66

Kindergarten

MARY FRANCES SCHAEFFER,

T

ETHICAL CULTURE SCHOOL, NEW YORK CITY

HAT the kindergarten world is in a state of ferment has been evinced recently by some heated discussions in one of our leading universities. Differences of opinion have arisen from two extreme views taken by many leading kindergartners. The conservatives claim to stand loyal to Froebel by contending for the literal interpretation of his thought as expressed in "Education of Man," "The Mutter and Kose Lieder," and Pedagogics of the Kindergarten." The progressives or radicals favor the reorganization of Froebelian theory and practice in the light of recent developments in child study and the newer psychology. This conflict is but another instance of the clash that has ever existed between the old and the new, tradition and progress, classicism and romanticism, idealism and realism. The leaders of the old school still look upon Froebel as a seer, and will not permit any inroads of modern scientific discoveries in child study that would demand radical changes in some of the practical work of the kindergarten. The leaders of the new school claim that the revelations of the truths of to-day are but the outgrowth of the revelations of yesterday, and the enfolders of that which will be revealed in the clearer light of to-morrow. The most significant feature of this controversy is the demand the educational world is making upon the kindergarten to get rid of many practices which it affirms are unscientific and unpedagogic. Dean Russell, of Teachers' College, says: "Principles of education, to stand the test, must be good and valid everywhere. Practice cannot be justified by tradition or eccentricity excused on appeal to authority." Dr. McVannel likewise offers a timely warning when he says: "To the disciples of Froebel, his system has become a unique power, not merely over the heart, but over the thought and life as well. They are indebted to him for a new interest imparted to their work, and for the inde

structible confidence that education is no empirical matter, but has its warrant deep in the very nature of the world. His philosophy of education, taken as a whole, seems, perhaps, the most satisfactory we have yet had. One cannot but believe, however, that the candid reader will at times find conclusions in his writings sustained by reasonings inadequately developed, and important questions by no means satisfactorily answered. We must not, therefore, permit ourselves, through mere kindliness of heart or intellectual inertia, to accept or emphasize as true or final all that Froebel ever said or did."

Kindergartners are practically of one mind regarding the appointments and furnishings of the kindergarten room, and are agreed in general upon the value of story telling, songs, games, and play, rhythm and play-activities or work as essential features which afford the child a somewhat conscious revelation of himself and his relation to the life about him. The difficulties arise in determining the nature of the stories and games; the practice with the materials known as gifts and occupations; and the distinction which is made between play and work. The problems then group themselves under three heads: first, the program; second, games; and third, work and play.

First, by the program is meant the definite plan of daily procedure extending through the school year. Both conservatives and radicals agree that each day's work should grow naturally out of each preceding day, and that the year's work should form a cycle of experiences leading the child to a growing consciousness of the various relationships-in the home, as a member of the family; in the school, as a member of another whole; in the industrial world, as consumer and producer (in a small way); in the city or state, as a citizen and sharer in its life; in the church, as one with all mankind, having the same Divine inheritance; and in nature, as one with all animate and inanimate life, subject to the same universal, beneficent Law.

The conservatives advocate the use of a universal program, finding the source for topics of interest for the subject matter of their curriculum in Froebel's Mother Play Book. The progressives do not believe in a universal program. They con

tend that the same law of creative self-activity is as essential to the life and growth of every kindergartner as to every child; and that only as she uses her powers of mind and heart in developing a program best adapted to individual needs, will she grow in knowledge and power, and insight into the nature of the child and the laws of his growth and development.

It is far more important for a teacher to evolve a program that will help the child-say of our city slums-to find his real self in an environment filled with pernicious influences, than to follow a perfected plan constructed for the child "generic" rather than the child "specific." She will have to study her own particular neighborhood and families in order to find "points of departure," seeking for beauty, order, and virtue even in the "mud and scum of things." Prof. Edward L. Prof. Edward L. Thorndyke says: "No single curriculum could possibly be the best for all kindergartens, no single method could possibly be the best for all kindergartners. To use the time honored phrase, every kindergarten is confronted more by concrete conditions than by abstract theories. Very great freedom should be allowed to kindergartners in the conduct of their work, provided only that they are individually capable and so educated as really to deserve professional rank."

Froebel's Mother Play Book was written as a result of his study and observations of the peasant mothers in the smaller cities of Germany in their associations with their children. Nature was very near and closely related to the simple home life of these people, hence we find fully two thirds of the book devoted to some form of nature plays. Many of the primitive industries were still practiced, such as the wheelwright, the joiner, the charcoal burner. These are found among the plays. The radicals claim the significant lesson taught by this book is the use the great Froebel made of the simple environment of the child; that he meant it as illustrating a principle of growth. They believe herein lies the key to the whole problem, hence would begin where Froebel began, with the known, the real, and lead to the unknown, the ideal. The conservatives contend that Froebel intended the book to set forth typical experiences which all children should have, hence they follow it almost religiously.

Second, on the subject of games: the divergence of ways seems even wider than on that of the program. Dr. W. T. Harris says, in speaking upon this phase of the kindergarten: "In the plays and games he (the child) becomes conscious of this general or social self, and there dawns the higher ideal of a self that is realized in institutions over against the special self of the particular individual. Here the child climbs up, on this symbolic pathway, through play, to the absolute Mind." Miss Susan E. Blow suggests a similar thought in her chapter on "The Meaning of Play," in Symbolic Education: "May not the child receive even in babyhood a prejudice in favor of the universal life, and, from the beginning of his conscious career, live in the clear sunlight and fresh air of the generic ideal, instead of being shut up in the prison walls of his own atomic individuality?"

The radicals do not believe such stage of development possible with even a five year old child. They believe with Schiller, that "Deep meaning oft lies hid in childish play," but they do not believe that the child plays a particular game because of any consciousness or premonition of its symbolism, but because he likes the activity involved in the particular play. Take, for example, the play of the knights, so popular in the kindergartens of the conservatives. The child can only become interested in it through the pictures shown him, for there are few castles in our time, and no knights of mediæval times to be seen "galloping fast and galloping free." The knight is a" de-personalized "individual, clothed with all the virtues bravery, kindliness, and strength can lend. He comes to greet the "good" child. Here again "good" is used in an abstract or general sense. When the knight comes to greet the child the second time, he is sad to find the little one has been "bad." The radicals would illustrate knighthood or valor by selecting a story, or stories, of the heroic acts of particular persons within the possible knowledge of the child, as for instance, the fireman, the policeman, the soldier, or the sailor. The hero would have a name, the incident would occur in a particular place, and the rescued would be, perhaps, a little girl named Elizabeth." They would idealize the virtue found in the

individual familiar to everyday life rather than in the far off mystical somebody who lived some time, somewhere. It is simply the choice between "raising a mortal to the skies, or bringing an angel down."

The third point of difference lies in the use of the kindergarten materials, called by the initiated-Gifts and Occupations. Froebel believed that the individual could not realize his threefold inheritance as a child of Nature, Man, and God, without a knowledge of the more formal aspects of nature as they are embodied in form, size, number, direction, and position. In order that the individual might begin the conquest of nature, he planned a series of objects known as Gifts. This series of gifts logically related represents a complete analysis of form from the sphere through the various solid forms of three dimensions in ball, cube, and cylinder, also divided cubes in the building blocks; surface forms of two dimensions in circular, square and triangular tablets; forms of only one dimension in sticks and rings of varying length and size, down to the final analysis in the point represented by the seed. A corresponding synthesis is represented by the occupations, beginning with the point in perforating, followed by lines curved and straight in sewing and linear drawing, surfaces in paper folding, and weaving; skeleton outlines in peas and sticks, also cardboard modeling, which brings us to the solid again in clay modeling, and thus completes the "Alphabet of Form." *

The conservatives believe in the use of this material by means of what they term "restricted play." "Not so much to illustrate the real or vicarious experiences of life as to acquaint the mind with general properties of matter" (Miss Harrison). Miss Mills voices the thought of the radicals when she says: "The formal use of the gifts violates the order of mental development in that it forces abstract, logical forms of thought upon the child at an age when the mental life is developed by means of apperceptive activities. The development of logical power

* For elucidation of the gifts see "Pedagogics of the Kindergarten," Froebel; Kindergarten Guide, by Madame Kraus Boelte; Kindergarten Building Gifts, by Elizabeth Harrison; The Kindergarten Gifts, by Harriette M. Mills; Teachers' College Record, November, 1904.