A harmless paper enough on "As You Like It" set in an Oxford Junior Local Examination, taken as typical of English method, is held up to scorn because it does not provide for "real knowledge, training, or cultivation of mind." Though the questions are not above criticism, we cannot detect in the paper any vital inconsistency with the ideal of study held up for pupils of the same age in a later passage of the book. The authors, however, will not admit that English ideas on teaching the vernacular are worthy of consideration. Relying perhaps too much on the jeremiads which almost alone find expression in print, they do not give us in England credit for the genuine interest in the teaching of our language and literature, or the thought that is bestowed upon the subject in many English

schools.

The reference in the book under review is naturally to the schools in the United States. . But most of what is said is directly applicable to English conditions, and even such a strictly American problem as that of "Uniform College Entrance Requirements" has a distinct bearing upon the parallel question of a Leaving Certificate in English schools. In reading the chapters on the elementary schools, one should remember that the leaving age contemplated is fourteen, and that for many of the children a "high school" course follows. It must also be borne in mind that the excessive amount of attention devoted to the "rhetorical" side of composition is foreign to English ideas and practice; and, it may be added, the perusal of the pages upon "rhetoric" will not induce the English teacher to modify his present attitude towards composition. As is usual in American books on education, a very full bibliography is provided.

EDUCATION AT THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION.

HOUGH the Education Section has not

ΤΗ swallowed up the rest of the British Asso

ciation, as some predicted it would, yet its influence has this year been more pervasive than ever. Sir Norman Lockyer's presidential address was an eloquent plea for the creation of more universities, the "battleships of the modern State," and for the more generous endowment of scientific research. In the Geological Section. Prof. Watts has been demanding a place in the curriculum for Geology, on the ground that observational science is being ousted from the schools in favour of the experimental sciences. Prof. Boys has ridden a tilt against the teaching of Euclid in the public schools; an attack which most teachers will consider a little belated. Finally, Sir Robert Giffen, in his paper on the nation's wealth, told us that a hundred millions ought to be spent upon education, instead of the paltry thirty millions now allotted to it.

Sir William Abney's address as President of the Educational Science Section was a historical

sketch of what the State has done to promote science teaching in England since the formation of the Science and Art Department in 1853. The subject is one upon which Sir William speaks with indisputable authority. Since 1876, in which year, as he reminds us, he became one of the first Inspectors under the Department, he has been ever more and more responsible for its work. As we read this, his "apologia pro vita sua," with its splendid record of achievement, it is impossible not to agree with Prof. Armstrong in deploring "the action which has deprived us, at one of the most critical periods in the history of English education, of the services of a man of such unique experience."

In accordance with the practice of former years, the work of the Section proper has been confined to one or two broad subjects; a prolonged debate upon Curriculum occupied the morning and afternoon sessions on Thursday and Friday, and was nominally based on the eight papers printed as a supplement to last month's SCHOOL WORLD. It would have been better had the writers of papers each been limited to a specific part of the subject; as it was, with the exception of Mr. Paton, each writer travelled over the whole field, in a manner which would have baffled discussion if the papers had been read to the meeting.

The first day was devoted to "General Prin ciples," and speakers were asked to discuss the following propositions, about which the writers of papers seemed to be in agreement :

(1) It is desirable that specialisation should be deferred to as late a period as possible in the school career, and that the early curriculum should be so arranged as to lay a good foundation in English subjects, with, say, drawing and elementary science.

(2) It is to be regretted that the influence of public-school entrance and scholarship examinations encourages the premature devotion of too much time to classics; it would be desirable that the study of Latin should not be taken before, say, twelve years of age, and that the language teaching up to that time should be confined to the mother tongue and one modern language.

(3) That a large measure of practical instruction should be included in the school course, and that both literary and practical instruction should be given throughout and made interdependent.

The field, as thus defined, was wide, but apparently not wide enough for some of the speakers. Over and over again the limits were transgressed, and, regarded as a debate, the discussion, in spite of some brilliant speeches, was hardly a success. For the teacher, however, it was well worth while to hear the question treated from such differing stand-points as those of the Professors of Education-Mr. Adams and Mr. Sadler; the public schoolmasters Mr. Eve, Mr. Page, and Mr. Swallow; the university women- Miss Cooper and Miss Maitland; the secondary schoolmasters -Mr. Daniell and Mr. W. L. Fletcher; the elementary schoolmasters - Mr. Gray and Mr. Yoxall.

Mr. Sadler opened the discussion with a plea for a wider interest in education. "We do not want experts governing a tame nation." What is neces

sary is that the people generally should come to believe in the value of education. He was in favour of deferring specialisation until after the secondary school course is completed. Practical manual work was certainly going to be more important in the future than in the past. Why shouldn't boys, for example, build and decorate their cricket pavilion? After all, however, it is the teacher that matters. The ideal which the teacher must satisfy is not an ideal of erudition; some of the best teachers don't know much. What we look for in a teacher are: "(1) Sympathy, (2) a hot temper, (3) a sunny disposition, (4) a sharp tongue to be used when necessary, (5) a young spirit under grey hairs."

Prof. Adams, who followed, saw at the present time that there was a distinct danger lest we should produce a generation of teachers "lopsided on the side of science." Only nine per cent. of his own students in the London Day Training College were reading for an Arts degree, and yet the ex-pupil teacher sorely needs the influence of humanistic studies. The type of mind they were producing was too scientific, and in London the University was not a little to blame. It encourages the study of Greek by examining Intermediate Arts Students in Sophocles, though they have not taken Greek for matriculation, and do not need it in their final examination.

Mr. Page, of Charterhouse, challenged the supporters of science to explain exactly what they wanted taught. Scientific training was, no doubt, the road to wealth; was it the best means of forming the mind? He found one of the papers headed with the quotation: "Man is a tool-using animal." Let them beware of training their boys to be tool-using animals and nothing more. It was easy to teach a boy to use his fingers, it was hard to teach him to use his mind. He was afraid that modern educationists were taking the easier and the lower way.

The fourth opener, Mr. Daniell, representing the Teachers' Guild, explained the views of that body as set out in his paper which appeared last month. The discussion was continued by Miss Maitland, who considered the salaries now paid to teachers were "degrading to the profession; " other speakers were Mr. H. W. Eve, the Rev. R. D. Swallow, Mr. W. L. Fletcher, and Prof. R. S. Conway. Mr. Yoxall, M.P., the secretary of the National Union of Teachers, was of opinion that we should soon see specialised schools established, each with a distinctive curriculum; the general trend of the discussion, however, was certainly away from specialisation of any sort in the secondary school. Mr. Ernest Gray, M.P., pointed out the danger there is that the business men, who are in the majority on the new Education Committees, will look for immediate practical results, and that this will lead to premature preparation for particular trades, unless teachers bestir themselves to prevent it.

The subject of the second day's discussion was "The Teaching of Girls," and was opened by Miss Burstall. Her first point was that, up to the age

of ten, at least half the school time should be given up to manual and physical training. Not until a girl is twelve years of age should the literary training predominate. From twelve to eighteen one-third of the time should be spent on science, one-third on languages, one-third on the humanities and English. Between the ages of twelve and sixteen there is a marked difference between a boy and a girl, and there must therefore be divergence in curricula. A girl between her twelfth and her sixteenth year cannot work hard and continuously without injury to her present and future well-being. "This is a point," said Miss Burstall, "which I will stand to to the last gasp." It was also the most interesting point which emerged during the debate. Its bearing upon the question of co-education is evident, and when appeals for a direct pronouncement which were made by Dr. Lloyd Snape, Mr. Ernest Gray, and others, went unheeded, one could not avoid the conviction that women teachers of high position and wide experience, such as Miss Maitland, Miss Cooper, and Miss Burstall, are not prepared to advocate co-education for girls and boys of secondary school age, save when financial conditions and considerations of numbers render the separate education of the sexes impossible.

Prof. Armstrong, in a speech which Mr. Yoxall subsequently described as a reversion to the ideas of a hundred years ago, attacked the modern attitude towards women's education. "Woman is not female man," he said; "she is a different animal. That is not the ladies' opinion, I know; but if you look at the matter from the Darwinian point of view, and consider what the position of women in the world has been and is, it cannot be otherwise. It was only within recent years that woman has ceased to be a slave. It takes many generations to get rid of the incubus laid on her by nature."

Miss Maitland answered Prof. Armstrong's charge, that women's education was too academic and too literary, by saying that in her experience college-bred girls became healthy, sensible women, and were certainly good housewives and mothers. It was only by beating man on his own ground that woman had won her right to higher education at all.

The outcome of a most animated, discussion was the following propositions, all of which were assented to by the section :

(i.) It is desirable that in organising the curriculum there should be some differentiation, especially in science, between courses of study for boys and those for girls, more particularly between twelve to sixteen years of age.

(ii.) That for all girls literary and artistic instruction is of the highest importance; at some period of their school life practical instruction in the domestic arts should be provided, based on and correlated with elementary science teaching.

(iii.) With a view to obviate over-pressure, injury to health and superficiality, girls who intend to proceed to college, or enter a literary profession, should in general remain at school till eighteen years of age.

(iv.) It is desirable that County and Borough Councils and other authorities offering scholarships for girls to enable them to proceed to college should not expect them to take up their scholarships before they reach the age of eighteen.

In the afternoon there was to have been a discussion upon Commercial Education. Mr. Paton, of Manchester Grammar School, summarised his paper in an admirable and convincing speech, but the rest of the session was occupied with echoes of the previous day's debate. Sir Oliver Lodge expressed his surprise that, while teachers talked so much common-sense in their meetings, the output of the schools was so unsatisfactory. Mr. W. L. Fletcher restated the principles upon which it seemed to him we were in agreement; and Mr. C. J. Hamilton, Secretary of the Moseley Educational Commission, asked for suggestions on the work of the Commission from practical teachers.

On Sept. 14th the teaching of geography was considered at a joint meeting with the Geographical Section. Mr. Mackinder, who opened the discussion, advocated a regional treatment of the subject as opposed to a physical treatment under such categories as "volcanoes," "climate," "wind," and the like. Geography would never, he thought, take its proper place as an educational discipline until four conditions were simultaneously satisfied: (1) the encouragement of university schools of geography, (2) the appointment of specialists in geography on the staffs of secondary schools, (3) the general acceptance of a progressive method in the subject, (4) the setting of examinations by geographical teachers.

Of the dozen speakers who followed him, Mr. Hugh Richardson was the most interesting with his account of the way in which the boys of Bootham School are taught to rewrite their notebook records in the language of Ruskin.

Four valuable reports upon School Hygiene, the Teaching of Botany, Elementary Science Teaching, and the Influence of Examinations, have been presented and considered, and a committee has been appointed to consider "Courses of experimental, observational and practical instruction most desirable for elementary schools." In the discussion on the Examinations Report Sir William Abney said that there would be no difficulty in obtaining competent officers for the Army if the subalterns were paid a living wage. The Army entrance examinations were not to blame. At the same time the practice of assigning definite marks to the different subjects set in those examinations would shortly cease.

It will be seen from this brief account that a great deal of solid work has been accomplished. Perhaps, however, the most useful function that the Section performs is that of an educational "clearing house." The associations with which the educational world is honey-combed are all of them sectional, and all of them, therefore, narrow; and because it supplies a common ground upon which all classes of teachers may meet one another and exchange ideas, and meet also thoughtful people who are not teachers, the Education Section deserves well of the profession.

H.

THE IRISH TECHNICAL CONGRESS.

THE second Irish Technical Congress was held in Belfast on September 2nd and 3rd, under the presidency of Sir James Henderson, chairman of the Belfast Library and Technical Instruction Committee. Upwards of fifty delegates were present from various technical instruction committees in the four provinces of Ireland. The Rev. P. J. Dowling, of Cork, acted as hon. secretary. The agenda was a full one, consisting of twenty-eight points, of which seventeen were energetically discussed. Most of these subjects had direct bearing upon the efficient organisa tion and management of technical schools in Ireland, upon the attitude of the Department of Technical Instruction in regard to technical instruction committees, and upon the distribution of funds at the disposal of the Department.

A lengthy discussion ensued upon the reading of a paper by Mr. A. E. Easthope, of Dundalk, on the co-ordination of secondary schools with technical schools. After instancing some of the changes that had taken place in educational administration in Ireland consequent upon the report of the Vice-Regal Commission of 1898, Mr. Easthope advocated a better understanding between the National Commissioners and the Department of Technical Instruction, whereby manual training, science, and domestic economy instruction, now being given in primary schools, might be transferred to the technical school laboratory and work. shop under properly trained teachers. There was at the present time too much overlapping between the various systems in Ireland, and a proper system of co-ordination of work was required. Mr. Quick (Limerick) stated that both Belfast and Limerick had decided upon the establishment of day technical schools as the best means of bridging the gap referred to. Eventually the fol lowing resolution was adopted unanimously: “That_the_Department be requested to draw up a scheme of co-ordination between the secondary schools and the technical schools, and that the same be submitted to and discussed by a joint conference of masters of secondary schools, the headmasters of technical schools, the representatives of associated county councils, and the representatives of the Department."

Considerable discussion took place relative to the attitude of some trades bodies in refusing to allow teachers of subjects connected with various trades to follow their work during the day. Mr. Quick, who introduced the subject, stated that his committee were somewhat hampered in their scheme by this action on the part of the local trades. The funds of the committee would not permit of their appointing expert men for all the trades subjects, but such men could be induced to come if work was available for them during the day. The trades unions, however, refused to agree to this, although the masters were willing to take the men. The Rev. Father Dowling remarked they were This attitude was experiencing the same difficulty in Cork. severely deprecated by Messrs. Richardson and Symonds, the president and secretary of the Dublin Trades Council, the former stating that the Trades Congress had been agitating for years past for the spread of technical education, and on no account would the committee he represented sanction or sympathise with such conditions as Father Dowling and Mr. Quick had referred to. The following resolutions were adopted: (i) "That this Congress deprecates the attitude adopted by trades bodies in some districts in Ireland in preventing teachers employed by technical committees following their trades during the day." (ii.) "That this Congress should call upon the master tradesmen to co-operate in extending technical education among their employees, particularly the apprentices."

On Wednesday, September 2nd, a meeting took place of the delegates of Associated Technical Committees, when the council of the association was elected, the name of the association changed to "The Irish Technical Association," and other business transacted.

THE NATIONAL VALUE OF HIGHER EDUCATION.1

CHIEF among the causes which have brought us to the terrible condition of inferiority as compared with other nations in which we find ourselves are our carelessness in the matter of education and our false notions of the limitations of State functions in relation to the conditions of modern civilisation.

Time was when the Navy was largely a matter of private and local effort. William the Conqueror gave privileges to the Cinque Ports on the condition that they furnished fifty-two ships when wanted. In the time of Edward III., of 730 sail engaged in the siege of Calais, 705 were "people's ships.” All this has passed away; for our first line of defence we no longer depend on private and local effort.

Time was when not a penny was spent by the State on elementary education. Again, we no longer depend upon private and local effort. The Navy and primary education are now recognised as properly calling upon the public for the necessary financial support. But when we pass from primary to university education, instead of State endowment we find State neglect ; we are in a region where it is nobody's business to see that anything is done.

We, in Great Britain, have thirteen universities competing with 134 State and privately endowed in the United States and twenty-two State-endowed in Germany. I leave other countries out of consideration for lack of time, and I omit all reference to higher institutions for technical training, of which Germany alone possesses nine of university rank, because they are less important; they instruct rather than educate, and our want is education. The German State gives to one university more than the British Government allows to all the universities and university colleges in England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales put together. These are the conditions which regulate the production of brain-power in the United States, Germany, and Britain respectively, and the excuse of the Government is that this a matter for private effort. Do not our Ministers of State know that other civilised countries grant efficient State aid, and, further, that private effort has provided in Great Britain less than ten per cent. of the sum thus furnished in the United States in addition to State aid? Are they content that we should go under in the great struggle of the modern world because the Ministries of other States are wiser, and because the individual citizens of another country are more generous than our own?

If we grant that there was some excuse for the State's neglect so long as the higher teaching dealt only with words, and books alone had to be provided (for the streets of London and Paris have been used as class-rooms at a pinch), it must not be forgotten that during the last hundred years not only has knowledge been enormously increased, but things have replaced words, and fully equipped laboratories must take the place of books and class-rooms if university training worthy of the name is to be provided. There is much more difference in size and kind between an old and a new university than there is between the old caravel and a modern battleship, and the endowments must follow suit.

What are the facts relating to private endowment in this country? In spite of the munificence displayed by a small number of individuals in some localities, the truth must be spoken. In depending in our country upon this form of endow

ment we are trusting to a broken reed. If we take the twelve English University Colleges, the forerunners of universities, unless we are to perish from lack of knowledge, we find that private effort during sixty years has found less than £4,000,000; that is, £2,000,000 for buildings, and £40,000 a year income. This gives us an average of £166,000 for buildings, and £3,300 for yearly income.

What is the scale of private effort we have to compete with in regard to the American universities? In the United States, during the last few years, universities and colleges have received more than £40,000,000 from this source alone; private effort supplied nearly £7,000,000 in the years 1898-1900.

Next consider the amount of State aid to universities afforded in Germany. The buildings of the new University of Strassburg have already cost nearly a million; that is, about as much as has yet been found by private effort for buildings in Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Bristol, Newcastle, and Sheffield. The Government annual endowment of the same German university is more than £49,000. This is what private endowment does for us in England, against State endowment in Germany. But our State does concede the principle of endowment; its present contribution to our universities and colleges amounts to £155,600 a year. No capital sum, however, is taken for buildings. The State endowment of the University of Berlin alone in 1891-2 amounted to £168,777.

When, then, we consider the large endowments of university education both in the United States and Germany, it is obvious that State aid only can make any valid competition possible with either. The more we study the facts, the more statistics are gone into, the more do we find that we, to a large extent, lack both of the sources of endowment upon one or other or both of which other nations depend. We are between two stools, and the prospect is hopeless without some drastic changes. And first among these, if we intend to get out of the present Slough of Despond, must be the giving up of the idea of relying upon private effort.

:

To compete on equal grounds with other nations we must have more universities. But this is not all we want a far better endowment of all the existing ones, not forgetting better opportunities for research on the part of both professors and students. Another crying need is that of more professors and better pay. Another is the reduction of fees; they should be reduced to the level existing in those countries which are competing with us-to, say, one-fifth of their present rates--so as to enable more students in the secondary and technical schools to complete their education.

In all these ways facilities would be afforded for providing the highest instruction to a much greater number of students. At present there are almost as many professors and instructors in the universities and colleges of the United States as there are day students in the universities and colleges of the United Kingdom.

Men of science, our leaders of industry, and the chiefs of our political parties all agree that our present want of higher education-in other words, properly equipped universities—is heavily handicapping us in the present race for commercial supremacy, because it provides a relatively inferior brain-power, which is leading to a relatively reduced national income.

The facts show that in this country we cannot depend upon private effort to put matters right. How about local effort? Anyone who studies the statistics of modern municipalities will see that it is impossible for them to raise rates for the building and upkeep of universities. The buildings of the most modern University in Germany have cost a million. For upkeep the yearly sums found, chiefly by the State, for German universities of different grades, taking the incomes of seven out of the twenty-two universities as examples, are:

Thus, if Leeds, which is to have a university, is content with the fourth-class German standard, a rate must be levied of 7d. in the pound for yearly expenses, independent of all buildings. But the facts are that our towns are already at the breaking strain. During the last fifty years, in spite of enormous increases in ratable values, the rates have gone up from about 2s. to about 75. in the pound for real local purposes. university can be a merely local institution.

But no

THE GROWTH OF THE TEACHING OF SCIENCE IN ENGLISH SCHOOLS.'

THE first science examinations conducted by the State took place in May, 1861, and, the system of grants being made on the results of examination having been authorised, the sum of £1,300 was spent on this occasion on the instruction of 650 candidates, that number having been examined. Thus early was the system of examination commenced, and the method of payments on the results of these examinations stereotyped for many years to come. There is reason to believe that the educational experts of that day considered that both were essential and of educational value, a value which has since been seriously discounted. Employers of labour in this country were not too quick in discerning the advantages that must ultimately ensue from this class of education if properly carried out and encouraged. Theoretically they gave encouragement, but practically very little, and this survives to some extent even to the present day.

No country but this, for very many years, considered that instruction in science for the artisan was a large factor in maintaining and developing industry. The educational interests of the employer and the foremen were, in some countries, well provided for, but the mechanic was merely a hand, and a "hand❞ trained in merely practical work he was to remain. He could not aspire to rise beyond. We may congratulate ourselves that such a "caste" system does not exist amongst ourselves.

For the first twenty-five years of the Department of Science and Art the grants given by Parliament for science instruction were distributed almost entirely amongst those who were officially supposed to belong to the industrial classes, and no encouragement was offered to any higher class in the social scale.

It would take me too long to show that at first the industrial classes were very shy of seizing on the advantages offered them. Suffice it to say that they had to be bribed by the offer of prizes and certificates of success to attend instruction, and it was not for several years that the evening classes got acclimatised and became popular.

Much of the science that was taught in state-supported classes was largely book work and cram, and the theoretical instruction, as a rule, was unillustrated by experiment. This was undoubtedly

1 Abridged from the Address to the Educational Science Section of the British Association delivered by Sir William de W. Abney, K.C, B., D.C. L., D.Sc., F. R.S., President of the Section, on September 10th.

due to the system of payments being based on success at the examinations. I must here say that there were honourable exceptions to this procedure. There were teachers, then as now, who knew the subjects they taught, and who were inspired by a genuine love of their calling.

I am not one of those who think, as some do, that cramming is entirely pernicious. A good deal of what used to be taught at public schools in my days was cram. It served its purpose at the time in sharpening the memory, and was a useful exercise, and it did not much matter if in after years much of it was forgotten. If the cramming is in science, a few facts called back to mind in after life are better than never having had the chance at all. In fact, as the faded beauty replied to the born plain friend, it is better to be one of the "have beens" than a "never wasn't."

The first grants for practical teaching were paid for chemistry. The practical work had to be carried out in properly fitted laboratories. There were not half-a-dozen at the time which really answered our purpose, and one of the earliest pieces of work on which I was engaged was in assisting to get out plans for laboratory fittings. Thanks to the Education Act of 1870 (I speak thankfully of the work that some of the important school boards have done in the past in taking an enlightened view of science instruction), there were some localities where the idea of fitting up laboratories was received with favour, and it was not long before several old ones were refitted, in which instruction to adults was given, and new ones established in board schools for the benefit of the sixth standard children. At that time an inspector's, like the policeman's, lot was not a happy one. We had to refuse to pass laboratories which did not fulfil conditions. though we left very few "hard cases."

Till after the passing of the Technical Instruction Act in 1887 the Department aided schools in the purchase of the fittings of laboratories (both chemical and others), and year after year this help, which stimulated local effort, caused large numbers of new laboratories to be added to the recognised list.

The half-dozen chemical laboratories which existed in 1887 have now expanded to 349 physical and 774 chemical laboratories, These are spread over all parts of England. I leave out Scotland and Ireland, as the science teaching is no longer under the English Board of Education. It is only fair to say that many of this large number of laboratories are at present in secondary schools, regarding which I shall have to speak more at length. But the fact remains that in twenty-seven years there has been such a growth of practical science-teaching that some 1,120 laboratories have come into being.

A reference must now be made to the removal of what anyone will see was a great bar to the spread of sound instruction in every class of school where science was taught. So long as the student's success in examination was the test which regulated the amount of the grant paid by the State, so long was it impossible to insist on all-round practical instruction. It was impracticable to hold practical examinations for tens of thousands of students in some twenty different subjects of science. The practical examination in chemistry told its tale of difficulties. It was only when the Duke of Devonshire and Sir John Gorst in 1898 substituted payment for attendance for the old scheme of payments, and in a large measure substituted inspection for examination, that the Department could still further press for practical instruction. For all elementary instruction the test of outside examination does more harm than good, and any examination in the work done by elementary students should be carried out by the teacher, and should be made on the absolute course that has been given. It seems to be useless or worse that an examination should cover more than this. Instruction in a set syllabus which for an outside examination has to be covered spoils the teaching and takes away the liberty of method which