In the way of cost the balance is distinctly on the side of the day school. With no costly special plant necessary, and with no charges to be incurred for food supplies, attendants and the like, it appears to decided advantage in the matter of economy in comparison with an institution; and its normal expenditures approach nearer those of the regular schools. At present the difference between the cost per pupil in the day schools and in the institutions is the difference between $120 and $277.[302] ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE DAY SCHOOL The argument against the day school rests upon the fact that the deaf form, educationally, a special class, very small in most communities, who have to be reached by unusual methods. To them the large institution offers advantages not likely to be had outside. For this reason the case against the institution, however cogent and logical it may be in general, cannot well apply. In the institution the children may be under intelligent supervision and direction their entire time, and they may be able to get, outside school hours, a part of the education which the hearing child so naturally acquires, for in an institution learning continues outside the classroom as well as within. The "picking up" of knowledge and bits of information, which the hearing child begins to make use of from the time he first hears human words, and the importance and value of which the general public cannot be expected to appreciate, is lost in the greatest measure to the deaf in the home. Here ready means of communication are lacking, and the necessary care and attention cannot be expected to be given in the household. Even though deaf children can and do mingle with their hearing acquaintances, they cannot get so much happiness or zest out of their sports and intercourse as they can with their own deaf comrades; and while, no matter what their surroundings are, the difficulties of most of them in mastering language will never be overcome, still in associations with similar deaf children there will be far more stimuli to react on their consciousness, and the tendency will be for them to become more and more in their mental actions like the normal. In the home there can be no great assurance of study and supervision; and the growing deaf child, not being able to appreciate the forces that surround him as the hearing child does, may the more easily fall under unwholesome influences. In the institution there can be suitable discipline, regular attendance, enlightened general oversight, and co-ordination of all that is concerned in the child's proper development. Furthermore, although there may be a growing feeling against the institution life, there is, on the other hand, an increasing social questioning as to the advisability of a child's remaining in a particular home if his welfare is not properly safeguarded.