Makch 18, 1887.] 



SCIEJSC-tJ. 



263 



LETTERS TO THE EDJTOP. 



*** Correspondents are requested to be as brief as possible. The 

 writer's name is in all cases reqiiired as proof of good faith. 



Zoology in the college course. 



The recent appearance of three zoological text- 

 books, so diverse in treatment as to be -well-nigh 

 contradictory, revives the question, ' How shall 

 zoology be taught ? ' The three books to which I 

 refer are Packard's ' Zoologj^' Colton's ' Practical 

 zoology,' and Sedgwick and "Wilson's ' General bi- 

 olog3\' The first of these has already proven its 

 popularity by passing through several editions. But 

 popularity and real merit are not identical in mean- 

 ing. Professor Packard's work is a conspectus of 

 the animal kingdom : it maj' justly be termed an ele- 

 mentary study of the classification of animals. The 

 student is constantly brought to view orders or 

 classes as exemplified in a few tj'pes selected for 

 study. 



Sedgwick and Wilson designed their work for col- 

 lege use. The latter part of it is an introduction to 

 the study of zo6logJ^ It is the counterpart of 

 Packard's ' Zoology.' In it the principles and facts 

 of classification are not first in importance, but the 

 student is kejat upon the study of one animal until 

 he has mastered it from every stand-point, — anatom- 

 ical, histological, embryological, and also to some ex- 

 tent physiological. 



Colton's ' Practical zoology ' occupies a place be- 

 tween the other two. It was not designed for use as 

 a college text-book, and we should not sjDeak of it 

 here but for the fact that it will be used in many 

 colleges, and we consider that it has serious limita- 

 tions if used for this purpose, and should be largely 

 added to, to make it cajjable of doing proper service. 

 The work is virtuallj'- a set of superficial studies of 

 the gross anatomy of a varietj^ of animals arranged 

 without reference to classification. Only the most 

 easily seen features in the anatomy are touched upon, 

 and all the more difficult ones are omitted. 



We consider these text-books as representing two 

 distinct ideas in zoological teaching, and the third a 

 compromise between them : first, the view that the 

 student of zoology should have at least a glimpse at 

 every large group in the animal kingdom : second, 

 the view that the student should have a very full 

 fund of information about a very few forms ; and 

 the third, the attempt at bridging the chasm between 

 them. The first view leads to suiierficial knowledge 

 of the whole, the second to thorough knowledge of 

 a part, and the compromise secures neither result. 



Before considering the relative merits of these two 

 ideas, we must be careful to make it understood that 

 we are speaking now of a college course in zoology, 

 and neither, on the one hand, a high-school course 

 in natural history, nor, on the other hand, a profes- 

 sional course in zoology. Zoology is not taught in 

 college to make zoologists : it should guide such 

 study of the phenomena of animal life as will best 

 increase the powers of observation or quicken the 

 activity of perception, but, at the same time, not 

 omit to acquaint the student with the principles of 

 the science, and ground him well for future deeper 

 study, should he ever wish to pursue it. If the col- 

 lege course has, then, this twofold ptirpose, — to de- 

 velop the student's powers and to show him some- 

 what of the science of zoology, — two questions 

 arise : what is zoology as a science, and does it train 

 the mind aright by its pursuit ? 



Zoology was advanced from a dry collation of ill- 

 -^ understood facts to a living science, and with this 

 growth its study has outgrown its old place in the 

 curriculum. The progressive colleges give it more 

 prominence and a strong force of instructors, and 

 furnish laboratories, etc., for work. Even the most 

 conservative have seasoned the ancient and dishonor- 

 able practice of a course of lectures on zoology with- 

 out any laboratory work, with some work upon the 

 animals studied. With this change should go the 

 desire, dear to so many instrvictors' hearts, to inform 

 the student with all the facts he has gathered after 

 long toil. As we discard the false notion that even, 

 the briefest course must still include some knowledge 

 of every group, and realize that by ' elementary ' we 

 mean, not more dilute knowledge of a great variety 

 of creatures, but thorough knowledge of fewer, we 

 are in a position to use the laboratory for its legiti- 

 mate purpose. This purpose is to study animals as 

 the zoologist studies them, not fully enough to learn 

 all zoology, but fully enough to intelligently under- 

 stand the work of the zoologist, including the student 

 of physiology and pathology, securing at the sanie 

 time zoological training just so far as the study is 

 pursued. It is all wrong and pernicious for the 

 teacher to feel that he must get his class ' over the 

 ground.' There is no limit to the amount to be done, 

 and he can't ' go over the ground ' except most super- 

 ficially. The feeling that each large group must re- 

 ceive some attention, however slight, is really most 

 harmful, though very wide-spread. The experiment 

 is tried every year of making students apprehend 

 principles before they have mastered enough facts, 

 and it is always most unsatisfactory in its results. 



Zoology is not at the present time chiefly concerned 

 in the discrimination of species, which forms but a 

 minor issue ; but the bulk of study is in the direc- 

 tion of anatomy and histology, embryology and 

 physiology. These studies all lead later to the con- 

 sideration of many very difficult problems, and 

 among them those of classification : but the zoolo- 

 gist is not in a position to attack these at the outset 

 of his study. At first he must pursue many little 

 details, tiresome or fascinating as the case niay be, 

 such as fine dissection, section-cutting, with minutest 

 attention to the processes of hardening, staining, em- 

 bedding, cutting, and mounting, careful study and 

 interpretation of sections, various careful experimen- 

 tal observations, and all these attended to with all 

 possible precision. No one has a right to claim a 

 notion of the science of zoology who has not had 

 considerable training in such work, met some of its 

 difficulties, and thus acquired information for him- 

 self along the arduous road of the zoologist. Fur- 

 nished thus with facts, he is ready to take some of 

 the higher steps of the scientific zoologist and seek 

 the law which unifies his observations or the general 

 principle which underlies them. How valuable an 

 idea of the cell, its derivation, differentiation, etc., 

 has one who has gotten his idea of cells from black- 

 board drawings ? But let him study the growth from 

 embryonic epidermis of skin, hair, nail, and gland, 

 and differentiation begins to take on meaning. 



While only direct observation can give the student 

 an adequate conception of the science of zoology, it 

 at the same time secures to him the very best for 

 which natural science training is of educational value. 

 It is not so much the variety of observations as their 

 exactness which produces valuable results in this di- 

 rection. Nothing so irksome as exactness, nothing 



