agement of the school or the studies to be taught. Nor do I mean that oddity, capriciousness, whimsicality, or eccentricity should claim indulgence under the more respectable designation of individuality. Nor would I allow incompetency to escape its just criticism and its just estimate on the plea of the rights of individuality. But what I mean is that it should not be insisted on that each teacher should do everything in the same way and at the same time. Teachers should be allowed to make their own plans and pursue their own methods so far as is consistent with the interests of the whole system, provided that the desired results are produced.

The New York system affords an admirable example of wise provision for what we have designated as the general supervisory examination. The chief superintendent is furnished with a sufficient number of assistants, who are made responsible to him for the faithful performance of this service. The number of assistant superintendents at the present time is seven. Almost the whole time of these officers is devoted to this service, and the majority of them have by long experience acquired great skill and efficiency in the work.

All schools and classes under the charge of the board of education are examined by these officers at least once during the school year. In these examinations a careful and patient inquiry is made into the discipline, progress in study, punctuality of pupils, care of text books, ventilation—in short, everything that characterizes efficient management and makes an excellent school.-(Report of City Superintendent Hon. John Jasper, 1882.)

During the year 1882 2,500 classes were examined in this manner. For each class a blank is filled by the examiner giving the result of the examination in each branch of instruction and in the matter of discipline. There is also for each school a blank to be filled, indicating the character of the principal's general management. The grades of excellence are indicated not by figures, but by the following words: Excellent, Good, Fair, Indifferent, Bad. The blank so filled and signed by the examiner becomes the official, authoritative report of the condition and progress of the class and the merit and standing of the teacher or principal. These reports are submitted to the superintendent and recorded under his direction for the use of the board. If a report is unsatisfactory the teacher is sent for by the superintendent, who points out the deficiency and appoints a time for another examination, allowing a reasonable interval for another trial on the part of the teacher. The general results are tabulated and printed in the annual report of the city superintendent.

This plan of examination and inspection is no novelty in the New York system. It is as old as the system itself. It was so wisely contrived at the outset that the experience of more than two-score years has suggested no essential modification of its features. In this respect New York has not only been superior to the other large cities of the country, but has been at least equal to the foremost cities abroad. In

regard to its beneficial results it would perhaps be scarcely an exaggeration to say that it has been the mainspring of the success of the New York schools, both in instruction and management. By means of this well contrived examining agency the board has constantly in possession reliable information not only of the general condition of the vast school system under its charge, but also of the minutest details of every school and class. The records in the office of the city superintendent show the standing of every class in the system in every branch of study during every year for at least a quarter of a century back, as ascertained by the personal examination of a competent expert whose name is appended as a guarantee of the value of the judgment recorded. The following statistics are quoted from the report of 1882 as an illustration of the summarizing of the results of this supervisory examination: In discipline there were examined 2,567 classes, of which 2,387 were marked excellent, 170 good, 9 fair, none indifferent, 1 bad. In reading 2,510 classes examined, of which 1,915 were reported excellent, 559 good, 25 fair, 1 indifferent, none bad. In spelling 2,500 classes were examined; 2,190 were reported excellent, 281 good, 26 fair, 1 indifferent, none bad. In arithmetic 1,729 classes were reported excellent, 638 good, 121 fair, 6 indifferent, and 6 bad. In penmanship and slate writing 2,500 classes examined; 2,136 were reported excellent, 351 good, 11 fair, 2 indifferent, none bad. In geography, whole number of classes, 1,336; 1,061 were reported excellent, 248 good, 26 fair, 1 indifferent, none bad. In history of the United States, whole number of classes, 549; of these 489 were excellent, 56 good, 3 fair, 1 indifferent, and none bad. In drawing 2,500 classes examined; 83 per cent. were excellent, 15 per cent. good, and 2 per cent. either fair or indifferent.

The character of the principal's management in the several schools is shown in the following table:

It is a curious fact that the two cities which have generally been regarded as the two representative educational cities of the country have for many years afforded a striking contrast in respect to this very important element of school economy, namely, the general supervisory examination. While New York has been for many years exemplifying the right way, Boston has been simultaneously illustrating the wrong

way. Forty years ago the Boston school committee made what I should now call a general supervisory examination by printed questions;1 this examination was limited to the pupils of the upper class of the grammar schools. The schools were then "double headed," the "grammar department" being examined by one subcommittee and the "writing department" by another. In the grammar department the whole number of questions put to them in geography was 31; definitions, 28; grammar, 14; history, 30; natural philosophy, 20; astronomy, 31. To these there should have been 57,873 answers, if each scholar had been able to answer. The answers were marked and tabulated by unknown nonexperts hired for the purpose. The results, tabulated in detail with actual answers to many questions, comprising about 100 pages, were printed in the report; the statistics were so arranged as to bring out the comparison between the schools as distinctly as possible. In the body of the report the comparison is referred to and commented upon without reserve. The report says "it is perhaps the only statistical information which has ever been so embodied." It is to be regretted that it was not the last. Considering that the oral method of examination had been the only one known to the schools and that no intimation of a change had been hinted until the examiners appeared in the school rooms with their printed questions, and considering the unwarrantable use made of the results, this examination, famous in its day, must be regarded as in fact a merciless crusade against the schoolmasters. It should be said, however, in justice to the examiners, that they were men of liberal culture and that they were earnest friends of the public schools. After giving this plan a trial of two years more, its injurious effects became so evident that it was discontinued with scarcely a remonstrance from its originators, who had at the outset put great value upon it. In 1850, when the board had come to a full realization of their error in respect to this contrivance for getting at the condition of the schools and the merit of the teachers, the chairman of the examining committee (Hon. Francis Brinley) in his report said:

No just estimate can be formed of the schools by instituting comparisons between them exclusively based on such calculations; neither would a comparison of any particular school with itself for two years together in succession, made on such computations, indicate whether it were stationary, progressing, or falling off with the unerring accuracy such an array of figures would apparently demonstrate.

The objectionable numerical comparison which we have been considering was accompanied in the examiner's report by a verbal comparison scarcely less to be deprecated. A short paragraph was devoted to each school, in which the committee endeavored to express their opinion of its general condition and to characterize the qualifications and work of the master. This bad device had an existence of five years.

The creation of the office of superintendent, in 1851, made efficient inspection possible, but the extent of the system was from the outset

1 Already referred to under the head "Programs."

such as to render it impossible for a single officer to make personally the requisite detailed general examinations and reports. More than a quarter of a century elapsed before any practical steps were taken towards remedying this defect, although, during this period, the system was greatly developed and improved in almost every other respect. It is but just to say, however, that the devotion and ability of the corps of masters, who had been made really supervising principals in 1866, were such as to reduce to a minimum the necessity of a general supervisory examination in detail. The present system of supervisory examination has been in operation eight years with no essential modification.

The creation of the office of supervisor and the functions assigned to it have been referred to under the head "Supervision." The supervisors, six in number, are required to make a general examination of all the schools at least once a year, in order to ascertain their condition and the standing of the teachers, and to record the results for the use of the school board. The supervisors divided the city into six districts, to correspond with their own number, each assuming the principal charge of one of these districts for supervisory duties. They also divided the studies in all grades into six groups, each supervisor assuming special responsibilities in regard to one of these groups. But no general system of supervisory examination, properly so called, was devised or attempted to be carried out. The plan of record adopted to meet the requirement of the regulations was to record in a book, for the use of the board, against the name of each teacher, an estimate, graded on a scale of three, of ability in teaching, and an estimate, on a similar scale, of ability in disciplining, these estimates being authenticated by no supervisor's signature. Each supervisor adopted such a course as he saw fit for obtaining information upon which to base his estimate of the standing of teachers. The schools were visited by the supervisors at pleasure. If a supervisor saw fit to examine a class in one or more branches, he did so. Sometimes the advice of a principal would be sought as to the ability of teachers under his charge. No teacher was allowed to know the estimate of ability standing against his name. Although this system has been in operation for upwards of eight years, there is believed to be no existing evidence that any one class has ever yet received a single appropriate supervisory examination. The superintendent has no responsibility whatever in connection with the supervisory examinations.

One of the results of this system has been a regrettable demoralization of the teachers. Another result has been that the board has not been furnished with the needed authentic information as to the actual condition of the individual schools as to any one branch of instruction.

PROMOTIONS.

Promotion is of two kinds: (1) the transfer of pupils from a lower class to a higher one in the same school and (2) the transfer of pupils

from a school of a lower grade to a school of a higher grade. The management of promotions is a matter of great importance in school economy..

There appears to be no one well defined and generally approved plan of promotions in our city systems of schools, and there are probably few cities where the mode of conducting examinations is the same in the schools of the different grades. As to the frequency of promotions it is probable that in the greater number of schools the transfer of pupils from the lower classes to the higher takes place annually; and probably there is no system where the work assigned to a class is intended for more than one year of study. The period of one year may, therefore, be considered as the maximum interval between the regular promotions of classes. This period is found by experience to work well in high schools and in the upper grades of grammar schools, and especially in the highest grade. But where it is carried through all the grades of the grammar and primary school it is found to be attended with grave inconveniences and evils, even when transfers are made with a good degree of care and professional skill. The lower classes are invariably crowded; a considerable percentage of pupils is kept waiting a long period for admission, while there are many seats in classes above rendered vacant by the withdrawal of pupils before completing the course; the time for promotion is too distant to operate with much force on the minds of the younger pupils as a stimulant to application and merito. rious conduct; in numerous cases the principal finds himself obliged to choose between the alternatives of transferring pupils not properly qualified to enter the higher class or subjecting them to all the disagreeable consequences of a repetition of a whole year's course by refusing them promotion. To get rid of the evils which inevitably result from the plan of uniform yearly promotions, some cities, going to the opposite extreme, have reduced the interval between promotions to a fourth of a school year, that is, about fifty days. St. Louis seems to have taken the lead in experimenting with this plan. In this city, although the grades or classes correspond to the years of schooling, as in most other cities, each grade is broken into four subgrades, corresponding to the quarters of the school time. This expedient has been resorted to in order, by reducing the intervals between the classes to a minimum, to facilitate individual promotions, and give the bright, capable pupils, a chance to go on, leaving behind those who are more slow and indolent. The point aimed at is to give flexibility to the graded system and maintain the desired closeness of grading in classes by frequent reclassification, instead of endeavoring to accomplish the same object by unduly restraining the foremost pupils and unduly urging forward the hindmost.

As the reclassification takes place at the end of each quarter, it is considered no great hardship for the poorer scholars in the class to repeat the course, and, on the other hand, some of the very best pupils are