secondary teachers is that of practice. The persons now most active in this discussion are those engaged in elementary training, not the principals of high schools or university authorities. It seems natural to think that if the practice school is a good thing in preparing elementary teachers, it would be an equally good thing in fitting secondary teachers for their work. Yet the matter needs some consideration on its own merits, and may need much experimentation before it is satisfactorily settled.

So far we have had little successful demonstration that a secondary practice school in the university is either practicable or desirable. No one would assume for a moment that a subject of such importance can be disposed of by a mere appeal to experience, positive or negative. Because a thing has been so or so adjusted in experience, long or short, home or foreign, we have no warrant for closing the debate, for the essence of progress often consists in innovation. Yet an appeal to experience is the natural introduction to a discussion of prínciple. In Germany the most weight has been laid upon the development of productive departmental scholarship, as a preparation for teaching in secondary schools. Only the man who knows his subject well enough to continue its development is, in Germany, theoretically fit to teach it in a gymnasium. This condition being met, the German candidate may turn his mind to other things. In the first place, there are two state examinations to be taken subsequent to his university study in which the history and principles of education are included. The secondary schools, being state institutions, and their teachers being state officials, the next step is to assign the young candidate to some gymnasium or school of similar rank for a year of trial or cadet teaching without salary under the supervision of the director of the institution. When the authorities are satisfied that the candidate can teach well, and when there is a place to which he can be assigned, his permanent appointment as a teacher follows. There are but few practice schools connected with German universities, and what there are busy themselves entirely with practice in elementary grades. This practice is of use to the supervisor of elementary instruction, but the question is an open one as to how useful it is to the real secondary teacher.

In the United States the practice of Germany is followed to a limited extent, as at Harvard and Brown with graduate students, while some are cherishing the hope which, in some cases amounts to expectation, of establishing secondary practice schools modeled after those of the normal schools. It would be premature to declare that the inherent difficulties lying in the situation cannot be overcome in this manner. Of one thing, however, we may be assured, that the means provided for giving the candidate his first practice in teaching, will in the end be those that conform most closely to the public interests concerned. Preconceived ideas, analogy with other institutions, practices of other countries, will all have to be measured by this standard. While we await the solution of the problem, as it will ultimately be worked out, it is perhaps allowable to consider the subject as it presents itself from theoretical and practical standpoints.

What shall we say, first of all, to the assumption that one may learn to do one thing well by doing another? Or, perhaps, that teaching is teaching, the same thing in the high as in the primary school, and that if you get good prac tice in the grades it will serve you equally well in the high school? This assumption must be seen to have decided limitations, because of the great differences between the two stages of school life. Young children are most effectively managed by an affectionate exercise of authority; highschool students, on the other hand, are most tractable when managed in accordance with the usages of good society. Authority there may be, nay, must be in the high school, but it is veiled by the social covering of politeness. To treat students as children is to be weak where one should be strong, for however childish some of their actions may seem, we may be assured that the feelings of American youth are those natural to the adolescent. The younger and more numerous in the class the children are, the greater the need of pedagogical technique; the older they become, the less need there is for it. It easily happens that the teacher trained in the methods of the primary school, but transferred to a high school, fails to arouse the best efforts of the students because he fails to apprehend the maturity of their capacity and feelings. The contact of mind with subject-matter is much more intimate and immediate in the high school than it can be in the grades. The intermediation of elementary devices for stimulating and guiding thought are far less necessary and desirable. The method of thought inherent in the development of the subject-matter itself becomes increasingly important as the student grows older, until in the university we often find impatience in any mediation between a subject of study and the mind of the student. The school man is rather inclined to condemn all teaching as unpedagogical that does not use the means of mediation with which he is familiar and which may be highly successful where he is wont to try them. But such condemnation may be wholly unjusti fied, as in the case of many famous teachers of language, history, and science. He is the best teacher who best succeeds in arousing the minds and hearts of his students to genuine educative activity, and while there is a wholesome methodology for the high-school teacher, I seriously question whether it is closely related to the technique so commonly employed in training elementary teachers. For the foregoing reasons I do not think that in principle we should train secondary teachers in elementary practice schools.

By this I do not mean that an elementary experiment school may not be of great educational worth in a university; but the function of such a school is not the training of secondary teachers.

Are practice schools of true high-school rank desirable and obtainable in connection with colleges and universities? Their educational desirability is dependent upon their educational (and it may be financial) cost. Advantages there would doubtless be in such practice schools, but it may be easily conceived that we find the community would have to pay too high a price for them.

In all our older communities the high-school teacher is a specialist hoth

because he wants to be one and because the school authorities demand that he shall be. A successful practice school of secondary grade should therefore be a large one to afford the desirable practice in many branches of study and kinds of schools. A teacher of languages would not be greatly inspired or guided by the teaching of a science, nor would the future specialist in history be much helped by teaching a class in mathematics. When we remember that universities must graduate large numbers of prospective teachers each year, every one of whom has specialized in one or two departments, we can easily see that such a practice school as contemplated would cost a formidable sum of money. But in America we need not be deterred by cost, if what we want is what the people want, or the cause of education imperatively demands.

Under favorable circumstances the people will stand and even pay for a practice school of elementary grade, but experience makes it questionable whether the public is willing to furnish students and money for one of secondary grade. An indication of the public aversion to such an arrangement is the potent fact that a private high school, like the Horace Mann School of Teachers College, for instance, would soon lose a large share of its patronage were it to introduce practice teaching in any considerable quantity. What the private public will not listen to, the public as such will probably in the end reject as an unjustifiable burden upon a few. And what no public will submit to, university boards of education are not likely to be willing to pay for, since it must be evident that in public opinion the advantages of such training would be too dearly bought.

The outcome of the foregoing argument may be summed up in the following propositions:

It is not worth while to establish elementary practice schools for the training of secondary teachers.

2.

Practice schools of secondary grade, tho having some advantages both for the individual and the community, would be but meagerly supported both as to quality and number of students and the money necessary to conduct them.

I conclude, therefore, that for the present we must be satisfied with good professional instruction in educational history and principles, supported by a fundamental study of the psychological and social sciences; and with such practical instruction as may be gleaned from high-school visitation or gained by occasional cadetship in public high schools. Tho this may not be all that is desirable in the professional preparation of teachers, it is a great deal more than we have ever had.

VI

PAUL H. HANUS, PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION, HARVARD UNIVERSITY What ought a high-school teacher to be, and what training should he have? He1 should be a man of good personal qualities; and he should possess sound For the sake of brevity the masculine pronoun only is used. The entire paper applies to women as well as men.

general scholarship, together with superior attainments in some one field of human learning including the useful arts or the fine arts; he should be an efficient class-room teacher and manager of pupils; he should have a professional outlook or horizon; he should ultimately become a leader in his profession, and a useful and helpful influence in the community where his lot is cast.

PERSONAL QUALITIES

1. Some persons ought never to be teachers. Hence, it is our duty as guardians of the teaching profession to keep such persons out of that profession if we can, whatever their training may be; as well as to encourage and even, on occasion, to persuade others to enter it.

To say nothing of such disqualifying and almost unmentionable characteristics as habitual untidiness in person and dress, and chronic bad taste, it is clear that one who has an inborn incapacity for good sense or fine feeling; persistent bad manners; an irritable or gloomy or despondent disposition; a stolid or sluggish mind, incapable of intellectual enthusiasms and a healthy, discriminating optimism; a narrow view of men and affairs-that one who is a mere bookworm or a pedant; or an intellectual or moral prig, incapable of winning or holding the respect or regard of his colleagues or his pupils, an egotist, or a self-seeker-it is clear, I say, that one who is unmistakably burdened with one or more of these disqualifying characteristics ought to be kept out of the teaching profession.

On the other hand, it would be absurd to set up requirements impossible of realization. What we want, first of all, in candidates for the teaching profession are the qualities that mark the gentleman and the lady; then we want physical vigor, moral health and strength, and intellectual attainments and power. In other words, we want good personal qualities, good health, and good general and technical education. If, in addition, we occasionally secure the "born teacher," we shall be as happy as members of other professions are when the occasional rara avis appears. In what follows, good personal qualities in the prospective secondary-school teacher are assumed. My task is to set forth in some detail what the preliminary training of such a person should be to insure a good degree of efficiency at the outset of his career as a teacher, progressive skill in teaching, and a broadening and deepening interest in and insight into his profession-such a training as we may reasonably expect will promote increasing professional usefulness, in the broadest sense of that term, as time goes on.

SCHOLARSHIP

2. The first element of the teacher's professional equipment is adequate scholarship-scholarship that is at once broad and deep. This general proposition is, of course, a commonplace. But the sort of scholarship here meant is of such fundamental and far-reaching importance and is so often wanting in high-school teachers, that one need not hesitate to discuss it in some detail. The secondary-school teacher's scholarship must be broad in order that his

intellectual sympathies may be broad; in order that he may have an appreciative insight into the resources that he and his colleagues have at their command for the appropriate education of every pupil committed to their charge; and his scholarship must be deep enough in some one field in order to enable him to reveal the sense of mastery, the intellectual enthusiasm and power to bring about results, that kindle the same intellectual emotion and the same consciousness of growing power over difficulties in his pupil. The secondary-school teacher, more than any other, must impart richness and breadth to his subject, no matter what it is. His pupil is old enough to appreciate the best he can give him; and unless checked or disappointed, he is usually keen enough to demand, or at least desire unceasingly an extension of the meaning, implication, and application of the results of his own study-of the significance. of all he learns. And this demand or desire only the well-equipped teacher can meet.

Not all pupils, it is true, manifest this eagerness to learn, and some are easily satisfied when they do. But a goodly proportion of the pupils have it and in most of them it can be aroused. Once started, it tends to grow. Whether it does grow or not depends on the teacher. Beauties in literature or art not perceived by the pupil, or meanings unsuspected by him; the unsolved mysteries of science as well as its known wonders and established laws, and its farreaching applications; the fascination of mathematical truth, reasoning, and investigation in elementary as well as in advanced mathematics, together with the never-ending practical applications of mathematics, in science and in the industrial and constructive arts; the constant bearing of history on the development of right conceptions of American public service; the processes and products of manual training, always interesting in themselves but capable of an interpretative significance that insures economic enlightenment and interest to enable the pupil to realize these and other illuminating, steadying, and inspiring influences is the privilege and the duty of the high-school teacher. And this duty cannot be adequately discharged by one who does not himself possess in full measure the resources of the subject he teaches.

To make this discussion specific, let us inquire now what ought to be the essential minimum of academic training which a high-school teacher should possess.

That our future high-school teacher should secure a good high-school and college education goes without saying; he must secure an equipment in scholarship at least four years in advance of his most advanced pupils. To this general proposition, I take it, every one will agree. But it will be necessary to examine this proposition more in detail.

Every well-educated person should have, first of all, a good high-school education, such as is represented in substance by preparation for admission to a good American college (provided the college allows a considerable range of choice in the studies that may be offered for admission). If all the best American colleges were ready, as they should be, to accept for admission any