O . 4 
 
 ON THE 
 
 TEACHING OF GRAMMAR 
 
 IN SCHOOLS. 
 
 A PAPER READ AT MANCHESTER, MARCH 12, 1887, 
 
 BY 
 
 A. ADAMSON. 
 
 Assistant Mistress in the Manchester High School. 
 
 PRINTED FOR 
 
 THE ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT-MISTRESSES. 
 
 London. 
 
 1888. 
 
1 
 
GRAMMAR, 
 
 My purpose in speaking of Grammar is not to enter into a discussion 
 of the science, but to give my opinions as to what I think has hitherto 
 hindered it from being useful in the school curriculum, and also mv idea 
 of the method in which it should be taught in schools. 
 
 In the first place I wish to quote here what Marcel, one of the most 
 able writers on Language says regarding the nature of grammar. 
 
 “ Grammar may be viewed in two lights — either as a collection of 
 rules which serve to guide us in the expression of thought, or an investi- 
 gation of the principles of language deduced from the nature and rela- 
 tions of the ideas to be represented. In the first light, grammar, apply- 
 ing only to the facts of one language is called • particular , and constitutes 
 an art ; in the second, grammar proposing to explain the nature of 
 words and their relations by the nature and relations of things which 
 they represent, and also to account for the mode of using them, by a 
 consideration of the mental operations on which it depends, is said to be 
 general , because it embraces the principles of all languages ; it then 
 constitutes a science , being founded on the universal and immutable laws 
 of external nature and of the hnman mincl. There are as many particular 
 grammars as there are languages, whereas there is only one general 
 grammar, one science of language. 
 
 “ The art of grammar gives rules for using the materials of one lan- 
 guage : the science gives the rationale of all the facts of language. The 
 art is local — the science is universal — its principles independent of 
 custom.” 
 
 Looking at grammar from both these sides it is easy to conclude that 
 it is a subject which should not be begun by young children. Ignorance 
 of the facts to be considered by particular grammar puts it beyond their 
 reach. The philosophical nature of the principles on which general 
 grammar rests puts the science above their capacity. Before attempting 
 the study of general grammar there must be a full development of the 
 reasoning faculties. There is no doubt that the almost universal dislike to 
 the study of grammar is accounted for by the fact that at an age when 
 general definitions expressing the nature of grammatical relations are in- 
 comprehensible to the pupil, grammars containing almost nothing but such 
 definitions are put in his hands. T A 1 n *'* 
 
 v? 
 
 O 
 
 I will illustrate some of the definitions 
 
4 
 
 given in what are regarded as the Lest grammar text-hooks of our day, I 
 think that they present riddles to a matured mind, rather than the simple 
 ideas suitable to a student beginning grammar. Before doing so I would 
 remark that it is no proof that a child understands a rule, to be able 
 to repeat it by heart, and even write correct exercises involving its 
 application. Many pupils attain a marvellously mechanical ease in 
 doing this, but the utterly unreasonable faults that crop up when the 
 real meaning of the rule has not been got at. It is only a sort of surface 
 dexterity that they have acquired. To compel a child to learn these 
 definitions by heart may possibly be an excellent exercise for the me- 
 mory, with that I am not at present concerned, but I would insist that if 
 the child learns by heart without fully understanding what he learns, he 
 acquires words without ideas. 
 
 But the paramount object in the education of the young is acknow- 
 ledged to be the development of the intellectual powers. To exercise 
 the memory to the exclusion of the other faculties can hardly be de- 
 fended in accordance with that general idea of the end at which educa- 
 tion is aimed. 
 
 I take now one or two definitions as samples. I have selected them 
 from text-books in use at the present time, and though I do not propose 
 to discuss them at any length I would appeal to you as to the probabili- 
 ties of their being grasped by young pupils — by young pupils I mean 
 from 14 downwards. 
 
 1. In speaking of nouns, the following is the definition of “ Case.” 
 
 " Case is the form in which a noun or pronoun is used in order to 
 shew the relation in which it stands to some other word in the sentence.” 
 
 I think the grammarian felt that some further explanation was ne- 
 cessary, for he goes on to elucidate by the vulgar method of simile- 
 noting that “ case” means “falling” and that the Greeks took a fancy 
 to represent the form of a noun which is used when the subject of a 
 sentence by an upright line, and compared the other cases to lines sloping 
 or falling off from the upright line at different angles — what we call 
 Nominative was the upright. It then proceeds to state that gradually 
 the cases were reduced to three — and that Nominative and Objective are 
 alike. 
 
 This definition comes in very early in the grammar, and yet plainly 
 both from definition and explanation of it we see that the pupil is pre- 
 supposed to possess a competent knowledge of the part played by the 
 subject in a sentence. This alone would in my judgment involve 
 the conclusion that the formal definition of ‘case' should not be 
 introduced to the pupil, nor used by him until, from the basis of his 
 previous knowledge, he had been gradually led up to the point of form- 
 ing the definition for himself. Moreover there appears the word 
 ‘ relation.’ Now I think teachers of grammar would probably under 
 pressure be driven to agree with logicians, who have universally found 
 the idea of relation one of the most subtle problems forced upon them. 
 
5 
 
 Belated facts or words can be brought before a pupil in concrete exam- 
 ples, and from them he may gradually arrive at a general notion of what 
 he should understand by the word ‘ relation 5 in the abstract. 
 
 Grammarians evidently feel the difficulty of the word relation, as one 
 of them, in a grammar also extensively used, endeavours to simplify this 
 definition by giving it almost in the same words, but introducing a 
 synonyme of the word relation ,’ “ the bearing or relation which it has to 
 another word in the sentence.” I candidly confess that I do not think 
 even the introduction of the word ‘ bearing ' has cleared up the difficulty. 
 
 In the same grammar the common noun is remarked on as being 
 “ significant,” and it is explained that this means “ it denotes the objects 
 contained in the class, and connotes the attributes.” This again I think 
 presupposes that the student should have some knowledge of elementary 
 logic. 
 
 2. Now, a definition regarding the adjective— begins thus. " When 
 we speak of a thing, we often require to mention some quality or state 
 of the thing, or its number, or quantity, or some relation (here again 
 relation) in which it stands to ourselves or other things.” The definition 
 is then given “ an adjective is a word that limits the application of a 
 noun to that which has the quality or state, the quantity or relation 
 which the adjective denotes.” 
 
 Let us endeavour to explain fully to a young class the exact meaning 
 of “ limiting the application of a noun,” and I should think we may 
 retire somewhat discouraged from the battle. 
 
 One of the ordinary definitions of the adjective is : 
 
 “ An adjective is a w T ord added to a noun to express its quality.” 
 
 We see at once that this is most misleading. In the first place it would be 
 better to substitute the word ‘ joined ’ for ‘ added J (this is done by some 
 grammarians), ‘ added * gives the idea of coming after, and our adjective 
 comes before the noun. 2nd. — A word which expresses a quality is an 
 abstract noun— such as ‘whiteness/ 3rd. — An adjective is not always 
 joined to a noun or pronoun, “ I am getting rich.” 4th. — Adjectives give 
 an idea of more than quality ; some express number ; some a want of 
 quality. Suppose after the child had learned the rule by rote he got 
 the word “ distant ” to parse— or “ bloodless,” what qualities do these 
 two words express, and yet they are adjectives. 
 
 I make these remarks not specially with a view to criticise adversely 
 the particular definitions I have given, but to enforce the general 
 opinion that in the highly abstract definitions forming the delight of 
 grammarians, there can rarely be found perfect accuracy or precision. 
 
 From these three definitions I think we may conclude that the result 
 of putting such text-books into the hands of children will indeed be 
 most barren— more than it is disastrous. It instils a distaste for what 
 I am convinced is a study of the highest excellence— the study of the 
 grammatical structure of a language. By this I understand the acquisi- 
 tion of an insight into the functions of words based on an analysis of the 
 
6 
 
 familiar and practical knowledge the pupil must be assumed already to 
 possess of liis own language. This may be carried to any degree of 
 generality. The idea I thus express in regard to what constitutes 
 grammatical study is not in precise harmony with the current defini- 
 tions of grammar in our recognised text-books. I will mention a few of 
 these, and I believe that they will amply illustrate the difference between 
 the points of view from which grammar may be regarded. 
 
 1. Grammar is the art of speaking and writing correctly. 
 
 2. Grammar is the science which investigates the laws of language 
 and the art of using it correctly. 
 
 3. “ Grammar is the science of the facts and rules we have arrived 
 at concerning the words that make up a language.” This grammar 
 further enlarges the definition by saying, u We examine words in three 
 ways— 1st, as to their sounds — 2nd, meaning, form, and origin— 3rd, as 
 to the way they are combined with other words to make a statement.” 
 
 4. (From Poicteven’s French Grammar) : — 
 
 La grammaire est Part d’exprimer ses pensees d’une maniere conforme 
 aux rigles etablees par la raison et le bon usage. 
 
 As to 1.— Grammar is the art of speaking and writing correctly; I 
 think we shall find on investigation that no amount of study of the rules 
 of grammar will bring about as result a correct style of speech or writ- 
 ing. It is rather a curious fact that most of our celebrated grammarians 
 are notoriously bad in their style, and that many of the most polished 
 writings we possess were brought forth before grammars were known. 
 In France, Boileau, Moli£re, Racine, Corneille, wrote their master-pieces 
 before the publication of any regular French grammar. “ Rules impede 
 the imagination and fetter genius. It is mostly little minds which take 
 pleasure in dwelling on the minute elements of language.” 
 
 “Lindley Murray,” the grammarian is noted for inaccuracy in style, 
 and Dumarsais, a noted French grammarian, wrote in a style below me- 
 diocrity. In no school do you find grammar more rigorously taught 
 than in ‘Board Schools/ Normal Schools, etc., and yet the effect, as re- 
 gards correct speaking, has not as yet been conspicuous. I remember 
 well, in a Normal Training College in Scotland, where grammar was 
 one of the pet subjects — there were two mistresses noted for the success 
 with which they trained their classes for the yearly examination in the 
 subject, and yet one of them in speaking invariably used the expression 
 (( I had went,” and the other as invariably used a nominative pronoun 
 after a preposition (for you and I), and yet her classes were thoroughly 
 up in the rule that “ prepositions govern the objective case.” Correct 
 speaking is learned by imitation. Children from the first try and model 
 their language on what they daily hear. At a stage later the reading of 
 good authors is the best guide to correct speaking and writing. 
 
*7 
 
 The 3rd definition specifying an order in which language is to he 
 studied, viz. — sounds, words, sentences, brings out in the sharpest manner 
 the view of grammatical study, against which my remarks are directed. 
 The order seems to me an entire inversion of what is natural and appro- 
 priate. It is putting the cart before the horse. Long before a child is 
 supposed to begin grammar he has learned to speak and understand 
 sentences. How much more intelligible to him is a sentence than a 
 word, and a word than a letter. 
 
 What idea is presented to a child’s mind on learning at the beginning 
 of his grammatical studies that “ a vowel is an articulate sound,” and 
 that “ a consonant has no sound of itself.” Evidently, in teaching 
 grammar, we must start from the point which is intelligible to the child, 
 viz., sentences. Whatever is learned of one’s own language must be 
 learned by the analytic method, and herein lies the difference between 
 our own language and the general method adopted in learning a foreign 
 language, viz., the synthetical. The slow building up, word by word, 
 till the pupil arrives at the stage from which we start in the study of 
 our own language. I do not by any means assert that what I here call 
 the] synthetical method is the only one, or the best one for the study 
 of a foreign language. All I do say is, that the arguments on which I 
 depend, in regard to the study of our own language, do not apply in the 
 same manner when the language in question is a foreign one. 
 
 In the youngest classes the observing powers are brought into play 
 by means of the “ object lesson” There the child has his attention called 
 to things, their actions or uses, certain qualities belonging to them, &c. 
 The Reading lesson may then become a fruitful source of observation. 
 Copious questions should be made on the matter read, and here begins 
 the course of study which should be substituted for the grammar text- 
 books filled with dry and incomprehensible rules which make their 
 appearance in the school curriculum about the age of 8 or 9, even 
 earlier. Take the different sentences which the child is supposed to 
 understand, and shew from them that there are two necessary conditions 
 in using language. 1. — Something to speak about. 2. — Something to say 
 about it. Give examples of sentences containing these two simple ele- 
 ments, and make the pupil find examples. Exercise thoroughly in this. 
 Until the child is quite secure in this, keep him employed in picking 
 out these two parts in a sentence. He might then be allowed to call the 
 thing (or person) spoken of, the ‘ Subject,’ but I would certainly not 
 admit of the w r ord Predicate being used— rather use even the words 
 “ action, state, or ‘ what it does,’ 6 what it is,’ ” than this word w T hose 
 meaning is not clear. Logically speaking the predicate is not confined 
 to the verb. The pupil might then find out what the action may be in 
 lt present,” past, or future time, but do not let him get involved with all 
 the mass of tenses usually given. For long these three will suffice. 
 
8 
 
 This point having been reached — with the addition of the object, 
 which suffers the action, the attention will be called to the other words 
 in a sentence. Above all give many sentences, and let the child seek for 
 words of a like nature. He will gradually find that there are some 
 which are used to state properties of things— others which modify the 
 action or condition or property— others are substituted for the thing, &c. 
 
 During all this process leave to one side, altogether, the naming of 
 the parts of speech. Only let the child state the function of the word in 
 the sentence. He will soon observe the different facts, remark the 
 resemblance between some, and their differences, and afterwards bring 
 into one class all similar facts. He will generalise these and for himself 
 constitute rules. These rules are the formulae by which he accounts for 
 what he knows. 
 
 After the pupil is quite secure in this kind of exercise the names of 
 the parts of speech might be given as a kind of record. Be careful, 
 however, of one thing, do not attempt to give the meaning of the names 
 given to the parts of speech. There are certain inconsistencies in con- 
 nection with the names, which it would be well to keep out of sight ; as 
 for instance, “ abverb” if explained “ to a verb ” (as it is often done) 
 how will you account for very in very rich 1 
 
 The question lately arose, regarding grammar, as to whether parsing 
 or analysis should come first. Parsing is only analysis in its more ex- 
 tended form. The distinction between parsing and analysis is that ex- 
 pressed in French, between U Ana lyse grammaticale—U Analyse logique . 
 I think the logical analysis naturally comes first, as the very fact of 
 giving the function of a word in a sentence must presuppose an analysis 
 of the sentence in which it occurs. 
 
 It has often been a disputed question as to whether a grammar text- 
 book should be used in a class. My idea of the method of teaching 
 grammar would, of course, preclude the idea of a text-book. In grammar, 
 as in arithmetic, no cut and dried rules should be placed before the pupil; 
 he should work up to the rule and formulate it himself. I do not say 
 there would be harm in a text book after the pupil has gone through 
 the process of analysing, first simply, then more fully, and finally classify- 
 ing the parts of speech ; but I confess I see little need for it. A child 
 requires no printed rules to say, “ The effect of putting your finger in 
 the fire will be to bum it.” 
 
 And now a few words as to the writing out the results of analysis. 
 Most of us are acquainted with the elaborate diagrams made out for 
 that purpose — with many headings. These are very unsatisfactory. It 
 is impossible to fit every sentence into these diagrams. Some sentences 
 have few elements in them, some many, and the consequence is — vacant 
 spaces. I have over and over again seen the despair this has raised in 
 
9 
 
 the breast of the unfortunate pupil, and the attempts to fill them up 
 with little stray conjunctions, &c. In these diagrams also, it is not easy 
 to shew the real relations of words, phrases, and sentences to one an- 
 other. I think the clearest method is that shewn by “ Fitch ” in his 
 Lessons on Education, where the words are placed one before the other 
 and numbered, those forming each clause bracketed and lettered ; should 
 some words be separated from their own clause — a note to that effect is 
 beside them. At the end is a summary of the letters, shewing the rela- 
 tions of the clauses to one another. 
 
 Having reached this stage in grammar, and having thoroughly under- 
 stood it, the pupil can then proceed to the study of comparative grammar. 
 I conclude with a quotation from Marcel : — 
 
 “ The analysis and comparison of t^vo languages, by shewing the general 
 principles of grammar, in contradistinction with those which are peculiar 
 to each language, unfold the genius of both, and lay a foundation for 
 most interesting researches in philology and mental philosophy. Rising 
 above the intellectual facts which constitute the art of grammar, learners 
 should then study the definitions, investigate its generalities, and seek 
 in the formation of ideas and in the operations of the mind, the universal 
 laws which govern language, and which constitute the science of 
 grammar.” 
 
 S. & J. Brawn, Printers, 13, Gate Street, Holborn, London, W.C. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2017 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates 
 
 https://archive.org/details/papersreadatmeetOOasso 
 

 
ON TIIE 
 
 AMOUNT OF TIME TO BE GIVEN 
 
 IN GIRLS’ SCHOOLS TO SCIENCE, 
 
 A PAPER READ AT BIRMINGHAM, MARCH 19, 1887, 
 
 BY 
 
 E. M. CLARKE, 
 
 Science Mistress in the Edgebaston High School. 
 
 PRINTED FOR 
 
 THE ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT-MISTRESSES. 
 
 London. 
 
 1888. 
 
AMOUNT OF TIME 
 
 TO BE GIVEN IN 
 
 GIRLS’ SCHOOLS TO SCIENCE, 
 
 The claims of Natural Science to a prominent place in our scheme of 
 teaching, have been so enthusiastically supported by many of our 
 modern educationists, that there is little need for me to take up the 
 cudgels in its behalf. Has not Prof. Huxley been preaching on this 
 subject in his “ Lay Sermons,” and elsewhere for years past ? And does 
 not Herbert Spencer, in reply to his own question — “ What knowTedge is 
 of most worth ? ” give the unhesitating answer — “ Science, science ; this 
 is the verdict at all counts.” 
 
 In fact, the scientists have been engaged for some time past, in dinning 
 this into the ears of the public, insomuch, that the non-scientific among 
 us are heartily wearied of hearing the subject named. 
 
 I should like to-day briefly, and in as impartial manner as possible, 
 to consider how far it is of advantage that girls should learn science, at 
 what age it should be taught, and why it should not, in my opinion, be 
 taught indiscriminately throughout the school. 
 
 Firstly then, as regards the advantages of learning science. At the 
 risk of seeming very audacious, I must say at the outset that I disagree 
 with Mr. Spencer as to the relative worth of knowing the facts of science . 
 
 I cannot personally see that it is of more value to a child to learn that 
 ivater , for instance, is composed of Hydrogen and Oxygen , than it is to 
 learn the constitution of our British Parliament . 
 
 I have always thought that the advantages of science lay rather in 
 the mental training which it confers, in the interest in natural objects, 
 and sense of their beauty which it should create, and lastly in the moral 
 lessons which it teaches. To consider each of these points briefly : 
 
 (1). As to mental training. 
 
 I think the mental training of science tends in two chief direc- 
 tions : — 
 
 (a) It developes the power of exact observation. 
 
4 
 
 (b) It trains the reasoning faculties by the process of reasoning from 
 experiment and from analogy, which the student is called upon 
 to perform. 
 
 But I would ask you to note in passing, that the latter advantage is 
 reserved only for the very advanced student. 
 
 (2) . As to conferring an interest in Natural objects, I suppose all 
 will agree with me in thinking that true science does this ; not “ the 
 science falsely so called ” of the text-book or the diagram merely, but 
 that which brings the child face to face with natural objects, and renders 
 the country lane and the sea shore, henceforth full of new interest for 
 him. 
 
 (3) . As to the moral teaching derivable from science, I am not sure 
 that elementary science, such as we can teach in our schools, furnishes 
 many moral lessons. I have myself been occasionally able to enforce 
 on my pupils the duty of cultivating their powers and letting nothing go 
 to rust, by illustrations from animal life, of the way in which degradation 
 goes hand in hand with idleness ; but such teaching cannot be afforded 
 by all branches of science. 
 
 Having thus summed up the advantages of learning science, I feel 
 impelled, science teacher as I am, to look impartially on the other side 
 of the question. 
 
 We science teachers are too apt to think of our own subject as the one 
 of prime importance ; we ourselves have given much time to it, and feel 
 much interest in it ; we find our pupils enthusiastic over their work ; 
 hence, we are only too much inclined to applaud Mr. Spencer and the 
 rest when they chant the praises of science, and to feel a little annoyed 
 if our subject is crowded out by the many others of a girl’s school 
 course. 
 
 Now, in the 1st place, I lay it down as a self-evident proposition that 
 it is impossible for a girl to specialise in science during her school 
 career. 
 
 And in the 2nd place, I go so far as to say that I think that the 
 mental training she will derive from it, unless she does specialise to an 
 undesirable extent, will be almost limited to the development of her 
 observing faculties — for speaking from my own experience, I consider 
 that the training of logical thought only comes into play in the highest 
 walks of science. 
 
 Now it is acknowledged that the observant faculties can be developed 
 at a comparatively early stage : hence, I say, let the younger children 
 take science most certainly, and let them give far more time to it than 
 they do at present. I cannot help thinking that the hours of weariness 
 to the flesh spent over Grammar boohs (English and foreign), by our 
 young children, might be put to better purpose over the study of Botany, 
 or Physical Geography — which, latter subject, intelligently taught, I 
 still think the best of all science subjects for girls. 
 
5 
 
 In the middle and upper forms, as far as the Fifth, too, I think that 
 science should find a place, but in diminishing ratio : — that is, supposing 
 the 1st form to have a daily lessson in science (which is highly desirable) 
 then, by the time we reach the 5th, one lesson a week would probably 
 suffice as the pupils would now be naturally doing a fair amount of work 
 in mathematics, languages and literature, &c. 
 
 Finally , in the 6th form. 
 
 I do not know what my fellow science teachers will think of me, when 
 I say that, in a school of my own, I should be disposed to put no science 
 work in the 6th form (unless it were specially desired by any pupil). 
 
 I hope they will not infer from this confession that I have myself 
 failed in arousing any interest among my older pupils ; this would be 
 a conclusion unfair both to myself and to them, my relations with whom 
 have been always very pleasant. 
 
 And now I come lastly to my reasons for such heresy. 
 
 Well, in the first place, I suppose that we shall confess that if there is 
 an overworked form in most schools, it is the 6th ; with so many subjects 
 daily crowding on their attention, so many wider interests opening up 
 around them, there is a danger either of the strain of school-life becoming 
 too much for them, or of their becoming somewhat superficial in their 
 work. Hence it seems desirable to diminish the number of their school 
 subjects, and I think science might fairly be renounced. And why ? 
 
 Well, I cannot help feeling, that at the age when our girls are about 
 to leave school, faculties are ccyning into play which are too high for 
 science to teach. 
 
 It is good to be exact, observant, perceptive — to have an eye for the 
 wonders of creation — but surely it is a better thing still to have the 
 mental and spiritual eye keen to discover the beauties of art and litera- 
 ture, to have a soul in sympathy with all that is noble and heroic and 
 manly, and at eternal strife with the low and the base. 
 
 Such thoughts and feelings, I contend, may be developed by the literary 
 rather than the scientific side of a girl's education. The best literature 
 of our own, and foreign languages, surely affords ends for the highest 
 culture in our girls, while of all subjects, History is pre-eminently cal- 
 culated to widen the minds of our older pupils, and aid them in forming 
 just and liberal judgments on men and actions. 
 
 Would any of us here present be content to be a mere scientific woman 1 
 I confess that I, for one, would sooner possess the capacity for entering 
 into the beauties of a single poet, than I would the scientific knowledge 
 of a Darwin, without appreciation of poetry. 
 
 John Morley, in his speech the other day to the London students, 
 quoted a saying of Dr. Arnold’s, with which I cannot do better than 
 conclude — as it exactly expresses my feelings. He said : 
 
 “ I would rather that a son of mine believed that the sun went round 
 the earth, than that he should be entirely deficient in the knowledge of 
 the beauties of poetry, and moral truth.” 
 
LONDON : 
 
 S. AND 
 
 BRAWN, PRINTERS, 13, GATE STREET, 
 LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS, W.C. 
 
3 V o . Q 
 
 
 
 ON THE 
 
 j 
 
 TEACHING 
 
 OF GEOGRAPHY i 
 
 IN 
 
 SCHOOLS. 
 
 j 
 
 A PAPER READ AT THE HEAD MISTRESSES' CONFERENCE 
 
 IN LONDON, OCT. STH, 1837. 
 
 
 BY 
 
 S. 
 
 EVERY, 
 
 Assistant- Mistress in 
 
 the Bradford Girls’ Grammar School. 
 
 
 PRINTED FOR 
 
 THE ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT- MISTRESSES. 
 
 
 London. 
 
 
 1888. 
 
ON THE TEACHING 
 
 OF 
 
 GEOGRAPHY IN SCHOOLS, 
 
 Lord Macaulay is somewhere reported to have expressed an opinion 
 that there is no occasion to teach geography in schools. “ Let a hoy 
 have the run of a good library ,’ 5 he says, “ and he will at his leisure pick 
 up enough geography to serve all ordinary purposes . 55 But our ex- 
 perience, unfortunately is, that most children, either because they have 
 not the run of good libraries, or because their tastes differ from those 
 of Lord Macaulay, do not of their own accord become geographical 
 students, or acquire any knowledge of the subject until it has been 
 forced upon their notice. Evidently Lord Macaulay was mistaken. 
 Does any meaning worth attention attach to his remark ? I think we 
 can discover such a meaning. He, in effect, says that a boy had better 
 be left to gain his geographical knowledge indirectly ; that in the course 
 of general reading he will find so much that can be cleared up only by 
 a reference to the geography book and the map, that he will spon- 
 taneously turn to these and take a living interest in them. 
 
 Now I am aware that Lord Macaulay’s favourite phoenix, “ any school- 
 boy , 55 is a young gentleman of such remarkable energy and industry that 
 he must be handled with extreme caution and largely handicapped when 
 put into competition with moderate and degenerate specimens of the 
 race. But he is not an unreal person. He is a schoolboy of peculiar 
 ability and attainment, and may be found here and there, and now and 
 then. It is the province of the educator to guide the faltering steps of 
 mediocre and dull children along the path which talent and genius 
 almost instinctively tread — over the same and not a different path ; and 
 if Lord Macaulay be correct in holding that his “ schoolboy 55 ought to 
 be left to gain his geographical knowledge indirectly, we on the other 
 hand may safely infer that our school children ought to be led to gain 
 their geographical knowledge indirectly, i.e., during the greater part of 
 the school course geography should not be taught in isolation, as a 
 
4 
 
 separate subject, but in connection with other subjects which lead up 
 to it, and to which it is closely allied. This is the question that I pro- 
 pose to discuss, and an answer to it must mainly consist in determining 
 the place of geography in a school curriculum. 
 
 Education aims first at the training of faculty, and secondly at the 
 acquisition of knowledge. All study has for its end one or both of these 
 objects. 
 
 In education the former is the more important result to attain, but 
 the latter remains, as ever, the healthier and more seductive motive. 
 The two objects are indeed, completely inter-dependent — distinguished 
 in thought, but seldom, if ever, distinguishable in fact. 
 
 Felt progress towards desirable knowledge, accompanied by felt hin- 
 derances to the attainment of the amount of knowledge desired, is the 
 complex feeling that stimulates the mind to effort, and begets habits of 
 application. Hence the necessity that we should begin to teach a sub- 
 ject by awakening the interest of our pupils in that which we are about 
 to bring before them. What is for them the interest that attaches to the 
 study of geography ? To the development of what faculties does this 
 study contribute 1 What purpose does a knowledge of this subject sub- 
 serve ? 
 
 Mr. Courthope Bowen gives an answer, complete so far as it goes, 
 when he says that the study of geography exercises (1) observation, (2) 
 constructive imagination, (3) inference and deductive reasoning ; and 
 that its constructive value consists in the gaining a knowledge of the 
 earth and of the connection of locality with man’s life and work, and of 
 the influence of locality upon the same. 
 
 Let us approach the regulation of the early study of geography 
 through its instruction value. Its earliest end is to cultivate the ob- 
 servation ; but as we have seen, it is the instruction value, the way in 
 which the knowledge ,of anything satisfies curiosity or helps to action, 
 that primarily interests, and therefore goes far in determining the manner 
 in which a subject should be brought to the notice, and the extent to 
 which attention should be claimed for it. Now the instruction value 
 of geography is to give a knowledge of the earth. So soon as children 
 have unconsciously taught themselves to see figure and to measure 
 distance with the eye, they have an extensive little world before them 
 to investigate ; and the best geography for them to learn is that which 
 tells them about the earth they see. They do not as yet want to analyse 
 substances into their ultimate elements, or to pry into the mysteries of 
 geological strata. They are content to count up the obvious qualities 
 of unresolved water and solid rocks. And we must remember that the 
 earth they see is for them the whole earth. We shall do ill if we rashly 
 and prematurely try to extend its limits. We need not tell them about 
 the earth they don’t see. Until their nearer surroundings are exhausted 
 the fact that we inhabit an Oblate Spheroid will not interest them a bit. 
 
5 
 
 The next thing that geography has to do is to train the constructive 
 imagination. The child notices that friends of his come and go — from 
 distant places they say ; and so soon as his absorbing interest in his 
 immediate surroundings loses its freshest force, he becomes desirous to 
 know what those different places are like — how they resemble and how 
 they differ from the world of his experience. 
 
 His efforts at imaginative picturing of other places from the materials 
 afforded by his own locality and the hints let drop, will vary according 
 to character, the imagination of some children being as lawless and bold 
 as that of others is feeble and timid. In restraining the one sort of 
 child within the bounds of probability, and encouraging the other to 
 more venturesome conceptions, the teacher must remember that ideas are 
 copies of sensations, and that a train of ideas (imagination) is a train of 
 copies of sensations which have been previously accumulated. He must 
 endeavour to portray unknown localities by their likeness and unlike* 
 ness to the locality which is known. 
 
 At about eleven years of age, when the child has gained some know- 
 ledge of the place where he happens to live, and some notion how 
 various other places or countries resemble or differ from the place with 
 which he is directly acquainted, it will be found that he has acquired, 
 or it will be easy to awaken in him, an interest in the relative position 
 of the places of which he has heard to each other, and to his native 
 place. 
 
 It will further be found that, with this natural basis of interest, the 
 acquirement and exercise of the manual skill involved in even the rudest 
 attempts at map-drawing become a source of pleasure. When the rela- 
 tive position of a few selected countries has been inquired into, and by 
 the encouragement of rude attempts at map-drawing impressed upon the 
 mind, the relative positions of the important divisions of the earth as a 
 whole must be investigated. 
 
 In this elementary course of physical geography it should be remem- 
 bered that the faculty exercise therein sought is that of logical inference 
 and deductive reasoning. We are no longer occupied with observation 
 and imagination only. The seat of wonder is shifted. The why as well 
 as the how of phenomena now concerns us. Whatever we notice is for 
 us an effect for which we seek a cause. 
 
 Thus from about eleven to about thirteen or fourteen years of age, 
 the study of geography becomes, according to the scheme I have briefly 
 and vaguely indicated, a regular school lesson, set apart from other sub- 
 jects with a fixed and separate place in the school curriculum. Before 
 then it was interwoven with object lesson and story-telling — advisedly 
 pursued in a desultory and discursive manner. Afterwards, it should 
 again, in my view, take a secondary and subordinate position. But for 
 the two or three central years of the middle class school course, it should 
 I think (contrary to the opinion ascribed to Lord Macaulay), be learnt 
 
6 
 
 as it were for its own sake. Map-drawing is indispensable, and it can- 
 not be taught indirectly ; a general knowledge of physical geography is 
 indispensable ; and it cannot be indirectly acquired. Concurrently 
 with this physical geography course, or just after it, should come the 
 learning of a certain number of commercial and political statistics, 
 usually called geographical statistics, which are connected with the con- 
 dition of the native country of the child. If these be judiciously selected 
 they will not lack interest. It is absurd to suppose, as the old geography 
 books assumed, that such statistics, concerning every country in Europe, 
 or the world, could find room for their housing in any ordinary brain, or 
 be of any appreciable use if they were by almost superhuman effort 
 crammed into it. But we need a more detailed knowledge of facts re- 
 lating to our own country, and on that account mainly find them a great 
 deal more interesting than facts which belong to the affairs of quite other 
 people. 
 
 It will perhaps be objected to this view, that the amount of geographi- 
 cal knowledge that has by this time been gained is a small amount to 
 go through life with ; and that a more accurate geographical knowledge 
 of even distant and unvisited countries of which we know nothing else, 
 is always useful, sometimes necessary. 
 
 Giving all possible weight to this objection, I nevertheless submit (1) 
 That the circumstance that a certain amount of information will, if 
 acquired, assuredly be useful, is not a sufficient reason for aiming at the 
 acquisition of that information during the very limited period of a school 
 career. We must, in order to prove the claim of a subject to be ad- 
 mitted or retained in a curriculum, show, not only that a knowledge of 
 the subject will be useful, but also that it will be more useful than the 
 knowledge of other subjects in whose stead it is studied. (2) While 
 the instruction value of a subject remains, as I have remarked before, 
 the healthier and more seductive motive to entice ourselves or induce 
 our pupils to its study, it is on the other hand the faculty exercise that 
 the educator must regard as of greater importance when he is determin- 
 ing the subjects that are to be taken up by his pupils. 
 
 We need not stop acquiring knowledge when we leave school, nor 
 indeed at all, until our lives draw near their close and our intellectual 
 powers begin to fail ; but when we leave school we ought to be in a 
 position to learn by ourselves without an instructor’s aid — to teach our- 
 selves any subject that we desire, or that it is needful that we should 
 know in order to do our work properly; and in order that we may be in 
 this position all our faculties must have been brought into exercise in 
 the best possible way and to the fullest possible extent. It is how we 
 have learnt, and not what information we have acquired, that makes 
 us, when we look back upon our school days, pronounce them to have 
 been wasted or well spent. 
 
 Now geography has, by the time we have arrived at the stage I have 
 
7 
 
 suggested, done its work in cultivating the observation, in strengthening 
 the imagination, in awakening the wonder which leads us to seek the 
 causes that underlie the phenomena we witness. It is not to be disputed 
 that observation may henceforth be more directly cultivated, that ima- 
 gination may henceforth be more abundantly fed, that reason may hence- 
 forth be more rigorously trained in the pursuit of various arts and 
 sciences — study of a more concentrated — of a less discursive character. 
 
 The instruction value of geography of course remains — a knowledge 
 of the earth, and a knowledge of the influence of locality upon man’s life 
 and work. This is not exhausted, and will not be exhausted by us as 
 long as we live. But after an elementary — say a year’s — course of 
 physical geography, is not such further knowledge of the earth as may 
 be attempted to be acquired at school better confined to the consistent 
 pursuit of a science like geology or chemistry, and such geography as 
 happens to concern the selected science, than scattered over the vast 
 field of physical geography ? After some notion of the political and 
 commercial condition of one’s own country has been gained, is not any 
 further knowledge of the influence of locality upon man’s life and work 
 that may be attempted to be acquired at school, better confined to those 
 countries and periods, the history of which we are for other reasons en- 
 gaged in studying, than scattered at random over all the regions which 
 travellers have yet explored ? 
 
 It is not as if we had not enough else to do. We try to do too much, 
 and the multiplication of subjects now required to be taught in our 
 schools is on all hands allowed to be a serious evil. 
 
 By this multiplication, what we know of the laws of memory, what 
 we know of the laws which govern the association of ideas, is prevented 
 from helping us as it would if we learnt a little throughly, instead of 
 trying to learn everything at once. 
 
 During the last stage of the school course, from the ages of thirteen 
 or fourteen to the ages of seventeen or eighteen, as the case may be, I 
 propose that geography should cease to form a separate subject in the 
 curriculum — should cease to be taught save in connection with that part 
 of other subjects upon which geographical knowledge happens to bear. 
 During the few years previous, enough geographical knowledge to make 
 the pupil feel no stranger to the subject, and ready to turn to book or 
 map for the information he now and again wants, ought to have been 
 acquired. The geography of any country, the history of which is being 
 studied, should be thoroughly got up. 
 
 The teacher should be alive to any chance of illustrating any subject 
 by geographical reference. For when we think, we find that geography 
 in a special and remarkable manner touches at some points, almost every 
 subject wehave to teach. How should it be otherwise? We can never escape 
 from the earth in which we have to live, and we must always be either 
 actually or imaginarily in some locality or another. With geography 
 
8 
 
 history is always intimately concerned ; all literature has do with geo- 
 graphy ; logic may be illustrated by geographical truths ; ethics and 
 mental science are aided by consideration of climate and race. All the 
 natural sciences have a background of geography. 
 
 When the period for lightly touching on diverse subjects, and arousing 
 the mind to varied interests, is passed and the period for concentrating 
 intellectual attention on the thorough mastery of a few subjects has 
 come, little good can, it seems to me, be effected by bestowing scattered 
 desultory half-hours on un-connected items of geographical statistics : 
 little good can come of burrowing here and there at random into so vast 
 a subject. 
 
 In conclusion, I wish to emphasize three points, Firstly — That the 
 systematic study of geography proper ( i.e ., any geography going beyond 
 personal surroundings and pictorial descriptions of other places), must 
 not begin too soon : must not begin until by some means an interest in 
 the relative position of different places has been aroused, and the mind 
 has been sufficiently developed to comprehend to some extent, and really 
 care about investigating on a large scale, the sequence of cause and 
 effect. I believe that this wise reserve is now widely understood. 
 Secondly — I consider that when the systematic study of geography has 
 begun, a course of about two, or at the most, three years, comprising 
 elementary lessons on physical geography, and the commercial and poli- 
 tical geography of one country only, ought to be enough to get one’s 
 pupils into the way of taking an intelligent interest in geographical 
 questions when they chance to crop up. Thirdly and lastly — I think 
 it is not even yet sufficiently recognized that geographical details and 
 statistics about a country are interesting, and can be retained in the 
 mind, only when we have outside reasons for being interested in the 
 country and its people. 
 
 I think that we are still apt to neglect to employ to our advantage 
 what we have learnt of the laws of the association of ideas. We do not 
 so group our subjects of study as to build up in our minds a solid fabric 
 of knowledge. A superficial and discursive acquaintance with many 
 countries is hard to acquire, hard to retain, unnecessary to possess, — 
 while an intelligent interest in geographical questions, so far as they 
 bear on other studies, should be aroused and encouraged and always 
 kept up. In conclusion, allow me to say once more that I think that 
 during the later years of school life, any regular course of lessons on geo- 
 graphy should merge in, and be subordinate to a history course. 
 
 PRINTED BY S. AND J. BRAWN, 13 , GATE 8TREET, LONDON, W.C. 
 

 
 \ 
 
 
 
 

 THE 
 
 EDUCATIONAL VALUE OF MUSIC. 
 
 A PAPER 
 
 READ AT CHELTENHAM, IN MARCH, 1889, 
 
 BY 
 
 M. CRUSE, 
 
 Assistant Mistress in the Clifton High School. 
 
 PRINTED FOR 
 
 THE ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT MISTRESSES. 
 
 MANCHESTER. 
 
 1891 . 
 

 • r v • ,t 
 
 , ^ / 
 
 S' 
 
 > ' 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
THE EDUCATIONAL VALUE OF MUSIC. 
 
 S O many years of my life have been given solely to the study and 
 teaching of music, that you will readily understand me when I 
 say I have lost what little power I ever had to put into words 
 all that I think about music itself, or to convey to you, except feebly 
 and in part, the opinion I have gradually formed as to the position 
 it ought to take in the educational system. This is certainly not 
 saying very much for the educational value of my chosen subject, 
 but I claim privilege as a specialist. Moreover, music has so many 
 sides that I am greatly at a loss which to present to you, but I have 
 endeavoured to put together a few thoughts, in the hope that they may 
 call forth aids and suggestions from others with a wider experience. 
 
 It is my sincere wish to see the study of music ranked with literature, 
 mathematics, and, I was going to add, science; but I will correct it to 
 “the other sciences,” for I love to think that our “Divine Art” is also 
 a mighty science. Have not its votaries in each generation had a Galileo- 
 like experience, from the great Bach, with his poverty and unknown grave, 
 to Brahms, whose works are still a sealed book to all but the very earnest 
 student ? Now, at present, music is that, to me, very objectionable item 
 on a school prospectus, an “extra” and an “accomplishment.” I have 
 always greatly wondered why the latter term should be applied to what 
 is so very rarely accomplished — fortunately one does not often hear the 
 word now ; it is to be hoped it is going out of fashion ; but one still hears 
 music spoken of as “one of the showy subjects”: this by a master of a 
 great elementary school. A well-known editor writes : “Music must only 
 be studied in hours of leisure, when school-days are past.” Then the 
 American girl who originated the term “parlour tricks” has come in for 
 a vast amount of praise. I myself have heard it suggested that music 
 should be made a kind of holiday task, together with cooking and plain 
 needlework. It is also certain that, when the time-table for the term 
 is under consideration, music is voted an utter nuisance by all 
 who are not intimately concerned in the teaching of it. Now, I am 
 fain to believe that music is one of those “good and perfect gifts 
 that come from above,” and that it is a mighty power for good in 
 the world, and a means of civilization — not an outcome of civilization — 
 but a something above and beyond, which can only grow and thrive 
 in a good and pure atmosphere. It is always a satisfaction to me to 
 remember that those Ancient Greeks, who are credited with every 
 kind of knowledge under the sun, from evolution upwards or downwards, 
 whichever way you choose to look at it, were utter strangers to both 
 melody and harmony in their true sense, and only possessed a feeling for 
 rhythm, and the very embryo of a scale. It reminds us how very young 
 music is after all, and how patient we must be with the uncultured in 
 musical literature, feeling, as we must do, that we are, perhaps, only on 
 the very edge of the great world of sound, and know not what develop- 
 ments, if not revelations, the future may have in store for us. I have 
 
4 
 
 written “the uncultured” advisedly, for most people are endowed with 
 a natural love for music, and rest content therewith, without patient 
 study ; but music cannot in any measure speak to the untrained as it 
 does to the trained, though even its sensuous side is a powerful agency. 
 Who amongst us, that love our art, did not thrill with enthusiasm and 
 pride as we read the newspaper accounts of the taming of that large 
 Trafalgar Square mass meeting, moved by some impulse to hear or 
 interrupt service in Westminster Abbey. You may remember that the 
 readers of the lessons were exhorted to “speak up,” and that the sermon 
 was loudly and freely commented upon as it was delivered, but when the 
 organ sent its volume of sound round the glorious old cathedral, and the 
 choir sang a familiar hymn, a great silence fell on the vast crowd, rude 
 cries ceased, the- roughest in the throng craned their necks forward to 
 listen, and some were even moved to tears. It reminded me of a little 
 paragraph in Darwin’s “Descent of Man.” May I quote it? “Music 
 arouses in us various emotions, but not the more terrible ones of horror, 
 fear, rage, &c. It awakens the gentler feelings of tenderness and love 
 which readily pass into devotion.” This, may I remind you, from the 
 pen of a man who could hardly distinguish one tune from another, yet 
 who would hurry back from a long walk in order to be in time for the 
 anthem in King’s College Chapel, and who bemoaned, late in life, that 
 he had not listened to some beautiful music every day, since, through 
 disuse, one side of his brain had become atrophied, and the power to 
 appreciate and apprehend had been destroyed. 
 
 I presume that most philanthropists give music a prominent place in 
 their schemes for raising and refining our less fortunate brethren. I 
 firmly believe that good music does raise and refine, and, even when not 
 understood, it commands respectful attention if presented at the right 
 time and place. Not long ago one of my pupils was asked to play to a 
 gathering of working men, and she bemoaned that she did not know any- 
 thing popular and suited to the occasion, so I said : “ Try some 
 6 Schumann,’ it is what you can play the best.” And she did play “ Schu- 
 mann,” and was listened to in solemn silence. Of course she thought 
 the experiment was a failure ; but at the close of the evening the men 
 went in a body to the organiser of the meeting and stated that they 
 “ very much approved of Miss A’s playing, and hoped she would come 
 and play to them again.” Now, may I contend that what has such 
 great power over the multitude might, in a greater degree, or, at least, 
 proportionately influence the individual, and also that what is eminently 
 calculated to make our world better and purer, and brighter and happier, 
 must be well worth time and trouble and patient study ? 
 
 When I first began to teach I used to say that none ought to learn 
 music but those with special talent. I do not believe I quite knew what 
 I meant ; perhaps it was only the echo of what I had heard so very often 
 from many people. After a wider experience, I consider the study of 
 music, in some one of its various branches, should form a part of every 
 woman’s education, talent or no talent. Special talent is so very rare ; 
 sometimes, nay very often, it is latent, and the individual far to seek 
 who is best calculated to bring it to the front. It is nearly always very 
 hard at first to find out whether a child has musical perceptions or not. 
 My experience is that little children are, naturally, very lazy and are 
 very disappointed on first coming to the piano to find that music 
 does not flow out of their finger tips ; but that, instead, they have come 
 upon the most difficult of all their studies, and have to use their brains, 
 and wills, and energies, and to work really hard. That half-hour’s music 
 lesson is a sore trial to many a little one, let the teacher be ever so 
 
patient ; pleasure will only come with the consciousness that difficulties 
 are being overridden. As a rule musical feeling will soon begin to show 
 itself, if it be there ; and if it be not, or only in a small measure, I am 
 sure the discipline must be good, and that the lesson, conscientiously 
 given and received, will call forth a great many powers of mind. Surely 
 if education be what its name implies, “ A leading out,” then music does 
 good work. It would be interesting to note the effect on the individual 
 of the various phases of musical thought. I will only just touch on one. 
 Speaking of the study of Bach’s works, Schumann says : “ It seems to 
 have a strengthening moral effect upon one’s whole system, for Bach was 
 a thorough man all over, there was nothing sickly or stunted about him, 
 and his works seem written for eternity.” 
 
 It is possible, in a great degree, to study your girls’ characters by the 
 way they practise for you. I need hardly say that many do not practise 
 at all ; but that speaks for itself. I infer that what indicates character 
 also moulds it, if used aright. A girl cannot get outside help with her 
 practical music. Nothing else calls for so much self reliance; it must be 
 done by herself alone, and laziness brings its own punishment in signal 
 failure. It is at this juncture that a girl will often declare she “hates 
 music!” and that she “will leave off learning,” and, in these days of 
 licence, she is generally allowed to do so, the subject being an optional 
 one. How a “weak will” shows itself, every moment, in the fingers that 
 cannot lift themselves without constant reminder! The want of “fixed 
 purpose” in the girl who will only work for a little while at a piece when 
 it is fresh, or when it happens to take her fancy — carelessness, 
 flightiness, self-dissatisfaction, superficiality, conceit, indolence, per- 
 severance, earnestness, and the like, every successive half hour brings the 
 music teacher something to combat with or correct, or something to foster 
 and approve. I, myself, find that it is nearly always possible to tell how a 
 girl stands, in relation to her other studies, by the way her work is done 
 with me or for me. In comparing notes with some of our form teachers, 
 I have hitherto formed a right estimate, and whenever I leave the 
 beaten track of “very fair” (“that refuge of the destitute,” as a friend 
 terms it) and add a few words of comment in a report form, I am always 
 told afterwards by parents: “So and so is the same in all her work.” I 
 once had a pupil, musical and teachable, whom I never could quite make 
 distinguish the time value of notes. I had my own theory about it, and, 
 on asking the Drawing Mistress if the child could draw, was told she 
 could not see the difference between a square and a circle, and was, in 
 fact, almost hopeless. I quite felt I was helping on that drawing when I 
 had partially succeeded in making the pupil tell a minim from a 
 crotchet, &c. 
 
 Now, in contending that music ought to be a universal study, do not, 
 for a moment, think I mean that every one who learns music ought to 
 play. I shudder at the very thought of such a thing. Indeed, I believe 
 the more generally music is understood, the less shall we be called upon 
 to listen to. The little that will be brought forward, both in social and 
 public life, will be of the very best; a “survival of the fittest” devoutly 
 to be prayed for. 
 
 Of all studies music seems to me to be treated the most unfairly ; 
 such wonderful and rapid results are expected, and money is supposed to 
 be thrown away if a girl cannot play, not merely after she leaves school, 
 but even while she is a student. In how many of her other studies is a 
 girl constantly called upon to exhibit her proficiency or the want of it ? 
 Or how much literature or mathematics does the ordinary girl trouble 
 her head about after her education is called “ finished ? ” And yet no 
 
one in this instance would dream of saying that time was wasted. If a 
 pupil is to be trained upwards from a first reading book until she can 
 appreciate in degree the great classic and modern writers, and yet may 
 not be called upon to read or recite from, or even converse upon them, 
 or to act in plays because she can read or understand them, then why 
 may not music and musical literature be thus treated 2 It will be so 
 soon, I firmly believe. Do you remember it is said of a character in 
 “ Eobert Elsmere,” “ He was not a musician, but he was more or less 
 familiar with music and its standards, as all people become now-a-days 
 who live in a highly cultivated society.” Not so many years ago Samuel 
 Warren drew for us the wealthy Mr. Tagrag asking Tittlebat- titmouse 
 whether Miss Tagrag should perform for him the “ Battle of Prague” or 
 “ Before Jehovah’s Awful Throne,” being answered by “ A little of both, 
 if you please.” Music has certainly made great way since then, but we 
 are yet very far off the musician’s ideal. Drawing has at last asserted its 
 rights, at least in all public schools. I suppose I am correct in saying 
 that most parents have quite given up expecting to have brought home 
 to them, at the end of each term, wishy-washy copies of flowers and 
 landscapes, crayon heads of doubtful anatomical proportions, cheeks 
 suggestive of toothache, and the like, or at the best correct copies of line 
 engravings, which Charlotte Bronte describes as “ woolwork.” And yet, 
 I venture to say, the said parents still hanker after the “ Battle of 
 Prague,” or its modern equivalent, though they tolerate freehand models 
 and perspective, and are quite content with South Kensington certifi- 
 cates, and do not expect each child to develop into an artist. I much 
 rejoice that what Mr. Mundella recently termed “ the language of the 
 hand ” is at last “ understanded of the people.” May it soon be so with 
 the language of the emotions. What I think we need now, so much 
 more than players, are intelligent listeners ; and to listen to music with 
 intelligence, study is absolutely necessary, study from early childhood, 
 and training in the sound and form of construction of the works of the 
 great tone poets. In no other way can true sympathy and appreciation 
 be extended to exponents of the art. At present it seems to me that the 
 listeners are fewer than the players, and that in many drawing-rooms 
 the players are in the majority, even supposing there be but two or three 
 in a crowded assembly. Those of us who have ever played the conversa- 
 tion up and down, crescendo and diminuendo, for personal amusement, 
 will know what I mean. I do not hesitate to say that I would rather 
 turn a barrel organ in Whitechapel and see the poor little gutter children 
 happy for a few minutes than play a solo on a Broad wood Grand at 
 many a so-called musical “ At Home.” There is, of course, the 
 other side of the picture — the long, wearisome musical evening, with 
 enforced silence, and an almost unbroken succession of, perhaps, tenth- 
 rate performances. Both are sins against art, and I fear the reform will 
 only come when future generations of students are turned out into the 
 social world after music has become a definite and serious study. How 
 many concerts too are you ever able to enjoy with perfect comfort 2 
 Conversation reaches you from all sides. People come in late and go 
 out early, and bang the doors ; or they beat time with their foot on the 
 floor; or, worse still, on the rail of your chair. Or they spin out a 
 concert to weariness be re-demanding popular pieces, and do a dozen 
 other uncomfortable things which charity demands shall be attributed 
 to defective or insufficient musical education. I was once present at a 
 representation of “ Hamlet ” when part of the audience was so noisy and 
 ill-behaved that the artistes had to stop and wait till partial order was 
 restored. Doubtless those who came for a Saturday night’s sixpenny worth of 
 
7 
 
 amusement were greatly bored by the great masterpiece, possibly only known 
 to them by name. The only part that seemed to please them was Ophelia’s 
 madness, which they treated as a good joke, and laughed at uproariously. 
 That a similar thing can happen at a concert I know, not from personal 
 experience, but at first-hand. In the Free Trade Hall of Manchester — 
 musical Manchester! — Halle’s band was to play a composition by Dussek 
 in imitation of a village amateur orchestra. At one part the players are 
 supposed to be very drunk or very incapable, and I have no doubt the 
 great master produced his humorous effects by the skilful use of 
 enharmonic changes and irregular resolutions of discords, only to be 
 detected as scientifically correct by the advanced student of harmony, or 
 taken for granted by the humble ones. In music,' as in all else, “a little 
 knowledge is a dangerous thing,” for this musical audience knew a discord 
 when it heard one, but was not educated into taking in quite so many in 
 succession, so it immediately concluded the band had come to grief, and 
 was floundering about hopelessly ; and thereupon began to hiss and groan 
 so heartily that the performance was brought to an untimely end, to the 
 vexation and disappointment of those who had come specially to hear 
 this number on the programme. Or, I might cite the instance of some 
 members of an ancient choral society objecting to learn a good part-song 
 by a modern composer, because they deemed it bad music, as it contained 
 consecutive octaves, the real fact being that some of the parts were 
 doubled in octaves — a very different thing, as we know. I suppose the 
 only way to rid the world of the disturbing element, born of a half 
 knowledge, is to let in as much daylight as possible on all subjects 
 worthy to bear it. 
 
 Then as to the time that ought to be devoted to the study of any 
 instrument. I am not going to say any dreadful things about girls 
 having four hours’ practice a day, for I know it would be out of all 
 proportion to the rest of their work, and if a girl will give all her 
 energies to her one hour a day, and not waste a minute, it is perfectly 
 marvellous what she can achieve. The regular, steady routine of 
 school is a great help to music, as it is, of course, to all other study. I 
 find a girl at school will do more work in one hour than she will do in 
 two after she has left school. But I should like to say this about the 
 very musical girls. It is rather cruel to lay down a rule for them that 
 they must make it a matter of conscience not to exceed the hour a day. 
 Music is to such their chief delight as well as work, and more of a 
 recreation than tennis or anything else you could suggest. I believe in 
 my heart that all musical girls break the rule, and I never ask any 
 questions. For girls with exceptional gifts there are, of course, the 
 English musical colleges and foreign conservatoriums, but I think it a 
 mistake to enter too young, or to have had the general education 
 neglected in early years. I know several whose musical career has been 
 blighted by a defective education. I feel more and more, every day, 
 that music cannot thrive alone, and must fade ultimately, if studied 
 exclusively. That very subtle thing, touch, is more a brain effort, or 
 rather a heart and soul effort, than the result of mechanical exercises. 
 The most excruciating touch I know belongs to one who misplaces every 
 “h” in the language, yet who practises every hour of the day, excepting 
 the time devoted to the reading and re-reading of Davenport’s 
 “ Elements.” I think it is the experience of most teachers that a little 
 music may exist with limited brain power, but where there are musical 
 gifts in a very large degree, there too is capacity for anything and 
 everything. Those of us who have been privileged to know some of the 
 best musicians of our day must have felt this; and, indeed, I am often 
 
8 
 
 i 
 
 sorely tempted to envy some of my own gifted pupils. It was only 
 recently, when I renewed my intercourse with one of my first masters, 
 that I discovered what an authority he was on literature; what a 
 knowledge he had of foreign languages, and what a clever mathematical 
 head he possessed. As a child I only felt his power as a musician, now 
 I know that it takes much besides music to make a musician. 
 
 I am sure you will be willing to accept the conclusion that if literature, 
 science, foreign language, everything in fact aid and further musical 
 proficiency, even, put inversely, music must take its part in the training 
 of those whose special talents lie in another direction. 
 
 I think there can be no class of persons to whom musical knowledge, 
 practical and theoretical, will not be of use at some period of their 
 lives. Ask the hospital nurse whether she is not doing a good work 
 when she can sing or play to the weary convalescents? How many a 
 young mother takes up her neglected, and at one time, perhaps, irksome 
 study, in order to amuse and delight her little ones. Or, to bring it 
 more nearly home to ourselves ; ask the musical staff of any big school 
 whether their respect for the head mistress is not deepened when they 
 find that the interest she takes in their work comes from a knowledge of, 
 and a love for, their own special subject? 
 
 I feel I have taken my much loved study on its very lowest standpoint ; 
 but I leave it to others to sing its higher praises, hoping that a wider 
 knowledge will beget wider sympathies, and that, in the near future, we 
 may claim for music, not toleration, but recognition. 
 
 
THE TEACHING OF SCIENCE 
 
 IN HIGH AND MIDDLE SCHOOLS 
 FOR GIRLS. 
 
 A PAPER READ AT THE GENERAL CONFERENCE, 
 JANUARY 17th, 1891. 
 
 BY 
 
 A. MITCHELL, 
 
 Assistant Mistress in the Skinners’ School for Girls. 
 
 PRINTED FOR 
 
 THE ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT MISTRESSES. 
 
 MANCHESTER. 
 
 1891 . 
 
THE TEACHING OF SCIENCE IN HIGH AND 
 MIDDLE SCHOOLS FOR GIRLS. 
 
 I N addressing this general meeting on the teaching of a special 
 subject, I am relieved by the thought that, although the teaching 
 of science is of immediate interest to the minority only of assistant 
 mistresses, it must have gained a secondary importance for all in conse- 
 quence of its close connexion, almost identification, with technical 
 education. 
 
 I suppose every one present is thoroughly tired of being told by educa- 
 tional authorities that modern English teaching is too mechanical, that 
 it does not fit the pupil for after life, but allows the High or Middle 
 School girl to start with a mind crammed with undigested or pre- 
 digested facts and incapable of any independent mental effort. 
 
 Every educational journal, every pamphlet on the subject addressed 
 to elementary and secondary teachers, repeats the same charges over and 
 over again and gets no farther. And I suppose I am not far wrong in 
 thinking that you are all reduced to the same state of almost prostrate 
 humility in which I find myself. I acknowledge myself to be part of an 
 institution that “is but didn’t ought to be.” We cannot, however, efface 
 ourselves — how then to regenerate ? Who will give us any real practical 
 help in devising plans by which the girls leaving our schools may possess 
 more good common sense, greater powers of profiting by experience, 
 greater powers of learning for themselves ? 
 
 The present cry for technical education is simply the old one in a new 
 guise, and somewhat extended. For technical education, if definable, is 
 said to be the endowing of pupils with a greater capacity for learning 
 arts and crafts, with greater versatility and comprehension of methods 
 employed. That is to say they are to have greater mental capacity with 
 greater physical deftness. 
 
 Now, it seems to me that perhaps the storm of disapprobation would 
 not have been so great if the school had all along been considered to be, 
 in the first place — far and away the first place — a training establishment, 
 and, in quite a secondary degree, a source of knowledge for the pupil. 
 It is not primarily to be adapted to the natural genius endowed with 
 quick comprehension and clear understanding, but for the average girl 
 who must be taught how to learn. For my part, of the small modicum 
 of my school learning still remaining to me, every particle has had to be 
 
4 
 
 re-digested and re-learnt. What we gain at school of real value are 
 habits of mind and body, order, neatness, self control, and modes of 
 thinking. 
 
 Of course, a certain amount of material is necessary for the mind to 
 work upon. One cannot think with nothing to think about, and the 
 memory as one faculty must be trained; but there is a vast 
 amount of material imparted in schools with no other exercise than 
 that of memory, and there are other more important faculties left 
 unpractised. 
 
 Even in the imparting of subjects which must be largely matters of 
 memory, where the laws involved are too complex to be arrived at by the 
 pupil, we sometimes commit another sin — we spend too much time and 
 effort in digesting and preparing the mental food of our pupils. They 
 are Strasburg geese into whom we pour food — good stuff in its way, and 
 wholesome, but rendered noxious because the recipient makes no effort 
 to acquire or digest it. Is it not generally enjoined on us never, or rarely, 
 to set new matter before a class, but first discuss and lay the subject matter 
 with great care before them, that it may be afterwards learnt from text- 
 book or notes, or that leading questions may be answered by the pupils 
 at home or during their next lesson ? But why should not the class be 
 encouraged first to make an effort to comprehend and grasp the new 
 matter, assistance only being afforded when absolutely necessary? How 
 often does a girl come saying, “I could not understand this at all?” 
 You ask her where she began not to understand, and she does not 
 understand at all, anything at all. It is not on account of apparent 
 contradictions, those they swallow cheerfully ; nor that the words are not 
 separately known to them, but the statements have made no impression 
 on them at all. This is generally pure mental inertness. They will not call up 
 past images and impressions to enable them to realise, in any way, rightly 
 or wrongly, the matter in hand. You must use the mental rake for them. 
 Women are said to make better teachers than men in virtue of their 
 extreme patience ; but this may be carried too far, and the boy who has 
 been left to struggle to clear his own ideas is better equipped than 
 the girl who has had no such experience — provided, of course, that the 
 boy does struggle, and the average boy, compared with the average girl, 
 generally does, just as he plays or fights. 
 
 Given then that the school is to be a training establishment, the next 
 question is what hind of training is most necessary for the girl, and what 
 difficulties especially obstruct the mistresses’ path? 
 
 In answering this, let us first consider the especial weaknesses and 
 strength of the woman’s mind, and how far these may be counteracted or 
 trained in the girls’ school. 
 
 I think the commonest accusations brought against us are that we are 
 prone to jump to conclusions — that we overlook glaring uniformities — 
 that our imaginations run wild — that we have but a feeble grasp of 
 generalities — that we are illogical and fail to apply the most obvious general 
 
5 
 
 laws, and, finally, that we are too much governed by fixed ideas — a woman’s 
 obstinacy is proverbial. The neo-biologist explains the divergence of the 
 sexes by saying that the one possesses innate maleness from the 
 beginning, and the other equally innate femaleness. The male is 
 katabolic, active, feverish, excitable, living at a greater rate and with the 
 more rapid expenditure of energy; the woman is anabolic, vegetative, 
 and functionally much more quiescent. Whether this be true or not, 
 physically it seems to describe very well the mental differences of man 
 and woman, girl and boy. The boy exercises his reason and observation, 
 attempts rude classifications for himself, the girl must be roused and 
 trained to do this. Her passive, receptive nature must be taught to act. 
 She is by nature prone to demand the already digested matter with 
 which we so liberally provide her. May I quote a short paragraph by a 
 leading biologist, in which he compares the man’s and woman’s minds at 
 the best ? I think you will see that the accusations brought against us 
 are against our best talents run to seed and untrained : — “ That men 
 should have greater cerebral variability, and therefore more originality, 
 while women have greater stability, and, therefore, more common sense, 
 are facts both consistent with the general theory of sex and verifiable in 
 common experience. The woman conserving the effects of past variations 
 has what may be called a greater integrating intelligence, the man 
 introducing new variations is strong in differentiation. The feminine 
 passivity is expressed in greater patience, more open-mindedness, greater 
 appreciation of subtle details, and, consequently, what we call more rapid 
 intuition. The masculine activity lends a greater power of masculine 
 effort of scientific insight or cerebral experiment with impressions, and 
 is associated with an unobservation or impatient disregard of minute 
 details, but with a stronger grasp of generalities. Man thinks more; 
 woman feels more. He discovers more but remembers less ; she is more 
 receptive , less forgetful.” That is to say, we retain and do little else. 
 
 It seems to me, therefore, that the training a girl wants is not only in 
 observation, but on the more active side — the making of classifications 
 and the arnving at definitions, and not the mere learning of them. A 
 girl should not be first told that such and such classes exist possessing 
 such and such qualities, and then be told to look out for those distin- 
 guishing marks, but the groups of objects should be placed before her, 
 and she should be trained to classify and divide for herself. It is an 
 active mental process in place of the passive one. Again, sets of simple 
 experiments could be gone through in order that she might arrive at, and 
 state for herself, uniformities or laws. And if, in any case, a certain 
 law or formula can be arrived at either by deduction or by a series of 
 experiments, it is better for a girl that she should get at them for herself 
 by generalising from a series of experiments ; it is less likely to be so 
 passive a process as the following of a series of deductions laid down for 
 her. Such a choice of methods exists, for instance, in the imparting of 
 laws of motion. And would not syllogistic reasoning also be of value in 
 
6 
 
 a school — as much as mathematics. It would not take long for the 
 pupils to practise the construction of syllogisms, and it would familiarize 
 them with the fact of the existence of general laws, and of the use to be 
 made of them. 
 
 One great difficulty in carrying out any systematic training in a school 
 is the fact that girls come to it at all stages and in all conditions. 
 Systematic teaching will always be more difficult in schools where the 
 public may send their girls just when and how they like, and greater 
 ease will be found in a system of State Elementary and Secondary schools 
 where the public are made to conform to certain regulations. Another 
 disadvantage in our High and Middle School system is that in each 
 school there are girls of all standards, and only .a comparatively small 
 number of any one standard. This, of course, makes a complete set of 
 appliances so expensive as to be almost impossible. It is an expensive 
 way of carrying on education altogether. 
 
 From the very definition of science — ordered knowledge — knowledge 
 reduced to law — it would seem that it ought to hold a prominent place 
 in an establishment where girls are to be trained in the formulating of 
 laws, and of observation as subservient to that formulation. The old 
 plan of having one science taught throughout the school with an idea of 
 giving the girls a thorough knowledge of one branch will have surely to 
 be abolished where any attempt at technical education is made. 
 A thorough knowledge of and power of handling the principles underlying 
 all sciences is far more important than an extended knowledge of the 
 facts involved in any one branch. 
 
 The first power possessed by a child is that of observation, and the 
 science of a school ought certainly to begin with object lessons. For 
 these there is wanted a far more extended collection than generally 
 exists, and if, for instance, rock salt is the object inspected, every child 
 ought to have the close inspection of a good-sized piece, and be allowed 
 to test its taste, solvency, transparency, cleavage, and so on. The objects 
 collected must be not only various, but in large quantities. There must 
 be no guessing, but every child must really note for itself. As soon as 
 possible classification and definition ought to be started, and dissimilarity 
 ought especially to be remarked, for girls are haunted and handicapped in 
 their work by similarities, but are extremely prone to over-look dissimilarity. 
 
 Botany and natural history should follow later, and should involve plenty 
 of observation, again and again active classification. Wings, tails, feet, limbs, 
 and teeth may be sorted out, classified and defined by the children them- 
 selves. Habits and adaptations of structure to habits may be made the 
 subjects for deduction. It is easy and most tempting to keep children 
 interested in a natural history lesson, without giving them mental exercise 
 in the very least. Here again much material is required, but it must not be 
 collected as for a public museum, where wide variety is the great con- 
 sideration. There must be plenty of reduplication in order that the class 
 lesson may be beneficial to a large number, and not to the few bright 
 
7 
 
 ones, or solely those gifted with good sight. Botany might also be made 
 a vehicle for manual training, as the pupils might be taught to model in 
 clay or plastic wax the different parts of fruits and flowers, instead of 
 making drawings and diagrams. 
 
 The elementary properties of all matter and the simpler laws of 
 physics can be gathered from experiments in the middle part of the 
 school. The knowledge obtained from the study of chemistry is extremely 
 useful, but is very difficult to turn into good mental exercise. The 
 experiments involved are often too complex, and the laws too difficult to 
 grasp until a girl is very well up in the school. It is a science still largely 
 in the stage of unclassified facts. 
 
 Physiography, as involving laws of gases and heat, &c., should come 
 later in the school course, although the work of rivers and rain might be 
 taken earlier. 
 
 There has been issued by a Committee of the British Association a 
 report on the present teaching of Chemistry. In this, an attempt is 
 made to show that this subject can really be taught so as to involve good 
 exercise for the pupil. Great stress is herein laid on the value of exact 
 weighing and measuring, and, no doubt, with justice. Girls are naturally 
 slovenly and inexact, and what better training could there be than a 
 course of observations and calculations of densities of various substances 
 by means of a good balance ? Nicety of handling is also to be acquired 
 in the bending and cutting of glass, boring and fitting of corks, and so on, 
 and the apparatus is not elaborate. Simple tests are then applied to 
 foods, such as loss of weight by drying, and so on. Deductions are made 
 from simple experiments as to the composition of air, chalk, &c. But 
 after all, such training is not complete. We do not spend all our lives 
 balancing, measuring with a tape, and testing the composition of stuffs. 
 This work should merely form a valuable part of a wider system. Know- 
 ledge concerning leverage, momentum, the effect of heat on metals, and 
 the simple laws of vibrating bodies is equally valuable as a vehicle for 
 mental exercise. 
 
 What I would urge, then, is^-(l) That there should be drawn up a 
 definite scheme of science teaching, which should be constructed with a view 
 to the mental development of the pupil as she passes through the school. 
 
 (2) That the apparatus should be far more complete than at present. 
 
 (3) That physics, as being reducible to exact laws and yet capable of 
 purely experimental treatment, should hold an important place in the 
 science teaching. (4) And lastly, that in all crises, whether the science 
 taught is one of classification, like botany, or of laws and formulae, like 
 physics, the teaching should be active ; the classifications made by the 
 pupils, not stated ; the laws formulated, and not given first and illustrated 
 afterwards. Wherever possible fairly exact practical work should be 
 carried out by the pupils. A scheme of such work, as diverse as possible, 
 should be drawn up, and the mistress herself practised in the careful 
 conduct of such work. 
 
I 
 
 r 
 
 . \ 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 ( 
 
 
ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT MISTRESSES. 
 
 THE PROFESSIONAL TRAINING 
 
 OF 
 
 SECONDARY TEACHERS. 
 
 A PAPER READ BY 
 
 MISS HUGHES 
 
 AT THE TRAINING COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, 
 ON JUNE 4th, 1892. 
 
 PRINTED FOR 
 
 THE ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT MISTRESSES. 
 
 MANCHESTER. 
 
 1892. 
 
I 
 
 ‘ 
 
 
THE PROFESSIONAL TRAINING 
 OF SECONDARY TEACHERS. 
 
 I T seems but yesterday that a few friends met in my old room at 
 Newnham College, and decided to form the Association of Assistant 
 Mistresses. We felt that our work as teachers was so difficult 
 that we needed every possible help, and one obvious way was to join 
 together, and to help one another. I feel now, even more than I did 
 then, that we teachers do not reap a sufficient harvest from the ex- 
 perience or the knowledge or the enthusiasm of other teachers. I am 
 very glad of this opportunity of passing on some of the results of my 
 own experience in one particular field of education, and hope in the 
 discussion which will follow my paper to reap a great deal from the 
 experience and the knowledge and the thought of others. 
 
 There are many causes at work, familiar to many of us, which will 
 tend, within the next few years, to press into public notice the subject 
 we are about to discuss. It is a large subject, and I therefore propose 
 to start with a few assumptions so as to clear away the ground a little, 
 and which I expect will be accepted by all present. We shall no doubt 
 find plenty of disputed points further on. 
 
 1st. — I assume that we are all agreed that training must never be 
 allowed to usurp the place of education, and that a Head Mistress who 
 chooses a badly educated trained teacher in preference to a well- 
 educated untrained one, cannot have a very good ideal of education, 
 and may I add she cannot know much about training, because good 
 training can only be given to those who are well educated, and I hope 
 the Association of Assistant Mistresses will keep a sharp look out on 
 the entrance qualifications required by secondary training colleges. A 
 reaction in favour of trained teachers is just beginning, and it matters 
 greatly to us all that training should not float into our profession a 
 number of half-educated teachers. 
 
 2nd. — That there is a training which is worse than none, which 
 teaches a set way of doing everything, which gives no time for reading 
 or thinking, which overworks and overworries the students, turns 
 them into machines, and not into bright fresh intelligent teachers, 
 crushes their originality, and arouses no enthusiasm for their pro- 
 fession. Of course we all abominate such training. 
 
 3rd. — That it is absurd to limit the term “trained teacher” to those 
 who have been through a training college, or have passed a professional 
 examination. Some of these are not trained at all, or very badly 
 trained, because their education was so incomplete, or because the 
 
4 
 
 system of training was bad ; and some of the best trained teachers that 
 I know have trained themselves in the midst of their professional work 
 by thought, and reading, and experiment. I should like to add that 
 I think it is only the minority who will train themselves under such 
 difficult conditions, and they always acknowledge that it has been at 
 the expense of their pupils. 
 
 4th assumption. — That training does not always produce a good 
 teacher. Having thus to some extent cleared away the ground, I will 
 attack the problem we have before us, and I shall assert the following 
 proposition : That every secondary teacher, man or woman, genius or 
 no genius, requires a special preparation for the work of teaching, over 
 and above a good general education. My own experience is that all 
 able teachers agree that we want some kind of preparation, whether it 
 be an apprenticeship in a school, or to be attached to a class for a short 
 time, or a more detailed preparation. I believe we are all agreed so 
 far, the real difficulty is to obtain agreement concerning the kind of 
 preparation most desirable. I think the best and quickest way of 
 training secondary teachers, and at the smallest cost to the children, is 
 by a short course in a professional college, and I will first of all enquire 
 into the special functions of such a college. What has it to do for the 
 education of the country ? Four things, I think. 
 
 1st. — It has to be a sieve; it has to keep out of the profession hopeless 
 failures. There are a great many failures which are not hopeless ; we 
 get them here ; and only in two cases have I had to tell a student it was 
 really not worth while for her to continue. It may be asked, ought 
 not a woman to know if she cannot teach ? Alas ! they do not know, 
 and also I am glad to say a good many students have come here 
 detesting teaching, looking forward with dread to their teaching life, 
 and when they have found out what one means by teaching, and have 
 learnt to do it fairly well, they have greatly enjoyed it. Therefore, I 
 maintain a training college ought to be a place where women can test 
 themselves as to whether they are ever likely to be fair teachers. The 
 experience in such a college as our own, for instance, is so much wider 
 than in an ordinary school, and the conditions can be so varied, that I 
 think the test is really a very fair one. There is surely great need in 
 England in our profession for several sieves of the kind. When the 
 incapables are removed, there will, of course, be a better chance for 
 the really able teachers. 
 
 2nd. — It has to be a factory of good teachers . How do we propose to 
 manufacture good teachers ? As shortly as possible I will give you a 
 rapid sketch of what we do here, and I shall be very glad to give further 
 details to any one present who may be interested in any special point. 
 As a factory of teachers I take it we have to do three things. 
 
 1st. — Develop the right teacher spirit . It matters so much what 
 relation exists between the teacher and her work. Let her see exactly 
 what the purpose of education really is, what it is we are trying to do; 
 let her realise what a great and important work it is, how the future of 
 
b 
 
 \ 
 
 our country so largely depends on its education, and she must realise 
 not only the end of education, the great importance of education, but 
 also its profound difficulty. Of course I know that every good teacher 
 eventually gets the right spirit by experience, but it is surely an 
 infinite gain to begin with it, and there are many teachers who never 
 get it at all through experience only. We attempt to develop this 
 right teacher spirit in many ways ; we read and discuss the purpose of 
 education, we study the lives of the great educators of the past, and 
 we receive here a great number of living educators, and catch much 
 enthusiasm from them. We receive not only English teachers, men 
 and women, as visitors, but also foreign teachers. We take every 
 opportunity, and in Cambridge the opportunities are many, of gaining 
 enthusiasm from great living teachers. Again, in our pleasant college life 
 we have a great many opportunities of stirring up one another to realise 
 something of what every good teacher ought to feel about her work. 
 
 2nd . — Give professional knowledge. We will assume that a student 
 who wishes to be trained has taken her college course and a university 
 degree, and now enters a training college. What ought she to know 
 before she becomes a school teacher? 1st, she must understand child 
 nature, and what does she know about children as a rule ? Very little* 
 I confess there is a danger in a training college, unless one is careful, 
 that the students shall gain certain abstract principles of education 
 and discipline, certain principles of method, and forget that each child 
 is an individual, differing from every other child, and to some extent 
 the education of each child has an element of experiment in it. I 
 think this danger is greatly lessened if the students are given every 
 opportunity of learning to know individual children, and it comes very 
 easy to most women. 1 believe a great many teachers dislike teaching 
 because they do not understand the children they teach, they only 
 understand their subject. We have to teach nearly all our students 
 to study children ; we do it in the following ways : — 
 
 1st. — By the study of children in class. 
 
 2nd. — Teaching children and discussing them afterwards. 
 
 3rd. — Being in charge of a class and teaching it and keeping 
 records of each child. 
 
 4th. — Getting other teachers’ experience of children. 
 
 5th. — Games and parties. 
 
 6th. — Talks about children. 
 
 7th. — Characteristics of childhood. We go to the physiologist, the 
 logician, the ethical writer, the psychologist, the practical 
 teacher, and the parent, and we learn from all. 
 
 We study school conditions. 
 
 1st. — Physical conditions. 
 
 2nd. — School organisation. 
 
 3rd. — School discipline. 
 
 4th.— School teaching, e.g ., method. 
 
 We study education as far as we can historically, believing that 
 
6 
 
 you never know anything till you know it historically. And wc 
 do not bury ourselves in the past or even in the present, but we look 
 ahead into the future. Any new educational movements of the day we 
 take an interest in and study. Our work is a developing one, and we 
 teachers have to develop it, and the sooner a young teacher realises 
 that the better., 
 
 But a good teacher must have more than the right spirit, and more 
 than the right knowledge, she must also have the right skill . Now I 
 maintain, and experience seems to bear me out, that if you see clearly 
 what you want to do and know a great many ways of doing it, this 
 will greatly help you in the doing, but to gain skill one of course 
 requires practice, and a training college must give you such practice. 
 
 We hold that every teacher ought to be able to speak well, that is, 
 produce her voice easily so that she herself is not worn out ; produce 
 her voice clearly and pleasantly, so that her class is not worn out ; 
 speak fluently so that when she has a thought she may be able to ex- 
 press it well ; and read admirably, at any rate this is necessary and 
 desirable for some subjects. For a training college which is to produce 
 oral teachers, to pay no attention to voice production, speaking, and 
 reading, is to me slightly absurd. 
 
 We hold that every teacher ought to be able to draw, not draw 
 pictures, but illustrate quickly her lessons. We lay great stress on 
 speed, and have various teaching exercises to develop the power of 
 rapid illustration. 
 
 We have to teach students to govern their class, a very difficult 
 problem. We have not reached the bottom of it yet. A good many 
 students who have failed in discipline before they came to us, have 
 become good disciplinarians here, but we do not always succeed as yet. 
 
 We have to teach students to teach : — 
 
 1st. — By the observation of others (we do not use this much at 
 first, because I believe so much in originality). 
 
 2nd. — By a series of single lessons, carefully prepared beforehand. 
 
 3rd. — By a course of lessons, four or six. 
 
 4th. — Sometimes a special subject in a class right through the term 
 
 5th. — A class for a week. 
 
 6th. — Teaching exercises, of which you will see some this morning, 
 where we try to analyse the difficulties of a lesson, and 
 conquer them one by one, with the advantage of not 
 experimenting on the children. I do not believe in the 
 formal criticism lesson, I am a heretic on many points 
 on training; we have so-called criticism lessons, but the 
 victim often begins herself, and the criticism is very 
 informal. 
 
 We give the students practice in many parts of a teacher’s work, 
 besides giving lessons : — 
 
 1st. —As monitors. 
 
 2nd.— By arranging the children’s parties. 
 
7 
 
 3rd.— They lecture as well as teach. 
 
 4th. — Drawing out a syllabus of work for the term in each subject. 
 
 5th. — Marks and record of a class for a week. 
 
 6th.— Examination papers and corrections. 
 
 7th. — Criticism of school books, &c. 
 
 Our method of teaching the student is somewhat peculiar. We have 
 each year fewer lectures and more discussions. Twice a week the 
 students give me problems, which we work out together. If we have a 
 lecture, we work before and after it. 
 
 I should like to say one word on the time of training. When shall 
 teachers be trained 1 After she has been well educated. During her 
 education let her forget she is going to be a teacher, let her mix with 
 others who are not going to be teachers, let her interests and sym- 
 pathies and her knowledge be as wide as possible. Then let her for a 
 very short time concentrate her attention on preparation for her 
 work. I would allow no training college to give education, or any 
 part of education. We have already good colleges for general educa- 
 tion. As regards the time to be devoted to training, Professor Laurie 
 says, I think, six months, i.e ., twenty-four weeks. I find thirty weeks 
 satisfactory, I think this is enough for a well-educated woman. 
 
 Then there is the question of where shall teachers be trained, and 
 because of the inevitable concentration of interests in a training college 
 I think it is of special importance that it is connected, either officially 
 or unofficially, with a university or university college. 
 
 Now I have not said one word on the question of practising schools. 
 Here again I am a hopeless heretic. I do not believe in a practising 
 school. The head of the training college is either head mistress of it, 
 or can control it ; the school is to some extent unnatural, and to some 
 extent bad. We have tried an experiment in Cambridge. We have four- 
 teen schools where we practise, where my fads count for very little, and 
 where we could be turned out if we gave too many bad lessons. I am 
 a little proud to say that to some of these schools we have been invited. 
 
 The two great advantages of possessing such varied and wide prac- 
 tising ground are, 1st, a student learns to apply a principle under very 
 varied conditions, and, therefore, will have little difficulty in adjusting 
 herself to new conditions when she leaves us ; and 2nd (and here 
 we come to the third function of a training college), the students find out 
 the kind of educational ivor/c for which they are most suited, e.g., three 
 C. T. C.s are lecturers in day training colleges, three are in residential 
 elementary training colleges, two in board schools, four are engaged in 
 secondary training, one in a boys’ school, one just appointed lecturer 
 under the County Council, and one already working as organiser of 
 technical work. 
 
 What about the poor little children on whom we experiment % You 
 may be surprised to hear that most of them enjoy it very much. I 
 had serious intentions of proving this point by introducing a few classes 
 this morning for you to iqterview, 
 
 
3 
 
 0112 105666579 
 
 8 
 
 The fourth function is to keep its old students as far as possible up to date 
 in all educational matters. I believe very much in the closest relation 
 existing between students in residence and students at work the 
 latter can help us much, criticise our training, tell us where wti have 
 failed to prepare them, &c. We have a free studentship, meant 
 chiefly for old students, which always forms a strong link. 
 
 Let me suggest three rough and ready ways for testing the value of 
 the work of a training college. 
 
 1st. — Does it educate the students'? Have they wider sympathies 
 and interests, greater knowledge, greater intelligence, quicker, 
 stronger, more original minds than when they entered. Education 
 is not the end aimed at, but, if the real end is gained, education is one 
 of the concomitant results. 
 
 2nd. — Do the students enjoy the training ? There are of course some 
 parts which are not very pleasant ; teaching exercises are called by 
 them “ teaching tortures” (I expect they will be so to-day), but on the 
 whole the work ought to be pleasurable to the students, to the staff, 
 and to the poor children ! 
 
 3rd. — If you compare the students when they leave the training 
 college with those students after five years’ experience, are they very 
 much improved at the end of the five years ? Training does give one a 
 good start, but that is the least good which it does ; it gives one the 
 power of learning quickly and extensively from one’s own experience, 
 and from the experience of others, so that the rate of improvement in 
 a trained teacher ought to be much more rapid than if she were un- 
 trained. 1 should have liked very much to have spoken of student 
 teachers, of the many chances a training college has of helping and 
 being helped by its old students, and by other teachers, of the many 
 ways in which such an association as this could help us who are fighting 
 against great odds to improve the profession of teachers. I should have 
 liked to have told you of some of our difficult problems, many of them 
 still unsolved, but the only use of a paper is to start a discussion, and 
 I was particularly anxious to allow plenty of time for this ; and I am so 
 accustomed in this room to have questions hurled at me, and to have 
 to prove my points and to hold my own continually, it has seemed quite 
 strange to be allowed to go on in silence for thirty minutes. 
 
 I am afraid a great many Assistant Mistresses, and indeed Head 
 Mistresses too, know very little of what we are trying to do. I do not 
 think all realise how completely the old idea of training is vanishing, 
 and a newer and far better ideal is being slowly evolved. 
 
 I have given you only a very slight sketch of a part of a very big 
 subject; you will have the opportunity, if you choose, of asking 
 questions of my present students, and of several old students, and some 
 of the students are willing to go through some teaching exercises 
 before you, if you would like to see them. 
 
 We shall hope to welcome you once more on some future occasion 
 when the idea of secondary training is much more advanced than it is at 
 present, 
 
 E. P. HUGHES,