THE 
NEW PHYTOLOGIST 
Vol. XXII, No. 3 July 31, 1923 
EDITORIAL NOTE 
THE TEACHING OF BOTANY 
T he following article by Dr F. E. Clements, and another which 
we hope to publish later, have been contributed on the invitation 
of the Editor. The author was rather in doubt as to the wisdom of 
publishing views formed under American educational conditions in 
an English journal. Dr Clements’s views are, of course, revolutionary 
in the strictest sense, and the Editor is far from being prepared to 
advocate their full adoption in this country, even if there were any 
possibility of such a thing coming to pass! At the same time he is 
quite sure that it will be profitable to British teachers of botany to 
read, with an open mind, what the author has to say. The Editor is 
in full agreement with Dr Clements on at least one point—-the extreme 
desirability of more experiment, and controlled experiment, in methods 
of teaching. The tyranny of tradition is far too strong in teaching, 
particularly in university teaching. And it is remarkable that this 
should be true in science as much as in other subjects, when we 
remember that science owes its life to unfettered observation and 
experiment. It is surprising, as Dr Clements points out, that scientific 
workers should seldom think of applying the methods of research to 
the process of education. 
Proposals for the reform of elementary university teaching, which 
seemed to their authors rather obviously sound so far as they went, 
and at the same time thoroughly workable, were put forward in this 
journal some years ago. They were greeted by one distinguished 
botanist as “ Botanical Bolshevism.” It is always desirable to keep 
a sense of proportion; and Dr Clements’s articles will have served 
one good purpose if they demonstrate the difference in this field 
between “left wing” idealism and progressive constitutional 
Liberalism. We can learn useful lessons from idealism even if we 
do not consider its schemes practicable. 
Phyt. xxii. 3. 
7 
