SCHOOLING is what happens to children and youth under the guidance of classroom teachers. If the teachers are well prepared, the teaching is likely to be effective in helping pupils attain the goals of the school program. But the most effective teacher is one who keeps his planning and instruction in tune with the useful and constructive findings of educational research. Research may be useful to the classroom teacher in at least three ways: (1) by helping him develop an alert, sensitive attitude to the advancing edge of human knowledge, (2) by supplying him with facts whereby he can improve his own work, and (3) by stimulating him to go on beyond existing research findings to discover additional facts for himself. The problem of the typical classroom teacher is to keep pace with the continually advancing field of educational research. He must know where and how to find research and then he must be able to read with understanding what he finds. The problem is further complicated by the varying degrees of reliability among research studies. These complications are so serious that many classroom teachers do not have the benefits of research and many research studies have little effect on everyday practice. The bridging of this gap seems to be one of the most important problems in today's education. For this reason the NEA Department of Classroom Teachers and the American Educational Research Association have joined together to produce a series of pamphlets on "what research says to the teacher." The cost of printing these publications has been met by the Department of Classroom Teachers of the National Education Association. The authors are well-known research leaders from among the membership of the AERA. The layout and editing of the series have been done by the staffs of the AERA and the NEA Research Division. The Department of Classroom Teachers and the AERA are indebted to the individual authors of this series. All of them have made personal sacrifices to prepare their manuscripts; none has received an honorarium. Their contributions are unselfish gifts to the progress of education. Copyright, August 1958 National Education Association The Library of Congress catalogue entry for this publication appears on the inside back cover. EXPLANATION The author has attempted to draw from research material on juvenile delinquency the items which promise to be of most help to classroom teachers. It is not a complete summary of research. In some instances opinion has been given which is believed to represent the views of most experts. The interpretation and recommendations are those which the author, William C. Kvaraceus of Boston University, believes to be soundly supported by research. His original manuscript was reviewed by Hazel F. Gabbard, Specialist, Extended School Services and Parent Education, U. S. Office of Education; and Jack A. Holmes, School of Education, University of California, Berkeley. Changes were made by the author on the basis of the suggestions of the reviewers and of the staffs of the AERA and the NEA Research Division. JUVENILE DELINQUENCY SINCE 1948 the volume and the rate of juvenile delinquency have shown a steady increase in the United States. About a half million children are now being referred to the juvenile courts of the nation each year. A 70-percent increase took place in the number of cases reported between 1948 and 1955. During this same period the child population (7 to 17 years) increased 16 percent. The rate of increase of juvenile delinquency has exceeded by more than four times the rate of population increase. If this trend continues, more than a million youngsters can be anticipated in the juvenile courts in the near future. These are not "just court statistics." These are children. They have names, parents, and teachers. Their natural habitat is the Classroom, U. S. A. But not all children, nor even a majority of children, are delinquent. Only about 2 percent of the children aged 7 to 17 have a court contact in any one year. Although the volume of delinquency country-wide is substantial, the actual number of cases that a classroom teacher may expect to find within his own class or classes will be small. However, the teacher's contacts with predelinquents may be considerable. If the present trends continue, it is likely that perhaps 1 boy in 5 will show a delinquency record by the time he reaches draft age. Far more boys than girls commit offenses which bring them to the attention of the courts. In 1952 the ratio was 5 boys to 1 girl. The anticipated ratios of delinquency vary from neighborhood to neighborhood and from community to community. In overcrowded, deteriorating, and neglected neighborhoods where social disorganization, rulelessness, and contradictory value systems are common, the schools can expect larger numbers and higher percentages of delinquents in their classrooms than can be expected in schools more favorably situated. Just how bad is the misbehavior picture as seen through the eyes of teachers? Judging from the questionnaire returns of more than four thousand teachers as reported by the NEA Research Division, the problem of misbehavior and delinquency is not nearly as bad as is frequently portrayed on the TV screen, in the movies, in the press, and on the radio-at least so said the teachers. For example, two-thirds of the teachers responding indicated that "real trouble makers" account for fewer than 1 in every 100 pupils. Almost 95 percent of the teachers described their pupils as either exceptionally well behaved or reasonably well behaved. However, this broad opinion survey gives no whitewash of the youth problem. Teachers working in the largest cities reported a heavy incidence of physical attack against faculty members in their schools. Twenty-eight percent of the teachers indicated that such an incident took place within the 12-month period, and only 23 percent of these teachers from the largest communities said that their pupils were exceptionally well behaved. These respondents also reported that the most troublesome and turbulent grades are to be found in the junior high school with the senior high school second, and the elementary school least affected. This study implies that "bigness" courts trouble. Teachers in the largest communities, in the largest schools, and who had the largest classes reported significantly more trouble with pupils than did instructors working in less crowded districts, in smaller schools, and in smaller classes. It may well be that "bigness" breeds anonymity and an impersonality of relationship that seriously affects the quality of classroom learning and behavior. NEEDED: A POSITIVE ATTITUDE TOWARD Within the array of deviate or exceptional children, the juvenile delinquent is low man on the totem pole of school-community acceptance. Studies indicate that most teachers, if they had a choice, would prefer not to work with the overt, aggressive, antisocial deviate. The juvenile delinquent is a child generally full of hate and hostility; the nature of his difficulty, as evidenced by his overt aggressiveness, is such as to elicit little sympathy from an offended and irritated community. The result is that the hostile delinquent is met with equal hate and hostility on the part of the community. There is little hope or promise in ultimate adjustment for the 41638 0-59- -22 delinquent or any lessening of the youth problem for the community on this two-way street of hate and hostility. Operating on the principle that the delinquent is first a child and secondly a delinquent, that he is seldom delinquent 24 hours a day and for a full seven-day week, and that there is no such thing as human rubbish, all professional workers, including classroom teachers, must distinguish between the sin and the sinner. Rejecting the delinquency, the worker should not reject the delinquent. Yet there is considerable evidence available that the public and even some professional workers are not so much attacking juvenile delinquency as they are attacking the delinquent himself. If not attacking the delinquent, the press and public opinion have opened up a sharp attack against his parents and even against many professional workers who are hired to help the young offender. These attacks can be seen in the rash of antiparent legislation enacted in many states, and in the “get tough with parents" attitudes visible in most communities, together with the periodic waves of criticism leveled against "soft" courts, "muddleheaded psychiatrists,” and “egghead researchers" who undertake to study and work with the nonconforming child. It is very easy to become indignant and irate with the offending behavior of the delinquent; it is hard to refrain from striking back at the delinquent and his neglectful or lackadaisical parents. Unlike the deaf child, the blind child, or the polio victim with his heavy leg brace, the delinquent evokes little empathy or positive action that promises help. Like a behavioral alcoholic he needs sympathy, study, and treatment rather than jailing. Instead of a helping hand, the delinquent gets the back of the community's hand. Like any nondelinquent, the young offender is much in need of approval, security, and acceptance, but he is least likely to feel these unless they are forthcoming through insightful planning on the part of some special community agencies including the schools. WHO AND WHAT IS A DELINQUENT? Different persons in the community look at the delinquent through different windows. What each sees through his own |