Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-03-2011 - 6c
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 03-03-2011
>
Agenda - 03-03-2011 - 6c
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2012 10:51:48 AM
Creation date
2/25/2011 2:07:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/3/2011
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6c
Document Relationships
Minutes 03-03-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
26 <br />NP3 Form 10 -900 -e <br />OMB No. 1024 -0018 <br />(8-8$) <br />United States Department of the Interior <br />National Park Service <br />NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES <br />CONTINUATION SHEET <br />Section L Page 10 Muighev School <br />name of property <br />Orange County. NC <br />county and state <br />towns and cities. With eighty percent of North Carolina's population living in rural areas, the <br />majority of people were not receiving an adequate education. Knight pressed that consolidation <br />was the answer to improving the rural school problem, stating, nit means more comfortable, <br />convenient, and attractive and better equipped school buildings. In such buildings the health and <br />the morals of the children are safeguarded to a greater degree than is possible in the smaller one - <br />room school.» Included in the plan of consolidation endorsed by Knight was a teacherage, a <br />feature constructed on the Murphey School property.6 <br />For consolidation to fulfill its purpose, Knight also admitted that the state must first embrace a <br />policy of road building in order to transport rural students to the newly consolidated schools that <br />possibly were not located within walking distance. Without the "Good Roads" movement during <br />the 1920s, consolidation would not have been successful. Knight encouraged each consolidated <br />school to purchase wagons or buses and to hire dependable drivers. in 1525 Orange County <br />operated five school trucks costing $1680.70 for oil, gas and repairs and $783 for drivers.7 Knight <br />explained that though the new consolidated school would be more expensive than its older <br />counterpart, the costs to the taxable district would be offset by state funding available through <br />programs such as the State Special Building Fund, established to provide funding to each county <br />for the erection of public school houses. Another aid to local school districts was the Division of <br />Schoolhouse Planning, created in 1920 by an appropriation from the legislature to assist the State <br />Board of Education in providing sufficient buildings for public instruction. The Division of <br />Schoolhouse Planning set now design .standards for, educational facilities and helped to organize <br />their construction. a <br />Even with the great solution of consolidation, many rural newly consolidated schools sat in strong <br />contrast to their sister schools in the city. Often small rural schools like Murphey School were <br />inadequately staffed and short on materials and equipment. Rural schools, including elementary <br />and high schools, emphasized more of an agricultural education due to the number of students <br />who would choose professions such as farming and domestic life. In Orange County there were <br />forty -seven rural schools in 1925 with ninety teachers. Orange County public schools' agricultural <br />departments not only focused on farming methods in the community, but also instructed adult <br />farmers and organized county fairs. <br />s Knight, Edgar W. -The Consolidation of Rural Schools,' 2n' ed., University QtNorth Carolina Extension <br />Leaflets, vol. 3, no. 8, (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1920), p. 5 -18. <br />7 Andrews, Nita. "A study of the Public Schools of Orange County,' Masters Thesis, (Chapel Hill: University of <br />North Carolina, 1925), p. 65. <br />8 Knight, Edgar W., p. 5-18. <br />9 Andrews, Nita. p. 64-66. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.