This is a fascinating glimpse into the world of teaching in 1948. The worry of teachers in America at the time seems to be learning to teach children using new forms of media such as radio and film and how to combat children wasting their time reading comics.

The Eighty-First Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II

Making all children "ready to learn" is the first, and probably the most important, national education goal for the year 2000. What does it mean for children to be "ready to learn?" This book is about the beliefs of the people who are shaping preschool policy. McGill-Franzen tells us what key decision-makers are thinking about preschool education -- what counts as school, who should pay for it, what should be taught, and especially, whether there should be reading and writing programs for four-year-olds. This book also explores the history of these beliefs. The author locates contemporary early childhood concepts about "developmental appropriateness" in the ideas of physicians and psychologists of the 1920s, 1930s, and in even earlier periods of time. She believes that these ideas no longer work within the broader framework of literacy as embedded in the interactions of cultures children know and the lives they live.

The impetus for this book emerged from a conference that brought together publishers, and reading researchers and educators for the purpose of examining the best available research evidence about what we know -- and what we have yet to learn -- about the teaching of reading and about how children learn to read. The goal of the conference was to contribute to a sound research base upon which to develop classroom practices that will ensure that every American child will become fully literate. Because the field is still so deeply divided over the best ways to translate belief into classroom practice, the editors decided to highlight rather than gloss over these divisions. It is hoped that the papers in this volume will promote thought and discussion that will lead to action in improving reading instruction for children, now and into the new century.

Educational Research, The National Agenda, and Educational Reform examines the origins, history, nature, purposes, and status of educational research by focusing on the relationships among educational research, the national agenda, educational reform, and the social and behavioral sciences. Its major claim is that the history of educational research is embedded in the nation’s social, political, intellectual, and economic histories. Attention is given to three significant periods: the Progressive Era when modern educational research began to assume its present form; the Post-World-War-II-Era when educators and educational researchers were directed to return to or turn to the academic disciplines; and the Civil Rights Era after the Supreme Court in Brown ended legal racial segregation and raised questions about equality of educational opportunity that are still with us. These were significant periods when there was a clear national agenda shaped by both public and private agencies. Educators and educational researchers adopted policies and strategies in response to concerns and interests expressed by the public, by government officials, and by philanthropies. Researchers’ responses have had long-term consequences as seen in the reaction to The Coleman Report, debates about the merits of quantitative research as opposed to qualitative research, the ongoing discussion about the merits of No Child Left Behind, the achievement gap, the creation of the Institute of Education Sciences, and the emphasis now placed on “scientifically-based research.” The origins of the common school, the work of the philosopher Johann Friedrich Herbart and his followers, and the revolution in scientific method brought about by Charles Darwin’s work are included because they serve as the foundation for educational research. Educational researchers’ identification with and interest in individual performance and ability and their measurement is related to the close relationship educational researchers have had with psychology, a discipline that typically does not focus on social context. The significance of educational researchers’ borrowing from the behavioral sciences, especially psychology, is examined through a discussion of the mental hygiene movement, as supported by private philanthropy, and through consideration of contributors such as G. Stanley Hall, Arnold Gesell, Lewis M. Terman, Daniel Starch, and Stuart A. Courtis.