OUR COMMON SCHOOLS. 201 



OUR COMMON SCHOOLS. 



BY JOSHUA VAKHOOSEN", PRESIDENT OF THE EOCHESTEK FAKMEKS INSTITUTE. 



My subject is one of the most important in our social economy, and is more 

 YTorthy the attention and treatment of a professor than of a common farmer. 

 But it has a practical phase within the reach of all. From this standpoint I 

 proj)ose to treat it. 



Tlie organization of school districts in many rural sections, in their geo- 

 graphical arrangement and general management, is detrimental to the conveni- 

 ence, health, and educational advantage of children. Often the districts are so 

 large as to make a distance of from one to three miles for th ■ children to 

 travel, causing, in inclement weather, more or less absence, which breaks in upon 

 the progress of pupils in their studies. In tlie district system, the location and 

 building of school houses is often a bone of contention which creates animosities 

 and bitterness which time cannot heal, and which lias a depressing influence on 

 the educational interests of all. Some, from their nature, are penurious and 

 indifferent as to tlje kind of school house they will build, while others desire to 

 build and maintain an attractive school house, and place over it a teacher 

 morally and educationally competent to manage and instruct their children. 

 From this cause there arises much contention and strife, a serious obstacle in 

 the way of a prosperous and efficient school. 



The same motives of penuriousness and indifference are often the dominating 

 influences in reducing the term to a minimum which is detrimental to the inter- 

 est of a minority who feel that their children should have and enjoy the advan- 

 tages of longer terms of school. 



We find in the report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, that in 

 Oakland county, in the years 1882 and '83, there were fourteen schools in 

 which the number of pupils averaged from four to twelve. The whole number 

 of resident pupils attending these schools was 106; an average of six months' 

 school was taught. Each school averaged 7 8-10 scholars. In the same county 

 there were thirty-three schools that enrolled from twelve to twenty, and in one 

 district there were but four scholars enrolled, three of whom were non-resi- 

 dents. There were three months' school taught in this district at a cost of $60 

 for a teacher, besides the expense of school house, wood and other items. 

 There were 217 districts that maintained schools, and they averaged a fraction 

 over 7 8-12 mouths each. 



These are the schools that the farmers' children have to attend, from three 

 to nine months in the year, and many of them are taught by very poor 

 teachers, the price being the only tiling taken into account. Many more 

 objections miglit be mentioned, but it is useless, for every person who has- 

 sent to the district school knows the disadvantages perfectly well. 



If the district plan is to be retained, there should be some improvement 

 made in management. In the first place, most of the towns should be 

 redivided, making fewer districts, and placing the school houses where they 

 would convenience the most scholars. 



Our school law needs some changes. The present law allows districts to 

 regulate the term of school according to the number of scholars, none having 

 less than three months in the year. This is all wrong. The law should com- 

 pel all districts to have at least nine months of good school. Why not? Dues 

 it make any difference how large or how small the district is? The children, need 



26 



