bigelow] NATURE-STUDY AND MANUAL TRAINING 95 



relations have been centered around the manual training activities 

 connected with these studies. But nature-study can not be satis- 

 factorily adjusted to such a scheme, for the following reasons : Nature- 

 study deals with the nature with which pupils of today are in contact. 

 It is only in so far as primitive-life studies are illustrated by things 

 now existing that there can be any close relation between nature-study 

 and manual training ; and these are the same relations which existed 

 long before primitive-life studies were suggested for the primary 

 curriculum. Could we teach primitive-life studies with the pupils 

 in the natural surroundings which touched primitive man, then I see 

 how we could make a very complete connection between the active 

 education of nature-study and that of manual training on the primitive- 

 life basis. But unfortunately primitive nature is not available and 

 for the purpose of primitive-life studies the imagination supplies it. 

 True nature-study can not be based on things imaginary. I think 

 that we must admit that here is a gap that only correlation gone mad 

 could be expected to bridge ; and hence I see no hope that primitive- 

 life studies will aid in bringing the nature-study and manual training 

 of the primary grades closer together. 



In conclusion, I want to urge that nature-study needs all the help 

 which it can get from legitimate correlation with manual training. 

 While in general there appears to be no deep and fundamental basis 

 for anything approaching a complete system of correlation between 

 the two subjects, we have seen that there are numerous possibilities 

 for correlations in connection with particular topics of nature- study. 

 Such minor associations of nature-study lessons with manual training 

 exercises will add to the interest in the nature-study, and I can see 

 no reason for expecting another effect on the manual training. 



Supplementary Note 



In answer to a question raised in the discussion by my colleague 

 Professor C. R. Richards, I here add to the paper as read the follow- 

 ing note : 



In all the foregoing, I have taken manual training in its literal and common 

 interpretation as hand-work. However, we must bear in mind that under the 

 influence of the most representative teachers this limited conception of manual 

 training seems to be expanding and the term "industrial education" better 

 describes the work now done in many schools where the shop-work gives manual 

 dexterity and also the stimulation to study of the industrial relations of the 

 materials used. In this broader conception of manual training there are numerous 

 new possibilities for correlation with nature-study, for there may be close relation 



