26 THE NATURE-STUDY REVIEW [i, i, jan. 1905 



come for beginning to eliminate by organizing the materials. 

 Such definite criticisms are bound to be helpful, whether we accept 

 them in full or not. 



Another recent criticism of nature-study as now taught in the 

 United States is by Professor Henry E. Amstrong, of London, 

 who visited this country last year as a member of the Moseley 

 Educational Commission. In the report of that commission (pub- 

 lished in London, 1904) Professor Armstrong summarizes his 

 observations on nature-study in many of our leading common 

 schools by the statement that " The Nature-Study lessons I wit- 

 nessed, when not specifically botanical or zoological and scientific 

 in character, were eminently superficial and worthless." In an- 

 other place Professor Armstrong writes concerning the nature- 

 study work for rural schools : *' There can be no doubt that a 

 pioneer work of great importance is being done, on which it 

 will be possible to build in the future. It is not possible now 

 to discuss in any proper way the method of teaching adopted. 

 I desire to say everything in its favor, feeling as I do that the 

 object in view is all important; but I am satisfied that the work 

 lacks depth and that those engaged in it are not yet aware of 

 the extent to which it is possible to introduce exact method 

 into such studies; they need to be more fully acquainted with 

 the practice of scientific method and with the art of discovery. 

 It would be more nearly correct to speak of the movement as one 

 for the promotion of Nature-love rather than as Nature-Study. 

 At present it involves far too little real study and concentration 

 of purpose ; which is unfortunate, as rural children particularly 

 need training in exactness." 



Taking this criticism as a whole, many American educators who 

 are quite familiar with our schools have expressed the opinion that 

 the sweeping criticism '' eminently superficial and worthless " de- 

 serves fuller explanation and discussion. Professor Armstrong 

 promises that when the pressure of his work allows he will write 

 for The Nature-Study Review a fuller discussion of nature- 

 study as he has seen the teaching in the United States; and then 

 we shall be able to consider whether we can get helpful sugges- 

 tions from his criticisms. 



