History of Education

CHAPTER XXXVII

MODERN EDUCATORS (Continued)

BASEDOW[128] (1723-1790)

The name of Basedow is connected with what is known as the Philanthropinic experiment. He was born at Hamburg, his father being a wigmaker. Not being appreciated in his home, the son ran away and bound himself out as servant in the household of a gentleman. Through the influence of this man, who discovered his extraordinary abilities, he was reconciled with his father, and returned home. He was sent to the Gymnasium at Hamburg, and afterward, through the assistance of friends, went to the university of Leipsic, where he studied theology. Here he lived a rather wild life, and upon the completion of his studies was found too unorthodox to take orders. Accordingly, he became tutor (Hauslehrer) to the children of Herr von Quaalen. In this position he showed great aptitude and originality in the instruction of children. His method of teaching included conversation, adaptation of play, and use of the woods, fields, plants, birds, and other works of nature.

"Owing to his original manner of teaching, Basedow obtained the best results. In teaching Latin, for instance, he began by pointing to objects and giving their Latin names. His pupils, in a very short time, learned to speak Latin almost as well as their native language. Basedow himself learned French, after the same manner, of the governess of the house."[129]

He next became Professor of Morals and Polite Literature at Soröe, Denmark, where his unorthodox writings again led him into trouble. He was removed to the Gymnasium at Altona. Rousseau's "Émile" produced a profound impression upon him, as it had done upon many other thinkers in Europe, and many of his theories are probably traceable to that book. Basedow was convinced of the need of a radical reform in the schools of Germany, and set himself the task of effecting it. Bernsdorf, the Danish minister of education, became interested in his writings, and, together with several of the crowned heads of Europe, assisted him in bringing out his "Elementary Book" (Elementarbuch), which foreshadowed his plans. It was modeled after the "Orbis Pictus" of Comenius. The interest of these distinguished patrons shows how urgent was the need of an educational reform. Basedow also made the acquaintance of the great literary men of the time, chief among whom was Goethe. In temperament he was misanthropic and peevish, owing in part, doubtless, to ill health brought on by overwork and worry.

The Philanthropin.—Indirectly through Goethe, Prince Leopold of Dessau was attracted to Basedow. The prince determined to found an institute in which the plans of the great educator could be carried out. The institute, called the Philanthropin, was established, and became celebrated throughout Europe. Quick says: "Then, for the first and probably for the last time, a school was started in which use and wont were entirely set aside, and everything done on 'improved principles.' Such a bold enterprise attracted the attention of all interested in education, far and near; but it would seem that few parents considered their own children vilia corpora (vile bodies), on whom experiments might be made for the public good. When, in May, 1776, a number of schoolmasters and others collected from different parts of Germany, and even from beyond Germany, to be present by Basedow's invitation at an examination of the children, they found only thirteen pupils in the Philanthropin, including Basedow's own son and daughter."[130]

The main purpose of the Philanthropin was to give Basedow an opportunity to carry out his new educational ideas. A prominent feature of the undertaking was that it should be a model institute "for the preparation of teachers in the theory and practice of the new education." The institution, was to be a "school of true humanity. Its name was to give evidence of its object—the education of youth in accordance with the laws of nature and humanity." In it Basedow was to exemplify his ideas of education. The best of teachers were to be employed, the best appliances furnished, and the instruction was to be founded entirely on sense-perception. The Philanthropin was opened in 1774, and at once awoke universal interest.

But this school, conceived in love for humanity, founded with the noblest of purposes, and exemplifying much of sound educational philosophy, was destined to be shortlived. It was abandoned in less than twenty years. This downfall was owing to several causes, some of which may be mentioned. 1. The institution was purely secular in character, and the world was not yet ready for this. Parents were suspicious of a non-sectarian school, the idea of which was so contrary to that of the traditional church-school. Hence the small number of pupils in the Philanthropin, even at the height of its prosperity under Basedow.

2. Altogether too many subjects were included in the course. Quick outlines the work undertaken as follows: "(1) Man. Here he would use the pictures of foreigners and wild men, also a skeleton, a hand in spirits, and other objects still more appropriate to a surgical museum. (2) Animals. Only such animals are to be depicted as it is useful to know about, because there is much that ought to be known, and a good method of instruction must shorten rather than increase the hours of study. Articles of commerce made from the animals may also be exhibited. (3) Trees and plants. Only the most important are to be selected. Of these the seeds also must be shown, and cubes formed of the different woods. Gardeners' and farmers' implements are to be explained. (4) Mineral and chemical substances. (5) Mathematical instruments for weighing and measuring; also the air pump, siphon, and the like. The form and motion of the earth are to be explained with globes and maps. (6) Trades. The use of various tools is to be taught. (7) History. This is to be illustrated by engravings of historical events. (8) Commerce. Samples of commodities may be produced. (9) The younger children should be shown pictures of familiar objects about the house and its surroundings."[131]

There are very many suggestive ideas in Basedow's course, which have been adopted in modern schools; but the trouble was that he demanded too much, and he himself acknowledged later in life that "he had exaggerated notions of the amount boys were capable of learning," and accordingly his curriculum was very much shortened.

3. Another reason for the failure of the Philanthropin was Basedow's indiscriminate condemnation of everything that had been done before, and of all who failed to agree with him. This awoke the antagonism of teachers everywhere. All reformers are apt to be radical in their own views and denunciatory of the opinions of others. Had there been less to criticise in Basedow himself, he would doubtless have triumphed over all opposition. But his educational theories and practices did not produce the results which he predicted for them, and his opponents were quick to mark every weakness that his system betrayed.

4. More fatal still, perhaps, was the unfitness of Basedow for the directorship of the institution. He was capricious, lacking in self-command and proper balance, visionary, and often suspicious of the teachers under his direction. Such causes prevented the experiment at Dessau from fulfilling the bright hopes of Basedow and the friends who assisted him in starting the enterprise.

Basedow retired after four years' leadership, and the institution continued for a few years with varying success, under such men as Campe, Salzmann, and Matthison. Yet, when the Philanthropin was closed in 1793, the teachers, dispersed throughout Germany, carried the new gospel wherever they went, arousing fresh interest in education and doing much for its advancement.

Quick thinks that Basedow's system possessed great merits "for children, say, between the ages of six and ten." Kant was greatly disappointed at the result. Rousseau's "Émile" had awakened his interest in education, and he looked to the experiment at Dessau for an exemplification of the new ideals. His estimate of the work accomplished is as follows: "Experience shows that often in our experiments we get quite opposite results from what we had anticipated. We see, too, that since experiments are necessary, it is not in the power of one generation to form a complete plan of education. The only experimental school which, to some extent, made a beginning in clearing the road, was the Institute at Dessau. This praise at least must be allowed, notwithstanding the many faults which could be brought up against it—faults which are sure to show themselves when we come to the results of our experiments, and which merely prove that fresh experiments are necessary. It was the only school in which teachers had liberty to work according to their own methods and schemes, and where they were in free communication both among themselves and with all learned men throughout Germany."[132]

Writings.—Basedow's chief educational writing is the book called the "Elementary." The "Book of Method" was the first to appear, and was really the first part of the "Elementary." Concerning the "Book of Method," Lang says, "This famous manual was undoubtedly the greatest of Basedow's educational writings.... It was full of valuable suggestions. It set educators to thinking, and has been a powerful motor in bringing about a change in school instruction."

The "Elementary," containing Basedow's complete scheme of education, has been called the "Orbis Pictus of the eighteenth century." The general opinion is that Basedow obtained the root ideas of this work from Comenius, Locke, and Rousseau. There is but little that is original in his pedagogical principles, but he made an effort to carry out the progressive teachings which had entered into the theories of advanced thinkers but had not been worked into practice. Still, the problem of education became through Basedow better understood, and he is deserving of a place among the great educators of the world for his experiment at Dessau toward the solution of that problem. The experiment was crude, but it has borne fruit in modern schools and their methods, in better school buildings and apparatus, in trained teachers, in milder forms of discipline, in the improved study of nature, and in a broader and more philanthropic view of man's duty to his fellow-man.

Jacotot (1770-1840).—Perhaps the most famous of the French educators and writers of this period was Jacotot, for a time professor of languages and mathematics at Paris, and later professor of the French language and literature at Löwen. His principal educational work is entitled "Universal Instruction." Jacotot is best known for his paradoxes, two of the most famous of which are, "Everything is in Everything," and "All men have equal intelligence." But his method rather than his paradoxical statements has proved his greatest contribution to educational progress. His method consisted in the selection of fundamental examples or types, having the pupils commit them to memory, repeating this work daily, amplifying it, deriving the rules or principles in relation to it, until the mastery in all directions is complete. Thus in studying Latin a page of Caesar might be taken and drilled upon until the style, rules of grammar, and meaning of the passage are mastered; in mathematics the fundamental rules,—the Pythagorean theorem must be repeated daily; in geography begin with a map and master all its details. Gain a complete understanding of one subject before taking up another. His method attracted much attention.

FOOTNOTES:

CHAPTER XXXVIII

MODERN EDUCATORS (Continued)

PESTALOZZI (1746-1827)

Literature.—De Guimps, Pestalozzi, his Life and Works; Krüsi, Life, Work, and Influence of Pestalozzi; Quick, Educational Reformers; Von Raumer, Life and System of Pestalozzi; Durrell, New Life in Education; Gill, Systems of Education; Skinner, The Schoolmaster in Literature; Barnard, Pestalozzi and Pestalozzianism; Vogel, Geschichte des deutschen Volksschulwesens; Rein, Encyklopädisches Handbuch der Pädagogik.

Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi was born in Zurich, Switzerland, January 12, 1746. His father was a physician of great intelligence, and his death before the boy reached his sixth year deprived the latter of a wise counselor. The character of the mother is shown by the dying appeal of Pestalozzi's father to his servant Bäbeli: "For God's sake and in the name of mercy do not forsake my wife. When I am dead she will be helpless, and my children will fall into the hands of strangers."

Bäbeli replied, "I will never leave your wife, if it should please God to take you hence. I will remain with her till death, if she wishes me to do so," a promise which she faithfully kept. Krüsi thinks that, "The sacrifices of a mother for her children do not show more nobility of soul than was displayed by this poor, uneducated girl, who gave up all her worldly interest for a family not her own." Who can say that Pestalozzi himself was not inspired to his long life of devotion to the interests of the lowly by the unselfish consecration of this lowly woman to his family?

Pestalozzi did not care for companions of his own age. He was peculiarly a mother's boy, content to grow up dreamy and impractical at her quiet hearthstone. Consequently he was awkward and reserved, easily imposed upon, and lacking in self-reliance. These qualities remained with him as long as he lived, and caused him many painful failures. On the other hand, the pious example of his mother and the tranquil life he led with her made the boy reflective and imaginative, while his soul became filled with great thoughts for the well-being of mankind. His grandfather, a country pastor, whom he often visited, by his simple, godly life exerted a great influence in shaping Pestalozzi's religious character.

Schooling.—At school he was the butt of ridicule among the scholars because of his awkwardness, his simplicity, and his ingenuousness. His comrades dubbed him "Harry Oddity of Follyville," a nickname that carried no reproach with it, but was intended to express good-natured appreciation of his characteristics. Mr. Quick tells us that "his good nature and obliging disposition gained him many friends. No doubt his friends profited from his willingness to do anything for them. We find that when, on the shock of an earthquake, teachers and scholars alike rushed out of the schoolhouse, Harry Oddity was the boy sent back to fetch out caps and books." While not brilliant as a scholar, he was by no means dull. He was more ready in grasping the content than the form of the subject. Consequently all through life he never overcame his weakness in some of the commonest requirements of education.[133]

Life Purpose.—After completing the work of the elementary schools, he entered the university of Zurich, where he sustained himself with credit. Even while yet a boy he joined a league of students which was intended to resist injustice. Of himself and his fellow-students, he says, "We decided to live for nothing but independence, well-doing, and sacrifice for love of country."

Speaking of society as he saw it, he says, "I saw the unfortunate condition of all mankind, especially of my own countrymen, in all its hollowness. I saw indulgence despoiling the highest moral, spiritual, and civil interests, and sapping the lifeblood of our race as never before in the history of Europe. I saw finally the people of our nation steeped in poverty, misery, and universal want. From youth up the purpose of my life has been to secure to the poor of my country a happier fate by improving and simplifying their educational privileges. But the only sure foundation upon which we may hope to secure national culture and elevate the poor is that of the home where the love of father and mother is the ruling principle. Through the unselfishness, truth, strength, and purity of their love, parents kindle faith in their children. This leads to that implicit obedience which is based on confidence and love."

Love for humanity, desire to ameliorate suffering, and thorough unselfishness furnished the key to Pestalozzi's purpose and lifework.

The Christian Ministry.—It was this lofty purpose that led him first to attempt the work of the Christian ministry, a work which his aged grandfather encouraged. But he failed in his first sermon, and at once decided that he had mistaken his calling. Krüsi[134] says that "he stopped short in his sermon and made mistakes in the Lord's Prayer. This may have been due to embarrassment, which made the young minister forget the sermon which he had been obliged to commit to memory. More likely, however, it was an exalted idea of the proper qualifications of a clergyman, compared with his own humble merits, which induced him to exchange the study of theology for that of law."

The Law.—His motive in devoting himself to law was the same that had led him to the ministry,—his desire to be a blessing to his fellow-beings. He saw the peasantry cheated and imposed upon because of their ignorance, and determined to become their champion. Krüsi thinks that his study of the law must "have produced negative results by showing him the insufficiency of human legislation to do away with abuses, unless supported by principles of charity and justice." He therefore gave up this enterprise also.

Farming.—The advice of a dying friend, Bluntschli, "Never embark in any operation which might become dangerous to your peace of mind, because of the simplicity and tenderness of your disposition," may have had its effect upon Pestalozzi. He now entered upon his third venture. Having induced a wealthy firm in Zurich to advance him money, he bought about one hundred acres of unimproved land in the canton of Aargau, where he proposed to raise madder as a means of profit. Once more his real purpose was philanthropic, as he intended to show the poor peasants improved methods of farming whereby they could obtain better results for their labor and thereby be enabled to live more comfortably. He named the place Neuhof.

Marriage.—At this time he had just passed his twenty-first year. We pause to mention an event that had much to do with his happiness and with his later life. He had made the acquaintance of Anna Schulthess, a young lady of considerable means, and sought her hand in marriage. His letter to her, proposing marriage, is remarkable for its frankness, for the ingenuous confession of his own weaknesses, and for its correct estimate of himself. A few quotations from this letter must suffice.[135] "My failings, which appear to me the most important in relation to the future, are improvidence, want of caution, and want of that presence of mind which is necessary to meet unexpected changes in my future prospects. I hope, by continued exertions, to overcome them; but know that I still possess them to a degree that does not allow me to conceal them from the maiden I love.... I am further bound to confess that I shall place the duties toward my fatherland in advance of those to my wife, and that, although I mean to be a tender husband, I shall be inexorable even to the tears of my wife, if they should ever try to detain me from performing my duties as a citizen, to their fullest extent. My wife shall be the confidant of my heart, the partner of all my most secret counsel. A great and holy simplicity shall reign in my house.... My dear friend, I love you so tenderly and fervently that this confession has cost me much, since it may even take from me the hope of winning you."

Anna was not discouraged by the picture which the man she loved drew of himself, and she consented to become his wife. They were married in his twenty-fourth year, and thus began a long period of happy wedded life that extended over fifty years. Quick tells us that "the forebodings of the letter were amply realized, ... and yet we may well believe that Madame Pestalozzi never repented of her choice."

Neuhof.—But to return to Pestalozzi's experiment in farming, matters had not progressed well. The Zurich capitalists became suspicious, and after an investigation decided to withdraw their support, thus precipitating failure. Of this Pestalozzi himself says, "The cause of the failure of my undertaking lay essentially and exclusively in myself, and in my pronounced incapacity for every kind of undertaking which requires practical ability." One cannot fail to admire the energy and courage of the man, who, conscious of his own weakness, still persevered in great enterprises until he achieved success.

It was not for himself, but for humanity, that Pestalozzi labored, and no discouragement could daunt, no failure defeat, no lack of appreciation or misunderstanding check, the ardor of his zeal for the great work that absorbed his life. Around him were men and women in poverty and misery, whose children were growing up in vice and ignorance, to perpetuate the evils under which their parents suffered. With the spirit of his divine Master, Pestalozzi sought to elevate and bless those around him.

Accordingly, after the failure caused by the withdrawal of the financial support heretofore mentioned, he started again at Neuhof, using his wife's money. He opened an "industrial school for the poor," which Krüsi calls "the first school of its kind ever conceived, and the mother of hundreds now existing on both sides of the Atlantic." This was in 1775. He gathered fifty children together, and fed, clothed, housed, and taught them without compensation; in return for this they were to work in the fields in summer and at spinning in the winter. But this experiment also was doomed to bring disappointment. The children were lazy, shiftless, and dishonest; their work was of little use to Pestalozzi, because of their lack of skill and their bad habits. They would often run away as soon as they were well fed and had a new suit of clothes. Parents were unappreciative and dissatisfied, demanding pay for the labor of their children. Was there ever a more discouraging situation than this which Pestalozzi had to confront, when people demanded pay for accepting the philanthropic and unselfish measures taken for the good of their children and for their own elevation?

This could not continue long, and in 1780 Pestalozzi was obliged to close his school. He found himself badly in debt, with his wife's property gone. But even under these overwhelming misfortunes he says, "My failure showed me the truth of my plans," and this has long since been verified, both in his ideas of farming and in the industrial school.

Authorship.—The next eighteen years, though passed by Pestalozzi in extreme poverty, were not unfruitful. He began to write pamphlets and books, the first book being, "The Evening Hours of a Hermit," which appeared in 1780. His second book, "Leonard and Gertrude,"[136] was published the year following. It created great interest and brought Pestalozzi immediate fame. The government of Berne presented him a gold medal, which, however, he was obliged to sell to procure the necessities of life for his family. In "Leonard and Gertrude" Pestalozzi gives a homely and touching picture of life among the lowly, and shows how a good woman uses her opportunities for uplifting and educating, first her own family, and then her neighbors. In this work she is aided by the village schoolmaster and the magistrate, who are inspired by her example and leadership. Pestalozzi wrote several other books during this period, but none to equal "Leonard and Gertrude."

Stanz.—In the meantime, the French Revolution broke out, and Pestalozzi, influenced by the writings of Rousseau, became an ardent champion of the new order of things. He seems to have acquired considerable political influence, as the Directors of the Government of Switzerland thought it necessary to win him to their cause by giving him a political office. They therefore asked him what office he wanted, and he replied, "I want to be a schoolmaster." Accordingly, when the French had pillaged the inhabitants and burned their homes, Pestalozzi was sent to Stanz,—the only village left in the canton of Nidwalden,—to establish a school.[137] Now for the first time he found himself in the calling for which his whole nature had yearned, for which he was peculiarly suited, and in which he was destined to become famous.

At the age of fifty-three Pestalozzi began his work at Stanz. The government gave him an empty convent in which to hold his school, and, before it was ready for occupancy, children flocked to it for admission. The devastation of the land by the French and the consequent lack of the necessities of life among the people increased the difficulties of Pestalozzi's task. His own description of the beginning of his work is full of eloquence. Speaking of the school, he says, "I was among them from morning till evening. Everything tending to benefit body and soul I administered with my own hand. Every assistance, every lesson they received, came from me. My hand was joined to theirs, and my smile accompanied theirs. They seemed out of the world and away from Stanz; they were with me and I with them. We shared food and drink. I had no household, no friends, no servants around me; I had only them. Was their health good, I enjoyed it with them; were they sick, I stood at their side. I slept in their midst. I was the last to go to bed and the first to rise. I prayed with them, and taught them in bed till they fell asleep." How true is the saying that, "He lived with beggars in order that beggars might learn to live like men."

Thus living with them, teaching them, inspiring them to be good, devoting his whole thought to their welfare, Pestalozzi, who was described as "either a good-natured fool, or a poor devil, who was compelled, by indigence, to perform the menial office of schoolmaster," began a work that has revolutionized educational method.

But the same discouragements that had met him at Neuhof attended him at Stanz. Parents brought their children to the asylum only to be clothed, and then removed them upon the slightest pretexts. Nevertheless, the work of Pestalozzi at Stanz was not a failure, though the school was rendered houseless by the French soldiers in 1799, and had to be abandoned after less than five months' existence. Krüsi comments upon this period of Pestalozzi's life as follows: "Let those who now witness the mighty changes that have taken place in education pay grateful tribute to the man who first took up arms against the hollow systems of the old school routine, and who showed the path to those delightful regions of thought, in whose well-tilled soil rich harvests will ever be reaped by the patient laborer.

"To the philanthropist and friend of education, Stanz will always be a hallowed spot, exhibiting, as it does, the picture of this venerable teacher sitting among the outcast children, animated by the very spirit of Christ, and by a great idea which not only filled his own soul, but also inspired those who witnessed his labors."[138]

Burgdorf.—But Stanz proved the turning point in Pestalozzi's career. He was soon chosen assistant teacher at Burgdorf. His experience at Stanz, without books and without appliances, had compelled him to invent methods of interesting the children. He was thus brought to the use of objects, and here we have the beginning of practical object teaching. It was not long, however, before the head master of the school became jealous of him because he secured the attention and affection of the pupils, and Pestalozzi's dismissal was obtained on the ground that he did not know how to read and spell correctly, a charge which, as we have seen, was without doubt true. As to his method of teaching, Ramsauer, one of his pupils, tells us that "there was no regular plan, not any time-table.... As Pestalozzi, in his zeal, did not tie himself to any particular time, we generally went on until eleven o'clock with whatever we commenced at eight, and by ten o'clock he was always tired and hoarse. We knew when it was eleven by the noise of the other school children in the street, and then we usually all ran out without bidding good-by." Certainly no one will commend such schoolroom practice, and at first glance Pestalozzi would seem to merit only censure; but his enthusiasm, his zeal for the good of his fellow-beings, and his consciousness of possessing the truth triumphed over his lack of system as well as over other obstacles. The school committee of Burgdorf appreciated this, as is shown by their report. "He (Pestalozzi) has shown what powers are hidden in the feeble child, and in what manner they can be developed. The pupils have made astonishing progress in some branches, thereby proving that every child is capable of doing something if the teacher is able to draw out his talent, and awaken the powers of his mind in the order of their natural development."

Upon his dismissal from this position he united with Hermann Krüsi in founding a private school. Pupils increased in numbers, and at last Pestalozzi was on the road to success as well as fame. He gathered a strong corps of teachers about him, who not only contributed to the success of the institution, but sat at the feet of their recognized master, and loyally supported his measures. During his life at Burgdorf, he issued his work entitled "How Gertrude teaches her Children" (1801), in which he attempts to give his system of education. "A work," says Professor Hunziker,[139] "whose contents in no way meet the demands of the subtitle." (The full title is, "How Gertrude teaches her Children; an Attempt to direct Mothers how to teach their own Children.")

Yverdon.—In 1804 Pestalozzi was obliged to vacate his quarters at Burgdorf, and after some hesitation he moved his school to Yverdon, into an old fortress, "which," says Krüsi, "having stood many a siege of invading armies, was now captured by a schoolmaster; and it was henceforth to become more formidable in its attack upon ignorance, than it had before been in its defense of liberty." At Yverdon Pestalozzi was enabled to carry out the principles of education which he had so long held, and this place must be recognized as the Mecca of Pestalozzianism. His success at Burgdorf had drawn to him the attention of the world, and now educators, philosophers, and princes began to study his theories, while many visited the institution to witness its peculiar workings. Without doubt the many visitors seriously disturbed the work, as Pestalozzi took great pains to show what his pupils could do, especially when men of influence came. During the first five years there was great prosperity, the number of students reaching one hundred and fifty. Pestalozzi usually arose at two in the morning, and commenced literary work; and his example was followed by his teachers, one of whom testifies, "There were years in which not one of us was found in bed after three o'clock, and summer and winter we worked from three to six in the morning."[140]

At first the teachers were thoroughly united, cordially carrying out the teachings of "Father Pestalozzi." But after a time private ambitions and personal jealousies crept in and destroyed harmony. Many of the best teachers left and the school was closed.[141] In 1825, after an existence of twenty years, the institute at Yverdon was abandoned, and once more Pestalozzi saw the apparent failure of his hopes. He died two years later, at the age of eighty-one.

Mr. Quick comments upon this event as follows: "Thus the sun went down in clouds, and the old man, when he died at the age of eighty,[142] in 1829,[143] had seen the apparent failure of all his toils. He had not, however, failed in reality. It has been said of him that his true function was to educate ideas, not children, and when twenty years later the centenary of his birth was celebrated by schoolmasters, not only in his native country, but throughout Germany, it was found that Pestalozzian ideas had been sown, and were bearing fruit, over the greater part of central Europe."[144]

Professor Hunziker says of Pestalozzi's influence, "Eighty years have passed since Pestalozzi was laid in the grave. The social thinker, who pointed out the way of reform for humanity in his 'Leonard and Gertrude,' who attempted to solve the enigmas and inequalities of social life in his 'Inquiries concerning the Course of Nature in the Development of Mankind,' is almost forgotten. But the name of Pestalozzi shines brighter than ever in the field of pedagogics. In every branch of education we hear the warning cry, return to Pestalozzi! Let the watchword for the future be: Pestalozzi forever!"[145]

Summary of Pestalozzi's Work.—No one can study the history of Pestalozzi without discovering the secret of his educational purpose. It is revealed in every enterprise he undertook, in every book he wrote, in his whole lifework.[146] Let us briefly sum up the work he accomplished:—

1. He showed how the theories of Comenius and Rousseau could be applied. By this a decided impulse was given to educational reform, and the way was prepared for the wonderful educational revival of the present century.

2. His greatest pedagogical principle is that education consists in the harmonious development of all the human powers.

3. Development should follow the order of nature. While he doubtless borrowed this thought from Rousseau, unlike Rousseau he held that the order of nature requires the child to be taught with other children.

4. All knowledge is obtained through the senses by the self-activity of the child.

5. Instruction should be based on observation, especially with young children. Hence objects must be freely used. There are three classes of object lessons,—those applying to form, to number, and to speech. Mr. Quick says, "By his object lessons Pestalozzi aimed at,—(1) enlarging gradually the sphere of the child's intuition, that is, increasing the number of objects falling under his immediate perception; (2) impressing upon him those perceptions of which he had become conscious, with certainty, clearness, and precision; (3) imparting to him a comprehensive knowledge of language for the expression of whatever had become or was becoming an object of his consciousness, in consequence either of the spontaneous impulse of his own nature, or of the assistance of tuition."

6. The mother is the natural educator of the child in its early years. "Maternal love is the first agent in education; ... through it the child is led to love and trust his Creator and his Redeemer." It follows, therefore, that mothers should be educated.

7. He illustrated his principles in his methods of instruction. He employed the phonic method in spelling;[147] made use of objects in teaching number; graded the work according to the capacity of the children; taught drawing, language, composition, etc., by use, thus illustrating one of the aphorisms of Comenius,—"We learn to do by doing."

8. But the greatest lesson that Pestalozzi taught is embodied in the word love. He loved little children, he loved the distressed and lowly, he loved all his fellow-men. By the spirit which actuated him, by the methods of instruction employed, by a life of disappointment and apparent failure, by the appreciation of his service after he had gone to his rest, by the accelerated growth of his teachings throughout the world, he more closely resembles the Great Teacher than any other man that has ever lived. Dr. Harris says, "He is the first teacher to announce convincingly the doctrine that all people should be educated,—that, in fact, education is the one good gift to give to all, whether rich or poor."[148] Hence there is no character in educational history more worthy of study and more inspiring to the teacher than Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi.

FOOTNOTES: