Volume 4Feburary 2008
How Language Teaching Started
Afresh: Origins and Repercussions of the Reform Movement in German Foreign
Language Teaching Curricula
Sabine Doff
Institute of English and American Studies
Department of English Language Education
Johann Wolfgang Goethe University
Frankfurt / Main
This paper critically
examines the origins and repercussions of the Reform Movement of teaching
modern languages (Neusprachliche Reformbewegung) at the end
of the 19th century which is generally considered the last thorough and
extensive reorientation of language teaching in continental
The Neusprachliche
Reformbewegung is usually perceived as a reform by men (like, for example, Wilhelm Viëtor and Gustav Wendt) for their younger counterparts (i.e. for
those learning modern languages at higher boys' schools). This makes perfect
sense against the backdrop of the prevailing assumption at the time that
learning and teaching were seen to be genuinely gender-specific. Thus in
the 19th century (and beyond) the gender-related acquisition of knowledge
and proficiency was considered absolutely natural. Consequently, a methodology
emerged that allowed the teaching of the modern languages, mainly French
and English, to be designed accordingly. Contemporaries pointed critically
towards the gender-bound approaches as early as the beginning of the century,
for instance Theodor von Hippel, one of the first radical German feminists.
He was convinced that with regard to foreign language teaching women had
a stronger tendency to include emotions whereas men were rather interested
in "heroic methods" ("heroische Methoden", Hippel 1801:
86). That is one of the reasons why he encourages both sexes to learn from
each other and profit from their complementary approaches which he describes
as follows:
We [i.e. the male teachers] prefer to announce what we are going to say
before we say it whereas women proceed straight to the point without delay:
we make preludes, the women play the songtext immediately, we start languages
by doing grammar, the women with speaking.i
In the following, two hypotheses will be investigated which contradict the
interpretation widely accepted so far that tends to see the female tradition
of teaching foreign languages as slowly adapting to the male-dominated regulated
state school system during the last third of the 19th century.iiIn
order to provide the context, dominant methodological principles of teaching
foreign languages at higher boys' schools mainly based on teaching Latin
and Greek and considered "standard" for much of the 19th century
are outlined (part 2). It will then be shown that evident overlappings between
the "female" tradition of teaching foreign languages and the ideas
of the Neusprachliche Reformbewegung
(discussed in part 3) suggest that the didactic principles of teaching modern
languages which had been followed by women teachers for a long time (investigated
in part 4) finally acquired a theoretical foundation by influential male
reformers in the public debate at the end of the 19th century. Part 5 of
this paper will make evident that the effects of this coupling phenomenon
were strengthened by the parallel institutionalization of the German higher
school system for girls from the 1870s onwards which can clearly be seen
in curricular repercussions of the reformers' ideas in modern language teaching
curricula for both sexes in the last quarter of the 19th and the beginning
of the 20th century in Prussia. In order to gain a broader perspective on
how didactic reorientations and curricular reforms have originated and been
carried out, the closing outlook (part 6) offers a plea for replacing the
study of isolated big (and usually male) names by an understanding of the
history of foreign language education as a complex contextual network of
a substantially larger number of participants, a considerable number of
whom happened to be female.
2 Dominant Methods for Teaching Languages at Higher Boys'
Schools
For a large part of
the 19th century, the teaching and learning of modern languages in higher
schools in
During the second half
of the century, the importance of the English language and as a result also
of English as a school subject, was increasing dramatically in higher education
due to a rapidly growing interest in English literature and to intensified
trading relations, to mention only a few reasons (Regel 1897: 153ff.). The
teacher training courses at university level (during the 19th century usually
open to men only) still included, however, Latin and Greek as important
mandatory constituents, and thus modern language learning at higher boys'
schools was geared to the methodological approaches applied in the classical
languages (Regel 1897).
Thus the predominant methodological concepts of
teaching English to boys were usually grammar-based; two of the most important
ones being the grammar-translation method and what became later known as
Meidinger's method, named after the man who first introduced it. iii
As far as the presentation and the systematic (usually deductive) conceptualization
were concerned, language was seen to consist primarily of grammar which
was structured according to the Latin model. Although these approaches were
criticized rather early, for instance with respect to their methodological
implications,iv
their "success story" continued throughout most of the 19th century.
Contemporary alternatives like, for instance, the interlinear method or
an approach first introduced by Seidenstückerv
that followed the principle "inductive before deductive", as well
as Karl Mager's vi so-called genetic method
following this very principle, surfaced in expert debates about teaching
and learning modern foreign languages, but neither of them succeeded in
overcoming the grammar-based methodological roots on a large scale.
An analysis of the regulations
for teaching and examining English at higher boys' schools in different
German states between 1840 and 1882 (collected in Christ & Rang 1985)
reveals that the predominant objectives are mainly to be found in the areas
of pronunciation, reading and translation skills as well as a knowledge
of grammar rules (Klippel 1994: 298f.). It is striking, however, that in
these documents the one skill that had been at the very core of teaching
and learning modern languages in the female tradition for a long time, i.e.
speaking, only plays a negligible (if any) role with regard to methodological
guidelines and exam regulations. This is analyzed critically by the author
of an encyclopaedic standard work that takes a retrospective view at the
beginning of the 20th century:
There has been a strong tendency in our circles not to consider speaking
a part of the core of higher education [Bildung], which means the actual
spoken performance in living languages; of course it was expected (yet often
in vain) that after learning to read and write Latin for many years students
would also develop basic speaking skills in this language as they went along. vii
The reasons why speaking
had not become an integral goal of modern language teaching in the context
of higher education for boys are explained by the same author as follows:
[...] there is a common and widespread belief that performance in spoken
language is and remains the business of an intellectually lower group of
waiters and the like, and as if it always meant a kind of mechanical training
unworthy of members of a higher human class. This line of thought has not
been followed in most other European countries.viii
The growing realization
that on the one hand the boys' performance in the modern languages (particularly
with regard to pronunciation and speaking) remained at a very low level
and that learners nevertheless felt overburdened on the other hand, provided
one of the main starting points for the Neusprachliche Reformbewegung at the end
of the 19th century. The following part of this paper focuses on the context
and direction of this substantial reform that has massively influenced foreign
language teaching not only in
3 A Closer Look at the Success Story
of the Neusprachliche Reformbewegung
Ever since it first
appeared under the pseudonym Quousque Tandem in 1882, Wilhelm Viëtors essay
Der Sprachunterricht muss umkehren! ("Language teaching has to
start afresh!") with the subtitle Ein
Beitrag zur Überbürdungsfrage ("A contribution to the debate about
overburdening") in 1882 has been considered a milestone documenting
the initiation of the Reform Movement in the field of teaching modern languages
in Europe right from the start (see, for example, Tanger 1888, Junker 1904:
420). The reformers' programme put spoken language at the very top of the
agenda of teaching English and French in higher education (regardless of
the sexes). Their innovative suggestions turned out to be highly controversial
in the public debate, for instance, at the Neuphilologentage
(Wendt 1888/1889, 1900/1901; for a collection of the expert literature
see Breymann 1895).
Generally speaking,
their approach was diametrically opposed to the methodological dominance
of teaching Latin at higher boys' schools, which up to that time had often
just been transferred to English and French. In short, the reformers aimed
at making practical language competence, i.e. its extensive, non-regulated
use, the primary goal. The core of learning modern languages was no longer
to be grammar, but its actual application in meaningful contexts. This meant
that the role of speaking and listening skills as well as pronunciation
had to be strengthened and that the importance of authentic texts increased
significantly in the foreign language classroom. Grammar served the purpose
of language use and should mainly be dealt with inductively (Junker 1904:
420).
Whereas the public dispute
about the reformers' demands went on, practitioners' reports show that these
ideas fell on fertile ground rather quickly in quite a number of modern
language classrooms. Thus it became obvious in many higher boys' schools
shortly after the turn of the century, for instance, that "[...] pronunciation
skills [...] have improved significantly, that more and more drills and
exercises are now set in meaningful contexts [...], that deeper insights
into the foreign culture are fostered and that texts have gained significant
importance". ix
School programmes and the discussion in expert journals indicate that quite
a number of teachers were eager to put the reformers' suggestions into practice
(Regel 1897: 155).
The controversial yet
striking success of the reformers' ideas can not be explained by the teachers'
dissatisfaction with the results they had reached on the basis of the "traditional"
methodology or with the problem of overburdening alone. Other decisive factors
that contributed to this success story substantially were, for example,
the parallel development of phonetics as a science and the facilitated transportation
to
In this context it is
well worth noting that the tradition of improving one's language skills
by a longer stay in the target culture following the mostly theory-oriented
training at a teachers' seminar had long been an established practice among
female teachers of modern languages. However, they usually had to pay for
this extra training themselves, which is why they regularly started work
at private colleges or as private teachers in families in
Research on the overwhelming
effects of the Reform Movement has so far neglected the striking phenomenon
that a substantial part of the methodological innovations suggested by the
reformers overlapped with the female tradition of teaching modern languages,
which had been applied, implemented and revised in the context of higher
education for girls for decades. This argument is strengthened against a
backdrop of the many active reformers who often spent significant parts
of their professional careers as modern language teachers at higher girls'
schools. Among them are key figures like Julius Bierbaum, professor at the
higher girls' school in Karlsruhe, Jakob Wychgram, director of the Augusta
Schule in Berlin and author of the standard handbook for higher girls'
schools (Handbuch für das höhere Mädchenschulwesen,
Wychgram 1897) as well as the already mentioned "father" of the
reform, Wilhelm Viëtor, who started his teaching career in the 1870s at
a higher school for girls in Essen. Furthermore, influential politicians
in the field of education belonged to this group, for example Stefan Waetzoldt
who took office in 1900 as head of the ministry for higher education for
girls in Berlin and who set the liberal tone for the reform of the higher
girls' school in Prussia in 1908 (see Wychgram 1905).
In other words, before
and also during the Neusprachliche Reformbewegung which is
generally assumed to stretch over the last two decades of the 19th century,
quite a number of male reformers had been able to pilot their innovative
ideas and methods concerning modern language teaching in the context of
higher education for girls, which was spared extensive state regulations
as far as, for instance, curricula were concerned for quite a long time
in Germany. xAs
a result of this rich experience, they were able to present their ideas
in the last two decades of the 19th century with a high degree of self-confidence
and professionalism, which doubtless contributed substantially to their
success story.
The female teachers
who had been working at higher girls' schools with the very same or similar
methods long before anybody had ever heard of the Reform Movement or its
male protagonists, did – partly due to the fact that they were women – not
have the opportunity to make their voices heard in public and to put their
ideas concerning modern language teaching into effect on a large scale,
i.e. outside their classrooms. This was only feasible for the male advocates
of the reform whose success thus has to be seen against the backdrop of
the long tradition of teaching modern languages in higher female education
which differed significantly from the male approach in several aspects as
I will show in the following.
4 Salient Principles of Teaching
Modern Languages in Higher Female Education
Before investigating
in more detail the female tradition of teaching modern languages that prevailed
in higher education for girls in
Secondly, when comparing
content and methods in the context of higher education for both sexes in
19th century
A closer look reveals
three outstanding distinctive principles which specify the female tradition
of teaching modern languages when compared to dominant standard methodology
of teaching language in the higher school system in Germany for boys (see
part 2 of this paper), namely the important role of native speaker teachers,
the oral principle and an utilitarian approach which will briefly be discussed
in the following.
One of the most obvious
features of a female language teaching tradition, particularly in private
schools and in private surroundings, i.e. in families, is that the (usually
female) teacher in many instances was a native speaker (often a governess,
see Hardach-Pinke 1993), which of course had far-reaching consequences for
the ongoing teaching and learning processes. It means, for example, that
the input the girls received was usually extensive and authentic and that
the direct contact with the target culture in the form of the teacher was
an integral part of their English and/or French lessons. A further consequence
of the teacher being a native speaker whose notoriously bad knowledge of
German in the case of governesses was often criticized in the public debate,
was that the girls were virtually forced to use the foreign language (and
not their mother tongue) to make themselves understood to their teacher.
The use of the target language, i.e. English or French, as the language
of instruction in the classroom was often supported by the girls' parents,
who were usually interested in their daughters obtaining the valued oral
language proficiency in the foreign language (Parlierfähigkeit), which enabled them to
conduct conversations in English and/or French. Furthermore, it could happen
that the language of instruction in other subjects taught by the same teacher
(for example geography or history) was English or French, too, as, for example,
school programmes for a higher private school lead by the Englische Fräulein in Munich around the middle of the 19th century
indicate (Winkler 1935).
Another crucial feature
of the female approach to foreign language teaching was the outstanding
predominance of the oral principle. Therefore, listening and speaking skills
were strongly promoted in the modern language classroom (for an example
see Johanna Schopenhauer 1839); accordingly, writing usually played a rather
negligible role and well into the 19th century the reading of novels and
magazines in English and/or French was considered a private activity reserved
for the girls' spare time. Lessons in English or French concentrated primarily
on the girls' conversational skills; grammar was usually taught to serve
this very purpose, as were the lexical items which were supposed to be learned
by heart and which often consisted of whole conversational chunks, as contemporary
textbooks (e.g. Jorns 1882, Kameke 1892) demonstrate. The topics in these
and other textbooks which were often designed exclusively for conversational
training were in many cases gender-related as well, as titles of units like
"The First Wedding", "At the Dressmaker's" and "Untidiness"
indicate. To sum up: Parents, particularly in the context of private higher
education, were often eager to make use of foreign language lessons exclusively
for the purpose of their daughters' Parlierfähigkeit,
i.e. their conversational oral proficiency.
This is why a utilitarian
approach to foreign language learning in higher female education in general
prevailed and the educational value (Bildungswert)
of learning English and French remained largely neglected in this context
for quite a long time. Critical voices repeatedly pointed out this monodimensional
orientation (which in the following quotation is – remarkably for a contemporary
critic – connected explicitly to the ideas of the Neusprachliche Reformbewegung):
If paying parents were to be satisfied by tangible, visible and "real"
results, then performance had to be put on top of the agenda. This is why,
even before the reform, speaking had played a more important role in higher
schools for girls than in those for boys. Moreover, this orientation was
promoted by the fact that the chattering method in general suits girls better
than boys. xi
By the last third of
the 19th century, however, there began a highly controversial discussion
about the Bildungswert of modern languages particularly
for girls (see, for example, Ackermann 1883), when English and French were
to be established as school subjects in higher education for both sexes
along with or in some types of higher state schools, even as substitutes
for Latin and Greek. In this debate, experts for higher female education,
the so-called Mädchenschulpädagogen,
stressed repeatedly that modern foreign languages had an equal Bildungswert to the classical languages,
which had dominated the higher school system in
A few of these distinctive
features of the female tradition of teaching modern languages had already
been implemented in official documents, for instance guidelines regarding
the content and methodology of English and French as school subjects at
higher girls' schools during the last third of the 19th century. These often
served as starting points for the further curricular organization and institutionalization
of higher female education for many German states which was just about to
begin.
5 Repercussions of the Reform in
Modern Language Teaching Curricula
The tendencies described
in the previous section can be found, for example, in early drafts of state
regulations for the curriculum of higher girls' schools from 1873 (discretionary
methodological recommendations of the Berlin conference, quoted in Kreyenberg
1887) and 1886 (draft of the so-called Berlin curriculum which was never
put into effect officially, see Centralblatt 1886). The first compulsory
curricular regulations, which were passed by the Prussian government in
1894, the so-called Maibestimmungen
(Centralblatt 1894) also show this distinctive signature with regard to
the two modern languages English and French that had then been officially
introduced to separate the higher from the middle school for girls (where
only one foreign language was a mandatory subject). All three curricular
documents reflect the utilitarian approach to learning and teaching a foreign
language as well as the consequently subordinate role of grammar.
The official guidelines
for higher girls' schools mentioned above illustrate among other points
how the female tradition of teaching modern foreign languages was implemented
parallel to the institutionalization process of the state school system
for girls during the outgoing 19th century. At the beginning of the 1890s
these tendencies stood in strong opposition to what was expected in modern
languages at higher schools for boys. This is illustrated, for instance,
in the Prussian guidelines for higher boys' schools from 1892, where the
methodological regulations for French and English begin as follows:
The task of logical-linguistic instruction which at schools teaching Latin
is predominantly performed by Latin grammar and the respective exercises,
is to be carried out by French grammar and suitable exercises at schools
without Latin.xii
This example illustrates
clearly that contrary to what was happening in higher girls' schools at
the same time the Reform Movement had not yet produced any strong repercussions
in curricula in higher education for boys in the outgoing 19th century.
In the latter context, innovations were nevertheless slowly but steadily
becoming evident, as further examples of curricula, methodological guidelines,
school programmes and textbooks for teaching modern languages show. They
illustrate, for instance, the growing importance of speaking exercises,
the stronger orientation towards language use as well as the increase of
inductive methodological approaches in the fields of grammar and syntax
(see, for example, Junker 1904).
However, it proved rather
difficult to implement these innovative impulses at higher schools for boys,
since they could not be connected to an existing tradition of teaching modern
languages communicatively like the decades of experience at girls' schools.
Many male teachers were simply not qualified for a teaching approach aimed
at actual communication in the classroom, for instance with regard to their
own language competence. A number of examples indicate that a few of these
male teachers eventually became outspoken opponents not only of the female
tradition of teaching foreign languages but also of the Reform Movement.
A female contemporary comments on this coincidence matter-of-factly in the
following way:
The strongest opponents of French conversation with whom I have discussed
have always demonstrated a poor command of the spoken language themselves.
Popular buzz words like "French for waiters", "French tinsel"
and "parrot language" leave me as cold as prejudices against women's
emancipation. Furthermore, I'm still waiting to meet people for whom correct
grammar has resulted in correct speaking or writing.xiii
It has to be kept in
mind that practical language teaching at higher boys' schools often lagged
behind the rather traditional, i.e. less reform-oriented formal regulations
anyway:
Modern language teaching practice [at higher boys' schools] remains, as
far as I can tell, still far behind the official regulations up to the present
day, even if there has lately been considerable progress in the field in
other respects. [...] The fact that the role of speaking has gained in importance
considerably in teaching foreign language at school during the past decade
or so can undoubtedly be ascribed to the merits of the reformers who based
their methodological innovations, which consequently demand speaking practice,
on progress in phonetics. xiv
In other respects such
as the predominant role of grammar in learning a foreign language, innovative
suggestions by the reformers did not show any considerable effects in the
context of higher education for boys at the time. What thus becomes evident
is how much more flexible the less regulated higher school system for girls
was with regard to didactic innovations.
Against this backdrop
the distinctive female approach to teaching modern foreign languages remained
unquestioned on the one hand during the outgoing 19th century, but was also
under attack on the other hand, allegedly due to its superficiality and
its lack of educational value. Furthermore, this didactic Sonderweg,
manifest already in the early curricula and regulations, certainly caused
some of the difficulties which the higher school for girls faced in the
institutionalization process which aimed at positioning it next to the Gymnasien and Realbildungsanstalten as a higher yet Latin-less schooltype. Unexpectedly,
this process was supported at the end of the 19th century by the Reform
Movement, which the overlappings of their demands and the female language
teaching tradition shown in detail in sections 3 and 4 of this paper have
indicated. This connection is analyzed clearly by a contemporary expert:
The demands the reformers have made for these schools [i.e. higher Latin-less
schools for boys] during the past 30 years have already been practiced at
higher girls' schools for a considerable length of time. [...] it seems
like the reformers have received their instruction from the so-called "higher
daughters" [...].xv
This led to a strong
coupling phenomenon with extensive effects which a glance at examples of
the next generation of curricula for higher school types for both sexes
at the beginning of the 20th century demonstrates. A comparison of the compulsory
curriculum for English put into effect in the course of the extensive reform
of the higher girls' school in Prussia in 1908 (Centralblatt 1908: 920ff.)
with contemporary guidelines for higher boys' schools (cf. Lehmann 1904:
131) illustrates that the substantial gender-related differences manifest
15 years earlier (see above) had not been abolished completely, yet they
had levelled out considerably by the beginning of the 20th century. A closer
look at these documents (Doff 2002: 469-478) reveals that the strong effects
of the coupling of the female tradition of teaching modern languages and
the approaches suggested by the reformers lead to a dominance of these innovative
approaches over the formerly prevailing methods in higher schools for boys
that taught modern languages like classical languages (and not vice versa).
6 Brief Outlook
The fresh start of language
learning and teaching in late 19th and early 20th century Germany as requested
and finally carried out by Viëtor and his colleagues illustrates that and
how didactic (and thus also curricular) reforms can be successful provided
the mainstream expectations in culture as well as in society match these
new ideas, which furthermore need influential representatives and an appropriate
institutional setting. The development investigated in this paper is an
example of how curricular change, in this case a reorientation of learning
objectives in foreign language teaching like, for instance, oral competence,
can only take effect on a large scale provided they coincide with public
expectations or what has been called the dominant mentality (Burke 1986)
at least in important respects. Since the latter was the case at the end
of the 19th century, the innovations suggested by the reformers were rather
quickly implemented into modern foreign language teaching curricula in
This inevitably leads
to the conclusion that the still young field of the historiography of learning
and teaching foreign languages in
Endnotes
- Hippel
1801: 86f; author's translation. The original reads: "Wir (die Männer)
sagen beim Unterrichte gern voraus, was wir sagen wollen, und ehe wirs
sagen; wogegen die Weiber ohne diese Erschwerung gradezu zur Sache schreiten:
wir präludieren, die Weiber spielen gleich das Textlied, wir fangen mit
der Grammatik Sprachen an, die Weiber mit Sprechen".
- The
latter line of argument is taken, for instance, in the standard work "Handbook
of German History of Education"
(Handbuch der deutschen Bildungsgeschichte),
Küpper 1987: 186.
References
Sources
Ackermann
[sic] (1883). Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht in der höheren Mädchenschule.
Zeitschrift für weibliche Bildung, 11,
173-184 and 217-226.
Breymann,
H. (1895). Die neusprachliche Reform-Literatur
von 1876 bis 1893. Leipzig.
Centralblatt
für die gesammte Unterrichtsverwaltung in Preußen. Hg. in dem Ministerium
der geistlichen, Unterrichts- und Medicinalangelegenheiten. Berlin 1859-1908.
Clodius
[sic] (1906). Die höhere Mädchenschule und der fremdsprachliche Unterricht.
Zeitschrift für französischen und englischen
Unterricht, 5, 1-14.
Glauning,
F. (1895). VI. Englisch. In W. Münch, W. & F. Glauning (Eds.). Didaktik und Methodik des französischen und
englischen Unterrichts. Sonderausgabe aus Dr. A. Baumeister's Handbuch der
Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre für höhere Schulen. München: C. H.
Beck.
Hippel,
T. G. von (1801). Nachlaß über weibliche
Bildung.
Jorns, C. (1882). The
Young Lady's Vocabulary with Conversations. Für höhere Mädchenschulen, Seminarien und zum
Selbststudium. Berlin: Herbig.
Junker,
H. P. (1904). Englischer Unterricht, geschichtlicher Abriß. In W. Rein (Ed.).
Encyklopädisches Handbuch der Pädagogik. Bd.
2. 2nd ed. Langensalza: Hermann Beyer & Söhne, 406-421.
Kameke,
H. von (1893 [1892]). The Girls' Book
of Dialogues for the Use of Classes and for Private Use both for German
and English Pupils, with some notes and headings of letters at the end. 2nd ed.
Kreyenberg,
G. (1887). Die deutsche höhere Mädchenschule.
Geschichte und Entwicklung derselben bis in die neueste Zeit. Frankfurt:
Moritz Diesterweg.
Lehmann,
R. (1904). Die höheren Lehranstalten. Lehrpläne und Lehrbetrieb. In W. Lexis
(Ed.). Das Unterrichtswesen im Deutschen
Reich. Bd. II: Die höheren Lehranstalten und das Mädchenschulwesen im Deutschen
Reich. Berlin: Asher, 67-165.
Mager,
K. W. (1846). Die genetische Methode
des schulmäßigen Unterrichts in fremden Sprachen und Litteraturen. Zürich.
Meidinger,
J. V. (1783). Practische Französische Grammatik wodurch man diese Sprache
auf eine ganz neue und sehr leichte Art in kurzer Zeit gründlich erlernen
kann. Frankfurt.
Münch,
W. (1908). Sprechen fremder Sprachen. In W. Rein (Ed.). Encyclopädisches Handbuch der Pädagogik. Achter Band. Erste Hälfte: Schulbesuch
– Schweizerisches Schulwesen. 2nd ed. Langensalza: Hermann Beyer &
Söhne, 815-820.
Regel,
E. (1897). Zur Methodik des Unterrichts an höheren Mädchenschulen – Englisch.
In Wychgram (Ed.), 153-172.
Schopenhauer,
J. (1839). Jugendleben und Wanderbilder. In E. Kleinau & C. Mayer (Eds.)
(1996). Erziehung und Bildung des
weiblichen Geschlechts. Eine kommentierte Quellensammlung zur Bildungs-
und Berufsbildungsgeschichte von Mädchen und Frauen. Weinheim: Deutscher
Studien Verlag, Bd. 2, 191-196.
Seidenstücker,
J. H. P. (1811; 1813). Elementarbuch
zur Erlernung der französischen Sprache. Erste Abtheilung 1811. Zweite
Abtheilung 1813. Dortmund und
Leipzig.
Staedler
[sic] (1879). Methode und Grammatik des fremdsprachlichen Unterrichts. Zeitschrift für weibliche Bildung, 7, 67-86
und 117-130.
Tanger,
G. (1888). Muss der Sprachunterricht
umkehren? Ein Beitrag zur neusprachlichen Reformbewegung im Zusammenhange
mit der Überbürdungsfrage. Berlin: Langenscheidt.
Thiel
[sic] (1898). Neue oder alte Methode? Die
Lehrerin, 14, 101-103.
Viëtor,
W. [Quousque Tandem] (1882). Der Sprachunterricht
muß umkehren! Ein Beitrag zur Überbürdungsfrage. 2nd ed. 1886. Heilbronn:
Henninger.
Wendt,
Gustav (1898/99; 1900/01). Die Wiener Reform Thesen. Die Neueren Sprachen, 6, 657-660 und 8, 61-64.
Wychgram,
J. (Ed.) (1897). Handbuch des höheren
Mädchenschulwesens. Leipzig: Voigtländer.
Wychgram,
Jakob (1905). Stephan Waetzoldt. Frauenbildung,
4, 193-208.
Secondary works
Burke,
P. (1986). Strengths
and weaknesses of the history of mentalities. History of European Ideas, 7,
439-451.
Christ, H. & Rang,
H.-J. (Eds.) (1985). Fremdsprachenunterricht
unter staatlicher Verwaltung 1700 bis 1945. Eine Dokumentation amtlicher
Richtlinien und Verordnungen. 7 vols. Tübingen: Narr.
Doff,
S. (2002). Englischlernen zwischen
Tradition und Innovation. Fremdsprachenunterricht für Mädchen im 19. Jahrhundert.
München: Langenscheidt-Longman.
Doff, S. (2007). Stairway
to Heaven
oder Road to Nowhere: Wie die Lehrerinnen in die höhere Schule kamen – und was dann geschah. Zeitschrift für pädagogische Historiographie 13, 70-77.
Doff,
S. & Klippel, F. (2007). Mädchen lernen fremde Sprachen – Lehrbücher
und Lektüre im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert. In H. Decke-Cornill & L. Volkmann
(Eds.). Gender Studies and Foreign
Language Teaching. Tübingen: Narr, 47-62.
Hardach-Pinke,
Irene (1993). Die Gouvernante. Geschichte
eines Frauenberufs. Frankfurt/Main und New York: Campus.
Historische
Kommission bei der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Bayerischen
Staatsbibliothek (2007). Mager, Karl. In Allgemeine
Deutsche Biographie (electronic version), vol. 20, 57-59.
Historische
Kommission bei der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Bayerischen
Staatsbibliothek (2007). Meidinger, Johann Valentin. In Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (electronic version), vol. 21, 189-192.
Historische
Kommission bei der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Bayerischen
Staatsbibliothek (2007). Seidenstücker, Johann Heinrich Philipp. In Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (electronic
version), vol. 33, 630-632.
Hüllen,
W. (2005). Kleine Geschichte des Fremdsprachenlernens.
Berlin: Schmidt.
Klippel,
F. (1994). Englischlernen im 18. und
19. Jahrhundert. Die Geschichte der Lehrbücher und Unterrichtsmethoden.
Münster: Nodus.
Küpper,
E. (1987). Die höheren Mädchenschulen. In K.-E. Jeismann & P. Lundgreen
(Eds.). Handbuch der deutschen Bildungsgeschichte,
Band III. Von der Neuordnung Deutschlands bis zur Gründung des Deutschen
Reiches. München: Beck, 180-191.
Winkler,
Theolinde Maria (Ed.) (1935). Hundert
Jahre im Dienste der höheren Mädchenbildung, Im Auftrag des Institutes der
Englischen Fräulein München-Nymphenburg, 2 Bde. München: Filser.