THE RECITATION LESSON
The recitation lesson as commonly conducted consists in having
children tell what they have read in their textbooks. Sometimes the
teacher accepts or even demands that the pupils recite by repeating
the words of the book. Better teaching requires rather that they
render the thought of the author in their own language. In this
chapter we shall discuss some of the worthy ends which may be
accomplished by such an exercise, some of the common deficiencies in
work of this type, and the modifications which are advisable in the
light of the principles already enunciated.
The recitation lesson commonly tests the pupil’s memory for facts.
The questions asked and answered serve to reveal to the teacher the
knowledge or lack of it on the part of the pupil. In a way this
testing also gives the teacher some idea of the amount of work done
by the pupil. The great weakness of work of this kind is found in
the tendency to demand and to accept words, the rehearsing of facts
unrelated and unorganized. Of course this need not be true, since it
is entirely within the power of the teacher to frame her questions in
such a way that the pupil’s grasp on the whole topic rather than his
memory for isolated facts is tested.
The recitation which tests the pupil’s ability to present in orderly
fashion the substance of the thought found in the sections assigned
in the book for study is of genuine value. The topical recitation
affords an opportunity to develop on the part of children the ability
to stand on their feet and speak to a question for some minutes.
And it may be suggested in this connection that we should develop
more power of this sort than is commonly found in our schools.
The ability to express one’s self adequately on the topic under
consideration will always make for effectiveness in social life. It
would be well to test the progress of our pupils from grade to grade
by their ability to speak more effectively and for a longer period as
they advance through the school, on some topic connected with their
school work.
When pupils are required not simply to recite on some topic which is
presented for their consideration, but are required to furnish their
own outline and to recite on the basis of their own organization of
the selections which they have read, the recitation may become a
valuable exercise in thinking. The success of work of this kind will
depend upon the definiteness with which the problem or aim of the
work has been provided. It will not require much thought simply to
follow the paragraph headings or marginal notes of the author and to
present the organization as a basis for recitation. If, however, a
problem has been suggested the solution of which may be found in the
pages assigned for study, then the recitation may test the pupil’s
power to analyze and organize the material which the book provides.
And this is the only test of a thorough mastery of the book. We
do not read to find out everything that an author says. Our needs
may demand a very different ordering of facts, we may use facts
in entirely new relations, and may ignore much that was essential
from a different point of view. Children have read their textbooks
thoroughly when they have derived from these texts the facts or
ideas which are essential in the solution of their problem, the
satisfaction of the aim which they hope to realize.
This ability to use to best advantage a book is a very valuable
accomplishment. When the recitation lesson accomplishes this result,
it justifies its use. Too frequently we find adults who seem to feel
that they must try to gather all of the knowledge and must try to
follow none other than the author’s point of view in their reading.
These persons read one book, and, as a result, believe one theory.
It seems not to disturb them greatly that the next book they read
takes the opposite point of view and that they range themselves
on that side of the question. Books are, or at least ought to be,
our servants, not our masters, and in the handling of books in his
regular school work the child ought to come to realize their true
function. There is no greater proof of a lack of thought than the
ready acceptance of whatever one finds in print.
There is great danger in the use of textbooks that children and
teachers will become satisfied with words, that they will come to
think that the repetition of the formula of the textbook is proof
of knowledge. Textbooks are all too often merely books of texts.
They have been made frequently enough by those who possess a very
wide knowledge of the field in which they write; and by some strange
process of thought they have apparently reached the conclusion that
the way to make a subject simple is to condense it. Many of our
most used textbooks are merely summaries or outlines of the subject
treated. They lack richness of detail, and state conclusions instead
of furnishing a large number of experiences, from which one may,
through processes of logical thought, derive the generalizations of
the subject. Take, for example, most of the textbooks in history
for elementary schools, and read carefully upon any topic selected
at random, and then ask yourself just what these _words_ mean to
twelve-year-old children; or, better still, ask these children who
repeat so glibly the words or reproduce the statements of the book
just what they mean by the words they use. Try to discover whether
they have any adequate knowledge of facts, or any command of images,
which would make possible the generalizations which they give as a
result of the process of thought. Remember that a textbook is not
logical for children because it has been logically arranged by the
scholar. The test is rather to be found in the pupil’s ability to
reproduce in his own thinking the steps which have made possible the
conclusions of the author.
Any wide-awake teacher can make her work more interesting and more
significant for children, if she will carefully provide for the
enrichment of the text. The sources from which data can be gathered,
regardless of the subject under consideration, are almost without
number. Especially to be recommended are the standard works in the
subjects. It will be interesting to discover that children would
rather read Parkman than to study the text in which some less
competent person has endeavored to tell his story in a few paragraphs
which mean absolutely nothing to the child. The magazines which
publish articles of wide social interest will furnish much helpful
material. There is no school that may not greatly enrich its work by
an appeal to the actual experiences of the children and by carefully
directed observations and experiments. We need our textbooks as a
summary, as a convenient condensed outline, or as books of reference;
but we must provide as best we can other books of reference which
will furnish the details which are impossible in the limited number
of pages allowed to the text. In every room of every school a library
of books, pamphlets, magazine articles, and illustrative material
should be found, and every teacher should expect to increase this
collection and to improve its quality as the years go by.
It will give new meaning to notebooks and note-taking, if both
teacher and children realize that the books thus prepared are a
real addition to the texts used. A comparison of the work done by
different members of the class will add interest in the work. One of
the greatest deficiencies of the recitation lesson is the danger that
nothing new will be presented. It is not intellectually stimulating
to listen to others who repeat simply the thought with which you
are already familiar. Where good notebook work is done and reported
upon, the chance for new ideas, the stimulus to thought, through the
presentation of new material, will greatly strengthen the work.
A tendency in work of this type to accept vague and indefinite
answers is another argument against the recitation lesson which
consists merely in rehearsing the words of the book. Statements are
apt to be vague when ideas are vague, and we may not expect ideas
to be very clear when the child lacks experience. The child’s power
of expression, aside from the difference in original talent in this
direction, is conditioned first of all by his acquaintance with
things and processes. The recitation lesson, as it is ordinarily
conducted, gives little opportunity for this sort of firsthand
knowledge. To work at the sand table, to construct with wood, clay,
paper, or yarn, to experiment, and to observe carefully the working
of nature may mean more for the command of language than much more
time devoted to so-called language lessons. But the effective use
of such experience for language growth depends in a measure upon
the requirement that the teacher makes for adequate expression.
The teacher who accepts the vague and indefinite answer encourages
slovenly habits of expression and incidentally slovenly habits of
thought. It is usually a mistake to say to a child: “I know what
you mean even though you have not said it.” Children are often lazy
enough to allow the teacher to do their thinking for them, if the
teacher willingly accepts the burden. Thinking is necessary for
expression; language is the tool of thought; we can do no greater
service to children than to hold them for what they say, give them
credit for the thought which they express and no more. Words for
children, as well as for adults, are used to conceal ignorance as
well as to reveal thought. A child is quick to take advantage of the
teacher who will accept any sort of an answer and interpret it as a
statement containing thought. Indeed, it is possible that a child may
even come to think that his incoherent statements, his word juggling,
really represent thought.
Another danger in the recitation lesson is found in the tendency to
develop the purely individualistic attitude. If excellence consists
in endeavoring to repeat more of the book statement than any one
else, manifestly it is your advantage to hinder rather than to help
others in their work. The attitude of excessive competition on the
one hand, and of indifference on the other, are both avoided when
children work together for common ends. The standard of the school
should be coöperation and helpfulness.
The recitation lesson in its least desirable aspects will not
disappear until all of our teachers realize that teaching does not
consist in hearing lessons. The broader the training of the teacher,
the better her understanding of child nature and of the meaning
of education, the less likely is she to resort to this method to
any considerable degree. We shall, it is true, so long as we use
textbooks, take occasion to discover what use children have made of
them; but this testing will be incidental to our teaching, and not
the sum and substance of it.
FOR COLLATERAL READING
W. C. Bagley, _The Educative Process_, Chapter XXII.
_Exercises._
1. Why is a recitation in which the teacher asks fifty questions
which test the pupil’s knowledge of the facts recorded in the book
not particularly valuable?
2. Why ask pupils to recite by topics rather than ask questions
which will bring out the facts concerning each topic treated in the
book?
3. Discuss the use of the textbook in teaching from the point of
view of both teacher and pupil.
4. When have you read a book thoroughly? Ought we ever to try to
remember all that the book tells?
5. It is essential in a democracy that people think for themselves;
how would you develop this independent attitude in children?
6. When children say that they know but cannot tell, how well do
they know; how clearly have they thought?
7. If a pupil recites the words of the book, does he know the
subject? How would you test further the extent of his knowledge?
8. Find examples in some textbook which you use of statements which
mean little to children who use the books.
9. How would you plan to supplement the textbooks which you use?
Give examples?
10. Why do children show a lack of interest in recitations where
the teacher tests the class on their knowledge of the facts
recorded in the text? How can the situation be improved?
11. Why is it generally a mistake to interpret to the class the
answers given by the pupil reciting?
12. Under what conditions is it better to have books open in class
than to test pupils on their knowledge of the facts recorded in the
text?
13. If a pupil reproduces accurately a line of reasoning recorded
in his book, has he necessarily thought through the situation for
himself?
14. What do the following paragraphs mean to a class of pupils from
twelve to fourteen years of age? Have they definite images? Do they
fully understand what the author means?
“_The Puritans._—The New England colonies were founded by English
Puritans who left England because they could not do as they
wished in the home land. All Puritans were agreed in wishing
for a freer government than they had had in England under the
Stuart kings, and in state matters were really the liberals of
their time. In religious matters, however, they were not all
of one mind. Some of them wished to make only a few changes in
the church. These were called Non-Conformists. Others wished to
make so many changes in religion that they could not stay in
the English State Church. These were called Separatists. The
settlers of Plymouth were Separatists; the settlers of Boston and
neighboring towns were Non-Conformists.”
“Unlike the poor humble Pilgrims were the founders of
Massachusetts. They were men of wealth and social position, as,
for instance, John Winthrop and Sir Richard Saltonstall. They
left comfortable homes in England to found a Puritan state in
America. They got a tract of land extending from the Merrimac
to the Charles, and westward across the continent. Hundreds of
colonists came over in the year 1629-1630. They settled Boston,
Salem, and neighboring towns. In the next ten years thousands
more joined them. From the beginning Massachusetts was strong and
prosperous. Among so many people there were some who did not get
on well with the rulers of the colony.”[15]
Professor Johnson asks, “Do the children see or feel anything but
words? Do they see Puritans? Do they see anything that the Puritans
might change or any reason for changing it? Do they see anything that
happened in America?... But what do the words actually tell about
the circumstances of the Puritans?... Can any one think that such
statements really convey information about the Puritans to one who is
being introduced to them for the first time?”[16]