Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

changing them over to less advanced classes. This cannot fail to result in a large percentage of pupils who spend more than the normal time in accomplishing the period of work than would be the case under more favorable circumstances,-a condition of things which should always be a serious reflection upon any system. Nor can we answer the evidence that a system operates to the disadvantage of such pupils by claiming that this loss is more than offset by the gains to the bright pupils, for it is very evident that bright pupils can be led to forge far ahead of the average under any system. Nor, for the same reason, is it a sufficient answer to this tendency of the lower portion of the class to settle down rather than to rise upward that the system increases the relative proportion of pupils in the upper grades, for it is comparatively easy to direct a rapid movement of the quicker portion of classes from the lower to the higher grades. What a system of classification does for the lower half of the class is a much safer test of its efficiency than what it does for the upper half. At least, the vital organic unity between the teacher and the most needy pupils should be religiously guarded and fostered in all of our educational schemes, for it is this unity which really tests the school, and all our equipment, close organization and time-saving schemes prove futile without it.

All short interval plans to be of value necessitate the maximum amount of changes of pupils from section to section or from stream to stream. This constantly overburdens the teacher with new material and prevents the development of a strong and helpful class spirit. A good class spirit arises only through confidence and sympathy, and these require time and intimate association for their development. Anything which prevents or breaks in upon this schoolroom tone lowers the efficiency of the teacher and makes impossible the subjective unity which really constitutes the school.

It is probably true that when all educational waste is removed, the work now planned for an eight year elementary course can be thoroughly covered in less time and without sacrificing any of the exceedingly valuable ethical elements. But a more rational method of accomplishing this would seem to be to permit each satisfactory teacher to take her class over as large a

portion as possible of the eight years' work, paying especial attention to the lower half of her class, and dropping back only those who get hopelessly in arrears. While the course of study is flexible, numbers, of course, are not, and under such a plan provision would have to be made, say twice a year, for some slight readjustment on account of the size of the class. By this arrangement teachers would be free to ignore grade limits and to continue and complete a subject while interest in it is keen; and there would be little or no loss from going over subjects again and again as is now necessary because pupils periodically pass into the hands of new teachers, who usually devote some of the first few weeks to finding out what they do not know. But would not transferred children be difficult to classify for their new school? Not necessarily, for the teacher would not be working without system, although not closely following the logical order of the course of study, and she and the principal could readily determine the grade at any time the transfer might be requested. Nor would it be necessary to worry about the work of the pupil in the new school to which he is sent, for we must not lose sight of the fact that the young pupil is not conscious of the logical order of subjects, and what appear to us as breaks and gaps are often not at all a serious detriment to the pupil. Hence, if he should find himself behind the new class in some subject, he would be just as likely to be ahead of them in some others and could readily take up the work necessary to fill in whatever gap might exist.

5. Any system of grading or classification which makes pos sible a marked separation of bright and dull pupils is both unnatural and unpedagogical. Dr. Seeley says that in no case should bright and dull pupils be segregated, for "bright pupils need not be retarded in their progress by association with those who must proceed more slowly. They learn to be more thorough, while, on the other hand, their quickness of perception. stimulates the slower pupils to greater intellectual activity. It is not sacrificing the one for the other, for there is mutual benefit to both the bright and the dull child by association. Besides, as has been shown elsewhere, there is abundance of extra material available to those who are capable of doing more than the

regular tasks." He advocates two regular promotions a year, with incidental promotions and the division of each class into two parts, and adds, "A long experience with children in graded schools leads me to say, in the first place, I am convinced that there are comparatively few pupils who are injured by being retarded in their school work because they fail of rapid promotion."

Any system of grading which has for its purpose the shortening of the time for completing the course of study for only bright pupils, carries with it two dangerous tendencies: one is to bring into undue prominence mere book knowledge, or the formal side of education as opposed to the thought or development side of education which requires more time than the getting of facts; the other is the gradual increase of the percentage of backward pupils in the lower grades and in the lowest class of a grade. The latter seems inevitable because the system is continually holding the incentive of moving up rapidly before the kind of pupils who can easily meet the requirements of rapid advancement. When to this we add the tendency to adhere to the teaching of facts rather than to the development of power, a sufficiently large percentage of pupils is able to move up rapidly as to give abnormally large upper grades. There are sufficient natural, and it should be added unavoidable, reasons, for pupils leaving school after the first four or five years which tend to cut down the normal percentage of pupils in the grammar grades of a unit school to very considerably less than fifty per cent, and it is probable that a careful looking after the interests of the more backward pupils under such conditions would show that the system is operating against them, while at the same time it is affecting the thoroughness and thought-work of the other pupils. We cannot force educational growth and yet maintain proper educational conditions.

At any rate, life conditions bring together people of all sorts of ability, no doubt to the common benefit of all, and in school it is neither easy nor pedagogically safe to decide just who are the bright and who are the dull. The teachers who classified the late President of France and our own General Grant as dull pupils made a serious mistake, and the steady-going, phleg

matic pupil, whose mind is not quick enough to keep up with the torrent of questions of the nervously tensioned teacher, not infrequently outranks his bright classmates when he gets an opportunity to think and to do. Then, too, very bright pupils are often notoriously dull in some subjects and, as a class, are so self-conscious of their ability that it seems wise to hold them down to a more harmonious and steady mental growth.

6. There should not be more formal promotions or reclassifications during the year than the number of classes or sections which a teacher can manage to the greatest advantage within her own room. Otherwise, under the varied and changing conditions of a large city, an unusually large number of teachers will of necessity have more classes than they can advantageously teach. While in a large school, having a large number of parallel grades, short-interval promotions can be carried on without this, even there, at times, it is not easy to avoid it and yet properly adjust numbers and at the same time maintain a high standard of promotion.

There are certain fallacies connected with the subject of classification and promotion which should be noted:

1. That pupils of different ability cannot work up to their full capacity if given similar work under the same teacher. Not only is this an error, but the whole subject of classification of pupils must always remain largely dependent upon the character of teaching desired; for teaching is just as much more important than classification as methods and principles are more important than devices. Before deciding upon a method of classification, we should clearly determine whether the aim of our teaching shall be the saving of time or the accomplishment of the most within the specified time of the course. While this need not affect our attitude towards special cases, it will greatly influence our methods of work, and hence the system of classification under which we work becomes important. There are two methods of teaching in vogue: in one the teacher or the text-book, or both combined, give the pupil everything which he is to learn or to do; in the other method, the teacher from the beginning makes the pupil as independent as possible of herself and the text-book in his learning and doing. In teaching the combination of numbers producing 7, the first teacher would

deem it proper to place the combinations on the board and have the pupils learn them; the second teacher will have so instructed her class that, by the time they reach the number 7, they will be able to find the numbers which in combination will produce 7. Under the first teacher, pupils of different capacity work together at a loss; under the second, the bright pupil works out more combinations than the slower pupil, but each derives full benefit from the exercise because he is working up to his capacity. And one has probably just as good an understanding of the matter as the other.

2. A second fallacy is in the belief that the close grading of our highly organized schools insures the best work. The pendulum has probably swung as high as it ever will in the direction of getting, as nearly as possible, pupils of exactly the same ability and standing in the same schoolroom. We have been following such high tension methods of continual recitation and work under the immediate direction of the teacher, that the need for the poise of self-deliberation and self-effort are becoming manifest. Many are coming to see the advantages of two classes or sections, at least in some of the more important branches, in the same room, so that while one section is reciting the other may be working or studying in a way which most profitably employs their best efforts. This removes the necessity for such close grading, and provides, in the best possible way within the class itself, for a free and easy readjustment on the basis of ability. Then, too, it is difficult to disassociate close grading from marks and mechanical teaching, and it is practically impossible under it to keep promotion from becoming to the child the most important thing in its school life.

3. A third fallacy is that a large percentage of elementary pupils leave school because of failure to secure promotion. Careful investigations of the causes for pupils' leaving school have been made at various times. All of these point out very clearly the primary causes to be temperament and the desire or necessity of going to work; and as secondary causes, ill-health, truancy, bad habits, etc. While, unquestionably, in some cases failure in school work hastens the time of leaving, it probably more frequently has been made the scapegoat of a parent's cupidity or of the pupil's own indifference. It is not at all likely

« AnteriorContinuar »