A Botanical Curriculum. 
i 72 
Conversation on points of interest should he encouraged in every 
way; it tends to the creation of a stimulating “atmosphere.” 
But if reading seems desirable, the Professor or demonstrator can 
of course recommend what they think fit. We have not, however, 
found that elementary students are particularly anxious to read, 
except from the point of view of examination-cramming ; and the 
examinations should be arranged so that such reading is of little 
use. A student is much better employed in worrying out a 
practical point in the laboratory, or in talking over a theoretical 
point with his demonstrator than in reading someone else t s 
descriptions, or “getting up” a probably sketchy account of a topic 
in an elementary text-book. A demonstrator who knows his business 
is necessarily better than any elementary text-book. Standard 
books of reference of the type of De Bary’s “ Comparitive Ana¬ 
tomy,” and Pfeffer’s “ Physiology ” should of course be imme¬ 
diately accessible in the laboratory. The keener students will thus 
naturally tend to spend most of their time available for botany in 
the laboratory, and this in itself is all to the good. A demonstrator 
should always be accessible during the hours the laboratory is 
open. He should by no means consider his duties ended when 
the regular class is over. This, of course, involves the existence of 
at least two demonstrators with adequate stipends, in order that 
they may have time to themselves. 
We consider that even in the case of an elementary class, by 
far the best examiner is the teacher, and hence the examination at 
the end of the year ought to be conducted by the Professor. There 
is clearly no objection to an independent examiner being associated 
with the Professor, if this is thought desirable. But even if the 
examination is an outside one, so far as departmental teaching is 
concerned, students who have been encouraged to look and think 
for themselves instead af depending on a more or less mechanical 
reproduction of the contents of text-books, will not find their 
training fail them in the examination-room. 
Probably the greatest fault which still exists in science exami¬ 
nations is the tendency to set questions, the answers to which 
depend mainly on the mere exercise of memory. What is wanted 
is a test of the firm grasp of fundamental conceptions and 
principles, and of the power of “tackling” an unknown object, i.e. 
of interpreting the unfamiliar in the light of thorough knowledge of 
the familiar. The faults n training indicated are constantly being 
revealed at public examinations in botany, where candidates fre- 
