2O2 Introduction. [10 



delight is to bring out, at such a critical moment a won- 

 drous machine from the show case and create sufficient 

 amazement in the class to stifle any little suspicions of his 

 incompetency which might be lurking there. After this 

 feat has been performed, the machine goes back upon its 

 shelf to remain until such time as it may be needed again 

 to establish his dignity. 



Those who champion the conventional apparatus, say 

 "the best is poor enough; scientific accuracy requires 

 the use of only the best," meaning by best, the most 

 elaborate and most expensive. 



In the first place, consider how small a proportion 

 of the experiments usually mapped out for a course of 

 physics or chemistry, are quantitative in their nature, 

 or demand "instruments of precision." Surely scientific 

 accuracy has nothing whatsoever to do with nine-tenths 

 of the apparatus which occupies our show cases. Why 

 then must it be of the most elaborate and most expensive 

 sort ? Very important reasons can be suggested why it 

 should not be of that sort. 



Experimental work in science has been debarred 

 wholly from our public schools even our most thor- 

 oughly equipped high schools with very rare exceptions, 

 on account of the great expense of apparatus, and it will 

 always be debarred so long as it is supposed that this is 

 the only kind of apparatus which should be used. It is 

 folly to think that the average school board can spend 

 the hundreds and thousands of dollars necessary for this 

 equipment. For this reason it should not be expensive. 

 There are reasons why it should not be elaborate. 



Experiments should have the important purpose of 

 rendering the subject more intelligible. This elaborate 

 apparatus does not do it. Most pupils of high-school age 

 fail to comprehend the machines and their minds are only 

 confused thereby with reference to the principles. Artifi- 

 cial experiments, intended to explain natural phenomena 





