THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF ILLINOIS 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 370 
 It6 . 
 
 No. 26-34 
 
ssarissss*" 
 
 __H41 
 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/studyofsupervise02brow 
 
BULLETIN XO. 26 
 
 BUREAU OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 
 COLLEGE OF EDUCATION 
 
 A STUDY OF SUPERVISED STUDY 
 
 By 
 
 William Arthur Browxell 
 Instructor, College of Education 
 
 M UBKAHY OF thf 
 
 IU! '■ iS?5 
 
 UNSVER'-' 
 
 PRICE 50 CENTS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS. URBANA 
 
 1925 
 
SB 
 - 3 \ 
 
 r 
 c 
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Preface 5 
 
 Chapter I. Introductory Statement 7 
 
 Chapter II. The Technique of Supervised Study 12 
 
 Chapter III. Merits of Supervised Study 20 
 
 A. Merits claimed on the basis of opinion 21 
 
 1. Individual opinion 21 
 
 2. Consensus of opinion 25 
 
 B. Merits claimed on the basis .of experimentation 29 
 
 1. Crude experimentation 30 
 
 2. Controlled experimentation 32 
 
 Chapter IV. Concluding Statement 44- 
 
 Bibliography 46 
 
 640609 
 
PREFACE 
 
 This bulletin illustrates a type of educational research which is 
 much needed. A multitude of "original" studies have been reported 
 in our educational periodicals and in bulletins and monographs, but 
 very few critical summaries of such work are to be found. The litera- 
 ture on many educational topics is now so vast that very few students 
 can find the time to read it. If waste is to be avoided, summaries must 
 be prepared in order that the results of "original" studies may be 
 sufficiently accessible to teachers, principals, superintendents, and 
 other students of Education. 
 
 The need for critical summaries of our educational literature is 
 even greater than the mere vastness of it indicates. Unfortunately, a 
 considerable portion of what has been written has little value and in 
 some cases reports of "original" studies are misleading, if not erron- 
 eous. Doubtless, Mr. Brownell's conclusion in regard to the general 
 character of the literature relating to supervised study would apply 
 also to the literature on other topics. In the concluding chapter of 
 this bulletin he says, "it must be admitted that an unfortunately 
 large amount of writing on supervised study is repetitious and, to 
 put it mildly, futile . . . Many of the investigations of supervised 
 study appear to represent much wasted effort since it is unnecessary 
 to prove the obvious." 
 
 Mr. Brownell has rendered a distinct service by preparing a 
 critical summary of over 450 pages of material relating to supervised 
 study, and it is hoped that the publication of this "Study of Super- 
 vised Study" will encourage students of Education to undertake 
 similar studies of the literature on other topics. 
 
 Walter S. Monroe, Director. 
 April 17, 1925. 
 

A STUDY OF SUPERVISED STUDY 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT 
 
 The problem. During the past fifteen years, a very large place 
 in educational literature has been occupied by discussions of the 
 theory and practice of supervised study. In the appended bibli- 
 ography magazine articles which total more than 450 pages are listed, 
 and these represent no more than a small sample of the total litera- 
 ture on this topic. 
 
 In this bulletin we are interested in discovering what is being 
 said and written about supervised study as it applies to the secondary 
 school. Our plan is not to present a mere summary of the printed 
 matter on the subject, a compilation, as it were, of the opinions of 
 this and of that writer; but rather to assume throughout a critical 
 attitude which will look into the evidence for the conclusions reached 
 by the writers. 
 
 General plan of report. After discussing the meaning of the 
 term supervised study as it is found in the literature, and after de- 
 fining the terms which will be employed in this report, the discussion 
 will be carried on under the following heads: 
 
 The Technique of Supe rvise d Study.- 
 
 The Merits of Supervised Study. 
 
 A. Merits claimed on the basis of opinion. 
 
 B. Merits claimed on the basis of experimentation. — » 
 Concluding Statement. 
 
 Variations in meaning of "supervised study." Our first task is 
 one of definition. Manifestly we must define "supervised study" 
 before we can reasonably attempt an evaluation of this phase of 
 school procedure. This matter of definition is the more necessary 
 because of lack of agreement in the common use of the term. Even 
 the most cursory reader of the literature on the subject must be 
 struck by the diverse connotations for the term in the hands of dif- 
 ferent writers. 
 
 [7] 
 
One writer uses "supervised study" to denote a form of school 
 procedure in which all formal recitations are eliminated. A second 
 writer uses the same term to designate the practice of lengthening 
 the traditional school period and of dividing it in such a way that 
 the first part is devoted to recitation and the latter part to study 
 under the direction of the teacher. A third writer says nothing at all 
 of the division of school time when he speaks of supervised study, 
 but means merely the guidance of the pupil's study by the teacher. 
 
 New terms to replace "supervised study." Of late there has 
 appeared in educational writings evidence of a dawning appreciation 
 of the significance of the ambiguity surrounding the concept of 
 "supervised study;"' and a number of educators have suggested the 
 abandonment of the old term in favor of some new one. 
 
 Among these proposed substitutes for "supervised study" we 
 find (a) "supervised learning," suggested by Inglis, 1 (b) "directing 
 study," sponsored by Miller, 2 (c) "directed study," used by Burr a 
 and Morrison, 4 and (d) "supervision of study," employed somewhat 
 generally in literature. 
 
 For these newer terms two advantages are claimed, the one 
 negative and the other positive. The negative advantage is the fact 
 that the substitution of a new name serves to eliminate certain non- 
 essential implications which through careless usage have become 
 connected with the old term. The positive advantage is that the new 
 name centers the emphasis and the attention upon the more impor- 
 tant ideas in the procedure. 
 
 Two important facts resulting from analysis. We may note 
 two facts of some importance. In the first place, writers on super- 
 vised study do agree on one essential point — the immature pupil 
 needs some sort of guidance in study. This guidance, all agree, has 
 not been sufficiently furnished. Under the traditional order of school 
 procedure, the child without direction acquired as best he might all 
 that he could, while the teacher's task consisted most largely in 
 assigning lessons and in measuring the quality and the quantity of 
 the pupil's achievement. „ 
 
 Inglis, Alexander. Principles of Secondary Education. Boston: Houghton 
 Mifflin Company, 1918, p. 713. 
 
 "Miller, H. L. Directing Study. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1922. 
 377 p. 
 
 3 Burr, A. W. "Directed study," School Review. 27:90-100, February, 1919. 
 
 4 Morrison, Henry C. The term ''directed study - ' is employed by this writer 
 in several places in the articles listed in the bibilography. 
 
 [8] 
 
In the second place, their disagreement regarding the meaning 
 and use of the term ''supervised study" may in part be accounted for. 
 This confusion seems to be due principally to two causes: a differ- 
 ence in the angles from which various writers have looked upon 
 supervised study; and a failure to discriminate consistently between 
 two essentially different phases of supervised study. 
 
 Confusion caused by differences in writers' points of emphasis. 
 Involved in any scheme of supervised study are the three agencies — 
 teacher, pupil, and administrator. We find some writers emphasizing 
 the place of the teacher in supervised study, and in this case, super- 
 vised study becomes a method of teaching. 5 Others write from the 
 standpoint of the pupil, and here the development of economical and 
 effective habits of study is considered the primary aim of supervised 
 study. 6 By far the greatest number of writers, however, view super- 
 vised study through the eyes of the administrator. In this sense, the 
 term is used to denote a part or the whole of some administrative 
 measure — equivalent, in many cases, to the notion of individual 
 instruction, or the lengthened period, or the divided period. This use 
 of the term is especially conducive to ambiguity and to consequent 
 confusion of thought. 
 
 It is at once apparent that these different points of view do not 
 supply meanings for supervised study which are totally unrelated. 
 All overlap to a greater or less extent. Thus, when the chief consid- 
 eration is administrative, supervised study will still necessarily imply 
 certain procedures which concern the pupil and the teacher. 
 
 Confusion caused by failure to discriminate between different 
 phases of supervised study. While much of the ambiguity regarding 
 the meaning of supervised study may be attributed to the cause just 
 discussed, a more important source of confusion is to be found in a 
 general failure among writers to keep in mind the essentially com- 
 plex nature of supervised study. In any scheme whatsoever for 
 supervised study there are two fundamentally different aspects: 
 ( 1 ) the direction of the pupil in study; (2) the form of school organ- 
 ization established to facilitate the administration of this direction. 
 
 ""Koos, Leonard V. The Junior High School. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 
 and Howe, 1920, p. 153. 
 
 "Hall-Quest, Alfred L. ''The direction of study as chief aim of the high 
 school," Chapter X, The Modern High School, edited by Charles H. Johnston. New 
 York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1916, p. 265-94. 
 
 [9] 
 
That the two are very closely related is obvious; the first, guidance, 
 is naturally dependent upon some plan of school organization for 
 execution. But the fact that these two aspects are not identical nor 
 mutually inclusive in significance and implication is not commonly 
 recognized. 
 
 The statement that the primary purpose of supervised study is 
 to give the pupil a form of guidance which he really needs in order 
 to acquire adequate habits of study would probably go unchallenged; 
 and yet we find all too frequently that the machinery of administra- 
 tion, which is but the vehicle to serve the prime purpose, assumes the 
 position of major consideration in theory and practice. In educa- 
 tional literature, the technique of administration — distribution of 
 time w r ithin the period, disposition of the recitation, and the like — is 
 much discussed, wdiile matters regarding the actual help in study, 
 which is the reform demanded, receive only incidental treatment. 
 The "side show" has swallowed up the "main show." 
 
 Terms used in report. A clear definition of the terms to be used 
 in this report is necessary in order to avoid the very confusion which 
 is prevalent in educational literature on supervised study. Three 
 terms, growing out of the analysis of the nature of supervised study, 
 are to be used. 
 
 1. "Pupil-direction." The essential element in supervised study 
 is the supplying of proper guidance to the learner in acquiring effi- 
 cient habits of study. This element will be designated as "pupil- 
 direction." 
 
 2. "Technique." To refer to the second of the elements, that is, 
 the formal procedure by which the school as an institution furnishes 
 this pupil-direction, the term "technique" will be used. The chief 
 aspect of technique is, of course, administrative. The technique of 
 supervised study will be found to take various specialized forms, and 
 in order to differentiate between these, a descriptive word or phrase 
 will be employed as seems appropriate. 
 
 3. "Supervised study." The old term "supervised study" will 
 be retained to represent any possible combination of the two elements, 
 "pupil-direction" and "technique." Its connotation will be anything 
 but specific, and it will be employed a-s a very general term wherever 
 careful discrimination between the two fundamental elements is 
 unnecessary. 
 
 [10] 
 
Re-statement of the problem. At the outset, the purpose of this 
 report was stated to be an analysis and evaluation QL_s.u_pexYis.ed 
 study in the secondary school as disclosed in periodical literature. 
 The terms defined in the preceding paragraphs make possible a more 
 restricted definition of the problem. The first of the elements in 
 supervised study, pupil-direction, will be treated only incidentally; 
 the second, technique, will receive primary consideration. 
 
 [11] 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE TECHNIQUE OF SUPERVISED STUDY 
 
 Forms of supervised-study technique varied. One usually reads 
 of supervised study as of a single, simple, unvarying form of school 
 procedure. That is, there seems to be in educational literature an 
 implicit assumption that supervised study is the same wherever 
 found — that if two schools have made provision for supervised study, 
 the two situations in all respects will be approximately identical and 
 the results, equivalent. When, however, the reader turns to a more 
 careful consideration of the technique of supervised study, he dis- 
 covers that the usual impression has little foundation in fact. Instead, 
 he finds several complex, variable forms of practical school organiza- 
 tion to administer pupil-direction. Thus, Willett 1 mentions nine 
 
 forms, Hall-Quest. 2 fourteen. Hines. 3 eieht. and so on. In fact, the 
 
 •. . . 
 
 periodical articles examined supply a total of fourteen types of tech- 
 nique sufficiently different to be classified separately. If we were to 
 add to these main types several subtypes, which by reason of modi- 
 fications in procedure would certainly alter the results obtained, the 
 list would easily mount to twenty-five or thirty. The exact number 
 is unimportant — the essential point is that all of these various forms 
 are labeled by the one term supervised study. 
 
 Types of technique. The fourteen main types of technique are 
 listed and described very briefly in the following pages. In a number 
 of the cases, especially the first two, the possibility of variation 
 within the type is illustrated. 
 
 1. Special study halls. In this plan, the study period is sepa- 
 rated from the recitation. The students segregated for study occupy 
 either (a) large assembly halls or (b) special small rooms, holding 
 perhaps thirty pupils (the latter plan known as the "East Cleveland" or 
 
 'Willett, G. W. "Supervised studv in high school." School Review. 26:259- 
 72. April, 1918. 
 
 "Hall-Quest. Alfred L. "The direction of study as the chief aim of the high 
 school,"' Chapter X. The Modern High School, edited by Charles H.Johnston. New 
 York: Charles Scribner"s Sons. 1916. p. 265-94. 
 
 3 Hixes, H. C. "Supervised study in the junior high school," School and 
 Society, 6:518-22, November 3, 1917. 
 
 [12] 
 
"neighborhood room" form of supervised study). Within these rooms 
 the students proceed with study under the direction of either (c) 
 special study teachers or (d) regular teachers who may be assigned 
 study-hall duty as part of their daily programs. It will be noted that 
 within this general type of technique, four special types may be 
 devised by adopting various combinations of the factors (a), (b), 
 (c), and (d). 
 
 2. The conference plan. This form of technique is planned to 
 provide direction in study for individual pupils, usually the backward. 
 Here too a number of varying forms may be recognized. The con- 
 ference may be (a) voluntary or (b) required, (c) for all the pupils 
 or (d) for only those who are behind in their work; it may be held 
 (e) at stated times or (f) by appointment (g) within the regular 
 school hours or (h) after school, (i) with special teachers set 
 aside for the particular task or (j) with the regular teachers of 
 the courses in which directed study is being given. Clearly a very 
 large number of special types of technique could be worked out with 
 these variables. 
 
 3. The DeKalb plan. The school program under this plan pro- 
 vides one period a week for the supervision of study, all the other 
 periods being for the usual purposes of recitation and undirected 
 study. 
 
 4. The Pueblo plan. This technique goes to the opposite ex- 
 treme from the DeKalb plan just described. In the Pueblo plan, 
 which was devised by Superintendent Preston Search, all recitations are 
 abolished, and the whole school day is devoted to study under the 
 direction of teachers. This represents a return to individual instruc- 
 tion par excellence. 
 
 5. Daily extra period. This plan which, according to Willett, 4 
 was used at Des Moines, Iowa, as early as 1906, and later at Pottstown. 
 Pennsylvania, provides, as its name implies, an extra period each day 
 for the preparation of work under supervision. All pupils with a 
 standing of 90 percent or better, however, are excused from this extra 
 period and are dismissed at the end of the regular school day. 
 
 A variation of this plan called the "study class," in which each 
 department regularly supplies a teacher for coaching the backward 
 
 Willett, G. \Y. "Supervised studv in high school," School Review, 26:259- 
 72, April 1918. 
 
 [13] 
 
pupils in an extra period, is reported by Harris. 3 Another adaptation 
 of this general technique is described by Nielson 6 under the name 
 "deficiency period." 
 
 6. Differential plan. In this supervised-study technique the 
 teacher is given large discretionary powers. There are no specific 
 requirements regarding the amount or the nature of the pupil-direc- 
 tion to be given. Such matters are left entirely to the judgment of 
 the teachers, the understanding being, however, that a certain amount 
 of guidance shall be given. One feature of the plan as described by 
 Burr, 7 though not under the above name, is the practice of furnishing 
 pupils with printed cards of directions on study. 
 
 7. The double period. The essential idea here is that two reg- 
 ular periods are assigned to each of the high-school subjects, in one 
 of which the pupils recite and in the other of which they stud}'. The 
 common practice seems to be to assign two teachers to each subject, 
 one being in charge continuously of study and the other, of recitation. 
 This results in a definite break being made between these two phases 
 of the pupil's activity. 
 
 Some authorities assign the credit of the procedure to Superin- 
 tendent J. Stanley Brown, of Joliet, Illinois. A description of the 
 technique under the name ''the laboratory-recitation plan" is given 
 us by Superintendent I. M. Allen s of Springfield, Illinois. The origi- 
 nal supervised study technique, worked out by Superintendent Ken- 
 nedy at Batavia, Xew York, and hence known as the ''Batavia plan," 
 appears to have been of this general type. 
 
 8. The divided period. This technique, in one or another of its 
 many forms, is probably the most widely used. It differs from the 
 double-period plan in that: first, customarily but one teacher is in 
 charge of the group for both study and recitation in the same school 
 subject; and second, the class activity is maintained as a unit, with- 
 out a break between recitation and study. Usually it involves the 
 lengthening of the class period and hence is sometimes described as 
 the "lengthened-period" plan. 
 
 "Harris, G. L. "Supervised study in the University of Chicago High School," 
 School Review, 26:490-510, September' 1918. 
 
 "Xielsox, C. H. "An innovation in supervised study," School Review, 25:220. 
 March. 1917. (Editorial comment.) 
 
 t Burr, A. W. "Directed study," School Review, 27:90-100. February, 1919. 
 
 'Allen, 1. M. "An experiment in supervised study," School Review, 25:398- 
 411. June, 1917. 
 
 [14] 
 
There is the widest variation in this plan from the standpoint of 
 (a) length of period and (b) distribution of time within the period. 
 On the first point, we have periods running from fifty minutes to 
 over one hundred, with the commonest practice probably at about 
 sixty minutes. On the second, utilization of time, we have the full 
 course of possibility from the one extreme where the teacher employs 
 the class time as she wishes, to the other extreme, where the period 
 is definitely laid out into a number of sub-periods, each of which is 
 intended for a certain type of activity. As an instance of this latter, 
 we have the following: 9 "recapitulation, five minutes; statement of 
 the business of the day, two minutes; discussion, twenty-five minutes; 
 assignment, five minutes; study period, twenty-five minutes." Proba- 
 bly the commonest procedure is to divide the lengthened period 
 roughly into halves, the first being used for recitation, and the second 
 for study. 
 
 What is sometimes called the "Merriam plan" and other times 
 the "Columbia plan" 10 belongs to this general type of technique, its 
 chief difference being the prominence given the assignment. One- 
 third of the period is taken up by the teacher for this purpose. 
 
 9. The Seattle plan, 11 or the supervised-home-study plan. 
 While somewhat like the divided-period plan, the Seattle plan differs 
 in its attitude toward home study. Steps are taken to direct the study 
 at home by means of definite instructions in procedure, specific tasks 
 to be accomplished, and the like. 
 
 10. The University High-School plan, of the University of 
 Chicago. Here, practically the whole period is devoted to study 
 under the direction of the teacher. In this respect it resembles the 
 Pueblo plan. The work in the University High School is laid out 
 into what are called "units," which vary in length, usually from two 
 to five weeks, with the particular subject and the type of topic. At 
 the conclusion of the period devoted to any one unit, the amount of 
 time depending upon the ability of the pupil, opportunity for a form 
 of recitation is given, when "floor talks," papers, and so forth may be 
 presented. 
 
 'Young, Eula, and Simpson, M. R. "A technique for the lengthened period." 
 School Review, 30:199-204, March, 1922. 
 
 "Merriam, Eugene E. ''Technique of supervised study," School Review, 26: 
 35-38, January, 1918. 
 
 "Cole, Thomas R. "One year of supervised study," School Review, 25:331- 
 35, May, 1917. 
 
 [15] 
 
The Wisconsin High School, of the University of Wisconsin, fol- 
 lows a similar procedure: the "units" are called "challenges," and 
 there is specific effort to secure motivation through the grading 
 system. 
 
 11. The graduated plan. This plan devised by Superintendent 
 Paul Stetson, 12 at Grand Rapids, Michigan, differs from all others in 
 its appreciation of the varying needs of pupils in successive grades 
 for direction and help in study. Thus in the seventh grade, thirty 
 minutes are given to recitation and thirty to study; in the eighth 
 grade, the ratio of time for recitation to study is 35:25; in the ninth 
 grade, 40:20; and in the last three years, or the senior high school, 
 45:15. Beginning with the ninth grade, provision is made for a "con- 
 sultation period" of thirty minutes a day to take care of the backward. 
 
 12. Study coach. Hall-Quest 13 lists as a form of supervised 
 study the practice of providing the high school with one or more 
 special teachers whose sole task is to train pupils in study-methods. 
 
 13. Review groups. In the same reference, Hall-Quest describes 
 as supervised study the segregating of backward children into special 
 groups for instruction. The idea here is probably the same as that 
 mentioned by Hines 14 under the name, "delayed-group plan." 
 
 14. Printed directions. Hines, in the article cited, also regards 
 as a form of supervised study the practice of supplying to pupils 
 directions for study, such as the study programs recommended by 
 Reavis. 15 Such a procedure, if it stops at this point, is certainly a far 
 cry from the elaborate plans for the immediate direction of study 
 called for in other schemes which we have briefly reviewed. 
 
 Significance of the list. In this list of fourteen distinct types we 
 have, on the one hand, a very complex technique which calls for a 
 period of definite length, every day in every school subject, divided 
 into sub-periods of time, each of which is to be utilized for a specific 
 purpose; and, on the other, the practice of giving pupils printed direc- 
 
 12 Stetson, Paul C. "A survey of supervised study," The American School 
 Board Journal, 54:19-20, 85-86, June, 1917. 
 
 "Hall-Quest, Alfred L. "The direction of study as the chief aim of the high 
 school," Chapter X, The Modern High School, edited by Charles H. Johnston. New 
 York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1916, p. 278. 
 
 "Hines, H. C. "Supervised study in the junior high school," School and 
 Society, 6:520, November 3, 1917. 
 
 15 Reavis, W. C. 'The importance of study programs for high-school pupils," 
 School Review, 19:398-405, June, 1911. 
 
 [16] 
 
tions on how to study. In between these two extremes there are from 
 a dozen to a score of other schemes of all degrees of complexity and 
 definiteness, but all, be it noted, parading under the name of "super- 
 vised study." 
 
 If the advisability of recognizing the hybrid nature of that 
 which we call supervised study has not been clear before, it certainly 
 should be now. Essentially, the only point of agreement in all these 
 forms or types of technique is their purpose to provide means for 
 guiding the pupil in his learning activities. From this common origin 
 spring all sorts of special techniques for the achievement of the end. 
 The whole becomes complicated out of all semblance of its origin 
 through administrative manipulation until the term supervised study 
 as commonly employed has very little if any meaning. 
 
 Variable factors. We have taken one means of showing the 
 impossibility of ascribing practical identity of procedure and of re- 
 sults to schools which purport to be using supervised study. Our 
 method has been to describe in gross various techniques for adminis- 
 tering pupil-guidance in study. 
 
 We may take another method, somewhat more direct, to illus- 
 trate further the possibility of variability in the practice and in the 
 results of supervised study. We shall here analyze the problem more 
 carefully witn a view to isolating certain specific factors which may 
 vary in different situations. The analysis will be suggestive rather 
 than exhaustive. Three types of variable factors are recognized: 
 1. those that may vary between schools; 2, those that may vary 
 between types of technique; 3, those that may vary within a single 
 type of technique in the matter of pupil-direction. Each of these 
 types of factor will be made clearer by subsequent discussion. 
 
 1. Variable factors between schools. Let us assume that two 
 school systems adopt the same type of technique for supervised 
 study. There will still be present a number of factors sufficiently 
 different in the two schools to make doubtful identity in procedure 
 or in results. Of these we may mention five, the influence of which 
 is obvious: 
 
 (1) Material facilities. 
 
 (2) Type of pupil-material. 
 
 (3) Particular curricular requirements. 
 
 (4) Teaching personnel (factors other than those involving 
 directly teaching study-habits). 
 
 (5) School standards. 
 
 [17] 
 
2. Variable factors between types of technique. Assuming now 
 that the two school systems in our hypothetical case are practically 
 identical in the factors above mentioned, but that they adopt different 
 types of technique, we may expect variation in the two systems from 
 the following factors: 
 
 (6) Unit of instruction — the individual pupil, or groups of pupils. 
 
 (7) Type of pupil supervised — the backward, or all the pupils. 
 
 (8) Type of teacher directing study — special study teachers, or 
 the regular teaching staff. 
 
 (9) Nature of the group of pupils supervised — all studying the 
 same type of material or different types of material. 
 
 (10) Frequency of periods of supervision — direction of study in 
 every period or the number of such periods left to discre- 
 tion of teacher. 
 
 (11) Length of period of supervised study — from 45 or 50 min- 
 utes to over 100 minutes. 
 
 (12) Attitude toward home study — home study eliminated, re- 
 duced in amount, or retained in full; if retained, directed 
 or undirected. 
 
 (13) Relation to the recitation — the recitation eliminated, re- 
 tained in full, or reduced in importance. 
 
 (14) Attitude toward study outside the period of direction — such 
 
 study discouraged, permitted, or even encouraged. 
 
 (15) Use made of the period of directed study — for review only, 
 or for advance work. 
 
 (16) Amount of discretion left individual teachers. 
 
 (17) Material facilities demanded. 
 
 (18) Length of school day. 
 
 (19) Relation of directed study to grade in school. 16 
 
 (20) Distribution of supervised study by subjects — mathematics, 
 for example, seems especially receptive to the newer pro- 
 cedure, according to some writers, and history much less so. 
 
 (21) Directions regarding the teacher's activity in guiding pupils 
 in study. 
 
 10 Davis, Calvin 0. Junior High School Education. New York: World Book 
 Company, 1924, p. 44. 
 
 Davis insists that supervised study should be concentrated in the junior high 
 school, and the amount of such study reduced progressively in the higher years and 
 in the senior high school. This fact is recognized in the ''graduated plan" described 
 earlier. 
 
 [18] 
 
3. Variable factors within a single type of technique. Impor- 
 tant as are all the preceding variable factors, they are certainly less 
 important than the sources of variation which enter when we consider 
 what is done by the teacher in the way of directing pupils' study. 
 
 Let us assume that it were possible to standardize all the condi- 
 tions affecting the two schools under discussion, including the type 
 of technique adopted for the administration of pupil-guidance in 
 study. We should still have to recognize the huge differences that are 
 possible in the utilization of the time set aside for the direction of 
 study. Here we are dealing directly with the human elements of 
 teacher and pupil, which are characterized by variability. This state- 
 ment probably needs little defense, for it is a matter of ready obser- 
 vation that teaching varies regardless of subject-matter, regardless 
 of material conditions, regardless of technical control. 
 
 From this source then, we may add to our list of variables the 
 following : 
 
 (22) Teachers' knowledge of the psychology of learning and of 
 individual differences. 
 
 (23) Teachers' ability to apply this knowledge to the needs of 
 pupils in aiding them to build up effective study habits. 
 
 (24) Teachers' attitude toward the direction of stud}'. 
 
 (25) Teachers' devices for motivation. 
 
 (26) Teachers' methods of measuring achievement. 
 
 (27) The whole question of pupil attitude. 
 
 Our list of variables has reached twenty-seven; some are left 
 far short of complete analysis, and still other variables might easily 
 be found. Enough, however, have been listed to serve our purpose. 
 
 Summary. In this chapter we have noted the numerous types 
 of technique by which pupil-direction is administered, and the large 
 number of variable factors which are involved in the practical appli- 
 cation of the supervised-study procedure. The inferences from such a 
 survey are that, on the administrative side, the term "supervised 
 study" means nothing at all specific, definite, or clear, and that any 
 general statements made about it as a single, simple form of school 
 practice must be critically examined. 
 
 [19] 
 
CHAPTER III 
 MERITS OF SUPERVISED STUDY 
 
 In one form or another, supervised study is to be found in a 
 large percent of the secondary schools of the country at the present 
 time. While supporting statistics are not at hand, the supervised- 
 study movement probably is still gaining rather than losing ground; 
 for, as Koos 1 points out, the tendency to question its value is on 
 the decline. 
 
 We are then led to raise the question: Why is supervised study 
 so popular? Is it an educational fad which is destined soon to go the 
 way of other fads, or is its growth in practice based upon demon- 
 strably sound values which insure continued use and increasing 
 adoption? In other words, what are the special merits of supervised 
 study? 
 
 History of supervised-study movement. The history of the 
 supervised-study movement, to which we can give only a word, sup- 
 plies something of an answer to these questions, indicating in a gen- 
 eral way that supervised study meets a real need. 
 
 There is probably nothing essentially new about the element, 
 pupil-direction; good teachers always have realized the limitations of 
 their pupils in the matter of study and have supplied guidance. The 
 supervised-study movement has contributed chiefly by making such 
 study-direction more general, more systematic, and more intelligent. 
 
 Parker 2 has traced the development of supervised study on the 
 side of technique, showing its modest beginnings through what may 
 be described as an accidental success at Batavia, New York, under 
 Superintendent Kennedy. Impetus was given the movement by the 
 popular outcry at the time against the necessity of home study and 
 by the experimental investigations of Reavis 3 and Breslich, 4 who 
 
 ^oos, Leonard V. The Junior High School. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 
 and Howe, 1920, p. 153. 
 
 2 Parker, Samuel Chester. Methods of Teaching in High Schools. Boston: 
 Ginn and Company, 1920, p. 393-402. 
 
 3 Reavis, W. C. "'Factors that determine the habits of study in grade pupils," 
 Elementary School Teacher, 12:71-81. October, 1911. 
 
 ''Breslich, E. R. "Teaching high-school pupils how to study," School Review, 
 20:505-15, October, 1912. 
 
 [20] 
 
proved that home conditions are not always conducive to effective 
 study and that directed school study produces measurably superior 
 results. 
 
 The rapid spread of the supervised study procedure during the 
 last fifteen years is due undoubtedly to the operation of a number of 
 influences; such as, the increasing realization of the facts and the 
 implications of individual differences, development of new methods 
 of teaching, changing conceptions of the ends of education, advances 
 in applied psychology, closer study of the problems of educational 
 administration, and the like. 
 
 Basis of claims for supervised study. We are not so much inter- 
 ested, however, in learning the general historical reasons which may 
 be assigned for the success of the supervised-study movement as we 
 are in finding out the specific claims advanced by various writers for 
 the new procedure. Our study of the merits of supervised study falls 
 naturally under the following heads: 
 
 A. Merits cl aimecL on tfte-ba-sis of opinion. 
 
 1. Individual opinion. 
 
 2. Consensus of opinion. 
 
 B. Merits claimed on the basis of experimentation. 
 
 1. Crude experimentation — purely statistical. 
 
 2. Controlled experimentation. — 
 
 Not all of the articles canvassed for material on the topic can be 
 placed finally in one or another of the above groups. Where the con- 
 tent of a particular article relates to more than one of the above rub- 
 rics, it is treated in the various proper connections. The discussion 
 from this point will follow the outline suggested. 
 
 A. MERITS CLAIMED ON THE BASIS OF OPINION 
 1. Individual opinion. 
 
 The proponents of supervised study are by no means slow to 
 advance claims of superiority for the new over the traditional study- 
 recitation type of procedure. In the survey of the educational litera- 
 ture covered in this paper, we find thirty-four specific merits of 
 supervised study. These claims are listed below. No attempt has 
 been made to assign authorities for the statements; many are made 
 by more than one writer, others as here given have been re-worded 
 from a number of similar statements by different writers. While 
 even with this revision there still remains a certain amount of over- 
 lapping, the claims are relatively distinct. 
 
 [21] 
 
(1) Supervised study insures specific rather than incidental 
 instruction. 
 
 (2) Supervised study makes the school program flexible and 
 admits of easy and quick adjustment to unusual circum- 
 stances. 
 
 (3) Supervised study assures a more definite, a more complete 
 assignment. 
 
 (4) Supervised study reduces, eliminates, or improves the qual- 
 ity of home study. 
 
 (5) Supervised study recognizes in practice the facts of indi- 
 vidual differences in pupil ability, assuring more adequate 
 attention especially to the needs of the duller pupils. 
 
 (6) Supervised study shortens lessons and therefore affords 
 opportunity for more intensive drill on the shortened lesson. 
 
 (7) Supervised study provides the teacher an opportunity to 
 treat intensively and extensively new topics or bodies of 
 material. 
 
 (8) Supervised study dignifies studying and learning in the eyes 
 of the pupil and therefore enlists his greater effort. 
 
 (9) Supervised study enables the teacher to give both the gen- 
 eral and the specific guidance necessary, rather than limit- 
 ing her to the more general type alone as under the older 
 procedure. 
 
 (10) Supervised study makes the teacher take a different attitude 
 toward the pupil — the individual becomes the unit of in- 
 struction. By coming into closer contact with the pupil, the 
 teacher approaches him on a new and desirable level. 
 
 (11) Supervised study gives the pupil a new view of his teacher, 
 as a friend and guide; he consequently takes greater interest 
 in his school work. 
 
 (12) Supervised study makes it possible to encourage special 
 ability to a greater extent than formerly, through the assign- 
 ment of extra tasks of interest to brighter pupils. 
 
 (13) Supervised study actually causes a saving in time, for it 
 means study under skilled direction rather than idleness 
 under conditions which provide little or no guidance or 
 encouragement. 
 
 [22] 
 
Supervised study secures the more complete motivation of 
 learning; the pupil has his interest aroused through rivalry 
 with a successful friend. 
 
 Supervised study makes the classroom a place for something 
 more than lesson-hearing; there is less attention to testing 
 and more to learning. 
 
 Supervised study regularly results in the improvement of 
 the quality of work. 
 
 Supervised study reduces the number of failures and the 
 amount of elimination. 
 
 Supervised study makes possible the giving of help when 
 and where needed, and thus assures a continuous checking 
 up on results and progress. 
 
 Supervised study improves the study habits of the pupils. 
 Supervised study brings about a better distribution of marks. 
 Supervised study fills the pupil with eagerness to go beyond 
 the immediate task; makes knowledge for its own sake a 
 desirable end to the pupil. 
 
 Supervised study makes possible sound educational guid- 
 ance. 
 
 Supervised study supplies dependable data for vocational 
 guidance. 
 
 Supervised study represents a return to fundamentals in 
 teaching; puts the emphasis on the right phases of teaching, 
 and hence elevates and dignifies the profession. 
 Supervised study develops school spirit. 
 Supervised study fosters and encourages the qualities of 
 good citizenship among pupils such as cooperation, self- 
 reliance, initiative, and the like. 
 
 Supervised study makes possible the teaching of worth- 
 while units of material as projects that challenge the best 
 in the pupil. 
 
 Supervised study forces the teacher to make a study of 
 study, and therefore of learning, and leads directly to bet- 
 ter teaching. 
 
 Supervised study is very popular — with teacher and pupil 
 alike. 
 
 Supervised study removes many of the difficulties of disci- 
 pline. 
 
 [23] 
 
(31) Supervised study enables the teacher to handle more pupils. 
 
 (32) Supervised study eliminates the lazy teacher. 
 
 (33) Supervised study enables a class to cover more ground. 
 
 (34) Supervised study develops the pupil's character by provid- 
 ing more "situations" (meaning of the term "situations" 
 not made clear). 
 
 Criticism of the list. One can hardly read such an array of 
 claims for anything, much less for an educational procedure, without 
 entertaining strong doubts concerning their validity. The general 
 implication in the list of claims advanced for supervised study is that 
 we have in this new procedure the panacea for most of our educa- 
 tional ills. The reader who is inclined to be critical will, however, 
 find a great deal to question in the claimed merits of supervised 
 study. We shall consider five possible objections. 
 
 First, the claims are made as if they must inevitably follow upon 
 the introduction of supervised study into a school system. There is 
 the implicit assumption that supervised study works by magic. The 
 enterprising administrator needs but to pen an order for the institut- 
 ing of supervised study and over night all of the stated advantages 
 of the new procedure put in their appearance. Any such implication 
 is, of course, absurd. There is nothing inherent in the technique of 
 supervised study which can possibly guarantee successful functioning. 
 The important factor in the situation, as in all school situations, is 
 the teacher. Under supervised study, the quality of work may be 
 raised, pupils' ability to study may be improved, and so forth, pro- 
 vided that the teacher directs her activity and that of the pupils 
 toward these ends. 
 
 Second, these claims are made for supervised study as if it 
 existed in but a single form. Our earlier discussion has shown the 
 falsity of any such assumption. It is little short of ridiculous to make 
 general claims of virtue for all the forms of supervised study, for 
 certain advantages may accrue to one form but be entirely absent 
 in others. 
 
 Third, some of the claims are inconsistent with each other. We 
 may cite the conflicting statements that supervised study permits 
 more ground to be covered and that it is responsible for shorter and 
 more intensively treated lessons. 
 
 Fourth, others of the claims may well be doubted on the face 
 of them; for instance, the statement that supervised study enables 
 
 [24] 
 
the teacher to handle more pupils. It is safe to say that while this 
 may be true from the "technique point of view," it is utterly false 
 when the essential element in supervised study — namely, pupil- 
 direction in learning, is considered. Certainly, once an optimum 
 number of pupils has been passed, the teacher's effective attention 
 to the needs of the individuals in her group must suffer. Another 
 such claim is that supervised study eliminates the lazy teacher. This 
 much-to-be-desired state of affairs can hardly be attained in any 
 such fashion if it can be attained at all. As sometimes administered, 
 supervised study may actually increase the happiness of the lot of 
 the lazy teacher. 
 
 Fifth, many of the claims for supervised study might likewise 
 be made and with equal validity for the traditional type of procedure. 
 For example, what is there about supervised study which necessarily 
 develops school spirit, builds character, inculcates the ideals and 
 attitudes of the good citizen more effectively than can be done by a 
 good corps of teachers under the older form of organization? 
 2. Consensus of opinion. 
 
 Five studies based upon questionnaires will be treated in order 
 to discover what those who are most directly and vitally concerned 
 with the practice of supervised study — the pupils, teachers and prin- 
 cipals — think about-the new procedure. After a brief description of 
 the nature of these articles, the data concerning the opinions of the 
 teachers will be presented in tabular form; those of the pupils and 
 of the principals will be handled in a paragraph or two, since there 
 have been reported only two studies for each. 
 
 Description of articles. Cole's 5 article reports the attitude of 
 sixty of his teachers after one year's trial with the following plan of 
 supervised study; the school day was divided into five sixty-minute 
 periods, the time within the periods being apportioned roughly 
 according to the needs of the particular subjects — as forty minutes 
 for recitation and twenty for study in the "academic" subjects. Home 
 study was not eliminated, but was 'directed as far as possible. Extra 
 assignments were given the brighter pupils. 
 
 Willed:" addressed his questions to 532 pupils and twenty-nine 
 teachers after a four-year trial of some undescribed form of super- 
 
 5 Cole, Thomas R. ''One year of supervised study," School Review, 25:331-35, 
 May, 1917. 
 
 "Willett, G. W. Supervised study in high school," School Review, 26:259-72, 
 April, 1918. 
 
 [25] 
 
vised study in a six-year high school. The length of the try-out period 
 furnishes a more reliable basis for estimate than in most of the 
 studies reported. 
 
 Proctor 7 sent questionnaires to the principals of forty-two Pacific 
 Coast high schools, where, for the most part, the double-period or 
 the divided-period type of technique was employed. Of this number 
 thirty-one replied. 
 
 Erickson* tried out a double-period plan of supervised study — 
 five eighty-minute periods a day — for six months, and then ques- 
 tioned his pupils regarding their attitude toward the innovation. The 
 shortness of the try-out, however, places definite limitation on the 
 value of the opinions given. 
 
 Brown and Worthington 9 have contributed the most recent study 
 of this type, following their cooperative experimentation with five 
 Wisconsin high schools. The trial period of supervised study in the 
 different schools varied, but in none did it last more than four and 
 a half months. At the end of this time, opinions were secured from 
 five principals, eight teachers, and a number of pupils. 
 
 Attitude of pupils. We may now turn to a consideration of the 
 pupil-attitude toward supervised study. Willett found that 94 per- 
 cent of his 532 pupils preferred the supervised-study technique to 
 the traditional form of school organization, and Erickson reported 
 78 percent of his pupils (the number is not given) as similarly 
 inclined. Keeping in mind the limitations of opinions in general, and 
 of those collected by questionnaires in particular, we still seem to be 
 safe in saying that supervised study is popular with the pupils. 
 Erickson also found that 56.5 percent of his pupils believed they did 
 their best studying at school. Comparing the quality of their work 
 under supervised study with that of the preceding year under the 
 usual organization, 31 percent of the pupils, according to Erickson, 
 thought they did better work under the new plan; 42 percent noticed 
 no difference; 19 percent thought they did worse. All was not clear 
 gain then in the minds of the pupils. Forty-nine percent of the pupils 
 thought they put a smaller total amount of time on study with the 
 
 t Proctor, W. H. '"Supervised study on the Pacific Coast," School and Society, 
 6:326-28, September 15. 1917. 
 
 s Ericksox, J. E. "The results of supervised study in the Houghton, Michigan, 
 High School," School Review, 24:752-58, December, 1916. 
 
 "Browx, \Y. W., and Worthixgtox, J. E. '"Supervised study in Wisconsin 
 high schools," School Review, 32:603-12, October, 1924. 
 
 [26] 
 
TABLE I. ATTITUDE OF TEACHERS TOWARD SUPERVISED STUDY 
 
 Question 
 
 and 
 Author 
 
 Number 
 
 of 
 Teachers 
 
 Percent of Total Number Questioned 
 
 Better 
 
 Results 
 
 No Appa- 
 rent Dif- 
 ference 
 
 Poorer 
 Results 
 
 No Answer 
 or Vague 
 Answer 
 
 Pupil preparation of 
 lesson. 
 Cole 
 
 Opportunity to aid pupils 
 Cole 
 
 Opportunity to attain 
 ideal in teaching. 
 
 Willett 
 
 Brown and 
 
 Worthington 
 
 Quality of work of pupils. 
 Cole 
 
 Amount of work covered. 
 
 Cole...*. 
 
 Willett 
 
 60 
 60 
 
 29 
 8 
 
 60 
 
 60 
 29 
 
 70 
 
 75 
 
 79 
 100 
 
 60 
 
 33 
 24 
 
 20 
 1 
 
 10 
 
 
 33 
 
 60 
 
 58 
 
 5 
 15 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 new procedure; 30 percent could note no difference; and 21 percent 
 said they had to study more. Here again, all is not to the credit of 
 supervised study. 
 
 Brown and Worthington asked the pupils of one algebra and 
 of one English class, who had been in the experimental sections in 
 their investigation, their attitude toward supervised study. It is 
 interesting to note that while the algebra pupils were unanimously 
 in favor of supervised study, eighteen of the twenty-six pupils in 
 English preferred the recitation procedure. Although the numbers 
 involved are small, there seems to be evidence that other factors than 
 the technical organization of supervised study play the predominant 
 part in determining its success in any specific situation. 
 
 Attitude of teachers toward supervised study. Cole, Willett, and 
 Brown and Worthington have given us information regarding the 
 views teachers take of supervised study. These data are presented in 
 Table I. In the left column there are given the questions asked, the 
 investigator's name, and the number of teachers questioned. In this 
 form, the facts are readily obtained and need little explanation. 
 
 [27] 
 
Perhaps the most surprising fact in the table, in view of the 
 sweeping claims made for supervised study, is the lack of agreement 
 in teachers' opinions. The greatest support is given the claim that 
 through supervised study teachers can better realize the standard or 
 ideal they have set themselves, and yet but 80 percent in an actual 
 trial find such to be the case, (the Brown-Worthington study con- 
 tains but eight expressions of opinion — too few to be given much 
 weight). 
 
 Considerable doubt is thrown upon the claim that more ground 
 can be covered under supervised study if we are prepared to accept 
 the above figures. Less than one-fourth of Willett's teachers were 
 able to accomplish more, and the gain for these is offset by loss with 
 other teachers. Cole's figures, however, lend some support to the 
 claim. In general, the data seem to reflect a sentiment which was 
 stated some pages earlier — that supervised study, like all other 
 phases of teaching, is a matter, not of a system nor of a formal 
 scheme, but of the individual teacher. 
 
 Attitude of principals toward supervised study. Facts regarding 
 the attitude of principals toward supervised study are given us by 
 Proctor and by Brown and Worthington. The thirty-one principals 
 who returned statements to Proctor were practically unanimously in 
 favor of the particular supervised-study technique which they em- 
 ployed. There was the same agreement that standards of scholarship 
 had been raised and eliminations through failure had been lowered. 
 Some quantitative support is given these facts, evidently as the result 
 of some study by the principals themselves. (These criteria of success 
 will be considered later, in another section of the report.) Eighty- 
 four percent of the principals replying stated that the pupils' study 
 habits seemed to have improved under supervised study; 72 percent 
 thought the pupils were studying less at home and completing their 
 work in school; 80 percent thought that both the teachers and the 
 pupils preferred the supervised-study procedure to the older type of 
 organization. 
 
 The chief objection that can be raised to this study of Proctor's 
 is the fact that the principals were asked questions about which, with- 
 out elaborate testing and investigation, they must have really known 
 very little. For example, the average high-school principal would 
 have little opportunity to gather the information concerning the state 
 of his pupils' study habits, even granted that there were an easy, 
 objective method for doing so. 
 
 [28] 
 
In the Brown-Worthington report, all of the five principals 
 thought the type of supervised study could be extended easily 
 throughout the system without requiring any great expansion of the 
 teaching force. Four of the five were heartily in favor of the tech- 
 nique used in the experiment, while one disapproved of it. 
 
 Claims for supervised study given little support by data. If we 
 accept at their face value the data which we have examined in these 
 studies of the consensus of opinion regarding supervised study, we 
 must admit that they give very little support to the claims which 
 writers advance for this procedure. The one possible exception to 
 this statement is the claim of popularity of supervised study with 
 pupils and teachers. Even on this point the opinions expressed are 
 far from being unanimously in favor of supervised study. 
 
 But we are under no obligation to accept the data as valid. The 
 questionnaire method of collecting data has itself been under very 
 heavy fire in recent years. Among the objections which are fre- 
 quently raised against the method we may mention three which hold 
 in full force in this connection; there is little assurance of a valid 
 basis of judgment for the opinion expressed; opinions are not 
 constant and thus, reliable, but rather vary greatly with the same 
 individual at different times; differences of interpretation of questions 
 play an important part in determining the answers given. 
 
 In addition to these general objections to the data, there are 
 other difficulties which are peculiar to the present instance. Alto- 
 gether too frequently the trial of supervised study was too short to 
 admit of final conclusions regarding the comparative merits of the 
 new and the old procedures. Again, in some of the studies the 
 number of individuals questioned was too small to provide facts of 
 wide significance. Still again, the individuals consulted were not 
 always those best qualified to furnish an opinion. 
 
 B. MERITS CLAIMED ON THE BASIS OF EXPERIMENTATION 
 
 In our discussion of the merits claimed for supervised study we 
 are following the usual practice of distinguishing between statements 
 which are based entirely upon personal judgment and those which 
 are supported by objective data. We have concluded our survey of 
 the first kind of material — individual opinions and reports of con- 
 sensus of opinion — and come now to a consideration of the claims 
 which are built upon some sort of measured results. We deal, first, 
 with purely statistical studies, and second, with controlled 
 experimentation. 
 
 [29] . 
 
1. Crude experimentation — purely statistical studies. 
 
 \\ e shall consider ten reports of a statistical nature bearing upon 
 the results of supervised study. With two exceptions they are all 
 concerned with matters of promotion, failure, elimination, and the 
 like. Five of the ten articles are mentioned and criticized by Breed. 10 
 In each case the comment will be very brief. 
 
 Claims of statistical studies. Increase in the percent promoted 
 under supervised study is mentioned by Wiener, who employed the 
 double-period technique at Newark, New Jersey, by Proctor, 11 on 
 the basis of data which he collected from thirty-one high-school 
 principals on the Pacific Coast, and by Martin 12 from his study of 
 6.000 school marks made after five years of the sixty-minute divided- 
 period type of technique in the Norristown, Pennsylvania schools. 
 
 Decrease in failures and eliminations from school through super- 
 vised study is claimed by Brown, 13 who employed the double-period 
 technique at Joliet, Illinois; by Hall-Quest, at Cairo, Illinois; by 
 Cole, 14 at Seattle, Washington, where he used the supervised-home 
 study plan, by Allen, 15 who at Springfield employed the laboratory- 
 recitation plan; by Proctor; and by Martin. 
 
 Loveland 16 reports the results of six years' experience with the 
 "extra-period" technique. The last three of the six years actually 
 showed an increase in the number of failures over the first three 
 years, but this loss was partly compensated for by a decrease in the 
 number of eliminations. 
 
 Martin's study of school marks with supervised study and with 
 unsupervised study is the most extensive in the literature. He states 
 that with supervised study (1) the failures constituted 49.5 percent 
 the number previously customary, (2) the number of minimum 
 
 10 Breed, F. S. "Measured results of supervised study," School Review. 27:186- 
 204, 262-84; March, April, 1919. 
 
 "Proctor, W. M. "Supervised studv on the Pacific Coast," School and Society. 
 6:326-28, September 15, 1917. 
 
 "Martin, A. S. "The long school day and directed study," Education, 39:158- 
 64, November, 1918. 
 
 13 Bro\vn, J. Stanley. "Supervised study in high school," School and Home 
 Education, 24:735-45, December. 1916. 
 
 "Cole, Thomas R. "One vear of supervised study," School Review. 25:331-35, 
 May. 1917. 
 
 '"'Allen, I. M. 'An experiment in supervised study," School Review. 25:398- 
 411. June, 1917 
 
 "Lovelaxd, L. I. '"Supervised studv," School Review. 23:489-90, September. 
 1915. 
 
 [30] 
 
passing grades was reduced, and (3) the number of grades of A and 
 B was increased. 
 
 Erickson 17 accepted the evidence resulting from the use of the 
 eighty-minute divided period at Houghton, Michigan, as indicating 
 that supervised study reduces the amount of home study. Proctor 18 
 compared the amount of time spent in study by 479 high-school 
 pupils in systems which had adopted the supervised-study procedure 
 with the amount spent by 1184 high-school pupils in systems which 
 still employed the old form of organization. Estimates of time were 
 furnished by the pupils themselves. The results showed that the 
 supervised-study pupils spent less time in home study than the 
 unsupervised, but that the gross amount of time spent in study by 
 the two types of pupils was about the same. The unsupervised pupil 
 then regularly studies less time in school and more time at home. 
 
 Limitations of statistical studies. We may criticize these ten 
 reports as a group. All the writers base their claims upon the com- 
 parison of gross results with supervised study and previous results 
 without supervised study. The improvement noted is accredited to 
 supervised study as such. 
 
 Before the claims can be accepted as valid, we need to note 
 possible sources of error. In the first place, the statistical method of 
 attacking such problems as those of the merits of supervised study 
 is not completely satisfactory. The statistical method merely takes 
 the data as it finds them, without controlling in any way the factors 
 responsible for the data, and manipulates the data toward certain 
 ends with no provision or allowance for the effect of the uncontrolled 
 factors. In the second place, we have in these particular cases, as 
 Breed 19 points out, the "indirect and probably invalid assumption 
 that there is a very clear, if not exact, correspondence between rate of 
 promotion and rate of improvement." 
 
 The implications of these general and special sources of error 
 are at once apparent when we raise the question: How does any one 
 of the writers cited know that supervised study as such increased the 
 percent of promotion; may there not have been other factors, unob- 
 served, which contributed much to this improvement? For instance, 
 
 "Erickson, J. E. ''The results of supervised study in the Houghton, Michigan 
 High School," School Review, 24:752-58, December, 1916. 
 
 1s Proctor, W. M. "Home and school study time of 1661 Pacific Coast high- 
 school pupils," School and Society, 6:596-600, November 17, 1917. 
 
 "Breed, Frederick S. "Measured results of supervised study," School Review . 
 27:189, March, 1919. 
 
 [31] 
 
perhaps there was a general lowering of standards of quality, or a 
 reduction in the requirements regarding quantity, or an increase in 
 the total amount of time spent by the pupils in study. None of these 
 factors could be directly attributed to supervised study, but some of 
 them or all of them may have exerted large influence. By neglecting 
 such factors the statistical method fails to meet the needs of the 
 situation. 
 
 If, however, we were disposed to overlook the difficulties in the 
 way of proof by the statistical method and to accept as valid the 
 claims for supervised study, we would still lack an explanation for 
 the success of supervised study, and would have with us the 
 questions: Why did supervised study succeed in any particular 
 instance? Did the advantages arise in connection with the whole 
 scheme of supervised study, or in connection with some phase or part 
 of it? If the latter, would it be possible to isolate this part from 
 the whole and to concentrate upon it without involving the rest of 
 the machinery of supervised study? Here again we find the statis- 
 tical approach hardly suited to the task. 
 
 2. Controlled experimentation. 
 
 As compared with the purely statistical type of investigation 
 which we have just discussed, the definitely experimental should 
 produce more significant results. The very essence of the latter 
 method is the control of the factors which the statistical method must 
 largely disregard. By the same token the controlled experimental 
 method is the more exacting and difficult. We are not entirely unpre- 
 pared, therefore, to discover but five articles which report the results 
 of an experimental approach to the problem of the value of super- 
 vised study. 
 
 Breslich — Study in mathematics. In 1912,Breslich, 20 in a math- 
 ematics course in the University high school of the University of 
 Chicago, first applied the controlled experimental technique to super- 
 vised study. The pupils in the course were divided into two groups 
 of nearly equal ability on the basis of their grades in mathematics 
 the preceding semester. The unsupervised group recited as usual in 
 a period of forty-five minutes and prepared their advance assign- 
 ments later in the day either at school or at home. The supervised 
 group met for recitation one period and remained with the instructor 
 
 20 Breslich, E. R. "Teaching high-school pupils how to study," School 
 Review, 20:505-15, October, 1912. 
 
 [32] 
 
for the next, in which all preparation for the following day was 
 completed under his direction. The material covered and the type of 
 instruction in the recitation period was the same for both sections. 
 
 After fourteen weeks devoted to a study of linear equations,. an 
 end-test was given, (a) The average grade for the supervised group 
 was slightly higher than for the unsupervised. While the latter 
 secured a greater number of A's and B's, they also received a greater 
 number of lower grades. The final advantage for the supervised 
 group is the more significant since, on the basis of the previous 
 semester grades, the unsupervised group held a slight initial advan- 
 tage, (b) The poorer pupils seemed to profit most while the brighter 
 may even have suffered some loss, (c) The supervised group put in 
 less time in study in toto than did the unsupervised, though the 
 former were required to spend a full additional school period on their 
 preparation. 
 
 When the fourteen weeks' experimentation had been completed, 
 Breslich reversed the procedure by taking up a unit of six lessons on 
 operations with fractions, in which the supervised group became the 
 unsupervised and vice versa. The results of an examination at the 
 end of the period showed that the group which had had the ad- 
 vantage of special training for the longer time maintained their 
 superiority. Apparently their improved methods of study continued 
 to function. 
 
 Minnich — Study in geometry. The second of the experimental 
 studies, also in the field of mathematics, was made by Minnich 21 
 at Bloomington, Indiana. A class of thirty-six pupils in plane 
 geometry was divided into two groups, as in Breslich's experiment, 
 on the basis of previous grades. The supervised group met for forty 
 minutes of recitation and spent the next forty minutes in directed 
 study on the advance assignment. Extra tasks were given the 
 brighter pupils. The unsupervised group met for a period of recita- 
 tion and made preparation outside without guidance. 
 
 During the fifteen weeks of the experiment a number of tests 
 were given and close records were kept of the daily recitations. In 
 both respects the supervised group surpassed the unsupervised. The 
 supervised group had higher average grades for ten of the fifteen 
 weeks and the same average grade for three of the other five weeks; 
 
 "Minnich, J. H. "An experiment in the supervised study of mathematics, 
 School Review. 21:670-75, December, 1913. 
 
 [ 33 ] 
 
in only two of the fifteen weeks were they excelled. At the end of 
 the experimental period, the advantage lay with the supervised 
 section both in the average grade given and in the number of the 
 problems correctly solved in the final examination. A further fact 
 of importance is that the supervised group contained no one who 
 failed in the subject whereas the unsupervised group lost two in 
 this way. 
 
 Breed — Cooperative experiment in English, Latin, and Algebra. 
 Both of the preceding experiments were on rather a narrow scale. 
 Breed's article 22 reports the results of cooperative experimentation in 
 fourteen high schools, thirteen in Michigan and one in Minnesota. 
 The general details of procedure were worked out by a committee, 
 who with Breed at the head, supervised the experimentation. 
 
 In each school a group of ninth-grade pupils in a given subject 
 was divided into two sections on the basis of previous marks and 
 preliminary tests. The same teacher instructed both sections, using 
 fifty-minute periods. In one section, this time was apportioned 
 thirty minutes to recitation and twenty minutes to directed study. 
 In the other no special instruction was given in study, and the full 
 fifty minutes of the period were devoted to recitation. This procedure 
 was continued for six weeks and then the sections were reversed. 
 Care was taken to make clear to the teachers the nature of their task 
 in furnishing pupil-direction in study. 
 
 It is useless here to go into detail in the matter of the results 
 obtained in the fourteen different schools. We may quote Breed 
 regarding the general results: "On the basis of average results for 
 whole classes, supervised study of the type tested was slightly less 
 efficient in first-year algebra, was much less efficient in ninth-grade 
 English, and was much more efficient in first-year Latin" (page 284). 
 There seemed to be corroboration for Breslich's finding that the 
 poorer pupils fare better with supervised study, while the better gain 
 little if anything. Breed also makes a number of recommendations: 
 first, that a "differential" plan for supervised study be employed, 
 with segregation of the poorer pupils; second, that a special technique 
 be devised for teachers in the directing of study; third, that instruc- 
 tion for the poorer pupils be "improved," and for the brighter pupils 
 "developed" (an important distinction) ; and fourth, that school 
 
 22 Breed, Frederick S. "Measured results of supervised study," School 
 Review, 27:186-204, 262-84; March, April, 1919. 
 
 [34] 
 
people exercise "caution against a general assumption of the effective- 
 ness of the divided and double-period plans of supervised study" 
 until further experimentation shall have proven their worth 
 (page 278). 
 
 This experimental work is interesting for the reason that it 
 attempted a wholesale attack upon the values of supervised study. 
 As stated, fourteen schools took part, and studies were made in three 
 school subjects. It is interesting also because of its failure to find 
 clear and convincing proof for many of the claims customarily made 
 for supervised study. While the results cannot be called negative, 
 certainly as a whole they are not strongly positive. 
 
 Heckert — Study in English composition. Breed's report of ex- 
 perimentation in ninth-grade English as above described influenced 
 Heckert, 23 at Miami, Ohio, in 1922, to try out the divided-period 
 technique in connection with English composition. The same length 
 of period and the same distribution of time within the period was 
 maintained as in the Breed experiment. 
 
 Heckert tried to improve Breed's procedure at three points; 
 first, he gave more care to training his teachers in the direction of 
 study; second, he used additional criteria for selecting his groups; 
 and, third, he employed a standardized scale for evaluating all 
 composition work. 
 
 Breed had used previous English marks and preliminary com- 
 position tests graded in the usual way to select his groups. Heckert 
 divided his thirty-four pupils on the basis of their scores in the 
 National Intelligence Examination and in two composition tests 
 graded by means of the Thorndike-Hillegas Scale. 
 
 For twenty-five one-hour periods (five weeks) the same teacher 
 taught both sections, giving two tests during the course of the experi- 
 ment, and also end-tests. The procedure was not reversed at any 
 stage. The results showed (a) a real gain for the supervised group, 
 both absolute and relative, over the unsupervised; and (b) a con- 
 tinuous gain for the brighter as well as for the poorer pupils, though 
 the gain was less pronounced in the case of the former. 
 
 This second result differs, of course, from the results obtained 
 by Breed and Breslich (the latter in mathematics). Heckert explains 
 the difference in results naturally on his variation from their experi- 
 mental technique, especially on the point of preparing the teacher for 
 
 ^Heckert, J. \V. '"The effects of supervised study in English composition," 
 Journal of Educational Psychology, 5:368-80, May, 1922. 
 
 [35] 
 
her work of study-direction. If he has proven that it is unneces- 
 sary for the brighter pupils to suffer from the use of supervised study, 
 his experiment is an important contribution. At any rate, he has 
 done well to call attention to the need of giving the teacher a clear 
 understanding of her work in connection with the guidance of study. 
 
 Beauchamp — Study in physical science. The most carefully 
 conducted experimentation reported is that by Beauchamp 24 in 
 teaching physical science in the University high school of the Uni- 
 versity of Chicago. The experiment was begun in October, 1921, 
 and was completed in April, 1922. 
 
 Beauchamp exercised extraordinary care in the selection of his 
 experimental and control sections. Five factors were taken into con- 
 sideration: (1) size of class (the same throughout for the two 
 groups), (2) age, (3) native intelligence, (4) rate of silent reading 
 and (5) ability to interpret the material read. The control group was 
 a very little older and very slightly less intelligent, but they read 
 more rapidly and understood better what they read. All statements 
 have reference to the average for the groups. 
 
 In the course of the experimentation, the following factors were 
 kept constant: time spent in study, amount of material covered, the 
 tests, the scoring of the tests, and the oral presentation of the teacher. 
 The only variable permitted was the specific problem attacked. The 
 sections knew that an experiment was being conducted, and because 
 of the natural rivalry which resulted, were careful to prevent any 
 "leaking" of information about the tests or class procedure. 
 
 Both sections were taught by Beauchamp himself, following the 
 pattern of instruction outlined by H. C. Morrison, 25 and known as 
 the "mastery technique." At the end of each "assimilation period," 
 three tests were given — written reports of the unit, completion tests, 
 and thought questions. These three tests, it was thought, measured 
 different phases of the material acquired and were therefore supple- 
 mentary in securing an adequate measurement of the whole. The 
 scoring was carefully worked out and impartially applied. The same 
 tests were given to both the experimental and the control groups. In 
 
 24 Beauchamp, Wilbur L. "A preliminary study of technique in the mastery 
 of subject-matter in elementary physical science." Supplementary Educational 
 Monograph, No. 24. Studies in Secondary Education, I. Chicago: University of 
 Chicago Press, 1923, p. 47-87. 
 
 "Morrison, H. C. "Studies in high-school procedure — half-learning," School 
 Review, 29:106-18, February. 1921. Also, "Supervised Study." School Review, 
 31:588-603, October, 1923. 
 
 [36] 
 
the article, the significance of the results is shown, not simply by the 
 presentation of the gross facts, but by an analysis of the experiment 
 itself and of the teaching. 
 
 The experimentation consisted of six parts, the first five based 
 on "units" of work extending over three to five weeks. In the first 
 unit, identical instructions were given both groups in methods of 
 study in order to furnish a basis for comparison for later and 
 different types of study-instruction. At the end of the period, which 
 lasted four weeks, tests were given; the two sections had virtually 
 identical scores, again demonstrating the fact of equal ability, or at 
 least of equal use of ability to assimilate. 
 
 Throughout the rest of the experimental period the control 
 group continued to employ the methods of study suggested to them 
 in the first unit. Specific instructions on study, however, were given 
 the experimental group in connection with each of the four problems 
 attacked. These were: the effect of instruction to develop the habit of 
 studying a paragraph to determine its central idea and then to 
 organize the rest of the material about this idea; the value of instruc- 
 tion to develop the habit of finding and answering questions in the 
 material assigned; the possibility of developing in pupils the habit 
 of reading through a whole assignment before beginning careful 
 analytical study of the parts; and the value of direct coaching on 
 the method of solving thought questions, together with practice in 
 such solution. In each of these four sub-experiments the supervised 
 group surpassed the unsupervised, though not always by as large a 
 margin as might have been expected. Beauchamp himself points out 
 also that some of the gain accredited to specific instruction in con- 
 nection with some of the problems may actually belong to earlier 
 instruction. 
 
 The last measurement taken was the relative gain made by the 
 two sections in reading ability during the period of experimentation. 
 The results seemed to show that the supervised group, because of 
 their special attention to analytical study, failed to increase the rate 
 of their reading as much as the control group, though their improve- 
 ment in comprehension was much greater. 
 
 Beauchamp's work is to be especially commended on a number 
 of points — his great care in selecting his sections, his control of 
 instruction so as to make it as nearly identical for the two sections as 
 possible, the use of a number of tests instead of a single test to 
 
 [37] 
 
measure the results of instruction, the narrowness of the problems 
 attacked, and the analysis of the results obtained. 
 
 It is important to note that there was no vast improvement 
 shown by the experimental group over the control group, as the 
 claims for supervised study seem to imply. On the other hand, the 
 advantage for the directed group, while small, was consistent. 
 
 Brown and Worthington — Cooperative experiment in Algebra, 
 English, and History. The last of the experimental reports here 
 discussed as also the most recent is Brown and Worthington's 26 
 cooperative study with five Wisconsin high schools, which in many 
 ways resembles Breed's study with the Michigan schools. In as 
 much as one of the five high schools undertook three experiments, 
 the report covers a total of seven. 
 
 The usual experimental procedure was followed; in having 
 paired sections of equal ability pursue the same subject-matter under 
 the same teacher for a given period of time, at the conclusion of 
 which tests were given. The sixty-minute supervised-study period 
 was used in the experimental groups, divided roughly into a twenty- 
 minute discussion and recitation period, a fifteen-minute assignment, 
 and a twenty-five minute work period. The members of the control 
 group met with the teachers only forty-five minutes in recitation — a 
 disparity of fifteen minutes as compared with the experimental group. 
 
 Experiments were conducted in algebra. English, and history. 
 The results are given in the article in a few tables of data in terms 
 of group scores, medians, and so forth. The major conclusions from 
 the study, as found on page 612. are: first, two pairs of classes, in 
 algebra and English, showed "rather definitely that greater progress 
 was made'" with supervised study; four pairs showed "slight varia- 
 tions, favorable to supervised study;" one pair, in United States 
 history, showed superiority for the unsupervised group. Second, in 
 three of the pairs fewer failures were made in the supervised sections: 
 in two. the number was indeterminate from the data supplied from 
 the schools; and in the seventh pair, more failures were found in the 
 supervised section. Third, ''objective data indicated a superiority of 
 the supervised plan over the recitation plan as a method of instruc- 
 tion.'' Fourth, "the investigation showed also that when objective 
 data are sought, the present instruments of measurement are not 
 
 "Browx, W. \V.. and Worthixgtox. J. E. "Supervised study in Wisconsin 
 high schools." School Review, 32:603-12, October, 1924. 
 
 [38] 
 
wholly adequate." Fifth, all agencies involved — principals, teachers, 
 and pupils — were generally favorable to the newer procedure. 
 
 We may spend some time on a criticism of this study since it 
 illustrates so well the dangers and the difficulties connected with an 
 experimental investigation of this sort. 
 
 The third and fourth conclusions as stated above are clearly 
 inconsistent, unless we are to assume that the third is based upon 
 other data than those secured by means of the measuring instruments 
 whose objectivity is decried in the fourth conclusion. In any case, it 
 is a fair question to ask what objective data one might gather to 
 prove the superiority of the supervised-study procedure. 
 
 The first conclusion states that two pairs of classes, one of 
 which was English, showed "rather definitely" greater progress with 
 supervised study. We have in the article data with which we may 
 test the validity of the claim. On pages 606-07 we find the following 
 statement, "From the foregoing evidence it appears that the super- 
 vised study method was slightly superior in English." The word 
 here is "slightly" rather than "'rather definitely." The sentence is 
 based on a table which shows that in a composition test scored by the 
 Hillegas Scale, the recitation group produced a median paper which 
 was scored 6.4 whereas the median paper for the supervised group 
 was 6.7. a difference in favor of the latter of .3. At the same time, 
 we note that the median individual in the supervised section has an 
 I.Q. of 96.3 as compared with the median I.Q. of 94.5 for the control 
 group. If we grant that intelligence as indicated by the I.Q. may be 
 exactly measured and that it bears a close relation to quality of 
 school work (clearly the assumptions in the use of the tests in this 
 investigation), then we may ask how much of the above advantage 
 in composition work with the supervised section was due to their 
 superiority in intelligence? 
 
 There are. too, other questions to be raised regarding the validity 
 of the same conclusion. Since the supervised group were with the 
 teacher fifteen minutes longer per day, are we not to expect a pro- 
 portionately better return from the former before we have proof that 
 the supervised study procedure is even as effective per unit of time 
 as the recitation method? Again, do not the writers themselves admit 
 that the .3 advantage for the supervised-study group means nothing 
 when they mention the inadequacy of the measuring instrument? 
 And again, is it not possible that numerous factors were at work, 
 which the experimenters were unable to control and have made no 
 
 [39] 
 
effort to evaluate, such as teachers' interest, amount and quality of 
 the pupils' outside work and the like: 
 
 The following illustration serves to show the care which must be 
 taken in interpretating gross experimental data. Superiority for the 
 supervised-study procedure is claimed on the basis of this table: 
 
 TABLE II.— SCORES FOR THE TWO SECTION'S WITH BRIGGS' 
 ENGLISH FORM TEST 
 
 Test 
 
 Median score 
 Recitation group 
 
 Median score 
 Supervised group 
 
 
 82.84 
 96.40 
 91.46 
 95.83 
 85.41 
 
 84.90 
 
 \ erb "lie v 
 
 98.64 
 
 Verb agreement 
 
 81.59 
 
 Possessives 
 
 99.55 
 
 95.95 
 
 In the first place, we are dealing with group scores, which may 
 actually conceal the real significance of the experimentation. In the 
 second place, putting aside the question of the validity of the data 
 as measuring the traits of abilities trained, we note that the differ- 
 ences in the median scores for the two groups, with the exception of 
 the third and fifth items, are insignificant, and that the advantage in 
 the one case lies with the supervised group and in the other, with 
 the recitation group. 
 
 General criticism of the experimentation reported. By way of 
 concluding our discussion of the experimental attack upon the 
 problems immediately connected with supervised study, we may 
 point out a number of general criticisms, adverse and favorable, 
 which apply in varying degrees to the studies considered. 
 
 Adverse criticisms regarding experimental work. 1. In general, 
 the scope of the problem undertaken has been too broad. That is. 
 the experimenter has usually tried to prove too much at one time — 
 that the supervised-study procedure as a general proposition produces 
 superior results to the older recitation type of organization. From 
 the very nature of the experimentation it has followed that the con- 
 clusions are open to question. 
 
 2. There usually has been insufficient control of variables. In a 
 way. this criticism follows directly from the first; nicety of control 
 has been made impossible by the grossness of the problem attacked. 
 
 C 40 ] 
 
On the other hand, where the problem has been restricted, variables 
 have been unnoticed, or if noted, uncontrolled. For example, we 
 may mention the varying amounts of time spent by experimental 
 and control groups on their work, the practice of making special 
 assignments with supervised study in order to keep the brighter 
 pupils busy and interested, and the difference in the teacher's atti- 
 tude in dealing with experimental and control groups. Such factors 
 must certainly have affected the scores of the pupils in the final 
 measurement of results. 
 
 3. The data supplied in the reports are treated usually only in 
 gross; that is, the comparison of supervised with unsupervised study 
 is usually in terms of averages, tertiles, and so forth. The fortunes 
 of the individual receive slight attention. Little effort is expended 
 to discover who are especially helped, and who, if any, hindered by 
 the change in school practice. 
 
 4. The results are usually presented without analysis to 
 determine the Why as well as the What. More specifically, the 
 element, pupil-direction is seldom isolated from the whole situation, 
 and its importance as conditioning the success or failure of supervised 
 study is seldom recognized. There seems to be a general assumption 
 that whatever the results, they may be traced directly to the tech- 
 nique employed. 
 
 5. In some cases the conclusions which have been reached as the 
 result of some particular piece of experimentation have been general- 
 ized to hold with equal validity for all schemes of supervised study 
 regardless of varying factors in different situations. In fairness to 
 the experimenters it should be noted that this criticism should be 
 lodged more especially against the general writers on the subject of 
 supervised study. 
 
 6. There is a tendency to exaggerate the importance of relatively 
 small differences in comparing experimental and control groups, 
 especially when the difference is in favor of the experimental group. 
 On the percent scale a difference of five as determined by tests is 
 insignificant, even when the difference refers to averages or medians. 
 
 7. The experimentation on supervised study has attacked only 
 one side, or one phase of the results of supervised study, namely, its 
 merits in securing more effective acquisition of information. The 
 assumption that supervised study possesses other advantages is 
 clearly shown in the long list of claims we were able to cite from 
 the literature. Breslich and Beauchamp have both shown a recogni- 
 
 [41] 
 
tion of this fact in their comments on the effect of the training given 
 the experimental group in later learning situations. 
 
 Positive value of experimental work. 1. In spite of the small 
 advantages customarily found in favor of the supervised-study pro- 
 cedure, and in spite even of inconsistencies and exaggerations in the 
 conclusions drawn, we cannot read the experimental literature with- 
 out being convinced that we have valid and adequate grounds for 
 believing in the comparative superiority of the supervised-study 
 procedure over the older types of organization. Experimentation has 
 given us justification for this belief as no other agency could have 
 done. If we add together all of the separate experiments enumerated 
 in the six reports (regarding Beauchamp's work as a single experi- 
 ment) we have a total of twenty-six experiments, the big majority of 
 which tend to establish the value of supervised study on at least one 
 point — the pupils whose efforts in study are directed acquire more 
 information than the pupils who receive no special instruction in 
 study. 
 
 2. Experimentation has also indirectly and implicitly indicated 
 the importance of the element which we have styled pupil-direction. 
 The twenty-six experiments w r hich we have canvassed disagree 
 radically on the type of technique used in each; their only point of 
 agreement is the fact, that pupil-direction was undertaken. We find, 
 it is true, very few direct references to this element, but it is not an 
 improbable hypothesis that the degree of success or failure of the 
 various experiments to demonstrate the value of the supervised-study 
 procedure was proportionate to the amount of attention paid this 
 element. It will be recalled that Heckert took this assumption as the 
 basis of an experiment which seemed to support the hypothesis. 
 
 3. We have said that experimentation has attacked but one 
 angle of the situation when it has shown that supervised study makes 
 possible the more effective acquisition of information. On the other 
 hand, in defense of the experimentation, one may doubt whether all 
 of the claims for the new procedure are susceptible of objective 
 proof — unless one is prepared to accept the doctrine that everything 
 that exists is measurable. At any rate, a beginning has been made in 
 certain of the experiments which show that improved habits of study 
 tend to persist. 
 
 4. The earlier type of experimentation has probably accom- 
 plished all that it can for us, in pointing out in a general way the 
 value of supervised study. What is needed is more work of the type 
 
 [42] 
 
represented by Beauchamp's investigation. Narrow problems, 
 capable of adequate control in experimentation, with the emphasis 
 upon the analysis of the results in terms of the type of learning called 
 for and in terms of individual pupils, should receive the major share 
 of experimental attention. From such studies there should develop 
 a clearer understanding of the gains to be expected as well as a more 
 satisfactory methodology of instruction. 
 
 
 [43] 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 CONCLUDING STATEMENT 
 
 In this critical summary of certain periodical literature on super- 
 vised study in secondary schools, we have noted a serious confusion 
 in educational writings and hence in educational thinking in connec- 
 tion with the meaning of the term "supervised study." We have seen 
 the extreme variability in the types of technique which are employed 
 for the administration of pupil-direction in study. We have pointed 
 out the common practice of making general unproven claims in 
 regard to the merits of the supervised-study procedure. We have 
 also canvassed this literature, giving special attention to articles of 
 an experimental nature, with reference to the validity of the evidence 
 relating to the merits of supervised study. 
 
 In concluding this discussion, we shall make a number of obser- 
 vations of a rather general sort regarding both the literature on 
 supervised study and the attitude taken by writers toward this new 
 procedure. 
 
 In the first place, we must admit that an unfortunately large 
 amount of writing on supervised study is repetitious and, to put it 
 mildly, futile. The general impression resulting from the reading of 
 several hundred pages of periodical matter on the subject is that the 
 same things might have been said to greater effect in a fraction of the 
 space actually used. 
 
 In the second place, we are struck by the failure of some writers 
 to confine their discussions to supervised study without involving 
 unrelated issues. We need mention here as examples only a few of 
 the newer pliases of methodology and administrative procedure 
 which are found continually and variously associated with supervised 
 study — classification of pupils in homogeneous groups, teaching by 
 projects, individual instruction, educational and vocational guidance. 
 Some writers even add to the general confusion by making supervised 
 study equivalent in meaning to some of these educational practices. 
 
 In the third place, many of the investigations of supervised study 
 appear to represent much wasted _effon._ .since-it-is-- unnecessary to 
 prove the obvious. We may assume that any intelligent effort to 
 apply generally accepted principles of teaching will be more efficient 
 
 [44] 
 
 
than instruction which neglects or violates such principles. It will be 
 noted that we are referring here rather to pupil-guidance than to 
 technique, and this fact leads us to the next general observation. 
 
 In the fourth place, relatively too much attention in educational 
 writing and thinking has been paid to the technique of supervised ^- 
 study, and too little attention to_pupil-direction in study. On page 11 
 we stated our purpose of devoting the majDt" share of Our comment 
 to the technique of supervised study. There were two reasons for 
 this decision: the periodical literature on pupil-direction is limited 
 in quantity and in quality; and this literature does not lend itself 
 readily to systematic treatment. Hence, weJiavje-jnade but incidental 
 reference to pupil-di recti on, and yet even such reference must have 
 suggested the thought that pupil-direction is the very heart and 
 center of supervised-study. 
 
 There may or may not be some technique which is superior to 
 all others whatever the circumstances. This is improbable. There 
 may be, and probably is, some technique which is superior to all 
 others for a given situation. And yet, granted that this technique 
 could be discovered and instituted, we have little assurance that it / 
 would produce the most desirable results. When we concentrate J 
 upon technique, we are dealing with but the externals, the form, and 
 neglecting the content. Sound pupil-direction in a poor technique is 
 better than a good technique with faulty pupil-direction. It may 
 honestly be questioned whether any sincere and intelligent (note the 
 adjectives) endeavor to give pupil-direction ever failed of its purpose, 
 regardless of the technique of which it was a part. 
 
 Our plea, then, is for a change in emphasis in thinking and in 
 practice. We need to be less anxious about the type of technique 
 which the administrator chooses for his school, and more concerned 
 with the quality of pupil-direction— whieh-the-teacher gives in the 
 period of study. 
 
 [45] 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Allen, I. M. "An experiment in supervised study," School Review, 25:398-411, 
 
 June, 1917. 
 Beauchamp, Wilbur L. "A preliminary study of technique in the mastery of 
 
 subject-matter in elementary physical science," Supplementaray Educational 
 
 Monographs. No. 24. Studies in Secondarv Education, I. Chicago: University 
 
 of Chicago Press. 1923, p. 47-87. 
 Beauchamp, Wilbur L. "Supervised study in elementary phvsical science," School 
 
 Review, 32:175-81, March, 1924. 
 Bixler, Roy W. "Getting awav from formal lesson-learning," School Review, 
 
 32:364-70, May, 1924. 
 Breed, Frederick S. "Measured results of supervised studv," School Review, 
 
 27:186-204, 262-84; March, April, 1919. 
 Breslich, E. R. "Supervised study as a means of providing supplementary in- 
 dividual instruction." Thirteenth Yearbook of the National Society for the 
 
 Study of Education, Part I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1914. 
 
 p. 32-71. 
 Breslich, E. R. "Supervised study in mathematics," School Review, 31:733-47, 
 
 December, 1923. 
 Breslich, E. R. "Teaching high-school pupils how to study," School Review, 
 
 20:505-15. October, 1912. 
 Brown, H. G. "Supervised study in the schools of Lebanon," Elementarv School 
 
 Journal. 16:179-80. November, 1915. 
 Brown, J. Stanley. "Supervised study in high school." School and Home Educa- 
 tion. 24:735-45, December, 1916. 
 Brown, W. W., and Worthington, J. E. "Supervised study in Wisconsin high 
 
 schools," School Review, 32:603-12, October, 1924. 
 Burr, A. W. "Directed study," School Review, 27:90-100, February, 1919. 
 Burr, A. W. "How is supervised study doing?" School Review, 32:224-26, 
 
 March. 1924. 
 Carter, Ralph E. "Teaching a study habit," School Review, 29:695-706, 761-75; 
 
 November, December, 1921. 
 Cole, Thomas R. "One year of supervised study," School Review, 25:331-35, 
 
 May, 1917. 
 Davis, Calvin O. Junior High School Education. New York: World Book Com- 
 pany, 1924. p. 43-44 and 339-42. 
 Downing, E. R. "Supervised study and the science laboratorv," School Review, 
 
 25:646-51, November, 1917. 
 Dunn, Grace A. "Value of supervised study," Teachers College Record, 18:430-37, 
 
 November, 1917. 
 Erickson, J. E. "The results of supervised study in the Houghton, Michigan, High 
 
 School," School Review, 24:752-58, December, 1916. 
 Farnham, C. E. "Supervised study," Education, 40:171-76, November, 1919. 
 Hall-Quest, Alfred L. "How to introduce supervised study," School Review, 
 
 26:337-40, May, 1918. 
 Hall-Quest, Alfred L. "The direction of study as the chief aim of the high school," 
 
 Chapter X, The Modern High School, edited by Chas. H. Johnston. New York: 
 
 Charles Scribner's Sons, 1916, p. 265-94. 
 
 [46] 
 
Hanes, Ernest. '"Supervised studv in English," School Review, 32:356-63, 
 
 May. 1924. 
 Harris, G. L. "Supervised studv in the University of Chicago High School," School 
 
 Review, 26:490-510, September, 1918. 
 Heckert, J. W. "The effects of supervised study in English composition," Journal 
 
 of Educational Psychology, 5:368-80, May, 1922. 
 Hines, H. C. "Supervised studv in the junior high school," School and Societv. 
 
 6:518-22, November 3, 1917.' 
 Holzinger, Karl J. "Periodical literature on supervised study during the last five 
 
 years," Elementary School Journal, 20:146-54, October. 1919. 
 Ixglis, Alexander. Principles of Secondary Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin 
 
 Company. 1918, p. 713-15. 
 Judd, Charles H. Psychology' of High-School Subjects. Boston: Ginn and 
 
 Company. 1915. p. 436-72.' 
 Kennedy, J. "The Batavia plan after fourteen years of trial," Elementary School 
 
 Teacher. 12:449-56. June. 1912. 
 Koos, Leonard V. The Junior High School. Xew York: Harcourt, Brace, and 
 
 Howe. 1920, p. 153-56. 
 Loveland, L. I. "Supervised study," School Review, 23:489-90. September. 1915. 
 Martin, A. S. '"The long school day and directed study," Education, 39:158-64, 
 
 November. 1918. 
 Mason, YV. L. "Xew svstem of supervised studv," Education, 38:117-20. October. 
 
 1917. 
 Merriam, Eugene E. "Technique of supervised study." School Review, 26:35-38, 
 
 January. 1918. 
 Miller, H. L. Directing Study. Xew York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1922. 377 p. 
 Miller, H. L.. and Johnson, Dorothy. ''Directing study for mastery." School 
 
 Review, 30:777-86, December, 1922. 
 Minnich, J. H. "An experiment in the supervised study of mathematics." School 
 
 Review, 21:670-75, December. 1913. 
 Mitchell, H. "Supervised study in foreign languages," Education, 38:385-87, 
 
 January. 1918. 
 Morrison, H. C. "Studies in high-school procedure — direct and indirect teaching," 
 
 School Review, 29:19-30, January. 1921. 
 Morrison, H. C. "Studies in school procedure — hall-learning." School Review. 
 
 29:106-18, February. 1921. 
 Morrison, H. C. "Supervised study." School Review. 31:588-603, October, 1923. 
 Xielson, C. H. "An innovation in supervised study." School Review, 25:220. March. 
 
 1917. (Editorial comment.) 
 Xutt, H. W. Principles of Teaching High School Pupils. Xew York: Centurv 
 
 Company. 1924. p. 295-323. 
 Parker, Samuel C. Methods of Teaching in High Schools. Boston: Ginn and 
 
 Company, 1920. p. 391-417. 
 Pieper, Chas. J. "Supervised study in natural science," School Review, 32:122-33, 
 
 February, 1923. 
 Proctor, W. M. "Home and school study time of 1,661 Pacific Coast high-school 
 
 pupils." School and Society, 6:596-600, Xovember 17, 1917. 
 Proctor, W. M. "Supervised study on the Pacific Coast," School and Societv, 
 
 6:326-28, September 15. 1917. 
 Reavis, W. C. "Administration of supervised studv." School Review. 32:413-19. 
 
 June, 1924. 
 Reavis, \V. C. "Factors that determine the habits of study in grade pupils." 
 
 Elementary School Teacher, 12:71-81, October, 1911. 
 
 [47] 
 
Reavis, W. C. "The importance of studv programs for high-school pupils," School 
 
 Review, 19:398-405. June. 1911. 
 Robert, A. C. "Supervised study in the Everett High School," School Review. 
 
 24:735-45. December. 1916. 
 Rynearsox. Edward. "The conference hour in the Pittsburgh high schools." 
 
 School Review. 20:246-53. April. 1912. 
 Stetsox, Paul C. "A survev of supervised studv." The American School Board 
 
 Journal. 54:19-20. 85-86.' June. 1917. 
 Wiener, William. "Home-study reform." School Review. 20:526-31, October. 1912. 
 Wiener, William. "The social value of school study versus home study," Chapter 
 
 XI. The Modern High School, edited by Chas. H. Johnston. New York: 
 
 Charles Scribner's Sons. 1916, p. 295-311. 
 Willett. G. W. "Supervised stud}- in high school," School Review, 26:259-72. 
 
 April. 1918. 
 Young, Ecla. and Simpsox, M. R. "A technique for the lengthened period." 
 
 School Review. 30:199-204. March. 1922. 
 
 [48]