PRINCIPLES OF TEACHING

Evening Star, Issue 21723, 18 May 1934, Page 8

PRINCIPLES OF TEACHING

EFFECT OF MODERN EDUCATION ADDRESS BY MR W. A. SERVICE The effect of the New Zealand educational system upon the mind of the child was the basis of an interesting and thoughtful address given at this morning’s session of the annual meeting of the Otago branch of the New Zealand Educational Institute by Mr W. A. Service (senior inspector). Mr Service spoke largely of the importance of the humanising influence , in teaching and of matters pertaining to the linking up of home and school life. “ One point*which 1 wish to try and bring out is that the child in general, while realising the necessity for his attending school, appears to look upon the activities of the school, or at least some of those activities, as happenings apart from, instead of as an active part of, his voung life,” said Mr Service. “ He will often take considerable pride in doing things well for his school and because of the esteem in which he holds his teacher, but somehow he does not always seem to follow through outside. When school is over, he often drops back into his old He for example, take pleasure in writing ‘ I saw ’ and ‘ 1 did,’ but in the playground will blandly continue, ■ j seen ’ and ' I done.’ Those of you who have been, say, to London may have experienced cases of pupils who speak good English in the classroom, and go back to the vernacular as soon as school is over. I have had similar experience in various schools. Th« child seems anxious to please his teacher for the time being. We, of course, should like to see a more £ general ’ result of our labours on his benalf. This apparent want of ‘ follow through ’ seems to be one of the most difficult problems which we, as educationists, have to face. Much of my own work during the last fourteen voars has been directed towards trying to bridge this gap, which I think you will agree does appear to exist. “ Let us compare for a moment education in general and that of the pnmary school child iu particular ■with other professions and callings. We immediately notice a general difference. In connection with education, there seems, 1 think, to be a greater gap between theory and practice than is apparent in most other activities. The foremost lawyers, medical practitioners, engineers, and so forth, occupy their foremost (position because they have translated theory _ into practice. A lawyer has won briefs, a 'medical man has effected cures, an engineer has built bridges, and so on. But leading educationists have not necessarily taught children. Their time has often been spent in analvsing the working of the child mind. They are able to show ns this working. They lead us. tor example, to understand what is meant by such a truth as the physical basis of mental life. But what we are not told is how to teach the child in accordance with those principles; as said before, how to translate thought and knowledge into action. We as teachers are sometimes criticised for our failure to run our schools in accordance with psychological principles, but 1 am afraid that our critics * might do very little better, and perhaps not as well, if they themselves were stood in our shoes. “ What I do feel, however, is that we as teachers should pay grave heed to what our friends tell us, and as practical people should endeavour to mould our teaching so that it is brought into closer relationship with the findings of theory. . , “ Perhaps we may consider a tew lines of thought which may assist us to bring our teaching more into direct relationship with child development. We are all quite familiar with the theory o£ the problem of fatigue. Such terms as onset of fatigue, toxins, etc., are part of our educational vocabulary. We arrange our day’s work in accordance ’ with certain principles; we attend to such matters as ventilation, and so forth. We are told that the child is a young animal needing activity and outlet for physical energy. We therefore foster and encourage of various kinds, while some of ns often give a good deal of our actual coaching in the different sporting activities. . “ So far, so good. But in the school, particularly in the standard classes, the children out of their natural environment are compelled ( perforce to sit physically inactive for fairly long periods during the school day. I think that here there is a field for investigation and experiment. We have already done something. Our furniture has improved, and we have swung away from the old rigid sit-up-straight type of posture that was imposed upon most of us when we were young. In other ways we endeavour to alleviate the position, but it still seems clear that children are still kept in the sitting position too long. 'lt would he an interesting investigation if we were to note exactly how long pupils .do sit in any school day and in a week, and also the actual lengths of time they sit without a break. The guiding principle that I give is that we should consider ourselves in similar circumstances. HOME LESSONS. “Then there is the matter of home lessons,” continued Mr Service. “ 1 should say that the primary schools, as I know them, have made a distinct advance in this direction. The primary period is, after all, a preparation one. When we consider the physical and mental drain that necessarily occurs under the present system in the higher education of our young people we are forced to the conclusion that the primary school is a place rather for the conservation of enerjjy than for its over-expenditure. \ve have known cases of pupils who, through apparent over-pressure, have done brilliantly in primary school, but who have petered out, as it were, in a higher school, and been outstripped by those whose primary career was less noteworthy. ‘‘Concerning homework, I do not say that the primary child should not have home duties. These can be made most valuable in the forging of bonds of unity between the home and the school. But 1 do say that home duties should be of the right kind. The doing of sums, for example, is in my opinion not a suitable home task. Arithmetic calculation is taken early iu the day because of the mental intensity required, and it seems-illogical to give such intense work when the'child is Fatigued at the end_ of the day. On the other hand, cutting out and measuring the dimensions of a. kitchen table would be quite suitable and a valuable starting point for the calculation part to be done the following day. 11 Similarly, I should say that the learning of spelling at night is wrong. - After all, the school is the place whore the child should be directly taught, and, though the homo can be rightly used for assisting school work, yet we should really bo condemning ourselves if we adopt the practice of extending the timetable into the home. It must be admitted that this is necessary in higher work, but it should not be necessary for primary children and tends especially.. with pupils who really need

special treatment—namely those of poorer mentality—to create a dislike for school. “Another feature that can cause the child to look upon school as a thing apart from life is the matter of discipline. Here again, 1 think we have advanced in that the old drill sergeant style is seldom seen. In this connection, it may be interesting to note that the general advance in infant-' room method in the last ten or fifteen years appears to have led to a much more natural discipline than used to exist. The proof of this seems to lie in the fact that the little ones generally love school. It was not always so. 1 think also that it is a tribute to teachers generally, that the primary school, as a whole, is a much more popular place than it used to be in the old days. Method has advanced generally, but it seems fair to say that the greater uplift is noticed in connection with infant children, and one does notice pleasing signs that method is likewise broadening as one goes up the school.

“If method can be made correctly, the problem of discipline largely disappears. If, for example, a child is a poor reader or a poor speller, one naturally looks first to his history, and his up-bringing. Then one considers two things, the method used, and the teacher’s manner towards the child. Upon the teacher’s manner largely depends the atmosphere of the classroom, and upon atmosphere depends influence. If the atmosphere is wrong no matter how perfect may be the socalled result, there is something radically wrong. There must be industry, but industry without happiness and inspiration would he wrong. “ As teachers we have to be forcetnl. we have to exert power, but we have to consider the vital distinction between the force that lifts rather than crushes. Children must work to their full capacity; there must be seriousness of purposes, but we must _ avoid any tendency to mechanised artificiality, and unsuitable rapidity of manner. Otherwise we stifle enthusiasm and kill initiative. Human relationships m the school should be the same as human relationship in an ideal home or m ideal life generally. Let ns then be natural in manner and always keen students of method. Let ns analyse all Ve do from the point of view of its effect *upon the child. . . “ How then are we to continue tins broadening of method which, combined with the right use of our’ personality, appears to be the secret of linking the school and the child-. One guiding principle I would mention to enunciate that of humanising our approach to the various subjects of the curriculum. 1 have heard it said that if principles are right, method will be right. But it is not quite so easy as would at first sight appear. There is a difference between knowing what to do and knowing how to do it.” . . *Mr Service concluded uy giving instances of cases in which the humanising influence could be applied, and was accorded a hearty vote of'thanks for his remarks.