erience, and its justification is in its
functioning in the future growth which it insures.
Hence the need of reinstating into experience the subject-matter of the
studies, or branches of learning. It must be restored to the experience
from which it has been abstracted. It needs to be _psychologized_;
turned over, translated into the immediate and individual experiencing
within which it has its origin and significance.
Every study or subject thus has two aspects: one for the scientist as a
scientist; the other for the teacher as a teacher. These two aspects are
in no sense opposed or conflicting. But neither are they immediately
identical. For the scientist, the subject-matter represents simply a
given body of truth to be employed in locating new problems, instituting
new researches, and carrying them through to a verified outcome. To him
the subject-matter of the science is self-contained. He refers various
portions of it to each other; he connects new facts with it. He is not,
as a scientist, called upon to travel outside its particular bounds;
if he does, it is only to get more facts of the same general sort.
The problem of the teacher is a different one. As a teacher he is
not concerned with adding new facts to the science he teaches; in
propounding new hypotheses or in verifying them. He is concerned with
the subject-matter of the science as _representing a given stage and
phase of the development of experience_. His problem is that of inducing
a vital and personal experiencing. Hence, what concerns him, as teacher,
is the ways in which that subject may become a part of experience; what
there is in the child's present that is usable with reference to it;
how such elements are to be used; how his own knowledge of the
subject-matter may assist in interpreting the child's needs and doings,
and determine the medium in which the child should be placed in order
that his growth may be properly directed. He is concerned, not with the
subject-matter as such, but with the subject-matter as a related factor
in a total and growing experience. Thus to see it is to psychologize it.
It is the failure to keep in mind the double aspect of subject-matter
which causes the curriculum and child to be set over against each other
as described in our early pages. The subject-matter, just as it is for
the scientist, has no direct relationship to the child's present
experience. It stands outside of it. The danger here is not a merely
t
|