traftonJ MATTER VERSUS METHOD 401 



of the teachers, altho capable teachers in the branches, were not 

 able to teach nature-study satisfactorily. A questionaire was sent 

 to these teachers and the answers showed that their work in the 

 Normal Schools had consisted almost entirely of general courses 

 in Botany and Zoology dealing with subject matter only. They 

 had received no training in the method of teaching nature-study 

 and this lack was very apparent in their teaching. 



Sometimes a strong pleasing personality is offered as a substitute 

 for a knowledge of the real science of teaching. A doctor may be a 

 splendid man but we are not willing to let this take the place of 

 expert knowledge of how to treat typhoid fever in case of sickness. 

 A carpenter was once recommended to the writer as "an awfully 

 good man," but later experiences showed that he was "an awfully 

 poor carpenter" and the knowledge of his goodness was little 

 consolation for his lack of ability as a carpenter. A magnetic 

 personality is always a great asset in any walk in life but it cannot 

 be offered as a substitute for a special knowledge of the field in 

 which the person works. 



It is well known that teaching lacks the professional spirit usually 

 found in other professions. The development of such a spirit is 

 one thing needed to the advancement of the profession of teaching. 

 A beginning in inculcating this spirit should evidently be made in 

 those schools where teachers are trained. One essential in foster- 

 ing this spirit is to make the teaching in these schools deal with the 

 professional, that is, the method side of teaching. The work in 

 nature-study in the Normal School must be more sharply differen- 

 tiated from the work in science in the College and the High 

 School. 



The writer ma)' briefly summarize his position by saying that 

 he believes a course in nature-study in the Normal Schools should 

 treat both of subject matter and method with special emphasis 

 on the method side and should not confine its entire time to the 

 discussion of subject matter alone. In his own course, the author 

 devotes about one-third of the time to method and two-thirds to 

 subject matter. This includes both the subject matter to be 

 taught children and a larger view for the teacher's background. 

 The proportion of time devoted to these two phases of subject 

 matter varies with the grade in which the students are to teach. 



The writer's usual plan of procedure in his own classes is first to 

 take up a general discussion of the essential facts about the topic 



