Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff You Missed in History Class, a production
Speaker 1: of iHeartRadio. Hello, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Holly
Speaker 1: Frye and I'm Tracy V. Wilson. In our recent episode
Speaker 1: on Gertrude Chandler Warner, we mentioned a book she wrote
Speaker 1: called Good Americans, First Lessons for the Little Ones, which
Speaker 1: was based on an existing set of guidelines about morality
Speaker 1: that Warner felt was too advanced for little kids. And
Speaker 1: then that set me down a rabbit hole regarding just
Speaker 1: what that existing set of guidelines was. It was a
Speaker 1: truly intriguing, quite creepy, and disturbing story that ties to
Speaker 1: evolving views on childhood, child labor laws, unrealistic patriotism, and
Speaker 1: a contest to see who could come up with the
Speaker 1: best morality code for kids. Yes, whole thing creeps me out,
Speaker 1: really doozy, and I knew nothing about it prior to
Speaker 1: that mention of in her biography, and then I was like, what, well,
Speaker 1: and this first sentence that I'm going to have to read,
Speaker 1: I immediately stopped what I was doing because I was like,
Speaker 1: what is this. On February twenty second, nineteen sixteen, the
Speaker 1: National Institution for Moral Instruction in Washington, d C. Announced
Speaker 1: a contest. Thanks to the donation of an anonymous businessman,
Speaker 1: the institution was offering five thousand dollars for quote the
Speaker 1: best code of morals suitable for use by teachers and
Speaker 1: parents in the training of children. So the rules of
Speaker 1: this competition were as follows. Each state in the Union
Speaker 1: was to submit at least one entry. Some could submit too,
Speaker 1: with a maximum total of seventy entries. Each state superintendent
Speaker 1: of Education was to select the person for I'm their
Speaker 1: state who would write the submission. In the case of
Speaker 1: New York, there were five contributors. Upon submission, the entries
Speaker 1: would all be bound together in textbook format so that
Speaker 1: the public would have access to them and their entirety,
Speaker 1: but only one of them would be declared the winner,
Speaker 1: as determined by a panel of judges. A write up
Speaker 1: about this contest in the Washington, d C. Times Herald
Speaker 1: quoted an announcement by the institution regarding the compilation of
Speaker 1: these code proposals. Quote Consultations by code writers have been
Speaker 1: had with all sorts of people, but especially with parents
Speaker 1: who have succeeded in bringing their children up well. So
Speaker 1: it's unclear what the criteria were for parents to be
Speaker 1: deemed successful in that regard, but the rules of the
Speaker 1: contest noted that the code should be written with wisdom, justice, courage,
Speaker 1: and temperance in mind, and that no theological dogmas should
Speaker 1: be in This issue of children and morality was a
Speaker 1: hot topic in nineteen sixteen. On May twenty first, the
Speaker 1: Richmond Times Dispatch of Richmond, Virginia ran a full page
Speaker 1: article titled what a child should Do in a moral Emergency.
Speaker 1: It opens by posing a series of questions to parents. Quote,
Speaker 1: if a ruffian tries to pick a row with your
Speaker 1: little boy Johnny, shouting you bumped into me, I am
Speaker 1: going to smash you in the nose? What is the
Speaker 1: correct thing for little Johnny to do under such circumstances?
Speaker 1: If a neighborhood bully grabs your little Tommy's bag of marbles,
Speaker 1: what should little Tommy say about it? If some strange boy,
Speaker 1: girl or grown up person attempts cajoleries with your daughter Mary,
Speaker 1: what is Mary to do and say under the many
Speaker 1: different circumstances which may arise, just saying I am one
Speaker 1: hundred percent adding cajoleries to my personal lives. On and
Speaker 1: once the parent is introduced by the paper to this conundrum.
Speaker 1: The article continues, quote, have you carefully instructed Johnny and
Speaker 1: Tommy and Mary on what to do under these various
Speaker 1: unexpected situations and emergencies which are confronting boys and girls?
Speaker 1: How can children be expected to face intelligently and act
Speaker 1: advisedly in these little daily tragedies of life unless instructed.
Speaker 1: Here is a field of practical instruction which has been overlooked.
Speaker 1: So this article continues by mentioning the Japanese schools in
Speaker 1: Hawaii use a picture series that show similar scenarios, that
Speaker 1: those pictures are hung all over the schools and they
Speaker 1: change out periodically so students can study them as they
Speaker 1: go about their daily school life, and schools in the US,
Speaker 1: the write up points out, have no program in place
Speaker 1: for character education. The paper puts the responsibility for the
Speaker 1: rise in various delinquent acts in the country squarely on
Speaker 1: that gap. The article also introduced the work of Milton Fairchild,
Speaker 1: who took photographs of kids around the Washington, DC area
Speaker 1: where he lived. He claimed never to pose children or
Speaker 1: to use actors. He just surreptitiously took kids' photos when
Speaker 1: they were engaged in activities like fighting, stealing, bullying, etc.
Speaker 1: He used a specially designed camera that was in his
Speaker 1: briefcase to avoid detection by the children. He also photographed
Speaker 1: the resolution of these kinds of incidents with the intent
Speaker 1: to use the ones that showed the kids doing the
Speaker 1: right thing as examples of correct behavior. Obviously, today this
Speaker 1: would run a foul of some privacy rights, even though
Speaker 1: taking pictures of strangers to put them on the internet
Speaker 1: has become a thing that people do. Don't do that though,
Speaker 1: don't and super don't do it with children. No. The
Speaker 1: virtue of this form of moral education, according to the paper,
Speaker 1: is that, unlike lecturing, which kids tend to be dismissive of,
Speaker 1: photographs are endlessly engaging to children. Noting that quote, pictures
Speaker 1: that touch on real life, the life of the child,
Speaker 1: make the problems vital and concrete, and the lessons they
Speaker 1: convey impressed children's minds with proportionate strength. Several of Fairchild's
Speaker 1: photos are in the write up, and at the end
Speaker 1: of the article it is revealed that Fairchild is the
Speaker 1: head of the National Institution for Moral Instruction. We're going
Speaker 1: to come back to him, but there is also a
Speaker 1: need to look at what was going on in the
Speaker 1: US in the nineteen teens that forms the backdrop for
Speaker 1: this push to teach kids everywhere how to be good
Speaker 1: and moral citizens. There were, of course, several contributing factors.
Speaker 1: One was all of the stuff that was happening in
Speaker 1: the lead up and eventual passage of the keeting Oen
Speaker 1: Act of nineteen sixteen. That act banned goods that came
Speaker 1: from any factory, shop, or cannery that employed children under
Speaker 1: the age of fourteen. Minds in the Act were named
Speaker 1: and had the same blockage of sales if they employed
Speaker 1: children that were younger than sixteen. Any other businesses were
Speaker 1: barred from employing children under the age of sixteen working
Speaker 1: at night or for shifts longer than eight hours. This
Speaker 1: labor law, the first attempt at regulating child labor, was
Speaker 1: a long time coming, and as this issue was being
Speaker 1: discussed and debated in legislation in the early twentieth century,
Speaker 1: it also was part of a bigger move of leading
Speaker 1: people to reconsider the place of children in US society.
Speaker 1: The idea of childhood as a time that special and
Speaker 1: precious had started to gain more of a foothold. So
Speaker 1: there was this idealization of children that no doubt fueled
Speaker 1: some of these pushes to create ideal children. The early
Speaker 1: years of the twentieth century also saw a huge surge
Speaker 1: of immigration into the United States, and there were concerns
Speaker 1: about how the children of those immigrants were going to
Speaker 1: assimilate into the culture of the United States. Many of
Speaker 1: these people settled in cities, which led to jumps in population.
Speaker 1: To keep up new infrastructure and more schools were created,
Speaker 1: and in those schools, reformers saw an opportunity to teach
Speaker 1: immigrant children how to be proper US citizens. We will
Speaker 1: return to the Morality Code competition in just a moment,
Speaker 1: but first we are going to pause for a sponsor break.
Speaker 1: So even though all of the states participated in this
Speaker 1: Morality Code competition, not everyone was on board with fair
Speaker 1: Child's idea of a structured morality education. As the competition
Speaker 1: got underway, there were a meetia detractors. A lot of
Speaker 1: them just held up the Ten Commandments as a perfectly
Speaker 1: good moral code, with complaints that there was no need
Speaker 1: for any additional effort to create something new. Milton Fairchild
Speaker 1: addressed this issue in interviews, noting that the Ten Commandments
Speaker 1: are written for adults and He also notes that the
Speaker 1: first five are about religious duties and not moral problems,
Speaker 1: but that the moral problems the commandments present in the
Speaker 1: second half aren't really suitable for kids. He noted, quote,
Speaker 1: honor thy father and mother is appropriate for children. Likewise,
Speaker 1: thou shalt not kill if there is a question of
Speaker 1: using a knife in a fight, a thing happily rare
Speaker 1: among boys. Thou shalt not steal is a much needed
Speaker 1: commandment to the child world. But to children, what significance
Speaker 1: has Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house. Most children
Speaker 1: never think of doing such a thing. Thou shalt not
Speaker 1: covet thy neighbor's wife. Why should a child covet a wife?
Speaker 1: A neighbor's wife would be some other child's mother. This
Speaker 1: brings us to the issue of morality more philosophically, as
Speaker 1: it was playing out in the education space when Fairchild
Speaker 1: launched this morality code contest in the early twentieth century,
Speaker 1: noted educator John Dewey wrote, quote, the moral has been
Speaker 1: conceived in too goody goody a way. Ultimate moral motives
Speaker 1: and forces are nothing more or less than social intelligence.
Speaker 1: He thought it was better for kids to work through
Speaker 1: their own solutions to moral problems, and to be rewarded
Speaker 1: if they came to a course of action that resulted
Speaker 1: in a positive outcome. Dewey argued that this would result
Speaker 1: in adults with a strong ability to navigate scenarios where
Speaker 1: there were moral issues in play. The logic was that
Speaker 1: if you just told children how to behave in certain situations,
Speaker 1: they would never develop the skills to manage the many
Speaker 1: unpredictable events they were likely to encounter in their lives.
Speaker 1: But for a more conservative branch of the progressive education movement,
Speaker 1: it made more sense to develop morality codes so that
Speaker 1: kids would have a map showing a list of rules
Speaker 1: essentially that people were expected to abide by. Seemed like
Speaker 1: a much more efficient way to teach children how to
Speaker 1: behave in this group's opinion. A lot of people probably
Speaker 1: already knew who Milton Fairchild was before that newspaper mention
Speaker 1: that we talked about a moment ago. He had been
Speaker 1: working in education and specifically focused on programs for raising
Speaker 1: moral children for quite some time. Milton Fairchild, whose first
Speaker 1: name was Edwin, sort of formed a bridge between the
Speaker 1: two ideologies we just discussed. For a little background on him.
Speaker 1: He was born in Michigan in eighteen sixty five. He
Speaker 1: attended Oberlin College, and in eighteen ninety three he graduated
Speaker 1: from Andover Theological Seminary. He became a Unitarian minister after
Speaker 1: he graduated, and one of the causes that he really
Speaker 1: worked on was trying to get churches to establish moral
Speaker 1: lessons for kids that were outside of the usual approach
Speaker 1: of parables and biblical stories and offered real world information.
Speaker 1: He actually left the church by the end of the
Speaker 1: nineteenth century because he couldn't really get that going, and
Speaker 1: instead he worked on achieving that same goal through the
Speaker 1: school system. And it is at that point that he
Speaker 1: dropped the Edwin from his name and started just going
Speaker 1: by Milton. Some people that noted his work kind of
Speaker 1: described this as him rebranding himself from a minister to
Speaker 1: an educational expert. The year that he left the church
Speaker 1: eighteen ninety eight, he founded the Educational Church Board, the
Speaker 1: first of several organizations that were intended to support his
Speaker 1: goals of moral education. He formed the Moral Education Board
Speaker 1: in nineteen oh six, and then in nineteen eleven the
Speaker 1: National Institution for Moral Instruction. That organization would also rebrand
Speaker 1: as the Character Education Institution in nineteen eighteen after this
Speaker 1: push for a morality code for kids, and reflective of
Speaker 1: the next stage of the larger effort, which we will
Speaker 1: talk about in a bit. The facet of fair Child's
Speaker 1: approach that made him really the sole holder of the
Speaker 1: middle ground between educational theorists who wanted institutionalized morality education
Speaker 1: and those who wanted to let kids work through ideas
Speaker 1: without imposing a structure of morality on them is that
Speaker 1: while Fairchild was a minister by training and did favor
Speaker 1: institutional lessons, he sought a secular approach to it rather
Speaker 1: than one that was rooted in Christianity. He recognized that
Speaker 1: not all families were Christian, but that didn't mean they
Speaker 1: weren't moral, or that they weren't valuable members of society.
Speaker 1: As noted by Alison L. Jackson in her twenty eighteen
Speaker 1: dissertation on Fairchild's work, He's frequently grouped with the conservative
Speaker 1: progressives in the movement, but that loses some of the
Speaker 1: nuance of his efforts, which changed and evolved. Some of
Speaker 1: that evolution was horrific, as we will see in a bit.
Speaker 1: Throughout the Morality Code competition, various newspapers reported on the
Speaker 1: work that their state's chosen writer was doing. For example,
Speaker 1: the Daily Utah Chronicle wrote in April of nineteen seventeen
Speaker 1: that the winners would be announced in October and that
Speaker 1: Utah's entrant was in the running to win it, stating
Speaker 1: Dean Milton Bannion, who represented Utah in the competition, is
Speaker 1: enthusiastic about such work being done in schools. He is
Speaker 1: also desirous of arousing general public interest in universal character education.
Speaker 1: Earlier in the competition, Banion had given a quote to
Speaker 1: the same paper stating that he would quote be grateful
Speaker 1: for advice and suggestions as to what moral principles should
Speaker 1: be taught to children from nine to fourteen years of
Speaker 1: age and to youths from fourteen to eighteen years also
Speaker 1: for suggestions as to the form of the codes. On
Speaker 1: February twenty second, nineteen seventeen, the competition closed with fifty
Speaker 1: two entries, and at that point the entries were sent
Speaker 1: to the panel of judges. Those judges were George Trumbull,
Speaker 1: Lad of Yale University, who was the chair of the
Speaker 1: judges panel, Supreme Court Justice Mellem Pitney, and Eva Perry Moore,
Speaker 1: president of the National Council of Women. It was announced
Speaker 1: that once the winning entry was chosen, all of the
Speaker 1: other entrants would be given a chance to revise their
Speaker 1: own prior to the publication of the collected works in
Speaker 1: a textbook. That book was published in two volumes with
Speaker 1: different purposes. The first was for childhood and the second
Speaker 1: was for elementary and high schools. The winning entry came
Speaker 1: from William J. Hutchins of Ohio, who was president of
Speaker 1: Maria College in Kentucky at the time, and his code
Speaker 1: opens with the paragraph quote, Boys and girls who are
Speaker 1: good Americans tried to become strong and useful that our
Speaker 1: country may become ever greater and better. Therefore they obey
Speaker 1: the laws of right living, which the best Americans have
Speaker 1: always obeyed. So right out of the gate, this flags
Speaker 1: is a little misguided in the claim that best Americans
Speaker 1: have always obeyed the law. We've had plenty of examples otherwise.
Speaker 1: On this show we threw that tea into the harbor.
Speaker 1: Hudgens Code laid out ten laws of right living, which
Speaker 1: are one the law of health. The good American tries
Speaker 1: to gain and keep perfect health. To the law of
Speaker 1: self control. The good American controls himself. Three the law
Speaker 1: of self reliance. The good American is self reliant. For
Speaker 1: the law of reliability, the good American is reliable. Five
Speaker 1: the law of clean play. The good American plays fair.
Speaker 1: Sex The law of duty. The good American does his duty.
Speaker 1: Seven the law of good workmanship. The good American tries
Speaker 1: to do the right thing and the right way. Eight
Speaker 1: the law of teamwork. The good American works and friendly
Speaker 1: cooperation with his spellow workers. Nine the law of kindness.
Speaker 1: The good American is kind. Ten the law of loyalty.
Speaker 1: The good American is loyal. The beginning of this list
Speaker 1: is ablest. Oh yeah, there's tons of ablest stuff. We'll
Speaker 1: talk about a little bit more. Under each of these
Speaker 1: headers is a brief explainer and then a set of
Speaker 1: pledges for students. We're only going to read the first one,
Speaker 1: the Law of self control, to give you a sense
Speaker 1: of the style of the document. Quote, those who best
Speaker 1: control themselves can best serve their country. I will control
Speaker 1: my tongue and will not allow it to speak mean,
Speaker 1: vulgar or profane words. I will control my temper and
Speaker 1: will not get angry when people or things displease me,
Speaker 1: I will control my thoughts and will not allow a
Speaker 1: foolish wish to spoil a wise purpose. The Hutchins Code
Speaker 1: was not the end of the effort. Once the National
Speaker 1: Institution for Moral Instruction had basic morals covered, the organization
Speaker 1: planned another contest right after it, As reported in the
Speaker 1: Atlanta Constitution on September thirtieth, nineteen seventeen, quote, the National
Speaker 1: Institution for Moral Instruction at Washington, d C. Has offered
Speaker 1: for nineteen eighteen to nineteen nineteen an award of twenty
Speaker 1: thousand dollars for the best method of character education in
Speaker 1: public schools in the US. The circular sent out from
Speaker 1: this institution states that it is a matter of vital
Speaker 1: concern to those who think in terms of the national
Speaker 1: interest and of the welfare of the several states, that
Speaker 1: ways and means be developed by which the children and
Speaker 1: youth of the nation can be given a thorough character education.
Speaker 1: The character of the masses of the people in all
Speaker 1: its express us controls the happiness, prosperity, and development of
Speaker 1: the nation. After the war, there will be a period
Speaker 1: of recuperation and readjustment, after which will be a more
Speaker 1: serious test of democracy than the war. The children of
Speaker 1: these war times will be the mass of our citizens
Speaker 1: and our leaders of national life in this period of readjustment.
Speaker 1: So it's a little unclear, but the point of this
Speaker 1: second contest was for someone to come up with a
Speaker 1: way to systematize the adoption and teaching of this code.
Speaker 1: According to the Washington Posts write up of the second
Speaker 1: phase quote, the proposal of the institution is that the
Speaker 1: public school system places character education on a par with intellectual, vocational,
Speaker 1: and physical education, because character is the foundation of a
Speaker 1: successful life, and character among the masses of the people,
Speaker 1: both rich and poor, is essential to the happiness and
Speaker 1: development of the repub blick. This all gets so creepy
Speaker 1: to me. Uh. This contest, this second one, worked a
Speaker 1: little bit differently than the first. In this instance, nine
Speaker 1: educators from each state for a total of four hundred
Speaker 1: and thirty two because Alaska and Hawaii were not states yet.
Speaker 1: So if you're like that, math doesn't math, it does, uh,
Speaker 1: And those nine educators would study for a year and
Speaker 1: work out the best way to implement this new morality code.
Speaker 1: The twenty thousand dollars prize money would be distributed among
Speaker 1: the nine people from the winning state. With the chairman
Speaker 1: of the group receiving four thousand dollars and all others
Speaker 1: receiving two thousand dollars. It took until nineteen twenty two
Speaker 1: to announce a winner. The statements fair Child gave during
Speaker 1: this second phase jump out as being a lot less everyone,
Speaker 1: love your neighbor and be good, and a lot heavier
Speaker 1: on consequences and with a little eugenics thrown in. In
Speaker 1: October of nineteen nineteen, he gave several statements to a
Speaker 1: state educational conference held in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, that were reported
Speaker 1: in multiple newspapers. He gave a talk at the conference
Speaker 1: titled how to Introduce Moral Instruction into the curriculum of Schools,
Speaker 1: and he made some troubling remarks in the process. He
Speaker 1: started by noting that he had charted ninety three virtues
Speaker 1: that make up the perfect human being. These included things
Speaker 1: like being artistic and neat quote cooperative and not individualistic, adaptable, attentive,
Speaker 1: not careless, decisive, quick, thrifty, cautious, et cetera. These seem
Speaker 1: relatively benign, but then some of them get downright awful
Speaker 1: quote developed body, not poorly nourished, strength, without disabilities, muscular
Speaker 1: control not bungling, grace of figure and carriage not frumpy,
Speaker 1: vital not sluggish, appetites normal, not inactive, endurance not quickly tired,
Speaker 1: and resistance to disease not susceptible. Just tripling down on
Speaker 1: the ablest part of it at that time, for real.
Speaker 1: And then he said, quote, a great training will be
Speaker 1: developed for the production of experts in character education who
Speaker 1: will function through the public schools. Each child will be
Speaker 1: registered at birth, and its character and age looked after
Speaker 1: to the age of citizenship. Already real dicey, but it's
Speaker 1: about to get so much worse. First, he seems to
Speaker 1: have loosened his feelings about church involvement, noting that they
Speaker 1: needed to participate. Quote the churches will be asked to
Speaker 1: assist in this character education and to furnish the religious
Speaker 1: sanctions for conduct. But the state will supply, under the
Speaker 1: plan being formulated, the state sanctions and will furnish through
Speaker 1: the schools, the ways and means and the wisdom for
Speaker 1: the success full character education of each child within the possibilities. Uh.
Speaker 1: It's his plans for the kids that don't quite make
Speaker 1: the grade that are really problematic. Quote children who cannot
Speaker 1: be educated into sound character, will be taken charge of
Speaker 1: at maturity by the state and kept under control, prevented
Speaker 1: from breeding and crime during their natural life. The parents
Speaker 1: will be chief factor in this successful character education, and
Speaker 1: they will be under the guidance of trained experts in
Speaker 1: home character education working from the schools. So it seems
Speaker 1: like if this scenario were to play out as fair
Speaker 1: Child envisioned in this talk, there would need to be
Speaker 1: state run containment facilities for the kids who were deemed
Speaker 1: unfit to be good citizens, and they would be incarcerated
Speaker 1: for the rest of their lives, kept from breeding. An
Speaker 1: important part of the eugenics movement. Yeah, it is so horrifying.
Speaker 1: This is some of those things where in his earlier stuff,
Speaker 1: I'm like, this is creepy, but I get where he
Speaker 1: got here, Like he's missing some vital things, But I
Speaker 1: see why he thinks this is a good path, even
Speaker 1: if it's a mess. But once I read this article,
Speaker 1: I was like, jum, excuse, there's no way, There's no
Speaker 1: way he could possibly think this was okay. But he did.
Speaker 1: In nineteen twenty two, the winner of the twenty thousand
Speaker 1: dollars prize was announced, and we will talk about which
Speaker 1: state won it, how the nineteen sixteen Morality Code was revised,
Speaker 1: and thankfully ongoing resistance to all of these initiatives after
Speaker 1: we hear from the sponsors that keep stuff you missed
Speaker 1: in history class going. In nineteen twenty two, Iowa's planned
Speaker 1: for implementing Hutchin's Morality Code into schools won the prize.
Speaker 1: The Iowa approach addressed one of the big criticisms that
Speaker 1: had been leveled since that first contest was announced, which
Speaker 1: was that tacking on a section of education about morals
Speaker 1: was not really going to be effective. So the Iowa
Speaker 1: plan was built on integrating the Morality Code into all
Speaker 1: of the other parts of the educational curriculum. Their proposed
Speaker 1: plan opened with quote, the right organization of the school
Speaker 1: can alone go far towards solving the character training problems.
Speaker 1: To feel the collective judgment of one's peers is the
Speaker 1: heart of moral impulse. With the announcement of Iowa's win,
Speaker 1: also came the news that the National Institute for Moral
Speaker 1: Instruction had reincorporated as the Character Education Institution to more
Speaker 1: accurately reflect its goals. In nineteen twenty four, the code
Speaker 1: got a revision pass This revision was covered in the
Speaker 1: Journal of Education that year and described the five point
Speaker 1: process that the Character Education Institution used in updating the code. First,
Speaker 1: it studied all the submissions from the original contest and
Speaker 1: tabulated the ideas in them to see which were often repeated. Second,
Speaker 1: experts in the human sciences were consulted and asked for
Speaker 1: input on the Hutchins Code. Third, and we'll quote this
Speaker 1: directly because it's a little odd quote. A list of
Speaker 1: the morality acts of well brought up children has been made,
Speaker 1: numbering about six hundred and fifty. The Hutchins Code has
Speaker 1: been checked up on this list of morality acts to
Speaker 1: make sure that it emits no important phases of childhood morality. Fourth,
Speaker 1: recent literature regarding childhood morality was reviewed. And then fifth,
Speaker 1: a list that was started by the Institution in nineteen
Speaker 1: fifteen to catalog all the virtues of human beings was
Speaker 1: looked at to ensure quote direction of the expression of
Speaker 1: each one of these virtues in childhood conduct must be
Speaker 1: contained within the Children's Morality Code. That list, once again
Speaker 1: was made up by Milon Fairchild. The revision led to
Speaker 1: a new order for the ten laws in the original
Speaker 1: Morality Code, and some of them were changed, so the
Speaker 1: new version was one the law of self control. The
Speaker 1: good American controls himself. Two the law of good health.
Speaker 1: The good American tries to gain and keep perfect health.
Speaker 1: Three the law of kindness. The good American is kind.
Speaker 1: Four the law of sportsmanship. The good American plays fair.
Speaker 1: That updates the clean play law. Five the law of
Speaker 1: self reliance. The good American is self reliance. Six the
Speaker 1: law of duty. The good American does his duty. Seventh
Speaker 1: the law of reliability. The good American is true. Eight
Speaker 1: the law of truth. The good American tells the truth.
Speaker 1: Nine the law of good workmanship. The good American tries
Speaker 1: to do the right things in the right way. And
Speaker 1: ten the law of teamwork. The good American works in
Speaker 1: friendly cooperation with his fellow workers. So not a lot
Speaker 1: of change. She reflects some differences in vocabulary. We mentioned
Speaker 1: in our Gertrude Chandler Warner episode that she wrote her
Speaker 1: book Good Americans' First Lessons for the Littlest Ones in
Speaker 1: nineteen twenty six as an adaptation of the Morality Code
Speaker 1: for younger children. But even as she worked on it,
Speaker 1: there was a study underway to assess its real efficacy,
Speaker 1: and that study did not go well for Milton Fairchild
Speaker 1: and his supporters. There had long been a debate about
Speaker 1: whether character was something that could be taught, or if
Speaker 1: it was more of a habitual response to various stimuli
Speaker 1: like scenarios. Yeah, it's more like, can you actually tell
Speaker 1: a kid what to do? Or will he learn what
Speaker 1: to do when he actually encounters these things in real life?
Speaker 1: And which is really going to be valuable. Two academics,
Speaker 1: Hugh Hartshorn, professor of Religious education at the University of
Speaker 1: Southern California, and doctor Mark A. Mayfessor of psychology at
Speaker 1: Syracuse University, working through the John D. Rockefeller funded Institute
Speaker 1: of Social and Religious Research, were able to start a
Speaker 1: series of investigations in nineteen twenty four into just how
Speaker 1: well a moral code for children actually worked. Their work
Speaker 1: was supervised by psychologist Edward Thorndike. The actual bulk of
Speaker 1: this research took place from nineteen twenty five to nineteen thirty,
Speaker 1: and it became known as the Character Education Inquiry. Its
Speaker 1: goal to quote develop an understanding of character as a
Speaker 1: personal and social phenomenon. If you're wondering why this topic
Speaker 1: was enough to get huge amounts of funding. It's because
Speaker 1: a lot of money was being spent to establish and
Speaker 1: maintain that morality program in schools, and a lot of
Speaker 1: people thought the whole thing was both incorrect in ideology
Speaker 1: and incredibly wasteful. Starting in nineteen twenty eight, the Character
Speaker 1: Education Inquiry findings were published in three volumes by the
Speaker 1: mcmill in Company under the general title Studies in the
Speaker 1: Nature of Character. The first of these was Volume one,
Speaker 1: Studies in Deceit. The following year, Volume two, Studies in
Speaker 1: Service and Self Control, was released, and finally in nineteen
Speaker 1: thirty Volume three, Studies in the Organization of Character, came out.
Speaker 1: They detailed their methods of testing and research, which involved
Speaker 1: a lot of work with students and teachers often asking
Speaker 1: students questions to gauge what the kids thought qualified as
Speaker 1: cheating on tests. There were many, many different tests conducted
Speaker 1: to get a large data set and offer a range
Speaker 1: of variables in moral situations. When it came to deception,
Speaker 1: part of their findings were summarized this way quote, no
Speaker 1: one is honest or dishonest by nature. Where conflict arises
Speaker 1: between a child and his environment, deception is in natural
Speaker 1: mode of adjustment, having in itself no moral significance. If
Speaker 1: indirect ways of gaining his ends are successful, they will
Speaker 1: be continued unless definite training is undertaken through which direct
Speaker 1: and honest methods may also become successful. Apart from the
Speaker 1: actual practice of direct or honest methods of gaining ends
Speaker 1: where a conflict of wills is actually involved, the mere
Speaker 1: urging of honest behavior by teachers, or the discussion of
Speaker 1: standards and ideals of honesty, no matter how much such
Speaker 1: general ideas may be emotionalized, has no necessary relation to
Speaker 1: the control of conduct. The extent to which individuals may
Speaker 1: be affected, either for better or for worse, is not known,
Speaker 1: but there seems to be evidence that such effects as
Speaker 1: may result are not generally good and are sometimes unwholesome.
Speaker 1: This does not imply that the teaching of general ideas,
Speaker 1: standards and ideals is not desirable and necessary, but only
Speaker 1: that the prevailing ways of inculcating ideas probably do little
Speaker 1: good and may do some harm. The Character Education Inquiry
Speaker 1: had a massive impact on both public and academic perception
Speaker 1: of the Morality Code and its teaching, and most schools
Speaker 1: abandoned it by the nineteen thirties. Fair Child kept trying
Speaker 1: to find ways to implement morality and character education in schools,
Speaker 1: but he was also declining in health, and after an
Speaker 1: extensive illness that began in nineteen thirty two, he died
Speaker 1: in December of nineteen thirty nine. I will say that
Speaker 1: there are ongoing discussions about how to teach morality to children.
Speaker 1: It's not like that suddenly ended at this point, but
Speaker 1: sure this particular effort did, which we will talk about
Speaker 1: on Friday, and how very creepy we both find them.
Speaker 1: In the meantime, I have a really fun email from
Speaker 1: our listener Jen about one of my very favorite topics lately,
Speaker 1: that being hydroponics. Jen Rights, Holly and Tracy. Your podcast
Speaker 1: gets me through the workday most days as I work
Speaker 1: on my PhD. I must say this week's hydroponic episode
Speaker 1: had me giggling as I sit at my desk, which
Speaker 1: is in a USDA Farm Service Agency building. She talks
Speaker 1: about where she works. I'm not going to say that
Speaker 1: just for safety, but mentions that they are currently developing
Speaker 1: an urban agricultural demonstration garden and I have been trying
Speaker 1: to find a way to add a hydroponic system to
Speaker 1: the garden. Thank you for the great history of hydroponics.
Speaker 1: I would like to believe that the gardens of Babylon
Speaker 1: really were the first. She shares a picture that she took.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to say where, just to preserve her privacy,
Speaker 1: but she writes, my ten year old son and I
Speaker 1: travel to that area and on our way home, notice
Speaker 1: that the snow squall happening between us and the greenhouse
Speaker 1: made the pink sky touch the ground. It's truly amazing
Speaker 1: to see how pink purple the grow lights make the
Speaker 1: skies around here. They are noticeable from the city, which
Speaker 1: is a good forty miles away. My family does complain
Speaker 1: that they don't get a dark sky all the time,
Speaker 1: even living in the country. But I think it's pretty,
Speaker 1: and she says, here is a picture of my mom.
Speaker 1: The reason we were traveling to the area it was
Speaker 1: to celebrate her ringing the bell after completing six months
Speaker 1: of chemo for pancreatic cancer. She is a rare breed
Speaker 1: of survivors and as a love of Snoop Dogg, the
Speaker 1: nurses made her this shirt and a pop brownie that
Speaker 1: was not grown idronically. I lost so much Keep up
Speaker 1: the great work, and thank you for being a little
Speaker 1: bright spot in my day as I assist landowners with conservation. Jen.
Speaker 1: Her mother's shirt is a Snoop Dogg shirt. Congratulations to
Speaker 1: your mother. She sounds amazing. I hope she has only
Speaker 1: great health going forward. She also includes a picture for
Speaker 1: pet Tax of her mom's lab who has been her
Speaker 1: constant companion through all of her treatment. Amazing, Jen, thank
Speaker 1: you for sharing all of this. It made my day very,
Speaker 1: very delightful and it's a lovely way to end a
Speaker 1: discussion of creepy things. You would like to write to us,
Speaker 1: you can do so at History Podcast at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 1: You can also subscribe to the show on the iHeartRadio
Speaker 1: app or anywhere else that you listen to podcasts. Stuff
Speaker 1: you Missed in History Class is a production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.