A survey of the educational system of the Philippine islands by the Board of educational survey, created under acts 3162 and 3196 of the Philippine Legislature.

BOARD OF EDUCATIONAL SURVEY REPORT 69

intendents over the past twelve years is two years. The average length
of tenure of the American high-school principal is 1.5 years; of the
Filipino high-school principal, but slightly more. Most of the highschool principals who have been in the Islands five years have had
assignments in four different places.
Different reasons are given in explanation of this situation. Many of
the American teachers who expect to stay only two or three years in the
Islands desire frequent changes in assignments. But this is of no advantage to the system, and there seems to be no professional reason for
catering to this sentiment. Again, it is argued that only thus can good
men be rewarded and promoted. This argument has been dealt with
elsewhere. There should be provided a reward for efficient service
aside from that of assignment to a larger school. The argument is also
advanced that frequent changes in assignments are necessary because
of leave of absence in the States. But the system would suffer far less
if substitutes were placed in these positions for the period of absence.
The chief argument put forward in favor of the custom is that certain
men are efficient and interested in certain aspects of administration, as
in the school plants or in agricultural work; and that only by a system
of transfers can these interests and influences be equalized. The answer
to this argument is that by a continuation of such a policy one-sided
men will continue to be developed. There is little inducement under
such circumstances for the growth in the system of all-around administrators. In the United States school superintendents by the hundreds
build up these all-around capacities. The difficulty which is experienced
in finding acceptable positions in America by men leaving the Philippine
school service may be traced to this situation. They lack neither capacity nor experience; but they have developed along a few lines only,
and consequently, cannot readily take a position which calls for allaround capacities. This general argument, therefore, does not seem
valid. But that the system of frequent transfers is detrimental, educationally, both to the men and to the system, is apparent. A system
of personal supervision from the central office would secure the advantages supposed to reside in frequency of transfers.
The other argument which seems to have considerable validity is
that any administrator achieves his best results under the stimulus of the
first three or four years spent in a new environment, and that after this
time he ceases to grow. Undoubtedly new environment is conducive
to the formation of new ideas and incentives. To offset this, however,
other considerations must be borne in mind. At least a year is needed
for a new incumbent to become acquainted with his teaching staff, with