tive prose (Cæsar, Nepos, Livý, Quintus Curtius, and the like); passages from the prescribed prose and poetry (let us say Cicero's oration for the Manilian Law and the second book of the Æneid, tho the choice is a large one, and might range over a wide field if the amount is to be small), with such questions on the subject-matter as will bring out the meaning; and grammatical questions, with simple sentences for composition, based on the passage of prescribed prose. The advanced examination would contain sighttranslation of prose and poetry, not necessarily limited to Cicero and Vergil; passages from the prescribed prose and poetry (say the oration for Archias and the sixth book of the Eneid), with questions on the subject-matter; and a piece of connected prose to be turned into Latin, based upon the prescribed prose.

What are we to do if we do not succeed in getting the sort of examination we desire ? I hope we may have the clearness of vision to see our duty and the strength to do it. Let us teach Latin and Greek, not the method of passing an entrance examination in Latin or Greek. Let us strive to make the study of these languages do all it is capable of doing for our boys and girls, and for the cause of American education. We shall then read what seems to us most helpful, when it seems best, and as we have time and strength and inspiration. The entrance requirements will, after all, take care of themselves, if we will remember that they are not for us, but for the college. If we are teaching as we ought, we should have little reason to fear the entrance examinations; but in case they are unreasonable and our students do not succeed in passing them, let us first examine ourselves, and then, if we are assured that we are doing our higher duty, be content to fail. To such an attitude as this the colleges must soon adapt themselves, and the result, I am persuaded, would be a distinct gain to all concerned.

DISCUSSION

MAYNARD M. HART, William McKinley High School, St. Louis, Mo.-For some time past the requirements in classics for entrance to college have been criticised as being excessive and mechanical. Many desire a change, but are not practical enough to suggest anything better. A number feel-and rightly, too-that for the general good the relations existing between the college professors and the teachers in the secondary schools ought to be much closer than they are at present. I am thankful to say that all concerned are beginning to realize that it is best to come into more sympathetic touch with one another. My experience in both college and secondary work has taught me that there is something for the college instructor to learn from the teacher in the preparatory institution, and that the opinion of the latter, if he be at all competent as a scholar and as a practical student of pedagogy, ought to carry, at least, as much weight as that of the former in outlining the scope and nature of the requirements for college entrance; for this means, practically, the work of the secondary school.

The attempts to satisfy the college requirements have produced many ills. In our thought on this matter we must not lose sight of the high school, as by far the greater number of pupils doing preparatory work are to be found in our public schools. Mark, I say, doing. Since so many subjects are now claiming the attention of the high-school pupils, it seems that the proper time cannot very well be given to the classics, and the teacher finds it difficult enough to read over hurriedly the minimum amount of author work. Under ordinary circumstances, with many pupils in the class who do not think of a college course, or who have no particular aptitude for language study, it is not possible for the instructor to accomplish all that is required without sacrificing quality for quantity-one of the fatal mistakes in our education, and nowhere more noticeable than in the teaching of Latin and Greek.

We are to consider not merely the college requirements, but the work of the secondary school in its relation thereto. Can this work be made more effective? Our course is

too stereotyped, and the division of labor is too artificial. A mistake is made in expecting the average pupil, after a rapid survey of some first-year book, to enter upon the serious study of an author like Cæsar. A great part of the period must be spent by the teacher in trying to explain the grammatical structure of the sentence to the loss of any appreciative grasp of the Commentaries as a piece of literature or of history. Sentiment and tradition seem to dictate this course, and so it is followed from year to year. Since it has been decreed that Cæsar must be taken up in the second year, Cicero in the third, and Vergil in the fourth, who can think of modifying or changing the course?

For some time I have contended, and experience has confirmed my contention, that some introductory reader ought to be used before Cæsar is read. Such a reader as Fabulae Faciles (ably revised for American students by our leader) can be taken up in the beginning of the second half of the first year, and continued along with the "first-year Latin" for a whole year; or, it may be used during the first half of the second year. Many may say that by giving only two years and a half to the three important authors we shall not be able to cover the prescribed work. However, I maintain that, even as things are, with the requirements too exacting, and having only four years in which to complete the course, the pupil would understand his Latin much better than is the case at present, due to the extra time spent on the introductory work and the probable enthusiasm created by a thoro foundation.

I believe that there should be prescribed some limited and definite work. For instance, at least a book from each of the works of Cæsar, Cicero, and Vergil in Latin, and of Xenophon and Homer in Greek, ought to be thoroly prepared to give the pupil an opportunity to show that he can master, and has mastered, what may be expected of him in the way of forms, syntax, prose, and such general information as may be required. Naturally there is necessity for definiteness, and this would be a guide, not only for instructors in the secondary schools, but also for tutors and those who may get up their work in private. From time to time the prescribed books could be changed. Then, in addition to this, wide scope should be given for sight-translation and other reading indicated by the college requirements or, in some cases, selected by the teacher. Upon this work very great stress ought to be laid, and for several reasons. So far as the student is concerned, it will give him a wider range of classical literature; and the mere fact that the reading is not specified ought to result in the absence of cramming. There will be no great likelihood of the use of translations, the bane to classical study, and there will be greater interest. I have always been pleased to note how much satisfaction it gives a boy or girl to be able to make out and master some piece of translation that is not prescribed. Very often this is the only method by which a dull or lazy pupil may be awakened and interested. For the teacher greater freedom in the translation means much. It will give him an impetus, and he will find it necessary to continue to be a student. He will be compelled to use judgment and care in the selection of suitable portions of literature. By hints and suggestions that the reading may demand he will get into closer touch with his pupils. And we need more of this co-operation in our school work.

As for admittance to college by certificate, I must state that not much time has been given by me to this matter. However, I have always been inclined to believe that the more satisfactory method is by examination. Professor Kirtland has pointed out the effectiveness of the examination in sight translation, and I agree with him; for if I desired to gain an idea of the ability of any student in classics, I should be satisfied with the results of a paper on sight-work, and I, of course, should not object to giving him something to do in prose, which, also, shows the pupil's grasp of his subject.

In conclusion, let me state that by doing thoroly less work than is at present required, and by giving more attention to additional work in the way of rcading selections, merely indicated, and in sight, and by emphatically giving the pupil in his examination an opportunity to show ability to do contemplated work, the efficiency of the secondary school will certainly be marked, and the standard of the classics in the college will be raised.

F. THE MODERN LANGUAGES CONFERENCE

THE DIRECT METHOD OF TEACHING A MODERN LANGUAGE ERNEST WOLF, YEATMAN HIGH SCHOOL, ST. LOUIS, MO. [ABRIDGED BY THE AUTHOR]

The mode of procedure employed by the old dictionary method could not fail to result in disaster. The pupil was required to commit a list of disconnected words to memory, a grammatical recipe was given him, and then he was expected to "create" the very language which he was to "learn." This "cook-book method" could not but produce results which were both unpalatable and indigestible. Instead of the living language we gave our pupils the disconnected words of the dictionary and the dead rules of grammar. It is one of the fundamental principles of pedagogy, and one of those very few which are generally accepted, that "the secret of success depends upon the intensity of the impressions." Can the impressions made by sounds of foreign words be intense, if they are immediately preceeded or followed by the sounds of English words? The "direct" method boldly assumes that results in pronunciation must be more satisfactory if the pupil hears, reads, speaks, even sings in the foreign language alone. Nor have we any right to expect that the foreign word will linger any great length of time in the memories of our students, if we replace it immediately after it is read by its English equivalent. By its overwhelming weight, the English must smother, as it were, the foreign word before the latter has had an opportunity to take root in the mind of the student.

From what has been said it is clear that the habit of translating is held chiefly responsible for the meager results attained by the “grammar,” “translation," and often haughtily called "scientific method."

In learning our own language we associate words and sentences with objects, events, actions, and thoughts. A certain group of sounds enters the mind thru the sense of hearing. At the same time the corresponding image enters the mind thru the eye. When a foreign language is first taken up, the student will unconsciously, and often against his will, associate the word of his mother-tongue with the corresponding object, action, or event. I cherish no illusions concerning the difficulties of overcoming this habit; but conceding that it may not be overcome is equivalent to conceding that foreign languages cannot be learned. The old "translation" method persists in confirming the learner in the very habit which it should try to destroy. The "direct" method is based upon the fundamental principle that the association formed by word and image is more intense than that between the foreign word and its English equivalent. To form this habit of thinking in the foreign language is its aim. Theoretically, this standpoint, it seems to me, is unassailable. Experience shows that it has stood the test of practical schoolroom work. Even the advocates of the translation method admit that the student should, in the end, acquire the habit of reading the foreign text without first translating it.

Everybody will admit that it is more difficult to form the habit of thinking in the foreign language after the translation habit has once been formed. If it is possible to avoid translations in the reading of the classics, it certainly must be possible to do so in reading elementary texts. By the use of objects, pictures, exercises such as Gouin recommends, a vocabulary of one thousand words may be acquired, sufficiently large to read, with the assistance of a well-prepared and skillful teacher, almost any foreign text.

Nothing, in my opinion, retards the progress of a class more than the indiscriminate use of the dictionary. Someone has called it "a positive curse." Disconnected words have no meaning. A word receives its meaning thru the associations in which it is used. The use of the dictionary leads to mental inertia. Nothing is gained by looking up the

word, the process is entirely mechanical. How much greater is this activity, if the student is required to make out the meaning of a word from the context! I am prepared to hear someone raise the objection: "This method leads to mere guessing." It cannot be denied that, when practiced under a teacher without skill and experience, it may deteriorate into such. But when done in the proper way and at the right time, it means a mental activity of the highest educational value; it implies an alertness of mind, due to the capacity for readily forming mental associations; it is real logical reasoning; it is in no way inferior to the mental activity required in the solving of an algebraic equation with an unknown quantity.

A few words remain to be said in regard to the application of the principles advocated in the work of the schoolroom. A few months ago, when I was discussing the relative merits of the direct and the translation methods with one of my St. Louis colleagues, the latter remarked: "Even conceded you get to your question a perfectly correct answer from your pupil, how do you know that he understands the words which he uses. Take, for example, the question: 'Wohin fiel das Bienchen ?' The answer is: 'Das Bienchen fiel in das Wasser.' How can you tell that the pupil knows what the words Bienchen and fiel mean?" I willingly grant that a superficial teacher, or one without experience, will be satisfied by the answer as given. A thoro teacher, one of experience, however, will continue to ask questions such as these: "Was ist ein Bienchen ?" Answer: "Das Bienchen ist ein Insekt." "Was gibt uns das Bienchen ?" Answer: "Es gibt uns Honig." As there is only one insect in the universe which gives us honey, I may feel reasonably sure in assuming that the pupil knows what Bienchen signifies.

On the other hand, I might raise this objection to the translation method: "How do you know the student knows the meaning of the English word which he found in the dictionary ?" Are there no teachers in this audience who have had experiences of this character? In the case of fiel, I should drop a pencil on the desk and ask: "Wohin fiel der Bleistift?" To make me absolutely sure that the words are understood, I should ask the class to use them in new combinations. And should there still remain any doubt in my mind, nothing would be left but to ask for the English meaning; such cases, however, are of very rare occurrence. Nor would it mean that the student had learned the meaning of the German word thru the English-he cannot give the English without understanding the German, no more than he can give the English synonym of an English word which he has not understood; but it would be merely for the convenience of the teacher, so he may feel sure he is on the safe side. I never hesitate to translate in such a case, wishing to have it distinctly understood, in making this statement, that nevertheless I consider every word of translation a step backward.

A room in which German is taught by the direct method should be well supplied with maps, charts, and pictures. There are hundreds of large wall pictures, some of real artistic value, in the market which may be had at very reasonable prices. They will not only render valuable services in the study of texts, but also impart interesting information concerning the foreign people, land, customs, and habits. But these alone will not suffice, and for explaining unfamiliar words we must look for other means. In some cases we shall readily find familiar synonyms; viz., for erblicken, schen; for kluge, weise; the word Obst we may explain by a process of analysis: "Obst sind Aepfel, Birnen, Beeren;" other words by one of synthesis. In the case of derivatives we shall have to look for the root; in the case of compounds, for the different components. A word like die Waise is explained by a definition: "Eine Waise ist ein Kind, das keinen Vater und keine Mutter hat."

Abstract words offer greater difficulties; if they do not become clear thru the context, as in most cases they will, they may become so thru a short story; for example "Furcht": "Ein Knabe was auf der Strasse; ein grosser Hund kam; der Knabe schrie, denn er hatte Furcht."

Often the teacher may, thru the expression of his face, or thru gestures explain the meaning of a sentence. From the face of the teacher the pupil readily reads joy and

anger, happiness and sadness, satisfactlon and the reverse. In many cases, the student will half understand a lesson at the first reading by the teacher, provided the teacher knows how to read and has some histrionic talent.

But, after all, this is very hard work for the teacher-immeasurably harder than the translation method; it requires more patience, more careful preparation, some natural skill, and a good deal of experience. The transition period from the object-teaching to the reading of texts is almost always slow and discouraging. But the patient teacher will find his efforts rewarded. The progress made later on will be the more rapid, since the task of translating-a most difficult, indeed too difficult task, with its tiresome and often fruitless, and therefore discouraging, looking up of words, the memorizing of word-lists, learned in futuram oblivionem—is no longer required of the student.

DISCUSSION

O. S. WESTCOTT, principal of Robert Waller High School, Chicago, Ill.-Twentyeight years ago last February, I wrote in a western educational journal as follows:

The remark is frequently made that nothing but a critical study of the dead languages will fit a person for the proper understanding of our English vernacular. This sweeping claim has too little foundation in either fact or reason, and the undue amount of time usually given to the pursuit of Greek and Latin should be curtailed to more reasonable proportions, that the time now allotted to German, French, and other modern languages may be correspondingly increased.

Further, it is believed that a large measure of responsibility for the standard belief in almost unlimited amounts of Latin and Greek, as compared with the limited amount of time devoted to French or German, is fairly attributable to the unphilosophical modes of presenting living languages as if they were dead, and thus unnecessarily creating in the mind of the student a distaste which only years can eradicate. By the standard mode, to be sure, such a knowledge of a language may be acquired as will enable one by strenuous efforts, and with the constant aid of both grammar and dictionary, to pick out something which remotely resembles the meaning of a foreign author; but such a knowledge as really puts one en rapport with the language itself, or with those accustomed to its use, the student by this process acquires never.

But there is a rational method of presenting modern languages to the learner-a method which not only accomplishes the object aimed at, but never attained by the common school, viz., a thoughtful familiarity with the real genius of the language and those who employ it as a means of communication; but also brings about a result rarely or never contemplated by the old plan, viz., that the student shall be able to express himself fluently, vigorously, and intelligibly in the language of his adoption.

The unanimous opinion of the most competent judges of the matter appears to be that the study of the ancient languages accomplishes for the student:

I.

2.

A familiarity with the exalted type of Greek and Roman civilization and high art. The acquisition of such a discipline of mind as fits the student always afterward more readily to grasp and more easily to retain anything in the vast range of human research to which he may be inclined to turn his attention.

3. A familiarity with the significance of the roots of the vast number of words in our vernacular which have been, wisely or unwisely, called from the storehouse of the ancients. The first of these somewhat specious pleas may be answered with a word; viz., that the ancient art and civilization are for the consideration of the English or American student now well presented in an English dress, and the toilsome and rugged road which alone has heretofore led to the accomplishment of this design need surely be no longer trodden. The second consideration demands thoughtful attention. Indeed, everything is willingly admitted which the strongest adherents to our classical courses can possibly