Speaking of the child, Arthur Holmes[[17]] says, “He is organic, living, developing. He cannot be kneaded like dough, nor hammered like iron, nor carved like marble, but he can be guided like a vine upon a trelis.”
This work of directing the life of a child is specially represented by some act which brings satisfaction to the pupil and so begins an interplay of personal forces that leads the pupil to have confidence in the teacher.
To mark off this kind of action we choose to name the principle involved in it, the Principle of Initiative in Co-operation.
Experience shows that no person can have the desired educative influence over a child unless it be by doing deeds that draw forth the child’s appreciation. The turn of affairs in the school depends on the teacher. He must choose and choose wisely if his control over the pupils is adequate. He must take the initiative in establishing good relations and in maintaining them.
In the discussion following, the term co-operation is used, but it is to be understood that the teacher thoughtfully takes the first step in all acts of co-operation, anticipating, of course, the pupils’ reactions to all of his acts of service.
There is no greater principle in discipline than that of co-operation. No other one is more potent among the teacher’s devices. But it is a fact, much to be regretted, that no principle is used less in the school-room. The fact is that a majority of teachers do not realize what disciplinary co-operation means. Its skillfull use as an instrument of government is unknown to them.
The inquiring teacher asks for an explanation of the principle of co-operation. It means a gratifying or yielding to a child’s wishes or desires. Or, it is a forbearance from restraint or control. It may be gratitude for a favor granted; no doubt some teachers need to “Learn the luxury of doing good.”
Leniency and tolerance are forms of co-operation. The term certainly denotes companionship in performing every school duty.
Co-operation requires mutual understanding and sympathy. Clearly demonstrated by Pestalozzi, this fundamental method of child management has found recent advocates in the founders of the Gary and Fairhope systems of instruction.
The question comes up at once, “Will not deviation from a uniform firmness which is implied in co-operation weaken discipline?” Upon close examination the opposite will be found to be true. It has been explained that the real end of discipline is self-control on the part of the child and further that self-control is the basal element in character.