order successively, observing carefully, and, in their own words, giving the best account of what they do at each step in the operation, and aided by the questions, rather than by the assertions of the teacher, note the best forms of expressing what they do. What the pupils have thus noted, is a rule made by the pupils themselves, by first doing, and then observing and stating what they have done. In this mode, the pupils first gain ideas and thoughts by attending to the proper occasions or objects of those ideas and thoughts, and then make expressions. In committing such a rule to memory the pupil will not commit meaningless expressions. He will have primarily in mind that which is denoted by the expressions rather than the mere expressions. In repeating the rule, he will but state what he himself did, or what he found out while making the rule. Since the pupils in this way make the rules for themselves, the making and learning of rules may be to them a very agreeable work. In studying Latin and Greek according to this mode, the pupils, instead of entering the fair fields of classic literature as too many are now compelled to enter them, through a wearying wilderness of grammatical rules, will find out the principles of construction for themselves, and will make their own grammar.

One objection often urged against this mode, is, that it takes too much time. If the high ends of education consist in mastering a certain number of pages of certain text-books, then it does take too much time; but if the end of education is the development of the powers of the pupil, then, since his powers can be developed only by means of his own activity, that mode which leads the pupil to do for himself is the sure and ready way to secure the true ends of education.

This mode is condemned by some as impracticable. If, by impracticable, they mean that it cannot be successfully employed in the school-room, then correct reasoning and the facts of experience disprove their assertion. If they mean that it is impracticable because it does not lead the pupil to go through with mental processes like those which make up a large share of his mental activity, in his daily life, after his school-days are ended, then we may appeal to the facts of our own observation and experience to deny the assertion. In every-day life, every man, so far as he is an indi

vidual man, is under the necessity of observing for himself the facts of the outer and the facts of the inner world, and of reflecting upon these facts for himself. And, so far as he is not a mere repeater of the expressions of others, every one is under the necessity of inventing his own expressions of the ideas and thoughts occasioned in his own mind. By what he thus learns, he comes to a knowledge of principles, and by means of them forms his own rules, by which he directs his activity from day to day. If we, in all our teaching, adopt that mode which is indicated by the laws of the human mind, our teaching will always be practical; for, in all our teaching, we shall lead the pupil to do that which he should do in after life, in whatever business he may engage.

CORRECTING COMPOSITIONS.

ONE of the most difficult acquisitions by a pupil, as proved by the experience of many a teacher, is accuracy in punctuation. I do not remember ever having been taught a lesson on the subject during my school days, and although we used, in college, a textbook containing rules respecting this part of an education, I am conscious of having derived more benefit from observing the usage of the best classical writers of our language, than from all the formal rules I ever learned bearing on the topic.

The large majority of scholars in our public schools, when writing compositions, do not, and will not, stop to apply rules. Even the simplest directions for the position of capitals, taught in all our grammars, are very often ignored in face of actual knowledge of propriety in the case. Carelessness pushes such knowledge aside in practice, and the teacher is often surprised to find the written thoughts of a correct theorist, whose recitations in grammatical rules are always perfect, full of violations of those same directions.

When I began to teach, I was accustomed to call the writer to my side, point out the errors of his composition, and correct them as we proceeded. I soon found, however, that, while some pupils of quick apprehension and retentive memory were benefited by this method of procedure, more were likely to repeat again and

again the same faults in subsequent exercises. I was therefore induced to contrive a plan whereby they should correct their own compositions directing them by figures to a table of enumerated errors, which were printed and hung up in the school-room or given to each scholar. Then, on reading the composition, I marked in red ink the references to the table, over the faulty word, and enclosed in brackets where a whole sentence was defective. The numbers were carried to 32, and the list embraced nearly all the errors into which young writers are prone to fall. Thus the pupil made his own corrections, and returned the exercise to me to see if it were correctly done, or set right any misapprehensions. The effect of this was charming, more progress being made in one term by this method than during a year on the old system. I presume other teachers have used something similar, perhaps better, and I am induced to give my experience, in hopes of eliciting improvements thereon from wiser heads than mine.

NOTE. Fold in Bill shape, and indorse it with name and number.

MASSACHUSETTS NORMAL SCHOOLS.

WITHIN a month past many schools have held their annual examinations, and institutes and associations have met. These public meetings of schools and teachers give the people a view of the work and workers of the educational field. Several days spent in the Massachusetts Normal Schools convinced us that teachers and pupils are doing better work than has been done in the past. Fundamental principles are more thoroughly taught, pupils investigate facts and deduce reasons, knowledge is generalized and rendered more definite and practical.

We were pleased to see the prominence given to natural science. Principles in Chemistry were illustrated by the students by simple experiments; different forms of matter were presented to the class, and such qualities as could be determined by the senses were first named, then others were made to appear by analysis and synthesis. Chemistry thus taught is interesting and profitable.

The class in Botany was supplied with plants of different kinds. Each pupil took a specimen, and, in turn, standing before the class named its parts and defined their uses; it was also his duty to ask and answer questions, to fill the place of a teacher in exciting an interest in the recitation and in drawing out latent knowledge. Pupils thus taught and trained, must make efficient workers.

Opportunities for training and self-culture are now offered to every ambitious teacher, and none can complain of lack of advantages.-The Maine Journal of Education.

TO WHAT EXTENT SHOULD

ORAL INSTRUCTION

TAKE THE PLACE OF TEXT-BOOKS?

[Remarks of PROF. C. O. THOMPSON, at the American Institute meeting, at Portsmouth, N. H.]

THE question to be considered, next to that of supervision, demands the most careful consideration, and has the most vital connection with the interests of education. The fact is, the present reaction, if we may so term it, against classical education, is due to the fact that gradually, and somewhat unconsciously, instruction in the classics has degenerated into instruction in a few text-books. The influence of text-book classics culminated when the new edition of Andrews & Stoddard's Latin Grammar was published; and from that time the renaissance of a more rational method of instruction dates. Then men began to inquire whether good learning is to be reached by that strange and unnatural process, to which most of us were unfortunately subjected.

The most obtuse student of the times of Elizabeth could not but note the more complete and available knowledge of the Latin language possessed by the notable men and women of that period, who studied the language without any grammar. The thought was at once suggested that the science of grammar is a growth of modern times, and that the scholarly and laborious authors of this almost universal classic had, honestly enough, completely reversed the old order of study, and substituted a manual of Latin grammar for a guide to a knowledge of the Latin language. They were turning the crank by the wheel. The speaker can assert, with some confidence, that it is possible for a student to know the whole of that mass of grammatical information, and still know