HOMEROOM PROGRAMS IN SELECTED SECONDARY SCHOOLS

IN THE UNITED STATES

by

DAVID BENSON McCORKLE

A THESIS

submitted to

OREGON STATE COLLEGE

in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

June 1953
APPROVED:

Redacted for Privacy

Head of Department of E <iXc tton

In Charge of Major

Redacted for Privacy

Chairman of School GrailAe Committee

Redacted for Privacy

Dean of Graduate School

Date thesis is presented August 12, 1952

Typed by Eunice L. Roth

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This study was possible only with the cooperation and

assistance of the writer's graduate committee, the home-

room teachers and school administrators.

The writer is particularly indebted to Dr. F. R.

Zeran, major advisor, for his kind help and encouragement.

To Dr. J. W. Sherburne, Dr. H. R. Laslett, and Dr. R. R.

Reichart, the writer wishes to express appreciation for

their many helpful suggestions and criticisms.

The writer expresses appreciation to his wife, George,

for her help and encouragement.

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER Page

I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1

Purpose of the Study 3

Scope of the Study 3
Research Procedures 6

II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 17

Purposes of the Homeroom 23

Organization of the Homeroom 32
Homeroom Practices 43
Problems Faced by Homeroom Teachers 45
Summary 46

III FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS 48

Organization of the Homeroom 49

Purposes of the Homeroom 65
Homeroom Practices 81
Problems of the Homeroom Teacher 94
Homeroom Trends 106

IV SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 116

Summary 117
Recommendations 120

BIBLIOGRAPHY 122

APT ENDICES

Appendix A 125

Appendix B 129

Appendix C 130
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I NUMBER OF SCHOOLS REQUESTED AND NUMBER

OF SCHOOLS SUGGESTED BY STATE 10

II RESPONSE TO THE INITIAL REQUEST, RESPONSE

TO THE FOLLOW-UP, TOTAL NUMBER OF
RESPONSES, AND PERCENTAGES 13

III THE NUMBER OF CHECKLIST SENT AND THE NUM-

BER RETURNED BY STATES 14

IV RESPONSES CLASSIFIED AS USABLE AND UNUSABLE 15

V BASIS OF ASSIGNMENT OF PUPILS TO THE

HOMEROOM. IN 268 SECONDARY SCHOOLS 51

VI ORGANIZATION OF THE HOMEROOM WITHIN THE

SCHOOL 53

VII NUMBER OF PUPILS ASSIGNED TO THE HOMEROOM.... 55

VIII NUMBER OF WEEKLY MEETINGS IN 226 HOMEROOMS... 57

IX LENGTH OF THE HOMEROOM PERIOD PER DAY IN

226 SCHOOLS 58

X LENGTH AND NUMBER OF HOMEROOM MEETINGS 59

XI LENGTH OF TIME PUPILS ARE ASSIGNED TO

THE SANE HOMEROOM IN 268 SCHOOLS 61

XII ORGANIZATION WITHIN THE 268 HOMEROOMS 63

XIII PREDOMINANT OBJECTIVES IN 268 HOMEROOMS 66

XIV PURPOSES OF THE HOMEROOM 66

XV SPECIFIC ADMIYISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS OF THE

HOMEROOM 69

XVI ORIENTATION IN THE HOMEROOM 70

XVII EDUCATIONAL GUIDANCE IN THE HOMEROOM 73

XVIII VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE IN THE HOMEROOM 74

XIX FUNCTION OF THE HOMEROOM FOR SOCIAL

GUIDANCE 77
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Pace

XX FUNCTION OF THE HOMEROOM AS TO INDIVIDUAL

COUNSELING 79

XXI HOMEROOM ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTING TO

VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE 82

XXII HOMEROOM ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTING TO

INDIVIDUAL ANALYSIS 84

XXIII MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT IN

THE HOMEROOM 86

XXIV METHODS USED IN TEE HOMEROOM TO CARRY OUT

ACTIVITIES 87

XXV SOURCE OF MATERIALS USED TN THE HOMEROOM 92

XXVI PROBLEMS OF HOMEROOM TEACHERS IN 268 SCHOOLS 96

XXVII RESPONSES BY HOMEROOM TEACHERS TO THE QUESTION

"DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT WHETHER
OR NOT YOU ARE ASSIGNED TO A HOMEROOM ?" 90

XXVIII RESPONSES TO TFE QUESTION, "DO TEACHERS

ROTATE AMONG THE HOMEROOMS DURING THE
SEMESTER?" 99

XXIX RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "DO YOU FEEL

THE ADMINISTRATION OF YOUR SCHOOL LOOKS
UPON THE HOMEROOM AS A DEFINITELY PLANNED
PART OF THE TOTAL EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM?" 99

XXX RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "IS THERE ANY

IN-SERVICE TRAINING FOR HOMEROOM 7IORK IN
YOUR SCHOOL?" 100

XXXI RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "DO YOU FEEL

THERE IS A NEED FOR SPECIAL TRAINING?" 102

XXXI/ RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "HAVE YOU HAD

ANY DIRECT OR SPECIAL TRAINING FOR
HOMEROOM WORK?" 103

XXVIII RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "HOW MUCH DO

YOU FAVE TO SAY ABOUT WHAT TAKES PLACE
IN YOUR HOMEROOM ? ", 104
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

XXXIV RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "DO YOU BhLIEVE

THE TIME SPENT IN YOUR HOMEROOM IS
JUSTIFIED BY THE RESULTS OBTAINED?" 105
 HOMEROOM PROGRAMS IN SELECTED SECONDARY SCHOOLS

IN THE UNITED STATES

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Administrators and teachers in the secondary school

are usually willing to admit that the homeroom program does

not operate as well as it might. Because this doubt of the

effectiveness of the homeroom has permeated throughout the

school staff as well as the student body many schools have

dropped the homeroom entirely; others have attempted reor-

ganization, and some have simply endured the ineffectiveness

or have relegated the homeroom to a very small role in the

school program.

That the homeroom does not operate as effectively as it

might is not sufficient reason for discontinuing it. Should

any social institution as the church, lodge, or school be

discontinued merely because it does not operate as effective-

ly as it might? A positive approach to the role of the
homeroom should be an evaluation of the present homeroom

program by the teachers and administrators in the school.

From a study of the strengths and weaknesses of each home-

room grogram should come a need for information about

other homeroom programs. Such pertinent questions as:

What are the purposes of the better homeroom programs?

 What practices are carried out in the better homeroom
programs?

How are these homerooms organized?

What materials are used by homeroom teachers?

What are the problems faced by homeroom teachers?

What plans and ideas do homeroom teachers have about
improving homeroom programs?

From the answers to the preceding questions administrators

and teachers may secure valuable data in statistics and

ideas which may be adapted to their own situation.

It is believed that such data should be helpful to

institutions engaged in the training of teachers by provid-

ing information to assist in the development of skills and

methods in the use of the homeroom. Such data may be most

helpful to those individuals interested in the organization

and administration of guidance services by showing how

schools have used the homeroom as a part of the guidance

program, as well as answering such questions as:

What guidance activities are carried out in the
homeroom?

What techniques are used in the homeroom`:'

What are the purposes and functions of the homeroom

as an agency for guidance?

The answers to these and similar questions may be helpful in

reorganizing or in organizing homeroom programs to provide

guidance services. Another important outcome of a study of

the homeroom in the secondary school may be the arousing of

interest or the awareness of the need for evaluation of

 3

homerooms in schools with the idea to make the homeroom a

more effective part of the school program.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to ascertain the present

practices in the more successful homeroom programs in the

secondary schools in the United States.

Specific purposes of this study are: (a) to find

general and specific purposes of the homeroom programs,

(b) to identify practices carried out in homeroom programs,

(c) to determine trends in the uses of homerooms, and (d) to

crystallize problems of homeroom teachers.

This study is not intended to solve the problems of the

homeroom by offering an ideal homeroom program. The writer

does hope, however, that by revealing some of the practices

of the more successful homeroom programs in secondary schools

administrators and teachers will profit by trying these and

other ideas with the objective of offering the best possible

service to the pupils and to the community.

Scope of the Study

This study concerns itself with 268 homeroom programs

in selected secondary schools throughout the United States.

The homeroom programs surveyed are those recognized by the

state department of education in each of the respective

states as being outstanding or at least creditable, and

 4

includes junior high schools, senior high schools and other

schools designated as secondary schools. Only public

secondary schools are used, since no private schools were

mentioned by representatives of the state departments of

education.

For the purpose of this study the definition of a home-

room as given by Dunsmoore (8, p. 28) is used. This is:

"A homeroom is a unit of school administration, which is

under the direct supervision of a teacher known as a home-

room sponsor, and which serves as the school home of the

pupils assigned to it for the purpose of administering

routine and other educational activities, not ordinarily
connected with subject-matter instruction". This is an
operational definition.

Several major limitations may be found in this study.

First, the selection of the schools that participated in
the study is a limitating factor. The schools were suggested
by an official of each state department of education; but
each state official used his own criterion of "outstanding"
or "creditable". This was necessary since few, if any,

state departments of education require the schools in their

states to report on their homeroom programs. In addition,

there is not a standardized rating device for homeroom pro-

grams.

Second, the use of a checklist has limitations. Since

teachers are only human, it is expected that in some

 5

instances additions reported or omissions may not represent

the actual situations. Then there is the checklist itself

which, although great effort was made to make it definite

and understandable, represents a weakness in that the or-

ganization of the checklist might misrepresent or distort

the situation as it exists. To overcome this limitation,

ample space was provided for comments on each of the topics

as well as at the end of the checklist.

Third, not all of the states or schools were willing

to participate in the study. Officials of forty-three

states cooperated in the study by suggesting schools in
their states. Although not all of the schools suggested

were willing to cooperate nevertheless, from the number and

the completeness of the returns, it is believed that there

are sufficient data for this study. The data are further

enhanced by the many comments, suggestions, and enclosures

of descriptive material about homeroom programs received

from homeroom teachers.

One of the first steps in making this study was to

obtain information about homeroom programs in secondary

schools. After reviewing much of the literature, interview-

ing members of the writer's Graduate Committee, homeroom

teachers and administrators using the homeroom type organi-

zation, an agendum of proposed research procedures was pre-

pared and submitted to the Graduate Committee. The Commit-

tee and later the Graduate Council approved the title of
 6

Homeroom Programs in Selected Secondary Schools in the

United States. The word "Selected" was placed in the title

because it was believed that a study of the better homeroom

programs would be more helpful than a representative study

of all homerooms in the secondary school.

Research Procedures

Preparation of the checklist

To visit and observe homeroom programs throughout the

United States would be a tremendous task. Finances alone

would prohibit such a venture. Thus the only feasible

method of obtaining information about homeroom programs in

the United States is to use a checklist or a similar type

of instrument. The writer decided to use a checklist be-

cause, first, a checklist requires less time to complete.

This is a major factor to consider since teachers have

duties other than filling out forms. Second, it is believed
the instrument requiring the least amount of time to com-
plete and yet cover the topic adequately would get better

returns both in number of responses and in terms of infor-

mation provided in the checklist.

After a review of instruments used in previous studies

of various phases of the homeroom and after consultation

with faculty members of the School of Education, Oregon

State College, a rough draft of a checklist was prepared

and presented to the writer's Graduate Committee for
 7

suggestions and criticisms. Each criticism and suggestion

was carefully considered and the checklist was revised to

include these suggestions.

Twenty of the revised checklists were sent to homeroom

teachers, administrators of homeroom programs, and leaders

in the field of guidance. Their suggestions were included

in the final draft. After approval by all members of the

writer's Graduate Committee, the checklist was printed.

Appendix A contains a copy of the checklist.

The checklist was organized into sixteen sections

each requesting the recipient to check items that applied

to his or her homeroom. Only items that directly related to

the subject were included; each item was very specific.

Ample space was provided for comments and additions at the

end of each section, and at the end of the checklist.

Cover letters were prepared to the administrator and

homeroom teacher explaining the purpose of the study. These
letters were written on official stationery of the School of

Education, Oregon State College. No mention was made that

the checklist was part of a doctoral project because of the

belief that such mention might decrease the number of re-

plies. Each letter was signed by the writer and was written

over the title of Instructor (see Appendices 13 and C).

Members of the writer's Graduate Committee approved

the proposal to send approximately five hundred checklists

to the selected secondary schools throughout the United

 8

States. This represents a great number of teachers because

of the request to the administrator to ask a representative

homeroom teacher in his school to complete the checklist.

Selection of the recipients

The first step in the selection of the recipients was to

secure the names and addresses of secondary school princi-

pals having outstanding homeroom programs. In order to do

this the writer contacted the Director of Secondary Educa-

tion, or similar official, in each State Department of

Education requesting the names of several schools in his

state which have outstanding homeroom programs. As there

is no standardized method of evaluating homeroom programs,

the director was asked to use his own criteria of outstand-

ing since he is probably the one who is most familiar with

homeroom programs throughout the state. In the event that

there were many schools having outstanding homeroom programs

the director was requested to suggest schools in varying

sections of the state. This request was made with the hope
of getting a more representative group of schools for the
state.

The number of schools requested was determined by the

number of Congressmen that state has to the Congress of the

United States as listed in the Congressional Directory of

the 82nd Congress, 2nd Session, January 1952. Two purposes

were served by using this procedure; first, the number of

 9

Congressmen is based on the state's population thus making

the selection representative of the United States as to

population, and second, the number of Congressmen corre-

sponded roughly to the number of checklists the author had

originally planned to use.

Officials of forty-three states responded to this re-

quest and suggested either as many schools as requested or

at least some schools. Most of the officials were prompt

in their answers. One state official said he did not know

the various programs well enough to suggest any schools and

five states did not respond to the initial request or two

subsequent requests.

Table I gives a list of the states, the number of

schools requested for that state, and the number of schools

suggested by an official of each state department of educa-

tion.

It may be noted that in eighteen states there is a dis-

crepancy between the number of schools requested and the

number suggested. This can be partly explained by the fact
that better homeroom programs do not always coincide with
the number of congressmen to the state. Another reason
stated by the majority of officials is that the homeroom

programs suggested were the only outstanding ones familiar

to the official. Several made the point that they were cer-

tain there were other successful homeroom programs, but they

were listing the more familiar ones. As a whole the

 TABLE I

NUMBER OP SCHOOLS REQUESTED AND NU1UER OF SCHOOLS SUGGESTED ITY STATE

Ao..*11.40.01M111111111.011../...MINS.1

Number Number Number Number

State Requested Suggested State Requested Suested
Alabama 11 11 Nebraska 6 6
Arizona 4 4 Nevada 3 3
Arkansas c,
a 9 New Hampshire 4 3
California 25 23 New Jersey 16 6
Colorado 6 6 New Mexico 4 6
Connecticut 7 7 New York 47 42
Delaware 3 3 North Carolina 14 14
Florida 8 7 North Dakota 4 4
Georgia 12 11 Ohio 25 25
Idaho 4 0 Oklahoma -10 10
Illinois 28 0 Oregon 6 11
Indiana 13 13 Pennsylvania 35 35
Iowa 10 5 Rhode Island 4 0
Kansas 8 0 South Carolina 8 10
Kentucky 11 11 South Dakota 4 3
Louisiana 10 10 Tennessee 12 13
Maine 5 5 Texas 23 22
Maryland 5 5 Utah 4 4
Massachusetts 16 14 Vermont 3 0
Michigan 19 7 Virginia 11 11
Minnesota 11 11 Washington 8 0
Mississippi 9 9 West Virginia 8 8
Missouri 15 5 Wisconsin 12 6
Montana 4 4 Wyoming 3 3

Total 530 424

 11

responses from the officials were encouraging with many re-

quests for a summary of the findings. One official in the

Northeast requested a detailed account of the study to be

used in a local study of homeroom programs. The great ma-

jority of officials noted the lack of information received

from schools in their state on homeroom programs.

Approximately half of the officials replying gave per-

mission to use their names in contacting the principals of

the schools in their state. Most of the officials that did

not give permission to use their names were kind enough to

explain why. These are the explanations most frequently

given:

1. That administrators might feel the state depart-

ment is shoving work onto them.

2. That friction might be caused between schools by

the state department suggesting some schools as
outstanding and omitting others.

3. That it is not a policy of the state department

to rate or classify schools.

In many instances the schools having better homeroom programs

were checked on a directory or as in the case of one state,

the members of a committee working in this area were named.

Some officials did not feel that there were any out-
standing homeroom programs in their state. However, they

suggested good or creditable homeroom programs. Whenever

possible these schools were used in the study.

The statement that "Your school was suggested by your

state department of education as being an outstanding or

 12

representative homeroom program" was deleted from the cover

letter sent to those schools in the state in which the of-

ficial did not give permission to use his name.

Responses to the checklist

Officials of state departments of education of forty-

two states suggested 424 schools, but 5 schools could not be

used because of the illegible writing of one state official.

The total number of schools contacted was 419. These schools

were sent letters containing the checklist, cover letter to

the principal and homeroom teacher, and a self-addressed

envelope. The letters were mailed on February 5 and 11,

1952.

The responses tapered off until the last of March. It

was believed that by April 12, 1952, all checklists were re-

ceived that were to be returned. A sample was made of the

schools not responding. The sample was obtained by listing

the states alphabetically, then picking every fifth school

not reporting. This gave a sample of 32 schools represent-

ing a cross section of the United States. These schools

were sent another letter containing the checklist, cover

letter, self-addressed envelope, and a note requesting their

cooperation in making the study more meaningful by including

their schools.

Table II shows the number of checklists sent, the number

 13

of responses to the initial request, the number of check-

lists sent as a follow-up, and the number of responses ob-

tained from the follow-up. Also shown are the total number

of responses and the percentages. The 268 responses to the

initial request represent approximately a 64 per cent return.

The 18 responses to the follow-up represent a 59 per cent re-

turn. This low percentage of response may be explained par-

tially by the late mailing of the follow-up letters when

teachers were probably busy with all the duties that arise

toward the end of each school year. The total number of re-

sponses to the request was 286, which represents slightly

over a 68 per cent return.

TABLE II

RESPONSE TO THE INITIAL REQUEST, RESPONSE TO THE

FOLLOW-UP, TOTAL NUMBER OF RESPONSES, AND
PERCENTAGES

Number of Checklists Number of Percentage

Sent Responses Returned

First mailing 419 268 64

Follow-up 32 18 59

Total 286 68

The total responses by each state to the initial re-

quest, and the follow-up are shown in Table III. It may be

noted that 7 states gave a 100 per cent response. The low

percentage of responses obtained from Virginia, Georgia,

and Oklahoma may be due somewhat to the fact that the names
 14

TABLE III
THE NUMBER OP CHECKLIST SENT AND THE NUMBER
RETURNED BY STATES

Number Number
State Sent Returned Percentage

Alabama 11 6 55
Arizona 4 4 100
Arkansas 9 3 33
California 23 16 70
Colorado 6 5 83
Connecticut 7 7 100
Delaware 3 2 67
Florida 7 6 86
Georgia 11 9 82
Indiana 13 11 85
Iowa 5 4 80
Kentucky 11 5 45
Louisiana 10 4 40
Maine 5 2 40
Massachusetts 14 8 57
Michigan 7 6 86
Minnesota 11 9 82
Mississippi 9 6 67
Missouri 5 4 80
Montana 4 3 75
Nebraska 6 5 83
,Nevada 3 2 67
New Hampshire 3 3 100
New Jersey 6 6 100
New Mexico 6 4 67
New York 42 32 76
North Carolina 14 8 57
North Dakota 4 4 100
Ohio 25 14 56
Oklahoma 10 6 60
Oregon 11 11 100
Pennsylvania 35 17 49
South Carolina 10 5 50
South Dakota 3 2 67
Tennessee 13 10 77
Texas 22 18 82
Utah 4 4 100
Virginia 11 6 55
West Virginia 8 4 50
Wisconsin 6 3 50
Wyoming 3 2 67
Total 419 286 68
 15

of the principals were not listed by the state official,

and hence the address was to the school and not as personal

as in the case of the other states where the letter was ad-

dressed to the principal.

Not all the responses to the request to complete the

checklist were usable in the study. Table IV shows that

of the 286 responses 268 or 94 per cent could be used in

the study. Of the 18 responses classified as unusable, 9

reported no homeroom programs operating at present and 4

returned the checklist uncompleted but included mimeographed

material dealing with the homeroom program. The checklist

was returned by 4 principals with the comment that the check-

list did not apply to their program. One checklist was re-

turned with a critical comment about teachers being "Ques-

tioned to death". This was the only critical comment re-

ceived. Many teachers expressed an interest in the study

and showed this interest by attaching supplementary ma-

terials as well as by stating that this is an area where

something could be done.

TABLE IV

RESPONSES CLASSIFIED AS USABLE AND UNUSABLE

Res onses Number Percenta e

Usable Responses 268 94

Unusable Responses 18. 6

Total 286 100

 16

As the checklists were returned, each was tabulated on

a 5" by 6" card using the Thurstone Ede Marking system (31).
 17

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The literature dealing with the homeroom in the second-

ary school is not as voluminous as the literature available

on other aspects of the school program. This is revealed

through an examination of the Education Index which lists a

yearly average of eight references dealing with the home-

room for the past 21 years. Not all of these dealt with

the homeroom in the secondary school. Much of the available

literature deals with the homeroom in the upper elementary

grades and the junior high school.

The literature may be classified into three groups:

(a) Descriptions of homeroom programs written

generally by the principal or homeroom
teacher.

(b) Promotional articles showing the merits of

the homeroom organization and including,
in many instances, ideas for use in the
homeroom.

(c) Reports of research on homeroom programs.

References to reports of such research studies on homeroom
programs listed in Education Index are relatively few.

Granted that many schools may do some evaluating of their

homeroom program, there are few reports of these studies.

There is also a dearth of research data on homeroom pro-

grams involving large or representative groups of homeroom

programs.
 18

Only the materials that apply directly to the home-

room in the secondary school will be reviewed. And in

order to provide a degree of continuity the literature will

be reviewed as it relates to the specific objectives of

this study. These objectives are:

(a) Purposes of the homeroom.

(b) Organization of the homeroom.

(c) Practices carried out in the homeroom program.

(d) ProPlems of the homeroom teachers.

Before beginning an analysis of the literature as it

relates to each specific purpose of this study, a brief

account of the origin and development of the homeroom is

necessary.

Origin of the homeroom

The exact origin of the homeroom is unknown and per-

haps will always remain so. Dunsmoore (8, p.35) has

traced its origin back to about 1862 in Michigan.

One of the developments leading up to the homeroom was
the "house system" used by the English. Johnson states:

(14, p.669)

In the English public schools, the house,

in which 40-60 boys live, forms the natural unit
of organization of the social life. On entrance
at the school a boy is placed in a certain house
of which he continues to be a member so long as
he remains in the school.

This house system of the English school contributed the

idea of using this type organization for social development;

 19

however, the homeroom in the American public schools has

other purposes besides the development of social relations.

Mc own gives this explanation of the origin of the

homeroom: (22, p.48)

The grandparent of the home room was an assem-

bly, study, or opening-exercise period, a short pe-
riod scheduled for the beginning of the school day.
The pupils hung their wraps and dinner pails on the
hooks at the back of the room, left here their sur-
plus books and equipment, and took their seats. In
this period the attendance was taken, announcements
made, admonitions given, and devotionals held. In
a part of it the pupil could hastily run over his
first lessons, become oriented in the spirit of the
school, rest himself a bit, and "get settled down to
work". Later, when the small one-room school grew
into a multi-room building, this same setting was
transferred to the various individual rooms, and
these same activities were performed there. This
was, and still is, the well known "report room" or
"report period".

Dunsmoore supports McEown by stating: (8, p.34)

We might say that even the one-room school had,

and still does have, some of the characteristics of
what now constitutes our homeroom organization.
The similarity of functions which exists in many
respects between some of the larger one-room schools
and the homeroom of twenty or forty pupils is quite
obvious. Matters of administrative routine, for
instance, are inevitably present in the one-room
school as are matters of educational and civic
guidance regardless of how well or how poorly they
may be executed.

Goetting stresses the origin of the homeroom as a re-

sult of the increased size of the school. He states:

(12, p.450)

The homeroom in the modern sense, originated

with departmentalized teaching. Growing from a
record room, report period, or book room where at-
tendance was checked and opening exercises held,
the home room serves to unify and integrate the
work of pupils in the modern departmentalized high
school.
 20

Development of the homeroom

The homeroom idea spread rapidly. Galen Jones, in a

study of the introduction of activities in 269 high schools,

found that homeroom programs were introduced and reported

in two schools between 1875 and 1879, and that the number

of schools reporting the introductions of homeroom pro-

grams increased to 33 between 1925 and 1929. (15, p.17)

McKown states that the greatest development of the homeroom

in American schools was between 1920 and 1930. (21, p.24)

McKown wrote in 1932: (20, pp.vii-viii)

The home room has appeared within the last

fifteen or twenty years, and its growth has been
astounding. If the reader doubts this, let him
atterrpt to find references to the home room in the
professional literature of fifteen years back, and
then contrast these, in number and extent with
those he finds today.

Fowlkes substantiates YeKown by stating: (10, p.72)

Not a single article is listed in Reader's

Guide on the homeroom between 1919 and 1929,
while between 1926-1931, some thirty-two articles
appeared.

Some idea of the extent of the development of the

homeroom is shown by Lefauver and Scott in an article pub-

lished in 1930. (16, p.624)

The homeroom plan, involving the assignment

of a group of students to a teacher for special
service, has been widely adopted as a means of im-
proving the program of secondary education. It
has been used especially in the junior high school.
In a canvass by Leonard V. Koos and Grayson N.
refauver of guidance activities in 336 high schools,
it was found that two-thirds of the schools utilized
the homeroom. Seven-eighths of the junior high
schools indicated provision for this organization.
This proportion far exceeded the 16 per cent for
 21

the senior high school. The proportions for the

four and aix-year high schools were both 60 per
cent.

In 1934 Abernethy made a study of homerooms in Massa-

chusetts secondary schools and found that over 66 per cent

of these schools had homeroom organizations. (1, p.136)

Mogill in an article published in 1951 found: (24,

p.143)

According to the results of the survey, prac-

tically all of the secondary schools in cities with
populations of 100,000 or more have homeroom organi-
zations. Further, it is found in 360 senior high
schools; 216 junior high schools; 14 junior-senior
high-school combinations; and, in 23 vocational high
schools.

In an article published in 1952 Gerald Van Pool, Di-

rector of Student Activities for the National Association

of Secondary School Principals, states: (32, p.150)

So important has the homeroom become that

practically all larger high schools have some
form of a homeroom, and it is also found in most
medium-sized high schools and many junior high schools.

any factors have contributed to the growth of the

homeroom in the American school. One factor was the in-

Greased size of the high schools. Chisholm summarizes this

problem with the statement: (5, p.337)

When the high school was small, and students

and teachers carie in close contact with each
other every day, everyone knew everyone else and
to some extent, at least, took an interest in each
other personally. With the rapid increase in en-
rollment in the high schools throughout the country
during the past quarter of a century or more, many
schools reached the place where the number of
 22

students and teachers was large enough for the

individual to be "lost in the mass".
Another problem which faced the larger high schools and

which contributed to the growth of the homeroom idea was

that of orienting the pupils to the complexities of the

school curriculum. Goetting clarifies the above problem

with his statement: (12, p.451)

Whether the offerings of the school are

organized as parallel curricula or on a constants-
with-variables pattern, the pupil is confronted
with a program that is amazing, to say the least.
This is further complicated by an additional list of
offerings of the school in the form of extra-curricu-
lar activities. In this situation it is essential
that some provision be made for orienting the pupil
to the opportunities which he has.

With the increased size of the high school has come in-

creased administrative problems. Cockrell states: (6, p.11)

The homeroom program came into exietence in

most schools for the purely administrative reason
that some one must be responsible for the conduct,
attendance, study, and general attitude of pupils
throughout the day.

Smith (28, p.3) emphasizes the increased heterogeneity

of the school population after the year 1900 as a factor in

the rapid growth of the homeroom idea.

Krug gives these reasons for the development of the

homeroom: (18, p.91)

Homerooms developed because there seemed to be

no place or time in the regular subjects to deal
with such matters as personality development, vo-
cational guidance, manners, getting along with
people, orientation to the school, hobbies, and
family living,
 23
McKown disagrees with this as to the original reason

for the development of the homeroom, but he does show how

the increased emphasis on the individual has changed the

homeroom by stating: (22, p.49)

With the rapidly developing interest in guid-

ance, the homeroom as an educative opportunity,
rather than merely as an administrative device,
came into existence. Teachers and administrators
were quick to see the excellent possibilities of-
fered by this more or less informal and nonacademic
setting and began to capitalize it for purposes of
individual and group guidance. And with the present
trends in guidanceindividualization and decen-
tralization---the homeroom has acquired an import-
ance and a significance second to no other setting
or opportunity in the school.

Purposes of the Homeroom

It is important that administrators and teachers have a

clear understanding of the purposes of the homeroom in the

secondary school if the homeroom is to function effectively.

Most of the activities carried out in the homeroom may be

grouped under two main headings -- those which facilitate the

administration of the school and those which provide some

guidance services for pupils. Obviously not all homerooms

have to have either one or the other. Rather, both admin-

istrative and guidance activities are carried out to some

degree.

Even though there is some disagreement as to the orig-

inal purpose of the homeroom, this disagreement should not

interfere with the functioning of present homeroom programs.

 24

Reports of research studies as well as descriptions of

homeroom programs will be reviewed as the findings refer to

homeroom purposes, which are administrative and guidance.

Since many studies do not state specifically the purposes of

the homeroom, they must be inferred from the practices and

activities carried out in the homeroom program.

Administrative functions of the Homeroom

Cockrell says that the homeroom came into existence

purely for administrative reasons. (6, p.12) And many of

the studies have reported findings which indicate the im-

portance of the homeroom as an administrative device.

Although McKown (21) and Krug (18) disagree with this,

and give purposes other than administrative, as the original

purpose; they recognize that the increased size of the high

school has created the problem, as Chisholm puts it, of:

(5, p.338) "Bringing the office closer to the student".

McKown states: (22, p.45)

The home room is the logical place for the

handling of a number of "report room" activities
such as taking attendance, reading announcements
and bulletins, receiving and caring for records
and reports of various kinds, care and distribu-
tion of supplies, tickets, publications, etc.,
and collections of various types.

McKown, also, emphasizes the "educative opportunity" of the

homeroom as an agency for guidance.

Swarm (30, p.90) reports in a survey of 47 high schools

 25

in the State of Washington in 1936 that 87.2 per cent of the

high schools use the homeroom to some extent as an adminis-

trative device. In 1934 Abernethy reported in a study of

164 Massachusetts high schools: (1, p.135)

Administrative effeciency appears to be a

common purpose for all but a few schools, 147, or
91.9 per cent, reporting this as an objective.
It is the only objective listed by 27 schools, or
15.9 per cent of the total.

In 1930 Kefauver and Scott found in a study of 130

schools in 37 states that the following administrative ac-

tivities were reported in at least 75 per cent of the

schools: (16, p.631)

Discussion of ideals and purposes of home-room

organization
Daily routine and bulletin notices
Collections of contributions of school funds
Sale of tickets
Subscriptions to school publications
Discussion of punctuality and attendance
Contests between divisions of homeroom group
on tardiness, scholarship, etc.

Mogill, in one of the most comprehensive studies of

the homeroom in cities of populations of over 100,000, has

this to say about the use of the homeroom as an administra-
tive device: (24, p.146)

In the modern public school there must be

some unit of organization for administration. The
home room is a unit through which schools are ad-
ministered and through which all educational prob-
lems are pursued. It has been found that the size
of a school makes it necessary to have small ad-
ministrative sub-units functioning in relation to
an overall administrative program. In general, it
 26

may be stated that the home room, used as an ad-

ministrative technique, increases in value as the
enrollment of the school increases. One adminis-
trator stated that the home room is: "Absolutely
necessary from an administrative point of view.
We could not function without it in a school with
a population of 4,580". One principal has stated
that the home room is: "All for the purpose of get-
ting the best job done in the least possible time,
for the most people to serve with the least amount
of energy".

Mogill grouped the administrative functions of the home

room into five areas:

(1) Make general announcements

(2) Record attendance

(3) Issuing and collecting report cards

(4) Collection of money

(5) Issuing lockers.

gill states further: (24, p.146)

Routine administrative announcements of a

general nature are made in 87 per cent of the
cases replying to the survey questionnaire while
only 13 per cent do not use the homeroom for this
purpose. The homeroom is used to record attendance
in 84 per cent of the schools, while only 16 per
cent do not use it. In 75 per cent of the cases
report cards are collected through the homeroom.
Only 25 per cent of the schools do not use this
administrative device.

Kefauver and Scott found that certain home room ac-

tivities contributed to school spirit. The state and be-

lieve that "School spirit and loyalty are important in the

administration of the school". (16, p.632) This school

spirit was shown by the discussion of the needs for im-

provement in one-third of the schools; boosting school en-

terprises and school songs and yells were reported by the

 27

majority of the schools. (16, p.623) Some writers, such as

Smith (26) and Van Pool (32) list the development of a

healthy school spirit as a separate function of the home-

room. Smith states: (2E, p.4)

The institution function includes such things

as the development of school spirit, understanding
of and participation in the extra-curricula pro-
gram of the school, promoting good sportmanship
and loyalty, building up in the student body a co-
operative attitude toward the program of the ad-
ministration, and an appreciation of the opportuni-
ties which the institution offers to the students.

There are, of course, many other administrative func-

tions of the home room besides those reported by the research

studies. One of these, the development of an overall edu-

cational philosophy, and some specific administrative func-

tions, would be peculiar to the school. These were not re-

ported as such but were grouped under general headings.

Guidance functions of the homeroom

The emphasis on the individual, the increased size of

the high schools, the heterogeneous character of the school
population, and other factors have all contributed to making

the homeroom an agency for guidance. This emphasis on the

individual and some of the factors wh ich make it more neces-

sary are, as stated by Goetting: (12, p.450)

Although the typical high school is a small

institution, it must be recognized that a majority
of pupils attend high schools of such size that an
understanding of individual personalities by
teachers is difficult, if not impossible. With
the increased enrollment of the schools, the im-
provement of this condition has been undertaken by
 28

the establishment of home rooms where groups of

thirty to forty pupils would be assigned to a
home room teacher. Each pupil would thus come
to feel that there is at least one teacher in
the high school who knows him intimately, and
who takes a personal interest in his progress.

Dunsmoore gives these similar reasons for placing guidance

activities in the homeroom: (6, p.25)

There developed a recognition of the fact

that many pupils were not obtaining the individual
attention and guidance which they had under a sys-
tem whereby at least one teacher knew the pupil
well through frequent and somewhat continuous con-
tacts with him. Inasmuch as the homeroom had already
been established for administrative-routinary pur-
poses, it seemed logical that schools should consi-
der the extension of its use to provide for a close
personal contact between homeroom teacher and pu-
pils. Gradually guidance activities of various
types were introduced into the homeroom period, and
thus it assumed in many instances the dual function
of performing both routine and guidance activities.

In 1936 Swarm, after investigating the literature

available, stated: (30, p.98) "There is quite general

agreement among the writers in this field that the purpose

of the homeroom is primarily guidance."

Kefauver and Scott in a study of 130 high schools in
37 states in 1930 found that high schools indicate a wide

variety of guidance activities. They state: (16, p.633)

The largest number is reported by the junior high

schools, the median being 21.2. The median for the
senior high schools is 16.0, and 12.5 for the four-
year high schools,
In discussing the results of the survey to determine

the activities contributing to guidance in the homeroom,

Kefauver and Scott say: (16, pp.633-635)

 29

Certain things are done by most of the

schools. The items occuring most frequently
are the discussion of courses offered in the
school, requirements for graduation from high
school, requirements for admission to college
and nature of extra-curricular activities in
college, and the advising of students in choice
of subjects and curricula---. Approximately one-
half of the junior high schools and slightly more
than a third of the senior and four-year high
schools are making some attempts toward informing
pupils about the conditions and opportunities in
occupations. A smaller proportion of the schools
are studying the members of the groups by tests,
rating of character traits, and visits to homes.

Abernethy in a study of 184 Yassachusetts high schools

published in 1934 found: (1, p.138)

The only forms of guidance appearing among

the objectives of one-half of the schools or over
are orientation, personal guidance, and educational
guidance, which are found in 56.3 per cent, 51.1,
51.3 per cent respectively. Other forms of guid-
ance range in order from social guidance in 41.9
per cent of the schools, through moral guidance in
38.8 per cent, health guidance in 31.1 per cent,
and vocational guidance in 26.9 per cent, to recre-
ational guidance in 18.1 per cent.

Swarm, in a study of 104 high schools in the State of

Washington in 1936, found: (30, p.99)

That guidance and counseling are the main

features of the homeroom prograts in thirty-one
or 65.9 per cent of the schools.

In 1941 Votaw in a survey of homeroom programs in Oregon

high schools reported: (33, pp.71-72)

67 per cent of the 47 schools reported had

ten per cent or less of the homeroom period de-
voted to vocational guidance, only one school re-
ported over 25 per cent of the homeroom period
concerned with vocational guidance.

Votaw also found that other phases of guidance, such as the

 30

personal interview and Tersonal problem discussions, re-

ported less than 25 per cent devoted to the homeroom period.

This is not necessarily a refutation of the findings

of the other studies quoted, inasmuch as Votaw's study was

an attempt to determine the amount of time spent in each

activity and the percentages represent this proportion of

time. It is interesting to note that some attempt at vo-

cational guidance in the homeroom was reported by 63 per

cent of the schools, (33, p.72) that 93 per cent of the

schools reported some time devoted to the personal inter-

view, and 100 per cent reported some time devoted to dis-

cussions of personal problems in the homeroom. Discussion

of school problems was reported by 100 per cent of the

schools. The per cent of time devoted to Vese discussions

varied, with the majority being 10 per cent or less. (33,

p.75)

Mogill reports, in his study of 613 high schools lo-

cated in cities of 100,000 population or over: (24, p.150)

Student counseling in terms of curriculum

programs occurs in 60 per cent of the schools.
The next most important aspect of the homeroom
program is student counseling in terms of personal
problems, which occurs in 78 per cent of the
schools.

Apparently there is a great discrepancy between the

time spent in these activities and the checking of the items.

Votaw's study is a good illustration of this.

The findings of these studies that guidance is a major

 31

function of the homeroom does not prove that effective

guidance is carried out or that the majority of the time in

the homeroom is devoted to these activities. That the

teachers check these activities as contributing to guidance,

indicates a recognition to some degree, of the need for as-

sistance to the pupils and of the possibility that the

homeroom can meet this need.

Other purposes of the homeroom

Undoubtedly some homerooms are used as instructional

units for unrelated subjects that cannot conveniently be in-

cluded in other periods. Kefauver and Scott found that ac-

tivities such as driver training, life saving and music ap-

preciation were carried out in a very small percentage of

the homerooms. (16, p.638)

Berman emphasized the use of the homeroom as a practi-

cal factor in democratic living when he stated: (4, pp.72-

73)
It is obvious that the school can do more
about democracy and democratic living. Its obli-
gation is implicit in these days of uncertainty,
but no matter what the school attempts to do, it
should proceed calmly without pedagogical hysterics.
A thousand and one opportunities are at hand with
which to undertake a practical, sane, effective
program. One of these opportunities rests in the
homeroom. No startling innovations are needed;
the possibility for democratic living is inherent
in the homeroom itself.
Actually many of the purposes given by the various

writers can be classified under either guidance or

 32

administration or both. The development of a desirable

pupil-teacher relationship is a prerequisite to effective

guidance.

Organization of the Homeroom

In order to provide as complete a picture of the or-

ganization of the homeroom as is possible the literature

was reviewed as it relates to the organization of the home-

room within the school, and the organization within the

homeroom.

Organization of the homeroom within the school

The literature is particularly meager on this aspect

of the homeroom. In the final analysis, the principal is

responsible for the organization of the homeroom program.

However, the general organization may be under a homeroom

director, homeroom committee, council composed of teachers,

pupils and principal, or various other ways and combina-

tions of organizing the homeroom.

In 1930 Kefauver and Scott made a survey of 130 high

schools in 37 states and found: (16, pp.628-629)

The most unsatisfactory characteristic of

the administration of the homeroom is the lack
of coordinating leadership. The principal very
infrequently attempts to develop the program.
A committee of teachers represents the most fre-
quently used type of organization. This commit-
tee outlines in a general way the nature of the
activity for the different groups, and in some
 33

instances, develops the materials in a detailed

manner for use by the home-room teachers. In
more than half the schools canvassed, however,
each homeroom teacher works independently with-
out any attempts being made to assist her in de-
veloping satisfactory activities and in coordinat-
ing the activities of the various groups.

Swarm reports in a study of Washington state high

schools in 1936 that 59.4 per cent of the 47 schools report-

ing homeroom organizations had a Director of Homeroom Acti-

vities. Three schools reported the use of a committee. The

large percentage of directors is easily understood when it

is explained that all reported this as a part-time job. No

mention was made of the amount of time spent by the di-

rectors. In this study, Swarm supports the findings of

}efauver and-Scott by showing that the principal or vice-

principal directs the homeroom in over 65 per cent of the

schools reporting. The degree of this direction may be

very active or very passive because, as previously stated,

the principal is the one responsible for the homeroom, and

its effectiveness depends upon the degree of leadership.
Votaw in a study of 47 Oregon high schools in 1941

reports finding much the same results, with approximately

53 per cent of the responses indicating no formal organi-
zation except the usual teacher-principal organization.

Votaw also found that a committee of teachers was respon-

sible for the homeroom organization in 10 per cent of the

schools, and 3 per cent reported the use of the student

council and teachers.

 34

Wagner (34, p.94) in a study of 104 high schools in

1946 found that 21 schools had faculty committees entirely

responsible for the promotion and development of the home-

room program with 76 schools reporting no such committee.

From the reports of homeroom organizations listed

above, it appears that no elaborate organizational plan

exists among homeroom programs. However, it should be kept

in mind that the studies reported may not represent the en-

tire country. McKown in his book, Homeroom Guidance,

states: (21, p.50)

In general, it appears that an organization

built around a faculty committee is a more de-
sirable plan than an organization built around an
activity or guidance director. Of course, if
there is an activity or guidance director he will
be a member of the committee, perhaps its chairman.
Such an organization combines the natural advan-
tages of both of the methods suggested. But, in
any case some central office or committee should
be charged with the responsibility for organizing,
promoting, and developing the homeroom plan.

Van Pool in his article on the homeroom published in

1952 suggests that in the small school the homeroom should
probably be under the direction of a single person, probably
the principal. Since there is such a great difference in

school programs and school personnel, a formal or rigid

organization would not apply to all situations. Factors to

be considered would be the personnel, both teachers and

students, school program as to time, purpose of the homeroom,

and in general the overall philosophy of the school.

The selection of a teacher for the homeroom has been

 35

the subject of much discussion. This is an important point

since essentially the success or failure of the homeroom

program depends upon the homeroom teacher. Swarm found

that approximately half of the schools required all teachers

to have a homeroom. Wagner reports that of 57 schools re-

porting, 7 said the homeroom teachers were selected, where-

as, 50 schools reported that all teachers were expected to

have homeroom. The consensus is that one of the major rea-

sons for the failures of the homeroom is the requirement

that every teacher must have a homeroom, regardless of per-

sonal characteristics, training or desire.

A possible solution to the lack of training of home-

room teachers has been reported by Leaver who states that

the rotation of homeroom teachers in a Midwestern state

school works successfully. She states: (19, pp.8-10)

Teachers serve as chairmen of the various

discussions and rotate from session to session
so that they meet with each group once during the
year. Each teacher selects a topic and becomes
rather a specialist on that one subject and
guides in its presentation and interpretation to
the students. Thus a teacher presents just one
topic during the year to each of the various
groups.

A warning about over organization may be interjected

here. As Swarm states: (30, pp.16-17)

It is possible to over-organize because of

the enthusiasm for the homeroom when one becomes
acquainted with it and sees its possibilities;
and also because of the desire to keep up with
the newer conception of modern education.
 36

Membership of the homeroom

Numerous plans have been suggested in the literature

for selecting pupils for the homeroom. Abernethy found

that the larger high schools selected pupils for the home-

room either by sex or alphabetically. (1, p.138) Wagner

reports in her study of 104 high schools in 1946 that of

73 schools reporting, 47 schools selected pupils for the

homeroom by the grade leVel of the pupil. The second

method in importance was reported by 15 schools, which

selected pupils by class, such as first, second or third-

period class. (34, p.89) Swarm found that class and sex

were the most-used methods_ of selecting pupils for the

homeroom in 57.5 and 27.7 per cent of the teachers report-

ing respectively. (30, p.88)

Kefauver and Scott found that the alphabetical and ran-

dom methods of selection were used the most, occasionally by

grade level. Ability grouping was reported in only a few

cases. Vocational interests are also used by placing in a

group pupils from a common vocational curriculum or with a

common vocational ambition. Kefauver and Scott give the fol-

lowing opinion of methods of selection: (16, p.627)

The bases of distribution of students to the

homeroom should be determined by the program pro-
jected for the homeroom. Certainly the plan
adopted, even though it has certain disadvantages,
should be adapted to the achievement of the major
purposes.
 37

Payne (26) found, in experimenting with different

methods of grouping pupils in his southern high school,

that grouping by centers of interest or ability did not

work out in his particular school. Grouping by alphabeti-

cal order and sex were the most popular with the pupils.

Van Pool in a study of researches on homeroom programs

in 1952 reemphasizes Kefauver and Scott's observations by

stating: (32, p.153)

Each school must decide which plan it will

use. However, the one that appears to be most
popular is that system in which the members of
certain grade level are divided alphabetically
into groups of about the same size. In general,
these groups are re-arranged every year but in
some schools this group is made up in the first
year of high school and the pupils remain to-
gether throughout their entire high-school ca-
reer.

Some of the methods that may be used to select pupils

are listed by Fretwell as follows: (11, pp.38-40)

By classes and alphabetically within the class

By representatives of all classes within the
school
By sex
By intelligence quotients or ability ratings
within classes
By first period recitation groups
By curricula pursued or by extra-curricular
activities
By random selection
Almy lists these methods in addition to the above: (2,

p.231)

By schools from which pupils come

By mental age
By permitting pupils to choose
By interests of pupils
 38

Of the numerous plans in operation for selecting the

students for specific homerooms Van Pool in a summary of

current practices lists the most commonly used methods as:

(32, p.153)

Grade level, alphabetically dispersed; first

period class; assignment by principal; pupil's
free choice; "cross-section" homeroom; alphabeti-
cal dispersion; curriculum; grade level, divided
into groups by sponsor; IQ; school marks; other
period class; special group for athletes.
The length of time the pupil remains in the same home-

room has also been a point of discussion. Kefauver and

Scott after surveying 130 high schools in 37 states report:

(16, p.628)

If the homeroom is to render a significant

guidance service in which the home-room adviser
is to be well informed about her students and to
furnish the close personal contact considered
desirable, the longer assignment is more advanta-
geous. Frequent change in groups preclude desir-
able familiarity between teacher and student.
Semiannual assignment with the relatively short
period is almost certain to make attempts at
guidance ineffective.

However, they found, in this same study, that the assignment

of pupils on a permanent basis is used less frequently than

the semester or annual assignment. (16, p.628)

McKown has analyzed the possibilities of the permanent

versus the temporary membership in the homeroom and gives

these main advantages of the temporary homeroom membership:

(21, p.75)

The main advantages of the temporary plan

are: (1) the student has opportunities of
knowing more teachers, and vice versa, the
 39
teacher has opportunities of knowing more stu-
dents; (2) the students can become acquainted
with a greater number of their schoolmates than
if they were with the same group for a longer
period; (3) the novelty of the situation---new
sponsor and new home room mates---adds to the
general attractiveness of the home room plan;
(4) if student-teacher relationships are not
mutually pleasant they will not be continued
for long.

McKown lista these main advantages to the permanent member-

ship homeroom plan: (21, p.76)

(1) the members and the sponsor can become

better acquainted than they could if the period
were short; (2) there will be no duplication of
work, emphasis, or activities; and (3) responsi-
bility for the success of the room is' definitely
placed. All three are good arguments.
Unfortunately little data are available to show which

of these plans are the most widely used. If Wagner's study

of 104 schools is representative, then the permanent home-

room seems to be gaining in popularity. Wagner found in her

survey that 70 schools used the permanent homeroom plan,

whereas only 26 schools used the temporary plan. Four

schools did not answer. Mogill (24) did not report any

findings dealing with the membership in the homeroom.

Size of the homeroom

The size of the homeroom depends upon the local situa-

tion. M Eown states: (22, p.63)

The usual homeroom is composed of from 25

to 35 students, because the regular classes are
traditionally organized on this basis, and also
because the room itself accomodates about this
number.
 40

Another advantage is that in classes of this size the

pupils get to know each other.

Wagner's study of 104 high schools in 1946 revealed the

number of pupils in the homeroom ranged from 25 to 35. (34,

p.89) Magill, in the study of homeroom programs in cities

with population of 100,000 or over, found that the average

number of pupils in the homeroom was 33. (24, p.157)

Length of the homeroom period

The length of the homeroom period should be determined

by the purposes of the homeroom. Short periods are all

that are necessary for checking attendance and similar rou-

tine details. The average period, according to Mogillts

study, is 22 minutes. Mogill, in the latest study avail-

able, gives the following results from 511 schools report-

ing: (24, p.145)

The length of the home room period shows

wide distribution. Numerically, 154 cases indi-
cated the preference for 11-20 minutes. In nu-
merical descendency 112 cases prefer 21-30 min-
utes, 85 cases select 1-10 minutes; 69 cases
choose 31-40 minutes; 68 cases check 41-50 min-
utes; 16 cases indicated 41-60 minutes; 3 cases
prefer 61-70 minutes; and 4 cases indicate 71-80
minutes.
In 1930 Kefauver and Scott found that 150-209 minutes

a week were usually allotted to the homeroom. This repre-

sents approximately a 36 minute period each school day of

the week. (16, p.639) In 1936 Swarm found essentially the

 41

same in his study of 47 schools in the State of Washington.

(30, p.06)

In her study of 104 schools in 1945, Wagner found that

fifteen minutes was the most common length of the homeroom.

A majority of schools reported periods of 10-20 minutes with

40 minutes the next most popular length, although a wide va-

riation existed of from five to 60 minutes. (34, p.91)

It is generally agreed that the homeroom period should

be the same length as the instructional period. This would

tend to give status to the homeroom. (22, p.61)

Not all homerooms meet daily as is indicated from re-

sults obtained in Mogillts study. He found that 85 per

cent of the schools reported meeting daily; 8.9 per cent

weekly, with the remainder meeting less often or when neces-

sary. (24, p.144) The length of the period and the number

of meetings per week are determined by the purposes of the

particular homeroom.

Or7anization within the homeroom

In his revised edition of Homeroom Guidance, McKown de-

votes all of Chapter V to the internal organization of the

homeroom and emphasizes student participation and responsi-

bility as the most desirable plan. He states: (21, p.81)

The main objectives of the home room plan

cannot be achieved through a teacher-dominated,
formal or even informal, class. They can be
achieved only through a miniature democracy in
which the students assume and more or less
 successfully discharge the responsibilities for
the room's various programs and activities.
The internal organization of the homeroom will vary

with the individual teacher and her students. It is not

the purpose of this review to list an elaborate organiza-

tional plan, but rather, to show the type of organizations

which have been used in homerooms.

Stewart, in developing a homeroom program for a high

school in the Northeast, gave the pupils a large share in

its internal organization. He writes: (20, p.117)

In each homeroom, pupil committees were

elected to plan, with the help of the teacher,
each meeting of the guidance hour,. The pupils
found the Student Council a convenient organiza-
tion to which to refer questions and suggestions
for 7eneral improvement.
Bartholomew, in a report of guidance services in the

homeroom in a Northeast high school, states that the home-

room is: (3, p.144) "The basis of pupil participation in

school government".
In a survey of 47 high schools in 1936, Swarm found
that 34 per cent of the schools utilized social committees
in the homeroom; other committees, such as scholarship and

attendance, occurred less frequently. However, Votaw in a

study of 47 Oregon high schools in 1941 found that approxi-

mately 57 per cent of the schools reported less than 25 per

cent of the homeroom programs planned by the pupils.

Little is available in the literature regarding recent

findings on the internal organization of the homeroom.

 43

Van Pool has summarized this problem of the homeroom by

stating: (32, p.153)

Some schools find it helpful to permit each

homeroom to develop a rather elaborate internal
organization, complete with officers, committees,
colors, constitution, and even dues or fees.
There is considerable doubt about the efficacy of
such an elaborate system for directing the activi-
ties of the average home room, but there may be
some justification for the election of officers.

Homeroom Practices

Two aspects of the practices carried out in the home-

room will be reviewed. These are the methods and the ma-

terials used by homeroom teachers in secondary schools.

Methods used by homeroom teachers

Broad pupil participation is obviously one of the most

desired characteristics of any homeroom program which is de-

voted to any phase of guidance.

Dunsmoore made an intensive study of 33 homeroom pro-

grams in 1936 and found that the responsibility for handling

homeroom meetings varied considerably. These are the find-

ings: that the homeroom teacher presides only occasionally

in most of the schools; that the next method used was that

the pupil officers preside at all meetings; next, was that

the homeroom teacher never presides, but takes part as a

member. Dunsmoore in his study found that in no homerooms

did the teacher preside at all the meetings. (8, p.245)

 44

It must be emphasized that this study dealt with the guidance

aspects of the homeroom and that schools studied were recog-

nized as having good guidance programs in the homeroom.

Group discussion seems to be the predominant method

used in the homeroom. Abernethy (1) reports in 1934 that

the discussion method was widely used in Massachusetts

secondary schools.
Little mention is made in the literature of the methods

used by homeroom teachers. This can probably be explained

by the wide divergence of practices as well as by the wide

variation of materials used and developed in the homeroom.

Materials used in the homeroom

Reference to materials used in the homeroom are seldom

found because, it is realized, that the materials may be

rapidly outdated because of the wide variation in purposes

and practices.
In the writer's opinion McKown has, at present, the

only major book in this area. His first edition of Home

Room Guidance was published in 1934 and was revised in

1946. This represents the classic in the field of books

devoted exclusively to the homeroom. Some additional

books and pamphlets dealing with the homeroom are listed

in the bibliography. (7, 9, 17, 23, 27)

Of course, many books, pamphlets, and articles deal

with topics of interest to the homeroom teacher. These will

 45

not be reviewed because, obviously, it would be an unending

task.

Many schools apparently develop materials for use in the

homeroom. Since these are not published and are not avail-

able to the author no method of tabulating the type or con-

tents is available.
Generalizing from a study of 160 responses from princi-

pals of homerooms in Texas, Van Pool states: (32, p.155)

Some schools find it helpful for the staff,

or certain members of the staff and students, to
prepare a mimeographed handbook or bulletin on
homeroom planning, operation and program.

This may not be an important aspect of the homeroom;

however, the author believes that the discussion and dis-

semination of materials used in the homeroom is a necessary

prelude to the improvement of homeroom programs throughout

the country.

Problems Faced by Homeroom Teachers

The literature dealing with the homeroom in the second-

ary school contains many words about the problems and fail-

ures of the homeroom. Novak, writing in 1951, has analyzed

the failures of homerooms and states: (25, p.50)

Nearly all of these failures can be traced

to violations of the following principles:
(1) Homeroom sponsors must be specially quali-
fied, trained and interested.
(2) Content of programs must be of direct and
immediate interest to most of the members
of the group and must fill needs of which
they are aware.
 46

(3) The program should be student planned and

student conducted, but intelligent assist-
ance should be provided by the sponsor.
(4) The primary outcomes are largely the de-
velopment of attitudes and the making of
adjustments. There are no grades or sub-
ject matter assignments.
(5) The student composition of the group should
be one that will be conducive to achieve-
ment of satisfactory outcomes.
(6) The scheduling and time allotted for the
program must be adequate.
(7) The importance of the homeroom as an inte-
gral part of the educational program should
be so accepted that obstacles will not be
placed in the way of regular attendance by
all students of the group.

His findings in general are substantiated by the find-

ings of Van Pool. (32, p.150)

Problems in the homeroom are expected, since few, if

any homerooms are near perfection. It is interesting to

note that in the literature available the writer could find

no mention of a study where the homeroom teachers listed

their problems. This aspect of the homeroom program will

be discussed further in Chapter IV.

Summary

The homeroom in the secondary school was in existence

as early as 1862 and was developed primarily as a device to
facilitate the efficient administration of the school. Be-

tween 1920 and 1930 the increased size of the secondary

schools with the attendant problems gave a great impetus to

the use of the homeroom type organization which still exists

today in more than half of the secondary schools.

 47

Although the purposes and specific functions of the

homeroom vary greatly among secondary schools, the major

purpose of the homeroom is to provide some form of guidance

service to the pupils. The facilitation of administrative

routines also remains a function of most homerooms. The

present trend is for even greater use of the homeroom as an

agency for guidance.

There is a tendency for the pupils in the homeroom to

be given more of the responsibility for planning and acti-

vating the program. However, not all schools are, as yet,

ready or willing to give this opportunity to the pupils.

The introduction of guidance services in the homeroom

resulted in many disappointnents and problems. The assign-

ment of classroom teachers to the homeroom without training

or consultation remains one of the greatest problems of the

homeroom. Another basic problem is the lack of status ac-

corded the homeroom as shown by pupils and particularly by

administrators, many of whom show this by their lack of a

coordinated purposeful homeroom program.

 48

CHAPTER III

FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS

A detailed account of the research procedures used in

collecting the data for this chapter is given in Chapter I.

Table IV, page 15, shows that of the 419 schools contacted

with a checklist, 268 or 64 per cent are usable for statis-

tical purposes. A few of the schools returning checklists

not completed were kind enough to send mimeographed ma-

terial which had been developed in their homeroom programs.

This material, though not lending itself to statistical

treatment, will be included whenever practical. In this

chapter it is proposed to examine the responses to the 268

checklists and the materials received from the homeroom

teachers.

In order to present the data obtained from the check-

lists as logically as possible, the same general structure

of 'classification used in Chapter II, Review of the Litera-

ture, is used in this chapter. This classification corres-

ponds to the major purposes of the study. The headings are:

(a) Administrative practices in the organization of

the homeroom

(b) Purposes of the homeroom

(c) Current homeroom practices

(d) Problems of homeroom teachers

(e) Trends in the use of homeroom programs.

 49

Organization of the Homeroom

Administrative practices in the organization of the

homeroom will be considered under this heading. Specific

practices to be considered are:

The basis of assignment of pupils to the homeroom.

Organization of the homeroom within the school.

Number of pupils in the homeroom.

Number of weekly meetings of the homeroom.

Length of the homeroom period.

Length of assignment of pupils to the same homeroom.

Also under this heading the internal organization of the

homeroom will be considered.

Basis of assignment of pupils to the homeroom

The procedure used to select pupils for the homeroom

may be an important aspect of the success of the homeroom

program. There are essentially two methods of selecting

pupils:

(a) A heterogeneous grouping of the class or of the

school; this grouping represents some form of a

cross-section of the school population, and

(b) A homogeneous grouping; this method involves the

assignment of pupils to the homeroom according

to some criteria. The most common criteria used

are: ability, sex, vocational aspirations or

 50

course of study, and special cases.

The data show that the predominant method of selecting

pupils for the homeroom is that of grouping pupils alpha-

betically by classes. One hundred twenty-nine schools, or

48 per cent, reported using this method. Fifty-two schools,

or 19 per cent, use the first period, or other class as the

basis of assigning pupils to the homeroom. The next most

common method is a random selection of pupils by the adminis-

tration. This method was reported used in forty schools, or

15 per cent of the responses. These three methods are simi-

lar in that a heterogeneous grouping of pupils is obtained

in each. A heterogeneous grouping was used by 82 per cent

of the schools responding or 221 of the 355 responses.

In only ten schools, or 4 per cent of the responses, are

pupils allowed to select their homeroom. Perhaps some con-

sideration may be given to allowing pupils to change home-

rooms; unfortunately, this was not asked of the homeroom

teachers.

The selection of pupils for the homeroom by geographi-

cal areas is practiced in four schools. Special homerooms

for disciplinary cases are found in four schools, and

special homerooms for pupils with personality problems are

found in eleven schools, or 4 per cent of the responses.

The criteria of sex, once a major method of selecting

pupils for the homeroom, is used in only eighteen schools,

or 7 per cent of the responses. The twenty-seven schools

 51

using ability or achievement ratings as a basis of assign-

ment represent 10 per cent of the responses. Of the thirty-

one schools reporting other methods than those listed in

Table V, the great majority use a combination of methods

rather than just one.

Table V shows the number of responses given to each of

the methods or criteria.

TABLE V

BASIS OF ASSIGNMENT OF PUPILS TO TEE HOMEROOM IN

268 SECONDARY SCHOOLS
10/1.111.10.111110...11.1...001111.111100111111.

Number of Per Cent of

Method Responses 268 Schools

Alphabetical grouping by classes 129 48

First period, etc., class 52 19
Random selection by administration 40 15
Ability :)1, achievement 27 10
Course of Study 20 7
Sex 18 7
For personality problems 11 4
Pupils select homeroom 10 4
Alphabetical grouping of entire school 9 3
Geographical areas of school district 4 1
Special homeroom for disciplinary cases 4 1
Others 31 11

Total 355

*The reason the total responses exceeds the number of

schools represented is that some schools checked two methods
of assigning pupils to the homeroom. Many homeroom teachers
checked one method and "Others", indicating a combination of
methods according to the situation.
 52

OrAsnization of the homeroom within the school

Since the organization would depend upon the purposes

of the homeroom and the local situation, no one method of

organizing the homeroom is best. The details of the organi-

zation should be those which best fit the situation and

which best meet the needs of the pupils and staff. An ex-

cellent opportunity is provided in the homeroom to practice

democratic living. To utilize this opportunity the home-

room must practice the principles of democracy. One way

this may be done is to give the pupils an opportunity to

assist in planning and executing the homeroom program.

Not all schools have developed to the point that the

pupils and staff are ready for a great degree of pupil

participation in planning and carrying out the homeroom

program. Only ten schools, or 4 per cent of those report-

ing, said that the pupils plan and activate the entire home-

room program. Teachers and pupils plan the homeroom program

in 154, or 58 per cent of the schools. No pupil partici-

pation is reported in planning the homeroom program by 143,

or 53 per cent of the schools. Of the 143 responses, 56

report that the teachers plan the homeroom program, and in

87 schools, or 33 per cent of the schools, report that the

homeroom program is planned by the teachers and the adminis-

tration.
 53

TABLE VI

ORGANIZATION OF THE HOMEROOM WITHIN THE SCHOOL

Number of_,, Per Cent of

Method Responses' 268 Schools

Pupils and teachers plan program 154 57

Administration and teachers plan program 87 32
Teachers plan program 56 21
Pupils plan and activate entire program 10 4
Others 41 15

Total 348

*Some schools use two methods of organization. An analysis

of responses reveals much overlapping between the last three
methods.

An analysis of the responses which indicated the pupils

plan and activate the entire homeroom program reveals that

the homeroom teacher acts only as an adviser. It should be

pointed out that the planning and carrying out of the home-

room program is a school function and is under the immediate

supervision of the school staff. Within limits, which the

pupils assist in setting, the homeroom program is planned

and executed by the pupils.

It appears that a discrepancy exists between theory and

practice in many schools. If schools are to give the pupils

an opportunity to participate in the planning of the school

program, the homeroom is an ideal place to begin because of

the nature of the homeroom---the pupil's home at school.

The responses of the 41 schools reporting the use of

other methods than those listed on the checklist may be

 54

categorized as follows:

1. Teacher, administrator, and guidance director plan

the homeroom program.

2. Committees of teachers are delegated this responsi-

bility.

That all the homerooms in the school have similar or-

ganizations and activities was reported by 106, or 40 per

cent of the homeroom teachers.

Number of pupils in the homeroom

The number of pupils in the homeroom has a direct bear-

ing on what the homeroom teacher can accomplish. A small

homeroom enrollment is conducive to an individual or per-

sonal relationship which is essential if the teacher is to

help the individual pupil. On the other hand, if the home-

room is to have as its only function the facilitation of

administrative efficiency by performing such duties as

checking attendance and giving out report cards, much

larger numbers can be handled adequately. As is often the

case, the homeroom is set up to care for administrative

routines, and later is given the responsibility for offer-

ing at least some of the guidance services.

The number of pupils assigned to the homeroom ranges

from 15 to 62. Twenty-one schools, or approximately 9 per

cent, report over forty pupils per homeroom. On the oppo-

site side, twenty schools, or approximately 6 per cent,

 55

TABLE VII

NUMBER OF PUPILS ASSIGNED TO THE HOMEROOM

Number of Pupils Number of Res onses

15 1
16 2
17 2
18 3
20 5
21 2
22 2
23 3
24 7
25 16
26 12
27 3
28 11
29 6
30 46
31 10
32 18
33 11
34 5
35 23
36 6
37 6
38 5
39 5
40 6
41 2
42 4
43 3
44 2
45 3
48 1
49 1
50 1
53 1
55 1
59 1
62 1
Varies 5
No answer 26

Total 268
 56

report that less than 24 pupils are assigned to each of the

homerooms in 266 schools.

A majority, 73 per cent, of the schools have homerooms

composed of from 24 to 40 pupils. The median number of pu-

pils per homeroom is 30. It is generally agreed by writers

in this field that schools having from 24 to 40 pupils in

the homeroom, the degree to Which the homeroom teacher can

function in a guidance capacity will depend to a great ex-

tent upon how well the homeroom is organiZed. By having an

internal organization functioning so that the pupils carry

on the program, the homeroom teacher can devote some time to

working with individual pupils.

Lenf4th and number of weekly homeroom meetings

Table VIII shows the number of weekly meetings of the

homeroom in 226 schools. One hundred twenty schools, or

53 per cent, meet five times per week. An analysis of the

responses show these to be daily meetings. The next most-

common number of weekly meetings is that of one meeting per

week Which is practiced by 43 schools, or 19 per cent of

the schools reporting. It is generally agreed by writers

in this field that around five meetings each week is the

most desirable practice. One hundred thirty-six schools,

or 60 per cent, meet this criteria with five or more home-

room meetings each week.

 57

TABLE VIII

NUMBER OP MEI= MEETINGS IN 226 HOMEROOMS

Number of
Frequency Responses Per Cent

Five 120 53
One 43 19
Two 16 7
Four 13 6
Three 11 5
Ten 10 4
Six 5 2
Biweekly 2 1
Fifteen 1 1
Varies 5 2

Total 226 100.0

Schools reporting that the number of homeroom periods

per week varied gave these explanations; (a) the homeroom

meets when necessary or desired, and (b) the number of home-

room periods per week varies during the school year because

of special events, scheduling, registration, and similar

reasons.
The length of time devoted to the homeroom in 226

schools is shown in Table IX. Fifty-six, or 25 per cent,

of the homerooms meet for 30-40 minutes each day of the

week. It is generally recognized by writers in this field

that shorter periods than 30 minutes, although sufficient

to handle administrative details, are not of sufficient

length to provide any great degree of guidance.

 58

TABLE IX

LENGTH OF THE HOMEROOM PERIOD PER DAY

IN 226 SCHOOLS

minutes Number of Per Cent of

Per Day Cases Cases

0-4 2 1
5-9 5 2
10-14 26 11
15-19 30 13
20-24 21 9
25-29 18 8
30-34 56 25
35-39 13 6
40-44 16 7
45-49 18 8
50-54 9 4
55-59 7 3
60-64 1 1
75-79 1 1
Varies 3 1
ale
No answer .018 111.1.

1041/MI
OMR

aargaeo...

Total 226 100

Actually the length of the homeroom period is not as

meaningful as it would be if it is compared with the number

of weekly meetings. Most of the reports found in the lit-

erature failed to reveal the relationship, except in sta-

tistical averages. Table X, page 59, shows the length of

the homeroom period according to the number of weekly home-

room meetings.
With the exception of one homeroom which met seven

minutes each week, the great majority of homerooms meeting

once per week have periods of 30 minutes or more. The

 59

length of the homeroom period is sufficient, but it is

doubtful if one meeting a week is often enough.

TABLE X

LENGTH AND NUMBER OF HOMEROOM MEETINGS

Length in Number of Weekly ioetin g!

Minutes 3 4 5 6 10 15 Varies Total

0-4 1 1 2

5-9 1 3 1 5

10-14 2. 23 2 26

15-19 1 3 22 3 1 30

20-24 5 1 1 1 10 2 1 21

25 -29 6 2 1 9 18

30-34 12 8 3 4 27 1 1 56

35-39 1 3 1 8 13

40-44 5 3 6 1 1 16
*
45-49 6 2 1 1 6 18

50-54 5 1 2 3. 9

55-59 3 1 7

60-64 1 1

75-79 1

Varies 3 3

Total 43 16 11 13 120 5 10 1 5 226

*Two homeroom teachers stated that their homerooms met

biweekly.
 60

The 120 schools reported to have daily meetings of the

homeroom showed these meetings to vary in length of time.

Fifty-three of the 120 schools met for a period of 30

minutes or more. Forty-six of these schools meet for 20

minutes or less every day. The length of time the homeroom

meets will depend upon the purposes of the homeroom. This

point will be elaborated upon under the topic of purposes

of the homeroom.

The school reported to have fifteen, three-minute

meetings each week doubtlessly uses the homeroom for purely

administrative reasons. The school reported to have nearly

two hours each day devoted to the homeroom uses the "Core"

program of organization with one period called the homeroom.

The checklist reveals that some instruction is given in this

homeroom along with guidance services and administrative

activities.

Length of assignment of pupils to same homeroom

It is generally agreed by writers in this field that

it is highly desirable to assign pupils to the same home-

room for a period of at least one year. It is believed

that when pupils are assigned for less than a year, teachers

and pupils do not have time to become well enough acquainted

for teachers to render effective guidance services.

The assignment of pupils to the same homeroom depends

upon the number of grades in the secondary school.

 61
Seventy-five schools reported the assignment of pupils for

more than four semesters or two years. Two schools reported

pupils remaining in the same homeroom for six years or twelve

semesters.

In 16 schools, or 6 per cent, pupils are assigned to

the same homeroom for one semester; 146 schools, or 54 per

cent, assign the pupils to the homeroom for two semesters

or one school year, and 42 schools, or 15 per cent, assign

pupils to the same homeroom for six semesters or three years.

Table XI shows the number of semesters pupils are as-

signed to the same homeroom.

TABLE XI

LENGTH OF TIME PUPILS ARE ASSIGNED TO

THE SAME HOMEROOM IN 268 SCHOOLS

Number of Number of PerCent of

Sem.e sters Res on es Rea =see
1 16 6
2 146 54
3 1 1
4 10 4
5 1 1
6 42 15
8 30 11
12 2 1
Varies 4 1
No answer 16 6

Total 268 100

A word of caution is necessary to those schools which

assign pupils to the same homeroom for a long period of

 62

time. When the best interest of the pupil or teacher is in-

volved the administration of the school should make some ar-

rangement whereby the pupil can be transferred to another

homeroom.

Internal organization of the homeroom

The degree of individual attention which the homeroom

teacher can give to her pupils will depend upon the effec-

tiveness of the internal organization of the homeroom.

Since individual interviews are at times necessary, the

only way the homeroom teacher can arrange for this time
while supervising the homeroom is to have the pupils or-

ganized in such a way that supervision is not needed for

short periods of time.

The responses of homeroom teachers as to the organi-

zation within their homerooms are shown in Table XII. In

190 homerooms, or 71 per cent, the pupils have a parlia-

mentary organization. In 125 schools, or 47 per cent, the

pupils choose committees or projects to work on during the

homeroom period. In 36 schools, or 13 per cent, the pupils

are assigned to committees by the homeroom teacher according

to expressed interests of the pupils. In 12 schools, or 4

per cent, definite assignments are made as in a regular

course.
Other forms of organization listed by 46 homeroom

teachers were the student council or other forms of student

 63

government. Other responses than those related to the stu-

dent council were combinations or aspects of those listed in

the checklist and in Table XII.

A very interesting point to note is that approximately

61 per cent of the responses showed that pupils had a voice

in the planning of the homeroom program. Yet practically

all of the homerooms have parliamentary organizations or

allow pupils to choose committees or projects to work on in

the homeroom.

TABLE XII

ORGANIZATION WITHIN Ti E 266 HOMEROOMS

Methods Responses Per Cent

Pupils have parliamentary organi-

zation, electing president, etc. 190 71

Pupils choose committees or projects

to work on 125 47

Pupils are grouped into committees

according to expressed interests
of pupils 36 13

Definite assignments are made as in

a regular course 12 4

Others 46 17

Total 409

It appears that in many schools the pupils have parlia-

mentary organizations which function only to carry out the

homeroom program planned by the teachers and/or administra-

tion. To the writer this is a serious indictment against

 64

those schools not allowing pupil participation in the plan-

ning and activation of the homeroom program. The writer has

observed, too often, cases where student councils or forms

of student government are organized to show the ways and

means of democracy only to be relegated to assisting the ad-

ministration in carrying out policies made by the adminis-

tration.

Summary

A wide variation exists in the physical characteristics

of the homerooms. The data show that:

The majority of schools report from 24 to 40 pupils

per homeroom.

The homeroom meets five or more times each week.

The median length of the homeroom period is from,30

to 34 minutes.

Membership in the homeroom is determined by alpha-

betical grouping by classes.

Pupils are assigned to the same homeroom for two

or more semesters.

In 53 per cent of the schools, homeroom teachers re-

ported that pupils do not have a share in the planning and

activating of the homeroom program. Even though this seems

extremely low to the writer, there appears to be a trend for

more pupil participation in the homeroom program, inasmuch

as Kefauver and Scott (16) did not report any pupil

 65

participation in 1930.
The majority, 71 per cent, of the homeroom teachers re-

ported that the pupils have a parliamentary organization for

such activities as electing officers. If this be true,

then it would appear that the pupils have not been given as
much responsibility as is possible in the planning and acti-

vating of the homeroom program.

Purposes of the Homeroom

In Chapter II it was found that basically the homeroom

has two major purposes, the facilitating of administrative

routines and the rendering of guidance services. It was

pointed out that most homerooms have some activities de-

signed to serve both purposes.

Guidance and administration were reported equally im-

portant as objectives of the homerooms in 172, or 64 per

cent, of the schools. Promoting administrative efficiency

was reported the predominant objective by fifty, or 18 per

cent of the homeroom teachers, and guidance was the chief
objective reported by 43, or 16 per cent, of the schools.

Table XIII shows the responses of the homeroom teachers to

the predominant objectives of their homeroom.

 66

TABLE XIII
PREDOMINANT OBJECTIVES IN 268 HOMEROOMS

Objective Number of
Responses Per Cent

Guidance and administration 172 64

Administration 50 18
Guidance 43 16
Others 1
No answer 2

Total 268 100

The responses to the general purposes of the homeroom

are shown in Table XIV.

TABLE XIV

PURPOSES OF THE HOMEROOM

Number of Per Cent of

Purpose Responses 268 Schools+
Orientation of pupils to school life 100 74
Guidance in social adjustment of pupils 190 74
To promote administrative efficiency 168 63
Personal guidance 161 60
Educational guidance 146 54
Vocational guidance 126 47
Activity period, music, etc. 84 31
Social period, clubs, etc. 62 23
Others 35 13

Total 1162

*Many homeroom teachers checked several purposes

Table XIV reveals that orientation of pupils to school

life and guidance in social adjustment of pupils were listed

as purposes by 190 of the schools. Although the homeroom

originated as an administrative device, in only 168, or

 67

63 per cent of the schools was this reported as a purpose.

In all 1162 responses were made by homeroom teachers from

268 schools. This represents an average of over four pur-

poses per school.

It appears, when one considers the length and number

of homeroom meetings per week and the purposes of the home-

room, that many homeroom teachers checked purposes but did

not consider the time element in carrying out these purposes

to any great extent. The degree to which these purposes are

translated into activities varies, although there is some

doubt by the writer that any great degree of effective

orientation, personal and social guidance as well as per-

forming administrative routines can be integrated into a

30-minute period each day, much less in a 30-minute period

once a week.

The general purposes of the homeroom have been enume-

rated and discussed. It is the purpose of this section to

ascertain the specific functions of the homeroom. The func-

tions to be considered are as follows:

(a) Administrative functions of the homeroom

(b) Orientation

(c) Educational guidance

(d) Vocational guidance

(e) Guidance in social problems

(f) Individual counseling.

 68

Administrative functions of the homeroom

The specific administrative functions of the homeroom

as reported by 268 homeroom teachers are shown in Table XV.

The regular function of checking attendance is reported by

195 homeroom teachers, or in 73 per cent of the schools.

Making announcements and reading bulletins and similar rou-

tine functions are carried out in 217, or 81 per cent of

the homerooms reporting. Actually these functions are of

minor importance as to the purposes of the homeroom because

of the short amount of time necessary to perform these ac-

tivities.

The supervising of collections and drives for social

and civic organizations required considerable time and ef-

fort. The homeroom teacher has charge of this function in

225, or 84 per cent of the homerooms. The issuing and col-

lecting of report cards in the homeroom is reported by 196,

or 73 per cent of the homeroom teachers. Other administra-

tive functions requiring considerable time to complete are

keeping personnel records up to date as shown by 138, or

52 per cent of the schools; sale of tickets as reported by

133, or 50 per cent of the schools; and registration of

students as checked by 117, or 44 per cent, of the home-

room teachers.
 69

TABLE XV

SPECIFIC ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS OF

THE ROMERO°

Number of Per Cent of

Function Responses 268 Schools

Collections and drives 225 84

Make announcements, read bulletins, etc. 217 61
Issue and collect report cards 196 73
Check attendance 195 73
Election of school officers 162 60
Keep personnel records up to date 138 51
Sale of tickets 133 50
Registration 117 44
School assembly programs 111 41
Supervise study period 103 38
Visit homes of pupils 46 17
Distribution of textbooks and materials 44 16
Others 22 8

Total 1709

In all 1709 responses were made to the question about

the specific administrative functions of the homeroom.

This represents an average of 6.4 responses per homeroom

teacher. When one considers the length of the homeroom

period and the number of weekly meetings, it is little short

of amazing that homeroom teachers can perform all the ad-
ministrative functions of the homeroom much less any of the

functions of guidance.

Orientation

The responses to the specific functions of the homeroom

in providing orientation for the pupils are shown in Table

XVI. Orientation to school life was reported by 201,

 70

or 75 per cent, of the homeroom teachers. Orientation to

school functions was reported by 188, or 70 per cent; school

regulations by 201, or 75 per cent, and student government

orientation was reported by 190, or 71 per cent, of the

homeroom teachers as a function of their homeroom.

TABLE XVI

ORIENTATION IN Ti E IOMEROOM

Number of Per Cent of

Orientation to: Responses 268 Schools

School life 201 75

School regulations 201 75
Student government 190 71
School functions 188 70
School clubs 151 56
School buildings 122 45
Guidance services 116 43
School publications 116 43
Athletics 94 35

Total 1379

Acquainting pupils with the guidance services in the

school was reported by 116, or 43 per cent, of the homeroom

teachers. The least number of responses was given to the

orientation of pupils to the athletic program.

An important fact revealed from the responses is that

the homeroom is the predominant agency for the orientation

of pupils to the school. An analysis of the responses re-

veals that 255, or 95 per cent, of the homeroom teachers

reported at least some form of orientation as a function of

the homeroom. Of the 268 schools represented in this study,

 71

42, or 16 per cent, report using a special course for orien-

tation of the pupils. Orientation is reported carried out

in regular courses by 46, or 17 per cent, of the schools.

The fact is that even in some of the schools utilizing

special courses for orientation the homeroom has certain re-

sponsibilities for orientation.

Obviously the homeroom does not perform all the func-

tions of orientation of the pupils. However, the data ob-

tained from 268 homeroom teachers show that the homeroom

has the responsibility for a major part of the orientation

program.
Only 46 schools reported using special counselors such

as a "big brother" and "big sister" in the orientation pro-

gram. It appears that more schools might investigate this

possibility for improving the orientation procedures. This

method has proved helpful in many schools both at secondary

and college level. The value of the pupils assisting new

pupils in the school is obvious to any one who has observed

this method. Of course, the use of special pupil counselors

does not constitute the total orientation program.

Educational guidance

The homeroom functions planned to provide assistance to

pupils with educational problems are shown in Table XVII.

The study of curricular offerings and courses of study are

offered in 161, or 60 per cent, of the homerooms. Methods

 72

of study and the improvement of study habits are reported by

127, or 47 per cent, of the schools as a function of the

homeroom.
The study of courses as a preparation for vocations was

reported by 119, or 44 per cent, of the homeroom teachers,

and 115, or 43 per cent, reported the study of the require-

ments of colleges and other educational institutions.

The function of the homeroom to assist in the improve-

ment of reading was reported by 29, or 11 per cent, of the

homeroom teachers. The discussion of the educational prob-

lems of the pupils was reported by 74, or 28 per cent, of

the homeroom teachers to be a function of the homeroom.

In 31, or 12 per cent of the schools represented in

this study special courses are offered to provide education-

al guidance services. In 50 schools homeroom teachers re-

port that assistance in educational problems is provided in

a regular course or courses. The use of special counselors

to handle educational problems of the pupils was reported

by 124, or 46 per cent, of the schools represented.

It appears that the homeroom is tending to be used more

for an over-view of the school program While individual

problems of an educational nature are being referred to

special counselors.
 73

TABLE XVII

EDUCATIONAL GUIDANCE IN.THE HOMEROOM

Number of Per Cent of

Function Responses 268 Schools

Study of curricular offerings 161 60

Methods of study 127 47
Relation of courses to vocation 119 44
Higher education requirements 115 43
Educational problems faced by pupils 74 28
Improvement of reading 29 11
Others 16 111/

Total 641

Vocational guidance
The responses of the homeroom teachers to the function

of the homeroom in providing vocational guidance services

are shown in Table XVIII. The study of occupations in the

world of work as a function of the homeroom was reported by

69, or 26 per cent, of the homeroom teachers. The study of

industries in the community was reported a function of the

homeroom in 38, or 14 per cent, of the schools. The study

of aptitudes, skills, and other requirements for different
jobs was reported by 67, or 25 per cent, of the schools.

In 30, or 11 per cent, of the schools the pupils make a de-

tailed study of their job choice. The discussion of the vo-

cational problems of the pupils was reported by only 41

homeroom teachers as a function of their homeroom.

 74

TABLE XVIII

VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE IN.TNE HOMEROOM

Number of Per Cent of

Function Responses 268 Schools

Study of occupations in the world of

work 69 26
Study of aptitudes needed for vocation 67 25
Vocational problems faced by pupils 41 15
Study of industries in community 38 14
Pupils make detailed study of jobs 30 11
Others 24 9

Total 269

Special counselors are reported available in 111, or 41

per cent, of the schools to assist pupils with their voca-

tional problems. In 52, or 19 per cent, of the schools

special courses are available for the study of occupations.

Vocational problems are considered in a regular course or

courses in 76, or 28 per cent, of the schools.

It appears that the homeroom as an agency for vocational

guidance is losing out in favor of special counselors or

special courses. It is the opinion of the writer that this

is a highly desirable development because of the need for

additional training as well as detailed information which
the homeroom teacher may not have, either because of lack

of time or interest.

Guidance in social problems

The functions of the homeroom- to provide assistance in

the solution of problems arising out of the social contacts

 75

of the pupils are indicated in Table XIX. Dealing with such

problems as manners, etiquette, and social behavior in gen-

eral was reported a function of the homeroom by 186, or 69

per cent, of the schools. Assistance in general adjustment

problems of the pupils was reported by 131, or 49 per cent,

of the homeroom teachers.

Specific problems dealing with the conduct of the pupil

were included in the checklist. The conduct of the pupils

in the halls, and in the assembly was reported considered in

204, or 76 per cent, of the schools. The conduct of the pu-

pils at athletic events was noted by 174, or 65 per cent of

the homeroom, teachers. In 134 homerooms the discussion of

the pupils conduct off the school campus was reported a func-

tion of the homeroom. Disciplinary problems was reported by

155 homeroom teachers to be a function of their homeroom.

It appears that the behavior of the pupils is consi-

dered in the majority of the homerooms. This is shown by

an analysis of the checklists whiCh reveals most homeroom

teachers checking at least one problem as a function of the

homeroom. The amount of guidance provided depends upon the

teacher. This section was included in an effort to deter,-

mine the extent to which the homeroom considered such prob-

lems. It is recognized that the discussion of these prob-

lems may be considered as administrative devices for the

administration of the school. As pointed out above they

also may be an excellent opportunity for the teacher to

 76

provide assistance to the pupils.

The function of the homeroom to provide assistance to

pupils with personal problems was reported by 128, or 46

per cent, of the schools. Discussion of boy-girl relation-

ships was noted as a function of the homeroom in 127, or 47

per cent of the schools. Although one of the aims of the

homeroom as reported in the literature is that of providing

a desirable pupil-teacher relationship, only 130 homeroom

teachers reported this as a function of their homeroom.

Discussions on inter-racial relations were reported by

61, or 23 per cent, of the schools, and family relationships

was reported by 73 of the homeroom teachers as a function of

the homeroom.

The problems of the pupils regarding social adjustment

was reported discussed in special courses by 27 homeroom

teachers, or in 10 per cent of the schools. The use of

regular courses to handle such problems was reported by 45

homeroom teachers, or in 17 per cent of the schools.

Special counselors were reported available to handle social
problems by 88 homeroom teachers, or in 33 per cent of the

schools.

The responses show a wide variation in the functions

of the homeroom to provide assistance to pupils with prob-

lems of a social nature. Homeroom teachers from 268 schools

checked 1683 functions of the homeroom as an agency for

social guidance. This is an average of 6.3 per homeroom

 77

teacher. Here again is demonstrated the great degree of

responsibility placed upon the homeroom teacher.

TABLE XIX

FUNCTION OF THE HOMEROOM FOR SOCIAL GUIDANCE

Number of Per Cent of

Function Res onses 258 Schools

Conduct in halls, assembly 204 76

Manners, etiquette, social behavior 186 69
Conduct, at athletic events 174 65
Student council problems 167 62
Disciplinary problems 155 58
Conduct off school grounds 134 50
Problems of adjustment (in general) 131 49
Teacher-pupil relationships 130 48
Personal problems 128 48
Boy-girl relationships 127 47
Family relationships 73 27
Inter-racial relations 61 23
Others 13 5

Total 1683

Individual counseling

The extent to which a homeroom teacher can interview

individual pupils depends upon the internal organization of

the homeroom. If a homeroom can be organized so that the

pupils take an active part in conducting it, then the home-

room teacher is able to spend some time with individual pu-

pils. The time element would partially determine the number

of pupils interviewed. The homeroom teacher has an oppor-

tunity to study individual pupils and get to know them per-

sonally. This knowledge of the pupils should enable the

homeroom teacher to be of valuable assistance to special

 78

counselors. Homeroom teachers from 127, or 47 per cent, of

the schools report cooperating with special counselors.

Tost of the homeroom teachers report referring special cases

to the counselor. The role of the homeroom teacher in

gathering data about individual pupils was stressed by many.

Some comments by homeroom teachers as to how they cooperate

with counselors are:

Often counselor asks me for data concerning pupils.

We cooperate by having conferences between teacher

and counselor, between pupil and counselor, and
between pupil and teacher.

Discuss with special counselor some of the problems of

pupils. Sometimes the three of us sit together in
conference.

Informal unscheduled reports, serve jointly on

guidance committee.

Report to'counselor and superintendent health and

guidance problems of pupils from homeroom.
To be familiar with the cumulative record of the pupils

is a function of the homeroom teacher in 175, or 65 per cent,

of the schools. Yost of the comments stressed the function'

of the homeroom teacher to obtain information about each pu-

pil, yet, only 67, or 25 per cent, of the homeroom teachers
reported keeping anecdotal records of each pupil. This is

certainly not a contradiction because of the many other ways

of obtaining and storing data on pupils. However, the use

of anecdotal records might be investigated as a possible

tool for the homeroom teacher.

 79

Interviewing each pupil regarding choice of an occupa-

tion was reported a function of the homeroom in 77, or 29

per cent, of the schools. An interview with each pupil re-

garding school adjustment and personal problems was reported

by 86 and 77 homeroom teachers respectively. An individual

interview to plan the pupil's program of study was reported

by 109, or 41 per cent, of the homeroom teachers to be a

function of the homeroom. One hundred thirty-two, or 49

per cent, of the homeroom teachers reported conferences with

each pupil failing subjects.

TABLE XX

FUNCTION OF THE HOMEROOM AS TO INDIVIDUAL COUNSELING

Number of Per Cent of

Function ResPonses 266 Schools

Familiar with cumulative records 175 65

Interview each pupil failing 132 49
Interview on program of study 109 41
Interview on adjustment to school 66 32
Interview on choice of vocation 77 29
Interview on personal problems 77 29
Keep anecdotal records 67 25
Others 31 11

Total 754

Of the 31 homeroom teachers who checked "Others ", some

stressed the group guidance nature of the homeroom. Most of

the teachers stressed that the interviewing was on an "as

needed" basis.

In the writers opinion the most important finding is

 80

that the homeroom teachers in 47 per cent of the schools co-

operated with special counselors. This is a highly desir-

able situation for maximum assistance to the pupil.

Summary

The majority of homerooms were reported to have dual

objectives; that of guidance, and that of assisting in the

administration of the school.

Administrative details reported by the majority of

homeroom teachers are: checking attendance, supervising

collections and drives, reading announcements and bulletins,

and issuing and collecting report cards.

There appears a trend to use the homeroom for the so-

cial adjustment of the pupils. This is shown by the major-

ity of schools reporting orientation of the pupils to the

school program, and to school life as a function of the

homeroom. Social adjustment in general was reported by the

majority of homeroom teachers as a function of the homeroom.

The use of the homeroom for vocational guidance is de-

clining. It appears that assistance in educational and vo-

cational problems are being handled by special counselors

in more and more of the schools. Nevertheless, the numerous

functions of the homeroom as reported by the homeroom

teachers are not at all in line with the limited time avail-

able in the homeroom to carry out these functions.

 81

Homeroom Practices

A section of the checklist that was sent to the home-

room teachers dealt with the activities carried out in the

homeroom within the past three years. A list of homeroom

activities was given and the teachers were asked to check

the letter of "A" if the particular activity listed was

carried out in cooperation with other school agencies or

"B" if the activity was carried out only in the homeroom.

In addition to the activities listed in the checklist space

was provided for the teachers to report other homeroom ac-

tivities.

The activities are grouped into the following general

headings to facilitate illustration:

1. Activities relating to vocations.

2. Activities relating to individual analysis.
3. General homeroom activities.

Also included in this section are methods and materials

used by homeroom teachers in carrying out these activities.

Activities relating to vocations

The responses of homeroom teachers to the activities

relating to vocations carried out in the homeroom within

the past three years are shown in Table XXI. The low num-

ber of responses to activities carried out in the homeroom

indicates that the homeroom does not play an important role

 82

in the vocational guidance of the pupils.

TABLE XXI

HOMEROOM ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTING TO VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE

Number of Responses Total Number

Activity to: "A" , "B"" of Responses

Career days 88 16 104

Follow-up of school leavers 85 8 93
Group conferences on oc-
cupations 76 15 91
Visits to business and
industry 71 14 85
College days 59 14 73
Community occupational
surveys 54 9 63
Job interview practice 49 11 60
Study of employment blanks 35 7 42
Career clubs 18 3 21

-Total 535 97 652

"A" was, checked if the activity was carried out in coopera-

Ion with other school agencies.
"B" was checked if the activity was carried out only in
the homeroom.

The minor role of the homeroom as an agency for voca-

tional guidance is shown by the fact that only eight home-

room teachers reported that a follow-up of school leavers

is carried out only in the homeroom; 85 homeroom teachers

indicated this was carried out in connection with other

school agencies. Unfortunately there is no way to deter-

mine the degree of cooperation, or the extent to Which the

activities are carried out in the homeroom.

Career days were reported by more homeroom teachers

than any of the other activities relating to vocations.

 83

The very nature of the homeroom lends itself to the promo-

tion of career and college days. Yet these activities were

reported by only 16 homeroom teachers, with the homeroom co-

operating in carrying out these activities in 88 and 59

schools respectively. Career clubs were reported by 21

homeroom teachers, three of whom reported career clubs an

activity exclusive with the homeroom.

Here again is emphasized the varied role played by the

homeroom in the secondary school. Although it can be

stated that vocational guidance is not a function of most

homerooms, nevertheless, those homeroom teachers reporting

activities such as community occupational surveys and

follow-up of school leavers apparently spend considerable

time in carrying out activities of a vocational nature. It

must be emphasized that the activities listed in Table XXI

do not represent all activities relating to vocational guid-

ance. They do, however, represent popular methods for ob-

taining information on occupations. The list used was ob-

tained from Hoppock's book, Group Guidance. (13)

Activities relating to individual analysis

Table XXII shows the number of responses made by home-

room teachers about the activities carried out in the home-

room that deal with an analysis of the individual. Psychol-

ogical testing was reported by 115 homeroom teachers to be

an activity carried out in the homeroom in connection with

 84

other school agencies. In 19 schools psychological tests

are administered only in the homeroom. Remedial reading

procedures are noted by 40 homeroom teachers as an activity

in connection with other school agencies, and by 14 home-

room teachers as exclusively an activity of the homeroom.

Improving study habits as an activity of only the homeroom

was reported by 69 homeroom teachers, and 66 homeroom teach-

ers reported that improving study habits was carried out in

connection with other agencies in the school.

TABLE XXII

HOMEROOM ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTING TO INDIVIDUAL ANALYSIS

Number ofResponseu Total Number

Activity to: "A", to "B" of Responses

Psychological testing 115 19 134

Study habits 66 69 135
Self-appraisal, using rating
scales 64 25 89
Remedial reading procedures 48 14 62
Self-improvement projects 18 3 21
Psychodrama 13 14 27
Sociograms 16 14 30
Group therapy 21 12 33

Total 361 170 531

*"A" was checked if the activity was carried out in coopera-

Ilon with other school agencies.
'"B" was checked if the activity was carried out only in
the homeroom.

The use of psychodrama, sociograms, and group therapy

was reported in only a few homerooms probably because these

are relatively new developments requiring very special

training.
 85

Miscellaneous activities carried out in the homeroom

Talks and lectures by outsiders were reported by 136

homeroom teachers. In 120 of the 136 homerooms this activ-

ity was carried out in cooperation with other school agen-

cies. Only nine homeroom teachers report that the homeroom

prepares handbooks; 70 homeroom teachers report this activ-

ity carried out in cooperation with other school agencies.

The publishing of a homeroom paper was reported by 33 home-

room teachers, 12 of whom reported that the paper was pre-

pared exclusively by the homeroom. The use of visual aids

in the homeroom was reported by 83 homeroom teachers. Films

of interest to the student body were reported most, particu-

larly films dealing with travel to foreign lands. Many

homeroom teachers stressed the use of all available films on

personality and vocations.

In response to the question about the use of group con-

ferences on problems, the majority of the 68 homeroom teach-

ers reported discussions of problems involving pupil-teacher

relationship, student government, and school regulatione. A

few homeroom teachers reported discussing personality, men-

tal hygiene, and citizenship. Library study as an activity

of the homeroom was reported by 41 homeroom teachers. The

majority stressed showing pupils how to use the library as

the most important phase of library study.

Table XXIII shows the number of responses given by

homeroom teachers to some of the activities.

 86

TABLE XXIII

MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT IN THE HOMEROOM

Number or Responsqg Total Number

Activity to: "A" , to "B"' of Responses

Talks and lectures by 120 16 136

outsiders
Use of visual aids 72 11 83
Preparation of handbooks 70 9 79
Group conferences on problems 51 17 68
Library study 35 6 41
Publishing homeroom paper 21 12 33

Total 369 71 440

"A" was checked if the activity was carried out in coopera-

tion with other school agencies.
"B" was checked if the activity was carried out only in
the homeroom.

Methods used in the homeroom

Table XXIV shows the responses of the homeroom teachers

to the methods used in the homeroom. The homeroom teachers

were asked to indicate the predominant method used and also

the lesser used methods. "Discussions led by the teacher"

as a predominant method was reported by 101 of the homeroom

teachers, and 57 reported this as a lesser used method.

"Discussions led by pupils" was reported as a predominant

method by 92 homeroom teachers, and by 50 homeroom teachers

as a lesser used method.

Individual interview with the teacher, pupil reports,

and committee projects were reported by approximately the

same number of homeroom teachers. Lectures by teachers was

 87

reported as a predominant method by 16 of the homeroom

teachers, and by 46 as a lesser used method.

TABLE XXIV

METHODS USED IN THE HOMEROOM TO CARRY OUT ACTIVITIES

Number of Response§ Total Number

Method to: "P", to "L"4` of Responses

Discussions led by teacher 101 57 158

Discussions led by pupils 92 50 142
Pupil reports 73 44 117
Committee projects 75 41 116
Individual interview with
teacher 77 36 113
Lectures 16 46 62
Others 7 3 10

Total 441 277 718

*"P" was checked if the method was used predominantly.

**"L" was checked if the method was a lesser used method,

The great majority of homeroom teachers report methods

involving participation of pupils. It is interesting to

note that even though pupils may not be given much respon-

sibility in planning the homeroom program they do partici-

pate in the homeroom. This is shown by the 240 responses

to the methods used which require the active participation

of the pupils. This does not mean that all pupils partici-

pate in the homeroom program, neither does it mean that the

homeroom program is alike if similar methods are used; the

purpose of including this section was to ascertain the

general methods used to see if an opportunity for pupil par-

ticipation and leadership was available. The findings show

 88

that the methods used are conducive to participation by pu-

pils, the extent to which this is accomplished depends upon

the homerooM teacher and the local situation.

The use of a leadership class is reported by a homeroom

teacher in California. Her comment on the methods used in

the homeroom is very interesting and may be helpful. She

states:

Our homeroom plan centers about our leader-

ship class which meets one period per day as a
regular class (in place of social studies).
Each meeting is conducted according to parlia-
mentary procedures and all student problems and
activities are handled through student commit-
tees (with faculty sponsors) responsible to this
organization (known as Student Council). The
homeroom president takes full charge of his or
her homeroom and the teacher acts as adviser when
called upon by the president.

The consensus of homeroom teachers reporting "Others"

on the checklist is that the method varies with the situa-

tion. There were many remarks to the effect that less

teacher domination and more pupil participation was the

trend.

Materials used by the homeroom teacher

Materials for use by the homeroom teacher are an im-

portant part of the homeroom program. In an effort to find

the names of the books and pamphlets used by the homeroom

teacher a section of the checklist requested teachers to

list three books and three pamphlets which had been most
 89

helpful to them in the homeroom.

The books listed covered a wide variety of subjects

ranging from books dealing exclusively with the homeroom to

books on dating, school administration, psychology, and ed-

ucational methods. A total of 96 books were listed. A list

of the 25 most mentioned books is as follows:

McKown. Home Room Guidance.

Detjen. Home Room Guidance Programs.
Fodder. Guiding Homeroom and Club Activities.
Jones. Principles of Guidance.
McKown. Extra-Curricular Activities.
Detjen, Your High School Day's.
Hamrin. Guidance in the Secondary Schools.
Hamrin and Paulson. Counseling Adolescents.
Hoppock. Group Guidance.
Strang. Counseling Techniques in College and Secondary
Schools.
Arbuckle. Teacher Counseling.
Cunningham. Understanding Group Behavior of Boys and Girls.
Gesell. Personal Problems.
Crawford and Woodward. Better Ways of Growing Up.
Forrester. Methods of Vocational Guidance.
Myers. Print pies and Tee iques o oca ional Guidance.
Traxler. Techniques of Guidance.
Chisholm. GuidingLYouth.
Endicott. One Hundred duidance Lessons.
Wright. Homeroom P o rams for Four rear High Schools.
Folk. Your H Sc ool Record.
Douglass. OrRanization and Administration of Secondary
School.
Hamrin. Guidance Talks to Teachers.
Sorenson -halm. Psychology for Living.
McKown and Bailard. So You Were Elected,

It is interesting to note that McKownis book, Home Room

Guidance, was listed by 24 homeroom teachers. Detjents book,

Home Room Guidance Programs, and Fodder's book, Guiding,

Homeroom and Club Activities, were listed by 13 and 6 home-

room teachers respectively. The Principles of Guidance by

Jones, and Extra-Curricular Activities by McKown were listed

 90

by four homeroom teachers. The remainder of the books rated

no more than three listings. The great majority of books

were listed only once by homeroom teachers.

It appears to the writer that there is a need for a

book devoted to the homeroom; a book containing methods and

suggestions for the homeroom teacher. From the comments

and responses given by the homeroom teachers such a book

does not exist at present. It seems that a book of this

type would be of great service to homeroom teachers through-

out all the secondary schools utilizing the homeroom type

organization.
Homeroom teachers listed 232 pamphlets and magazines

as being the most helpful to there 'in the homeroom. Many of

the pamphlets pertained to the pupils rather than the home-

room. In particular one or more of the Life Adjustment

Series pamphlets published by Science Research Associates

was listed by 54 homeroom teachers. The National Forum

Guidance Series was listed by 25 homeroom teachers, and

Human Relations in the Classroom was listed by 11 homeroom

teachers. The remainder of the pamphlets, 142, were men-

tioned by no more than three homeroom teachers per pamphlet

with the majority being mentioned by only one homeroom

teacher.

A list of the most-mentioned pamphlets and magazines

follows:
 91

"Life Adjustment Series". Science Research Associates.

National Forum Guidance Series.
Human Relations in the Classroom. Bullis and O'Malley.
Clearing House. Ignor Publishing Company, Inc., 207, 4th
Ave., N. Y.
Journal of National Education Association.
Guiding the Adolescent. Douglas A. Thom. Children's Bureau.
" Junior Citizen Series". Traw, Zapf, McKown. McGraw-Hill.
"Careers". Institute of Research. Research Monograph.
Chicago.
It Starts in the Classroom. Public Relations Council.
NSPR.
Occupations Outlook Handbook. U. S. Department of Labor,
Bulletin No. 998.
The wide variation of subjects covered by the pamphlets

mentioned is amazing, ranging from dating to "Codes of

Ethics" for teachers. Several homeroom teachers stated

that they used numerous books and pamphlets, none of out-

standing value; and others stated that the materials were

handled by the guidance office. One teacher said, "I have

not been able to use published materials very effectively".

Only materials that were developed by the school were

reported used by 21, or 8 per cent of the homeroom teachers.

Published materials as well as those developed by the

school were reported used by 127, or 44 per cent of the

homeroom teachers. An analysis of the checklist reveals

that generally those who did not complete the section on

books and pamphlets used in the homeroom program, also

omitted checking whether the materials were developed by

the homeroom or that published materials were used along

with those developed in the homeroom.

Table XXV shows the responses of the homeroom teachers

 92

to the questions on the source of materials used in the

homeroom.

TABLE XXV
SOURCE OF MATERIALS USED IN THE HOMEROOM

Number of
Source of Materials Responses Per Cent

Materials used in homeroom are

developed by school and are
used entirely 21 14
Some materials used in homeroom
are developed by school and
are used along with other
published materials 127 86

Total 148 100

Following is a list of some of the materials developed

in the homerooms which were sent to the author along with

the checklist:

Welcome New Students. Folwell Junior High School, Minne-

apolis, Minnesota.
Introduction of 8th Graders to Clifton Forge High School.
Clifton Forge High tchool, Clifton Forge, Virginia.
Teachers Handbook and Guidance Syllabus. Waycross High
School, Waycross, Georgia.
Getting Acquainted with the Homeroom Plan. Lincoln Junior
High School, Santa Monica, California.
Homeroom Bulletin. Lincoln Junior High School, Santa
Monica, California.
Guidance News Bulletin. Johnson Junior High School,
Cheyenne, Wyoming.
Home Room Guidance Handbook and Home Room Record. Albu-
querque High School, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Suplgestions for Home Room Programs. Murfreesboro High
School, Murfreesboro, Tennessee.
Home Rooms. Austin High School, Austin, Minnesota.
Home Room Guide. Kane High School, Kane, Pennsylvania.
Student's Three Year Program. Royal Center Regional High
School, Royal Center, Indiana.
Home Room Guidance Program. Memorial Junior High School,
San Diego, California.
The Advisory. Bronxville Senior School, Bronxville, N. Y.
 93

The homeroom teachers also included many of the various

forms and informational materials used in their homeroom

programs.

Summary

Homeroom teachers appear to cooperate with other school

agencies in carrying out the group guidance activities.

Tables XXI, XXII, and XXIII show that in only a few schools

are activities carried out exclusively in the homeroom.

Possibly one reason for the low number of responses to

activities of the homeroom is that the activities listed

are relatively new and may not be familiar to the majority

of homeroom teachers.
The methods reported used by homeroom teachers indi-

cates an opportunity for pupil participation in the home-

room program. It is interesting to note tha t lectures was

reported a predominant method by only 16 homeroom teachers,

whereas, the great majority stressed the use of methods in

which pupil participation is encouraged.

One of the most disheartening findings is the lack of

materials available to homeroom teachers. This is shown

by many remarks as well as by the great variety of ma-

terials listed by homeroom teachers.

The writer believes that homeroom programs could be

improved if a way were found to disseminate materials de-

veloped by schools for the homeroom program.

 94

Problems of the Homeroom Teacher

In reviewing the literature many problems of the home-

room were found. However, the writer could find no mention

of a study of the problems from the homeroom teacher's point

of view. It is the purpose of this section to show the

problems and factors contributing to the morale of homeroom

teachers as reported in the checklists.

The responses of the homeroom teachers to the ques-

tions dealing with their problems are shown in Table XXVI.

Inadequate time for the homeroom period was checked by 129,

or 46 per cent of the teachers. This problem is easily

understood when one considers the many functions of the

homeroom. Some teachers commented that the many administra-

tive details to be carried out in the homeroom left little

time for gUidance.

Lack of interest on the part of the pupils was re-

ported a problem by 79, or 29 per cent of the homeroom

teachers. This may seem to be paradoxical inasmuch as the

length of time devoted to the homeroom was considered to

be too short. This is not necessarily true because a great-

er emphasis on the homeroom would perhaps generate more

enthusiasm on the part of the staff and pupils in improving

the homeroom program. The fact that 73, or 27 per cent of

the homeroom teachers noted the lack of an overall school

program for the homeroom would account in some part for the
 95

lack of pupil interest.

Too many clubs and activities were checked as problems

by 66, or 25 per cent of the homeroom teachers. Interrup-

tions such as pupils being called to the office was checked

by 61, or 23 per cent of the homeroom teachers. Several

comments were made about the pupils going to clubs and

other activities during the homeroom period. This situation

prompted one teacher to remark, "I never know who will be in

the homeroom or for how long".

The disconcerting effect of the interruptions caused by

the public address system was noted as a problem by 27, or

10 per cent, of the homeroom teachers. From the comments

it is obvious that all schools do not have a public address

system.
Lack of materials for use by the pupils was reported a

problem by 67, or 25 per cent, of the homeroom teachers,

while 51, or 19 per cent, noted the lack of materials for

the homeroom teacher. Some commented on the problem as

follows:
Our school library has very little, if any
materials for the faculty members, on this sub-
ject.

I have had little experience in the home-

room, but I do need materials and methods.

Various problems other than those listed in the check-

list were reported by 40 homeroom teachers with the majority

stressing:
 96

Lack of interest on the part of the teacher.

Lack of time for preparation of the homeroom program.

Lack of planning for the homeroom.

Several comments were made Which blamed teachers and ad-

ministrators for not stressing careful planning of the home-

room program. Characteristic comments on this problem were:

I am a believer in a good uniform home-

room program at any age level. I think teachers
as a Whole are too lazy to make an original ef-
fort for a good homeroom program, which would
eventually ease this burden.

The homeroom period in our school is only

as good as the teacher that guides it. I think
the administration should take a stand and
recommend that the teachers use it for some
constructive purpose.
The responses of teachers to the questions dealing with

the problems of the homeroom are shown in Table XXVI.

TABLE XXVI

PROBLEMS OF HOMEROOM TEACHERS IN 268 SCHOOLS

Number of Per Cent of

Problem Responses Schools

Not enough time 129 48

Lack of interest 79 29
Lack of over-all program 73 27
Lack of materials for pupils 67 25
Too many clubs and activities for
pupils 66 25
Interruptions, pupils called to office 61 23
Lack of materials for teacher 51 19
Discipline problems 28 10
Public address system disconcerting 27 10
Others 40 14

Total 621
 97

Other factors indirectly related to the problems of

homeroom teachers will also be considered in this section

because they are factors affecting the morale of the home-

room teacher.

The selection of a teacher for the homeroom is very im-

portant because essentially the success or failure of the

homeroom program rests with this teacher. The tendency to

delegate more specific guidance functions to the homeroom

teacher has made the selection of this teacher doubly im-

portant.
Answers to the question as to whether or not the

teachers who responded had a choice in being assigned to a

homeroom are shown in Table XXVII. Only 52, or 19 per cent,

of the homeroom teachers reported that they were consulted

about being assigned to a homeroom; whereas, 197, or 74 per

cent, of the homeroom teachers reported they had no choice

in being assigned to a homeroom. The assumption that if a

teacher can teach he can also carry out the guidance func-
tions of the homeroom is a controversial issue. Some of

the comments to this question point out the disadvantages

of the way teachers are selected for the homeroom. One

teacher said:

I believe a homeroom program, if educa-

tionally sound, should include all of the
classroom teaching corps. Special cases and
seniority in homeroom administration under-
mines united action.
 98

TABLE XXVII

RESPONSES BY HOMEROOM TEACHERS TO THE QUESTION, "DO YOU HAVE

ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE ASSIGNED TO
A HOMEROOM?"

Number of
Response Responses Per Cent

No 197 74
Yes 52 19
No answer 19 7

Total 268 100

The rotation of teachers among the various homerooms as

reported by Leaver (19) offers a possible solution to the

problem of the selection of the homeroom teacher. When

asked if the teachers rotated among the homerooms during

the semester, 247, or 92 per cent, reported that they did

not rotate. Only 4, or 2 per cent, reported using a rota-

tion system. Perhaps the reason few schools use the rota-

tion system is that it is relatively new. Some homeroom

teachers were interested in the rotation system and asked,

"Is this really done?" The number of responses to the ro-

tation of teachers in the homeroom are shown in Table XXVIII.
A comment about using two homeroom teachers to rotate
was given by a teacher from West Virginia. She stated:

A homeroom, if possible, should have two

sponsors. One a woman teacher, the other a
man. This would give the students a chance
to get personal advice. If this would be im-
possible, I believe rotation of teachers in
the homerooms would be advisable. This is a
handicap in some cases, because it reduces
the efficiency of reports.
 99

TABLE XXVIII

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "DO TEACHERS ROTATE AMONG THE

HOMEROOMS DURING THE SEMESTER?"

Number of
Response Responses Per Cent

No 247 92
Yes 4 2
No answer 17 6

Total 266 100

The responses to the question, "Do you feel the admin-

istration of your school looks upon the homeroom as a

definitely planned part of the total educational program?"

are shown in Table XXIX. Only 31, or 12 per cent, of the

teachers reported, "no" to this question whereas 78 per

cent, or 210, homeroom teachers reported that they believed

the administration considered the homeroom a definitely

planned part of the school program.

TABLE XXIX

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "DO YOU FEEL THE ADMINISTRATION

OF YOUR SCHOOL LOOKS UPON THE HOMEROOM AS A DEFINITELY
PLANNED PART OF THE TOTAL EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM?"
...........
Number of
Response Responses Per Cent

Yes 210 78
No 31 12
No answer 27 10

Total 268 100

 100

The writer thoroughly agrees with the teacher who sug-

gested that perhaps the question was misphrased. Perhaps

the way the adninistration "acts" should have been substi-

tuted for the was the administration "looks".

Homeroom teachers in 85 secondary schools report some

in-service training for homeroom work. No in-service train-

ing was reported by 152, or 57 per cent, of the homeroom

teachers. Thirty-one teachers did not answer the question.

Table XXX shows the responses given by the homeroom

teachers.

TABLE XXX

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "IS THERE ANY IN-SERVICE

TRAINING FOR HOMEROOM WORE IN YOUR SCHOOL?"

Number of
Response Responses Per Cent

No 152 57
Yes 85 32
No answer 31 11

Total 268 100

From the many comments it appears that in-service

training of homeroom teachers is increasing. Comments such

as the following were given:

This year our faculty is making a detailed
study of the homeroom as part of the county in-
service training program.

Our school is planning an in-service train-

ing course before school begins next September
to try to plan ways in which the homeroom can be
used to better advantage.
 101

A need for special training of homeroom teachers was

reported by 198, or 74 per cent of the homeroom teachers;

4'7, or 17 per cent of the homeroom teachers stated they

felt there was no need for special training. An analysis

of the responses reveals that the majority of those teachers

reporting no need for special training have homerooms de-

voted primarily to carrying out administrative routines. It

appears that the homeroom teachers feel a need for training

in guidance practices that apply to the homeroom. The ob-

servations reported under comments of the homeroom teachers

are very interesting in that they stress the need for some

preparation for the homeroom in the teacher-training pro-

gram. One teacher states:

There is a definite need for prospective
teachers to have a required course or courses
in homeroom and extra-curricula activities.
Many of our teachers, new and old, fear having
a homeroom.
The need for requirements other than course work was pointed

out by a teacher from the Mid-west, who states:

If a teacher has interest, zest, and per-
sonality, he or she will take the homeroom
job in regular stride. I've had courses in
guidance, read books and pamphlets, etc., but
these are not responsible for any successes
I may have. You simply have "to want to help
people." If you do not, teaching is not the
profession for you.
There were many such remarks in the comments; however,

only a few gave this type response. The writer feels that

in many of these cases the checklist was used as a method

 102

of relieving some of the pent-up emotions of the homeroom

teachers. Possibly the teacher from Georgia summed up the

situation as regards training for the homeroom by saying,

"I have had a homeroom for two years and have a great deal

to learn."
TABLE XXXI

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "DO YOU FEEL THERE IS A NEED

FOR SPECIAL TRAINING?"

Number of
Response Responses Per Cent

Yes 198 74
No 47 17
No answer 23 9

Total 268 100

In an attempt to ascertain the training of the homeroom

teacher, the question was asked, "Have you had any direct or

special training for homeroom work?" There was a wide vari-

ation in responses, with 97, or 36 per cent, reporting

special training. From the responses it is impossible to

state what degree of training or what types of training the

teachers have had. The majority, or 151 of the homeroom

teachers reported no special training for work in the home-

room. These responses are shown in Table XXXII.

 103

TABLE XXXII

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "HAVE YOU HAD ANY DIRECT OR

SPECIAL TRAINING FOR HOMEROOM WORK?"

Number of
111110011=0111111111,
Response Responses Per Cent

No 151 57
Yes 97 36
No answer 20 7

Total 266 100

In an effort to determine the degree of administrative

supervision of the homeroom teacher the question was asked,

"How much do you have to say about what takes place in your

homeroom?" Responses from 73, or 27 per cent of the home-

room teachers showed that the administration of the home-

room was left entirely to the teacher, while 156, or 58 per

cent, indicated that the administration of the homeroom was

left partly to the teacher. Five homeroom teachers reported

having no choice in the administration of the homeroom.

Thirty-four teachers declined comment on this question. It

appears that in the majority of homerooms there is some

supervision by the administration. The practice of a rigid

and prescribed course was reported by a very small number of

schools.
 104

TABLE XXXIII

RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "HOW MUCH DO YOU PAVE TO SAY

ABOUT WHAT TAKES PLACE IN YOUR HOMEROOM?"

Number of
Response Responses Per Cent

Left partly to me 156 58

Left entirely to me 73 27
Nothing 5 2
No answer 34 13

Total 268 100

In an attempt to discover the opinions of the homeroom

teachers as to the value of the homeroom this question was

asked, "Do you believe the time spent in your homeroom is

justified by the results obtained?" Of the 268 checklists

returned, Table XXXIV shows that 171, or 64 per cent, of

the homeroom teachers feel that the time was definitely

justified; 58, or 22 per cent of the homeroom teachers re-

ported that they were uncertain, and 12, or 4 per cent,

stated they did not believe the time spent in the homeroom

was justified by the results obtained. Twenty-seven home-

room teachers declined comment on this question.

 105

TABLE XXXIV
RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "DO YOU BELIEVE THE TIM SPENT
IN YOUR HOMEROOM IS JUSTIFIED BY THE RESULTS OBTAINED?"

Number of
Response Responses Per Cent

Yes, definitely 171 64

Uncertain 58 22
No 12 4
No answer 27 10

Total 268 100

Summary

The responses of the homeroom teachers as to their

problems as well as some factors contributing to their

morale may be summarized as follows:

1. Inadequate time for the homeroom period was listed

a problem by approximately one half of the home-

room teachers.

2. Homeroom teachers from 197, or 74 per cent, of the

schools report no voice in being assigned to a

homeroom.

3. The practice of rotating homeroom teachers during

the semester was reported by only 4 schools.

4. In-service training for homeroom teachers was re-

ported in 05, or 31.5 per cent, of the schools.

The many comments by Ve teachers indicate a

trend toward more in-service training.

 106

5. A need for special training was reported by 198, or

74 per cent, of the homeroom teachers.

6. A majority of the homeroom teachers feel that the

administration of the school looks upon the home-

room as a definitely planned part of the total

educational program.

7. A majority of the homeroom teachers reported that

they believed the time spent in the homeroom was

definitely justified by the results obtained.

Homeroom Trends

In an effort to ascertain trends in homeroom procedures,

a section of the checklist requested homeroom teachers to

list trends which they had observed in their homerooms in

the past five or ten years. Trends were listed by 162, or

60.4 per cent of the homeroom teachers. Many of the teach-

ers who did not answer this section explained that they had

not been teaching long enough to detect trends.

An analysis of the responses given by the homeroom
teachers reveals three major trends in the use of the home-

room in the secondary school. Following are the trends and

remarks made by some of the homeroom teachers:

1. The increased use of the homeroom as an agency

for guidance.

2. The increased emphasis on pupil participation

in the homeroom program.

 107

3. The increased emphasis on training for the home-

room teacher.

More and more specific guidance services are being

added to the responsibility of the homeroom. This is shown

by the remarks of 54 homeroom teachers who stressed the in-

creased role of the homeroom in the guidance program. Some

typical comments given by homeroom teachers are:

From an administrative convenience to a

planned supplement of the guidance program.

Greater emphasis on both individual and

group guidance.

There seems to be a shift from administra-

tive convenience to a real educational function.

Some teachers stressed the increased emphasis on the

individual pupil rather than on subject matter in the home-

room. This was expressed in this way by a teacher from

Georgia:

Time is spent in becoming acquainted with

the child, rather than a period for making an-
nouncements, class elections, study time, etc.
The problems of the.child are more numerous
and more serious in this changing world, and
we accept more of the responsibility of helping
him solve them.

Although a few of the homeroom teachers stressed the

trend of the homeroom toward the handling of vocational

problems, the majority of responses noted the emphasis of

the homeroom in social problems and orientation. Some

typical responses are given:

 108

The main trend in our system is toward better

social adjustment to high school life.

More and more toward providing situations

where relationships within the group can be ob-
served---also setting up groups for discussions
of pupils problems to clarify and gain security
through each others' experiences.

The trend toward greater pupil participation was

checked by teachers in the section of the questionnaire

dealing with methods used in the homeroom. The comments

of 38 homeroom teachers also stressed the use of pupils in

the planning and activating of the homeroom program. Many

other comments were made inferring the trend toward the

practice of democracy in the homeroom. Some of the com-

ments are:
The main trend has been allowing pupils to
assume greater responsibilities.
The trend has been to bring students more
and more into a cooperative acceptance of re-
sponsibility in working with sponsors and stu-
dent body affairs.
The main trend has been toward greater
student participation in homeroom activities.

The trend has been to give more authority

to the students. The class president takes
the attendance daily, arranges for the Bible
reading and flag salute, reads notices, etc.
The members of the homeroom get along very well
by themselves. They are given more and more
responsibility.

Some schools in California reported using "leadership

classes" as a part of the homeroom program.

The increased emphasis on in- service as well as pre-

paratory training for the homeroom teacher was stressed by

 109

many homeroom teachers. As stated previously this training

is due primarily to the increased responsibility of guidance

in the homeroom. Not all stated that in-service training

was available, however, many reported that teachers were

more cognizant of the need for training. Some typical

responses follow:
The main trend has been the gradual in-service
training and experiences of teachers in group
guidance techniques so that they might share
counseling work by testing and other processes.

The trend has been toward more emphasis on

the homeroom and in-service training for the
homeroom teachers. The main problem has been
enough time for the homeroom period. Some
teachers do not use the time profitably therefore
the administration feels some time is wasted.

Trend toward a realization of the need for

training for homeroom work.
Many homeroom teachers reported that a director of

guidance or a person with similar duties was employed, or

contemplated, to assist teachers with the homeroom pro-

gram. This apparently would promote in-service training

of the teachers.
Other trends were not subscribed to by the majority.
An example is this trend noted by a teacher from Califor-

nia.

Assignment of lockers, lost and found, lost

book accounts, and all ticket selling as well as
other matters of such nature involving handling
of funds, have been put on a business basis, and
are now conducted through a central "Accountants
Office".
 110

Several teachers noted the trend away from routine de-

tails in the homeroom, but. still others noted the trend to-

ward more administrative and clerical work. This then would

depend upon the administration of the school and is not a

trend as given by the majority of homeroom teachers. It

should be emphasized that the trends listed above represent

the majority of the responses. Six homeroom teachers re-

ported that the homeroom was declining importance and one

homeroom teacher reported that the homeroom was a "waste of

time".

Proposed chances in the homeroom

Responses were given by 115, or 43 per cent, of the

homeroom teachers to the question, "What, if any, changes

are you planning in your homeroom program?" These responses

ranged from "drop it", as suggested by one respondent, to

the use of the homeroom as an integral part of the school

program.
An analysis of the responses reveals the following

major changes planned in the homeroom:

1. Development of materials for the homeroom.

2. Evaluation of the homeroom program.

3. More and careful planning of the homeroom program.

4. More emphasis on pupil participation in the home-

room program.

5. Greater length of the homeroom period.

 111

6. ore emphasis on guidance, especially on social

problems.

The writer was particularly impressed by the many

statements indicating that the homeroom program was not

static, but that effort was being made to improve the home-

room program. This statement by a teacher from Pennsyl-

vania illustrates this point:

We are in the process of developing a definite

program for entire school. Still experimenting.

Some teachers stressed the needs of the pupils as the

basis for changes in the homeroom program. This statement

is by a teacher from Nevada:

My homeroom changes each semester so I re-

vamp it, particularly as to discussion topics,
to the needs and wishes of the group. The or-
ganizatIBE-Femains the same in the main.

The following statements indicate that the homeroom teachers

are making plans for changes in their homerooms.

We are planning the working out of a more
fully developed program. As new procedures and
methods are used checks on the practicality are
made periodically. Careful study of the prob-
lem is constantly being made, We are thinking
of developing a guidance handbook for incoming
homeroom teachers.

Our homeroom set-up as it is at present is

still developing. It was started just two years
ago and still is flexible and in a state of
flux. Personally, I am most interested just now
in building up my homeroom library so that it in-
cludes sufficient materials for every reading
level. Other changes will come along as they
are needed...we really are experimenting a great
deal in many lines.
 112

The use of in-service training was not discusses al-

though several homeroom teachers noted that a counselor

would assist them in the homeroom program. Apparently the

in-service training for the homeroom is tied in with the

guidance training which to the writer seems logical and

highly desirable.

Comments by homeroom teachers

Space was left at the end of the checklist for

comments of the homeroom teachers; 110, or 41 per cent, of

the teachers made some form of comment. Many comments

dealt with problems of the homeroom and these are included

in the section of this chapter devoted to the problems of

the homeroom teacher. The remainder, except for a few, of

the comments dealt with the teachers personal opinions of

the value of the homeroom. Not all the comments were com-

plimentary to the homeroom type organization. However, the

great majority of homeroom teachers are apparently sold on

the value of the homeroom and stated so in unmistakable

terms. The following comments are given to show the various

attitudes and feelings teachers have for the homeroom.

The homeroom is potentially one of the

greatest boons to child development yet is the
most sadly neglected and abused of all the
schools' programs.

I think that the homeroom organization is

the most important organization within the school.
The pupil's conduct, his attitudes, his thinking
are greatly influenced by what is said and done
in the homeroom.
 113

This is my personal reaction to homeroom ac-

tivities. The homeroom should be the most im-
portant place to a pupil in school. The primary
purpose of education is to help the child adjust
himself to living in a way that will produce hap-
piness for him. Subject matter is only one of
the means of doing that. A properly conducted
homeroom can be even more important than subject
matter,

In our school the homeroom group and the

teacher remain together throughout the three
years of high school. During this period teacher
and pupils come to know one another, and the
homeroom has an opportunity to develop a desir-
able pupil-teacher relationship, as well as to
simplify the carrying on of routine administra-
tive requirements. When given time for opera-
tion, the homeroom can, through planned leader-
ship, help to bring about a spirit of coopera-
tion and loyalty within the group which will
extend into the activities of the whole school
program;

We look upon our homerooms as individual

democracies within the school, designed to offer
opportunity for citizenship in practice, and to
serve as basic units for the school organizations
from which a great many of the school activities
originate. The success of our various school
activity clubs, publications, plays, sports, and
school government plan depends to a great extent
upon the support developed in the homeroom.

Our teachers on the whole are agreed that

rather than being monotonous tasks, their home-
rooms offer opportunities to select activities
Which are closely related to the needs and life
situations of their pupils. We develop programs
for homerooms for each year of school in order to
avoid duplication.

Since the homeroom is an important source of

educational opportunities through its activities,
homeroom teachers should be given more time to
coordinate the programs of pupils, and to work
with the individual members of the room. If
homeroom groups are kept down to workable size,
and if ample time is allowed for group guidance
 114

in studying and considering problems which are

common to all the students, an invaluable con-
tribution of the group will be the provision for
study and discussion of topics not provided in the
regular classrooms, since the children can be en-
tirely free from the restraint of texts, tests,
and grades.
Some principals attached notes to the checklists after

they had been completed by the homeroom teachers. Three of

these notes are included to show the varied responses ob-

tained.

The homeroom is the most important adjusting

agency in our high school of 2200 students.

I was under the impression that the homeroom

idea was decreasing in significance. We have
thought of it more or less as a "rag-bag closet".
We can do considerably better guidance, etc., by
using our modern counseling system.
I have felt for many years that homeroom
keeps teacher alert to full school program (avoids
isolation in subject matter area) aids awareness
of "whole" pupil in relation to extra-curricula
activities, interests, potentialities, as well as
academic achievement.
Another thing--do not disregard - -this is
sometimes the only time a pupil bows his head and
prays.
Requests for the findings of this study by many teach-

ers and principals indicates the interest on the part of

the school staff to improve the homeroom program.

Summary

The main trends in the use of the homeroom as reported

by homeroom teachers are:

1. The increased use of the homeroom as an agency for

guidance.
 115

2. The increased emrhasis on pupil participation in

the homeroom program.

3. The Increased emphasis on training for the home-

room teacher.

The proposed changes in the homerooms indicate that

many homeroom teachers are aware of the problems and possi-

bilities of the homeroom and are making an effort to improve

the homeroom program. This is shown further by the many

comments about the value of the homeroom in the secondary

school.
 116

CRAP= IV
SUMMARY AD RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of this study is to ascertain present

practices in the most successful homeroom programs in

secondary schools in the United States. Specific purposes

of this study are: to find general and specific purposes

of actual homeroom programs, to identify practices carried

out in homeroom programs, to determine trends in the use of

the homeroom, and to crystallize problems of homeroom

teachers.

An examination, through the use of a survey, was made

of 268 homerooms in selected secondary schools. A summary
of the data obtained is arranged according to the five sec-

tions used in Chapters II and III. These sections are:

1. Organization of the homeroom.

2. Purposes of the homeroom.

3. Practices of the homeroom.

4. Problems of the homeroom teacher,
5. Trends in the use of the homeroom.

The recommendations in this chapter are based on the

responses from the 268 homeroom teachers, and from the

writer's reading of the literature relating to the home-

room.
 117

Summary

Ouanization of the homeroom

While a wide variation exists in the characteristics

of homerooms, it was found that:

1. The majority of schools select pupils for the home-

room by an alphatetical grouping by classes.

2. In approximately half of the schools the pupils are

given a voice in the planning of the homeroom programs.

3. A majority of the schools have from 24 to 40 pu-

pils in each homeroom. The average number of pupils in a

homeroom is 30.

4. In 57 per cent of the schools the homeroom meets

at least five times weekly.

5. A wide variation exists in the length of the home-

room period, with 54 per cent of the homerooms meeting 30

minutes or more each period.

6. In 93 per cent of the schools pupils are assigned

to the same homeroom for two or more semesters.

7. The majority of homerooms are reported to have a
parliamentary type of organization.

Purposes of the homeroom

1. The majority of homerooms were reported to have

dual objectives, that of guidance and that of assisting in

the administration of the school.

 118

2. Administrative details reported by a majority of

the homeroom teachers are: checking attendance, supervis-

ing collections and drives, reading announcements and bulle-

tins, and issuing and collecting report cards.

3. Orientation of the pupils to the school and guid-

ance in social adjustment of the pupils were reported as

functions of the homeroom by a majority of the homeroom

teache re.

4. Vocational guidance was checked as a purpose of

their homeroom by approximately half of the homeroom teach-

ers, but it is questionable as to whether it can be classi-

fied as a major purpose since the majority of schools re-

ported using special courses or special counselors to handle

vocational problems.

5. Since the time available to the homeroom teacher is

so limited in contrast with the multitude of purposes as

checked by these homeroom teachers, it is doubtful whether

or not all of the purposes can ever by fully achieved.

Homeroom practices

1. The majority of homeroom teachers report coopera-

tion with other school agencies in carrying out many of the

homeroom activities.

2. The methods used by the great majority of homeroom

teachers offer opportunity for pupil participation in the

 119

homeroom programs. In only 16 schools were lectures re-

ported as a predominant method used in the homeroom.

3. A wide variety of materials for use by the homeroom

teacher was reported. The most-mentioned book was McKownts

Home Room Guidance (21) which was reported as used by 24

homeroom teachers. The most-mentioned pamphlets were the

"Life Adjustment Series" published by Science Research As-

sociates.

4. The great majority of homeroom teachers used pub-

lished materials along with materials developed in the

homeroom.

Problems of the homeroom teacher

1. Inadequate time for the homeroom period was listed

a problem by approximately half of these homeroom teachers.

2. The majority of these homeroom teachers report

having no choice in being assigned to homerooms.

3. Rotation of homeroom teachers during the semester

is practiced in only a very few schools.

4. In-service training for homeroom teachers was re-

ported in 85, or 31 per cent of the schools. The many com-

ments by these teachers indicates a trend toward more in-

service training in this area.

5. The majority of these homeroom teachers reported

there is a need for special training for homeroom work.

6. A majority of these homeroom teachers believe that

 120

the administration of the school looks upon the homeroom as

a definitely planned part of the total educational program.

7. A majority of these homeroom teachers reported

that they believed that the time spent in the homeroom was

definitely justified by the results obtained.

Trends in the use of the homeroom

1. The trend is toward the increased use of the home-

room as an agency for guidance.

2. The trend is toward the increased emphasis on pu-

pil participation in the homeroom programs.

3. The trend is toward the increased emphasis on

training for the homeroom teacher.

4. It appears that the use of the homeroom for voca-

tional guidance is declining in favor of special counselors

and special courses.

5. There seems to be a trend toward greater emphasis

on school orientation and guidance in social adjustment

problems in the homeroom.

Recommendations

It is recommended that:

1. Administrators and teachers carefully evaluate

their present homeroom programs as a basis for a concerted

effort toward improving the entire homeroom program.

 121

2. In-service training courses be provided for home-

room teachers in techniques for working with group problems.

3. Training be given prospective teachers in group

techniques as well as methods and materials for use in the

homeroom.

4. Homeroom teachers be selected on the basis of

training, interests, and personal qualifications.

5. An effort be made by teacher training institutions

and state departments of education to make materials de-

veloped in successful homeroom programs widely available.

6. Schools using the homeroom type organization care-

fully study the desirability of making the homeroom a regu-

lar period of the day. It is believed that this will

greatly improve the status of the homeroom as well as pro-

moting a better over-all homeroom program.

7. Pupil participation and pupil leadership be empha-

sized in the planning and executing of the homeroom programs.

8. Social adjustment be emphasized in the homeroom and

that referral sources be made available to the homeroom

teacher.

9. Administrators and teachers carefully consider the

possibility of using the homeroom as a basic part of the

school orientation program.

10. Purposes of the homeroom should be assigned on

the basis of time allotted in order to assure the attainment

of these purposes.
 122

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Abernethy, T. J. Homeroom guidance. Education 55:

134-140. Nov. 1934.

2. Almy, H. C. Present status of homeroom in secondary

schools. Educational administration and supervision
21:230-234. March 1935.

3. Bartholomew, B. r. Guidance service through the agency

of the homeroom. National association of secondary
school principals bulletin 29:143-140. April 1945.

4. Berman, Samuel. The homeroom as a practical factor in

democratic living.. National association of secondary
school principals bulletin 26:72-76. Dec. 1942.

5. Chisholm, Leslie Lee. Guiding youth in the secondary

school. New York, American, 1945. 433p.

6. Cockrell, Emerson T. The home room period. Junior

senior high school clearing house 2:12. 1935.

7. Detjen, Mary E. Ford, and Erwin W. Detjen. Homeroom

guidance programs for junior high school years. New
York, Houghton, 1940. 509p.

8. Dunsmoore, C. C. The role of the homeroom as an

agency for guidance in junior high school. Ed. D.
dies. Harvard University, 1938. 385p.

9. Fodder, Ruth. Guiding homeroom and club activities.

New York, McGraw, 1949. 467p,

10. Fowikes, John Guy. Administering home room in junior

high schools. Nations schools 8:72-74. Nov. 1931.

11. Fretwell, E. K. Extra-curricular activities in sec-

ondary schools. Boston, :Houghton, 1931. 552p.

12. Goetting, Y. L. Teaching in the secondary school.

New York, Prentice, 1942. 519p.

13. Hoppock, Robert. Group guidance. New York, McGraw,

1949. 393p.

14. Johnson, F. W. Social organization of the high school.

School review 17:665-680. Dec. 1909.
 123

15. Jones, Galen. Extra-curricular activities in relation

to the curriculum. New York, Teacher's college,
Columbia Univ., 1935. 99p.

16. Kefauver, G. N. and R. E. Scott. The homeroom in the

administration of the secondary school. Teacher's
college record 31:624-641. April 1930.

17. Koos, Leonard V. and Grayson N. Kefauver. Guidance in

secondary school. New York, MacMillan, 1937. 640p.

18. Krug, Edward A. Curriculum planning. New York, Har-

per, 1950. 306p, ,

19. Leaver, Lila M. Home rooms in the guidance program.

Topeka, Guide posts 1:8-10. Dec. 1951. (Kansas
board for vocational education, Guidance service,
No. 3)

20. McKown, Harry C. Home room guidance. New York, McGraw,

1934. 447p.

21. . Home room guidance. Second. New York,

McGraw, 1946. 521p.

22. . Extra-curricular activities. Revised. New

York, Macmillan, 1949. 734p.

23. Minka, Ernest A. Home room program aids and education-

al guidance principles. Maryland, Minka, 1951.
56p. (Apt. 7, 198 E. Green St., Westminister, Mary-
land)

24. Mogill, Raymond G. The educational value of the home

room. National association of secondary school
principals bulletin 35:143-152. May 1951.

25. Novak, Benjamin J. Don't sell the homeroom short.

Nation's schools 48:49-51, Oct. 1951.

26. Payne, W. D. Experiences in homeroom administration.

National association of secondary school principals
bulletin 30:120-123. April 1946.

27. Roemer, Joseph, and Charles Forrest Allen. Extra-

curricular activities in junior and senior high
schools. Boston, Heath, 1926. 333p.

28. Smith, K. S. Plan for the homeroom. School activities

17:3-4. Sept. 1945.
 124

29. Stewart, S. T. Jr. Organization and administration of

a homeroom program. National association of second-
ary school principals bulletin 26:109-120. Dec.
1942.

30. Swarm, Jenry Jay. The status of the home room in the
state of Washington: a recommended plan for high
school. Corvallis, Oregon state college, July 1936.
128p. (Master's thesis)

31. Thurstone, L. L. The edge-marking method of analyzing

data. Chicago, Psychological corporation, 1948.
10p.

32. Van Pool, Gerald M. The home room. National associa-

tion of secondary school principals bulletin 36:150-
156. Feb. 1952.

33. Votaw, Marjorie Brown. A study of the home room as an

aspect of guidance in Oregon high schools. Corvallis,
Oregon state college, August 1941. 95p. (Master's
thesis)

34. Wagner, J. E. Factors conducive to the effective func-

tioning of the home room organization. National
association of secondary school principals bulletin
30:86-100. Jan. 1946.

35. High-school personnel work today.

',starters, Jane. New
York, McGraw, 1946. 277p.
APPENDIX A
 129

APPENDIX B

OREGON STATE COLLEGE

School of Education

Corvallis, Oregon

Letter to School Administrators

Considerable attention is being focused on the homeroom

in secondary schools. Many schools have been experimenting
with various plans in an attempt to make the homeroom a more
important and more effective part of the school program. A
study of the purposes and practices of better homeroom pro-
grams will be helpful to those who are planning new homeroom
programs or improving their homeroom programs, and also to
those who are training teachers.
Your school was suggested by your State Department of
Education as having an outstanding or representative home-
room program.
Will you please ask a representative homeroom teacher
in your school to fill in the enclosed check list and re-
turn it in the enclosed envelope? It will only take a few
minutes, and I am sure you will agree that the information
will be of great value in improving homeroom practices.
Your cooperation in this study will be greatly appre-
ciated. The results will be made available through a
professional magazine. I would be happy to correspond with
you at any time regarding the study and findings.
Yours truly,

David B. McCorkle
Instructor

DBM/jtm

Enc.
 130

APPENDIX C

OREGON STATE COLLEGE

School of Education

Corvallis, Oregon

Dear Homeroom Teacher,

Many schools have been experimenting with various
plans in an attempt to make the homeroom a more important
and effective part of the school program. By consolidat-
ing information from certain schools of your state along
with information from other states, we hope to be able to
assist in making homeroom programs more effective.

This information should be helpful to administrators

and teachers, in planning new homeroom programs or in im-
proving their present programs. It will also be valuable
in the training of teachers. Findings of this study will
be made available through a professional publication.
Your school administrator has suggested that you
could best represent your school in this study of homeroom
programs.
Will you please take time to check the items on the
attached check-list as they relate to your homeroom? Your
attention is called to the last two items dealing with
trends and changes.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Yours truly,

David B. McCorkle
Instructor