Continuity was to be found by arranging courses in better sequence. In a few of the schools it was realized at the beginning that really significant continuity of experience cannot be achieved by any fixed pre-arrangement of courses alone. This year's work must build upon last year's, but no two groups or individuals are the same. Therefore, some schools with unusual insight and understanding attempted to secure continuity of growth by enlisting the students in the work of planning each unit of study in relation to the experiences which had gone before.

Because of their concern for the individual as well as for the whole group, the schools realized that they must know each student well and guide him wisely. They said they should know each one as a person, not just as a student of English or mathematics or as halfback on the football team. Some teacher should know him in these and all other phases of his life, including his home. That teacher should be sensitive, understanding, and wise enough to bring all the appropriate resources of the school and community to bear upon the task of guiding the student in meeting his personal, educational, and vocational problems.

From the beginning the Commission. and the schools recognized their responsibility for measuring, recording, and in reporting the results of their work. They knew this would be difficult. They realized that neither they nor any other schools really knew much about the results of school experience's in the lives of Their students. They had means of measuring accretions of knowledge and development of skills, but they could not be sure of the achievement of other equally important but less tangible purposes. They expected that fuller appraisal of results would facilitate curriculum revision, revealing weaknesses and strengths and providing a sound basis for further change.

As the Study got under way, the Thirty Schools hoped that more satisfactory relations with colleges and universities would be developed. Some schools were sending almost all graduates to college; from others only one in five or six continued his formal education. All the schools were eager to improve their service to both groups. Theoretically, secondary schools were free to meet the needs of the noncollege-going student in any way they wished; but, as has been pointed out, college requirements fixed in most schools the program of studies for all. It was acknowledged that high schools did have a limited range of freedom, but it had to be admitted that they did not use the freedom they possessed and that college prescriptions were often only an excuse for stagnation and inaction.

Now that these requirements were no longer binding on the Thirty Schools, they were under the necessity of proving that they could use freedom creatively and wisely. They were eager to do this, for they believed that the larger measure of freedom which they now had should characterize school and college relations generally. They doubted that success in college depends upon the study of certain subjects for a certain length of time. They questioned the basic assumption upon which college-school relations were based: that only by the study of English, foreign language, mathematics, science, and history could a student be prepared for the work of the liberal arts college.

The schools believed that there are many different avenues of study and experience by way of which young people could develop the skill, understanding, and intellectual maturity necessary for satisfactory achievement at the college level. They were convinced that work in school should have meaning for each student because of its pertinence to his concerns and that such work would develop the powers needed in college. In the formal proposal to colleges and universities, the Commission stated, "We are trying to develop students who regard education as an enduring quest for meanings rather than credit accumulations." The schools were confident that this could be done by basing the secondary school curriculum upon the needs of youth in our society. If the high school helped students to find the meanings of their life experiences, they would go on to college to seek deeper and broader meaning in their maturing experiences. To this end traditional studies would have to be revitalized and re-oriented; much new content would have to be included in the curriculum of school and college.

The schools involved in the Study were quite sure that they could really prepare students for the life and work of college. Most "college preparation" consisted of doing what was necessary to get in. Little thought was given by the student or his teachers to the real purposes in going to college or to the problems of living and working there. These schools took their eyes off the college gates and looked to the fruitful fields beyond.

Everyone involved in the Study was convinced that some means should be found by which teachers in the schools and professors in the colleges should work together in mutual respect, confidence, and understanding. Unless this could be done, the Thirty Schools knew that honest, realistic co-ordination of school and college work would not be achieved.

And so the adventure in pioneering wits begun. To some teachers even in the participating schools the Study was an unnecessary and dangerous innovation; to some college professors "Progressive Education now had enough rope to hang itself"; and to some parents the Study was a source of uneasiness and dissatisfaction. But to most of the teachers in the Thirty Schools and to thousands of educators and parents throughout the nation, it held great promise for the future.

| Previous Page | Top of Page | Next Page | | 8 Year Home | Chapter 1 Home | Index | Email Comment |