Chapter III: Foreword: Aims

=Foreword.= It is assumed that woodworking and mechanical drawing have subject matter and that it is desirable to have an orderly arrangement. Such an assumption may seem unwarranted to some--to those who labor in private institutions where the instruction is individual or nearly so. It is believed, however, that to teachers of these subjects in the public schools, where for economic reasons, classes of considerable numbers must be cared for, the necessity for a careful selection and arrangement of subject matter is very evident.

It has taken some years for the manual training movement to recover from the extremes into which the late psychology and child study movement had led it. The exaltation of the “individual” and the reign of the “self-expressionist,” it would seem, is about over. Not that this latter movement was an evil--far from it. Its influence was needed and came none too soon. Like other great movements, however, it led some teachers to extremes, causing them to overlook the good in the old with the result that the new alone has proven no more desirable than the old alone. The pendulum of opinion is returning and in not a few important places, is already swinging to the other extreme. It is for manual training teachers to try to determine by an exchange of ideas where the sanest position lies.

In this discussion, we should ever keep in mind that the American public school system is maintained mainly to prepare boys and girls for good and useful citizenship; that this is a democracy in which neither individual nor class is to be exalted unduly and that our system of education must result neither in the chaos of anarchy nor in the dull formalism of a despotism. To the writer it appears that manual training as practiced before the psychologist took possession was quite typical of the countries from which its influence came, Russia and Sweden-formalism. Under the influence of the most radical of the psychologists, manual training became synonymous with educational anarchy.

The best American citizenship cannot be developed by means of either the new alone or the old alone. There must be due attention paid to the development of the individual but that same individual must learn that he is but one of many and that he must do some things because they make it possible for all to enjoy equal rights and privileges. With this thought in mind, irrespective of any consideration of economic advantages, orderly arrangement of subject matter and class instruction, made necessary in large schools, must be looked upon as helpful rather than harmful in the preparation of the individual for citizenship.

Superintendent L. D. Harvey has said:

Members of society may be roughly classed into four groups: those who
think without doing; those who do without thinking; those who neither
think nor do; and those who think and do because of their thinking.
This fourth class comprise the productive, constructive, organizing
element of society. It is the function of the public schools to
produce members of this fourth class. It must be evident to all that
for the production of a thinking and doing individual the two forms of
activity should be carried on side by side; the doing growing out of
the thinking, and the thinking made clear and definite thru the doing.

In this statement the writer sees the proper relation of those two essential elements that make manual training valuable as a school subject--the thought element and the element of skill. Manual training suffered by having the one--skill--unduly emphasized when our European importations were made. Recently, it has suffered by having the other--the thought side--unduly magnified. Both of these elements are important.

In the author’s experience the practical application of a system that would make the most of each of these elements has been a source of no little disappointment. Effort in one direction seemed always to result in a sacrifice in the other. That is, when the thought side was emphasized there was a falling off in the accuracy of the results. When skill was magnified it was attained only with a sacrifice of the thought element. With many misgivings the conclusion was reached that the introduction of original thinking on the part of the pupil must mean somewhat of a sacrifice on the skill side. Concerning this phase of the subject Professor Richards writes:

In order to develop in the highest degree independence of thought and
power of initiative the pupil must be given opportunities for
determining ends and working out means. Only in this way is the
natural cycle of mental activities--thinking, feeling and doing--fully
realized and made effective. The practical realization of this
principle means, of course, a distinct problem of instruction. The
problem is essentially one of proportion and balance between freedom
of expression on the one side and skill and mastery of process on the
other. Extreme emphasis on the one leads inevitably to a class of
crude and ill-considered products while attention restricted to the
other results in mere drill and formalism.

Further, in “THE MANUAL TRAINING TEACHER,” Charles L. Binns, an Englishman just returned from a trip thru the United States, writes of manual training in the grades as follows:

The lack of exactness is the main defect of American manual training.
But there are many compensations to be balanced against this, and
these arise chiefly, in my opinion, from the fact that the teacher is
allowed more liberty to follow his own judgment in teaching the
subject than is the case here. He has more scope for exercising his
initiative, with the result that he retains the freshness of interest
and enthusiasm for his work that our own stereotyped and restricted
schemes do much to quell. There is a fine spirit of free activity,
eager interest, and industry permeating most of the manual training
classrooms. Even the inferior work is done with a happy glow of
achievement that half excuses it. * * * To emphasize unduly the aim of
rigid mechanical accuracy generally means a sacrifice of the thought
side of the work. Those qualities which lead eventually to the
realization of the pupil’s highest powers--such qualities as
intelligent self direction; an alert resourceful attitude of mind; and
power to plan means to an end--are too valuable to lose for such an
aim. * * * At the same time a system of handwork that ignores a
reasonable standard of accuracy does not count for much. In the course
of my visits I found more than once not only an almost entire
disregard for exactness in the work of the boys, but also an almost
entire neglect on the teacher’s part to strive for it. Something may
be said for a method which grants the pupils liberty to express
themselves freely in their work, if the results are critically
examined and the errors pointed out, but to accept and pass
complacently work manifestly inferior is quite inexcusable. There is
an element of haste about some of the work which may account for some
of this.

More recently Dr. Georg Kerschensteiner the eminent German authority of Munich while on a tour of the United States is quoted by the “MANUAL TRAINING MAGAZINE” as criticising our manual training strongly, saying:

He could not see why children are encouraged to make big pieces of
furniture before they can square up a piece of wood properly or make a
single joint of the type that must be multiplied many times in the
piece of furniture, if it is properly constructed. From this statement
it must not be concluded that his pedagogy is of the dried out kind.
On the contrary he stated with marked emphasis that the first
requisite in training for skill is to cultivate joy in work. “It is in
that way that we appeal to the heart,” and “it is only when the
feelings are brought into action that we can most truly educate.”

We may conclude from this brief statement of the situation that it is desirable to organize and have courses in our manual training and mechanical drawing and that whatever system is adopted it must make allowance for emphasis upon both the thought element and upon skill.

=What System Shall We Use.= It is pretty generally conceded that manual training as exemplified by the Russian system of joint making and the Swedish system of model making fails to lead forth the powers of the child to the fullest extent. The educational theory, now generally accepted, that interest is the indispensable basis of every method of education is sufficient to condemn the Russian system so far as its application in non-technical schools is concerned, while Swedish Sloyd, unmodified, is weak in that it fails to take into account the reflective phase of interest, namely, the power of self-initiative. Extreme “educational manual training’s” greatest weakness lies in its undue emphasis upon the thought element resulting in too great sacrifice of that other equally important element, skill or accuracy. The manual training movement is to be congratulated in that all signs now seem to point to its speedy delivery from the hands of these latter extremists. Is it too much to hope that out of our past experiences with the joint making Russian system with its admitted disciplinary value, the Swedish model making with its effort to utilize the energy of the worker toward useful products, and the self expression of the pedagogical movement with its attendant elements of interest and initiative there may come a manual training practice that shall be marked by a combination of the best of these elements with a consequent elimination of the weaknesses of each?

The outline of study suggested in the Illinois State Course of Study, credit for which is due mainly to Professor Charles A. Bennett, the chairman of the committee on manual training in woodwork, has proven a source of very great help to the writer in his efforts to properly present the subject matter of woodwork to his pupils. The introduction to this course is well worth repeating and is in substance as follows:

Any course in woodworking worthy of a place in the eighth and ninth
grades of public school work should meet the following requirements:

1. It should arouse and hold the interest of the pupils.

2. Correct methods of handling tools should be taught so that good
technique may be acquired by the pupils.

3. Tool work should be accompanied by a study of materials and tools
used in their relations to industry. Special attention should be
given to the study of trees--their growth, classification,
characteristics and use.

4. Drawing should be studied in its relation to the work done.

5. The principles of construction in wood should be taught thru
observation, illustration and experience.

6. At least a few problems should be given which involve invention or
design or both, thereby stimulating individual initiative on the part
of the pupils.

The course is arranged in groups, each group representing a type of
work. These groups are given in the order of procedure. The teacher is
expected to provide problems of the greatest value educationally. This
means that the things to be made should be worth making and that the
process of making them should be interesting to the student.

From this it follows that the things to be made must come to the pupil
in an order which gives reasonable consideration to the difficulties
to be encountered in making them.

Our outline will aim to present the work so as to meet the conditions specified above. It has been thoroly tested over a period of years in public school work. It follows the group plan. The advantages of the group system are distinct. It permits class instruction and therefore minimizes the amount of demonstrating and talking that the instructor must do by preventing needless repetition. By grouping a number of projects having similar tool operations it permits a boy to satisfy his individual needs without interfering with the orderly presentation of the subject matter. It provides work for the fast worker of an interesting and profitable nature until the slow worker completes the minimum requirement. It provides for the “repeater,” who often has to repeat, not because of poor work in manual training but because of poor work in academic studies, by giving him choice of different models upon which to work. In general, the group plan possesses the manifest advantages of class instruction at the same time making allowance for the individuality of the worker.