Читать книгу Practical School Discipline: Introductory Course - Ray Coppock Beery - Страница 8

Table of Contents

It is true, popular lecturers often bore us by speeches in which they emphasize over and over the necessity of knowing the disposition of our individual child. Of course, it is helpful to know the individual disposition; but the mistaken emphasis placed upon this detail as compared with really knowing the general and fundamental nature of children is indeed astounding.

A case was reported to us not long ago of a child-lecturer who chanced to be confronted with a practical situation. Little “George,” his son, was near a newspaper in the drawing-room. The gentleman asked George to bring the newspaper to him. George refused. The command was repeated. “George, bring me the newspaper.” George refused. He again gave more commands, in a louder tone of voice while George laughed at him. The lecturer then started over to him and George ran behind a table. The man soon managed to seize the boy’s hand and escorted him over to the newspaper, whereupon he again commanded him to pick up the paper. George refused. The gentleman took the boy’s hands and tried to force them to grasp the newspaper but George’s fingers were lax. At this moment, George received a keen slap on the side of the face. He was then told to pick up the paper and he did so. Why? Merely through fear? (The fallacy of this method will be discussed later on.)

The point of the above illustration is this: That man would treat all of ten thousand other children in precisely the same way as he did George if they refused to obey him. And yet this same lecturer is continually going before mothers’ clubs and admonishing them thus: “Mothers, mothers—know your individual child.” If his doctrine is so important, why does he not practice what he preaches? A man or woman, parent or teacher, who can not get a child to obey, without slapping him or threatening him, has something fundamental to learn about child training. This man not only failed to be influenced by the boy’s individual disposition but he showed by his method that he did not understand the fundamental nature of children.

To explain further the distinction between individual disposition and fundamental nature, you have in your room five pupils: Ralph, Charley, Miriam, Fay and Helen. Let us assume that these pupils are as different in disposition as it is possible for them to be. Ralph is pessimistic, secretive and has a bad temper. Charley is optimistic, frank and very amiable. Miriam and Fay have certain other opposite characteristics and Helen is in a class by herself—overbearing, spiteful, high tempered and hard to approach.

Now what shall we do? Must we use a fundamentally different method on each of these pupils in order to reach the same result? By no means. While these five pupils have characteristics which are distinctly their own and different from each other, yet they have precisely the same instincts underlying their actions. They have the same individual instincts, the same adaptive instincts, the same social instincts, the same regulative instincts and the same parental instincts. If we appeal to the same instinct in one child that we appeal to in another we will get a similar result. The expression will not be exactly the same, of course. One child may react more quickly than another or with more enthusiasm but nevertheless the response will be similar. For example, if I do something which Ralph sees is going to push forward his own interests: if I praise Ralph for something which he has done, he will react in the same direction as will Charley, Miriam, Fay and Helen when I appeal to the same instinct in them, such as their instinctive desire for approval.

Instead of only five pupils, we might take a hundred or a thousand pupils, each one having a disposition slightly different from all the others. Their natures are all based upon certain fundamental instincts common to the race. Therefore, it is this fundamental nature of the pupil which we must know. The disposition of the particular pupils is a matter of detail as compared with the deep-seated and essential nature and will not trouble us much after we have learned the fundamental principles of child supervision, because all children have the same natural instincts and, in applying principles, we appeal to these instincts. Part Four of this book is devoted exclusively to the naming and explaining of these great fundamental principles.

A teacher who thoroughly understands each of these principles is in possession of information that is really invaluable in discipline. It would be well for each teacher to read over these important principles several times during the school year. The reading can not fail to aid in getting better discipline.

The best possible way to acquire skill in discipline is to study a great variety of typical examples. In fact, the author has planned other volumes devoted exclusively to concrete cases of discipline.

By a concrete case is meant an interruption or annoyance caused by one or more pupils at a given time, which must be dealt with by the teacher in one way or another.

Very often a teacher, after observing the results of a certain method, will look back and say, “If I had that to do over again, I would treat the case differently.” Perhaps he has asked a child a question which, on account of the embarrassing circumstances, caused him to tell a falsehood; perhaps he has tried to force obedience instead of attaining the end in a better way. These and dozens of other cases might be suggested which often confront a teacher and unless he has correct ideas about disposing of them when they arise, he will have no small amount of trouble before the year is over. That teacher is almost sure to fail who waits for the occasion to select a method instead of preparing beforehand for different emergencies.