¹ Stewart, Alice, “Living in a Machine Age,” Teachers College Record 39 (1936): 494–505.Google Scholar

² Flexner, Abraham, A Modern School (New York: The General Education Board, 1916), 10.Google Scholar

³ Lortie, Dan C., Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975), 241.Google Scholar

⁴ Memorandum to Caldwell, Dr., April 30, 1918, File 3607, box 349, series 1.2, General Education Board Archives (Rockefeller Archive Center, New York) (hereafter referred to as GEB).Google Scholar

⁵ Dewey, John, “The Relation of Theory to Practice in Education,” in Teacher Education in America: A Documentary History, ed. Borrowman, Merle L. (New York: Teachers College Press, 1965), 140–71, 151; and Labaree, David F., The Trouble with Ed Schools (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004), 86.Google Scholar

⁶ Labaree, , The Trouble with Ed Schools, 83–108.Google Scholar

⁷ Mershon, Sherie and Schlossman, Steven, “Education, Science, and the Politics of Knowledge: The American Educational Research Association, 1915–1940,” American Journal of Education 114, no. 3 (May 2008): 307–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ See Labaree, , The Trouble with Ed Schools; Ellen Condliffe Lagemann, An Elusive Science: The Troubling History of Education Research (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2000); Kliebard, Herbert M., The Struggle for the American Curriculum, 1893–1958 (New York: Taylor & Francis, 2004); Ravitch, Diane, Left Back: A Century of Battles Over School Reform (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001); and Cremin, Lawrence A., The Transformation of the School: Progressivism in Education, 1876–1951 (New York: Knopf, 1961).Google Scholar

⁹ Lagemann, , An Elusive Science, 116.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Statistic derived from Anderson, Eric and Moss, Alfred A. Jr., Dangerous Donations: Northern Philanthropy and Southern Black Education, 1902–1930 (Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press, 1999), 220. For more on the historiography of the GEB and black education, see Anderson, James D., The Education of Blacks in the South, 1860–1935 (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1988); Hoffschwelle, Mary S., The Rosenwald Schools of the American South (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2006); Watkins, William H., The White Architects of Black Education: Ideology and Power in America, 1865–1954 (New York Teachers College Press, 2001).Google Scholar

¹¹ For more complete accounts of Flexner's relationship with the GEB, see Fosdick, Raymond, Adventure in Giving: The Story of the General Education Board, a Foundation Established by John D. Rockefeller (New York: Harper & Row, 1962); Eliot, Charles W., “The Modern School,” Education 38 (May 1918): 639–67; and Bonner, Thomas Neville, Iconoclast: Abraham Flexner and a Life in Learning (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 2002).Google Scholar

¹² Flexner, , A Modern School, 10.Google Scholar

¹³ Flexner, , A Modern School, 6.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Flexner, , A Modern School, 23.Google Scholar

¹⁵ This is especially true because of Dewey's 1904 departure from his Laboratory School, for which he once had held similar hopes. His replacement by Charles Judd, who believed that education research was the exclusive domain of academics, meant that any teacher research produced after Dewey left was a product of individual aspiration rather than school culture. For more on this shift, see Ellen Condliffe Lagemann, “The Plural Worlds of Education Research,” History of Education Quarterly 29, no. 2 (Summer 1989): 183–214. For more on the school, see Mayhew, Katherine Camp and Edwards, Anna Camp, The Dewey School: The Laboratory School of the University of Chicago, 1896–1903 (New York: Appleton-Century, 1936); Tanner, Laurel N., Dewey's Laboratory School: Lessons for Today (New York: Teachers College Press, 1997); and Anne Durst, Women Educators in the Progressive Era: The Women Behind Dewey's Laboratory School (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Cremin, , The Transformation of the School, 280.Google Scholar

¹⁷ As one sign of Rugg's influence, a 1931 national survey of social studies courses showed that the curriculum he advanced in his textbook series was required in 107 of the 301 schools surveyed. See Wilson, Howard E. and Erb, Bessie P., “A Survey of Social-Studies Courses in 301 Junior High Schools,” The School Review 39, no. 7 (September 1931): 497–507. For more on Rugg's influence, see Zimmerman, Jonathan, Whose America? Culture Wars in the Public Schools (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002), 64–80. For more on Mearns, see Rubin, Joan Shelley, Songs of Ourselves: The Uses of Poetry in America (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 2007) and McGurl, Mark, The Program Era: Postwar Fiction and the Rise of Creative Writing (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 41, 89.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Willing, Matthew H., “The Value of an Experimental School,” School and Society 23 (May 1926): 614.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Monroe, Walter S., Odell, Charles W., Englehart, Max D., and Hull, Mabel R., Ten Years of Educational Research, 1918–1927, Bureau of Educational Research, College of Education (Urbana: University of Illinois, 1928), 48.Google Scholar

²⁰ For example, see Buckingham, B. R., Research for Teachers (New York: Silver, Burdett, and Company, 1926); Brim, Orville G., “Research That Prevents Research,” The Journal of Educational Research 22, no. 3 (October 1930): 161–71; and Woody, Clifford, “The Values of Educational Research to the Classroom Teacher,” The Journal of Educational Research 16, no. 3 (October 1927): 172–78.Google Scholar

²¹ Dewey, John, The Sources of a Science of Education (New York: Horace Liveright, 1929), 46.Google Scholar

²² Dewey, John, “Experiment in Education” The New Republic, February 3, 1917:16. For more on the histories of elite progressive schools already in existence in 1916, see “Schools of Tomorrow,” Schools of Today: What Happened to Progressive Education, ed. Semel, Susan F. and Sadovnik, Alan R. (New York: Peter Lang, 1999); and Founding Mothers and Others: Women Educational Leaders During the Progressive Era, ed. Sadovnik, Alan R. and Semel, Susan F. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002).Google Scholar

²³ Dean James Russell, E. to the General Education Board, May 1, 1918, File 3625, box 351, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

²⁴ Russell, James E. to Abraham Flexner, September 28, 1921, File 3611, box 349, series 1.2, GEB. For more on the competition between Russell and Flexner, and particularly Flexner's concern that Russell wanted to use the school to advance Thorndike's research agenda, see Peter Lehman Buttenweiser, “The Lincoln School and Its Times, 1917–1948” (PhD Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1968), 34–39, 43–44; and Lagemann, , An Elusive Science, 113–17.Google Scholar

²⁵ Russell, James E., “A Summary of Some of the Difficulties Connected with the Making of a Teachers College” (1924) in Teacher Education in America: a Documentary History, ed. Borrowman, Merle L. (New York: Teachers College Press, 1965), 210.Google Scholar

²⁶ For more on the differences between administrative and pedagogical progressives, see Labaree, David F., “Progressivism, Schools and Schools of Education: An American Romance.” Pedagogica Historica 41, no. 1–2 (February 2005): 275–88; Lagemann, , “The Plural Worlds of Educational Research”; Tyack, David, The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974); Tyack, David and Hansot, Elizabeth, Managers of Virtue: Public School Leadership in America, 1820–1980 (New York: Basic Books, 1982); and Reese, William J., America's Public Schools: From the Common School to ‘No Child Left Behind' (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011).Google Scholar

²⁷ Stewart, , “Living in a Machine Age.”Google Scholar

²⁸ Caldwell, Otis to Flexner, Abraham, December 9, 1916, File 3639, box 352, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

²⁹ Flexner, Abraham to Caldwell, Otis, August 31, 1917, File 3605, box 348, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

³⁰ Bachman, Fred F. to Caldwell, Otis, March 8, 1917, File 3603, box 348, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

³¹ Flexner, Abraham to Caldwell, Otis, August 24, 1917, File 3605, box 348, series 1. 2 GEB.Google Scholar

³² For example, see Betts, George H., “Teachers’ Remedies for Classroom Difficulties,” The Elementary School Journal 29, no. 1 (September 1928): 54–62; Greenan, John T., “The Teacher's School Week,” The School Review 30, no. 8 (October 1922): 592–98; Backus, Bertie, “Solving the Problem of the Failure in English,” The English Journal 9, no. 10 (December 1920): 579–83; and Hunt, Thelma, “Measuring Teacher Aptitude,” Educational Administration and Supervision 15 (May 1929): 334–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³³ Bachman, to Caldwell, , March 8, 1917, File 3603, box 348, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

³⁴ Flexner, Abraham to Caldwell, Otis, August 22, 1917, File 3605, box 348, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

³⁵ Bolton, Frederick E., “Curricula in University Departments of Education,” School and Society 2, no. 50 (December 1915): 832–34.Google Scholar

³⁶ Hall-Quest, Alfred Lawrence, Professional Secondary Education in Teachers Colleges (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1925), 36–47. See also Peterson, Francis Edwin, Philosophies of Education Current in the Preparation of Teachers in the United States: A Study of Four State Teachers Colleges, Twelve Normal Schools, and Nine Liberal Arts Colleges (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1933); Clifford, Geraldine Joncich and Guthrie, James W., Ed School: A Brief for Professional Education (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988); Fraser, James, Preparing America's Teachers: A History (New York: Teachers College Press, 2007); Labaree, David F., The Trouble with Ed Schools (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004); Cremin, Lawrence A., Shannon, David A., and Townsend, Mary Evelyn, A History of Teachers College, Columbia University (New York: Columbia University Press, 1954); and Herbst, Jurgen, And Sadly Teach: Teacher Education and Professionalization in American Culture (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989).Google Scholar

³⁷ Charters, W. W. and Waples, Douglas, The Commonwealth Teacher-Training Study (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1929), 51–76. I cite this study not to argue for the correlation between character traits and teacher preparation, but as one well-publicized view into expectations of teachers from the period. For more on teachers’ traits, see John Almack, American School Board Journal 61 (November 1920): 29–31; Madsen, I. N., “The Prediction of Teaching Success,” Educational Administration and Supervision 13 (January 1927): 39–47; and Dearborn, Ned H., “A Program for the Selection of Prospective Teachers for Elementary Schools in New York State,” Educational Administration and Supervision 14 (January 1928): 15–26.Google Scholar

³⁸ For example, see Berts, , “Teachers’ Remedies for Classroom Difficulties,” 54–62; Greenan, John T., “The Teacher's School Week,” The School Review 30 (October 1922): 592–98; Backus, Bertie, “Solving the Problem of the Failure in English,” The English Journal 9 (December 1920): 579–83; and Hunt, Thelma, “Measuring Teacher Aptitude,” Educational Administration and Supervision 15 (May 1929): 334–42.Google Scholar

³⁹ Memorandum for the Administrative Board of The Lincoln School, February 14, 1918, 6, File 3620, box 350, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Abraham Flexner to the General Education Board, May 22, 1917, File 3606, box 349, series 1.2, GEB. It is difficult to know what to make of teacher collaboration in the Lincoln School, especially in the early period. While most reports, published and unpublished, suggest that teachers worked well together, Harold Rugg told a different story, and wrote, “I doubt there was a single member of the faculty in those early years who wasn't a rank individualist…. It was laissez faire in education, every man for himself…. Eventually the school—like America—came to exemplify both ‘I’ and ‘We,’ but not in the earliest years!” See Harold Rugg, That Men May Understand: An American in the Long Armistice (New York: Doubleday, Doran and Company, 1941), 191.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Caldwell, Otis W., “Some Social Obligations of Modern Science,” 1923, 4, File 3620, box 350, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁴² Flexner, Abraham to Caldwell, Otis, January 28, 1920, File 3610, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁴³ Flexner, Abraham to Caldwell, Otis, March 8, 1918, File 3607, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Caldwell, Otis to Flexner, Abraham, June 7, 1917, File 3604, box 348, series 1.2. GEB; and Caldwell, Otis to Flexner, Abraham, May 3, 1918, File 3607, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Caldwell, Otis, “School Experimentation,” Teachers College Record 33, no. 2 (November 1931), 127–51, 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁶ Flexner, to Caldwell, , March 8, 1918, File 3607, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Caldwell, Otis W. to Flexner, Abraham, June 2, 1917, File 3604, box 348, series 1.2, GEB. For more on tensions between Flexner and the Teachers College, see Heffron, John M., “The Lincoln School of Teachers College: Elitism and Educational Democracy,” in Semel and Sadovnik, “Schools of Tomorrow,” Schools of Today, 141–70.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Lima, Agnes De, A School for the World of Tomorrow: The Story of Living and Learning in the Lincoln School (New York: Lincoln School of Teachers College, Columbia University, 1939), 41.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Caldwell, , “School Experimentation,” 129.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Caldwell, , “School Experimentation,” 127.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Caldwell, Otis to Russell, Dean, December 24, 1920, File 3610, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁵² Russell, James E. to Flexner, Abraham, September 23, 1921, File 3611, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁵³ A Report on the Study of the Teachers College Schools, April 1939, 73, File 3618, box 350, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Porter, Martha Peck, The Teacher in the New School (Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY: World Book Company, 1931), 239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵⁵ Mearns, Hughes, Creative Youth: How a School Environment Set Free the Creative Spirit (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Page, 1926), 9.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Mearns, , Creative Youth, 10. Joan Shelley Rubin expands on and contextualizes Mearns's work on poetry instruction and the “new poetry” in Song of Ourselves, 108–39.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ On the history of private school teaching, see Cookson, Peter J. Jr. and Persell, Caroline Hodges, Preparing for Power: America's Elite Boarding Schools (New York: Basic Books, 1985), 86.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Rugg, , That Men May Understand, 187–88. For more on Rugg at the Lincoln School, see Winters, Elmer A., “Man and His Changing Society: The Textbooks of Harold Rugg,” History of Education Quarterly 7, no. 4 (Winter 1967): 493–514.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Tippett, James S. and the Staff of the Elementary Division of the Lincoln School of Teachers College Columbia University, Curriculum Making in an Elementary School (Boston: Ginn and Company, 1927), 5, 43.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ All Lincoln School statistics taken from Survey Committee of the Affiliated Schools of Teachers College, Summary Report (Section 2), June 1930, 17 (Section 2), File 440B, box 62, series G, RG 2, Rockefeller Family Papers, Rockefeller Archive Center. For state statistics see National Education Association, Division of Research, “The Problem of Teacher Tenure,” Research Bulletin of the National Education Association 2, no. 5 (November 1924): 139–75.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Survey Committee of the Affiliated Schools of Teachers College, Summary Report (Section 2), 19.Google Scholar

⁶² Survey Committee of the Affiliated Schools of Teachers College, Summary Report (Appendix), 15–16.Google Scholar

⁶³ Bachman, Fred P., Memorandum Re Observations at Lincoln School of Teachers College, November 23, 1917, 6, File 3606, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Caldwell, to Russell, , December 24, 1920, File 3610, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Survey Committee of the Affiliated Schools of Teachers College, Summary Report (Section 2), 131.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Survey Committee of the Affiliated Schools of Teachers College, Summary Report (Section 2), 70.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Caldwell, to Flexner, , May 3, 1918, File 3607, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Flexner, Abraham to Caldwell, Otis, December 3, 1917, File 3606, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Survey Committee of the Affiliated Schools of Teachers College, Summary Report (Section 2), 18.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Raleigh Schorling to Flexner, Abraham, January 11, 1923, File 3613, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Flexner, Abraham to Caldwell, Otis, May 8, 1920, File 3610, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁷² Russell, James E. to the General Education Board, April 30, 1925, File 3617, box 350, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁷³ Memorandum to Caldwell, Otis, April 30, 1918, File 3607, box 349, series 1.2, GEB.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Lincoln School teachers transferred to higher education institutions as diverse as Stanford, Wisconsin, Ohio State, California-Berkeley, Montclair State Teachers College, and Maryland State Teachers College. It is worth noting that while the low pay of the Lincoln School teachers was a product of the same gender dynamics that drove low pay in public K–12 schools, it was probably in line with other private progressive schools. The insufficient pay extended to all of the school's teachers. That said, male teachers appear to have been offered high-status university positions (i.e., at research universities rather than teachers colleges) in greater numbers than women. See Lincoln School Comes of Age, 1917–1938 (New York: Lincoln School of Teachers College, Columbia University, 1938), 28–30.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ The merger between the two schools lasted for five years until the Horace Mann-Lincoln School was closed and Teachers College transferred the GEB endowment to its general research fund. The demise of the Lincoln School and the role of its troubled political relationship with Teachers College in the merger, merits its own evaluation. Currently, the best treatment of this can be found in Buttenweiser, “The Lincoln School and Its Times, 1917–1948,” 169–234.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Report of the Special Committee of the Board of Trustees of Teachers College on Horace Mann-Lincoln School (June 1946), 29, File 3607, box 349, series 1.2, GEB. For a more complete account of the GEB's desire for the school to become more financially independent—the end goal of all of its sponsored projects—as well as the GEB's assessment of the Lincoln School's diminished influence in the light of broad school reforms, see Fosdick, Adventure in Giving, 222–25.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Monroe, , Ten Years of Educational Research, 48.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ For examples of this contemporary conversation see Cochran-Smith, Marilyn and Lytle, Susan L., Inside/Outside: Teacher Research and Knowledge (New York: Teachers College Press, 1993); Ballenger, Cynthia, ed., Regarding Children's Words: Teacher Research on Language and Literacy (New York: Teachers College Press, 2004); Burnaford, Gail, Fisher, Joseph, and Hobson, David, eds., Teachers Doing Research: The Power of Action Through Inquiry (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates, 2001); Goswami, Dixie and Stillman, Peter R., eds., Teacher Research as an Agency for Change (Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook, 1987); Meyers, Ellen and Rust, Frances, eds., Taking Action with Teacher Research (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2003); and Lieberman, Ann and Miller, Lynne, Teachers Caught in the Action: Professional Development That Matters (New York: Teachers College Press, 2001). The National Writing Project and its multitudinous publications also have made a compelling argument that teacher research promises professional, political, and intellectual agency for teachers.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Cochran-Smith, Marilyn and Lytle, Susan L., Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner Research in the Next Generation (New York: Teachers College Press, 2009), 159.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ See Murphy, Marjorie, Blackboard Unions: The AFT and the NEA, 1900–1980 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992); Rousmaniere, Kate, Citizen Teacher: The Life and Leadership of Margaret Haley (Albany, NY: State University Press of New York, 2005); Urban, Wayne J., Why Teachers Organized (Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1982); Perrillo, Jonna, Uncivil Rights: Teachers, Unions, and Race in the Battle for School Equity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012); Shipps, Dorothy, School Reform, Corporate Style: Chicago, 1880–2000 (Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press, 2006); and Taylor, Clarence, Reds at the Blackboard: Communism, Civil Rights, and the New York City Teachers Unions (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013).Google Scholar

⁸¹ Lortie, , Schoolteacher, 241.Google Scholar