in paper requirements and important features of methods. This is an argument for the general adoption of such recommended courses as shall be the final outcome, after free discussion of the investigations of these conferences and of the committee.

CONNECTION BETWEEN HIGH SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES.

Nothing in the whole report is more important than the proposed closer connection between high schools and colleges, and this is clearly and forcibly urged. Whatever course of study properly belongs to a secondary school is also a good preparation for higher education, else either secondary or higher education is seriously in error. Whenever a youth decides to take a college course, he should find himself on the road toward it. No one can doubt that in the coming years pupils from properly arranged high school courses must be admitted to corresponding courses in higher education. The divorcement between higher education and all lower grade work, except the classical, has been a fatal defect in the past. The entire course of education should be a practical interest of college professors, and there should be a hearty cooperation between them and school superintendents and principals in considering all educational problems.

STANDARD OF PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS.

It is a fact of significance that a committee on which some leading institutions are represented urges the professional schools of the country to place their standard of admission as high as that of the colleges; and we hope that aid will thus be given the institutions endeavoring to raise the prevailing low requirements of law, medical, and divinity schools.

The reports of most of the conferences asked for continuous and adequate work for each subject, that it might become a source of discipline and of valuable insight. No doubt part of the work in high schools is too brief and fragmentary to gain from it the best results, and I regret that the committee report did not more clearly present this defect.

In fact, I believe the aim should be to reduce the number of courses, the number of subjects, and the number of topics under a subject. It is not necessary that the entire landscape be studied in all its parts and details if a thorough knowledge of the most prominent features is gained.

CHOICE OF SUBJECTS.

In one important point I was constrained to differ from the reading of the report, as finally submitted, although the expressions to which exceptions were taken were due rather to the standpoint of the writer of the report than the resolutions of the committee. I refer to those paragraphs in which it is implied that the choice of studies in secondary schools may be a matter of comparative indifference, provided good training is obtained from the subjects chosen. This view makes education formal without giving due regard to the content. Here are the world of nature and the world of mind. Nature, when its meaning is realized, has the same meaning for all, and in its various phases affects all in substantially the same way. The history of mankind in its various kinds and degrees of development has the same content for all. The nature of mind in generic characteristics and the universal truths that belong to the spiritual world are the same for all. Mind has the same powers in all human beings. We all know, feel, and will; all persons acquire through attention; retain in memory under the same conditions; obey the same laws of association; reason, so far as rightly, from the same. principles; act from motives. Men may be classed crudely according to the motives that will appeal to them. While there are infinite variations in details of men's natures, in power of insight, degree of development, methods of acquisition, predominant motives, in interests and tendencies, all persons in their growth obey the laws of human nature. Hence I argue that a

science of education is possible; that it is possible to select studies with a view to their universal use in the primary development of the powers and with the assurance of superior value as revealing to man his entire environment and the nature of his being.

Mere form, mere power, without content, means nothing. Power is power through knowledge. The very world in which we are to use our power is the world which we must first understand in order to use it. The present is understood not by the power to read history but by what history contains. The laws of nature and deductions therefrom are not made available by mere power, but by the power which comes from the knowledge of them. Hence the education which does not include something of all views of the world and of the thinking subject is lacking in data for the wise and effective use of power.

ANALYSIS OF STUDIES.

In view of this position I would regard it the duty of the committee to analyze carefully the nature and importance of each leading subject representing a part of the field of knowledge, to the end that a wise correlation of the work of the conferences might be made. The study of number in its concrete form and in its abstract relations, the study of space relations as founded upon axiomatic truths, are necessary as a basis of many kinds of knowledge, as representing an essential view of the world, as a foundation for the possibilities of commerce and structures, and as furnishing important training in exact reasoning. Science includes many things; but chemistry and physics, which explain the manifestations of force in the material world; biology, which reveals important laws of plant and animal life, and physiography, which acquaints us with our entire environment as to location, phenomena, and partial explanation-these are connected with the practical side of civilization and the welfare of humanity, and are a guard against superstition and error. They are indispensable for practice in induction, and they should be well represented in a course of study. History, in which man discovers the meaning of the present and gains wisdom for the future, which is a potent source of ethical thought, must not be omitted. English language, as the means of accurate, vigorous, and beautiful expression, and English literature, which is the treasury of much of the world's best thought, are not subjects to leave to the election of the pupil.

In addition to the training in observation, memory, expression, and inductive reasoning which most studies offer, we must consider the development of imagination, right emotion, and right will. In other words, æsthetic and ethical training is most essential. Secondary schools need not employ formal courses of study to this end, but various means may be employed incidentally. There are a hundred ways in which taste may be cultivated, and literature is one of the best means for developing the art idea. Moral character is developed by right habit, by the right use of the powers in the process of education, by growth in knowledge of ethical principles, by growth of the spirit of reverence, and by the ethical code of religion. All of these means, except the formal use of the last, may be employed by the schools. And the ethical element is inherent in the very nature of right education. To educate rightly is to educate ethically. History, biography, and literature make direct contributions to ethical knowledge.

We now reach the study of foreign classical tongues. If there is nothing more than formal training, for instance, in Latin, the sooner we abandon its study the better. But we find in it also a valuable content. In the process of development some phases of human possibility seem to have been aimost fully realized, while the world has continued to develop along other lines. In such cases we must go back and fill our minds with the concepts that belong to the remote period. The insight into the character of the peoples and their institutions, the concepts of their civilizations, the beauty of their literatures, the practical contribution to the knowledge of our own language, form an important content to be realized by the study of the

Greek and Latin classics. From the foreign modern tongues German may be chosen because of its valuable literature, its contributions to science, its dignity, and its relation to the Anglo-Saxon element of our own language.

We have endeavored to show that the choice of studies is not a matter of indifference, that mathematics, science, history, the English language and literature, foreign language, and art and ethics all belong to the period of secondary education, and we have tried to suggest the inference that all should be employed. The relative importance of each can not be exactly measured, but experience and reason must guide us.

ORGANIZATION OF COURSES.

Granting that these are the subjects to be used in making secondary school programmes, we must consider the time element the most difficult problem of all. But we must grapple with it calmly and firmly, as did each of the conferences in their recommendations, and correlate, in the light of history and reason, the data given by the conference. We must grant the possibility of certain differentiations at some points in the high school courses. For instance, pupils choosing the classical course must depart in a measure from the normal modern programme.

I have placed at the end of this discussion for comparison tables which group subjects under the four heads named in the analysis-mathematics, science, history and English, and foreign language.

Table of subjects as assigned by the committee.—The first table shows, classified, the nine divisions of subjects, as assigned to the nine conferences, respectively.

Table showing recommendations of the conferences.-The second table shows the recommendations of the conferences classified in the same way as above. Since the conferences worked separately this table shows at almost every point need of adjustment. For the first year an aggregrate of 22 periods per week is recommended, for the second 374, for the third 35, for the fourth 374. The programme maker must either choose a few subjects, omitting other essential ones, or must adjust the time and order relations of the table. The latter appears to be the preferable alternative.

Table showing proposed arrangement of courses.—I would base the whole subject of programme making upon the relations of the child to the world of knowledge; would make mathematics, science, history, and literature the foundation, and provide for the foreign languages by additions or by modification and substitution. I would adopt the present standard for mathematics, and would limit the number of sciences recommended by the conferences. Arranging for convenience the studies in four parallel lines, under the heads of mathematics, science, history and English, and foreign language, I would give to history and English the time of one of the four divisions. English is the native tongue and is already familiar, and English literature will be read voluntarily through life if the taste for it and the power to understand it are acquired in the schools. History, if the right method of study be imparted and the interest be cultivated, will also be pursued voluntarily. We may allow for Latin about the usual time, and in the classical course we may substitute Greek for some of the sciences and mathematics. In case an additional foreign language is taken it must be an extra, or the time of each line of work must be shortened or further substitutions must be made as wisely as possible.

The table showing the proposed arrangement of courses is not worked out in detail. It suggests that approximately one-fourth of the time be given to each column; that in other courses than the classical, if a second foreign language be taken, it should be regarded as an extra if possible; that Greek, if taken, be substituted for the science of the last two years and the mathematics of the last year. This combines simplicity of plan, identity of instruction in the same subject for all courses, and continuous and adequate work with the necessary differentiation.

Tables showing the courses as arranged by the committee, the subjects being reclassified for comparison.--In view of this discussion I would offer the following criticisms of the four model courses presented by the committee:

(1) While there is much to be said in favor of the courses as they stand, I think they lack more or less in simplicity of arrangement, in proper classification, in proportion, in continuity and adequateness of time for some of the subjects, in economy to a slight degree, and in failure to properly limit the number of studies.

(2) Taking 80 as the aggregate number for each of the four courses the proportionate number of each group is as follows:

Except in the English course, foreign language appears to have more than its just proportion, and history and English claim a very large share in the course with one foreign language.

(3) It is doubtful whether higher algebra belongs to a high school course, although it is inserted in my own scheme.

(4) The scheme for science violates the principle so strongly urged of adequate time for each subject. Too many science subjects are inserted. It is better to pursue four sciences, each one year, than to take twice the number with half a year for each. If we select as the most important high school sciences, for instance, physical geography, physics, chemistry, and biology, we shall see that the committee have added (1) botany or zoology, (2) astronomy, (3) meteorology, (4) geology or physiog raphy, (5) physiology. In the second and fourth years two sciences are presented side by side. Moreover, physics, the generic science, is given only three hours, no more than is given botany or zoology.

(5) In two of the courses besides the classical no history appears in the second and fourth years, except as an option in the fourth.

(6) Since in small high schools pupils in all courses should be taught the same subject in one class, there appears to be a mistake in that in a few instances divisions are made necessary.

FINAL STATEMENT.

The criticisms of the report of the committee of ten which I would emphasize most are these: The lack of a bold and clear analysis of the value of subjects before correlating the recommendations of the conferences; the implications that the committee favored an extreme theory of equivalence of studies; practical details in the organization of the model courses.

I do not know how far other members of the committee may agree with me in any of these adverse views, nor what stand may be taken by the council, and I feel a diffidence in taking exceptions to any parts of results the most of which can but be heartily approved. If the committee consent and the council wish it, it would seem very desirable that these points be given further consideration. It would be easy to obtain by correspondence the views of a few of the most intelligent programme makers in the country, and the committee could hold another meeting at some convenient time. We must remember that a large percentage of the schools will look chiefly at the practical and formal results of the investigation, hence the importance to be attached to the model courses. May I add that the recommendations of the conferences to introduce certain subjects in the elementary school period are worthy of the most careful and extended consideration at no remote date by a competent committee.

In closing I wish to express my most hearty appreciation of the work done by the other members of the committee, and especially by the chairman, who took the greater share of the burden as well as faith in the general results which should be but the beginning of a much needed work in this country.

Proposed arrangement of courses (not marked out in detail, intended to be merely suggestive).

*German, if taken, to be an extra, giving the pupil 20 hours instead of 16.

Greek, if taken, to be substituted for science for last two years and mathematics of last year.