270 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



in finding teachers competent for this 

 work, and no trouble at all in finding 

 any number of men held abundantly 

 qualified to be directors, trustees, man- 

 agers, and superintendents of such edu- 

 cation. 



But the system was no sooner en- 

 tered upon than it began to undergo a 

 series of changes which were, of course, 

 characterized as improvements. There 

 were at first much crudeness, laxity, and 

 irregularity in the schools, and these 

 were to be replaced by better order and 

 closer and more methodical work. The 

 scope of instruction began to widen, 

 and new subjects were introduced. 

 Courses of study were laid out requir- 

 ing years to complete them. The pu- 

 pils were classed and graded, and this 

 necessitated the gathering of larger 

 numbers in the same establishment. 

 Lesser schools were absorbed under 

 the policy of expansion. With more 

 diversified study, a complicated system 

 of examinations, markings, and pro- 

 motions grew up, which required a spe- 

 cial apprenticeship of the teachers to 

 work in it. The department of normal 

 schools was instituted to meet the new 

 demands on teachers, and, as the sys- 

 tem was regulated by State authority, 

 it was reduced to constantly increasing 

 uniformity in all details of management. 



In this way the public schools un- 

 derwent a radical change, by which 

 what had no existence at first gradual- 

 ly came to be of supreme importance. 

 Liberty on the part of both teacher and 

 pupil disappeared, and they became the 

 passive subjects of inflexible regulation. 

 Rules grew sacred, and there was no 

 sin so great as to be absent from school 

 a day, or not to be promptly on hand 

 at the moment for starting. The offi- 

 cials directed everything, decided what 

 and how much to study, hours of at- 

 tendance, recesses or no recesses, and 

 put as much or as little pressure as 

 they pleased upon school operations. 

 As a consequence, a gigantic mechani- 

 cal system was created, the perfection 



of which consisted in the mechanical 

 element. There are many who think 

 that the system is now essentially per- 

 fected, and that, to gain its highest ad- 

 vantages, nothing remains but to aug- 

 ment its resources, and drive it with in- 

 creasing vigor. Yet experience is dis- 

 closing grave diflSculties in its working, 

 and diflBculties, moreover, which spring 

 out of the alleged perfections of the 

 method. That which characterizes it 

 is the completeness of organization for 

 dealing with pupils in masses ; and the 

 vice which is now widely recognized in 

 its operations is, that the individuality of 

 pupils is sacrificed to the perfect work- 

 ing of the mechanical arrangements. 



Of course, in the nature of the case, 

 the greater the number of children op- 

 erated upon, the less is the considera- 

 tion that- can be given to each person- 

 ality. Children are treated by a plan 

 which implies that they are alike, but 

 the assumption is not true. They are 

 unlike, the differences among them are 

 great ; and, when it comes to the pro- 

 cesses of education, these differences 

 are fundamental. The fact which is 

 neglected in machine education is the 

 most important fact of the case. The 

 palpable differences in physical aspect 

 by which each is known as an individ- 

 ual extends through the whole nature. 

 Children differ widely in their mental 

 faculties, in their capacity of apprehen- 

 sion and retention, in aptitude for dif- 

 ferent kinds of mental effort, in quick- 

 ness of perception, in moral sensibility, 

 and power of self-restraint, in organic 

 soundness, and the capability of endur- 

 ance. To cultivate them all alike is to 

 do violence to those peculiarities which 

 make up the individuality. They can 

 neither be taught m the same way with 

 the same results, nor plied by the same 

 motives with equal effect, nor subjected 

 to the same degree of strain without 

 injurious consequences. Say what we 

 will, there in an undoubted antagonism 

 between the necessities and rights of 

 individual children and the inexorable 



