This essay tries to show that J. F. Herbart (1776-1841) is “the living Herbart (der lebendige Herbert)” not only in educational theories, but also in practical school educational reform. In general, Herbart has been considered as the past theorist of education to whom nobody refers. In addition, his educational concept “educative instruction (erziehender Unterricht)” has been regarded as one which has no effect in the history of educational theories and there is no theorist of education who cites his idea. Although H. Nohl (1879-1960) gave a high evaluation saying that “Herbart is still alive”, he and his “educative instruction” are playing a minor role in the history of education nowadays when compared with “progressive education”.<br/> This view could be understandable only in the limited context of the study of Herbart in Japan. On the other hand, from the viewpoint of German pedagogy and school education, another insight is acquired: Herbart is alive in the true sense. In other words, his concept “educative instruction” is alive not only in philosophy of education but also in an actual use in the state of Nordrhein-Westfalen in Germany. His thought and method gave a mainspring of the elementary school reform in the state in the 1980s and was incorporated into the basic guideline of the revised curriculum of 1985 in Nordrhein-Westfalen. In the latest curriculum guideline in elementary school in Nordrhein-Westfalen, which was implemented in 2008, Herbart’s theory is one of the references and has led the development of the curriculum. Of course, many studies that eliminated prejudice against Herbart also exist in Japan. Unfortunately, these studies have overlooked the fact that there is a certain correlation between Herbart and school reform.<br/> The interests in this paper are related to the following two research questions. How Herbart was interpreted in Germany in the 1980s? What caused the classical concept of “educative instruction” included in the 1985 edition of the curriculum of study in Nordrhein-Westfalen? Through answering these questions, on the basis of the primary source about the curriculum revision, this paper aims at demonstrating that Herbart and his “educative instruction” have been a theoretical reference and guided the actual curriculum development.<br/> In order to achieve this purpose, the following three subjects must be examined. The first one is to clarify the overall structure of “educative instruction” described in the 1985 edition of the curriculum guideline by reference to its draft. The second one is to prove the relation between the “Elementary School Project Gievenbeck (Grundschulprojekt Gievenbeck)” and Herbart’s “educative instruction”. Dietrich Benner (1941-), who was a professor of the University of Münster at the time and a framer of the items about “educative instruction” in the curriculum guideline of 1985, had led the “Elementary School Project Gievenbeck” for school experiment from 1977 to 1982. He reinterpreted Herbart and his idea of “educative instruction” from the point of view of the “progressive education (Reformpädagogik)”. Through looking at the relation, on the basis of the primary source, we can connect the content of “educative instruction” described in the guideline with a theory and praxis of the school experiment Gievenbeck. The last one is to establish presumption that the incorporation of “educative instruction” into the curriculum of study of 1985 was due to the result of school experiment Gievenbeck. For this, it is necessary to investigate the close connection between winning the “Elementary School Award (Grundschulpreis) 1981” by this school experiment and the invitation from the “Nordrhein-Westfalen Elementary School Commission (Grundschulkommission)” to Benner.