很早，就有一种把小孩集中起来送到乡下的想法。在卢梭的《爱弥儿》那里，城市则被直接斥为“坑陷人类的深渊”。与卢梭思想一脉相承的裴斯泰洛齐，他所倡导的要素教学法本身也是一套穷人教育学，或伯恩斯坦所说的作为再生产系统的可见的教育学。现实中，经常可以见到那种对于乡土文化与劳动教育的强调，对城市的教育学意蕴也未真正认可。尽管要素教学法最终指向城市，反映的却是乡土中追求实用性或功能满足的那一面。当今那样一种“‘关于’乡土的文化”，也只是城市社会的一种文化乡愁。甚至马克思的教育与生产劳动相结合，本身也是城市取向的。城市有闲者那种总是试图突破边界、呈现自我、追求技艺的本能、做力量的炫耀性展示、触摸另一个世界的教育学，正是帮助我们跳出农村那种狭隘的共同体的教育依仗。看不到城市与乡村的相互贯通，我们就会从根本上误解乡土与成长。

Long ago, there was an idea for people to gather children to the countryside. In Rousseau's “Emile: on education”, the city is directly criticized as “an abyss to sink the humanity”. Pestalozzi’s Element Pedagogy, which is in line with Rousseau’s ideas, is also a set of pedagogy tailored for the poor, or what Bernstein called “visible pedagogy” as a reproduction system. In reality, the familiar emphasis on rural culture and labor education has not truly recognized the pedagogical implications of the city too. Although the Element Pedagogy is ultimately oriented to the city, what it reflects are still the sides such as utility or functional satisfaction pursued in the rural area. And “the culture ‘about’ the rural” is actually just a cultural nostalgia of urban society. Even Marx’s combination of education and productive labor is itself oriented towards the city. The pedagogy of the city or leisure to break through boundaries, present ourselves, pursue skills, show off our strength, and touch another world, is precisely the educational reliance that helps us break free from the narrow rural community. If we cannot see the interconnection between the city and the countryside, we will fundamentally misunderstand the rural community and the growth.