practice has yet been adequate to stop it, so strong is the power of habit and tradition. The remedy must be found, if at all, in a better appreciation on the part of teachers of the relative values of subject matter for its practical, disciplinary, or culture ends. As a rule no effort is made in our elementary and higher schools to grade information according to any standard of relative values. All the topics of arithmetic, of history, and of geography are taught by most teachers as of equal or nearly equal importance. As a proof of this, witness the kind of questions generally called for upon examinations in our best schools and colleges; consider also the specific values attached to questions of various sorts. The absence of any just standard for determining relative values will be apparent everywhere.

This leads to the statement that when the broad distinction is made between studies that have a culture value mainly, and those that have a practical value merely, a sharply defined difference of method should be adopted in teaching. For example: whatever is needed for the uses of daily living should be so well and thoroughly learned that the processes, mental or physiological, should become automatic. We learn to walk, to move the arms and hands, to articulate, etc., so as to perform the normal acts automatically and without conscious effort. So the mental and physical processes of reading, and largely of writing, and of combining small numbers, etc. By frequent repetition all these acts become thoroughly mechanized, and the wise teacher will see to it that her instruction reaches the point where useful acts become fixed and invariable habits. The mistake is made when history and geography, which are essentially culture studies, are taught with the same end in view, to wit, the absolute fixing of this information by frequent repetition, so that it is reproduced with ease and certainty.

It was Voltaire, I believe, who said facetiously that all the geography a girl needed to know was "how to find the northeast bedroom," and all the chemistry, "how to make a kettle boil." We may be willing to extend Voltaires's categories of necessary information, but to treat all facts as of equal, or of anything like equal value, and to seek to reduce them to the automatic memory is the most common error in teaching. It exhibits a failure to estimate either the true ends of teaching or the relative values of different kinds of knowledge.

In general the method to be pursued in teaching practical studies, as distinguished from culture studies, may be broadly described as follows: the principle of the former should be that of repetition until certainty of automatic reproduction is secured. In all operations with the small numbers, in reading, spelling, etc., the end should be absolute memorizing-no halfway results; in other words, to mechanize the processes so completely as to relieve the mind from all conscious effort. Perfect and absolute memorization then, is the rule for practical studies.

But in culture studies, not so. Here the principle is that of unconscious absorption. For illustration: one may read a story by Scott or Dickens and unconsciously absorb the whole plot and development, and be profoundly and permanently impressed thereby, while having made no conscious effort to memorize any part of it. So all culture studies that have in view the enlargement of the intellectual horizon, the development of the sensibility, and the guidance and control of the will, should be studied upon the absorptive principle and never by forced memorizing, as though they were practical studies.

The carrying out of this principle would modify the teaching of geography, of history, and of literature to a remarkable extent. Instead of making the immediate end of such study the power to reproduce from memory certain facts, the aim should be rather to secure such a reaction upon the mind of the pupil as would enlarge the mental perspective, broaden the sympathies, strengthen the will, exalt the sentiments, and in general, conduce to the development of intelligence and character.

JERSEY CITY, N. J.

ADDISON B. POLAND.

VI.

EDITORIAL.

The argument of President Walker in regard to the education furnished by the American scientific schools, which appears in this issue of the EDUCATIONAL REVIEW, made up the major portion of his eloquent and striking address at the University Convocation at Albany. To graduates of literary colleges, and to teachers in those institutions, President Walker's conclusions may at first sight seem very radical, but it will be found a task of great difficulty to controvert them. It is hard for those accustomed to another order of things to understand that a deepening and widening civilization has altered the content of education-or better, has broadened it—while retaining its form. The objects and ideals of intellectual and moral culture are the same that they have always been since systematic education began. But the path to this goal is no longer a single or a narrow one. Science, as well as letters, history as well as philosophy, can afford that mental discipline and culture that the world prizes so highly.

It is not impossible, however, that President Walker has too constantly in mind the admirable institution over which he himself presides, in making his generalizations. Even the school of science or technology needs in its curriculum some instruction in the English language and literature, in history and in economics. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology furnishes this; but the same cannot be said of many other schools of similar character. The fault of the technically trained man in this country too often is that he knows nothing but his technique. His intellectual sympathies are narrow and his vision limited. It is of the essence of the old humanities to guard against these faults, and for that reason literary and historical studies should have some representation in every scientific or technical course of study.

After considerable delay, the managers of the World's Columbian Exposition have appointed a director of the de

partment of liberal arts, which, in the classification adopted, includes education. It is highly creditable to the intelligence and good judgment of Director-General Davis that his nominees should have been such competent and representative men as President Daniel C. Gilman, Professor Herbert B. Adams, and Dr. Selim H. Peabody. Neither President Gilman nor Professor Adams felt able to accept the position, and while their decisions were greatly regretted, the acceptance of the place by Dr. Peabody renders it certain that education will occupy a dignified and important place at the World's Fair. Dr. Peabody has just retired from the presidency of the University of Illinois, and will, it is understood, be able to devote his whole time to the organization of the department of liberal arts.

On March 28 next occurs the three hundredth anniversary of the birth of John Amos Comenius, one of the greatest and most practical educational leaders of all time. In Germany elaborate preparations are making for the celebration of the event. A similar movement has been organized in this country, and appropriate exercises will be held at Columbia College, in March next, under the auspices of the department of philosophy and education in that institution. The committee having the matter in charge are: Dr. William T. Harris, Commissioner of Education; Professor Herbert B. Adams, of Johns Hopkins University; Professor Paul H. Hanus, of Harvard University; C. W. Bardeen, of Syracuse, N. Y.; Rev. Edward Rondthaler, of Salem, N. C.; and Rev. Robert de Schweinitz, of Bethlehem, Pa.; together with the professor of philosophy in Columbia College.

It may fairly be doubted whether three more successful educational meetings were ever held than those of the American Institute of Instruction, the New York University Convocation, and the National Educational Association in July last. The attendance at each was very large, and the tone of the papers and discussions was healthier and more serious than usual. As was quite generally predicted, the experiment of holding Round Table Conferences of specialists in connection with the general meeting at Toronto was very successful. They are to be introduced hereafter at the meetings of the

Department of Superintendence and the American Institute of Instruction. The most obvious criticism on the Albany meeting is that too many 'subjects were placed on the programme, and the rules as to five and ten minute speeches, which were so frequently and emphatically announced, were not enforced until late in the meeting. In 1892 neither of these criticisms should be possible. At Toronto the generous hospitality of the Canadians made everything run happily and smoothly, and the social side of the meeting was unusually pleasant and helpful. To Minister Ross, and his deputy, Mr. Millar; to Principal Kirkland; and above all to the tireless energy and unfailing thoughtfulness of Inspector Hughes, the National Association owes a lasting debt of gratitude.

A new and very important step was taken at Toronto at the first meeting of the new Board of Directors of the National Association. A resolution was introduced, and unanimously carried, authorizing and directing the President to appoint a committee of three to consider and report a plan by which some portion of the annual income of the Association may hereafter be devoted to encouraging and rewarding original investigation and research in the field of education. The committee as appointed, consists of Nicholas Murray Butler of New Jersey, William T. Harris of the District of Columbia, and James H. Baker of Colorado.

The opinion was strongly expressed at Toronto that the time has come when the Association should assume the responsibilities attached to its great size and importance. The mere reading of papers and holding debates is not enough. The Association should assume the responsible leadership which belongs to it and become the patron of pedagogical scholarship. The Association stands not for the lower or the higher education, but for united education. Its broad view takes in the whole series of institutions from the kindergarten to the university, and it esteems the one as highly as the other. can and should do for American education what the Institute of France and the Royal Society do for literature and science in their respective countries.

It

Signs multiply that education is exciting greater interest and attracting more attention among the public at large than