Our own system of education was but the counterpart of that which existed in Europe at that time, and which, indeed, had existed in much the same form for many generations. Speaking in general, it may be said that all civilized and even the so-called barbarous nations have always made religion the rock foundation and the most pervasive force in education, while moral action has ever been considered its true expression in the lives of good citizens. Of recent years, in the more progressive of European countries, there has been at steadily growing feeling of dissatisfaction with the results of religious training. Somehow the Bible stories have not always been transmuted into ethical principles, active in the lives of pupils, and there has seemed to be a dangerous gap between precept and practice in the routine of daily affairs. During the past year, in many of the schools of England the Scripture lessons have been so arranged as to constitute a systematic course of moral instruction; and in Germany a league has been formed to make religious teaching more ethical.

But, however you look at the problem, in the abstract or the concrete, through the eyes of philosophy or the records of history, moral and religious training have ever gone hand in hand, maintaining the closest relation to each other, finding strength in union and weakness in separation.

It is unnecessary to recall to your minds those changing events in our national life which have gradually eliminated all religious instruction from the public schools, and made our system of education nominally secular. That system is here to stay, and it is our duty to accept it gladly as a part of God's wise providence, and do our level best to make it most effective in the training of the young. There is, of course, no question as to the propriety or desirability of so arranging this system of education as to give the first place to moral training, for in the very nature of things all else should be secondary. But, in the light of that which has gone before, how are we going to have a vital morality without the introduction of that religious instruction which is forbidden? or, stated somewhat differently, what relation can be established, in the public schools of America, between these two essentially complimentary factors-religion and morality?

Briefly answering this question, I would say:

First, In teaching morals one should yield to the philosophical requirement of the situation and acknowledge the religious basis on which morality rests. Surely we may be permitted in this country to speak with greater freedom concerning the general subject of religion than they who live in that land of religious controversy, sometimes called "Godless France," and yet that government, in its official program, urges upon its teachers to show the relation between the moral and divine law, to inculcate in their pupils a reverence for God and religion, and to be attentively respectful at any service of the church.

Second, As one makes use of that best medium for the teaching of a moral lesson, i. e., the biography of a good man, it can properly be shown how large a part religion played in the development of character and in the winning

of success. There need be nothing here of dogmatism or theology, but a simple recognition of the historical fact that one of the mighty influences in the life of any man is his religion, be he Protestant, Catholic, or Jew.

Third, Formal worship once a day should be the universal practice in the schools of America. If at the basis of all moral teaching we come in touch with the divine, and if the chief aim of education is to promote moral training, surely we are illogical and foolish beyond measure to prohibit the recognition in some formal way of that first great underlying Cause, whom some call "Lord," "Our God," and "Heavenly Father." When the juror, and the witness, and the client before a notary are no longer asked to swear their affirmation in God's name; when our judges, and our congressmen, and other public servants are permitted to assume their solemn obligations without taking oath of office on the word of God; when the President of the United States refuses to issue a Thanksgiving proclamation, in acknowledgment of the blessings of Almighty God; when Congress, by deliberate choice, refuses to elect a chaplain, or be led in prayer, and strikes from our coin "in God we trust;" and when the laws of the land so change their character as to give no recognition to God's Holy Day, and divine authority, then, and not till then, will the public schools of America be justified in omitting all forms of daily worship. It is needless to enter here upon the discussion of this much mooted question, but I cannot refrain from saying how monstrously absurd and sinfully dangerous I consider it to be for any organization controlling the educational force of a great sin-burdened city deliberately to refuse to give official recognition to the greatest power which makes for righteousness in all the world.

Fourth, The atmosphere of the school may be a medium for the introduction of religion. This will require no stating of creed, no expression of belief, nothing that might be called pietistic or sanctimonious, but only a pervasive spirit of light and joy and happiness, a sort of general understanding that life is a great and beautiful gift of God, not to be used for sordid purposes, but rather as a means of serving others to the limit of one's ability. This will be religion, pure and undefiled, admitting of no sectarian controversy, but exerting a tremendously vitalizing influence on every effort at moral training. The source of this religious atmosphere is not the school in which we find it, but the church and the homes of the neighborhood. A score or more of antagonistic denominations will help to make it, a thousand different faiths will enter into it, the Bible story, the pastor's prayer, the mother's counsel, the father's command, these all will do their part, while underneath these runs a steady current of religious conviction, sweeping down from the days of our ancestors to keep the hearts of the children strong and true. This is not some strange illusion of an idle dreamer, for here and there one finds a school whose life and spirit answer well to this description, and the religious element which pervades it in this atmospheric manner is a powerful reality working mightily for good. The church and the home may well feel a new

sense of responsibility as it thus becomes clear that the correlation of religion and morality in our system of education is so largly dependent upon them. Religion in the individual is good; but it becomes a better and greater thing when, multiplied a thousand fold, it gives the spirit of religion to the town, the school, and the nation.

Fifth, The teacher, through his personality, should bring religion to the aid of morality. Considering my words very carefully, I have no hesitation in saying that an irreligious person has no right to teach in a public school. Do not understand me to mean by "irreligious" a person who lacks membership is some one of our many churches. I mean by "irreligious" a person who fails to perceive any relation between the finite and the infinite, who recognizes no supreme good in the universe, who has no consciousness of a "power not himself that makes for righteousness." Such men are often caught up by the tide of wholesome life which surrounds them on every side and are carried on to the achievement of a noble career. But as teachers of

the young they lack in the spirit of reverence, in the discernment of true values, in the power to quicken high ideals, and in that love for self-sacrifice which the Great Teacher taught his disciples. I know there are some whose faith has been twisted and dwarfed by the blows of misfortune until its form is strange beyond words to describe; and there are some who by nature or training can only bow the knee, like the Greeks of old, before an altar inscribed 'Agnosto Theo" (to the Unknown God); but such men are not irreligious, for with patient hope they look forward to a day of clearer vision, and with glad self-sacrifice they lend a helping hand to others as they walk the road toward the better life. Religion, even such religion, expressing itself in the person of one who is honored and loved, is worth ten thousand homilies on theology, or as many chapters learned by rote from the Holy Book.

Summing it all up, then, very briefly, we are agreed that moral training should be increasingly emphasized in our system of education. To be most effective it should never be divorced from the element of religion with which it has always been closely related by the theories of philosophy and the history of events. Under the conditions which exist in our country today, it lies within the power of our educational authorities to develop an increasingly strong and vital connection between these two important agencies, by a clear statement of their mutual dependence, a fair portrayal of their joint influence on the lives of men, the observance each day of some form of public worship, the wise use of a potential and pervasive religious atmosphere, and last, but not least, by the life and character of the honored teacher, who himself is sincerely religious.

DISCUSSION

MISS NEBRASKA CROPSEY, Indianapolis, Ind.-It is very evident, from the able reports presented this morning, that moral development cannot be secured by any kind of early specialization (not even by manual training), nor apart from personal guidance. The studies of the elementary school, reading, writing, arithmetic, manual training,

art, will not of themselves secure moral development though they are the opportunity for growth by means of self-activity, and also the means by which the child is related to the great world, of which the school is a part. The training of the intellect must be considered in training for moral development.

The important and difficult work of the school is to furnish such conditions, by association and work, as will develop the rational will. To make the will pure and strong, as Froebel tells us, is the object of education; to place the action of the will beyond the power of accident, and, in our time especially, to make a man capable of dominating the machinery which he himself has invented.

We are constantly endeavoring to adjust our conduct to the standards of our civilization. Imitation as a process should not be underestimated in education. "How can I listen to what you say when what you do is thundering in my ears ?" The personality of the teacher is the great factor in moral education. Children must be considered as individuals, and must be directed by individual intelligence and sympathy. The organization of the school community is most important, but all machinery should be considered subordinate to human growth. It is impossible to give adequate moral training in the present crowded condition of the schools. The reform most needed is not a reduction of the number of studies, but a reduction of the number of pupils assigned to each teacher. The studies in the curriculum represent only the opportunities which a child might have in a cultivated family.

Much attention has been given to literature for children, and no instrumentality is more effective in creating the ideals which must influence and direct the will. The theory of life, the theory of conduct is expressed in the art form and applied to life, before the child is capable of understanding philosophy or religious creeds.

Our literature and art should explain the child to himself in his own civilization. The life of the primitive man has its place, no doubt. The myths of earlier civilizations have much value, in a scheme of education, if they are well chosen.

The method of indirect teaching has great value, but not to the exclusion of direct teaching. Children are constantly asking the meaning of the life around them and are placing their interpretation upon it. The old-time stories endeavored to explain, in a very simple way, the consequence of the deed, and the relative values of actions. It is true that an arrest of development may take place in an effort to bring the moral powers to early maturity, but it is equally true that development may be arrested by teaching below the level of the child's power to comprehend.

DISTINCTIVE FUNCTIONS OF UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE, AND NORMAL SCHOOL IN THE PREPARATION OF TEACHERS ELMER ELLSWORTH BROWN, UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION WASHINGTON, D. C.

It is, I believe, my function at this time merely to start the discussion of this topic, a topic that has been much discussed in the past, and sometimes with the warmth of opposing convictions. The points in which there has appeared to be irreconcilable opposition of view have now been so far talked out and studied out, that it will be possible, I am sure, for us here to consider without irritation the difficulties with which the question is necessarily attended. And we may be able to go a little way forward toward a solution of those difficulties.

What I have to present may be summed up as follows: The chief difficulty of adjustment from the side of the normal school arises from the fact that the normal school seems to be out of the main current of our scholastic life, which

flows from the elementary school through the high school directly into the university or, the other way round, from the university to the secondary and elementary school.

The chief difficulty of adjustment from the side of the university arises from the fact that it has been found impossible as yet to organize in the university any system of training in the actual practice of teaching that can be compared in efficiency with that to be found in our best normal schools.

I am taking the question as it was assigned to me with this exception, that I do not undertake to discuss the function of the college as apart from that of the university. What I have to say concerning the university will apply only in part to an institution having a fully developed school of education or teachers' college. What is said of the lack of adequate practice teaching of secondary grade is, I think, of universal application. With reference to both of the difficulties mentioned above I shall have some mild suggestions toward improvement to offer before I close.

We are now well accustomed to the idea that all grades of education in this country are to be closely bound together, from the lowest to the highest. Our fidelity to the spirit of democracy requires this of us, and we are convinced that it is best in the long run both for science and for the national life. Continuity and coherence are watchwords of our educational organization.

But just because the higher grades of instruction are bound fast to the lower, we see the need of especial care that a steady progression shall be maintained in both the method and the content of our teaching. No grade of instruction shall be allowed to lay a detaining hand of scholastic custom and inertia upon the grade above it. At no stage of our scholastic ascent shall we tarry for more than two years with instruction of essentially the same type or the same grade of difficulty.

Furthermore, we cannot be content with the standards of the past. Not only our own national development, but, more particularly, our closer touch with the rest of the world, has shown us that our standards have been pitched too low. This is true both on the side of knowledge and on the side of skill in teaching. In our new position in the world, it is not enough that we win patronizing approval of our science and of our school instruction from the older culture nations. That new position requires of us that we do our full part in determining what the world-standard shall be, both in pure science and in pedagogic practice. This is particularly difficult when half our teaching force is a rope of sand and when the profitable pursuits of applied science are luring our scientists away from their laboratories. But these unfavorable circumstances cannot relieve us of our responsibility; and a consideration of the higher attainments which the present times demand, as regards both knowledge and teaching skill, has an important bearing on the distribution of function between normal schools and universities.

We are pretty well agreed that the knowledge of subject-matter and skill in presentation are both requisite in all grades of teaching, and that, broadly