North Carolina Newspapers

    The news in this publi
cation is released for the
press on receipt.
DECEMBER 2, 1925
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
NEWS LETTER
Published Weekly by the
University of North Caro
lina for the University Ex
tension Division.
CHAPEL HILL, N C.
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA PRESS
VOL. XII, NO. 5
Bditoria! Boards E. C. Branson, S. H. Hobbs. Jr.. L. R. Wilson. E. W. Knight, D. D. Carroll. J. B. Bullitt. H. W. Odum.
Entered as second-class matter November 14. 1914, at the Postoffice at Chapel Hill. N. C.. under the act of August 24, 1912
PROGRESS IN EDUCATION
THE RURAL MIND
At the last meeting of the 'North
'Carolina Club Mr. L, M. Brooks pre
sented a paper on The Rural Mind: Is
ft a Myth? The following is only a brief
summary of Mr. Brooks’s paper.
The answer to this question seems to
be found in the writings of rather a
large number of students of rural life,
among whom are Professors Butterfield,
€alpin, Gillette, Groves, Sims, Vogt,
and Williams.
Although from the viewpoint of pres
ent-day psychology there can be no
rural mind, since no group mind is held
to «xist, sociology finds certain charac
teristics common to country folk which
differ from those of city dwellers.
These differences arise wholly from en
vironment. The outstanding feature of
a rural environment is isolation, the
teane of country life, though from it
arise valuable social traits such as self-
reliance, family loyalty, democratic
spirit, and a generous helpfulness. Prob
ably the most destructive trait fostered
by isolation is fear, psychic fear not
physical fear. Adult life is too often
dominated by the chain of fear forged
in childhood through the fear method of
discipline: superstition, morbid funerals,
ghost stories, unfortunate contacts at
school, and with hired help. Thus, fear
of the new and untried may result in
extreme conservatism.
Unsocial attitudes are fostered by
lack of play, particularly team play
among both children and adults, largely
because of geographical isolation but
partly also because play is often deemed
a waste of time. Among other destruc
tive traits having their roots in isola
tion are adherence to custom, and self-
aufficiency.
Changing Traits
The dependence on weather also has
a great influence on the thinking of the
farmer. It is either friend or enemy
and must be reckoned with constantly.
All these tr^ts, however, ace chang
ing in proportion as isolation is being
•vercome. The-g still persist in the
more remote and inaccessible regions.
Wherever isolation is being broken down
by rural maij service, telephones, auto
mobiles, good roads, movies, the radio,
libraries, and consolidated schools, there
cooperation is taking the place of indi
vidualism, and the rural attitude is
blending with the urban. This result
also is stimulated and hastened by im
proved methods of work, machinery
displacing hoe farming.
The conclusion is, that while there is
technically no rural mind, it is a con
venient way of referring to the appar
ent average attitude and expression of
the mind of rural individuals, which is ■
fading out as isolation is eradicated,
but which has made a wholesome contri- ■
bution to the life of the nation. :
\veeks later. The effort is sponsored
i by the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce
’ whose support has made possible the
'undertaking. There is no reason why
‘ a similar bulletin could not be issued for
every county in North Carolina, and
! there will be when local citizens and
agencies come to demand it of their
county students at the University, and
then support the publication of their
efforts. —Edgar T. Thompson.
MECKLENBURG SURVEY
A study of Mecklenburg County:
Economic and Social, under the direc
tion of the Department of Rural Social-
Economics, is at the present tiqae in
process of preparation. There is per
haps no better sample county in North
Carolina than Mecklenburg, a great in
dustrial county, possessing excellent
natural resources, with both city and
rural problems, and producing all of
North Carolina’s major crops except
tobacco. For this reason an effort is
being made to provide in the Mecklen
burg survey a bulletin excelling any one
of the thirteen which have been issued
by the Department—a bulletin which
may be used locally by study clubs and
civics classes in the high schools of the
county. The historical background is
being prepared by Miss Julia Alexander
of Charlotte; the chapter on Mecklen
burg County Towns by Mr. J. A. Per
son, Jr.; Natural Resources by Mr. J,
S. Clark; Facts About the Folks by Mr.
Edgar T. Thompson; Wealth and Taxa
tion by Mr. A. T. Cutler; Schools and
Churches by Mr. J. A. Honeycutt;
Agriculture by Mr. Myron T. Green;
How Mecklenburg is Governed by Mr.
Paul W. Wager; How Charlotte is Gov
erned by Mr. Edward Woodhouse; and
Social and Civic Organizations by Mr.
T. S. Clarkson. In addition there will
be chapters on Industries, Problems,
and Evidences of Progress.
It is hoped that the bulletin will be
ready for the press by January and |
ready for distribution two or three j
FOR BETTER FACILITIES
Some Southern states are increasing
per capita expenditure for schools more
rapidly than others. North Carolina
leads the list, having multiplied her per
capita expenditure by 16.66 in the
twenty-two year period. Louisiana is
second, with an increase of IU.92 times,
and Alabama third, with an increase of
1U.68 times. Maryland and Kentucky
are the laggards, having .multiplied
j their expenditure by only 4.29 and 4.10
i respectively.
This basis of comparison measures
th^rate at which educational facilities
are being improved. It does not indi
cate the present relative rates of ex
penditure, for states that have been
most energetic in increasing their ex
penditures were laggards in 1900.
Low Per Inhabitant
Measured by this standard a different
group takes the lead. North Carolina
drops from first place to ninth, having
spent only $8.33 per capita for schools
in 1922. Oklahoma takes the lead with
an expenditure of $14.36. W’est Vir
ginia, below the average by the former
standard, comes second by this, having
spent $12.20, while Missouri and Texas
came third and fourth with $11.94 and
$10.79, respectively. This shifting is
explained by the fact that in 1900
North Carolina stood at the bottom of
the Southern states on a basis of per
capita expenditure, and in climbing to
ninth place has made greater relative
process than any of the others, while
West Virginia stood third in 1900, and
in stepping up one place made only a'
slight relative advance. On this basis
Georgia is* the tailender with an ex
penditure of $4.56 per capita, while
Arkansas is next with $4.91.
A few states that in 1900 were lead
ers in per capita expenditure for public
schools have lost g;round relatively,
although they have increased their per
capita expenditures. While North Caro
lina rose from sixteenth to ninth place
and Louisiana from thirteenth to
seventh, Mississippi fell from eleventh
to fourteenth, Arkansas from ninth to
■ fifteenth, and Georgia from tenth to
sixteenth.
Wealth as a Basis
Neither of the foregoing comparisons
measures the effort the people of the
states are making for better educa
tional facilities. To get at this it is
necessary to take the wealth into ac
count. Measured by this standard,
Oklahoma again takes the lead, having
spent 0.77 percent of its wealth for
public schools in 1922. Texas comes
second, with 0.536 percent, and North
Carolina is third with 0.488 percent.
Arkansas is again the tail-ender with
only 0.341 percent. Kentucky stands
twelfth, Tennessee stands fourteenth,
and Georgia fifteenth.
Nothing but an imaginary line separ
ates the backward Georgia and Ten
nessee from the progressive North
Carolina. Nothing but a similar line
separates the backward Arkansas from
the progressive Oklahoma. Why should
the people of one state be so much less
liberal in support of their schools than
the people of another that has no better
opportunities for obtaining the advan
tages of civilization? Does the differ
ence lie in the people themselves, in
their leaders, or—what may seem the
same thing, but isn’t quite—in a differ
ence in political machines?—World’s
Work.
POPULAR KIND OF SCHOOL
Dr. E. W. Knight, a member of the
faculty of the State University, who is
in Denmark studying the educational
system of that country, is writing a
series of interesting articles for several
of the leading North Carolina daily
papers. The series began Sunday and
will doubtless be read with interest and
profit by many throughout the state.
KNOW NORTH CAROLINA
Educational Progress
The table which appears elsewhere
presents at a glance the remarkable
progress North Carolina has made in
the field of public education during
the last quarter of a century. We
believe that no state in the Union
can match our record of progress in
public education.
In 3900 we were spending annually
on all public education for all pur
poses approximately one million dol
lars. In 1923-24 we spent all told
nearly 30 million dollars, 19 millions
of which went for current expenses,
and more than ten and a half millions
for new buildings. New school build
ings erected throughout North Caro
lina in 1900 cost all told $67,400.
The total value of all school prop
erty in North Carolina in 1900 was
one million dollars. In 1924 our school
property was valued at 60 million
dollars, and at the present time it is
valued at approximately 70 million
dollars.
There were 1,190 log schoolhouses
in the state in 1900, and 63 in 1924,
only 4 of which were white schools.
The school teachers have increased
from 8,320 in 1900 to 21,403 in 1924,
and along with this growth in num
ber of teachers there has been a
great improvement in the quality of
teachers.
In 1900 the average white teacher
received a monthly salary of $24.79,
while in 1924 the salary averaged
$110.06.
The public schools of the state had
an average term of 70.8 days in 1900
and 143.4 days in 1924.
Remarkable progress has been
made with respect to enrollment and
attendance during the last quarter
century. In 1900 less than 61 per
cent of the school population was
enrolled in school, and of those en
rolled only 51.7 percent were in aver
age daily attendance. In 1924 86.1
percent of the school population was
enrolled and 72 percent of all children
enrolled were in average daily at
tendance.
It is estimated that there were 30
high schools in all North Carolina in
1900 with a total enrollment of only
2,000 pupils. In 1924 we had 738
high schools with a total enrollment
of nearly 64,000 students. However,
in percent of students enrolled in
high schools North Carolina still
ranks low among the states of the
Union.
The above are the more outstand
ing facts with reference to our mar
velous progress in public education
and every inhabitant of the state
should know the facts and should
feel proud of our achievement.
But that is not the whole story,
and it would be unfair to fail to re
mind ourselves that, remarkable as
has been our progress, we do not yet
rank high among tbe states in public
education. The rank of the state in
1922 was forty-second, and it is esti
mated chat our present rank is .
fortieth. We have passed by eight
states in twenty-four years, but we
will have to pass by several more
states before we can justly point
with pride to our system of public
education.
There is still abundant room for
progress in every phase of public
education in North Carolina, and
especially with respect to our rural
schools.
his first letter about tbe Danish educa-
these schools is to “awaken, enliven,
and enlighten,” and it is said that they
have literally remade life for the Danish
country. They have been largely re
sponsible for the much talked of con
tentment and prosperity of the rural
folk of Denmark. There are no admis
sion requirements in these schools, no
examinations, and no credits are offered,
but they are for the purpose of awaken
ing the people, enlivening them, and
enlightening them., Schools of this kind
must be an inspiration to any people
and an invaluable aid in developing the
best there is in them. Dr. Knight says:
“Danish culture has been revived and
restored and increased by these means.
XV. INDEPENDENT COOPERATIVE LINES
The last few articles have dealt en- annual expense can be calculated ap-
tirely with the rural distribution of proximately as follows, the estimates
energy which has been generated at the being taken as far as possible from con-
central station of some power company i ditions now existing in North Carolina,
or municipal plant. But what about
the case of farmers who live in remote
districts and have no access to this
service? A map of North Carolina
showing existing transmission lines in
dicates many parts of the Coastal Plain
and Mountain sections, and even quite
a few parts of the Piedmont section,
that are so far from the nearest power
line as ^o make service out of the ques
tion. Does it follow, then, that dwellers
in these parts must necessarily be de
prived of the admitted advantages of
electricity? This question can be an
swered only by considering the alterna
tives to central station service.
25 H. P. Hydro-electric plant
$1,986
Power house and dam..
1,600
Two miles iff line
. 1,700
’I'ransformers and meters
480
Total investment
$6,666
Cooperative Projects
The chief alternative, of course, is
for the farmer to get a water-wheel and
dynamo, ind rig up his own system on
some convenient stream so that the idle
water power may become a valuable
source of farm power. There is one
form of this enterprise that deserves
special attention, and that is where
several farmers cooperate for the pur
pose so that a single generating plant
on one stream is made to serve a group
of farmers living within a radius of one
or two miles. This plan has been worked
out in Lancaster county, Pennsylvania,
with considerable success.
The Annual Cost
But how would the cost of such an
independent system compare with the
cost of obtaining power from an electric
company? Take, for example, a group
of 10 farmers scattered over two miles
of a remote country section. Some
where near the center of the group
runs a small stream, and the 10 farmers
combine to install a 26 horse-power gen
erating plant and set up a line of wires
to the various houses in the group. The
percent.. $ 905
Operating expenses, one year . 150
Total annual expense $1,066
Annual expense per farmer.106
How, then, does this annual burden
per farmer of $105 under an inde
pendent cooperative system compare
with the* annual bill of those farmers
who purchase power from an electric
company? As far as can be determined
the annual bills of rural customers in
North Carolina run between $90 and
$136. The average of a large number
of bills in Pennsylvania is $102. The
conclusion would seem warranted that
the annual expense to each farmer co
operating in an independent system is
in the same general neighborhood as
the expense under the other system.
No more specific conclusion can be
drawn on account of the fact that the
table given above is an estimate, al
though the individual items are based
on actual costs.
But another question immediately
arises. While the annual expense is
complete to the extent that it includes
interest on investment, where are the
funds for the original investment of
$6,666 to come from? One obvious
answer is a loan from a bank, but the
future will probably bring with it
another answer, and that is the develop
ment of cooperative credit societies in
agricultural regions. This question, of
course, is outside tbe sphere of the
present series of articles.—A. T. Cutler.
They have helped to produce a remark
ably substantial, presperous, and happy
rural life in Denmark, which is said to
have the broadest and most generous
culture of any country in Europe.”
We believe such schools would be a
wonderful factor in broadening life and
developing culture among our own peo
ple. Perhaps it is not too much to hope
that some day a similar plan may ma
terialize in the good Old North State.—
Smithfield Herald.
PROGRESS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION
In North Carolina from 1899-1900 to 1923-1924
The following table, based on the 1922-24 Biennial Report of the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction, gives the basic facts concerning the prog
ress North Carolina has made in public education during the last twenty-four
years. Although our present general status in public education is not such that
we can point to it with particular pride, no state has made greater progress dur
ing the last quarter of a century than has North Carolina.
Items
1899-1900
1918-1919
1923-1924
Total school expenditure
$1,062,304
$ 6,768,063
$29,747,076
Expenditure current expense. .
$1,004,903
$ 6,860,129
$19,078,667
Expenditure capital outlay
$57,400
$917,932
$10,668,419
Value school property
$1,097,664
$16,294,859
$69,768,006
Average value per school house ...
$168.66
$1,977.77
$8,222
Number of log houses
1,190
124
53
Number white one-teacher schools.
5,047
2,712
1,633
iljlumber of teachers
8,320
16,037
21,403
a. White. ,
6,763
11,685
16,283
b. Colored
2,567
3,352
6,120
Average monthly salary
$23.46
' $56.83
$99.93
a. White
$24.79
$62.00
$110.06
b. Colored
$20.48
$37,18
$64.83
Average term in days
70.8
112.0
143.4
a. White
73.3
113.8
146.2
b. Colored
66.3
106.6
134.6
Average number days in school....
73.0
103.3
a. White
76.6
109.3
b. Colored
63.6
89.1
Total school population
657,949
832,839
921,316
a. White
439,431
667,416
628.132
b. Colored
218,613
266,424
293,183
Total school enrollment
400,462
691,487
793,046
Total average daily attendance.....
206,918
386,673
571,369
Percent of school population enrollec
60.9
71.0
86.1
Percent of enrollment in average
daily attendance
51.7
66.2
72.0
Number public high schools
*30
391
738
Enrollment in high schools
*2,000
23,666
63.867
Number state-aided rural libraries..
4,686
5,070
Educational appropriations:
a. Public schools, maintenance....
$100,000
$844,692
$1,678,760
b. Normal schools, perman’nt imp
t$316,000
$2,219,000
Maintenance
$16,000
$113,950
$393,000
c. Higher institutions:
Permanent improvement....
t$12,600
t$I,325,000
t$4,795.000
Maintenance
$65,000
$427,500
$1,426,000
Percent illiteracy
29.4
a. White
14.0
b. Colored
38.6
**24.5
♦Estimated
tTwo years
**1920 Census
    

Page Text

This is the computer-generated OCR text representation of this newspaper page. It may be empty, if no text could be automatically recognized. This data is also available in Plain Text and XML formats.

Return to page view