Kentucky we are not doing our duty in or by Massachusetts or New York. It is no excuse to say that we have troubles of our own-let other States take care of their difficulties. Such a doctrine is untenable; it is suicidal. We are tied up together in one bundle. We are parts of a single organism. If one member suffers all the members suffer with it. It is the ruse of the Arch-enemy to camouflage the issue and make us believe we have nothing whatever to do with it. They claim that what they do with their things or with their children does not concern us. A moment's thought, however, will make us see that injustice, greed, and crime in one part of our country injures the whole body of our people. Our legislators and lawgivers must conserve the welfare and the rights of all alike. No right is greater or more precious to us all than the right of our children to protection from that which assails their physical, mental and moral life and happiness. It is to conserve these that the voters go to the polls. It is their tremendous responsibility to find out what the facts are about the Child Labor situation.-THE EDITOR.

REQUIREMENTS FOR COLLEGE ENTRANCE TO WHAT? One of the great problems of the secondary schools is to provide adequate preparation for college under the conditions prescribed by the College Entrance Board. The difficulty comes from the fact that the recognized educational objectives of such schools call for training that admittedly does not prepare sufficiently for the successful passing of the entrance tests. But why should they not? That they do not may be seen even in the university high schools where the courses are shaped according to the highest pedagogical standards, but where these are consciously abandoned in the case of students preparing for college for the sake of giving the more formal drills and exercises that will best prepare for the one specific purpose of passing the set examinations of the College Entrance Board. Does this not present a conflict that should be fought out within the universities themselves? When the universities are consistent in this matter, the problem will no longer be an added, artificial one for the high schools.

The colleges of education and the departments of education are leading in the development of new standards, and methods, and tests, through the application of educational psychology and of the various social sciences. No one questions their right to do this, and the secondary schools are showing a surprising readiness to avail themselves of the results of the most recent research and of the recommendations of the educational experts. But not so the other departments and colleges in the universities. They, unaffected by recent educa

tional progress, are demanding the same sort of preparation as has been required for decades. Why should not the colleges of education turn their attention to the other departments of the universities? Is it possible that the educational process in the university becomes so different from that recognized in the lower schools that it is not amenable to the suggestions of the professional educators? Must a very old standard, knowledge of subject matter, be the only objective in college instruction?

It probably will be, so long as the departments are manned by scholars who are experts in research but who care nothing about education. Is it not time that the university authorities call for a few "surveys" within the field of college education by the scientific experts in the departments of education, and then inaugurate belated policies of reconstruction to bring the college curricula and methods up to date? When this has been done, the need for the old type of college entrance test will have passed and a real, progressive develop-ment of the whole, complex, educational process from high school to and through college will have been made possible.

C. A. COCKAYNE, Springfield, Mass.

ON TEACHING ENGLISH IN THE HIGH SCHOOL. It is not unnatural, it seems, to expect more than commonplace qualifications in teachers-though this expectation does not necessarily assure us of the acquisition of individuals so endowed. Nor is it unreasonable to expect teachers to know the subjects they teach. That is the primary qualification, as it should be. But just as essential is it that teachers, supervisors, and others understand the application of their knowledge to the interests and capacities of the pupils. Mathematics, the sciences, modern languages, and the classics are more easily adjusted. than is English.

It has been said that at best we cannot teach English-we can only talk about it pleasantly. If this be so-though we are not willing to admit it-then it is the more necessary that the talk be made pleasant for the listeners. In high schools, rhapsodizing on the charms, delicacies, imagery, and emotional content of a selection of prose or poetry is not going to lead to a deluge of requests on the town library for the works of Keats, Browning, Henry James, or even Shakespeare. Such parading of well intended but poorly conceived instruction inspires the student to the inelegant but adequate characterization, "bunk."

Certainly such a dissection and study of prose and poetry has its

place; but that place is not in the high school. Frequent exposure of students to the teachers' excursions into ecstatic descriptions will leave them with the idea that English is a "funny thing to hand out to us," with despair, without the knowledge of how to write a correct sentence, without knowing or wanting to know a good book, and possibly with a headache.

In view of what some teachers of English are attempting in their classes, it is not at all surprising that their students leave school without knowing how to write a correct sentence and without any desire to read a valuable book. During the past few months we have seen and heard of instances of useless-if not senseless-practices which ought to take the prize without further competition. One teacher of Sophomore English asked his students to write on "Shelley and His Influence on His Time." Here is a subject worthy of a doctor's thesis given to immature boys and girls who have neither the information nor the ability to correlate the information if they had it. Nor have they the desire to know anything about what influence Shelley had. The boys would rather discuss "The Influence of Keeping Training on Success in Athletics"-and justly so. If they were allowed to handle this topic, we could look forward to honest effort. But perhaps this topic has not the semblance of culture which some desire so much. Still another teacher was at a loss to understand why it was that her junior class was unable to grasp the technical details of short-story writing-which she was reading from a book. And she felt it was most strange that the class showed no interest. Perhaps the mystery would disappear if she gave a little thought to the proper place for a discussion of that sort. Yet another instructor was surprised to find that his senior class had lost its enthusiasm for the work, and that it had not acquired those fundamentals which are necessary for clear, grammatical use of English. The explanation for this attitude was beyond him, for had he not read prose and poetry to his students? Had he not pointed out to them the charm, rhyme, vigor, fluency, and the onomatopoetic specimens of these selections? Of course, he had! But what can one do with dull, unappreciative minds? Nothing. And this instructor goes right on "enlightening" the youth.

Instead of attempting to generate a superficial "appreciation" for literature, it seems more reasonable to believe that more could be accomplished if students were allowed to write on topics on personal experience, observation, or opinion; if they were given instruction in "applied grammar"; if they were shown why punctuation is neces

sary; if they were taught that principles of effective writing could be applied to their own homely subjects.

From this it is not to be inferred, however, that literature has no place in secondary school. To insist on that would indeed be stupid. But the implications are that literature as taught by misguided enthusiasts (as in the several cases cited) should have no place in the high school. Shakespeare, Macaulay, even Burke, and yet even Browning can be made to appeal to the student by means of proper applications and by removing the tatters of hackneyed characterizations. But certainly this appeal cannot be achieved by becoming. confused in the discussion of the æsthete.

FRANK S. FREEMAN, Cambridge, Mass.

The United States Civil Service Commission, in co-operation with the National Vigilance Committee of the Associated Advertising Clubs of the World, is engaged in an active campaign against so-called civil service schools which deceive the public in their advertising, or whose practices are otherwise unfair. These so-called schools claim to give instruction in preparation for examinations for the Federal civil service. Recently, on complaint of the Civil Service Commission and the National Vigilance Committee, the Federal Trade Commission issued an order to "cease and desist" against the Civil Service School, Inc., Washington, D. C. The order prohibits the use of the term "civil service" in the school title, on the ground that such use gives the impression that the school is connected with the Government. The order also commands discontinuance of certain other alleged unfair practices. The Civil Service Commission and the National Vigilance Committee will at once lodge complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against approximately 20 other such schools, including three in Washington, D. C., which use the term "civil service" in their titles, or are believed to be otherwise unfair.

Book Reviews

FIRST YEAR ALGEBRA. By William J. Milne and Walter F. Downey. American Book Company.

This is a successful book of long standing, revised by a member of the National Committee on Mathematical Requirements. The result is most pleasing. There is an easy, interesting approach, with much practice in translation, equations, and problems of a very simple nature. Then come graphs and formulas, followed by the fundamental operations. Factoring is reduced to three cases, as it should be. Fractions are limited to the easier kinds. Variation is treated in a short and sane manner. There is, of course, a chapter on numerical trigonometry. This topic has come to stay. The word "transpose" is not favored. All teachers may not approve of this, but I think the idea is right. While the word may shorten the work slightly, it does not imply mathematical operation, and is therefore unsafe in first year algebra. Self-reliance and accuracy are encouraged by checking. There are timed tests, which are also becoming a fixture in the best algebras. I heartily commend this book to teachers of mathematics.-Robert R. Goff.

STANDARD ALGEBRA. By William J. Milne and Walter F. Downey. American Book Co.

The first part of this book is practically the same as the First Year Algebra by the same authors. It then goes on from Quadratic Equations through further Variation and Factoring, a good chapter on Logarithms, the Binomial Theorem and the Progressions. Continued emphasis is placed upon the equation, the problem, the formula, and the graph. At the end is a generous amount of supplementary material. The two books meet in every way modern requirements in high school algebra.— Robert R. Goff.

PHYSICAL TRAINING LESSONS. Games, Dances, Stunts, Track and Field Work. By William A. Stecher, M.P.E. $2.50. John Joseph McVey,

Physical training directors will find this a very satisfactory volume. All the McVey physical training books are right up to date, attractively illustrated, and written by the best specialists on the subject. This book is especially rich in detailed directions for exercises that will symmetrically develop ordinary grade pupils. Special rates are promised for "adoptions" by Boards of Education.