2 44 THE NA TURE-STUD V RE VIE W U :8-nov., .908 



high school are administrable — they are adapted to large num- 

 bers and various grades of students, to city schools, to a winter 

 session; and further I maintain that where even only passably 

 taught, they are doing much good, sitmulating the interested to 

 higher work, giving the indifferent some uplift, and keeping the 

 mediocre at least busily occupied. Our college and high school 

 courses are adapted to a condition, Professor Hodge's to a theory. 

 So much for the practicability of Professor Hodge's course. 

 But I maintain further that even if his were practicable it would 

 be inferior educationally to the scientific courses as commonly 

 taught. The educational value of a course consists in two things, 

 the information imparted and the training given. I place infor- 

 mation first because Professor Hodge lays practically his whole 

 stress upon it. Now, remembering that several of the topics in 

 his course are already treated in our biological courses, I will ask 

 my readers w T ho are teachers to compare the knowledge-value of 

 the subjects in Professor Hodge's list with those in the usual 

 scientific courses, remembering also the all-essential point that 

 the vast majority of our students are to dwell in cities, and will 

 have a contact with nature that is general and not specific. I 

 maintain that for all such people a knowledge of the way in which 

 a seed unfolds and develops into a mature flowering and fruiting 

 plant, even if the facts are seen only in pots and boxes in a 

 laboratory, is much more worth while than a knowledge of the 

 "Economic status and foods of about 100 birds;" that a knowl- 

 edge of the construction of plants and animals from tissues and 

 cells is worth more than that of the "Important fresh-water 

 fishes, food, spawning habits and habitats;" that a knowledge of 

 the significance of the green color of vegetation to plants, the 

 animals and man, is worth more than that of the "common 

 amphibia, natural history and value as destroyers of insects;" 

 and so on through most of the list. In fact most of the topics 

 studied in our scientific courses illuminate a wide circle of 

 phenomena beyond their own limits, and are such as are likely 

 to interest men and women no matter what their future residence 

 or occupation may be, while Professor Hodge's topics for the 

 most part have not that merit. On the other hand, I admit that 

 some of the topics in his list should receive more attention in our 

 courses than they do, e.g., relations of forestry to the public good. 

 But the trouble is that most of these subjects are not yet organized 



