56 



The National Geographic Magazine 



differences ; enough history to appre- 

 ciate the influence of history upon polit- 

 ical geography, etc. In other words, 

 geography has such varied relationships 

 that the teacher who would teach it 

 properly must have a broad range of 

 information. Otherwise it is necessary 

 to blindly follow the text-book, and this, 

 unfortunately, is far too often done. 



Then, too, the teacher must be well- 

 balanced — not too easily led astray by 

 passing fads which often appear so at- 

 tractive. This presupposes sufficient 

 appreciation of the subject and its possi- 

 bilities to understand what is good and 

 what is bad in method. Next to know- 

 ing something to teach, it is important 

 to understand how to teach what one 

 knows — what to include, what to omit, 

 how to present difficult points, and how 

 to secure training from the teaching — 

 not merely of the memory, but of the 

 powers of observation and deduction. 

 I believe that I am not misstating the 

 facts when I say that, while geography 

 demands these powers from the teacher, 

 it is possible to teach the other three 

 subjects with much less training. In- 

 stead, therefore, of demanding from the 

 teacher the knowledge and training 

 which geography requires, a teacher is 

 selected who is amply qualified for the 

 other subjects, and then required to do 

 the best she can with the difficult and 

 complex subject of geography. 



OPPORTUNITY FOR SECURING 

 TRAINING 



To secure better trained teachers, 

 boards of education should be prepared 

 to offer better compensation. Three or 

 four hundred dollars is now commonly 

 offered, and this surely cannot command 

 highly trained teachers of geography. 



Not only is it difficult to find well- 

 prepared geography teachers because of 

 the complexity of the subject and of the 

 low compensation offered, but also be- 

 cause of the limited opportunity for 



securing proper training for such teach- 

 ing. By far the greater number of 

 grade teachers go no farther for their 

 training than the high school, with pos- 

 sibly a year of two in a " training class' ' 

 or as pupd teacher. No geography in- 

 struction is given them in the high 

 school, and little that bears directly on 

 geography, with the exception of some 

 short courses in geology, physical geog- 

 raphy, etc., which are often indiffer- 

 ently taught, and rarely so taught as 

 to show their geographic significance. 

 Thus the teacher of geography is, in a 

 vast number of cases, selected from the 

 ranks of those who had no further in- 

 struction in geography than that of the 

 grammar school. In other words, the 

 teacher must return to teach the sub- 

 ject with little more knowledge of it 

 than the very pupils whom she teaches 

 will possess when they go from under 

 her instruction. It is not quite as bad 

 as this, of course, for the teacher is 

 more mature, better disciplined men- 

 tall}-, and, in the natural course of 

 events, has obtained a broader range of 

 information. But it is an anomalous 

 condition, and, in view of the fact that 

 so many teachers are supplied from the 

 high school, there seems to be a demand 

 that geography instruction be given in 

 that school. There are other good rea- 

 sons for believing that geographer should 

 be taught in the high school, but as these 

 have no bearing on the present question 

 they will not be considered. 



Of the teachers who did not get 

 their preparation solely from the home 

 schools the great majority come from 

 the normal school. The training there 

 is decidedly better, and in some is excel- 

 lent ; but in far too mam' it is very far 

 below the standard that should be set. 

 I have visited one normal school (and 

 understand that there are many quite 

 like it) where the geography was taught 

 by the teacher of English, while the 

 science was all in the hands of one 

 man, who, in spite of his marked ability, 



