In the Middle Ages there were everywhere little groups of persons clustering round some beloved teacher, and thus it was that men learned not only the humanities but all gracious and useful, crafts. There were no State art schools, no State technical schools: as I have said, men became artists in the studio of some master-artist, men learned crafts in the workshop of some master-craftsman. It was always the individual inspiring, guiding, fostering other individuals, never the State usurping the place of father or fosterer, dispensing education like a universal provider of ready-mades, aiming at turning out all men and women according to regulation patterns.

在中世紀(jì)，到處都有一些小團(tuán)體，圍繞著他們敬愛的老師。他們不只學(xué)到了人文知識(shí)，還有所有優(yōu)雅而實(shí)用的技藝。那時(shí)沒有國(guó)立藝術(shù)學(xué)校，也沒有國(guó)立技術(shù)學(xué)校：正如我所說(shuō)，人們?cè)谀硞€(gè)大師的畫室里成為藝術(shù)家，或在某個(gè)大師的作坊里學(xué)習(xí)技術(shù)?？偸莻€(gè)人激勵(lì)、指導(dǎo)、培養(yǎng)其他個(gè)人，而不是國(guó)家篡奪了父親或養(yǎng)父的位置，像一個(gè)萬(wàn)能的供應(yīng)商一樣分發(fā)教育，試圖按照規(guī)定的模式制造出所有的男人和女人。

In Ireland the older and truer conception was never lost sight of. It persisted into Christian times when a Kieran or an Enda or a Colmcille gathered his little group of foster-children (the old word was still used) around him; they were collectively his family, his household, his clann - many sweet and endearing words were used to mark the intimacy of that relationship. It seems to me that there has been nothing nobler in the. history of education than this development of the old Irish plan of fosterage under a Christian rule, when to the pagan ideals of strength and truth there were added the Christian ideals of love and humility. And this, remember, was not the education system of an aristocracy, but an education system of a people. It was more democratic than any education system in the world today. Our very divisions into primary, secondary, and university crystallize a snobbishness partly intellectual and partly social. At Clonard, Kieran, the son of a carpenter, sat in the same class as Colmcille, the son of a King. To Clonard or to Aran or to Clonmacnois went every man, rich or poor, prince or peasant, who wanted to sit at Finnian's or Enda's or Kieran's feet and to learn of his wisdom. Always it was the personality of the teacher that drew them there. And so it was all through Irish history. A great poet or a great scholar had his foster-children who lived at his house or fared with him through the country. Even long after Kinsale the Munster poets had their little groups of pupils, and the hedge schoolmasters of the Nineteenth century were the last repository of a high tradition.

在愛爾蘭，古老而真實(shí)的教育觀念從未被忽視。它一直延續(xù)到基督教時(shí)代，當(dāng)基蘭、恩達(dá)或科爾姆基勒把他的一群養(yǎng)子（古老的詞語(yǔ)至今仍在被使用）聚集在他身邊；他們共同組成了他的家庭、他的家人、他的氏族——有許多溫馨而親切的詞語(yǔ)來(lái)表達(dá)這種關(guān)系的親密。在我看來(lái)，在教育史上沒有比這種在基督教規(guī)則下發(fā)展起來(lái)的古愛爾蘭寄養(yǎng)計(jì)劃更高尚的事情了，當(dāng)時(shí)除了異教徒的力量和真理的理想之外，還增加了基督教的愛和謙卑的理想。這不是一個(gè)貴族階層的教育制度，而是一個(gè)民族的教育制度。它比今天世界上任何一個(gè)教育制度都更民主。我們把教育分為小學(xué)、中學(xué)和大學(xué)，反映了一種部分是智力的，部分是社會(huì)的勢(shì)利。在克洛納德，木匠之子基蘭和國(guó)王之子科爾姆基勒坐在同一間教室里。到克洛納德或阿蘭島或克隆馬克諾伊斯去的每一個(gè)人，無(wú)論富貴貧賤，王子或農(nóng)夫，都是想要坐在芬尼安或恩達(dá)或基蘭的腳下，向他們學(xué)習(xí)智慧。吸引他們的總是老師的個(gè)性。愛爾蘭歷史也是如此。一個(gè)偉大的詩(shī)人或?qū)W者總是有養(yǎng)子，他們住在他家里或跟隨他走遍全國(guó)。甚至在金塞爾戰(zhàn)敗之后很久，芒斯特的詩(shī)人仍受到一小群學(xué)生追隨。十九世紀(jì)的樹籬學(xué)校的老師是這種高尚傳統(tǒng)的最后傳承者。

I dwell on the importance of the personal element in education. I would have every child not merely a unit in a school attendance, but in some intimate personal way the pupil of a teacher, or, to use more expressive words, the disciple of a master. And here I nowise contradict another position of mine: that the main object in education is to help the child to be his own true and best self. What the teacher should bring to his pupil is not a set of ready-made opinions or a stock of cut-and-dried information, but an inspiration and an example; and his main qualification should be, not such an overmastering will as shall impose itself at all hazards upon all weaker wills that come under its influence, but rather so infectious an enthusiasm as shall kindle new enthusiasm. The Montessori system, so admirable in many ways, would seem at first sight to attach insufficient importance to the function of the teacher in the schoolroom. But this is not really so. True. it would make the spontaneous efforts of the children the main motive power, as against the dominating will of the teacher which is the main motive power in the ordinary schoolroom. But the teacher must be there always to inspire, to foster. If you would realise how true this is, how important the personality of the teacher, even in a Montessori school, try to imagine a Montessori school conducted by the average teacher of your acquaintance, or try to imagine a Montessori school conducted by yourself.

我強(qiáng)調(diào)教育中個(gè)人因素的重要性。我希望每個(gè)孩子不僅僅是一個(gè)學(xué)校考勤的單位，而是以某種親密的個(gè)人方式成為一個(gè)老師的學(xué)生，或者用更有表現(xiàn)力的詞語(yǔ)，一個(gè)大師的弟子。在這里，我并沒有與我的另一個(gè)觀點(diǎn)相矛盾：教育的主要目的是幫助孩子成為他自己真實(shí)而最好的自我。老師不應(yīng)當(dāng)直接像學(xué)生灌輸一套現(xiàn)成的觀點(diǎn)或一堆切割好的信息，而應(yīng)當(dāng)給予他們啟發(fā)和榜樣；他的資質(zhì)不應(yīng)當(dāng)來(lái)自強(qiáng)大的意志，以至于無(wú)論如何都要把自己強(qiáng)加給所有受其影響的較弱的意志，而是一種感染人的熱情，以至于能點(diǎn)燃新的熱情。蒙特梭利教育法在許多方面都很令人欽佩，但從表面來(lái)看似乎對(duì)教師在教室里的作用沒有給予足夠的重視。而那僅僅是表象。誠(chéng)然，它會(huì)讓孩子們自發(fā)的努力成為學(xué)習(xí)的主要?jiǎng)恿?，而不是普通教室里的教師的支配意志。但老師必須始終在那里激勵(lì)、培養(yǎng)。如果你想意識(shí)到這是多么真實(shí)，教師的個(gè)性，即使在一個(gè)蒙特梭利式學(xué)校，也相當(dāng)重要。試著想象一個(gè)由你所認(rèn)識(shí)的普通教師經(jīng)營(yíng)的蒙特梭利式學(xué)校，或者由你自己經(jīng)營(yíng)的蒙特梭利式學(xué)校。