« AnteriorContinuar »
actually forced to learn by rote the details of human vice; and that; too, under the name of "physiology," the only science which they learn. Unconsciousness, naïveté, is the symbol of childhood. The fact that physiology, even if well taught, tends to destroy this trait is the chief objection to its early study. Instruction such as the above implies crushes the most valuable trait in the child, directs curiosity to what is morbid, and forces into precocious development all its dangerous elements. Not enough that the newspaper and the dime novel proclaim in glaring colors the story of crime and sin; some notion of the perversity of human nature must be mixed with the food of babes. That the result of this teaching is to excite in the children a morbid curiosity to experiment for themselves in such matters; or (with the boys) to regard the whole thing as a lesson in "goody-goodiness," to which they forthwith decide to show themselves superior; or to regard their father who takes his glass of wine at dinner as an incipi ent criminal-this could easily have been foreseen and goes without saying. If there is one method better than all others to produce a race of drunkards, this has good claims to that distinction. If there is a degree of wrong in such superlatively perverse methods, then it is still worse that the fair name of science should be outraged in this cause. Not only that this kind of teaching necessarily depends upon catechism methods (that the answer to the second question, for example, is to read that the especial perniciousness of cigarettes is due to the fact that they are usually made of decayed cigar stumps), but that the entire idea of science thus implanted is as wrong as it well can be. Better far revert to the old days when there was no science on the curriculum than have science thus taught. The crowning educational virtue of science is that it leads to the use of scientific methods of teaching; this usurper chokes up all possibility of an interest in the scientific. The temperance question is doubtless one of the most important with which our age has to deal; sufficiently important, perhaps, to make some consideration of it in the public schools a legitimate proceeding, but it must be done at the right time and in the proper way. Nothing can excuse the conversion of a text-book on physiology into a temperance" tract; nothing can excuse the sacrilege of presenting this story of disgusting vice under the name of "science."
TEMPERANCE INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOLS.
[From the Medical Record, September 24, 1887.]
Probably no class of men in the community are better fitted to give a calm, unprejudiced opinion on the alcohol question than physicians. In their capacity of public sanitary guardians, they feel an interest in all practical measures designed to limit the deleterious effects of the use of liquors upon the human systems. The latest effort in this direction is the introduction into the public schools of several States of so-called "temperance" text-books and other paraphernalia of teaching. Some communities have already experienced the first fruits of this new system of instruction. These results are somewhat curious. It is found that the incidental facts designed only to lead up to the one great moral are more prominent in the pupils' minds than the moral itself. The various charts which portray stomachs, livers, and other viscera diseased from alcohol are regarded much in the light of picture-books on a large scale. They produce no more impression on a child's mind than the sight of a tattooed man, or some "freak" of a dime museum.
It is right that the question of temperance should be brought down to the scope of a child's ideas; right from a medical standpoint as well as from a moral one. But it is hardly the judicious course to teach him to regard alcohol as a deadly poison under every circumstance. He will be disillusioned as he grows older, and will look back to his text-book teaching as a mass of overstated facts. The trouble with many of the text-books on temperance used in schools is that they are not physiologically correct. They are written by persons with more zeal than accurate knowledge, and consequently we have sometimes ludicrous statements from pupils. The description of the distillation of alcohol strikes the child as a very interesting thing, and so the fact designed to be taught-its pernic ious effects-fails to make a lasting impression.
We think that a better state of things could be brought about if physicians could be led to take a more active management in the public schools. Ministers, lawyers, business men, and professional politicians are always represented upon school boards, but rarely physicians. They are the very ones who should be fully represented. They can, by their advice, better than any other class, conduce to bring up a class of pupils who shall have sound minds in sound bodies. They can prevent the introduction of text-books on temperance or any other topic having a reference to physical matters which are not written with a due
regard for truth and for the receptivity of the minds which are to grasp it. It is coming more and more to be realized that a physician's duty to the community oversteps the sphere of mere sanitary matters and lays hold upon social factors as well. Much of the teaching in schools nowadays is one-sided, because the mind is regarded as something apart from the body and taught accordingly. No one so well appreciates the relation of one to the other as the physician.
HOW WE TEACH INTEMPERANCE.
[From the Popular Educator, December, 1891.]
At the Norfolk County teachers' convention, recently held in Boston, a paper was read on the teaching of physiological temperance (or intemperance) in the public schools; and, a little more than a week after, the same subject was presented for our consideration at a teachers' meeting in Hyde Park.
At the former meeting it was very noticeable in the discussion that followed the reading of the paper that those who objected to this scientific teaching, taking the moral side instead, met with greater favor from the audience as a body, judging from the heartiness of the applause, than the paper itself. Possibly, if those gentlemen who advocated the strengthening of the moral nature as the best preventive of intemperance had explained their position more fully, this article would not have been written.
There is, as I believe, a radical error at the basis of this scientific teaching of intemperance, or its causes, to little children. Let me illustrate.
On our way home from the convention we were discussing this subject, and one of our party related the following incident which had come under her notice: A teacher, who was an enthusiast on this subject, had taken the fruit into the schoolroom and taught the children the process by which the pure juices of the grape and apple were changed into alcohol, and its effect upon the body.
A short time after, one of the boys who had been instructed by her remarked to some one that he had learned the taste of all the liquors in his father's store (he was a saloon keeper), and could readily distinguish one from the other.
How much fear of the effects of alcohol upon his body do you suppose had been created in this boy's mind by this teaching? Instead of this, it would seem there had been aroused in him a curiosity to know more of the things about which he had been taught.
How many of these boys, think you, went home, took their grapes and apples, and made their own wine and cider ?
All might not do this, of course, but, judging human nature as it appears, and especially child nature, there seems to be a strong desire to do that which is forbidden.
I know the thought has been, and still prevails, that to avoid evil we must know something about it.
What is our practice in educational matters?
Formerly teachers used to put mistakes upon the blackboard to correct, hut now the best teachers claim that children should see only the perfect form of word or letter.
We teach children to be pure in thought, word, and deed, but would never think of specifying the evils to be avoided.
No wise parent or teacher would ever say to a child, "You must not read that book. It contains that which will poison your mind and give you wrong views
Nevertheless, I did hear of a teacher not long ago who advised her girls not to read a certain book which she named, and immediately they sought and obtained the book, of which they had not known before, and read it, although warned against it.
No doubt all who read this can recall many instances of like character.
Vice is a monster of such frightful mien,
As the world is to-day, the children can not but see that which we call evil all about them; but if they have been taught to love the good, the evil will be hated, or perhaps not recognized by them; while, if we continually keep it before their minds, even though we teach them to avoid it, we make it a familiar object of thought which can not but produce bad results. "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he."
"Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, what
soever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."
We all know what great imitators children are, and that with them example goes further than precept. How, then, can we teach them the bad effects of alcohol and tobacco so they will feel it and never touch them when fathers and brothers and men who hold high places in the community and are respected by everyone are slaves to one or both of these habits? We must find some other means of te ching them the truth so they also shall not be led into this captivity to the senses, than that recommended at the convention.
Teach temperance, not intemperance; health, not disease; truth, not error; purity, not impurity; goodness, not badness; teach the positive, not the negative.
"EFFECTS OF ALCOHOL."
[From the Journal of Education (Boston), December 31, 1891.]
May I again call attention of the importance of strictly adhering to truth in teaching concerning the effects of all drugs upon the body. On page 359 of the Journal we are told, "Whatever effect is produced upon the albumen of the egg by contact with the alcohol the same thing must happen when alcohol is mixed with food in the stomach."
This is incorrect: 1. Because blood albumen is not egg albumen. 2. Because the blood albumen is greatly diluted, while the egg albumen is concentrated. 3. Because in one case the alcohol used is concentrated, in the other greatly diluted. 4. The experiment in the test tube is performed away from the "life forces," while in the body "life forces" modify chemical forces. In a word, a laboratory experiment must not be taken to explain literally what occurs in the body. The boy, taking a drink of beer, finds he is not killed by it, and soon comes to reject all that he has been taught in reference to the effects of stimulants. Harm is done by our inaccuracy.
G. G. GROFF, M. D.,
President State Board of Health, Pennsylvania.
CHILDREN CAN BE TAUGHT TO THINK ABOUT BETTER THINGS.
An effort has recently been made to fight intemperance by teaching, in connection with the subject of physiology, the effects of alcohol and narcotics on the system. It is an open question whether the results are all that were anticipated. It seems that in many places the craze after cigarettes and old cigar stumps is worse than ever before, notwithstanding the fact that the schools are giving instruction along this line. Why is this? It is quite possible that many teachers use both time and text book in such a way as to injure the cause of temperance. To spend a portion of each recitation in talking about rum and tobacco is, to say the least, unwise on the part of the teacher. Instead of this let him class rum, tobacco, and opium with other things that should be let alone, and let him speak of them only as occasion requires. The better way will be to see that none of these things are found on or about the school grounds. Milton has not increased our hatred of Satan by making him a hero in Paradise Lost. Why should rum and tobacco be the "heroes" in so many school rooms? Children can be taught to think about better things. (J. D. Meese, Southwest State Normal School, Pennsylvania.)
VII. ANSWERS TO SOME FALSE NOTIONS.
BY MRS. MARY H. HUNT.
The following misconceptions have arisen in certain quarters concerning the teaching of physiological or scientific temperance:
First, that "temperance is a moral not a scientific question; therefore, if taught at all in the schools it should be from the moral standpoint only." "The strengthening of the moral nature is the best preventive of intemperance." You should strengthen the will to prevent the pupil from drinking," these objectors say.
Second, "If you teach the pupil the evil character and effects of alcohol, tobacco, etc., the law of perversity in his nature will make him want to try those things for himself," etc.
Third, "As long as the fathers smoke and drink it is not only of no use to teach the children not to, but such teaching is disrespectful to parents."
In answer to the first objection that "temperance is a moral, not a scientific question," etc., let us inquire:
(1) Is it not true that a moral question is one that considers what is right or wrong in action on the part of beings capable of choice?
(2) Are there not certain facts which are the reasons for an action or course of action being right or wrong?
(3) If these facts, the reasons for the right or wrong, are duly arranged in the case of each obligation, do they not form the science of that special obligation? Webster says that "Science is knowledge duly arranged."
(4) Can a person be taught the principles of morality in any case, or to intelligently choose the right without being taught the facts which show why one course or set of acts is right and another wrong; are not these facts the science of the case?
To illustrate: Moral obligations may be classified under three general heads: (1) Duties to our Maker.
(2) Duties to our fellowmen.
(3) Duties to ourselves.
The facts that are the reasons for our duties to our Creator are set forth in the science of theology.
Those in the case of our duties to our fellowmen are classed as the science of sociology.
The facts that prove our moral obligations to ourselves in the case of alcoholic drinks and other narcotics are very properly termed the science of temperance; and here, as in the case of other duties, no person can fully comprehend the extent or scope of that obligation without knowing the facts.
The answer to the question, "What is the nature and effects of these substances," is the facts in this case, on which the whole temperance question
There is no such thing as moral question without a basis of fact that is the science of the question. These are not the days of dogmatic morality. Modern morality teaches the reasons for the right, shows why, and thus strengthens the moral nature."
The objector says, "Strengthen the will to resist temptation." How do we strengthen the will? The will is the faculty in us that acts on choice, and our choices are more or less influenced by our knowledge or ignorance of the facts in the case. How would you strengthen the will of a boy against the temptation to row across the Niagara River a little way above the falls-by telling him he must not, it would be wrong, or by explaining to his reason the perils that inhere in that fatal current? How would I strengthen a boy's will against intemperance? I would try to give him intelligent reasons on which his will should act. Just as I would teach him the character of the Niagara Rapids I would teach him the nature of those other, the alcoholic rapids, that lead to a worse, a more hopeless plunge into utter darkness. While I would never exaggerate, I would search for the truth on this topic as for "hid treasures," and then teach it, abating not "one jot or tittle," leaving the consequences with Him who said "I am the Truth." He has so made the human mind that it is moved by truth that warns as well as promises. I would teach the boy before appetite is formed the dangerous and deceptive character of alcoholic drinks and other narcotics, especially that proven fact that a little alcohol in any liquor has the power to create an imperious, uncontrollable, and destructive appetite for more, and therefore its use in any quantity is never safe. I would show him that there is a scientific connection between the first glass and the drunkards' fate. I would not preach at the boy nor weary him with repeated homily, but I would lead him, through the study of the laws of his own being, to see and understand for himself that the inestimable blessing and happiness of a strong, healthy, useful life are the result of obedience to laws that are written in our living tissues, and that the penalty of disobedience inheres in the law itself. I would strip the wine cup, and the whole brood of strong drinks, the pipe, the cigar, and the cigarette of the glamor with which ignorance and tradition have decked them, and help the boy to see them and their consequences as labeled by modern science-narcotic poisons.
In answer to the second objection, that teaching the evil character of alcoholic drinks will make the pupil want to try them for himself, we reply: If we tell the boy the perils of the rapids in the smooth, safe-looking stream above the falls, will he immediately wish to embark thereon? Is it a rule that teaching the consequences of evil is only furnishing a motive for immediately plunging into the evil? If so, there must be something radically wrong in the most authoritative of all teaching, for all through the Bible the blessings of right doing are coupled
with vivid descriptions of the consequences of following the wrong. Gerizim and Ebal stand together. I am sure the great body of teachers in our land will agree that it will be safe for us to follow in method the great Teacher. He made the human mind, and He knows the laws of its development far better than we ever can, after all our study.
We teach the need of pure air and good ventilation by showing its importance and relation to health, and how to get it, and the consequences of its absence. If you teach the need of oxygen by showing the consequences of breathing vitiated air, are you thereby teaching imperfect ventilation? Such a claim would be absurd. And yet a recent writer refers to teaching the evil nature and effects of alcoholic drinks, etc., as "teaching intemperance." Then the vivid descriptions of intemperance in the woes" the Bible pronounces upon drunkards is "teaching intemperance." These objectors certainly need a new and expunged version of the greatest of all manuals of instruction.
Experience must, after all, decide, and happily we are not without precedent. Wherever in the thirty-five States of our country the spirit and letter of the law requiring this study are obeyed, and well-graded text-books on this topic containing the truths the law requires taught are used, with the same wise and thorough methods of teaching as in the case of other branches, pupils thus taught have not consequently rushed headlong to the saloons. On the contrary, an intelligent aversion to strong drinks and other narcotics is manifest; fewer cigarettes are smoked, and pupils are more careful to obey other laws of hygiene.
Giving an occasional temperance exhortation in the schoolroom may take less time and study on the part of the teacher, but, compared with the results of carefully prepared lessons that guide the pupil in finding and intelligently understanding the reasons for total abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, and other narcotics, and for obedience to other laws of health, the mere exhortation or socalled moral homily falls immeasurably short.
The prophet said, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge," not for lack of exhortation. To a right-minded child or youth the most impressive of all moral lessons is the one that convinces his understanding and is thereby lodged in his reason. That all children and youth are not right-minded towards alcohol and tobacco is evidence of the deep wound these substances have made upon our humanity through inheritance upon children and "children's children." That some of these, heavily weighted with the sins of the fathers, will go wrong anyway, does not prove that faithful instruction is useless in all other
To the third objection we would put the question: Shall we make no attempt to teach the children better because the fathers drink and smoke? Because some parents murder the Queen's English, we do not therefore think it useless or disrespectful to their parents to teach the children correct speech, and as a consequence the generations rise in the scale of better utterance.
The difficulties are appreciated of teachers who were commanded to teach this topic and given nothing to do it with but the imperfect, badly graded books first put upon the market: But a better day has dawned. Well-graded manuals of instruction, that contain these truths adapted to all classes, are published in great abundance and variety.
Truth is the lever of Archimedes that moves the world. The truth concerning the evil nature of alcoholic drinks and other narcotics is the lever destined to overthrow their use. To the teacher has come the opportunity to scatter that truth. Opportunity is God's command.
VIII-QUESTIONS ON PHYSIOLOGY AND HYGIENE, AND THE NATURE AND EFFECTS OF ALCOHOLIC DRINKS AND OTHER NARCOTICS.
Published by the scientific temperance department of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union for use in the preparation of essays, examination papers, etc., for the World's Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893.
FOR PRIMARY GRADES.
In this subject, as in other branches which extend through several years of school life, a few of the simple elements of each topic are taught, where the subject is properly pursued, in the lowest grade, to be reviewed, with additions from year to year, until an advanced treatment of the whole subject is completed in the high school.
The work of the first year, therefore, properly consists of oral lessons on parts of the body, sight, hearing, taste, smell, touch, cleanliness, and very simple les