A brief course in the teaching process

by George D. Strayer

In the field which requires judgment, it is also true that one’s attitude may become habitual. Much which we call morality can be accounted for by taste. Many boys and girls have been saved the struggle through which others pass by ideals and contempts which they have derived from their associates. Fortunate, indeed, is the boy or girl who can say: “The members of our set do not frequent saloons, do not lie or cheat, play fair, work hard, dare to do right.” All of us tend to derive our moral code from the group of people with whom we are constantly associated. There is honor even among thieves, because they have a code which they respect. The teacher who secures the coöperation of the leaders of the group can modify, indeed transform, the moral attitude of a class by this appeal to the code which the whole group accepts and upon which the leaders insist.

The highest type of moral action is that which involves judgments of worth. When one asks himself the question, is this right, will it be for the general welfare, and then acts in accordance with that judgment, he has performed an essentially moral act. Training for this sort of action is of the same sort that is demanded wherever the judgment is involved. The child must be taught to analyze the situation and to pick out the essentially moral element. The writer once knew a high school class who habitually cheated in examinations. They said that they were getting ahead of the teacher. The principal explained that they were dishonest, that cheating was stealing. The attitude of the class changed. They responded to this analysis of the situation which pointed out the moral element. What we call thoughtlessness and the sowing of wild oats is often to be explained by the lack of analysis which makes prominent the moral significance of the contemplated action. The school should give opportunity whenever possible, whether in ordinary schoolroom work, on the playground, or with reference to extra-school activities, for the exercise of the moral judgment. Power to analyze new situations and to act morally depends entirely upon previous judgments and actions.

Any discussion of moral training would be incomplete which did not take account of the reformation of the wrong doer through school punishments or discipline. “Discipline and punishment are teaching processes as much as are grammar or arithmetic lessons, and when we remember that conduct and behavior is the whole of life, we must welcome the occasions for discipline, and even for punishment. No sane person is glad that a child’s instincts, impulses, and habits have taken wrong forms, but the real teacher is glad that these forms manifest themselves, so that they may be worked over into correct reactions.”[23] The key to the situation is found in placing the responsibility with the child. If a wrong has been committed, either he has failed to think of the moral significance of his act, or he has chosen to do wrong. In the one case reformation may be brought about by making clear the nature of the act; in the other the child must will to do differently, and must by his own act regain his place in the group whose welfare he has transgressed. What the ordinary situation demands is more of thinking on the part of children and less of resentment and anger on the part of teachers.

Punishments need to be differentiated to fit the child. The writer has known boys in active rebellion against school authority who would accept corporal punishment rather than give any evidence of intention to submit. In such a case this form of punishment was justified. Happily such cases are rare with the teacher who knows how to work with children. Even in cases where the offense is seemingly identical, the punishment must be varied to suit the individual to be reformed. Suggestion may suffice for one, another may be persuaded, and still another must be labored with at length in order that the judgment which the teacher has passed may be accepted by him as valid. In any event it is the thoughtful individual, who has the habit of analyzing the situation when in doubt, and then acts in accordance with his judgment, which it is the purpose of the school to develop.

The importance of the moral influence of the teacher has always been recognized. At times, however, the negative rather than the positive factors have been emphasized. It is well enough to demand that the teacher be free from vices, petty or great; but it is even more important to inquire concerning the positive virtues which characterize the instructor of children. We may hope that our schools will develop open-minded children, provided the teachers are not dogmatic. Courage, industry, integrity, are fundamental virtues. Does the teacher possess them? Sympathy with all activities which make for public good is demanded of all in a democracy. Does the teacher participate, is the teacher a factor, in those movements which make for improvement in the community? The ideal teacher is an intelligent, hard-working public servant, whose field of endeavor is limited only by the needs of the community which he serves. The number of teachers who have thus exalted the office of teacher in the community is happily increasing. The moral effect upon the lives of children of association with such a man or woman cannot be overestimated.

For Collateral Reading

Moral Training in Public Schools, Chapter I, by C. A. Rugh.

J. MacCunn, The Making of Character.

The Essentials of Character, by E. O. Sisson.

Exercise.