The point is
illustrated admirably by the report in the _Ladies Home Journal_, for
January, 1913, of a request from a hardworking widow that the teacher
of one of her children in school try teaching the child instead of just
hearing the lessons which the mother had taught.
Directing the pupils' study is sometimes regarded as a more or less
formalized scheme of organization and procedure, which requires extra
time, extra teachers, and a lesser degree of independence on the part
of the pupils. But here too the important things are differentiation
and specific direction as adapted to the needs of the subject, the
topic or the pupils. It must be insisted that supervised study is not
the same thing in all schools, in all subjects, or for all pupils. In
other words, its very purpose is defeated if it is overformalized. An
experiment is reported by J.H. Minnick with two classes in plane
geometry,[62] of practically the same size, ability, and time allowance
for study, which indicated that the supervised pupils were the less
dependent as judged by their success in tests consisting of new
problems. The pupils also liked the method, in spite of their early
opposition, and no one failed, while two of the unsupervised class
failed. William Wiener also speaks of the wonderful self-control which
springs from the supervised study program.[63] As to the need of extra
teachers for the purpose there is not much real agreement, since the
plans of adaptation are so different in themselves.
Pages:
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159