required by the State to show changes taking place in the status of persons of census age. Instead of limited State authority over the enumeration or instead of such compulsions as the requirement that the census be retaken in any school district if the chief State educational official deems the report to be inaccurate, some State departments of education are now, nder legal authorization, issuing detailed instructions on how to take the enumeration, assisting local school authorities in making plans for the purpose, and exercising supervisory controls to make them effective. The emphasis upon State control is shifting from penalties and from requirements that census reports be made under oath, to State leadership in developing and putting into practice procedures that (1) will sure an accurate census and (2) will include a coverage of items raluable not only for local but also for State-wide purposes. ENUMERATION TO BEGIN AT BIRTH In accordance with the purposes the school census can serve in planning to meet educational needs, especially long-range planning, there is much that can be said in favor of the practice followed in some States to begin the enumeration of children at birth. This is more accurate and valuable for planning to meet future demands in a given locality or in the State as a whole than are estimates based upon the birth rate. It furnishes a record of children that may be expected to enroll in school any year, rather than determining how many are eligible for enrollment after they have come of school age; it affords a means for the discovery in early life of children with handicaps that may need special educational provisions; and it provides statistical information for determinIng the number to be served by extended educational, recreational, health, and other welfare services for children. Moreover, census registration at birth constitutes an accurate and ready reference for certifiation of age of children at any later time. There is much effort now ging into the procedures for "proving your age" to be used for various purposes. A continuous census which begins at birth automatically certifies the age of any child. It is easier for schools to obtain records of birth at the time of birth than it is to secure them at school entrance or at the time of entrance upon employment. A CONTINUING SCHOOL CENSUS Probably no census practice of recent origin has resulted in greater approval by authorities undertaking it than has the continuing census. It is justified on the grounds that it provides: 1. Up-to-date information at any time. Timeliness is a very important factor for making decisions relative to problems for which census data are pertinent. 2. Accurate data. If proper and adequate procedures are fol lowed for the purpose, the constant checking of the school census rolls required by a continuous census insures much greater accuracy than a periodic census. 3. Integration of the census with other phases of child-accounting work. Keeping the census up to date becomes the work of the regular child-accounting service and is handled by regular and experienced personnel rather than by special personnel appointed to take a periodic census. The total values to be derived from child accounting are thereby increased and the census figures related to other items are made more available. It seems to be apparent that there is a growing conviction that a wellconceived and well-carried-out school census constitutes the one record the local and State school authorities have which gives a complete coverage of all persons for whom both present and long-range educational plans need to be made. Data from such a census can be treated to show groups classified according to age, sex, types of physical handicaps, future date for school enrollment, etc. The data included in the census also constitute the official record against which to check school enrollments for use in the enforcement of compulsory school education provisions. The census is an essential instrument in any complete system of child accounting that cannot be supplanted by any other device. COMPULSORY EDUCATION THE PARENT IS TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE Every State places the responsibility for compliance with the compulsory education law upon the parent. This has been a continuous and universal practice in writing legal prescriptions to secure the school attendance of all children of the ages set for compulsory education. This placement of responsibility has been an aid in overcoming probably the oldest and most effective argument against the enactment of compulsory school attendance laws, namely, that they contravened the right of the parent to the control of his child.1 It was argued by the opponents of compulsory education that in a democratic country such legal provisions deprived the parent of his right to control his child and that they were monarchial. The proponents of such provisions granted that in general the parent has the right of control over his child, but seized the opportunity to point out that in a democratic country every right has, as a counterpart, a given responsibility. In this instance, the responsibility which is the counterpart of the parent's right to the control of his child, is that of providing it with the essentials 1 See U. S. Office of Education Bulletin 1940, No. 6, Monograph No. 5, p. 6. of life and certain designated social opportunities, among which education is regarded as an essential. The attendance laws thus recognized the rights of the parent to the control of his child, but at the same time made the parent responsible for his school attendance. It is the parent, therefore, not the child, who violates the compulsory school attendance law, and it is he against whom gal proceedings are enacted and penalties assessed. So strictly have egislatures in the enactment of attendance laws, and State departments of education in establishing policies for their enforcement, adhered to these principles that in all States where attendance laws are effectively enforced, the parent has found it difficult to plead his inability to keep Es child in school. In some States, before he can evade the responsibility for the nonattendance of his child, he is required to establish as a fact that he is not able to control the behavior of his child. If he complains that he is not able to furnish his child the necessary personal equipment for attending school, his case is investigated, and if his contention is substantiated, the general practice is to extend public aid for the purpose. Either the parent must send his child to school or surrender some of his rights to control his child, to the end that the child may receive the educational opportunities the law guarantees him. Regardless, however, of the specific responsibility placed upon parents for the attendance of their children in accordance with compulsory school laws, parents have found some reasons and offered various excuses for irregularity of attendance which some local school officials having discretionary power have been too much inclined to accept, and which have led to considerable laxity in the strict enforcement of the law. Some examples include necessity for the labor of the child, distance from school, condition of roads coupled with inclement weather, temporary lack of adequate articles of clothing, and personal health. The trend is definite in some States to eliminate, more and more, irregularity of attendance due to such exemptions and excuses by (1) more careful investigations of each case to determine whether or not such irregular attendance is really warranted, and to act accordingly in enforcing the ; and (2) providing necessary means and furnishing remedial measures to remove any real cause for irregularity in attendance. EXEMPTIONS One of the main loopholes in both compulsory attendance laws and their enforcement by local officials is the looseness with which legal provisions, dealing with exemptions and granting discretionary power to officials in issuing requests for exemptions, are drawn. States interested in bringing about strict and universal compulsory school attendance are, in the revisions of their laws, beginning to eliminate references to such conditions as a child whose labor is necessary for the support of himself or family, living a specified distance from school, attendance at school would be hazardous to pupil's health. They are also beginning to eliminate the authorization of broad discretionary powers to local officials granting exemptions, making the authorization more specific and providing for objective evidence as a basis for making decisions under them. REQUIRED SCHOOL ATTENDANCE There is a definite trend to increase required school attendance to cover the full term of school. This is in keeping with the assumption that the length of time schools are to be in session constitutes the minimum term regarded as necessary for realizing the goals for which the educational program is established. This assumption is basic to the fundamental philosophy governing our social order, namely, economy, not prodigality, in providing social institutions to meet social needs. ATTENDANCE AT NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS There is a growing trend to make more specific the conditions under which children may attend nonpublic schools or be provided private tutorage, in lieu of attendance at public schools, to meet the requirements for compulsory education. State laws and practices are being strengthened relative to accrediting nonpublic schools for the purpose. Qualifications of teachers are being written in terms of the qualifications and certification practices required for public-school teachers; general facilities for providing educational experiences, in addition to courses of study pursued in the public schools, are being considered as important factors, and are required to be equal to those provided by public schools; identical reports to those made by public schools are being required in some instances. In addition, more attention is being given to inspection by public-school officials to ascertain if required standards are being met. EMPHASIS ON PREVENTION Rapid progress is being made in many States in the shift of emphasis from penalties imposed for violations to preventive measures. There is a growing recognition of the fact that nonattendance and irregular attendance of the present time, as different from the early years of compulsory education, are in most cases due to determinable and removable causes. For example, unfavorable home situations, economic conditions, personal health problems, lack of proper adjustment to school situations, environmental influences that act as a deterrent are all problems in the field of child welfare which can be studied in accordance with the techniques used in that field and treated in accordance with practices of proven value. The trend in this direction is indicated by the kinds of officials, such as visiting teachers, who are given the respon sibility for the enforcement of attendance laws, and by arrangements made with welfare agencies to secure their cooperation in removing the conditions which result in the nonattendance of a child. QUALIFICATIONS OF ATTENDANCE OFFICERS Legal prescriptions establishing qualifications for attendance officers, or the legal delegation of authority to the appointing of local school ficials for the purpose, are becoming more common. The trend is decidedly in the direction of establishing qualifications that not only include but emphasize abilities for social and child-welfare services. SUPPORTING PUBLIC OPINION Regardless of the fact that a State has on its statute books, as all States do, a law that requires the regular school attendance of every child of certain specified ages, there may not be strict and universal compliance with the law unless there is a sufficient supporting public opinion for its enforcement. State departments of education which are working on the problem of improved compulsory school attendance are giving attention to building up and maintaining, through educational processes, a public opinion that will support their efforts. CHILD LABOR COOPERATION OF ALL INTERESTED AGENCIES Prohibitions against the employment of children of specified ages in all or certain occupations, and the protection of them against undesirable working conditions, constitute problems in child welfare that need the cooperation of all interested agencies. The practices of States that have made comparatively good progress in the protection of children against undesirable employment substantiate this viewpoint. Cooperative efforts for this purpose call for the participation of labor authorities, educational authorities, and social-welfare agencies. While the enforcement of child-labor laws is by statute placed in the hands. of a designated authority, usually the State Commissioner of Labor, the laws frequently express or imply that the State educational authority shall cooperate in the enforcement of the law. This is sound procedure as the child is usually released from school to go to work. Moreover, the issuance of the permit to work is usually the responsibility of a school official. Furthermore, the health of the child is a factor for consideration in issuing a work permit. Hence, good practice requires the participation of all these agencies working with a common background of understanding for a common goal-the welfare of the child. An example of a trend in this direction is the requirement made by one State that in addition to legally specified hazardous occupations |