« AnteriorContinuar »
owes its origin to a time when Latin was the language of business and science, and Greek the store-house of a great literature, accessible only through that language. This age of great national growth, of close international relations without a common language, and of marvelous progress in every department of learning, seems to demand a corresponding change in its course of educational instruction. Some of the leading arguments usually adduced in favor of the prominence given to Latin and Greek, as for instance, that those languages are necessary to gain a knowledge of ancient life and thought, are regarded as fallacious.
3. The principal alternative course has been the scientific. This course omits Greek, reduces the amount of Latin, and provides, in connection with additional studies in the modern languages, extended instruction in the natural sciences. It corresponds essentially to the “real schools” of Germany. As compared with the ancient classical course, it reduces the amount of linguistic study nearly one-half. By an undue substitution of natural science for linguistic studies, the scientific course seems to give too much importance to the knowledge factor in education. The acquisition of the facts laid down in our text-books on natural science, cannot be very valuable as a disciplinary exercise. It involves chiefly the memory. It is not of a nature to give the manifold and thorough discipline acquired by the study of language.
After a considerable period of trial, the scientific course is coming to be regarded as a defective educational instrumentality. Amherst College has abolished it. The philosopical faculty of the University of Berlin has declared that "the preparatory education acquired in the “real schools” is, taken altogether, inferior to that guaranteed by the Gymnasia.” It seems probable that in the near future the scientific course will occupy a very subordinate position.
4. The modern classical course, which it is the object of this article to advocate, seems to avoid the mistakes of the other two courses. It makes a partial substitution of modern for ancient languages; at the same time, it gives Latin and Greek a place of importance because of their grammatical excellence and etymological relations to the English. It makes linguistic study the basis of education. While making ample provision for the training of the mind, it keeps in view the relations and needs of modern life.
The nature of this course will appear more fully from a specific statement of the changes proposed. For the degree of Bachelor of Arts, our Southern colleges require from four to six years in Latin, from four to five years in Greek, and usually two years in either French or German. This is the ancient classical course, which requires, in most cases, from ten to thirteen years of foreign linguistic study, occupying about one-half of the student's time. In the modern classical course, it is proposed to retain about the same amount of linguistic study, but with a different apportionment of time. According to the time now devoted to foreign languages, three or four years should be allowed to German, three or four years to French, three or four years to Latin, and not less than one year to Greek on account of its relation to our technical nomenclature. This change would not affect any of the other departments of the College, though it might be found expedient to make a year or two in language elective with natural science.
This is proposed as a course which shall run parallel with the ancient classical course, and lead to the same degree. In view of existing and irremediable dissatisfaction with the two courses now most in vogue, the modern classical course, as here set forth, seems suited to meet a popular want. It affords a fine, mental discipline; it gives a large acquaintance with English etymology; it imparts a thorough knowledge of general grammar ; it prepares the student for the numerous exigencies of business and travel ; it introduces him to the two richest modern literatures after his own; it prepares him to appreciate the masterpieces of antiquity when read in translations; and, what needs to be especially emphasized, it furnishes him with a good working knowledge of two foreign languages whose treasures of thought he can draw upon in the literary or professional labors of subsequent life.'
It is believed that these advantages, which for many students seem to surpass those of any other course, must commend the modern classical course, in fact if not in name, to every candid mind.
Outline in Primary Arithmerio
SUBTRACTION.—The subtraction table is best taught as the opposite of the addition table, considering that the figures added are the parts of the sum, and that taking away one part from the whole leaves the other part. Shown objectively thus :
1111 11,2 marks from 6 marks leave 4 marks.
9 and 7 are 16, then 9 from 16 leaves 7, and 7 from 16 leaves 9.
As in addition, we would also teach to subtract a single figure from any number of two figures, with a similar key, as 3 from 68 leaves 65, because 3 from 8 leaves 5; 3 from 21 leaves 18, because 3 from 11 leaves 8.
We would also use the same tests as in addition, pointing at numbers up to 18 to take any figure from ; dictating several subtractions to class to write remainders on slate; &c.
Besides, we would give mental practical questions and oral drills combininig + and —; as: 5—2+7+9–3–2+8–1–6+5=20; and as one way of getting many such oral drills, take the numbers in any oral drill in different orders; as, the above:
7+9-3+84-2-1+5–6–2+5=20; &c., &c.
.We teach subtraction fully after multiplication, because multiplication is immediately connected with addition, the carrying being the same as in addition and the only difference being the multiplication table. We, however, finish our remarks on subtraction first.
We explain the method of subtracting large numbers objectively by means of dollars, dimes, cents; as:
and then teach to subtract large numbers by a mechanical rule; also, as tests of subtraction table:
I 18 9 3 6 4 9 5 0
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 &c.,
19 3 6 2 5 4 40
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
&c., to subtract.
But when able to subtract accurately, return to the analysis of the work. We would also introduce the scholars to the terms, minuend, subtrahend and remainder, as we would introduce them to a person.
Here, as everywhere else, we notice the case of o's particularly, and notice the special difficulty of sometimes carrying and sometimes not carrying. We do not use the new method of subtraction because it leads to more mistakes.
Observe also the steps:
1. Subtracting when the top figures are all larger than the bottom.
2. Subtracting when some of the top figures are smaller than the bottom.
3. The case of a number of o's in top number.
Also give practical questions in small and large numbers in subtraction, and in addition and subtraction combined.
This is a good exercise, take any number as 98 4 6 5 7 3 2 0 98465732, annex a o, and subtract the number 98 4 6 5 7 3 2 ten times. The last remainder should be o.
The o in the minuend might be made any figure, as 8, and then the remainder would be 8.
Might also multiply any number by 40, &c., and require to subtract the number 40 times from the product-sometimes given as a task to scholars kept in.
* We teach subtraction thoroughly by the old method in a week.
Map Study. How would a man, free to choose his own method, study the geography of a township five miles square? Evidently by direct observation. He would trace out the boundaries, find the springs, follow the water-courses, the hills, and the valleys, locate the forests, villages, and isolated buildings, and take note of minerals, vegetation, and productions. This would be an original, first-hand study, and would furnish the fullest and freshest knowledge that he could in any way acquire. This is, in fact, the way in which all original geographical study is done, and all real knowledge of the surface of the earth obtained.
Suppose, again, that the man, for any reason, cannot study the township in this way, but is shut up to a colored map and a written description—what then? Evidently he will make the map and the description take the place of a personal survey, as far as possible. He will trace out, on the map, boundaries, water-courses, hills, and valleys, and locate forests and villages just as though he were studying nature. In his imagination, the pictured representations of things become real and substantial things. Not only so, his imagination will fill in a multitude of things that can be represented only imperfectly, or not all, on paper. To a certain extent, the written description must supplement the map; but he will not be content to take the description for more than necessary. In a large sense, the map will
* Pendleton's Arithmetic Cards give a large number of examples for drill in subtraction,
stand to him in the room of nature; the township itself will be ideally present to his mind. And this is just the way that a state or country should be represented in a geography studied in school. Perhaps for some teachers these general hints will be sufficient; but for others, it will be useful or necessary to go into detail.
The teacher should see to it that the pupil goes about his work in the right way; she must teach the pupil how to study a map. She will not allow the pupil to pick out the map questions one by one, and then turn to the map for answers to be memorized; in fact, the map questions in a well prepared geography are, for the most part, guides to intelligent map-study; and the teacher who is content to have her pupils proceed by the question-and-answer method does them a great wrong. She will rather put before them a map, say, of Ohio, and lead them to study it. She will say: “Children, we are going to study this map. It is a picture or representation of the surface of Ohio. We are going to see what we can find here. Trace out these boundaries; see the direction in which they run; notice the States that surround Ohio, and the order in which they come; the relation in which they stand to each other; see, too, the rivers that separate Ohio in part from other States, and from what States; observe any other body of water that may touch the State, and where. Now, children, turn your eyes away from the map, and think of Ohio as placed in the midst of these States and bodies of water. What is north of Ohio, what east, what south, and what west?” Having thus led the children to grasp the environment of Ohio, the teacher will next lead them within the bounderies of the State. The pupils should now be called upon to study the form of the State, and its size. Its size as compared with the surrounding States should be observed, not indeed in statistics of square miles, but as measured by the eye-relative map size. Breadth should be compared with length. She will, in a similar way, lead them to study the great water-shed (“ or divide ") that separates the waters flowing north to the Lake from those flowing south to the River, causing them to observe in what part of the State it is found, and in what direction it runs. Then she will lead them to study, in the same way, the water-sheds that run at right angles to this one, forming the basins of the streams that flow into the Ohio and into Lake Erie. This study of water-sheds will lead to two general conceptions : two planes sloping from the great “divide,” one north to the Lake and one south to the River; and each of these as cut by ridges running nearly at right angles with the “ divide.” The way now being open, the teacher proceeds with the study of the rivers.