Social principles of education

Preface

Education is an ever-changing ideal; hence concepts of educational values and methods are in a state of constant reconstruction; and the aim of education must be progressively redefined. The direction of this reconstruction varies from age to age in accordance with the trend of thought. At one time education is valued for its contribution to religion; again, as a means of preparing a favored few for leisure or leadership; and at another time for its results in enlightenment, discipHne, or culture in the life of the individual.

The present demand upon education, though but half defined in social consciousness, is that it shall relate itself immediately to the concrete and vital experience of all as they carry out the activities that constitute their Hfe-process. Such values as knowledge, culture, power, no longer satisfy the educational ideal; these must in some way combine to spell efficiency. Nor is this efficiency something fanciful or unreal, but rather the power and the will to become an active, helpful contributor to the social welfare of the present. Education is therefore a social function, and educational values are

to be measured in terms of social efficiency.

vii

I viii PREFACE

It is the purpose of this volume to formulate the social concept of education; to offer some help, however slight, toward bringing the social meaning of education more clearly to consciousness; to make a tentative statement of the social principles underlying the educational aim and process. Much work has been done in recent years in the field of the general principles of education. Differentiation has been working out until we now have a more or less clearly defined set of biological, psychological, and philosophical principles. The social principles of education have been less fully developed. Much good work has been done, but a complete and coherent statement has not yet been accomplished, if indeed such has been attempted. On the other hand, it is doubtful whether the material is yet available for anything Hke a full or final statement in this field. It will not be expected, therefore, that the present work will aim at completeness or finality.

The plan of the volume is simple. The individual and society are conceived as the two fundamental elements in the educational process; hence their relations and the part each plays in the common life-process are discussed. Since all conscious evolution must be guided by purpose, the aim of education is next considered. The educational aim is found to originate in and lead back to the social process. This necessitates an analysis of the social process to discover what demands the different social activities put upon education. But education

PREFACE ix

accomplishes its purpose only through changes wrought in the individual. It is necessary, therefore, to consider the powers and capacities of the individual which enable him to fit into the social process. Education works upon these powers and capacities in the course of their genetic development; so the mode of individual development is considered. The means that education employs in utiHzing the powers and capacities of the individual to fit him into the social process, and thereby to accomplish the ideal relations between the individual and society are next to be sought. These are found to consist in the curriculum and the social organization of the school.

Contents

I. Introduction 3

/. The Nature of Philosophy. — i. Its organizing function. 2. Its various fields. 3. Its method.

//. The Scope of the Present Work. — i. Limitations as to its scope. 2. Its purpose.

Part I

Educational Elements and Aim 11. The Individual and Society t;

/. The Interdependence of the Individual and Society. — i. Various concepts as to this relationship. 2. The individualistic concept. 3. The socialistic concept. 4. The organic concept. 5. The nature of the social bond.

//. The Contributions of Society to the Individual. — i. Society supplies the individual with a medium for his development. 2. Society stimulates the individual to activity. 3. A set of organized activities provided by ' society. 4. Society sets before the individual criteria of conduct. 5. Social obligation to educate the individual.

III. The Contributions of the Individual to Society. — i. The nature of the individual makes society possible. 2. The individual is the bearer of all social culture. 3. Individual initiative makes social progress possible. 4. The individual's obligation to attain social efficiency.

III. Aim IN Education: Its Origin and Function 32

/. The General Nature of Aim. — i. All progress dependent on change. 2. But change, to be progress, must be directed. 3. In the lower realms of being, the directive principle works from without. 4. But in man, teleology has become conscious and intelligent. 5. Ability to con-

xi xii CONTENTS ceive an aim and select means for its attainment as a measure of stage reached in evolution.

//, Ahn to Be Found Only in Experience. — i. Aim cannot be divorced from experience. 2. The nature of experience. 3. Experience as a process. 4. Experience as a product. 5. The function of experience.

///. Education as a Selective Agent in the Social Process. — I. The complexity of the social process makes some selective agent necessary. 2. Education rises out of the ' consciousness of aim, and as a means to its attainment. 3. Organized and unorganized educational factors.

IV. The Educational Aim but a Statement of the Social Progress Already Made. — i. The educational aim and the social aim identical. 2. The educational aim must therefore be defined in terms of the social process. 3. The futility of educational aims conceived as outside the social process. 4. The tendency of social institutions to become divorced from the social aim.

Part II

The Social Process and Education IV. The Nature of the Social Process . . 51

/. The Nature of the Social Process to Be Shown Either from the Social or the Individual Point of View.

II. A Complete Interpretation of the Social Process Involves Past, Present, and Future.

III. An Outline View All that Is Required in the Present Study.

V. Education and Institutional Modes of Experience 55

I. Institutions the Product of Social Evolution. — i. The nature of social institutions. 2. Institutions both the product and mode of social progress. 3. Individual experience included within institutional activities.

II. The Family and the Individual. — i. The nature of the family. 2. The fundamental relations in the home. 3. Recent social changes affecting the home as an educa-

CONTENTS xlli tional factor. 4. Losses suffered by the home through these changes. 5. New demands placed upon the home relations. 6. The home included in the educational aim.

///. The Community as an Educative Factor. — i. Social relationships afforded by the community. 2. Influences exerted by the community. 3. Decline of community life. 4. Obligations resting on the community as an educative factor.

IV. The Church as a Social Institution. — i. The church and the religious concept. 2. The social programme of the church. 3. The church and general education, 4. The church and religious education. 5. The present opportunity of the church. 6. The educational aim as related to the church.

V. The State and the Educational Aim. — i. The place of the state among social institutions. 2. The negative functions of the state. 3. The positive functions of the state. 4. Democracy and the individual. 5. Education and the foes of the state.

VI. The School as the Instrument of Education. — i. The place of the school in the social process. 2. The measure of educational waste. 3. Sources of educational waste. 4. The school as the complement of other educative agencies. 5. Bases of co-operation between the school and other institutions.

VI. Education and Vocational Modes of Experience 95

/. Vocations as a Mode of Social Evolution. — i. Man is by nature a worker. 2. The origin of vocations. 3. The interrelations of the vocations as a social bond.

II. The Industrial Vocations. — i. The fundamental nature of the industrial pursuits. 2. The industrial vocations late to be included in the educational aim. 3. The problem created by the division of labor.

III. The Business Vocations. — i. The functions of the business vocations. 2. The relation of business to the industries. 3. The two-fold problem of the business vocations. 4. The business vocations as related to the educational aim.

xiv CONTENTS

CHAPTER ^AGE

IV. The Technological Pursuits. — i. The relation of the technological pursuits to other vocations. 2. Contributions of the technologist to social welfare. 3. The education of technological workers.

F. The Scientific Pursuits. — i. The nature of the scientific pursuits. 2. The relation of the scientist to other workers. 3. Education for the scientific vocations.

VI. The Professional Pursuits. — i. The rise of professional pursuits. 2. The function of professional pursuits. 3. The type of education required for professional pursuits.

VII. The Vocation of the Artist. — i. The social function of the artist. 2. The artist as a teacher. 3. Education and the art impulse.

VII. Education and Avocation al Modes of Experience 114

/. The Place of Avocations in the Social Process. — i. Avocations as much a matter of social concern as vocations. 2. The physical necessity for avocations. 3. The mental necessity for avocations. 4. Social development through avocations. 5. The relation of avocations to moral development. 6. The relation of play and work.

II. Classes of Avocations. — i. Difficulty of making such a classification. 2. The physical avocations. 3. Avocations involving chiefly mental activities. 4. The social avocations. 5. Incidental avocations.

///. The School and Its Avocations. — i. The school must meet the problem of avocations. 2. Avocations as a part of the school's activities. 3. Work must be the centre of the school's activities.

PART III Socializing the Individual

VIII. The Powers and Capacities of the Individual 133

/. The Social Nature of Individual Powers and Capacities. — I. The nature of the social process defined by the powers and capacities of the individual. 2. The powers

CONTENTS XV and capacities of the individual the product of social participation.

II. Capacities of the Individual for Impressions. — i. Impressions a fundamental biological necessity. 2. Scope of environment measured by capacity for impressions. 3. Capacity for direct, or physical, impressions. 4. Capacity for indirect, or social, impressions.

III. Capacities for Interpretation. — ^i. The part played by interpretation in adaptation. 2. Interpretation in terms of knowledge, leading to the sciences. 3. Interpretation in terms of feeling, leading to appreciation of values.

IV. Powers of Control. — i. Control the outcome of impression and interpretation. 2. Control over the self, leading to adjustment. 3. Control exercised through the physical. 4. Mental aspects of control over the self. 5. Control through the moral aspects of the self. 6. Control over environment, leading to progress. 7. Mastery of environment through science and technique.

IX. The Mode of Individual Development . . 192

1. The General Nature of Development. — i. Development conditioned by the original nature of the individual. 2. The dependence of development on adequate stimuli. 3. One function of education is to supply stimuli.

II. The Inherent Attributes of the Individual Influencing Development. — i. The individualistic nature of response.

2. Plasticity the first requisite to development. 3. Self-activity defines the process of development. 4. Instincts and impulses the motives to activity. 5. Imitation, suggestion, and language determine the course of development. 6. The desire for self-realization a motive in later development.

III. The Social Stimulus to Individual Development. — i. Response primarily individualistic, but the stimuli chiefly social. 2. The social points of contact with physical environment. 3. Influence of the Zeitgeist in determining direction of development. 4. The unorganized sources of educational stimuli. 5. The organized sources of educational stimuli. 6. The function of the school to organize and present stimuli.

xvi CONTENTS

X. The Curriculum 231

/. The Social Origin of the Curriculum. — i. The social evolution of culture and civilization. 2. The great mass of culture renders selection necessary. 3. The curriculum embodies the social ideal of culture values.

II. The Function of the Curriculum. — i. The curriculum develops the social consciousness. 2. The curriculum provides stimuli leading to development. 3. Social adjustment secured through the curriculum. 4. The concept of social efficiency versus that of discipline.

///. The Content of the Curriculum. — i. The content of the curriculum determined by its function. 2. The growth of a broader curriculum. 3. The influence of tradition in determining the curriculum. 4. Professional influence in the curriculum. 5. The response of the curriculum to social demands. 6. The curriculum still dominated largely by disciplinary concept. 7. The present curriculum as related to social demands.

IV. The Organization of the Curriculum. — i. The content of the curriculum social, but the organization, psychological. 2. The psychological versus the logical organization of the curriculum. 3. The social activities the basis of the organization of the curriculum. 4. The organization of the elementary curriculum. 5. The organization of the high-school curriculum.

XI. The Social Organization of the School . 291

I. The Social Nature of the School. — i. The school as a miniature society. 2., The principle of organization inherent in the school.

II. The Social Spirit of the School. — i. The importance of the pupil's attitude toward the school. 2. The lack of unity between pupils and school. 3. Educational waste through lack of unity. 4. The source of disunity to be found in the organization of the school. 5. The intellectual and the social organization of the school.

///. The Organization of the Elementary School. — i. The continuous nature of experience. 2. Relations between home experience and school experience. 3. Factors affecting continuity of experience between home and school.

CONTENTS xvii

PAGE

4. Loss in efficiency through placing too many children under one teacher. 5. Points of contact between parents and school, 6. The school as an intellectual and social centre for the community.

IV. The Organization of the High School. — i. Principles of social organization that apply both to elementary and high school. 2. The school not to prepare for life, but a place to live. 3. The problems of high-school organization grow out of the psychology of adolescence. 4. The attitude of the adolescent toward conduct and authority. 5. The organization of personal control of conduct. 6. Problems growing out of the social relations of the sexes. 7. Social efficiency the aim of the social as well as the intellectual organization of the high school.

Index 315

SOCIAL PEINCIPLES OF EDUCATION

Introduction

The problem of philosophy is to bring to light new and more profound meanings. Philosophy seeks to find in the world as a whole a broader and richer moZtr'^ significance through discovering the ultimate and vital relations which exist among its parts. It tries so to organize and unify experience that it may possess the richest and fullest reahty possible. Philosophy attempts to fit part to part in the great mosaic of creation, confident that the meaning of the whole and of each part will appear when the pattern is complete.

The scope of philosophy is, therefore, as broad as the universe; its limits are set only by the reach of the mind in its search for truth. Hence philosophy pWiosophy.°^ must enter every field known to man; nothing is foreign to its interest, and nothing too trivial or too important for its consideration. And when philosophy shall have fulfilled its task, we shall have a special philosophy for each particular field: a philosophy of history, of poKtics, of religion, of science, of education, and as many other fields as there are divisions of human activity; we shall also have a general philosophy showing the interrelations among these fields, and organizing them into one great unity. The method of philosophy is the same in each of the many fields it enters: it seeks to relate the parts of the field to each other, and to relate the special field to the larger whole. Applying this method to education, the philosophy of education seeks the true meaning of education by defining its elements, and discovering its place in that larger whole which we call the social process.

The plan of the present work does not include a complete philosophy of education, which would require a discussion of the relations and meaning of present work. ^ education in each of its many aspects, such as the biological, the psychological, the historical, and the social. Our purpose is rather the narrower and more immediate one of discovering and applying the philosophical principles underlying the last of these fields, the social aspect of education. It must be kept in mind, however, that education is primarily a unity in actual experience, and that these different phases do not exist apart. They are separated only for purposes of discussion and emphasis. In the following pages, therefore, constant reference will be made to the biological, the psychological, and the historical factors in education, but always with reference to their bearing upon its social aim and significance.

EDUCATIONAL ELEMENTS AND AIM

Chapter II The Individual And Society

The fundamental terms with which the social principles of education have to deal are two, the individual and society. It is through the interrelations of and sodety ?he ^^^ individual and society that the necessity fundamental for education arises, and that education is e?^ation. made possible. For if individuals did not

constitute an organized society; if each person lived encased in an impenetrable shell of selfsufficiency; if there were no bond uniting all together in one common set of activities and one common destiny; if there were no common ideal toward which all are striving — then there would be no need for education. For the need for education arises at the points where life touches life in social activities, and the subject-matter of education has its origin in the solution of these social problems. Since the problem of education is the problem of the interrelations of the individual and society, it will be well at the outset of our study to consider something of the nature and relations of these factors. .

/. Interrelations of the Individual and Society _ , . , . Various concepts of the relation of the in-

Relationship ,..11 1 . 1 ^ > ^ it

between the dividual and socicty have obtained at diiindividuai and ferent times. The relative importance of one or the other has been emphasized as the socialistic or the individualistic view has happened to prevail in the thought of the time.

The individualistic concept holds that the individual is the ultimate and all-important factor in the relationship, ^jjg His interests are supreme, and his rights

" individual- are higher than the rights of society. Sociistic concep . ^^^ -^ -^^^ ^^ "aggregation of individuals,"

with the emphasis on individuals. There is no such thing as common good when it comes into conflict with individual liberty. Such a society lacks a unifying bond or organizing element to hold it together, and hence cannot endure. Historically the individualistic concept has been of great service in emphasizing and establishing the dignity and worth of individual personality. But, carried to its logical outcome, this concept gives us as its sequel a group of victorious and blood-crazed French Revolutionists turning and rending each other when they have triumphed over their foe. It is impossible permanently to base a society on an individualistic concept, for the outcome of such a relationship of the individual and society can only be anarchy and dissolution.

The socialistic'^ concept in its most extreme form leads to the view that "man is a mere abstraction, and there is nothing real but humanity." If a conflict should occur

^The term "socialistic" is here used as the opposite of "individualistic," and with no other meaning.

between the immediate interests of the individual and society, the individual must give way. The individual does <j«jjg not count as against the interests of society,

" socialistic " and he has no rights which society is bound, concep . j^g^ because they are his, to respect. If

society demands that the child shall be taken from home at the age of seven years and trained only in the calling of a soldier, the individual has no choice but to submit — and Sparta is the result. If that more powerful part of society Kving on a higher social plane wills that the weaker who live on a lower social plane shall be made slaves, in order to give wealth and leisure to the higher and more powerful, then the interests and welfare of the enslaved are not to be taken into account.

In its less extreme form, the socialistic concept does not so ruthlessly sacrifice the individual. The interests A modified form ^^ socicty Still comc first, but it is recogof the sociaiis- nized that society can secure its own inc concep . terests without trampling on those of the individual. In this modified concept, the interests of the individual and society are not wholly common, but they are not as a rule antagonistic. Society begins to consider the individual; he is taking on a value in his own right. He is now educated by society chiefly because the welfare of society demands it, but also in some degree because it is good for the individual. He is punished when he becomes an offender primarily for the protection of society, but also in the hope that it may do the individual himself some good. The interests of the two are not yet felt to be identical. Two distinct and relatively independent orders do exist: the social order which must in all cases prevail, and the individual order which must always give way at the points of conflict.

No social organization based on this false concept of the relationship of the individual and society can finally The socialistic succeed. Such an element of strain in their concept inade- relations must prove fatal to the developquate. ^^^^ ^f ^^^j^^ While it is true that society

must seek to promote the common welfare, yet this must include the welfare of every individual. For there is an individuality in all men, high and low, that has its rights, and that must be held sacred by society. The individual has in him the seeds of personal freedom, and must finally come to his own. Universal democracy covering the whole range of social relationships must ultimately prevail, else man is a craven and civilization a failure.

Plato saw clearly the fallacy of both the individuahstic

and the sociaKstic concept, and their fallacy has been

more fully exposed in the writings of

No real conflict jjo^^es, Spenccr, and many other philoso-

between inter- 7 r- 7 ^ n* j. -u

ests of society phers. There can be no real conilict be- Itdu^^'''^'' tween the interests of the individual and the interests of society. When there is seeming conilict it is either because the interests of one or the other are not understood, or else there is failure in adjustment between the two.

The reahzing of this truth has led to the development of the organic concept of the relation of the individual and society. Plato conceived society as an co^nce' t'^^^'"^ " organism, and individuals as organs or members of the social body. Spencer has carried this biological analogy out in great detail in his social philosophy. The analogy is very attractive, and the concept has been useful in emphasizing the indentity of interests between society and the individual, and the community of interests between individuals. With this concept in mind it is easy to understand that if we are members one of another, then one member cannot suffer without the others suffering with it; or, presenting another phase of the same truth, that

"All are needed by each one; Nothing is fair or good alone."

Nevertheless, a danger, or at least an inadequacy, lurks in the biological concept of the relations of the in- Dangerofpush- dividual and society. For in the biological ing the organic organism the separate organs do not posanaiogy too far. g^^^ ^-^^ inherent power of activity and selfdirection; the organs or members do not develop into persons; they respond blindly and without intelligence to stimuli which they cannot control or resist. Society, on the other hand, is constituted of self-conscious and at least partially self-directive individuals, each with a personality striving for development and expression, and each a functional element in a larger functional whole.

Viewed from the dynamic standpoint, society is not a thing, but a process. The social process is made up of the Society more ^^^^ proccss of all the individuals constitutthan the sum of ing society — all the thoughts, the feeHngs, Its parts. ^1^^ activities of the participants in the great

complex that we call the day's life. But the social process is something more than a mere aggregate of the life-processes of individuals. For the lives of individuals do not run along like so many parallel streams, each untouched by the other. There is a constant interplay of hfe upon life, a constant interlinking of destiny to destiny, a constant interlocking of force to force until the currents of the great social stream are all woven together like a great network of capillaries. And, just as an animal is more than the sum of its organs, because through them it has life, so society is more than the sum of its individuals, because out of their interrelations it has spirit, life — Zeitgeist.

This Zeitgeist is more than an expression of the life or spirit of society; it is in turn an organizing, unifying Necessity for f actor, tending to bind society together and an organizing to mould individuals after one common so- *^*°^' cial purpose. For society does not just

happen to hold together in the working out of a common social life and purpose, any more than the particles of the earth merely happen to stick together instead of flying separately out into space. Each requires an integrating, organizing force suited to the requirements of its own particular realm. The result of this unifying social force is an organic society, whose watchwords are unity and progress.

The bond which holds society together in one unitary process is not homogeneous and simple, but is marvel- The social lously complex. It has its rise in the mul-

bond a subjec- tipHcity of interrelations at all the multive principle, ^.^j^ ^^j^^^ ^^^^^ jjj^ touches Hfe in the

social process. The unifying bond comes from within, and not from without; it is implanted in the nature of man, and not forced upon him as an afterthought. It is not, therefore, governments, nor armies, nor such natural barriers as mountains or oceans, that hold society together; but rather an organizing, teleological, subjective principle working in the individual. This principle expresses itself more or less blindly in the earlier stages of social development, and has not even yet risen fully to consciousness in man.

Various attempts have been made to discover the nature of this social bond, and to formulate it under one comprehensive term. Some have conceived fodi'bond^^ force as the great unifying principle; people are held together only because of the strong hand of those in power over them. Others have said that it is economic necessity; man cannot successfully cope with the forces of nature and secure for himself a living from the earth except in co-operation with other men. Others look upon religion as the tie that binds all together; the thought of an overruling providence and our common dependence and common destiny weld us into a unity. Others say that thought is the great bond; we are held together by the fact that we conceive our world in its meanings and realities, and our relations to them in the same light. Others have made very plausible the claims of like-mindedness as the unifying element; it is the fact that we are alike, the fellow feeling that comes from being '^members one of another," that holds us together. Still others advocate the thought of a common good as the welding force; there is a common element somewhere in the nature of men, a common "good" conceived by each as the coveted goal toward which all are striving, and man has in him enough of divinity to impel him to service and sacrifice for others, that all together may attain the goal.

To which of these views shall we hold? Is it true that

there is one great integrating force in society which is

so much stronger than all other unifying

The social bond r --i , ♦, t_ i ^ j r ,^

a complex. lorces that it can be selected from among the

others as the most fundamental? Is there

a keystone to the social structure which, if withdrawn,

will cause the whole to tumble? We shall probably be nearer the truth if we say that all the forces mentioned, and many others besides, are fundamental to social unity. The social process is so complex, and life touches life at so many points, that no single bond could tie millions of individual Hfe processes up into one great coherent social stream; it must rather be a network of forces, each exerting its influence upon the individuals to whom this force most appeals.

For not all individuals are equally influenced by social forces. What may serve to draw one into the social process as a contributor to the general welfare sodaibond^ may leave another untouched. Beyond varies for doubt there are individuals whose hand

peoples!^ ^^^ would be against society were it not for the fear of force. There are others who co-operate chiefly from economic necessity. Others are appealed to by religion; others by the feeling of like-mindedness; and still others by the ideal of a common good. Not only does this truth hold for individuals, but for societies as well. Indeed, it is probable that each of the forces mentioned has been the chief force in turn at different stages of social development; and all are in some degree operative in any organized society. Without attempting to arrange these forces in a hierarchy, it is evident to all who accept the spiritual as the highest form of evolution in man, that force and economic necessity belong to a lower stage of social development than like-mindedness and the ideal of a common good. The social bond is itself a product of social evolution, and hence of necessity keeps pace with the progress of society.