3.

practical farmer, the science teacher, and the agricultural graduate.

The term practical farmer is here used in a somewhat arbitrary manner to sedignate any teacher claiming farm experience as special preparation or qualification for agriculture. In the 1911 report 197, or 21%, belonged in this class. Some of these teachers of other subject; not a few are principles and superintendents who had been reared on the farm and frequently were farm owners, who had become convinced of the value of agriculture as a school subject, and who taught the subject themselves in anticipation of the time when they might secure an adequately trained teacher. While it cannot be denied that many did splendid

was

work, there can,nevertheless, be no question but that farm
experience alone will not suffice. It is well known that the
development of the agricultural colleges greatly checked by
the mistaken policy of employing farmers to teach agriculture.
Practical farm experience will not give a knowledge of the
science of agriculture, nor will it prepare for teaching.
The ideal of the high school is not that of the trade school.
We are aiming at something higher than mere skill in farm
operations. With the apprenticeship method the man who
was skilled in the practice alone might make a good teacher,
but more is needed for high school instruction.

In the

The science teacher is even less qualified. first place, ignorance in the subject matter on the part of the teacher is always fatal. Agriculture has a subject matter

по

of its own and mere knowledge of the basal sciences will take

teacher no great advance could be expected for agriculture.
Statistics show that science is loosing ground, is doing

so, not because the teachers are not grounded in their subject
matter. In general, the science teacher has the pure science
ideal, he loves to much the shiny brass instruments and
demostration of principles are often given the most important
place. But agriculture is an applied science; the emphasis
must be placed on the application and the method shaped to
fit the aim. To teach agriculture as ,e.g., physics is
commonly taught today would soon put it were science seems
to be today, among the fads of yesterday.

There remains the agricultural graduates. Here the complaint is not that the teacher does not know the subject matter, and yet he has often been a dismal failure as a

teacher. As Bricker puts it:

"Experience has shown that he invariably has had his troubles.
These arise from three distinct sources. 1, he does not know
children. Association for a period of four or more years with
adults has given him the point of view in education in which
only mature minds, bodies, experiences, and lives have entered.
*** 2, He knows little of teaching methods. He knows agricul-
ture but not the child. *** Knowledge of the science of
teaching, as well as the ability to apply it in practice is
quite essential in securing efficiency in education as a
knowledge of the subject taught. *** He should acquire some
knowledge from professors, and practice this by imitation;
but unfortunately, the lack of training and ability in teaching
does not always exclude learned men from the teaching staff
of our colleges. 3, He does not know what to omit and what
to include in teaching the subject to pupils of the public
schools. He gathered a fund of agricultural knowledge with
the view of using it on the farm, and not for instructional
purposes. His knowledge has not been educationalized'. He
does not know the philosophy, or the science, or the art of
education; never having been taught either by percept or
example, why shall he be expected to practice successfully,
or understand the teaching business? If he has been trained

a farmer, a farmer he should be." (1)

1, Bricker. Agrl education for teachers. p.118-9.

V. The Demand for Teachers.

The extent to which agricultural collèges will engage in the work of training teachers of agriculture will to a large extent depend upon the demand.

They are obligated to both the state and the individual student. It would be a difficult matter to decide which duty is paramount. In the last analysis this question in futile, for usually there will be no students to prepare unless there is an effective demand for men with such a preparation.

In

the preparation of teachers of agriculture it not so much a question of postulating the qualifications which the ideal teacher should have in order to make this the sole basis for a teacher's training course, as it is to train the best teacher for the existing conditions regardless any variance from the ideal. To illustrate, the fact that rural school teachers are, as a class, untrained is not due to a lack of knowledge of the qualifications a rural teacher should possess, nor is it due to an unwillingness on the part of the agencies for the training of teachers, but entirely to the fact that there is no demand for such teachers, hence no students to take the training course. The courses given by county training schools are far from the ideal, but they meet present conditions and supply a demand, hence are more effective than the ideal course, which will probable be the eventual source of rural school teachers.

In many of the discussions of the training of teachers