Page images
PDF
EPUB

tion that Dr. Tappan advocated the teaching of the elements of algebra in the grammar grades. I want to endorse all that Dr. Findley has said.

We have algebra in the eighth grade, of the Columbus schools, and we have no bad results. We find that pupils after having studied arithmetic for eight years take the study of algebra with delight. It strikes me that the reason for the failure of so many pupils in the first year of ligh school is not always due to the work in schools below. It is sometimes because the weakest teachers are put in the high school to receive these pupils. We are putting teachers into the primary work who are specially fitted for it, and we are not always as careful in putting teachers into the higher grades.

W. S. STRICKLAND: It may sound like heresy in me to oppose the ideas advanced here, but there are several phases which have not been considered. It seems to me that as yet this must be regarded as an experiment. I have made a close observation during the past year and my own idea, supported by the testimony of two competent teachers, is not in its favor.

Here are some points to remember, and we must remember that only a small percentage of the pupils in the A grade ever reach the high school. I think the true theory of the public school system is the greatest good to the greatest number. Personally, I would rather have a child of mine leave the common school better grounded in mental arithmetic, and with some practical ideas of mensuration than to have a mere smattering of algebra. That seems to me to be a strong point in this discussion.

In the schools of Cincinnati the subject of mensuration is almost wholly neglected. The work we have to do can be done just as well without the help of the algebra.

The present course of study is already

overloaded. The time that is given to algebra is taken away from mental and practical arithmetic. It takes the time away from these subjects; it makes the work heavier in arithmetic and the examinations show that the result is not good. I think the idea of nature work, advanced by one of the speakers, is not a good point. We have changed in that respect. I think this experiment is very doubtful to say the least.

I would rather have the student have a better foundation in arithmetic and especially mental arithmetic, than to have a smattering of algebra. If he goes on in school he gets it from the high school, and that is the proper place for it.

I

J. P. CUMMINS: This seems to be an experience meeting this afternoon. want to say that we have had some experience in this matter in our schools. I have the testimony of two teachers, who say nothing is so good as this change. We have done just as much work in every department as we have ever done. We have done as good work in every respect as we have ever done. I do not wish to exaggerate it in the least, but it is true we have been doing just as much mental arithmetic as we have ever done. It is true that the algebra we teach in the lower grades is not the algebra that we take in the first year of the high school. I want to say another thing and that is that one of the gentlemen who objects to the introduction of algebra wants to introduce geometry under another name, when he talks of mensuration in arithmetic. For my part, I would like to see Latin introduced into the lower grades. Not Cæsar's Commentaries, of course, but certain words that every boy and girl should know better than they do. I would like, especially, to see Latin introduced with reference to the study of prefixes and suffixes. I want to say still further that we have been pursuing nature studies which belong just as

much to the higher grades. We can introduce and teach these studies just as well as we can those studies.

You who have studied Lation will agree with me, that one year's Latin has done more for your English Grammar than anything else. I believe the introduction of Latin will very greatly aid our work in English Grammar, and would favor the study of Latin instead of the technical part of English Gram

mar.

O. P. VOORHEES: I have been watching this subject for the past two years. I have been teaching it for the past two years and I was greatly in favor of it. I thought it was a good thing. I have been watching the results in the first year of the high school. That is the true test as to whether the work has been properly done in the lower grade. It has been a question with me whether if we had spent the same time in the other branches, the pupils would not have done better in their work in the first year of the high school. It seems to me if we had put this extra time on the branches, instead of the study of Algebra it would have been better. Perhaps some of those who failed in the first year's work, would not have done so, if they had not taken up this work. I have watched the progress of these pupils, for two years in order to satisfy myself on this subject.

J. P. CUMMINS: Let me ask you whether it is not true that your pupils sustained themselves better than they did, before they took up this study?

O. P. VOORHEES: No, sir; it is not true, I think.

E. W. WILKINSON: I like the idea suggested by Dr. Findley. There are many instances in our school work that we aim to satisfy instead of stimulate. I might go to school until I was as old as Methuselah and I would not consider that I had finished the mathematics; I am no particular fool on mathe

matics either, at least the state board thought so when they passed me on it.

H. C. MINNICH: I changed my course of study and I have had no difficulty. It occurred to me that when you change your plan of instruction, this might be the cause of some of the complaint. My idea of an examination is that it need not be based so much upon the technique of a study, as it should be a test of the power of the boy.

I understand that the feature of the new Arithmetic will be the study of surfaces, and lengths and distances. I think that is all right and that it will take care of itself.

I do not believe that a boy should be ten years old, before he knows the difference between a one foot pole, and a ten foot pole. If you send a boy to the blackboard to draw a foot line, he will likely draw a three foot line, instead of a foot line.

I want to say another thing, and that is, that the study of Algebra in the eighth grade is no more a preparation for high school work than arithmetic is a preparation for high school. It is not a preparation for specific high school work.

F. J. ROLLER: If I ever entertained the idea that this was a one-sided question I have abandoned it since this discussion commenced. I am sure it is not a question of only one side. It is a question whether it is advisable to carry the studies into the grammar grades. I raise no question whatever as to the advantages that may be found in it. I do not say that they will not derive good from it, but I hold that we are dealing with the average student and with the average school. I doubt whether it is best that the average school or student should be asked to approach the high school studies in the lower grades.

I think we are fast becoming a nation of pencil pushers. You go to a grocery and the man will take his pencil and fig

ure out your purchases. Give the boy a problem and he will take his pencil and figure it out. He ought to study it out in his mind. Algebra seems to be a popular study. A teacher goes to an examination. Instead of solving the problem by arithmetic as he should do he solves it by algebra. The boy in school very frequently solves the problem by algebra when he should solve it by arithmetic. I do not mean to say there should be no principles of algebra or geometry taught in the lower grades, but I maintain this is not the teaching of that branch as a subject. I believe we have enough work to do without this. Of course we can teach these principles where necessary, but we teach them in an elementary way and I think the high school work is only a continuation of the primary work, or the work of the ordinary school. Again, I would have no objection whatever to the study of Latin, especially with regard to prefixes and suffixes, but I would call it the study of English. When you come to the formal study of Latin and algebra and geometry it is carrying it too far.

E. W. WILKINSON: I spent some time here a few years ago studying the geological formation of this island and it took me two hours to come up to this point.

If I were coming up here now, I would take the street car, and come up in a few minutes and spend the rest of the time in study.

I believe in studying in the lower grades principles leading directly to the high school work.

J. W. JONES: The position which one takes on this question depends largely upon what he has been doing. I take it that the gentleman who has just spoken is either a school examiner or an instructor of teachers. Elu at'on is 1`rgely a matter of development, and the measure of one's education is the vocab

ulary in which he expresses himself. There is but little opportunity for the pupil to enlarge his vocabulary by remaining in the same studies for many years. I, at one time, thought that every person could learn the subject of arithmetic. But I have abandoned that notion. I am sure that but few people can become good arithmeticians. Why whole classes should be kept in a routine work in the same subject year after year, using the same words, not being permitted to learn anything new, is more than I can understand. I think it highly important that the child should have access to all avenues of information and to subjects which lead up to one's complete education. I care not whether you call it nature study or high school study, but the fact remains that the more the child has to do with these subjects, the earlier he has to do with them the more familiar will he become with them. It is not necessary for the child to defer on the enlargement of his vocabulary until he enters college. The child of to-day, properly instructed in all of the fields of information, can have a greater variety of words, in which to express his thoughts, also more thoughts, than many of us had when we entered college and at least in some instances possibly when we completed our college course. But this can not be done by working the same field over year after year. New work must be given the child to do where thought is expressed in new words, new language. We have found it absolutely necessary in the education of deaf children in our institution to give them more variety of language in order that they can be educated in other branches. The English language is to them what the German or the French language is to the English child and I am quite sure that if we should confine our educational work wholly to the words found in the common branches, so-called, we would fall

far short of equipping the children with the knowledge of the English language that they should have. For this reason we open up new fields, acquaint him with new terms, and he takes more interest and is better educated by having access to them. What is true of defective children in the very simplest manner is also true and will apply to children with normal conditions. I am therefore heartily in favor of expanding our school work and to begin with the first year and to continue that work until the child has left the public schools. It is a fact that the ordinary boy or girl, and even the boy who has graduated from the high school after having spent some eight or ten years in the study of arithmetic is not able to solve the simplest problem in percentage, after being out of school three or four years. What has such a child to show for the time spent in the public schools? Would it not be better for such graduates to have in their minds a true knowledge of the English language and in various departments of science, mathematics, literature, even in an elementary form? One reason why so many children learn arithmetic slowly is because they can not read intelligently and understand the directions of the problems with which they have to deal. They do not understand the meaning of the words, nor the terms, and consequently that which is intended to be conveyed by the writer is obscure. This can only be remedied by a wider knowledge of language, which will enable him to understand what he reads, and apply the directions to securing the results. This of itself seems to me to be sufficient argument why the child's field of investigation should be enlarged, and how can it be enlarged except by giving it new subjects to think about and talk about, where new words appear and new sentences are used in expressing thought? Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I

wish to go on record as heartily in favor of bringing into our lower grades all the material which is necessary and helpful in educating our children, even should they enter the high school. I have no doubt that in a few years the children who have been educated in this way will enter high school and complete a course with as much practical information as the ordinary graduate of college has, when his primary work has been conducted wholly in the so-called common branches.

A. B. JOHNSON: I am ready to exclaim, "Oh, educational reform, what crimes have been committed in thy name!"-Why is it that we hear, so often, the complaint made against the schools that they do not give the pupils a reasonable mastery of the subjects studied?

This is a serious charge and we shall do well to give heed to it. If it be true, we shall not mend matters by still more overcrowding the course of study. "Too much arithmetic," we hear continually from the reformers; and their pupils do not know arithmetic. A satisfactory degree of accuracy and rapidify in this branch is not reached by their pupils.

"Algebra and less arithmetic." And what is algebra? A mere link to connect the higher mathematics with arithmetic. A generalizer, useful, and only useful, here and there, in the higher register of mathematics: the most mechanical of all. Teach the pupil a little algebra and you have shown him the lazy way to arithmetical analysis.

We talk much of teaching pupils to think, and when they have reached the upper grammar grades, and an age when the higher faculties of the mind begin to develop the best exercise ever yet used in any school to cultivate clear, logical, consecutive thought must, in the opinion of these uneasy reformers, give place to a mathematical make-shift.

ure out your purchases. Give the boy a problem and he will take his pencil and figure it out. He ought to study it out in his mind. Algebra seems to be a popular study. A teacher goes to an examination. Instead of solving the problem by arithmetic as he should do he solves it by algebra. The boy in school very frequently solves the problem by algebra when he should solve it by arithmetic. I do not mean to say there should be no principles of algebra or geometry taught in the lower grades, but I maintain this is not the teaching of that branch as a subject. I believe we have enough work to do without this. Of course we can teach these principles where necessary, but we teach them in an elementary way and I think the high school work is only a continuation of the primary work, or the work of the ordinary school. Again, I would have no objection whatever to the study of Latin, especially with regard to prefixes and suffixes, but I would call it the study of English. When you come to the formal study of Latin and algebra and geometry it is carrying it too far.

E. W. WILKINSON: I spent some time here a few years ago studying the geological formation of this island and it took me two hours to come up to this point.

If I were coming up here now, I would take the street car, and come up in a few minutes and spend the rest of the time in study.

I believe in studying in the lower grades principles leading directly to the high school work.

J. W. JONES: The position which one takes on this question depends largely upon what he has been doing. I take it that the gentleman who has just spoken is either a school examiner or an instructor of teachers. Education is Irgely a matter of development, and the measure of one's education is the vocab

ulary in which he expresses himself. There is but little opportunity for the pupil to enlarge his vocabulary by remaining in the same studies for many years. I, at one time, thought that every person could learn the subject of arithmetic. But I have abandoned that notion. I am sure that but few people can become good arithmeticians. Why whole classes should be kept in a routine work in the same subject year after year, using the same words, not being permitted to learn anything new, is more than I can understand. I think it highly important that the child should have access to all avenues of information and to subjects which lead up to one's complete education. I care not whether you call it nature study or high school study, but the fact remains that the more the child has to do with these subjects, the earlier he has to do with them the more familiar will he become with them. It is not necessary for the child to defer on the enlargement of his vocabulary until he enters college. The child of to-day, properly instructed in all of the fields of information, can have a greater variety of words, in which to express his thoughts, also more thoughts, than many of us had when we entered college and at least in some instances possibly when we completed our college course. But this can not be done by working the same field over year after year. New work must be given the child to do where thought is expressed in new words, new language. We have found it absolutely necessary in the education of deaf children in our institution to give them more variety of language in order that they can be educated in other branches. The English language is to them what the German or the French language is to the English child and I am quite sure that if we should confine our educational work wholly to the words found in the common branches, so-called, we would fall

« PreviousContinue »