Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

Jacotot claimed that "to teach is to cause to learn." Professor Hart improved on this definition by claiming that "teaching is causing another to know." Probably no more simple or accurate definitions than these two have ever been suggested. They certainly indicate the essence of true teaching. Teaching involves the idea of knowledge obtained by a process. One may, indeed, teach himself, may be his own teacher, through reaching out after knowledge by an intelligently directed effort; but no one can teach-and to that extent be a teacher of—either himself or another, without the obtaining of knowledge by the person taught. Teaching, in fact, includes the idea of learning, not as its correlative term, but as one of its constituent parts. There really can be no such thing as teaching without learning; the process of learning must accompany the process of teaching and must keep pace with it. Just to the extent of the learning on the one part, is there the teaching on the other part. If the learning process halts, so halts the teaching process. If the learning process ends, the teaching process has ended.

Originally, in our English language, as in accordance with the analogy of other European languages, the word "learn" was used in the two-fold sense of teaching and learning; one could learn by himself, or he could learn another-could cause another to learn. Thus, the poet Drayton makes a royal guide tell of the instructed king: "Who, till I learned him, had not known his might."

And Shakespeare's queen, in Cymbeline, asks of her court physician:

"Have I not been

Thy pupil long? Hast thou not learned me how

To make perfumes? distil? preserve?"

In the natural progress of language, there came to be a subdivision of the two-fold idea of the word "learn;" and the distinction between the objective and the subjective phases of the learning process was

indicated by the use of the term "teaching" for the one, and "learning" for the other. Now, therefore, "teaching" is that part of the two-fold learning process by which knowledge which is yet outside of the learner's mind is directed toward that mind; and "learning" is that part of the same two-fold process by which the knowledge taught is made the learner's own. Still, as before, however, there can be no teacher where there is not a learner; although, on the other hand, there may be a learner where there is no one else than himself to be his teacher. If this truth be borne clearly in mind, there is a decided gain in the verbal distinction of the two component parts of the learning process, as made by our modern use of the words "teaching" and "learning;" but if this distinction should lead us to suppose that there can be any teaching, where there is no corresponding learning, that it is possible, in fact, for one to teach while no one learns; then indeed it would be far better for us to go back to the old terminology, and to insist in very phrase that no one is taught until he has learned, and that no one teaches another until the other learns; that, in short, teaching another is ever and always learning another, causing another to learn.

*

*

*

*

It is the causing another to know that which we know, and which he does not; that which we want him to know, and which we seek to have him know-which is "teaching" in its technical sense; teaching in the sense in which we use the term, when we say that we have been teaching a particular lesson to a particular scholar or class. In this sense, "teaching" obviously involves the three-fold idea of a teacher, a lesson, and a learner; it involves knowledge on the teacher's part, and, at the start, the lack of it on the part of the scholar; also, an actual transfer of that knowledge from the teacher's mind to the scholar's, before the teaching process is concluded. Hence, to say that you have "taught a lesson," includes the idea that some one has learned that lesson; for unless there is learning by a learner there can be no teaching by a teacher; and until the teacher has caused a learner to know a lesson or a truth, the teacher has only been trying to teach-so far without success.

Intelligent, purposeful teaching includes the idea of two persons, both of them active. Nor is it enough that there be two persons, both of them active; both active over the same lesson. This may be secured by hearing a recitation, and commenting on it; but that is not, necessarily, teaching. The scholar, in such a case, may be merely exercising his memory, reciting what he has memorized ver bally without understanding a word of it; he learns nothing; he is

not, taught anything; he is not caused to know a single fact or truth, by his teacher's hearing him recite; nor does he learn anything by his teacher's wisest comment, if he pays no attention to that comment, or if he is unable to understand it. "Teaching," as causing another to know, includes the mutual effort of two persons to the same end. The teacher must endeavor to cause the pupil to learn a particular fact or truth which he wants him to know; the learner must endeavor to learn that particular fact or truth. Until the two are at this common work, the process of teaching has not begun: until the learner has learned, the teacher has not taught.— Teaching and Teachers.

The Two Practical Results of School Education.

By E. E. WHITE, LL. D.

The most practical result of school education is not knowledge, but mental power. A knowledge of the facts which relate to a given calling is very important; but better than this is that intellectual power-acumen, grasp, poise, inspiration-that can change the dead facts of knowledge into the living reality of human action. Knowledge, to be of practical value for guidance, must be applied by an intelligent mind. Thought is the lucky winner of success in all the labor and conflict of life. I have often said that if my memory were a tablet, and, with a sponge, I should erase every fact that I learned in school and college, I should not be very poor; but were I to lose the intellectual power gained by the mastery of these facts, so many of which have been forgotten, I should be poor indeed. The physical sciences are properly regarded as practical studies, but the most practical result of such study in school is not a knowledge of the facts, but the power and habit of scientific thought and investigation secured by their mastery. The scientific facts and principles which a common artisan will ever consciously use in his trade can be printed on the fly-leaf of a text-book in science, but he will find the power of scientific thought of daily application and utility. Thirty years ago I handed diplomas to the first class that formally graduated from the Central High School of Cleveland. I am sure that the eight members of that one class have contributed more to the present wealth of that city than the cost of its entire school system during their connection with the High School. One of the young ladies of that class is the wife of one of the wealthiest men in the country-a man who has

contributed largely to the material prosperity of Cleveland, more largely, probably, than any other citizen. Another young lady greatly assisted in the devising and adoption of those improved methods of primary teaching for which the Cleveland schools early received so much merited commendation.

Not the chief end of school education is to prepare pupils for the business of life. The getting of a living implies that this is only a means to a higher end. Living is not the end of life. The graduate of the high school is to be the head and guide of a family, a member of society, a citizen of the State, a subject of Divine government, and out of these relations will flow duties and obligations of the highest practical importance. The one comprehensive end of education is to prepare man to live completely, and hence the highest function of the teacher is not to train an artisan, but to make a man. Manhood is the supreme test of the school, and the chief element in manhood is character As a result of school-training, character is much more important than culture. What man most needs is not better leeks and onions, but deliverance from this Egypt of animal dominion-a passage-way through the Red Sea that he may escape from this worse than Egyptian bondage of appetite and lust, to a Canaan of manhood and light; and in this final exodus of the race the teacher, under God, must be its Moses.

There are two extreme views on the moral training in the public school. The one asserts that moral training in the school must be completely divorced from religion, and that such divorcement is consistent with the most effective moral instruction. The other holds that technical or formal religious instruction must be made the basis of all moral training, and that the absence of such instruction in a school renders its moral training ineffective. It has long seemed to me that the truth lies between these two extremes. I have little confidence in the efficacy of any system of moral training that may properly be characterized as Godless; and, on the other hand, what is needed to give efficacy to moral training in school is not formal religious instruction, but religious influence-the enforcing of the authority of the conscience by religious motives and sanctions. When a witness appears in court to give testimony, he is not instructed in religious doctrines, but the oath administered appeals to the Supreme Source of authority, to the Omniscient Searcher of hearts, to quicken and enforce the authority of conscience. A like use of the authority and sanction of religion is needed to quicken the conscience of the young and make it regal in the life. It may be possible for the courts to

dispense with the religious oath, but it never will be practicable to dispense with religious sanctions in the moral training of youth.

Every moral code that commands and secures obedience among men derives its highest and most restraining authority from religion, and this is as true in Pagan as in Christian countries. Back of the "Thou must not" of the conscience, must be heard the " Thou shalt not" of the Lord. Make right and wrong rest solely on human authority, and the restraining power of conscience is sadly weakened. Virtue may soon become mere self-restraint, temperance, moral cowardice, and theft the secret redistribution of wrong accumulations. What is needed in the moral training of the young is the making of the conscience regal by the proper use of the sanctions and authority of religion. To this end a Christrain teacher is better than the catechism, and a reverent recognition of Divine authority is better than Scripture exegesis. There is a practical mean in the public school between Godless moral training and technical religious instruction. The American teacher is showing that vital religious influence is more essential in moral training than formal religious instruction.-The American Teacher.

Incentives in the School.

Diligence in study and good order in school instruction and management must be attained by an appeal to motives which quicken the child's sense of right and duty, and develop his moral nature. It is easy to hedge in a child's conduct by punishments and to urge him forward by artificial rewards; but when the restraining hedge is broken down and the temporary incitement is wanting, then there is seen the need of the power of self-guidance and self-impulsion-an in-dwelling monitor and a never-failing impulse. The school life of the pupil should prepare him to be a self-governing being.

Incentives may be classified as natural and artificial. Natural incentives are those which arise from the nature of the subject, or are a natural result, not a necessary consequence, of full success or complete attainment. Among these are:

The pleasure of duty done.

The inward reward of obedience.

The satisfaction of success.

The hope of future good.

The desire for knowledge.

« AnteriorContinuar »