(9) Power must be linked to knowledge, and skill to learning. (10) The relation between the teacher and the pupil, especially as to discipline, should be based upon and ruled by love. (11) Instruction should be subordinate to the higher aim of education. (d) Influence on the General Spirit of the There remains one further point to be noted, in the tenth principle stated above. In regard to method, as Pestalozzi himself stated in an exaggerated way, "half the world" was working on the same problem. The new purpose in education was held by many others- public men, religious leaders, philosophers, and educators. In defining the new meaning of education, he was but making more explicit the ideas of Rousseau, Basedow, and others. His peculiar excellence was in making evident, through all his writings and all Schoolroom. that contained A TYPICAL GERMAN SCHOOLROOM OF THE his work, that a new spirit must pervade the schoolroom, that both teacher and pupil must breathe a new atmosphere, -the atmosphere of the home. What cannot be taken away from him is the credit for demonstration from the very nature of the educational process that when the end is development and not mere acquisition of formal principles, the only basis for the relation of teacher and pupil is sympathy. The contrast is clearly indicated by a comparison of accompanying illustrations; one of the typical German schools before Pestalozzi's time, the other of Pestalozzi's school at Stanz. In other lines, more recent times have developed the germs of the ideas suggested by the unlettered reformer; but in this one respect, every modern schoolroom is so directly indebted to him that he may yet be called, as he was by his own teachers and followers, "Father Pestalozzi." THE HERBARTIAN MOVEMENT. Its Relation to Pestalozzianism. Herbart built upon and supplemented the work of Pestalozzi. But he soon reached an elaboration of educa tional thought far beyond that of Pestalozzi. The latter insisted always in his theoretical statements that instruction was to lead from sense-perception to "clear ideas." But his practical work went little beyond the formulation of the training in sense-perception through exercises in observation. Except as he accomplished it with a few children through the genius of his own personality, he did not show either theoretically or practically how mental assimilation and growth take place from this starting point, or how moral character was to be made the outcome. Herbart carried this further and showed how the product of sense-perception could be converted into ideas, through the apperceptive process, and how knowledge in turn could thus be made to bear upon moral character through the processes of instruction. As Pestalozzi would substitute his method for the formal verbal methods in memory training of the existing schools, making this latter method wholly subordinate to methods of training in sense-perception, so Herbart would use Pestalozzi's method merely as an initial one. In a discussion of the Pestalozzian method, Herbart says: "The whole field of actual and possible sense-perception is open to the Pestalozzian method; its movements in it will grow constantly freer and larger. Its peculiar merit consists in having laid hold more boldly and more zealously than any former method of the duty of building up the child's mind, of constructing in it a definite experience in the light of clear sense-perception; not acting as if the child had already an experience, but taking care that he gets one; by not chatting with him as though in him, as in an adult, there already were a need for communicating and elaborating his acquisitions, but, in the very first place, giving him that which later on can be, and is to be, discussed. The Pestalozzian method, therefore, is by no means qualified to crowd out any other method, but to prepare the way for it. It takes care of the earliest age that is at all capable of receiving instruction. It treats it with the seriousness and simplicity which are appropriate when the very first raw materials are to be procured. But we can be no more content with it than we can regard the human mind as a dead tablet on which the letters remain as originally written down." Consequently, in one other main point, Herbart differs radically from Pestalozzi, again by way of addition. As Pestalozzi made the presentation of the physical world through sense-perception the chief aim of instruction, if not of education, Herbart made the moral (æsthetic) presentation of the universe the chief end of education. Sense-percep tion is no longer sufficient. "Experience, human-converse, and instruction taken all together constitute the presentation of the universe." As a result, the emphasis which Pestalozzianism tended to place on arithmetic, geography, and the nature studies is replaced in Herbartianism by an emphasis on pure mathematics on the one hand and more especially on the other by that on the classical languages, literature, and history. At one other point Herbart's work takes its initiative from Pestalozzi's. The latter reiterated his purpose of "psychologizing education"; but while rejecting the old psychology he did not and could not construct any system of his own. Herbart did quite as notable work in this line as in constructive educational thought. However, his psychological ideas much sooner served their purpose than have the educational, and gave way to more accurate knowledge. In general, Herbart's work was the antithesis of Pestalozzi's, in that it was logical and philosophical in character, while Pestalozzi's possessed no logical form or system and little definitely formulated philosophical basis. The one possessed the comprehensive view and calm logic of the philosopher; the other the intense emotionalism and strong purpose of the reformer working toward immediate betterment, though with no adequate view of the ultimate end. Life and Works of John Frederick Herbart (1776–1841). – There is little in the life activities of the man that throws light upon his educational doctrines, and hence little that can concern us here. Passing through the traditional educational course of the gymnasium and university, he gave evidence of ability and originality at every point. At the age of twentyone he left the university for a three years' experience as private tutor, from which he formulated much of his educational doctrine. He later enunciated the belief that any real knowledge of the psychology of education can be gained, not from the study of children in masses and from brief acquaintance, but only from a prolonged intimate study of the mental development of a very few individuals. He returned later to study and then to give instruction in philosophy and in education in the University of Göttingen. Here and at the University of Königsberg he spent the remainder of his life. At the latter place he established his pedagogical seminar with a practice school attached, the forerunner of the university type of instruction and experimentation in the subject of education. While as a member of school commissions he took some part in educational reform, his life for the most part was spent in investigation, lecturing, and publication. Referring to his approach to educational problems, he says in one of his essays, - Observations on a Pedagogical Essay: "I have for twenty years employed metaphysics and mathematics, and side by side with them self-observation, experience, and experiments, merely to find the foundations of true psychological insight. And the motive for these not exactly toilless investigations has been and is, in the main, my conviction that a large part of the enormous gaps in our peda gogical knowledge results from lack of psychology, and that we must first have this science nay, that we must first of all remove the mirage which to-day goes by the name of psychology - before we shall be able to determine with some certainty concerning even a single instruction period what in it was done aright and what amiss." Herbart's Psychology. This, then, is Herbart's great contribution to education. The movement which Locke began |