That divine appreciation of soul qualities and skill to embody them in lifeless marble are not developed simply by striving after physical perfection. That which constitutes the chief charm of life, that which makes life worth living, springs out of the proper training and development of the intellectual and spiritual. Greek education had in it provisions for the development of that wonderful intellectual life which will always remain its greatest glory. That their ceaseless practice of gymnastics contributed somewhat to the attainment of this intellectual superiority, thru the development of healthier and stronger bodies, needs no argument. That it also provided a better body, a clearer brain, a more perfect instrument for the mind to use, and established closer and more harmonious relations between mind and body, can be promptly accepted; but that it was the chief factor in the development of their intellectual superiority is pressing the argument too far, and is likely to produce a reaction. As one who believes very strongly in physical training in our public schools, and particularly in a larger introduction of it in the form of manual training, and who has advocated, to the best of his ability, the necessity of thoroly correlating and co-ordinating the activities of hand and brain, I wish to say that I believe it the part of wisdom not to make such broad claims. Here is another statement which is open to discussion: "We must not forget that all exercises are as much activities of the brain as of the muscles." Evidently in this statement the brain stands for the mental activities. Will anyone, after careful consideration, hold that all exercises, particularly in the schoolroom, are as much activities of the brain as of the muscles, or as much activities of the muscles as of the brain or the mind? There might be some advantages to be gained in the process of instruction, if these conditions of equal activity always prevailed. But we know they vary greatly, insomuch that we name this a physical and that a mental exercise, because of the predominance of one or the other of these activities. The act of walking may become almost entirely a physical activity. The act of reading at first is largely a mental activity. Educators have realized the necessity of arousing and bringing into exercise all the powers of the child, increasing thus the points of contact, and thereby hastening as well as fixing more permanently the learning process. The "trot method" in teaching reading, as it is sometimes jokingly called, is wisely based upon this idea. To place the words, "Run and shut the door," on the blackboard, and have the learner read and do the thing written, is to bring into the act of learning nearly all the child's powers, increase his interest, increase the points of contact in the learning process, and make more permanent his acquisition. But in the schoolroom exercises there is so little opportunity of combining in equal proportions the physical and mental that, unfortunately, this happy combination is almost wholly divorced, and the learning process so often becomes a lifeless process, having in it but little of even healthy mental activity. We certainly need to press this point, that school work is entirely too much directed toward the vain attempt to call out and develop the intellectual at the expense of the physical; yes, and it should be added, at the expense of the intellectual as well. My argument for placing greater emphasis on physical training in our schools is that thru it our children may have stronger, healthier bodies, which may become the readier servants of their minds; clearer brains, which may acquire keener powers of investigation, and thus make possible the development of stronger mental fiber and the attainment of a broader, nobler life. DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE INSTRUCTION SECRETARY'S MINUTES FIRST SESSION.-THURSDAY, JULY 11, 1901 The department met in Room 111, Central High School, Detroit, at 3 P. M., and was called to order by President N. A. Harvey. Music-solo, "The Night Has a Thousand Eyes," Lambert-by Miss Grace Bert. President Harvey delivered an address on "A Plea for the Study of Educational Philosophy by Teachers of Science." A paper on "What the Teacher of Science Can Do to Increase the Estimation in Which Scientific Studies Are Held" was read by W. S. Blatchley, state geologist for Indiana, Indianapolis, Ind. A paper on "The Status of Science Instruction in the Secondary Schools of the State of New York" was presented by S. Dwight Arms, inspector of secondary schools for the University of the State of New York, Albany, N. Y. Joseph Carter, of Illinois; Elmer A. Redman, of New York; and C. D. Lowry, of Illinois, were appointed Committee on Nominations. Discussion of the papers followed by C. D. Lowry, Chicago, Ill.; S. Dwight Arms, Palmyra, N. Y.; W. H. Norton, Mt. Vernon, Ia.; J. E. Armstrong, Chicago; J. A. Merrill, West Superior, Wis.; and Mr. Nichols, Chicago, Ill. SECOND SESSION.- FRIDAY, JULY 12 The meeting was called to order by President Harvey, and the following program was rendered: Music solo, "The Dandelion," Protheroe-by Miss Grace Bert. "Agriculture as a Science for the Elementary Schools," by Joseph Carter, superin. tendent of city schools, Champaign, Ill. "The Relation of Physical Geography to Other Subjects," by W. H. Norton, professor of geology, Cornell College, Mt. Vernon, Ia. Discussion followed by Mr. Jacques Redway, Mt. Vernon, N. Y.; Mr. C. F. Dutton, West High School, Cleveland, O.; and William H. Snyder, Worcester, Mass. In accordance with report of the Committee on Nominations, the following officers were elected for the ensuing year: President-Franklin W. Barrows, Buffalo, N. Y. The following resolution was adopted: Resolved, That the sincere thanks of the Department of Science Instruction are due, and are hereby tenred, to the school authorities of the city of Detroit, for the use of a convenient room for meeting; to the local committee, for the completeness of its arrangements, including the graceful reception of Thursday evening; those who furnished music; and to the local press, for its courtesies. On motion, the department adjourned. CHAS. NEWELL COBB, Secretary. PAPERS AND DISCUSSIONS PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS—A PLEA FOR THE STUDY OF EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY BY TEACHERS OF SCIENCE N. A. HARVEY, HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE, CHICAGO NORMAL SCHOOL, CHICAGO, ILL. There is a general feeling that science and philosophy are essentially opposed to each other. As each is commonly understood, there may be some reason for this belief. The scientist believes that the philosopher lives in the realm of intangible ideas, and projects from his ratiocination unprovable propositions. The philosopher is inclined to look upon the inan of science as one who is so engrossed with the details of his subject that he is unable to see the relation it holds to the world in general, on both its material and spiritual sides. The grounds for this opposition are passing away. Philosophers are more and more willingly adopting scientific methods, and scientists more willingly push their conclusions beyond the limits of visible and tangible things. Something of the contemptuous indifference of science toward philosophy in general has been manifested toward educational philosophy in particular. There is probably some justification for such an attitude, but I believe that it will soon be recognized that science and philosophy are necessary to each other and neither can be neglected. There is no disposition or intention in the present paper to criticise adversely science or science teachers. But he is a true friend who indicates to us how we may improve our work. This paper is prepared for the purpose of indicating an element in science teaching in general, and high-school science in particular, that is of very considerable importance if science is to maintain its position as a major subject in our schools. The past forty years have witnessed a remarkable revolution in habits of thought. The apotheosis of Darwin and Lyell and Agassiz and Wallace renders it almost impossible for us to realize that there was a time when the teaching of science in schools was not felt to be a necessity. The startling nature of the theories discussed, the brilliancy of their demonstrations, the efficiency of the methods adopted by these leaders of the scientific renaissance, led to a demand for the introduction of scientific studies into the secondary schools. Hence originated a demand for teachers of science that could not be supplied. The methods adopted were crude and bookish. Mr. Forbes has given some amusing illustrations of this phase of science teaching. One teacher asked a young lady to what class of animals the turtle belonged. She thought it was a crustacean, having in mind, no doubt, a pie with its upper and lower crust and the filling between. The teacher decided it was a mollusk, because it had a shell. Next came a demand for laboratories with improved facilities and a reasonable comprehension of the possibilities of science teaching. This rendered the old-style teacher useless and incapable of filling the position of teacher of science. His place has been supplied in part by the young university graduate, trained in university methods of laboratory research, but whose inclinations and training rank him rather as a scientist than as a teacher. He is inclined to teach the subject rather than to teach the pupil. His eyes are fixed upon the recent discoveries in science rather than upon the discussions of educational methods. He is likely to be found at the meetings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which is very commendable, if he did not also habitually neglect the meetings of the National Educational Association. The result has not been altogether satisfactory. There is a feeling, more or less prevalent, that the claims of science have not been fully justified. This finds expression in occasional articles in educational journals; in the recent great gain in the history and language courses over science in high schools; and in the refusal of colleges and universities generally to demand knowledge of science as a requirement for admission to college. I can but feel that there is some ground for this coolness toward scientific subjects. My own experience would lead me to say that there may be some reason for the position that universities assume. I have recently had occasion to teach two classes a day in physics for three successive years. One was a class of high-school graduates, all of whom had studied physics. The other class had not studied physics. The two For three successive years classes did identical work in the laboratory. the tabulated records of the accuracy of data obtained in the laboratory showed that the class which had never before studied physics exceeded the accuracy of the high-school graduates in the proportion of about 7 to 3. It was a case peculiarly favorable for comparison, and I feel sure that the comparison is indicative of an actual condition in those classes. The only explanation that I can suggest is that the teaching of the high-school graduates had been conducted under the influence of improper ideals; that the teachers were physicists rather than teachers; that, in other words, they needed to study educational philosophy, and to get a rational knowledge of the content of the subject. Educational philosophy has a particular problem to solve. It seeks first of all to determine the laws of thought. It is a necessary assumption in all our attempts at education that, within certain limits, human minds are alike. It would seem that every teacher ought to know as clearly as possible the way in which the human mind acts. Educational philosophy seeks also to determine the way in which the mind grows. The teacher usually works upon the young and immature mind for the purpose of enabling it to reach a final maturity greater than it would without such training. No teacher who stops to think about the matter will deny that this, too, is a very necessary thing for the teacher to know. Educational philosophy tries to determine what is the purpose of education and what is the end toward which the efforts of the teacher are consciously directed. Here is a place in which teachers and philosophers are likely to differ widely. Every teacher will probably acknowledge that it is necessary to have a fixed aim, but that the aim is so apparent and so self-evident that no study of philosophy is necessary to have it clearly before him. The aim and purpose are not so apparent to the philosopher. Finally, educational philosophy seeks to determine the content of the subject. That is, it tries to determine what the subject contains that can be utilized by the teacher for the purpose of leading the student to the real end of education. If there has been one advance in educational truth better demonstrated than another, it is that in schools for general education the knowledge of the facts acquired is not the chief value to be derived from a particular study. There is something more important than that, even in science. Just as the benefit derived from the study of algebra is not to be looked for in the answers to the problems that the student so laboriously solves, and the value of the study of Latin comes not from the knowledge of the historical facts that the pupil learns while reading the Latin language, so the value of the study of science does not depend upon the knowledge that the pupil acquires, but upon the power the student acquires while gaining that knowledge. In physics one set of exercises may be substituted for another without any disadvantage. It makes no difference whether one selection of animals is studied in zoology or another, provided other things are equal; and one set of exercises in chemistry may be a full equivalent for another series, and yet it would be wrong to give both. In fact, there is recognized a fair degree of equivalency among scientific subjects; something in which they agree among themselves and differ from other subjects in their power to influence the mental habits of students. In our work in zoölogy we study the structure and life of animals, but if my classes fail to see and to recognize the processes by which a general concept of a group is formed; if they fail to discriminate and compare; if they do not get into the habit of analyzing a specimen before them and of examining it part by part; if they do not learn what is involved in a logical definition; and, more than this, if they do not carry this habit of mind into every other subject in school, I feel that my work |