|
|
Progressive Education in New York City
By Camille Avena
Twentieth-century New York City public schools were characterized by their ability to educate the “whole child” and they had to act as parents, psychologists, doctors, and social workers in order to adjust to the changes of the city. The influx of immigrants in the late nineteenth-century introduced a class of the “immigrant child” – a child who was of the lower class, who did not exhibit the proper health etiquette, and who was certainly not American. Progressive reformers quickly saw the potential of delinquency that these children possessed and through their efforts, public school education became “a fostering, a nurturing, and a cultivating process”[1]. The main purpose of the beneficial changes to the school system was to counter-act the poor living conditions of these children and to ultimately turn immigrant children into American citizens. Likewise, the Henry Hudson-Robert Fulton Celebration also attempted to help new immigrants in the assimilation process. (see below)
New York City schools responded to the effects of urbanization, immigration, and industrialization. Many children, especially immigrant children, were living in tenement houses. The typical tenement house was composed of five to seven stories and they were twenty-five feet wide and ninety-feet long. Each floor was shared by three to four families. Of the 3,437,202 people living in Manhattan in 1900, two thirds of them lived in tenement housing[2]. Tenement house children suffered from inadequate diet, poor health, and lack of fresh air. Therefore, public school reformers would have to find methods to alleviate these problems.
 An important aim of New York City schools was to transform a “land of strangers”, in the eyes of reformers and the commission to the parade, into a land of orderly and educated Americans. From the year 1900 to 1920, 14 million people immigrated to the United States, many of whom settled in New York City, and in 1914 40.8% of the city’s population was foreign born. By 1920, Jews and Italians made up 26% and 14% of the population respectively. Most importantly and most alarmingly, in 1920, 76% of children had one or both foreign born parents. These children were considered the main targets of progressive era education[3] (Berrol 1973, 20-21). (right)
New York City school sought to remedy the harsh reality of city life and ease the adjustment process of immigrants. In 1890 schools conducted medical inspections, vaccinations, and instructions in hygiene. Many of these reformers believed that immigrants lacked proper hygiene and considered its oversight the schools responsibility. These health inspections educated the “backward” children on proper sanitary habits and ensured that parents would have to be more responsible for their child’s health[4] (Tyack 1992, 21). A worker for the New York City Settlement houses, Lillian Ward (1867-1940), promoted more health inspections for students. The program she created stationed nurses in schools in order to treat sick children.. Pediculosis, also known as lice, was a major problem among children and the school nurse would make classroom visits and examine the children’s heads in public. The embarrassment of the lice-infected child proved that public humiliation was a successful tool in promoting better health habits[5] (Berrol 1970, 138).
Another program initiated by an outside source was a free lunch PROGRAM– provided by Women’s clubs. These lunches had to be healthy in order to battle the malnutrition and poor diets of immigrant children. Prior to the school lunch program, schools usually had a lunch hour in which children were permitted to go home to eat. However, most immigrant mothers worked and had to give their children money since no one was home during the day. Their children would use their money for buying pickles, which was believed to lead to alcoholism, gambling, and bribing bullies. While some schools served free lunch, others charged a small free. Immigrant settlement worker, Mabel Hyde Kittredge organized the School Lunch Committee, which served three cent lunches in some schools[6] (Berrol 1970 ,139). (below)
Progressive reformers also sought to eliminate any mischief that children might encounter during the summer vacation. Vacation schools were created to keep children occupied during the summer months. This program served as an experimental field for progressive education. During their time spent at vacation schools, children went on field trips to parks, learned crafts, staged plays, and visited museums[7] (Tyack 1992, 23). John Dewey’s Democracy and Education inspired this idea of education through experience that lead to the creation of vacation schools.  Dewey wrote that it is the responsibility “of the school environment to balance the various elements in the social environment, and to see to it that each individual gets an opportunity to escape from the limitations of the social group he was born”[8] (Dewey 1916, 34). Trips to museums and working groups to perform a play underscored Dewey’s philosophies on education. The same activities were seen in the Henry Hudson-Robert Fulton Celebration of 1909; children played and performed during the Children’s festival. Most importantly, programs like vacation schools aided immigrant children on their journey of assimilation. (right)
Another progressive reform in the school system was the Visiting Teachers program. In the school system, there was a visiting teacher program “discover . . .the causes of the difficulties which manifested themselves in poor scholarship, annoying conduct, and irregular attendance”. Each visiting teacher would meet with the parents of the children referred to her and held counseling sessions with the children themselves. The role of the visiting teacher is analogous to that of school counselors today. If there was a problem between child and teacher, the visiting teacher would request for the student to be put into a different class. Other causes for absences and bad behavior might be health problems or extreme poverty. In the case of health problems, students would be contacted bya physician. For students suffering from extreme poverty, direct aid was offered through donations of food. The Visiting Teachers program operated under the belief that children were not bad, essentially but troubled by external problems that were beyond their control[9] (Berrol 1970, 140-1).
The progressive school not only catered to the immigrant child but to the immigrant adult as well. Schools were open after hours to be used as recreation areas for teenagers. This program allowed for young adults to learn a skill and meet peers from the same neighborhood. They would learn how to cook, bandage, and sew. Similar to the vacation schools, teens would play games, exercise, and go historical sites throughout New York City. Every week, an expert on New York history would visit the school and give history lessons (Berrol 1973, 27). Influences of school reforms presented themselves in the Henry Hudson and Robert Fulton Celebration of 1909 – floats and costumes gave a visual history lesson to all of those unknowledgeable of the city and the English language. In addition to this, children performed historical plays dressed in traditional American costumes.
The immigrant teen was too old for elementary school and needed a new venue to learn how to become American. This after-hours program was eventually ended and recreation programs were replaced with evening schools. (below) Evening schools originated in 1823 and by 1920, there were 171 evening schools in New York City. Classes were offered in grooming, etiquette, and job placement. Their main purpose was to provide acculturation for immigrant adults and eventually to prepare them for citizenship[10] (Berrol 1973, 27). Reformers utilized the entire school building in order to provide programs for the immigrant family as a whole.
During the Progressive Era, the playground was considered an extension of the school building itself. It became a requirement for any school built after 1895 to include a playground in the construction plans. Social worker Lillian Betts said that “the need for play centers is caused by the crowded, cosmopolitan city. The lack of space for play [has] brought into existence a generation of children who do not know how to play [and] whose knowledge of activity is expressed in mischief . . .”[11] (Berrol 1970, 139). The playground (below) became a place where children could play in a wholesome and civilized way and stay out of trouble. It was believed that the child who was given time to play outside got better grades and was less likely to become a delinquent. Eventually, this same child would become a productive member of American society. Progressive reformers strongly believed they were shaping the future of the city. William H. Maxwell, superintendent of New York City schools from 1898 to 1908, said that “the boy without a playground is father to the man without a job”[12] (Berrol 1970, 140). The work of reformers was intended to benefit not only the current generations but also subsequent generations.
Progressive education reformers acted for several reasons, ranging from humanitarianism to fear of the future[13] (Berrol 1970, 137). The children were considered the future of America and immigrant children were considered inferior. Therefore, a main goal of reformers was to preserve the next generation of workers in America. Many reformers believed immigrants did not know about proper health care, dental care, or nutrition and that it was their job to help them. Most importantly, it was widely accepted that they did not possess proper civic values in order to properly raise their children. Reformers believed that “clean mouths could produce clean minds; proper playgrounds could eliminate juvenile delinquency; adenoidectomies could prevent academic failures”[14] (Tyack 1992, 26). An institution needed to exist where it would be acceptable for reformers to show children proper health care, to teach them how to play with others, and most of all – to teach the children how to “fit in”. Lastly, there was the fear that immigrant children would become the criminals of tomorrow if they were not properly civilized. Reformers saw an opportunity to convert these “little aliens”[15] into “little Americans” in order to preserve social stability.
 Overall, the progressive movement in New York City public schools (left) was successful. Several of the programs started in the early 1900s have endured and grown during the twentieth-century. Programs like affordable school lunches, school counselors, recreation time, summer schools, and school nurses still exist today. The progressive movement accomplished their primary task: to turn “little aliens”[16] into “little Americans” – the future of the American workforce and of democracy. The ideas of this movement penetrated the Henry Hudson-Robert Fulton Celebration of 1909, which provided entertaining historical lessons for New York immigrants.
Endnotes
[1]John Dewey. Democracy and Education. (Plain Label Book, 1916), 18.
[2] Robert Weeks DeForest and Lawrence Veiller, “The Tenement House Problem” In The Tenement House Problem: Including the Report of the New York State Tenement House Commission of 1900, ed. Robert Weeks DeForest and Lawrence Veiller (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1903), 3.
[3] Selma Berrol, “Education in New York City, 1900-1920.” Illinois Quarterly 35 (1973) : 20-21.
[4] David Tyack, “Health and Social Services in Public Schools: Historical Perspectives.” The Future of Children 2 (1992) : 23.
[5] Selma Berrol, “Health Education and Welfare: The Progressive Impulse in the New York City Public Schools.” Elementary School Journal 71 (1970) : 138.
[6] Selma Berrol, “Health Education and Welfare: The Progressive Impulse in the New York City Public Schools.” Elementary School Journal 71 (1970) : 139.
[7] David Tyack, “Health and Social Services in Public Schools: Historical Perspectives.” The Future of Children 2 (1992) : 23.
[8] dewey
[9] Selma Berrol, “Health Education and Welfare: The Progressive Impulsein the New York City Public Schools.” Elementary School Journal 71 (1970) : 140-1.
[10] Selma Berrol, “Education in New York City, 1900-1920.” Illinois Quarterly 35 (1973) : 27..
[11] Selma Berrol, “Health Education and Welfare: The Progressive Impulse in the New York City Public Schools.” Elementary School Journal 71 (1970) : 139.
[12] Selma Berrol, “Health Education and Welfare: The Progressive Impulse in the New York City Public Schools.” Elementary School Journal 71 (1970) : 140.
[13] Selma Berrol, “Health Education and Welfare: The Progressive Impulse in the New York City Public Schools.” Elementary School Journal 71 (1970) : 137.
[14] David Tyack, “Health and Social Services in Public Schools: Historical Perspectives.” The Future of Children 2 (1992) : 26.
[15] Selma Berrol, “Health Education and Welfare: The Progressive Impulse in the New York City Public Schools.” Elementary School Journal 71 (1970) : 142.
[16] Ibid, 142.
|
|
|
