212 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



ing in favor, and we are once more told that it is a successful revolt 

 against book-studies. It is chiefly applicable to the sciences, and its 

 cardinal idea is instruction without a text-book. This looks fair, but 

 it is delusive. The method does not remove the book that the pupil 

 may come at the phenomena, but it removes the book that the teacher 

 may take its place. Oral-teaching is class-instruction, in which infor- 

 mation is imparted in a familiar manner with the view of awakening 

 the interest of the class. But, so far as real science is concerned, it is 

 doubtful if this method is not worse than the one it replaces. Fol- 

 lowing the maxim of certain German educators, that " the teacher is 

 the school," it was assumed that when apathy prevails in the school- 

 room it is solely the teachers' fault. Oral exercises enable them to 

 escape this reproach by giving animation to school-work. It is said 

 that this is a " live system " in contrast to the old humdrum routine 

 of lessons and recitations. But science gets no real help. There is 

 only the substitution of a superficial class-activity for the more delib- 

 erate work of the individual pupil. More mental effort is required on 

 his part to get a lesson from a book than to listen to a lesson given by 

 the teacher. The teacher is to do everything, and stands in the place 

 not only of the book but of the pupil also. Is this not a step back- 

 ward in education ? The teacher is magnified at the expense of close 

 study, and science is cheapened by the method. Oral-teaching implies 

 a fertility, a versatility, and a proficiency in scientific knowledge on 

 the part of teachers which that class of persons does not possess. It 

 is a premium on tutorial smattering and cramming by which the volu- 

 ble teacher with superficial acquisitions and a ready memory becomes 

 the model teacher. There may be benefits in this method, but science 

 does not gain them. Judicious oral assistance, as in the physical, 

 chemical, or natural history laboratory, given by a competent master 

 to a pupil at work, is invaluable for stimulus and guidance ; but the 

 aid must be discreet, and the skillful teacher will not talk too much. 

 But where it is all talk and no work, and text-books are filtered 

 through the very imperfect medium of the ordinary teacher's mind, 

 and the pupil has nothing to do but to be instructed, every sound 

 pi-inciple of education is outraged, and science is only made ridiculous. 

 This failure to gain the benefits of real scientific study has its 

 source deep in the constitution of the public schools. In dealing with 

 masses of children, classification became necessary, which gave rise, as 

 we have seen, to grading and an elaborate mechanical system. The 

 working of children in lots seems to be a necessity of the public schools, 

 but it strengthens the practice of verbal instruction, recitations, and 

 lesson-giving. It is well fitted to impress the public with the idea 

 that there is much done in the schools. There are a prescribed routine 

 of operations and a display of order that are admired. But teacher and 

 learner are subordinated to the system. It is machine-work, and ma- 

 chines make no allowances. Gradation assumes and enforces a uni- 



