A brief course in the teaching process

CHAPTER XV
CLASS MANAGEMENT

In any discussion of class management it is necessary to distinguish clearly between organization and control as a means and as an end. Much of the discussion of school and class management assumes that its sole purpose is found in economizing time and energy for teacher and pupils. Class management, from this point of view, is important as the means without which effective work cannot be done in the school. Such a view neglects to consider the opportunity afforded in managing a class for growth on the part of pupils in the power of self-control. Any school which plans to reproduce in its life the conditions commonly found in life outside of the school must allow children to accept responsibility for their own acts, and will, therefore, look upon management as an end.

The discussion has not been wholly one-sided. At times there has been considerable controversy concerning the kind of management which was most to be desired in the schoolroom. Those who have thought of management as a means only have been apt to overemphasize routine; while those who have thought only of the opportunity afforded for growth in self-control have neglected to realize the importance of habit in situations which are invariable. The adherents of the one type of control want everything done at the tap of the bell, in accordance with the rules which have been made by the teacher. Their opponents would do away with “mechanized routine,” and would expect children to exercise their judgment as each question arises. This difference in point of view is easily reconciled when we look at management now as a means and again as an end.

If a fire drill is to be effective, every one must drop the work in hand when the signal is given and march out of the building in an order and by a route which has been determined previously and from which there is no variation. Here we have the best example of management as a means. There can be no question in this situation concerning the right of the individual to exercise his judgment. The safety of all depends upon the absolute following of rules, upon the degree to which the response to the fire drill has become a matter of habit. If we analyze this situation, we will discover the elements which characterize situations in which we are to look upon management as a means. In these situations we should strive to secure habitual responses.

In the first place the response demanded is invariable. It will not do to march out of the building one way to-day and another to-morrow. The class may not go before or after its place in the line. The speed with which the building is emptied depends upon every individual. Here we have the second element: the welfare of the whole group demands that the situation be followed always by a certain response.

Let us examine now some of the schoolroom situations in the light of these criteria. In passing books, paper, pencils, and the like, a definite order should be followed. In this situation the end desired is invariable. What is wanted is to place the desired material in the hands of each pupil with as little delay as is possible. The welfare of the whole group depends upon this invariable response upon the part of each pupil. If any one fails to do his part, there is delay and loss of time in the work which it is desired to accomplish. For the same reasons it is wise to have a definite order in getting wraps, a rule concerning the manner of passing in the room, the habit of rising and facing the majority of the class when reciting, and the like.

Let us now examine other situations which afford an opportunity for the exercise of self-control, in which management is an end. In some schools children are formed in lines five minutes before the hour and marched into the building. There is no good reason why children should march into the building. The end desired, that they all be in their places promptly, can be secured by ringing a warning bell and requiring that all enter the building as they see fit and be in their places on time. In the latter instance they have a chance to act as normal human beings who accept and fulfill their responsibility to themselves and to the group. The desired end is secured, and, far more important, the children are learning to exercise that self-control which is demanded outside of school. Of course, it may be objected that it is much easier to control the children, if you march them into the building. The answer is found by suggesting that the school does not exist primarily for the ease of teachers, but rather for the development of socially efficient children.

A principal who had some difficulty in having the boys come from a somewhat distant playground promptly lined them up for a race to the schoolhouse. They found that it took them little more than a minute to reach their schoolrooms. The boys understood his suggestion that the warning bell, rung five minutes before school opened, afforded ample time to reach their rooms and be ready for work when school opened. It would have required less thought on the part of the principal and less self-control on the part of the boys to have marched them to the schoolhouse at the right time each day. Many school situations offer similar opportunity. Passing through halls, asking the teacher questions, leaving one’s seat for books or materials, consulting with one’s neighbor may, in the hands of a skillful teacher, become a most efficient means of training children in self-control. In all such cases management is an end, in the sense that these opportunities are sought by the teacher because of their value in training children.

Pupil participation in school government has been much advocated of late as the best means of securing a feeling of responsibility on the part of pupils for the welfare of the whole group, as well as in the exercise of self-control. As long as these ideals control, it matters little what particular form of organization is utilized to secure the ends desired. What sometimes happens is an exaggeration of the importance of the machinery of government, with a corresponding lack of self-control, or exercise of social responsibility. The writer once visited a school which was much talked of because of its system of “pupil self-government.” He found there the worst bullying of small boys by those who held offices that he has ever seen in any school. Many of the children declared that they were not parties to the government supposedly in control of the school. When the teachers were absent from their rooms, the children droned over certain set exercises which were constantly before them and from which type of activity they were not permitted to depart. Now these defects in school management may not all be charged directly to the overemphasis of the machinery of government, but they were due to the fact that this machinery, this form, had taken the place of genuine self-government on the part of the pupils.

A wise principal or teacher may secure good results by inaugurating a system of pupil participation in school government, but the wise guide and counsellor must be there all of the time. Introducing children dramatically to the machinery of government will not place old heads on young shoulders. Children will still be childish in their judgments and in their ideas of punishment, even though they be called senators, aldermen, policemen, judges, and the like. The dramatization of city or state government will undoubtedly help in the understanding of the function of citizens and of their servants, the officeholders. This alone would be sufficient justification for introducing in the upper grades, in dramatic form, a system of government, without expecting that it would in any considerable measure relieve teachers or principals of the necessity of guiding children in their development in power of self-control, and in their acceptance of social responsibility.

The same system of pupil participation in school government will succeed with one principal and set of teachers and fail in another situation. The results which are most worth while, self-control and the exercise of social responsibility, will be secured without any of the forms of civil government in one school, while another principal will claim that success in his school is due to his system of “pupil government.” No teacher need feel condemned because she cannot succeed with a particular scheme of government, and none should be unduly elated because of the invention or use of some particular form of organization. The essential element in school management is found in the spirit of coöperation and helpfulness which should actuate teachers and pupils.

The questions of management considered above cover much of the ground usually considered under the head of school discipline. The same problems, especially from the standpoint of punishments and rewards, are considered in the chapter which deals with the moral training of children. It may be well to add here that the problem of discipline is largely one of good teaching. Children who are hard at work seldom worry the teacher. Right conditions for work may play an important part. The consideration of some of the problems of organization is, therefore, in place in a chapter on management.

The ordering of the daily program is one of the most important elements in classroom management. The desire for variety is strong in children, and their power to concentrate their attention upon a single kind of work is correspondingly short. In the primary grades periods of from eight to twelve minutes, with a possible extension to fifteen, will give sufficient opportunity for change of work. These periods may be lengthened to thirty or even forty minutes in the upper grades. The length of the period will depend upon the variety which may be found in the work of a single period. In a reading lesson which includes word drill, reading, and oral composition, the maximum period may be used, while a period devoted to number drill may be worse than useless after the first five or six minutes. It is undoubtedly better for children to work to the maximum of their capacity for short periods than to dawdle for twice the time. In the upper grades twenty minutes may be as long as children can work on the development of a difficult problem in geography, while they may be active and willing to continue work in a literature lesson after thirty-five or forty minutes. The writer has seen a class of seventh-grade children who worked consistently for forty-five minutes on a history problem which involved discussion, map work, and the consulting of reference works.

Group instruction has long been recognized by teachers of large classes as essential to the best work. In a class of forty or fifty children, however carefully they may have been graded at the beginning of the year, there will appear differences in attainment which make it necessary to divide the class into two or more groups in some subjects, in order to work to best advantage. In the lower grades, especially in the first, where grading is least able to place children on the basis of their ability, there is the greatest demand for group work. As many as three or four classes in reading may be necessary in the first grade. It must be remembered that such grouping should never be made to apply to all subjects, nor is it necessary to apply the group plan to any subject without variation. Children divided into three groups for reading may do very well in two for arithmetic, and may all work together in nature study or constructive work. In reading it will be worth while to have all work together at times on work which is possible for the least capable and which may serve as a review for the more advanced group.

By the time the fourth or fifth grade is reached, the pupils will be somewhat more evenly graded. It will still be necessary, however, to group pupils in those subjects in which the sequence is such that the pupils’ advance depends upon the complete mastery of the part of the subject already covered. In arithmetic, in the more formal part of the work in English composition, and sometimes in geography or history, two groups are advantageous.

When pupils all work together it is not expected that all will be able to do an equal amount of work. It is especially important that provision be made for the brighter members of the class, in order that they may have enough work to keep them active and alert. It too often happens that in large classes the work is scaled down to meet the ability of the poorest half of the class, in consequence of which the brighter pupils learn to loaf and tend to lose interest in school work. However many groups the class may be divided into, there will always be the necessity for individualizing the children of each section. The brighter ones must be given assignments which are beyond the ability of the less capable, while a minimum of achievement must be accepted when it represents the best effort and means the continued development of the pupil who is weaker intellectually.

Good teachers provide for individual needs, not only by grouping their classes on the basis of their ability, but also by giving individual instruction. No daily program should fail to provide a period during which the teacher can devote herself to the needs of those individuals who need special help. It may be to help the boy or girl who has been absent on account of sickness, to explain a difficult problem in arithmetic, to help in the interpretation of a map or diagram, or to teach the pupil how to study; always there will be plenty for the teacher to do who thinks of her pupils as individuals during the half hour or more devoted to individual instruction.

The idea of providing individual instruction may be made the central idea in organizing the daily program, as is done in the Batavia system,[24] which allows one half of all school time for individual instruction. There would seem to be little need for devoting so much time to individual instruction in a school having any adequate system of grading and promotion. Indeed, as has already been pointed out in the discussion of social phases of the recitation, there is a positive advantage in teaching in groups. The extravagant claims sometimes made for particular systems of organization, especially when it is declared possible by means of the system for all children to reach the same standard of excellence, bear on their face the evidence of their fallacy.

Any attempt to give group or individual instruction must be accompanied by provision for seat work for those who are not working with the teacher. In the lower grades much has been accomplished by allowing children to express themselves with colored crayons and paints, with scissors and paste, as well as with the more common pencil and paper for copying, or the letters and words for word and sentence building. There is probably as much worth in the seat work which results in the expression of the ideas gained from a story by means of crayons or with scissors as there is in the conversation concerning the story in class. As children advance, more difficult problems in constructive work and in study may be assigned.

In the intermediate and upper grades the problem of having children occupied who are not directly under the supervision of the teacher is largely the problem of teaching these children to study. A child in the fourth grade ought to be able to discover and note carefully the difficulties which the lesson assigned presents, and he should, in some measure at least, be able to satisfy the problems which arise. In succeeding grades, if children are being taught to study, they ought in increasing measure to be able to gather data, organize it, and proceed to the solution of their own problems.[25]

The conduct of the recitation has been discussed at length in preceding chapters. It may be well to emphasize here the more essential criteria. In a well managed recitation all of the children are responsible for the progress of the class all of the time. To this end the teacher addresses her questions to the whole class before calling on any individual. The pupils are held responsible for the answers which are given. The teacher does not constantly repeat and explain answers. When they do not understand, children are expected to ask each other questions. To secure these ends the class should, when possible, be seated so that the one reciting may easily face the other members of the class. The ideal seating is found in the kindergarten circle. In a room with sufficient space in front, the children may be seated or may stand in such a way as to gain most of the advantages of the circle. If pupils must sit in rows of seats with their backs to each other, it may help to have the children reciting face the majority, and to encourage those whose backs are toward the speaker to turn in their seats. It would seem possible that we may sometime furnish our schoolrooms with reference to our ideals of education; that a classroom may sometime become a place fitted for a group of children who are to work together in the solution of their problems.

The lack of proper management of a class may hinder the work of a teacher whose work is excellent in other respects; but no skill in management, however efficient in keeping children in order, can take the place of good teaching. Most men and women who know how to teach learn to manage a room full of children. There are still a few who call themselves teachers who exalt management unduly. For them the essential elements in school teaching are discipline, control, organization. To the young teacher, or to the one who would grow, the ideal of better teaching must constantly lead toward greater efficiency. Observe any successful teacher, and you can discover the devices of management which allow her to work to best advantage, and the use which she makes of the opportunities which the school presents to develop self-control and social responsibility on the part of her pupils.