favor of the apparently helpless and immovable plant, and they rejoice that, while it may not act offensively, it remains a citadel not easily stormed. For them the wonders of plant life reach the maximum in cuttings and graftings, and in the methods of seed dissemination. Perhaps their curiosity leads them to experiment on home trees and house plants. Give the child a garden of his own, and he will learn many practical lessons in botany that will serve as fundamentals in his science course in later years. Check lists of the wild flowers, with date of finding, name of locality where found, and name of finder, properly recorded, help in starting herbaria.

Who can measure the value of field excursions as ground work for subsequent science instruction? The joy of finding a bubbling spring in a shadowy glen, the pure delight of suddenly coming upon a vision of a sheltered. valley appearing thru an opening in the trees, are experiences that live in the heart, always forming settings for any and all the gems the science teacher may produce. Is it not worth while to experience the dense forest with its inviting cool, its impenetrable gloom, its awful majesty, and its rustling, reverberating sounds that bring mystery and fears? No other sensation is comparable to it. It is one of nature's choicest allurements. Its value is beyond estimate in giving an æsthetic imagery-a background, if you pleaseto class-room instruction on the homes, haunts, and lives of living things.

No study pursued in the elementary school can be of more direct aid to earth science and to the biological sciences than nature study, which teaches the pupil to gather knowledge first hand, trains so certainly in observation, develops the power of discrimination, leads to a capacity for concrete and abstract analysis, and at the same time is capable of giving a lifelong joy in the appreciation of the ever-changing panorama surrounding us.

DISCUSSION

OTIS W. CALDWELL, professor of biology, Eastern Illinois Normal School, Charleston Ill.-In one of the preceding papers is the statement that "the art of right and rational living is the most difficult of all the arts, and the most complicated and perplexing of all the sciences are those which underlie that art." Now, all the people practice this art of living in varying degrees of devotion and intelligence; consequently all are engaged, consciously or mechanically, in "the most complicated and perplexing of all the sciences." The low degree of devotion and intelligence with which the art is practiced by the larger number of people furnishes us with an explanation of the facts that so few recognize the possibilities of the science, and that so many faulty conclusions have been formulated within it. The general method of procedure of the student engaged in one of those fields usually included in the term “science" is the thing that will give the greatest assistance to those engaged in this larger field, and suggestions calculated to enhance the teaching of the method of science with the people in general should receive more earnest attention from those engaged in the more technical aspects of scientific thought. The general method of scientific thought is usable in the various fields of human interest, each field necessitating special applications of the method. It is applicable in an elementary way to elementary thought upon various subjects, and is sufficient for use in the most intricate problems of a specialist.

If all the people might have suitable instruction in several formal sciences, the benefit to the practice of the art of living would be enormous, but such a condition obviously is not near at hand. Possibly when present opportunities for science are more judiciously used, thru the evidence of her fruition larger opportunities may come.

Notwithstanding the fact that elementary science should not be a formal presentation of any separate field of science, the scientific method may be taught with varying degrees of appreciation in any part of an educational system where any science work is done. The most elementary science, if properly presented, will develop a little of the method of science. It may be greatly limited in quantity, and in application may not be seen in connection with any phenomena except those immediately at hand. The method may not even be appreciated as being present, but such appreciation is not essential in order that it may begin to develop. The method of any subject is taught in the most fundamental and potent way when the subject itself is taught in the best way. Certainly in secondary schools and colleges some emphasis should be placed upon an understanding of the scientific habit of mind, but in lower work it would be futile to attempt this.

If so-called elementary science for grade work were more truly elementary science, and less legendary, mythical, imaginary, and impersonating, it would do something toward establishing some elementary notions of the scientific method of thinking; it would remove elementary science from its present position of well-earned disrepute; and would give it the support of science men—a support it can never have until elementary science is scientific in an elementary way; it would give grade pupils an opportunity of observing phenomena in the field of science-a field in which normally they have an active interest—and would teach them some of the ways of discovering truth.

In secondary-school science the logic of the subject should be observed, thus permitting the application of the method of science study along a given line of thought for a considerable period of time. The logic of the subject is easily seen in botany and zoology, whether they be organized from the point of view of their evolutionary development, or from that of their special adaptation to nutrition and reproduction. In the case of any formal science best results may be had when topic sequences are definitely related, rather than when consisting of isolated topics, more or less attractive, but not necessarily representing the science as such. To the claim that the latter plan is easier it may be said that less valuable results accrue, and it may be questioned strongly whether it is easier or more attractive.

It has been strongly urged that the purely inductive method of study should be kept constantly in mind, and with this I am essentially in agreement. But in many cases is not the verification method necessary to beginners? The processes involved in the study of any science are sometimes quite intricate. A law stated, then proved by experiment, confers scientific value, not of the highest order, but often necessary as a step toward employment of the highest order of scientific experiment. If sufficient experience has been had already to enable the worker to project such experience into new occurrences or new fields, the verification method should decline or disappear, and the inductive method should become predominant. In any piece of work assumption concerning the accuracy of preceding work must be made. These pieces of preceding work are not to be accepted in complete trustfulness, but must be questioned sufficiently to give assurance of their accuracy. The experiences of preceding workers must be reviewed in a scientific spirit. Where doubts arise, all workers must employ the method of verification. The worker has before him the stated conclusion of his predecessor, and works to see whether it be true. The ability to perform this work of verification involves the same sort of knowledge of the value of experiment and observation that will eventually enable the possessor to draw just conclusions from observations and experiences in a new field in which he does not have the guidance of the stated conclusion of a previous worker.

If the scientific method is to be taught by verification of details, each fragment of which is carefully stated and figured for the student, little of value will result, but the problem should be to see whether such proposition be true, not to see that it be true. If the

preceding work be exact and sufficiently extensive, the verifier will approach the same conclusions in proportion to the inclusiveness of his experiences and the accuracy of his judgments.

At this point it should be said that in order to verify well-known scientific facts the use of elaborate apparatus in the form of models, special preparations, and mechanical devices under the direction of an extensive laboratory outline quite often does less to confer the scientific habit of thinking than did the meager equipment and paucity of laboratory outline that prevailed when science was just beginning to come into her own estate.

In the attempt to remove from the student the necessity of rediscovering the entire known field of science he is sometimes left without the ability or inclination to discover any of this field. One needs but to recall the fact that some books highly recommended for science work are made up of outlines for laboratory work by students, and following the outlines on the same page, or at best the one following, are found full answer and discussion of each of the points the student is asked to investigate. There is so much solicitude lest the student should not learn promptly, and in some certain prescribed way, that haste is made to inform him before he has opportunity to investigate.

So much of a cry has arisen for the commercial, industrial, and technical that a considerable part of our system of education has responded to the demand for an education of early utility. There are a great many facts in the various fields of science that it is desirable for a student to know. It is not necessary for him to discover all of them by investigation in order that he may know them, but he must discover some of them in order to know and appreciate all of them. And he must obtain the mental discipline that will be of inestimable value to him if the scientific method of thinking becomes a working factor in the ordinary affairs of his life.

DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION

SECRETARY'S MINUTES

FIRST SESSION.-WEDNESDAY, JUNE 29, 1904

The department was called to order in the Hall of Congresses of the Universal Exposition at 2:30 P. M., by B. F. Hunsicker, president of the department, who read a paper on "Retrospective and Prospective School Administration."

William B. Ittner, commissioner and superintendent of school buildings, St. Louis, Mo., next read a paper on "School Architecture." Stereopticon views of floor plans, elevations, and perspectives, showing the later school architecture of St. Louis, were used in illustration by Mr. Ittner.

A paper was then read by Professor Calvin M. Woodward, president of the St. Louis Board of Education, on the "Lessons in School Administration Afforded by the World's Fair."

While the attendance at the meeting was fair, it was apparent that there was not a sufficient number of Association members present to warrant the election of officers. It was therefore decided that the present officers of the department hold over for another year, unless otherwise ordered by the Executive Committee of the Association. These officers were as follows:

President-B. F. Hunsicker, Reading, Pa.

Vice-President-Grafton D. Cushing Boston, Mass.
Secretary-William George Bruce, Milwaukee Wis.

Executive Committee-Harlan P. French, Albany, N. Y.; Albert Gehring, Cleveland, O.; Israel H. Peres, Memphis, Tenn.; Charles Holden, Grand Rapids, Mich.

A final adjournment was then taken in accordance with the plan to hold but one session of the department.

WILLIAM GEORGE BRUCE, Secretary.

PAPERS AND DISCUSSIONS

RETROSPECTIVE AND PROSPECTIVE SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATIONS

B. F. HUNSICKER, PRESIDENT OF SCHOOL DISTRICT, READING, PA.

It is no easy matter to formulate into readable form all the tendencies in school administration. We are now in a time of transition, and to find even a general policy adapted to the country in general would set an expert to thinking. In this paper I can only give briefly my opinion of the past and present and what I believe possible in the future. As I already suggested, school government is constantly changing. Many things enter into a school policy,

and I will not try to formulate a policy, but present those tendencies in school government which are most significant.

A school board is a creature of the lawmaking power designed to do certain things, and it owes allegiance to this power. In the performance of its duty it comes in contact with other forces, and this creates other allegiances. Its duties in general may be divided into two classes-business and professional. On the performance of these duties hinges the history of American school boards. In the performance of these duties, the state, the community, the paid officials, the teachers, and the pupils all play a part. To know just how to keep all these varied factors in harmony is now, and I think has been, the mooted question in school administration. For a solution of the problem the past does not furnish much help. School boards have had nearly as much diversity in plan and policy as the number of such bodies will permit. In fact, outside of certain general regulations of a particular commonwealth, school boards have been regulated by the kind of men that have composed them. The personnel of school boards has been good, indifferent, or bad, according to the interest of the community in educational matters. The early history of the school board records little except a difficult task for existence. It was well satisfied if it could "keep school" with teachers who had sufficient muscle, sufficient influence, or could enlist sufficient sympathy to get the places. The school board, as a rule, wanted to be bothered as little as possible. In the course of time, however, as new issues arose, school boards found themselves confronted with various problems. This was too much for men otherwise employed and often with a mental equipment unable to grapple intelligently with the situation. This gave rise to paid officers such as secretaries, treasurers, superintendents, etc. Here again arose a contention as to what these officers should do and with what authority they should be clothed. This is now a bone of contention and promises to be for some time to come.

It is interesting to note the progress in school administration. The school boards now have a broader and a more intelligent attitude toward the state, toward the community represented, toward the officials, toward the teachers, and toward the pupils. They are relegating self-interests to the rear and legislating for the good of the pupils. They are beginning to understand that the state has committed to them a sacred duty, and the present tendency is in favor of doing that duty unselfishly and conscientiously. The vague relation between the lawmaking power and district boards is clearing up. There is less clash and more recognition of a common interest. Lawmakers legislate more generally than they used to in behalf of school districts and less in behalf of selfish interests. The past few years have been very encouraging, and a better spirit has grown up between these two factors in school government. In time the statute-books will largely reflect the sentiment of the people in regard to school legislation. There ill not be complete concord, and there cannot be so long as people have different notions of education.