Experimental Hamburg Schools of the 1920s: A History of Complete Freedom in the Classroom

Contents:

• How Germany moved from conservative to experimental education
• How schools worked where children were declared the main ones
• What successes did the experimental Hamburg schools achieve?
• What happened to the experimental schools next?

This article will introduce you to key aspects of the topic, including key ideas and recommendations. We will cover important points in detail that will help you better understand the issue at hand and apply the acquired knowledge in practice. Get ready for in-depth analysis and helpful tips that will make your work more effective.

• How did it happen that four free public schools with an atmosphere of complete freedom opened in Hamburg, Germany?
• How were these schools organized, which even by today's standards seem incredibly bold?
• What successes did these schools achieve (if any?) and what happened to them next?

How Germany went from conservative to experimental education?

The turn of the 19th and 20th centuries in pedagogy was marked by an era of significant experimentation and reform. During this period, many educational concepts emerged that focused on respect for the personality and individuality of the child. The main goal of these approaches was to develop children's ability to think and act independently, instead of simply memorizing information. Innovative ideas began to be actively implemented in educational practices, leading to the creation of schools such as those of Maria Montessori, John Dewey, and Helen Parkhurst. These educational institutions arose as an alternative to the traditional system, which emphasized the teacher as the primary bearer of knowledge, and required students to merely memorize material. New teaching methods contributed to the development of children's active participation in the educational process and their ability to think critically.

Innovative concepts emerged that asserted that a child is an individual with the right to free development. Swedish writer and educator Ellen Key, an ideologist of liberal education, called the 20th century "the century of the child" in 1900. These ideas became the basis for new approaches to education and upbringing, emphasizing the importance of respect for children's individuality and the desire for self-development.

Progressive pedagogical ideas actively developed in the late 19th century, creating unique educational trends that differed from traditional approaches. One of the centers of such innovations was Hamburg, where communities of innovative educators began to form in the last decades of the 19th century. These communities actively published journals and petitioned authorities for permission to open experimental schools, seeking to introduce new teaching and educational methods. The improvement of education in Germany during this period was driven by several factors, including rapid industrial development and the growth of human rights movements. It is important to note that German schools adopted a utilitarian approach to education, focusing students on the need to contribute to society and the state. This approach shaped the perception of education as a means of preparing citizens capable of effectively fulfilling their responsibilities within the social and economic system.

Read also:

Georg Kerschensteiner and his labor school: the influence of a physics teacher on German

Georg Kerschensteiner, a prominent educator and reformer, became a key figure in the development of German education in the early 20th century. His concept of the work school, based on the integration of theoretical knowledge and practical skills, brought about significant changes in the German educational system. Kerschensteiner emphasized the importance of practical learning, which contributed to a deeper assimilation of material and prepared students for real life.

His approach to education included not only the teaching of academic subjects but also the development of work skills, which allowed students to better understand the connection between theory and practice. The work schools he created became a role model and inspired many educators to implement new teaching methods.

Kerschensteiner also emphasized the importance of an individual approach to each student and the need to take into account their interests and abilities. This contributed to the development of a more motivated and active educational process, which in turn led to improved learning outcomes. Georg Kerschensteiner's contribution to German education remains invaluable, and his ideas on work-based learning continue to influence modern teaching practices. A real boom in experimental educational institutions in Germany began after the First World War and the November Revolution. At this time, the country became a republic, and ideas about a new way of life based on the principles of freedom, respect for the individual, and anti-militarism began to spread throughout society. These changes also affected the education system: social discrimination was abolished, and free general education for all citizens was introduced. German schools gained self-government, reflecting a desire to democratize the educational process. These reforms formed the basis for the formation of a new national culture and morality, which in turn influenced the further development of the educational system in Germany. Educational institutions actively took advantage of these new opportunities in the 1919–1920s, particularly four state primary schools in Hamburg: Telemannstraße, Berliner Tor, Wendeschule, and Tieloh Süd (the girls' section of the Tieloh School, later known as the Barmbek School). The initiators of this reform were educators and social activists, among whom the Social Democrats Karl Götze, Emil Krause, and Wilhelm Paulsen were prominent. Thanks to their efforts, they managed to obtain a special experimental status for these educational institutions from the authorities, which made it possible to introduce innovative teaching methods and improve the quality of education.

The design of these schools can be considered quite bold even by today's standards. The basic principle is that students are given complete freedom in their learning. This approach fosters independence and responsibility in children, allowing them to choose their own paths of learning and exploration. This creates a unique educational environment where every student can unlock their potential and develop creative thinking.

How schools worked, where children were declared the main ones

The founders of the Hamburg experimental schools sought to distance themselves from traditional educational practices. Their primary goal was to create a new society that emphasized productive and creative collaboration and the self-fulfillment of each individual. Experimental schools became a platform for the introduction of innovative teaching methods aimed at developing the personality and skills needed in the modern world.

The Hamburg reformers, striving to create the ideal new school, relied on the principles of freedom and community. However, their interpretation of freedom and the motto "Begin with the child" had their limits. Hamburg's experimental schools lacked strict rules, prescribed curricula, and clear learning goals. Children were given the opportunity to act independently while simultaneously learning responsibility, including discipline in the classroom. Teachers also enjoyed freedom in determining their teaching methods, and the principal had no right to interfere with their teaching practices. This approach contributed to the creation of a unique educational environment where each participant could develop and realize their potential.

The second key idea was that the school should become a community of children, teachers, and parents based on mutual understanding and trust. This approach is known as gemeinschaftschule, which can be interpreted as a solidarity school or a school of community life. In this model, the teacher is not an authoritarian leader, but acts as a partner, creating an atmosphere of fraternity among all participants in the educational process. An important aspect is that the community as a whole is responsible for the learning and harmonious development of the children, which contributes to a more holistic and supportive educational environment.

Some of these elements were already used in early experimental schools, but their combination in one place is new.

Each of the four experimental gymnasiums in Hamburg had its own unique characteristics, but they all shared a few key principles. These principles included an individualized approach to learning, an emphasis on the practical application of knowledge, and the development of critical thinking and creativity in students. Thanks to these core principles, the gymnasiums were able to create an innovative educational environment that promoted the comprehensive development of the individual.

• administrative autonomy;
• freedom from state curricula;
• independence in the choice of teachers;
• coeducation of boys and girls (which was an unconventional solution for that era).

The experimental schools in Hamburg fundamentally rejected adherence to any specific teaching method. The innovators freed themselves from the traditional curriculum and schedule, rejected punishments, hierarchy, and the separation of students by age. Exams and grades were also excluded from the educational process, although grades were still included in the final certificate, which was mandatory by law. It was believed that such restrictions suppressed children's ability to independently seek and process information. The proponents of this approach to education argued that school should not only prepare for life but also be a part of it. This concept emphasizes the importance of students' active participation in the educational process and the development of their personal responsibility. School today must be more closely connected to real life. Children grow up in the communities where they live and work, and this interaction should be reflected in the educational process. A child must actively participate in the life of society, and society, in turn, must support and develop the child. The interaction of the individual and social aspects is key to the formation of a complete personality, as Wilhelm Paulsen emphasized. Education must take these interrelations into account to prepare children for life in the modern world and help them become responsible members of society. Teachers introduced students to the concept of active participation in the educational process from the very beginning. Students were given the opportunity to set their own rules, address teachers by name, and decide for themselves which topics to study and when. For example, children could express a desire not to discuss certain issues. In such schools, there was student self-government, organized in the form of general assemblies reminiscent of parliament. This contributed to the development of responsibility, critical thinking, and an active civic position in students.

In the school system, subject-based instruction took place and covered various courses, such as economics, geography, history, mathematics, arithmetic, chemistry, English, handicrafts, drawing, music theory, choral singing, dance and rhythm, and life sciences. Teachers had freedom in choosing their teaching methods, which allowed them to adapt the learning process to the interests and needs of students. Classes often took the form of informal conversations, games, experiments, stories, discussions, excursions, work activities, presentations of independent work such as essays, and theatrical performances. This approach contributed to a deeper assimilation of the material and the development of creative skills in students.

Students were expected to study most of the material independently, although they could also help each other. This approach brings Hamburg schools closer to the project-based method developed by American educator William Kilpatrick. Interestingly, similar ideas were also relevant in the early years of Soviet Russia, underscoring the universality of this approach in educational practice. This teaching method promotes cooperation and collective responsibility among students, which makes the learning process more effective.

During class, students discussed the recent communist uprising and its suppression, shared poems, presented their written work, and evaluated the essays of their classmates. The teacher provided comments, advice, and constructive criticism, demonstrating examples and summarizing. Although they did not formally manage the class, their role in the school community was undoubtedly significant. The teacher remained an active participant in the learning process, promoting the development of critical thinking and creativity in students.

Reading is an important part of our lives, and it brings many benefits. Regular reading helps develop thinking, improve vocabulary, and expand horizons. It is not only a way to gain new knowledge but also an opportunity to immerse yourself in fascinating stories and get to know different cultures. Reading books, articles, and scientific research contributes to the development of critical thinking and analytical skills. In today's world, where information is available in vast quantities, it is important to be able to filter and analyze data. Therefore, reading is becoming a key skill that helps you navigate the information flow and make informed decisions. Don't miss the opportunity to develop through reading, because it is not only useful but also engaging.

I believe that a human-centered school is a place where students actively learn, not just receive information from teachers. In such a school, the emphasis is on the individual needs and interests of each student. Here, it is important not only to impart knowledge, but also to develop critical thinking, creativity, and social skills. A human-centered approach creates the conditions for effective learning and promotes harmonious personal development.

Manual labor occupied a significant place and was inextricably linked with other disciplines.

The Hamburg experimental schools of the late 19th and early 20th centuries differed from their counterparts in that they were not located in rural areas and were not intended for a select group of students. These schools were located in large cities and targeted working-class children, with each school accommodating approximately 600 students. This approach promoted the integration of diverse social classes and provided equal educational opportunities for all children, regardless of their background.

These educational programs were free. Unlike John Dewey's schools, they were not scientifically tested or researched. Furthermore, Hamburg's experimental educators did not limit their innovative methods to the first four years of primary school. According to their system, children could receive education until the age of fourteen.

What successes did the experimental Hamburg schools achieve?

The concept of Hamburg schools may seem unrealistic and unsustainable, but this opinion does not fully reflect reality. In practice, these schools have achieved some successes that are worth considering. Their approaches to teaching and nurturing students have yielded positive results, despite fears of possible anarchy and collapse. Hamburg schools have demonstrated that innovative methods can be effective and promote student development in settings that differ from traditional ones.

News and stories about unusual schools quickly spread throughout the world, drawing attention to reformist pedagogy. As a result, Hamburg has become a place of pilgrimage for many interested people. They were surprised that even with complete freedom in the educational process, the schools did not descend into chaos. Children, in turn, demonstrated an amazing ability to maintain order and organization, which underscores the effectiveness of such educational approaches.

Older students were able to conduct discussions without the participation of a teacher, demonstrating a friendly and organized manner. The class remained calm even in the absence of a teacher. Attendance was stable, and the quality of students' work, despite their low social status, exceeded that of traditional schools. For children of the post-war era, many of whom had experienced psychological trauma and lost their moral compass, this was a significant achievement.

Visitors were also impressed by the extent to which the students in the experimental schools had their own opinions and the confidence to defend them. These qualities underscore the importance of developing critical thinking and self-expression in young people, which is a key aspect of the educational process in such institutions.

Hamburg educators successfully engaged parents in active participation in school life. Regular joint events, such as holidays, induction ceremonies for new students, graduation ceremonies, and theatrical performances, fostered stronger bonds between students, teachers, and parents. Parents played a vital role in the development of the school, participating in tasks such as painting walls, assembling benches, and teaching children various crafts. They were also able to organize out-of-town trips for students, leading excursions, and trips. Some parents even taught arithmetic courses, teaching children the basics of calculating wages and prices, which helped increase financial literacy among teenagers. Thus, cooperation between school and parents creates a favorable educational atmosphere and helps develop children's skills.

Some schools organized class and general meetings for parents, while others actively involved them in administrative processes and decision-making. This contributed to the fact that parents became an integral part of school life, and the school itself was integrated into the urban community. This approach was made possible by the active political position of parents, many of whom, as representatives of the working class, shared social democratic or communist ideas. This interaction between school and parents contributed to the creation of a more responsible and involved educational process.

What happened to the experimental schools next

However, the situation was not unambiguously positive. Conservative educators and parents expressed criticism of the experimental schools. Complaints from parents were often heard that children were not learning enough and were not receiving the necessary knowledge in full. Furthermore, the emphasis on humanities in the curriculum caused discontent among some proponents of a more traditional approach to education.

Discipline was maintained by allowing students to take responsibility for it. They organized general assemblies and created prefectural committees to maintain order. However, classes sometimes descended into chaos. For example, during a discussion, someone might stand up and tell their story, ignoring the general disapproval. Such incidents undermined the learning atmosphere and distracted attention from the main topic. It is important to find a balance between freedom of expression and the need to maintain discipline for effective learning.

Some participants would engage in their own activities during presentations, reading books, creating paper crafts, or writing down their thoughts. Because the discussions were based solely on the students' personal experiences, many chose to remain silent. The call to order applied not only to students, but also to teachers, who, without strict discipline, could be late for classes.

Check out our content:

The school introduced innovations, but I received only a limited amount of knowledge.

The Hamburg experimental schools faced serious economic difficulties after the war. With a shortage of school supplies and materials, schools were overcrowded with children, many of whom suffered from extreme poverty and hunger. The depleted state was unable to provide significant assistance, forcing parents to actively participate in school life. Furthermore, foreign donations from humanitarian organizations and caring individuals played a significant role in supporting the idea of ​​a new education. The established educational system failed to change. Experimental schools failed to replace traditional ones; over time, they lost their experimental characteristics. In 1930, the Berlin Gate (Berliner Tor) decided to cease experimenting with the educational process. The school stopped accepting new students, but six experimental classes continued to operate until 1933. At the same time, the Wendeschule (Reversal School), initially known for its radical methods, also gradually returned to traditional teaching methods after the departure of several key teachers. Ultimately, in 1930, this school finally gave up its experimental status.

The last two experimental schools ceased operations in 1933, after the Nazis came to power in Germany. During the Hitler era, freedom of choice for children and teachers was eliminated. Although the experimental schools were not formally closed, their status was revoked, and coeducation was abolished. These institutions underwent significant changes: many directors and teachers were replaced. Most of the teachers and graduates of the experimental schools subsequently actively opposed the Nazi regime.

The idea of ​​​​free education is not disappeared, despite its loss of popularity. During the existence of experimental schools, elements of free education began to be introduced outside of Germany. In the 1920s in Great Britain, the innovative educator Alexander Neill founded Summerhill School, which became a landmark example of alternative education. It is noteworthy that Neill opened his first educational institutions in Germany, near Dresden and in Austria, between 1921 and 1923. Summerhill continues to function today, often serving as a model for the discussion of the concept of human-centered schools that emphasize the interests and needs of students.

In the first years after the October Revolution in Russia, a wave of self-government was observed in Soviet schools, which, however, was spontaneous and soon degenerated into anarchy. This practice did not last long. In contrast, Anton Makarenko developed a well-thought-out system of child self-government, which was linked to work education. However, unlike the Hamburg schools, his approach maintained strict discipline and the dominant role of the teacher.

The late 1960s and early 1970s saw a renewed interest in Hamburg experimental pedagogy. In the early 2000s, this approach began to attract renewed attention, and schools using similar principles began to open in Europe, particularly in the Netherlands. Hamburg experimental pedagogy continues to influence educational practices, promoting the introduction of innovative teaching methods and the development of critical thinking in students.

Primary sources of information play a key role in developing knowledge and understanding of various topics. These sources can include books, research articles, online resources, and specialized databases. Using reliable and verified sources enhances the quality of research and helps avoid the dissemination of inaccurate information. When working with sources, it is important to critically evaluate their credibility, relevance, and authority. This is especially relevant in the context of rapidly advancing technology and changing information landscapes. The use of a variety of sources helps to create a more complete and objective understanding of the topic under consideration.

• Dzhurinsky A. N. History of pedagogy. - M., 1999.
• Nesterova L. A. Innovative processes in secondary schools in Germany in the first third of the 20th century. Abstract of a PhD thesis. - Volgograd, 2009.
• Yatsenko E. Yu. Content and forms of educational work in experimental schools of the Weimar Republic. Abstract of a PhD thesis. - Pyatigorsk, 2007.
• Braster S. From Holland to Hamburg: the experimental and community schools of Hamburg seen through the eyes of Dutch observers (1919-1933) // Paedagogica Historica.
• Grunder H-U. Kämpfen gegen Windmühlen und reale Mächte: William Lottigs Tagebuch (1919–1921) als Ausdruck der politischen, pädagogischen und schulinternen Machverhältnisse in einer Hamburger Gemeinschaftsschule zu Beginn der 1920er Jahre // Paedagogica Historica.
• Lopez D. L’apprentissage de la liberté au service de l’émancipation des élèves en situation de difficultés scolaires. Montpellier. — 2013.
• Mayer C. The experimental and community schools in Hamburg (1919-1933): An introduction // Paedagogica Historica.
• Pozo Andres M. Community and the myth of the ideal school: Circulation and appropriation of the Hamburg Gemeinschaftsschulen in Spain (1922–1933) // Paedagogica Historica.
• Roith C. Educational theory and practice in post-revolutionary times: the European academic debate on the experimental schools in Hamburg (1919–1933) in the 1930s and 1970s // Paedagogica Historica.
• Self-management in educational systems. — Paris, 1981.