OCTOBEE 15, 1920] 



SCIENCE 



349 



conferences witli the students, who had regis- 

 tered for the work, to find out why they were 

 there, what contact they had already had with 

 prohlems in this suhject, what points they 

 expected the course to clear up for them. 

 They were asked to prepare a rough outline 

 of the subject, limited though their knowl- 

 edge was, and from this outline their labora- 

 tory work was begun, so that they began with 

 the points of contact previously made with 

 the subject, and were already at work organ- 

 izing what slight knowledge they had. 



Each student's laboratory work was made 

 at all times the center of his activity; it was 

 starting point and unifying element. The 

 questions that arose in the student's mind 

 during his laboratory work were the basis of 

 laboratory conversations and class-room dis- 

 cussions. Most of the conferences on work 

 took place in the laboratory, when problems 

 arose. The class room v/as used in part for 

 the discussion of problems that could not well 

 be worked out in the laboratory because x>i 

 lack of time or equipment. This discussion 

 of more general problems and of investigations 

 carried on by other scientists, though usually 

 introduced by the instructor, was brought in 

 when suggested by the laboratory work of the 

 students. Each student presented, also, dur- 

 ing this class hour, the results of his own 

 research studies. And though many problems 

 were individual in origin, some of them were, 

 of course, related, and lent themselves well to 

 group discussion. It is true the students 

 were less interested in the discussion of each 

 other's investigations than in their own; still, 

 a problem that a fellow student feels vividly 

 is more interesting than one imposed by an 

 instructor. ISTearly all work was done in- 

 dependently of both his fellows and the in- 

 structor, in so far as the student was able, 

 unaided, to solve his own difficulties. 



Most of the systemization of work was done 

 in laboratory conversations between instructor 

 and student. Such correlation was urged 

 throughout the course. Attempt was made to 

 order data as they accumulated. At the end 

 of the course, this systemization was rounded 



out in a second outline of the subject the 

 students prepared. 



The students almost invariably floundered 

 at first. They had grown so dependent on 

 directions that for a time they could only 

 with difficulty initiate work of their own. 

 Gradually they came to understand what was 

 expected and they became clearer as to what 

 they themselves wanted. And as the course 

 continued the method seemed to them in- 

 creasingly desirable and successful. 



There were difficulties and hindrances in 

 applying the method, of course. Almost all 

 of them came from having to fit it into the 

 regular university system. It couldn't be 

 adopted wholeheartedly because of the regular 

 schedule; and when work was prescribed in all 

 other courses and enforced by examinations, 

 there was a tendency, naturally, to slight a 

 more flexible course. 



And it is difficult to persuade a student one 

 is really interested in his opinions when all 

 through his home and school life independent 

 thinking has been discouraged as incon- 

 venient. But probably it is better to save 

 him at the eleventh hour than let his power 

 to think be dammed forever. It certainly 

 seems absurd to dictate all details of work to 

 the imdergraduate and expect the graduate 

 student suddenly to manifest originality, in- 

 itiative and creative power. The method of 

 the little child and the graduate student 

 should not be interrupted by the years of 

 directed mental effort our present school sys- 

 tem imposes, should not because it is ineffi- 

 cient, and so fatiguing as to be almost dis- 

 astrous. It is equally important that the be- 

 ginnings of a science be taught by the scien- 

 tific method as that graduate work be so 

 carried on. Por the early years in any sci- 

 ence should be given largely to discovery and 

 original research, as are the early years of 

 childhood. Thinking and first-hand contact 

 would better come early, else they may never 

 come. 



The difficulty of handling many students in 

 this way is more fancied than real. One can 

 not, of course, believe it possible to know and 

 develop individually as many students as one 



