and did a great service where free schools had been few the best methods in other cities and countries, decided to try the system of Lancaster. It spread rapidly through New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and other states, and before long had influenced nearly all cities of any size as far south as Charleston, and west as far as Cincinnati. In 1818 Lancaster himself was invited to America, and assisted in the monitorial schools of New York, Brooklyn, and Philadelphia. A dozen years later the system began to be introduced into the high schools and academies, and for two decades it was the prevailing method in secondary education. Training schools for teachers on the Lancasterian basis became common. In fact, the monitorial system was destined to perform a great service for American education. At the time of its introduction, public and free schools were generally lacking, outside of New England. Even in that section the early Puritan provision for schools had largely become a dead letter, and the facilities that existed were meager, and available during but a small portion of the year. In all parts of the country illiteracy was almost universal among children of the poor. This want of school opportunities was rendered more serious by the rapid growth of American cities, which was evident even in the earliest part of the century, and by the consequent increase and concentration of ignorance, poverty, and crime. Societies like that in New York City, formed to study and relieve the situation, were driven to the conclusion that free schools must be instituted, if the poorer classes were to be trained to habits of thrift and virtue. Because of its comparative inexpensiveness, these philanthropic associations came to regard the system of Lancaster as a very godsend for their purpose. And when, before long, the people awoke to the crying need of public education, the legislators found the monitorial schools the cheapest way out of the difficulty, and the provision they made for these schools gradually prepared the way for the ever increasing expenditures and taxation that had to be made before satisfactory schools could be established. Hence the introduction of Lancasterianism may well be considered to have provided a basis for the substantial public support of education now universal in the United States. ineffective, Moreover, the Lancasterian schools were not only and the work economical, but most effective when the educational conditions of the times are taken into consideration. Even in the cities, the one-room and one-teacher school, which had been perpetuated from the district system, was the prevailing type, and grading was practically unknown. The whole organization and administration was shiftless and uneconomical, and a great improvement was brought about by the carefully planned and detailed methods of Lancaster. The schools were made over through his definite mechanics of instruction, centralized management, well-trained teachers, improved apparatus, discipline, hygiene, and other features. We can, then, well understand the enthusiasm for these new schools that is apparent in the utterances and writings of statesmen, educators, and other persons of the times that felt responsible for the training of the people. One of the earliest and best known estimates is that of the governor of New York, De Witt Clinton, who in 1809 declared in his address at the dedication of the new building of the Free School Society : "When I perceive that many boys in our school have been taught to read and write in two months, who did not before know the alphabet, and that even one has accomplished it in three weeks when I view all the bearings and tendencies of this system when I contemplate the habits of order which it forms, the spirit of emulation which it excites, the rapid improvement which it produces, the purity of morals which it inculcates - when I behold the extraordinary union of celerity in instruction and economy of expense and when I perceive one great assembly of a thousand children, under the eye of a single teacher, marching with unexampled rapidity and with perfect discipline to the goal of knowledge, I confess that I recognize in Lancaster the benefactor of the human race. I consider his system as creating a new era in education, as a blessing sent down from heaven to redeem the poor and distressed of this world from the power and dominion of ignorance." 1 1 For Clinton's complete eulogy of the system adopted by the Free School Society, of which he was president, see Bourne, History of the Public School Society of the City of New York, pp. 18-20. peared when But while the monitorial methods met a great educational emergency in the United States, they were clearly mechanical, inelastic, and without psychological foundation. Naturally their sway could not last long, and as public sentiment for education increased, and but disapenlarged material resources enabled the people to make educational greater appropriations for education, the obvious defects of the monitorial system became more fully appreciated and brought about its abandonment. It gave way to the more psychological conceptions of Pestalozzi and to those afterward formulated by Froebel and Herbart. sentiment improved. SUPPLEMENTARY READING I. SOURCES *BELL, A. An Experiment in Education. *LANCASTER, J. British System of Education and Improvements in Education. II. AUTHORITIES *ADAMS, F. History of the Elementary School Contest in England. Pp. 44-64. *BARNARD, H. American Journal of Education. Vol. X, pp. 323 531. BARTLEY, G. C. T. The Schools for the People; History, Develop- BOURNE, W. O. History of the Public School Society of the City of FITCH, J. G. Educational Aims and Methods. Lect. XI. GREGORY, R. Elementary Education. HOLMAN, H. English National Education. Chap. II. LEITCH, J. Practical Educationalists and their Systems. Pp. 121 165. *MEIKLEJOHN, J. M. D. An Old Educational Reformer, Dr. Andrew Bell. OLIVER, H. K. Advantages and Defects of the Monitorial System of Instruction. RANDALL, S. S. History of the Common School System of the State of New York. Pp. 28-32. Ross, G. W. The Schools of England and Germany. Chap. II. *SADLER, M. E., and EDWARDS, J. W. Summary of Statistics, Regulations, etc., of Elementary Education, England and Wales (English Education Department, Special Reports, Vol. II, pp. 436-544). *SALMON, D. Joseph Lancaster. *SHARPLESS, I. English Education. Pp. 1-8. SOUTHEY, R. and C. C. The Life of the Rev. Andrew Bell. SPALDING, T. A. The Work of the London School Board. Pp. 13-14. STEINER, B. C. History of Education in Maryland. Pp. 57-62. STOCKWALL, T. B. History of Public Education in Rhode Island. Pp. 254-294. WICKERSHAM, J. P. History of Education in Pennsylvania. Pp. 254-285. WIGHTMAN, J. M. Annals of the Boston Primary School Committee. Pp. 35-116. |