Billeder på siden


Industry a matter of state importance-Schools for industry to be established by the state--Course pursued by Great Britain-Art-schools and drawing in England—Effect of, on prosperity—Manual instruction correlated-How to treat the question-Not to be introduced into the school-room-Dr. White's and Mr. MacAlister's views-Schools at Montclair and Philadelphia-Manual training in Europe-It improves the pupils-Public opinion-Conflicting opinions and objections-Statement of the same-Diversity of views-Mr. Stetson's-Dr. White'sUnited States' limited provision for industrial education-Consideration of popular objections-Instruction in the use of tools and machinery— Illustrations-Pursuits that resemble each other-Mechanical powers -Trades easily learned-Occupations will multiply-No danger of glutting them-Mode of industrial instruction-Moderate instruction at outset-Pupils with a general knowledge of hand-tools prepared for a variety of trades-Illustrated by Mr. Leland's school-A community of skilled workmen, its value-Further notice of industrial schools in Europe-Statement of M. Rossat-School at Charleville-Industrial training in French elementary schools-School of the Rue Tournefort -The French act of 1880-Programme of the commission-Report of H. Tolman, senator-Conclusions of the Boston committee-Views of Mr. Steel-Important as coming from the right quarter.

BUT the time has come to extend our view beyond these individual and scattered efforts, for it is claimed with much semblance of justice that the interdependence which exists between manual education and the industrial prosperity of the state is a subject of too much impor

tance to be safely left either to the speculations of the mere philosophical theorist, or to the narrow and shortsighted views engendered by personal or local interests; and it is therefore asserted that the state itself should recognize the relation between a high type of manual education and the great interests of material prosperity, just as it makes provision for the cultivation of the mental powers, and all that goes to make up the moral and intellectual capacity of the community; and it is suggested that, as the common welfare becomes fixed and possible only by the joint labor of mental and physical endowments, the education of each should to some extent pari passu accompany the other. It is argued that industrial schools should be established by the state; or at least that opportunities for industrial instruction at its expense should be provided in different districts, to be determined, of course, by the pursuits and experience of the people.

When Great Britain found herself outstripped at the Crystal Palace Exhibition, she "faced the music" at once, and established the South Kensington Museum, with its annexed art-schools, at an expense of six million dollars. There are now (1882) nearly two hundred art-schools in England, where thirty thousand people receive instruction; and the progress is still more remarkable in the way of general education, for there are not less than four thousand two hundred schools where drawing is taught, and where nearly a million pupils are instructed in drawing and design. Between 1874 and 1878 Parliament expended over one million dollars in aid of drawing-schools and museums of art. Says the author from whom I take these facts: "The English were eminently a practical

people, and thought this an excellent investment to increase the wealth of the nation; . . . the English now surpass the world in certain kinds of articles." We may confidently affirm that the wealth and business prosperity of Great Britain are to-day owing as much to these schools as to any other cause, for by means of the improved appearance of all her mechanical products she has been enabled to regain her mastery all over the globe. She took the lesson of the Crystal Palace to heart, and set an eminent example of renaissance in her industrial art through the active agency of the Government.

Much of the instruction received in the English artschools, such as drawing, geometry, etc., has been recently introduced into our public schools. If these were developed in close connection with the expedient of manual instruction, which would show the practical application of the knowledge acquired by the students in these studies, public education would then be fixed upon the immovable basis of industrial rights and conquests. The fact must sooner or later be recognized, that manual instruction is correlated and inseparable in any adequate system of public teaching; and that it is important that provision be made where our youth can be taught who intend to engage in industrial pursuits; for without this assistance our skilled industries can not be carried on except by the importation of that species of labor from other countries.

The sneering observation is frequently heard that the public schools cannot be expected to turn out ready-made smiths, carpenters, wheelwrights, masons, brick-layers, shoemakers, tailors, and farmers. This is, of course, intended to be a crusher, and to settle the matter peremptori

ly. It is not exactly, however, upon this principle that the great question of industrial education is or ought to be treated. Good men may and do differ as to the best mode for the practical instruction of a whole community; but they ought not to be embarrassed by a superficial slur. Even if this were the purpose of manual training, it would be as little a reproach to it as it is to the present system that it turns out so many ready-made clerks, book-keepers, accountants, insurance agents, and students prepared for entering college. The way in which manual training ought to be carried on, and the extent to which our public schools can be used for that purpose, is of course a question that will receive a variety of answers. It is not intended to introduce the pegging or the sewing machine, or any other machine into the school-room. Upon this subject there is much misunderstanding; for, while the state has clearly a right to direct the ingredients of the education it freely furnishes to all, it is not intended that work and study are to occur in the same apartments or even in the same building necessarily. For instance, Dr. E. E. White, who strenuously objects to manual training in the public schools, is perhaps under this erroneous impression, for he qualifies his objections by saying: "Of course, I could take no exception to all that may be said in favor of technical and industrial schools, standing beside the public schools and carrying on this work of education-giving to our youth technical and special training for industrial pursuits. That is what we have got to do in this country. We must have a system of technical training, and the question is, Shall we put a system into the public schools, as they are now organized?"

And Mr. MacAlister expressed his opinion to be, that

alongside the high-school there might be a manual training-school that should fit the pupils to enter in advance upon those industrial occupations that they intended to follow. These gentlemen agree that industrial education is valuable, and that there is no objection to any measures for its promotion, if the schools for that purpose are placed by themselves. We see that things have taken that course already. There are at least two instances of that kind described in the preceding chapter-the shop which was fitted up for industrial instruction in the town of Montclair, and the room devoted to industrial art in the Hollingsworth Buildings, Philadelphia. They are both designed as accessories to the common school, separated from it, and yet contiguous enough to accommodate the public-school children; and the extent to which they have achieved success is rapidly solving the problem of industrial education in the United States. The question of manual and elementary instruction is now scarcely an open one, for the formula of reconciliation between them has at length been discovered; and the two forces, instead of being rivals, are becoming good friends. Besides, it is a matter of general observation that manual training and ordinary teaching have been conducted in distinct parts of the same school for many years in Europe; and that generally the effect of this has served to enlarge the faculties, refine the taste, to give clearness and breadth to the intellect, to make the character more helpful and self-reliant, and to start the pupils with the best prospects of success in the practical ends of life. Education can by this means be made a unit, and not a fragment. Indeed, this system of commensurate education is demanded by reasons more imperative than those which require the

« ForrigeFortsæt »