Training the History Teacher The Organization of His Field of Study

BY NORMAN MACLAREN TRENHOLME, PROFESSOR OF THE TEACHING OF HISTORY, SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI.

Provided that the text-books have been selected and the courses to be given arranged for by some higher power, the first problem that faces the history teacher in the fall is that of properly organizing the field or fields of study. Now we all know that many teachers do not realize this problem or that if they do they shirk it and adopt a sort of go-as-you-please plan of so many pages each day, irrespective of topical or any other sort of unity, that usually results in careless recitation work and an incomplete course. In some cases the teacher seeks aid and guidance from a printed syllabus or outline of the course to be covered, and if these are available and properly constructed in connection with the text-books used, they can be of great service, but they cannot wholly relieve the teacher of responsibility as to the length and character of topics to be considered.[1] Even the best teachers are inclined to adopt a day-to-day plan of organization and so work blindly, not knowing how much of the text-book will, in the end be left unstudied. Such unsatisfactory conditions as are here referred to are totally unnecessary if history teachers will only learn to organize their courses in advance of giving them and thus be able to round out their work in a thoroughly satisfactory manner. The reason that this is not done is that most of our high school teachers of history have had little or no training in the teaching of their subject and have not learned how to handle and interpret the subject matter to the best advantage. What some lack in training they make up for in enthusiasm and interest in their work, but there are, unfortunately for the profession, many teachers of history who have neither training nor enthusiasm. On the other hand, the number of trained, earnest and enthusiastic teachers of history is constantly increasing, and there are opportunities offered for every teacher to improve his or her methods and enter more understandingly and more successfully into the work of teaching the subject. The greatest danger in history work in schools is the prevalence of matter over spirit, of facts over thoughts and ideas, of mechanical memory work over constructive thinking and reasoning. If teachers of history will learn to enter into their work with more spirit and understanding the subject will soon be regarded with respect on account of the vital interest that the development of the present out of the past must always have. One way of emphasizing historical unity or continuity is by a well-planned series of recitation or discussion topics based on the text-book used in the course, and it is the question of such organization of the field of study that I wish to discuss in this article.

General Suggestions as to the Organization.

The history teacher who wishes to make a success of the courses given must plan the work in advance according to certain common sense rules and conditions. In the first place, the extent of the subject matter to be covered must be carefully considered in connection with the time allotted for its completion, and the relative emphasis to be placed on the different portions of the period to be covered. Instead of a haphazard assignment of so many pages each day irrespective of time and subject matter, the length and character of the lesson assignments should be plotted out in advance. If the number of pages of text-book subject matter be accurately ascertained (many text-books have pages of outlines, review questions, references, and so forth), and compared with the number of recitation hours available, from which it is well to deduct one-third or one-fourth for reviews, a mechanical basis of assignments can be had. But a mechanical basis is not alone sufficient, a topical one is necessary also. This is the most difficult and at the same time the most vital part of organization and the part in which most teachers fail on account of poor perspective as to important and unimportant topics and a failure to realize the inner meaning and significance of the external events with which they are dealing. Fortunately most history text-books have been constructed on a skeleton of topics, and even a poorly-trained teacher can, with a little care, discover the proper lesson divisions. Some of the newer text-books go so far, indeed, as to give a series of lesson topics which the teacher can follow.[2]

A competent history teacher, however, should not need to depend entirely on the text-book, outline, or syllabus, but should be able to select his or her own topics with judgment and success. A teacher properly trained to interpret the subject matter of the different fields of study who will take into account the length of time available and the extent of the text to be covered, can successfully plan out any desired course of study from beginning to end. This plan does not need to be absolutely rigid, but it will be a valuable guide for the work of the year or half year and will lead to a successful completion of the course of study. Instructors in normal schools and in college departments of education can easily train the students in courses on the teaching of history to make such topical outlines based on standard text-books. It will be time well spent, as the student will afterwards find in active teaching, as one such experience in enlightened planning out of a field of study will lead to competent handling of other fields.

Organization of the Ancient History Field.

If we say that this field of study should deal with the political, governmental, social, and cultural development of the western portion of the Ancient World under the three main divisions of (a) the Oriental nations, excluding, of course, India, China and Japan; (b) the Greek world, and (c) the Roman world—then we have a fairly comprehensive definition of what is to be covered. If we add to this that the chief teaching problem of the course is so to organize and interpret the subject matter as to bring out in a clear and connected way the really significant and essential movements and developments during ancient times in connection with the leading historical peoples, we are giving greater definiteness to the teaching work of the course. But what are the really significant and essential movements in the history of the ancient world from the pedagogical viewpoint? Can it not be said that they are those that have most continuity with and exerted most influence on later Mediterranean and European history? To this end emphasis should be especially laid on the Greek world, centering in Athens, and on Rome, centering in her great imperial system. As a general rule, teachers of ancient history are inclined to give too great a proportion of the time at their disposal to the Oriental empires and their civilizations, to early Greek history and archæology, to Roman legendary history, and the petty politics and mythical conflicts of the early Roman republic, and the governmental organization of the decaying republic, while Athenian life and thought, Macedonian imperialism and its results, the rise and organization of the great Roman empire, the causes of its strength, and of its weakness and decline are not given sufficient time and attention.

In the general organization of the Ancient History field the topics should be so planned that the teacher and class will work from a broad study of the Oriental peoples of the eastern Mediterranean world and of the early history of the Greek peoples and States to a more careful and intensive examination into the Athenian world as typical of the best of classic Greece, of Alexander and Macedonian imperialism, as promoters of Hellenic culture. The early Roman period should be rapidly covered and far less time spent on the republic and its government. The object in organizing the Roman portion of the Ancient History field should be to emphasize the growth of the Roman empire and the creation of an imperial system. To this end as much attention as possible should be directed to the provinces and to the general problems of the imperial government. The influence of the Roman historians, Livy, Suetonius, and even to some extent of Tacitus (I refer to the annals and histories), and of teachers of the classics is responsible for much wrong perspective in the teaching of Ancient History. Nor have we one really well-proportioned textbook for this field, though several of the existing ones are fairly satisfactory. The success and interest of the ancient history course depends largely on the teacher’s power of selection, organization, and interpretation.

Organization of the Field of Medieval and Modern History.

In organizing this field of study, while following the general rules of organization, the teacher should remember that the object of this course is above all else to make the student familiar with his present historical environment and its immediate background. To this end it is desirable that a large proportion of the time should be devoted to bringing out and emphasizing movements and institutions that have distinctly modern significance, and that recent European history should be carefully studied. This does not mean, however, that the medieval portion of the field should be neglected as an important contributory factor in modern civilization. Emphasis should be laid on the continuity of Roman influence, as seen in the imperial Church and the imperial State and in Roman law, on the Christian religion as a factor in advancing civilization, and on the contribution of political, social and economic importance made by the Germans. The medieval world is more foreign to the schoolboy mind than even that of Greece and Rome, and the struggles of popes and emperors, the intricacies of feudalism, and the ascetic and adventurous aspects of the Crusades are hard for him to understand. But the feelings of nationality against imperial control by Church or State, the growth of the towns and commerce, the gradual development of representative government, the struggles against despotism—these are things he can understand and appreciate and in connection with which he can see the present emerging from the past. Nor should the great personalities of medieval and modern history be neglected, for they have historical interest and importance and serve to give greater interest and definiteness to movements of which they are a part. A little thought and care on the part of the teacher in planning the lesson assignments and conducting the recitation will keep the course from becoming dull and meaningless. The attention of the class should always be drawn to the bearing of what they are studying on present conditions and particular emphasis should be directed to great international movements as well as to the growth and development of the leading European countries. In no field of high school study does careful previous organization lead to more satisfactory results than in the medieval and modern field.

Organization of the English History Field.

The organization and treatment of this field should be based on the idea of bringing out clearly the origin, growth and larger developments of English political, social and economic institutions. The field offers especial advantages for developmental study, as the history is well connected throughout, and can be easily organized into topics and problems. All that the teacher needs is a little insight into the fundamental factors and influences in English history, and this should be obtained from any well conducted general course in English history. The history of England should always be organized and treated as being the study of the growth of a great imperial nation out of various elements and through different policies. The idea of the growth of free, representative government (the power of the people, or democracy, in government) is the predominant note, but the broader viewpoint of the growth of national civilization as shown in policies, industry, art, language and letters is also desirable and important. Among the dangers to be avoided in teaching English history, and in teaching how to organize it, is the temptation to emphasize the minor political details relating to royalties, wars and so forth. The history of England is after all closely related to the history of Europe, and the two great questions of interest in her story are those of her internal development along national lines and of her external policy and growth along imperial lines. More attention than is now given could well be bestowed on the British empire, and it is a pleasure to find one text-book at least that attempts to do justice to this important phase of English history and government.[3]

Organization of the Field of American History and Government.

Probably all teachers of American history will admit that broadly stated the course in American history and government should be organized with special emphasis on the national period, and should represent an attempt to show how out of the diversity of the colonial period there finally emerged the spirit of federal union, and how American history largely centers around the erection of a sovereign federal state, in face of English opposition, and the maintenance of the union, in the face of internal dissensions, and finally, the growth and expansion of the United States as a world power. The European background, the native or American background, exploration, colonization and colonial development must all be touched on lightly. Then a careful study should be made of the steps leading up to union and to independence, though the military side of the revolutionary struggle is frequently over-emphasized, and the beginnings of national government as we know it to-day can be studied in connection with the formation of the constitution. Territorial expansion, foreign and civil wars, colonial expansion and problems of internal development can all be treated in relation with the central problem of successful federal government and in relation with the present. Interwoven frequently with American national history is the history of one’s own state, and teachers can frequently use local interests to make the story of some particular phase of national development more real and significant.

There is quite a marked tendency to separate American government from American history in the fourth year of the high school, and to give a half year’s work in each subject. If American government is taught as a separate subject a text-book should be selected which allows the teacher to organize the course so as to work from the familiar to the unfamiliar aspects of government, from the local to the national aspects of the field of study. Several good text-books of this character have been recently published.[4]

The attempt has been made in this article to show how the history teacher can be trained, or can train himself, to organize thoroughly the field of study to be covered so as to complete the course in the time allotted and also bring out the meaning and importance of the study undertaken. Proper organization of the field of study will undoubtedly aid the teacher greatly, but such organization must be followed by successful recitation and class-room work. The next paper in this department will therefore, be devoted to a discussion of the training of history teachers in the organization of the recitation.