L IBRAHY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UN IVER.SITY 
 
 Of ILLINOIS 
 
 370 
 IfG 
 
 no 
 
 -53 
 
c 
 
 Return this book on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books 
 are reasons for disciplinary action and may 
 result in dismissal from the University. 
 University of Illinois Library 
 
 N3!/ 1 3 fggj 
 
 > 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 DEC 1 t IS 
 
 78 
 
 
 t 
 
 1978 
 
 
 APR 2 9 
 
 981 
 
 
 MAYl 
 
 J1AK ub 
 
 5«M 
 
 2006 
 
 L161— O-1096 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2012 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/summerworkinpubl49odel 
 
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BULLETIN 
 
 Issued Weekly 
 Vol. XXVII April 22, 1930 No. 34 
 
 [Entered as second-class matter December 11, 1912, at the post office at Urbana, Illinois, 
 under the Act of August 24, 1912. Acceptance for mailing at the special rate of post- 
 age provided for in section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917, authorized July 31, 1918.] 
 
 BULLETIN No. 49 
 
 BUREAU OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 
 COLLEGE OF EDUCATION 
 
 SUMMER WORK IN 
 PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 By 
 
 Charles W. Odell 
 Assistant Director, Bureau of Educational Research 
 
 PRICE 30 CENTS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, URBANA 
 
 1930 
 
The Bureau of Educational Research was established by- 
 act of the Board of Trustees June 1, 1918. It is the purpose 
 of the Bureau to conduct original investigations in the field of 
 education, to summarize and bring to the attention of school 
 people the results of research elsewhere, and to be of service 
 to the schools of the state in other ways. 
 
 The results of original investigations carried on by the 
 Bureau of Educational Research are published in the form of 
 bulletins. A list of available publications is given on the back 
 cover of this bulletin. At the present time five or six original 
 investigations are reported each year. The accounts of re- 
 search conducted elsewhere and other communications to the 
 school men of the state are published in the form of educa- 
 tional research circulars. From ten to fifteen of these are 
 issued each year. 
 
 The Bureau is a department of the College of Education. 
 Its immediate direction is vested in a Director, who is also an 
 instructor in the College of Education. Under his supervision 
 research is carried on by other members of the Bureau staff 
 and also by graduates who are working on theses. From this 
 point of view the Bureau of Educational Research is a re- 
 search laboratory for the College of Education. 
 
 Bureau of Educational Research 
 
 College of Education 
 
 University of Illinois, Urbana 
 
BULLETIN No. 49 
 
 BUREAU OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 
 COLLEGE OF EDUCATION 
 
 SUMMER WORK IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 By 
 
 Charles W. Odell 
 
 Assistant Director, Bureau of Educational Research 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, URBANA 
 
 1930 
 
UNIVERSITY 
 OF ILLINOIS 
 ■ l PRESS ■■ 
 
PREFACE 
 
 Information concerning present practices is helpful to 
 superintendents and boards of education in planning the 
 work of a school system. The fact that certain things are 
 being done in certain schools, or even in a large number of 
 schools, does not, of course, mean that these practices 
 should be introduced into all schools, but when a practice 
 becomes at all general or when it is being introduced in an 
 increasing number of schools, a superintendent should be 
 informed concerning the matter. This bulletin on summer 
 work in public schools is published for the purpose of 
 bringing to the attention of superintendents and boards 
 of education in Illinois, the present status of provisions 
 for summer work in the schools of the state and the prac- 
 tices in schools elsewhere. The facts presented indicate an 
 evident tendency to make some provision for school work 
 during the summer months and it is believed desirable that 
 superintendents and boards of education should be in- 
 formed concerning what is being done in many places. 
 
 February 4, 1930 Walter S. Monroe, Director 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Chapter I. Introduction 7 
 
 Chapter II. The Development and Present Status of Sum- 
 mer Work in This Country 9 
 
 Chapter III. Summer Work in Illinois Public Schools in 
 
 1929 21 
 
 Chapter IV. The Outcomes of Summer W t ork 30 
 
 Chapter V. Summary and Conclusions 41 
 
LIST OF TABLES 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Table I. Data Concerning Summer High Schools in the United States 18 
 Table II. Per Cents of School Systems of Different Sizes Responding 23 
 
SUMMER WORK IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 Importance of the problem. Although summer work for public- 
 school pupils has not received so much space in written and oral dis- 
 cussion of educational problems as has been accorded each of several 
 others, it nevertheless should rank among those of relatively high 
 importance in the educational field. This is evidenced, in part, by the 
 fact that it has been receiving an increasing amount of attention for 
 several decades. The rapid growth of attendance at summer sessions 
 of colleges, normal schools, and universities, the ever increasing con- 
 gestion in our cities, the movement for the reduction of child labor;, 
 the use of labor-saving machinery which renders the services of chil- 
 dren less helpful on the farm, and the general social tendency for the 
 family to assume less and the state more responsibility for children, 
 have all contributed to bring the question of summer work in public 
 schools into greater prominence. In view of these and other reasons, 
 it seems worth while to make a brief study of the question, including" 
 its development and present status, and the available evidence as to 
 the results that follow from the attendance of elementary and high- 
 school pupils during the summer. 
 
 Plan and purpose of this bulletin. Summer work in public schools 
 exists in many forms and varieties, ranging from individual tutoring 
 of pupils who have failed, through summer sessions held in the school 
 building and open to many if not all who desire to attend, up to sum- 
 mer quarters that constitute an integral part of all-year schools. It 
 is the purpose of this bulletin to deal briefly with several phases of 
 summer work, including all the various forms just referred to. Chap- 
 ter II contains a brief history of the development of summer work in 
 the elementary and secondary schools of the United States, including 
 short descriptions of the plans of such work as given in a number of 
 city-school systems, and summaries of several studies of the number 
 and characteristics of summer sessions. Chapter III gives the results 
 of a study of such work in the public schools of the State of Illinois 
 for the summer of 1929. Chapter IV presents arguments for and 
 against summer work, and the rather scanty evidence available as to- 
 
8 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 its outcomes. Finally in Chapter V the previous chapters are briefly 
 summarized and conclusions stated. 
 
 In this bulletin, no effort will be made to trace and discuss in de- 
 tailed fashion the various types of summer work offered. Moreover, 
 in most cases elementary and high-school work will be treated to- 
 gether, since there appear to be few significant differences. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE DEVELOPMENT AND PRESENT STATUS OF 
 
 SUMMER WORK IN THIS COUNTRY 
 
 Former lengths of school years. During the earlier part of the 
 nineteenth century, and even later, it was not unusual for rural and 
 small-town children, especially girls and small boys, to attend school 
 during a considerable part of the summer rather than during the 
 severe winter weather. Probably the chief cause was that because of 
 the lack of good roads and the distances that must be travelled to 
 reach the schools, it was difficult to attend school during the winter. 
 However, as roads were improved and as cities and towns became 
 more numerous, the practice of having summer terms became less 
 common until it has become the almost universal practice for the 
 longest vacation period of the year to come during the summer months, 
 or perhaps to include all of them. 
 
 In the larger cities of the country conditions w r ere different. Many, 
 probably most, of them formerly had school years much longer than 
 is the custom now, with short vacations including only a small part of 
 the summer. For example, the Commissioner of Education 1 has re- 
 ported data on lengths of school years about 1841-42. Some of the 
 lengths are reported in days, some in weeks, and some in months. 
 Boston is stated to have had a session of 224 days, Washington of 238, 
 Philadelphia of 251%, and Detroit of 253. That of Cleveland was 
 forty-three weeks in length, that of Chicago forty-eight, and that of 
 New York forty-nine. Brooklyn, Baltimore, and Cincinnati had 
 eleven-month sessions, whereas Buffalo had one of twelve months. 
 
 Decrease in length of sessions. The school years just cited are all 
 much longer than those in more recent times. Fifty years later those 
 in the same cities ranged from 180 days in Washington to 203 in 
 Baltimore, and at present they are practically the same. In other 
 words, the school years of these cities about ninety years ago were 
 from twenty to sixty days, or one to three months, longer than at 
 present. These long terms were not balanced by shorter school days. 
 In the eight of the above named systems for which such figures are 
 given, no daily session was less than five hours, and one was as much 
 as seven hours, with recesses omitted, whereas in the same systems 
 
 ll 'U. S. Commissioner of Education, Annual Report 1891-92." Washington: Govern- 
 ment Printing Office, 1894, Vol. 2, p. 664. 
 
10 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 fifty years later, and also at present, the sessions are mostly from 
 four and one-half to five hours, an average of an hour or more less 
 than in 1841-42. 
 
 In most cases the decreases in the lengths of the school years did 
 not occur all at once, and seem not to have resulted from critical con- 
 siderations of what was desirable, but rather to have been largely 
 accidental and to have happened almost imperceptibly. For example, 
 in Boston, which had a school year of 224 days about 1841, there were 
 a number of short decreases resulting in a length of 200 in 1891. 
 Since then the process has continued, the length being 197 in 1900, 
 187 in 1910, 182 in 1920, and approximately that at the present time. 2 
 The same change has occurred in most of the other cities, although a 
 few exceptions exist. A study made a few years ago to which 569 
 cities responded showed that only one had a school year of over 200 
 days, and that approximately half of them had school years of not 
 more than 180 days. Within the past few years there has been a slight 
 tendency for city-school systems to increase the length of their terms. 
 Thus fifty out of eight hundred cities reporting in 1928 claim to 
 have added from five to twenty days to their terms within the last 
 two years. 3 Most of these, however, are small cities and not those 
 which formerly had longer terms. 
 
 On the other hand, the length of school sessions in rural and small 
 town schools has been increasing. Indeed, this increase has been so 
 pronounced as to raise the average for the whole United States from 
 130 days in 1880 to 162 in 1920. Thus instead of the former condi- 
 tion in which city-school children received almost an entire year or 
 at least eleven months of schooling and country-school children only 
 about half that amount, or even less, it has now come to be that the 
 former receive nine or ten months and the latter seven, eight, or nine. 
 
 The beginning of vacation schools. The first summer schools for 
 elementary or high-school pupils, as distinct from the summer terms 
 referred to above as existing earlier, were so-called "vacation schools." 
 Their chief function, at least at first, was to keep the children who 
 attended, pleasantly and perhaps profitably occupied so that they would 
 be removed from undesirable influences to which they would other- 
 wise be exposed. Some of what might be called the supplementary 
 or non-essential school subjects were offered, usually in rather in- 
 formal fashion, but no attempt was made to have the children do the 
 
 2 "The Waning School Term of the Cities," Los Angeles School Journal, 7:15, Novem- 
 ber 5. 1923. 
 
 3 Deffenbaugh, W. S. "Significant Movements in City School Systems." U. S. Bureau 
 of Education Bulletin, 1929, No. 16. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1929, p. 7-8. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 11 
 
 work of the regular school year. Furthermore, these schools were 
 established and maintained by charitable, social, or other organiza- 
 tions and were not an integral part of the public schools. The first 
 such vacation school on record appears to have been organized by 
 First Church in Boston in 1866. 4 The second was established in Provi- 
 dence four or five years later by a voluntary committee. Both of 
 these schools appear to have remained open during all but three weeks 
 of the summer vacation. In 1894 the Association for Improving the 
 Condition of the Poor started such schools in New York City. In 
 1896 they were begun in Chicago under the auspices of the Civic 
 Federation, which was replaced in 1898 by the Chicago Woman's 
 Club. In Pittsburgh the Civic Club, in Cleveland the Ladies' Aid 
 Society of the Old Stone Church, in Rochester the Woman's Educa- 
 tional and Industrial Union and the Playground League, and in other 
 cities similar organizations established them. 
 
 The first real summer schools. In some of the cities referred to 
 above, permission was granted the organizations maintaining vacation 
 schools to make use of school buildings. From this step others fol- 
 lowed until the summer work was incorporated as part of the regular 
 public-school system. Thus in Providence, for example, the schools, 
 after being discontinued in 1876 and resumed again in 1894, were 
 taken over by the Board of Education in 1900; in Xew York they 
 were taken over somewhat earlier, 1897, and in Chicago, about the 
 same time as in Providence. In many cases the Board of Education 
 at first contributed only a portion of the expense and did not assume 
 entire control, in others the whole step was taken at once. By about 
 1900 the movement for the incorporation of vacation schools into 
 regular school systems may be said to have been fairly well under 
 way, although it had actually been carried out in a comparatively few 
 systems. The same may be said of the tendency to offer more or less 
 the same work as in the regular year. Instead of devoting practically 
 all of their time to activities largely recreational in nature, pupils 
 began to study one or two of the regular school subjects and then 
 gradually more and more until the work became quite similar to that 
 of the regular year, although perhaps not including all subjects. 
 
 The first all-year school. Although Buffalo and several other cities 
 had what may properly be called all-year schools about 1840, no 
 systems deserving this term appear to have existed near the close of 
 
 4 Perry, C. A. "Vacation Schools," Wider Use of the School Plant. New York City: 
 Russell Sage Foundation, 1910, Chapter V. 
 
 Reals, W. H. "A Study of the Summer High School," Teachers College, Columbia 
 University Contributions to Education, No. 337. New York: Bureau of Publications, 
 Teachers College, Columbia University, 1928. 88 p. 
 
12 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 the nineteenth century. Bluffton, 5 Indiana, seems to have been the 
 first to organize its schools on such a basis, since those having it 
 earlier had discontinued the practice. In 1904 it adopted four three- 
 months terms with the provision that pupils were to attend only three 
 of the four terms. This was qualified by allowing those who had been 
 absent a great deal to attend enough of the fourth term to make up 
 their absences. 
 
 Features of summer work in different cities. Newark* The city 
 whose summer work has attracted the most attention of any in the 
 country is undoubtedly Newark, New Jersey. In 1885 it established 
 what is claimed to have been the first real summer school, as dis- 
 tinguished from vacation schools, in the United States. As elsewhere, 
 the work in Newark began on a small scale and gradually increased. 
 During the first few years the summer work was merely a separate 
 term or session offered in some of the schools. In 1912, however, 
 the all-year school with four twelve-weeks' terms was introduced. 
 There were four weeks of vacation during the year, one at Christmas, 
 one at Easter, and two toward the end of August. The work offered 
 in the summer in the all-year schools was the same as that during the 
 other three quarters. Regular teachers were employed. Entrance at 
 the beginning and graduation at the end of each quarter w r ere allowed, 
 and in numerous other w r ays the four quarters were made as similar 
 as possible. Apparently it was required that pupils attend the fall, 
 winter, and spring quarters, and not the summer one, attendance at 
 the latter being optional. The plan was not completely adopted. Some 
 schools were put on the all-year plan, others offered special summer 
 work, and apparently others were closed during the summer. All 
 pupils who wished to attend in the summer were allowed to do so. 
 
 North Dakota State Normal School. 1 The summer work for ele- 
 mentary-school pupils at the State Normal School at Minot, North 
 Dakota, began about 1914. The session was six weeks in length and 
 was intended chiefly for laggards. As time went on, however, the 
 proportion of laggards gradually decreased and that of pupils taking 
 advanced work increased. After several years on this plan, the work 
 for the whole year was organized into four quarters, the summer 
 quarter, however, being different from the other three in that draw- 
 ing, manual training, physical education, and music were omitted, 
 
 5 Wirt, W. A. "A School Year of Twelve Months," Education, 27:619-22, Tune, 1907. 
 
 6 Carson, D. B. "The All- Year School," Journal of Education, 88:563-68, December 5, 
 1918. 
 
 Farrand, Wilson and O'Shea. M. V. "The All- Year Schools of Newark, New Jersey." 
 Newark, New Jersey: Board of Education, 1925. 96 p. 
 
 Lovell, L. E. "All-Year School," Educational Review, 73:196-202, April, 1927. 
 
 7 Clarke, W. F. "An All- Year Elementary School," Elementary School Journal, 
 22:286-89, December, 1921. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 13 
 
 and the daily sessions lasted only from 8:30 until 12:00. Apparently 
 summer attendance was entirely optional, but about 70 per cent of 
 the number of students in the regular sessions attended. 
 
 Amarillo. 8 Amarillo, Texas, made a somewhat unusual organiza- 
 tion of the school year with three sixteen-weeks' terms instead of 
 the more usual four twelve-weeks' quarters of an all-year school. 
 All pupils were allowed, and apparently also required, to attend 
 two of the three terms free, and the regular year's work was covered 
 in the thirty-two weeks. Apparently all pupils who were willing; 
 to pay the tuition charges attended the third term also. At the 
 time that this plan was inaugurated, it was stated that it was only 
 temporary and that the school authorities hoped to change it to one 
 wherein two of the terms would be devoted to academic work and the 
 third to practical application thereof, with all pupils attending all three 
 terms. 
 
 Omaha. 9 The Commercial High School of Omaha began the all- 
 year plan with four twelve-weeks' terms about 1918. Pupils were al- 
 lowed to enter at the beginning and were graduated at the end of each 
 quarter. Other high schools in the city had for some time given eight- 
 weeks' summer terms, but the all-year plan was so successful that they 
 were contemplating changing to it. 
 
 Nashville. 10 Next to Newark, Nashville, Tennessee, has probably 
 received the most publicity for its summer work. After a thorough 
 study of the question, the organization of the schools was changed 
 from two ordinary semesters to four twelve-weeks' terms with two 
 weeks' vacation at Christmas, and two in the summer. As at New- 
 ark, the attempt was made to make the work and conditions sur- 
 rounding it during the summer just the same as during the other 
 quarters. At Nashville also attendance during the summer was made 
 voluntary; nevertheless about two-thirds of the pupils enrolled. A1E 
 teachers who wished to do so were allowed to teach, the result being: 
 that 86 per cent of them did. Both teachers and pupils in the summer 
 quarter were allowed, if they wished, to take a vacation during any one 
 of the other three quarters, but apparently they were encouraged to 
 remain for all four. 
 
 Seattle. 11 Seattle has offered summer work for a number of years. 
 That for elementary pupils is only six weeks in length, whereas that 
 
 8 " All-Year Schools," Elementary School Journal, 21:10-12, September, 1920. 
 
 9 Beveridge, J. H. "Omaha High Schools on All-Year Plan," School Life, 11:22, 
 October, 1925. 
 
 10 Weber, H. C. "All- Year Public School Succeeding," Texas Outlook, 9:7-8, June, 1925. 
 
 Weber, H. C. "To Increase the Educated Quota— The All-Year School," Journal of 
 Education, 102:102-7, August 13, 1925. 
 
 ""All- Year Schools," Elementary School Journal, 21:10-12, September, 1920. 
 
14 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 for high-school pupils is eight weeks. Apparently there are separate 
 classes, in some cases at least, for pupils who have failed or have 
 been in danger of failing and for those who are attending in order 
 to gain time or credit. 
 
 Aliquippa. 12 Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, rather recently adopted the 
 all-year plan, but apparently with a different motive from that of 
 many other systems. In this case, as in that of Bluff ton, the motive 
 seems to be chiefly financial economy. It is not expected that children 
 will attend all four quarters, but that three-fourths of them will be 
 in school each quarter, or, in other words, each child will attend three 
 of the four quarters. Thus because greater use is made of the school 
 plant and the additional amount necessary to pay teachers is not so 
 great as the additional amount of schooling gained by pupils, economy 
 is effected. 
 
 New York State. 13 In most cases the city systems that have offered 
 summer work have met the expenditures necessary out of their ordi- 
 nary school funds, in some cases charging tuition from the pupils to 
 supplement these, or occasionally even to meet the whole expense. 
 Furthermore, there has been little action by state legislatures or other 
 controlling bodies regarding the matter. In Xew York State, however, 
 definite action has been taken with regard to summer schools, so that 
 they may be said to have state encouragement. Some four years ago 
 a special appropriation of twenty-five thousand dollars was made to 
 provide for supervising and inspecting summer and evening high 
 schools and for holding the Regents Examinations of pupils therein. 
 More or less as a result of this encouragement, the number of such 
 schools in the State of New York has increased rather rapidly. In 
 1925, the first year after the provision was made, there were twenty- 
 two schools with over nineteen thousand pupils. The very next year 
 the number increased to thirty-five schools with almost twenty-seven 
 thousand pupils, or about a 40 per cent gain. In practically all cases 
 the terms were seven or eight weeks and the daily periods were sixty 
 minutes, although some periods ranged from eighty up to one hundred 
 and twenty minutes. Two-thirds of the pupils attending were making 
 up work, and about one-third were studying advanced subjects. About 
 one-third of the schools charged tuition. 
 
 12 Deffenbaugh, W. S. "Significant Movements in City School Systems," U. S. Bureau 
 of Education Bulletin, 1929, No. 16. Washington: (iovernment Printing Office, 1929, p. 7-8. 
 
 13 "Twenty-second Annual Report of the New York State Education Department." 
 Albany: University of the State of New York, 1926, p. 246-50. 
 
 "Twenty-third Annual Report of the New York State Education Department." Albany: 
 University of the State of New York, 1927, Vol. 1, p. 49-50, 188-92. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 15 
 
 Studies of summer work. Deffenbaugh (1917). 14 In 1917 Deffen- 
 baugh published the results of a study carried on for the United States 
 Bureau of Education. According to this study 109 city systems re- 
 ported summer high-school work, and 211 summer elementary work. 
 Seventy-five of those having high-school work, and sixty-eight of 
 those having elementary work, admitted any pupil who desired to 
 enter, and in addition ninety-live of the latter admitted any who de- 
 sired to enter grades in which work was given, but did not offer it in 
 all eight grades. The length of the term varied from four to twelve 
 weeks, about half being six weeks, with eight next most common. The 
 length of the daily session was usually three or four hours, or some- 
 where between. 
 
 Bush (1924). 15 In the year indicated. Bush published the results 
 of a letter and questionnaire study of high-school summer work, 
 mostly in cities of from twenty- live thousand to one hundred thousand 
 population. Out of 273 schools addressed 190 responded, and of these 
 83 offered summer work. The terms ranged from four to ten weeks 
 in length, with six and eight weeks, as before, being most common. 
 Practically all had five days a week with pupils attending each class 
 each day. About half of the periods were sixty minutes in length, the 
 others ranging from forty up to one hundred and twenty. About 
 three-fourths had daily sessions lasting three to four hours. In about 
 four-fifths, pupils were restricted to two subjects. Only 18 per cent 
 offered any subject desired. Among those commonly not offered were 
 home economics, manual training, physics, chemistry, stenograph v. 
 and typing. In all cases regular teachers were used, and in slightlv 
 over one- fourth some others also. One- fourth of the systems had 
 been giving summer work for no more than two years, and less than 
 half for more than five years. Bush gives other data not reported here 
 as to teachers' salaries and loads, number of cuts permitted, types 
 of high schools, and so forth. 
 
 Jones (1925). 16 This study was limited to Indiana high schools 
 of more than 150 enrollment. Jones reports that twenty-two such 
 schools had offered summer work at some time in the past, and that 
 nineteen of the twenty-two did so in the summer of 1925. All of 
 them were among the larger schools, the smallest having an enrollment 
 
 "Deffenbaugh, W. S. "Summer Sessions of City Schools," U. S. Bureau of Educa- 
 tion Bulletin, 1917, No. 45. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1917. 45 p. 
 
 13 Bush, R. H. "Current Practices in Summer School," School Review, 32:142-46,. 
 February, 1924. 
 
 16 Jones, J. W. "High School Summer Work in Indiana," Bulletin of the School of 
 Education, Indiana University, Vol. 2, No. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1925, n. 
 43-47. 
 
16 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 of slightly more than three hundred. Less than one-fourth of the 
 pupils enrolled did so to make up previous failures. Two-thirds of 
 the schools charged tuition, which ranged from six to twelve dollars, 
 ten being much the most common amount. Only regular teachers were 
 employed. In almost all cases pupils were limited to two subjects. 
 The subjects given, in order of frequency, were history, algebra, geom- 
 etry, and English. Jones also gathered enrollment figures for five 
 years, showing a steady increase from 927 pupils in 1921 to 3,290 in 
 1925. In other words, about one-eighth of the pupils regularly en- 
 rolled in the schools offering summer work attended them. 
 
 Hoffman (1925)}' Hoffman made a study of cities having a popu- 
 lation of over one hundred thousand and received returns from all 
 but two. Exactly two-thirds of these offered summer work in 1923, 
 most of those that did not being the smaller ones. The summer en- 
 rollment ranged from about one-thirtieth up to one-third of that of 
 the regular year, the median being near 13 per cent. Approximately 
 •one-third reported six weeks, and another third eight weeks, of work, 
 Avith none more than ten. The most usual length of daily sessions 
 was four hours, the others ranging from three to six. Sixty- and 
 ninety-minute periods were most common, with forty and fifty fairly 
 frequent, and others running up to one hundred and twenty. In most 
 cities the work was given in one building only, Chicago with six re- 
 porting the largest number. Pupils were ordinarily limited to two 
 subjects. Only about 20 per cent of the cities had special classes for 
 repeaters or those wishing to gain time. The salaries paid the teachers 
 averaged about five or six dollars a day, and those paid principals nine 
 •or ten. Although teachers of the regular year were commonly used, 
 .about half of the systems made use of some others. 
 
 Bush (1926)}* In addition to the study referred to above, Bush 
 made another. This dealt with the secondary schools of Illinois, ex- 
 clusive of the city of Chicago, in the summer of 1926. He found that 
 seventeen systems planned to offer summer work, and made an in- 
 tensive study of these. (His report is quite detailed and only a few 
 of the findings will be given here.) The seventeen systems were all 
 of such size as to have regular year enrollments of five hundred or 
 more, and constituted about 35 per cent of all schools of that size 
 in the state. Their summer enrollments ranged from 4 to 44 per cent 
 of their regular year enrollments, the total being about 19 per cent. 
 
 "Hoffman, M. D. "Status of Summer High Schools in Cities of More than 100,000 
 Population," School Review, 33:107-14, February, 1925. 
 
 18 Bush, R. H. The Status of the Summer Schools in the Secondary Schools in Illinois. 
 Springfield, Illinois: Superintendent of Public Instruction, 1927. 69 p. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 17 
 
 During a five-year period, the summer enrollment in these schools 
 had increased from 2.601 to 3,785. Xo teachers other than those on 
 the regular staffs were employed. The most common method of de- 
 termining the subjects offered was to give those for which advance 
 enrollments indicated there would be sufficient demand. Eight of the 
 seventeen sessions were six weeks in length, and eight, eight weeks. 
 All but three met live days a week, these meeting six. The length 
 of the school day was most commonly four hours, and in no case 
 less than that nor more than five. All but two of the schools limited 
 pupils to two subjects. The fraction of all pupils enrolled who had 
 previously failed was not far from one-half. Ten of the summer 
 schools had supervision whereas seven did not. The number of years 
 during which such schools have been in operation ranged from one 
 to twenty-five, over half of them being between three and ten, in- 
 clusive. Seven of the seventeen schools were supported by tuition and 
 one partly so. In the others tuition charges varied from five to thirty 
 dollars per term or per subject. 
 
 Biennial Surveys of Education (1924-27 J. 19 The last few Biennial 
 Surveys of Education of the Bureau of Education have contained 
 data on summer work in public schools. These report the figures given 
 in Table I. It will be seen that these figures show a steady increase. 
 During the four years from the first to the last, the increase in the 
 number of cities offering such work was almost 60 per cent, that in 
 the number of pupils about 90 per cent, and in the number of teachers 
 almost 80 per cent. For both elementary and high schools the last 
 survey referred to reported sixty-six cities of one hundred thousand 
 or more with four hundred thousand pupils and nine thousand 
 teachers, almost one hundred and fifty cities of from thirty to one 
 hundred thousand with about sixty thousand pupils and two thousand 
 teachers, and about three hundred cities of from ten to thirty thousand 
 with twenty-seven thousand pupils and over a thousand teachers. The 
 total is over five hundred cities, almost five hundred thousand pupils 
 and twelve thousand teachers. This shows the enormous growth of 
 the summer school movement since it began about a generation or 
 more ago. 
 
 ^Phillips, F. M. (Prepared by). "Statistics of City School Systems, 1921-22," L\ 5. 
 
 Phillips, F. M. (Prepared by). "Statistics of City School Systems, 1921-22," U. S. 
 
 Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1924, Xo. 34. Washington: Government Printing Office. 
 
 1925, p. 110-115. 
 
 Phillips, F. M. (Prepared by). "Statistics of City School Systems, 1923-24," U. S. 
 
 Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1925, Xo. 41. Washington: Government Printing Office, 
 
 1926, p. 60-68. 
 
 Phillips. F. M. (Prepared by). "Statistics of City School Systems, 1925-26," U. S. 
 
 Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1927, Xo. 32. Washington: Government Printing Office, 
 
 1928, p. 64-72. 
 
18 
 
 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 OOrO t>. 00 
 
 
 (J 
 
 O \0 CN 00 
 
 
 **« Tf 
 
 
 4> 
 
 CN 
 
 c*5 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 <0 
 
 
 
 
 <n 
 
 
 
 
 rf 
 
 _oo 
 
 OOffO f*3 
 
 
 
 rt-^O t^ 
 
 Os 
 
 ■ft 
 
 t^ ^HITJ CO 
 
 
 3 
 Oh 
 
 CCt-> — < 
 
 
 O-H 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 05 
 
 
 
 
 4J 
 
 
 
 
 
 »H 00 CN »-< 
 
 
 
 Tt^r- \0 
 
 
 U 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 Ih 
 
 OM> S 
 
 
 
 «H id ro O 
 
 
 »* t*3 tN t>» 
 
 
 <u 
 
 CN 
 
 CN 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 ■* 
 
 
 
 
 cs 
 
 
 
 
 CN 
 
 to 
 
 00 -* O 00 
 
 
 
 O t*5 O CN 
 
 Ov 
 
 'a 
 
 CSM- 00 
 
 
 3 
 
 -* o>/ 
 
 00 
 
 
 .£ 
 
 OXN ID 
 
 
 
 ■* rO io <T> 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 -<oo O 
 
 
 
 Tf t^- m t^. 
 
 
 J3 
 
 ■^rr, ^ 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 ~H 
 
 ~H 
 
 
 h 
 
 
 
 CN 
 
 
 
 
 CS 
 
 
 
 
 © 
 
 
 WfON f> 
 
 
 Tf CN r-- t* 
 
 9> 
 
 "S, 
 
 ©^_ 
 
 r*5 
 
 
 3 
 
 *OOf> 00 
 ** id 
 
 
 co 
 
 
 
 
 .li 
 
 oo-<t 
 
 
 
 
 CN <r> oo ( 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 >. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ( 
 
 J 
 
 
 © 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 u 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 c 
 c 
 
 
 
 
 
 ©" ° c 
 
 5 
 o 
 
 
 
 ^©C 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 cu © O 
 
 
 
 
 £©■© 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 f*i 
 
 •H 
 
 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 19 
 
 Summary. A century or somewhat less ago, the sessions of most 
 city schools were considerably longer than at present, frequently con- 
 tinuing throughout most of the summer. It was also common for 
 rural and small-town schools to have summer terms. Summer work- 
 as given now has little if any connection with the facts just mentioned, 
 but instead seems to have developed from vacation schools, the first 
 of which was organized in Boston in 1866. At first these were not 
 supported by public taxation and did not offer work in most of the 
 regular school subjects, but, beginning with Newark in 1885, they 
 began to come under the control of boards of education and to give 
 more or less the same work as in the regular year. In 1904 Bluffton. 
 Indiana, organized an all-year school. A few other cities have followed 
 Bluffton in this, until a decided majority of the larger cities of this 
 country and many of the smaller ones are now offering summer work 
 of some type or other. The results of a number of studies indicate 
 that such work is increasing rapidly. The last figures reported, now 
 about four years old, show that more than five hundred cities offering 
 summer work had an enrollment therein of about half a million pupils 
 taught by about twelve thousand teachers. Allowing for the increase 
 since that time and for the work offered in smaller systems than 
 those included in the study, it is probable that present figures are at 
 least 50 per cent greater than those just given. The various studies 
 also indicate that the typical summer term is six or eight weeks in 
 length, with daily sessions of not far from four hours, and usually 
 sixty-minute class periods. High-school pupils are generally limited 
 to two subjects and elementary pupils correspondingly restricted. 
 Usually both pupils who have failed and those who wish to do ad- 
 vanced work are admitted, and the classes are ordinarily taught by 
 regular-year teachers. 
 
 Additional References 
 
 American, Sadie. "Movement for Vacation Schools," American Journal of 
 
 Sociology, 4:309-25, November, 1898. 
 American, Sadie. "Vacation Schools," Education, 26:509-18, May, 1906. 
 Blackwelder, I. S. "Extracts from the Last Report of the Superintendent of 
 
 the Chicago Vacation Schools," Elementary School Teacher, 5:432-38, 
 
 March, 1905. 
 Deffexbaugh, W. S. "Recent Movements in City School Systems," U. S. 
 
 Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1927, No. 8. Washington: Government 
 
 Printing Office, 1927, p. 18-22. 
 Duggax, S. J. "The All-Year School," Journal of Education, 106:214-15, Sep- 
 tember 12, 1927. 
 Elsox, W. H. "The All-Year School Plan in Cleveland," Journal of Education, 
 
 73:11-12, January 5, 1911. 
 
20 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 Farrand, Wilson and O'Shea, M. V. "All-Year Schools in Newark," School 
 and Society, 23:462-69, April 10, 1926. 
 
 Hebb, B. Y. "All-Year Schools Have Many Advantages," School Life, 8:198,' 
 May, 1923. 
 
 Kennedy, J. W. "The All- Year School," Addresses and Proceedings of the 
 National Education Association. Washington: National Education Asso- 
 ciation, 1917, p. 795-801. 
 
 Monroe, Paul. "Vacation Schools and Continuous Sessions of Public School," 
 Cyclopedia of Education, Vol. 5. New York: Macmillan Company, 1913, 
 p." 701-2. 
 
 Reals, W. H. "A Study of the Summer High School, with a Detailed Analysis 
 of the Achievement in Two Summer High Schools," Teachers College, 
 Columbia University Contributions to Education, No. 337. New York: 
 Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1928. 88 p. 
 
 Webb, F. S. "Bibliography of All-Year Schools and Vacation Schools in the 
 United States," U. S. Bureau of Education Library Leaflet, No. 23. Wash- 
 ington: Government Printing Office, 1923. 15 p. 
 
 Weber, H. C. "Defense through the Educated Quota: The All-Year School," 
 Addresses and Proceedings of the National Education Association. Wash- 
 ington: National Education Association, 1925, p. 751-59. 
 
 Wiener, William. "An Educational Innovation — The All-Year High School," 
 American School Board Journal, 61:29-30, December, 1920. 
 
 "Summer High School Enrolment," Pennsylvania School Journal, 78:176, No- 
 vember, 1929. 
 
 "The Waning School Term of the Cities," School Life, 9:34, October, 1923. 
 
 "U. S. Commissioner of Education, Annual Report, 1911." Washington: Gov- 
 ernment Printing Office, 1912, Vol. 1, p. 151-54. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 SUMMER WORK IN ILLINOIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN 1929 
 
 The data obtained. The purpose of this study was to ascertain 
 certain facts concerning the summer work done by pupils and the 
 practices connected therewith in the public elementary and high schools 
 of the State of Illinois in 1929. The first step was to send a double post- 
 card to the principal or superintendent in charge of each such school. 1 ' 
 The chief question on this card had to do with whether or not summer 
 work of any sort was offered in 1929. To those who responded that 
 such work had been offered a questionnaire consisting of thirteen ques- 
 tions, most of which had two or more parts each, was sent. This ques- 
 tionnaire will not be reproduced here, but in the succeeding discussion 
 the questions will be given one at a time and the answers presented. 
 
 Cards were sent to the officials in charge of 1,479 elementary and 
 946 high schools. They were returned from 503 elementary and 5?7 
 high schools, or, in other words, from about 34 per cent of the former 
 and 59 per cent of the latter. Eighty-five, or 17 per cent of the ele- 
 mentary schools that responded, were reported as having offered sum- 
 mer work, and 410, or 81 per cent, as not offering it, whereas 12, or 
 2 per cent, did not answer the question. Of the high schools that 
 responded, 94, or 17 per cent, offered summer work in 1929, 451, or 
 81 per cent, did not offer it, and 13, or 2 per cent, did not answer the 
 question. From these figures it is apparent that the per cent of ele- 
 mentary and high schools answering that had and had not offered 
 summer work in the given summer were the same. It is not probable 
 that the per cents of all elementary and high schools in the state doing 
 so were the same, however, since there are at least two reasons which 
 indicate that the per cent of high schools offering summer work was 
 considerably greater than that of elementary schools. In the first place 
 it is generally true in any such study as this that a larger proportion 
 of responses is received from systems that have the feature under dis- 
 cussion than from those that do not have it. Therefore, although the 
 per cent of all elementary schools replying was much smaller than that 
 of all high schools, it is probable that most elementary and high schools 
 that offered such work replied ; and, therefore, it is probable that the 
 per cent of elementary schools in the state giving summer work was- 
 actually smaller than that of the high schools. In all probability the 
 
 1 Because of an error in mailing out these cards, a few principals and superintendents 
 did not receive any. The number omitted, however, was small, constituting less than 2 
 per cent of all in the state. 
 
 21 
 
22 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 per cent of elementary schools that offered summer work in 1929 was 
 "between 6 and 17 per cent, probably nearer the former, and that of 
 high schools between 10 and 17 per cent, also probably nearer the 
 former. The second reason referred to above is that the proportion 
 of responses was in general greater in the larger school systems than 
 in the smaller ones, 2 and further that both the responses obtained and 
 other data indicate that the per cents of the larger school systems 
 giving summer work were greater than those of the smaller systems. 
 Therefore since most of the systems not replying tended to be small, 
 it is likely that they were among those not offering summer work. 
 
 Of the 81 elementary and 93 high schools that responded affirma- 
 tively on the postcards, only 43 elementary and 52 high schools re- 
 turned questionnaires filled out so that the results were usable. In a 
 number of these cases, however, all the questions were not definitely 
 answered, so that the data given in connection with separate questions 
 are in most cases based on somewhat fewer than this number of 
 responses. 
 
 The per cents of schools of various sizes returning postals and 
 answering the chief question thereon affirmatively are shown by Table 
 II. From the figures therein one can see that although all of the ele- 
 mentary-school systems having more than five thousand pupils re- 
 turned the cards, the fractions gradually decrease to only 21 per cent, 
 or about one in five, of those having less than one hundred pupils. The 
 same, although to a less marked degree, is true of high schools, as 88 
 per cent of the high schools with more than a thousand pupils returned 
 the cards, whereas the number decreases, with one irregularity, to only 
 48 per cent of those of less than one hundred pupils. Similarly, but 
 even more markedly, the per cents of all those responding who gave 
 affirmative answers decreased with the size of the schools. Seventy- 
 three per cent of the largest elementary-school systems reported sum- 
 mer work, but only 9 per cent of the smallest. Likewise 67 per cent 
 of the largest group of high schools and only 7 per cent of the smallest 
 reported it. In both cases the per cent of the largest schools is eight 
 or nine times as great as that of the smallest schools offering summer 
 work. 
 
 Question 1. What was the total enrollment in each grade for the 
 regular year 1928-29 and for the summer of 1929? Only thirty-one 
 of the elementary and thirty-five of the high schools gave such re- 
 sponses to this question that their figures could be used. The total 
 1928-1929 enrollment for these schools was 417,336 in the elementary 
 
 ■Table II and the discussion thereof bring out this fact. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 
 
 23 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 O 4, 
 
 
 
 
 C5 *" 
 
 oo t- 
 
 
 ©1 
 
 X NO 
 
 
 
 
 
 Oi 
 
 
 
 
 o. 
 
 
 
 
 o> 
 
 •<*< CO 
 
 
 § 
 
 OC Tt 
 
 
 \T) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 J3 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 Tf 
 
 u-> <*} 
 
 
 § 
 
 no CO 
 
 M 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ov 
 
 
 
 
 o« 
 
 
 
 
 tN 
 
 O O 
 
 
 6 
 
 r~» cn 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 " 
 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 
 o> 
 
 oo 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 4> 
 
 
 
 
 8e 
 
 8 5 
 
 
 lO 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 i 1 
 
 On f*5 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 Ov 
 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 es 
 
 
 NO 
 
 
 8 
 
 r> 
 
 ■<f 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 
 
 >> 
 
 Ot 
 
 C 
 
 fO 
 
 a 
 
 § 
 
 \r 
 
 «N 
 
 c 
 
 «o 
 
 
 
 4) 
 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 
 4J 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 
 
 "* 
 
 •* 
 
 r» 
 
 
 8 
 
 •<* 
 
 rs 
 
 
 tr> 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 (N 
 
 r^ 
 
 C 
 
 
 8 
 
 c 
 
 •-< 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 CS 
 
 ON 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 05 
 
 
 
 K 
 
 u ■ 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 C • 
 
 
 COn 
 
 "0 
 u 
 
 §>aj 
 
 
 O <N 
 
 ri 
 
 to > 
 
 
 S2 
 3 oo 
 
 "o-i 
 
 ° % 
 
 
 fc.CN 
 
 <-> c 
 
 
 f 
 
 COn 
 
 c fc 
 «j - 
 
 8* 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 In 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 <U 
 
 
 
 Oh 
 
 Oh 
 
24 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 grades, and 121,769 in the high school. The total summer enrollments 
 reported were, respectively, 20,079 and 21,655, or about 5 and 18 per 
 cent of the regular year enrollments. Since Chicago was one of the 
 cities that contributed data and its size is so much greater than that 
 of all the other contributing systems combined, it seems well also to 
 give figures with Chicago omitted. These were 56,648 elementary and 
 35,542 high-school pupils in the regular year and 2,784 elementary and 
 4,098 high-school pupils in summer. Thus the per cents in the other 
 systems than Chicago were about five and twelve. The proportions of 
 the summer enrollments to the regular-year enrollments in the separate 
 school systems ranged from less than 1 up to 70 per cent in elementary 
 schools, and to 35 per cent in high schools. The median per cent was 
 four for elementary schools and five for high schools. Twenty per 
 cent of the elementary schools and 30 per cent of the high schools 
 had summer enrollments that were 10 per cent or more of their 1928- 
 1929 enrollments. 
 
 Question 2. How many weeks in length was your regular school 
 year in 1928-29? Your summer work in 1929? The reported lengths 
 of summer sessions varied from three to twelve weeks, but almost half 
 of the total number were six weeks and more than one-fourth eight 
 weeks. 3 For the regular year 30 per cent of the schools had thirty- 
 eight w T eeks, 27 per cent thirty-six, and 22 per cent forty weeks. The 
 others ranged from thirty to forty-two. The combined lengths of ses- 
 sions for the regular year plus the summer work ranged from thirty- 
 six to forty-eight weeks, the most common being forty-six, which was 
 that of almost one-third of the systems. Next to this was forty-four 
 in almost one-fifth. The coefficient of correlation between the length 
 of the summer session and that of the regular school year was — .16 
 ± .08, which indicates that there is very little if any connection be- 
 tween the two. 
 
 Question 3. Did pupils attend as many hours per day in the sum- 
 mer as in the regular year? If not, how many hours? The variety of 
 practice wuth regard to the number of hours per day attended by pupils 
 was even greater than that as to the number of weeks. Almost 20 per 
 cent of the schools had summer sessions of the same length as the 
 regular year sessions ; more than 30 per cent had them four hours in 
 length ; about 20 per cent had three hours, and 16 per cent two hours. 
 The others ranged from one-half up to five and one-half hours. The 
 median for all was four. Although the question as to when the daily 
 
 3 The replies to this and most of the other questions were not differentiated according 
 to whether they came from elementary or high schools because no significant differences 
 appeared. In the few cases in which such differences did appear they will be noted. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 25 
 
 sessions began and ended was not asked, many replies gave that in- 
 formation. In practically every case in which the hours per day were 
 not greater than three and one-half and also in most of those in which 
 they were four, there was a single morning session, most often be- 
 ginning at 8:30, but sometimes at 8:00, 9:00, or some other time. 
 
 Question 4. Was credit given in connection with summer work? 
 If so, how much? If not, what was purpose of summer work? The 
 responses to this question indicate that 86 per cent of the schools gave 
 credit for summer work, whereas the remaining 14 per cent did not. 
 Thirty per cent of those that gave credit responded that they gave 
 "regular" or "full" credit, whatever that may mean. Twenty-five per 
 cent reported one semester's credit and about 10 per cent one-half 
 semester's credit. Almost 30 per cent of those who reported that 
 credit was allowed did not answer the second part of the question at 
 all. or in such a way as to give information that could be used. Of 
 the few schools that did not allow credit for summer work, over one- 
 third gave as the purpose of such work the preparation of pupils for 
 special examinations, which, if passed, apparently would give credit. 
 Another third stated merely "to strengthen pupils," apparently meaning 
 to help pupils who were in danger of failing and might be prevented 
 from doing so by extra work. 
 
 Question 5. Were all regular subjects taught? If not, which were? 
 Less than 20 per cent of the schools taught all regular subjects, but an 
 additional 30 per cent taught either all that anyone wished to take, or 
 all that any pupils who wished to attend had failed in. In other words, 
 for all practical purposes almost half of the schools may be considered 
 as giving complete offerings. About two-thirds of the remaining ele- 
 mentary schools offered a group including all the so-called "major" 
 subjects. These differed somewhat in various schools, but in prac- 
 tically all included arithmetic, reading and language, with history, geog- 
 raphy, and spelling frequently added. The other elementary schools 
 appear to have offered work in a single subject, or perhaps two sub- 
 jects, each, those named most often being arithmetic, language, and 
 agriculture. In the high schools that did not offer all subjects, or at 
 least all those requested, history, usually American, was most com- 
 monly given, being offered by about two-thirds of such schools. Eng- 
 lish was next, being given in about half, and geometry and Latin almost 
 as frequent. Either geometry or algebra or both were given in about 
 two-thirds of the schools. Almost all other common high-school sub- 
 jects were named by some schools ; manual training and mechanical 
 drawing, however, being named by only one each, and domestic science 
 not at all. 
 
26 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 Question 6. Who attended? All who wished? Those who had 
 failed? Those who wished to gain time? Those who were ill or out 
 for other reasons? If others, who? Not quite half of the schools 
 allowed all pupils who wished to do so to attend. Almost 94 per cent 
 admitted pupils who had failed, about 56 per cent accepted those who 
 wished to gain time, and about 70 per cent those who were ill or 
 out for other reasons. Evidently, according to these figures, the one 
 dominant purpose of offering summer work was to enable pupils who 
 had either failed or lost time to make up their work. Indeed, com- 
 ments and additional information given on the returned questionnaires 
 indicated that in a number of the schools which allowed all pupils 
 who wished to take work in the summer or which provided oppor- 
 tunities for pupils to gain time, the emphasis was put on taking care 
 of those who needed to make up work. 
 
 Question 7. Who taught in the summer? Regular teachers? 
 Others? How were teachers selected? In 90 per cent of the schools 
 responding only regular teachers were employed, in 6 per cent both 
 regular and other teachers, and in 4 per cent others only. In about 
 half of the systems it was indicated that principals or superintendents 
 selected the teachers, no other basis being given. In a few cases it 
 was indicated that they attempted to select the most able teachers or 
 those whom they considered best qualified. About one-seventh of the 
 systems appear to have allowed all of the regular-year teachers who 
 wished to do so to teach. In a few cases teachers were selected ac- 
 cording to the order in which they applied for the opportunity, the 
 desires of the parents or pupils, and on other bases. 
 
 Question 8. Was summer work supervised similarly to work dur- 
 ing regular year? If not, was it supervised at all? Fifty-four per 
 cent of the principals and superintendents reported that the summer 
 work received supervision similar to that given in the regular year, 
 and half of the remainder that it received some supervision. Thus in 
 almost one-fourth of the systems the summer work seems to have re- 
 ceived no supervision whatsoever. 
 
 Question 9. Was summer work organized in classes as in regular 
 year? Was it rather of a tutorial or individual nature? About three- 
 fifths of the systems reported that the summer work was organized 
 in classes as in the regular year, whereas about two-fifths stated that 
 it was not so organized. Almost half of those that reported regular 
 class work during the summer also answered the second part of the 
 question affirmatively so that about 70 per cent of the schools re- 
 ported work of a tutorial or individual nature. Apparently the situa- 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 27 
 
 tion is that in about one-third of the schools the summer work was 
 entirely in regular classes, in about 40 per cent it was entirely tutorial 
 or individual, and in slightly less than one-third there was either some 
 of both, or, although the work was organized in regular classes, the 
 enrollment was so small that it was largely individual. In almost all 
 cases in which work was reported as totally unsupervised, it was of 
 a tutorial nature, whereas practically all of the regular class work 
 and a portion of the tutorial work was supervised. 
 
 Question 10. Was summer work carried on in school buildings? 
 If not, where? The answers to this question were rather closely con- 
 nected with those to No. 9. In practically every case in which class 
 work was reported and in some others it was carried on in the school 
 buildings, about 75 per cent of the work being done there. Of the 
 slightly more than 25 per cent reporting it carried on elsewhere, three- 
 fourths stated that it was done in teachers' homes. It was almost 
 always true that when the work was done outside of the school build- 
 ing, it was not supervised at all. 
 
 Question 11. Were fees charged of summer pupils? If so, how 
 much? Was the amount sufficient to cover all expenditures? Or only 
 to pay teachers? Or less than enough to pay teachers? Seventy per 
 cent of the systems charged fees of summer pupils, whereas 30 per 
 cent did not. Of those that did, less than 30 per cent charged enough 
 to cover all expenditures, about 60 per cent just enough to pay 
 teachers, and about 10 per cent not enough for that purpose. The 
 bases of determining fees were so varied that it is rather difficult 
 to summarize the data on this point. The most common basis in high 
 school was the semester credit. Tuition ranged from five to thirty 
 dollars per credit, the median being fifteen. In elementary school the 
 most common practice was a flat fee for the whole period, usually 
 six weeks. The amount of this ranged from five to forty dollars, ten 
 being the median. In a number of cases charges were made on the hour 
 basis, the range being from thirty-five cents to one dollar per hour. A 
 few schools charged by the week, from seventy-five cents to two dollars, 
 one dollar being most common. In several cases charges were based 
 on the number of subjects carried, the number of classes attended per 
 week, and so on. 
 
 Question 12. Is summer work offered regularly every summer? 
 In what year did it begin? Seventy per cent of the systems reported 
 summer work offered regularly every summer. The length of time 
 that it has been offered ranges from one to twenty years. Only about 
 one-eighth of the schools have offered it more than ten years, how- 
 
28 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 ever, and only about two-fifths for more than five. The median length 
 of time is four. Apparently, therefore, the practice of giving summer 
 work is relatively new in most of the systems that do so, and even 
 though it is reported as a regular practice, it has in many cases 
 not existed long enough that this can appropriately be said of it. Its 
 continuation probably frequently depends upon the attitude of the 
 superintendent or principal in charge. 
 
 Question 13. Do you favor summer work? Do you intend to con- 
 tinue it? Do you favor making it free? If not, should enough be 
 charged to cover all expenditures? As would be expected, a large 
 majority of the officials in charge of systems that offered summer 
 work favored the practice. Only about 12 per cent responded that 
 they did not. Likewise all but about 13 per cent stated that they in- 
 tended to continue the practice. Almost 60 per cent, including prac- 
 tically all of those in charge of systems where it is now free and a 
 number in charge of systems where it is not, replied that when offered 
 it should be free. Seventy per cent of those who believed that it should 
 not be free, or about 30 per cent of the total number responding, 
 thought that enough should be charged to cover all expenditures. 
 
 Summary. Responses from about one-third of the officials in 
 charge of elementary and three-fifths of those in charge of high 
 schools in Illinois were received to a questionnaire dealing with sum- 
 mer w r ork. Almost exactly one-sixth of those reporting stated that 
 such work was given in the summer of 1929. For all schools in the 
 state the proportion was undoubtedly somewhat lower. The responses 
 show that the practice of giving summer work is much more common 
 in large systems than in small, the per cent of the largest offered being 
 about seventy and of the smallest less than ten. The situation in 
 general may be described as follows: About 5 per cent as many pupils 
 were enrolled as in the regular year. The term was usually six weeks, 
 although not infrequently eight. The daily session was commonly 
 four hours or more in length. Pupils were ordinarily allowed to earn 
 a semester's credit in one or two high-school subjects or in all ele- 
 mentary subjects. All subjects desired were offered by about half the 
 schools and most of the so-called "fundamental" subjects by the others. 
 Not quite half of the schools allowed all pupils who wished to do so 
 to attend, most of the remainder limiting attendance to those who had 
 failed or perhaps had missed school through illness or other good 
 reasons. In almost all cases only regular teachers were used, and in a 
 majority the work was supervised. In about two-fifths of the systems 
 it was of a tutorial nature, in half of the remainder there were regular 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 29 
 
 classes only, and in the other half some of both. About three-fourths 
 of the work was done in school buildings. Less than one-third of 
 the systems charged no tuition. Of those that did a majority charged 
 just enough to pay the teachers, the median amount being fifteen dol- 
 lars per semester credit for high-school work and ten for the whole 
 term of elementary work. Most of the systems offer work regularly 
 every year, but only half of them have done so for more than four 
 years. A large majority of the officials in charge favor summer work 
 and intend to continue the practice. Sixty per cent of them believe 
 that it should be free. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 THE OUTCOMES OF SUMMER WORK 
 
 Introduction. Although a great deal more of what has been written 
 and said concerning summer work in public elementary and high 
 schools has been favorable than unfavorable, there have also been a 
 number of opposing arguments advanced. It is the purpose of this 
 chapter to consider first the arguments advanced on both sides of the 
 question and then the rather limited available evidence as to the truth 
 of some of these arguments, or, in other words, as to the beneficial and 
 harmful outcomes of summer work. 
 
 Favorable arguments. 1 One of the most common arguments ad- 
 vanced in favor of summer work is that of financial economy. Be- 
 cause the school plant is used for two or three months when it would 
 otherwise be idle, because school is in session at a time of the year 
 when heat and artificial light are rarely required, and because, at 
 least in many cases, the additional amount paid teachers is not so 
 large a proportion of their salaries for the regular academic year 
 as the work done in the summer is of that done in the regular year, 
 the per capita cost of summer instruction is claimed to be less than 
 that of instruction during the usual nine- or ten-months session. 
 Furthermore, if pupils attend during the summer as well as the regular 
 year and thus complete their school work sooner, the total number in 
 school at any given time will be smaller than if they do not attend 
 during the summer and, therefore, the total building accommodations, 
 equipment, and so forth, needed will be less. If they attend only 
 three of four quarters, and these three differ for different children, a 
 smaller number will be in attendance at any one time and thus fewer 
 accommodations will be needed. If, instead of either of the above 
 conditions holding, pupils remain in school to the same ages as at 
 present and thus reach higher levels, the educational output of the 
 schools will be greater than at present, but will require only the same 
 building accommodations and equipment, since no more pupils will 
 be present at any one time. 
 
 Another of the most frequently urged arguments for summer work 
 is that, especially in large cities, the environment of the school is 
 much better than that in which children would be if they were not in 
 
 1 The favorable arguments given here, also the unfavorable ones which follow, repre- 
 sent a summary of those advanced by numerous advocates or opponents of summer work. 
 Therefore references for each are not given here, but instead a selected list is to be 
 found at the end of this chapter. 
 
 30 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 31 
 
 school. It is claimed that pupils learn many bad habits, such as petty 
 thievery, loafing, gambling, gang life, and so forth, during the long 
 summer vacation, which both render them less desirable citizens and 
 make the problem of the school more difficult. Xot only is the school 
 environment said to be better in this respect, but also from the point 
 of view of hygiene. Both the home and the other conditions in which 
 many city and some rural children live are far less satisfactory in 
 this respect than is the typical school. It is pointed out that in the 
 larger part of this country the summer rather than the winter is the 
 season of the year in which the physical conditions at school are most 
 satisfactory and that, therefore, it is unwise to have no school at 
 that time. Since the problem of providing heat is practically absent, 
 pupils can have a great deal more fresh air in their rooms and can also 
 spend more time out-of-doors. Furthermore, it is claimed that dis- 
 ease epidemics can be better controlled and prevented when children 
 are in school under supervision than when they are not there. These 
 arguments also appear to be true, especially in the case of city children 
 not living in the better residence sections. They are recognized by 
 many parents, especially the more intelligent ones, who are too busy 
 to give as much time to their children as they would like, hence worry 
 concerning what the children can do during the summer that will help 
 their physical, mental, and spiritual development. It is pointed out 
 that especially in the case of city children there are comparatively 
 few wholesome summer activities, and that those which are desirable 
 can easily be carried on outside of school hours if the school itself 
 does not provide them. In the case of the much larger number of 
 parents who do not worry very much concerning their children's sum- 
 mer occupations, the situation is even worse, since almost no effort 
 is made to provide such children with the right kinds of activities. 
 
 A third argument advanced has to do with what may be called 
 instructional or educational, as contrasted with financial, economy. It 
 is commonly recognized by teachers and others concerned that when 
 pupils return to school in September, several weeks' work is usually 
 necessary to bring them up to the level of achievement at which they 
 had arrived when school closed the preceding May or June. Attend- 
 ance at summer school avoids such a loss. Furthermore, and per- 
 haps more important, pupils who have failed during the regular year 
 can in many cases make up the work in which they have failed during 
 the summer and thus can progress at what is generally considered the 
 regular rate. Likewise pupils able to do so can shorten the time of 
 completing elementary and high school by earning advance work 
 
32 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 in the summer ; thus it becomes probable that many more pupils will 
 complete each given level of the educational system. Also, some pro- 
 ponents of summer work urge that it will enable pupils to enter vo- 
 cational or professional schools and industry earlier or, if not earlier, 
 to secure a better preparation before they do enter. 
 
 It has been claimed by some that the large number of failures in 
 university work is likely due in part to the short period of schooling, 
 and that if the school year were lengthened, failures would be 
 markedly reduced. Those who advance this argument believe that 
 the chief function of summer work should be to enable pupils to com- 
 plete the public school more thoroughly rather than more rapidly. 
 
 Another argument sometimes advanced is that summer work in 
 addition to that during the regular academic year, or, in other words, 
 the all-year school, provides a better preparation for life because it 
 accustoms children to working all but a few weeks of the year, which 
 is what will be expected of them later in most vocations. 
 
 It is urged as an advantage of the all-year school, which is ordi- 
 narily divided into four quarters of twelve weeks each, that pupils 
 who fail lose only three months' time rather than four and one-half 
 or five months. Furthermore, especially in the elementary school, the 
 organization of work into units three months in length is said to be 
 better suited to pupils' maturity, since it is difficult for them to look 
 ahead longer periods of time or work toward more distant goals. In 
 other words, it is easier to keep their interest and stimulate them to 
 work in connection with a three-months' term than with a four and 
 one-half or live-months' semester. 
 
 From the point of view of the teachers an advantage claimed is 
 that by teaching throughout the summer, their earnings can be con- 
 siderably increased, and yet that they will have as long a vacation as 
 do workers in most other vocations. One writer has suggested that 
 instead of the usual long summer vacation, it is better for them to 
 teach the full year for several years and then take a whole year off, 
 and that the extra remuneration received for summer work will enable 
 them to do this. 
 
 Unfavorable arguments. Probably the chief argument advanced 
 against summer work is that it is of an inferior quality compared to 
 that done during the regular year. Closely connected with this is 
 the claim that pupils who attend school the whole year and thus gain 
 time are poorly prepared or too immature when they reach the higher 
 levels of work, the high school, and still more the college and uni- 
 versity. It is stated that mere time in school is not sufficient, even 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 33 
 
 though the quality of the instruction offered is high. There is no doubt 
 that this contention is true in some cases, but it does not appear to be 
 an inevitable, or even very common, outcome of summer work. Many 
 schools enforce as rigid standards in the summer as during the rest 
 of the year and all can do so. Xo convincing evidence has been ad- 
 duced to prove the immaturity of summer-school pupils. 
 
 One group of arguments appears to be based upon the general 
 assumption that attendance at school is a necessary evil and, therefore, 
 should be reduced to a minimum. It is claimed that school provides 
 an artificial, unnatural, and unhygienic environment, that children are 
 made too dependent thereby, that they are controlled too much by the 
 state and its representatives rather than by their parents, that they 
 are thrown into groups too much and thus do not develop individually 
 as they should, and so on. Therefore it is urged that the longer the 
 summer vacation the better, provided, of course, that the term be 
 of sufficient length to insure the acquisition of desirable facts, abilities, 
 and attitudes. Few people who know our schools intimately will agree 
 that they produce the results pictured to such a degree as to warrant 
 the conclusion drawn. If they do. however, they should be reformed, 
 not regarded as a necessary evil. 
 
 Some advance the contention that children must learn so many 
 things from sources outside the school, especially, of course, from the 
 family, that attendance at school during practically the whole year 
 limits opportunity for such learning entirely too much. Some of those 
 who urge this admit that in the case of parents who cannot or will 
 not do their part, it is perhaps better that children should attend in 
 the summer as well as during the regular year, but the}- argue that 
 even here attention should be centered on getting the parents to do 
 their duty or providing other agencies to do it rather than putting 
 the children in school. This argument seems scarcely valid if one con- 
 siders the small fraction of their total time which children spend in 
 school. If they attend six hours a day. which is longer than most do 
 attend, five days a week, for forty-eight weeks a year, the total time 
 spent in school is less than one-sixth of that in the year. Even count- 
 ing out the time spent in sleep, they have fully two and one-half 
 times as much time out of school as in school. Surely this is sufficient 
 for the purposes named above. 
 
 Some who argue that it is highly desirable that children be kept 
 off the streets, away from certain types of recreation, and even out 
 of certain kinds of homes, do not admit that the school is the desirable 
 agency to accomplish this. Instead they urge the use of playgrounds 
 
34 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 and other means similar rather to the early vacation schools than to 
 the common present-day type of summer school which offers more 
 or less the same course of study as is given during the regular year. 
 It appears, however, that the public school is the most efficient agency 
 for this purpose. Furthermore, it combines most of the advantages of 
 the playground with additional ones not gained therefrom. 
 
 From the practical standpoint it is claimed that the four-quarter 
 all-year school is undesirable in that it involves four periods of re- 
 organization as contrasted with only two or three in the ordinary plan. 
 Not only do these periods entail a considerable amount of extra work 
 on the part of teachers and other school officials, but they also con- 
 stitute breaks into the continuity of the work and loss of time on the 
 part of the pupils. The answer is that school exists for the sake of the 
 pupils and that whatever administrative details are necessary in con- 
 nection with the most efficient educational activity should be carried 
 out. The additional labor of this sort entailed by summer work is 
 really not very great, however. By proper planning the effect of the 
 breaks referred to can be made almost, if not quite, negligible. 
 
 Evidence as to the outcomes of summer work. Comparatively few 
 objective or scientific studies dealing with the advantages and disad- 
 vantages of summer-school work have been published and presumably, 
 therefore, few have been made. The results from studies of this sort 
 with which the writer is familiar, and also of some others of a much 
 less objective and scientific nature, will be summarized in the follow- 
 ing pages. Some of the reported evidence is no more than mere ex- 
 pression of opinion, but because it is, in some cases at least, the ex- 
 pression of the opinions of those who were in such positions or had 
 made such observations that their opinions should carry some weight, 
 it will be given. 
 
 The Newark Survey. 2 The outstanding study of summer public- 
 school work is that made in Newark, New Jersey. As has been previ- 
 ously mentioned, this city established regular summer sessions in 1885 
 and in 1912 introduced the first of its all-year schools, which later 
 came to include the elementary, junior high-school and senior high- 
 
 2 Farrand, Wilson and O'Shea, M. V. "All-Year Schools in Newark," School and 
 Society, 23:462-69, April 10, 1926. 
 
 Farrand, Wilson and O'Shea, M. V. "The All- Year Schools of Newark, New Jersey." 
 Newark, New Jersey: Board of Education, 1925. 96 p. 
 
 Lovell, L. E. "All-Year School," Educational Review, 73:196-202. April, 1927. 
 
 "The All- Year School," Elementary School Journal, 26:401-5, February, 1926. 
 
 "The All-Year School," Elementary School Journal, 24:409-11, February, 1924. 
 
 "The Ail-Year School," Michigan Education Journal, 6:111-12, October, 1928. 
 
 "The All-Year School in Newark," Elementary School Journal, 26:561-63, April, 1926. 
 
 "The All- Year School Situation in Newark, New Jersey," School and Society, 22:715-16, 
 December 5, 1925. 
 
 "The All- Year School Wins," American School Board Journal, 73:66, December, 1926. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 35 
 
 school levels. Dr. Poland, who was superintendent when the all-year 
 schools were introduced, had the plan criticized by experts and tested 
 in what was at the time considered a careful manner, and on the basis 
 of the results obtained approved it. These results indicated among 
 other things that the health of the pupils and of the teachers was not 
 injured, that pupils liked summer work, and that summer heat was 
 not an obstacle. 
 
 When Superintendent Corson took office a few years later, he ap- 
 proved the idea, but in a comparatively short time changed his opinion 
 and recommended that such schools be abolished. Because of the 
 strong protests made against his recommendation by principals, teach- 
 ers, pupils, and parents, Dr. Wilson Farrand of Newark Academy and 
 Professor M. V. O'Shea of Wisconsin were invited to conduct an in- 
 vestigation to determine the efficiency of all-year schools as compared 
 with those of the so-called "traditional" type. These men consented 
 to do so, and secured the cooperation of Professor W. Carson Ryan. 
 Jr., of Swarthmore, Professor W. A. McCall of Teachers College, Dr. 
 A. T. Wylie of Columbia, Dr. R. K. Atkinson of Russell Sage Foun- 
 dation, and others. 
 
 The results of this survey, which were published in a report of 
 almost one hundred pages, are decidedly favorable to the all-year 
 school. The investigators found that Superintendent Carson's three 
 bases of condemning it were not valid. The first was that such schools 
 do not coordinate well with other schools. This was admitted, but since 
 the all-year schools were found to be superior to the other schools, it 
 was recommended that all schools be put on this basis and thus the lack 
 of coordination avoided. His second argument was that the advantages 
 gained by a comparatively few pupils cost too much. The study 
 showed, however, that the cost per unit of work in the all-year schools 
 was appreciably less than in the others. In the third place, Superin- 
 tendent Corson had claimed that the all-year pupils who were gradu- 
 ated from elementary schools were not so well equipped for high- 
 school work as were the others. In response to this it was shown 
 that most of the pupils in the all-year schools came from the foreign 
 sections of the city and on the whole possessed below average ability 
 and, therefore, might be expected to do poorer work in high school 
 regardless of w r hat type of elementary school they attended. 
 
 In addition to presenting refutations of Superintendent Corson's 
 objections, the surveyors studied other phases of the question. It was 
 shown by physical examinations that the condition of all-year pupils 
 in September was as good as that of pupils who had attended during 
 
36 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 the regular academic year and spent the summer at the seashore. The 
 teachers were not subjected to physical examinations, but of eighty- 
 seven who answered a questionnaire, eighty-two stated that they had 
 not suffered from teaching in the summer with regard to their health, 
 energy, and general spirits. Although data were not given to prove 
 the point, the investigators stated their belief that the all-year schools 
 were responsible for a large proportion of pupils advancing further 
 in their school work than would otherwise have been the case. In 
 other words, their chief value consists in holding pupils in school and 
 in reducing retardation and elimination rather than enabling large 
 numbers of pupils to gain time. They indicate also their belief that 
 from other than strictly educational points of view attendance in sum- 
 mer school is desirable. 
 
 In addition to the findings of this survey, other data regarding the 
 all-year schools of Newark have been gathered and published. With- 
 out detail, it may be stated briefly that these support some of the con- 
 clusions of the surveyors, especially those having to do with the re- 
 duction in per capita cost and the increase of graduation from both 
 elementary and high school, and do not conflict with any. 
 
 Nashville. 3 No special survey of summer work appears to have 
 been made in Nashville, but various data concerning it have been pub- 
 lished. Enrollment was voluntary, but was about two-thirds as great 
 as in the winter. The daily attendance during the summer was about 
 94 per cent of the enrollment, and the tardiness only .22 per cent. The 
 promotion rate was 85 per cent as compared with 79 per cent in the 
 winter. Although the pupils who attended during the summer were 
 not required to attend the following fall term, the attendance that 
 term was larger than during any term of the previous year. In other 
 words, attendance during the summer apparently had no effect in 
 reducing that immediately thereafter. All of the regular teachers who 
 wished to do so, about six-sevenths of all, were allowed to teach in 
 the summer. The superintendent's conclusion both after the first year 
 and later was that the new plan was a success chiefly because of the 
 increased adaptation to individual needs which it made possible. 
 
 Dcffenbaugh's study. 4 In one of the earlier studies of summer ses- 
 sions, Deffenbaugh collected the opinions of superintendents and other 
 
 3 Weber, H. C. "All-Year Public School Succeeding," Texas Outlook, 9:7-8, June, 1925. 
 
 Weber, H. C. "Defense Through the Educated Quota: The Ail-Year School," Pro- 
 ceedings of the National Education Association. Washington: National Education As- 
 sociation, 1925, p. 751-59. 
 
 Weber, H. C. "To Increase the Educated Quota — The All-Year School," Journal of 
 Education, 102:102-7, August 13, 1925. 
 
 "The Ail-Year School," Michigan Education Journal, 6:111-12, October, 1928. 
 
 4 Deffenbaugh, W. S. "Summer Sessions of City Schools," U. S. Bureau of Education 
 Bulletin, 1917, No. 45. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1918. 45 p. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 57 
 
 administrative officials in charge of more than one hundred summer 
 high schools and two hundred summer elementary schools. One of 
 the items of information obtained had to do with the effect of such 
 sessions on the health of pupils. Practically all those who replied 
 stated that the effect was to improve the health of those who attended. 
 
 Bush's findings. 5 Bush's two studies report a number of conclu- 
 sions, practically all of which are based upon opinion. His nation- 
 wide study of summer high schools in medium sized cities yielded 
 opinions of administrators in the majority of more than two to one 
 that the results obtained in the summer were as good as in the regular 
 year. In his other study he quotes a few opinions and gives conclu- 
 sions that tend in the same direction. 
 
 Jones' results. 6 Almost none of the facts gathered by Jones offer 
 evidence as to the efficiency of summer w r ork. Apart from the gen- 
 eral increase in the amount of such work reported, the one signifi- 
 cant fact is that practically 15 per cent of summer pupils failed as 
 compared with 10 per cent in the last semester of the previous year. 
 
 Hoffman's study. 7 Hoffman likewise reported almost no data bear- 
 ing on the efficiency of such schools. He did, however, give figures 
 for promotions, showing that in the cities that reported them the 
 per cents ranged from 45 to 96, the median being about 78. Un- 
 fortunately he gave no corresponding data for the regular year. 
 
 Reals' study.* Reals, as a part of his study, attempted to determine 
 certain facts that bear upon the question at issue. He found that of 
 summer pupils in New York City high schools, from 60 to 79 per 
 cent wrote Regents Examination papers that were accepted as passing, 
 an average which he considers good in view of the short length of the 
 summer term. He also gave achievement tests in five high-school 
 subjects, accompanied by intelligence tests, to about fifteen hundred 
 summer high-school pupils. The results indicate that on the whole 
 the summer-school pupils were decidedly lower in intelligence than 
 those of the regular year. Despite this fact, however, the achievement 
 test results were slightly better for the summer-school pupils than for 
 the others. Out of twenty-nine possible comparisons seventeen favored 
 
 5 Bush, R. H. "Current Practices in Summer School," School Review, 32:142-46, Feb- 
 ruary, 1924. 
 
 Bush, R. H. "The Status of the Summer Schools in the Secondary Schools of Illinois." 
 Springfield, Illinois: State Superintendent of Public Instruction, 1926. 69 p. 
 
 "Jones, J. W. "High School Summer Work in Indiana," School of Education Bulletin, 
 Indiana University, Vol. 2, No. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1925, p. 43-47. 
 
 •Hoffman, M. D. "Status of Summer High Schools in Cities of More than 100,000 
 Population," School Review, 33:107-14, February, 1925. 
 
 "Reals, W. H. "A Study of the Summer High School," Teachers College, Columbia 
 I nwersity Contributions to Education, No. 337. New York: Bureau of Publications, 
 Teachers College, Columbia University, 1928. 88 p. 
 
38 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 the summer pupils, three those of the regular year, and nine were not 
 significant. Furthermore, he followed up about four hundred summer- 
 school pupils into their work of the next year and compared their ability 
 to do such work with that of others. Out of thirteen comparisons five 
 favored the regular-year pupils and eight yielded no significant differ- 
 ences. In another study of about four hundred pupils, he found that 57 
 per cent of them considered their summer work more valuable than 
 that of the regular year, that 26 per cent thought it was less valuable, 
 and 17 per cent rated it the same. In this group 22 per cent failed in 
 enough work to be definitely retarded. He gives as reasons why sum- 
 mer work is superior that it is more intensive because pupils are not 
 allowed to carry more than two subjects, and because the periods are 
 usually longer, that it is more adapted to the individual pupil, that it 
 is more purposeful since attendance is voluntary rather than compul- 
 sory, and that there are no extra-curricular activities to interfere 
 with it. 
 
 Garfield High School, Terrc Haute? Clogston reports a study of 
 the health and scholarship of pupils attending the nine-weeks' summer 
 session of the Garfield High School in Terre Haute, Indiana. Pupils 
 were weighed at the beginning and end of the session, teachers filled 
 out blanks each week as to the pupils' condition, and the pupils them- 
 selves filled out questionnaires concerning absences due to illness 
 during the preceding semester and the summer. It was found that 
 the majority of pupils gained slightly in weight or remained the same, 
 although the average loss was one ounce, largely because of one pupil 
 who lost a considerable amount. The teachers lost an average of 
 about one and one-half pounds during the summer. Apparently there 
 was less absence due to illness during the summer than during the 
 previous year. The per cent of attendance during the summer was 95.5 
 as compared with 96.4 for the previous semester. About 53 per cent 
 of the pupils' summer marks were higher than those they had made 
 the second semester of the preceding year, about 32 per cent were 
 lower, and about 14 per cent the same. In all of the subjects offered 
 in the summer except two, the per cents of failures were less. 
 
 Summary. The chief arguments in favor of summer work are 
 that it is both financially and educationally economical and that it 
 provides much better environment for children than that to which they 
 would otherwise be exposed. The chief arguments against it, none of 
 which appear to be entirely valid, are that the work done in summer 
 
 9 Clogston, E. B. "Health and Scholarship in Summer High School," School Review, 
 37:760-63, December, 1929. 
 
Summer Work in Public Schools 39 
 
 is inferior, that the school environment is not satisfactory, that chil- 
 dren's time outside of school should not be reduced, and that extra 
 administrative work is caused. The thorough survey made in Newark 
 resulted in findings very favorable to summer work and the all-year 
 school. Less scientific and careful studies in Nashville and a few other 
 cities yielded similar results. These are supported by the opinions of 
 administrative officials and others who have been in positions enabling 
 them to observe summer work and the results thereof. On the whole, 
 therefore, the evidence in favor of summer work may be considered 
 rather strong. 
 
40 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 References Containing Arguments for and Against 
 Summer Work 
 
 Bush, R. H. "Current Practices in Summer School," School Review, 32:142-46, 
 
 February, 1924. 
 Bush, R. H. "The Status of the Summer Schools in the Secondary Schools of 
 
 Illinois." Springfield, Illinois: State Superintendent of Public Instruction, 
 
 1926. 69 p. 
 Clogston, E. B. "Health and Scholarship in Summer High School," School 
 
 Review, 37:760-63, December, 1929. 
 Deffenbaugh, W. S. "Summer Sessions of City Schools," U. S. Bureau of 
 
 Education Bulletin, 1917, No. 45. Washington: Government Printing Office, 
 
 1918. 45 p. 
 Farrand, Wilson and O'Shea, M. V. "All-Year Schools in Newark," School 
 
 and Society, 23:462-69, April 10, 1926. 
 Farrand, Wilson and O'Shea, M. V. "The All-Year Schools of Newark, New 
 
 Jersey." Newark, New Jersey: Board of Education, 1925. 96 p. 
 Hoffman, M. D. "Status of Summer High Schools in Cities of More than 
 
 100,000 Population," School Reviezv, 33:107-14, February, 1925. 
 Jones, J. W. "High School Summer Work in Indiana," School of Education 
 
 Bulletin, Indiana University, Vol. 2, No. 2. Bloomington: Indiana Uni- 
 versity, 1925, p. 43-47. 
 Lovell, L. E. "All- Year School," Educational Review, 73 : 196-202, April, 1927. 
 Reals, W. H. "A Study of the Summer High School," Teachers College, Co- 
 lumbia University Contributions to Education, No. 337. New York: Bureau 
 
 of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1928. 88 p. 
 Weber, H. C. "All-Year Public School Succeeding," Texas Outlook, 9:7-8, June, 
 
 1925. 
 Weber, H. C "Defense Through the Educated Quota: The All- Year School," 
 
 Proceedings of the National Education Association. Washington: National 
 
 Education Association, 1925, p. 751-59. 
 Weber, H. C "To Increase the Educated Quota — The Ail-Year School," 
 
 Journal of Education, 102:102-7, August 13, 1925. 
 "The All-Year School," Elementary School Journal, 24:409-11, February, 1924. 
 "The All-Year School," Elementary School Journal, 26:401-5, February, 1926. 
 "The All-Year School in Newark," Elementary School Journal, 26:561-63, 
 
 April, 1926. 
 "The All-Year School," Michigan Education Journal, 6:111-12, October, 1928. 
 "The All-Year School Situation in Newark, New Jersey," School and Society, 
 
 22:715-16, December 5, 1925. 
 "The All-Year School Wins," American School Board Journal, 73:66, December, 
 
 1926. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 
 
 Development and present status. A century or so ago it was com- 
 mon for city schools to continue in session throughout most of the 
 summer, and for rural schools to be held then rather than in the most 
 severe part of winter. This practice gradually disappeared, leaving 
 instead a long summer vacation. There has, however, been a strong 
 tendency to return to the practice of having summer elementary and 
 high schools. This began with vacation schools, of which the first 
 started in Boston in 1866, then included regular summer schools, 
 which began in Newark in 1885, and finally a few all-year schools 
 dating from that of Bluffton in 1905. Surveys, made by Deffenbaugh, 
 Bush, and others, show that the number of systems offering such work 
 and of pupils taking it has increased rapidly until at present almost 
 all of our larger city systems and many of those in smaller cities, 
 towns, and even villages, are giving some work of this type, and that 
 the attendance has reached at least three-fourths of a million pupils 
 each summer. 
 
 Among the characteristic features most frequently found in some 
 of the surveys just referred to and also in one of summer work in 
 1929 in the public schools of Illinois made by the writer are the fol- 
 lowing: The term is usually either six or eight weeks in length, and 
 the daily sessions not far from four hours each. High-school pupils 
 are ordinarily limited to two subjects and elementary pupils to one 
 semester's work. Pupils who have failed, or perhaps who are in danger 
 of failing, are allowed to attend, and also frequently those who wish 
 to gain time. Almost all summer teachers also teach during the regu- 
 lar year. The work is about equally often organized in regular classes 
 and on an individual basis and credit is almost always given for it. 
 In a majority of the larger systems no charge is made, but in smaller 
 ones the situation is reversed. 
 
 Evaluation of summer work. There has been considerable argu- 
 ment concerning the outcomes of summer work in the public schools, 
 as to whether they are desirable or undesirable, but little objective 
 or conclusive evidence concerning them has been published. On the 
 basis of a critical consideration of the arguments advanced and of 
 what evidence there is available, several conclusions seem justified. 
 The per capita cost of summer school or of the all-year school is less 
 
 41 
 
42 Bulletin No. 49 
 
 than that of the ordinary school year of eight, nine, or ten months. At- 
 tendance during the summer benefits pupils educationally by allowing 
 some to make up failures, by helping others so that they are prevented 
 from failing, and by permitting others who are able to do so to gain 
 time. It also helps pupils physically and morally, since the school en- 
 vironment is better in both these respects than that in which most 
 children would be if they were out of school. On the whole, the 
 quality of summer work is probably as high as that of work done 
 during the regular school year. The rapid spread of the movement ap- 
 pears to leave little doubt that it will soon become a feature of most 
 school systems, and there appear to be no compelling reasons why 
 any system should refuse to adopt it. 
 
 Because of these and other minor considerations, the writer does 
 not see how it is possible to avoid the conclusion that summer work 
 on the elementary and high-school levels has passed the experimental 
 stage and shown its worth. Boards of education, administrative offi- 
 cers, and others responsible for determining school policies in systems 
 where such work is not already offered should give serious consider- 
 ation to the question of introducing it. Furthermore, there appear to 
 be certain advantages possessed by the all-year school organized in 
 four terms of twelve weeks each over the regular two-semester year 
 plus a short summer term. For the present, at least, it is probably un- 
 wise in most communities to extend compulsory education to include 
 attendance during the summer as well as during the remainder of 
 the year, but the summer term should be open to all who wish to take 
 advantage of it, and all pupils should be encouraged to do so. Further- 
 more, there should be no tuition charge, but attendance should be free 
 just as during the regular year. If it seems impossible to finance sum- 
 mer work on this basis, it is better to begin by offering such work 
 with a tuition charge and to plan toward doing away with this charge 
 as soon as possible rather than not to offer it at all. 
 
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 
 
 3 0112 065081975