ON TEACHING CHEMISTRY. 77 



np by those who have been, or are being, well trained in " the humani- 

 ties " are composed in much better style than the productions of boys who 

 have had less advantages of the kind, or who, from their dulness in other 

 subjects, are considered to be exactly fitted for learning natural science. 

 But the power of refuting this objection rests with the teacher. If he 

 refuses to pass over bad spelling and bad grammar, if he takes the trouble 

 not merely to point out slovenliness of expression, but to show how it 

 may be corrected, and if the learner is compelled to rewrite any careless, 

 inaccurate work in better form, there seems no reason why an account of 

 the two oxides of carbon, including an intelligent comparison of their pro- 

 perties, may not be made as good an exercise in English composition as 

 an essay on points of Greek and Roman history.' 



2. ' The difficulties that are met with in teaching, and the hest way of obviating 

 them ; the influence exerted by external examiners on the character of the 

 teaching.^ 



Much might be written about the various difficulties which are 

 alluded to in these reports in answer to the second question suggested by 

 the letter of the Committee. The chief difficulties are stated to be those 

 which arise from : — (i) Defective organisation and considerations of 

 expense ; (ii) the lower value attached to chemistry, as compared with 

 other subjects of the school curriculum ; (iii) the time which is devoted 

 to the subject ; (iv) preparation for various examinations ; (v) absence 

 of good text-books ; (vi) dearth of properly qualified teachers. 



(i) The expenses incidental to chemical teaching and the defective 

 organisation, which is often the result of insufficient endowment, are the 

 subjects of general complaint. Sometimes no laboratory is provided ; fre- 

 quently the laboratory accommodation is inadequate ; and it appears that 

 the details of the preparations for lectures and practical work genei'ally 

 devolve on the teacher himself. The following statements may be quoted. 

 The first two are from the reports of small schools. 



XII. ' We have no laboratory or other facilities for practical work, 

 and so our experiments have to be very simple and oar work very 

 elementary.' 



XIII. ' The chemical teaching is quite elementary, and there is no 

 apparatus, so that it is only taken as a lesson with figures drawn and 

 explained on the black-board.' 



XIV. ' Thus our difficulties are : — (a) Having too many to teach. I am 

 responsible for about 160 boys, and have no help. (&) The want of a 

 large laboratory. We have a small but very good laboratory. There is, 

 however, only accommodation for 12 boys, while I always have about 

 70 doing practical chemistry in an aggregate of 6 hours a week. Hence 

 each boy gets only one hour a week, (c) The want of sufficient time to 

 prepare for experimental work. The whole of my school time, except 

 three hours, is taken up in teaching, so that all preparation has to be 

 done either before or afterwards, the practical result being that I am 

 obliged to limit my experimental teaching to the two lowest and the 

 highest forms.' 



XV. ' The chief obstacle to the effective teaching of chemistry here 

 is the poorness of the laboratory — a room in the basement, low pitched, 

 ill lighted, and worse ventilated, accommodating only 15 boys, and in 

 such connection with the other class-rooms as to make some of them 



