5 6 THE JVA TURE-STUD Y RE VIE IV [ 3 . 2 _ FEB ., , 9 o 7 



power can only be trained by the doing and I earnestly urge that we make 

 our nature-study differ from other subjects in that every lesson shall be an 

 effort to get knowledge at first hand through observation of either natural 

 objects or natural phenomena. 



State Normal School, Plattsburg, N. Y. George H. Hudson. 



IV 



In accordance with the invitation to discuss the article "Weakness in Teach- 

 ing Nature-Study," published in the October issue of the Review, I wish to 

 take this opportunity to protest against the principles involved in that article, 

 for I believe them to be detrimental to the greatest good that the child may 

 acquire from nature-study. 



The article seems to be written from the standpoint of a specialist who 

 puts the science of zoology first and the child second. This is a mistake too 

 often made in much teaching; the child should be put first. The purpose of 

 nature-study should not be to develop scientists with a systematic knowledge of 

 biology, but to develop men and women with some appreciation of nature's 

 vast realm. 



The chief aims of nature-study which have found quite general acceptance 

 in the columns of The Review are three : (i) the observational study (2) 

 of common things (3) to create an interest therein. All three of these would 

 receive scant fulfillment if the principles of the article under discussion were 

 carried out. 



One of the chief features which has lead educators to look with some degree 

 of favor upon the introduction of nature-study into our schools has 

 been the opportunity offered to develop the child's powers along new lines. 

 If nature-study is reduced to the level of mere memory work, what justifica- 

 tion is there for introducing such a subject into a crowded curriculum which 

 already overtaxes the child's memory? 



One of the chief difficulties which the author has met in his supervision of 

 nature-study has been the tendency of teachers to make the subject one of 

 mere memory and book work. To advocate this doctrine is to rob nature- 

 study of the vitality which it has slowly been acquiring, and to reduce its 

 educational possibilities to such a low ebb that it could have little claim to a 

 place in our schools. 



Passaic, N. J GlLBERT H. TrafTON. 



V 



Probably most of us who are in touch with school work today would 

 take exception to Dr. Hornaday's assumption that geography was better 

 taught forty or fifty years ago than it is today. If geography means a 



