66-9828
ARNDT, Edward John, 1909- AN ADMINISTRATIVE HISTORY OF THE EDUCA TIONAL SYSTEM OF THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC FROM 1945 TO 1964.
The American University, Ed.D., 1966 Education, history
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan ii
(§} Copyright by
Edward John Arndt
1966 AN ADMINISTRATIVE HISTORY OF THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM OF
THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC FROM 1945 TO 1964
by
Edward John Arndt
Submitted to the
Faculty of the Graduate School
of The American University
in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree
of
Doctor of Education
Signatures of Committee:
Chairman: ^Li < - i t ' ------JlusnAUh> 0c &***$?- Graduate Dean: °
^ 7
1966
The American University AMERICAN UNIVERSITY Washington, D. C. l i b r a r y MAY 19 1966
WASHINGTON. D. C. PREFACE
The author gratefully acknowledges the useful criticism s and many helpful suggestions made by the following members of the Disser- ration Committee:
Dr. Paul D. Leedy, Chairman, Professor of Education
Dr. Carl G. Anthon, Professor, Department of History
Dr. Hugo J. Mueller, Professor, Department of Languages
and Linguistics
Dr. Stanley V. Smith, Adjunct Professor, Department of
Education
Dr. Ralph Whitfield, Associate Professor, Department of
Education
Special thanks are due Dr. Anthon and Dr. Mueller for their careful scrutiny of all German quotations and translations.
The author is deeply indebted to the Library of Congress for many courtesies which were extended. Dr. I. Sipkov of the Law Library deserves special mention.
The author wishes to express his sincere thanks to Dr. Paul
D. Leedy for his expert guidance of this entire project from the time of the proposal to the final version of the dissertation. TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Statement of the P roblem ...... 1
Survey of Related L iterature ...... 7
' Data U sed ...... 23
Importance of the S tu d y ...... 28
H. THE FORMATIVE YEARS OF THE COMMUNIST
EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN THE DDR (1945-52) . . 30
The Situation in 1945 ...... 31
Review at the End of 1945 ...... 51
Democratization of the German School and The First
Pedagogical Conference (1 9 4 6 )...... 55
Important Developments of this Y e a r ...... 69
The Third Year of the Occupation (1947)...... 72
S u m m a r y...... 81
The Year of the Supreme Test (1948)...... 83
S u m m a r y ...... 89
Prelude to the Creation of the German Democratic
Republic (1 9 4 9 )...... 90
R e v i e w ...... 108 CHAPTER PAGE
The Ascendancy of Youth and Preparation for the
Five-Year Plan (1950) ...... 112
Significance of the Year's Educational Developments . . 130
The Expansion of Education and the Five-Year Plan
( 1 9 5 1 ) ...... 132
Review of 1951 ...... 145
The End of the Wandel Period (August, 1952) .... 146
Paul Wandel's Term of O ffice ...... 155
Significance of the Wandel P eriod...... 161
III. THE PERIOD OF REVERSALS (1952-1954) ...... 164
The Administration of Else Zaisser (1952-1953) .... 164
Evaluation and Significance of Minister Zaisser's
Administration ...... 186
The Administration of Hans-Joachim Laabs
(March to November, 1 9 5 4 ) ...... 189
Evaluation and Significance of the Laabs
Administration ...... 197
IV. INTENSIFICATION OF PARTY CONTROL OVER
EDUCATION (1954-1958) ...... 202
Preparations for the Fifth Pedagogical Conference
( 1 9 5 5 ) ...... 204 vi
CHAPTER PAGE
Evaluation of the Year 1955 215
The Year of the Fifth Pedagogical Conference (1956) . 216
Significance of the Year 1956 224
The Great Debate on General Education (1957) .... 226
Evaluation of the Year 1957 ...... 234
Direct Intervention of the Party in Education (1958) . . . 236
Evaluation of the Lange Adm inistration...... 248
Y. REORGANIZATION OF EDUCATION AND ESTABLISHMENT
OF THE UNIFIED SOCIALIST EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
(1958-1964) ...... 254
A New School System (1959) 256
The Importance of the Year 1 9 5 9 ...... 263
Re-tooling for Polytechnical Education (1960-1961) . . 265
Evaluation of the Years 1960 and 1961 272
New Ideas in Education (1962) ...... 274
Evaluation of the Year 1962 ...... 282
Ingredients of a New Unified School System (1963) . . . 282
Evaluation of the Administration of Alfred Lemnitz . . 291
The Administration of Margot Honecker (1963-) . . . . 295
The Unified Socialist Educational System ...... 298
VI. SUMMARY ...... 306
C o n c l u s i o n ...... 331
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 336 LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1. Schematische Darstellung der Ausbildungswege im
einheitlichen sozialistischen Bildungssystem . . . 304
2. Graphic Presentation of Educational Channels in the
Unified Socialist System of Education...... 305 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Two world wars were fought during the first half of the twentieth century. In both instances, the military conflict was begun by Germany.
As a result of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was greatly reduced in size, but she remained a single nation. Before twenty years had passed following World War I, the first stages of World War II were under way. After World War II, Germany was again greatly reduced in size, but this time she was split into two states, one loyal to the USSR and the other aligned with the West. All efforts at unifying Germany have proved of no avail. Again twenty years have elapsed since the end of the conflict.
Statement of the Problem
This dissertation was concerned, in point of time, with the period of almost twenty years following the end of World War H. As to location, this dissertation centered its interest on that part of
Germany which was closest to the USSR. Western Germans who hoped that some day all of Germany might be reunited, called this area Mitteldeutschland or Middle Germany, thereby emphasizing that they
did not accept the Oder-Neisse Line which presently marks the
western boundary of Ostdeutschland or Eastern Germany, now under
Polish control. The part of Germany with which this dissertation was
concerned bears the name "Deutsche Demokratische Republik" (DDR),
or German Democratic Republic. ^ The problem was that of gathering
and presenting facts of the administrative history of the DDR's school
system from 1945-1964 and of interpreting the meaning and importance of these facts, so that an accurate picture of the school system might be obtained. The qualifying term "administrative" was inserted to
suggest that the emphasis would be on studying the school system in operation. This would certainly include an examination of all changes
in the structure of the school system itself. Less attention was given
to examining the educational philosophy or describing the curricular offerings of the school system. Similarities or differences between the National Socialist and Communist administration of education were not discussed. No effort was made to contrast the teaching of German history during the period 1933-1945 and the period 1945-1964.
^The abbreviation, DDR, will be used throughout this disserta tion. 3
Statement of Subproblems
The meaning of the term administrative history, as used in this dissertation, was further clarified by a summation of some of the sub-problems. A considerable amount of attention was devoted to the educational and political leaders who made contributions in this field of education. Among these were Ministers of Education, members of the Deutsches Pedagogisches Zentral Institut (DPZI), or German
Central Pedagogical Institute, contributors to pedagogical magazines, and the like. A further area of interest was the various means used by educational leaders to achieve their ends. Here mention should be made of conferences, commissions, institutes, workshops, speeches, laws, and publications. Problems in teacher training are directly related to administrative changes in the school system, so there were reviews of new types of teacher training, changes in the classification of teachers, teachers' examinations, and the like. The influence of the USSR on changes in education in the DDR were followed closely, along with indications of resistence to such influences. Mention of these sub problems should illustrate what was meant by an administrative history of the school system of the DDR. By studying the main trends of the
DDR's educational system and by analysing the forces behind these trends, a new and deeper understanding of education in the DDR should be achieved.
Delimitation of the Problem
To some extent, the subject of delimitation has already been touched upon in connection with the section on "Statement of the Problem. "
This dissertation did not cover vocational and technical education completely. This type of education was discussed in connection with grades one to twelve whenever vocational education became part of the general school system. In situations where vocational and technical education were removed from the Ministry of Education and thus came under the jurisdiction of the State Secretary for Vocational Education or the State Secretary for Universities and Technical Schools, the subject was not pursued. University education was not discussed.
Generally, universities were mentioned only in connection with teacher training or when they influenced the school system directly. As in the case of vocational education, universities eventually came under separate jurisdiction.
Not included were the history of the educational system as it developed in the Eastern Sector of Berlin, because the quadripartite control of the city created special problems. Similarly, no attempt was made to deal with various educational issues which had to do with 5
East-West German relations.
Details about committees responsible for education within the
Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands (SEP), or Socialist Unity
Party, were not given, although the influence of politics on education frequently received attention. Party training schools were not discussed.
The youth organizations, Freie Deutsche Jugend (FDJ) /Free German
Youth/ and the Pioniere /Pioneers/, did not receive special attention as mass organizations, although these were mentioned in connection with various educational endeavors.
Also not included were writings on German education in the
Russian language. Furthermore, no attempt was made to describe the operation of the Soviet Military Administration (SMA) in the field of education. The influence of Russian educators on German education was not treated exhaustively, but was touched on briefly.
Terminology
The terms East Zone, Soviet Zone, Soviet Zone of Occupation, and the DDR all refer to the same geographical area. In point of time, the first three titles explained a situation which existed from 1945-1949; after that, DDR was more accurate. For political purposes, the
Federal Republic of Germany referred to the DDR as the SBZ, or
Sowjetische Besatzungszone /Soviet Zone of Occupation/. In this dissertation, an attempt was made to keep the titles separate on a time b a sis.
The term, Minister of Education, was used loosely to desig nate the head of the Department of Education. Strictly speaking, there was no Minister in 1945 but rather a Director.
German terms for various types of schools will not be mentioned at this time but these will be introduced within the text. The German term, Oberschule / Secondary SchoojV, was retained in this dissertation because there is no exact English equivalent to the word. Titles of speeches, books, laws, and the like were given first in German, then followed by a translation. Since many titles were long and wordy, more effort went into suggesting the meaning of the original than in providing a literal translation.
The Hypotheses
This, historical analysis of the school system of the DDR was based on the following hypotheses:
1. The USSR did not have a carefully worked out educational plan prepared before the occupation of Germany. While some thought was given to the subject by German Communists in exile who worked among German POW's in Russia, detailed plans were not worked out until the occupation actually got under way. 7
2. Russian officials in charge of education in Germany
generally depended on giving instructions to trusted Germans, who
then developed an educational system which was agreeable to the
Russians. Naturally, the Russians had a bias for their own educational
sy stem .
3. The Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (KPD)
(_ German Communist Party / and later the SED were largely respon
sible for developing the educational system of the Soviet Zone and the
DDR.
4. Slavish imitation of the Russian model increased over a
period of years. This was not necessarily due to Russian pressure, but possibly to German inability to be creative while bound to a
Communist ideology.
5. Resistance to the Russian model existed throughout the period under discussion, but this resistance was ineffective.
These hypotheses will be discussed at various stages in this paper, when appropriate.
Survey of Related Literature
No one apparently has heretofore attempted to trace the historical development of the administration of the DDR school system.
There were however a number of short articles which reviewed five, 8 ten, or fifteen year periods of educational history. ^ Many books discussed the educational system as it existed at a given time. Some of these books, such as those written by Gordon Schaffer, Max Lange,
Erwin S&uberlich, and Wilhelm Schneller, contained information of considerable historical value, but they were not written in historical perspective. ^ There were a few studies, among them those done by
Albrecht Timm, Emil Wendt, Heinz Gutsche, Edgar Drafenstedt, and
Helmut Klein, which showed the historical development of one phase
^Examples are: Karl Elrich, "Die Entwicklung des Grund- schulwesens in der Sowjetischen Besatzungszone seit 1945" /The Growth of_the General School System in the Soviet Zone of Occupation since 1945/, Paedagogik, IV (June, 1949), 24-31; "Zehn Jahre Deutsche Demokratische Schule" /Ten Years of the German Democratic School/, Deutsche Lehrerzeitung /German Teacher's Newspaper/, October 1, 1955; and Horst Krahn, "Die Entwicklung unserer Schule in Zahlen" /The Development of Our Schools in Figures/, Paedagogik, XIV (September, 1959), 736-46.
^Gordon Schaffer, Russian Zone (London: Published for the Cooperative Press by G. Allen and Unwin, 1947), pp. 119-28; Max G. Lange, TotalitUre Erziehung; das Erziehungssystem der Sowjetzone Deutschlands/ Totalitarian Education; the Educational System of the Soviet Zone of Germany/ (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag der Frankfurter Hefte, 1954); Erwin Sfeluberlich, Vom Humanismus zum demokratischen Patriotismus /From Humanism to Democratic Patriotism/ (Duisburg: Verlag fUr Politik und WirtschafL_ 1954);-Wilhelm Schneller, Die Deutsche Demokratische Schule /The German Democratic SchoojV (Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1955). 9 of education, such as teacher training, adult education, and poly- technical education. ^ The publications about to be reviewed at this time will be presented in chronological order according to the year in which they appeared in print. No claim of complete coverage is in tended, The books and articles here mentioned were selected because they provided some degree of information of historical interest.
One of the earliest books which discussed Soviet Zone C education was Gordon Schaffer's Russian Zone. u This was the account of an eyewitness, a foreign journalist, who visited the Soviet Zone in
1946 for ten weeks. This first-hand account was based on interviews with people of all social levels and varying occupations. Many of these provided Schaffer with newly printed materials. His ninth chapter was
4 Albrecht Timm, Das Fach Geschichte in Forschung und Lehre in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone von 1945- 1955 f_ R e se a r c h and Teaching of History in the Soviet Zone of Occupation from 1945- 1955/ (Bonn: Deutscher Bundes-Verlag, 1957); Emil Wendt, Die Ent wicklung der Lehrerbildung in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone seit 1945 /_The Development of Teacher Training in the Soviet Zone of Occupation since 1945/ (Bonn: Deutscher Bundes-Verlag, 1957); Heinz Gutsche, Die Erwachsenenbildung in der SBZ /_ Adult Education in the Soviet Zone of Germany/ (Bonn: Bundesministerium fttr Gesamt- deutsche Fragen, 1958); Edgar Drafenstedt, et al., Auf dem Wege zur Sozialistischen Landschule /_On the Way to a Socialist Rural School/ (Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1959); Helmut Klein, Polytechnische Bildung und Erziehung in der DDR; Entwicklung, Erfahrungen, Probleme /Polytechnical Education and Training in the DDR; Development, Experiences, Problems/ (Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rohwolt, 1962).
^Schaffer, loc. cit. 10 devoted to education and bore the title, "New Teachers, New Books. "
Schaffer was greatly impressed with the new school reform and claimed that this was the first time that Germany had a single school system which led directly from the elementary school to the university. He stated that education at the higher levels was no longer based on wealth, but on ability. He favored abolition of private schools, since this would provide equal opportunity for all. Schaffer mentioned talking to several members of the Christian Democratic Party (CDU) who seemed to be satisfied that there had been no interference with religious instruction.
Since there were few accounts of the early period of the school system, Schaffer's book had some value historically; however, his account was totally lacking in objectivity. J. P. Nettl, who also wrote about the Soviet Zone, said about Schaffer's work: "The bias of 6 the book is towards unqualified admiration of the regime. "
A number of useful publications appeared in 1954. The most detailed account of the educational system up to that year was Max
Lange's TotalitMre Erziehung. ^ This book, like Schaffer's, was based on personal experiences, except that, in this case, the author himself
®J. P. Nettl, The Eastern Zone and Soviet Policy, 1945-1950 (London: Oxford University Press, 1951), p. xiii. 7 Lange, op. cit. contributed to such educational journals in the Soviet Zone as the
Paedagogik, a magazine which will be quoted frequently in the course O of this dissertation. Lange wrote articles for this publication from
1946 to 1949. He was one of the professors who left the DDR in 1950.
By his own account, Lange admitted that he was one of the educators who was taken in by the "democratic" line of the SED. Later, when he became more wary, Lange justified his continued residence in the Soviet
Zone by the fact that he was able to write non-Marxist articles on education for Paedagogik. According to Lange's own statement, he be came disenchanted long before 1950; in fact, he said that he had completed the first draft of TotalitHre Erziehung before he left the DDR. Lange's intention in writing the book was to show how the educational system in the DDR was set up and how it was manipulated. As the title of his book indicated, the purpose was to demonstrate the totalitarian nature of the educational system. The raw materials for his book were somewhat similar to those used for this dissertation, namely, educational laws, curriculum guides, conference reports, educational periodicals, and the like. It is interesting to note that Lange refused to attempt a historical analysis; he felt that the time was not ripe.
^Paedagogik / Pedagogy/ (Berlin: Volk and Wissen). Publication began in 1946. 12
The tone of Lange's book was strongly political and unfavorable to the Soviet Zone. Not much time was spent on discussing the school structure. Although the historical method was not employed, Lange's book contained many items of historical interest. Among these, mention might be made of the Soviet Military Administration's relation to German education, Minister Zaisser's views on school reform, the anti-religious campaign in the Oberschule, the development of the
DPZI, "objectivism, " and the structure of the Ministry of Education in 1952. Each of these subjects will be discussed in the body of this dissertation, and reference to Lange's book will be made whenever appropriate.
The only doctoral dissertation related to the subject under consideration appeared during this year. ® This was Harold Bartell
Erickson's "An Analysis of Some Aspects of Secondary Education in
East Germany. " Erickson served with the U. S. Army in Germany from 1948 to 1950. He returned to Germany in 1952 to gather material for his dissertation.
Erickson's paper attempted to answer three questions:
(1) What was being done educationally for East German youth? (2)
What was the response of East German youth to this education?
9 Harold Bartell Erickson, An Analysis of Some Aspects of Secondary Education in East Germany" (Unpublished doctoral disserta tion, The University of California, Berkeley, 1954). (3) What were the implications of East German education for the United
States? Erickson limited his study to youths between the ages of thirteen to eighteen. He sought answers to his questions by interviewing some hundred students who had fled from the East Zone and were living temporarily in refugee camps. Erickson also analysed a German history textbook, taught at the eighth grade level, in search for an answer to his first question. He came to the conclusion that German youths were not being taught history but rather, psychological warfare.
His final finding was that German students in the DDR were generally not satisfied with their schools and that the entire school system was shaped after that of the USSR.
Only chapter II, "East German Education in the Postwar Period, touched on the subject of this dissertation. The period covered was
1945 to 1952. The author mentioned that his information was found in publications of the U. S. Occupation Forces in Germany, certain East
Zone periodicals, and reports of educators studying East German education. Actually, Erickson depended almost entirely on American sources. Two East Zone publications were referred to briefly. The reports of educators, five in number, were written between 1947 and
1949. Erickson himself stated that he could find almost no research or studies on the East German school system at that time. He must certainly be credited with being among the first to write in detail on the educational system of the DDR. 14
1 n A third contributor during this year was Erwin SHuberlich.
His book, which was considerably shorter than the other two just mentioned, was intended merely to provide information. He discussed such subjects as: the structure of the school system, principles of teaching, level of performance, methodology, and school of administra tion. The views expressed were very personal and were built around one theme: that the DDR's school system was devised to Bolshevize the country. The title of the book was intended to demonstrate the change which took place in educational philosophy between the early years and the time this book was written. Erickson also devoted part of his third chapter to a description of "democratic patriotism. " It was mentioned earlier that Lange admitted to being taken in by the friendly appeal of the SED during the years 1946 to 1949. S&uberlich's description of the school system contained some historical information, but his facts were not documented.
The year 1955 provided an occasion for tenth anniversary celebrations. Many articles, recalling the early years, appeared in the educational magazines, Paedagogik and Deutsche Lehrerzeitung.1 2
•^S&uberlich, op. cit.
11 E rickson, _op. c i t . , p. 83 ff.
1 ^Deutsche Lehrerzeitung /^German Teacher's Newspaper? (Berlin: Volk und Wissen). Publication began April 3, 1954. Paul Wandel wrote on SMA Order Number 40 which, he said, really 1 O started the school system in the Zone. A year-by-year account of developments in education over a ten year period appeared in an
October issue of the DLZ. ^ These short reports will not be discussed further at this time, because they will be referred to later in the body of the dissertation.
Two short books appeared this year, one in West Germany, the other in the East. Richard Lukas wrote a history of the Soviet
Zone of Occupation covering the years 1945 to 1955. ^ He devoted only five pages to education, and these were filled very largely with quotations from newspaper releases and from the Paedagogik. The treatment was very superficial.
Wilhelm Schneller's book constituted the first attempt of a 1 R German Communist to write at length on the DDR's school system.
13Paul Wandel, "Ein Historischer Befehl" /_A Historic Command/, Deutsche Lehrerzeitung, August 27, 1955. Identification of references to this publication, abbreviated as DLZ, will not be uniform, because the system varies in the original.
14nZehn Jahre Deutsche Demokratische Schule, " op. cit.
15Richard Lukas, Zehn Jahre Sowjetische Besatzungszone: Politik, Wirtschaft, Kultur, Rechtwesen /Ten Yearjj of Soviet Zone Occupation: Politics, Economics, Culture, and Law/ (Mainz- Gonsenheim: Deutscher Fachschriften Verlag, 1955), pp. 191-6.
16 Schneller, op. cit. The presentation was historical. An attempt was made to show the
German antecedents of the democratic school reform. These included
Clara Zetkin, Ernst Schneller, and Theodor Neubauer. SMA Order
Number 40 and the Law for the Democratization of German Schools-- to be discussed later--were interpreted. A good explanation of
ReformpUdagogik (school reform pedagogy, a term which had an evil connotation for Communists) was given from a Communist point of view. Schneller also provided new material in discussing teacher training after 1953. This book was extensively used in all teacher training institutions.
Two studies, which touched somewhat remotely on the subject of this dissertation, might be mentioned for the year 1956. One of these was prepared at Harvard University on "The Soviet Zone of 17 ” ' Germany. " A chapter was devoted to "Education and Youth. " The structure of the school system, the universities, political training, teacher preparation, and youth were discussed. Considerable attention was given to school statistics. The report frequently referred to
Lange's book on TotalitHre Erziehung. The other was a propaganda pamphlet written by Gerhard MiJbus which makes no pretense of being
^*The Soviet Zone of Germany" (Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, HRAF-15 Harvard 1, 1956), pp. 98-127. an impartial study. 1 8 No material of historical importance was found in either of these studies.
During the following year, two historical studies were published in Western Germany in brochure form. One of these, by Albrecht Timm, concentrated on an investigation of the teaching of history in the DDR school system during the period 1945-1955. ^ The brochure was filled with quotations from DDR publications, and the conclusions drawn were rather obvious. The other pamphlet was written by Emil Wendt who was interested in the history of teacher training since 1945. 20 Wendt divided his history into four periods: 1945-49, 1949-51, 1952-54, and
1955-56. It was very sketchy and without documentation.
In 1958, a third in a series of historical studies sponsored by the Bundesministerium flir Gesamtdeutsche Fragen appeared. This was a pamphlet prepared by Heinz Gutsche which told the history of adult 21 education from 1945 to 1955. Gutsche distinguished three periods:
•'■^Gerhard MBbus, E rziehung zum H ass; Schule und U nterricht iiri Sowjetbesetzten Deutschland /Educatton to Hate; Schools and Education in the Soviet Occupied Zone of Germany / (Berlin: Morus Verlag, 1956).
1 QT im m , op. c it.
20Wendt, op. cit. 18 the Volksfront Kurs [_Period of the United Front/ from 1945-1947, the
Bewusste Lenkung des gesellschaftlichen Fortschritts / Planned Control of Social Progress/from 1948-1950, and Die Kader Entscheiden Alles
/_A11 Decisions are Made by the Cadres/ from 1951-1955. Gutsche also provided a very detailed description of the adult education organization.
An appendix reprinted all important laws related to adult education.
This was the best presentation of one phase of the educational system of the DDR.
The year 1959 produced a minor publication in the DDR, but a major production in the United States. The minor work was that of
Edgar Drafenstedt, Heinz Lindner, and Hans Rettke who wrote on the history of the rural school system. ^2 This was the most detailed account of the rural school system written by Communists. Some space was devoted to the inherited rural school system. Comparisons with the
West German rural schools showed the DDR way ahead. Color charts illustrated the tremendous strides made by the DDR.
The most impartial and informative, also the best documented portrayal of the DDR's school system, undoubtedly was that of Paul S. OQ Bodenman. Bodenman gave an accurate picture of the school system
^Drafenstedt, op. cit. o o ^Paul S. Bodenman, Education in the Soviet Zone of Germany. Office of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bulletin 26 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1959). as it existed in 1958. He covered the school system from the crib to the university. He provided a very useful, selected bibliography which, for the first time, identified many important laws bearing on education.
Like Erickson, Bodenman was a trail blazer. His bulletin, however, was out of date soon after it was written. While it contained some historical references, it made no pretense of being a historical account.
Some portions of the brochure showed signs of being put together hastily and depended heavily on mere quotation. Despite this criticism,
Bulletin 26 still provides the clearest picture of the DDR school sy ste m .
In 1960, a very informative book on the school system of the
DDR appeared. ^4 jt was written by Hans Mieskes who, like Max
Lange, was an early contributor to the East Zone educational journal,
Paedagogik. The cover of the book suggested that the author had re mained at the University of Jena in the DDR at least until 1956. This was a scholarly book, which was carefully documented. Mieskes pursued three subjects:the bases of DDR education, the theory of its pedagogy, and the product of the educational system. Mieskes made
^Hans Mieskes, P&dagogik des Fortschritts ? Das System der Sowjetzonalen PUdagogik in Forschung, Lehre und Praxis / Pedagogy of Progress? The System of the Soviet Zone’s Pedagogy in Research, Teaching, and Practice/ (Munich: Juventa Verlag, 1960). the observation that the DDR had attempted no systematic study of its
own pedagogical system, hence his interest in filling in the gap. The
author apparently had read Max Lange's TotalitHre Erziehung care fully, but he reached the conclusion that Lange tried too hard at
'Irttckwirkende Rechtfertigung" or making alibis for what he had done.
Possibly, he was referring to Lange's explanation that, during the
early years, many distinguished educators accepted at face value the
SED invitation extended to all anti-fascist teachers to help build up a democratic school system.
Paedagogik des Fortschritts was not a historical account of the
DDR school system, although it did contain information of historical value, such as the discussion of pedagogical faculties, the evaluation
of the magazine Paedagogik, and an analysis of the DPZI. Mieskes' book tended in the direction of a theoretical discussion. It was written
with great care, but its style and presentation was ponderous. It can-''
not be called an objective presentation.
In 1962, a brochure by Helmut Klein appeared on the history of
polytechnical education in the DDR. 25 Although this was published in
the West, it was written by an instructor at Humboldt University,
2^Klein, op. cit. 21 located in the East Sector of Berlin. Klein surveyed the history of polytechnical education in Eastern Germany from 1945 to the time of publication and discussed current trends and problems of polytechnical training. An appendix contained documentary materials from Marx,
Engels, and recent DDR legislation. The brochure was favorably 0 ft reviewed in the August, 1962 edition of Paedagogik.
During the same year, Leonhard Froese, who was well acquainted with the school system of the USSR, wrote a short article on the historical development of the schools in the DDR. 97 Froese determined that there were three stages. The first of these was the period 1945-1949, a time when all political parties, and even some unpolitical educators, joined hands in developing a new educational system. At this point there was a recognized need for old, experienced teachers and a considerable degree of autonomy was permitted. Froese called attention to the freedom allowed in the magazine, Paedagogik.
He considered it a tragedy that German educators did not exploit the situation sufficiently and develop a feeling of solidarity, as was done in
9 fi "Polytechnische Bildung und Erziehung in der DDR, M Paedagogik, XVII, (August, 1962), 773-5.
^Leonhard Froese,_"Die Geistigen Grundlagen des Mittel- deutschen Bildungswesens" / The_Spiritual Foundations of the Educa tional System of Middle Germany/, Schriften der Arbeitsgemeinschaft f{lr Osteuropaforschung der Universit&t Mifnster. (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1962), pp. 1-10. 22
Poland. According to Froese, a change came about in 1946 when the
Communists recognized the drawing power of the phrase, demokratische
Einheitsschule f_a democratic unified school/. The second stage went from 1949-1953. During this time the Constitution of the DDR restated the principles of the Law for Democratizing the German School. This was the time of SED growth. The Weimar school reform tradition was no longer regarded as adequate. Anti-Soviet views were sharply criticized. The last stage mentioned by Froese covered the period
1953-1956. During this time the Soviet model took over, the school administration was centralized, the ten-year Soviet school was copied, teacher training became an imitation of the Soviet system, the Party controlled all thinking, and Russian became the foreign language.
Froese mentioned that, by 1965, the DDR expected to have completed the changeover to a new type of ten-year polytechnical Oberschule.
Froese described the three periods of the DDR's school system very well. The subject will be discussed in further detail in the body of this dissertation.
Finally, in 1963, Franz von Nesselrode wrote a book on
Germany's Other Half which contained a chapter on ’’Education and A p Culture. Like Gordon Schaffer's Russian Zone, the first book
28pranz von Nesselrode, Germany's Other Half (New York: Abelard-Schuman, Ltd., 1963). 23 mentioned in this Survey of related literature, this was an eyewitness account filled with favorable comments on the educational system of the
DDR. The author expressed the view that the level of education was very high, in many respects having surpassed that of West Germany, especially at the university level. Polytechnical education, which was just getting into full swing, was lauded.
The observations on education were superficial and arbitrary, but the book was mentioned in this review of related literature to show
that admirers of the DDR's school system continue to exist.
Data U sed
Materials on the first year of the Russian occupation were the most difficult to find. For the year 1945, the following proved useful:
(1) Orders of the Supreme Commander of the Soviet Military Administra
tion, ^ (2) speeches held by Paul Wandel and Clemens DHlitzsch,
^%tab der Sowjetischen Milit&rverwaltung in Deutschland, Befehle des Obersten Chefs der Sowjetischen Milit&rverwaltung in Deutschland /Staff of the Soviet Military Administration in_Germany, Orders of the Supreme Commander of the SMA in Germany/ Sammelheft 1. (Berlin: SMA Verlag, 1945). “
*^Paul Wandel, "Die Aufgaben der Deutschen Lehrerschaft am Neuaufbau des Schulwesens, " P^dagogische Neuorientierung / The Contri bution of German Teachers toward Rebuilding the School System, Pedago gical Reorientation/ (Dresden: Landesdruckerei Sachsen, 1945); Clemens DBlitzsch, "Der Organisatorische Aufbau des Anti-faschistichen Schul wesens" /_Organization of the Anti-fascist School Systenj?, ibid. 24
(3) a pamphlet concerning the new school published in Saxony, ^ o 9 (4) a collection of historical documents, (5) a chronology of events prepared in West Germany, ^ (6) and a similar chronology done in
East Germany. ^4
Beginning in 1946, educational publications greatly increased.
In August of this year the first issue of the educational journal,
Paedagogik, appeared. This monthly publication has continued to the present. After January, 1950, this magazine became known as the official organ of the DPZI. Die Neue Schule, a weekly devoted ex clusively to education, also started this year and continued until 1954 when it was replaced by a newspaper, Deutsche Lehrerzeitung, which is still in existence.
O 1 — . Die Neue Schule /_The New SchoojV {Halle: Provinzialver- waltung Sachsen, Abteilung Presse und Propaganda, 1945).
^^Percy Staly and Siegfried Thomas, Die DDR auf dem Wege zum Sozialismus / The DDR on the Way to Socialism / (Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1959), Teil I (1945-1949). “
^^Fritz Kopp and Gttnter Fischbach, Die Sowjetische Besat- zungszone Deutschlands in den Jahren 1945-1954 /The Soviet Zone of Occupation in Germany during the Years 1945-1954/ (Bonn: Deutscher Bundes-Verlag, 1964).
•^Geschichtliche Zeittafeln der DDR 1945- 1954 / Chronology of the DDR from 1945-1954/ (Berlin: Kongress Verlag, 1954), 25
From 1949 the Gesetzblatt der DDR, which contained all im portant laws enacted by the DDR, became available. 33 This collection soon became so unwieldy that, beginning in 1951 and ending in 1961, three compilations of laws and regulations concerned with educational matters alone appeared in succession under different titles in varying form at. 36
Several books which contained useful information have previously been discussed under "Review of Related Literature" and will not be listed again here. Mention should also be made of the SBZ-Biographie which, although not always accurate, still provided data not available otherwise. 3?
The Criteria
Any publications dealing either directly or indirectly with educational subjects and which have been printed by one of the following
3 5 _ Gesetzblatt der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik /_Legal Gazette of the DDR/ (Berlin: Staatsverlag der DDR).
36Karteibuch des Schulrechts ^Collection of School Laws/ (Weimar: Volk und Wissen). Covers_period from April, 1951, to November, 1956; Recht der Schule /_School Law7 (Berlin: Deutscher Zentralverlag). Covers period from November, 1956, to May, 1960; Bildung und Erziehung ^Education and Training/ (Berlin: Deutscher Zentral verlag). Covers June, 1960, to April, 1961.
^SBZ-Biographie / Biography of the Soviet Zone of Germany/ (Bonn: Bundesministerium fflr Gesamtdeutsche Fragen, 1954). publishing houses have been accepted as primary evidence: Volk und
Wissen, Dietz, SMA Verlag, Staatsverlag der DDR, Kongress Verlag,
Deutsches Institut fUr Zeitungswissenschaft, and Deutscher Verlag der
Wissenschaft. Also any printed official announcement concerning education bearing either the name of an official or office of the SMA, the DWK, or the DDR on a central or local level may have been thus accepted. Any printed statement issued by the KPD or SED which has a bearing on education may likewise have been included as primary data. All the above primary sources must have been printed in the original German language.
As secondary sources, publications of the Bundesministerium ftlr Gesamtdeutsche Fragen have been employed. The books, disserta tions, studies, and articles specifically identified in the Review of the
Literature have also been included in the secondary source data.
Personal interviews carried on with and other non-printed materials obtained from persons acquain ted with the subject of this dissertation have not been introduced.
The difficulty of dealing with materials which are under constant scrutiny by members of the Party and Government officials must ostensibly be recognized as biased data and care must be exercised in its interpre tation. Yet for a limited degree, criticism of this nature was often permitted and even encouraged. Close observation of such criticism 27 often provided information concerning future trends. Critical comments on education by political and educational leaders were examined to de
termine the potential of such data for showing a trend, either up or
down. Such trends were then reported.
This dissertation was based on East German sources so far as possible; however, materials which originated in the West were brought
in only when East German publications either did not cover the point under discussion or gave only a part of the story.
Methodology
The historical method has been employed in this dissertation.
Historical data has been assembled on cards which have been filed according to two systems; one has been arranged in chronological order by years, the other under topics arranged alphabetically. Each piece of information has been filed twice, once in each system. For example, the Ten-Year School has been filed with appropriate informa tion under consecutive years from 1949 to 1963, but the same information is also found under the heading, the Ten-Year School. In this way, the subject was studied in relation to other events which took place at the same time and it was also analysed as a separate topic.
Primary sources have been searched year by year for informa tion relative to the operation of the school system. Data was sought
concerning the political control of education, the responsibilities of the 28
Ministry of Education on a national and local level, methods of
administering the school system, the organization of the schools,
influence of the USSR, teacher training, and the educational press.
Each time important information was found, it was recorded on film
for later study. Each microfilmed topic has then been analysed and
essential information has been recorded on cards. On the basis of
the cards, a flow chart was prepared for each major area to be covered
in the dissertation in order to determine trends.
In examining primary sources, special attention has been
given to locating different treatments of a similar subject. If these
were in general agreement, this fact has been noted. If they were in
disagreement, the various versions have been examined closely to
determine the reasons for such disagreement.
Secondary sources have also been studied in an effort to
determine the facts.
Importance of the Study
This dissertation marks the first attempt to write the adminis
trative history of the DDR school system from its establishment in 1945
to the year 1964. Short historical articles have appeared from time to
time, but no one has studied the problem in depth.
This dissertation will also be the first to place emphasis on the contributions of the six Ministers of Education toward the educational 29 system of the DDR. Most of these educational leaders are unknown in the United States.
Until now, information about the DDR school system was limited to spot reports which covered either a short period of time or a specific subject. There has been no study which brought the scattered information together into a unified whole. Also, most information about the DDR school system has appeared only in the German language.
This dissertation will make basic information available to all who under stand the English language.
Finally, it is hoped that this work will make a contribution to the field of comparative education, particularly in the area of Soviet influence on the educational systems of Europe. CHAPTER II
THE FORMATIVE YEARS OF THE COMMUNIST
EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN THE DDR (1945-1952)
Among the six administrations of the Ministers of Education to be discussed in this dissertation, the one of Paul Wandel was the longest.
Wandel's term of office covered seven out of the nineteen years of this administrative history. The contents of this chapter will show that
Wandel's long term in office was not accidental but was based on his merit as an administrator. Wandel's term may also be described as the period of the most rapid growth of the educational system. In making this statement, it must be realized that growth statistics for the number of schools opened within a given period of time and the number of teachers employed were necessarily more spectacular at the beginning when they started from nothing and showed rapid growth than later, after the major expansion had taken place and growth possibilities were more limited.
Another distinguishing characteristic of Wandel's term in office was that the chaos which had originally existed in the administration of the educa tional system was gradually replaced by an orderly procedure. This was not an inconsiderable achievement. Finally, the Wandel period differed from all others in that it began with an appeal to all anti-fascists to join 31 the school system but ended by fully embracing the ideals of socialism.
While Wandel personally was very influential in building up the
DDR school system, it must be kept in mind that he received his orders originally from the SMA and later from the SED.
The Situation in 1945
Two accounts, written many years later, gave a picture of the educational situation in 1945. One was by Willy Rosenfeld, who had been appointed a Kreisschulrat (county school official) in Kreis Lebus on
September 1, 1945. * He described Lebus as one of the most badly damaged areas in Germany. Not a single school remained intact. In
Schulbezirk Lebus-SUd (school division of South-Lebus) twenty per cent of the school buildings had been totally destroyed, 28. 8 per cent were not usable, 48. 2 per cent were in need of major repairs, and five per cent were requisitioned for essential non-school purposes. Beside the physical destruction of buildings, the Kreisschulrat had no books and very few qualified teachers. All Nazi textbooks had been banned and, in the total Kreis of Lebus, only five teachers could be found who were not former members of the National Socialist Party. In time,
* Willy Rosenfeld, ^jDie Rote Armee Half den Schulen im Stark ZerstBrten Kreis Lebus" /_The Red Army Helped the Schools in Badly Damaged Lebus/, Paedagogik, VII (November, 1952), 866-68. the Kreiskommandatura (local Soviet Military Government) cleared forty-eight nominal party members for service as teachers. To start the school system, Willy Rosenfeld had to depend upon a few retired teachers and very largely upon any person, regardless of training, who expressed a desire to teach.
This sketch of utter destruction admittedly described one of the areas which had been hit hardest during the war. Another account by Horst Krahn provided statistics which covered the entire Soviet
Zone. ^ Krahn estimated that, of the twelve thousand schools then in existence in the Soviet Zone of Germany, 134 had been completely destroyed, 363 almost totally destroyed, and 2,741 badly damaged. As far as teachers were concerned, Krahn claimed that ninety-five per cent were active Nazis.
The devastation just described had been anticipated by the
Russians. With the Nazi regime completely discredited by its accept ance of unconditional surrender, and the Soviet armies impressed with their victory, little time was lost in exploiting the situation and offering the Germans who happened to be located in the Soviet Zone at that time some way of identifying themselves with the new regime. The magic formula consisted of uniting all Germans who were against the Nazis.
^Krahn, op. cit. , 736-46. 33
Recruitment of anti-fascist educators had already started among German
POW's in Russia.
Evidence of Preparation for a New School System in Germany
Fritz Rtlcker became a prisoner of war in December, 1942. ^
While in prison camp, POW's were addressed by Wilhelm Pieck, who later became President of the DDR, Walter Ulbricht, later First Secre tary of the Central Committee of the SED, and Willi Bredel, later a member of the Central Committee of the SED. ^ During July, 1943, the
Nationalkomittee Freies Deutschland / National Committee of Free
Germany/ was organized in the USSR. ^ Rttcker reported on many dis cussion evenings during which Russian officers would visit German prisoners to sound out their views on education. German teachers among the prisoners were asked to work out plans for reorganizing the
German school system. It was suggested that they prepare guide lines for the teaching of German history. German textbooks of the Weimar period were made available. Riicker himself was assigned to work in
O FritzJFtilcker, "Freunde und Lehrer beim Aufbau unserer Neuen Schule" /Friends and Teachers Who Helped Build Up Our New Schools/, Paedagogik, XV, (May, 1960), 444-50.
^Rttcker, op. cit., 444.
^Rllcker, op. cit., 446. 34 education in Mark Brandenburg and was asked to submit plans to an education committee in Moscow. ® Rilcker was filled with admiration for the Russians, because they insisted that no country had the right to force its way of life on another nation nor to destroy that nation's school system.
A number of German prisoners of war were won over to the
Soviet side during their internment. At least two later achieved con siderable prominence: Werner Dorst and Ernst-Joachim Giessmann.
Dorst, who attended an anti-fascist school in the USSR, returned to
Germany as a Department Head in the Central Administration for
Education and soon became a frequent contributor to educational publi- cations. Giessmann started as a school director at Oranienburg, but O later became a State Secretary for Universities.
Another indication of advance preparation for changing the school system in Germany may be found in Walter Ulbricht's Zur
Geschichte der Deutschen Arbeiterbewegung. ® Here Ulbricht mentioned
6Rilcker, ibid.
7SBZ Biographie, p. 71.
^SBZ Biographie, p. 107.
^Walter Ulbricht, Zur Geschichte der Deutschen Arbeiterbewegung /_Concerning the History of the German Worker's Movement/ (Berlin: Dietz, 1953), p. 386. As quoted in Paedagogik, XI (February, 1956), 125. 35 that the Politbuero /Political Committee/ of the KPD had created a commission in February, 1945, to work out detailed plans which would elicit the cooperation of anti-fascists in removing the Nazi ideology from the schools and establishing other cultural objectives.
The evidence shows that, before the Russians entered Germany, some thought had been given to reorganizing the schools. Russian educators had been in contact with German educators among the POW's and had made some converts. On the other hand, the German Communist
Party in exile had agreed upon at least one phase of a course of action as soon as the Russian occupation of Germany would begin.
The Soviet Occupation of Germany
Soviet troops entered and occupied the city of Berlin on May 2,
1945. Originally, the Russians controlled the entire city themselves.
All accounts seem to agree that the remainder of the Russian Zone of
Occupation was broken up into many independent military commands which varied considerably in their local administration. ^ Nettl stated
•*-°Stab der SMA, c>p. cit. , p. 9.
^ -^Schaffer, op. cit., p. 20;_Wilhelm Cornides, Die Welt- m&chte und Deutschland 1945-1955 / The World Powers and Germany? (Tttbingen: Rainer Wunderlich Verlag, 1957), p. 45; Nettl, op. cit., p. 57. 36
that the SMA had difficulty in asserting its authority in the Laender before the autumn of 1945. These conditions, along with the varying
degrees of destruction resulting from the war in specific areas, brought about a greater emphasis on local initiative than on the immediate forma tion of national policies. Applied to education, this meant that, in the early days of the occupation, there was no sudden implementation of an established policy decided on by the Russians, but rather a gradual formulation of basic principles which Germans would be willing to support and which were not contrary to the objectives of the Soviet occupation. The way in which this was done by the SMA, the KPD, and later by the SED, as well as by the Director of the Central Adminis tration for Education will now be described.
The SMA and Education
The Soviet Military Administration was created by Command 1, dated June 9, 1945. ^ While it stood for the highest authority in the
Soviet Zone as far as the German population was concerned, there were a number of special m issions, such as the one on reparations and the
Sowjetische Aktiengesellschaften /Soviet corporations/, which took their
■^Stab, op. cit. , p. 9. 37 orders directly from Moscow and paid no attention to the SMA. By an order issued on July 9, 1945, the Soviet Zone was subdivided into five Laender, and each Land was put under its own SMA. In time, this order strengthened the authority of the SMA in Berlin.
On the second day of the SMA's existence, Order Number 2 permitted the Germans to establish mass organizations, "free" unions, and anti-fascist political parties. ^ Each such organization had to receive permission to operate. Since all fascist organizations and institutions had been declared illegal, the most sensible thing to do was to join an anti-fascist group. Mass organizations were then used to mould public opinion. They soon became involved in issues related to education.
On July 27, 1945, the Verwaltung fUr Volksbildung /Administra- tion for Education/ was created, and Paul Wandel was appointed director.16
This administration, as well as others, corresponded to various divisions which existed in the SMA, thus the German administrations actually served as agencies for carrying out orders received from the SMA.
•^These were Soviet corporations formed from confiscated industries.
14Ibid. , pp. 13-14.
l^Ibid. ^ p. io.
16Ibid. , p. 35. 38
However, since the Germans, appointed as directors to these adminis trations, were, carefully selected and often were leaders in the communist movement, their position was often that of advisor or consultant. This was especially true of Paul Wandel.
The difference in the function of the SMA Department for
Education and the Verwaltung fllr Volksbildung can be surmised by comparing the contents of the orders issued by the SMA and the regula tions set forth by the German administration. The former dealt with a ban against Nazi teachers and textbooks, announced an opening date for all schools, established a publishing house for textbooks, and started short training courses for teachers; the latter promulgated details of administration, determined curriculum content, set up objectives of the educational system, and outlined the structure of the school system.
There is no evidence that the working relationship between the
SMA and the Verwaltung fUr Volksbildung was preestablished in Moscow before the war; in fact, Wandel explained how a cooperative approach gradually developed on a practical basis in Berlin. ^ As far as is known, Paul Wandel's original assignment in Berlin was that of editor-
f O in-chief of the Communist Party organ, Deutsche Volkszeitung. Five
■^Paul Wandel, ”Ein Historischer Befehl” /A Historic Command/, DLZ, August 30, 1955, 3.
^SBZ Biographie, p. 370. 39 years later, while explaining how SMA Order Number 40 came about,
Wandel mentioned that German anti-fascists and SMA officials jointly worked out the details of the order which started a new school system .^
This article stated that this was a routine procedure for all major decisions which affected the German population.
Early German Pronouncements on Education
It was mentioned above that the KPD had met in February, 1945, to work out some plans concerning education. On June 10, 1945, the
KPD became a legal, anti-fascist party. ^0 The next day the KPD was ready to issue its first statement, in the form of a demand, on education.
It asked for S&uberung des gesamten Erziehungs-und Bildungswesen von dem faschistichen und reaktionMren Unrat. Pflege eines wahrhaft demo- kratischen, fortschrittlichen, und freiheitlichen Geistes in alien Schulen und Lehranstalten /Clearing out all the fascist and reactionary filth from the educational system. Cultivation of a truly democratic, progressive,
o -a and free spirit in all schools and teacher training institutions/. This
l^Wandel, "Ein Historischer Befehl, " loc. cit.
n n — _Stefan Doernberg, Kurze Geschichte der DDR /Short History of the DDR/ (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1964), p. 514.
21Ibid., p. 30. 40 declaration contained two basic ingredients which were found in most educational pronouncements which followed: a hostile anti-fascist statement and an invitation to all who were progressive, democratic, and free. Almost no references were made to communism.
More than two months passed before SMA Order Number 40, which bore the title "Ueber die Vorbereitung der Schulen zum Schulbe- trieb" /Concerning the Preparation of Schools for School Business/, was published on August 25, 1945. 22 The dual ingredients, just mentioned, were expanded. Fascists now included militarists and racists. SMA
Order Number 40 included an appeal to all teachers who believed in democratic principles to join the school system. The order mentioned that textbooks which had been printed before 1933 might be used. The order established October 1 as the date for opening all schools. Order
Number 40 required that all private -- which meant denominational --
o o schools be turned over to local authorities.
Within a week after SMA Order Number 2, which permitted the formation of anti-fascist organizations, had been announced, five repre sentatives each of the small KPD Party and the large SPD Party (Socialist) met on June 19, 1945, to create a block of all anti-fascist parties. By
22Karl-Heinz Gilnther, eta l., Quellen zur Geschichte der Erziehung /Sources for the History of Education/ (Leipzig; Volk und Wissen, 1959), pp. 375-6.
23Ibid. , p. 376. October 18, 1945, negotiations had proceeded far enough to allow a
joint statement concerning education. 24 Agreement had been reached
on these points: the youth had been swallowed up (i. e ., taken over) by
the Nazis without their knowing it, the Nazis had brought the entire
school system into the service of the Party, the schools had produced
nothing but servants, and teachers had lost all respect for the truth.
Soon-after releasing this statement, the two major Parties held a mass n c meeting in Berlin on November 4, 1945. Anton Ackermann, a member of the German Communist Party since 1926 and more recently
an announcer for the program "Freies Deutschland” /Free Germany/ from Moscow, was the main speaker. Much of what he said was a
repetition of the joirij: statement of October 18. Ackermann hit hard at
the anti-fascist'theme. He told his Berlin audience that the symbol of
Nazi education was not a book, but the dagger of the Hitler Jugend
/Hitler Youth Organization^/. The test of Nazi education was its
WehrtUchtigkeit /_military preparedness/. He criticized the fact that even university students were members of the National Socialist Party
24Ibid., p. 377.
2^”Demokratische Schulreform" /The Democratic School Reform/, Bericht Uber die gemeinsame Kundgebung der KPD und SPD am 4, November 1945 im Palast in Berlin [A Report on the Mass Meeting of the German Communist Party and the German Socialist Party Held in the Palace Theatre on November 4, 1945/ (Berlin: Verlag Einheit, no date). 42 and the SA (Storm Troopers). He berated the Nazis for forcing students in the grade schools to join the Hitler Youth and for poisoning the minds of young people in history classes. Then Ackermann explained the ideals of the new education in these words:
Unser Erziehungsziel ist der wahre Humanismus, worunter wir die Erziehung zu einer lebendigen und kUmpferischen Demokratie, zu sch8pferischer, friedlicher Leistung des Einzelnen fUr das Volks- ganze, die Erziehung zur Freundschaft unter den friedlichen ViJlkern, zum aufrechten, freiheitlichen, fortschrittlichen, und selbst&ndigen Denken und Handeln verstehen.
/Our educational goal is the achievement of true humanism, whereby we understand an education in the direction of a living and fighting democracy, the creative and peaceful contribution of the individual to the people as a whole, the cultivation of friendship among peace- loving nations, and the encouragement of an honest, free, progressive, and independent way of thinking and acting
It is very clear which instincts Ackermann was appealing to at this school rally. At the same time, it is ironic, in view of later developments in the DDR, that Ackermann should have stressed the close political ties with education during the Nazi period.
Strangely, a publication which appeared the following month expressed a view diametrically opposed to that of Ackermann and some what close to that of the Nazis themselves. ^7 Ddlitzsch complained
26Ibid.. p. 14.
^Clem ens DBlitzsch, op. cit., pp. 33-46. 43 that Germans were inclined to think of themselves first and to put their political freedom in second place. He wanted to see the Germans change and realize that politics was a part of life. He insisted that, if Germans did not look after their political rights, they themselves would become an object of politics. He reminded Germans that it was a political system which brought about Germany's destruction.
DBlitzsch's article was also noteworthy, because it was among the first to propose the Einheitsschule /unified schoo_l/ for the Soviet Zone.
This new type of school was fully endorsed at a joint conference of the
Central Committees of the KPD and the SPD in Berlin from December
20-21, 1945. 28
This short review of the high points of the KPD's activities in the field of education during the year 1945 showed its mounting interest in that subject; however, it must be realized that, although the KPD certainly had the inside track as far as the SMA was concerned, it was almost completely without popular support. Most members of the Party had to return to Germany from life in exile; others were released from prison or concentration camps. In order to gain mass support, the
KPD resorted to the device of an anti-fascist movement. A merger with the SPD, the most influential anti-fascist party, was a major part of this
28Percy Staly, op. c it., pp. 60-67. 44 effort. Applied to education, this meant an emphasis on points which the communists and socialists held in common: the Einheitsschule, elimination of private schools, complete state control, and a school system which favored the working class.
Paul Wandel and the Administration for Public Education
When Paul Wandel, who had emigrated from Germany to the
USSR in 1933 and had gradually worked his way up to the position of political secretary to the man who later became the first president of the DDR, was named director of the newly created Deutsche
Verwaltung fUr Volksbildung on July 27, 1945, he was given very broad responsibilities. His chief function was to bring order into the educational departments which existed or were coming into existence at the Land, Bezirk, Kreis, and Gemeinde levels. Wandel was also put in charge of all universities, teachers' colleges, libraries, museums, theatres, cultural societies, publishing houses, and youth activities. In most of these areas, chaotic conditions existed and fundamental changes, of a political nature, had to be made.
One of Wandel's most difficult tasks as Director of Public
Education was to find teachers for the schools. The methods he used 29 can be recognized in an early publication, which appeared in December, 1945.
^Paul Wandel, "Die Aufgaben der Deutschen Lehrerschaft am Neuaufbau des Schulwesens, " op. cit. , pp. 5-29. 45
He began by heaping blame on the Nazi school system, which produced students whose language could not be understood. He called attention to Germany's discredited international reputation. He mentioned that many of the victorious powers felt that Germany was incapable of re educating itself and that this task should be undertaken by others; however, said Wandel, the Russians were allowing the Germans to 30 take an active part in the process of reeducation. He warned that, if the Germans did not correct their own situation, they might never 31 again become a nation. The Russians, according to Wandel, were a peaceful people who would really have preferred not to cross the
German boundaries. Germany stood to profit by maintaining friendly relations with Russia.
Wandel gave the impression that he wanted to be reasonable with teachers. He said: Wir verlangen keinen politisch geformten _ 32 Menschen /We do not require a person to be made over politically/.
He agreed that concessions would have to be made here and there before a new type of teacher could be developed. All he asked of teachers was a willingness to change.
30Ibid., p. 7.
3l_Ibid. , p. 8.
32Ibid., p. 19. 46
With respect to the new school, Wandel was happy to concede
that many of the new ideas actually were old. 33 Many had been dis
cussed during the 1920's. The new school would set up high standards equal, at least, to those of the Weimar Period. Germany would finally achieve a school system which would be available to all children.
Wandel's methods were disarming and effective. The Nazis were made responsible for bringing on the occupation, the Russians were pictured as friends, the new school system was going to be what the
Germans had always wanted, future teachers did not have to pass political tests, and positions were available for anyone who was willing to change. This was Wandel's preparation for introducing the unified school system.
The Einheitsschule
The idea of the Einheitsschule developed in Germany after
World War I and was incorporated in Article 146 of the Constitution of
Weimar. Its purpose was to revise the existing dual system of education in which one track provided a more limited general education for the masses, while the other prepared selected students for higher education,
33Ibid. , p. 21.
34Ibid. , p. 29. 47 usually culminating at the university. The Einheitsschule was designed to allow more competent students from the lower classes to enter the secondary school system. This school reform was strongly supported by the Socialists after World War I.
The Communists were quick to revive the idea of the Einheits schule in 1945. It had the advantage of being German in origin, yet it was similar to that of the USSR. Socialists favored it, because it helped to remove class distinctions.
Ddlitzsch's comments on the unified school have already been mentioned. Friedrich Elchlepp likewise contributed two articles on the subject. 35 He recommended that the new school begin with six years of the Grundschule /Basic School/ and continue with seven years of a Mittelschule /Middle School/ for those who followed a language track or eight and one-half years for those who chose a vocational, technical track. During the fourth year of the Grundschule, he provided for two groups: those who continued with a first foreign language, and those who had trouble with foreign languages. The latter were per mitted to take, practical subjects. All tracks led to the university.
"^Friedrich Elchlepp, "Die Kommende Schulreform" /The Coming School Reform/ and "Die Einheitsschule /The Unified School7, Die Neue Schule /The New School_/ (Halle: Provinzialverwaltung Sachsen, Abteilung Presse und Propaganda, 1945), pp. 7-10. 48
This particular version of the Einheitsschule was mentioned, because it allowed for a difference in talent among children. It also retained the distinction between the Grundschule and the Mittelschule.
It will be seen later that Elchlepp's version of the unified school was not acceptable to the KPD, because it showed remnants of bourgeois thinking. The same could be said of the Teachers1 Union (Verband der
Lehrer und Erzieher) demand of November 15, 1945, which asked for
its own brand of Einheitsschule. 33
Comparative Education
The following interesting and instructive cycle of events can be established between the Einheitsschule, which developed in Germany-
after 1919, and the Neue Schule proposed by Paul Wandel in 1945. The
chain of events did not proceed directly between two countries but
rather, indirectly, via a third country. The two countries were
Germany and France; the third country was the USSR. The Einheits
schule in Germany directly affected the ecole unique in France. 37 The
36tiporherung des 'Verbandes der Lehrer und Erzieher' zur Schulfrage und Lehrerbildung" /Demand of the Union of Teachers and. Educators Concerning School Problems and Teacher Training/, Neue Schule (April, 1946), 35.
3^Donald W. Miles, Recent Reforms in French Secondary Education (Teacher's College Studies in Education. New York: Columbia University Press, 1953). 49 ideas of the ecole unique were taken over by the Jean Zay Plan in 1937.
The Algiers Commission in 1944 drew heavily on the Jean Zay Plan and the ecole unique. During the same year, the Langevin Commission absorbed the educational philosophy of the Algiers Commission.
Langevin and his successor, Dr. Henry Wallon, were French Commun ists. Concerning Langevin, Robert Ulich said: "The liberation of France, as conceived by Langevin and his friends, was intended to be the beginning of a communist France and Europe, with Soviet Russia as the leading pow er.
Proposals for instituting the Einheitsschule in the East Zone of
Germany in 1945 have already been mentioned. Two additional facts showed the direction in which the educational system in the Soviet Zone was beginning to move: Paul Wandel announced that all children would begin their first foreign language in the fifth year--he was too delicate or too careful to say, in his announcement, that the language was Russian; the other fact was that a number of prominent Russian educators were taking a direct interest in German education. Among such educators were: Prof. Mitropolski, Prof. Oreschkova, and Dr. Sokolova. Many lesser educational officers were assigned at lower levels. The direct
^Robert Ulich, The Education of Nations (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962), p. 170. 50 intervention of Russian educators in the educational system of the n Q Soviet Zone was described by Fritz Rttcker. This subject will be discussed further in ensuing years.
Teacher Shortages and Founding of the Teachers' Union
These subjects require only brief mention for the year 1945.
Gttnter Wilms, who later wrote a short history of teacher education, explained that, during this year, thousands of well-meaning teachers, including many workers, began teaching in the newly opened schools. Some had a few months' training, some a few weeks, but many had no training at all. Teacher training was not well organized nor uniform. Teachers were selected on the basis of being anti-fascist; there were no other political requirements. Teacher training was reformp&dagogisch bestimmt, which meant that it was largely in the hands of teachers trained in the pre-Nazi period of the Weimar Republic.
This was not what the SMA and the KPD wanted, but there simply were
39»Erfahrungen Eines Ministers ueber die Hilfe der Sowjetischen Paedagogik Beim Aufbau der Neuen Demokratischen Schule im Lande Brandenburg" /Experiences of a Minister Concerning the Help Given by Soviet Pedagogy in the Reconstruction of the New Democratic Schools in Brandenburg/, Paedagogik, VH (November, 1952), 858-65.
4°G(lnter Wilms, "Ueber die Sozialistische Umgestaltung der Lehrerausbildung" /Concerning the Socialist Reorganization of Teacher Training/, Paedagogik, XIV (May, 1959), 357-61. no other trained instructors for teachers. For years to come, a
considerable number of these liberally educated professors taught at
the teacher training institutions and universities. They taught others
as they themselves had been taught. They were sincerely anti-fascist
and many believed in socialism. They favored the concepts of the
Einheitsschule. Some of these educators remained in the Soviet Zone
for several years and then went West; Others remained permanently
and constituted a core of "reactionaries, " which worried the SED year
after year. Their activities will be reported from time to time.
On August 21, 1945, it was announced that a union of teachers,
called Verb and der Lehrer und Erzieher, was about to be organized.
The union was to include all teachers from kindergarten to the university.
The union actually came into existence on November 13, 1945.
Review at the End of 1945
At the end of the first seven months of Soviet occupation, the
East Zone of Germany was still in the middle of a harsh winter. The population was short on food, clothing, housing, and heat. Everything was rationed.
41"Forderung des ' Verbandes der Lehrer und Erzieher' . . ., op. cit., 35. 52
The SMA had been established and provided an administration which assured law and order. Its influence was just beginning to be felt in the Laender.
As far as education was concerned, the center of control was concentrated in the Deutsche Verwaltung ftlr Volksbildung. Paul Wandel, its director, was made responsible for starting all schools on October 1.
By that date he was expected to have prepared recommendations for a curriculum, to have provided textbooks, and to have found and trained teachers. His task was difficult. Adequate classroom space was scarce. There were a few teachers who had been trained before 1933; others had only a few weeks training or none at all. History was omitted from the curriculum; an attempt was made to introduce Russian in the fifth grade.
While the Russians did establish some contacts among educators who were POW's in the USSR, there was no evidence of a carefully prepared plan for reorganizing the educational system of the
Soviet Zone. The method followed was that of a gradual adaptation to existing conditions. Since there were only a handful of German
Communists in the Soviet Zone, almost no mention was made of communist doctrine. Anti-fascism became the slogan which brought in support from the Socialists. The Einheitsschule provided a perfect solution for the educational system of the Soviet Zone, because it was 53
equally acceptable to the Russians, the KPD, and the SPD. While widely discussed during the year 1945, it was not implemented until
the following year.
Assessment of the First Year
When the Russians succeeded in 1945 in bringing their military campaign against Germany to a successful conclusion, they were immediately beset by all the problems of an occupying power. The
Russians were as unaccustomed to their role as the supreme power in the East Zone as the remaining Germans were unaccustomed to taking orders from the enemy.
The Russian armies which conquered Germany in the East did not arrive with a ready-made plan either for exploiting or rebuilding what remained of that part of the country. Such plans were gradually developed over a period of years. As far as schools were concerned, the Russians quickly decided on three objectives: schools were to open promptly in the fall, all vestiges of National Socialism were to be re moved, and denominational schools were not be be permitted. All three objectives were essentially political: theopening of schools would help to restore and maintain order in the civilian population, the banning of all traces of National Socialism was essential to the security of the occupation power, and the closing of denominational schools prevented a 54 possible future rallying point for those who opposed communism.
Not only were Russian objectives in education limited during this first year but there was also a severe language barrier. These circumstances made the employment of a few select German Communist educators mandatory. The Russians were fortunate in their selection of
Paul Wandel. While not an educator by profession, he was an excellent propagandist for the communist cause among educators. He held to a black and white theme: everything that was bad about Germany had been brought on by the National Socialists; the Russians had no choice, after being invaded, but to destroy National Socialism -- the Russian motives were pure. Wandel then pictured Germany’s great future, if everyone closed ranks and worked hard. Wandel was able to achieve what the
Russians themselves would not have been able to do, namely, to give the impression that the Germans themselves would be allowed to develop their own school system. Wandel was very successful in convincing many German educators that he was a sincere and reasonable man and that the Russians were prepared to help the Germans, if the Germans would help themselves.
During this first year, little was achieved beyond physically opening many schools and carrying on some instruction. Propaganda for a unified school system was initiated, but nothing was accomplished beyond carrying out the three objectives mentioned above. The 55 significance of the first year lay in the fact that the SMA had demon strated its great interest in education and that the KPD had come out in favor of the Einheitsschule.
Democratization of the German School and the First
Pedagogical Conference (1946)
This was a very active year for Paul Wandel. Many years later, when Wandel was awarded an honorary doctorate at Wittenberg, one of his major achievements was considered to be the enactment of the Law for the Democratization of the German School.
The convening of the First Pedagogical Conference was also an achievement which was carried out under the difficult conditions then existing in the Soviet Zone. It is an interesting fact that, of six pedagogical conferences held during the entire period covered by this dissertation, four were convened by Wandel in as many years.
A third accomplishment during this year was the creation of a system of Pedagogical Faculties at all six Soviet Zone universities.
Selection of future teachers to be trained by these faculties was limited from the beginning to the children of workers and peasants.
The hand of Paul Wandel seemed to touch almost every important educational development which took place during these early years when the influence of the KPD was still relatively weak. 56
Fashioning of a New Political Weapon, the SED
Mention has been made earlier of joint meetings of the KPD and the SPD in October, November, and December, 1945, during which time common ground was found in an anti-fascist approach. To complete the picture and to emphasize the broad appeal desired by the SMA, both the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) and the CDU (Christian Democratic
Party) were asked to join hands. The SMA exerted more and more pressure on the SPD, which was trying to maintain its independence as a political party, since it had strong backing in other parts of Germany.
The SMA realized that, without SPD support, the Soviet Zone could not risk an election. The SMA was finally successful in bringing about a fusion of the KPD and SPD during April, 1946. The event was celebrated by the appearance of a new newspaper, Neues Deutschland.
Elections were held in September, 1946. Results showed that the new SED Party was stronger than any other single party, but it was still quite weak. Several factors or facts contributed toward this weak ness: support of the Oder-Neisse Line, the difficulty of reconciling the widely proclaimed generosity and friendliness of the Russians with the seizure of reparations on a large scale, and the mass exodus of technical and professional specialists to the West. To counteract these political liabilities, the SED used a broad appeal, asked for all-German solutions 57
to problems, favored religious tolerance, stressed humaneness and the
love of peace, and barely mentioned Marxism. There were some
occasions when the United States and West Germany were discussed
in friendly terms.
Gesetz zur Demokratisierung der Deutschen Schule
The Law for the Democratization of the German School did not
appear as an order of the SMA, as was true of some other education laws, but was enacted individually in each of the five Laender within the span of one month beginning with Thuringia on May 12, 1946, and 42 ending with Brandenburg on June 6, 1946. The text in all instances was practically identical.
The Law embodied many of the pronouncements and suggestions of the KPD-SPD, the Teachers' Union, and prominent educators. It repeated the idea that Germany had never had an educational system which raised its youth to become free citizens. It mentioned again that the children of the working class were denied a higher education, be cause they could not afford it. The anti-fascist theme was incorporated: opposition to race hatred, conquest, militarism, and imperialism;
^"Gesetz zur Demokratisierung derJDeutschen Schule” /Law for the Democratization of the German School/, Paedagogik, I (August, 1946), 2-4. 58 support of peace, humanity, and democracy. The educational objective was stated to be: the training of an individual to think independently, and the development in each individual of a feeling of responsibility to his community.
The school structure consisted of a Kindergarten, eight years of Grundschule (ages six to fourteen), three years of Oberstufe (including vocational, technical, evening, and adult education), or four years of
Oberschule (university preparatory). Education in the Grundschule and
Oberstufe was to be free. All children were required to take a foreign language beginning with the fifth year; during the seventh or eighth year, students were to be permitted to take a second foreign language, mathe matics, or science. The Law for Democratization did not require that the first foreign language be Russian.
Schools were to be organized on a Land basis under a Minister of Education. The director of a school was to be appointed by the Land
Division of Education and Culture. The director was expected to work closely with the m ass organizations and the latter were obligated to support him.
There is no question that this Law constituted a milestone in
Soviet Zone education. It was mentioned earlier that this Law brought order into the school system. The requirement that all children would have to learn a foreign language beginning in the fifth year--and this 59 turned out to be Russian--marked the beginning of an attempt to make the Soviet Zone of Germany bilingual. The Law made permanent the provision of SMA Order 40, which forbad confessional schools. The
Law fully exploited the ideas of the Einheitsschule. Despite the radical provisos concerning foreign languages and confessional schools, certain conservative elements remained. For example, the Oberschule continued intact as a school which prepared for the university. Also, while the vocational school took on a new importance, the intellectual approach to higher education was not abandoned. The basic tenets of the Law for
Democratization of the German School determined school policy until
1952 when the SED felt strong enough to embark on a new course.
The First Pedagogical Conference
43 This was held in Berlin from August 15-17, 1946. The meet ing was organized and dominated by Paul Wandel. The impression was intentionally given that this was an all-German conference. Schramm, the Minister of Education from Hessen in the American Zone, and Grimme, the Minister of Education from Hannover in the British Zone, were in vited to address the assembly. West German educators, said Karl
_ “^Karl Sothman, "Betrachtungen wHhrend des Kongresses" /Observations during the Congress/, Neue Schule, I, Nr. 8 (no month, 1946), 4; "Erster PMdagogischer Kongress in Berlin" /First Pedagogical Congress in Berlin/, Paedagogik, I (August, 1946), 58. 60
Sothman, were as anxious to attend as East Germans. Col. Tulpanov, who was in charge of German education within the SMA, represented the Army of Occupation.
The declared purpose of the conference was to take a critical view of the accomplishments and failures of the first year's educational efforts. Specific problems, such as, the teaching of history, the treat ment of current events, the availability of foreign language materials, and ways of democratizing the schools were discussed. Wandel delivered the major address which envisioned a new type of democratic school system for the Soviet Zone. At least one voice was raised in criticism and fore shadowed a controversy which continued for many years. This was the voice of Dr. Heise, the head of the School Division in the Deutsche
Verwaltung furn Volksbildung, 44 Supporters of the issues raised by the controversy were later called "revisionists. " Dr. Heise expressed his opposition to an education vom Kinde aus, which referred to a child-centered classroom. Apparently, a fair number of the partici pants at the conference who had been trained during the 1920's, favored this form of progressive education. Articles which appeared in the educational journal, Paedagogik, during the next few years showed such a trend. Dr. Heise made it clear that he opposed an educational
^Sothman, op. nit. , 5. 61 philosophy which simply allowed a child to develop its talents but that he favored a system in which a child would be raised in a direction which was useful to society. The latter tendency was to prevail.
In considering the real purposes of the First Pedagogical
Conference, the conclusion seemed warranted that it was necessary at this time to build up teacher morale and to give educators some sense of unity. When due consideration is given to the poor academic preparation of most teachers, their discouraging working conditions, the lack of organization, and poor communications, the need for a clear statement of purpose and some strong words of encouragement can readily be understood. This was not a time to raise too many contro versial issues. Trained teachers were scarce and, if pressed too hard, their only choice was to go to the West. For valid reasons, critical comments were kept at a minimum during this first conference and the broad emphasis was placed on the rewards of a democratically orientated school system.
Three Related Educational Problems
The Law for the Democratization of the German School was concerned chiefly with the Grundschule and the Oberstufe or Oberschule, yet there were certain related areas which were not covered by the Law.
One of these was adult education. An order which decreed the opening 45 of adult education schools was issued by the SMA on January 31, 1946.
Adult education was placed under the Central Administration for People's
Education. Since there were many youths and adults whose education had been neglected due to the war, it was reasonable to expect that there would be a demand for adult education classes. Such classes were offered to help workers to qualify for positions requiring special training but also for general education. In addition, adult education classes were used to provide political training. Anti-fascism, anti militarism, and the spirit of "democracy*1 were taught extensively in an effort to raise the cultural level of the people. By means of these courses, the SED hoped eventually to widen its support in the mass organizations.
Another related subject was that of vocational education. Accord ing to the Law for the Democratization of the German School, both adult education and vocational education were phases of the Oberstufe. The topic of vocational education was discussed extensively at a meeting held in Halle from November 11-13, 1946. On this occasion, Dr. Theodor
Litt, who later went to the West, delivered an address on the "Synthese zwischen Berufs - und Allgemeinbildung" /Synthesis between Vocational and General Education/. ^ Dr. Litt said that, in our time, youth could
45stab, pp. cit. (Sammelheft 2. Berlin: SMA Verlag, 1946), p. 32.
"Die Berufsschultagung in Halle" /Vocational Education Meet ing in Halle/, Paedagogik, II (February, 1947), 41-44. not always go by whether an inclination toward vocational training existed or not; youth might need to receive such training regardless of inclination. Two directions or trends had to be brought closer togethe general education could no longer merely serve cultural purposes, but vocational education had also to greatly increase its range to include a big picture of life. In future, vocational education had to become a part of general education. On this occasion, Dr. Buchholz stated that one might no longer speak of vocational education as practical and general education as theoretical; the two had now to become one.
The discussions which took place in Halle marked the beginning of a movement in Soviet Zone education which assigned more and more importance to vocational education. Various stages of this development will be described below until a climax is reached in the 10 klassige allgemeinbildende polytechnische Oberschule /ten-year universal poly- technical upper schoo^/.
A third related subject was the teaching of Russian in the grade schools. Otto Hermenau mentioned that this was the first time that a foreign language, namely, Russian, was taught in the fifth year through out the Soviet Zone.47 He expected, rather optimistically, that by the
47Otto Hermenau, "Zum Lehrplan fUr den Russischen Unter- richt" /Curriculum for Teaching Russian/, Paedagogik, I (November, 1946), 41. 64 eighth year a clear pronunciation, an understanding of form and syntax, and confidence in using daily conversation would be achieved.
A more realistic appraisal of the status of instruction in
Russian was given by Wolfgang Steinitz. ^ He explained that the teach ing of Russian was in a category all its own. Over a period of years,
Germany had amassed experience in teaching Latin, Greek, French, and English; no equivalent existed for Russian. Until recently, not a single Russian textbook in German could be found for use in grade schools. Previously, Russian was taught only in commercial schools, higher schools, and at the university. Teachers had little interest in
Russian culture or in the Soviet Union. Until 1918, Germany felt superior to Russia; after 1933, Russia was ignored. Not only was there a lack of knowledge about Russia, but there was also much false information.
The introduction of instruction in Russian was beset with difficulties in 1946. In 1945, there was only one Russian textbook,
Wir Lernen Russisch. Eine Sprachfibel fttr AnfSnger /~We Study
Russian. A Language Book for Beginners/, which contained only thirty-two pages. New textbooks for grades five to eight, seven to
^W olfgang Steinitz, "Zur_Lage des Russischen Unterrichts" /Curriculum for Teaching Russian/, Paedagogik, I (November, 1946), 41. 65 eight, and nine to twelve appeared in 1946. In addition to a lack of textbooks, there was also a severe shortage of teachers. Steinitz estimated that, as of March, 1946, eight thousand Russian teachers were needed. The subject of language instruction will be pursued further in subsequent years.
Founding of the Pedagogical Faculties
The teacher shortage which Paul Wandel faced in 1948 has been discussed above. In the year 1945, only one university in the Soviet
Zone had a Pedagogical Faculty, and that was the University of Jena.
To help alleviate the teacher shortage, the SMA ordered each of the six universities in the Zone to establish Pedagogical Faculties which would begin teaching in the winter semester of 1946. 49 Discussions regarding the new type of faculty began in November, 1945, within the Zentralver- waltung fUr Volksbildung. Advantage was taken of the experience gained at the Universities of Jena, Leipzig, and Dresden during the years
1922-1933. The length of the training period was determined to be three years or six sem esters. Tuition was to be free, but in addition
49Mpgdagogische F akultUten an den Universit&ten" /Pedagogical Faculties at the Universities/, Paedagogik, I (September, 1946), 62.
^Heinrich Deiters, nDer Studienplan der pUdagogischen Fakult&ten" /Curriculum of the Pedagogical Faculties/, Paedagogik, I (September, 1946), 8-15. 66 to this, seventy-five per cent of the students were to receive stipends.
A selective process assured a student body of workers’ and peasants' children.
Wandel determined that there was no time to try out various
educational theories in these faculties. They were to follow a pragmatic purpose: to turn out teachers quickly. Nor would too much leeway be
allowed for academic freedom. Course content was rigidly prescribed: history of education, didactics, psychology, philosophy, political and
social problems, administration, and practice teaching.
A few of the- unusual features about the Pedagogical Faculties
should be noted. First, putting the training of teachers on the university level was intended to upgrade the teaching profession. Second, the speed with which these faculties were created showed not only a sense of urgency bred of necessity, but also a willingness to take chances with a bourgeois mentality found among the professors. Third, the rigidity of
the course content went against German university tradition but agreed
with the system found in the USSR. Finally, no time was lost in limiting
the selection of future teachers to the working classes.
Educational Publications
During the year 1946, two important educational journals put in
their appearance: Die Neue Schule and Paedagogik. Both publications 67 have already been quoted frequently in this dissertation and this-will continue.
According to the first issue of Die Neue Schule, which appeared in April, 1946, plans for establishing the journal were resolved as early 51 as November 13, 1945. Karl Sothman, the first editor-in-chief, later 52 claimed that the first number was ready in December, 1945. Paul
Wandel took over the first page and immediately related the appearance of the publication with the proposed Law for the Democratization of the
German School. He expressed the hope that Die Neue Schule would educate a new generation along new lines, that it would remove class distinctions, and that it would dispel racial and national hatreds. Karl
Sothman wanted the journal to give the new teachers something to hold to. He favored practical articles. He intended to widen the horizon of German teachers by telling them about educational developments in the USSR, the USA, and Denmark. The April, 1946 edition proclaimed a broadminded objective: no issue would be avoided for open discussion.
Reverses would be frankly admitted, but progress would also be re ported.
51 Die Neue Schule, I (April, 1946), 3.
52Die Neue Schule, U (no month, 1947), 1-3, • Paedagogik appeared four months later in August, 1946. Its format was intended to make an impression. It was printed on quality paper. Its style was very modern, with all nouns, usually capitalized in German, written in lower case. Early contributors included famous scholars, with their erudition showing. Among these were: Theodor Litt, who later ended up in Bonn, Erich Hylla, who went to Frankfurt am Main,
Max Lange, author of TotalitEre Erziehung, Hans Mieskes, writer of
P&dagogik des Fortschritts?, Heinrich Deiters, who was later dismissed as editor of Paedagogik, and Robert Alt, who managed to hold his own in the Zone. The first issue of Paedagogik reprinted the text of the Law for the Democratization of the German School and provided a detailed ex planation of the implications of the Law. The same issue carried an article by Robert Alt on "Zur Gesellschaftlichen Begrlindung der Neuen
Schule" / The Social Foundation of the New School7, one by Erich Hylla,
"Zur EinzUgigkeit des Amerikanischen Schulaufbaus" / The Uniform
Structure of the American School System/, and a contribution by Sergei
Schubalov, "Uschinskij, Vater der Russischen pMdagogik" /Uchinski,
Father of Russian Pedagogy/. No one reading this first issue could have described it as one-sided or Communist-inspired.
The objectives of the new publication were stated in the editorial of the first issue in these words: 69
Die neue zeitschrift will mitten in der schwierigen und vielgestaltigen erziehungsarbeit unserer zeit grtlndlichen untersuchungen ilber die gesamte volksbildungsarbeit raum gewMhren, sie will klUrende aus- sprachen pflegen und ein spiegel aller ernsthaften bemtihungen um eine neue, nach strengen wissenschaftlichen grunds&tzen aufgebauten pSdagogik sein.
/The. new publication intends to provide an opportunity for a thorough investigation of all phases of the difficult and many faceted educational endeavors of our times; it will invite discussions which clear the air; and it will serve as a mirror reflecting all serious efforts at arriving at a pedagogy developed along strictly scientific lines7.
The editors admitted that Germany was a long way behind other countries, due to Hitlerism and issued an appeal for help from all educators, pro gressive forces, and those interested in democracy, humanity, and understanding among nations. Such an appeal was hard to resist.
Important Developments of this Year
The year 1946 was marked by the founding of the SED. Until its formation, the KPD had only a small following. The SPD enjoyed a considerable popular support, but it did not have Soviet backing. As a result of the forced merger of the two parties, the SED was able barely to command a majority and allow an election.
Even as a degree of political unity was achieved within the SED, so also was an understanding reached within the framework of the Law for the Democratization of the German School. This was not a dictum
^"Zum Geleit" /Guide/, Paedagogik, I (August, 1946), 1. of the SMA but was an achievement of Paul Wandel. The Law spelled out the details of the Einheitsschule: eight years of Grundschule followed by three or four years of further training. This system remained in effect for many years until it was determined that it no longer served the needs of the State. The Law made possible a single school system under
complete control of the State, with the confessional schools eliminated.
It was interesting to note the comments of the publication, Paedagogik, which suggested that the school system of the Soviet Zone was an
adaptation of the best educational thought coming from the United States, the USSR, and Switzerland. Such comparisons were unthinkable a few years later.
The Zentralverwaltung fUr Volksbildung under Paul Wandel had a very active year. Adult education was resumed in January, 1946.
Vocational education was put on a new pedestal and discussions were begun which eventually led to a complete reorganization of the Soviet
Zone School system. It was ironic that many of the proponents of a new approach to vocational education left the Soviet Zone a few years later. This was also the year of the First Pedagogical Conference which, more than any subsequent meeting, tried to give the impression of being all-German in scope.
This was the year during which two important educational journals began publication. Paedagogik, despite many changes in 71
editors, policies, and format, remains in existence. Die Neue Schule
survived until 1954 and was then replaced by a newspaper. Both journals
have provided important information concerning the history of the German
school system in the DDR.
Implications of the Year 1946
During the year 1946, Paul Wandel greatly increased the in fluence of the Central Administration for Education. He did this by promoting a law which established a unified, school system throughout the Soviet Zone under his administration. Wandel further strengthened his personal prestige by converting the First Pedagogical Conference in
Berlin. This gave him an opportunity to personally address teachers from all over the Soviet Zone. Teachers, on the other hand, came
away with the impression that the Government was behind them.
This was also a year during which some important changes were introduced in the teaching profession itself. Wandel's creation of
Pedagogical Faculties at all six East Zone universities, where previously
only the University of Jena provided such training, meant that more
teachers could be trained at the university level. In future, many
teacher candidates would have to attend the university for three years.
Combined with this raising of academic standards was the more insidious
requirement of social background. The selection procedure for teacher candidates at the Pedagogical Faculties was structured to favor the children of workers and peasants. This meant that Wandel's 1945 appeal to all educators with an open mind to join the school system was gradually being amended. Ironically, while professors for the
Pedagogical Faculties were still being selected largely on the basis of their academic background -- which was simply a matter of ex pediency -- the first criticism of the educational philosophy of the
Weimar period was heard at the First Pedagogical Conference.
The Third Year of the Occupation (1947)
During the year 1947, the first unmistakable signs appeared that the Soviet authorities in their Zone were giving up the idea of an all-German post-war solution and were beginning to plan for a separate existence for the Soviet Zone. The three indications were: the creation of the Deutsche Wirtschaftskommission (DWK), the setback received by the Soviet Zone delegation at the Laender Ministers' Conference in
Munich, and the reverses suffered by Ernst Reuter after his election as Mayor of Berlin.
As was reported earlier, the Law for the Democratization of the German School was adopted individually in each Land during 1946.
The Soviet Zone was trying to make the point that a Central Government did not exist but that each Land was supreme. Stefan Doernberg put the blame for this decentralization on the Western Powers. ^ According to Doernberg, the Russians had favored a German Central Government from the very beginning. On June 4, 1947,, SMA Order Number 138 established the DWK, which brought together the Central Administrations for Industry, Transportation, Trade and Supply, Agriculture and Forestry, and Fuel and Energy. The DWK marked the beginning of a German Soviet
Zone Government. It showed that the Russians were ready to turn over certain government functions to Germans. The purposes of the DWK in cluded raising the living standard, the promotion of greater economic independence within the Zone, and an increase in available reparations.
It will be noted that the Central Administration of Education was not put under the DWK.
Concurrently, during the same month that the DWK was created, the Laender Ministers' Conference was held in Munich. The five Laender of the Soviet Zone sent delegates, but their proposals for a united
Germany were voted down. From this time forth, efforts at bringing about an all-German solution practically came to an end and the likeli hood of the creation of a separate East Zone Government increased.
Likewise in June, Prof. Ernst Reuter was elected Mayor of
Berlin in spite of the opposition of the SED in the Soviet Sector of
^^Stefan Doernberg, Kurze Geschichte der DDR /Short History of the DDR/, (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1964), p. 45. 74
Berlin. This election demonstrated the preponderance of political power in the remaining three sectors of Berlin. Although elected, Reuter could not serve as Mayor because the SMA would not recognize him.
This situation, too, pointed in the direction of an eventual separation of the Soviet Sector from the remainder of the city. Many years later, the Berlin Wall symbolized this separation.
Changes in the Higher Grades of the School System
The creation of the DWK, with its concentration on the economi cal problems of the Soviet Zone, immediately had an effect on the school system. The subject of integrating vocational and general education had previously been discussed in connection with the Halle conference.
Conditions were now right for putting theory into practice. D. Bruins described the new school structure. 55 This was to consist of four stages:
Grundschule /Common or Basic Schoof/, Berufsschule /_Vocational School/
Fachschule /Technical School/, and Hochschule /University/. The Grund schule was to provide a general base for all later schools. During his years in the Grundschule each student was expected to acquire a clear understanding of his later practical occupation, which implied that he would make a selection during these early years.
®^D. Bruins, "Der Aufbau des Berufs-und Fachschulwesens" /Structure of the Vocational and Technical Schools^, Neue Schule, II (issue 5, no date, approximately February, 1947), 4-6. 75
After completing the Grundschule, students who did not go on with the Oberschule would have a choice between the Berufsschule and the Berufsfachschule /Trade or Professional School/. Most vocational students would receive eight to ten hours of instruction per week to prepare them for such occupations as artisan, agricultural assistant, commercial assistant, or home economics assistant; students qualified to learn a trade could attend school for two years with thirty-two to thirty-four hours of instruction per week.
The Fachschule was the continuation of the Berufsschule and might last from four to six sem esters. Graduates would enter careers in engineering, economics, administration, and agriculture. Continua tion of study at a university was possible. All technical schools had as basic requirements courses in German, foreign languages, economics, and current history. Every effort was to be made to establish close working relationships between the technical schools and the universities.
Certain curricular adjustments were also carried out in the last two years of the Grundschule to prevent the exclusiveness of the
Oberschule as the only university preparatory school. Special concen tration on mathematics, foreign languages, and science were no longer permitted in grades seven and eight. These subjects were replaced by vocational courses. By playing down the importance of intellectual training and putting more emphasis on practical achievements, the school 76 system was gradually brought in line with the objectives of the DWK.
A prime target for changes in the schools was in the rural school system where strenuous efforts were made to eliminate the one- room schools and replace them with centralized schools. Improvement in the quality of instruction in the rural schools was sure to increase the number of technically competent agriculturists needed by the DWK.
The Second Pedagogical Conference
The Second Pedagogical Conference was held in Leipzig from
September 8-10, 1947. It was jointly sponsored by what was now called the Deutsche Verwaltung ftlr Volksbildung /German Administration for
Education/ and the Teachers' Union. This Conference was preceded by local meetings of teachers, which took place during July and August.
At these local meetings, all problems related to education in the Soviet
Zone were discussed. The most important points brought up at the local meetings were then reported on by ten commissions at the Conference itself. Three of the commissions, one on "Rural Education, " the other on "Vocational Education within the Unified School, " and a third on
"Problems of the Upper School" discussed the anticipated school changes just described.
56»»p^dagogischer Kongress 1947 in Leipzig" /The 1947 Peda gogical Conference in Leipzig/, Paedagogik, II (May, 1947), 59. 77
Two other of the ten commissions should be mentioned during this year; both are related to the word "democracy. " An effort was made to identify communism with democracy. One commission was charged with the problem of "Democratizing School Administration. "
The commission asked for improved relations between the Schulleiter
— __ cry [Principal/ and the teacher. This was just the beginning of a compli cated system of checks and balances between the Schulleiter, who was responsible for the total accomplishment of the school, the P&dagogisher
Rat /Pedagogical CouncijV, which included teachers, the Elternrat
I Parential Council/, and the FDJ /Free German Youth/. The other commission studied the problem of "Self-administration of Students. "
The true meaning of "democracy" was discussed. The agencies for self-administration were declared to be the FDJ and the Pioniere. The importance of these two "democratic" mass organizations continued to mount.
Paul Wandel dominated this second conference as he had the first. He reviewed the accomplishments of the year past, giving special attention to the achievements of the Law for the Democratization of the
German School. The creation of a Pedagogical Council, decided on at
^"Zum 2. PUdagogischen Kongress" /The Second Pedagogical Congress/, Neue Schule, II (issue 12, no date, 1947), 1-2. 78
the First Pedagogical Conference, was announced, and its function was
declared to be that of a scientific body which would provide an opportunity for open, democratic discussions of all educational issues. The contents
of such discussions were to be printed in Paedagogik and Die Neue Schule.
Improving and Standardizing the Qualifications of Teachers
By 1947, the Law for the Democratization of the German School had established the broad outlines of a school system for the Soviet Zone.
At the Second Pedagogical Conference, ten commissions studied and
reported on problems raised by the Law. One of these commissions
concerned itself with teacher qualifications.
The problem of teacher shortage was closely related to that of teacher qualification. In order to overcome the shortage, described
earlier, qualification requirements had to be kept to a minimum. In fact, one source reported that of the 37, 180 teachers due to be trained by the end of 1947, 1, 634 received two months' training, 24, 040 had
eight months' training, and 6,625 future teachers were still enrolled in a twelve-month program. The teacher qualification problem was further complicated by the changes being made in the curriculum, as
discussed above under vocational education.
^Neue Schule, II (issue 12, no date, 1947), 450. The total of these three figures does not equal the figure 37, 180. The original text did not offer an explanation. 79
Several methods were devised this year to help the teachers who had not received adequate training. A Pedagogical Cabinet was established
KQ in Potsdam for Brandenburg teachers. This was a form of curriculum center divided into two branches, one for science and mathematics, the other for the humanities and culture. Each branch was headed by a specialist. The double purpose of the Cabinet was to help teachers by providing practical advice and by keeping them up-to-date. Members of the Cabinet were expected to write monographs on subjects, with which they were acquainted, for use of teachers. This institution was an early version of what was later called the Deutsches PHdagogisches Zentral
Institut (DPZI). Other forms of assistance included a Visual Aid Center, which was placed within the German Administration for Education, and a
Correspondence Course Center, with headquarters in Leipzig.
Raising the standards of teachers and teaching while, at the same time, increasing the number of teachers constituted one of the most difficult problems for Paul Wandel to solve, and he certainly was just coming to grips with it in 1947. At about this time, a new complication was arising for teachers: they were being expected to know something about Soviet pedagogy and culture. During the first two years of the
® ^Martin Herberg, "Das Paedagogische Kabinett in der Mark Brandenburg" /The Pedagogical Cabinet in Mark Brandenburg/, Paedagogik, II (February, 1947), 48-9. 80 the Soviet Occupation, few teachers had any direct knowledge of Soviet education. During these years, the first POW's were returning from
Russia; some of these brought a limited understanding of Soviet pedagogy with them. Max Lange described one such returnee in the person of
Heinrich Deiters, a former Ref ormpUdagoge, i.e ., a person who took an active part in the pre-1933 educational reform movement, who was trying to find a compromise between the Soviet educational system and his own former beliefs.®*^ On June 30, 1947, a Central Organization for the Study of Soviet Culture was established in Berlin for the purpose of acquainting artists, writers, scientists, teachers, and students with 0 ^ the ideas of the USSR. The Russification of the Soviet Zone began in the schools when the study of the Russian language was made compulsory in the fifth year. This movement was continued when German school teachers were gradually exposed to Russian pedagogical theory. In these early years, the pressure was not excessive, yet, although most teachers had all they could do to learn their new profession, they were now confronted by a further demand: the comprehension of an alien school system.
C A Max Lange, op_. cit., p. 274.
61 "GrUndung einer 'Zentralen Gesellschaft zum Studium der Sowjetischen Kultur' in BerlinV^Founding of a Central Society for the Study of Soviet Culture in Berlin/, Paedagogik, II (June, 1957), 57. 81
Sum m ary
When the year 1947 began, the tenor of most public statements
coming from the Soviet Zone was one of friendliness towards the other
zones of Germany. This feeling had changed considerably by the end
of the year. In early 1947, Wandel, for example, was still seeking an
all-German solution to educational problems. Such a Solution was
6 P pursued at an educational workshop held in Berlin in May, 1947.
Gathered here were some seventy prominent educators, including
representatives from West Germany. Wandel stated very emphati
cally that, at this time, the Soviet Zone was not insisting on empha
sizing socialist educational objectives or on establishing a socialist
society. This was the spirit of the First Pedagogical Conference, but
it was not that of the Second. While guests from West Germany were
still invited, they were barely mentioned in reports. Most discussion
centered around Soviet Zone problems.
The creation of the DWK, with its concentration of economic power in one branch of the Government, indicated that the Russians were planning a new approach to the German problem. They were putting more
authority in the hands of German officials, which suggested that a new
®2"Die P&dagogentagung in Berlin" /The Conference of Pedagogues in Berlin^ Neue Schule, II (issue 10, no date, 1947), 1. 82
German government, friendly to the USSR, was seriously being con sidered. During this year, education remained outside the control of the DWK and directly under the SMA, nevertheless, the economic plans of the DWK strongly influenced the entire educational system by calling for more emphasis on vocational education. At the same time, in anticipation of the new German state, teachers were encouraged to become better acquainted with Soviet pedagogy and culture.
The Second Pedagogical Conference was sponsored jointly by
Paul Wandel and the Teachers' Union. Wandel again assumed complete control of the Conference. The SED still remained in the background, because its influence was very limited.
Significance of the Year 1947
The trend toward a greater emphasis on vocational education at the expense of general education, which began in 1946, received a decided push forward as a result of the creation of the DWK. This trend implied a weakening not only of general education but also of the Oberschule, which prepared for the university. The Communists desired such a change. They wanted to remove the exclusiveness of the
Oberschule and make the university available to all, including graduates of vocational schools.
Along with the renewed interest in vocational education, there 83
was also a renewed effort to improve rural education, especially to
reduce the number of one-room schools. A substantial increase in the
number of consolidated schools in rural areas was closely related to
DWK planning.
This year demonstrated that Wandel was concentrating on
improving the technical and practical aspects of education; he showed little, if any, interest in the literary and cultural aspects of education.
This attitude was consistent with the overall purposes of Soviet Zone
education.
The Year of the Supreme Test 0.948)
In the history of post-war Germany, the year 1948 was a
decisive one, for it was during this period that Russia threw down the
gauntlet in her supreme effort to force the Western Powers, particularly
the United States, out of Berlin. General Lucius Clay recognized the
challenge and the U. S. Government replied with the Berlin Airlift. The political and military events of this year completely overshadowed the
developments in education. For this reason, more space will be devoted in this portion of the dissertation to background information. Without it,
the great changes which took place the followirig year could not be under
stood. 84
Events Leading up to the Berlin Blockade
After a series of unsuccessful Foreign M inisters’ Conferences,
Ernest Bevin announced on January 23, 1948, that England would, in future, work more closely with West European powers to prevent Russian
domination of that area. 00 In March, a conference was held in Brussels
during which it was agreed that, if either England, France, or the Benelux
countries were attacked by another power, all member nations would
assist the country under attack. The question was raised whether
Germany might be permitted to join the Pact. The dissent came from
Russia who quickly denounced the Pact as aggressive.
Likewise in March, the United States, Great Britain, and France met in London to seek agreement on the creation of an all-German federal
government. It was decided that the three western zones should be brought
together more closely and that they should receive help from the Marshall
Plan. The Russians also denounced this move as being against the Potsdam
A greem ent.
The last meeting of the Allied Control Council in Berlin took place on March 20. The Council had been ineffective since it started in
1946. The blockade of Berlin was foreshadowed by a SMA order, issued
^^Wilhelm Cornides, Die WeltmUchte und Deutschland, 1945- 1955, /The World Powers and Germany_/ (Tlibingen: Reiner Wunderlich Verlag, 1957), pp. 186-204. on March 31, that henceforth trains might not cross the Soviet Zone without Russian permission. On June 18, the three western zones carried out a currency reform. The SMA countered by ordering that the Ostmark /Eastern Mark/ would be the only legal tender in the
Soviet Zone and all sectors of Berlin. The Western Powers announced that the Deutsche Mark /German Mark/ would be legal tender in the three western sectors of Berlin. With the lines sharply drawn, the
SMA declared the complete blockade of Berlin on June 24, 1948. By
June 30, the airlift was in full operation.
According to Nettl, the Russians expected the blockade to last only a few weeks. f\A. After this lapse of time, the Russians expected the SED to assume the initiative and take over the rest of Berlin. This did not happen. They had miscalculated. The Russians then tried a new approach via a newly created National Democratic Party. They appealed to militant German nationalism. Soviet Zone frontiers were described as essential bulwarks to provide a safe area in which German unity could be nurtured. This approach likewise foundered, because conditions in West Germany had changed and the Marshall Plan generated hope.
In the meantime, efforts were being made both in West Germany and in East Germany to establish separate German governments. A
^Nettl, op, cit., pp. 108-203. 86
Parliamentary Council met for this purpose in West Germany on September
1. Likewise, the Volks rat or People's Council met in East Germany on
October 22 and declared itself the only legitimate German government.
The Mayor of Berlin had moved into the western sectors as early as
June 26; the SMA dismissed all German officials remaining in the East
Sector, unless they belonged to the SED.
The supreme test in Germany came in the year 1948. It proved that the United States, England, and France could not be forced out of
Germany and it showed that Russia could not penetrate West Germany. i It demonstrated, at the same time, that Russia was determined to re main in the Soviet Zone of Germany.
Steps Toward a New Educational System
While a struggle for Berlin was going on with no quick or easy solution in sight, the SMA and the SED must gradually have come to the conclusion that the final outcome of the contest would be a clear split between East and West Germany. This implied greater concentration on a school system which would serve the special needs of the Soviet
Zone and, eventually, a new German government.
6 5 Kopp, op. cit. , p. 89. 87
One indicator of the new trend was the Third Pedagogical
fifi Conference, held in Leipzig from July 5-8, 1948. Whereas the first conference made much of the presence of guests from West Germany, the second barely mentioned the guests, and the third conference ignored them completely. Wandel, Kreuziger, and Sachse spoke largely on the school reform and teacher training.
A second indicator was the attack launched by Hans Siebert 67 against ReformpMdagogen. Siebert, a pre-1933 German Communist, who had spent most of the Hitler Period in England, had just returned to Germany and had been put in charge of the School Division of the
German Administration for Education. The significance of his warning, made at a conference of educators called by the SED in Leipzig during
November, 1948, was that it called for an end to the era which began when, in 1945, Paul Wandel declared: Wir verlangen keinen politisch geformten Menschen. . . . The period of making concessions to reputable "progressive" teachers was coming to a close. Siebert pointed out the new requirement: study Soviet pedagogy.
6®"m. pUdagogischer Kongress in Leipzig" /The Third Peda gogical Conference in Leipzig/, Paedagogik, III (June, 1948), 43.
^Rudolf Pfautz, "Die fllhrende Rolle der SED bei der Verwirk- lichung der demokratischen Schulreform undjpei der sozialistischen Umgestaltung des Schulwesens in der DDR" /The Leading Role Played by the SED in Carrying out the Democratic School Reform and in Bringing about the Socialist Reorganization of the School System of the DDR/, Paedagogik, XVI (April, 1961), 310-29. 88
The study of Soviet pedagogy was greatly facilitated by the publication this year of the first translation of a Russian textbook on the subject of education, Jessipov and Goncharov's Paedagogik.6 8
This book quickly became the introductory text for most new teachers.
It was put on the required reading list for teachers who were preparing to take their first or second teacher examinations. Most teachers who had never heard of Soviet education before received their first im press ions from this book.
A final indication of a change in education this year was the new interest shown by the SED in this subject. Max Lange made the observa tion in his book, Totalit^re Erziehung, that Wandel and Ackerman were the top leaders in East Zone education during the years 1945-1948 but that, beginning in 1949, Walter Ulbricht entered the field and forced
Ackerman into the background. fi Q The new interest began on June 30,
1948, when the SED decided on a two-year plan. This economic plan was tied in with a cultural plan, which called for a considerable im provement of education. It was to be expected that the SED would expand its role as soon as it became clear that the Soviet Zone was getting ready to create its own government.
gg______MEin Lehrbuch der P&dagogik" /A Textbook on Pedagogy/, Neue Schule, IV (February, 1949), 101. fi Q Max Lange, op. c it., p. 294. 89
Sum m ary
During this year, the USSR played for high stakes in Germany.
The objective of the Berlin blockade was to force the Western Powers out of Berlin and thereby discredit them in the eyes of all Europeans.
If Russia had been successful, her chances for moving into West .
Germany were bright. The Western Powers, however, remained firm, broke the blockade with an airlift, and helped West Germany to its feet with the Marshall Plan. In the course of this year, plans for establish
ing separate governments in East Germany and West Germany were
com pleted.
All educational developments in the Soviet Zone reflected the new state of affairs. All suggestions of common goals between East and West Germany were dropped for the time being. Wandel's former
all-inclusive appeal to all teachers who were anti-fascist now contained some reservations. For example, ReformpMdagogen were told that
their beliefs delayed the progress of the democratic school reform.
The translation of a Russian textbook on pedagogy started a new trend in teacher preparation. Finally, Walter Ulbricht and the SED began
taking a direct hand in the development of the Soviet Zone school
sy stem . 90
Prelude to the Creation of the German Democratic Republic (1949)
During almost the first half of this year, the blockade of Berlin
was still in force and the Soviet Zone continued to be run by the SMA and
the DWK.
The DWK's main assignment was carrying out the first year of
the Two-Year Plan, which the SED had decided on in June, 1948. The
Plan was devised to put the Soviet Zone on its economic feet and do for
East Germany what the Marshall Plan was doing for West Germany. To
achieve this, the DWK was forced to seek the active cooperation of all
intellectuals, including the bourgeois; at the same time, with a long
term objective in mind, it proposed the creation of a new class of intel
lectuals chosen from the worker and peasant class. To reach both
goals, the DWK and Paul Wandel collaborated in drafting the law:
Ueber die Erhaltung und die Entwicklung der Deutschen Wissenschaft
und Kultur, die weitere Verbesserung der Lage der Intelligenz und die
Steigerung Ihrer Rolle in der Produktion und im Oeffentlichen Leben
/Concerning the Preservation and Development of German Science and
Culture, the Further Improvement of the Lot of the Intellectuals, and
Increasing Their Role in Production and in Public Life/. This law
70 _ _ "Deutscher Kulturplan" /German Cultural Plan/, insert in Neue Schule, IV (April, 1949), 1-4. — 91 stated that intellectuals were to be encouraged everywhere in a material way. Special premiums were to be offered to engineers, technicians, and masters. After April 1, 1949, all teachers and doctors were to receive rations equal to those of heavy workers. Ten million DM were to be set aside for building private homes for artists, writers, and dramatists. Building materials, coal, and rest centers were to be provided for intellectuals. Also, special income tax regulations were aimqd at benefitting intellectuals. Furthermore, scholarships were to be granted the children of intellectuals.
Changes in the SED
Just as the DWK's interest in education increased, largely as a result of the Two-Year Plan, so also the SED began to play a more direct role in education.
Significant changes were taking place within the SED Party structure. The First Party Conference was held on January 28, 1949.
At this meeting, it was decided to make the SED a fighting party, a party 71 devoted to Marxism and Leninism. A Iblitbliro was created to achieve the new objective. Otto Grotewohl, later Minister President of the DDR, admitted in the March issue of Einheit that the initial objective of finding
^Kopp, op. cit., p. 105. 92
a Gqrman path towards socialism had been unsuccessful, in fact, had produced anti-Soviet and nationalistic tendencies; the new direction would, however, require close cooperation with the USSR. This
carried forward the idea advanced by Siebert in Leipzig the year before when he recommended that teachers get acquainted with Soviet pedagogy.
This drawing closer together could also be seen in the change of names of the former Society for the Study of Soviet Culture to the Society for 73 German-Soviet Friendship.
Beginning with the year 1949, specifically with the establishment of the PolitbUro, it will be noted in all important educational developments that the Party will usually take the initiative and the Party will, in almost every instance, rely on the example of the USSR.
The Founding of Two New Governments
74 The blockade ended on May 12, 1949. On May 25, the West
Germans ratified the Constitution of the new Federal Republic of Germany.
On September 7, the Federal Republic came into existence at Bonn. ^ The
Provisional Government of the German Democratic Republic (DDR) was
7^Ibid. , pp. 106-7.
7^Ibid. , p. 114. 74 Cornides, op. cit., p. 197.
75Ibid., p. 199. 7 fi constituted on October 7, 1949. Nettl expressed the opinion that the creation of the DDR was tactically delayed to give the impression that this step was taken only as a reaction to the establishment of the Federal
Republic. 77 Actual elections of a new government were postponed until
October 15, 1950. On November 11, the SMA was changed to the Soviet
Control Commission (SKK).
Wandel1 s Activities in the German Administration for Education
The combination of fulfilling the requirements of the Two-Year
Plan and preparing the way for a new German government provided Wandel with an ideal setting for one of his most productive years in education. Of his many activities, those that follow deserve mention.
Paul Wandel served on a joint commission comprised of the DWK, the Administration of the Interior, and the Deutsche Verwaltung fllr Volks- bildung (DVfV) which had as its purpose the reorganization and improvement 7 8 technical schools. This commission had the authority to open and close
n q __ "Gesetz liber die Provisorische Regierung der DDR" _/Law Concerning the Provisional Government_of the DDR/, Gesetzblatt der DDR, Teil I /Legal Gazette of the DDR, Part I/, October 7, 1949, 2. 77 Nettl, op. cit., p. 111. 7 8 "Reorganisation und Verbesserung des Fachschulwesens in der Sowjetischen Zone]1 /Reorganization and Improvement of Technical Schools in the Soviet Zone/, Paedagogik, IV (March, 1949), 43-4. 94 or to reorganize technical schools in the Zone. The DWK assumed general responsibility for all technical schools and employed their teachers and directors; however, the DVfV provided training for the teachers.
It was noted earlier that the DVfV was not placed under the DWK when the latter was established. The requirements of the Two-Year Plan soon brought the DWK into the field of education. The Joint Commission was one way of bringing the DWK and the DVfV together. In a discussion of polytechnical education, which will follow shortly, further effects of the Two-Year Plan on general education will be observed.
Mention has already been made of Wandel's participation in writing the law: "Concerning the Preservation . . . of German Science and Culture. " This law, dated March 31, 1949, started many new developments in education. It was responsible for the creation of the
DPZI. Reference to this institution was made earlier in a discussion of the Pedagogical Cabinet, which was founded in Postdam in 1947. The
DPZI was to serve a similar purpose, i.e. , to improve the standards of teaching and instruction. 7 9 The DPZI was organized as a separate institute within the DVfV. The president of the DVfV had the authority
^"Das Deutsche P&dagogische Zentralinstitut" /The German Pedagogical Institute/Paedagogik, IV (June , 1949), 51-2. This might be an appropriate place to correct an impression left in Paul S. Bodenman's Education in the Soviet Zone of Germany (page 107) that the DPZI orig inated in 1954 and that Werner Dorst was its first director. 95 to employ or dismiss the director of the DPZI. Prof. Hans Siebert was named the first director. As will be seen later, the directorship of the DPZI became quite important; at times, it later served as a stepping stone to the position of Minister of Education.
Originally, the DPZI was organized into two major departments, one for teacher training, the other for theoretical-practical affairs. The former concentrated on teacher training problems; the latter had among its purposes the development of basic principles, the study of new forms of organization, the revision of study plans, the writing of new textbooks, and the development of new teaching aids.
The law which started the DPZI also created the German Academy of Arts. The DVfV was ordered to start this Academy. One of the first tasks assigned to the German Academy of Arts was the nomination of candidates for national prizes and medals for outstanding achievements.
These awards were to be made for the first time at the Fourth Pedagogical
Conference, to be held in August of 1949.
The DWK law of March 31, 1949, also originated a Scientific
Senate within the DVfV and made Paul Wandel its chairman. ^ The stated purposes of the Senate were to determine measures for democrat izing the universities, developing research, and publicizing progressive
_ 80iiDer Kulturplan der Ostzone" [The Cultural Plan of the East Zone/, Paedagogik, IV (April, 1949), 48. 96 scientific knowledge. Many prominent educators were appointed to the
Scientific Senate.
A final achievement of the DWK law, for which Wandel was generally given credit, was the conversion of the former pre-university O 1 schools to Worker and Peasant Faculties. These were three-year preparatory schools located at the universities to help the children of workers and peasants get into the university. These schools consti tuted one of the many devices used to bring about a change in the social composition of the student body at all universities.
One common denominator could be found in all that Wandel undertook this year, whether as member of the Joint Commission, as head of the Scientific Senate, or as the inspiration for the DPZI, the
Academy of Art, and the Worker and Peasant Faculties, this was the demand for an improvement of the quality of teachers and teaching. A resolution passed at the end of the Fourth Pedagogical Conference had OO a similar objective.
81"Deutscher Kulturplan, " op_. cit., p. 2.
82"Der IV._PHdagogische Kongress zur Entwicklung der Demo- kratischen Schule'* ^Viewpoint of the Fourth Pedagogical_Conference concerning the Growth of the German Democratic School/, Paedagogik, IV (October, 1949), 57-60. 97
The Fourth Pedagogical Conference
The Fourth Pedagogical Conference was unusual in many
respects. It was the last of such conferences organized by Wandel,
even though he soon became Minister of Education and remained in
office until 1952. Wandel set a record of four conferences in four years. S Seven years passed before another such conference was attempted. It
was also most unusual that a teachers' meeting should be sponsored not only by a teachers' organization, the Teachers' Union, but also by
a youth organization, the FDJ. The recognition accorded the FDJ on
this occasion demonstrated the importance attached to youth in building up the new school system. This subject will be pursued further below.
The conference would also be remembered because, in contrast to two
earlier meetings, when Western Germans were welcomed as guests,
this meeting issued a manifesto which described the West Germans as O Q warmongers.
Wandel's basic formula for pedagogical conferences was to
review the year's work, point out glaring weaknesses, call attention
to any progress which had been made, and make recommendations for
^"D ie -Deutsche Schule K&mpft fttr den Frieden und die Einheit Deutschlands" /_The German School Fights for Peace and the Unity of Germany/, insert in Paedagogik, IV (September, 1949), 1. improvement. This pattern was followed at the Fourth Pedagogical
Conference, with this variation. As the educational problems became more complicated and as teachers became more competent, the im portance and participation of the commissions which studied the problems grew. The Fourth Pedagogical Conference ended, not with a personal interpretation by Paul Wandel of the strengths and weaknesses of the educational system, but with a report adopted by the conference as a whole. Since this resolution was described as a critical review of the development of the German Democratic School and since it appeared in print during the very month that the DDR came into being, it is well suited as a basis for describing the school system as it was on the eve
8 4 of the new DDR Constitution.
Among the achievements noted for the school system, mention was made of an increased number of schools and teachers, a stronger vocational program, more vocational schools, and an improved ratio of the number of children from worker and peasant families in the higher schools. Figures were not given in this report, but they were in cluded in a special exhibit on display at the Conference. ^5 These statistics
^"Der IV. PUdagogische Kongress, " loc. cit.
^Paedagogijc, IV (October, 1949), 46-8. showed that, during a span of four years from 1945 to 1949, five hundred
and ninety-seven new Grundschulen, seventy-five Qberschulen, and two hundred and fifteen vocational schools had been added. These figures represented an increase of five per cent in the number of Grundschulen, twenty-two per cent in the Qberschulen, but thirty-one per cent in the vocational schools. Statistics on increases among the teachers help to correct the misleading impression just given that the Qberschulen were favored over the Grundschulen. During the four years under review, the number of teachers in the Grundschule was raised by twenty thousand and forty-four, in the Oberschule by only seven hundred and thirty-nine, but in the vocational schools by four thousand and ninety-three. Seen in percentages, these figures showed an increase of forty-nine per cent among the Grundschule teachers, only eighteen per cent in the Oberschule, but ninety-six per cent for vocational school teachers. Even more astounding were the student enrollment statistics.
In the Grundschule, the total enrollment rose by thirty-two thousand, seven hundred and twenty-one, representing a twenty-five per cent increase. The Oberschule, however, decreased its student population by one thousand, seven hundred and thirty, a loss of two per cent. On the other hand, the number of vocational students rose by three hundred and
sixteen thousand, eight hundred and thirty-two, which amounted to one hundred and eleven per cent. These figures left no doubt about the direction
in which Soviet Zone education had been moving for four years. 100
One of the twelve commissions preparing for the Conference, the one called the Commission on the Oberschule, added some details to the picture where the building capacity rose by twenty-two per cent, the number of teachers by only eighteen per cent, but where the student body declined by two per cent. This report stated that thirty per cent of the students attending the Oberschule were now workers' children.
It added, significantly, that a dose relation would have to be established
O f ? between the Oberschule and industry, as well as with the political parties.
A point not specifically mentioned in the resolution but other wise widely acclaimed as an achievement in education was the improve- ment of the situation in the rural schools. 87 Ellrich claimed that, in four years,the number of single-room school buildings had been reduced from four thousand, one hundred and fourteen to fourteen hundred and seven, a reduction of sixty-five per cent. At the same time, said Ellrich, the number of rural schools with eight full years had been increased from eleven hundred and sixty-seven to twenty-seven hundred and nine, an improvement of one hundred and thirty-two per cent.
_^'Zum IV. P&dagogischen Kongress" /The Fourth Pedagogical Conference/, Paedagogik, IV (June, 1949), 50.
^K arl Ellrich, nDie Entwicklung des Grundschulwesens in der Sowjetischen Besatzungszone seit 19_45" /Development of the Common School in the Soviet Zone since 1945/, Paedagogik, IV (June, 1949), 24-31. 101
Critical comments were directed against instruction and the reactionary thinking of some teachers. Again, details were not given in the resolution, but these were discussed elsewhere as, for example, in a critique on the results of the final eighth grade examinations, which were given for the first time this year. **8 Here the observation was made that students were not sure of themselves, that they could not think on their feet, and that they had difficulty reaching their own con clusions. The blame for this lack of confidence on the part of the students was put on the teachers, because they did not know about the simplest ways of helping students to remember and because they were not system atic in their review of subject matter. Teachers were told that their students would fare better on examinations, if the curriculum established by the State were followed.
The two-pronged attack against teachers, which was begun by
Hans Siebert in Leipzig in November, 1948, was continued at this
Conference. The Commission on Pedagogical Faculties concluded that, at the university training centers for teachers, there was a lack of opposition to bourgeois ideas on educational reform and that teachers
88"Gesichtspunkte flir die Erziehungs-und Unterrichtsarbeit im Neuen Schuljahr" /Viewpoints concerning Education in the New School Year/, Paedagogik, XV (August, 1949), 45-48. 102 were not cultivating Soviet pedagogy sufficiently.
The final resolution passed by the Fourth Pedagogical Con ference included these recommendations for improving the educational situation existing in the Soviet Zone: the DPZI should work out detailed lesson plans for teachers to follow and make practical suggestions for improving the level of instruction, the Pedagogical Faculties should concentrate on helping teachers study the science of education in the light of new social requirements, and the FDJ should assist the teachers in enforcing strict discipline in the classroom and in arousing in students an eagerness to learn by organizing "interest groups" after school. ^0
Polytechnical Education
The subject of polytechnical education was completely omitted from the final resolution just discussed. This fact should be mentioned,
®®Der IV. pUdagogische Kongress liber die PEdagogischen FakultHten" /Comments of the Fourth Pedagogical Conference concern ing the Pedagogical Faculties/, Paedagogik, IV (September, 1949, 56-7, Attention is called to Paul S. Bodenman, op. cit., p. 98, where the Fourth Pedagogic Conference is discussed. Bodenman describes the Conference as a "turning-point in the training program for teachers" and then tells about Siebert's denunciation of Kerschensteiner, Gaudig, and others in his keynote speech. As shown above, the turning point can better be fixed at November, 1948. Bodenman also says that the Conference "marks the beginning of the systematic sovietization of teacher education. For some time there remained almost a vacuum. . . . Soon, however, German trans lations of Soviet works began to appear. " He then mentions "Pedagogy by Esipov and Goncharov. " As stated earlier in this dissertation, the text just mentioned appeared in 1948.
^Compare also Ibid. 103
because an article on this topic appeared in the January, 1949, issue of
Paedagogik and stated that a direct relation existed between polytechnical
education and the Two-Year Plan, which was just getting underway. ^
There is no evidence that anything was accomplished in the way of introducing polytechnical education during this year and this may be the reason that the subject was not included in the final resolution of the
Fourth Pedagogical Conference, however, since polytechnical education later dominated the Soviet Zone's educational system, it is historically important to know what Wolf had to say at this early date.
Wolf stated in his article that polytechnical education should begin in the Grundschule where children were to come into direct contact with the Two-Year Plan. Activists who had distinguished themselves in local industries were to be brought into the schools as lecturers.
Children were to learn at first hand what the industries near them were contributing toward the Two-Year Plan. If at all possible, an individual school was to establish contact with a specific industry.
Pupils were to be encouraged to inquire about the success of the industry in meeting its production quota. Students were to be made to realize
^^Walter Wolf, "Polytechnische Erziehung in der Grundschule und Zweijahrplan" /Polytechnical Training in the Common School and the Two-Year Plan/, Paedagogik, IV (January, 1949), 9-17. 104 that industry was based on the steam engine, the electric motor, and the gas engine, but they were also to be reminded that machines were unreliable without competent technicians to service them.
Wolf explained the purpose of polytechnical education. It was to create an awareness of the production processes. The production systems of capitalist countries, as well as the various economic plans of socialist countries, including the USSR, had to be understood.
Every subject taught in school was to be drawn into the poly technical teaching system. The natural sciences were best suited: physics, chemistry, and biology. Mathematics was to be taught with practical, current applications in mind. In all subjects, the combination of theory and practice was to be cultivated.
The Wolf article was replete with frank references to the achievements of the USSR. Specific mention was made of Russian experiences with polytechnical education in 1931. The importance of polytechnical education in the Russian war effort was emphasized. There was no longer any hesitancy to say that polytechnical education was one of the chief requirements of Communist education. The propaganda element was not forgotten. It was explained that the Russian Five-Year
Plan helped toward peace, while the Marshall Plan's political purpose was to dominate certain countries and to prepare them for war.
As inexplicably as the subject of polytechnical education appeared 105 at the beginning of this year in connection with the Two-Year Plan, just so mysteriously it disappeared until Oskar Mader revived it in February,
1953. The topic will be discussed further under that date.
The Constitution of the DDR
All that has been said about education up to this point during this year took place before the Soviet Zone achieved its own German government. On October 7, 1949, the new Constitution of the Deutsche
Demokratische Republik became law. Since this was a basic document, some of the more important principles will be stated briefly, followed no by a short review of some of the provisions regarding education.
The Constitution described Germany as an indivisible democratic republic, ba^ed on the Laender. The Republic was re sponsible for matters which pertained to the whole country; all other problems were to be settled by the individual Land. The Laender carried out decisions of the Republic.
The power of the state eminated from the people. Government officials worked for the nation, not for a single Party. Personal freedom, t including that of movement, was assured. The unions had the right to strike. The state assured everyone a job. Women were accorded
^"Die Verfassung der DDR11 ^Constitution of the DDR/. Gesetzblatt der DDR, Teil I, October 8, 1949, 5-16. 106
special protection. Private property was guaranteed, but industries
which belonged to war criminals and active Nazis were to be national
ized .
Article IV, which applied specifically to education, assured
every citizen an education and free selection of employment. ^
Generally, the schools were to be run by the Laender, but basic principles were to be determined by the Republic. Teachers were to
trained at the universities.
Compulsory education extended to the eighteenth year. The
Grundschule had to be attended by all children. This basic training was to be followed by vocational, technical, or Qberschulen. There were to be many avenues leading to the university; this was not an exclusive right of the Oberschule. Education, including textbooks, was to be free. Financial aid was to be given needy students who wanted to continue their studies. Religious instruction was protected. So much for the section on education.
Section IV introduced no radical changes as compared with the Law for Democratizing the German School. Some difference existed in the fact that the Law for Democratizing spelled out an eight year
^Soviet Zone Constitution and Electoral Law (Office of the U.S. High Commissioner for Germany. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1951), pp. 16-18. 107
Grundschule, followed by three years of vocational school or four years of the Oberschule, whereas the Constitution spoke of eighteen years of compulsory education with all children being required to
attend the Grundschule.
Generally, it should be noted in this Constitution that no mention was made of the SED. Nothing was said about Communism.
Socialism was touched on indirectly only in connection with nationalized property. The impression was given that the individual citizen enjoyed many rights. Finally, every effort was made to counteract the idea that there was a strong central government.
Treatment of Former National Socialists
In view of the high percentage of teachers who had become \ National Socialists during the Hitler era, attention must be called to two laws which were promulgated shortly after the creation of the DDR.
One law offered civil rights to Nazis who had lost their civil rights as a result of court decisions or de-Nazification committees; this law in- eluded both Party members and officers of the Wehrmacht. 94 A later
^"Gesetz liber den Erlass von SUhnemassnahmen und die GewUhrung Staatsbllrgerlicher Rechte flir Ehemalige Mitglieder und Anhclnger der Nazipartei und Offiziere der Faschistischen Wehrmacht’1 /Law concerning Penalization and the Granting of Civil Rights to former Members and Fellow Travelers of the National Socialist Party and Officers of the Fascist Army/, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 7 (November 18, 1949), 59-60. 108 law set up certain restrictions concerning former Nazis. This law stated that civil rights would be denied to those who: (1) had specifically been denied the right, (2) had fled, (3) were born before May 8, 1927, and had been sentenced to more than one year, and (4) had committed misdeeds after May 8, 1945. Other former Party members were per mitted to hold public office and to seek employment, however, they were not permitted to hold office in the inner administration.
These laws which pardoned former Nazi Party members and officers in the Wehrmacht were but a continuation of the search for talent as exemplified in Wandel's early appeal to any teachers who were willing to "change" and in the law: "Concerning the Preservation . . . of
German Science and Culture, " which was enacted in March of this year.
When the need for trained personnel became even greater, the DDR showed no hesitancy in removing even those restrictions just mentioned.
R eview
With the Western Allies, particularly the United States, winning in West Germany as a result of following two enlightened policies,- the
^"Ausftihrungsbestimmungen zum Gesetz liber den Erlass von Siihnemasshahmen und die ..." /Implementation to the Law concerning Penalization . . . I, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 14 (December 12, 1949) 91-2. 109
Marshall Plan and the Berlin Airlift, East Germany was hard put to show some results. The DWK was created both as an agency to direct the Two-
Year Plan and to prepare the way for a new German government. In all these efforts, the SED assumed a leading role.
The requirements of the Two-Year Plan brought on a proposal for introducing polytechnical education, but nothing came of it at this time; however, educational statistics revealed at the Fourth Pedagogical
Conference showed a tremendous increase in vocational education but a reduction in the number of students attending the Oberschule. There was also a considerable improvement in rural education, where the number of centralized schools was greatly increased and the number of one-room schools sharply reduced. At the same time, an effort was made to improve the quality of instruction in the Grundschule, where comprehensive final examinations were given to all eighth year students for the first time. The DVfV was not pleased with the results of the examinations and hence recommended some sweeping changes.
This was a very active year for Paul Wandel. He participated in preparing the important law: "Concerning the Preservation . . . of
German Science and Culture" which started the DPZI, the German
Academy of Arts, the Scientific Senate, and the Worker and Peasant
Faculties. He also organized the Fourth Pedagogical Conference.
Finally, with the establishment of the DDR and with it a Ministry of 110
Education, Wandel was appointed as the first Minister of Education.
As of October 7, 1949, the DDR had its own Constitution.
Section IV, which has already been discussed, contained the basic principles concerning education in the new state.
The Importance of 1949
During 1949, a shift in educational leadership took place.
Walter Ulbricht began to assert himself as Anton Ackermann retired into the background. Wandel, however, continued to play an influential role in education: he helped found the Worker and Peasant Faculties which assured an entree of this social group into the universities, he established a new institute for pedagogy within the Ministry (the DPZI), he created a research organization (the Scientific Senate), he founded an institution for honoring the best teachers (the Academy of Arts), and he placed more confidence than ever before in a series of teacher commissions which were asked to study the most urgent educational p rob lem s.
On the occasion of the constitution of the DDR, statistics provided by the Ministry of Education showed substantial growth in the school system during a four year period. The greatest gains were to be found in the areas of vocational and rural education. General education and the Oberschule declined in importance. Educational Ill standards were generally admitted to be low and unsatisfactory. Blame was placed chiefly on the teachers, yet no more could reasonably be expected of them with such inadequate preparation. A solution for the future was sought in extending the training period of teachers and re quiring them to pass two examinations.
As the DDR became a separate part of Germany, the influence of the USSR mounted rapidly. The pro-Russian trend in education began in 1948 with the publication of a translation of a Russian textbook on pedagogy. The Russian version of polytechnical education was discussed in connection with the Two-Year Plan, but the DDR was not yet ready for this form of education.
As the SMA prepared to discontinue its activities in education, it was in a position to turn over full responsibilities to the German
Ministry of Education. The man who had worked for the SMA as director of the DVfV was ready to continue in his same capacity as
Minister of Education. An uninterrupted transition from Russian to
German control was assured. Russian influence even increased under
German supervision. The more isolated the DDR became from the rest of Germany, the more dependent she became on Russian assistance. 112
The Ascendancy of Youth and Preparation for the Five-Year Plan (1950)
When the year began, the DDR, on a provisional basis, had been in existence only three months. Elections had been postponed to give the National Front time to get organized. This was a clear admission that the SED could not handle the situation alone. The National Front was not limited to political parties but included the mass organizations.
Although the National Front was preparing for a separate German govern ment in East Germany, the fiction was maintained that it stood for a united Germany, a German peace treaty, and the withdrawal of all occupation troops. Within the territory of the DDR, the National Front proposed a single ticket, with voters given a choice of approval or dis approval.
Economically, this year marked the end of the Two-Year Plan.
During this year alone, the productivity of industry and agriculture was supposed to be raised by twenty-one per cent. Before the year ended, a new Five-Year Plan was announced.
Even though the SED was not strong enough to risk an election in 1949 or early 1950, its influence was growing. The power center was the Politbllro and Central Committee of fifty-one members. Walter
Ulbricht was elected General Secretary of the Central Committee. Yet another concentration of power developed in the new Ministry of State 113
Security. This was formerly a department within the Ministry of the
Interior and was called the Department for Security of the People's
Economy. Wilhelm Zaisser, a bitter rival of Walter Ulbricht, was named Minister. His name is mentioned because he was the husband of
Else Zaisser, who later became successor of Paul Wandel as the second
Minister of Education. Her rapid rise to fame, followed by her sudden dismissal in 1953, closely parallels her husband's career.
This was also the year during which the DDR entered the field of foreign affairs. Peace pacts were signed with her neighbors to the
East, Poland and Hungary. As far as the DDR was concerned, German territory East of the Oder-Neisse Rivers had become Polish.
The Youth Law
While the population was being readied for the October elections, while the economy of the new country was being strengthened by the com pletion of its first economic plan, and while the Provisional Government
QfiWilhelm Zaisser, a former teacher and reserve officer, began his Communist career in 1920 as leader of the Red Army of the Ruhr. He later served as an intelligence agent in China. He was chief-of-staff of the International Brigades which fought in the Civil War in Spain. During World War H, he was head of an Antifa school in Krasnogorsk. He re mained in office as Minister of State Security until July, 1953, when he was summarily dismissed as a "defeatist" and head of a faction which opposed Walter Ulbricht in the SED. For further information see SBZ-Biographie, pp. 394 and 406. 114 was trying to get some degree of international recognition, the DDR was also busily at work on a law which was expected to provide leadership for the future.
Two rising forces combined to produce the Youth Law: one was fete SED, which had become increasingly aggressive since the First Party
Conference was held in January, 1949; the other was the FDJ, which only recently helped sponsor the Fourth Pedagogical Conference.
The purpose of the new Youth Law was outlined in a statement issued by the PolitbUro of the SED on January 17, 1950:
Die besten Vertreter der Jugend sind mehr als bisher zu alien staatlichen, wirtschaftlichen und kulturellen Aufgaben heranzuziehen und zu diesem Zwecke in den entsprechenden Institutionen mit verant- wortlichen Arbeiten zu betrauen.
/The best representatives of youth are to be called on more than ever before for assignment to tasks in all state, economic, and cultural affairs. For this purpose, they are to be entrusted with responsible jobs in these areas at various institutions^/®^
On February 8, a Youth Law was promulgated which carried out the PolitbUro's decision. The exact title of the law was: Gesetz Uber die Teilnahme der Jugend am Aufbau der Deutschen Demokratischen
Republik und die FUrderung der Jugend in Schule und Beruf, bei Sport und Erholung [T h e Participation of Youth in Building the DDR and the
97Kopp, op. c it., p. 125. 115
go Promotion of Youth in School and Occupation, in Sports and Recreation/.
This law stated that young people were to be given an increasing number of responsible positions, that youth must take an active part in building up the economy of the country, and that youth organizations had the right to speak up on any issues related to youth.
No time was lost in implementing the law. In February, two young men were made Ministers of Education on the Land level. Horst
Brasch, former Secretary of the Central Council of the FDJ, was named
Minister of Education for Land Brandenburg at the age of twenty-eight.
At the same time, Hans-Joachim Laabs, who had been a POW and started teaching in 1946, was appointed Minister of Education for Mecklenburg at the age of twenty-nine. 99 Margot Feist, who later married Erich
Honecker, became a candidate for the Central Committee of the SED at twenty-three. She later rose to the position of Minister of Education of the DDR. The SED was very youth conscious, as could be seen from the provisions of the Election Law for October 15, 1950, which permitted youths of eighteen to vote and allowed those who had reached twenty-one to hold office.
qo Gesetzblatt, Nr. 15 (February 21, 1950), 95-99.
99'»Die jUngsten Minister der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik" /The Youngest Ministers of the DDR/, Neue Schule, V, Nr. 42 (December 7, 1950), 1053.
*®®Kopp, op. cit., p. 138. 116
Wandel's First Year as Minister of Education
Wandel's first year as Minister of Education was not essentially different from his years as director of the DVfV, except that no pedagog ical conference was held this year. Wandel partially made up for the latter by issuing many administrative orders and by writing articles for educational journals. He was quick to favor the Youth Law and observed that youth caught on to socialization faster than most teachers, hence teachers should learn from their pupils. 101 jje continued in his role as political propagandist by repeating the old canard about the West pre paring its children for war while the DDR taught them to work and learn for peace. He added a new note of national consciousness by asking all students to love the DDR and its President Pieck. He continued to criticize the educational system and to make recommendations for its improvement.
Wandel was not satisfied with the teaching of German. He had mentioned in 1945 that, under the Nazis, education had so deteriorated that there were youths of sixteen and seventeen whose German could not be understood. Wandel wanted to see German taught by qualified teachers.
_ lOlpaul Wandel, "Richtlinien fUr die Arbeit im Schuljahr 1950-51" /Guide for the School Year 1950-51/, Paedagogik, V (June, 1950), 22-32. 117
He also wanted more emphasis placed on modern progressive authors.
Wandel was equally dissatisfied with the teaching of modern history, especially current events. He, therefore, issued an administrative order making the discussion of current events obligatory in the Grund- 102 schule years five to eight, beginning with the school year, 1950-51.
Discussions of current topics were to be based on specific subjects included in a list issued by the Ministry of Education three times a year.
Two hours a week were to be devoted to such discussions. Wandel was also displeased with instruction in Russian. He said there was a need for better teachers of the language, better teaching methods, more reading of Russian newspapers, and a letter exchange with Russian school children.i Wandel spent a very considerable amount of effort this year on trying to systematize and improve the quality of instruction. In July, for example, he came out with this order: Verordnung liber die Unter- richtsstunde als Grundform der Schularbeit, die Vorbereitung, Organi sation und Durchflihrung der Unterrichtsstunde und die Kontrolle und
Beurteilung der Kenntnisse der Schiller /Order concerning the Class
102»'ueber EinfUhrung eines obligatorischen Gegenwartskunde- unterrichts in den Klassen 5-8 der Grundschule" /Concerning the Intro duction of Obligatory Instruction in Current_Events in Classes 5-8 of_the Grundschule/, Karteibuch des Schulrechts /Collection of School Laws/ (Weimar: Volk und Wissen, 1951-1956), B, Section 2, Subdivision 3, Sheet 1. The date of this order was August 15, 1950. Period as the Basic Unit of School Work; the Preparation, Organization,
and Implementation of the Class Period; Supervision over and Evaluation
• - / 103 of Learning/. In this order,, Wandel established the forty-five minute
class period as the basis for planning the schedule of the entire school
year. This unit was to be used in planning a student's daily, weekly,
and yearly schedule. All records were to be kept on the basis of this i unit. One type of record which Wandel ordered to be kept was the
Klassenbuch /class book/. This record book was to contain all essential
information related to instruction of the class. Wandel specified that
homework assignments were to be entered in the Klassenbuch. The V teacher's grades were to be recorded in the Klassenbuch. Wandel's
entire scheme could be summarized under the one German word:
Kontrolle. This implied a system of constant regulation of the smallest
details. Wandel's plan for raising the quality of student performance
was by the Kontrolle of the class collective, of examinations, of written
homework, and of comprehensive examinations at the end of the eighth
and twelfth years.
As the end of the year approached and details of the Five-Year
Plan were being perfected, Wandel again -- as in the case of the Two-Year
Plan -- began to equate the success of the new Plan with a higher level of
1 OS Neue Schule, V, Insert in Nr. 21 (July, 1950), no page numbers. performance in the school system. Wandel became concerned over the number of pupils who did not complete the eighth year of the Grundschule.
This did not fit into the pattern. He wanted all students to finish the eighth grade. He thought of the obvious ways of improving instruction: teachers should teach for retention, there should be much repetition and drill, homework should be corrected before it was returned, and parents should be contacted when a student's work was not satisfactory. Beyond this, Wandel proposed two new solutions: the Klassenleiter /class leader/ system and a compulsory school law.
No exact definition of a Klassenleiter has been found, but he seemed to be an adult with training comparable to that of a teacher whose major interest was to see to it that each student in a class worked up to capacity. Wandel expected each Klassenleiter to inform the Schulleiter
/principal/ at the beginning of the year about all students who might have academic difficulties. With the school year divided into three parts, the
Klassenleiter was to inform the Schulleiter at the end of the first trinary period about all students who were behind in their work, together with an analysis of the reasons. At the end of the second trinary period, a
:1-0^"Aus dem Ministerium ftlr Volksbildung der DDR. Richtlinien Uber die FBrderung zurUckgebliebener Kinder" /From the Ministry of Education of the DDR. Regulations concerning Students Who Have Not Passed/, Paedagogik, V (October, 1950), 53-8. 120 similar report was to be given and a teacher conference called. During the middle of the year, each Schulleiter was to report to the Kreisschulrat
/county superintendent/ the number of students who were in danger of failing in each class. The Kreisschulrat was then expected to visit the schools in question and make recommendations.
The Compulsory School Law was a second way of assuring more eighth year graduates. It was enacted on December 15, 1950, and im- 105 plemented on December 29, 1950. This law applied to children who had reached the age of six and continued to control them until they had passed their eighth year examination. This law merely spelled out what was already included in the Constitution. The law did not state that every child had to pass the eighth year examination, but it did say that those who passed it had met the requirements.
While Wandel felt that his major contribution to the Five-Year
Plan was a substantial raising of teacher and pupil performance in the entire school system, Hans Siebert, a Division Chief under Wandel, introduced yet another compulsory requirement into the Grundschule, 1 OR that of vocational counseling. According to Siebert’s order, issued
■^^"DurchfUhrungsbestimmungen zum Gesetz ilber die Schul- pflicht in der DDR" /Implementation for the Law concerning Compulsory Education in the DDR/, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 1 (January 9, 1951), 6-8.
^®"FUr die Verbesserung der DurchfUhrung Eferufskundlicher Unterweisungen in den Grundschulen" /For the Improvement of Vocational Counseling in the Grundschulen/, Karteibuch, op. cit., B, Section 2, Subdivision 2, sheet 1-2. The date of this order was June 21, 1950. 121 in the name of the Minister of Education, vocational counseling was to take place on all levels of the Grundschule up to the seventh year wher ever the subject matter lent itself to such counseling. During the eighth year, a full hour each week was to be devoted to the subject. Counselors were required to be thoroughly familiar with the needs of the Five-Year
Plan so as to be in a position to provide the best vocational advice to the graduating class. The law became effective on September 1, 1950.
The Ten-Year School
While the evidence just presented showed that Paul Wandel was very active during his first year as Minister of Education, it was also a fact that he no longer had the field entirely to himself. As was mentioned earlier, Walter Ulbricht was beginning to take an active interest in education. At the Third SED Party Congress, which was held in July, 1950, Ulbricht declared that, in view of the economic changes brought about by the Two-Year Plan and because of the re quirements of the Five-Year Plan, the school system produced by the Law for the Democratization of the German School was no longer adequate.
He, therefore, proposed a new type of school, the Ten-Year School.
Shortly after Walter Ulbricht ordered that the new school system be started in September, 1951, Wolfgang Groth explained some 122 of the reasons for the innovation. 1 07
The primary reason, according to Groth, was that the Five-Year
Plan required a more highly trained labor force. More students were needed who had had ten years of general education. Another reason was the fact that too many students quit the Oberschule after having completed the tenth year; they entered the labor market before completing their training. A third reason was that very many students matriculated in the Oberschule without ever intending to finish the four years. This resulted in small classes during the eleventh and twelfth years. Finally, as the title of Groth's article indicated, this was to be a school specifically planned for workers' and peasants' children. ) These were the main reasons for starting a new type of school.
The subject will be discussed in greater detail later in the dissertation.
The Ten-Year School was mentioned at this time as an illustration of the initiative being taken in education by the SED.
Institutes for Teachers
Wandel's criticism of existing schools and his recommendations for correcting the conditions mentioned have just been discussed. In an
107Wolfgang Groth, "Zehnklassenschulen fttr unsere Arbeiter und Bauernkinder" /Ten-Year Schools for our Workers' and Peasants' Children/, Neue Schule, V, Nr. 33 (October 5, 1950), 844-6. 123 article on "The New Order of the Democratic School, " he stated that the most important task of all was to improve the qualifications of the teachers?-08
Therewith he announced the end of all one-year teacher training courses for students who had merely finished the eight year school. In future, all teachers would receive a minimum of three years of training.
Wandel estimated that twenty-five thousand new teachers for the Grundschule and Ten-Year Schools would have to be trained during the span of the Five-Year Plan. Since this far exceeded the capacity of the Pedagogical Faculties, Wandel announced the establishment of
Institutes of Teachers, which would begin instruction on January 1, 1951.
The Institutes for Teachers would offer a three-year curriculum, two years of which would be devoted to theoretical studies and one year to practice teaching. The teachers trained at the Institutes would later be placed in the Grundschulen.
Werner Dorst added some information concerning the curriculum 109 at the Institutes for Teachers. After completing the first five-month semester of training, each teacher candidate was expected to select a combination of two subjects for intensive study. This was called his
_ 10®Paul Wandel, "Die Neuordnung der Efemokratisehen Schule" /The New Order of the Democratic School/, Paedagogik, V (July, 1950), 1-5.
* ^W erner Dorst, "Struktur und Inhalt der Ausbildung an den Instituten fUr Lehrerbildung" /Structure and Content of the Training at the Institutes for Teachers/, Paedagogik, V (August, 1950), 19-21. 124
Fachstudium /his field/. Combinations included: German and mathe matics; German and biology; German and history; or history and geography. Those who wanted to teach Russian were required to take only that one subject. In addition to the Fachstudium, all students took political courses in Marxism and Leninism, and professional courses in the history of pedagogy, psychology, didactics, school law and administration, and school hygiene. The DPZI was made responsible for working out details of the curriculum.
It was expected that most of the teacher candidates who would attend the Institutes would be recruited from among activists in the FDJ.
Two observations must be made at this point. While speaking out in favor of higher standards among teachers, Wandel allowed for a difference in training standards between teachers of the Grundschule and the higher grades. Paragraph 36 of the Constitution, however, stated that teacher training "shall take place in the university or institutions of equal status." By implication, the standards of the
Institutes for Teachers were not equal to those of the Pedagogical
Faculties. Also, the recruitment of Grundschule teache rs from among activists of the FDJ showed how far Wandel had moved away from his
1945 offer not to ask questions about political affiliations. 125
Attacks Against Reactionary Teachers
While a strong campaign was getting under way to find and train
more teachers and while efforts were being made to relieve teachers
from many onerous tasks which interfered with their real work, more
and more criticism was heaped on the reactionary elements among the
older teachers. Walter Ulbricht, while addressing a rally of some
eight thousand FDJ functionaries in Berlin on November 26, 1950,
asked FDJ students to expose teachers with reactionary tendencies, but, in an unguarded moment either of respect or concern, he asked
students not to be crude with professors who had agreed to stay on at
the universities.
Wolfgang Groth expressed the hope that the last had been heard from reactionary teachers at the Fourth Pedagogical Conference. For
some unexplained reason, he felt that reactionaries were a thing of the
past and that, from this time on, the new school would completely
identify itself with the economic system.
^ ^W alter Ulbricht, "Entfaltet den Feldzug zur Aneignung von Wissenschaft und Kultur" /Develop the Campaign for Acquiring Science and Culture/, Paedagogik, V (November-December, 1950), 1-10.
111 Wolfgang Groth, ^Die schulpolitischen Richtlinien des 4. PEdagogischen Kongresses" /The Basic Political Program of the Fourth Pedagogical Conference/, Neue Schule, V,,Nr. 36 (October 26, 1950), 429 -3 1. 126
Ulbricht, Groth, Wandel, and others found occasion to complain about reactionary teachers for many years to come. The breed would simply not die out.
The Status of Soviet Pedagogy in the DDR
This year marked a considerable change in the status of Soviet pedagogy. Coincidental with such change was the departure of Prof.
Mitropolski, on July 31, 1950, and his return to the USSR. Prof.
Mitropolski had been in the Soviet Zone from the time the Russian armies seized Berlin until the East Germans held their first election. Among the Russian pedagogues in East Germany, Prof. Mitropolski's name was mentioned most frequently. Very little was said about what he accomplished while in Germany. The story repeated most frequently was the one about his personal intervention in 1945 in seeing that certain textbooks were flown from the printing press in Leipzig to the schools in Berlin. He was frequently invited as guest and representative of the
SMA at educational conferences. On a number of occasions, he ex pressed the opinion that he did not wish to see the Soviet school system forced upon the Germans. No reason for his return to the USSR at
112f|p rof> Mitropolski, Botschafter der Sowjetp&dagogik, in die Sowjetunion zurtlckgekehrt" /Prof. Mitropolski, Ambassador of Soviet Pedagogy, Returns to the Soviet Union/ Neue Schule, V (August 24, 1950), 714-5. 127 this time was given. A very likely possibility was that he felt that his usefulness was now at an end, since the Germans themselves were promoting the acceptance of Soviet pedagogy.
A concerted effort to popularize Soviet education got under way.
According to Lange, it began when Hans Siebert returned to the Soviet
1 I Q Zone from England. x-LO He identified Siebert and others, such as
Werner Dorst, Herbert Becker, Wolfgang Groth, and Sigrid Schwarz as Stalinists. Lange said that the eye of the movement developed this year around Else Zaisser and the DPZI. Some time before November,
1950, Zaisser had been named director of the DPZI. Lange made this statement about the DPZI and its work on behalf of Soviet pedagogy:
Die Machtstellung des Instituts war so gross, dass es die Rezeption der Sowjetp&dagogik und ihre Verbindlichkeit fttr Lehre und Forschung im Laufe des Jahres 1950-51 zur unantasbaren und institutionell untermauerten Norm machen konnte.
/The influence of the Institute had expanded to such a point that, in the period 1950-51, it had been able to assure the acceptance of Soviet pedagogy and cause it to become the unquestioned and insti tutionally supported norm for all teaching and research/. 4
On January 1, 1950, the editorial staff of the journal, Paedagogik,
■'••^Lange, op. cit. , pp. 284 ff.
114Ib id ., p. 285. suddenly described the periodical as the official organ of the DPZI.
Lange sensed a change in this publication and said:
In der Zeitschrift Paedagogik kommt der stalinistische Jargon vor 1950 nur ganz vereinzelt zum Vorschein. Auch der Sowjetmythos wirkt sich noch nicht bei der Interpretation der Erziehungswirk- lichkeit aus.
/The Stalin jargon occurred in the periodical, Paedagogik, only in isolated instances before 1950. Likewise, the Soviet myths did not yet play an important role in the interpretation of education/. H®
The swing toward Soviet pedagogy was now well under way. On
November 16, 1950, Else Zaisser contributed an article to the Neue
Schule with the title: "Wir lernen von de^r SowjetpMdagogik" /We L^arn — 117 from Soviet Pedagogy/. The article was studded with quotations from
Stalin concerning education and the October Revolution. This marked the beginning of Else Zaisser's bid for power.
Just a month before, Karl Semberg contributed an article to I Paedagogik on "Die Bedeutung der Sowjetp&dagogik fiir die Demokrat- isierung der deutschen Schule" /The Importance of Soviet Pedagogy for
115Ibid., XLVII.
116Ibid., p. 275.
117Else Zaisser, "Wir lernen von der SowjetpSdagogik, " Neue Schule, V (November 16, 1950), 988-9. 129
lift for the Democratization of the German School/. The article resounded with praise for Stalin and the USSR. It mentioned that Soviet pedagogy had entered Germany with the liberating Russian armies, a remark that Paul
Wandel would not have made in the early years of the occupation. Semberg assumed the role of a prophet for the DDR when he referred to the leader- \ ship of the Party in education in the USSR and commented that the function of education in the Soviet Republic was to bring about a transition to communism. He ended on the note that Soviet pedagogy alone could help
German education solve the problems raised by the Five-Year Plan.
It is hard to escape the conclusion that a few convinced German
Communists (Stalinists), given the right setting, were much more effective in imposing Soviet pedagogy on the DDR than the Soviet educators them selves. This may well have been the reason for Prof. Mitropolski1 s return to his homeland this year.
H^Karl Semberg, "Die Bedeutung der Sowjetp&dagogik fttr Demokratisierung der deutschen Schule,11 Paedagogik, V (October, 1950), 1- 11.
As an interesting incidental note, the masthead of the Paedagogik was printed directly above the title of this article followed by thejwords "Herausgegeben vom Deutschen PUdagogischen Zentralinstitut" /Produced by the DPZI/. In listing the editorial staff, the first name which appeared was that of Max Gustav Lange, whose name has been quoted frequently in this section of the dissertation. 130
Significance of the Year's Educational Developments
In analysing the year's educational developments, certain shifts in the forces which controlled education were recognizable. Walter
Ulbricht and the SED were more directly involved in educational affairs than heretofore. Ulbricht's appeal to FDJ youths to expose their re actionary teachers was an illustration of direct interference. Passage of the Youth Law, which resulted in leaders of the FDJ suddenly being appointed to such responsible positions as Ministers of Education in the
Laender, likewise showed the Party's immediate involvement in educa tional administration. It was also demonstrated by the actual initiation of a new type of school -- the Ten-Year School -- and the announcement of its opening date. This new school was proposed by the Chairman of the SED and not by the Minister of Education.
A power shift also took place in the standing of the FDJ in relation to education. The FDJ not only provided future Ministers of Education, but it also supplied most of the future teachers. FDJ activists were called on not only to tell on reactionary teachers but also to help with class discipline, assure the completion of homework, and assist students who were failing in their studies. The entire .area of extra-curricular activities was turned over to the FDJ.
There was also a further extension of the two economic plans into the school system. Vocational counseling was introduced into all 131 grade levels, but particularly into the eighth year. This meant that students were locally channeled into occupations which were needed and were discouraged from others. The economic plans continued to favor \ vocational education. In this year alone, they were largely responsible for bringing about the Compulsory Education Law and the idea of a Ten-
Year School.
This year also saw new forces developing within the educational system. Wandel was no longer the primary initiator of educational changes, although he was still very active in trying to raise educational standards. Else Zaisser moved into the picture with her glowing accounts of Soviet pedagogy. She, in turn, was supported by the DPZI, a new educational power center. As director of the DPZI, Frau Zaisser was able to impose her views of Soviet pedagogy on the entire school system and teacher training institutions. She made the DPZI a stepping stone to the position of Minister of Education.
Finally, a tendency to use compulsion as a means of achieving educational goals was on the ascendancy. The Compulsory Education
Law tried to force all children to complete the eight-year Grundschule.
The discussion of current events on the basis of a list of subjects pro posed by the Minister of Education was made compulsory. Vocational counseling was made compulsory. The entire, system of Kontrolle by means of a Klassenleiter, Klassenbuch, FDJ organization, and using 132 the class period as a unit of instruction, all of these relied upon some form of pressure to achieve the desired result. The suggestions of Siebert, Semberg, and Zaisser, that only Soviet pedagogy had some- \ thing to offer the DDR, was in the same tradition.
The Expansion of Education and the Five-Year Plan (1951)
The key word to describe educational developments this year was "expansion. " This was the beginning of the Great Leap Forward.
Although the Five-Year Plan had been decided upon in May, 1950, and went into effect on January 1, 1951, the law itself was not published until November, 1951. Here it was stated that the Two-Year Plan had been completed early --in eighteen months -- and had restored the area to its pre-war status. It was claimed that living conditions had greatly improved by the second half of 1950 and that industry was now far enough along to be able to undertake a Five-Year Plan. Special credit for previous successes was accorded the nationalized industries.
The new Five-Year Plan was expected to bring about a decisive change in production for industry and agriculture. It was anticipated that a high living standard, such as had never been reached
*^"Gesetz liber den Fllnfjahrplan zur Entwicklung der Volks- wirtschaft der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik (1951-1955)" /Law_ concerning the Five-Year Plan for Developing the Economy of the DDR/, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 128 (November 8, 1951), 973-91. 133 before, would be achieved. In education, similar spectacular changes were expected. To cite two examples, the Plan called for 12,410
Grundschulen and vocational schools. Since the law did not mention the figure for such schools in 1950, an earlier number, as of 1949, will be used for comparison. The 1949 figure was 11, 727, which would mean a gain of 683 schools, or 5. 8 per cent in five years. The other example was for teachers for Grundschule and vocational schools. Here the Plan called for an increase of 25, 334 teachers, or 28. 6 per cent. If these projected figures showed nothing else, they did demonstrate the DDR's determination to move forward in expanding the educational system. At the same time, the rapid increase in the number of schools and teachers could but lead to an aggravation of the existing problem of improving the quality of instruction. The Ministry of Education was expected, of course, to resolve both problems at the same time.
Expansion of the Ministry of Education
As the educational structure expanded, so did the Ministry of
Education. It soon became necessary to create a separate and independent branch to control the universities and technical schools, and to encourage research. Walter Ulbricht was the first to make such a recommendation 120 in a speech delivered before some FDJ functionaries on November 26, 1950
l 30Walter Ulbricht, "Entfaltet den Feldzug . . ., " op. cit. 10. 134
It was to be headed by a State Secretary. On January 19, 1951, the
Central Committee of the SED decided that a drastic reorganization in the administration of the universities and technical schools would be
121 necessary. Two reasons were given: the special demands of the
Five-Year Plan and the need for controlled research.v, The Committee decided to abolish all Land level university offices and concentrate all matters pertaining to the universities and related institutions in the
Secretariat. The Secretary was also put in charge of the Worker and
Peasant Faculties, scientific libraries, and museums. Dr. Gerhard
Harig was the first appointee to the position. This centralization increased the influence of the Ministry of Education by concentrating more authority in Berlin.
The Minister of Education added not only a State Secretary for
Universities but also a State Secretary of Education. Some time between
November 16, 1950 and February 6, 1951, Prof. Else Zaisser was
I pp promoted from Director of the DPZI to the State Secretaryship. The
1 p I "Die nSchsten Aufgaben in denJJniversitUten und Hochschulen der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik_n /Future Projects in the Univer sities and Technical Schools of the DDR/, Paedagogik, VI (February, 1951), 54-58.
122The February 6, 1951 date is based on an administrative order signed by her on this date. See "Verordnung liber die 1. und 2. Lehrerprllfung" /Regulation concerning the First and Second Teacher's Examination/, Insert to Neue Schule, VI, (February 15, 1951), no pagination. 135 creation of the two new posts at the top level of the Ministry marked the first major change since Paul Wandel took office in 1945. The establish ment of a State Secretary immediately under the Minister of Education provided the Minister with an assistant but the position soon developed into a stepping stone to the Ministry itself. Frau Zaisser was the first to use it in this manner.
Expansion of Activities at the DPZI
Prof. Zaisser first made a name for herself as director of the rapidly expanding DPZI. The growth of this institute was also directly related to the Five-Year Plan.
As the total number of teachers in the DDR increased greatly, as the number of teacher training institutions expanded, and as the demand for a higher quality of instruction mounted, the responsibilities of the DPZI grew rapidly. Some of the more important of these are mentioned below to show the areas into which the DPZI was expanding.
The DPZI was expected to prepare all the LehrplMne /lesson plans or curriculum/ for all Grundschulen, Oberschulen, and the new
Ten-Year Schools for the year 1951-52.
The DPZI prepared the final examination questions for all
Grundschulen. This meant that the Institute was involved not only in what was taught in all DDR schools but also in determining how effectively it was taught. 136
During this year, the DPZI became involved in organizing special four-week courses intended to prepare teachers who would be on the faculties of the new Institutes for Teachers. Clearly, therefore, the DPZI was concerned not only with the curriculum, with the examina tions, but also with the teachers.
Since the DPZI was interested in these three areas, the im portance of building up a central pedagogical library, which would provide the materials needed for helping both students and teachers, was quickly recognized. The director of the Library was named by the Minister of
Education.
Finally, since the interest of the DPZI in Soviet pedagogy had already been established, it was not surprising to find its members joining the Ministry of Education, the State Secretary for Universities, and the publishing house, Volk und Wissen, in promoting the translation ' of Russian textbooks. In fact, the DPZI regularly provided Paedagogik with a list of the latest translations of Russian texts into German.
Expansion of the School System
Some reasons for starting a Ten-Year School System were discussed originally when Walter Ulbricht made such a proposal at the
123i,Durchflihrungsbestimmungen liber die Einrichtung einer P&dagogischen Zentralbibliothek!' /Implementation for Instituting a Central Pedagogical Library/, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 136 (November 29, 1951), 1069-70. 137
Third SED Party Congress in 1950. The first hundred of such schools were to be ready by September 1 of 1951; another fifty were to be added a year later.
Horst LBbner provided additional information on the running of 124 these schools. He reiterated that the Ten-Year School was needed because the Oberschule could not produce enough graduates to satisfy the requirements of the Five-Year Plan. He explained that students who did not complete the Oberschule were not able to handle middle level occupations. A school was needed which could provide personnel specifically trained for the middle level jobs.
LBbner said that Ten-Year Schools, in mosLinstances, would merely be a Grundschule to which a ninth and a tenth year was added.
Generally speaking, the Schulleiter of the Grundschule would be in charge of the higher classes. In big cities or other concentrated in dustrial areas, Ten-Year Schools might be separate, but there would have to be a minimum of eight classes.
Ten-Year Schools charged tuition, but stipends were available for all students who needed financial assistance. Graduates of Ten-Year
Schools might elect to go on with an eleventh and twelfth year in the
Oberschule.
^^Horst LBbner, "Bedeutung und Aufbau der Zehnklassenschulen" /The Significance and the Organization of the Ten-Year Schools/, Paedagogik, VII (July, 1952), 503-12. 138
In analysing the reasons given for establishing the Ten-Year
Schools, more attention should be given to the admission that the en rollments in the upper grades were so low. Lbbner himself pointed out that ninth year classes were filled to capacity while eleventh and twelfth year classes often had less than twenty students. ^25 Evidence was cited earlier that, as of 1949,. the enrollment for the Oberschule had declined by two per cent while that of the Grundschule had risen by twenty-five per cent,
German Communists had always been wary of secondary schools, because they were convinced that the selective process used by these schools were prejudicial to working-class children. Friedrich
Elchlepp expressed their view in 1945 in these words:
Das zeigt deutlich die bisherige Schulgliederung, flir die Masse die Volksschule, filr das mittlere Btirgertum die Mittelschule, fllr die fUhrende Schicht die htfheren Schulen und die Universit&t.
/That is clearly shown by the way the schools were divided until now; the Peoples' School for the m asses, the middle school for the bourgeois class, and the higher schools and the university for the ruling class/. ^26
The combination of class prejudice against secondary schools and the admittedly low educational standards existing in the DDR at this
^25jjorst Ltibner, op. cit. , p. 506.
1 PRFriedrich Eichlepp, op. cit., p. 9. 139 time certainly created conditions which favored the introduction of a ten-year school with a curriculum planned for working-class children.
Introduction of Special Education
During this year, Else Zaisser, in her capacity as State
Secretary of Education, signed legislation which created four different
« J 0 7 ______types of schools for special education. Heimerziehung /home training/ was a type of education provided by the state for children who could not attend regular schools; this might include children who were serious behavior problems, children who were physically handicapped, and the educable mentally retarded. The state assumed responsibility for all such children and youths and would not permit private institutions to care for them. Two of the four categories were divided by age groups \ which roughly corresponded to the ages of children who attended the
Grundschule and those who went on to higher schools. In the age group three to fourteen, there were two possibilities: Normalkinderheime
/normal homes for children/ and Spezialkinderheime /-special homes for children/. The latter were either for children who were difficult to train or for educable mentally retarded children. In the age group
127ttQesetz {|ber Heimerziehung von Kindern und Jugendlichen" /Law Providing Home Training for Children and Youths/, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 91 (August 2, 1951), 708-9. 140
fourteen to eighteen, there were three possibilities: JungendwerkhBfe
/youth work camps/, Jugendwohnheime /youth homes/ and homes for
educable mentally retarded youths. The other two categories were the
Durchgangsstationen /transition stations/ for children and youths, and
children's rest homes. The basis for assigning young people to these
various schools was not explained in the law.
Directives were issued in November of this year concerning
the training of teachers for these special schools. Teachers who taught blind, deaf, or otherwise physically handicapped children received a
year of special training at the University of Berlin. Teachers who were preparing to teach the educable retarded children attended Halle-Wittenberg.
Even these handicapped children and youths, according to Frau \ Zaisser's directive, were to be trained not only as active builders of a united and peace-loving Germany, but also as fighters for peace and as future friends of all peace-loving nations, especially the Soviet Union.
No school escaped political indoctrination. At the same time, it must be recognized that the DDR did provide training for the handicapped.
Intensification of Teacher Preparation
The Five-Year Plan called for a substantial increase in the
number of teachers and for a higher quality of teacher training. Included
in the latter was an intensification of political indoctrination. In order to 141
increase the number of teachers, some twenty Institutes for Teachers
were established on January 1, 1951. The responsibility of improving
the quality of teaching, including political training, was put into the hands
of the DPZI.
The DPZI began by conducting two courses of four weeks each for the faculties of the future Institutes. These were held in October and
November, 1950.128 d p z l also planned the entire three-year
curriculum of the institutes themselves, including methods of instruction.
Course content was planned down to the individual class period. The
DPZI, furthermore, had the last word on determining the political
reliability of faculty members at the institutes.
One method for improving the quality of teaching was to set a minimum of three years for teacher training. The other method was to 1 O Q require all teachers to take two examinations. Teachers who were preparing to take the first examination were called Lehramtsbewerber
/teacher candidates/. This examination had to be taken four years after
1 ^W erner Dorst, "Bemerkungen zur Organisation der Unter- richtsarbeit an den Instituten fllr Lehrerbildung" /Remarks concerning the Organization of Instruction at the Institutes for Teachers/, Paedagogik, VI (January, 1951), 23-31.
129,lAnweisung Nr. 80 des Ministeriums fUr Volksbildung der DDR fiber die Ausbildung und Weiterbildung der im Schuldienst stehenden Lehrer an den allgemeinbildenden Schulen" /Order Nr. 80 of the Ministry of Education of the DDR concerning the Education and Continued Training of Teachers Who Are Already Teaching in the Common Schools/, Neue Schule, VI (February 8, 1951), 143. a teacher had begun teaching. Teachers who were completing the third year at the Institutes for Teachers were expected to take the first teacher examination. Teachers who were awaiting permanent appointments were called Lehramtsanw&rter /prospective teachers/; they could not be appointed without passing the second teacher examination. Teachers were expected to present themselves for the second examination two years after taking the fir s t.
In examining the five stated aims of the first teacher examination, there could be no doubt that Minister Zaisser, who had signed the order, was more concerned about establishing the political reliability of the 130 Lehramtsbewerber than in the high quality of their professional training.
Three of the aims (contribution to the National Front, friendly attitude to the Soviet Union, and understanding of Marxism-Leninism) were entirely political. Special attention should be given to the requirement about being a convinced friend of the Soviet Union, because it showed how far the DPZI had been able to go with its pro-USSR drive. The order stated that the second purpose of the examination was to determine:
. . . ob der Lehramtsbewerber ein Uberzeugter Freund der Sowjet- union ist, und wie er sich filr die Festigung des Freundschaftsver- hUlt.nisses mit der Sowjetunion and den Volksdemokratien unt er
■J O A _ "Verordnung Uber die 1. und 2. Lehrerprlifung" /Order concerning the First and Second Teacher Examinations/, insert in Neue Schule, VI (February 15, 1951), no pagination. 143
Bejahung der Oder-Neisse-Grenze als Friedensgrenze bei den SchUlern, den Eltern und in der demokratischen Oeffentlichkeit einsetzt.
/_. . . whether the teacher candidate was a convinced friend of the Soviet Union and to what extent he would support the solidification of friendly relations with the Soviet Union and the People's Democracies while accepting the Oder-Neisse Line as a Pjjace Border, among students, parents, and the democratic public/. -*-31
The second examination was to confirm that the LehramtsanwHrter had successfully carried out the five aims stated in connection with the first examination. The requirement for the second examination then ended with this sentence:
Vor allem soli er zeigen, dass er sich in seiner tSglichen Unterrichts- und Erziehungsarbeit auf die fortschrittlichste P&dagogik stlltzt, die in der SowjetpRdagogik ihre hBchste Entwicklung gefunden hat.
/Above all, he must prove that, in his daily teaching and instruction, he rests solidly on the most progressive pedagogy, which has reached its peak in Soviet pedagogy/.132
Apparently, Minister Zaisser and the DPZI felt that the standards of instruction would, rise as soon as Soviet standards werq followed.
Proliferation of School Law
The frequent citation of school law in the footnotes of this dissertation is, in itself, a partial indication of the importance of the law
131 Ibid.
132’Ibid. 144 itself as a source of primary data. German educators and, especially, educational administrators were overcome by the plethora of educational legislation which caused general confusion. Laws and administrative memos appeared in the Gesetzblatt, the Ministerialblatt /Ministerial
Gazette/, Blotter der Landes regie rung / Land Government Gazette/, and the RundverfUgungen des Ministers filr Volksbildung /Memoranda of the
Minister of Education/. Many of the latter were merely mimeographed notices sent from Berlin to the Land Ministry of Education, from there to the Schulrat /county superintendent/, and from him to the Schulleiter. By the time the information reached the teacher, the original order had frequently been superseded by something more recent. The article being quoted said:
Das ganze Verfahren ist umstMndlich, zeitraubend, teuer, verschlingt ArbeitskrUfte, Nerven und Papier und ist letzlich doch recht unwirksam.
/The whole process is bothersome, time wasting, and expensive; it consumes_man hours, nerves, and paper and, in the last analysis, is inefficient/.
The article called for a collection of all important legislation to relieve the situation. That same month the Karteibuch des Schulrechts /Collection
\ , of School Laws—* / appeared in Weimar. 1 S 4 - This collection, too, soon became unw ieldy.
133iiDie amtlichen Bestimmungen jetzt als Beilage der 'Neuen Schule1" /Official Decrees to Become Inserts in the Neue Schule/, Neue Schule, VI (April 12, 1951), 358-9.
* ^ Karteibuch des Schulrechts (Weimar: Volk und Wissen, April, 1951 to November, 1956). 145
Review of 1951
This second year of the DDR and the first of the Five-Year Plan
was expansive and filled with optimism. The Ministry of Education was
enlarged to include two new State Secretaries. The State Secretariat for \ Universities became a separate, almost autonomous department within
the Ministry of Education. This action removed the universities from
any existing Land control and put them under direct supervision of a
central office. The other State Secretaryship was presumably established
to relieve the Minister of Education from some of his mounting duties.
Hind-sight suggests that the position may have been intended as a place where a successor to the Minister might be groomed. Be this as it may, it is significant that Frau Else Zaisser was appointed to the position.
She was an understandable choice because of her success in building the DPZI into a powerhouse in a relatively short period of time. She did this by riding the crest of a wave which strongly supported Soviet \ pedagogy.
The Five-Year Plan profoundly affected the school system.
Since the Plan called for a very considerable increase in industrial production, an immediate need existed for more technically trained workers. The DDR expected the school system to provide them. More students meant that more teachers were needed. More teachers in the quantity which was required implied an immediate increase in the number 146 of teacher training centers. Since the Five-Year Plan was a crash program and the greatest need was for technically competent workers, j the curriculum of the entire school system was affected, but special emphasis was placed on improvising Ten-Year Schools in concentrated \ industrial and agricultural centers to produce technicians.
The two economic plans being carried out in the DDR were closely patterned after Soviet models. It was to be expected that educators who were charged with the responsibility of fitting the educational system into the Five-Year Plan would conclude that only Soviet pedagogy could show the way.
The End of the Wandel Period (August, 1952)
During the last few months of Paul Wandel's tenure in office, a number of great political changes took place in the DDR. These were preceded in the earlier part of the year by efforts, both on the part of the
East and the West, to find a satisfactory formula for uniting Germany.
The United Nations invited both the Federal Republic of Germany and the
DDR to send representatives to discuss all-German elections. The invitation was extended on December 4, 1 9 5 1 . ^ 5 On March 10, 1952,
•*•3^stefan Doernberg, Kurze Geschichte der DDR (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1964), p. 185. 147
the USSR made a proposal for a peace treaty with Germany which would
have united the country and assured the withdrawal of all occupation
forces. 136 Nothing came of either proposal.
The first indications of a worsening of relations between East
and West Germany came in May, 1952. On June 9, 1952, the Ministry
of State Security was ordered to take all precautions to prevent
"diversioparies, spies, and terrorists" from entering the DDR. 137
This order mentioned earlier precautionary measures taken a fortnight earlier, on May 26.
On June 13, 1952, the Democratic Bloc issued this foreboding statem ent:
Die Aufstellung nationaler StreitkrHfte der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik zur Verteidigung ihrer Grenzen und des Friedens wird wesent- lich dazu beitragen, den Frieden zu erhalten und von Deutschland, seinen Nachbarn und der Welt die drohende Katastrophe eines neuen Weltkrieges abzuwenden. v
/The establishment of national fighting forces of the DDR for the purpose of protecting her borders and preserving peace will constitute a sub stantial contribution toward maintaining peace and preventing the threatening catastrophy of a new worl 136jbida, p. 191. 1 Qtt _ Verordnung ilber weitere Massnahmen zum Schutze der Republik" /Order concerning Further Measures to be Taken for Protection of the Republic/, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 72 (June 10, 1952), 451. l^stefan Doernberg, op. cit., p. 203. 148 These two disquieting announcements were followed, on July 9, 1952, by Walter Ulbricht's dramatic declaration before the Second SED Party Conference that conditions were now right for the DDR to start 13 9 on the planned road to socialism. Many DDR historians refer to this event as a turning point in the history of the Party and the nation. ^49 On this occasion, Ulbricht spoke out in favor of a national army and even discussed the issue of justified and unjustified wars. ■^44 Finally, closely related to Ulbricht's announcement about the progressive socialization of the DDR, the Volkskammer /People's Chamber/ decreed the abolition of the five German Laender and the division of the entire DDR into fourteen Bezirke /Administrative Units/. Doernberg explained that the division of the country into Laender was antiquated and no longer suited to the kind of economic planning needed in a modern socialist state. ^4^ These important developments, which took place while Wandel was still in office, soon affected the educational system of the DDR. 139Neue Schule, VII (July 11, 1952), 669. 140See the editorial, "12. Juli 1952" /The Twelfth of July, 1952?, Neue Schule, VII (July 25, 1952), 693; Pfautz, ^'Die fUhrende Rolle der SED . . .," op. cit. , 318; Doernberg, _op. cit., pp. 196 ff. 141Neue Schule, VII (July 11, 1952), 669. 142stefan Doernberg, op. cit., p. 204. 149 Reorganization of the Ministry of Education and the DPZI When the Laender were abolished, so were the Land Ministries of Education. 1^3 There were now three levels of the Ministry of Education: the Volksbildungsamt des Kreises /Kreis Educational Office/, the Volks- bildungsamt des Bezirks /Bezirk Educational Office/, and the Ministry in B erlin . The Ministry of Education in Berlin was divided into three major departments: Unterricht und Erziehung /Instruction and Training/, Lehrerbildung /Teacher Training/, and Ausserschulische Erziehung /Extracurricular Training/. There was also a department for Methodik, Organisation und Inspektion /Department for Methodology, Organization, and Inspection/, which included certain phases of each of the other three major departments. Smaller offices existed for Kader /Personnel/, Adult Education, Jungendhilfe und Heimerziehung / Youth Aid and Special Training/, Haushalt /Budget/, and General Administration. According to Lange, the Ministry of Education in Berlin had a staff of about two hundred and fifty employees at the beginning of 1953. The Land offices of the DPZI were affected in the same way as those of the Ministry of Education and had to be adapted to the Bezirk *^Max Lange, op. cit., pp. 385 ff. 150 and Kreis system. No other major reorganization took place except that a fifth department was added to the existing four in July, 1952. Since the organization of the DPZI had not been discussed in available publications before this year, a brief description follows. The Institute came under the general jurisdiction of the Minister of Education, who selected and appointed the director. The director was assisted by a pedagogical council of twenty-five members, which included department heads, representatives of the Pedagogical Faculties, outstanding teachers, and members of various mass organizations. The council served in an advisory capacity and had to be consulted on all major issues. The DPZI itself was divided into four major departments: theory, methods, teacher education, and correspondence courses. 145 The fifth department, which was added later during this year, was for the education of the Sorbs. The Department of Theory was expected to make sure that everything which was taught was scientifically sound. This Department was put in charge of all pedagogical research conducted in the DDR. It ■^^"Statut des_'Deutschen PUdagogischen Zentralinstituts' und seiner Zweigstellen" /Statute concerning the DPZI and its Branches?, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 23 (March 14, 1950), 155. ■^^"Aus der Arbeit des Deutschen P^dagogischen Zentralinstituts im Jahre 1952" /From the Work of the DPZI in the Year 1952/, Paedagogik, VII (June, 1952),_ 4 65-9. 151 was responsible for popularizing Soviet pedagogy and for seeing to it that Marxist-Leninist principles governed all educational thinking. The Department of Methodology worked on introducing the latest and most effective methods of teaching. Raising the quality of teacher training in line with the Five-Year Plan was a special concern of the Department of Teacher Education., although a new priority had been set on improving patriotic training and discipline -- qualities needed in officers and soldiers of the new DDR army. Finally, the Department for Correspon dence Courses worked on trying to qualify teachers for their first or second examinations, as previously described, and to help subject matter teachers master their subject. Before leaving this topic of reorganization, mention should be made of a number of important personnel changes which took place in key positions both of the DPZI and its official organ, Paedagogik, between February and May, 1952. On February 1, 1952, Karl Sothman, who was the first editor-in-chief of the Neue Schule and who subsequently became acting editor of Paedagogik while also serving as head of the Methodology Department of the DPZI, was made editor-in-chief of a new publication, Elternhaus und Schule /Home and School/. Dr. Emil Hruschka replaced 146 Sothman as head of the Methodology Department. Werner Dorst was *^Paedagogik, VII (March, 1952), 240. 152 carried on the masthead as editor-in-chief of Paedagogik in March, 1952. During April, 1952, sweeping changes on the editorial staff for Paedagogik 147 were announced but no names were mentioned. Between March and May, 1952, the editorial staff of Paedagogik was increased from three to ten, and two important names were included among these ten, those of Frau 1 AO Else Zaisser and Hans-Joachim Laabs. Both of these soon became Ministers of Education. The New State Secretary of Education The former director of the DPZI and recently named first State Secretary within the Ministry of Education, Prof. Else Zaisser, moved forward rapidly in educational and Party circles. She was instrumental in organizing the Theoretische Konferenz der Deutschen PRdagogen /Theoretical Conference of German Pedagogues/, which was held in 149 Berlin on February 12, 1952. The conference carried the imprint of Frau Zaisser's consuming interest: Soviet pedagogy and Stalin. The conference was built around Stalin's article: "Der Marxismus und die Fragen der Sprachwissenschaft" /_Marxism and Problems of Linguistics/. 147Paedagogik, VII (April, 1952), 332. 148Paedagogik, VII (May, 1952), 416. 149" The o ret is che Konferenz der Deutschen P^dagogen, " Paedagogik, VII (April, 1952), 241-9. 153 The declared purpose of the meeting was to bring German educators abreast with Soviet pedagogy, an objective that Frau Zaisser had been following for some time. Prof. Zaisser was well equipped to discuss Soviet pedagogy, because she had lived in the USSR from 1933-1947 and had taught in Russian schools. The climax to Frau Zaisser's pro-Soviet campaign came on May 22, 1952, when she headed a delegation of prominent educators who were on their way to the USSR to study aspects of Russian education which had special value for the DDR. 1 50 The delegation was made up of fourteen members, including Groth and Dorst. Vocational Counseling in the Grundschule During this year, Hans Siebert's idea of compulsory vocational counseling in the Grundschule was greatly expanded. The goal of the Five-Year Plan was to train 1,170,000 technicians. In order to attain the objectives of the Plan, the areas to be stressed in counseling were: mining, metals, construction, and agriculture. A special effort 180|,Studiendelegation 5Uhrt in die Sowjetunion" /Study Committee Goes to the Soviet Union/, Paedagogik, VH (May, 1952), 415-6. ^•^"Anordnung Uber die DurchfUhrung des Planes 'Berufsaus- bildung" /Order concerning the Implementation of the Plan for Vocational Training/, Gesetzblatt, Nr. 39 (April 1, 1952), 235-40. 154 was to be made to win over girls who were about to complete the eighth year. Counseling in the schools was to be organized by coordinating committees made up of representatives from those ministries which needed trained technicians. These committees were to establish Werbeaktivs /recruiting teams/ which would be made up of prize winners, masters, and apprentices. The Werbeaktivs would tell the school children about their work. This was to be done during a period usually reserved for a current events discussion. A limit of one period a month from January to May was set. Other methods suggested for recruiting future workers were: holding an open house for students and parents in the local industries, preparing special exhibits to illustrate different kinds of industries, and giving talks before parents' groups. To prevent any potential worker from being missed, the law specified that all students enrolled in classes five to eight were required to fill out cards. The cards were to be kept on file in the schools until the students signed a contract for vocational training with some industry. If students left school before the end of the fifth year, their card was to be sent to the local vocational office. The names of students who left school without a contract were to be reported to the same office. Contracts were to be regarded as cancelled if the student either did not pass, or was about to enter a higher school. 155 Law Number 39 was but another illustration of a widespread system of compulsion used in the DDR educational system. While students in the Grundschule were allowed a degree of choice of a future occupation, the choice was limited by the priorities set up by an economic plan.. Furthermore, each student would be expected to have his mind made up about a future occupation by the time he reached the age of fourteen or fifteen, unless he showed enough promise to be permitted to go on to a higher school. This law was also a clear example of the extent to which the vocational school idea had come to dominate the Grundschule. This law helped to move the Grundschule away from the idea of providing a general education but in the direction of the poly- technical school. Paul Wandel1 s Term of Office Although the title of his position and the name of his office changed, Wandel remained in essentially the same position and office for seven years (1945-1952). This was a time of great transitions, with the biggest one coming in 1949, when the Soviet Zone changed from an occupation status to that of having its own government, the DDR. A 152Ibid. 156 further important change took place when the SED announced that the DDR was starting along the path of becoming a Socialist state. An analysis of Wandel's term of office revealed some of the reasons for his staying power. Wandel had the ability of changing with the times. In the early years, when he was trying to win over as many trained teachers as possible, he used an anti-fascist approach and in- Ated any person to become a teacher who had either the good sense or the good will to change his political philosophy, provided only he was now against the Nazis. He knew how to appeal to the German feeling of nationalism, both in the East and in the West. When conditions changed, he had no trouble in castigating the West and working toward a socialist state in the East. Wandel was successful, because he was trusted by the SMA as well as by the SED. He carefully maintained close relations with the Party. When he left the Ministry, he took a position connected with education in the Party. Wandel was also successful because he remained in close touch with the people, especially teachers and the FDJ. He organized four Pedagogical Conferences with educators from all over the Zone attending. He was adept at keeping his name before the public. His ability to do so somewhat diminished during his last year in office. Wandel's success must also be attributed to the fact that he did not go all out in favor of Soviet pedagogy during the early years. Although 157 he had spent as much time in the Soviet Union as Frau Zaisser, he made little mention of his sojourn in Russia but concentrated on making the Germans feel that they must find their own solution. He mentioned on one occasion that the Germans should be grateful that the Russians were ICQ giving them a chance to develop their own educational system. x As far as DDR educational publications were concerned, there was no mention of any serious criticism of Wandel during his entire tenure in office. This could not be said of some of his successors. Over the period of seven years, there were certainly a number of changes in the Ministry of Education itself. While the size of Wandel's original staff is not known, there was a report that the staff of the Ministry stood at two hundred and fifty at the beginning of 1953. In the early years, the Ministry included a much wider scope of responsibilities than it did in 1952. Over the years, the arts, theatres, museums, libraries, youth activities, universities, and vocational and technical education were re moved from the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education and assigned to other departments or M inistries. The Ministry of Education was more directly connected with educational matters in 1952 than it was in 1945. The Ministry had serious staffing difficulties. Well-educated German Communists who were also well-known educators were scarce. ^ ^Wandel, "Die Aufgaben der Deutschen Lehrerschaft. . . , " op. cit. , 7. 158 Even Paul Wandel was new to the academic profession. Lange mentioned that, of the fifteen top officials in the Ministry, not one had finished his i 5 4 training at the university. Of nine division chiefs in the three major departments of the Ministry, six were Neulehrer /new teachers, so designated because they had not begun teaching until after 19457 and three were leaders in the FDJ. The Ministry never attained a high degree of independence. At first, it received all of its orders from the SMA; after about 1948-9, all major decisions were made by the SED. Beginning in 1950, the DPZI began wielding considerable influence within the Ministry, especially in the areas of teacher training and curriculum planning. There was no doubt from the start that the Einheitschule would be the model for the school system of the Soviet Zone. This system had existed in Germany before, it was similar to the Russian system, it included all children, and it eliminated the confessional or private school, thereby giving the state absolute control of the school system. The DDR had a compulsory school system up to the age of eighteen. DDR schools were closely tied in with economic plans. The latter spelled out the expansion program of all types of schools. These 1 54 Max Lange, op. cit. , p. 386. 159 figures, in turn, were directly related to the manpower needs for industry and agriculture. Schools were regarded less as educational institutions than as training centers. Vocational training moved ahead rapidly and soon permeated the entire Grundschule. Polytechnical education was discussed in 1949, but was not introduced. A Ten-Year School, planned specifically for workers' children and intended to produce technicians for middle range jobs, was introduced in 1951. Considerable progress was made in increasing the number of centralized schools in rural areas. This was also part of the economic planning. On the negative side, the DDR recognized the low performance level of its school system, especially that of the Grundschule. The Oberschule was suffering reverses, particularly in attendance. The Communists continued to think of these schools as centers of bourgeois thinking and did what they could to pack more workers' children into them. This attempt backfired to some extent when many workers' children quit school at the tenth grade. There were many complaints about a lack of discipline and good work habits among students in the schools. Authori ties tried to correct this situation by calling on the FDJ for help and by developing various means of Kontrolle. The Ministry's biggest headache was devising a suitable curri culum. This problem was closely related to the absence of textbooks containing the right ideology. To fill the gap, a few pre-Hitler books 160 were introduced. Translations of Russian books began in 1948. At first, textbooks for teaching Russian did not exist, even though the teaching of this subject had been made compulsory in the Grundschule. During these years, the subjects which the Ministry thought needed most attention on the part of curriculum planners were: history, German, and R ussian. Wandel placed a high priority on finding or developing teachers. His efforts in getting trained teachers back to teaching have already been mentioned. The bulk of his teachers were Neulehrer. Many of these were trained in courses lasting between a few weeks to one year. These short- order courses were continued until 1951. After that date, all teachers were required to get at least three years of training. When compulsory, final examinations were introduced at the end of the Grundschule during 1950, Wandel was shocked at the poor performance. Wandel realized that teachers were largely to blame for the low standards in the DDR schools. He devised correspondence courses, administered by the DPZI, to raise the quality of teachers who were already in the system. He then required that all teachers pass two lengthy examinations in order to qualify them for a permanent position. Wandel tried in every way to raise the social standing of the teacher, including annually giving public recognition and a variety of titles to teachers who had distinguished themselves during the year. Wages compared favorably with the best workers' scale. 161 Throughout his term of office, Wandel had trouble with "reactionary" teachers. At first he had to tolerate them, especially the teachers who taught the teachers in the Pedagogical Faculties. Then came the day in 1950 when Walter Ulbricht asked his audience of youth leaders to start exposing "reactionary" teachers. Many such teachers left the DDR and went West during 1951; others remained and were heard from in ensuing years. A fitting conclusion to this resume of Paul Wandel's stewardship as Minister of Education may be a statement on Soviet pedagogy. During the years 1945-49, Russian education officers were on hand in the Soviet Zone in large numbers, although no precise figure can be given. No matter, educational journals published at this time in the Soviet Zone did not clamor for Soviet pedagogy. The first translation of a Soviet book on pedagogy was not published in East Germany until 1948. It was German Communists, specifically those gathered around Frau Else Zaisser in the DPZI, who advanced the idea that Soviet pedagogy was the only way out. The Wandel period ended on an upsurging wave which demanded a complete acceptance of Soviet pedagogy - - a demand which Wandel never made, but also one which he did not wish to oppose. Significance of the Wandel Period Paul Wandel must be regarded as the father of the present DDR school system. He, more than any other single educational leader, was 162 responsible for bringing about the quick change in educational and political philosophy within the school system. Before Wandel, the schools taught racism, German superiority, fascism, anti-communism, and hatred of Russia; Wandel was most active in changing the educational climate into one which was anti-fascist, international, pro-USSR, and later, anti-W est. Wandel was highly successful as a Minister of Education because he possessed three special qualifications; (1) he was a clever propagandist and very active publicist, (2) he was a good administrator, and (3) he remained in close contact with the SMA and the SED. No Minister of Education who followed Wandel during the next nineteen years could equal him in these three respects. The Wandel Period was also distinguished from later administra tions by the fact that he alone experienced the change from a government run by the USSR to one run by Germans themselves -- from the status of an occupied zone to that of an independent country. Certain important changes in the educational system took place in the Wandel Era. Originally, an eight-year school system for all was introduced; towards the end of the Wandel Period, a ten-year basic school was being proposed but it was implemented only on a limited scale. When the schools opened in 1945, general education was dominant in the Grundschule; as the two economic plans were introduced, general 163 education gave way more and more to vocational education. The schools became vocational training centers. As the curriculum was adjusted to meet the economic requirements of the state, the social composition of the Oberschule and the universities was gradually changed in order to reduce the number of students of bourgeois background and to increase the number of children from worker and peasant families. Finally, it was during the Wandel Period that the concept of Neulehrer developed. While concessions were made from 1945-50 to teachers who had received their training during the pre-Nazi period, the attitude toward such teachers gradually stiffened after 1948. The teachers on which the Ministry of Education really depended were the Neulehrer who received their training after 1945. What these teachers lacked in academic training they compensated for in political reliability. The Neulehrer were the teachers of the future. CHAPTER III THE PERIOD OF REVERSALS (1952-1954) Following Wandel's long and generally successful term of office, it appeared for a while that his successor was preparing to make some sweeping changes in the educational system. Plans for a complete re organization of the school system were announced with much fanfare y and these were then suddenly rescinded by the Minister herself. The circumstances surrounding the unexpected confession of errors on the part of the Minister were apparently so embarrassing that, following her dismissal, the position of Minister of Education was allowed to remain unfilled for several months. Finally, an obscure Neulehrer was appointed to the post, but he remained in office for only eight m onths. The prestige of the office of the Educational Ministry reached its lowest point during the period 1952-1954. This chapter will be devoted to a description of the administrative careers of the two ministers who followed Paul Wandel. The Administration of Else Zaisser (1952-1953) The various stages along the path which finally led Frau Zaisser 165 to her appointment as Minister of Education were described in the previous chapter: her appointment as director of the DPZI, her article on Soviet pedagogy, her being named State Secretary for Education, her discussion concerning Stalin and linguistics, and finally her fact-finding trip to the USSrt. On August 14, 1952, Minister-President Grotewohl named her as the second Minister of Education, An announcement which appeared in the Neue Schule claimed that this was the first time in German history that a woman had been entrusted with such a high position. * Among her special qualifications was the fact that she had been a teacher for thirty- three years and a member of the Communist Party for twenty-six years. At the same time that Frau Zaisser became Minister of Education, Paul Wandel was put in charge of the "Koordinierungs-und Kontrollstelle fttr Unterricht, Wissenschaft und Erziehung" /Office for Coordination and Control of Teaching, Science, and Training/, and Hans-Joachim Laabs was made State Secretary for Education. A few months later, possibly in October, Paul Wandel was awarded an honorary doctor's degree by the Pedagogical Faculty at the Martin Luther University in Halle Witten berg. He was cited for his contribution to the Law for the Democratization l"Frau Professor Zaisser zum Minister_filr Volksbildung berufen" /Professor Zaisser Named Minister of Education/, Neue Schule, VII (August 22, 1952), 789. ^Paedagogik, VII (September, 1952), 704. 166 of the German School, and his founding of the Pedagogical Faculties and O the Worker Peasant Faculties. Criticism of the Ministry of Education and Recommended Changes A few weeks after the SED decided that the DDR would start on the road to Socialism, the PolitbUro of the SED became deeply involved in making decisions about the school system. Although the PolitbUro's meeting took place on July 29, 1952, while Wandel was still Minister of Education, the text of their conclusions was not reprinted in the Neue Schule until August 22, 1952, when Frau Zaisser was in office, ^ Special attention is called to these dates, because the Politbiiro was openly critical of the Ministry of Education. Not only was the Politbiiro critical, but the committee gave the Ministry a deadline of January 1, 1953, to finish reorganizing itself. The PolitbUro ordered: Die Genossen im Ministerium ftlr Volksbildung werden beauftragt, die Struktur des Ministeriums und der Organe der Volksbildung in den Bezirken und Kreisen an Hand der Erfahrungen der Sowjet- union mit Wirkung vom 1. Januar 1953 zu Mndern, damit eine enge Verbindung mit der Schulpraxis erreicht wird. ^"Minister Paul Wandel wurde zum Ehrendoktor errnannt" /Minister Paul Wandel Awarded an Honorary Doctorate/, Neue Schule, VII (October 15, 1952), 44. ^"Beschluss des Politbllros des Zentralkomitees der SED" /Decision of the PolitbUro of the Central Committee of the SED/, Neue Schule, VII (August 22, 1952), 786-7. 167 /Comrades of the Ministry of Education are assigned the responsibility of changing the organizational structure of the Ministry and of the educational offices on the level of the Bezirk and Kreis by January 1, 1953, following the experiences of the USSR, in order_that a close contact with actual school routine may be established^/^ The Politbliro repeated the charge about poor instruction in German, Russian, and history. It added that teachers lacked a psychological under standing of children. It warned that hostile views could no longer be tolerated among teachers. An especially sharp attack against the Ministry of Education g appeared in the Neue Schule a week later. The specific target was the Department of Teacher Training; the charge was poor administration. "D 8" was an administrative bulletin dated September 11, 1951, and was issued by the Ministry of Education. The bulletin had to do with a correspondence course which would qualify teachers in the Grundschule and the Ten-Year School. According to Brinkmann, fifteen thousand teachers signed up for and were working on the lessons when another terse announcement was made on June 3, 1952, stating that this course was only for teachers of grades five to eight. Brinkmann said that teachers would no longer tolerate such incompetence. He concluded 5Ibid., 787. ®Karl-Erich Brinkmann, UD8 - Musterbeispiel des Adminis- trierens" /D 8 - A Typical Example of Administrating/, Neue Schule (August 29, 1952), 816-7. 168 with the hope that Walter Ulbricht's announcement concerning the new path to Socialism and th^e new insights gained by the study committee which recently visited the USSR would improve conditions in the Ministry of Education. Yet another article appeared in the same issue of Neue Schule which was critical of the Ministry of Education, especially the teacher training program. ^ The critic charged that there had been too much improvisation in the program, that there was no overall system, and that it was time to analyze what had been achieved in teacher education during the period 1945-52. By lack of an overall system was meant that, at present, there were too many categories of teachers with different types of training. The article suggested that Hans Knauer's visit in the USSR with the study committee would undoubtedly help him correct the situation. By a strange coincidence, it was this same Hans Knauer whom Brinkmann criticized for incompetency, as described in the pre vious paragraph. A third criticism of the Ministry of Education appeared in the same issue of Neue Schule and was offered by the Frau Minister herself. ® ^"Lehrerbildung" /Teacher Training/, Neue Schule, VH (August 29, 1952), 815-6. ~ _^Prof. Else Zaisser, "Deutsche Pfeldagogen besuchten die Sowjet- union" /German Pedagogues Visit the Soviet Union/, Ibid., 810-1. 16 9 Her criticism included these statements: . . . /es/ bestanden hinsichtlich der Organisationsformen der verschie- denen schulischen Einrichtungen und der Organe der Schulverwaltung noch zahlreiche Unklarheiten, die sich fUr die weitere Entwicklung und Verbesserung hemmend auswirkten. Hinzu kam, dass es trotz grosser Anstrengungen und verschiedentlicher guter AnsHtze noch nicht gelungen war, den allgemeinen Erfahrungsaustausch under den Lehrern zur Hebung der Qualit&t der Arbeit aller Lehrer breit zu entfalten. /_. . . there still remained many nebulous areas concerning forms of organization of various schools and departments of school administration, which interfered with further progress and improvement. In addition, in spite of great effort and a number of good starts, it was not possible to develop a general exchange of experiences_among teachers which would raise the general level of all teachers. / As the title of this article suggests, the criticism was related to Frau Zaisser's recent trip to the USSR. With these three criticism s of the Ministry of Education appearing at the same time directly after Minister Zaisser took over and with all three articles speaking favorably of Frau Zaisser's visit to the Soviet Union, it was clear that the new Minister of Education was building up the public image of a person who was about to sweep out the cobwebs from the Ministry and introduce the latest progressive ideas on education directly from the Soviet Union. A month later, Wolfgang Groth, head of the Department of Instruction and Training in the Ministry and also one of the fourteen selectees to go to Russia with Frau Zaisser, reported on the changes 170 G which were planned for the Ministry of Education. A department for Methodik, Schulinspektion und Schulorganisation /Methodology, School Inspection, and School Organization/ was to be created within the Major Department of Instruction and Training. 'It was intended that there be seven inspectors for the Ministry in Berlin, five inspectors for each Bezirk, and between one and three in each Kreis. The inspectors were to make sure that the instructions of the Ministry were being carried out to prepare field reports. Pedagogical Councils were to be established in schools in order to encourage discussions among teachers. They were to offer advice to the Schulleiter and he was expected to listen. Methodische Kabinette /Resource Centers/ were to be encouraged in larger schools. These were to contain professional publications and visual aids. Finally, Lehrerweiterbildungsinstitute /Teacher In-service Institutes/ were to be set up on the Bezirk level in order to encourage teachers to exchange teaching experiences. The best suggestions were to be published and sent on to the DPZI. ^Wolfgang Groth, uNeue Struktur und neue Arbeitsmethoden -- Voraussetzungen fUr die Verbesserung des Unterrichts" /A New Organizational Plan and New Methods -- Prerequisites for Improving Instruction,-/ Neue Schule, VII (September 19, 1952), 887-90. 171 Education for Patriotism The PolitbUro's policy statement of July 29, 1952, concerning the improvement of instruction not only asked that the Ministry of Education be reorganized to more nearly conform to the Ministry in the USSR but it also set the pace in two other directions: polytechnical education and patriotic training. 10 The subject of polytechnical education will be dis cussed later in connection with the year 1953 because no immediate action was taken in 1952, however the patriotic note was picked up at once. It will be recalled that Walter Ulbricht spoke of a new German army in the same speech in which he announced that the DDR was embarking on the route to Socialism. The PolitbUro, in its statement of July 29, 1952, declared that the new democratic school would train patriotic students willing to fight for the unity of Germany and for the protection of socialist property, who would support the might of the state, and who would be filled with eternal friendship for the USSR. In the future, students would have to be taught such character qualities as will power, resistance, courage, loyalty to principle, and toughness in overcoming difficulties. Minister Zaisser took over this militant approach when she discussed plans for the school year 1952-53. Her theme was: "Die deutsche 10"Beschluss des Politburos . . .," loc. cit. 172 demokratische Schule erzieht K&mpfer fttr Frieden, Demokratie und Sozialismus" /The German Democratic School Aims at Training Fighters for Peace, Democracy, and Socialism. An Ambitious Year for Frau Zaisser (1953) The new year started very favorably for Minister Zaisser. Beginning on January 1, 1953, all teachers in the DDR received a pay raise. Such a raise had been under discussion since June, 1952. 12 Minister Zaisser signed the administrative order on December 19, 1952. The pay scale recognized nine classes of teachers which were sub-divided according to the level on which they taught and the quality of their preparation. Provisions were made for married state, number of children, and overtime. For the chief editors of the Neue Schule the pay raise was bad news. Both Ernst Z. IchenhUuser and Johann Rtlssler were dismissed from their jobs because of their ineptness in the handling of a story ^E lse Zaisser, "Die deutsche demokratische Schule erzieht KMmpfer fiir Frieden, Demokratie und Sozialismus, " Neue Schule, VII (August 22, 1952), 788-9. 12iiyerordnung Uber die Verglitung der T&tigkeit der Lehrkr&fte und der Pionierleiter an allgemeinbildenden Schulen sowie der Lehrkr&fte fUr die Lehrer - und Erzieherbildung" /Order for Reimbursement for the Work of Teachers and Pioneer Leaders in the Common Schools as well as the Teachers Responsible for Teacher Training,_/ insert in Neue Schule, VIII (January 16, 1953), III-X. 173 . that had to do with salary raises. ^he article in question bore the title: "VerhBhnung der Hamburger Lehrer" /Derision of Hamburg — 14 Teachers/, which appeared in the November issue of the Neue Schule. The basis for the dismissal was negligence and causing the DDR em barrassment by allowing an "objectivist" article to appear in the journal without editorial comment. Even when the writer of this dissertation read the article for the first time, it did not strike him as unusual, since it was merely telling about the troubles teachers were having in the West in getting a salary raise. The Neue Schule often reported unhappy incidents about West Germany. This short account told about two mass meetings which the Hamburg teachers had called to ask for a raise, but the Senate had refused to listen. Since they felt ignored, the four thousand teachers urged their union to inform the Senate that they would go on strike, if their demands were not met by October. Accord ing to Hagemann, who dismissed the two editors, the timing of this story was not discreet; and its publication caused ’’destructive” criticism among DDR teachers. lO _ _ ”An unsere Leser" /To Our Readers/, Neue Schule, VIII (January 9, 1953), 5. ■^"VerhBhnung der Hamburger Lehrer, " VII (November, 1952), 2. 174 The fact of the matter was that the story came too close to the truth for comfort. A pay raise had long been overdue in the DDR. The subject had been discussed interminably, but no action had been taken. Hagemann was afraid that DDR teachers might get an idea from the Hamburg teachers and go on strike. In view of what did happen later this year, Hagemann was right to be worried. Two items were of special interest in connection with this story, one, the use of the charge "objectivist" to describe this kind of wrong doing; the other, the public censure of high German officials. Both indicate the feeling of uneasiness and uncertainty which then existed in the DDR. Although every precaution seemed to be taken, "objectivists" continued to show up, even in high places. Many more "objectivists" or "revisionists" will come to light later in this dissertation. In fact, a charge will later be made that, during the period 1953-57, the "revision ists" were successful in keeping mathematics instruction throttled down to a low operating level even though the need for improving mathematics instruction was obvious. ^ 1 5n Beschluss zur Verbesserung und weiteren Entwicklung des Mathematikunterrichts in den allgemeinbildenden polytechnischen Ober- schulen der DDR" /Decision to Improve and Further Develop the Instruction of Mathematics in the General Polytechnical Oberschulen of the DDR/, Gesstzblatt, II, Nr. 100 (December 31, 1962), 854. 175 Polytechnical Education The Politburo's frequently mentioned decision of July 29, 1952, recommended that polytechnical training be tied in with the various sciences in order to improve instruction. In order to pursue this subject further, the DPZI held a conference from December 16 to 18, 1952, to discuss Stalin's work, "Oekonomische Problpme des Sozial ismus in der USSR” /Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR/. Oskar Mader reported on this meeting in the February issue of Paedagogik. ^ Mader stated that Stalin regarded compulsory poly technical education essential in Russia in order to bring about a trans ition from Socialism to Communism. Stalin believed that the working day would have to be reduced to five or six hours in order to allow the worker free time for individual study. Stalin contended that polytechnical education would free the individual from having just one area of compe tence. Through study, every worker should be able to extend the range of his technical ability. ^"BeschlUsse des PolitbUros, . . . , " loc. cit. l^Oskar Mader, "Der obligator is che polytechnische Unterricht als eine der Vorbedingungen zum Uebergang vom Sozialismus zum Kom- munismus und die gesellschaftlichen Aufgaben und Mbglichkeiten der poly- technischen Bildung in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik” ]_Com pulsory Polytechnical Education as a Prerequisite for the Transition from Socialism to Communism and the Social Problems and Possibilities of Polytechnical Training in the DDR/, Paedagogik, VIII (February, 1953), 139-144. 176 Mader expressed the view that the DDR was not in a position to do what Stalin advocated, but he felt that something could be done to intro duce polytechnical concepts into the subject areas of chemistry, physics, 18 biology, and mathematics. He also favored investigating the possibil ities of associating extracurricular activities with polytechnical training. During the period May 21-23, the DPZI held a meeting in Berlin which concentrated on issues raised by the introduction of polytechnical education. At this time the Department of Theory of the DPZI agreed that polytechnical education -should not be introduced generally throughout the DDR, as demanded by Stalin for the USSR. Actually, the entire September issue of Paedagogik was built around the subject of polytech nical education and the conference which took place in May in Berlin. Minister Zaisser even wrote the introduction to the issue. However, events were happening at such a clip at this time, that it was quite possible that Frau Zaisser was no longer Minister Zaisser. Her article was signed "Else Zaisser, " without the title of Minister. Except for the discussions here recorded, there was no indica tion of further developments in polytechnical education at this time. 18Ibid., 142-3. -*-8Else Zaisser, "ErHffnungsansprache" /Opening Remarks/, Paedagogik, VHI (September, 1953), 643-5. 177 Stalin, the man around whom the subject had been built, had died in March. Conditions in the USSR had become somewhat unsettled and they were far from stable in the DDR, as will be seen before this chapter is concluded. Reorganization of the School System In May, 1953, Minister Zaisser stood at the height of her in fluence, and she was also her most radical self. On May 15, 1953, the Ministry of Education announced the fusion of the Oberschule and the Ten- Year School. 20 In the future, there was to be just one higher school system consisting of grades nine to eleven. This would mean eight years of Grundschule followed by three years of a higher school, which would lead to the university. This reorganization was heralded as a tremendous step forward and the greatest change since the Law for 21 Democratization of the German School. Groth explained that the new system would do away with the confusion which existed among graduates of the Ten-Year Schools and the three groupings (A, B, and C) of the 20 "Reorganisation der allgemeinbildenden Schulen und der Lehrerbildung" /Reorganization of the General School System and of Teacher Training/, Neue Schule, VIII (May 29, 1953), 2-7. 21 Wolfgang Groth, "Reorganisation in Schritt auf dem Wege zur sozialistischen Schule" /Reorganization Keeping Pace Along the Road to Socialism/, Neue Schule, VIII (May 29, 1953), 5. 178 Oberschule. A Neue Schule editorial said that the reorganization was merely bringing the school system up-to-date with the social and economic changes which had already taken place.22 Since the state was now composed of workers and peasants, the schools should reflect this fact. Also, there was no longer any place in the higher schools for students who were not enthusiastically in favor of the regime. The same was true of teachers. Groth said that the new type of school would be phased in gradually. Beginning with the fourth grade in September of 1953, a grade would be changed each year so that, by 1961, a new eleven-year school system would be in operation. Anti-religious Campaign At about the same time that Minister Zaisser was getting ready to revise the entire school system, an attack was launched against the Protestant youth organization, Junge Gemeinde. 2^ Fully exploiting the mass hysteria encouraged by the announcement of June 9, 1953, concerning 22Ibid., 4. 23Ib id ., 5. 24"ijunge Gemeinde' Tarnorganisation fUr Krieghetze, Sabotage und Spionage" /The Young Congregation, Cover Organization for War Propaganda, Sabotage, and Espionage/, Neue Schule, VIII (May 8, 1953), 2. "diversionaries, spies, and terrorists, " this religious youth organization was described as a hotbed for warmongering, sabotage, and espionage. ^ Wholesale withdrawal from the organization was advocated. Minister Zaisser took an active part in this campaign of vituperation. She addressed a conference of FDJ secretaries assigned to Oberschulen and spoke to them about the illegal activities carried on by members of the Junge Gemeinde in all schools and even in teacher training institutions. It turned out later that Minister Zaisser did not confine her attack to this form of defamation. Students were also denied permission to enter the Oberschule, if they were known to support the Junge Gemeinde. Even teachers lost their jobs, if they spoke favorably of the Junge Gemeinde. Minister Zaisser had one prime target in mind when she went after changing the school system and in taking on a religious contro.versy -- that common target was the secondary school system, the Oberschule. Since she was impatient to get under way along the path of Socialism, she recognized that a major stumbling block was the Oberschule, including OP Verordnung Uber weitere Massnahmen zum Schutze . . ., loc. cit. ^®Else Zaisser,_ "Kampf gegen die Spionage und Agentenorganisa- tion 'Junge Gemeinde'” /Attack against the Spy and Agent Organization, ”Junge GemeindelT7, Neue Schule, VIII (May 8, 1953), 6. ^E lse Zaisser, "RegierungsbeschlUsse werden konsequent verwirklicht" /Decisions of the Government to be Carried Out/, Neue Schule, VIII (July 10, 1953), 4. ~ 180 students and teachers. By having all students attend the same school for eleven years, she felt that the distinction between the primary and secondary schools would soon disappear. By discrediting, removing, and not permitting students who showed signs of thinking independently to enter the secondary schools, Minister Zaisser hoped to remove or at least reduce the pockets of resistance which had remained to this tim e. Up to this point Minister Zaisser's educational program was moving ahead rapidly. Many of the announced changes were to begin in September. Then something very unexpected happened. The June 17 Uprising On May 28, 1953, the Government ordered all Ministers and State Secretaries to re-evaluate the production norms with the purpose in mind of increasing these by at least ten per cent by June, 1953. 28 Shortly afterwards, on June 9, the Central Committee made the unusual announcement that the Government and the Party had made a series of 29 mistakes, which would be corrected by charting a "new course. " ^Kopp, op. cit., p. 229. 29lbid. , pp. 230-7; Doernberg, op. cit. , 219 ff. 181 Among the errors admitted were: the confiscation of property of Germans who had fled to West Germany, not paying sufficient attention to the needs of intellectuals, and prejudice against members of the Junge Gemeinde. As late as June 16, Walter Ulbricht stated that the Party had been in too big a hurry and had resorted too frequently to introducing great changes from the top without sufficient mass support from below. On this same day, the newspaper of the FDGB (Free German Labor Union), the TribUne, commented that the "new course" did not imply any change in the require ment that the production norms be raised by at least ten per cent. This must have triggered the first strike of some eighty construction workers on Stalinallee in Berlin. By the next day, this strike had mushroomed into a nation-wide uprising against the Government. Martial law was on declared, and Russian tanks moved into action. Neue Schule was embarrassed. 31 The uprising had to be blamed on the American imperialists who had chosen June 17 as their "X" Day. German workers would not have done such a thing. It was true that some Germans did not understand what was going on in the DDR, and there ^F or a detailed account of this uprising see: Arno Scholz, Der 17. Juni; Volkerhebung in Ostberlin und in der Sowjetzone (Berlin: Arani-Verlag, 1953)“ O 1 Unser Vertrauen der Regierung und der Partei der Arbeiter- klasse!" /We Have Full Confidence in the Government and the Workers' Party/, Neue Schule, VHI (July 3, 1953), 2. 182 were others who wanted to see some changes made, but they were satisfied that the Government was taking their criticism s seriously. After all, the Party had admitted openly that mistakes had been made. ^ Minister Zaisser's Confession of Error Following this unexpected turn of events, Frau Zaisser recog nized the handwriting on the wall and rescued what she could. In an interview which appeared in the Neue Schule, the first woman Minister OO of Education admitted her failings. She said that she had been too precipitous in introducing the Eleven-Year School. This plan, which would have changed the entire school system by 1961, had since been cancelled. Frau Zaisser now realized that she and the State Secretary for Universities had lost contact with the people. She had not thought through the implications of having an eleven-year training program in the DDR when the Federal Republic had a twelve-year system. What complications would arise if a student transferred from Dresden to Munich! She also admitted to being wrong when she attacked the religious institution, Junge Gemeinde, when she denied entry of many members of ^"Der 17. Juni -- eine ernste Lehre" /The 17th of June -- A Serious Lesson/, Ibid., 3. ^E lse Zaisser, ’’RegierungsbeschlUsse . . ., " op. cit., 4-5. 183 this organization to the higher schools, and when she caused certain teachers to be dismissed. All these teachers were to be restored to their former positions and Junge Gemeinde members were to enjoy the same rights of matriculation in higher schools as workers' children. After being a Communist for twenty-six years, Minister Zaisser had learned something about being too radical. The editorial of the same issue of the Neue Schule which carried the Zaisser confession, was likewise humble in tone. 34 Tlie editor said that it was time for the journal to put its own house in order. He admitted that there had been too many glowing reports about results achieved at educational meetings and a suppression of the criticism s which had been made at these meetings. Many critics had called the Neue Schule dull and said that the publication was completely out of touch with its readership. The Party's Judgment of Minister Zaisser The plant union within the Ministry of Education, called the Betriebsparteiorganisation der SEP im Ministerium fUr Volksbilding, brought about Frau Zaisser's downfall. An evaluation took place within 34"Sch8nf£trberei ist Selbstbetrug” /Don't Kid Yourself/, Neue Schule, VIII (July 10, 1953), 3. 184 the Ministry from September 15 to 26. 35 The union levelled this general criticism against the Ministry: no person in a leading position had reacted satisfactorily to the events of June 17, too many officials were self- satisfied, not enough was being done to back up the teachers, and the errors revealed by the Central Committee had not been corrected. In a direct attack on Minister Zaisser, it was mentioned that she lacked first-hand information; she relied on committees and written reports to keep informed. She allowed events to control her. She maintained no contact with teachers. She had not visited a school for more than a year. Kreis teachers' meetings were ignored. Her personal relations with fellow Party members within the Ministry left much to be desired. She would not take them into confidence. She would not impress on her officials the political importance of what they were doing. The Minister's domineering attitude carried over to her department heads. Another fault was Frau Zaisser's lack of originality. She relied too heavily on her knowledge of conditions in Russia. She simply copied the Soviet school system and tried to apply it in Germany without being aware of the difference between the two countries. She leaned heavily 33,lFllr einen entscheidenden Umschwung in der Arbeit des Ministeriums fUr Volksbilding, 11 /For a Decisive Change in the Work of the Ministry of Education/, Neue Schule, VIII (October 30, 1953), 4-5. 185 on the advice of her husband and felt too secure in her long membership Off in the Party; for this reason she did not listen to critics. Two other officials in the Ministry shared criticism with the Minister: Wolfgang Groth., head of the Department for Instruction and Training, and Hans-Joachim Laabs, the State Secretary for Education. Groth was blamed for poor coordination of materials used for examina tions and for making very superficial decisions. Laabs was taken to task, because he did not attend discussion meetings, exercised little influence on functionaries, and because he neglected to do something about improving discipline in school. In concluding its critique, the union requested that the Central Committee check the leaders in the Ministry of Education to see what they planned to do to bring about a change and to determine whether the best available people were in the top positions. No official announcement was found in the educational journals concerning Else Zaisser's dismissal. One source said that she was terminated during October, 1953, and this may be correct. It also said 37 that she was employed by the Volk und Wissen Verlag and the DPZI. Kopp, op. cit., p. 247. According to this reference, Wilhelm Zaisser, Frau Zaisser's husband, was dropped from the Central Committee and the Party on July 26, 1953. Since the June 17 episode directly involved the Ministry of Security, he was a logical scapegoat. on Kopp, op. cit., p. 394. 186 Evaluation and Significance of Minister Zaisser's Administration When Minister Zaisser was eased out of her position, the Ministry of Education was left leaderless. The usual procedure of moving up the State Secretary was made difficult, because he too was under fire. The Ministry had been severely shaken by the June 17 incident. There was no strong personality to take over Frau Zaisser's duties. When Frau Zaisser was appointed Minister of Education, all signs pointed toward a great push forward along the education front. Prof. Zaisser had carefully prepared herself for the position. She had been a strong State Secretary and had received much publicity. She had successfully promoted the idea that Soviet pedagogy offered the best solution for the DDR. The PolitbUro's decision of July 29, 1952, was exactly what Minister Zaisser had advocated after her return from a three-week study tour of the USSR. Since Walter Ulbricht had just announced the beginning of a new era for the DDR, the Ministry had an excellent setting for initiating its new program. All went well until June 17. What was the connection between the rioting and scrubbing all the new plans? Why did this experienced Communist so abjectly admit that she was wrong in what she had done? How could it come about that students and teachers who one day were accused of being spies and saboteurs would, on another day, be restored to the classroom? 187 The main reason was fear. The SED recognized that their whole movement might go up in smoke. As one editor remarked: Habt ihr schon darliber nachgedacht, ist euch klargeworden, wie nahe wir explodierenden Granaten und zerfetzenden Bomben, wie nahe wir dam Tod und der Vernichtung waren? /Have you thought about it, has it become clear to you, how narrowly we escaped exploding grenades_and mutilating bombs, how close we were to death and destruction?/33 Another reason was acute embarrassment. The same editor said: Besonders schmerzlich war es filr manchen Lehrer, unter den irrege- leiteten Demonstranten viele Jugendliche zu sehen. Jugendliche, die vor zwei oder drei Jahren unsere Grundschulen verliessen. Schmerz lich ist die Erkenntniss, wieviel unwahrhaftige "Bekenntnisse" von SchUlern und Lehrern es in den vergangenen Jahren gegeben hat, in Gegesatz zu ihrem wirklichen Bewusstsein. /It was particularly painful for many a teacher to see many a youth among the m isled demonstrators who had graduated from our Grund schulen two or three years ago. It was painful to be forced to realize how many untruthful "confessions" were made in past years by students and teachers, confessions which did not reflect their real attitudes/739 SchBnfUrberei /wishful thinking/ was yet another reason. It was a sobering experience for some long-time Communists to recognize the fact that there were people who were not listening to them. Another editor said: "Wie oft haben wir ilber die Kbpfe der Menschen hinweggeredet" /How often we must have talked right over their heads. /^ 33,lDer 17. Juni -- eine ernste Lehre, " loc. cit. 39Ibid. ^9"SchBnfErberei, etc., " loc. cit. ^7"Der 17. Juni -- eine ernste Lehre, " loc. cit. 188 The full meaning of the Zaisser Administration was this. In May of 1953, the Ministry of Education was ready to move ahead boldly with an educational program which the Party wanted; however, the plan could not be carried out, because the SED had misjudged the breaking point of workers' resistance. As far as can be determined, ’’revisionists" among educators had nothing to do with starting the trouble; the disturbances were started by laborers who had had enough. Once the SED was openly defied, the full resentment of many other elements in the population found expression in the revolt. Resistance quickly carried over into the schools, particularly the Oberschulen, which Minister Zaisser had tried to abolish. This year revealed many weaknesses in the Party and in the Ministry of Education. Stefan Doernberg, the Communist historian, frankly admitted the errors committed by the SED and the Government of the DDR: Die Filhrung der Sozialistischen Einheitspartei Deutschlands und die Regierung der DDR erkannten diese Lage und korrigierten durch den Beschluss des Politburos des ZK der SED vom 9. Juni 1953 die Ueberspitzungen und Fehler, die sich beim Aufbau des Sozialismus in der DDR gezeigt hatten. Die Partei und die Regierung traten offen vor die Arbeiterklasse und alle WerktUtigen und erklUrten, dass in der Vergangenheit eine Reihe von Fehlern begangen wurden. /Leaders of the SED and the Government of the DDR recognized this situation and corrected the excesses and errors which came about when socialism was being developed in the DDR. This was done in the decision of the PolitbUro of the SED on June 9, 1953. The Party and the Government frankly admitted to the working class and _ to all workers that a number of errors had been committed in the past/42 4.9 Doernberg, op_. c it., p. 221. 189 The mistakes made by the Minister of Education were publicly admitted 43 by Frau Zaisser herself. The June 17, 1953 incident constituted one of the rare occasions where the Party, the Government, and the Ministry of Education all admitted that they were wrong. While it is undoubtedly true that Frau Zaisser's dismissal was related to her husband's fall from grace, just as her rise to power may have been influenced by her husband's prominence, the fact is that she admitted her own inadequacy in handling the reorganization of the school system and in attacking the church. Her other weaknesses, specifically charged by the Betriebsparteiorganisation, have already been mentioned. One must conclude that Else Zaisser simply was not in the same class as Paul Wandel; nor was Hans-Joachim Laabs. The Administration of Hans-Joachim Laabs (March to November, 1954) The frightened feeling which the June 17 uprising had produced among the SED leaders continued on into 1954. The type of Party in vestigation which took place in the Ministry of Education and which resulted in Frau Zaisser's dismissal was repeated wherever there was an indication of trouble. Some of these hearings took a long time, be cause they involved high officials. On January 23, 1954, Anton Ackermann, 42Zaisser, "Regierungsbeschltlsse . . .," 4-5. 190 who was discussed in the second chapter of this dissertation as an ardent supporter of education and who had risen to the position of State Secretary of Foreign Affairs, was removed from the Central Committee. ^ As late as June 9, 1954, an announcement was released that Georg Dertinger, who, as Foreign Minister, had declared the formation of national fighting forces for the DDR on May 8, 1952, had been sentenced to fifteen years iruprison AC as an espionage agent for the United States and Great Britain. In Feb ruary, 1954, the Central Committee of the Teachers' Union took a long look at its membership and decided that its own chairman, Karl Ellrich, could not be trusted. ^ The Committee announced that Ellrich knew that two enemy agents, Georg Schuetze and Werner Schaeffner, who had since escaped to the West, had been engaging in illegal activities. Since he himself was acting more like a Social Democrat, he would be dis missed from the Union. These instances are cited to show the atmosphere of suspicion which existed everywhere. No one could feel safe. A chance remark, ^Kopp, op. cit. , p. 270. ^Geschichtliche Zeittafeln der DDR, 1949-59 (Berlin: Kongress Verlag, 1954), p. 162. ^"Kommunique liber die J^5. Zentralvorstandssitzung der Gewerk- schaft Unterricht und Erziehung" /Communique concerning the Fifteenth Session of the Central Committee of the Teachers' Union/, Neue Schule, IX (February 26, 1954), 15. 191 a frank opinion, relatives in the West, any or all of these could start an investigation. Small wonder that State Secretary Hans-Joachim Laabs was keeping very quiet after his original hearing. The Interregnum So far as can be determined from the documents at hand, there was no Minister of Education from approximately October, 1953, to March 18, 1954, when Hans-Joachim Laabs was appointed to this position. The functions of the office were, however, carried on during this time by Laabs in his capacity of State Secretary. A substantial reason for believing this to be true was the fact that Laabs signed an important law as State Secretary on March 4, 1954. 47 This five months' period during which the top position was not filled was clear evidence of the demoralized state of the Ministry of Education following the people's revolt of June 17. It was possible that Laabs was kept on the job because no other more suitable person was available. This con jecture was supported by the fact that Laabs later held the position of Minister for only eight months, after which he was demoted. An Verordnung zur Verbesserung der Arbeit der allgemein- bildenden Schulen" ^Bulletin for the Improvement of the Work of the General School/, insert to Neue Schule, IX (March 19, 1954), 1-10. 192 Improvement of Instruction in the General Schools In this very quiet year for education, only one document appeared which deserved some attention. This was the law called: "Improvement „48 of Instruction in the General Schools. It was signed by Laabs in his capacity as State Secretary on March 4, 1954. Possibly by way of making up for the previous year's attempt to wipe out the Oberschule, this law claimed that the number of secondary schools had doubled, that, since 1945, the percentage of workers1 children attending secondary schools had risen from nineteen to forty- eight, and that now every fifth graduate of the Grundschule went on to a secondary school. The law did not mention actual figures. Also, Ten- Year Schools were regarded as secondary schools, although the curriculum varied considerably from the Oberschule. It will be recalled that the Ten-Year School was developed when the drop-out rate during the year 1951 became very high. The Oberschule was generally accepted as university preparatory. This law announced that, for the first time, a PrUfung der Mittleren Reife /Examination of Middle Maturity/ would be given to all graduates of the Ten-Year School at the end of the 1953-54 school year.^® 49,,Verordnung zur Verbesserung der Arbeit der allgemeinbildenden Schulen, " loc. cit. 49Ibid., 2. 193 Passing of this examination entitled students to enter certain technical schools. The State Secretary for Universities was asked to provide a list of such technical schools. The establishment of this examination implied that the Ten-Year School was there to stay and that no further thought was being given, at this time, to fusing this type of school with the Qberschule. Russian, mathematics, and German were required 50 subjects in the written portion of this examination. A further determination of the law was that the DPZI was to be developed into a research center for pedagogy. This idea was not en tirely new, since the Department of Theory within the DPZI had been v 51 given a similar assignment in 1952. This law greatly extended the original plan and made the DPZI into an institution which could award the doctor’s degree in Education. Details of this program were to be worked out and made known at a later date. The DPZI was also put in charge of all educational research at all pedagogical institutions. All research subjects had to be cleared by the DPZI before a candidate could begin his work. It was expected that the DPZI would not only become a clearing house for research but would also inspire teachers to take an active interest in research. 5Q______"Anordnung ttber die Prllfung de£ Mittleren Reifeu /Order con cerning the Examination of Middle Maturity/, Karteibuch, B, 4, 52 (April 5, 1954), 1. ~~ ^"Aus der Arbeit des DPZI, etc. " op. cit., 466. 194 This placement of confidence in the DPZI showed that the Institute had survived the shake-up of the Ministry of Education which followed the June 17 uprising without a loss of standing. The present statement on the purposes of the DPZI failed to mention the function of bringing the DDR abreast with Soviet pedagogy, a point which was 52 stressed in 1952. This statement emphasizes research of the most pressing problems which existed in the German democratic school. The law also made known the end of the publication, Neue Schule, an educational journal which first appeared in 1946 and which has been quoted frequently in this dissertation. Neue Schule ceased publication with issue thirteen in March, 1954. It was replaced by the Deutsche Lehrerzeitung, which appeared twice a week in newspaper format. A preview of the paper stated that it would provide important educational news, educational problems, educational news about other countries, discussions about political events, letters from teachers, some humor, and sport news. 54 There were possibly two explanations for the changeover from a journal format to that of a newspaper. One went back to an editorial 52Ibid. ^^"Verordnung zur Verbesserung, . . ., M op. cit., 9. 54,1'Deutsche Lehrerzeitung1 kommt" /German Teachers’ News paper on the Way/, Neue Schule, IX (March 12, 1954), 10-11. 195 which appeared in the Neue Schule in 1952 when the editor recognized complaints from readers that the journal had become nothing but a newspaper. The editor recognized the criticism but did not accept it. He admitted a change from the early days, when practical advice was offered beginning teachers, to a later time, when this practical advice no longer seemed necessary but discussions of larger issues seemed important. The other explanation might be found in an introduction to the newspaper which said: Alle Formen der journalistischen Arbeit, wie Leitartikel, Kurzhommentar, Bericht, Nachricht, Reportage, Glosse, Karikatur, kBnnen in der Zeitung angewandt werden, um den Leser schnell und zuverlMssig, interessant und lebendig zu informieren, um ihm in der t&glichen pUdagogischen und gesellschaftlichen Arbeit zu helfen. /All types of journalism, such as lead stories, short commentaries, reports, news items, personal interviews, news analyses, and carica tures, all these can be used in the newspaper to inform a reader quickly and reliably, and in an interesting and lively_fashion, in order to help him in his daily pedagogical and social work While the reason was not known, it was interesting to see that Ernst Z. IchenhUuser, who had been dismissed from the Neue Schule in January, 1953, for embarrassing the DDR, was appointed editor-in-chief of the Deutsche Lehrerzeitung. ^"Wandel der Zeiten -- Wandel der Zeitung" /Change in the Times -- Change in the News/, Neue Schule, VII (January 3, 1952), 5-6. ^"Was wird sie bringen?" /What Will the Paper Offer?/, Neue Schule, IX (March 26, 1954), 2. 196 Finally, the law declared that the Fifth Pedagogical Conference would be held in 1955. The last such conference took place in 1949, which meant an omission of six years. Laabs Appointed Minister of Education The day after the law: "improvement of Instruction in the General Schools" appeared in the Gesetzblatt, Hans-Joachim Laabs was promoted from State Secretary to Minister of Education. He was only thirty-three years of age at the time of his appointment and much was made of the fact that he had started as a lowly teacher in a one-room rural school in 1946. Laabs held a unique position in the history of DDR education. After being appointed State Secretary in the Ministry of Education in 1952 to succeed Else Zaisser, he managed to survive the sharp critique which toppled Zaisser, became her successor after a five-month incubation period, managed to hold his own for only eight months, and was then quietly demoted to his original State Secretaryship. According to one source, he was dismissed from this position in 1958, after which he became a — 57 Bezirksschulrat /county superintendent/. When Laabs was promoted to Minister of Education, Dr. Gertrud CO Bobek succeeded him as State Secretary. Dr. Bobek had been a member ^Kopp, op. cit., p. 203. ^Deutsche Lehrerzeitung, I (April 10, 1954), 4. 197 of the Communist Party before 1933. She had spent the time between 1933 and 1945 in the USSR. Before her appointment to the Ministry, she had spent two years with the DPZI, where she specialized in pre paring correspondence courses for geography. When Laabs was re duced to State Secretary and First Deputy of the Minister of Education on November 26, 1954, Dr. Bobek became Deputy Minister of Education.^ Evaluation and Significance of the Laabs Administration In comparing Minister Laabs with his two predecessors, the most obvious fact was that his term of office was the shortest -- only eight months -- in contrast to Frau Zaisser's eighteen months and Paul Wandel's almost eight years. Another obvious difference was his age -- thirty-three years -- in contrast to Wandel's forty years when first appointed to the Ministry and Else Zaisser's fifty-four. Both Wandel and Zaisser were old-time Communists who had spent most of the war years in the USSR; Laabs' contact with Communism, as far as is known, did not begin until after the war. He was the only Neulehrer among the six Ministers. For these reasons, his rise to a high position was the more remarkable, although it was entirely in conformity with the Youth Law. In only one other instance, namely that of the last of the six Ministers of Education to be discussed in this dissertation, Margot Honecker, was a post-war Communist appointed to such a position. ^Deutsche Lehrerzeitung, I (December 1, 1954), 1. 198 Laabs presided over the Ministry of Education at its lowest ebb and when it was most unproductive. The Ministry had not yet recovered from the setback it had received when Frau Zaisser was forced to disavow most of her ambitious plans. This was also a period when the SED was in a slump and had no major proposals to make for education. The Ministry had never been so freely criticized by teachers as during the Laabs' regime and, since Laabs himself was not a very strong Minister, he joined the critics and said: Verantwortlich fUr die Mangel in der Arbeit der Schulen ist in erster Linie das Ministerium flir Volksbildung. Die Anleitung der Schulen durch das Ministerium und die ihm unterstellten Organe der Volks bildung ist unzureichend. /The Ministry of Education is primarily responsible for the weaknesses in the work of the schools. The leadership pr 'ded by the Ministry and its subsidiary organizations in unsatisfactory. The era of Laabs was characterized by its conservatism. The school system returned to the Grundschule and Oberschule routine, with some increase in the Ten-Year School. Actually, the introduction of the Certificate of Middle Maturity meant that the field for university prepara tion was very largely left to the Oberschule, where it had always been. The strongly pro-Soviet pedagogy tendency of the Zaisser period was amended considerably to the point where Laabs announced that, henceforth, the DDR would not just borrow from the Russians, but would develop some Verordnung zur Verbesserung 199 German ideas. On the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the founding of the DPZI, Laabs wrote: Aber wir stehen jetzt vor einer neuen Aufgabe. Unsere sowjetischen Freunde haben uns oft gesagt, dass sie nicht nur die Gebenden sein wollen, dass sie es nicht nur gern sehen, dass wir uns mit ihren Erfahrungen auseinandersetzen und sie gegebenenfalis anwenden, sondern dass sie von uns auch etwas erwarten. Das ist eine neue Phase der Beziehungen der deutschen p£Ldagogischen W issenschaftler zu den sowjetisohen. Wir ktJnnen uns nicht mehr zufriedengeben, sowjetische Forschungsergebnisse und Erfahrungen zu interpritieren, fUr uns anzuwenden und umzuformen, sondern wir mils sen zur Ent- wicklung der fortschrittlichen p&dagogischen Wissenschaft selbst sehr viel tun. Das unsere sowjetischen Freunde das von uns verlangen, ist ein Ausdruck sehr grossen Vertrauens. /But now we face a new assignment. Our Soviet friends have often told us that they do not merely wish to be among those who contribute, that they are not satisfied with seeing us discuss their experiences and perhaps putting their ideas to work, but that they also expect something of us. That is a new development in the relationship be tween German and Soviet pedagogues. We can no longer be satisfied with interpreting the results of Soviet research and experience, to adapt these to our own purposes, but we must do a great deal toward promoting the science of progressive pedagogy ourselves. The fact that our Soviet colleagues expect this of us is an indication of their great confidence in us This was a time of many worried people, not least among them Minister Laabs himself. He had been left dangling in his State Secretary ship for five months before being promoted and must soon have surmised that he would not last very long in his new capacity. As mentioned pre viously, many individuals had either been tried or were awaiting trial in ^"Festliche Veranstaltung zum Ftinf jahrigen Bestehen der DPZI" /Formal Reception in Honor of the Fifth Anniversary of the DPZI/, Paeda go gik, IX (October, 1954), 901. 200 connection with their participation in the June 17 affair. The law of March 4 showed that teacher training standards were still widely differentiated and generally low. Many teachers were still in teaching assignments for which they were not qualified. The Ministry of Education ordered the DPZI to prepare correspondence courses for ten thousand teachers in the middle grades who were not qualified to teach their subject. Even since June 17, 1953, the Ministry of Education was concerned about the poor discipline which existed in many schools. The blame was usually put on the teachers, because they did not use the FDJ and the Pioniere to assist in maintaining order. Another disturbing factor was the number of teachers who were still not solidly behind the SED's program. This number must have grown when teachers who had been dismissed on Zaisser's orders were returned to duty under orders from the same Minister. While the Laabs Administration was generally a dismal period in the history of DDR education, a few developments showed a forward looking trend. A new publication in newspaper form, which was ex pected to bring more life and timeliness into the dreary lives of many fi o "Verordnung zur Verbesserung, . . ., ,'_2P- cit. , 5. 201 teachers, made its appearance. There was also some prospect of a large pedagogical conference being held the following year. Such a meeting had not been attempted for six years. Finally, the foundation was laid for establishing a research program for education which promised to provide some new solutions for DDR education based on local research, not on mere imitation of the USSR model. CHAPTER IV INTENSIFICATION OF PARTY CONTROL OVER EDUCATION (1954-1958) Fritz Lange was appointed Minister of Education on November 19, 1954. * He did not come up via the usual ladder of the State Secretaryship. He came straight from the Central Committee of the SED, a good indication that the SED wanted to be sure that it had a direct hand in the affairs of the Ministry. No explanation for Laabs' demotion to State Secretary and First Deputy of the Minister of Education was given. The announcement merely said that Minister Lange would work closely with Laabs in carrying out the provisions of the Law of March 4, 1953, which was discussed in the previous chapter. Minister Lange was an old-time communist whose first contact with the Soviet Union came on the Eastern Front at the end of World War I. He joined the KPD in 1920. In 1923, he was invited to the USSR to become acquainted with the Pioneer organization. During the Hitler Period, he worked in his wife's tobacco business until he became implicated in a plot l"Weitere Festigung unserer demokratischen Schule" /Further Strengthening of Our Democratic School/, Deutsche Lehrerzeitung, I (November 24, 1954), 1. In future, DLZ will be used for Deutsche Lehrerzeitung. 203 of high treason for which he was sent to prison. He was freed from prison by the Russians. Although educated as a teacher, Lange had not been near a school since 1924. His selection for the Ministry had nothing to do with his academic standing. Comparison between Lange and Wandel Lange was, in many respects, similar to Paul Wandel. Neither had received much formal education. Both had been politically active most of their lives. Even at this time, both had been elected to the Volkskammer and both had been voted into the Central Committee of the SED. Both had newspaper experience. Both were very aware of the need for mass support. As in the case of Paul Wandel, Minister Lange did not wait for teachers to expose weaknesses of the Ministry; he initiated the criticism himself. After only a few months in office, he made fun of the Ressortgeist /narrow viewpoint / which existed in the Ministry. - With a very effective ironic humor, he described various departments which operated independently and would have nothing to do with each other, except that they maintained some form of diplomatic relations. Lange said that he would make sure that the situation was corrected. o SBZ-Biographie, op. cit. , p. 205. O _ "Diskussionsrede des Ministers fUr Volksbildung, Fritz Lange" /Speech of the Minister of Education, Fritz Lange"7, DLZ, II (March 27, 1955), 4. 204 As was true of Wandel, who invited the FDJ to co-sponsor the tx Fourth Pedagogical Conference, so Lange made much of the Pioniere in connection with schools.^ As stated above, he showed a special interest in the youth organization as far back as 1923. Somewhat later, within the framework of this discussion of the year 1955, Lange's special pro motion of youth organizations and extracurricular activities will be m entioned. Finally, Lange was the first Minister since Wandel who recog nized the usefulness and importance of pedagogical conferences. Lange, it was true, had not originated the idea, which was incorporated in the Law of March 4, 1953, but he executed it with unprecedented thoroughness. Preparations for the Fifth Pedagogical Conference In September, 1955, Minister Lange announced that the conference which was supposed to have been held in October, 1955, would be postponed until the following year. ^ The basic and only reason given for this delay was the fact that the school system was closely attuned to the economic plans and that a change from the first to the second Five-Year Plan would take place at the end of 1955. This statement underlined more than anything 4Ibid. 5 t_ "Auf dem Wege zum V. P&dagogischen Kongress" /On the Way to the Fifth Pedagogical Conference/, DLZ, II (September 24, 1955), 1-2. 205 that the DDR school system could not be understood unless it was related to the economic system. As stated above, no one had ever prepared a pedagogical conference more thoroughly. Perhaps this was the lesson which Lange learned from the June 17 revolt and Frau Zaisser's experience with it. From October 2-5, 1955, at about the time the conference was to take place originally, eight special commissions met in Leipzig to make proposals for discussions at the Fifth Pedagogical Conference. Consider ing its past pro-Soviet reputation, the DPZI was given the unusual assign ment of setting up four workshops to determine which German educational f t traditions could be useful to the new school. The areas assigned to the four workshops were these: (1) the classic period, (2) the end of the Nineteenth Century, (3) the present West Germany, and (4) the effect of USSR pedagogy on the present East Germany. These workshops were to meet during November, 1955, and the results were to be reprinted in the December issue of Paedagogik. Clearly, every effort was being made to rally heavy support in back of the Fifth Pedagogical Conference. Few teachers could reasonably say that their opinions had not been heard; on the other hand, the Ministry knew what teachers were thinking. 6Ibid., 2. 206 The Function of School Inspectors One way by which Lange hoped to win wide support among teachers for the Ministry was through extensive preparations for the pedagogical conference; another way of maintaining a close working relationship with teachers was by the inspector system, which he had inherited from the Zaisser administration. The details of this system were completed during this year. ? There were three categories at three levels: the Hauptschul- inspektor /Head School Inspector / worked at lever of the Ministry of Education in Berlin and was assigned to the Ministry; the Bezirksschul- inspektor /Inspector of Bezirk Schools/ was assigned to the Abteilung Volksbildung der RUte der Bezirke /Department for Education in the Council of the Bezirk/; and, finally, the Kreisschulinspektor /Inspector of Kreis Schools_/, who came under the Abteilung Volksbildung der RSte der Kreise /Department for Education in the Council of the KreisJ. T his breakdown, incidentally, showed not only how the inspector system was organized but also how education itself was administered from top to bottom. The requirements for the three levels of inspectors were also staggered, except that all officials were required to have university training and had to be politically reliable. The Kreisschulinspektor had ^"Anordnung Uber die TStigkeit der Schulinspektoren” /Order concerning the Work of the School Inspectors/, Gesetzblatt, II, Nr. 30 (June 7, 1955), 181-4. 207 to have five years of teaching experience, including two years as Schuldirektor or Schulleiter, the Bezirksschuiinspektor had to have at least one year of experience as Kreisschulinspektor, and the Hauptschulinspektor had to have been a Bezirksschuldirektor for at least a year. All inspectors had certain rights and privileges. The Kreis schulinspektor was empowered to void any regulation of a Schuldirektor, if he considered the regulation unsound or illegal; he also had the authority to dismiss a teacher, but the charges would have to be investigated by the Department for Education of the Kreis within three days. The Bezirksschuiinspektor had the right to propose teachers to the Kreis for employment; the Hauptschulinspektor had the same privilege for the B e zirk . Enough has been said to show that inspectors had authority to take action within well defined lim its. Their general function was not to become involved in local administration but to observe what was going on, determine the effectiveness of the educational program, and to make sure that all regulations were being carried out. The inspector system, imported from the USSR, became a permanent fixture in the Ministry of Education. It served to counteract the charge that the Ministry was out of touch with the teachers. The inspectors also kept the Ministry aware of public reactions; a healthy 208 respect for the public had developed as a result of June 17, 1953. Finally, the Ministry previously lacked a system of enforcing its many regulations; the inspector system was a partial answer to this problem . Plans for Middle Schools During the year 1955, another reorganization of the school system took place. The change was built around the Ten-Year School, a favorite with the SED since it was introduced in 1951 in connection with the Five-Year Plan. With a second Five-Year Plan about to begin, a further adaptation of the school system was decided upon. The Ministerial Council decided on the establishment of Middle Schools on June 23, 1955, following a proposal made by the Central Committee. ® The new Middle Schools were not to be a mere adding of two years to the Grundschule, as was the case with the original Ten- Year School. They were to have a newly-thought-through ten-year curriculum which would provide a complete education for middle level jobs in industry, agriculture, communications, trade, the police, and teaching. No subjects were to be included in the curriculum which ^Laabs, "Ueber die Entwicklung von Mittelschulen in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik" /Concerning the Development of Middle Schools in the DDR/, DLZ, II (July 30, 1955), 1. 209 could not be finished in the ten years; hence, a second language was not to be started. Students in their tenth year would be required to take the examination for Middle Maturity. The name, Middle Schools, had nothing to do with the system having a similar name in West Germany. Middle School meant that it was a school which prepared for middle level professions. The curriculum was to provide general education, but an education which emphasized the practical applications of all which was learned. It was anticipated that, in time, the Middle School would completely replace the eight-year Grundschule and that completion of the Middle School would become compulsory. By the year 1956, graduation from a Middle School would be required to enter an Institute for Teachers. Laabs made it clear that the Middle School was not intended to replace the Oberschule. Possibly to relieve criticism, he mentioned that the Oberschule might even be increased in some areas, especially in heavily populated centers. In some locations, Laabs admitted, incomplete Oberschulen, i. e ., where all academic subjects could not be offered be cause of the limited student population, would have to be converted to Mittelschulen. In fact, said Laabs, there might be situations where the same school might be both an Oberschule and a Mittelschule. As soon as possible, however, such schools were to be differentiated. Beginning August 2, all Ten-Year Schools were to be called Middle Schools. ^ \ This reorganization scheme of Lange's was not really too far removed from what Minister Zaisser was trying to do when she decided on an eleven year system. Her objective was similar to that of Lange, namely to work toward having all children take the same basic education beyond the eighth year. A primary difference between Zaisser's and Lange's approach was that Zaisser was ready to do away with the Oberschule while Lange retained it, at least for the time being. Extension of Extracurricular Activities As mentioned earlier, Minister Lange had a special interest in youth organizations. A few months after he came into office, Lange criticized the lack of interest among teachers in the Pioneer organiza tion. -*-0 Lange said that he would see to it that teachers would, in future, learn to understand that the Pioneers were a part of the school. He in tended to have questions about Pioneer work included in the teacher examinations. Lange felt that between one and one-half to two years of the four a teacher candidate would spend at the teacher institutes should be devoted to Pioneer work outside of school. ^"Anweisung Uber Bezeichnung der Zehnklassenschulen als Mittelschulen" /Order which Designates Ten-Year Schools as Middle Schools/, Karteibuch, B, 3, 3 (August 21, 1955), 1. ^"Diskus^sionsrede, . . . , " loc. cit. 211 Beginning September 1. 1955, Lange created a central station for a new youth organization called the Junge Naturforscher ^ /Young Natural Scientists/. This group was related to the FDJ, but came under the Minister of Education. The subdivisions included Young Gardeners, Young Meteorologists, etc. The purpose of all these groups was to make propaganda among Pioneers on behalf of science. This was an extension of the school into after-school activities. The intention was to arouse the interest of youngsters of the Pioneer age in natural science and thereby improve the quality of their work'in school. The new organiza tions also served the purpose of supervising the free time of students. International Education The year of 1955 was a year of expanding interest in inter national relations and education. During the first few months of the year, an end of a state of war between the DDR and such countries as the USSR, Poland, Bulgaria, Rumania, and Hungary were negotiated.1 2 An end of a state of war, even with Red China, was arranged. 1 1 Anordning Uber die Stellung der Aufgaben der Zentralstation der Jungen Naturforscher 'Walter Ulbricht'" /Order concerning the Assign ment of Objectives for the Central Station of the Young Natural Scientists/, Gesetzblatt, II (November 5, 1955), 369-70. ■^Geschichtliche Zeittafel der DDR, op. cit. , p. 192. 212 In keeping with the general trend, the DDR submitted a request to the United Nations for permission to join UNESCO. ^ At that time Luther H. Evans was UNESCO’s General Director. The application was submitted August 22, 1955. A German UNESCO Committee was organized with Lange as chairman and Laabs as his deputy. The appli cation was turned down in December, 1955, but the reasons were not made public in the educational journals. Lange did say that the DDR would try again at a later date. Toward the end of the year, Lange sent a delegation to a country where he knew he would not be turned down. For the second time, a committee of fourteen educators was sent to the USSR as a study group to obtain the latest information. ^ This delegation was headed by Laabs and was made up largely of teachers, rather than officials in the Ministry and the DPZI. The subjects which they intended to study were: the middle school, polytechnical education, and vocational training. These were Of special current and future interest for the DDR. *^Leo Regener, "Die Organisation der Vereinten Nationen filr Erziehung, Wissenschaft und Kultur (UNESCO)" /The Organization of UNESCO?, Paedagogik, XI (March, 1956), 219-21. 14"i4 p U d a g o g e n nach Moskau abgereist" /Fourteen Pedagogues Depart for Moscow/, DLZ, II (December 3, 1955), 1. 213 Due to the nature of the Soviet occupation and the subsequent close relations between the DDR and the USSR, East Germany had experienced, since 1945, a constant exposure to comparative and international education. Certainly, the influence of the USSR was greatest, but many articles, also appeared in educational journals on the educational systems of most Communist-bloc countries and even a few on the educational practices of capitalist countries. The outlook of German educators in the DDR was definitely not isolationist or nationalistic, even though it encouraged patriotism. This newly-won, international point of view must have prompted the application to UNESCO. The dispatch of a delegation to the USSR demonstrated again that Lange and others in his Ministry lacked full confidence in their ability to solve educational problems in the DDR; they were dependent on following the Soviet example. In many respects, Lange and Laabs were reverting back to policies of the Zaisser administration. P&dagogenkollektiv /Pedagogical Collectives/ As the pace of moving along the path to socialism gradually quickened under Minister Lange, so likewise the need increased to follow the Russian example in all phases of educational administration. The 214 PMdagogischer Rat, Methodische Kabinette, and the like were discussed earlier. ^ The PHd ago ge nko lie ktiv was yet another form of organizing and controlling teachers. Helmut Stolz, who wrote a doctoral dissertation on the subject, regretted that the term, "collective, " was being used too loosely by groups of students, workers, and teachers who did not realize the implications of the term. He then went on to explain what a pA'dago- genkollektiv really was. Stolz explained that the PMdagogenkollektiv was made up of members of the administration, the faculty, and the youth leader of a school. All of these had to agree to work harmoniously together to achieve the socialist purposes of the school. Stolz said that a genuine PMdagogenkollektiv could be recognized by the existence of these characteristics: the maintenance of strict discipline, the helpful attitude of one member toward another, the possibility of criticizing each other, and the presence of a carefully structured group in which, in one capacity, a person might be over another member, while in another capacity, he might be subordinated, e.g., a school director would be head of the collective, but as a subject matter teacher, he would come under the -*-5"BeschlUsse des PolitbUros, . . ., " loc. cit. ^Helmut Stolz, "Zum Begriff_des 'Kollektivs' und zu den Merkmalen des PMdagogenkollektivs" /The Concept "Collective" and the Characteristics of the Pedagogical Collective,_/ Paedagogik, X (September, 1955), 686-92. ' 215 Klassenleiter, who was responsible for the total educational objectives of the class. Also, in the PMdagogenkollektiv, all members jointly shared the responsibilities of the Schulleiter. The PMdagogenkollektiv was one of many administrative control devices used in the DDR school system. Helmut Stolz's doctoral disserta- tion was mentioned at this time as an example of the type of dissertation encouraged by the DPZI. The subject provided an explanation of a phase of Soviet pedagogy, yet it had "practical" application in the DDR. Evaluation of the Year 1955 During the year 1955, a new Minister, with close connections with the Central Committee of the SED, took over the Ministry of Education. Minister Lange quickly restored confidence in the Ministry and gave it a prestige which Laabs was unable to provide. Surprisingly enough, Laabs was retained as Lange's first deputy, and in this capacity, proved quite active. In many respects, Lange was similar to Wandel, especially as an effective administrator. He also had something in common with Frau Zaisser. He continued her school inspector system but used a different approach in reorganizing the schools. Lange created the new Middle School of ten years! duration, while retaining the Oberschule, in contrast to Zaisser, who wanted a single school system lasting eleven years, with absorbtion of the Oberschule. New in Lange's administration were his interest in youth organizations and in international education. 216 The Year of,the Fifth Pedagogical Conference (1956) Anything of any significance that happened during the year 1956 was related in some way with the Fifth Pedagogical Conference. The last time such a meeting was held was in 1949 under the Wandel administration. The elaborate preparations begun in 1955 were continued during 1956 up to the moment the conference actually took place. The DPZI and the Conference At the first meeting of the Wissenschaftlicher Rat /Scientific Council/, which was held from October 31 to November 1, 1955, the four research areas designated by the Minister of Education for the period i 7 1955-60 were discussed. The four areas were listed in the discussion of the year 1955. ^ The Council decided to add a fifth area to include pedagogical developments which had taken place since the end of World War II. While retaining the five areas just mentioned for long-term research, the Council agreed to emphasize five short-term research areas in preparation for the Fifth Pedagogical Conference. These five ■^"Erste Sitzung des Wissenschaftlichen Rates beim DPZI” /First Session of the DPZI Scientific Council7, Paedagogik, XI (January, 1956), 48-50. *®See above page 205. 217 topics were: patriotic training, polytechnical training, curriculum of general education, methods of pedagogical research, and the proper place for these four topics in the history of education. The Council specified that research for its own sake would not be acceptable; re search would have to lead to an improvement of instruction. The results and the recommendations of such research were to be reported in Paedagogik. When Lange assigned the four long-term research projects to t he DPZI, he was starting a new trend not only for that institute, but also for DDR education in general. Laabs had thrown out a strong hint in the same direction in 1954 when he asked the DPZI, in reviewing its five year history, to spend some time on German ideas in education and not confine itself to Soviet pedagogy. 19 During the same year, a book appeared for use in the Institutes for Teachers called: Einf'Uhrung in die pUdagogik, Teil I. 20 This book was reviewed and criticized in a 1956 article for not mentioning enough about the contributions of the German worker's movement towards education. 21 The article said 19npestliche Veranstaltung, . . . , " loc. cit. 2QEinfllhrung in die pMdagogik, Teil I. Grundlagen der pHdagogik /Introduction to Pedagogy, Phrt I, Fundamentals of Pedagogy/(Berlin, Volk und Wissen, 1954). 21"Zur Darstellung der Rolle_der Arbeiterklasse bei der Schaffung der deutschen demokratischen Schule" /Portrayal of the Ro^e of the Workers’ Movement in the Creation of the German Democratic Schooj7, Paedagogik, XI (February, 1956), 123-26. 218 that it was right to mention great German educators such as Diesterweg and Wander but that the contributions of such labor leaders as: Klara Zetkin, Ernst Schneller, and Theodor Neubauer had been neglected. No attention had been given to the founding of the German Communist Party on December 30, 1918, to the speeches of Ernst Schneller con cerning the Reiehsschulgesetz /Reich School Law[ of 1927, and to the work of Walter Ulbricht during the Hitler Period. Lange's request to have the DPZI investigate and perform re search in various periods of German educational history was less for the purpose of contrasting Russian and German pedagogy than for determining which of German achievements in education would have most to offer the DDR. Group II of the DPZI researchers was assigned the task of studying German pedagogy during the period 1850-1945. Their special interest p p centered around the concept of ReformpHdagogik. The issue of pedago gical reforms had come up for discussion as early as the First Pedagogical Conference. Group II found that the tradition of the ReformpMdagogik had taken root in the Soviet Zone at once in 1945. Many of the early teachers' courses were filled with the thinking of ReformpHdagogik. The first person to challenge the penetration of the educational reform philosophies n n Karl-Heinz Gllnther, "Bemerkungen liber unser VerhMltnis zur_ ReformpUdagogik" /Remarks concerning Our Attitude to Reform Pedagogy/, Paedagogik, XI (March, 1956), 201-4. 219 of such men as Hugo Gaudig and Barthold Otto, was Hans Siebert. 23 At the Fourth Pedagogical Conference, held in 1949, he spoke out in favor of the pedagogy of the USSR. In looking for ways by which the ReformpMdagogik might be exploited for use in the DDR, Group H recommended that research ers separate the reformers' ideas from their social setting--which was imperialistic--and concentrate on their methodology. The DPZI was only partially responsible for making preparations for the Fifth Pedagogical Conference; its contributions were to be made in research. Most of the work was done by seven commissions, some of which had started their deliberations in October, 1955. The Commissions of the Fifth Pedagogical Conference The Fifth Pedagogical Conference was held May 14-18, 1956. A special edition of the DLZ provided a detailed account of the recommendations 23Barthold Otto (1859-1933) was director of a private school in Berlin which bore his name. His basic educational theory was that students were born with all they would ever know, that it was the teacher's function to help bring this knowledge to the student's consciousness, and that a student achieved understanding when he was able to express himself in language geared to his age level. Hugo Gaudig (1860-1923) built his theory of education around the development of a student's personality. _Every student concentrated on the objective, sich selbst zu vollenden /self-realization/. All instruction was highly individualistic. 220 made by each of the commissions to the conference. 24 These drafts of resolutions revealed the educational problems which most concerned the DDR during the year 1956. An educational issue still considered to be of prime importance to the DDR was that of patriotic training. Both the PolitbHro and Minister Zaisser had demanded such training in 1952 shortly after Walter Ulbricht had decided that the time had come to start on the road to socialism. The old problem had taken on new significance this year when the establishment of DDR army units was announced on January 18, 1956. 25 The Commission took great pains to explain that patriotism had nothing to do with national ism. Patriotism did mean love of homeland and the willingness to fight for its protection. Patriotism also included hatred against all enemies of the DDR; on the other hand, it meant love for Russia and the working class. What was needed was socialist patriotism. Patriotic training was to begin before children entered school and was to be accomplished by picturing the armed forces and the police as friends. The Commission then made concrete proposals as to what should be taught about patriotism at each grade level. Concern was expressed that there were still some ^Entschliessungsentwurf der Kommission 'Patriotische Erzie- hung'" /Draft of a Resolution by the Commission for Patriotic Training/, D L Z , in (May 5, 1956), 1-9. 25"Volksarmee schtttzt friedliches Lernen" /People's Army Protects Peaceful Learning/, DLZ, III (January 28, 1956), 1. 221 teachers who did not fully understand the meaning of patriotism and hence would not be able to train children properly. Polytechnical education was also high on the priority list of subjects discussed at the Conference, yet the subject had been debated before, having been brought up earlier in connection with the Two-Year Plan in 1949 and with the SED declaration of July 29, 1952. Nothing essentially new was added by the Commission on Polytechnical Education. ^ The Commission's purpose was to explain which subjects in the Grundschule lent themselves to polytechnical treatment, how youth organizations could sponsor polytechnical activities, how the Grundschule and the vocational school would be affected by polytechnical education, and how the poly technical school system would establish a direct relationship between the factory and the school. The Commission was primarily concerned with the practical aspects of introducing polytechnical education into the schools and, there fore, no mention was made of a time when all this was to be accomplished. This information was contained in an article which appeared in the Paeda- 9 7 gogik at the time of the Conference. According to this article, Minister ^'Entschliessungsentwurf der Kommission 'Polytechnische Bilding1" /Draft of a Resolution by the Commission on Polytechnical Education/, DLZ, III (May 5, 1956), 3-5. 2^"Allgemeinbildung und allgemeine Mittelschule" /General Education and the General Middle School/, Paedagogik, XI (May, June, 1956), 385-96. ~ 222 Lange had stated on March 2, 1956, that he expected the zehnklassige allgemeinbildende polytechnische Schule /Ten-Year General Polytech nical School/ to be started with the Second Five-Year Plan (1956) and to become compulsory for all DDR children by the end of the Third Five- Year Plan (1965). The Commissions on Pedagogical Science and Teacher Training did not introduce any new information, except for mentioning the need for teachers to know more about child psychology and, especially, to have a better understanding of Pavlovian psychology. This suggestion may have been related to the fact that Werner Dorst had recently started a Pavlov Commission within the DPZI. ^ No action was taken on this recommenda tion for another two years. The Commission on Simplification of Administration criticized excessive bureaucracy and charged that it was killing the initiative of individual teachers. 2 Q Especially demoralizing was the confusion of laws, directives, administrative bulletins, and the like. The Commission recommended that laws be enacted only when they were expected to remain in force for a longer period of time. In future, DLZ was asked to report _ 'Pavlov-Kommission beim Deutschen PUdagogischen Zentral- institut" /Pavlov Commission within the DPZI/, Paedagogik, IX (October, 1954), 10. ~ ^^"Entschliessungsentwurf der Kommission ! Vereinfachung der Schulverwaltung'" /Draft_of a Resolution by the Commission on Simplifica tion of the Administration/, DLZ, III (May 5, 1956), 3-4. 223 all important decisions relative to education. A collection of current educational laws and regulations was to appear in Eecht der Schule. This compilation was to include all laws dealing with education from 1945 to the current year, providing the law was still in effect. This compendium replaced the Karteibuch, which had been started in 1951 but had become bulky. The Recht der Schule lasted four years, from 1956 to 1960. It included an index, which facilitated search for any particular regulation. This Commission had very little success in simplifying the administration and in curtailing the number of education law s. The Commission for Pedagogical Research did not report specifically on the five areas of research mentioned at the first meeting of the W issenschaflicher Rat, as mentioned earlier, but stated in general terms that investigations should be carried on to determine the classic ideals of perfection in the individual and in society, the development of human personality, and the cultivation of true humanitarianism. The Commission implied that the workers' movement would be in the most favorable position to achieve the goals of humanitarianism. The need to study and cultivate the German heritage was mentioned only in general terms. n a Entschliessungsentwdrf der Kommission 'PHdagogische Wissenschaft,n /Draft of a Resolution by the Commission on the Science of Pedagogy/, DLZ, III (May 5, 1958), 5-6. 224 Significance of the Year 1956 The outstanding educational event of the year 1956 was the Fifth Pedagogical Conference. This marked the return of an extensive forum of public discussion of educational problems. The ostensible purpose of the Conference was to give teachers and the public the feeling that what teachers had to say made a difference. Teachers had objected on earlier occasions that they were not being heard and they had declared that they would not put up with being ignored any longer. Was there actually a debate among teachers concerning the need for patriotic education? Did teachers discuss the advisability of introduc ing polytechnical education? Were teachers' opinions polled regarding subjects to be researched by the DPZI? Such discussions may have taken place, but varying opinions, pro and contra, were not reported in the educational journals. Nothing which appeared in the various drafts for resolutions to be passed at the Fifth Pedagogical Conference went contrary to policies which had previously been announced by Walter Ulbricht and Fritz Lange. The drafts were no more than detailed state ments telling how Party policies were to be carried out. A very informative editorial in Paedagogik, written at the end of the year 1956, contained this reaction to the Fifth Pedagogical Conference: 225 So etwas hat keiner erwartet? Nun, ganz so vielleicht nicht; aber immerhin klang und klingt noch heute in vielen GesprHchen und auch Artikeln ein solcher Ton der EnttHuschung mit, dass nun--obwohl man doch gegen das Dogma und ftfr die Entfaltung der Demokratie k&mpft-- manches noch immer so sei wie vor dem Kongress. /Did no one expect this?/ /namely, that the Conference would bring about a complete change/ /Well, perhaps not exactly that; just the same, one notices a note of disappointment in conversations and in articles, even today, to the effect that, although one is opposed to dogma and favors the growth of democracy, much has remained as it was before the Conference^/31 The editor, needless to say, was not in agreement with the pessimistic reaction just quoted. His thought was that the Fifth Pedagogical Conference had indeed brought about a decisive change toward socialism . The point of citing the above quotation was to show that negative views concerning the Conference had been and were being expressed. Toward the end of this editorial there was an innocent-appearing announce ment of some articles which had just appeared (November and December, 1956), in Paedagogik and others which were to follow. These articles were intended to allow serious educators to freely express their opinions on basic educational issues. The purpose was to encourage educators to "struggle" for solutions to pedagogical problems. The guileless state ment, which eventually' led to a full-scale SED investigation of the entire DPZI and its publication, Paedagogik, read as follows: S1 Paedagogik, XII (January, 1957), 1. 226 Wenn wir an der Wende von 1956 nach 1957 unsere Arbeit rttckwHrts und vorausgewandt tlberblicken, so liegt uns vor allem Thematischen dies am Herzen: dass die wichtigsten Fragen, die von uns in aller- nUchster Zeit geklUrt werden mUssen, mit grossem Verantwortungs- bewusstsein, mit Mut, mit FreimUtigkeit und polemischer SchUrfe angepackt werden. Wir hoffen, dass dieser Start schon deswegen gltlckt, weil die beiden letzten Hefte des alten Jahres in den BeitrUgen zur Allgemeinbildung und zu den Themen des Psychologielehrbuches schon viel von der neuen Art, mit der wir an die neuen Aufgaben herangehen mttssen, ahnen lassen. /As we look back upon our work during the year 1956 and look ahead to the new projects for 1957, we are determined, to attack the problems which must be resolved in the near future with a sense of responsibility, with courage, with openness, and with polemic sharpness. We hope that we have made a good beginning, because the two articles which appeared in the last two issues of 1956 on general education and a textbook on psychology give a good idea of how we expect to go about our new task in the future. /32 The Great Debate on General Education (1957) Beginning with the First Pedagogical Conference in 1946 and almost every year thereafter, this dissertation has called attention to the presence of elements of opposition among the teachers of the DDR. These elements were given different names such as "revisionists" and Reformp&dagogiker. After twelve years of unchallenged Communist control and repeated attacks by political leaders at all levels, these "revisionists" not only refused to give in or disappear, but they published articles in the leading educational periodical, Paedagogik, and even penetrated the DPZI. In the thirteenth 32Ibid., 3. 227 year of Communist domination of East Germany, a few ReformpHdagogiker sparked a controversy on schools which lasted all of the year 1957 and went well into 1958. As previously mentioned, the discussion began with two articles and a contemplative editorial, which may have been written by Edgar Drafenstedt, who had been editor-in-chief of Paedagogik since July 1, 33 1954. His sudden departure from the editorial staff on February 1, 1957--som ething he did not appear to be thinking about when he wrote concerning the new year--and a later statement that his successor had taken over "in einer schwierigen situation" /in a difficult situation/, tended to support the interpretation that he had been dismissed. The DPZI held a very lively meeting at the end of the same month, from February 27-8, during which the status of the pedagogical debate and polytechnical education were discussed. Dr. Dorst seemed to be very satisfied with the.new slogan for teachers: Lasst Sonne herein; Heiterkeit ist der Himmel Unter dem alles gedeiht. /Let the sunshine in; Happiness is the sky Under which everything prospers._/ 33paedagogik, XII (April, 1957), 2 4 3 . 3^Paedagogik, XIH (May, 1958), 324. 33,lAus der Arbeit des Deutschen PHdagogischen Zentralinstittuts" /The Work of the DPZj/, Paedagogik, XH (May, 1957), 378. 228 While in this happy and critical mood, some participants spoke out against the way Soviet pedagogy had been "nahegebracht" /forced upon/ /quotation marks in the original text/ teachers and how it had been "verballhornt" /jBowdlerized/. Schulleiter Albert Tebbe could not resist basking in the sun, Tebbe said that he would be glad to accept the generous invitation to take part in a discussion of the problems involved in general education. ^ Tebbe's major criticism was that too much was expected of students, but he also found that teaching was dull, and that there had been no change in the attitudes of students to teachers. Tebbe complained about too many teachers being just a few pages ahead of their students. Albert Tebbe wanted the general school to concentrate on providing a solid foundation; he was opposed to just putting up pretty walls. He wanted general education to include: command of the German language, ability to use figures, and reliability in work. Tebbe felt that foreign language instruction should not begin until the seventh year; he said that teaching Russian in the fifth year was unproductive and beyond the capacity of most students. At this young age, said Tebbe, most students have not learned to use German. Tebbe recommended that a ^Albert Tebbe, "Zur Diskussion liber Probleme de£ Allgemein- bildung" [A Discussion of the Problems of General Education/, Paedagogik, XII (March, 1957), 184-92. 229 selective process take place at the end of the sixth year in order to give bright students a chance to get into the Oberschule quickly. Tebbe wanted to know whether the Ten-Year School was supposed to replace the Oberschule. With this frank critique, the lid was off. Although Tebbe's article appeared in the March issue and Dr. Gerhard Neuner was said to have taken over the editorship of the Paedagogik with the April issue, it was later admitted that Neuner "hat es hier zeitweilig an einer konse- quenten Haltung gemangelt" /at this time lacked a consistent policy/, i.e. , he did not make any drastic changes. That expression was certainly an understatement for, in the April issue of Paedagogik, Neuner allowed Werner Dorst's critical article to appear. The truth was that Werner Dorst was director of the DPZI and it would have been very difficult for a new editor to turn down his superior's contribution. After Tebbe, Dr. Dorst was the next person to bask in the sun. Werner Dorst asked some searching questions about the DDR school system. Why was it that, after a sharp reduction during the years 1955 and 1956 in the quantity of materials which had to be covered, children still had such short memories? Why were many students who had gone through the entire school system such a disappointment? Why was one forced to the conclusion that many students who had studied Russian from the fifth to the ninth grades could not master the subject? Dorst put in a cushion here by saying that one might be tempted to say that Russian was 230 only for the bright, which would not be true. Why were there so many behavior problems? After these probing questions, Dorst went Tebbe one better by proposing that differentiation of students begin in the fourth year in order to allow good students to move ahead more rapidly. Speaking of Russian education, Dorst expressed his amazement at the mechanical way in which the DDR had imitated Soviet pedagogy since 1951. By May, the first reactions set in. The editorial of the May issue of Paedagogik agreed that the subjects which had been featured since January, 1957, deserved free and open discussion but that not enough attention had been paid to *'den Inhalt und . . . die Linie der Diskussion" /the content and the line or direction of discussion/^ The editor, probably Dr. Neuner, favored courageous discussion but cautioned that the DDR was trying to speed up education for a Marxist educational system; the purpose was not merely to have a free discussion. It would be wrong, said the editorial, to undermine the existing school system which had operated successfully for twelve years. The editor would not agree that children should be divided according to talent. The editor expressed the view that it would be wrong to say that Russian psychology had reached a dead end and that it was time to turn to West G erm any. 37paedagogik, XII {May, 1957), 321-2. 231 Another voice, that of Gottfried Uhlig, was heard in July of 1957. Uhlig commented that the recent discussions showed the danger of criticizing the school system without using the Marxist viewpoint as a basis. ^ Uhlig then pointed out Tebbe's errors: he had not included patriotic training among his minimum requirements, in fact, Tebbe's minimum requirements were not high enough; Tebbe was wrong in thinking that workers' children could not learn a foreign language in the fifth year; and Tebbe was wrong in wanting to select children for the Oberschule during the sixth year. The same July issue contained an article which favored the Tebbe argument. Kurtfritz Bergleiter said that the universities were not inter ested in receiving students with specialized training but that they needed students with a good general education. 39 Bergleiter came out for a thirteen-year preparatory school, with a selective process beginning during the sixth year. He asked that a commission be appointed to determine what a modern school should offer in the way of general education. By the September issue of Paedagogik, the revisionists seemed to be doing so well that Prof. Hans Herbert Becker took it upon himself "^Gottfried Uhlig, nDiskussion--aber auf dem Boden unserer demokratischen Einheitsschule” /Discussion--but on the Basis of Our Democratic Unified School/, Paedagogik, XII (July, 1957), 528-31. ^Kurtfritz Bergleiter, "Allgemeinbildung und allgemeinbildende_ Schulen” /General Education and Schools Which Provide General Education/, Paedagogik, XII (July, 1957), 523-31. 232 to summarize the year's arguments concerning general education and to form the conclusion that classes should be differentiated or grouped in grades seven to ten to allow for differences in intellectual ability. ^ Prof. Becker recommended that general education be limited to four years because, after that time, there were too many children who could not meet the same standards. At this point, Minister Lange must have felt that matters had gotten out of hand. He ordered the editors of Paedagogik to take a position on the controversy in the November issue of the magazine. ^1 Gerhard Neuner, who must have had a rough half year as editor- in-chief of such a controversial journal as Paedagogik and who did not seem to know just where he stood himself, at this time seized upon the opportunity offered by the first successful firing of Sputnik I to comment on the obvious superiority of the Russian school system. 42 He mentioned that the Russians had come to recognize the advantage of a good general ^H . H. Becker, "Ueber das Wesen der Allgemeinbildung und einige aus ihm sich ergebende Folgerungen fiir das System der Volksbildung” /Con cerning the Nature of General Education and Conclusions Which May Be Drawn and Applied to the System of Education/, Paedagogik, XII (September, 1957), 663-676. ^"Filr vollstUndige Durchsetzung der marxistischj-leninistischen Erkenntnisse in alien Zweigen der pHdagogischen Arbeit” /For a Complete_ Implementation of Marxist-Beninist Doctrines in All Branches of Pedagogy/, DLZ, IV (December 5, 1957), 4-5. ^Gerhard Neuner, ”Eine Grosse Perspektive” /A Great Prospect^, Paedagogik, XII (November, 1957), 855-59. 233 education in contrast to early specialization. He emphasized that the Russians were working toward a longer period of general education, up to twelve and thirteen years. He also brought out that Russian educators were not opposed to differentiation of students according to their inclina- tions and talent. 4 9 These points came very close to those advanced by the revisionists. Werner Dorst did all he could to produce the kind of position paper which Minister Lange had ordered. He aimed his attack at Prof. H. H. B eck er. 4 4 The basis of his criticism was reflected in the title of his article, namely, that Becker had not proceded a priori from Marx and Lenin, as he should have, but was arguing in the manner of Spranger, Litt, Lersch, and Kerchensteiner /all ReformpSdagogen/. Becker had missed the point of the entire discussion when he spoke of the relation between general education and vocational education; the real issue was the kind of education needed by all children who were living in a socialist society. Becker's approach to the subject had been idealistic and bourgeois; it should have been socialistic. Dorst could not suppress _ ■ - the admission that there were differences in inclination among students with some preferring mathematics and others favoring foreign languages, 4 3 Ibid., 858. 44Werner Dorsti_ ,,Ftlr Durchsetzung der marxistischen-lenin- istischen Erkenntnisse" /In Favor of Implementing the Marxist-Leninist Doctrines/, DLZ, IV (December 14, 1957), 3. 234 but he did not feel that these differences should require different types or levels of schools. Others who joined Minister Lange in attacking revisionism were Deputy Minister Laabs, Prof. Siebert, and some professors at 45 Leipzig University. Evaluation of the Year 1957 In many respects, no jear in the history of DDR education was like 1957. Not since the first three years of Paedagogik had so many articles appeared in that publication which freely expressed a point of view known to be at variance with the policies of the Party. No basis could be found for estimating the number of revisionists in the DDR, but the figure was high enough to cause the SED considerable concern. The very audacity of men such as Albert Tebbe, Oskar Mader, Kurtfritz Bergleiter, Prof. H. H. Becker, Hartmut Richter, Gertrud Klauss, and even Werner Dorst must have disturbed the Party leadership, especially since all this took place after the purges following the June 17th uprising. These men would not have spoken up, if they had felt alone in their b e lie fs . 45>»jr,yr vollstUndige Durchsetzung, . . ., " loc. cit. 235 This discussion of a basic, issue in general education did not come about because a handful of individuals disagreed with the SED. This was not a straw man being put up to provide a target. This discussion started in November, 1956, and did not end until drastic measures were taken by the SED in 1958. While the men named above showed courage, there was no suggestion at any time that they were a disloyal element within the DDR. They were simply educators who were convinced that all children were not the same, that there were differences in ability and interest, and that these differences would have to be taken into account when educational objectives, curricula, and school systems were devised. These educators were opposed by others who contended that education must be built around the needs of the State. To them it seemed right that the economy of the country came first, because the welfare of the individual depended upon the status of the economy. The year 1957 stood out as the high point of the struggle between the revisionists and the Party. The revisionists continued to exist, but they were not given the facilities to express themselves openly. Why this opportunity was given during the year 1957 was hard to explain. A partial answer might be found in a report of a DPZI meeting which was held in September, 1956, close to the time that the great debate began in Paedagogik. The report said: 236 Dr. Dorst wies darauf hin, dass das DPZI in eigener Sache eine klare Antwort auf die bedeutenden Ereignisse in der letzten Zeit geben muss (XX. Parteitag der KPdSU, III. Parteikonferenz der SED, V. PUdago- gischer Kongress). In einer solchen Zeit der Auflockerung gibt es eine Reihe von Gefahren. Neben den 'Neudogmatikern' erheben sich die 1 BilderstUrmer.' Man raunt und tuschelt so vieles: ’Hast du schon geh8 rt, mit Pawlow stimmt es nicht mehr--Makarenko wird auch schon kritisiert-- Sprich nicht mehr so viel von der SowjetpMdagogik, sprich lieber vom kulturellen Erbe--Eine neue Linie tut not. ’ /Dr. Dorst called attention to the fact that the DPZI would have to find its own answers to the problems raised by recent historical events (Twentieth Party Congress of the Communist Party of the USSR, The Third Party Conference of the SED, the Fifth Pedagogical Conference). During such a time of relaxed tension, there are many dangers. This was a period for "new dogmatists" and iconoclasts to appear. At such a time, whispering campaigns get under way: "Have you heard, Pavlov isn't doing too well any m ore--People are beginning to find fault with Makarenko--Quit talking about Soviet pedagogy, speak about cultural inheritance--It's time to change the Line.^/^ The Twentieth Party Congress referred to above was held early in 1956. On this occasion, peaceful coexistence between socialist and capitalist nations was announced. The personality cult which had been built around Stalin was attacked. According to Dorst, the Twentieth Party Congress brought about a feeling of relaxed tension everywhere, including Germany. This may explain, at least to a degree, why revisionists were given a chance to be heard. Direct Intervention of the Party in Education (1958) The Party and Paedagogik A very unusual editorial appeared in the first issue of Paedagogik ^Paedagogik, XI (December, 1956), 964. 237 for the year 1958. The fourteen page commentary was a joint effort of the director of the DPZI, Werner Dorst, and the editor-in-chief of Paedagogik, Gerhard Neuner, and bore the title: "Filr eine marxistisch- leninistische PHdagogik" /For a Marxist-Leninist P e d a g o g y^ /^ In the background of this editorial was the formation of a SED Party Group within the editorial staff--a group reminiscent of another that brought Minister Zaisser's career to a close--which took place in the autumn of 1957. Special sessions of the Group took place on November 8 and D ecem ber 6 . 4 8 The purpose of the editorial was to evaluate the past year's work and to identify projects for the new year. Here was an opportunity for Neuner and Dorst to explain their actions during the year 1957. The joint authors made many statements with which the Party Group could not quarrel: the DDR was the most western of the Socialist powers, Theodor Litt was completely out of order in making political statements in the West, both dogmatism and revisionism in education were bad, and the recent trend away from Soviet pedagogy had to be corrected. They then proceeded with their explanation of the past year's editorial policy. They said that there had been keine einheitliche Auffassung Uber die 47werner Dorst and Gerhard Neuner, "Filr eine marxistisch- leninistische PUdagogik," Paedagogik, XIII (January, 1958), 6-19. 48Ibid., 15. 238 Fllhrung des wissenschaftlichen Meinungsstreites und Uber einige Grund- fragen der sozialistischen Bildung und Erziehung /no unanimity of opinion on the manner in which opposing viewpoints should be handled in a scientific manner, nor was there agreement on a number of basic issues concerning socialist education and training. Neuner and Dorst admitted: 'so waren . . . die Meinungen ilber die Arbeiten von Albert Tebbe . . . geteilt" /opinions differed concerning the articles by Albert Tebbe, etc,_J Both agreed that more liberal use should have been made of editorial comment and that the editorial staff of Paedagogik needed to be strengthened. The SED Party Group was not satisfied with this explanation and later commented: er . . . spiegelt den damaligen Stand der Auseinandersetzung im Kollegium viriedei; . . er kann deshalb . . . nicht voll befriedigen, weil er nicht eindeutig genug erklUrt, worin die Ursachen fUr das ZurUckbleiben der pUdagogischen W issenschaft fUr das Auftreten der revisionistischen Tendenzen auf pUdagogischem Gebiet liegen und weshalb auch in unserer Zeitschrift revisionistische Auffassungen unkritisch verUffentlicht werden konnten. /the editorial/ / . . . reflects the air of dissention existing at that time within the editorial staff . . . and does not fully satisfy, because it does not explain in unequivocal terms the reasons for the backward ness of pedagogical science and for the emergence of revisionist tendencies in education nor does it explain why revisionist view^_ points found their way into our journal without being challenged. ^ 9 4 9 Ibid. CQ — "Unser Wort" /Editorial Comment/, Paedagogik, XIII (May, 1958), 322. “ 239 At the thirty-fifth meeting of the Central Committee of the SED, which met from February 3-6, 1958, the DPZI reached its lowest ebb when some of its members were publicly accused of being vacillating 51 and allowing revisionism to thrive within the organization. In connection with an SED conference on schools, which was held in Berlin from April 24-5, Hans Siebert reviewed the whole case against the revisionists and summarized his recommendation in the title of his article: "Revisionistischen Ballast endlich liber Bord werfen" /Let's —52 Throw the Whole Revisionist Ballast Overboard. / This suggestion was followed in May, 1958, when the SED Party Group on the editorial staff announced its findings. ^3 The Group referred to the criticism of the Central Committee which had noted vacillation among leaders of the DPZI since the Twentieth Party Conference of the Communist Party in the USSR. The Group listed the errors which had occurred and determined the reasons for their taking place. The main reason was that the editors paid insufficient attention to directives of the Party. Even Gerhard Neuner, who had been made editor-in-chief of Paedagogik in order to provide new leadership, was criticized. 5 1 Ibid. , 321. ^Hans Siebert, "Revisionistischen Ballast endlich ilber Bord werfen, " DLZ, V (April 26, 1958), 5. ^ " U n ser Wort, 11 Paedagogik, XIII (May, 1958), 321-5. 240 The Party Group decided that Paedagogik would henceforth steer a new course. The journal would no longer invite discussion, but would show the way; it would become a fighting publication for Marxist-Leiniism; it would concentrate on a study of Soviet pedagogy. To achieve these goals, changes would have to be made on the staff. 54 These changes were not announced until October. Gerhard Neuner managed to remain as editor-in-chief; his new deputy was to be Ernst Pilz. Prof. Hans Siebert was named to the staff. Dr. 'Hans Berger became director of the DPZI. All above changes were made effective October 1, 1958. Two erstwhile prominent leaders in education were sacrificed. This explanation was given concerning Dr. Dorst: . . . Kollege Dr. Werner Dorst gehBrt nicht mehr dem Redaktionskoliegium an, nachdem er wegen ernster Fehler und VersMumnisse von seiner Funktion als Direktor des DPZI entbunden wurde /Our colleague, Dr. Werner Dorst, no longer belongs to the editorial staff since he was dismissed as director of the DPZI due to his serious mistakes and his negligence/. 5 5 The other person was the former Minister of Education, Hans-Joachim Laabs, who was dropped im Zusammenhang mit der Kritik an den Fehlern seiner Arbeit /as a consequence of ^"D as neue Re daktions kolle gium der 'PUdagogik'1' /The New Editorial Staff of Paedagogik/, Paedagogik, XIII (October, 1958), 711-12. ^Paedagogik, XIII (September, 1958), 645. 241 criticisms made of the errors he committed in his work/, This announcement came late, because Laabs had been replaced by Werner Lorenz on June 1 , 1958. ^ Like Laabs, Werner Lorenz had not taught in school until after World War II; he was brought in at this time because he had a reputation for fighting revisionism. Toward a Socialist School System The reconstituted editorial staff of Paedagogik wrote an editorial in the September issue under the title: "Der Sozialistischen Schule entgegen" /Toward a Socialist School System/. 8 8 The editorial made the statement that, if some day someone would write a history of the DDR school system, he would probably devote a chapter to the events of this year because the year 1958 marked the period during which the socialist upheaval actually made inroads into the school system. After much soul-searching, clarity had been achieved. The SED School Conference of April 24-5, 1958, left no doubt about the new trend. That radical changes were in progress was just shown in connection with the publication, Paedagogik. Changes were taking place in other areas as well. Since February, 1958, attacks were 5 6 Ibid. r r j "Mit ganzer Kraft flir unsere_sozialistische Schule" /Give All Your Strength to Our Socialist Schooj_/, DLZ, V (June 14, 1958), 1. 58"Der sozialistischen Schule entgegen, " Paedagogik, XIII (September, 1958), 641. revived against religion. Accusations had been leveled against churches in 1953, when Minister Zaisser denounced the Junge Gemeinde. The new attack, in which Gerhard Neuner was very active, was directed against all who opposed the Jungendweihe /youth consecration]. 5 9 On this occasion , there were no charges of spying or carrying on other illegal activities, but rather that churches were interfering with youth training by confusing young people with superstitious beliefs and mystic notions. Such accusa tions were not to be interpreted as attacks against religion, since that was a private affair, but the truth was that churches were dabbling in affairs of the State. Only the Government had the right to educate children and to train them to think in a scientific manner. The Jungend weihe was a ceremony sponsored by the State as a means of training youth and making youth aware of its responsibilities. Churches had no right to interfere when young people wanted to take part in the rites of the Jugendweihe. The attacks against the churches were part of the drive to establish socialist doctrines in the schools. In connection with the SED School Conference of April, 1958, the editorial staff of Paedagogik complained that not enough was being done to develop a dialectical- ^9,,Zur Konferenz Uber sozialistische Erziehung" /The Conference concerning Socialist Education/, Paedagogik, XIII (March, 1958), 161-6. 243 m aterialistic Weltanschauung among young people.6 0 Children in school must learn to apply the dialectical approach to everything they study. They must learn to accept only what can be demonstrated in a scientific way; the dialectical method must become ingrained in every student. This method of thinking must be applied not only in science, but also in social studies. A change had certainly taken place in the political atmosphere of the DDR during the past five years. When Minister Zaisser castigated the church in 1953, she was forced to recant; there was no such demand in 1958, when Gerhard Neuner's actions were supported by the SED. Even the teaching of educational psychology was subjected to scrutiny as part of the new drive to socialize the schools. Heinz Klemm reviewed past articles which had appeared on the subject in DDR publi- 61 cations and found that many of them showed strong traces of revisionism. In an earlier meeting held in Berlin from April 10-11, psychologists had determined that they had been too self-satisfied and that they knew very little about the latest developments in Soviet psychology. At a later meeting, called by a DPZI workshop on educational psychology for 6 Qnprokj.eme der weltanschaulichen Bildung und Erziehung" /Problems Related to a World View on Education/, Paedagogik, XIII (April, 1958), 287-94. R1 Heinz Klemm, "Die Entwicklung der marxistisch-leninistischen Psychologie in der DDR" /The Development of Marxist-Leninist Psychology in the DDR/, Paedagogik, XIII (July, 1958)', 512-20. 244 December 5, 1958, the subject of psychology as it related to polytechnical education was discussed. The forward movement in the socialization of the school system thus widened the imposition of a materialistic woi’ld view upon all school children and also demanded of teachers a psychology which was compatible with such a philosophy. From July 10-16, 1958, the Fifth Party Congress met and determined once again that the necessary conditions for intro- 6 3 ducing socialism existed. The next step, as far as education was concerned, was to start the general polytechnical school. On September 1, 1958, the Unterrichtstag in der Produktion /Day of Instruction in — n A Production/, a fusion of school and factory, began. Lange's Last Lap Like Wandel, Lange left the Ministry of Education just as it had reached a high point. In the case of Wandel, it was the Second Party Congress of the SED announcement that the DDR was ripe for socialism. There was also an order that polytechnical education should be tried in £* n Walter Vier, "Konstituierung der Arbeitsgruppe Padagogische Psychologie" /Establishment of a Workshop on Pedagogical Psychology7, Paedagogik, XIV (January, 1959), 7 9. fi O "Ueber die sozialistische Entwicklung des Schulwesens in der DDR” /Concerning the Development of Socialism in the School System of the DDR/, insert in DLZ, VI (May, 1959), 1. 64Ibid., 3. 245 some subjects in order to improve instruction. A few months before Minister Lange retired, the Fifth Party Congress made a second statement about the DDR being ready for socialism and also made public the close alignment of schools and factories as of September, .1958. Before ending his four years of service as Minister of Education, Fritz Lange was active in three different areas of education: juvenile problems, T age she im s c hule /special school for children of working parents/, and polytechnical training for teachers. Lange's interest in young people, especially in the Pioniere youth organization, was mentioned earlier. Apparently, in spite of the two large youth organizations and the many smaller special interest groups planned especially for young boys and girls, the juvenile problem existed in the DDR as in many other countries. The dress and attitude of these young nonconformists were described in these words: Entenschwanzfrisur, grosskariertes buntes Jackett, schwarze enge Hose, Schal iHssig um den Hals geschlungen, Zigarette verkaut im Mundwinkel, HUnde demonstrativ in den Hosentaschen, Urlaute ausr Stosserial,dureh Haltung und Gebaren ganz Verneinung . . . /Ducktail hair-do, wildly checkered loud jacket, tight black pants, scarf carelessly slung around the neck, a chewed-up cigarette in one corner of the mouth, hands stuck demonstratively in pants1 p o c k e t s , emitting primitive sounds, completely negative in attitude and bearing /6 b • • • t 6 ^paedagogik, XIII (January, 1958), 1. 246 These juveniles were a source of embarrassment for the DDR. Blame for their existence was placed on the bad influence of West Berlin and the Americans who had enticed these young people across the border by offering them special rates for movies and by taking them to bars. These invitations were all part of a scheme to create disorder in the DDR and to prepare for MX" Day. In ofder to help resolve this and other problems related to youth, Minister Lange established a new Office for Youth Problems within the Ministry of Education effective July 1, 1958?® This order showed, incidentally, how close youth activities were regarded as being to school instruction. If young people did not behave properly outside of school, reasons for their misbehavior were led back to their training in school. Lange had said at the beginning of his administration that a closer relationship would have to be developed between teachers and the Pioniere; bringing the Office of Youth Problems into the Ministry of Education followed the same basic line of thinking. Another contribution which Lange, assisted by the SED, made toward the end of his administration was to experiment with the on Tagesheimschule. This was a day school, including grades one to ®®"Beschluss ilber die Eingliederung des Amtes fUr Jugendfragen in das Ministerium fUr Volksbildung" /Decision concerning the Assimilation of the Office of Youth Problems into the Ministry of Education/, Gesetzblatt, I (July 19, 1958), 565. 67Horst Druwelow, "Tagesheimschule als Schulversuch in der DDR" /Day School as an Experimental School in the DDR7, Paedagogik, XIII (November, 1958), 843-7. 247 ten, especially planned to take care of the children of working parents who were on an early or late shift. The school was in session from six o'clock in the morning until six-thirty in the evening. Students would do their homework in school under teacher guidance. Spare time at the school was under FDJ control. Teachers taught not only the regular school subjects but also trained the students to be socialists. A few of these schools, located near large population centers, started on September 1, 1958. These schools served the double purpose of releasing mothers for factory or agricultural work and of providing a form of private tutoring for workers' children. A further educational experiment which took place during Lange's administration and which also began in September, 1958, was conducted by the Pedagogical Institute in Karl Marx City to determine the best way to prepare teachers for instruction in polytechnical schools. 6 8 Most teachers were completely unprepared for this kind of school. The experiment called for two groups of candidates who would spend four days a week at the Pedagogical Institute, one day teaching in a school, and one day in a factory; another two groups were to spend two days in mines, two days teaching in schools, and two days at special teacher's schools, where they would be taught by instructors from the Pedagogical 6 8 Gttnter Wilms, "Ueber die sozialistische Umgestaltung der Lehrerausbilding" /Concerning the Socialist Reorganization of Teacher Training/, Paedagojik, XIV (May, 1959), 357-67. 248 Institute. The total training period was to cover four years. The last year was to be spent at the Institute. All teacher training candidates were to receive four varieties of instruction: classes at the Institute, practice teaching, factory training, and political indoctrination. Even while this experimenting was going on, Glinter Wilms claimed that a basic course in polytechnical education would be offered fi Q to all teacher candidates beginning September 1, 1958. Judging by these various reports, a new system of education, the polytechnical system, was partially instituted on September 1, 1958. On the very same day, teacher candidates began their training in polytechnical education. Nothing was mentioned as to when the teachers in the teacher training institutions had an opportunity to convert to a new curriculum, although such re-tooling would have seemed necessary. Evaluation of the Lange Administration Minister Lange celebrated his sixtieth birthday on the eve of his retirement from the Ministry of Education. He had remained in office a full four years and had left his assignment without being publicly criticized. At the time when Fritz Lange took over the Ministry, its reputation had suffered from the ineffective leadership provided by Hans-Joachim Laabs. 6 9 Ibid. , 359. 249 When Lange left the Ministry, the SED had just reasserted its leadership in education and had introduced some extensive changes, including in p ersonn el. Throughout Lange's administration, emphasis was placed on a closer relation between youth, youth organizations, and the schools. Lange stressed the importance of the Pioniere in the schools, he intro duced some new ideas into the youth organizations by developing interest groups built around science, and he established an Office_for Youth Problems within the Ministry of Education. Lange showed an interest in international education and actually applied for membership of the DDR in UNESCO. His application was turned down. At this same time, Lange encouraged the cultivation of German educational ideas by assigning research projects to the DPZI. These two trends somewhat lessened the interest in Soviet pedagogy for a while. The Middle School replaced the Ten-Year School early during Lange's administration. Just as his term came to a close, the beginning of another school reorganization was announced by the SED. The new school system was to be called the Ten-Year General Polytechnical School. Lange declared that, by 1965, all children in the DDR would be required to attend this school. The training of teachers for this new type of school began at the end of Lange's administration. The curriculum of the new school system called for a heavy emphasis on understanding the nature of 250 the productive process of industry. The curriculum and the school organization were to establish a direct relation between the school and production, whether the latter took place in a factory or on a farm. The peak of revisionism was reached during Lange's administra tion. The term was sometimes used by Communists in Germany to describe the thinking of many educators who had been trained in progress ive schools during the Weimar Period when considerable attention was given to individual differences in children. Revisionists were especially plentiful in the higher school grades and in the Pedagogical Institutes. During the year 1958, they found an opportunity to express their views, particularly in the publication, Paedagogik. The purpose of publishing revisionist articles ostensibly was to clarify thinking by listening to what all sides had to say. This liberal approach was brought to an abrupt end by several SED committees which left no doubt that debates on educational issues were not desired; educational journals existed entirely for the purpose of explaining decisions which had been made by the P arty. The SED, not the Ministry of Education, brought about the educational changes which were instituted in 1959. Although Fritz Lange was appointed to his position directly from the Central Committee, he had not taken stern measures to suppress the offending articles which had appeared in Paedagogik. The most he did was to require that the 251 editors explain what their views on the subject of revisionism were. There was no completely satisfactory explanation as to Why the SED waited almost a year before stepping in. The closest approximation would be that this was a time of Auflo eke rung or relaxation following Stalin's death, of the Twentieth Congress of the Communist Party in the USSR, arid of the uprisings which took place in Poland and Hungary. The revisionist trend, here described in connection with education, affected many other areas of the DDR. Revisionism was widespread within the SED. Wolfgang Harich, who was on the faculty of the SED Party School and also served as editor in chief of the publication, Deutsche Zeitschrift ftlr Philosophie /German Journal for Philosophy/, was one of the more prominent revisionist leaders. He was given a ten- year sentence in 1956 for his activities. Even members of the Central Committee of the SED, such as Kurt Vieweg and Fred Oelssner, showed strong revisionist tendencies. A former member of the State Planning Commission, Fritz Behrens, spoke out in favor of less central control over the economy and greater autonomy in industry at the local level, a revisionist point of view. ^ 9 Revisionism existed in the DDR both before and after the period under discussion but there is no doubt that this was the time of its great est expansion. 70For further information compare: Doernberg, op. cit. , pp. 283 ff. , and SBZ von A-Z, p. 406. 252 Significance of the Lange Administration Minister Lange's administration had certain features in common both with Paul Wandel and Else Zaisser. He shared with Wandel a realiza tion of the value of publicity, the skill of a good administrator, and close connections with the SED. He adopted Frau Zaisser's idea of a school inspectorate and a ten year (Middle) school to replace the eight year Grundschule, with the difference that Frau Zaisser envisioned an eleven year course. During Lange's administration, as during Zaisser's, much attention was focused on polytechnical education and patriotic training. During both M inistries, attacks against the church flourished. While Minister Lange resembled Paul Wandel in many respects and certainly provided the Ministry with some badly needed leadership, he did not equal Wandel's standing. A partial explanation for this fact was that the SED played a far more important role in education during Lange's term and this had an inhibiting effect on the Minister. A number of educational events characterize the Lange Period. The school structure was changed to a ten year Middle School which prepared students for middle level occupations, such as technical assistants, shop foremen, and machine station (MAS) operators. This was a logical development of the trend previously described in this dissertation whereby vocational education gradually eliminated general education. The new school dealt a further blow at the Oberschule. A second conversion of the school structure into a polytechnical system was under discussion at the end of the Lange Era. An effort was made to bring the DDR into UNESCO. This move showed a healthy interest in international education, but it failed. Research to bring out the German rather than the Russian roots of the DDR educational system was strongly encouraged. This was one of the rare occasions when German Communists gathered enough courage to intimate that they themselves had something to contribute to the new pedagogy. Finally, the high point of revisionism was reached. A most extraordinary period of tolerance allowed a number of educators openly to criticize the existing school system with respect to such sensitive issues as general education, instruction in Russian for all students, the Oberschule, class discipline, and special provisions for bright children. This frank discussion was permitted for more than a year, after which the SED stepped in and brought the debate to an abrupt halt. Lange was not publicly criticized for allowing the contro versy to go on, but he was soon replaced by another Minister. CHAPTER V REORGANIZATION OF EDUCATION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UNIFIED SOCIALIST EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM (1958-1964) On December 8 , 1958, newly appointed Minister President Grotewohl submitted a list of Ministers to the Volkskammer for approval. ^ The list contained a new name for Education, Prof. Dr. Alfred Lemnitz. No comments were made in the educational journals about out-going Minister Lange. Alfred Lemnitz was a typesetter by trade, but he had taken adult o education courses in economics. He had joined the KPD in 1931. He had worked in the Communist underground both in Germany and Holland and spent many years in German concentration camps. After World War II, he had resumed his studies at Leipzig University and earned a doctor's degree. Lemnitz was given a professorship of economics at Rostock in 1953. Shortly before his appointment as Minister of Education, he worked briefly under the State Secretary for Universities and Technical Schools. 1 Geschichtliche Zeittafeln der DDR, p. 3_41; ,!Prof. Dr. Alfred Lemnitz zum Minister filr Volksbildung berufen*1 /Prof. Dr. Lemnitz Named Minister of Education/, DLZ, V (December 12, 1958), 2. ^"Prof. Dr. Alfred Lemnitz, " ibid. ; See also SBZ-Biographie, p. 211. 255 Lemnitz did not reach the Ministry via the DPZI or a State Secretaryship, however, his eventual successor had already begun her preparations for using this route. Margot Honecker started her educa tional career by receiving training in the Soviet Union from 1953-54. ^ Upon her return, she was made chief of the Department of Teacher Training in the Ministry of Education. She remained in this position until she replaced Gertrud Bobek as Deputy Minister of Education in August, 1958. Alfred Lemnitz was appointed to the Ministry at a significant time. The Central Committee of the SED was getting ready to declare a new economic plan which, in July, 1959, was described as a seven stage rocket. The Central Committee decided to work out a Seven-Year Plan which would include the years 1959-65; this was an exact duplication of the Seven-Year Plan decided on at the Twenty-first Congress of the Communist Party in the USSR in February, 1959.^ Walter Ulbricht called the plan: Der Siebenjahrplan des Friedens, des Wohlstandes und des Gltickes des Volkes /The Seven Year Plan for Peace, High Living Standards, and Good Fortune of the People/, in order to emphasize the concentration on the production of consumer goods until the living Q SBZ-Biographie, p. 155. ^Robert Maxwell, Information U .S.S.R . (London: Pergamon Press, 1962), p. 222. 256 standards of Germans living in the DDR were equal to those of the Germans in the West. In this great effort, the school system was again expected to take an important part. Polytechnical education was believed to hold the key for achieving the desired results, so the next few years witnessed a heavy concentration on all aspects of this kind of education. A New School System The Fourth Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the SED met January 15-17, 1959, to decide on the creation of a new school system which was to be called: Die zehnklassige allgemeinbildende poly- g technische Oberschule. The entire project was entrusted to a Schul- kommission /School Commission/ headed iy Kurt Hager, a member of the KPD since 1930, a journalist by profession, the director of Radio Madrid during the Spanish Civil War, and at that time a candidate for the Politbilro of the SED. ^ ^Walter Ulbricht, "Der Siebenjahrplan des Friedens, des Wohlstandes und des GlUckes des Volkes, " Neues Deutschland, October 1, 1959, p. 3. ®Kurt Hager, "Die weitereJEntwicklung der polytechnischen sozialistischen Schule in der DDR" /TheJFurther Development of the Polytechnical Socialist School in the DDR/, DLZ, VI (May, 1959), 2-8. 7 SBZ-Biographie, p. 129. 2 5 7 In an introduction to a very comprehensive report concerning the new polytechnical school, Kurt Hager suggested that the change over would have been accomplished several years before if it had not been for the revisionist controversy. ® He placed blame for the delay on the in fluence within the Central Committee of the Schirdewan Group. Hager described this group as composed of influential Party members who were not convinced of the need for socialization and who preferred to leave t hings as they were. This laissez faire attitude gave revisionists a chance to be heard, said Hager, and thus prevented the plans of the Second SED Party Conference of 1952 and Walter Ulbricht's recommendations at the Third Party Conference in 1956 from being carried out. Hager did not identify members of the Schirdewan Group, but they included the following leaders: Karl Schirdewan, a member of the KPD since 1927, who at this time was a member of the PolitbUro and the Central Committee of the SED; Ernst Wollweber, who was at that time the Minister of State Security, which position he had taken over when William Zaisser was demoted; and Gerhard Ziller, who had been Minister for Heavy Industry and at that time served as Secretary of the Central Committee of the SED. ^ These top officials of the SED opposed the ^Hager, "Die weitere Entwicklung . . . , " op^ cit., 2. information contained in this paragraph was taken from two sources: Stefan Doernberg, op. cit., pp. 295-6 and SBZ-Biographie, pp. 304, 392, and 406. 258 Central Committee's demand for a rapid socialization of the DDR and favored maintaining the status quo. Efforts on the part of Walter Ulbricht to counteract the group's influence began at the Thirtieth Session of the Central Committee, which was held January 30 to February 1, 1957, and ended with the Thirty-fifth Session, held on February 3-6, 1958, when all three members mentioned above were ousted from the Central Committee. While no supporting evidence was found, it was very likely that Paul Wandel, the first Minister of Education, had something to do with this group; Wandel was dismissed from his position on the Central Committee on October 19, 1957. ^ With these elements of resistance removed, the Central Committee was able to proceed with its plans of perfecting a new school system. The recommendation made by the Education Committee under Kurt Hager was that the Grundschule and the Middle School be replaced by the Ten-Year General Polytechnical Oberschule. ^ The Committee proposed that this new school be phased in gradually but become compul sory for all children aged six to sixteen by 1964. The ten-year system was to be divided into an Unterstufe /lower level / for years one to four ^Gerhard Ziller had committed suicide in December, 1957. See SBZ-Biographie, p. 406. 11Ibid. , p. 370. ■^Hager, op. cit., 2. 259 and an Oberstufe /higher level/ for years five to ten. Hager tried to explain why the term Mittelschule was being dropped and replaced by Oberschule. His reasons, which really had nothing to do with terminology, were these: the new curriculum would put more emphasis on technical content, it would be tied in closely with production, it would prepare directly for socialization, and it would provide the base for all further education. Hager attempted to dispel all fears that the twelve-year Oberschule would be eliminated. He said that the Ober schule would have to become polytechnical and, in time, would be re quired to include all children. In future, Hager explained, there would be a ten-year Oberschule and a twelve-year Oberschule. He admitted that this terminology would lead to confusion. 13 According to Hager's plan, there would be four roads leading to the university: the ten-year Oberschule, followed by three years of a special vocational school; the ten-year Oberschule, followed by two years of vocational training and attendance at a technical school, the Worker and Peasant Faculties, and the traditional Oberschule. All four types of training were to be main tained at the same high level. Even though the "day of production" had been scheduled to start in all DDR schools in September, 1958, a detailed curriculum for poly technical training had not been worked out. Kurt Hager made these 13Ibid., 3. 260 recommendations: introduction of manual dexterity in the kindergarten, Werkunterricht /work instruction/ in grades one to six in order to intro duce polytechnical information, metal work in grade seven, electronics in grade eight, and agriculture in grade nine. Hager expressed the hope that a revised curriculum would be ready by September, 1959. The DPZI took over this assignment, used some forty specialists, worked 1 ^ on the plans for six months, and were ready on time with a plan. Concerning this new curriculum, Rudolf Pfautz later wrote: Das Lehrplanwerk ist der erste Versuch, eine durchgUngige Verbindung von Theorie und Praxis, Unterricht und produktive Arbeit wMhrend der Schulzeit herzustellen. /The curriculum is the first attempt to establish a close relationship during the school day between theory and practice and between in struction and productive work._/*® The importance now being attached to polytechnical education was shown by the appointment of Dr. Hans Kaiser, a specialist in poly- 1 7 technical training, as head of the DPZI beginning April 1,. 1959. ± 1 Dr. Hans Berger had held the position for only six months. 14Ibid., 5. 15»>Das neue Lehrplanwerk ftlr die zehnklassige Oberschule1* /New Plans for the Ten-Year Oberschule/, Paedagogik, XIV (February, 1959), 151-67. 16Rudolf Pfautz, "Die fUhrende Rolle der SED bei der Verwirklichung der demokratischen Schulreform und bei der sozialistischen Umgestaltung des Schulwesens in der DDR" [T he Leading Role of the SED in Bringing about the Democratic School Reform and the Socialist Reorganization of the DDR School System/, Paedagogik, XVI (April, 1961), 310. 1 ?Paedagogik, XIV (April, 1959), 319. 261 Allgemeinbildung und Berufsbil.dung I General Education and Vocational Training/ As tbe movement toward a universal introduction of polytechnical education advanced, traditional distinctions between general education and vocational training had to be reconsidered. Heinrich Less stated in an article which appeared in the revitalized Paedagogik that teachers of general education would, in future, be forced to think in vocational terms while vocational teachers would be obliged to see vocational education as general education. 18 Each would have to learn from the other. Less cautioned vocational teachers that they would need to know much more about their subject in the near future; on the other hand, general education teachers would have to think of their subject matter in more practical terms. Less anticipated that even equipment and the physical layout of the classroom would be influenced considerably by the new emphasis on production. Less saw the development of a new relationship between general education and vocational training as the socialistic society became more complicated. ■^Heinrich Less, "Ueber die neuen Beziehungen zwischen Berufsausbilding und Allgemeinbildung /Concerning the New Relations between Vocational Training and General Education/, Paedagogik, XIV (January, 1959), 29-41. 262 In the following issue of Paedagogik, while discussing poly technical education as taught in general schools and technical schools, Georg Maiwald left no doubt about his views on the future of the traditional Oberschule. He wanted to see all the ballast removed from the Oberschule and have the latter converted completely into a polytechnical institution. The ballast which Maiwald wanted to have thrown overboard was the entire btlrgerlichhumanistische Erziehung /bourgeois humanistic education/. In spite of Kurt Hager's assurances about the continuation of the Ober schule, it was clear from Maiwald's article, as well as from comments made by Hager himself, that merely the name, Oberschule, was being retained; the content of instruction was to be entirely polytechnical. On December 2, 1959, the law Gesetz Uber die sozialistische Entwicklung des Schulwesens in der DDR /Law Concerning the Socialistic _ n Development of Schools in the DDR/ was announced. Practically every thing that Kurt Hager had said about the new school in January, 1959, was incorporated in the law. The enactment of this law was as decisive for the new educational era in the DDR following the year 1959 as the Law for the Democratization of the German School was for the old period which began in 1946. •*-®Georg Maiwald, MDie polytechnische Bildung in der allgemein- bildenden Schule und die ingenieurtechnischen Fachschulen" /Polyte chnical Training in the General School and the Technical Schools for Engineers/, Paedagogik, XIV (February, 1959), 125-33. ^°"Gesetz iiber dis sozialistische Entwicklung des Schulwesens in der DDR," Gesetzblatt, I (December 7, 1959), 858-863. 263 The Importance of the Year 1959 Two events stood out in the administrative history of DDR education for the year 1959: completion of the first year of a five year term for the new Minister of Education, Alfred Lemnitz, and the pro mulgation of a law which established a new educational system. While this was Lemnitz's first year in office, the educational scene was not dominated by him but by the Central Committee of the SED. This situation had come about because the Central Committee had just finished cleaning house in the entire educational establishment and was now determined to remain as policy maker for the school sy stem . The polytechnical philosophy of education had been under dis cussion in the DDR for approximately ten years. Walter Ulbricht had wanted to introduce this form of education on several occasions, but conditions were not favorable. The biggest setback came as a result of the uprising of May 17, 1953. The decisive reason for polytechnical education moving forward in 1959 was Walter Ulbricht's decision to raise the living standard of the DDR population to equal that of West Germany; this decision required the training of a large number of technicians. Over a period of years, only the school system would be able to produce in quantity the talent needed by the expanding economy. 264 The new Seven-Year Plan, like its three shorter predecessors, was geared to production. Polytechnical education was favored, because it helped the socialist economy. The bourgeois educational system, especially as reflected in the traditional four-year Oberschule, was quickly being undermined, although its name was retained, in all likeli hood, because it had a reputation for quality. Since the SED contended that every child had the right to a complete education, including access to the university, many ways beside the Oberschule were devised to help especially the children of workers and peasants. There can be no doubt that the SED was sincerely interested in raising the quality of its teachers and students. An order issued on November 12, 1959, specified four different plans intended to improve instruction: the year's curriculum ordered by the Ministry of Education, the Klassenleiter's plan, the individual teacher's plan, and the Schulhort /_study hall/ plan, by which the individual student was helped with his hom ew ork. 211 Two basic weaknesses were built into the educational system: all education had to conform to the decisions of one political party and all education had to be practical. 21 "Verordnung Mber die Sicherung einer festen Ordnung an den allgemeinbildenden Schulen" /Decree concerning the Assurance of Hard and Fast Regulations in the General Schools/, Paedagogik, XIV (December 1959), 1004-7. 265 Re-tooling for Polytechnical Education (1960-61) The years 1960 and 1961 were uneventful as far as education was concerned. A reason for this rather long lull might be found in the fact that, although polytechnical education had been discussed for many years, no time had been allowed for teachers to prepare for a new type of in struction. According to Gilnter Wilms, the results of a series of conferences between the Minister of Education and the State Secretary for Universities and Technical Schools, which extended over a two year period, were published in April, 1960, under the title, Grundkonzeption Lehreraus- — “ 9 9 bilding /A Basic Concept of Teacher Training/. The decisions reached in this document were to be implemented in all teacher training institutions beginning September 1, 1960. A fundamental change to be introduced in teacher training following this date was that the first year of instruction would be carefully balanced between school work and actual experience in production. Such a distribution of study and work was necessary to prepare teachers for polytechnical instruction. The length of training was determined to be four years at a university or Pedagogical Institute ^Gllnter Wilms, "Die Sozialistische Entwicklung der Lehreraus- bilding" /The Socialist Development of Teacher Training/, Paedagogik, XV (August, 1960), 722-32. 266 for Oberstufenlehrer /Upper Level Teacher / (grades 5-10) and three years at a Lehrerinstitut for Unterstufenlehrer /Lower Level Teacher/ (grades 1-4). Class Management and Discipline A problem frequently discussed in 1960 was that of class manage ment and discipline. Special attention was given to this subject in 1950 under Paul Wandel, later in 1953 shortly after the May 17 incident, and most recently in the November 12, 1959 order on strict school regulations.23 The subject appeared to receive special emphasis either when a concerted drive was under way to raise school standards or when the country was restless. In the year 1960, a drive to improve the quality of instruction was in progress, but the tense feelings which preceded the announcement of compulsory military service in May, 1961, and the Berlin incident of August 13, 1961, were also present at this time. The March issue of Paedagogik carried an article by Helmut Stanelle which showed how the individual student in a school was both pA helped with his studies and kept under control. ^ The key person in 23l,yerordnung liber die Sicherung einer festen Ordnung, " loc. cit. ^Helmut Stanelle, ”Die Aufgaben des Klassenleiters und der Klassenleiterplan" /Responsibilities of the Class Leader and the Class Leader Plan/, Paedagogik, XV (March, 1960), 197-206. 267 each school was the Klassenleiter. He was responsible for the total training and education of the class assigned to him. It was up to him to make sure that every student reached the Oberschule. His responsibilities included close familiarity with the work of each student, an understanding of the abilities of each class teacher, and conferences with the teacher to determine the student's weaknesses. The Klassenleiter could get help from many sources. The Klassenbuch /class book/, the student's grade cards, and his homework provided useful information about his progress. He could call on the youth organizations for help. The Klassenkollektiv /class collective/ would provide assistance from member students, introduce an element of competition, and encourage the student to do better. The Klassen- leiterplan, mentioned above, provided an action program. After analysing a student's difficulties, all factors which might bring about an improvement were considered. A plan was then devised which in volved commitment on the part of the student, his teacher, the Klassen kollektiv, and the Klassenleiter. The object of all this help was to prevent failure of the student and to assure political conformity. During this same year, 1960, the translation of a Soviet text on discipline appeared in Berlin. 25 This book said that the Klassenkollektiv ^W iktor Gmurman, Disziolin in der Schule /Discipline in SchooI7 (Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1960). 268 provided the best solution to the discipline problem. According to Gmurman, proper discipline followed in the wake of effective teaching. If a teacher set a good example, students presumably would not act oth erw ise. The Sixth Pedagogical Conference In February, 1961, Minister Lemnitz announced that the Sixth Pedagogical Conference would be held in Berlin from June 10 to 12, 1961. The short span of time between the announcement and the actual convening of the conference stood in sharp contrast to the Fifth Pedagogical Confer ence with its elaborate preparations of more than a year. As in the case of the Fourth Pedagogical Conference, the FDJ played a prominent role with Horst Schumann, the First Secretary of the FDJ, featured as the second main speaker, immediately after Minister Lemnitz. A further unusual feature about the Sixth Pedagogical Conference was that it was held in Berlin, where the First Pedagogical Conference had met; all other pedagogical conferences had convened in Leipzig. The precipitous announcement, the short period of preparation, the emphasis on the younger generation, and the selection of Berlin as the site for the conference, all these were closely related to troubled conditions which existed in that city during the year 1961, the year of the August 13 sealing of the border between East and West Berlin and of the creation of the Berlin Wall. Minister Lemnitz declared the theme of the conference to be; 'Fttr die Verbesserung des Lernens und der sozialistischen Erziehung an den Oberschulen" /For the Improvement of Learning and Socialist 9 c Education in the Oberschulen/. He stated that the conference was needed in order to review the weak spots of the educational system, now in its third year of socialization, and to look for solutions to remove these weaknesses. Careful reading of reports concerning the conference resulted in the conclusion that nothing of real importance was achieved. One subject, which later received considerable attention, was that of improving instruction in mathematics. 27 The conference determined that training in the fundamentals of mathematics had left much to be desired because students generally were unable to apply what they had learned in class to practical problems. At this stage of the discussion, the focal point was still upon helping a larger number of students pass examinations; little was said of the content of the mathematics curriculum. Another result of discussions held at the Sixth Pedagogical 26ttvii pSdagogischer Kongress" /Sixth Pedagogical Conference/, Paedagogik, XVI (March, 1961), 193. ^Oskar Mader, "Ueber die Aktivierung des Wissens im Mathe- matikunterricht" /Activating Knowledge in Mathematics Instruction^, Paedagogik, XVI (August, 1961), 702-8. Conference was that educational research was given an additional boost.^ 8 The DPZI was ordered to prepare a catalog of themes or subjects which required research. The results of partial research engaged in by doctoral candidates were to be made known before their entire dissertation was com plete. These two mildly significant achievements of the Sixth Pedagogical Conference were hardly enough to have justified calling a nation al meeting, but there was a possible political advantage to be gained by demonstrating the peaceful intent of the DDR in the form of a pedagogical conference at the same time as other hostile actions of a military nature were taking place. In May, 1961, universal military training was proclaimed. The DLZ used the headline: Waffendienst -- h8 chste Ehre und patriotische Pflicht jedes Staatsbllrgers der DDR /Military Service -- the Highest — 29 Honor and Patriotic Duty of Every DDR Citizen/. An oath of loyalty to the flag was publicized. On August 13, 1961, barricades were erected along the entire line separating the Soviet Sector of Berlin from the Western Sectors. Germans in the DDR were told that these measures were necessary to thwart a plan of the West German Government to seize 28«'Arbeitstagung pUdagogischer W issenschaftler Uber die Verwirkli.chung des Forschungsprogramms" /Workshop of Educators for Implementing the Research Program/, Paedagogik, XVI (September, 1961), 860-2. 29DLZ, VIII (May, 1961), 1-2. 271 -East Berlin by force and to prevent a wave of sabotage within the DDR. Likewise on August 13, 1961, the text of an agreement among member nations of the Warsaw Pact was made public which demanded that Berlin 30 be declared a demilitarized zone. This declaration explained the purpose of the measures of August 13. Armed workers and the existing military forces of the DDR were credited with having prevented crossing of the DDR border by Western military forces and espionage agents. At the very same time, the subversive activities of the Ted- 31 Herold Club were exposed. These were young boys of the eleventh grade in the East Sector of Berlin who cultivated "hot" music, indulged in drinking, enjoyed the company of girls, and listened to the radio station RIAS, located in West Berlin. Members of the organization had built a club house in the woods. Here they kept phonograph records and other anti-DDR propaganda which they had obtained from the Amerika- House in West Berlin. At their public trial, the youths admitted that, on the night of August 14, they had terrorized the peaceful countryside of the DDR by painting slogans on walls and pouring buckets of paint over ^^"ErklUrung der Regierungen der W arschauer-Vertrags- Staaten /Declarations of the Governments of the Warsaw Pact Nations//, Gesetzblatt II, August 13, 1961, 331-3. 31"Vom RIAS-HBrer und Herold-Fan zum Staatsverbrecher" /From RIAS Listener and Herold Fan to Being a Criminal/, DLZ, VIII (August, 1961), 7. 272 political posters. They had even set fire to a barn. For these and similar activities, five youths were sentenced to prison, one for life, as a warning to other Teddies in the DDR. Teddies were followers of Elvis Presley. While this one incident would certainly not justify a general con clusion of extensive unrest among the young people of the DDR, it must be viewed against the background of other accounts given earlier in this dissertation, such as the complaints about juvenile dress and manners in 1958, the charges against members of the Junge Gemeinde made in 1952 and 1958, the stories of vandalism connected with the uprising of June 17, 1953, and the concern over discipline problems mentioned in 1950, 1959, and 1960. These instances of resistance to the established order were particularly painful for Communist authorities because their youth organizations were designed to encompass the interests of all young people without exception. Socialism required the participation of everyone. Evaluation of the Years 1960 and 1961 At the time Minister Lemnitz made known his decision to convene the Sixth Pedagogical Conference, he mentioned that the two preceding years had provided the basis for the socialist school and that the time had now come to tackle the Probleme des inneren Ausbaus /problems 273 — 32 which needed to be resolved from within/. Minister Lemnitz was un doubtedly referring to the first two years of the Seven-Year Plan, which started in July, 1959, and to the decision of the Fourth Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the SED concerning the establishment of a new polytechnical Qberschule. The new system was introduced before teachers were trained for their new assignment. As a result, these first few years of necessity saw more emphasis placed on teacher training than on revolutionary changes in the schools themselves. The Sixth Pedagogical Conference was heralded as one of great national and international importance. ^ It did not achieve any such distinction. Its main purpose was to calm the troubled waters in Berlin by demonstrating the DDR's interest in educational pursuits at a time of great international tension. During these years, efforts were increased to improve the quality of each student's school work. The methods which were devised to achieve this goal concentrated more on external controls and meeting the requirements of examinations than on an inner appeal to a deeper understanding of a given subject. 32mvi. pMdagogischer Kongress. u loc. cit. 274 Two personnel changes should be mentioned in connection with the year 1961. In June, Prof. Dr. Hans Kaiser was replaced as director of the DPZI by Prof. Dr. Gerhard Neuner, who had served as editor-in- chief of Paedagogik since 1957. 84 New Ideas in Education (1962) After more than two uneventful years, the first indications of change, expansion, and new thinking began to appear. The Ministry of Education widened its sphere of activities, the DPZI moved forward in research, a breakthrough was achieved in introducing new ideas into mathematics instruction, the possibilities of cybernetics were examined, programmed instruction was discussed, and the DDR showed renewed interest in comparative education, especially in the pedagogy of the USSR. Changes in the Ministry of Education The new trend showed up first at a scientific conference sponsored jointly by the Ministry of Education and the DPZI. 35 Minister Lemnitz explained that the meeting was being held in the wake of the XXII Party 3 4 DLZ, VIII (June, 1961), 1. 3 3 "Er 8 ffnungsansprache des Ministers fUr Volksbildung, Prof. Dr. Alfred Lemnitz" /Opening Speech of the Minister of Education, Prof. Dr. Alfred Lemnitz/, Paedagogik, XVII (April, 1962), 289-315. 275 Conference of the Russian Communist Party and the Fourteenth Session of the Central Committee of the SED, the latter having met from November 23 to 26, 1961. The main speaker at this meeting was Prof. N. K. Goncharov, the vice president of the Academy of the Pedagogical Sciences of-the R.S.F.S.R. Goncharov provided a picture of the Soviet school system and explained that the USSR was preparing to make an eleven year school system compulsory by 1970. He added that thought was being given to making it a twelve year compulsory system. Significantly, Goncharov called for a systematic stepping up of atheistic propaganda in the schools in order to counteract religious influence. This first-hand account of the changes which the USSR had in mind for its own schools was but one of the many ways by which Soviet influence was brought to bear on DDR educators during the year 1962. As the preceding scientific conference illustrated, a new wave of interest in research was sweeping over the Ministry of Education. A Wissenschaftlicher Rat /Scientific Council/, reminiscent of the Scientific Senate created in 1949 under Paul Wandel, had recently been OC This was the same Prof. Goncharov who met frequently with Oliver J. Caldwell, Acting Associate Commissioner and Director, Bureau of International Education, U.S. Office of Education in 1963. See Oliver J. Caldwell and Loren R, Graham, Moscow in May 1963, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bulletin 1964, No. 38 (Washington: Government Printing Office). 276 established as a research center and clearing house for the latest developments taking place in the USSR. A pedagogical research program was outlined by the Minister of Education on June 28, 1962, OO which specified six areas of concentration. The DPZI worked closely with the Council by maintaining a Koordinierungsstelle fUr p&dagogische 3 9 Forschung /Coordinating Office for Pedagogical Research7. All current pedagogical research had to be reported to this office. A further addition to the Ministry of Education was the Zentral- institut fttr Weiterbildung der Lehrer, Erzieher und SchulfunktionUre /Central Institute for Further Training of Teachers, Trainers, and School Functionaries/. ^ This institute was established in Ludwigsfelde on August 1, 1962. There had always been a problem of raising the qualifications of teachers who were already in the school system. With the introduction of polytechnical education in 1959, most teachers were 3 7 Paedagogik, XVII (October, 1962), 911-12. S^Das pctdagogische Forschungsprogram" /The Pedagogical Research Program/, Paedagogik, XVII (October, 1962), 906-7. 3 9 Ibid. , 911-12. ^9Werner Kath. "Aufgaben des Zentralinstituts filr Lehrer- weiterbildung im System der Qualifizierung der Lehrer, Erzieher und SchulfunktionUre" /Responsibilities for the Central Institute . . f7. Paedagogik, XVIII7May, 1963), 467. 277 in need of considerable additional training. The Zentralinstitut was created to help all teachers reach the degree of proficiency required by their assignment. A third development within the Ministry of Education was the expansion of the adult education program. The purpose of the program was to provide adults with an incentive to continue their education and to make it possible for them to enter a higher technical school or university. Three types of schools were provided for adults: the Betriebsakademie /factory schoolV, which was tied in directly with a factory, the Dorfakademie /village school/, which was closely related to a rural area, and the Rundfunk und Fernsehakademie /radio and television schoojL/, which was not limited to an individual factory or rural area. ^ All of these schools were administered by the Ministry of Education. The Ministry of Education became revitalized during 1962 by taking a new look at educational developments in the DDR, by encourag ing pedagogical research, and by expanding the programs of assistance to teachers and of adult education. In addition, the Ministry of Education, together with the DPZI, took active steps to improve the curriculum, ^"Verordnung liber die Bildungseinrichtungen zur Erwachsenen- qualifizierung" /Decree concerning the Schools for Adult Education/, Gesetzblatt, Part II, (October 13, 1962), 687-90. 27 8 particularly in mathematics. New Ideas in the Curruculum The September, 1962, issue of Paedagogik carried an important 42 article on mathematics instruction by Fritz Neigenfind. He deplored the high mortality rate among students who took mathematics. Neigenfind excused the students and put most of the blame for this state of affairs on poorly prepared teachers. He said that most mathematics teachers had not progressed beyond teaching the manipulation of figures; they seemed to be incapable of communicating mathematical concepts. Neigenfind stated that new methods of teaching mathematics had been introduced in the DDR in 1951 with Russian assistance but that the revisionist period from 1953-57 had wiped out all these gains. Since 1959, according to Neigenfind, the method of teaching mathematical concepts had been revived. Fritz Neigenfind1 s article was particularly significant because he was among the first to mention the importance of cybernetics in connection with mathematics instruction. Here, as was the case in Prof. Goncharov's talk before the scientific conference, Soviet influence 4-2 Fritz Neigenfind, "Zur Situation und_zu den Massnahmen filr die Verbesserung des Mathematikunterrichts" /Concerning the Status of Mathematics Instruction and Measures to be Taken to Improve the Same/, Paedagogik, XVII (September, 1962), 810-23. 279 was much in evidence. Neigenfind stated that the Soviet Union intended to train ten thousand programmers by 1965; they were needed to operate computors in connection with an expanded program of automation. Neigenfind's article was followed in October by a report of a Committee on Cybernetics and Pedagogy which had been established A O within the Scientific Council. ° This committee was chaired by Heinz Kelbert. The committee recommended that steps be taken at once to train technical mathematicians, programmers, automation experts, and control technicians. Dr. Kelbert asked that cybernetics be recognized as a subject for research and that it be taught at all teacher training institutions. As the year 1962 drew to a close, the Politbtlro of the SED ordered that a study be undertaken covering the entire mathematics curriculum and that specific recommendations be made by September, 1963. ^ The Minister of Education was directed to supervise the trans lation of all mathematics textbooks used in the Soviet Union in grades ^"Konstituierung der Arbeitsgruppe 'Kybernetik und P&dagogik'" /Establishment of the Workshop "Cybernetics and Pedagogy'^/, Paedagogik, XVII (October, 1962), 964-5. 44 "Zur Verbesserung und weiteren Entwicklung des Mathematik- unterrichts in den allgemeinbildenden polytechnischen Oberschulen der DDR" /The Improvement and Further Development of Instruction in Mathematics in the General Polytechnical Oberschulen of the DDR/, DLZ, X (January 4, 1963), 1. 280 one to eleven and to have the project completed by the same date. The study was to determine how early instruction in algebra might begin. Recommendations, were to be prepared on the need in the mathematics curriculum for analysis, mathematical logic, the theory of probabilities, and statistics. The Politbtiro established deadlines for completion of-new textbooks on mathematics by 1964 and implementation of the new curriculum by 1965. Comparative Education Interest in comparative education also took an upward turn during 1962. Much attention was given to the Lipitzker Movement which 45 had originated in the area of Lipitzk, Russia. Teachers in Lipitzk had . experimented with improving class instruction. They had agreed that too much class time was being spent on checking student answers and reviewing materials to improve retention. The Lipitzk method called for a reorganization of the class period. Instead of repeating informa tion covered in a previous class, an effort was made to find new applica tions for what had been learned, thereby widening the horizon of the students. In presenting new materials, the connection between these ^"Leuchttllrme p&dagogischer Arbeit" /Lighthouses of Peda gogical Work/, DLZ, IX (June 22, 1962), 5. 281 and what had been covered previously had to be established. Generally speaking, the Lipitzer Movement aimed at making instruction more interesting to the student and at helping the student retain what he had learned. Since the DDR was greatly concerned about improving the quality of its students, especially in mathematics, German and Russian, the example set by the teachers of Lipitzk was widely publicized. The new interest in and the promotion of comparative education was shown by numerous publications which appeared during the year 1962. A book was published on Das Schulwesen sozialistischer Lender Europas _ 40 /School Systems of Socialist Countries in Europe. / By the year 1962, Volk und Wissen had printed thirty-six pamphlets on comparative education in a series called, Informationsmaterial aus der pHdagogischen Literatur der Sowjetunion und der Lender der Volksdemokratie /infor mation concerning the Pedagogical Literature of the Soviet Union and Countries of the People's Democracies^ During the same year, DPZI and Volk und Wissen jointly produced a new periodical called Vergleichende P&dagogik /Comparative Education/. Besides this great increase in written materials on the subject of comparative education, the Ministry of Education was also very active in ^"Zum Erscheinen der 1 Vergleichenden PMdagogikl" /In Connection with the Appearance of "Comparative Education'_V, Paedagogik, XVIII (August, 1963), 474-8. 282 arranging for teacher exchanges. During August and September, 1962, teachers of German from the USSR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Rumania attended a summer institute at Halle. At the same time, fifty teachers of German in the USSR came to the DDR to 47 help German teachers of Russian. Evaluation of the Year 1962 The year 1962 marked the beginning of a new forward movement in DDR education. The influence of the USSR educational system was evident everywhere. The most important contributions of the Soviet Union to the DDR's educational system were the introduction of a modern type of mathematics instruction, programmed learning, and cybernetics. This new direction in education was brought about by the DDR's projected expansion of automation. The new trend in the DDR ran parallel to a sim ilar movement then going on in the USSR. Ingredients of a New Unified School System (1963) During the year 1963, there was much discussion regarding the curriculum of a new unified school. The term, unified school, had been used as early as 1945 in connection with the proposed educational system ^Internationale Sommerferienkurse" /International Summer Vacation Courses/, Paedagogik, XVII (October, 1962), 963-4. 283 of the Soviet Zone. As mentioned earlier in this dissertation, the ex pression had been used in many European countries after World War I. On April 2, 1963, the Staatliche Kommission zur Gestaltung des einheitlichen sozialistischen Bildungssystems /State Commission for Establishing a Unified Socialist Educational System/ was constituted as the result of a PolitbUro decision. ^8 Alexander Abusch, the Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers, was made chairman. Margot Honecker, at that time Deputy Minister of Education, was a member of the Commission. The purpose of the Commission was to make a close study of the entire school system from the first year to the com pletion of the university in order to make sure that all phases of education fit into a single unified structure. By July 3, 1963, discussions had proceded far enough to permit the enactment of a law concerning the new school which bore this title: Beschluss tiber die Grunds&tze der weiteren Systematisierung des poly- technischen Unterrichts, der schrittweisen EinfUhrung der beruflichen Grundausbilding und der Entwicklung von Spezialschulen und klassen. /Decision, concerning the Principles of the Further Systematization of Polytechnical Instruction, the Step-by-step Introduction of Basic AO "Staatliche Kommission zur Gestaltung des einheitlichen sozialistischen Bildungssystems konstituiert" /Creation of a State _ Commission for Establishing a Unified Socialist Educational System/, Paedagogik, XVIII (May, 1963), 471-3. 284 Vocational Training, and the Development of Special Schools and Special — 49 Classes/. The introductory statement of the law explained that the educational pattern had to be changed to conform to the social changes which had taken place in the DDR. The new school system had to produce the many-faceted type of personality needed in an industrial age. Children had to be raised as conscious builders of socialism , they had to be provided with an understanding of production processes, and they had to become highly skilled in science and technology in order to increase production. The quality of general education had to be improved considerably with special emphasis being placed on science and mathematics. The new education was expected to bring together general education, polytechnical education, and vocational training. The future required a new curriculum for the Oberschule, the improvement of polytechnical instruction, conver sion to a basic occupational education, and the development of special sc h o o ls. The law then described the curriculum for grades one to six. During these years, children were to gain an elementary understanding of the production processes in industry and agriculture. They were to acquire simple work skills. They were expected to understand elementary machine operations and the basic organizational techniques for workers. ^Gesetzblatt, II (July 23, 1963), 501-7. 285 During grades four to six, children were supposed to set up special projects in cooperation with factories and agricultural cooperatives. The student's selection of a specialty in the field of work was to begin after completion of the sixth year. The curriculum for grades seven to ten was built upon what had been learned during grades one to six. During these four years, some subjects were taken by all students, such as: introduction to socialist production or mechanical drawing. In other cases, students were assigned to an industrial track where they learned about machinery, electricity, and metals, or to an agricultural track, where they concen trated on studying plants and animals. During the seventh and eighth grades, theory was stressed; in grades nine and ten, the student was expected to begin actual production, providing the area in which the school was located offered the opportunity. Students engaged in actual production were to receive some pay. The year 1963-64 was designated by the law as a transitional year. During this period, teachers were to be trained for polytechnical classes. At the same time, managers of factories and farms were ex pected to provide working stations for students. The training received at such working stations was to be closely related to current needs of the economy. The entire program of polytechnical education was to be ready to start on September 1, 1964. The new curriculum was to place special 286 emphasis on chemistry, metallurgy, electronics, machines, energy, transportation, agriculture, and construction. The latest methods of standardization, mechanization, and automation were to be employed. This law set the pattern for the future of the unified school system of the DDR. The objectives of the school were identified specifically with the needs of the economy. Schools were linked directly to factories and farms. Vocational and polytechnical education dominated the curriculum. The model for the DDR school system was that set by the USSR. Cybernetics and the New School The DDR became interested in cybernetics for education for two related reasons: cybernetics provided a new approach for studying the laws of learning and cybernetics was directly connected with teaching machines or programmed learning. Since the Ministers of Education from Wandel to Lemnitz had expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of instruction in the DDR and had recognized the need for improving the level of performance of most students, it was understandable that the new approach in education provided by cybernetics would arouse considerable in terest. Alfred Dietz wrote an informative article in Paedagogik on the subject of cybernetics as related to the laws of learning. jje described 50Alfred Dietz, "Unterrichtsforschung und Kybernetik" /Research of Education and Cybernetics/, Paedagogik, XVIII (January, 1963), 114-20. 287 the learning process as consisting of four operations: Vom Standpunkt der Kybernetik aus ist zun&chst festzustellen, dass sich in den Lehr-und Lernakten im Unterrichtsprozess Aufnahme, Verarbeitung, Bewahrung und Weitergabe von Informationen. vollziehen. /Seen from the viewpoint of cybernetics, one may divide the teaching and learning activities into reception, assimilation, storage, and transmission of information._/^ In speaking of reception, Dietz explained that all the senses were at work in the relation of teacher and student: sound (impulses of the voice), sight (visual presentation), taste and smell; all acted as channels of the nervous system to convey impressions. When assimilating information, there were procedures which helped the process and there were others which interfered. Just what went on required further study. Assimilation of information also necessitated a logical conversion of thoughts into a pattern which could be retained. Logical conversion likewise helped in the storage and transmission process. Dietz also described the cybernetic phenomenon of Rtlckkoppelung or feedback which had important implications both in understanding the operation of the human mind and the nervous system, as well as for the programming of teaching machines. Gerhard Neuner, the new director of the DPZI, was particularly CO interested in the possibilities offered by programmed learning. He 51Ibid., 117. 52Gerhard Neuner, "Aufgaben und Probleme bei der Weiterent- ■ wicklung des sozialistischen Bildungswesens" /Objectives and Problems in connection with the Further Development of Socialist Education/, Paedagogik, XVIII (February, 1963), 133-49. 288 recognized that the principles which were applied in programming materials for various machines would also benefit the classroom teacher. Neuner saw teaching machines as a very useful device for differ entiation in the basic schools. Machines would allow individual instruction for students who needed help or who had special interests. At this point, Neuner was walking on thin ice, because the concept of the Einheitsschule tended toward uniformity in instruction and opposed too much differentia tion. Persistence in this direction might easily have led to charges that Neuner had revisionist ideas, especially since it was generally recognized that the United States was a world leader in the field of cybernetics and programmed learning. During 1963, many educators experimented with designing teaching machines. Among these inventors were Wolter and Bock at the Martin Luther University in Halle, FrBlich in Berlin, and Bennewitz with the Ministry of Education. The center for cybernetics in relation to education was the committee, Kybernetik und Schule /Cybernetics and the School/, headed by Prof. Kelbert under the auspices of the DPZI. Machines were built for use in biology, physics, mathematics, and 53»tpr0grammierter Unterricht und Anwendung moderner Lern- hilfsm ittel" /P rogrammed Learning and the Application of Modern Aids to Learning/, Paedagogik, XVIII (April, 1963), 374-6. 54Paedagogik, XVIII (August, 1963), 738-42. 289 languages. Articles which described various experimental models of machines admitted that the DDR was still in the very early stages of a new development and that working machines were not yet available. There can be little doubt that the idea of applying cybernetic principles in education in the DDR came to East Germany via the USSR, since only Russian leaders in this field were mentioned. At the same time, there was a strong awareness, as Heinz Shaffenhauer admitted, that capitalist countries were very active in this area of education. Other Curriculum Trends For a number of years, the poor quality of instruction in mathematics was criticized in the DDR. Educational developments in the Soviet Union and trends toward automation within the DDR itself were probably responsible for the Politbiiro's demand, in 1962, that the entire mathematics curriculum be revised. An article in the April issue of Paedagogik suggested that special schools for mathematics, similar 56 to others which concentrated on ballet, music, and sports, be established. 5 5 Heinz Schaffenhauer, "Ueber die Entwicklung kybernetischer Unterrichtsmittel und das Problem der Programmierung von Unterrichts- abschnitten" /Concerning the Development of Cybernetic Instructional Materials and the Problem of Programming Instructional Units/, Paedagogik, XVIII (November, 1963), 498-1003. ^"Spezialoberschulen -- Aufgaben und Probleme" /Special Oberschulen -- Objectives and Problems/, Paedagogik, XVIII (April, 1963), 361-6. 2 90 These schools would teach mathematics using the latest techniques; students would be selected because of their special aptitude and interest in mathe matics. The reason given for creating such specialized schools was that this would give the socialist countries an edge in the competition with capitalist countries. This trend toward specialization, similar to the one mentioned in connection with Gerhard Neuner's discussion of differentiation in in struction, reflected a tendency toward recognizing the special abilities of individuals. Perhaps this was the reason for Walter Ulbricht's state ment at the Sixth Party Congress, held on January 15, 1963, that the evil of the day in education still was dogmatism and that revisionism had not r hr yet disappeared. Ulbricht wanted to see all children within the DDR receive the same polytechnical education, yet it seemed that the only way to raise the level of education in the DDR was by providing specialized education for selected individuals based on talent. Another trend in curriculum, with disturhng, unpeaceful impli cations for the future, was the repeated suggestion that students should be encouraged to engage in pre-military training. ^ The subject was to be _ ^"Die Weiterbildung des sozialistischen Bildungswesens" /Continuation of Socialist Education/, DLZ, X (January 25, 1963), 4. ^"VormilitUrische Ausbildung und Wehrerziehung" /Pre military Training/, Paedagogik, XVIH (October, 1963), 940-3. 291 discussed in history and physical education classes. Students were to be invited to join the Gesellschaft ftlr Sport und Technik /Organization for Sports and Technology/, where training in close combat and rifle practice would be provided. In spite of repeated assertions that the DDR followed only peaceful objectives, many instances reported in this dissertation, including the present one on the purpose of the GST, showed that the DDR would never hesitate to use armed forces, if she stood to gain by it. Evaluation of the Administration of Alfred Lemnitz As the year 1963 drew to a close, so did the administration of Minister Lemnitz. He had remained in office about one month short of five years, which meant that he had served one year longer than his predecessor, Fritz Lange. Lemnitz came closer than any of the other Ministers of Education discussed in this dissertation to equalling Paul Wandel's record of seven years in office. Alfred Lemnitz began his career as Minister of Education in the same year as the SED announced the start of a Seven-Year Plan; this was also regarded as the beginning of the socialization of the DDR, although a similar claim had been made in 1952. During the same year, the SED, in the person of Kurt Hager, resumed the initiative in education and announced the beginning of a new school system to be called the Ten Year General Polytechnical Oberschule, which was to become compulsory for all children 292 in the DDR by 1964. At the time of the announcement, very little had been done to train the teachers who would eventually have to carry out the new program. The first few years of the Lemnitz administration were unevent ful. During this time, polytechnical education was widely discussed, lesson plans were worked out for teacher training institutions, and teachers received their first polytechnical training. The Sixth Pedagogical Conference was held in Berlin in 1961 when that city presented a threat to world peace. Judged by the educational achievements of this conference, the meeting was not very significant. A few subjects were discussed which later became important; the improve ment of mathematics instruction, greater emphasis on research, and cybernetics in education. A forward movement began in the Ministry in 1962 and persisted until the end of the Lemnitz administration. In 1962, the Politbilro of the SED again asserted itself and demanded that a new mathematics curriculum become operational by September, 1963. At the same time, an entirely new field in education was opened up, the study of cybernetics. Both subjects, the new mathematics and the theories of cybernetics, were closely related with the DDR's interest in automation and this, in turn, was a part of the Seven-Year Plan. Before leaving the Ministry, Lemnitz had also initiated the discussion of yet another reorganization of the entire school system from 293 grade one to the university. The deliberations begun by him reached their climax a year later, in 1964, under a new Minister of Education who was, at this time, his Deputy. The Standing of Alfred Lemnitz Alfred Lemnitz was appointed to the Ministry of Education at an auspicious moment. The SED had just engaged in a wholesale cleanup of revisionists. The Party felt so confident that it announced its immediate embarkation along the road to socialism -- which it had done once before in 1952 but apparently, the revisionists set up a roadblock which lasted from 1953-57 -- and a new Seven-Year Plan was about to get under way. With all this advantage, Lemnitz must still be rated below both Wandel and Lange. In length of service as Minister of Education, Lemnitz was second only to Paul Wandel. As far as publicity and public relations were concerned, he was somewhat effective, but not equal to either Wandel or Lange. His Sixth Pedagogical Conference did not match any of the preceding conferences in quality. Lemnitz was an able adminis trator, but his achievements rank below those of Wandel, although they come quite close to those of Lange. With respect to maintaining close relations with the Party, Lemnitz equaled Wandel and was in a stronger position than Lange. In assessing Lemnitz's achievements, he must be credited with bringing the DDR's school system closer to the communist standard of 294 perfection than any previous Minister. All the details for converting to a ten year sequence of polytechnical education were finalized during the Lemnitz administration, although full implementation was scheduled for 1964. Under Lemnitz, four paths were designed to help students reach the university. While the name Oberschule was retained for euphonic reasons, its reputation as the exclusive selector of university- bound students had been completely undermined. Oddly enough, removal of the Oberschule as an anachronism during the new period of socialism did not do away with the problem of providing appropriate training for students of superior ability. While communist doctrine insisted that all students should receive the same training, special schools were being developed for those who were gifted in art, music, mathematics, and languages. Selectivity was returning in a non-bourgeois form. During the Lemnitz administration, the school curriculum be came more sophisticated. After offering alibis for more than ten years and blaming poor mathematics instruction on the revisionists, efforts were made to modernize the mathematics curriculum. The new mathe matics, as well as conversion to automation, aroused an interest in cybernetics. In all these new areas, the USSR served as a model even to the extent that Russian textbooks were simply translated into German. With these improvements in the curriculum and some primitive experimentation in programmed learning, no evidence was found of 295 original or creative work in education by the Germans themselves. Here and there a few soft-spoken comments showed that Germans were aware of their limitations. This may be the explanation for mounting demands during the later years of the Lemnitz administration for a greater concen tration on research. At this juncture, no more can be said than that an awareness of the weakness existed. The Administration of Margot Honecker (1963-) Margot Honecker was named the sixth Minister of Education on c n November 15, 1963. Her appointment, similar to that of her predecessor, was announced in connection with the creation of a new M inister's Council. An unusual feature of her induction into office was that M inister-President Grotewohl wrote a special letter of commendation to the outgoing Minister of Education and explained that Lemnitz was leaving at his own request so that he might devote all of his time to certain research projects. Such explanations were rarely given. Unusual, also, was Alexander Abush's welcome speech in which he praised the political record of Margot Honecker. 6 0 The new Minister of Education won her reputation within the FDJ. ^"Feierliche Amtsttbergabe" /Solemn Inauguration Ceremony/, DLZ, X (November 22, 1963), 1. “ 6 0TL oc. ext. 296 She was one of the original organizers of the youth group and rapidly rose to the top. She married Erich Honecker, former Secretary of the FDJ and now a member of the Politbliro of the SED. Minister Honecker was only thirty-six years of age at the time of her appointment; Minister Laabs, her closest rival in age, was thirty-two years old when he took office. Other facts about her life have been given elsewhere in this dissertation and will not be repeated. Minister Honecker demonstrated her own conviction about appointing young people to responsible positions by naming two Neulehrer as Deputy Ministers of Education: Ernst Machacek was put in charge of teacher training and pedagogical research, while Siegfried Beier was made responsible for planning, economics, and sports. ^ Views Expressed by Minister Honecker Margot Honecker started her work as Minister of Education by C O granting an interview to a reporter from the DLZ in February, 1964. On this occasion, she emphasized the importance of the teacher. She felt _ "Ernst Machacek Stellvertreter des Ministers filr Volksbildung" /Ernst Machacek Named Deputy Minister of Education/, DLZ, X (December 20, 1963), 1; "Siegfried Beier, 11 DLZ, XI (June 19, 1964), 2. _ fi 9 Minister Margot Honecker zur schiJpferischen Arbeit des Lehrers" /Minister Honecker Comments of the Creative Work of the Teacher/, DLZ, XI (February 7, 1964), 1-2. 297 at home in this subject, since it was her original specialty when she was made head of the Department for Teacher Training within the Ministry of Education. She expressed sympathy for the criticism that teachers were frequently asked to take part in activities only remotely related to the profession. She added that more people should realize that the teachers' greatest social contribution was the fact that they taught. She asked the directors of schools to pay more attention to their teachers. Finally, she expressed the view that schools should be used for school purposes only. The points made in this interview sounded inconsonant with the views of a former youth leader and Party activist. Certainly if anything interfered with the school schedule, it was the seemingly endless rounds of political activity of the youth and other Party organizations. Teachers had complained about such interferences since Wandel's time. The inter view may have been intended to mollify some of the teachers' feelings about the best use of their time, but it might also have come about be cause Minister Honecker was beginning to realize how much needed to be done to raise the level of DDR schools. Minister Honecker fully supported the new trend in education which appeared in 1962 which demanded new approaches in teaching mathematics and stressed the natural sciences. In a speech before a meeting of young educators held in Leipzig during April, 1964, Minister Honecker expressed her confidence in the final victory of Socialism over 298 Capitalism because of the fact that the former had the capacity to produce better machines, had a better grasp of technology, and provided superior fi O technical training. She asked the teachers to concentrate on conveying basic laws and important theories in their instruction rather than wasting time on descriptions of processes or of materials. The Unified Socialist Educational System * Mention was made earlier of the fact that Margot Honecker, while still serving as Deputy Minister of Education, was appointed to the State Commission for the Creation of a Unified Socialist Educational System. During the sixth month of Minister Honecker's administration, the final recommendations of the State Commission were announced. The report expressed the view that these recommendations would determine the structure of the DDR school system until 1975-80. The State Commission was of the opinion that it had developed plans for an educational system suitable to a modern Socialist state. The ten-year compulsory school system was to be divided into three levels: the Unterstufe, /lower levelV, grades one to three, the CO — "Untrennbare Einheit von Oekonomie und Bildungswesen" /The Inseparability of the Economy and Education/, DLZ, XI (April 17, 1964), 3. 64 "GrundsMtze fllr die Gestaltung des einheitlichen sozialistischen Bildungssystems" /Principles for Creating a Unified Socialist Educational Systeno/, DLZ, XI "(May 8 , 1964), 1-34. 299 Mittelstufe /middle levelV> grades four to six, and the Oberstufe / upper level/, grades seven to ten. Instructions in the Unterstufe included a fusion of mathematics and algebra, as well as learning about the world of work by observation. Polytechnical education began in the Mittelstufe. Students were introduced to the various occupations. During grades four to five, stories about the German workers' movement were to be featured. By the sixth grade, an organized historical account of the workers' move ment was to be presented. The principles of physics and biology were to be explained. Emphasis was to be placed on spoken Russian. Local geography and intramural sports were to be included. During the Oberstufe, students were to select and then prepare for a specific occupation; in fact, they were expected to engage in actual production. The Oberstufe was to explain the scientific and political bases for Socialism, it was to train students in logical and dialectical reasoning, and to provide patriotic education. Fluency in spoken Russian was to be achieved at this level. The sciences to be taught included astronomy, physics, biology, and chemistry. Within the framework of the ten-year polytechnical school, there were also to be special schools for students who wanted to concentrate on science, languages, the arts, or sports. Such students would begin their specialty during the seventh year. Generally speaking, these students, as well as those from the regular ten-year polytechnical school who wanted 300 to continue their studies at a university, attended an Erweiterte Ober- schule /Extended Oberschule / for an additional two years, at the end of which groups took the Abitur /university qualifying examination/. Provision was made for vocational students, if they took specified courses for two years and passed the Abitur, to enter the university. Workers could qualify for university training by attending classes conducted in factories, in university extension courses, and in special adult education centers. Graduates of technical schools might also qualify for university training. The State Commission had provided many ways by which workers might achieve a university education; they were equally generous in assur ing various avenues for entering technical schools. The latter schools prepared workers for middle level positions. Being close to industry, they were necessarily quite diversified; they quickly reflected industry's trend toward automation. A final major category of schools within the new unified educational system was the worker's school for employed adults. This category in cluded the previously mentioned Betriebsakademie, located in factories, where workers received specialixed training, where they were shown new methods of production, or where they were retrained, if a change of occupation had become necessary; the Dorfakademien, located in rural areas, where farmers learned to apply industrial methods to farming; university extension classes, where workers might qualify for attendance at a technical school or university; and adult education classes, where 301 workers had an opportunity to learn as adults what they had not mastered while attending a regular school. In the year 1964, eighteen years after the Law for the Demo cratization of the German School made the first attempt at creating a unified school system within the territory then known as the Soviet Zone of Occupation, the State Commission, which had been appointed for the purpose, submitted its proposal for a unified school system which now included a ten-year compulsory school, the workers' schools, technical schools, and the universities. The purpose of the State Commission was not to create a new school system but rather to establish relationships between the various existing types of education. The overriding idea was to provide an educational system which favored the children of workers and peasants and which allowed this preferred class a wide choice of ways by which children and adults might enter either technical schools or the university. These many approaches were illustrated by the State Commission's 65 graphic presentation which is reproduced in Figure 1. An examination of the chart prepared by the Commission shows seven different avenues by which students enrolled in the ten year poly technical Oberschule might enter the higher technical schools. Completion 65DLZ, XI (July 23, 1964), 1. See pages 304 and 305. 302 of the technical school could lead to further study at a university. The chart also showed three ways by which graduates of the ten year poly tec hnicaljOberschule; might qualify for the university: (1) the special school track ending in the Abitur examination, (2) the Erweiterte Oberschule, and (3) certain vocational schools which ended with the Abitur examination. As was mentioned earlier, the Oberschule formerly constituted the only path by which a student might enter the university. In the present plan, the subjects emphasized in the former Oberschule, namely science and languages, were divided between the Spezialschule, mathematische- naturwissenschaftliche Richtung [special school, with emphasis on mathe matics and science/ and the Spezialschule, sprachliche Richtung /special school, with emphasis on languages/. In addition to the seven approaches to the university from the polytechnical Oberschule, the chart also showed all four branches of adult education leading to the university or the technical schools. When this latest school plan is compared with the earliest equivalent brought about by the Law for the Democratization of the German School, the significant changes which came about in the DDR school system during an eighteen year period become very apparent. The most important of these changes included the extension of the basic school system from eight to ten years, the elimination of the selective process formerly controlled by the Oberschule, and the virtual dominance of vocational 303 education over a general or liberal education. The entire educational system was devised to train workers and to serve the economic needs of the DDR. In closing, a short statement might be made about the incumbent Minister of Education. During her first year as Minister, Margot Honecker demonstrated that she had a flair for publicity. No previous Minister was photographed as frequently. The manner in which her appointment was announced indicated her close Party affiliations. Her ability as an administrator remains to be seen. Margot Honecker typifies the post- World War H product of leaders of the DDR. She is an example of the leadership which is destined to replace an earlier generation of German Communists trained in the post-World War I era of which Paul Wandel, the first Minister of Education, was an outstanding representative. 304 ; - 7\ «• p n _ _ fl ‘, ; .t f */"> 1 • • ~ r ? ,-'i r«, ^ ^ '■* *. J <• ti ■ *» U i v.Ii •!*« j W - ‘ *•* b V J ;,'l or.1. ciu r.-’j dym cfttvvurf dor C *•’r . W:v <5j~ K4 ‘2 u i ;..:ac e.r.I.^iiULiicn sozicli^tijchcn j. .’’^iVjzj'jyL'U'rr.s) i.i i ::J V," • H t i.'-l 4 fcr-4 W * 4~i * ¥ V J |l ^ ^ I L.: lJ • I i ici.i'ii .... :nc.’- C.J * ! 111.' ID ;n U-i ...... ■ -- i, Ci v> J vl U J i 'Jk w i 1 I’ — . ..i. ,-.7. Uni. o. ,!,i, ~ fJ 5 r" r-i'.l!lrr: i;:.: s iti-usuii S u: S ~ s i i : : r i ^ § = , • • H 7" "iiniiiiimiiJiniiiiii;?; ci U = i Lfi? •\lo3TJCn . £rivciir:ric iv.it A juur:; ^ I j — | - ; „ ^ L t t> c rtils • Qbor^chuls nusfcildung Spcncitc ; rE'fV !4lt*» ■•••Cpozi: !lo 0 crufsanubildung” mu Abitur . .'crutsiiiisbil'rfun^ ^cruf*j.iu3hildunB : ■ — U JjJi j Op . biijl.iC klUlc O '••••.• D S a it F L I C H E 6 H U .1 D A 15 3 D.ltOU Z ' : £ i., ■ ' : •.' . .; ...... ;------" j " Tccf.il i.ichiun.;; ■ ■ ' V; 4 . ‘ , h m ’ •. J ’• f V / i tlCiih. Udlur. n i c hj Sprachlichc fticbiur.g ;; -J __ Kunstf. Aichcun^ — •allrpiftciniaHdcndc I : A.I.. ;l ^ V pcJysochnische Gi:: _TJ ' . f- G b e r s c h u S e M i. UntcrstuCc II 2 |s Kindergarten X in [mnchlungcn r - drr Brrulsdu.bildung i* /.III : Weg . on Scl.ule ru Schulo Kinderkrippe 2 — =t / — 1 ; w eg ium Derulsleben ti; CC1 : V.cgjus Bcrufslcbcn zui Scl'Ule FIGURE 1 SCHEMATISCHE DARSTELLUNG DER AUSBILDUNGSWEGE IM EINHEITLICHEN SOZIALISTISCHEN BILDUNGSSYSTEM GRAPHIC PRESENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL CHANNELS IN THE 305 UNITED SOCIALIST SYSTEM OF EDUCATION , (Presentation in accordance with the Draft of the Principles for Creating a Unified Socialist Educational System) - f t " 'O' - - Correspondence J 0 C> Courses UNIVERSITIES a Qualification 15 of Adults f t 0 [Adult Education - C 1 1 1 1 7 0 f t I C [Industrial Academj^j' Corr.& Evening u ------uuiimilttir — Classes i Village Academy fj[l p A Evenlng'.'Classcs—•at at i - TECHNICAL SCHOOLS Universities ,.m T Preparation for m»n <> /£> »£► «;> /Jv = = X I A d m i s s i o n 0 5 | t 3 § - ntuu=:inj=>lSiilw~iiiirilDUinimiiiJ = = = § § Tjililiin Etii H lOJ/fiH imitjiiiijU = N " ' = = 73j|in!U!tiJl£ (flioitlUrf nj := S ~ znini))tnninn}ziit zm ~ ~ ~ ~ uniuiiwummjiutmG 5 = § = = • § I On Uff §fft §. £ Classes ?orS§oc.for Voc. Extended With[pith = U 5 l a ------. ~Tr.with j *-u Oberschule [pp.,. On-the-job Compl.or VocMaturity Training &' Special Voc. Training...... K >l . Kindergarten ■F Related to Requirements •Ii*L of Vocational Training ;iL tfHJ From School to School Nursery ih CD Toward an Occupation From an Occupation to a School FIGURE 2 GRAPHIC PRESENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL CHANNELS IN THE ITNTTF.n snr.TAT.TST SYSTEM OF EDUCATION CHAPTER VI SUMMARY Having completed the historical presentation of the DDR's educational system, this chapter will be devoted to a series of topics which will review the essential facts needed to understand what has been going on in the DDR during the nineteen years from 1945 to 1964. Russian Influence on German Education The Russians were both subtle and quite successful in allaying fears about the importation of a foreign school system into East Germany. The strategy used was to condemn every aspect of the Nazi school system and to declare its teachings illegal. The Russians then allowed the Germans to fill in the vacuum by reviving many of the educational ideals of the Weimar Republic. This approach won over those German educators who had taught before Hitler assumed power and gave the impression that the Russians were allowing the Germans to establish their own school system. The Weimar educational system happened to have something in common with the Russian system since both favored a unified and non- denominational approach to education. Although Soviet education officers were assigned down to the Kreis level, these officers were more concerned with preventing the use 307 of Nazi textbooks and the employment of die-hard Nazi teachers than in introducing Soviet principles of education. During the first five years, when the Soviet Zone suffered from a severe teacher shortage, especially of well-trained educators, Soviet education officers tolerated many of the Weimar pedagogues partly because they needed them but also because they hoped to win them over to the Communist side. When the Soviet armies entered the Soviet Zone of Germany, few Germans knew anything about Soviet pedagogy. This situation could not be remedied quickly, because few Germans knew Russian and few Soviet books had been translated into German. It was not until 1947 that the first Russian textbook appeared in German translation. As more Russian books appeared in German translations, the Soviet clever ly allowed a German Communist, Hans Siebert, to let it be known that the German ReformpHdagogik was not desired but that German educators should become better acquainted with Soviet pedagogy. Siebert's views soon took root in the newly created DPZI. In May, 1952, Frau Else Zaisser, a German Communist who had spent thirteen years in the USSR and had taught in Russian schools, lead a German delegation to the USSR to study the latest Soviet educational methods. Her intention was to find solutions to certain German educational problems in the USSR. Shortly after her return to Germany, she was made Minister of Education and the SED decided that Germany was ready to em bark on the road to Socialism. 308 This latter development made the DDR almost completely dependent upon the USSR. Since the DDR was working toward becoming a Socialist state, what was more natural than to follow the Russian leader ship in politics, economics, and education? By 1962, the SED wanted a polytechnical school system sim ilar to the one developed by the USSR. Soon the SED felt inferior to the Russians in teaching mathematics. Then they noticed that the USSR was placing emphasis upon programmed learn ing and cybernetics. Russia's role in the development of the DDR education system started with a negative approach, the removal of all traces of National Socialism. The Russians at first generally assumed a tolerant attitude to educators trained during the pre-Hitler era. As various plans changed the economy of the DDR to more nearly approximate that of the USSR, the Russian educators began to fulfill the functions of consultants whose aid was solicited by the SED because only the Russian school system provided a model which could be used in the DDR. The SED and Education In the USSR, the Communist Party played the decisive role in education. In the DDR, the KPD and later the SED had similar ambitions but these could not be fulfilled at once. The SED did not come into existence until April 21, 1946. In the discussions which preceded the creation of this fusion of two political 309 parties, the KPD and the SPD had no difficulty agreeing on the unified school system. During the following month, in May, the unified school system was incorporated into the Law for the Democratization of the German School. At this juncture, the noblest motives were ascribed to the new type of education: true humanism, living democracy, peace among nations, and free, independent thinking. This was the time-of- Wandel and Ackerman, which lasted until 1948. During this year, 1948, Walter Ulbricht.and the SED entered more directly into the field of education. The political situation had changed as a result of the Berlin Blockade. The need for creating a separate state in Eastern Germany had become very clear. The Two- Year Economic Plan called for specialized training. During this year, Hans Siebert made the first suggestion that Russian pedagogy should be followed. German Communists later explained that it took about four years to remove the reactionary inheritance before more progressive ideas could be introduced. Direct involvement of the SED in educational affairs was shown on July 24, 1950, when the Third SED Party Conference decided that a ten-year school system should be established in large cities and industrial centers. On July 29, 1952, the Politbllro, not the Ministry of Education, determined that the level of instruction was to be improved at once and that more attention was to be given to patriotic training. This was also 310 the first occasion that mention was made about introducing a polytechnical education to the DDR. The SED received quite a setback as a result of the 1953 uprising. While the Party retained enough power to let the blame for resistance demonstrations within the schools fall on Minister Zaisser, and while it took the lead in advocating the Ten-Year Middle School in 1955, the SED remained in the background in education until about 1958. The period 1953-57 was sometimes referred to, in articles on educational history, as the revisionist period. The SED brought this period to a close by setting up a purge committee within the staff of the periodical, Paedagogik. In May, 1959, the SED asserted for the second time that satis factory conditions now existed for introducting socialism to the DDR. The Party alibied that recommendations had been made in 1950 to change from a mere anti-fascist democratic approach to one which openly worked for socialism but that many people in education did not understand what the Party was talking about and therefore did not lend their support. This admission bore out the statement made in the previous paragraph about the weakness of the Party. The final direct involvement of the SED in educational affairs, as far as this dissertation is concerned, came in 1963 when the PolitbUro decided on the creation of the State Commission which was to determine the course of DDR education for the next fifteen to twenty years. 311 The DDR school system cannot be studied merely as a school system; it cannot even be regarded as a state school system under the control of the Ministry of Education; it must be seen as an agency which took its orders directly from a single political party, the SED. Economic Plans and Education 1 ■ - ~ ■ - • If the Party itself played a decisive role in education, so also did the series of economic plans designed by the Party. In the Two-Year Economic Plan, which covered the years 1948- 50, the SED stated, for the first time, the country's need for a new class of intellectuals who would be highly proficient in technology. At this early stage, the plan could do little more than make a start in the new direction . By the time of the second economic plan, which was of five year's duration, steps were taken to place greater emphasis on vocational educa tion in the Grundschule. In connection with the plan, Walter Ulbricht revealed the DDR's interest in a ten year school system. At this time, the ten year schools were thought of merely as two year extensions of the Grundschule. When the third economic plan was started in 1956, the Ten-Year Middle School was no longer regarded as an extension of earlier grades but was intended to be a unified school system of ten years duration which would produce technical specialists for middle level occupations. 312 The fourth economic plan, covering the years 1959-65, proposed the completion of the conversion to a polytechnical school system. From the first to the fourth economic plans, the basic objective was the same, to produce technicians for production in industry and agriculture. In the early phases, the schools concentrated on vocational education; in the later stage, the system was converted completely to polytechnical education. The Ministry of Education In this review of the administrative history of the DDR school system, the influence of the USSR, of the SED, and of the DDR economic plans from 1948-65 upon the school system have been stated briefly. Having examined three important external forces which affected the schools, attention is next focused on the six Ministers of Education who actually administered the school system. Within the period 1945-64, there were six Ministers of Education, four men and two women. The terms of office varied between seven years and eight months. Four of the six Ministers were old-line Communists; the other two were a young man and a young woman who had demonstrated their Communist convictions after 1945, one as a Neulehrer and the other as a youth leader. Five of the six Ministers had, at one time, visited or lived in the USSR; two Ministers had spent many years in concentration camps and prisons. 313 In comparing the achievements and weaknesses of the six Ministers of Education, Paul Wandel stood out not only because he remained in office longest but also because he resolved some of the most difficult situations facing the DDR. No Minister after him faced such a severe shortage of classroom space, textbooks, and trained teachers. \ Wandel's range of responsibilities far exceeded that of his successors. Wandel played a decisive role in bringing about the enactment of the Law for the Democratization of the German School, in establishing the Peda gogical Faculties at the universities, and.in creating the Worker Peasant Faculties. No one came anywhere near the Wandel record for holding pedagogical conferences. He was very successful in maintaining contact with teachers. The school system expanded steadily under Paul Wandel. When he was replaced by Else Zaisser, all indications pointed toward a continued growth and even toward a reorganization of the school system to more nearly conform to the educational system of the USSR. Else Zaisser appeared to be an excellent choice as Minister of Education to introduce the new school system. She had been active in the field of education for a considerable length of time. She was personally acquainted with the Russian school system. The fact is that the eleven year school system which Minister Zaisser proposed was very close to the Russian and was not far removed from the system which was eventually introduced in 1959. Then the country was shaken to its roots by the uprising 314 of June 17. Since the revolt had spread throughout the school system, Else Zaisser was called to account. Her administration was investigated and she was forced to admit her many shortcomings. Whatever she failed to mention was later incorporated into a statement of condemnation by an SED committee. This report ended her career as Minister. As a result of the June uprising and of Minister Zaisser's humiliating recantation, the school system and the Ministry of Education received a severe setback. The Zaisser failure demonstrated that, while long-time Party membership and personal study in the Soviet Union might help in obtain ing an important assignment, these qualifications alone would not suffice to keep an official in office, if events transpired which embarrassed the Party or the Government. The Zaisser dismissal also demonstrated that high officials were expected to command a considerable degree of popular support. If an official was not aware of or dared to ignore public reaction, his usefulness was rather limited.\ * The state of disinterest and inactivity into which the adminis tration had slipped continued under the next Minister of Education, Hans-Joachim Laabs. Laabs was both the youngest and least experienced of the six Ministers. He was the only Minister who served as a Deputy Minister twice, once before he became Minister and again, after he had become Minister. He remained in the position of Minister for only eight 315 months. His nomination was due to a series of circumstances: the desire to bring new blood into the administration, an attempt to implement the Youth Law by placing a young person into a responsible position in the Government, an effort to build up the morale of the new class of teachers, the Neulehrer, and the fact that the SED was caught off guard by the June 17 incident. The removal of Laabs from office, after serving such a short term, can best be explained by the fact that he lacked ability as an administrator. Apparently, he was also without strong backing by the Party. If Frau Zaisser was criticised for being precipitous about introducing educational reforms, the same charge could be leveled at the SED for being too eager to place an inexperienced Neulehrer in an important post. Laabs1 appointment illustrates the fact that the DDR was very short on talent for executive positions. If a better candidate than Laabs had been available, he certainly would have been appointed. The second in a series of Ministers with names beginning with "L" was Fritz Lange who was hand picked by the SED Central Committee to restore dignity to the Ministry of Education. He was an old-time Communist with a long prison record, including confinement for high treason. The high point of his ministerial career was the Fifth Pedago gical Conference which was easily the most thoroughly prepared 316 prepared pedagogical conference of the six which were held. Lange greatly expanded the school inspector system started by M inister Zaisser. The Middle School System was begun during his administration. Lange showed a special interest in youth organizations and originated the Young Gardeners, the Young Meteorologists, etc. He was the first Minister who tried to bring the DDR into UNESCO, but he was not successful. It was during Lange's term of office that the freest discussions of educational reform took place, but these deliberations were brought to an abrupt conclusion by the SED while he was Minister. After making two unsatisfactory selections for the post of Minister of Education, the SED finally found an executive who had the necessary qualifications. This time the SED was more circumspect and chose its candidate directly from within the Central Committee, thereby assuring a close relationship between the Party and the Ministry. Lange soon overcame the lethargy which had characterized the school system and the Ministry of Education after the uprising. Lange made three major contributions toward education during his term of office: (a) he impressed on all offices of the Ministry the need for listening to criticism s and suggestions coming from teachers and schools, (b) he brought about wide discussion of educational subjects, and (c) he started the Ten-Year Middle School system which was planned specifi cally for the children of workers. The Middle School represented a major step in the direction of a polytechnical school system. 317 Fritz Lange might have remained in office longer if he had taken a firmer hand in ending the revisionist controversy. The third of the nL" Ministers was Alfred Lemnitz who also spent many years in concentration camps. Lemnitz had a good educational background which included an earned Doctor's degree. Under him the Ten-Year Polytechnical School became a reality. Lemnitz's administra tion coincided with an upsurge of activity on the part of the SED in education. During this period, vocational education made its greatest inroads into the entire educational system. The last pedagogical confer ence was sponsored by Lemnitz. Towards the end of his ministerial career, Lemnitz encouraged the exploration of new possibilities in teaching mathematics, the use of programmed learning, and the application of cybernetic principles. The influence of Soviet pedagogy was never stronger than during the administration of Alfred Lemnitz. At the time of this writing, Margot Honecker's term of office had not been completed; only one year of her administration could be considered. Her selection was another example of the application of the Youth Law. She shared the interest of Wandel and Lange in youth organiza tions and was herself a product of the FDJ. Her administration will be remembered for completing the unification of the entire DDR educational system and setting up a school structure which was supposed to remain intact until 1975-80. 318 The upswing in education, which had begun under Lange, continued under Lemnitz and then under Margot Honecker. Improved conditions in education reflected political and economic changes which had taken place in the DDR. Political control was now firmly in the hands of the SED. The economy had changed from one existing on a subsistence level to one which was viable. By the year 1964, the DDR school system had been completely reorganized into a polytechnical school system. This meant that, in the future, all DDR youths would receive a ten year education which would qualify them to work as technicians in factories and on cooperative farms. The emphasis for all students was on technical competence and political reliability. The path to higher education, which also served practical purposes, was open to all workers' children who had sufficient ability and interest. With the projected introduction of polytechnical education as a compulsory school system, the DDR reached its goal which had been suggested in 1949, attempted under Minister Zaisser in 1952, abandoned shortly thereafter, then resuscitated under Lange. Organization and Responsibilities of the Ministry of Education and the DPZI In reviewing the history of the Ministry of Education, attention must next be given to changes which occurred within the organization of 319 the Ministry itself and then to the changes which took place in the local administration of education. The original Verwaltung fttr Yolksbildung was a German admin istrative office which carried out instructions received from the Soviet Military Administration. The scope of this office went far beyond education and included the supervision of museums, libraries, theatres, youth organizations, and the like. In 1949, an Academy of Arts and a Scientific Senate were added to the Ministry. This was also the year during which the DPZI was created and placed under the Ministry. In 1951, the Ministry was reorganized. A State Secretary for Universities and Technical Schools was established and these institutions were placed directly under his control. This meant that the higher schools of learning again lost much of their traditional autonomy. This year also saw the creation of a State Secretary for Education who assisted the Minister. During 1951 the Land Ministries of Education were abolished and these were replaced by Bezirk and Kreis offices. This corresponded with changes in the structure of the Government. The basic organization of the Ministry of Education was de termined in 1952. There were three major departments: Instruction, Teacher Training, and Extracurricular Activities. There was also a Department for Methods, Organization, and Inspection. Smaller offices were responsible for adult education, budget, personnel, and youth aid. 320 > The DPZI came into being as an institution which was to help teachers. It started out with two departments, one for teacher training, the other for theoretical and practical problems. The DPZI helped teachers in two ways: by assisting them in their preparations for the two state teacher's examinations and by offering practical suggestions to inexperienced teachers in the areas of curriculum and methodology. In 1951, the DPZI was assigned the task of preparing the curriculum for the new Institutes for Teachers. The DPZI also provided the final examinations for the Grundschulen. In both assignments, the strong pro-Soviet convictions of leaders in the organization found full expression. Beginning in 1954, the DPZI was gradually transformed into a research organization. It became a clearing house for all educational research projects. The DPZI was even given the right to award Doctor's d eg rees. During the years 1956-58, the DPZI's reputation as a pro-Soviet educational institute reached its lowest ebb. Revisionism had penetrated the institute and had even won over the director, Werner Dorst. In 1958, a SED committee cleaned house and dismissed the director. From this time on, the DPZI steered a new course. Once again the institute became a research center. It was given the responsibility of preparing the curric ulum for the new polytechnical schools. In 1962, the DPZI was put in charge of the continued training of teachers with the specific objective of bringing them up-to-date in polytechnical education. 321 The Ministry of Education looked upon the DPZI as the center for originating new ideas, maintaining contact with educational develop ments in the Soviet Union, and promoting research in education. The right to award doctoral degrees was given to the DPZI because most educational research was concentrated within the institute. The DPZI controlled educational research in the universities because the latter were not permitted to investigate new fields without prior approval of the DPZI. While the DPZI was in a position to prevent duplication of effort in research, it was also able to suppress topics which were considered undesirable. Thus, the function of the DPZI was both to inspire new ideas and to control them. Local School Administration Since the reorganization, which took place in 1952, the Ministry of Education was represented locally by Bezirk and Kreis offices. The responsible local official was the Kreisschulrat, who was the immediate superior of the Schulleiter. The Ministry also maintained an inspector system with repre sentatives at the Ministry, Bezirk, and Kreis levels. These officials were not supposed to get involved in the administration of local school areas but were merely assigned to observe the operations of local schools and to keep the Minister of Education informed of developments. 322 In the internal administration of a school, the Schulleiter was basically responsible. He was the official representative of the school, he was responsible for carrying out all school laws, and the instructional program came under his direction. He was expected to share his authority with a PHdagogisches Kollektiv, a committee made up of administrators, teachers, and youth leaders. In theory, all members of the Kollektiv shared the responsibility of running the school. The Schulleiter was also expected to listen to suggestions made by the Elternrat /PTA/ and the FDJ. These organizations were expected to keep the Schulleiter in check and make him exercise his authority democratically. Each class or grade had a Klassenleiter, usually a teacher charged with the special duty of making sure that each student and teacher was living up to established standards. The Klassenleiter was assisted by a Klassenkollektiv made up of students who had agreed to maintain self-discipline, to take their studies seriously, and to help each other. The Klassenleiter also used the Klassenbuch or class register which contained an account of all instruction, homework assignments, examina tions, grades, and discipline problems. The Klassenbuch alerted the Klassenleiter to students who were failing. He was then expected to look into each individual case to see what could be done to help the student. This system of close supervision of each individual student was contrived to help workers' and peasants' children achieve success in school, to raise school standards, to keep students in school for a longer period of 323 time than heretofore and to exercise very tight political control in class. In spite of these efforts, complaints by school officials about the low standards of instruction and the poor achievements of many students continued throughout the period under discussion. The complicated control system which was devised for use in the individual school suggests that there must be a considerable number of reluctant learners among the working class children. As the remaining sections of this review of the educational system of the DDR will show, the structure of the school, the curriculum, and even teacher training were constantly being adjusted to provide the kind of education needed by workers' children yet, in spite of all these efforts, the control system here described apparently was considered necessary in order to provide the state with a trained working population. Judging by the precautions taken to prevent failure in school, it might at first glance appear that the DDR had found the solution to a problem which exists everywhere where compulsory education is enforced but DDR reports themselves reveal a general laxity in applying the preventive measures. Modifications of the School Structure All proposals for an East Zone school system agreed on the Einheitsschule but, within this framework, many changes in the school structure occurred over a period of years. 324 The first school system was established in 1946 by the Law for the Democratization of the German School. Here the structure was divided into eight years of Grundschule, three years of Oberstufe or four years of Qberschule. In this system the eight years of the Grundschule were com pulsory; the Oberstufe was intended for vocational students and the Ober- schule for students who expected to enter the university. During the years 1947-49, partially in connection with the Two- Year Plan, vocational education was greatly expanded at the expense of the Qberschule. More and more was being done for children of workers; rural education was greatly improved. The Constitution in 1949 stated that education was compulsory to the eighteenth year, but that all students had to finish the Grundschule. In reality, school authorities were satisfied if they could get students to finish the Grundschule. By 1950, the ten-year school was introduced because it was found that a high percentage of DDR students quit after the tenth year; they wanted ^ ' to work. The ten-year school helped to weaken the twelve-year Qberschule. The explanation given was that there were not enough students who wanted to attend the Qberschule. In 1953, Minister Zaisser announced the fusion of the Qberschule and the ten-year school. The plan was to have the eight-year Grundschule followed by a three-year secondary school which would lead directly to the 325 university. The new system had strong political overtones; it was intended only for students who had demonstrated their political loyalty. The eleven- year system was to become effective in 1961, however, Minister Zaisser was forced by circumstances to withdraw her own proposal. During 1954, the Qberschule enjoyed a brief period of popularity; Minister Laabs even claimed that more workers' children were attending this sphool than ever before. In fact, the ten-year school continued in 1955 under a new name, the Ten-Year Middle School. Seniors in this school were required to take an examination of Middle Maturity. This school system led directly to the technical schools; it was intended to replace the regular Grundschule by 1956. The system which did replace both the Grundschule and the Middle School was the Ten-Year Polytechnical Qberschule. Legislation was prepared in 1959 and the system was to become compulsory in 1964. This school was to be divided into two levels, a lower level covering grades one to four and an upper level for grades five to ten. The impression was given that the twelve-year Qberschule was being continued. In 1964, the State Commission modified this plan to include three levels: a lower level for grades one to three, an intermediate level for grades four to six, and an upper-level for grades seven to ten. This latest proposal allowed three different approaches to the university and seven methods by which students might enter the technical schools. With this proposal the unified school system had reached the objective of undermining the 326 single approach to the university by means of the Oberschule and pro vided a wide selection of avenues to higher schools. It remains to be seen whether this new system will raise the quality of students who attend the university. Changes in the School Curriculum Just as there were modification of the structure of the school system, so also were there changes in the curriculum. The most radical change in the curriculum took place in 1946 when Russian was made a required subject in the fifth year. It was in tended that the language would be understood by students by the eighth year. In fact, the teaching of Russian, in spite of all requirements, never really became successful. Complaints about the teaching of Russian continued right up to 1964. From the beginning, the DDR had difficulties with the teaching of history. There were no textbooks, teachers were not trained, so the subject was ignored. In 1950, two hours per week were devoted to a discussion of current events, which was the closest approximation to teaching history. The subjects to be discussed were prescribed by the Ministry of Education. As might be expected, these discussions served only a propagandistic purpose. The teaching of history never freed itself from the propagandistic objective. 327 Beginning in 1952, vocational counseling permeated the Grundschule. As a result, vocational training soon replaced general education. The trend of all education veered in the direction of poly technical training. During the same year, emphasis was placed on patriotic education. An attempt was made to popularize the new DDR army. This required development of the art of double talk, since the emphasis since 1945 had been on the peaceful motives of the Soviet Zone in contrast to the warlike motives of West Germany. During 1947, as well as in 1953, polytechnical concepts in chemistry, physics, biology, and mathematics were widely discussed but not acted upon. This situation did not change until 1959, when the school system was converted completely to polytechnical education. As stated earlier, 1962 saw a new emphasis placed on the teaching of mathematics, on the principles of .cybernetics, and on programmed learning. By 1964, the curriculum of the DDR's educational system concentrated on polytechnical education, actual production in schools, dialectical theory, and emphasis on science and the Russian language. Teacher Training Paul Wandel faced a serious shortage of teachers when he tried to open the schools in 1946. Most trained teachers had been National Socialists. Wandel realized that it would take many years to 328 train teachers to think as Communists. For this reason, Wandel appealed to all teachers to enter the school system who did not persist in their Nazi beliefs and who were willing to change their former views. He extended a special invitation to the older teachers who were active under the Weimar Republic but were not employed by the Nazis. The need for teachers was so great that Wandel accepted everyone who expressed a willingness to teach. Such teachers were given short courses of six weeks, three months, or a year. Teachers who fell into this category were called Neulehrer. Pedagogical Faculties were created at various universities as early as 1946. A high percentage of the professors on these faculties were ReformpSdagogen or educators who had received their training at the time of the Weimar Republic. These faculties provided a three year training for teachers who taught in the secondary schools. During 1951, Paul Wandel felt that the time had come to raise the standards of teachers. He announced the creation of Institutes for Teachers which would provide a three year course for all teachers, not just for those who taught in secondary schools. Teachers' examinations were instituted which stressed political reliability. All teachers who expected permanent employment were required to take two examinations. The DPZI was given the responsibility for helping teachers prepare for the examinations. 329 During the years 1960-61, all teacher training institutions concentrated on retraining teachers for the new polytechnical school system. First-hand experience with production in industry and agriculture became a requirement even for teachers. Teaching standards were raised again so that teachers for the Oberstufe were required to study four years as compared with three years for teachers of the Unterstufe. Revisionism In conclusion, attention should be called to an element of resistance, within the school system which had persisted from 1945 to the present. All educators and students whose views differed from the Party line were called revisionists, objectivists, or dogmatists. During the first five years, when the SED was comparatively weak, revisionists were tolerated. In 1950, a change took place when Walter Ulbricht asked the FDJ functionaries to expose reactionaries. Werner Groth expressed the hope that the year would see the end of all resistance to the Party program, but he was soon disappointed. In 1952, the editor of the Neue Schule was dismissed, because he had shown revisionist tendencies. The following year, Minister Zaisser exposed the Junge Gemeinde as a resistance center. The uprising in 1953 showed that resistance to the Party was widespread. The SED received a setback from which it did not recover for many years. Walter Ulbricht later 330 admitted that revisionism had interfered with the Party program from 1953-58. During the years 1956-57, the periodical Paedagogik had printed articles written by revisionists and no one interfered until the Party cracked down in 1958. After many dism issals of officials in high places, a wave of confessions followed which admitted that there had been too much freedom and that the discussions which had taken place had paid no attention to the Party line. In 1959, Kurt Hager made it appear that the SED was in complete control of the educational system, yet as late as January, 1963, Walter Ulbricht was still complaining about the activities of the dogmatists and revisionists. This undercurrent of resistance to the established educational system, which had managed to remain in existence for some nineteen years despite stern repressive measures, revealed that the DDR school system had not succeeded in winning over all Germans living in East Germany. The uncompromising demands of the socialist school system, its attempt to control the student in school and out of school, and the monotony of a system that was geared entirely to production, all these characteristics of the DDR school system combined to engender a spirit of resistance among those who dared to think independently and who knew that there were higher goals for education. These were the individuals called revisionists. 331 Conclusion An evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the DDR school system might be preceded by a few general observations concerning the significance and certain peculiarities of the system. During the post-World War II period, the DDR had witnessed the replacement of a narrow, isolationist, and nationalist world view, which distinguished the Hitler period, with a broader, more international, yet still very isolationist creed of Marx and Lenin. This meant that the Germans in the DDR merely exchanged one form of authoritarianism with another; a democratic system was never allowed to develop. Another significant post-World War II fact was that the school system s in the DDR and in the Federal Republic of Germany had almost nothing in common. This was significant because it would constitute an almost insurmountable barrier if Germany were ever to be reunited. A peculiarity of the DDR school system was that it was modeled after a foreign school plan, yet it cannot be said that the Russians forced the Soviet school system on the East Germans. Clearly, German Commun ists borrowed from the Soviets, because they were unable to create some thing of their own which would be suitable to the new economy. The DDR educational system might best be described by the words pragmatic, materialistic, and technical. Its educational scope was severely limited by the fact that it was tied in directly with the economy. This 332 meant that changes in the economic plan implied adjustments in the educational system. It likewise meant that the success or failure of the educational program was measured entirely in terms of the economic plan. Education did not stand on its own feet. Despite the limitations imposed upon the objectives of the educational system, it must be given credit for its achievements. The early chaotic conditions were quickly overcome. A very extensive school network was developed. The m asses of worker and peasant children were shown special consideration and every effort was made to provide them with the same opportunities to profit from higher education as was formerly reserved for the children whose parents could afford to send them to advanced schqbls. This achievement was tarnished some what by the general lowering of standards in the secondary schools and the exclusion of some students from the upper schools due to their bourgeois family background. It must also be considered a substantial achievement that the DDR was able to train a sufficiently large number of teachers to take care of the many different types of schools which were opened within a span of nineteen years. Since the political requirements were very exacting, this was no small achievement. An indirect measure of the success of the school system, which seems appropriate in view of the previously described close relation between the schools and industry, might be seen in a recent Time Magazine report which said that: 333 . . . East Germany has become the top producer for the Soviet orbit outside of Russia itself. It has the highest living standard of any Communist country and - -a t least by its own statistics -- ranks as the world's tenth biggest industrial power, eighth in production of TV sets, seventh in chemicals, fifth in exports of office machines. * However, the DDR school system had many limitations and weaknesses. The very class consciousness, which undoubtedly brought benefits to the children of workers, became a disadvantage to the DDR by excluding talented youths of bourgeois origin. The DDR school system suffered from the political domination of education. The system was directed by politicians, not by educators. As a result, decisions about education were made chiefly on the basis of political considerations. Ministers of Education were political appointees. Teachers were selected because of their political reliability rather than on the basis of their merit as educators. Another weakness of the school system was that decisions aboult education usually came from the highest echelon, from the PolitbUro or from the Minister of Education. This procedure often resulted in radical changes in education being announced without any consideration being given to training the personnel who were supposed to carry out the program. For a similar reason, courses might be instituted in schools without thought being given to the availability of textbooks. As a result 1 "East Germany, "Time, Vol. 86, No. 16 (October 15, 1965), 98. 334 of such perfunctory decisions, there would often be a considerable time lag between the proclamation of a new educational program and its final implementation. The educational system suffered from contradictions in policy. Many public statements were made that schools were to encourage creative, independent thinking, yet students and teachers soon realized that such thinking had to be carried on within the framework of the teach ings of Marx and Lenin. The Constitution guaranteed freedom of religion, yet members of the Junge Gemeinde were frequently discriminated against and even accused of being spies and saboteurs. Since the DDR was at one time predominantly Protestant, the difficulties created by teaching atheism in school is apparent. A third contradiction existed in the teaching of the Russian language. Although teaching of Russian was compulsory as early as 1945, reports up to 1964 indicate that Russian had not achieved the standing of being the first foreign language in the DDR. A basic weakness of the DDR school system was that it was based on a foreign model. This meant that, whenever new problems arose in education, recourse had to be taken to foreign sources. Russian educators had to be consulted, Russian textbooks examined, or delegations sent to the USSR. The deliberations were one-sided. The Russians did not appear to be learning anything new from the Germans. Finally, discipline was a constant matter of concern to school officials from the time the schools first opened up to the present. 335 Numerous accounts told of unruly behavior in class, lack of interest, and even outlandish dress. With all the facilities for correction of these irregularities available to them, it seems incomprehensible that the conditions which were described in this dissertation could exist. A possible explanation might be the dullness of instruction. Another might be the constant supervision of students even outside of class. In spite of the weaknesses just enumerated, the potential of the school system of the DDR deserves careful attention. The achievements of Germans, especially in the area of science and technology, before and during World War II, should not be forgotten. Schools in the DDR may not continue to be inferior. In time, the DDR may well aspire to a leadership role among the East European nations. Strategic location, advanced technology, and a command of East European languages, could easily combine to place the DDR ahead of other East European countries. In our own national self-interest, the United States should keep well informed about educational developments taking place in the DDR. Hopefully, this dissertation will provide background information which will facilitate, understanding of some phases of DDR education. BIBLIOGRAPHY A. PRIMARY SOURCES Government Documents Deutsche Verwaltung filr Volksbildung. Liste der auszusondernden Literatur /Black Listed Books/. Vorl&ufige Ausgabe nach dem Stand vom 1 April 1946 /Provisional Edition as of April 1, 1946/. Berlin: Zentralverlag, 1946. ______. LehrplHne filr die Grund- und Qberschulen in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone Deutschlands: Geschichte /Lesson Plans for History in Soviet Zone Primary and Secondary Schools/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1946. ______. LehrplUne flir die Grund- und Qberschulen in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone Deutschlands: KBrperliche Erziehung /Lesson Plans for Physical Education in Soviet Zone Primary and Secondary Schools/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1946. Deutsches P&dagogisches Zentralinstitut. Zu den Aufgaben der sozialist- ischen Schule im Siebenjahrplan /Objectives of the Socialist School in the Seven-Year Plan/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1961, Gilnther, Karl-Heinz, et al. Quellen zur Geschichte der Erziehung /Sources for the History of Education/. Leipzig: Volk und Wissen, 1959. Minis ter ium filr Volksbildung. EinfUhrung in die PUdagogik. Lehrbuch fUr den Unterricht an Institutionen fUr Lehrerbildung /Introduction- to Pedagogy. Textbook for Instruction at Teachers' Colleges/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1954. ______. EinfUhrung in die PUdagogik. Grundlagen der pUdagogik /introduction to Pedagogy. Fundamentals of Pedagogy/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1954. . Ein Jahr DDR /One Year of the DDR/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1950. 337 ______. Lehrplan der zehnklassigen allgemeinbildenden polytechnischen Qberschule /Curriculum for the Ten-Year General Polytechnical Oberschule/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1959. ______Die Schule in der DDR /Schools in the DDR/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1959. ______. Sozialistische Schule; eine Zusammenstellung der wichtigsten gesetzlichen Bestimmungen und. Dokumente /The Socialist School; A Compilation of the Most_Important Legal Decisions and Documents/, 2. Uberarbeitete Auflage /Second Revised Edition/. Berlin: Staatsverlag der DDR, 1963. Stab der Sowjetischen MilitUrverwaltung in Deutschland. Befehle des Qbersten Chefs der Sowjetischen MilitHrverwaltung in Deutschland /Orders of the Supreme Commander of the Soviet Military Administration in Germany/. Sammelheft 1 /Collected Orders Number 1/. Berlin: SMA Verlag, 1945. Sammelheft 2 /Collected Orders Number 2/. Berlin: SMA Verlag, 1946. Ruhm von Oppen, Beate. Documents on Germany under Occupation: 1945- 1954. London: Oxford University Press, 1955. Staly, Percy, and Siegfried Thomas. Die DDR auf dem Wege zum Sozialismus /_The DDR on the Way to Socialism/. Teil I (1945-49). Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1959. Teil II (1950-60). Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1961. Laws Adomeit, Heinz, (ed.). Gesetze finden leicht gemacht /Locating Laws Made Easy/. Berlin: Deutscher Zentralverlag, 1956. . Gesetzes-Generalregister /_General Index of Laws/. Covers laws for the period 1947-1960. Berlin: VEB Deutscher Zentralverlag, 1961. . Karteibuch des Schulrechts /Collection of School Laws7. Covers period from April, 1951 to November, 1956. Weimar: Volk und Wissen, 1956. ______. Recht der Schule /School Law/. Covers period from November, 1956 to May, 1960. Berlin: Deutscher Zentralverlag, 1960. 338 Adomeit, Ursula (ed.). Bildung und Erziehung /Education and Training/. Covers the period from June, 1960 to April, 1961. Berlin: ~ Deutscher Zentralverlag, 1961. Bttro des Ministerialrates der DDR. Das Geltende Recht. Alphabetischer Teil /Laws Which Are in Force, Alphabetically Arranged/. Berlin: Staatsverlag der DDR, 1963. — ______. Das Geltende Recht. Chronologischer Teil /Laws Which Are in Force, Chronologically Arranged/. Berlin: Staatsverlag der DDR, 1963. ~ Bilro des Minis ter irate s der DDR. Gesetzblatt der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik /Legal Gazette of the DDR/. Jahrgknge 1949-63 /Issues 1949-63/. Berlin: Staatsverlag der DDR. Heilmann-Birnbaum. Gesetze und Verordnungen fUr die Schule der DDR /Laws and Regulations concerning the Schools in the DDR/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1956. — Schulrecht und Schulverwaltung in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik; Allgemeinbildende Schulen /School Laws and School Administration in the DDR; General Schools/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1956. Books Deutsches Institut fUr ZeLtgeschichte. Jahrbuch der DDR /Yearbook of the DDR/. Berlin: Verlag Die Wirtschaft, 196Q. Education in the German Democratic Republic. Leipzig: VEB Edition, 1962. Hortszchansky, Werner. Das deutsche Zentralinstitut filr Lehrmittel /The German Central Institute for Teaching Materials/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, estimated 1954. Kubz, Otto Ernst. Der Elternbeirat in der DDR /The Parents' Council in the DDR/, Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1956. Pkdagogischer Kongress. Aufgaben und Probleme der deutschen Pkdagogik /Objectives and Problems of German Pedagogy/ Berlin: Volk und -• • Wissen, 1956. 339 Provinzialverwaltung Sachsen, Abteilung Presse und Propaganda, Halle. Die Neue Schule /_The New SchoolJ. Halle: 33 und Vertriebsstelle, estimated 1945. Schneller, Wilhelm. Die Deutsche Demokratische Schule /The German Democratic School/ Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1955. SED V. Parteitag. Ftlr den Sieg der sozialistischen Revolution auf dem Gebiet der Ideologie und der Kultur /May the Socialist Revolution Be Successful in the Areas of Ideology and Culture/. Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1958. ~ Wandel, Paul. Der deutsche Imperialismus und seine Kriege -- das nationale UnglUck Deutschlands /German Imperialism and Its Wars -- the National Catastrophe of Germany/. Berlin: Dietz Veriag, 1955. Weitendorf, Friedrich (ed.). Geschichtsunterricht. Methodisches Handbuch filr den Lehrer /The Teaching of History. A Reference Book for Teachers/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1961. Winde, K^the. Organisation des Sonderschulwesens /The Organization of Special Schools/ Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1955. N ew spapers Deutsche Lehrerzeitung /German Teachers_J_Newspaper/. Organ der deutschen demokratischen Schule /Organ of the German Demo cratic School/. From April 3, 1954 to 1964. Der Tagesspiegel /Daily Mirror/. British Sector of Berlin. From November 27, 1945. Berliner Zeitung /The Berlin Newspaper/. Soviet Sector of Berlin. From May 21, 1945. Neues Deutschland /The New Germany/. Official newspaper of the SED. From April 23, 1946. Periodicals Die Neue Schule /The New School/. Blotter filr demokratische Erneuerung in Unterricht und Erziehung /A Publication for Democratic Revival in Education and Training/. Began April, 1946 and ended March 26, 1954. Succeeded by Deutsche Lehrerzeitung. 340 Elternhaus und Schule /Home and School/. A monthly magazine which began in March 1952 and ended in 1958. Paedagogik /Pedagogy/. A monthly magazine which began in August, 1946. After January 1, 1950, it assumed the role of official organ of the DPZI. Publication continues to the present. Speeches "Demokratische Schulreform" /The Democratic School Reform/, Bericht fiber die gemeinsame Kundgebung der KPD und SPD am 4. Novem ber 1945 im Palast in Berlin /A Report on the Mass Meeting of the German Communist Party and the German Socialist Party Held in the Palace Theatre on November 4, 1945/. Berlin: Verlag Einheit, no date. DBlitzsch, Clemens. "Der organisatorische Aufbau des antifaschistichen Schulwesens" /The Organized Structure of the Anti-fascist School System/. P&dagogische Neuorientierung /Pedagogical Reorientation/. Dresden: Rat der Stadt Dresden und Volks- bildungsamt der Stadt Leipzig, 1945. Groth, Wolfgang. "Ueber die aussere und innere Ordnung in der Schule" /Concerning External and Internal Discipline in School'/. A speech held on September 24, 1953, at Stolberg/Harz before a class of school inspectors. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1954. Heise, Wilhelm. _^Grundfragen der PMdagogik in der neuen demokratischen Schule" /Basic Pedagogical Issues in the New Democratic School/. Speech held at the Pedagogical Conference in Berlin on August 16, 1946. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1946. Wandel, Paul. "Demokratisierung der Schule" /On the Democratization of Schools/. Speech given at the Pedagogical Conference in Berlin on August 15, 1946. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1946. "Die Aufgaben der deutschen Lehrerschaft am Neuaufbau des Schulwesens" /The Responsibilities of German School Teachers in Reconstructing_the German School System7. pHdagogische Neuorientierung /Pedagogical Reorientation/. Dresden: Rat der Stadt Dresden und Volksbildungsamt der Stadt Leipzig, 1945. 341 B. SECONDARY SOURCES Books Atlantik-BrUcke. Meet Germany. Tenth Revised Edition. Hamburg: Greener Druck, 1962. Berliner Verband der Lehrer und Ejrzieher. Die Schule in der sowjetischbesetzte.n Zone /Schools in the Soviet Zone of Occupation/. Berlin, 1951. Bodenman, Paul S. Education in the Soviet Zone of Germany. Office of Education, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bulletin 26. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1959. Bundesministerium fUr Gesamtdeutsche Fragen. Das Erziehungswesen der Sowjetzone /The Educational System of the Soviet Zone/. Bonn: Deutscher Bundes- Verlag, 1952. Caldwell, Oliver J ., and Loren R. Graham. Moscow in May, 1963. Education and Cybernetics. Office of Education, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bulletin 38. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1964. Cornides,_Wilhelm. Die Weltm&chte und Deutschland. 1945-55 /The World Powers and Germany/ Tilbingen: Rainer Wunderlich Verlag, 1957. Doernberg, Stefan. Kurze Geschichte der DDR /Short History of the DDR/. Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1964. Drafenstedt, Edgar, Heinz Lindner, and Hans Rettke. Auf dem Wege zur sozialistischen Landschule /On the Way to a Socialist Rural School/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1959. Froese, Leonhard. "Die geistigen Grundlagen des mitteldeutschen Bildungswesens" /The Spiritual Basis of the Middle German Educational System/, Schriften der Arbeitsgemeinschaft filr Osteuropaforschung der Universitkt Mttnster. Die Sowjetunion in Europa, VortrSge. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrasowitz, 1962. 342 Gutsche, Heinz. Die Erwachsenenbildung in der SBZ /Adult Education in the Soviet Zone of Germany/. Bonn: Bundesministerium filr Gesamtdeutsche Fragen, 1953. John, Erhard. Die sozialistische Kulturrevolution in der DDR /The Socialist Cultural Revolution in the DDR/. "Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1960. Klein, Helmut. Polytechnische Bildung und Erziehung in der DDR; Entwicklung, Erfahrungen, Probleme /Polytechnical Education _ and Training in the DDR; Development, Experiences, Problems/. Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rohwolt, 1962. Kopp, Fritz. Die Wendung zur "nationalen" Ge^chichtsbetrachtung in der Sowjetzone /Change to a National Viewpoint in History in the Soviet Zone/. Mlinchen: Ysarverlag, 1955. Lange, Max G. TotalitHre Erziehung; das Erziehungssystem der Sowjetzone Deutschlands /Totalitarian_Education; the Educational System of the Soviet Zone of Germany/. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag der Frankfurter Hefte, 1954. Ltiwenthal, Fritz, News from Germany. London: Verlag Gollancz, 1950. Lukas, Richard. Zehn Jahre sowjetische Besatzungszone; Politik, Wirtschaft, Kultur, Rechtwesen /Ten Years of the Soviet Occupation; Politics, Economics, Culture, Law/. Mainz- Gonsenheim: Deutscher Fachschriften Verlag, 1955. Medlin, William K ., Clarence B. Lindquist, and Marshall L. Schmitt. Soviet Education Programs. Office of Education, U.S. Depart ment of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bulletin 17. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1960. Mendyk, Alfred. Die nationale Frage und der Kampf um die Einheit Deutschlands, stoffliche und methodische Hinweise filr den Lehrer der 10. Klasse /The National Issue and the Struggle for the Unity of Germany; Suggestions for Materials_and Methods to Be Used by Teachers of the Tenth Grade/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1954. Mendyk, Inge und Hans Joachim Holz. GrundsHtze und Erfahrungen zur Fflrderung der Arbeiter- und Bauernkinder /Principles and Experiences Used in Promoting Workers' and Peasants' Children/. Berlin: Volk und Wissen, 1959. 343 Mieskes, Hans. PHdagogik des Fortschritts? Das System der sowjetzonalen PMdagogik in Forschung, Lehre und Praxis jls This Progressive Pedagogy? Research, Doctrine, and Practice of Soviet Zone Pedagogy/, Mtlnchen: Juventa Verlag, 1960. Miles, Donald W. Recent Reforms in French Secondary Education. Teacher's College Studies in Education. New York: Columbia University Press, 1953. MBbus, Gerhard. Erziehung zum Hass; Schule und Unterricht im sowjetbesetzten Deutschland /Training to Hate; Education in the Soviet Zone of Occupation/. Berlin: Morus Verlag, 1956. Nesselrode, Franz Von. Germany's Other Half. New York: Abelard- Schuman, Ltd., 1963. Nettl, J. P. Die deutsche Sowjetzone bis Heute; Politik, Wirtschaft, Gesellschaft /The_German Soviet Zone until Today; Politics, Economy, Society/. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag der Frankfurter Hefte, 1953. Nettl, J. P. The Eastern Zone and Soviet Policy in Germany, 1945-50. London: Oxford University Press, 1951. Saeuberlich, Erwin. Vom Humanismus zum demokratischen Patriotismus /From Humanism to Democratic Patriotism/. Duisburg: Verlag Mr Politik und Wirtschaft, 1954. Schaffer, Gordon. Russian Zone. Published for the Cooperative Press by G. Allen and Unwin, 1947. Scholz, Arno. Der 17. Juni; die Volkserhebung in Ostberlin und in der Sowjetzone /The Seventeenth_of June; the Insurrection in East Berlin and in the Soviet Zone/. Berlin: Arani-Verlag, 1953. Timm, Albrecht. Das Fach Geschichte in Forschung und Lehre in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone von 1945-55 /Research and Teaching of History in the Soviet Zone of Occupation from 1945-557, Bonn: Deutscher Bundes-Verlag, 1957. Ulich, Robert. The Education of Nations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962. 344 Wendt, Emil. Die Entwicklung der Lehrerbildung in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone seit 1945 /The Development of Teacher Training in the Soviet Zone of Occupation since 1945/. Bonn: Deutscher Bundes-Verlag, 1957. ' Reference Materials Bernhard, Horst (ed.). Kleine pUdagogische EnzyklopUdie /Small Pedagogical Encyclopedia/. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, 1960, Childs, James B. German Democratic Republic, Official Publications: 1945-58. Washington: Serial Division, Reference Department, Library of Congress, 1961. Deutsches_Institut fiir Zeitgeschichte. Dokumentation der Zeit /^Documentation of the Times/. Began in 1949. Berlin: Verlag fttr Zeitgeschichte. GesamteuropUisches Studienwerk. Literatur unserer Bibliothek zur Themengruppe: Die allgemeinbildende Schtfle im Sowjetbereich /Reference Materials in c>ur Library concerning the_General School in the Soviet Zone/. 2. erweiterte Auflage /Second Revised Edition/. Vlotho, 1959. Geschichtliche Zeittafeln der DDR, 1945-54 /Chronology of the DDR from 1945-54/. Berlin: Kongress Verlag, 1954. Kopp, Fritz und Gilnter Fischbach. Die Sowjetische Besatzungszone in den Jahren 1945-54 /The Soviet Zone of Occupation from 1945-54/. Bonn: Deutscher Bundes-Verlag, 1964. Maxwell, Robert. Information U. S. S. R. London: Pergamon Press, 1962. Sander, Heinz (ed.). Geschichtliche Zeittafeln der DDR, 1949-59 /Chronology of the DDR from 1949-59/. Berlin: Kongress Verlag, 1959. SBZ Biographie ^Biographies of the Soviet Zone of Occupation/. Bundesministerium fttr Gesamtdeutsche Fragen. Bonn: Deutscher Bundes-Verlag, 1964. 345 SBZ von A Bis Z /The Soviet Zone of Occupation from A to Z/. Bundesministerium fUr Gesamtdeutsche Fragen. Bonn: Deutscher 'Bundes-Verlag, 1963. Wittig, Horst. Das Bildungswesen der DDR; Literatur zur Einflihrung in die ideologischen, historischen, politischen Grundlagen and pHdagogischen Probleme des Mitteldeutschen Bildungswesen /The Educational System of the DDR; Introductory1 Materials for the Ideological, Historical,_and Political Bases of the Middle German Educational System_/, Eine Auswahlbibliographie [A Selected Bibliography/. Frankfurt am Main: Hochschule filr Internationale PUdagogische Forschung, 1960. Periodicals Bodenman, P. S. "Education in the Soviet Zone of Germany, " School Life, XLI (December, 1958), 14-17. "East Germany, " Time Magazine, LXXXVI (October 15, 1965), 98. 1 1 Erickson, H. B. "East German Youth Decide for Themselves, " California Journal of Education, XXXI (February, 1956), 75-8. Hausen, H. "Die geistige Situation_der Ostzonenstudenten" /The Spiritual State of East Zone Students/, Deutsche, Rundschau, LXXVI (December, 1950), 1050-53. Henderson, J. L. "Education in Modern Germany; An Appraisal, " Education Forum, XXI (March, 1957), 315-25. Philipp, W. "General Studies in Germany Today, " Christian Scholar, XXXVII (June, 1954), 101-5. Smart, K. F. "Education in East Germany, " Education Forum, XXV (May, 1961), 463-71. Wert, C. C. "Christian, the University, and a Communist Land, " Christian Scholar, XXXVII (June, 1954), 106-13. Wellner, M. H. B. "Encounter with Communist Teacher Training, " Education, LXXVHI (April, 1958), 980-5.