schools in which the sexes are separate, and in boarding schools of the same sort, it is possible that more definite instruction can profitably be given. Whether this is true in any particular case will depend upon local conditions, which do not admit of generalization. In small schools for pupils of but one sex, where the relations between teachers and children are sound and wholesome, unquestionably some instruction of a healthful nature, on even the most intimate subjects, may be given. In larger schools the difficulty is greatly increased. It is almost safe to say it increases in geometrical ratio to the number of students, because of the moral influence of the transference of thought due to the presence of numbers, containing always some abnormally self-conscious as to sex, some morbid, and some vicious. Unfitness of Teachers. The great danger from any general introduction of this important topic into common schools, however, is in the teachers themselves. That does not mean that teachers are not moral. I believe that they are so beyond the members of most other professions. Not only are they conventionally moral, but they have high ideals and exalted standards of right and wrong, and are extremely conscientious. They undertake all imposed tasks, and would undertake this one, with the keenest sense of responsibility and the utmost desire to do good and not harm. But how many of them are qualified? We must take conditions as they are and not as we might desire them to be. A very large majority of the teachers of this country are very young women of little experience, and very meager knowledge outside the narrow field of the common school course of study. Many of them have slight pedagogical skill and no pedagogical training. Many of them, probably a majority, are themselves very ignorant of those things that a eugenist would have them teach. Many of them are still adolescent and sexually self-conscious. Attempts on their part to give instruction on these matters, even in the simplest and broadest way, if they have in mind the relation of their instruction to the sex question, would greatly embarrass them. -- Grave Dangers. It is to be feared that any general course of study in sex hygiene, to be administered ́through the usual channels and taught by the ordinary teachers of our common schools, instead of doing good would greatly magnify the evils aimed at, instead of decreasing them. Without imparting much protective knowledge, it would do that very dangerous thing, make young people prematurely conscious of sex. The instruction to be given, needful as it is, should be given only by those thoroughly familiar with the subject, and also wise, strong, and mature enough to impress young people without exciting them, or arousing undue curiosity. Such instructors, unhappily, in any system of schools, public or private, are very few. Regretfully, I have been convinced that for the present at least the necessary instruction beyond the very broadest facts of life reproduction must be given through some other agency than the common school. One thing, however, might be done and should be done, in normal schools and in all schools and colleges for the training of teachers, there should be very full and careful instruction in the subject of sex hygiene, sex relationship, and all that has to do with the reproduction of life, by thoroughly qualified specialists, to the members of the sexes separately, so that the students going out to teach may have knowledge enough to guide them in whatever efforts they may find it possible to make toward leading their pupils to a wise and wholesome sex life. This is entirely possible, and would be the opening wedge. If we could in this way get each year a large body of well-equipped teachers qualified for this special phase of the work, possibly some of the other difficulties might be disposed of, because the one great difficulty in the way of the early introduction of sex hygiene into common schools is the lack of fitness of the teachers to do the work. School Physicians. - At the present day many school systems, especially in the larger cities, employ physicians to visit the schools, chiefly to discover the presence of contagious and infectious diseases. It is possible that in the high schools at least, and perhaps in the grammar schools, these physicians might add to their usefulness by talking to the boys and girls separately now and then upon certain solitary vices, and that such talks, in addition to checking these vices, might have a tendency to create wholesome thinking and feeling on the part of the boys and girls. What I have here outlined seems to me the limit of possibility within the near future in regard to teaching the facts and principles of sex hygiene. If the time ever comes when the fundamental crucial facts of the reproduction of life can be taught to the young in such a way as to do more good than harm, it will be indeed a happy time. But I fear it will not arrive before the millennial days. CHAPTER XXI WRITING WRITING is the most purely mechanical of all the arts taught in school. It has no æsthetic value worth considering and no intellectual value. Its sole function is to enable one to record his thoughts so that others may read them with the least effort. Because of its limited value in education, the time in learning to make this record should be reduced to the minimum. Children learn to write by writing, and most of the writing necessary for learning to write can be obtained in connection with the other school subjects. A little time spent upon the form and quality of the penmanship in ordinary written exercises in arithmetic, language, and other topics will obviate the necessity of devoting very much time to barren writing lessons. Too much "Fuss." There is altogether too much "fuss" made over learning to write. There are but two essentials of good writing, legibility and speed. Beauty of form is of so little consequence to the ordinary person as to be negligible in education. Unquestionably that method of writing is the best that enables a child to learn to write legibly and rapidly, with the least possible expenditure of time and effort. It is doubtful if there is any such single method. There was much to be said in favor of vertical writing, now fallen into general disfavor. Children certainly learned to use it with little effort and to write legibly. Second grade children could write their short sentences in vertical script, so that any one could read them easily, something that was unknown before its introduction. Whether the same good results will follow the general return to a modified slant remains to be seen. The question of speed was never settled to the satisfaction of all, particularly of those who had writing books to sell. Many rapid writers use the vertical form, many use some other. It would seem to be chiefly a matter of the personal equation. Without doubt the chief criticism came from bankers and other men of the bookkeeper class, and was sheer prejudice in favor of the accustomed appearance of their account books. But be that as it may, any system that requires a great amount of time and attention to learn must justify its expenditure by better arguments than the "looks" of a ledger. Writing is necessarily copying. In teaching it, there is no possibility of induction, and but little of development, the only approach to it being the analysis of the letters into their constituent lines, and this analysis can be greatly overdone. Analysis of Letters. Writing should begin with the copying of whole words, the same words that the child is learning to read. For a considerable time there should be no attempt at analysis, except the unconscious analysis made by the child himself. Later, as difficulties manifest themselves, they should be met by some simple analysis and by drill on the troublesome forms. These will vary with the children. Hence the futility of any early general analysis of letters for whole classes. |