A School of Their Own: Teacher Training in Brooklyn, New York




By Sandra Roff

Gazing out from the shores of Brooklyn Heights in the nineteenth century, a city expanding seemingly endlessly across the river encompasses the view. New York, separated from Brooklyn by a ferry ride, was the epitome of culture and the pursuit of learning. The more prominent residents of the city envisioned providing outlets for enrichment and learning. Educating the growing population of New York was important to its citizenry and by 1832, educational opportunities were available for all when “public notice [was] given that schools were now open to all as a common right, and that every effort would be made to render them attractive and desirable to all classes of citizens.”[1]

At the same time, that New York was growing and expanding its cultural and educational boundaries, Brooklyn Heights was assuming the designation of New York City’s first suburb. The wealthy men and women who first settled the Heights had the means and desire to organize in their community, cultural venues equal to and perhaps even better than New York’s. Following Brooklyn’s incorporation in 1834 the residents, many connected to maritime commerce, traveled by ferry to work by day and returned home at night. They nurtured the same values, desired the same intellectual enlightenment and had similar educational aspirations as New Yorkers.

The financially secure residents of Brooklyn Heights established private schools for their children, but for the children living beyond the borders of Brooklyn Heights providing free education was of paramount importance. To address the educational concerns of Brooklynites the Brooklyn Board of Education was organized in 1843, and issues that previously were tabled, now were the focus of discussions.

Because the population of Brooklyn was growing and additional public schools opened in Brooklyn, there was a need for more qualified teachers. The new Board, organized a Saturday Normal School which was as reported in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle opened in October, 1843 and all of the teachers in the primary departments were required to attend.[2] The Committee on Teachers reported the following:

That the establishment of a Normal School, for the purposes named in the resolution, would, in their opinion, be highly beneficial to the class of teachers referred to, and conduce to the general welfare and prosperity of the public schools. The committee understand the main object and purpose of Normal Schools to be, to fit and prepare teachers of little experience, but possessing the requisite interest and zeal in the cause of instruction, for the greatest practicable degree of usefulness in their calling….The committee see no reason to doubt that the plan suggested by the resolution may be carried into efficient and successful operation, and that this Board, and the friends of education generally, may confidently expect that the impulse thus given to the subordinate classes of teachers will continue to operate with accumulating force, till the whole corps of the instructors in our public schools will feel its influence, and both they and their schools be benefitted thereby.[3]

Unfortunately, because the legality of using money designated for education for a Normal School was in question, the school ceased operation after a few months.[4]

Preparing teachers for their prospective career was not uniformly practiced in nineteenth century America. Normal schools, established for the purpose of training teachers, had European origins dating to eighteenth century Berlin. The Teacher’s Seminary of Mr. Hall in Concord, Vermont, is believed to be the first Normal School in America, opening in 1823, but it took several more years until the Normal School model was adopted in New York City.[5] There was a proposal in 1827 to establish a central school to instruct teachers, but it was not until 1834, nine years before Brooklyn, that a Saturday Normal School opened in New York City.[6] However, Normal School instruction was not the only route used to prepare teachers for the classroom. Teachers’ Institutes became popular based on the experiments of Henry Barnard in the Hartford, Connecticut public schools in 1839 when pedagogy students observed classroom instruction for six weeks.[7] In 1845 New York formed “The Teacher’s Institute of the City and County of New-York” which remained in operation until 1848 when “The Teachers’ Association of the City and County of New York” was founded.[8] Brooklyn was ahead of the times since as early as 1836: there was already a movement afoot to establish a “Teachers’ Association or Lyceum” “to consider what could be done by them for the benefit of their respective charges, and the rising generation in general.”[9] There is no evidence that this idea went any further at that time since mention of a similar organization in Brooklyn does not appear in the press until 1846 when there was a meeting at the Brooklyn Lyceum on January 16, 1846 calling for the formation of a Teachers’ Institute.[10]

In February of 1855 the “Teachers’ Association of the City of Brooklyn” was founded. The Eagle reported: “The Teachers’ Association met on Thursday evening…Messrs. Syme & Reeve of the Executive Committee presented subjects for debate at the next meeting, when the following subject was selected: Does the study of mathematics or the languages most tend to develop the mental faculties?” [11] It is important to note that this association was only composed of male teachers of the public schools “associated for the better promotion of their interests as a class, and for mutual edification and improvement in all that pertains to their calling.”[12]

The Teachers’ Association maintained a presence in Brooklyn and in 1877 Henry Kiddle gave a lecture at a meeting of the Association titled, ”Common-School Teaching” when he stressed the importance of teachers receiving the proper training. “What we, as educators, need is to impress upon the community the fact that teachers are members of a separate profession; for there is scarcely any error so prolific of evil, and which so utterly ignores the results of modern thought and discovery, as that of believing education, and, of course, teaching, to require no special study in order that it may be understood and practiced.”[13]

Saturday Normal Schools were already operating across the river but had an unsuccessful beginning in Brooklyn and closed in 1843. Although the Teachers’ Association was an attempt at teacher education, the impact was very limited. The by-laws of the Brooklyn Board of Education for 1849 gives the requirements for teaching. “A certificate of qualification, dated within one year, from the City Superintendent, or a State or County certificate, or a diploma from the State Normal School, is necessary to render a teacher legally qualified to instruct in the Public Schools of Brooklyn.”[14] A solution was needed to allow prospective teachers to meet the requirements for employment locally.

The city of Brooklyn was growing in the 1850s and Williamsburg joined Brooklyn in 1854. Before this union, Williamsburg had established its own Normal School in 1853, but once the consolidation took place it closed its doors and reopened in February 1856 in a more central location.[15] The press noted at the closing exercises of the Eastern District Normal School “the room was crowded with the lady teachers of the Eastern District and their friends and a more interesting constellation of intellect and beauty never graced the precincts of a literary institution.” In the valedictory as well in the comments by other speakers the students reflected on their fondness for the school.[16] “It is a fact not generally known, or one which is forgotten, that, before the present Normal School [opened in 1856] was organized, many of our best teachers were voluntarily attending the Normal Schools of Williamsburg and New York, while many others were either taking lessons of private tutors, or meeting by themselves for mutual improvement.”[17] The new Normal School was not without controversy and the press devoted space to the pros and cons of the school. In January of 1857 the Eagle reported: “There are nearly five hundred pupils in general attendance, all of whom are females, the greater number teachers in the public schools. The object of the Normal School, tersely expressed, is “to teach the teachers how to teach.” “Ability to instruct does not come by intuition, neither will any amount of learning insure it—teaching is an art.”[18] It is significant to note that all the students who attended the Saturday Normal School were women because “the males are excused from attendance at the school,” as stated on May 7, 1857 in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle.[19]

The first graduates of the new school received their diplomas on May 30, 1857—a significant accomplishment.[20] However, debates were chronicled by the Eagle on issues ranging from the importance of Normal School education and the requirements for attendance to the question of male vs. female teachers. A few “experts” in the field of education declared “education was peculiarly and exclusively the sphere of the female sex, and that males were entirely unfitted to teach.”[21] This was completely in sync with the mid-19th century doctrine of the “cult of domesticity,” which emphasized the nurturing qualities of women, important when teaching children. Catherine Esther Beecher was an influential American educator, who championed teaching as appropriate to the sensibilities of women, and wrote widely on the subject, thus convincing many skeptics.[22] Also, Horace Mann, a national spokesman for educational reform promoted the employment of female teachers in the early 1840s. However his idea of the education of women differed from that of Catherine Beecher and other educational reformers, He envisioned state-controlled and financed teacher training schools teaching only pedagogy, whereas Beecher and her contemporaries wanted liberal arts institutions on par with Harvard and Yale.[23]

The Brooklyn Normal School remained in operation and each year graduation ceremonies praised the important work of the school and the graduates. The graduation ceremonies were important public events and the venues where they took place shows their increasing public stature. The graduates assembled at Packer Institute, the Washington Street Methodist Church and finally the Academy of Music. The Brooklyn Daily Eagle celebrated the occasion.

The exhibition of the graduates of the Normal School at the Academy of Music exhibited to great advantage the corps of teachers employed in the public schools of the city…The Academy was densely crowded; entirely too much so [sic] for the comfort of the greater part of the audience, and many could not gain admission. This was owing in part to the large number of teachers employed in the schools.The graduates of the Normal School occupied the stage, those who graduated during the present season in the front seats, and were attired in white.

The Normal School was instituted a few years ago for the purpose of educating the teachers themselves in the art of teaching…As it is conducted, the female teachers of the public schools are compelled to attend every Saturday…Owing to the low scale of salary, very few of the teachers intend to make a life business of the profession and only expect to follow it for a few years until they find a favorable opportunity of entering that sphere of life which is the natural destiny of woman.[24]

Discontent was mounting to close the Normal School and there was much discussion in the Brooklyn press about its failure. “Its opponents insisted that the radical principle of the school is wrong and that the idea of establishing a high school for educating young women to fit them for the position of teachers is a mistaken one.”[25] The Eagle noted that when the school was first established all the teachers of the public schools attended but this did not last long and the attendance kept dropping until very few teachers were in attendance and consisted primarily of outsiders who were thinking of becoming teachers.[26] The school closed in June 1861 and although there were some discussions monitored in the press about meetings and proposals for a new Normal School, nothing happened until the end of the Civil War.

Brooklyn was active in supporting the war and the efforts of its citizenry rivaled those of the city across the river. New York City organized the Metropolitan Sanitary Fair to raise money and supplies for the Union Army, and Brooklyn held its own Sanitary Fair on Montague Street in the new Academy of Music. Brooklynites rallied to the needs of the troops and the education of its teachers had to wait.

The Normal School question received public attention once again in 1867. There was vigorous discussion in the press about the feasibility of reopening the Normal School. At first the Board of Education proposed to change the organization and management of the school, employing five professors who were not connected to the school instead of the principals of the public schools who formerly served as instructors. A frequently voiced complaint, echoed in The Brooklyn Daily Eagle was that after going to the expense of educating teachers there was no guarantee that they would actually teach in the Brooklyn schools. [27] The article went on to say: “If any facilities for obtaining a more complete education than the public schools afford should be deemed desirable let us have a High School, open to all classes alike, in which the training of pupils for the profession of teaching would be an incidental feature.”[28]

Another proposal was to use the money to augment the teachers’ salaries instead of opening a new Normal School. Then the city could hire better teachers. According to The Brooklyn Daily Eagle: “ Most of the girls who fill the subordinate positions in the schools only regard teaching as a temporary occupation, and the average duration of their services in the schools is not over three or four years. The most capable teachers will not remain here because they can get better pay in other localities.”[29] In October of 1867 another article in the same newspaper appeared which once again challenged the usefulness of a Normal School and proposed instead that: “If the Board of Education has any money to spare, it had better build new school-houses to receive the hundreds of children who have within a month been turned away from the overcrowded schools, and are now growing up in idleness and ignorance, a state of affairs disgraceful to Brooklyn.”[30]

All of the rhetoric that was printed by the press led to the foregone conclusion that a plan for a new Normal School was doomed. On November 1, 1867 a Brooklyn Daily Eagle article stated that members of the Board of Education were unable to approve the school and the Board threatened to appeal to the Legislature.[31] The issue was laid to rest for several years.

Discussion of the issue again made the news in early 1871 when The New York Times responded to articles in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle on education in Brooklyn. The Times author felt that it was a problem that Brooklyn had no High School or Normal School where men or women could be educated free of charge to become teachers. The Packer Institute offered instruction for women and Polytechnic for men, but these schools were not free. These private academies would suffer if a Normal School were established and the author felt that this was one factor why the establishment of a Normal School in Brooklyn was stalled.[32] Later in the month the Times followed up on that article and put their support behind a “real” Normal School. “We do not mean mere Saturday normal schools, such as are found in country school districts, and such as Brooklyn has tried and disapproved, but regularly-established normal schools, with a complete course of preparation extending through two or three years.”[33] The new Normal College opened in 1870 in New York City providing free higher education to women and it was thought that Brooklyn could do the same. “Brooklyn can better afford to pave fewer streets with patent pavements, and to leave the salaries of all her officials at their present rates, than to be longer without a free school in which teachers can be educated for her public schools.”[34]

Fig. 1. New York City Normal College, 1874
J.G. Holland Scribner’s Monthly, An Illustrated Magazine for the People (New York, NY: Scribner & Co., 1874).

Interest in the Normal School question dissipated but every few months an article appeared in the press on the subject. In 1873 an editorial in The Brooklyn Daily Eagle advocated a central high school or free academy. “A high school would afford a good basis for a city normal school. I do not mean that we should launch out like the Gotham across the river into a stupendous normal college (?) but that as a part of the organization of the high school, there should be certain classes in which instruction should be given in the science and art of teaching.”[35] The author went on to say that there should also be a model primary school connected with the institution that would serve as a training ground for teachers.[36] The opposition persisted and the next year an article appeared which said the advocates of a Normal School felt that hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent employing teachers and they should be properly trained for their positions. The argument against this was that a Normal School had been tried but wasn’t successful and that if the Board limited teaching positions to those who had graduated from the public schools additional instruction at a normal school would not be necessary.[37] There were a few other mentions of the issue in the next few years but interest waned.

Training schools for teachers again received attention in 1881 and 1882 when there was a proposal for two professional schools, one for the Western District and another for the Eastern District.[38] In 1882, Calvin Patterson, the Superintendent of Public Instruction for Brooklyn, addressed the problem of training schools for teachers in Brooklyn. “The Committee on High and Normal Schools will, at the proper time, report in favor of the establishment of two training schools, one to be organized in the Eastern District and the other in the Western. These schools should be strictly professional, reviewing only the elementary studies, and doing this as a means of exhibiting methods of instruction.”[39] Brooklyn educational leaders were still not ready to agree to the plan. Another year passed and other proposals were made but nothing was adopted.

Fig. 2. Brooklyn Board of Education, c.1880
E.J. Whitlock, Souvenir of Our Public Schools (Brooklyn, New York, 1892). Reprinted by Forgotten Books, London, England.

Finally, in 1884 a decision was made to use a new school building scheduled to be completed on Berkeley place, as a model primary school and training school for teachers.[40] A summary of the Board of Education meeting was reported in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle.

The question of establishing a training school for teachers in this city was settled in the affirmative by the Board of Education yesterday. Four classrooms in the new schoolhouse in course of erection on Berkeley place were set apart for this work, the other parts of the building being reserved for ordinary school purposes. From within these limits it is expected that about fifty young ladies will be turned out every year so instructed in the business of handling and enlightening children as to be able effectively to manage primary classes when they are put in charge of them.[41]

The training school opened in 1885, the culmination of many years of discussion covered regularly by the Eagle concerning the pros and cons of such a school.

The new Training School for Teachers, on Berkeley Place, near Fifth avenue was formerly opened yesterday with appropriate exercises. The building, which is one of the finest of the kind in the city, has been occupied nearly a year, and the Normal School work is in full operation…The object of the school is to thoroughly educate by theory and practice young ladies to become efficient public school teachers.[42]

The school first opened with an enrollment of 40 students, a principal and three assistants. The program was one year and admission was by examination for a teacher’s license, known as a B certificate, allowing the holder to teach any primary class in Brooklyn, but attendance at the school was not compulsory. “After spending thirty weeks in the study and principles and methods of teaching, a student was put in charge of a practice class for ten weeks. The practice classes were supervised by the teachers of methods and by the model teachers.”[43] The first graduation took place on June 30, 1886 at the school on Berkeley Place. The President of the Board of Education addressed the graduates and awarded the diplomas. The demand for the graduates was great and all of the graduating women had positions waiting for them.[44]

Fig. 3. Training School 1892
E.J. Whitlock, Souvenir of Our Public Schools (Brooklyn, New York, 1892). Reprinted by Forgotten Books, London, England.

In Superintendent William Maxwell’s annual report to the Board of Education in Brooklyn in 1891, he reviewed the graduation rates since its founding in 1885. In 1886 48 students graduated, in 1887, 63, in 1888, 47, in 1889, 50, and in 1890, 31.[45] The State Legislature in 1895 enacted a State law (Chapter 1031, laws of 1895) approved by Governor Levi P. Morton “to encourage and promote the professional training of teachers.”

After January first, eighteen hundred and ninety-seven, no person shall be employed or licensed to teach in the primary and grammar schools of any city unauthorized by law to employ a superintendent of schools who has not had successful experience in teaching for at least three years’ course in and graduated from a high school or academy having a course of study of not less than three years; approved by the state superintendent of public instruction, or from some institution of learning of equal or higher rank, approved by the same authority, and who, subsequently to such graduation, has not graduated from a school or class for the professional training of teachers, having a course of study of not less than thirty-eight weeks , approved by the state superintendent of public instruction.[46]

The year 1898 was a turning point for New York City and for Brooklyn. On January 1, 1898 the incorporation of Greater New York was official. New York and Brooklyn, along with Queens, the Bronx and Staten Island merged into a “super-city.” One of the goals of the incorporation was to eliminate the competition between municipalities, with the hope that common problems could be solved.[47]

The Brooklyn Teachers Training School remained in operation and the merger did not affect its continuation for many years. A month after incorporation, seventy-five women graduated from the Training School for Teachers. According to the Eagle “Mr. Maxwell [the superintendent] said that the training school was as good as ever and that excellent work had been accomplished.”[48] The school in Brooklyn remained, and men joined the ranks of graduating students. In 1913 406 men and women received their diplomas.[49]

In 1920 a new era for the school began when the name of the school was changed from the Brooklyn Training School for Teachers to the Maxwell Training School for Teachers named by The Board of Education in memory of the late City Superintendent of Schools. The Brooklyn press praised Dr. Maxwell’s dedication. “Dr. Maxwell’s long period of service as City Superintendent, first in Brooklyn and later Greater New York, the teachers’ training schools received his special care and supervision.”[50] In the ensuing years there was a growing interest in the professionalization of teaching and the limited curriculum of the Maxwell Training School was in question. A public debate was planned in April of 1925 and covered by the press on the question of whether the Maxwell Training School for Teachers should be changed to the Maxwell College with a four-year course and degree granting status. “This question would seem to be of vital interest not only to the students of Maxwell and their parents, but also to all who have at heart the problem of higher education of the Borough of Brooklyn.”[51] There is no evidence that any action on this plan took place anytime soon. An 1929 Eagle article reported that: ”The standards of the training school have been raised to such a degree that it is harder to enter than the average college. The Board of Education has authorized the foundation of a four-year course. When that -fledged college is in effect, the Maxwell Training School for Teachers will be a full, Professor [Frederick L.] Holz declared.”[52] This was short-lived and in 1932 it was announced that the Maxwell School for Teachers was to close.[53]

Fig. 4. William H. Maxwell, Superintendent of Schools first in Brooklyn and later in New York City. E.J. Whitlock, Souvenir of Our Public Schools (Brooklyn, New York, 1892). Reprinted by Forgotten Books, London, England.

These were hard times for Brooklynites as well as all New Yorkers. The Great Depression affected everyone and unemployment was at a high as the economy tried to recover. The July 8, 1932 Eagle went on to emphasize that there was an oversupply of teachers and the Board of Education wanted to discontinue the school and use the facilities as an annex for the Girls Commercial High School. “The sound and businesslike thing to do is to stop adding to the oversupply of teachers. Discontinuance of one of the training colleges is a step in this direction and at the same time a step that will help relieve overcrowding in the high schools.”[54] The plan was not without opponents. As was further reported the Brooklyn Borough President Henry Hesterberg, condemned the proposal. “I believe that if a Brooklyn girl wants to take a course to prepare herself to be a teacher, she should be allowed to do so, whether there are teaching positions open in this city or not.”[55] Several “Letters to the Editor” of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle protested the closing of the school. “I wish to express my protest against the closing of the Maxwell Teachers Training College. It will impose both physical and financial burdens upon the students.” [56] The school was destined to close and the evening session of Brooklyn College, the newly opened senior municipal college, accepted transfer students from the Maxwell School. The Brooklyn Daily Eagle continued to monitor the progress of the Maxwell girls. “Most of the former Maxwell girls are taking the regular course of study leading to a baccalaureate degree. Bachelor of Science in Education in most cases, but are still grouped under a separate administration. In January, the last class of Maxwell girls to get the three-year teachers’ training certificates will be graduated.”[57]

An impressive history of teacher training in Brooklyn came to an end, but there were other options available for students to prepare for careers in education. New York State was supportive of opening State Normal Schools and these were established by an act passed May 7, 1844. “For the instruction and practice of teachers of common schools in the science of education and in the art of teaching.”[58] The first Normal School in the state was located in Albany, followed by Brockport, Cortland, Fredonia, Potsdam, Buffalo, Genesco and Oswego.[59] At the time of the closing of the Maxwell School, New Paltz, Oneonta and Plattsburg also had teacher- training schools.[60] The teacher training schools of Brooklyn had provided an opportunity for immigrant children to become teachers and the thousands of graduates over the years helped Americanize generations of children. Brooklyn had met its challenges and it was now time for the city and the state to assume the responsibilities for the education of its teachers.

Fig. 5. State Normal School, Albany, New York 1909 Haines Photo Co., Copyright Claimant. State Normal School, Albany, N.Y. Albany New York United States, ca. 1909. Photograph https://www.loc.gov/item/2007661469/.



  1.  Thomas Boese, Public Education in the City of New York: Its History, Condition, and Statistics.(New York: Harper Brothers, Publishers, 1869), 59.
  2.  E. Emerson Palmer. New York Public School: being a history of free education in the city of New York. (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1905), 213.
  3.  “Board of Education,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, September 18, 1843, 2.
  4.  Palmer, 215.
  5.  Samuel E. Staples, “Normal School and their Origin: a paper read at a regular meeting of the Worcester Society of Antiquity June 5th, 1877.” (Worcester, Massachusetts: Printed by Tyler & Seagrave, 1877, 2-4.http://archive.org/details/normalschoolsan00massgoog(accessed 24 July 2018)
  6.  Ibid, 74; “Our Common Schools,” New-York Daily Tribune, February 4, 1843, 1.
  7.  Christine A. Orgen. The American State Normal School: “An Instrument of Great Good.” (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 20.
  8.  Joseph McKeen, “The Teacher’s Institute of the City and County of New-York: Constitution,” The District School Journal of the State of New York 6, no.2 (1845), 28; “New York Society of Teachers, The Mathematical Club, The City Teachers’ Institute, Ward School Teachers’ Association, City Teachers’ Association,” The American Journal of Education 40 (September 1865), 495-496.
  9.  Native American Citizen, “Meeting of the Brooklyn Teachers,” Common School Assistant: A Monthly Paper, for the Improvement of Common School Education 1 (July 1836), 56.
  10. Brooklyn Daily Eagle, January 17, 1846, 2.
  11. Brooklyn Daily Eagle, February 17, 1855, 3.
  12. The Brooklyn City and Kings County Record: A Budget of General Information; with a map of the city, an almanac, and an appendix, containing the new city charter. (Brooklyn: Compiled and published by William H. Smith, 1855), 109-110. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=loc.ark:/13960/=88g8wr5c;view=1up;seq=7(accessed 7 July 2018)
  13.  Henry Kiddle, “Common-school teaching: a lecture delivered before the Teachers’ Association of the City of Brooklyn, Sept. 28, 1877,” Papers of Education, First Series 9 (New York: E. Steiger, 1877), 1. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=loc.ark:/13960/t4pk1685;view=1up;seq=5(accessed 7 July 2018)
  14. By-Laws of the Board of Education, with Rules and Regulations for the government of the Public Schools. In the City of Brooklyn.(Brooklyn: I.VanAnden, No. 30 Fulton Street, 1849), 19-20. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=nyp33433075990923;view-1up;seq=9(accessed 7 July 2018)
  15. Palmer, 221.
  16. “Educational Matters—Closing Exercises of the Normal School in the Eastern District–Presentation of a Service of Plate to Mr. Buckley,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, February 1, 1856, 2.
  17. “The Necessity of a Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, December 4, 1856, 2.
  18. “Examination of the Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, January 17, 1857, 2.
  19.  “Quarterly Report of Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, May 7, 1856, 2.
  20.  “Board of Education,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, August 5, 1857, 2.
  21.  “The Normal School Exhibition,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, February 15, 1858, 2.
  22.  Jo Ann Preston, “Domestic Ideology, School Reformers, and Female Teachers: Schoolteaching Becomes Women’s Work in Nineteenth-Century New England, The New England Quarterly 66, no.4 (1993), 532.
  23.  Ibid, 538-539.
  24.  “The Normal School Exhibition,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, February 15, 1861, 2.
  25.  “The Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, June 5, 1861, 2.
  26. “The Abolition of the Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, December 5, 1861, 2.
  27.  “The Board of Education,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, August 7, 1867, 2.
  28. Ibid.
  29. “The Proposed Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, September 4, 1867, 2.
  30. “The Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, October 1, 1867, 2.
  31. “The Normal School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, November 1, 1867, 2.
  32. “Education in Brooklyn,” New York Times, February 16, 1871, 4.
  33. “A Normal School Needed in Brooklyn,” New York Times, February 21, 1871, 4.
  34. Ibid.
  35. A.W. Adsto. “High and Normal Schools,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, May 26, 1873, 4.
  36. Ibid.
  37. “The High and Normal School Question,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, January 7, 1874, 2.
  38. Palmer, 241-2.
  39. “Training Schools for Teachers,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, May 10, 1882, 4.
  40. Palmer, 242.
  41. “Training Schools for Teachers,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, April 16, 1884, 2.
  42. Teachers: formal opening of the new Training School,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, November 14, 1885, 1.
  43. Tomas E. Finegan. Teacher Training Agencies. The University of the State of New York, 1913-1914. Vol. 2 of the 11th Annual Report of the State Department of Education, 343.http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo.31924069157091;view=1up;seq=7(accessed 7 July 2018).
  44. “Turning Out Model Teachers,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, June 30, 1886, 4.
  45. “City Schools,” The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, May 5, 1891, 1.
  46. “Education in Brooklyn,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, September 8, 1895, 26.
  47. Mike Wallace, Greater Gotham: A History of New York City from 1898 to 1919. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017), 4-5.
  48. “Young Teachers Graduate,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, February 3, 1898, 11.
  49. “Public School Graduations Close the Term Next Week,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, June 20, 1913, 22.
  50. “Training School to Honor Maxwell,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, June 10, 1920, 10.
  51. “Students to Debate Question of Changing Maxwell to College,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, April 27, 1925, 11.
  52. “Training Schools Passing Through Crisis, Says Holz,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, June 20, 1929, 10.
  53. “Maxwell School For Teachers To Discontinue,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, July 8, 1932, 1.
  54. Ibid.
  55. “School Closing Plan Attacked by Hesterberg,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, July 15, 1932, 2.
  56. John Wahlen, “Letter-to-the-Editor,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, July 29, 1932, 14.
  57. “Men Lead Women in Enrollment in Evening College,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Oct. 15, 1933, 4.
  58. New York State Normal Schools. Report of the Special Committee of the Assembly on the State Normal Schools.( Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, Printer, 1879), 4.http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.3901507416404040;view=1up;seq=3(accessed 25 July 2018)
  59. Ibid.
  60. New York Legislative Documents. One hundred and fifty-seventh session 1934. Vol. III-Nos. 14 and 15 (Albany:J.B. Lyon Company, Printers, 1934), 183.https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015068081432;view=1up;seq=7(accessed 26 July 2018)


1 thought on “A School of Their Own: Teacher Training in Brooklyn, New York

  1. Pingback: 2020 Vol 28-1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *