Page images

PRINCIPAL JAMES M. GREEN, State Normal School, Trenton, N. J.-The highest culture that I know about is the culture that comes from the mastery of subjects. When you talk to me about a cultured man, I want to see a man who knows his subject; if it is physics, I want him to know physics; if it is mathematics, I want him to know that. When it comes to the normal school, we must be practical. We are directly in contact with the taxpayers. We want to help the one who goes out into the schools. We want to send out teachers who can give a knowledge of these branches in the best and quickest way. The psychology we want is to help in that direction.

I have noticed, in my work as superintendent and as principal, certain very marked faults. There is the teaching of symbols that do not symbolize anything. I have seen college graduates in a primary grade trying sentences which convey no impression to the mind of the child similar to that in the mind of the teacher, and the teacher did not know how to test the child to see whether he was getting the idea. In other words, it seems to me that the art of making an impression must be studied.

that we do not do enough In the school referred to, a

Some years ago it was decided in a city in our region object-teaching. I think Oswego was working in that line. certain number of objects-blocks, etc.-were purchased, and the teacher was required for six months to teach from these, and pretty generally they became blockheads. There was no knowledge on the part of the teachers of the things to be symbolized. It seems to me that the normal teacher must know psychology to give force to symbols. I have known of certain schools that decided that the proper way to teach spelling was by writing; no oral teaching whatever. They made no test to see whether something was gained thru the ear.

Not a great while ago there came into our section of country the theory that we must teach the spiral system in arithmetic. We must select from the higher subjects what was simple, and teach it in the lower. The pupil would leave school before reaching the subject, and the spiral system was so worked out that not enough time was given you to make an impression that would endure. There were so many impressions made that none were deep enough to be lasting. It was not very long before very severe criticism came upon that school; the bankers and merchants knew that their boys could not work arithmetic. The banker's children had spent more time on arithmetic than the father ever had, but it was scattered.

I wish to close with this statement: that I think the psychology we are to study must show us the habit of the mind in learning. I do not ignore that physiological psychology which teaches us to know what it means to be tired, the study of a sort of phenomenon psychology. For the normal schools, in our field of labor, we must remember that we come in contact with the children of all classes, and we must teach that psychology which will most help the children.

JOHN A. H. KEITH, of Northern Illinois Normal School, De Kalb, Ill., was asked to state President Cook's point of view on this subject.—I am reluctant to attempt this, because I have not heard the discussion. The teacher who is to study psychology should get out of it the knowledge of the process. She should be prepared to give the children the conditions for learning. We believe that the teacher should learn how the child utilizes the things which he gets by his senses. She should get this from the child's point of view. The child-mind changes gradually from image-making to the more abstract proWe are making less rigorous use of terms, and there is less of division between some of the terms used in psychology. The making of definitions so exact is not true to the reality. One-fourth of our work centers around these two topics, attention and interest. We are also paying more attention than formerly to the agencies of the child's emotions. We believe that his interest depends on his attitude toward things. We pay considerable attention to the study of the genesis of the child's emotions in the formation of habit, also to how the child's experiences are shaped to form the self of the child,


which is not a fixed but a changing personality. This is the important thing to be reached in the teaching process. It all centers around this principle-that the teacher should learn how the child-mind acts, rather than judge by the adult's consciousness.



GRANT KARR, superintendent of practice, State Normal School, Oswego, N. Y.— The question whether the text-book shall be used, or oral instruction, is a very large question, and what is applicable to other studies is applicable to psychology. It seems to me best to note briefly what method is. Method is usually considered simply a means of conveying knowledge. I do not believe in that notion of method. Mind is a thing that makes itself, and method is some sort of a procedure that takes into account this selfactivity. Otherwise the teacher must be a sort of divinity that creates. The teachers who hold the theory of total depravity, and who aim to put into the minds of children ideas that are not now there, must have some such theory of method. Method is simply an environment. A mechanic is not a person who creates natural forces, but one who environs natural forces; no person creates electricity; the farmer does not create the forces that grow the grain. All the process that the teacher goes thru with might well be called method. Taking that view of it, there are four or five different varieties of method. The first, most common and easiest, is the oral method; another is the method of presenting the book; another is that of experiment; another is that method of development which results from discussion. The text-book method is perhaps not the best method, and it cannot be used wholly and solely. The teacher has to know the individual. To present the book first is unduly hastening the matter. I do not think that the text-book, however good it may be, can ever replace the teacher. As a general thing, the book will be better than any outline that the teacher can construct. The author is usually a specialist. The person who teaches psychology must be a master of his subject; he is the one who is expected to interpret the subject.

There are decided advantages in using a text-book; the subject is well outlined; the book is gotten up in good form, is more easily read than notes, and is permanent. The book will shut up when you get tired of it. The disadvantages are those which pertain to books in general-the chance to memorize, so that the pupils may recite without having ideas. Again, they may get the idea that the whole subject of psychology is in a book, and only one book. If they read many books, they may get confused because of conflicting opinions.

To sum up: In the teaching of psychology both the text-book and the oral methods are valuable. To do without oral instruction does away with the teacher; correspondence instruction would be very unsatisfactory. Whether the oral instruction shall precede and the reading come after, depends on the teacher's view and his previous training. If he has a broad view, he can outline his course and put his work thru orally, and lead each student to make his own summary; but the student may get to think that writing notes is studying psychology. If they are to read books at all, they should know what conflicts they are to find.

I would, therefore, recommend that both the oral and the text-book methods be used, the text-book, as a general thing, to follow oral instruction.

THOMAS H. GENTLE, director of training school, State Normal School, Platteville, Wis. My work lies just between the children, on the one hand, and the teachers, on the

other. In many of our normal schools there are two courses in psychology- the elementary and the advanced. I think the advanced course has not much bearing on the work of the teacher in the training courses.

The instructor in elementary psychology would better select a few principles which he thinks of value, and use children to illustrate the principles. Let the students take notes of what is done. After two or three such recitations have been held, let the students meet the instructor and hold a discussion. More lessons may then be given, putting these principles into application. After thus bringing out the principles, let the pupils go to the library and read on method rather than on psychology. I do not mean to crowd out the text-book; I think the teacher should have the text-book close to him. Teachers are likely to throw away psychological training, and fall back on tradition. If the student-teacher gets his psychological data from seeing it applied, he will see how his theory fits the pupils.





We take for granted this afternoon that teachers can be trained for their work. The problem before us is how best to assist the young teacher in acquiring the skill which makes for success in class instruction. Or, from another point of view, how shall the young teacher acquire those habits in class work which will leave him free to exert personal influence upon his pupils ?

Teaching is an art, and, like other arts, certain habits must be acquired in order to achieve the greatest success. Some light, it seems to me, can be had from the analogy of the ordinary workman. When an artisan is asked to make an object — for example, the columns in this room-we must supply him with material. In this instance the material is a hard wood. We must then give him the instruments which he requires and the means for carrying on his work-in this instance, tools for working in wood and a suitable workshop. We must then provide him with a plan, showing the elevation and giving the details required in the execution. If he is able to improve upon the plans given him, or to form his own plans in such a way as to meet our requirements and arouse our admiration, we no longer call the workman an artisan; he then becomes the artist.

It is possible, however, for a man to invent very elaborate plans, to have the best of tools and instruments, and to be provided with an abundance of choice material, and still be unable to do the work required. He must have skill in the use of tools which are adapted for work upon the material, if he would shape this material in conformity with the ends to be obtained. How does the workman acquire this skill? If we applied this analogy to the work of the teacher, the material which is supplied is the pupil, the means and instruments are the subjects of instruction and all the school equipment which are essential in education. The ends to be attained are suggested by the study of the history and philosophy of education, and by the requirements of modern life. The skill which is looked for in the teacher comes from experience in doing the work of the teacher.

The teacher who works blindly and who uses the means and instruments of instruction thoughtlessly, or who is incapable of giving a personal touch to all that he does, is an artisan, not an artist.

In the work of our normal schools we hope to make every student somewhat of an artist, but it should be borne in mind that artistic qualities are dependent upon clearness

of vision and strength of intellect. In the training of the teacher, therefore, due allowance must be made for these qualities. The person who has no considerable grasp upon either the ends of education or the means of instruction must approximate in his training the training of the artisan. The normal school that has to do with students without elementary training ought not to pursue the same methods as the normal school which deals with students of higher academic attainments. The difference, however, consists mainly in the amount of drill required in fixing the necessary habits.

Every workman, whether artisan or artist, must know the nature of the material with which he is dealing. Both alike must have some idea of what is to be accomplished. The knowledge of these two factors will determine what instruments and means must be employed in the work. The study of the child and of the society of which the child is a part, of psychology, sociology, of the history and principles of education, may be expected to give a better knowledge of the pupil and of his possibilities, and a clearer understanding of what is worth working for in education. This knowledge, coupled with an understanding of the requirements of the life which the pupil ought eventually to lead, must determine the nature of the influences which can be brought to bear upon the pupil. Important among these influences are the subjects of instruction in our schools and the manifold activities of school life. These are the teacher's tools. Of course, all teachers must know the subjects which they teach.

But how about the skill which is required in adapting the means to the material and in doing the work in such a manner as to attain the desired results? If the apprentice be ignorant, relatively speaking, we put him under a master-workman, and that masterworkman will show him what he is to do. He will teach him how to use the instruments; if necessary, he will guide his hand in doing what he is told to do, and he will keep him at it until the habit is fixed. In other words, the apprentice is (1) given to understand what he is to do, (2) shown how to do it, and (3) compelled to perform the action until satisfactory results are obtained.

With a higher degree of intelligence the workman can be taught something of the quality and strength of materials, of the laws of mechanics, physics, and chemistry, and of other subjects which have a bearing upon his work. The man who is well trained in mechanical engineering may be unable to make the simplest implement or bit of machinery used in his profession; but it is safe to say that, if such a man is thoroly anxious to perfect himself in any mechanical art, he will not only acquire the skill more quickly than a more ignorant workman, but he will always be the better prepared to improve upon his art. So it is in the training of teachers—an important consideration is the degree of intellectual strength which we have a right to expect of the pupil-teacher. If he is weak intellectually and the period of special training is short, it is impossible to get very far away from the apprentice's method. He must be told what to do, shown how to do it, and keep doing it until desirable habits are fixed.

Of course, we expect in the teacher-certainly in the teacher with normal-school training something more than we find in the artisan; hence, the normal school does something more than instruct in methods and give practice in teaching. But whether the pupil-teacher be strong or weak, the skill which he acquires in teaching must come from experience under proper direction.

The topic for our discussion this afternoon, as I understand it, is: What shall be the nature of this direction? Taking into account what the pupil-teacher brings from his other instructors in a normal school, what further directions should be given for teaching, and how can that teaching be improved thru criticism?

I think we ought to realize that criticism is not picking and nagging pupil-teachers. It does not consist in telling them that this way is right and that wrong. There must be criticism both affirmative and negative, which must be categorically stated. But criticism, as we understand it, must be constructive.

I have attempted to outline some of the most important matters which may properly

be considered under this head. I put them before you for your consideration this afternoon. They are as follows:

1. General aims of criticism: (a) to illustrate and apply theory; (b) to detect mannerisms and to check bad habits and practice; (c) to secure acceptable methods of teaching.

2. Special objects of criticism: (a) teacher's personal appearance, dress, etc.; (b) use of language, voice, etc.; (c) appreciation of personal peculiarities and needs of pupils in class; (d) knowledge of subjectmatter to be taught; (e) selection and arrangement of materials of instruction; lesson plans; (f) methods of instruction; reviews; presentation of new facts; summing up; fixing lesson by drill and application; (g) securing attention and interest; use of subject-matter; art of questioning; discipline; (h) personal influence of teacher upon pupils.

3. Persons to give criticism: (a) instructors in psychology and general methods; (b) instructors in academic subjects; (c) special critic-teachers.



PRESIDENT J. N. WILKINSON, State Normal School, Emporia, Kan. Wilkinson said that he would make no attempt to cover the points given in the outline in the program. It had been well prepared and gave valuable suggestions in every item. It might be worth while to add as a general purpose of criticism the fixing of good habits in teaching. It is not enough to know that the student-teacher has done a little good work. A small sample, however good it may be, does not assure the excellence of the whole future product. The student-teacher, nerved up to a special effort or a few special efforts, may drop to a much lower standard unless this excellent teaching becomes a fixed habit. This consideration would suggest that a student-teacher who has already had some years of experience may need to do more work under criticism, in order to overcome bad habits and form good ones, than would a student-teacher who has never formed any bad habits in teaching.

There must be such formation of habits in the line of scientific teaching as will make the teacher safe to do at once the thing that is philosophically correct without pausing to reflect. The teacher who must reason out the method for each new case cannot move swiftly enough to meet the new emergencies as they arise. The best theoretical preparation that can be given will not prepare for dealing with the peculiarities of individual pupils. The illustration that the master of a trade must understand his material does not indicate the power that the teacher must acquire. His material could never be brought to uniform excellence, nor can anyone tell in advance how the pupil will behave under any given conditions. The teacher must acquire a sufficient surplus, a sufficient reserve power, to enable him to meet firmly any emergency that may arise. The student-teacher needs criticism and help until he has fixed good habits, so that it is easier to do good teaching than poor teaching.

GUY E. MAXWELL, superintendent of training department, State Normal School, Winona, Minn.-For the purposes of this discussion the elements of teaching skill may be thought of as of three kinds: (1) The mechanics of the schoolroom; for example, the passing of material, the seating of pupils, the regulation of temperature, and the like. These things are easily open to direction or change thru criticism. (2) What we may call the technics of teaching, which has to do with questioning, lesson plans, method of instruction, and so forth. These things are also open to change and direction thru suggestion and criticism, tho they are much less objective than the first kind, and thus less easily influenced by the critic. (3) Lastly, there is the vital phase of the art, dependent upon the subtle power of personality, and having to do with such things as the interpretation of the child's mental states, the knowing what to do next, and the like. teacher's inner self, and is pretty largely born in him. slow growth and thru the most skillful suggestions. phases of teaching skill, tho without the other two, few

This element springs from the It is open to change only thru Having the last of these three teachers have been known to fail.

« EelmineJätka »