RE LA TION OF NA TU RE- STUD Y AND SCIENCE 49 



XII. EDITORIAL REVIEW 



It seems desirable that, for the convenience of some readers 

 who have not systematically followed the literature of nature- 

 study in recent years, the foregoing discussions should be reviewed 

 in this connection. Otherwise some misunderstanding is sure to 

 follow. 



The general conclusions are as stated in the editorial note at 

 the head of the first article in the series; but a number of minor 

 points deserve comment. 



(i) Obviously there is in all essentials agreemenc with the 

 line drawn between nature-study and science in paper No. IV. 

 It is true that papers No. V and VI state that "nature-study is 

 science for children"; but we notice that No. V says "Problems 

 must be graded according to age of student" and No. VI speaks 

 of "natural science which car be appropriately taught to children." 

 In other words, both these authors (and all the others) 

 admit that we must distinguish between elementary and advanced 

 studies of natural things, which is obviously in harmony with 

 those who urge a distinction between nature-study and science. 

 The one slight difference in words, but practically of great 

 significance, is that the authors of V and VI offer no suggestion 

 as to how we are to determine what subject-matter is proper 

 "science for children;" but No. IV urges that the generalities 

 of science are not proper and that the absence of these is charac- 

 teristic of good nature-study — the nature-study approved by all 

 the men of science who in recent years have carefully studied 

 elementary education. You may call such proper elementary 

 work "science for children," if you prefer; buc for brevity and 

 definiteness most experts in elementary education will prefer the 

 term "nature-study." To say that "nature-study is science for 

 children" is logically parallel with the statement that "a puppy is a 

 dog not grown up and, therefore, there is no difference between a 

 dog and a puppv." But there is sufficient difference to make it 

 useful to distinguish between dogs and puppies by using the two 

 words. Likewise, while good nature-study should in the gram- 

 mar school begin to develop into science, its characteristics are 

 distinct enough to warrant the term "nature-study" for elementary 

 study of nature independent of the characteristic generalizations 

 and technicalities of science. Think of nature-study as a young, 

 an immature, a "puppy" stage of science teaching, if you wish; 



