#sorting-machine model

The end of the Common-School Era is generally marked by the beginning of the Civil War.  At the war’s conclusion, the United States went through a Reconstruction and Redemption Era in which both the North and South worked to rebuild the country, then regain control of their respective societies within the structure of new laws.  As the United States moved into the 20th century, education became an issue of increasing importance due to several quickly evolving factors.  With the move from rural to urban areas, the growth of industry and increased immigration, schooling within the United States had to be revised and ultimately was re-invented in order to address the new needs of a quickly changing country (Tozer et al., (2009).

“While we cannot hold all children to the same standard of school progress, we can at least prevent the kind of retardation which involves failure and the repetition of a school grade” (Terman, 1916, p. 4).  Terman’s writing demonstrated a belief that students have differing abilities, and holding one to the standards of a “normal” student may lead to this repetition of grade levels, and that such failure is detrimental to a student’s academic efforts and tend to wreak havoc on their self-confidence.  Allowing for alternate tracks of education would alleviate the strain on the lower third or half of the student population (Terman, 1916).  If the different tracks exist, it is important that students are appropriately filed into each track.  This was done via scientifically standardized IQ testing of students as young as 6- or 7- years of age.  Terman (1916) suggested “our main reliance must always be in mental tests, properly used and properly interpreted” (p. 5), offering both support to the scientific knowledge upon which the test was created, but also a warning about its misuse.  

Other solutions for public education included the building of larger school structures, allowing a student to “learn by doing,” and providing more options for educating all students, the high and low achievers alike (Tozer et al., 2009).  These redesigned schools became institutions whose goal was to create and reproduce, not unlike an assembly line, well rounded and productive members of American society; individuals who possessed an understanding of their role and an ability to contribute to the betterment of the United States (Spring, 2014; Tozer et al., 2009).  Some educators, such a John Dewey, saw an opportunity to use these factory school buildings to turn the schoolhouse into a center for social and political activities within the community (Spring, 2014).  Given the increase to the size of an average school and the school’s generally central location within the ward, this idea makes perfect sense.

In summarizing other aspects of Dewey’s educational beliefs, Tozer et al. (2009) revealed a desire for schools be centered around needs and interests of the student, as opposed to basing one’s education on archaic values or societal desires.  The purpose was to allow a student some control in their education, to be an active participant throughout their learning process, and to allow students to explore social issues within the schooling process.  This last portion would allow for graduating students to immediately step into their chosen societal roles with a significant level of confidence and understanding.  Mann had a similar desire for all students through their common-school experience (Spring, 2014).

Other progressive educators believed in the building of efficiency through rote memorization and drill (Thorndike, 1922; Tozer et al. 2009).  For Thorndike, the student who understood mathematics could do calculations quickly and accurately, and memorization and drill represented the best way to build the stimulus-response bonds needed for such knowledge.  

With all the ideas surrounding education during the early 20th century, three ideas were taken up to create the sorting-machine model rooted in social efficiency, standardized IQ testing, tracking, and an overemphasis on efficiency (Spring, 2014; Terman, 1916; Thorndike, 1922).  Tozer et al. (2009) describe social efficiency as “progress focused on achieving an orderly society in which political and economic institutions represented the interests of the governed through the application of the best principles of scientific knowledge and expertise” (p. 151).  The Progressive Era’s pursuit of social efficiency led to the sorting students into tracks and making sure they are efficient in their work, and represent cornerstones of our educational system, today.