Mother Play.
TheMother Play and Nursery Songswere intended to exercise the infant’s senses, limbs, and muscles, and, through the loving union between mother and child, draw both into intelligent and agreeable relations with the common objects of life about them. The fifty ‘play songs’ are each connected with some simple nurserygame, like ‘pat-a-cake,’ ‘hide-and-seek,’ or the imitation of some trade (Fig. 43), and are intended to correspond to a special physical, mental, or moral need of the child. The selection and order of the songs were determined with reference to the child’s development, which ranges from almost reflex and instinctive movements up to an ability to represent his perceptions with drawings, accompanied by considerable growth of the moral sense. Each song contains three parts: (1) a motto for the guidance of the mother; (2) a verse with the accompanying music, to sing to the child; and (3) a picture illustrating the verse.
‘Gifts,’—
The ‘gifts’ and ‘occupations’ were both intended to stimulate motor expression, but the ‘gifts’ combine and rearrange certain definite material without changing the form, while the ‘occupations’ reshape, modify, and transform their material. The emphasis in kindergarten practice has come to be transferred from the ‘gifts’ to the ‘occupations,’ which have been largely increased infirst,range and number. Of the ‘gifts,’ the first consists of a box of six woolen balls of different colors. They are to be rolled about in play, and thus develop ideas of color, material, form, motion, direction, and muscular sensibility. A sphere, cube, and cylinder of hard wood composesecond,the second ‘gift.’ Here, therefore, are found a known factor in the sphere and an unknown one in the cube. A comparison is made of the stability of the cube with the movability of the sphere, and the two are harmonized in the cylinder, which possesses the characteristicsthird,of each. The third ‘gift’ is a large wooden cube divided into eight equal cubes, thus teaching the relations of the parts to the whole and to one another, andmaking possible original constructions, such as armchairs,and the other three,benches, thrones, doorways, monuments, or steps. The three following ‘gifts’ divide the cube in various ways so as to produce solid bodies of different types and sizes, and excite an interest in number, relation, and form. From them the children are encouraged to construct geometrical figures and ‘forms of beauty’ or artistic designs. Beside the six regular ‘gifts,’ he also added ‘tablets,’ ‘sticks,’ and ‘rings,’ sometimes known as ‘gifts seven to nine.’ This material introduces surfaces, lines, and points in contrast with the preceding solids, and brings out the relations of area, outline, andand ‘occupations.’circumference to volume. The ‘occupations’ comprise a long list of constructions with paper, sand, clay, wood, and other materials. Corresponding with the ‘gifts’ that deal with solids, may be grouped ‘occupations’ in clay modeling, cardboard cutting, paper folding, and wood carving; and with those of surfaces may be associated mat and paper weaving, stick shaping, sewing, bead threading, paper pricking, and drawing.
The Value and Influence of Froebel’s Principles.—For one pursuing destructive criticism only, it would not be difficult to find flaws in both the theory and practice of Froebel. In theMother Playthe pictures are roughSuperficial faults,and poorly drawn, the music is crude, and the verses are lacking in rhythm, poetic spirit, and diction (Fig. 43). But the illustrations and songs served well the interests and needs of those for whom they were produced, and Froebel himself was not insistent that they should be used after more satisfactory compositions were found. Other criticism of his material has been made on the ground that it was especially adapted to German ideals, Germanchildren, and the relatively simple village life of Froebel’sbondage to local ideals,experience, and that it needs considerable modification to suit other countries and the industrial organizationand formal discipline.of society to-day. Also the argument of ‘formal discipline’ for care and accuracy in the use of the gifts, and the insistence upon the employment of every part of each gift upon all occasions in the exact order mentioned by Froebel, have been shown to violate the principles of modern psychology. His more liberal disciples, however, realize that it is the spirit of his underlying principles, and not the letter of his practice, that should be followed, and have constantly struggled to keep the kindergarten matter and methods in harmony with the times and the environment.
Seht mir nur den Zimmermann,Welch’ seltne Kunst er üben kann:Was steht, bringt er zum Sturz;Was lang ist, macht er kurz;Das Runde macht er grad;Das Rauhe macht er glatt;Was krumm ist, macht er gleich;So ist an Kunst er reich.Das Einzle nicht ihm g’nügt,Zum Ganzen schnell er ’s fügt;Doch, was kommt da heraus?—Aus Balken wird ein Haus!Ein Haus für ‘s gute Kind,Daß es d’rin Eltern find’,Die sorgsam es bewahrenVor Seel’- und Leib’sgefahren.Den Zimmermann das Kind d’rum liebt,Der ihm den Schutz des Hauses giebt.
Seht mir nur den Zimmermann,Welch’ seltne Kunst er üben kann:Was steht, bringt er zum Sturz;Was lang ist, macht er kurz;Das Runde macht er grad;Das Rauhe macht er glatt;Was krumm ist, macht er gleich;So ist an Kunst er reich.Das Einzle nicht ihm g’nügt,Zum Ganzen schnell er ’s fügt;Doch, was kommt da heraus?—Aus Balken wird ein Haus!Ein Haus für ‘s gute Kind,Daß es d’rin Eltern find’,Die sorgsam es bewahrenVor Seel’- und Leib’sgefahren.Den Zimmermann das Kind d’rum liebt,Der ihm den Schutz des Hauses giebt.
Fig. 43.—Der Zimmermann(The Carpenter).(Reproduced by permission of D. Appleton and Company from the Eliot and Blow edition of Froebel’sMother Play.)
Fig. 43.—Der Zimmermann(The Carpenter).
(Reproduced by permission of D. Appleton and Company from the Eliot and Blow edition of Froebel’sMother Play.)
A more serious hindrance to the acceptance of FroebelianismGreatest weakness in symbolism and mysticism.has arisen from his peculiar mysticism and symbolism. Since all things live and have their being in and through God and the divine principle in each is the essence of its life, everything is liable to be considered by Froebel as symbolic in its very nature, and he often resorts to fantastic and strained interpretations. Thus with Froebel the cube becomes the symbol of diversity in unity, the faces and edges of crystals all have mystic meanings, and the numbers three and five revealFantastic and vague doctrines.an inner significance. At times this symbolism descends into a literal and verbal pun, where it seems to a modern that Froebel can hardly be in earnest. Further, he holds that general conceptions are implicit in the child, and each of these can be awakened by ‘adumbration,’ that is, by presenting something that will symbolically represent that particular ‘innate idea.’ Thus, in treating the gifts and games, he maintains that from a ball thepupils gather an abstract notion of ‘unity.’ Moreover, because God is the self-conscious spirit that originated both man and nature, and everything is interconnected, he believes that each part of the universe may throwNotion that nature may illumine mental and social laws.light on every other part, and constantly holds that a knowledge of external nature,—such as the formation of crystals, will enable one to comprehend the laws of the mind and of society.
Unfortunately, this mystic symbolism, vague and extreme as it is, is regarded by the strict constructionistsMost essential to conservatives.among the kindergartners as the most essential feature in Froebelianism, and they expect the innocents in their charge to reveal the symbolic effect of the material upon their minds. There is no real evidence for supposing that such associations between common objects and abstract conceptions exist for children. But such an imaginary symbolic meaning may be forced upon an objectEffect upon pupils.by the teacher, and pupils in conservative kindergartens soon learn to adopt certain phrases and attitudes that imply such mystic meaning. This often tends to foster insincerity and sentimentalism rather than to inculcate abstract truth through symbols. Had Froebel possessed the enlarged knowledge of biology, physiology, and psychology that is available for one living in the twentieth century, it is unlikely that he would have insisted upon the symbolic foundations for his pedagogy. His excellent practice is heavily handicapped by these interpretations, and might as easily have been inferred from very different positions in modern psychology.
But Froebel has had a most happy effect upon education as a whole. In some respects he utilized featuresBorrowed from others,from other reformers. We can see that he adopted manyof Pestalozzi’s objective methods in geography, natural history, arithmetic, language, drawing, writing and reading, and constructive geometry; reiterated Rousseau’s views upon the infallibility of nature; and advocated the physical training and excursions as a means of study that are stressed by both these reformers. In his use of stories, legends, fables, and fairy-tales, he paralleled his contemporary, Herbart, in his influence upon the curriculum.but unique in motor expression, social participation and informal school.But in his emphasis upon motor expression and social participation, together with his advocacy of a school without books or set tasks, Froebel was unique, and made a most distinctive contribution to educational practice. And whenever the real significance of his principles has been comprehended, they have been recognized as the most essential laws in the educational process, and are valued as the means of all effective teaching.
Froebel himself never fully worked out his theories in connection with schooling beyond the kindergarten, butContribution to all stages of education.all stages of education have now come to realize the value of discovering and developing individuality by means of initiative, execution, and coöperation; and spontaneous activities, like play, construction, and occupational work, have become more and more the means to this end. For example, the ‘busy work,’ ‘whittling,’ ‘clay-modeling,’ ‘sloyd,’ and other types of ‘manual training’Manual training through Cygnæushave to a large degree sprung from the influence of Froebel. Uno Cygnæus (1810-1888), who started the manual training movement, owed his inspiration to Froebel and his own desire to extend the kindergarten occupations through the grades. As a result of his efforts, Finland in 1866 became the first country in the world toadopt manual training as an integral part of the course in the elementary and teacher training schools. Inand Salomon.1874, through the visit of Otto Salomon (1849-1907) to Cygnæus, Sweden transformed its sloyd from a system of teaching the elements of trades to the more educative method of manual training. This use of constructive and occupational work for educational purposes rather than for industrial efficiency soon spread throughout Europe, and was first suggested to the United States by the Centennial Exposition of 1876 at Philadelphia. Various types of modern educational theory and practice, especially those associated with experiments made in the United States, also reveal large elements of Froebelian influence. Among these might be included theParker and Dewey.work of Colonel Parker (Fig. 40) and of Professor John Dewey. The Froebelian emphasis upon motor expression, the social aspect of education, and informal schooling are evident throughout Parker’s work in his elementary school, and are even extended so as to include speech and the language-arts. Similarly, Dewey’s occupational work and industrial activities, which were used through the entire course of his ‘experimental school’ in Chicago, although not copied directly from Froebel, closely approached the modified practice of the kindergarten (seepp. 430f.).
The Spread of Froebelianism through Europe.—Directly after the death of Froebel, the kindergarten began to be spread through his devoted followers, especiallyBaroness von Bülow visited all countries.Baroness von Bülow. By means of her social position and knowledge of modern languages, she was enabled to become his great apostle throughout Europe. Having failed to obtain a revocation of the edict againstthe kindergarten (see p. 355) in Prussia, the baroness turned to foreign lands. She visited France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Russia, and nearly every other section of Europe, and in 1867 was invited to speak before the ‘Congress of Philosophers’ at Frankfort. This distinguished gathering had been called to inquire into contemporary educational movements, and after her elucidation of Froebelianism, a standing committee of the Congress, knownFoundation of Froebel Union.as the ‘Froebel Union,’ was formed to study the system. The propaganda was soon everywhere eagerly embraced. Kindergartens, training schools, and journals devoted to the movement rapidly sprang up. While the kindergarten was not generally adopted by the governments, it was widely established by voluntary means throughout Western Europe, and has since met with a noteworthy growth. Instruction in Froebelian principles is now generally required in most normal and teacher trainingResults in Western Europe.institutions there. Sometimes, as in France and England, it has been combined with the infant school movement, and has lost some of its most vital characteristics, but even in these cases the cross-fertilization has afforded abundant educational fruitage. Only in Germany, the native land of the kindergarten, has serious hostility to the idea remained. Kindergartens have, with few exceptions, never been recognized there as genuine schools or part of the regular state system. Even to-day the German kindergarten is regarded as little more than a day nursery or convenient place to deposit small children and have them amused.
The Kindergarten in the United States.—The development and influence of the kindergarten have been more marked in the United States than in any othercountry. First attempts at a kindergarten in America were made shortly after the middle of the nineteenth century by educated Germans, who had emigrated to America because of the unsettled conditions at home.Voluntary basis through Elizabeth P. Peabody,A more fruitful attempt was that of Elizabeth P. Peabody at Boston in the early sixties. Notwithstanding the immediate success of this institution and the evident enjoyment of the children, Miss Peabody felt that she had not succeeded in getting the real spirit of Froebel, and in 1867 she went to study with his widow, who had been settled in Hamburg for several years. Upon her return the following year Miss Peabody corrected the errors in her work and established a periodical to explain and spread Froebelianism. The remainder of her life was spent in interesting parents, philanthropists, and school boards in the movement, and a service was done for the kindergarten in America almost equal to that of Baroness von Bülow in Europe. In 1868 through Miss Peabody the first training school for kindergartners in the United States was established at Boston. A similarMaria Bölte,institution was opened in New York by 1872 in charge of Maria Bölte, who had also studied with Frau Froebel.Susan E. Blow,The same year saw the beginning of Susan E. Blow’s work in St. Louis, where her free training school for kindergartners was opened. Another missionary effortEmma Marwedel, and others.began in 1876 through Emma Marwedel, who was employed to organize voluntary kindergartens and training classes throughout the chief centers of California. The kindergarten movement grew rapidly. Between 1870 and 1890 in all the leading cities of the country subscriptions for kindergartens were raised by various philanthropic agencies, and by the close of the centurythere were about five hundred such voluntary associations.
But private foundations are restrictive, and it was not until the kindergarten began to be adopted by school systems that the movement became truly national in the United States. Boston in the early seventies addedPart of the public school system in all progressive cities.a few kindergartens to her public schools, but after several years of trial gave them up on account of the expense. The first permanent establishment under a city board was made in 1873 at St. Louis through the efforts of Miss Blow. Twelve kindergartens were organized at first, but others were opened as rapidly as competent directors could be prepared at Miss Blow’s training school. Within a decade there were more than fifty public kindergartens and nearly eight thousand pupils in St. Louis. San Francisco authorized the addition of kindergartens to the public schools in 1880; and between that date and the end of the century New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Rochester, Providence, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, and nearly two hundred other progressive cities made the work an integral part of their system. About twenty of the cities employed a special supervisor to inspect the work. Excellent training schools for kindergartners are now maintained by half a hundred public and quasi-public normal institutions.
The Relative Influence of Pestalozzi, Herbart, and Froebel.—It is now obvious how large a part in the development of modern educational practice has been played by Herbart and Froebel. There are few tendencies in the curricula and methods of the schools to-day that cannot in their beginnings be traced back to them, or to Pestalozzi, their master. But the reformsof all three find their roots in Rousseau (Fig. 44). His ‘naturalism’ was continued by Pestalozzi (Fig. 45) in his ‘development’ and ‘observation,’ which were, in turn, further elaborated by Froebel and HerbartStudies improved by Pestalozzirespectively (Figs. 47 and 46). Through his ‘observation’ methods, Pestalozzi greatly improved the teaching of arithmetic, language work, geography, elementary science, drawing, writing, reading, andand Herbart,music, and, by means of Fellenberg’s work, developed industrial and philanthropic training. As a result of Herbart’s moral and religious aim, marked advances in the teaching of history and literature have taken place, and, largely through his carefully wroughtand training contributed by Froebel.educational doctrines, order and system have everywhere been introduced into instruction. From Froebel’s mystic interpretation of ‘natural development’ we have obtained the kindergarten training for a period of life hitherto largely neglected, the informal occupations,Period of reforms of Pestalozzi,manual training, and other studies of motor expression, together with psychological and social principles that underlie every stage of education. Pestalozzi’s reforms were felt in Europe throughout the first half of the nineteenthFroebel,century, but did not have any wide effect upon the United States until after the ‘Oswego movement’ in the sixties. The influence of Froebel appeared inand Herbart.Europe shortly after the middle of the century, and began to rise to its height in America about 1880. The Herbartian theory and practice became popular in Germany between 1865 and 1885, while the growth of Herbartianism in the United States began about five years after the latter date. Hence the development of modern educational practice, due to these three great reformers,falls distinctly within the period of the nineteenth century.
Fig. 44.—Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778).Fig. 45.—Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi(1746-1827).Fig. 46.—Johann Friedrich Herbart(1776-1841).Fig. 47.—Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel(1782-1852).
Fig. 44.—Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778).Fig. 45.—Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi(1746-1827).
Fig. 44.—Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778).
Fig. 44.—Jean Jacques Rousseau(1712-1778).
Fig. 45.—Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi(1746-1827).
Fig. 45.—Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi(1746-1827).
Fig. 46.—Johann Friedrich Herbart(1776-1841).Fig. 47.—Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel(1782-1852).
Fig. 46.—Johann Friedrich Herbart(1776-1841).
Fig. 46.—Johann Friedrich Herbart(1776-1841).
Fig. 47.—Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel(1782-1852).
Fig. 47.—Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel(1782-1852).
Great Educational Reformers
Graves,In Modern Times(Macmillan, 1913), chap. VII;Great Educators(Macmillan, 1912), chaps. X and XI; Monroe,Textbook(Macmillan, 1905), pp. 622-673; Parker,Modern Elementary Education(Ginn, 1912), chaps. XVII and XVIII. Herbart’sScience of Education(translated by Felkin), andOutlines of Educational Doctrine(translated by Lange and De Garmo, Macmillan, 1909); and Froebel’sEducation of Man(translated by Hailmann; Appleton, 1894),Pedagogics of the KindergartenandEducation by Development(translated by Jarvis; Appleton, 1897 and 1899), andMother Play(translated by Eliot and Blow, Appleton, 1896), should be read at least cursorily. The best brief treatise onHerbart and Herbartianism(Scribner, 1896) is that by De Garmo, C., a graphic description ofThe Herbartian Psychology(Heath, 1898) is given by Adams, J., in chap. III, and a history ofThe Doctrines of Herbart in the United Statesas a doctoral dissertation (University of Pennsylvania) by Randels, G. B. A good account ofFroebel and Education by Self-Activity(Scribner, 1897) has been furnished by Bowen, H. C.; a conservative treatment ofKindergarten Education(Education in the United States, edited by N. M. Butler, Monograph No. 1), by Blow, Susan E.; an interesting treatise onKindergarten in American Education(Macmillan, 1908), by Vandewalker, Nina C.; and a critical account ofThe Psychology of the Kindergarten(Teachers College Record, vol. IV, pp. 377-408), by Thorndike, E. L.
The leading states of Western Europe and of Canada have, during the past century and a half, organized systems of education, which may prove suggestive.In Prussia, owing to a strong line of monarchs, state control has taken the place of ecclesiastical through a series of decrees and enactments. The people’s schools are quite separate from the secondary schools. Three types of secondary institutions have developed,—the ‘gymnasium,’ with the classics as staples; the ‘real-school,’ with modern languages and sciences; and the ‘real-gymnasium,’ with its compromise between the other two. The universities have likewise been emancipated from ecclesiastical control.In France, a highly centralized system has been developed. Napoleon united secondary and higher education in a single corporation; under Louis Philippe, an organization of elementary schools was made; and, during the third republic, elementary education has been made free, compulsory, and secular. The present secondary system—lycéesand communal colleges—began with Napoleon, and has now been differentiated into several courses. One-half of the universities established by Napoleon were suppressed during the Restoration, but since 1896 there has been a university in each of the sixteen ‘academies,’ save one.In England national education has grown out of the conflict of a number of social elements. The sentiment for universal training appeared toward the close of the eighteenth century, but not until 1870 were ‘board schools’ established. In 1899 a central Board of Education was created; and the Act of 1902, while permittingvoluntary schools to share in the local rates, unified the system and established secondary education at public expense. During the nineteenth century also the classical and ecclesiastical monopoly in secondary and higher education was largely broken.In Canada there have developed two types of educational control,—(1) the closely centralized system of public schools in Ontario, and (2) the public supervision of ecclesiastical schools in Quebec.
The leading states of Western Europe and of Canada have, during the past century and a half, organized systems of education, which may prove suggestive.
In Prussia, owing to a strong line of monarchs, state control has taken the place of ecclesiastical through a series of decrees and enactments. The people’s schools are quite separate from the secondary schools. Three types of secondary institutions have developed,—the ‘gymnasium,’ with the classics as staples; the ‘real-school,’ with modern languages and sciences; and the ‘real-gymnasium,’ with its compromise between the other two. The universities have likewise been emancipated from ecclesiastical control.
In France, a highly centralized system has been developed. Napoleon united secondary and higher education in a single corporation; under Louis Philippe, an organization of elementary schools was made; and, during the third republic, elementary education has been made free, compulsory, and secular. The present secondary system—lycéesand communal colleges—began with Napoleon, and has now been differentiated into several courses. One-half of the universities established by Napoleon were suppressed during the Restoration, but since 1896 there has been a university in each of the sixteen ‘academies,’ save one.
In England national education has grown out of the conflict of a number of social elements. The sentiment for universal training appeared toward the close of the eighteenth century, but not until 1870 were ‘board schools’ established. In 1899 a central Board of Education was created; and the Act of 1902, while permittingvoluntary schools to share in the local rates, unified the system and established secondary education at public expense. During the nineteenth century also the classical and ecclesiastical monopoly in secondary and higher education was largely broken.
In Canada there have developed two types of educational control,—(1) the closely centralized system of public schools in Ontario, and (2) the public supervision of ecclesiastical schools in Quebec.
National Systems of Education in Europe and Canada.—In previous chapters (XVII, XXI, XXIII) we have witnessed the gradual evolution in America of state systems of universal education out of the unorganized and rather aristocratic arrangement of schools that had first been transplanted from Europe in the seventeenth century. But development of a centralized organization of public schools has not been confined to the United States. During the past century and a half, the leading powers of Western Europe and Canada have likewise organized state systems of education, similar in some respectsElementary education free, but few cases of gratuitous secondary schools, and France alone secularized.to those of the American union. All of these states have now established universal elementary education free to all, although as yet in few instances are secondary schools also gratuitous, and only Canada has welded her elementary and secondary systems. France alone has completely secularized its system, but the public schools of the other nations, while still including religious instruction, have been emancipated from ecclesiastical control, and are responsible to the civil authorities. In all of them school attendance is compulsory. Yet the educational system in none of these countries is identical with that in the United States, but has been adapted in each case to the genius and social organization of thepeople concerned. Its characteristics must, therefore, be considerably modified, in order to be utilized or to prove suggestive to the United States or other nations, and can be understood only in the light of the educational history of the particular country to which it belongs.Suggestive, when understood historically.For an intelligent appreciation of these modern school systems, we must, therefore, trace the gradual development to their present form in response to the changing ideals of successive periods.
The Beginning of State Control in Prussia.—We may look first at Germany. Up to the later years of the eighteenth century all stages of education in the various German states remained almost entirely under ecclesiastical control, but during this period the schools and universities were taken over by the state from the church, although the clergy still exercised a few prerogatives, and centralized national systems were gradually organized. Among these states of Germany the first and most influential in the organization of universal education was Prussia. While each of the others is characterized by an educational history and peculiarities of its own, this state may be taken as an illustration of theRise of Prussian education due to enlightened despots:evolution of German school systems. The rise of Prussia, educationally as well as politically, seems to have been due to the strong Hohenzollern monarchs,—despotic, but thoroughly awake to the interests of their people. Although for nearly two centuries state control of education was carried on more or less through the medium of the church, its development was well under way by the seventeenth century. While the ‘consistory,’ or board of supervision, was still composed largely of the clergy, the schools were soon (1687) declared not to besimply church organizations, but to belong to the state, and some attempt was made to extend schools to the villages as well as cities. But the first noteworthy attempt to establish compulsory attendance occurred during the reign of Frederick William I. In 1717 that(1) Decree for compulsory attendance by Frederick William I in 1717;monarch decreed that, wherever schools existed, children should be required to attend during the winter, and in the summer whenever they could be spared by their parents, which must be at least once a week. He also founded the first teachers’ seminary at Stettin from his own private means (1735), and the next year had a definite law passed, making education compulsory for children from six to twelve years of age.
Educational Achievements of Frederick the Great.—His most important contribution, however, consisted in preparing the way for an educational movement that was to be greatly developed through his more able son, Frederick the Great. Frederick began by improving the administration of secondary education, and requiring that all vacancies on crown lands be filled by graduates from Hecker’s normal school at Berlin. But the great step toward a national system was taken in 1763,(2)General School Regulationsdecreed by Frederick in 1763,when Frederick issued hisGeneral School Regulations for the Country. This decree required children to attend school from five until thirteen or fourteen, and until they “know not only what is necessary of Christianity, fluent reading, and writing, but can give answer in everything which they learn from the school books prescribed and approved by our consistory.” If any pupils should arrive at this state of proficiency before thirteen or fourteen, they could even then leave school only through the official certification of the teacher, minister, andinspector. Provision was also made for the attendance of children who had to herd cattle or were too poor to pay the school fees. Sunday continuation schools were to be established for young people beyond the school age. Teachers must have attended Hecker’s seminary and had to be examined and licensed by the inspector. This decree was two years later supplemented withsupplemented byRegulations for Catholic Schools;similarRegulations for the Catholic Schools in Silesia, drawn up by Abbot Felbiger. The carrying out of the decree was, however, stubbornly opposed by many teachers, who could not meet the new requirements; by farmers, who objected to the loss of their children’s time; and by the nobles, who feared the discontent and uprising of the peasants, in case they were educated. The execution of the regulation was still in the power of the clergy, and for some time it proved but little more than a pious wish. But Frederick strove hard to have it enforced, and it became the foundation for the more effective laws that have since become embodied in the Prussian school system.
Educational Influence of Zedlitz.—After 1771 the educational work of Frederick was substantially aided by the appointment of Baron von Zedlitz as head of the Department of the Lutheran Church and School Affairs. This great minister had been much impressed by Basedow’s principles and experiments and by Rochow’s application of the ‘naturalistic’ training, and through him village schools were greatly strengthened and enriched, a regular normal school was opened at Halberstadt, and(3) Establishment of Central Board of Administration under Frederick William II in 1787;the humanistic ideal of secondary education revived. A year after Frederick’s death Zedlitz succeeded, even under the reactionary monarch, Frederick William II,in further developing the nationalization of education. In 1787 anOberschulcollegium, or central board of school administration, was appointed instead of the former church consistories. However, while the organization was supposed to be made up of educational experts, and Zedlitz was actually made chairman, the membership was mostly filled from the clergy, and the king refused to extend its jurisdiction to the higher schools.
Despite the reactionary policy of the sovereign, the culmination of the attempts to establish a national nonsectarian system of education occurred during this reign.(4) Publication ofGeneral Codein 1794;In 1794 there was published theGeneral Code, in which the chapter upon education declared unequivocally that “all schools and universities are under the supervision of the state, and are at all times subject to its examination and inspection.” Teachers were, therefore, not to be chosen without the consent of the state, and where their appointment was not vested in particular persons, it was to belong to the state. Teachers of all secondary schools were to be regarded as state officials. No child was to be excluded from the schools because of his religion, nor compelled to stay for religious instruction when it differed from the belief in which he had been brought up.
Foundation of the Ministry of Education and Further Progress.—While this comprehensive code met with much opposition from the clergy and the ignorant masses, and the next king, Frederick William III, weakly yielded at first, the humiliation of Prussia by Napoleon (1803) brought the country to a realization of the need of a centralized organization of the school system. TheOberschulcollegiumwas abolished, to get rid of the clerical(5) Creation of a Bureau of Education in 1807, which later became a separate Ministry and then was further organized.domination that had crept in, and a Bureau of Education was created as a section of the Department of the Interior in 1807. The Bureau was within a decade erected into a separate Department or Ministry of Education. Eight years later (1825) the state was divided into educational provinces; and aSchulcollegium, or administrative board, with considerable independence, but subject to the minister, was established over each province. Since then there have been many further developments, and provinces themselves are now divided into ‘governments,’ each of which has a ‘school commission’ over it, and every government is divided into ‘districts,’ whose chief officer is a ‘school inspector.’ Under the district inspector are local inspectors, and each separate school also has a local board, to take charge of repairs, supplies, and other external matters.
Thus the supreme management of the schools has been gradually coming into the hands of the state for nearly two centuries. The decrees of 1717 and 1763, the establishment of theOberschulcollegiumin 1787, the General Code promulgated in 1794, the foundation of a distinct civic administration of education in 1807, are the mile-stones that mark the way to state control. But, while the influence of the church has been constantly diminishing, many of the board members are ministers or priests and the inspectors come mostly from the clergy. Moreover, religious instruction forms part of the course in every school, although it is given at such an hour that any pupil may withdraw if the teaching is contrary to the faith in which he has been reared. The secondary schools are largely interdenominational, but in elementary education there are separate schoolsfor Catholics and Protestants, alike supported by the state.
The Elementary System.—Prussia, like most of the principal states of Europe, as a result of their educational history, has its elementary and secondary systems quite separate and distinct from each other (Fig. 48). The universities continue the work of the gymnasiums and real-schools, but these two latter institutions parallel theVolksschulen,work of theVolksschulen(people’s schools), rather than supplement it. The course of the secondary school ordinarily occupies the pupil from nine to eighteen years of age, while that of the elementary school carries him from six to fourteen, and after the first three years it is practically impossible to transfer from the elementary to the secondary system. A pupil cannot enter a gymnasium or real-school after completing the people’s school, and the only further training he can obtain is that of theFortbildungschulen,‘Continuation schools,’or ‘continuation schools,’ which supplement the system (see p. 420). The people’s schools are gratuitous and are attended mostly by the children of the lower classes, while the gymnasiums charge a tuition fee and are patronized by the professional classes and aristocracy. Hence the line between elementary and secondary education in Prussia is longitudinal and not latitudinal, as it is in the United States; the distinction is one of wealth and social status rather than of educational grade and advancement. There are alsoandMittelschulen.someMittelschulen(middle schools) for the middle classes of people, who cannot send their children to the secondary schools, and yet can afford some exclusiveness. They have one more class than the people’s schools, include a foreign language duringthe last three years, and require teachers with a better training.
The Secondary System.—The main types of secondaryGymnasienandRealschulen;schools in Prussia are theGymnasien(see p. 114), with the classic languages as the main feature of their course, and theRealschulen, or real-schools (see p. 176), characterized by larger amounts of the modern languages, mathematics, and the natural sciences. For more than a century after the first real-school was opened in Berlin by Hecker (1747), this type of institution had only six years in its course, and was considered inferior to the gymnasium. By the ministerial decree of 1859, however, two classes of real-schools were recognized, and those of the first class had a course of nine years, and included Latin, but not Greek. They were given full standing as secondary schools, and graduates were granted admission to the universities, except for the study of theology, medicine, or law. The course of the second class of these institutions contained no Latin, and was but six years in length. In 1882 the compromise character of the course of the first class of institutionsRealgymnasienandOberrealschulen;led to their being designated asRealgymnasien, while the second class in some instances had their work extended to nine years and became known asOberrealschulen. The graduates were then allowed the privilege of studying at the universities in mathematics and the natural sciences. Since 1901 the university courses have been thrown open to graduates of any of the three types of secondary schools, except that, to be eligible for theology, one must have completed the course of a gymnasium, and for medicine, the course of a real-gymnasium at least. Besides these schools that have been mentioned, in ruraldistricts where a complete course cannot be maintained, there are often secondary institutions that do not carry the student more than six years. These are known, according to the curriculum, asProgymnasien,Realprogymnasien, andRealschulen. The first two classes are far less common than institutions with the longersix-year courses;course of the same character, but theRealschulenare nearly twice as numerous as theOberrealschulen.
Since these three types of secondary institutions are so distinct from each other (Fig. 48), it is evident that a parent is forced to decide the future career of his boy at nine years, long before his special ability can be known. If he once enters a real-school, he can never transfer to a gymnasium, because the Latin begins in the lowest class of the latter course, nor can he enter the gymnasium from the real-gymnasium, after twelve, since he has had no Greek. To overcome this objection, during the past quarter of a century efforts have been made to delay the irrevocable decision by grouping all three courses as one institution and making them identical as long as possible. In secondary schools of this new sort, French is usually the only foreign language taught for the first three years. Then the course divides, and one section takes up Latin and the other English. After two years more a further bifurcation takes place in the Latin section, and oneReformschulen;group begins with Greek, while the other studies English. These institutions are known asReformschulen(Fig. 48), and the plan was first introduced at Frankfort in 1892. The ‘reform schools’ are now growing rapidly, and there is evident an increasing tendency to postpone the choice of courses as long as possible. The three years of training preliminary to admission to a secondary school ofany type may be obtained through the people’s or the middle schools. But there has also grown up, as an attachmenttheVorschule.of the secondary schools, aVorschule(preparatory school), to perform this function for pupils of the more exclusive classes.
Higher Education.—Like the other stages of education, the universities are now emancipated from ecclesiastical control, and may be regarded as part of the national system of education. The university is now coördinate and under the same authority with the church, for bothUniversities, state institutions, but controlled by charters and decrees.are legally state institutions. Universities can, therefore, be established only by the state or with the approval of the state. In general, however, they are not controlled by legislation, but through charters and special decrees of the minister of education. As their income from endowments and fees is very small, they are for the most part supported by the state. They are managed internally by the rector and senate. The rector is annually chosen from their number by the full professors, with the approval of the minister, and the senate is a committee from the various faculties. The professors are regarded as civil servants with definite privileges, and they are appointed by the minister, although the suggestions of the faculty concerned are usually respected.
During the nineteenth century new institutions for the cultivation of science in application to practical and technological purposes have developed from technical schools of a more elementary character. While knownTechnische Hochschulen.as ‘technical high schools’ (Technische Hochschulen), they are institutions of higher learning, and exist side by side with the universities. They include schools ofengineering, mining, forestry, agriculture, veterinary medicine, and commerce.
DIAGRAM OF GERMAN EDUCATIONFig. 48.
Fig. 48.
Educational Development in France.—The development of a centralized system of education in France began almost a century later than in Germany. During the eighteenth and the early nineteenth century the different monarchic powers were not at all favorable to training the masses, and popular education was badly neglected. It required several revolutions in government and the establishment of a permanent republic, to break the old traditions completely, and to make it evident that universal suffrage should be accompanied by universal education. Just after the middle of theFirst agitation for elementary education during the Revolution.eighteenth century the revolutionary spirit began to manifest itself with the appearance of Rousseau’sEmile(see p. 222), and, except for the training started by the Christian Brothers (see p. 140), the first serious attention was given to elementary education. Rolland, to whom a general plan for reorganization had been committed, recommended universal education and an adequate number of training schools for teachers. While his proposals were not adopted, they were the basis of much of the short-lived legislation that arose during the Revolution, and of the great principles of educational administration that have since been established.
Napoleon, from the beginning, endeavored to reorganize education upon a better basis, and when he had become emperor, ordered all the lycées, secondary colleges, and faculties of higher education to be united in a single corporation, dependent upon the state and knownNapoleon and the University of France.as the ‘University of France’ (1808). This decree of centralization divided the country into twenty-sevenadministrative ‘academies,’ each of which was to establish university faculties of letters and science near the principal lycées.
This organization, however, did not include elementary education, and little attempt was made to provide for schools of this grade before the reign of Louis Philippe. Upon the advice of his great minister of education,Through Guizot primary schools began.Guizot, that monarch organized primary education, requiring a school for each commune, or at least for a group of two or three communes, and starting higher primary schools in the department capitals and in communes of over six thousand inhabitants (1833). He also instituted inspectors of primary schools, and established department normal schools under the more effective control of the state authorities. The plan for higher primary schools was never fully realized, and the institutions of this sort that had been established disappeared during the second empire. The reactionary law of Falloux (1850) did not even mention these schools, but encouraged the development of denominational schools.
The Primary School System.—Guizot, however, had given a permanent impulse to popular education, and during the third republic foundations for a national systemUnder third republic primary system was completed.of education have rapidly been laid. Schools have been brought into the smallest villages, and elementary education has been made free to all (1881) and compulsory between the ages of six and thirteen (1882). To provide trained teachers, every department has beenNormal schools.required to provide a normal school for teachers of each sex; and two higher normal schools, one for men and one for women, to train teachers for the departmental normal schools, have been opened by the state (1882).Higher primary and continuation schools.The higher primary schools have been reëstablished and extended (1898), and ‘supplementary courses’ offered for pupils remaining at the lower primary schools after graduation. The studies in the supplementary courses are technical, as well as general, and some of the higher primary schools have been established for vocational training rather than literary. In addition, there are continuation ‘schools of manual apprenticeship’ in the various communes, subsidized by the state for industrial and agricultural education, and five large schools for training in special crafts have been organized in Paris. Institutions for children between two and six years ofMaternal schools.age became part of the primary system in the days of Guizot (1833), and half a century later the present name,écoles maternelles(see p. 244), was adopted (1881), although there have since been marked reforms made in the curriculum.