to benefit by all the findings of researches to which they have contributed by supplying information. 7. The board often needs to investigate a special problem or situation inde- pendently from existing reports. 8. The board needs a current guarantee that all offices at headquarters and in schools are being conducted in an up-to-date and efficient manner. 9. The board needs to know at all times public opinion, criticism and suggestion relating to the city's schools. 10. The board wishes to keep the public in close touch with the achievements of the school system. To meet these needs, an educational division of the proposed research and efficiency bureau is suggested, to consist of the following departments, with functions as indicated: Department Function 1. Records and reports To have custody of all local reports. To keep records of state regents examinations. To keep records concerning progress through school for each school and grade; single, double, trial promotions ; non-promotions ; e-xamination results. To have charge of teachers' register and card system. To have charge of correspondence files. To have charge of clipping files. To have charge of office library, including reports and publications. 2, Statistics To tabulate data. To prepare statistical matter for annual reports, charts and graphs. S6 019 822 075 9 To prepare statistical summaries for board and supervising officers. To compile per capita cost of each school, each school department, supplies, unit costs of courses of instruction, etc. 3. Information To assort for ready call all available information about Buffalo schools. (a) For board members. (b) To supply facts to members of school system, guarding individual schools against time-consuming requests. (c) To supply out-of-town inquirers (question- air es, from individuals, institutions. State Education Department, U. S. Bureau of Education, etc.) directly from files, thereby guarding office heads against time intrusion. (d) To supply local inquirers with informa- tion, to protect office heads and employees against avoidable loss of time. To follow up and get results of researches to which local schools have contributed. To collect educational information from other cities. To request or subscribe for educational periodicals, bulletins, annual reports, etc. 4. Suggestions and com- plaints To investigate and report to the board all sugges- tions and complaints addressed to that body and its employees. 5. Routine and forms To secure blank forms and sample records of other city school departments. To examine continually and to recommend improve- ments in routine of offices and in forms and blanks used for collecting and recording necessary information — to facilitate collection of data, to increase its usefulness, and to protect employees from unnecessary requests for information. 6. Publicity and clipping service To have general charge of the preparation of all publications of the school department. To have charge of newspaper pubhcity. To have charge of work connected x^'ith conven- tions, entertainments of visiting educators, etc. 7. Appraisal and research. . . To collect, compile and analyze special data for board of education and for supervisory officers, such as salary schedules, rules and regulations of school boards, teachers' examinations, etc. To analyze local and outside records and reports, dealing with costs of instruction, results, methods, retardation, elimination, etc. To conduct educational efficiency tests, such as tests in spelling, writing, arithmetic, reading, etc. To prepare educational efficiency indices for school system. To prepare digests, charts and graphs dealing with educational matters. As the writer is engaged in war work at Washington, D. C, full information relating to blank forms, charts and tabulations of Age Progress statistics for superintendents desiring to have this work done outside, additional copies of this handbook, samples of blanks used in school surveys, etc. may be obtained by addressing Mr. F. E. Shapleigh, Public Education Association, 706 Niagara Life Building, Buffalo, N. Y. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 019 822 075 9