A day of celebration generally is
in the first place dedicated to retrospect, especially to the
memory of personages who have gained special distinction for the
development of the cultural life. This friendly service for our
predecessors must indeed not be neglected, particularly as such a
memory of the best of the past is proper to stimulate the
well-disposed of today to a courageous effort. But this should be
done by someone who, from his youth, has been connected with this
State and is familiar with its past, not by one who like a gypsy
has wandered about and gathered his experiences in all kinds of
countries.
Thus, there is nothing else left for me but to speak about such
questions as, independently of space and time, always have been and
will be connected with educational matters. In this attempt I
cannot lay any claim to being an authority, especially as
intelligent and well-meaning men of all times have dealt with
educational problems and have certainly repeatedly expressed their
views clearly about these matters. From what source shall I, as a
partial layman in the realm of pedagogy, derive courage to expound
opinions with no foundations except personal experience and
personal conviction? If it were really a scientific matter, one
would probably be tempered to silence by such
considerations.
However, with the affairs of active human beings it is different.
Here knowledge of truth alone does not suffice; on the contrary
this knowledge must continually be renewed by ceaseless effort, if
it is not to be lost. It resembles a statue of marble which stands
in the desert and is continuously threatened with burial by the
shifting-sand. The hands of service must ever be at work, in order
that the marble continue lastingly to shine in the sun. To these
serving hands mine also shall belong.
The school has always been the most important means of transferring
the wealth of tradition from one generation to the next. This
applies today in an even higher degree than in former times for,
through modern development of the economic life, the family as
bearer of tradition and education has been weakened. The
continuance and health of human society is therefore in a still
higher degree dependent on the school than formerly.
Sometimes one sees in the school simply the instrument for
transferring a certain maximum quantity of knowledge to the growing
generation. But that is not right. Knowledge is dead; the school,
however, serves the living. It should develop in the young
individuals those qualities and capabilities which are of value for
the welfare of the commonwealth. But that does not mean that
individuality should be destroyed and the individual become a mere
tool of the community, like a bee or an ant. For a community of
standardized individuals without personal originality and personal
aims would be a poor community without possibilities for
development. On the contrary, the aim must be the training of
independently acting and thinking individuals, who, however, see in
the service of the community their highest life problem. As far as
I can judge, the English school system comes nearest to the
realization of this ideal.
But how shall one try to attain this ideal? Should one perhaps try
to realize this aim by moralizing? Not at all. Words are and remain
an empty sound, and the road to perdition has ever been accompanied
by lip service to an ideal. But personalities are not formed by
what is heard and said, but by labor and activity.
The most important method of education accordingly always has
consisted of that in which the pupil was urged to actual
performance. This applies as well to the first attempts at writing
of the primary boy as to the doctor’s thesis on graduation from
the university, or as to the mere memorizing of a poem, the writing
of a composition, the interpretation and translation of a text, the
solving of a mathematical problem or the practice of physical
sport.
But behind every achievement exists the
motivation which is at the foundation of it and which in turn is
strengthened and nourished by the accomplishment of the
undertaking. Here there are the greatest differences and they are
of greatest importance to the educational value of the school. The
same work may owe its origin to fear and compulsion, ambitious
desire for authority and distinction, or loving interest in the
object and a desire for truth and understanding, and thus to that
divine curiosity which every healthy child possesses, but which so
often early is weakened. The educational influence which is
exercised upon the pupil by the accomplishment of one and the same
work may be widely different, depending upon whether fear of hurt,
egoistic passion or desire for pleasure and satisfaction are at the
bottom of this work. And nobody will maintain that the
administration of the school and the attitude of the teachers does
not have an influence upon the molding of the psychological
foundation for pupils.
To me the worst thing seems to be for a school principally to work
with methods of fear, force and artificial authority. Such
treatment destroys the sound sentiments, the sincerity and the
self-confidence of the pupil. It produces the submissive subject.
It is no wonder that such schools are the rule in Germany and
Russia. I know that the schools in this country are free from this
worst evil; this also is so in Switzerland and probably in all
democratically governed countries. It is comparatively simple to
keep the school free from this worst of all evils. Give into the
power of the teacher the fewest possible coercive measures, so that
the only source of the pupil’s respect for the teacher is the
human and intellectual qualities of the latter.
The second-named motive, ambition or, in milder terms, the aiming
at recognition and consideration, lies firmly fixed in human
nature. With absence of mental stimulus of this kind, human
cooperation would be entirely impossible; the desire for the
approval of one’s fellowman certainly is one of the most
important binding powers of society. In this complex of feelings,
constructive and destructive forces lie closely together. Desire
for approval and recognition is a healthy motive, but the desire to
be acknowledged as better, stronger or more intelligent than a
fellow being or fellow scholar easily leads to an excessively
egoistic psychological adjustment, which may become injurious for
the individual and for the community. Therefore the school and the
teacher must guard against employing the easy method of creating
individual ambition, in order to induce the pupils to diligent
work.
Darwin’s theory of the struggle for existence
and the selectivity connected with it has by many people been cited
as authorization of the encouragement of the spirit of competition.
Some people also in such a way have tried to prove
pseudoscientifically the necessity of the destructive economic
struggle of competition between individuals. But this is wrong,
because man owes his strength in the struggle for existence to the
fact that he is a socially living animal. As little as a battle
between single ants of an ant hill is essential for survival, just
so little is this the case with the individual members of a human
community.
Therefore one should guard against preaching to the young man
success in the customary sense as the aim of life. For a successful
man is he who receives a great deal from his fellowmen, usually
incomparably more than corresponds to his service to them. The
value of a man, however, should be seen in what he gives and not in
what he is able to receive.
The most important motive for work in the school and in life is the
pleasure in work, pleasure in its result and the knowledge of the
value of the result to the community. In the awakening and
strengthening of these psychological forces in the young man, I see
the most important task given by the school. Such a psychological
foundation alone leads to a joyous desire for the highest
possessions of men, knowledge and artistlike workmanship.
The awakening of these productive psychological powers is certainly
less easy than the practice of force or the awakening of individual
ambition but is the more valuable for it. The point is to develop
the childlike inclination for play and the childlike desire for
recognition and to guide the child over to important fields upon
the desire for successful activity and acknowledgment. If the
school succeeds in working successfully from such points of view,
it will be highly honored by the rising generation and the tasks
given by the school will be submitted to as a sort of gift. I have
known children who preferred schooltime to vacation.
Such a school demands from the teacher that he be a kind of artist
in his province. What can be done that this spirit be gained in the
school? For this there is just as little a universal remedy as
there is for an individual to remain well. But there are certain
necessary conditions which can be met. First, teachers should grow
up in such schools. Second, the teacher should be given extensive
liberty in the selection of the material to be taught and the
methods of teaching employed by him. For it is true also of him
that pleasure in the shaping of his work is killed by force and
exterior pressure.
If you have followed attentively my meditations
up to this point, you will probably wonder about one thing. I have
spoken fully about in what spirit, according to my opinion, youth
should be instructed. But I have said nothing yet about the choice
of subjects for instruction, nor about the method of teaching.
Should language predominate or technical education in
science?
To this I answer: In my opinion all this is of secondary
importance. If a young man has trained his muscles and physical
endurance by gymnastics and walking, he will later be fitted for
every physical work. This is also analogous to the training of the
mind and the exercising of the mental and manual skill. Thus the
wit was not wrong who defined education in this way:
"Education is that which remains, if one has forgotten
everything he learned in school. "For this reason I am
not at all anxious to take sides in the struggle between the
followers of the classical philologic-historical education and the
education more devoted to natural science.
On the other hand, I want to oppose the idea that the school has to
teach directly that special knowledge and those accomplishments
which one has to use later directly in life. The demands of life
are much too manifold to let such a specialized training in school
appear possible. Apart from that, it seems to me, moreover,
objectionable to treat the individual like a dead tool.
The school should always have as its aim that the young
man leave it as a harmonious personality, not as a
specialist. This in my opinion is true in a certain
sense even for technical schools, whose students will devote
themselves to a quite definite profession. The development of
general ability for independent thinking and judgment should always
be placed foremost, not the acquisition of special knowledge. If a
person masters the fundamentals of his subject and has learned to
think and work independently, he will surely find his way and
besides will better be able to adapt himself to progress and
changes than the person whose training principally consists in the
acquiring of detailed knowledge.
Finally, I wish to emphasize once more that what has been said here
in a somewhat categorical form does not claim to mean more than the
personal opinion of a man, which is founded upon nothing but his
own personal experience, which he has gathered as a student and as
a teacher.