Educational Past In Anthologies And Sourcebooks For Teacher Education

Abstract

Selection and representation of a corpus of sources from the end of the 19 ^th till the beginning of the 21 ^st centuries about the educational past in sourcebooks for teacher education indicates the changing role of the past in teaching for the present. This article overviews the ways to present and teach educational past have been changed in sourcebooks of the last century used in teacher education. Studying this corpus of sourcebooks which included texts on history of education, we analyze the canon and approaches stimulating students’ interest in historically deep research considerations of any pedagogical realities allowing them to consider both informative and research questions. We investigate the strategies of selection and representation of sources about the educational past in sourcebooks by methods of intellectual history and curriculum studies, structure analysis and Kanonforschung, discourse analysis, content analysis, and tools for comparing similar functions in different structures. Changes in the status of the history of education has cardinally been reflected in contents of sourcebooks. The last thirty years shows the transition from standard lists of texts to variable; the rejection of the exemplar approach (one person as an icon of the period); using previously unrecognized sources; and the transition from focusing on theories of education to pedagogical practices.

Keywords: Sourcebookhistory of educationanthologycanon studyhigher educationuniversity teaching

Introduction

It is widely known that educational heritage of the past was mostly passed down to students through textual sources. Such sources usually came to them via sourcebooks which enabled the students to view the history of education as it had been constructed by this or that anthology’s perspective. Pedagogical classics in modern culture exists thanks to the collections of texts, anthologies.

For the reflection of the maximum number of meanings in certain cases we enumerate the terms ‘anthology’, ‘sourcebook’ taking into account their partial synonymy. Whenever it's possible we omit the terms 'documentary history' and 'reading' which are also found in defining the genre of the edition in order to avoid too big scale of meanings.

In our article we discuss what kind of "classical classics" and how (means, ways, structure, sequence, tools, etc.) the antique pedagogics forms in sourcebooks. The subject of the discussion is work with classics for the creation of "a memory frame" to define content frames of history of pedagogics and pedagogics as disciplines.

Problem Statement

Academics' attitude to anthologies is different. Defending their importance, Martha Banta ( 1993) equates an anthology with variety. Anthologies allow students to see variations in learning. Difficulties of choice of texts from the wide and contextually caused corpus of a big historical distance for representation historical texts to students in practice turn, according to her, into quite good informative and heuristic opportunities. Banta believes that an anthology is a polyphony where each voice is turned into the past and into the future at the same time ( Banta, 1993, р.331-333). The anthologies compare and collate and, as a result, corroborate or reconsider a point of view of others and your own point of view.

The diversity of anthologies generates criticism. Opponents of anthologies say that only integral works can be valuable, but not the works which are "a kind of a buffet". In the modern fragmented world diversity is not expedient in all areas ( Lauter, 2004, р.19). The reader risks ‘overeating’ or even ‘getting poisoned’ with incompatible texts. However, we believe, the risk is a question of criteria of composition of this or that anthology, but not a denial of a genre. The reading mode is the sphere of compiler's responsibility who asks a reader to use the prepared dish.

Another question related to anthologies follows not from integrity, but from the different status of what is represented. Canonical, non-canonical, neocanonical, ‘deuterocanonical’ texts and so on are collected under one cover. Anthologies are the frames for reading of sources about the past that defining points, sides and prospects for their understanding, and the concept of all the past and views of all traceable process in history of education. Anthologies mainly set frames for the vision of a discipline itself, the tradition of understanding of this or that historical period / problem defining both a canon and creativity at the same time.

Each anthology represents a way of textual interpretation of the pedagogical past which the reader seems to have the right both to accept and to reject, but with the help of the texts’ selection and guidance he is softly pushed to certain methodology and conclusions. So, the traditional sample of Plato’s / Aristotle’s / Quintilian’s / Plutarch’s dialogues and treatises within chapters about antiquity define the borders for student's understanding of antique pedagogics through political, state, economy, social and family points of view and not with any others like for example theatrical, topographical, age classes, gender, texts circulation, copying, transmission and translation, teacher-pupil relations, and so on.

It is important to consider the attitudes authors of anthologies and of canons and boundaries of classics - they treat them as laws, as a living area of cultural memory, or as the tool with the help of which it is possible to cut out from this area newly represented images unknowable before but which nevertheless correspond to the rules of a scientific research. A canon as a law to rule the cognition and understanding probably causes one of the reasons for loss of interest in classics by university and college students. The source which inspires each teacher with interest in the historical pedagogical past is hidden in a canon as the expanded scale of a professional landscape.

Research Questions

For our research we need to nominate the anthologies which requires investigation. Anthologies in history of pedagogics can be divided into several types or subgroups: anthologies of sources and analytical ones.

Sometimes the reference to what group the anthology belongs to, for example, – Anthology of sources or Critical anthology – is specified through a colon in the name, but most often there is no such a reference, and belonging of this or that anthology to a specific group is seen from its structure. A special group of anthologies is bilingual anthologies which can belong to any of groups but they bring a special nuance approaching the "user" to the original.

Anthologies of sources are constructed in such a way to draw reader's attention to the important past which has few available sources. Sometimes the compiler(s) postulates that these sources need a new presentation or frame for their perception. Introduction of new sources, renovate or new translations of the known sources, a new selection of the known and unknown texts into circulation, approving of these or those sources as historical and pedagogical and etc. can be the purposes of the anthology. Anthologies of sources can be either anthologies of documents , in them the emphasis is put on the texts registering pedagogical process, or anthologies of treatises in which the emphasis is put on various philosophical and pedagogical, methodological, projecting or model compositions. Sometimes such treatises and their authors became icons of the given time period to represent all the essence of it in one name and few texts.

Examples of the anthologies of the first type are collections of documents on history of educational practice in which sources are most often organized chronologically or according to levels of education. Professor of Columbia University Paul Monroe (1869-1947) constructed his well-known "Source Book of the History of Education for the Greek and Roman Period" chronologically ( Monroe, 1901). The features of the historical period, sources and their selection are given inside of this or that historical periods.

The anthology of the second type among anthologies of sources is, for example, the anthology "Antique Authors about Pedagogics" ( 1897) written by Céline-Lucie Saffroy (1855 – after 1908), an inspector of a primary school, and Georges Noël, a professor of philosophy in Lycée Lakanal close to Paris ( Saffroy & Noël, 1897). According to this anthology Vladimir Glebovsky in 1903 published the analog in Russia, having assembled the available Russian translations of the authors included in the French model and offered his own translations in those cases where Russian translations hadn't been done yet ( Glebovsky, 1903). Sofia Melikhova, Sergej Zhebelev and Faddej Zelinsky followed his way having composed the anthology "Plato and Aristotle's Pedagogical Views" ("Pedagogicheskie vozzreniya Platona i Aristotelya") ( Melikova, Zhebelev, Zelinsky, 1916). The similar is "The Anthology of History of Foreign Pedagogics" ("Khrestomatiya po istorii zarubezhnoy pedagogiki"), published by Alexey Piskunov in 1971 and reprinted in 1981. One of the recent examples is ‘The School of Freedom: A Liberal Educational Reader from Plato to the Present Day’ where Anthony O’Hear and Marc Sidwell present 4 names as representatives for ‘paideia’, 3 names for ‘humanitas’ and 2 names for Christian Logos (per each name has been selected from one to four works).

Analytical anthologies integrate fragments both from sources and from scientific works according to the chronological periods. This type of anthologies was popular in the 19th – the beginning of the 20th centuries, but by the beginning of the 21st century it had been divided into anthologies of sources, generalizing editions, collections of exemplified research articles, reference books ( Guiraud, 1995). Collection of articles set not only a frame for perception, but also a frame for studying sources, showing the methods and conclusions drawn on their basis by different scientists. In the history of pedagogics, it's "Readings in the History of Education" written by Ellwood Patterson Cubberley (1868-1941), professor of the Stanford university. The subtitle announced an integration of the practice, the ideas and institutes: "A Collection of Sources and Readings to Illustrate the Development of Educational Practice, Theory, and Organization" ( Cubberley, 1920). Using the research fragments hasn't saved the whole book and its readers from a progressivism concerning pedagogical practice ( Bailyn, 1960; Cremin, 1965). According to Bernard Bailyn and Lawrence Cremin, Cubberley interpreted historical approach incorrectly to find sources of schools in Antiquity even where they didn't exist. As a result, he alined contradictions and modernized the course of history ( Lewis, 1967, р.57). Cubberley was followed by Russian "The Anthology in History of Pedagogics" ("Khrestomatiya po istorii pedagogiki") printed by Ivan Svadkovsky in 1935.

At the beginning of the 21st century critical anthologies appeared which specially draw attention to difficult questions of a historical and pedagogical research. They contain less number of texts and more of their discussions. Their purpose is to teach the reader to see the sources, to choose them and to analyze them, to discuss and evaluate the significance of these or those texts as sources, to rethink their role and place in the history of education. The elements of editions of this kind are visible to different degrees in various parts of the three modern anthologies compiled by Laurent Pernot; Marc Joyal with his colleagues; Anthony O'Hear and Marc Sidwell ( Pernot, 2008; Joyal, McDougall & Jardley, 2009; O’Hear & Sidwell, 2009). In these anthologies the authors offer a student ambiguous selections, explaining their choice and the sequence, inviting to search, comparison, further reading and reflection.

Purpose of the Study

We t ried to trace and then to show how the ways to study, to arrange, to present and to teach educational past have been changed in sourcebooks of the last century used in teacher education. Studying this corpus of sourcebooks printed in 1897-2013 which included texts on history of education we analyze the canon and approaches stimulating students’ interest to historically deep research considerations of any pedagogical realities allowing them to put both informative and research questions to them. We wanted to investigate the strategies of selection and representation of sources about educational past in sourcebooks and present the spectrum of them to the audience used such kind of books and/or prepared them.

Research Methods

So we investigate the corpus of sourcebook s printed from the end of the 19th century nowadays which included texts on history of education. The strategies of selection of sources about educational past, the canon and approaches stimulating students’ interest to historically deep researchs of any pedagogical realities are the main focus of the study. To attain the objective, methods of intellectual history, curriculum studies, structure analysis, Kanonforschung, discourse analysis, content analysis, comparative studies were used.

Findings

The authors of one of the first anthologies on Greek and Roman pedagogics Céline-Lucie Saffroy and Georges Noël applied not the idea of tracing of historical development of education in documents, but more likely the thesis about echoing of two epochs: classics and contemporaneity. That's why their approach can be called "model approach": the antique pedagogics is represented by those key figures which have been entrusted to speak about different sides and features of a whole as a heritage. The matter concerned less the representation of spheres of antique education than the names representing it. Each author was announced as a kind of label for this or that feature of the epoch or phenomenon. Themes "were hidden" lesser in chronology, and bigger in this or that personal name. In the French edition of 1897 only five names were given utterance: Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, Quintilian, Plutarch. Inside of these names the main themes were accentuated in texts of this or that author, for example, the "Socratic method" in Plato's "Meno".

Paul Monroe's anthology became a manual standard for university courses of the English-speaking countries and in other regions. In 1911 his "Textbook in the History of Education" (1905) was published in 2 volumes in Russian and withstood 4 reprints up to 1923. His anthology of classic texts wasn't translated more likely because of the existence of books prepared by Glebovsky, Melikhova and Zhebelev. Monroe at the beginning of each chapter gives an introduction characterizing both the epoch with peculiarities of education of this epoch and the sources of this or that peculiarity. The titles of the chapters synthesize both chronology and a theme: "Old Greek Education", "Education of Women in Greece", "The New Greek Education", "Greek Educational theorists: The Historical View", "Greek Educational theorists: The Philosophical View", "Greek Educational theorists: The Scientific View", "The Later Cosmopolitan Greek Education", "Early Roman Education in General", "The Second Period of Early Roman Education", "Contrast between the Earlier and the Later Periods of Roman Education", "Survival of Early Roman Educational Ideals in the Later Period", "The Third Period: The Hellenized Roman Education", "The Orator as the Ideal of Roman Education", "Scientific Exposition of Roman Education". Monroe's thematic accentuation is continued through his notes on margins of the fragments of antique authors' texts. Marginalia set the logic of reading of the historical text. His approach can be called a documentary thematical sketch. The selection of the texts and comments to them in each chapter aims to create a general view on this or that epoch, the peculiar side or processes in it. However, the division into chapters and the title of each chapter confirm the sketch principle of representation of documentary material to the reader.

The anthology written by the professor of Stanford University Elwood Patterson Cubberley (1868-1941) and printed in 1920 with the title "Readings in the History of Education" became a key event in the field ( Cubberley, 1920). Cubberley's anthology "Readings in the History of Education" contained twenty nine chapters placed in a chronological order, tracing the history of pedagogics from an Old Greek period up to 1910s and supplementing his lectures in history of education. Five chapters of the anthology are devoted to Greek and Roman education. Cubberley included antique texts there, having supplied them with the subtitles denoting key themes for it inside of this or that period. Fragments of scientific works of different authors and illustrative material have been also given here. Each fragment from a source is called in a special way: Plutarch's "Lycurgus" was made into "Ancient Education in Sparta", Plato's "Protagoras" is a "Description of an Athenian Schoolboy's Day", Aristotle's "Athenian Constitution" became an "Athenian Citizenship and the Ephebic Years" in life of the reaching manhood Greek youth, it’s nice that about Xenophon's "Memorabilia" we read as "An Example of Socrates' Teaching", Thucydides's "History" is in anthological truth the "Athenian Education" summarized, Polibius's "The Histories" covers by "The Roman Character", Marcus Aurelius's "Meditations" is "The Old Roman Education" described, and Cicero's "De Oratore" and Quintilian's "Institutio Oratoria" show "Oratory the Aim of Education" etc. Cubberley's analytical approach has become a stumbling block in a dispute on anthologies: how much the presence of a fragment from the modern writer with his interpretations is not always proved in the published fragment that can expand or restrict even the comprehension of the source.

No accentuation based on contemporary taxonomy of themes can be found in "The Anthology of History of Foreign Pedagogics" ("Khrestomatiya po istorii zarubezhnoy pedagogiki") (ed.by Alexej Piskunov, 1971) where the antique pedagogical heritage is presented in the section "Education and Pedagogical Thought in slaveholding Society" ("Vospitanie i pedagogicheskaya mysl v rabovladelcheskom obschestve") and where Vladimir Glebovsky is mentioned but the names of neither Monroe, nor Cubberley, nor Svadkovsky can't be found. In general, Alexej Piskunov follows Glebovsky's scheme coping French and he only replaces Xenophon by Democritus. The priority of the materialist Democritus is clear because of the Soviet regime in the 1960s-80s, but why exactly Xenophon was excluded is not easy to understand. The anthology includes Democritus's fragments, Plutarch's "Lycurgus", Plato's "Protagoras" and "Republic", Aristotle's "Politics" and Quintilian's "Institutes of Oratory" without any thematic explanations. The composer explains that the anthology includes only those works which are "the most essential" for this or that epoch and "have influenced" further development of pedagogics. Enumerating antique teachers, he is less guided by chronology and more likely by recognition hierarchy of acceptance; we saw it also in the author's preface: on the first place is Plato, then Aristotle, Socrates and Democritus, and after them are "and others". Besides Democritus loved by Marxists all other authors follow the Saffroy-Noël-Glebovsky line. The standard marking of fragments of antique texts has been survived and there are no compiler's titles of sections and illustrations, as can be seen in Monroe and Cubberley's works. The texts are precessed with the short introduction sketches nominating the important place of the selected compositions and their authors in the representation of an antique pedagogical thought and practice. The main purpose is to provide "a rather entire idea of two educational systems" such as Athenian and Spartan via model authors for them. The Roman education at the same time appears as some kind of addition to Greek education. We can see again the transition made from chronological sequence of themes to chronological medallions of antique texts in anthologies and sourcebooks according to the hierarchy of key figures. A text of a particular author apparently begins to be considered as a kind of pedagogical monument to an epoch as a whole. This approach forgets about modern taxonomy in attribution and arranging the texts, but it doesn't follow historicism and consider each figure in the context of its epoch and the cultural horizon.

The approach standing apart from Saffroy-Noël, Cubberley and developing Monroe at a new qualitative level we meet in the anthology "Greek and Roman Education: A Sourcebook" (2009), prepared by the Canadian colleagues Mark Joyal (the university of Manitoba), Iain McDougall (the university of Winnipeg) and John Yardley (the university of Ottawa). The declared and evident purpose of the book is to show the variety of original sources on pedagogics in Antiquity. Papyruses, inscriptions, juridical monuments, biographies, fiction has become equal to philosophical and ethical treatises. The sequence of texts has assumed an accurate chronological order (with a traditional dominant on classical, but not on the late period). Regions and aspects of analysis are hidden inside of the chronology. The taxonomy of names and modern pedagogical problems doesn't dominate over the presentation, providing the reader with the opportunity not to follow classics but to open a dialogue between the studied material and the understanding of the educational processes her/himself. The editors mark relations between texts of different genres, formulate criteria for their choice and their point of view, inviting to open a dialogue with them with the help of texts selection and the specified way of further reading. However, the compilers’ choice of various material is being within formal education (more precisely: teaching literacy, oratory, philosophy in a group of students, at school), though they use a wide range of sources devoted to different social groups and the statuses. Other types of education, craftsmanship, growing up in groups of peers, education as social practice of the arranging of space and time (including parental participation, theatre, the visual, construction and material environment) are presented much less. It isn't told about such ‘traditional’ dominant outright, the traditional character "is packed" into a new scheme. In a number of modern anthologies such processing allows to integrate the antique pedagogical past into other contexts accurately: the anthology about the Roman household sheds light on the features of the family pedagogical power ( Gardner & Wiedemann, 1991); anthologies about sexual relations in a classical antiquity deal with the interrelation of a pederasty and mentoring ( Hubbard, 2003); anthologies on sport and on military science ( Sweet & Segal, 1987; Christesen & Kyle, 2013; Sage 1996) are devoted to education of the attitude towards competitive spirit, including its extreme manifestations, etc.

It's known that the field of a source study of history of education and pedagogics which is called "the corpus of sources about very remote pedagogical past" contains texts which throughout centuries were translated into different languages and defined the development of the western intellectual and cultural tradition. Homer's "Iliad" and "Odyssey", Aeschylus's "Oresteia", Aristotle's "Poetics" and Euripides's "Medea", Aristophanes's "The Clouds" and Plato's "Republic", Xenophon's "Cyropaedia", Vergilius' "Aeneid", Cicero's "De Officiis" and Seneca's "De Ira" and many others in university curricula of different countries are sometimes called "Great Books" which are compulsory for students' reading. The teacher's choice of "the program for reading" with students, of the texts generated by people who differ us so much is especially difficult as they de jure are remote from the reader by tens of centuries, and de facto are brought closer to him by translators. Each of translators had his own understanding of the hierarchy of the extant versions of the text and the meanings of the words which are found in it, their own scientific situation in the concrete intellectual environment. Anthologies and sourcebooks on history of pedagogics which include the heritage of the bygone times are collections of the translations done according to different canons with these or those peculiarities and restrictions: artistic, ideological, technical, etc. Even an anthology with the translations of experts from one team isn't free from a difference in translation approaches and found equivalents. The authors of the anthology on methods and concepts of translation said clear about the complex character of these restrictions: "Let's not forget that translations are done by people who don't need them for people who aren't able to read originals". The first group of people do not always translate "word for word" so the second group has no other way out as to listen to interpreters’ words at "nominal value" of understanding and presentation style of the first group ( Lefevere, 1992, р.1; Lauter, 2004).

The authors of anthologies and sourcebooks who want to reflect pedagogical heritage not only by means of great pedagogical treatises inevitably face difficulties of decoding the sense of the texts written in dead languages by translators. Each modern culture thinks itself being "main" or "central" use to treat the previous ones. Lacunae in translations can become sources of the modern person's myths about his ancestors, and lacunae in a selection of texts can be vague pictures of pedagogical reality. It is difficult not to create numerous additions, misreading, inventions and reticens (figures, concepts, subjects etc.) composing anthologies and sourcebooks. We see exceptions / replacements in translations, we inevitably make exceptions ourselves by selecting these or those texts as more or less suitable for the thematic anthology. Translators / compilers often retouch or delete the fragments contrasting with the existing recent cultural norm in education without any explanations. Not only special relationships between a teacher and a pupil, but also teaching slaves, educating epic heroes and women, manuals given to gladiators and gourmets, coursebooks of late antiquity and many other things are included in the list of preterition. Besides "topics and terms of preterition" there are a lot of "people of exclusion". It is strange but one of them now is the outstanding rhetor Marcus Tullius Cicero who for a long time was the cause of many sufferings of the gymnasium students studying Latin. The complexity and ambiguity of his life and career caused the emergence of the historical and pedagogical stereotype which denies his originality. The widespread general definition of Cicero as "political weathervane" didn't allow educators to tell about the importance of his pedagogical ideas seriously for a long time. Maybe that's why Cicero isn't so popular as Quintilian, Marcus Aurelius, Suetonius and other Roman authors in contemporary anthologies.

Looking at the translation of each text included into the anthology, the reader has the right to ask questions: who has translated it, for what purpose, what source edition was used, what he was guided by (the translation principles and techniques, theories of reading of an era), what he meant as the main essence of the fragment, can we trust him? etc. And the generalizing questions which are global for this situation are: why this text has been chosen for the anthology/sourcebook and placed at a certain theme, period of time in it, why only these certain fragments have been selected? We see the result of double or even threefold choice which is done instead of the reader and for the reader. The editor usually chooses the translation which appeal to him for its inclusion in a frame of a certain pedagogical culture. The new translation for the manual is not always qualitative but choosing among the translations which have already been done is sometimes even more difficult. You can find a different ratio of pluses to minuses in them, for example a ratio from literary style to terminological accuracy. Translators of different generations work with different editions of original texts that generates one more problem for selecting the translation.

Referring to the translations we lose and get meanings at the same time. Each text is surrounded with other texts which pose it in this or that pedagogical culture. An environment and perception of the original text inevitably change in translation, and with increase in number of target languages in each of the sequential translations we can find more and more nuances of its perception which sometimes distract from original meanings. Bilingual anthologies or sourcebooks on history of pedagogics would allow generations of students to see advantages and disadvantages of the translation, but such tradition in sourcebooks for higher pedagogical education hasn't been developed yet.

Conclusion

We have found, considered and recognized three principles and sets of texts, three basic principles of supply of antique material in anthologies are the following: chronological, biographical (personal) and thematic. The majority of sourcebooks on history of education is built by the personal principle which, it seems, mostly answers the educational purposes, at the same time it is limiting their effects very much. Biography principle legally turns history of education into history of teachers and pedagogical thinkers. However, he replaces ideas of this or that era with ideas of this or that person as "sign" or "symbol" of a certain era. Using the personal approach compilers try to get from texts "the eternal questions of education", to show the answers given on them and to turn "the world pedagogical heritage" into the reference book-catechism which questions and answers seem to be out of history and have got an eternal importance. The chronological movement "following centuries", on the contrary, facilitates the perception of the material in its historical specifics, but, however, it turns to be predefined, in a sense that the reader knows what was after. Without teacher's competent analysis each previous text risks to be displaced by the following one and the pedagogical past will remain for a student something that steadily concedes to the pedagogical present. The thematic principle of presenting the material tries to reach the "theoretical" or "methodological" clearness of immersion into the pedagogical past which gets surmountable limits to establish a link with the pedagogical present due to using the conceptual dictionary which is modern for us. Thematic anthologies and sourcebooks group texts making some of the themes visible and others invisible in their content. Their ratio with a historical context is as difficult as in two approaches mentioned above, so if you choose modern nomenclature of themes the historical past is exposed to unprecedented transformations.

Besides three mentioned main teacher's approaches and ways to historical and pedagogical anthologies there are also some others. Alternative versions of a combination of chronological and thematic principles can be regional, confessional and problem anthologies. In spite of clearness the division into chronological and thematic anthologies is, nevertheless, rather conditionally. Having solved author's logic of selection and presenting of the material it becomes clear that in using a chronological arrangement of texts there can also be hidden topicality allowing to reach understanding of separate problems of education in their historical context.

The best approach doesn't still exist. The combination of approaches corresponds to the relevance of revision of the structure of courses in the system of the higher pedagogical education. The speed of changing of the educational space demands continuous updating of the content of the pedagogical education. Things, which seemed to be extremely modern yesterday, are quickly losing their relevance nowadays.

In the last quarter of the 20th century systemacity and contextuality of monuments of past became a basis for the new attitude both to the history of antique pedagogics and to its "anthologization" for educational purposes respectively. The aim of this transition is to take into consideration various sources which don't give the superiority to few "big" and "strong" theoretical texts which sometimes show only some and not most important parts of antique education. At the beginning of the 21st century the research has led to the creation of curricula and university courses which are composed in a different way, another general corpus on history of education in Antiquity which, in its turn, cause the creation of a new sort of the anthologies considering not only Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, Quintilian and Plutarch's points of view.

The new approaches of selecting and presenting the educational past in sourcebooks have appeared as a result of expansion in recognition of: 1) historical sources (widening the subject), 2) the learning settings types (deinstitutionalization in historical and pedagogical reconstructions of the Antiquity which has involved a wider range of educational practices and teaching space into the field of consideration), 3) ways of their studying (polidisciplinarism). The inclusion of historical texts into the anthologies devoted to modern pedagogical problems, drawing attention to evidence of different pedagogical environments and the processes happening in them, attracting new ways of their exploring, perhaps, will give a chance for teacher education to involve contemporaries into the history who are really suitable for interplay with them.

Acknowledgments

The article is written as part of the government assignment for FSBSI “Institute for Strategy of Education Development” for 2017-2019 (No 27.8089.2017).

References

1. Bailyn, B. (1960). Education in the Forming of American Society. New York: Vintage Books.
2. Banta, M. (1993). Why Use Anthologies? or One Small Candle Alight in a Naughty World, American Literature, 65 (2), 330-334. https://doi.org/10.2307/2927347
3. Christesen, P. & Kyle, D.G. (Eds.). (2013). Companion to Sport and Spectacle in Greek and Roman Antiquity. Hoboken: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118609965
4. Cremin, L.A. (1965). The Wonderful World of Ellwood Patterson Cubberley: An Essay on the Historiography of American Education. N.Y.: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
5. Cubberly, E.P. (Ed.). (1920) Readings in the history of education. A collection of sources and readings to illustrate the development of educational practice, theory, and organization. Cambridge (Mass.): Houghton Mifflin Company.
6. Gardner, J.F. & Wiedemann T. (Eds.). (1991). The Roman Household: A Sourcebook. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203324059
7. Glebovsky, V.A. (Ed.). (1903). Drevnie pedagogicheskie pisateli v biografiyakh i obraztsakh [Ancient Pedagogical Writers in Biographies and Samples]. St. Petersburg.: Soykin. [In Rus.]
8. Guiraud, P. (1995). Chastnaya I obschestvennaya zhizn’ grekov [La vie privée et la vie publique des Grecs]. St. Petersburg: Aleteya. [In Rus.]
9. Hubbard, T.K. (Ed.). (2003). Homosexuality in Greece and Rome: A Sourcebook of Basic Documents. Orlando: University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520223813.001.0001
10. Joyal, M., McDougall, I., & Jardley, J.C. (Eds.). (2009). Greek and Roman Education. A Sourcebook. London: Routledge.
11. Lauter, P. (2004). Taking Anthologies Seriously. MELUS, 29(3/4), 19-39. https://doi.org/10.2307/4141840
12. Lefevere, A. (Ed.). (1992). Translation/History/Culture. A Sourcebook. L.: Routledge.
13. Lewis, H.G. (1967). Bailyn and Cremin on Cubberley and History of Education. Educational Theory, 17 (1), 56-59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.1967.tb00285.x
14. Melikova, S., Zhebelev, S. & Zelinsky, F. (Eds.). (1916). Pedagogicheskie vozzreniya Platona i Aristotelya [Plato and Aristotle's Pedagogical Views]. Petrograd: School and life. [In Rus.]
15. Monroe, P. (Ed.). (1901). Source Book of the History of Education for the Greek and Roman Period. New York. NY: Macmillan.
16. O’Hear, A. & Sidwell, M. (Eds.). (2009). The School of Freedom. A Liberal Education Reader from Plato to the Present Day. Charlottesville, VA: Imprint Academic.
17. Pernot, L. (2008). À l’école des anciens. Professeurs, élèves et étudiants. Précédé d’un entretien avec Jacqueline de Romilly. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
18. Saffroy, M., & Noël, G. (Eds.). (1897). Les Écrivains pédagogues de l'antiquité: extraits des oeuvres de Xénephon, Platon, Aristote, Quintilien, Plutarque. Paris: Ch. Delagrave.
19. Sage, M. (Ed.). (1996). Warfare in Ancient Greece: A Sourcebook. New York, NY: Routledge.
20. Sweet, W. E. & Segal, E. (Eds.). (1987). Sport and Recreation in Ancient Greece: A Sourcebook with Translations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.