The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-03-10

IS THERE A SCIENCE OF EDUCATION


The teacher ought to be a man of
ideals. The end of education is ethical.
We desire to give the State a loyal
subject, and society a worthy fellow
worker. To this end we labor with
u pupil. Is it possible, then, to de-
fine In any scientific terms the moral
ideal Is it useful for the teacher to
AVE studied ethics? Upon this side
OF pedagogy Dilthey lays small stress.
The universal type of organization
seems to be formulated by him in bio
logical, rather than in ethical, terms.
The child Is to befmade a harmonious,
living organism. The ends of life in
the abstract cannot be universally de
fined. There are some who would re-
gard Dlthey's skepticism in this mat
ter with a mlngling of dread and CON-
tempt.
Nevertheless, l. feel the great diff
Guilty of giving much practical aid to
teachers, especially in this country,
and at the present time, by demanding
of wen the more learned class of them
a universal attention to theoretical
ethics. The call to become conscious
of ones moral ideals, both~for the sake
of ones own salvation, and for the
sake of teaching others, is a call that
comes to men in very different degrees
and forms. Our clergymen are
principal ethical advisers in this o
try; and, on the whole, it is well that
this should be the case.
Yet [ am impelled to insist that the
pedagogy of the future will have, as
III of its duties, the encouragement
of a reasonable ethical reflection
among u teachers. [ care, indeed,
little, whether or not this reflection is
generally pursued under a constant
theological supervision. | desire the
study of ethics, without ceasing to be
truly devout, to become also, as time
goes on, more and more scientific in
spirit and in content. Of the difficult
ties in the way of such a study in this
country, in so far as they Immediately
concern the educators business, the
present widespread controversy con-
corning secular and religious instruc-
ton in the public schools gives a sufh-
Gent hint.
Furthermore, the teacher, [ say,
should be a naturalist, and the depart
ment of natural history, which direct
ly concerns him is psychology. Let
the young teacher remember that it is
not the system" of a psychological
science, not the exhaustive theory of
the powers of the human mind" that
he needs, but rather the psychological
spirit: that is, the love and the skill
that are required for the purposes Of
mental diagnosis. When | say that
the teacher should be a naturalist, |
mean hat he should be in the habit of
observing the mental life of children
for its own sake, and of Judging the
relative value of its moods and tenden-
cieS. For such observation Of the live
child, the teachers study of published
researches ought primari-
~ to be meant to prepare him.
1t is easy to illustrate how the atti-
tude of the naturalist is worth training
as a part of a teachers equipment.
Lubbock, studying his bees and ants
and wasps, to find just in what sense
they had intelligence, learned no peda-
gogical principles. But his attitude
was, at least, that of a relatively dis
passionate diagnosis. In some fashion
he learned to know the minds of his
bees and ants, to look at their world
as they must look at it. Well, a
teacher in presence of a naughty child
feels often as hopeless a sense of the
remoteness and mystery of this demo
MAC s~ullenness, Obstinacy, cruelty, or
disobedience, as ever an amateur natur-
alist may have felt as he looked at the
marvellous doings of ants and bees.
We naturally take refuge from such
mysteries, by refusing to observe the
mechanism of their symptoms, and by
conforming ourselves to mere external
Judgment. We dislike the naughty
child, and we tell him so. And up to
a certain point this unsympathetic dis
like of ours is indeed a useful discip-
line to the child. If he is strong
enough to save himself, as he often is,
our hatred and punishment set him at
work to do so.
The child, however, may not be
strong enough to get out of the lonely
mental dungeon of his naughtinesS.
In any case we must help him out, if
we can. He can't diagnose himself.
He knows not whence comes the de-
mon that torrents him, or what power
locks him in this prison. We must
find out. That he is naughty, we
know, but what naughtiness is it Is
it, SO to speak, cerebral naughtiness,
or stomachic naughtiness Are his
bowels out of order, OF is it his very
strength of body that is here making
his brain Justify hayward p If we be-
come satisfied that it is the brain cor
tex and not the alimentary canal
which is primarily affected, then the
teacher must become a psychologist,
not In the systematic, but in the
scrutinizing sense What is going on
in this mind How does it feel to be
naughty In just this way ? Is it a
S of the rue ''insistent impulse, - or
is it a chaos of angrilyz contending sug-
gestions that come to the child from
without ? Is it irritable weakness of
temperament, or is it confusion of head
by reason of the manifoldneSs of the
new impressions that are just now as
sailing the young brain? Or is it
mere apathy, mental an@sthesia
Such questions may look technical.
We don't ask them very often. When