schools, and is accompanied by mineralogy in others, two consider- 

 ations make this fact consistent with the original statement. First, 

 the number of pupils in high schools, as compared with the number 

 in the lower grades, is extremely small. Second, even in high 

 schools, the method of study is such as to indicate the light esteem 

 in which it is held; and the few good results from the study are not 

 seldom quoted to the discredit of the study itself. As an illustration 

 of "how not to do it," the method of teaching in a college, with 

 which the speaker was familiar, was cited. 



A genial, well-informed gentleman of mature years and fine culture 

 occupies the position of instructor in the department of natural 

 science in this well endowed, vigorous and flourishing New England 

 college. During the fifteen or twenty weeks given to botany, with 

 three or four recitations weekly, in one year less than half a dozen 

 plants were examined by the pupils, in the class-room, and, worse 

 than this, the time was spent instead, in committing to memory, ver- 

 batim et literatim, the glossary of technical terms at the end of the 

 book, with the definitions, on the ground that if these were first 

 learned the things corresponding could be easily recognized on occa- 

 sion. 



This was the introduction to nature, and this is not a solitary ex- 

 ample. There are hundreds of high schools and academies, as well 

 as colleges, where thus the method curses the subject. This means a 

 great deal. What a plea against such methods was the whole life of 

 Prof. Agassiz! 



There are being made well directed efforts, in some of our cities and 

 towns, to have the subject introduced into the common schools, and 

 this fact, with the other fact that the subject is in our high school pro- 

 grammes, permits us to estimate the condition of natural history in 

 the schools to-day. The reason for the present state of things is 

 perhaps unimportant, but it is not because educators for half a cen- 

 tury have not been agreed as to the principles which govern the 

 case. It is curious to observe that in the face of this agreement, and 

 the fact that the statement of the principles has become so frequent 

 in convention as to be almost stale, few in authority have essayed to 

 take the first logical step in the indicated direction. 



The speaker prefaced his remarks upon the condition of natural 

 science as it ought to be in the schools, by saying that he was not a 

 proficient in the subject, and in no sense a specialist, being person- 

 ally more interested in other subjects. 



As it was shown to be true on the one hand that natural history 

 is not in the schools, the speaker maintained on the other hand that 

 it ought to be there. First, for the knowledge it offered, which an- 

 swered one aim of education. Second, because the knowledge is 



