tion in the severity of regular work. Those who find in this situation a fortunate broadening of the student's opportunity and those who view with pessimistic alarm the increase of outside engagements are both clear that there is here a grave problem in school organization. If the outside activities are to be an advantage, they must be organized, and they must be selected so as to aid rather than distract from the class work. If, on the other hand, the outside activities become excessive, there should be substitutes and a proper control which can bring the student back to the class work.

ADVANTAGES OF A LENGTHENED SCHOOL DAY.

One remedy which is more discussed than tried is the lengthening of the school day. As suggested above, shopwork out of regular hours and study out of hours, but under the school roof, have been tried with success in a number of centers. But there is objection to the actual extension of the school day, because, in the first place, it would tax the instructors too heavily and, secondly, because in most high schools the students often have to go long distances in order to reach school. It may be said in answer to these objections that an arrangement which gives a long school day does not necessarily involve full attendance during the whole session on the part of each member of the teaching staff. Nor does the special student who makes a long trip to reach school necessarily need to spend all the hours of the session in the school. These matters being adjusted, as they easily may be, there is much to be said in favor of a longer supervised period of school activity. A longer day would make it possible to put physical activity on a proper basis as a part of the supervised educative work of all students. It would give larger opportunity for supervised study and it would give much needed administrative relief in organizing individual curricula by distributing electives over more recitation periods. When one attempts to include all that is suggested as desirable in the school, there can be no doubt that the lengthening of the school day is theoretically the simplest first step in the solution of the problem. It will require time, however, to achieve such a solution. Most principals and boards would hesitate under present conditions to urge such a step, and most faculties would find reasons apparently based upon sound educational considerations for rejecting the proposal if it were made.

In the meantime there are two indirect methods of extending school supervision over outside activities, both of which have been tried with gratifying success. In the first place, the school can supply in a greater degree than is usual supervision for a great variety of activities. In athletics the schools have commonly recognized the necessity of supplying a supervising instructor. The voluntary devotion of individual instructors has often furnished supervision for

The investment of supervisory

clubs or other outside activities. energy in these student activities is becoming more and more common and is undoubtedly a justifiable charge against the instructorial budget of any school. As this demand comes to be recognized, there will grow up a class of teachers skilled in the type of supervision which is needed. Their work with students will practically extend the school day, even if that step is not formally taken.

A second type of organization which has been successfully carried out is one in which the student systematically lays out his program for the whole day and thus extends the period of regulated work and recreation by organizing his own personal program. This adjustment can best be carried out by providing each student with a program card for the day and by discussing with him from time to time the economy of a well-ordered expenditure of time. The program should make liberal allowance for recreation and should thus emphasize the value in individual development of systematic recreation. It should also leave to the student margins for self-directed intellectual activities. In short, it should be something more than a school program. If students can thus be induced to take charge of their own programs, much will be gained without enlarging at all the school equipment. The danger is that only the better students will have the strength of purpose to carry out such programs.

The discussion of outside activities, like the discussion of the fuller curriculum, brings us to the conclusion that the high school can never go back to the simple program of a generation ago. Those who would repress outside school activities make the mistake of regarding them as unnecessary funguslike growths to be cut off This is an untenable view of these activities. They are here as part of the expansion of high-school life and they must be recognized and controlled. Some legitimate occupation must be found for the abundant energies ⚫of students.

One phase of the general movement toward the extension of school activity which may properly be mentioned in this connection is the increasing practice of supplying students with luncheon. All of the newer and better types of high-school buildings are providing a luncheon room. This room is sometimes used as a laboratory for the department of domestic science. This ideal arrangement does not in other cases seem possible, when the enterprise is let out by contract to a manager. There is great need of more adequate preparation of managers for school luncheon rooms. Also there is need of a keener recognition on the part of local authorities that the conduct of such a room should be in the hands of a well-trained officer, who can make the luncheon room contribute to the sound social and scientific. spirit of the school.

ALL-THE-YEAR SCHOOLS ARE DEMANDED.

In connection with the discussion of the lengthening of the school day, reference must be made to the lengthening of the school year. Serious summer study has become a familiar fact in the lives of many teachers. There is a feeling on all sides that vacations are excessive, and that the student loses too much by the long suspension of activities. Among that class in society which can afford to go to summer camps it is becoming a common practice for both boys and girls to seek during the summer a type of outdoor education that the regular school could hardly furnish. The great majority of city students, however, are cut off from such camping opportunities on any large scale. The question is coming to be more and more commonly asked, Why not keep schools open during the summer? In the meantime the demand for longer school sessions has become very loud on the part of students who have failed in one or two subjects and find themselves in danger of being failures. Summer high schools are, as a result of all these demands, beginning to appear. At the present stage these schools are usually of a special type, offering a limited number of courses, mostly of a manual nature or especially adapted to the needs of those who have failed. In a few centers the summer school is becoming regular in its offerings. There can be no doubt that this will become more common as ways and means are found.

NIGHT SCHOOLS OFFER A FIELD FOR DEVELOPMENT.

Another extension of the high school is into the night school. In a few conspicuous centers the policy has been definitely adopted of offering a broad course during the evening. In general, however, the night school is not regular in its work. The night school is usually a place for adults who have not had full school opportunities, or it is an aggregation of special industrial classes. The work is frequently not graded either as to the qualifications of the members of the class or with a view to distinguishing sharply between elementary work and secondary work. Finally, attendance is not so satisfactory as during the sessions of the regular school. All these irregularities show that the night school has not been fully organized. Somewhat more rigorous modes of administration have proved to be effective in foreign centers, and there will doubtless come a period in American organization of these additional schools when they will become somewhat more regular in form and in student body.

THE TRAINING OF SECONDARY-SCHOOL TEACHERS.

No survey of the secondary-school situation would be complete without a discussion of the training of teachers. In all Englishspeaking countries the training of secondary teachers has been allowed

to drift on without any special provision and for the most part without any supervision whatsoever. In this respect the United States, with England and Scotland, compare very unfavorably with France and Germany, where the training of secondary teachers is more fully provided for than the training of elementary teachers.

The neglect of the training of high-school teachers is historically connected with the fact that these schools grew up without supervision. The colleges were the real supervisors of the high schools until very recently, and the colleges were satisfied to send their graduates into the high schools as teachers without questioning seriously their ability to teach. It is interesting to note, in passing, the obvious historical fact that the colleges exhibited very little confidence in these graduates after they became high-school teachers. The colleges for a long period dictated in truly paternal fashion every step that the high-school teacher should take. The high-school teacher in turn, feeling very little responsibility for the organization of curricula and having no special training in the history of education and little knowledge of the problems of school organization, was proud of his detachment from pedagogy and somewhat scornful of his colleagues of the elementary schools, who frankly absorbed themselves in discussions of method.

As pointed out above, the evolution of the high school has brought out its problems with such clearness that secondary teachers have been forced to take up pedagogical consideration. In the meantime State departments have developed far enough to see that if an elementary-school teacher needs to be licensed to teach and needs supervision, at least during the early years of his work, the secondary teacher certainly requires equal attention. Colleges have come to recognize that the strong high school will grow up where there is a strong staff of instructors alive to the problems of the school and not acquiescing in the dictates of an external institution. Therefore the wiser colleges are striving to raise in the minds of the high-school teachers, both in service and in preparation, a realization of the problems of high-school organization. Finally, the demonstrated efficiency of those schools which manage themselves on scientific principles has opened up an era of study of high-school problems which arouses in the mind of the scientific student of education the most optimistic hopes for the future of the training of high-school teachers.

THE TENURE OF TEACHERS IS TOO SHORT.

In the midst of these optimistic views it must be admitted that there is the shadow of pessimism when one studies the present situation as it really appears when examined in detail. A recent study made by Prof. Jessup (School Review, October, 1913) shows that high-school teachers are a most migratory class. Not only the teach

ers, but also the principals of high schools, change with a frequency which almost destroys the hope of developing anything like a definite policy within these institutions. This transient character of the high-school instructorial staff is understood when one considers, first, the lack of special training, to which reference has just been made. The second fact which explains the situation is the lack of appreciation on the part of communities of the advantage to the school of continuity in educational policy. Boards of education are themselves in many cases very transient, and they add to their own short term entire willingness to make experiments with new principals and new teachers. All these causes result in the migration which Prof. Jessup so vividly portrays. Finally, there is the more general fact that many teachers are engaged in the work for only a few years between college and some other calling. Some of the annual changes are accordingly to be understood as complete withdrawals from the teaching profession.

Whatever the causes-and the above list is doubtless only a partial one-the result is most disastrous for high-school education. It is very often the experience of a high-school student passing through a single school that he will be under from two to four principals and will have even in the same subject a great variety of different types of instruction. If one could be sure that each change experienced by such a student is in the direction of improvement, there might be complacency about the matter, but a succession of reforms which are unfinished experiments at all stages is not likely to be altogether in the direction of improvement.

DEPARTMENTS OF EDUCATION IN COLLEGES.

The lack of proper training among high-school teachers and their short tenure of office are part of the general problem created by the rapid development of secondary schools. Whatever contributes to a better organization of these schools will contribute to a solution of the problem of supplying better teachers. If the high school can be better defined and its work systematized, the reflex influence of these improvements will immediately be felt in the longer tenure of teachers and in a higher type of professional spirit and performance. The same agencies which are operating to improve high schools through a better definition of their problems are contributing to the better preparation of high-school teachers for their professional work. Conspicuous among these agencies are the departments of education in the State universities. The large responsibility of the State university for all forms of education in the State has long been recognized in the established systems of high-school inspection. In a number of States the inspector is a man of very large influence.