1A well-known 19th century work on the psychology of gender-specific teaching methodology clearly indicates a specific affinity of the female gender with modern languages:
- 1 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Auffällig ist es, daß das Sprachgedächtnis des weiblichen Geschlec (...)
The female linguistic memory related to words and word forms in foreign languages is remarkably well developed. It is a well-known fact that girls acquire modern languages faster than men and boys. The latter usually achieve less in English and French even if they are equally gifted1. (Wendt 1887: 111)
- 2 Among them the “father” of the Reform Movement in Germany, Wilhelm Viëtor; for more details see foo (...)
2Wendt’s words sum up main background features of the key hypothesis of this paper, that modern languages, in particular English, played an influential role in the constitution of higher secondary (that is post-elementary) schools for girls in 19th century Germany (Doff 2002: 2005). A considerable number of experts like Wendt and key figures of the Reform Movement, who often taught at secondary schools for girls for at least a few years,2 obviously followed the idea that girls were especially gifted for learning modern languages, rather than maths or the classical languages which were thought to “overburden” and be of no use at all to them (see below). Thus English and French, two subjects which were hardly represented in the secondary school tradition for boys (the Gymnasium), dominated private and public institutions of higher secondary education for girls. In this context, it is hardly surprising that a distinct gender-specific methodological approach of teaching modern languages developed eventually (Doff 2002: 396-400).
3Although they had existed since the beginning of the century, the number of higher secondary schools for girls in Germany in the private as well as in the state sector increased significantly in the second half of the 19th century. Traditional schools for higher secondary education for girls had existed in Germany since the 17th century; yet these institutions were not run by the state and aimed at a training of practical skills for so-called “higher daughters” (“höhere Töchter”, meaning daughters from well-off families) in the fields of languages (in particular conversation in French), music and housekeeping rather than at a higher secondary education by academic standards. This changed with the last third of the 19th century, when public calls for “proper” higher secondary education enabling girls to attend university increased (Albisetti 1998; Doff 2002). A milestone in this development was the so called Weimarer Konferenz (Weimar Conference) of 1872, where women and in particular men from all parts of Germany representing this school type got together officially for the first time to discuss questions of secondary education for girls provided by the state. The date is often taken to mark the official beginning of the institutionalization of the higher secondary school state system for girls in Germany (Albisetti 1988; Doff 2002). Since then, not only the number of schools but also of published contributions discussing related questions, for example in educational journals and school programs (Schulprogrammschriften) increased substantially. This development came to a temporary end in 1908 with the extensive reform of the higher secondary educational system for girls in Prussia.
- 3 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Man begnügt sich fast nirgends mehr mit der Erlernung einer fremde (...)
4The most distinctive feature which was commonly used during this period to characterize higher secondary schools for girls (as compared to middle schools for girls or higher secondary schools for boys) was the teaching of at least two modern languages, usually French and English: “Learning one foreign language hardly suffices anywhere; in particular girls claiming certain educational standards ask for French and English” (Strack 1879: 3)3. Against this backdrop the salient role of the modern languages as school subjects in this context becomes clear: they were the feature which distinguished higher secondary education for girls and boys but at the same time helped to provide the former with an equivalent status to the latter.
5As the quotation from Wendt (1887) above shows, some of the main motives for this specific profile were gender-related. They were controversially discussed in a fierce and often emotionally heated public debate which is analysed in more detail in section 2 below. Whereas for most of the 19th century, French was the modern language dominating in higher secondary education for girls, this started to change with the institutionalization of the higher secondary school system in the last quarter of the century. This development is reflected in a parallel public debate on the relative merits of English and French, some highlights of which are discussed in section 3.
- 1 This paper focuses on subject- and gender-related motives of this debate and does not take into acc (...)
6Gender-related motives for teaching modern languages often came up in the public debate concerning the institutionalization of the higher secondary school system for girls. It is a remarkable though hardly surprising fact that gender-related argumentation hardly ever appears in the corresponding debate related to the higher secondary school system for boys. For most of the 19th century this debate was dominated by arguments related to the usefulness of modern language teaching, but in the last quarter of the century arguments in favour of modern language teaching related to Bildung (that is educational reasons) took over. The changing character of this debate is mirrored in the parallel discussion of the general public state school system in Germany: in the beginning this discussion concentrated on defining higher versus middle secondary schools for girls; the main difference between both was finally settled by two (English and French) versus one (English) foreign language. Moreover, the debate soon focused on establishing higher secondary schools for girls as equal to higher secondary schools for boys (where traditionally the classical languages played an important role); in order to achieve this, the educational value (Bildungswert) of the modern languages (rather than their usefulness) had to be stressed.1
7Before the beginning of the 20th century (and often for longer) the moderate liberal approach saw education of boys and girls as different but equal. This view was shared by a majority of moderate reformers, whose number grew slowly but steadily; it was also supported by the conservative (and dominant) wing of the German women’s movement around Helene Lange (1848-1930). The following gender-related arguments were used by advocates of modern language teaching at higher secondary schools for girls to stress the distinct gender-related character of this school type. Later, that is when more progressive ideas supporting identical education for girls and boys were gaining ground, these arguments were often used against women and higher female secondary education.
8One of the most common gender-related arguments in this debate was that modern languages were easier to learn than classical languages (i.e. Greek and Latin) and thus minimized the threat of “overburdening” the girls (Maass 1872: 219). Moreover, they more or less guaranteed quick success in learning which was crucial especially for less gifted girls who would attend higher secondary schools along with the more gifted (Kalepky 1890: 8).
9Furthermore, it was argued that girls were especially talented in learning modern languages, as the introductory quotation of this paper illustrates. The special “female” talent becomes evident, for example, in women’s speech rate – worldwide, as the same author at least suspected:
- 2 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Fast ebenso sicher zeigt sich das schnelle Sprechtempo der Frauen (...)
Surely women’s fast speech rate also becomes evident in Mongolian and Afro-American people as well as in Polynesia and Melanesia. Most likely the women of Australians and bushmen behave in the same way since their strange liveliness and excessive emotional constitution perfectly match the character of the female gender2. (Wendt 1887: 71)
10This particular character of the female gender and its consequences for modern language teaching were discussed in more detail in a popular encyclopedia at the beginning of the 19th century:
- 3 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Ist ja doch in der Weiblichkeit das Gemüthliche mehr vorherrschend (...)
Warmth and friendliness (Gemüthlichkeit) are typical features in femininity and nature tries to keep anything away from the female character which might destroy its natural constitution. This is the reason why grammar and mathematics mean neither fortune nor bliss for girls; also with regard to languages they simply do not favor analytical approaches. This is why language teaching for girls should be designed in a more lively way. And since they should never grasp rules systematically, these should be depicted as vividly as possible. But this can of course only happen in the mother tongue, and maybe also in a foreign one, but of course only in a living language which is learned accordingly3. (Reuter 1811: 183-184)
- 4 This approach is summarized here and discussed in more detail in Doff (2002: 386-390). Many of the (...)
11This quotation also indicates possible consequences for a specific methodology of language education at higher secondary schools for girls4 which were discussed extensively by experts in educational journals and school programs. Its most dominant didactic feature was the oral principle, that is, the important role that was assigned to the spoken word. Translations were limited to cases where they could not be avoided, grammar was supposed to fulfill a subsidiary function as well. Next to speaking the language, understanding texts was considered one of the main aims in this gender-specific language teaching approach.
12To sum up, according to the authors quoted here (and to many others), it was not only their partial mind but also their gender-specific character which made girls particularly gifted for learning modern languages. Not surprisingly – at least from our perspective today –, these arguments soon turned against the very gender they were originally supposed to be in favor of.
13Apart from gender-specific reasons, there were also other arguments which spoke in favour of teaching two modern languages at higher secondary schools for girls. As pointed out before, these can be divided into two categories, usefulness and Bildung (“general education”). Based on the earlier was, for example, the argument that the opportunities for girls and women to actually use the languages they learned at school in “real life” was steadily increasing: even if the number of jobs available for them (for example, as teachers) was still limited, they could foster their language proficiency by reading books and journals without translations. The growing influence of the English language in particular on German culture and literature has to be mentioned in this context as well as the important and steadily growing trade relationships between Britain and Germany. Moreover, it became significantly easier to travel abroad in the course of the 19th century, an opportunity which many so-called “higher daughters” (see above) took as a welcome break between school and marriage (Benecke 1868: 36; Ritter 1897: 439; Haas 2000). It also became common for future female teachers to spend a considerable period of time abroad in order to qualify for teaching modern languages in the higher secondary educational German system, which formally did not admit women into regular high school teacher training courses for most of the 19th century.
- 5 Transl. SD. The original reads: “In Methode und Begrenzung einzelner Lehrstoffe nähert [die höhere (...)
14For the school type “higher secondary girls school” the teaching of two modern languages became the distinct feature which characterized them against elementary education on the one hand and against higher secondary education for boys on the other: “With regard to methodology and limitation of certain contents [the higher secondary school] for girls resembles elementary school, with regard to foreign language teaching, however, […] it is closer to higher secondary schools for boy” (Dammann 1885: 67).5
15As the century moved on, arguments related to Bildung became more and more important for reasons discussed above. A typical quotation highlights the change of direction in this debate and mentions a number of arguments which often surfaced in this context:
- 6 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Sprachen bringen uns den Entwicklungsgang der menschlichen Vorstel (...)
Languages make us aware of the development of human imagination, humankind’s rich terminology and the colors of various terms, their inter-relatedness and their imaginary power. Comparing various languages can create an awareness of how one and the same image was conceptualized by various peoples. Moreover speaking and listening to languages, in particular foreign languages, offers a perfect training of the speaking and listening organs as well as of the ability to learn6. (Maass 1872: 214)
- 7 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Sehen wir […] in der Toleranz eines der schönsten Kennzeichen mode (...)
16Another of the key arguments which came up repeatedly in the debate was the cosmopolitan character of higher secondary education which played a particularly important role in Germany, also for historical reasons: “If we see […] tolerance as one of the finest features of modern education, it is not feasible any longer nowadays to accept limitations to our own people in any field […]. The modern individual has to be (and in fact is) a cosmopolitan” (Schumann 1876: 604).7 It was obvious even to non-experts that modern languages were considered to be particularly suitable means to foster this cosmopolitan ideal.
17These arguments in the three categories gender, usefulness and Bildung demonstrate that modern languages were a constitutional feature when it came to defining and later to the institutionalization of higher secondary education for girls in Germany in the course of the 19th century. The next part of this paper takes a closer look at the two languages involved.
18In the tradition of the 18th century and the governesses (see Hardach-Pinke 1993), when French was considered to be the language of the court in particular and of good taste in general, this continued to be the key modern language subject taught at German higher secondary schools for girls well into the 19th century. In the context of the methodological concept highlighted in part 2, however, French was a suitable subject only to a limited extent, mainly due to its grammar which seemed quite complex when compared to other modern languages, in particular English:
- 1 Transl. SD. The original reads: “[Es] lässt sich […] nicht verkennen, dass die schablonenhaften, of (...)
It can […] not be denied that the static, often purely extrinsic rules are nothing but a logical means of education. Moreover, the outstanding gifts of mind typical of female learners (judgement, taste, quick ability to learn) are not fostered by drumming French grammar into them. By overburdening women’s minds, which are often less strong than those of men, their development is paralyzed. That means a lot of reading, constant exercise of writing and conversation but grammar only when necessary and rather by exercise than by learning by heart or rule drills1. (Horn 1893: 310-311)
- 2 Transl. SD. The original reads: “[…] die französische Litteratur neben vielem Trefflichem recht vie (...)
19Grammar was obviously one of the reasons why English in the course of the 19th century replaced French as the most popular foreign language taught at higher and middle secondary schools for girls. Apart from the grammar, French literature was a problem: there were too few standard works which were regarded as suitable for educating young girls and women since a number of popular literary works in French were considered to promote a superficial and frivolous lifestyle. This is, for example, pointed out by Ackermann (1883: 182) who claims that “French literature next to many fine aspects also contains a lot of superficial features, that namely in more recent publications a certain view of life is presented to us – moreover in a shining way – which we would not like to be anchored in German women’s minds”.2
- 3 Transl. SD. The original reads: “[…] Das Französische ist das Latein der Töchterschulen.”
20But there were also a number of reasons which spoke for French: Apart from its long tradition in the education of the so-called “higher daughters” in Germany, it was considered particularly suitable in terms of higher formal education and taken to be the best replacement for classical languages at higher secondary schools for boys, as Kreyenberg (1887: 88) put it: “French is the Latin of higher secondary schools for girls”.3
21The arguments in favor of French were occasionally used against English and vice versa. Due to many similarities with German, quick successes in learning English at the beginning were more or less guaranteed. This matched the increasingly popular didactic principle to proceed from the easier to the more difficult phenomena. Moreover, since logical and formal thinking was not considered to be a strength of the female character anyway, the English language which could be handled with a minimum of grammar seemed an ideal choice in the context of higher secondary education for girls (see, for example, Sander 1889: 126). For practical reasons, it made sense to promote English, the upcoming lingua franca, as the first and dominant modern foreign language at higher secondary schools for girls. But also in terms of Bildung (here: formal education), English was promoted as a first choice for reasons which had been discussed by no one less than Jakob Grimm:
- 4 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Keine unter allen neueren Sprachen hat gerade durch das Aufgeben u (...)
None among all modern languages but English has gained greater power and strength by giving up and shattering all sound laws, by omitting nearly all inflections. It’s learnable but not teachable abundance of colours provides for an expressive power which has probably not been gained by any other human tongue before. Its full mental wonderfully fortunate capacity and formation had evolved from a surprising marriage of the two noblest languages of the late Europe4. (Grimm 1852: 50)
22Next to this special quality resulting from a mixture of Germanic and Romance elements, a number of literary works in English by authors like, for example, Shakespeare, Thomas Milton or Jane Austen were considered excellent choices for teaching more proficient female learners of English; in case a Shakespearian tragedy was regarded as too bloodthirsty, the end was simply rewritten by textbook authors for English language teaching at higher secondary schools for girls (Niemeyer 1794: 173; Gantter & Wildermuth 1880: 197).
- 1 Transl. SD. The original reads: “Wir sehen also, daß beide Sprachen hinsichtlich ihres gesamten Bil (...)
23To sum up, this paper has argued that modern languages played a salient role in constituting higher secondary education for girls in Germany in the course of the 19th century and that a specific didactic approach of teaching English and/or French resulted from this. The reasons for this development can be discussed in the three categories gender, usefulness and Bildung. The teaching of two modern languages at the higher secondary school for girls was a crucial feature which separated this school type from middle schools for girls on the one hand and made it comparable to higher secondary education for boys on the other hand. In this context, English and French were often discussed as contrasts, but in the end, there was a majority of voices which stressed the fact that due to a variety of reasons, some of which were discussed in this paper, French was an ideal complement of English (and vice versa), for example in terms of grammatical and inflectional complexity but also with regard to the specific female “character” which was supposed to influence learning to a considerable extent. Whereas contrasting elements of both languages were not denied they were seen as complementing each other in a growing number of cases like the following: “Thus we can see that both languages all in all equal each other regarding their overall educational value. Carried out in a parallel way they complement one another nicely: French provides for intellectual and English for emotional education” (Nimmerjahn 1898: 466).1 Thus a combination of the two languages was often considered to be a perfect solution for the higher secondary education of German girls and women.