Page images
PDF
EPUB

subject well to a pupil to whom it has been imperfectly taught than to a person to whom it is wholly unknown.

(d) If the subject matter of the book or of a single lesson is radically bad, or the method decidedly faulty, the book or lesson should be laid aside altogether. If only certain portions are objectionable, or certain methods of presentation, the teacher should not assign these to be studied, but should teach such subjects de novo. This observation assumes that the teacher is able to do so.

(e) The wise teacher will not present a subject in more than one way unless the first way has failed. It is folly to explain the division of a fraction by a fraction in a second way if the first explanation has been understood. The same remark will apply to casting interest and to many other subjects. It is well enough for the author of an arithmetic to give two or more methods of performing these operations, thus giving the teacher an option; but the teacher should choose the method which he thinks best adapted to his purpose, and then adhere to it. At the stage of teaching now supposed, never give more 'than one definition or rule on a single point. Superfluous illustrations not only do no good, but they do positive harm, begetting confusion worse confounded.

It will be understood that these rules relative to the use of the text-book apply to the early stages in teaching particularly, and that they would require very important modifications if they are to be applied to the advanced, rational, or critical stage of education. row teaching must come before broad teaching. In time the pupil, if rightly handled, will get out of his single line of thought; will be able to deal with subjects; can criticise and weigh different definitions, contradictory views and rules, and opposing opinions; can use a variety of books, compare authorities, and employ different methods of procedure. Thus Dr. Bain recommends that in geometry the pupil should be held strictly to Euclid until he has become thoroughly at home on the main ideas and leading propositions; then he is safe in dipping into other manuals and comparing the differences of treatment, and in widening his knowledge by additional theorems and by various modes of demonstration. But the time when all this can be done will not be hastened by pushing the pupil forward prematurely. The teacher who inundates the pupil with all kinds of things is the pupil's worst enemy, unless, indeed, it be the teacher who keeps him too long and too intensely harping on the same string. It is only the knowledge that really energizes the mind which is valuable.

7. It has already been remarked that the laws of congruity and energy bear on the college or university student's choice of electives. How many subjects should such a student have at the same time, and what should be their relations? Should he scatter his energies over a considerable field, or concentrate them on a small one?

Professor Trowbridge,* discussing some years ago the subject of economy in college work, urged that the Harvard student should study two subjects for at least three months, and two subjects only; one of these should be a hard subject, giving plenty of opportunity for application, while the other might be a comparatively light subject that could serve as a mental rest through the change which it afforded. At the end of three months two other subjects might be taken up, and the first ones be relinquished for a time; and so on to the end of the course. After observing that some studies are so nearly related that intellectual effort in one is of service to another while others are not; that Latin and Greek, philosophy and history, political economy and history, are examples of the one class, while German and French, chemistry or physics and philosophy, are examples of the other, he examined the nineteen or twenty subjects which formed in the main the elective curriculum of Harvard University. He found that the division of subjects could be reduced to twelve, by grouping together the subjects which aid each other, as follows: Latin and Greek; French and French history; German and German history; political economy and history; chemistry alone, or in conjunction with English; Spanish and Spanish history; philosophy and history; physics alone; Semitics and ancient history; fine arts and music with English, or fine arts and music as a let-up with any of the severer studies; mathematics and English; romance philology and its suitable language. Having twelve subjects, the student could pursue three of these in the nine months of each college year, and in four years he could accomplish the whole twelve; provided, of course, he wished to take all the subjects enumerated.

This scheme has been introduced mainly for the sake of illustration. In criticising it we should remember that at Harvard University all studies are elective, save only a modicum of English and physics. Although propounded for a laudable purpose, the scheme is open to one or more serious objections. Within the successive three months period study is certainly over-specialized, and particularly in the first college years. The common freshman will not, and cannot, work up bis avaliable power on one main line of study. The laws of mental energy are violated. The range of interests is too narrow. In the later years of the course this objection would be less serious. Other important questions, as whether the time allotted would be sufficient for the leading subjects, occur, but they need not be considered. This branch of the subject is dismissed with the remark that college electives call for a fuller examination than they have yet received, par

• "Atlantic Monthly," November, 1888, pp. 671, 672.

ticularly in respect to the principles that shall underrun electives and practical administration. There is good reason to think that in some quarters, at least, laissez faire has been carried too far.

8. The last topic to be mentioned is graduate study. While there is not, or at least should not be, a chasm between undergraduate and graduate work, still there are palpable differences of ideal and method involved. The first period looks to general cultivation. The second period looks to special cultivation. The undergraduate need not lay equal stress upon all the studies that he pursues; he may emphasize some more and some less; but he should not sacrifice general culture to Greek scholarship, Latin scholarship, mathematical scholarship, or any other kind of special scholarship. The graduate student, on the other hand, should go much farther on the road to specialization, and particularly the candidate for the doctor's degree. But even here specialization may be overdone. It is not desirable that the student should confine himself for three years to a special line of study. The first objection to such a course is that it is overgrooving the mind at the time of life supposed. Even the graduate student should not lose sight of general cultivation and fall into stark professionalism. But, secondly, a single study will not absorb to advantage the student's power. It will be carried on in derogation of the law of specific and generic fatigue. One brain tract will be overworked, while others are neglected. If the professional man needs a let-up, or an avocation, to keep his mind out of the ensnaring groove, still more the student who is yet lingering in the schools.

How many subjects then should the graduate student have? The answer will depend somewhat upon the student, as well as upon other considerations. As a rule, there should be at least two distinct lines of work, one of which may be heavy and one light. The first may include different subjects chosen with reference to congruity, as Greek literature and Greek history; Latin literature and Roman history; but there should certainly be a second distinct line of work, separate and apart from the first one, also made up with regard to congruency, that will at once cultivate breadth and also consume time and power that the main subject cannot appropriate.

At this point a cautionary remark may be dropped. It is a mistake to suppose that subjects are congruous merely because they bear the same name in part. Congruity is determined by elements and not by words. For example, how much have Greek literature and Greek antiquities, or Latin literature and Roman antiquities, in common? Certainly less than some enthusiastic scholars are wont to assume.

It will no doubt be said that this report is conservative on the subject of specialization. This is no accident. There is in the opinion of the committee good reason for reconsidering the relations of

education and erudition. Professor Davidson says* it is the failure to draw this necessary distinction that is misleading our universities into the error of allowing students to "elect" specialties before they have completed the cycle of education; the result of which is that we have few men of thorough education or of broad and comprehensive views.

Professor Butcher, contending for the unity of learning, declares that it is at present endangered by disintegrating tendencies. "Conceive, if you can," are his words,† "a world of specialists, in which each man's vision and labor are concentrated on some microscopic point in the field of human activity, and the very idea of a political and social organism disappears. There is a point at which the subdivision of labor in the intellectual sphere must be checked, and some unifying principle introduced, if we are to retain any rational conception of man, or of the world, or of human life.”

And finally, Professor Paulsen sounds a note of warning from the greatest of the German universities. Pleading for the unity of the university, he speaks of the danger of disintegration through the diminished influence of the faculty of arts. "Of course," he says, “there is no possibility of retrogression in the division of labor, upon which depend the mighty advances of scientific research. We are called upon, however, to oppose the spirit of 'specialism,' of over-narrow self-confinement and small-souled satisfaction with one's self; and everyone who belongs to a university is likewise called upon to help along the opposition.” Dr. Paulsent suggests several remedies, the principal one of which is the maintenance of the old conception of liberal culture. "In particular, the tendency toward generalization of study, the philosophical sense, which ever stands ready to turn the details to good account in the service of the ultimate and highest insight, must always find its proper home in the faculty of philosophy. Herein may be found a peculiarly appropriate field for 'public' lectures; to present to a wider circle of hearers, to the disciples of all related branches of learning, whatever problems and results of general interest are included in a special subject."

The purpose of this report may now be briefly restated. It is to apply the law of mental congruence as limited by the laws of mental energy to some important pedagogical problems, as the fabrication of a course of study, the making up of a working program for a school, the choice of college electives, and the whole subject of graduate study. Congruence means the meeting or bringing together of things that are consonant or related; and as applied to the problems enumerated it looks to the deepening, broadening, and strengthening of study and teaching by co-ordinating those studies and elements of studies that by their nature tend to support and re-enforce one an. other. It is hoped that the report may prove useful as a basis for fur ther study.

* "The Education of the Greek People," p. 23. ^ "Some Aspects of the Greek Genius," pp. 209, 210. { "The German Universities' (translated by E. D. Perry), p 234.

B. A. HINSDALE, Chairman.
D. L. KIEHLE,
NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER,
A. R. TAYLOR,
CHARLES A. MCMURRY,

Committee on Pedagogics.

DISCUSSION.

(REPORTED BY E. O. LYTE.]

MR. Brown. This is another great paper. It is a great satisfaction to live in this educational era, when educational questions are discussed in the strong and masterly way so well exemplified in this report. The author evidently had in mind that other great report on the correlation of studies, and this paper is, in a sense, complementary to that. It is a basal discussion of the much-talked of question of concentration of studies from another point of view—the psychological. The practical question is, What are congruent and what are incongruent studies? In the large view of the world, all things are congruent, for the universe is a unity. But in the school curriculum there is seemingly much incongruence of activity, as the report defines the term. The social order is an incongruous congruity. To what extent shall the incongruity in the school studies control in the isolation of the one from the other? This is the problem of concentration stated in different words. I wish that this Council would take up this basal question and discuss it in the light and spirit of this admirable report.

MR. F. Louis Soldan.-While the great majority of us will unhesitatingly assert that the explanation of the thoughts and actions of man are found on a spiritual, not a material, plane, the study of the physical conditions, which forms part of this thoughtful report, leads at every step to valuable practical conclusions. The relation between emotion and energy is well stated in the paper. Fear saps energy; a pleasurable feeling promotes the serious work of the schoolroom. The teacher who tries to look and be pleasant in her intercourse with her pupils produces an environment in which the child is at its best. Jean Paul Richter utters this thought in his beautiful saying: "Serenity is the heaven under which childhood thrives."

To create a pleasurable feeling in teaching things naturally void of interest is the art which the teacher has to learn. Herbart said: "The greatest sin in instruction is to make it tedious." Illustration, attractive presentation, variety in the required drill, keeping the pupil self-active, are means of producing a pleasurable feeling in receiving instruction, which we call interest. I am aware that this does not exhaust the definition of interest. There is another topic contained in Dr. IIinsdale's report which invites discussion-the topic of continuity. The committee lays com

« PreviousContinue »