On Popular Education

"On Popular Education" is a thought-provoking essay by Leo Tolstoy in which the renowned Russian author explores the role of education in shaping individuals and society. Written in 1862, Tolstoy critiques the existing educational systems of his time, advocating for a more accessible, practical, and moral approach to learning. He emphasizes the importance of fostering critical thinking and moral values over rote memorization, urging educators to nurture the innate curiosity of learners. Tolstoy's reflections serve as a powerful call for a more humane and equitable educational framework that empowers individuals to contribute meaningfully to society.

• Essay

								
I suppose each of us has had more than one occasion to come in contact
with monstrous, senseless phenomena, and to find back of these phenomena
put forward some important principle, which overshadowed those
phenomena, so that in our youthful and even maturer years we began to
doubt whether it was true that those phenomena were monstrous, and
whether we were not mistaken. And having been unable to convince
ourselves that monstrous phenomena might be good, or that the protection
of an important principle was illegitimate, or that the principle was
only a word, we remained in regard to those phenomena in an ambiguous,
undecided condition.

In such a state I was, and I assume many of us are, in respect to the
principle of "development" which obfuscates pedagogy, in its connection
with the rudiments. But popular education is too near to my heart, and I
have busied myself too much with it, to remain too long in indecision.
The monstrous phenomena of the imaginary development I could not call
good, nor could I be persuaded that the development of the pupil was
bad, and so I began to inquire what that development was. I do not
consider it superfluous to communicate the deductions to which I have
been led during the study of this matter.

To define what is understood by the word "development," I shall take the
manuals of Messrs. Bunákov and Evtushévski, as being new works, which
combine all the latest deductions of German pedagogy, intended as guides
for the teachers in the popular schools, and selected by the advocates
of the sound method as manuals in their schools.

In discussing what is to form the foundation for a choice of this or
that method for the teaching of reading, Mr. Bunákov says:

"No, an opinion about the method of construction based on such
near-sighted and flimsy foundations (that is, on experience) will be too
doubtful. Only the theoretical substratum, based on the study of human
nature, can make the judgments in this sphere firm and independent of
all casualties, and to a considerable degree guard them against gross
errors. Consequently for the final choice of the best method of teaching
the rudiments, it is necessary first of all to stand on theoretic soil,
on the basis of previous considerations, the general conditions of which
give to this or that method the actual right to be called satisfactory
from the pedagogical standpoint. These conditions are: (1) It has to be
a method which is capable of developing the child's mental powers, so
that the acquisition of the rudiments may be obtained together with the
development and the strengthening of the reasoning powers. (2) It must
introduce into the instruction the child's personal interest, so that
the matter be furthered by this interest, and not by dulling violence.
(3) It must represent in itself the process of self-instruction,
inciting, supporting, and directing the child's self-activity. (4) It
must be based on the impressions of hearing, as of the sense which
serves for the acquisition of language. (5) It has to combine analysis
with synthesis, beginning with the dismemberment of the complex whole
into simple principles, and passing over to the composition of a complex
whole out of the simple principles."

So this is what the method of instruction is to be based upon. I will
remark, not for contradiction, but for the sake of simplicity and
clearness, that the last two statements are quite superfluous, because
without the union of analysis and synthesis there can be not only no
instruction, but also no other activity of the mind, and every
instruction, except that of the deaf and dumb, is based on the sense of
hearing. These two conditions are put down only for beauty's sake and
for the obscuration of the style, so common in pedagogical treatises,
and so have no meaning whatever. The first three at first sight appear
quite true as a programme. Everybody, of course, would like to know how
the method is secured that will "develop," that will "introduce into the
instruction the pupil's personal interest," and that will "represent the
process of self-instruction."

But to the questions as to why this method combines all those qualities
you will find an answer neither in the books of Messrs. Bunákov and
Evtushévski, nor in any other pedagogical work of the founders of this
school of pedagogy, unless they be those hazy discussions of this
nature, such as that every instruction must be based on the union of
analysis and synthesis, and by all means on the sense of hearing, and so
forth; or you will find, as in Mr. Evtushévski's book, expositions about
how in man are formed impressions, sensations, representations, and
concepts, and you will find the rule that "it is necessary to start from
the object and lead the pupil up to the idea, and not start with the
idea, which has no point of contact in his consciousness," and so forth.
After such discussions there always follows the conclusion that
therefore the method advocated by the pedagogue gives that exclusive
real development which it was necessary to find.

After the above-cited definition of what a good method ought to be, Mr.
Bunákov explains how children ought to be educated, and, having given an
exposition of all the methods, which in my opinion and experience lead
to results which are diametrically opposite to development, he says
frankly and definitely:

"From the standpoint of the above-mentioned fundamental principles for
estimating the value of the satisfactoriness of the methods of
rudimentary instruction, the method which we have just elucidated in its
general features presents the following plastic qualities and
peculiarities: (1) As a sound method it wholly preserves the
characteristic peculiarities of all sound method,--it starts from the
impressions of hearing, at once establishing the regular relation to
language, and only later adds to them the impressions of sight, thus
clearly distinguishing sound, matter, and the letter, its
representation. (2) As a method which unites reading with writing it
begins with decomposition and passes over to composition, combining
analysis with synthesis. (3) As a method which passes over to the study
of words and sounds from the study of objects it proceeds along a
natural path, coöperates with the regular formation of concepts and
ideas, and acts in a developing way on all the sides of the child's
nature: it incites the children to be observant, to group their
observations, to render them orally; it develops the external senses,
mind, imagination, memory, the gift of speech, concentration,
self-activity, the habit of work, the respect for order. (4) As a method
which provides ample work to all the mental powers of the child, it
introduces into instruction the personal interest, rousing in children
willingness and love of work, and transforming it into a process of
self-instruction."

This is precisely what Mr. Evtushévski does; but why it is all so

								Rate this book:0.0 / 0 votes