A PART OF THE INVESTIGATION OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY IN THE UNITED STATES

Mr. KEFAUVER, from the Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency in the United States, submitted the following

INTERIM REPORT

[Pursuant to S. Res. 62, 84th Cong., 1st sess., and S. Res. 173, 84th Cong., 2d sess.]

I. INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE

The Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency, pursuant to authorization in Senate Resolution 62, 84th Congress, 1st session, and Senate Resolution 173, 84th Congress, 2d session, has been making a "full and complete study of juvenile delinquency in the United States" including its "extent and character" and its "causes and contributing factors." In carrying out its mandate, the subcommittee has held hearings at which experts in the field of juvenile delinquency and related areas of inquiry have testified from the background of their studies and observations. This testimony has pointed to a number of special problems affecting the incidence of juvenile delinquency. Interim reports have been issued by the subcommittee on a number of these problems."

As the inquiry has progressed into various aspects of the problem of juvenile delinquency, considerable testimony has been heard on the possible relationship between education and juvenile delinquency. Many persons have written the subcommittee urging that consideration be given to the relationship of educational experience to delinquent or nondelinquent behavior.

While there is virtually unanimous agreement among those who have given careful study to the problem that the educational experi

1 These reports include: Comic Books and Juvenile Delinquency (February 1955); Television and Juvenile Delinquency (August 1955); Juvenile Delinquency Among the Indians (August 1955); Youth Employment and Juvenile Delinquency (December 1955); Motion Pictures and Juvenile Delinquency (March 1956); and Obscene and Pornographic Literature and Juvenile Delinquency (May 1956). The subcommittee also issued interim report I in March 1954 and interim report II in March 1955.

ence has a relationship to the pattern of youthful behavior, there is considerable difference in the spectrum of opinions held as to the effects of the present American elementary and secondary school systems upon the young people and their behavior as a consequence of such experience. Likewise, there is much difference of opinion as to the extent and manner in which the child's educational experience may be planned by those charged with his teaching so that his individual needs are met in the school.

3

The subcommittee approached this problem without preconceived notions. The witnesses who appeared before the subcommittee were not selected on the basis of their opinions or viewpoints. A number of educators, scholars, and officials from many parts of the Nation have testified or corresponded with the subcommittee in setting forth their thinking on various aspects of the problem.

WITNESSES HEARD AND COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED

6

Among the witnesses whose testimony on educational problems has been heard by the subcommittee in hearings other than those on education at Nashville was Dr. Samuel M. Brownell, Commissioner of the United States Office of Education, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, D. C. His testimony was heard in the national hearings. Another witness at the same hearings was Dr. A. C. Flora, Columbia, S. C., chairman, board of trustees of the National Education Association.5 Robert C. Taber, director, division of pupil personnel and counseling, school district of Philadelphia, Pa., testified at the same hearings. Mr. Taber also testified in the youth employment hearings. Another witness heard in this connection was Allen H. Wetter, associate superintentent of schools, Philadelphia, Pa. His testimony was heard in the Philadelphia hearings. The testimony of Henry Barry, head supervisor of attendance, Boston School Committee, testified in the Boston hearings. The testimony of Dr. Dennis C. Haley, superintendent of Boston schools, appears in the printed Boston hearings.10 Dr. Herbert Clish, superintendent of schools, city and county of San Francisco, Calif., testified at the hearings in San Francisco. The other witnesses who testified on the possible relationship of education and juvenile delinquency at the hearings in Nashville, Tenn., included: Dr. Harold Benjamin,

11

8

2 It is being increasingly recognized by sociologists, psychiatrists, and others concerned with various aspects of the care and development of the individual that the prevention of crime and juvenile delinquency must be regarded as a community enterprise in which the schools must exercise leadership-Barr, A. S., Burton, W. H., and Brueckner, L. J., Supervision, p. 551.

3 The word "education" is derived from the Latin "educatus," past participle of "educare," "to bring up a child."

Alfred North Whitehead defined education as "the acquisition of the art of the utilization of knowledge”— Whitehead, Alfred North, The Aims of Education and Other Essays, p. 6.

When one considers in its length and in its breadth the importance of this question of the education of a nation's young, the broken lives, the defeated hopes, the national failures, which result from the frivolous inertia with which it is treated, it is difficult to restrain within oneself a savage rage. In the conditions of modern life the rule is absolute, the race which does not value trained intelligence is doomed.-Whitehead, Alfred North, op. cit., p. 22.

Hearings Before the Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate, 83d Cong., 2d sess., National, Federal, and Youth-Serving Agencies, pt. 2, pp. 439-451.

5 Op. cit., pt. 3, pp. 670-676.

Op. cit., pt. 3, pp. 676-681.

"Hearings Before the Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate, 84th Cong., 1st sess., Youth Employment, pp. 192-200.

Hearings Before the Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate, 83d Cong., 2d sess., Philadelphia Community Hearings, pp. 90-94.

Hearings Before the Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate, 83d Cong., 2d sess., Boston Community Hearings, pp. 179–187.

10 Op. cit., pp. 168-187.

11 Hearings Before the Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate, 84th Cong., 1st sess., Education, Aug. 10, 11, 12, 1955.

professor of education, George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville; Dr. Otto Billig, psychiatrist, Vanderbilt Hospital, Nashville; George L. Blackwell, superintendent of schools, St. Joseph, Mo.; Dr. H. C. Brearley, professor of educational sociology, George Peabody College for Teachers; Quill E. Cope, commissioner of education, State of Tennessee; N. A. Crippens, of Tennessee Agricultural and Industrial State University, Nashville; Lawrence G. Derthick, superintendent of schools, Chattanooga, Tenn., representing the National Education Association; Mrs. Ralph W. Frost, president, Tennessee Congress of Parents and Teachers, Knoxville, Tenn.; Dr. Willard E. Goslin, director, division of educational administration and community development, George Peabody College for Teachers; Dr. Nicholas Hobbs, professor of educational psychology, George Peabody College for Teachers; W. B. Jones, professor of sociology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tenn.; Ward I. Miller, superintendent of schools, Wilmington, Del.; Dr. Daniel Alfred Prescott, director, Institute for Child Study, University of Maryland, College Park, Md.; Dr. Albert Reiss, Jr., sociology department, Vanderbilt University; Dr. S. O. Roberts, professor of psychology and education, Fisk University, Nashville; Maycie Southall, professor of elementary education, George Peabody College for Teachers; Thomas A. Van Sant, director, division of adult education, department of education, Baltimore, Md.; and Dr. William Van Til, chairman, division of teaching of curriculum development, George Peabody College for Teachers.

The subcommittee acknowledges its appreciation of the following persons who have contributed papers for this report:

Prof. W. W. Carpenter, University of Missouri; Dr. William_G. Carr, executive secretary, National Education Association; Dr. Harold L. Clapp, Grinnell College, Grinnell, Iowa; Dr. Albert K. Cohen, Indiana University; Prof. Augustine G. Confrey, St. Louis University; Lawrence G. Derthick, superintendent, Chattanooga, Tenn., public schools; Miriam Fuhrman, Bureau of Labor Standards, United States Department of Labor; Dr. Buell G. Gallagher, president, The City College, New York, N. Y.; Mrs. Thelma W. Horacek, director, division of special services, Chattanooga, Tenn., public schools; Dr. Herold C. Hunt, Under Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; Elizabeth S. Johnson, Bureau of Labor Standards, United States Department of Labor; Prof. Carol Kahler, St. Louis University; Albert Lynd, author of Quackery in the Public Schools; Dr. Earl J. McGrath, president of the University of Kansas City; M. D. Mobley, executive secretary, American Vocational Association: F. Hemans Oliver, Jr., and members of committee of teachers in Savannah, Ga., schools; Prof. Theo M. Shea, St. Louis University; Dr. George N. Shuster, president, Hunter College; and Dr. John W. Taylor, executive director, WTTW, Chicago Educationa! Television Association.

Helpful suggestions for the preparation of this report were received from Dr. William F. Soskin of the American Psychological Association and from Dr. Samuel A. Kirk, director of the Institute for Exceptional Children at the University of Illinois.

VARIED OPINIONS EXPRESSED

A considerable variation is observed in the opinions of those who have studied the problem of the extent to which educational experience

may contribute to a youth's delinquent behavior. 12 Several viewpoints have been expressed by those who have contributed to this interim report. Their thinking has shown that the interweaving in the relationship of the schools to delinquency has many threads in a pattern that is beginning to be probed 13 There is a need for much research to be done in furthering this exploration.1

15

The American system of public schools is an enterprise of vast proportions, employing over 1 million teachers. The cost is in excess of $6 billion each year. The responsibility is for the education of 32 million young people throughout the United States, where today 9 out of every 10 children between the ages of 7 and 15 years are in school. This remarkable approach to universal education is a significant achievement of the public-school system. 16 The purpose of universal education is to insure a minimum of disciplined intellectual training to every youth. The extension of educational opportunity to every future citizen, or universal educational opportunity, would require that the opportunity for advanced study be open to every student who demonstrates the intellectual capacity and the willingness to exert himself to achieve a high degree of performance."

12 The fact that the crime situation has been very much better handled in practically all other civilized countries is a standing challenge to American citizens. When the campaign was being waged for free public schools it was claimed the schools would pay for themselves through the reduction of losses resulting from crime. Horace Mann went about saying, "More schools, less policemen. Now we have more of both Upon the public schools and the public-school students of today there rests a big responsibility to inform people and to arouse them, to correct the evils that encourage crime.-Douglas, Harl R., Why You Have High Schools, in Social Studies, p. 37.

Perhaps the most strategic community agency for the prevention of delinquency is the school, since it reaches practically all children at a relatively early period in their growth. If it succeeds in helping them achieve healthful attitudes, habits and interests, integrated personalities, and a sense of social responsibility, it has won a major battle in the prevention of delinquency.-Lesser, Edith K., Understanding Juvenile Delinquency, in Federal Probation, vol. 13, No. 3, September 1949, p. 60.

13 E. g., truancy appears as a first offense in the record of many delinquents. The child plays truant when he is unable to make a satisfactory adjustment at school, that second organized social group that he encoun ters. (The first social group, of which he is a part and to which he must make adjustment, is the family.) This maladjustment may arise from his inability to fulfill minimum educational requirements, or it may have as its cause his failure to establish satisfying social relationships with his classmates.-Banay, Ralph S., Youth in Despair, p. 49.

14 The obvious and tragic need for revitalizing moral values calls even more widely for farflung changes in education and for social invention in developing new forms. The widespread immorality, or more properly unmorality, of our society, particularly of our economic and political leaders, is a genuine threat to our society. The challenge to education in all its manifestations is direct and inescapable.-Barr, A. S., Burton, W. H., and Brueckner, L. J., op. cit. p. v.

15 For interesting views of one sociologist, see Hollingshead, August B., Elmtown's Youth; the Impact of Social Classes on Adolescents, pp. 441-453.

16 A century ago, the opponents of free schools resisted strenuously the proposals for their establishment. Many could not be made to see the desirability of universal taxation for education. It was commonly said that "taking a man's property to educate his neighbor's child is no more defensible than talkng a man's plow to plow his neighbor's field." The dangers of noneducation were not realized, nor were the benefits fully appreciated of reading and writing. Beyond the elements it was difficult even for men of some vision to justify the expenditure of public funds. The parent and citizen of today who are awake to their responsibilities would pay larger school taxes if they were certain that children would profit in direct proportion to the increased contribution.-Percival, W. P., Why Educate? pp. 23-24.

While impressed by much that America has accomplished, Dr. Hsu, an astute observer, writes that, "The higher incidence of crime motivated by runaway emotions in America must be linked to the same sources of energy which have made America great. Such crimes are, therefore, one of the prices for American civilization."-Hsu, Francis L. K., Sex Crimes and Personality, The American Scholar, winter issue, 1951-52, p. 65.

17 In education we are trying to do something to human beings, that is, to make changes in them. What we are trying to do, or what changes we wish to make in individual human beings is more strictly the problem of what the individual wants to do for himself with himself to meet the problems of his time and of his own life. To talk about liberal education or general education or specialized education or vocational education often hides the problem. It leads us into abstractions. It hides the definitely individual character of the educational problems-as well as its desperately human character. It corrupts educational thinking by permitting us to forget the personal human quality of education. We tend to lose the individual human being. This is most evident as we concern ourselves primarily with teaching as we do in our mass educational activity. We think in terms of masses instead of individuals, in terms of universal education rather than of the education of the individual persons. When we are thinking of individual human beings who are trying to educate themselves we inevitably think of students not teachers, of learning not teaching. Learning is the essential characteristic of all genuine education. Teaching is merely a phase of the economy of learning. Let us try to define what the educational problem is in terms of the individual human being, the necessary starting point of all education which calls itself liberal or anything else."-Fitzpatrick, Edward A., How To Educate Human Beings, pp. 17-18.

Modern education says: The curriculum must be based on the child's needs, interests, and abilities. This doctrine might be called the cornerstone of modern educational theory, for it is advanced on every hand and dinned into every prospective teacher. It is a nice, plausible-sounding doctrine and indeed a perfectly valid one if accepted cautiously and with reservations; for it is obviously true that all students do not have the same abilities and that learning will be most effective when it takes account of these individual differences.-Smith, Mortimer, And Madly Teach, p. 37.[