Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

Now the philosophical educator will always suit his methods of instruction to the age of his pupils, or rather to the state of the intellectual and moral development of the faculties of his pupils; and he will also administer to them that intellectual aliment, both as to kind and degree, which is best calculated to promote the growth of the faculties at their different stages of development. Method, and the principles of method, therefore, necessarily become to him distinct and all-important matters of inquiry.

A good teacher, before laying down any plans for the management of his school, makes himself acquainted with the tempers, habits, capabilities, and attainments of his pupils. He then asks himself the two great questions; WHAT shall I teach? How shall I teach? He is well aware that these questions cannot be satisfactorily answered without a thorough knowledge of the nature of the beings whom he has to teach, as well as a comprehensive acquaintance with the various methods whereby instruction may be communicated.

All artificial and unnatural methods of instruction, violating the laws of mind, necessarily demand the use of unhealthful stimulants. There is always a want of organisation in schools where the plans and methods of the master are framed without any regard to the constitution of the human mind, or the peculiar tempers, tastes, and capabilities of the pupils: such masters always blame their pupils for the failures of their system, but never seem to be aware that the excellence of a system depends upon its adaptation to the intellectual and moral condition of these pupils. A teacher, who is ignorant of human nature, is like an engineer who sets to work to erect a bridge before he has made himself acquainted with the properties of the material employed in the structure; when his work is completed, he finds, perhaps, that the material is ruptured by the pressure, or by the expansion due to heat; it is true, he might console himself with the reflection that his plan would have been excellent if it had not been for the peculiar properties of the material. A wise en

gineer would first make himself acquainted with the nature and properties of his material, and then, knowing the difficulties which he would have to encounter, he would provide against them accordingly. In like manner the teacher, who is thoroughly acquainted with the laws regulating the juvenile mind, suits his methods of instruction to the soul which he has to rear, and, fully foreseeing the difficulties which he has to encounter, lays his plans accordingly, he is quite prepared to supply strength to what may be weak, and to introduce a self-corrective agency to meet any ebullitions of temper or waywardness of disposition.

Our ignorance of mental philosophy has hitherto led us into various erroneous methods and systems of education. The teacher showed an ignorance of the tastes and capabilities of the infant mind, when he overtasked his juvenile pupils with the dull dry detail of technical. learning, in the place of communicating to them that kind of knowledge which is best calculated to foster the development of their perceptive and observing faculties.

Teachers, in their ignorance, at one time believed that the first object of primary instruction is to cultivate the verbal memory of their pupils, when, in fact, the verbal memory is one of the few faculties of our nature which need no cultivation. This erroneous opinion led to the adoption of the task system. In accordance with this system, little boys had to commit to memory frightful columns of spelling, long paragraphs of geography, abstract grammatical definitions, declensions of nouns, and conjugations of verbs. The debasing system of rewards and punishments formed a necessary adjunct to this unnatural system of instruction.

In this system the cultivation of the reasoning powers was entirely disregarded, and the aids of philosophical memory, or the faculty of association, were never called in requisition.

The same erroneous opinion of human nature led to the adoption of the rule and rote system of instruction, whereby the pupil had to work out results by formulas and dogmas rather than by the independent and health

ful exercise of his own reasoning powers. For example, in the teaching of arithmetic and practical geometry, the pupil was required to work out his problems by a rule appealing to his memory and simple apprehension, rather than by the exercise of his own reasoning powers.

These unnatural methods of instruction have given rise to our debasing systems of discipline. Under a proper system of teaching, children rarely require any other motive to attention than the pleasure which the acquisition of knowledge affords them; but what natural motive can induce a child to study what is above his capacity, or to commit to memory what he cannot comprehend? hence the teacher's only resource was to act upon the vanity or upon the fear of his pupils.

The art of education consists in the practice of its principles. It stands in the same relation to the science of education, that any other art does to the scientific principles of that art. A man may be thoroughly acquainted with the principles of any particular art, without being an adept in the practice of it; in order to become this, he must practise the art until he has acquired the requisite amount of tact and skill. At the same time, it must be observed, that the highest amount of skill can only be obtained by a thorough knowledge of the principles of the art, combined with the constant application of these principles. Thus, for example, a man may be thoroughly acquainted with the principles of architectural construction, and yet he may not be able to frame a door, or to build a shed. In like manner a man may be intimately acquainted with all the leading principles of education, and yet, at the same time, he may not be able to give efficient instruction to a class of little boys. It is a lamentable error to suppose, that if a man has knowledge he must necessarily possess the art of communicating that knowledge. In order that a man may become a good teacher, he must not only be thoroughly acquainted with the various branches of elementary education, and intimately acquainted with the great leading scientific principles of education, but he must also acquire that tact and skill in the manage

[ocr errors]

ment of numbers and classes, and that fluency of diction, power of illustration, and facility of availing himself of contingent circumstances, which can only be attained by long practice and patient study.

The art of education, without a due regard to its science, degenerates into empiricism; and the science, without the practice of the art, becomes little better than a code of barren abstractions without the vital principle of development.

The philosophy of education should go hand in hand with the practice of it;-every step of advance taken by the one, should be followed by a corresponding progress of the other: philosophy should suggest plans and theories, art should test them and try them: philosophy should build up a structure of general principles and rules; art should supply the facts-the materials — by which, and upon which, this structure should be reared.

DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT.

The philosophy of education may be divided into five parts:

1. On method, as applied to education.

2. On the cultivation of the intellectual and moral faculties.

3. On the comparative advantages of different systems and methods of education.

4. On the application of different systems and methods to the various branches of elementary education.

5. On school organisation and discipline.

[blocks in formation]

Different Methods and Systems of Education at present employed in Elementary Schools.

BY a METHOD of education is meant the peculiar way in which a subject is taught; and by a SYSTEM is meant those peculiar arrangements, both as to organisation and modes of teaching, whereby instruction generally may be given to the pupils of a school. A system is the development of a method applied to certain objects.

A difference of opinion at present exists relative to the use of the term method as applied to education. According to some writers, method simply means the way in which a subject of instruction may be treated; so that there are only two methods of education, namely, Synthesis and Analysis. Such a restrictive use of the term is not only based on a contracted view of the subject, but it does not give the entire conception usually associated with the term. We use the term in a more

comprehensive sense :- A method of teaching comprehends, not merely the way in which the subject-matter is treated, but also the means, artifices, forms of expression, &c., that are employed in conveying instruction to a class of children in a common school.

There are two great methods whereby a subject may be treated, viz., SYNTHESIS and ANALYSIS. By the former method we put the parts of a subject together; by the latter we take the subject-matter to pieces. The method of synthesis is the method of INDUCTION, whereby

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »