SELF-REPORTING IN SCHOOLS.

Many persons of sound judgment and extensive observation have come to regard the self-reporting system, widely adopted in our public schools, as of very doubtful propriety. The objection is, that it encourages deceit and falsehood, and tends to demoralize pupils. The success of a single pupil in improving his rank by a false report is a very dangerous example for the whole class. The spirit of emulation is thus brought to the aid of temptation. It is a great trial for a spirited young scholar to carry home to ambitious parents a low report, when a little deceit, such as others practise, will save him from mortification. Deceit and falsehood should never triumph over honesty in the school-room.

It is important to develop in scholars a high standard of honor, and they should feel that they can be trusted; but there should be no system in schools where dishonesty has advantages over truth. Unless the self-reporting system is carefully guarded it will lead to great abuses. If all false returns could be discovered and corrected, and timely punishment inflicted, the danger would be greatly reduced; but the great mass of teachers have not the time or the ability for investigating and detecting frauds. It is certainly far better for the teacher to make up his own reports, however imperfect his materials may be, than to tolerate a system which may undermine the morals of his pupils, by rewarding falsehood and degrading truth. Knowledge will be of little advantage to the coming generations without character; and while we enlighten, we should also fortify and strengthen the youthful mind.-Mass. Annual Report.

SPELLING. It is a mistake to require the use of a spelling-book in a primary school. But if one must be used, put as many of the words as possible into sentences of their own. This is a good exercise, and the recognition of a word here and there may lead them to suppose there is a meaning in the rest. But it is enough for a child to spell the words he can read and use intelligently. With these his familiarity should be perfect. Early establish the habit of curiosity about the spelling of a word heard for the first time; so his knowledge of spelling keeps pace with his understanding; but for classes of words, or any generalization, he is yet much too young.-Maine Normal.

Ir is now nearly two years since we organized this department of the MONTHLY to succeed the former "Official Department," which, for years, was filled almost exclusively with official communications from the School Department. Our object was to widen the department—to include in it not only the official instructions and opinions of the School Commissioner, but also plans and suggestions for the improvement of schools, and such other information as would be of value to school officers, particularly the directors of country schools. We believed that this change would make the department more interesting and valuable. We have not been disappointed. On the contrary, there is gratifying evidence, notwithstanding we have failed to receive the assistance we desired and expected, that this department has never been read with greater interest, not only by the general reader, but also by school officers. We feel confident that no other equal number of pages in the MONTHLY are exerting so potent and beneficial influence on our country schools. It is our purpose to enlarge the department, and make it of still greater interest and value. We hope soon to be favored by the School Department with official communications; and brief contributions from school officers and all others interested in this feature of the MONTHLY, are earnestly solicited. We always take pleasure in answering, when able to do so, any practical inquiries that may be submitted.

A FEW WORDS TO SCHOOL DIRECTORS.

We wish to invite the special attention of school officers, particularly of school directors, to the contribution in this number headed "School Progress." The facts stated by the writer reveal a lamentable condition of things in the school districts referred to, and yet, with the single exception of the sub-district that has been without a school for four years, we can give not simply one but several parallel, and even worse, cases. A teacher, not long since, told us that he requested a large boy in his school, who found trouble in distinguishing the letters b and d, to print them on the blackboard. This the boy refused to do, and his parents sustained him in his disobedience, urging that they had bought the boy a spelling-book "to learn his letters from." The truth is hundreds of teachers are deterred from any attempt to adopt better methods of teaching through the fear of opposition from parents and directors. It is true that this fear is often cowardly and sometimes groundless, but it nevertheless exists and exerts its evil influence.

What we wish to urge is, that school directors should not only stand by teachers in their laudable efforts to find a "better way," but they should encourage them to seek it. Instead of being found fault with for getting out of

the beaten track, teachers should be berated for keeping in it. No parent who knows any thing of teaching, wishes his children taught as he was taught. He feels too keenly the defects of his early training. He knows by sad experience, that improvement is both possible and desirable. But, unfortunately, those who know the least about schools are the very parents that resist all improvement, and give teachers most trouble. School directors should firmly stand between the teacher and such old fogyism. There is not only progress in all other departments of effort, but it is accepted and rejoiced in. The farmer does not use the same plow, hoe, scythe, or rake, that was used thirty years ago. Even his horses are not shod in the same way. Every where we recognize progress. Let school instruction form no exception. How sadly it needs to be made more thorough and efficient!

SEPARATE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

MR. EDITOR: In examining the November number of your valuable magazinę, I was much interested in an article headed "The Township System." It expresses my views on this subject. But there is one defect in our present system, which, though important, is not mentioned. I refer to separate or independent districts. A law was passed last winter authorizing any sub-district or any two or more contiguous sub-districts containing two hundred and seventy-five (275) inhabitants, or upwards, to organize as a separate district with all the powers and privileges of such a district. That this provision will prove highly injurious to our township schools, is easily shown.

Townships of average size contain about ten sub-districts. In the more fertile and densely populated townships, there are three or four of these subdistricts containing the requisite number of inhabitants, and, under the law, they may become independent districts, leaving the smaller and weaker subdistricts, from which not unfrequently they have derived their wealth, to take care of themselves. By so doing the larger sub-districts obtain more privileges than when under the control of the township board. They can levy a higher rate of tax, build better school-houses, pay higher wages to teachers, and, as a consequence, have better schools. But how is it with the weaker sub-districts? Cut off from the assistance of the wealthier sub-districts, they are left to struggle on with limited school funds, and are compelled to pay low wages to teachers, and thus can only secure the incompetent and inefficient—those who are willing to "teach for nothing and board themselves." The result is, that the weaker sub-districts as a class can only have poor schools. This evil is great even where an entire township is fertile and rich, but when only a portion of a township is fertile (and this portion will usually have the requisite population), the condition of the schools in the more unproductive portion may more readily be imagined than described.

But, it will be urged, these wealthier sub-districts wish better schools than they now have, and they ought to have the privilege of sustaining them. We admit that they ought to have better schools, but not by injuring or destroying

the schools in the other sub-districts. I think that the desired end could best be attained by repealing all the provisions of the law relating to independent districts, and giving to each township board of education full control and direction of all the schools within the boundaries of the township, with power to levy as high a rate of tax as the boards of separate districts are authorized to levy. In short, I would substitute for our present mixed arrangement the "Township System" as described by you in the November number of the MONTHLY.

W. R. S.

[REMARKS.-In our November article, we purposely omitted any reference to the law referred to by our correspondent, intending to give this feature of our school system a separate consideration. We are glad that we are happily saved the trouble. The fact is worthy of remark that the two principal amendments to the general school law enacted by the last Legislature, were serious inroads on the township feature of the school system. We allude to the law providing for the organization of separate districts above referred to, and the law authorizing a sub-district tax for school-house purposes-the latter, we are happy to add, being limited in its action to the years 1867 and 1868. Both of these laws are in the direction of the old sub-district system. They are steps backward. What is wanted is a forward movement—the adoption of the township system, pure and simple. We do not, however, quite agree with our correspondent in the opinion that all separate districts should be abolished. We see no objections to the provisions of the law of 1853 which make towns and incorporated villages containing three hundred inhabitants, separate districts. This provision has resulted in the organization of hundreds of good graded schools, and has otherwise worked well. But we unite in the protest against the breaking up of our townships into petty independent districts.—ED. MONTHLY.]

THE TOWNSHIP SYSTEM.

With my whole heart I believe that the highest success can not be attained with our present local organization, and that the true remedy is the township system. It was recommended by our first State superintendent, and has been indorsed by all his successors; I have cited in its favor the earnest approval of some of the ablest and best men of other States; it is sanctioned by every State superintendent from whom I have heard on the subject; it has been in operation in several States for many years, and not one of them could be induced to return to the other plan; the tendency of legislation is all in that direction in States where the system has not yet been established; it has been vindicated by experience, vindicated by results, vindicated by its simplicity and self-evident adaptation to the wants of the people and to the necessities of the case: the preponderance of argument, of experience, of testimony, of economy, and of common sense, is arrayed on its side. I believe it is destined to become, territorially, the ultimate American system of school organization ; and to the end that it may speedly be inaugurated and established in Illinois, I earnestly invoke the coöperation of the friends of common schools, and the favorable regard of the General Assembly.-Hon. NEWTON BATEMAN, State Superintendent of Public Instruction of Illinois.

Editorial Department.

WE call special attention to the article in this number ably reviewing the recent work of Professor Youmans entitled “The Culture Demanded by Modern Life." We most heartily agree with the writer in the view that the great problem in higher education is the harmonious adjustment and combination of language, mathematics, metaphysics, and the physical sciences as parts of a philosophic and thorough course of training. As we said last month, neither of these great classes of studies can take the place of the other. Each is necessary to a full and harmonious development of the mind. We wish to add that, in our judgment, the study of the physical sciences should begin as early as the study of language.

CLOSE OF THE VOLUME.

We are happy to be able to announce that the MONTHLY closes the current volume with the largest circulation in its history. This fact is all the more gratifying since the volume was begun under special discouragements. The previous year had been so crowded with duties that we had been unable to give the necessary time to editorial labor, and its close found us in a condition demanding rest and recuperation. A new magazine was started at Cincinnati, and, although its own want of success was evident, bid fair to lessen the MONTHLY'S circulation in that section of the State, and otherwise weaken its support.

Notwithstanding these and other drawbacks, the MONTHLY was enlarged to forty pages, and otherwise, with increased expense, greatly improved. We put our trust in the professional spirit of Ohio teachers, and confidently went forward. The result has more than met our moderate expectations. Our Cincinnati rival quietly suspended with its fourth issue, leaving us again an open and undisputed field. Our circulation steadily increased not only within but beyond the borders of the State-in the East, West, and South. In short, the evidences of increasing success multiplied from month to month, and the year closes with bright prospects for the future. Certainly the MONTHLY has never before been so widely and favorably known. Words of encouragement reach us from all parts of the country.

THE MONTHLY FOR 1868.

Our arrangements for the next year are a guarantee that the present character of the MONTHLY will be more than sustained. Our excellent corps of contributors-whose contributions have certainly not been excelled by those to any