CLASS MANAGEMENT
In any discussion of class management it is necessary to distinguish
clearly between organization and control as a means and as an end.
Much of the discussion of school and class management assumes that
its sole purpose is found in economizing time and energy for teacher
and pupils. Class management, from this point of view, is important
as the means without which effective work cannot be done in the
school. Such a view neglects to consider the opportunity afforded in
managing a class for growth on the part of pupils in the power of
self-control. Any school which plans to reproduce in its life the
conditions commonly found in life outside of the school must allow
children to accept responsibility for their own acts, and will,
therefore, look upon management as an end.
The discussion has not been wholly one-sided. At times there has been
considerable controversy concerning the kind of management which
was most to be desired in the schoolroom. Those who have thought of
management as a means only have been apt to overemphasize routine;
while those who have thought only of the opportunity afforded for
growth in self-control have neglected to realize the importance of
habit in situations which are invariable. The adherents of the one
type of control want everything done at the tap of the bell, in
accordance with the rules which have been made by the teacher. Their
opponents would do away with “mechanized routine,” and would expect
children to exercise their judgment as each question arises. This
difference in point of view is easily reconciled when we look at
management now as a means and again as an end.
If a fire drill is to be effective, every one must drop the work
in hand when the signal is given and march out of the building in
an order and by a route which has been determined previously and
from which there is no variation. Here we have the best example of
management as a means. There can be no question in this situation
concerning the right of the individual to exercise his judgment. The
safety of all depends upon the absolute following of rules, upon the
degree to which the response to the fire drill has become a matter of
habit. If we analyze this situation, we will discover the elements
which characterize situations in which we are to look upon management
as a means. In these situations we should strive to secure habitual
responses.
In the first place the response demanded is invariable. It will not
do to march out of the building one way to-day and another to-morrow.
The class may not go before or after its place in the line. The speed
with which the building is emptied depends upon every individual.
Here we have the second element: the welfare of the whole group
demands that the situation be followed always by a certain response.
Let us examine now some of the schoolroom situations in the light of
these criteria. In passing books, paper, pencils, and the like, a
definite order should be followed. In this situation the end desired
is invariable. What is wanted is to place the desired material in the
hands of each pupil with as little delay as is possible. The welfare
of the whole group depends upon this invariable response upon the
part of each pupil. If any one fails to do his part, there is delay
and loss of time in the work which it is desired to accomplish. For
the same reasons it is wise to have a definite order in getting
wraps, a rule concerning the manner of passing in the room, the habit
of rising and facing the majority of the class when reciting, and the
like.
Let us now examine other situations which afford an opportunity for
the exercise of self-control, in which management is an end. In some
schools children are formed in lines five minutes before the hour
and marched into the building. There is no good reason why children
should march into the building. The end desired, that they all be in
their places promptly, can be secured by ringing a warning bell and
requiring that all enter the building as they see fit and be in their
places on time. In the latter instance they have a chance to act
as normal human beings who accept and fulfill their responsibility
to themselves and to the group. The desired end is secured, and,
far more important, the children are learning to exercise that
self-control which is demanded outside of school. Of course, it may
be objected that it is much easier to control the children, if you
march them into the building. The answer is found by suggesting that
the school does not exist primarily for the ease of teachers, but
rather for the development of socially efficient children.
A principal who had some difficulty in having the boys come from a
somewhat distant playground promptly lined them up for a race to
the schoolhouse. They found that it took them little more than a
minute to reach their schoolrooms. The boys understood his suggestion
that the warning bell, rung five minutes before school opened,
afforded ample time to reach their rooms and be ready for work when
school opened. It would have required less thought on the part of
the principal and less self-control on the part of the boys to
have marched them to the schoolhouse at the right time each day.
Many school situations offer similar opportunity. Passing through
halls, asking the teacher questions, leaving one’s seat for books
or materials, consulting with one’s neighbor may, in the hands of a
skillful teacher, become a most efficient means of training children
in self-control. In all such cases management is an end, in the sense
that these opportunities are sought by the teacher because of their
value in training children.
Pupil participation in school government has been much advocated of
late as the best means of securing a feeling of responsibility on
the part of pupils for the welfare of the whole group, as well as in
the exercise of self-control. As long as these ideals control, it
matters little what particular form of organization is utilized to
secure the ends desired. What sometimes happens is an exaggeration of
the importance of the machinery of government, with a corresponding
lack of self-control, or exercise of social responsibility. The
writer once visited a school which was much talked of because of
its system of “pupil self-government.” He found there the worst
bullying of small boys by those who held offices that he has ever
seen in any school. Many of the children declared that they were not
parties to the government supposedly in control of the school. When
the teachers were absent from their rooms, the children droned over
certain set exercises which were constantly before them and from
which type of activity they were not permitted to depart. Now these
defects in school management may not all be charged directly to the
overemphasis of the machinery of government, but they were due to the
fact that this machinery, this form, had taken the place of genuine
self-government on the part of the pupils.
A wise principal or teacher may secure good results by inaugurating
a system of pupil participation in school government, but the wise
guide and counsellor must be there all of the time. Introducing
children dramatically to the machinery of government will not place
old heads on young shoulders. Children will still be childish in
their judgments and in their ideas of punishment, even though they
be called senators, aldermen, policemen, judges, and the like. The
dramatization of city or state government will undoubtedly help in
the understanding of the function of citizens and of their servants,
the officeholders. This alone would be sufficient justification
for introducing in the upper grades, in dramatic form, a system of
government, without expecting that it would in any considerable
measure relieve teachers or principals of the necessity of guiding
children in their development in power of self-control, and in their
acceptance of social responsibility.
The same system of pupil participation in school government will
succeed with one principal and set of teachers and fail in another
situation. The results which are most worth while, self-control and
the exercise of social responsibility, will be secured without any of
the forms of civil government in one school, while another principal
will claim that success in his school is due to his system of “pupil
government.” No teacher need feel condemned because she cannot
succeed with a particular scheme of government, and none should be
unduly elated because of the invention or use of some particular form
of organization. The essential element in school management is found
in the spirit of coöperation and helpfulness which should actuate
teachers and pupils.
The questions of management considered above cover much of the ground
usually considered under the head of school discipline. The same
problems, especially from the standpoint of punishments and rewards,
are considered in the chapter which deals with the moral training of
children. It may be well to add here that the problem of discipline
is largely one of good teaching. Children who are hard at work seldom
worry the teacher. Right conditions for work may play an important
part. The consideration of some of the problems of organization is,
therefore, in place in a chapter on management.
The ordering of the daily program is one of the most important
elements in classroom management. The desire for variety is strong
in children, and their power to concentrate their attention upon a
single kind of work is correspondingly short. In the primary grades
periods of from eight to twelve minutes, with a possible extension to
fifteen, will give sufficient opportunity for change of work. These
periods may be lengthened to thirty or even forty minutes in the
upper grades. The length of the period will depend upon the variety
which may be found in the work of a single period. In a reading
lesson which includes word drill, reading, and oral composition, the
maximum period may be used, while a period devoted to number drill
may be worse than useless after the first five or six minutes. It
is undoubtedly better for children to work to the maximum of their
capacity for short periods than to dawdle for twice the time. In
the upper grades twenty minutes may be as long as children can work
on the development of a difficult problem in geography, while they
may be active and willing to continue work in a literature lesson
after thirty-five or forty minutes. The writer has seen a class of
seventh-grade children who worked consistently for forty-five minutes
on a history problem which involved discussion, map work, and the
consulting of reference works.
Group instruction has long been recognized by teachers of large
classes as essential to the best work. In a class of forty or
fifty children, however carefully they may have been graded at the
beginning of the year, there will appear differences in attainment
which make it necessary to divide the class into two or more groups
in some subjects, in order to work to best advantage. In the lower
grades, especially in the first, where grading is least able to
place children on the basis of their ability, there is the greatest
demand for group work. As many as three or four classes in reading
may be necessary in the first grade. It must be remembered that such
grouping should never be made to apply to all subjects, nor is it
necessary to apply the group plan to any subject without variation.
Children divided into three groups for reading may do very well in
two for arithmetic, and may all work together in nature study or
constructive work. In reading it will be worth while to have all work
together at times on work which is possible for the least capable and
which may serve as a review for the more advanced group.
By the time the fourth or fifth grade is reached, the pupils will be
somewhat more evenly graded. It will still be necessary, however,
to group pupils in those subjects in which the sequence is such that
the pupils’ advance depends upon the complete mastery of the part of
the subject already covered. In arithmetic, in the more formal part
of the work in English composition, and sometimes in geography or
history, two groups are advantageous.
When pupils all work together it is not expected that all will be
able to do an equal amount of work. It is especially important that
provision be made for the brighter members of the class, in order
that they may have enough work to keep them active and alert. It too
often happens that in large classes the work is scaled down to meet
the ability of the poorest half of the class, in consequence of which
the brighter pupils learn to loaf and tend to lose interest in school
work. However many groups the class may be divided into, there will
always be the necessity for individualizing the children of each
section. The brighter ones must be given assignments which are beyond
the ability of the less capable, while a minimum of achievement
must be accepted when it represents the best effort and means the
continued development of the pupil who is weaker intellectually.
Good teachers provide for individual needs, not only by grouping
their classes on the basis of their ability, but also by giving
individual instruction. No daily program should fail to provide a
period during which the teacher can devote herself to the needs of
those individuals who need special help. It may be to help the boy
or girl who has been absent on account of sickness, to explain a
difficult problem in arithmetic, to help in the interpretation of
a map or diagram, or to teach the pupil how to study; always there
will be plenty for the teacher to do who thinks of her pupils as
individuals during the half hour or more devoted to individual
instruction.
The idea of providing individual instruction may be made the central
idea in organizing the daily program, as is done in the Batavia
system,[24] which allows one half of all school time for individual
instruction. There would seem to be little need for devoting so
much time to individual instruction in a school having any adequate
system of grading and promotion. Indeed, as has already been pointed
out in the discussion of social phases of the recitation, there is
a positive advantage in teaching in groups. The extravagant claims
sometimes made for particular systems of organization, especially
when it is declared possible by means of the system for _all_
children to reach the same standard of excellence, bear on their face
the evidence of their fallacy.
Any attempt to give group or individual instruction must be
accompanied by provision for seat work for those who are not working
with the teacher. In the lower grades much has been accomplished by
allowing children to express themselves with colored crayons and
paints, with scissors and paste, as well as with the more common
pencil and paper for copying, or the letters and words for word and
sentence building. There is probably as much worth in the seat work
which results in the expression of the ideas gained from a story by
means of crayons or with scissors as there is in the conversation
concerning the story in class. As children advance, more difficult
problems in constructive work and in study may be assigned.
In the intermediate and upper grades the problem of having children
occupied who are not directly under the supervision of the teacher is
largely the problem of teaching these children to study. A child in
the fourth grade ought to be able to discover and note carefully the
difficulties which the lesson assigned presents, and he should, in
some measure at least, be able to satisfy the problems which arise.
In succeeding grades, if children are being taught to study, they
ought in increasing measure to be able to gather data, organize it,
and proceed to the solution of their own problems.[25]
The conduct of the recitation has been discussed at length in
preceding chapters. It may be well to emphasize here the more
essential criteria. In a well managed recitation all of the children
are responsible for the progress of the class all of the time. To
this end the teacher addresses her questions to the whole class
before calling on any individual. The pupils are held responsible
for the answers which are given. The teacher does not constantly
repeat and explain answers. When they do not understand, children
are expected to ask each other questions. To secure these ends the
class should, when possible, be seated so that the one reciting may
easily face the other members of the class. The ideal seating is
found in the kindergarten circle. In a room with sufficient space
in front, the children may be seated or may stand in such a way as
to gain most of the advantages of the circle. If pupils must sit in
rows of seats with their backs to each other, it may help to have the
children reciting face the majority, and to encourage those whose
backs are toward the speaker to turn in their seats. It would seem
possible that we may sometime furnish our schoolrooms with reference
to our ideals of education; that a classroom may sometime become a
place fitted for a group of children who are to work together in the
solution of their problems.
The lack of proper management of a class may hinder the work of a
teacher whose work is excellent in other respects; but no skill in
management, however efficient in keeping children in order, can
take the place of good teaching. Most men and women who know how to
teach learn to manage a room full of children. There are still a few
who call themselves teachers who exalt management unduly. For them
the essential elements in school teaching are discipline, control,
organization. To the young teacher, or to the one who would grow,
the ideal of better teaching must constantly lead toward greater
efficiency. Observe any successful teacher, and you can discover the
devices of management which allow her to work to best advantage,
and the use which she makes of the opportunities which the school
presents to develop self-control and social responsibility on the
part of her pupils.
FOR COLLATERAL READING
W. C. Bagley, _Classroom Management_, Chapters I to VIII inclusive.
J. A. H. Keith, _Elementary Education_, Chapters VI and VII.
_Exercises._
1. Distinguish between class management as a means and as an end.
Give examples of each.
2. How would you hope to have pupils feel their responsibility for
good order in the class?
3. Why do schemes of “pupil self-government” sometimes fail?
4. What is the argument in favor of having pupils pass into or out
of the building without marching in line?
5. Why is it important not to have the class periods too long?
6. Why do teachers sometimes divide their classes into two or more
groups even though they are all of the same school grade?
7. Can you ever expect to find a group of children all of whom will
do equally well in all subjects? Are the weaker pupils necessarily
lazy?
8. Why is it important to make special provision for bright
children?
9. What is the relation between the proper organization of class
work and teaching children how to study?
10. What do you think of a program which provides for class
instruction during every period of the day?
11. What criteria would you apply in judging your own class
instruction?
12. What is “good order” in a schoolroom?
13. How would you judge of the success of a teacher in managing a
class?
14. Name all of the activities of a class which in your judgment
should be reduced to routine.
15. What rules would you make on the first day of school for the
guidance of your pupils?
16. What is the relation of good teaching to good class management?
17. If a majority of the class are misbehaving, where would you
expect to find the cause?