349 
The second objection is likewise not well founded, because the 
overcrowding of the course is not due to the number of subjects 
but to the attempt to teach too many things in these subjects 
which are not worth the teaching. 
The subject matter in the common school course of study needs 
a critical revision, not so much with the idea of eliminating entire 
subjects as for the purpose of cutting out matter now found in 
most textbooks in the treatment of these subjects, and upon which 
nuich time is spent in the school without profit to pupils. 
Textbooks are made to sell ; most publishers recognize that cer- 
tain detail of treatment of a subject is regarded as of vital impor- 
tance by one superintendent while another regards it as utterly 
without value. The argument of the publisher from the com- 
mercial standpoint is that if this detail is supplied, it will meet 
the requirements of one, and can be omitted by another, and thus 
the book can be accepted by both. 
In the rural schools the supervision is necessarily lacking in 
effectiveness, and the teachers, not feeling themselves competent 
to make proper eliminations, undertake to teach everything in the 
books, which was made to include everything which anybody 
might wish to teach.- 
The Course of Study — What is it? What is its purpose? 
A course of study should represent the policy of the Depart- 
ment of Public Instruction in regard to the subjects to be taught 
in the public schools, so arranged as to suggest their relation to 
each other, their relative importance, and the methods of teaching. 
It is the Charter, the Constitution. 
The Term Outline is an adaptation of the course of study for 
each individual school or group of schools, giving the work in 
each subject in detail and apportioned to each month or divisions 
of the term. 
The Lesson Plan is a detailed statement of the methods used in 
teaching the different subjects. 
•The Daily Program shows the amount of time devoted to the 
study of each subject. This is important as showing the time 
given to each subject and also the economical use of the school 
hours by the teacher. 
Considering the favorable attitude of such men as I have 
quoted from towards our present course of study, and remem- 
bering its evolution, I would not at the present time recommend 
any radical changes. It is elastic enough to be adapted to all our 
conditions and lacks detail enough to leave room for the initiative 
and originality of the teacher. All agree that it is sound in prin- 
ciple and good so far as it goes. In fact, you have never heard 
an unfavorable criticism of it when clearly understood from any 
student of school administration, from any educational expert, or 
from any organization which has gained for itself a reputation for 
intelligent interest in public school affairs, 
