« EelmineJätka »
Joseph Rawlins Hickman, “car tracer,” St. Louis and San Francisco Railway, 7th and Cerre Streets.
Samuel D. Hodgdon, express business, "extra messenger," Bryan, Tex.
Richard G. Mincke, clerk, commissary department, Pullman Car Company, 1723 Chouteau Avenue, St. Louis.
George R. Rice, Jr., clerk at office of the Wabash Western Railroad Company, 1131 Benton Street, city.
Edward O'Neal Shotwell, 2740 Lucas Avenue, bill clerk, Pullman Car Works, St. Louis.
William H. Slicer, teacher of drawing in the Technical School of Cincinnati, 94 N. 9th Street.
Charles B. Spicer, shipping clork, with W. McBlair & Co., 2679 Lucas Avenue, city.
Gustavus E. Wetzel, Jr., with G. E.Wetzel, general commission business, south-west corner Market and Second Streets.
Rowland Lee Wilson, raising Clydesdale horses and “Shorthorn" stock at Olney, Ill.
Louis H. Winter, Jr., assistant book-keeper, Missouri Car and Foundry Company.
Class of 1887.
Wallis V. Graves, machinist, Hydraulic Press Brick Company, 2813 Lafayetto Avenue.
Chas. S. Greene, Freshman class, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass.
Wm. R. Grier, office of St. Louis, Ill., Gas Company, 601 Washington Avenue, 3126 Lucas Avenue.
Harry F. Hammel, 3649 Clark Avenue.
Michael Isaaēs, on surveying party, St. L. & San F. Ry. Address, 101 Park Street, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Oscar A. Kelly, member Sophomore class, Washington University.
Geo. F. Steedman, member Sophomore class, Lawrence Scientific School, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
Edmond A. Thomas, book-keeper, Fox Bros. Manufacturing Company, 2730 Stoddard Street.
Wm. F. Thompson, clerk, Parsons & Co., 1113 Olive, 2320 Scott Avenue.
John W. Valliant, member Sophomore class, College of New Jersey, Princeton, N. J.
John C. Van Doorn, in employ of Merchants' Exchange, 3000 Olive Street.
Class of 1888.
John McCune Allen, 3424 Pine Street, machinist, Pacific Lock & Seal Company, Olive Street.
Geo. Y. Bast, teacher of drawing and tool-work, Oakland Manual Training School, California.
Wm. Herbert Bouton, 2909 Park Avenue, member Freshman class, Washington University.
Gustave Ernst Bruere, student, St. Louis Medical School.
L. Dutihl L. Cabanne, 719 Garrison Avenue, Missouri Pacific Machine Shops, shipping clerk with Ripley & Bronson, St. Louis.
Edward P. Clark, Jr., 22103 Olive Street, clerk.
Wm. N. Cummings, 3514 Olivo Street, member Freshman class, Washington University.
Clarendon Davis, Jackson, Mo., medical student.
Albert A. Ehrhardt, California, Mo., member Freshman class, Washington University.
Walter Eisenmayer, milling business, with “The Eisenmayer Company,” San Diego, Cal.
Sidney A. Fairchild, 2117 Clark Avenue, member Freshman class, Washington University.
Wendell C. Fletcher, 1045 Good follow Avenue, motor inspector, St. Louis Electric Power Company.
Walter H. Fuchs, 1014 S. Fourth Street, member Freshman class, Washington University.
Henry M. Greene, member Freshman class, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass.
Jas. Alonzo Hance, Montgomery City, Mo.
Charles Hendrich, Washington, Mo., member Freshman class, Washington University.
Ernst Hoelke, 2001 Park Avenue, member Fresliman class, Washington University.
Wm. Luedinghaus, 2831 Rauschenback Avenue, in business with his father, Henry Luedinghaus, Esq., 1721 N. Broadway.
Evans McCarty, 2628 Rutger Street, in office of Southern White Lead Company, St. Louis.
Edward C. Meier, 1726 Mississippi Avenue, member Freshman class, Washington University.
Peter Holme Morrison, 1401 Washington Avenue, student, St. Louis Medica] School.
August H. Mundt, 2355 Rutger Street, draughtsman, with Ranken & Fritsch. William L. Nichols, 2710 Olive Street, Freshman class, Washington University. Albert G. Nulsen, 1641 Missouri Avenue, Freshman class, Washington University.
John Erwin Page, 5581 Cabanne Place, draughtsman, Pullman Car Works, St. Louis.
Wm. L. Poppenhusen, Washington, Mo., in hardware business with his fatber.
Thos. T. Richards, 2210 Lucas Place, member of Freshman class, Washington University.
Francis E. Schwentler, 1908 Carr Strect, draughtsman, American Brake Company,
John Stack, East Louis, Ill., student, St. Louis Medical School.
Lewis C. Stone, 103 N. Channing Avenue, book-keeper and salesman, St. Louis Wheel Company.
Clarence J. Taussig, 2112 Waverly Place, member Freshman class, Washington University.
Ralph Day Udell, manufacturer, Indianapolis, Ind.
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MANUAL TRAINING.
BY WM. T. HARRIS, LL.D.,
Concord, Mass. In bringing forward my thoughts on the Psychology of Manual Training, I desire to say in advance that I shall endeavor to assume and maintain a judicial attitude toward this important educational question. I shall avoid the position of advocate or polemic so far as I am able.
As persons interested practically and theoretically in the manage. ment of schools we meet from year to year to discuss the vital questions that may arise in our province. Practically and theoretically, it is our fortune and our choice to find ourselves arrayed on different sides of each question. A free comparison of opinions in a friendly spirit gives us each matters for further reflection and may lead to partial revision of opinions previously held. A free comparison of grounds or reasons for opinions is still more profitable. All search for grounds, all search for principles, goes back out of the region of surface and diversity of facts-goes back out of the multiplicity of details toward unity. From differences we converge toward agreement when we begin to compare the grounds of our opinions. Principles and fundamental grounds are held in common by all minds, and this is necessarily so in case of ultimate principles at least.
Now, as a class of people interested in the management of schools, we have two opposite trends of opinion before us; we may divide here, one class of us tending toward conservatism and the other class tending to. ward new. experiments with a view to progress and improvement. One class holds by the heritage of the past, and strives to conserve its power. What is established has been established through struggle, and the victory of the strongest. A study of the grounds for the existence of what is, discovers many and powerful reasons for the continuance of the existing order even in presence of the fact that defects are everywhere visible. The conservative sees the defects but attributes them to inefficient administration and not to essential shortcomings in the old system itself.
On the other hand, the party whose watchword is progress bends its mind on the discovery of what is inadequate in the old system. It marshals the shortcomings and refers them to vicious methods inherent in the old system. It looks about for remedies and undertakes radical changes, bravely confident of their success. And inasmuch as the teaching profession is for the main part engaged during its daily tasks in the work of repression (inhibition), holding back pupils from doing wrong or improper things, teaching self-control, and that action of the will which psychologists call inhibitory, it (the teacher's profession) tends toward the conservative side too readily. It is engaged in strug. gling against caprice and arbitrariness, against raw, unformed habits and manners, against thoughtless disregard of the interests of others. This effort is apt to swallow up the teacher and cause neglect of that other side of will training the side of spontaneous, original activity. It neglects the positive for the negative, because the negative is the first and indispensable, while the positive may appear of itself without any education, after the school period is over, or outside of the school. Mere positive will power without the negative or inhibitory power will produce only anarchy. The new human being must learn to inhibit or hold back by an effort of will his native, mere animal, impulses and desires, having due regard to the requirements of social existence-clean. liness of person and clothing, courtesy and decency of manners toward others, purity of life, temperance, prudence, fortitude, and justice, all requiring this inhibition (or self-restraint over impulse) and conformity to pre-ordained ideals of order. Mere spontaneous originality attacks all these things and runs riot.
On the other hand, mere prescription, mere inhibitory will-power, de. veloped to extremes, produces only a mechanical civilization-a dead mechanical state of social existence. We look upon the Chinese education as productive of such a condition. All is cut and dried and given to the pupil as a ready-made form into which he must fit himself-by in. hibition of natural caprice and inclination. The consequence is the
. least possible progress and the completest administration of the old sys. tem.
What the philosophy of history must regard as the ideal standard of progress among nations is, therefore, not a mere perfection in administration, for this is achieved in the perfectly stationary empire of con. servatism.
The ideal standard of progress is found in the form of government which secures the greatest degree of individual development while not losing the centralized power of the whole. In the patriarchal empire the social whole is perfect at the expense of individual freedom. We Americans are apt to think that the German Empire sacrifices to some extent the development of the individual for the sake of the perfection of the administration of the will of the social whole. Certain it is that the German statesman looks upon our American régime as sacrificing the welfare of the social whole in order to give an unreasonable margin for individual whims and preferences.
The Anglo-Saxon doctrine expressed in French words), laissez faire, is thought to go too far when it permits parents to choose illiteracy for their children, or when it permits an illiterate community to substitute lynch law for the regular judicial process.
However this may be regarded, there is certainly a mutual relation between the form of government, with its administrative process, and the self-activity of the individual; and that government is best which secures the greatest perfection of central administration through the greatest development of individual freedom. But it remains true that the self-activity of the individual must be strictly limited by the necessity of perfect central administration for the good of the whole.