It may be well to mention two or three details, which are so importantthat no system of _appropriate_ female education, separate or mixed,can neglect them. They have been implied throughout the whole of thepresent discussion, but not distinctly enunciated. One is, that duringthe period of rapid development, that is, from fourteen toeighteen,[33] a girl should not study as many hours a day as a boy."In most of our schools," says a distinguished physiological authoritypreviously quoted, "the hours are too many for both boys and girls.From a quarter of nine or nine, until half-past two, is with us(Philadelphia schools for girls) the common schooltime in privateseminaries. The usual recess is twenty minutes or half an hour, and itis not filled by enforced exercise. In certain schools,--would it werethe rule,--ten minutes' recess is given after every hour. To thesehours, we must add the time spent in study out of school. This, forsome reason, nearly always exceeds the time stated by teachers to benecessary; and most girls between the age of thirteen and seventeenthus expend two or three hours. Does any physician believe that it isgood for a growing girl to be so occupied seven or eight hours a day?or that it is right for her to use her brains as long a time as themechanic employs his muscles? But this is only a part of the evil. Themultiplicity of studies, the number of teachers,--each eager to getthe most he can out of his pupil,--the severer drill of our day, andthe greater intensity of application demanded, produce effects on thegrowing brain, which, in a vast number of cases, can be onlydisastrous. Even in girls of from fourteen to eighteen, such as crowdthe normal school in Philadelphia, this sort of tension and thisvariety of study occasion an amount of ill-health which is sadlyfamiliar to many physicians."[34]
Experience teaches that a healthy and growing boy may spend six hoursof force daily upon his studies, and leave sufficient margin forphysical growth. A girl cannot spend more than four, or, inoccasional instances, five hours of force daily upon her studies, andleave sufficient margin for the general physical growth that she mustmake in common with a boy, and also for constructing a reproductiveapparatus. If she puts as much force into her brain education as aboy, the brain or the special apparatus will suffer. Appropriateeducation and appropriate co-education must adjust their methods andregimen to this law.
Another detail is, that, during every fourth week, there should be aremission, and sometimes an intermission, of both study and exercise.Some individuals require, at that time, a complete intermission frommental and physical effort for a single day; others for two or threedays; others require only a remission, and can do half work safely fortwo or three days, and their usual work after that. The diminishedlabor, which shall give Nature an opportunity to accomplish herspecial periodical task and growth, is a physiological necessity forall, however robust they may seem to be. The apportionment of studyand exercise to individual needs cannot be decided by general rules,nor can the decision of it be safely left to the pupil's caprice orambition. Each case must be decided upon its own merits. Theorganization of studies and instruction must be flexible enough toadmit of the periodical and temporary absence of each pupil, withoutloss of rank, or necessity of making up work, from recitation, andexercise of all sorts. The periodical type of woman's way of work mustbe harmonized with the persistent type of man's way of work in any successful plan of co-education.
The keen eye and rapid hand of gain, of what Jouffroy callsself-interest well understood, is sometimes quicker than the brain andwill of philanthropy to discern and inaugurate reform. An illustrationof this statement, and a practical recognition of the physiologicalmethod of woman's work, lately came under my observation. There is anestablishment in Boston, owned and carried on by a man, in which tenor a dozen girls are constantly employed. Each of them is given andrequired to take a vacation of three days every fourth week. It isscarcely necessary to say that their sanitary condition isexceptionally good, and that the aggregate yearly amount of work whichthe owner obtains is greater than when persistent attendance and laborwas required. I have never heard of any female school, public orprivate, in which any such plan has been adopted; nor is it likelythat any similar plan will be adopted so long as the communityentertain the conviction that a boy's education and a girl's educationshould be the same, and that the same means the boy's. What is knownin England as the Ten-hour Act, which Mr. Mundella and Sir JohnLubbock have recently carried through Parliament, is a step in asimilar direction. It is an act providing for the special protectionof women against over-work. It does not recognize, and probably wasnot intended to recognize, the periodical type of woman'sorganization. It is founded on the fact, however, which law has beenso slow to acknowledge, that the male and female organization are notidentical
Experience teaches that a healthy and growing boy may spend six hoursof force daily upon his studies, and leave sufficient margin forphysical growth. A girl cannot spend more than four, or, inoccasional instances, five hours of force daily upon her studies, andleave sufficient margin for the general physical growth that she mustmake in common with a boy, and also for constructing a reproductiveapparatus. If she puts as much force into her brain education as aboy, the brain or the special apparatus will suffer. Appropriateeducation and appropriate co-education must adjust their methods andregimen to this law.
Another detail is, that, during every fourth week, there should be aremission, and sometimes an intermission, of both study and exercise.Some individuals require, at that time, a complete intermission frommental and physical effort for a single day; others for two or threedays; others require only a remission, and can do half work safely fortwo or three days, and their usual work after that. The diminishedlabor, which shall give Nature an opportunity to accomplish herspecial periodical task and growth, is a physiological necessity forall, however robust they may seem to be. The apportionment of studyand exercise to individual needs cannot be decided by general rules,nor can the decision of it be safely left to the pupil's caprice orambition. Each case must be decided upon its own merits. Theorganization of studies and instruction must be flexible enough toadmit of the periodical and temporary absence of each pupil, withoutloss of rank, or necessity of making up work, from recitation, andexercise of all sorts. The periodical type of woman's way of work mustbe harmonized with the persistent type of man's way of work in any successful plan of co-education.
The keen eye and rapid hand of gain, of what Jouffroy callsself-interest well understood, is sometimes quicker than the brain andwill of philanthropy to discern and inaugurate reform. An illustrationof this statement, and a practical recognition of the physiologicalmethod of woman's work, lately came under my observation. There is anestablishment in Boston, owned and carried on by a man, in which tenor a dozen girls are constantly employed. Each of them is given andrequired to take a vacation of three days every fourth week. It isscarcely necessary to say that their sanitary condition isexceptionally good, and that the aggregate yearly amount of work whichthe owner obtains is greater than when persistent attendance and laborwas required. I have never heard of any female school, public orprivate, in which any such plan has been adopted; nor is it likelythat any similar plan will be adopted so long as the communityentertain the conviction that a boy's education and a girl's educationshould be the same, and that the same means the boy's. What is knownin England as the Ten-hour Act, which Mr. Mundella and Sir JohnLubbock have recently carried through Parliament, is a step in asimilar direction. It is an act providing for the special protectionof women against over-work. It does not recognize, and probably wasnot intended to recognize, the periodical type of woman'sorganization. It is founded on the fact, however, which law has beenso slow to acknowledge, that the male and female organization are notidentical
No comments:
Post a Comment