4. The best mode of government for youth in large collections, is certainly a desideratum not yet attained with us. It may well be questioned whether fear, after a certain age, is the motive to which we should have ordinary recourse. The human character is susceptible of other incitements to correct conduct, more worthy of employ, and of better effect. Pride of character, laudable ambition, & moral dispositions are innate correctives of the indiscretions of that lively age; and when strengthened by habitual appeal & exercise, have a happier effect on future character, than the degrading motive of fear; hardening them to disgrace, to corporal punishments, and servile humiliations, cannot be the best process for producing erect character. The affectionate deportment between father & son offers, in truth, the best example for that of tutor & pupil;
Preach!
In executing their duties to organize and govern the University of Virginia, the Commissioners created 5 provisions for the education of the youth. Of interest is #4, in which the Commissioners discuss in length how best to govern the students. Wisely, they deduce that "fear" does not create men of "erect character." Instead, they believed the act of appealing to one's "pride of character" and "moral dispositions" when governing young men would better produce the desired effect. The Commission further supports their position by saying that ideally the tutor/pupil relationship should emulate the father/son relationship as the best means to motivate and govern the student body. "Fear" and "corporal punishment" are merely degrading methods of governing and should be avoided in all situations. I believe in the US education system fear is used to much for motivation and I think it is completely unproductive!