Billeder på siden

with much reluctance, come to accept. My own regard for the classics, philosophy, and general history as college disciplines has caused me to view with apprehension any disposition to curtail their scope. It now seems clear, however, that the modern tendency to emphasize the functional aspects of the History of Education is both necessary and wise. The present work, therefore, is not a mere condensation of my History of Education in Three Volumes, but has been very largely re-written from the new angle.

In the first place, I have sought to stress educational institutions and practices, rather than theories that did not find embodiment in the times. This has led to the omission of much that is unessential or more strictly related to philosophy, general history, or literature. For example, even the immortal work of Plato and Aristotle has been epitomized; the entire subject of mysticism and most of scholasticism have been dropped; the masterpieces of such pure theorists as Rabelais, Montaigne, and Mulcaster, are barely mentioned; and the various historical epochs are given only so much detail as may be needed to form a social setting for the educational movements of those periods.

Secondly, it has seemed to me that our present problems in education can best be analyzed through a knowledge of the practices that have developed in modern times. Hence, while this book includes an account of all educational endeavor from the day of primitive man to the present, somewhat more than one-half the material is connected with the last two centuries. Even the attractive period of Hellenic activity and the fascinating stories of monasticism and of chivalry have been

reduced to a minimum. But, though most of the changes in the earlier half of the work are in the nature of shortening, or have to do with more immediate connections, some topics, notably the development of commerce and cities (Chapter XI) and the analysis of formal discipline (Chapter XVI), have seemed to be so closely connected with subsequent progress as to deserve more adequate treatment.

Finally, since this book is intended chiefly for teachers in the United States, I have believed it most helpful to give considerable space to the discussion of American education. The account of each educational movement has included at least an attempt to trace its influence upon the content, method, and organization of education in the United States, while three chapters have been devoted exclusively to the rise of educational systems in this country.

My indebtedness for many valuable features in this book is heavy. The idea of an Outline, which appears at the beginning of each chapter, was first suggested to me by the History of Modern Elementary Education of Dean S. C. Parker of the College of Education, University of Chicago, although I have adopted a different explanation of its value. Professor Parker also read through the manuscript and sent me a general estimate of it. Professors J. H. Coursault of the University of Missouri, A. J. Jones of the University of Maine, W. H. Kilpatrick of Columbia University, A. R. Mead of Ohio Wesleyan University, and A. L. Suhrie of the West Chester (Pennsylvania) State Normal School, have all read the manuscript through with exceeding care and furnished me with numerous corrections and criticisms, both particular and

general. Professor T. H. Briggs of Columbia University suggested a number of improvements in the chapter upon Present Day Tendencies in Education (XXVII). The chapter upon the Educational Influences of the Reformation (XIII) has been relieved of several inaccuracies, and possibly of some Protestant bias, through the assistance of the Rev. Benedict Guldner, S. J., of St. Joseph's College, and of Brother Denis Edward, F. S. C., President of La Salle College, Philadelphia. I have also, as usual, been greatly aided by my wife, Helen Wadsworth Graves.

F. P. G.

« ForrigeFortsæt »