FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:[253]The two institutions here are the Kendall School and Gallaudet College, though both really form what is known as the Columbia Institution.[254]In Louisiana full action has not been taken as yet for the creation of a special school for the colored deaf, though this may be expected soon. See Message of Governor, 1908, p. 78. In regard to the value of the schools for the colored, the opinion of the heads of the schools in the Southern states has been ascertained by the Board of Charities of Louisiana. The wisdom of the policy was agreed in by all, and the schools were reported as doing well, as were their graduates. By one superintendent it was stated that "ignorance is costly to the state in more ways than one". Report, 1907, p. 43.[255]In the District of Columbia and West Virginia colored children are sent to Maryland for education.[256]The Maryland School approaches more nearly a state institution, though it is under a self-perpetuating body of trustees.[257]Two schools in Pennsylvania are entirely state institutions, the Home for the Training in Speech and the Pennsylvania Oral School.[258]In a few institutions there are aid or auxiliary societies composed of ladies, usually about fifteen in number, as in the New York Institution, the New York Institution for Improved Instruction, and the Pennsylvania Institution.[259]These fees and dues, as we have seen, are of varying size. Annual membership dues are often $5, and sometimes as high as $25. Life membership fees range from $25 to $100, with corresponding fees for patrons, vice-presidents and others. The highest fee is that of life donor in the New York Institution for Improved Instruction, being $1,000.[260]Dr. I. L. Peet, Proceedings of National Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1883, p. 415.[261]The annual appropriations are from $265 to $360 for each pupil, but not often over $300 or $325.[262]In the case of the Pennsylvania Institution we are advised that theper capitaappropriation is $32 less than the actual cost. See also Report, 1900, p. 9; 1901, p. 10; 1908, p. 10. In the case of the Clarke School, the trustees declare that the state has never paid the school for each pupil the average annual cost of instruction and maintenance, and the legislature is repeatedly asked to increase its appropriations. See Report, 1904, p. 8; 1911, p. 9; 1912, p. 8. Of the American School we are told that the state appropriation "has never been enough to meet the actual cost". Report, 1909, p. 9. In the case of the New York Institution we are advised that the cost per pupil from 1903 to 1913 has ranged from $338 to $415, while the state appropriation has never exceeded $325; and that from 1893 to 1913 $357,579 has been expended for educational purposes, and $500,000 for buildings and equipment, from the school's own funds.[263]On this subject, seeAmerican Journal of Sociology, vii., 1901, p. 359; Report of Superintendent of Charities of District of Columbia, 1891, p. 11; Proceedings of National Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1911, p. 27.[264]As we have noted, Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia have similar arrangements for their colored deaf and blind.[265]In New Mexico, however, where there are schools for both classes, the governor has advised their consolidation, as one institution "could administer to the needs of both". Message, 1907, p. 21.[266]Report of Colorado School, 1908, p. 20. See also Report of Board of Charities of West Virginia, 1910, p. 209.[267]The educators of the blind have particularly arraigned this plan. At one of the first conventions of the American Instructors of the Blind, the following propositions were enunciated: 1. Deaf-mutes and the blind differ from each other more widely than either class differs from those having all the senses; 2. the methods of instruction peculiar to each are entirely unlike and incompatible; 3. the deaf engross the main attention; 4. the development of the blind department is retarded. Proceedings, 1871, p. 87. Educators of the deaf have likewise stated their objections. At an early conference of principals, a resolution was adopted that the arrangement was bad, the methods being entirely different. Proceedings, ii., 1872, pp. 146, 151. See also Report of Michigan School, 1855 (first report), p. 1; 1880, p. 62; Louisiana School, 1870, p. 30. In times past, however, advantages of this arrangement have been pointed out. See Report of California Institution, 1869, p. 15; 1873, p. 19.[268]See individual accounts in William Wade's monograph on the Deaf-Blind, 1901; see alsoNational Magazine, xi., 1857, p. 27;Review of Reviews, xxv., 1902, p. 435; Ohio Bulletin of Charities and Corrections, xiii., 1907, p. 47; Proceedings of American Instructors of the Deaf, xvi., 1901, p. 175ff.;Annals, l., 1905, p. 125.[269]The chief schools where they have been of recent years or are now being instructed are the New York Institution, the Pennsylvania Institution, the Western Pennsylvania Institution, and the schools in Ohio, Mississippi, Kentucky, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Colorado, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. The number in any one school at one time seldom exceeds two or three, most often there being but one.[270]A considerable proportion of such children are rather dumb than deaf, having some oral, as well as mental, defect.[271]On this question, see especially Report of Illinois School, 1860, p. 15; Michigan School, 1887, p. 25; Maryland School, 1885, p. 13; 1897, p. 13; Mississippi School, 1909, p. 24;Minnesota Companion, of Minnesota School, Nov. 22, 1911; Report of Board of Charities of New York, 1912, i., p. 144. Of the Alabama School, it is said that it "has turned away a number of these feeble-minded children during the past two years". Report, 1904, p. 21. In Ohio there are stated to be a hundred such children. Report of Ohio School, 1909, p. 17. In another state there are said to be 150 feeble-minded deaf.Annals, liv., 1909, p. 444.[272]In 1910 the census reported 294 deaf persons in institutions for the feeble-minded, or 1.4 per cent of all their inmates. Insane and Feeble-minded in Institutions, 1914, p. 92. It has also been estimated that five per cent of the deaf are feeble-minded. Proceedings of Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1906, p. 254ff. On the subject of the feeble-minded deaf in institutions, Mr. Cyrus E. White, of the Kansas School, sent letters to the heads of 55 schools, receiving replies from 45. No state, it was found, had made special provision for the feeble-minded deaf. It was the general agreement that they should be in institutions for the feeble-minded, one superintendent declaring that "feeble-mindedness is a better classification than deafness". Another superintendent suggested the establishment of such an institution in a central state, to which the different states could send suitable cases. SeeAnnals, lv., 1910, p. 133. A committee of the Pennsylvania Society for the Advancement of the Deaf has found that all of the three feeble-minded institutions in this state are crowded, and that there is no hope for the feeble-minded deaf in them. Proceedings, xxiv., 1910, p. 9. In one institution for the feeble-minded there are said to be twenty deaf feeble-minded.Annals, liv., 1909, p. 444. In the institution for the feeble-minded in Iowa a special class of such inmates was organized in 1912.Ibid., lviii., 1913, p. 107. It is to be remembered in this connection that in many states there are no institutions for the feeble-minded. Educators of the deaf have often been instrumental in securing the creation of such institutions. See Proceedings of Convention of American Instructors, iv., 1857, p. 227. In a few states, as Illinois, Minnesota and Washington, departments for the feeble-minded have been created in schools for the deaf, the feeble-minded being removed later. In Montana a department is still maintained.[273]The Columbia Institution is considered a corporation, its governing board being composed of nine members, one of whom is a senator appointed by the President of the Senate, and two members of the House appointed by the Speaker, while the President of the United States is patron.[274]In the New York Institution and the New York Institution for Improved Instruction the number is 21, and in the Maryland School, the Pennsylvania Institution and the Western Pennsylvania Institution, 27.[275]Such is the case in Alabama, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Utah. Confirmation by the Senate is also usual with boards of control.[276]On rare occasions a deaf man himself is made a member of the board.[277]In a few states compensation is allowed, as in Indiana, Montana, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia.[278]On the arrangements in the several states, see especiallyAnnals, xlviii., 1903, p. 348; lviii., 1913, p. 327. See also Proceedings of American Instructors, iv., 1857, p. 199; vii., 1870, p. 144; ix., 1878, pp. 195, 217; Report of Royal Commission on the Blind, Deaf and Dumb, etc., 1889, iii., p. 456ff.[279]In certain of these states, however, as Idaho, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, and West Virginia, the boards of charities or central boards have only more or less financial concern, the statutes usually referring to some such connection with the several state institutions, though not always mentioning them by name. In one or two states, as Rhode Island, there is connection with a board of purchases and supplies. In Minnesota there is also a board of visitors for state institutions, exerting rather a moral supervision.[280]The duties of such boards may be indicated from the following extract in a letter to the writer from the Secretary of the Wisconsin Board: The board "appoints the chief officers, purchases all the supplies for the institutions, formulates the provisions under which the institutions are managed, and has almost unlimited power with reference to the institutions". The boards thus have practically complete control of the public institutions of the state, and in some cases state universities have come within their direction. The boards have come especially into favor in states of the West and Middle West. In their favor it is claimed that they secure economy, accuracy, better discipline and more equitable appropriations, introduce business methods, relieve the heads of schools from financial problems, visit other states, and keep in touch with the people. See University of Nebraska Studies, Oct., 1905. The evolution of state control is also here traced. See also Bulletin of Ohio Board of Charities, Dec., 1908, xiv., 6.[281]In Iowa the school for the blind is under the board of education.[282]In nearly all the states the schools were placed at first in the hands of special boards of trustees, with connection with no other bodies, and it was only later that any change was brought about. In some states there have been various experiments in the organization of governing boards and in the number of members they were to contain. Several schools at their beginning have been put under the direction of a state educational institution, as the university in Utah, and the normal school in Oklahoma. In a few states the schools have been placed under certain state officers, as in New Mexico and Oregon. In Washington the first board of trustees of the school consisted of a physician, a lawyer and a practical educator.[283]We have already noted that the colored deaf of the District of Columbia and West Virginia are sent to an outside school.[284]In regard to the organization of the several boards that have to do with the education of the deaf, it may be stated that in some states, as in Ohio and Indiana, the law restricts the number that may be of any one political party. In connection with the government of schools for the deaf, the saddest feature has too often been the political influences which have been allowed to become factors in the conducting of some of them. In certain instances the playing of "politics" has been of serious moment, and with incalculable harm to the work of the schools. In some cases the administration of schools has been considered legitimate spoils to the party in power, and appointments have been made as a matter of reward, and removals as a matter of punishment. The evil effect of such procedure it is hard to overestimate, and indeed in an enlightened land it is even difficult of credence. Public opinion should severely condemn all attempts at political interference in the work of the education of the deaf, and those seeking to promote it should be dealt with befittingly. Happily, however, such conduct seems now on the decline in the schools, and it may earnestly be hoped that the end is not far in the future.

[253]The two institutions here are the Kendall School and Gallaudet College, though both really form what is known as the Columbia Institution.

[254]In Louisiana full action has not been taken as yet for the creation of a special school for the colored deaf, though this may be expected soon. See Message of Governor, 1908, p. 78. In regard to the value of the schools for the colored, the opinion of the heads of the schools in the Southern states has been ascertained by the Board of Charities of Louisiana. The wisdom of the policy was agreed in by all, and the schools were reported as doing well, as were their graduates. By one superintendent it was stated that "ignorance is costly to the state in more ways than one". Report, 1907, p. 43.

[255]In the District of Columbia and West Virginia colored children are sent to Maryland for education.

[256]The Maryland School approaches more nearly a state institution, though it is under a self-perpetuating body of trustees.

[257]Two schools in Pennsylvania are entirely state institutions, the Home for the Training in Speech and the Pennsylvania Oral School.

[258]In a few institutions there are aid or auxiliary societies composed of ladies, usually about fifteen in number, as in the New York Institution, the New York Institution for Improved Instruction, and the Pennsylvania Institution.

[259]These fees and dues, as we have seen, are of varying size. Annual membership dues are often $5, and sometimes as high as $25. Life membership fees range from $25 to $100, with corresponding fees for patrons, vice-presidents and others. The highest fee is that of life donor in the New York Institution for Improved Instruction, being $1,000.

[260]Dr. I. L. Peet, Proceedings of National Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1883, p. 415.

[261]The annual appropriations are from $265 to $360 for each pupil, but not often over $300 or $325.

[262]In the case of the Pennsylvania Institution we are advised that theper capitaappropriation is $32 less than the actual cost. See also Report, 1900, p. 9; 1901, p. 10; 1908, p. 10. In the case of the Clarke School, the trustees declare that the state has never paid the school for each pupil the average annual cost of instruction and maintenance, and the legislature is repeatedly asked to increase its appropriations. See Report, 1904, p. 8; 1911, p. 9; 1912, p. 8. Of the American School we are told that the state appropriation "has never been enough to meet the actual cost". Report, 1909, p. 9. In the case of the New York Institution we are advised that the cost per pupil from 1903 to 1913 has ranged from $338 to $415, while the state appropriation has never exceeded $325; and that from 1893 to 1913 $357,579 has been expended for educational purposes, and $500,000 for buildings and equipment, from the school's own funds.

[263]On this subject, seeAmerican Journal of Sociology, vii., 1901, p. 359; Report of Superintendent of Charities of District of Columbia, 1891, p. 11; Proceedings of National Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1911, p. 27.

[264]As we have noted, Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia have similar arrangements for their colored deaf and blind.

[265]In New Mexico, however, where there are schools for both classes, the governor has advised their consolidation, as one institution "could administer to the needs of both". Message, 1907, p. 21.

[266]Report of Colorado School, 1908, p. 20. See also Report of Board of Charities of West Virginia, 1910, p. 209.

[267]The educators of the blind have particularly arraigned this plan. At one of the first conventions of the American Instructors of the Blind, the following propositions were enunciated: 1. Deaf-mutes and the blind differ from each other more widely than either class differs from those having all the senses; 2. the methods of instruction peculiar to each are entirely unlike and incompatible; 3. the deaf engross the main attention; 4. the development of the blind department is retarded. Proceedings, 1871, p. 87. Educators of the deaf have likewise stated their objections. At an early conference of principals, a resolution was adopted that the arrangement was bad, the methods being entirely different. Proceedings, ii., 1872, pp. 146, 151. See also Report of Michigan School, 1855 (first report), p. 1; 1880, p. 62; Louisiana School, 1870, p. 30. In times past, however, advantages of this arrangement have been pointed out. See Report of California Institution, 1869, p. 15; 1873, p. 19.

[268]See individual accounts in William Wade's monograph on the Deaf-Blind, 1901; see alsoNational Magazine, xi., 1857, p. 27;Review of Reviews, xxv., 1902, p. 435; Ohio Bulletin of Charities and Corrections, xiii., 1907, p. 47; Proceedings of American Instructors of the Deaf, xvi., 1901, p. 175ff.;Annals, l., 1905, p. 125.

[269]The chief schools where they have been of recent years or are now being instructed are the New York Institution, the Pennsylvania Institution, the Western Pennsylvania Institution, and the schools in Ohio, Mississippi, Kentucky, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Colorado, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. The number in any one school at one time seldom exceeds two or three, most often there being but one.

[270]A considerable proportion of such children are rather dumb than deaf, having some oral, as well as mental, defect.

[271]On this question, see especially Report of Illinois School, 1860, p. 15; Michigan School, 1887, p. 25; Maryland School, 1885, p. 13; 1897, p. 13; Mississippi School, 1909, p. 24;Minnesota Companion, of Minnesota School, Nov. 22, 1911; Report of Board of Charities of New York, 1912, i., p. 144. Of the Alabama School, it is said that it "has turned away a number of these feeble-minded children during the past two years". Report, 1904, p. 21. In Ohio there are stated to be a hundred such children. Report of Ohio School, 1909, p. 17. In another state there are said to be 150 feeble-minded deaf.Annals, liv., 1909, p. 444.

[272]In 1910 the census reported 294 deaf persons in institutions for the feeble-minded, or 1.4 per cent of all their inmates. Insane and Feeble-minded in Institutions, 1914, p. 92. It has also been estimated that five per cent of the deaf are feeble-minded. Proceedings of Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1906, p. 254ff. On the subject of the feeble-minded deaf in institutions, Mr. Cyrus E. White, of the Kansas School, sent letters to the heads of 55 schools, receiving replies from 45. No state, it was found, had made special provision for the feeble-minded deaf. It was the general agreement that they should be in institutions for the feeble-minded, one superintendent declaring that "feeble-mindedness is a better classification than deafness". Another superintendent suggested the establishment of such an institution in a central state, to which the different states could send suitable cases. SeeAnnals, lv., 1910, p. 133. A committee of the Pennsylvania Society for the Advancement of the Deaf has found that all of the three feeble-minded institutions in this state are crowded, and that there is no hope for the feeble-minded deaf in them. Proceedings, xxiv., 1910, p. 9. In one institution for the feeble-minded there are said to be twenty deaf feeble-minded.Annals, liv., 1909, p. 444. In the institution for the feeble-minded in Iowa a special class of such inmates was organized in 1912.Ibid., lviii., 1913, p. 107. It is to be remembered in this connection that in many states there are no institutions for the feeble-minded. Educators of the deaf have often been instrumental in securing the creation of such institutions. See Proceedings of Convention of American Instructors, iv., 1857, p. 227. In a few states, as Illinois, Minnesota and Washington, departments for the feeble-minded have been created in schools for the deaf, the feeble-minded being removed later. In Montana a department is still maintained.

[273]The Columbia Institution is considered a corporation, its governing board being composed of nine members, one of whom is a senator appointed by the President of the Senate, and two members of the House appointed by the Speaker, while the President of the United States is patron.

[274]In the New York Institution and the New York Institution for Improved Instruction the number is 21, and in the Maryland School, the Pennsylvania Institution and the Western Pennsylvania Institution, 27.

[275]Such is the case in Alabama, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Utah. Confirmation by the Senate is also usual with boards of control.

[276]On rare occasions a deaf man himself is made a member of the board.

[277]In a few states compensation is allowed, as in Indiana, Montana, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia.

[278]On the arrangements in the several states, see especiallyAnnals, xlviii., 1903, p. 348; lviii., 1913, p. 327. See also Proceedings of American Instructors, iv., 1857, p. 199; vii., 1870, p. 144; ix., 1878, pp. 195, 217; Report of Royal Commission on the Blind, Deaf and Dumb, etc., 1889, iii., p. 456ff.

[279]In certain of these states, however, as Idaho, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, and West Virginia, the boards of charities or central boards have only more or less financial concern, the statutes usually referring to some such connection with the several state institutions, though not always mentioning them by name. In one or two states, as Rhode Island, there is connection with a board of purchases and supplies. In Minnesota there is also a board of visitors for state institutions, exerting rather a moral supervision.

[280]The duties of such boards may be indicated from the following extract in a letter to the writer from the Secretary of the Wisconsin Board: The board "appoints the chief officers, purchases all the supplies for the institutions, formulates the provisions under which the institutions are managed, and has almost unlimited power with reference to the institutions". The boards thus have practically complete control of the public institutions of the state, and in some cases state universities have come within their direction. The boards have come especially into favor in states of the West and Middle West. In their favor it is claimed that they secure economy, accuracy, better discipline and more equitable appropriations, introduce business methods, relieve the heads of schools from financial problems, visit other states, and keep in touch with the people. See University of Nebraska Studies, Oct., 1905. The evolution of state control is also here traced. See also Bulletin of Ohio Board of Charities, Dec., 1908, xiv., 6.

[281]In Iowa the school for the blind is under the board of education.

[282]In nearly all the states the schools were placed at first in the hands of special boards of trustees, with connection with no other bodies, and it was only later that any change was brought about. In some states there have been various experiments in the organization of governing boards and in the number of members they were to contain. Several schools at their beginning have been put under the direction of a state educational institution, as the university in Utah, and the normal school in Oklahoma. In a few states the schools have been placed under certain state officers, as in New Mexico and Oregon. In Washington the first board of trustees of the school consisted of a physician, a lawyer and a practical educator.

[283]We have already noted that the colored deaf of the District of Columbia and West Virginia are sent to an outside school.

[284]In regard to the organization of the several boards that have to do with the education of the deaf, it may be stated that in some states, as in Ohio and Indiana, the law restricts the number that may be of any one political party. In connection with the government of schools for the deaf, the saddest feature has too often been the political influences which have been allowed to become factors in the conducting of some of them. In certain instances the playing of "politics" has been of serious moment, and with incalculable harm to the work of the schools. In some cases the administration of schools has been considered legitimate spoils to the party in power, and appointments have been made as a matter of reward, and removals as a matter of punishment. The evil effect of such procedure it is hard to overestimate, and indeed in an enlightened land it is even difficult of credence. Public opinion should severely condemn all attempts at political interference in the work of the education of the deaf, and those seeking to promote it should be dealt with befittingly. Happily, however, such conduct seems now on the decline in the schools, and it may earnestly be hoped that the end is not far in the future.

A smallnumber of the institutions for the deaf had begun as day schools, the pupils living away from the school outside school hours, and had continued so for a longer or shorter period. The schools were then in an experimental stage, and this plan came first to hand. In the course of time it was found that this feature was not practicable, as the pupils were often far scattered, and the boarding arrangement was accordingly adopted.[285]This was the policy finally chosen in all the states having schools. Later, however, when the states had grown in population, and in some of the cities there were found not a few deaf children, the demand was renewed for day schools.[286]The resulthas been the beginning and development of a system of day schools in a number of states; and they have come to occupy part of the field formerly covered by the state institutions alone.

Of the day schools now existing, the Horace Mann School, of Boston, which was established in 1869, is accredited with being the initial one.[287]Two others were opened before 1890, while from 1891 to 1900 there were 22 started, and since 1901, 40, making 65 in all now.[288]These schools are found in fourteen states, but the movement has reached its greatest growth in the Middle West, especially in Wisconsin and Michigan. In some of the states special laws have been enacted, providing for the establishment of day schools.[289]

The day school for the deaf is still sometimes regarded as an experiment, while its advocates insist that its success has been demonstrated.Among school authorities in cities especially, pleas for the establishment of day schools are often listened to with favor, and there is frequently a tendency to give them at least a trial. General bodies interested in education or the public welfare are likewise inclined to countenance day schools, largely for the reason that they are opposed to the institution idea, and would place as many children as possible in the regular schools. An illustration of this view is found in the Report on Children of the National Conference of Charities and Corrections in 1906.[290]

Institutional care of healthy, normal children is objectionable.... Institutional care for educational purposes is necessary for a portion of the deaf and blind children ... but it is recognized that in large cities public schools can be provided for many deaf and blind children.

By some it is believed that in time the day school will supplant the large institution, so far at least as large cities are concerned, and that the deaf, and the blind as well, will not be differentiated from the pupils in the regular schools. Separate apartments and special teachers will be provided for them, but in all public school systems these classes will be actual factors.

On the other hand, it is maintained that there is an abundant field for both day school and institution.The former should only supplement the work of the latter, especially in reaching children that cannot otherwise be brought into school. The reason why the day school is called into being is thus given by an educational authority of one city:[291]

Institutions that care for these children throughout the entire year, that feed, clothe and educate them, that render skilful and prompt medical attention, and afford uplifting social advantages—all under one roof—have a worthy place under our social and educational systems; but these institutions cannot care for all the unfortunate children in need of education.

It is also suggested that it might be arranged that day schools should keep pupils during their early years, as from five to nine years of age, after which time they could enter the institution, and be placed in graded classes and in a suitable trade school.[292]Hence it is pointed out that the day school and institution should not be antagonistic, that their interests are common at bottom, and that they should work hand in hand, without friction or misunderstanding.

The day school plan has not as yet been followed in a large number of states; yet as these schools are being looked upon with more and more favor by city boards of education, and as in the centers of population there is said to be a need for them, it is not improbable that they may be extended much farther in the future. It is doubtful, however, if very soon they will spread beyond the large cities; and states without great cities may be without such schools for many years at least.[293]

The day schools, numbering 65 in all, as we have seen, are found in the states of California, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Washington, and Wisconsin. In Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, and Oregon each there is but one school, in New Jersey and Washington each 2, in New York 3, in California 4, in Ohio and Illinois each 5, in Michigan 14, and in Wisconsin 24. Where only one day school is found in a state, it is located usually in the largest city (Atlanta, New Orleans, Boston, St. Paul, St. Louis, and Portland), while the two schools ofNew Jersey are in Newark and Jersey City, the two of Washington in Seattle and Tacoma, and the three of New York in New York City. Of the five schools in Illinois, four are in Chicago.

In six of these states, namely, California, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, and Wisconsin, there are special state laws under which the schools are established and operated.[294]By such laws it is generally provided that where there are a certain number of deaf children, usually three,[295]a school may, on application of the local school trustees or district board, be organized by the state department of education.[296]The minimum age for such children is often three. A stated sum is frequently allowed for each pupil, as $150.[297]In the remaining eight states the schools are organized and directed by local school authorities, without assistance from legislative statute.

These schools are supported by local funds or by state and local funds together. The latter is the more common procedure, and in the caseof schools operating under a state law, it is the usual, but not the necessary, practice. The schools in six states, namely, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, and New York, are thus maintained only by local funds of the city or county, the remainder receiving aid in whole or in part from the state.[298]The school in Minnesota and one in California are aided by private contributions. In nearly all cases carfare is provided to and from school when necessary.

In the day schools special buildings are not usually provided, separate classes being created in the regular school buildings; but in some of the larger cities there are special buildings, known as distinct schools, in which the class-rooms are for the different grades of deaf pupils.

The number of pupils in the day schools in 1912-1913 was 1,942. The smallest schools have but three pupils, while the largest one, in Chicago, has 307, the number usually depending on the size of the city. The method employed in the day schools is exclusively the oral with but two exceptions.[299]In all but a few certain industries are also taught, or more or less of manual training is given.

The great argument for the day school is that it is not well that children be "institutionalized." The institution life is said not to be the normal life, and its habits and associations are not in accord with the principles now being largely held in America. It is coming to be more and more realized that the home should always be the center of interest and attachment in the well established community, and that the character and influence of the family should be maintained unimpaired. In connection with orphan and other child-caring agencies, a greater emphasis than ever before is being put on the question of how to reduce the life to one of normality, and the "placing-out" of dependent children in homes where they can grow up as normal children is now a popular faith. The great watchword to-day in intelligent and constructive philanthropy is the "ideal of the normal," and it is on this ground that the institution is declared to be removed from the standard of the highest interests of society. Even though a child should profit in the institution, and even though he should be sent out into the world strong and self-reliant, yet while in the institution, he is out of line, and is just so far displaced from the ideal of the normal; and even though the institution is cleanlier, more sanitary and otherwise better equipped than thequarters from which the child comes, still the institution cannot be justified, for no solution can be acceptable if in the end it results in the breaking up of the home.[300]

More specific charges are also brought against the institution. Here life for the inmates is made too easy, and little can be known by them of the actual struggles of the world. The life is machine-like, and all is routine clockwork. By the discipline, which is necessary, much of the spontaneity of growing children is destroyed, and the surroundings are pervaded with the spirit of uniformity, "solidarity" and "dead levelism." On the other hand, the children fail to learn many important lessons in domestic economy which would be before them every day in the home; and they lose the attitude towards life, morally and socially, which is given by the home.[301]

The arguments for the day school may be stated more concretely yet. The special day school may be co-ordinated with, or made a part of, the state's educational system, standing on a level with its other schools. Deaf children here come to feel their place in the normal world, whilepeople in general become more ready to regard them in a proper manner. These children at the same time are not made strangers to their own family circles and communities; and certain ones, by a school nearer home and consequently more acceptable to their parents, may be reached who would otherwise possibly never enter an institution.

In the way of cost the balance is distinctly on the side of the day school. With no costly special plant necessary, and with no charges to be incurred for food supplies, attendants and the like, it appears to decided advantage in the matter of economy in comparison with an institution; and its normal expenditures approach nearer those of the regular schools. At present the difference between the cost per pupil in the day schools and in the institutions is the difference between $120 and $277.[302]

The argument against the day school rests upon the fact that the deaf form, educationally, a special class, very small in most communities, who have to be reached by unusual methods. To them the large institution offers advantages not likely to be had outside. For this reason the case against the institution, however cogent and logical it may be in general, cannot well apply.

In the institution the children may be under intelligent supervision and direction their entire time, and they may be able to get, outside school hours, a part of the education which the hearing child so naturally acquires, for in an institution learning continues outside the classroom as well as within. The "picking up" of knowledge and bits of information, which the hearing child begins to make use of from the time he first hears human words, and the importance and value of which the general public cannot be expected to appreciate, is lost in the greatest measure to the deaf in the home. Here ready means of communication are lacking, and the necessary care and attention cannot be expected to be given in the household. Even though deaf children can and do mingle with their hearing acquaintances,they cannot get so much happiness or zest out of their sports and intercourse as they can with their own deaf comrades; and while, no matter what their surroundings are, the difficulties of most of them in mastering language will never be overcome, still in associations with similar deaf children there will be far more stimuli to react on their consciousness, and the tendency will be for them to become more and more in their mental actions like the normal. In the home there can be no great assurance of study and supervision; and the growing deaf child, not being able to appreciate the forces that surround him as the hearing child does, may the more easily fall under unwholesome influences. In the institution there can be suitable discipline, regular attendance, enlightened general oversight, and co-ordination of all that is concerned in the child's proper development. Furthermore, although there may be a growing feeling against the institution life, there is, on the other hand, an increasing social questioning as to the advisability of a child's remaining in a particular home if his welfare is not properly safeguarded.

In many day schools there are comparatively few pupils, and in most of these we cannot expect to find the carefully graded classes, with a place for every pupil according to his needs, bright or dull, quick to learn or slow. A pupilin a day school, if not neglected to some extent, may be required to do work for which he is quite unfitted, being either beyond it or incapable of it. The backward child will here be the worst sufferer, for if there are but few classes, he can get little of the special attention he needs; and his progress cannot be the same as when in a class of like pupils and under an appropriate and patient teacher.

Again, the attention that is given in an institution with a considerable number of pupils to the learning of a trade—accounting in strong measure for success in after life—means much more to a deaf child than it could to any other. In an institution there will usually be found larger equipment, fuller apparatus and more varied lines than in any but a very large day school; and in its trade department habits of industry will be formed, talents developed, a knowledge of mechanism and the use of tools implanted, an ardor enkindled for the mastership of a trade, and an appreciation of the part to be played in the great world of industrial activity, besides the incentive of being in a great workshop with other workers—all in far greater measure and more effectively than would be possible anywhere else, save in a great trade school, in which there could not be expected to be taken the special care and provisionnecessitated by the want of hearing of the pupils.

Finally, it may be said that we have no evidence, as respects institutions for the deaf, to show that they have in any way undermined the character or mission of the home, or that their results have been other than desirable in a well-ordered state. Hence we are told, in a word, that no matter how strong and valid are the theoretical objections to an institution, yet so far as the practical issues are concerned, in the preparation of the deaf for the world, and in what really counts for their development and progress, the institution, for many at least, occupies a position of demonstrated usefulness, recognition of which cannot rightly be withheld.[303]

Thus far in this chapter we have discussed day schools in relation to children, that is, pupils in the usual sense. But there is another form of day schools to which attention is to be directed. This is in the creation of evening day schools forthe use of adults only, the field open to which is as yet apparently but little realized.

Occasion for such schools arises chiefly in communities, especially large cities, where a considerable number of adult deaf persons are within reach, and where a real need may often be found. The matter is to be regarded in effect as the extension of the means of education by the state to include as large a part of the population as possible—a movement which is being so notably evidenced in the opening of evening schools of not a few kinds in cities to-day. With the deaf the demand is of a peculiar nature. Their avenues for receiving instruction are materially restricted, and for some, especially the congenitally deaf, the acquisition of correct language always remains a difficult problem, while to others the advantages of the regular schools may have been limited. A large number of the deaf will not require such special opportunities, but for a portion of them the assistance may be of quite substantial character.[304]

FOOTNOTES:[285]The New York Institution, the Pennsylvania Institution and the Western Pennsylvania Institution notably started out as day schools, the first remaining so for eleven years. In some of the institutions also there have been at times day school pupils in attendance.[286]Day schools have, moreover, been fostered and supported to a great extent by advocates of what is known as the oral method, in opposition to the manual, or sign method, which had been largely the method hitherto employed in the institutions. The day school may even be said to have entered the field in part as a protest against this method.[287]A day school was started in Pittsburg two months previously; but it was soon made into the Western Pennsylvania Institution.Annals, xv., 1870, p. 165.[288]A number of day schools which were started have been discontinued, but there were never so many as at present.[289]Wisconsin was the first state to have a day school law, which was enacted in 1885. Bills were offered in 1881 and 1883, but were defeated. The movement in this state has been in large part due to the activities of the Wisconsin Phonological Institute to Promote the Teaching of Speech to the Deaf, an organization formed in 1879. The question has even been considered in this state of abolishing the state school as a boarding institution. SeePublic Opinion, xxv., 1898, no. 16;Association Review, iii., 1901, p. 193.[290]Proceedings, p. 88.[291]Mr. C. W. Edson, Associate Superintendent of Schools of New York,Charities and the Commons, xix., 1908, p. 1357. See also Report of Illinois Institution, 1874, p. 65.[292]See Report of Washington State School, 1910, p. 6. A like solution was offered before the National Educational Association in 1903. Certain children might be "trained in special schools and live at home if possible up to the age of adolescence, when they may acquire trades at special institutions maintained by the state". Proceedings, p. 1004.[293]It is to be remembered that in Michigan and Wisconsin schools have, under the operation of the state law, been organized in comparatively small towns.[294]Efforts have been made in several other states to secure laws. In Ohio in 1902 the state law was declared unconstitutional, as being class legislation in granting special aid to the cities of Cleveland and Cincinnati. See Report of Ohio School, 1903, p. 14.[295]In California the number is five, and in New Jersey ten.[296]In Ohio the state commissioner of education may appoint and remove teachers, and inspect schools. In Wisconsin the state superintendent appoints inspectors, and the county judge may compel the establishment of schools.[297]In Wisconsin $100 additional is allowed for the board of children who move to a town to attend a school.[298]In Massachusetts a direct appropriation of $150per capitais made by the state.[299]The methods employed in the instruction of the deaf are treated of inChapter XIX.[300]The importance of this is accentuated in the present apprehensions concerning the dissolving and loosening of the ties of the home, indicated in more ways than one in present programs of social work.[301]See A. G. Warner, "American Charities", rev. ed., 1908, p. 283; R. R. Reeder, "How Two Hundred Children Live and Learn", 1910, pp. 57, 88; "Philanthropy and Social Progress", 1893, p. 172ff.[302]It is claimed that in Wisconsin with the centralization plan of a state institution one-third of the deaf children failed to be reached, and that by the day school there is a saving to the state of $20,000 a year. Proceedings of National Educational Association, 1907, p. 986. See alsoibid., 1897, p. 96; 1901, p. 870; 1910, p. 1039; Report of United States Commissioner of Education, 1881, p. ccxi.; P. A. Emery, "Plea for Early Mute Education," 1884; Improvement of the Wisconsin System of Education of Deaf Children, 1894; Public School Classes for Deaf Children: Open Letter from Chicago Association of Parents of Deaf Children, 1897; Michigan Day Schools for the Deaf, 1908; Report of Superintendent of Public Instruction of Michigan, 1909, p. 61; Report of Department of Public Instruction of Wisconsin, 1910, p. 60; Report of Board of Education of Chicago, 1912, p. 155; A. J. Winnie, "History and Handbook of Day Schools for the Deaf", Wisconsin, 1912;Annals, xx., 1875, p. 34;Association Review, ii., 1900, p. 248; viii., 1906, p. 136; xi., 1909, p. 30;Volta Review, xiii., 1911, p. 292;Independent, lxxiv., 1913, p. 1140.[303]SeeAnnals, xxvii., 1882, p. 182; xxix., 1884, pp. 165, 312; xxx., 1885, p. 121; l., 1905, p. 70; lvi., 1911, p. 91;Volta Review, xv., 1913, p. 180; Proceedings of Convention of American Instructors, vii., 1870, p. 114; xiv., 1895, pp. 130, 350; Conference of Principals, vi., 1888, p. 202; viii., 1904, p. 70; Minnesota Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1898, p. 88; Report of Iowa School, 1885, p. 16; Pennsylvania Institution, 1903, p. 38; California School, 1904, p. 20.[304]One or two evening schools have been started in the past, to be discontinued after a few years, both under private and under public auspices. In the consideration, however, of any general scheme for evening schools it should be arranged that the work of the regular schools for the deaf is not infringed upon, and that pupils in these schools should not have before them the temptation of leaving prematurely, with the expectation of making up later. Probably the safest plan would be the securing of a satisfactory compulsory attendance law before evening schools are attempted upon a broad scale.

[285]The New York Institution, the Pennsylvania Institution and the Western Pennsylvania Institution notably started out as day schools, the first remaining so for eleven years. In some of the institutions also there have been at times day school pupils in attendance.

[286]Day schools have, moreover, been fostered and supported to a great extent by advocates of what is known as the oral method, in opposition to the manual, or sign method, which had been largely the method hitherto employed in the institutions. The day school may even be said to have entered the field in part as a protest against this method.

[287]A day school was started in Pittsburg two months previously; but it was soon made into the Western Pennsylvania Institution.Annals, xv., 1870, p. 165.

[288]A number of day schools which were started have been discontinued, but there were never so many as at present.

[289]Wisconsin was the first state to have a day school law, which was enacted in 1885. Bills were offered in 1881 and 1883, but were defeated. The movement in this state has been in large part due to the activities of the Wisconsin Phonological Institute to Promote the Teaching of Speech to the Deaf, an organization formed in 1879. The question has even been considered in this state of abolishing the state school as a boarding institution. SeePublic Opinion, xxv., 1898, no. 16;Association Review, iii., 1901, p. 193.

[290]Proceedings, p. 88.

[291]Mr. C. W. Edson, Associate Superintendent of Schools of New York,Charities and the Commons, xix., 1908, p. 1357. See also Report of Illinois Institution, 1874, p. 65.

[292]See Report of Washington State School, 1910, p. 6. A like solution was offered before the National Educational Association in 1903. Certain children might be "trained in special schools and live at home if possible up to the age of adolescence, when they may acquire trades at special institutions maintained by the state". Proceedings, p. 1004.

[293]It is to be remembered that in Michigan and Wisconsin schools have, under the operation of the state law, been organized in comparatively small towns.

[294]Efforts have been made in several other states to secure laws. In Ohio in 1902 the state law was declared unconstitutional, as being class legislation in granting special aid to the cities of Cleveland and Cincinnati. See Report of Ohio School, 1903, p. 14.

[295]In California the number is five, and in New Jersey ten.

[296]In Ohio the state commissioner of education may appoint and remove teachers, and inspect schools. In Wisconsin the state superintendent appoints inspectors, and the county judge may compel the establishment of schools.

[297]In Wisconsin $100 additional is allowed for the board of children who move to a town to attend a school.

[298]In Massachusetts a direct appropriation of $150per capitais made by the state.

[299]The methods employed in the instruction of the deaf are treated of inChapter XIX.

[300]The importance of this is accentuated in the present apprehensions concerning the dissolving and loosening of the ties of the home, indicated in more ways than one in present programs of social work.

[301]See A. G. Warner, "American Charities", rev. ed., 1908, p. 283; R. R. Reeder, "How Two Hundred Children Live and Learn", 1910, pp. 57, 88; "Philanthropy and Social Progress", 1893, p. 172ff.

[302]It is claimed that in Wisconsin with the centralization plan of a state institution one-third of the deaf children failed to be reached, and that by the day school there is a saving to the state of $20,000 a year. Proceedings of National Educational Association, 1907, p. 986. See alsoibid., 1897, p. 96; 1901, p. 870; 1910, p. 1039; Report of United States Commissioner of Education, 1881, p. ccxi.; P. A. Emery, "Plea for Early Mute Education," 1884; Improvement of the Wisconsin System of Education of Deaf Children, 1894; Public School Classes for Deaf Children: Open Letter from Chicago Association of Parents of Deaf Children, 1897; Michigan Day Schools for the Deaf, 1908; Report of Superintendent of Public Instruction of Michigan, 1909, p. 61; Report of Department of Public Instruction of Wisconsin, 1910, p. 60; Report of Board of Education of Chicago, 1912, p. 155; A. J. Winnie, "History and Handbook of Day Schools for the Deaf", Wisconsin, 1912;Annals, xx., 1875, p. 34;Association Review, ii., 1900, p. 248; viii., 1906, p. 136; xi., 1909, p. 30;Volta Review, xiii., 1911, p. 292;Independent, lxxiv., 1913, p. 1140.

[303]SeeAnnals, xxvii., 1882, p. 182; xxix., 1884, pp. 165, 312; xxx., 1885, p. 121; l., 1905, p. 70; lvi., 1911, p. 91;Volta Review, xv., 1913, p. 180; Proceedings of Convention of American Instructors, vii., 1870, p. 114; xiv., 1895, pp. 130, 350; Conference of Principals, vi., 1888, p. 202; viii., 1904, p. 70; Minnesota Conference of Charities and Corrections, 1898, p. 88; Report of Iowa School, 1885, p. 16; Pennsylvania Institution, 1903, p. 38; California School, 1904, p. 20.

[304]One or two evening schools have been started in the past, to be discontinued after a few years, both under private and under public auspices. In the consideration, however, of any general scheme for evening schools it should be arranged that the work of the regular schools for the deaf is not infringed upon, and that pupils in these schools should not have before them the temptation of leaving prematurely, with the expectation of making up later. Probably the safest plan would be the securing of a satisfactory compulsory attendance law before evening schools are attempted upon a broad scale.

Inaddition to the state institutions and the day schools, there have been established in America certain schools for the deaf which are strictly under private management, and, as a rule, not subject to the immediate control and direction of the state. These are of two kinds: 1. denominational schools, maintained by some religious body; and 2. schools conducted as purely private and secular affairs. Such schools now number twenty-one, ten denominational and eleven private, all in 1912-1913 having 638 pupils. Most are of comparatively recent date, the first having been established in 1873, and nine since 1901.[305]

The denominational schools are found in California, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin,there being two in Pennsylvania. They are for the most part boarding institutions, in a few cases being departments of larger institutions. Their controlling purpose is to surround their pupils with religious influences, and to provide them with religious instruction. All but one are under Roman Catholic auspices, as a usual thing in the hands of the Sisters. The single Protestant school is in the care of the Lutheran Church, and is controlled by the synod, with the direct management vested in a board of trustees. These schools are supported by denominational funds, by voluntary contributions, and in a small measure by tuition fees. In some of the schools, as in Maryland and Pennsylvania, there is state aid to a small extent. The fees paid by pupils are never high, and not many in the schools pay the full amount, though inability to pay is never allowed to keep any away who wish to attend.[306]

The eleven non-denominational schools may bethemselves divided into two classes: those which are really homes for very young deaf children, sometimes under the control of a society organized for the purpose; and those which are purely private enterprises, owned and directed by one or more individuals. Of the former there are four homes or kindergartens—the Sarah Fuller Home of Boston, the McCowen Homes of Chicago, the Home School near Baltimore, and the Home School of San Francisco.[307]Their main object is to give their pupils an early start in the use of speech as well as to provide a home, and children as young as three, or even younger, may be admitted. The management of these schools is usually in the hands of trustees. Support is derived largely from the fees of pupils, though some schools are often the recipients of private donations, especially when children are taken without charge; and one or two have aid from public allowances.[308]

The private schools of the second class are almost entirely dependent on tuition fees, though one or two likewise receive some state aid. With two exceptions,[309]they are found in large cities, New York having two, and Philadelphia,Baltimore and Cincinnati one each. These schools are both boarding and day schools.

The method employed in the private schools is nearly always the oral, and this is the method also of some of the denominational schools. In some of the schools of both classes manual training and instruction in trades are given to an extent.

Back to Index Next