learners, especially as related to the subject under consideration; for an example, how can the pupil best attain the end aimed at through the study of language, considering the nature of language and his mental state regarding it? Psychology or Logic. Here we come upon the old question: Shall psychology or logic determine the method of teaching a subject? Shall the nature of the subject or the nature of the child be the dominant influence? Shall the method of nature study, for example, be for the development of the child's powers of observation, discovery, and reasoning, or shall it be for verifying the classifications of science? I once heard a schoolman say, while we were watching a class of children studying beetles, " To begin the study of the beetle at the wrong end is a pedagogical crime.' I should say that to try to make the child see the beetle in any other than the natural way of seeing is a pedagogical crime. The order of procedure is determined by his mental state and his opportunities for observation and not by the shape of the bug. This principle applies in all teaching, whatever the topic. The child must learn as he can. Any attempt to force or to change the processes of his mental action results in waste or disaster. Must vary with Age. Naturally, methods must vary as children advance in age and in mental power. "Nature study" progresses toward science, "number work" toward arithmetic, and "language study" toward grammar and rhetoric. The casual observation becomes orderly, the unconsidered expression becomes definite, but solely because the child's mental state is different. In most cases, though not in all, the methods here considered will be those applicable to the beginning of a particular study. With this understanding of " method," we will proceed to its application to the subject of reading. METHODS OF TEACHING READING There are many methods of teaching reading to beginners, all of which, however, fall into a few classes determined by the unit of study, whether the letter, the sound, or the sentence. - The Alphabetical Method. The alphabetical or spelling method was in universal use until comparatively recent times. This is hardly worthy of being classed as a method. It is merely the unconsidered way in which reading was taught before scientific method had received serious thought. Its unit was the letter as named, and as combined on the printed page with other letters into words. The oral significance of letters was scarcely even thought of. As the first step in learning to read, the children "learned their letters" by name and appearance. Next they learned simple combinations as a-b ab, b-a ba, always arbitrarily and without conscious recognition of the sonant value of the letters. It is probable that there was, at least in some cases, a subconscious recognition of sound values, especially of vowels; but if such recognition existed, it never advanced into consciousness. The child never became aware of a synthesis of sounds in bat differing at all from the names be-a-te. Yet though the process was necessarily slow and painful, children learned to read by it, relying on memory and sight. Its great defect was not its awkwardness and slowness, but what is still the great defect of all its direct and collateral descendants, namely, that reading in its earlier stages was not reading at all, but merely calling syllables and words. - Two Classes of Methods. With the development of educational science in the latter half of the nineteenth century, reading naturally received early attention. The faults of the old way were manifest to even shallow observers. Hence many teachers set about devising new methods. These efforts fall into one or other of the two classes into which all modern methods of teaching reading fall the one logical, the other psychological. The former takes as its unit the sound of the letter; the other, the whole word or sentence as expressing an idea or a thought. There are several so-called methods for which their authors claim great merit, in both these classes. Some indeed claim the merits of both classes. It is necessary, therefore, to bear in mind the fundamental determining difference, which is the door of approach, whether the sounds of the letters or the ideas or thoughts represented by the symbols. Phonic Methods. The various phonic methods, by whatever special name they are called, are the direct development of the original alphabetical method. The sound of the letter has taken the place of the name, and the synthesis of the sounds that make the spoken word has become conscious and purposeful. The aim is simple, to secure the recognition, in the graphic symbol, of the word already familiar as spoken. The method is logical rather than psychological. That is, it follows the orderly development of the word considered as a mechanical structure, and not the laws of growth of the mind of the child or his natural way of learning. The earliest of these methods to gain general recognition was called correctly "the synthetic method." It was more radical than any of its successors. The first step was the recognition of the sounds of the letters. To secure this, much drill was given upon single letters. Then these were combined by sounds into pronounceable groups, which were sometimes words, sometimes recognizable syllables, and sometimes mere meaningless aggregations, usually representing " families," as the at family, the op family, and the like. The children were drilled. upon such lists as, at bat cat dat lat In order to make possible the study of all the sounds of the letters, an intricate system of diacritical marking was employed, creating practically a new alphabet, in which every sonant element of English words was supposed to be represented by a character. Later these phonic groups, or " phonograms," were used in the building of words, after which children began to read. This was a carefully thought out and logical system. Within certain very manifest limits it produced notable results. Undeniably children acquired extraordinary facility in using the marked letters to build the family the combination of sounds- unhampered by any consideration of purpose. They worked for synthesized sounds, and they got them. Moreover, the facility acquired was of real service in the detection of new words as they occurred in the reading lesson. For a time the apparent progress of the children was truly astonishing. The defects of the system, however, were no less notable. One of them has already been mentioned as the greatest defect of the alphabetical method, namely, that “reading" was, at first, not reading at all, but merely calling words, the meaningless repetition of synthesized sounds; and all the evil characteristics of the old methods were present, the hard voice, the uniform modulation, the pause between words, the unvarying stress upon all words important and unimportant. Then, when introduced to words without diacritical marks, the children were somewhat like cripples whose crutches had been taken away. It took time and effort to reduce the alphabet to the conventional twenty-six letters. So, even in the matter of time, the apparent saving at the beginning was often lost in the later delays incident to really learning to read. Moreover, the desirable influence upon all the later reading of the first impression that reading is getting thought was, of course, forever lost. Phonics and Spelling. Perhaps the most peculiar effect of this phonic method was that upon spelling. It seemed practically impossible for children accustomed to the luxury of a complete phonetic alphabet ever to adjust themselves to the peculiarities of English orthography. The truly "phonetized" children continued to spell, years after, in a manner that would have rejoiced the heart of the laird of Skibo. The purely synthetic method, though heralded as the great emancipator from the bondage of the primer, did not long survive, but it left a healthy family of de |