effort, and aid in the independent districts of the nine selected counties in the same manner as those items were compared for the rural districts of the same counties in Table XXII.

TABLE XXIII

INEQUALITIES IN ABILITY, EFFORT, AND AID IN SOUTH DAKOTA INDEPENDENT DISTRICTS OF NINE SELECTED COUNTIES, 1920

b Computed by dividing total state aid as given in Superintendent of Public Instruction Report, 1920, pp. 220-25, by total enrollment as given on pp. 202, 203, 210, 211.

© Computed by dividing the total state aid as found in (b) above by total number of teachers as given in State Superintendent of Public Instruction Report, 1920, pp. 200, 201, 206, 207. a Ibid., pp. 218, 219.

* Computed by dividing amount raised by district tax as shown in Superintendent of Public Instruction Report, 1920, pp. 220, 221 by total state aid as found in (b) above.

↑ No independent districts in this county.

While the inequalities among independent districts, as shown in Table XXIII, do not appear as great, one comparison will bring out a very unfair condition. Potter County receives $11.59 from the state for each child enrolled, while Spink County receives only $8.21. At the same time, Potter County independent districts levy an average tax of 6.10 mills as compared to 10.87 for those of Spink County. Potter County independent districts raised only $1.48 for each dollar received from the state while Spink County independent districts raised $8.12 for each dollar received from the state.

Five of the 9 selected counties used in previous tables did not have consolidated districts within their borders, so 5 other counties having consolidated districts, were selected as near to these 5 in valuation per census school child as possible. Table XXIV, which follows, shows the inequalities in ability, effort, and aid in the consolidated districts of 9 counties, in the same manner as these items were compared for rural and independent districts in Tables XXII and XXIII.

TABLE XXIV

INEQUALITIES IN ABILITY, EFFORT, AND AID IN SOUTH DAKOTA CONSOLIDATED DISTRICTS IN NINE SELECTED COUNTIES, 1920

b Computed by dividing total state aid as given in Superintendent of Public Instruction Report, 1920, pp. 251-53, by total enrollment as given on pp. 242-46.

c Computed by dividing the total state aid as found in (b) above by total number of teachers as given in State Superintendent of Public Instruction Report, 1920, pp. 240-44.

a Ibid., p. 250.

• Computed by dividing the amount raised by district tax as shown in Superintendent of Public Instruction Report, 1920, p. 251, by total state aid as found in (b) above.

f Not sufficient data available.

As shown in Table XXIV, the variations in effort and aid are so great as to be almost unbelievable. Extreme variations as shown in these nine counties are as follows: state aid per child enrolled, from $7.82 to $16.16; state aid per teacher employed, $91.63 to $422.09; tax levy in mills, 2.75 mills to 24.78 mills; amount raised by local tax per dollar received from the state $2.17 to $11.32. What may be still worse than these extreme variations is the condition which permits the fact that in Hanson County, in which the state aid per child enrolled is highest, the tax rate in mills is among the lowest. And in Butte County, where the aid per child enrolled is lowest, the tax rate is over 21⁄2 times as great as in Hanson County. One need scarcely point out the injustice of such variations.

If we should now compare the items in Tables XXII, XXIII, and XXIV, we would find a very wide variation between rural, independent, and consolidated districts. The extremes shown by these tables are as follows: received from the state per child enrolled, $5.94 to $16.06; received from the state per teacher employed, $91.63 to $450.93; average school tax in mills, 1.8 mills to 24.78 mills; amount raised by local tax for each $1 received from the state $1.48 to $11.32. It must be borne in mind, too, that these figures are for a small group of counties, and that the entire number of

counties would undoubtedly give a wider variation. Also, if figures for individual districts were available, a wider variation in school burdens and state aid would be shown to exist.

Statistics are not available in any reports for individual districts. Many repeated efforts were made by the author to secure information from county superintendents, so that individual districts might be compared. Eighteen letters were sent to county superintendents asking for a certain minimum of information which might serve, but only three replies were received, two of them giving no information at all, and the other not giving sufficient information to make it at all usable. Through the efforts of Dr. William A. Cook, of the University of South Dakota, who wrote personal letters to a number of superintendents of his personal acquaintance, information for three counties is available. In the requests sent out, the county superintendent was asked to select the richest, the poorest, and a representative rural one-teacher district in the county and give five items of information for these three districts. Two replies gave these items for three chosen districts, and a third gave the items called for in 90 districts.

Table XXV (see p. 279) shows total assessed valuation, assessed valuation per census school child, tax rate in mills, annual salary of teacher, length of school year in days, and state aid for three districts in each of three counties. It is assumed in the case of Clay and Hand counties that the first district is the richest, the second fairly representative, and the third the poorest in total assessed valuations. These are selections of the county superintendents of these counties. In Turner County, the 90 districts were arranged in order of assessed valuation and the richest, median, and poorest districts were selected on this basis. Figure 9 shows the inequalities in ability and effort in the selected districts. In this figure, total assessed valuation of the district is used in each case since all are one-teacher districts.

Table XXV shows that in these three counties, the total valuation of one-teacher rural districts varies from $1,476,960 in District No. 112-66 of Hand County to $87,964 in District No. 57 of Clay County. The assessed valuation per child enrolled varies in these nine districts from $23,582 in District No. 1, Turner County, to $6283 in District No. 57, Clay County. It is interesting to note that in each county the poorest district has the highest tax rate, with one exception, has the most poorly paid teacher, and in all cases gets the smallest amount of money from the state. On the other hand the richest district in each case, except one, has the lowest tax rate, the best paid teacher, and gets the most money from the state. It is hardly probable that these variations are by any means the extremes in the counties named, with the exception of the first item given, namely, the total

assessed valuations. But these examples serve to show that wide variations in ability, effort, and aid do exist among the individual districts in the

state.

That the variations given above are not the extremes is shown by the data for Turner County which were received for 90 districts in the county. Table XXV, which follows, shows data selected on two different bases. In Part I, these 90 districts were arranged in order of valuation per census child, and the districts having the highest, lowest, and median valuation per census child were chosen with a district intervening between the highest and the median and one between the lowest and median. Part II shows districts chosen in the same way arranged with the tax levy as the basis.

TABLE XXV

INEQUALITIES IN ABILITY, EFFORT, AND AID OF THREE SELECTED RURAL ONE-TEACHER DISTRICTS IN EACH OF THREE SOUTH DAKOTA COUNTIES, 1921-22a

All data taken from information furnished by county superintendent of counties named.

Table XXVI, Part I, shows variations in assessed valuation per census school child from $50,464 to $8178 and in Part II variations from 15 mills tax levy which is the upper limit down to no tax levy at all. Almost paralleling the decrease in valuations are the increases in tax levies as shown in Part I. Other items in this table do not seem to show any tendency to vary in the same ratio as the tax rate or as the valuations. The state aid depends on neither of these items but is totally dependent on the number of children between the ages of six and twenty-one years of age enumerated in the district. The fact that one district is six times as rich per census child as another is not considered at all in distributing state aid. Neither is the fact considered that a district levies seven and one-half times as high a tax as others. The state, by its method of apportionment, seems to concede

that it makes no difference how rich or poor a district is; no matter how high or low a tax levy may be, within the limit of 2 to 15 mills, no difference in state aid should be made. In other words, under the present system, no account is taken of these great inequalities.

INEQUALITIES IN ABILITY AND EFFORT

AMONG THREE SELECTED ONE-TEACHER RURAL DISTRICTS
IN THREE SELECTED COUNTIES-SOUTH DAKOTA

Responsibility for inequalities.-The inequalities which have been shown in educational opportunities and in burden of support lie at the door of the state. The state of South Dakota is the only agency which can in any way mitigate the evils we have shown to exist. South Dakota has a large permanent school fund, does not levy any state tax for education, but has pursued