CHAPTER X
THE RECITATION LESSON
The recitation lesson as commonly conducted consists in having children tell what they have read in their textbooks. Sometimes the teacher accepts or even demands that the pupils recite by repeating the words of the book. Better teaching requires rather that they render the thought of the author in their own language. In this chapter we shall discuss some of the worthy ends which may be accomplished by such an exercise, some of the common deficiencies in work of this type, and the modifications which are advisable in the light of the principles already enunciated.
The recitation lesson commonly tests the pupil’s memory for facts. The questions asked and answered serve to reveal to the teacher the knowledge or lack of it on the part of the pupil. In a way this testing also gives the teacher some idea of the amount of work done by the pupil. The great weakness of work of this kind is found in the tendency to demand and to accept words, the rehearsing of facts unrelated and unorganized. Of course this need not be true, since it is entirely within the power of the teacher to frame her questions in such a way that the pupil’s grasp on the whole topic rather than his memory for isolated facts is tested.
The recitation which tests the pupil’s ability to present in orderly fashion the substance of the thought found in the sections assigned in the book for study is of genuine value. The topical recitation affords an opportunity to develop on the part of children the ability to stand on their feet and speak to a question for some minutes. And it may be suggested in this connection that we should develop more power of this sort than is commonly found in our schools. The ability to express one’s self adequately on the topic under consideration will always make for effectiveness in social life. It would be well to test the progress of our pupils from grade to grade by their ability to speak more effectively and for a longer period as they advance through the school, on some topic connected with their school work.
When pupils are required not simply to recite on some topic which is presented for their consideration, but are required to furnish their own outline and to recite on the basis of their own organization of the selections which they have read, the recitation may become a valuable exercise in thinking. The success of work of this kind will depend upon the definiteness with which the problem or aim of the work has been provided. It will not require much thought simply to follow the paragraph headings or marginal notes of the author and to present the organization as a basis for recitation. If, however, a problem has been suggested the solution of which may be found in the pages assigned for study, then the recitation may test the pupil’s power to analyze and organize the material which the book provides. And this is the only test of a thorough mastery of the book. We do not read to find out everything that an author says. Our needs may demand a very different ordering of facts, we may use facts in entirely new relations, and may ignore much that was essential from a different point of view. Children have read their textbooks thoroughly when they have derived from these texts the facts or ideas which are essential in the solution of their problem, the satisfaction of the aim which they hope to realize.
This ability to use to best advantage a book is a very valuable accomplishment. When the recitation lesson accomplishes this result, it justifies its use. Too frequently we find adults who seem to feel that they must try to gather all of the knowledge and must try to follow none other than the author’s point of view in their reading. These persons read one book, and, as a result, believe one theory. It seems not to disturb them greatly that the next book they read takes the opposite point of view and that they range themselves on that side of the question. Books are, or at least ought to be, our servants, not our masters, and in the handling of books in his regular school work the child ought to come to realize their true function. There is no greater proof of a lack of thought than the ready acceptance of whatever one finds in print.
There is great danger in the use of textbooks that children and teachers will become satisfied with words, that they will come to think that the repetition of the formula of the textbook is proof of knowledge. Textbooks are all too often merely books of texts. They have been made frequently enough by those who possess a very wide knowledge of the field in which they write; and by some strange process of thought they have apparently reached the conclusion that the way to make a subject simple is to condense it. Many of our most used textbooks are merely summaries or outlines of the subject treated. They lack richness of detail, and state conclusions instead of furnishing a large number of experiences, from which one may, through processes of logical thought, derive the generalizations of the subject. Take, for example, most of the textbooks in history for elementary schools, and read carefully upon any topic selected at random, and then ask yourself just what these words mean to twelve-year-old children; or, better still, ask these children who repeat so glibly the words or reproduce the statements of the book just what they mean by the words they use. Try to discover whether they have any adequate knowledge of facts, or any command of images, which would make possible the generalizations which they give as a result of the process of thought. Remember that a textbook is not logical for children because it has been logically arranged by the scholar. The test is rather to be found in the pupil’s ability to reproduce in his own thinking the steps which have made possible the conclusions of the author.
Any wide-awake teacher can make her work more interesting and more significant for children, if she will carefully provide for the enrichment of the text. The sources from which data can be gathered, regardless of the subject under consideration, are almost without number. Especially to be recommended are the standard works in the subjects. It will be interesting to discover that children would rather read Parkman than to study the text in which some less competent person has endeavored to tell his story in a few paragraphs which mean absolutely nothing to the child. The magazines which publish articles of wide social interest will furnish much helpful material. There is no school that may not greatly enrich its work by an appeal to the actual experiences of the children and by carefully directed observations and experiments. We need our textbooks as a summary, as a convenient condensed outline, or as books of reference; but we must provide as best we can other books of reference which will furnish the details which are impossible in the limited number of pages allowed to the text. In every room of every school a library of books, pamphlets, magazine articles, and illustrative material should be found, and every teacher should expect to increase this collection and to improve its quality as the years go by.
It will give new meaning to notebooks and note-taking, if both teacher and children realize that the books thus prepared are a real addition to the texts used. A comparison of the work done by different members of the class will add interest in the work. One of the greatest deficiencies of the recitation lesson is the danger that nothing new will be presented. It is not intellectually stimulating to listen to others who repeat simply the thought with which you are already familiar. Where good notebook work is done and reported upon, the chance for new ideas, the stimulus to thought, through the presentation of new material, will greatly strengthen the work.
A tendency in work of this type to accept vague and indefinite answers is another argument against the recitation lesson which consists merely in rehearsing the words of the book. Statements are apt to be vague when ideas are vague, and we may not expect ideas to be very clear when the child lacks experience. The child’s power of expression, aside from the difference in original talent in this direction, is conditioned first of all by his acquaintance with things and processes. The recitation lesson, as it is ordinarily conducted, gives little opportunity for this sort of firsthand knowledge. To work at the sand table, to construct with wood, clay, paper, or yarn, to experiment, and to observe carefully the working of nature may mean more for the command of language than much more time devoted to so-called language lessons. But the effective use of such experience for language growth depends in a measure upon the requirement that the teacher makes for adequate expression. The teacher who accepts the vague and indefinite answer encourages slovenly habits of expression and incidentally slovenly habits of thought. It is usually a mistake to say to a child: “I know what you mean even though you have not said it.” Children are often lazy enough to allow the teacher to do their thinking for them, if the teacher willingly accepts the burden. Thinking is necessary for expression; language is the tool of thought; we can do no greater service to children than to hold them for what they say, give them credit for the thought which they express and no more. Words for children, as well as for adults, are used to conceal ignorance as well as to reveal thought. A child is quick to take advantage of the teacher who will accept any sort of an answer and interpret it as a statement containing thought. Indeed, it is possible that a child may even come to think that his incoherent statements, his word juggling, really represent thought.
Another danger in the recitation lesson is found in the tendency to develop the purely individualistic attitude. If excellence consists in endeavoring to repeat more of the book statement than any one else, manifestly it is your advantage to hinder rather than to help others in their work. The attitude of excessive competition on the one hand, and of indifference on the other, are both avoided when children work together for common ends. The standard of the school should be coöperation and helpfulness.
The recitation lesson in its least desirable aspects will not disappear until all of our teachers realize that teaching does not consist in hearing lessons. The broader the training of the teacher, the better her understanding of child nature and of the meaning of education, the less likely is she to resort to this method to any considerable degree. We shall, it is true, so long as we use textbooks, take occasion to discover what use children have made of them; but this testing will be incidental to our teaching, and not the sum and substance of it.
For Collateral Reading
W. C. Bagley, The Educative Process, Chapter XXII.
Exercises.
1. Why is a recitation in which the teacher asks fifty questions which test the pupil’s knowledge of the facts recorded in the book not particularly valuable?
2. Why ask pupils to recite by topics rather than ask questions which will bring out the facts concerning each topic treated in the book?
3. Discuss the use of the textbook in teaching from the point of view of both teacher and pupil.
4. When have you read a book thoroughly? Ought we ever to try to remember all that the book tells?
5. It is essential in a democracy that people think for themselves; how would you develop this independent attitude in children?
6. When children say that they know but cannot tell, how well do they know; how clearly have they thought?
7. If a pupil recites the words of the book, does he know the subject? How would you test further the extent of his knowledge?
8. Find examples in some textbook which you use of statements which mean little to children who use the books.
9. How would you plan to supplement the textbooks which you use? Give examples?
10. Why do children show a lack of interest in recitations where the teacher tests the class on their knowledge of the facts recorded in the text? How can the situation be improved?
11. Why is it generally a mistake to interpret to the class the answers given by the pupil reciting?
12. Under what conditions is it better to have books open in class than to test pupils on their knowledge of the facts recorded in the text?
13. If a pupil reproduces accurately a line of reasoning recorded in his book, has he necessarily thought through the situation for himself?
14. What do the following paragraphs mean to a class of pupils from twelve to fourteen years of age? Have they definite images? Do they fully understand what the author means?
“The Puritans.—The New England colonies were founded by English Puritans who left England because they could not do as they wished in the home land. All Puritans were agreed in wishing for a freer government than they had had in England under the Stuart kings, and in state matters were really the liberals of their time. In religious matters, however, they were not all of one mind. Some of them wished to make only a few changes in the church. These were called Non-Conformists. Others wished to make so many changes in religion that they could not stay in the English State Church. These were called Separatists. The settlers of Plymouth were Separatists; the settlers of Boston and neighboring towns were Non-Conformists.”
“Unlike the poor humble Pilgrims were the founders of Massachusetts. They were men of wealth and social position, as, for instance, John Winthrop and Sir Richard Saltonstall. They left comfortable homes in England to found a Puritan state in America. They got a tract of land extending from the Merrimac to the Charles, and westward across the continent. Hundreds of colonists came over in the year 1629-1630. They settled Boston, Salem, and neighboring towns. In the next ten years thousands more joined them. From the beginning Massachusetts was strong and prosperous. Among so many people there were some who did not get on well with the rulers of the colony.”[15]
Professor Johnson asks, “Do the children see or feel anything but words? Do they see Puritans? Do they see anything that the Puritans might change or any reason for changing it? Do they see anything that happened in America?... But what do the words actually tell about the circumstances of the Puritans?... Can any one think that such statements really convey information about the Puritans to one who is being introduced to them for the first time?”[16]