International Review of Educational Cinematography (Jan-Dec 1930)

— 1263 — After reading M. Ehrler's delightful scenario, it might reasonably be held that this film version of the life of Pestalozzi should be followed by an article on child welfare rather than on modern pedagogy, a system, that is, of teaching which attaches increasing importance to the use of the cinematograph. It was naturally a difficult matter, in a scenario of movement and action, to do justice to Pestalozzi 's methods of educational reform; M. Ehrler has preferred to emphasize the exquisite sensibility and loving — kindness which inspired the work of the famous Swiss pedagogue. With great suggestive force he shows us Pestalozzi living, fighting and suffering in an atmosphere exposed to the strong blasts of the Encyclopaedists. The intellectual whirlwind which swept Europe at that time did havoc among the reactionary and the unprepared, but it brought new life to those whose ears were already tuned to catch the voice of reason and truth. Pestalozzi was one of these. Children were his first, indeed his only care and it was his endeavour to make education fruitful instead of burdensome. Thus his life is an example to those who devote themselves to child welfare and to those who seek to make lessons more attractive and thereby more effective. Nature decrees that the tree must blossom before it bears fruit. Childhood and adolescence have often been called the spring-time of life, but until Pestalozzi' s day this spring was without fresh air, sunshine or flowers. Culture was a hothouse plant for a few privileged people; the rest had to be content with the rudiments of knowledge knocked into them by some village cobbler who was more gaoler than teacher. Pestalozzi s great merit is that he introduced life and colour into elementary education, bringing light and sunshine into the classroom. Following in his tracks, Froebel was destined later to create those kindergartens whose very name conjures up visions of sunshine, fresh air, spring flowers and happy children. It may be said that all teachers worthy of the name have always tried to make school a pleasanter place and the lessons easier to assimilate, and it may even be added that they have all found one of the main conditions of this increase of pleasure and assimilative power in visual teaching. Pestalozzi, if he hzd lived in our day, would certainly have been a strong supporter of film-teaching. We should be anticipating the article that follows if we were to point out in this note how and why the cinema is an admirable means of humouring youthful brains and of making school more attractive to children. M. Ange shows this so convincingly that we need add nothing to his arguments in favour of teaching by film and to his replies to objections. In inserting this note between M. Ehrler's scenario and M. Ange' s article, our only intention is to stress a factor common to all educational reformers — love of children and love of progress. Before concluding, however, we would draw our readers' particular attention to the second part of M. Ange's article, which deals with the pedagogic aspects of film-teaching, and we would ask them to refer to the letter-questionnaire recently circulated by the I. E. C. I. to the teachers of a large number of schools in different countries which had already received other questionnaires addressed to the pupils {See Int. Rev. of Educ. Cin., No. 6, June 1930). This letter to teachers contained numerous questions on the method to be followed in film-teaching. M. Ange gives some practical hints of the greatest value to all who are working for the introduction of the cinema into our schools. B. de Ch. ingl. 3