A close observation has impelled us to the conclusion, that in abandoning old methods, we have not been sufficiently careful in selecting others. We have been too prone to seize upon any floating theory, if it be but new, and without reason or reflection, adopt it, praise it, and in every way commend it to others.

That our methods should be philosophical, adopted to the development of the faculties of the mind in the order in which nature develops them, all will agree; yet how few of our Teachers endeavor to attain this philosophical method. Socrates, and Pestalozzi-whose plan is almost iden tical in its main features with that of Socrates—are the only exceptions that now occur to me. Instead of founding our methods on the firm rock of an enlightened philosophy, we resort to a rule miserable and blind, and destined in a majority of cases, to yield nothing but disappointment, the "try rule." We tried the memoriter method, and found it in many points defective; then, of course, something else must be tried; and that something else as being farthest removed from that in use, happened to be the lecturing method.

Under this method, I fear, are growing up a laxness of mental discipline, and a superficiality of knowledge, to be deplored by every friend of thorough culture, and sound acquirements. To show that this su perficiality naturally results from the method of instruction, will not, I think, be difficult.

Ere the method could be introduced in its full blown beauty, its advocates found it necessary to depreciate the value of text books. Instead of being considered helps, they were declared such hindrances in the way of mental growth, that they ought to be entirely banished from the hands of Teachers; and pupils were to have them or not, as happened to be most consonant with their feelings; or, if not allowed to go that far, they were to be permitted to make their own selections. It was contended, that, if the Teacher was himself full of his subject, by some process not very clearly explained, the pupil would also be filled. The writer may be here allowed to make what some will consider the very humbling confession, that notwithstanding all the new lights, he has a strong and abiding affection for good text books; and he hopes the manufacture of that kind will go on in an accelerated ratio. He would further add to his offense, by declaring it to be his fixed belief that he has learned more from one such book, than from all the lectures he has ever heard put together—and he has been delighted and bored by as many, probably, as any one of his years.

Without the aid of the eye, our culture would certainly be most mis

erably cramped and defective. Now by the lecture the ear alone is informed, and the eye can afford no assistance. But place the text-book beneath the student's eye, and he has before him his kingdom of thought to be conquered; it may be a field limited in its extent, it is true, and not over fertile, but still it must be subjugated before other and more extensive acquisitions are attempted, as it will not do to leave an army of ignorance posted in the rear. If he fails in his first charge, as he probably will, and in many others, he can return to the attack again and again. He knows exactly where the enemy lies intrenched, and he spends no unnecessary time in searching him out, but proceeds at once to make a descent upon his stronghold.

But to drop the figure-every man knows that no one can become a scholar by listening to lectures alone, however animated, learned and eloquent; nor by reading, however wide that reading may be; nor by both combined. Something more is required. It is necessary to pursue a science in a methodical manner, and in order to do this the foundation of its knowledge should be laid by a careful and assiduous study of a well-arranged text-book. However well it may be, nay, essentially necessary, for the Teacher to know many books on the subject in which he is giving instruction, and something beyond books, yet the pupil himself, in his early training, should not be encouraged to dissipate his powers, by what, with him, can be but a very superficial dipping into numerous authors. After his mind has become disciplined and matured by age and culture, the store-houses of knowledge may be freely thrown open to him, without any danger of what farmers would call a "founder." In early training is the adage, "know few books and know them well," specially applicable.

In the lecture method of instruction, the pupil appears to me to occupy the position of a sponge, absorbing whatever the Teacher, from a retentive memory and an extensive reading, may choose to deluge him with; and resembling the sponge in another particular, in that it does not take a great amount of pressure to squeeze him dry.

Have you ever seen a recitation conducted in "the newest style?” If not, I will try to describe it to you. A long class of young ladies, (I choose a class of young ladies as an example, because the style is believed to be peculiarly adapted to their capacities, and hence is immensely popular with keepers of fashionable Boarding Schools, who look upon the capacities of girls and boys as widely dissimilar institutions,) file into the recitation room and take their seats, in the best of order. The Teacher, who has read everything on his subject, is fully

loaded, and will go off on the least provocation. But few questions are asked, and those few are but in such a manner as to insure an answer. The greater part of the hour allotted to the recitation, is consumed by the Teacher in telling his class what he knows of the subject

and very agreeably he does it too. The pupils of course knew, when the lesson was assigned, that they would not be called on to recite it, that the Teacher would take the onerous task off their minds; and justice compells me to add, that he is none the less popular for it. Observe the countenances of the different members of the class. How pleased and interested they look! Surely, you think, this man is doing a good work. Be not deceived; he is unwittingly stultifying those naturally fine intellects. There is no mental culture there. Examine the class. You will find they can tell you nothing, not even of the lecture they have just heard. The intellect may have been very pleasantly titillated, but no deep furrows have been plowed in the minds' fallow, and no seeds of knowledge have been dropped therein. I grant that useful crumbs of information may accidentally be picked up in this way, but any mental discipline acquired worth the having, never.

My ideas of a good recitation are somewhat different from this. I call that a good recitation which is given with clearness and fluency, and not in too many words; for the pupil should be early taught to avoid that error too grievously common, of spreading a little thought over a great surface. And further, I like to see a Teacher a good listener, rather than a showy talker- one who says but little himself, but has the faculty of making his pupils talk, and talk well.

In their dislike for memoriter recitation, even those who have not become entirely enamored with the lecturing method, but yet incline to the belief that good mental discipline requires some little study on the part of the pupil himself, fall into a very grave error. Instead of following the text book, the pupil is allowed to give definitions in his own words. Every thinking mind must perceive, that if the latter course is pursued, the inevitable result will be a laxness and indefiniteness, fatal to any after just conceptions of the subject. No mere boy, and but few men, can give exact and logical definitions. A definition should be cumbered with no useless words, but be given in the least possible number, that will convey the exact idea. Can this be done from a boy's own limited resources of thought alone? We are accustomed to say, "if my pupil gives me the idea, I don't care for the words" -as if the idea and the words could be separated! Have you ever noticed how extremely limited the vocabulary of children is

even of those in

the highest classes of our public schools? And can it be supposed, 1 that with their small stock in trade of words, such children can get up a definition in mathematics, grammar or any other science, that a Teacher ought to receive? Such an idea is simply absurd. Judging from the frequent failures, definitions must be very difficult for even our best authors, those who have spent years of careful study on their respective branches.

I care

The pupil then should commit the definitions to memory. not whether they be found in the text book, or formed by the Teacher. But after the best form has been determind upon, that is what should be taken, suffering nothing to be added nor subtracted.

But it is urged, that if "book definitions are required, we are in danger of obtaining mere words without ideas, thus lumbering the brain with useless furniture. Why this should be the case, if the Teacher is a competent one, more by this method than any of the looser ones, I am at loss to know.

It was the remark of a distinguished Teacher, who followed the memoriter method most rigidly, that there were two things to be got in a lesson, the letter and the spirit; and that it was always his aim to have pupils get both, and although he could not always be sure of the latter, he could of the former; and he thought that much better than a failure in both. How often a failure does take place in both under our improved fast methods, is a question for each Teacher's own experience. But it may be inquired whether the lecture method is always objectionable. My reply would be, "certainly not always." I have no doubt there is a point in a mental culture, where it may be most properly applied; but just as surely that point is not reached in our primary or grammar schools. Before this method is used, the student should have received that kind and amount of mental drill, that will enable him to arrange his facts systematically, and to reason upon them logically.

I regard the German system of education, however fashionable it may be with some of the advocates of unlimited freedom on this subject, to denounce it as a cunningly devised scheme of tyrants, to fetter the minds of their subjects as they have the bodies, as the only one worthy the name of system. Other nations, our own among them, have methods but not systems. In the German system, the different parts all fit beautifully into each other, each school doing its own work, and that alone; there is no lapping back, but from the beginning there is a steady onward progress. The primary school does its work up to a

certain point; there the gymnasium takes up the pupil and gives him that thoroughly mental drill necessary to fit him for the University, which stands at the apex of the system. This, with its libraries, and its lecturers whose fame is bounded only by the circumference of civilization, has no parallel in other countries. There is dropped into a soil thoroughly prepared, the seeds of a knowledge mighty for the quickening of thought.

With us then, as in Germany, would I confine the lecturing method to the final stage of a youth's education. Engrafting this on a solid basis, we should induce in our young men such a freedom and power of thought, and such an originality and perseverance of investigation, as would give them a proud place among the most profound scholars of the world.

The above thoughts were suggested by reading in the May number of the Journal a short extract on the subject of Rote Recitations. I think I see such evidences of haste to be learned, in all our methods of instruction, that I deem it both a duty and a privilege to utter a word of warning, and to give my voice in favor of sound instruction. If we cannot keep the flash method of doing things, out of any other department of life, let us as sober and earnest men try at least to exclude it from our educational training.

J. H.

TEACHING ELEMENTARY SOUNDS.

BY CHARLES S. ROYCE.

I was much pleased to see an article, in the May number of the Journal, upon this subject. Of the importance of this branch of instruction, it seems to me, there can be but one opinion. But I cannot say with Primus, that "there are few schools in which it is not daily, and we might say hourly, practiced," if by that he means to say that the giving of this kind of instruction is practiced. That we are practicing upon the elementary sounds of our language during almost every waking hour, from our cradles to our graves, is true, and that, during all that time, we fail to enunciate as we should, is also true; but, in traveling over our state for the last four years, I have found that, in a majority of the schools which I have visited, they fail to give any instruction in this important branch of education; and, where some little instruction