Establishment of Science Education in England -- Focused on the Theories of H. Spencer, T. Huxley, and H. Armstrong --

Abstract

As is generally known, H. Spencer, T. Huxley and H. Armstrong played important parts in the establishment of science education in England. But it has not been all accounted yet how relations their theories had with one another. In this paper, the writer tries to clear up this point. From the analysis of human activities in daily life, Spencer concluded the necessity of science education in school, and theoretically formulated a system of science education based on the Pestalozzian principles of education. Huxley and Armstrong, who were both much influenced by Spencer, ap plied the practical teaching materials and teaching methods to Spencer's theory. That is, Huxley and Arm strong stressed, from the viewpoint of natural science, the practical research of science and put in practice. This is one of the developments they established. In this meaning, their concept of science teaching is worthy of note. It seems, however, that Armstrong's purpose, teaching content and teaching methods of science teaching were quite different from those of Huxley. As the purpose, for example, Huxley advocated 11 a grasp of the general character of science and the discipline in the method of all sciences", while Armstrong concentrated his attention only on the "training in scientific method". This difference between these two viewpoints has exerted an influence on the selection and the construction of teaching content. This difference is also found in Armstrong's criticism; 11 Huxley's physiography is a type of the book to be avoided until method has been fully mastered", and “Object-lesson” which was adopted as an effective method of science teaching by Huxley, “is not the experimental teaching". Armstrong's method, which was the latest one of the scientific methods established in Germany, differed from Huxley's old-type method which was applied to natural history. Arm strong classified the difference between the teaching of science and the training in scientific method, and sharply defined demonstration by teacher, experiment by pupil, verificative experiment, heuristic experiment, quantitative experiment, and qualitative experiment. He also verified in practice that training in scientific method is effective only in the process of heuristic research. This implies that Armstrong completely achieved what Huxley had not done, in spite of the same standpoint in purpose, method and principle. Armstrong established a truly modern teaching method of science education beyond the limits of Huxley. But the excessive stress of heuristic method degenerated into formal ism and has been severely criticised. For overcoming this criticism, the science teaching which lays stress on the cultural value of science as Huxley advocated must be accepted. In the science education in England leaves a difficult problem how these two are consolidated, the training in scientific method and science teaching which lays stress on the cultural value of science, without changing both characteristics.