“In speaking to the resolution, Mr. L. Stanley Jast, formerly Secretary of the Library Association, developed the argument--“The work of the librarian is sharply contrasted with that of the teacher. The teacher deals with human material, the librarian with the written record, and only incidentally with the people who come to consult and use it. But not only is there this wide difference in the nature of the material upon which the teacher and the librarian respectively work; there is a difference of immediate aim of so basic a character that one is almost the negative of the other, and therefore are they perfectly complementary to one another.... The library and the school supplement and complement each other. And the virtue of each is that it is not the other.... The material of each is different, the aims are different, and the administrative machinery of the one has no real relation to that of the other.... The resolution has a second thesis, which is that it is after all only a portion of the library field which touches education.... We outgrow the school; we cannot outgrow the library.”[45] “We have examined these arguments with the care to which the policy of the Library Association is entitled. The first argument, however, rests upon a sharp distinction between the library and the school which should not, in our opinion, exist. A school is a more complex and many sided institution than the argument would appear to assume, and its functions are too narrowly confined by the phrase ‘training in an atmosphere of restraint or discipline.’ The class-room is but part of a school. Other institutions--the workshop, the gymnasium, the playing field, and the library--are essential features, each of them making its peculiar contribution to that self-development which is claimed to be an end of the library. The school in fact, is a community which fulfils its end through a variety of agencies of which the class-room is one and the library another. The ideal school is one which seeks to aid self-development through the medium of ‘discipline’ on the one hand, and by providing opportunities for the pupil ‘to strike out on his own line’ on the other. “The antithesis between the teacher and the librarian is also, in our judgment, too sharply defined. Powers are trained by their exercise, and the printed book is an integral part of the equipment of the school. If the librarian deals with the written record, it is but as a means to self-development in the scholar. In other words, the library is part of the educational fabric, just as much as the art room or the school clinic. The school and the teacher will perform their true function only in so far as they enter into the closest co-operation with the library and the librarian. The latter will fill their real place only through co-operation with the former. Both school and library will be immeasurably strengthened when the artificial line of demarcation is obliterated.