Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 7168x9216 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

THE LATE EDUCATION BILL, CON-
SIDERED PROM A GERMAN POINT OF
VIEW.
|By DR. MUECKE.]
As it is probable that the principles of the
Education Bill rejected by Parliament last
session will again be brought before the public
either at or before the next election, I wish to
offer some remarks upon them. It must have
been observed that the rejected Bill met with
the strongest opposition from the German
colonists. The German Press viewed it closely
in a penetrating critique, and rejected it for
reasons which it might be worth while for our
British fellow-colonists to consider and examine.
There can be no doubt that the system
of education in Germany and Sweden
is well-arranged and excellent, and all
intelligent nations have admitted this. It can
therefore be but beneficial if a practical German
pedagogue, who is thoroughly acqainted (sic) with the
German educational system, publicly expresses
his opinion from a German aspect on the late
School Bill of South Australia, as copied from
the Victorian Act. As an old colonist I consider
this my duty; I shall therefore comment at
present only on its chief points.
The late Bill set forth the prominent prin-
ciples—1, free; 2, compulsory ; and 3, secular—
with which it was to stand or fall. Every one
well versed in the education question knows that
two of those principles are, indeed, the true
foundation of an educational system which
can make a nation truly great and happy
if they are sensibly carried out according
to their real conception. This, however, was
not the case in the Bill in question, according to
German ideas, and therefore all three are a com-
plete illusion, and can never realize the great
hopes that were set upon them.
1. Education is to be free, according to this
South Australian Bill—i.e., accessible for each
child without payment. However, this is a
delusion. The Bill promises free education,
yet intends to accomplish so little that nobody
can be satisfied with it. Everybody is there-
fore compelled to pay for such additional
instruction as our present time demands—
even to pay more than under the old
system, which accomplishes more than the
new one contemplates, as it essentially pro-
mises only the three R'e. At present a child pays
for the complete instruction only 1s. per week,
while under the new Bill, which promises free
education, from 2s. to 2s. 6d. per week would
have to be paid for extras if the afterwards-to-
be-constructed regulations are also copied from
the Victorian Act, as is most likely. Only the
most wretchedly poor children will and must be
satisfied with the insufficient three R's, and
therefore only for those the "free" is actually of
consequence. The number of those really poor,
however, is so small that I cannot understand
why, for their sake, the colony should be bur-
dened with an expenditure of more than
£100,000 per annum, whereas a comparatively
small sum would pay the school-fees for those
children. Thus, the new Bill forces the colo-
nists to pay four or five times as much for a new
system that promises much less than the one to
be abolished, and which asks from the
children about two and a half times
more fees for such instructions which
most schools give at present for 1s. Quite
incomprehensible, however, it is for a German
that in our days where in all nations the most
pressing necessity is most keenly felt to give the
rising generations a better—if possible, the very
best and meet complete education accessible to
each child—a South Australian Education Bill
dares to revive the spirit of costs after the
fashion of the old Egyptians, by allowing the
children of the poor only the lowest measure of
knowledge, thus branding them as mental
pariahs while, on the other side, it favours the
formation of an aristocratic caste by payment of
2b. 6d. per week. This Bill would be the means
of opening an unsurpassable chasm between poor
and rich, and of creating a feeling of hatred
between high and low which will be unbearable,
though it is the of the school to pro-
mote goodwill and justice. While all thinking
nations hold the opinion that the most earnest
and important question of the day—the social—
can only radically be solved by giving every
child the same of obtaining a certain
measure of knowledge, South Australia would
legitimately sanction the most abominable and
dangerous separation of poor and rich from the
first schooldays. I know very well that a great
number of our legislators do not aim at this end,
yet they cannot conceal from themselves the
truth that thin Bill would in reality have that
fatal effect.
But what plan is to he adopted in carrying out
the teaching of "extras." Are the poor to be
gathered to the left to drill the three R's into
them, and the rich to the right to feed them with
manna of higher knowledge? In this case I would
suggest that the poor child should appear with
shorn head, wearing a poverty badge, while the
child of the rich should he arrayed in elaborate
uniform, to enable the teacher to distinguish
them. In Prussian primary schools of the
present day the school-fee is four shillings per
annum, and every child, without exception, is
taught the following branches, viz.:—Religion,
German grammar, arithmetic, geometry, tech-
nology, general history, geography, natural
history and philosophy, chemistry, drawing, sing-
ing, gymnastics; and for girls—needlework. (In
geometry, for instance, as far as the calculation
of superficial and cubic measures.) In schools
that have more than one teacher, English and
French are also taught. Involuntarily a ques-
tion presents itself to us Germans:—Why
does the Bill prefer such a separation of
rich and poor? Why does it not openly
and honourably provide the same instruc-
tion free to all children? Thus the teacher
would have a much earner task to perform, a
much higher aim will be gained, and a much
nobler and more useful generation would be
brought up than can be done under the pro-
posed Bill, and not costing the colony a farthing
more. Only then shall we satisfy the demands
of the time and do justice to them. It is also
incomprehensible why the five hours of instruc-
tion per day should be reduced to four; pro-
bably because it would be impossible for the
teacher to employ the pupils the whole of the five
hours with the three R's, German primary schools
are from 30 to 32 hours open during the week;
our Bill provided for 20 hours only. Four
hours' tuition should be the minimum for children
from six to eight years, five hours for those from
8 to 12, and six hours for those from 11 to
14 years. Only then we can speak of a system
worthy of a civilized nation, and in this respect
the new Bill is a fallacy. The German colonist
would gladly vote £120,000 and even £150,000
yearly, which are required for a really good
measure, but be cannot approve of a Bill that
makes a distinction between rich and poor by
requiring payment for "extra," and does
not accomplish what it ought to. Are we blind
to the fact, then, that Victoria adds one branch
after another to the three R's ?
2: Education is to be compulsory. Also in this
principle the Bill conveys no clear idea, for the
seeming compulsion is actually counterbalanced
by the provision that it will suffice that the
child visits school 140 days in the year—scarcely
half the time the school is open. If our
legislators want to introduce a measure worthy
of a noble nation they must have courage
enough to make it entirely compulsory—i.e., the
child has to attend each day the school is open.
Every well conducted school has to attain a fixed
aim or standard. A flight of stairs leads to this
aim, and has as many steps as days on which the
child attends school from its fifth to fourteenth
year. On this ladder the teacher leads his pupils
one step every day. Successively and uninterrup-
tedly progresses the teaching, and in no other
way can a thoroughly developing system be con-
ceived. Only that child will attain the aim that
ascends without missing a single step. This is the
object of compulsion. If our South Australian
Bill permits a child to miss nearly half of the school
time to-day or to-morrow at its own pleasure,
it must be clear enough to everbody (sic) that such
child cannot attain the standard and will learn
very little better than nothing. Under such
circumstances, it would seem to me to be more
advisable to have no compulsion at all. All
parents that send their children voluntarily to
school now will send them as regularly as
possible for a certain time at least—even if only
for three or six months, &c.—especially for the
sake of the fees; consequently the children will
be able to ascend a certain portion of this ladder
without missing a step, and thus will reap some
benefit. But under the proposed Bill they will
miss every other day or so, and it must be clear
for every teacher that he can only do a kind of
patchwork—i.e., in my estimation as much as
nothing. Our present system, objectionable as
it is, is therefore better than the proposed one,
because children who are absent for a longer
time under the old system can be brought on
by the teacher in a separate class, which
would, however, be impossible if children miss
a day every now and then. The new Bill,
though it evidently bears testimony of best in-
tentions, lacks in every respect for want of not
being constructed by practical schoolmasters.
We can only call that compulsion if the child is
obliged to attend school quite regularly. The
time of attendance in primary schools should be
so arranged that holidays fall in the harvest
time, &c. Leave of absence to be given in cases
of necessity in a lawfully-arranged manner, and
such children to be instructed afterwards in a
separate class to make up for lost time. The
fear of legislators to burden the parents too
severely by complete compulsion is foolish and
cowardly. Parents soon get used to it, and will
soon learn to call it a blessing. Germany,
Sweden, Switzerland, &c., where much more
poverty exists than here, prove this. It is well
known that half measures never act beneficially
—they must be complete and entire.
3. Secular Education.—This principle expels
religious teaching from schools. On this we
have to give the same decision as on the other
two. On account of the many religious sects it
is thought necessary to exclude religious teach-
ing, yet the courage lacked to carry it right
through; and to pacify some sects Bible-reading
was substituted, thus outweighing the exclusion
of religious teaching again. In this way a
measure is introduced in which I see a great
danger, greater than it is in Victoria, where
religious teaching is entirely abolished, and
parents therefore consider it their duty to get
their children instructed in religion by the
respective ministers. Here, however, parents
will consider religious teaching unnecessary, as
children read the Bible in school; and the poor ;
children grow up wild with the three R's, want-
ing the greatest boon and blessing of life. The
Bible-reading, as provided by the Bill—with-
out comment and explanation—is at all
events a treason against the Bible as
well as against the children, and will
often lead to a profanation of that holy
Book, and in most cases give an aversion,
as most teachers can prove. Moreover, it is
quite impossible to carry it out practically with
out tending to evil. The Bible itself demands
that we shall understand what we read, and
therefore it must be read, in schools with expla-
nations given, so that the children can under-
stand it, or it must be abolished altogether, and
the parents left to provide religious instruction
in another way. This must be convincing to
everybody. The Bill ought to be firm and
consequent on this point—either religion taught
or excluded entirely. Here I touch a question
on which our British fellow-colonists perhaps
may not understand us Germans, We under-
stand by the word "education," which seems to
be used synonymously with school or teaching,
the meaning of the root "educare"—i.e., to
bring out, to guide, to deliver, to explain, to
develop; but not merely teaching, what the
English generally understand by it Teaching
is only one of the means to attain the
aim of education. We understand in a peda-
gogical sense by education the harmonically
conducted, uninterrupted, and ethical develop-
ment of all the human faculties and talents to
the highest perfection. The meaning of educa-
tion, however, as interpreted by the old as well
as the new Bill is to teach or impart the three
R's to children. The difference of the two
definitions is immense. The Germans have a
highly developed system of education, which has
to be thoroughly studied by every one who
intends to become a teacher. In this colony,
however, any person who knows a little more
than the three R's is considered fit to be a
teacher. The German candidate for the office
of teacher has to acquire the knowledge in all
necessary branches of science in higher institu-
tions, and has to prove his abilities by examina-
tion. And only then, as a youth of 17 to 20
years old, he can enter a seminary of the State—
the pedagogical University — to learn and
practice the science of education. According to
this our maxim — to develop all human
faculties and talents uninterruptedly, har-
moniously, and ethically to their highest perfec-
tion—we can under no circumstances dispense
with religion and its teaching. The heart, the
mind, the conscience, the imagination, the
inborn ideal, the instinct of love, &c.f must be
properly developed as well as the intellectual
faculty, the reason, the physical powers, and the
senses. Which now is the chief means of
developing the former ? I know only of the one
means—this is religious instruction; and in vain
I have sought far a substitute? in our
schools here. A thoroughly educating? school
without religious teaching is therefore an im-
possibility? in the estimation of Germans. Such
school could only educate the lower faculties, but
not the higher ones that make man Godlike.
Why has man two feet and two arms ? One
of each would do for him, and we might there-
fore tie up one arm and one foot at once after
birth. Why should he be so fully developed ?
I ask those that might laugh at the foregoing
remark—Does man not also consist of two
natures, in a certain sense ?—the earthly one,
which we share with the animals and, the moral
Godlike nature which elevates us so much above
the animal. Why then will you not develop
this Godlike nature in your children equally
with the other ? Why tie it up ? The last can
only be done at the expense of the first.
Religion, according to German ideas, is not
only a mere outward form or rite, but it is also
a cultivation of the heart, the conscience,
reasonable judgment, sublime love, moral sense,
and true virtue. Religion is therefore life and
action in us. Without such education and culti-
vation I cannot fancy man to be complete and
entire, and I fully endorse the lately so often
heard and often mocked-at assertion,
cultivation of the lower faculties, i.e. the
mere teaching of the three R's (and the few
additional branches) does not make man better
at all, only more skilful and cunning. Truly
good and virtuous he is only made by the higher
ethical education, in all that we understand by
religions education and instruction. This re-
ligious instruction is not a onesided one, consist-
ing barely in leaning certain forms and cus-
tomary statutes. There is a sublime religious
teaching for the young. This religions educa-
tion ought to receive the most earnest considera-
tion of the legislators, in carrying out the urgent
reform of the educational system, to prevent them
offering the young a stone instead of the bread
prayed for. When Victoria had wasted several
millions of pounds on the Coliban Waterworks,
it was found necessary to procure an experienced
engineer from India, and the beneficial result is
well-known. Might not this experience be wisely
utilized with regard to the new educational
system ? If a thoroughly competent pedagogue
could, be got from abroad, not only a great deal
of money would be saved, but something of
much higher value, and the highest might be
gained,
$