I. THE ORGANIZATION OF THE CONTENT OF EDUCATION. THE PROGRAM OF STUDIES. CHAPTER XXXIV. Introductory. 1. Intellectual treasures are, like material goods, objects of our desires; they are sought after, and are acquired; and so they involve, like material goods, the activity of offering, imparting, and transmitting. This transmission of intellectual treasures can be considered either as a whole, i. e., with a view as well to the social factors, which determine it to some extent, as to the social institutions, through which and by which it is carried on; or it can be considered in the individual case, i. e., in regard to the individual that seeks a share of the treasures and thereby acquires an education. In keeping with the plan outlined in the Introduction,' we shall reserve the social treatment of the subject for the part dealing with the system of education, and shall here examine how the individual, with the assistance of other individuals, acquires an education. The acquiring of education is here understood to include every intellectual acquisition that has any, whether close or remote, connection with education. Such an acquisition may be either an intellectual content or a psychical modification of the subject (the pupil). The concept of acquiring an intellectual content is synonymous with the concept of learning. Even if the two terms do not altogether overlap in meaning, since the work of learning may be determined by other than educational ends, yet this does not preclude all learning from having, at least in its results, some, though perhaps remote, connection with education. In theory, the acquiring of psychical modifications can not be separated from the acquisition of an intellectual content, for every acquired modification-acquired, in contradistinction to those modifications of the subject that are the 1 Cf. Vol. I, Introduction, IV, 8. result of physical development, of sex, age, etc. has some relation to the acquisition of a content. Thus the whole process of acquiring an education can be traced, directly or indirectly, to the work of learning. The acquiring of an education proceeds from a content, but the mind may assume different attitudes toward this content. The acquiring of knowledge implies a direct grasping of the content. But if the object is not knowledge, but a certain ability, the proximate object of the acquiring will be certain activities tending toward the respective ability; but as every ability is based on an intellectual content, this content is, in the present case, the remote object. In the case of reading, writing, figuring, singing, or drawing, the content is so closely connected with the respective ability, that the acquisition of the latter is inseparable from the acquisition of certain elements of knowledge. But even in other cases in which the object is the acquisition of bodily skill, there is always some definite purpose, some idea (therefore an intellectual content), which governs and modifies the whole process, and this intellectual element differentiates learning from the training given to the brute. Knowledge and ability agree in this that they are the direct objects of learning. Other phases of education, however, are not the direct results of learning. For instance, the world-view, taste, tact, mental disposition, etc., can not be learned; but learning is, nevertheless, an important factor in acquiring and subsequently modifying them. Learning binds itself more or less strictly to its content, and this circumstance offers another opportunity for an important differentiation. A certain kind of education may be acquired from sense-perception, observation, experience, reading, social intercourse; and these factors either precede, or accompany, or supplement the learning proper, i. e., the learning of the schools. We may call this process of learning a free acquiring of education (freier Bildungserwerb).' But free is here used not in the sense of voluntary-for the regular studies of the schools can and should also be pursued voluntarily-but rather in the free attitude of the pupil toward the content, of which he assimilates only certain elements, whereas the process of education proper binds itself to the content, which it would assimilate as completely 1 The term informal expresses better than the term free the irregular nature of this kind of education; hence we shall designate it hereafter as informal education. (Tr.) and thoroughly as possible. Though the process of education proper does not include all educative forces, it may still be employed to designate the whole field of inquiry, as it is the fixed centre of all related activities. 2. To acquire an education, the individual needs, indeed, the co-operation of others; yet the chief requisite is that he be self-active. This co-operation is not seen in one's own senseperceptions, observations, and experiences; but, though not seen, it is still there, for even in these activities there is a potent influence from our environment, and it is the external influence that first enables the child to be self-active. In informal education this co-operation is largely unintentional and not infrequently even unconscious. In the work of education proper the cooperation of others is strongest and most thorough. Here the co-operation may be personal, as of the teacher, or impersonal, as that of the author of the textbook or of the organizer of the school. The concept of teaching is closely related to these different functions. The following definition of teaching will serve for the purpose of comparing the teaching process with kindred activities: to teach is to present an intellectual content for the purpose of having others assimilate it. The teacher, in common with the poet, the writer, and the orator, has the task of presentation; but the end he has in view differentiates his work from that of the others. The poet presents to elevate, to please, to entertain, etc.-his primary aim is, therefore, to produce certain effects in the reader; but if he has, besides his primary aim, a further object in view, namely to have the matter presented in his poetry assimilated by the reader, he is both poet and teacher. Analogously, the same is true of all writers. The orator strives by means of the presentation of his subject-matter to convince, please, or persuade his audience; he regards his subject-matter primarily as a means to an end. But if he strives at the same time to have his audience make the matter of his discourse their own intellectual possession, he is a didactic orator; and to this class all preachers belong. The primary object of the teacher's endeavors must be the content and its assimilation by the pupils. This primary aim does not relieve him from the obligation of striving to produce in his pupils certain mental states and modifications, but the latter must always be regarded as remote effects. But examined more closely, the above definition of teaching appears inadequate, because too narrow, and that for two |