done without conscious regard to sound fundamental principles; and, on the other hand, the detailed practical applications of fundamental principles are seldom indicated on a large scale by educational theorists.

Observations for illustration versus observations as sources of discussion. For purposes of economy, in covering the ground in a general course in the principles of method it is usually necessary to have the observations serve primarily as illustrations of principles of method which have been or are being studied systematically in the class. It is possible, however, to base a course on observations so that practically all the principles which it is desired to formulate can be derived from previous observations through discussions strictly guided by the instructor. In my own teaching of prospective teachers it has always seemed to me desirable to follow the more systematic introduction to the principles of method by means of syllabus, assigned readings, lectures, and discussions, with observations to provide illustrations. On the other hand, in classes consisting of experienced teachers who are preparing for supervision, it has seemed to me that the informal discussions based on observations are better. An essential point in this method is the systematic statement and organization of principles after they have been worked out in the discussions. This should include the gradual development of a syllabus of the main points by the teacher as the course progresses, and the independent preparation of a detailed syllabus by each member of the class. It usually happens that these syllabi contain nearly all the material that is found in the syllabus which is used in the systematic course, and, strange to say, the experienced teachers constituting the informal classes usually say that they would have preferred to have the course conducted in a formal, systematic way with the syllabus given to them at the beginning. In spite of this testimony I continue to believe that for experienced teachers who have had introductory

courses in education the informal discussions based on observations and leading to well-organized principles are superior. The great objections to such courses are that they get nowhere in particular, leave matters in the air generally, and waste time in attempting to "discover " principles. These objections are avoided, however, by (1) definite direction and control by the instructor, (2) the progressive organization of syllabi, and (3) considerable assigned reading at points where it applies. Printed scheme saves time but must be used intelligently. In connection with the formal introductory course in the principles of method I have found it useful to print a list of points or questions to be used as a partial basis for reports upon lessons observed. This outline, which is printed below, may also be used in connection with observations and discussions with practice teachers. In order that the observation of the individual pupils constituting a practice group may be definitely provided for and organized, a list of questions for this purpose was prepared by Professor F. N. Freeman and is also printed below. The outlines may be used in a variety of ways and modified to suit local conditions. It is essential that the instructor make clear to students just how he expects the observations to be made and in just what way the outline for observation is to be used. As a routine device it saves time and energy, but it cannot take the place of intelligent adaptation and direction by the instructor.

In the case of observations in high school, prospective teachers are usually most interested in observing lessons in the special subjects which they are planning to teach. This often necessitates organizing observations by individuals or small groups instead of by the whole class. In the case of nearly all the old-established subjects, however, it is well for the prospective teacher to remember that in most high-school positions he may be called upon to teach any one of several subjects; hence he may observe to advantage along a number of lines.

SUGGESTIONS FOR ORGANIZING OBSERVATION OF TEACHING

The following outlines are printed in order to provide teachers and students with a definite starting point for the observation of children and of teaching.

OBSERVATION OF PUPILS

I. Physical differences. — 1. Age of pupil for his grade. 2. Size of pupil for his age. 3. Degree of physical maturity (change of voice, etc.) in comparison with others in class. 4. Weight, color of skin, manner (active or languid, etc.), as indications of nutrition and health. 5. Pronounced growth of abnormalities, as asymmetry of head, protruding teeth excessively large or small head, etc. 6. Posture sitting and standing and character of movements as indicating degree of neuromuscular control. 7. Sensory normality - visual and auditory. Evidence of nearsightedness or eyestrain from farsightedness or astigmatism. Evidence of inability to hear well—inattentiveness, slowness of response, or strain of attention. 8. Evidence of undue fatigue, nervousness, chorea, stuttering, or stammering.

II. Mental differences. 1. Mental quickness. 2. Accuracy. 3. Sustained or flighty attention. 4. Degree of interest and enthusiasm. 5. Degree of initiative. 6. Unusual deficiency or ability in judgment and reasoning. 7. Mental energy.

III. Social and moral characteristics. 1. Fairness and disposition to coöperate. 2. Aggressiveness or meekness. 3. Boldness or shyness. 4. Self-confidence or self-depreciation. 5. Temper. 6. Degree of thoroughness, carefulness, persistence shown in work. 7. Obedience. 8. Honesty and truthfulness.

OBSERVATION OF TEACHING

The following outline is based on the topics discussed in the preceding chapters. In answering the questions, students should not write simply yes or no, but should describe the situation in the light of the question under consideration. In some cases single questions may serve as the basis for prolonged discussion in the class. In writing a report based

on certain paragraphs in the outline it is well to write to the general point of each paragraph and in such a way as to cover the detailed questions, but not to give a separate answer for each question or item in the paragraph. Such a report should contain concrete evidence for each point.

I. The physical situation. Note the following aspects of the room: 1. Lighting. 2. Ventilation. 3. Temperature. 4. Seating. 5. Equipment and apparatus. 6. Cleanliness. 7. Decoration.

II. The routine factors in management. Note the following from the standpoint of economy of time and energy: 1. Getting started. 2. Taking attendance and tardiness. 3. Handling materials, including use of monitors. 4. Necessity and means of discipline. III. What the teacher was trying to accomplish, that is, the aim. 1. What was it? 2. Was it appropriate or worth while? 3. Was it definite? clearly obvious to an observer? 4. Were the pupils clearly aware of it? 5. Was the lesson controlled by it? 6. Was it definitely achieved?

I.

IV. The subject matter. What was it? 2. What was its social or applied value? 3. Did it center around a few definite large topics or principles or was it "scattering"? 4. Was there a clear appreciation by the teacher of the relative value of the various parts? 5. Was the subject as a whole organized logically in terms of itself, or psychologically in terms of the learner?

V. The type of learning involved in the lesson. The following paragraphs (A to F) relate to special types of learning, any one of which may be predominant in a lesson that has been observed. That is, the lesson may have been organized primarily to develop motor skill, or to build up associations of ideas, or to solve problems, etc. For each type of learning special questions of method need to be considered, some of which are suggested in paragraphs A to F. A. Motor learning. — If the process was primarily one of acquiring motor skill or motor control (for example, writing, manual training, gymnastics, vocal music, pronunciation of a foreign language): 1. Did the pupils have a clear idea of what they were to attempt? 2. Did the teacher depend on imitation or descriptive directions to give the idea? 3. Did he emphasize a special method or way of doing the thing? 4. Did he concentrate the pupils' attention on the

form of the movement or on the objective results produced? 5. Did he give separate drill on the elementary movements or provide only for drill upon complex movements? 6. Did he tend to make the pupils self-critical or to have them depend upon him for criticism?

B. Association of ideas. — If it was primarily a process of building up associations or connections between ideas or between ideas and symbols (for example, beginning reading, learning arithmetical combinations, vocabulary of foreign language, facts in history and geography): 1. Were the connections established in the form in which they would be used by the children; that is, were " things put together as they should go together"? 2. Were meanings connected with new symbols or simply one symbol with another? 3. Were ideas organized in a flexible way, so they could be recalled freely, or were inflexible systems built up? 4. Did the teacher suggest any wrong connections, thus initiating wrong habits. 5. Was he careful to make sure the pupils were not establishing incorrect associations? 6. Was there any endeavor to establish cross connections between different subjects (correlation)?

C. Drill. If the teaching was primarily a process of fixing either motor or ideational connections that had already been started (for example, flash work in multiplication and in learning vocabularies, acquiring speed in writing): 1. Was the drill premature; that is, was it started before sufficient care had been taken to assure correct connections? 2. Did the students enter into it with zeal and concentration? 3. Was it concentrated upon the connections to be fixed or was time wasted on accessories? 4. Was it continued too long?

D. Reasoning. If the process was primarily one of problemsolving or reasoning (for example, in mathematics, science, thought work in history and literature): 1. Did the pupils really solve the problems or did they reproduce some other person's solution? 2. Did the teacher succeed in assisting pupils to do their own reasoning instead of doing it for them? 3. Were they stimulated (a) to make a careful and thorough analysis of the whole situation? (b) to examine critically each suggestion or element, to determine its bearing on the question? (c) to keep the main problem clearly in mind and to check irrelevant thoughts and wanderings? (d) to arrange, compare, and organize their ideas? (e) to express tentative