Revolutionary periods. The work begun in the Colonial period prepared
men to act a noble part in the Revolutionary period. The _truth_ of the
educational system would bear fruit, but the error which we have already
noticed was in great danger of gaining strength enough to choke the
pure principles. Mere accusations amount to but little. Let it suffice
to follow the history of educational progress through the next century.
Results speak for themselves.
II. THE REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD.
[Sidenote: Founding preparatory schools]
In addition to the instruction given by pious Puritan parents to the
flock in their own homes, a limited number of common or church schools
was established in the Colonial period. The position of academies, as
they develop in the Revolutionary period, is significant. We find that
“alongside each of the first colleges, frequently antedating them,
sometimes forming part of the organization, was a grammar-school.”
Such schools, attached to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, William and Mary’s,
and others, prepared for the universities, and supplemented the work of
the elementary or common schools. Herein lay a vital point. They had home
schools, elementary schools, and colleges. It was impossible for these
elementary schools to fit students for university life when such schools
required for entrance that the student should “read Tully or any like
classical Latin author _ex tempore_, and make and speak true Latin in
verse and prose, and decline perfectly the paradigms of nouns and verbs
in the Greek tongue,” as has already been quoted from an early Harvard
announcement.
[Sidenote: The universities demanded classics]
The universities founded by the church were, then, forming a course
of study for these grammar schools, or academies, as they were soon
called; and since the demand was for a classical preparatory school,
naturally their courses were “fitted to the time-sanctioned curriculum
of the college. They taught much Latin and Greek, an extended course in
mathematics, and were strong generally on the side of the humanities.”
This was a modeling after Rugby, Eton, and other noted English schools,
or the classical drill-schools of Germany, which, as we have before seen,
were schools bearing decided marks of Jesuit teaching.
Should a young man care to pursue his studies beyond the elementary
school, his only opportunity to do so was in one of the academies, where
the classics formed the sum and substance of the instruction. The
tendency to revert to the established forms of European education, or the
papal system, is plainly visible.
[Sidenote: Footprints of the papal education]
The first colleges had been planted to give a Christian training, and
doubtless had a start which might have resulted in the greatest strength
to the church, and to the nation in a secondary way; but the introduction
of these grammar schools or academies, with a course of study in the
_classics_ made necessary by the universities, threw the majority of
the young people into a _classical instead of a practical line of
instruction_. Looking at it from one standpoint, no wiser move could
have been made to turn the tide of educational reform again toward papal
education. Can we here trace the footprints of the Jesuits, whose policy
since the days of Loyola had been to overthrow Protestantism by a false
system of education?
[Sidenote: Protestantism and republicanism weakened]
The effect of the mixture of the pure and the impure methods, traceable
in indistinct lines at the very beginning, now assumed more definite
proportions. The growth of academies was remarkably rapid, and when
attention is called to such men as Franklin, the Adamses, John Hancock,
and the generation of “’76,” who received most of their education in
these schools, it may seem like sheer presumption to condemn their work.
The results, however, as seen in later years, warrant the charge that at
that time was taken a long step from the principles of the Reformation,
which meant to this country a weakening both in Protestantism and
republicanism.
[Sidenote: Union of Christian and papal systems]
These academies were denominational, it is true; still they offered this
prescribed course of instruction. Almost immediately appear signs of
the result of this union of Christian education with scholasticism. For
instance, we read that “Brown University, though founded as a Baptist
institution, was nevertheless one of the first schools of the period
to emphasize the growing sentiment for a thoroughly undenominational
collegiate training.” Why should a denominational college give an
undenominational course of instruction, and why, above all denominations,
should the Baptists do so, to whom such a flood of light had come, and
who always with pride pointed back to Roger Williams and the State of
Rhode Island as the ancestors and embodiment of all that is Protestant
and republican? But this is not the only indication of this decline from
early principles.
[Sidenote: Harvard loses sight of original object]
About 1793 Harvard assumed the name of university. Boone says, “Signs
of Catholicity also appear, in that students were no longer required
to attend the divinity lectures, except they were preparing for the
ministry.... Literary societies, voluntary associations for social and
general culture, were multiplied.”
[Sidenote: Decline in other schools]
“The first Greek fraternity,—the Phi Beta Kappa,—the parent of both
secret and open college fraternity organizations of America,” was formed
at William and Mary in 1776. This is another indication of the stealthy
introduction of principles opposed to democracy, and which tend to break
existing prejudice against the secret organizations of the papacy.
Again, “Yale, also, though nominally on a Congregational foundation,
received aid (1792) from the state, and gave place in her corporation to
state representatives.” Educational apostasy was beginning; religious
decline must follow.
[Sidenote: Schools ask state support]
Boone gives another paragraph, which, in a few words, tells a story
of much significance, more, perhaps, than the author realized; for he
was merely chronicling the history of education, not searching for
the philosophy thereof. He says, “The college, once an appendage to
the church, was seen, in view of imminent state dangers, to have an
equal value to the Commonwealth.” This, of course, is true, because
the Commonwealth depended for support, for very existence, upon the
educational ideas propagated in its schools. But the writer continues:
“First encouraged because it provided an educated ministry, there
was coming to be recognized an opinion, despite the deficiencies in
culture, that education is something more—that it has a value in itself;
that schools might well be maintained apart from the church as an
organization, and in no way lessen their usefulness.”[163] Here was the
challenge.
[Sidenote: Education belongs to the church]
God has placed in the hands of his church the right and privilege to
educate the young. In doing this, he has done more; for in educating the
youth, the church stands at God’s right hand to guide the nation into
paths of rectitude. Not by joining hands can this be done, for _church
and state must, in order each to be free, be forever separate_. Still the
pillar upon which the nation must stand, the only one upon which it _can_
stand, is _a true system of education_, and this is a divine gift to the
church, which was born of the Reformation.
[Sidenote: Church fails in educational work]
To the Lutheran Church the message of education was preached by
Luther. The Episcopal Church received this “word and grace of God,”
as Luther expresses it; but it passed from them, and they returned to
scholasticism. Oxford, Cambridge, Eton, Rugby, all English schools
testify to this. The message passed on to the Congregational Church,
and Harvard, Yale, and others started on the right road, but through
the glories of the world lost sight of their original object. Harvard,
founded to educate ministers, sent forth in the year 1896, out of a class
of four hundred graduates only six ministers. The Presbyterian Church
had its opportunity, and likewise the Baptist and the Methodist. Rapidly
education, the scepter with which America was to be ruled, was slipping
from the churches. “Of the four colleges established during the war, two
were non-sectarian, as were three fourths of the sixteen colleges founded
in the twenty years after 1776.”
A momentous time was reached. Not only were the colonies to organize
a government which would astonish the world, but the people of these
colonies were on the verge of an educational precipice, and mighty
interests were hanging in the balance.
[Sidenote: Fruit of the classics]
We have seen that from the classical academies came forth the minds
which, for a generation or two, bore sway while the nation passed its
critical period. There were the Adamses and Jefferson, Franklin, Webster,
De Witt Clinton, Horace Mann, Joseph Henry, Everett, and Story; Guilford,
of Ohio; Grime, of South Carolina; Frelinghuysen, of New Jersey; Wayland,
in Rhode Island; and Shaw, in Virginia; besides Kent, Clay, Marshall, and
Randolph, who were, many of them, not only solving political problems,
but exerting an influence in the school systems planned for their several
States.
Many of these were classical academy men, and we can but see that the
education received in these schools must affect the systems they would
father in their several States. Had the colleges remained true to their
trust with Christian education, the academies would have been preparatory
schools for Christian colleges, and men sent forth from their walls would
have been firmly grounded in the principles of Christian education, going
forth into every State of the Union to found Christian schools which
would in their turn make earnest and valiant youth, true to Protestantism
and true to republicanism.
WHEN THE CHURCH FAILS TO EDUCATE, MEN TURN TO THE STATE. These men
“differed in their views about the Constitution, and wrangled over the
dangers of centralization; the best men were fearful of the inroads
of slavery and the dangers to commerce,” says Boone, “but all agreed
that intelligence was necessary to citizenship.” Washington said, “In
proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public
opinion, it is necessary that public opinion should be enlightened,”
and Jefferson urged that “the diffusion of light and education are the
resources most to be relied on for ameliorating the condition, promoting
the virtue, and advancing the happiness of man.”
There is a demand for the highest and most practical kind of education.
Statesmen see that statesmen, _citizens_, are needed. The denominational
colleges ceased to educate Christians, and citizens must be educated
elsewhere. “In 1805 the Public School Society, of New York City, was
formed; the claims of public primary education were urged in Boston in
1818; and New York provided for the county supervision of schools. Early
in the nineteenth century were either introduced or else discussed the
first high schools, manual training schools, and mechanics’ institutes,
teachers’ associations, teachers’ publications, professional schools, and
free public libraries.”
We have entered the third period.
XV
AMERICA AND THE EDUCATIONAL PROBLEM (Continued)
III. THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
The problem of elementary preparatory education fell from the hands
of the churches, and was taken up by the state. What is the character
of that education which the state can rightfully support? A momentous
question indeed; but before considering it, let us investigate the
schools that the state has organized, and which it did, and still does,
support. There was an urgent demand for liberal education, and several
States appropriated lands toward a school fund. As early as 1786 “New
York State set apart two lots in each township of the unoccupied lands,
for ‘gospel and school purposes,’” and by a vote of about eighteen
hundred, devoted the proceeds of half a million acres of vacant lands to
the support of the common schools. Other States followed the same general
plan, some in rapid succession, others more slowly. One thing was a
settled fact,—the _education of the common people, passed over by the
churches, had been taken up by the government_.
[Sidenote: Horace Mann and the public schools]
Under those circumstances it is not surprising that in 1837, Horace
Mann, president of the Massachusetts Senate, interested himself in the
subject of education. Of this man it is said, “Rarely have great ability,
unselfish devotion, and brilliant success been so united in the course of
a single life.” This man became the father of the public-school system
of the United States, and began a work which long before should have
been started by the popular churches of America. But it was neglected
by them, and it will be profitable for us to watch the development of
the grandest system of schools ever organized,—a system which, if the
subject of Christian education could be dropped, and it be viewed alone
from the standpoint of the politician, has brought the United States
into prominence as an educational center among the nations of the world.
However, since _republicanism rests in the bosom of Protestantism, and
Protestantism is cradled in Christian education_, the moment the feature
of Christian education is laid aside, and the system purports to be
civil (but in fact it is never really that), that moment it loses its
real vitality and genuine strength. But to return to Mr. Mann and his
wonderful work.
[Sidenote: The churches and public schools]
Boone says: “The gnarls of a century’s growth were to be smoothed; not
all of the large number of private schools were in accord with the new
movement, and the churches were naturally watchful of the encroachments
of unsectarian education.”[164] This expression describes the sectarian
schools as in much the same attitude as that assumed by the weakening
Christian church about the days of Constantine; and as the church of
those days held out its hands to a stronger power for aid, and because
it had lost its individual supply of strength,—the Spirit of God,—so
now these sectarian schools watched with a jealous eye the progress of
unsectarian schools, and, unable to hold their former and their allotted
position by virtue of inherent strength, they reached out their hands
to the state coffers, and received aid. Yale did it before the days of
Horace Mann; many others have done it since.
[Sidenote: Improvements made by Horace Mann]
Boone continues: “Incompetent teachers were fearful, politicians carped,
and general conservatism hindered” by the advances of Mr. Mann. “Much was
to be accomplished, also, within the school. Teachers had to be improved,
interest awakened, methods rationalized, and the whole adjusted to the
available resources. Moreover, school architecture had to be studied. All
this Mr. Mann did.” How great was the opportunity which the religious
sects of America had missed! Some of the things which were accomplished
in the next few years are thus reported: “A system of normal schools was
originated. The annual appropriation for schools was doubled; two million
dollars expended on houses and furniture; the number of women teachers
increased; institutes introduced and systematized; school libraries
multiplied; education provided for the dependent, and young offending
classes, and the first compulsory school law of the State enacted.”
[Sidenote: Henry Bernard]
Henry Bernard, a young lawyer of Connecticut, did for his State a work
similar to that of Horace Mann in Massachusetts. He was a man of keen
insight, and struck at the root of many evils. Finding that public
money was misapplied, and many primary children neglected, he went about
to work a reform. “Teachers were awakened, associations for mutual
improvement were formed.... He established an educational periodical,”
wholly at his own expense. In 1843 this strong-hearted, level-headed man
was called by the State of Rhode Island to straighten out the tangles in
her educational system. From this beginning has grown the public school
system as seen to-day. It is interwoven in the meshes of our national
history from Boston to San Francisco, and from St. Paul to New Orleans.
[Sidenote: Reaction in colleges]
The colleges had made necessary the academies—classical preparatory
schools; and these sent forth men who modeled the high schools after the
academic course. The Christian colleges set the pace to begin with; then,
finding themselves outrun in the race, to meet the needs, the nineteenth
century sees a gradual but none the less decided change in their courses
of instruction. Here are a few of the changes, with the reasons for them.
Says Boone:—
“The current and recent magnifying of the humanities, the growing
recognition of an altruistic and co-operative spirit in civil and social
and political life, the increasing complexity of social forces, new
aspects of government, the fundamental oneness of all life, and sequent
idea of the solidarity of human society, have created for the student new
lines of investigation.”[165]
How true! How wide the separation between the ideal held before the early
Harvard and that of the Harvard of to-day. “The sequent idea of the
solidarity of human society” as a new line of investigation for students,
seems almost like mockery when we see the fundamental principles of the
government loosening, and ready to crumble on the application of some
unexpected force.
[Sidenote: Further changes]
The same departure from the study of God’s Word and the record of his
dealings with men and nations—God in history and politics—is noticeable
in the curriculum of each modern college and university. To quote again
from Boone, “The history of customs and institutions, the growth of
opinions and sentiments as crystallized in social forms, the study of
governments and religions, of art and industry, are clamoring for a place
in the curriculum. Comparative philology, with the enlarged interest of
modern languages, belongs to the present period.” Such a curriculum can
not but have weight in molding the minds of men, and the history we are
making to-day is but the resultant of the thoughts inculcated in our
modern colleges.
[Sidenote: Evolution taught]
The chair in science has been greatly enlarged: the ideas of evolution
as advocated by Darwin, Huxley, and Dana have crept into the lecture
courses, and having been received, bid fair to stay. Says Boone: “It
has been said that biological study [in the universities] began with
Huxley in England, and later in this country.” “Of the several courses in
Harvard, thirty per cent are in science, and in most other contemporary
institutions a similar large ratio obtains. This has had its influence
upon the accepted curriculum.” This science would be termed by the
Apostle Paul “science falsely so called.”
[Sidenote: Multiplication of courses]
“Great changes have occurred in the twenty years [since 1868] in the
multiplication of courses and the accompanying specializations of study.”
Perhaps figures will be more impressive on this point than mere words.
Boone states that “of the forty-seven higher institutions whose reports
are given by Dr. Adams, including Harvard, Columbia, and Brown, and ten
leading State universities, forty-six report an aggregate of _one hundred
and eighty-nine_ courses in history and closely related studies.” Cornell
now offers so many courses that should a student attempt to take them
all, it would require more than the natural life of a man to complete
them.
[Sidenote: A cramming system with children]
It is not with any spirit of condemnation that these things are stated,
but it can be seen by all that there is a meaning which inevitably
attaches to these changes. The multiplicity of subjects taught has led
to a wonderful book study, and a student’s whole life is spent in an
attempt to put into his own head the thoughts which others have written
for him. The spirit of the universities was caught by the academies, and
by the high schools, and is reflected even in the lower grades. It is the
beginning of the cramming process now so forcibly denounced by a few true
educators. Readers of our magazines are familiar with the ideas expressed
by Mrs. Lew Wallace in “The Murder of the Modern Innocents,” by the
editor of the _Ladies’ Home Journal_, and others. I deem it sufficient
to quote from Mr. Edward Bok, who startled American homes by stating
that “in five cities of our country alone there were, during the last
school term, over sixteen thousand children between the ages of eight and
fourteen taken out of the public schools because their nervous systems
were wrecked, and their minds were incapable of going on any farther in
the infernal cramming system which exists to-day in our schools.... It
was planned by nature that between the years of seven and fifteen the
child should have rest,—not rest which will stop all mental and physical
growth, of course, ... but the child’s pace should be checked so as to
allow him to recover from the strain which his system has just undergone.
“But what really happens to the child at the age of seven? Is he given
this period of rest?—Verily, no! He enters the schoolroom, and becomes a
victim of long hours of confinement—the first mental application, mind
you, that the child has ever known. The nervous wear and tear begins;
the child is fairly launched upon his enjoyment (God save the mark!) of
the great educational system of America.... Special systems of ‘marks,’
which amount to prizes, are started, serving only to stimulate the
preternaturally bright child, who needs relaxation most of all, and to
discourage the child who happens to be below the average of intelligence.
It is cramming, cramming, cramming! A certain amount of ‘ground must be
gone over,’ as it is usually called. Whether the child is physically able
to work the ground, does not enter into the question. And we do not stop
even there! The poor children are compelled to carry home a pile of books
to study, usually after supper, and just before going to bed, and that is
about the most barbarous part of the whole system.”[166]
This is enough to show that the system is recognized as practicing
methods not in accordance with the laws of nature, which are the laws of
God. Such methods are the result of the system at the head of which stand
the colleges and universities which outline the work for all below them.
Parents read these statements with wonder and a feeling of horror, but
only a few realize that the primary schools and the grammar schools,
and even the high schools, are responsible for the health-destroying,
brain-benumbing methods employed in our public schools. The cause for the
present system and methods is to be searched for in the changes which
time has wrought in those simple schools planted by the freedom-seeking
Puritan fathers. Say, rather, that Protestantism offered a system of
Christian education which, if it had been followed, would have prevented
what we find to-day.
[Sidenote: Modern reformers]
It is gratifying to find that the decline has not proceeded undisturbed.
Its history has not sped on as a smooth-flowing river. From time to
time men have arisen offering educational ideas in advance of the
age in which they taught. Such men were Comenius and Pestalozzi, who
introduced object-study in place of the time-honored memory work; and
Froebel, whose patient labors for the children of the kindergarten have
not only endeared him to the heart of the true teacher, but have made
him a benefactor of mankind in that he aroused queries in regard to the
methods of instructing the human mind. These men, searching for truth,
caught glimpses of the principles of true education as taught by Christ.
Disciples of these men, instead of taking from them a borrowed light,
have the privilege of going again to the source of true wisdom,—“the
Teacher come from God.” Here is the secret of success for educational
reformers of the twentieth century.