Harford County Public Schools:
A Brief History
by
Sean Abel
A dissertation submitted to the faculty of
Wilmington University in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
in
Innovation and Leadership
Wilmington University
August, 2012
Harford County Public Schools:
A Brief History
by
Sean Abel
I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standards required by Wilmington University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Education in Innovation and Leadership.
Signed:______
Linda H. Frazer, Ph.D., Chairperson of Dissertation Committee
Signed:______
Lynne L. Svenning, Ph.D., Member of the Dissertation Committee
Signed:______
Gerald Scarborough, Ph.D., Member of the Dissertation Committee
Signed:______
John C. Gray, Ed.D., Professor and Dean College of Education
ii
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to the four people who have provided me with support and patience throughout this long road toward a doctorate—my three children, Ali, Nick, and Alex, and to my wife, Gina. I love you all and thank you so much for pushing me to finish.
iii
Acknowledgments
The author would like to acknowledge the helpful staff at the Harford County
Public Library for their assistance in gathering hard to find materials that were essential to this research.
Thanks to Dr. Gerald Scarborough, for serving as a third reader and for being a mentor in many ways.
For her willingness to go beyond expectations to help get this dissertation completed, a special word of thanks goes to Dr. Linda Frazer, the chair of this author’s dissertation committee.
iv
Abstract
The history of the Harford County Public Schools school system, located in
Harford County, Maryland, is examined. The school system’s development in regard to financial and operational components of the organization is the focus of this overview study. Conclusions drawn from this examination indicate that the school system struggled with obtaining sufficient funding to allow for proactive solutions to issues of student population growth, of curriculum development, and in securing appropriate materials of instruction. Despite this handicap, the school system was able develop acceptable, though reactive, solutions to these issues through advocacy and persistence.
v
Table of Contents
Dedication…………………………………………………………………………….iii
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………...iv
Abstract………………………………………………………………………………..v
List of Tables………………………………………………………………………..viii
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………...…ix
Chapter
I Introduction…………………………………………………………………...1
Statement of the Problem……………………………………………...2
Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………..3
Need for the Study………………………………………………….....4
Research Questions…………………………………………………....5
II Review of the Literature………………………………………………………7
Inclusion Criteria……………………………………………………...7
III Methodology………………………………………………………………….9
Data Sources…………………………………………………………..9
Bias Issues…………………………………………………………….9
IV Harford County Public Schools: A Brief History……………………………11
The Schoolhouses of HCPS………………………………………….13
The School Consolidation Movement……………………………….19
The High School Movement…………………………………………22
Funding the Schools before 1946……………………………………23 vi
The Curriculum of HCPS before 1946………………………………31
The Teachers of HCPS before 1946…………………………………33
The Colored Schools before 1946……………………………………37
The Boston University Study of 1946……………………………….41
The Response to the Study…………………………………………...51
The Long-Term Response……………………………………………57
The 1990s and Beyond……………………………………………….60
V Conclusions from the Study………………………………………………….63
Limitations of the Study……………………………………………..65
Recommendations for Future Study…………………………………65
Closing Thoughts…………………………………………………….67
References……………………………………………………………………………68
Appendices
A: HCPS County Examiners/Superintendents…………………………..76
B: Select One/Two Room White Schoolhouses………………………...77
C: Select One/Two Room Colored Schoolhouses………………………78
D: One/Two Room Schoolhouses Closed………………………………79
vii
List of Tables
1. Table Number of Students and
Schoolhouses—Harford County Public Schools: 1867-
1900………………………………………………………………………...... 14
2. School-Age Population Projections by School Level: Harford County Public
Schools……………………………………………………………………….28
3. Eight Common Objectives for Elementary and Secondary Education………46
viii
List of Figures
Figure
1 HCPS in 2012…………………………………………………………………6
2 Prospect School………………………………………………………………16
3 Aberdeen School……………………………………………………………..17
4 Black Horse School……………………………………………………………….…18
5 Churchville School and Bel Air Elementary………………………………...21
6 Hosanna School……………………………………………………………...43
7 Central Consolidated School…………………………………………………44
8 Bel Air High School………………………………………………………….54
9 Aberdeen High School……………………………………………………….55
ix
Chapter I
Introduction
The topic of public education in the United States has become one of the hot- button political issues of the twenty-first century (Education-Portal.com, 2012).
Issues of administrative control, fiscal responsibility, curricular composition, and teacher accountability are being discussed throughout the federal, state, and local governments by citizens and officials alike. Educational reform is being focused upon at the national level (No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top Fund, etc.) (United
States Department of Education, 2012); accordingly, individual states respond in-kind with their own attempts at reform in order to keep the money flowing from
Washington (Maryland Department of Education, 2012a).
What is often left out of this discussion about the state of American public education is that all of these initiatives and reforms are implemented by individual, local school districts. These districts are mandated to follow the regulations issued by the federal and state authorities; within those guidelines, local school boards create the policy and procedures that actually involve interaction with students. Moreover, these districts must work within the cultural and economic environment of their communities, affecting the districts at the practical level of what is taught in the schools and how much money there is to open schools staffed with teachers and the necessary support staff. At its base, the success or failure of the American public school system rests with the individual, local school districts.
1
Statement of the Problem
The Harford County Public Schools (HCPS) is one of these individual school districts. Located in the state of Maryland, HCPS serves the pre-kindergarten through grade twelve populations of children attending public school throughout the entire county of Harford (Maryland public school districts are all based upon county boundaries) (Harford County Public Schools, 2012a). From its modern-day creation in 1867 through the current day, HCPS has been responsible for implementing federal, state, and local directives as they involve public school education with all of the corresponding financial, curricular, political, and social pitfalls that accompany such a charge.
Considering the importance of its responsibilities and the length of time it has been in existence, an institution such as HCPS would benefit from an examination of its history. The positive value of historical study has been substantiated by research for many years (American Historical Association, 2007). Simply put, the successes and failures of the past can provide guidance and necessary experience when the time comes to face similar situations.
HCPS, however, will face many roadblocks when conducting this historical study. Despite being in existence for 150 years, there is no one single document outlining the historical development of the school district.
2
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this historical study of the Harford County Public Schools during its early years is twofold. At its most basic level, this study describes how the
Harford County Public Schools developed its financial, organizational, and curricular structure from its creation through the present day. At its most complex level, this study analyzes how the nature of this development led the Harford County Public
Schools to be a school system that was often able to carry out its mission successfully, while also meeting with the occasional failures.
Addressing the first purpose, the origin story of a public school system provides meaningful insight into the priorities of the society from which it was created. Power is invested in various entities within the school system; the decisions made by said entities about how the schools are to be organized, how they are to be staffed, and how they are to be funded reflect the motivations of both the power- holders and the power-providers. Thus, for example, a school system that is consistently provided less money from the local government than was requested from the Board of Education does not necessarily indicate a period of economic downturn.
Instead, it could indicate a difference of opinion between the power-holders (the
Board of Education) and the power-providers (the local government) over what the educational needs of their population are.
As the facts of how the Harford County Public Schools developed are researched and illuminated, the interpretation and analysis of how this development affected the education of Harford County’s children can begin. Analysis of this nature 3
always involves subjective qualities; however, general patterns and specific effects of specific causes can be legitimately identified and explained. This study will complete such an analysis.
Need for the Study
Historical study provides contemporary society and modern organizations with essential understandings of how they developed into their current state of existence. Patterns of behavior, rationales of decisions made, and consequences of actions taken are just a few of the insights that can be gained from an examination of an organization’s history, hopefully guiding its leaders toward making educated, well- thought decisions for the betterment of the organization’s future.
Such is the hope for this study. Harford County Public Schools are currently facing problems in the financial, organizational, and curricular arenas (Gallo, 2012b;
Gallo & Vought, 2012). Through a study of its past successes and past mistakes in these areas, the leadership of the school system (power-holders) and the local governments and related citizenry (power-providers) can work toward solving some of these crucial dilemmas.
Additionally, a monographed, comprehensive historical study of the Harford
County Public Schools during this time period has never been published. Wright
(1967) includes a chapter about education in his comprehensive history of Harford
County, only half of which covers the time period during which the Harford County
Public Schools were in existence. White (1918), in his Master’s thesis, provides the
4
only other comprehensive study of the Harford County Public Schools; however, there is not even a complete version of this document in existence. Histories of individual schools (Charnock, 2006), of individual leaders (Jones, 2003), or of individual events (Spicer, 2007) involving the Harford County Public Schools exist, none of which provides the overall perspective needed to present a more complete version of how the school system developed.
Research Questions
1. How did HCPS develop its financial and operational structure from its origin
to the present day?
2. How did this financial and operational development affect HCPS in terms of
carrying out its mission?
5
Figure 1. HCPS in 2012
Figure 1. A map of Harford County, Maryland with schools as of 2012 labeled. Map created by HCPS. Printed with permission.
6
Chapter II
Review of the Literature
Histories of specific American public school systems are simply few and far between. Extensive review of databases containing scholarly articles, research papers, and dissertations has shown that the development of public education in the United
States has rarely been studied from the historical perspective of a modern school district.
Inclusion Criteria
A typical result of such a search produces works, such as that of Fischel
(2009). School systems as a general institution, not as individual local entities, are examined with a conceptual focus (in this case, the changing nature of how school districts are funded was the focus). Key search terms included history of American public school systems, history of American public school districts, development of
American public school systems, and history of American public education.
Harrison (2005) provides the only relevant example of a historical examination of a local school district; in this case, the Kyle, Texas Public School
District. Noting that few studies exist on rural school systems, Harrison’s work focused on “understanding the origins of structures and practices in the schools, the alternatives with which they were contrasted, and the reasons for their resilience and decline” (p. 6). Within that broad outline, Harrison more specifically explored the curricular and extracurricular organization of the school system while also focusing 7
on the ethnic and socio-economic divisions that existed in the school district during the period of the study (which was from 1911 to 1967).
8
Chapter III
Methodology
Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2006) include historical research as a type of qualitative, narrative research that studies how “different humans experience the world around them” (p. 429). The story that is created from this research is in-and-of itself that point of the study. Raymond (2004) presents an amalgamation of theories behind how and why historical research is completed: it is the search and presentation of facts that have been gathered from reliable sources and that have been analyzed and interpreted to tell a story. The research gathered for this examination of HCPS is indeed being analyzed and interpreted for the purpose of telling the story of HCPS with the hope that the present and future development of the school system can learn from its past successes and failures.
Data Sources
Sources of data will include: newspapers, journal articles, books, local, state, and federal government documents, minutes of governmental meetings, university studies, oral histories, personal communications, and Internet sites.
Bias Issues
Historical research is always fraught with issues regarding the biases inherent in both the sources used to develop a historical presentation and in the personal beliefs and opinions of the author who puts the historical presentation together. The
9
well-trained historian may never know what hidden agenda a chronicler from the past may or may not attempt to incorporate into a document or if some point of view was expressed unconsciously (Carr, 1961). It is for these reasons that all artifacts presented as facts must be analyzed and accurately identified as to issues of bias before being included in a scholarly study. Such is the case with the material included in this study.
Roberts (2002) stated that it is impossible to separate one’s worldview when creating a historical narrative—that one’s own feelings and opinions cannot be put aside to create an impartial, neutral document. Whether this is true or not, one way to minimize the influence of such concerns is to divulge any known or perceived biases that preexist (Carr, 1961).
To that end, this author is currently an employee of the focus of this study—
Harford County Public Schools. For the past eighteen years, he has served as a teacher, an assistant principal, and a principal in three different schools within HCPS.
Most of his experiences have been positive (promotions, relationships with students and colleagues); some have been negative (no raises in three years, lack of support during high-intensity discipline cases). There is no hidden agenda behind the creation of this dissertation; however, full disclosure compels the author to identify this area of potential bias.
10
Chapter IV
Harford County Public Schools: A Brief History
Public education in the state of Maryland has its origins in 1723 through an act of the colonial legislative body, the General Assembly, which authorized that each county establish one school “at some Convenient Place” led by a seven-member
Board of Visitors (Everstein, 1980). Though Harford County was not formed until
1773 from a part of Baltimore County (Maryland State Archives, 2010); the region that would become Harford County contained the site for Baltimore County’s one school, located near modern-day Joppatowne (Harford County Directory, 1953). The legislative act further directed that a teacher “capable of Teaching Grammar and the
Mathematicks if such can be Conveniently got” (Everstine, 1980, p. 230) be paid 20 pounds per year (Wright, 1967, p.240). Though taxes were to be collected at the colonial level to support these county schools, efforts to increase the amount received were blocked, mainly by the colonial Senate, who stated that most income brought in by the colony through taxes belonged to “his Lordship”, Lord Baltimore, Proprietary
Governor of Maryland (Everstine, 1980, p.338). The Baltimore County School was not well attended and closed in 1784 (Wright, 1967, p.240).
It took until 1825 for any sort of public education to reach Harford County again. In that year, the General Assembly of the now state, not colony, of Maryland authorized counties to establish boards of educational commissioners of up to nine people in any manner they deemed proper. The government of Harford County
11
determined that the people (or at least eligible voters) could select these commissioners via popular vote (Wright, 1967). These early days of education in
Harford County were not well documented as the state did not require any form of record keeping; in addition, the citizenry of Harford County did not fully support public education, resulting in low student attendance (Wright, 1967).
Public education gained more prominence in Maryland when the state adopted a new constitution in 1867. In this new document, the state declared that “a thorough and efficient system of Free Public Schools” be provided in the state (Everstine,
1984); moreover, it mandated that each county have a county examiner to implement the directives of the school commissioners (Wright, 1967). This essentially created the first public school system in Harford County in that there was now an administrative executive to carry out the educational vision of the commissioners.
Both the county examiner and the educational commissioners continued to be elected until 1875; at that point, the county government determined that both positions would be appointed by the state circuit court judge assigned to Harford County (Wright,
1967).
Though the Harford County educational system now had an executive, the school commissioners did not provide any guidance to the county examiner regarding how the school system should be organized for over a decade (Wright 1967). It was not until 1881 when educational commissioners created attendance districts with
Harford County, directing that students go to “the nearest school by a publicly travelled road” (Wright, 1967, p.253). There was no compulsory attendance 12
requirement in Maryland, meaning only those children whose parents wished for them to attend school did so. Thus, approximately 3,200 students, aged 7 to 12, attended Harford County Public Schools when the Constitution of 1867 was implemented (Wright, 1967). Table 1 provides more specific numbers of how many students HCPS served in the last quarter of the nineteenth century.
The Schoolhouses of HCPS
The building and maintenance of the schoolhouses of HCPS mirrors the development of the school system itself. The lack of centralization that was present in the school system resulted in schoolhouses being constructed in a decentralized manner and in large numbers.
The initial report of the new county examiner in 1867 reported that Harford
County had 69 schoolhouses. All of these buildings were one-room schools that served primary, intermediate, and secondary-aged students (Wright, 1967). This total included three Freedman’s Bureau Schools, established by order of the federal government to provide for the education of the newly-freed slaves (Wright, 1967).
Consistent with the lack of centralization with the early development of a school system in Harford County, the number of schools exploded within a short period of time during the last three decades of the 1800s. By 1870, only three years after the initial report of the county examiner, Harford County added 12 schoolhouses; additionally, within the next four years, another 12 Black schools were
13
established (Wright, 1967). Table 1 describes the intense program of building that occurred between 1875 and 1900.
Table 1
Number of Students and Schoolhouses—Harford County Public Schools: 1867-1900
Year Number of Students Number of Schoolhouses
1867 3,230 69
1875 4,692 94
1880 5,272 124
1890 6,000 136
1895 6,296 141
1900 6,842 162 Note. Data gathered from Our Harford Heritage by C.M. Wright, 1967.
As would be expected with a decentralized approach to the building of schoolhouses, the methods by which these buildings were funded and maintained varied across the county during the last half of the nineteenth century. Most of the buildings were held by a public trust, combining aid from the state and county governments with contributions from members of the community (Wright, 1967).
Most of the land upon which the schoolhouses were built was private property until the late 1870s, when the county government began purchasing real estate outright
(Wright, 1967).
Beyond the cost of the property, one-room schoolhouses were relatively inexpensive to build. During the decades of the 1880s and 1890s, the average one- 14
room schoolhouse cost $700 to build and furnish (Wright, 1967, p.252). The total
HCPS budget for the year of 1885 was $54,400 (Wright, 1967, p.254); accordingly, the cost of an average one-room schoolhouse was less than two percent of the system’s budget. This percentage remained steady until the first decade of the twentieth century (Wright, 1967). With no financial incentive to be more efficient in how schoolhouses were constructed, the decentralization of school system planning and building continued.
As identified in Table 1, Harford County reached a high of 162 schoolhouses in 1900, providing for a population of fewer than 7,000 students. All of these schools were either one or two-room buildings that included all ages of students. As requirements mandated from the state government and national educational trends reached Harford County, coupled with HCPS centralizing its approach to providing educational programming to its students, this design would not suffice as a model for the twentieth-century development of HCPS schoolhouses. As HCPS developed into an organized, centrally-powered bureaucracy, schoolhouses were constructed from a systemic perspective, not from the perspective of individual communities. The result of this development was fewer schoolhouses that served a larger number of students and communities.
15
Figure 2. Prospect School
Figure 2. A brief article and accompanying photograph of Prospect School, which
was one of the many one-room schoolhouses in Harford County. This unusually
designed structure was built in 1830 (Wright, 1967) and was used as a schoolhouse
until 1930 (Harford County Directory, 1953). Taken from the Harford Gazette (a),
date unknown; photocopy of article in position of the Harford County Public
Library.
16
Figure 3. Aberdeen School
Figure 3. A brief article and a photograph of the Aberdeen School in 1891, which
was one of the many one-room schoolhouses in use in Harford County at that time.
Taken from the Harford Gazette (b), date unknown; photocopy of article in
position of the Harford County Public Library.
17
Figure 4. Black Horse School
Figure 4. A picture of the Black Horse School, an extremely small one-room
schoolhouse in northern Harford County. It was built in 1885 (Wright, 1967); it
ceased use as a school in 1935 (Harford County Directory, 1953). Taken from The
Aegis, 1951, July 13; photocopy of article in possession of the Harford County
Public Library.
18
The School Consolidation Movement
As the twentieth-century dawned and as schooling began to become mandatory for many students, the concept of the one or two-room schoolhouses began to decline. There were simply too many students of varying ages whose needs were diverse. In its place, schools began to consolidate, opening one larger, multi- room building in the place of several one or two-room schoolhouses. In this way, instructional programs could be tailored more to the individual needs of student cohorts. The Harford County Board of Education stated this as part of its rationale for transitioning to consolidated schools: “A consolidation of smaller schools is always advisable where a central house can be built, thus securing better classification, better teaching, and more skillful general management” (Historical Story of Harford’s
Educational System, 1950c, p. 1).
The first consolidated school opened in Harford County in 1907 in the northern part of the county. Called the Highland School, it consisted of six classrooms and served students aged seven through 15. Built at the cost $8,000, it allowed three one-room schoolhouses to close upon its opening (Wright, 1967, p.260). Two additional consolidated schools were built in quick succession—Slate
Ridge in 1912 and Dublin in 1915 (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System,
1950b). As consolidation continued throughout the early decades of the twentieth century, the 162 one and two-room schoolhouses that existed in 1900 shrunk to only
65 by 1915. This trend continued over the next 25 years with 13 one or two-room schoolhouses closing by 1920 and 28 more closing by 1940 (Billett, Blair, Sullivan, 19
& Yeo, 1946). Ironically, the consolidation movement was so successful in the closing of one-room schoolhouses that HCPS, in order to meet the needs of a growing student population, had to start using portable, temporary buildings on the grounds of consolidated schools. The first use of such portable classrooms was in 1920
(Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950c).
An unintended consequence of the consolidation movement was that students were not always attending a school within walking distance. Needing a way to get students to spread-out schools in a rural environment, the school system authorized in
1912 the creation of “The Kid Wagon”, a horse-drawn spring wagon used to transport students (Wright, 1967, p.261). Harford County was the third school system in
Maryland to provide transportation for students (the first two systems being
Baltimore County in 1905 and Howard County in 1909); however, beginning in 1918, it was the first system to provide motorized transportation (Historical Story of
Harford’s Educational System, 1950a). The six years during the time the “The Kid
Wagon” was in use provided a glimpse of the Spartan life of rural Harford County in the early twentieth century. According to a student who rode in the horse-drawn wagon, “Mr. Harkins blew an old conch shell as a signal that the vehicle was about to start, so that all could be ready to be picked up, and that in very cold weather, some carried heated bricks to warm their feet” (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational
System, 1950a, p. 1).
20
Figure 5. Churchville School and Bel Air Elementary School
Figure 5. Class portraits of the Churchville School Class of 1912 (above) and of the Bel Air Elementary School student body around 1900. This Churchville School was a one-room schoolhouse built in 1873 (Wright, 1967). A consolidated school was built at that site, opening in 1931 (Harford County Directory, 1953). The building is currently in use as Churchville Elementary School, the oldest schoolhouse still in use in Harford County. The Bel Air Elementary School pictured here was built in 1883 and used until 1923 (Wright, 1967). The building then served as the central office headquarters for HCPS from 1923 until 2006. Taken from The Aegis, 1951, August 24; photocopy of article in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
21
The High School Movement
The next movement that had an impact on the construction of schoolhouses in
Harford County was the development of specific secondary or high school programs that were designed to meet the needs of the growing secondary-aged student population. The main impetus toward this development was the passage of a comprehensive education law in 1916 by the Maryland General Assembly. This law mandated compulsory school attendance for students within the ages of seven and 12; additionally, those students aged 13 through 15 had to attend school for at least 100 days out of the year (Wright, 1967). The consolidated schools could not handle the numbers and the needs of an increasingly older student body. Harford County was experiencing this growth even before the law was enacted. Specifically, there were only 147 secondary students (grades seven and above) enrolled in Harford County public schools in 1904; only six years later, they were close to 1,000 students of this age being served by HCPS. Accordingly, three high schools (serving grades seven and above) were built in Harford County during the 1910s (Wright, 1967).
The growth of the secondary student population continued to grow, doubling to more than 2,000 students by the mid-1940s. Coupled with this population growth, the state of Maryland passed in 1945 another education law that mandated school attendance for students until the age of 16 along with a mandatory twelfth grade
(previously, schooling had ended after the eleventh grade) (Wright, 1967). In response to this growth and changes in the law, HCPS built five more high schools through the 1920s and 1930s, resulting in a total of eight (Billett et al., 1946). Though 22
increased in number, these eight high schools were not enough to meet the growing educational demands of the post World War II period in Harford County. The origins of this disconnect came from how the school system was funded.
Funding the Schools Before 1946
Before moving into an examination of HCPS during the modern era, the mechanisms and policies by which the school system was funded from its origins through the mid-1940s should be addressed. The flaws inherent in the funding process, coupled with the lack of political support for enhancing the public schools, resulted in several crises with how HCPS delivered its services to the citizens of the county.
The local funding for the establishment of HCPS in 1867 was produced by a property tax of 20 cents per one-hundred dollars of valued property. Common practice established a 50/50 split between the county government and the state government for county school systems; accordingly, the first budget for HCPS totaled
$28,000 once the local property taxes and the state contribution was added (Wright,
1967). School system funding was also supplemented with student-paid tuition. Until
1916, all students attending Harford County schools paid a fixed rate per term, the amount of which was based upon the age of the student. In the early 1870s, for example, primary students paid 40 cents per term, intermediate students paid 70 cents per term, and secondary students paid one dollar per term (Wright, 1967). Students
23
also had to purchase their own textbooks until 1916 (Wright, 1967), even though a state law prohibited this practice in 1896 (Everstine, 1984).
HCPS also experienced funding problems within five years of its existence due to resistance from the local (county) governmental authority—the County
Commissioners. Even though the state mandated at least 20 cents per one-hundred dollars property assessment for the benefit of public education, the County
Commissioners refused to implement the law. Robert Henry, County Examiner for the schools from 1869 to 1876, stated in a report to the state that “the County
Commissioners have manifested their illiberality to public schools by refusing to grant the 20 cent levy required. They gave us ten cents and intimated that they would not levy more, even though required to do so by law” (Harford County Directory,
1953, p. 383). Even after having been reported to the State Superintendent of Schools, the county government was still able to get away with illegally underfunding public education.
Another major component of early funding for HCPS was the private donation of money and land. When the school system agreed to build new schoolhouses from the 1870s through the early 1910s, for example, it was not uncommon to find stipulations such as “the local community would furnish the lot [for the schoolhouse] and $1,000 in cash” (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950b, p. 1).
When the first consolidated schoolhouse was built in Harford County in 1907, part of the requirements was that the community provide $800, the lot upon which to
24
construct the building, and to provide all “necessary hauling of brick, lumber, and other materials” (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950a, p. 1).
As the era of mandated community contribution and of student-paid tuition came to an end in the 1920s, HCPS began to experience its first funding crisis. As mentioned above, the Harford County Board of Education was and is dependent upon the state of Maryland and the local county government for funding—it has no taxing power of its own. Accordingly, when the state and local governments were accommodating in their funding levels, HCPS could proceed with its budget priorities as it saw fit. This was the case when the state government authorized the county government to issue bonds, the funds of which were to be used for schoolhouse construction. The Harford County Commissioners agreed to this bond sale, and bonds in the amount of $250,000 were issued, resulting in the construction of seven consolidated schoolhouses from 1923 to 1931 (Wright, 1967). This sale of bonds, however, was only authorized after the Board of Education and committee of parents and community leaders organized action committees with public hearings geared to exert pressure on the County Commissioners. Initially, the Commissioners refused to authorize the bonds, not desiring to incur further debt or the possibility of having to raise property taxes (Harford County Directory, 1953).
Of course, the political will and direction taken by government officials are not always going to be so inclined to support the needs and desires of the local school system. Such was the case in the late 1940s as the needs of HCPS did not match the political goals of the county government. 25
The state legislature passed a law in 1947 permitting the county governments to float four million dollars worth of bonds to support capital improvement projects for the local school systems, including the construction of schoolhouses (Harford
County Maryland Board of Education, 1949). The impetus behind this bond sale came from the realization of the state that the requirements included in the education law of 1945 (compulsory attendance through age 16, the addition of the twelfth grade, limits on class size) put an incredible amount of stress on the resources of the local
Boards of Education. Coupled with the exploding population growth of post World
War II-Maryland, the state government wanted to give tools to the local jurisdictions to meet the educational needs of the state (Harford County Maryland Board of
Education, 1949).
The Harford County Board of Commissioners, however, did not see the political benefit in authorizing that the county to take on such a debt on behalf of
Harford County Public Schools (HCPS). After more than one year after the state law passed allowing for the bond sale, seven counties had approved the measure. Harford
County was not among them. After several entreaties by the Board of Education to support the bond measure, the county commissioners required HCPS to “explain this
[the bond sale] to citizens and to get an expression of public opinion” (Harford
County Maryland Board of Education, 1949). If the public opinion was favorable, the commissioners agreed to approve the sale of the bonds.
Using its own resources, the Harford County Board of Education published a pamphlet that described what the bond sale would do for education in the county and 26
why it was needed. It implored the citizenry of Harford County to send letters of support to the county commissioners. Entitled “The Most Important Job of Any
Generation is Taking Care of the Next Generation,” the pamphlet indicated that the current resources of HCPS could not meet the demands of the ever-growing population of the county. The introductory paragraph of the pamphlet concluded with the plea: “Your children’s education will suffer unless something is done immediately—read and help solve the problem” (Harford County Maryland Board of
Education, 1949). The contents of the pamphlet cited Census Bureau data and future estimates of just how overcrowded the school system had gotten and would continue to be. Table 2 displays the specific figures contained in this report.
Required by the local government to beg for its existence, HCPS won the day.
The public responded to the call to action and demonstrated enough support to provide the necessary political cover for the Board of Commissioners to approve the bond sale (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950d).
27
Table 2
School-Age Population Projections by School Level: Harford County Public Schools
School Year Elementary Secondary Total +/- Population Population Population
1945-46 4,524 2,327 6,851
1946-47 4,637 2,450 7,087
1947-48 4,744 2,614 7,358
1948-49a 5,155 2,688 7,843 +485
1949-50a 5,584 2,779 8,363 +1,005
1950-51ab 5,957 3,292 9,249 +1,891
1951-52a 6,280 3,457 9,737 +2,339
1952-53a 6,564 3,725 10,289 +2,891
1953-54a 7,083 3,946 11,029 +3,631
Note. In the chart above, a means Population projection and b means this school year is the first with a mandatory twelfth grade.
28
In making its successful pitch for public support of funding for capital projects in the late 1940s, HCPS neglected to discuss a parallel financial crisis having an impact on the system, namely, the dismal state of the school system’s operating budget. By 1946, Harford County’s level of funding for public education was the lowest of all the 24 school systems in the state of Maryland (Billett et al., 1946).
There were several reasons for this lowly state of affairs.
Depending upon paid property taxes as the main vehicle for funding the county government’s budget, Harford County’s public economy took a major blow during World War I in 1917. During the war, the United States government was in desperate need of land in order to accommodate the expanding size and expanding training needs of the military. Some of the new land obtained by the federal government for this purpose was prime agricultural and waterfront property in
Harford County. The United States Army established the Aberdeen Proving Ground and the Edgewood Arsenal in Harford County in 1917 (Aberdeen Proving Ground
History, 2011.). Incorporating over 69,000 acres, much of which bordered the county’s shoreline with the Chesapeake Bay, the federal government exercised its right of eminent domain, taking the land from approximately 3,000 people for the price of 200 dollar an acre (Aberdeen Proving Ground History, 2011).
Approximately 35,000 acres of fields used to grow tomatoes and shoe-peg corn were withdrawn from this use (Washburn, 2006). This once valuable, productive land was now outside of the authority of the county government for the purpose of property tax collection (Wright, 1967). To its credit, the United States Army did establish a 29
relationship with the school system by becoming a “partner” with Edgewood
Elementary School in 1923 (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System,
1950c); however, the federal government, taking into consideration its large presence in the county, did not provide any additional monetary aid for educational funding in
Harford County until 1942, when it contributed $161,000 from the Federal Works
Administration toward school building upkeep (Historical Story of Harford’s
Educational System, 1950d).
A shrunken tax base, however, was not the only factor that kept Harford
County education in the funding basement by 1946. In that year, the property tax rate upon which the Harford County government assessed its citizens for public education was the lowest in the state (and had been since 1924)—40 cents per one-hundred dollars of valued property (Billett et al., 1946). Put into another perspective, this tax rate had only little more than tripled since the initial property school tax was put into place in 1867 at a rate of 12 cents per one-hundred dollars, a time period encompassing almost 80 years. Harford County was not keeping up with the economic times.
As would be expected, this lack of funding had a crippling impact upon the services the school system could provide. According to accepted standards for education funding in 1946, Harford County was woefully inadequate. Only one other school system in the state spent less on textbooks, resulting in HCPS having access to
“only about one-quarter of what is considered to be the minimum amount needed” for student books (Billett et al., 1946, p.104). Likewise, the amount of money spent per 30
pupil on materials of instruction in 1946 was $1.15 compared to a regionally-accepted minimum funding standard of two dollars (Billett et al., 1946). As a result, in the twelve-year period leading up to 1946, Harford County had the lowest level of education funding in the state of Maryland for seven of those 12 years (Billett et al.,
1946). To help compensate for this low level of funding, the school system and individual schools conducted extensive fundraising efforts in the private sector.
During the 1943-1944 school year, for example, private citizens and organizations donated $24,878 to white schools and $5,631 to black schools (Billett et al., 1946, p.xxvii). This is the equivalent in 2011 dollars to $324,944 and $73,549, respectively.
The Curriculum of HCPS Before 1946
The first evidence of what students were learning in the Harford County
Public School system is found in an 1872 curriculum. Instruction in the one-room schoolhouse was broken into three groups. The “first” or primary class was composed of those students using McGuffey’s first reader and/or speller while the “second” or intermediate class employed McGuffey’s second reader and could write in a copybook. The “third” class consisted of all other students and was not tied to any specific reader or text (Wright, 1967). There is no evidence of students being divided into the modern concept of grade levels until 1873, when schools in Havre de Grace and Bel Air organized their students into grades (Wright, 1967).
The graded school curriculum was quite an extensive course of study. The published curriculum in 1879 for the secondary graded school was a diverse and
31
rigorous liberal arts experience. Seventh grade students studied algebra, natural philosophy, English, Latin, bookkeeping, composition, declamation and English history. Eighth grade students took courses in geometry, physiology, English literature, Latin, Greek, and ancient history; ninth grade students explored mental and moral philosophy, the Constitution, trigonometry, surveying, astronomy, Latin, and the metric system (Wright, 1967). Students had to take all of these subjects in each grade; moreover, their promotion to the next grade level was based solely on their passing written exams that were created jointly by the principal and the teacher
(Wright, 1967).
Over the course of the next three decades, both Harford County Public
Schools and the state of Maryland refined their expectations of what should be included in the curriculum of the public schools. In 1910, a state law was passed that established the first minimal standards for high school curriculum (Historical Story of
Harford’s Educational System, 1950b). These standards included the requirement of diversify course offerings to meet the needs of students going into different career fields: vocational, agricultural, and academic (Historical Story of Harford’s
Educational System, 1950b). Five high schools in Harford County met these new standards with at least a minimal level of satisfaction: Aberdeen, Havre de Grace, Bel
Air, Highland, and Jarrettsville (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System,
1950b). Indeed, Harford County Public Schools engaged in some ground-breaking initiatives within the scope of curriculum development during this time, the most influential being that Harford County was the first school system in Maryland to offer 32
agricultural instruction with its program instituted at the Highland School in 1910
(Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950a). The system’s leadership in the area of agricultural education was further advanced with the construction of the first building in the state dedicated specifically for agricultural instruction at the
Highland School in 1924 (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950c).
The elementary school curriculum included more subjects as the one and two- room schoolhouses were closed in favor of consolidated schools, allowing for more teachers and for more space to be used instruction beyond reading and writing. By the mid-1940s, the elementary curriculum consisted of seven distinct fields: “language arts, social studies, math, science experiences, health experiences, aesthetic and creative experiences, and related activities” (Billett et al., 1946, p. xiv). Additionally, all elementary students by the mid-1940s had to take the same standardized tests, including the California Short Form Test of Mental Mathematics and the Iowa Every
Pupil Test of Basic Skills (Billett et al., 1946).
The Teachers of HCPS Before 1946
As noted above, the initial report of the new school examiner in 1867 indicated that Harford County had 69 schoolhouses (Wright, 1967). Since all of these schoolhouses consisted of one-room buildings, it comes as no surprise that this same report notes that there were 69 teachers working in the public schools, 31 men and 38 women (Wright 1967). In a school year that consisted of three, two-and-one-half month terms, these teachers earned sixty dollars per term, thus equating to 180 dollars 33
per year, unless the community opted to include a fourth, non-mandatory term
(Wright, 1967). If the school had more than 15 students, the teacher would receive extra money for every extra student up to 60 students, the amount of money based upon the age of the student; extra primary students were 50 cents per head, extra intermediate students were one dollar per head, and extra secondary students were one dollar 50 cents per head (Wright, 1967).
As the population of Harford County grew throughout the late 1800s into the early 1900s and consolidated schools began to replace the one and two-room schoolhouses, more teachers were obviously added to the employee rolls. Indeed, by the time World War I started for the United States in 1917, Harford County had such a demand for new teachers that the system faced a teacher shortage (Wright, 1967).
Though the growth of the county with its larger student population caused the demand for teachers to overwhelm the supply, other factors were also involved. For one, Harford County’s lowest-in-the-state funding for education created a situation in which the teacher salaries were not keeping pace with other jurisdictions. The starting salary for a teacher in Harford County in 1920 was $950 a year with an extra $200 added if the teacher worked in a high school. Perhaps more disheartening to potential teachers, there was no opportunity for a wage increase until the end of their eighth year of teaching, when the salary increased to $1150 a year (Wright, 1967). Adding to their short-term struggle with expenses, Harford County teachers, along with their colleagues across the state, starting in 1927, had to contribute ten percent of their salary toward a pension (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950c). 34
Adding to the complexity of finding teachers, the state government changed the teacher licensure law in 1916, taking away the power of local school systems to grant teacher’s licenses and investing that power with the state board of education (Wright,
1967). As a result, some candidates that Harford County would have hired as teachers were no longer eligible, having not met the new state standards (Wright, 1967).
As Harford County entered the 1930s, teacher salaries continued to trend downwards. With the Great Depression shrinking the tax receipts needed to fund education, Harford County teachers took a ten percent pay cut starting in 1930, reducing the starting teacher’s salary to 855 dollars a year. This salary reduction remained in place until 1937 (Wright, 1967). With the restoration of the ten percent cut in 1930, a teacher beginning her career in Harford County started at the same salary in 1937 as the rookie teacher in 1920.
As the United States entered World War II in 1941, Harford County teachers earned the lowest public school teacher salary in the state of Maryland (Billett et al.,
1946, p. xxviii). Even with a ten percent raise of the average teachers salary in
Harford County between 1943 and 1944 from 1,344 dollars a year to 1,679 dollars a year, Harford County teachers continued to bring up the rear in the salary department
(Billett et al., 1946).
The education and training received by teachers employed by the Harford
County Public Schools by 1946 was dictated by the age of the students taught; moreover, it illustrated a great amount of discrepancy between primary and secondary level teachers. Based upon a survey conducted for the 1945-1946 school year, there 35
were 129 elementary school teachers working for Harford County. Only 36 of these teachers had earned a Bachelor’s degree; the remaining 93 elementary school teachers had not earned a college degree. None of the 36 teachers with undergraduate degrees had received a Master’s degree (Billett et al., 1946). It was not uncommon for the teachers with the least amount of training to work in the remaining one and two-room schoolhouses in the county (Merryman, 1994).
Teachers of secondary students (grades seven and up) had an educational background different from their elementary counterparts. In 1946, Harford County employed 95 secondary school teachers. Of these 95 teachers, 81 had Bachelor’s degrees; moreover, 12 of those 81 teachers with undergraduate degrees had earned
Master’s degrees (Billett et al., 1946). The specific nature of the content taught at the secondary level explains the variance in the level of training expected between primary and secondary teachers (Billett et al., 1946).
The experience level of Harford County teachers in 1946 was young in a strict numerical analysis. For example, of the 95 secondary teachers employed during the
1945-1946 school year, nearly 25 percent were completing their first year of teaching.
Another 24 teachers were completing between year two and year five at this same time, resulting in 50 percent of the secondary teaching ranks having five or less years of experience (Billett et al., 1946).
These numbers, however, do not include the scores of administrators with more extensive experience who were teaching classes. In 1946, all 42 elementary school principals taught classes for at least 50 percent of their day; eight of the ten 36
secondary school principals did the same thing (Billett et al., 1946). Thus, 50 additional professionals were teaching in Harford County beyond the 224 combined primary/secondary teachers referenced above.
Though not directly stated in official policy, a major reason that administrators were teaching was due to restrictive state policies and laws controlling when and how many teachers could be hired and the willingness of the Harford
County Board of Education to hire more teachers. Maryland law in 1946 dictated that school systems could not hire a new elementary teacher for a school until the roll of an established class hit 35 students (Billett et al., 1946). Using this criteria, Harford
County Public Schools could have hired many more elementary school teachers as
62% of elementary classrooms had 35 or more students and 33% of the classrooms had 40 or more students (Billett et al., 1946). The Harford County Board of
Education, realizing this state of affairs, did not find the need to hire more teachers to reduce class size; therefore, principals had to provide some assistance in the classroom.
The Colored Schools Before 1946
Considered a southern state, Maryland provided for the education of its
African-American population through the creation of segregated schools. The origins of Harford County’s “colored” schools as segregated schools for African-Americans were called in Harford County until desegregation occurred in the 1960s began after the Civil War in 1867. As mentioned above, three Freedman Bureau schools were
37
opened in 1867: the Hosanna School in Berkley, the Greenspring School in Level, and the McComas Institute in Abingdon (Washburn, 2005). Freedmen Bureau schools were creations of the federal government to provide for the education of newly freed slaves in the southern states. As such, these schools were administered by agents of the federal government with no funding provided by the local school systems (The
Freedmen’s Bureau National Archives, 1969). Accordingly, the Harford County
School Commissioners provided no direction to or oversight of these initial colored schools.
This state of affairs, however, soon changed. Because there was greater demand for colored schools than provided for by the three Freedmen Bureau schools, the Harford County School Commissioners stated in 1869 that if the federal government would not fund additional Freedmen Bureau schools, then they would authorize the opening of additional colored schools with funds collected from the taxes of the colored population (Washburn, 2005). As it turned out, the school system not only had to pay for new colored schools; it also had to assume total oversight of the three original Freedman Bureau schools in 1871 as the federal government withdrew from its initial foray into local schooling (Washburn, 2005).
At first glance, the first five years of segregated schooling in Harford County portrayed an approach that was equitable between the white and the African-
American population. The system had authorized the creation of a total of 17 colored schools by 1876 in which the students followed the same schedule as white students and the teachers in the colored schools were all African-American, received the same 38
pay as white teachers (Washburn, 2005). Additionally, the construction of new colored schools followed the same path as those of white schools of the time: the community had to contribute funds to build a new building; otherwise, local churches were rented for instructional space (Washburn, 2005).
It quickly became apparent, however, that the intent of an equitable education for African-Americans and whites never existed. The pay for the teachers at the colored schools was reduced by five dollars in 1877 to $65 from $70 per term, because “the col’d fund is shown by the books to be in debt to the white fund”
(Washburn, 2005, p. 20). Simply put, money collected from the taxes of the white population would not be used to supplement the lower tax receipts from the African-
American population, resulting in the cutting of services and resources provided for colored schools. This manifested itself again with the official policy of the School
Commissioners to only provide new furniture and other materials of instruction to colored schools when they could receive “handed-down” equipment from white schools when those white schools received new items (Washburn, 2005). As a result of this substandard maintenance and replenishment of supplies, it was not uncommon for colored schools to be in disrepair and generally poor condition. Accordingly, reports on the condition of the colored schools of Harford County would frequently resemble the following report contained in the minutes from a Harford County Board of Education meeting in 1908 (as cited in Washburn, 2005):
The colored school buildings of the county are as a rule in very unsatisfactory condition, at least seven of them being old churches, with the poorest facilities
39
for either comfort or instruction, the facts relating to the colored building at Havre de Grace have been brought your attention from year to year, and it is sufficient to say that these conditions have been neither removed nor improved, the house being at the present time totally unfit for use, and in the judgment of many unsafe. p. 27
As the twentieth century progressed through its first three decades, the colored schools, teachers, and students of Harford County continued to be treated as second- class institutions. The gap between the starting salary of white and African-American teachers grew to $200 by the beginning of the 1930s with the African-American teachers obviously making the smaller amount (Wright, 1967). Many African-
American teachers were making almost 50% less than their white counterparts of equal training and seniority in 1937 (Washburn, 2006).
An initially-promising development for Harford County’s colored schools was the introduction of Rosenwald Foundation funding in 1917. The Rosenwald
Foundation, started by Julius Rosenwald, the CEO of Sears, Roebuck, and Company at the time and Booker T. Washington in 1913, was created to help fund the establishment of grammar and industrial schools for African-Americans in the southern states (Hoffschwelle, 2003). Harford County received $3,300 from the
Rosenwald Foundation over the course of nine years (1917-1926). This money was used to start the construction of six different colored schools (Washburn, 2006). This
Rosenwald construction coincided with the first major initiative on the part of the
40
school system to renovate the existing colored schools (Historical Story of Harford’s
Educational System, 1950c).
As discussed above, Harford County Public Schools had established eight high schools (grades seven through 11 or 12) by the end of the 1930s (Billett et al.,
1946). None of these high schools, however, served African-American students. If
African-American students wished to continue their education beyond the sixth grade prior to 1930, they had to take a train into Wilmington, Delaware or near Philadelphia
Pennsylvania (Lee, 2000). It was in 1930 that Harford County Public Schools finally opened a colored high school, erecting a new building in Havre de Grace. A second colored high school opened with a new building in Bel Air in 1934 (Washburn,
2006). Despite the new construction, it took the Board of Education almost three years to agree to install inside toilets and running water in the school in Havre de
Grace (Washburn, 2006). By the 1938-1939 school year, there were 148 Black students enrolled in the two high schools: 53 in Bel Air and 95 in Havre de Grace
(Washburn, 2006).
The Boston University Study of 1946
The conclusion of World War II occurred during the summer of 1945. Though of a definitely-smaller magnitude, Harford County Public Schools experienced its own ending at the same time; namely, the retirement of C. Milton Wright, the
Superintendent of Schools for the 30 years from 1915 to 1945. Taking over the leadership of the school system in 1915, Mr. Wright guided Harford County
41
education from the dawn of the consolidated school movement, through the development of comprehensive high school programs and mandatory attendance, concluding his career just as the population of Harford County was beginning to boom (Wright, 1967).
Succeeding Mr. Wright was Dr. Charles Willis. Upon taking the helm of
HCPS in the summer of 1945, Dr. Willis, in consultation with the Board of
Education, contracted Boston University to complete a top-to-bottom review and evaluation of the school system. A four-person evaluation team, led by Dr. Roy
Billett, began its work in the fall of 1945 and presented its conclusions to the Board of Education in the spring of 1946 (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System,
1950d). What this evaluation determined regarding the condition of the Harford
County Public Schools brings all of the facts presented in the pages above into a clear, focused endpoint.
The purpose of the evaluation was to determine:
To what extent and how well are the public schools of Harford County meeting the common and different educational needs of all boys and girls of elementary and secondary school age in Harford County? How can the public schools of Harford County meet these needs better than they are now being met? (Billett et al., 1946, p. 1)
42
Figure 6. Hosanna School
Figure 6. The Hosanna School, pictured above in its remodeled state, was one of the
first Colored schools built in Harford County—it was one of the original three
Freedmen Schools built in 1867; it remained in use until 1950 (Wright, 1967). Taken
from The Aegis, 1995; photocopy of article in possession of the Harford County
Public Library.
43
Figure 7. Central Consolidated School
Figure 7. A brief article about and photographs of the laying of the cornerstone in
1950 of the first consolidated Colored school in Harford County—Central
Consolidated School. It was first modern building provided for African-Americans
in the county (Spicer, 2007). Central Consolidated remained a segregated school
until Harford County fully implemented integration in 1965-1966; it then became
and currently remains Hickory Elementary School. Taken from the Aegis, 1950,
June 30; photocopy of article in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
44
Data were gathered through the use of surveys, rating scales, and interviews of students, teachers, parents, and administrators and the analysis of government records and minutes from Board of Education meetings. Guiding the team in its evaluation was a document called the “Eight Common Objectives for Elementary and Secondary
Education.” This document was created by the Education Department at Boston
University as a template for what schools and school systems should consider when developing an educational program (Billett et al., 1946). These eight principles are displayed in Table 3.
The picture painted by the final report of Dr. Billett’s survey is not an encouraging one. Regarding the schoolhouse and accompanying facilities, Billett et al. (1946) were “shocked” (pp. 9-10) at what they found. Of the 52 elementary and secondary schoolhouses in Harford County, none had a cafeteria, contributing to the informal evaluation finding that “malnutrition was evident in this rich, fruitful county” (Billett et al., 1946, p. xii). Additionally, none of the 52 schools had a gymnasium or properly-equipped fine arts (elementary and secondary levels) or business (secondary level) classrooms. No secondary school had a science classroom equipped to complete modern experiments; indeed, the survey team found scores of outdated textbooks and materials of instruction with one example dating back to
1816. The school libraries were substandard to accepted educational specifications, housing over 10,000 fewer volumes as a system than would be expected (Billett et al.,
1946). Many of the schools did not have telephone access; more frightening than that, the 26 remaining one or two room schoolhouses did not have running water, relying 45
on outhouses as toilet facilities and on drinking pails and ladles for fresh drinking water. Looking at the overall condition of all 52 schools in the system, Havre de
Grace Elementary, Bel Air Elementary, and all 14 of the Black schools were rated as
“unsafe” (Billett et al., 1946, p. xii).
Table 3
Eight Common Objectives for Elementary and Secondary Education
1. Growing Up
2. Sound Guidance
3. Health and Fitness
4. Making the Most of the Environment
5. Living aesthetically and in Good Taste
6. Using Leisure Time Well
7. Preparing for Vocation or Further Education
8. Becoming Self-Educative
46
Billett’s et al. study (1946) also exposed some major deficiencies regarding the staffing of the Harford County Public Schools. As a school system, Harford
County had no school psychologists, no special education teachers, and no visiting teachers (teachers who made home visits to check on the status of truant or sick students). There were limited numbers of fine and practical arts teachers; instead, the school system relied on community volunteers to expose the students to various cultural activities and to share their expertise with students through informal instruction. The secondary schools had no guidance counselors, resulting in students having no school-based staff member who could provide any career or academic advising on a formal basis.
The report (Billett et al., 1946) expressed concerns regarding the administration of the Harford County Public Schools. Out of the 52 schools in
Harford County, only two of the high schools had non-teaching principals; the remaining 50 principals spent at least 50 percent of their day teaching with many of the elementary school principals spending up to 80 percent of their week in the classroom. Supervision from the central office was also deficient as there were only two supervisors on staff, responsible for traveling the county to oversee the instructional program. This deficiency was compounded considering that one of those supervisors was responsible for the colored schools, 14 out of 52 schools with approximately 10% of the student population.
47
Regarding the teaching staff, the findings of the report (Billett et al., 1946) were mixed. In terms of the number of teachers employed by HCPS, the secondary schools were able to maintain a reasonable class size. The average class size was 25 students with a range from three students at the low end to 50 students at the top.
Elementary school class sizes, however, were larger than recommended, 30 per class being the accepted figure for grades two and up at the elementary level with only
15% of elementary classes being at 30 students or less; indeed, one-third of elementary classes had 40 or more students. The report additionally commented upon the overwhelmingly “pleasant” (p. xi) nature of the teaching staff across the county.
The methods with which the teachers instructed the students, however, were an area of concern for Billett et al. (1946). Having observed scores of teachers through the course of the study and having received student and teacher rating scales that included questions about instruction, Billett et al. (1946) determined that the main instructional strategy in the secondary schools was “recitation from text” (p. xxi). More generally across both levels of schools, the instructional methods employed in Harford County Public Schools were the “traditional teacher-dominated type with relatively little pupil activity and much teacher activity” (p. 123). There were also concerns regarding the accuracy of the content being communicated to students at the secondary level due to the fact that less than half of teachers in the high schools were teaching within their qualified, certificated content areas.
Operational issues were brought to the forefront in the report (Billett et al.,
1946). Record-keeping, at both the school level and the central office level, did not 48
meet state guidelines. Accordingly, there were concerns regarding funds being unaccounted for and that the state was not receiving accurate statistics regarding the education of the county’s children. Connected to the system’s finances, the report expressed concern that HCPS was entirely too dependent on community organizations, such as Lion’s Clubs, Rotary Clubs, 4H, and the Grange Halls for voluntary services and for donated funds to maintain essential programs. For example, any type of fine art instruction, art classes, music classes, etc. was taught by volunteers from the community (Merryman, 1994); additionally, materials of instruction for use in business and technology education classes often did not exist if not for the generosity of the local Lion’s club (Billett et al., 1946).
Billett et al. (1946) used the issue of student transportation as an example of dysfunction in the Harford County Public Schools operational program. In 1946, approximately 3,000 students were transported to school by bus. To service all of these students across the entire county, HCPS had only 11 buses working. Citing a lack of resources to fund more buses, even though secondary school students paid a daily rate in order to ride the school bus through 1945, the school system leadership expected the students and their parents to make the necessary schedule adjustments and sacrifices in order to ensure that the students got to school. These sacrifices, however, proved to be excessive, having a negative impact on school attendance.
Over 50 students in the county, for example, had to walk over two miles to get to a bus stop. Having a more wide-ranging impact, the lack of buses caused HCPS to create tiered bus runs that did not match the school schedule. Many students 49
throughout the county had to wait until 4:00 p.m. for a bus to take them home despite the fact that school dismissed at 2:30 p.m. Most schools did not provide any type of organized student activity while the students waited for their daily ride home.
Perhaps most telling of the negative findings of Billett et al (1946) is the performance of the students. Reviewing the standardized testing completed by ninth and eleventh graders attending HCPS schools, the California Short Form Test of
Mental Maturity, the median score earned by HCPS students was 105 (Billett et al.,
1946). Though no specific numbers were provided to which to compare, these results classified HCPS students as “behind” the rest of the country (Billett et al, 1946, p. xxiii). African-American students receiving instruction in the county’s colored schools fared even worse—the median standard score for those students was an 85
(Billett et al., 1946).
Billett et al. (1946) provided overall ratings for the various components of
HCPS’ operation as they related to how the school system was meeting the educational needs of the county’s students. As would be expected, most of the ratings were unfavorable; specifically, the “school grounds, school buildings, space, equipment and supplies, [and] teaching methods” (p. xi) categories were subpar. The only areas to receive a favorable rating were fairly nebulous categories: “teaching, administrative, and support staff [and] pupil potentialities for growth” (p. xi).
Basically, this formal evaluation of the Harford County Public Schools could only find positive things to say about the nature of the people working for it and that its students can only get better—not exactly a glowing report. The most damning words 50
regarding the success of the Harford County Public Schools came in the conclusion of the report’s executive summary. Stating that HCPS’ approach to educating the county’s children was to house as many students as possible at the cheapest cost regardless of educational effectiveness, the report concluded that:
the low school tax…has been secured through the use of inadequate, unsanitary and unsafe school buildings, overcrowded classes, limited supplies of textbooks and materials of instruction and poorly paid teachers. The savings in taxes has resulted in poor school attendance, non-promotion of pupils, and early dropping out of school (p. xxx).
The Response to the Study
The Boston University study of HCPS did not paint a desirable picture of the school system that was serving an ever-growing population of students. The response of the leadership of the school system, of the political leadership within Harford
County, and of the citizenry of Harford County was of a mixed nature—some deficiencies were lessened while others grew worse.
As was described above, Harford County experienced a post-World War II population explosion. Between the times that the United States Census was taken in
1940 and the Maryland Board of Public Works estimated the population of Harford
County in 1948, Harford County’s population grew by over 55 percent, with a corresponding growth in the student population attending the county’s schools
(Harford County Maryland Board of Education, 1949). This population growth only
51
accentuated the poor conditions that existed in HCPS school facilities as described by
Billett, et al (1946).
Because of the political cover provided by the Harford County Board of
Education’s public relations job of convincing the county’s politicians and citizens of the need to approve a bond bill for school construction discussed above (Harford
County Maryland Board of Education, 1949), the Harford County Commissioners subsequently sold four-million dollars’ worth of bonds. Accordingly, from 1949 through 1954, HCPS built four modern high schools, Bel Air, Aberdeen, Edgewood, and North Harford High Schools and two consolidated schools for African-American students: Central Consolidated School in Hickory and Havre de Grace Consolidated
School (Spicer, 2007). As an example of the modern schoolhouses that HCPS was building, the Bel Air High School of 1949 was considered to be the “most modern in the state” (Historical Story of Harford’s Educational System, 1950d). A teacher new to Harford County in 1951 indicated two reasons for leaving New York to teach at
Bel Air High School: an $800 a year raise and because of the “brand new, highly regarded school in Bel Air” (Roberty, 2001, p. ).
Billett et al. (1946) expressed great concern about the inadequacy of the curriculum that was being taught to the students served by HCPS. Again, the school system rose to the challenge to upgrade its curricular menu. By 1952, all of the high schools serving white students with grades 7 through 12 being considered high school, had diversified their curricula enough to create four career pathways. These pathways included a general curriculum, an academic curriculum for the college- 52
bound, a vocational curriculum for those going into trades, and a commercial curriculum for those students looking to go into the business world (League of
Women Voters of Harford County, 1955). A multitude of classes was offered under these career programs, all of which were taught by at least a trained teacher, if not some certificated to teach that subject (League of Women Voters of Harford County,
1955).
53
Figure 8. Bel Air High School
Figure 8. A photograph of the new Bel Air High School prior to it receiving its first students in 1949. It was the first post-World War II school built in Harford County and was considered one of the most modern, state-of-the-art schools in the country (Roberty, 2001). It remained in use until 2010; it was torn down the next year upon the erection of a new building immediately adjacent to it. Taken from the Harford
County Directory, 1953; photocopy of the picture in possession of the Harford
County Public Library.
54
Figure 9. Aberdeen High School
Figure 9. The architectural drawing of the new Aberdeen High School, which
opened in 1953. It was built in the same wave of building high schools that
resulted in new schools in Bel Air, Edgewood, North Harford, and Havre de
Grace. It remained in use until 2004 when it was the first high school of the ones
listed above that was replaced with a modern building. Taken from the Harford
Democrat, 1951, July 20; photocopy of drawing in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
55
Not all of the school system’s responses to the Boston University study were as successful. Billett et al. (1946) cited the lack of proper administrative procedures and the failure of the HCPS central office to maintain adequate records. According to the man who became the HCPS Superintendent in 1970, this operational deficit only became worse in the decade after the study’s report. Throughout the 1950s, HCPS had one of the worse reputations in the state for its poorly-run central office.
Mandated paperwork was not submitted on time; even worse, bills were often not paid on time (Roberty, 2001).
The quality of education afforded the African-American students of Harford
County is the most glaring example of how HCPS did not respond to the findings of the Boston University study. The condition of the colored schools did not improve after Billett et al. (1946) designated all of them as being unsafe and lacking in resources and curricular opportunities. Improvements to the physical plants of the colored schools were not made in any sort of equitable way compared to the white schools. Bel Air High School received flood lights on its athletic field for nighttime games in the same year that the Ashbury Colored School requested that electricity be provided for their one-room schoolhouse (Spicer, 2007). Things were no better for colored schools from a curricular and instructional perspective. In 1952, the same year that the white high schools were providing four different paths of study for their students, the only course of study available for African-American students was the general curriculum, which included no foreign language, vocational, or advanced- level courses (League of Women Voters of Harford County, 1955). Materials of 56
instruction were almost non-existent at the colored schools; the teachers had to rely on sharing amongst themselves and on donations provided by the parents (Spicer,
2007).
HCPS was most obvious in its lack of response to the needs of African-
American students in its resistance to the racial integration of schools that was mandated by the Supreme Court of the United States in its decision in the case of
Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Through various actions of the Harford County
Board of Education and the Superintendent, including written policy statements opposing the integration of schools and numerous court cases in which HCPS was the defendant opposing individual African-American students’ with their NAACP representation, attempts to access white high schools, the schools of HCPS were not integrated until 1965—a full 11 years after the Brown decision (Spicer, 2007).
The Long-Term Response
Billett et al. (1946) presented a fairly damning critique of the Harford County
Public Schools; the initial response of the school system was of a mixed nature.
Issues regarding the quality of the schoolhouses and of the curriculum improved, while the administration of the system and the equitable treatment of African-
American students continued its negative trajectory. The study played an invaluable role in securing funding for modern high schools (Harford County Maryland Board of
Education, 1949) and in the creation of a modern curriculum (League of Women
57
Voters of Harford County, 1955). Did the improvements continue in the decades after the study and did HCPS ever address and correct its failures in the same decades?
Harford County has continued to experience massive student population growth for the past 50 years. Starting with a population of 6,851 students in HCPS schools in 1945, the school system had to adapt to three times that number over the next 20 years. The approximate number of students in HCPS schools in 1967 was
24,000 (Wright, 1967). By 1980, that number had grown to 32,000 students (Roberty,
2001).
A new Superintendent of Schools took over the reins of HCPS in the midst of this population explosion. Dr. Willis, superintendent since 1945, retired in 1970; taking his place was a former HCPS science teacher and central office administrator,
Dr. A. A. Roberty (Roberty, 2001). Looking back on his 18 years as superintendent
(Dr. Roberty retired in 1988) he identified the greatest challenge of his tenure as the securing of funding to build enough facilities to house this enormous amount of students (Roberty, 2001). Despite having state-of-the-art high schools in 1955, the zeal for maintaining this cutting-edge modernity declined through the 1960s and
1970s.
As in the early 1940s, when the population of Harford County grew by 55% over the course of a decade with only three small elementary schools being built
(Harford County Maryland Board of Education, 1949), the governmental funding sources for capital projects would not provide the funds to build schools to keep up with the student population. Despite growing by more than 20,000 students 58
throughout the 1960s and 1970s, only one new high school was built between 1954 and 1980, Joppatowne High School in 1972 (Roberty, 2001). According to Roberty
(2001), the county government provided little assistance in either providing money for building projects or in lobbying the state to provide construction funds. It was not until schools were busting at the seams, creating unsafe environments with large class and school sizes that the state finally started to fund school construction in Harford
County.
The result of this state money was 18 new schoolhouses being built between
1971 and 1980 (Wright, 1980). Among these 18 schools were two new high schools,
Fallston High School and C. Milton Wright High School, built to relieve the massive overcrowding of Bel Air High School, which had a student population of over 3,200 students in the 1970s (J. Mascari, personal communication, 2012). Additionally, multiple elementary schools, one middle school, Magnolia Middle in 1979, a special education school, John Archer School in 1975, and a vocational-technical high school, now known as Harford Vocational-Technical High School in 1978, were built
(Wright, 1980).
The HCPS operating budget, which saw little growth in the first decades after the Billett et al. (1946) study, continued to be among the lowest in the state. Roberty
(2001) noted that the per pupil expenditure figure for Harford County ranked as the seventh lowest in state out of 24 jurisdictions in 1945. This figure still remained as the seventh lowest when Dr. Roberty became superintendent in 1970 and when he retired in 1988. At the time of his interview in 2001, Roberty (2001) stated that the 59
per pupil expenditure figure finally changed rankings—for the worse (it was the third lowest).
Low education funding often equates to low teacher salaries; such was the case with HCPS teachers during this time period. Earning the lowest salary in the state in 1945 (Billett et al., 1946), HCPS teachers continued to lag throughout the
1960s and 1970s. In 1967, for example, an average HCPS teacher salary was approximately $5,800 (Wright, 1967); comparatively, the average teacher salary across the country at that same time was approximately $7,400 (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2007).
Roberty (2001) stated that the struggles for teacher pay continued throughout the 1970s and 1980s: “We put high emphasis on salaries at the expense of other things. Sometimes we didn’t buy the books we needed so we could pay good salaries.” Thus, even as HCPS teacher pay became competitive with surrounding jurisdictions, materials of instruction, textbooks, and other such purchases had to be deferred.
The 1990s and Beyond
HCPS experienced more leadership changes in the past 20 years than had been common in its previous 100 years of existence. Upon Dr. Roberty’s retirement in
1988, Dr. Raymond Keech, a school administrator from Michigan served two terms as Superintendent of Schools until 1996 (Roberty, 1988; Keech, 1996). Another
Michigan school administrator, Jeffrey Grotsky, took over the reins of HCPS in 1996,
60
only to have his contract bought out by the Harford County Board of Education in
1998, less than halfway through his four-year contract (The Baltimore Sun, 1998).
Jacqueline Haas was then appointed interim superintendent, receiving the permanent appointment a year later. She served until her sudden death on December 30, 2008
(Kohn & Madigan, 2009). After a six-month interim replacement, Robert Tomback, a former Area Superintendent in the Baltimore County Public School system, was appointed Superintendent of Schools, his term beginning on July 1, 2009 (Harford
County Public Schools, 2012b).
In the 1990s and 2000s, HCPS built four new elementary schools: Emmorton in 1994, Church Creek in 1994, Forest Lakes in 2000, and Red Pump in 2011 and one new middle/high school, Patterson Mill Middle/High School in 2007. In addition, four of the “modern” high schools built between 1949 and 1954 were either replaced or modernized: Aberdeen in 2004, North Harford in 2007, Bel Air in 2010, and
Edgewood in 2011 (Harford County Public Schools, 2012a).
In regard to its operating budget, HCPS has experienced the highs and lows associated with the economy as a whole. During the strong economies of the first half of the 2000s, teacher salaries increased nearly 20 percent; during the “Great
Recession” of the late 2000s, teachers went four years without any form of salary increase (Gallo & Vought, 2012).
Though HCPS continued to rank in the bottom-level in regard to teacher salaries and per pupil spending across the state of Maryland, HCPS students met with high levels of achievement. The state of Maryland was an early entrant into the first 61
wave of school reform in the late 1980s-early 1990s. The Maryland State Department of Education created the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program
(MSPAP), the cornerstone of which was a yearly student achievement assessment
(Maryland Department of Education, 2012b). HCPS students achieved scores well above the state average throughout most of the 1990s; indeed, HCPS was ranked fourth in the state out of 24 school systems for five years in a row from 1995-1998
(Libit, 1997). When the state of Maryland transitioned to the Maryland School
Assessment (MSA) program in response to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002,
HCPS students continued to earn scores that placed them in the top third across the state (Gallo, 2012a). All of this achievement came as HCPS ranked 17 out of 24 or lower in regard to per pupil spending (Libit, 1997).
62
Chapter V
Conclusions from the Study
Harford County Public Schools experienced many troughs and peaks in its financial and operational development in the 120-year span covered in this research.
That being said, what conclusions can be drawn from the examination of this development?
One clear conclusion is that HCPS had developed into an institution that was constantly in a reactive, as opposed to a proactive, state when it comes to aspects of its mission that involve the obtainment of funds. The safety and security of the students and staff were paramount components of a school system’s mission. A key component of being safe and secure was having schoolhouses and other facilities that meet capacity standards and have modern safeguards. Because of its difficulty in getting the necessary funds from the local government, HCPS had to compromise its commitment to safety and security many times over multiple decades by operating schoolhouses that were filled three times their capacity and failed to meet contemporary safety standards (Billett et al., 1946; Roberty, 2001).
The other main mission of a school system was to provide first-class instruction so that all students could learn and grow; again, HCPS, because of funds not being made available to it, could not be proactive in providing this service in many occasions. Textbooks and materials of instruction could not be bought because the county spent the least amount of money on these items of any other county in the
63
state (Billett et al., 1946). Computers could not be put into schools at a rate conducive to their inclusion in high-quality instruction, because funds had to be diverted into teacher’s salaries in order for those salaries not to be the lowest in the state (Roberty,
2001). Students had classes in a locker room with no desks or chairs, working on the floor, because their high school had 2,000 more students than it was built to hold (J.
Mascari, personal communication, 2012). The best ideas and plans to provide top- notch instruction with appropriate tools could not be implemented; instead, HCPS
“made-do” with what they had until it got to an unsustainable breaking point. Once these instructional situations got beyond repair and damage was done to student achievement was when the money was allocated. HCPS was in a consistent pattern of reaction instead of being proactive.
These previous two conclusions led to a third conclusion; namely, the Harford
County government lacked the political will to provide the support to the school system that it needed. This was best exemplified by the County Commissioners insisting that the Harford County Board of Education persuade the electorate to support the passing of the bonds for school construction after the Boston University study (Harford County Maryland Board of Education, 1949). Even with all of the damning conclusions presented by Billett et al. (1946), the local government was still unwilling to take the steps necessary to support the school system at the most basic of levels. Indeed, the Harford County government continued to fund HCPS at one of the lowest levels in the state in the 40 years after the study—the same as it did in the 40 years before the study (Billett et al., 1946; Wright, 1967). 64
Limitations of the Study
As this study focused on one American public school system during one fixed period of time, the facts that made up and the conclusions that were drawn from this study cannot be generalized to other American public school systems. This study did not provide a representative description of the development of any public school system beyond Harford County Public Schools.
A further limitation of this study was that it is not designed to be a comprehensive, exhaustive examination of the history of Harford County Public
Schools. Rather, its intent was to provide a broad overview of the financial and operational development of HCPS over a lengthy period of time. Accordingly, this study was not intended to serve as the definitive statement of HCPS history. As this was the first attempt to begin the task of writing the system’s life story, it is beginning in small steps that are suited to this format.
Recommendations for Future Study
As with any beginning study of a new topic, many questions were raised that were not on the initial agenda of study. Future research could be conducted to clarify and extend the discoveries that were initially uncovered with this first attempt.
First, a comparative analysis of HCPS’ development to other public school systems in Maryland could provide a wealth of information regarding common stages of growth among school systems, as well as identifying areas of development about
65
which each system could learn from the successes and mistakes from each other’s histories.
Focusing just on Harford County, this history could be extended to include the events of the past 25 years in more detail, thus providing more support, or lack thereof, to the findings of this study. Considering the technological and informational advancements within those 25 years, there will be more data than ever to examine regarding the most recent history of HCPS. This would be a monumental task, worthy of its own lengthy study; however, such a study will be more appropriate from a historical perspective with the passing of time.
One common thread throughout this study was the positive and negative interactions between HCPS and the local Harford County government. Since both organizations were so intertwined, a historical study of the actions of the Harford
County governmental entities as they related to their workings with HCPS could provide needed insight into the rationale behind fiscal and policy decisions. This could not only uncover valuable information and lessons about governmental/educational relationships, but could help to even out any sort of favorable bias toward HCPS as opposed to the Harford County government that this study may present.
As a school system, HCPS should consider authorizing another top-to-bottom study conducted by a qualified third-party, similar to the study completed by Boston
University in 1946. Such a study would provide the leadership of HCPS with valuable information as to how the system could improve or is performing successfully; 66
moreover, it would produce objective data with which the Board of Education could educate the public and the local politicians as to the system’s needs and areas of deficit.
Along that same end of capturing essential data regarding the operation, the funding, and the performance of HCPS, the school system should consider compiling its historical data and making this compilation available to the public. Patterns of success and areas of underperformance would be easily visible if such information was organized and published, creating a tool that could be used for the betterment of the school system.
Closing Thoughts
This study opened with statements supporting the need and the value of historical study as it can help individuals, organizations, and institutions learn from the successes and failures of past actions and decisions (American Historical
Association, 2007). It is impossible to know if the many leaders of Harford County
Public Schools over the past 100 years studied the history of their school system, just as it is impossible to know if the other power-players, government officials and community members, similarly studied this history. What is clear, however, is that the current and future leaders of HCPS can use the lessons gleaned from this study to be proactive in avoiding the mistakes and in planning toward the successes that their predecessors made. Here’s hoping that they do.
67
References
Aberdeen Proving Ground History. (2011.). Retrieved from the official homepage of
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland and Army Management Installation
Command website: http://www.apg.army.mil/apghome/sites/about/history.cfm
American Historical Association. (2007, July 19). The study of history in schools: A
report to the American historical association by the committee of seven.
Retrieved from
http://www.historians.org/pubs/archives/CommitteeofSeven/ReportValue.cfm
Architects’ drawing of the new Aberdeen High School. (1951, July 20). [Clipping
from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy in possession of the Harford
County Public Library.
Billett, R. O., Blair, H. B., Sullivan, H. B., & Yeo, J. W. (1946). A survey of the
public schools of Harford County, Maryland. Bel Air, MD: Harford County,
Maryland Board of Education.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
Carr, E. (1961). What is history? New York: Random House.
Central Consolidated School scene of cornerstone laying. (1950, June 30). [Clipping
from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy in possession of the Harford
County Public Library.
Charnock, J. T. (2006). Mt. Horeb: The little white schoolhouse on Little Deer Creek,
from small schools to megaschools: The sad story. Tucson, AZ: Wheatmark.
68
Churchville School pupils in 1912. (1951, August 24). [Clipping from The Aegis, a
Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy in possession of the Harford County Public
Library.
Education-Portal.com. (2012). Hot topics in education. Retrieved from the
Education-Portal.com website:
http://education-portal.com/article_directory/Hot_Topics_in_Education.html
Everstine, C. N. (1980). The General Assembly of Maryland 1634-1776.
Charlottesville, VA: The Michie Company.
Everstine, C. N. (1984). The General Assembly of Maryland 1850-1920.
Charlottesville, VA: The Michie Company.
Far cry from our modern school houses. (1951, July 13). [Clipping from The Aegis, a
Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy in possession of the Harford County Public
Library.
Fischel, W. (2009). Making the grade: The economic evolution of American school
districts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
400 attend colored school site meeting. (1948, January). [Clipping from The Aegis, a
Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy in possession of the Harford County Public
Library.
Gallo, M. (2012a, July 11). Harford’s state test scores continue to improve. [Clipping
from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Retrieved from the
exploreharford.com website:
69
http://www.baltimoresun.com/explore/harford/news/ph-ag-msa-scores-0711-
20120710,0,4612710.story
Gallo, M. (2012b, June 14). Harford teacher’s union opposes job cuts.[Clipping from
The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Retrieved from the exploreharford.com
website: http://www.baltimoresun.com/explore/harford/news/ph-ag-teacher-
reaction-0615-20120613,0,2272884.story
Gallo, M., & Vought, A. (2012, June 13). Harford school system settles with
teachers, other employees. [Clipping from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD
newspaper]. Retrieved from the exploreharford.com website:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/explore/harford/news/ph-ag-teacher-contract-
settlement-0613-20120611,0,5933493.story
Gay, L., Mills, G., & Airasian, P. (2006). Educational research: Competencies for
analysis and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Grotsky, rhymes with Trotsky, superintendent fired: Once again, Harford operates
like the former Soviet Union. (1998, March 18). [Clipping from The
Baltimore Sun newspaper. Retrieved from The Baltimore Sun website:
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1998-03-18/news/1998077029_1_grotsky-
harford-county-superintendent
Harford County Directory: A reference book of history, businesses, and general
information. (1953). Baltimore: State Directories Publishing Company.
Harford County Public Schools. (2012a). About Harford County public schools.
Retrieved from http://www.hcps.org/aboutus/default.aspx 70
Harford County Public Schools. (2012b). HCPS superintendent of schools. Retrieved
from
http://www.hcps.org/departments/publicinformation/NewSuperintendent.aspx
Harford County Maryland Board of Education. (1949). The most important job of any
generation is taking care of the next generation. Copy in possession of the
Harford County Public Library.
Harrison, E. S. (2005). The history of Kyle, Texas public schools: 1911-1967
(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com
Historical story of Harford’s educational system: Public schools 1900-1919 (No. 12).
(1950a, April 14). [Clipping from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper].
Copy in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
Historical story of Harford’s educational system: Public schools 1910-1920 (No. 13).
(1950b, April 21). [Clipping from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper].
Copy in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
Historical story of Harford’s educational system: Public schools 1920-1930 (No. 14).
(1950c, April 28). [Clipping from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper].
Copy in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
Historical story of Harford’s educational system: Public schools 1930-1950 (No. 15).
(1950d, May 5). [Clipping from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy
in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
Hoffschwelle, M. S. (2003). About the Rosenwald Schools (Rev. ed. 2012).
Washington, DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation. Retrieved from 71
http://www.preservationnation.org/travel-and-sites/sites/southern-
region/rosenwald-schools/
Hosanna School. (1995). [Clipping from The Aegis, a Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy
in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
Jones, C. C. (2003). The restless giant of Harford County. Bel Air, MD: self-
published.
Keech, R.H. (1996). BeeLine. Report from the Board of Education meeting, Harford
County Public Schools, Bel Air, MD.
Kohn, D. & Madigan, N. (2009, January 1). Jacqueline C. Haas, head of Harford
schools for a decade, dies at 59. The Baltimore Sun newspaper. Retrieved
from the Baltimore Sun website: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2009-01-
01/news/0812310222_1_superintendent-harford-county-haas
League of Women Voters of Harford County. (1955). A survey of Harford County
public schools. Copy in possession of the Harford County Public Library.
Lee, J. (2000). Portrait of a black educator, the struggle continues. Havre de Grace,
MD: J & E Publishing, Co.
Libit, H. (1997, December 14). MSPAP scores please Harford educators: Better
instruction is noted as performance improves countywide. The Baltimore Sun
newspaper. Retrieved from the Baltimore Sun website:
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1997-12-14/news/1997348035_1_harford-
schools-maryland-school-performance-middle-school
72
Maryland Department of Education. (2012a). Maryland’s race to the top (RTTT).
Retrieved from http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/programs/
race_to_the_top
Maryland Department of Education (2012b). Testing: Overview. Retrieved from
http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/testing/msa/?WBCMODE=Pre
sentationUnpublished%25%3e%25%3e%25%25%25%3e%25%25%25%3e
Maryland State Archives. (2010). Harford County, Maryland: Historical Chronology.
Retrieved from
http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/36loc/ha/chron/html/hachron.html
Merryman, V. (1994, July 26). Harford’s living treasures: An oral history. Harford
County Public Library.
Raymond, J. H. (2004). A history of American Indian tribal colleges (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com
Roberts, J. (2002). The new history of the world (3rd Ed.). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Roberty, A.A. (1988, May 22). BeeLine. Report from the Board of Education
meeting, Harford County Public Schools, Bel Air, MD.
Roberty, A. A. (2001, June 18). Harford’s living treasures: An oral history. Harford
County Public Library.
Spicer, P. P. (2007, Winter/Spring). Decade of delay: The desegregation of Harford
County Public Schools-Part 1 (No. 105). Harford Historical Bulletin, The
Historical Society of Harford County, Inc., Bel Air, MD. 73
The builder proved he could do it. (n.d.). [Clipping from The Harford Gazette, a Bel
Air, MD newspaper]. Copy in possession of the Harford County Public
Library.
The Freedmen’s Bureau: 1865-1872. (1969). Field office records of the Bureau of
Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands, The Freedmen’s Bureau (M752,
74 rolls). National Archives Trust Fund Board: African American Heritage,
Washington, DC. Retrieved from the National Archives website:
http://www.archives.gov/research/african-americans/freedmens-bureau/#state
United States Department of Education. (2012). Elementary and Secondary
Education Act. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/esea
United States Department of Education. (2012). Race to the top fund. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html
United States Department of Education. (2007). Estimated average salary of teachers
in public elementary and secondary schools: Selected years 1959-1960
through 2005-2006. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_075.asp
Washburn, D. (2005, Summer/Fall). The colored schools of Harford County: Separate
and equal? Part 1 (No. 101). Harford Historical Bulletin, The Historical
Society of Harford County, Inc., Bel Air, MD.
Washburn, D. (2006, Winter/Spring). The colored schools of Harford County:
Separate and equal? Part 2 (No. 102). Harford Historical Bulletin, The
Historical Society of Harford County, Inc., Bel Air, MD. 74
When readin’, ‘ritin’ and ‘rithmetic ruled (n.d.). [Clipping from The Harford Gazette,
a Bel Air, MD newspaper]. Copy in possession of the Harford County Public
Library.
White, W. H. H. (1918). Testing the efficiency of the school system of Harford
County, Maryland by a comparative study with nine other counties in the
United States (Master’s thesis).
Wright, C. M. (1967). Our Harford heritage: A history of Harford County, Maryland.
Glen Burnie, MD: French-Bray Printing.
Wright, C. M. (1980). Our Harford heritage: A history of Harford County, Maryland
(Rev. ed.). Glen Burnie, MD: French-Bray Printing.
75
Appendix A
Harford County Public Schools
County Examiners/Superintendents of Schools*
Name Years Served
Rev. Thomas S.C. Smith 1867-1869
Robert Henry 1869-1876
William H. Harlan 1876-1882
Noble L. Mitchell 1882-1887
John D. Worthington 1887-1899
Thomas C. Galbreath 1899-1902
Charles T. Wright 1902-1915
C. Milton Wright 1915-1945
Charles W. Willis 1945-1970
Alphonso A. Roberty 1970-1988
Ray Keech 1988-1996
Jeffery R. Grotsky 1996-1998
Jacqueline H. Haas 1998-2008
Patricia L. Skebeck (interim) 2009
Robert M. Tomback 2009-present
Note. * The title of the position of the leader of the school system changed in 1916 from County Examiner to Superintendent of Schools.
76
Appendix B
Selected One/Two Room White Schoolhouses in Harford County
Name of School Year Built Name of School Year Built
Prospect 1830 Mill Green 1893 Dry Branch 1864 Upper Cross Roads 1898 Franklin 1866 Castleton 1898 Susquehanna Hall 1867 Shawsville 1899 Rock Spring 1867 High Point 1901 Bel Air 1867 Abingdon 1901 Emmorton 1868 Taylor 1901 Lapidum 1870 Mount Pleasant 1902 Kirkwood 1870 Rutledge 1905 Calvary 1870 Harford Furnace 1906 Forest Hill 1870 Thomas Run 1906 Fallston 1870 Mechanicsville 1870 Abingdon 1871 Harford Seminary 1871 Chrome Hill 1873 Davis’ Corner 1873 Edgewood 1873 Upper Cross Roads 1873 Magnolia 1873 Cooptown 1873 Angleside 1881 Madonna 1881 Fairview 1881 Hopes 1882 Black Horse 1883 Cunningham’s 1884 Cross Roads Robin Hood 1884 Rutledge 1884 Mt. Vernon 1885 Heaps Cross Roads 1885 North Bend 1885 Locust Hill 1889 Note. Taken from Our Harford Heritage: A history of Harford County, Maryland,
Wright, C. M. (1967). 77
Appendix C
Selected One/Two Room Colored Schoolhouses
Name of School Year Built
Hosanna 1867
Green Spring 1867
McComas Institute 1867
Muttonsburg 1874
Hopewell 1874
Michaelsville 1874
Abingdon 1874
Bel Air 1874
Hendon’s Hill 1874
Asbury 1874
Clarke’s Chapel 1874
Fallston 1874
Fairview 1874
Upper Cross Roads 1874
La Grange 1874
Havre de Grace 1874
Churchville 1879
Note. Taken from Our Harford Heritage: A history of Harford County, Maryland,
Wright, C. M. (1967). 78
Appendix D
One/Two Room Schoolhouses Closed by Consolidated Schools
Highland Consolidated (1907) Minefield (1907) Heaps Cross Roads (1907) Sylvan Retreat (1907) Rocks (1923) Clermont Mills (1934) Mount Pleasant (1936) Mill Green (1936) Cherry Hill (1938) Last Chance (1939) Fairview (1939) Enterprise (1939) Summitt Hall (1945)
Dublin Consolidated (1915) Scarborough (1915) Rock Hill (1922) Macton (1927) Mount Vernon (1931) Susquehanna Hall (1940)
Churchville Consolidated (1931) Calvary (1931) Glenville (1931) Locust Hill (1931) Aldino (1931) Rock Run (1944) Thomas Run (1945)
Bel Air Consolidated (1919) Dunkale (1919) Angleside (1937) Bleak Heights (1945) Billingslea (1945)
Forest Hill Consolidated (1927) High Point (1927) Hickory (1944) Chestnut Hill (1946)
Old Post Road Consolidated (1931) Joppa (1931) Van Bibber (1931) Abingdon (1931)
Edgewood Heights Consolidated (1919) Gunpowder Neck (1919) Edgewood (1925) Edgewood Arsenal (1942) Magnolia (1946)
Aberdeen Consolidated (1918) Boothby Hill (1918) Oakland (1919) Boden (1919) Michaelsville (1919) Union (1923) Robin Hood (1929) Forest Institute (1936)
Havre de Grace Consolidated (1929) Prospect (1929) Harford Seminary (1929) Lapidum (1945)
79