Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

to refer to some features of that briefly in order to give you the background upon which this opinion is based.

I was born in the country and worked on the farm as a boy, and in a blacksmith shop, and attended a rural school, later a village high school. My first experience in educational work was in a one-room school, and I had the good fortune to have had the privilege of teaching for six years as a boy in a rural school. I had the privilege of supervising the schools of the county later, and 27 years' service in the State education department of New York, during which time it was my good pleasure to have had very cordial relations with the distinguished member of this committee from the State of New York. I am glad to say he supported very cordially every proposition which the State education department presented to the legislature in New York. I served as deputy commissioner and was acting head of the department in 1918 and 1919. From 1919 to 1923 I was the head of the State system in Massachusetts

Mr. DOUGLASS. Did you say "Massachusetts?"

Doctor FINEGAN. I beg your pardon; Pennsylvania. Looking at you, I thought of Massachusetts.

Mr. DOUGLASS. I thought of Massachusetts, too.

Doctor FINEGAN. One can't help, who has been at these hearings, knowing you are from Massachusetts.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Well, I am proud of it.

Doctor FINEGAN. You well might be, and if it will give me any status with the member from Massachusetts, I should like to say that the author of the paper read by Mr. Smith, Mr. Filene, happens to be one of my very good friends, and I have had the privilege of sitting in his office and in his home a great many times for the sole purpose of discussing educational problems.

Mr. DOUGLASS. He is an outstanding public spirited man. Doctor FINEGAN. I agree with you, and I want to appear before your distinguished committee with all the credentials possible. Mr. DOUGLASS. You come well recommended by him.

Doctor FINEGAN. Now, I want to get before the members of the committee the thought that for over 30 years I was a State officer in the administration of education, and I have the viewpoint and the background and the philosophy of education being the function of the *State and not the function of the National Government. Notwithstanding that I have been for this bill and am for it now and, as I said at the outset, because of the experiences which I have had as a teacher and an administrator in education.

Now, it is not possible, nor is it necessary, to go over the various features of this bill. I just want to take up two or three, because they seem to me, in the public discussions, in the hearings which have been held from time to time, and in the press, to be the two or three vital things upon which the opposition is based. I am frank to say that in my experience I have not known a State administrator in education who is opposed to this bill. I think I know the head of each one of the 48 State systems now and I don't know of one who opposes it, man or woman. I know that they are for it on the basis. on which it now stands. I believe this: That if these men and women believed, if there was a shadow of doubt in their minds, that the enactment of this measure and the establishment of this department

would in any way infringe upon the prerogatives of State authority and education, they would be against it.

They are jealous of their prerogatives and they should be officially the defenders of what has been the traditional policy of this country in the administration of education. If the time ever comes when an effort will be made in this country to place the control of education in the hands of a Washington bureau or a Washington department, the first people who will rise up in rebellion against it, and who will be the outstanding defenders of this traditional policy, are the men and women in education who are represented here to-day through those who have spoken for them, and you will find that in the history of the National Education Association there will be written just as effective protests against a measure of that kind as have been written in the last nine years in favor of a Federal bureau.

The CHAIRMAN. Federal department.

Doctor FINEGAN. Federal department. Now, why have a Federal department? Why are we for it? I say I am for it because of my experiences. To illustrate-this is only one of hundreds of things which have occurred in my experience-I framed a measure which was introduced into the Legislature of New York to establish a sound unit of control of administration of rural schools. We wanted to go before the legislature with as much information and background upon that measure as was possible to present to the members of the legislature. Now, how did we get it? There was no place in this country where it could be found. The National Education Association did not have it; the Federal Board of Vocational Education did not have it. And all the information which we needed, and which we had to obtain within a few months, we had to dig out ourselves from the limited amount of literature that was available upon the subject.

Now, it may be said, as I believe the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts implied in his questions which he put to some of the previous speakers, that the information which I needed was available at my office in Albany, or, if not, it was available throughout the State. It wasn't collected; it wasn't in the form it was necessary to be in to convince the minds of the members of the legislature. But suppose we did have all the information available relating to this problem in New York. When enacting a law of such vital consequences, a law so fundamental in its character, when going to the legislature with it, we ought to be able to go to that body and say, "Here is the available material and information; here are the things which we think are the ones best adapted to the conditions of our State. We submit the facts to you for your reaction."

I wish to say here that in my experience I have never relied solely upon the opinions and judgments of the expert in education. I would have burnt my fingers a great many times had I done so. But that material when formulated by an expert in education should always be submitted to a layman in education, to the citizen who is accustomed to doing large things, the citizen of vision, to get his reaction, so that through his thoughts and his powers we may penetrate the future and ascertain, so far as possible, the problems which we will be up against after the enactment of that law. It would not have been possible; it was not possible and it is not possible to-day

for the National Education Association, and I am an officer of it; I am one of its trustees, and I say it is not possible for that association to conduct a research bureau of the scope which is essential for the administration of a system of education of the proportions outlined in that admirable paper of Mr. Filene.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Just what one proposition would you go ahead on that needs to be acted upon?

Doctor FINEGAN. The one I have just talked particularly about. Although that occurred 14 years ago, there isn't available to-day sufficient data upon that question of rural schools to enable any expert in education in this country to sit down and formulate a sound bill.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Within 14 years you got information sufficient to satisfy the State of New York, didn't you?

Doctor FINEGAN. Fourteen years?

Mr. DOUGLASS. That is what you said.

Doctor FINEGAN. Yes. What progress has been made in 14 years? Mr. DOUGLASS. In the State of New York?

DOCTOR FINEGAN. Anywhere throughout the country. In formulating a bill for New York, as I said before, we have no right to rely simply upon the data available for New York. We should be able to select the best from nation-wide sources in order to make it valuable to that State.

Mr. DOUGLASS. May I ask how that system of rural education is working out in New York now, after this bill you spoke of had gone into effect?

DOCTOR FINEGAN. Well, there is a little romance and some history to that.

Mr. DOUGLASS. No, but practically speaking, has it worked out all right?

Doctor FINEGAN. It was in operation a year, and the next year it equalized taxation, and the fellow over here in the back district of large valuation, who had been paying small taxes, was the powerful, influential man who made a noise; and the fellow who had been paying high taxes, and now found them lowered, was satisfied and didn't say a word. The result was that the bill was repealed after one year. Mr. DOUGLASS. And that is a condition that you will meet at all times in all localities in all parts of the country, won't you?

Doctor FINEGAN. Well, I would be prepared to meet it. I would have the best information that is available to meet it.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Well, if the people didn't accept the proposition you put forward, how are we going to remedy that state of mind of the people by a Federal act of this kind?

Doctor FINEGAN. In New York it wasn't the people who opposed the act; it was the politicians.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Well, that is all right. They are part of the people, bad as some of them may be. However, popular influence defeated your object.

Doctor FINEGAN. I beg to differ with you. It was not popular information, but popular feeling that was responsible for repeal of the act.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Pardon me. Some local influence defeated your proposition.

Doctor FINEGAN. No; I beg to differ with you there.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Well, what?

Doctor FINEGAN. Here was one man whose taxes had been raised from $125 to $752, and he was a powerful man within the organization of the party who controlled the legislature.

Mr. DOUGLASS. How are we going to remedy such a condition by this bill now under discussion?

Doctor FINEGAN. I didn't tell you that. I am answering your question. Let us keep right to the question. You asked me what the result was of that bill. I told you what the result was. The politicians monkeyed with it. I said to you that we didn't have the data that we should have had when we framed that bill. We haven't got it to-day, and that problem is just as unsettled to-day as it was 14 years ago on the whole question of rural education-not only in New York, but it is just as unsettled in Massachusetts and in each one of the 47 other States of the Union as it was then..

Mr. DOUGLASS. I don't agree with you as to Massachusetts. We are making pretty good progress in Massachusetts as to rural education.

Doctor FINEGAN. And we are making good progress in New York. Mr. DOUGLASS. Do you mean to tell me you are making no progress in New York?

Doctor FINEGAN. I haven't said that. There is no ground on which you could imply that from what I have said.

Mr. DOUGLASS. That is the question. What is the status of rural education in New York?

Doctor FINEGAN. It is in a poor condition.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Is it such that the State of New York can not. remedy the condition?

Doctor FINEGAN. Nobody has said the State of New York can't Nobody else can. New York must remedy it.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Surely.

Doctor FINEGAN. We don't expect Massachusetts to remedy it, or Congress.

Mr. DOUGLASS. You don't expect Massachusetts, which is a part of the country, to help New York with its rural school problem? Doctor FINEGAN. We do not. But here is what we are expecting the country to do, and we think we have the right to expect it. Take the paper of Mr. Filene. He pointed out the business aspect. of education.

Mr. DOUGLASS. The business conditions, yes. We are not dis-cussing that. This committee wants to hear about the educational viewpoint. We do not want to hear about the money it will cost. We want to understand where your bill is going to improve the education of the children of this country. That is what we want to know.. The CHAIRMAN. I just want to ask a question right there. Mr. Douglass has asked about the rural education in the State of New York. Is it not a fact that every county is beset and dedeviled with abandoned farms at the present time?

Doctor FINEGAN. More or less, because they have the old district system. You abandoned it in Massachusetts. You had more vision some years ago, but now you are not going ahead any better than New York is. But now I want to enter into the business aspects,. because they do play a large part in this problem. It was pointed out in this paper that here is a great piece of work being done in the

name of local government, school government throughout the country; that the expenditures run into two and a half billion dollars; and the money invested in school buildings was only four and a half billions.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Just a minute there; that is not a question of education.

Doctor FINEGAN. I have to beg to differ with you.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Isn't that a question of administration by local authorities, what the financing of their schools is?

Doctor FINEGAN. I beg to differ with you. I am willing to make the statement before this committee and before the country that you can not separate the business aspects of education from the technical and professional aspects of education, and that the business aspects, the amount of money put into buildings, the amount of money put into teachers, that goes into the whole maintenance of public schools, is a question that relates to education and education relates to that. Mr. DOUGLASS. Is the National Education Association more interested in the financing of its schools and the salaries paid its teachers than it is in the education of the children?

Doctor FINEGAN. The National Education Association, did you say?

Mr. DOUGLASS. Yes.

Doctor FINEGAN. No. Oh, no. Please, for your own sake, don't make that statement in public.

Mr. DOUGLASSs. I am not making a statement. I am asking you.
Doctor FINEGAN. Why do you ask me such a foolish question?
Mr. DOUGLASS. Because I assume you know.

Doctor FINEGAN. I do know. And I have a right to assume, if you ask such a question, that you don't know.

Mr. DOUGLASS. I am looking for information always, and am glad to get it from New York. Massachusetts is pretty bright itself, but we are always willing to be instructed by New York.

Doctor FINEGAN. We have helped you all we could.

Mr. DOUGLASS. Isn't there back of all this problem the question of finance? Isn't it one of the main issues that you are interested in?

We

Doctor FINEGAN. It doesn't touch it. If the question was put up to-day: Shall we incorporate in this bill a hundred million and put it through the Congress, I would say, "No; don't do it." don't want money, and I want to resent the implication that the million teachers of this country are interested more in the compensation which they receive and in the appropriation which may be made by Congress than they are in the 30,000,000 pupils to whom they are devoting and sacrificing their lives.

Mr. DOUGLASS. I didn't mean to insinuate anything. I merely asked you if that entered into it at all. I just put the question to you, without any insinuation.

Mr. BLACK. Suppose you had this Federal bureau and you were confronted with this same situation you were confronted with, in the repeal of the act which you sponsored. Just what particular benefit would this legislation be, in view of this local situation in opposition to the act?

Doctor FINEGAN. I shall be very glad to tell you. When we formulated our measure at Albany, we called in the leaders in rural educa

« AnteriorContinuar »