DOES EDUCATION MAKE THE MAN? What can education do for the individual? The question has been variously answered. Some say, "Everything;" others, "Nothing." Both answers are given with great finality. George Boas1 of Johns Hopkins University, however, considers a third possibility. I n response to such definite statements of the situation, he says, "Curiously enough, the answer given seems t o depend not so much on the actual results of education as upon a supposed theory of biology, either that the individual is the product of environmental elements, in which case the educationalist is jubilant, or that the in vidual is the sum of inherited traits, in which case the educationalist laments." The third possibility, as he states it, is "that education can do something for some people and nothing for other people. It is based on the theory that education is not merely an environment to which the individual reacts, but is the total interaction of the individual and the environment. . . . For it will he found, I believe, that in learning anything an individual modifies what he learns just as what he learns modifies him. I t will he found that there is a current flowing in both directions a t the same time, one towards the individual and one away from him, and that he has, t o repeat, as much influence upon his education as his education has upon him." H e adds, "If the individual comes into the world wise or stupid, active or passive, extrovert or introvert, hyperkinetic or hypokinetic, t o use even more fashionable terms, and always stays so, the only education which will do him any good is one fitted to his peculiar character. The same education for all then becomes futile and may just as well be abandoned." Often students and teachers coijperate in the endeavor to defeat the ends of education, according to Mr. Boas. "It might not be amiss at this point to invite attention t o the efforts made by undergraduates t o avoid an education, an effort which has been crystallized into a tradition a t some colleges, into a tradition which only the most anti-social students would dream of violating. A student may, for instance, be highly curious, he may need information about something, but he would go t o the stake r a t h 8 than interview his instructor about it. For if he were known to have been along with the instructor on his own initiative, he would be instantly labelled a 'handshaker'-conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. . . . There are also efforts made by teachers and administrators to prevent a student's getting an education. There is the lecture system, putting a premium on memory, the Ph.D. system, putting a premium on 'scholarship,' the textrbook system, putting a premium on authoritarianism. . . . .One can see that even the serious student has difficulties with which t o grapple."
.
1 "The
Limits of Education." Sch. & Soc., 22, 3 7 H 1 (1925).
VOL.2, No. 11
QuoV I S ?
10%
Not considering these obstructions, he divides students into four characteristic groups: 1. Those who are utterly unteachable; 2. Those who are teachable but do not see the relevancy of what they learn-the memorizers; 3. The teachable who see a limited relevancy; 4. The teachable who have a great power of transferring what they learn to other fields. The first, be says, can be selected by psychological examinations; the second group "can learn anything by rote but, in their purest form, do not see its application." The third group is clever within a limited field. "In physics it sees the application of the law of the conservation of energy hut does not see its possible application to psychology." The fourth group "is the most interesting and the one group which might be said to have intelligence as contrasted with what Dr. Roback and people in general call 'intellect.' . . . . This group understands your ellipses and can jump a premise without breaking its bones. At their best the members of this group are interested in ideas as such. They enjoy playing with ideas, experimenting with them to see what their implications are. They make teaching interesting and conversation a delight." With a final quotation from Mr. Boas, this question will be left for the reader's consideration. "By steady coaching, persistent conferences, private tutoring, I have been able to keep certain students from failing in my freshman course only t o have them flunk out of college because of their marks in other courses. The situation is somewhat like that of the damned and the elect, according to St. Augustine. Only God knows which is which and so the church prays for them all. We teachers have the faith that we can induce God t o change His mind and so we continue to teach even after the case looks hopeless. We are a chicken-hearted race and have not the courage to let students sink or swim on their own merits. We must always be encouraging, haranguing, forbidding, demonstrating, anathematizing, pleading, as if our words were magic formulas. They are just about as potent as magic." W. R. W.
