Fig. 42.-The University of Michigan in 1855. (The oldest picture of the first prominent state university; established by the legislature in 1837, and opened in 1841.)

CHAPTER XXIV

DEVELOPMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE

OUTLINE

Of the two aspects to Pestalozzi's educational positions, Froebel stressed development from within, and Herbart development from without.

Through an early tutorial experience Herbart developed his pedagogy, but afterward invented an ingenious psychology upon which to base it. He undertook to show how the mind of the pupil is largely built up by the teacher, and he held to the moral aim of education. To accomplish this, he advocated 'manysided interest,' and, while recognizing the value of both 'historical' and 'scientific' subjects, emphasized the former. But he also held that all subjects should be unified through 'correlation,' and formulated the 'formal steps of instruction.' The value of his work has been obscured by the formal interpretations of disciples, but he contributed greatly to the science of education. Herbartianism, developed by Ziller and others, spread throughout Germany; through the Herbart Society, it has greatly influenced educational content and methods in the United States.

Through his university environment, Froebel developed a mystic philosophy, but made it the basis of remarkable educational practices. He held to organic 'unity' in the universe, and to the general method of 'self-activity.' Besides this (1) 'motor expression,' he also stressed (2) 'social participation,' and attempted to realize both principles in (3) a school without books and set tasks, -the 'kindergarten.' The training here has consisted chiefly in 'play-songs,' 'gifts,' and 'occupations.' The chief weakness of Froebelianism is its mystic and symbolic theory, but it has comprehended the most essential laws of education at all stages.

The kindergarten was spread through Europe largely by Baroness von Bülow, and through the United States by Elizabeth P. Peabody and others.

Few tendencies in educational practices to-day cannot be traced back for their rudimentary form to Herbart and Froebel, or their master, Pestalozzi.

Froebel and Herbart as Disciples of Pestalozzi. In the discussion of observation and industrial training, we have noted the suggestions for improvement in educational practice that arose through Pestalozzi. While somewhat vague and based upon sympathetic insight rather than scientific principles, the positions of Pestalozzi not only left their direct influence upon the teaching of certain subjects in the elementary curriculum, but became the basis of the elaborate systems of Herbart and Froebel. These educators may be regarded as contemporary disciples of the Swiss reformer, who was born a generation before, but they continued his work along rather different lines. Each went to visit Pestalozzi, and it would seem from their comments upon what the master the they saw that each found in the master the main prinprinciple that ciple which appealed to him and which he afterward developed more or less consistently throughout his work.

Each saw in

appealed to

him.

For there were two very definite aspects to Pestalozzi's positions, which may at first seem opposed to each other, but are not necessarily contradictory. On the one hand, Pestalozzi seems to have held that education should be a natural development from within; on the other, that it must consist in the derivation of ideas from experience with the outside world. The former point of view, which is apparent in his educational aim and definition of education (see p. 285), would logically argue that every

from within

were empha

development

characteristic is implicit in the child at birth in the exact Development form to which it is afterward to be developed, and that and the child the teacher can at best only assist the child's nature in sized by the efforts for its own unfolding. This attitude Pesta- Froebel; lozzi apparently borrowed from the psychology implied in Rousseau's naturalism. The other conception, that of education as sense perception, which is evident in Pestalozzi's observational methods (see p. 286), depends from without upon the theory that immediate and direct impressions and methods, from the outside are the absolute basis of all knowledge, and holds that the contents of the mind must be entirely built up by the teacher. Some such naïve interpretation has been common since speculation began, especially among teachers, and had been formulated before Pestalozzi's day by Locke, Hume, and others. In the main, Froebel took the first of these Pestalozzian viewpoints and rarely admitted the other, but the latter phase was developed by Herbart to the almost total disregard of the former. Hence we find that the one educator lays emphasis upon the child's development and activities, and the other concerns himself with method and the work of the teacher. The original contributions of both reformers to educational practice, however, were large, and are deserving of extended description.

The Early Career and Writings of Herbart.-Johann Friedrich Herbart (1776-1841) both by birth and by education possessed a remarkable mind, and was well calculated to become a profound educational philosopher. He came of intellectual and educated stock, and at the gymnasium and university displayed a keen interest in philosophy, Greek, and mathematics. Each of these philosophy, subjects, too, was destined to play a part in his educa- mathematics.

Interest in

Greek, and