866 REPORT— 1901. 



manufactures were higher grade schools and scliools of science. The metliods 

 followed were explained, and Dr. Kerr declared that most valuable results might 

 he anticipated from the highly practical training they provided. He argued in 

 favour of the institution of maintenance scholarships, which would merely be 

 jjayments during the period of preparation for capable citizenship, and he con- 

 tended that the able youth who had to face such a trade as engineering should 

 not be required to work through five years' apprenticeship in the shops if the 

 school training whicli he had received justified a reduction. With increased 

 school training the genuinely capable youth would make the very most of his 

 workshop experiences, would more easily find his way to higher positions, and be 

 likely to do better national service than could be expected from the less educated 

 youth who had been hurried into hard manual work before a basis of knowledge 

 iiad been laid or good intellectiuil habits acquired. 



Dr. Kerr anticipated no serious objections to diminished apprenticeship from 

 the trades unions, and the capitalist employer would not be altogether influenced 

 in his attitude by the profitableness of apprenticeship labour. It was the case 

 that many apprentices of ability were discouraged, and it was true that many 

 other promising youths of scientific and mechanical turn kept clear of apprentice- 

 ship. But Britain could not aftbrd to let capacity go to waste, and accordingly 

 every effort should be made to discover and train for industries youths of first- 

 class brain-power. France, in applying prudent and skilful methods of eliminating 

 the unfit from point to point in the higher practical schools, had set an example 

 which might be followed with profit. 



FRIDAY, SEPTEMBEIi 13. 



The following Papers were read : — 



1 . Thr. Future Work of the Section. 

 By Professor H. E. Armstrong, F.E.S. 



The Experimental Method of Teaching. 

 By Professor L. C. Miall, F.R.S. 



Si 



3. On the Scojie of the Science of Edncation. 

 By Professor H. L. Withers. 



At the outset of the work of the new Section of Educational Science it is of 

 exti'eme importance that we should come to some working agreement about its 

 cope. There is grave risk of our being overwhelmed by a multitude of interesting 

 problems, some of whicli cannot properlj^ be attacked before we liave settled our 

 procedure and arranged our topics in some sort of order of priority and propor- 

 tional importance. In that case our discussions are likely to be no more convincing 

 than the debates of the many ecores of clubs and societies which are already pour- 

 ing out an endless .stream of papers and treatises on educational subjects. We 

 must begin with the matters which are most fundamental and central, and leave 

 for a while those which are subordinate and marginal. 



We start with the claim that there is such a study as the science of education. 

 A study does not become a science until it is systematic, orderly, and continuous ; 

 until the field of its investigations is marked out ; and until the terms which it uses 

 are defined with some precision. Until this point is reached everything remains a 

 matter of opinion and prejudice, and no genuine advance in thought is possible. 

 We must admit that this point has not yet been reached in the British study of 



