Teaching children to study; the group system applied

Preface

The purpose of this volume is to put forth in a practical manner the methods of using the Group System so as to secure the accomplishment of its two great aims: (i) To give the child habits of self-reliant study ; (2) to secure for the exceptional child, either the abnormally bright or the abnormally slow, teaching adapted to his individual needs. No effort has been made to write a scientific pedagogical treatise, but rather to present to the class-room teacher a clear and practical exposition of the Group System, and definite suggestion as to the details of its plans and management.

For four years the writers have been collecting suggestions on the subject of the Group System. From time to time they have written on this subject; first in School Work, in 1906, and later in Teachers Magazine, Much of the material has been used in lectures by Miss Jones. The writers, therefore, feel that it has been thoroughly vi PREFACE

tested as to its truth and practical value. For publication in this volume, all the material gathered has been sifted and revised, according to the results of experience in its use, and the best of it all selected and explained.

It would be impossible to mention by name the many principals of schools in New York, and superintendents and principals of schools in other cities, who have given much kindly help and suggestion. Especial mention of heartiest thanks for much valuable assistance must, however, be made to Dr. Andrew W. Edson, Associate City Superintendent, and Miss Julia Richman, District Superintendent, of schools in New York City, and to Miss Elizabeth S. Harris and Miss Marietta J. Tibbits, Principals of Public Schools 65

and 137, New York.

Chapter I The Development Of The Group System An Evolution

The phrase made immortal by President Lincoln "that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth," has become the expression of an American principle. Education On that principle our republic stands. A well- of Amencan recognized corollary of that principle is that the men™ first requisite for a safe administration of "government of the people, by the people, for the people," is education. Only through education can liberty be preserved from demagogism, monarchism, or anarchism. So rooted is this conviction that throughout our land the school system is probably the most thoroughly organized department of public work.

The beginnings on which this system has been its begmbuilt contained no such elaborate machinery as is district familiar to us. The "deestrick school " made familiar to us by play and story, had little of machinery and little of imposed system. The master directed study, the pupils recited one at a time, and such actual teaching as was given was individual instruction. As the district school grew in numbers, the master's time for actual teaching decreased, the work degenerated into a mere hearing of lessons, its failures, and the child was overburdened with home study, work unexplained and little comprehended. To remedy these imperfect conditions the graded school was invented, and out of that the present school system has evolved itself, an enormous machine devised to educate children with the least waste of effort, time, or money.

The graded Education became organized with definite stages leading to definite goals, recognized by teachers and pupils, and so arranged that many might be engaged in the same work at the same time. The system of class instruction had replaced individual instruction. Besides the advantage directly aimed at and already indicated, some other educative influences at once resulted. These were the sub- Results for ordination of individual, selfish desires, the appeal

good and . . . . .

evil. to emulation, and the rousing of the spirit of com-

petition. But almost immediately did it become

THE GROUP SYSTEM AN EVOLUTION 3

evident that, although much unexpected good had accompanied the establishment of the graded school, with its system of class instruction, some of the old evils of the district school continued to exist. The work of the school had become organized, and children were classified according to attainments, so that there was much slighter degree of difference between the best and the poorest children grouped in the same room or class ; but lessons were still set and heard, rote memorizing of lessons ill taught and uncomprehended was the only form of study, and the burden of home work was as iniquitous as ever. In addition, it was soon learned that attempts to enforce a close grading resulted in the directing of instruction only to the needs of the majority, that this neglect of the needs of the majority caused a deadening influence, and that this deadening influence manifested itself in the discouragement of the brightest and the slowest children and in decreased numbers in the higher grades.

The inevitable difficulties of the graded school Relief

t r • sought in £

system once realized, relief was sought, at first in reform of

methods of

a reform of method, and method was made a matter teaching. of scientific study. The teacher's results, i.e. how much her pupils know, once tested by rigid examinations and considered carefully in marking her rating and record, were forgotten in the criticism of how she prepared, presented, developed a lesson, questions which became so important a part of our pedagogical catechism that we forgot that for the salvation of the child's soul intellectually, as well as morally, there must be much of the self-effort which means power. So it was that, instead of relief, other new evils followed. We have let our pendulum swing to the other extreme, and to-day we are anticipating and making easy every step, until the child has too little independent work to do and is unable to work alone. In consequence, he does not know how to fix knowledge in his mind for himself ; he cannot select essentials ; in a word, he lacks self-reliance, and does not know how to do independent study.

Evils still Notwithstanding, then, the wonderful reforms in

methods of teaching brought about in the last fifty years, the schools still faced an unsolved problem. There was still either too heavy a burden or too little training in habits of independent study. There existed the same worry and strain among children about promotion, among teachers about the accomplishment of grade work. There still continued existing.

THE GROUP SYSTEM AN EVOLUTION 5 the same frightful decrease in numbers as the upper Neglect

. IT °f t ^ le eXCe P"

grades were reached, pointing towards discourage- tionai 1 child. ment and distaste for school and study as among its causes. It became apparent that great injustice was being done to two classes of children, the bright child and the exceedingly dull. The scheme of a graded school produced higher general averages and enabled a larger part of a class to advance more rapidly; but, as Superintendent Kennedy says, "The machinery of our graded school ran amuck in its false assumption of uniformity in the nature of children and in their environment and in its misplaced faith in uniform methods of teaching and treatment." The exceptional child, the one above as well as the one below the general average, was lost, neglected; habits of truancy and disorder were formed, or at best, when discipline was too strong for either of these, then, habits of listening with closed ears, inattentive minds, and a firm determination to get away from the restraints of the schoolroom as soon "as permitted by law.

Such conditions existing and allowed to continue, Therefore the school has failed in its mission. It is not pro- f a n s ca as°an viding the education which is to preserve our Ameri- prhSpie? can principle, for government by the people and for

Relief sought in special plans of promotion,

Pueblo plan.

the people demands that each individual be prepared to share individually and intelligently in the duties of government.

Prominent educators have, therefore, sought a remedy in special plans of promotion and classification, and of these the Group System is an evolution as well as a compromise. Noting only those which were enthusiastically advertised as having specific power to assist in removing the conditions already described, we shall consider first the Pueblo plan, with its long study periods, class recitation, and pupils advancing under the individual direction of the teacher. But the Pueblo loses many, if not most, of the advantages of the graded system in its lack of a social whole. Probably of all these special promotion schemes, more was hoped for from the Cambridge Cambridge plan, permitting the child to finish his school course in four, five, or six years, according to his ability; but while the Cambridge plan alleviates the evils of the graded class system in that it provides a stopping place for the slow child and a point at which the bright child may forge ahead, yet many individuals drop out for lack of interest and of personal touch and aid of the teacher. Two promotion plans, which found little favor in America, plan.

THE GROUP SYSTEM AN EVOLUTION 7

two worthy of mention as efforts elsewhere to seek

relief, are the English Pupil-teacher plan and the European

plans.

German Blocking System, consisting of alternate class and study periods.

In New York City schools have been tried several New York

. City experi-

expenments to meet the needs of the exceptional ments. child, not meaning thereby the mental defective. One of these, an interesting account of which appeared in the Educational Review of June, 1898, provides that each grade shall be divided into classes for slow and bright pupils. The same idea was extended a little further in another school, where the plan entails three divisions : one, the bright children of the grade; second, the slow pupils of the same grade; and third, the over-age children of the two grades in the same year. In both these schemes the divisions progress at a different rate of progress, the brighter child doing more extensive and intensive work on the same subject-matter, and both plans allow the children to pass from one division to another at the end of a term, according to the differences in development of their mental capacity.

Best known of all experiments is the Batavia plan, Batavia devised almost accidentally by Superintendent John Kennedy in 1898. The central idea is a stated period for individual instruction to alternate with class work. Because the plan began with an accidental necessity of placing an extra teacher in an overcrowded room, it has been thought that the Batavia plan has as an essential two teachers in a room. But this is an error, for the plan may be worked with one teacher with one grade, one teacher with two grades, and two teachers with two grades in a room. It is organized individual instruction supplementing mass or class instruction; the child has all the educative influences, already referred to, that result from class instruction, and yet is systematically helped in his own weaknesses.

Elizabeth A grouping system has long been in use in the

grouping. schools of Elizabeth, New Jersey. Four or five groups are taught in one room ; reclassification is frequent, and promotion is made from group to group, room to room; but it has disadvantages, too, for there are the dangers of basing promotion on a knowledge standard only, and of having the same deadening uniformity prevail in the division into groups as into classes, since the grouping is formally made and maintained for definite, formally fixed periods.

The experiment in the use of the Group System began in New York City through needs and con-

THE GROUP SYSTEM AN EVOLUTION 9

ditions forced upon attention by the establishment The Group

System in

of the so-called special classes. These special special

classes in

classes, known as C, D, and E classes of each school New York

City.

year, were organized for three distinct purposes. The first, or C class, is to teach English to non-English-speaking immigrant children. The second class, or E class, is to give the over-age child special, individual, personal instruction which will fit him as rapidly as possible to advance to the grade in which his age entitles him to be placed, but below which he has fallen for various reasons. The D class, is to enable the child who is at or near the age when the law allows him to go to work, but who fails to meet the scholarship requirements of the Child Labor Law, and for whose personal or family needs it is imperative that he become wage-earning, to obtain the necessary teaching and training more rapidly than would be possible in a large class of the regular grade. The very manner of formation of these special classes will naturally enough bring together in one room the careless student, the mentally inapt, the unwilling and the disorderly pupil, children widely different in mental power and attainment. It necessarily follows that three or four grades wil] be represented in one room, and that practically io TEACHING CHILDREN TO STUDY

the same condition exists as in ungraded or countryschools. Teaching such a class as a whole is a practical impossibility, is manifestly unfair to the children, and is the cause of the failure and consequent discredit which attended the formation of such classes in some places. To work with the class as a whole, where would the teacher begin work? Could she carry each with any degree of rapidity? What about the fairness of making those of the highest grade wait while the others were catching up to them?

Experi- The advantages resulting from the use of a Group

with G g roup System in these special classes led to experiment with regular " its use in regular classes in the schools of New York schools. City. Its recommendation by the city superintendent for general adoption in all schools, and its earnest advocacy by other members of the superintendents of New York followed. A study of the methods and plans in use in other cities, where similar conditions have suggested similar remedies, must result in an enthusiastic belief that the Group System has been found a way out of the difficulties and evils so well recognized and deprecated everywhere.

The Group System is an evolution out of all the plans and experiments we have briefly considered in this chapter. It bears marked resemblance to

THE GROUP SYSTEM AN EVOLUTION n

the Elizabeth and the Batavia plans. It is not at The Group all the ungraded or district school plan, but it does evolution apply to a well-graded school all that was good in promise. the old district school. It plans for the alternation of study and instruction, as in the German Blocking System. It allows for a different rate of progress for the slow and the bright child, as in the experimental schemes in New York. It is not a reaction against method, but it is an emphasis on the last of the five steps in teaching — application. It includes the old-fashioned drill we've lost sight of, translated into the new thought of self-reliant study. Its aim is not to cover the work of any grade necessarily more quickly, but to cover it so that every child is given the opportunity to progress according to his individual capabilities. Its aim is not necessarily to advance the bright pupils, although the brighter child should, and may, through its use, be allowed to advance as rapidly as he can cover the ground with thoroughness. Its particular advantage in our schools is that it brings the backward child up to grade. Historically considered, then, the Group System is a natural development of conditions, a natural sequence. The pendulum swings to one side, then to the other, but finally rests between the two.

Chapter II

Very earnestly must a warning be urged against being too precipitate in adopting the Group System in wholesale fashion, against using group instruction solely to the exclusion of all whole-class teaching with a consequent loss of the virtues of the graded class system, against limiting the teacher's opportunities to discover by experiment the solution of her difficulties. We are prone to think that in some one new method of teaching, or method of discipline, or method of classification and promotion, we have found a panacea for all the educational ills we have known. Such hasty, ill-considered use of the Group System will produce disorganization and evils greater than those it is intended to remedy ; therefore, until after work with the Group System has advanced beyond the experimental and introductory stage, it will be wise to proceed slowly and cautiously. A careful consideration of the limitations of the Group System will prevent the possibility of such disorganization and consequent discredit to the method ; furthermore, having the difficulties clearly set before them, principals and teachers will comprehend how thoroughly these difficulties are offset by what is gained through the use of group teaching.

Among some half dozen difficulties which have been advanced as arguments against the use of the Group System, several apply only to city schools. Two are general, applying equally to the graded schools of the cities and towns and the ungraded schools of the country districts, and are very real problems to either. The first of these has to do with the use of busy work. The nature and style Seat work

a difficulty.

of the material published in most of the magazines for teachers testify to the demand there must be for suggestion along this line. It is hard to find employment for the group or groups not receiving oral instruction from the teacher. Still harder is it to insure that such employment shall be profitable occupation of real and permanent value to the child, and not merely "busy" work. In the city is added to this hardship in providing busy work of proper character, the fact that teachers have become so accustomed to a discipline which includes attention from every child in the class at every moment of the day that they are confused by the loss of the old-time, machine-like quiet. They find it a great strain to teach one group and at the same time supervise one or two others at busy work.

Discipline This brings us to a consideration of the second of

as affected

by Group these two general difficulties which affect a safe

Svstem.

introduction of the Group System, and that is the effect on discipline. In places where the Group System has been long in use, including such schools in the large cities as have given the method sufficient testing, certain beneficent results in discipline have been generally recognized and acknowledged. Chief among these are the following : —

i. The busy work interests the "bad boy," and can be used as a means of reward for good behavior.

2. Working in small groups holds the flighty attention of the child with little power of connected thinking.

3. Eye, hand, and mind are kept equally busy.

4. The Group System necessitates independent work; it therefore teaches self-reliance, with self-government as a natural outcome.

5. Every child is kept usefully employed, so that he has no idle moments in which to devise mischief.

6. The Group System, rightly managed, teaches care for other people's property and regard for other people's rights, since the books, papers, and busy work devices and material the child uses are not his and must be preserved intact for his mates to use later.

7. When any disorder does arise, it is much easier to detect the offender. Such disorder as can occur in the class of a teacher who has any power of control will seldom or never arise in the group receiving oral instruction from the teacher. This fact limits the possibilities at once, and moderate care in the supervision and testing of the busy work of the other groups will at once betray the offenders, since they must necessarily have slighted or neglected the tasks assigned.

Yet so constantly has the discipline problem been argued as a limitation of the value of the Group System that, in order to get at the teacher's point of view and ascertain the real source of her difficulty, a questionnaire was circulated among several hundred teachers. Two conclusions are forced upon the readers of the replies to that questionnaire : first, the truth of the old story that a good disciplinarian never finds any conditions adverse to the securing of good discipline; second, the uselessness of trying to decide such a matter on the basis of answers to questions, viewing those answers as votes. To illustrate the contradiction in these statements from teachers in response to the question, "Is the use of the Group System an aid or a hindrance in disciplining your class? Why?" the following representative papers are quoted : —

One teacher writes: "The Group System solves the question of discipline. The discipline is more natural, because busy work is another outlet for natural activity; the children are busy, and therefore quiet. Requiring the entire class to concentrate on the same thing at the same time demands a more strenuous effort by teachers and pupils. Group work removes this strain of discipline, and at the same time gives the child the ability to concentrate, so invaluable to him."

The next answer says: "The influence of the Group System on discipline is positively pernicious. Not all finish their work at the same time, and the quick ones sit and talk while waiting. If the teacher stops to speak to such children, she loses the attention of the group taught."

The third in order reads: "Group teaching has a bad effect on the discipline of the class: first, because it works against unity; second, it destroys class spirit; third, it gives an opportunity for lying and cheating, inattention and idleness; fourth, it destroys the spirit of emulation, and, consequently, learning by imitation; and fifth, the impetus that the bright child might give to the backward one is lost."

A terrible arraignment, if true. But the fourth teacher answers: "According to my judgment, the Group System aids the discipline of a class, for by it every child is taught self-control, so that it is impossible for him to create any disorder. The busy work group, kept busily engaged, has no time for disorder. If the class is taught as a whole, these advantages are utterly impossible; especially is it impossible to stop to teach a slow child, for then the bright one loses interest and becomes disorderly."

It is easy to see just where the question rests if left to a vote of this kind, for nearly as many answers say that the effect upon discipline is good as the contrary. The questionnaire was not without its value, however, since the answers clearly indicate wherein lie the teacher's troubles in discipline after adopting the Group System. They arise mainly from the teacher's own errors, inexperience, or want of judgment, and most of these errors are due to the newness of the venture and the lack of adequate information and practical aid.

Teachers make the mistake of trying to keep the groups "in order," not realizing that absolute quiet and the old-fashioned kind of attention are not only unnecessary, but injurious, and not understanding that the children employed in busy work should be working as individuals and should be receiving training in self-reliance and self -helpfulness. In addition, the further, complete discussion, in later chapters, of types of busy work and practical plans for the management of the groups, the two factors in the discipline problem as complained of by teachers, will remove any lingering doubt. Considered in this new light and with respect to the beneficent results upon discipline already noted as generally acknowledged, all statements similar to the two quoted in condemnation of the Group System lose all worth or semblance of truth. Since we must agree that the Group System teaches self-reliance, truthfulness, industry, and devotion to work, and gives confidence and encouragement to continue at work, and since these are, after all, the final aims of school discipline, have we not reached in the Group

System the surest and most natural means of accomplishing our aims?

Among the difficulties which apply more spe- The city

teacher's

cifically to graded schools undertaking the use of the training as

affecting the

Group System are four which need recognition and Group

System.

discussion. The first of these lies in the teacher's training. In the cities, the teachers are almost all city born and bred, and have no background of personal experience in anything except whole-class teaching. Scarcely any of them have seen any country school teaching, and consequently they have not even such second-hand experience. Their pedagogical training has not included any instruction in methods of teaching by groups or plans of busy work. Is it any wonder they are afraid and unwilling, and is it fair for them not to have a chance to learn how to use it ? An earnest, willing teacher, one who has had just enough years of experience to realize the important and serious nature of her work, and not so many as to be unable to bend to new conditions, such a teacher should do the work in its experimental stage, especially if she has had out-oftown or common evening-school experience. Then let the others benefit by what such a teacher can teach them.

Size of The second difficulty, if removed, would lessen the

classes.

force of all other objections ; for it is the size of our classes which makes the amount of preparatory work so great, and it is the size of our classes which makes it impossible for any group to be small enough to make sure that real, concentrated effort is put forth, or to enable the teacher thoroughly to correct her busy work. To offset this obstacle, various schemes have been tried, and will be described to you when we reach the topic of ways and means of adapting the Group System to conditions.

Daily pro- The third difficulty arises from attempts to make

grammes.

the work fit into programmes or orders of exercises. Teachers are worried about the time schedule — how to give each subject its due amount of time, and how to accomplish in each subject the exact amount required by the course of study. Of course, there must be a programme, — every good teacher recognizes the need of one, — but the set, red-lined orders of exercises have always seemed of doubtful value except as crutches for the new teacher or the poor teacher. What can be done in the way of programmes will be illustrated in a later chapter, and evidence given to show that in thinking of the programme as being a special or specific limitation of the value of the Group System, we are conjuring up a difficulty where none exists.

The fourth difficulty is in the demand on the teach- The deer's time, and here we are facing a very real and the teach-

er's time.

very serious obstacle. The amount of labor which is put upon a teacher by the first term's work in the use of the Group System is enormous. The amount of preparation the teacher must make in the planning of work to meet the special requirements of different groups in a class, in the preparation of so-called " busy-work" or occupation for the group not actually receiving instruction, is apparently so much greater in amount over and above what whole - class teaching would require that it is hard to see just how this difficulty can be surmounted. The testimony of teachers is almost unanimous that it takes longer to plan the work, the length of time varying from one to ten hours weekly. All agree that there is a greater tax on the teacher's memory and judgment in planning the work, and this without consideration of the amount of time needed for the correction of busy work, which must, of course, always receive correction, or it is absolutely valueless. Yet with proper cooperation of teachers, one with another, and the saving of plans of work and of busy-work devices from term to term, the burden will steadily become lighter, although this question of demand on the teacher's time made by the use of the Group System is great, and will help to disgruntle, indeed, the teacher who keeps more accurate count of hours of labor outside of school than of good accomplished for her pupils.

In closing this effort to give frank recognition and discussion to all the difficulties and limitations advanced against the adoption of the Group System, attention is invited to the following quotations from Bagley's "Classroom Management": "Any system of class and individual instruction" (which is, of course, what we mean by the Group System) "must be applied with a full recognition of its pitfalls. It requires teachers of skill and scholarship for its effective application, and it must not be looked upon as a royal road to learning. One must not think of eliminating in any degree the struggle and effort that are always essential to growth, whether of a child in school or a teacher in her profession." Advantages Somewhat full consideration has been given to the System. difficulties confronting the teacher who undertakes to teach her class in groups, as it was felt that only by a preliminary removal of any preconceived idea that the Group System has many hardships and limitations could just and thorough attention be secured to the ways and means of putting the method into practical use. Lengthy discussion of the advantages of the Group System is unnecessary at this point, since later development of the subject emphasizes them, one by one.

Briefly summed up, the advantages of the Group System are as follows : —