There is in no sense any intention here to condone the large number of failures simply because it is pointed out that they do not operate chiefly to cause elimination from school. The above facts may lead to some such conviction as that expressed by Wooley,[33] after giving especial attention to those who had left school, that "the real force that is sending a majority of these children out into the industrial field is their own desire to go to work, and behind this desire is frequently the dissatisfaction with school." A somewhat similar conviction seems to be shared by King,[35] in saying that "the pupil who yields unwillingly to the narrow round of school tasks ... will grasp at almost any pretext to quit school." W.F. Book tabulated the reasons why pupils leave high school,[36] as given by 1,051 pupils. He found that discouragement, loss of interest, and disappointment affect more pupils than all the other causes combined. Likewise Bronner notes[37] that the "irrational" sameness of school procedure for all pupils often leads to "serious loss of interest in school work, discouragement, truancy, and disciplinary problems." Still it may be that the worst consequences of multiplied failures are not to those dropping out. W.D. Lewis observes[38] that the failing pupil "speedily comes to accept himself as a failure," and that "the disaster to many who stay in the schools is greater than to those who are shoved out."
To the same point Ha.n.u.s tells[39] us that "during the school period aversion and evasion are more frequently cultivated than power and skill, through the forced pursuit of uninteresting subjects." A pupil who acquires the habit of failing and the att.i.tude of accepting it as a necessary evil may soon give up trying to win and become satisfied to accept himself as less gifted, or even to accept life in general as necessarily a matter of repeated failures. In a similar connection, James E. Russell says,[40] "the boy who becomes accustomed to second place soon fails to think at his best." Such psychological results in regard to habits and att.i.tude accruing from repeated failures are both certain and insidious. And an education which purports to be for all and to offer the highest training to each must abandon the inculcation of att.i.tudes of mind so detrimental to the individual and to the very society which educates him.
4. THE PERCENTAGES THAT THE NON-GRADUATE GROUPS FORM OF THE PUPILS WHO HAVE EACH SUCCESSIVELY HIGHER NUMBER OF FAILURES
By merely adding the columns of totals for Tables VIII and IX, we are able to obtain the full number of pupils who have each number of failures from 1 to 25. We may readily secure the percentages for the non-graduates in each of these groups by referring again to the numbers in the totals column of Table IX. The following series of percentages are thus obtained.
THE PERCENTAGE FORMED BY NON-GRADUATES WITH 0, 1, 2, 3, ETC., FAILURES ON THE TOTAL NUMBER WHO HAVE 0, 1, 2, 3, ETC., FAILURES
No. of Failures 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Per Cent 68.4 65.7 68.5 77.2 69.0 68.0 70.6 67.3 63.5
No. of Failures 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17+ Per Cent 61.8 63.6 69.0 61.2 66.0 65.3 70.0 61.5 69.4
That these percentages would be higher for the non-graduates than for the graduates (that is, above 50 per cent) would certainly be expected by a glance at their higher numbers in every group of their distribution. But it would hardly be expected by most of us that the percentages would show no general tendency to rise as the failures per pupil increase in number, yet such is the truth as found here. The reverse of these facts was found by Aaron I. Dotey, with a smaller group of high school pupils[41] (1,397), studied in one of the New York City high schools. Still he also a.s.serts that failure in studies is not a cause of elimination to the extent that it is generally supposed to be. We may gain some advantage for judging the general tendency of the extended and varied series of percentages above, by computing them in groups of larger size, thus yielding a briefer series, as follows:
(A CONDENSED FORM OF THE PRECEDING STATEMENT)
No. of Failures 0 1 to 4 5 to 8 9 to 12 13 to 16 17 to 25 Per Cent 68.4 67.6 67.3 63.9 65.7 69.4
Not only do the percentages of non-graduates not increase relatively as the numbers of failure go higher, but there is a slight general decline in these percentages until we reach "17 or more" failures per pupil.
Then for "17 to 25" failures per pupil there is an increase of only 1 per cent over that for failures. The number of failures does not seem directly to condition the pupil"s ability to graduate or to continue to in school.
5. TIME EXTENSION FOR THE FAILING GRADUATES
We shall now inquire further what extension of time for graduating characterizes the failing graduates in comparison with the non-failing ones.
The distribution according to the period for graduation for the 1,936 pupils who graduate was shown by the summary lines of Table VIII. In the same table the non-failing graduates are included (but distinct).
No pupil graduates in less than three years and none takes longer than six years; 9.8 per cent of the number finish in less than 4 years; 19.7 per cent take more than 4 years. The small number that finish earlier than four years may be due in part to the single annual graduation in several of the schools. Some of the schools admitting two cla.s.ses each year graduated only one, and the records made it plain that some pupils had a half year more credit than was needed for graduating.
Considering, however, that about 42 per cent of the graduates had no failures, they should have been able to speed up more on the time period of getting through. They were doubtless not unable to do that.
But some princ.i.p.als hold the conviction that four years will result in a rounding out of the pupil more than commensurate with the extended time. More than 35 per cent of those who did finish in less than four years are graduates who had failed from 1 to 11 times. In the conventional period of four years 77 per cent of the non-failing and 64 per cent of the failing graduates complete their work and graduate (see p. 59, for the means employed). The percentages of non-failing graduates for each time period are given below.
THE PERCENTAGES OF NON-FAILING GRADUATES FOR EACH PERIOD
Time Period in Years 3 4 5 6 Per Cent of Non-Failing 80.4 50.0 46.5 19.3 13.3 .. ..
This continuous decline of percentages representing the non-failing graduates shows that they have an evident advantage in regard to the time period for graduating. Their percentages are high for the shorter time periods and low for the longer periods. But by reference to Table VIII we quickly find that the slight extension of the time period for the failing graduates is not at all commensurate with the number of failures which they have. The failures are provided for in various ways, as Chapter V will explain. No striking differences are observed for the boys and girls in any division of this chapter.
A SUMMARY OF CHAPTER IV
The percentages of graduates and of non-graduates that fail are almost identical.
The percentages of the failing pupils who graduate and of the non-failing pupils who graduate are identical (31.5 per cent); hence, graduation is not perceptibly conditioned by the occurrence of failure.
The non-failing non-graduates do not persist long in school, as compared with the failing non-graduates. The short persistence partly accounts for their avoidance of failure.
As the number of failures per pupil increase for the failing graduates, the time extension is not commensurate with the number of failures.
For 11.5 per cent of the non-graduates who fail in 50 per cent or more of their work, failure is probably a chief cause of dropping out.
Failure is probably not a prime cause of dropping out for most of the non-graduates, as 80 per cent have only 5 failures or fewer.
The worst consequences of failure are perhaps in acquiring the habit of failing, and in coming to accept one"s self as a failure. The number of drop-outs does not tend to increase as the number of failures per pupil increases.
The time period for graduating ranges from three to six years, with approximately 79 per cent of all graduates finishing in four years or less. The failing graduates take, on the average, a little longer time than the non-failing, but not an increase that is proportionate to the number of failures.
The boys and girls present no striking differences in the facts of Chapter IV.
REFERENCES:
33. Wooley, H.T. "Facts About the Working Children of Cincinnati,"
_Elementary School Teacher_, Vol. XIV, 135.
34. Caldwell, O.W. "Laboratory Method and High School Efficiency,"
_Popular Science Monthly_, 82-243.
35. King, Irving. _The High School Age._
36. Book, W.F. "Why Pupils Fail," _Pedagogical Seminary_, 11:204.
37. Bronner, A.E. _The Psychology of Special Abilities and Disabilities_, p. 6.
38. Lewis, W.D. _Democracy"s High School_, pp. 28, 37.
39. Ha.n.u.s, P.H. _School Aims and Values._
40. Russell, J.E. "Co-education in High School. Is It a Failure?"
Reprint from _Good Housekeeping_.
41. Dotey, A.I. _An Investigation of Scholarship Records of High School Pupils_. High School Teachers a.s.sociation of New York City. Bulletins 1911-14, p. 220.
CHAPTER V
ARE THE SCHOOL AGENCIES EMPLOYED IN REMEDYING FAILURES ADEQUATE FOR THE PURPOSE?
The caption of this chapter suggests the inquiry as to what are the agencies employed by the school for this purpose, and how extensively does each function? The different means employed and the number attempting in the various ways to satisfy for the failures charged are cla.s.sified and stated below, but the success of each method is considered later in its turn. One might think also of time extension, night school, summer school, correspondence courses, and tutoring as possible factors deserving to be included here in the list of remedies for failures made. The matter of time extension has already been partly treated in Chapter IV, while the facts for the other agencies mentioned are rather uncertain and difficult to trace on the records. However, they all tend to eventuate finally in one of the methods noted below.