USA > Massachusetts > Norfolk County > Norwood > Norwood annual report 1923-1927 > Part 46
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101
On the basis of the policy announced by the Finance Commission in its 1924 report to the Town Meeting (that $100,000.00 be provided for school- house construction until our shortage has been overcome), it will require four consecutive annual appropriations to meet this situation. When it is met, however, there would seem to be promise of relief from demand for elementary schools; that is, if the proposed parochial school is built. But the Town must still take care of its probable increasing High School needs. It is thought by experts that we may expect that the average period pupils remain in school may be still further increased and that there will be a disposition for boys and girls to remain longer in High School until such a level is reached as will not be exceeded; that is, every person of school age who desires a High School education has a right to it if her or his parents care enough to make the sacrifice. The adult population of the com- munity owes this much to each oncoming generation. It is an obligation to be squarely faced-and at an increasing cost.
Increasing Cost of Operation
Several tables have been prepared for the purpose of showing the in- creasing cost of operation. Table VIII gives the average attendance, the mount expended, the population, and the cost per capita of the schools from 1912 to 1925 inclusive.
Table IX adds to this direct cost an amount for overhead and fixed charges. In other words, this table not only shows the direct cost of in- struction in total and per pupil, but also the overhead cost and the weighted cost per pupil in all the schools.
The Increasing Cost of Construction and Equipment
The amount, that has been necessary for the Town to appropriate for buildings has increased much more rapidly per unit than the increase of current operation, as was shown by statistics in last year's report. The cost of each building per pupil, assuming 35 pupils per room, has increased from $69.54 West School, $$1.51 Guild School, $114.60 East School, $123.82 Shattuck School, $157.57 Winslow School to $285.70 new wing on
223
Table VIII. Increase in School Membership and in Amount Expended for School Support from 1912 to 1925-Population and Per Capita
Year
Average Member- ship
Amount Expended (Direct)
Per Capita Pupil Cost
Population
Cost per Capita Population
1912-13
1707
$ 56,576.22
$33.14
9,793
$ 5.78
1913-14
1839
66,679.52
36.26
1914-15
1990
68,348.98
34.34
1915-16
2097
74,109.04
35.34
10,977
6.23
1.916-17
2163
77,801.45
35.97
1917-18
2250
87,571.84
38.92
1918-19
2329
97,967.41
42.06
1919-20
2461
137,414.81
55.84
1.2,627
10.88
1920-21
2629
180,025.65
68.48
1921-22
2681
205,965.16
76.82
1922-23
2789
226,774.25
81.31
(Estimate)
1923-24
2967
238,824.45
80.49
13,947
17.12
1924-25
3071
235,423.73
76.66
14,151
16.64
(1925 Census)
Table IX. Cost per Pupil (Direct and Indirect) for Elementary, Junior and Senior High, 1924-25
Per Pupil
Schools
Direet Expense 1924-25
Interest 43% on Cost of Plant
Total
Direet Cost of I11 . struc- tion
Int. Adm. ou Cost of Plant and Over- head
Actual Pupil Cost
Wt. Pupil*
Administration Elementary
S 8,305.18
$2.70
$ 2 70
Junior High
60,994.02
9,070.54 9,070.54
70,064.56 49,502.23 173.20 673.00
81.87 118.57
$ 7.06 13.30 29.30
74.14 $ 75.88 95.17
95.83
Senior High
40,431.69
Evening
173.20 573.00
Vacation
* This per pupil cost is not to be taken into the reckoning when considering the tax burden. It is significant, however, when considering charges to other towns for children who come here for their education.
Balch School. Assuming $12,000.00 per unit for High School construction, the investment which the Town has to make in buildings per pupil has risen from $64.00 to $343.00, an increase of about 500%. This is to be accounted for partly by the change of type of building, and partly by the increasing cost of labor and materials. The Town can no longer put up buildings of the type of the Beacon which at one time were considered
147.87
148.17
133,151.82 $13,950.46 $147,102.28 $ 67.08
Gen- oral
224
Table X. Showing Amount Spent for Salaries, Number of Teachers, and Average Salary Each Year from 1912 to 1925
Year
Amount Spent for Salaries
Number of Teachers
Average* Salary
1912
$ 37,522.35
56
$ 670.00
1913
42,241.72
65
650.00
1914
43,960.58
72
611.00
1915
52,681.70
74
712.00
1916
55,499.33
76
730.00
1917
61,831.56
77
793.00
1918
63,680.58
78
816.00
1919
73,134.10
86
850.00
1920
108,152.15
89
1,215.00
1921
133,200.47
100
1,332.00
1922
156,304.31
105
1,489.00
1923
168,248.24
106
1,587.00
1924
175,831.65
111
1,584.00
1925
184,233.88
119
1,548.00
* For the purpose of determining this average, the cost of substitute and part-time teachers is loaded on the regular roll. The above average is the total paid all teachers divided by the number of regular teachers.
adequate for High School. But even if it could put up buildings of such a type, they would probably cost double the amount today. For every pupil added to the average attendance, the Town must figure on investing from a minimum of $250.00 for elementary buildings and running up to $500.00 for Senior High, beside ineurring the annual expense of operation.
Can We Afford the Increasing Cost of Education?
Can we afford to pay the increasing eost? This is a question that is being asked in many places. It is a question that has been investigated by State Commissions, the Federal Government and several of the large educational foundations. Whether we ean afford to maintain our present standard, if need be to raise it to meet the inereasing demands-these are questions of relative judgment. The American people have by far the largest income of any national group, yet the educational standards of America are not higher than in some of the countries having a very much. lower average income. Possibly this question may be approached and answered with better perspective and judgment when we take into account some of the facts that have been developed in the inquiries referred to above. The following comparative data is taken from summaries of
225
national educational reports: the total cost of education for 1922 as taken from the Federal statistics was $1,799,383,894.00. From statistics of the Treasury Department, the following facts are also noted: the expenditure for cigars, cigarettes and tobacco was $1,847,000,000.00. In other words, as a nation, we are spending more for tobacco than for education. Also it is shown that we are spending nearly as much for soft drinks, candy and chewing gum as for education. We are spending more than half as much for the movies and other similar forms of amusement as for education. We are spending twice as much for pleasure automobiles every year as for education. In other words, according to these reports, during the years 1920 to 1924, the cost of public education in the United States was $8,727,- 680,735.00, whereas the retail value of pleasure automobiles for 1920 to 1924 inclusive was $17,077,000,000.00. Comparison of the school building cost and school operating expenses with the total accumulated wealth of the nation and the average yearly income of the United States is also interesting. This is shown below:
IS THE COST OF PUBLIC EDUCATION MORE THAN SOCIETY CAN BEAR?
Accumulated National Wealth 1922-$ 320.803,662.400
Average Yearly Income of United States $65.000.000,000
Cost of all Public Education 1922-$1799.383,894
Pararah Duran National Education Cson
Wealth Data from U.S. Department of Commerce , Income Data from National Bureau of Economic Research; Cost of Education Prom U.S. Bureau of Education.
Using further data developed in these inquiries as background for con- sidering our local situation, it will be seen that we are not extremists in matters of educational cost. In fact, we fall somewhere in the middle ground. The expenditures per capita for some of the best equipped Western states are as follows: California, $25.30; Wyoming, $24.49; South Dakota, $23.22; Montana, $23.55; North Dakota, $23.19. Going now to the worst equipped states of the South, we find the following very low per capita: South Carolina, $5.54; Alabama, $5.34; Mississippi,
226
$5.24; Arkansas, $4.91, and Georgia $4.55. Our per capita cost is $16.64. In other words, Norwood is spending only 69% of the average per capita cost of the Western states above enumerated, including country districts as well as cities and towns. When the comparison is limited to urban communities, we are spending less than half the amount that is being spent in these states. Making a comparison between Norwood and other Massachusetts towns fairly comparable in population with the local situa- tion, facts do not indicate that Norwood is making a disproportionate expenditure for education as will be shown by the table on the opposite page.
It is of interest to us to know whether our industries are being put at a disadvantage in competition because of the burden of taxation for educa- tion. This question may be answered in two ways. First, by showing to what extent the industries of Norwood are being taxed; and second, by showing the relative burden borne by industries in Massachusetts as com- pared with those with which Massachusetts and local industries come into competition. An analysis shows that the amount of the burden of taxa- tion for 1925 borne by the Norwood industries and business enterprises, as opposed to the amount borne by the owners of residences and other properties, is not large; that out of a total $24,089,870.00, $4,952,620.00 was assessed against manufacturing, $2,632,830.00 was assessed against. business and $16,504,420.00 against the remaining properties. In other words, our local industries are paying 20.56% of the direct taxes; our local business establishments are paying 10.93% of the direct taxes; while our owners of other property are paying 68.51%. The industries are bearing about one-fifth of the burden, businesses about one-ninth. Together, they are bearing 31.49% of the cost of education as well as other public expenses.
Two years ago we published in our annual report a table showing the relative position of Norwood and of Massachusetts as reflecting the ad- vantages and disadvantages under which the industries of this locality labor duc to the cost of education. Without taking the trouble to bring this table up to date, it is reproduced on page 228. From the foregoing it will be scen that our industries are not carrying the chief burden in the town; the table below shows that in comparison with other parts of the country, they are not suffering because of the taxation for education.
In Norwood there were 2,203 dwelling houses assessed. The assess- ment on these was $14,184,670.00, or about 60% of the total, and of thesc only 7% were houses valued above $10,000.00. This means that more than one-half of the direct taxes are paid by the owners of relatively inexpensive houses.
Need for Further Expenditures to Improve High School Grounds
In the past, high school buildings have been constructed with little or no thought being given to the grounds. As a matter of fact, it has been only within the last few years that thought has been given to procuring space enough to provide for out-door facilities for the schools. At the Beacon School, only a building site was purchased. There is no play-
227
Table XI. Comparison of Expenditures by Massachusetts Towns-from State Report, 1925
. Towns
Expenditure Per Pupil
All Pupils
Valuation per Pupil
High
Elementary
Amount
Rank
Amount
Rank
Wellesley
$160.10
$119.43
$125.88
1
$15,795
2
Brookline
142.18
107.74
114.17
2
24,795
1
Watertown
127.75
75.07
83.81
23
9,348
10
Arlington
132.95
71.47
85.91
20
9,176
11
Framingham
115.23
63.55
75.33
48
7,149
29
Greenfield
127.89
73.72
83.27
26
6,910
30
Winthrop
104.13
54.56
67.62
62
7,177
28
Methuen
88.51
61.48
68.42
59
5,539
49
Weymouth
102.36
56.73
67.47
63
6,873
31
Southbridge
98.56
59.61
68.12
60
7,713
22
Milford
89.13
54.24
59.15
73
5,163
59
West Springfield
144.06
79.90
89.81
14
7,808
21
Webster
99.70
66.42
88.46
17
8,515
16
Plymouth
115.56
83.02
87.78
18
9,150
12
Wakefield
126.88
63.11
77.54
35
6,043
42
Clinton
100.30
59.75
77.53
36
7,961
18
Adamns
95.59
70.93
77.48
37
8,270
17
Norwood
118.57
67.08
83.80
24
7,213
27
Easthampton
117.03
69.08
82.88
27
8,991
14
Danvers
92.99
71.28
83.91
22
5,769
46
Natick
96.21
64.04
76.80
43
4,586
67
Saugus
104.36
56.56
62.61
68
3,882
71
Dedham
106.03
64.57
75.68
47
6,841
32
Belmont
139.95
69.00
83.73
25
8,775
15
Braintree
114.05
69.66
76.20
44
6,339
41
Winchester
156.65
79.47
99.38
6
13,791
3
-
Northbridge
112.39
70.52
77.28
40
4,923
63
Amesbury
114.17
77.62
104.15
5
8,979
13
Attleboro
110.39
67.20
77.86
21
6,241
32
Walpole
112.34
78.59
91.10
12
6,744
34
Mansfield
132.82
59.94
69.43
57
5,279
55
Averages
114.19
68.90
80.73
8,062
Average expenditure per pupil for the whole state is $87.63.
228
Table XII. Percentage of State and Local Expenditures Going to Educa- tion in the Year 1920
Cotton and Textile
Leather, Metal Working, etc.
Clothing and Gen- eral Mfg., etc.
New England Competitors
Mass.
20.3
Mass.
20.3
Mass.
20.3
Mass. 20.3
Miss.
21.1
Ky
22.0
N. Y.
19.3
R. I. 19.4
S. C.
21.2
Mo.
24.8
Del.
20.7
Vt.
26.4
Fla.
25.8
Mich.
27.4
Ohio
21.8
Conn.
27.0
N. C.
30.7
Tenn.
28.4
Ill.
28.6
N. H.
27.2
Ga.
32.2
Minn.
28.9
W. Va.
31.8
Me.
27.4
Va.
36.5
Wis.
31.3
Penn.
33.4
Ala.
27.5
Colo.
32.8
N. J.
36.8
Tex.
43.3
Kan.
33.1
Fla.
44.7
ground. The Washington Street High School depends on the Civic As- sociation for its out-of-door gymnasium service. Fortunately, however, there was enough space for a small playground in the rear of the building and in the adjoining small park. These have been graded and appropria- tions are being asked for to make them available next year. A chart of the playground facilities for the Junior High School is shown on opposite page. The new Senior High School has fourteen acres of ground and the School Building Committee have planned to have adequate facilities for physical training for both boys and girls.
How the Tax Rate Can Be Kept Down
In last year's report some thought was given to the question as to whether it is possible to maintain the educational standard desired without increasing the tax rate. In this relation it is pointed out that the cost incident to maintaining our present educational standard is such that it cannot be met without increasing the tax rate unless the community is made attractive for suburban residence. In an industrial community such as we have here, the housing facilities for families having a relatively low income must necessarily be in keeping. Taking the average cost per pupil as shown in the comparative statistics (Table XI) as a basis-$83.80 per year was the average cost per pupil in Norwood for the year ending June, 1925. Assuming an average of five persons per family in Norwood (the usual assumption in estimating families), we have an average of one and one-tenth pupils per family in the schools. This means that it costs the Town $92.18 per family for school operating expenses, without taking into consideration interest paid in bonds and other general overhead. If this latter factor is taken into consideration, the cost per family for educa- tion is over $100.00. To produce $100.00 at the present rate of taxation
MOYLL
STELLT
IC
.
1835
MEDICINL DALL
DALL
WALPOLL
YOLLLY DALL
NWING
GE435
1
0
WYTULL
WING
CHILDLENS
ILAYCLEUNDCS
JVNICE
NALL
FIELD
STREET
BOY's PLAY FIELD
1
. PLAN OF -
NORWOOD JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
. GROUNDS .
WINTER
STELLT
RECOMMENDED BY . THE TOWN PLANNING BOARD
229
1
1
GEASS HOCKEY
HIGH SCHOOL DLDG.
WAS MINGTON
STELLT
230
would require that cach family own property which would be assessed at $3,750.00 without taking into consideration the other costs of government. The educational cost is about 40% of the total tax bill. On the basis of our past costs, it would require an assessed valuation of $9,375.00 for each family to meet the budget. It does not require much imagination in the present situation to believe that the cost will shortly reach such a point as to require an average assessed valuation of $10,000.00 per family if the rate remains the same. There are, at present, only 158 residences in Norwood that are assessed above $10,000.00. In a situation such as ours in which only 31.49% of the taxes are paid by the industries and by busi- nesses, and 68.51% by residence and other land properties, it is evident that either we must make the town attractive to those who desire to build homes that will cost in excess of $10,000.00 or increase the burden on those who have cheaper residence property. During the year for which this report is submitted a proposition came before the voters of the Town having in mind giving to persons who desire to make home investments, protection by the passage of a zoning ordinance. At the same time a definite program was launched to make Norwood a more attractive Town for home building by the development of small parks and playgrounds. It is evident that on the success of a plan which would include both zoning and small parks and playgrounds, the future development of Norwood largely depends. Norwood has been specially thoughtful in the last few years in matters of planning. It has been fortunate in the interest persons looked to for official leadership have shown, and also the interest taken by non-official groups in street lay-outs, in zoning, and in the movement for the acquisition of vacant spaces for parks and playgrounds. Unless much is made of the present opportunity, it is clear that the community must choose between a lower standard of education and a higher tax rate. Given, however, an increase in the more expensive types of residences, it would become possible to maintain a high standard of education and at the same time much reduce the tax rate. That such is the fact is shown by a glance at the comparative table prepared by the State setting forth the cost of education (equipment and operating expenses) and the tax rate in the towns where the more expensive residences have been constructed. For example, in Wellesley, the annual cost per pupil for education is nearly double that of Norwood, yet the tax rate is only $20.00 per thousand as against our $26.50 per thousand. Five hundred residences at $10,000.00 apiece would add more to the assessed valuation of the Town than all of the manufacturing plants we have put together. When we add to our manufacturing equipment without making provision of the kind inen- tioned above, we are adding to our social liabilities. In other words, every property-less family brought into the Town carries a cost of $200 per annum that must be met by taxes, only 20% of which is paid by the manufacturers.
FREDERICK A. CLEVELAND, Chairman, FLORENCE M. FIELD, JULIA R. O'BRIEN, ARTHUR S. HARTWELL, EDWARD F. BRENNAN, CHARLES J. RICH.
231
REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT
To the School Committee of Norwood:
The year 1925 has been a period of particularly marked activity in planning for the necessary re-adjustments of organization and adminis- tration for the Senior and Junior High Schools for the coming school year. To plan this organization most effectively, it was thought wisest to enlist the corps of teachers of both the Senior and Junior High Schools in a co- opcrative study of Senior and Junior High School organization. Ac- cordingly, Professor Jesse B. Davis, Professor of Secondary Education at Boston and Harvard Universities, and an outstanding authority in the field of high school education, was secured to conduct the course. The class met in the present High School building for a series of fifteen two- hour lessons, with most of the teachers of both schools in attendance. Many extra conferences were held by groups of teachers to consider re- vision of the work of their particular fields. The fine results of this co- operative and constructive piece of work far exceeded the expectations of all, and the new plan of organization contemplated for the two schools is a part of the outgrowth.
It is expected that the new Senior High School building will be completed during the coming summer. Plans are accordingly being made to start the next school year with the Senior High School in that building. The Junior High School will then occupy the present High School building and the Everett School.
Previous to the crowded conditions existing in both these high schools, the pupils of the seventh and eighth grades were able to attend school on a two-session plan. As crowding increased. the day was shortened and the eighth year pupils placed on an afternoon shift, attending school from 12.50 to 5.00 o'clock.
With the opening of the New High School, it again becomes possible to conduct both schools on the basis of an adequate school day. It, therefore, is unquestionably advisable to conduct each school on a daily time schedule of not less than five full sixty-minute periods exclusive of the time con- sumed in filing. The time schedules now before the Committee for con- sideration are, therefore, made up on such a basis.
The sixty-minute period makes it possible to do three things: (1) find out whether the assignment has been done; (2) properly assign the ad- vance work; and (3) get the pupils started right on that assignment (that is, devote more time to directed study).
A recognized function of the Junior High School of today, and one which seems to the writer to be particularly valuable, is the provision in the pro- gram of studies for so-called tryouts for all Junior High School pupils, during the seventh and eighth school years, that they and their instructors may better discover the aptitudes, interests, and abilities of the individual pupils. In brief, all Junior High School pupils should be required to have
232
the experience of a few weeks of tryout along four or five different lines as a direct help toward-first, wise selection of course to be pursued in the Senior High School; second, as an aid to self discovery; and third, to give breadth of understanding and appreciation of different kinds of work.
Teaching Staff
Of a total teaching staff of 111, eleven, or approximately 10% withdrew during the past year. Marriage was the reason for six of the eleven with- drawals.
The staff changes which occurred during the year 1925 are listed below:
Left the System
1. Hazel M. Blaisdell, English, High.
2. Florence E. Hayes, Spanish and French, High.
3. Helen E. Johnson, Latin, High.
4. Hertha Bergner, Junior High.
5. Mary G. McCarthy, Junior High.
6. Caroline Bodell, Guild.
7. Gertrude T. Lord, Shattuck.
8. Geraldine Woods, Balch.
9. Lottie D. Barker, Balch.
10. Adelbert H. Morse, Supervisor of Music.
11. Doris M. Cutler, Household Arts.
Leave of Absence
1. Marion F. Clapp, Junior High.
2. Leonora M. Bradford, Junior High.
New Teachers
1. Jennie C. Beaulieu, Spanish and French, High.
2. James C. Geer, Science, High.
3. Bessie D. James, English, High.
4. Elizabeth Shirley, English, High.
5. Elizabeth Upton, Latin, High.
6. Marie A. Watson, Commercial, High.
7. Mary E. Laiviz, Grade IX, Junior High, Science.
8. Mildred O'Donnell, Civics and English, Junior High.
9. Emma W. Elliott, Grade VIII, Junior High.
10. Ruth Johnson, Grade VIII, Junior High.
11. Grace M. Richard, Grade VIII, Junior High.
12. Ethel Sawin, Grade VII, Junior High.
13. Vina G. Freeman, Grade VI, Guild.
14. Hannah M. McGuire, Grade V, Shattuck.
15. Helen Nickerson, Grade III, Winslow.
16. Hazel S. Fraser, Grades V and VI, Balch.
17. Flora L. Wade, Unassigned, Balch.
18. John H. R. Ward, Assistant Director of Physical Education.
-
233
19. Ellen Lytle, Household Arts.
20. Sara L. Hall, Household Arts.
Transfers
1. Marie S. Brown from Grade VII, Junior High, to Grade VIII, Junior High.
2. Ruth Rogers, from Unassigned, Balch to Grade V, Balch.
Professional Study
No.
Per Cent
1. Total number of courses taken 99
2. Total number of teachers in force. 118
3. No. taking one or more courses during year 67
57
4. No. taking one course only .
42
36
5. No. taking two courses.
20
17
6. No. taking three courses .
4
3
7. No. taking five courses .
1
8. No. who did not take any course during the year . 51
43
Aims
Some of the essential objectives of the Norwood School Department should be:
a. Provide and maintain suitable accommodations and equipment for a full school day for every child of school age.
b. Abandon the Everett School building as soon as the seventh year pupils of the Junior High may be otherwise adequately housed.
c. Keep the enrollment in classes down to a standard of thirty-five pupils.
d. Provide in the budget of each year for actual growth in membership.
e. Increase the scope and effectiveness of the health work.
New Senior High School
Norwood is fortunate in having an unusually able Building Committee for its New Senior High School. The members of this Committee have given unstintingly of their time and energy to get for the citizens of Nor- wood one of the finest Senior High School buildings of its size in the coun- try. How well they have succeeded is evidenced by the fact that the United States Commissioner of Education has requested a photograph and copies of plans for a national exhibit.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.