standard it makes all the difference whether one small book has been read through and through for the whole year, or a variety of books, so as to accustom the children to the sight of many words and phrases. In the first case nearly all the lessons may be known by heart, and no testing of the power of reading can be had while the child's acquaintance with his mother tongue has been restricted to very narrow limits indeed, and for the acquirement of the art of reading time has been thrown away; but if the range of experience has been widened it has been found that no lower certainty of performance in the given standard has been achieved, while comparatively a world of information, and a vast fund of intelligence, as well as a better practice in pronunciation, expression, and readiness, has been opened out to him. Yet both these extremes are to be found. The first, it is to be regretted, with the great majority is adopted as the safest course for the individual examination, and as least expensive in the outlay for books, and yet thereby much opportunity is lost to the children, for the reading lesson affords a ready Linge for collateral information and intellectual cultivation. Better than the purchase of reading books is the plan now adopted in some of the best schools, of taking out on loan by subscription from a library, which has been established in London for this purpose alone, sets of suitable books, which are exchanged at the month's end, or at longer intervals. This ensures a constant succession of books, and more expensive works of a higher character are thereby put before the children. The success of this undertaking is showing itself in the reading of those schools which have availed themselves of it, and the cost of subscribing does not exceed the usual outlay for books.'

Mr. Scoltock (British Schools, Midland District).—' Reading continues to be well taught.'

Mr. Sewell (Lincoln and Notts.) The reading has sensibly improved with the improved character of the books lately introduced. Where this exercise is not well done, it is often found that a change of books will improve it, when the greatest pains are wasted with the books that are old and familiar. A new book requires both teachers and children to look at it while they read, and to pronounce each word as they receive the impression of its printed symbol on their eyes. Thus clearness of pronunciation and vivacity are produced; but a book so well known as to be seen, so to speak, without being looked at, is read with confusion and indistinctness. Those books are found best that have, among other things, their text broken up into short paragraphs, with plenty of beginaings and endings for the eye to rest upon. The children have not then to gaze across a seemingly trackless wilderness of words, but find halting places which diversify the dull monotony of the page. The weariness which most men find in reading a page of folio, children feel in reading from a book printed in continuous unbroken lines.'

Mr. Temple (Cheshire).-' Reading is very decidedly better throughout the district than it was four years ago, and I am disposed to attribute this amendment in great measure to the practice of teaching the children to repeat poetry, which has now become almost universal in my schools.'

Mr. Warburton (Hampshire).-' Reading continues to be carefully and correctly taught. The elements of reading are certainly imparted with more method, rapidity, and success than formerly, but it never seems to get beyond a certain point of excellence; as the children rise into higher standards they are able to read longer and harder words, and that is all. I do not remark a progressive improvement in intelligent and expressive reading in proportion as children are longer under instruction. The Inspector can hardly refuse to pass boys and girls who glibly read off, and correctly articulate words of four or five syllables, however evident it may be that they have no conception of what the author meant to convey, and though they read the whole in one tone, or only dropping the voice at certain mechanical intervals, as if trying to read on the principle of a Gregorian chant, with a total absence of feeling, emphasis, and undertone. Candidates for apprenticeship as pupil teachers are required by your Lordships to read with expression: is it too much to expect of children of nearly the same age, in the classes, that they should do the same? I am convinced that two expedients commonly neglected would conduce more to this end than long and continuous lessons of the approved type: first, the adoption of the plan of making the children commit to memory short passages of prose as well as poetry, and repeat them again and again with proper emphasis and expression, as an exercise in elocution; and secondly, the introduction into the reading lessons of a much larger element of dialogue, in reading which the children should be made to personate the speakers engaged in the conversation, a group of three or four, as the case may be, first taking up the reading and conducting it in quasi-dramatic form, and then another group, between whom the parts of the dialogue should be distributed in the same way. Where this plan has been tried by way of experiment for the first time in a school, the bystanders have been taken by surprise at observing its effect on the children, in awakening them out of the state of half consciousness in which the reading lesson is too frequently got through, and exhibiting to them in such a vivid manner as often to provoke a general laugh, the absurdity of reading an animated question and the reply to it in the same tone and in the same key.'

Mr. Watkins (Lincoln, Nottingham, and York). Of the 11,410 children examined under the code from the day schools, 10,427, or 911 per cent. passed in reading. But is the return from the day schools satisfactory? 91 per cent. of the children examined can read sufficiently

well in their different tests to satisfy the demands of the code. But the children examined are not quite half of the whole number in attendance, so that the percentage drops at once from 91 to 45, and this latter number represents the percentage of children in a school who can read passably. By this term I understand fluently, correctly, and with proper observance of stops, but I have never held it to require expressiveness in reading, which alone shows intelligence of the subject matter, and is of any real use to the reader. I must record my conviction, from two more years' work, that the character of reading required under the code, and obtained by it, is altogether insufficient, and almost illusory. It does not convey the idea that the reader is interested in his book, or hold out the hope that he will voluntarily take to it when he is his own master in life. The meaning of any but the commonest words is generally unknown to him, and allusions to other matters-places, persons, things are for the most part thrown away upon him.'

Mr. Wilkinson (Episcopal Schools, Scotland). The reading varies much in my district; generally it is much more accurate than it used to be, but still it is very far from being sufficiently distinct. Poetry I seldom find to be read well.'

Mr. Woodford (South Scotland) shows by a table that the percentage of passes in reading has gradually improved in each standard during the last three years, ranging from 91.9 in Standard I., to 97.3 in Standard VII., and then proceeds: The steady and unbroken advance here shown is due primarily to the increased care that is taken to secure individual progress, instead of relying, as formerly, on the general appearanee made by a class, when the error of one was immediately corrected by another, or his hesitation covered by prompting. The books for beginners are now also much more equally progressive, and otherwise more judiciously prepared and printed. And a good many teachers are showing less faith in the "look and say " system, and letting the children try to make out a word from the powers of the letters, instead of telling them words before they know the letters; a practice which was introduced by this system as a great improvement, and might really be so on the fallacious assumption that the name sounds (so called) of the vowels are really their normal sounds in the language.'

REVIEWS OF READING BOOKS, No. II.-LAURIE'S
STANDARD BOOKS.

The Primer. This is an admirable little book of lessons, containing 64 pp. and four full page illustrations. It is well printed, and the matter is suitable. We should suppose that it is principally intended for infant schools, for which it is in every way adapted. It would also make a very good reading book for the first Standard, and by some might be preferred to Mr. Laurie's 1st Reader. It is bound strongly in cloth at 3d., and sewed in stiff paper covers at 1d.

Reader No. I.-This book is beautifully printed, and contains 62 pp. and 8 illustrations. The price of the best edition is 4d.; that of the cheap edition, 3d. The lessons are chiefly of a narrative character, and are adapted to the understandings of children. In the new Reader which has recently appeared there is nothing to offend any judgment, however fastidious with regard to lessons written in a childish style. Of the printing of the book we cannot speak too highly; the illustrations, also, are excellent. This is decidedly the best first Standard Reader we have yet seen. This book is entirely different from the original first Standard Reader which has been the subject of so much hostile criticism. The objection to it was this: that aiming to adapt itself to a child's understanding, it was really foolish and nonsensical. As to the idea that was in Mr. Laurie's mind there is no doubt that it is worthy of consideration. We of mature age have our literature-our Homer, our Shakspere, our Dante and our Scott. But to a child these are all strange and foreign. The question then narrows itself to this-is a child's imagination only to be fed with inane and maudlin sketches of faithful dogs and grateful donkeys, or is it to be nourished with the literature which it most loves, and which, when it has the power, it invariably selects. A child is as fond of his Jack the Giant-killer, Beauty and the Beast, Story of Cock Robin, Aladdin and the Lamp, as an adult is of the Iliad of Homer ́or the historical plays of Shakspere. The question boldly presents itself, then :'Can these books be recommended for a child's reading with safety?' We have no space to discuss the question here, but it is evident that Mr. Laurie would answer the question in the affirmative. We cannot help remarking, that some of the lessons in this old first Reader are far sillier than the story of the Giant-killer or of Bluebeard. On the whole, therefore, we think that Mr. Laurie has acted wisely in remodelling this book. It is a great improvement upon the first edition,

Reader No. II. This book contains 94 pp., and is illustrated with eleven wood engravings. The price of the best edition is 6d.; of the

cheap edition, 5d. We cannot speak too highly of the excellence of the printing, binding and engraving of this book. The printing is so large, clear, and open, as to make its perusal additionally pleasant. There may be difference of opinion as to whether the stories in this book are suitable. We cannot see any valid reason against them. We find here, for instance, the story of Little Bo-peep who lost her Sheep. Most of the poets tell us that it is an unhealthy state of mind, when a man has no sympathy with the life of childhood. The verses Mary had a little Lamb are excellent, and well-suited to this book. The story of the Three Bears, too, if we mistake not, is by a writer of no less eminence than Southey, and has a quaint attraction that commends it to the minds of all. We are also pleased to see some extracts from Robinson Crusoe.

Reader No. III.-This book contains 126 pages, and has six full page illustrations. The printing, however, is not nearly so good as in the preceding book. It contains passages for dictation at the end; the multiplication, division, and pence tables; and an admirable piece of music to Mr. Capern's song on the cuckoo. It consists of a number of moral tales. And here again we find ourselves in the midst of a wide question, as to whether useful or attractive matter is most suitable for teaching reading in schools. Mr. Laurie seems to argue thus:-The chief design of the reading book is to teach reading, and reading will be sooner taught if the subject matter is attractive. And without entering upon the subject here, we cannot deny that there is much force in the argument. The kind of reading lessons which consist of descriptions of the manufacture of glass, paper, and silk, are not only ill adapted for teaching reading, but also fail to convey any idea to the youthful mind of the processes they describe. They are dreaded by the scholars, and it is a hard task to enforce attention, whilst they are being read. We are glad to see in this book the story of Little Red Riding Hood, and some extracts from the Pilgrim's Progress. More pieces might have been taken from this book with advantage, and other extracts might have been inserted from Robinson Crusoe. The story of Dame Crump and her Pig might have been omitted without loss, although there is nothing objectionable in it. The price of the best edition of this book is 8d.; that of the cheap edition, 7d. Generally speaking, the lessons are well selected, and admirably adapted for children in the third Standard. One great fault the editor has avoided-the lessons are not too difficult.

Reader No. IV.This book contains 152 pages, and is adorned with six full-page illustrations. The price of the best edition is 10d., that of the cheap edition 8d. The printing, though plain and readable, is neither so plain nor so attractive as in the second reading book. This book consists of stories of animals. As we remarked in our notice of Book III.,