June 24, 1897J 



NATURE 



,87 



Several papers on the aims of instruction in chemistry were read 

 on the openinc: day. In one paper Dr. Otto N. Witt, Professor 

 of Chemical Technology at the Polytechnic Schbol of Berlin, 

 said he could not admit any fundamental difference in the 

 methods of research of pure and applied chemistry, consequently 

 he could not admit the necessity for a difference of instruction 

 for the two. A well-organised instruction in pure chemical 

 science would, in his opinion, be the best preparation of any 

 young chemist for his future career. He held that schools 

 for producing specialists were not wanted ; for specialism came 

 as a matter of course in later life. Chemists were needed who 

 embraced their science as a whole, and who were incapable 

 either of separating practice from theory or theory from 

 practice. 



Dr. H. E. Armstrong urged the need of better organisation 

 in regard to instruction dealing with the preparation of the soil 

 for agricultural purposes. 



Dr. Gladstone, in the course of a paper on " The Teaching of 

 Chemistry in Evening Continuation Schools," said that when 

 the evening school was situated in the neighbourhood of 

 factories it would be allowable and even desirable that the 

 illustrations should be chosen with some reference to the 

 prevailing industry. 



Sir H. Roscoe, in opening a general discussion on the subjects 

 dealt with in the foregoing papers, pointed out that what we in 

 England suffered from was the failure of our manufacturers to 

 see, as they ought to see, the importance of the highest scientific 

 training for their employes. Recently he visited some large 

 colour works near Frankfurt, where lOO men were employed, 

 including many highly-trained scientific chemists who had 

 devoted years to original research with a view to making new 

 discoveries. One employe, who received looo/. a year, worked 

 for several years without producing any results. But eventually 

 he made a discovery which repaid the firm ten times over and 

 placed an entirely new branch of manufacture in their hands. 

 .Scientific teaching had taken up a sound position already, and 

 if manufacturers would only appreciate its value we could turn 

 out scientific men as well as any country in the world. 



This view was given support by a paper on " The Teaching 

 of Chemistry," by Prof. G. Lunge, of Zurich, read by Sir H. 

 Trueman Wood. The writer held that, to raise English 

 chemical industry to the foremost rank (which was disputed to 

 it at present in several important branches), it was necessary 

 that the technical management of chemical factories should not 

 be left in the hands of " rule-of-thumb " men, but should be 

 intrusted to real chemists. These men should have a much 

 fuller education than the majority of chemists seem to obtain at 

 present in Great Britain, which meant that they must spend 

 more time and money on their training than they generally did. 

 At college the student should receive a thorough training in 

 scientific chemistry, taking this in its widest meaning, not 

 merely as a " testing " exercise. Next to this, but not to the 

 same extent, he should be taught physics, mineralogy, tech- 

 nology, mechanics, and the elements of engineering. As to 

 whether foremen or even the common workmen should possess a 

 certain knowledge of chemistry and technology, such as may be 

 imparted at Board schools or at night classes for adults. Prof. 

 Lunge was afraid that such knowledge was quite useless to 

 ordinary workmen, who had simply to do as they were told, and 

 who might do more harm than good by trying to apply a 

 superficial idea of the nature of the operations which they had 

 to perform, without possibly having a real insight into them. 

 He did not even think that, apart from isolated exceptions, 

 such knowledge was much good to the foremen, whose duty it 

 was to carry out their instructions and to see that the men did 

 their work as prescribed by the staff, but who were not to 

 meddle with the chemical process itself. 



Prof. .Silvanus P. Thompson, in discussing the paper, said 

 there should be a distinction between the different branches of 

 the subject. He urged that where a great industry was localised 

 -science should be applied to that industry, and an institute 

 should be put there devoted to monotechnical rather than poly- 

 technical instruction. Training in research was absolutely 

 necessary, and specific research should not be undertaken too 

 soon by students who had not been taken through an all-round 

 course in chemistry. 



Mr. G. R. Redgrave, Chief Senior Inspector Science and Art 

 Department, read a paper giving an historical retrospect of 

 " The Intervention of State in Secondary Technical Education," 

 in the course of which he urged that something of the nature of 



NO. 1443, ^'OL. 56] 



the German Realschule, but with a far larger proportion of 

 practical science work and manual training, should be our 

 model for the secondary school in this country. 

 . On Wednesday, June i6, Sir Philip Magnus, in a paper on 

 "Theory and Practice in Trade Teaching," referred to the 

 diflSculty of determining the true relation of theory and practice 

 in teaching the technology of any trade, and in the Technical 

 Instruction Act, which expressly forbade the teaching of the 

 practice of a trade in any technical school. But in the great 

 majority of industries the practice of the trade was best acquired 

 in the factory and shop, and the instruction of the technical 

 school should be .supplementary only to the experience obtained 

 in commercial work. By this principle nearly all our technical 

 classes were regulated. Although a technical school might be 

 equipped almost as completely as a trade shop the equipment 

 served a very different purpose. Its object is the production of 

 intelligent workpeople, and not the production of saleable com- 

 modities. The practice a student obtains in a technical school 

 was intended to enable him to understand appliances of his 

 trade, and to use them with care and judgment. 



Mr. S. H. Wells, Principal of the Battersea Polytechnic, 

 pointed out that the greatest of all difficulties in connection with 

 technical classes was undoubtedly the provision of satisfactory 

 and efficient teachers. The first and most natural qualification 

 of a teacher of technical classes was that he should possess a 

 practical knowledge— acquired in the factory or workshop — of 

 the subject to be taught; the second, that he should possess a 

 sound knowledge of the arts and sciences applicable to the sub- 

 ject ; and the third, that he should be able to impart his know- 

 ledge to others, to arrange a syllabus of instruction, to manage 

 a class, in a word, to teach. 



Prof. Ayrton gave an account of the Central Technical Col- 

 lege, South Kensington. He remarked that the facilities for 

 technical instruction in London were increasing every day, but 

 a system of coordination was greatly needed. 



Prof. Silvanus Thompson urged the coordination of educa- 

 tional institutions from the highest to the lowest. Dr. Garnett 

 said that if artisans were to be attracted to technical classes the 

 teachers must be acquainted with the practical details of the 

 trades to which the artisans belonged. It was difficult to find 

 theoretical and practical knowledge combined in one man. The 

 presence of practical workmen he had found a great advantage 

 when holding his classes. Prof. Viriamu Jones (Cardiff) believed 

 that artisans would ultimately avail themselves of the best in- 

 struction to be obtained in each science bearing on their trade. 

 They would feel that teaching by specialists was better for them 

 than teaching from those who might have learnt but little of the 

 subjects. Mr. Reynolds (Manchester) pointed out the wasteful 

 overlapping that prevailed in connection with technical in- 

 struction. The Technical Instruction Act, which forbade 

 the practice of a trade being taught in technical schools, 

 was practically a dead letter in Lancashire, and de.served to be. 

 Prof. Chatterton (Madras) said that the great difficulty in con- 

 nection with the technical schools in the Madras Presidency was 

 to obtain efficient teachers. Mr. Mundella, M.P., said that 

 proper elementary education was indispensable before working 

 men could derive benefit from special technical instruction. 

 Parliament must raise the limit of age for compulsory attendance 

 at elementary schools to that which prevailed in other countries. 

 If his students had not been well educated in elementary subjects 

 the science ma.stcr was called upon to make bricks without 

 straw. 



The Chairman, Major-General Sir J. Donnelly, in concluding 

 the discussion, referring to the interpretation of the Technical 

 Instruction Act, said technical instructors might teach how a 

 thing was done, but not carry their training so far as to give the 

 rapidity and dexterity of manipulative skill required for the 

 craftsman or journeyman. Looked at in that way, there was 

 no difficulty in working the Act. 



Mr. Mundella, M.P., in introducing Prof. T. V. Diefenbach, 

 to read a paper on "Technical Education in Wiirtemberg," 

 referred to the marvellous progress made by the kingdom of 

 Wiirtemberg during, the last forty years. A commission from 

 England, which visited Wiirtemberg to inquire into their system 

 of technical education, reported that they had seen no part of 

 Europe more progressive than Wiirtemberg, and they were 

 assured that there was not a single pauper in the whole country. 

 He wished he could .say the same of England. 



Sir Joshua Fitch then read a paper on "Some Limitations to 

 Technical Instruction," in which he entirely admitted that our 



