This experience has been of value to me as a teacher since, for it has

effectually saved me from being didactic and dogmatic in my religious

teaching of children. The Socratic method is the true way of bringing

into the definite conscious thought God's revelation of Himself to the

soul. That image of authority and power to punish did not, I think,

help, but rather puzzled my moral sense of which I was already

conscious. For I remember that I used to muse very much in my childhood

upon the mental phenomenon of feeling myself to be two persons. I was

clearly conscious of an inward conversation on all occasions of a

question of right and wrong, when a higher and lower law distinctly

uttered themselves. The lower self often prevailed by the argument that

the thing to be done was _transient_, I would do it only this _once_,

and never again; and often I thus sinned against the very present God,

which I think I might not have done so presumptuously, had I associated

the thought of this strange other me with that kind face of Love Divine.

When later in life I did learn that the remonstrating voice was

unquestionably God, because He is the Love that I saw in my childish

vision, the war between self-love and conscience ceased. But this was

not till a great body of death had been accumulated, which I have never

shuffled off except in moments of hope.

But to take up the thread of my discourse again. I would very earnestly

say that the Socratic or conversational method is the only way of

bringing into a child's definite consciousness God's revelation of

Himself to souls. But this requires a mutual understanding of words,

and if we are careful, we may produce this in the kindergarten.

Froebel intimates that a general impression of there being an invisible

Friend and Protector may be given by the baby's seeing the mother in the

attitude of devotion, and he would have recognition of God called forth

by her naming the unseen Father at moments when the child's heart is

overflowing with joy and love, or seeking to know where some beautiful

thing comes from. The child feels already at such times the presence of

the Infinite Cause, the Infinite Source of joy and goodness, and the

name of Heavenly Father given to this presence will not be an empty

vocable. Using with the name of Father the word "our," with which the

Lord's Prayer begins, suggests that He is the Father of all alike, and

all human beings will thus be united together with Him in the child's

imagination.[6]

This idea of one personal but comprehensive Being, the centre of the

social organization, is a quickening of the immortal personality, which

has a date in time no less certainly than the quickening of the body,

and is our sense of identity.[7]

FOOTNOTES:

[4] See Hazard's _Man a Creative First Cause_. A book published since

this lecture was first given.

[5] "Order reigns in Warsaw" was the form of words in which the

subjugation of the Poles to Russians in 1849 was announced in France.

[6] See Frederic Denison Maurice's book on the Lord's Prayer, published

by Hurd & Houghton.

[7] See Appendix, note A.

LECTURE IV.

THE KINDERGARTEN.

IN my last lecture I spoke of the ideal nursery; for only there,

hitherto, has the divine method of education ever been completely

carried out, the unquestionable teacher there being _the child_,

"trailing clouds of glory from God who is our home"; its sweet content

and inspiring smile indicating when its nurse is treating it aright;

while all that is wrong, whether proceeding from mere ignorance or

selfish wilfulness on the part of the adult, is indicated by its cries

of fright and anger, which it behooves her to heed.

How is it that, with the spectacle forever before our eyes of the mother

and infant, mutually emparadised in child's play (that mutually

educating communion of trust and love, by which the child is put into

gradual possession of his body, and joyous consciousness of his

individuality),--how is it, I say, that we find education has lost its

_ideal_, and as soon as the child leaves the nursery for the schoolroom,

an antagonism has begun, "with its blessedness at strife," and which

leaves us all such scarred and bewildered creatures as we find ourselves

to be, as soon as we come to reflect?

But I must remember that what we have to speak of especially is the

kindergarten, which follows hard upon the nursery.

When the child's growing activities begin to require a larger social

sphere than the nursery,--_i.e._, at about three years old,--it was

Froebel's plan to gather the children of several families into what he

called a "Child Garden," and to extend the nursery law of _cherishing_

(which is the dealing with living organisms that children are), by

exercising them for several hours of every day in rehearsing in plays,

in the first place, all the sweet charities of life. This employs their

physical forces, and makes them experimentally know that human happiness

and goodness are social and generous.

For the so-called "movement plays" are social exercises, gently calling

out moral sentiments, as well as intellectual powers. They can only be

beautiful and enjoyable when they give mutual pleasure; and this

involves that mutual reference and kind consideration of each other

which leave no room for selfish feeling or action. Moral education is

the alpha and omega of a kindergarten, but it cannot be given by

precept. To _do_ the will of God,--_i.e._, to obey the moral

law,--"doing to others as we would have others do to us," _even in

play_, is the only way for children to know vitally the doctrine of

moral life.

Froebel has suggested a variety of these movement plays, all of them

conceived with the greatest care as to their intellectual as well as

moral effect. They always have a fanciful aim, within the scope of the

child's knowledge and affection, and to play them begins to develop the

understanding also.

A gentle intellectual exercise, involved in learning by rote, reciting,

and singing the songs that direct the plays, takes the rudeness out and

puts intelligence into that exhilaration of the animal spirits which

healthy children crave, and prevents it from exhausting the body or

disordering the mind; the joyous association of the children with each

other aiding this effect. In the sedentary plays, which are called

"occupations," and in which the child is genially drawn into producing

symmetrical effects to the eye, by making things (albeit only little

toys) which begin their artistic life, Froebel has had equal regard to

the moral as to the intellectual influences. When the child has gone

beyond the age in which he is satisfied with making transient forms and

gathering the materials back into boxes, and desires to make something

that will last, a legitimate sense of property arises. He feels that

what he has made is _his own_, for the thought and work which he knows

that he has put into it are his own. Froebel, therefore, would have him,

before he begins to _make_ anything, pause and appropriate it

intentionally to some object of his love, reverence, or pity. This will

check the otherwise rampant propensity to hoard, and prevent the

passions of avarice, vanity, and jealousy from making their appearance.

In our common school life, the pride of _showing off_ their powers, and

excelling others, is regularly cultivated in children by competition, as

a stimulus to industry. But this is as unnecessary as it is deleterious.

For disinterested desire to confer pleasure, and express gratitude and

love of others, is found by experience to be a surer stimulus to

industry than the baser passions, and has the additional value of

cultivating positive sweetness and active benevolence. It is desirable,

and really produces the greatest practical humility, for children to

regard themselves as embryo powers of beneficence, learning to do the

Heavenly Father's business from the beginning, like the child Jesus.

Then may they grow "in favor with God and men," as they grow "in

stature," and all their knowledge will prove a divine wisdom unto the

salvation of others and themselves. To go into a truly ordered and well

governed child-garden, and see all the little children busy making

things for the Christmas tree, or for birthday and new year's gifts, for

all the friends they know or fancy, we shall see sufficient proofs that

love is the truest quickener of industry, and love-inspired industry the

true sweetener of the disposition and temper.

Moreover, such industry is the special desideratum to temper the spirit

of the present age, which is so keen and energetic that it hurries our

young men into pursuits in their amusements which take on the character

of gambling; and hence gambling in business, gambling in politics, where

even human beings, instead of being regarded as _brothers to be kept_,

are used as dice, to be recklessly thrown in our game. The only

preventive or cure for this passion for gambling is industry, and the

only industry that is attractive is artistic; and why should not all

industry become artistic, now that the great cosmic forces are suborned,

by our advancing civilization, as the legitimate slaves of men, to do

all the hard work for men? I have already set forth this view of the

subject in the _Plea for Froebel's Kindergarten as the Primary

Art-School_, which I appended to Cardinal Wiseman's lecture on the

relation of the arts of design with the arts of production (which I

published in 1869, under the title of _The Artist and the Artisan

Identified,--the Proper Object of American Education_).

Before I leave these general remarks for more specific explanation of

Froebel's method of intellectual development, I would make one more

observation. It is in the social and moral character of the kindergarten

that Froebel has shown himself so much superior to Rousseau, whose

method was to cultivate individualities exclusively, the teacher

pretending to know no more than the child, but taking his idiosyncrasy

for his only guide in discovery and invention. In the first place,

Rousseau's method has been found an impracticable one, for it requires a

separate teacher for every child; and in the only instance, perhaps, in

which it was ever carried out with perfect fidelity, that of Maria

Edgeworth's eldest brother (we have in her memoirs of her father all the

facts), the ultimate effect was to make a monstrosity. He was utterly

strange, so odd and unsocial, nobody but his father, who educated him,

could have any practicable relation with him. He might be said to be

conscientiously unsocial, and therefore immoral; and, though not

ungifted, he was an utter failure in human life. We see similar effects

produced measurably, in all cases where the main object is to cultivate

the individual rather than the universal characteristics of humanity.

Froebel was tender, and gave freedom to individualities, but he took

great care not to _pamper_ them. They are the results of the free-will,

irrefragable, and will take care of themselves sufficiently, if not

cruelly snubbed, but tenderly respected.

What is to be _intentionally_ cultivated in earliest infancy, are the

_general_ affections and faculties, which relate us to our kind,

insuring _common_ sense and _common_ conscience with a reasonable

self-respect. Therefore, what is done in the kindergarten is necessary

for all children, their idiosyncrasies being left free to play on the

surface and give variety and piquancy to life, freedom and dignity to

the individual.

All minds seem to be divided into two classes. In one class, the primal

tendency is to observe single objects; and these are the so-called smart

children, interesting the spectator by their vivacity and precocity. In

the other class, children seem to be dull in sense, unobserving, but

dreamy, as if they had an over-mastering _presentiment_ of that

connection of things which binds them into wholes. It has been remarked

that this latter class turns out the great men,--the poets, the

philosophers, the inventors, high artists, great statesmen, and

law-givers,--while the precocious children disappoint expectation;

probably because they have accumulated such a chaos of single

impressions of disconnected things, that it quite overwhelms the

classifying and generalizing powers of the intellect. Froebel's method

equally meets the respective wants of both these classes of minds,

supplying by specific culture the _other_ side of their practical

endowment. By its discipline of production, it gives the lively and

restless ones the wand of the Fairy-Order, in discovering to them the

connections of things, and the conditions as well as laws of

organization; while for those of the dreamy, poetic, philosophic

temperament, it sharpens the senses to individual things, supplying the

definite and sensuous impressions, and suggesting the corresponding

words that enable them to give an account of their own thinking, and

illustrate to others the struggling ideal; which, like conscience and

the love of order and rhythm, is perhaps the yet persistent vision of

that Heavenly Father's face, which Jesus Christ has told us we are

created beholding.

Jesus evidently is quoting a familiar proverb, when he says "for their

angels behold the face of my Father who is in heaven." Does it not refer

to the Persian mythology current in Judea after the captivity? However

neglected and eclipsed, that primeval vision can never be quite lost. It

persists in the love of order and beauty; in the desire to be loved

_infinitely_; in hope "that springs eternal in the human breast"; in the

ideals of imagination, that haunt both the savage and the sage, and, at

worst, in _remorse_, in which, as Emerson says, "there is a certain

_sweetness_," whether it be gentle as in what the Quakers call "the

reproof of truth," or felt as the reproachful strivings within us of our

neglected infinite nature.

This brings me to speak of Froebel's superiority to Pestalozzi. The

kindergarten is not mainly _object-teaching_, though of course a

constant object-teaching is _involved_; all the materials of their work

and all the surroundings of the children become objects of examination

in their individualities of form, size, number, etc., and in their

possible connections with each other and with the _child_. If Froebel

proposes to give the fruits of the tree of _life_, before he gives those

of the tree of knowledge, it is only that the latter may prove, _not a

curse_, but a blessing. The world's history and the present state of

civilization in the foremost nations of the world shows us that

knowledge may be _a power_ without being _a good_ (a snakish subtlety

not Divine Wisdom). It begins to be realized in Europe as well as in

America, that Froebel's idea of education, in making _character_ the

first thing, and knowledge the _hand-maiden_ of goodness, is the

desideratum of the age, and promise of the millennium.

I should like to read you some letters of eminent men in France,

addressed to Froebel's most earnest disciple and apostle, the Baroness

Marenholtz-Bülow, which I have translated from the appendix of her _Work

in Relation to Education_ (see Appendix, Note B).

In an address to the school committee of Boston in 1868 I gave the call

addressed in 1867 by the Philosophers' Congress in Prague to the

convention of teachers in Berlin, and the call of the latter to the

second convention of this congress at Frankfort-on-the-Main in 1869. The

burden of all these papers is the paramount necessity of religious and

moral education, begun in earliest infancy, in order that the modern

intellectual activity may not land us in licentious vices and heartless

atheism, _our nearest dangers_. They all accept Froebel's method of

education by work and experience (beginning with the work and experience

of the child of three years old) as the first condition of the

regeneration of the human race.

It is the office of the kindergartner to awaken the intellect, which the

child does not bring into the world, like its heart and will,

full-grown. The infant suffers and enjoys as keenly, and wills as

energetically, at first as ever in its life, but apparently begins and

lives for some time, unconscious of a world without as a _not me_. It is

purely subjective, _i.e._, feeling its material environment to be a part

of itself. As Emerson says:--

"The babe, by its mother,

Lies bathed in joy;

Glide its hours uncounted;

The sun is its toy!

Shines the peace of all being,

Without cloud, in its eyes;

And the sum of the world

In soft miniature lies!"

Only by intentional help of those around the child can it grow into

individual consciousness of its relations with nature in that order

which produces the sound intellect. For the intellect is a growth in

time, that carries on the nursery exercises of the limbs and affections

by the movement plays, and adds those sedentary plays with the series of

gifts, which are symbols of all nature in miniature, that objective

revelation of God to which the receptive mind answers by thoughts.

Thinking is that reaction of the individual mind upon nature which, when

it is put into words, produces progressively an image of God, which is

the human mind.

The kindergartner's conversation with the children upon their playthings

is therefore her most important and delicate work, and one which she

cannot do instinctively, but only if she scientifically understands the

child on the one hand, and nature in some department on the other. It is

impossible in this lecture, perhaps, to demonstrate my meaning. By

following out Froebel's own method of playing with the gifts, as

suggested in Mrs. Kraus-Boelte's guide or in _The Florence Handbook_,

the whole process of the formation of the human understanding by the

order of objective nature will become patent, and enable the

kindergartner to avoid any great mistakes in her guidance of the

children's minds, which guidance should always be tentative, and

respectful, to say the least, of their freedom to will. Then we shall

have not mechanical work, but orderly, creative work from the children,

whose spontaneity is not to be choked; but when it seems to be going in

a wrong direction, interrogatively guided. Like Ariel, she must do her

spiriting gently, lest she violate the legitimate individuality, and we

have Caliban instead of the germ of Prospero.

I here pause to display two kinds of work actually done by children

under seven years of age at Frau Marquadt's kindergarten in Dresden.

They enable me to show that those sedentary plays, with which Froebel

would have children amused, must needs develop and educate the

perceptive faculty and understanding in a substantial manner; for these

things were done without patterns, and therefore from _thought_,--the

thought being sometimes suggested by the dictation of the

child-gardener, requiring of the child only one single act of

reflection. But much of this work was invented by the children

themselves, their wildest fancies being controlled to produce symmetry,

by following the one rhythmical law of always making an opposite to

everything they do. After showing and explaining the _modus operandi_ of

the work exhibited, I went on to say:--

I believe nobody disputes, after they see what kindergarten is, that it

is the gospel of salvation for children. The exercises put them into

complete possession, not only of their limbs, especially the

characteristic limb of man, the hand, just when they are the most

flexible, and therefore most easily trained; and of their organs of

sense (by which they gradually make the universe their instrumentality),

but also of _accurate speech_, enabling them to express their

impressions of individual things, as well as of what they _do_ with

things and in the order of its doing. Thus they are prepared for

entering upon more abstract subjects, by means of books and schools of

instruction. A child well "gardened" and exercised in the intelligent

use of his mother tongue enters upon the process of learning to read,

for instance, with all the more advantage from being accustomed to hear

and use language with precision and fluency; and is ready to learn to

cipher all the more quickly, because of the concrete arithmetic and

geometry he has mastered experimentally with the playthings and in the

occupations, all his habits of delicate observation and nice calculation

formed by the embroidery and other fanciful work giving the basis for

intelligent classifications. Even the few years of experience of some

genuine kindergartens in this country has already proved this. I can

give an instance in detail of the almost miraculous rapidity with which

a class of seven-year-old children learned to read in the primer called

_After Kindergarten--What?_ (Note C, in Appendix.) All the time given to

"child-gardening" is therefore more than saved at the next stage, when

instruction begins. Other advantages accruing are incalculable, for the

children themselves have become intelligent and conscientious

co-operators with their elders, instead of passive receivers or

antagonists. When Miss Youmans' _First Lessons in Botany_ (a book made

to teach botany in nature on Prof. Henslow's method) was introduced into

the New York primary schools, with great expectations of a brilliant

success, it was found that the children did not take hold as expected of

this science of observation. "I see now," said Miss Youmans to me, "the

indispensableness of kindergartens to develop the faculties; more than

half the children are intellectually demoralized by neglect or

injudicious teaching before they are seven years old." Everything,

however, depends upon the single-minded self-devotion and affectionate

character of the kindergartner, and it is obvious that her education

must be as special as that of a teacher of instrumental and vocal music;

for as little as music can be taught by the ear, or drawing by the eye,

without studying the underlying principles of harmony and symmetry, can

kindergartning be taught empirically. Its foundation is in both a

scientific and sympathetic study and understanding of the child's

perceptive powers and the material world. Not merely what is to be

taught, as is the case with a university professor, but the free-willing

and deep-feeling beings that are to be taught must be studied generally

and individually above all things else. Hence, there must be special

schools for teaching child-gardening, or a special department made in

the already existing normal schools.

The burden of thinking out the steps of procedure in the schoolroom is

too great a one to be laid on the teacher who has to exercise the

general care. It must all be at the tongue's tip and fingers' ends

beforehand. It took Froebel a lifetime, with all his genius and wisdom,

to discover all the steps of this order of exercises, in correspondence

with the true evolution of the faculties; but "one man dies, and other

men enter into the fruits of his labors." Besides, it is as cruel to

study the philosophy of education at the expense of the living

children's minds, as it would be to study anatomy and medicine at the

expense of their living bodies. All kindergartners should observe and

practise for awhile under the direction and criticism of those who are

already experts and adepts; and the latter should be careful that their

assistants try no rash experiments, but at first reverently observe

successful work. It is the highest interest of all teachers to learn

this method, because it develops themselves. It not only makes the best

mothers, but the most perfectly accomplished women. It is entering into

the secret of creation and redemption, which is the flower and fruit of

human culture.[8]

Education in the Home, the Kindergarten, and the Primary School · 第 6 / 17 段