Appendix 30: Notes on the Home Workshop Movement

Here's what I know about (organized) hobbyist woodworking in America.

The first signs of an organizing of woodworking enthusiasts appeared in 1933-34. So far I haven't found anything before this date. If hobbyist woodworking occurred before the 1930s, the drive came from the individual, not group activity. See 1908 Hall item below.

The National Homeworkshop Guild was formed during the Depression, guided by Arthur Wakeling, homeworkshop editor at Popular Science, and I've found traces of evidence that the National Recovery Act was also involved. By the mid-30s, some 500 chapters existed across North America.

Details are briefly given month by month in issues of PS, but unfortunately not indexed in the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature, the only index of the time that covers popular magazines, and then only selectively.

"Selectively" is the operative word, because while I use the RG database online a lot, news of events like the formation of the NHWG are not indexed. Instead I discovered this Depression-era movement, more-or-less accidentally, when perusing bibliographies of master's these done in the 1930s. One university library in Iowa is a goldmine!

I have yet to find the smoking gun evidence, but I believe now the motives for the formation of the NHWG come from reactions by Industrial Arts teachers - woodworking, primarily, but other technologies as well -- to the declining enrollments for woodworking courses in the era leading up to and during WW I.

Part of the Industrial Revolution, this enrollment decline was caused by the impact of mass production upon manufacturing processes mucking up the old apprenticeship programs. That is, if manufacturers could hire untrained workers off the street, the long term apprenticeships were no longer needed. Hence the decline in enrollment in woodworking courses.

Apprenticeship in America.

"Apprenticeship and Education", Paul Monroe, ed., Cyclopedia of Education, v 1, ny: Macmillan, 1911, pp 156-161. James Sullivan, Charles R. Richards, Isaac L. Kandel, and James Phinney Munroe - This is worthwhile incorporating.

Use Richards et al from monroe's cyclopedia of education v 1, Macmillan 1911.

Since the term "apprentice" is loosely used to designate almost any shop learner or employee below the journeyman, it is important to point out that fundamental to true apprenticeship is the indenture, a legal instrument, in the terms of the laws of New York, "whereby a minor is bound out to serve as a clerk or servant in any trade, profession, or employment, or is apprenticed to learn the art or mystery of any trade or craft." An indenture implies mutual obligation of service in preparation for a definite occupation, and apprenticeship is therefore a sharply defined and strictly limited type of vocational education.. Read more

My speculation: To protect their enrollments, IA instructors came up with the idea of encouraging their students to develop workshops at home. It happened in the 1920s, and -- ever so slowly -- I am gathering together the evidence on this shift in direction in technology education. (While I won't go into these details right now, there are several reasons that such a move made sense.) This homeworkshop movement evidently - in today's cliché - "had legs", because it resulted in a cadre of young men - schooled in the 1920s -- who had been given a taste for what rewards amateur woodworking has, primarily giving personal pleasure in creating useful objects, and who had workshop space in their homes. In the 1930s, this enthusiasm translated in the NHWG.

Alleged Defects in the Industrial Arts Program

Statement of Professor Emanuel E Ericson, California State University, Santa Barbara, CA, January, 1926, IEM "Defects in IA Program" Ericson authored a textbook in IA, starting in 1930. It went through at least 5 eds, the last one evidently in 1976. in Google print there is quite a few hits, but none are in full text

 

 

The apparent assumption that every junior high school boy is likely to become a tradesman, and the organization of the shop curriculum almost en­tirely on the prevocational or semi-vocational basis may not best serve the average youth.

 

There appears to be a lack of correlation in our large junior high schools between the various types of short-unit subjects required of the individual, and probably too little cooperation and understand­ing between the highly specialized individuals who teach these subjects.

 

Exclusion, particularly in larger school sys­tems, of activities and operations which do not fall distinctly under one of the five or six accepted unit shop subjects leaves the student deprived of those experiences which may be of more future usefulness to him than his participation in formal, classified trade processes.

 

A lack of connection between present per­sonal and home needs of the individual with the work he is required to do in school is often evident. Boys in many classes are too young to see the trade application of the work and no other motive is furnished.

 

Overstressing trade methods below the high school by teachers who have extensive industrial and trade training, and who have the strictly vocational education viewpoint, and no other, is often a drawback in industrial arts teaching. Correct methods of working are not without flexibility and can be used without placing production in the place of instruction and making of the instructor a shop foreman instead of a teacher.

 

Time was when a cry for more equipment was in order. Now it may be questioned whether too much equipment cannot be used for industrial arts work. Is not mechanical activity more than equipment, and manual dexterity more than manipulation of machines? Are we producing machine operators, or are we endeavoring to develop initiative and ability in the use of tools.

 

There is a lack of an organized program governing the planning of courses, subject matter and teaching procedure in such a way that the boy shall pass through a definite series of predetermine activity during his school career.

 

There is also a lack of a system of comprehensive records of actual progress made by the individual during all of his experiences in school, home, boy scout activities, employment, and so on, in order that his experiences may be consciously guided in school to cover a certain desirable variety of problems and processes.

 

 

 

In a 1929 article in IEM, Professor E E Ericson, state Teachers College, Sanata Barbara, CA

 

(4) A lack of connection between present per­sonal and home needs of the individual with the work he is required to do in school is often evident. Boys in many classes are too young to see the trade application of the work and no other motive is furnished.

 

The Project Method

The origins of the project method is a subject of revisionist scholarship. Gary E. Moore (1988) locates the concept in the thought of the agricultural scientist and educator, Rufus Stimson. Michael Knoll, Journal of Technology Education  (1997) at the university of Bayreuth claims that the roots of the project method are much older, tracing back to 1590, in the architectural schools of Renaissance Europe.

From IEM 7, no 4 April, 1918, 138-139

 

THE PROJECT -- SINNING AND SINNED AGAINST

 

L. L. Jackson, Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Montclair, N. J.

 

[This definition can be added to by looking at kilpatrick's small book on opd or john alford stevenson's book in google print on the project method]

 

The project-method foreshadows the practice of teaching through types, today often identified as teaching/learning through "analogy":

 

For example, in history, the learner seeking to obtain a concept of a "statesman" will choose to study a few typical statesmen rather than from "a composite of the biographies of all the statesmen of Europe, Asia, and the Americas". Likewise, to understand the qualities of hardwood, rather than from a formal study of many varie­ties, draw conclusions about the nature of hardwood from a study of several typical specimens.

 

 

Educational criteria for project method of teaching/learning falls into three major categories:

 

The focus of the first educational criterion - ie, involving both teaching by the instructor and learning by the student components -- is where the student (a) seeks the materials most suited to his project; (b) passes judgment on several kinds of wood, (c) notes the different methods of construction, and (c) evaluates types of finish.

 

(Few pupils have sufficient information to make this decision until they have made a study of the problem.)

 

The second standard of good teaching/learning provides (a) the exercise of judgment, (b) the motive for gaining a fund of useful information, (c) enlist the service and co-operation of the student's physical and mental powers.

 

The third educational test includes (a) exer­cising a capacity for organization and assembling of the parts according to the specifications governing the design. Employing sound pedagogical methods - an activity the requires special preparation by teacher -- creates the opportunities for the exercise of the desirable mental activities.

 

For critics apt to conclude that project-teaching is inconsistent with the requirements for information-getting, Jackson says that

 

The probable answer to all this is two-fold: First, right habits of thought are more important than most information, and second, most curricula consist of a minority of important information and a majority of secondary information. Furthermore, it is now generally conceded that education is not chiefly concerned with technical knowledge and tech­nical skill except in the strictly vocational field.

 

 

Rhetorically, M L Roark asks, "Is the Project method a contribution", in his January 1925 article in the Peabody Journal Of Education, v 2, no 4, pp 197-204.

Need para on stultifying state of education in the early part of the 20^th century:

Unraveling and sorting out how the homeworkshop movement emerged tests an investigator's skills. But while the evidence is sketchy and scattered, things are coming together. For example, the founding father of the Project method is said to be Rufus S Stimson, a pioneer in American agriculture education, William Kilpatrick, John Dewey's colleague at Columbia University, and author of the oft-cited The Project Method: The Use of the Purposeful Act in the Educative Process; see the online paper, "WHERE ARE YOU WHEN WE NEED YOU, RUFUS W. STIMSON?", by Gary E. Moore.

 

(Moore's Stimson paper was first presented to the National Agricultural Education Research Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia, December 1985. This was later published as an article in The Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 1988, 29 (3), 50-58. The article was titled "The Forgotten Leader in Agricultural Education: Rufus W. Stimson.") William james connection -see more in Thayer 1928 - also the 1935 William H., Kilpatrick, ed. The Educational Frontier. New York and London: Century, 1933. 325 p. Reprint. Arno Press, 1970.)

 

An unbiased account of the evolution of the project method is found in V. T. Thayer's The Passing of the Recitation (1928). Thayer, a noted educational philosopher, wrote several important books during the first half of the twentieth century. He was a contemporary of Kilpatrick. He collaborated with Kilpatrick, Dewey, Bode, and others to write The Educational Frontier which was edited by Kilpatrick in 1933. In The Passing of the Recitation Thayer (p. 229) wrote:

Some twenty years ago R. W. Stimson, at the time a representative of the Massachusetts Board of Education, devised a plan for revitalizing the teaching of agriculture in the vocational high schools of Massachusetts. . . . What Mr. Stimson proposed to do was to supplement the regular class work of the school with home projects. Thus in the Smith Agricultural High School at Northampton a trained teacher was employed for the summer months of 1908 to assist and direct boys in selecting and carrying on appropriate home tasks, which tasks should involve the concrete application of principles already learned in the school.-

This plan was successful from the start. Consequently, in 1911, the Massachusetts Legislature agreed to pay two-thirds of the salary of specially qualified teachers whom a selected list of high schools might employ. In this action Massachusetts set the standard for a new departure in vocational education

 

W Wilbur Hatfield, "THE CREATIVE IMPULSE", The English Journal, 8, 2 (Feb 1919), pp 139-140

 

1 The Creative Impulse in Industry. By Helen Marot. New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., 1918. Pp. 146. [from google print, on opd]

 

A neglected aspect of living has been brought sharply to the fore by Helen Marot in her slender volume on the Creative Impulse.1 Her surprisingly simple thesis-many find it simply surprising, too-runs something like this:

 

Work is not educative unless the worker is interested in producing rather than in acquiring economic goods. Such interest is possible only when the worker shares the responsibility

 

(1) for choosing the object to be produced,

 

(2) for planning the production, and

 

(3) for executing the plan-actual producing.

 

Adventure, experiment, finding out for one's self, not blindly following the directions of another, is the essence of the intellectual life and the best part of freedom. This sharing of responsibility is denied the mass of workers by our present system of managing industry for profit. Machines and scientific management have concentrated all responsibility in the hands of the manage­ment. Two bad results follow:

 

(1) The life of the ordinary worker is straitened, whereas it should be broadened by his work.

 

(2) The warmth of interest gone, the worker shrinks back into himself and applies only a small fraction of his potential energy to the business of production, so that our total production is much less than it should be. In other words, our present methods of pro­duction tend to make the worker a mere attachment of a machine, much less valuable both to himself and to his employer than the vivid personality he might be.

 

Miss Marot goes on to show that our industrial schools have much the same effect as the factories. They too often treat the methods of production as already settled and perfected and needing only to be learned and minutely followed by the learner. She even hints that our ordinary high schools have been guilty of this sin of making the eager youth into a mere cog in our social and economic machine.

 

The remedy ? It scarcely needs statement. Restore to the employee and to the pupil a share in the planning of the enterprise and in the responsi­bility for its conduct. In factory work the restoration will be difficult, but fortunately we are concerned with that phase of the problem only as English teachers are vitally concerned with every aspect of social life. In schools the restoration is hindered only by our own bondage to tradition. There is no reason why we should not, in secondary schools and colleges at least, permit our pupils to participate in choosing the objectives and in planning the procedure, and to bear much of the responsibility for executing the plan. The project method again! You knew it all the time? Naturally, for the project method is the method of real living in school as well as in industry.

W. W. H.

 

At bottom, in the era of WW I, what educational theorists worked out is that school life should be organized with life in the home and community. In such a context, a 'project' was defined then as "a single complete unit of purposeful existence." (james fleming hosic, "An Outline of the project method," the english journal, 7, 9, (Nov 1918), pp 599-603.

jpg from p 65 of this piece, ed by William Kilpatrick

http://books.google.com/books/pdf/Syllabus_in_the_Philosophy_of_Education.pdf?vid=OCLC02102901&id=Fxwp7DMzPbkC&output=pdf&sig=qXlOdtvtmmVZgQMCwgob9kxUWGQ

Earlier, in 1918, Kilpatrick laid out the theoretical outlines of the project method: THE PROJECT METHOD: The Use of the Purposeful Act in the Educative Process, by William Heard Kilpatrick, Professor of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, [shaded area below from an explanation of how "the project method was plagiarized", by gary e moore's paper on Rufus W Stimson.

William Heard Kilpatrick, a noted professor at Columbia University, published an article in the September 1918 issue of the ' Teachers College Record titled "The Project Method." The article went into considerable detail discussing the merit, basic assumptions, and value of the project method. The article was well written and pedagogically sound. Kilpatrick made a statement (p. 320) in the article, which many people may have ignored; he said, "I did not invent the term [the project method] nor did I start it on its educational career. Indeed, I do not know how long it has already been in use." Later in his book Foundations of Methods (1925) Kilpatrick wrote,. . .. the merits of purposeful activity [referring to the project method] depend on how well it will work if given a fair chance and not at all on the name assigned to it and still less on who first used the name."

Kilpatrick's books, articles and presentations about the effectiveness of the project method received national attention and acclaim. His works have been cited many times. An entire issue of Educational Theory was published in 1966 in honor of Kilpatrick. In this issue, several distinguished authors told how the project method of teaching was used around the world. They espoused the project method as one of the greatest events to have occurred in education. It revolutionized education. .

 

Writing in 1920, in Industrial Arts Magazine, Fred C. Whitcomb, a professor of industrial education, Miami University at Oxford, Ohio, claimed that,

 

In the new name, "Industrial Arts", which is grad­ually replacing that of "manual training" the newer ideas are embodied. As Dean Russell says [1 Russell "The School and Industrial Life"-Educational Review December. 1909.] this third element (industrial education) is needed in our school curriculum (the other two being the humanistic and scientific). He says: "If the humanistic studies are essential in the training of the child in his social rela­tions, and the scientific in his relation to the physical world in which he lives, it is equally important that economic studies be included in the curriculum to pro-vide instruction in the industries from which man gains `leis material possessions. I mean the study of industries for the sake of a better perspective on man's achievements in controlling the production, distribution, and consumption of the things which constitute his material wealth.".

.The opportunity to make projects which are thought provoking and which satisfy real needs of the boy are of vastly more educational value than the formal manual training model or exercise, but we should go a step farther and make what may be called the general project the unit of instruction in industrial-arts work.

 

This unit of instruction would not limit the project to one or even two materials to be used in its construc­tion, but a variety of materials and appropriate tools would be available. This need not be more expensive from the standpoint of equipment than the conventional woodworking shop equipment as only one or two units of equipment of each kind need be provided. The seemingly increased difficulty of teaching under such conditions is counteracted, at least partially, by the increased interest of the boys. The different kinds of equipment are located in one large room, or in some instances specific units are placed in small rooms immedi­ately off the main room. .

. 7. As the project seems to be the best unit of instruction in industrial-arts teaching, the inductive development type of lesson plan lends itself best to the presentation of this unit of instruction. But there is also a place for the lesson for appreciation and (especi­ally in the vocational phase of our field of teaching) for the drill lesson.

8. The double column form of lesson plan seems best adapted to the coordinate arrangement of subject matter, and. method of procedure.

 

..In considering the above plans attention is called first to the "teacher's aims". Instead of the conven­tional aims of skill and learning how to make certain joints properly and how to use tools correctly, the em­phasis is placed on what seems more fundamental in boy development. In general education, industrial skill is incidental to industrial intelligence, appreciation, etc. Even in vocational education thoughtful use of manual skill is receiving increased attention. Boys naturally like to make things, and the home seldom provides this opportunity any more. The school must make use of this tendency in a beneficial manner. The school should be real living, and life is continually presenting prob­lems to be solved..

.. In conclusion, I wish to add: As educators in gen­eral are advocating the thought-provoking problem as the unit of school instruction, does it not behoove the industrial-arts teacher to carefully consider his organ­ization of instructional material to the end that the project which meets the real needs of the boy be his unit of instruction? And further, can this project be made so­cially worth while if the woodworking field of industry only is considered? This has been a very general pre­sentation only of what to my mind seems a very im­portant subject. Details have to be worked out very carefully.

 

In 1920, and after a tortuous journey (ie, as laid out in the Manual Training Magazine 22, no 3 (September 1920), pp 57-61), H J Whitney, Head of the Dept of Vocational Education, at what is now Central Washington University, in Ellensburg, concludes that

 

"Project teaching of manual training is the most difficult kind of teaching, but with all the most fruitful, for it furnishes the opportunity to de­velop those qualities of manhood that our democratic society most needs today, and it enables one to make most effective use of the laws that govern the develop­ment of all human beings."

 

 

Whitney's writing is dense, suggesting that he is not comfortable expressing views about "project teaching", the implicit message being that, maybe, using this method, industrial arts teachers are forsaking too much of their authority, both as mentors and as repositories of learning. He does, though - as the above quote shows - give approval to project learning.

 

Per Capita Costs of Manual Arts Courses "More Expensive"

In an editorial comment in Industrial Education Magazine 29, no 8 (February 1928), p 265-266, William T Bawden, co-editor of IEM and director of vocational education in Tulsa Oklahoma.

 

"Summarizing the foregoing sketchy outline, in which I have attempted to confine myself to conditions affecting practically all high schools regardless of size, it appears that manual arts work is neces­sarily and substantially more expensive than the average of subject-costs. Superintendents are anxiously scrutinizing per capita costs, and are becoming more and more impressed by these differences, and are seriously considering possible measures of relief." [see opd for more details]

 

As editor, issue by issue, Bawden wrote editorials, generally with a focus on the economics of manual arts programs - see opd file under iem

 

 

Could "possible measures of relief" include encouraging home shops? That same issue of Industrial Education Magazine had a brief review of Chelsea Fraser's The Boy's Busy Book [link later to manuals_1921-1930]

 

The Boy's Busy Book. By Chelsea Fraser. Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York City. 1927. Size, 8 x 57/8 inches; cloth, 471 pages.

 

A book which has been conceived with the idea of helping the boy with a home workshop to develop a tool knowledge and a resourcefulness which will be quite an aid to him in his shop-work in school, and will stimulate within him the creative instinct.

 

The book begins with suggestions for establishing a simple workshop and a description of various items of equipment, some of which can be made by the boy. This is followed by instruction in the care and use of tools and the making and repairing of many and various objects, taking in such mediums as wood, paper, metal, leather, concrete, etc.

 

Mr. Fraser is a teacher, writer and patentee of seven inventions.

 

 

 

I am gathering other evidence: Charles G Wheeler, Woodworking A Handbook for Beginners in Home and School Treating of Tools and Operations, NY: G P Putnam's sons, 1924; Also two vols by Paul Woolley (Need to check activities by Dumwoody Institute and Index to Handicrafts.)

 

Where does this go? This is a very significant article

 

1908: Document 2: A L Hall Workshop at Home 1908

http://home.comcast.net/~rgmc36/hall_workshop_at_home_1908.html

 

1914: Kelland, C. B. American boys' workshop. Philadelphia: D. McKay Co. 1914,

 

Philadelphia (1914) David McKay An Octavo, 339 pages, including index. Bound in original turquoise cloth with pictorial cover and spine in black, white and red. A marvelous Arts and Crafts period book, nicely illustrated, including a section on Mission furniture.

 

 

1920: Jackson, A. Home mechanic's workshop companion. N. W. Henley Pub­lishing Co., New York. 1920.

(jan 1925) pp 197-204 paper filed in cabinet under Roark - also cited by oaks 1935

 

 

1923: Bonser, Frederick. G. & Mossman, Lucy C. (1928). Industrial arts for elementary schools. New York: Macmillan.

[In many ways, this study is the most famous in the industrial arts field, from 1900-1925, often cited by later scholars in technology education as the first period. Overlap occurs, where the 1917 Smith Hughes Act signals the beginning of the second period, which lasts until 1957. Then, with Sputnik, a third period begins in 1958.

 

Bonser and Mossman presented concepts that can only be viewed as oppositional to the homeworkshop movement. See many of the comments on the impact of this study in Theodore Lewis and Karen Zuga, document in pdf (all 95 pages) in opd file:]

 

Industrial arts is a study of the changes made by man in the forms of materials to increase their values, and of the problems of life related to these changes (Frederick Gordon Bonser and Lois Coffey Mossman, 1923, p 5).

This interpretation of the meaning of "industrial arts" was written seventy years ago by Frederick Gordon Bonser and Lois Coffey Mossman of Teacher's College at Columbia University. This book contained the definition for industrial arts, and was the foundation for the general-education conception of industrial arts, as well as the general shop theory later popularized by Warner (Gemmil, 1979; Kirkwood, et al, 1994 ). Lux (1981), characterizing this definition as "famous" and "widely accepted," credited Bonser with leading "a major thrust to redirect industrial arts away from activities and studies based on discrete materials or selected trade skills and toward broader conceptualizations such as how humankind provides itself with clothing, food, and shelter" (p. 211). The definition has three major elements: education, technology, and society (see Figure 1). Industry is not mentioned.

 

.

 

 

... in the elementary school, where vocational industrial education was not as large an issue, Bonser's philosophy was at times misconstrued. In elementary school industrial arts, sometime after Bonser's death, "there was a transition toward an arts and crafts and/or handicrafts approach. It is probable that this approach, as well as the 'method of teaching' approach, stemmed from an out-of-context application of the Bonser philosophy" (Hoots, 1974, p. 234). However, Hoots implied that the difficulty may not have been entirely in misapplication.

"The manner of presentation utilized by Bonser was somewhat difficult to follow," he said, "and somewhat difficult to implement" (1974, p. 227).

If Bonser's theories were not clear to educators, then interpretation was necessary, and, perhaps, misinterpretation was inevitable...

 

 

1923: Wood, N. Boy's Workshop. Funk & Wagnalls Co., New York, 1923.

85, March, 1936.

 

1923: R W Selvidge 1923 How to Teach a Trade -- part of the dewey revolution in education, ie, activity-based education

 

1924: Charles G Wheeler. Woodworking: A Handbook for Beginners in Home and School, Treating of Tools and Operations. Putnam, 1924. 369 p.

 

A truly remarkable work, especially as a project conducted by one person.  Obviously part of the "homeworkshop movement" taking place in the 1920s, Wheeler dedicates this book "to the Boy Scouts of America, from one of the advisors to the 'National Court of Honor'." [look up NCH] Further, in the sense that the book demonstrates what a single person can achieve, when this project is compared to the two-volume set by Paul Woolley -- two years later, and Chelsea Fraser's The Boy's Busy Book in 1927 -- we begin to see a body of knowledge accumulating in behalf of the homeworkshop movement.

 

(And, starting earlier in the decade, 1921? -- but working in an almost isolated situation -- the cooperative agreement between Minneapolis Public Library and the Dunwoody Institute, a technical school, resulted in what was at first an informal shoe-box-like file of 3 X 5 forming an index of articles and book chapters on handicrafts relating to the Dunwoody technology curriculum. Woodworking was a heavy component in the the index. Created and maintained by librarians in the Reference Department of MPL, this informal index was published formally in a single volume as the 1936 Index to Handicrafts. Read more here).

 

From Wheeler's PREFACE:

The aim has been to make this working handbook sufficiently simple, concise, and comprehensive to be suitable for everyone, from the young beginner to the student or amateur of mature years-for everybody except those already well trained in the subject, and possibly some of the latter class may find in it something of value to them. It contains [over 800 illustrations, including drawings of 762 woodworking hand and machine tools,] principles and operations which a long and varied experience has shown to be needed and used repeatedly by beginners, school pupils, and amateurs. It is hoped that it will answer a large proportion of the common questions about the more important problems of general woodworking.
 

 

1925:  Wheeler, Charles G. 1855-1946. (Charles Gardner). A manual of woodworking: the fundamentals of hand work in wood for home and school.  New York, London, G.P. Putnam's sons, 1925.  x, 189 pages. illus. 20 cm.

 

Worldcat Note: Abridged from the author's 1924 Woodworking: a handbook for beginners. cf. Preface,  "Suggested books for reading": p. vii.

 

 

 

1925: Roark, M L "Is The Project Method A Contribution?" Peabody Journal of Education, v 2, no 4

 

 

1926: Proffitt, Maris (Maris Marion), Time allotment to manual arts work : [Washington, Govt. Print. Off.,

1926] Pages: 1-10

 

 

1926: Document 11: Paul V. Woolley's "The Importance of Projects in the Education of Boys" 1926
http://home.comcast.net/~rgmc36/woolley_woodworking_projects_1926.htm -- should another document

 

 

1926: Ericson, Emanuel B. "The home workshop," Industrial Education Magazine, 28:22-3, July 1926.

 

 

1926: Ewing, E. N. "How we did it; a home-made workshop," House Beautiful, 591482-4. April 1926.

 

 

1926: Lecarboura, A. C. "Corner workshop for apartments," Popular Mechanics, 46:167-8, July 1926.

 

1927: Mays, Arthur B. The Problem of Industrial Education New York: Century, 1927. 418 p.

 

A commissioned work? In the "editor's introduction", whether this is the initiative of Mays or of the publisher, The Century Company, is not entirely clear. (this file is on the disk on the D drive)

Other similar works needed to account for are C A Bennett's 1937 History of Manual and Industrial Education (Peoria, IL: Bennett, 1937) and the 1937 book of chapters edited by bawden, with contributions by Bennett and Mays.

 

 

 

1927: Fraser, Chelsea. The Boy's Busy Book.

 

 

1927: Snedden, D. & Warner, W. E. Reconstruction of industrial arts courses. New York: Teachers College Columbia, 1927.

 

See below:

 

 

1928: Van Horn, D.R. "Workshop for the Home". House and Garden 54:56 1928? 54:86. 1928.

 

1928? [really 1923] Bonser

 

 

 

Context and Significance

 

A Conceptual Framework for Technology Education represents pieces and parts of many curricular ideas, educational philosophies, and ideologies that preceded it. Figure 5 is an attempt to contextualize those parts. Any effort of this kind, and with the experts who were involved, will spring from a diverse and multigirded philosophical base. Of prominence is the philosophy of social reconstructionism which recognizes that the human, armed with the knowledge of resources and processes, can interact with necessary constituents to solve problems. The work of Bonser almost 90 years ago (Andrews & Erickson, 1976) provided the framework for industrial arts focusing on technologies of the home. This was in contrast to Selvidge's (1909) work that resulted in the Standards of Attainment for the Industrial Arts as part of vocational education. Bonser's perspective was modernized by Snedden and Warner (1927) and then refocused to reflect the technologies of dominant industries by Warner et al. (1952). Warner et al. also supported Wilbur's (1948) definition of industrial arts, which was paraphrased in Maley's (1973) definition leading to the Maryland Plan. The Industrial Arts Curriculum Project (IACP; Towers, Lux, & Ray, 1966) also has some Warner influence as does the American Industry Project (Face & Flug, 1967). Both those

projects influenced the Jackson's Mill effort which in turn influenced the Conceptual Framework effort. Some might say that this interpretation of our curricular efforts has provided evidence of the incestuous nature of our field. I

find it difficult to deny that perspective. With the exception of IACP and the Standards for Technological Literacy

Project (ITEA, 2000), there have never been substantive funds to "go outside" of our field for different views of industry or technology. We are still in our infancy as a discipline and, as such, are still trying to determine what we want to be when we grow up.

 

 

1928: Coakley, F. L. "Handy and compact home workshop," Popular Mechanics Monthly, 50:159-60, July

1928.

 

 

1928: Page, Earl Lorain. Values to Be Derived From the Industrial Arts / by Earl Lorain Page. Thesis? 1928. LC1081 P142v

 

 

 

1929: Hippaka, T. A., "Industrial Arts and Worthy Use of Leisure Time," Phi Delta Kappan, 12:29-30, June,

1929.

 

1929: Lee, Joseph. Play in education 180-181 NY Macmillan Co. 1929.

 

1929: Marshall, D. C. "Tinkering with tinkers; home work shop club," Industrial Arts Magazine, 18:427,

November, 1929.

 

 

THE past few years have seen a great development of organizations to direct the proper use of the boy's spare time. . another class of boys that need the attention of the school and that is those who like to tinker. . prefer to read magazines about mechanical subjects, . try out the things that they have read, . work on ideas of their own origination. . an organization in the Manhattan (Kansas) Junior High School.

 

. two years ago (1927) we began . success .

 

increased interest in shopwork,

 

better class spirit, and

 

cooperation in the care and upkeep of shop equip­ment . appeal to those students who like to make things because of a natural interest in such work rather .

 

 

We started this work by inviting all boys who were enrolled in shop classes and who had a workshop at home, . the purpose of form­ing a home workshop club.

 

 

. "Woodpecker Club". Some boys joined for the sake of joining something rather than because they were interested in a home shop. . the boys drew up the following rules:

 

 

1. A member must have a home shop with at least the following tools: saw; plane; hammer; bit brace; a few auger bits; a bench; and a vise.

 

2. They must attend the meetings of the club.

 

3. They must stay at least one-half hour and work.

 

4. Absence without a good excuse drops a member from

the roll.

 

5. Members must be voted in by a majority of those in the club.

 

 

1929: Schmidt, G. A. "Arranging a home shop," Industrial Education Magazine, 30:477-8, June 1929.

 

this project the boy's home shop . purpose . threefold:

 

(1) To arrange and equip the shop in such a way that the boy shall have a fit place in which to work, and good tools to work with;

 

(2) To please Dad;

 

(3) To introduce in a natural way the various jobs in farm shopwork that are to be done.

 

 

1929: Thatcher, E. "Practical home made combination workshop," Popular Mechanics, 58:870-3, 1046-8,

November-December 1929.

 

1929: Halbort, B. "Every boy needs tools," Parents' Magazine, 4:26, September 1929.

 

1930: Levitas, Arnold. "The Industrial Arts as an Educational Factor in the Public Schools," Journal of Educational Sociology 3, no 7 (March 1930), 423-431.

 

Stresses that manual training/industrial arts (p 425) helps overcome mass production's de-emphasis of "creative work".

 

 

1930: Emanuel E Ericson Teaching Problems In The Industrial Peoria, IL: Manual Arts Press, first of 4 editions, starting in 1930 and ending in 1976?

 

This is the first of four editions dedicated to "teaching problems". For our purposes, i.e., tracing the origin and impact of the homeworkshop movement, Ericson's textbooks give us an "insider's" view of the progress - or lack of progress, as subsequent editions give less attention and/or space to both the "project method" and "the homeworkshop movement". Why?

 

These two authors, 2005: Lewis Theodore and Zuga, Karen F "A Conceptual Framework of Ideas and Issues in Technology Education" 2005 7 No. 1, Fall 1995, a much attention to Bonser, F. G. & Mossman, L. C. (1928). Industrial arts for elementary schools. New York: Macmillan., social reconstrutionism. Lewis and zuga at least imply that the "project approach" - their term for project method - morphs into social reconstructionism.

 

 

 

 

 

132. The Home Workshop. Shopwork properly taught in the school should encourage the boy to estab­lish a workshop at home if he does not already have one. The home workshop among boys is not so com­mon as it should be. Where such shops exist there is usually no correlation between them and the school shop or instructor. A few teachers have given splen­did service in this connection by offering suggestions.

 

 

[pp 75 to 80+] 49. The Purpose of the Project. If the purpose for the work is to be conceived and declared by the stu­dents, it will of necessity mean that the instructor will be put in the position of a guide, an inspiration, in causing the learners to think in the right direction, rather than the one to announce the purpose for their thinking.

 

At this point Friese writes as follows : "It is just as much the duty of the junior high school teacher to im­bue pupils with a worthy purpose as it is to teach sub­ject matter. A teacher must be expert in both. Pur­poses must not only be recognized and accepted by the teacher, but also by the pupils. Unless the latter accept and appropriate the purposes as their own, this first important step in the project method will fail