Texts:1968 Architecture and Pedagogy: Difference between revisions

Line 19:

Designs for classrooms not only tell us much about the didactic means that were used therein; they also reveal the essence of the pedagogy that directed the educative efforts of past times. As we shall see, a good architect not only designs a building to accommodate the external behavioral pattern of those who will inhabit it; he further makes it harmonious with the intellectual, aesthetic, and moral aspirations that affect the conduct of those who will live within its walls. Thus, in addition to providing a suitable space for the activities of instruction, a well-wrought classroom will be in keeping with the educative aims that brought the teacher and students to that particular place. The buildings of bygone times stand as monuments to the purposes of our predecessors. In what follows, we shall seek to extract an understanding of the old-time pedagogy by examining one of the better contributions to the architecture of the old-time school.

School Architecture, or Contributions to the Improvements of School-Houses in the United States was an ungainly work. It had grown by accretion, beginning in 1838 with the text of an address on the disgraceful condition of the average schoolhouse, and becoming by 1842 a major manual on the art of building and equipping schools. To the heterogeneous committees that planned local schools, and to the citizens who paid for their construction, Barnard offered much improved patterns for facades, floors, yards, mechanical equipment, and furniture. In all his works, Barnard excelled as a compiler; and into this one he crammed available statistics and reports on the condition of existing school buildings, representative plans and elevations for various exemplary schoolhouses, designs for effective ventilating and heating systems, and the better catalogues and descriptions of instructional aids. All this he “unified” with a detailed index and an occasional editorial comment. But as for any art in his presentation, alas — “it was the wish of the author to revise that portion of the work in which the general principles of school architecture are discussed, and to arrange the various plans and descriptions of improvements in the construction, internal arrangement, and furniture of schoolhouses under appropriate heads. But his time is too much absorbed in the immediate and pressing duties of his office, to admit of his doing anything beyond a general superintendence of the publication, and the preparation of a few additional plans. . . .”<ref>School Architecture, p. 6. Barnard’s reputation as a great orator suggests that had he had the time he could have written much better than he did.</ref>p>

School Architecture, or Contributions to the Improvements of School-Houses in the United States was an ungainly work. It had grown by accretion, beginning in 1838 with the text of an address on the disgraceful condition of the average schoolhouse, and becoming by 1842 a major manual on the art of building and equipping schools. To the heterogeneous committees that planned local schools, and to the citizens who paid for their construction, Barnard offered much improved patterns for facades, floors, yards, mechanical equipment, and furniture. In all his works, Barnard excelled as a compiler; and into this one he crammed available statistics and reports on the condition of existing school buildings, representative plans and elevations for various exemplary schoolhouses, designs for effective ventilating and heating systems, and the better catalogues and descriptions of instructional aids. All this he “unified” with a detailed index and an occasional editorial comment. But as for any art in his presentation, alas — “it was the wish of the author to revise that portion of the work in which the general principles of school architecture are discussed, and to arrange the various plans and descriptions of improvements in the construction, internal arrangement, and furniture of schoolhouses under appropriate heads. But his time is too much absorbed in the immediate and pressing duties of his office, to admit of his doing anything beyond a general superintendence of the publication, and the preparation of a few additional plans. . . .”<ref>School Architecture, p. 6. Barnard’s reputation as a great orator suggests that had he had the time he could have written much better than he did.</ref>

In form, School Architecture was a pattern book, which was not an unusual layout for a building manual published in the 1840’s. At that time such publications on architecture became popular, and they continued to be the companion of prospective builders until the end of the century.<ref>On the use of pattern books in school building see “The Use of Architectural Handbooks in the Design of Schoolhouses from 1840 to 1860,” by Barbara Wriston, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 22 (1963), 155-60. Unfortunately, Wriston pays too little attention to the pedagogical significance of the various designs she surveys..</ref> In Barnard’s book on schoolhouses, in Andrew Jackson Downing’s treatise on landscape gardening, and in Alexander Jackson Davis’s guide to rural residences, the authors recognized that the building needs of Americans differed from those of their contemporaries in England and Europe.<ref>See Andrew Jackson Downing, A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening Adapted to North America. . . . with Remarks on Rural Architecture (New York and London: Wiley and Putnam, 1841); and Alexander Jackson Davis, Rural Residences. . . . Published Under the Supervision of Several Gentlemen, with a View to the Improvement of American Country Architectur (New York, 1837).</ref> Americans needed architectural models that had been designed with local materials and conditions in mind. As buyers of clothing patterns today, the readers of these works could use the designs either without alteration or with adjustments to make them fit special needs. Gone were the days of the once popular builder’s guides, in which only structural and decorative details were illustrated. With the older guides the hapless reader, often a man who was inexperienced in building, had been forced to ponder alone how classical orders, designed to be executed in stone, might serve to stable his horses or grace his wooden outhouse.<ref>Typical of the old builder’s guides is Asher Benjamin, The Builder’s Guide, or Complete System of Architecture (Boston: Perkins and Marvin, 1839); and Owen Biddle, The Young Carpenter’s Assistant (Philadelphia: Benjamin Johnson, 1805).</ref> In the new pattern books whole buildings, rather than details, were illustrated and the readers were shown how historical styles might form a liveable rural residence or an efficient school. Authors of these books created building types and forms that have no historical counterparts.<ref>For instance, see the interesting note by Joseph Masheck, “The Meaning of Town and Davis’ Octagonal Schoolhouse Design,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 25 (1966), 302-4, in which Masheck tries to show the possible origin in Froebelian pedagogy of an original schoolhouse design.</ref>

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 <p>Designs for classrooms not only tell us much about the didactic means that were used therein; they also reveal the essence of the pedagogy that directed the educative efforts of past times. As we shall see, a good architect not only designs a building to accommodate the external behavioral pattern of those who will inhabit it; he further makes it harmonious with the intellectual, aesthetic, and moral aspirations that affect the conduct of those who will live within its walls. Thus, in addition to providing a suitable space for the activities of instruction, a well-wrought classroom will be in keeping with the educative aims that brought the teacher and students to that particular place. The buildings of bygone times stand as monuments to the purposes of our predecessors. In what follows, we shall seek to extract an understanding of the old-time pedagogy by examining one of the better contributions to the architecture of the old-time school.</p>
-<p><i>School Architecture, or Contributions to the Improvements of School-Houses in the United States</i> was an ungainly work. It had grown by accretion, beginning in 1838 with the text of an address on the disgraceful condition of the average schoolhouse, and becoming by 1842 a major manual on the art of building and equipping schools. To the heterogeneous committees that planned local schools, and to the citizens who paid for their construction, Barnard offered much improved patterns for facades, floors, yards, mechanical equipment, and furniture. In all his works, Barnard excelled as a compiler; and into this one he crammed available statistics and reports on the condition of existing school buildings, representative plans and elevations for various exemplary schoolhouses, designs for effective ventilating and heating systems, and the better catalogues and descriptions of instructional aids. All this he “unified” with a detailed index and an occasional editorial comment. But as for any art in his presentation, alas — “it was the wish of the author to revise that portion of the work in which the general principles of school architecture are discussed, and to arrange the various plans and descriptions of improvements in the construction, internal arrangement, and furniture of schoolhouses under appropriate heads. But his time is too much absorbed in the immediate and pressing duties of his office, to admit of his doing anything beyond a general superintendence of the publication, and the preparation of a few additional plans. . . .”<ref><i>School Architecture,</i> p. 6. Barnard’s reputation as a great orator suggests that had he had the time he could have written much better than he did.</ref>p></p>
+<p><i>School Architecture, or Contributions to the Improvements of School-Houses in the United States</i> was an ungainly work. It had grown by accretion, beginning in 1838 with the text of an address on the disgraceful condition of the average schoolhouse, and becoming by 1842 a major manual on the art of building and equipping schools. To the heterogeneous committees that planned local schools, and to the citizens who paid for their construction, Barnard offered much improved patterns for facades, floors, yards, mechanical equipment, and furniture. In all his works, Barnard excelled as a compiler; and into this one he crammed available statistics and reports on the condition of existing school buildings, representative plans and elevations for various exemplary schoolhouses, designs for effective ventilating and heating systems, and the better catalogues and descriptions of instructional aids. All this he “unified” with a detailed index and an occasional editorial comment. But as for any art in his presentation, alas — “it was the wish of the author to revise that portion of the work in which the general principles of school architecture are discussed, and to arrange the various plans and descriptions of improvements in the construction, internal arrangement, and furniture of schoolhouses under appropriate heads. But his time is too much absorbed in the immediate and pressing duties of his office, to admit of his doing anything beyond a general superintendence of the publication, and the preparation of a few additional plans. . . .”<ref><i>School Architecture,</i> p. 6. Barnard’s reputation as a great orator suggests that had he had the time he could have written much better than he did.</ref></p>
 <p>In form, <i>School Architecture</i> was a pattern book, which was not an unusual layout for a building manual published in the 1840’s. At that time such publications on architecture became popular, and they continued to be the companion of prospective builders until the end of the century.<ref>On the use of pattern books in school building see “The Use of Architectural Handbooks in the Design of Schoolhouses from 1840 to 1860,” by Barbara Wriston, <i>Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians,</i> Vol. 22 (1963), 155-60. Unfortunately, Wriston pays too little attention to the pedagogical significance of the various designs she surveys..</ref> In Barnard’s book on schoolhouses, in Andrew Jackson Downing’s treatise on landscape gardening, and in Alexander Jackson Davis’s guide to rural residences, the authors recognized that the building needs of Americans differed from those of their contemporaries in England and Europe.<ref>See Andrew Jackson Downing, <i>A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening Adapted to North America. . . . with Remarks on Rural Architecture</i> (New York and London: Wiley and Putnam, 1841); and Alexander Jackson Davis, <i>Rural Residences. . . . Published Under the Supervision of Several Gentlemen, with a View to the Improvement of American Country Architectur</i> (New York, 1837).</ref> Americans needed architectural models that had been designed with local materials and conditions in mind. As buyers of clothing patterns today, the readers of these works could use the designs either without alteration or with adjustments to make them fit special needs. Gone were the days of the once popular builder’s guides, in which only structural and decorative details were illustrated. With the older guides the hapless reader, often a man who was inexperienced in building, had been forced to ponder alone how classical orders, designed to be executed in stone, might serve to stable his horses or grace his wooden outhouse.<ref>Typical of the old builder’s guides is <i>Asher Benjamin, The Builder’s Guide, or Complete System of Architecture</i> (Boston: Perkins and Marvin, 1839); and Owen Biddle, <i>The Young Carpenter’s Assistant</i> (Philadelphia: Benjamin Johnson, 1805).</ref> In the new pattern books whole buildings, rather than details, were illustrated and the readers were shown how historical styles might form a liveable rural residence or an efficient school. Authors of these books created building types and forms that have no historical counterparts.<ref>For instance, see the interesting note by Joseph Masheck, “The Meaning of Town and Davis’ Octagonal Schoolhouse Design,” <i>Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians,</i> Vol. 25 (1966), 302-4, in which Masheck tries to show the possible origin in Froebelian pedagogy of an original schoolhouse design.</ref></p>