sometimes not even in the same country. We, then, who are seeking light
not from one country only but from all, are compelled to simplify these
grade distinctions as much as possible, and to accept the local
definitions. This does not really invalidate comparisons between
different areas so seriously as we might at the first glance be tempted
to expect. There is in every country a grade which is primary; there is
a secondary, or middle, or high school; there is a normal, or college,
or arts course. The primary in one country may run into higher primary
and be at its best far in advance of the primary in another country; and
so far the two are incomparable; but, nevertheless, this primary grade
is the lowest grade in each country, and if the inquiry is, what number
of pupils are taught in this local first grade, then the comparison is
admissible. Similarly of the second grade and the third. If the inquiry
is understood to imply no more than it states, and no conclusion is
drawn as to the relative stage or merits of the education in the two
countries in relation to one another, it may justly be argued that the
primary pupils in one country stand in relation to the illiterate and
more highly educated pupils in their own country in a similar position
to that in which the primary pupils in another country stand to the
illiterate and more highly educated pupils in their own country; though
the primary pupils in the one may be far more advanced than the primary
pupils in the other. On this basis a possible comparison can be made.

But since colleges and normal schools generally serve a larger area than
the station district, these are reserved for provincial survey, and the
present tables deal with nothing above the secondary, or middle, or high
school. In the station district area the matter of chief importance is
the extent to which the need of the district for primary and secondary
education is met, and the proportion in which the needs of the many and
the few are met.