338 REPORTS ON THE STATE OF SCIENCE, ETC. 
(d) The difficulties of obtaining an adequate supply of suitable lecturers 
and tutors. 
3a. Apparent Remoteness of the Subject. 
It is becoming more generally realised that formal courses of work on 
various branches of science, such as elementary physics or chemistry, are 
misdirected and unattractive, lacking in essential elements of Adult 
Education. They fail to awaken interest or understanding, and lead to an 
entire misconception of the practical value of science studies. On the other 
hand, in all cases when the approach is made along popular lines—when the 
courses deal, frankly and simply, with the real issues of life, and touch the 
everyday experience of the students—classes are well attended and high 
enthusiasm is engendered. Indeed, the testimony of many experienced 
teachers shows that starting with these simple natural interests the work 
has frequently developed a high standard of study, and led to the forma- 
tion of clubs and societies that have done good work along both social and 
scientific lines in the most unlikely neighbourhoods, and often under 
very discouraging conditions. 
“The general public regards science courses as too technical and 
specialised for them to understand . . . as too remote for ordinary life to 
interest them. . . . The great majority of people are not interested in 
botany qua botany, or in zoology qua zoology, but they are interested in the 
human and social applications of botany and zoology. . . . Most people 
are not interested in data, but in principles and generalisations. .. . 
(Dr. Brierley, Reading). 
Dr. Brierley further draws attention to the type of lecturer who tends to 
kill interest at the outset by following too meticulously the details of 
a subject, to the exclusion of the more general aspects, and by using academic 
language or technical jargon in place of pictorial terms in which to translate 
the messages of science. Compared with normal University education, he 
says, ‘ the approach must be made with different ideals, from a different stand- 
point, seen in a different perspective, and carried out witha different technique 
. . . the general public is keenly interested and wants to know what science 
can tell it, and what science cannot tell it of real life, but it has no use for 
academic futilities and unreal issues, which are so often put forward in 
answer to its demands.’ 
“The response to the science courses largely depends upon the method 
of presentation. Students are invariably attracted by a scientific lecture if 
care is exercised in the choice of title, and there is something to see as well 
as to hear . . . the adult student, without guidance, is very prone to 
select from those subjects offered which seem likely to throw light upon his 
immediate problems of life . . . hence the choice of economics and allied 
subjects in the first place.” On the other hand, ‘ If the scope of scientific 
classes is put before prospective students with the same degree of persuasive 
explanation that is commonly used with other subjects, then a greater 
response would equally follow ’ (Dr. A. J. Grove, London). 
‘The ordinary man in the street is afraid of science. He knows nothing 
about the nature of science ’ (Dr. Norman Walker, Leeds). For this reason 
he strongly urges the need to bring the students right close up to things, to do 
experiments themselves and: so learn through their own interested observa- 
tions the real meaning of science. His method is fully described in a paper 
published by the British Institute of Adult Education in their Report of the 
Conference held in 1927. 
‘It is absolutely essential that every lecture should be illustrated either 
