reader will recognize that such calisthenic systems are still widely used in the gymnastic training of children.

The ABC of observation emphasized geometrical names. -One of the most remarkable applications of the Pestalozzian theory of proceeding from the simple to the complex was in the teaching of geometrical figures and names. Rousseau and Pestalozzi had created an enthusiasm for the observation of things, and since squares, circles, angles, triangles, etc. appear in doors, windows, street corners, etc., Pestalozzi and his followers concluded that an alphabet of these had to be taught, so they devised "A B C's of observation." The Pestalozzian object-teaching books which had great vogue in England and America about 1860 included in their material for "infant and primary schools" not only the simpler geometrical names such as the cylinder, cone, sphere, hemisphere, etc., but even such appalling names as tetrahedron, octahedron, and rhombic dodecahedron.

ABC of kindergarten exercises based by Froebel on geometrical forms from simple to complex. - Pestalozzi's theory of proceeding from the simple to the complex was applied by his disciple Froebel in organizing the activities used in play and construction in the kindergarten. Froebel spent two years as a teacher or observer in Pestalozzi's school and said, "It soon became evident to me that 'Pestalozzi' was to be the watchword of my life." After many years of vicissitudes, Froebel finally organized the first kindergarten in 1837. At an earlier date he had emphasized "proceeding from the simple to the complex" in the organization of constructive activities, and later, in speaking of the use of games in the kindergarten, he said, "They should be organized in 'logical sequence.'” These ideas, combined with the general enthusiasm for geometrical names described above and Froebel's experience with geometrically formed crystals while working as a mineralogist, resulted in a most peculiar series of play devices for educating

"Forms of beauty" made with Froebelian blocks. Note the contrast between this picture and the socially meaningful activities of progressive kindergartens pictured on pages 123-129 and 154

children. Throughout these devices the geometrical idea stands out. Instead of choosing dolls and doll clothes and toy furniture and other socially meaningful objects found in children's imitative play, he chose a ball because it was a sphere, blocks because they were cylinders and cubes, little sticks because they could be laid into geometrical forms such as triangles, squares, rectangles, etc. The use of these objects in constructing geometrical "forms of beauty" is shown in the picture on page 147. It is evident that you proceed from the simple to the complex as you glance from the upper part of the picture to the lower part.

Teaching of formal subjects long dominated by Pestalozzi's unpsychological alphabet methods. - The examples from the teaching of reading, writing, drawing, gymnastics, and the kindergarten show what an enormous influence has been exerted in the teaching of these formal subjects by the principle of proceeding from the simple to the complex. In many places the methods described are still in vogue. It remains to show that Pestalozzi was badly mistaken when he decided that the way to psychologize teaching was to break up each subject into its smallest elements and then feed these elements to children in "logical sequence."

Pestalozzi's alphabets based on the subjects, not on childhood. It will be remembered that we defined the psychological organization of subject matter as the order in which pupils best learn a subject, and that Rousseau laid the foundation for the psychological reforms by saying we must study childhood to understand how children learn most readily and effectively. Now it is quite obvious that while Pestalozzi said he would "psychologize teaching," he frequently forgot "childhood" in the practices described above and focused his attention absolutely on each subject in itself. Disregarding children's experience and natural methods of learning, he devised the most unpsychological schemes for having them learn. This may be explained by presenting a partial

description of the way a person learns according to William James, the greatest of American psychologists.

Learning usually involves the learner's analyzing complex wholes himself. According to James, a person learns ordinarily by meeting complex situations and analyzing these situations himself, not by being fed the elements of these situations by someone else who has dug them out. In describing the frame of mind of a child in a very new situation, James characterized it as "a big, blooming, buzzing confusion." Examples of such situations from adult life are the following: coming out of a depot in a strange city; being plunged into the water for one's first swimming lesson; trying to draw an unfamiliar object if you have little skill in drawing; trying to solve a difficult original exercise in geometry. The learner clears up such a buzzing confusion by picking out now this phase and now that phase for separate attention. For example, in coming out of the depot you may look the people over and pick out a policeman to question, or you may look for a street car, or you may watch where the crowd goes and decide to follow it. As you have more and more experiences with strange depots the mental confusion disappears; you have learned how to behave in such situations; you have them clearly analyzed into checking rooms, ticket offices, train bulletin boards, train announcers, cab drivers, policemen, street-car conductors, street signs, etc., and have developed appropriate methods of noticing these and behaving accordingly.

Unnecessary to dig out smallest elements in many situations. - We usually carry our analysis only as far as is necessary for practical purposes. Hence we are quite familiar with many complex situations or objects, and know just how to behave toward them, although we have never analyzed them into their smallest elements. For example, we learn to recognize and to eat or avoid onions; we are familiar with their so-called taste" and know how to behave toward

it. As a matter of fact, most of the so-called taste is a complex mixture of taste and odor. It can be analyzed into these two elements by having a person close his eyes, plug his nostrils, stick out his tongue, and close his lips. Then place a piece of onion or potato or apple or turnip on his tongue and have him guess which it is. Obviously, however, this process is unnecessary in teaching a person to recognize and discriminate onions from potatoes, apples, and turnips in daily life.

Similarly, children learn to recognize, name, and use such complex objects as doors, windows, chairs, wagons, automobiles, etc. without first being taught that these have acute and obtuse angles or consist of circles, rectangles, squares, cylinders, or what not. It is obvious that an ABC of observation organized in geometrical terms is an unnecessary and useless device in teaching observation in ordinary life, since for most practical purposes the analysis of complex objects and situations is not carried down to such geometrical elements.

Subject matter, now psychologically organized, begins with wholes. Thus we see that great modern psychologists, such as William James, describe learning not in terms of proceeding from the simple to the complex, but in terms of the learner's meeting more or less complex objects or situations and analyzing these as far as may be necessary for practical behavior. This account of the learning process is having large influence in changing the organization of subject matter. For example, since children can easily recognize as wholes such statements as "We have two pets" or "They are white mice," such short sentences may be used in beginning reading, instead of beginning with letters or syllables.

This process is described in one of the current manuals of a commercialized reading system in the following terms, which clearly reflect James's influence: