EDITORIAL. 1045 



of its agricultural population. He declared the teaching of agricul- 

 ture in a practical manner to be just as necessary for the rural school 

 as manual training is for the city school. 



The subject was also referred to in a report upon the educational 

 progress of the year by Howard J. Rogers, first assistant commissioner 

 of education of the State of New York, who had charge of the educa- 

 tional exhibits at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition. Miss Susan B. 

 Sipe, of the normal school of Washington, D. C, gave an illustrated 

 talk on the work of the Bureau of Plant Industry of this Department, 

 in relation to agricultural instruction in Indian schools; and Prof. J. B. 

 Smith, of the New Jersey Experiment Stations, presented a paper on 

 "Some of the commoner insect pests and how the children can study 

 them." 



Most important of all, however, was the report of the committee on 

 industrial education in schools for rural communities. The report of 

 such a committee was in itself a significant fact, and this was further 

 emphasized b}^ the prominent place given it in the programme and 

 discussions of the association. The committee, which was appointed 

 at the meeting in Boston in 1903, consisted of L. D. Harvey, chair- 

 man, superintendent of schools of Menomonie, Wis.; L. H. Bailej-, of 

 Cornell University; Alfred Bayliss, State superintendent of public 

 instruction in Illinois; W. T. Carrington, State superintendent of 

 public instruction in Missouri, and W. M. Hays, Assistant Secretary 

 of Agriculture. The report was an elaborate one, comprising nearly 

 a hundred pages; and in addition to giving the arguments for industrial 

 education in rural schools, discussing the form which this should take 

 in different grades of schools, the advantages of consolidated schools, 

 and the preparation of teachers of industrial subjects, it outlined 

 syllabi for courses in nature study, agriculture, and domestic economy 

 for various conditions. 



In general the committee maintained that the rural schools, which 

 train nearly one-half of the school population of this country, should 

 recognize the fact that the major portion of their pupils will continue 

 to live upon the farm, and should provide specific, definite, technical 

 training fitting them for the activities of farm life. It adduced strong 

 arguments in support of this position, and emphasized the educational 

 value as well as the practical utility of courses of study framed with 

 this end in view. 



But the committee called attention to the difficulties of securing the 

 efficient teaching of agriculture with the present organization of our 

 public school system. It discouraged the wholesale introduction of 

 agriculture in country schools having onlv a single teacher. "To 

 require by law that every country school-teacher shall give instruc- 

 tion in the elements of agriculture is, in the judgment of the commit- 

 tee, a serious mistake. It will simply result in another failure to be 



