Talk:Prussian education system

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 September 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Curriculum#Curriculum in formal schooling|curriculum]] The anchor (#Curriculum in formal schooling) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Sources[edit]

There are no historical sources cited for this article. In particular, the widely quoted line attributed to Fichte has no source, and turns up in Web searches only as an unattributed quotation. I have not found it in Fichte's works yet. I added it as unsourced in Wikiquote.--Cherlin (talk) 22:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The claim is made that this quote appears in Gatto, J. T. (1993). Our Prussian school system. Cato Policy Report, 15 (2), l, 10 - I l, 14-15. March 1993. I have not yet found a copy of this report.--Cherlin (talk) 23:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Found, fixed, reference added.--Cherlin (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The quoted line is attributed to a quote by Betrand Russell in a book that was published by a Routledge titled "The Impact of Science on Society". I can't find any reference to the book other than on the publisher's site and the publisher is of dubious credentials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.164.47.154 (talk) 19:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

Alright somebody reverted that again. I think you really have to think about editing before casually reverting. This article is exemplary of many of the criticisms about wikipedia. I will now delete at least the links to partisan homeschooling association propaganda material again and I hope you leave them out at least. As a casual user I can't influence this article but I hope a more experienced editor stumbles over this and realises the unsubstantiated myth and connections that are being established in this article to serve the purpose of in the end slandering the American system of education (sounds absurd, but check the references being made).

I removed everything that was plainly untrue or not classified. I also removed two links to propaganda videos of homeschooling associations. I think the article could be very valuable, as indeed the Prussian system was very influential, but as long as somebody with time can produce a sensible version and not something to give credence to his political ends it should be deleted. Reference can be made to parts of the articles on German and American education. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.2.247.156 (talk) 13:58, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed POV copyvio —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlohcierekim (talk • contribs) 14:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend that you sign in and become a member instead of editing anonymously, which makes your claims much more dubious. Your claims of 'propaganda, 'myth' 'slander' and so on are POV.Rusmeister (talk) 03:56, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Theresa[edit]

"In Austria, Empress Maria Theresa made use of Prussian pedagogical methods as a means to strengthen her hold over Austria."

Theresa died before the 19th Century had begun. The article says the Prussian system dates to the early 19th Century. I don't see how these two assertions are compatible. Boris B (talk) 01:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reference in popular media[edit]

In David Brooks' column of 3/26/12 ("The Relationship School") he cites the founder of an alternative school in New York City as saying that the American education model was "copied from the 18th-century Prussian model designed to create docile subjects and factory workers."…while I would agree with the goal of producing obedient and politically docile citizens, wasn't Prussia an agrarian state, and such, have no need for masses of factory workers? It sounds to me like an ignorant Marxist-inspired description facilitated by lack of knowledge of the geographical base of German industry (the Rhineland). Historian932 (talk) 17:57, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Historian932 is quite correct on Prussia. Brooks is all wrong. see Horace Mann As for "docile" -- the German troublemakers (as in 1848) all came out of the German gymnasia and universities. The American high schools were set up to create teachers and professionals and engineers--very few alumni became factory workers. Rjensen (talk) 18:48, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Including Japan and the United States"[edit]

I can see how the US could be considered relevant because this is the English Wikipedia (but why not UK and Australia?) but why Japan? Out of all the countries that are examples of the Prussian system, what makes Japan special? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.90.165.47 (talk) 01:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the US and Japan more than anyone else made a special effort to study and emulate Prussia. Britain and Australia certainly did not. Rjensen (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the line about the United States as there is no national system of education in the country. As a result, it's misleading to suggest the country adopted a particular approach when it happened on a state by state basis. EdHistory101 (talk) 19:42, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

POV Tag[edit]

The term doesnt exist in German and has no academic merits, its more of an US internal political slogan of home schooling propagandists trying to smear compulsory education via refering to a rather outworldly POV image of Prussia. The article ignores major scientific results of education history. The major impulse for educational reforms within Prussia and as well the major foreign influences happened due to the rivalry and due to the various outcomes of the different wars with France - and influenced the French primary system as well, which was much more primitive and church controlled for a long time, till 1905 btw. The proverbally "the battles of Königgrätz and Sedan have been decided by the Prussian Teachers" (e.g. in Deutsche Geschichte 1866-1918: Bd. Arbeitswelt und Bürgergeist von Thomas Nipperdey) was based on the comparably low amount of analphabetes in the Prussian army - and has nothing to so with serfdom. The introcution already contains basic errors

- the basic foundings of the Prussian primary education system were layed by Frederick the Great with his Generallandschulreglement, a decree of 1763, long before the 19th century. The Generallandschulreglement, authored by Johann Julius Hecker, asked to educate all young citizens, girls and boys, something the article ignores as well, to be educated from the fifth till at age 13 or 14 and to provide them with a basic outlook on (Christian) religion (no ethics ;)), singing, reading and writing based on a regulated, state provided curriculum of text books. Thats still today included in primary education of 21th century Germany.
Claims like "the general population had virtually no access to secondary education" are complete bullshit, in the scientific sense of the word as by Frankfurter's On bullshit. Social mobility was intended and e.g. made possible by tutions for gifted children. Social mobility was higher in Prussia than in other countries of the time. The article tries to deny such basic facts and provides propaganda instead.
Similar nonsens and POV is expressed "Affluent children often went on to attend preparatory private schools for an additional four years". Humbolds Gymnasium was a state funded institution, no prep school and as well intended to be open for all kinds of kids, and not at all as class exclusive as e.g. in England. Its true that funding and training of the teachers and the abolishment of tution fees took its time, the system was far from perfect and slowly improved from the 18th century on and till teachers gained full academic status and tution fees were abolished in the 20th century (but the education share in tax payers funded budgets stays high), but thats not changing the overall picture. Serten 09:15, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

better re-read the revised article. And yes, it was very highly stratified--only the elite made it to the gymnasium. Rjensen (talk) 09:22, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did so, no reason to do away with the tags. The push for improved education in Prussia was lead since the 18th century by the middle strata of society and pioneered by the Bildungsbürgertum, which was NOT the elite - the nobility had the say on top of the state-. Actual research tells a much more differentiated picture- try Volkmar Wittmütz Die preussische Elementarschule im 19. Jahrhundert. Humboldts ideal of a Generic education, Neuhumanism, "bestand in einer „allgemeinen Menschenbildung“, ohne Rücksicht auf Stand, zukünftigen Beruf oder Vermögen" (was way beyound status or profession or wealth), Teachers and their fights for recognition and better pay were instrumental in various german uprisings, from 1830, 1848 (and via the 48ers in the USA) till 1968. That said the prussian education system was far from being as onesided as it is stil being described in the article and it were better you based your claims e.g. about the elite role on science, not on propaganda. Serten 09:47, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

PS.: You changed the intro, now "18th century" but still use the same source (Jeismann) that was being used before to claim the 19th century. Thats more a "Verschlimmbesserung" (do gooder improvemt to the worse) than a actual improvement. Serten 09:50, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

The Jeismann quote referred to its influence in the US. Sagarra makes clear the class-related stratification for the gymnasium, which you seem to think was representative of all strata in Germany not just the elite. I quoted Sagarra otherwise. We are dealing here with Prussia (before 1919) not with Germany today. Rjensen (talk) 09:59, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your notion of class and strata is already based on a misunderstaning - the fact that the education system covered - and still covers - stratas in society, doesnt mean it was (and is) not open to social mobility. Compare the USa - there is an purported dishwasher till millionaire equalitarian ideal, but the US has generated its own sort of royal families, from the Kennedies till the Bushes ;) and is excellent in universities, based on Humboldt btw, but far from providing suitable basic education for blue collars. Point is that the basic layout of the Prussian system described is valid for Germany till today. Germany in so far e.g. avoids the whole problem with creation versus darwinism in school curricula, the creation is taught in religion, which is a regular topic in most Länders and Darwin in biology. Problem solved ;) Furthermore, the German Dual education system uses as well the Prussian education "ständisch" approach and philosophy for its blue collar workers. Thats being iignored in the article as well. The Duale System is one of the most successfull systems of Vocational schooling world wide and has been adapted by dozens of countries like no other German legal concept. Serten 10:14, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

The article is about Prussia pre-1920 and not 2014. Serten's comments are mostly about the 21st century USA and how Germany today handles some issues in biology. NONE of this is relevent to this article. The article makes clear that the Prussian system was widely adopted in USA and elsewhere. It states that gymnasia were attended primarily by elite families--not the working class. Serten provides zero sources. Rjensen (talk) 06:00, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about Prussia pre-1920 and not 2014? Prussia ended in 1947 and the legacy of the Prussian system - similar to the reception of Frederick the Great doesnt end 1947, it goes on till the present and WP should cover that. I have started to provide real sources, as you might be able to read (I hope so) in the article. Your claims about zero are ridiculous. Start reading, stop vandalizing and I would not claim to be an historian in your case. Serten 06:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Rollback[edit]

Be a little bit more careful with claims about the "true goals" of the system. To claim a forced integration as one of the goals is without any base in the actual edicts - the wording you used is part of the propaganda and clarly not in line with the comparable slow actual developement, which was not at all fergusoned. Serten 06:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC) PS.: Are you aware, that the concept of a Nationalsprache was rather alien to Frederick II - the guy allegedly spoke French better than German? I strongly doubt he would have cared much about Polish when introducing the system. In so far I would prefer you check the quality of your sources respectively your wording as well, thats a classical ex post view and not very accurate. Serten 06:48, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Sources showing the use of the term as homeschooling propaganda[edit]

I assume the role of the term as opolitical slogan in the inneramerican discussion is of major importance and has to be elaborated en detail, starting from the lede. Serten 10:14, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Zero[edit]

Wilhelm von Humboldt, Franz-Michael Konrad UTB, 21.07.2010, explicit references to the ideal and role
PISA Under Examination: Changing Knowledge, Changing Tests, and Changing Schools, Miguel A. Pereyra, Hans-Georg Kotthoff, Robert Cowen Springer Science & Business Media, 24.03.2012 explicit references to the ideal and role
Volkmar Wittmütz Die preussische Elementarschule im 19. Jahrhundert Clio-online explicit references to the ideal and role and detailed reception history
"German school system reflects nineteenth century". Justlanded.com. 2007-06-19. Retrieved July 2013. Comprehensive schooling debate, refering to the 19th century origin claim
Was gehen uns »die anderen« an?: Schule und Religion in der Säkularität (Why care about the others, School systems in secular minded societies) Henning Schluß, Michael Domsgen, Matthias Spenn, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 15.08.2012 explicit references to the ideal and role and detailed reception history from theological perspective
Leo Wieland: Katalonien – Kulturnation ohne Staat. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. 10. Oktober 2007 Kulturnation as a term in current use
Construction of the First Mass Education Systems in Nineteenth-Century Europe Yasemin Nuhoglu Soysal and David Strang, Sociology of Education, Vol. 62, No. 4 (Oct., 1989), pp. 277-288 Published by: American Sociological Association was mentioned before but not used actually
Yasemin Nuhoglu Soysal, and David Strang, "Construction of the First Mass Education Systems in Nineteenth-Century Europe," Sociology of Education (1989) 62#4 pp. 277-288 in JSTOR
John Dewey. German philosophy and politics by John Dewey, 1905, quoted in Domsgen et al 2012 p.55-57 see Domsgen
The Prussian-Industrial Model THE ROOTS OF MODERN PUBLIC SCHOOLING, web entry of the The New American Academy rather explicite example of the propaganda use
Researching policy borrowing: Some methodological challenges in comparative education David Phillips and Kimberly Ochs 2 JAN 2013 DOI: 10.1080/0141192042000279495 2004 British Educational Research Association British Educational Research Journal Volume 30, Issue 6, pages 773–784, December 2004 deals explicitely with the borrowing effect of the topic
James F. Tent, "American Influences on the German Educational System", in The United States and Germany in the Era of the Cold War, 1945–1968, edited by Detlef Junker, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Publications of the German Historical Institute, 2004), pp. 394-400. was mentioned before but not used actually
ZEITGESCHICHTE Opfer der Umstände Speigel article from 1983 refering to de:James F. Tent Mission on the Rhine : reeducation and denazification in American-occupied Germany. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1982, refering to Tent, which was mentioned before but not used actually
The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America: A Chronological Paper Trail (1999) ISBN 978-0-9667071-0-6 by Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt rather explicite example of the propaganda use
Lockhart, Paul. The Drillmaster of Valley Forge: The Baron de Steuben and the making of the American Army. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers the actual origin of the drill story
Deutsche Geschichte 1866-1918: Bd. Arbeitswelt und Bürgergeist von Thomas Nipperdey, basic textbook.

Prussia is not 21st century USA and Germany[edit]

The article does not deal with German or American educational policies in the last 100 years or so ...only on the earlier period. Rjensen (talk) 07:19, 29 November 2014

The use of the term "Prussian education system" did neither stop 1919 nor 1948, its ongoing. Serten 19:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Biased language[edit]

"France and the UK failed to introduce similar systems till the 1880s."

The word failed has a negative connotation and implies that the Prussian system was necessarily the right choice. 73.173.210.49 (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to American Schools[edit]

Most of the references to American schools suggest the actions of individual states (ie. Massachusetts) happened across the country. Due to the 10th Amendment, education in the United States is left up to each state. As a result, it's misleading to talk about American schools as if there is one system. In addition, some states had compulsory education laws in the books before Prussia had their system up and running and some wouldn't have theirs finalized until after Prussia ceased to exist. EdHistory101 (talk) 19:50, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading Sources[edit]

The section on the adoption of compulsory education is based on misleading sources and misrepresents how compulsory education worked in the United States. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdHistory101 (talk • contribs) 12:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]