342 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



Schools. He invited discussion on the comparative educational 

 value, and as a training in scientific method, of botany and 

 chemistry and physics. He recommended the intelligent appre- 

 hension of a few truths rather than an ill-digested mass of facts. 

 He thought that the subject of experimental plant physiology was 

 especially useful in a school course, formed an excellent training in 

 observation, experimental manipulation, and the proper discrimi- 

 nation of evidence. As to the proper method of teaching botany, 

 he recommended that the pupil should be led through his own 

 observations and experiments to arrive at his own conclusions. 

 Pupils (he quoted from Herbert Spencer) should be told as little as 

 possible. 



Before Mr. Wager's paper was thrown open to discussion, 

 Prof. F. 0. Bower also read a paper on the teaching of Botany in 

 the Universities. He deprecated all microscopic work in schools. 

 He protested, also, against the teaching of so-called elementary 

 biology as an introduction to the study of botany. As early as 

 possible in his studies the student should be left entirely to him- 

 self, his object being not so much to acquire information as to in- 

 culcate a scientific method. The trend of the subsequent discussion 

 was such as to confirm the view of the openers in the importance 

 which they attached to the teaching of botany to the youngest 

 children. All were practically unanimous on this point. 



Prof. Miall gave an account of the method followed in the 

 Yorkshire College. It was indispensable, he said, that the students 

 should begin by seeing, after which they should be dealt with in 

 the class-room. With a new class he began in the laboratory, the 

 demonstrator directing attention to the points to be observed, and 

 abstaining from giving any information. Nothing would induce 

 him to go back to the lecturing system, which, as far as he was 

 concerned, stood finally condemned. 



Prof. Marshall Ward said that the teaching in school and uni- 

 versity must be progressive. The object of the teaching of science 

 was to show the student by research, and, in course of time, to 

 convince him, that it was one of the noblest things he could be 

 engaged in. At the very outset the botanical student should be 

 taught to think and speculate for himself, and to check his specula- 

 tions and form his conclusions. 



Prof. Withers said that it was the collective method of teaching 

 in schools which made botany so difficult a subject to handle 

 practically in the school-room. Prof. Armstrong approved of the 

 abolition of the class-room. Whatever lecturing was necessary 

 should be done in the laboratory. Dr. D. H. Scott thought that 

 botany had been regarded too much from the point of view of the 

 specialist. Miss Clarke gave an account of the botanical work 

 done in the James AUeyn School for Girls, Dulwich, under the 

 Technical Board of the 'London County Council. Dr. Kimmins 

 supported the suggestion that there should be a Special Committee 

 of the British Association to inquire into the teaching of botany. 

 Prof. Scott Elliott said that most of the discussion had proceeded 

 on the technical side of botany and not on its practical side. Sir 



