president's ADURES.S SECTION J. 241 



at all superior to the lower half of the whole word set. Ap- 

 parently, then, the phonic method would seem better suited to the 

 brighter pupils, while on the other hand it may be that the 

 whole word method is better suited to the duller pupils. Any- 

 way, the need for a further study of this suggestion is clear, 

 especially as at present in New South Wales at least the various 

 fc'rnis of phonic method are in fashion, and threaten to drive other 

 methods out of the field. 



What Valentine's experiment suggests as holding for reading 

 niay very well apply in the case of other subjects. It may be 

 that the method of educational treatment, like that of medical 

 treatment, must vary with the nature of the patient. No doubt 

 competent teachers recognise and act on this principle more or 

 less implicitly, yet it is certainly desirable that we should have 

 accurate knowledge for our guidance, and this we do not have. 

 Text-books on method make no mention of the circumstances 

 under which different methods are appropriate, unless this is what 

 they mean when they advocate a judicious mixture of teaching 

 methods, but fail to inform us how the mixture is to be com- 

 pounded. As Burt points out, " Similar results are reached by 

 different children by very different mental processes ; consequently 

 a child who fails under one method of instruction will often suc- 

 ceed, if a brief study be made of his natural aptitudes and opera- 

 tions, and another mode of instruction adopted accordingly." 

 Those responsible for the supervision of teachers are at present 

 too prone to the belief that every method can be labelled ' ' good 

 or " bad," and that a teacher is to be judged by the supposed 

 goodness of the methods he uses instead of being judged by the 

 nature of the results he achieves. 



Winch's investigation, " Should Young Children be Taught 

 Arithmetical Proportion," does not answer this question, but it 

 does prove that an infant class of ordinary pupils could do quite 

 satisfactory work in proportion sums, and could do it after a 

 short period and without explanatory or illustrative teaching. 

 This investigation raises the same question as that suggested by 

 the work of Dr. Montessori, whether our teaching, in the early 

 school years at all events, might not with advantage be less ex- 

 planatory and dogmatic. It is possible that teaching would be 

 more effective if less time were devoted to exposition and explana- 

 tion, and the pupils were supplied with exercises and toys for 

 occupations in which they might learn for themselves. We say 

 often enough that children leat'n by doing, but it would seem that 

 we do not take sufficient pains to devise and grade suitable forms 

 of occupation and exercise. 



For successful teaching there is needed, then, more knowledge 

 than at present we possess of the psychological nature of scholastic 

 abilities, and in addition the teacher must study his i)upils as he 

 has done in the past. But if teachers are to study their pupils they 



