There are, in general, three methods of conducting recitations: the questioning method, the topical method, and the discussion. The first, skilfully employed in connection with the other two, is valuable, but exclusively used, it is harmful. Poor teachers, as a rule, employ this method too exclusively. It requires little information on the part of either teacher or pupil, for the teacher usually has one eye on the book and asks leading questions in such a way as to suggest the answer. But with the skilful teacher, questioning is an art, and one not easily acquired. Just how to question so as to reveal the pupil's previous knowledge, at the same time kindling curiosity and arousing the intellect into a wakeful condition creating a desire to know more; just how to lead the pupil from point to point in a line of thinking, giving him all needed assistance without relieving him of the necessity of putting forth earnest effort; just how to question so as to most securely link the leading facts of today's lesson with those of yesterday; just how to lead the pupil to say as much as possible to the point, while the teacher says as little as possible, is a question which requires for its answer much careful study of both pupil and lesson.

The following recitations reported by Agent Martin, of Massachusetts, as having been heard by him in a city high school of that state, illustrate the misuse of the questioning method. A lesson about a Greek philosopher, teacher with book in hand questions as follows:

“Who was an eminent philosopher, and taught mathematics and astronomy?"

One Pupil.

Teacher."No, Anaragoras! Who was Diogenes? Can any one tell?"

Several Pupils.-"He lived in a tub.”

Teacher.

66

Yes; he was a famous cynic. Who was called the laughing philosopher? Can any one tell?"

No answer.

Teacher." Democritus; because he treated the follies and vices of mankind with ridicule. He taught that the physical universe consists of atoms, and that nature, space, and motion are eternal."

In another high school, the following recitation on the reign of Charles I.—

Teacher."This is known in history as the

Answer." Long Parliament."

Teacher."The king ungratefully gave his consent to his
Answer."Execution."

I believe these recitations fairly illustrate a large part of the work done by those who have not made a study of teaching.

The topical method is especially well adapted to develop readiness in thinking, self-reliance, and self-possession. The pupil is placed face to face with his subject, and he succeeds according to his knowledge of the subject, his self-command, and his readiness in speech. He is trained in correctness and facility of speech, and, in a degree, he is practiced in extemporaneous speaking. He is also obliged to take a somewhat larger view of the subject.

The discussion is profitably used, in the higher grades, in connection with the two other methods. It tends to give increased life and interest to recitations upon certain subjects, and, if properly conducted, it teaches pupils to yield to the force of reason. Which of these methods should be made most prominent in a particular recitation, largely depends upon the character of the lesson, and the maturity of the pupils. While the topical method supplemented by the other two is best suited to a recitation in history, the questioning method is chiefly employed, though wrongly, I think, in teaching the ancient classics. While neither the topical method nor the discussion can be used to any considerable extent in the primary grade, the three should be combined in the higher grades.

The number of devices and expedients that may be employed in the application of these three general methods is almost infinite, and many are equally good. In so far as they conform to pedagogical principles, they are proper, and in so far as they are effective, they are valuable. To pronounce this particular method or device in teaching the best is the merest folly. What to one seems absurd, to another appears reasonable and valuable. Is the method based upon right principles? Is it, in a degree, original? Is it the way in which the teacher's best thoughts, deepest interest, and most glowing enthusiasm go? With it, does he accomplish his best results? If so, then it is his best method, however it may appear to others.

But any method is empty and futile, dead, unless filled and vital

ized, and made effective by an unquenchable interest and enthusiasm on the part of the teacher; an enthusiasm that shows itself, not in noisy, highly demonstrative, and egotistic bluster, attracting attention from the lesson to the teacher, or causing unhealthful excitement, but a deep and intense interest that forgets self, centres in the subject and the pupil, and rivets attention on the lesson, an interest, not of the head to the head alone, but also of the heart to the heart, and through it reaching and moving the will. Without this genuine, consecrated interest, the teacher is only sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal; with it and through it, he becomes a fashioner of intellectual and moral character.

THE TEACHING OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.1

NE

TEW generations need new methods. Especially is this true in the study of English Literature. My early impressions of the study will never fade. A small biographical history of literature served for a textbook and an interrogation mark for a teacher. The lesson was so many hard dry facts, dates, names, and titles, all to be piled up in the memory like bricks. Even the day of the month of the author's birth and death, no matter how unimportant his work might be, must be carefully memorized. The titles of all the works each writer had composed, with the dates of publication, must be religiously committed to memory. Great emphasis was laid upon such good mouth-filling names as Areopagitica, Novum Organum, or The Leviathan. That these words might mean anything or contain ideas which we could understand never once dawned upon us. Why one man was called a better writer than another we made no attempt to find out. We memorized the opinion of our textbook with painstaking accuracy, and that always satisfied the question mark.

1 Copyright, 1888, by Eastern Educational Bureau.

The best rank was awarded to the most complete rehearsal of the facts of an author's life, the perfect enumeration of his writings, and the repetition, word for word, of the summary at the end.

No suggestion was made that these were readable books and of possible interest to us. Neither was it made clear to us that the papers and magazines we enjoyed so much at home were a part of the very literature we were studying at school. It has taken time to remove from my mind the impression received in those early days that a man must be dead in order to make his writings a part of literature.

Knowledge comes, and the methods of study in this department have been greatly improved. The true teacher of literature should work for thoughts and not for facts. In our best schools this work is done, and well done, but there are still many where too much of the old method lingers. The true teacher should study the minds of his pupils, the peculiar tastes and tendencies of each. He must try to awaken one out of dullness, and to steady the erratic brilliance of another. In no department can this mental development be carried on with greater success than in that of literature.

The student should study the works of the authors themselves. Every high school girl and boy can not only read Chaucer but enjoy his writings. Most of them will find him a delightful writer and well worth the slight trouble of mastering his charming method of spelling and his rhythm. The sturdy boy will at once claim fellowship with the pilgrims as they journey toward Canterbury. He will tell you that Chaucer is a jolly fellow with a level head, and that he likes him first-rate. If you question him, he will give you his reasons for this opinion in honest English. The power of thought gained from reading the old masters can scarcely be estimated. No amount of memorizing textbook opinions will give the training obtained from reading and forming an opinion for one's self. A pupil that is required to tell what he thinks and why he thinks so, learns to rely upon his own brain rather than the textbook for his ideas. Then as the types of character, the styles of expression and the subjects presented are ever varying the teacher may rapidly master the tendency of mind in each pupil. The dreamy girl "dotes" on Edmund Spenser. The practical boy "has no use" for Spenser but likes the way Bacon puts things because he stops when he gets through. In such

expressed preferences, the bias of the pupil's mind can be easily read. And the teacher can make suggestions for outside reading accordingly, so that other powers of the mind will be developed ; a taste for the romantic cultivated in the boy and an appreciation of the practical every-day side of life awakened in the dreamloving girl.

In studying an author through his works, emphasis must be laid upon two points. The work chosen-if the class have time for but one-should be one that well represents the peculiar characteristics of the writer and one that is complete in itself. It is always desirable to study more than one selection from each author. In many instances it is necessary to study some of the shorter productions of the author and then parts of longer ones. This is true of writers like Edmund Spenser, John Milton, and Robert Browning, with whom the style of the shorter poems differs so greatly from that of their so-called masterpieces. The purpose of the author cannot be well understood unless the student has the whole composition in mind. And unless the writer's aim is understood the student is liable to misjudge the work produced.

When one complete selection from an author has been studied for its purpose, the relation of each part to the end in view, the author's methods of accomplishing his purpose and his style of expression, then the student is not likely to be unjust to that author in selections from writings too long for class study as a whole.

The most important factor in producing the desired mental development is the teacher's power to ask questions.

It is assumed that no person will be entrusted with the teaching of literature who is not at home in the subject, who does not possess a mind imbued with the spirit of the masters whom he has to teach. In no way can he awaken the enthusiasm of his class if he attempts to teach what he does not know himself. The art of questioning is of great moment and cannot be gained in a day. To draw out each pupil's thought of the poem or essay under examination and of the man who wrote it, will require in the teacher an extensive knowledge of the laws of the human mind as well as of the author. It will also demand a thorough comprehension of the meaning of the questions asked. The teacher cannot study too carefully the exact content of "why," "when," "where," and "how." The dull pupil must be encouraged to express what thought he has and incited to further thinking by