On Popular Education Page #8

"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

								

prone to imitate the Germans; in the second, because it was the most
complicated and cunning of methods, and if it comes to taking something
from abroad, of course, it has to be the latest fashion and what is most
cunning; in the third, because, in particular, these methods were more
than any others opposed to the old way. And thus, the new methods were
taken from the Germans, and not by themselves, but with a theoretical
substratum, that is, with a quasi-philosophical justification of these
methods.

This theoretical substratum has done great service. The moment parents
or simply sensible people, who busy themselves with the question of
education, express their doubt about the efficacy of these methods, they
are told: "And what about Pestalozzi, and Diesterweg, and Denzel, and
Wurst, and methodics, heuristics, didactics, concentrism?" and the bold
people wave their hands, and say: "God be with them,--they know better."
In these German methods there also lay this other advantage (the cause
why they stick so eagerly to this method), that with it the teacher does
not need to try too much, does not need to go on studying, does not need
to work over himself and the methods of instruction. For the greater
part of the time the teacher teaches by this method what the children
know, and, besides, teaches it from a text-book, and that is convenient.
And unconsciously, in accordance with an innate human weakness, the
teacher is fond of this convenience. It is very pleasant for me, with my
firm conviction that I am teaching and doing an important and very
modern work, to tell the children from the book about the suslik, or
about a horse's having four legs, or to transpose the cubes by twos and
by threes, and ask the children how much two and two is; but if, instead
of telling about the suslik, the teacher had to tell or read something
interesting, to give the foundations of grammar, geography, sacred
history, and of the four operations, he would at once be led to working
over himself, to reading much, and to refreshing his knowledge.

Thus, the old method was criticized, and a new one was taken from the
Germans. This method is so foreign to our Russian un-pedantic mental
attitude, its monstrosity is so glaring, that one would think that it
could never have been grafted on Russia, and yet it is being applied,
even though only in a small measure, and in some way gives at times
better results than the old church method. This is due to the fact that,
since it was taken in our country (just as it originated in Germany)
from the criticism of the old method, the faults of the former method
have really been rejected, though, in its extreme opposition to the old
method, which, with the pedantry characteristic of the Germans, has been
carried to the farthest extreme, there have appeared new faults, which
are almost greater than the former ones.

Formerly reading was taught in Russia by attaching to the consonants
useless endings (buki--uki, vyedi--yedi), and in Germany es em
de ce, and so forth, by attaching a vowel to each consonant, now in
front, and now behind, and that caused some difficulty. Now they have
fallen into the other extreme, by trying to pronounce the consonants
without the vowels, which is an apparent impossibility. In Ushínski's
grammar (Ushínski is with us the father of the sound method), and in all
the manuals on sound, a consonant is defined thus: "That sound which
cannot be pronounced by itself." And it is this sound which the pupil is
taught before any other. When I remarked that it is impossible to
pronounce b alone, but that it always gives you b[)u], I was told
that was due to the inability of some persons, and that it took great
skill to pronounce a consonant. And I have myself seen a teacher correct
a pupil more than ten times, though he seemed quite satisfactorily to
pronounce short b, until at last the pupil began to talk nonsense. And
it is with these b's, that is, sounds that cannot be pronounced, as
Ushínski defines them, or the pronunciation of which demands special
skill, that the instruction of reading begins according to the pedantic
German manuals.

Formerly syllables were senselessly learned by heart (that was bad);
diametrically opposed to this, the new fashion enjoins us not to divide
up into syllables at all, which is absolutely impossible in a long word,
and which in reality is never done. Every teacher, according to the
sound method, feels the necessity of letting a pupil rest after a part
of a word, having him pronounce it separately. Formerly they used to
read the psalter, which, on account of its high and deep style, is
incomprehensible to the children (which was bad); in contrast to this
the children are made to read sentences without any contents whatever,
to explain intelligible words, or to learn by heart what they cannot
understand. In the old school the teacher did not speak to the pupil at
all; now the teacher is ordered to talk to them on anything and
everything, on what they know already, or what they do not need to know.
In mathematics they formerly learned by heart the definition of
operations, but now they no longer have anything to do with operations,
for, according to Evtushévski, they reach numeration only in the third
year, and it is assumed that for a whole year they are to be taught
nothing but numbers up to ten. Formerly the pupils were made to work
with large abstract numbers, without paying any attention to the other
side of mathematics, to the disentanglement of the problem (the
formation of an equation). Now they are taught solving puzzles, forming
equations with small numbers before they know numeration and how to
operate with numbers, though experience teaches any teacher that the
difficulty of forming equations or the solution of puzzles are overcome
by a general development in life, and not in school.

It has been observed--quite correctly--that there is no greater aid for
a pupil, when he is puzzled by a problem with large numbers, than to
give him the same problem with smaller numbers. The pupil, who in life
learns to grope through problems with small numbers, is conscious of the
process of solving, and transfers this process to the problem with large
numbers. Having observed this, the new pedagogues try to teach only the
solving of puzzles with small numbers, that is, what cannot form the
subject of instruction and is only the work of life.

In the instruction of grammar the new school has again remained
consistent with its point of departure,--with the criticism of the old
and the adoption of the diametrically opposite method. Formerly they
used to learn by heart the definition of the parts of speech, and from
etymology passed over to syntax; now they not only begin with syntax,
but even with logic, which the children are supposed to acquire.

								Rate this book:0.0 / 0 votes