Table Of ContentCOPYRIGHTED
by
AGATHA TOWNSEND
19 HO
THE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL IN NEW JERSEY EDUCATION
by
Agatha Townsend
This dissertation has been approved for final
examination by the student's Dissertation Com
mittee whose written approval is on file in the
Advanced School.
Dissertation Committee
Edward H. Reisner, Chairman
Erling M. Hunt, Member of Committee
' R. Freeman Butts, Member of Committee
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the require
ments for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in the Faculty of Philosophy, Columbia University.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author desires to acknowledge her sincere and grateful
appreciation to Professor Edward H. Reisner, who guided and counseled
with the writer throughout the development of the study. To Professor
Erling M. Hunt and to Professor R. Freeman Butts, the writer is deeply
indebted for their wise criticism and advice, and no less for their
understanding and encouragement.
Especial acknowledgment is due to the invaluable assistance given
so generously by Dr. Arthur E. Traxler, Associate Director of the
Educational Records Bureau, through whose inspiration the ".tudy was
attempted, who spared neither time nor effort in affording the author
opportunities for his personal judgment and for contact with men and
women loading the independent schools of the country. If space per
mitted, it would be just and desirable to list the entire school
membership of the Bureau, for experience with this group of institutions
ha3 been the major equipment of the author in undertaking her own
research. Grateful mention should at least be made of Dr. A.L. Lincoln
of the Lawrenceville School, Dr. William S. Litterick of The Peddie
School, Mr. Henry Adams of The Collegiate School, formerly of Blair
Academy, Dr. Allan V. Heely of The Association of Independent Schools
of New Jorsey, headmaster of The Lawrenceville School, and Mr. Clarke
W. Slade of Olney, Maryland, formerly headmaster of The Slade School.
The author's debt to the individual schools in New Jersey is, of course,
the whole meaning of the study, and the cooperation and support of this
group has been the real inspiration of the work.
Acknowledgment should also be made to Dr. John Bosshart, Commissioner
of Education of the State of New Jersey and to the staff of the State
Department of Education, particularly to Dr. Heber H. Ryan of the Division
of Secondary Education, Miss Edna Miller of that Division, and to Mr.
Thomas H. Durrell', Assistant Commissioner in the Division of Elementary
Education. To Mr. Lawrence S. Chase, Superintendent of Schools, Essex
County, New Jersey, the writer owes especial gratitude.
The author owes a great debt of appreciation to the staff of the
Educational Records Bureau whoso constant interest and oncouragement
has rendered the task easier of accomplishment. The assistance of
Mrs. Victor A. Nappi and that of Mrs. Robert F. Westall and Miss
Leonette Vanderhost should receive special mention.
Finally, the writer wishes to give particular thanks to her mother,
Blanohe Buckbee Townsend, for her encouragement and help at every step
of the way. Perhaps it may give her some slight pleasure to reflect
that this is the second doctoral dissertation to be thus dedicated.
THE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL IN NEW JERSEY EDUCATION
CHAPTER I - The Challenge of the Independent School in New Jer
CHAPTER II - Why Did the Private School Survive?
CHAPTER III - The Making of the Independent School
CHAPTER IV - Students and Seleotion
CHAPTER V - How Do Independent Sohools Educate?
CHAPTER VI - Measurement and Guidance
CHAPTER VII - New Jersey Schools Look to the Future
CHAPTER VIII - Independent Schools in New Jersey Education
ALPHABETICAL LIST OF NEW JERSEY INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIONS
CHAPTER IV
Elementary School Cumulative Record Card and
Transfer Form
Independent (Secondary) School Cumulative Record
Card
Table I - Total Scores on the American Council
psychological Examination, 1947 College Freshman
Edition, for 472 Pupils in Grade XII of Twelve New
Jersey Independent Schools Participating in the
Fall, 1947, Educational Records Bureau Program
Table II - Intelligence Quotients of 118 Pupils in
Grade V of Nine New Jersey Independent Schools
Giving the Kuhlmann-Anderson Intelligence Tests
(Fifth Edition) in the Fall, 1947, Educational
Records Bureau Program
CHAPTER V
Table III - The "Majority" Curriculum of Thirty-
Five New Jersey Independent Secondary Sohools
CHAPTER VI
Figure 1 - Profile of the Median Grade Ratings
on the Metropolitan Achievement Test, Form R,
for Fifth-Grade Classes in New Jersey Independent
Schools Participating in the Spring, 1948, Edu
cational Records Bureau Program
Table IV - Distributions of Grade Ratings for
Arithmetic Fundamentals, Test 3, Metropolitan
Achievement Test, Form R, for Fifth-Grade
Classes in Nine New Jersey Independent Sohools
Tested Spring, 1948
Table V - Scaled Soores on the Cooperative
heading Comprehension Test, C^, Form S, for
Eleventh-Grade Classes in Seven New Jersey
Independent Schools Participating in the Spring,
1948, Testing Program of the Eduoational Records
Bureau
Table VI - Scaled Scores on the Cooperative French
Test, Higher Level, Form X, For Third-Year Classes
in Seven New Jersey Independent Sohools Partici
pating in the Spring, 1948, Testing Program of
the Eduoational Records Bureau
CHAPTER I
THE CHALLENGE OF THE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL IN NEW JERSEY
I
When social institutions are permitted to develop freely, they
are apt to assume the most diverse forms, even though all arise in
answer to the same fundamental human needs. Nowhere is this di-
i
vorsity more marked than in the eduoational systems existing in the
United States. General recognition of the right of a family to edu
cate its children as it sees fit has allowed schools of many types
to exist, although common interest in the training of citizens has
led the public to expect certain services from all sohools.
During the nineteenth century, at dates varying according to
the development within each state, public schools under local auspices
and state support grew to take their place as the normal vehicle of
instruction. At no time, however, did publicly supported schools
attain the universal patronage anticipated by their founders. Private
schools of many sorts remained in existenoe after the rise of the
public school system, and new independent schools were organized in
every decade following.
According to the latest national survey available, more than 10
per cent of the total pupils in the elementary and secondary schools
in the country attend nonpublic institutions.-'- This figure means, to
be sure, that private education carries a significant proportion of
the burden of instructing American youth. Moreover, there is at least
some evidence that in the past the private school has managed to teach
1 Statistics of Nonpublic Elementary and Secondary Schools. 1940-41.
Volume II, Chapter IX, Biennial Survey of Education in the United
States, 1940-42, p. 2# U.S. Office of Education, Federal Security
Agenoy, Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1945.
1
V
£
far more than it3 share, judged on the basis of comparative public
and private school enrollments, of the civic and professional
leaders of the country.Even if such a statement seems controversial,
it may be agreed that many private schools have had a tradition of
educating potential leaders. In any event, the very size of the pupil
group served, and the importance of assuring public information about
the sort of education rendered, are sufficient justifications for the
continuing study of the private school.
If the reasons indicated above were not adequate motivation for
the study of nonpublic schools, it could be added that various -trends
in the nation and in the separate states seem to increase the need for
the data which might be drawn from such study. There are important
questions, as yet unsettled, regarding federal aid to education and
child health and welfare legislation as those relate to private school
pupils. Just as, on the national scene, the question has arisen of
federal control over education, so, within the states, a great deal of
disagreement has arisen over state certification, approval, or super
vision of private elementary and secondary schools.^ These are
questions which we, as citizens, will be called upon to decide.
The establishment of wise policies about these questions naturally
requires a foundation of exact information. Yet, so little historical
research has been reported on the story of the private school after it
1Arthur E. Traxler. MThe Independent School and Education, Yesterday,
Today, and Tomorrow,” School and Society, L7I (November 28, 1942),
p. 507.
2For a recent note on such disagreement, see: Humphrey L.G. Fry,
"The Packer Collegiate Institute Case," Independent School Bulletin,
Series of '48-'49 (April, 1949'), pp. 8-10.
3
.
3
became the minority type in American education, that one finds it
difficult to say, not only what become of the private school after
the academy passed its prime, but even why it survived at all. As
one author vividly puts it:
Comparative consideration of private and public secondary
education in this country has been dominantly a matter of
prejudice and partisanship--sometimes intense. The champion
of private schools has disparaged public schools, while the
advocate of public schools has looked upon private education
as unnecessary and even dangerous. Both sides to the contro
versy..,have been unwilling to gather and digest the evidence
that w ould actually illuminate the issues involved.^
Obviously, it will take many research reports to furnish the informa
tion needed to decide all the various questions about public policy
toward private education. However, it seems likely that a study of
3ome sample group of private schools can make a contribution,
especially if the schools chosen illustrate trends and conditions
found in the larger group of sohools from whioh the sample is drawn.
It is desirable, for instance, that there should be a variety of
types of schools in the sample and that a study should cover a largo
enough number of schools to provide not one but several examples of
each kind discussed. Above all, it is desirable that representation
should be given to schools functioning in a situation relatively free
from authoritarian oontrol, so that the reader oan judge what may
happen in nonpublic schools trying to work out their own destinies.
In respect to this last point, it is more important that the sample
should include sohools aotive enough to take advantage of their
opportunities than that it should include an especially large number
of sohools conducting their programs only out of tradition or inertia.
In short, there is ample reason for reporting on what seem to be
^Leonard V, Koos. Private and Publio Secondary Education. A Compara
tive Study, pp. 1-2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1931.
forward-looking or promising trends, even if these are extraordinary,
rather than typical praotices when the whole group of private schools
in the country is considered. In the final analysis, the far-reaching
decisions which must be made about state and national policies regard
ing non public schools require an evaluation of the claims made by these
schools to continue without major external regulation. If new data
are not added to the information now available about independent
sohools, the deoisions will be made on the basis of popular stereotypes
concerning these schools. Such stereotypes may be a fairly accurate
reflection of the characteristic school of a generation ago, but with
out current revision they are likely to 3tand in spite of changes v/hich
may be of great significance. Decisions made today influence both the
present and the future. It would be unfortunate if any decisions froze
the school situation or even caused 3ohools which had made notable
progress to retrogress into a majority pattern. In other words,
publio policy can decide to accept or reject the private sohools on
the basis of what they have been in the past. Or, we can look at
new evidence regarding the sohools and decide, not whether earlier
claims to non-intervention were justified, but whether there are trends
today in some groups of sohools which may be hopeful signs for tomorrow,
and which merit a guarantee of the fullest possible freedom for future
growth.
II
For many reasons, a state seems to furnish a convenient unit for
such a sample study. While individual schools within a state may
vary, all will work under the same legal conditions. Previous studies,
especially historical surveys, have usually treated the states separately.
Moreover, the state is a functional as well as a political entity and
organizations within it are apt to identify themselves and their work
with their location.
The selection of New Jersey has been based on a number of factors,
one among them the author's close personal and professional contact
with both publio and private schools in the state. Aside from this
subjective element in the decision, which is an advantage a3 it facili
tates information-getting, choice of this state is made primarily be
cause New Jersey's private schools meet two of the criteria mentioned
above. First, and most important, these schools have for years exem
plified the nonpublio sohool working almost unhampered by legal con
trols.
The general relationship between the state and its private schools
is simple to describe. Through provisions for the state registration
of boarding schools, the State Department of Education maintains con
tact with both elementary and secondary private schools. The regula
tions under which registration is carried on refer, however, to only
the most necessary standards of health, safety, and assurance that
bona fide eduoational programs are in operation. The county superin
tendents of schools supervise this registration,, which is the only
aotual provision made for the approval of elementary school programs.
Approval of private secondary schools is entirely optional. The
independent secondary sohool seeking accreditation submits a letter
of application to the division of secondary education of the State
Department of Education and requests a visit by representatives of
this division for the purpose of approval. Members of the division
will also confer, if invited by the administration of the sohool,
*
with regard to educational philosophy and praotice.
