or race to-day. The inherited qualities of the minds of the Greek children of to-day are not like those of the adult Socrates or Homer, but they are like those of the Greek children of the same blood in the fourth or seventh century before Christ. The minds of the German children of to-day are not different in their fundamental inherited traits from the minds of the average German children of the time of Charlemagne; yet these Germans were barbarians. The stages of social development which the Germans have passed through, from barbarism to present-day culture, have no corresponding stages in the inherited biological development of German children of to-day. Biologists and anthropologists will agree that it is absurd to say that because of the inherited biological characteristics of their nervous systems the German children of eleven are in the stage of barbarism of Charlemagne, the children of thirteen in the stage of the Lutheran Reformation, and the children of fourteen in the stage of the nationalism of Frederick the Great. Yet these are the stages indicated in Ziller's course of study.

The five formal steps. Applied to instruction units by Ziller.- Ziller took the four steps (clearness, association, system, method) which Herbart had outlined as necessary in the methodical treatment of every subject and made them the basis of the organization of material for topical units units of instruction or lessons. Ziller's followers have modified the original steps slightly, increasing them to five and changing the names. In America, under the influence of De Garmo and the McMurrys, the steps are commonly known as follows:

1. Preparation. - Stating the aim of the lesson, recalling related facts, and taking other precautions to put the children in the right frame of mind for the new material.

2. Presentation. - Securing new data or experiences from reading, lecturing, conversing, experimenting, questioning, etc. 3. Association, comparison, and abstraction.- Discussing and interpreting the new material, relating it to previous

experiences, comparing, classifying, arranging, noting common characteristics, perhaps reaching a vague feeling of the general principles involved.

4. Generalization. - Formulating a statement of the general principles which have been worked up to in step 3.

5. Application. Interpreting other situations or experiences (new or old) in terms of the generalization reached, working particular problems, judging special cases of all sorts.

Criticism of formal steps. - The general use of the Herbartian method books in the United States has made these steps so familiar that it is not necessary to explain them further. They constitute the basis of the practical training of teachers in many of the normal schools. In Germany there is a large body of controversial and critical literature relating to them. In the United States there has not been nearly so much criticism. The criticisms which are advanced vary, depending on the point of view from which the steps are considered. They may be thought of in at least three different ways as follows:

1. As an artificial formula to assist young teachers in planning their lessons. From this point of view it is generally agreed that the steps serve the same useful purpose that any similar formula would; namely, they enable the young teacher to plan in advance, quite completely, according to definite standards, just what he will try to work out in teaching a given unit of instruction. As a rule, teachers outside of the normal schools do not use these steps very definitely. The danger in using them for guidance in the normal schools is that the work will become too wooden, too stilted; the steps will come to be looked upon as an end instead of a means for assisting inexperienced teachers.

2. As paralleling the steps of scientific method. - The second way of regarding the five formal steps considers them as corresponding to the method of modern, inductive, scientific research. From this point of view they are criticized as

being essentially defective. As shown on pages 114-117, the essential element in modern scientific method is the inductive verification of hypotheses which are formulated in the endeavor to find the solutions to problems. Neither the construction of hypotheses nor their verification is mentioned in the five formal steps. They correspond to the Baconian method of pseudo-induction rather than to the method of Newton, Galileo, Harvey, and other real scientists (see above, p. 119).

3. As natural steps in reflective thought. In the third place, the five formal steps may be considered as corresponding to the natural order of reflective thinking. This point of view is really the same as the one described in the previous paragraph, since the methods of science and of reflective thought are essentially the same; but inasmuch as the methods of science are unknown to most persons, whereas any one may easily become familiar with his own methods of reflective thought, it is worth while to discuss the two points of view separately. The formal steps have been criticized, from the point of view of reflective thought, by Professor John Dewey in his recent book entitled "How we Think." Dewey emphasizes the fact that reflective thought, like scientific investigation, begins with some problem or difficulty to be solved, for example, with such problems as "How to get the funds to go to school," "How to relieve social distress," etc. Considering the Herbartian steps from this point of view, he says:

We are struck by one difference: the Herbartian method makes no reference to a difficulty, a discrepancy requiring explanation, as the origin and stimulus of the whole process. As a consequence, it often seems as if the Herbartian method deals with thought simply as an incident in the process of acquiring information, instead of treating the latter as an incident in the process of developing thought. (14: 204.)

Dewey also makes the criticism that the steps in reflective thought are not separated as they are in the formal steps, but that there is a constant working back and forth between

individual cases, generalizations, verifications, and applications. That is, a person begins to generalize from the first one or two cases thought of, and then revises this generalization as new cases come to mind. Likewise, he may be making applications right along instead of waiting until the final conclusion is reached before making any.

Moreover, if the steps are to be considered as steps in reflective thought, the choice of a name for the second, namely, "presentation," is especially unfortunate. In reflective thought, either in everyday life or in scientific work, the data or facts necessary to solve the problem in hand are not presented" to the individual, but he ordinarily is required to search for them. Hence some term which suggests this fact would be better than "presentation."

Finally, in view of these criticisms, it would probably be better if the Herbartians, instead of trying laboriously to maintain that the formal steps correspond to reflective thought or scientific inquiry, would admit that they are a somewhat artificial device to assist in the somewhat artificial processes of studying, which must prevail in a school where there are many things to be studied and a short time to study them. From this point of view the Herbartian method may rightly claim the virtue of emphasizing the thorough appreciation by the pupil of large significant aspects of knowledge which he has helped to organize and apply in the lessons.

Few modern practices not Pestalozzian or Herbartian. This will conclude our discussion of the Herbartian movement, of which various phases are so prominent in presentday practices. Some of these practices, as we have noted, go beyond what Herbart himself would have advocated; for example, the practices in connection with the theory of concentration and the culture-epochs theory, and probably the application of the formal steps to instructional or lesson units. When we have selected from recent educational practices those that are Pestalozzian and those that are Herbartian

either in origin or character, there remain very few aspects of the modern elementary school to be discussed. Some of these remaining aspects, however, are very important, especially manual training and social training as represented in the kindergarten and, to a certain extent, in the other grades of the elementary school. To the history of these practices we shall turn in the next chapter.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES

Concerning Herbart's relation to Pestalozzi.

1. ECKOFF, W. J. (translator). Pestalozzi's Idea of an ABC of Sense-Perception, and Minor Pedagogical Works of Herbart. (D. Appleton and Company, 1896.) Contains Herbart's own account of Pestalozzi's work. Concerning new humanism.

2. PAULSEN, F. German Education. (Charles Scribner's Sons, 1908.) Pp. 161-165, 201, 208, 290.

3. RUSSELL, JAMES E. German Higher Schools. (Longmans, Green, & Co., 1901, revised edition.) Pp. 69-75.

Systematic discussion of Herbart's theory. 4. HERBART, J. F. Outlines of Educational Doctrine. (The Macmillan Company, 1901.) As the mature formulation of his practical pedagogy this is the best source for study. Herbart's psychologies and his Science of Education are comparatively unprofitable reading.

Concerning the Herbartian movement. - 5. DE GARMO, C. Herbart and the Herbartians. (Charles Scribner's Sons, 1895.) This wellknown volume traces the development after Herbart in Germany and America.

6. SCHERER, H. Geschichtsunterricht. (Wunderlich, Leipzig, 1908.) A brief history of the teaching of history in Germany.

Much of the Hebartian literature in English is of little value because it is lacking in historical perspective. Some of it consists of interpretations of Herbart's practical pedagogy in terms of his useless psychology, and is biased by a desire to show that Herbart provides a thoroughly satisfactory system of pedagogy. Some of the German histories of education treat Herbart as a part of the new humanistic movement, but this is seldom done in English.

Other works referred to in the chapter. 7. HERBART, J. F. Science of Education and Esthetic Revelation of the World. (D. C. Heath & Co., 1895.)