attendance problems, the former primarily but not solely concerned wit attendance laws, the latter with causes of nonattendance and its elimina tion, tracing them to school or home or community situations.

The data in table 5, section B, especially those concerned with the tw large groups, namely 74 cities reporting all the functions named as cluded in the visiting teacher services, and 77 reporting 5 (all but 1 if studied in connection with table III in Appendix (showing the com binations of functions assumed by visiting teachers), have some impo tant implications. The variety of combinations of services shown table III indicates the lack of uniformity of practices in this field pr viously referred to. However, and of equal importance, the tables sho also that the functions not reported by cities in the second group, table numbering 77 (see also columns 1 and 2 of table III in Appendix) a either (a) acting as attendance officers, or (b) direct treatment of chi dren's difficulties, in all but one city. In view of the fact that where pr fessionally prepared attendance officials are employed by State or loc school systems, thus obviating the necessity of visiting teachers assumin attendance duties, the service represented by function (a) may well taken care of in the 36 cities (table III, line 2, column 1) in which it omitted. It is also true that in many cities organized social work agencie function in cooperation with the schools, thus possibly eliminating th need for visiting teachers assuming function (f), namely, direct treat ment of children's difficulties. Forty cities fail to report (f) as a func tion of their visiting teacher staff (see table III). It seems possible, therefore, that the services represented by (a) and (f) are available from other than visiting teacher services in the 76 cities reporting five services, as they are through the schools in the 74 reporting six servicesa total of 150 city systems. If this assumption is a valid one, it follow that at least these 150 city systems, 60 percent of those reporting on fune tions, provide through the schools or cooperating agencies the full pro gram represented by the six functions indicated.

For similar reasons the 59 cities reporting four functions, usually (b), (c), (d), and (e), may be considered as having efficient, possibly complete (according to the functions named on the questionnaire) visiting teacher services. Of the remaining 40 cities offering organized services consisting of one to three of the functions, it can at least be said that a beginning has been made toward development of an efficient service, and probably urgent needs are being met.

Professional qualifications of visiting teachers.-Obviously the year 1943-44 is a particularly unsatisfactory one so far as conclusiveness of studies of teacher qualifications is concerned. With visiting teachers as with all teachers, conditions are far from normal and standards of quali fications lower than those prevailing in other years. The questionnaire

m sought information concerning the qualifications required of visiting chers in the school systems reporting. It was intended to apply to ndard requirements under normal conditions. However, many replies re based on the actual qualifications of the persons serving. Because this, as well as of the general situation, it is probable that qualifications ported do not always meet the standards normally required. For examone city reports, "normally we require a State teacher's certificate, years' experience, an A.B. degree, 1 year of professional training in xial work, or 12 weeks' summer school in social work. This year none s a degree, two of the three have teaching experience, and the third $ no experience." Another city reports that "a married woman gives e-third of her time to this work. She has no degree, but considerable perience in social work." Other comments with similar connotation re not uncommon.

Despite the abnormal situation indicated, it was believed desirable to ake an effort to secure and summarize information concerning the prossional preparation and experience required of visiting teachers in the ties which maintain organized services in the two fields, i.e., education nd social work. To secure information on education, the form carried inquiry concerning degrees required, training on the college level leadg to degrees, and on teaching experience in years; in the social work eld, the amount of professional training in an accredited school of social ork by years was asked for and the years or fractions of years of experiace required in that field.

Reports on one or more of the items indicated were received from 250 es. While incomplete and overlapping in some cases, due in part to the fact that there are not generally established standards met by all members of the visiting teacher staff and in part because actual qualificaions of visiting teachers employed as well as established requirements Table 6. Professional preparation and experience of visiting teachers, by number of cities1

Of the 266 cities reporting organized visiting teacher services, 253 gave some information on professional preparation and experience. In general, the reports seemed to indicate these were qualifications possessd by incumbents at time of reporting, rather than requirements of school systems reporting.

(if any) were reported, the results are not as conclusive as would desirable. They are presented for what they are worth in table 6 page 27. The information is undoubtedly indicative of the situation but should not be interpreted too literally nor as typical of normal pre war conditions.

In educational preparation a high percentage of the cities reportin on this item report college degrees as a requirement or as held by th visiting teachers employed. Nearly one-fourth, however, report no col lege training required. In social work, 158 cities report no training quired of visiting teachers; 95 report college training varying in amoum as shown in the table.

The table also shows a surprising number of cities which employ inex perienced visiting teachers-inexperienced in each, possibly both educătion and social work. When one considers the responsibilities usually accepted by visiting teachers, the information points to the need of plan ning for greatly improved conditions now as well as for the postwar period.

Certification. So general is the requirement that school officials, not only teachers, but supervisors, administrators, and even custodial employ ees in some systems, hold legal certificates, State or local, that it is a natural expectation that visiting teachers would be expected to hold some type of certificate in order to be eligible to receive salaries from public funds. It is, therefore, somewhat surprising that of the 266 cities report ing, only 182, or 68 percent, reported that certificates were required of the visiting teachers employed. (See table IV in Appendix.) It is possible that in some systems possession of the A.B. or B.S. degree may be recognized in lieu of a certificate, or failure to report on this question may be due to oversight or to the emergency situation. In 103 of the 182 cities in which certificates are required, State teaching certificates are those reported. Special child welfare certificates, special attendance, "special" certificates are among others reported. Eight cities report a special visiting teacher's certificate, a type now issued and required in several States. Such certificates are issued by State or local certificating authorities, including local boards of education which employ visiting teachers, in much the same way as regular teaching certificates are issued and required. Forty cities report "special" certificates, including special attendance and "child welfare and attendance credential." Fifteen cities report teaching certificates other than State certificates.

.

The possession or requirement of a teaching certificate by candidates for positions as visiting teachers does not obviate the possibility that school officials require additional preparation, probably in the social work field, as a prerequisite to employment. Certainly many of them do. The Superintendent of the Baltimore, Md., City Schools, among others, in

replying to the questionnaire form on which this study is based, gave the requirements in that city as follows:

Requirements for visiting teacher certificates include experience and professional training in either teaching or social work; plus 1 year's probationary status with this department; plus a professional examination covering educational psychology, philosophy of education, knowledge of the Baltimore school system and social agency set-up, principles and practice of visiting teacher case work.

Atlanta, Ga., requires in addition to "such general qualifications as may be required for a teacher in the division of schools to be served ... special training and experience for this particular work."

Cincinnati issues a visiting teacher certificate requiring in Education an A.B. degree, 1 year of teaching, 1 year of social work experience, and an additional year in either of the preceding, i.e., training or experience. These examples indicate considerable variety among local systems in certification policies. Only among cities located in States in which there is State-wide certification is there an approach to standardization in the certification of visiting teachers. Some examples of State certification requirements are given in the Appendix as well as additional information on types of certificates held according to States in which the reporting cities are located.

Some comments of administrators.-Among interesting side lights which the canvass of the city systems shed on the visiting teacher situation were remarks from many superintendents in whose systems visiting teachers are not now employed, who took the time to comment on and return the questionnaire and to express an interest in and a desire to develop such services. Such comments as, "We hope to add this service as soon as funds permit," or "as soon as public sentiment is favorable," were commonly expressed. At least 39 superintendents expressed their interest in or purpose or expectation to secure visiting teacher services during the following school year as indicated below. Eight of these were from Michigan, showing the influence of the newly passed State Legislation subsidizing visiting teachers employed by local school districts from State funds. A few representative replies follow:

We started a guidance clinic this year and hope to obtain a visiting teacher for next year.

None in capacity indicated. We should have. Our district has a population of approximately 28,000.

None; but feel need for the service. Should like to have result of the survey when completed.

Necessary to discontinue this position this past year due to inability to obtain properly qualified person for work.

Have not since the depression restored visiting teacher.

We use regular teachers on part-time special assignment. Our limited experience brings conviction as to value of visiting teacher service. Difficult to create

opinion in its favor. Should be the chief element in attendance service; officers to finish legal cases only.

We have an attendance officer who is policeman. I have recommended appointment of visiting counselor; but school committee has done nothing.

None at present, but we are interested for next year.

We hope to add possibly two full-time visiting teachers next year.

State program just now being established. Board of education has approved project here.

Provision has been made to employ one July 1, 1944.

No visiting teacher this year, but hope to have next.

We have no visiting teacher but our school nurse does a fine piece of social work on her home visits. We believe every district this size (18,000) should have a visiting teacher.

We are to add one or two visiting teachers next year.