200 
Frederic E. Clements 
inevitable results of the former and in their turn serve to explain it. 
The decision as to the first work to be taken up is followed by a 
discussion of the general method of attack, which still leaves room 
for individual initiative as to the details. The actual work of observa¬ 
tion or experiment is begun at the second meeting, a considerable 
range of choice being permitted as to material and method, while 
unity is secured by having all deal with the same project. The 
teacher’s task is to stimulate and on occasion encourage, and to 
train the student to realize that he can secure nothing of value from 
the work except by his own effort. By holding the quicker students 
to greater accuracy and helping the slower ones to form simpler and 
more direct habits of thinking, the class will come through each 
project with a fairly equable preparation for refining their methods 
and interpreting their results by group discussion. The latter will 
often reveal the need for further investigation and point the way to 
the problem that should follow. Each problem must grow out of 
one or more of the preceding ones and be kept in the broadest 
possible contact with them, as it is only in this way that permanent 
and usable knowledge can be -secured. Each student turns to his 
experience again and again for the materials on which he must build 
and the repeated use of them makes lecture, text, and notebook 
superfluous. No examinations are needed to test his memory or to 
help him “organize” his material, nor are they necessary for the 
teacher who is in constant touch with his individual students 
throughout the entire working period. Each problem is itself a test 
made under the eye of the teacher, and he requires in addition only 
occasional definite measurements of progress in the various learning 
processes, measurements which should be as intelligible to the 
student as to himself. 
In experimental education, as in all research, knowledge rests 
upon quantities. Measurement is as essential to the student as to 
the teacher if either is to be sure that adequate development is being 
obtained and permanent results secured. Qualitative evidence of 
this is furnished by the inquiry method itself, since the ability of the 
student to organize and carry out projects with increasing demands 
is proof of constant growth. Such evidence renders examinations, 
both oral and written, quite unnecessary, except as they are used to 
measure improvement in memory. Quantitative results are necessary 
in the first place as an essential part of the investigation, but their 
great value lies in the certainty and accuracy with which the mental 
development of the student can be traced. Measurements make it 
