STATE SUPERINTENDENTS OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF NEVADA SINCE ORGANIZATION OF THE STATE *Died September 13, 1910. John Edwards Bray appointed for unexpired term. BIENNIAL REPORT SALARY SITUATION The financial side of the school situation has been forced upon the attention of the public and the school officials because of the great loss of teachers to other occupations paying larger salaries than the public school. The wonder has been that so many teachers have remained, and that the schools could secure as well-trained teachers as they have. The teachers have been influenced strongly by the appeal of childhood and the opportunities of service. The salaries of teachers have been advanced about 50% in Nevada during the last six years-most of the increase coming during the past two years. And yet the advance in salaries has not kept pace with the mounting cost of living. The latter rose more than 100% during this period, so that salaries made but a half-way climb. More than that, salaries started from an unjustifiably low level in their half-way climb. The following facts and figures present the case more definitely than a general discussion can do. In 1914-1915 the average annual salary paid rural teachers was $680, while the average for all teachers, principals and superintendents included, was but $888. Such a salary situation did not even then draw to the public schools well-trained teachers in sufficient numbers. Not until 1918-1919 did any material increase in salaries take place, when under the new Apportionment Act of 1917 more funds on a more equitable basis became available, and, as a first step, even the small school of five census children was provided an annual minimum of $775, which was generally nearer $800 to $850 per school, while larger schools drew proportionately larger amounts on the per capita basis. In 1919 the law went into full effect, with a minimum of $805 and a per capita increase for the larger schools; again the actual amounts were considerably above the minimum in most cases. The state aid given districts taxing themselves by special district levy still further aided in bringing additional funds to the smaller districts where small assessed valuations generally prevail. In 1919-1920 the average salary for rural teachers reached $860, while the average for all teachers was $1,156. For the current school year a larger increase took place than in any single year previous. The budget law enabled schools to present their needs, so that county tax-rates and special district tax-rates were fixed to provide a larger income. The state apportionment was about $21,000 above the bare minimum required under the new law. Even then, some districts had to make application to the State Board of Finance for emergency loans. By dint of these combined means of procuring larger school revenues, salaries reached an average of $1,022 for rural teachers and $1,362 for all teachers, supervisors included. There is the economic argument to justify generous expenditures on education, for this factor is the greatest one in the production of wealth, bringing back in multiplied value returns due to intelligence and proper training for vocations. Civic and moral stability of our citizenship can be assured only through sufficient provision for our school system. The response made by the various communities during recent years has demonstrated that Nevada is alive to the need of maintaining school efficiency and is willing to furnish the necessary money, not only to pay adequate salaries, but to provide school supplies and proper housing, if only the need is clearly set forth. But while Nevada was thus making heroic financial efforts neighboring States were doing even more than we were. The results are seen in California in the salary schedule for the current year, which exceeds that in Nevada, and, for the future, the provision written into the California State Constitution by the passage of Amendment 16 a still greater advance in teachers' salaries is assured. The cost of living has begun to fall. However, it does not seem probable that it can drop to the 50% increase basis for some time. With the generous provision made in California and other States, Nevada must do even better than to maintain the present schedule. If we do not, we shall become a second-rate State educationally, trailing behind more progressive neighbors. In urging provision for an adequate salary schedule, my chief concern is not, and has not been, primarily economic justice to the teacher, although there can be no question that justice demands a living wage for those who serve the welfare of our children in the public schools. Teachers can go into other occupations, as they have done by thousands, if not paid a living wage. But the childhood of the Nation would suffer from an inferior quality of untrained teacher. The great goal in better school finance is justice to the children by providing a sufficient supply of well-trained teachers. LARGER STATE SHARE IN SCHOOL SUPPORT I recommend a further equalizing of the burdens of school support, to the end that the beginning made in 1917 may be carried to a point where the State shall assume approximately 60% of the general minimum requirements for all the schools of the State, leaving 40% to be borne by the counties. Great inequalities are revealed by a study of the table of assessed valuations and tax-rates. So long as counties differ in ability as much as in the ratio of 10 to 1, there can be no just argument made against assigning a larger proportion of the required minimum maintenance costs to the State with a corresponding reduction for the counties. The situation this year is such that in the budget figures submitted I have not attempted to make a full change to meet the above arrangement, but have sought to move approximately half-way toward such a goal. STATE SUPERVISION Supervision of schools in a State with such a vast stretch of territory as Nevada possesses presents a complex of difficulties little realized by those not actively in touch with the problem. Nevada has gone from the very loosely organized form of ex officio supervision of fifteen years ago, that came as an effort to reduce expenses to the very lowest point, to the most highly centralized system of supervision found in the United States. The practice and experience of nearly every State seems to indicate clearly that we as a State have not yet found a solution of our supervision problem. In no other State are such immense districts assigned to one single supervisor. The time has come when the need is clearly imperative for the addition of another District Superintendent. The attention of those who read this report is respectfully called to the report of Deputy Superintendent T. W. Chapman of the Fifth District. For the past eighteen months, to mitigate in some measure the discouraging and overwhelming supertask imposed upon the deputy in that district, I gave part of the services of my office deputy to take over Esmeralda County and the northwestern valleys of Nye County. This was done, in spite of the fact that my office is carrying responsibilities beyond those of any other state office in Nevada with so small an office force. The result was not satisfactory as to the measure of relief afforded the Deputy of the Fifth District, although for the first time in the history of the district all schools within it were visited as required by law. The schools of the Fifth District are not receiving just consideration. This district should be divided, and another Deputy added to the force. The total supervision expense, including the state office, the travel and office expenses of all connected with state supervision, was less than 24% of the current expenditures of the schools-a rate so low for such overhead expenses as to show at once to any business man that we are on a very economical basis. To refuse to expend several thousand dollars a year additional, in order to make sure that we get dollar-fordollar returns on the $1,150,000 expended for school maintenance, is a poor business policy; nor is it just to the children whose welfare is involved. I am not pleading for those who have unsparingly given their strength and professional services as District Deputies. They are free to leave and go to better-paying positions, with reasonable demands. But the welfare of the children is the stake in this case as is the question of just and fair compensation for teachers. A study of the salaries paid to principals and teachers this year reveals the fact that practically all of the principals in the small schools, and some of the instructors in the high schools, receive as much salary as the Deputy Superintendents who have general charge of the schools in these districts, and a large part receive more. In other words, a man can take a little school, live at home with his family rather than drive the long taxing miles of the supervision routes, and get as much or more pay. Not for long can we claim the services of competent supervisors in these days when well-trained men are in such demand for schools. A salary of at least $3,000 should be set. With an additional deputy and a fair salary, Nevada can then hope to retain the services of experienced supervisors. THE ONE-SCHOOL-FUND ACT One of the enactments of the Legislature of 1919 was the bill I presented to simplify keeping account of school funds. In place of the several funds previously required, a single district-school fund was provided for with a 100% guarantee of the teacher's salary from this fund. The burden upon county officials was greatly reduced, as was the amount of work necessary to make the semiannual apportionments. In this same measure a greater provision was made for aid from the State School Reserve Fund for the small districts that taxed themselves in order to maintain better school facilities. Under the budget law, schools have been able to plan more clearly for the coming year's financial needs. But the law is in need of amendment in order that the schools may know the school census for the coming year as well as the actual balance at the close of the last budget period. It has been difficult in some districts to arrive at even a fair approximate estimate of the needs of the coming year on account of the uncertainty. A better system of reports from the County Auditors and Treasurers should be established. Most of the data now required by law from the County Treasurer is in the records of the County Auditor. There has been a fine spirit of cooperation on the part of the County Auditors in sending in the requested report material, even though they are not required by law to do so. A law defining the nature of these reports more clearly, and assigning the part that would naturally come to the office having on record the information sought, would be a step toward greater efficiency. RETIREMENT-SALARY-FUND CHANGES The Public-School Teachers' Retirement Salary Fund has been carefully studied and full data gathered as to the soundness and necessities of the system. A study of the report of the Executive Secretary, submitted later in this report, will be of great interest to all who have at heart the good of this provision for retired teachers. We now have, for the first time, an intelligent basis for judging the demands that may have to be carried on this fund. Upon my recommendation, the Legislature of 1919 repealed the provision of the Retirement Salary Fund Act requiring the payment of $9 per year on the part of teachers to help maintain this fund. Ever since the passage of the original Act, I had felt that the tontine nature of this payment was unjustified. The larger part of the teachers compelled to pay this assessment would never have an opportunity to derive any benefit from the Retirement Salary Fund Act, inasmuch as all who drop out of teaching before the full period for retirement would lose all money paid into the fund, there being no provision for refunding such payments. The Legislature not only did away with this tontine feature, but also struck out the requirement of payment on the part of even those teachers participating in the benefits of the Act. The Legislature also increased the retirement salary from $500 to $600. SEGREGATION OF SCHOOL EXPENDITURES The costs of school supervision, examinations, and institutes, now carried on the General Fund of the State, should be transferred to the General School Fund, with a proper transfer of state tax-rate to provide for these. This would make it easier to get complete accounting of educational expenses. SMITH-TOWNER BILL Among the many things that call for careful attention at the hands of citizens generally, as well as the educators of our State, the following should be noted. The urgent advisability of the passage of the Smith-Towner bill, which embraces the greatest possibilities of educational advancement ever brought together in one proposed federal enactment. The proposed law would provide a Secretary of Education in the President's Cabinet, a tardy recognition of the vital importance |