The Case for the Private School; G. Schuyler

This diversity by its very nature enriched our culture. Mr. Schuyler is editor of the New York edition of the Pittsburgh Courier. [42 ] While the government school system has never entirely displaced the private schools, it has largely superseded them. With the growing desire and demand for mass instruction follOwing the Civil War, municipalities, cities, and states turned increasingly to tax-supported govern.. ment schools until the latter became swamped by enroll.. mente There is now a widespread agitation for some form of federal subsidy. Thirty or forty years ago, such a suggestion would have been overwhelmingly rejected as leading inevitably to repugnant regimentation. This fear has been considerably justified by events, and accord ingly dissatisfaction with government schools has grown, with widespread criticism of what and how our children are taught. Some Parents Pay Twice It is significant that despite the heavy school taxes which all must pay, an increasing number of parents are willing to assume the added burden of private tuition to assure their children the kind of educational discipline they want them to have. Many families are prepared to forego expensive gewgaws in order to do this, believing that the scholastic and ethical standards are higher in private than in government schools. They are scarcely in the mood for expensive frills and experiments of dubious value, preferring to have a more direct and final say about what, how, and by whom their children are taught.

If they are not intrigued by efforts to instill in their off springs' minds enthusiasm for the United Nations, world [43 ] government, TVA experiments, and "progressive" educa tion, but prefer that they be instructed in the background and meaning of our Constitution, the clear and precise use of our language, and the mastery of mathematics or another language or two, they would like to choose their school. Many American parents feel rightly that they, and not the State, should be responsible for what their children become; that education should be divorced from political control; and that those who prefer private instruction for their children should not be taxed for the upkeep of facilities which they did not choose nor curricula to which they do not want them exposed. There is a grow ing feeling that top administration and control of gov ernment school systems are too remote and too difficult to influence, that parents are mere robots in a machine that leaves little individual choice. There is some resent ment that families should be taxed to "educate" the ineducable until adulthood when there is neither the capacity nor desire among these "children" nor their parents for further instruction.

Tax Relief Needed The increase in real wages and the general lift in the standard of living in the United States now makes it possible for a much greater expansion of the private school system than was possible a century or haH-century ago. There is certainly a much larger proportion of par ents who would prefer to remove their children from [44 ] government schools if some means could be devised to free them from paying for both systems as they now must do. It is difficult to see the justice of compelling those who are paying already for private instruction to be taxed additionally for government schools to which their oHspring do not go or to which they would prefer not to send them. Indeed, such a legal provision, which would automatically expand the private school system, would relieve the· State of just so much responsibility and expense, and thus reduce taxes. There are dozens of religious organizations, whose members now find a double educational burden onerous, which would be able to establish their own schools where instruction could be given in their faith without any political controversy. There are wealthy labor unions, now maintaining many facilities for their members, which could as easily afford schools with curricula of their choosing. Private colleges and universities could expect a sustaining revenue from inevitably enlarged student bodies, thus relieving tax-supported institutions of higher learning from the increasing need for larger budgets. With continued prosperity one can envision the time when "free" education would be reduced to a mini mum. The "right" to an education would thus become a parental obligation and more in accord with a free society.

There is a real and present danger in regimented gov ernment education which an expanded private school system would allay by its wide variety of curricula and decentralization of control. Courses of study laid down [45 ] by, or increasingly influenced by, a central administration can be disastrous if not in step with changing requirements in an evolving society. Such a ponderous hierarchy does not readily respond to developing individual tastes nor social necessity. This is already reflected in the distress ingly small proportion of secondary-school and college graduates who are equipped for leadership in our highly technical age where rapid communications have shrunk the earth. With the greater flexibility and capacity of a decen tralized private school system to be more responsive to the needs and desires of an alert and responsible citi zenry, it is doubtful if the present educational impasse would have occurred or be so difficult to resolve. Some private schools might lag or become bogged down in performing their duty of educating students to cope with contemporary problems of citizenship, culture, and in dustry; but by virtue of their diversity and greater parental influence, it is probable that the percentage would be small.

[46 ] THE CASE FOR CHURCH SCHOOLS THE EARLY settlers came to these shores impelled by the strong desire to worship God in their own way. Our institutions were forged by a people who put their re ligion at the center of life's concerns. Our history was shaped by the religious convictions which prevailed in these states. If a contrary system of beliefs and values had guided our forebears, American history would be quite different; and this would be a different country today. Thus, if we would preserve our institutions and further their development, we cannot neglect the role of religion. We must make room for religion in our system of education. H. G. Wells would not see eye to ·eye with me on religion; but he said, cCEducationis the preparation of the individual for society, but his religious training is the core of that preparation." And Charles W. Eliot, when he was president of Harvard, declared, ,cExclude re~ ligion from education and you have no foundation upon The Reverend Mr. Brustat is Pastor of Trinity Lutheran Church and Trinity Christian School, Scarsdale, New York.