The organization and administration of summer public school educational and recreational programs in districts within metropolitan areas of the United States

Citation preview

THE ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF SUMMER PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATIONAL AND RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS IN DISTRICTS WITHIN METROPOLITAN AREAS OF THE UNITED STATES

A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Education University of Southern California

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education

by Russel L. Lewis May 1950

UMI Number: DP25783

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, ' a note will indicate the deletion.

Dissertation Publishing

UMI DP25783 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346

T h is d isse rta tio n , w r i t t e n u n d e r the d ir e c tio n o f the C h a ir m a n o f the cand id a te ’s G u id a n c e C o m m itte e a n d a p p r o v e d by a l l m em bers o f the C o m m itte e , has been presented to a n d accepted by the F a c u l t y o f the S c h o o l o f E d u c a t io n in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the re q u ire m e n ts f o r the degree o f D o c t o r o f E d u c a tio n .

June 17, 1950

D a te .......................

Guidance Com m ittee

C hairm an

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.

PAGE

THE PROBLEM

1

Purpose of this s t u d y ..........................

1

Statement of the p r o b l e m ......................

2

Importance of the s t u d y ........................

3

Scope of the s t u d y ..................

4

Limitations of the s t u d y ......................

5

Assumptions....................

6

Definitions of terms used . . . . . Related literature

• • • • • • • • .

............

6

..........

7

Sources of d a t a ............................

9

Procedure..............

10

Preliminary inquiry ............................

10

Development of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e................ 11 Classification of districts ............ Organization of the study II.

....

12

...................... 12

SOCIETAL CHANGES AND SUMMER PUBLIC EDUCATION

. . . 16

The agrarian frontier versus the urban community

16

The citizen in industrial A m e r i c a ................ 19 The child as pupil and w o r k e r .................... 21 Federal p r o g r a m s ................................ 23 County, city, and community summer education Church-supported summer programs

. .

..............

24 25

CHAPTER

PAGE Other community-supported summer programs

...

25

Utilization of school facilities .........

...

25

Summary of c h a p t e r .............................. 27 III.THE EVOLUTION OF SUMMER EDUCATIONAL SERVICES . . .

28

Length of the urban school y e a r ............ .28 Length of school day and curricular requirements

39

The vacation s c h o o l s ...................... .. .

41

The all-year schools ..........................

46

Development of summer schools

56

................

1917 study by D e f f e n b a u g h ..............

56

Bush study (1924) on current practices ........

57

State level encouragement of summer high schools

57

Hoffman study in cities over 100,000 . . . . . .

58

Jones study on high school summer work in

Indiana 59

Illinois summer high school study by Bush Reals study of the summer high school

...

. . . . .

59 60

Odell study in I l l i n o i s .....................61 Achievement in the summer high school

. . . . .

62 63

Growth of summer s c h o o l s ................... Recent developments in extended-year education .

66

Playgrounds

69

......................... . . . •

The 12-month school y e a r ........................ 70 Camping e d u c a t i o n .......... Summary of chapter .

. . .% ........... 74

..................

. . •

87

iv CHAPTER IV.

PAGE

THE EXTENT OF'SUMMER EDUCATIONAL SERVICES IN 1949 .

90

Preliminary inquiry replies .................... Responsibility for summer educational services

.

90

..

92

the metropolitan public school year .♦

94

Number and per cent of questionnaire replies Length of

90

Time of the beginning of the fall t e r m .......... 96

98

Closing time of the regular school year . . . . . Extent of

school-supervised summer playgrounds . 101

Extent of

summer music programs .............. . 105

Extent of

summer classroom programs...........109

Influence of university schools of education Pupil participation in summer programs

. • 112

. . . . . 115

Chapter s u m m a r y ................ V.

119

SUMMER RESPONSIBILITY FOR METROPOLITAN PUBLIC SCHOOL P L A Y G R O U N D S ............................... 122 Administering public school summer playgrounds Financing summer playground activities

. 122

. . . . .

Joint use agreements for playground facilities

126 . 130

City or county investment in playground equipment 134 Operation of nonschool playgrounds

............

137

Master plans for joint d e v e l o p m e n t ............. 138 Use of experts for joint planning .

........... 139

Kinds of playground-activity..............

140

V

CHAPTER

PAGE

Weeks of unsupervised summer playgrounds

....

144

Days per week of supervised playgrounds......... 14$ Pupil utilization of summer playground facilities 152 Hour of the day playground programs begin . ... 156 Hour of the day playground programs end . . . . . 160 Length of the playground d a y ................... 164 Chapter summary . . . . . . .

..................

166

71. PUBLIC SCHOOL SUMMER CAMPING P R O G R A M S ............. 171 Number of overnight camping programs

..........

171

Number of day camping p r o g r a m s ................. 174 Recreation facilities for overnight camping . . . 175 Recreation facilities for day cam p i n g ........... 176 Operating costs for summer overnight camping .

. 177

Operating costs for summer day c a m p i n g ..... 179 Pupil eligibility for summer overnight camping Pupil eligibility for summer day camping

* 180

. . . . 182

Length of time in the overnight school camp . . Length of the day school c a m p ..................

. 182 183

Time of year overnight camping program operates . 185 Duration of the day camping program . . . . . . .

186

Chapter summary

186

................

711. SUMMER SCHOOL CLASSROOM PROGRAMS

............... 188

Kind of classroom offerings..................... 188 Pupil eligibility for the classroom program . . . 193

vi CHAPTER

PAGE Summer classroom achievement..............

195

Subject area offerings on the secondary level

. 199

Duration of the summer s e s s i o n ................. 201 Length of d a y ................................. 205 Minimum-sized class

..............

Optimum-sized class

210

..........

214

Number of secondary level class periods per day. 218 Number of class periods of instruction per day . 220 Length of secondary level class periods

....

220

Chapter s u m m a r y ............................... 222 VIII. SUMMER MUSIC PROGRAMS............................. 226 Organization of summer music activities

....

226

Kinds of summer music activities............... 229 Chapter s u m m a r y ............................... 235 .IX. PERSONNEL PRACTICES IN SUMMER E D U C A T I O N ......... 237 Personnel compensation for summer playgrounds

. 237

Teacher compensation for summer camp services

. 238

Teacher compensation for classroom services

. . 240

Teacher compensation for summer music programs

. 242

Individual in

chargeof the playground . . . . .

Individual in

chargeof the camping programs

Individual in

chargeof classroom program

. . . 247

Individual in

chargeof the music program

. . . 248

Summer playground personnel

244

. . 247

..................

251

vii CHAPTER

PAGE Summer camping personnel

. . . . .

254

Summer classroom personnel ....................

254

Summer music program personnel ................. 256 Chapter summary X.

............................... 256

FINANCING THE SUMMER P R O G R A M ...................... 261 Funds from the local d i s t r i c t ................. 26l Fees or t u i t i o n ............................... 262 State aid Federal funds

................. 270 ................................

City or county aid

272

........................ 274

D o n a t i o n s .................... Chapter summary

.276 . . . . . .

277

XI. SCHOOL SERVICES AND FACILITIES................... 281 Library facilities for summer use

............

School cafeteria services during the summer

. , 285

Student health services

in summer

Transportation services

in s u m m e r ......... .. 289

Guidance services in summer Summer community use of

...........

..........

....

school facilities

290

298

COMMUNITYR E L A T I O N S .............. Advisory groups

285

. . . 292

Chapter s u m m a r y .......... XII.

281

302

..............................

302

Summer community relations a c t i v i t i e s ......... 308 Chapter summary

. . . . .

314

viii CHAPTER

PAGE

XEII. APPRAISAL

........................

Appraisal of summer playground programs

317 ....

317

Appraisal of joint plans for playgrounds . . . .

319

Appraisal of summer camping programs . . . . . . 322 Appraisal of summer music programs ............. 324 Curtailment or extension of summer education . . 327 Extension of the regular curriculum

. . . . . .

Chapter s u m m a r y ..........................

332 335

XIV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMvIENDATIONS................. 339 Background summary . . . . . . . Length of school year

..............

................. 340

Extent of summer programs

......... 341

Financial support for the summer program . . . . Personnel administration .

339

343

................... 344

Kinds of summer programs ..............

345

Pupil personnel p r a c t i c e s ............

34&

School services and facilities ................

349

Community r e l a t i o n s ..........

350

Superintendents* appraisal ....................

351

General conclusion

352

R e c o mmendations............................... 353 Further problems suggested by the study

. . . .356

BIBLIOGRAPHY.. TVY........................................357 A P P E N D I X ..............................................366

LIST OF MAPS AND TABLES tabu:

I. II.

PAGE Geographical Regions of the United States

. . .

13

Urban and Rural Population of the United States, 1790 to 1940 .............. '................... 17

III.

Change in Length of School Year in Typical Large C i t i e s .................................. 30

IT.

Average Number of Months School Was Maintained, I 864-63

V. VI.

....

37

Length of School Year in the United States . . .

38

. . . . . . . .

............

Comparative Length of School Bay, 1823-1926, by Grades as Found by Mann . . . . . .

VII.

...

40

Number of Cities Maintaining Summer Schools as Compared with Size of Cities, 1 9 3 $ ............ 64

VIII.

Summer Schools in School Systems of 2,500 Population and More, 1928-38 ..............

IX.

.

Number and Per Cent of Preliminary Inquiry Replies by City Size and Geographic Region . .

X.

65

91

Extent to Which Metropolitan Public School Districts Assume Responsibility for Summer Educational Services ........................

XI.

Number and Per Cent of Questionnaire Repliesby . City Size and Geographic Region

XII.

93

. . . . . . .

95

Number of Days School Was in Session in the Regular 194 8 -4 9 School Y e a r .............. ..

97

X

TABLE XIII. XIV.

PAGE Date of the Beginning of the 1948-49 Fall Term. Date of the Termination of the 1948-49 School Year

XV.

99

......................

100

Ratio of Total Number of Elementary School Playgrounds Supervised During the Summer to Total Number of Elementary Schools

XVI.

......... 102

Ratio of Total Number of Secondary School Playgrounds Supervised During the Summer to Total Number of Secondary Schools

XVII.

. . . . . .

104

Ratio of Total Number of Elementary School Music Programs Conducted During the Slimmer Months to Total Number of Elementary Schools . 107

XVIII.

Ratio of Total Number of Secondary School Music Programs Conducted During the Summer Months to Total Number of Secondary Schools . . . . .

XIX.

108

Ratio of Total Number of Elementary School Classroom Programs Conducted During the Summer Months to Total Number of Elementary Schools . 110

XX.

Ratio of Total Number of Secondary School Classroom Programs Conducted1 During the Summer Months to Total Number of Secondary Schools

XXI.

. Ill

Ratio of Number of Elementary Summer Schools Operated in Cooperation with a University School of Education to Total Number of Elementary Classroom Summer Schools

. . . . .

113

xi

TABLE mi.

PAGE Ratio of Number of Secondary Summer Schools Operated in Cooperation with a University School of Education to Total Number of Secondary Classroom Summer Schools

XXIII.

. . • •

• 114

Ratio of Pupil Participation in the Summer Program to Total Enrollment of Elementary P u p i l s ..................................... 117

XXIV.

Ratio of Pupil Participation in the Summer Program to Total Enrollment of Secondary P u p i l s .......................... . . . .

XXV.

*118

Administration of Elementary Level Summer Playgrounds . . ............................. 123

XXVI.

Administration of Secondary Level Summer Playgrounds.........

XXVII. XXVIII. XXIX.

. . 125

Financing Elementary Level Summer Playgrounds

•127

Financing Secondary Level Summer Playgrounds

.129

Cooperation with City or County Regarding Elementary Level Summer Playground F a c i l i t i e s .......................

XXX.

132

Cooperation with City or County Regarding Secondary Level Summer Playground Facilities. 133

XXXI.

Kinds of Playground Activity in Elementary Level Summer Programs . . .

XXXII.

. 141

Kinds of Playground Activity in Secondary Level Summer Pro g r a m s ....................... 143

xii TABES XXXIII.

PAGE Summer Playground Supervisions on the Elemen­ tary L e v e l ............................

XXXIV.

Summer Playground Supervision on the Secondary Level

XXXV.

..........................

147

Number of Days Per Week Elementary Level Summer Playgrounds Were Supervised . . . . .

XXXVI.

145

149

Number of Days Per Week Secondary Level Summer Playgrounds Were Supervised......... 151

XXXVII.

Elementary Pupil Utilization of Summer Play­ ground Facilities During the Summer Months . 153

XXXVIII.

Secondary Pupil Utilization of Summer Play­ ground Facilities During the Summer Months . 155

XXXIX.

Beginning Hour for Elementary Level Summer Playground P r o g r a m s ....................... 157

XL.

Beginning Hour for Secondary Level Summer Playground P r o g r a m s ..............

XLI.

Closing Hour for Elementary Level Summer Playground P r o g r a m s ....................

XLII.

XLTV.

• 161

Closing Hour for Secondary Level Summer Playground Programs

XLIII.

159

......................

163

Length of Summer Playground D a y .............165 Provision for Campgrounds and Recreational Facilities for Day Camping and Overnight Camping P r o g r a m s ............

172

xiii TABLE XLV.

PAGE Provision for Operating Costs for Summer Camping Programs

XLVI* XLVII. XLVIXI.

..............

Pupil Eligibility for Summer Camping Programs . 181 Duration of Summer Camping P r o g r a m s.......... 184 Kinds of Elementary Level Summer Classroom Offerings..........

XLIX.

............................. 191

Pupil Eligibility for the Elementary Level Summer Classroom Program

LI.

189

Kinds of Secondary Level Summer Classroom Offerings

L.

178

•

............... 194

Pupil Eligibility for the Secondary Level Summer Classroom P r o g r a m ................... 196

LII.

Subject Area Offerings in Secondary Level Summer S c h o o l s ..................

LIII.

200

Duration of Elementary Level Summer Classroom P r o g r a m s ................................... 202

LTV.

Duration of Secondary Level Summer Classroom P r o g r a m s ....................

LV.

Opening and Closing Hours for the Elementary Level Summer Classroom Sessions .

LVT.

204

......... 206

Opening and Closing Hours for the Secondary Level Summer Classroom S e s s i o n s ............. 209

LVII.

Minimum Number of Pupils for a Class in Ele­ mentary Level Summer Classroom Sessions . . . 212

xiv

TABLE LVTII.

PAGE Minimum Humber of Pupils for a Class in Second­ ary Level Summer Classroom Sessions . . . . .

LIX.

Optimum-sized Class for Elementary Level Summer Classroom Sessions

EX.

..............

.

................. . . 217

Humber of Student Class Periods Per Day in Secondary Level Summer Schools

LXII.

. . . . . . .

221

............. 223

Administrative Organization of Elementary Level Summer Music P r o g r a m s .........

LXV.

219

Total Length of Class Periods in Secondary Level Summer Schools

LXEV.

. . . . . . .

Humber of Teacher Class Periods Per Day in Secondary Level Summer Schools

E3XEI.

. 216

Optimum-sized Class for Secondary Level Summer Classroom Sessions

LXI.

213

22?

Administrative Organization of Secondary Level Summer Music P r o g r a m s ................. 230

LXVT.

Kinds of Elementary Level Summer Music A c t i v i t i e s ........... .................. . 231

LXVII.

Kinds of Secondary Level Summer Music Activities

LXVIII.

Personnel Compensation for Summer Public School Playgrounds

IXEX.

233

....................

239

Teacher Compensation for Summer Classroom S e r v i c e s ................................... 241

XV

TABLE LXX.

PAGE Teacher Compensation for Summer Music . 243

P r o g r a m s .................. . ........... LXXI.

Individual in Charge of the Summer Playground Program at the Local S c h o o l ............... 245

LXXEI.

Individual in Charge of the Summer Classroom Program at the Local School

L3QCIII.

. . . . . . . .

249

Individual in Charge of the Summer Music . Program at the Local S c h o o l ............... 250

LXXIV.

Personnel Selected for Summer Playground P r o g r a m s ................................... 252

EXXr.

Personnel Selected for Summer Classroom Programs

LXXVT. LXXVII. LXXVTII.

................................. 255

Personnel Selected for Summer Music Programs . 257 Financial Support of the Summer Program

. . . 263

Extent of Local District Financial Support of the Summer P r o g r a m ........................

LX3CDC.

Extent of Tuition and Fees as Financial Support of the Summer P r o g r a m ..........

LXXX.

. 265

Phases of the Elementary Summer Program for Which Tuition Was P a i d ............

LXXXI.

267

Phases of the Secondary Level Summer Program for Which Tuition was P a i d ...............

LXXXEI.

264

268

Extent of State Financial Aid in the Support of the Summer P r o g r a m ........................

271

xvi

TABES

PAGE

LXXXIII.

Extent of Federal Financial Aid in the Support of the Summer Program . . . . . . .

LXXXIV.

273

Extent of City, County, and Other local Governmental Agency Financial Support of the Summer P r o g r a m ...........

LXXXV.

275

Extent of Nongovernmental Donations as Financial Support of the Summer Program . . 27#

LXXXVT. LXXXVII. LXXXVTII.

Summer Use of Elementary Library Facilities . 282 Summer Use of Secondary Library Facilities

• 284

Elementary Level Summer Student Health S e r v i c e s ................................. 286

LXXXIX.

Secondary Level Summer Student Health S e r v i c e s .........................

XC. XCI. XCIX.

Elementary Level Summer Guidance Services . . 291 Secondary Level Summer Guidance Services

S u m m e r ...........

295

Community Use of Secondary Level Facilities During the

XCIV.

. . 293

Community Use of Elementary Level Facilities During the

XCIII.

288

S u m m e r ........................ 297

Gommunity Groups Which Have Had Most to Do in an Advisory Capacity with the Planning of the Summer Elementary Level Program • . . .

XCV.

304

Community Groups Which Have Had Most to Do in an Advisory Capacity with the Planning of the Summer Secondary Level Program . . . 306

TABLE XC7I.

PAGE Elementary Level Summer Community Relations Activities. . . . .

XCVII.

. . . . . . .

310

Secondary Level Summer Community Relations Activities

XCVIII.

..........

. .

................

312

Superintendents* Response to tiie question: **Bo you consider your present summer play­ ground program adequate?1* ................... 320

XCIX.

Superintendents* Response to the question: **If you have a school and city or county plan of joint playground operation, do you con­ sider it an ideal arrangement?**

C.

Superintendents* Response to

. 321

the question:

**If you have a camping program does your experience justify recommending such programs to other metropolitan area school districts?** 323 Cl.

Superintendents* Response to

the Question:

**Do you consider your present summer music program adequate?** CII.

.

..........

326

Superintendents* Response to the Question: **Do you plan to curtail any part of your summer program in the next

CIII.

three summers?**

. 328

Superintendents* Response to the Question: **Do you plan to extend any part of your summer program in the next three summers?**

. 329

xviii TABES CIV.

PAGE Superintendents* Response to the Question: **Do you favor the concept of extending the *regular curriculum* school year throughout the summer?**............................ .. 333

CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM From the time the colonists settled America up to the present time there has been an increasing responsibility upon public education to prepare adequately the youth of America for their tasks of citizenship.

Extension of the number of

years of formal education, of the curricular requirements, *

of the school day, and of the length of the school year are but a few of the methods by which this educational responsi­ bility has been increased. The present study is concerned with the length of the school year and the responsibility assumed by the metropolitan public school district for summer educational programs both directly or indirectly related to the. traditional school year. Purpose of this study.

The primary purpose of this

study was to secure data which would lead to an understanding of the present status of summer public school educational and recreational programs in districts within metropolitan areas of the United States.

Such data should not only be

valuable for describing summer public school educational programs as they were at the time this survey was made, but should also serve as a basis for making recommendations for public school summer educational practices.

2

Statement of the problem.

The problem for this

investigation may be stated as follows:

the organization

and administration of summer public school educational and recreational programs in districts within metropolitan areas of the United States.

It involved answering the following

questions regarding the nature of summer educational programs and summer educational services in effect in 1949 in the public schools of the metropolitan communities of the United States: 1.

What is the length of the school year in the

metropolitan communities? 2.

What is the extent to which metropolitan com­

munities conduct summer programs in the public schools? 3.

What are the sources of financial support for

the summer programs in metropolitan communities? 4*

What are the characteristics of the personnel

admini stration? 3.What kind of educational and do

the

recreational programs

metropolitancommunities conduct 6.

practices 7.

during summer months?

What are the characteristics of the administrative for pupil personnel in summer programs? What public school services and facilities are

utilized during the summer months? 8.

What public relations techniques and services are

most effective in the development of the summer educational

3 programs? 9.

What appraisal can be made of the trends to

develop or decrease the summer educational opportunities? Importance of the study.

The population shift from

a rural young colonial country to an industrialized America has brought about such changes in the societal pattern as to cause many leaders in education to re-evaluate their educa­ tional' responsibility in terms of an all-year educational and recreational program.

Other community agencies have

assumed the educational and recreational leadership for summer activities in many cities. Some public school districts have in the past had summer programs to help children get through school at an early age.

Prevention of juvenile delinquency and the con­

structive use of leisure time have been reasons given for some school summer programs in the past.

Others have raised

the professional and economic status of the teachers through the summer extension of education.

Economy of building space

and equipment has been given as still another reason for some summer programs.

Most summer public school programs

have resulted from the fundamental changes which have come about in the population shifts from a rural America to an urbanized America. Community leaders are confronted with the responsi­ bility of providing constructive programs of educational

4 and recreational activity for children during the period between the end of the traditional school year and the fall opening of school.

Little research has been done on the

summer, phases of these programs as they affect the public school.

This study was an attempt to bring to light some of

the trends in the operation of public school summer programs. Public school educators are confronted with a build­ ing shortage in many parts of the country.

At the same time

a large majority of the school buildings in the United States are idle a good share of the summer in spite of the building shortage.

An increase in the efficiency of industrial

operations has caused many educators to suggest further study of the possibility of more efficient uses of school buildings. The research work of this study involved gathering data on current practices and on the evolution of summer educational services in public school districts of the United States.

This information was summarized, evaluated,

and used to set up suggestions and recommendations for con­ structive summer educational programs. Scope of the study.

The problem involved in this

study was to investigate and describe the status of the programs and administrative practices in the operation of summer public school educational and recreational programs

in districts within metropolitan areas of the United States, Being nation wide in scope, this survey attempted to obtain information from all metropolitan area public school districts located in or as a part of incorporated places of 2 , 5 0 0 or more population.

How successful this attempt was will be

outlined in Chapter IY. Summer school classes, informal playground activities, summer music activities, and camping programs in metro­ politan public school districts represent the area of the study.

It included elementary and secondary grades through

grade twelve. Limitations of the study.

Correspondence courses,

special programs for the handicapped, junior college work, and adult education are not aspects of this study.

More­

over, it does not represent rural America or even a cross section of the United States because of the emphasis on the urbanized areas.

Some of the metropolitan communities, as

defined in this study, necessarily have within their sphere of influence small incorporated places which may more or less be rural. A limitation also was the weakness inherent in the questionnaire technique of research.

In order to get

responses it was necessary to have the instrument relatively brief and easy to answer.

Therefore, most of the informa­

tion was put on a check-list type inquiry.

The range of

responses was necessarily limited.

Every attempt was made,

however, to include the possible typical responses. addition, a space was left for write-in responses.

In Further,

the instrument was modified and expanded by suggestions and answers secured in a pilot study before the questionnaire was circulated generally. Assumptions.

This survey is based on the following

assumptions: 1.

A survey of practices in summer public school

education can provide a basis for making recommendations in broad terms for the improvement of summer programs. 2.

Respondents to the questionnaire represent an

adequate sampling of the entire group of districts which indicated that they did have summer programs sponsored by school districts. 3.

Responsibility for constructive programs of

education during the summer months belongs to the public school district as well as other community agencies. Definitions of terms used.

The following definitions

are set forth in order that there may be common ground in interpreting the procedures and findings of this study. "Metropolitan area" as used in this investigation represents one or more large central cities along with the

7 surrounding smaller "satellite" cities.

In describing the

rural to urban shift in population McKenzie (70:443) indicates that a metropolitan constellation is made up of central cities which are almost always surrounded by a cluster of smaller centers, varying in size, which are economically and socially intertwined.

The term as used

is essentially the same term as "metropolitan district," which is used in the 1940 United States Federal Census. The term "metroplitan area" was used in this study in order to keep public school district terms differentiated from the population areas. In much of the literature up to date the all-year school has carried the connotation of being a 4-quarter school year.

Recent trends show that many programs of

education extend into the summer months and that they are in effect "all-year schools," even though the summer program is separately organized from the so-called traditional school year.

Therefore, "all-year school" in this study is

used to describe those types of educational programs which extend into the summer months regardless of the administra­ tive organization. Related literature.. As Lafferty (40:17) pointed out in a recent article,

8 . • . even though the twelve-months school is not a new idea, and a number, of schools have taken up the plan only to drop it', the amount of space taken up in the professional literature on this subject is negligible. It is doubtful that there are many topics in public education about which so little has been written. While no previous studies have been located which are directly related to the present investigation, a number have dealt with certain phases of the summer program.

Each of

these mentioned below will be reviewed in Chapter III to show how it contributes to the knowledge of public school summer education. The Farrand and O'Shea study (26:462) of the Newark all-year schools and the George Peabody study (3) of the Nashville all-year schools represent investigations into a now more or less extinct 4-quarter academic school year in which most students participated. In 1917 Deffenbaugh (18:10) made an early study of summer sessions in city schools to show the trends of the time.

Bush (7:142) made two studies of summer school

practices in high schools; the 1927 study (19) was limited to the status of summer schools in Illinois.

Hoffman (33)

made a similar study of summer high schools in cities over 100,000 population.

Summer high school work in Indiana was

the subject of a 1925 investigation by Jones (3 6 ).

Although

most of the studies cited were concerned with administrative

9 practices and status of the summer schools, Reals (68) largely limited his study of summer high schools to factors related to pupil achievement.

In 1930 Odell (55) studied certain

facts concerning the summer work done by pupils and the practices connected therewith in the public elementary and high schools of the state of Illinois.

Duell and Kenet (21)

recently reported an achievement study of summer high school students. In 194& Life Camps, Inc., in cooperation with the city schools of New York City, published a research study (44) on values of camping education.

The camping experiment involved

a comprehensive testing program along with a great deal of subjective evaluation. Sources of data. Primary sources of data included library materials and a nationally circulated questionnaire. Books by Monroe (51), Cubberly (17), and Elsbree (24), gave much of the background for the study.

Considerable informa­

tion on changes in the urban-rural ratio was taken from former President Hoover*s research committee report on Recent Social Trends (70).

The 1940 United States Federal Census

(54) provided other population statistics.

Research

bulletins, educational magazines, and various reports from the United States Office of Education made up the balance of the source materials.

10

Procedure.

After a study of the population changes

and the historical pattern of summer education, the author set out to determine what the administrative practices were in regard to metropolitan public school summer education and recreation.

Interviews, field study, a short preliminary

inquiry, and a more lengthy questionnaire were methods used in gathering the data regarding current practices. Preliminary inquiry.

In order to locate cities

which had some kind of summer educational program a brief double postcard inquiry was devised and sent to 1 ,0 3 2 city and county school administrators throughout the United States.

These school officers represented the heads of

their respective city or county school districts in the 140 metropolitan communities of the United States.

The 140

metropolitan communities were made up of 172 large central cities and £>59 public school districts in other incorporated places which had a 1940 population of 2,500 or more. Some incorporated cities received more than one inquiry when those communities had one or more elementary districts and separate high school districts.

In other

cases the inquiry was sent to the county school superin­ tendent when he was listed as the administrative head of one or more communities in a county district.

Thus, in

some cases one questionnaire, represented a county unit made

11 up of several suburban incorporated cities; in other cases, several questionnaires went to the same multiple district communities. The metropolitan communities were those defined in the Sixteenth Federal Census for 1940 (54).

The names of the

school officers were found in the Educational Directory (96) published by the United States Office of Education for the school year 194S-49. Development of the questionnaire.

Before the question

naire was constructed, studies of the related literature and actual types of summer programs were made,

A preliminary

form of the inquiry was developed to include the curricular content of the summer programs studied as well as the common administrative practices in summer education.

Suggestions

from a number of prominent educators were considered in evaluating the items.

A pilot study was made in districts

which were known to have summer programs.

Suggestions and

criticisms were considered in developing the final form of the questionnaire. Since summer educational programs are broad in scope, the inquiry was necessarily long.

Every attempt was made to

simplify the instrument in order to insure adequate returns. The final form of the questionnaire was mailed to the superintendents who had answered "yes" to the postcard inquiry:

"Do you have any kind of district-sponsored summer

12 program in any school?”

The returns from the questionnaire

are shown in Chapter IV. Both the postcard inquiry and the final form of the questionnaire were sent out as Santa Monica City School inquiries.

The letter of transmittal, lithographed on the

questionnaire, was sent out over the signature of the Santa Monica Superintendent of Public Schools. Classification of districts. School districts in this study were classified into groups according to the size of the city of which they are a part or with which they were closely affiliated.

The same size classifications are used

by the National Education Association, namely, those cities above 100,000 population, those between 3 0 ,0 0 0 and 99,999, those of 10,000 to 29,999, those of 5,000 to 9,999, and those of 2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999. The method of grouping metropolitan public school districts, for study by geographical area, was the system used in the Sixteenth United States Federal Census for 1940. Table I shows the nine regions used.

They include the New

England, Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, East North Central, West North Central, East South Central, West South Central, Mountain, and Pacific regions. Organization of the study.

The present study was

organized in harmony with the problems for solution as set

w

m z m m .

SSffiSSff! FK+WMil®

m m m u p

MMiS

fX X X X .ii.X >X > > >

■111 South Atlantic

West ;

xxxxxxxx: ,‘ \ X X )

XXXXXXXXXXXXV ^XX> X X X X X X SXXXXXX

xxxxxx XX X X X xxxx

yx xx; XXX) «v>

TABLE

I

GEOGRAPHICAL REGIONS OF THE UNITED STATES

14 forth in the statement of the problem.

Changes in societal

patterns from a rural to an urbanized United States and an account of present nonpublic school extensions of education into the summer months were summarized in Chapters I and II* These summaries were made in order to acquire background for interpreting the inquiry results in terms of the present status of summer educational and recreational programs i n • public school districts within metropolitan areas. Chapter III was devoted to a historical study of the length of the school year and public school summer education. The extent and organization of public school summer programs in the United States made up Chapter IV. Chapter V was devoted to a study of the summer play­ ground program.

The summer camping program was considered

in Chapter VI.

Chapter YII includes a study of elementary'

and secondary classroom summer programs.

Summer music

activities in metropolitan public school districts was the subject of Chapter VIII. Personnel practices in the operation of summer public educational programs were summarized in Chapter IX.

Chapter

X was devoted to the financing of the summer educational programs, while Chapter XI summarized the summer public school services and facilities. Chapter XII considered public relations factors in the summer extension of educational programs.

Evaluation of the

15 summer program was the topic for Chapter XIII.

The final

chapter consisted of the summary, conclusions, and certain recommendations for the operation of summer educational programs.

CHAPTER I I

SOCIETAL CHANGES AND SUMMER PUBLIC EDUCATION The changes in societal patterns, which made summer public education important in 1949> are recorded in this chapter.

The first part of the chapter is concerned with

the changes and their implications in the rural to urban migrations during the past century.

The second part

considers the trends toward support of stammer education by nonschool organizations.

Greater summer utilization of

school facilities is the concern of the third part. The agrarian frontier versus the urban community.

The

needs of youth have changed materially during the past 150 years due to differences in environment brought about by migration from rural to urban communities.

Urban classifi­

cation includes cities and towns of 2,500 or more population. In 1790 only 5 per cent, Table II, of the population lived in urban centers.

Even as late as the Civil War years only

about 20 per cent of the people lived in urban centers.

The

1940 urban population was a 42 per cent increase over that of 1900.

In' 1940 over 56 per cent of the United States

population were urban dwellers*

A large percentage of the

population who lived in small incorporated places but with­ in the metropolitan areas were not included in those figures.

17

TABLE

II

URBAN AND RURAL POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES 1790 TO 1940*

Census year

Population Urban Rural

Per cent Increase over Of preceeding census ' population Rural Urban Urban Rural

1940 1930

74,423,702 63,954,823

57,245,573 53,820,223

7.9 27.3

6.4 4.4

56.5 5 6 .2

43.5 43.3

1920 1910

54,157,973 41,996,932

51,552,647 49,973,334

2 9 .0 39.3

3.2 9.0

5 1 .2 45.7

43.3 54.3

1900 1390

30,159,921 22,106,265

45,834,654 40,841,449

36.4 56.5

1 2 .2 13.4

39.7 35.1

60.3 64.9

1330 1370

14,129,735 9 ,9 0 2 ,3 6 1

3 6 ,0 2 6 ,0 4 8 2 8 ,6 5 6 ,0 1 0

42.7 59.3

25.7 1 3 .6

23.2 25.7

71.3 74.3

1360 1350

6,216,518 3,543,716

25,226,803 1 9 ,6 4 8 ,1 6 0

75.4 92.1

23.4 29.1

19.3 15.3

30.2 34.7

1340 1330

1,845,055 1,127,247

15,224,398 11,738,773

63.7 6 2 .6

29.7 31.2

10.3 3.3

39.2 9 1 .2

1320 1310

693,255 525,459

8,945,198 6,714,422

31.9 6 3 .0

33.2 34.7

7.2 7.3

92.3 92.7

1300 1790

322,371 201 ,§55

4 ,9 8 6 ,1 1 2 3,727,559

59.9

33.3

6 .1 5.1

93.9 94.9

* 54:20

18 To a large extent social and educational problems of the small town in the metropolitan sphere are much like those of the city dweller. The purposes of formal education were comparatively simple a century ago when over 90 per cent of the population was rural.

The "Three B ’s” constituted the subject matter.

The family provided the vocational and other informal forms of education.

The child’s time had economic value in

helping with the farm work.

Severe winters, bad roads, and

lack of available schools were other factors which made the typical early American school year short and the curriculum simple. During the process of urbanization large cities developed in the United States.

These are nearly always

surrounded by a cluster of smaller cities which are economically and socially intertwined.

Population increases

in this group of small cities are largely in areas exposed to the metropolitan influence.

Between 1930 and 1940 there

was a 16.9 per cent population increase in the smaller cities of metropolitan areas, as compared with an increase of 6.1 per cent in the population of the larger central cities (54:61). Enrollment in high schools in 1880 included but 110,277 pupils. over 7j million.

By 1940 the4enrollment had increased to The summer educational problems of the

19 modern schools, then, must certainly be different from those of the early part of the last century. The citizen in industrial America.

Today the average

child grows up in the city environment, whereas a century ago the average child grew up on a farm or in some other comparatively rural situation.

The small family residence

or the apartment house has replaced the wide open spaces where home and informal learning took place.

In 1940 large

metropolitan cities housed more than 7 >813 people per square mile, as compared with 515*2 people per square mile in smaller metropolitan areas. The population shifts have brought about a change in occupation for the father.

Instead of the rural farmer who

needed the services of his sons, he has become the industrial employee of the city who seldom sees his family during the work day. The housing conditions in eities are always such as to restrict the freedom of children.

The conditions are

often such as to deprive children of normal and wholesome surroundings.

Not long ago Judd (37:9) indicated that the

confining of children in factories, one of the evils of the earlier industrial period when child labor was common, is now paralleled in some cities by the placing of children in unsuitable environments where play and outdoor life are

20 reduced to an intolerable minimum. Shorter working hours during the last few years have meant an increased responsibility on the community for whole­ some recreation for both parents and children.

Public schools

have extended their services in the areas of adult education, child care centers, and playground supervision, but have more or less not altered the traditional school year.

This study

indicates, however, that some changes are taking place in regard to metropolitan public school district responsibility for summer education. The school has gradually assumed more responsibility for education which was formerly provided in the home. Apprentice training on the farm and in the trades was often supervised by the father.

In our modern urban society the

father’s occupation ordinarily does not provide opportunity to supervise the child’s work or learning of such skills. Formerly, summer was a time for the child to learn most about the skills of agriculture.

Home in the summer was a

center where the rudiments of almost all the trades and industries of life were practiced for the benefit of both boys and girls.

Blacksmiths, wagon-makers, cabinet-makers,

harness-makers, shoe-makers, millers, and sawmill workers carried on most of the fundamental trades in villages. Children could see and learn about the complete industrial processes.

In the homes the girls were taught how to sew,

21 make hats, cook, wash, and do other household skills.

The

town boy as well as the farm boy had his "chores” to do.

The

urban father*s supervision and help are lacking and many traditional schools are on vacation during the summer. The mother also may find her place in industry.

A

large part of the growth in the labor forces and the proportion of population gainfully employed have been due to the rapid expansion of female employment (19:542). Since learning is continuous, some kind of program for constructive learning should continue during the summer. In order to prevent undesirable learnings, many civic, social, and philanthropic organizations have accepted responsibility for constructive summer programs. The child as pupil and worker. Educational require­ ments are much higher for employment than formerly.

A

premium is placed on the skilled and educated youth.

The

trend has been toward more years of formal schooling with a corresponding increase in time during the summer when opportunity to do something constructive is important.

The

trend, away from the employment of children has been caused by the same fundamental industrial changes which have operated to produce unemployment among adults (37:10). Another factor which has prolonged the number of idle summers for the average urban youth has been the gradual

increase in minimum age before entry into jobs.

In 1900

over 18 per cent of the children between the ages of 10 and 15 were in gainful occupations.

The employment age for

the majority is now generally considered to be sometime after the usual high school age.

The complex processes of

modern business and industry require superior training as a condition of success on the part of the individual.

The

increase in the ratio of adult population to children and the retaining of older employees in industry have also operated to exclude children from early employment. The growth of school attendance, particularly in the secondary levels, shows that pupils are continuing in school much longer than they did in earlier years.

The attitude

that schools are essential to the welfare of the community and that children must be provided with the opportunity to attend school has been an evidence of a new social attitude which has been expressed in the form of compulsory attendance laws in various states.

The predominant pattern for com­

pulsory school attendance in the United States is from ages 7 to 16.

The average minimum age for work during school

hours is slightly over 14 (99)* The first compulsory attendance law, passed in Massachusetts in 1852, established the principle that society is concerned equally with the family in securing for the child proper conditions for development.

Legislation

23 permitting child labor and legislation requiring minimum school attendance has operated to carry out this principle. The realization that education is not a privilege but a duty of citizenship has tended to place responsibility on the public schools for the education of the child of school age.

In spite of the complexity of urban life and changes

in educational minimums, the public school’s traditional summer vacation has not been materially disturbed in many metropolitan public school districts. Federal programs.

The Civilian Conservation Corps

from 1933 to 1940 has been regarded as a promising form of work camp and educational center (20:35).

While the program

was not restricted to summer education, it apparently met a depression need.

Although the primary purposes of the camps

were for relief and conservation, the camps included formal education when it was found that the education of the enrollee was below accepted goals.

The Civilian Conservation

Corps represents at least in part a form of summer outdoor education wh±'ch""has” recen11y been~'Supporbe-d~-by^the-jmb&a.-e-r* However, educators generally opposed the federal basis on which both it and the National Youth Administration had been organized (22). The 4-H Clubs, sponsored by the Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in cooperation with the state colleges of agriculture, include over ij

24 million rural young people (11:64).

Much of their program

continues from where the school stops both in length of school year and in curricular content. Summer education is a major objective in the program of other federally sponsored youth-serving organizations. These include the Future Farmers of America and the Future Homemakers of America, Inc., sponsored by the United States Office of Education (11:Chapter VIII). County, city, and community summer education.

Cities

and counties independently and in cooperation both with each other and with public schools have in many areas assumed the role of summer recreation educator.

The limits of

recreational education are not well defined.

Whether

recreational activities are educational or merely recreational is not the issue.

Children's needs are apparently being met

and at public expense.

It should be noted that many of the

city recreational programs include crafts, music, and other skills or learnings which might well be a part of a regular school curriculum. Where city or county governmental agencies do not conduct summer educational and recreational programs to include all youth of a community various other character building and social agencies play a part.

Many cities

conduct a summer library program consisting of visual education and reading clubs.

25

Church-supported summer programs.

Churches support

many forms of summer education and recreation some of which could not and should not be taken over by the schools.

In

other cases the church program may be evidence of a deficiency in the public school1s program.

Church programs

often include summer institutes, camps, vacation Bible schools, and recreational programs. Other community-supported summer programs.

The

extent of nonpublic-school youth serving organizations is very extensive.

M. M. Chambers has prepared a compilation

of these in a book entitled, Youth-Serving Organizations (11). The Boy Scouts of America alone include about lj million boys in their program, much of which is directed toward outdoor summer education. Trends in federal, state, and local nonpublic-school programs of education and recreation indicate that there is a need for summer programs for youth.

The trends also show

that the public is willing to support such programs in many forms. Utilization of school facilities.

During the nine­

teenth century public schoolhouses in American cities and towns were open only for the regular school work and for children of legal school age.

Education was supposed to

stop with childhood and the total or partial completion of

26 the prescribed work of the elementary and high schools. The public schools had no further responsibility for the young people; only a very few went on to college, LAfter the turn of the century there was a growing interest in public school extension and a fuller use of the public school plant (5&:5).

A study of such uses was made by the

Russell Sage Foundation in cooperation with the United States Bureau of Education (5&:67). The industrial revolution and the subsequent modern industrial life have made efficiency and economy in planning an essential part of the business life of education.

Serious

consideration is being given in some localities to the question: ^JpShould school plants stand relatively idle for a quarter of the year?” (59:38).

In most communities the

greatest capital investments are in school buildings, Chapter III it will be' pointed out that the>'all-yearAquarter school v£ar in some cities was999 population supported their own summer playground

127 TABLE

X X V II

FINANCING ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS

Percent of districts Population group Number of financing summer playgrounds by: by city size and districts Local Jointly City County Other geographic;-region reporting public with school city or district county 100,000 or over

39

26

41

13

2

13

30,000 to 99,999

39

33

57

5

0

5

10,000 to 29,999

53

31

52

10

0

7

5,000 to 9,999

54

24

52

5

2

17

2,500 to 4,999

13

46

39

0

0

15

1

0

0

100

0

0

Middle Atlantic

37

41

41

7

1

9

South Atlantic

10

10

30

10

10

40

East North Central

46

22

50

15

0

13

West North Central

16

44

56

0

0

0

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

9

11

33

11

0

44

Mountain

4

0

100

0

0

0

30

17

76

0

0

7

203

29

50

3

1

12

New England

Pacific Totals

128 program.

About one third of the larger cities followed this

plan; nearly half of this group cooperated with the city or county government in this respect.

The implication is that

a town with under 5,000 population less frequently joined the city or county government in such a cooperative enter­ prise. A great variation existed geographically in the amount of financial responsibility assumed by the school districts for summer playground programs.

The amount varied from

practically zero per cent in the New England and East South Central regions to 100 per cent and 76 per cent, respectively, in the Mountain and Pacific regions.

Reports from all

geographical regions showed the majority of playgrounds jointly supported by the school district and city or county government.

Districts within the Middle Atlantic region

showed 41 per cent supported by local public school districts and 41 per cent supported jointly with the city or county. One hundred and sixty-six districts reporting on the secondary level, as noted in Table XXVTII, showed that approximately the same percentages apply for financing the secondary level playgrounds as for the elementary level playgrounds.

Approximately 31 per cent of the districts

supported the program in the school district locally, and about 50 per cent joined with the city or county in the support of the program.

129 TABLE

X X V III

FINANCING SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS

Per cent of districts Population group Number of financing summer playgrounds by: by city size and districts Local Jointly City County Other geographic region reporting* public with school city or district county 100,000 or over

23

22

52

9

0

17

30,000 to 99,999

32

34

53

3

3

6

10,000 to 29,999

52

37

43

3

0

3

5,000 to 9,999

47

21

53

9

0

17

2,500 to 4,999

12

50

25

0

0

25

0

0

0

0

0

0

67

39

43

9

0

9

9

0

33

11

11

45

East North Central

33

32

50

3

0

11

West North Central

13

46

54

0

0

0

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

9

11

33

11

0

45

Mountain

2

0

100

0

0

0

23

21

63

0

0

11

166

31

49

7

1

13

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific Totals

^Includes all metropolitan public school districts which financially or administratively indicated their sponsorship of summer playgrounds. Only selected districts in the 2,500 to 4,999 city size were included.

130 Approximately 7 per cent of the districts had the financial support solely from the city or the county in situations where the school evidently was responsible for part or all of the administration of the program.

In nearly

13 per cent of the reported cases there were still other

plans of support.

Usually these involved some other com­

munity civic agencies of a nongovernmental nature.

The

smaller towns, under 5,000 population, more frequently supported their programs independent of other agencies. There was little difference among the cities of above 5,000 population in the matter of joint support, with about 50 per cent having this plan. In the New England and East South Central areas the summer playground plan was almost totally absent.

In every

other geographical area some plan for joint financing of the summer program exceeded the number of cases where the sole support was from the local district.

Therefore, Table

XXVIII shows that, although nearly one third of the secondary schools of the metropolitan areas had playgrounds supported solely by the local district, another 49 per cent were supported jointly with the city or county. Joint use agreements for playground facilities. With a relatively high degree of cooperation between county or municipal governments and the public school district, it

131 seemed significant to determine something of the extent to which swimming pools, recreational buildings, and playground equipment were purchased by the city or county agency for use on the school grounds.

Tables XXIX and XXX indicate that

little difference existed between the elementary and secondary levels in regard to the joint use agreements of playground facilities.

Of 133 districts reporting elementary schools,

42 per cent indicated that their joint program with the city or county was for the summer only, and 45 per cent indicated that the agreement was for the entire year.

City size was

not a great factor in the matter of summer or all-year joint agreements, except for the 3 cases of cities under 3,000 population where all 3 indicated a year-long agreement. Geographically, the East North Central, Mountain, and Pacific regions more frequently reported that their joint use agree­ ment lasted the entire year; the Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, West North Central, and West South Central regions indicated their agreements were predominantly for summer only. The s.ummary in Table XXX indicates that 41 per cent of the 111 districts reporting this item on the secondary level had playground agreements which were for summer use only, and 46 per cent reported that their playground program conducted jointly with the city or county was an all-year plan.

Cities in the 5,000 to 99,999 size reported the

greatest percentages of joint use agreements.

In the Mountain,

132

TABES' XXIX COOPERATION WITH CITY OR COUNTY REGARDING- ELEMENTARY .LEVEL.SUMMER PLAYGROUND FACILITIES....

Population group Number of by city size and districts geographic region reporting

*

Joint use agre ements for All year Summer only

Per cent of districts which have City or county, investments on:" School funds for school property the. operation of Swimming Recreation playground non-school playpools buildings equipment grounds

Master plans for joint development

Use of experts from outside

Other

100,000 or over

20

40

45

20

10

15

30

30

5

10

30,000 to 99,999

26

38

50

8

12

19

15

50

20

0

10,000 to 29,999

44

48

46

;.o

23

81

25

11

0

5,000 to 9,999

40

48

40

3

10

28

33

20

18

3

2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

3

0

67

33

0

33

67

33

0

33

New England

1

0

100

0

0

100

100

0

0

0

50

52

32

6

6

26

24

12

2

4

9

67

33

11

22

33

0

22

22

0

East North Central

31

26

58

10

3

20

29

55

16

0

West North Central

10

50

40

20

0

0

10

50

0

0

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

83

67

33

0

0

17

83

0

0

Mountain

4

25

75

25

0

25

25

25

0

0

22

32

60

9

14

23

41

32

41

9

133

42

45

10

7

23

26

29

14

3

Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific Totals

U

COOPERATION WITH CITY OR COUNTY REGARDING SECONDARY IEWL. SUMMER PLAYGROUND FACILITIES. :.

Population group Number of by city size and districts geographic region reporting

. ...

.

•.

...

......

............

.:.

Joint use agreements for Summer only All year

.......

Per cent of districts City or county.investments on school property Swimming Recreation Playground pools buildings equipment

which have School funds for the operation of non-school playgrounds

Master plans for joint development

Use oif experts from outside

Other

100,000 or over

15

40

33

20

7

7

33

27

0

0

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999

22

23

64

9

5

18

18

50

23

0

10,000 to 2 9 ,9 9 9

35

43

57

11

9

14

20

20

11

0

5,000 to 9,999

35

54

31

3

9

17

20

20

9

6

2,500 to 4,999

4

25

25

25

20

50

25

25

0

0

New England

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

43

49

37

7

5

19

23

14

2

2

8

63

36

13

25

25

0

25

25

0

East North Central

25

24

52

12

4

12

28

48

12

0

West North Central

7

29

57

29

0

0

0

57

0

0

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

67

33

0

0

17

0

17

17

0

Mountain

2

0

100

50

0

50

50

0

0

0

20

40

55

5

15

15

35

25

25

5

111

41

46

10

7

16

23

27

11

2

Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific Totals

134 Pacific, West North Central, and East North Central regions the all-year joint use agreement for playgrounds was the plan most commonly used.

In. the East North Central and West

North Central regions the joint use agreement frequently applied only to the summer. City or county investment in playground equipment. City or county investment in swimming pools and similar permanent installations was common to 10 per cent of the 133 districts reporting on the elementary level according to Table XXIX.

By city size this practice was most common in

cities under 5,000 and next most common in the cities over 100,000.

Cities in the 5,000 to 9,999 size reported this

least frequently.

Geographically, the West South Central,

Mountain, and West North Central most frequently reported such city or county investments in swimming pools and other permanent recreational facilities on school property. As many as 7 per cent of the elementary districts reporting had recreational buildings and other permanent installations of a similar nature supported by city or county investment.

This kind of investment was reported in

about 10 per cent of the cities over 3 0 ,0 0 0 population and in the 5,000 to 9,999 population size groups, but was never reported in city sizes between 10,000 and 29 ,9 9 9 and in the cities under 5,000 population.

Geographically, only 4 of

135 the 9 regions indicated such investments by county or city governments on school property.

The South Atlantic, with 22

per cent, represented the area where most frequently the city or county spends money for recreational buildings on school property. City or county investments in playground equipment, used primarily on school property, was a much more common practice as shown by 23 per cent of the 133 districts re­ porting on the elementary level.

Table XXIX shows that the

plan ranges from 15 per cent in the cities over 100,000 to 33 per cent in the cities under 5,000, being inversely proportional to the size of the city. district reported this item.

The single New England

The Middle Atlantic, South

Atlantic, East North Central, Mountain, and Pacific areas ranged from 20 to 33 per cent in reporting this practice, with the South Atlantic region reporting it most frequently. Table XXX shows that approximately 10 per cent of the 111 districts reported city or county investment in swim­ ming pools or other penaanent installations on secondary . level school property.

The practice was most common in the

towns under 5,000 population and next most common in cities over 100,000.

Although 3 of the geographical areas reported

no investments by municipal or county governments in recreational facilities on secondary public school property, 1 of the 2 Mountain area districts reported this for the

136 highest percentage of any geographical area. Central region reported 29 per cent.

The West North

The South Atlantic

and East North Central regions reported 13 and 12 per cent, respectively. Only 7 per cent reported city or county investment in recreational buildings on secondary school property. This apparently did not occur in the few cases reported in cities under 3,000 but was slightly more common to the cities under 3 0 ,0 0 0 as compared with those over 3 0 ,0 0 0 . five of the 9 geographic areas indicated that no such invest­ ments in recreational buildings were common to their districts.

The South Atlantic districts indicated that 25

per cent and the Pacific region districts indicated that 15 per cent of their public school districts did have recreational buildings or other permanent installations financed by nonschool governmental agencies. A larger percentage, or 16 per cent, of the districts reported city or county investment on secondary school property of various types of playground equipment.

By city

size this was least common to cities over 100,000 and most common to cities under 5,000.

In the geographical areas

of the South Atlantic, Middle Atlantic, West South Central, Pacific, and Mountain the plan was rather common to the extent of about 20 per cent.

137 Operation of nonschool playgrounds. School district participation in summer recreation was not limited to school playgrounds as shown in Table XXIX; 26 per cent of the re­ porting districts indicated that school funds were used for cooperative operation of nonschool playgrounds.

This co­

operation was most frequently reported in the towns under 5,000 population, with a percentage of 67, and least frequently in the cities between 3 0 ,0 0 0 and 99>999. The Pacific area with 41 per cent represented the area where such school investments were most frequently made, The Mountain, West South Central, East North Central, and Middle Atlantic regions all reported about 25 per cent of "the districts with these school district investments. School funds for cooperative operation of secondary level nonschool playgrounds were supplied in approximately 23 per cent of the districts reporting.

Table XXX shows

that the practice most commonly reported was in the large cities, where one third of them indicated that some municipal or county playgrounds were operated by an ap­ propriation from public school district funds.

.In

approximately one fifth of the cities below 100,000 population this plan of cooperation with city or county existed.

Five of the geographical areas indicated not a

single case in which school funds were used for the co­ operative operation of nonschool playgrounds.

The Middle

138 Atlantic, East North Central, and Pacific areas all reported practices which when grouped amounted to about 23 per cent of the districts joining with the city or county governments in providing nonschool playgrounds. Master plans for joint development. About 29 per cent of the reporting districts indicated that they co­ operated with the city or county in a master plan for joint development of playgrounds and recreational facilities. Cities from 30,000 to 99,999 population reported this in $0 per cent of the districts.

Table X K U shows that the range

for cities of other sizes was from 20 to 33 per cent.

Geo­

graphically, such planning was most frequent in the West South Central cities and next most frequent in the West North Central and East North Central, with 50 per cent and 55 per cent respectively, of the districts thus reporting. ' These indicate that it was common practice in many communities for the schools to cooperate with municipal and county governments in assuming responsibility for the recreational aspect of educational services during the summer months. Almost as large a percentage of the districts re­ porting on the secondary level indicated that they cooperated with the city or county in the development of a master plan for future recreational services. reported cooperative planning.

A total of 27 per cent

A summary is shown in

139 Table XXX.

The cities in the 30,000 to 99>999 size most

frequently reported this practice.

The frequency of this

joint development practice in other cities ranged from 20 to 27 per cent.

The Hast North Central region indicated

that 4# per cent of the districts cooperated with the city or county in this master plan development.

The West North

Central reported such plans in 37 per cent of the districts for the greatest frequency. Use of experts for joint planning.

The city or county

and schools in 14 per cent of the districts, as noted in Table XXIX, call in experts from outside the district to help in the planning of their recreational program.

Cities

in the 30,000 to 99>999 size have most frequently reported this so far as city size is concerned*

The Pacific area

in 41 per cent of the cases reported the use of experts to lead the geographical regions in cooperative planning for elementary level summer recreational facilities.

Five of

the geographical areas did not use outside experts in the joint planning. Table XXX shows that on the secondary level the use of experts from outside the district occurred in 11 per cent of the cases reported. elementary level.

This is slightly less than on the

Cities in the 30>000 to 99>999 size, with

23 per cent, indicated the greatest use of such experts in

140

joint and cooperative planning between the school district and either the city or county. Geographically, the Pacific and the South Atlantic, each with 25 per cent, represented areas which most frequently made use of experts.

Five of the geographical

areas did not use such experts in their joint planning. About 2 per cent of the secondary and 3 per cent of the elementary respondents checked another item with an opportunity to specify further cooperative efforts between the cities and the schools.

However, in most cases the

further cooperative efforts were not specified. Kinds of playground activity. A summary of activities is shown in Table XXXI.

Of the 146 districts on the

elementary level answering this section of the questionnaire, 90 per cent reported that they conducted regular supervised

games as a part of the summer program.

Crafts and hobby

clubs were next on the list, with 71 per cent of the districts reporting such activity.

Third in frequency, with

58 per cent of the elementary level districts reporting, was adult participation in recreation in either afternoon or evening.

Swimming was reported by 53 per cent of the

districts as being a part of the summer playground program; 50 per cent reported modern and folk dancing.

Movies

represented a part of the recreational aspect of the

TABLE

X X XI

KINDS OF PLAYGROUND ACTIVITY IN ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAMS

Population group Number of by city size and districts geographic region

Supervised games

Swim­ ming

Per cent of the districts Grafts and Movies Dancing hobby clubs

Adult ■ Other program

100,000 or over 3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

20 2S 46 43 9

35 93 &5 100 73

75 61 44 42 73

70 36 72 70 33

45 43 46 37 44

70 66 42 35 67

65 63 59 49 56

20 25 9 9 11

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

0 60 a 30 12 0 7 2 27

0 97 100 • 77 100 0 100 100 62

0 26 25 73 33 f-0 57 100 74

0 72 75 73 67 0 71 100 67

0 35 63 43 33 0 71 100 43

0 33 50 47 50 0 100 100 74

0 53 50 70 50 0 71 100 56

0 5 25 20 17 0 0 50 22

146

90

53

71

43

50

53

14

Totals

141

142 playground program in 43 per cent of the. districts; hikes, field days, organized athletics, celebrations, and other special events were reported by 14 per cent of the districts. Table XXXII shows that on the secondary level I83 districts reported the school participation in summer play­ ground activities.

A total of 97 per cent of the districts

indicated supervised games made up a part of the playground program.

It is rather significant that 91 per cent of the

districts indicated that crafts and hobby clubs were present frequently in secondary level playground programs.

Swim­

ming was reported in 53 per cent of the cases with modern and folk dancing reported in 52 per cent of the districts. Movies represented another aspect of the program in 54 per cent of the districts.

Adults were included in the program

in 41 per cent of the districts.

Organized athletics, field

trips, celebrations, music, and other types of activities were reported by 11 per cent of the respondents when those items were written into the questionnaire.

The frequency

of crafts and hobby clubs was even greater than on the elementary level. These statistics indicate that the summer playground program on both the elementary level and secondary level is broad and not restricted to athletic skills.

The fact that

such a large percentage of the programs included crafts and hobby clubs is rather significant in the interpretation of

TABLE

X X X II

KINDS OF PLAYGROUND ACTIVITY IN SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAMS. '

Population group Number of by city size and di stricts geographic region

Supervised games

Swim­ ming

Per cent of the districts Crafts and Movies Dancing hobby clubs

Adult program

Other

100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10.000 to 29,999 5.000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

30 33 59 51 10

97 100 95 100 100

77 5* 44 43 60

90 97 S6 92 90

63 61 4S 49 60

ao 70 44 33 50

53 46 39 39 10

17 15 5 12 10

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

1 79 10 40 14 0 7 4 2a

100 99 100 95 100 0 100 100 100

100 32 30 7S S6 0 57 75 61

100 91 90 95 64 0 100 100 93

100 46 60 53 43 0 71 100 6a

100 33 60 45 57 0 100 100 &9

0 32 30 45 50 0 71 50 54

0 3 20 15 21 0 0 25 21

1S3

9S

53

91

54

52

41

Totals

H -PKjJ

144

modern trends for summer playground activities. Weeks of unsupervised summer playgrounds.

Of the 167

elementary districts included in this part of the study, 46 per cent indicated that their summer playground supervision lasted all summer or all except 2 weeks.

A total of 47

per cent indicated that the supervision of playground facilities operated during the summer with not more than 2 to 6 weeks of unsupervised time.

Among these school dis­

tricts which had school-sponsored summer programs of recreation only 7 per cent had more than 6 weeks of un­ supervised playgrounds during the summer.

Cities over

100.000 apparently had supervision practically every week during the summer.

Table XKXEII shows that cities below

100.000 quite frequently had school playground vacation periods of from 2 to 6 weeks during the summer. In the New England, South Atlantic, West South Central, Mountain, and Pacific areas the playground program on the elementary level was practically continuous in a majority of the districts.

In the Middle Atlantic, East

North Central, and West North Central areas the program continued most of the summer but had an unsupervised period of from 2 to 6 weeks.

The most frequent report of long

unsupervised periods was in the West North Central region, where 29 per cent of the districts had their playgrounds on the elementary level unsupervised for more than 6 weeks

145 TABLE

X X X III

SUMMER PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION ON THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of Per cent of districts that have districts* playgrounds unsupervised 0-2 2-6 More than weeks -weeks 6 weeks

100,000 or over

23

74

22

4

30,000 to 99,999

33

45

49

6

10,000 to 29,999

55

46

47

7

5,000 to 9,999

46

39

52

9

2JJ00 to 4,999

10

20

BO

0

1

100

0

Middle Atlantic

70

44

49

7

South Atlantic

9

7$

22

0

East North Central

41

44

54

2

West North Central

14

15

56

29:

East South Central

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

S3

17

0

Mountain

.3

67

33

0

Pacific

23

4S

4S

4

167

46

47

7

New England

Totals

0 ■

^Includes those districts which reported school sponsored summer playground programs. Includes all who marked this section of the questionnaire.

146

during the summer.

The Middle Atlantic, Pacific, and East

North Central had 7 per cent or less of their districts with unsupervised playgrounds for more than 6 weeks during the summer. About 50 per cent of the 134 secondary districts, according to summary shown in Table Z2XIY, reported that they had their summer playground supervision continuous or without more than 2 weeks of unsupervised time during the summer.

Another 43 per cent of the districts had un­

supervised periods of 2 to 6 weeks during the summer.

Only

7 per cent had an unsupervised playground time of more than 6 weeks during the summer.

These indicate that the plan in

general-was to have playground supervision continuous through the summer in the districts where a summer playground program was in operation.

Where a continuous program was

not possible, a program which included all except 2 to 6 weeks of the summer was the next most frequently followed plan. A total of 71 per cent of the cities over 100,000 population reported an almost continuous summer program, as did the cities in the 2 ,5 0 0 and the 10,000 population size.

Those in the 5,000 to 9,999 and 30,000 to 99,999

most frequently reported unsupervised playgrounds o f .2 to 6 weeks during the summer.

Less than 10 per cent of the

cities in each size group had unsupervised playgrounds for

147 TABLE

X X X IV

SUMMER PLAYGROUND SUPERVISION ON THE SECONDARY LEVEL

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts*

Per cent of districts that have playgrounds unsupervised 0-2 2-6 More than weeks weeks 6 weeks

100,000 or over

14

71

21

7

30,000 to 99,999

26

42

54

4

10,000 to 29,999

43

54

37

9

5,000 to 9,999

41

44

46

10

2,500 to 4,999

10

50

50

0

0

0

0

0

Middle Atlantic

57

49

44

7

South Atlantic

3

75

25

0

East North Central

2$

43

54

4

West North Central

12

a

67

25

East South Central

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

33

17

0

Mountain

1

100

0

0

Pacific

22

64

27

9

Totals

134

50

43

a

New England

^ In c lu d e s th o s e d i s t r i c t s

w h ic h r e p o r t e d s c h o o l s p o n so re d

summer playground programs.

1US more than 6 weeks during the summer. The Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, West South Central, Mountain, and Pacific areas all reported most frequently the continuous summer playground supervision program.

Only the East North Central and West North Central

most frequently reported vacation periods of 2 to 6 weeks during the summer.

The West North Central reported 25 per

cent of the districts with unsupervised playgrounds for more than 6 weeks during the summer.

This was a greater

percentage than for any of the other geographical areas. On the secondary level the trend appears to be a rather continuous supervised playground program with not more than 2 weeks of unsupervised summer time.

The next

most frequent pattern was supervision most of the summer with an unsupervised time of not more than 6 weeks. Days per week of supervised playgrounds. Five days per week was the common practice for the number of days per week that 65 per cent of the metropolitan public school districts conducted the supervision of their summer -play­ grounds, according to the summary found in Table XXXV.

Of

the 1?6 public school districts reporting elementary supervised summer playgrounds, 29 per cent conducted at least part of their playgrounds on a basis of 6 days per week; 5 per cent indicated playground activities on a basis

149 TABLE

XXXV

NUMBER OF DAYS PER WEEK ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAY­ GROUNDS WERE SUPERVISED Population group by city size and geographic region

Number Per cent of districts which operate of summer playgrounds on the basis of districts Seven Six Five Four or days days days less days per per per per week week week week

100,000 or over

25

16

52

32

0

30,000 to 99,999

34

3

41

53

3

10,000 to 29,999

57

3

12

S2

0

5,000 to 9,999

52

2

33

65

0

2,500 to 4,999

10

0

10

SO

10

1

0

0

100

0

so

3

21

76

0

9

11

11

7&

0

East North Central

33

6

27

61

6

West North Central

15

20

0

SO

0

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

7

0

71

29

0

Mountain

5

20

SO

0

0

Pacific

2S

0

57

43

0

Totals

173

5

29

65

1

New England Middle Antiantic South Atlantic

150 of 7 days per week.

Only 1 per cent of the districts re­

ported a program of 4 days or less per week.

This shows that

practically all playground programs operated either 5 or 6 days per week. Cities of over 100,000 population frequently had some of their programs on a basis of 6 days, and all cities below 100.000 population most frequently conducted their programs on a basis of 5 days per week.

Some of the cities below

5.000 have their program 4 days per week or less. The school districts in the West South Central, Mountain, and Pacific areas tend to conduct the program 6 days per week.

Five days per week was the most frequent

practice in all other geographical areas. In 145 secondary level districts 63 per cent reported summer playgrounds supervised 5 days per week, according to Table XDCVI.

Another 30 per cent operated on the basis of

6 days per week; the remaining 7 per cent was distributed between those which operated 7 days per week and those which operated 4 or fewer days per week. City size was not a significant factor in regard to the number of days per week that the program operated.

All

5 city size classifications most frequently reported a 5-day week for the secondary level summer supervised playground program. School districts in the West South Central, Mountain,

151 TABLE

XXXVI

NUMBER OF DAYS PER WEEK SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS WERE SUPERVISED Population group Number Per cent of districts which operate by city size and of summer playgrounds on the basis of: geographic region districts Seven Six Five Four or days days days less days per per per per week week week week 100,000 or over

17

24

29

47

0

30,000 to 99,999

29

3

3$

55

3

10,000 to 29,999

47

6

24

70

0

5,000 to 9,999

42

3

33

64

0

2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

10

0

20

70

10

0

0

0

0

0

61

3

21

76

0

7

14

14

72

0

East North Central

30

7

30

60

3

West North Central

12

17

0

33

0

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

7

0

57

43

0

Mountain

r.2

50

50

0

0

Pacific

26

4

53

34

4

145

6

30

63

1

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Totals

152 and Pacific regions frequently reported a program of 6 days per week; the remaining geographical areas most frequently reported a 5-day week summer program of supervision.

There

were more reporting a program of 7 days per week than re­ porting a program of 4 days per week.

Current practice

indicates that the majority of the secondary public school districts operate summer playground programs on the basis of 5 days per week, with nearly half as many districts operating at least some playgrounds 6 days per week. Pupil utilization of summer playground facilities. An attempt was made to secure some kind of estimate as to how extensive the metropolitan public school district pupil avails himself of the summer playground facilities. XXXVII shows a tabulation of results.

Table

Sixty-four per cent

of the 179 districts reporting checked the item which indicated that many of the students of the district par­ ticipated in the summer program.

Other choices were "most,"

"comparatively few," or "practically none."

As many as 25

per cent indicated that most of the pupils of the district utilized playground facilities.

Only 11 per cent checked

the item to indicate that comparatively few students utilized the playground facilities. There was uniformity both by city size and geo­ graphical area in the indication that many of the students of the district availed themselves of playground facilities

153 TABLE

X X X V II

ELEMENTARY PUPIL UTILIZATION OF SUMMER PLAYGROUND FACILITIES DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS

Population group Number of by city size and districts geographic region

Per Most of the students of the district

cent of districts______ Many of Comparatively the few students students of the of the district district

100,000 or over

29

24

62

14

30,000 to 99,999

32

19

75

7

10,000 to 29,999

55

25

62

13

5,000 to 9,999

52

29

63

a

2,500 to 4,999

11

27

55

ia

1

0

100

0

Middle Atlantic

7&

26

67

7

South Atlantic

9

11

79

n

East North Central

39

36

54

10

West North Central

14

21

57

21

East South Central

0

0

0

0

West South Central

7

29

43

29

Mountain

5

20

ao

0

26

15

73

12

179

25

64

11

New England

Pacific T o ta ls

154

during the summer months.

The highest percentage of dis­

tricts by city size, indicating "most of the students of the districts," were the districts in the cities of from 5,000 to 9,999 population with 29 per cent of them reporting this tendency.

Geographically, districts within the East North

Central area most frequently reported that "most" of their students participated in a summer playground program.

Their

total of 36 per cent was considerably above the average for the group. These statistics indicate that, although summer play­ ground facilities do not accommodate all students of the districts, they do afford opportunities for "many," with the greatest percentage of use in cities in the East North Central region. Like the elementary districts, the most common re­ port made was that "many" of the students of the district participated in the secondary level playground program.

Of

the 145 reporting districts, as noted in Table XXXVIII, 59 per cent indicated this estimate of participation.

There

was uniformity both by city size and geographic region in checking the item which indicated "many" of the pupils of the area rather than "most," "comparatively few," or "practically none."

An average of 23 per cent of the

reporting districts indicated that "most" of the students of the district participated in the program, and IS per cent

155 TABLE

X X X V I II

SECONDARY PUPIL UTILIZATION OF SUMMER PLAYGROUND FACILITIES DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts

Per cent reporting Most of. Many of Comparatively the the few students students students of the of the of the districts district district

100,000 or over

13

17

56

23

30,000 to 99,999

26

27

62

12

10,000 to 29,999

45

13

71

11

5,000 to 9,999

46

23

50

22

2,500 to 4,999

10

20

50

30

0

0

0

0

61

23

59

13

9

11

67

22

East North Central

23

39

61

0

West North Central

12

17

56

25

East South Central

0

0

0

0

West South Central

7

29

43

29

Mountain

.2

50

50

0

Pacific

26

3

62

31

145

23

59

13

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Totals

156 indicated, that comparatively few so participated.

Cities

in the 5 ,0 0 0 to 9 ,9 9 9 group more frequently indicated "most."

The geographical areas to indicate most frequently

that "most" of the pupils in the area participated were the East North Central region and one of the two Mountain region reporting districts. Hour of the day playground programs begin.

Of the

171 districts reporting elementary summer playgrounds 63

per cent reported their programs of supervision beginning during the 9 o fclock hour.

A summary is given in Table

XXXIX. Eighteen per cent started during the 10 o !clock hour; 9 per cent started before 9.

Only 2 per cent started

the daily program during the 12 o' clock hour; 9 per cent began the program sometime between 1 p.m. and 5 p.m. There was rather common agreement among the various groups of cities when classified by size in that the pre­ dominant group in each case indicated a 9 .o’clock hour starting time.

In the cities above 10,000 population there

were about as many which started their programs before 9 as during the 10 o ’clock hour.

Note that 19 per cent of

the cities over 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 population started the program at 1 p.m. or later in the day.

The group also continued the

program later in the evening far more frequently.

Other

groups of cities indicated approximately 11 per cent of

157 TABLE

X X X IX

BEGINNING HOUR FOR ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAMS Population group Number by city size and of disgeographic region tricts reporting

Per cent of districts reporting summer playground _______programs beginning at:________ Before 9101112 I T S 9 A.M. 9:59 10:59 11:59 noon- and A.M. A.M. A.M. 12:59 later P.M.

100,000 or over

26

12

54

12

0

4

20

30,000 to 99,999

30

17

57

17

0

0

10

10,000 to 29,999

54

11

59

15

0

4

11

5,000 to 9,999

52

2

73

23

0

2

0

2,500 to 4,999

9

0

67

22

0

0

11

New England

1

0

100

0

0

0

0

76

4

70

21

0*

0

5

7

0

57

14

0

0

29

East North Central

38

13

5&

11

0

a

11

West North Central

14

0

79

7

0

7

7

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

50

33

17

0

0

0

Mountain

3

33

0

33

0

0

33

26

12

54

23

0

0

12

171

9

63

IS

0

2

9

Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific T o ta ls

158 their programs starting at 1 p.m. or later, except the cities in the 5,000 to 9,999 size classification.

In these there

was not a single report where the program started later than the 12 o ’clock hour. General agreement was found among the geographical areas that the 9 o ’cloqk hour was the most common starting 'time.

The West South Central and the Mountain regions

were the lone exceptions.

Fifty per cent of the West

South Central districts started their elementary program before the 9 o ’clock hour.

The Mountain region distributed

their 3 reporting districts to the 8 o ’clock, 10 o ’clock, and 1 p.m. or later groups. In 137 secondary level districts, 60 per cent indicated the 9 o ’clock hour as the starting time for the summer supervised playground program.

Another 23 per cent

began their program during the 10 o ’clock, 7 per cent before 9 o ’clock, 1 per cent during the noon hour, and 9 per cent at 1 o ’clock in the afternoon or later.

Table

XL shows that there was general agreement both as to city size and geographical region in regard to the most common practice of having the starting time during the 9 o ’clock hour.

In cities over 100,000 population 17 per cent started

their program at 1 p.m. or later.

This represented the

greatest percentage of cities which started a program later than the noon hour.

In the South Atlantic region 29 per

159 TABLE

XL

BEGINNING HOUR FOR SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAMS — : Population group Number by city size and of disgeographic region tricts reporting

' Per cent of districts reporting summer playground _______ programs beginning at;________ Before 9101112 1 PM. 9 A.M. 9:59 10:59 11:59 noonand A.M. A.M. A.M. 12:59 later P.M.

100,000 or over

1a

11

55

17

0

0

17

30,000 to 99,999

25

12

56

24

0

0

a

10,000 to 29,999

44

9

64

16

0

0

11

5,000 to 9,999

43

2

5a

30

0

2

7

2,500 to. 4,999

7

0

71

29

0

0

0

New England

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

61

1

64

2a

0

0

7

7

0

57

14

0

0

29

East North Central

29

14

59

14

0

3

10

West North Central

11

0

a2

9

0

0

9

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

50

33

17

0

0

0

Mountain

2

0

0

50

0

0

50

21

9

52

29

0

0

10

137

7

60

23

0

1

9

Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific T o ta ls

160 cent of the programs got underway as late as 1 p.m., as did 1 of the 2 cases reported from the Mountain region.

Only 10

per cent or less of the districts in the other geographical regions started their programs after the 12 o*clock noon hour. Hour of the day playground programs ended.

The

closing hour for the summer playground program varied considerably, with 26 per cent of the districts indicating a 4 o'clock hour closing time and another 26 per cent con­ ducting the program until 9 o'clock or later.

Only 6 per

cent ended their program before 4 o 1clock in the afternoon, and the remaining 42 per cent closed their daily program of supervision sometime between 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. All 3 of the city size classifications above 10,000 population most frequently reported a program which continued until 9 p.m. or later.

The most frequent closing hour for

cities under 10,000 population was during the 4 p.m. hour. Closing during the 3> 6, and 7 o'clock hours was relatively uncommon according to city size, but 4> 8, and 9 or later were most common times for ending the supervised playground program day.

Table XLI shows a summary of the playground

closing times. Considerable variation was noted in the various geo­ graphical regions in regard to the closing hour for the

TABLE

XLI

CLOSING HOUR FOR ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAMS Population group Number of by city size and districts* geographic region

Per cent of districts reporting summer playground programs extending in the P.M. to: 6 8 3 4 5 7 9

-

100,000 or over

26

0

15

15

0

0

19

50

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999

30

3

13

23

13

0

13

33

10,000 to 29,999

54

13

20

19

6

2

17

24

5,000 to 9,999

52

4

37

19

2

8

15

15

2,500 to 4,999

9

0

67

11

0

11

0

New England

1

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

76

8

34

17

0

5

17

18

7

0

0

29

29

14

29

0

East North Central

38

3

0

16

13

0

21

45

West North Central

14

0

50

7

0

0

14

29

East South Central

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

0

17

17

0

17

17

33

Mountain

3

0

0

33

0

0

33

33

26

8

15

35

19

0

0

23

171

6

26

19

5

4

16

26

Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific Totals

n

'’'Includes only those districts reporting actual beginning and ending hours for playground programs.

162 elementary playground program.

The single New England case

reported the closing hour as 3 p.m., but the predominant closing hour for Middle Atlantic and West North Central cities was during the 4 o ’clock hour.

In the South

Atlantic region the closing hours were evenly distributed at 5, 6, and 8 o ’clock.

In the Mountain region the three

reporting indicated closing hours at 5, 8, and 9 p.m. or later.

In the last North Central and West South Central

the majority of the districts extended their program until 9 o ’clock or later. Of the 137 districts reporting secondary level play­ ground programs the most frequent closing hour was 9 p.m. or later with 30 per cent of the districts so indicating. An additional 1? per cent of the districts closed their programs between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. with only 4 per cent stopping during the 3 o ’clock hour, 22 per cent closing during the 4 o ’clock hour, and 19 per cent ending during the 5 o ’clock hour.

Only 4 per cent closed their programs

during the 6 o ’clock hour and 4 per cent during the 7 o ’clock hour. closing times.

Table XLII shows a summary of the playground In all of the cities above 10,000 popula­

tion the most frequent closing hour was 9 p.m. or later. In cities under 10,000 the most frequent closing time was found to be the 4 o ’clock hour.

The most frequent closing

time for cities in the Middle Atlantic region was 4 o ’clock*

TABLE

XLI I

CLOSING HOUR FOR SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAMS

Population group Number of by city size and districts* geographic region

100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999 New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific Totals

IS

Per cent of di stricts reporting programs extending to: 9 P.M. or 3-3:59 4-4:59 5-5:59 6-6:59 7-7:59 8-8:59 P.M. P.M. P.M. later P.M. P.M. P.M2

0 0 5 5 14

11 12 16 35 43

2 21

0 7 0 0 9 0 0 0 0

0 29 0 14 36 0 17 0 14

137

4

22

25 44 43 7 0 61 7 29 11 0

6

0 16 4 0 0

5 0 2 9 0 0

9 0 17 50 29

0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 19

19

4

17

2S 23 14 0 0 15 29

21

23 14

50 40 32 14 29

14

0 21 29

0 23 0

10

17

4S

0 0 33 0 0

9 0 17 50 0

36 0 17 0

4

17

30

5

17 4

IS

3S

^Includes only those districts which reported this section of the questionnaire. Ov

164

In the West North Central 36 per cent was the most frequent report at both the 4 o' clock hour and 9 p.m. or later.

In

the South Atlantic region there was approximately an even number distributed between 5 p.m., 6 p.m., and 8 p.m.

In

the last North Central, West North Central, and Pacific regions, the predominant group extended their program to 9 p.m. or later. Length of playground day. The mean elementary level playground day was found to be 8,6 hours, and the median day was found to be 8 hours.

A summary by city size and

geographical region is given in Table XLIII.

The cities

of 100,000 or more population averaged 9.5 hours for the longest mean day of any city size group with cities under 5,000 having a mean.day of 6 .9 hours.

The length of day

was directly proportional to the size of the city size group. The single report from the New England area indicated a 3-hour supervised playground day as the shortest one recorded; the West South Central had 10.1 hours for the mean with 10 hours as the median day representing the longest' elementary level playground day.

The geographical areas

which exceeded the mean for the group in length of day included the Middle Atlantic, the East North Central, West North Central, West South Central, and Mountain regions.

165 TABLE X L I I I LENGTH OF SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAM

Population group Elementary level by city size and Number Mean Median geographic region of day day in dis­ in hours tricts* hours

Secondary level Total Mean Median districts day day in reporting in hours hours

100,000 or over

26

9.5

3.0

13

9.3

9.5

30,000 to 99,999

30

9.2

9.0

25

9.2

9.0

10,000 to 29,999

54

3.3

3.0

44

9.2

3.0

5,000 to 9,999

52

£.4

3.0

43

a.5

3.0

2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

9

6.9

7.0

7

3.9

7.0

New England

1

3.0

3.0

0

0.0

0.0

Middle Atlantic

76

9.1

3.0

61

3.3

3.0

South Atlantic

7

3.0

3.0

7

3.0

3.0

East North Central

33

9.5

9.0

29

9.3

9.0

West North Central

14

a.7

7.5

11

3.9

3.0

East South Central

0

0.0

0.0

0

0.0

0.0

West South Central

6

10.1

10.0

6

10.6

10.0

Mountain

3

3.7

7.5

.2

7.3

7.0

26

3.0

3.0

.,21

9.0

3.0

171

3.6

3.0

137

9.1

3.0

Pacific Totals

^Includes only those districts which reported actual time for beginning and ending of the supervised-summer playground.

166 In the 137 secondary level districts reporting, the mean day was 9.1 hours.

The median length was 8 hours.

Table XLIII shows a summary of the length of the secondary level playground day as compared with the elementary level. The variation by city size ranged from 8.5 to 9.8 hours as the mean secondary level summer playground day. The length of day was almost directly proportional to the size of the city.

The mean day for the cities over 100,000

was 9*8 hours; the mean day for the cities under 5,000 was only 8.9 hours.

The West South Central region had the

longest days, with a mean of 10.6 and a median of 10 hours. The shortest secondary level playground day was indicated in the 2 reporting districts of the Mountain region with 7.3 hours as the mean day, and 7 hours as the median day. Cities in the East North Central and West South Central were the only ones to exceed the mean for the group. It should be noted in the interpretation of these data that the length of the secondary level school day was defined as the difference between the starting hour and the ending hour of the summer playground day.

It does not

take into account lunch periods when the playgrounds may not have been supervised in all cases. Chapter summary.

Many agencies and organizations

conduct various kinds of playground and recreation programs

167

during the summer months.

Public school districts throughout

the United States cooperate directly or indirectly with the county, city, and private organizations in conducting summer recreation programs.

This study, however, attempted to

include only those public school districts which had some direct responsibility in the administration, personnel, or finance of public school summer playground activities. In 196 elementary and 158 secondary level districts reporting, 38 and 44 per cent respectively administered the summer playground program; 40 and 36 per cent respectively administered the program jointly with either the city or In approximately 14 per cent of the districts the

county.

city or county administered the summer playground program and the school district apparently aided financially. About half of the districts on both levels had a joint school-municipal or school-eounty plan for financing the summer playground programs.

In approximately 80 per

cent the financial support was left primarily to the local district.

In the remaining 21 per cent the financial

support was furnished primarily by the municipality, county, state, private individuals, or private organizations. In approximately 42 per cent of the elementary and 41 per cent of the secondary level districts the summer play­ ground 1program was a joint school-municipal or school-county summer program, but the joint agreement did not extend into

168

the regular school year.

In a slightly greater percentage

of districts it was an all-year project. In approximately 10 per cent of the elementary and secondary level districts swimming pools and other instal­ lations were financed partly by the city or county even though they were on public school district property.

About

7 per cent of the districts reported recreational buildings and similar facilities on school property financed jointly with the city or county.

In 23 per cent of the reporting

elementary level districts and 16 per cent of the secondary level districts the city or county aided in the financial support of playground equipment.

In 23 to 26 per cent of

the districts having summer playground programs, public school district funds were provided for the operation of playgrounds other than those of the public school district. A total of 29 per cent of the elementary level and 27 per cent of the secondary level districts indicated that there was a master plan for joint school-city or schoolcounty development of summer playground facilities.

In from

11 to 14 per cent of the districts experts from outside the district were called in for such planning.

All of these

statistics tend to indicate a trend toward the dual support and administration of summer playground and recreational facilities in metropolitan cities and public school dis­ tricts.

169

The kinds of playground programs conducted on both the elementary and secondary level playgrounds, in order of frequency of mention, were supervised games, crafts and hobby clubs, swimming, dancing, movies, and other activities such as organized sports, field trips, celebrations, and music activities.

It is rather significant that 91 per cent

of the secondary level districts indicated that crafts and hobby clubs made up a part of their recreation programs. These statistics indicate that the summer program on both the elementary and secondary level was broad and not restricted to athletic skills. The playground program was continuous throughout the summer in approximately 46 per cent of the elementary and 50 per cent of the secondary level districts.

In 47 pex*

cent of the elementary and 43 per cent of the secondary level districts the programs operated during the summer with a vacation of not more than 6 weeks.

Of the districts

having a playground program only 7 per cent of the elemen­ tary and 8 per cent of the secondary had more than 6 weeks of unsupervised time during the summer. Approximately two thirds of the districts reported summer playgrounds on a 5-day week basis.

Nearly one third

of the districts operated on the basis of 5i. or 6 days per week. In estimating the number of pupils using summer

170 playgrounds 64 per cent of the elementary level reports and 59 per cent of the secondary level reports indicated that "many" of the students participated in the summer program. Twenty-five per cent of the elementary and 23 per cent of the secondary level reports indicated that "most" of the pupils of the district participated.

Only 11 per cent of

the elementary and 18 per cent of the secondary level reports indicated that "comparatively few" of the pupils of the district made use of the playground facilities. The 9 o*clock hour was the most frequently reported starting time for the elementary and secondary level summer playground programs.

Nearly two thirds of the districts

reported the 9 o*clock hour and about one fifth of the districts reported the 10 o'clock hour as their daily be­ ginning time.

Approximately 45 per cent of the elementary

level summer playground programs ended between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m.

Approximately 42 per cent extended to the 8 o' clock

hour or later.

The mean length of playground day was 8.6

hours and the median was 8 hours.

On the secondary level

41 per cent reported a closing hour between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. and 47 per cent indicated that the program extended to 8 p.m. or later.

The mean length of playground day on the

secondary level was found to be 9.1 hours and the median reported program was 8.0 hours.

CHAPTER VI PUBLIC SCHOOL SUMMER CAMPING- PROGRAMS In Chapter III it was pointed out that school camp­ ing programs are becoming quite common especially in public school districts in the states of Michigan, New York, Virginia, and California.

The results of this study indicate

that summer public school camping in metropolitan public school districts is in its infancy. In this chapter the day camping program is included along with the regular overnight camping programs.

A day

camping program is often either a substitute for or a preliminary step in the development of a more extensive overnight camping program.

Undoubtedly, day camping

programs vary a great deal, but in each case the respon­ dents indicated that their day camping program was something different from the.ir regular playground program.

Table

XLIV gives a summary of the frequency with which various kinds of camping programs were reported. Number of overnight camping programs. A total of 10 metropolitan public school districts reported on the details of the organization and operation of their summer camping programs.

These were distributed as follows:

4 In

the cities over 100,000; 3 in cities of 3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999;

172

TABLE

X L IV

PROVISION FOR CAMPGROUNDS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR DAY CAMPING AND OVERNIGHT CAMPING PROGRAMS

Level and kind of camping program

Number reporting campgrounds and facilities provided by Entirely by the City and county Other local school recreation departments district

Elementary level overnight camping

3

3

4

Secondary level overnight camping

3

1

2

Elementary level day camping program

2

7

4

Secondary level day camping program

1

2

2

173 none in the cities of 10,000 to 2 9 ,9 9 9 ; 1 in the cities of 5,000 to 9,999; and 2 in the smaller cities between 2,500 and 4,999.

Geographically, the East North Central and

Pacific regions each reported 3.

The Middle Atlantic

indicated 2, the West North Central 1, and the West South Central 1.

Other reports indicated that a summer camping

program was conducted but that it did not extend into the summer months.

Therefore, other camping programs were not

reported in this study of summer public school responsi­ bility.

Dade County, Florida, on a county-wide basis, had

access to public school camping programs as indicated by the material furnished in response to the questionnaire, but the details of the program were not included in the 10 schools indicated in this section.

In a report from one

of the schools in Missouri it was noted that some county schools were planning the acquisition of property for a county-wide camping program.

Therefore, the 10 schools

reported here represent part but not all of the metropolitan public school district camping programs. The overnight camping program of the metropolitan public school districts was evidently more common in the elementary than in the secondary level schools.

Although

10 districts reported overnight camping programs on the elementary level, only 6 indicated these opportunities for secondary level youth where the school had the responsibility

174

for conducting such programs.

These were found to be dis­

tributed by city size rather evenly as follows:

2 in the

cities above 100,000 population; 1 in cities of 3 0,000 to 99,999; 1 in cities of 3,000 to 9,999; and 2 in cities 2,500 to 4,999. .Geographically, the secondary level overnight camping programs were most frequently reported in the East North Central regions with a total of 3 extending their programs into the summer; the Pacific reported 2 and the Middle Atlantic 1. Number of day camping programs. A total of 13 respondents indicated that day camping programs different from the regular playground programs were conducted.

Four

of these were in the large cities over 100,000; 2 were in cities of 3 0,000 to 99,999; 4 were in cities of 10,000 to 29,999; 2 were in cities of 5,000 to 9,999; and 1 in the cities of less than 5,000 population.

These were most

frequently reported in the East North Central region for a total of 6.

The Pacific region was next with 3.

The Middle

Atlantic and South Atlantic regions each reported 2. The total number of secondary level day camping programs, as found by the reports of this questionnaire, was less than on the elementary level.

A total of 5 metropolitan

public school districts indicated the operation of such day camping programs.

One of these was in a large city in the

South Atlantic region.

One was in a city of 30,000 to

175

99,999 population size in the South Atlantic region.

Two

were in the Middle Atlantic region and 1 was in cities of the 5,000 to 10,000 size classification, and 1 city under 5,000 in the East North Central•region also reported the day camping program on the secondary level.

These represent

some of the new extensions of public education into the summer months. Recreational facilities for overnight camping. Apparently there is no set pattern, as yet, for providing campgrounds and recreational facilities for overnight camp­ ing programs.

Table XLIV shows that 3 of the 10 elementary

level districts indicated that the campgrounds and facilities were furnished entirely by the local school district; an equal number indicated that the city or county recreation departments furnished these facilities, even though the schools had a part in the summer camping program.

Two of

the elementary level districts indicated that the camp­ grounds and recreational facilities were furnished by certain organizations such as the facilities at Battle Creek, Michigan.

In 2 cases the report was not complete in regard

to this item.

On the secondary level 3 of the 6 reports

indicated that the local school district furnished these facilities and 1 of the 6 had such facilities furnished by the city or county recreation departments.

One indicated

that the facilities were furnished by a private foundation.

176 Recreational facilities for day camping.

Table XLIV

shows that where a day camping program was conducted by metropolitan public school districts the cooperation of the city or county in furnishing the facilities was apparently common practice.

Only 2 of the 13 elementary level day

camping programs reported were supported or had the camp­ grounds and recreational facilities furnished solely by the local school district.

In 7 cases these facilities were

furnished by the city or county.

This, of course, indicates

a cooperation between public school districts and city or county that is at least becoming quite common.

Two of the

elementary level districts indicated such facilities were furnished by the city and the school cooperatively.

One

indicated that the facilities were furnished by the state, and 1 left the item incomplete. On the secondary level only 1 of 5 reporting districts indicated the facilities furnished entirely by the local school districts.

In 2 of the 5 the city or county

furnished the facilities.

In 1 there was a cooperation

between the city and school and in 1 the facilities were furnished by the state.

Reports from both the elementary

and secondary level schools indicate that where summer day camping programs were conducted, the actual recreational facilities and campgrounds were usually not the property of the local school district.

Schools often use either city

177 or county facilities, facilities furnished cooperatively by the city or county and school district, facilities furnished by the state, or facilities furnished by some private organization. Operating costs for summer overnight camping. Although agencies outside the public school district helped to supply the recreational facilities and campgrounds for summer overnight camping programs, the operating costs other than food were more frequently borne by the public school districts as shown in Table XLV.

Five of the 10 reporting

elementary level districts indicated that the school dis­ tricts provided operating costs, with help from the city in 1 case.

In only 2 cases were the operating costs borne

by the city or county.

In 1 district a private foundation

provided the costs and in 1 the pupils were responsible for most of the expenses.

On the secondary level 4 of the 6

reported operating costs borne by the district.

Only 1

reported that these costs were provided by the city or county and a private organization supported 1. The food costs were almost always borne by the pupils and their parents.

The exceptions were in cases of private

foundations furnishing the camp program.

In all other cases

the pupils and parents on both the elementary and secondary level were responsible for that part of the operating costs. The cost of conducting overnight camping programs was

TABLE

XLV

PROVISION FOR OPERATING COSTS FOR SUMMER CAMPING PROGRAMS Number of districts Level and kind Costs other than food of summer Food costs camping Local Local Other Parents Local dis­ district program district trict plus tuition

Other

Elementarylevel over­ night camping

5

2

3

a

0

2

Secondarylevel over­ night camping

4

1

1

3

0

1

Elementarylevel daycamping program■ 4

4

5

9

1

4

Secondarylevel daycamping program

1

2

3

0

2

2

179

assumed by the public school district in more than half of the cases reported on both the elementary and secondary level.

Such operating costs such as food apparently were

furnished entirely by the parents and pupils in a majority of cases. Operating costs for summer day camping.

In 4 of the

13 elementary level districts conducting day camping programs the operating costs were borne by the local district with help from the city in 1 case.

Table XLV shows that 4 re-

ported these operating costs supported by the city or county recreation departments.

Five reported either co- ■

operation between the city or between the state and the school in the support of day camp programs.

On the second­

ary level 2 of 5 reporting districts indicated that the facilities were furnished by the local school district. One program was financed by the city, and the other 2 were furnished cooperatively by either the city and school or the school and the state. The operating costs such as food were almost always borne by the pupils and parents as reported in all of the day camping programs.

In only 1 case was there an indica­

tion that food costs were not a responsibility of parents or pupils in this part of the camping program.

In this lone

exception the city or county recreation department aided.

180

Pupil eligibility for the summer overnight camping. Table XLVI shows that pupil eligibility for summer overnight camping varies a great deal.

Three of the districts re­

ported that all pupils on the elementary level were eligible for the camping program on a first-come basis, 3 indicated that pupils were selected on the basis of their eligibility to have family camping experiences, and 4 restricted eligibility to either specific grade levels or specific age levels.

One district indicated that the camping program

was only for orthopedic pupils.

Where a grade level was

specified by elementary level districts the sixth grade was indicated in at least 3 of the cases.

One district

specified ages 9 to 15 as the elementary and secondary age level group. On the secondary level 3 of the 6 reporting districts indicated that all of the pupils were eligible on a firstcome policy.

Only 1 indicated that pupils were selected

on the basis of their inability to have family camping experiences.

In the only case where a specific grade or age

level was indicated ages 9 to 15 were included. These few reports indicate that there is not a great deal of agreement on pupil eligibility for the summer over­ night camping program as reported by the metropolitan public school districts.

Almost as many indicated all pupils were

eligible on a first-come basis as pupils selected on the

131

TABLE

XLVI

PUPIL ELIGIBILITY FOR SUMMER CAMPING PROGRAMS Level and kind of summer camping program

Number of districts All pupils Pupils selected Pupils of on a first- on basis of in­ specific come basis ability to have grade family camping levels experiences

Other

Elementary level overnight camping

3

3

4

2

Secondary level overnight camping

3

1

1

1

Elementary level day camping program

6

1

6

0

Secondary level day camping program

2

0

3

0

182 basis of their inability to have family camping experiences. Pupil eligibility for the summer day camping. In the day camping program on the elementary level the trends are a little more definite.

Table XL7I shows that 6 re­

ported all pupils eligible on a first-come basis with only 1 district limiting the pupils to those selected on the basis of their inability to have family camping experiences.

Where

specific age or grade levels were indicated there was no common answer.

The 6 who specified particular age or grade

level eligibility for the day camping program included the following:

sixth grade, grades 4 to 6, grades 1 to 6,

grades kindergarten to 8, ages 6 to 12, and ages 9 to 1$. On the secondary level only 2 of the 5 reporting these day camping programs indicated that all pupils were eligible on a first-come basis.

None reported a selection

on a basis of inability to- have family camping experiences. Only 2 specified age or grade level requirements.

One

indicated grades 7 to 12 were eligible; the other specified the 9 to 15 age level. The reports indicate that in the day camping program frequently all pupils are eligible and that in general the eligibility is not limited to specific grade levels. Length of time in the overnight school camp.

On the

elementary level 5 of the 10 reporting districts indicated

183 that the typical camping pupil was in camp from 1 to 2 weeks during the summer months.

Three of the reporting districts

indicated the duration of the student's stay in camp was approximately 6 days.

Only 1 of the districts reported a

program of 2 to 3 weeks, and the single camp reported for orthopedic children had a duration of 10 weeks.

According

to Table XLYII and a summary of these few reporting cases the trend was to have the overnight camping program of approximately 2 weeks* duration. Length of the day school camp.

The day camping

program tended to be of greater duration than the overnight camping program according to the summary given in Table XLYII.

Five of the 13 districts indicated that the duration

of the day camping program was over 3 weeks.

Five reported

a program of approximately 6 days; 3 districts reported a program of from 1 to 3 weeks in length for elementary level schools.

On the secondary level 2 indicated a program of

6 days* duration, 2 a program of from 1 to 2 weeks.

In one

case the program lasted for more than 3 weeks. The day camping program, as reported by the metropoli­ tan public school districts which conduct such programs, was operated both on the basis of a short term and a term longer than 3 weeks.

The districts were about equally divided as

to whether they had a program of approximately 1 week or a program that lasted more than 3 weeks for each individual

1$4

RABLE

XLVII

DURATION OF SUMMER CAMPING PROGRAMS Level and kind of summer camping; program

Number of districts Length of time the average camping pupil spends in School program the school camp operates Less Only during All One to 15-21 Over than three summer days year two a week weeks weeks months

Elementary level overnight camping 3

5

1

Secondary level overnight camping

2

3

1

Elementary level day camping program 5

3

Secondary level day camping pr ogram

2

2

1

5

5

0

3

3

0

5

12

1

0

1

4

0

’

135 camping pupil. Time of year the overnight camping program operates. Four of the 10 districts reporting on the elementary level, according to Table XLVU, indicated that the summer over­ night camping program lasted only during the summer months. Six indicated that the program operated all year, but there were some exceptions noted on these responses.

One indicated

that the program was of 3 months 1 duration, part of which extended into the regular school year.

Another district

indicated that the program was in the late spring in ad­ dition to some time in summer.

Still another reported 2

weeks of camping during the regular school year plus time during the summer. On the secondary level 2 of the 6 reporting districts indicated that the program was conducted only during the summer; the other 4 indicated that it was not limited to summer but did operate during the regular school year.

One

district indicated that the operation during the regular .school year was limited to 2 weeks. Many of the districts which had summer camping programs operating in the regular school year did not respond to the questionnaire because this study was designed to seek information about programs confined largely to summer activities.

The indications are that when metropolitan public

school districts do conduct overnight camping programs they

186 are seldom limited to summer month activities but rather their summer month activities are continued into the regular school year. Duration of the day camping program.

The day camping

program, as noted in Table XLVII, differs from the overnight camping program in respect to the time of the year that it operates.

In almost every case the day'camping program was

a summer-operated program and did not extend into or from the regular school year.

In only 1 case on the elementary

level and none on the secondary level was the day camping program reported as being an all-year affair. Chapter summary.

It was found that 10 elementary

level districts reported summer public school district operation of overnight camping programs, while 6 secondary level programs were reported.

A total of 13 districts

indicated elementary level day camping programs, and 5 secondary level districts indicated such day camping programs.

Details were not given on at least 1 of the

county district camp programs.

Other districts reported

camping programs which extended during the regular school year but were not included in this study. Campgrounds and other recreational facilities were most frequently furnished by city or county recreational depart­ ments or other private foundations.

In only a few cases did

187

the local school district provide such facilities.

Operating

costs other than food were most frequently reported as being the responsibility of either the public school district or a combination of the school district and either the city or state.

Food costs in both the overnight and day camping

programs were reported as being the responsibility of pupils and parents. Although approximately 30 per cent of the elementary level districts limited their overnight camping program to the underprivileged children, the others indicated that all pupils were eligible for the program on a first-come basis. Pupil eligibility for the day camp program in almost every case was not limited. The typical camping pupil was in camp from 1 to 2 weeks during the summer in the overnight camping programs reported in metropolitan public school districts.

The

duration of day camping programs was less well defined, with nearly equal numbers reporting programs of 1 week’s duration, 1 to 3 weeks1 duration, and over 3 weeks’ duration. Nearly half of the metropolitan public school dis­ tricts reporting overnight camping programs indicated that these programs were confined to the summer months, but more indicated that camping was not limited to the summer months. This indicates that the summer camping program was in many cases an extension of the regular school year rather than a separately organized public school summer activity.

CHAPTER VII SUMMER SCHOOL CLASSROOM PROGRAM One of the objectives of the present study was to gather information regarding the kind of summer classroom programs operated on both the elementary and secondary levels in metropolitan, public school districts. . A section of the questionnaire was designed to gain information about the kinds of classroom offerings, student eligibility for the program, summer achievement, the length of the daily session, the total length of the session in weeks, and certain other pertinent information. The percentages reported are in relation to the number of districts reporting classroom programs.

In some

cases a respondent checked more than one of the choices, indicating either 2 kinds of programs in operation or a com­ bination of these kinds of offerings. Kind of classroom offerings.

The most frequently

reported kind of classroom program for the summer of 1949 more or less paralleled the regular school curriculum, with 76 per cent of the 99 districts reporting elementary level classroom programs making this response.

A summary of

responses, by city size and geographical area, is shown in Table XLVIII.

Only 15 per cent.of the districts indicated

TABLE

X L V T II

KINDS OF ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASSROOM OFFERINGS Per cent reporting Population group Number of by city size and districts Offerings Achievements geographic region Parallels Exploratory Other Recorded Remedial Cultural; Other regular or for acwork not relayear cultural celeration ted to curriculumi promotions

100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

30 30 21 13 5

£3 70 76 100 20

13 17 19 0 40

17 10 10 15 40

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

5 10 10 35 7 6

60

40 ,'0 20 3 29 17 13 0 31

3& 0 50

3a

2 16

71 100 75 50 56

0 10 0 14 14 0 25 50 31

Totals

99

76

15

14

4a

a

ao ao a6

50 47 43

3a

20 40 30 50 54 43.

a3

30 43 33 62 20

23 23 19 15 60

7 0 19 0 0

ao

50 25

0 20 0 20 29 17 25 50 50

0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 25

36

23

6

40 40 37 43 33

H oa

190 that the program was of an exploratory or cultural nature not necessarily related to the regular curriculum.

The

remaining 14 per cent wrote in still other types of class­ room offerings.

Most of these had indicated that the program

was primarily a reading clinic, remedial program, special guidance center, or some other remedial help for the re­ tarded child. There was general agreement, by city size, in regard to the summer classroom offerings except in the cities be­ low 5,000 population, where a slightly larger percentage indicated remedial and exploratory-type curricula.

A

deviation from the regular curriculum was most frequently reported in the Mountain, Pacific, and West South Central regions.

These indicated a high degree of either exploratory

or remedial type summer offerings on the elementary level. Table XLIX shows that 183 districts reported this section of the questionnaire.

This implies a more frequent

secondary level classroom program than elementary level classroom program, since only 49 districts reported elemen­ tary level summer classroom programs.

Since 81 per cent of

the responses indicated that the summer classroom program paralleled the regular curriculum, the secondary level schools more frequently than the elementary schools had a summer classroom program that more or less paralleled the regular school year curriculum.

In 7 per cent of the reporting

TABLE

XLIX

KINDS OF SECONDARY LEVEL S U M E R CLASSROOM OFFERINGS Population group Number of Per cent by city size and districts Offerings Achievement Parallels Exploratory Other Recorded Remedial Cultural; Other geographic region regular or for acwork not rela­ year cultural celeration ted to curriculum promotions 100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 3,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999 New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific Totals

49

94

57

S2

49 23

69

5

60

4 45

100 53 94 93

17

S3

a

n

0

S2

5

$4

2 4 0

4 4 0

7S 37

0

0 2 0 6

13 6

60 100 64

71

71

0 7

14

11 2 27

100 91 100 #9

0 9 0 11

0 0 0 0

93 79 100 91 50 35

1S3

Si

7

3

Si

56

14 7

S

29 26 29 30 20

S 17

50

0

47 41 IS

13

16 20

6 0 0 0 0

21 29 0 0 22

7 14 9 0 26

0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 7

2S

12

2

0 11

vO

192 districts the secondary level classroom program was marked as an exploratory and cultural program not necessarily re­ lated to the regular curriculum.

Only 3 per cent of the

responses indicated a third choice, which in most cases was written in as a remedial or make-up program for the re­ tarded student. City size was not a great factor in the kind of offerings secondary level summer classroom programs contain. All city sizes most frequently indicated that the offerings more or less paralleled the regular school year curriculum. A deviation from the regular school year curriculum was reported most frequently in the 3 0,000 to 99,999 population size cities and least frequently in the cities of 2,500 to 5,000 population. Geographically, deviation from the regular curriculum was more frequently reported by the Middle Atlantic, Pacific, and West South Central regions.

According to the summary

reported in Table XLIX, the summer classroom program always paralleled the regular year curriculum in the New England, East South Central, and Mountain regions. The statistics cited indicate that the regular school year curriculum was followed more frequently on the secondary level than on the elementary level and that ex­ ploratory and remedial type programs were more frequent on the elementary level than on the secondary, level.

193 Pupil eligibility for the summer classroom program. Table L shows a summary of the responses made by the 99 public school districts reporting elementary classroom programs in this section of the questionnaire. more than 1 choice.

Some checked

Therefore, the percentages indicated

represent total responses in relation to the 99 reporting districts.

A total of 66 per cent of the responses showed

that all pupils of the district who chose to attend were eligible to attend.

Remedial programs were indicated in 38

per cent of the responses.

Only 2 per cent of the districts

checked the item to indicate that the program was for ac­ celerated students, and most of these respondents also indicated that the program was for all who chose to attend. This means that the program was not limited to accelerated students.

Another 2 per cent reported certain other

restrictions on eligibility for the program, but these were not specified. Cities of the various size classifications were generally agreed in the extent to which only those pupils who needed remedial help were accepted.

Cities in the 5,000

to 9,999 size most frequently reported that all pupils who chose to attend summer school were eligible. In the South Atlantic and Hast North Central regions, as compared with other geographical areas, it was more commonly accepted practice for the elementary level programs

194

TABLE

L

PUPIL ELIGIBILITY FOR THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASS­ ROOM PROGRAM Population group Number by city size and of geographic region dis­ tricts

All who choose to attend

Per cent Only those Only needing re­ acceler­ medial help ated students

Other

100,000 or over

30

70

30

0

7

30,000 to 99,999

30

60

40

3

0

10,000 to 29,999

21

62

43

5

0

5,000 to 9,999

13

85

46

0

0

2,500 to 4,999

5

60

40

0

0

New England

3

60

40

0

0

Middle Atlantic

10

40

40

0

0

South Atlantic

10

30

60

10

20

East North Central

35

£0

31

3

0

West North Central

7

57

57

0

0

East South Central

6

100

33

0

0

West South Central

3

75

25

0

0

Mountain

2

50

50

0

0

Pacific

16

69

3$

0

0

Totals

99

66

33

2

2

195

to be for remedial help only.

In the West North Central and

Mountain regions the responses were equally divided in re­ gard to student eligibility between the opportunity for all students to attend and the opportunity for only those who needed remedial help to do so.

The freedom for all pupils

who chose to attend was shown most frequently in the East South Central, East North Central, Pacific, and New England regions. Students of the secondary level were more frequently permitted to attend summer school, if they chose to attend, than the elementary level according to the summary given in Table LI.

A total of 78 per cent of the 183 reporting

districts indicated that the summer school student eligi­ bility included all pupils who chose to attend.

Only 20 per

cent restricted the program to those pupils who needed remedial help.

Special consideration for the accelerated,

students was indicated in 3 per cent of the responses, although many of these indicated other choices in addition, which meant that the programs were not limited to the accelerated students. ■ Gity size was not a great factor in determining student eligibility.

Greatest opportunity for remedial help and

eligibility based on the need to provide studies for the accelerated student was best exhibited in the large cities. Summer classroom, achievement. An evidence of the

196 TABLE

LI

PUPIL ELIGIBILITY FOE THE SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASS­ ROOM PROGRAM Population group Number by city size and of geographic region dis­ tricts

All who choose to attend

Per cent Only those Only needing re­ acceler­ medial help ated students

Other

100,000 or over

49

71

27

10

S

30,000 to 99,999

57

79

21

5

2

10,000 to 29^999

49

£4

14

2,

0

5,000 to 9,999

23

?S

17

4

0

2,500 to 4,999

5

SO

0

0

0

New England

4

50

25

25

25

Middle Atlantic

45

62

29

4

4

South Atlantic

17

59

41

IS

6

East North Central

56

SS

14

7

0

West North Central

14

93

21

0

0

East.South Central

7

100

29

0

0

West South Central

11

100

0

0

0

2

50

0

0

0

27

31

7

0

4

1&3

73

20

5

3

Mountain Pacific Totals

197

status of the elementary classroom educational program is indicated in Table XLVTII by the responses made to the section on achievement in summer school.

In less than half

of the elementary level districts, or a total of 48 per cent of the 99 districts reporting, summer achievement was re­ corded in the school records so that the pupils could progress at an accelerated rate.

The achievement was recorded

in the school records for make-up work in 38 per cent of the responses.

Another 23 per cent on the elementary level con­

sidered the summer achievement as a cultural supplement to the regular school year progress and did not necessarily relate this progress to class promotions. Having the summer achievement recorded in the school records so that the pupil could progress at an accelerated rate was most frequently reported in the cities above 30,000 population.

Summer achievement recorded only for failure

or remedial make-up work was most frequently reported in the cities of 5,000 to 9,999 population size.

In the few cities

under 5,000 population reporting, the percentage was greatest for considering summer achievement as a cultural supplement to the regular school year progress and not necessarily related to classroom promotions. The East South Central region frequently indicated that summer achievement was recorded in the school records so that pupils could progress at an accelerated rate.

198

Summer achievement recorded only for failure or remedial work was reported by geographical area most frequently in the New England elementary school districts.

The Mountain

and Pacific regions reported more frequently than other regions that the summer achivement was considered a cultural supplement to the regular school year.

The implication is

that the geographical areas differ considerably in the nature of their summer elementary level school programs. By far the largest percentage, with a total of 81 per cent, indicated that summer achivement on the secondary level was recorded in the school records so that pupils could progress at an accelerated rate.

Table XLIX shows that 28

per cent, which was considerably less than on the elementary level, had largely restricted the summer achievement to failure or remedial make-up work.

A smaller percentage, as

compared with the elementary level schools, considered the summer achievement a cultural supplement to the regular school year progress. On the secondary level, city size did not make a great deal of difference in the recording of summer achieve­ ment.

There were greater implications in the responses

from the geographical areas.

In the New England, South

Atlantic, and Mountain regions there were no responses to indicate that the summer achievement was considered a supple­ ment to the regular school year progress.

On the other hand,

199 the Pacific, East South Central, and Middle Atlantic regions reported from 13 to 26 per cent of the responses as consider­ ing the achievement a cultural supplement not necessarily related to classroom promotions.

In most of the rest of the

districts the summer achievement was recorded for accelera­ tion as well as for failure make-up. Subject area offerings on the secondary level. A list of subject area offerings was included in the question­ naire with opportunity for the respondents to indicate the most frequent offerings.

Table LII shows that English was

reported in 96 per cent of the districts with summer schools as the most frequently reported secondary level subject area. The social sciences ranked second with 94 per cent..

Mathe­

matics was reported in 93 per cent of the 178 districts re­ porting this section of the questionnaire for the third most frequently offered subject area.

Business education ranked

fourth with a total of 71 per cent of the responses.

Sciences

ranked fifth with other subject areas ranking in the follow­ ing order:

modern languages, music, ancient languages, arts,

industrial arts, homemaking, vocational shop, health, physical education, agriculture, driver education, remedial reading, and safety education. The differences by city size were not great for the subject areas of English, social sciences, mathematics, and science.

The large cities and the cities under 5,000 popu-

200 TABLS LII SUBJECT AREA OFFERINGS IN S E C O N M R Y LSYEL SUMMER SCHOOLS

Population group Number of by city size and districts English Ancient Modern geographic region lanlanguages guages

Math, /

. ___________ Per cent of districts r e p o r t i n g ______________ Science Social Music Art IndusAgnHome Business ' Health Phys.Toe.'DriverOth science trial culture making education Ed. shop Ed. arts

100,000 or over

48

100

60

77

100

94

98

46

35

38

13

38

85

25

21

35

2

4

30,000 to 99,999

55

96

33

51

95

58

96

35

24

22

9

20

65

16

11

22

2

0

10,000 to 2 9 ,9 9 9

48

98

29

48

94

73

92

44

25

13

2

13

69

17

13

8

2

2

5,000 to 9,999

22

91

23

32

86

41

95

50

14

9

5

14

59

5

9

5

0

10

2 , 5 0 0 to 4,999

5

40

20

0

40

* 20

40

40

20

20

20

20

80

0

20

0

40

0

New England

3

100

67

100

100

100

100

0

0

33

0

33

100

0

0

33

0

0

Middle Atlantic

45

93

60

73

91

89

89

42

18

9

4

9

71

18

2

9

0

4

South Atlantic

17

100

59

65

100

71

100

24

6

6

0

24

59

12

0

0

0

0

East North Central

56

95

29

27

91

59

96

38

25

23

4

16

68

20

16

18

5

2

West North Central

12

100

0

25

92

50

92

42

8

25

0

0

33

8

0

8

0

0

East South Central

7

100

43

57

100

100

100

29

14

29

0

0

71

0

0

43

0

0

West South Central

10

100

40

50

100

70

100

60

30

30

40

50

80

30

30

30

0

0

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

50

50

50

50

50

50

0

0

50

0

0

Pacific

26

92

12

73

92

81

88

65

65

46

19

58

96

19

46

35

4

0

Totals

178

96

38

53

93

69

94

42

26

22

8

22

71

17

14

19

3

2

Mountain

201 lation more frequently indicated business education than did cities in the other city size classifications. Table LII shows that geographically the curricular offerings were of a broader nature in the Pacific, East North Central, and Middle Atlantic areas.

Some of the

other geographical areas had more of a tendency to stick to academic curricula for the summer session work. Duration of the summer session. A total of 53 pe^ cent of the 89 elementary level districts reporting this section of the questionnaire indicated that their summer session program was a 6-week program.

The next most

frequently reported program was an 8-week session reported by 27 per cent of the districts.

Table LIII shows also

that 6 per cent reported a 5-week session and 6 per cent indicated that the program was 4 or less weeks in length. Only 3 per cent held the school session for 7 weeks; 1 per cent continued it for 9 weeks.

Four per cent of the

elementary districts reported the duration as 10 to 12 weeks. None of the small towns under 5,000 population re­ ported sessions greater than the 6-week period.

Sessions

of 4 or 5 weeks were reported rather frequently in the smaller cities.

A session of 10 weeks or longer was re­

stricted to city size classifications of 30,000 and 100,000 population.

Approximately half of all size groups conducted

the elementary classroom program for the 6-week period.

202 TABLE

LIII

DURATION OF ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASSROOM FROGRAMS Population group Number by city size and of geographic region districts

Per cent of districts reporting the number of weeks as: ______ Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten

100.000 or over

29

0

4

52

4

34

0

7

30.000 to 99,999

26

3

3

53

4

15

0

3

10.000 to 29,999

16

0

6

56

6

31

0

0

5.000 to 9,999

14

14

0

43

0

36

7

0

2,500 to 4,999

4

25

25

50

0

0

0

0

New England

4

0

25

75

0

0

0

0

Middle Atlantic

6

0

0

33

0

17

0

0

South Atlantic

10

0

0

60

0

40

0

0

East North Central

35

6

6

54

6

26

0

1

West North Central

7

0

14

71

0

0

14

0

East South Central

5

0

0

20

0

30

0

0

West South Central

3

13

0

25

0

33

0

25

Mountain

1

0

0

100

0

0

0

0

Pacific

13

15

3

33

3

23

0

3

Totals

39

6

6

53

3

27

1

4

203 Geographically, all groups except the East South Central and West South Central most frequently reported the 6-week session.

In the few cases reported from the East South

Central and West South Central the 8-week session was most common.

Sessions of 7 to 12 weeks were more common to the

South Atlantic, East North Central, East South Central, West South Central, and Pacific regions. Table LIV shows that a total of 179 districts re­ ported on the length of their summer session secondary level classroom program.

Of these 40 per cent indicated a 6-week

summer session on the secondary level and 40 per cent re­ ported an 8-week session.

Only 12 per cent reported the 7-

week term; 7 per cent indicated that the program lasted for 10 to 12 weeks.

One per cent conducted the schools for 4

weeks or less; 1 per cent reported a 9-week session. The cities over 100,000 population most frequently reported the session as being 10 or more weeks in length; the cities of less than $,000 population most frequently reported a session of 4 weeks or less.

Otherwise, there was

general agreement regarding the frequency of the 6- and 8week sessions when studied according to city size. Geographically, the New England, West North Central, and Pacific areas most frequently reported a 6-week session rather "than a session of any other duration.

The Middle

Atlantic also most frequently reported a 6-week session but

204 TABLE

L IV

DURATION OF SECONDARY LEVEL SUM ER CLASSROOM PROGRAMS

Population group Number Per cent of districts reporting by city size and of the number of weeks as:______. geographic region districts Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten or ______________________ more 100,000 or over

49

0

0

35

10

43

0

12

30,000 to 99,999

55

0

0

44

8

47

0

8

10,000 to 29,999

49

2

0

40

16

39

0

2

5,000 to 9,999

21

0

0

33

14

33

5

5

2,500 to 4,999

5

20

0

40

20

20

0

0

New England

4

0

0

75

0

25

0

0

Middle Atlantic

44

0

0

57

27

11

0

5

South Atlantic

17

0

0

47

0

53

0

0

East North Central

56

2

0

29

5

63

0

2

West North Central

13

0

0

46

23

23

8

0

East South Central

7

0

0

0

14

71

0

14

West South Central

10

0

0

10

0

40

0

50

2

0

0

0

0

100

0

0

Pacific

:26

4

0

46

8

31

0

12

Totals

179

1

0

40

12

40

1

7

Mountain

205

had a high degree of responses for 7-week sessions.

The

South Atlantic, East North Central, East South Central, and Mountain regions indicated a preference for the 8-week period.

The sessions of 10 weeks or more were most frequently

reported in the West South Central, East South Central, and Pacific regions with a few in the Middle Atlantic regions. Length of day.

The elementary classroom program

began before 8 a.m. in 2 per cent of the 87 districts re­ porting elementary classroom programs.

Nearly one half, or

48 per cent, began their programs between 8 and 8 :2 9 a.m. for the most frequent pattern.

A total of 16 per cent

indicated that the program started between 8:30 and 8:59, and 33 per cent got under way between 9 and 9:29 a.m. started as late as 9:30 a.m.

None

A summary of city size and

geographical region variations is shown in Table LV. The predominant practice was for the elementary level classroom program to extend to 12 m. or to 12:15 p.m.

A

total of 59 per cent of the reporting districts on the elementary level indicated that the end of the daily session of summer school came between 12 m. and 12:29 p.m.

Only 24

per cent indicated that the program extended beyond 1 2 :3 0 , with several indicating that the program extended as late as 2, 3, or 4 p.m.

The few longer sessions extending late into

the afternoon, according to Table LV, were reported from the Pacific, East North Central, West North Central, and South

206 TABLE

LV

OPENING- AND CLOSING HOURS FOR ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER ... CLASSROOM SESSIONS.. Population group by city size and geographic region

Per cent reporting

Number of districts Before 8 A*M.

Opening hour 8-8:29 8:308:59

9:009:29

Before 11 A.M.

Closing hour 11:0011:30- T 2 -12 T29 “ 12730 or later 11; 29 11:59 ..

Mean length of day in hours

100,000 or over

26

0

58

15

27

0

4

4

69

23

3.8

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999

2?

0

52

19

30

4

7

7

52

19

3.7

1 0 ,0 0 0 to 29,999

16

0

38

13

50

0

6

31

56

6

3.5

5,000 to 9,999

14

14

50

21

14

0

0

14

64

21

3.9

2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

4

0

0

100

0

0

0

0

25

75

5,8

New England

4

0

25

25

50

0

0

25

75

0

3.3

Middle Atlantic

6

0

17

17

67

0

17

17

50

17

3.1

South Atlantic

10

0

30

40

30

10

0

0

20

7

4.2

East North Central

35

3

54

11

31

0

6

14

63

17

3.8

West North Central

6

0

67

0

33

0

17

0

67

17

4.2

East South Central

6

17

50

33

0

0

0

33

33

33

3.8

West South Central

8

0

88

0

13

0

0

0

88

13

4.0

Mountain

1

0

100

0

0

0

0

0

100

0

4.0

Pacific

11

0

27

18

55

0

0

9

6.4

27

3.8

Totals

87

2

48

16

33

1

5

11

59

24

3*8

/

207

Atlantic regions.

Another 11 per cent concluded the program

between 11 :3 0 and 1 1 :5 9 a.m.; 5 per cent concluded the program between 11 and 11:29 a.m.

Only 1 per cent of the

districts terminated the program by 11 a.m. Except for the cities under 5>000 population, where the few cases reported longer days, the city size groups were in general agreement that the summer session for the elementary level pupil was between 3 and 4 hours* duration. Geographically, the greatest mean average was 4.2 hours in the West North Central and South Atlantic regions and 4 hours in the West South Central and Mountain regions.

The

East North Central, East South Central, and Pacific regions each had a mean average of 3.8 hours.

The New England cities

had a mean of 3 .3 hours; the Middle Atlantic had shorter classroom days with a mean average of 3 .1 hours. The mean average for the elementary level summer schools reported by the 87 districts was found to be 3 .8 hours with the most common opening hour between 8 and 8 :3 0 a.m.

The most common closing hour was between 12 and 12:29

p.m. The secondary level classroom program in 68 per cent of the 174 districts, reporting on the secondary level, started the daily classroom program during the summer some­ time between 8 and 8:29 a.m.

Only 14 per cent started be­

tween 8 :3 0 and 8:59 a.m.; 9 per cent get under way before

208 8 o'clock and 9 per cent get under way after 9 o 1clock. started the program later than 9:30 a.m.

None

As shown by Table

LV I, city size was not a great factor in causing the opening hour to vary, although cities under 10,000 population had a greater frequency of districts starting before the 8 a.m. hour. Geographically, the New England, East South Central, and Mountain regions had a higher percentage of districts starting the daily program before 8 a.m.

There was a great

tendency for the Middle Atlantic and the South Atlantic districts to delay the starting time until 8 :3 0 or.9 a.m. The early part of the 12 noon hour was the most frequent stopping time for the summer session secondary level classroom program.

More than 55 per cent of the 144

secondary level districts reported this termination hour. A total of 36 per cent of the districts extended the program later than the 1 2 :3 0 p.m. hour; the largest percentage of those which extended it to 1 2 :3 0 or later actually terminated the program by 1 p.m.

A few scattered districts from the

East North Central, West North Central, Pacific, and South Atlantic areas extended the program to as late as 3:45 p.m. Only 7 per cent of the secondary level districts ended the program before the 12 noon hour.

Other variations may be

noted in Table LVI. Table LVI shows that the mean length of the secondary

209

table

lvi

OPENING- AND CLOSING HOURS FOR SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASSROOM SESSIONS Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts

Per cent reporting Before 8 A ,M •

1 0 0 ,0 0 0 or over

46

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 9 9 ,9 9 9

54

1 0 ,0 0 0 to 29,999

Opening hour 8-8:29 o :308:59

9-9:29

9:30 or later

Closing hour Before 11-11:29 11:3011 A* M. 11:59

12-12:29

1 2 :3 0 or later

Mean length of days in hours

72

15

.7

0

0

0

4

52

43

4,2

9 -

69

13

9

0

6

2

2

48

43

4,2

49

4

.73

14

8

0

0

6

8

63

22

3,9

5 ,0 0 0 to 9 ,9 9 9

20

20

60

20

0

0

0

0

5

50

45

4,4

2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

5

20

20

0

60

0

0

0

0

100

0

3,6

New England

4

25

50

25

0

0

0

0

50

25

25

4,0

Middle Atlantic

42

0

50

36

14

0

0

5

7

48

40

3,9

South Atlantic

16

0

50

25

25

0

0

6

0

38

56

4.2

East North Central

56

11

80

4

5

0

4

2

2

61

32

4,2

West North Central

13

0

92

0

8

0

0

0

0

77

23

4,4

East South Central

7

29

57

14

0

0

0

0

0

29

71

4,5

West South Central

9

11

89

0

0

0

0

0

0

67

33

4,3

Mountain

2

50

50

0

0

0

0

0

0

50

50

5.0

Pacific

25

16

72

8

4

0

4

0

8

64

24

4.1

Totals

174

9

68

14

9

0

2

2

5

55

36

4 ,2

.7

210 level summer session classroom program in the 174 reporting districts was 4.2 hours.

The cities under 5,000 population

had a program slightly shorter than that, but all other citysize classifications had a program of approximately the same length. Geographically, the longest summer session school day was in the Mountain region with a mean of 5 hours.

The

shortest mean average program was 3.9 hours in the Middle Atlantic region.

The degree of variation was not great

either geographically or by city size.

The mean length of

school day as used in this part of the study was the dif­ ference between the starting hour and the ending hour of the daily program. Qn the secondary level the most frequent practice was to start the program between 8 and 8:30 a.m. and to conclude it between 12 m. and 12 :3 0 p.m., with approximately 4 hours and 15 minutes as the total duration of the program for the summer day. Minimum-sized class. With varying kinds of programs for the elementary students during the summer an attempt was made to determine how large the class must be in order to operate it as a part of the summer session program.

A total

of 35 per cent of the districts indicated that the minimum­ sized class that would be offered during the summer was be­ tween 10 and 14.

A total of 31 per cent reported that 15 to

211 19 would be the minimum size for which the class would be held.

About 14 per cent held the classes for as few as 5

to 9; 4 per cent conducted classes for as few as 1 to 4. Nine per cent required 20 to 24 as a minimum-sized class; 7 per cent of the districts required a minimum of 25 pupils. The differences, according to city size, were not great.

There was some tendency for the larger districts to

require larger classes and the smaller cities to hold classes for smaller groups of pupils.

Geographically, the most

noticeable interpretation is that the Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, East North Central, East South Central, and West South Central more frequently indicated that they required something less than 10 students in order to conduct a class. Qn the other hand, the New England, East North Central, and especially the Pacific indicated more frequently 20 pupils as the minimum number for which a class was held.

Other varia­

tions may be noted in Table LVII. In 160 districts reporting this section of the question­ naire, 40 per cent reported that the number of students for which a class may be held was between 10 and 14.

The next

most frequent report was 25 per cent of the responses for the 15 to 19 pupil group.

A total of 17 per cent of the districts

reported that they would conduct a class for groups of from 5 to 9 and only 3 per cent for groups of 4 or less.

Table

LVIII shows also that 11 per cent required a minimum of 20

TABLE

L V II

MINIMUM NUMBER OF PUPILS FOR A CLASS IN ELEMENTARY .LEVEL SUMMER CLASSROOM SESSIONS Population group Number of by city size and districts geographic region

0—4

100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

24 22 12 12 4

17 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

3 5 9 32 5 5 7 1 7

0 0 22 3 0 0 0 0 0

Totals

74

4

0 0

a

Per cent reporting the following number of pupils: 25 or more 5-9 10-14 15-19 29-24

0 9 17 25 75

21 55 50 25 0

12 23 25 17 25

17 9 0 S 0

11 5 0

0 20 11 16 0 29 0 0

33 60 44 31 40 40 43 0 14

33 20 11 2B 60 40 29 100 43

33 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 14

0 0 11 6 0 0 0 0 29

14

35

31

9

7

20

■a 0

212

TABLE

L V III

MINIMUM NUMBER OF PUPILS FOR A GLASS IN SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASSROOM SESSIONS

Population group Number of by city size and districts geographic region

6-4

Per cent reporting the following number of pupils: 25 or more 5-9 20-24 10-14 15-19

100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

41 53 43 17

0 0 2 IS 0

7 17 23 29 0

37 40 49 29 50

24 32 16 IS 50

22 9 9 0 0

10 2 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

4 34 15 54 11 7 7 2

0

26

7 0 9 0 0 0 0

0 29 13 17 IS 29 14 0 4

25 53 47 41 45 57 72 0 S

50 3 27 2S IS 0 14 100 50

0 9 7 11 9 0 0 0 27

25 0 0 4 0 14 0 0 11

160

3

17

40

25

11

4

Totals

6

6

.

6 0

213

214

pupils, and only 4 per cent required a minimum of 25 pupils in order to conduct a summer class. There was some tendency on the part of the large cities to require larger minimums for these classes and for the cities under 3 0 ,0 0 0 to offer classes for smaller numbers of pupils. Geographically, the Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, West North Central, and East North Central more frequently had a tendency to give consideration to the small classes. The Mountain, Pacific, New England, and East North Central regions reported more frequently than other districts that elementary level summer classes would not be held for minimums below 15 or 20 pupils. Optimum-sized class.

Opportunity was given for

respondents to write in the number of pupils that were con­ sidered an optimum-sized class.

Those who marked from 20 to

35 represented the predominant practice because there were 21 per cent of the respondents who indicated the 20 to. 24 pupil group, 21 per cent who selected the 25 to 29 pupil group, and 21 per cent who chose the 30 - to 34-sized group. Only 10 per cent of the respondents indicated optimum sizes greater than 34; 17 per cent indicated the optimum-sized class to be between 15 and 19 pupils.

A total of 9 per cent

considered the optimum size for the summer class to be less than 15.

215

Table LIX shows that the tendency was for the larger cities generally to indicate classes of 25 pupils or more on the elementary level.

In the cities of the smaller-sized

classifications there was a greater tendency for the respon­ dents to indicate classes of 15 to 24 pupils.

Geographically,

the differences were not particularly great. Of the 157 respondents on the secondary level 27 per cent indicated that the optimum-sized class was from 25 to 29 pupils. groups.

This was the greatest frequency of all pupil

Second most frequently mentioned size of class was

20 to 24 pupils, with 24 per cent of the districts reporting this preference.

A total of 19 per cent of the respondents

preferred the optimum-sized class ranging from 15 to 19 pupils.

The fourth preference indicated by 15 per cent of

the respondents was for classes of 30 to 34 pupils.

Only

11 per cent indicated classes of 35 or more as their choice; 4 per cent considered classes smaller than 11 as optimum. By city size there was somewhat of a tendency again for the cities of the larger sizes to consider larger classes as optimum, whereas the smaller cities more frequently preferred classes of 20 or less.

Geographically, as noted in

Table LX, the most significant difference was found in the East Horth Central and South Atlantic regions, where there was more of a tendency to have a wider range of preferences than in the other geographical areas.

In general, a

TABLE

L IX

OPTIMUM-SIZED CLASS FOR ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASSROOM SESSIONS

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts

0-9

Per cent reporting number of pupils as: lo - i4 25-29 20-24 15-19 30-34 35-39

4Q—44

100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10.000 to 29,999 5.000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

23 23 14 11 4

0 0 0 9 0

0 4 14 id 25

9 4 36 36 25

30 22 7 ia 25

26 22 21 9 25

22 35 14 9 0

13 9 0 0 0

0 4 7 0 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

4 5 a 33 5 4 7 1 a

0 0

25 40 25 9 60 25 14 0 0

50 0 13 24 20 25 2a 0 13

25 0 25 21 20 25 14 0 3a

0 40 13 21

0 0 13 9

0

3 0 0 0 0 0

0 20 13 9 0 0 0 0 13

0

0

25 2a 100 25

0 14 0 0

0 13

Totals

75

1

a

17

21

21

21

7

3

0

0

*

0 3

0 0 0

216

TABLE

IX

OPTIMUM-SIZED CLASS FOR SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER CLASSROOM SESSIONS

Population group Number of by eity size and districts geographic region

10-14

Per cent reporting number of pupils as •• 25-20 40 or more 35-39 20-24 30-34 15-19

100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 2 9 ,9 9 9 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

42 49 41 20 5

2 2 5 10 0

17 6 27 30 60

21 27 22 25 20

26 37 29 10 0

14 22 7 10 20

14 0 7 10 0

5 6 3 5 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

4 36 13 54 11 6 7 2 24

0 6 8 2 18 0 0 0 0

25 33 15 15 36 0 14 0 8

25 17 23 30 18 50 43 0 13

25 39 30 28 18 17 0 50 21

0 3 15 13 9 33 43 50 25

25 3 8 7 0 0 0 0 17

0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 17

157

4

19

24

27

15

7

4

Totals

217

218

majority of the respondents preferred classes at least in the size range from 20 to 34 pupils. Number of secondary level class periods per day. As was noted in another section, a typical summer session program was of about 4 hoursT duration.

Table IXE shows that 168

districts reported, with 68 per cent of them indicating that the most frequent practice was to have 2 class periods per day for the regular student in the secondary level summer session.

Usually these were indicated as double periods

or were designated as 120-minute periods.

Only 14 per cent

of the respondents indicated that students participated in 4 class periods in the secondary level summer session school; 12 per cent reported 3 class periods per day; only 4 per cent reported a single class period as being typical for a regular student; 2 per cent reported 5 class periods.

The

smaller cities always indicated 1 or 2 class periods of greater duration. Among the cities, by class size, there was not a great difference in the frequency of reporting 1, 2, 3, 4, or 3 class periods for the summer school student.

Geographically,

it was noted that the New England, East North Central, and West North Central areas reported single class periods, where­ as none of the other geographical regions did so.

The

Mountain and Pacific regions quite frequently reported 4 class periods per day for the regular student, although they,

219 TABLE

LXI

NUMBER OF STUDENT CIASS PERIODS PER DAY IN SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER SCHOOLS

Population group Number by city size and of geographic region districts

Per cent of districts reporting the number of periods as: Two Three One Four Five

100,000 or over

44

5

64

14

16

1

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999

53

0

75

13

8

4

10,000 to 2 9 ,9 9 9

47

4

62

11

21

2

5,000 to 9,999

19

5

68

16

11

0

2,500 to 4,999

5

20

80

0

0

0

New England

4

25

25

50

0

0

Middle Atlantic

33

0

71

16

11

3

South Atlantic

16

0

69

13

13

6

East North Central

54

6

72

11

11

0

West North Central

13

15

62

0

15

8

last South Central

7

0

72

14

14

0

West South Central

8

0

50

* 38

0

12

Mountain

2

0

50-

0

50

0

Pacific

26

0

69

4

27

0

Totals

168

4

68

12

14

2

220 like all other geographical regions except New England, most frequently reported 2 periods per day.

The West South Central

and New England areas reported 3 periods more frequently than did other geographical areas. The number of class periods of instruction per day. The average teacher load was 2 class periods per day as reported by 50 per cent of the 176 secondary level school districts reporting teacher load.

These were quite

frequently double class periods of about 120 minutes.

Three

class periods per day and 4 class periods per day were reported with equal frequency by 22 per cent of the respondents. The number of class periods per day that the average teacher has does not differ materially by city size nor by geographical region.

Even if there was some variation it

would be partially compensated for by the fact that the class periods varied considerably in length.

A summary is

given in Table LXII. Length of secondary level class periods. A total of 26 per cent of the 172 respondents to this item in the questionnaire indicated that 120 minutes was the regular length of the secondary level summer class period.

Almost

as many, a total of 21 per cent, reported 60-minute class periods.

The third most frequently mentioned time was 90

221 TABLE

L X II

NUMBER OF TEACHER CLASS PERIODS PER DAT IN SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER SCHOOLS

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting

Per cent of districts reporting the number of periods as: One Two Three Four Five Six

100,000 or over

47

4

49

21

23

2

0

30,000 to 99,999

55

0

56

22

20

2

0

10,000 to 29,999

43

6

44

25

23

2

0

5,000 to 9,999

21

0

4#

19

2^

0

0

2,500 to 4,999

5

20

60

20

0

0

0

New England

4

25

50

25

0

0

0

Middle Atlantic

42

2

41

36

19

2

0

South Atlantic

16

0

44

19

31

6

0

East North Central

56

5

55

20

20

0

0

West North Central

13

a

54

15

23

0

0

East South Central

7

0

29

57

0

0

14

West South Central

9

0

33

17

56

0

0

Mountain

2

0

50

0

50

0

0

Pacific

27

0

67

7

22

4

0

176

4

50

22

22

2

0

Totals

222 minutes, which was checked by 15 per cent of the responding districts.

Ten per cent marked 50 to 55 minutes and 9 per

cent indicated 100 to 119 minutes.

A summary i-s given in

Table XXEII. Chapter summary.

This chapter considered the various

aspects of both the metropolitan public school district ele­ mentary and secondary level summer classroom programs. Approximately three fourths of the districts conducting elementary level classroom programs followed a curriculum that was much like that for the regular school year.

Over

two thirds of the districts permitted all pupils to attend, although 38 per cent of the responses indicated that the summer programs were primarily remedial in nature.

A

noticeable trend, however, was shown by the fact that 15 per cent of the district reponses indicated that the summer program was of an exploratory or cultural nature and not necessarily related to class promotions. The secondary level schools more frequently than the elementary level schools had a summer classroom program that more or less paralleled the regular school year curriculum. 7

Of the I83 public school districts reporting on the secondary level, 81 per cent indicated that the program paralleled the regular year curriculum.

Since only 20 per cent of the

secondary level districts indicated that the summer program was restricted to those who needed remedial help, secondary

TABLE

L X III

TOTAL LENGTH OF CLASS PERIODS IN SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER SCHOOLS

Population group by city size and geographic region

Humber of districts

45

100,000 or over 3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

45 53 43 21 5

4 0 3 10 0

9 9 15 10 0

s 20 2d 15 19 20

11 6 10 10 20

16 15 15 10 20

7 13 6 14 0

27 26 25 24 20

7 2 6 5 20

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

4 40 16 54 13 7 9 2 27

0 10 6 4 0 14 0 0 0

0 id 6 7 a 0 0 50 15

25 13 31 20 15 43 44 10 19

0 20 6 2 23 0 11 0 0

25 13 13 4 0 29 11 0 7

0 10 0 22 3 0 11 -50 15

2§ 13 31 24 31 14 22 0 a

25 0 6 7 15 0 0 0 4

172

5

10

21

9

15

9

26

2

Totals

Per cent of districts reporting length in minutes: 73-36 60 90 100-119 120 140-240 55

ro

224

level pupils were more frequently permitted to attend summer school than elementary level pupils. In less than half of the elementary level districts which conduct summer classroom programs, was summer achieve­ ment recorded so that the pupils could progress at an accelerated rate.

Dn the other hand, 81 per cent of the

secondary level districts reported that summer achievement was recorded in the school records so that pupils could progress at an accelerated rate.

The implication is that

the secondary level classroom program was more of an extension of the regular school year, whereas the elementary level programs more frequently represented either a remedial program or a cultural supplement to the regular school year but not directly related to class promotions. The subject area offerings on the secondary level in summer schools during the summer of 1949 in order of frequency were English, social science, mathematics, business education, science, modern languages, music, ancient languages, arts, industrial arts, homemaking, vocational shop, health, physical education, agriculture, driver education, remedial reading, and safety education. The summer term in most districts was either a 6-week session or an 8-week session.

Secondary level schools more

frequently than elementary schools had an 8-week session. Only 4 per cent of the elementary and 7 per cent of the

225

secondary level schools had sessions of 10 weeks or more duration during the summer.‘ Only 1 city reported schools on the 4-quarter school year with a 12-week summer term. Both elementary and secondary level summer class­ room programs generally began daily between 8 and 8 :3 0 a.m. and ended between 12 m. and 12:30 p.m.

The duration of the

daily summer program in both the elementary and secondary level schools was approximately 4 hours. Ten to 14 pupils represents generally the minimum number of pupils for which summer classes were held, but most districts indicated that 20 to 34 pupils represented a more optimum-sized summer class.

Secondary level minimum-

and optimum-sized classes were approximately the same as on the elementary level. Most common practice, on the secondary level for both the teacher and the pupil, was to have 2 so-called double periods each of 120 minutes* duration.

In other

districts 3 or 4 periods of shorter duration were held.

CHAPTER VIII SUMMER MUSIC PROGRAMS Experience shows that various kinds of music activities are partially or totally sponsored by public school districts during the summer months.

In some districts the music

instructor or instructors are hired on a 12-month contract in contrast to the other regular teachers.

Some teachers

remain in the community for the summer to give private, music instruction.

In other cases private classes are

conducted in public school buildings by school personnel. In this study an attempt was made to discover what responsi­ bility public school districts were assuming for various kinds of summer music activities. Organization of summer music activities.

The superin­

tendents in 143 districts of elementary level reported this section of the questionnaire.

In 57 per cent of the districts

elementary level music activities during the summer were classes held as a part of the regular school program.

Table

LXIV reveals that 20 per cent of the districts have music activities conducted by school personnel in public school buildings; financial support was primarily by tuition. Another 15 per cent indicated that the music activities on the elementary level during the summer were a part of a city

TABLE

L X IV

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER MUSIC PROGRAMS

Population group Number of districts by city size and reporting music geographic region section

____________Per cent of Tuition In regular In school summer buildings* school

responses A r e a part of a city or county summer program with some school aid

Other

100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

26 26 44 39 6

27 21 21 16 0

50 47 59 64 67

6 25 11 15 17

15 7 9 3 17

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

1 46 •6 40 17 2 6 2 19

0 21 13 25 17 0 17 0 21

0 59 62 53 59 100 50 50 56

100 10 0 ■15 12 0 33 50 21

0 10 25 7 12 0 0 0 0

143

20

57

15

6

Totals

.

by s tu d e n t t u i t i o n .

227

*Are conducted by school personnel in public school buildings and are supported primarily

228

or county program with some school aid in terms of build­ ings, personnel, finances, or musical instruments.

When the

representatives of these school districts were asked to indicate what kind of help the public school gave to the city or county in the summer program, 90 per cent reported the use of school buildings, 76 per cent indicated the use of school personnel, 67 per cent reported the use of school instruments, and 33 per cent checked financial support. Eight per cent of the elementary districts indicated that the music program had some other form of organization. The respondents frequently indicated that this included music in connection with playground work, a music program sponsored by a parent-teacher council, a music program organized through a city recreation council, or tax funds for support of the program.

There were small differences

according to city size and to geographical regions. About two thirds, or 66 per cent, of the 172 respon­ dents indicated that the secondary level summer music activities were a part of a regular school-organized program of summer classes.

Twelve per cent of the responses indicated

that the secondary summer music activities were conducted by school personnel in public school buildings and supported primarily by student tuition.

Eight per cent had checked

the alternate item, but in most cases they failed to specify the kind of music organization.

229 The most frequent kinds of organizations mentioned were those operated by Parent-Teacher Associations, as a part of the playground program of recreation, as a city recreation project, or as a program supported primarily by tax funds. Fifteen per cent indicated that these summer music activities were a part of a city or county summer program with some school aid.

In 72 per cent of the cases the aid con­

sisted of the use of school buildings. in 68 per cent of the cases. cent of the districts.

Personnel was checked

Instruments aided in 64 per

Another 4$ per cent indicated

financial help by the school districts in this city or county venture.

Variations as to city size and geographica‘1 region

can be found in Table LXV. Kinds of summer music activities. An attempt was made to determine the kind of activities which take place in the summer elementary music program.

Various types of music

activities were listed in the questionnaire, and the respon­ dents had an opportunity to write in other activities.

Table

LXVI gives a summary of the kinds of elementary music activities.

Instrumental instruction was checked in 71 P©**

cent of the cases.

This represented by far the most frequent

kind of school-sponsored music activity for elementary level in the summer months.

Next most frequently checked item was

participation in regular band concert or other similar group

TABLE

LXV

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER MUSIC FROGRAMS

Population group Number of districts by city size and reporting music geographic region section

Tuition in school buildings*

100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

31 37 55 40 9

16 19 11

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic , East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

1 57 13 44 17

Totals

3 9 2 26 172

Per cent of In regular sximmer school

responses Are a part of a city or county summer program with some school aid

Other

65 54 67 72 7S

6 22 15 15 11

0 14 15 11 IS 0 11 0

a

0 67 62 61 70 67 67 50 73

100 10 0 21 6 33 22 50 15

23 7 6 0 0 0 4

12

66

15

a

a

0

13 5 7 5 11 0

9

by s tu d e n t t u i t i o n .

230

*Are conducted by school personnel in public school buildings and are supported primarily

231

TABLE

L IV I

KINDS OF ELEMENTARY SUMMER MUSIC ACTIVITIES ...

population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item

Appreciation classes

.

r

Per cent Recreational Vocal Instrumental music for instruction instruction folk dancing, ©■fee*

Parti cipa tTon in regular band concerts

Preparation for early fa^l activities

Other

100,000 or over

26

19

31

42

69

46

27

4

30,000 to 99,999

28

14

32

32

61

32

18

0

10,000 to 2 9 ,9 9 9

44

9

14

14

86

43

30

0

3,000 to 9,999

39

3

13

13

69

46

23

5

2,500 to 4,999

6

0

17

0

33

17

17

17

New England

1

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

48

8

6

23

79

46

29

0

30

38

75

88

25

0

Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

8

East North Central

40

8

20

15

68

38

10

0

West North Central

17

6

6

24

58

29

29

12

East South Central

2

0

0

0

100

50

100

0

?/est South Central

6

0

50

33

67

50

50

0

Mountain

2

0

0

0

100

50

50

0

19

16

53

26

68

26

21

11

143

10

20

22

71

41

24

3

Pacific Totals

232 music programs during the summer.

The band activities were

indicated in 41 per cent of the responses.

Preparation for

early fall activities came third in frequency of response, with a total of 24 per cent.

Vocal instruction was checked

in 22 per cent of the returns, and recreational music for folk dancing was indicated in 20 per cent.

Although 3 per

cent of the respondents checked still other activities, not many were actually specified. Variations in these music activities by city size and geographical areas were not great.

In every city size and in

every geographical region, the instrumental music instruction was the most frequently mentioned item, except in the South Atlantic region, where 7 of the 8 respondents indicated that participation in regular band concerts or other music activities was more common. Table LZVII shows that on the secondary level 172 responses indicated that instrumental music was also most frequently mentioned as a kind of summer music activity. Participation in regular band concerts was checked in 46 per cent of the cases as the next most frequently reported *

kind of music activity.

Preparation for early fall activities

was checked more frequently than on the elementary level, with a total of 31 per cent.

The premium placed on organized

bands and music groups for fall sports has evidently made this important.

Vocal instruction came fourth in the check

TAB IE

LXVII

KIND OF SECONDAEY LEVEL SOTMEE MUSIC ACTIVITIES

Population group by city size and geographic region

lumber of districts reporting this item

Appreciation classes

Hecreational music for foils: dances etc.

Yocal instruction

Per cent Instrumental instruction

Participation in regular band concerts

Preparation Otter for early fall activities

1 0 0 ,0 0 0 or over

31

16

26

32

58

35

23

3

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 9 9 ,9 9 9

37

5

22

24

59

46

16

8

1 0 ,0 0 0 to 2 9 ,9 9 9

55

7

5

13

73

49

42

2

5 ,0 0 0 to 9,999

40

3

10

10

80

53

35

3

2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

9

0

11

0

33

33

44

11

Hew England

1

0

0

0

100

0

0

0

Middle Atlantic

57

5

7

14

72

47

42

2

South Atlantic

13

23

33

33

77

77

23

0

East North Central

44

5

9

9

61

39

23

7

West North Central

17

6

12

18

71

29

29

12

East South Central

3

>;0

0

0

67

67

67

0

West South Central

9

0

33

22

67

44

44

0

Mountain

2

0

0

0

100

50

0

0

26

12

23

31

54

50

23

4

172

7

14

17

67

46

31

4

Pacific Totals

.

234 list of music activities, with 17 per cent indicating vocal instruction as a part of the music activity for summer. total of 14 per cent checked recreational music.

A

Only 7 per

cent indicated appreciation classes; the remaining 4 per cent indicated that the music program included still other activities not mentioned in the questionnaire. Both variations in city size and in geographical region existed in regard to the kind of music activities on the secondary level.

On the most frequently mentioned item,

which was instrumental music, the range was from 33 per cent in the cities under 2,500 to 80 per cent in the cities from 5,000 to 9>999.

There was no particular consistent pattern

for the frequency in the 3 groups of larger cities.

Instru­

mental music had about the same significance in each area. Participation in regular summer concerts most frequently took place in cities with a population of 5,000 to 9,999.

Cities above 100,000 population and those below

2,500 had a somewhat smaller percentage indicating this type of activity.

The South Atlantic region checked this

activity in 77 per cent of the districts responding; the East South Central area indicated 67 per cent of the 3 districts reporting.

Other geographical areas to exceed the

mean on this item were the Middle Atlantic, Mountain, and Pacific regions. The cities under 30,000 population placed more stress

235 on summer music as a training period for early fall school activities.

In from 35 to 44 per cent of these cities such

training was considered important.

Geographically, the

New England, East South Central, Middle Atlantic, and West South Central regions reported this preparation for early fall activities more frequently than the mean of the group. Other types of music activities were reported less fre­ quently.

The summary can be found in Table LXVII.

Chapter summary.

Elementary level summer music

programs, as shown by this study, were a part of the program of summer classes in 57 per cent of the reporting school districts.

Approximately 20 per cent conducted summer

elementary music activities in school buildings and with school personnel, but these did not represent regularly organized school classes.

The public school district aided

the municipality or county in conducting summer music programs in another 15 per cent of the reporting districts. On the secondary level there was a greater tendency for the summer music program to be organized as a part of the regular program of summer classes. On both the elementary and secondary level instrumen­ tal instruction ranked first in frequency of kind of summer music activity.

Next in frequency of mention was partici­

pation in band concerts or other group music programs during

236 the summer, band activities, preparation for early fall activities, vocal instruction, recreational music, and appreciation classes*

Preparation for early fall activities

was more frequently reported on the secondary level than on the elementary level.

The premium placed on organized bands

and music groups for fall sports has evidently made this important in 1949.

CHAPTER IX PERSONNEL PRACTICES IN SOMMER EDUCATION An attempt was made to determine certain personnel practices for the metropolitan public school districts. This chapter considers the various kinds of public school summer programs in relation to the administration, selection of personnel, and method of determining compensation for summer services. Personnel compensation for summer playgrounds. A total of 188 districts reported some part of the personnel section of the questionnaire; altogether, 170 responses applied to this section regarding playgrounds.

A total of

68 per cent of the responses indicated that a flat sum for summer services was by far the most common practice for compensating summer personnel in public school playground programs.

An additional 20 per cent wrote in other plans

of compensation.

Most of these included payment by the week

or month, which is almost the same principle as a flat sum for the term.

Only 5 per cent reported that this compensa­

tion was a part of a 12-month contract.

Only 4 per cent

indicated that the summer salary was based on a per cent of the regular year's salary.

A sum based on enrollment

was indicated in only 2 per cent of the districts.

238 Table LXVTII shows that the smaller cities had a slightly greater tendency to employ summer playground personnel on a 12-month basis, but otherwise personnel com­ pensation practices did not vary a great deal by city size. Employing summer playground personnel on a 12-month contract was most frequently reported in the South Atlantic, West North Central, and West South Central regions.

By far the

greatest majority pay a flat sum for the summer or pay that sum by the day, week, hour, or month. Teacher compensation for summer camp services. A total of

25 districts marked some section of the summer camp

personnel part of the questionnaire.

A total of 21 responses

applied to the teacher compensation for the summer camp services.

Of these 21 the most commonly reported practice

was a flat sum for the summer term, indicated in 43 per cent of the districts.

An additional 19 per cent included pay by

the week, month, or day rate.

This practice of paying a

specified sum by hour, day, week, or term, then, includes approximately 62 per cent of the districts. To pay for summer camp services of teaching personnel on

a 12-month contract was more common to the camp program

than to the playground program according to the few districts reporting.

A total of 29 per cent of the reporting districts

indicated that the teacher compensation was a part of a 12month school contract.

In 5 per cent of the reporting dis-

TABLE

LXVIII

PERSONNEL COMPENSATION FOR SUMMER PUBLIC SCHOOL PLAYGROUNDS

Population group Number of Total Per cent of responses____ by city size and districts rePart of Flat sum Sum based on Based on per Other geographic region reporting sponses** 12-month for enrollment cent of reguthis item* contract summer lar year salary 100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to ..9,999 2,500 to 4,999 New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific Totals

26 60 52 12

24 32 55 47 12

4 3 5 4 17

71 69 67 6a 67

4 3 2 2 0

4 3 5 4 0

17 22 20 21 17

1 79 7 39 17 1 9 3 32

1 76 7 33 17 0 6 2 2d

0 3 29 3 1a 0 17 0 0

100 74 71 73 65 0 a3 0 50

0 0 0 3 12 ' 0 0 50 0

0 3 0 6 6 0 0 0 7

0 21 0 15 0 0 0 50 43

la a

170

5

6a

2

4

20

3a

239

^Number of districts reporting the personnel section of the questionnaire. ^Differs from total number reporting in that some checked more than one of the choices ■while some' omitted the item.

240 tricts the summer compensation was indicated as a sum based on the school enrollment, and in another 5 per cent summer compensation was based on a percentage of the regular year salary.

The number of cases reported were so few that no

particular study was made in regard to city size or geo­ graphical area. Teacher compensation for summer classroom services. Table LXIX reveals the fact that 191 districts reported some section of the classroom personnel part of the questionnaire. A total of 19^ responses were made, indicating that some dis­ tricts reported more than one practice within the individual district.

This means that in some of the schools or on some

of the levels the practice may have differed from the practice in other sections of the school system.

The flat sum, with

a total of 57 per cent of the responses, was most frequently reported.

An additional 15 per cent checked the alternate

item in which most of them wrote in the payment by day, week, month, or some other flat fee.

A total of 72 per cent

of the districts paid for the summer personnel services by this fixed flat sum for the term, including payments on the basis of day, week, month, or total term. In the classroom program a total of 15 per cent of the responses indicated the payment based on enrollment. This is not surprising in view of the fact that a part of the classroom programs included tuition charges.

These

TABLE

L X IX

TEACHER COMPENSATION FOR SIMMER CLASSROOM SERVICES

Population group Number of by city si&e and districts geographic region reporting this item*

Total re­ sponses5

Part of 12-month contract

Per cent of responses Flat sum Sum based on Based on per Other for enrollment cent of regu­ summer lar year salary

a a

100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10.000 to 29,999 5.000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

46 5& 50 30 7

4^ 63 51 29 7

4 6 0 0 29

67 49 57 62 57

17 16 14 14 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

7 40 17 60 15 7 12 4 29

a 39 17 61 16 7 12 3 35

13 0 6 3 6 0 17 0 3

63 69 59 61 75 43 42 33 37

25 5

21 6 43 25 33 3

6 0 17 0 14

0 7 6 14 0 33 43

191

19a

4

57

15

10

15

Totals

ia

13 7 14 0

a is a

^Number of districts reporting the persD nnel section of the questionnaire. ^Differs from total number reporting in that some checked more than one of the choices while some omitted the item.

6 16 22 17 0 0

ia

^ -P~

242 personnel practices based on enrollment evidently were closely related to the tuition summer schools.

Ten per cent

of the classroom programs based the personnel salary on a per cent of the regular year salary, and another 4 per cent made this a part of a 12-month school contract. City size was not a great factor in making differences in regard to the practice of teacher compensation for summer classroom services.

In the cities under 5,000 population,

the payment as a part of a 12-month school contract was more frequently reported than for any other city size classification.

Geographically, the most noticeable varia­

tion from the practice indicated was that the New England, East North Central, East South Central, West South Central, and Mountain regions more frequently based the summer pay­ ment on enrollment.

A percentage of the regular year salary

for summer compensation was reported more frequently in the South Atlantic, West South Central, and Pacific regions in contrast to other geographical sections. Teacher compensation for summer music programs. A total of 142 districts reported some section of the music personnel practices.

Table LXX reveals the fact that 124

responses applied to the compensation for summer services. The common practice for music programs was very similar to that for the regular classroom program, except that the music instructors were somewhat more frequently paid for

TABLE

LXX

TEACHER COMPENSATION FOR SUMMER MUSIC PROGRAMS

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of distri cts reporting this item*

100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

20 26 49 3$ 9

15 21 44 35 9

13 14 16 17 22

60 3# 55 60 73

7 14 11 0 0

7 14 5 9 0

13 19 14 14 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

0 44 9 39 14 2 6 3 25

0 41 9 33 13 1 4 1 22

0 7 33 12 46 0 50 0 9

0 63 56 53 33 100 25 0 45

0 2 11 0 0 0 100 0

0 5 0 6 15 0 25 0 9

0 17 0 6 0 0 0 0 36

142

124

16

56

7

7

14

Totals

Total responses**

Part of 12 month contract

Per cent of responses Flat sum Sum based Based on for on per cent cummer enrollment of regu­ lar year salary

id

Other

^Number districts reporting personnel section df questionnaire, **Differs from total districts reporting in that some checked more than one choice while others omitted the item.

2if/j. the summer services as a part of a 12-month contract.

A

total of 16 per cent of the responses indicated payment for services in the music program as a part of the 12-month contract.

The flat sum for summer services was reported in

56 per cent of the responses, and 14 per cent were paid a

flat sum on a day, week, or month basis.

A sum based on the

enrollment was reported by 7 per cent of the districts, and a sum based on a regular per cent of the yearly salary was indicated in another 7 per cent. In many districts the music program was actually a part of the summer classroom program.

In other reporting

districts there was no regular classroom program, but some kind of music program continued throughout the summer. Variations by city size and by geographical region were not significantly great. Individual in charge of the playground. A total of 188 districts responded to some section of the playground personnel part of the questionnaire, with 181 reponses to this particular part of the personnel section.

Table I3QCI

shows that a total of 49 per cent of the responses indicated that a selected teacher was in charge of the administration of the summer playground program at the local school.

In 18

per cent of the responses a school employee hired by the city or county was indicated.

A total of 14 per* cent wrote

TABLE

LXXI

INDIVIDUAL IN CHARGE OF THE SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAM AT THE LOCAL SCHOOL

Population group Number of Total Per cent of responses by city size and districts responses** Regular Assistant Selected School City or Other geographic region reporting principal teacher employee county school this item* principal hired by employee city or county

100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

26 36 60 52 12

26 32 60 49 12

11 3 13 6 25

4 3 2 0 0

43 41 40 65 5*

4 19 27 14 17

21 13 3 4 0

16 22 15 10 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

1 79 7 39 17 1 9 3 32

1 71 7 40 16 1 6 4 33

0 11 14 10 13 '0 13 0 6

-o 3 0 36 6 0 0 0 0

0 65 43 23 44 0 63 25 33

100 3 14 10 13 0 13 50 27

0 10 14 20 13 100 0 0 12

0 6 14 0 13 0 13 1 21

166

161

10

2

49

16

6

14

Totals

245

^Number of districts reporting the personnel section of the questionnaire* Differs from total number reporting in that some checked more than one practice while others omitted the item.

246 in some combination other than the ones indicated in the questionnaire.

The majority of these included a person

selected by the joint municipal-school recreation commission. The regular principal or an assistant principal was indicated in 12 per cent of the districts; 8 per cent reported a city or county employee in charge of this part of the program. In the larger cities there was a tendency to indicate quite frequently a city or county employee or an employee of the recreation commission although all city size groups indicated the most predominant practice was to have specially selected teacher in charge of the program at the local dis­ trict.

The districts reporting from cities under 5,000

population had a little greater tendency to report the regular school principal in charge of school program.

Geo­

graphically, the differences were not great except that the practices were somewhat more varied in the South Atlantic and East North Central regions than in other regions.

The

South Atlantic more frequently reported the school employee hired by the city or county, city or county employee, or an employee of the recreation commission.

The same tendency to

include municipal or county employees was indicated in the Pacific regions.

The East North Central region more fre­

quently assigned this responsibility to the principal or the assistant principal.

247

In interpreting the responsibility for the administra­ tion of the playground program at the local school, it should be remembered that the reporting districts were especially selected by the preliminary inquiry indicated in Chapter TV. In other cities not included in this study the playground program was more frequently left entirely to the municipal or county authorities. Individual in charge of the camping programs. A total of 25 districts reported camping programs, with 21 responses applying to this administrative part of the camping program at the local school.

In 52 per cent of the

districts reporting, a teacher selected for the summer was in charge of the program.

A total of 24 per cent indicated

that this responsibility fell to the regular school principal. Ten per cent reported that it was a school employee hired by the city or county; 14 per cent reported still other individuals in charge of the program at the local school. Most of these reports indicated that a representative of a municipal school recreation commission headed the camping program.

With such a small number of responses no particular

study was made of the geographical area or city size trends in regard to this administrative practice. Individual in charge of the summer classroom program. A majority of the 207 responses from 191 districts indicated

243 that the regular school principal or an assistant principal headed the summer classroom program.

More responses than

districts, as noted in Table LXXII, indicate that more than one practice was followed within the same district.

A total

of 59 per cent of the districts left this responsibility to either the principal or the assistant principal during the summer months.

In 33 per cent of the districts a teacher

was selected for this responsibility during the summer­ time.

The city or county did not enter in to this part of

the summer program to any great extent. Individual in charge of the music program.

Table

LXXIII shows that 142 districts reported this personnel part of the questionnaire in regard to the music program.

A total

of 52 per cent of the 110 responses indicated that the pre­ dominant practice was to have a selected teacher as the individual in charge of the music program at the local school,. Another 29 per cent indicated that the school principal was in charge.

Those reporting the principal or assistant

principal in charge of the program evidently represented music programs conducted within the regular summer classroom program.

The higher percentage of districts reporting a

selected teacher in charge of the program probably means that a summer music program operated more or less independently of the regular summer classroom.

In 5 per cent of the

TABLE

LXXII

INDIVIDUAL IN CHARGE OF THE SUMMER CLASSROOM LOCAL SCHOOL

PROGRAM AT THE

Population group Number of Total Per cent of responses__________ by city size and districts responses** Regular Assistant Selected School. City or Other geographic region reporting school principal teacher employee county this item* principal hired by employee city or county

100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10.000 to 29,999 5.000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

46 5^ 50 30 7

56 63 52 29 7

34 57 40 62 57

16 S 17 3 0

43 27 35 24 29

0 0 4 0 0

2 0 0 0 0

5 a 4 10 14

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

7 40 17 * 61 16 7 12 3 35

7 40 19 64 17 7 14 3 36

0 45 5& 41 71 $6 64 33 42

0 15 11 11 12 0 7 0 17

71 33 21 42 IS 14 29 67 25

14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0

14 5 11 5 0 0 0 0 17

207

47

12

33

1

1

7

Totals

191

249

'''Number districts reporting the personnel section of the questionnaire. **Differs from total number reporting in that some checked more than one practice while others omitted the item.

TABLE

LXXIII

INDIVIDUAL IN CHARGE OF THE SUMMER MUSIC PROGRAM AT THE LOCAL SCHOOL Population group Number of Total Per cent of responses by city size and districts responses** Regular Assistant Selected School City or Other geographic region reporting principal teacher employee county school this item* principal hired by employee city or county 100,000 or over 30,000 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

20 26 49 3^ 9

22 IS 37 25 S

23 33 27 32 37

14 6 5 4 0

59 44 46 56 63

0 11 11 0 0

5 0 3 0 0

0 6 S a 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

0 44 9 39 14 2 6 3 25

0 31 6 31 11 2 5 2 22

0 26 33 26 45 50 40 0 27

0 6 0 3 9 0 0 0 14

0 55 50 5S 36 50 60 100 41

0 3 17 3 0 0 0 0 14

0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0

0 10 0 3 9 0 0 0 4

142

110

29

6

52

5

2

5

Totals

250

^Number of districts reporting the personnel section of the questionnaire. **Differs from total number reporting in that some checked more than one choice while others omitted the item.

251

reporting districts a achool employee was hired by the city or county.

In 2 per cent the music program in which the

school had a part was actually conducted by a city or county employee. The cities under 10,000 population had less of a tendency to cooperate with the city or county in the ad­ ministration of the summer music program, but otherwise city size was not a factor of any great significance in determin­ ing the leadership of the public school summer music program. Except for the West North Central region all geo­ graphical areas indicated that a selected teacher was in charge of the music program at the local school.

In the

West North Central region more frequently the principal and assistant principal were indicated as being in charge of the program.

The East South Central and West South Central also

frequently reported the principal as having this responsi­ bility; the South Atlantic and Pacific regions more fre­ quently reported cooperation with the city or county in this respect. Summer playground personnel.

Table LXXIV reveals the

fact that 188 districts gave 218 responses to the personnel practices on summer playgrounds section.

This indicates that

in a large percentage of the districts playground employees were not limited to any one of the categories making up the

252

TABLE

L20Q T

PERSONNEL SELECTEE FOR SIMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAMS

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Total responses**

Regular teachers exclusively

Regular teachers and other teachers

Per cent of responses Regular teachers Non-certificated and non-certifipersonnel cated personnel

Parents

Others

100,000 or over

26

30

27

13

30

27

0

3

30,000 t© 99,999

3a

44

25

23

23

18

7

5

10,000 to 29,999

60

72

24

24

36

13

4

0

5,000 to 9,999

52

56

39

20

32

7

2

0

2,500 to 4,999

12

16

44

6

19

19

13

0

1

1

100

0

0

0

0

0

79

66

36

23

23

10

2

2

7

7

43

0

28

28

0

0

East North Central

39

44

27

25

34

11

*2

0

West North Central

17

18

17

17

39

22

6

0

East South Central

1

1

0

0

0

100

0

0

West South Central

9

10

50

20

20

10

0

0

Mountain

3

6

50

0

17

33

0

0

32

45

11

16

42

18

11

2

188

218

30

20

30

15

4

1

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific Totals

^Num ber o f d i s t r i c t s r e p o r t i n g t h e p e r s o n n e l s e c t i o n o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e , * * D i f f e r s f r o m t o t a l nu m ber r e p o r t i n g i n t h a t some c h e c k e d m ore t h a n one p r a c t i c e

w h ile o th e r s o m itte d th e it e m .

253 employment types.

A total of 30 per cent of the responses

indicated that regular teachers, exclusively, were employed. Another 30 per cent indicated that regular teachers and non­ certificated employees, trained in some form of recreational leadership, made up the summer playground personnel.

Third

in frequency of response was regular teachers and other teachers recruited from outside the district; 20 per cent responded in this manner.

Only 15 per cent of the districts

left the playground personnel responsibility to noncertificated employees trained or competent in playground and recreational leadership.

A total of 4 per cent of the responses indicated

that parents volunteered services for playground responsi­ bility during the summer months.

Only 1 per cent of the

respondents indicated some other choice which was not mentioned. Although the city size differences were not great, there was a slight tendency for the large cities to include more noncertificated personnel and for the cities under 10,000 more frequently to include only certificated personnel for the summer playground work.

Geographically, the South

Atlantic, West North Central, last South Central, and Mountain regions more frequently than other regions indicated the utilization of noncertificated personnel for the summer play­ ground teaching.

The West South Central, Middle Atlantic,

254

East North Central, and New England regions indicated a greater'frequency, as compared with other areas, in the practice of restricting playground supervision to regular certificated teachers. Summer camping personnel.

There were only 24

responses to this personnel -section.

In 46 per cent of the

reporting districts regular school year teachers, exclusively, were used in the camping program, and in an additional 13 per cent of the districts regular school year teachers plus some other teachers recruited from outside the district made up the regular staff.

In 25 per cent of the districts the

camping school staff included both regular teachers and noncertifieated personnel trained in recreational leadership. Noncertificated personnel made up the staff in only 17 per cent of the districts.

Parents were not mentioned in this

responsi bility. Summer classroom personnel.

The predominant practice

reported in 193 responses, shown in Table EXXV, indicates that regular teachers, exclusively, were used in the summer classroom program.

A total of 72 per cent of the responses

indicated that the regular teachers, exclusively, were employed.

A total of 23 per cent indicated that the regular

teachers were employed but that teachers from outside the district; were also employed for the summer.

255 TABLE

LOT* i

PERSONNEL SELECTED FOR SUMMER CLASSROOM PROGRAMS

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Total ,responses**

Regular teachers exclusively

Per cent of responses Regular teachers Regular teachers Non-certificated and other and non-certifica-- personnel teachers ed personnel

Parents

Others

100,000 or o^er

46

46

83

15

0

0

0

2

30,000 to 99,999

58

60

72

23

3

0

0

2

10,000 to 29,999

50

49

59

37

0

0

0

4

5,000 to 9,999

30

30

73

20

3

0

0

3

2,500 to 4,999

7

8

88

0

0

12

0

0

Mew England

7

7

43

43

0

0

0

14

Middle Atlantic

40

40

45

43

3

0

0

10

South Atlantic

17

17

94

6

0

0

0

0

East North Central

61

58

79

19

2

0

0

0

West North Central

16

15

93

7

0

0

0

0

East South Central

7

7

100

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

12

11

91

0

9

0

0

0

3

5

80

0

0

20

0

0

35

33

64

36

0

0

0

0

191

193

72

23

2

1

0

3

Mountain Pacific Totals *N u m b er o f d i s t r i c t s * D iffe r s

r e p o r tin g t h e

p e rs o n n e l s e c tio n o f th e q u e s t io n n a ir e .

f r o m t o t a l nu m b er r e p o r t i n g

in

t h a t some c h e c k e d m ore t h a n one p r a c t i c e

w h ile

o t h e r s o m it t e d

th e it e m .

256 Cities in the 10,000 to 29,999 population size most frequently recruited teachers from outside the district to add to the teaching staff for the slimmer months.

Cities

under 5,000 did not in any case report such practices of recruiting teachers from outside the district for the summer work.

New England, Middle Atlantic, and Pacific regions

had the most frequent reports of adding teachers from out­ side the district.

In the East South Central, West South

Central, and Mountain regions this practice was never reported. Summer music program personnel.

In 12? responses from

142 districts the conclusion can be drawn that in a majority of the cases regular teachers, exclusively, were used to conduct the summer music program.

Table LXXYI shows that 72

per cent of the responses indicated the summer employment of regular teachers exclusively.

In 16 per cent of the

responses, the regular teaching staff was supplemented with regular certificated teachers recruited from outside the district. In 10 per cent of the districts regular teachers were employed, but the staff for the summer months was supplemented with noncertificated personnel.

In 2 per cent of the

responses noncertificated personnel aided in the music program during the summer months. Cities above 100,000 population and below 5,000

257

TABLE

IX C V I

PERSONNEL SELECTED FOR SUMMER MQSIC PROGRAMS

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Total responses**

Regular , teachers exclusively

Per cent of responses Regular teachers Regular teachers and other and non-certifi­ teachers cated personnel

Non-certlficated personnel

Parents

Others

100,000 or over

20

15

87

0

13

0

0

0

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999

2£

21

SI

10

10

0

0

0

10,000 to 29,000

45

62

22

13

2

0

0

5,000 to 9,999

49 i 38

36

69

22

S

0

0

0

2 , 5 0 0 to 4,999

9

10

90

0

0

10

0

0

New England

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

44

39

69

23

8

0

0

0

9

7

100

0

0

0

0

0

East North Central

39

34

76

9

12

3

0

0

West North Central

14

14

86

0

14

0

0

0

East South Central

2

2

100

0

0

0

0

0

West South Central

6

6

83

0

17

0

0

0

Mountain

3

3

67

0

0

33

0

0

25

22

50

36

14

0

0

0

142

127

72

16

10

2

0

0

Middle Atlantic South Atlantic

Pacific Totals

N um ber o f d i s t r i c t s r e p o r t i n g t h e p e r s o n n e l s e c t i o n o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . * * D i f f e r s f r o m t o t a l nu m b er r e p o r t i n g i n t h a t some c h e c k e d m ore t h a n o n e p r a c t i c e

w h ile

o t h e r s o m it t e d

th e

ite m .

258 population never reported the recruitment of teachers out­ side of the district for the summer program.

Cities in the

size classification from 5,000 to 29,999 most frequently reported the supplementing of the summer staff with teachers recruited from outside the district.

Supplementing the

regular certificated teachers with noncertificated personnel was more frequently reported in the cities above 5,000 and never reported by the cities under 5,000 population. Geographically, the Pacific, Middle Atlantic, and Hast North Central were the only regions to supplement the regular summer music staff with certificated teachers, from outside the district.

The West South Central, Pacific, West North

Central, East North Central, and Middle Atlantic were the only geographical regions to add noncertificated personnel to the regular summer teaching staff. Chapter summary. No distinction was made between elementary and secondary level in regard to personnel practices.

In all 4 kinds of public school summer programs

reported in this study, the most frequent method of paying for summer teaching personnel was on the basis of a flat sum for a specified summer term.

This practice included 68 per

cent of the districts reporting playground programs, 57 per cent reporting classroom programs, 56 per cent reporting music programs, and 43 per cent reporting summer camping

259

programs.

From 14 to 20 per cent, in addition, reported

payments on an hourly, daily, or weekly basis. Districts which reported camp programs indicated that 29 per cent paid the teaching personnel on a 12-month basis.

Payment on the 12-month basis was also reported in 16 per cent of the music programs, 5 per cent of the playground programs, and 4 per cent of the classroom programs.

Payment

for summer services on the basis of a percentage of the enrollment or a percentage of the yearly salary was found to be more common to the classroom than to other kinds of summer programs. Metropolitan public school district summer playground programs were administered in a variety of ways.

Approxi­

mately half of the districts had a teacher in charge of the program at the local school.

A school employee hired by

the county was indicated in IB per cent of the cases.

The

program operated under the direction of the principal in about 12 per cent of the districts.

Approximately 22 per

cent indicated that the playground administration at the local school was under the direction of an employee of a joint school-municipal recreation commission. In approximately two thirds of the summer classroom programs either the regular principal or an assistant principal administered the program.

In one third a teacher

was selected for the administration of the summer program

260 at the local school. In both the summer camping and summer music programs a teacher was selected to administer the program at the local school in about half the reporting districts.

Approximately

one third to one fourth of the reporting districts had music and camping programs administered by the principal or assistant principal.

Even though this study was limited to

programs operated by the public school district, 12 per cent of the music and 24 per cent of the camping programs included cooperation or aid of either the municipality or the county.

CHAPTER X FINANCING- THE SUMMER PROGRAM No attempt was made to differentiate between secondary level and elementary level in the matter of financing the summer educational program.

The financial study was broad

and was intended to give certain information about the over-all support of the summer programs.

The most important

consideration was the responsibility assumed by the local district as compared with aid from tuition, state aid, federal aid, city or county aid, and donations by civic organizations of a nongovernmental nature.

Respondents were

asked to check the sources of income and to indicate whether all of the budget, most of it, a small amount, or none was received from a particular source.

Funds for operation of

the summer program in this study excluded regular plant and equipment expenditures. Funds from the local district. A total of.69 per cent of the 287 districts marking any part of the financial section of the questionnaire reported local district participation in the financial support of the summer program. This means that about 30 per cent of the districts depended upon sources of revenue other than the local district for support of the summer program.

The smaller cities had a

262 tendency to supply funds in a greater percentage of the cases than did larger cities.

The Pacific and Middle Atlantic

regions checked this local district support more frequently than did any other of the geographical areas. is given in Table LXXVTI.

A summary

Table LXXVIII reveals the fact

that approximately an equal number reported "all,” "most,” and a "small amount” of financial support from the local district. Pees or tuition.

Table I X O T I shows that fees or

tuition were assessed in 5 & per cent of the public school districts reporting summer educational and recreational programs.

In cities above 30,000, 63 to 66 per cent of the

districts reported tuition or fees.

Cities in the 10,000

to 99 ,9 9 9 population sizes reported fees in 1+8 per cent of the districts.

In the cities under 10,000, 25 to 32 per cent

reported fees or tuition involved in the local support. Geographically, the East South Central and West South Central most frequently charged tuition for at least part of the summer program.

The Pacific area least frequently reported

tuition charges for the summer program. Table LXXIX reveals that where fees or tuition were charged the tendency was to support the program entirely from such tuition.

Approximately 40 per cent of the districts

which charged tuition reported that tuition paid for "all"

TABLE

L X X V II

FINA N CIAL SUPPORT OF THE SOMMER PROGRAM

Population group Number of by city size and districts geographic region reporting this item

Per cent of responses State • Federal City or donations aid aid county

Local dis­ trict

Fees or tuition

54 65 36 66 16

65 57 67 31 94

63 66 43 32 25

22 26 31 33 19

9 3 2 2 0

15 12 27 32 6

4 5 16 17 19

4 2 2 0 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

:7 101 19 72 22 7 11 3 45

29 34 53 60 63 0 45 67 34

71 33 63 72 59 36 32 67 24

14 36 16 14 9 14 9 0 60

14 3 5 3 0 0 9 0 4

14 20 16 19 23 0 13 67 31

14 15 21 69 9 0 13 0 9

0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

Totals

237

69

53

23

3

21

11

2

100,000 or over 3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

Other

N> UJ

264 TABLE

L X X V I II

EXTENT OF LOCAL D IS T R IC T FINA N CIAL SUPPORT OF THE SUMMER PROGRAM

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Per cent of districts reporting local district support as: All Most Small amount

100,000 or over

54

33

7

24

30,000 to 99,999

65

15

25

17

10,000 to 29,999

S6

21

24

22

5,000 to 9,999.

66

20

36

26

2,500 to 4,999

16

44

6

44

7

0

14

14

101

33

29

22

South Atlantic

19

21

0

32

East North Central

72

IS

26

15

West North Central

22

32

23

14

East South Central

7

0

0

0

West South Central

11

IS

IS

9

Mountain

3

0

0

67

Pacific

45

16

22

47

Totals

2S7

23

23

23

^ In c lu d e s a l l d i s t r i c t s q u e s tio n n a ir e •

r e p o r t i n g f i n a n c i a l s e c t io n o f

New England Middle Atlantic

265 TABLE

L X X IX

EXTENT OF T U IT IO N AND FEES AS FIN A N C IA L SUPPORT OF THE SUMMER PROGRAM

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Per cent of districts reporting tuition or fees support as: All Most Small amount

100,000 or over

54

33

20

9

30,000 to 99,999

65

29

20

17

10,000 to 29,999

36

17

15

15

5,000 to 9,999

66

8

12

12

2,500 to 4,999

16

6

6

13

7

43

28

0

101

5

14

14

South Atlantic

19

42

11

11

East North Central

72

26

26

19

West North Central

22

23

27

9

East South Central

7

86

0

0

West South Central

11

55

0

27

Mountain

P3

33

33

0

Pacific

45

11

2

•4

Totals

287

20

16

14

^ In c lu d e s a l l d i s t r i c t s q u e s tio n n a ir e .

r e p o r t in g f i n a n c i a l s e c tio n o f

New England Middle Atlantic

266 of the current expenditures.

Approximately 32 per cent of

those charging tuition indicated that it paid for "most” of the summer expenses, and 28 per cent indicated that it paid for "some" of the summer expenses. Of the 123 elementary level districts charging tuition 16 per cent indicated that fees or tuition were charged for summer playground and crafts.

Table LXXX shows that this

represented approximately 7 per cent of the 287 districts reporting the finance section to the questionnaire.

On the

secondary level only 3 per cent of the 143 districts re­ porting tuition charges indicated that such charges were for summer playground or crafts activities.

This represented,

as noted in Table LXXXI, approximately 2 per cent of all the respondents to the financial section of the questionnaire. A total of 27 per cent of the elementary level districts reporting tuition charges used such fees for summer music classes.

The 27 per cent group represented

approximately 11 per cent of the total respondents to the finance section.

On the secondary level those charges were

made in only 22 per cent of the districts reporting tuition charges.

The 22 per cent represented 11 per cent of all the

districts responding to the finance section of the question­ naire . On both the elementary and secondary level the charges for tuition were more frequent in the larger cities

267 TABLE

LXXX

PHASES OF THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL SIMMER PROGRAM FOR WHICH TUITION WAS PAID Population group Number of Per cent of responses indicating by city size and districts tuition was charged for; geographic region reporting Play- OverMusic Class- Other this item* ground night room and camping crafts 100,000 or over

54

7

0

17

35

4

30,000 to 99,999

65

3

2

14

32

3

10,000 to 29,999

36

6

1

7

7

5

5,000 to 9,999

66

6

0

12

14

3

2,500 to 4,999

16

13

6

6

13

0

7

0

0

0

57

0

101

3

0

9

1

6

South Atlantic

19

0

0

16

32

11

East North Central

72

15

1

17

32

3

West North Central

22

O'

5

14

23

0

East South Central

7

0

0

0

36

0

West South Central

11

13

0

0

55

0

3

33

0

33

33

0

45

7

2

11

11

0

237

7

1

11

20

3

New England Middle Atlantic

Mountain Pacific T o ta ls

"‘'in c lu d e s a l l d i s t r i c t s w h ic h r e p o r t e d t o q u e s t io n n a ir e *

f in a n c i a l s e c tio n

of

26a

TABLE

LXXXI

PHASES OF THE SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER PROGRAM FOR WHICH TUITION WAS PAID

Population group Number of Per cent of responses indicating by city size and districts tuition was charged for: geographic region reporting Play­ OverMusic Class­ Other this item* ground night room and camping crafts i 100,000 or over

54

0

0

17

44

9

30,000 to 99,999

65

2

0

15

46

6

10,000 to 29,999

66

3

1

9

26

5

5,000 to 9,999

66

2

0

6

14

3

2,500 to 4,999

16

0

6

0

6

6

7

0

0

0

43

0

Middle Atlantic

101

1

0

6

12

9

South Atlantic

19

0

0

21

63

21

East North Central

72

6

1

19

46

3

West North Central

22

0

0

9

36

0

East ^outh Central

7

0

0

0

66

0

West South Central

11

0

0

9

73

0

3

0

0

0

0

0

45

0

2

6

11

4

267

2

1

11

30

6

New England

Mountain Pacific Totals

^ In c lu d e s a l l d i s t r i c t s

naire.

r e p o r t i n g f i n a n c i a l s e c t i o n o f q u e s t io n

269

than in the smaller ones.

On the secondary level the tuition

charges were more common in the South Atlantic and East North Central regions than in other regions for the music part of the program. In 46 per cent of the responses, which indicated tuition charges on the elementary level, these applied to the class­ room part of the summer program.

The 46 per cent represented

approximately 20 per cent of the 28? respondents to the finance section of the questionnaire.

On the secondary level

tuition charges were more common for the classroom program, with 61 per cent of those charging tuition indicating that it was for the classroom program.

The 61 per cent represented

approximately 30 per cent of all who reported any part of the questionnaire.

Tuition charges were more frequent in

larger cities than in smaller ones and to some extent more frequent in the South Atlantic, East South Central, and West South Central geographical areas. A number of others indicated that tuition charges, both on the elementary level and secondary level, applied only when nonresidents of the community participated in the summer program of their respective communities. The tuition studies show that it was more common practice to charge tuition for secondary level classroom programs than for elementary.

It was more common practice

to charge for the classroom program than for any other phase

270 of the summer program.

Music activities were reported next

most frequently in tuition charges.

Crafts and ho'bbies were

tuition subjects in some communities, and these charges were made more frequently on the elementary level than on the secondary level.

So few cases responded to the camping sec­

tion in regard to tuition charges that it is difficult to draw any conclusions. State aid. A total of 28 per cent of the 287 respon­ dents indicated some state aid in support of district programs.

the local

According to the summary shown in Table

03X11, this was reported most frequently in the Pacific area, where 60 per cent ofthe respondents indicated state aid.

The Middle Atlantic region was next in frequency of

response to the state aid item. Where state aid was available 56 per cent of the districts indicated that the state supported "most” of the program, 38 per cent indicated that it supported a "small amount" of the program, and only 2 per cent indicated that it appeared to support "all" of the summer program.

The

fact that there was some state aid available for certain kinds of summer programs rather complicates the interpreta­ tion of this because of the fact that the summer program as used in this study includes playground activities, class­ room programs, music programs, and

camping programs, as well

271 TABLE

L X X X II

EXTENT OF STATE FIN A N C IA L A ID I N THE SUPPORT OF THE SUM ER PROGRAM

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Per cent of districts reporting state financial aid as: All Most Small amount

100,000 or over

54

4

11

7

30,000 to 99,999

65

2

12

12

10,000 to 29,999

S6

1

20

10

5,000 to 9,999

66

0

IS

15

2,500 to 4,999

16

6

13

0

7

0

0

14

101

0

23

13

South Atlantic

19

0

5

10

East North Central

72

4

4

6

West North Central

22

0

0

9

East South Central

7

0

14

0

West South Central

11

0

0

9

3

0

0

0

Pacific

45

2

3&

13

Totals

2$7

2

16

11

^ In c lu d e s a l l d i s t r i c t s q u e s ti o n n a ir e .

r e p o r tin g

f i n a n c i a l s e c t io n o f

New England Middle Atlantic

Mountain

272 as other vocational and agricultural programs. In the questionnaire the question was asked:

"If state

funds are received are they limited to any phase of the summer program?"

A total of 53 per cent of the 86 respon­

dents to this item indicated that there were restrictions. Washington in 3 instances reported that the recreation program was supported from state aid.

California reported

state aid for the high school academic program. district included vocational agriculture.

One Texas

Indiana reports

indicated teachers* salaries, high school programs, and a vocational agriculture program.

One Minnesota respondent

indicated that state aid was for crippled children programs. One Florida respondent reported state aid limited to teachers* salaries.

In Virginia one respondent indicated

state aid for homemaking. in one Ohio report. was reported.

Recreation director was mention

In New York state aid for playgrounds

In Pennsylvania state aid for recreation and

music were indicated. Federal funds.

Only 3 per cent of the responding

districts utilized federal aid in summer programs.

Table

LXXXIII reveals the fact that larger cities made use of federal funds more frequently than cities below 100,000 population.

None of the towns under 5,000 population reported

the use of federal funds for the support of the summer

273 TABLE

LXXXIII

EXTENT OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL AID IN THE SUPPORT OF THE SUMMER PROGRAM

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Per cent of districts reporting federal financial aid as: All Most Small amount

100,000 or over

54

4

2

4

3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999

65

0

0

3

10,000 to 29,999

S6

0

0

2

5,000 to 9,999

66

0

0

2

2,500 to 4,999

16

0

0

0

7

^0

14

0

Middle Atlantic

101

1

0

2

South Atlantic

19

5

0

0

East North Central

72

0

0

3

West North Central

22

0

0

0

East South Central

7

0

0

0

West South Central

11

0

0

14

3

0

0

0

Pacific

45

0

0

2

Totals .

2^7

1

0

2

New England

Mountain

^Includes all districts reporting financial section of questionnaire*

274

program.

Funds from this source were reported from the New

England area in a greater percentage of districts than from *

any other area. Respondents were asked the question:

"If federal

funds are received, what phase of the program is thereby supported?"

In reply four of them indicated that the

veteran program was supported by federal aid, 3 reported homemaking, and 6 included vocational training or vocational agriculture.

The implication is that the types of programs

for which federal aid was available were not abundantly utilized during the summer months in the metropolitan public school districts of the United States. City or county aid. A total of 21 per cent of the 287 responding districts indicated that the city or county govern­ ment participated to some extent in the summer public school program of the local district.

By city size, as revealed

by Table LX2XIV, this appeared to be more frequent in cities of the 5,000 to 9,999 and 10,000 to 29,9 99 population sizes. There were no great differences geographically except that 2. of the 3 Mountain districts reported such city or county aid. The Pacific area had such aid from city or county to the school district in 31 P®p cent of the responding districts. Approximately as many responding districts indicated that the city or county contributed a "small amount," as

275 TABLE

LXXXIV

EXTENT OF CITY, COUNTY, AND OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF THE SUMMER PROGRAM Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Per cent of districts reporting the financial aid as: All Most Small amount

100,000 or over

54

4

4

7

30,000 to 99,999

65

3

6

3

10,000 to 29,999

86

5

15

7

5,000 to 9,999

66

3

12

17

2,500 to 4,999

16

0

6

0

7

14

0

0

101

3

9

8

South Atlantic

19

11

0

5

East North Central

72

3

11

6

West North Central

22

0

18

5

East South Central

7

0

0

0

West South Central

11

9

0

9

3

0

33

33

45

2

13

16

287

3

10

8

New England Middle Atlantic

Mountain Pacific Totals

Includes all districts reporting financial section of questionnaire.

276 compared with those who indicated that the city or county contributed "most" of the support.

Approximately one third

as many as in the "most" and "small amount” groups reported that the city or county aid supported "all" of the program. Most of these districts probably had the summer program limited to playground activities. In 70 of the districts reporting aid from the city or county government, 41 per cent indicated that there were restrictions or limitations on how the money was to be used. Those who did indicate such funds always included recreation, swimming pools, or youth activities. Donations. Eleven per cent of the 287 respondents, as noted in Table XXXVTI, indicated some aid from various non­ governmental agencies or groups of individuals for support of the summer program.

This is rather significant in view

of the fact that many programs supported almost entirely by donations were excluded from this study by the process of using the preliminary inquiry cited in Chapter 17.

On the

preliminary inquiry, it was found in several instances that professional school people reported that the summer program was in charge of the Junior Chamber of Commerce, the Kiwanis Club, or

some other civic organization.

Donations for support of the summer program were received least abundantly in the large cities and most

277

frequently in the smaller towns.

The East Worth Gentral

region reported the greatest frequency.

This is probably

largely accounted for by the camping and recreation emphasis given in some of the East North Central states, particularly Michigan.

Table LX2XV reveals the fact that where donations

were received they made up only a small part of the summer budget. Of the 33 districts reporting an answer to the question:

”If donations are received are they limited to

any phase of the summer program?” ”yes.”

39 per cent responded

When respondents indicated what phase of the program

was supported, in almost every instance it was recreation. This indicates that donations were given without much restriction in many districts.

Experiences in other sections

of this study indicate that donations undoubtedly were most frequently used for recreational purposes in most of the districts. Chapter summary.

The financial part of this

particular study shows that the support of the various phases of the metropolitan public school district summer program comes from many different sources.

Nearly three

fourths of the districts having summer programs contributed part or all of the funds for the support of the summer program.

Approximately equal numbers contributed ”all,”

27S TABLE

LXXXV

EXTENT OF NONGOVERNMENTAL DONATIONS AS FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF THE SUMMER PROGRAM

Population group by city size and geographic^region

Number of districts reporting this item*

Per cent of districts reporting donation aid as: All Most Small amount

100,000 or over

54

0

0

4

30,000 to 99,999

65

0

2

3

10,000 to 29,999

36

0

0

16

5,000 to 9,999

66

2

3

12

2,500 to 4,999

16

0

12

6

7

0

0

14

101

0

2

13

South Atlantic

19

0

5

16

East North Central

72

0

1

6

West North Central

22

0

0

9

East South Central

7

0

0

0

West South Central

11

'9

0

9

3

0

0

0

45

0

2

7

0 !

2

9

New England Middle Atlantic

Mountain Pacific Totals

237

Includes all districts reporting financial section of questionnaire.

279

"most,” or a "small amount” of the financial support from the local district. Over half of the reporting districts indicated that fees or tuition were charged for some part of the summer program.

Tuition was charged in 20 per cent of the

elementary level and 30 per cent of the secondary level, classroom programs.

On both the elementary and secondary

levels about 11 per cent of the reporting districts charged tuition for various types of summer music activities.

The

tuition charge was less frequently applied to the play­ ground and crafts part-of the summer programs.

Two per

cent of the secondary level and 7 per cent of the elementary level districts reporting the finance section of the question­ naire reported tuition charges. Approximately 28 per cent of the respondents to the finance section of the questionnaire reported some state aid for local district summer programs.

The Pacific and the

Middle Atlantic regions most frequently reported this state aid for summer programs. Only 3 per cent of the 287 districts responding to the finance section of the questionnaire reported the use of federal funds for the support of the summer programs.

The

implication is that types of programs for which federal aid is available were not abundantly utilized during the summer

280

months in the metropolitan public school districts. Approximately 21 per cent of the 287 responding dis­ tricts indicated that the city or county government par­ ticipated to some extent in the local public school district summer program.

The greatest portion of such city or county

aid was for playgrounds, swimming pools, or other youth recreational activities. Although 11 per cent of the 287 responding districts indicated that some aid was received from various non­ governmental groups, agencies, or individuals for support of the summer program, the amount they contributed was actually a ttsmall” amount.

Many summer programs were

excluded from this study because they appeared to be directly supported and administered by agencies, organizations, or groups outside the public school district even though they did use school playgrounds.

CHAPTER X I

SCHOOL SERVICES AND FACILITIES A measure of the summer extension of education is in terms of the summer utilization of the various school auxiliary services and facilities.

A check list was pre­

pared as a part of the questionnaire in order to determine what auxiliary services were made available during summer months. Library facilities for summer use. A total of 19 per cent of the 197 reporting districts indicated that elementary library facilities were used to a great extent during the summer; 23 per cent indicated that the library facilities were available to a limited extent.

Table LXXXVI also shows

that 1 per cent indicated other choices.

Frequently write-

in answers included suggestions that various arrangements had been made with the local public library for library facilities and in some cases the loan of library books. It is rather significant that only 37 per cent of the 197 elementary level districts did not have elementary library facilities available for student use during all or part of the summer months.

The cities under 3,000 popula­

tion most often had these library facilities available; cities in the 3,000 to 9,999 size had them available in only 23 per cent of the districts.

Cities above 30,000 had

TABES

EJQQCVI

SUMMER USE OF ELEMENTARY LEVEL LIBRARY F A C IL IT IE S

Population group

Total districts reporting Service section This of questionnaire item

Per cent Not available to students in summer

reporting this item Available Used to to limited great extent extent

Other

100,000 or over 30 ,0 0 0 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2 ,5 0 0 to 4,999

49 56 64 62 14

41 42 49 53 12

51 40 61 77 33

29 33 16 13 42

17 26 23 10 25

2 0 0 0 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

7 84 16 65 19 7 13 4 30

6 65 14 50 14 6 8 .3 31

50 82 50 38 64 33 13 0 61

17 14 14 34 14 17 63 33 26

17 5 36 28 21 50 25 67 13

17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

245

197

57

23

19

1

Totals

233 library facilities open to some extent in nearly half of the districts. The Mountain, West South Central, East South Central, and East North Central regions most frequently reported availability of library facilities on the elementary level; the Middle Atlantic region reported such availability in only 19 per cent of the districts reporting. Secondary level library facilities for summer use were more frequently reported as available than those on the elementary level according to Table L2GGCVTI which shows the 257 responses to this part of the questionnaire.

A total of

32 per cent indicated that library facilities were available

to a limited extent; 26 per cent reported that the library facilities were used to a great extent.

The more frequent

report of secondary level summer sessions probably accounts for the greater utilization of secondary level library facilities.

By city size the library facilities were most

frequently reported available in the cities from 3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999 population.

The cities under 5,000 population ranked

next. . Cities in the 5,000 to 9,999 had the library facilities least available. The Mountain, East South Central, West South Central, and East North Central regions reported most frequently some availability of library facilities during the summer months. As on the elementary level, the Middle Atlantic indicated

TABLE

L X X X V II

SUM ER USE OF SECONDARY LEVEL LIBRARY F A C IL IT IE S

Population group by city size and geographic region

100,000 or over 3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999 10.000 to 29,999 5.000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

Total districts reporting Service section This of questionnaire item

Per cent reporting this item Not available Available Used to to students to limited great in summer extent extent

Other

54 64 7$ 60 13

55 61 71 53 12

33 23 39 67 33

31 43 32 17 42

29 34 28 14 25

2 0 0 2 0

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

6 95 19 68 19 7 '13 4 33

5 39 19 66 19 7 11 3 33

40 53 42 26 47 0 9 0 45

40 24 16 44 26 28 55 0 34

0 18 37 30 26 72 36 100 21

20 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0

Totals

269

257

41

32

26

1

ro oa ■£-

285 some availability in only 42 per cent of the districts re­ porting as the most limited availability of library facilities. Although this study does not show that library facili­ ties are available to the same extent as during the regular school year, it.does show that more than half of the secondary level districts reporting have their secondary library facilities available to some extent during the summer months. School cafeteria services during the summer.

Since

a majority of the academic summer schools were in the morn­ ing and only a few extended into the afternoon, the need for cafeteria services during the summer was practically negligible.

Not a single district on either the elementary

or secondary level indicated that cafeteria services were used to a great extent during the summer.

Sight on the

secondary level, and 7 on the elementary level checked the item which indicated that cafeteria services were available to a limited extent in summer.

A few wrote in an explana­

tion of the fact that the snack bar or student soda fountain was open during the summer.

Therefore, school cafeteria

services were not in the summer of 1949 used to any con­ siderable extent in any geographical area of the metropolitan public school districts. Student health services in summer.

Table L33QCVTII

ZB6 TABLE

L X X X V III

ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER STUDENT HEALTH SERVICES

Population group Total districts Per cent of responses* by city size and reporting ser- Not Include Include Other geographic region vices section avail- nurse physician of questionable at local naire school *

100,000 or over

49

59

a

20

4

30,000 to 99,999

56

61

16

21

4

10,000 to 29,999

64

61

16

20

3

5,000 to 9,999

62

65

10

23

5

2,500 to 4,999

14

72

7

14

7

7

71

0

14

0

Middle Atlantic

64

55

13

31

2

South Atlantic

16

69

0

19

6

East North Central

65

52

17

22

6

West North Central

19

6S

11

16

5

East South Central

7

S6

0

14

0

West South Central

13

31

23

15

0

Mountain

4

100

0

0

0

Pacific

30

97

10

3

7

Totals

245

62

12

21

4

New England

*Some respondents marked two or more choices, while a few omitted the item.

287 shows that 62 per cent of the 245 reporting districts indicated that no public health services were available during the summer months.

This means that of the 3$ per

cent which did have some services available approximately 12 per cent included a nurse at the local school, and 21 per cent included a physician on call for medical emergencies and physical examinations.

The remaining 4 to 5 per cent

included various combinations of summer services.

One of the

most frequently mentioned of these was the summer round­ up medical examination given to the prekindergarten children. City size was not a great factor in the availability of health services, although the small towns had these less frequently available than cities of the other size classi­ fications.

They appeared to be most available in the East

North Central and Middle Atlantic regions. Student health services on the secondary level were available to practically the same extent that they were on the elementary level according to Table LXXXIX which shows the responses from 269 secondary level districts.

Sixty-

four per cent indicated that health services were not avail­ able during the summer, 13 per cent indicated that the school nurse was on duty at the local school, and 21 per cent had the physician available for medical emergencies or physical examinations.

The remaining 2 to 3 pe^ cent had other

combinations of services indicated.

233 TABLE

LXXXIX

SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER STUDENT HEALTH SERVICES

Population group Total districts Per cent of responses* by city size and reporting ser- Not Include Include Other geographic region vices section avail - nurse school able of question­ at local physician naire school 100,000 or over

54

67

20

17

0

30,000 to 99,999

64

63

11

23

3

10,000 to 29,999

7S

60

14

23

3

5,000 to 9,999

60

65

3

22

3

2,500'to 4,999

13

77

3

15

3

6

33

0

17

0

Middle Atlantic

95

5^

13

29

1

South Atlantic

19

63

11

16

5

East North Central

6$

56

15

26

6

West North Central

19

39

11

11

5

East South Central

7

36

0

14

0

West South Central

13

31

23

15

0

4

75

0

0

0

33

32

16

5

0

269

64

13

21

3

New England

Mountain Pacific Totals

*Some respondents marked two or more choices while a few omitted the item.

289 The school nurse was more frequently available in the large cities; there was not much difference in the avail­ ability of a school physician in the cities above 5,000 population.

Geographically, the school nurse was most

frequently reported available to the local school in the West South Central region; the school physician was on duty in a larger percentage of the districts in the Middle Atlantic and Hast North Central regions. Transportation services in summer. Approximately 5 per cent of the reporting districts on the elementary level indicated regular summer transportation provided on a distance-from-school basis.

Only one of these cases was in

the cities above 100,000 population, 1 in a city above 3 0 .0 0 0 , 3 in the cities above 10,000, 6 in the group above

5.000, and 3 in the group below 5,000.

Geographically, they

were most frequently reported in the Hast North Central and Pacific.

Approximately 10 per cent of the districts re­

ported availability of transportation services for crippled children, regular pupils on field days, athletic participa­ tion, transportation to camps, excursions, and other types of special events. The percentage of districts which actually did provide transportation for special events was evidently much greater than what this study indicates, because this item was not

290 included formally in the questionnaire.

Geographically and

by city size these districts were rather evenly distributed. Only 6 districts reported regular transportation services during the summer on a distance-from-school basis for secondary level students.

Four of these were in cities

of 5,000 to 9,999 population.

Three of them were found in

the East North Central region.

More districts made the

transportation services available during the summer either for special crippled children or for field days or other special events.

A total of 19 districts wrote this choice

in the questionnaire.

The districts reporting the special

transportation services for special occasions were rather evenly distributed both by city size and by geographical area. Guidance services in summer. A total of 79 per cent of the responses to the guidance part of the check list indicated that the only special guidance services available to elementary students during the summer were those received as a part of the instructional work of the teachers.

Twelve

per cent of the responses indicated that the school had counselors at the local school for guidance services. Another 10 per cent indicated that centralized guidance services were available during the summer. a summary.

Table XC gives

The implication is that when summer guidance

291 TABLE

XG

ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMER GUIDANCE SERVICES

Population group Total districts by city size and reporting geographic region This This secitem tion

Per cent of responses Only part Through Centralof instruc­ counselors ized tional work in local guidance of the school service teachers

100,000 or over

49

3&

68

18

13

30,000 to 99,999

56

35

74

14

11

10,000 to 29,999

64

37

86

5

8

5,000 to 9,999

62

36

83

8

8

2,500 to 4,999

14

8

88

12

0

7

5

60

40

0

Middle Atlantic

$4

44

82

11

7

South Atlantic

16

6

100

0

0

East North Central

65

50

68

16

16

West North Central

19

13

84

7

7

East South Central

7

7

71

14

14

West South Central

13

7

71

14

14

Mountain

4

2

100

0

0

Pacific

30

20

95

0

9

245

154

79

12

10

New England

Totals

292 services were considered they most frequently took place through regular teachers.

It should be noted that only 154

responses were included for this item, but 245 respondents had checked some phase of the service and facility section of the questionnaire.

Many of the respondents failed to

check any one of these choices. Of the 204 responses noted regarding guidance services on a secondary level, 68 per cent reported that the guidance services available were those which were a part of the instructional work of the teachers.

Twenty-two per cent

of the responses indicated that counselors were available in the local schools.

Centralized guidance services were

checked in 10 per cent of the responses.

Table XCI shows

a summary of the responses. Although there were differences both as to city size and as to geographical areas, the greatest variation existed in the fact that the cities in the 5,000 to 10,000 size classification less frequently had counselors at the local schools, and that centralized guidance services were in­ significant or practically absent in both the cities under 5,000 and the geographical areas of the New England and Mountain regions. Summer use of school facilities.

The newer concept

of education has included the idea that the school should be the center of various community activities.

There was an

293 TABLE

XCI

SECONDARY LEVEL SUMMER GUIDANCE SERVICES

Population group Districts Per cent of responses* by city size and reporting Only as part Through Centralized geographic region services of instruc- counselors guidance section tional work in local service of teachers schools 100,000 or over

54

53

27

15

30,000 to 99,999

64

62

29

10

10,000 to 29,999

73

71

20

9

5,000 to 9,999

60

&3

S

10

2,500 to 4,999

13

73

22

0

6

40

60

0

Middle Atlantic

95

71

23

6

South Atlantic

19

71

21

7

East North Central

6S

61

20

20

West North Central

19

73

20

7

East South Central

7

71

14

14

West South Central

13

56

33

11

4

100

0

0

Pacific

33

SO

16

4

Totals

269

6S

22

10

New England

Mountain

Includes two or more choices in sonre districts and no mark in other districts.

294

attempt in this section of the questionnaire to determine what extent local schools served in this capacity.

The

respondents were asked to check various items regarding the summer community use of buildings on the elementary level. Table XCII shows that the greatest response, which was 40 per cent of the total number of districts reporting the services section of the questionnaire, indicated the use of the local schools as a civic center or made use of the school auditorium during the summer months.

Adult recrea­

tion ranked second, with 36 per cent of the 245 responding districts so participating.

Adult classes were indicated

in 10 per cent of the responding districts; community projects such as canning and agricultural extension classes accounted for 3 per cent in each category. Civic center use was greatest in cities in.the 5,000 to 30 ,0 0 0 size classifications, and least in the cities over 100,000.

Adult recreation ranged from 29 per cent in the

smallest towns to 41 per cent in the cities over 100,000 population.

Adult education classes were most frequent in

the large cities and least common in cities under 3 0 ,0 0 0 . Geographically, the Pacific area most frequently re­ ported the utilization of school facilities as a civic center. The districts in the West South Central, East South Central, and Mountain regions apparently also made considerable use of the school auditorium and other buildings for community

TABLE

X C II

COMMUNITY USE OF ELEMENTARY LEVEL F A C IL IT IE S DURING THE SUMMER

Population group Number of by city size and districts Adult Adult geographic region reporting* recrea­ education tion classes

Per cent of responses Community Agricultural projects extension such as classes and canning projects

100,000 or over 3 0 ,0 0 0 to 99,999 10,000 to 29,999 5,000 to 9,999 2,500 to 4,999

49 56 64 62 14

41 3# 34 32 29

24 13 2 5 7

4 5 2 2 0

2 2 2 5 7

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

7 $4 16 65 19 7 13 4 30

14 29 33 33 26 0 46 75 57

0 7 19 9 0 43 15 0 13

0 2 6 2 0 0 3 0 7

245

36

10

3

Totals

Use of audi­ torium as a civic center

Other

33 33. 43 42 36

6 0 3 5 7

0 1 13 2 0 14 3 25 0

23 26 44 33 42 57 62 50 70

14 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 3

3

40

4

*Some districts reported several choices, while others omitted the item even though they reported other parts of the services and facilities section of the questionnaire. ro vO vn

296 meetings of a civic nature during the summer.

Adult recrea­

tion was most common in the Mountain area; the Pacific and West South Central areas were next in frequency.

From these

responses one may conclude that the elementary buildings and playgrounds were used by adults during the summer in some­ thing more than one third of the districts within metropoli­ tan regions studied. Secondary level facilities were used more frequently than were elementary school facilities during the summer months according to the summary shown in Table XCIII. Forty-six per cent of the responses from 269 districts reporting some phase of the services section of the question­ naire indicated the use of the auditorium and other build­ ings as a civic center.

Second in importance on the check

list was adult recreation in gyms and on playgrounds in summer months.

A total of 39 par cent of the 269 districts

reported this adult activity.

Canning and other community

projects were reported in 7 per cent of the districts; 22 per cent reported adult education classes * Agricultural extension classes and projects were twice as frequent on the secondary level as on the elementary level.

Four per

cent listed the use of either swimming pools or stadia during the summer months. The extent of use of the auditorium and other build­ ings as a civic center was inversely proportional to the

TABLE

X C III

COMMUNITY USE OF SECONDARY LEVEL F A C IL IT IE S DURING THE SUMMER

Population group Number of by city size and districts Adult Adult geographic region reporting* recrea- education tion classes

Per cent of responses Community Agricultural projects extension such as classes and canning projects

Dse of audi- Other torium as a civic center

100.000 or over 30.000 to 99,999 10.000 to 29,999 5.000 to 9,999 2,500,to 4,999

54 64 73 60 13

37 36 44 35 62

26 27 17 13 31

9 9 6 5 3

4 5 3 10 23

31 39 50 52 35

New England Middle Atlantic South Atlantic East North Central West North Central East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific

6 95 19 63 19 7 13 4 33

17 23 37 46 37 0 46 50 66

0 9 21 22 5 43 46 25 53

0 3 21 1 0 0 23 0 24

0 3 21 1 0 14 23 25 3

33 31 43 49 53 43 69 50 63

269

39

22

7

6

46

Totals

6 0 3 7 3 17 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 3

297

*Some districts reported several choices, while others omitted the item even though they reported other parts of the services and facilities section of the questionnaire.

4

298 size of the city; the large cities reported this in 31 per cent of the responses and the smaller towns indicated it in 85 per cent.

Similarly, the frequency of agricultural

extension classes and projects was inversely proportional to the size of the cities, ranging from 4 per cent in the large cities to 23 per cent in the smaller places.

Evidently

the smaller places had more of a rural touch, even though they were within the sphere of the metropolitan area. Adult recreation was found more frequently in the small communities.

The use of the civic auditorium or other

buildings as a civic center was most frequently reported in the West South Central and Pacific regions..

Community

canning projects and agricultural extension projects were most frequently reported in the South Atlantic, West South Central, Pacific, and Mountain regions.

By geographical

regions, the adult education classes were found more abundantly during the summer months in the Pacific, West South Central, and East South Central regions.

Adult

recreation was reported most frequently in the Pacific region, with the Mountain, West South Central, and East North Central regions next in frequency. Chapter summary. More than 42 per cent of the ele­ mentary level districts and over 58 per cent of the second­ ary level districts reported the ftgreattf or ,tlimitedt, use

299

of public school district library facilities during the summer months. Although many schools operated various types of summer programs, none kept the cafeteria open during the summer months.

Most of the districts operated snack bars, student

soda fountains, or other limited eating facilities during the summer months in place of the cafeteria. More than one third of the 245 districts reporting the services section of the questionnaire did have some health services available during the summer on the elementary level,

These services included a nurse at the local school

in about 12 per cent of the districts and a physician who was at least on call for medical emergencies and physical examinations in 21 per cent.

The facilities for preschool

physical examinations of kindergarten children were fre­ quently mentioned.

The availability of student health

services on the secondary level was only slightly less frequent than on the elementary level. Approximately 5 per cent of the reporting districts on the elementary level and only 6 districts on the secondary level reported regular transportation services available for students during the summer months.

Approximately 10 per cent

of the districts on the elementary level and almost as many on the secondary level reported the availability of trans­ portation services for crippled children, field days,

3oa athletic participation, transportation to camps, excursions, and other types of special events. Although many respondents omitted any reference to guidance services, a total of 79 per cent of the elementary responses indicated that the only special guidance-services available to elementary students during the summer were those received as a part of the instructional work of the teachers. Although two thirds of the secondary level responses indicated that the summer guidance services were limited primarily to instructional work, approximately 22 per cent of the responses indicated that special counselors were on duty at the local schools.

Approximately 10 per cent of the secondary level

districts reported guidance workers at the central offices during the summer months. School buildings and facilities were used as community or civic centers during the summer in 40 per cent of the elementary level and 46 per cent of the secondary levQl dis­ tricts reporting.

Adult recreation, which includes the use

of playground and gymnasium facilities, was reported in 36 per cent of the elementary level districts and 39 per cent of the secondary level districts.

Other adult activities re­

ported on both the elementary and secondary levels included community canning projects and other agricultural extension classes.

Many districts made'a particular point of the

community use of the swimming pool, stadium, and auditorium

301 during the summer months.

The statistics indicate that the

smaller towns have a'greater summertime utilization of school buildings for community use than do larger cities.

CHAPTER X I I

COMMUNITY RELATIONS In order to locate some of the people and organiza­ tions who have had most to do in an advisory capacity with the summer programs, a check list was prepared for use in the questionnaire.

The check list included commonly used

public relations techniques, with an opportunity for respondents to indicate other techniques particularly suitable to summer programs. Advisory groups for the community relations program. The parent-teacher groups had most to do in an advisory capacity with the planning of summer programs.

In the 200

districts reporting schools on the elementary level, 39 per cent reported the parent-teacher organizations as being important in the planning of summer activities.

A co­

ordinating council, representing many agencies, was second on the list; 26 per cent of the districts reported this advisory aid.

Third on the list in frequency were the civic

clubs, with 20 per cent of the districts reporting their help.

Individual parents were reported in 17 per cent of

the districts as being influential in this part of the community relations program.

Professional organizations

and business men of the community were each indicated in 10 per cent of the elementary level districts.

Labor organiza-

303

tions, as such, were checked in only 2 per cent of the dis­ tricts.

Although 21 per cent of the respondents checked the

items which included still others, only a few actually speci­ fied the persons or organizations. tion commission was specified.

In a few cases a recrea­

Table XCIY reveals a summary.

The parent-teacher group was reported most frequently in all city size classifications above 5,000.

Evidently the

parent-teacher groups in the smaller towns under 5,000 had less parent-teacher activity in this direction.

Coordinating

councils were reported most frequently in cities of from 5.000 to 10,000 population.

The coordinating council was

less than half as frequent in cities above 100,000 and under 5.000 population.

Civic clubs were important in this

activity inversely proportional to the size of the cities. The cities under 5,000 reported the civic club activity in 62 per cent of the districts; only 2 per cent of the civic club groups aided materially in cities over 100,000. Individual parents had most to do in an advisory capacity in the larger cities and less frequently helped in the smaller towns. Although there were slight differences in city size in the checking of the item for businessmen and professional organizations, these differences were not great.

Every area

except the South Atlantic checked parent-teacher as fre­ quently as any other group.

The South Atlantic region most

304

TABLE

X C IV

COMMUNITY GROUPS WELCH HAVE HAD MOST TO DO IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY WITH THE PLANNING OF THE SUMMER.SECONDARY .......... LEVEL PROGRAM

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item

Busine ss men

'Givi c clubs

Professional organizations

Per cent of districts reporting Labor Parent-Teacher Individual organizations organizations parents

Coordinating Council

Other

100,000 or over

35

9

2

14

0.

40

29

14

18

30,000 to 99,999

45

11

13

15

2

42

18

29

27

10,000 to 29,999

68

7

16

4

4

41

16

28

18

5,000 to 9,999

55

13

29

9

2

38

11

33

22

2,500 to 4,999

13

15

62

8

0

15

15

15

15

4

0

0

25

0

25

25

25

25

Middle Atlantic

76

8

26

8

1

28

9

25

14

South Atlantic

12

8

0

17

0

25

17

33

25

last North Central

54

13

19

6

0

33

17

28

28

West North Central

17

29

24

18

6

71

41

24

6

East South Central

5

0

0

0

Q

40

20

20

40

West South Central

11

18

27

27

18

45

36

45

0

4

0

25

0

0

50

25

25

0

33

.3

15

9

3

61

15

21

39

216

10

20

10

2

39

17

26

21

New England

Mountain Pacific Totals

305 frequently reported the coordinating council, although all of the districts reported it quite frequently.

Individual

parents were most frequently reported in this public relations activity in the West North Central and West South Central regions.

In the Middle Atlantic region civic clubs rated

second in importance in this advisory work.

The higher rate

for the Middle Atlantic’area was partly 'due to the fact that there were so many cities of the smaller size reporting for the area. Table XCV shows that on the secondary level responses for the community relations program were not especially different from those on the elementary level.

A total of

33 P©*4 cent of the 210 districts reporting secondary level schools indicated the parent-teacher group most frequently in this community relations activity.

As on the elementary

level, the coordinating council was the second most fre­ quently mentioned organization, with 24 per cent of the districts reporting it.

Civic clubs ranked third, with 21

per cent of the districts reporting their advisory activi­ ties as being important.

Professional organizations were

mentioned in 13 per cent of the responses; businessmen were indicated in 12 per cent.

A total of 22 per cent checked

the item listed as "other," and in most cases did not indicate what other agencies did assist.

However, in those

districts which did write in organizations, it was usually

306

TABLE

XCV

COMM0NITT GROUPS WHICH HAVE HAD MOST TO DO IN AH ADVISORY CAPACITY WITH THE PLANNING OF THE SUMMER SECONDARY LEVEL-PROGRAMPopulation group Number of by city size and districts geographic region reporting this item

Per cent of districts reporting Business ^TvTc~ Professional labor Parent-Tea cher clubs organizations organizations organizations men

Individual parents

Coordinating council

Other

100,000 or over

36

14

8

17

6

39

25

11

22

30,000 to 99,999

47

13

19

26

4

34

17

23

23

10,000 to 29,999

65

8

18

6

5

32

17

22

25

5,000 to 9,999

50

14

26

8

2

28

12

34

20

2,500 to 4,999

12

17

58

8

0

33

33

33

17

4

25

25

50

25

50

50

25

25

Middle Atlantic

75

8

23

9

1

23

11

24

16

South Atlantic

14

7

7

14

0

21

14

21

29

last North Central

47

15

21

9

0

32

17

19

34

West North Central

17

29

24

18

6

53

29

18

6

last South Central

6

0

0

0

0

50

33

17

50

West South Central

12

17

25

25

17

33

33

42

0

2

0

50

0

0

50

0

50

0

Pacific

33

9

21

18

9

45

21

27

27

Totals

210

12

21

13

4

33

18

24

22

New England

Mountain

307

the local school board or local school officials and there­ fore should be discounted in our interpretation of the find­ ings in this study.

Labor organizations were reported as

participating in only k per cent of the reporting districts. City size differences were not great for the parentteacher organizations* assistance because all city size ■groups were near the mean of 33 per cent.

Coordinating

councils were most frequently reported in the smaller cities and least frequently reported as being important in cities over 100,000.

As in the elementary schools, the civic clubs

were indicated in a greater percentage of the instances in the smaller cities.

The range was from 8 per cent in the

cities over 100,000 population to 5$ per cent for the cities under 5,000 population.

There was no significant difference

in the way the districts reported the item regarding parti­ cipation of businessmen, with about 12 per cent of them checking this item.

Professional organizations and labor

organizations were most effective in the larger cities. The Middle Atlantic and West South Central regions most frequently reported the coordinating council as being important in the community relations program.

Parent-teacher

groups were most frequently reported in all other geo­ graphical regions.

Individual parents assisted most fre­

quently in the New England, East South Central, West South Central, and West North Central regions.

Civic clubs were

308 most frequently reported in the Mountain, West South Central, West North Central, Middle Atlantic, and New England area. Businessmen most frequently participated in the summer plan­ ning in the West North Central and New England areas. Professional organizations were most frequently reported in the New England and West South Central regions. Summer community relations activities.

In order to

determine what activities were most beneficial to the local school district, various community relations techniques were listed in the questionnaire.

A total of 68 per cent of the

superintendents reporting on the elementary level indicated that school news reported through local papers was con­ sidered important in the community relations program.

A

total of 40 per cent of the respondents indicated that exhibits placed in halls, on bulletin boards, in the school building, and on the playgrounds were important.

Special

visiting days ranked third, with 33 per cent of the question­ naires so marked.

In one fourth of the cases school exhibits

displayed in the windows of business places were considered important. , Fifth on the list was student talent for com­ munity programs, 22 per cent of the districts reporting this as important on the elementary level.

A news sheet

occasionally printed or mimeographed for parents seemed important in 18 per cent of the districts reporting. 2 per cent reported a school paper.

Only

Six per cent indicated

309

techniques not mentioned in the check list.

Some of these

could well have been placed within the regular check list. The ones most frequently mentioned were recreation activities, recreation commission, film of summer school, radio programs, graduation exercises, competitive skills, song contests, concert, music recital, harvest show, and open house.

Table

XCVI shows a summary by city size and geographical area. In all city size classifications, exhibits placed in halls, on bulletin boards, and on the playgrounds were con­ sidered important by about the same percentages.

Special

visiting days were common to one fourth to one third of the cities above 3,000 population, but those under 3,000 popula­ tion reported special visiting days as being important in 62 per cent of the districts.

Student talent was indicated

in 13 per cent of the districts in the small towns, with a maximum of 26 per cent in the cities above 100,000 population. All city size groups under 100,000 made effective use of school exhibits in business places in from one fourth to one third of the districts; the large cities made use of this technique in only 9 per cent of the cities.

School news

reported through one or more local newpapers was the most commonly reported activity in each of the various city size classifications, except those under 3,000 where the special visiting days were more frequently reported.

The news sheet

occasionally printed or mimeographed for parents was reported

310

TABLE

XCVI

ELEMENTARY LEVEL SUMMEg COM&KJNITY RELATIONS ACTIVITIES

Per cent of districts reporting Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of Exhibit § Special districts visiting reporting days

Stuaem; taienx; SbhOOl exhibits— sefrsrol news— N e w — for programs in business in local sheet places papers

Student— Other paper

this item 100,000 or over

35 .

31

26

26

9

71

6

3

14

30,000 to 99,999

45

40

33

24

2?

71

24

4

9

10,000 to 29,999

68

46

35

21

32

71

18

1

7

3,000 to 9,999

55

40

25

22

24

62

16

0

0

2,500 to 4,999

13

38

62

15

31

54

31

8

0

4

0

25

0

0

50

0

0

25

Middle Atlantic

76

39

29

21

25

72

13

1

1

South Atlantic

12

42

50

17

17

67

17

0

0

East North Central

54

44

35

22

30

74

26

4

11

West North Central

17

29

35

18

18

29

12

0

12

East South Central

5

40

0

40

20

80

0

0

20

West South Central

11

27

18

45

18

82

18

0

0

Mountain

4

100

50

75

50

50

25

0

0

Pacific

33

42

36

15

27

64

21

6

9

216

40

32

22

25

68

18

2

6

New England

Totals

311

in only 6 per cent of the large cities, but it was more common to cities under 100,000 population. In 8 of the 9 geographical regions the local news­ paper was most frequently listed as important in the com­ munity relations program.

In the Mountain region school

exhibits and student talent were more frequently reported. A news sheet printed or mimeographed for parents was frequently reported in the East North Central and Mountain regions.

School exhibits in business places were frequently

reported in the East North Central, Mountain, Pacific, and Middle Atlantic regions.

Student talent was frequently

reported in the Mountain and West North Central regions. Exhibits in hallways, on bulletin boards, and on play­ grounds were marked frequently in Mountain region, last North central, South Atlantic, Pacific, and East South Central regions. In general, the public relations techniques on the secondary level were similar to those on the elementary level.

Table XCYII shows that there was a tendency for the

respondents on the secondary level to have a greater degree of agreement, both by city size and geographical region, as to what was most important.

A total of 67 per cent of the

210 districts reporting on the secondary level agreed that school news reported through the local paper was important in the community relations program.

School exhibits were

3;2 TABLE

XCVTI

SECONDARY LEVEL SOMMER COMMUNITY RELATIONS A C T IV IT IE S

Population group by city size and geographic region

Humber of districts reporting this item

Exhibits

Special visiting days

Per cent of districts reporting t School exhibits School hews for programs in business in local places papers

News sheet

Student paper

Other

100,000 or over

36

28

17

19

6

67

6

30,000 to 99,999

47

30

21

19

17

64

21

4

9

10,000 to 29,999

65

31

23

29

28

77

14

0

6

5,000 to 9,999

50

28

22

20

24

64

16

2

0

2,500 to 4,999

12

33

25

25

25

42

25

0

0

4

0

0

0

0

25

0

0

25

Middle Atlantic

75

29

23

24

21

72

9

1

1

South Atlantic

14

43

36

14

14

64

21

0

0

East North Central

47

32

23

21

19

79

26

2

11

West North Central

17

6

18

12

6

24

6

0

12

East South Central

6

50

0

33

17

83

0

0

17

West South Central

12

25

17

42

17

75

17

8

0

2

100

50

50

100

50

50

0

0

33

30

18

24

.30

64,

18

... 12....

6

210

30

21

23

20

67

15

3

6

New England

Mountain Pacific Totals

11

313

reported in 30 per cent of the cases; student talent, special visiting days, and school exhibits in business places accounted for 23 per cent, 21 per cent, and 20 per cent, respectively.

Qn the secondary level 15 per cent

indicated the use of a news sheet occasionally printed or mimeographed; only 3 per cent reported a regular summer student newspaper.

The other techniques listed by the

various respondents included recreation activities, work of the recreation committees, a film of the summer program, graduation exercises, competitive skills, song contests, music recitals, parades, harvest show, and open house. The variations by city size were not materially different from those on the elementary level.

The large

cities less frequently made use of school exhibits in busi­ ness places, occasionally putting out mimeographed news sheet, whereas the larger cities more frequently published a regular summer student newspaper. Geographically, all except the Mountain region agreed that the school news reported through a local newspaper was most frequently considered important.

The Mountain region

stressed the importance of school exhibits in business places; the West South Central and Mountain regions frequently re, ported the use of student talent.

Special visiting days on

the secondary level were most frequently reported in the South Atlantic and Mountain regions.

School exhibits were

314

reported frequently in many districts, the Mountain, Hast South Central, South Atlantic, East North Central, Pacific, and Middle Atlantic reporting the greatest frequencies* Chapter summary.

Community groups which have had most

to do in an advisory capacity with the planning of the summer public school program include many organizations, individuals, and groups besides school officials.

In this advisory work

on both the elementary and secondary levels the parentteacher organizations ranked first in frequency of mention. A city coordinating council was second mainly because many of the summer programs included joint recreational planning on the part of the district and municipal government. Civic clubs ranked third in frequency of mention for advisory aid in developing the summer program.

A number of

the replies to the preliminary inquiry indicated that many civic clubs were quite directly concerned with the summer program.

Those were, however, excluded from this study of

school-sponsored summer programs. Individual parents evidently played quite an important part in developing summer programs in many communities.

Other

professional organizations, businessmen, recreation commis­ sions, and other agencies were also frequently reported and in the order indicated. Parent-teacher groups in towns under 5,000 population

315 were reported less frequently in helping with the summer program.

Coordinating councils, representing many agencies,

were more frequently reported for cities between 5,000 and 100,000 population than for larger or smaller cities.

Civic

clubs were more active in helping the summer programs in the small to medium-sized communities than in large cities. Summer community relations activities in the metro­ politan public school districts were varied according to 216 responses on the elementary level and 210 responses on the secondary level.

Approximately two thirds of the reports

from the elementary and secondary level schools indicated that school news reported through local newspapers was important in the public relations program.

A total of 30

per cent of the secondary and 40 per cent of the elementary level responses indicated that school exhibits on school premises constituted a common public relations technique. Next in frequency of mention were special visiting days, with 21 per cent of the secondary and 32 per cent of the elementary level districts indicating this technique. Student talent for programs off the school premises was reported as important by 22 per cent of the elementary and 23 per cent of the secondary districts.

School exhibits

placed in windows of business places ranked fifth in fre­ quency.

A total of 25 per cent of the elementary and 20 per

cent of the secondary level responses indicated the use of

316 these school exhibits.

A news sheet was reported by 15 per

cent of the secondary and 18 per cent of the elementary level districts.

A, student newspaper for summer use was less fre­

quently reported. There were variations both by city size and by geo­ graphical region in the significance of each of these techniques of public relations. reveal these variations.

Tables XCYI and XCVII

CHAPTER XIII APPRAISAL Evaluation or appraisal of any school activity is often difficult to make.

In this study an attempt was made

to secure in broad terms an estimate of superintendent reaction to particular aspects of the summer curriculum and to particular questions regarding the curtailment or exten­ sion of summer education in the next three summers. Appraisal of summer playground programs. A total of 274 districts responded to the question:

ffDo you consider

your present summer playground program adequate?”

A total

of 42 per cent of the responses were answered in the affirma­ tive.

The. negative comments appeared to fall under one of

several categories.

First, there were those who felt that

the playground program was directed too much for adults and that it did not attract a sufficient number of children. More activity for the younger children was a recommendation frequently made.

On the other hand, there were many sug­

gestions that more adult participation of the nonathletic type was needed to round out an adequate playground program. The term ”broad” was frequently used in statements like: ”It needs broader participation.” There was a second group which quite frequently in-

318 Heated the need for expansion of playground facilities in the area of various types of swimming activities.

Probably

the most frequent comment was to the effect that the com­ munities needed to cover more areas or that they needed more centers opened.

Quite frequently limited funds was noted as-

the reason for the curtailment of the playground program. In keeping with the findings of other parts of this study there were several respondents who indicated that music, art, crafts, and other cultural development needed to be a part of the playground program.

These necessarily

imply the concept that playground or recreation programs during the summer months were not in the summer of 1949 necessarily limited to athletic feats and skills.

Some

included the suggestion that more hobby clubs were needed. Still another group answered "no" to the question because of the difficulties in the organization and securing of an adequate staff.

One comment indicated that the

district was made up of 9 incorporated cities and coordina­ tion was difficult.

Other comments along this line indicated

that the school found it difficult to afford enough trained help to conduct the kind of program that was needed. The cities under 3,000 were less frequently satisfied with the playground program.

Cities of 5,000 and over in

population all appeared t o consider their playground program adequate with about the same degree of frequency.

Geo­

319 graphically, the Pacific, East North Central, and Middle Atlantic regions most frequently indicated ”yesn in response to the question.

Other variations are shown in Table XCVIII.

Appraisal of the .joint plans for playground operation. This question was asked:

nIf you have a school city or county

plan of joint playground operation, do you consider it an ideal arrangement? other districts.”

List suggestions for master plans for Table XCIX shows that 56 per cent of the

127 responses to this question indicated affirmative responses.

Cities with populations of 5,000 to 30,000 were

more frequently satisfied with the joint plan of operating summer playgrounds than either larger or smaller cities. Geographically, the East North Central, South Atlantic, Pacific, and Middle Atlantic areas most frequently reported satisfaction with the joint plan of operation of the summer playgrounds.

The remarks in relation to this question seem

to fall into about three broad categories.

The first were

those who were happy and satisfied with the joint plan of operation.

In those the comments were frequently to the

effect that the school supervisor and city supervisor should sit down and correlate their plans, or that a member of the board should always be on the recreation board.

Comments

also indicated that the plan was excellent because of mutual cooperation.

320 TABLE

X C V III

SUPERINTENDENTS1 RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: "DO YOU CONSIDER YOUR PRESENT SUMMER PLAYGROUND PROGRAM ADEQUATE?" Number of districts reporting this item

Yes

No

100,000 or over

49

41

59

30,000 to 99,999

57

40

60

10,000 to 29,999

aa

44

56

5,000 to 9,999

6S

44

56

2,500 to 4,999

12

33

67

3

33

67

Middle Atlantic

94

44

56

South Atlantic

ia

22

7a

East North Central

72

49

51

West North Central

23

30

70

East South Central

6

17

33

West South Central

13

31

69

4

0

100

56

44

42

53

Population group by city size and geographic region

New England

Mountain Pacific Totals

274

Per cent

321 TABLE

X C IX

SUPERINTENDENTS' RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: "IF YOU HAVE A SCHOOL AND CITY OR COUNTY PLAN OF JOINT PLAYGROUND OPERATION, DO YOU CONSIDER IT AN IDEAL ARRANGEMENT?" Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item

Yes

100,000 or over

23

52

43

30,000 to 99,999

33

43

*52

10,000 to 29,999

41

59

41

5,000 to 9,999

26

65

35

2,500 to 4,999

4

50

50

New England

0

0

0

Middle Atlantic

33

47

53

South Atlantic

9

67

33

East North Central

30

70

30

West North Central

13

33

62

East South Central

1

0

100

West South Central

7

71

29

Mountain

4

25

75

25

60

40

127

56

44

Pacific T o ta ls

Per cent No-

322 Suggestions were frequently made of some "shoulds" which they felt were necessary for adequate planning.

Com­

ments were to the effect that there should be a coordinating committee, and that there should be cooperation between school, city, and the joint recreation board.

Other comments

indicated that the success of the program was to a large extent dependent upon the adequate organization, planning, and administration of the dual control. For those who answered ,fnoTf in regard to the satis­ faction with the arrangement of the joint control, the com­ ments usually indicated that there was little success at coordination.

Some indicated that it would be easier to

operate the playground program under the local school board. Others indicated that the summer playground program should be under the operation or direction of the public schools with the city cooperating.

Some indicated that it should

be under the direction of the schools because of the better opportunity to give good leadership to the program.

The

negative answers to the joint control question generally reflected difficulties in planning and coordination. Appraisal of summer camping programs.

Only 33 dis­

tricts, as shown in Table C, reported an answer to the question:

ffIf you have a camping program does your ex­

perience justify recommending such programs to other

323 TABLE

C

SUPERINTENDENTS1 RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: "IF YOU HAVE A CAMPING PROGRAM DOES YOUR EXPERIENCE JUSTIFY RECOMMENDING SUCH PROGRAMS TO OTHER METROPOLITAN AREA SCHOOL DISTRICTS?"

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item

Per cent Yes

No

100,000 or over

9

67

33

30,000 to 99,999

S

75

25

10,000 to 29,999

7

71

29

5,000 to 9,999

6

33

67

2 , 5 0 0 to 4,999

3

100

0

New England

0

0

0

Middle Atlantic

7

71

29

South Atlantic

3

100

0

East North Central

11

$2

id

West North Central

4

25

75

East South Central

0

0

0

East South Central

0

0

0

Mountain

1

100

0

Pacific

7

43

57

33

67

33

T o ta ls

32 4

metropolitan area school districts?"

A total of 67 per cent

of those responding to the question answered "yes."

This

included those who operated both the day camp and overnight camping programs.

One group was in response to day camps.

They indicated a favorable reaction in several instances, typical comment being:

"Have only day camping now, but hope

to extend to overnight camping." A second group reporting in response to this question indicated that local camping programs were popular and that there was more demand than could be met.

A third group

indicated that camping had been tried before and was given up because the educational leaders were disappointed with the program.

One remark indicated that the answer was "no"

for the summer camping, but "yes" for regular year camping. In this study the summer camping only was indicated in the questionnaire.

The frequency of the summer camping was not

nearly so great as the number of camping programs which were conducted during the regular school year. One respondent in answering "yes" indicated that the camping program gave better chance for democratic planning. The children get to know each other better.

Teachers were

better able to understand children and the camp program was a good morale builder. Appraisal of summer music programs.

In an attempt to

325 get an estimate of the superintendent's opinion of the music program in the various metropolitan school districts the question was asked:

"Do you consider your present summer

music program adequate?"

Table Cl shows that a total of 39

per cent of 206 respondents indicated satisfaction with the smnrner music program.

The least satisfaction was noted in

the small cities under 5,000 population. Geographically, the greatest satisfaction was re­ ported in the West North Central, East North Central, and Pacific regions.

Eeactions to this question indicated 3

general areas of responses.

The first group indicated that

the music program needed to be extended and expanded; there was no attempt to reach all the children.

Gathers indicated

that the summer music program should be free to students. One respondent answered "no" because he felt that there were no public appearances and that the summer music program should more directly relate to activities within the community. A second general group made suggestions regarding the introduction of various types of vocal training into the summer music program.

Some comments included vocal music

programs for adults as being desirable.

In many, districts

summer instrumental and band programs were present, but the vocal program was needed. The third group of responses indicated that the program

326

TABLE

Cl

SUPERINTENDENTS1 RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: "DO YOU CONSIDER YOUR PRESENT SUMMER MUSIC PROGRAM ADEQUATE?"

Number of districts reporting this item

Yes

No

100,000 or over

32

41

59

30,000 to 99,999

41

29

71

10,000 to 29,999

73

43

52

5,000 to 9,999

50

33

62

2,500 to 4,999

10

20

30

1

0

100

Middle Atlantic

67

37

63

South Atlantic

13

31

69

East North Central

53

43

57

West North Central

19

53

42

East South Central

4

25

75

West South Central

9

22

73

Mountain

4

0

100

31

42

53

006

39

61

Population group by city size and geographic region

New England

Pacific Totals

Per cent

327

was either limited to vocal music or that there was no music program.

The music program as it was being expanded and

needed to be expanded would include instrumental instruction and a school band. Curtailment or extension of summer education.

In

order to determine whether or not the concept of summer educational responsibility was being retarded or expanded, two questions were asked.

The first question was:

"Do

you plan to curtail any part of your summer program in the next three summers?"

Only 3 of the 256 superintendents

responding indicated such curtailment.

A summary by city

size and geographical region is shown in Table Oil.

The

only comments suggested were to the effect that curtailment was necessary because of extensive building program or other financial reasons. The second question was:

"Do you plan to extend any

phase of your summer program within the next three summers?" The responses, as noted in Table CIII, were decidedly in favor of further extension of the summer program, because 77 per cent of the 231 respondents to this question answered in the affirmative.

The public school districts in the cities

under 3 0 ,0 0 0 most frequently indicated an affirmative answer to the question.

Geographically, the West South Central

areas most frequently reported an affirmative answer.

323 TABLE

C II

SUPERINTENDENTS 1 RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: ”DO YOU PLAN TO CURTAIL ANY PART OF YOUR SUMMER PROGRAM IN THE NEXT THREE SUMMERS?”

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item

Per cent Yes

No

100,000 or over

44

0

100

30,000 to 99,999

54

4

96

10,000 to 29,999

33

0

100

5,000 to 9,999

59

2

93

2,500 to 4,999

11

0

100

5

0

100

Middle Atlantic

S3

1

99

South Atlantic

15

7

93

East North Central

71

1

99

West North Central

23

0

100

East South Central

6

0

100

West South Central

11

0

100

5

0

100

37

0

100

256

1

99

New England

Mountain Pacific T o ta ls

329 TABLE

GUI

SUPERINTENDENTS1 RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: "DO YOU PLAN TO EXTEND ANY PART OF YOUR SUMMER PROGRAM IN THE NEXT THREE SUMMERS?"

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item

"Tes

Per cent No

100,000 or over

39

62

3S

30,000 to 99,999

50

72

2S

10,000 to 29,999

77

S3

17

3,000 to 9,999

56

£2

IS

2,500 to 4,999

9

7S

22

New England

5

SO

20

Middle Atlantic

74

70

30

South Atlantic

15

SO

20

East North Central

65

7S

22

West North Central

21

Si

19

East South Central

5

SO

20

West South Central

9

S9

11

Mountain

5

60

40

Pacific

32

Si

19

Totals 4Vo

231

77

23

330

Arts, crafts, shops, and dramatics represented the most frequent areas of extension of the summer program.

All of

these respondents more or less implied the recreational aspects of art as enrichment activities rather than art or crafts in relation to an accelerated academic program.

The

second most frequent response was in regard to the expansion of playground facilities and recreational areas including swimming pools, wading pools, and recreation programs that were not in conflict with those already in operation under city administration.

In this area some of the respondents

indicated that they had plans to work with the city or county park boards. One of the large county systems reported this ex­ pectation to extend the camping program.

A number of the

districts indicated that camping was to be a recreational activity of the school district within the next three summers. Next in frequency, of mention were plans to extend summer music activities.

In some cases it was a matter of

expanding the program to include vocal or band music.

In

other cases it meant setting up plans for summer music activities. Most of the responses appeared to extend the phases of the program which tended to emphasize the extracurricular, enrichment, cultural, and broad aspects of education and recreation not directly related to the curriculum.

Such

331

suggestions as "extending the whole program," "would like to broaden the

program," "extend all phases,"

and"the

program is too

limited and needs overhauling"

indicate this

broader concept of what superintendents believed to be important in summer education. Several of the districts indicated that the summer program could be broadened to include adult participation to a greater extent and to include school use by the public during the summer. projects, such

Some comments indicated that adult

as canning, would be a part of

Some of the suggestions included

a story hour

theprogram. forchildren

and programs particularly for the smaller children. Safe driving courses were indicated in other plans. Gne superintendent indicated that they had 3 cars operating all summer for eleventh grade students in driver education and that they hoped to have more cars for this part of the summer program which was difficult to schedule during the regular school year. A few of the suggestions did include some phase of the academic program.

It amounted to the expansion of the

elementary level or high school level reading clinics. Homemaking and public speaking were also mentioned.

One

comment was to the effect that they looked forward to a continuous year-round program with teachers on a 12-month basis.

332 Extension of the "regular curriculum". question and request for information was asked:

The following "Do you

favor the concept of extending the regular curriculum school year throughout the summer?

This question was asked to help

determine whether or not superintendents believe it feasible to utilize school plants and equipment in summer during the present general building shortage.

If the answer is ^es*

give suggestions as to your recommended vacation patterns." Table CIV shows that a total of 45 per cent of the 250 districts reporting this item indicated an affirmative answer.

However, practically all of those who made comments

were opposed to extending the regular curriculum, but rather suggested various types of enrichment programs with provision for acceleration, remedial work, or the typical summer session. Of the vacation patterns suggested, the most frequently mentioned plan was to organize a school on a 4-quarter basis with the implication that the children were required to attend 3 of the 4 quarters of the year.

The suggestion was

made that it would increase the school facilities by 33 l/3 per cent.

In a few cases the suggestion was made that

school be conducted on an 11-month school year basis with the eleventh month devoted to remedial work for failing and poor scholarship students.

Several would use two thirds of

333 TABLE

C IV

SUPERINTENDENTS' RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION: "DO YOU FAVOR THE CONCEPT OF EXTENDING THE 'REGULAR CURRICULUM' ' SCHOOL YEAR THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER?"

Population group by city size and geographic region

Number of districts reporting this item

Per cent ^es

No

100,000 or over

43

35

65

30,000 to 99,999

52

50

50

10,000 to 29,999

SO

46

54

5,000 to 9,999

64

45

55

2,500 to 4,999

11

55

45

5

go

20

Middle Atlantic

£6

37

63

South Atlantic

16

44

56

East North Central

65

45

55

West North Central

21

76

24

East South Central

6

17

$3

West South Central

12

5g

42

4

25

75

35

46

54

250

45

55

New England

Mountain Pacific T o ta ls

334

the staff each summer with one third on a longer vacation for travel or school work. Comments in regard to the question may be summarized under several heads.

First, there was general agreement with

the idea that the school buildings, school organization, staff, and facilities should' and could be used during the summer months to a greater extent than was apparently taking place.

Almost all of these same respondents indicated that

the type of activity participated in by the teachers, staff, and pupils should not be the regular curriculum but should include a recreational program, opportunity for remedial or accelerated work, a camping program, crafts, hobbies, and other types of programs most of which are not directly related to class promotions. The comments were fairly well represented in the widely publicized G-lencoe and Rochester plans of year-round school.

They were decidedly different from the all-year

school of the 1920*s in that those schools were designed primarily as academic schools for acceleration.

Some of

the "yes" answers indicated that they were not forgetting the need for vacations for both pupils and teachers.

Others

stressed the importance of the greater utilization of the school facilities. Another group of the respondents in favor of the plan

335

indicated a favorable response to camp programs.

One comment

was to the effect that summer education should have activites for all ages including sports, trips, excursions, camping, lectures, classes, choral and instrumental music groups, radio presentation, and other broad enrichment programs. Some of the responses recommended school day camps for the summer program; others recommended a plan similar to the Battle Creek, Michigan, camping program. Among those who answered the question in the negative some indicated that there were too many complicating factors, that the climate was too hot, that the children and teachers need rest during the summer, that it would be difficult to organize in an agricultural area, and that there were maintenance problems involved in a greater utilization of the buildings during the summer months.

Therefore, while

nearly half of the respondents gave an affirmative answer to the question regarding the concept of extending the regular curriculum into the full year, actually a much smaller per cent really meant that they were in favor of extending the regular curriculum.

More frequently they

indicated a broader type of program for the summer and at the same time better use of school facilities. Chapter summary.

In this chapter an attempt was made

to secure in broad terms an estimate of superintendent re-

336

action to particular* aspects of the summer metropolitan public school district program. According to reports from 274 districts, 42 per cent of the superintendents had the opinion that their summer playground program was adequate in 1949.

Suggestions to

improve the program in general included suggestions for gearing the program to younger people, increasing swimming facilities, increasing the number of playground areas, and increasing such cultural playground-related activities as art, crafts, and music. In 127 districts reporting joint school municipal or school-county playground operation, 56 per cent indicated that the arrangement was a good one.

Cities in the 5,000

to 3 0 ,0 00 population size range were more frequently satis­ fied with the joint plan of operating summer playgrounds than were larger or smaller cities.

The chief difficulties

in the operation of the playground program were caused by lack of adequate planning and cooperative action. Although only 3 3 districts responded to the summer camping appraisal.question, 67 per cent indicated that their experience justified recommending such camping programs to other metropolitan public school districts.

It was found

that many of the camping programs that operate during the regular school year did not operate during the summer months.

337

Only 39 per cent of 206 respondents indicated satis­ faction with their summer music program.

In most cases of

dissatisfaction suggestions and comments indicated that the program needed to be expanded to include instrumental, band, vocal, or other aspects of summer music activities not already present. Curtailment of the summer program, as it existed in the summer of 1949 in metropolitan public school districts, is not likely to occur in the next three summers according to the responses from 256 districts.

Only 3 or slightly

more than 1 per cent indicated a general curtailment of the metropolitan public school district summer program. On the other hand, 77 per cent of the respondents indicated that they did plan to expand one or more phases of the summer program during the next three summers.

Arts,

crafts, shops, dramatics, playground facilities, music, and camping represented the most frequently mentioned areas for extension of the summer program. The question was asked:

"Do you favor the concept

of extending the regular curriculum school year throughout the summer?"

Approximately 43 per cent of the 250 respondents

indicated an affirmative answer, but practically all of these made comments which indicated that it was not a regular cur­ riculum, but rather a modified one which they preferred.

As

reported in the preceding paragraph., they indicated that the summer program should be something of an enrichment cur­ riculum including a well-rounded recreational program, opportunity for remedial or accelerated work, a camping program, crafts, hobbies, and other activities, many of which are not directly related to promotions.

CHAPTER XIV CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter has included a summary, general con­ clusions, and recommendations for the operation of extendedyear programs of education and recreation. Background summary.

By the middle of the nineteenth

century it was customary for the urban public schools to be in session most of the year although rural education was rather limited.

Summer vacation periods became longer;

urban centers not only became larger but they developed spheres of influence such as to make many smaller suburban cities a part of the larger central cities.

During the

past century the shift of population from an agrarian life to an industrallzed urban life has brought about changes in the space in which the urban pupil lives and in the contacts he has with his parents in learning skills, chores about the home, and trades. Before the turn of the century summer vacation

schools,

often held in public school buildings and supported by private individuals or agencies, developed in order to provide constructive summer programs for urban youth.

The

vacation schools were later taken over by boards of educa­ tion.

340

Shortly after 1900 regular school playground programs and regular summer schools often replaced the former privately operated vacation schools.

The summer

session led to a four-quarter school year in several cities during the 1920Ts but these had practically disappeared by 1949*

Summer public school playground programs have con­

tinued to grow where cities wished to prevent juvenile delinquency.

The playground program more recently has

been extended to include various types of public school camping programs. A preliminary inquiry was sent to 1032 metropolitan public school districts as a part of this study.

A total

of 87.4 per cent of the inquiries were answered.

Most of

the remaining summary is based on a more lengthy question­ naire returned by 72 per cent of the 340 metropolitan public school districts which had been founds to have con*

ducted school-sponsored programs during the summer of 1949. Length of school year.

The metropolitan public .

school district traditional school year has not changed much during the past half century.

During the school year

of 194&-49, approximately 73 per cent of the districts started the school year during the week of September 6-11. The agreement was less among the districts in the time of ending the 1948-49 regular school year.

The implication is

that where the school year has been extended the actual

341

increase in length has occurred at the end of the traditional school year. The metropolitan.public school district school year was actually longer than the traditional school year as shown by the fact that 60 per cent of the metropolitan public school districts contacted in the preliminary inquiry con­ ducted some kind of summer program.

The implication is that

supplementary programs actually extended the school year through a good part of the summer in a majority of the metropolitan public school districts. Extent of summer programs. The percentage of metro­ politan public school districts which assumed responsiblity for summer educational services was found to be directly proportional to the size of the cities, ranging from 52 per cent in cities between 2,500 and 5?000 population to 80 per cent in cities over 100,000 population.

The statistics

indicate that the metropolitan area cities assumed responsi­ bility for extended-year educational and recreational services. The practice of conducting public school district summer playground programs has continued to increase in fre­ quency since its beginning about a half century ago.

In

1949 the summer playground program was quite an accepted part of the concept of extended-year educational and recrea­

342

tional services.

An evidence of this was the fact that

school-sponsored summer playgrounds were reported in ap­ proximately 31 per cent of the individual elementary level schools and in 22 per cent of the individual secondary level schools of the metropolitan public school districts studied. Early fall activities frequently require bands and other organized music groups.

Training for these and other

music activities does not begin and end with the traditional school year.

Private music training has been the accepted

pattern for summer music in many communities.

However,

reports for the summer of 1949 indicate that approximately 13 per cent of the elementary schools and 19 per cent of

the secondary level schools of the metropolitan public school districts studied, conducted music programs which extended into the summer months. The summer classroom program or "summer session” as it is frequently called has increased in frequency over the last half century except for a time during the depression of the early 1930fs.

Approximately 11 per cent of the

elementary schools and 29 per cent of the secondary schools within metropolitan public school districts had summer classroom programs during the summer of 1949.

College and

university schools of education helped sponsor summer classroom programs on both the elementary and secondary level for teacher training purposes but their influence was not

343

great as compared with the total number of summer schools.

Public school camping programs have been announced frequently throughout the United States but most of them operated only during the regular school year.

Only 10

elementary and 6 secondary level districts responded to the overnight camping section of the questionnaire.

Public

school summer camping was in its infancy in 1949 according to these reports. Financial support for the summer program. Financial support for the various phases of the metropolitan public school district summer program came from many different •sources.

Nearly three fourths of the districts contributed

part or all of the funds for the support of the summer program.

Full financial responsibility was not assumed by

the districts because over half of them charged tuition or fees for some part of the program.

The fact that slightly

over one fourth of the' districts reported state aid indicates that responsibility for summer education was being assumed to some extent on the state level.

Only a very few dis­

tricts reported a kind of program for which federal aid was available.

Many of the districts cooperated with the city

or county in joint plans of summer playground operation; additional financial support was provided through these cooperative efforts.

Reports from a few districts indicated

344

that private groups or individuals made gifts for the financial support of the summer program. Personnel administration. The most frequent method of paying summer teaching personnel ■was on the basis of a flat sum for the specified summer term.

A few districts

which have gone on the so-called tfyear-round” plan pay on the 12-month basis.

In nearly a third of the districts

which reported camp programs the employees were paid on the 12-month year contract.

Sixteen per cent of the districts

that conducted summer music programs remunerated their teachers on the same basis. In the regular summer classroom program the pre­ dominant practice was for the principal or his assistant to be in charge at the local school.

Although the principal

evidently had general supervision of all kinds of summer programs at the local school reports indicate that the greater responsibility for the administration of the camp­ ing, playground, and music programs was in the hands of a specially selected teacher. Limiting summer teaching to regular school-year teachers, exclusively, was reported in 46 per cent of-the camping programs, 12 per cent of the classroom programs, 12 per cent of the music programs, and only 30 per cent of the playground programs.

The implication is that teachers from

345

outside the district and noncertificated employees were called upon for summer teaching in the camping and playground programs more frequently than in the music and classroom programs.

Few districts left the playground or camp

teaching duties entirely to noncertificated employees. Kinds of summer programs. The playground program was found to be the most frequent type of summer program. Approximately an equal number of districts administered and financed their own summer playgrounds as compared with those that had a joint district-municipal or districtcounty plan for summer recreation.

Where joint plans were

in operation about half of them were for the summer only and the other half extended throughout the year.

In the

joint plans for cooperative operation of playgrounds, the municipality-or county spent funds for swimming pools on school property in about 10 per cent of the reporting dis­ tricts, for recreational buildings in 7 per cent of the reporting districts, and for playground equipment in from 16 to 23 per cent of the reporting districts.

Approximately

one fourth of the districts spent money for the operation of nonschool summer playgrounds. Kinds of summer playground activities on both the elementary and secondary level playgrounds in descending rank order'of frequency were supervised games, crafts and

hobby clubs, programs for adults, swimming, dancing, movies, and types, of celebrations.

The typical playground program

lasted all summer but almost as many had 2 to 6 weeks of unsupervised summer playground time. •

\

The playground week was typically of 5 days duration but approximately 30

cent of the districts rexported at

least some playgrounds operating 5k or 6 days per week.

The

summer playground program typically began at 9 o*clock. About half of the districts ended their program between 3 and 6 p.m. and most of the others closed their daily program between 8 and 10 p.m. for a mean day of about 8.6 hours on the elementary level and 9.1 hours on the secondary level. In the few day and overnight camping programs re­ ported the local district provided the campgrounds and recreational facilities in nearly one third of the districts the county provided these in about one third and private organizations provided them in the remaining third.

In the

typical situation most of the operating costs other than food were borne by the local district and food costs were provided by parents.

In some cases fees or tuition were

paid and in others the finances were provided by private foundations. All pupils were eligible for the camping program in a majority of the districts which had camping programs.

347

Grade level and age level group requirements varied.

The

overage' time pupils spent in the summer camp was from 1 to 2 weeks.

The day camping program tended to operate only

during the summer but one half of.the overnight camping programs were a part of the regular school year program. Many of the districts had programs during the regular school year that did not operate during the summer. Although three fourths of the elementary classroom programs paralleled the regular year curriculum, a notice­ able trend was the fact that 15 per cent conducted a cultural or exploratory program not necessarily related to class promotions.

Some of these programs evidently were

quite similar to certain aspects of the broad playground program in other districts.

A majority of the districts

permitted all children to attend but 38 per cent indicated that the summer programs were primarily remedial in nature. Ordinarily the elementary level summer achievement was not recorded for accelerated progress. On both the elementary and secondary levels the summer classroom programs were usually conducted only in the mornings for a period of 6 weeks.

On the secondary

level the classroom program paralleled the regular year curriculum and provided opportunity for pupils to progress at an accelerated rate as well as opportunity to make up work.

The usual pattern for both teacher and pupil was to

348

have 2 class periods of about 120 minutes each. Elementary level summer music programs were a part of the program 'of summer classes in slightly over half of the reporting school districts.

Approximately one fifth of the

districts reporting music programs on the elementary level conducted classes in school buildings and with school personnel but not as regularly organized school classes. The semiacceptance of the music program was shown by the fact that the districts aided the municipality or county in conducting summer music programs in another 15 per cent of the districts.

On the secondary level there was a greater

tendency for the summer music program to be organized as a part of the regular program of summer classes. Pupil personnel practices. Pupil personnel practices were described or implied in the section dealing with the kinds of summer programs.

Opportunities for pupils were

broad in the usual playground programs and not limited to athletic feats.

Except for a few districts limiting their

camping programs to orthopedic problem children the practice was general for districts to give all children an opportunity to participate in the summer camping program.

Although the

elementary classroom programs were usually remedial several districts provided exploratory programs.

Opportunity to

receive music training in summer was common to many com-, munities.

The secondary level classroom program was usually

349

not considered a remedial program. School services and facilities. The summer utiliza­ tion of public school library facilities was found to be quite extensive as shown by the fact that more than 42 per cent of the elementary level districts and over

per cent

of the secondary level districts reported with the "great” or "limited” use of public school library facilities during the summer months. Very few schools operated cafeteria services during the summer.

Snack bars, student soda fountains, or other

limited eating facilities were frequently substituted for regular cafeteria services.

The reason for the lack of use

of the cafeteria services is that the classroom program was primarily a morning program and the other phases of the program gave ample opportunity for children to eat at home. Health services at the local school were available in approximately one third of the districts.

These health

services included a nurse at the local school in about 12 per cent of the districts and a physician who was at least on call for medical emergencies and physical examinations in 21 per cent of the districts.

Various plans for preschool

physical examinations of prekindergarten children were in operation. Regular public school transportation service was

350

available in summer in slightly less than 5.per cent of the districts.

A much more common practice was to have school

transportation available for field days, athletic events, summer camp trips, crippled children in school activities, and other special events. Counselors and other guidance workers were available in nearly one fourth of the secondary level schools.

The

implication is that these services were rather widely accepted as a part of the pattern of summer classes.

There

was some tendency to r ecognize a need for summer guidance services in another aspect of the program because 10 per cent of the districts had guidance counselors at the city central offices during the summer.

The elementary class­

room program in a majority of the districts was a remedial one; this necessarily implies a teacher-counselor type of guidance program which was reported by 79 per cent of the elementary responses. School buildings and facilities 'were used as community or civic centers during the summer in 40 to 46 per cent of. the reporting districts.

The summer use of swimming pools,

stadia, auditoriums, and other adult recreational facilities appeared to be an accepted pattern in a great many public school districts. Community relations. Community groups which have had most to do in an advisory capacity with the planning of

351

summer programs included parent-teacher organizations and coordinating councils made up of many agencies; civic clubs ranked third.

Bummer community relations techniques in

metropolitan public school districts were varied but two thirds of the reports indicated that school news reported through the local newspaper was important.

Qther public

relations techniques which have proved useful included school exhibits on school premises, special visiting days, student talent for programs off the school premises, school exhibits placed in windows of business places, news sheets, and student newspapers. SuperintendentsT appraisal. A slight majority of the responses indicated that the individual playground programs were inadequate.

The implication is that summer

public school 'playground programs are in the process of development; the trend of responses was generally to expand present facilities.

A school-municipal joint plan of

operating summer playgrounds was common practice in nearly half of the districts reporting school-sponsored summer playgrounds.

More than half of these found that a "joint"

plan was successful.

The chief difficulties in the joint

operation plan were caused by the lack of adequate planning and cooperative action in the dual control. Although public school district summer camping was

352

still relatively rare, experiences justified recommending summer public school camping to other metropolitan public school districts. Reports in general indicated that summer music programs were inadequate in many communities.

Many districts

had plans to organize or expand their music programs for summer. The future of the summer extension of education is shown by the fact that 77 per cent of the respondents indicated that they did plan to expand one or more phases of the summer program during the next 3 summers; only 1 per cent indicated a possible curtailment of any phase of the summer program. Although superintendents favored the extension of school activities into the summer months not many recommended a regular school year curriculum.

The general trend was to

stress a broad curriculum involving a well rounded recrea­ tional program, opportunity for remedial or accelerated work, music, camping, hobbies, crafts, and other activities many of which are not directly related to class promotions. General conclusion. Metropolitan public school districts have developed a new "all-year school.”

The

administrative practices in the summer education and recrea­ tion programs in over half of the public school districts in

353

and near the 140 metropolitan centers of the United States show that education was in 1949 a year-round responsibility. The summer phase of the program did not necessarily parallel the regular school year program although it did parallel it in many districts; the program was broad and varied but some districts assumed responsibility for only 1 or 2 of the several phases that were supported in other districts. Recommendations. Summer administrative practices in metropolitan public school districts and appraisals made by educational leaders in those districts point to certain general recommendations which should make up a framework of policy for metropolitan public school districts.

The follow­

ing recommendations seem appropriate.

/(1)

The educational implications in the shift in

population from agrarian urban communities to large metro­ politan centers should be recognized in determining the kind and extent of summer educational and recreational programs. (2)

Where the school year is to be extended the

actual increase in length should occur as an extension of the traditional school year unless peculiar factors in a community suggest beginning the school year earlier. (3)

A new "all-year school" should be recognized as

an accepted part of the pattern of metropolitan public school district programs because administrative practices in 1949

354

show that types of ’’year-round" programs were common to more than half of the metropolitan public school districts. (4)

The summer extension of education is an integral

part of the metropolitan public school district program; adequate financial provision should be made for it.

This__^"

may involve a redefinition of the basis for state aid in • many states.

(5) Extended year programs should have high quality professional leadership in order to insure the best programs for the children of American cities; remuneration for personnel should be on a professional basis agreeable to both teachersT groups and administrative leaders. (6)

Summer education should include opportunities

in music, camping, playground activities, crafts, recreation, and other forms of education and recreation necessary in

%

urban communities to replace some of the types of family learnings in non-urban areas.

These opportunities should

not necessarily be related to class promotions. (7)

Metropolitan public school districts should not

compete with city^or county summerrecreational programs; j

they should supplement programs of existing public agencies. Public school districts should insure adequate provision for cooperative planning and action whenever public school dis­ tricts and either municipalities or county governments find

355

it possible to work out joint recreational programs. Summer education should be optional on the part

(8)

of the pupil. (9)

The summer program-should include opportunity

for remedial work on both the elementary and secondary level. The secondary level classroom programs should provide op­ portunity for accelerated curricula as well as exploratory programs.

A number of schools have found, as an example of

the latter, that summer provides a good opportunity for driver education. (10)

The utilization of auxiliary services and

facilities should be redefined in terms of the "new allyear school” concept. (11)

Parent-teacher groups, coordinating councils

representing many agencies, service and civic clubs, and other community groups should be called upon to help plan types of extended-year programs most suitable to particular communities/

Local newspapers should be utilized in the

public relations program; other techniques in the public relations program for the summer which should be considered are school exhibits on school premises, special visiting days, student talent for programs off the school premises, school exhibits placed in windows of business places, mimeo­ graphed news sheets, and student newspapers.

356 Further problems suggested by the study. The present study was concerned with a survey of practices on a rather broad basis; many aspects of the problem need further de­ tailed study.

An additional contribution could be made

by a rather detailed field study of only a few selected metropolitan public school district summer programs.

The

factors necessary for successful cooperation between school district and municipality in the joint operation of recrea­ tional programs needs further study.

The extent to which

public school districts should be responsible for recreational programs offers further opportunity for research.

A re­

definition of state and local aid for extended-year programs should be further investigated.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1.

"All-Year Schools," School Executives Magazine, 49:517* July, 1930.

2.

American, Sadie, "Vacation Schools," Education, 26:50918, May, 1906.

3.

Bachman, Frank P., The All-Year School of Nashville Tennessee. Field Studies No. 3, Division of Surveys and Field Studies, Nashville: George Peabody College for Teachers, 1931. 59 pp.

4.

Baer, Joseph S., "They Go to School Outdoors," Parents* Magazine, 22:36-39, 183-87, November, 1947.

5.

Blose, D. T.,"Length of Life, 23:316, May, 1936.

6.

Brown, S. M . ,and A. M. Freeland, "Cooperative Action Toward a Common Goal," National Elementary Principal, 28:39-40, February, 1949.

7.

Bush, R. H., "Current Summer School Practices," School Review, 32:142-146, February, 1924.

Public School Term," School

8.____________ , The Status of the Summer Schools in the Secondary Schools of Illinois. Issued by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Springfield, Illinois, 1927. 69 pp. 9.

California Department of Public Instruction, First Biennial Report of Superintendent for Years 1864 and 1 8 6 5 . 4 2 2 PP.

10. "Camp as Part of the Regular School Year," School Manage­ ment, 16:17, September, 1946. 11.

Chambers, M. M . , Youth Serving Organizations. Washington, D. C.: The American Council on Education, 1946. 162 pp.

12.

Chapman, A. L., "Keep the Schools Open All Year," School Executive, 61:16, May, 1942.

13.

Clark, W. F., "All-Year Elementary Schools," Elementary School Journal, 22:286-289, December, 1921.

14.

Claxton, P. P., "The Summer School of the South," High ’School Journal, 32:107-12, May, 1949*

359

15.

"Conference Plans for Youth Camping Programs," School Life, 31:12, October, 1943.

16.

Cooper, Herman, "Preparation of Teachers for Out-OfDoor Education," School Executive, 64:53-59* February, 1945. s

17.

Cubberley, Ellwood P., Public Education in the United States. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1910. 732 pp.

IS.

Deffenbaugh, W. S., "Summer Sessions of City Schools," Bulletin, 1917* No. 45. Washington, D. 0.: The United States Bureau of Education, 1913. 45 pp.

19.

Bewhurst, J. Frederick, and Associates, America^ Needs and Resources. New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1947. 812 pp.

20.

Douglass, Aubrey A., The American School System. New York: Rhinehart and Company, Inc.", 1940• 432 pp.

21.

Duell, Henry W., and Maurice S. Kenet, "A Study of the Comparative Achievement of Summer High School and Regular High School and Regular High.School Students," Journal of Educational Research, 33:508-521, March, 1945.

22.

Educational Policies Commission, The Civilian Conserva­ tion Corps, The National Youth Administration, and the Public Schools. Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 1941. 79 pp.

23.

Elliott, 1. B., and J. S. Smith, "Michigan Program In Action," National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 31:60-74* May, 1947.

24.

Elsbree, Willard S., The American Teacher. New York: The American Book Company, 1939. 566 pp.

25.

"Extend Term and Add Camp," Nation1s Schools, 32:32, October, 1943.

26.

Farrand, Wilson, and M. V . O'Shea, "All-Year Schools in Newark," School and Society, 23:462-469* April 10,

1926.

27.

Flanders, Jesse Knowlton, Legislative Control of the Elementary Curriculum. Teachers College Contributions to Education, No. 195* New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1927. 239 PP.

28.

Gaumnitz, W. H., "A Senior High School Extends Its Program," School Life, 29:23-24, May, 1947*

29-

Hamilton, Otto T., The Courts and The Curriculum, Teachers College Contributions to Edcuation, No. 250. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1927. 168 pp.

30.

Hebb, B. Y., "All-Year Schools Have Many Advantages," School Life, 8:198, May, 1923.

31.

Herlihy, Lester B., Walter S. Deffenbaugh, and Timon Covert, "Statistics of City School Systems, 1937-38," U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1940, No. 2. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1941.

32.

Hoffman, Betty, "School Camping Means Real-Life Learning," National Education Association Journal, 3$: 360-1, May, 1949.

33.

Hoffman, M. B., "Status of Summer High Schools in Cities of More Than 100,000 Population," School Review, 33:107-114, February, 1925.

34.

Hubbard, R. A., "Three Teachers Start A School Camp," National Elementary Principal, 28:36 -3 8 , February, 1949.

35.

Johnson, Clifton, Old-Time Schools and School-Books. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1917. 3$l 'pp•

36.

Jones, J. W., "High.School Summer Work in Indiana," Bulletin of the School of Education, Vol. 2, No. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1925. pp. 43-47.

37.

Judd, Charles H., Problems of Education in the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1933. 214 PP.

38.

Katterle, Zeno B., "How Schools Can Function in Summer Months," School Executive, 67:40-42, June, 1948.

39*

Kbsengarten, Mary F., "Guidance Program for the Summer Months," Nationfs Schools, 44:48-49, luly, 1949.

40.

Lafferty, H. M., "The American School— Open All Year!" American School Board Journal, 118:17-18, 80, June, 1949.

41.

Lane ,\ Elias N., "The All-Year School— Its Origin and Development," Nation1s Schools, 9:49-52, March, 1932. %

361

42.

"Length of School Day," City School Leaflet No. 25, Washington, D. C.: Bureau of Education, July, 1927. 8 pp.

43.

"Lexington Kentucky, Adopts Year-Round School Program," The School Administrator, June, 1949. 4 pp.

44.

Life Camps, Inc., Extending Education Through Camping. 369 Lexington Ave., New York 17, New York: Life Camps, Inc., 194§. 130 pp.

45.

"Los Angeles School Camps," Education for Victory, 2:11, February 20, 1944.

46.

Los Angeles School Journal, 7:15, November 5, 1923.

47.

Mackintosh, Helen K., "Camping and Outdoor Experiences in the School Program,? Bulletin 1947. No. 4 . Washington, D. C.: The United States Office of Education, 1947. 41 pp.

48.

Mann, Carleton H . , How Schools Use Their Time. Teachers College Contributions To Education, No. 333. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1927. 94 pp.

49.

Masters, Hugh B., "A Community School Camp," Elementary School Journal, 41:736-47, June, 1941.

50.

Misner, P. J., "Teachers* Role in an All-Year Program," National Education Association Journal, 37:500-1, November, 194$.

51.

Monroe, Paul, Founding of the American Public School System. Vol. 1. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1940. 520 pp.

52.

Moody, Jeanne, "Summer Camp That is Fun*,, and Also Profitable," School and Society, 69:14-15, January 1, 1949.

53*

"Multisensory Aids to Learning," Twenty-sixth Yearbook of American Association of School Administrators, Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 194S. 434 PP.

54.

Number of Inhabitants, Sixteenth Census of the United States, 1940, Vol. I. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1286 pp.

362

55*

Odell, Charles W . , "Summer Work in Public Schools," Educational Research Bulletin No. 49, Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois, 1930. 42 pp.

56.

Pahl, Eleanor, "Year-Round Program," Childhood Education, 24:82-4, October, 1947.

57.

Palmer, F. E., "Economy of Time, etc.," Proceedings, National Education Association, 1918. pp. 641“645.

58.

Perry, C. A., Wider Use of the School Plant, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1910. 423 pp.

59.

Petersen, R. G., "Twelve-Months School," American School Board Journal, 110:38-40, May, 1945.

60.

Phillips, F. M,, "Statistics of City School Systems, 1925-26," U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1927, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1928. pp. 64-72.

61.

____________ , "Statistics of City School Systems, 192122," U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1924, No. 34. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1925. pp. 110-115.

62.

Pike, K. V., "Long Beach Public School Camp," National Elementary Principal. 28:24-8, February, 1949.

63.

"Population Trends and Their Educational Implications," Research Bulletin of the National Education Association, Vol. XVI, No. 1. Washington, D. C.: The National Education Association, 193#• 59 PP.

64.

Pruitt, Wilton, "Secondary-Sehool Camping at Parker," Journal of the National Education Association, 36:37071, May, 1947.

-6 5 .

"Public Schools Provide Summer Programs for School r Children and Community," Education for Victory, 1:7-9, August 1, 1942.

66.

Pumala, E. E., "San Diego Sixth Graders go Camping," National Elementary Principal, 28:29-32, February, 1949.

67.

Rawlings, Grace, "Forest Park Day Camp," National Elementary Principal, 28:41-43, Februairy, 1949.

363 68.

Reals, Willis Howard, A Study of the Summer High School. Contributions to Education, No. 337 • New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1928. 88 pp.

69.

Reavis, W. C., "Evaluation of the Various Units of the Public School System: The All-Year School," Review of Educational Research. 1:193-199, June, 1931.

'70.

Recent Social Trends, New York: McGraw-Hill- Book Company, Inc., 1933* Volumes I and II. 1568 pp.

-71.

Remmlein, Madaline K., "Legal Aspects," National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 31:119-125, May, 1947.

72.

Roe, Warren, "All-Year Schools— A Potential Progressive Educational Improvement," Educational Method, 10:3-6, October, 1930.

73.

__________ "All-Year School Organization," Educational Method, 10:66-69, November, 1930.

74.

Rogers, Virgil M., "School Camping All Year Round," Educational Leadership, 3:367-368, May, 1946.

75.

Sangren, P. V., and W. D. West, "School Camping and Outdoor Education at Western Michigan College of Education," Twenty-fifth Yearbook of the American Association of Teachers Colleges, pp. 48-55, 1946.

76.

Schorling, Raleigh, "Socialization of the Camps," Phi Delta Kappan, 21:114, December, 1938.

77.

Sharp, L. B., "Out-Of-Door Education," School Executive, 64:55-56, Eebruary, 1945.

78.

Sharp, L. B., and E. De Alton Partridge, "Some Historical Backgrounds of Camping," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 31:15-20, May, 1947.“

79.

Smith, J. W . , "Camping and Outdoor Education," School Executive, 68:60-1, April, 1949.

80.

, "Overview of School Camping in Michigan," National Elementary Principal, 28:6-10, February, 1949.

81.

______ , "School in the Woods," Reprinted from the Michigan Educational Journal, February, 1949*

3 64

82.

. ______ _, ♦’Camping and'Outdoor Education,” School Executive, 68:60-61, April, 1949*

83.

Smith, J. W . , "Camping and Outdoor Education," School Executive, 68:60-61, April, 1949*

84.___________ > "Youth Learns to Conserve,” Michigan Conservation, 17:7, 14, December, 1946. 85. ^Sternig, J., '"All Year Program,” School Executive, 68:66-67, April, 1949. 86.

__________ _, "Glencoe’s 12 Month School Year,” School Management, 17:4, August, 1947.

87.

"The Advance of the American School System,” Research Bulletin of the National Education Association, Yol. Y, No... 4. Washington, D. C.: The National Education Association, 1927. pp. 194-223.

88.

"The Continuous School Year at Bayonne,” School and Society, 5:564, May, 1917.

89.

"The Waning School Term of the Cities,” School Life, 9:34, October, 1923.

90.

Thomas, Maurice J., "Year-Round Service and Higher Salaries,” School Executive, 6 6 :63 -4 , April, 1947.

91.

____________ , "Returns on a Year-Round Investment,” Educational Leadership, 5:459-464, April, 1946.

92.

Thurston, Lee J., A Camping Experience for Older Youth, Lansing, Michigan: Department of Public Instruction, 1946. 23 pp.

93.

”Trends in City-School Organization,” Research Bulletin of the National Education Association, Yol. XXYII, No. Washington, D. C.: The National Education Association, 1949. 39 PP.

94.

’’Twenty-third Annual Report of the New York State Education Department,” Albany: University of the State of New York, 1 9 2 6 . pp. 246-250.

95.

Uger, Charles, ” ...As Happy as Kings,” School Executive 61:8-10, March, 1942.

•*

365

96.

United States Office of Education, Educational Directory Part II, County and City School Officers for 1948-49> Washington, D. C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1949* 77 pp.

97.

United States Office of Education, "School Census, Compulsory Education, Child Labor State Laws and Regulations," Bulletin 1945, No. 1. Washington, D. C.: The United States Office of Education, 1945.

98.

"U. S. Commissioner of Education, Annual Report, 1911,” Washington: Government Printing Office, 1912, Vol. 1. 159 PP.

99.

”U. S. Commissioner of Education, Annual Report, 1911,” Washington: Government Printing Office, 1912, Vol. 1. 675 PP.

100.

Vanderslice, H. R., "The All-Tear School in Aliquippa, Pennsylvania," Elementary School Journal, 30:576-85, April, 1930.

101.

Van Til, William, "Schools and Camping," Toward a New Curriculum, 1944 Tearbook. Washington, D. C.: Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association, 1944. 102 pp.

102.

"What About Camp-Schools," Nation's Schools, 3^:49, August, 1946.

103.

Weil, Truda T., "Camping has a Place in the Regular Curriculum,” Nation*s Schools, 44:27-9, July, 1949*

104.

Wolfe, "Summer High Schools," Unpublished Thesis, The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1931176 pp.

j105.

Willoughby, W. W., "History of Summer Schools in the United States,” Report of the Commissioner of Education, 1891-1892. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1894, Vol. II. pp. 893-959.

APPENDIX

367

April 20, 1949 S an ta M onica, C alifornia D ear Superintendent: W e w ish to determ ine the kinds of sum m er program s in city school districts. Will you p lease check a n d m ail the return "Reply C ard" even if you do not h a v e a district sponsored sum m er program in a n y of your schools? V ery truly yours, RUSSEL L. LEWIS R esearch Division S a n ta M onica City Schools

WASrtV^

Research Division BOARD OF EDUCATION 1333 Sixth Street Santa Monica, California

363

Do you have an y kind of a district sponsored summer program in any school? Yes__ No,_____ P lease check ( /) below e a c h item w hich ap p lies to your summer program if ab o v e an sw e r is yes. 1. Litnited to recreational activities...................................................... 2. Is a n extension of the reg u lar y e a r ................................................. 3. Is a sep a rately organized "sum m er session"......................... 4. Is lim ited to elem en tary le v e l...................................................... 5. Is lim ited to seco n d ary level........................................................ .6. Includes both elem entary a n d se c o n d ary ..................................... 7. Sum m er duty teachers are: a . P aid on a y e a rly b a sis .......................................................... b. P aid extra for sum m er w ork..................................................

DISTRICT

CI TY

STATE

Sum m er

'48

'49

□ □ □ □ □ Q

□ □ □ □ □ □

□ □

□ □

ADMINISTRATOR

S a n t a M o n i c a C it y S c h o o l s

Tjhe

BOARD O P EDUCATION BUILDINO * 3 3 3 SIXTH STRUT

£?/// y[ear School

SANTA M O N IC A, C A U P.

July 5>» 1?U9

o p p ic c o p s u p e r i n t e n d e n t

A Study of Summer Public School Educational and Recreational Programs in Districts Within Metropolitan Areas of The United States

Dear Fellow Educator: Your district, like ours, is one within a metropolitan area which assumes some responsibility for summer public school educational and recreational services. We wish to determine the nature of the programs in other metropolitan districts. For your cooperation in this survey, we shall be pleased to send you a digest of our findings. The evaluation statement at'the end of the questionnaire should be made by the superintendent but the rest of the items can be checked by any administrator who is familiar with the summer educational and recreational services. Very sincerely yours,

Vta. S. Briscoe Superintendent

-1

'.VSB

NAME

OF

369

PERSON ANSWERING

CITY

Conducted By R u s s e l L. L e w i s

Santa Monica C ity Schools

This Questionnaire is a Follow-up on a Previous Postcard Inquiry Fill in the blank spaces and make the appropriate checks in terms of actual practice for the 1949 Summer Public School educational and recreational services of your district. Indicate the prevailing practice when prac­ tices in schools within the same city vary. This study includes elementary and secondary schools through grade 12. It does not include 13f^ and 14>th year junior col­ leges nor adult education.

QUESTIONNAIRE

POSITION

ZONE

STATE

PART I. EXTENT A N D ORGANIZATION OF S U M M E R P R O G R A M S 1. What was the date of the fall opening of the 1948-49 school y e a r ? _________________________________________________ 2. Closing date for the 1948-49 school y e a r ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. Number of days school was in session for the 1948-49 school year?______________________________________________ 4. Fill in the following blanks with the appropriate answers as the statements apply to your school district for the summer of 1949. (Junior High Schools, which include grades 9 and | or 10, should be classed with the secondary schools.) Elementary Level

Secondary Level

a. Total number of SCHOOLS in the district . . . . ------------------------------ ----------------b. Total number of SCHOOLS which have public school district supervision of the play­ grounds during the summer m o n t h s ............................................................................................. -

---------------

c. Total number of SCHOOLS which conduct some kind of a summer music program .----------------------

---------------

d. Total number of SCHOOLS which have some type of summer classroom program other than music a c t i v i t i e s ..........................................................................................................................

—

---------------

e. Total number of SCHOOLS whose students participate to some extent in a public school overnight camping program ..............................................................................................

....................

f. Total number of SCHOOLS operated during the summer in cooperation with a university school of education or a college teacher training i n s t i t u t i o n -----------------------------------------------------

---------------

g. Total number of SCHOOLS which operate on a four-quarter school year with: (1) the summer quarter as either a required or an optional 4th quarter for the student --------------(2) the summer quarter as one of the three quarters of required attendance for the s t u d e n t ...................................................................................................................................... ....................... (3) (Specify O t h e r ) ..........................................................................................................................................

.................... ....................

h. Total number of public school PUPILS in the district during the regular school year. (Do not include the adult education s t u d e n t s . ) .............................................................................................

....................

i. Total number of PUPILS who participate in one or more phases of the public school summer p r o g r a m .............................................................

VOULD Y O U LIKE TO RECEIVE A DIGEST OF THIS STUDY U P O N ITS COMPLETION?

---------------

—--------- ---------------

- - - YES □

NO □

PART II. THE PROGRAM A. S U M M E R PLAYGROUND ACTIVITIES. Check (V) the items which apply in your public school district.

B. PUBLIC SCHOOL S U M M E R CAMPING P R O G R A M Include all programs in which the public school dis trict has responsibility. Check (V) items which apply

Elem’ntry Secondary Level Level

1. There is no supervision of summer school play­ grounds by'either the public schools, city, or c o u n t y .......................................................... 2. Summer playground activities are financed: a. By the public school district . . . . b. Jointly by public school district and either the city or county government . . . . c. By the city govern m en t.............................. • d. By the county g o v e r n m e n t .......................... e. (List Other) -----------------------------------------3 Summer playground activities are administered: a. By the public school district . . . . b. Jointly by the public school district and either the city or county government c. By a city government agency . . . . d. By a county government agency e. (List Other)-------------------_______________ 4. If you checked items b, c, or d in item 3 above please give name and address of the city or county officer in charge. Name (please print)

Title

□

□

□

□ '

□ □ □ □

□ □ □ □

□

□

□ □ □ □

□ □ □ □

Address

5. School district cooperation with city or county regarding playground facilities includes: a. Joint use agreement for summer only . . □ □ b. Joint all year use of school playgrounds □ □ c. City or county investment in permanent in­ stallations such as swimming pools on public school property . . . . □ □ d. City or county investment in recreation buildings on public school property □ □ e. City or county investment in playground equipment on public school property □ □ f. School district funds for cooperative opera­ tion of playgrounds other than those of the public school d i s t r i c t ...................................... □ □ g. A master plan for the joint development of recreational f a c i l i t i e s ................................... □ □ h. The use of experts from outside the com­ munity for joint p l a n n i n g .......................... □ □ i. Other (specify) _ _________ ______ __ □ □ 6. Total length of time during the summer that the playgrounds are WITHOUT supervision: \ a. Less than 2 w e e k s ........................................... □ □ b. Between 2 and 6 weeks . . •. □ □ c. More than 6 w e e k s ........................................ □ □ 7. Playground supervision during the summer is: a. Seven days per w e e k ...................................... □ □ b. Six days per week . . . . . . . □ □ c. Five days per w e e k ....................................... □ □ d. Four or less days per week . . . . □ □ 8. Playground activities include: a. Supervised g a m e s ........................................... □ □ b. Swimming and | or swimming classes □ □ c. Crafts and hobby c l u b s ................................ □ □ d. Moving pictures . . . . . . . □ □ e. Modern and | or folk dancing . . . . □ □ f. Adult participation, day or evening □ □ g. Other (specify) — --------------□ □ 9. Students utilizing playground facilities during the summer months includes: a. Most of the students of the school district □ □ b. Many of the s t u d e n t s .................................. □ □ c. Comparatively few s t u d e n t s ......................... □ □ d. Practically n o n e ................................................ □ □ 10. Hour of the day that the playground supervision begins? 11. Hour of the day that playground supervision ends?------

Elem’ntry Secondary Level Level 1. Our public school district: a. Has no camping p r o g r a m .................... Q b. Conducts a day-camping program which differs from the playground program ■ • O c. Conducts an overnight camping program . []] 2. Campgrounds and facilities are provided: a. Entirely by the local school district b. By city or county recreation facilities . c. Other (specify) ______________ ____ ______

Q Q Q

3. Summer camp operating costs (other than food) are: a. Assumed by the local public school district Q b. Assumed by the local district plus income from pupil tuition or f e e s ............... Q c. Other (specify) _________________________ Q

Q Q Q Q [_] Q Q Q Q

4. Camp food costs are provided primarily by: a. Parents . ............................................ b. Local school district .......................... c. Other (specify) _________________________ 5. Pupil eligibility for the program: a. A ll pupils on a first come policy . . . b. Pupils selected on the basis of their inabil­ ity to have family camping experiences c. Pupils of specific grade levels . . . . Which grade levels?______________________ d. Other (specify) _________________________ 6. Length of time the average camping pupil spends in the school camp during the summer is: a. Less than a week .......................... b. One to two weeks ........................... □ c. Fifteen to 21 d a y s ........................................ d. Over three weeks................... ............................ □ 7. The school camping program operates: a. Only during the summer months b. A ll y e a r .............................................................

□ □ Q

□ □ Q

[[]

(~~]

□ □

□ □

Q

Q

□

□ □ [[] □

Q

□ Q

□ Q

C. PUBLIC SCHOOL S U M M E R MUSIC PROGRAM. Check (V) the items which apply to your school district. 1. Our district has -90° summer music program 2. Public school summer music activities: a. Are conducted by school personnel in public school buildings and are supported primarily by student tuition . . . . b. Are a part of a regular school-organized program of summer c l a s s e s ......................... c. Are conducted by the city or county governgovernment with the aid of: (1) School b u i l d i n g s ............................... (2) School personnel . . . . . . (3) School finances .......................... (4) School instruments • • • d. Other (specify) ---------------------------------------3. The summer music program primarily consists o f: a. Formal or informal appreciation classes . b. Recreational music, for folk dancing, etc. c. Individual or group vocal instruction • • d. Individual or group instrumental instruction e. Participation in regular band concerts, or other community music programs in summer f. Preparation of organized music groups for early fall school a c t i v i t i e s .......................... g. Other (specify) _________ ________________

□

□

□

□

Q

Q

Q] Q □ □

Q Q □ □

[j| Q C] Q

Q Q CD CD

□

□

□ CD

□ CD

S U M M E R SCHOOL C L A S S R O O M P R O G R A M BASED O N THE REGULAR SCHOOL YEAR CURRICULUM. Check (V) the items which apply to your school disElem’ntry Secondary Level Level 1. Our district has no classroom type summer • □ □ p r o g r a m ............................................................... 2. Summer classroom offerings: a. More or less parallel the regular curriculum b. Are of an exploratory and cultural nature and not necessarily related to regular □ c u r r ic u lu m .............................................. c. Other (specify) ________________________ 3. Student eligibility includes a. All pupils who choose to attend b. Only those pupils who need remedialhelp c. Only accelerated students d. Other (specify) -------------------------------------4. Summer achievement is: a. Recorded in the school records so that a pupil may progress at an accelerated rate b. Recorded only for failure or remedial make up c. Considered a cultural supplement to the regular school year progress and not neces­ sarily related to class promotions d. Other (specify) ________________________

2. If state funds are received are they limited to any phase of the summer program’? Yes □ No Q . If yes, what phase?________ __ 3. If federal funds are received, what phase of the program is thereby supported? ____________________________________________________ 4. If city or county funds are received, are they limited to any phase of the summer program? Yes |~] No If yes, what phase?

Q

Q

5. If donations are received, are they limited to any phase of the summer program? Yes Q No If yes, what p h a s e ? _________

Q

□ Q

6. If tuition is paid by the student, check the phases of the pro­ gram for which it is paid. (Do not include incidental fees).

Q . Q]

Q Q

Q

Q

a. Summer playground including crafts b. Summer overnight camping (exclude food) ...................................................

□

□

d. Summer classroom studies e. Other (specify)

□

□

□ Q

□ Q

Elem’ntry Secondary Level Level □

□

□ □ □ □

□ □ □ □

PART IV. PERSONNEL Check (V) items which apply to your school district. rrt

c

a su§ -2i Kn

o g

© 2

5 Check subject area offerings in SECONDARY schools during the summer of 1949. |~~| English Q Music Q [~~1 Ancient Languages Q Arts, Crafts Q [~~| Modern Languages Q Industrial Arts Q [~1 Mathematics [[] Agriculture □ □ Sciences Q Homemaking Q |~1 Social Studies Q Busines Education Q

Health Physical Edu’tion Vocational Shop -----------------------------_________________ _________________

6. In the summer SECONDARY schools classroom program a. The duration of the summer program is _____________ weeks. b. The opening hour of the summer session i s _____________ A.M. c. The closing hour of the summer session is _________________ d. The number of class periods per day that periods. a regular student has i s ------------------------e. The number of class periods of instruction per day for the average teacher is . . periods. f. The total length of the class periods is . minutes g. The minimum number of students for which a class will be held . . . . . ----------------- students. h. The ‘optimum’ sized class for summeris about_______ students 7. In the summer classroom program of the ELEMENTARY schools: a. The duration of the summer program is . --------------- weeks. b. The opening hour of the summer session is__________ A.M. c. The closing hour of the summer session is__________________ d. The minimum number of students for which a class will be held . . . students. e. The optimum sized class for summer is about________ students.

PART III. FINANCING THE S U M M E R P R O G R A M Check (V ) in the appropriate spaces. 1.

To what extent is the budget for the summer program (exclusive of plant and equipment) : a. Derived from local district funds? b. Derived from fees and | or tuition ? c. Derived from state aid funds? d. Derived from federal funds? e. Derived from city, county, or other local governmental agency? f. Derived from donations by groups, civic clubs, organizations, or indi­ viduals of a non - governmental nature? . . . . . . . g. Other (specify)

tg ^ □ □ □ □ [~~|

□ □

□ □ □ . □ |~ |

□ □

£ ^ o ^ □ □ □ □

£ ^ □ □ □ □

f~l

|~1

Q Q

Q] Q

1. The teacher compensation for extra summer services is: a. Part of a 12-month school contract b. A flat sum for the summer term c. A sum based on the school enrollment . . . d. Based on a percent of the regular school year salary . . . . e. Other (specify) _______________ 2. Individual in charge of the summer program at the lo ca l school is: a. The regular school principal b. The regular school year assistant p r i n c i p a l ............................................ c. A teacher selected for the summer d. A school employee hired by the city or c o u n t y .................................. e. A city or county employee f. Other (specify) -----------------------3. Summer program personnel is composed a. Regular school year teachers from the local school district exclusively b. Regular school year teachers and teachers recruited from outside the district ................................ . c. Regular school year teachers and non-certified personnel trained in some form of recreational leader­ ship ..................................................... d. Non-certified personnel trained or competent in playground or re­ creational leadership e. Parents who volunteer services f. Other (specify) ----------------------- .

PART V.

Cfl O

’HCO CJCn

&

op cj O

3 ©

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

. □

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□ □

□ □

□ □

□ □

□ □ □

□ □ □

□ □ □

□ □ □

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□ □ /

□

□ □ □

d □ □

□ □ □

□ □ □

SCHOOL SERVICES A N D FACILITIES Check (V) the items which apply.

1. School library facilities are: a. Not available to students in summer b. Available to a limited extent in summer c. Used to great extent (in proportion to pupil enrollment) in summer d. Other (specify) — ------- ----------------------

□ □

□ □

□ □

□ D

2. School cafeteria services are: a. Not available to students in summer b. Available to a limited extent in summer c. Used to a great extent in summer d. Other (specify) _______________________ 3. Student health services: a. Are not available in the summer b. Include a registered nurse on duty at the local school ............................................ c. Include a school physician on call for medical emergencies and physical ex­ ....................................................... aminations d. Other (specify) ______________________ 4. Transportation services: a. Are provided during REGULAR school school year on a “distance - from - school” b a s i s ................................................................... b. Are provided during the SUMMER school on a “distance-from-school” basis c. Are not provided in summer . . . . d. Other (specify) _______________________ 5. Educational and personal guidance services are provided in the summer: a. Only as a part of the instructional work ............................................. of the teachers b. Through counselors or special guidance workers in the local school organization c. Through psychologists a n d guidance workers on duty in centralized city ................................................... school offices 6. Summer community use of school buildings includes: a. Adult recreation in gyms and | or play­ grounds ............................................................. b. Adult education c l a s s e s ............................. c. Community projects such as canning, etc. d. Agricultural extension classes or pro­ jects .................................................................... e. Community use of auditorium and other buildings as a civic center . . . . f. Other (specify) ___________ ___________

PART VI.

Elem’ntry Secondary Level Level □ □ □ □

□ □

□

□

□

□

□ □

□ □

□

□

□ □ □

□ □ □

□

□

' □

□

□

□

□

□

□ □ □

□ □ □

□

□

□ □ PUBLIC RELATIONS

□ □

1 Check ( V ) the items which best describe the groups which have had most to do in an advisory capacity with the planning of the summer program a. Business Men b. Civic clubs □ □ c. Professional organizations • □ □ d. Labor organizations e. Parent-Teacher organizations • □ □ f. Individual p a r e n t s EH EH g. Coordinating Council representing many

agencies of the community

.

.

.

.

EH

h. Other (specify) 2. Check the items which best describe the summer public relations activities: a. Exhibits are placed in the halls, on bulletin boards and | or playgrounds b. Special visiting days are held • • • c. Student talent is used for programs for non-school organizations in the community d. School exhibits are displayed in windows of business places e. School news is regularly reported through one or more local newspapers f. A news sheet is occasionally printed or

mimeographed for parents

.

.

.

.

g. A student summer newspaper is published h. Other (please note other devices which

are particularly suited to summer)

.

EH

1.

2.

Do you consider your present summer playground program adequate?

Yes Q

Yes If you have a school and city or county plan of joint Q playground operation, do you consider it an ideal ar­ rangement? List suggestions for master plans for other districts.

3.

If you have a camping program does your experience justify recommending such programs to other metro­ politan area school districts?

4.

Do you consider your present summer music program adequate?

5.

Do you plan to CURTAIL any part of your summer program in the next three summers?

,6. Do you plan to EXTEND any phase of your summer program in the next three summers?

No (~|

No [~|

Yes Q

No |~~)

Yes □

No □

Yes

No

EH

EH

Yes Q

No [~~|

Yes |” ]

No |~~1

EH EH

□

□

EH

EH f~l

□

□

□

□

□

PART VII. APPRAISAL (To be answered by the Superintendent) Your suggestions and comments will be appreciated

Do you favor the concept of extending the “regular curriculum” school year throughout the summer? This question is asked to help determine whether or not superintendents believe it feasible to utilize school plants and equipment in summer during the present general building shortage. If the answer is yes, give suggestions as to your recommended vacation patterns.

□

EH

EH

Q

EH

EH

EH

Signature