so-called “Methods” taught by means of academic studies, the subject
is usually taken up again in connection with applied psychology. The
school subjects, treated one by one in detail, are used to illustrate
principles of education, while much reference is made at every stage to
the personal experience of teacher and students. Many different plans
are adopted in teaching “Methods.” At the Normal School, Westchester,
I heard a lesson which was in the form of a modified “recitation.” A
certain point had been chosen for discussion. The students had prepared
the subject beforehand, and some had written short essays, which they
read in turn. Afterwards the whole class was questioned by the teacher.
As new ideas were brought forward, they were noted on the blackboard
by the students who supplied them, until a complete sketch was made. A
discussion on “Noise in Class” was carried on somewhat in the same way.
At Westfield, Massachusetts, the lessons on “Didactics” are carried
out on a similar plan, the students being called upon in turn to
furnish certain parts of the subject, and to build up a sketch on the
blackboard.
At the Normal School, Albany, methods are taught thus:--With each
of three terms of psychology, certain subjects are chosen for
consideration. A syllabus of work in a certain subject is given in
by each student. It is carefully discussed in class. Then parts of
the detailed syllabus are taken in order, methods of dealing with any
particular part discussed, and one method decided upon as best. For
the next day, all the students prepare a lesson on the part selected,
and any one of them may be called upon to give it to his or her
fellow-students. Then follows criticism by teacher and students. The
plan of requiring all students to consider detailed methods in all
subjects seems not to be altogether a good one. It assumes a knowledge
of all the subjects of study on the part of all students, a condition
only attainable at the price of superficiality. Even where a general
knowledge of subjects can be relied upon, details in method cannot do
other than encourage empiricism, in cases where the knowledge of the
subject matter is not thorough and complete. It would seem better,
especially in the case of training institutions like that at Albany,
designed to give purely professional training to teachers of higher
grades, to encourage more specialization, and to allow all students
some choice of method subjects, so that dead forms of method might
be made as few as possible. The system of giving detailed methods to
all stimulates, too, a tendency to rigid forms of lesson-giving, and
somewhat encourages the idea that there is only one good arrangement
of subject matter for a particular lesson, and one good way of giving
it. This is, I think, a danger of all method-teaching; but it is much
intensified where methods are discussed in great detail.
The actual methods taught in the Normal Schools, and followed out in
the connected Model Schools, vary so much as regards both principles
and details, that it is almost impossible to report on them as a
whole. It is a feature of many of the Normal Schools to cling to old
methods, and lines of work of twenty, thirty or forty years ago;
while, on the other hand, a few of the Normal Schools I saw--those of
Connecticut, the Oswego Normal School, and Colonel Parker’s School, at
Englewood, Chicago--seem to be leaders in a campaign which is beginning
to revolutionize “Methods” in America.
The educational principle which is effecting this reform is the
connection or correlation of studies, a theory the most fully expressed
and applied at the Cook County Normal School, Illinois. As a result of
this theory, the hard and fast lines between the so-called subjects
of study are being broken down. Reading is taught in all the grades
through nature study, history and literature; _e.g._, natural objects
studied by the children in different grades, or poems in the selected
literature for the year, serve as subjects for reading lessons.
The children are encouraged to express their ideas orally on these
subjects, and the teacher writes their statements on the blackboard,
and takes care that the statement is really the expression of an idea
in the child’s mind. When various sentences, given by the children,
have been connected and arranged, the class reads from the board,
and afterwards from printed or type-written copies of what has been
written. Thus the children make their own reading books, and need no
ordinary reading primers. This method, as adapted to the earliest
stages of reading, necessarily implies the learning of script before
printed characters, also the learning of words and sentences as
wholes, and their necessary association with the thought which they
express. So, too, writing and drawing, as modes of expressing thought,
are taught in close connection with all other subjects. At New Britain,
the teacher of drawing in the Model School is present at all literature
lessons, and children are encouraged to illustrate their literature
by drawings or paintings. In papers on the “Spontaneous Drawings of
Children,” read at the Chicago Educational Conference by Professor Earl
Barnes, of Leland Stanford University, California, he showed how much
of this illustrative work of children was being used by himself and
others in the cause of experimental psychology.
At the Model School connected with the Oswego Normal School, natural
history is made the central subject, and reading, writing, and drawing
are made to bear upon it. The natural history course, including both
plants and animals, is most carefully planned to suit the seasons
of the year. As each plant or animal is studied, it is drawn by the
children, stories are told about it, the children write about it, read
about it, and make it a general object of study for some time. The work
is carefully graded for different ages, but the subject or topic of
study is the same throughout the school at the same time.
At the Cook County Normal School, Illinois, all the teaching is made
to group itself round three subjects--science, geography, history; and
these subjects are made to include everything forming the environment
of the child. The study of form and number, instead of being followed
as separate subjects in themselves, are considered merely as means of
studying these three comprehensive subjects--as modes of thinking in
fact. Hearing, observing, and reading are regarded as different ways
of gaining ideas, and as such, silent reading is encouraged, and many
devices are used for helping the child to get quickly and clearly the
ideas from the printed or written page. Writing, music, modelling,
painting, drawing, speaking, are considered as means of expressing
ideas about objects studied--the act of expression making the ideas
clearer. Thus, number or arithmetic is taught, not, as is usual, by
means of problems specially made and arranged in books of arithmetical
examples; but in close connection with any class subject. I heard part
of a course of excellent laboratory lessons in Science, given to Summer
School Students at this school, and as the methods employed were those
of the ordinary Normal School Course, I may mention them here. At the
end of each lesson the teacher used the numerical results obtained
by individual students, and worked them into arithmetical problems.
For example, the subjects used for successive number lessons were as
follows:
Conductivity of heat in metals.
Expansion of metals by heat.
Determination of boiling-point of fresh and salt water.
Such a treatment of subjects is a strong protest against routine
work and rigid method. It allows great scope to the teacher by
concentrating attention on the child and its needs, rather than on the
artificial divisions into so-called subjects, and their methods. On the
other hand, it puts great responsibility upon the teacher, and taxes
his skill to the utmost. There are many difficulties in adopting the
plan, one of the chief being the construction of the school time-table.
In any case, the practical application of such a system can only be
partial, until all teachers are enthusiasts and experts; but the lines
of work seem to be true lines, and may be suggestive of much that shall
reform some of our own old methods.
PRACTICE IN TEACHING.
It is usual for each Normal School to have attached to it a Model
School, which serves the double purpose of model and practising school
for students. The head of the Model School and her assistants are
experienced teachers, known as the critic teachers, and to the care and
supervision of these the students are submitted during their training
in practical teaching. All the Normal Schools I saw had such a Model
School except the one at Providence, Rhode Island.
The amount of time actually devoted to teaching by each student is
different in different States, and the plans by which the required
amount is secured for all vary in the different schools.
The State of Pennsylvania requires of its Normal School students
actual practice in teaching for one hour a day during three-fourths
of the last year of the Course; but students generally do more than
this. At Westchester, Pennsylvania, the students go into the Model
School in sections of six each morning after 10.30. A new section is
chiefly engaged in observing the children, and hearing lessons given
by the critic teachers or other students. Later, the students teach,
but always under supervision. The subject matter of their lessons is
definitely mapped out for them by the critic teacher, and they discuss
with her the best ways of treating it. There are no written notes of
lessons, and no public criticism of lessons, either by teachers or
students. Each week, meetings of teachers and students are held, for
the purpose of taking up any points noted during the students’ work of
the week. These are really talks supplementary to the ordinary method
lectures. At Millersville, Pennsylvania, each student gives two or
three lessons every day for a year. She teaches in different grades,
and takes lessons in different subjects, and has also practice in
managing simultaneously several divisions of one class.
At the Oswego Normal School, under the regulations of the New York
State, the student is in the schools only twenty weeks, but during this
time she has much responsibility. She spends ten weeks in a primary
or elementary grade, and ten weeks in a more advanced grade, and
during the whole time is practically responsible for her class. Each
afternoon, after the school is dismissed, the teaching class remains
for an hour to discuss any points of difficulty with the Head of the
Model School.
At Willimantic, Connecticut, the teaching class spends its first four
weeks in general observation of children, and hearing lessons. Then
each student is placed under the supervision of one special critic
teacher, and she continues some of the courses of work already begun by
the critic teacher. At least four weeks are spent by each student in
every grade in the school, first in observing, then in teaching under
the criticism of the class teacher.
The Model School at New Britain, Connecticut, is preserved strictly
as a Model School. After observing teacher and class for some time,
the student usually gives one trial lesson in the school, but there
is no systematic teaching by the student. For the actual independent
practice, the student must go to a practising school outside New
Britain, and be entirely responsible for a class for four months. At
the large practising school in connection with the New Britain Normal
School, at South Manchester, I saw students dealing with the actual
difficulties of discipline and class-management. Each student was in
charge of a large class with different divisions or grades. There
were four responsible, experienced teachers for reference in cases of
emergency, and for criticism; but each student had her own class, and
the school of 700 children was practically managed by students. Such is
the general plan of practice-work in the Normal Schools.
Much care is given to the Model Schools. The class-rooms are supplied
with all necessary apparatus, and they are bright and airy, and well
supplied with flowers and children’s books. It is quite customary
in some of the schools to give short periods in school hours for
private reading, or to allow one child to read to the other children
while they are doing some kind of mechanical work. Much importance
is laid upon the observation of the teaching in Model Schools. It is
possible, however, that this is insisted on too early in the course;
indeed, the hearing of lessons is usually the students’ first work
in the school. It would be much more profitable, and there would be
less danger of blind imitation, if the student had herself previously
gained experience in teaching. As it is, the danger of imitation, and
one-sided and narrow lines of teaching is increased by the fact that
one student is chiefly under the supervision of one teacher.
At the Worcester Normal School there is no Model or practising School,
but the students teach in the public schools of the city. For the
first six months of her last year at the Normal School, the student
acts as an apprentice or pupil-teacher, serving in at least three
grades during this time. Each teacher has the direction of only one
student, who may be left in sole charge of the class for hours or
days. One day in the week the apprentice-student attends the Normal
School, where she shows her class diary for the week, and discusses any
difficulties that may have arisen. On that day, too, she takes part in
the “Platform Exercises” of the Normal School--viz., exercises in which
students speak, read or draw, on the platform, in presence of the
whole school. The apprentice-students usually give an account to their
fellow-students of anything interesting or helpful in their practical
work of the past week.
EXAMINATIONS.
At the end of the Normal School Course, State examinations are
held in most of the States. In Pennsylvania each school examines
its own students, who, when they have satisfactorily completed the
required course of study, and passed the final examination, receive
a certificate, and are said “to graduate.” After graduation, they
are recommended to the State Examiner, who awards a State-Teaching
Certificate valid for two years. At the end of this period, the teacher
is required to present to the State Board a certificate of good work
from the county Superintendent under whom he or she has taught, and
also a certificate from his own school board. He is then entitled
to teach in his own State for life. The Normal School students of
Connecticut are submitted to State Examination, but in Massachusetts
no outside examination is required. Students who work satisfactorily
through the course, and pass the final examination, “graduate” at the
discretion of the President, or according to results of an examination
set by the School Board of the city. The State examination of teachers
and most of the final examinations of the Normal Schools are usually
in academic subjects only. It is not attempted to test by actual
examination the degree of skill in teaching or governing.
SUPPLY OF TEACHERS.
As regards the number of teachers who have been trained in Normal
Schools relatively to the number who teach in the Common Schools of the
State without previous training, statistics are apt to be misleading,
because, in many cases, Normal Students do not take the entire
course or “graduate.” Out of 372 students enrolled at New Britain
in 1889-1890, only 77 completed the entire course; in 1890-1891,
only 61 out of 401 graduated; and in 1891-1892, out of 444 students,
only 91 were graduates. For 1888-1889 Framingham shows 30 graduates
out of 205 present in the school; Salem shows 129 out of 292; and
Bridgewater, 69 out of 232. In all these schools the courses are two,
three or four years, and if all the students completed the course,
the number of graduates each year would be ½, ⅓, or ¼ respectively of
the number of students enrolled. The Report of School Commissioners
for 1888-1889 shows that among 75,529 teachers in the Common Schools
of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and
Pennsylvania, there were only 1,461 students who completed the Normal
School Course in these States. In all the States, arrangements are made
for teachers who do not go through the Normal Schools. Certificates
of license to teach in the State for a shorter or longer time are
granted according to results of the State Certificate Examination.
A third-grade certificate, entitling its owner to teach for a short
time, may be exchanged for a second-grade certificate, when further
proficiency is shown by re-examination. So a second-grade certificate
may be exchanged for a life-certificate in many of the States. It
should be borne in mind that these examinations are only in school
subjects.
The fact that in a State such as Massachusetts the qualifications of
teachers in the High and Latin Schools of Boston is stated merely as
“Education at some respectable college of good standing,” shows that
the necessity for the professional training of teachers for higher
or secondary schools is not at present fully recognised. Until the
last few years, no Institution especially devoted to the training
of secondary teachers existed in the eastern States, and those who
wished to prepare themselves for the teaching of the higher branches
of subjects had no other means of training than that offered in the
Normal Schools. At Worcester and Bridgewater, College and University
graduates may take the pedagogical course as special students, and so
prepare for teaching in the higher schools. At the Indiana and Illinois
Normal Schools, and in other places, there are courses of study chiefly
or entirely professional, for college or university graduates, if such
present themselves. At Albany, too, where the standard of admission is
high, many of the students prepare for work in the secondary schools.
On the whole, however, the number of special students preparing for
higher work in the Normal Schools is very small. In 1891-1892, the
Southern Illinois Normal University had only six special students, the
Terre-Haute Normal School, Indiana, only four; and we find in the
eastern States generally that the Normal Schools take very little part
in the training of secondary teachers. For the most part Normal School
students are found only in the lower grades of public schools; and
college graduates, even though untrained, are preferred as teachers in
High Schools, good private schools and academies.
The reason for this is probably to be found in the nature of the Normal
School itself. It, perhaps more than any other educational institution
in America, has adhered to its old traditions. It was designed to
train teachers for the lower grades of Elementary Schools, and in the
early days was prepared to accept the only material at hand--would-be
teachers, many of whom possessed few intellectual qualifications, and
almost all were inadequately prepared for training. But with rising
standards of work, and increased facilities for good preliminary
preparation, the Normal School has not yet closed its doors to students
whose general attainments do not qualify them to profit by courses
in the Science and Art of Teaching. In one or two cases only is the
standard of college graduation insisted upon, and in many cases the
admission standard is lower than that required to complete the course
in a city High School. Hence it results that most of the teaching in
High Schools and academies is given into the hands of professionally
untrained teachers--college graduates, whose scholarship can be relied
upon, but who have no previous technical training, rather than to
trained teachers, whose knowledge of the actual subject matter of
studies may or may not be thorough. The choice, open to heads of
Secondary Schools when appointing assistants, is, moreover, not between
good scholarship and good training. Without adequate preparation the
training must be inadequate, and in many cases cramping and injurious.
On the other hand, it is only after the preliminary preparation has
been sound and complete that the work of training can be carried out in
the best possible way.
_CITY NORMAL AND TRAINING SCHOOLS._
The existence of State Normal Schools and City Training Schools
side by side suggests at once a fact which has an important bearing
on educational questions in the United States--viz., the absolute
distinction, as regards jurisdiction, between schools outside the
limits of a town or city, under the supervision of a State Board and
State Superintendent, and schools within the city radius, and under the
supervision of a Town or City Superintendent. In educational matters,
the city areas are completely exempt from State control. Their schools
and training schools are managed by local authorities, and supplied for
the most part by local funds. Hence it follows that City Normal and
Training Schools show even greater diversity of methods and arrangement
than is found in State Normal Schools, for their lines of work and
efficiency are entirely dependent upon the respective City Boards of
Education. One effect of local school administration is distinctly
undesirable. The appointment of the principal of the school by the
Educational Board, and the election of that Board by local vote,
produces, in many cities, a tendency to display, in order to cull
popular favour. The “graduation exercises,” yearly public ceremonies,
held in connection with almost all American schools and colleges,
consist, in the case of training schools, of various kinds of students’
and children’s exercises, to which the public are invited. Much
valuable time is taken by the students in preparing essays to be read
and lessons to be given in public; and in some cases the student or
teacher conducts an examination of her class in the presence of parents
and friends. Several such public exercises I heard, but in all cases
it was evident that true results of training, or honest results of
teaching, were not demonstrated. The endeavour to impress the audience,
besides involving great waste of time, seems likely to create an
unconscious dishonesty on the part of teachers, students, and children.
CITY NORMAL SCHOOLS.
The City Normal Schools are the local training schools, maintained by
the larger cities for the preparation of their own teachers.
They require as conditions of admission:--
i. Residence in the city.
ii. Satisfactory completion of the high schools course of the city.
iii. Statement of intention to teach in the schools of the city.
To all those who satisfy these conditions, and are eighteen years of
age or more, instruction is free, and completion of the professional
course entitles the student to become a teacher in any of the Common
Schools of the city.
The City Normal Schools of New York and Philadelphia combine the
functions of Normal and High Schools, admitting students who do not
intend to become teachers to their academic studies, without requiring
of them any professional study or practice in teaching. The necessity
of extending the function of a Normal School in this way has arisen
from the fact that there are no public High Schools for girls in these
cities.
At the Normal College of the city of New York there are two separate
courses of work:--
i. An academic or classical course of five years.
ii. A normal or training course of four years, with an optional extra
year for specializing in any branch of manual training.