of the same quality, but out of class there seemed to be very little general intercourse,-girls speaking to girls, and boys to boys. At recess the sexes are generally separated, the boys occupying the basement, and the girls the upper part of the buildings.

We were unable to obtain any information as to the conditions, if any, under which co-education becomes unsuccessful. A teacher of experience, a principal of a large public High School, gave to the writer an interesting comparison between boys and girls. When the girls enter the High School, they are more mature, more honest in work, with greater power of concentration, and are more apt in acquiring information. This lasts for a year or two; then the boys develop, and become at 16 thinking beings. At 18 years of age the girls' work in general becomes worthless, other interests claiming their attention. Boys excel in mathematics, economics, and civics; girls hold their own in languages and history, and many do well in science. Girls always do rote work

better than their brothers.

When we come to the University the question of co-education assumes an entirely different aspect in America; whether students of both sexes, of the college age, should be educated together in the lecture room and laboratory is, even at the present day, the subject of warm discussion, and one on which prominent educators hold utterly diverse opinions.

This seems specially strange when co-education in the schools has been the custom for many years. The subject was discussed at the University Con

vocation of the State of New York, in July, 1891. Some extracts from the record of the proceedings will perhaps give the varying arguments from the American standpoint.

President Taylor, of Vassar, declares :— 1

"Without any question, it seems to me that there is more danger that in a co-educational College there will be a certain loss of influence that is needed about the life of almost every young girl to encourage the more refined feelings and tendencies of life, and a greater temptation, than can possibly exist in the separate College. There is a feeling in

my own mind that in these years of College life there is a certain tranquillity that enters into the life that is separated from its general social conditions; a certain restfulness that comes to both boy and girl in just that separation, and a certain lack of restfulness that comes to both boy and girl in the other relations. And I believe that it is of immense value in this American life of ours, if we can give such a period of tranquillity, by this means, to both boy and girl."

On the other hand, the upholders of co-education, such as Ex-President White, of Cornell, declared at the same meeting that co-education in Universities had been successful in practice, and that evil results had not followed. A Boston lady, Miss Alla W. Foster, asserted, "Co-education is an unqualified success at Michigan and at Boston University." The writer visited the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, as described in a previous chapter, where some account is given of the social life of the students. From all we could gather in that institution, there have been no difficulties, although the students do not live in dormitories (College halls), but are free to reside where they like. We

1 Regent's Bulletin, 1893, pp. 426-7.

were informed that after graduation, students not unfrequently marry; but this is not considered as a drawback, but rather as an advantage to the system. All the Western State Universities are co-educational, and so is the new University of Chicago. At the latter, however, there are to be special halls of residence for women, with a responsible Lady Principal; social life here will probably be modelled somewhat on the Eastern type. In the article dealing with the Harvard Annex (page 118) reference has been made to the feeling at Cambridge (Mass.) against women students attending lectures with the men, but we were unable to ascertain the reasons for this.

CONCLUSION

T may perhaps be advisable to select from the

IT

main body of the Report those features of the American educational system which seem to the writer most worthy of study by English educators.

Whatever may be the differences between England and America in regard to local government, one conclusion at least may be drawn from the phenomena of the American public school system. It is that the combination of local and central authorities is absolutely necessary. The best proof of this is found in the Massachusetts system; the formation of the High School Board of Minnesota, the revival of the University of the State of New York, illustrate it. It may be noted that the powers of the Central Boards are advisory and supervisory rather than compulsory; the influence of these bodies on secondary education in particular has been excellent.1 The Central State Boards generally have been established in order to make up for the deficiencies of local bodies, and many American teachers desire that the powers of these central authorities should be increased. The reason for this is the evil influence

1 See Bureau of Education Report, 1889-90.

of politics in local government. The corruption of municipal life in America is, however, due so entirely to Transatlantic conditions of foreign immigration, the spoils system, etc., etc., that no inference can fairly be drawn from American experience in this matter: we can only say that political influence does seriously injure the public schools in the United States, especially in the great cities; we cannot say that the same evil would occur in England, for our political life is entirely different.

Another conclusion may perhaps be drawn safely: it is that small areas ad hoc are bad in the organization of a public school system. The area should be the same as for other purposes of local government, and should be moderately large.

American systems throw little light on the vexed question as to whether Boards should be elected for educational purposes only, or whether Town and County Councils should control education also. It can only be said that the former is almost universally the case. In Buffalo, where the schools are said to be very bad,1 the Town Council governs them, but this is an isolated instance. Some of the best Central Boards are those in which teachers are represented, as for instance the Indiana Board, and the High School Board of Minnesota. No conclusions can be drawn as to the relative merits of the methods of popular election and nomination in the formation of educational committees: the Massachusetts State Board, which is excellent, is

1 Dr. Rice, in The Forum.