.
| [Excerpted from the
article, "My Pedagogic Creed," The School Journal,
Vol. LIV, No.3 (January 16, 1897), pp. 77-80] |
ARTICLE I -- What Education Is
I believe that all education proceeds by the participation of the
individual in the social consciousness of the race. This process begins
unconsciously almost at birth, and is continually shaping the
individual's powers, saturating his consciousness, forming his habits,
training his ideas, and arousing his feelings and emotions. Through this
unconscious education the individual gradually comes to share in the
intellectual and moral resources which humanity has succeeded in getting
together. He becomes an inheritor of the funded capital of civilization.
The most formal and technical education in the world cannot safely
depart from this general process. It can only organize it or
differentiate it in some particular direction.
I believe that the only true education comes through the stimulation of
the child's powers by the demands of the social situations in which he
finds himself. Through these demands he is stimulated to act as a member
of a unity, to emerge from his original narrowness of action and
feeling, and to conceive of himself from the standpoint of the welfare
of the group to which he belongs. Through the responses which others
make to his own activities he comes to know what these mean in social
terms. The value which they have is reflected back into them. For
instance, through the response which is made to the child's instinctive
babblings the child comes to know what those babblings mean; they are
transformed into articulate language and thus the child is introduced
into the consolidated wealth of ideas and emotions which are now summed
up in language.
I believe that this educational process has two sides - one
psychological and one sociological; and that neither can be subordinated
to the other or neglected without evil results following. Of these two
sides, the psychological is the basis. The child's own instincts and
powers furnish the material and give the starting point for all
education. Save as the efforts of the educator connect with some
activity which the child is carrying on of his own initiative
independent of the educator, education becomes reduced to a pressure
from without. It may, indeed, give certain external results, but cannot
truly be called educative. Without insight into the psychological
structure and activities of the individual, the educative process will,
therefore, be haphazard and arbitrary. If it chances to coincide with
the child's activity it will get a leverage; if it does not, it will
result in friction, or disintegration, or arrest of the child nature.
I believe that knowledge of social conditions, of the present state of
civilization, is necessary in order properly to interpret the child's
powers. The child has his own instincts and tendencies, but we do not
know what these mean until we can translate them into their social
equivalents. We must be able to carry them back into a social past and
see them as the inheritance of previous race activities. We must also be
able to project them into the future to see what their outcome and end
will be. In the illustration just used, it is the ability to see in the
child's babblings the promise and potency of a future social intercourse
and conversation which enables one to deal in the proper way with that
instinct.
I believe that the psychological and social sides are organically
related and that education cannot be regarded as a compromise between
the two, or a superimposition of one upon the other. We are told that
the psychological definition of education is barren and formal - that it
gives us only the idea of a development of all the mental powers without
giving us any idea of the use to which these powers are put. On the
other hand, it is urged that the social definition of education, as
getting adjusted to civilization, makes of it a forced and external
process, and results in subordinating the freedom of the individual to a
preconceived social and political status.
I believe that each of these objections is true when urged against one
side isolated from the other. In order to know what a power really is we
must know what its end, use, or function is; and this we cannot know
save as we conceive of the individual as active in social relationships.
But, on the other hand, the only possible adjustment which we can give
to the child under existing conditions, is that which arises through
putting him in complete possession of all his powers. With the advent of
democracy and modern industrial conditions, it is impossible to foretell
definitely just what civilization will be twenty years from now. Hence
it is impossible to prepare the child for any precise set of conditions.
To prepare him for the future life means to give him command of himself;
it means so to train him that he will have the full and ready use of all
his capacities; that his eye and ear and hand may be tools ready to
command, that his judgment may be capable of grasping the conditions
under which it has to work, and the executive forces be trained to act
economically and efficiently. It is impossible to reach this sort of
adjustment save as constant regard is had to the individual's own
powers, tastes, and interests - say, that is, as education is
continually converted into psychological terms.
In sum, I believe that the individual who is to be educated is a social
individual and that society is an organic union of individuals. If we
eliminate the social factor from the child we are left only with an
abstraction; if we eliminate the individual factor from society, we are
left only with an inert and lifeless mass. Education, therefore, must
begin with a psychological insight into the child's capacities,
interests, and habits. It must be controlled at every point by reference
to these same considerations. These powers, interests, and habits must
be continually interpreted - we must know what they mean. They must be
translated into terms of their social equivalents-into terms of what
they are capable of in the way of social service.
ARTICLE II -- What the School Is
I believe that the school is primarily a social institution. Education
being a social process, the school is simply that form of community life
in which all those agencies are concentrated that will be most effective
in bringing the child to share in the inherited resources of the race,
and to use his own powers for social ends.
I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a
preparation for future living.
I believe that the school must represent present life - life as real
and vital to the child as that which he carries on in the home, in the
neighborhood, or on the playground.
I believe that education which does not occur through forms of life, or
that are worth living for their own sake, is always a poor substitute
for the genuine reality and tends to cramp and to deaden.
I believe that the school, as an institution, should simplify existing
social life; should reduce it, as it were, to an embryonic form.
Existing life is so complex that the child cannot be brought into
contact with it without either confusion or distraction; he is either
overwhelmed by the multiplicity of activities which are going on, so
that he loses his own power of orderly reaction, or he is so stimulated
by these various activities that his powers are prematurely called into
play and he becomes either unduly specialized or else disintegrated.
I believe that as such simplified social life, the school life should
grow gradually out of the home life; that it should take up and continue
the activities with which the child is already familiar in the home.
I believe that it should exhibit these activities to the child, and
reproduce them in such ways that the child will gradually learn the
meaning of them, and be capable of playing his own part in relation to
them.
I believe that this is a psychological necessity, because it is the
only way of securing continuity in the child's growth, the only way of
giving a back-ground of past experience to the new ideas given in
school.
I believe that it is also a social necessity because the home is the
form of social life in which the child has been nurtured and in
connection with which he has had his moral training. It is the business
of the school to deepen and extend his sense of the values bound up in
his home life.
I believe that much of present education fails because it neglects this
fundamental principle of the school as a form of community life. It
conceives the school as a place where certain information is to be
given, where certain lessons are to be learned, or where certain habits
are to be formed. The value of these is conceived as lying largely in
the remote future; the child must do these things for the sake of
something else he is to do; they are mere preparation. As a result they
do not become a part of the life experience of the child and so are not
truly educative.
I believe that the moral education centers upon this conception of the
school as a mode of social life, that the best and deepest moral
training is precisely that which one gets through having to enter into
proper relations with others in a unity of work and thought. The present
educational systems, so far as they destroy or neglect this unity,
render it difficult or impossible to get any genuine, regular moral
training.
I believe that the child should be stimulated and controlled in his
work through the life of the community.
I believe that under existing conditions far too much of the stimulus
and control proceeds from the teacher, because of neglect of the idea of
the school as a form of social life.
I believe that the teacher's place and work in the school is to be
interpreted from this same basis. The teacher is not in the school to
impose certain ideas or to form certain habits in the child, but is
there as a member of the community to select the influences which shall
affect the child and to assist him in properly responding to these
influences.
I believe that the discipline of the school should proceed from the
life of the school as a whole and not directly from the teacher.
I believe that the teacher's business is simply to determine on the
basis of larger experience and riper wisdom, how the discipline of life
shall come to the child.
I believe that all questions of the grading of the child and his
promotion should be determined by reference to the same standard.
Examinations are of use only so far as they test the child's fitness for
social life and reveal the place in which he can be of the most service
and where he can receive the most help.
ARTICLE III -- The Subject-Matter of Education
I believe that the social life of the child is the basis of
concentration, or correlation, in all his training or growth. The social
life gives the unconscious unity and the background of all his efforts
and of all his attainments.
I believe that the subject-matter of the school curriculum should mark
a gradual differentiation out of the primitive unconscious unity of
social life.
I believe that we violate the child's nature and render difficult the
best ethical results, by introducing the child too abruptly to a number
of special studies, of reading, writing, geography, etc., out of
relation to this social life.
I believe, therefore, that the true center of correlation on the school
subjects is not science, nor literature, nor history, nor geography, but
the child's own social activities.
I believe that education cannot be unified in the study of science, or
so-called nature study, because apart from human activity, nature itself
is not a unity; nature in itself is a number of diverse objects in space
and time, and to attempt to make it the center of work by itself, is to
introduce a principle of radiation rather than one of concentration.
I believe that literature is the reflex expression and interpretation
of social experience; that hence it must follow upon and not precede
such experience. It, therefore, cannot be made the basis, although it
may be made the summary of unification.
I believe once more that history is of educative value in so far as it
presents phases of social life and growth. It must be controlled by
reference to social life. When taken simply as history it is thrown into
the distant past and becomes dead and inert. Taken as the record of
man's social life and progress it becomes full of meaning. I believe,
however, that it cannot be so taken excepting as the child is also
introduced directly into social life. I believe accordingly that the
primary basis of education is in the child's powers at work along the
same general constructive lines as those which have brought civilization
into being.
I believe that the only way to make the child conscious of his social
heritage is to enable him to perform those fundamental types of activity
which make civilization what it is.
I believe, therefore, in the so-called expressive or constructive
activities as the center of correlation.
I believe that this gives the standard for the place of cooking,
sewing, manual training, etc., in the school.
I believe that they are not special studies which are to be introduced
over and above a lot of others in the way of relaxation or relief, or as
additional accomplishments. I believe rather that they represent, as
types, fundamental forms of social activity; and that it is possible and
desirable that the child's introduction into the more formal subjects of
the curriculum be through the medium of these activities.
I believe that the study of science is educational in so far as it
brings out the materials and processes which make social life what it
is.
I believe that one of the greatest difficulties in the present teaching
of science is that the material is presented in purely objective form,
or is treated as a new peculiar kind of experience which the child can
add to that which he has already had. In reality, science is of value
because it gives the ability to interpret and control the experience
already had. It should be introduced, not as so much new subject-matter,
but as showing the factors already involved in previous experience and
as furnishing tools by which that experience can be more easily and
effectively regulated.
I believe that at present we lose much of the value of literature and
language studies because of our elimination of the social element.
Language is almost always treated in the books of pedagogy simply as the
expression of thought. It is true that language is a logical instrument,
but it is fundamentally and primarily a social instrument. Language is
the device for communication; it is the tool through which one
individual comes to share the ideas and feelings of others. When treated
simply as a way of getting individual information, or as a means of
showing oft what one has learned, it loses its social motive and end.
I believe that there is, therefore, no succession of studies in the
ideal school curriculum. If education is life, all life has, from the
outset, a scientific aspect, an aspect of art and culture, and an aspect
of communication. It cannot, therefore, be true that the proper studies
for one grade are mere reading and writing, and that at a later grade,
reading, or literature, or science, may be introduced. The progress is
not in the succession of studies but in the development of new attitudes
towards, and new interests in, experience.
I believe finally, that education must be conceived as a continuing
reconstruction of experience; that the process and the goal of education
are one and the same thing.
I believe that to set up any end outside of education, as furnishing
its goal and standard, is to deprive the educational process of much of
its meaning and tends to make us rely upon false and external stimuli in
dealing with the child.
ARTICLE IV -- The Nature of Method
I believe that the question of method is ultimately reducible to the
question of the order of development of the child's powers and
interests. The law for presenting and treating material is the law
implicit within the child's own nature. Because this is so I believe the
following statements are of supreme importance as determining the spirit
in which education is carried on:
1. I believe that the active side precedes the passive in
the development of the child nature; that expression conies before
conscious impression; that the muscular development precedes the
sensory; that movements come before conscious sensations; I believe
that consciousness is essentially motor or impulsive; that conscious
states tend to project themselves in action.
I believe that the neglect of this principle is the cause of a large
part of the waste of time and strength in school work. The child is
thrown into a passive, receptive, or absorbing attitude. The
conditions are such that he is not permitted to follow the law of his
nature; the result is friction and waste.
I believe that ideas (intellectual and rational processes) also
result from action and devolve for the sake of the better control of
action. What we term reason is primarily the law of orderly or
effective action. To attempt to develop the reasoning powers, the
powers of judgment, without reference to the selection and arrangement
of means in action, is the fundamental fallacy in our present methods
of dealing with this matter. As a result we present the child with
arbitrary symbols. Symbols are a necessity in mental development, but
they have their place as tools for economizing effort; presented by
themselves they are a mass of meaningless and arbitrary ideas imposed
from without.
2. I believe that the image is the great instrument of instruction.
What a child gets out of any subject presented to him is simply the
images which he himself forms with regard to it.
I believe that if nine tenths of the energy at present directed
towards making the child learn certain things, were spent in seeing to
it that the child was forming proper images, the work of instruction
would be indefinitely [infinitely?] facilitated.
I believe that much of the time and attention now given to the
preparation and presentation of lessons might be more wisely and
profitably expended in training the child's power of imagery and in
seeing to it that he was continually forming definite, vivid, and
growing images of the various subjects with which he comes in contact
in his experience.
3. I believe that interests are the signs and symptoms of growing
power. I believe that they represent dawning capacities. Accordingly
the constant and careful observation of interests is of the utmost
importance for the educator.
I believe that these interests are to be observed as showing the
state of development which the child has reached.
I believe that they prophesy the stage upon which he is about to
enter.
I believe that only through the continual and sympathetic observation
of childhood's interests can the adult enter into the child's life and
see what it is ready for, and upon what material it could work most
readily and fruitfully.
I believe that these interests are neither to be humored nor
repressed. To repress interest is to substitute the adult for the
child, and so to weaken intellectual curiosity and alertness, to
suppress initiative, and to deaden interest. To humor the interests is
to substitute the transient for the permanent. The interest is always
the sign of some power below; the important thing is to discover this
power. To humor the interest is to fail to penetrate below the surface
and its sure result is to substitute caprice and whim for genuine
interest.
4. I believe that the emotions are the reflex of actions.
I believe that to endeavor to stimulate or arouse the emotions apart
from their corresponding activities, is to introduce an unhealthy and
morbid state of mind.
I believe that if we can only secure right habits of action and
thought, with reference to the good, the true, and the beautiful, the
emotions will for the most part take care of themselves.
I believe that next to deadness and dullness, formalism and routine,
our education is threatened with no greater evil than sentimentalism.
I believe that this sentimentalism is the necessary result of the
attempt to divorce feeling from action.
ARTICLE V -- The School and Social Progress
I believe that education is the fundamental method of social progress
and reform.
I believe that all reforms which rest simply upon the enactment of law,
or the threatening of certain penalties, or upon changes in mechanical
or outward arrangements, are transitory and futile.
I believe that education is a regulation of the process of coming to
share in the social consciousness; and that the adjustment of individual
activity on the basis of this social consciousness is the only sure
method of social reconstruction.
I believe that this conception has due regard for both the
individualistic and socialistic ideals. It is duly individual because it
recognizes the formation of a certain character as the only genuine
basis of right living. It is socialistic because it recognizes that this
right character is not to be formed by merely individual precept,
example, or exhortation, but rather by the influence of a certain form
of institutional or community life upon the individual, and that the
social organism through the school, as its organ, may determine ethical
results.
I believe that in the ideal school we have the reconciliation of the
individualistic and the institutional ideals.
I believe that the community's duty to education is, therefore, its
paramount moral duty. By law and punishment, by social agitation and
discussion, society can regulate and form itself in a more or less
haphazard and chance way. But through education society can formulate
its own purposes, can organize its own means and resources, and thus
shape itself with definiteness and economy in the direction in which it
wishes to move.
I believe that when society once recognizes the possibilities in this
direction, and the obligations which these possibilities impose, it is
impossible to conceive of the resources of time, attention, and money
which will be put at the disposal of the educator.
I believe that it is the business of every one interested in education
to insist upon the school as the primary and most effective interest of
social progress and reform in order that society may be awakened to
realize what the school stands for, and aroused to the necessity of
endowing the educator with sufficient equipment properly to perform his
task.
I believe that education thus conceived marks the most perfect and
intimate union of science and art conceivable in human experience.
I believe that the art of thus giving shape to human powers and
adapting them to social service, is the supreme art; one calling into
its service the best of artists; that no insight, sympathy, tact,
executive power is too great for such service.
I believe that with the growth of psychological service, giving added
insight into individual structure and laws of growth; and with growth of
social science, adding to our knowledge of the right organization of
individuals, all scientific resources can be utilized for the purposes
of education.
I believe that when science and art thus join hands the most commanding
motive for human action will be reached; the most genuine springs of
human conduct aroused and the best service that human nature is capable
of guaranteed.
I believe, finally, that the teacher is engaged, not simply in the
training of individuals, but in the formation of the proper social life.
I believe that every teacher should realize the dignity of his calling;
that he is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of proper
social order and the securing of the right social growth.
I believe that in this way the teacher always is the prophet of the
true God and the usherer in of the true kingdom of God.
|