Go to history; observe the educational activities about us, and wherever you find a great teacher you will find a scholar. She should have wide professional training. The history, the philosophy, the science, and the art of education should be at her command.

She should be a student of children. A little child should be sacred

to her. She should see it as a thought of God-his most sublime thought, yet expressed in flesh and blood. She should know how and love to live with children. The tenderest feelings of respect and love should exist between her and the children and pupil teachers.

She should know and love nature. She should see in it divinity. She should have the subtle ability to have the pupil teacher and the children see in it truth, beauty, and good, and to lead them to love and enjoy these graces. A soul grows to its ripest fruition when in the forum of truth, the gallery of beauty, and the temple of good.

She should be a lover of the best literature.

Literature is soul. It is

the life blood of the race spirit. It makes soul. It represents the history of humanity. She should be able to adapt it to the hungry, growing child. It should be an intellectual and moral feast. She should be able to present it hot and steaming. The best sentiments gotten from it should be manifest in the child's activities. To accomplish this is rare skill. A critic teacher must be able to do it.

The critic teacher should be a lover of art. Art is the effort of the human mind to preserve the record of the sentiments. The art sentiment should be strong in the training school. All must be interested in it. The superintendent, the pupil teacher, the children, and the critic teacher must all be interested. The critic teacher must be the moving

spirit in her room. An appreciation of art in nature, art in literature, art in poetry, art in pictures, art in painting, art in architecture, art in sculpture, should all be cultivated. The pupil teachers should be led to carry this art spirit with them into their schools. It should be seen in the schoolroom decorations, in the dress, in recitation, and everywhere.

One of the very essential characteristics of the critic teacher is the power to give severe criticism and have the pupil teacher receive it in the student spirit, to have her feel that it is a great privilege to have the opportunity to have the critic present. The life of the training school should be that the pupil teacher is sorry when she has finished her work. Great teaching power, gentleness, firmness, simplicity, sympathy, and the consciousness that in all she knows just what she is doing, are the ele ments that beget the proper spirit in the practice school.

The pupil teacher should have a thoro training in the common branches common-school subjects-together with good general training in the subjects of the secondary schools. She should have had sufficient observation in the model department of the training school or of model work to gain a fairly clear insight into good teaching and the proper

management of children. She should have had the opportunity of observing some work in the practice department, and of taking part in the critic conferences made up of those practice teachers whom she observes teaching and of the observers, and conducted by the critic teacher in whose room the work has been done. There should be a seminar in which the superintendent gives pedagogical meaning to the observation. work and to the theoretical professional work, as psychology and general pedagogy. A keen insight into the nature of children should also be acquired. The entire life in the normal school should be such as to put the pupil teacher in sympathy with the child life. With this preliminary preparation the pupil teacher is ready to enter upon her work in the practice department.

Here she enters into active teaching. She should, at least, teach one hour a day, five days in the week, for one full school year, together with an opportunity to have charge of an entire room for a sufficient length of time to prove her ability to manage a school. During this time conferences with critic teachers and seminars with the superintendent are held regularly.

The critic work has to do with the immediate work of the class from all standpoints- those of management, preparation, recitation, and the application of pedagogical principles. The work of the seminar will have to do with the discussions of all pedagogical questions arising in connection with the work in the training school. It is here where all the work of the institution is correlated and concentrated so as to be available for actual practice. It is here where general method finds a place. It deals. with the courses of work for the different grades — the development, correlation, concentration, and arrangement of the same.

Another feature of the seminar is that it is a center of stimulation for the study of the children. More real, helpful, systematic child-study grows out of this seminar than out of any other center of activity in the institution.

The children are a very important part in the organization of a training school. It should contain the kindergarten and all the grades below the high school. The kindergarten should be an integral part of it. It should not be something unique in itself. The work should be so gradually developed that there would be no break. In short, where the one ends and the other begins should not be capable of being discerned. All pupil teachers should be required to study this training school as an organic whole. They should be required to study the philosophy of it from the beginning to the end should by all means go out with the kindergarten spirit as the spirit that characterizes and permeates all true education.

The arrangement and organization of the children should be of interest. The organization of the child is the first consideration. Nothing should take the place of its interests.

The kindergarten children should be arranged in groups based upon their development. These groups preserve their identity thru the training school, but vary in individuals. The criterion of the group should, as a rule, be equality of development.

As these groups move into the primary department and onward, they will integrate into classes two classes constituting a room. The pupil teachers work with groups, classes, and with rooms of children. To be able to manage a room of two classes is the best criterion of the ability of a pupil teacher to manage a school. To be able to conduct a recitation well with one class while the other is preparing a lesson, and doing it well, is good evidence of success.

A school conducted on this plan brings out and develops the two kinds of attention active upon the part of those reciting, and passive upon the part of those preparing. It is under this sort of régime that the teacher develops a kind of omnipresent influence. Some have this to a marked degree. Their influence is everywhere without effort in the recitation, in the preparation, and on the grounds. Without an opportunity to develop this power there is no certainty in the product you send out.

In the organization of the training school, as in any other organiza tion, harmony is the binding element of success.

Superintendent, critics, pupil teachers, children, and all the institution should be in complete harmony. The center of life in the institution should be the training school. It should be the center from which emanates the professional life and toward which it gravitates.

To this end the professors in the normal department proper must be in sympathy with the spirit of the training school. They should have an opportunity to do work in it. This is the surest way of developing

the right spirit.

Another way to centralize the interest and efforts of the entire institution is to constitute the faculty of a seminar, in which the most vital questions pertaining to the training of the child, and the relation of this training to their respective departments, are discussed. This will lead each department to show the relation of its work to teaching, to the training school, and to the unification of the work of the normal school.

DISCUSSION

PRESIDENT T. B. Noss, California, Pa., approved the ideas of Dr. Snyder's paper, and thought no teacher was fit for his place in a normal school who could not prepare his pupils to go out and do correct work from the beginning.

PRINCIPAL W. E. WILSON, Providence, R. I., thought he had never seen a complete

practice school, but said the Oswego, N. Y., school came nearest to his idea. He thought there should be two separate schools, one a school for observation, the other a school for practice. These should be entirely separate. The pupil should first make observations under favorable circumstances, and take notes which should be afterward discussed. After this, practice under a qualified training teacher. The observation school should not be called a model school, but a school of good, tho varied, practice, so that the observer shall not be led to imitate any one individual.

DR. SNYDER said, in answer to a question, that his paper was designed to represent what schoolmen want. It was not so much his own thought as a setting forth of what he had gathered.

PROFESSOR J. N. WILKINSON, Emporia, Kan., questioned whether we could get over all the inherent difficulties of the situation. For instance, the teacher of a normal class may go into the practice school and criticise the amount of work done in his department, and the manner of doing it, from his own point of view, not making allowance for the difference of circumstances, nor of the other requirements of the school.

A. S. DOWNING, Albany, N. Y., said that it is the function of a normal school to prepare a pupil for successful teaching, but not every teacher is prepared for all teaching. He asked the question if it is not possible to give practice work of different grades to different pupils.

MISS LUCY E. MOTEN, M.D., Washington, D. C., said: "In our medical school the pupils have to use the scalpel and do the dissecting themselves." She thought the practice school should be like the dissecting room- pupils should first learn what is to be done in a theoretical and observational way, and then do the work for themselves.

A. R. TAYLOR, Emporia, Kan., said he could not certify to the success of graduates until his school came nearer to the ideal. He sometimes recommended a teacher for one position, and a little experience would show that a different place would be better for her. It is a difficult problem to fit teachers to their places.

Dr. F. J. Cheney, Cortland, N. Y., said that an experience of seven years in placing teachers had taught him that the point made by Mr. Downing could be met, and that graduates could be classified by the normal schools when they are sent out. He thought Dr. Snyder's paper one of very great value.

ALEXANDER M. RowE, Little Falls, Minn., said he could not make of all his pupils such teachers as he could recommend. He would reduce the teaching of the poorer teachers to a minimum and give the better teachers a maximum. In this way the poorer teachers will be discouraged and take up some other work.

DR. JOHN W. COOK, of Illinois, thought that often a pupil will make a failure at first and afterward become distinguished. He would reverse the order of minimum. He also believed in imitating, especially in the beginning of a teacher's work. He did not believe in laying down such hard and fast rules as some had advocated. He. said there was nothing that we should say we would never do.

DEPARTMENT OF MANUAL AND INDUSTRIAL

EDUCATION

SECRETARY'S MINUTES

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

Inasmuch as among the officers and leading members of the American Manual Training Teachers Association a desire has been gaining strength for a union of that organization with this department of the National Educational Association, arrangements were effected for holding the sessions of the two organizations in Washington on alternate days in the same room, and invitations to attend one another's exercises were exchanged. Following a well-established procedure, and as the result of the able and devoted labors of the officers of the visiting organization (Professor C. R. Richards, of New York, president; H. G. Bryant, of Newport, R. I., vice-president, and W. E. Roberts, of Cleveland, O., secretary and treasurer), assisted by Professor J. A. Chamberlain, director of manual training, Washington, D. C., a very valuable and quite extensive exhibit of pupils' work in manual training had been installed in the room in the Masonic Temple where the meetings were held.

FIRST SESSION.- MONDAY, JULY 11, 1898

The session of the department was called to order at 3 P. M. by President E. O. Sisson, of Peoria, Ill. Owing to some changes which made the session's program unexpectedly full, the president, refraining from reading the address which he had prepared, occupied time only for a few remarks, bearing upon the program and business of the meeting, in which he expressed especial gratification at the presence of the American Manual Training Teachers' Association, and recognized the valuable services rendered by it to the cause of manual training in the few years of its separate existence. The committee on nominations was appointed as follows:

Professor C. R. Richards, Teachers' College, New York, N. Y.

Professor Charles A. Bennett, Bradley Polytechnic Institute, Peoria, Ill.

Professor W. R. Lazenby, State University, Columbus, O.

The first paper was presented by President J. L. Snyder, Agricultural College, Mich., on the subject "Education for the Industrial Classes." It was discussed by Superintendent E. Mackey, of Reading, Pa.

66

Mrs. Ellen H. Richards, of the Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass., read a paper on Domestic Science as a Synthetic Study for Girls." Written discussion was presented by Miss Perla G. Bowman, professor of domestic arts, Ohio State University.

The subject "Manual Training in Horticulture" was treated in a paper by Professor William R. Lazenby, of the State University, Columbus, O., and discussed by Professor George T. Fairchild, Berea College, Ky.

The report of the committee which was appointed at the Milwaukee meeting, pursuant to a resolution by Professor George A. Robbins, providing for an inquiry into the causes which help or hinder the introduction of manual training into schools, was read by Professor Robbins, chairman, who has borne almost unaided the labor of the investigation, and to whom credit for so valuable a report is chiefly due. This report is presented for publication.in full.