Those familiar with
the cartoon Dilbert (see http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/dilbert/index.html)
will remember that one of the favorite sayings of the pointy-haired
boss is "Work smarter, not harder." This irritating
cliché also seems to be a guiding principle adopted by
many of the bodies that control education. One result of following
such a principle is that to minimize salary costs in education
class sizes are allowed to increase. Although some studies suggest
that smaller class sizes are particularly important for students
in the lower grades (Biddle & Berliner, 2002; Finn, 2002;
Hampel, 2002; Scottish Parliament, 2002), the findings are less
certain concerning the advantages of smaller class size at higher
grades (Johnson, 2002). Nevertheless, whether one believes that
smaller class sizes are beneficial or not, the fact remains that
the logistics of instructing larger numbers of students are problematic.
This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it a function of whether
teachers are "good" or not.
Through the study of ancient history, and especially through Hollywood
epics, most people have some knowledge of ancient Rome. Although
the Republic, and more frequently the Empire, were often portrayed
as militaristic, with individuals prepared to sacrifice their
lives at any time, education was an underpinning factor that helped
support Rome in its imperialistic aspirations. Much of Rome's
military success occurred because of the successful education
of its soldiers. Most recruits were organized into centuries of
100 under the command and tutelage of a centurion. Even during
the late Roman Republic, optimum class size was a consideration.
Among the various skills that recruits had to learn was proper
use of the sword and shield. Poor technique would leave one exposed
to a possibly fatal blow from an enemy soldier. Although recruits
were shown proper techniques by the centurion, incorrect techniques
were often practiced by recruits, either through incomplete learning
or through not paying attention to what they were doing. While
the centurion circulated among the practicing recruits and corrected
inappropriate technique whenever it was observed, in many instances,
because of the numbers, recruits would repeatedly practice incorrect
techniques before being corrected. Often the result was that in
battle, when stress levels were particularly high, the swordsmanship
employed by the new soldiers would revert to the inappropriate
maneuvers practiced most frequently. The consequence of this was
often disastrous, both to the individual soldier and to the particular
army.
By the final years of the Republic the problem of heavy losses of new soldiers was of such concern that the matter was investigated and solutions sought. One of the first suggestions made was to reduce the size of centuries. Thus instead of one centurion, two individuals might be used, each responsible for 50 recruits. As the number of recruits to supervise would be fewer, it followed that the amount of supervised time received by each individual would increase, thus also reducing the amount of time that incorrect techniques would be practiced. Perhaps not surprisingly, this kind of suggestion was not received favorably by government, because reducing century size would be an expensive proposition (Vegetius). Then, as now, the government made the tacit recommendation "Work smarter, not harder." Without altering century size, what could be done?
About this time, either
an individual or several individuals thought of using technology
to improve the teaching of military recruits. The result was the
creation of the quintain. Although details differed between
individual examples, the basic design was consistent. A pole stuck
vertically in the ground supported a horizontal pole placed on
top of it. The horizontal pole, which was pinned to the top of
the vertical pole, was designed to pivot freely. Attached to one
end of the horizontal pole was a large burlap sack filled with
straw, while the other end supported a counterbalance weight,
sometimes with spikes attached (Kuret, 1963). The basic operation
of the quintain was simple. A recruit would practice sword technique
against the burlap bag using a blunt practice sword. If the technique
used was correct, the sack remained relatively stationary. However,
if an incorrect technique was used, the sack would pivot away
from the recruit, and the counterweight would swing around, most
often striking the recruit. This was a clear indication that what
was being done was wrong. In most instances the recruit would
modify his behavior immediately, thus practicing proper technique
most often. In a century, therefore, a centurion could employ
several quintains to help recruits practice proper sword techniques.
In this manner the centurion was working smarter rather than harder.
A Consul, Publius Rutilius, recognized the method as being superior
to previous practice, and he advocated universal adoption of the
quintain (Valerius Maximus). Although some Romans saw the utility
and advantage of using the quintain, others did not. Some feared
that this device would disrupt military training and cause the
collapse of a traditional system. Others feared that the quintain
might lead to an increased century size, or at the least to a
reduction in the number of centurions. Yet another view was that
instruction from a quintain was inferior to that provided by a
live person, and as a result the quality of instruction would
be diminished (Valerius Maximus). Although experimental research
designs were unknown at the time, comparisons between soldiers
educated with the quintain and those that were not did occur.
Frontinus, describing a general's experience in choosing an army,
noted,
Gaius Marius had the opportunity to select his army out of two already in
existence, the army which had served under Rutilius, and the other one which
had been under Metellus He chose the army of Rutilius even though it was
smaller, because he thought it to be better trained. (Strategemata, 4.2.2)
It appears that the quintain gained favor extensively, as it eventually became a standard adjunct to direct instruction in Roman armies. The use of the quintain continued into the medieval period when the arrival of guns rendered the quintain and sword warfare largely superfluous (Buck, 1989). The quintain did not, as some feared, replace the centurion, nor did it result in inferior instruction.
Although modern education bears little resemblance to Roman military education, there is a possible parallel with how problems of class size are dealt with. Instead of either continuing with the status quo or arguing for reduced century size only, an adjunct to instruction was used. The quintain was not touted as a replacement for the centurion, and it was not regarded as being the primary means of instruction. Instead, the quintain was viewed largely as a means of assisting both recruits and centurions. Can the experience of the Romans using the quintain as an adjunct to instruction be applied to the issue of class size in contemporary schools? No doubt some would say "absolutely not." Indeed the point is not to advocate that teachers use quintains. There are nevertheless many appropriate adjuncts to instruction ranging from computerbased programs to various methods of instructional delivery and assistance.
The point is that governments
are unlikely to change their position significantly regarding
class sizes at the higher grades. If this is the case, then instead
of continually trying to change a tradition that seems to have
existed since Roman times, is it not wise for educators to work
smarter?
George H. Buck
References
Biddle, B.J., & Berliner, D.C. (2000). Small class size and its effect. Educational Leadership, 59(5),
12-24.
Buck, G.H. (1989). Teaching machines and teaching aids in the ancient world. McGill Journal of
Education, 24(1), 31-54.
Finn, J.D. (2002). Small classes in American schools: Research, practice, and politics. Phi Delta
Kappan, 83, 551-561.
Frontinus, S.J. Strategemata. In The strategies and the aqueducts of Rome (C.E. Bennett Trans. 1925).
London: Heinemann.
Hampel, R.L. (2002). The long road to small schools. Education Digest, 67(8) 15-20.
Johnson, K.A. (2002). The downside to small class policies. Educational Leadership, 59(5), 27-29.
Kuret, N. (1963). La quintaine des Slovènes de la vallée de la Zilia (Gailtal), et son cadre européen.
Ljubljana: Institut za Slovensko Narodopisje, Institutum Ethnographiae Slovenorum.
Scottish Parliament. (2002). Debate on class size and pupil attainment. Education Parliamentary
Monitor (February 11), 21-22.
Valerius Maximus. Facta et dicta memorabilia (compiled by C. Kempf, 1854, reprinted 1976).
Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.
Vegetius, F.R. Epitoma rei militaris (compiled by C. Lang, 1885, reprinted 1967). Stuttgart: B.G.
Tuebner.
Copyright © AJER, the Faculty of Education, and the University
of Alberta, 2002.
Last revised: August 8, 2002.
Designed by G.H. Buck