267

EDUCATION.

UPPER AND MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.

The Scottish University System, with suggestions for its further improvement. By GEORGE LEES, LL.D., St. Andrews.

IT

T is a fact no less remarkable than true, that while all our older and more notable institutions have been opened up and accommodated to the growing intelligence and requirements of the day, the Universities have unfortunately taken an entirely opposite course. For, from having been so thoroughly open by their original constitution, that every Graduate on taking his degree, became entitled ipso facto to teach in the University, or Studium Generale, and to take a part in the general management of all University affairs, these rights have been so gradually narrowed in the course of time, and are now so completely set aside, not as it would appear by design, or any untoward Act upon the subject, but from the force of circumstance, that the Universities are now virtually in the hands of permanently salaried professors, to the exclusion of all graduates however distinguished.

Though bearing but little upon our present object it may be well to refer in a sentence or two to the circumstances under which the graduates of the Scottish Universities lost the rights originally conferred upon them. In the earlier days of the Universities it would appear that though the graduates had an undoubted right of teaching in the Universities, yet whether from better employment as preachers or teachers in schools or otherwise, they were often so drafted away, that in order to secure a sufficient supply, they were at length enjoined to give their services in teaching for a period of two years after their graduation. Again, when they became more numerous, dispensations from teaching were occasionally granted; then as time went on, more and more frequently, until what was asked at first as a favour, became in the course of events so common as to be demanded and assented to as a right.

In this way the resident doctors, masters, or regents, as they were then synonymously called, became so reduced in numbers, whether from the smallness of the remuneration in comparison with that of other fields for educational purposes, or from other causes, that the authorities were under the necessity of having recourse to salaried teachers in order to carry on the business of University Instruction.

During the open teaching time of the Universities, or open Doctorate as it was then called, it was the uniform practice of the teachers to carry on their respective classes in all the branches of the curriculum, during the whole four years' course, just as the Masters of the High School or Edinburgh Academy conduct their classes, through their four years' course of study, before passing them into the hands of their respective rectors; or as the tutors in the English Universities do at the present day. Though this plan had the advantage of enabling the doctor or master to become intimately acquainted with the character and talents of his pupils, from being so long under his charge, and thereby to give his instructions a better adaptation perhaps to their intellectual progress and moral condition, it lay open to the objection of the student's course being more fully charged with those subjects which the particular gifts of the master would lead him to estimate most highly, and this necessarily to the comparative neglect of the other branches, and these perhaps of no less importance in the judicious training of the student.

At what precise period the plan, now invariably followed in Scotland, of assigning the different branches of the curriculum to different masters respectively, came to be adopted, does not exactly appear. There can be no doubt, however, of its vast superiority over the old method. For in this way each master gets the subject best suited to his special gifts and tastes; and by which therefore we may fairly expect the whole curriculum to be most thoroughly and zealously developed; the bearings and beauties of its various branches most fully and clearly expounded, and thus the whole course of instruction made most effective, for the general advantage of the student.

Though the rights of the graduate to teach during the various transformations through which the Universities must have passed were never questioned, far less annulled by any enactment, they nevertheless fell in process of time into complete abeyance; and the salaried professors, as a matter of course, took entire possession of the field as University teachers. Whether in these circumstances the rights of the graduates to teach are still good, still intact, as never having been given up, or taken from them by any statute is a question for the lawyers to answer.

Such then seems to be the early history of the Scottish Universities, and such the more prominent facts connected with the changes they have undergone, in coming into their present condition. And now what shall we say of this?

That the professorial system, now in force in Scotland, is immeasureably superior to the original plan of teaching entirely by graduates, or to the tutorial system now prevalent in the great English Universities, can hardly be questioned, and certainly will not be questioned by any one qualified from experience to judge. Under no arrangements, we believe, for laying all departments of University study on a sound philosophical basis, could the teachers and the taught be more favourably situated, with reference to this great object, than under those now existing in the Scottish Univer

sities. There is undoubtedly very much in a numerous class intent upon improvement, that is eminently fitted to stir up all the intellect and energies of a teacher, in doing his utmost on behalf of his students; and not a little certainly on their part, as awakened by his zeal and their own numbers, and as having their thoughts directed individually and collectively to the exposition of the same point at the same moment, which contributes greatly, in our opinion, to secure a thorough efficiency in the results of the teaching. Now these stimulating influences, these acting and reacting forces, as affecting both professors and students, existing as they must do in a degree much less intense under every form of the tutorial system, cannot but produce results of a kind correspondingly inferior, intellectually weak and mechanical in comparison. A combination of the tutorial with the professorial, conducted, not by two different persons, but by one and the same individual, namely by the professor himself, is, we humbly but firmly believe, the most truly efficient system that can be devised; the professor as professor expounding and illustrating principles, and as tutor looking for the application of these in written exercises or in oral examinations, or both, as may be found convenient. And this is now the constitutional system of the Scottish Universities.

If it be said in objecting to these views that classes are sometimes so large that they cannot be conducted by one professor without the assistance of a tutor, the reply is plainly and decidedly this-that as the assistant, if really fit for the duty, would be far more effective, if, untrammelled by the professor, he were left to his own judgment and responsibility; he ought, in justice to the students, to the University, and the country, to have that position in which his services will tell with most advantage. This we think must Be conceded; and now the question arises, How can it be effected? In no other way we believe than by founding additional and independent professorships, as in the German Universities, or by renewing the original system of teaching by graduates, under such regulations as may be desirable in the existing order of things. The first, though apparently the best, would not only be more difficult to attain, but would not meet the necessities of the case either so readily or so effectively as the other, nor would it be so desirable, for reasons affecting the welfare of the graduates themselves, as will afterwards appear.

While it cannot well be questioned, then, that the professorial system of conducting a class, as indicated above, is the best that can be adopted, it will readily be understood, as implied in the successful issue, that the professor must not only be profoundly and minutely acquainted with the special department which he undertakes to teach, but must have the power besides of conveying instruction in a style at once attractive and philosophical. Without this power no ability, however great, nor accomplishments, however varied, will tell to much advantage in the great and leading purpose of training the intellect. Without this indispensable gift, indeed, little or no interest can be awakened, the faculties of the understanding can

hardly be called into exercise at all, and as a matter of course the results as affecting these cannot but prove futile and ineffective. Such a state of things is not by any means of unfrequent occurrence. The want of communicative power on the part of a teacher, where ability, in other respects, may not be wanting, is one of the chief causes of complaint in reference to ineffective teaching in the Universities. The complaint, there is reason to believe, is too wellfounded; but whether arising from the cause above referred to, from too large classes, from physical infirmity, or from any other cause whatever, the results of ineffective teaching are so very pernicious, and in the general case of young men, so irreparably hurtful, that in no circumstances whatever should they be tolerated. By the usages of society as now purified, after no little warring against monopolies and abuses of various kinds, we have the free choice of what may be considered as contributing most to our advantage, in keeping, of course, with the interests of society generally; but, in regard to University instruction, there is as yet in the arts classes no choice; the rule being, that having University honours in view, every University class in the curriculum must be attended, whatever the character of the teaching may be. This is surely a very grievous abuse, and one calling loudly for an immediate remedy. The very idea of compelling a young man, anxious for progress, burning with zeal it may be for academic distinction, to attend a teacher incompetent, from whatever cause, to instruct him, is so utterly preposterous, so oppressive to the student, and so hurtful to the progress of knowledge generally, that the rule in question, however individual professors may be affected by the change, should now be relaxed as standing most grievously in the way of the public good.

Though we would regard the professorial system, then, as the best that can be adopted, both with reference to professors and students, yet looking to its practical working over a period of years, to the occurrence now and then of bad appointments, and to other unavoidable causes of inefficiency, we cannot but see that some maintaining power is wanting, which shall not only make up for the loss occasioned by all such unfavourable elements, but which shall secure to it over and above the means of that high intellectual culture, so urgently demanded by the wants and requirements of the day, in all departments of human learning. This maintaining power will be found, we believe, in recognizing the services of graduates as part and parcel of the University system. This supplementary teaching, commonly called extra-mural or extra-academical teaching, as recommended by Lord Brougham and Mr. Gladstone in their inaugural addresses before the Edinburgh University Council, would not only obviate the evils complained of, but awaken, we are persuaded, such an amount of talent and zeal for high attainments in all departments of study, as could not but tell with the greatest advantage, both in the Universities and in all the higher schools of the country.

The words employed by the Lord Rector on the occasion referred

to, when speaking on the question of extra-mural teaching in the Universities (and with which the Chancellor expressed his entire concurrence), were these :

"As respects teaching, I neither define nor dispute the changes that the altered condition of modern society may have required; but I think there is no doubt that in proportion as we can give a just freedom to teaching by introducing into it the element of a wholesome competition, do we approach more closely to the primitive spirit and system of Universities."

If it be said by way of objection to these remarks, that our University courts are invested with the power of dealing with all cases of inefficiency, whether arising from age or other causes as the statute says, "by requiring a professor to retire from his office on a retiring allowance," we reply, that considering the difficulty and delicacy attending their interference, and the indefinite nature itself of the evil complained of, there can be but little hope of any practical remedy from this quarter. It may be difficult to say when a professor is inefficient, unless under the guidance of public opinion or repute; for it would certainly be impossible for any court to obtain satisfactory evidence on the question. Except in extreme cases then, it appears to us that University courts, with all their powers, and with every desire to put them in force for the public good, will be unable to meet the evil by any other remedy than that of supplementary teaching by graduates. Give the students the choice of a teacher, as here implied, then depend upon it, that as no better jurors can sit on the merits of a teacher than students themselves, they will feel no difficulty in dealing with the question of inefficiency, no difficulty whatever in deciding between those who can instruct them and those who cannot.

That the outdoor lecturing or teaching by graduates, so specially recommended by the high authorities already mentioned, would have all the good effects ascribed to it, by its awakening “salutary competition," that great motive power, to which all progress and improvement in all the other numerous and diversified concerns of our social well-being is so largely indebted, appears with all the force of a demonstration from the recent history of the medical department in the University of Edinburgh. Before the plan of sanctioning the tickets of extra-mural lecturers on medical science was resorted to in Edinburgh, medical students were under the necessity, in cases of incompetency within the walls, of feeing a professor for his class-ticket, and an outdoor lecturer for the necessary knowledge. Without the professor's ticket he could not go up for examination, and without the lecturer's he could not expect to get successfully through it, so that he had to take out, and of course pay for, both. This was a state of things so oppressive to students, and in other respects so unsatisfactory, that the Town Council, then the patrons of the University, and of most of the chairs, decreed that students of medicine might take one-third of their classes from extra-mural lecturers. Since the enactment of this salutary