They have neither the skill which is requisite, nor the knowledge of the meanings of words essentially necessary to make reading useful than the iron, the other rejected the iron because it was less valuable than the gold; there was no end to the controversy; no mean to be struck between them; and the longer the enthusiasts argued, the more unlikely were they to agree. I believe that the mistakes of the promoters of the monitorial system were, that they did not select children who were sufficiently mature and intelligent for their duties; that they required them to teach more than they were prepared for: that the balance of the double capacity of the monitor, as teacher and pupil, was not maintained; that there was no course of special instruction given to them to qualify them for their duties and to make up for whatever time they were employed in teaching; that they were not required to prepare themselves for the lessons which they were called upon to teach; that they were employed at random, had charge of no particular class, and had no set course of instruction to impart; that the teachers were not properly drilled, trained, or qualified to control or prepare the monitors for their duties, and, above all, that the main, the higher, the essential part of the education of the pupils, was not given by the teachers themselves. These were grievous errors to have made; errors which show it to be no wonder that the monitorial system came into disrepute. The most fatal error of all, however, the error from which all the other evils sprang, was that alluded to above, in respect to the double capacity of the monitor as teacher and pupil. Immediately that the pupil's employment as a monitor interfered with his business as a pupil, the fabric began to totter; when the monitor remained teaching for the whole length of the day, the old structure was doomed, it soon crumbled away, and lay in ruins and unrespected dust. It is, however, no imputation upon the strength of a horse, if you place an overload upon his shoulders, and find him unable to carry it; it does not reflect upon the floating quality of a vessel, if you add pile upon pile to the cargo, and find it at last to sink; it does not prove a carpenter to be worthless, if he fail to slate the house, chisel the cornicestones, and paint the panels of the doors; and it certainly was no stigma upon the monitorial system to have been so roughly handled, so inconsiderately and absurdly tested, and so immoderately employed, whilst so egregiously misunderstood, and then to have experienced failure, and a general loss of public confidence. The schools of those who are indisposed to avail themselves of monitorial assistance are, as might naturally be expected, exhibiting the deficiencies and imperfections of the large school with an inadequate teaching staff. Mr. Kay observes, "The teachers are not assisted by monitors in Germany as in Switzerland, France, and England; and this, I think, a very great error. I have often been in schools in Prussia, where the teacher had about 100 children, of different degrees of proficiency, to instruct in the same class-room, without any assistance whatever; the consequence was that while he was teaching one class, the others were in disorder, and making noise enough to distract the attention of the children who were receiving instruction, as well as that of the teacher who was giving it." Unless the children are permitted to remain uninstructed, in a school where the attendance is large, and the monitorial system not resorted to, a large staff of competent teachers must be employed to do a great deal which could be as well, if not better, done by monitors; and this involves the country in very considerable expense. Mr. Kay refers to this point. "In Prussia," he says, "where they have no monitors, they are obliged to augment the number of their teachers very considerably; and I have found in a small school, which could have been very easily managed by one teacher and some well-trained monitors, as many as three teachers, for each of whom good salaries had to be provided, as well as houses and gardens." Thus the strong reaction against the monitorial system was nearly as deep an error as the ori PLAN FOR USING UNPAID MONITORS. 287 intelligent. They fail also in zeal and earnestness. I have found the following plan of using them very good. Suppose there were ginal mismanagement of the disciples of Lancaster and Bell. It is quite evident, however, from the tone of recent writers, that the Germans and others are coming to a sense of their long-standing mistake on this question. Mr. Kay, speaking of the Prussians, says, "They have resolved, as I have already mentioned, to employ no monitors in the schools; and as they are conscious that without them they require a much greater number of teachers, they have directed the inspectors to inform the county magistrates when two or more teachers are required by a parish, and the magistrates are, in these cases, authorised to oblige the parochial authorities to elect and support as many additional teachers as are necessary. It often happens, however, that a parish, although very populous, is very poor, and unable to do more than support one teacher, even when the number of its children, of an age to attend school, is 120 or 130. In these cases, all the children, of different ages and different degrees of proficiency, are assembled in one school-room under the care of only one teacher. Now it is evident, that no matter how clever such a teacher may be, it is utterly impossible for him to conduct such a school properly. Even if the children were all of the same degree of proficiency, it would be impossible for one man to promote the individual development and education of so many scholars; how much more so, when they are of different ages, and of different degrees of proficiency? This is the great fault of the Prussian village schools. They are, at present, actually retarding the progress of their own education by their too blind fear of doing so. They fear the evil effects of our old, absurd monitorial systems so much, as to refuse to reason calmly on the subject of monitorial assistance. But the evil will soon bring its own cure. They find that many parishes, with more than a hundred children, cannot afford to support more than one teacher; they clearly see that one is not enough for so many; and that, owing to this paucity of masters, the education of the less intelligent children is neglected. They are really anxious to perfect their schools; and where there is such a will, and such an experience as is possessed by the educational authorities in Prussia, or, in other words, by the Prussian people themselves, there the remedy will soon be applied. They are already, in some few quarters, beginning to see their error, and not many years will pass ere a change will be introduced." The Commissioners of National Education have always encouraged monitorial teaching; they have seen that a child who is employed, at stated times, in the teaching of a class of his fellow pupils is rendering most valuable assistance to the master, is improving himself in knowledge, and is obtaining a taste, and undergoing the best possible training for becoming a teacher. They approached the consideration of the question with the greatest care. They never contemplated conducting a large school solely by monitorial assistance; nor did they ever permit their monitors to forget that they are pupils. The first regular monitors in the service of the Board were those in the Model Schools, Dublin, so far back as March 1833. Some were paid, and others acted gratuitously. One of the greatest prizes and highest distinctions in the school was to attain to a monitorship. At one time during school hours the monitors taught some of the classes, and at another time they were themselves instructed; and, before school-hours there was a special course of instruction always given them. The Commissioners, in their Report for 1837, refer to a new system of remunerating this class of young persons, in the Model Schools they were intending to establish throughout the country, which shows the permanency of the monitorial system at that early period in the history of the Board. They say, "that the money so paid (in school fees) shall constitute a school fund, and that it shall be divided into such proportions as we may determine, between the head master, his assistant, and the most three drafts in the lowest class, which is the number that ought to be in it, and suppose that these were on the floor to receive a reading lesson' of 45 minutes in a school in which there was but one teacher. Two monitors would be necessary, and these could assist in the following order. In draft 1 the master could teach reading for, say, fifteen minutes, the time varying by the circumstances of the class-during this time one monitor would be teaching draft 2 to spell on and off the book, and the other would be teaching draft 3 to count or add mentally. The master could then move from draft 1 to draft 2, and teach the children in it to read, the monitor of draft 2 going to draft 1 and giving out the spelling, while the boy in draft 3 could change from mental addition to the teaching of the alphabet, &c. The advanced of the monitors whom he may employ." The system was always worked with moderation; it was free from the wild pretensions of the plans of Bell and Lancaster; and the pupilary and the monitorial functions were happily coalesced. It was the first rational trial, in my mind, which was given to monitorial teaching in these countries. In their Report for 1846, the Commissioners refer to the fruits of the system; they develop its organisation, and they announce their determination to extend it to the Ordinary National Schools throughout the country. Each monitor was to serve for a period of four years; at the end of each year there was a sifting examination as to his proficiency; his teacher was required to employ him mo erately as a monitor, and freely as a pupil: and his income increased each year up to the last of his service. Then the system received a further development, by the institution of a small staff of pupil-teachers in each of the Model Schools, who, in most cases, were the elite of those monitors who had completed their fourth year of service. It should be remembered that the functions of the pupil-teacher and the monitor are very different; the former is more of a teacher than a pupil, the latter more of a pupil than a teacher. In 1855 the monitorial system received a still further extension of its usefulness, by the appointment of a number of junior paid monitors, commencing at eleven years of age, and serving for three years; to receive 27. for the first year, 31. the second, and 47. the third. If the conduct and attainments of a junior paid monitor be satisfactory at the end of his period of service, he is then drafted into the ranks of the senior paid monitors, to serve for four years more, and receiving respectively each year, 57, 67, 87, and 107. The paid monitor is now eighteen years of age, and should he persevere in his intention to become a teacher, and exhibit the necessary qualification, he may then be appointed to a pupil teachership in a District Model School, in which he remains for twelve months or two years. In this last stage, his professional education is carried to such a degree, as to qualify him in the most superior way for the offices of teaching; and at the expiration of his stay in the Model School, he is very likely at once nominated to the charge of an Ordinary National School. After serving a year or two as teacher of a school, and becoming acquainted with the difficulties and the responsibilities of the position, he is then brought up to Dublin to receive a final course of training in the Central Institution, Marlborough Street. A monitorial system, such as I have descr.bed, can hardly fail: the country may, I think, well be proud of it; and the more that it is developed, the less likelihood is there of hearing complaint or cavil at its arrangements, or suspicion or hesitation as to the soundness and judiciousness of the principles upon which it is established.' * * ORDER CARRIED TO EXCESS. 289 master might then pass to draft 3 and teach it, while the monitor of that draft might teach tables, &c., to the class thus left vacant. The three drafts should be so near each other that, without actually interfering with each other, the master could make himself certain that the lads were working correctly. Occasionally he could take up spelling, tables, &c., and see that these subjects were going on well. Paid monitors, pupil teachers, &c. may of course be employed in higher duties. Extra hour's teaching requisite. Monitors must be taught after hours, both as a compensation for the time they gave in teaching, and as a preparation for that teaching. They should also continue to discharge the same duties in the same class for a month at least. Change of teachers is bad for any class, and a continuance in office until some result could be shown is a good means of stimulating the monitor to faithfulness in performance of his duty. 12. Order, value of. When anything is to be done, it is best to do it in an orderly manner. There are also many things in which attention to order not only is the best course to be adopted, but in which success would be impossible without it. Among these may be reckoned the teaching of a primary school. Children are naturally restless, noisy, and prone to irregularity, so that when many of them are together it would be impossible to direct their efforts to any good end, unless under a proper controlling and governing power; but by strict attention to the rules of order and discipline we can make even their natural restlessness contribute to their advancement. Order may be carried too far. Order may, however, be carried too far, and in that case it is an evil. Too many arrangements to secure precision, attention, silence, &c. clog the wheels of the machine and destroy its usefulness. The advantage of order and discipline is in facilitating the performance of the day's duties, and therefore there is an error in every system in which time is spent on the mere maintenance of order, that could be given effectively to the real business of the school. Over-drill is very often practised, and, though drill is very good, it becomes when in excess a nuisance. The following style, which I have sometimes met with, I consider exceedingly objectionable, from the unnecessary loss of time involved. A class, for instance, engaged at arithmetic in desks is about to be taught a reading lesson on the floor. The master gives the following orders : Attention. Boys look at the master. Pencils down. They place the pencils at the top of the desk. U Show slates. They turn them round, and slope them a little towards the breast. In. They place them in the grooves made in the desks for their reception. Hands up. Both hands extended upwards; to show, I suppose, the slates and pencils are laid down. Down. Hands placed on the knees. that To the left (or right) face. Turn to the side mentioned, half round. Hands up. Both hands raised again. Horizontally. Hands extended slightly above, and parallel to the desk. Down. Placed, one on the desk the boys sit in, and the other on the back of the next. This is generally done with a smart noise. Out. Pupils, supporting themselves on their hands, spring out of the forms and stand upright between the desks. Fold arms. They cross their arms on their breasts. Slow march. They move one after another to the place indicated, keeping step, and making a distinct noise with their feet. These orders may seem exaggerated, but I have met with them in most large schools, chiefly model schools, and in some smaller country schools whose masters imitate 'not wisely but too well.' But, bad as these are, the case is often even worse, for some teachers who are extreme lovers of regularity and precision give the orders over and over again until they get perfect uniformity of action from the whole class. Thus, if the slates at the order 'show,' or 'in,' are not placed where desired so simultaneously as to produce but one effect, those fastidious persons will go over the performance for many minutes, often wasting as long in this as would serve to teach an ordinary school lesson. Children so drilled must be disgusted with order. It must be a sad bore to them. They who adopt this system mistake order for the end of education; and it will be found in such schools that not only is every movement and motion made by rule, but every answer is generally by guess. In Defects of over-drilling in the example just given. the example just given, what the master wanted was (1) that the slates and pencils should be quietly and quickly put into their proper places, and (2) that the children should form round himself on the floor rapidly, but without confusion. Will any one say that these objects were best effected by the method he adopted? In my opinion he not only took the longest plan of arriving at the desired result, but he impeded the business of the entire school, for no business could possibly go on in any class so long as another class was obeying such multifarious and noisy commands. |