To teach form in an interesting manner, to make it plain to the child
without giving him any terms, but rather coaxing him by ingenuity to
formulate his own knowledge, is a difficult thing to do, and should
not be attempted at all with very young children. It seems
unnecessary to say that Froebel did not intend the ball should be made
a medium of object lessons for babies, although this distorted view of
his idea seems to have entered the minds of some critics.
The child, when old enough to enter a kindergarten, will generally
know round objects, and be somewhat familiar with the ball already in
his home plays. We should let him roll and grasp it in his tiny
fingers, till gradually, in comparison with other objects handled in
the same way, he notices the absence of corners, edges, or any
obstructions which would meet his touch or eye. Then we may ask him if
he could make a ball out of a rough block of wood which we show. Some
bright little one will guess that a carpenter could do it with his
tools. "What would he have to do?" "Plane it off," will perhaps be the
answer. "Where and how is he to plane?" may be the next inquiry, and
the child often answers, "All the rough parts and the parts that stick
out." "Why does he like to play ball?" He does not know exactly.
"Would he like to play ball with the scissors?" "Why not?" "Then why
does he like to feel the ball in his hand?"
After such preliminary conversations upon the form of the ball, we may
lead the children first to note other round things in the room, and
then to recall what they have at home of a similar shape and what
they may have seen in the streets. These exercises are always
delightful to the little ones, and are invaluable to the
kindergartner, as they furnish a thorough test of the child's
comprehension of the subject she has been handling.[12] We should
notice slight divergences from the spherical form in the objects the
children name, and speak of them. They will soon be able to tell in
every case where the egg or cobblestone is not "just round."
[12] "Finding forms of the same general shape as those taken
as types is of the highest importance. Unless this is done,
pupils are not learning to pass from the particular to the
general. They are not taught to see many things through the
one, and the impression they gain is that the particular
forms observed are the only forms of this kind. Unless that
which the pupil observes aids him in interpreting something
else, it is of no value to him. Certain things are taught
that through them other things may be seen. Pupils should not
be trained to see for the sake of the seeing, but that they
may have the power to see." W. W. Speer, _Lessons in Form_.
They will of course mention stove-lids, dinner-plates, etc., as round
objects, and the attempt to give a clear and definite understanding of
the difference between solids and planes is difficult at first, but
they very soon discriminate between rounding objects that possess
thickness and those that are flat but have curved edges. A ball of
putty or one of dough is a good thing with which to illustrate this
difference.
We must remember that any abstract teaching on Form is too difficult
at this time, much more difficult than Color. Let the children, during
these first few weeks, draw circles on the blackboard and on paper,
and sew, and draw pictures of balls, peaches, or round fruits; they
may also make balls of wax, dough, or clay. Rousseau says, "A child
may forget what he sees, and sooner still what is said to him, but he
never forgets what he has made."