Moving Picture Age (Jan-Dec 1921)

FEB 18192! 'C^4875«5 ^ MOVING PICTURE AGE For Non-Theatrical Film and Slide Users Vol. IV MARCH, 1921 No. 3 Visual Instruction in the School Room I. The Part Pictures Play in Instruction Those who have not definitely decided on adopting visual aids in instruction will find in this article convincing arguments for such use; others who now use pictures will be encouraged into taking greater advantage of their aid By Charles Roach In charge of Visual Instruction Service, Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, Ames, Iowa A RETURNED missionary from West Africa, while addressing a group of college students explained her work among the women and children of the Dark Continent. Among other things she made mention of the wonderful help the stereopticon and slides had been to her in her work, especially with those who could not understand her language. "The children are extremely fond of pictures," she said. "They sit patiently and absorb every view. They remember what they see much better than that which we tell them. One little fellow expressed it very clearly when he said : 'We like to hear the Bible stories but it just seems as though the words go in this door (pointing to his ear) and out the other into the bushes and get lost, but that which goes in these doors (pointing to his eyes) stays inside because there are no doors back here (pointing to the back of his head) for the pictures ret out.' " The little African boy may not have had a scientific explanation for the phenomena of memory and may never have heard of such a word as psychology, but he discovered for himself a principle that psychologists would require pages to clarify and explain. The boy discovered that visual sense stimuli overwhelmingly exceed others in the formation of concepts. He observed that seeing is knowing. The observations of many teachers and pupils in the schools of America have recognized the importance of visual presentation of text matter and today we have the expression "visual instruction" or "visual education," whatever that may mean. Do We See or Hear a Show? The common expressions of every-day life are significant, especially those that attribute to the visual sense those qualities that belong to the other senses. For instance, one asks "Let me see how heavy the parcel is," or "I see how to solve the problem." Musicians speak of tone "color." Our eyes are the gateway for knowledge, they are the easiest and quickest way to consciousness. Recently the writer asked a group of persons to recall the word horse. When asked to tell the characteristic of the horse recalled, invariably it was the color, size, an action or position of the animal that was mentioned rather than the sound of hoofs, the swish of the tail, the odor of the stable or the feel of the animal's coat. One goes to the theater to see a show but who goes to hear it? Phonographs reproduce the human voice perfectly but who will pay $2 to hear a phonograph concert? Many willingly undergo the torture of evening 11 clothes, endure the annoyance of the congested traffic, elbow the jostling crowd and pay the price to hear — or is it to see — the artist. No doubt it is both to hear and see the artist but the point I wish to make is that we are, for the most part, eye-minded. We think our thoughts in terms of the visual and it is quite natural that pictures have a universal appeal, whether it be the cultured gentleman or the little heathen African boy. Why Interesting Pictures Are Not Sufficient The desire for pictures is almost instinctive. The child mind responds to them before the little mouth can shape words. Where is the child that cannot be won by a picture book? If it is a colored picture, so much the better. Color is an additional stimulus for the sensory nerves, hence the colored print or lantern slide is far more interesting than the plain. But pictures must be more .than interesting if they are to be of any value to the teacher. Are they pedagogically correct? Does the method of presentation correspond to the educational theories commonly accepted? Here is the place where the arguments arise. The difficulty lies in what is meant by "pedagogically correct," and what is meant by "education." Until all can agree upon what is meant by good pedagogy and good educational theory we never shall be able to answer that question. If we wait to accept pictures until the controversy is settled the future for the visual instruction idea is not very hopeful. The visual instructionist should not wait. Remembering that Pestalozzi, Comenius and Herbart were not afraid to introduce something not exactly conventional in their day, he should continue to discover new truths and explore every possible avenue that may help him in his task of teaching. There are many who accept the visual instruction idea in a limited sense. The blackboard is the most common piece of visual instruction apparatus in the modern school room. No argument is necessary to persuade the teacher to permit it to remain. Charts, maps, and printed pictures have long since been in common favor. Teach.ers praise excellent halftones and zinc etchings in their text-books. The coming of the "magic lantern" gave a new and attractive vehicle for teaching. In every modern school the stereopticon is quite a necessary part of the physical equipment, either in the class room or the laboratory. In the darkened room, eyes instinctively turn toward the light. A form or figure commands attention. The picture then succeeds or fails to hold attention in pro