ems and for developing desirable changes in their educational programs. Accordingly, topics for discussion are outlined, quesions raised for consideration by the study group, and references uggested to guide individual or group reading.

The bases for broad evaluation, discussion, and recommendaions contained herein are derived from the observations and indings of the visits made by the U. S. Office of Education, from contributions of the committee appointed by Dr. Dill, from data provided by the Children's Bureau of the U. S. Department of Labor, and from recent research studies. Dr. Christine Ingram, Assistant Director of the Department of Child Study and Special Education, Public Schools, Rochester, N. Y., was appointed temorarily to the U. S. Office of Education staff to work on the roject. To her and to all others who have contributed to the ontent of the report, the Office of Education expresses its grateul appreciation.

It is significant that this enterprise had its inception in the arly days of 1939, previous to the exigency of wartime social ressures. Since that time, the war has accentuated and brought to unprecedented focus the nature and causes of juvenile delinuency. There is a growing awareness on the part of both proessional workers and laymen that juvenile delinquency is a comunity problem. Social and educational planning agencies are I work in behalf of prevention. It is an appropriate time, therere, to crystallize our thinking to the end that training schools, a unit in State and community services for children, may more arly realize their potentialities for the guidance of the boys and rls committed to their care.

BESS GOODY KOONTZ

Assistant U. S. Commissioner of Education

PART 1

OBJECTIVES PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES

IN ORDER to understand and to plan for the needs of train

ing schools, one should first know something of their history and development, their changing objectives, and desirable policies and practices. Part I presents these matters for the general information and guidance of all who are interested in improving educational programs in training schools. It also furnishes a background of information for those who wish to use the study guides in Part II. It is written for State welfare and educational authorities who help to determine policies and programs; for training school administrators and staffs, whose responsibility it is to apply those policies; for State legislators, who have it in their power to endorse and to support a progressive program; and for laymen, whose representatives the legislators are. All of these groups in any State are concerned with the development of a training school that meets the standards of educational and social progress.

For discussion of chart on opposite page see pages 17-19.

WHAT ARE THE OBJECTIVES?

Some Current Facts

Reaching over the country from the Atlantic to the Pacif from Canada to the Gulf, and on the islands of Hawaii and Puer Rico are scores of State, county, and municipal residential trai ing schools for boys and girls, the majority of whom the law h called "delinquent." One hundred sixty-seven such schools r porting to the Children's Bureau in January 1942, served approx mately 20,901 boys and 8,535 girls, a total of 29,436 children fro communities large and small, both urban and rural. Of the schools, 112 are under the jurisdiction of States, 4 are under th District of Columbia, and 51 are under county and municip authorities. In addition, a considerable number of similar instit tions operate under private auspices.

The lower and upper limits of age for admission are set by Sta law or by administrative ruling. The legal age of admission the majority of schools ranges approximately from 8 to 10 yea to 18 years, with a few States permitting admission of childr even younger than 8 years and older than 18. In general, t tl upper age for admission is higher for girls than for boys. Mo schools, therefore, care for boys or girls of widely varying age in several instances covering as wide a range as from 7 to? years.

In some States, the lower limit of intelligence for admission set at 70 IQ, or thereabouts. This ruling eliminates those wh are seriously mentally deficient. Some of the courts do not abi by the ruling, however, since State residential schools set up pa ticularly for the mentally deficient are frequently already fille to capacity. A very few States still admit dependent children their training schools for delinquents.

Decision as to length of stay in the training school is general indeterminate and left to the discretion of the administrato The average length of stay is in most cases approximately a yea Ordinarily the children remain on parole or under the jurisdi tion of the school until they attain their majority, and they can returned to the school for further treatment if it is necessar Parole is ideally a continuation of treatment, whereby the boy girl is transferred to the community under the continuing supe

'Directory of State, District of Columbia, County, and Municipal Training Schools Cari for Delinquent Children in the United States. Chidlren's Bureau, U. S. Department of Lab Washington, D. C. February 1943. 25 p.

vision of the training school or the agency that is acting for the training school.

Differences in age levels, in learning abilities, in the interests of pre-adolescents and adolescents, in the reasons for commitment, and in length of stay create real difficulties in planning an adequate educational program in a given school. Added to these factors are the present situations resulting from the war. Statistics on training school enrollment have not as yet been fully compiled to show the trends that administrators of training schools are reporting. The statements made by them indicate that there is an increase in number of cases admitted, that the commitments represent a larger proportion of girls than in prewar years, that more younger children are admitted, and that the offenses are of a more serious nature.

The Present an Outgrowth of the Past

The programs of training schools today, whatever their assets, whatever their limitations, have been influenced by earlier attitudes toward delinquency. In the early years of the past century, child offenders against the law were prosecuted in adult courts and imprisoned with adults. In 1825 the Society for the Reformation of Juvenile Delinquents in New York City opened the first House of Refuge to care for boys neglected by parents or charged with petty crimes, and for delinquent females and youths. In 1826 and 1827 similar houses were opened in Boston and Philadelphia, and between 1845 and 1854 in New Orleans, Cincinnati, and Baltimore. Designed for neglected and homeless children as well as for delinquents, these houses were regarded by their founders as works of "charity and mercy," for sheltering these children and leading them "into ways of usefulness and virtue." Their programs, however, were based generally on confinement and industrial work. These early institutions were local in character, were supported by private funds, and were under private management.

By the middle of the nineteenth century, the movement for the State care of delinquents was well under way, and in 1847 the first State institution of its kind, the Lyman School for Boys, was established in Westboro, Mass. In 1856, Ohio established the Ohio Reform School, the first training school built on a cottage plan. These State schools were designed to serve only delinquents sentenced by the court. With the tendency toward the choice of large country sites and with the cottage plan introducing the