EDUCATION REPORT, 1902. the industry to be benefited and are distinctly utilitarian in character. Besides these, there are many continuation and manual training schools. So numerous are these specialized schools that a German can always find one in which he can learn the latest and best principles, devices, and methods of any trade or profession he may desire to follow. Add to all these the latest German innovation of commercial high schools and colleges of commerce, then wonder, if you can, why German competition is so keen and why German trade and industry are reaching every market the world over. The Germans have discovered that the secret of success in trade and industry depends upon education; not upon the education of the library and cloister, but upon the education of the laboratory, the shop, and the modern lecture room. REPORT ON DRAWING IN WESTERN NORMAL SCHOOLS. [Adopted by the Western Drawing Teachers' Association May 9, 1902.] In the territory represented by the Western Drawing Teachers' Association there are 15 States, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Missouri, California, Oregon, Washington, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Colorado, and Texas. In these States there are 40 State normal schools. Your committee sent to the presidents or principals of these schools a circular letter, reading as follows: At the last meeting of the Western Drawing Teachers' Association, held April 23 to 25, 1901, at Rock Island, Ill., a committee was appointed to investigate conditions governing the preparation of normal students for the teaching of drawing. It was thought advisable to gather statistics from the norm.l schools of the West, with a view to bringing valuable information before the association. The association hopes that there may be a united effort among public school workers to raise the standard of art instruction, in order that teachers may be better prepared to handle a subject which has become vital in American education. Will you aid us in our work by filling out the inclosed blank? The questions asked on the circular blank were the following: 1. Is drawing taught in your school? 2. Is it an obligatory study? 3. During how many years is it required? 4. How much time per year is devoted in your school to the subject? 5. What is the character of the instruction? 6. Is your drawing department well equipped? 7. Have your graduates found themselves suitably prepared for teaching drawing when becoming teachers? 8. What has been the art training of your teacher of drawing? 9. What salary is paid the drawing teacher? 10. How many normal students does the teacher of drawing instruct? 11. Does she also have charge of her subject in a practice school? 12. Will you send an exhibit of drawing to the next meeting of the Western Drawing Teachers' Association, at Minneapolis, May 7 to 9, 1902? Response was made by 34 of the normal schools; the remaining 6 could not be heard from. Your committee regrets that it is unable to bring before you the complete information that it considers desirable. Many schools did not seem willing to answer all the questions asked. When a normal school principal stated that he was not permitted to say what salary was being paid the drawing teacher, there was nothing further for the committee to do. To know that thirty-two periods are being devoted to the teaching of drawing in a school, when the principal refuses to state the length of a period is not very satisfactory. When asking what the training of the supervisor has been, to receive the answer that it has been good is not altogether comprehensive. However, notwithstanding the many difficulties encountered, many principals seemed anxious to further the work of the committee and to express interest in and appreciation of the work of the association. We feel that the information obtained is sufficient to be of much interest and value to the association. In the 34 normal schools heard from drawing is taught. It is an obligatory study in all but two-Cape Girardeau, Mo., and Terra Haute, Ind. The time over which work in drawing extends varies from six weeks in Moorehead, Minn., to three years in Houston, Tex. Of 21 schools stating the number of hours devoted to the subject, the average is one hundred and thirty-six hours. In 4 schools students have less than eighty hours' training. The greatest amount of time devoted to the subject is three hundred and twenty hours in the course at Los Angeles, Cal. Opinion seems to differ widely as to what constitutes a good course of study. One normal school states: "We teach art, not the old-time magazine and perpetual model drawing." Another states: "Our teachers are not artists, and the elementary work we do is not art. We endeavor to prepare our students to use drawing in elementary work." A few of the outlines of the courses of study in drawing seem to the committee comprehensive and well ordered, but most of them not good and some decidedly bad. Regarding equipment of 32 schools, 12 consider themselves well equipped for art study, 13 moderately so, and 7 not equipped. In answer to the question, "Have your graduates found themselves suitably prepared for teaching drawing when becoming teachers?" of 27 schools willing to answer, 14 find that they are prepared, 3 fairly well prepared, 2 not prepared, 3 not often prepared, 4 can not tell, and 1 hopes that they are. Of the training of teachers, 9 have received instruction at Pratt Institute, 3 at the Massachusetts Normal Art, 1 at Chicago Art Institute, 1 at the Cooper Institute, 1 at the Columbus (Ohio) Art School, and 1 at the New York Academy of Design. Of the remaining 11, regarding whom answers were received, 3 have had extensive studio work, 7 have had only the training afforded by the regular normal schools and colleges, and 1 is "a 19-year-old girl," a born genius, picked up at home. The salaries paid drawing teachers in normal schools heard from are as follows: One teacher receives $2,000; one, $1,530; three, $1,300; three, $1,200; five, $1,100; five, $1,000; one, $950; five, $900; one, $850; four, $800; one, $700; one, $600; two, $500, and one, $350. In 16 of 35 schools the salaries are below $1,000. In 26 schools the drawing teachers have charge of work in a practice school and in 5 schools instruct the normal students only. The number of students being instructed in the various schools varies from 10 to 500. At present in 30 schools there are 5,067 prospective teachers receiving art instruction. After the compilation of the above a list of 40 supervisors was made representing the territory of the Western Drawing Teachers' Association. A circular letter was addressed to these asking if they found the graduates of State normal schools, as a rule, fitted to teach drawing efficiently. Thirty-one answers were received. Four teachers spoke words of commenda tion: I find that the teachers who have had the training of the normal schools of the State are the most efficient in the corps in my line of work. IDA M. CRAVATH, Madison, Wis. I will say that I have found normal graduates well fitted to teach drawing, but I must add that my experience is limited, being only in connection with the Los Angeles State Normal, of California. MAY GEARHART, Berkeley, Cal. I find graduates of State normal schools better prepared to teach drawing than those without normal training. The training in normal schools is inadequate, however, and the graduates themselves feel it so. They speak of the lack along creative lines in their development. GRACE C. SYLLA, Akron, Ohio. The matter, according to my experience, is wholly relative. The teachers we receive from the State normal schools are so much better prepared to do intelligent work without drawing outlines than those received from other sources that we are very thankful to think that the course is somewhat adequate. Though they may not be able to draw, they are able to approach the subject with some intelligence. I think I may safely say that our normal graduates are as well prepared to teach drawing under a good supervisor as they are to do most of the other work of the school, and the condition is improving every year. That there is large need and room for such improvement goes without saying. MARY G. DIEM, Winona, Minn. Supervisors from the following cities reported that they did not find State normal graduates fitted, as a rule, to teach drawing: Youngstown and Dayton, Ohio; Detroit, East Saginaw, and Bay City, Mich.; Indianapolis, Evansville, Fort Wayne, Marion, and South Bend, Ind.; Eau Claire, Oshkosh, and West Superior, Wis.; Minneapolis and Stillwater, Minn.; Burlington, Iowa; Colorado Springs, Denver (Dist. No. 17), and Pueblo (Dist. No. 1), Colo.; Joplin, Mo.; Alameda and Oakland, Cal. We quote briefly from some of the letters as follows: I think that I can safely say in my seven years' experience as supervisor I have never found a normal graduate who was prepared to teach the subject intelligently. My heart aches with each succeeding September as I realize afresh how poorly prepared our otherwise good teachers are to handle the subject. I most sincerely trust that the day is not far distant when the teachers' (prospective) preparation for and ability to handle art as taught in our public schools shall be subject to as severe tests and requirements as is any of the other branches. MARGARET SHEARDOWN, Calumet, Mich. We have had a number of graduates from various normal schools, and none have been able to teach drawing successfully. In fact, their knowledge of the subject is so limited that it seems ridiculous to say that they have studied art. Hoping that this state of things may be overcome in the near future, ALICE E. HALL, Fort Wayne, Ind. Do I find graduates of State normal schools, as a rule, fitted to teach drawing efficiently? No; it has not been my pleasure to have so fortunate a corps. So many of the high schools do not have drawing; then, too, the rural schools are without. Consequently the normal students are poorly prepared to receive sufficient training within the twenty weeks' allotted art course. Allow me to plead less methods in normal art work, perspective and freehand work in light and shade and color. The supervisor will supply help in methods and the proper adjustment to grades, but finds uphill work with the normal graduate who puts in her time with discussions and methods. Give me the teacher who can sketch a little, has some idea of correctness of light and shade, knows simple rules (and applications thereof) in perspective, and her work proves efficient. Sometimes she comes from the normal so full of cubes and prisms and drawing books that it is hard to get her to dare to do free work. If every normal demanded an examination, be it ever so slight, in drawing, it would force the drawing into the high schools and set the districts thinkin'." Of course all normal schools would have to agree on an examination, or else the students might vote against it and attendance might suffer. ANNA EARL GRADY, Superior, Wis. In answer to your question I can give an unqualified "No." Not only are they unqualified, but some are prejudiced against the work and seem to have no conception of what art education desires to do for the child. A very large part of the teachers with whom I come in contact are from private normals. While they are just as poorly qualified, they are not prejudiced. I think the work should not stop with the State normals, but should be carried into all schools where teachers are trained. Call on me for any aid that I can give along this line. J. L. MASSENA, Marion, Ind. Almost without exception I find normal-school graduates poorly prepared to teach drawing. Indeed, I find it impossible to have them teach in the schools where I supervise without asking them to attend special meetings for instruction for the best part of a year. Almost invariably they are deficient in elementary observation and expression. Generally the work they show as having been done at normal schools would not be accepted from our high-school pupils. Their deficiencies seem to be the result of too little time devoted to the subject and superficial instruction; and yet, as Cabrill Compayro says in his report on the educational exhibit of the United States at the Paris Exposition, Drawing is king in the schools of America." CHAS. M. CARTER, Denver, Colo. In my seven years' experience in Indianapolis I have found only two graduates of State normal schools who were fitted upon entering our schools to teach drawing. WILHELMINA SEEGMILLER, Indianapolis, Ind. In the last annual report of the superintendent of the Minneapolis schools to the board of education a report from the supervisor of drawing, Miss Bonnie Snow, is published. In this the statement is made: We are doing all we can to teach the children in the grades how to draw, how to appreciate and enjoy nature and art; but we are doing very little in our high schools to strengthen the teachers of the next generation to know more about the technical side of the subject. In this we are open to criticism. The normal schools in their turn are perhaps more directly responsible for the woeful lack of knowledge of drawing on the part of their graduates. The average normal-school course of study was planned, apparently, years ago, before drawing and its related art subjects entered so vitally into the course of study of the average public school. Hence their students, coming to them, it is true, in ignorance of the subject, are expected in six weeks' or at most in three months' time to learn enough about it to fulfill the requirements of the average school curriculum. It is because I feel so positive that the trouble lies in the lack of preparation on the part of the teacher in this line of work that I have sought to better the conditions so far as lies in my power. A very large part of my time is devoted to the teaching of teachers-doing practical normal-school work, instead of depending on pure supervision. I do not speak of this in a spirit of complaint, but only to put before you a truthful statement of the conditions under which we work. From lack of experience in working with normal-school graduates the supervisors of Decatur, Ill.; Duluth, Minn.; Davenport, Iowa; and St. Joseph, Mo., reported that they were unable to answer the question. To sum up, two supervisors find graduates fitted to teach drawing, one as well fitted as to teach most other things, one more nearly fitted than if not instructed, four can not say, and twenty-three say "No," most of them very emphatically. As the conclusion of its investigations your committee reports that it believes drawing is not being well taught in the majority of Western State normal schools, and that in consequence superintendents are finding it very difficult to secure the services of well-instructed teachers, supervisors are expending much unnecessary force in training normal graduates, the graduates themselves have much difficulty and disappointment when they find themselves almost or wholly unfitted to teach a required subject, and large numbers of children suffer while teachers are becoming, under much hardship, prepared to teach a subject that has become a vital and established part of American education. Your committee feels that conditions will not very materially improve until normal schools require some preparation in drawing before students are admitted and until teachers' examinations are established in drawing, as in other subjects, by the cities and towns. When superintendents of schools demand that teachers entering their schools be prepared to teach drawing as other subjects, there will be more time devoted to the subject in the normal schools, better equipment, much better salaries paid the drawing teachers, the drawing courses enriched in the high schools, and a better teaching and understanding of art throughout the West. Respectfully submitted. WILHELMINA SEEGMILLER, Supervisor of Drawing, Indianapolis, Ind. Supervisor of Drawing, Minneapolis, Minn. Supervisor of Drawing, Columbus, Ohio. Supervisor of Drawing, Grand Rapids, Mich. Supervisor of Drawing, Denver, Colo. |