Increased labor for
the same teachers will rightly imply greater renumeration. Colvin makes
mention of the additional expense imposed by the larger force of
teachers required.[64] But J.S. Brown finds that the failures are so
largely reduced that with fewer repeaters there is a consequent saving
in the teaching force.[65] With a faculty of 66 teachers, he reports 38
classes in which there was no failure, and a marked reduction of
failures in general by the use of supervised study. It is interesting
and significant to note here that by allowing 100 daily pupil
recitations to the teacher the repeated subjects reported in this study
would require 87 teachers for one semester or 11 teachers for the full
four years. This fact represents more than $50,000 in salaries alone.
Buildings, equipment, heat, and other expenses will more than double
the amount. But such expense is incomparable with what the pupils pay
in time, in struggles, and in disappointment in order to succeed later
in only 66.7 per cent of the subjects repeated. As none of the eight
schools provided anything more definite than a general after school
hour for offering help, and which often has a punitive suggestion to
it, the possibility of saving many of these pupils from failure and
repetition by the wise and helpful direction of their study is simply
unmeasured. A conclusion that is particularly encouraging is reported
by W.C. Reavis to the effect that the poorer pupils--the ones who most
need the direction--are the ones that supervised study helps the
most.
Pages:
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160