Education

An emperor in the 5th century ordered the establishment of a “School of Occult Studies” along with the more commonly accepted schools of Confucian learning. It was devoted to the study of Buddhism and Daoism and occult subjects that transcended the practical affairs of government and society. Such schools were often carried on by the private effort of scholars who served as tutors for interested followers.

The schools of Tang were well organized and systematized. There were schools under the central government, others under local management, and private schools of different kinds. Public schools were maintained in each prefecture, district, town, and village. In the capital were “colleges” of mathematics, law, and calligraphy, as well as those for classical study. There was also a medical school.

Semiprivate schools formed by famous scholars gave lectures and tutelage to students numbering in the hundreds. Students from Korea and Japan came to study in China and took back the lunar calendar and the Buddhist sects, as well as the examination system and the Confucian theories of government and social life. Chinese culture also penetrated Indochina.

The examination system was at this time given the form that remained essentially unchanged until the 20th century. Examinations were held on different levels, and for each a corresponding academic degree was specified. Interestingly, there was provision for three degrees, not unlike the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctor’s degrees of modern times. The first degree was the xiucai (“cultivated talent”), the second the mingjing (“understanding the classics”), and the third the jinshi (“advanced scholar”). The name of the second degree was in later periods changed to juren (“recommended man”). An academy of scholars later known as the Hanlin Academy was established for select scholars whom the emperor could call upon for advice and expert opinion on various subjects. Membership in this institution became the highest honour that could be conferred upon those who passed the jinshi degree with distinction. To be appointed a Hanlin scholar was to be recognized as one of the top scholars of the land. Among the services that they rendered were the administration and supervision of examinations and the explanation of difficult texts in literature, classics, and philosophy.

Examinations were given for students of medicine and for military degrees. The study of medicine included acupuncture and massage, as well as the treatment of general diseases of the body and those of eye, ear, throat, and teeth. The Song (960–1279)

The Song was another dynasty of cultural brilliance. Landscape painting approached perfection, and cultural achievement was stimulated by the invention of movable type (first made of earthenware, then of wood and metal). This advance from the older method of block printing led to the multiplication of books; the printing of a complete set of the classics was a boon to literary studies in schools.

The rulers of Song were receptive to new ideas and innovative policies. The outstanding innovator of the dynasty was Wang Anshi, prime minister from 1068 to 1076. He introduced a comprehensive program of reform that included important changes in education; more emphasis was subsequently placed on the study of current problems and political economy.

Wang’s reforms met with opposition from conservatives. The controversy was only a phase of a deeper and more far-reaching intellectual debate that made the philosophical contributions of the Song scholars as significant as those of the Hundred Schools in the Zhou dynasty over a millennium earlier. Confucianism and the dominant mode of Chinese thinking had been subject to the challenge of ideas from legalism, Daoism, and Buddhism, and, despite the resistance of conservatives, the traditional views had to be modified. Outstanding Confucian scholars of conservative bent argued vigorously with aggressive proponents of new concepts of man, of knowledge, and of the universe. The result was Neo-Confucianism, or what some prefer to call rational philosophy. The most eminent Neo-Confucianist was Zhu Xi, a Confucian scholar who had studied Daoism and Buddhism. His genius lay in his ability to synthesize ideas from a fresh point of view. Song scholars distinguished themselves in other fields, too. Sima Guang’s Zizhi tongjian (“Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government”) was a history of China from the 5th century bce to the 10th century ce. The result of 20 years of painstaking research, it consisted of 1,000 chapters prepared under imperial direction. A volume on architecture was produced that is still used today as a basic reference work, and a treatise on botany contained the most ancient record of varieties of citrus fruits then known in China. No less worthy of mention is an encyclopaedia titled Taiping yulan.

The general pattern of the school system remained essentially the same, with provision for lower schools, higher schools, and technical schools, but there was a broadening of the curriculum. A noteworthy development was the rise of a semiprivate institution known as the shuyuan, or academy. With financial support coming from both state grants and private contributions, these academies were managed by noted scholars of the day and attracted many students and lecturers. Often located in mountain retreats or in the woods, they symbolized the influence of Daoism and Buddhism and a desire to pursue quiet study far away from possible government interference. The Mongol period (1206–1368)

The Mongols were ferocious fighters but inept administrators. Distrustful of the Chinese, they enlisted the services of many nationalities and employed non-Chinese aliens. To facilitate the employment of these aliens, the civil service examinations were suspended for a number of years. Later, when a modified form of examinations was in effect, there were special examinations for Mongol candidates to make sure of their admission into high offices.

The Mongols despised the Chinese and placed many limitations on them. Consequently, an aftermath of Mongol rule was a strong antiforeign reaction on the part of the Chinese, accompanied by an overanxious desire to preserve the Chinese heritage.

Despite the setback in Chinese culture under Mongol rule, the period was not devoid of positive cultural development. The increase in foreign contacts as a result of travel to and from China brought new ideas and new knowledge of other lands and other peoples. Mathematics and medicine were further influenced by new ideas from abroad. The classics were translated into the Mongol language, and the Mongol language was taught in schools.

Private schools and the academies of the Song dynasty became more popular. As a result of a decrease in opportunities for government appointment, scholars withdrew into the provinces for study and tutoring. Relieved of the pressure of preparing for the examinations, they applied their talents to the less formal but more popular arts and literary forms, including the drama and the novel. Instead of the classical form, they used the vernacular, or the spoken, language. The significance of this development was not evident until the 20th century, when a “literary revolution” popularized the vernacular tongue. The Ming period (1368–1644)

The Ming dynasty restored Chinese rule. Ming was famous for its ceramics and architecture. There were excellent painters too, but they were at best the disciples of the Tang and Song masters. The outstanding intellectual contribution of the period was the novel, whose development was spurred by increases in literacy and in the demand for reading materials. Ming novels are today recognized as masterpieces of popular vernacular literature. Also of note was the compilation of Pencao kangmu (“Great Pharmacopoeia”), a valuable volume on herbs and medicine that was the fruit of 26 years of labour.

Of considerable scholarly and educational importance was the Yongle dadian (“The Great Canon of the Yongle Era”), which marked a high point in the Chinese encyclopaedic movement. It was a gigantic work resulting from the painstaking efforts of 2,000 scholars over a period of five years. It ran into more than 11,000 volumes, too costly to print, and only two extra copies were made.

The examination system remained basically the same. In the early period of the dynasty, the schools were systematized and regularized. In the latter part of the dynasty, however, the increasing importance of the examination system relegated the schools to a secondary position. The decline of the state-supported schools stimulated the further growth of private education. The Manchu period (1644–1911/12)

Except for two capable emperors, who ruled for a span of 135 years at the beginning, the Manchu dynasty was weak and undistinguished. Under Emperors Kangxi and Qianlong, learning flourished, but there was little originality. The alien Manchu rulers concentrated on the preservation of what seemed best for stability and the maintenance of the status quo. They wanted new editions of classical and literary works, not creative contributions to scholarship.

Distrust of the Chinese by the Manchus and a feeling of insecurity caused the conquerors to erect barriers between themselves and the Chinese. The discriminatory policy was expressed in the administration of the examinations. To assure the appointment of Manchus to government posts, equal quotas were set aside for the Manchus and the Chinese, although the former constituted only about 3 percent of the population. The Chinese thus faced the keenest competition in the examinations, and those who passed tended to be brilliant intellects, whereas the Manchus could be assured of success without great effort.

Schools were encouraged and regulated during the early period of the dynasty. The public school system consisted of schools for nobles, national schools, and provincial schools. Separate schools were maintained for the Manchus, and for their benefit Chinese books were translated into the Manchu language. Village and charitable schools were supported by public funds, but they were neglected in later years so that, by the end of the dynasty, private schools and tutoring had overshadowed them.

At the threshold of the modern era, China had sunk into political weakness and intellectual stagnation. The creativity and originality that had brightened previous periods of history were now absent. Examinations dominated the educational scene, and the content of the examinations was largely literary and classical. Daoism and Buddhism had lost their intellectual vigour, and Confucianism became the unchallenged model of scholarship.

Much could be said for the Chinese examination system at its best. It was instrumental in establishing an intellectual aristocracy whereby the nation could be sure of a cultural unity by entrusting government to scholars reared in a common tradition, nurtured in a common cultural heritage, and dedicated to common ideals of political and social life. It established a tradition of government by civilians and by scholars. It made the scholars the most highly esteemed people of the land. The examinations provided an open road to fame and position. Chinese society was not without classes, but there was a high degree of social mobility, and education provided the opportunity for raising one’s position and status. There were no rigid prerequisites and no age limits for taking the examinations. Selection was rigorous, but the examinations were on the whole administered with fairness. The names of the candidates did not appear on the examination papers, and the candidates were not permitted to have any outside contacts while writing them.

Nevertheless, the system had serious drawbacks. The content of the examinations became more and more limited in scope. The Confucianist classics constituted the core, and a narrow and rigid interpretation prevailed. In early times, Chinese education was broad and liberal, but by the 19th century art, music, and science had been dropped on the wayside; even arithmetic was not accorded the same importance as reading and writing. Modern science and technology were completely neglected.

After alien rule by the Mongols, the Chinese were obsessed with restoring their heritage; they avoided deviating from established forms and views. This conservatism was accentuated under Manchu rule and resulted in sterility and stagnation. The creativity and original spirit of classical education was lost. The narrow curriculum was far removed from the pressing problems and changing needs of the 19th century. Theodore Hsi-en Chen Japan The ancient period to the 12th century

The Japanese nation seems to have formed a unified ancient state in the 4th century ce. Society at that time was composed of shizoku, or clans, each of which served the chōtei (“the imperial court”) with its specialized skill or vocation. People sustained themselves by engaging in agriculture, hunting, and fishing, and the chief problem of education was how to convey the knowledge of these activities and provide instruction in the skills useful for these occupations.

The influence of the civilizations of China and India had a profound effect on both the spiritual life and the education of the Japanese. Toward the 6th century the assimilation of Chinese civilization became more and more rapid, particularly as a result of the spread of Confucianism. Buddhism was also an important intellectual and spiritual influence. Originating in India and then spreading to China, Buddhism was transmitted to Japan through the Korean peninsula in the mid-6th century.

A monarchic state system with an emperor as its head was established following a coup d’état in 645. The subsequent Taika (Great Reform) era saw the beginning of many new institutions, most of which were primarily imitations of institutions of the Tang dynasty of China. In the field of education, a daigakuryō, or college house, was established in the capital, and kokugaku, or provincial schools, were built in the provinces. Their chief aim was to train government officials. The early curriculum was almost identical to that of the Tang dynasty of China but by the 8th and 9th centuries had been modified considerably to meet internal conditions, particularly as regarded the educational needs of the nobility.

Through the Nara and the Heian eras (8th–12th century), the nobility (kuge) constituted the ruling class, and learning and culture were the concern primarily of the kuge and the Buddhist monks. The kuge lived an artistic life, so that the emphasis of education came to be placed on poetry, music, and calligraphy. Teaching in the daigakuryō gradually shifted in emphasis from Confucianism to literature, since the kuge set a higher value on artistic refinement than on more spiritual endeavours. Apart from the daigakuryō, other institutions were established in which families of influential clans lodged and developed their intellectual lives. The feudal period (1192–1867) Education of the warriors

Toward the mid-12th century, political power passed from the nobility to the buke, or warrior, class. The ensuing feudal period in Japan dates from the year 1192 (the establishment of the Kamakura shogunate) to 1867 (the decline of the Tokugawa shogunate).

The warrior’s way of life was quite unlike that of the nobility, and the aims and content of education in the warrior’s society inevitably differed. The warrior constantly had to practice military arts, hardening his body and training his will. Education was based on military training, and a culture characteristic of warriors began to flourish. Some emphasis, though, was placed on spiritual instruction. The warrior society, founded on firm master–servant relations and centring on the philosophy of Japanese family structure, set the highest value on family reputation and on genealogies. Furthermore, because the military arts proved insufficient to enable warriors to grasp political power and thereby maintain their ruling position, there arose a philosophy of bumbu-kembi, which asserted the desirability of being proficient in both literary and military arts. Thus, the children of warriors attended temples and rigorously trained their minds and wills. Reading and writing were the main subjects.

Temples were the centres of culture and learning and can be said to have been equivalent to universities, in that they provided a meeting place for scholars and students. Education in the temple, originally aimed at instructing novitiates, gradually changed its character, eventually providing education for children not destined to be monks. Thus, the temples functioned as institutions of primary education. Education in the Tokugawa era

In 1603 a shogunate was established by a warrior, Tokugawa Ieyasu, in the city of Edo (present Tokyo). The period thence to the year 1867—the Tokugawa, or Edo, era—constitutes the later feudal period in Japan. This era, though also dominated by warriors, differed from former ones in that internal disturbances finally ended and long-enduring peace ensued. There emerged a merchant class that developed a flourishing commoner’s culture. Schools for commoners thus were established.

Representative of such schools were the terakoya (temple schools), deriving from the earlier education in the temple. As time passed, some terakoya used parts of private homes as classrooms. Designed to be one of the private schools, or shijuku, the terakoya developed rapidly in the latter half of the Tokugawa era, flourishing in most towns and villages. Toward the end of the era they assumed the characteristics of the modern primary school, with emphasis on reading, writing, and arithmetic. Other shijuku—emphasizing Chinese, Dutch, and national studies, as well as practical arts—contributed to the diversification of learning and permitted students with different class and geographic backgrounds to pursue learning under the guidance of the same teacher. Their curricula were free from official control.

The shogunate established schools to promote Confucianism, which provided the moral training for upper-class samurai that was essential for maintaining the ideology of the feudal regime. Han, or feudal domains, following the same policy, built hankō, or domain schools, in their castle towns for the education of their own retainers.

The officially run schools for the samurai were at the apex of the educational system in the Tokugawa era. The Confucian Academy, which was known as the Shōheikō and was administered directly by the shogunate, became a model for hankō throughout Japan. The hankō gradually spread after about 1750, so that by the end of the era they numbered over 200.

The curriculum in the hankō consisted chiefly of kangaku (the study of books written in Chinese) and, above all, of Confucianism. Classics of Confucianism, historical works, and anthologies of Chinese poems were used as textbooks. Brush writing, kokugaku (study of thought originating in Japan), and medicine were also included. Later, in the last days of the shogunate, yōgaku, or Western learning, including Western medicine, was added in several institutions.

Both hankō for samurai and terakoya for commoners were the typical schools after the middle of the Tokugawa era. Also to be found, however, were gōgaku, or provincial schools, for samurai as well as commoners. They were founded at places of strategic importance by the feudal domain.

The various shijuku became centres of interaction among students from different domains when such close contact among residents of different areas was prohibited. They served as centres of learning and dialogue for many of those who later constituted the political leadership responsible for the Meiji Restoration of 1868. Effect of early Western contacts

The Europeans who first arrived in Japan were the Portuguese, in 1543. In 1549 the Jesuit Francis Xavier visited Japan and, for the first time, the propagation of Christianity began. Many missionaries began to arrive, Christian schools were built, and European civilization was actively introduced.

In 1633 the shogunate, in apprehension of further Christian infiltration of Japan, banned foreign travel and prohibited the return of overseas Japanese. Further, in 1639, the shogunate banned visits by Europeans. This was the so-called sakoku, or period of national isolation. From that time on, Christianity was strictly forbidden, and international trade was conducted with only the Chinese and the Dutch. Because contact with Europeans was restricted to the Dutch, Western studies developed as rangaku, or learning through the Dutch language.

It is noteworthy that the Tokugawa period laid the foundation of modern Japanese learning. As a result of the development of hankō and terakoya, Japanese culture and education had developed to such an extent that Japan was able to absorb Western influences and attain modernization at a remarkably rapid pace after the Meiji Restoration. Arata Naka Nobuo Shimahara European Renaissance and Reformation The channels of development in Renaissance education The Muslim influence

Western civilization was profoundly influenced by the rapid rise and expansion of Islam from the 7th until the 15th century. By 732 ce, 100 years after the death of Muhammad, Islam had expanded from western Asia throughout all of northern Africa, across the Strait of Gibraltar into Spain, and into France, reaching Tours, halfway from the Pyrenees to Paris. Muslim Spain rapidly became one of the most advanced civilizations of the period, where much of the learning of the past—Oriental, Greek, and Roman—was preserved and further developed. In particular, Greek and Latin scholarship was collected in great libraries in the splendid cities of Córdoba, Sevilla (Seville), Granada, and Toledo, which became major centres of advanced scholarship, especially in the practical arts of medicine and architecture.

Inevitably, scholarship in the adjacent Frankish—and subsequent French—kingdom was influenced, leading to a revitalization of western Christian scholarship, which had long been dormant as a result of the barbarian migrations. The doctrines of Aristotle, which had been assiduously cultivated by the Muslims, were especially influential for their emphasis on the role of reason in human affairs and on the importance of the study of humankind in the present, as distinct from the earlier Christian preoccupation with the cultivation of faith as essential for the future life. Thus, Muslim learning helped to usher in the new phase in education known as humanism, which first took definite form in the 12th century. The secular influence

The word humanism comes from studia humanitatis (“studies of humanity”). Toward the end of the Middle Ages, there was a renewed interest in those studies that stressed the importance of man, his faculties, affairs, worldly aspirations, and well-being. The primacy of theology and otherworldliness was over. The reductio artium ad theologiam (freely, “reducing everything to theological argument”) was rejected since it no longer expressed the reality of the new situation that was developing in Europe, particularly in Italy. Society had been profoundly transformed, commerce had expanded, and life in the cities had evolved. Economic and political power, previously in the hands of the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the feudal lords, was beginning to be taken over by the city burghers. Use of the vernacular languages was becoming widespread. The new society needed another kind of education and different educational structures; the burghers required new instruments with which to express themselves and found the old medieval universities inadequate.

The educational institutions of humanism had their origin in the schools set up in the free cities in the late 13th and the 14th centuries—schools designed to answer to the needs of the new urban population that was beginning to have greater economic importance in society. The pedagogical thought of the humanists took these transformations of society into account and worked out new theories that often went back to the Classical Greek and Latin traditions; it was not, however, a servile imitation of the pedagogical thought and institutions of the Classical world.

The Renaissance of the Classical world and the educational movements it gave rise to were variously expressed in different parts of Europe and at various times from the 14th to the 17th century; there was a connecting thread, but there were also many differences. What the citizens of the Florentine republic needed was different from what was required by princes in the Renaissance courts of Italy or in other parts of Europe. Common to both, however, was the rejection of the medieval tradition that did not belong in the new society they were creating. Yet the search for a new methodology and a new relation with the ancient world was bitterly opposed by the traditionalists, who did not want renewal that would bring about a profound transformation of society; and, in fact, the educational revolution did not completely abolish existing traditions. The humanists, for example, were not concerned with extending education to the masses but turned their attention to the sons of princes and rich burghers.

The humanists had the important and original conception that education was neither completed at school nor limited to the years of one’s youth but that it was a continuous process making use of varied instruments: companionship, games, and pleasure were part of education. Rather than suggesting new themes, they wanted to discover the method by which the ancient texts should be studied. For them, knowledge of the Classical languages meant the possibility of penetrating the thought of the past; grammar and rhetoric were being transformed into philological studies not for the sake of pedantic research but in order to acquire a new historical and critical consciousness. They reconstructed the past in order better to understand themselves and their own time. The humanistic tradition in Italy Early influences

One of the most influential of early humanists was Manuel Chrysoloras, who came to Florence from Constantinople in 1396. He introduced the study of Greek and, among other things, translated Plato’s Republic into Latin, which were important steps in the development of the humanistic movement.

Inspired by the ancient Athenian schools, the Platonic Academy established in Florence in the second half of the 15th century became a centre of learning and diffusion of Christian Platonism, a philosophy that conceived of all forms as the creative thoughts of God and that inspired considerable artistic innovation and creativity. Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola were two of the most original of the scholars who taught there. Florence was the first city to have such a centre, but Rome and Naples soon had similar academies, and Padua and Venice also became centres of culture.

A famous early humanist and professor of rhetoric at Padua was Pietro Paolo Vergerio (1370–1444). He wrote the first significant exclusively pedagogical treatise, De ingenuis moribus et liberalibus studiis (“On the Manners of a Gentleman and on Liberal Studies”), which—though not presenting any new techniques—did set out the fundamental principles by which education should be guided. He gave pedagogical expression to the ideal of harmony, or equilibrium, found in all aspects of humanism, and underlined the importance of the education of the body as well as of the spirit. The liberal arts were emphasized (“liberal” because of the liberation they reputedly brought). The program outlined by Vergerio focused upon eloquence, history, and philosophy but also included the sciences (mathematics, astronomy, and natural science) as well as medicine, law, metaphysics, and theology. The later subjects were not studied in depth; humanism was by its nature against encyclopaedism, but it brought out the relations between the disciplines and enabled students to know many subjects before they decided in which to specialize. Learning was not to be exclusively from books, and emphasis was placed on the advantages of preparing for social life by study and discussion in common. Vergerio felt that education should not be used as a means of entering the lucrative professions; medicine and law, especially, were looked on with suspicion if one’s aim in studying them was merely that of gaining material advantages. Emergence of the new gymnasium

As a result of the renewed emphasis on Greek studies, early in the 15th century a definite sequence of institutions emerged. The gymnasium was the principal school for young boys and was preparatory to further liberal studies in the major nonuniversity institution of higher learning, the academy. Both terms, gymnasium and academy, were Classical revivals, but their programs were markedly different from those of ancient Greece. The gymnasiums appeared in ducal courts; they were created for the liberal education of privileged boys and as the first stage of the studia humanitatis. Outstanding among these early gymnasiums was the school conducted by Gasparino da Barzizza in Padua from 1408 to 1421, which was considered a model for later institutions, and more particularly the gymnasium of Guarino Veronese (1374–1460) and that of his contemporary Vittorino da Feltre (1378–1446).

Guarino had first established a school in 1415 in Venice, where he was joined by Vittorino. He subsequently moved to Ferrara where, from 1429 to 1436, he assumed responsibility for the humanist education of the young son of Nicolò d’Este, the lord of Ferrara. Guarino wrote no treatises, but something may be learned about his work and methods from his large correspondence and from De ordine docendi et studendi (1485; “On the Order for Teaching and Studying”), written by his son Battista. Guarino organized his students’ courses into three stages: the elementary level, at which reading and pronunciation were primarily taught, followed by the grammatical level, and finally the highest level, concentrating on rhetoric. The education given in his schools was perhaps the best example of the humanistic ideals, since it underlined the importance of literary studies together with a harmonious development of body and spirit, to the exclusion of any utilitarian purpose.

Vittorino was a disciple of both Barzizza and Guarino. He conducted boarding schools at Padua and Venice and, most importantly, from 1423 to 1446 one at Mantua, where he had been invited by the reigning lord, Gianfrancesco Gonzaga. This last school, known as La Giocosa (literally, “The Jocose, or Joyful”), soon became famous. At La Giocosa only those who had both talent and a modest disposition were accepted; wealth was neither necessary nor sufficient to gain admission. In fact, the school was one of the few efforts made during this period to extend education to a wider public. The program of study at La Giocosa was perhaps closer to the medieval tradition than that of the other boarding schools but, in any case, the spirit was different. Studies were stimulating; mathematics was taught pleasantly—Vittorino going back to very ancient traditions of practicing mathematics with games. After having studied the seven arts of the trivium (grammar, rhetoric, and logic) and the quadrivium (geometry, arithmetic, harmonics, and astronomy), students completed the cycle by a study of philosophy and then, having mastered this discipline, could go on to higher studies leading to such professions as medicine, law, philosophy, and theology. Italian was completely ignored at Vittorino’s school; all instruction was given in Latin, the study of which, along with Greek, reached a high level of excellence. Great importance was given to recreation and physical education; his concern for the health of his students did not come to an end with the scholastic year, for during the summers, when the cities became unhealthy, he would arrange for his students to go to Lake Garda or to the hills outside Verona.

Vittorino’s educational philosophy was inspired by a profound religious faith and moral integrity, which contrasted with the general relaxation of standards within the church itself; but, if he was severe with himself, he was very open and tolerant with his pupils. The school continued only for a while after his death because, more than in the case of the other schools, La Giocosa was identified with the personality of the founder. Nonscholastic traditions

Leon Battista Alberti, one of the most intelligent and original architects of the 15th century, also dedicated a treatise, Della famiglia (1435–44; “On the Family”), to methods of education. Alberti felt that the natural place for education was the home and not scholastic institutions. The language in which he wrote was Italian, education being in his view so important in social life that he felt that discussion of it should not be limited to scholars. He stressed the importance of the father in the educational process.

Baldassare Castiglione expressed the transition of humanism from the city to the Renaissance court. He himself was in the service of some of the most splendid princes, the Gonzagas at Mantua and the Montefeltros at Urbino. Just as in the 15th century the humanists had been concerned with the education of the city burgher, so in the 16th century they turned their attention to the education of the prince and of those who surrounded him. Il cortegiano (“The Courtier”) was published in 1528, and within a few years it had been translated into Latin and all the major European languages. The courtier was to be the faithful collaborator of the prince. He had to be beautiful, strong, and agile; he had to know how to fight, play, dance, and make love. But this was not all, since great importance was also attached to the study of the classics and the practice of poetry and oratory; the courtier had to be able to write in rhyme and in prose and have perfect command of the vernacular, which was becoming important in political affairs; but above all he had to have skill at arms.

The courtier described by Castiglione, though in the service of necessarily devious princes, had to know how to keep his dignity and his virtue. Castiglione’s moral standards, reflecting the spiritual climate at Urbino, completely disappeared, however, in Giovanni della Casa’s work, Galateo (1551–54), in which considerations of etiquette were placed above all others; the values of humanism no longer existed, and all that was left was ceremonial. The humanistic tradition of northern and western Europe

The economic and social conditions behind the intellectual and cultural revolution of humanism in Italy were also present, though in different forms, in other parts of Europe. In some states—chiefly England, France, and Spain—humanism and educational reforms developed around the courts, where political power was being concentrated. In others, such as the Netherlands, they were brought about by the city burghers, whose power, both economic and political, was increasing. The educational reforms that the humanists brought about in northern and western Europe developed slowly, but on the whole they were lasting, since they affected a greater number of people than was the case in Italy, where they tended to be restricted to a narrow circle of families. There were close relations between Italian and other European educational humanists, as there were among English, Dutch, French, and German humanists, and, thus, national differences were not so significant. Dutch humanism

In the Netherlands the ground for educational reform had already been prepared in the 14th century by the Brethren of the Common Life, a group founded by Gerhard Groote to bring together laymen and religious men. Although their work was not originally in the field of education, education started when they set up hostels for students and exercised some moral direction over these students. This work was extended, and the Brethren eventually set up schools, first at Deventer and then in other cities. Some of the most important humanists of the Netherlands and Germany attended their schools—including, among others, Erasmus.

The school at Deventer came to have great prestige under Alexander Hegius, rector from 1465 to 1498 and author of a polemic treatise, De utilitate Graeci (“On the Usefulness of Greek”)—underlining the importance of studying Greek—and of De scientia (“On Knowledge”) and De moribus (“On Manners”). Hegius had great talent as an organizer and succeeded not only in attracting some of the best scholars of the time but also in giving the school an efficient structure that became a model for many schools in the north.

Desiderius Erasmus was a great scholar and educator, and his influence was felt all over Europe. His strong personality earned him the respect and sympathy of humanists who saw in him, as in few others, the symbol of their ideals and values. Unfortunately, his proposals for reform and greater tolerance were not always accepted in the tortured Europe of the 16th century.

Erasmus was a prolific writer, and part of his work was concerned with education: De ratione studii (1511; “On the Right Method of Study”), De civilitate morum puerilium (1526; “On the Politeness of Children’s Manners”), Ciceronianus (1528), De pueris statim ac liberaliter instituendis (1529; “On the Liberal Education of Boys from the Beginning”). His educational program was original in many ways but in no sense democratic. The masses could not partake in higher education, since their aim was that of gaining skill in an occupation. He felt that religious instruction should be made available to all but that Classical literary studies—the most important of all studies—were for a minority.

Study of ancient languages and intelligent comprehension of texts formed the basis of Erasmus’ system of education; he took a stand against the formalism and dogmatism that were already creeping into the humanist movement. Erasmus was in favour of acquiring a good general liberal arts education until the age of 18, being convinced that this would be a preparation for any form of further study. His great love for the Classical languages, however, made him neglect the vernacular; he was not interested in local traditions; and he attributed very little importance to science, which he did not think necessary for a cultured man. He was against instruction being imposed without the participation of the student. His optimism about the nature of man and the possibilities of molding him made Erasmus feel that, if adequately educated, any man could learn any discipline. He further sought renewal of the schools and better training for teachers, which he felt should be a public obligation, certainly no less important than military defense. Many of Erasmus’ themes were elaborated a century later by John Amos Comenius and form the basis of modern education, in particular the effort to understand the child psychologically and to consider education as a process that starts before the school experience and continues beyond it. Juan Luis Vives

Strongly influenced by Erasmus was Juan Luis Vives, who, though of Spanish origin, spent his life in various parts of Europe—Paris, Louvain, Oxford, London, Bruges. His most significant writings were De institutione foeminae Christianae (1523; “On the Education of a Christian Woman”), De ratione studii puerilis (“On the Right Method of Instruction for Children”), De subventione pauperum (1526; “On Aid for the Poor”), and De tradendis disciplinis (1531; “On the Subjects of Study”).

Juan Luis Vives, engraving by Jean-Jacques Boissard from Icones quinquaginta, 1597Courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum; photograph, J.R. Freeman & Co. Ltd.

Not only was his vision of the organic unity of pedagogy new, but he was the first of the humanists to emphasize the importance of popular education. He felt that it was the responsibility of the city to provide instruction for the poor and that the craft and merchant guilds had an important contribution to make to education. Unlike other humanists, moreover, he did not despise the utilitarian aspects of education but, on the contrary, suggested that his pupils should visit shops and workshops and go out into the country to learn something of real life. Just as he felt that education should not be limited to a single social class, so he felt that there should be no exclusion of women, though perhaps they required a different kind of education because of their different functions in life.

Vives worked out a plan to take account of both educational structures and teacher training. In emphasizing the social function of education, he was against schools being run for profit and believed teachers should be prepared not only in their specific fields but also in psychology, so as to understand the child. He also suggested that teachers should meet four times a year to examine together the intellectual capacities of each one of their pupils so that suitable programs of study could be arranged for them. Vives considered that, in teaching, games had psychological value. He favoured use of the vernacular for the first stage of education; but, as a humanist, he had a passion for Latin and felt that there was no substitute for Latin as a universal language. Classical studies were to be completed by investigation of the modern world, in particular its geography, the horizons having been greatly enlarged by recent discoveries. Vives’s method was an inductive one, based not on metaphysical theories but on experiment and exercise. The early English humanists

At the end of the 15th century, there was a flowering in England of both humanistic studies and educational institutions, enabling a rapid transition from the medieval tradition to the Renaissance. The English humanists prepared excellent texts for studying the Classical languages, and they started a new type of grammar school, long to be a model. Most important were John Colet and Thomas More. Thomas Linacre, author of De emendata structura Latini sermonis libri sex (1524; “Six Books on the Flawless Structure of the Latin Language”), should also be remembered, as well as William Lily, author of a Latin syntax, Absolutissimus de octo orationis partium constructione libellus (1515; “Comprehensive Study of the Construction of the Eight Parts of Speech”), and director of St. Paul’s School in London from 1512 to 1522.

Colet has an important place in English education. As dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral, he founded St. Paul’s School, thus favouring the introduction of humanism in England and the transformation of the old ecclesiastical medieval schools. He had traveled a great deal in France and Italy and wanted to bring to his country the humanistic culture that had so fascinated him. In 1510 he started a “grammar school,” open to about 150 scholars who had an aptitude for study and had completed elementary school. Colet’s personality and energy made his school a lively centre of English humanism.

More was both a distinguished humanist and a statesman. He was interested in pedagogy, to which he dedicated part of his work Utopia (1516). In his Utopia, More saw the connection between educational, social, and political problems and the influence that society therefore has on education. English humanists such as More were engaged in a bitter battle because medieval tradition was deeply rooted; they were fierce opponents of a group called the Trojans, who opposed the Greek language and all that the new instruction of that language represented. Education in the Reformation and Counter-Reformation

New political and social systems developed in those European countries that, for various reasons and at different times, broke away from the Roman Catholic Church in the 16th century. The religious reforms brought about by Martin Luther, John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli, and the ruling family of England were both cause and effect of these transformations. Characteristic of all these countries was the importance of the state in the organization of the educational system.

Martin Luther, oil on panel by Lucas Cranach, 1529; in the Uffizi, Florence.Photos.com/Thinkstock

The Reformation and European humanism influenced one another. There were analogies between the flowering of the Classical world in the European courts and the reawakening of religious interests; there were similarities in the critical position adopted toward Aristotelianism and in the interest shown toward the study of Classical languages, such as Greek and Hebrew. The presuppositions behind the two movements—humanism and Reformation—were different, however, and sooner or later a clash was inevitable. The most spectacular of these clashes was between Erasmus and Luther, despite the fact that for a long time they had respected each other. It was important for Erasmus and for the humanists to encourage the development of a world of writers and artists who, free from material preoccupations, could devote their time to literary and artistic pursuits. For the reformers, the situation was different: they did not aim to educate a small minority; unlike Erasmus, Luther had to keep the masses in mind, for they had contributed to the success of the religious reforms. Luther and the German Reformation

Luther specifically wished his humble social origins to be considered a title of nobility. He wanted to create educational institutions that would be open to the sons of peasants and miners, though this did not mean giving them political representation. (The German princes were glad to promote the Reformation on condition that it would not diminish but would, on the contrary, increase their political power.) Luther realized that an educational system open to the masses would have to be public and financed by citizens’ councils. His educational programs were set out in An die Radsherrn aller Stedte deütsches Lands: Das sie christliche Schulen affrichten und hallten sollen (1524; “Letter to the Mayors and Aldermen of All the Cities in Behalf of Christian Schools”), in Dass man Kinder zur Schulen halten solle (1530; “Discourse on the Duty of Sending Children to School”), and in various letters to German princes.

Although Luther advocated the study of Classical languages, he believed that the primary purpose of such an education—in marked distinction to the aims of the humanists—was to promote piety through the reading of the Scriptures in their pure form. “Neglect of education,” Luther wrote in a letter to Jacob Strauss in 1524, “will bring the greatest ruin to the Gospel.” Accordingly, Luther argued that education must be extended to all children—girls as well as boys—and not simply to a leisured minority as in Renaissance Italy. Even those children who had to work for their parents in trade or in the fields should be enabled, if only for a few hours a day, to attend local, city-maintained schools in order to promote their reading skills and, hence, piety. Out of the Lutheran argument emerged a new educational concept, the pietas litterata: literacy to promote piety.

On the premise that a new class of cultivated men must be developed to substitute for the dispossessed monks and priests, new schools, whose upkeep was the responsibility of the princes and the cities, were soon organized along the lines suggested by Luther. In 1543 Maurice of Saxony founded three schools open to the public, supported by estates from the dissolved monasteries. It was more difficult to set up the city schools, for which there was no tradition. In towns and villages of northern Germany, Johannes Bugenhagen (1485–1558) set up the earliest schools to teach religion and reading and writing in German, but it was not until 1559 that the public ordinances of Württemberg made explicit reference to German schools in the villages. This example was shortly followed in Saxony.

Whereas Luther combined his interest in education with his work as a religious reformer and politician, another reformer, Philipp Melanchthon (1497–1560), concentrated almost entirely on education, creating a new educational system and in particular setting up a secondary-school system. He taught for many years at the University of Wittenberg, which became one of the centres of theological studies in Reformation Germany; and his experience there enabled him to reorganize the old universities and set up new ones, such as Marburg, Königsberg, and Jena. His ideas about secondary education were put into practice in the schools he founded at Eisleben. Scholastic work was divided into three stages, access to each successive stage depending on the ability of the student to master the previous course work; this was a new concept (foretelling the later “grading system”), unknown in the traditional scholastic system. He was convinced that too many subjects should not be imposed on the student. He felt that Latin was important but not German, Greek, or Hebrew, as had been taught in the humanistic schools; such variety, he felt, was exhausting and possibly harmful. This opened the door to a new type of formalism, however, a danger that in other spheres the educational reformers had tried to fight.

The work of Johannes Sturm (1507–89) illustrates this danger. He founded a grammar school in Strassburg (now Strasbourg, France) that became a model for German schools. Sturm believed that methods of instruction in elementary schools and, to some degree, in secondary schools should be different from those in the institutes of higher education. Not much autonomy was to be allowed the child, who started learning Latin at the age of six by memorizing. Sturm’s love of Latin was even greater than that of his friend Erasmus, who never wanted it to become a mechanical exercise. As a consequence, German was neglected—as was physical instruction—and too much importance was given to form and expression for its own sake. The English Reformation

The separation of the Church of England from the church of Rome in the 16th century under Henry VIII did not have quite the repercussions in the scholastic field that were experienced by the Continental reformations. The secondary-school system in England had been strongly influenced by the Renaissance in the period preceding the reform, and about 300 grammar schools were already in existence. Nevertheless, the situation became precarious, for political reasons, under a succession of sovereigns.

Henry VIII included the schools in his policy of concentration and consolidation of power in the hands of the state. In 1548, under Henry’s son Edward VI, the Chantries Act was passed, confiscating the estates of the church expressly for use in education; but the turmoil of the times, under the boy Edward and then his Roman Catholic sister Mary I, allowed the funds allocated to education to be diverted elsewhere. Many primary schools and grammar schools disappeared or retrenched their operations for lack of funds. Elizabeth I, however, succeeding to the throne in 1558, revived Henry VIII’s educational policy; considerable sums were appropriated for education, even though it was not always possible to enforce the new provisions because of local opposition and some lack of concern on the part of the Anglican clergy.

The growth of a rich and prosperous mercantile class and the spread of Calvinist reforms through the Puritans in England and the Presbyterians in Scotland were also factors in the transformation of English education in the 16th and 17th centuries. Scholastic programs reflected changes in society: importance was given to English, to science, to modern languages (in particular French and Italian), and to sports, as is still the case in England today. The Puritan contribution was thus considerable, though often hindered by the traditional forces of the Anglican church and the old nobility.

Sir Thomas Elyot, in The Boke Named the Governour (1531), wrote the first treatise in English that dealt specifically with education. He was interested in those who would have the future economic and political power in their hands. Though their education was to include the classics, it was to be supplemented by the needs of the new mercantile class—the national English language, manual arts, drawing, music, and all forms of sport. Elyot was obviously influenced by Erasmus.

Roger Ascham was close in thought to many of the English humanists. In The Scholemaster (1570) he underlined the importance of the English language (in spite of his being a professor of Greek) and proposed that it should be used in teaching the Classical languages. He also believed that physical exercise and sport were important, not only for the nobility and the leisured classes but also for students and teachers. He was aware of the social changes in the country; and, observing with sadness the corruption of the new wealth, he was particularly chagrined to see students going to university not to gain culture but to prepare themselves for high offices of state.

Richard Mulcaster had 30 years of experience as an educator at St. Paul’s School and at the Merchant Taylors School, a Latin secondary school maintained by the tailors’ guild in London—and most famous of all the “guild schools.” Mulcaster was in favour of efficient teacher training and of teachers being adequately paid. In agreement with some of the Lutheran educational reforms, he felt that schools should be open to all, including women—who should, moreover, have access to higher education. He is particularly remembered for his opposition to Italianate trends: “I love Rome, but London better. I favour Italy, but England more. I know the Latin, but worship the English.”

Sir Francis Bacon was interested in education though it was not his main concern—his main concern being the championship of the scientific method and “sense” realism, or empiricism, in opposition to traditional Aristotelianism and Scholasticism. He was opposed to private tutors and felt that boys and youths were better off in schools and that their education should be geared to their social status and future activity. Schooling should aim at preparing statesmen and men of action as well as scholars and thus should include history, modern languages, and politics. Bacon himself had a passion for study not only for its utilitarian purposes but also because it was for him a true source of delight. The French Reformation

Schools in 16th-century France were still largely under the control of the Roman Catholic Church, as they had been in the Middle Ages. This traditional education faced opposition, however, both from Protestants and from reformers who had been influenced by the humanist principle of the primacy of the individual.

François Rabelais was a great and original interpreter of humanistic ideals, and his views on education reflected this. He himself studied in various fields, from medicine to letters, and was passionately interested in all of them. His controversy with the Sorbonne, a remaining stronghold of medievalism and Scholasticism, was bitter; he satirized the school and the useless notions taught there in his novels Pantagruel (1532) and Gargantua (1534).

Rabelais’s educational philosophy was entirely different from that of the medievalists—his being based on liberty of the pupil, in whom he had maximum faith. In Gargantua this cult of liberty was celebrated in the utopian Abbey of Thélème, where all could live according to their own pleasure but where the love of learning was so great that everyone was dedicated to it—getting much better results than those obtained at the medieval universities. And yet in the education of Gargantua and Pantagruel there were limits placed on liberty: Gargantua’s day started at 4 in the morning; he studied all subjects, both literary and scientific; and this was alternated with play and pleasing diversions. The heavy program, however, was not a constriction because of Gargantua’s delight in learning. The culture that Rabelais wanted for his two heroes was directly connected with the world in which they lived.

Gargantua and Pantagruel were perhaps among the first texts by a humanist in which not only the quadrivium but also scientific studies were enthusiastically proposed. There was nothing arid or abstract in Rabelais’s approach to nature, and in this context the classics also had a new flavour: ancient literature—no longer limited to Latin, Greek, and Hebrew but expanded to include Arabic and Chaldaic—could bring to light valuable knowledge that had been accumulated by the Classical world.

Petrus Ramus, one of the most bitter critics of French medieval Aristotelianism, was an intelligent reformer of educational methods. His best-known treatises are Aristotelicae animadversiones (1543; “Animadversions on Aristotle”) and Dialecticae partitiones (1543; “Divisions of Dialectic”), both condemned by royal decree; he also wrote two discourses on philosophy, Oratio de studiis philosophiae et eloquentiae conjungendis (1546; “Speech on Joining the Study of Philosophy with the Art of Speaking”) and Pro philosophica Parisiensis accademiae disciplina oratio (1551; “Speech in Defense of the Philosophical Discipline of the Parisian Academy”), as well as Ciceronianus, published posthumously. In these works, his criticism of traditional ways and of the degeneration of humanistic thought made him hated by all Roman Catholics, though not much better understood by Protestants; he died a Protestant victim of the massacre of St. Bartholomew. His program of study was fairly close to the traditional one, but his method was original, for he was concerned that the teacher should not suffocate the child with too many lessons and considered the child’s autonomous activity important. He especially resented any pedagogy that relied on a blind appeal to authority; learning had to be utilitarian and issue from practice.

Michel de Montaigne (1533–92) was much influenced by his personal experience as a student. Though often critical of humanism, especially when it was misinterpreted and transformed into pedantic studies, he had great admiration for the classics and lacked the scientific interests of Rabelais or Ramus. Montaigne wrote specifically about education in two essays on the upbringing of children and on pedantry. Culture, he felt, had become imitation, often with no trace of originality left, whereas it should be a delight—not something a student is forced to assimilate but something to draw the student’s participation. He was in favour of instruction by tutors capable of giving the student individual attention—the ideal tutor being one with a good mind rather than one filled with pedantic notions. He also believed in the importance of physical education and in a boy’s being hardened to nature and to danger.

For Montaigne, it was important not only to travel to foreign countries but also to stay there for a while, to learn languages and, even more, to learn about foreign customs and thus break out of the narrow limits of one’s own province. There were many differences between Montaigne and Erasmus, but both were convinced that for the wise man there could be no geographic boundaries, for, through cultural diffusion, barriers would be broken down. The Calvinist Reformation

The Protestant reformer John Calvin was of French origin, but he settled in Geneva and made this Swiss city one of the most prominent centres of the Reformation. Unlike Luther, whose reforms were backed by princes hoping to gain greater political independence, Calvin was supported by the new mercantile class, which needed political and administrative changes for the purposes of its own expansion.

Calvin, JohnJohn Calvin.Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (Digital File Number: cph 3b19375)

Calvin considered popular education important, but he was not an innovator. The theological academy he founded in Geneva in 1559 was modeled on Sturm’s school in Strassburg, where Calvin had taught; it became distinguished under the directorship of Theodore Beza, an intelligent reformer but unfortunately a very intolerant one, at least in theological matters. Calvin’s influence on education was nevertheless felt in many of the European universities, even as far as England, where, in spite of Anglican opposition, the Puritans had gained a foothold.

Calvin was in favour of universal education under church control (the cost to be in large part borne by the community), but “universal” did not mean “democratic.” Even if some form of instruction was to be given to everyone (so that everyone might in some measure read the Scriptures for himself, in good Calvinist tradition), very few individuals reached secondary or higher education, and of these only a minute percentage came from the working classes. Documents of the period show the steps taken to achieve the aim of universal education. In the Netherlands, the Calvinist Synod of The Hague in 1586 made provision for setting up schools in the cities, and the Synod of Dort in 1618 decreed that free public schools should be set up in all villages. In Scotland in 1560, John Knox, a disciple of Calvin and the leader of the Scottish Presbyterians, aimed at setting up schools in every community, but the nobility prevented this from actually being carried out. The major educational contributions of Calvinism were its diffusion to a larger number of people and the development of Protestant education at the university level. Not only was Geneva significant but also the Universities of Leiden (1575), Amsterdam (1632), and Utrecht (1636) in the Netherlands and the University of Edinburgh (1582) in Scotland. The Puritan, or English Calvinist, movement was responsible for the founding of Emmanuel College at the University of Cambridge (1584). The Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation

The religious upheaval, so important in northern Europe, also affected—though less violently—the Latin countries of southern Europe. If the new ferment in the Roman Catholic Church was mainly directed at answering the Protestants, at times it also had something original to suggest. At the Council of Trent (1545–63), the Roman Catholic Church tried to come to terms with the new political and economic realities in Europe.

Education was foremost in the minds of the leaders of the Counter-Reformation. The faithful were to be educated. For this, capable priests were needed, and, thus, seminaries multiplied to prepare the clergy for a more austere life in the service of the church. There was a flowering of utopian ideas, which should be remembered when trying to understand unofficial Catholic thought of the period. Writings such as La città del sole (“The City of the Sun”) by Tommaso Campanella and La repubblica immaginaria (“The Imaginary Republic”) by Lodovico Agostini are examples of this new vision of the church and of the duties of Christians. But if in the minds of the utopians this education was to be universal, it was in fact almost entirely directed at the ruling classes.

The Society of Jesus, founded in 1534 by Ignatius Loyola, was not specifically a teaching order but was nevertheless very important in this field. The first Jesuit college was opened in Messina, Sicily, in 1548; by 1615 the Jesuits had 372 colleges, and by 1755—just 18 years before the suppression of the order—the number had risen to 728. (The society was not reestablished until 1814.) In Ratio studiorum, an elaborate plan of studies issued by the Jesuits in 1599, there is laid out an organization of these institutions down to the smallest details. An authoritarian uniformity was thus the rule in their colleges, and individual initiative was discouraged. The complete course of study took at least 13 years, divided into three periods: six or more years that included grammar and rhetoric, three years of philosophy, and four of theology. The teacher was thought of not only as an instructor but also as an educator and often a controller, for he was at the centre of a vast network of controls, in which those students considered promising also took part. Emulation was encouraged in the class, which was often divided into two groups to stimulate competition. These new techniques, as well as the Jesuits’ efficient training of teachers, had good results—proof of this being the rapid increase in their colleges, which found greater favour than others started in the same period. The legacy of the Reformation

The effects on education of a movement as complex and widespread as the Reformation were far-reaching. Perhaps its most original contribution was the extension of the idea of education at the elementary level. As a result, the vernacular language took on a new importance, and also the new pedagogy had to take account of the realities of the situation—namely, that the children brought into the new school network could not spend as much time on “useless” books, so that schoolwork had to be combined with learning a practical trade, which had not previously been considered a part of education. This, however, was to take several centuries to be implemented in practice. Ettore Gelpi James Bowen European education in the 17th and 18th centuries The social and historical setting

The Renaissance had been the beginning of a new era in history, which culminated in the 17th and 18th centuries in the development of the absolutist state everywhere but in England and Holland (and even in these states the issue was for some time in doubt). France, the Habsburg empire, England, and Russia became the leading powers in Europe. The absolutist state extended its control beyond the political and into the religious (with the creation of the established church) and into almost all other aspects of human life. Although the High and later Middle Ages had witnessed the growth of middle-class forces, the pattern of society still clearly bore the stamp of court life. The concentration of power determined this life, and the citizen and his possessions were more and more at the disposal of the aristocracy. The citizen was subject.

Even in an absolutist state, however, education cannot be the sole privilege of the rich or the ruling classes, because an efficient absolutist state requires capable subjects, albeit bound to their social position. Elementary education for the middle classes thus developed in the 17th and 18th centuries, and more and more the state saw as its task the responsibility for establishing and maintaining schools. This tendency toward general education did not stem only from considerations of political expediency; it stemmed also from the desire to improve the world through education—making all areas of life orderly and subordinate to rational leadership. There was not only an inclination toward encyclopaedism and systemization of the sciences but also, in similar fashion, a tendency to set education aright by extensive school regulations.

In general, this distinction can be made between the 17th and the 18th centuries: in the 17th century the aim of education was conceived as a religious and rationalistic one, whereas in the 18th century the ideas of secularism and progress began to prevail. The 18th century is especially remembered for three leading reforms: teaching in the mother language grew in importance, rivaling Latin; the exact sciences were brought into the curriculum; and the correct methods of teaching became a pedagogic question. The new scientism and rationalism

These social and pedagogic changes were bound up with new tendencies in philosophy. Sir Francis Bacon of England was one who criticized the teachers of his day, saying that they offered nothing but words and that their schools were narrow in thought. He believed that the use of inductive and empirical methods would bring the knowledge that would give man strength and make possible a reorganization of society. Therefore, he demanded that schools should be scientific workplaces in the service of life and that they should put the exact sciences before logic and rhetoric.

Francis Bacon, oil painting by an unknown artist. In the National Portrait Gallery, London.Courtesy of the National Portrait Gallery, London

Another 17th-century critic of medievalism was René Descartes, but he did not proceed from empirical experience, as did Bacon; for him, the only permanence and certainty lay in human reason or thinking (cogito, ergo sum; “I think, therefore, I am”). The ability to think makes doubt and critical evaluation of the environment possible. A science based only on empiricism fails to achieve any vital, natural explanations but only mathematical, mechanistic ones of doubtful living use. Only what reason (ratio) recognizes can be called truth. Thus, education must be concerned with the development of critical rationality.

Like Descartes, Benedict de Spinoza and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz also outlined rationalistic philosophical systems. Decisive for educational theory was their statement that knowledge and experience originate in thinking (not in sense impressions, which can provide only examples and individual facts) and that formal thinking categories should form the substance of education. They believed that the aim of education should be the mastery of thinking and judgment rather than the mere assimilation of facts. The Protestant demand for universal elementary education

The schools that were actually developed fell short of these philosophically based demands. This is especially true of elementary education. In the Middle Ages, the grammar schools (especially for the education of the clergy) had developed, and the humanism of the Renaissance had strengthened this tendency; only those who knew Latin and Greek could be considered educated. For basic, popular education there were meagre arrangements. Although schools for basic writing and arithmetic had been established as early as the 13th and 14th centuries, they were almost exclusively in the towns; the rural population had to be content with religious instruction within the framework of the church. This changed as a result of Protestantism. John Wycliffe had demanded that everyone become a theologian, and Martin Luther, by translating the Holy Scriptures, made the reading of original works possible. Everyone, he asserted, should have access to the source of belief, and all children should go to school. So it happened that church regulations of the 16th and 17th centuries began to contain items governing schools and the instruction of young people (mainly in reading and religion). At first, the Protestant schools were directed and supported almost entirely by the church. Not until the 18th century, following the general tendency toward secularization, did the state begin to assume responsibility for supporting the schools. Education in 17th-century Europe Central European theories and practices

It was while Europe was being shaken by religious wars and was disintegrating into countless small states that such writers as Campanella and Bacon dreamed their Utopias (La Città del sole and the New Atlantis, respectively), where peace and unity would be had through logical and realistic means. To even attempt realizing this dream, however, man needed suitable education. Both leading representatives of so-called pedagogic realism, Wolfgang Ratke and John Amos Comenius, were motivated by this ideal of world improvement through a comprehensive reform of the school system. Despite this common starting point, however, both were highly distinct personalities and, moreover, had divergent influences on the development of education and schools. The pedagogy of Ratke

Wolfgang Ratke (1571–1635), a native of Holstein in Germany, journeyed to England, Holland, and through the whole of Germany and to Sweden expounding his ideas to the political authorities and finding considerable support. His plans for progressive reform failed for several reasons. First, political conditions during the Thirty Years’ War were understandably not favourable for any kind of planning or reform of schools. Moreover, Ratke demonstrated little practical ability in executing his plans. Finally, Ratke’s ideas were not free of exaggerations. He promised, for example, to be able to teach 10 languages in five years—each language in six months.

His ideas about the art of teaching are, nevertheless, of importance for the theory and practice of education. First, he believed that knowledge of things must precede words about things. This “sense realism” means that individual experience in contact with reality is the origin of knowledge; principles of knowledge follow, rather than precede, the study of specifics.

Second, everything must follow the order and course of what may be called human nature. In modern terms, one would say that a lesson should be designed with psychological conditions taken into consideration.

Third, he asserted that everything should be taught first in the mother language, the mother language being the natural and practical language for children and the one that allows them to concentrate wholly on the business at hand. Only when the mother language is fully commanded should a child attempt a foreign language; then special attention should be paid to speaking it rather than merely reading it.

Fourth, Ratke emphasized what might now be called a kind of programmed learning. One piece of work should be fully completed before progress is made to the next piece, and there should be constant repetition and practice. The teacher’s methods and the textbook program should agree and coincide.

Fifth, there should be no compulsion. A teacher should not be a taskmaster. To strike a pupil would be contrary to nature and would not help him learn. A pupil should be brought to love his teacher, not hate him. On the other hand, all work was the teacher’s responsibility. The pupil should listen and sit still. More generally, all children—without exception—should go to school, and no lessons should be canceled for any reason. There is, of course, a certain paradox in Ratke’s views: there was to be no compulsion, and yet pupils were to remain disciplined and were not permitted to work independently.

As for curricula, Ratke suggested reading and writing in the native tongue, singing, basic mathematics, grammar, and, in the higher classes, Latin and Greek. The sciences had not yet appeared in his timetable. His demand that, above all, young people should be given instruction in the affairs of God is typical of the combination of rationalistic and religious education in the 17th century. The pedagogy of Comenius

John Amos Comenius (1592–1670) was, even more than Ratke, a leading intellect of European educational theory in the 17th century. Born in Moravia, he was forced by the circumstances of the Thirty Years’ War to wander constantly from place to place—Germany, Poland, England, Sweden, Hungary, Transylvania, and Holland—and was deprived of his wife, children, and property. He himself said, “My life was one long journey. I never had a homeland.”

As a onetime bishop of the Bohemian Brethren, he sought to live according to their motto, “Away from the world towards Heaven.” To prepare for the hereafter, Comenius taught that one should “live rightly”—that is, seek learned piety by living one’s life according to correct principles of science and morality. Comenius’s philosophy was both humanitarian and universalistic. In his Pampaedia (“Universal Education,” discovered in 1935), he argued that “the whole of the human race may become educated, men of all ages, all conditions, both sexes and all nations.” His aim was pansophia (universal wisdom), which meant that “all men should be educated to full humanity”—to rationality, morality, and happiness.

Comenius realized that, to achieve pansophia by universal education, radical reforms in pedagogy and in the organization of schools were required, and he devised an all-embracing school system to meet this need. During infancy (up to six years of age), the child in the “mother school,” or family grouping, would develop basic physical faculties. During the following period (seven to 12), the child would go to the “vernacular school,” which was divided into six classes according to age and could be found in every town. The prime aim of these schools would be to develop the child’s imagination and memory through such subjects as religion, ethics, diction, reading, writing, basic mathematics, music, domestic economy, civics, history, geography, and handicraft. This vernacular school formed the final stage of education for technical vocations. After this school would come the grammar school (or Latin school), which the pupils would attend during their youth (13–18) and which would exist in every town of every district. Through progressive courses in language and the exact sciences, the young people would be brought to a deeper understanding of things. Finally, the university (19–24) would be a continuation of this school. Every province ought to have one such university, whose central task would be the formation of willpower and powers of judgment and categorization. Over and above this four-tier school system Comenius also envisaged a “college of light,” a kind of academy of the sciences for the centralized pooling of all learning. It is important to note, in this regard, that it was Comenius’s stay in England (1641–42) that initiated discussions leading to the founding of the Royal Society (incorporated 1662). Furthermore, the German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, influenced by Comenius, founded the Berlin Academy, and similar societies sprouted elsewhere.

The Great Didactic (1657) sets forth Comenius’s methodology—one for the arts, another for the sciences. Comenius believed that everything should be presented to the child’s senses—and to as many senses as possible, using pictures, models, workshops, music, and other “objective” means. With proper presentation, the mind of the child could become a “psychological” counterpart of the world of nature. The mind can take in what is in nature if the method of teaching most akin to nature is used. For the upper age levels, he recommended that language study and other studies be integrated. Indeed, he employed this scheme in his Gate of Tongues Unlocked (1631), a book of Latin and sciences arranged by subjects, which revolutionized Latin teaching and was translated into 16 languages. The Visible World in Pictures (1658), which remained popular in Europe for two centuries, attempted to dramatize Latin through pictures illustrating Latin sentences, accompanied by one or two vernacular translations. The schools of Gotha

The zeal for reform on the part of such educators as Ratke and Comenius, on the one hand, and the interests of the ruling classes, on the other, led in the years after about 1650 to the publication of school regulations that were free of church regulations. The circumstances in the central German principality of Gotha were typical. The duke, Ernst the Pious, commissioned the rector Andreas Reyher to compile a system of school regulations, which appeared in 1642 and is known historically as the Gothaer Schulmethodus. This was the first independent civil system of school regulations in Germany and was strongly influenced by Ratke. The five most important points of these regulations were (1) compulsory schooling from the age of five, (2) division of the school into lower, middle, and higher classes, (3) extension of the usual subjects (reading, writing, basic arithmetic, singing, and religion) to various other fields (natural history, local history, civics, and domestic economy), (4) the introduction of textbooks (for reading and basic arithmetic), including notably the first textbook of exact sciences for elementary schools, Reyher’s own Kurzer Unterricht von natürlichen Dingen (1657; “Short Course on Natural Things”), and (5) methodical instruction that, above all, emphasized the clarity of the lesson and the activity of the pupils. French theories and practices

In the second half of the 17th century, Germany suffered from the aftereffects of the Thirty Years’ War, whereas France, under Louis XIV, reached the zenith of political and military power. France’s leadership was also demonstrated in the cultural field, including education. Some of the most important developments in France included the promotion of courtly education and the involvement of religious orders and congregations in the education of the poor. Courtly education

The rationalistic ideal of French courtly education was foreshadowed in Michel de Montaigne’s Essays (1580) in which the ideal man was described as having a natural, sensible way of life not deeply affected by the perplexities of the time but admitting of pleasure. He had a “correct” attitude toward the world and people, a certain spiritual freedom, and an independent judgment—all of which, in Montaigne’s view, were more important than being steeped in knowledge. “As lamps are extinguished from too much oil, so is the mind from too much studying.” Montaigne came from a merchant family that aspired to nobility, and thus there is a certain fashionable elitism in his views; he held, among other things, that courtly education succeeds best when the pupil studies under a private tutor.

This ideal, rather unlike the ideal of the learned and humanistic Renaissance man, became important in 17th-century France, especially after mid-century and the rise of the court of Louis XIV. The education of the would-be versatile and worldly-wise gentleman was furthered not only by the continuation of the institution of private tutoring but also by the establishment of schools and academies for chevaliers and nobles, in which the emphasis was on such subjects as deportment, modern languages, fencing, and riding. It was most emphatically an example of class education, designed for the nobility and higher military and not for any commoners. The teaching congregations

In the countries that remained Catholic, such as France, the Roman church retained control of education. Indeed, as monarchy became more absolute, so largely did the authority of the church in matters of education. In France, practically all schools and universities were controlled by so-called teaching congregations or societies, the most famous and powerful of which during the first half of the 17th century was the Society of Jesus. By mid-century the Jesuits had 14,000 pupils under instruction in Paris alone; their colleges (not including universities) all over the land numbered 612.

It was their successful teaching and comparatively mild discipline that caused the Jesuit schools to attract thousands of pupils. “They are so good,” said Bacon of the Jesuit teachers in his Advancement of Learning, “that I wish they were on our side.” The curriculum was purely Classical, but importance was attached to spacious, well-adapted buildings and amenities designed to make school life interesting. In general, however, the religious and international conflicts did great harm to education, which suffered much because those kings and religious factions that gained power in France (as elsewhere) used the schools to propagate their cause, discarding teachers not of the approved persuasion. Moreover, the schools continued largely to ignore the new directions of men’s minds; in the universities staffed by Jesuit fathers, medieval Scholasticism, though purged of the formalistic excesses that had degraded it, was fully restored. Schools and universities declined, for the most part, to contemplate any enlargement of the frontiers of knowledge and were too often deeply involved in the religious conflicts of the time. The University of Paris in particular remained distracted throughout the 17th century by theological dissensions—in at least one instance as a result of the rivalry that ensued after the Jesuits had effected a footing at Clermont College.

Aside from the Jesuits, the most important teaching congregations in France were the Bérullian Oratory, or Oratorians, and the Jansenists of Port-Royal. The former, founded in 1611 and soon to open a number of schools and seminaries for young nobles, was composed of priests—but priests more liberal and rationalist than was common for the times. They offered instruction not only in the humanities but also in history, mathematics, the natural sciences, and such genteel accomplishments as dancing and music. Though continuing to use Latin in instruction, they promoted also the use of the vernacular French in the initial years of their curriculum. They tended indeed to be drawn to the ideas of Descartes, to a faith based on reason. When in 1764 the Jesuits were banned from France, their teaching positions were largely assumed by Oratorians.

More famous than the schools of the Oratorians, though enjoying a briefer career, were the Little Schools of Port-Royal. Their founder was Jean Duvergier de Hauranne, better known as the abbot of Saint-Cyran, who was one of France’s chief advocates of Jansenism, a movement opposed to Jesuitry and Scholasticism and favouring bold reforms of the church and a turn to a certain Pietism. About 1635, Saint-Cyran, with the help of some wealthy, influential Parisians, succeeded in gaining control of the convent of Port-Royal, near Versailles. There the Jansenist group began about 1637 to educate a few boys, and by 1646 it had established the Little Schools of Port-Royal in Paris itself. Their curriculum was similar to that of the Oratorians, though excluding dancing, and was celebrated for its excellence in French language and logic and in foreign languages. Influenced by Descartes’s rationalistic philosophy, the Jansenists theorized that learning has a “natural” order and should begin with what is familiar to the child: thus, a phonetic system of teaching reading was used; all instruction was in French, not Latin; and student compositions were directed toward topics drawing on one’s own experiences or toward subjects in one’s current reading. Involved in political struggles with the Jesuits, who were still influential at court, the Jansenists were fated to have all their schools closed by 1660, but their theories and practices were widely adopted and became extremely influential. Female education

During the century, the education of girls was not entirely neglected, and France was notable for its efforts. Mme de Maintenon, for instance, had been a pupil of the Ursuline nuns in Paris and then a governess at the court of Louis XIV before she was wedded to the king in 1684. From her royal vantage point, she took upon herself the founding of a school in 1686 at Saint-Cyr near Versailles—a higher school principally for orphan girls descended from noble families. Besides such basic subjects as reading and writing, the girls were prepared for their future lives as wives and mothers or as members of genteel professions. In 1692 this school was taken over by the Augustinian nuns. Another important worker in the field of female education was St. Jane Frances de Chantal, who, together with her father confessor St. Francis de Sales, founded in 1610 the order of the Visitandines, a group dedicated to charitable work and the religious education of women.

Madame de Maintenon, detail of a portrait by Pierre Mignard; in the Louvre, ParisGiraudon—Art Resource/Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

François de Salignac de La Mothe-Fénelon, archbishop of Cambrai and noted theologian and writer, is especially known for his views on the education of girls. In his Traité de l’éducation des filles (1687; “Treatise on the Education of Girls”), he remarked on the importance of women in improving the morals of society and went on to express his thoughts about girls’ education. Because girls, he believed, are meant to fulfill roles as housewives and mothers, they should pursue religious and moral education rather than scholarly learning. They should learn reading and writing, basic mathematics, history, music, needlework, and Latin (because it is the church language)—but no modern languages, since they tend to moral corruption. Education, he maintained, should make the lady of the house both Christian and accomplished, neither ignorant nor précieuse. English theories and practices

The 17th century in England (up to the Glorious Revolution of 1688–89) was one of argument over religious and political settlements bequeathed by Queen Elizabeth I; the period was one characterized by the confrontation of two different worldviews—on one side the royalist Cavaliers and on the other side the Puritans. The division was reflected in education. The Puritan reformers

In the Anglo-American world the Reformation came about in the form of Calvinism—“Puritan” being the derisory name for strict Calvinists. Their ideals were sober, practical behaviour, careful management, thrift, asceticism, and the rejection of hedonistic pleasures of life. Many of the educationists who sought this Puritan ideal were followers of the reform plans of Comenius. Samuel Hartlib, a Polish merchant residing in England who was friend, publisher, and patron of Comenius, tried to interest Parliament in the idea of popular education; his treatise London’s Charity Enlarged (1650) proposed that a grant be made for the education of poor children, all in the interest of general social betterment. The Committee for Advancement of Learning, which he founded in 1653, was the impulse and model for later educational associations. In general, his ideas for reform included the introduction of agricultural schools and the state organization of the educational system, as well as the establishment of general elementary education.

The name of John Dury stands close to those of Comenius and Hartlib. In his book The Reformed School (1651), he proposed teaching societies in England much like the teaching congregations in France. Indeed, he was particularly insistent that control of education be in the hands not of a regimentizing state but of free educational organizations. He was also concerned about teaching youth the useful arts and sciences so that they might “become profitable instruments of the Commonwealth.” From him, too, stemmed the draft of a nursery school; thus, he can be regarded as the first representative of infant teaching in England.

The most renowned of the Puritan intellectuals, John Milton, was more concerned with the education of “our nobler and our gentler youth” than with the education of common boys. Of Education (1644), written at the request of Hartlib, was one of the last in the long line of European expositions of Renaissance humanism. Milton’s aim was the traditional one: the molding of boys into enlightened, cultivated, responsible citizens and leaders. His proposed academy, which would take the place of both secondary school and college, was to concentrate on instruction in the ancient classics, with due subordination to the Bible and Christian teaching. Milton also emphasized the sciences, and physical and martial exercise had a place in his curriculum as well. Royalist education

Frequently opposed to Puritanism on educational as well as political grounds were the royalists and supporters of the nobility. In education, their views went back to Sir Thomas Elyot and Roger Ascham in the 16th century, who had written so persuasively about the education of gentlemen in the tradition of the so-called courtesy books. Influenced by these few English forerunners and also by Montaigne were James Cleland (The Institution of a Young Nobleman, 1607) and Henry Peacham (The Compleat Gentleman, 1622). In the view of the latter, an extreme royalist, “Fashioning him [the pupil] absolute in the most necessary and commendable Qualities concerning Minde and Body to country’s glory” was the overriding aim of education; the table of contents of The Compleat Gentleman exhibits the variety of interests of an ideal gentleman or noble—cosmography, geometry, poetry, music, sculpture, drawing, painting, heraldry, and so on. John Gailhard (The Compleat Gentleman, 1678), another writer in the same tradition, can be said to have anticipated John Locke’s empiricism (see below John Locke’s empiricism and education as conduct) when he wrote that “the nature of Youth is like Wax by fire, or a smooth table upon which anything can be written.” The academies

The beginning of academies for the promotion of philosophy, arts, or sciences can be traced to the early Renaissance, particularly in Italy and France. The Platonic Academy in Florence was one of the most noted of speculative societies. The first scientific academies belong to the 16th century: in 1560, for instance, the Academia Secretorum Naturae (“Secret Academy of Nature”) was founded in Naples; in 1575 Philip II of Spain founded in Madrid the Academy of Mathematical Sciences. Then, in 1617, the first German academy, Fruchtbringende Gesellschaft (“Productive Society”), was founded at Weimar with the expressed purposes of the purification of the language and the cultivation of literature. A number of other academies were founded throughout Europe.

It was in the 17th century that the two preeminent scientific academies were founded. Both the English Royal Society and the French Academy of Sciences began as informal gatherings of famous men. The “invisible college” of London and Oxford had its first meetings in 1645; it was incorporated as the Royal Society in 1662. In Paris, a group of men including the philosophers Descartes and Blaise Pascal started private meetings almost at the same time. In 1666 they were invited by the economic minister Jean-Baptiste Colbert to meet in the royal library. In 1699 the society was transferred to the Louvre under the name of the Academy of Sciences. The French Academy also started as a private society of men of letters some five years before its incorporation in 1635 under the patronage of Cardinal de Richelieu. In the 18th century the fame and achievements of these English and French academies became internationally recognized, and many other European countries started to found their own national academies. Education in 18th-century Europe

In the 18th century the theories and systems of education were influenced by various philosophical and social trends. Among these were realism, which had its origins in Ratke and Comenius, among others, and also Pietism, which derived principally from Philipp Jakob Spener and August Hermann Francke in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. Another trend was the far-reaching rationalistic and humanitarian movement of the Enlightenment—best seen in the pedagogical views of Locke, in the upsurge of philanthropy, and in Denis Diderot’s Encyclopédie, a comprehensive system of human knowledge in 28 volumes (1751–72). Also important was naturalism, of which Jean-Jacques Rousseau can be regarded as the main representative. Education during the Enlightenment John Locke’s empiricism and education as conduct

The writings of the late 17th-century empiricist John Locke on philosophy, government, and education were especially influential during the Enlightenment. In the field of education, Locke is significant both for his general theory of knowledge and for his ideas on the education of youth. Locke’s empiricism, expressed in his notion that ideas originate in experience, was used to attack the doctrine that principles of reason are innate in the human mind. In An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), Locke argued that ideas come from two “fountains” of experience: sensation, through which the senses convey perceptions into the mind, and reflection, whereby the mind works with the perceptions, forming ideas. Locke thought of the mind as a “blank tablet” (tabula rasa) prior to experience, but he did not claim that all minds are equal. In Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693) he insisted that some minds have a greater intellectual potential than others.

John Locke, oil on canvas by Herman Verelst, 1689; in the National Portrait Gallery, London.Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/REX/Shutterstock.com

For education, Locke’s empiricism meant that learning comes about only through experience. Education, which Locke felt should address both character and intellect, is therefore best achieved by providing the pupil with examples of proper thought and behaviour, by training the child to witness and share in the habits of virtue that are part of the conventional wisdom of the rational and practical man. Virtue should be cultivated through proper upbringing, preparatory to “studies” in the strict sense. The child first learns to do through activity and, later, comes to understand what has been done. The intimacy between conduct and thinking is best illustrated in the title of Locke’s Of the Conduct of the Understanding, written as an appendix to his Essay. There it is clear that understanding comes only with careful cultivation and practice; this means that understanding not only involves conduct but also is itself a kind of conduct. If the child and the tutor share a kind of conduct, then the child will have learned the habits of character and mind that are necessary for education to continue. Giambattista Vico, critic of Cartesianism

Like Locke, the Italian philosopher Giambattista Vico believed that human beings are not innately rational; he argued, however, that understanding results not through sense perception but through imaginative reconstruction. Although Vico’s ideas were not widely known in the 18th century, the importance of his work for the history of philosophy and education has been increasingly recognized since the late 1960s. Vico was professor of rhetoric at the University of Naples from 1699 to 1741. His best-known work is New Science (1725), in which he advanced the idea that human beings in their origins are not rational, like philosophers, but imaginative, like poets. The relation between imagination and reason in New Science is suggestive for educational theory: civilized human beings are rational, yet they came to be that way without knowing what they were doing; the first humans created institutions literally without reason, as poets do who follow their imagination rather than their reason. Only later, after they have become rational, can human beings understand what they are and what they have made. Vico’s idea that early humans were nonrational and childlike prefigured Rousseau’s primitivism and his conception of human development (see below The background and influence of naturalism); and the importance Vico accorded to imagination foreshadowed the place that feeling was to have in 19th-century Romantic thought.

De Nostri Temporis Studiorum Ratione (1709; “On the Study Methods of Our Time”) defended the humanistic program of studies against what Vico took to be an encroachment by the rationalistic system of Descartes on the educational methods proper for youth. Vico asserted that the influential Cartesian treatise The Port-Royal Logic, by the Jansenists Antoine Arnauld and Pierre Nicole, inverted the natural course by which children learn by insisting on a training in logic at the beginning of the educational process. He argued instead that young people need to have their mental powers developed and nourished by promoting their memories through the study of languages and enhancing their imaginations through reading poets, historians, and orators. Young minds first need the kind of reasoning that common sense provides. Common sense, acquired through the experience of poets, orators, and people of prudence, teaches the young the importance of working with probabilities prior to an education in logic. To train youth first in logic in the absence of common sense is to teach them to make judgments before they have the knowledge necessary to do so. Vico’s aim was to emphasize the importance of practical judgment in education, an echo of the ideals of Locke and a prefiguring of Rousseau and the 19th-century reformer Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi. Outside Italy, among those who were most influenced by New Science were Joseph de Maistre in the late 18th century and Victor Cousin and Jules Michelet in the 19th century. The condition of the schools and universities

The school system became more and more in the 18th century an ordered concern of the state. Exponents of enlightened absolutism, as well as parliamentarians, recognized that the subject was of more use to the state if he had a school education. Ideally, there was to be compulsory schooling everywhere, but of course in practice the ideal was scarcely reached anywhere. The state also recognized that worthwhile school instruction depended on the standard of education of teachers: thus, the first teachers’ colleges were established. But admittedly the standard of education of teachers was fairly poor. The teaching profession still did not provide a living wage, for which reason can be read from a regulation of 1736:

If the teacher is a workman he can already support himself; if he is not, then he is hereby allowed to go to work for daily wages for 6 weeks at harvest-time (Principia regulativa, clause 10).

Ever since the 16th century the universities had suffered a decline, mainly as a result of religious wars. Progress in the exact sciences was accomplished under government support in the academies of science, not in the universities, which became more and more training institutions for higher civil servants. There was, however, a notable change for the better, at least in Germany.

The year 1694 saw the foundation of the University of Halle, which has been described as the first real modern university. It originated in a Ritterschule, or “knight’s school,” imitative of the schools for chevaliers in France, and in 1694 the Holy Roman emperor Leopold I granted it a charter. The primary object in founding a university in Halle was to create a centre for the Lutheran party; but its character, under the influence of its two most notable teachers, the philosophers Christian Thomasius and Francke, soon expanded beyond the limits of this conception. Thomasius was the first to set the example—soon followed by all the universities of Germany—of lecturing in the vernacular instead of the customary Latin; this was a declaration of war against Scholasticism. Francke, as the founder of the Pietistic school, exercised great influence. Throughout the whole of the 18th century, Halle was the leader of academic thought and advanced theology in Protestant Germany, although sharing that leadership after the middle of the century with the University of Göttingen (founded 1737). With Göttingen, another important contribution was made by the revival of Classical studies and the creation of a faculty of philosophy distinct from that of theology. This was designed not only to advance scholarship but also to train teachers. Halle itself established the first chair of educational theory. The background and influence of Pietism

The dispute over the correct religious dogma—fought for almost 200 years with the utmost strength, controversy, and academic subtlety and reaching its terrible culmination in the Thirty Years’ War—led to a certain ill feeling against dogmatically sanctioned religious revelation. There was a widespread trend toward secularization. Everywhere, there was a clear tendency to free belief from dogmatic quarrels. The search for a new belief took generally two different paths. One wanted to base belief in man’s reason; the other wanted a godliness of the heart. For one line of thought, belief was a postulate of omnipotent human reason; for the other, man, corrupted by original sin, was to be saved only by simple belief in God’s grace. The one path turned to the religious understanding of the Enlightenment; the other followed the subjective, mystical, zealous devoutness of Pietism. Such a movement away from the institutionalized church, away from the established church, and toward an intensified faith was evident in France within Roman Catholicism in the form of Jansenism and Quietism. In England it was clearly evident in certain forms of Puritanism and in Independent movements and Quakerism. In Germany it was evident in Pietism.

Pietism was a Protestant movement of renewed faith that became popular from about 1675 to 1740, though it remained residually influential even into the 19th century. Its spiritual centres were in Württemberg, among the Moravian Brethren, and above all in Halle. Pietism was principally opposed to dogmatic Protestant orthodoxy, which usually included impatience and polemics against other beliefs. Pietism, on the contrary, stood for the renewal of importance of the individual prayer and for humility. The experiences of belief were to be based less in the acceptance of fixed conditions of belief and more in a mystical, personal submersion in feelings. According to standard Protestant theory, salvation could be hoped for only by the suppression of the corrupted individuality and by waiting for the grace of God to show one the way. From this came the Pietists’ inclination to turn away from the world with its temptations (e.g., the theatre, dancing, games, and other enjoyments). The uneasiness that they felt toward church institutionalization led to their splitting into numerous separatist groups; their subjective certainty about their belief led to a certain arrogance; and finally their seclusion led often to a joyless and moralizing way of life.

Although the founder of German Pietism is considered to be Spener, who established several private devotional gatherings (collegia pietatis) for Bible study in Frankfurt am Main and elsewhere, he was important for education only in the sense that he fashioned a spirit or concept in which education could be conducted—a concept that would subordinate all education to a simple Christian faith. This concept was realized mainly by his follower Francke. August Hermann Francke

Francke, after service as a grammar-school teacher and priest in Leipzig, Lübeck, Hamburg, and Erfurt, was, through Spener’s recommendation, given a post at the University of Halle in 1691, at the same time assuming the post of parish priest nearby. Motivated by the sad conditions of neglect in his parish, he quickly devoted himself to practical pastoral duties. In 1695 he instituted a vernacular school for the poor, popularly called the “ragged school,” whose purpose was that the children should be led to a living knowledge of God and Christ and to a rightly accomplished Christianity. Through his activity and eloquence, Francke won several charitable patrons for his school, and the institution quickly expanded. After the school for the poor came the establishment of an elementary school for children of fee-paying burghers, then an orphanage, and lastly a Pädagogium, or boarding school, for the sons of nobility. Because Francke perceived a lack of suitable teachers for his schools, he subsequently established two teachers’ seminaries, seminarium praeceptorum and seminarium selectum (for teachers in higher schools). In 1697 there followed a Latin grammar school and in 1698, even if short-lived, a gynaeceum, a school for the daughters of nobility. To the whole complex of Halle’s institutions (known collectively as the Halle Foundation) there also belonged a bookshop with a publishing house and press, a very profitable chemistry laboratory, as well as four agricultural properties, a Bible institution, and an office for sending evangelical missions abroad. These institutions flourished, and about 1750 they were more and more brought under the control of the state.

August Hermann Francke, engravingBBC Hulton Picture Library

Francke’s main concern was ministerial work in the spirit of Pietism and not systematic educational theorizing. His educational aims were religious and at the same time practical. He himself paraphrased it as “true godliness and Christian wisdom”—true godliness meaning a pious, moral, devout life, and Christian wisdom referring to an ability to work hard according to the Protestant ethic. Francke’s style of education went along with this aim: the corrupted willfulness of man must be broken, not through severe punishment but through “loving reproaches,” a close supervision of the pupils, and a schooled and regimented care of the spirit. Games and childlike exuberance have no place in the system; thus, education had a joyless and moralizing effect.

The harsh demands and regimentation are shown, for instance, in the daily timetable and the syllabus. The children arose at 5:00 am, and there was almost continuous instruction with frequent Bible reading and religious lessons until 7:00 in the evening. The grammar school had lessons in reading, writing, basic mathematics, catechism, the Holy Scriptures, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, optionally another Oriental language, geography, history, mathematics (including astronomy and geometry), botany, zoology, mineralogy, anatomy, and theology, as well as lathework, glass polishing, field trips to observe trades, factory work, horticulture, and so forth. These latter subjects were counted as “recreation.” The pansophic idea of Comenius was being followed here, in the sense that there was to be an all-encompassing education. It is worth noting that Francke was actually trying to inject realism into education—promoting, as he did, scientific subjects, lessons in manual skills, planned field trips, and even the reading of newspapers in the classroom. Johann Julius Hecker

Johann Julius Hecker came to Halle shortly before Francke’s death in 1727 and became a teacher in the Pädagogium. In 1739 he was summoned by Frederick I of Prussia to Berlin, where he established a six-year Realschule, or “realist school,” designed to prepare youth for the Pietistic and Calvinistic ideal of hard work and, especially, for the new technical and industrial age that was already dawning in countries such as England and France. Godliness was to be combined with a realistic and practical way of life. As early as 1699 Francke had conceived the idea of a school for children who were not meant for scholarship but who could serve usefully in commercial pursuits or administration, and in 1739 one of his teachers, Christoph Semler, published a pamphlet proposing such a “mathematical and mechanical Realschule.” It was Hecker’s fortune to put these plans into realization. His school included, among other things, classes for architecture, building, manufacturing, commerce, and trade. Both the exact sciences and manual skills were in the curriculum. A room for natural history specimens, geographic maps, and realia was set aside for the illustration of lessons. Schools like Hecker’s were gradually opened in other cities. In the 19th century, courses were extended to nine years, and such an institution was renamed Oberrealschule, or “higher realist school.” Thenceforth it was one of the main types of German secondary education. Hecker also compiled the general school regulations (1763) that formed the main outlines of the Prussian school system. The background and influence of naturalism

Pietists emphasized Christian devotion and diligence as paths to the good life; Enlightenment thinkers focused on reason and clear thinking as the sensible way to happiness. Rousseau and his followers were intrigued by a third and more elusive ideal: naturalism. Rousseau, in his A Discourse on Inequality, an account of the historical development of the human race, distinguished between “natural man” (man as formed by nature) and “social man” (man as shaped by society). He argued that good education should develop the nature of man. Yet Rousseau found that mankind has not one nature but several: man originally lived in a “pure state of nature” but was altered by changes beyond control and took on a different nature; this nature, in turn, was changed as man became social. The creation of the arts and sciences caused man to become “less pure,” more artificial, and egoistic, and man’s egoistic nature prevents him from regaining the simplicity of original human nature. Rousseau is pessimistic, almost fatalistic, about changing the nature of modern man.

Émile, his major work on education, describes an attempt to educate a simple and pure natural child for life in a world from which social man is estranged. Émile is removed from man’s society to a little society inhabited only by the child and his tutor. Social elements enter the little society through the tutor’s knowledge when the tutor thinks Émile can learn something from them. Rousseau’s aim throughout is to show how a natural education, unlike the artificial and formal education of society, enables Émile to become social, moral, and rational while remaining true to his original nature. Because Émile is educated to be a man, not a priest, a soldier, or an attorney, he will be able to do what is needed in any situation.

Illustration of Émile from Émile; or, On Education (1762), by Jean-Jacques Rousseau.Photos.com/Thinkstock

The first book of Émile describes the period from birth to learning to speak. The most important thing for the healthy and natural development of the child at this age is that he learn to use his physical powers, especially the sense organs. The teacher must pay special attention to distinguishing between the real needs of the child and his whims and fancies. The second book covers the time from the child’s learning to speak to the age of 12. Games and other forms of amusement should be allowed at this age, and the child should by no means be overtaxed by scholarly instruction at too early an age. The child Émile is to learn through experience, not through words; he is to bow not to the commands of man but to necessities. The third book is devoted to the ages from 12 to 15. This is the time of learning, not from books of course but from the “book of the world.” Émile must gain knowledge in concrete situations provided by his tutor. He learns a trade, among other things. He studies science, not by receiving instruction in its facts but by making the instruments necessary to solve scientific problems of a practical sort. Not until the age of 15, described in the fourth book, does Émile study the history of man and social experience and thus encounter the world of morals and conscience. During this stage Émile is on the threshold of social maturity and the “age of reason.” Finally, he marries and, his education over, tells his tutor that the only chains he knows are those of necessity and that he will thus be free anywhere on earth.

The final book describes the education of Sophie, the girl who marries Émile. In Rousseau’s view, the education of girls was to be similar with regard to naturalness, but it differed because of sexual differences. A girl cannot be educated to be a man. According to Rousseau, a woman should be the centre of the family, a housewife, and a mother. She should strive to please her husband, concern herself more than he with having a good reputation, and be satisfied with a simple religion of the emotions. Because her intellectual education is not of the essence, “her studies must all be on the practical side.”

At the close of Émile, Rousseau cannot assure the reader that Émile and Sophie will be happy when they live apart from the tutor; the outcome of his experiment is in doubt, even in his own mind. Even so, probably no other writer in modern times has inspired as many generations as did Rousseau. His dramatic portrayal of the estrangement of natural man from society jolted and influenced such contemporary thinkers as Immanuel Kant and continues to intrigue philosophers and social scientists. His idea that teachers must see things as children do inspired Pestalozzi and has endured as a much-imitated ideal. Finally, his emphasis on understanding the child’s nature had a profound influence by creating interest in the study of child development, inspiring the work of such psychologists as G. Stanley Hall and Jean Piaget. The Sensationists

A group of French writers contemporary with Rousseau and paralleling in some ways the thought of both Rousseau and Locke are known as the Sensationists, or, sometimes, the Sensationist psychologists. One of them was Étienne Bonnot de Condillac, who, along with Voltaire, may be said to have introduced Locke’s philosophy to France and established it there.

In the Treatise on Sensations (1754) Condillac imagined a statue organized inwardly like a man but animated by a soul that had never received an idea or a sense impression. He then unlocked its senses one by one. The statue’s power of attention came into existence through its consciousness of sensory experience; next, it developed memory, the lingering of sensory experience; with memory, it was able to compare experiences, and so judgment arose. Each development made the statue more human and dramatized Condillac’s idea that man is nothing but what he acquires, beginning with sensory experience. Condillac rejected the notion of innate ideas, arguing instead that all faculties are acquired. The educational significance of this idea is found in Condillac’s An Essay on the Origin of Human Knowledge (1746), where he writes of a “method of analysis,” by which the mind observes “in a successive order the qualities of an object, so as to give them in the mind the simultaneous order in which they exist.” The idea that there is a natural order which the mind can learn to follow demonstrates Condillac’s naturalism along with his sensationism. Condillac does not begin his work Logic (1780) with axioms or principles; rather, he writes, “we shall begin by observing the lessons which nature gives us.” He explains that the method of analysis is akin to the way that children learn when they acquire knowledge without the help of adults. Nature will tell man how to know, if he will but listen as children “naturally” do. Thus the way in which ideas and faculties originate is the way of logic, and to communicate a truth is to follow the order in which ideas come from the senses.

Claude-Adrien Helvétius, a countryman of Condillac’s who professed much the same philosophy, was perhaps even more insistent that all human beings lack any intellectual endowment at birth and that despite differing physical constitutions each person has the potential for identical passions and ideas. What makes people different in later life are differing experiences. Hypothetically, two persons brought up with the same chance experiences and education would be exactly the same. From this it followed that the teacher must attempt to control the environment of the child and guide his instruction step by step. Helvétius was, perhaps, unique in joining such a strong belief in intellectual equalitarianism with the possibility of a controlling environmentalism. The Rousseauists

Rousseau left behind no disciples in the sense of a definite academic community, but hardly a single theorist of the late 18th century or afterward could avoid the influence of his ideas. One of those influenced was the German Johann Bernhard Basedow, who agreed with Rousseau’s enthusiasm for nature, with his emphasis on manual and practical skills, and with his demand for practical experience rather than empty verbalism. The teacher, in Basedow’s view, should take pains over the clearness of the lesson and make use of the enjoyment of games: “It is possible to arrange nearly all playing of children in an instructive way.” In another respect, however, the contrast between Rousseau and Basedow could not be sharper; Basedow tended to force premature learning and overload a child’s capabilities. A foreign language, for instance, was to be learned in six months. He promoted, in general, a pedagogic hothouse atmosphere. Basedow was perhaps influenced by his seven-year-old daughter, who was put forward as a wonder child with extraordinary knowledge. He established an experimental school called a Philanthropinum, in Dessau, which lasted from 1774 to 1793.

Kant referred to Rousseau’s influence on him. He dealt specifically with pedagogy only within a lecture he gave as holder of the chair of philosophy in Königsberg; the main features of the lecture were collected in a short work, Über Pädagogik (1803; “On Pedagogy”). In it he asserted, “A man can only become a man through education. He is nothing more than what education makes him.” Education should discipline man and make him cultured and moral; its aim is ultimately the creation of a happier mankind. In general, Kant agreed with Rousseau’s education according to nature; but, from his ethical posture, he insisted that restraints be put on the child’s passionate impulses and that the child even be taught specific maxims of conduct. The child must learn to rule himself and come to terms with the twin necessities of liberty and constraint, the product of which is true freedom.

Children should be educated, not with reference to the present conditions of things, but rather with regard to a possibly improved state of the human race—that is, according to the ideal of humanity and its entire destiny. The influence of nationalism

The Enlightenment was cosmopolitan in its effort to spread the light of reason, but from the very beginning of the age there were nationalistic tendencies to be seen in varying shades. Although Rousseau himself was generally concerned with universal man in such works as The Social Contract and Émile, his The Government of Poland (1782) did lay out a proposal for an education with a national basis, and generally his ideas influenced the nationalistic generation of the French Revolution of 1789. France

The real starting point, generally speaking, of national pedagogic movements was in France. It perhaps began with the philosophes, the rationalists and liberals such as Voltaire and Diderot who emphasized the development of the individual through state education—not as a means, of course, of adjusting to the state and its current government but as a means of creating critical, detached, responsible citizens. The marquis de Condorcet was closely connected with this line of thought. For him man was by nature good and capable of never-ending perfection, and the goal of education should be the “general, gradually increasing perfection of man.” He drafted a democratic, liberal, and at the same time somewhat socialist concept of school policy: there should be a uniform structure of public education and equal chances for all; ability and attainment should be the only standards for selection and careers; and private interests should be prevented from having influence in the educational system. An educational concept so rationalistic in its aims and with such a democratic and liberal structure cannot be narrowly nationalistic; it is cosmopolitan. But Condorcet was nationalistic insofar as he wanted “to show the world at last a nation in which freedom and equality for all was an actuality.” He was, in fact, a strong supporter of the Revolution.

Many of the Rousseauists were nationalistic in a somewhat different way. They believed in a kind of “moral patriotism.” They distrusted state-controlled nationalism and favoured instead a virtuous, patriotic citizen who experienced spontaneous feelings for his nation. Proper development in the family setting and in school would lead to the mastery of everyday situations and would naturally lay the foundations for this true nationalism.

Some of the French revolutionists—particularly Jacobins such as Maximilien de Robespierre and Louis de Saint-Just, who were associated with the Reign of Terror (1793–94)—were concerned with an education for the revolutionary state, an education marked by an enmity toward the idea of scholarship for its own sake and by state control, collectivism, the stressing of absolute equality, and the complete integration of all. What is good is decided by the collective “people.” Thus, it could be said that the Jacobins favoured a complete politicalization of educational practice and theory. National education under enlightened rulers

The absolutism of the 18th century has often been called “benevolent despotism,” referring to the rule of such monarchs as Frederick II (the Great) of Prussia, Peter I (the Great) and Catherine II (the Great) of Russia, Maria Theresa and Joseph II of Austria, and lesser figures who were presumably sufficiently touched by the ideas of the Enlightenment to pursue social reforms. Their reforms were limited, however, and usually did not include anything likely to upset their sovereignty. Thus, they were often willing to improve education for middle-class persons useful in civil service and other areas of state administration, but they were often chary of educating the poor. That risked upsetting the social order.

Frederick the Great, however, issued general school regulations (1763) establishing compulsory schooling for boys and girls from 5 to 13 or 14 years of age. His minister Freiherr von Zedlitz founded a chair of pedagogy at Halle (1779) and generally planned for the improved education of teachers; he supported the founding of new schools and the centralization of school administration under an Oberschulkollegium, or national board of education (1787); and one of his colleagues, Friedrich Gedike, was instrumental in introducing the school-leaving examination for university entrance, the Abitur—which still exists.

The guarded though increasingly liberal attempt by benevolent despots to nationalize and expand education is well illustrated by the events in Russia. Until the 18th century, schools in Russia were founded by ecclesiastical organizations (monasteries), the clergy (priests, deacons, readers), and private persons (boyars, or lower-level aristocrats). Boys were taught reading, writing, arithmetic, singing, and religion. A system of state-owned schools was started by Peter the Great as a state organization for purposes of administration and for the development of mining and industry. Peter did not intend to promote the Orthodox faith or formal Classical learning—whether Greek, Latin, or Slavonic—or universal education. He created schools of mathematics, navigation, artillery, and engineering for utilitarian purposes. In 1725 an Academy of Sciences with a university and a gimnaziya (secondary school) was founded at St. Petersburg. The utilitarian, secular, and scientific characteristics of Peter’s schools became the dominant features of Russian education, but, as a result of the many changes of policy after Peter’s death in 1725, a national system of education did not develop.

A second attempt at nationalizing education in Russia was made by Catherine II. After many abortive schemes, Catherine issued in 1786 a statute for schools, which can be considered the first Russian education act for the whole country. According to this act, a two-year course in minor schools was to be started in every district town and a five-year course in major schools in every provincial town. Catherinian schools were also to be utilitarian, scientific, and secular. At the end of the 18th century, 254 towns had the new schools, but 250 smaller towns and the rural districts had no schools whatever.

A third nationalizing attempt was made by Alexander I and was influenced by the disintegration of the serf system, by the development of industry and commerce, and by the ideas of the French Revolution. The new statutes (1803 and 1804) maintained the principles of utility and secular scientific instruction. The parochial schools (prikhodskiye uchilishcha) in the rural areas were to instruct the peasantry in reading, writing, arithmetic, and elements of agriculture; the district schools of urban areas (uyezdnye uchilishcha) and the provincial schools (gimnazii) were to give instruction in subjects necessary for civil servants—law, political economy, technology, and commerce. The system was state-controlled and free and formed a continuous ladder to the universities. Later conservative reactions, however, tended to blunt or reverse these reforms. England

In England the development of a “national” education took a completely different course. It was influenced not by a political but by an industrial revolution. It is true that theorists such as Adam Smith, Thomas Paine, and Thomas Robert Malthus proposed state organization of elementary-schooling, but even they wanted to see limited state influence; the state could pay the musicians but not call the tune. Not until 1802 did Parliament intervene in the development of education, when the Health and Morals of Apprentices Act required employers to educate apprentices in basic mathematics, writing, and reading. For the most part this remained only a demand, since the employers were not interested in such education.

The reluctance on the part of the state induced several philanthropists to form educational societies, principally for the education of the poor. In 1796, for example, the Society for Bettering the Conditions of the Poor was founded. A further impulse for elementary education stemmed from the Sunday schools, the first of which was founded in 1780 in Gloucester; by 1785 their numbers had so increased that the Sunday School Society was founded. The lessons in such schools, however, were mainly those of Bible reading.

The educators Andrew Bell and Joseph Lancaster played a major role in progress toward an elementary-school system. They realized that the root of the problem lay in the lack of teachers and in the lack of money to hire assistants. Therefore, first Bell developed, then Lancaster modified, the so-called monitorial system (also called the Lancasterian system), whereby a teacher used his pupils to teach one another. The use of children to teach other children was not new, but Bell and especially Lancaster took the approach and developed it into a systematic plan of education. From 200 to 1,000 children were gathered in one room and seated in rows, usually of 10 pupils each. An adult teacher taught the monitors, and then each monitor taught his row of pupils the lesson in reading, writing, arithmetic, spelling, or higher subjects. Besides monitors who taught, there were, in Lancaster’s system, monitors to take attendance, give examinations, issue supplies, and so on; school activity was to be directed with military precision; the emphasis was on drill and memorization. The system and the publicity connected with it expanded the efforts toward mass education, even though, pedagogically, the whole process was so routinized and formalized that opportunities for creative thinking or initiative scarcely existed. Heinz-Jürgen Ipfling J.J. Chambliss European offshoots in the New World Spanish and Portuguese America

With the Spanish conquerors of the New World, the conquistadores, came friars and priests who immediately settled down to educate the Indians and convert them. Because there was little separation of church and state, the Roman Catholic Church assumed complete control of elementary education, and the early Franciscan and Dominican friars were followed by Augustinians, Jesuits, and Mercedarians.

The first elementary school in the New World was organized in Mexico by the Franciscan Pedro de Gante in 1523 in Texcoco, followed in 1525 by a similar school in San Francisco. Because such schools in Mexico were designed for Indian children, the monks learned the native languages and taught reading, writing, simple arithmetic, singing, and the catechism. The schools of the hospicio of the bishop Vasco de Quiroga in Michoacán added agriculture, trades, and crafts to their curriculum.

Mestizo children, the issue of Spanish and Indian parents, were often abandoned. Thus, special institutions appeared to collect and educate them—for example, the Girls’ School and the School of San Juan de Letrán, founded by Viceroy Mendoza in New Spain, and the Bethlehemite schools of Guatemala and Mexico.

In the beginning, Spaniards’ children born in the colonies, called Creoles, had tutors. Eventually schools promoted by cabildos (municipal authorities) emerged.

During the 18th century the Enlightenment came to Latin America, and with it a more secular and widespread education. Among famous projects were those of Viceroy Vertiz y Salcedo in Argentina and two model schools, free for children of the poor, by Archbishop Francos y Monroy in Guatemala. In New Spain the College of the Vizcainas (1767) became the first all-girl lay institution.

Because of the social structure, riches and administrative privilege were held by the elite—the Creoles—and secondary education was specially organized to serve them. Originally, secondary schools existed only in the monasteries, but when the Jesuits arrived in the late 1560s they founded important colegios (secondary institutions) to prepare students who wanted to enter the universities. There existed a few special colegios for the Indian nobility, such as the outstanding Santa Cruz de Tlaltelolco (1536) in Mexico and San Andres in Quito, both founded by the Franciscans for liberal arts studies. The Jesuits also established schools for the Indians, including El Príncipe (1619) in Lima and San Borja in Cuzco. All these schools were eventually closed because of the jealousy of the Spanish bureaucracy.

Though the Dominicans and Franciscans had been pioneers in education, the Jesuits became the most important teachers. They offered an efficient education, molded to contemporary requirements, in boarding schools, where the elite of the Spaniards born in the Americas studied. When their order was expelled in 1767, education was dealt a severe blow. In Portuguese Brazil, where the expulsion edict had been issued eight years earlier and where they had been the only educators, the royal chancellor was forced to make feeble attempts toward organizing a secular education. The Spanish king Charles III also took advantage of the occasion and founded some new institutions—the Academy of San Carlos, the School of Mining in Mexico, the Royal College of San Carlos in Buenos Aires—and modernized others.

Traditionally, Spanish universities had been organized on the model of either Paris or Bologna. The former was a universitas magistrorum, governed by professors organized in faculties, whereas the latter, as a universitas scholarium, received its corporate authority from the student body organized into “nations” that elected leaders to whom even the professors were subject. In 1551 the Council of the Indies authorized the founding of the first American universities, one in Mexico and one in Lima; academic government was placed in the hands of a claustro, or faculty, composed of the rector, the teachers, and the professors. Dedicated to general studies, the universities required a papal as well as a royal authorization.

The Royal Pontifical University of Mexico was the first to open its doors, in 1553. In the Spanish colonies, eventually 10 major and 15 minor universities came into existence. The latter were actually colleges—nine Jesuit, four Dominican, one Franciscan, and one Augustinian—which, because they were located far from the closest university (minimally 200 miles), were given special authorization to grant higher degrees. In Brazil no university existed, and Portuguese born in the colony had to go to Portugal for study.

Though in Spain itself law reigned supreme, in the Americas theology became the principal chair. Teaching was in Scholastic mode: it began with the reading of a Classical text; then the professor explained the thesis or proposition and offered arguments pro and contra so that a conclusion in accord with Roman Catholic dogma would result. Josefina Zoraida Vázquez French Québec

Soon after the founding of the Québec colony in 1608, the first organized educational activity began with missionary work among the Indians, carried on mainly by members of the Récollet and Jesuit orders and, from 1639, by Ursuline nuns. The first mission “school” recorded was that of Pacifique du Plessis, established in 1616 in Trois-Rivières (Three Rivers).

Christian efforts among the Indians were only a dimension of the religious purposes that framed educational activity in Old World France. Roman Catholic social philosophy allowed no compromise in the spiritual direction of education, and the doctrine and aim of religion coincided with that of education in both formal provisions and informal socialization patterns. At the general level, education was intended to produce religious conformation in thought and behaviour; at the higher level, education was to produce a progeny of clerical leadership. The paternalistic authority of church and monarch was carried from the Old to the New World, where it perhaps became even more pervasive because of the initial absence of alternative institutional developments. In education the exclusive role of the state (though not insignificant) was confined to financial subsidization. Authority for the institution of education was vested in the bishop of Québec.

Most of the nonreligious functions now associated with formal education were, in the 17th and 18th centuries, carried in other institutional sectors: the family, the community, the vocation. Just as there was no sharp break between church and school in formal learning, there was an easy transition between the information and behaviour necessary for work and life as transmitted in the course of various socialization experiences. Thus, the self-sustaining and isolated life of the farmers, the wild and solitary ways of the coureurs de bois (fur traders), the miniature of European manners and customs established in the cities by the gentry—all contained within their own cycle the educative procedures for life in that society. Education as a separate institution was understandably associated with learning not related to the business of life.

Institutional forms found in French colonial Québec included parish schools, girls’ schools, secondary schools, and vocational schools; and literacy records indicate that the provision for education was, in sum, comparable to that in the Old World. Parish or common schools were irregularly provided to afford the rudiments of literacy and religion. Because of the relative sparseness of educational resources, social classes were frequently mixed in these schools. Girls’ schools were established in Québec City by the Ursulines from 1642 and by the Sisters of the Congrégation de Notre Dame from 1659, with a rudimentary curriculum but including a characteristic “finishing” of social graces appropriate to the French Canadian girl. Vocational training was probably of least concern in this early period, but specific attempts to institutionalize this educational area were begun as early as 1668 with the establishment of the School for Arts and Trades in Saint Joachim for instruction in agriculture and certain trades.

Secondary education was offered by the Jesuits from 1636. The Jesuit college, offering early training for eventual entrance into the priesthood, was conducted along characteristically Jesuit lines: militaristic discipline in conduct, unequivocal authority in method, Classical curriculum in content. The Classical curriculum pattern, comprising basically Latin, Greek, mathematics, philosophy, and theology, was to be essentially preserved in the French Canadian development of collèges classiques for secondary education.

In 1663 Bishop Laval established in the city of Québec the grand séminaire as the apex of the educational “system,” as the first French Canadian “university.” Shortly thereafter he also established the preparatory petit séminaire.

Following the cession of Québec to Britain in 1763, education fell prey to political and cultural disruption. Although the British military and colonial government attempted to preserve the structure of French civil and religious institutions, the cultural integrity of the system was inevitably broken. Financial grants from France for education were discontinued and were not replaced by the British government; recruitment to religious orders was restricted; and educational development was obstructed by the continual association of educational plans with cultural-religious controversies. The end of the 18th century saw French Canadian education fall backward into neglect. Robert Frederic Lawson British America New England

The year 1630, chronicled in New England annals as the beginning of the Great Migration, witnessed the founding there of Puritanism as the established religion. Rejecting democracy and toleration as unscriptural, the Puritans put their trust in a theocracy of the elect that brooked no divergence from Puritan orthodoxy. So close was the relation between state and church that an offense against the one was an offense against the other and, in either case, “treason to the Lord Jesus.” The early Puritans also put their confidence in centralized church governance; however, geographic reality forced them to settle for a localized, congregational administration, for impossible roads made land travel over any distance onerous and even dangerous, and thus the focal point of social and political life had to be the village. Small and constricted, a place where the vital necessities, sacred and profane, were within walking range of all and where one’s conduct was exposed to constant public watch, the New England village was the prime mover of communal life.

In Puritan moral theology, the young, like the old, were sinners doomed by almost insurmountable odds to perdition. To God, indeed, even infants were depraved, unregenerate, and damned. Hence, the sooner the young learned the ground rules of the good society, as revealed in the Bible, the better. The task of teaching them first befell the parents. Later, when they were old enough, the burden was conferred upon the school. The first secondary school was probably the Boston Latin School. Founded in 1635, it was modeled on the grammar schools of England, which is to say that it put an overwhelming emphasis on the ancient languages and “humane learning and good literature.” By the 1640s the idea of town-supported schooling had lost its novelty.

If towns braved the first steps in education, then the Commonwealth of Massachusetts did not trail far behind. In 1642 it ordered parents and masters of apprentices to see to it that their charges were instructed in reading, religion, and the colony’s principal laws. Five years later, the General Court reinforced this enactment with yet another. Aimed at the “old deluder Satan,” it undertook to thwart him from keeping “men from a knowledge of the Scriptures,” by requiring every township of 50 households to commission someone to teach reading and writing. The law also directed towns of 100 families to furnish instruction in Latin grammar so that youth might be “fitted for the university.” Finally, the measure required teachers to be paid by “parents or masters… or by the inhabitants in general.” The measure was given only a pallid obedience, but its assumption that the state may compel the schooling of its young and that, in order to support education, it may impose taxes is pertinent to subsequent times.

The first colonists had scarcely settled when, in 1636, the General Court appropriated £400 “towards a school or college.” When two years later John Harvard died and left the institution his library and some £800, the grateful founders honoured their school with his name. Designed to train youth for important Puritan places, particularly in the ministry, the college accepted only those who could read, write, and speak Latin in prose and verse, besides knowing Greek nouns and verbs familiarly. Once admitted, the student was lodged at the college, pledged to a blameless behaviour, and put upon a prescribed four-year course of grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, ethics, ancient history, Greek, and Hebrew. If he weathered these hazards, he was made a bachelor of arts (B.A.), and, if ambition still roweled him, he could enroll for another three years to become a master of arts (M.A.).

So things sat until the century’s passing. Then, swayed by the intellectual breezes of Europe’s Enlightenment, Harvard College ventured some earnest renovation. Its texts, cobwebbed with Aristotelianism, were replaced with newer ones by John Locke and Sir Isaac Newton. In 1718 it added mathematics and sciences to its offerings, and 20 years later it enriched itself with a professorship of mathematics and natural philosophy. There were the usual grumblings from conservatives, and in 1701 a number of Congregational parsons, all Harvard sons, distressed by their alma mater’s dalliance in newfangled ideas, inaugurated the collegiate school of Connecticut, now Yale University. The new academies

Disdainful of the challenging intellectual values, the secondary schools continued in their Classical tracks. By the 18th century, however, their tradition was playing out, especially among the rising nabobs of the marketplace. When the old schools failed to respond to their demands for an education calculated to prepare their sons for everyday living, they resorted to private schooling. From such endeavour emerged the academy. The first school of strictly native provenance, it made its advent in 1751 in Philadelphia (the Philadelphia Academy), the work in the main of Benjamin Franklin. What differentiated it from its Classical antecedent was its promotion of “useful learning,” to wit, the vernacular, modern languages, history, geography, chronology, navigation, mathematics, natural and applied science, and the like.

The first academies addressed themselves solely to boys, but time saw them vouchsafe instruction to girls in a “female department,” which in turn gave way to the “female academy,” whose curriculum reflected debates of the time about female education. Fine arts, domestic subjects, and training for occupations open to women were included, though some female educators stressed intellectual attainment rather than practical learning.

Private ventures always, academies generally were not loath to solicit outside assistance—some, indeed, as in New York, enjoyed a public subsidy. Whatever their special character, to their very end they maintained their original purpose of bringing education into closer consonance with “the great and the real business of living,” as Phillips Academy of Andover, Massachusetts, phrased it when, in 1778, it held its first sessions. The middle colonies

The religious uniformity that marked the Puritan theocracy was missing in the middle colonies. From New York through Delaware there flourished a host of sects whose scriptural interpretations were diverse—often, in fact, in collision. Nor was there even the tie of a common language, for the settlers came from many lands. Divergent in religion and language—the bedrock in those times of elementary schooling—the middle colonists could not accommodate themselves, as did the Puritans, to a single school teaching reading and religion to all the children of the neighbourhood. Instead, they depended on parish or parochial schools, each of them free to teach by its own denominational lights. True, for a time New Netherland, with its established Dutch Reformed Church, maintained some town schools, but, after the English seized the colony (renaming it New York), such endeavours ceased. Pennsylvania, linguistically and denominationally the most heterogeneous of the colonies, began its educational history by ordering the erection of public schools and the instruction of children. But the ordinance fell prey to powerful sectarian antagonisms, and in 1701 the colony essayed to make peace by sanctioning the establishment of parochial schools.

Like the New Englanders, the middle colonists aspired to establish colleges, but, with no friendly lawmakers to sustain them, they found their task heavily hobbled, and the mid-1700s were upon them before their hopes materialized with the advent, in 1746, of the College of New Jersey (Princeton). There followed King’s College (Columbia) in 1754, the College and Academy of Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) in 1755, and Queen’s College (Rutgers) in 1766. Common to these schools was their stress on the ancient languages, metaphysics, and divine science. At the same time, however, one discerns signs of a new liberalism. Both Rutgers and Columbia announced their interdenominationalism. Pennsylvania offered courses in physics, and in 1765 it became the first colonial college to sponsor systematic instruction in medicine. The Southern colonies

Unlike New Englanders, Southerners resided not in villages but on widely scattered plantations. For years, town life was impossible and so, per consequence, were town schools. But even had their establishment been feasible, the odds against them were staggering, since the ruling classes, like their analogues overseas in England, were averse to schooling the young under governmental direction. Instead, they regarded education as a personal concern, the affair of parent and church rather than of the state. Left thus to their own devices, Southerners schooled their young to suit their taste, the rich resorting to tutors and private schools and the rest scratching out an education as best they could. Time saw the appearance of a number of free schools serving those who were neither rich nor poor. For the offspring of the low-down and unregarded folk, Virginia enacted its law of 1642. An echo of England’s Poor Law, it provided for the “relief of such parents whose poverty extends not to give them [the children] breeding.” For this purpose it ordered the creation of a “workhouse school” at James City to which each county was to commit two children of the age of six or over. There, besides being reared as Anglicans, they were to be “instructed in honest and profitable trades and manufactures as also to avoid sloth and idleness.” Amended several times, the statute became the model for similar legislation throughout the South.

The first Southern college was founded in Virginia in 1693. William and Mary College was chartered to propagate the “Liberal Arts and the Christian Faith,” with particular stress on preparing young men for the Anglican pulpit. As the 18th century swept on, the secular interest that had invaded Harvard appeared in Virginia, and there ensued a waning of the earlier religious motivation. In 1779, led by Thomas Jefferson, the college trustees refurbished the school with chairs in medicine, mathematics, physics, moral philosophy, economics, law, and politics. The chair in divinity was discontinued as “incompatible with freedom in a republic.” Adolphe Erich Meyer Robert Frederic Lawson Newfoundland and the Maritime Provinces.

Newfoundland was, during most of this period, under British control, and, though there were settlers even before the 17th century, the island was not considered a settlement colony. Other than for naval training and fishing advantages, the British government had no concern for Newfoundland. Thus, policies were constructed with regard to the rights and advantages of British seamen, while implicitly, as well as in overt regulations, settlement was obstructed and restricted. Destruction from the running French-British military conflicts further discouraged development. These conditions of economic and political diminution of the settlement from outside were aggravated by the usurious conduct of merchants and the corruption of officials and by the national and religious divisions among the inhabitants themselves.

With such substantial problems of mere survival in Newfoundland, it is not surprising that the luxury of formal education was almost absent during this period. Some accounts verify that informal, unorganized efforts were made on an occasional basis to convey minimum schooling to settlers’ children, but the only organized effort was that of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts (SPGFP). The SPGFP founded or aided a school in Bonavista in 1722 and in St. John’s in 1744 and sponsored schools in more than 20 settlements between 1766 and 1824. Religion was undoubtedly more important than education as such to the society, but its provision of reading materials as well as the mere act of establishing some kind of school filled a notable void in the Newfoundland settlement. Other charitable societies—such as the Society for Improving the Condition of the Poor in St. John’s, the Benevolent Irish Society, the Newfoundland School Society (later the Colonial and Continental Church Society), the Wesleyan Society, the Sisters of the Presentation, the Sisters of Mercy, and the Irish Christian Brothers—carried the charity-school work into the 19th century and maintained a thread of education through the colonial “dark ages.”

For a time after 1763, the Maritimes were all one colony—Nova Scotia—but Prince Edward Island was separated in 1769 and New Brunswick in 1784. This area comprised a heterogeneous population of French Acadians, English Protestants and others from Europe, Highland Scots, and loyalists from the United States. Each of these groups carried attitudes more or less favourable to education, and the regionalization of these attitudes, together with other conditions, influenced the differential development of education in the area. At the end of the 18th century, for example, New Brunswick, with a high loyalist population promoting political and educational development, probably ranked highest among the Maritime colonies in educational interest.

The first relatively organized attempt at common schooling in the Maritimes was made by the SPGFP, closely connected to the Church of England. The society opened both weekday and Sunday schools, and it might be said that it fostered teacher training in stipulating qualifications for its teachers. Other than SPGFP schools, education in the Maritime colonies was carried on by itinerant teachers and in scattered private-venture schools. Schools for separate ethnic or religious groups were discouraged by the Anglicans, but consistent pressure for such schools did succeed at least temporarily—for example, in Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, and in Sydney, on Cape Breton Island. A school for blacks was established in Halifax in 1788.

Upper schools were established only toward the end of the 18th century in the Maritimes. As they were established singularly and recruited from a social class rather than from a lower school, there is no clear line of demarcation among the various types as there would be later in an integrated system. Basically, they were Anglican and Classical, although the private schools, advertising to as wide a clientele as possible, often included some breadth, extending into practical studies. Probably the most influential of the early attempts were the two Latin grammar schools founded in 1788 and 1789 at Windsor and Halifax, Nova Scotia. The former became associated with King’s College, established in Windsor at the same time. Thomas McCulloch’s Academy at Pictou, Nova Scotia, and the College of New Brunswick at Fredericton, both founded around the turn of the century, were also early exemplars of higher education. Robert Frederic Lawson Western education in the 19th century The social and historical setting

From the mid-17th century to the closing years of the 18th century, new social, economic, and intellectual forces steadily quickened—forces that in the late 18th and the 19th centuries would weaken and, in many cases, end the old aristocratic absolutism. The European expansion to new worlds overseas had stimulated commercial rivalry. The new trade had increased national wealth and encouraged a sharp rise in the numbers and influence of the middle classes. These social and economic transformations—joined with technological changes involving the steam engine and the factory system—together produced industrialism, urbanization, and the beginnings of mass labour. At the same time, intellectuals and philosophers were assaulting economic abuses, old unjust privileges, misgovernment, and intolerance. Their ideas, which carried a new emphasis on the worth of the individual—the citizen rather than the subject—helped to inspire political revolutions, sometimes successful, sometimes unsuccessful. But, more importantly, they worked to make it impossible for any government—even the most reactionary—to disregard for long the welfare of common people. Finally, there was a widespread psychological change: people’s confidence in their power to use resources, master nature, and structure their own future was heightened beyond anything known before, and this confidence on a national scale—in the form of nationalism—moved all groups to struggle for the freedom to direct their own affairs.

All these trends influenced the progress of education. One of the most significant results was the gradual acceptance of the view that education ought to be the responsibility of the state. Some countries, such as France and Germany, were inspired by a mixture of national aspiration and ideology to begin the establishment of public educational systems early in the 19th century. Others, such as Great Britain and the United States, under the spell of laissez-faire, hesitated longer before allowing the government to intervene in educational affairs. The school reformers in these countries had to combat the prevailing notion that “free schools” were to be provided only for pauper children, if at all; and they had to convince society that general taxation upon the whole community was the only adequate way to provide education for all the children of all the people.

The new social and economic changes also called upon the schools, public and private, to broaden their aims and curricula. Schools were expected not only to promote literacy, mental discipline, and good moral character but also to help prepare children for citizenship, for jobs, and for individual development and success. Although teaching methods remained oriented toward textbook memorizing and strict discipline, a more sympathetic attitude toward children began to appear. As the numbers of pupils grew rapidly, individual methods of “hearing recitations” by children began to give way to group methods. The monitorial system, also called the Lancastrian system, became popular because, in the effort to overcome the shortage of teachers during the quick expansion of education, it enabled one teacher to use older children to act as monitors in teaching specific lessons to younger children in groups. Similarly, the practice of dividing children into grades or classes according to their ages—a practice that began in 18th-century Germany—was to spread everywhere as schools grew larger. The early reform movement: the new educational philosophers

The late 18th and 19th centuries represent a period of great activity in reformulating educational principles, and there was a ferment of new ideas, some of which in time wrought a transformation in school and classroom. The influence of Jean-Jacques Rousseau was profound and inestimable. One of his most famous followers was Pestalozzi, who believed that children’s nature, rather than the structure of the arts and sciences, should be the starting point of education. Rousseauist ideas are seen also in the work of Friedrich Froebel, who emphasized self-activity as the central feature of childhood education, and in that of Johann Friedrich Herbart, perhaps the most influential 19th-century thinker in the development of pedagogy as a science.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, drawing in pastels by Maurice-Quentin de La Tour, 1753; in the Musee d'Art et d'Histoire, Geneva.Courtesy of the Musée d'Art et d'Histoire, Geneva; photograph, Jean Arlaud Pestalozzi

The theories of the Swiss reformer Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi laid much of the foundation of modern elementary education. Beginning as a champion of the underprivileged, he established near Zürich in 1774 an orphanage in which he attempted to teach neglected children the rudiments of agriculture and simple trades in order that they might lead productive, self-reliant lives. A few years later the enterprise failed, and Pestalozzi turned to writing, producing his chief work on method, How Gertrude Teaches Her Children, in 1801, and then began teaching again. Finally in 1805 he founded at Yverdon his famous boarding school, which flourished for 20 years, was attended by students from every country in Europe, and was visited by many important figures of the time, including the philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, the educators Froebel and Herbart, and the geographer Carl Ritter. The pedagogy of Pestalozzi

In spite of the quantity of his writings, it cannot be said that Pestalozzi ever wrote a complete and systematic account of his principles and methods; an outline of his theories must be deduced from his various writings and his work. The foundation of his doctrine was that education should be organic, meaning that intellectual, moral, and physical education (or, in his words, development of “head, heart, and body”) should be integrated and that education should draw upon the faculties or “self-power” inherent in the human being. Education should be literally a drawing-out of this self-power, a development of abilities through activity—in the physical field by encouraging manual work and exercises, in the moral field by stimulating the habit of moral actions, and in the intellectual field by eliciting the correct use of the senses in observing concrete things accurately and making judgments upon them. Words, ideas, practices, and morals have meaning only when related to concrete things.

From these overarching principles there followed certain practical rules of educational method. First, experience must precede symbolism. There must be an emphasis on object lessons that acquaint the child with the realities of life; from these lessons abstract thought is developed. What one does is a means to what one knows. This means that the program should be child-centred, not subject-centred. The teacher is to offer help by participating with the child in his activities and should strive to know the nature of the child in order to determine the details of his education. This means that the stages of education must be related to the stages of child development. Finally, intellectual, moral, and physical activities should be as one.

Much of Pestalozzi’s pedagogy was influenced by his work with children of the poor. Thus, there was a strong emphasis on education in the home. The development of skills was emphasized not for their own sake but in connection with moral growth. Manual training was important for the head and heart, as well as for the hand. Whereas the reformers of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution stressed the “emancipation” of the lower classes, Pestalozzi aimed at helping poor people to help themselves. This was social reform, not social revolution. The influence of Pestalozzi

“The art of education,” Pestalozzi claimed, “must be significantly raised in all its facets to become a science that is to be built on and proceeds from the deepest knowledge of human nature.” Through his own efforts in this direction, Pestalozzi stimulated pedagogical theory and practice to an enormous degree in many parts of the Western world. Through his philanthropic efforts on behalf of the poor, he advanced pedagogical theory and practice in three pivotal ways: (1) he inspired new movements toward the reform of philanthropic educational institutions and the pedagogy applied to such institutions, (2) he created a new methodology for elementary education that was introduced not only into schools but also into programs of teacher education in Europe and America, and (3) by his own example he gave teachers a high professional ethos. Pestalozzi, like few others at any time, recognized and sincerely tried to alter the misery existing in the world. If the Enlightenment saw its pedagogical mission as the spreading of the light of reason, then Pestalozzi showed that it was not reason alone but love above all that would show a way out of the “mire of the world.”

It is hardly possible to name all of Pestalozzi’s disciples—the Pestalozzians—for almost all the pedagogical figures of his time literally or figuratively went to his school. His influence was most profound in Germany, especially in Prussia and Saxony. Generally speaking, in the first half of the 19th century the English school system was completely under the influence of the disciplinarian monitorial systems of Andrew Bell and Joseph Lancaster. Pestalozzi, for most Englishmen, was “a distressing type of the German” and “an idealistic dreamer,” as some critics put it. Nevertheless, he exercised some influence in England through James Pierrepont Greaves and the London Infant School Society and through Charles and Elizabeth Mayo and the Home and Colonial School Society. In the United States Pestalozzianism was introduced by Philadelphia scientist and philanthropist William Maclure, one of the sponsors of the utopian colony at New Harmony, Ind., and by Joseph Neef, who opened a school near Philadelphia.

In Switzerland itself, in Hofwil near Bern, Philipp Emanuel von Fellenberg founded an institution for the education of the poor. He tried to build up a kind of pedagogical province or miniature state, in which work was the means of self-help and in which the pedagogical program was the joint responsibility of teachers and pupils. Froebel and the kindergarten movement

Next to Pestalozzi, perhaps the most gifted of early 19th-century educators was Froebel, the founder of the kindergarten movement and a theorist on the importance of constructive play and self-activity in early childhood. He was an intensely religious man who tended toward pantheism and has been called a nature mystic. Throughout his life he achieved very little literary fame, partly because of the style of his prose and philosophy, which is so academic and obscure that it is difficult to read and sometimes scarcely comprehensible.

In early life, Froebel tried various kinds of employment until 1805, when he met Anton Gruner, a disciple of Pestalozzi and director of the normal school at Frankfurt am Main, who persuaded him to become a teacher. After two years with Gruner, he visited Pestalozzi at Yverdon, studied at Göttingen and Berlin, and eventually determined upon establishing his own school, founded on what he considered to be psychological bases. The result in 1816 was the Universal German Educational Institute at Griesheim, transferred the following year to Keilhau, which constituted a kind of educational community for Froebel, his friends, and their wives and children. To this period belongs The Education of Man (1826), his most important treatise, though typical of his obscurantism. In 1831 he was again in Switzerland, where he opened a school, an orphanage, and a teacher-training course. Finally, in 1837, upon returning to Keilhau, he opened his first Kindergarten, or “garden of children,” in nearby Bad Blankenburg. The experiment attracted wide interest, and other kindergartens were started and flourished, despite some political opposition. The pedagogy of Froebel

Froebel’s pedagogical ideas have a mystical and metaphysical context. He viewed man as a child of God, of nature, and of humanity who must learn to understand his own unity, diversity, and individuality, corresponding to this threefold aspect of his being. On the other hand, man must understand the unity of all things (the pantheistic element).

Education consists of leading man, as a thinking, intelligent being, growing into self-consciousness, to a pure and unsullied, conscious and free representation of the inner law of Divine Unity, and in teaching him ways and means thereto.

Education had two aspects: the teacher was to remove hindrances to the self-development or “self-activity” of the child, but he was also to correct deviations from what man’s experience has taught is right and best. Education is thus both “dictating and giving way.” This means that ordinarily a teacher should not intervene and impose mandatory education, but when a child—particularly a child of kindergarten age—is restless, tearful, or willful, the teacher must seek the underlying reason and try to eradicate the uncovered hindrance to the child’s creative development. Most important, the teacher’s dictating and giving way should not flow from the mood and caprices of the teacher. Behaviour should be measured according to a “third force” between teacher and child, a Christian idea of goodness and truth.

School for Froebel was not an “establishment for the acquisition of a greater or lesser variety of external knowledge”; actually, he thought children were instructed in things they do not need. School instead should be the place to which the pupil comes to know the “inner relationship of things”—“things” meaning God, man, nature, and their unity. The subjects followed from this: religion, language and art, natural history, and the knowledge of form. In all these subjects the lessons should appeal to the pupil’s interests. It is clear that, in Froebel’s view, the school is to concern itself not primarily with the transmission of knowledge but with the development of character and the provision of the right motivation to learn.

Froebel put great emphasis on play in child education. Just like work and lessons, games or play should serve to realize the child’s inner destiny. Games are not idle time wasting; they are “the most important step in the development of a child,” and they are to be watched by the teachers as clues to how the child is developing. Froebel was especially interested in the development of toys for children—what he called “gifts,” devised to stimulate learning through well-directed play. These gifts, or playthings, included balls, globes, dice, cylinders, collapsible dice, shapes of wood to be put together, paper to be folded, strips of paper, rods, beads, and buttons. The aim was to develop elemental judgment distinguishing form, colour, separation and association, grouping, matching, and so on. When, through the teacher’s guidance, the gifts are properly experienced, they connect the natural inner unity of the child to the unity of all things (e.g., the sphere gives the child a sense of unlimited continuity, the cylinder a sense both of continuity and of limitation). Even the practice of sitting in a circle symbolizes the way in which each individual, while a unity in himself, is a living part of a larger unity. The child is to feel that his nature is actually joined with the larger nature of things. The kindergarten movement

The kindergarten was unique for its time. Whereas the first institutions for small children that earlier appeared in Holland, Germany, and England had been welfare nursery schools or day-care centres intended merely for looking after children while parents worked, Froebel stood for the socializing or educational idea of providing, as he put it in founding his kindergarten, “a school for the psychological training of little children by means of play and occupations.” The school, that is, was to have a purpose for the children, not the adults. The curriculum consisted chiefly of three types of activities: (1) playing with the “gifts,” or toys, and engaging in other occupations designed to familiarize children with inanimate things, (2) playing games and singing songs for the purpose not only of exercising the limbs and voice but also of instilling a spirit of humanity and nature, and (3) gardening and caring for animals in order to induce sympathy for plants and animals. All this was to be systematic activity.

The kindergarten plan to meet the educational needs of children between the ages of four and six or seven through the agency of play thereafter gained widespread acceptance. During the 25 years following Froebel’s death in 1852, kindergartens were established in leading cities of Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Hungary, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States. In Great Britain the term infant school was retained for the kindergarten plan, and in some other countries the term crèche has been used. Herbart

Johann Friedrich Herbart was a contemporary of Froebel and other German Romanticists, but he can hardly be put into the ranks of such pedagogues. During his lifetime his sober, systematic “philosophical realism” found little approval; only posthumously, during the latter half of the 19th century, did his work achieve great importance. He is regarded as one of the founders of theoretical pedagogy, injecting both metaphysics and psychology into the study of how people learn. The psychology and pedagogy of Herbart

As a young man of 18, Herbart had studied at the University of Jena under the idealist philosopher Fichte. It was a long while before he broke from the spell of Fichte’s teachings and turned to philosophical realism, which asserts that underlying the world of appearances there is a plurality of things or “reals.” Change consists simply in the alteration in the relations between these reals, which resist the changed relationships as a matter of self-preservation.

Ideas, like things, always exist and always resist change and seek self-preservation. It is true that some ideas may be driven below the threshold of consciousness; but the excluded ideas continue to exist in an unconscious form and tend, on the removal of obstacles (as through education), to return spontaneously to consciousness. In consciousness there are ideas attracting other ideas so as to form complex systems. These idea masses correspond to the many interests of the individual (such as his home and his hobbies) and to broader philosophical and religious concepts and values. In the course of mental development certain constellations of ideas acquire a permanent dominance that exercises a powerful selective facilitating influence upon the ideas struggling to enter or reenter the consciousness.

In his systematic account of the nature of education, Herbart conceived the process as beginning with the idea masses that the child has previously acquired from experience and from social intercourse. The teacher creates knowledge from the former and sympathy from the latter. The ultimate objective is the formation of character by the development of an enlightened will, capable of making judgments of right and wrong. Moral judgments (like reals) are absolute, springing from contemplation, incapable of proof and not requiring proof. Ethics, in other words, is the ultimate focus of pedagogy.

In the classroom, it is the aim of the lessons to introduce new conceptions, to bind them together, and to order them. Herbart speaks of “articulation”—a systematic method of constructing correct, or moral, idea masses in the student’s mind. First the student becomes involved in a particular problem, and then he considers its context. Each of these two stages has a phase of rest and of progress, and thus there are four stages of articulation: (1) clarification, or the static contemplation of particular conceptions, (2) association, or the dynamic linking of new conceptions with old ones, (3) systematization, or the static ordering and modification of what in the conceptions are deemed of value, and (4) methodization, or the dynamic application and recognition of what has been learned. Herbart phrased this system of instruction only in very general terms, but his successors tended to turn this framework into a rigid schedule that had to be applied to every lesson. Herbart himself warned:

We must be familiar with them [the methods], try them out according to circumstances, alter, find new ones, and extemporize; only we must not be swallowed up in them nor seek the salvation of education there. The Herbartians

Herbart’s basing of educational methods on an understanding of mental processes or psychological considerations, his view that psychology and moral philosophy are linked, and his idea that instruction is the means to moral judgment had a large place in late 19th-century pedagogical thought. Among Herbart’s followers were Tuiskon Ziller in Leipzig (founder of the Association for Scientific Pedagogy) and Wilhelm Rein in Jena. From 1895 to 1901 a National Herbart Society for the Scientific Study of Education flourished in the United States; John Dewey was a major critic of Herbartianism in its proceedings.

Ziller’s ideas are representative of the Herbartians. He insisted that all parts of the curriculum be closely integrated and unified—history and religion forming the core subjects on which everything else hinged. The sequence of instruction was to be adjusted to the psychological development of the individual, which was seen as corresponding to the cultural evolution of mankind in stages from primitive savagery to civilization. His main goal in education, like that of most Herbartians, was to promote character building, not simply knowledge accumulation. Other German theorists

In the history of pedagogy there is no period of such fruitfulness as the 19th century in Germany. In addition to Herbart, Froebel, Pestalozzi (in German Switzerland), and their followers, there were scores of the most important writers, philosophers, and theologians contributing their ideas on education—including Friedrich von Schiller, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, G.W.F. Hegel, Friedrich Ludwig Jahn, Johann Paul Friedrich Richter, Ernst Moritz Arndt, and Friedrich Nietzsche. To list the many ideas and contributions of these figures and others is impossible here, but it is worthwhile to suggest briefly the work of three men—Fichte" class="md-crosslink">Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Wilhelm von Humboldt—representing three divergent views.

Wilhelm, baron von Humboldt, oil painting by F. Kruger.Bruckmann/Art Resource, New York

When the great heterodox University of Berlin was founded in 1809, Fichte became one of its foremost professors and a year later its second rector, having already achieved fame throughout Germany as an idealist philosopher and fervent nationalist. At a time when Napoleon had humbled Prussia, Fichte in Berlin delivered the powerful Addresses to the German Nation (1807–08), full of practical views on national recovery and glory, including suggestions on the complete reorganization of the German schools along Pestalozzian lines. All children would be educated—and would be educated by the state. Boys and girls would be taught together, receiving virtually the same education. There would be manual training in agriculture and the industrial arts, physical training, and mental training, the aim of which would be not simply the transmission of measures of knowledge but rather the instillation of intellectual curiosity and love and charity toward all men. Unlike Pestalozzi, however, Fichte was wary of the influence of parents and preferred educating children in a “separate and independent community,” at least until a new generation of parents had arisen, educated in the new ideas and ideals. Here was an apparent revival of Plato’s idea of a strictly ordered, authoritarian state.

Another of the founders of the University of Berlin (teaching there from 1810 to 1834) was the Protestant theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher, who sounded a very modern note by offering a social interpretation of education. Education, in his view, was an effort on the part of the older generation to “deliver” the younger generation into the four spheres of life—church, state, social life, and science. Education, however, not only assumes its organization in terms of these four areas of life but also serves to develop and influence these areas.

Perhaps more than any other individual, the philologist and diplomat Wilhelm von Humboldt was responsible for the founding of the University of Berlin. Supported by the king of Prussia, Frederick William III, he adopted for it principles that raised it to a foremost place among the universities of the world—the most important principle being that no teacher or student need adhere to any particular creed or school of thought. This academic freedom survived in Germany despite its temporary suspension and Humboldt’s dismissal by a reactionary Prussian government in 1819. Philosophically and pedagogically, Humboldt was himself a humanist—a part of a wave of what were called new humanists—who reasserted the importance of studying the classical achievements of humanity in language, literature, philosophy, and history. The aim of education in these terms was not the service of society or the state but rather the cultivation of the individual. French theorists

At this time there were two men in France who were making their names through the introduction of new methods—Jean-Joseph Jacotot and Édouard Séguin. Jacotot was a high school teacher, politician, and pedagogue, whose main educational interests focused on the teaching of foreign languages. “You learn a foreign language,” he said, “as you learn your mother-language.” The pupil is confronted with a foreign language; he learns a text in the language almost by heart, compares it with a text in his own native language, and then tries gradually to free himself from the comparison of texts and to construct new combinations of words. The teacher controls this learning by asking questions. “My method is to learn one book and relate all the others to it.” The learning of grammar came later.

Jacotot’s method emphasized first the practical side and then the rule, constant repetition, and self-activity on the part of the pupils. Controversy arose, however, over his two basic theses: (1) that everyone has the same intelligence, differences in learning success being only a case of differences in industry and stamina, and (2) that everything is in everything: “Tout est dans tout,” which suggests that any subject or book is analogous to any other.

The doctor and psychologist Édouard Séguin developed a pedagogy for pupils of below-average intelligence. Historically, scientific attempts to educate mentally retarded children had begun with the efforts of a French doctor, Jean-Marc-Gaspard Itard, during the latter part of the 18th century. In his classic book, The Wild Boy of Aveyron (1801), Itard related his five-year effort to train and educate a boy found, at about the age of 11, running naked and wild in the woods of Aveyron. Later, Séguin, a student of Itard, devised an educational method using physical and sensory activities to develop mental processes. Limbs and the senses were, in his view, a part of the whole personality, and their development was a part of the whole human education. His method was a specific adaptation of the idea that the development of intellectual and moral distinctions grows out of sensory experience. Spencer’s scientism

The English sociologist Herbert Spencer was perhaps the most important popularizer of science and philosophy in the 19th century. Presenting a theory of evolution prior to Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Spencer argued that all of life, including education, should take its essential lessons from the findings of the sciences. In Education: Intellectual, Moral, and Physical (1860), he insisted that the answer to the question “What knowledge is of most worth?” is the knowledge that the study of science provides. While the educational methodology Spencer advocated was a version of the sense realism espoused by reformers from Ratke and Comenius down to Pestalozzi, Spencer himself was a social conservative. For him, the value of science lies not in its possibilities for making a better world but in the ways science teaches man to adjust to an environment that is not susceptible to human engineering. Spencer’s advocacy of the study of science was an inspiration to the American Edward Livingston Youmans and others who argued that a scientific education could provide a culture for modern times superior to that of classical education. Heinz-Jürgen Ipfling J.J. Chambliss Development of national systems of education

The great changes in Europe in the 19th century included, among other things, the further consolidation of national states, the spread of modern technology and industrialization, and increasing secularization. These changes had consequences for the design of school systems. National school systems had to be conceived and organized. Alongside the older schools—including elementary schools, Latin, or grammar, schools, secondary schools, and universities—there developed so-called modern schools that stressed the exact sciences and modern languages, reflecting the new technological and commercial age. Vocational schools also appeared in greater numbers. The influence of the church was increasingly repressed, and the influence of the state on the school system correspondingly grew stronger. The ideal of universal education—education for all—became more and more a reality. Germany

Martin Luther’s pronouncements on the educational responsibilities of the individual had no doubt helped create that healthy public opinion that rendered the principle of compulsory school attendance acceptable in Prussia at a much earlier date than elsewhere. State intervention in education was almost coincident with the rise of the Prussian state. In 1717 Frederick William I ordered all children to attend school, if schools were available to them. This was followed in 1736 by edicts for the establishment of schools in certain provinces, in 1763 by Frederick II the Great’s regulation asserting the principle of compulsory school attendance, and in 1794 by a codification of Prussian law recognizing the principle of state supremacy in education. Humboldt’s reforms

The schools, however, had established a traditional classical curriculum that ignored the changing needs of life and fields of knowledge. No effective reorganization of the educational system was carried out until after the disaster of the Battle of Jena (1806), during the Napoleonic Wars, which brought about the virtual collapse of Prussia. Fichte delivered his Addresses to the German Nation at this time, appealing to the spirit of patriotism over a selfish individualism. He advocated a nationalism to be cultivated and enhanced by controlling the education of the young. In the period of governmental reform which came about, one of the first acts of the prime minister Freiherr Karl vom Stein in 1807 was to abolish certain semi-ecclesiastical schools and to place education under the Ministry of the Interior, with Wilhelm von Humboldt at the head of a special section. Humboldt’s policy in secondary education was a compromise between the narrow philological pedantry of the old Latin schools and the large demands of the new humanism that he espoused. The measure introduced by Humboldt in 1810 for the state examination and certification of teachers checked the then-common practice of permitting unqualified theological students to teach in the schools and raised the teaching profession to a high level of dignity and efficiency, placing Prussia in the forefront of educational progress. It was also a result of the initiative of Humboldt that the methods of Pestalozzi were introduced into the teachers’ seminaries. To this period also belongs the revival, in 1812, of the Abitur (the school-leaving examination), which had fallen into abeyance. Developments after 1815

The period that succeeded the peace of 1815 was one of political reaction, and not until the 1830s were there further significant reforms. In 1834, for example, an important step was taken in regard to secondary education by making it necessary for candidates for the learned professions, as well as for the civil service and for university studies, to pass the leaving examination of the Gymnasium, the Classical secondary schools. Thus, through the leaving examination, the state held the key to the liberal careers and was thereby able to impose its own standards upon all secondary schools.

In connection with the so-called Kulturkampf, the struggle between the state and the Roman Catholic Church, the school law of 1872 reasserted the absolute right of the state alone to the supervision of the schools. Nevertheless, the Prussian system remained both for Catholics and for Protestants essentially denominational. On the elementary level, in particular, the mixed school was established only when the creeds were so intermingled that a confessional school was impracticable. In all cases, the teachers were appointed with reference to religious faith; religious instruction was given in school hours and was inspected by the clergy.

The official classification, or grading according to the type of curriculum, of secondary schools in Prussia (and throughout Germany) was very precise. The following were the three officially recognized types: (1) the Classical nine-year Gymnasium, with a curriculum that included Latin, Greek, and a modern language, (2) the semi-Classical nine-year Realgymnasium, with a more modern curriculum that included, in addition to Latin and modern languages, the natural sciences and mathematics, and (3) the modern six-year Realschule or nine-year Oberrealschule, with a curriculum of sciences and mathematics.

The differentiation between the types was the result of a natural educational development corresponding to the economic changes that transformed Prussia from an agricultural to an industrial state. The Classical schools long retained their social prestige and a definite educational advantage in that only their pupils were admissible to the universities. From the foundation of the German Empire in 1871, the history of secondary education was largely concerned with a struggle for a wider recognition of the work of the newer schools. The movement received a considerable impetus by the action of Emperor William II, who summoned a school conference in 1890 at which he set the keynote: “It is our duty to educate young men to become young Germans and not young Greeks or Romans.” New schedules were framed in which the hours devoted to Latin were considerably reduced, and no pupil could obtain a leaving certificate without a satisfactory mark in the mother tongue. The reform lasted only a single school generation. In 1900 equality of privileges was granted to three types of schools, subject to the following reservations: the theological faculties continued to admit only students from Classical schools, and the pupils of the Oberrealschule were excluded by their lack of Latin from the medical faculties. But insofar as Latin was required for other studies, such as law or history, it could be acquired at the university itself. Girls’ schools

In Prussia, as elsewhere, the higher education of girls lagged far behind that of boys and received little attention from the state or municipality, except insofar as the services of women teachers were needed in the elementary schools. Thus it came about that in Prussia secondary schools for girls were dealt with administratively as part of the elementary school system. After the establishment of the German Empire in 1871, a conference of directors and teachers of these schools was held at Weimar and put forth a reasoned plea for better organization and improved status. The advocates of reform, however, were not at unity in their aims. Some wished to lay stress on ethical, literary, and aesthetic training; others stressed intellectual development and claimed an equal share in all the culture of the age. Even the women teachers fought an unequal battle, for all the school heads and a large part of the staff were men, usually academically trained. The women continually demanded a larger share of the work, and this was secured by the establishment of a new higher examination for women teachers. University study, though not prescribed, was in fact essential, and yet women had not the right of access to the university in Germany. They were allowed to take the leaving examination, for which private institutions prepared them, but their admission to the university rested with the professor. Not until the 20th century were desired changes achieved. The new German universities

Unquestionably one of the greatest worldwide influences exercised by German education in the 19th century was through its universities, to which students came from all over the world and from which every land drew ideas for the reformation of higher education. To understand this, one must be aware of the state of higher education in most countries in the 19th century. Although the century witnessed a steady expansion of scientific knowledge, the curriculum of the established universities went virtually untouched. Higher education followed a single dimension. This was the century of the scientists Michael Faraday, Hermann von Helmholtz, James Prescott Joule, Charles Darwin, Joseph Lister, Wilhelm Wundt, Louis Pasteur, and Robert Koch. Yet, until the end of the century, most of the significant research was done outside the walls of higher educational institutions. In Great Britain, for instance, it was the Royal Society and other such societies that fostered advanced studies and encouraged research. The basic curriculum of colleges and universities remained nontechnical and nonprofessional. The English cardinal John Henry Newman, lecturing in Dublin on The Idea of a University in 1852, stated that the task of the university was broadly to prepare young men “to fill any post with credit, and to master any subject with facility.” The university ought not to attempt professional and technical education.

While Newman’s words epitomized the views held in most of Europe and America, some of the new universities in Germany were moving toward the expansion of the educational enterprise. In 1807 Fichte had drawn up a plan for the new University of Berlin, which Humboldt two years later was able to realize in its founding. The school was dedicated to the scientific approach to knowledge, to the combination of research and teaching, and to the proliferation of academic pursuits; and its ideal was adopted in the founding or reconstitution of other universities—Breslau (1811), Bonn (1818), Munich (1826). By the third quarter of the 19th century, the influence of German Lernfreiheit (freedom of the student to choose his own program) and Lehrfreiheit (freedom of the professor to develop the subject and to engage in research) was felt throughout the academic world. The unity of the universities, for better or worse, was more and more dissolved by the fragmentation of subjects into different branches. Some critics would eventually condemn what they considered to be the excesses of the free elective system and the extreme departmentalization of research and curricula. Much of the debate, however, would centre on the general education of undergraduates. In the meantime, the conviction, fathered in Germany, that research is a responsibility of universities was to inspire the founders of universities in the United States in the late 19th century. France