School has to do, a certain determinate amount and character of professional study is needed to constitute it a Normal School at all. This must be accomplished. Time must be found by cutting down merely academic work. In our ambition most of us now attempt, in two years' study, to comprise most of the English studies of a Grammar-School and a HighSchool course. It is true that with some of these studies we presume a familiarity on the part of the pupil. Yet at best we are likely to get scholars rather than teachers; at worst, cram instead of culture. We must not sacrifice professional study to general literature and higher branches of physical science. The Normal School must ever remember its special aim, which is not that of the School for literary culture nor of the Scientific: School, however desirable a wide knowledge of literature and of science may be for the teacher.

That there is a lack in practical training, as well as in theoretical, is shown by the fact that of the 137 Normal Schools of the United States, only 78 report departments for practical training.

The organization of the work of Normal Schools which will enable them. most successfully to vindicate their claim to be called professional Schools,, and most effectually to repel assault, may then be considered under the three heads of Philosophy, History, and Practice.

On the side of Philosophy we shall most of us be found rather weak, and here we ought to be especially strong. Pedagogy-we have not yet fairly settled upon the name for the science of Education-is but the application of Philosophy to human culture, and the world has a right to expect the soundest and truest Philosophy to proceed from the schools of Pedagogy. Were this so, long ere this some reproaches would have been removed from our philosophical and pedagogical literature, and our teaching would have been more fruitful of results. The solely empirical method of treating Pedagogy can give us only still more of books upon minute details of method, of books made for teachers who can not, or are not allowed, to think. Every new advance in Pedagogy has been a fresh application of Philosophy to education. The principles thus struck out, in the hands of teachers destitute of philosophical culture or trained powers of thought,. become but a new routine; the life-giving spirit of philosophy becomes a life-destroying letter of mechanical imitation.

Merely gathering up results which even the soundest thinkers have formulated in classifications and in laws, will not suffice. Pupils must also test their powers upon the solution of problems; they must be led to make classifications, and derive laws, for themselves. Power will thus be developed to deal with questions in pedagogy, which can be developed in no other way.

On the side of History the work of the Normal School should be at once broadened. This must be a history of culture and of the development of education. Thus alone can teachers come to appreciate and understand fully our present systems of education and their relation to the past and to other countries; thus alone can we make advances from year to year and from age to age. It is to the want of just such knowledge as this that. must be ascribed much of the controversy which now endangers popular education in this country. For to what else can we ascribe the proposi

tion from the President of Harvard for the re-establishment of rate bills for High-School education; from the Evening Post, edited by WM. CULLEN BRYANT, that State aid be withdrawn from all but the elementary Schools; from grave D. D.'s, that the public High School be replaced by denominational Schools? The National Education League of England-to the Secretary of which, by the way, it was left to write the best account of the School systems of the United States-is to-day fighting the battle which was fought here a generation ago, and which these men and journals, and such as these, oblivious of the past, or of any present but their own, are asking us to fight over again.

Under this lead will come a more thorough and critical study of School law, and of its relation to educational progress. A fairly cultivated common sense will help us greatly here. For instance, in most of our States, the State School fund is distributed on the absurd basis of the School census, regardless of attendance, and our School year is 125 days. My neighbors in the Province of New Brunswick, establishing a free Public School system first in 1872, and distributing their government money on the basis of average attendance and length of School, reached in 1876 an average School year, throughout the Province, of 37 weeks, and our neighbors in Ontario, by pursuing a similar plan, twenty years ago reached an average of over 10 months to the School year.

If the Normal School does not deal with such questions as these, of whom can consideration of them be demanded? If the Normal School does not see to the formation, in the minds of its pupils, of correct opinions upon these questions of School history and School polity, of whom can the formation of such opinions be expected? Had the thousands of men and women in our country who have passed through the courses of study in our Normal Schools received the needed training in this direction, the battle would already have been won and successful attack would have become impossible.

It is a question whether the School which makes no provision for practical training in methods of teaching, can really be called a professional School. Certainly all other professional Schools recognize the practical element as an essential one. Yet nearly half the Normal Schools of the United States report nothing of this kind. However thorough may be the drill in practice in teaching the branches comprised in their course of study, under such an organization there can be no training in methods of primary teaching. There may be difference of opinion as to the range of work which should be comprised in the Training or Model School. Certainly all grades of primary work must be included. The Kindergarten is becoming a part of our public-school system, and deserves, also, recognition here. This weak place in the present organization of our Normal Schools I leave without further discussion.

In this place may be considered the Pedagogical Museum, a collection of the means for illustration like that in the Normal School at Toronto, like the admirable Russian exhibit at Philadelphla. Such a Museum should be found in every Normal School and should be carefully studied. Thus I have tried to present such an organization of the work of the

Normal School as will vindicate its claim to a place among professional Schools, and strengthen it against successful attack. This work I believe we can do better than we have done it. In even two years' time, it is possible to make of strong and thoughtful young men and young women -and all else we should reject-teachers well grounded in the scholarship needed for their work, so established in principles and so accustomed to thought as to be able to separate the true from the false in educational theory, so familiar with the general course of educational history as to recognize old falsehoods and fallacies in whatever disguises, and, looking before and after, to see lying in clear light the true road of progress; so trained in practical application as to command the best methods and to ground them on true principles of philosophy. Such graduates as these are a strong tower of defence; others are reeds shaken by every wind and a failure in every trial.

A witty Frenchman said, in one of the troublous periods of French history, "We are despised because we are on our knees. Suppose we get up." We need to get up. At the late meeting of the American Institute of Instruction, the President presented, among others, the following proposition, for the consideration of the Institute:-"All instructors charged with the education of children and youth, should be selected on the ground of especial talents, professional training, and aptness to teach." The Committee to which this was referred, after long deliberation, fearing protest against the words "professional training," reported the following, which was, without discussion, adopted :

"All instructors charged with the education of children and youth, should be selected on account of excellence of character, special talents, adequate acquisitions, and known or presumed skill in teaching." New England dare not place teaching beside the other professions! Dare this Association do it?

Look beyond our eastern border. Says the Hon. T. H. RAND, Sup't of Education for the Province of New Brunswick, in a letter received since the preceding portion of this paper was written, "Seventy-five per cent (fully) of our teachers now in the service have been trained. Since 1872, none have been commissioned as regular teachers except those trained at our own or some other recognized Normal School. But in consequence of our inability to provide a full supply of such persons at once, untrained persons are authorized by the Board of Education to teach in certain districts for a period of one year. (Regular teachers are licensed for the Province, and during good behavior.) Most of these local licensees find their way to the Normal School after teaching one year,

Of 450 persons (men) who have attended our Normal School since Jan. 1, 1872, 440 have taught 85 per cent of the time since they were commis. sioned by the Board of Education.

*

If the faculty of instructors (of the Normal School) does not rank any student-teacher as 'fair,' 'good,' or 'superior,' in professional worth, he or she is not eligible to examination for license. The examination in Scholarship is conducted by papers set by the Chief Sup't, and the answers are estimated by four examiners of the Province (Professors of the University),

and the licenses are issued on their reports, such licenses bearing the professional standing of the holder as estimated by the Normal School."

It will be observed that upon Scholarship, even thus carefully determined, licenses to teach are not issued, and that in the final award the Normal School passes judgment only upon the character of professional work. It may also be added that Graduates in Arts of a chartered College or University, who have not been in attendance as regular student-teachers at the Provincial Normal School or at a recognized Normal or Training School of some other country, shall be required to give practical illustration of their knowledge of method before the Principal of the Normal School, who shall report to the Chief Sup't his estimate of the same.

A work has been in progress for a few years, over the border, to which we may well give heed. It is easy to raise the cry of despotism and centralization, it is not easy to educate a nation. Let us beware lest we sacrifice too much to political cant; lest we let our neighbors steal all our sunrise.

Striving thus more firmly to establish teaching upon a professional basis, we have a right to demand a wider recognition. It is certainly a very strange thing that a profession outnumbering any other if not all others in our land, should not be recognized by our Colleges and Universities. The leading Associations of English teachers are moving Oxford and Cambridge to establish chairs of Pedagogy, and the demand is powerfully seconded by the London Times. The Universities of Edinburg and Aberdeen have such chairs already. The German Univerities have them, and even Finland puts us to shame. I trust this meeting of the National Association will not close without taking steps to memorialize at least one College in every State to establish a chair, or at the least a lectureship, of Pedagogy. As a first measure of defence, we must plant this germinal idea of the necessity for professional training or study (not of absolute necessity in a Normal School) in the minds of all teachers, and through them in the minds of the intelligent public. Then may we form an American pedagogical literature which will enable us to look at a German catalogue without shame. Then may we find adequate recognition, by our great libraries, of the claims of pedagogy, and not find all its books in this department resting upon the shelves. Then may the reproach that teachers alone of professional men will not buy professional books," be removed. Then shall we respect ourselves and thus command the respect of others.

S. H. WHITE, of Illinois, then read the following paper on

A FEW QUERIES CONCERNING SOME OF THE DETAILS OF NORMAL-SCHOOL WORK.

The object of this paper is to learn from others engaged in normal-school work, their views concerning some of the questions which arise in school management, and their experience in connection with them. The plan first suggested was to spend an hour in a somewhat informal exchange of views upon such topics as might be presented. It was afterward thought,

however, that a somewhat formal presentation of points might profitably precede the discussion.

In the progress of this paper certain views are expressed concerning the queries raised, rather to pave the way to a ready expression of opinion upon them than merely for the sake of advancing an individual opinion. It is assumed at the outset that a normal school should have a character so distinctively its own that its object can be clearly seen from its work by an intelligent observer. Normal schools suffer because they do, to a considerable extent, the same work in the same way that good schools for general instruction do it. The low attainments of the teachers of the country make this necessary, but the object for which they traverse this common ground should determine their method and this method should point clearly to the work of teaching,

To illustrate, let a botanist, a geologist, and an entomologist, all explore the same region. What will be the result? There will be a certain amount of general information concerning the field which all will possess. Beyond that their knowledges diverge. Each has given himself to the study of those features which belong to his specialty. That has been uppermost in his mind, and, as a result, he has whatever will be of service to him as a specialist. In order to secure his purpose, each one has worked in his peculiar way.

Again, take a piece of rock from the ledge. The chemist resolves it into its constituent parts with a view to discover the amount and value of each; the architect studies it with a view to ascertain its hardness, power to withstand pressure, and its durability; the naturalist, to learn the story it tells of organic life in some former age. They study precisely the same object, each to gain from it information for his own use, and each pursuing a method peculiarly his own. No one of them could have gained the desired information by adopting the plan of another.

So with the pupil in the normal school. His objective point is the schoolroom. Having some appreciation of the teacher's work, he studies any one of the branches he is to teach for the purpose of being able to impart as well as to possess its knowledge. His forms of expression, his analysis, his methods are peculiarly adapted to teaching children, and are different from those of one striving simply to know for himself.

Wherever normal schools are compelled to traverse the same ground as other schools, it should be done in consonance with the idea of instruction instead of education simply.

QUERIES.

1. Is it wise for normal schools to undertake more than is necessary to secure their legitimate results?

This is done in two ways; by admitting to their privileges, on payment of tuition, persons who have no intention to teach; and by establishing departments which, practically, have no part in the special work of the school. By these practices they bring upon themselves the charge of superfluity in that they do work which is provided for elsewhere, and, at the same time, they incur the jealousy of other schools.