« ПретходнаНастави »
specialists, is adapted to the requirements of secondary education, and all attempts to adapt them to such requirements have been obstructed by tradition, as in the case of history. Is it not time, in this field as in history, “to take up the whole problem afresh, freed . . . from the impressions of " the traditional social sciences? 2. Relation to preceding courses.—The suggestion that follows with reference to the last-year course of social study must be considered in the light of the recommendations for the preceding years. The courses in community civics and in history, if developed along the lines suggested in this report, are rich in their economic, sociological, and political connotations. Even if no provision be made in the last year for the further development of the special social sciences, the committee believes that its recommendations for the preceding years still provide as never before for the education of the pupil regarding the economic and social relations of his life.
3. Concrete problems in varied aspects.-The only feasible way the committee can see by which to satisfy in reasonable measure the demands of the several social sciences, while maintaining due regard for the requirements of secondary education, is to organize instruction, not on the basis of the formal social sciences, but on the basis of concrete problems of vital importance to society and of immediate interest to the pupil. In other words, the suggestion is not to discard one social science in favor of another, nor attempt to crowd the several social sciences into this year in abridged forms; but to study actual problems, or issues, or conditions, as they occur in life, and in their several aspects, political, economic, and sociological. These problems or issues will naturally vary from year to year, and from class to class, but they should be selected on the ground (1) of their immediate interest to the class and (2) of their vital importance to society. The principle suggested here is the same as that applied to the organization of civics and history. 4. Illustrations.—In actual life, whether as highschool pupils or as adults, we face problems or conditions and not sciences. We use sciences, however, to interpret our problems and conditions. Furthermore, every problem or condition has many sides and may involve the use of various sciences. To illustrate the point we may take the cost of living, which is a vital problem from the standpoint of the individual and of society, and may readily have been forced upon the interest of the pupil through changes in mode of life, curtailment of allowance, sacrifice of customary pleasures, change in plans for education, etc. This problem involves, on the economic side, such fundamental matters as values, prices, wages, etc.; on the sociological side, such matters as standards of living, birth rate, etc.; on the political side, such matters as tariff legislation, control of trusts and the like, and the appropriate machinery of legislation, law enforcement, and judicial procedure. The problem of immigration might impose itself
upon attention for any one of a number of reasons. It will have been touched upon in an elementary way in community civics, and doubtless will have come up in a variety of ways in connection with history; but it may now be considered more comprehensively, more intensively, and more exhaustively. One of the chief aims should now be to organize knowledge with reference to the economic, sociological, and political principles involved. Economic relations of immigration: Labor supply and other industrial problems (on the side of “production ”). Standards of living, not only of the immigrants, but also of native Americans as affected by immigration (on the side of “ consumption ”). Relation to the problem of land tenure in the United States.
A study or series of studies of the type here suggested, developing from concrete issues, would afford opportunity to go as far as occasion demands and time allows into the fundamental economic and political questions of the time. In the field of political science, for example, problems can readily be formulated on the basis of particular cases involving a study of legislative methods of Congress and of State legislatures; the powers and limitations of Federal and State executives; judicial machinery and procedure; lack of uniformity in State legislation and its results; weakness of county government; comparison of administration of cities in Europe, South America, and the United States, etc.
There has not yet been the same insistent demand for sociology as a science in the high school that there has been for economics and the science of government. But there are many questions and principles of a more or less purely sociological character that are just as important for the consideration of a highschool boy or girl as many others of a more or less purely economic or political character. A course of the kind suggested by the committee should doubtless afford opportunity for some consideration of such vital social institutions as the family and the church. These institutions will, it is hoped, have been studied in some of their aspects and relations in connection with history courses and in community civics, but they may now be considered from different angles, the point of departure being some particular problem in the foreground of current attention, such as, for example, the strength and weakness of the church as a socializing factor in rural life, etc.
Again, there are certain facts relating to the “social mind" for which the high-school boy and girl are quite ready, provided the study has a sufficiently concrete foundation and a sufficiently direct application. Any daily paper, indeed the life of any large school, will afford numerous incidents upon which to base a serious consideration, for example, of the impulsive action of “crowds " in contrast with the deliberative action of individuals and of the consequences of such action in social conduct. The power and effects of tradition are another phenomenon of social psychology fully as worthy of study in the highschool as many of the other social facts and laws that seem indispensable; it is not necessary to go farther than the curriculum which the pupil is following and the methods by which he is instructed to find a starting point for a discussion of this question and abundant material for its exemplification.
These two particular illustrations of expressions of the “social mind ’ are taken from a description of the social studies in the curriculum of Hampton Institute.” It may be said in passing that this committee has found no better illustration of the organization of economic and sociological knowledge on a problem basis, and of the selection of problems for study with direct reference to the pupils’ immediate interests and needs than that offered in the work of this institution.
5. Summary of reasons for the proposed course.— In making its suggestion for this study of concrete problems of democracy in the last year of the high school the committee has been particularly influenced by the following considerations:
(1) It is impracticable to include in the highschool program a comprehensive course in each of the social sciences. And yet it is unjust to the pupil that his knowledge of social facts and laws should be limited to the field of any one of them, however important that one may be.
(2) The purposes of secondary education and not the intrinsic value of any particular body of knowledge should be the determining consideration. From the standpoint of the purposes of secondary education, it is far less important that the adolescent youth should acquire a comprehensive knowledge of any or all of the social sciences than it is that he should be given experience and practice in the observation of social phenomena as he encounters them; that he should be brought to understand that every social problem is many-sided and complex; and that he should acquire the habit of forming social judgments
4 Jones, Thomas Jesse. “Social Studies in the Hampton Curriculum.” Hampton Institute Press, 1908.
only on the basis of dispassionate consideration of all the facts available. This, the committee believes, can best be accomplished by dealing with actual situations as they occur and by drafting into service the materials of all the social sciences as occasion demands for a thorough understanding of the situations in question. (3) The principles upon which such a course is
based are the same as those which have been successfully applied in community civics and, to some extent in isolated cases, to the teaching of economics, sociology, and even history.
6. Erperiment urged.—The committee believes, however, that it should at this time go no further than to define principles, with such meager illustration as it has available, and to urge experiment. It would especially urge that the methods and results of experiment, either along the lines suggested in this report or in other directions, be recorded by those who make them and reported for the benefit of all who are interested.
A pageant of Missouri was given by students of the Kirksville State Normal School on May 20, 1916. The book of the pageant was prepared during the fall term by a class in history under the direction of Professor Violette, which gathered historical material for the book, and another class in English under Professor Wise, which composed the various episodes, preludes, interludes, postludes, upon the basis of the historical material furnished by the history class. The drilling of the cast, the rendering of the music, and the orchestration of the music were all done under the direction of members of the faculty of the Normal School.
The New York State Historical Association met at Cooperstown, October 3 and 4. Dr. Sherman Williams, the president of the association, delivered a very interesting address upon “The Present Position and Importance of the Teaching of State History.” He pointed out that in the Regents’ examinations in American history fewer questions were asked about the history of New York than were asked upon the history of Ireland in the English history examinations. He said that pupils learn more of the history of Massachusetts, of Pennsylvania and of Virginia than they do of the history of New York. He urged the preparation of a syllabus of state history outlining the history and provisions for examinations in the subject. He would have a list of books for reading prepared. In closing, Doctor Williams said, “We want our boys and girls so trained from the time they enter school to the day of their graduation, that they may think and act intelligently in regard to matters connected with our history. We should neglect no opportunity to see that the pupils in our schools are always taught our history thoroughly, beginning with the history of the locality in which they live, and from such small beginnings may grow ever-widening and deepening interest in the world’s history.”
Historical Geography in College Classes
The importance of appreciating the relation of history to geography is recognized by all instructors of history. In colleges, however, when the instructor discovers how lamentably ignorant his students are upon this aspect of history, he generally uses strong language against the high school teachers of history, and then proceeds to teach historical geography in the way he thinks it should have been taught in the high school. A far more rational way of approach is to ignore what has gone before, and handle historical geography in a manner adapted to the intellectual maturity of the college student. This is now being done successfully in the course in Introductory European History in Columbia University. This course has passed through many changes since it was described in THE History TEACHER's MAGAZINE six years ago (Vol. I, p. 220). The ancient and medieval portions have been omitted and it now begins with a survey of European society at the opening of the sixteenth century. The emphasis upon historical geography mentioned by Prof. J. T. Shotwell in his description in 1910, has, however, been greatly strengthened. Prof. C. J. H. Hayes and Messrs. P. T. Moon and A. P. Evans have expressed their views on the place of map work in their “Syllabus of Modern History with Map Studies” (3rd edition, N. Y., 1916). “These studies should, therefore, aid the student in fixing in his mind a picture of the homes of the people with whom he expects to become familiar; from them he should come to recognize river and lake, mountain and valley, as well as political boundaries of states, the growth of nations, and their inter-relations. It is only when he has such a picture clearly fixed in his mind that the story of the people of these lands can be intelligently followed. “Frequently the student looks upon the map study as sheer drudgery, wasting time which might be better employed. And if the map study is to degenerate, as it too frequently does, into the mere mechanical exercise of copying meaningless lines and colors from an atlas, such a viewpoint is in large measure justified. But that lies with the student himself. The attempt has here been made so to co-ordinate the map work with the assigned reading that its value may readily become apparent if the studies are done in connection with the reading, and are followed chronologically and understandingly. The student should see countries or movements grow. Any tendency merely to copy a map from an atlas is to be avoided. Every student will be held responsible for a thorough knowledge of the important facts and ideas of all map studies assigned and on final examination may be required to reproduce any map in its larger features” (p. 49). With the permission of the authors of this syllabus several of their map studies are printed below.
MAP STUDY NUMBER FIVE.1 THE ECCLESIASTICAI, SITUATION IN EUROPE, 1500-1648.
Text: Hayes I, 112-169, ch. iv.; Hulme, Renaissance, Protestant Revolution, and Catholic Reformation. Atlas: Shepherd, 116, 118; Muir, p. 10; Hayes I, 165 map; Hulme, 260 map. McKinley Outline Map No. 101a. The present study is designed to show (A) the essential religious unity of western Europe in the year 1500; (B) the rending of that unity by the religious upheaval of the sixteenth century, and the deep inroads made by Protestantism during the first half of the century; and finally (C) the regaining of large sections of territory by a revitalized Catholicism. It must be continually borne in mind that the limits of religious faiths, unlike political boundaries, tend to shade into one another. They are intangible and ever shifting, but a study such as the present, even though necessarily only partial and inaccurate, should help the student to visualize clearly the essential facts in the ecclesiastical situation of the sixteenth century. For it is quite as important that one have these religious boundaries well in mind, as that one know the political divisions of Europe. A. Divesting yourself in so far as possible of present-day preconceptions, read carefully Hayes I, 112-113, 122-123, and then draw lines showing the approximate boundaries in Europe of Roman Catholicism, Greek Catholicism (Orthodoxy), and Mohammedanism in the year 1500. (Hayes I, 165 map, or Shepherd, 116.) Were there any appreciable bodies of heretics to be found in Europe at this time? If so, indicate by light cross-hatching in brown. It must be remembered that large territories in Europe were controlled directly by the Church and administered by the clergy. This fact gave the clergy great political as well as religious importance, and led during and after the Protestant Revolt to serious complications. Such lands were the Papal States in Italy and the lands in the Empire controlled by the great prince-bishops. Refer now to Map Study Number One, and also to Hulme, 260 map, and see that you remember the Church lands there mentioned. Compare these maps with Shepherd, 116, and note in your key which of these lands were swept over into Protestantism. It should be remembered that these were not the only lands lost by the Church, but that countless smaller holdings were confiscated, not only in the states which outright became Protestant, but even in some of the countries which remained Catholic (Hayes I, 126). B. The Protestant Revolt split Europe into two camps, between which the dividing line tended ever to become more sharply defined. In general, what parts of Europe broke away from the headship of the Pope? Draw a line showing the approximate extent of the Revolt in the year 1550. (Shepherd, 116.) On your key-sheet name the states and the more important divisions of the Empire that had become Protestant by this time, indicating whether Lutheran, Anglican, Calvinistic, or Zwinglian. These countries should now be colored, using pink for Lutheran, red for Anglican, yellow for Calvinistic (and Zwinglian). If traces of Catholicism remain, indicate the fact by oblique lines in blue. In the Germanies, where much of the land was still debatable, indicate by solid color (pink) those lands which had gone over to Protestantism and outline in pink those lands, such as Bavaria and Austria, in which the new movement had won a considerable popular following. Would you say that at this time the Germanies gave indication of going over entirely to Lutheranism” (Read Hulme, 264265.) In France, Protestantism never won any solid districts. In the south and west, however, Calvinism gained numerous adherents. Indicate these by oblique lines in yellow (Shepherd, 116). The three most important towns which were confirmed to the Protestants (Huguenots) by the Edict of Nantes (1598) were La Rochelle, Nimes, and Montauban. Locate these towns. We should now be in a position to recognize the rapidity of the spread of the Protestant movement. Within a generation nearly the whole of northern Europe had broken with the Roman Catholic Church, and Protestantism had made serious inroads upon central and southern Europe. Can you give any reason for the fact that the new faith gained its staunchest adherents in the north Consider this question, but do not attempt to answer it in your key. C. That the Revolt spread no further was due in large part to the Catholic Reformation which is the central fact in the religious life of Europe during the latter half of the sixteenth and the early part of the seventeenth century. It must be remembered that this was not merely a defensive movement, but an aggressive attempt to win back the lands which had been lost to the Catholic Church. The shortlived restoration of Roman Catholicism in England during the reign of Mary Tudor illustrates the aggressive character of the movement. Unsuccessful in England, the Catholic Church was none the less victorious in lands of central and southern Europe. Recall the terms of the Religious Peace of Augsburg (1555). That princes were thereby given free reign in deciding the religion (Lutheranism or Catholicism) of their subjects—a contention which the Protestant princes had long upheld—would now aid Catholic princes as well. It would also tend to make the fluctuating line of division between Catholicism and Protestantism more clear-cut. Notice the important gains made by Catholicism in the southern Germanies. Compare the maps in Shepherd, 116 and 118. Where and against what Protestant sect did Catholicism make its most notable gains? (See Muir, page 10.) Fill in now with solid blue the lands, such as Italy and Spain, which had preserved their allegiance to the Catholic Church, and the lands which were won back to the Church during this period (15551600), enumerating the latter in your key. Did any Protestant sect make gains, also, during this period? (Shepherd, 118.) Indicate such gains on your key-sheet and on the map where possible. This should make clear why the recognition of Calvinism became such a burning question during the later sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Compare, finally, the extent of lands held by Protestantism in 1550 and about the year 1600, making mental note of any important changes. The line between Catholic and Protestant countries, as it appeared about the year 1600, and as it was more definitely established at the end of the Thirty Years' War (1648), has to the present day remained substantially the same.
1 The text used is C. J. H. Hayes’ “A Political and Social History of Modern Europe; ” the atlases are W. R. Shepherd, “Historical Atlas,” R. Muir, “Hammond's New Historical Atlas for Students’’ (second edition), and C. G. Robertson and J. G. Bartholomew, “An Historical Atlas of Modern Europe from 1789 to 1914.”
icy, aiding first one side and then the other.
MAP STUDY NUMBER SIX. THE THIRTY YEARs' WAR AND THE PEACE OF WESTPHALIA.
Text: Hayes I, 218-232; 1598-1715.
Atlas: Shepherd, 114-115, 118-119, 121-123; Muir, pp. 11-12 and plate 9; Hayes 1, 229 map; Map for Map Study Number Five.
McKinley Outline Map No. 125a.
A study of the territorial changes which took place at the close of the Thirty Years' War is illuminating from several points of view. It makes evident one at least of the leading motives for the intervention of neighboring powers in German affairs; it marks the beginning of aggressions on the part of two of these powers, France and Sweden, at the expense of German states; it points also to the rise of the House of Hohenzollern to a position of power in the Germanies, and protrays most impressively the hopeless confusion, weakness, and disunion of the numberless states, small and large, comprising the Holy Roman Empire. (See Muir, pp. 11-12.)
A. After reading Hayes I, 219–229, draw a line on the ecclesiastical map you prepared for Map Study Number Five, separating those countries of Europe and divisions of the Empire which adhered to the Catholic and Imperial party from those which fought for the “Protestant * cause. Name on your key-sheet and indicate (on McKinley Outline Map No. 125a) by bi-colored cross-hatching at least one of the states within the Empire which pursued a double pol(Consult Shepherd, 118-119, 122-123; Muir, plate 9; Hayes I, 229.) Comparing the line of the Thirty Years' War with the line of ecclesiastical division (Map Study Number Five), would you infer that religious conviction formed the only or even necessarily the chief motive in this war? Does the political condition of the Germanies invite foreign intervention? Outline the Holy Roman Empire before the war (Shepherd, 114-115.) Note the patch-work effect of the myriad states shown by the map just referred to. And no map can possibly convey an exaggerated or even an adequate idea of the complexity and disunion of the Holy Roman Empire.
B. (1) Foreign aggrandizement. One motive which actuated the belligerents in the Thirty Years' War will be patent upon a survey of the territorial gains confirmed to foreign powers by the Peace of Westphalia. Indicate by oblique lines the territory which the king of Denmark hoped to gain for a younger son (Wakeman, 68; Hayes I, 223). Show next in solid color the territories actually secured by France either as new acquisitions or as confirmations of earlier conquests. (See, especially, Shepherd, 121 inset.) Map Study Number Seven will show how these gains were the fruit of a consistent policy of the French government, namely, to round out French territory to its “natural frontiers.”
Wakeman, European History,
Show by horizontal shading what territorial gains were made by Sweden. Note that she was now placed in control of the mouths of three of the most important German rivers— the Weser, the Elbe, and the Oder. The significance of this becomes manifest when one recalls that railways were then unknown, and the rough highways were too frequently rendered either impassable by rains or unsafe by “gentlemen of the road.” The rivers, therefore, served as the great arteries of trade and communication, and the Power controlling them secured an immense advantage. The Germanies were now largely at the mercy of Sweden in respect of their foreign communications and commerce. Sweden, like France, was pursuing a consistent policy—the policy of making the Baltic a Swedish lake.
B. (2) Internal changes. No less self-seeking than the foreign Powers were the several states of the Empire. Each sought its own advantage from the weakness and disruption of the central government. Indicate the gains made by Bavaria as reimbursement for service rendered by Duke Maximilian to the Emperor. At whose expense were these gains made? What did Saxony win from the war and at whose expense? (Key.) The state which gained most, however, was Brandenburg, thanks to the efforts of its able, wily, and unscrupulous ruler, Frederick William, the Great Elector. He claimed the whole of Pomerania, but received compensation for the portion taken by Sweden in the rich lands of Magdeburg, Halberstadt, and Minden. Having indicated in solid colors all lands secured by Brandenburg, Saxony, and Bavaria, outline each of these states in the same color as its new acquisitions, in order to make sure that you have clearly in mind the relative position of each ceded territory with reference to the state by which it was acquired. (Shepherd, 121 inset, shows the territorial changes most clearly; the terms of the treaty are well summarized by Wakeman, European History, 1598-1715, pp. 123-124.) C. Significance of the treaty. More significant than the actual territorial changes was the reaction of the Peace of Westphalia upon the Empire and upon Europe as a whole. It “is the beginning of a new era. It marks the formation of the modern European states system. In Germany itself, the central fact registered by the peace is the final disintegration of the Empire. The German people were governed by the German princes, who had all the rights of sovereignty . . . the central authority was reduced to a minimum.” Foreign states (enumerate them in your key) now had votes in the Diet by virtue of their newlyacquired German possessions. Large territories now broke away from the Empire and were declared independent (indicate them on your map and in your key). The Emperor became less German in his policy and more Austrian. (The student would do well to read the summary in Wakeman, pp. 122-128.) MAP STUDY NUMBER EIGHT. THE Colonial CoNFLICTs of FRANCE AND ENGLAND, 1688-1763. Text: Hayes I, 299-319. Atlas: Hayes I, 301, 317; Shepherd, 128, 132, 133, 136137, 189-194; Muir, pp. 52-53; plates 48-50, 53-55. McKinley Outline Map No. 104a, No. 148a, and Map Study Number Three. While in the European wars from 1688 to 1763, the French Bourbons were dearly purchasing a few square miles of territory to round out the frontiers and establish the military prestige of France in Europe, they underestimated the importance of sea-power, colonies, and commerce. It is the purpose of this Map Study to exhibit and explain the downfall of France as a colonial power and the triumph of Great Britain in the century-long conflict for worlddominion. A. In order to make clear the position of the rivals on the eve of the “world-conflict,” refer back to Map Study Number Three, and on that map of the colonial explorations (or in the key) show the chief colonial possessions gained or lost by England, France, Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands between 1600 and 1688 (comparing Shepherd, 107110 and 128; see Hayes I, 58-59, 299-304). Which of these five Powers, in your estimation, controlled the greatest colonial area; the most valuable mining regions; the most important spice-producing areas? For what products were the French and English colonies (a) on the North American continent, and (b) in the West Indies, chiefly prized : What was to be the position of Spain (Hayes I, 307, 308, 311,
315) and of the Netherlands (Hayes I, 307-308) in the forthcoming struggle between France and England? B. The Colonial Wars in America. On Map No. 104a, fill in with solid color the areas effectively settled by the English and by the French before 1688 (Hayes I, 300-302 and map p. 301; Shepherd, 128, 189-193; Muir, plates, 48, 53, 54). Indicate in lighter tints of the same colors or by cross-hatching the extent of the English and French settlements about 1750. What were the geographic and economic reasons for the wide diffusion of French settlement and for the compactness of English colonization ? What prevented the English from spreading westward around the southern end of the Appalachian barrier? Outline the extreme territorial claims—regardless of effective occupation or justification—of the French and of the English about the year 1688 (Shepherd, 190-191; Hayes I, 300). Following the narrative in Hayes I, 306–312, for each of the colonial wars in America between 1689 and 1750, indicate the principal places conquered by the belligerents and the territories ceded by treaty. In preparation for the great French and Indian War, indicate the following French forts and posts, taking mental note of the date and the strategic importance of each: Louisburg, Frédéric, Oswego, Niagara, Presqu' Isle, Le Boeuf, Venango, Duquesne, Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie, New Orleans (Shepherd, 191; Hayes I, 309). Place circles around the French strongholds captured by the British, 1758-1760 (Hayes I, 314.) On your key-sheet note the territorial changes in America registered by the peace of 1763, and the American possessions retained by France (Hayes I, 317-319). Referring to Shepherd, 176, note in your key the regions of the New World where French is still the language of the people. C. Anglo-French Rivalry in India. To gain some idea of the size of India, compare the distance between Calcutta and Bombay with that between London and Liverpool; between Paris and Vienna; between New York and San Francisco. Remembering that the densely populated empire of India was valuable not for colonization but for trade and possibly for tribute, indicate on McKinley Outline Map No. 148a the English and French trading posts established in the seventeenth century, with dates (Hayes I, 303-304; Shepherd, 128, 132, 137). Observe especially the localities where French and English ambitions might clash. In the eighteenth century, when the power of the Mogul Emperor at Delhi had fallen into decay, and his vassals and viceroys, such as the nizam of the Deccan (capital at Hyderabad) and the nawab of Bengal (capital at Murshidabad) had become virtually independent princes, the masterful French governor-general Dupleix entered into the political intrigues of the native Indian rulers, hoping thereby to increase French power and prestige. “When Dupleix was appointed governor of Pondicherry, the French were already practically masters of the south Coromandel Coast, and their influence extended far into the Carnatic. He quickly put the older settlement in order, and returned to Chandernagore, to be installed there as nawab of that place. Returning to Pondicherry, he used his new title as a means of overawing the neighboring chieftains; his magnificence dazzled them, and he was soon recognized as sovereign of the South.” (Tilby, British India, p. 51.) Puppets of Dupleix were established as nizam at Hyderabad and nawab at Arcot. In addition, the Northern Circars were brought directly under French control. Shade with oblique lines the territory held by the French, and outline the wider regions in which French influence predominated, in the time of Dupleix (Shepherd, 137). To Robert Clive, whom the natives called Sabut Jung