HOW NATURE STUDY SHOULD BE TAUGHT 2$ 



inquire, with frowning brow and threatening tone, 

 " Vat for ish dat ? " 



The reverse of this lobster-pumpkin teaching 

 is the true doctrine. 



C. B. Scott, in his " Nature Study and the 

 Child " occupies the correct standpoint. 



More than is the case with most other studies, probably, 

 science, or nature study, deals with the individual child, 

 and aims to develop each child as an individual. It places 

 the material in the hands of each child, and expects him to 

 see and think and tell for himself. Nature is many-sided ; 

 and when pupils observe for themselves, each will have a 

 different point of view, will see a different side. The teacher 

 will thereby be helped to realize the difficulty, the impossi- 

 bility, and, finally, the viciousness, of teaching en masse, of 

 teaching classes rather than individuals, and will recognize, 

 respect, and at length encourage and develop, the individ- 

 uality and self-reliance of the pupil. . . . 



We are more and more endeavoring in our schools, from 

 university to kindergarten, to have our students get more 

 than facts ; we are striving to develop their intellectual 

 powers — of seeing or apprehending for themselves, of think- 

 ing or combining ideas in their relations, of expressing or 

 conveying these ideas to others, and of doing or making 

 their ideas active or efiective. 



And it may well be added that this original 

 seeing and telling by the child are not to be con- 

 fined to nature study. What a glorious thing it 

 would be if education could take the place of in- 

 struction, if the nature-study point of view could 



