3<D NATURE STUDY AND AGRICULTURE 



killer. All of these epithets have been applied to it by 

 those in authority in the schools, and by parents; and it is 

 interesting to trace the cause of such opinions. It is 

 usually found that such criticism is founded upon the work 

 of some teacher who was marking time rather than teach- 

 ing. One is forced to the conclusion that among the worst 

 foes of nature study must be counted many of its teachers. 



It is often urged that this state of affairs will continue 

 until teachers become trained for this particular work. It 

 is very true that teachers should be trained in nature study, 

 but this is not the principal thing. University repre- 

 sentatives of the sciences have even urged an amount of 

 general knowledge of the sciences that would stagger a 

 university instructor. This is clearly impractical, for 

 grade teachers cannot obtain so extensive a training, and 

 if they can they will no longer consent to be grade teachers. 



The principal thing is not formal training in teaching 

 nature study, although this is very desirable; or a university 

 course in all the sciences involved; but the principal thing is 

 the spirit in which nature study is taught. This is the first 

 thing, and training and knowledge will develop through 

 experience and wise suggestion; without it, no amount of 

 training and knowledge will make a successful teacher of 

 the subject. There are teachers with no formal training 

 and with no exact knowledge who have succeeded in de- 

 veloping almost ideal courses in nature study, judged by 

 all the tests we know; and there are teachers with all the 

 formal training of the schools who could not " make it go." 

 To catch by observation the qualities of an effective teacher 

 is like trying to catch a personality. For such a one no 

 rules can be formulated; he is like an artist, born with a 



