DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE INSTRUCTION SECRETARY'S MINUTES OFFICERS President-IRVING O. PALMER, science master. Newton High School, Newtonville, Mass. FIRST SESSION.-TUESDAY MORNING, JUNE 30, 1908 President Irving O. Palmer opened the sessions of the department at 9:30 o'clock in the Second Presbyterian Church of Cleveland. In the absence of the secretary, the president appointed, as acting secretary, N. Henry Black, science master, Roxbury Latin School, Boston, Mass. 1. Topic: Geography. a) "Home Geography"-Martha Krug Genthe, associate editor of the Bulletin of the American Geographical Society, Hartford, Conn. b) "Geography in the Elementary School"-R. H. Whitbeck, supervisor in the Model School of the New Jersey State Normal School, Trenton, N. J. Discussion-led by W. N. Clifford, superintendent of schools, Council Bluffs, Iowa. c) "Geography in the Secondary School"-George D. Hubbard, assistant professor of geology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. General Discussion-led by James F. Chamberlain, Department of Geography, 2. Topic: Physics. a) "The Function of the Demonstration Lecture in Secondary School Physics"Robert A. Millikan, associate professor of physics in the University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. Discussion-led by Franklin T. Jones, registrar and science teacher, University On motion, the chairman was authorized to appoint the usual nominating committee. SECOND SESSION.-THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 2 President Palmer announced the nominating committee as follows: Charles H. Smith, Chicago, Ill. W. M. Butler, St. Louis, Mo. H. W. LeSourd, Milton, Mass. The program of the evening was as follows: 1. "Preservation of the Natural Resources of the United States," by Herbert A. Smith, editor of The Forest Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. 2. "Scientific Agriculture in the Secondary Schools," by Liberty H. Bailey, director, New York State College of Agriculture, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. The nominating committee reported the following nominations: For President-Otis W. Caldwell, assistant professor of botany, University of Chicago. The report was accepted and the nominees were elected as the officers of this department for the ensuing year. Gilbert H. Trafton of New Jersey moved that the President appoint a committee of seven to consider what constitutes the fundamentals of a course in geography for secondary schools, and, if practicable, to outline such a course. The motion was seconded and carried. The President later announced the appointment of the following committee: James F. Chamberlain, chairman, professor of geography State Normal School, Los Angeles, Cal. R. H. Whitbeck, supervisor, Model School, State Normal School, Trenton, N. J. Martha Krug Genthe, assistant editor of the Bulletin of the American Geographical Society and instructor in the Beacon School, Hartford, Conn. W. H. Snyder, 116 West Avenue 53, Los Angeles, Cal. W. L. W. Field, master in Milton Academy, Milton, Mass. Mark Jefferson, professor of geography, State Normal College, Ypsilanti, Mich. William C. Moore, head of Department of Education, Mt. Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass. On motion the President was authorized to appoint a Committee of Three to determine what scientific material can be found that would be useful in the Forest Service of the National Government. The President later announced the following committee: W. N. Clifford, chairman, head of the Department of Commerce, Southern Manual Training Boys' High School, Philadelphia, Pa. Clifton F. Hodge, professor of biology, Clark University, Worcester, Mass. The Department then adjourned. N. HENRY BLACK Acting Secretary PAPERS AND DISCUSSIONS HOME GEOGRAPHY MARTHA KRUG GENTHE, OF THE BEACON SCHOOL, HARTFORD, CONN. The name of home geography admits, perhaps, more different interpretations than any other subject of the public-school course. To some, it means elementary geography; to others, a general introduction into the sciences; to still others, object-lessons on a great many useful things which have no other relation to geography but their existence on the globe. Home geography is, in this respect, still suffering from the traditional misconception of geography itself-namely, that it is a receptacle for all kinds of disconnected. information for which no other place can be found in the course of study. A lesson on cork, for instance, is not a lesson in geography; neither is a lesson on the manufacture of Bessemer steel, nor on the revolution in Russia. Yet I have seen these and many similar subjects enumerated on lists of geographical topics. No one will deny, of course, that geographical factors are at play in each of them; but the study of these things for their own sakes is botany, or technology, or sociology, not geography. Likewise, elementary naturestudy is not elementary geography, or home geography as we call it, even tho the study of objects of nature forms part of it. The difference is that, in geography, these objects are not studied for their own sakes, but only as the material for geographical deductions. Not what things are, but where they are, constitutes the problem of geography and, as earliest impressions are also most lasting, the teacher of home geography ought to be especially careful lest his teaching give the pupil that erroneous conception of geography which I characterized above. This danger is especially great in home geography because the beginner possesses only a very limited amount of information about the things themselves, so that at first real object-lessons must be inserted between the purely geographical work. But in proportion as the child's general knowledge increases, the teacher's conscious efforts must tend more and more to eliminate that kind of teaching and make the lessons genuinely geographical. Every transgression into mere object-study carries with it the danger of mistaking the by-path for the main road and thus being led astray from the true goal. If the final purpose of geography is the training of the pupil to find his way intelligently in any part of the globe, the purpose of home geography is 'the same in regard to his nearer surroundings. What is necessary to reach this purpose? First, to become acquainted with the home by personal observation as far as possible; second, to acquire the ability to learn, from the observations of others, what we cannot learn from our own experience. Observation is therefore necessary at the beginning of every step that is going to widen the geographical horizon. The power to observe is more or less present in every child; but it needs careful training in order to reach its state of highest efficiency. The elements of such training, of course, are object-lessons pure and simple. The children must know the things themselves before studying where they are, and each one of the various stages of this course-the schoolroom, the school-grounds, the district, the town, etc.—must include a certain amount of work not strictly geographical, so that the children may know what they are talking about. It is certainly not a geographical statement that the blackboard is of wood, or that the crayon is white; but if the discussion is undertaken with a view finally to locate these things and to draw a diagram on which they are recorded, and on which the children can recognize the relative places of the objects, the digression is justified. If, on the other hand, we should indulge to enter into a discussion of the manufacture and uses of these objects, we should have sinned against the spirit of geography. Or, in studying the school-yard, we cannot help telling the children the names of the trees and flowers in it, so that they may be able to properly locate the same; but lessons in botany or horticulture would be out of place. We misuse the time allotted to us if we do not concentrate all our efforts in the endeavor to convey to the child an understanding of the characteristics and consequences of a given location, however interesting the rest may appear. It is the point of view that makes the difference; the point of view of the naturalist is essentially another than that of the geographer, even in treating the same subject. This the teacher should never forget. For all these preliminary exercises, the relative locations, right, left, etc., will be perfectly sufficient. The names of the cardinal points need not be used before the children know, from actual observation, that the sun appears at a given place in the sky at a given time of the day. Such observations on sun, moon, and stars ought to be made between the regular classroom work whenever possible, and continued thruout the course. If we limit ourselves to telling the child that south, for instance, is where we see the sun at noon, it is just possible that one of them will look up to see; but ten to one the other ninety-nine will take the teacher's word for it and believe on authority what should have been acquired by observation. To believe is so easy, but to look and see for oneself requires an effort. Yet in elementary education, more than anywhere else, we should make it an iron rule for ourselves never to let words take the place of facts. It is for this reason, probably, that many competent educators wish that the true movements of the heavenly bodies shall never be spoken of to the child at this stage. The child's power of abstractive thinking is yet so undeveloped that if we force him to do what he cannot do, we educate intellectual hypocrites who pretend to understand when in fact they believe only. To understand the apparent movements of sun, moon, and stars is difficult enough; but it can be achieved by continuous careful observation. Let us be satisfied with this, as was humanity in its own childhood. Moreover, when the apparent movements are once well understood, and the child knows what he sees when he looks up to the sky, it takes comparatively little effort for the advanced pupil to realize the true stages of things, because the concrete knowledge makes the abstraction less formidable. We cannot banish abstraction too rigidly from elementary teaching. Ambitious teachers often sin in this respect, because they think they must teach the child how to reason. They forget that reasoning is the privilege of those who know, and that conclusions and generalizations which are not based on a liberal amount of facts are merely self-deceit. The discovery of those abstractions which we call laws of nature has in every instance been the result of years of observation and experience, and it would be contradictory to all psychological and historical truth to deduct laws and generalizations, as it were, from the one or two things that the child knows. Let him open his eyes and see things, let him tell plainly and intelligently what he has seen, let him try visual reproduction by means of pen and pencil, and the rest will take care of itself. A child who says: "Cedar Hill is very high. It is so steep that we get very tired climbing it. It is harder to climb from Berlin than from Wethersfield, because it is steeper on the Berlin side. Therefore few people from Berlin go to Wethersfield, but the Wethersfielders used to cross the mountain, and settled the place where Berlin now stands. Nobody lives on the mountain because it is so high and there is no water on the top. It is only covered with wood"—such a child shows thereby as perfect a physiographic and ontographic understanding of mountains as can possibly be expected of one of his age, while one who recites from the textbook: "A hill is an elevation of the land," or: "Mountains are obstacles to traffic," may become a voluble talker, but his actual knowledge will never amount to much. |