The Educational screen (c1922-c1956])

Page 4 Edit oria The Educational Screen WITH this issue The Educational Screen be- gins Volume XIV. For a magazine in the vis- ual field to survive thirteen birthdays is necessarily some sort of a record, the longest life-span of any of our six predecessors having been but a half dozen years. It is a further satisfaction that, although the thirteen years have included the five-year depression period when magazine mortality ran high, The Edu- cational Screen lives on in better health than ever under the same name, same management, and the same faith. The changing times are unmistakable promise of still better things in 1935. We confidently expect to make Volume XIV the best to date. IN THE spring of 1934 much stirring publicity was achieved through press and platform regarding the plans of the National Council of Teachers of English and others to insert in High School curricula new courses to teach "appreciation of motion-pictures" to the rising generation. Manuals were to be prepared by qualified educators on masterpieces of the screen. It was more than hinted that this material in systematic use in classrooms was the solution of the movie prob- lem. One had only to teach young people why a good motion picture is good—by seeing it and studying the manual thereon—and why a bad motion picture is bad—presumably by seeing it and discussing it in class without a manual. This accomplished, said young people would thereafter attend only good pictures and scrupulously boycott the bad. Unfortunately, from the Garden of Eden down, knowledge of good and evil has proved far from a panacea for unwise human conduct. High intelligence and full maturity still frequently prefer coffee to milk, night-clubs to church socials, bedroom-farce to Shakespeare, sensation to serious thought. With healthy, normal youth the preference is frequently stronger still. We emphatically approved, of course, whatever would develop keener, deeper appreciation and en- joyment of good pictures, much as youth appreciates them already. We deplored, however, any program that would increase the exposure of youth to the trash of the screen. Assorted reactions greeted our remarks. Many glowed in agreement. Some were simply scath- ing. One district chairman, heading a committee mak- ing manuals under the National Council, informed us forcibly that "appreciation could be taught", that many teachers "knew motion pictures" and were qualified to write and use such manuals, and finally that The Edu- cational Screen had "betrayed the good cause." We agreed earnestly with the first two declarations and could only regret and deny the third. But the mystery remained, and still remains, as to how a qualified ci inations, built by themselves from the magic of Car- roll's pages? On the other hand there can be nothing but praise for such classroom material as the study guides on "Little Women" (by Abbott), "Treasure Is- land" (by Lewin), "Great Expectations" (by Barnes), "The Little Minister" (by Bauer), published by or for The National Council of Teachers of English. Such work should continue for all screen masterpieces from classics or near-classics—happilv appearing in greater numbers than ever before. There is one disturbing possibility. The industry of course approves the work of The National Council be- cause it increases attendance on such films, a most de- sirable result for all concerned, to be sure. But what prevents the industry from promoting attendance on any film by preparing its own "manual"? In Novem- ber last, the Motion Picture Producers and Distribu- tors of America announced that they had produced their own "Teacher's Manual" and "Student's Study Guide" for "Anne of Green Gables"—which seemingly ought to have been done by the Council. And a film of very dubious classroom suitability. DeMille's "Cleo- patra," has been manualized and an elaborate campaign is on. If the schools accept it as readily as the publi- cations of the National Council, the gate is wide open. Do American schools want their classroom materials prepared by the movie industry? ALFRED W. ABRAMS IT WOULD be difficult to name a more commanding ■ figure in visual instruction than A. W. Abrams, whose life-work has contributed so richly to educa- tional progress. He knew pictures, their ])ower, their use, and above all knew how to move, win and train others—teachers, schools, school-systems—to use with increasing joy and maximum efficiency that great vis- ual aid, the lantern slide. We quote at length from the Bulletin of the University of the State of New York. A notable service of 44 years in public education in this State terminated on December 1st, 1934, when Al- fred W. Abrams retired as Director of the Visual In- struction Division of the Department. Mr. Abrams was graduated from Cornell University in 1891. Prior to that he had taught one year in a rural school and after graduation he was principal of the Oneonta High School for four years and superin- tendent of schools at Ilion for seven years. He came to the State Education Department as inspector of schools in 1906, and became Director of the Visual Instruction Division in 1909. .--, , „„ ,„ „ ,j^^ ^_ ^.)m- mittee could possibly have selected that grotesque g^^,^, O" April 1, 1934, Mr. Abrams completed 25 years of screen absurdity, "Alice in Wonderland", as the subject '.-ML"^'*^^ ^^ '^^"'^ head of the Visual Instruction Division, for its skillfully done manual. How could they have"•'"'•l^rtng these 25 years he has developed the use of failed to recognize that lumbering, plaster-of-paris screen pictures for regular class instruction in schools monstrosity as an unconscious outrage upon Lewis ., u .. ..i c^ ^ a^-i i ■ f ^ i „„ i ^c r- „ ir 11- i 1 r ^5 TT ir.i i • throughout the State. W hen he was appointed head ot Carroll s delicate work of art? How could thev bniiig,„L„,-i ;L±_i;. . ,„„^ , , , ,, . . , . themselves to offer to youngsters such a devastating '^"*^*^'^^^'0" '" ^^^ ^y *^ '^^^ Commissioner Andrew antidote to the delightful ensemble of dream whimsy S. Draper the State Education Department was circu- and subtle charm already existing in their young imag- • r\ {Continued on page 8) At 6 '28