Principles of Teaching Part 22

Weigle, _Talks to Sunday School Teachers_; Betts, _How to Teach Religion_; Brumbaugh, _The Making of a Teacher_; Betts, _The Recitation_; Strayer and Norsworthy, _How to Teach_; Thorndike, _Principles of Teaching_; Colgrove, _The Teacher and the School_.

CHAPTER XIX

METHODS OF THE RECITATION

OUTLINE--CHAPTER XIX

The question of method raised.--Danger of an entire disregard of method.--The case of the "born" teacher.--Sound pedagogy largely a matter of common sense.--Danger of being committed to a single method.--The five possible methods: The Story Method; Reading 'Round; The Special Topic; The Lecture; The Discussion.

Two of the most practical questions that a teacher ever has to solve are:

How shall I go about to prepare a lesson?

Having prepared a lesson, how shall I set about to teach it to my cla.s.s?

The first of these questions has already been discussed in preceding chapters; the second now calls for our consideration.

Is there a _one best method_? If so, what is it? What steps does it involve? Instead of answering these questions directly, perhaps it will be better to point out the various methods of the recitation, set down their characteristics and relative values, and then formulate a conclusion.

At the outset it may be advisable to sound two notes of warning. One is against an entire disregard of methods. There are those persons who believe that teachers are born, not made, and that therefore a discussion of methods is useless. The born teacher, say these persons, just teaches naturally according to his own personality. To change his method would be to destroy his effectiveness. If he isn't a teacher then the study of methods will not make him one. In either case work done on methods is lost.

Of course, experience refutes both contentions. It is admittedly true that great teachers are born to their work--that some individuals just naturally impress others and stimulate them to high ideals. And yet there is no one so gifted that he cannot improve through a study of the game he is to play. Most great athletes are by nature athletic. And yet every one of them trains to perfect himself. The best athletes America sent to the Olympic games were wonderfully capable men, but they were wonderfully trained men, as well. They had studied the _methods_ of their particular sports. Great singers are born with great vocal potentialities, but the greatest singers become so as the result of thorough training. _Methods_ elevate them to fame. What is true of the other arts ought also to be true of teaching.

As to the cla.s.s of teachers not born to the calling, it seems perfectly clear that here is the great opportunity for a study of the fundamentals underlying good teaching. Sound pedagogy is just a matter of good, common sense. Any normal person by studying how to do anything ought in the end to come to do that thing better than if he ignored it. I may not know how to operate an automobile. But if I study how to operate one, if I observe those who do know how, and if I practice operating one--surely I shall come to be more efficient as a chauffeur.

But while many will admit that this law of development applies in the mechanical world, they hold that there is something mystic about teaching for which only a pedagogical birthright is a solution. The fallacy of such a contention seems too evident to call for argument. At least the only sensibly hopeful view to take in such a Church as ours, in which so many members must perforce be called to be teachers, is that power in teaching can be developed as it can in any other field of endeavor.

The other bit of warning applies to the kind of teacher who is unalterably committed to a single method, not only as the best method, but the only one worth following. Method depends so essentially on the personality of the teacher, on the nature of the pupils taught, and on the subject matter to be presented, that it is a very dangerous thing to say that, in spite of circ.u.mstances, one method is invariably the best method.

Let us, then, turn to the different methods and consider their relative values. Five possibilities immediately suggest themselves:

1. The story method.

2. The "reading 'round" method.

3. The special topic method.

4. The lecture method.

5. The discussion method, built up through questions and answers.

1. _The Story Method._ The story is the method for childhood. "All the world loves a story." Children certainly are a part of that world. How they thrill in response to the appeal of a good story. Their little souls fairly seem to open to receive it. What an opportunity--what a sacred trust--is the teacher's as he undertakes to satisfy that soul hunger! The subject, the story, has been so fully gone into by Brother Driggs in his book, _The Art of Teaching_, that we need not attempt to discuss it fully here. Then, too, so many other excellent books have been written on the art of the story that the teacher need only be referred to them. Suffice it here to make two observations in pa.s.sing.

The best stories for purposes of religious instruction should possess four essential characteristics:

Point--Brevity--Message--Adaptation to the experience of pupils.

And, of course, this message should be a truth appropriate to the occasion--a message heightened by the spirit of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The second observation has to do with the telling of the story.

Naturally it should be well told. But the story hour should not be one of mere telling. The child, in addition to listening to the story, should be given opportunity to express its reaction to the story told--should be directed in discovering the avenue through which it will carry into action the emotion aroused by the story.

2. _The "Reading 'Round" Method._ The old idea of a cla.s.s coming together and sitting through a process of reading in turn from the one book in the cla.s.s as it was pa.s.sed about is largely a thing of the past.

Let us hope that the day when neither teacher nor pupil prepared his lesson is gone forever. Surely "reading 'round" is a poor subst.i.tute for preparation. And it clearly is a dull, routine method of procedure. But there was one merit attached to it that is worthy our consideration. It did bring the scriptures into the hands of our pupils. Whatever method we may follow, this contact with the actual word of the Lord is a valuable a.s.set. We cannot advocate resorting to the old notion of "reading 'round" as an apology for a recitation, but we can well point out the merit of seeing to it that pupils see and read the scriptures.

If the lesson can be so conducted that reading is indulged in as a supplementary laboratory exercise--a turning through of gems that entice the reader to make further study of the book--then reading can be made a very valuable factor in the teaching process. Then, too, it is educational just to have members of a cla.s.s turn through the scriptures to know what they are--what books are involved and where they may be found. Ignorance with respect to the scriptures is alarmingly prevalent.

The following report taken from the _New York Tribune_ relative to a simple test in Bible literature, given by an Eastern university to 139 students, is significant:

"Out of 139 only 12 reached 75%; 90 received less than 50%; 10 could not name a single book of the Old Testament. Some who did spelled them Salms, Joob, etc. Some named Paul, Babylonians, and Gentiles as Old Testament books."

Surely much might be said in favor of the use of books in our cla.s.ses.

3. _The Special Topic Method._ Much can be said both for and against the topic method. At least three objections to its use can be raised:

A. It makes for piece-meal preparation. The lesson is part.i.tioned off into segments, one of which may be prepared by a particular pupil who does not concern himself at all with the rest of the lesson. This method, therefore, encourages fragmentary and incomplete preparation.

B. It makes for a disconnected presentation which makes it quite impossible for pupils to get a unified conception of the whole lesson.

This is doubly bad, because of the fact that frequently those who are a.s.signed parts absent themselves from cla.s.s.

C. It often results in dull, commonplace recitations. All too frequently, especially if topic a.s.signments are the usual method of procedure, those pupils given the various topics to work up content themselves with very meagre preparation. They come to cla.s.s, therefore, and merely run over so many facts wholly without inspiration and often by constant reference to notes or the text.

Of course, these difficulties can be overcome largely by the judicious use of the topic method. It ought not generally to be followed as the regular order of business, but rather as a supplementary means of enriching the lesson. It ought not to be used so as to excuse all cla.s.s members from regular preparation of the lesson as a whole. If the teacher will a.s.sign the lesson proper to all of the cla.s.s and then select certain aspects--certain suggested problems--for more intensive research, the reports on special topics can be made to contribute wonderfully to the richness of the cla.s.s hour. The topic method, then, is primarily a supplemental method, and if wisely used has these advantages:

A. It makes for an enriched lesson. It makes possible expert opinion, and the results of special, careful investigation which the cla.s.s as a whole would be unable to make.

B. It lends variety to cla.s.s procedure and guarantees that the teacher will not do all the talking.

C. It fosters individual expression. It trains pupils to formulate an attack, to organize findings, and to stand and deliver a connected and well thought out message.

D. It promotes a habit of investigation--it leads pupils to work out for themselves the problems of the Gospel which they encounter.

4. _The Lecture Method._ The comment of a student of the Brigham Young University on the lecture method was unique: "The lecture method wouldn't be so bad if a teacher really lectured--he usually just talks.

And talking a lot when you haven't much to say is pretty discouraging to a cla.s.s."

Aimless talking which indulges in the main in vague generalities can never be justified. _Preaching_ presumes a pulpit and has little place in cla.s.swork. The teacher who persists in talking most of the time overvalues his own thoughts and minimizes the ideas of others. Much talking stifles initiative and independent thinking. Then, too, it gives no opportunity for developing pupils' power of self-expression and provides no means for the teacher to check the reaction going on in the pupils' minds--a.s.suming that one goes on! It is astonishing what erroneous notions members of a cla.s.s can get from merely hearing a lesson presented. Given a chance to express their conclusions, they will themselves correct many of their false impressions.

There are occasions, however, when a lecture is extremely valuable.

Frequently after several weeks of discussion a cla.s.s is hungry to hear "the truth about the matter." There is then afforded a splendid opportunity for the teacher to drive home a real message. Then, too, specialists, because of their advanced study on a particular subject, can often present in an hour the results of years of investigation.

Furthermore, in a lecture, the teacher can make an emotional appeal which is practically out of the question in other methods. His enthusiasm and conviction can be made to "carry" his pupils to the contemplation of new truths. Used with discretion, the _real lecture_ is a valuable a.s.set in teaching; indulged in regularly as _mere talking_ or _preaching_, the method ought certainly to be discouraged.

5. _The Discussion Method._ This method, built upon questions and their answers, is commendable for its democracy and because of the fact that it stimulates both thought and discussion on the part of most if not all of the pupils. Questions are so vital to good teaching that Chapter XXI will be devoted to their consideration. Suffice it to say here that for all practical purposes it is the basis of the best teaching. Discussions make it possible to reach pupils "Where they are"--make it possible for everyone to contribute of his experience to everyone else.

The one outstanding difficulty with the discussion method lies in the fact that it calls for such skilful direction. It so easily runs off on tangents that the teacher is kept on his mettle holding to the subject in hand.

After all, each method has its advantages and its disadvantages. There are times when any one of them can be profitably used; it is clear that any one of them can be abused--can be made more or less monotonous.

Perhaps we can wisely conclude that, "_The best method is a variety of methods._"

QUESTIONS AND SUGGESTIONS--CHAPTER XIX