Introduction     Photo Gallery     Documents     Acknowledgments
Reform of NYC Public Schools, 1896

Source: Department of Education. City of New York. First Annual Report of the City Superintendent of Schools to the Board of Education for the Year Ending July 31, 1899. With Report of the Committee on School System Prefixed (New York, 1899), p. 135-6. NYC Board of Education Archives, Milbank Memorial Library, Teachers College, Columbia University.

The time has arrived when the compulsory education law should be amended with regard to the compulsory school age. As the law stands, all children between the ages of eight and twelve are required to attend school all of the time the public schools are in session from October to June. From twelve to fourteen, children may go to work provided they attend school eighty days during the school year. This latter provision is in conflict with the factory and other laws regulating child labor, which forbid the employment of children under fourteen years of age. In my judgment, the Board of Education of The City of New York should take the lead in this matter and secure legislation to make the compulsory school age extend from six to fourteen. No intelligent man can for a moment doubt the benefits that would accrue to the community and to the individual were all children from six to fourteen subjected to the beneficent influences of well regulated schools. I estimate that there are about 40,000 children in the city between six and eight years of age who are not attending any school. The objection will be raised that there is not room in the present school buildings for these children and that it is not wise to place on the statute book a law which cannot be enforced. The answer to this objection is two-fold: first, never before was so large a sum of money available for building purposes, and hence we may hope that before many years the supply will be equal to the demand; second, it is always possible to double the number of children in any school by extending the school day to half past four in the afternoon, doubling the number of teachers, and having one set of pupils with their teachers come in the forenoon and another set with their teachers come in the afternoon. This is not, of course, an ideal arrangement, even though it may well be doubted whether it is wise to keep children under eight more than four hours a day in school. The scheme has, however, the overwhelming advantage that it enables us at once to accommodate all pupils seeking admission to the schools. I tried the plan on a large scale in Brooklyn and found it as satisfactory as could well be expected—more satisfactory than any other plan, except that of providing ample school accommodations. With satisfactory results Borough Superintendent Ward has largely extended the field of its operation within the past year. If we cannot teach all children between the hours of nine and three, the next best thing is to teach half of them between half past eight and twelve, and the other half between one and half past four.