THE COURSE IN HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY. 11. In the article by Miss Stephens on "A Plea for Interest,"' I am pleased to note that she agrees with some of my statements concerning the report of the National Committee on the "Reorganization of Science in Secondary Schools." Miss Stephens, however, appears to have gained the impression that I am opposed to the introduction of useful and interesting material and that I consider it "lacking in educative value." I did not wish to give this impression. I thoroughly approve of making subjects both interesting
' J . Chem. Ed., 2, 141 (1925).
VOL.2, NO. 3
T ~ E Comse
IN
HIGHSCHOOL CHEMIS~Y
189
and useful, and believe that such information has a decided educational value, but this effort to make courses interesting and utilitarian has been carried to extremes. As a result other phases, which are of more real consequence in life after school days are over, are being saaificed. I cannot agree with Miss Stephens that "education is the establishment of worthwhile interests," particularlv when applied to primary and secondary education. This may be well enough for those who will have no special responsibilities to assume after leaving school. Most young men and women, however, after completing their secondary education, find i t impossible to follow the lines of least resistance, though this is done altogether too frequently a t present, and mainly because the school and home have failed to develop the ability to do otherwise. The primary object of precollege education should be to develop moral character, stability, good judgment, responsibility, respect for authority, stick-to-itiveness, endurance, self control, the ability to force one's self to do the things he does not want to do, etc., rather than to cram their heads full of interesting and possibly useful information. These are developed qualities rather than inherited qualities and are saaificed when courses are so changed that they become primarily interesting and instructive and demand the least possible effort on the part of the pupils. I agree with Miss Stephens that interest in literature is frequently injured rather than improved by the schools and that this is due largely to the uninteresting way in which the subject is taught. This, however, does not indicate a "failure in education" but a failure in the teaching of English. The primary object of English courses is to arouse an interest in the proper kinds of literature and it applies to every boy and girl; but a similar statement cannot be made about most of the other high school subjects as, for instance, chemistry, algebra, geometry, Latin, etc. I do not agree with the statement that "Unless our teaching of chemistry leaves the student with a desire to explore further than we are able to take him in an elementary course, it, too, is a failure." A course in chemistry, properly taught, should, in most instances, arouse an active interest in the subject, but this is by no means its principal objective. Is a course in Latin afailure if it does not create a desire to read more books in Latin after leaving school? Miss Stephens questions my statement that a course in chemistry assists in the development of the qualities above listed. She remarks that "The statement needs proof." From my own experience in teaching, both high school and college chemistry, I am convinced that it should accomplish these things. The most convincing proof for me is, however, the fact that freshmen entering our colleges and universities at present are woefully more inferior in respect to these qualities than they were before the introduction of the present day ideas of professional educators concerning the methods of teaching and the subject matter of courses.
190
JOURNAL OB CHEMICAL EDUCATION
M ~ n c n 1925 ,
The changes in chemistry alone are, of course, not entirely responsible, but they come in for their share. The colleges and universities are largely responsible for this condition. Their entrance requirements have been so weakened that many high school graduates are entering college who are not prepared to do the work. When subjects like domestic science, manual training, household chemistry, music, drawing, etc., are no longer accepted as entrance requirements, and there is a return to the old requirements of physics, Latin and more real mathematics, the question of freshman failures will be solved and high schools will again turn out real students. I believe the time is not far distant when a return to former conditions will be instigated. NOTE:I t may be of interest to the readers to learn that I have heard from many of the most prominent chemistry teachers and authors in the country in response to my SOfax they have all expressed their artide in the October nnmher of THISJOURNAL. most enthusiastic support of the stand there taken. The question involved is one of the most vital ones confronting those interested in education. As with all questions. there are two sides, and I believe free discussion should be invited through the medium oP. CAEMICAL EDUCATION. of the JOURNAL
