STUDENT SELF-GOVERNMENT. Student self-government as an organized sys tem is the product of modern times and of democratic ideas. In its ideal form it must not be confused with systems of government of one group of pupils by an older pupil set over them by an appointment from a teacher or the head of the school. Such systems of maintaining good order in the schoolroom and out of it existed in the Middle Ages and continued down into our own day under the names of prefec tural and monitorial systems. Though these involved the government and sometimes even the teaching of students by students, there was little about them to warrant their being called self-government systems.
Strictly defined self-government of students implies the existence of a system under which the students elect their own leaders or com mittees to see that school or college rules are obeyed and that violators are punished. Even though in the background the supreme authority of the school or college officials is always present, it is never so apparent as to disabuse the student body of the idea that it is to all intents and purposes governing iself.
The most advanced steps in student self government under such a definition have been taken in America. The development of a great number of extramural activities on the part of college students led quite naturally to the or ganization of governing bodies for such pur poses almost entirely free from control by col lege officials. In fact in some cases the abuses of self-government in such matters became so great that the college officials and the alumni had to interfere to set things right and to impose a supervision which had not previously existed. Nevertheless the influence of self governing action in their own affairs made for the development of self-reliance and character and both college officials and students found it was but a short step to granting the participa tion of the students in matters heretofore deemed the business of the professional staff of the college.
One of the first of these steps was that of self-government in the examination room. This has commonly been defined as the "honor sys tem?) Before its institution one or several college officials were deputized to guard the examination room to prevent cheating. Under the new system these officials were withdrawn and the students put on their honor not to cheat and in some institutions to report those whom they saw cheating. In general the sys tem has come into vogue far more widely in the colleges of the South and West than in those of the Northeast. Another development has
been in taking resident officials out of the dormitories or living halls of the students and placing reliance on the honor of the latter to commit no infractions of the college rules and to report students guilty of such. Still another development in some colleges has been the elec tion by the students of a committee which takes up the matter of disciplining students and acts in consultation with members of the fac ulty in important questions affecting the students.
In some colleges the attempt to put these measures of student self-government through have met with failure whereas in others they have been a success. In the latter case reports would indicate that although some weaknesses are discovered, the general conditions are no worse and are sometimes a good deal better than when all of the government was directly in the hands of college officials. The most serious difficulty encountered is in getting students to play the part of informer even though the information given is secret and in violate.
The development of self-government in American public elementary and high schools grew from somewhat different motives. At first it came into vogue through the desire on the part of teachers to teach civics or civil govern ment in a graphic manner. Inspired by such a motive they organized their classes into school cities and States, and sometimes the whole school was organized into a great gov ernmental institution with legislative, execu tive and judicial departments and an array of government officials. This organization was in many cases used as a self-governing body, but, as was the case with the colleges, some were successful and some were not. It usually depended upon how much backing and time the school teachers and officials were willing to give to it, or how much they were able to simplify and modify the structure to meet the purposes of self-government. The enthusiasm of a teacher or a principal made up for much, and in almost all cases there is evidence of a certain artificiality and a feeling that the school official is constantly behind the scenes to make the wheels of self-government work smoothly. The value of the systems is not always so much in what the students accomplish as in the development of character which such sys tems may produce. Teachers in high schools have sometimes reported very adversely on students coming to them from self-governing elementary schools and sometimes very favor ably.