USA > Massachusetts > Plymouth County > Plymouth > Town annual report of the officers of the town of Plymouth, Massachusetts for the year ending 1927 > Part 47
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
(1) Prof. George D. Strayer of Columbia, noted surveyor of school systems.
(2) Prof. L. O. Cummings of Harvard School of Education, surveyor of school systems.
(3) Prof. L. L. Dudley of Harvard School of Education, sur- veyor of school systems.
-14-
(4) Dr. Randall Condon, Supt. of Cincinnati and former President of Department of Superintendence-"One of our most successful schools opened last year with 1,500 pupils."
(5) Hector L. Belisle, Supt. of Fall River.
(6) Franklin E. Pierce, Supervisor of Secondary Education in Connecticut.
(7) Roscoe L. West, Asst. Commissioner of Education in New Jersey.
(8) John Granrud, Asst. Supt. of Springfield, Massachusetts.
(9) Leslie A. Butler, Supt. of Grand Rapids, Michigan.
The following raised certain objections to a six-year school where pupils of all ages mingle. However, when a description of the building showing that each three-year unit was entirely separ- ate in its administration, they gave their endorsement.
Supt. Allen P. Keith of New Bedford.
Dr. Charles H. Judd of University of Chicago.
Dr. Frank N. Freeman of University of Chicago.
Supt. J. W. Sexton of Lansing, Michigan.
The only one unwilling to commit himself without knowing local conditions by personal observation was Prof. F. E. Spaulding of Yale School of Education.
Prof. Calvin O. Davis, professor of Secondary Education at University of Michigan, and a recognized authority on junior high schools, has recently obtained opinions from various educators throughout the country who have used the six-year school, in which they expressed the advantages and disadvantages of such a school. A letter was sent to Prof. C. O. Davis describing the situation at Plymouth and the plan for a combined school and a plan for separate schools, asking his opinion in regard to the pro- posals. He states: "I am disposed to feel, since your town and school are apparently not going to grow greatly in the near future, that your combined arrangement for junior and senior high schools accomplishes the best results for your people. To all intents and purposes the two schools are separated since each have special rooms as gymnasium and auditorium. It seems to me therefore
-15-
that each group can secure all of the special advantages which are alleged to accrue from separation and that at the same time you will save financially and possibly otherwise by the quasi union."
Charles H. Judd, Director of School of Education, University of Chicago, in reply to a letter describing the situation at Plym- outh, writes as follows :-
"I have been in the habit of saying that a six-year high school is entirely legitimate where the registration of pupils is relatively small. I have ordinarily put the limit in my thinking at about six hundred but it seems to me that you are entirely justified in carrying out the program which you have in mind for Plymouth. I think that a reasonable amount of isolation of the two divisions of the institution can be secured at the same time that you get the advantage of general facilities for both divisions."
L. H. Bugbee, Superintendent of Schools at West Hartford- one of the outstanding systems in Connecticut-states, "Our ex- perience has taught us that a thousand unit, six-year high school can be very happily handled in one building and especially so where the two units would be separated by a gymnasium and auditorium."
Grand Rapids, Michigan, has five six-year schools. Asst. Supt. Chas. A. Dawson says: "From our experience here, it seems that from a financial point of view it is more economical to arrange your junior and senior high schools so that they may be in the same building or in buildings which are closely connected.
We find this arrangement more economical because one as- sembly hall will serve both schools. Likewise, gymnasiums, science laboratories, and library may be used by both. Furthermore, one heating system is more economical than two."
T. S. Grindle, Supt. of Schools, Lexington, Mass., states: "At the present time we have a combined junior-senior high school with a total of approximately 985 pupils divided as follows: Junior high school 535, senior high school 450. Our building has a gym- nasium, auditorium, lunch room, shops and cooking room which are used by both schools.
I think it is fair to say that under our present arrangements there are no difficulties from the administrative point of view
-16-
which are important enough to be considered. The principals of the two schools work in harmony and there is fine cooperation be- tween the two schools."
G. C. Marsden, Principal of Milton High School, states: "The combined total school enrolment in the junior and senior high schools at Milton during the present school year is 1,082. There are 447 in the senior high school. The junior high school totals 635. There are three grades in each school.
For a group of approximately 1,000 pupils in the upper six grades I favor a junior-senior high school rather than two separ- ate units. From my experience here at Milton I am convinced that better educational service can be rendered the pupils and the community at a lower cost for each child under the combined school system than under the separated school system. There are many special rooms that are needed in modern school work, yet which are very expensive if they are utilized only part time by a school of 500 pupils. These rooms include assembly hall, lunch room, cooking, sewing, printing, woodworking, sheetmetal, electricity, lathe, art, gymnasium, teachers' rest, medical, dental, and library. Moreover, better teaching can be obtained within these specialized fields if teachers do not have to spread themselves over too many subjects. Special rooms, special equipment, and special teachers are not expensive if they are used all of the time."
Rochester, New York, is considered the home of the junior high school and has an excellent national reputation. It has com- bined junior-senior schools and separate schools. J. P. O'Hern, Deputy Superintendent of Schools in Rochester, writes: "If I had your problem I would add enough rooms to your present junior high school to make it into a six-year high school, just as we did with our Monroe Junior-Senior High School".
Thus leading educators both from a theoretical and prac- tical viewpoint endorse a combined building with the two units sep- arated.
2. IS THE PRESENT LOT TOO SMALL?
Supt. Fausey in his report on page 9 states that the present lot is too small for a combined school and recommends a twelve acre lot.
-
-17-
The Junior High School lot contains 3.5 acres. The Pope lot (old lumber yard) recommended by the School Committee for pur- chase contains 1.1 acres. Within a short distance is the Stephens Field, which is well adapted for play activities. This contains 7.1 acres, making a total of 11.7 acres available. Approximately 2.5 acres in the rear of the Junior High School, if graded properly, will provide sufficient playground space for most activities.
This question of the size of grounds was referred to Carl Schrader, State Supervisor of Physical Education. His letter states : "If the athletic field were not available within a close proximity, I should consider the area for physical education and recreational purposes inadequate for both junior and senior high schools in the one building. With this additional athletic field available and the School Committee willing to make a proper time allotment to carry out an activity program for all pupils, the plan of housing both junior and senior high schools together is a very satisfying one. The program could be carried on very efficiently, and I am quite sure, more economically, inasmuch as the same teachers could function, or at least cooperate, in the maintenance of a worth- while health and physical education program. It seems to me that the matter of junior and senior high school pupils being both in the same building, and utilizing the same facilities, is largely a matter of administration which, if well thought out and efficiently carried through, should not result in any adverse experience. The planning of the indoor facilities, as well as the outdoor ones, for health and physical education, should be carefully made so as to render the plan feasible for an up-to-date school program."
The fact that the larger athletic field is away from the school building is a decided advantage in that it can be used throughout the summer time by any group without damage to expensive school buildings.
It would, of course, be admitted by everyone that the Holmes Field would make a more beautiful location for play activities, but the grading of the sloping and irregular field to provide for base- ball, track, soccer, tennis and other outdoor activities, would be a more expensive proposition than at the present location.
-18-
3. IS THE PRESENT JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL MORE OFF-CENTER THAN IF LOCATED ON HOLMES FIELD?
Two years ago a pin chart was made of the homes of the Junior and Senior High School pupils by the School Department. The center of these six grades was Chilton Street.
Supt. Fausey's pin chart of the Junior High School pupils shows the center to be Cushman Street and that of the Senior High School at Brewster Street. These centers do not include the distribution of the Manomet and Chiltonville children, numbering 67 pupils. Were they counted in the centers would be a little farth- er south.
Assuming, however, that Cushman Street is the center, the distance to Hall Street,* opposite the proposed new building is .75 miles and to the present Junior High School it is .85 miles. Thus the Holmes Field is .1 of a mile, or about 500 feet nearer to the center of the Junior High School population.
The problems of transportation in the north would be offset by problems in the south, thus the difference, if any, in transportation cost would be small.
*Note .- There is an apparent discrepancy between the location of the proposed school as shown on page 17 on the map of the Fausey report and the description on page 16. The Holmes property is opposite Hall Street, nearly one fourth of a mile north of Russell Avenue. The center of the solid circle and the circle itself drawn on the map on page 17 should therefore be moved north this distance.
PROVISION FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
The present Junior High School rooms are well adapted for junior high school classes, which should usually number about 35 pupils. To try to fit these rooms over for the special classes re- quired in the High School such as bookkeeping, typewriting, phys- ics and chemistry, biology, sewing and cooking is unsatisfactory for each of the above must be planned for its special equipment and special use. Furthermore, on page 11 of the Fausey report, there are listed four rooms to hold 20 pupils. According to the present high school schedule at no period of the day are there more than two classes as small as 20 and most periods but one. In other words there are too many small rooms in the Fausey plan.
-19-
Every modern well planned high school has a study hall and library. No reference is made to these rooms. There is no adequate office for the principal.
On page 8 Supt. Fausey states : "It is quite apparent that the enrollment of the Senior High School grades will not go over 300 for the next few years." In September the three upper grades numbered 332. This year the Sophomore class numbers 165 as against 101 a year ago with the Freshman class about the same as last year. This should bring the school up to 350-60 next year. This difference of 50 to 60 pupils must be provided for.
The only way the Junior High School building could meet the educational needs of the Senior High School would be to add three rooms as suggested on page 12 of the Fausey report, together with the gymnasium, auditorium and cafeteria. Even then it would not be ideal.
PROVISION FOR THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
The provisions as specified by Supt. Fausey would meet the immediate needs of the Junior High School with the exception of a room for drawing. There is no allowance for growth, for which every new building should provide.
USE OF OLD HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING
One half of the old high school should be used for the special class work now carried on at the South Street School and for the grades now occupying the Lincoln Street School. It would also per- mit further development of the work for some overage pupils now in the grades. With the present arrangement of the heaters this section of the building could be heated independent of the rest of the building at a cost no greater than that of heating these two schools. The janitor service would be no greater than that of these separate buildings.
ANALYSIS OF COSTS
A. Cost of changes in the Junior High School building.
On page 11 of the Fausey report the changes outlined are as follows :
1. "Remove the two wooden stairways at the ends of the building and install a fireproof stairwell and stairs."
-20-
2. "Remove the two front stairways and convert the space they occupy into four classrooms." This involves building two walls to each room inside the school. It also involves putting in large windows on the outside in place of three small windows now present. This change would be in each of four rooms.
3. "Remove toilets from northeast room on ground floor". "Move partitions in back corner rooms so as to make pos- sible the installing of two toilets each on the second and third floors." All this necessitates new plumbing from the basement to the top floor.
The estimate of cost of the above is $6,000. From consultation with architects it would seem as if $10,000 is a conservative es- timate.
B. The estimate for installing a new heating system in the Junior High School is $4,000. When figures were obtained by the School Committee from actual specifications two years ago, a heating concern's close estimate was $7,500. Definite plans and specifications must be drawn up before a fair comparison can be made.
C. The addition of an auditorium to seat 400, a gymnasium and a cafeteria would cost $36,000 according to Supt. Fausey. No detailed plans are submitted nor are contractors' estimates given. The gymnasium implies another floor area as large as a gymnasium for lockers, dressing rooms, showers and rooms for the physical directors. The cafeteria with its facilities would have a floor area about the size of the auditorium. How four rooms of such size with the necessary heating and ventilating could be built for $36,- 000, may well be questioned.
Again, no positive statement is fair until actual plans are made, specifications drawn up and estimates of costs from reliable builders secured.
D. The new Junior High School is estimated at $250,000. This figure does not include architect's fees and equipment. In comparison with the above estimate are the following data:
A year ago last September, Rockland completed a new Junior- Senior High School to accommodate about 700 pupils. It has a
-21-
similar number of rooms to that recommended by Supt. Fausey for his Junior High School. The cost of this building was as fol- lows :
General Construction (including heating, plumbing,
lighting, electrical work, etc.) $281,295.15
Finish Grading 6,000.00
Furniture and Equipment
35,000.00
Architect's Fee
19,337.70
Contingent Item
8,367.15
Total $350,000.00 Again, the only fair comparison of building costs is for plans and specifications to be drawn and actual estimates secured, as was done by the School Committee.
E. The cost figures submitted by Supt. Fausey do not in- clude architect's fees which are reckoned at 6% on new work and a higher rate for reconstruction.
Approximately $20,000 is needed for this item.
F. The cost figures submitted by Supt. Fausey do not include equipment. In the Davis plan a careful study was made and an estimate of $30,730 secured. With the duplication of the audi- torium, cafeteria, gymnasium and some duplication of the special rooms, the cost of equipment would be between $35,000 and $40,- 000.
G. The cost figures of Supt. Fausey do not include the cost of the Holmes Field. As understood by the School Committee the land referred to by Supt. Fausey is the Holmes Field just south of Robbins Road. It contains approximately 12 acres and is assessed for $20,450.
H. The cost figures of Supt. Fausey do not include grading. Until plans are drawn no close estimate can be given. It seems only fair to state that this item must be considered in making any final estimate of total cost. In the Davis plan $15,000 was pro- vided for grading the grounds at the rear of the Junior High School.
It should be stated that Supt. Fausey and the Special Com- mittee of Nine did not have funds sufficient to secure specific plans
Plymouth Nineteen
-22-
and specifications for the new building upon which to base approx- imate costs. However, the report should have included such items as architect's fees, equipment, cost of land and grading.
COMPARISON OF COSTS
1. Alterations in Junior High School A. Fausey, Plan
(1) Install fireproof stairwell, remove toilets in base- ment, install toilets in four rooms, build four class- rooms, etc. $6,000.00
(2) Revise heating system ..
B. Davis Plan Central heating plant, larger boiler room, and changes in cor- ridor $27,500.00
4,000.00
2. Addition to Junior High School for use by Senior High School
A. Fausey Plan
(1) Auditorium, cafeteria, gymnasium with locker rooms, showers, etc. ... 36,000.00
B. Davis Plan 33 classroom units, auditorium, cafeteria, gymnasium 282,000.00
3. New Junior High School 250,000.00
Total cost construction and changes as recommended above
$296,000.00 $309,500.00
4. Necessary addition to present Junior High School for Senior High School use 16,000.00
Total cost construction to meet needs of schools $312,000.00 $309,500.00
-23-
5. Other necessary items not included in Fausey report, but recommended by School Committee.
(a) Equipment
40,000.00
30,730.00
(b) Architect's Fees
20,000.00
19,770.00
(c) Land
25,000.00
8,700.00
(d) Grading
15,000.00
15,000.00
(e) Contingent Fund
10,000.00
10,000.00
Total cost fully equipped ready for use $422,000.00
$393,700.00
6. Not necessary, but advisable
(a) Heat carried to old Senior High School building
5,000.00
$398,700.00
Note 1 .- The Fausey plan would cost approximately $9,000 more than the Davis plan for equipment because it would need to include the following items:
(1) Plumbing and wiring in the old Junior High School for labora- tories for Senior High School use.
(2) Duplication of gymnasium equipment, also lockers and showers.
(3) Duplication of cafeteria equipment.
(4) Duplication of auditorium, seats and stage equipment.
(5) Duplication of equipment for at least two special rooms.
Note 2 .- The School Committee asked for $282,000 for the building. This included a pitched roof on the Lincoln Street front of the building. The architect estimated the cost of this type over a flat roof at $10,000 to $15,000. In the opinion of the Committee it seemed advisable to have the front of the building correspond in type to the other two school buildings.
Note 3 .- It seemed advisable to provide for the future heating of the old high school from a central heating plant. The laying of this pipe is more economical at present than later. This should not only provide more economical heating later but also would greatly reduce the fire hazard in the old building at the same time.
Elimination of these last two items would reduce the School Committee's request to $383,700.
The above figures show that the Fausey plan would cost $28,- 300 more than the Davis plan, if the question of carrying heat to the Senior High School is eliminated, and at least $38,300 if a flat roof is substituted for the pitched roof, as recommended by the School Committee.
-24-
COSTS OF MAINTENANCE
From all evidence available the Fausey plan will be more costly in the yearly running expense, due to heating of duplicate large rooms; gymnasium, auditorium and cafeteria, heating in separate building, extra janitor service and extra teaching force. This would undoubtedly average over $5,000 a year.
ADVANTAGES OF FAUSEY PLAN
1. Ample grounds for the Junior High School.
2. Somewhat easier to arrange program because schools are inde- pendent.
DISADVANTAGES OF FAUSEY PLAN
1. More expensive in initial cost of construction because of dupli- cation of gymnasium, auditorium, cafeteria and some special rooms.
2. More expensive to maintain.
(a) Heat-Two heating plants instead of one and more large rooms to be heated.
(b) Janitor Service-At least one more janitor.
(c) Some additional teaching force required because it would not be possible to arrange schedules of special teachers as efficiently in widely separated schools.
3. Does not permit as close correlation of school work.
4. Assembly hall and cafeteria and special rooms not used as ex- tensively as in Davis plan.
ADVANTAGES OF THE DAVIS PLAN
1. The two schools may work together as one comprehensive unit, permitting the interchange of teachers more readily and pro- ducing a closer correlation of the work in each study.
2. Pupils may be promoted more readily by subjects, for example: pupils in the ninth grade, failing in a study, may make up the failure without repeating all their work. From the present school records twenty-three sophomore pupils are thus affected.
3. Frequently pupils in grades 10, 11 and 12 need to take Algebra or Latin in the 9th grade to meet college or normal school requirements. This affects a less number than above, but is a serious condition for the few who decide late in their course to go to higher institutions.
-25-
4. Each school still retains its own identity and administration.
5. The assembly hall, the cafeteria, the gymnasium and the spe- cial rooms are not duplicated and therefore used more exten- sively.
6. It is easier to arrange schedules for special teachers in the two schools than if widely separated.
7. From the financial side there would be economy :
(a) In heating as there are fewer large rooms to be heated- gymnasium, auditorium and cafeterias not duplicated. Also one central heating plant is more economical than two.
(b) In janitor service -- at least one less janitor would be needed.
(c) Probably in special teachers-this is difficult to analyze without actual working conditions. However, it would be the equivalent of at least one teacher.
8. The plans call for modern Senior High School rooms in the present Junior High School being made over to meet High School needs. These present rooms are better adapted to Jun- ior High School use.
9. Provided for future heating of old High School building in an economical method. This also reduces the fire hazard to a minimum.
DISADVANTAGES OF THE DAVIS PLAN
1. The outside playground is less than ideal for playground activi- ties. However, with Stephens Field near by and with the addi- tion of the Pope property, much of this objection is overcome.
BORROWING CAPACITY OF THE TOWN
Valuation for 1927 $26,447,375.00
Valuation for 1928
25,222,650.00
Valuation for 1929 25,061,325.00
Total
$76,731,350.00
-26-
Average $25,577,117.00
3%
$767,313.00
Total debt incurred and outstanding .. $367,167.00 Less: Plymouth County Hospital Loan $10,000.00 Water Loans 24,667.00
Total debt outside limit
34,667.00
Total outstanding within debt limit
$332,500.00
Borrowing capacity January 1, 1930
$434,813.00
Assuming that the town voted to issue twenty bond year bonds, totalling $375,000 to carry out the building plan as recommended by the School Committee it would leave a borrowing capacity of $59,813 as of January 1, 1930.
EFFECT ON COST OF YEARLY RUNNING EXPENSE
The present plan of two sessions at the Senior High School, which requires the freshmen to come afternoons, adds materially to the cost of running the schools. Extra transportation is required this year from Manomet, Long Pond and Chiltonville. This extra cost amounts to at least $2,400 a year. Extra janitor, lighting, and heating service required for the afternoon session, add a consid- erable amount to the cost. The extra teaching force, necessitated by the difficulty of arranging programs on the two session plan, costs about $2,000 which would be eliminated in the new plan. However, the new plan would call for three or four additional teachers in order to reduce the large classes of 40-45 pupils in the Junior High School to 35 pupils and to improve the teaching of some subjects now not adequately taught because of lack of facili- ties.
When all items are considered the yearly expense of running the combined school should not exceed the present cost by more than $3,000.
-27-
COST OF THE DAVIS PLAN TO THE TAX PAYER
As previously stated, last March the School Committee asked for the following:
(a) $390,000 for new building construction, changes in the Junior High School architect's fees, carrying heat to the old High School, equipment, contingent fund and grading, that is, everything complete, ready for use.
(b) $8,700 for the Pope and Frim property.
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.