because of poverty. The elementary school up to 12 must be the national school offering a common foundation for all; beyond this opportunities must be created for differentiation according to the needs of the individual and of the nation. The common school must be free from clerical control and permitted to be self-directing. He expresses his opposition to the classical tradition in days when German culture is fully developed to furnish a sound basis for education. Prof. Rein, in a work by Fr. Thimme,' in which are collected the opinions of leading Germans on the subject under discussion, declares himself most emphatically, as might be expected, in favor of the common school, whose establishment would make a real and effectual contribution to the development of national feeling in the hearts of all children. Such an organization would give inner unity to the whole system of moral culture in Germany.

Dr. Kerschensteiner 2 approaches the whole question of reform from a broader standpoint than any other of its advocates. He not only questions the existing basis and aims of education, but seeks to bring the reform into line with the modern needs of society. The acquisition of knowledge is a secondary and subordinate end; the school's essential task is to make men capable of devotion to the cause of society and of humanity. Character, moral courage, energy, and sense of civic duty are qualities that are more vital than mere information. Contrary to prevailing thought among his countrymen he opposes the theory that the state is a separate entity existing apart from the individuals composing it. He accepts the Roman and Anglo-Saxon view that the state is an association of individuals organized to promote and protect the interests of all. In such a state the free and willing collaboration of citizens should mean the elimination of restraint and coercion.

The educational implication, according to Kerschensteiner, is that it is essential that the school should cease to be the playground of individual ambitions and egoisms, in order that it may become the home of social devotion." The aim should not be intellectual culture or knowledge for its own sake but training for human intercourse and just action. The sense of civic duty can only be called forth in a state that furnishes scope for the development of personality. "If we wish to realize the true civic spirit, we must subdue the narrow national spirit." The school must accordingly fulfil a twofold. duty-it must take account of individual differences and at the same time keep in the foreground the universal element-practical conduct. Educational reform must start from these premises.

Thimme, Fr. Vom inneren Frieden des deutschen Volkes. Leipzig, 1916. *Deutsche Schulerziehung in Krieg und Frieden. Berlin, 1916. Kandel, Jessie D. itral Tendencies in German Education. Educational Review, vol. 57, May, 1919. Pp.

The state, says Kerschensteiner, must guarantee the right of every child to an education suited to his ability. He combats all the arguments of opponents of this movement-overcrowding of secondary schools, difficulty of selection, lowering of standards, increase of the intellectual proletariat, and the danger of social conflicts. The Einheitsschule should, therefore, be an educational institution for all up to the age of 22 or 24, with selection all along the line according to individual differences. Unlike Rein, Kerschensteiner does not desire to keep all children together as long as possible but would begin to differentiate as soon as individual bent appears. For such a system flexibility and elasticity are indispensable; bureaucratic control and uniformity are dangerous. Selection might begin at as early an age as nine, when those who show intellectual aptitude may be transferred to secondary schools. For those who remain in the elementary school variety may be afforded by a departmental system. There should be transfers back and forth between schools and departments to give the individual every opportunity for realizing himself. But whether a child remains in an elementary school or goes on to a secondary or vocational school, the fundamental task of education continues to be the preparation of citizens; the civic spirit must saturate the whole of education; not the emphasis on nationalism or on German language and literature, but the sovereign idea of preparation of all for society, can successfully promote the desired end. Education is a State function, and since the State has claims superior to those of smaller groups and societies, it should have the right to arbitrate and decide between conflicting interests, without, however, ignoring particular characteristics. Centralization that is too strict will stifle local effort and individual initiative; competition and rivalry are essential to life and progress.

Opposition to these claims was immediately aroused and came from the secondary schools, teachers of traditional subjects, school inspectors, administrative officials, and the clerical and conservative elements in politics. The secondary-school teachers in general feared overcrowding of their schools. The specialists were alarmed at the thought of the postponement of the beginning of secondary education from the age of 9 to 12 and the consequent lowering of standards. The inspectors and administrative official produced arguments against a radical change based on considerations of the good of the lower classes; higher education would only lead to unrest and discontent, to dissatisfaction with the social position of parents, and ambitions for higher positions that are limited in number; pupils from poorer homes and humbler environments do not enjoy the same advantages and opportunities that are possessed by the children of the upper classes-a condition that in itself might be fraught with danger consequent on the sudden transfer from a humble to a higher status.

In any case the work of the elementary schools furnishes no criterion for the selection of pupils for advancement to higher education, so that early selection would be surrounded with risk for the aspiring pupil, while no account would be taken of or provision made for late development. It would also be unjust to the elementary school teachers to deprive them of the pick of their product and the promotion of gifted pupils would mean the withdrawal of an everpresent incentive to the less well endowed. If the views of the radicals were realized and the selection of able pupils for advancement to secondary schools were made by the schools, the rights of parents would be outraged; at the most all that the schools should do would be to advise parents and allow them to act if they choose. The fear was also expressed by no less an authority than Rudolf Eucken that the realization of the common-school proposal would endanger traditional values in school, lower standards, compromise the precious things of German culture, and in the last analysis lead to the establishment of private schools and the perpetuation of a social class to preserve these heritages. Curt Fritzsche, in a work on the Einheitsschule, claims to see the purport of the whole movement in the reception accorded at the Kiel congress of 1914 to the declaration of two French delegates that it represented the international ideal common to all Europe clearly the aims of the movement are internationalism, democratization, radicalism, antireligious secularization, egoism, and social feuds.

Finally, Ferdinand J. Schmidt, professor of education at the University of Berlin, attacks the movement in an article in Preussische Jahrbücher, October, 1916. He charges the reformers with basing their agitation on political prejudices and class interests. The proposal to establish an extended unified school system, with sixyears of elementary education, three years of intermediate and three of secondary, without distinction for all would lower the standard to meet the needs of the poorest intellect; it would tend to a reduction of the elementary school subjects, and, by consequence, would lower the standards of the secondary schools. Foreign languages would be begun too late, and the boy going out into the world at the age of 15 would have studied French or English for only one year; ultimately languages would disappear entirely from the intermediate stage and with them the most effectual instrument for broadening the mind would be gone. The reformers are the dupes of a pedagogic materialism which would be disastrous to the nation in diverting the aim of education from its true goal-moral culture. Emphasis would then only be placed on developing those qualities and those abilities that would yield most profit.

1 Fritzsche, C. Die Einheitsschule in Bibliothek für Volks- und Weltwirtschaft, No. 21, Dresden, 1916.

115176°-19-2

This is the American method in education with all its dangers. The reform would not result in social equality; class distinctions continue even in countries that have a unified school system open to all. By boundlessly developing the understanding, which divides and separates, by releasing, without check or hindrance, the intellectual abilities of individuals, by freeing them from that wholesome and indispensable discipline of social morality, they are bringing about, with the best intentions in the world, the overthrow and dismemberment of national unity.

Early in 1916 the subject came within the realm of practical politics when the educational estimates for 1916-17 were brought up for debate in the Prussian House of Representatives (Abgeordnetenhaus). The Social Democrats and the Progressive Volkspartei came forward with a demand for the abolition of the Vorschule and the throwing open of opportunities for ability in whatever grade of society it might appear. The Vorschule is merely a school for those privileged by class, who made no other use of their educational opportunity than to advance as far as the Einjährigenzeugnis. If the principle of the Einheitsschule were adopted the best pupils would pass on completion of their elementary school course to the secondary school and in five or six years obtain the Reifezeugnis or certificate of maturity that would admit them to the universities. Both proposals met with opposition from the conservatives and the clericals who feared that the common-school movement would involve secularization. They were prepared to grant one concession that the transfer of pupils from the elementary to the secondary schools should be made as easy as that from the Vorschule. On behalf of the Government the minister of education admitted the need of establishing facilities for transferring able pupils from the elementary to the secondary schools and suggested the organization of a Mittelschule for this purpose. He referred to an experiment that had already been conducted in Berlin whereby pupils from elementary schools were transferred to the Quarta class or third year of the Realschule and in four years attained to the Einjährigenzeugnis. Such pupils could then move on to the Oberrealschule and at 19 or 20 be ready to pass on to the universities.

In the course of 1916 announcements appeared in the press that the ministry of education was preparing regulations to enable fit and selected pupils, after three years in an elementary school, to be transferred without further examination to a secondary school, thus enjoying practically the same privilege as the pupils of the Vorschule, with the difference that, if found deficient, they could be returned to the elementary grades. This proposal met with a storm of opposition; it was feared that the secondary schools would be invaded and that the teachers and principals of these schools would not have the power to turn pupils back to the elementary schools. The result was

that the ministry denied that it was even considering such a suggestion, and stated that it was merely planning to codify the regulations for the entrance examinations to secondary schools which had remained unchanged since 1837. When the new regulations were issued in August, it was found that they benefitted the Vorschule rather than the elementary schools.

The question of the Einheitsschule again came up in the course of the debate on the estimates for 1917-18 and the Government was then compelled to act. The position of the minister of education showed. clearly that the ground had been shifted. From the consideration of the Einheitsschule and of plans for facilitating the transition from the elementary to the secondary school, the problem had been narrowed down to that of selecting gifted elementary school pupils for advancement to higher education. The minister announced that he had early in 1917 addressed the following questions to all district inspectors:

(a) In what elementary school organizations can a good pupil pass into sexta of a secondary school without necessitating special arrangements or alterations in the school program?

(b) If such organizations do not exist, what changes would have to be made in the program to render these transfers possible?

(c) Can such changes be made without disadvantage to the other students? If not, suggestions should be made for special arrangements to meet the needs of the gifted pupil.

It was announced that an experiment was being conducted by the Government at Königsberg and plans were in progress for dealing with the needs of gifted children in Berlin, Frankfort, Breslau, Mannheim, and Hamburg.

The new movement for the selection of gifted and exceptional children seems to have had the effect of checking completely any further demands for the Einheitsschule. In the schools systems to which reference is made above Begabtenschulen have been or are in process of being established, and it is not improbable that this compromise will be accepted by both sides. Nowhere has a common school been put into operation, and teachers' associations appear to have been active in promoting the new experiments, which are limited to facilitating access to middle and secondary schools to gifted and exceptional (Begabten and Hochbegabten pupils) in elementary schools.

In Berlin such an experiment was introduced on the suggestion of Geheimer Justizrat Cassel, a member of the Progressive Volkspartei, who urged, in the Prussian Abgeordnetenhaus, in 1916, the establishment of facilities in each province to enable pupils on finishing the elementary schools to continue to a higher school and reach the Reifezeugnis or maturity certificate in five or six years. Such a plan, he stated, would be of advantage to children of poor parents in larger