chemical and physical theory. "Theories are necessary for further development, and that, though the actual teachings of science may lie in the facts, the real intellectual significance can only be acquired by connecting isolated facts by means of hypotheses." Other problems will present themselves for solution in the future and these will demand some ready and convenient explanation. For this reason we will undoubtedly still witness further extensions of this useful idea as times goes on, and I firmly believe that it will be the light which shall be the guide for investigators to even more brilliant achievements than in the past.

As an apology for an examination of this general subject let me quote from President Rückers' address before the British Association: "It is well to fix our attention on some of the hypotheses and assumptions on which the fabric of modern theoretical science has been built, and to inquire whether the

may

foundations have been so 'well and truly' laid that they be trusted to sustain the mighty superstructure which is being

raised upon them."

I wish to close with a brief paragraph from Dr. Clarke's splendid paper already referred to: "If we take the atomic theory out of chemistry we shall have left but a dust heap of unrelated facts. The convergence of the testimony is remarkable and when we add to the chemical evidence that which is offered

by physics the theory becomes overwhelmingly strong.

And

yet, from time to time, we are told that the theory has outlived its usefulness and that it is now a hindrance rather than a help to science. When we say that matter as we know it, behaves as if it were made up of very small, discrete particles, we do not lose ourselves in metaphysics and we have a definite conception I which can be applied to the correlation of evidence and the until something better is offered in its stead, a condition which solution of problems. Objections count for nothing against it

the critics of the atomic theory have so far failed to fulfill."

II. When and Where Should the Notebook be Written Up. III. Corrections of Notebooks.

THE NOTEBOOK.

A. E. PERKINS,

Holland High School, Michigan.

What to put in the Notebook largely depends upon the aim of the course in laboratory work and the methods employed in carrying out that aim.

Besides the usual benefits derived from laboratory workskill in manipulation, training in observation, and reasoning, etc. -I believe that it is most useful when it also assists in making the text book interesting and clear. The pupil remembers but few of the facts of the book and fails to get the slightest idea. of the theoretical parts unless enlightened by the work in the laboratory. The beginner in chemistry approaches a subject entirely out of his experience. The laboratory work is necessary to build up an experience before the text is really understood.

After the experience is acquired, it is necessary that he should see the relation of this to the related subject matter in this text. It is best that the pupil study out this relation for himself, and this is largely possible if he is properly directed. The easiest way the teacher can determine whether the pupil understands this connection is through the Notebook. Therefore besides the things which must necessarily be embodied in the notes, i. e., what is done and what is observed, I wish the notes to show what bearing the experiment has on the related topics in the book.

It often happens that the experiment is related to something in the pupil's experience not included in the text. I think it a good thing to have this included in the notes so that it may be brought out again when a recitation or review is made.

In writing up the Notebook we try to eliminate everything possible, yet make the notes complete enough to furnish a thorough review of the work in the laboratory when such a review is desired.

While I do not favor any particular hard and fast order of

*Read before the conference of Chemistry, a section of the Michigan Schoolmasters' Club, March 28, 1907.

topics in writing the notes, we usually use the following heads: number, date, name, material, operations and results, and discussion. Under operations and results are included:

Drawings, if any:

What was done and what observed; and equations, if any. The drawings are not elaborate but merely diagrammatic with only the essential parts to the apparatus. We make the drawing such that the arrangement of the apparatus, the chemicals used, whether heat was necessary or not, and the products obtained may be seen at a glance.

I do not consider it necessary to copy the whole of the directions to an experiment, but something more than the mere results is needed so we include both under one head and write the notes such that the directions and results will both be evident in the same sentence or sentences.

The following record of an experiment taken from a pupil's notebook will illustrate what I mean on that point:

"A Chemical Compound.

"Operations and results.

Sept. 18, 1906.

"(a). Thoroughly mix equal amounts of iron and sulphur in a mortar. The resulting color is light green. If a magnet is passed over the mixture it will remove the iron. The sulphur is moist and therefore some of it adheres to the iron. Again thoroughly mix the two and put a little carbon disulphide on some of it in a test tube. Stir and pour a little of the liquid on a glass. After the carbon disulphide has evaporated, sulphur will be left, which shows that the sulphur is soluble.

"This mixture of iron and sulphur is a mechanical mixture. “(b). Place a little of the mixture in a test tube and heat. The mixture begins to glow and continues to glow even if taken from the flame. The burned substance is black. If a magnet is passed over the substance it will remove a very small amount of the iron, and if carbon disulphide is added it will remove a very small amount of sulphur."

The following, taken from the same experiment, illustrates what we included under the discussion in this particular experi

ment:

"When the mixture is heated nearly all of the iron and sulphur disappears and forms a new substance which is called a chemical compound. In the chemical compound the identity of the sulphur and iron is lost. In this experiment it is shown that heat.

will change some mixtures into chemical compounds. The class of chemical action which here took place was synthesis or combination."

As was said before, what was included under the discussion was determined by the pupil through proper questions. If this cannot be done, as is the case in some instances, I state outright what I want them to see.

We do all notebook work in the laboratory. At the time of or just after doing the experiment and before another is started. The pupils are required to present the experiment or notes for acceptance as soon as written. The experiment is fresh in the mind of the pupil. You have a good chance to ask questions relating to the experiment and if anything is to be added or corrections to be made, then is the best time to make them. If the experiment needs to be repeated it can be done then with the greatest economy of time.

Corrections.

Sometimes the pupils add the corrections to the end of the experiment. But where they are slight they are made in the body of the notes. If a number are necessary so as to mar the looks of the book the experiment is rewritten.

No experiment is accepted until it is complete in every respect. After that I have nothing further to do with the Notebook. We complete each section of work in both laboratory and text before proceeding to the next. After a recitation on the whole we have no further use for the Notebook except for ref

erence.

I try to make the Notebook an affair of the pupils and thus relieve the teacher of the care.

From the above it is evident that the Notebook is simply a means and not an end. It is a means of bringing laboratory work and text-book work into connection and is therefore of secondary importance. We do our laboratory work not to make a Notebook but to gain an experience that will enlighten and enliven the text.

BY H. S. REED,

Michigan Agricultural College.

Before beginning the discussion of the subject assigned to me I must be truthful and say that it is not exactly to my liking. It savors of that branch of pedagogics which I have never been quick to defend. I believe that good teachers are born, not made. I do not mean by this poor teachers cannot be made

better, or even excellent teachers improved by training, but I do not believe that any amount of training can make a successful teacher if he has no natural ability back of it. I hold this same opinion with reference to other professions, and am a great believer in the old adage, "Many a good carpenter is spoiled to make a poor preacher." These brief remarks may seem somewhat irrelevant to my subject, but the idea I wish to bring out is this: the success of the teacher, and by the success of the teacher I mean the welfare of the student, depends infinitely so much more on his personality than on his method that no fixed rules for keeping notebooks can be applied to all teachers. Their different natural manners of presenting the subject may and must, to be efficient, require different forms of notebooks.

My ideas concerning notebooks are the natural outgrowth of my teaching. I present my division of chemistry to the students of the Agricultural College by means of lectures and laboratory work, requiring notebooks in each. I also assign reading lessons in a text-book and advise the student to purchase one, but leave that matter optional with himself.

At the suggestion of Mr. Peet I have considered the subject under three heads, the first of which is. "What to put in a note'book?" In answer to that question I should say anything and everything the student gets from his teacher if it is relative to the subject. I do not believe in "set form" notebooks leaving simply blanks to be filled in by the students. Notebooks of this description take away the student's imagination, destroy his power of initiation, curb his originality. I don't know how the most of my hearers feel under the same circumstances, but when I stand up before a hundred or so students assembled to hear my lectures in organic chemistry it is not my object to make chemists out of them-ninety-five per cent probably will never do anything with chemistry after graduation-but to give them a scientific knowledge and with the aid of the laboratory a scientific training that will be of practical utility to them throughout their after life.

I have here a page from a cerain laboratory manual and "set form" notebook. The first word on the margin is "Object,” then follows, "The preparation and study of Methane, CH.." I consider that to be simply one of the objects and I do not want my students to think that is all they are going to learn from the experiment. For, to the average student, the consid