Peter E. Pflaum - Golden Globe -

The Synergy Network

Wiredbrain Pflaump@wiredbrain.com

ONE-ROOM SCHOOLS

AND

AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL TRADITION

Introduction

When my husband Peter and I moved from the Virgin Islands back to Florida in spring of 1982, our mode of transportation was our 27-foot sloop Far Tortugas. Our journey took two months. Lack of a working engine since Puerta Plata forced us to become true sailors.

In early June in the Bahamas, the wind dies. Giving up final hope for engine repair in Freeport, we set our sails for Cape Canaveral. That first evening we observed a Bahamian town full of lights. At two a.m. Peter woke me.

The lighted "island" was a supertanker on autopilot, obviously and directly approaching Far Tortugas. We sent up all our flares; we blew our horn; we called on the emergency channel; we tried to tack.

The tanker kept coming.

There was no wind.

The largest supertankers -- those in Freeport -- are about a quarter of a mile long. This was the size of the monster that bore down upon us, apparently unaware of our existence. Even with awareness, the tanker on autopilot was powerless to stop or turn. Ten years later, I see similarities between this

frightening experience and our current educational system. While many schools do an excellent job, too many do not. Part of the problem is a system grown so large it cannot stop; it cannot maneuver.

Perhaps the most frightening characteristic of our present dilemma is lack of recognition of the magnitude of our plight. As Peter and I failed to see the supertanker for what it really was, how many of us sail along, blind to the reality of the bureaucratic monster towering above us? Peter and I initially viewed the supertanker as just another Bahamian island. When the truth became obvious, we were dangerously close to collision. Because of skills and teamwork developed through experience, we were able to find and use a saving breath of wind.

Dewey writes of "evils in education" (Dewey, 1920, p. 197) when discussing isolation of subject matter from experience. Ethics are central to his philosophy of democracy and education. Is it immoral and unethical -- perhaps evil -- to continue to employ methods, subject matter, and organizational features we know are not just ineffective but are in fact detrimental to students?

The supertanker is on autopilot. Is it powerless to stop or turn? Peter and I were saved from imminent demise by a breath of wind, allowing us to tack just in time. Before our educational system can respond, we must have a system capable of change.

The supertanker could not alter its course. Can we?

Review of the Literature

Much educational writing, both current and past, addresses reorganization for improvement of schools. Literature describing the one-room school and its multiage nongraded grouping offers a logical, appropriate place to start. Perhaps investigating some of this literature will enlighten our search for a restructuring path. Historical Overview

The Buildings. America's little red schoolhouse often pictured nostalgically is not without its critics. Physical conditions of rural public school buildings came under attack in 1930 by the U.S. Office of Education (USOE). Poor lighting from broken windows; inadequate heating from old open box stoves; unsanitary conditions; nails used as coat hooks; lack of

workrooms, libraries, cupboards, and bookcases; defective floors, ceilings, and walls are problems of some schools as noted by authors of the USOE report. In teacher training programs, colleges failed to prepare eager young educators for crude and demanding teaching conditions (Dressler & Pruett, 1930 in Muse, Smith, & Barker, 1987).

Thirty years after the USOE report, the National Education Association (NEA) noted further physical problems with such schools. Through time, building maintenance became increasingly difficult. In 1960 most one-teacher school buildings were 43 years old; 20% were built prior to the turn of the century. Building materials often reflected local resources. As recently as 1934 a Nebraska community established a sod school for its children. Many earlier schools were built of logs or other wood (84%), and destruction by fire was not uncommon. By 1984 fewer buildings were wood; 22% were brick or cement; 6% were trailers. Whatever their physical problems, one-room schools are considered retrospectively as a foundation of the American elementary educational system (Muse et al., 1987; Muse & Moore, 1988). Decrease in Number

The demise of the one-room school as a major force in

American education began following the close of World War I. Returning soldiers moved from farms to urban areas seeking better paying factory work. Twenty years later with scientific

development of agricultural methods, large farms grew larger at the expense of many traditional small family farms. Often small farmers simply could not keep up financially and sold out to organized cooperatives. This trend continued and by 1954 farms of over 260 acres were increasing while farms of 30 to 80 acres were decreasing rapidly (Muse et al., 1987).

Exodus to cities combined with changes in farms and farming methods had dramatic effect on one-room schools. Frequently established to serve children of farmers, decrease in rural population and number of farms impacted directly on American educational needs. Often school districts transported their few remaining pupils to other districts. Distance to the nearest operating school sometimes prevented daily travel, so students boarded or stayed with relatives in other communities. Other children in isolated areas lived at home and were educated by correspondence. Some small school districts were virtually abandoned.

As early as 1922 Cubberly noted the distressingly high ratio of school board members to teachers in thousands of small school districts. District efficiency was questioned where 150 to 500 school officials supervised 50 to 175 teachers. Poorly

maintained small rural schools with poorly prepared teachers were viewed as unjustified educational means when compared to

attractive larger schools featuring well-qualified instructors.

The result is a collection of small schools, a horde of school officials, short school terms, cheap teachers, poor buildings, poor teaching equipment, schools behind the times, and a general lack of interest on the part of the people in the schools

maintained (Cubberly, 1922 in Muse et al., 1987, p. 3).

Decrease in population, remote location, and cost were often cited as reasons for discontinuing education through the little red schoolhouse. Policy-makers increasingly recommended closing of small rural schools rather than correction of their problems.

The answer was consolidation (Muse et al., 1987). Number and Location

In 1900 approximately 200,000 one-room schools existed in America (Gulliford, 1981 in Barker, 1986). In 1917-18 there were about 196,000 public one-room schools. Found in all 48 states, these schools made up 71% of all U.S. public schools and were attended by 25% of school children (Gaumnitz & Blose, 1950 in Muse et al., 1987). By 1920 this number had dropped to 188,000 (Swanson, 1976 in Barker, 1986).

In 1930 there were 128,000 districts and 238,000 public

elementary schools in 48 states. Of these schools, 149,000 had only one teacher (Muse et al., 1987); Muse & Moore, 1988). With the trend toward consolidation, number of school districts decreased as did total number of public schools. Numbers of one-room schools dropped to 121,000 in 1938; 75,000 by 1948 (Lambert, 1960 in Barker, 1986).

By 1950 amount of districts had dropped to 84,000 with 128,000 total public elementary schools. Of these schools, 60,000 had one room. Of 200,000 operating one-teacher schools in 1900, 140,000 had been closed in 50 years; about 30% remained. By 1980 this rapid decrease of districts and schools resulted in slightly less than 16,000 total number of districts, slightly more than 61,000 total public elementary schools. In the 50 years since 1930, over 148,000 of these schools disappeared -- 921 were left. This total continued to drop with 837 reported in 1984 by Muse et al. (1987). Gulliford (1985) reported

approximately 835 for the same year, down about 199,000 since the turn of the century. Figure 1.1 NUMBER OF SCHOOLS 1930-1980 Page 8 Comparisons

By comparing data of Muse et al. (1987) to Dewalt's (1987) information regarding 674 operating public one-room schools, a trend downward appears to remain. This could be a statistical aberration due to difficulty in locating accurate data or often in finding any data at all. Muse and Moore (1988), however, estimate number of remaining public one-teacher schools has stabilized. This number is likely to be around 800.

Dewalt (1989), in non-public as well as public counts, finds growth in number of Amish and Old Order Mennonite schools helps stabilize present total number of public and private one-teacher schools. Establishment of these religious schools increased rapidly following the 1972 United States Supreme Court ruling in Wisconsin v. Yoder, giving Old Order religious groups right to end formal education after grade eight (Dewalt, 1989).

Some sources for data listed by Muse et al. (1987) include a National Education Association (NEA) Research Monograph (1960) for 1958-59 counts, National Center on Education Statistics (NCES) (1980) for 1980 counts, and original research by the authors for 1984. Dewalt's sources for public schools include review of literature, state departments of education

information, data from Freeman (1986), and some estimates from the 1985 data for 1986 and 1987 numbers. For Amish and Old Order Mennonite numbers he used the December 1987 issue of

The

Blackboard Bulletin (Dewalt, 1989).

Comparison of Muse, Smith, & Barker's 1984 report with Dewalt's of 1987 shows some states gained slightly in number of public one-room schools. According to the data, Colorado increased from 3 to 6; Illinois added 1; Montana added 11; Oregon added 2. State departments of education vary in information recorded and accuracy of reporting data. Due to research problems in finding correct data, the possibility of inconsistencies between various reports must be considered.

One questions whether schools actually increased or if one researcher found a school missed by others. Small gain in Colorado may be accurate and may be explained by the existence, as listed in Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), of Mountain Plains Library Association in Silt, Colorado -- the Country School Legacy Project. In 1985 the Denver Post applauded one-teacher schools in an article headlined "One teacher, six students: that's quality education" (in Muse et al., 1987, p. 1). Local belief in effectiveness of small schools could

conceivably cause increase. Historically, it was not uncommon for one- teacher public schools, especially in remote places, to open and close as rise and fall in student population demanded. This could still be true today (Muse et al., 1987; Barker, 1986).

As far back as 1958-59 Nebraska, with 2,812 of 23,695

nationwide, led in number of one-teacher schools. This remained true in 1984 with Muse et al. (1987) reporting 385 and Gulliford (1985) reporting 360 in Nebraska for the same year. Dewalt (1989) reports 264 in 1987. To gather information about

Nebraska's one-teacher schools Muse et al. (1987) surveyed all 93 county superintendents for 1984 numbers.

These researchers actually verified 306 one-room schools.

The rest were estimated using Nebraska State Department of Education information (Muse et al., 1987).

Dewalt used Freeman's 1986 information (Freeman, 1986 in Dewalt, 1989), information from state departments of education, and estimates from 1985 data. Colorado and Connecticut

departments of education estimated their 1950 data as listed by Dewalt. Twenty-six states had no data to report in 1950; 2 had no data in 1985. In 1986 and 1987, 8 and 7 states respectively listed no data, but for these years Dewalt estimated numbers for Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, and Michigan using 1985 information (Dewalt, 1989).

Muse et al. (1987) list Florida as having 27 public one-teacher schools in 1958-59 and only 1 in 1980 and 1984. Dewalt lists Florida as having no data for number of public one-room schools in 1950, and he found 0 in 1985, 1986, and 1987. In searching for private one-room schools, Dewalt found none in Florida in 1987 (Dewalt, 1989).

The Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) Southern Union Conference, Small Schools (1990) reports 11 one-teacher schools in Florida representing 35% of SDA small schools (one, two, and three-room) in Florida. Ninety-one SDA one- teacher schools operated in 1990 in 8 area districts comprising the Southern Union.

These 91 schools make up almost 55% of SDA Southern Union small schools.

The SDA North American Division -- Small Schools (omitting Canada), reports 461 total number of SDA one-teacher schools across the United States (SDA, 1990).

Gulliford (1985) reports Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod Board for Parish Education had 36 one-room schools in 1983-84, down just 3 schools 6 years. According to a church official, these Lutheran schools often begin as one-room schools and add more rooms within a few years (Gulliford, 1985). While Dewalt (1989) reports private one-room schools for 1987 only, he notes for Wisconsin 24 Amish, 3 Old Order Mennonite, and 0 other. In comparing data of SDA, Gulliford, and Dewalt, one notices

discrepancies.

Summary: Decline of

The Little Red Schoolhouse

Nostalgic recollection of one-room schools continues for many Americans, despite criticisms. Physical problems of the schools coupled with historical events and trends impacted substantially on their existence. Poor conditions, ill-prepared teachers, and exodus from rural to urban areas following World War I marked a beginning of dramatic decline. As returning soldiers sought higher paying urban employment and numbers of small family farms decreased, the appearance of rural America began to change. Country schools became less necessary and perhaps even more importantly, less fashionable.

Influence of one-room schools on American public education is evidenced in part by enormous numbers of Americans educated in these small rural schools. Current data, although often

conflicting in exact amounts, shows an overall rapid decline leaving today less than 1,000 of 200,000 public one-room schools operating in 1900. Numerous research problems include lack of extensive historical data and variation in accuracy and

information recorded by states. It is interesting now to examine one-room educational practices and students and most importantly to focus on a person instrumental to life in the little red schoolhouse -- its one teacher.

One-Room Educational Practices, Teachers, and Students

Yesterday

In 1940 and 1959 Gaumnitz noted several reasons for original establishment of one-teacher schools. Equality of educational opportunity was perceived as a vital ingredient during the early struggle for democratic equality in America. Providing education to isolated pioneer families presented a problem different from small towns or rural areas in Europe. American pioneers required low-cost educational institutions designed to serve a few

students and located within walking distance of their homes. "

The one-teacher school and the local school district seem to have been the logical answer to the demands of the day"

(Gaumnitz, 1940, p. 3; 1959, p. 1, 10).

Since educational studies were not conducted in colonial America, early one-room schools can be examined retrospectively through such information as historical descriptions and period novels. Colonial schools were primarily religious institutions offering learning through mediums such as the popular seventeenth century textbook, Spiritual Milk for American Babes, Drawn out of the Breasts of Both Testaments for

Their Soul's Nourishment (Cubberly, 1919 in Devin-Sheehan & Allen, 1975). Basically the teaching method during this period was independent study at the student's desk followed by recitation at the teacher's desk. "School discipline was often harsh, with the teacher's rod a frequent reminder that children should not be spoiled" (Muse & Moore, 1988, p. 9). Public education was most often a community or district school supervised by local citizens (Cubberly, 1919 in Devin-Sheehan & Allen, 1975).

Nineteenth century one-room schools consisted of students in the first eight grades who spent most of the day sitting on log benches. Schools were often heated by potbellied stoves or fireplaces; drinking water was provided by a communal bucket and dipper; lunches were brought from home (Mead, 1963; Orr, 1962; Rissler, 1966 in Devin-Sheehan & Allen, 1975).

The teacher was often a young single woman who taught school until she married. Frequently, her own education had ended with high school

(academy) graduation or less. Lack of data prohibits analysis of the educational attainment of past one-room teachers. Throughout the literature, however, runs suggestion of numbers of marginally prepared instructors in these small schools. "Teachers were poorly trained and not much older than the students that they taught" (Muse & Moore, 1988, p. 9).

Secularization of schools increased throughout the nineteenth century. In 1897 and again in 1960, the NEA cited unsatisfactory conditions of many rural one-teacher schools. Criticisms

included attendance problems (either too high or too low), lack of equipment, and low pay for teachers (Devin-Sheehan & Allen, 1975; Muse & Moore, 1988).

Perhaps the closest living example of colonial and nineteenth century educational practices exists through examination of one-room schools sponsored by religious groups resistant to change. It is interesting to examine a 1987-88 case study conducted through observation of an Old Order Mennonite community school in Snyder County, Pennsylvania.

Educational Practices. To preserve cultural values and ethnic identity, it is often necessary for groups to avoid mainstream acculturation. Old Order Mennonites have been successful in this goal through "[retention] of economic self-sufficiency,

residential independence, and complete control of their own schools" (Dewalt & Troxell, 1989, p. 308). Old Order Mennonite one-teacher schools combined with other societal aspects and institutions successfully socialize Mennonite children ethnically and culturally. Rejection of government school funding gives the community a certain amount of autonomy in running its own

schools.

The Mennonite community described in this case study, however, does comply with some government regulation such as attendance and teaching of the English language (Dewalt &

Troxell, 1989). Old Order Mennonites do not use electricity or many other modern conveniences.

Physical structure of the school is important in this

examination of educational practices.

The frame building with its vestibule, classroom, and dirt cellar containing a wood stove, resembles American public one-room schools around the turn of the century. Set amid pastures and fields, a dirt road ends many yards from the school. Outhouses and a shed for the

teacher's horse are behind the main building.

Lunch boxes and outer clothing are stored in the vestibule; the schoolroom contains rows of students' desks attached to the floor.

The teacher's desk, blackboards, and bookshelves are in front of the room; wooden benches for visitors are in back.

The only light is from single pane windows on both sides of the room.

The school year runs 180 days, September to May, with few vacation days. Grades one through eight are taught in one room by one teacher.

The teacher works separately with each grade according to schedule, but she divides and varies her time according to need.

Subjects taught are reading, arithmetic, spelling, geography, English, German, penmanship, and some art and music. A program is given at the end of the school year.

Textbooks are most often specially designed for Mennonite children.

The school does accept from the public school system some discarded older textbooks.

These books must meet Mennonite standards for content. All eight grades use the 1934 Practical Mathematics series, Columbia University, reprinted by the

Gordonville Print Shop of Pennsylvania. Researchers note, "

These books are predominately mathematical problems with no

illustrations and minimum explanation" (Dewalt & Troxell, 1989, p. 315).

Students work by grades with the teacher on math, spelling, and reading. During this time, other students work independently at their desks. For reading, the teacher calls each grade level. Students file to the front, face the class, and read individually in predetermined order. Students know how much to read, when to stop and start. No direction from the teacher is necessary.

The teacher asks comprehension questions at the conclusion of the story.

These questions are answered in turn by each child. If someone does not know an answer, the next pupil in line responds.

The teacher also uses phonics flashcards. Students return to their desks, individually complete workbook comprehension

exercises, and read silently to prepare for the next day.

Teacher.

The teacher, a single woman of 29 years, drives her horse and buggy to school. She stays with a married sister during the week and on weekends travels ten miles to her home where she lives with an unmarried sister.

The teacher dresses conservatively according to Mennonite custom. Because of its necessity in mastering other subjects, she believes the most important subject is reading. She enjoys working with children, reading, and writing in her diary.

Innovation in methodology is discouraged by the Mennonite community.

The teacher, therefore, teaches as she was taught. Pennsylvania has no certification requirements for Old Order Mennonite teachers. Researchers did not specifically mention this particular teacher's educational attainment level. Teachers are selected by the community school board made up of parents (Dewalt & Troxell, 1989).

Students. Researchers did not address class size but did indicate 25 student desks in a schoolroom floor plan. Students spent 65% of their time working individually, 15% in groups with the teacher, 9% listening to another group, and 6% reading individually. Off-task behavior was observed just 5% of the time. Researchers observed students out of their seats less than 0.01% of the time and never observed a student leaving to use the outhouse, get a drink, or sharpen a pencil. Students do not leave their seats during class except by the teacher's

instruction. After students listen to another group, they return to their own individual work without direction.

Researchers observed little time spent with the teacher

explaining procedure (5%). Students know what to do at specific times. Students receive little praise or criticism from the teacher (0.01% of the time). Occasionally they do receive a small reward such as a sticker for good work.

The students never have a discussion but spend 48% of class time reading aloud, reciting, and giving answers. About 30% of class time is devoted to lecturing and the teacher asking questions.

The classroom is silent 16% of the time (Dewalt & Troxell, 1989). Researchers note in a typical classroom 65-75% of time is used for statements by the teacher. This is in sharp contrast to the 35% in this Old Order Mennonite school (Flanders and Simon, 1969 in Dewalt & Troxell, 1989).

Student attendance rate is high (96.6% for September 1986 to December 1987) reflecting community educational values. Local public schools have a similar attendance rate. After completion of grade eight, children no longer attend school but learn homemaking and farming under the direction of their parents.

Analysis of student interviews showed students were satisfied with school and enjoyed parental school visits (about twice a year). Most children had given little thought to future

occupations realizing there was little choice. Many said reading was their favorite pastime (Dewalt & Troxell, 1989).

Past educational practices, teachers, and students can, of course, never be exactly reproduced. However, from an unmarried female teacher arriving at a one-room schoolhouse via horse and buggy, to eight grade levels of disciplined children seated in nailed-down desks, to a basic curriculum liberally interspersed with religion, to local school control, this case study is a remarkable reflection of customs and values of this religious community. With Old Order Mennonite resistance to change, it appears to be as accurate a living picture of the past available to us today. 1920's - 1960's

Several common threads run through literature of these twentieth century years. Among them are energetic movement toward consolidation. Another is interest in the child- centered approach to education, a progressive movement explored by (among others) Dewey, Kilpatrick, and Rugg.

Consolidation - 1920's. Post World War I population movement toward urban areas and away from rural communities combined with improvement in roads and the widespread conviction that bigger is better worked to eradicate one- room schools at the dramatic rate described earlier. In a 1928 Department of Interior, Department of Education bulletin, Covert notes, "One hundred years ago Horace Mann made a vigorous attack on one-room schools. Since then educators have continually bombarded them" (Covert, 1928, p. 1). In this 1928 bulletin the author lists growing and

apparently prevalent attitudes of the day

* one teacher's inability to cover all grades as well

as in a graded system;

* one-room teachers are often young and inadequately

trained;

* percentage of attendance in one-teacher schools is

much less than in graded schools;

* centralized schools offer advantages small isolated

schools cannot, such as socialization and training

for life (Covert, 1928, p. 1).

The central purpose of Covert's report is gathering

information and disseminating results of educational testing programs in two types of educational settings. Through this examination the author seeks to determine the more advantageous learning environment -- small rural one-room or larger modern consolidated ones. This author feels scientific methods of the times are dependable measures of achievement. "Before the advent of standardized tests, comparing schools in educational

achievement was practically impossible; with age grades and achievement norms scientifically established, it becomes a simple matter" (Covert, 1928, p. 1). Such evidence can substantiate elimination of one-teacher schools through consolidation.

The NEA Department of Rural Education conducted a study (1921-22) comparing academic achievement of one-teacher and consolidated schools. Never before had such an extensive study been conducted in this area of research. Approximately 11,000 pupils in 135 consolidated schools and 4,700 pupils in 370 one-teacher schools were tested in reading, arithmetic, language, spelling, and handwriting. Grades 3-8 were tested. Testing instruments used include Monroe Standardized Silent Reading Tests, Woody-McCall Mixed Fundamentals of Arithmetic, Iowa Spelling Scales, and the Ayers Handwriting Scale.

Due to small print and age of the document, specific

comparative scores are difficult to decipher. Overall findings, however, indicate in each grade children in consolidated schools obtained higher median reading scores than children in

one-teacher schools; handwriting indicated even or higher scores for consolidated school pupils. Generally the report shows better academic achievement of students attending larger schools (NEA Department of Rural Education, 1922 in Covert, 1928).

Pointing to rapid increase in centralized schools (1000 per year since the turn of the century) and more rapid decrease in one-teacher schools (5 times that rate for the same period) Covert continues:

There are few thoughtful people left who fail to see the many social and administrative advantages of the larger, better-equipped schools. [Factors causing growth in number of large schools include] great improvement in roads . . . ; the modern school bus, equipped with comfortable seats,

heaters, windows, and front and rear doors (Covert, 1928, p. 2). Problems of Smallness - 1950's. About 30 years after Covert's bulletin, U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare reported "Small Schools Are Growing Larger" (Gaumnitz, 1959). This document concerns status and trends of size factors in public education. Problems with rural education were

frequently attributed to smallness -- "small administrative districts, small school systems, small enrollments, small

instructional staffs, and small classes" (Gaumnitz, 1959, p. iii).

To properly evaluate smallness factors, one must examine the overall picture. Data of state and geographical areas showing size in this 1959 report is more comprehensive than previous information on size of school districts, systems, staffs, and classes across the United States. Special attention is given to rural counties (Gaumnitz, 1959).

Gaumnitz notes the role our pioneer heritage plays in

smallness. Desire for local control resulted in many small school districts, each with its own school board and school often employing one or two teachers. Often the district area was small -- four or five square miles. Life was simple. Skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic made up the bulk of curriculum. Persons possessing these skills were deemed qualified to impart these skills to others. Thus one or two teachers were chosen by local citizens for their community school. As consolidation spread, many communities valuing small schools reluctantly relinquished local control. Gaumnitz points to tradition in American education as a major factor in such reluctance; to economic, demographic, and production changes as reasons for change in educational structure; to the remaining necessity of smallness in remote undeveloped areas having inadequate roads.

Gaumnitz cautions against one administrative system as the solution to smallness problems. Educational researchers

recommend urgent need for experimentation in development of appropriate school programs. "Rural life in America is

characterized by diversity, rather than homogeneity, and the fitting of many patterns of rural life to one type of

administrative unit is highly questionable. Research needs to point the way to other solutions to this problem" (Monroe, 1950 in Gaumnitz 1959, p. 2). In light of this recommendation, it is interesting to briefly review growing interest in child-centered and community-oriented education.

Child-Centered and Community-Oriented Education

Recollections of a One-Room Schoolhouse. In a 1975

interview, Marian Brooks, Professor Emeritus, City University, New York, recalls her initial teaching experience (1924-26) at age 15 in a one-room school in rural New Hampshire. Due to shortage of certified teachers, high school graduates were recruited, given a six-weeks course in methodology, and placed in small communities needing instructional staff.

In this fascinating account, Marian Brooks vividly describes her eleven students (grades 1-8), their parents, and their isolated Irish farming community of about 15 families (Dropkin, 1975). Through her perceived inability to function effectively within confines of prescribed strict time schedules, this

educator successfully ran her school in terms of the individual child. Using local resources (for example, mud to study dikes and medieval villages; snow to study ice houses and Eskimo way of life), Ms. Brooks often implemented a project-oriented and integrated curriculum. Nailed-down student desks were moved to suit educational needs.

The platform for the teacher's desk became a stage.

Several years after leaving this one-room post, Ms. Brooks was introduced to works of Dewey, Kilpatrick, and Rugg regarding progressive education. Later she studied and served as Professor Harold Rugg's assistant at Teachers College (Dropkin, 1975).

The Rural School Improvement Project. Berea College of Eastern Kentucky participated in the Rural School Improvement Project (RSIP) of 1953-57. With a longstanding philosophy regarding commitment to needs of surrounding mountain

communities, this college reports remarkable improvement in educational opportunities and services initiated through this project.

Here again, concern for individual children, parents, and community is reflected in this description of rural education. Through teacher training and travel, Berea assisted in widening the scope of student and parent awareness of life beyond their mountains and in reducing the scope of racial prejudice. Through encouragement of community effort, poorly maintained schools were improved. Through initiation of a project-oriented integrated curriculum, students and parents gained knowledge meaningful to their own lives (Buckland, 1958).

1956 Yearbook. Teaching in the Small Community: 1956 Yearbook, a collection of essays documenting experiences in rural America, further indicates growing interest in pupils, parents, and communities as individuals. Contributors to this yearbook reflect on Gaumnitz's observation Defenders of small schools insist . . . that many of the recognized advantages of largeness are lost to the mechanization of child development.

They declare that the intimate relationship of the teacher and the child in the small school is the ideal way to develop children (Gaumnitz, 1959, p. 7).

From a small desert community north of Phoenix, Arizona, to a mountain community involved in the Rural School Improvement Project of Eastern Kentucky, educators contributing to this yearbook echo several common themes. Learning is enhanced when students perceive relevance to their own lives; learning is enhanced when curriculum is integrated forming a comprehensive whole; learning is enhanced when students, parents, and

communities work together for the common good (Fox, 1956). Today Rural Location. Today many rural areas in America are experiencing growth rather than decline. Country life has long been treated idyllically by lyricists and other artists.

Throughout history man has sought simplicity in pastoral

existence.

Departure from rural areas following World War I lasted for about 50 years. Decrease in number of farmers continues today.

The 1970's and 80's, however, saw population increase in some sparsely inhabited areas. In 1981 the American Association of School Administrators called this move from city to country a "rural renaissance -- a [realization that] small can be

beautiful" (Muse et al., 1987, p. 7).

Reasons for increased country population include improved highway systems and relocation of business and industry in small rural communities.

These two factors work synergistically, increasing opportunities for country employment while allowing city workers to more easily commute. Additionally, there is a growing perception of country living as much improved over earlier years. Shopping centers, government, and professional services are common aspects of smaller communities while problems of crowded streets and heavy traffic are not. Characteristics such as these contribute to return to a more relaxed rural lifestyle (Muse et al., 1987; Gulliford, 1985).

Teachers. Muse et al. (1987) surveyed 402 one-room teachers in 1984. Ninety-three percent of these teachers hold a bachelor's degree or higher. About 33% of the teachers were raised in country settings, and 25% grew up in communities with populations under 2,500. Another one- fourth lived for much of their lives in communities of over 25,000.

When researchers surveyed reasons for teaching in small rural schools, the most frequent response was desire to do so (72%). Other reasons given were "limited employment opportunities elsewhere," "reasonable salary and benefits," "spouse works in the area," "family and relatives in the area," and "recreational area nearby" (Muse et al., 1987, p. 9-10). According to the 1960 NEA study, rural teachers were paid much less than the national average. Salary schedules for rural teachers, however, have risen in recent years (Gulliford, 1985). Today these teachers often have salaries commensurate with local cost of living (Muse et al., 1987). Wyoming supplements some teachers with isolation pay or mileage allotments (Hobbs, 1979).

The 1984 study often found spouses of rural teachers to be farmers (almost one-third). Other reported occupational areas include management/self-employment, skilled/ semiskilled, and professional/semiprofessional.

These 3 areas ranged from

13%-10%. Homemaking was reported at slightly over 5% (Muse et al., 1987).

Isolation. Slightly over half of the teachers surveyed in 1984 lived within the school district (54.2%). Teacherages, homes provided by the school district, were provided one-fourth of the time. In isolated places housing is often adjacent to the school. In one case in Wyoming, the teacher lives in one end of the trailer; the school occupies the other (Gulliford, 1985). In remote areas in Wyoming, house trailers are frequently utilized.

These mobile schools can be located on a ranch as required. When the school is no longer needed, it can be moved (Hobbs, 1979). While improved communication, roads, and transportation gives some contact to the outside world, isolation continues as a major problem of rural schools today. Hazardous weather conditions in Albany County, Wyoming, prompted a requirement for teachers to take survival courses; all schools have emergency supplies of food and water; schools without telephones have citizens band radios.

Distance to shopping and services such as health care and government services varies according to the 1984 study.

Twenty-five percent of teachers surveyed reported easy access (within 4 miles) to shopping facilities; 25% reported shopping facilities within 20 miles. Teachers in more remote locations reported distances of 50 miles or more.

The greatest distance was almost 1000 miles for one teacher in Alaska (Muse et al., 1987).

Teachers working in isolated areas have special needs for community support. While some teachers do remain on the outside, others become a vital part of community life. In a rural school there can be an obligation to conform to local values (Gulliford, 1985).

Frequently one-room teachers provide a variety of extra

services. From teaching all subjects, to performing janitorial and maintenance duties, these teachers are among the most

resourceful in our nation (Muse et al., 1987). Even though many one-room teachers are versatile and hardy, need for peer

consultation can be a problem in rural areas.

In recognition of teacher and student special needs due to remote location, Wyoming often provides traveling teacher teams as a supplement to small school instruction in areas such as art, music, physical education, and reading.

These teams, however, are not always available to the one-teacher schools. In the 1984 study, Muse (et al., 1987) found traveling teachers providing support in music (12.5%), in remedial reading (6.5%), and in special education (7.7%) (Muse et al., 1987). Some Wyoming districts schedule breaks to "[bring] the teacher out" for weekends at the Holiday Inn. District supervisors and rural coordinators commonly travel to remote schools on a regular basis (Hobbs, 1979).

Educational Practices.

The 1984 (Muse et al., 1987) study found isolation frequently prevented field trips to urban areas with 85% of teachers surveyed reporting no such outings. When questioned regarding use of television, computers, and guest speakers for instructional purposes, teachers responded to moderate use of television (40%); 36% used computers "often" or "sometimes"; 75% reported using guest speakers "infrequently" or never.

Gulliford (1985) reports use of project-oriented curriculums similar to those described by Marian Brooks (Dropkin, 1975), by the Rural School Improvement Project (Buckland, 1958), and by contributors to the 1956 Yearbook (Fox, 1956).

The teacher of the Cozy Hollow School (Wyoming) feels remoteness is a blessing. Without others around to imitate or impress, children must "draw upon themselves.

They have time to think, to use their own imaginations" (Gulliford, 1985, p. 11). Another Wyoming teacher, besides teaching regular subjects, uses the lunch hour to

instruct children in fishing and preparing the fish for lunch, starting fires on ice, skating, playing the piano, and ballet. Further descriptions of projects carry messages of teacher creativity in using local resources as learning tools (Gulliford, 1985).

Recommendations made by contributors to

The Wisdom of Practice: Managing the Multigraded Classroom (Wolfe et al., 1990) mirror those made by contributors to the 1956 Yearbook (Fox, 1956) and other child-centered, project-oriented, integrated curriculum proponents previously described. Throughout this 1990 handbook, master teachers of Alaska promote the importance of the

individual child, correlation of subject matter, and teacher individuality in determination of class structure (Wolfe et al., 1990).

Instructional methods born and developed in the little red schoolhouse, continue as mainstays of educational practice in these schools today. Devin-Sheehan and Allen (1975) reported 31% of 110 one-teacher schools surveyed in Nebraska in 1973 had some form of peer tutoring. One-room teachers in the 1984 survey reported widespread use of peer tutoring (70%) and individualized instruction (95%) (Muse et al.,1987). In addition, there is growing evidence of trends in consolidated schools toward use of these teaching methodologies. Educational emphasis on

consideration of each child's special needs is increasing beyond the one-room school (Devin-Sheehan & Allen, 1975).

Mario Fantini, dean of the University of Massachusetts School of Education, supports one-room schools. He believes number of one-room schools may increase due to dissatisfaction with larger more bureaucratic schools. "

The trend in education today is toward smaller, more community based, more intergenerational settings . . . . [In many schools] students have lost their sense of identity" (Gulliford, 1985, p. 11-12). Without

significant change by larger consolidated schools, departure will continue toward other kinds of nonpublic education -- the kind that "takes on the characteristics of the one-room schoolhouse" (Gulliford, 1985, p. 12).

Further criticism of large schools was voiced in 1981 by Bruno Bettelheim, University of Chicago. He held little optimism for improvement of most public schools today. Pointing to the necessity of peer tutoring in one-room schools, Bettelheim stated, I've found that having some children help teach is the best way for all children to learn.

The older child learns material that can be mastered only by rote much better by

teaching it to a younger child.

The one-room school was the best school we ever had (Gulliford, 1985, p. 10).

Historian and Nebraska State Board of Education member Dorothy Weyer Creigh adamantly disagrees writing in 1980

There are unfortunately a number, an appalling number, of one-room country schools still in existence in Nebraska, with outdoor privies, incredibly slipshod teaching, with a criminal lack of books and other teaching tools . . . . I know the present-day one-room country schools for the anachronisms they are, and am eager to dispel the myth of the rural school now as the be-all and end-all of educational excellence. For their time they served a purpose.

Their time is long past (Gulliford, 1985, p. 9).

Students. Little information exists regarding race of one-room school students. During the era of segregation in America, black students attended their own one-room schools with white one-room schools nearby (Buckland, 1958).

The literature reflects a predominance of white students in these schools today. Currently there are hints in some rural areas of an increasing appreciation of cultural pluralism (Muse et al., 1987).

Since the 1960 NEA report, there is evidence of one- room school improvement in physical condition, materials, and teacher training. Little quantitative study, however, has been conducted regarding academic achievement and social adjustment of

one-teacher school graduates when they attend high school. To provide current information, researchers at Brigham Young

University investigated academic and social performance of 204 high school students who spent their elementary school years in one-teacher rural schools. Chosen for the study were Nebraska, South Dakota, and Montana (Muse et al., 1985).

School personnel and former one-room students were surveyed using questionnaires designed to determine student attitude toward small school experience, social adjustment in high school, academic preparedness for high school, and educational plans following high school graduation. Additionally, socioeconomic status (SES) of the entire high school student body was addressed through questionnaires administered to school personnel.

Questionnaires were not administered to graduates of larger elementary schools. Standardized test results were analyzed to compare academic achievement of one-room elementary school graduates with graduates of larger elementary schools.

Results indicated small school students:

* were similar academically to graduates of larger

elementary schools;

* tended to have some difficulty adjusting to the first

year of high school but not to later years; (Note:

Some faculty members felt this difficulty was due to

boarding in town);

* viewed their elementary years as worthwhile and no

disadvantage;

* would have liked more students in elementary school

for increased participation in sports and other

activities;

* were not dropouts; were not disruptive;

* were well-behaved and performed as well in school as

other students (Muse et al., 1985).

In conclusion researchers note problems in attempting to measure school effectiveness. Many factors besides school size can temper a student's performance in school. While it may be possible to measure academic achievement with some amount of standardization, it is certainly not a perfect measure (as alluded to by Covert [1928] -- see Consolidation - 1920's

section), nor is it accepted in every instance. Such tests measure only a fraction of a student's school experience.

According to these researchers, further study is needed. Participation of a greater number of schools and samples

representative of states having one-room schools are two

suggestions for improved research design. While keeping in mind study limitations and the large versus small controversies, researchers remind the reader, "It is not a requirement that rural schools be better than their city counterparts, only hopefully that they be as good" (Muse et al., 1985, p. 17).

Summary

Reasons for original establishment of one-room schools are embedded in America's colonial way of life.

These schools worked because of unique requirements of frontier existence. Where small communities or groups of families settled, one-teacher schools were established to educate their children according to American ideals of democracy in education. Early ideas of democracy impacted directly on the desire for local control of local schools. Numerous small school districts were formed; their remnants often exist today.

Some early American educational practices can be witnessed through existing one-room schools of religious groups resistant to change such as those of Old Order Mennonites. Early methods were often rigidly structured, but over the years several

one-room methods evolved such as peer tutoring and individualized instruction applicable today in large as well as small schools.

The 1950's saw increase in support of child-centered,

project-oriented, integrated curriculums explored earlier by Brooks, Dewey, Kilpatrick, and Rugg. Attention to dilapidated school buildings, unprepared teachers, and isolation was given during this decade through projects such as the RSIP in Eastern Kentucky. Further effort to assist teachers in isolated areas through sharing of instructional ideas for multigrade classrooms became recently available through

The Wisdom of Practice (Wolfe et al., 1990). Improvement in rural roads throughout the

twentieth century reduced isolation while promoting

consolidation.

There is very little evidence regarding social or academic performance of one-room school students. Researchers of Brigham Young University conducted two studies in the 1980's. After identifying existing one-room public schools, Muse et al. (1985) surveyed academic achievement and social adjustment of

one-teacher elementary school graduates who attended high school. While these former one-room students appear to perform as well academically as high school students who attended larger

elementary schools, further study is indicated. With data showing one-room school students virtually do not drop out and are not discipline problems in high school, important classroom framework implications may exist.

These factors require further study.

There is lack of research regarding one-room students of races other than white. Current increase in appreciation of cultural pluralism in rural areas is a mere hint in the

literature, suggesting more examination is needed.

While public rural one-room schools greatly decreased in number in the twentieth century, there is suggestion of increased interest in nonpublic one-room schools. This interest is

partially prompted by dissatisfaction with larger consolidated schools. Criticisms of these larger schools include inadequate academic effectiveness and impersonal factory-like atmosphere.

There is lack of study in this area. Possible trends in

nonpublic one-room schools in communities of all sizes present a challenging area for research.

The battle of large versus small, one-room versus

consolidated continues. Both types of schools, historically and today, have advocates and opponents. Only through more extensive well-conducted research will answers regarding strengths and weaknesses of these differing educational frameworks become more apparent.