these Normal Schools must always arrange their work on the basis of a kind of compromise.

The subject being open for discussion, Dr. SHANNON, State Superintendent of Missouri, said: "The position has been assumed on the one hand that the work of the Normal School should be strictly professional; on the other hand, that matter and method should be combined. Neither of these theories has been strictly carried out anywhere. I hold that it is impossible, especially in the West, to make Normal Schools strictly professional, except in the large cities. We have means of training pupils in our State Normal Schools, but until our Common-School work is much more thoroughly done we can not have the material upon which to work.'

Mr. MELL, of Kentucky, said that he agreed with the paper read, and agreed also with the gentleman from Missouri that the material for strictly professional training is not to be found outside of the city.

Mr. PHELPS, of Wisconsin, desired to correct an evidently false impression with reference to his views. It was not in contemplation to change the Normal Schools everywhere, and without regard to cónditions, into professional schools; nor, in his opinion, did the term professional mean that the school should teach methods alone, but that the underlying principles, out of which methods grow, should be mastered.

Mr. S. H. WHITE asked permission of the gentleman to make a statement with reference to a plan projected in Illinois for purely professional work, which plan has as yet been wholly without success.

Mr. PHELPS responded that the fact only proved that Illinois was not ready for purely professional work.

Mr. SOLDAN, of St. Louis, said that he believed the subject had been discussed too much from an ideal standpoint, and that it would be possible at some future time to have Normal Schools which should be strictly professional. "There are two methods of gaining knowledge, one by experience, the other by studying the net results of the experience of others. The Normal School of St. Louis has been referred to. This school instructs at the beginning in studies which are also included in a high-school course, but these branches are studied in such a way as to prepare the pupil to teach to others that which he learns. Of course, we have technical training in method, so-called, but the one should no more be called professional than the other. The knowledge of political economy shows us that we can not expect to have for the compensation paid in lower grades first-class talent. First-class talent rises of necessity from the ranks. Normal Schools may all have a few studies which are strictly professional. Finally, we may have a work which shall be put into the hands of any one who asks, What is the science of teaching? There is as yet an unoccupied field in science." 1

Mr. JOHN AUGUSTUS WILLIAMS, of Harrodsburg, Ky., spoke of the four learned professions, and of their relative importance in the minds of peo

ple in general. Mr. WILLIAMS spoke at some length, and with considerable humor, of the advantages which, as teachers, women possessed over

men.

The hour for adjournment having arrived, the further discussion of the question, "Should the work of the Normal School be strictly professional ?” was postponed to the next meeting.

The Chair announced the Committee on Nominations as follows: S. H. WHITE, of Illinois; Miss GRACE C. BIBB, of St. Louis; S. P. Lucy, of Kentucky.

. Adjourned.

Second Day's Proceedings.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1877.

The Normal Department was called to order by its president, Mr. SOLDAN, of St. Louis, and proceeded immediately to the election of officers for the ensuing year, with the following result:

President-WM. F. PHELPS, of Wisconsin.

Vice-President-T. MARCELLUS MARSHALL, of West Virginia.
Secretary-GRACE C. BIBB, of St. Louis.

In the absence of Mr. J. C. GREENOUGH, of Rhode Island, his paper on Common-School Studies in Normal Schools, was, upon motion of Prof. PHELPS, read by its title and referred to the Committee on Publication.

COMMON-SCHOOL STUDIES IN NORMAL SCHOOLS.

The studies of the common school are not the same in the several States, and yet there is a good degree of uniformity; Reading, Writing, Language including Grammar, Arithmetic, and Geography, claim the first place.

The object of these schools is not to fit the pupil for one trade or profession, but to furnish the opportunity for a general preparation for any employment in which he may engage.

The normal schools are a part of the common-school system; they are the outgrowth of its needs and one of the prime elements of its progress. Those who are to instruct in our collegiate institutions need professional training. The science and art of teaching would be greatly advanced by the establishment of a school for this purpose. When a normal school of the grade required shall be fully equipped and generously maintained, the introduction of better methods of instruction into our higher institutions of learning, will not be left, as now, to the indirect influence of normal schools established for the improvement of our common schools, nor to the limited influence of German schools and universities.

The fact that our normal schools are for the common schools, gives im

portance to the question, "What shall be done with the studies of the common school, in the normal school?" Before answering this question specifically, we may inquire whether the normal school shall include, in its course of study, branches not generally taught in the common school. Some hold that the normal school should help its pupil to gain a knowledge of the common-school branches, and furnish instruction in higher branches, and that when the pupil has thus gained sufficient scholarship and discipline, he is prepared to teach a common school. This view of the teacher's preparation is fatal to all steady advance in methods of elementary instruction; it substitutes academic instruction for normal training, or rather, it sets aside all professional training.

We must have teachers trained to teach the common school, or it will speedily deteriorate in methods of teaching and in efficiency. On the other hand, if a normal school merely teaches its pupils what they are to teach, and merely trains them in the methods of elementary instruction, teaching will be like a mechanical handicraft in which imitators will too often repeat in dull routine in their own schools, what they have been trained to do in the normal school. We need more than imitative artisans. In schools of lower grade, especially, we need the inventive genius of the artist. The teacher of every primary school should understand much that lies beyond her immediate field of effort, that she may intelligently plan her work in harmony with the subsequent studies of her pupils, and adapt her teaching to their present and future needs. The formation of the character of the teacher, both intellectual and moral, is an end of normal-school instruction, second to no other. Hence every normal school should include in its course what have been termed "culture studies." These should be those studies which are valuable both as means of culture and as means of a better understanding and appreciation of the studies of the common school. If all those who enter our normal schools, had honorably completed a course at a good high school, they would need little additional knowledge and discipline before entering upon the purely professional work of the normal school; but a large proportion of those who now enter, have not completed a good high-school course. Just how much culture is requisite, in addition to professional training, is not a question that admits of the same specific answer in every community. This, however, may be said:-the graduate of a normal school should be, in intellectual and moral power, aside from any professional skill he may have gained, superior to the average candidate for teaching, who is not a graduate. The attacks recently made upon normal schools, find in some sections valid ground in the lack of scholarship of normal graduates, as well as in the fact that the work of many normal schools is academic rather than professional.

We now return to the main question, "What shall be done with the studies of the common school in the normal school?"

The normal pupil should supplement his knowledge of these studies, acquire correct methods of teaching and an abiding enthusiasm in teaching. The order of these studies and the method of teaching them in the normal school, should correspond to the work of the several grades of the common school. The relation of elementary knowledge,-a knowledge

of specific facts,—and scientific knowledge,―a knowledge of general truths reached by considering facts and used to explain facts,-should be clearly understood at the outset. One of the greatest advances in teaching which normal schools have effected, in some schools at least, is the proper separation of elementary and scientific knowledge, and the teaching of scientific truth by the inductive method. Instead of beginning the study of Arithmetic, or of Geography, or of any other science, with the memorizing of scientific statements, the pupil first considers the facts that lead to a knowledge of the scientific truth to be taught, and, by a natural process of induction, comes to the scientific truth.

The teachers of a normal school should arrange and train the pupils to teach a scientific outline of each of the studies authorized in the common schools. To do this, the facts that lead to each scientific truth to be taught, must be carefully selected, logically arranged, and skilfully presented; and whatever else may be omitted, the normal school should not fail to train those who are to teach, to the use of correct methods of teaching.

While awarding a generous approval of whatever excellence other methods may possess, a normal school should steadily strive to perfect that method of teaching which is based upon the laws of the human mind and vindicated by a wide experience. The common school is not so much for the acquisition of a certain amount of knowledge, as for gaining the. ability to think accurately and to act promptly and wisely. The method by which the pupil is trained is more important than the facts which he commits to memory.

Among the methods most commonly employed in schools two are prominent; one may be called the book method, the other the natural method. By the one the author of the text-book is the real instructor of the class, by the other the teacher is the instructor; by the one the pupil begins with the statement of a book, by the other the pupil begins with the thing to be studied; by the one the child commits to memory statements which are or are not made clear to him at time of recitation, by the other the pupil is led to observe and reason for himself—to state his own ideas and then to commit to memory the correct statements of what he has learned; by the one verbal memory is primarily cultivated, by the other the mental powers are called into activity in the order of nature; by the one the pupil is told, by the other he learns for himself; by the one the pupil has words first and then ideas, by the other ideas first and then words; by the one the pupil is led to rely upon the statements of others, by the other the pupil is led to use his own powers and to rely upon his own observation, experience, and reasoning; by the one the pupil is ever learning only what others have discovered and recorded, by the other he is trained to discover and to state his own discoveries; by the one books may prevent independent thought, by the other books are used only as helps to observation, experience, and reasoning.

The natural method demands that the teacher understand the mind to be taught, the truth to be taught, and also that the teacher be trained to teach according to the method. It is the method used by all discoverers of truth, it is the only method by which the boundaries of human knowledge can be extended. It was employed by SOCRATES, it was the

method of BACON. By this method PESTALOZZI, FROEBELand others revolutionized primary teaching in Germany and thus laid the foundation of that excellent system of public instruction to which Germany owes so much of her prestige and power. By his firm adherence to the natural method, and by his great skill in using it, AGASSIZ gave new impulse to the study of natural science and to the art of teaching in the United States. Since all correct methods are based upon the laws of the human mind, the study of the mind and the application of the knowledge thus gained, must be an integral part of a normal-school course. In all the work of the school, the pupils should be led to form the habit of introspection, and of testing the value of teaching by its effect upon the mind. Mental philosophy and the philosophy of teaching will be incidentally taught in connection with the professional training of the teacher in the several studies; but a systematic course in mental science and in the philosophy of teaching, should be mastered late in the normal course, when the reflective faculties are better developed.

The class work in every study should be such as to give knowledge of the principles of teaching and skill in their application. A school for the preparation of teachers must be a training school as well as a school of instruction. Some of the conditions of a good model school are hard to be met. In some sections in which they have been fairly tried, they have been discarded. In many sections, they have never been established in connection with normal schools. A good proportion of our normal schools must, then, use their own classes as practice classes, and it is still an open question whether it is not best for every normal school to be also a training or practice school. In such a school the teacher, when he assigns a lesson, presents by topics the subjects to be taught by the pupils at a subsequent recitation, the teacher himself teaching so much as will enable the pupils to prepare to teach the topics assigned.

The time of the recitation hour is mainly spent in actual teaching, each pupil in turn teaching one or more topics to the class who take the position of learners. The mode of procedure may be thus outlined:

1. Present the real object of study to the mind of the pupil, whether the object be mental or material. If the object is material and cannot be presented in the class room, present an illustration.

2. By pertinent questions, call attention to that of the object which is to be taught, thus directing the mind of the pupil in a natural or logical analysis, and leading him to express the ideas occasioned.

3. Train the pupils to the correct use of language in expressing their ideas and thoughts.

I will not occupy time by stating modes of varying class exercises or modes of criticism.

Lecturing renders an incidental service; it should not assume much prominence in a normal course.

The teachers of a normal school should so appreciate the importance of common-school studies, and should so enthusiastically teach, as to awaken an abiding enthusiasm in the teaching of common-school studies. The impulse received at a normal school should be far more valuable than the knowledge gained.