from that it formerly asked and changes in school practices must be made to correspond. The successful manufacturer is one who changes and readjusts his machinery from time to time in order to produce what the people want, and from this practice the school may well learn. Of course every analogy breaks down if carried far enough and this one fails in the fact that the manufactured product is formed and shaped from without, whereas the school product is formed and shaped from within. And yet one cannot but wonder after such statement whether the pressure for a change in the school product does not come from our too frequent practice of applying educational subjects externally, furnishing raiment when food stuff is needed.

In any event, nature study needs to adjust itself to the newer educational demands. And since these demands are for more ability on the part of the children to do, then nature study should aim to combine physical and mental activity in education. Practically, then, the teacher should first carefully select from the nature study course for her grade those subjects offering such possible treatment. Perhaps some wholly informational subject that has been in use in the past will give way to one of greater demand on the student; or perhaps the method of attack will be changed to permit more doing on the part of the children. Just here the teacher will need to be on the alert to avoid the other extreme-the possibility of physical activity accompanied by only a trace of mental effort. The teacher should be neither merely a dispenser of information nor a shop foreman. Both are invaluable in their places, but not in our public schools. There is probably no only way to obtain the combination desired, but one way that has given satisfactory results is to get the children interested in some problem in the solution of which they must work with material. For example, the children in a lower grade might become interested in making their schoolroom more attractive by providing and maintaining a window box in it. From the teacher's point of view the children are then to have an opportunity to plan for and provide the best window box they can, stock it, and maintain it to the best of their ability. The teacher, of course, would supervise the work as seemed nec

essary to the success of the undertaking, but would solve their problem for them no more than were it a problem in arithmetic. If some of the older children chose to beautify the school grounds the teacher would play the same role as before. Or again, suppose in one of the higher grades the children decide to have a small electric light in their cloak room or on a Christmas tree. Just as before the problem of planning and providing is theirs and the teacher supervises the mental and physical effort. Or once more, suppose they decide to study the behavior of plants as winter approaches. By going out among the plants several times. during the autumn they find that some lose only their leaves, others die above ground, and still others die completely. But it might be said that the same information could have been obtained from a book in a few minutes and it must be granted as true, but was the bit of information the thing uppermost in the teacher's mind when the children undertook the investigation? Let it be clearly understood in what is said here that no adverse criticism is meant for those subjects that are necessarily mainly informational, but it is urged that nature study is chiefly concerned with the struggle in getting the information. Instead of opposing informational subjects treated through the medium of books the position of nature study is that of helping such informational subjects by furnishing opportunities for wholesome experiences with things, which experiences in turn are essential to a worthy interpretation of the printed page. Thus nature study becomes complementary to, and a forerunner of, book interpretation.

No one would tolerate the thought of providing a book of solutions and answers for the children's problems in arithmetic. Nature study asks for like treatment-a treatment which will insure the children an opportunity to solve their problems, through the medium of experience with things. Such procedure in nature study will mean, of course, that the number of subjects treated in a given time will be greatly diminished. Whether the children desire the experience because they want to know something or whether because they want to make something to use, the teacher never loses sight of the fact that to her the children's effort is from the

standpoint of first hand experiences with things in the solution of their problems.

Unfortunately most children in large cities do not have the opportunities for initiative with material that usually come to other children in their daily routine and this makes the teacher's problem even more difficult. Compare in educational value two possible procedures, one of which is planned and executed by the children with the teacher as their guardian and in the other of which the children do the mechanical operation as before but in doing so follow, step by step, minute dictation by the teacher. The latter procedure is the one to be guarded against in nature study teaching.

Granting that the teacher has a course of study psychologically well organized from the above standpoint, we come to the most vital and difficult problem, namely, how can the teacher insure the situation that will adjust the children's experience and material to each other in such a way that the children's initiative forges to the front, instead of having the experiences follow uninteresting dictation by the teacher. This is the nature study problem in large cities.

Department of Science
Chicago Normal School

JOHN WILKES Shepherd

W

The City Forester and His Work

HILE the municipal control of street trees is a new thing for Chicago, the benefits derived from streets properly planted with trees have been recognized

for years.

In 1904 a Chicago Tree Planting Society was organized to promote the planting and care of trees in Chicago. It published and distributed a circular letter setting forth the reasons why trees should be planted. Finally the Chicago Woman's Club put forth determined efforts to establish the office of City Forester.

In January, 1909, the Civics Committee of the Chicago Woman's Club called a public meeting at Fullerton Hall, at which there was appointed the Chicago Tree Committee, made up of thirty citizens representing many prominent clubs and societies, with Franklin McVeagh, now Secretary of the Treasury, as chairman. This body proposed to Mayor Busse the adoption of an ordinance concerning trees and shrubbery in the streets of the city.

The proposition was approved by the mayor, and on his recommendation the City Council unanimously adopted, on March 12, an ordinance as originally drafted by the Tree Committee, with minor amendments. It was agreed by the mayor and citizens interested that the work ought to be placed in charge of the Special Park Commission, which had already extended its work for small parks and playgrounds over the whole city, besides possessing the necessary experience and interest in the subject. The ordinance accordingly gives control of trees in the streets to the Special Park Commission, and authorizes it to appoint a City Forester, who is to direct, assist and advise persons wishing to plant trees, and to have general charge of the care of trees in the streets.

The condition of the city's finances was such that the only appropriation which could be made in this year's budget was for the salary of a Forester, and sundry expenses,

such as printing, so that the work for the present must be confined to the supervision and direction of private effort, the protection of existing trees and the collection of information regarding the number, location, and condition of trees existing in the city

The Commission believes that this new branch of its work can be made very valuable in improving the appearance and increasing the attractiveness of the residence districts. To that end it asks the co-operation of all publicspirited citizens.

The Commission will furnish expert advice at any time to citizens planning the planting of street trees, or shrubbery, and will be glad to receive information enabling it to prevent threatened violations of the ordinance, whether the violation relates to the carrying on of building operations without properly guarding the street tree, or the continued existence of gas leaks where trees are liable to be affected. If a neighborhood or street improvement association desires advice on a plan for street planting, the City Forester will be pleased to consult with those having the matter in charge, or if practicable, address any meeting of property

owners.

The principal provisions of this ordinance are as follows: It shall be the duty of owners of lots within whose lots trees are growing to keep them trimmed so that they shall not interfere with the passage of light from the street lamps, and that dead or living limbs shall not overhang the street or sidewalk so as to interfere with the proper use of the same.

Before planting trees in the parkways of the city streets a written parmit must be obtained from the City Forester.

Trees must not be planted nearer together than twenty-five feet in any case.

No one shall, without a permit from the City Forester, remove or cut down any tree, or in any way injure trees in the parkway, nor hitch horses to them, nor allow horses to stand near enough to bite them, nor fasten any rope, wire, sign, poster, or handbills to them, nor interfere with any guard put up to protect the trees.

Gas companies, upon notice, must repair any leak in their gas pipes that may endanger the trees in the parkways.

No stone, cement, or other material shall be permitted in the