486 



NATURE 



[October 13, 19 10 



standard at the public schools. He would make this consist 

 of two parts : an examination coming at about the age of 

 sixteen and well within the reach of a boy of ordinary 

 intelligence and industry, and comprising the ordinary sub- 

 jects of school curriculum at this age ; he would then let 

 the boy leave the subjects from which he is not likely to 

 get much further profit and begin to specialise for the 

 remaining two or three years, say, in two subjects, which 

 would then be the material of the second examination. In 

 this way they would make a wholly fresh start at a critical 

 age, and he thinks that the bulk of the boys would probably 

 find this a great advantage. 



I quote this opinion because it shows that an experienced 

 schoolmaster regards it as highly desirable that at a certain 

 period in a schoolboy's career a real change should be made 

 in his curriculum, and I have expressly stated that I find 

 it difficult to express an opinion upon this particular educa- 

 tional period. 



What should be the exact nature of the teaching before 

 and after the age of si.xteen or seventeen for the mass of 

 ordinary boys I would prefer to leave to the decision of 

 those who are best able to judge. I think it highly prob- 

 able that there should be a considerable alteration of 

 curriculum at the critical age. But, if a break and change 

 of subject are required at this age, I believe that a yet 

 more complete change is required at the later stage when 

 the boy goes to the University, and that school methods 

 should then be entirely replaced by University methods — 

 not because there is then a natural change in the mental 

 powers of the student, but because it is the obvious stage 

 at which to make the change if we are to abandon pre- 

 paratory training at all. Should it be proposed that the 

 change ought to be made at sixteen, and that after that 

 age somethmg of the nature of University methods should 

 be gradually introduced, my fear is that this would only 

 lead to the perpetuation of school methods at the Uni- 

 versity. 



An interesting question which deserves to be very seri- 

 ously considered is the question, What sort of school educa- 

 tion affords the best preparatory training for the University? 

 I have often heard it asserted that, if a boy is capable of 

 taking up at the University a course which is entirely 

 different from his school course, he will generally be found 

 to have come from the classical side and not from the 

 modern side. An ordinary modern-side boy is rarely able 

 to pursue profitably a literary career at the University, 

 whereas it often happens that ordinary classical-side boys 

 make excellent scientific students after they have left school. 

 1 am bound to say that this is, on the whole, my own 

 experience. It suggests that a literary education at school 

 is at present a better intellectual training for general Uni- 

 versity work than a scientific education. If this be so 

 what is the reason ? 



There are no doubt many causes which may contribute. 

 In some schools the brighter boys are still retained on the 

 classical side while those who are more slow are left to 

 find their way to other subjects ; and some whose real tastes 

 have been suppressed by the uniformity of the school curri- 

 culum turn with relief to new studies at the University and 

 pursue them with zeal. But the facts do also, I think, 

 point to some defect in the present teaching of school 

 science whereby a certain narrowness and rigidity of mind 

 are rendered possible. This may be partly due to the lack 

 of human interest in the teaching of elementary science ; 

 the story of discovery has a personal side which is too 

 much neglected, though it is more attractive to the beginner 

 and might with advantage be used to give some insight 

 into the working of the human mind and character. More- 

 over, it would form an introduction to the philosophy of 

 science which is at present so strangely ignored by most 

 teachers. 



But another noteworthy defect is the absence of that 

 mental exercise which is provided by the thoughtful use and 

 analysis of language. 



I believe that the practice of expressing thoughts in 

 carefully chosen words, which forms so large a part of a 

 good literary education, constitutes a mental training which 

 can scarcely be surpassed, and it is unfortunately true that 

 in_ the non-literary subjects too little attention is paid to 

 this practice. In school work and examinations in science 

 a pupil who appears to understand a problem is often 

 allowed full credit, although his spoken or written answer 

 NO. 2137, VOL. 84] 



may be far from clear. This is a great mistake. .\ state- 

 ment which is not intelligibly expressed indicates some 

 confusion of thought ; and, if scientific teaching is to main- 

 tain its proper position as a mental training, far more 

 attention must be paid to the cultivation of a lucid style in 

 writing and speaking. 



The various Universities seem fairly agreed upon the 

 subjects which they regard as essential to an entrance 

 examination — subjects which may be taken to imply the 

 groundwork of a liberal education. Among these is 

 English : and yet of all the subjects which children are 

 taught at school, there is none in which such poor results 

 are achieved. It may be taught by earnest and zealous 

 teachers ; the examination papers are searching, and seem 

 to require a considerable knowledge of English literature 

 and considerable skill in the manipulation of the language, 

 and yet the fact remains that the power of simple intelli- 

 gible expression is not one that is possessed by the average 

 schoolboy and schoolgirl. It is the most necessary part 

 of what should be an adequate equipment for the affairs 

 of life, whether the pupil passes to the University or not, 

 and yet it is, on the whole, that which is least acquired. 



Although it is true that the intelligent reading and study 

 of the great masters should assist in the acquisition of a 

 good style, it is equally true that, if they come to be 

 regarded as a school task, they are not viewed with affec- 

 tion, especially in these days of crowded curricula, w/hen 

 there is little leisure for the enjoyment of a book that 

 requires deliberate reading. If the modern strenuous 

 curriculum of work and games has abolished the loafer, it 

 has also abolished leisure, and has therefore removed one 

 of the opportunities that used to exist for the cultivation 

 of literary and artistic tastes and pursuits by those to 

 whom they are congenial. The art of expressing one's 

 ideas in simple, straightforward language is to be acquired 

 not so much by study as by practice. There is no essential 

 reason why children should write worse than they speak ; 

 they do so because they have constant practice in the one 

 and little practice in the other. Our grandparents felt 

 less difficulty in expressing themselves clearly than we do 

 ourselves : of this their letters are evidence. It may have 

 been partly due to the fact that they had more time and 

 encouragement for leisurely reading, though they had not 

 so much to read ; but I believe that the letters which they 

 wrote as children were their real education in the art of 

 writing English. Much would be gained if boys and girls 

 were constantly required to express their own meaning in 

 writing. The set essay and the prdcis play a useful part, 

 but do not do all that is needed. Translation does not 

 give quite the necessary exercise. What is required is 

 constant, with certain periods of conscious, practice, and 

 that is only to be obtained by making every piece of 

 school work in which the English language is used an 

 exercise in lucid expression. Very few paragraphs in any- 

 thing written by the ordinary schoolboy — or, for the matter 

 of that, by the ordinary educated Englishman — are wholly 

 intelligible, and teachers cannot devote too much pains to 

 criticising all written work from this point of view. If 

 we first learnt by practice to express our meaning clearly 

 we should be more likely to acquire the graces of an 

 elegant style later. I must add that I believe the train- 

 ing in the manipulation of words would be improved if all 

 children were required to practise the writing of English 

 verse — not in efforts to write poetry, but narrative verse 

 used to express simple ideas in plain language — and I 

 believe that this would enable them the better to appreciate 

 poetry, the love of which is possibly now to some extent 

 stifled by the pedantic study of beautiful poems treated as 

 school tasks. 



In such a subject as English composition, in which 

 reform is so badly needed, something, perhaps, would be 

 gained by an entire break with existing traditions — a break 

 of the sort which would be required if it became suddenly 

 necessary to provide for an entirely new type of student. 



Now there is one new and interesting development in 

 which, for the first time, an opportunity offers itself of 

 dealing with a body of students who, although possessed 

 of more than average intelligence and enthusiasm, have 

 not received the conventional training which leads to a 

 University course. The tutorial classes for working people 

 which have now been undertaken by several Universities, 

 and which already number about 1200 students, are 



