50 
duced under the term "nature study," and the child's knowledge of the phe- 
nomena of plant and animal life is much clearer and more definite by reason of 
the concrete methods employed in nature study. 
In the average village and rural school nothing approaching adequate instruc- 
tion in the biological group of studies has ever heen given. Geography, as far 
as taught in the primary grades, has consisted almost entirely of text-book 
work, and has had in it very little that is concrete or that touches the experience 
of the child. Nature study, on the other hand, begins with the concrete — with 
the organic life of the school yard, the garden, and the farm. It has, therefore, 
a very definite and useful place to fill among the culture studies, particularly 
the biological studios of the primary grades. Elementary nature study, together 
with an informal study of local geography, might well supersede the formal 
study of geography during the first three or four years. This- should he fol- 
lowed by more formal geography and nature study, the latter to he superseded 
by the elements of agriculture when the child is eleven or twelve years old. 
Agriculture should not be confused with manual training as taught in the city 
schools. Manual training " relates to the transformation of materials such as 
wood or stone or other minerals into structures for human use," and draws more 
from the mathematical group of studies than from the biological. Agriculture, 
on the other hand, is confined mainly to things biological. Its purpose in the 
common schools is to awaken an interest in the work and life of the farm, show 
the progress being made in the improvement of farming, indicate the rational and 
scientific basis of modern agriculture, and give the pupil an outlook toward the 
work of the experiment stations, agricultural schools and colleges, and other 
agencies for his future education or assistance in his life work. 
The motive for teaching agriculture in the rural school may, however, to a con- 
siderable extent be the same as that for manual training in the city school — 
namely, to bring the child into direct and sympathetic relations with the indus- 
trial life of the community in. which he lives. Undoubtedly, manual training in 
the city school has an outlook toward the shop, factory, and kitchen, and in the 
same way agriculture in the rural school should be directly related to the prac- 
tical work of the farm. 
A REASONABLE PROGRAMME FOR AGRICULTURAL TEACHING IN THE RURAL 
COMMON SCHOOLS. 
Whenever it is proposed to introduce the teaching of agriculture into the rural 
common schools the objection is at once raised that the curriculum is already 
crowded ; there is no time for more. This is true. There is no time for more, 
but there is time for better. It would be undesirable and unwise to do away 
with any of the studies now regularly taught in the common schools, but it would 
be wise to make a more judicious selection of the topics to be included in the 
courses in the various branches and omit much which now occupies the time of 
the pupils but which is not likely ever to be of use to them. Prof. Frank M. 
ji (-Murray, of the Teachers' College of Columbia University, in a recent article 
discussing Advisable Omissions from the Elementary Curriculum, and the 
basis for them,** says, " Life is too full of large specific ends to be attained to 
allow time for work that has no really tangible object." As a basis for the 
rejection of subject-matter from school courses he holds to the following propo- 
sitions : 
"(1) Whatever can not be shown td have a plain relation to some real need of 
life, whether it be aesthetic, ethical, or utilitarian in the narrower sense, must be 
dropped. 
"(2) Whatever is not reasonably within the child's comprehension, likewise. 
"(3) Whatever is unlikely to appeal to his interest; unless it is positively 
demanded for the first very weighty reason. 
"(4) Whatever topics and details are so isolated or irrelevant that they fall 
to be a part of any series or chain of ideas, and therefore fail to be necessary 
for the appreciation of any large point. This standard, however, not to apply 
to the three R's and spelling." 
lie does not favor the entire omission of any subject now taught in the ele- 
mentary schools, but does recommend the omission of particular topics and 
details. Omission, however, is not the only remedy that he suggests for the 
a Ed. Rev., 27 (1004). No. 5, p. 478. 
