■nmow] ARE CHIL1>RTLN NATURALISTS 239 



attitude of the teacher. A mechanical toy or a physical experi- 

 ment will attract as strong and lasting attention as will a jumping 

 insect or a wriggling worm, provided — and here is the heart of 

 the whole matter — provided that there is action, "something 

 doing." There are teachers who are extremely successful with 

 biological materials; but who can get as much enthusiasm 

 into lessons on magnets and mechanical toys as from beautiful 

 butterflies, agile grasshoppers, and record-breaking amphibian 

 jumpers. The child, again like a young puppy, has interest 

 aroused by action, and it is only in so far as inactivity seems 

 characteristic of certain things in the lifeless world that the child 

 distinguishes between the living and the lifeless. 



And what is the bearing of all the above on the present-day 

 problems of nature-study? If children are not as a rule naturally 

 inclined to be naturalists, is our nature-study on the wrong basis? 

 Not at all. The problem has nothing to do with the educational 

 value of stimulated interest in nature ; but whatever part of our 

 nature-study has been built entirely on the assumption that 

 children are naturally naturalists must be revised. Especially 

 must we revise by giving more attention to the physical side of 

 nature-study, which has practical applications in the every-day 

 life of the average citizen more important than much of our 

 biological nature-study. We have long recognized this to be true, 

 but we have continued to neglect the lifeless nature because we 

 accepted without question the dictum that most children are 

 naturally inclined to be naturalists. Is it true ? 



