432 , REPORT— 1903. 



elementary feducation. Hfere and there work of the Vfery greatest value 

 has been done ; but such cases are all too rare. 



There are many and obvious reasons for the failure. Pupil teacher.s, 

 as a rule, have received no proper instruction in the subject and, with few 

 exceptions, the training colleges have done little to promote rational 

 methods of teaching the elementary principles of Science and their 

 application to common life. The inspectorate have had but little 

 sympathy with .such work and the Education Department itself long 

 took no interest in the subject. The School Boai-ds also have given little 

 help, owing to the fact that they have rarely counted among their 

 members men able to understand the great importance of training in 

 Bcientitic method. In so far as the work has prospered at all, it has 

 been mainly under the regis of the Science and Art Department ; but 

 by placing a premium on certificates they have done much to discouragti 

 other than superficial knowledge of individual subjects in teachers. 

 Unfortunately the requirements of the Science and Art Department with 

 reference to specific subjects have rarely been such as to encourage a class 

 of work suitable for elementary schools. A protest from this point of 

 view against the inclusion of specific science subjects in the Code was 

 made by the Joint Scliolarships Board in 1897 in a memorandum 

 forwarded to the Vice-President of the Council. The principal recom- 

 mendation was as follows ' : — ' That in order to place " Science " on a 

 sounder footing in Elementaiy Schools and, above all, in order that the 

 teaching of the subject may be of real value educationally, it is desirable 

 that only one Science subject should be taught up to and within the Sixth 

 Standard, and that the course should be a progressive one. It seems that 

 this might be accomplished by adopting exclusively Course H given in the 

 Supplement to Schedule 2 of the Day School Code.' 



Unfortunately no effect has yet been given to this recommendation 

 by the Education Department. 



There can be little doubt that the most effective experiment yet made 

 is that carried out under the London School Board in the Tower Hamlets 

 and Hackney districts by Mr. Gordon and then by Mr. Heller. Although 

 the London Board failed to understand the great work done under its 

 auspices and made no proper arrangements to carry it on when Mr. Heller 

 quitted their service in 1897, it has been appreciated by others, especially 

 by the late Professor FitzGerald and his colleagues on the Commission on 

 Manual and Practical Instruction in Primary Schools in Ireland. In 

 fact, since 1900 Mr. Heller has been engaged as Head Organiser of 

 Science Instruction in Iri.sh Elementary Schools. The system developed 

 in London schools is therefore in full force in Ireland - and it is to Ireland 

 that we must now look for guidance. 



The great obstacles to good Science teaching at the present time in 

 elementary schools arc still, in the words of the report of 1895 ; — 



' Bcjmrt, 1897, p. 291. 



' The subject — General Elementary Science — lias been made a compulsory part 

 of the carrioulum of national schools and the conditions of object lesson teaching 

 have been carefully defined. Satisfactory laboratory instruction must be given to 

 all students in training colleges. In 1901 the Commissioners of National Education 

 ordered that ' the entire inspection staff ' should undergo a course of training in 

 laboratory work and the methods of experimental inquirj'. Mr. Heller was origin- 

 ally appointed only for five years ; his appointment has recently been made a 

 permanent one, however. 



