Now it is just as true that there are some disadvantages to permanency of positions. Teachers are apt to become non-progressive and in some cases, little more than fixtures. Change of environment stimulates progress and development. Variety in teaching experience broadens the capabilities and increases the usefulness of teachers. In addition, children need the touch and influence of many lives. They receive greater inspiration because of coming in contact with the personality of a large number of teachers. However, too frequent change is wasteful. It dissipates the energy of teachers and breaks the continuity of the work of the children. Where the permanency of positions is absolutely uncertain, the teaching profession is transitory and dwindling. Only a few remain for long time in the work under such conditions. Many efficient school men leave the profession annually because of this discouragement.

At present, the feeling appears to be general that permanency in position should be conditioned upon improvement in efficiency. Evidently a recognition of this principle is a basic cause underlying the increase in number of appointments to temporary teaching positions. This procedure affords an excellent opportunity for weeding out the unfit. At the same time it acts as a spur inducing growth and development. Progressive tendencies, along with other qualifications, are regarded necessary to appointment even to temporary posts, and, as implied before, success in such positions is a prerequisite to appointment to permanent ones.

In America, teacher's tenure of office is very short. Each year there are many changes in the personnel of teachers throughout the country. Here we have the extreme of uncertainty, while in Norway they go to the limits of certainty in teaching positions. Both these extremes are unfortunate. Could a golden mean be reached which would include proper incentives to and recognition of continuous self-improvement and a reasonable sense of security in permanent occupation, the profession would call into its ranks a large and more efficient body of men and women, and the schools would make greater and more substantial progress. In order to illustrate the permanency of positions in Norway Table VI has been arranged.

TABLE VI

Table indicating Retirement from Teaching Staff and Reasons for Retirement.

Year 18901895 1900 1905
Sex Male Female MaleFemaleMaleFemale Male Female
Total number of positions 3941 1187 4402 2116 4670 2613 4865 2885
Total number leaving 117 17 88 22 106 89 110 90
Vacated after a period service from
1 to 10 years 19 11 21 13 24 65 20 53
10 to 20 years 26 4 10 7 10 13 19 19
20 to 30 years 38 1 18 16 5 13 10
Over 30 years 34 1 39 2 56 6 58 8
Reasons for leaving
Death 30 1 24 2 30 6 32 11
Retirement on pension 39 3 48 3 53 21 59 22
Change in position 9 3 2 4 4
Marriage 9 11 47 48
Various others 39 4 16 6 20 13 15 5

It is immediately apparent that the changes in the body of teachers are rare. It is also evident that nearly all who leave the profession do so on legitimate grounds. A few changes result from transfers in position, a large per cent of withdrawals are retirements after extended periods of service, and many vacancies are due to death. Fifty per cent or more of the women who retire do so on account of marrying, a few die at their posts, and many retire on pensions. Very few of the women teachers retire to enter other lines of work. While the table does not indicate how much longer than thirty years some teachers remain in the service, it may be added here that examples are not rare where individuals continue teaching for more than half a century. In most cases teachers occupy the same position throughout their teaching experience.

V. TEACHERS' SALARIES