The library or the laboratory method of teaching history and literature has been generally adopted. This method has some difficulties that need to be overcome or the method will fail and consequently be abandoned. I believe that the method must be a failure in many schools. Dr. MacDonald has written a letter to the “Nation,” October 7, about the inadequate equipment for teaching history and literature in universities and colleges. In teaching science, suitable apparatus must be made for every four pupils. In teaching history and literature in a high school, reference books ought to be provided every four pupils in the same subject. The difficulty in teaching history in the high school is greater than in teaching science, as pupils pursuing different subjects, as ancient history, medieval history and modern history, often need the same reference books. If pupils are required to read four hundred pages, more or less, in some history other than the school text, a pupil may average about fifty pages a month. But not more than ten per cent. of the number can get the books required for this reading.
I think the whole system is wrong. No definite number of pages should be required. Instead of this plan, topics should be assigned to be gotten up and written in note-books. Suppose the topic should be, “Trace the course of the Visigoths from Adrianople till they blend with the Spanish people”; or, “Give a narrative account of Napoleon’s Russian campaign, accompanied with suitable maps.” The preparation of these topics may require the reading of two hundred or more pages. Each pupil, during the year, should prepare not less than four such topics. This work for all our pupils will fill twenty-five thousand pages of note-book work. This is too much reading and correcting for our teachers. Therefore, the teachers ought not to undertake to read and correct the note-books. They ought, however, to inspect them. Each topic should he headed with a summary, and with a statement of authorities used. I think that an oral narration of the written work should be made by some pupil or by more than one pupil, and a criticism or discussion by members of the class should be made.
I shall be glad to have the views of others on this important subject. I have confined what I have written to teaching history. The teaching of literature will require a different plan.
R. H. Parham.
Librarian, High School, Little Rock, Ark.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Editor’s Note.—This is the first of several articles upon maps and atlases by Prof. Smith.
[2] Editor’s Note.—Dr. Haynes will contribute similar articles to forthcoming numbers of the magazine.
[3] James Alton James, Chairman, Henry K. Bourne, Eugene C. Brooks, Wilbur F. Gordy, Mabel Hill, Julius Sachs, Henry W. Thurston, J. H. Van Sickle
[4] Editor’s Note.—These and many other helpful suggestions have been privately printed by Professor Riley in a syllabus entitled “Methods of Teaching History in Public Schools,” University, Miss., price 25 cents.