The Reconstructed School | Page 3

American
civilization, and here, again, we show forth our provincialism. But even
in this restricted field we arrive at our hazy concept of a good citizen by
the process of elimination. We aver that a good citizen does not do this
and does not do that; yet the teachers in our schools would find it
difficult to describe a good citizen adequately, in positive terms. Our

notions of good citizenship are more or less vague and misty and,
therefore, our concept of civilization is equally so.
Granting, however, that we may finally achieve satisfactory definitions
of citizenship and civilization as applying to our own country, it does
not follow that the same definitions will obtain in other lands. A good
citizen according to the Chinese conception may differ widely from a
good citizen in the United States. Topography, climate, associations,
occupations, traditions, and racial tendencies must all be taken into
account in formulating a definition. Before we can gain a right concept
of good citizenship as a world affair we must make a thoughtful study
of world conditions. In so doing, we may have occasion to modify and
correct some of our own preconceived notions and thus extend the
horizon of our education.
What society is and should be in the world at large; what good
citizenship is and ought to be in the whole world; and what civilization
is, should be, and may be as a world enterprise--these considerations
are the foundation stones upon which we must build the temple of
education now in the process of reconstruction. Otherwise the work
will be narrow, illiberal, spasmodic, and sporadic. It must be possible
to arrive at a common denominator of the concepts of society,
citizenship, and civilization as pertaining to all nations; it must be
possible to contrive a composite of all these concepts to which all
nations will subscribe; and it must be possible to discover some
fundamental principles that will constitute a focal point toward which
the thinking of all nations can be directed. Once this focal point is
determined and the thinking of the world focused upon it, the work of
reconstruction has been inaugurated.
But the task is not a simple one by any means; quite the contrary, for it
is world-embracing in its scope. However difficult the task, it is, none
the less, altogether alluring and worthy. It is quite within the range of
possibilities for a book to be written, even a textbook, that would serve
a useful purpose and meet a distinct need in the schools of all lands. At
this point the question of languages obtrudes itself. When people think
in unison a common language is reduced to the plane of a mere

convenience, not a necessity. The buyer and the seller may not speak
the same language but, somehow, they contrive to effect a satisfactory
adjustment because their thinking is centered upon the same objective.
When thinking becomes cosmopolitan, conduct becomes equally so. If
this be conceded, then it is quite within the range of possibilities to
formulate a course of study for all the schools of the world, if only we
set up as goals the qualities that will make for the well-being of people
in all lands. True, the means may differ in different lands, but, even so,
the ends will remain constant. A thousand people may set out from
their homes with Rome as their destination. They will use all means of
travel and speak many languages as they journey forward, but their
destination continues constant and they will use the best means at their
command to attain the common goal. Similarly, if we set up the quality
of loyalty as one of our educational goals, the means may differ but the
goal does not change and, therefore, the nations will be actuated by a
common purpose in their educational endeavors.
The one thing needful for the execution of this ambitious program of
securing concerted thinking is to have in our schools teachers who are
world-minded, who think in world units. Such teachers, and only such,
can plan for world education and world affairs, and bring their plans to
a successful issue. Some teachers seem able to think only of a
schoolroom; others of a building; others of a town or township; still
others of a state; some of a country; and fewer yet of the world as a
single thing. A person can be no larger than his unit of thinking. One
who thinks in small units convicts himself of provincialism and soon
becomes intolerant. Such a person arrogates to himself superiority and
inclines to feel somewhat contemptuous of people outside the narrow
limits of his thinking. If he thinks his restricted horizon bounds all that
is worth knowing, he will not exert himself to climb to a higher