NEW WINE IN NEW BOTTLES

C. H. McCloy, (Published in the Journal of Physical Education,
November, 1927)

While the principles, methods, and philosophy of general
education have, in the past twenty years, been growing in definiteness
and content, adding convolutions and general height of brow, the
principles, practice, and philosphy of physical education have been
an educational Island of Reil, buried at the bottom of the Fissure
of Archaic Tradition, its function and educational connections more
than dubious, and apparently all too-well protected from the external
stimuli of research and experiment to be forced to progress except |
through the slow process of accidental contact with the overwash from
the teachings of the more vigorous of the philosophers of general
education. The fact that it possessed its share of the educational
cortex was apparently almost overlooked. We shall endeavor, within
the limits of a paper of this length, to uphold the thesis that
there are sufficient bases at this time for the construction of a
system of physical education which could be an integral and necessary
part of the educational process, and to present briefly the more im-
portant fundamental principles involved in the formulation of such
@ system.

The older systems of physical education in current use are,
in most cases, educational anacronisms - hangovers from the semi-
military European systems of physical education; developed in
nations constantly exposed on all sides to threats of war; invented
by and for militarists, and impregnated throughout with the
angular never=to~be~used~in=-life movements devised by the orthodox
military mind. Some of these systems were then elaborated by
anatomists with no knowledge of the psychology of learning or of
modern educational principles and who thought only in terms of
anatomical parts, not in terms of living, dynamic man. These older
systems were further complicated by teachers of gymnastics, few of
whom were scholars, who too~often thought in terms of "stunts,"
of inventing new movements to do, most of which were of no conceivable
educational value.

Since the developmemt of the modern educational philosophy, there
have been three general types of reactions on the part of physical
educators: {1) A large group have stood pat, defiantly closing their
minds to the demonstrated facts of modern educational science, and
making changes only when forced to do so by a waning attendance upon
voluntary activities. (2) A second group, who became imbued with
the new wine of educational philosophy, tried to put it in the old
bottles, patching up the old skins, and “adapting” until the old.
medieval warrior ~ to change the figure ~- became outwardly dressed
in modern clothing and talked the modern educational jargon, but still
retained the rigid soul and the inefficient educational outlook of the
old, to largely sterilize the result. (3) A third group could
see no other hope than to throw away everything formal and turn the
physical educational period into anything which might carry the
name of being "natural" =- dancing games, athletics, - all~too-often
poorly selected, and frequently the product of little constructive
thought. Whatever faults might be found in the old systems, they