A brief course in the teaching process

CHAPTER IX
REVIEW OR EXAMINATION LESSON

The review or the examination, in so far as methods of teaching are concerned, present the same problem. We seek by means of exercises of this type to bring about a better organization of knowledge, to test the efficiency of our work by finding out whether or not pupils can, when put to the test, utilize the knowledge or habits which we have labored to make available for them, whether they are actuated by the ideals and purposes which we have sought to inculcate, whether they do actually employ the most economical methods of work when they meet a situation which challenges their strength. It will be recognized at once that work of this sort is a part of every recitation. But for our own satisfaction, and, possibly, in order to meet the requirements which may be imposed by those higher in authority, we may at times feel the need for a stated exercise of this sort.

A review should mean a new view, a placing of facts in their true relationship. It should mean a clearer view of the topic or the subject which the children have been studying. It avails little to go over the ground that has already been covered more rapidly. The purpose to be accomplished is not to fix in mind a series of unrelated facts. In our discussion of memory we had occasion to call attention to the fact that recall of past experiences was conditioned by the number and the quality of the associations which had been established. And it is not simply a matter of recall. The use that we can make of a fact depends upon our ability to relate it logically to other facts. It is quite possible that a man of great native retentiveness might be able to recall thousands of facts, and yet be stupid, utterly unable to do the thinking required for effective action. To bring about such an organization of ideas demands that from day to day the new facts or principles that are learned be consciously related to the old. It will not be economical to put off all reviewing until the end of the month, or quarter, or term. The step taken in advance to-day can be properly appreciated only when it is seen in relation to that which has gone before; and the work of the past week or month will, in turn, by this additional effort be seen in truer perspective.

There are, however, convenient units into which subjects naturally divide themselves; and when one of these units has been completed, it may be well to take a period or two for the express purpose of review. We may then clear up any misconceptions, give a chance for additional verification and application of the knowledge thus far gained. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the review which really counts is one in which the teacher works with the children, guides them and instructs them, rather than sits in judgment over them. There is nothing more disastrous to the best type of work than the idea on the part of children that the review lesson is the teacher’s opportunity to ask catch questions, or to overemphasize unimportant details. Children respond very quickly in such a situation by their endeavor to cram, with little or no effort at organization, all of the facts that they have been taught.

A convenient stimulus to the proper sort of review is found in the requirement that pupils prepare an abstract or topical outline of the ground which has been covered, and submit it, preferably from memory, for class criticism and discussion. If the teacher asks questions, she should be very careful to see that they are questions of large scope which demand organization, or still better the application of organized knowledge. This brings us to the problem of testing.

The only adequate test of school education, as of all other education, is action. The nearer we can in our tests reproduce the conditions which will confront the child in actual life, the better. Not that we can always have him actually present in the situation; but when that is impossible, we can present for his consideration ideal situations which correspond to those which he will later find. The possibilities of presenting precisely the test which he will meet and is meeting in life are, I believe, much greater than most examiners suspect. We have discovered after many years that the best test of a child’s ability to spell in the only situation in which he will ever need to spell is to test him in that situation; i.e. by judging his ability in writing words in connected discourse. The way to discover whether one can speak or write grammatically is to listen to him speaking or reading what he has written, and not to ask him to recite rules of grammar. The only real test of a child’s ability to give adequate oral expression to the story or poem is to see whether or not he can make clear the thought and furnish enjoyment to others, preferably to those who have not before heard the selection which he reads. We can assure ourselves that we have awakened an interest in literature and history, when we know that children read good books other than those which we compel them to read. The success of manual work, the time spent in art or music, ought certainly to be measured by ability to make and to decorate, the singing of songs, and the desire to hear music, or to see pictures. The more occasions that can be found for the application of the arithmetic we teach in actual measurements and computations which have real significance to children, the better will children understand their work, and the more certain we can be of their future efficiency.[13] It is coming to be a recognized principle of nature study that the common things, the animals and plants which are significant for our living, are the ones which should engage our attention; and we expect that children will, on account of the teaching, enjoy more, take better care of, and utilize to better advantage the plant and animal life with which they come in contact. Even in such subjects as history and geography, one can hope to find just such applications while the child is studying as are apt to occur in his later life. The presentation of the results of the study of a country to a school assembly with the aid of pictures and a lantern, or the interpretation of current events in the light of their geographic setting will afford no mean test of the children’s knowledge of geography. The comparison of to-day’s happenings in the light of the events of a decade or a century ago; the explanation of the historical reference in the period devoted to literature; the writing and presentation of a historical drama, will afford as great application of one’s knowledge as most of us ever make.

Work of the sort indicated above will not only serve to test the value of the work that children have done, but will also add greatly to the interest and enthusiasm with which children do their work. We can scarcely hope that all examinations will satisfy this ideal; but of this we can be sure, the more work of this kind we do with our pupils, the firmer will be their grasp upon their work and the greater is apt to be their power to satisfy even less adequate tests.

Examinations have another function which we as teachers should not overlook. Any adequate test of children’s abilities is also a test of our teaching. It will probably not be best for us to try to defend ourselves by pleading the inadequacy of the test, nor the backwardness of the pupils when they come to us, nor their parentage, nor any other less common reason. If children do not write as well as they should, if they misspell words they commonly use in their written work, if they cannot tell the story, recite the poem, solve the problem, describe the geographical area, or relate the events of the historic period, we had better inquire whether we have helped them to work to best advantage, whether we have clearly differentiated the several aspects of our work and have then applied the methods suitable to accomplish the desired result. There may be mistakes made, but, all things else being equal, the teacher who gets results is the best teacher.

We shall do better work, children, teachers, and supervisors, when we have provided for our use more definite standards or scales by which to measure our results. There is no reason why we should not have a scale which would enable us to tell with a fair degree of accuracy just what the standing of this group of children is in writing, in ability to perform the fundamental operations in arithmetic, in spelling, in writing compositions, in discussing the geography of North America, in decorating a cover for a notebook, or in any other subject or aspect of their school work. Beginnings have been made in this direction, and we may hope for more as time passes.[14] As these units of measure are perfected and applied in examining the results of school work, we will, of course, hear the cry of those who will tell us that the best things that a teacher does cannot be measured. The obvious reply will be that efficiency in accomplishing results which can be measured need not in any way prevent a teacher from exercising that influence or doing that sort of work which is not recorded on examination sheets. Rather it will be found, I venture, that the efficient teachers, as measured by the results which we can test, are, on the whole, the teachers that are doing the noblest work. Strength of personality, appreciation of child nature, a life which by its example makes for truth and beauty in other lives, are qualities not uncommon in the teacher who is glad to be judged by the results which pupils can demonstrate.