8. DEWEY, J. Interest as related to Will. (The University of Chicago Press, 1895.)

9. DAVIDSON, J. New Interpretation of Herbart's Psychology. (Blackwood, London, 1906.)

10. BARNARD, H. Kindergarten and Child Culture. (C. W. Bardeen, Syracuse, 1890.)

II. GUIMPS, ROGER DE. Pestalozzi, his Aim and Work. (D. Appleton and Company, 1890.)

12. SCHMID, K. A. Geschichte der Erziehung. Vol. IV, Part II. 13. MARSHALL, A. M. Biological Lectures and Addresses. (1894.) 14. Dewey, J. How we think. (D. C. Heath & Co., 1910.)

15. JAQUITH, C. A. The Development of History Teaching in the United States up to the Civil War. (Essay for master's degree, The University of Chicago Library, 1911, unpublished.)

16. BARNARD, H. American Journal of Education, 1863-1865. Vol. XIII, pp. 209-222, 401-408; Vol. XIV, pp. 626–635, 753-777; Vol. XV, pp. 540-575. For a list of American textbooks.

17. BOURNE, H. E. The Teaching of History and Civics. (Longmans, Green, & Co., 1903.)

18. MOSES, M. J. Children's Books and Reading. (Mitchell Kennerley, N. Y., 1907.)

19. FIELD, MRS. E. M. The Child and his Book. (Gardner & Darton, London, 1891.)

20. GODFREY, ELIZABETH. English Children in the Olden Time. (Methuen, 1907.)

21. REEDER, R. R. Historical Development of School Readers and Methods of Reading. (The Macmillan Company, 1900.)

22. ELIOT, C. W. Educational Reform. (The Century Co., 1898.) 23. Educational Review, July, 1891. Vol. II.

24. Dendro-Psychoses, American Journal of Psychology, July, 1898. Vol. IX, pp. 449-506. Hydro-Psychoses, American Journal of Psychology, January, 1899. Vol. X, pp. 171-229.

CHAPTER XVIII

EDUCATION THROUGH MOTOR EXPRESSION AND SOCIAL PARTICIPATION; THE FROEBELIANS

Main points of the chapter. 1. Froebel (1782-1852), directly influenced by Pestalozzi, conducted experimental schools in Germany from 1816 to 1852. In this way, beginning 1837, he became the founder of the kindergarten.

2. He reverted to Rousseau's idea of education through motor expression, but formalized it in practice as the Pestalozzians formalized object teaching.

3. He corrected Rousseau's theory of nonsocial education and made social participation a fundamental educative factor.

4. From his own peculiar introspective, mystical temperament Froebel developed a peculiar educational theory of symbolism which prevailed for a long time in the kindergarten.

5. Between 1850 and 1875 kindergartens were established in a few places in the United States, and between 1875 and 1900 they became common. They existed as parts of the public-school systems of approximately two hundred cities of over eight thousand population by 1900.

6. Progress in child psychology has resulted in a criticism and reform of some of the crudities in the original kindergarten practice. Many kindergartens, however, adhere to the old practices.

7. Froebel was one of the most influential personal factors in the development of systems of manual constructive work for general educative purposes. The sloyd system (Finland, 1866) is partially a direct outcome of his work.

8. Manual training was initiated in higher schools in the United States by the Russian exhibits at the Centennial Exposition of Philadelphia in 1876. Between 1883 and 1890 manual training was organized in the high schools of at least thirty-eight cities.

9. In the elementary school manual training developed during the same period. It consisted largely of kindergarten activities for "busy work" in the primary grades, and experimentation to find a system of exercises adapted to the two highest grades.

10. Colonel F. W. Parker and Professor John Dewey have been most influential in applying principles similar to Froebel's to the work of the elementary school. They have both emphasized (a) artistic and industrial activities as important forms of expression; (b) training in thought through expression, and training in expression through thought; (c) the importance of the real audience-situation as fundamental for training in expression.

II. Professor Dewey, on the basis of his fundamental principles of social psychology, makes the study of industries the central point of the curriculum. This study is conducted in the primary grades by having the children actively engaged to a certain extent in miniature industrial processes which are reproduced in the school.

12. Recently other psychologists (James, Thorndike, Judd), while emphasizing the importance of expression in relation to thought, have maintained that verbal expression is more important than the artistic and industrial forms of expression which the Froebelians emphasize.

Froebel continued and supplemented the Rousseau-Pestalozzi movement. -The previous discussion demonstrated that the Pestalozzian methods were dominant in the scientific and formal subjects of the elementary-school curriculum during the nineteenth century, and that the Herbartian influence affected especially the methods of teaching history and literature, particularly in the lower grades. Through the work of the Pestalozzians many of the reforms for which Rousseau had created enthusiasm were actually achieved in practice. On the other hand, the Herbartians supplemented and corrected the Rousseau tendencies by organizing moral instruction based on the study of history and literature.

Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852), a more intimate disciple of Pestalozzi even than Herbart, was largely responsible for two further innovations in practice: (1) he organized school training based on motor activity, as Rousseau had suggested; and (2) he corrected Rousseau's doctrines by making active social participation one of the most prominent elements in school life. These two innovations he organized most effectively in the kindergarten, of which he was the founder. His followers have carried them into the other grades of the elementary school.

Froebel's career and character. Philosophy a dominant influence. — Unlike Herbart, Froebel probably derived his educational theories to a considerable extent from his fundamental philosophy, and they were consistent with it. But since most students do not know or understand the theories or the history of modern philosophy, it is not worth while here to attempt to study Froebel's philosophy in order better to understand how he explained his educational belief. Moreover, those parts of his educational theory and practice that are proving most permanent do not depend for their validity upon his system of philosophy, but are consistent with quite opposite systems. For example, Froebel's favorite belief was in the unity of life, the unity of God and all things, the unity of mind and matter, etc., as expressed in the following quotation:

...

In all things there lives and reigns an eternal law. . . . This allcontrolling law is necessarily based on an all-pervading, energetic, living, self-conscious, and hence eternal Unity. . . . This Unity is God. All things have come from the Divine Unity, from God. . . . In all things there lives and reigns the Divine Unity, God. . . . The divine influence that lives in each thing is the essence of each thing. (1: 1.)

To this belief in unity Froebel related his belief in organized play, motor expression, invention, and social participation as important factors in education. But it is possible to believe in all of these, and at the same time to believe in a fundamental philosophy that is just the opposite of Froebel's, namely, in a dualism of mind and matter, in a God of which the world is not a part, or in an atomic philosophy of the universe. In view of these facts we shall not enter into a further consideration of Froebel's metaphysics.

Froebel an enthusiastic follower of Pestalozzi. - Before arriving at the age of twenty-three Froebel had not seriously considered following teaching as a life work. His father had been a pastor of little means, and Froebel had not enjoyed the advantages of a very systematic education. He was largely self-instructed. He had been apprenticed to a forester for a

while; had spent a short time in study at the University of Jena (1800); and had served as a secretary, bookkeeper, and surveyor. He finally decided to study architecture, and went to Frankfort (in 1805) for this purpose. Here he became acquainted with Gruener (1778-1844), who had organized a most successful Pestalozzian school. Gruener advised Froebel to take up teaching as a profession and offered him a position in the Pestalozzian school. Froebel accepted, was very successful as a teacher, and, with the exception of a few years, devoted the rest of his long life to the improvement of education.

To better prepare himself for his new work, he spent two weeks at Pestalozzi's school in Yverdon (1805). Again, in 1808, he took to Yverdon three boys whom he was tutoring and entered them in Pestalozzi's school. Here he spent two years (1808-1810), studying Pestalozzian methods as they were organized in the various classes. In 1809 he wrote an enthusiastic account of Pestalozzi's methods, concluding with this paragraph:

And thus the Pestalozzian method sets man forth on his endless path of development and culture on the way to knowledge, bound to no time and no space, a development to which there is no limit, no hindrance, no bounds.

Organized experimental and model schools. After leav ing Pestalozzi's school Froebel dropped teaching for six years, meanwhile pursuing university studies, serving in the Prussian army against Napoleon, and assisting in a mineralogical museum in Berlin. In 1816, using some of his brother's children as a nucleus, he organized an experimental school under the formidable title of The Universal German Institute. This school was similar in character and fortune to Pestalozzi's schools, prospering at times and again suffering such poverty that the few teachers and children had to subsist on wild fruits. Here, in 1826, Froebel published his most important pedagogical work, "The Education of Man." In 1829