Herbart and Froebel (Volume 14); An Attempt at Synthesis (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1907. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... INTRODUCTION. The notion of a synthesis of Herbart and Froebel was first suggested to the writer by Professor John Adams, of London University, in 1905. Already the outline of a synthesis has appeared in an article in the Educational Review, written by Professor Welton, and entitled A Synthesis of Herbart and Froebel.1 Dr. F. H. Hayward, himself an able Herbartian writer, has admitted that this phrase suggests the vision of a third educational "Secret," beyond the secrets that seem to him to have been disclosed in the respective works of Froebel and of Herbart.2 The article by Professor Welton is suggestive, and only too slight. A more inclusive comparative study has been made by Professor MacVannel, of Columbia University.* With the work of Professor Welton and of Professor MacVannel the present attempt at a synthesis is in general accord. Like both of these, it assumes the practical value of a philosophy of education. It is, however, widely differentiated, as to its aims, from the former by its scope, and from the latter by a less historical mode of approach. The writer is deeply indebted to Professor MacVannel, as well for his aid in the present undertaking as for his invaluable contributions to a philosophy of education. In the present dissertation, the term synthesis has been broadly interpreted. At the same time it has not been used to denote an aggregation of the educational principles of Froebel and of Herbart. Neither is it intended to imply that in cases where Herbart may be said to maintain a thesis, and Froebel an antithesis, anything like an equal validity need always be attributed to the respective principles that may be emphasised by each. That which is sought is neither an aggregation of principles, nor an indifference to them, nor a forced equal...