Ttu Be0001 001076.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
U. S . DEPARHiENT OF' INTER I OR STATUS OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGE INSTRUCTOR PArJPHLET No . 20 P4mphlet N..o. 20 September, 1931 Status of the Junior College Instructor c.By ]OHN T . WAHLQUIST·., University of Utah, Salt LaJte City, Utah . ~TED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Ray Lyman Wilbur, Secretary OFFICE OF EDUCATION ' , , ' • • , William John Cooper, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFfiCE \V ASHINGTON 19ll J'Qr eaie by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. Price 5 cents \ STATUS OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGE INSTRUCTOR CONTENTS.-!. The problem and methods of lnvestlgation-11. The social statns of the junior college Instructor-III. The economic statns of the junior college lnstructor IV. The professional status of the junior college instructor-V. The legal statns of the junior college Instructor-VI. Summary. I. The Problem and Methods of Investigation The setting of the problem.-The editor of a brief statement of current educational readjustments at the higher levels has said: " The reforms which are taking place at the junior college level are doubtless more significant and certainly more spectacular than in either the senior college or the graduate school." 1 A second author ity, after extended field experience, has said: "All together, the jun ior college movement seems to me to have more implications for good in the fields of both secondary and higher education than any other single proposal which is now before us for consideration." 2 The junior college is a new unit, admittedly in the experimental stage. As such it has not received the critical attention given to other units in the educational scheme. Although advocated in the ory by Harper as early as 1892,3 the actual development has been of far more recent date. Harper's influence is seen in the establishment of the first public junior college in the United States, at Joliet, Ill.4. Lange was largely responsible for the movement on the Pacific coast. The Fresno courses were established in 11907.s From these begin nin~s the movement has become national. In 1927 Koos reported 325 institutions in 39 States, 284 of the 325 enrolling 35,630 students, an increase of 121 per cent over the enroll ment in 207 institutions in 1922.6 Whitney, in 1928, found 328 insti tutions in 39 States, the District of Columbia, and the Philippine Islands. 7 The movement has been most pronounced in California. After a most careful study of the California situation Eells states: 1 W. S. Gray: Educational readjustments at the junior college level. School and Society, 80: 136 (Aug. 3, 1929). 'G. F. Zook: Is the junior college a menace or a boon? School Review, 37: 425 (June, 1929). • W. R. Harper: The situation of the junior colleges. .In The trend In higher education. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1905. Ch. XXIII, pp. 378-390. • F. L. Whitney: The junior college ln America. Greeley, Colo., Colorado State Teachers College, 1928. P. 2. • C. L. L!ttel : "The junior college." Proceedings of the twelfth annual meeting of the Northwest Association of Secondary and Higher Schools, Apr. 9-11, 1929. Ph. Soulon, secretary, Moscow, Idaho. , • Leonard V. Koos: Recent growth of the junior college. School Review, 86: 256-266 ' (April, 1928). • F. L. Whitney, op. cit., p. 8. 1 2 STATUS 01!' THE JUNIOR OOLLEGE INSTRUCTOR " The facts * * * point toward a probable junior-college enroll ment of at least 20,000 1!-nd perhaps 30,000 ormor_e by 1934-35; of at least 35,000 and possibly 50,000 or more by 1939-40."8 Although the California movement likely will continue to set the pace, we may reasonably expect giant strides elsewhere, especially in the larger municipalities.9 In the face of such rapid expansion the major studies in the field have been concerned primarily with organization and administration. Studies of the faculty, on a national scale, have been incidental and consequently, piecemeal in nature. McDowell found the. training of junior-college instructors inferior to that of the instructors in regular college or university.10 The monumental study by Koos 11 included a chapter which dealt with personnel, teaching load, and remunera tion of the staff. Elsewhere12 he recounts at length an attempt to determine the relative efficiency of instruction in the junior college and university, giving assurance "of the ultimate efficacy of instruc" tional work in the junior college." A theoretical statement of faculty qualifications based on California data is given in the book edited by Proctor.13 Whitney studied standards, including statutes extant, and formulated tentative standards for the State of Colorado.u A few isolated studies of merit have been made. Martens reports a questionnaire study,u in which California public junior-college teachers were asked to list (1) colleges and universities attended, with dates and length of time spent in each; (2) degrees received, with dates and names of institutions granting each degree; and, (3) itemized statement of educational experience, including nature of work done and length of time spent in each position. Returns were made by 544 teachers in 26 junior colleges. This has been followed • W. C. Eells : Trends In junior college enrollment In California. California Quarterly of Secondary Education, 4: 59-69 (October, 1928). • G. F. Zook: Is the junior college a menance or a boon? School Review, 37: 415-425 (;Tune, 1929), and J". R. Reed and S. M. N. Marrs, Texas Municipal J"unior Colleges, Bulletin State Department of Education, Vol. V, No. 5 (;Tune, 1929). Austin, Tex., State Department of Education, 1929. 10 F. M. McDowell: The junior college. Bureau of Education Bulletin, No. 35, 1919. Washington, Government Printing Oftice, 1919. 11 L. V. Koos: The junior college. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota, 1924. Vol I, Ch. XIV. 11 L. V. Koos: The junior-college movement. Boston, Ginn & Co., 1926. Ch. IV. 11 Charles S. Morris: The junior-college faculty. In The junior college, Its organization and administration. Edited by W. M. Proctor. Stanford University, Stanford University Press, 1928. :u F. L. Whitney: The junior college In America. Greeley, Colorado State Teachers Col lege, 1928, and --·- Present standards for junior colleges. School Review, 36: 593-603 (October, 1928). 111 Elise H. Martens: Training and experience of teachers In the junior colleges of Cali fornia. California Quarterly of Secondary Education, 4: 51-58 (October, 1928). STATUS OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGE. INSTRUCTOR 3 by a more recent study also limited to California.18 A committee submitted a report containing similar data to the Educational Coun cil of the Iowa State Teachers' Association.Y The recent study of municipal junior colleges in Texas devotes a section to a study of instructors, including subjects taught, teacher load, hour-teaching load, training, and salaries.18 Haggerty made a study of standards established by various agencies affecting the junior college teacher.19 Although the junior-college instructor has received limited study, there has been common understanding that the teacher is the key to the situatiqn. From the very beginning such statements as the fol lowing have been common: "The major concern of the faculty in .the junior-college years should be with teaching rather than with research such as may be a legitimate object of emphasis in upper division instruction." 20 In fact, one of the early arguments for the junior college was that "the more seasoned high-school instructors selected for junior-college work are more effective teachers than are the younger, less-experienced instructors often employed in colleges and universities." 21 AB a matter· of fact, information concerning. the teachers actually engaged in molding ·the new institution has been too fragmentary and disconnected to permit satisfactory generalization. Definitions.-For the purpose of this study the term "junior col lege " is interpreted as meaning an institution administered as a separate unit, whether connected with another institution or not, if it uses the name junior college or seeks recognition under statutes or standards of accrediting bodies as a junior college. Similarly, by junior-college instructor is meant an individual de voting time to the actual work of teaching in such an institution. Unless administrative heads were actually teaching they were ex cluded from the study.22 The problem.-This study is an attempt to determine the social, economic, professional, and legal status of the junior-college instruc tor in the United States. 1• Florence Evett : The status of the junior-college teacher in California_ M. A. thesis. Los Angeles, University of Southern California, 1929. (Unavailable.) 11 A study of junior colleges In Iowa. Bulletin of the Educational Council of the Iowa State Teachers Association, Des Moines (November, 1927). ta J. R. Reid and S. M. N. Marrs: Texas Municipal Junior College. Bulletin State De partment of Education. Vol. V, No. 5, Sec. III, pp. 32-48 (June, 1929). Austin, Tex., State Department of Education, 1929. 10M. E. Haggerty : Faculty qualifications for junior college. North Central Association Quarterly, 8: S00-309 (December, 1928). *'F. W. Thonras: Fundamental concepts underlying junior-college education. California Quarterly of Secondary Education, 4 : 14-20. n L. V. Koos : The junior-college movement. Boston, Ginn & Co., 1926, P. 64 . ., Those Interested In the work of administrative heads may wish to refer to R. E. Green's Administrative dean of jubllc junior colleges, in School Executives Magazine, 49 : 122--124 (November, 1929). ·4 STATUS · Ol!' ·THE JUNIOR OOLLEGE INSTRUCTOR (a) Social status is: interpreted to include such items as age, na tivity, family, sex, and marriage. (~) ·Economic status is construed to involve salary and additional earnings. (c) Professional status includes preparation, major and minor studies, courses taught, teaching load, professional plans, experi ence; and publications. (d) Legal status is expanded to include laws enacted by legis latures, certificates issued by duly commissioned boards, and stand ards adopted by recognized accrediting agencies.