124 Journal of the Mitchell Society [31 arch 



have elapsed since that time many ehano'es have taken place. The 

 number of colleges and universities including some kind of Biology in 

 their curricula, then small, has multiplied into the hundreds. With 

 this has come about a vast increase in the numl)er and viewpoints of 

 teachers, their leaders primarily interested, as investigators, in ex- 

 tending our knowledge into new fields of an ever broadening and deep- 

 ening science. 



Along with this must also be reckoned the profound influence of 

 German science upon that of America. As complained of by Professor 

 Carmichael* our science has become practically an appendage of that 

 of Europe (and especially of German.y) as witnessed by the character 

 of the research in most departments of American universities. These 

 various exhaustive and extensive research programs pursued by lead- 

 ing professors and the "schools" which they represent demand dis- 

 tinct limitation in the scientific interests of the workers which, unfor- 

 tunately, spells the extinction of the general point of view. 



The General Biology Course, on the other hand, was born out of 

 a more generalized condition and in a day of more limited knowledge. 

 Uniting the genius of interpreter with that of investigator, Huxley 

 w^as able to organize out of simple materials a course of great suggest- 

 iveness and value which undoubtedly stimulated many students. The 

 pedagogical theory underlying the course was that each type is both 

 broadly suggestive in itself and also that, through their sequence, 

 evolutionary progress is epitomized. The inclusion of both plant and 

 animal types was defended on the ground "that the study of living 

 bodies is really one discipline, which is divided into Zoology and 

 Botany simply as a matter of convenience. ' ' 



In the second edition of their textbook Huxley and Martin re- 

 versed the order of animal forms, beginning with the frog, running 

 down to the Protozoa and then up on the plant side to the Angiosperm. 



From that day to this we have had an unending series of experi- 

 ments in the pedagogy of General Biology among writers in English 

 recalled by the names of Parker, Gibson, Dodge, Boyer, Wells, Need- 

 ham, Hamaker, Sedgwick and Wilson, Abbott, Conn, Calkins and 

 others. Each of these books seems to be the embodiment of a sincere 

 attempt to frame "a general biology" for the beginner in somewhat 

 the spirit of one writing an introduction to philosophy. 



They disclose many influences. The book l)y Sedgwick and Wilson, 



Carmichael, R. D., Science, Apr. 1, 1921. 



