CHAPTER III

EFFECT OF THE INTRODUCTION OF MANUAL TRAINING UPON AMERICAN EDUCATION

In a discussion of the merits of manual training, as in many other new projects, its advocates have many times made extravagant claims for it, and its opponents have made many equally bitter attacks upon it. A number of opinions might be given on both sides of the question, but one of each will be sufficient to make this point clear. The following is taken from an article by Mr. W. N. Hailman:

"Manual training is proving its value as an efficient educational factor, not only in the development of manual skill, but also in the enrichment and invigoration of the intellect, in the direction and strengthening of the will, in the establishment of the healthy moral attitude, and in the nature of public spirit."45 Again, "Whatever course in the high school the child may enter (presumably manual training in the grades is referred to here) he will carry there with him the habits of patient research, of rational thinking, of solid judgment, of creative fervor, of mobile skill, and calm self-reliance-in short, of all-sided efficiency, which no other training can give him. And by these alone can he climb to mastership in life."'46

Were these claims true, practically all our educational problems would eventually disappear. But they appear to be without foundation in many instances and are based on no statistics or observations. That such results are desirable is undeniable, but the mere fact that manual training may produce such results does not warrant anyone in making the statement that it does. Even if it be granted that the child acquires all these

45 W. N. Hailman, "Educational Aspects of Manual Training," in the "Pedogogic Quarterly," Oct., 1899, Vol. 1, No. 4, p. 1, E. L. Kellog Co. 46 Ibid., p. 18.

characteristics, there are so many other influences to be considered that it is not safe to assume that they are benefits derived only from manual training. On the other hand, when the movement for manual training schools was first being inaugurated in the United States, Dr. Wm. T. Harris, who was one of the leading educators of the day, as chairman of a committee on Pedagogics, strongly opposed it, and in the course of a report in 1889, to the National Council of Education, stated that the argument that manual training cultivates the powers of attention, perseverance, and industry, is misleading, because they are formal powers and not substantial. They derive their value from what they are applied to, and they may be mischievous as well as beneficial.47 Dr. Harris did not seem to appreciate the fact that the same argument may be turned against any of the recognized academic studies. For many years it has been contended that mathematics, languages, history, and other academic studies have cultivated these same powers. Such being the case, these subjects might produce mischievous as well as beneficial effects, and consequently have the same objections raised against them as the committee raised against manual training.

Manual training is no longer an experiment. It has been in use in this country for over twenty-five years and is now so widely diffused that it has become an integral part of the public school curriculum. It has been given sufficient time to demonstrate its usefulness and its adaptation to present day conditions.

When the movement was still in its infancy, Dr. C. M. Woodward, 48 of the St. Louis Manual Training School, suggested several results which might be expected to follow the introduction of manual training. These results are submitted for two reasons. First, because they include most of the results usually

47 “The Educational Value of Manual Training,” Report of the Committee on Pedagogics, National Council of Education, July, 1889. In Appendix of Woodward, "The Educational Value of Manual Training," D. C. Heath & Co., 1890.

48 These 18 results are quoted from C. M. Woodward, "The Manual Training School," Chapter VIII, pp. 212–213.

given by advocates of manual training; second, because they were suggested twenty-five years ago, so that, after an experience of that length of time, it can be determined, to a large extent, whether the prophecies made have come true.

"The value of manual training, when properly combined with literary, scientific, and mathematical studies, will be shown in the following ways:

"I. Science and mathematics will profit from a better understanding of forms, materials, and processes, and from the readiness with which their principles may be illustrated.

"2. Without shopwork, drawing loses half its value.

"3. Correct notions of things, relations, and forces, derived from actual handling and doing, go far toward a just comprehension of language in general; that is, manual training cultivates the mechanical and scientific imagination, and enables one to see the force of metaphors in which physical terms are employed to express metaphysical truths."

A.-Numbers 1, 2, and 3 would probably hold true if mathematics, science, drawing, and language work were closely correlated. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. The progress in this direction one would expect after a period covering twenty-five years has not been made. There have been a few books on practical mathematics published, and the new books are devoting more and more space to practical problems, so that we may hope for more definite results in the near future. In order to make mechanical drawing effective it is absolutely essential that it be correlated with the manual training, yet frequently we find them divorced entirely. Whenever possible, working drawings of the objects to be made should first be required. If the teachers of the manual training and the teachers of other subjects would confer and map out a course whereby each subject would be taught so as to bring out its relation to the other branches, better results might be obtained.

"4. Manual training will stimulate a love for simplicity of statement and a disposition to reject fine sounding words whose meaning is obscure."

B.-Number 4 is of no significance whatever. Just as a boy at one period of his life has an inclination to jump from high

places, at another period to display his physical prowess, so at a third period he has a desire to use large and fine sounding words. Difference in training would hardly affect him, and even if it did the advantage gained would be of small moment. "5. It will awaken a lively interest in school, and invest dull subjects with new life."

C.-Number 5 may or may not be true. There is testimony to support this claim, but my own experience has been that it does not invest dull subjects with new life to any great extent. Testimony of others with whom I have conferred agrees with my own conclusion. Mr. C. T. Lane, Principal of the Highland Manual Training School, Fort Wayne, Indiana, states:

"Our experience points straight to the conclusion that boys, if left to themselves, will tend to neglect their academic studies in favor of their shop work, and this conclusion of experience is confirmed by correspondence with principals of other schools."49 "6. It will keep boys and girls out of mischief, both in and out of school."

D.-Number 6 offers no reason either for the introduction or the maintenance of manual training. Cases of discipline can be handled with much less expense and in much less time than the time devoted to teaching manual training. At the same time, it must be admitted that manual work has improved the discipline in particular schools.

"7. It will keep boys longer at school."

E-Number 7 will be discussed later.

"8. It will give boys with strong mechanical aptitudes and fondness for objective study an equal chance with those of good memories for languages."

F-Number 8 is no doubt true, for the innate tendencies of all individuals are not the same. At least it should make the school work much more interesting for those who have strong "mechanical aptitudes."

"9. It will materially aid in the selection of occupation when school life is over."

G.-Number 9 involves a question that it is extremely difficult to answer. That it is true in individual cases is almost a

49

'Report of Public Schools," 1907, Fort Wayne, Indiana, p. 58.

certainty, but whether it occurs in a sufficient number of cases to warrant its being called a result is another matter. Even though statistics were available on the matter there would be no surety that it was not some other factor that influenced the selection of occupation. In many cases, particularly in industrial districts, the boy would probably enter into industrial work whether he had received manual training or not, so that the selection could not be ascribed to his training. Furthermore, it is quite possible that the manual training may be instrumental in leading many boys to take up mechanical work who might otherwise have followed some profession and thus placed themselves in more enviable positions. The tendency among boys is, too frequently, to follow the line of least resist

ance.

The Alumni Association of the Northeast Manual Training School of Philadelphia has compiled statistics relating to the occupations of the graduates of the school. This school has just completed its twentieth year.