Π Practicable Nature Study IS the purpose of this article to discuss briefly, in a constructive way, some of the criticisms which teachers have made in regard to nature study. 1. The need of more definite aims in nature study. It is one of the most persistent criticisms that the aims of nature study are so vague and indefinite and capable of such a variety of interpretations that one who complies with their letter at all may be said to be carrying out their spirit. The fact is that the aims have been definite but that their interpretations have frequently been vague. This amounts to the admission that the indictment has been just; but the more immediate aims have been much more definitely stated recently. * The aims of nature study as we know them today have been derived from two sources: namely, from the kindergarten and from the universities. These two influences coming into the elementary schools, which were then formal and "literary" in character, have produced such currents and counter-currents of theory, of interpretation, and of practice that many teachers despair of finding a clear course. Froebel wished all children to come into a state of loving companionship with nature in order that she might enrich and ennoble their lives and thus serve as a means of mental and moral culture. Next, from the universities came, directly and indirectly, the demand that children should share in the benefits, in the way of discipline and culture, to be derived from a systematic study of nature such as the sciences furnish. Through nature study the "perceptive faculties," as one scientist phrases it, are to be developed to the end that the citizen shall be enabled to think and to act intelligently in those situations, both personal and social, wherein he shall come into contact with the physical universe. In other words, according to an eminent botanist, nature study is to See "The Established Principles of Nature Study," by Maurice A. Bigelow, The Nature Study Review, vol. III., pp. 1 to 7, 1909. "keep functional" in the individual those "tentacles of inquiry" by means of which the human mind detects error and arrives at truth. But "the new education" demands that nature study, in conformity with other subjects, shall contribute to a more complete development of the individual for social service. Knowledge and skill are of worth in proportion as they enable us to make life satisfying in the higher sense not only to ourselves but to others. Outworn is the toast of the votary of pure science who shouted, "Here's to pure mathematics; may it never be of any use to anyone!" The emphasis is not less on the value of pure science, but more on the recent point of view that, properly conducted, the pursuit of useful knowledge brings culture, that "knowledge is power" only as it is secured through experiences which also yield technique. The active workers in nature study have been influenced by the present movement in education. They also acknowledge the need of a more precise statement of aims. Hence they find a common ground for agreement which will enable teachers much more surely than heretofore to engage children in educative activities. Thus in a more immediate sense it may be said that: It is the aim of nature study to furnish many valuable first hand experiences with the common nature materials, in order that, by means of direct contact, the children may become acquainted with those aspects of nature which are interesting because of their effect on or application in man's daily life. 2. The need of a more critical interpretation of the aims of nature study. But will activities, such as this aim implies, attain to those higher aims for which nature study has stood? Children in the cities can come into a love of nature such as Froebel meant in no other way. For Froebel's ideas were very generally misunderstood. Love of nature, or of any object of sense, is not born of imaginative experiences. They are an effect not a cause. It is suitable experiences with the external world which fructify the soul; and the fruit is love. Froebel wished children to live with nature intimately. He said: "Take your little children by the hand; go with them *Froebel's "Educational Laws for all Teachers," by James Hughes, Appleton & Co., 1897. into nature as into the house of God. Allow the wee one to stroke the good cow's forehead, and run about among the fowls, and play at the edge of the wood. Make companions for your boys and girls of the trees, and the banks, and the pasture land.' He urged strongly that all children should be trained to cultivate plants, partly in order to gratify their natural tendency to work in the earth, to use their interest in productive activity and in the nurture of living things, especially plants and pets. But he had higher reasons for making each child a little gardener both at home and at school. Careful culture in the preparation of the soil and its proper enrichment, coupled with due attention to watering, weeding, hoeing, and, if necessary, to pruning, produces plants of grander proportions, greater beauty, and richer fruitfulness. . . . It is impossible to overestimate the advantages of a training that, through the self-activity (activity) of a child reveals to it two vital truths-that it may aid all life-human life as well as plant life-to reach a higher condition of life, and that it may bring into existence new elements of living power, material power, intellectual power, or spiritual power to aid in unifying and uplifting the (That) life must remain comparatively barren. in which these ideals have not been implanted." race. But it is easier in teaching to acquire a new professional vocabulary than to discard old practices and take up new ones. Hence, the majority of teachers who accepted Froebel's ideas, being conservative, as teachers are, and being at that time accustomed to a formal and "literary" education, did not attempt to insure a love of nature through experiences which beget a love of nature. But they tried to employ for the purpose nature literature. The point is not at all that the study of the literature that interprets nature is not excellent for children; quite the reverse. Such study may lead to a love of nature literature and to a knowledge of literary forms; it may contribute to a better appreciation of those who have given us our classics; it may lead the pupils to strive to emulate them. Teachers may indeed use such literature as one sort of device for enticing children into experiences, or later to enrich these experiences. But the idea that the ennobling interpretations can be successfully used as a substitute for The same those experiences has proved to be a mistake. * is true of stories and anecdotes, of the use of books, and of games when used to serve the ends of nature study. Certain kinds of art expression are naturally adapted to aid nature study, not that they have the same aims, but that the activities of modeling, of cutting or tearing paper, of drawing, painting, or otherwise representing natural objects, necessitate on the part of the children informal, individual, and sustained observations. Love of nature of the true quality can come only from intimate contact with nature through the sensory avenues to the mind. 3. Training the perceptive powers. Many teachers are much dissatisfied with the results of their efforts to teach nature study by the observational methods which came into vogue with the advent of the so-called object-teaching. Usually some modification of the conversation lesson has been employed, the pupils having specimens to observe, the teacher plying the children with questions which they answered as soon as their observations could be made. Discouragement has usually come from such methods, not because the children were not interested, (for any teacher with knowledge and nimble wits can count on a kind of interest), but because they usually have not gained thereby power of initiative nor the taste for following up such studies by independent observations of their own; neither have their powers of observation seemed to grow any more keen than in children who have not had such instruction. Other teachers, in seeking new methods, have come to a better understanding of the essential difference between the "power of observation" in civilized man and in savages; they conclude that nature study is not to develop the special senses merely, but especially to be the opportunity for that interplay of the senses and the reasoning powers by which * On the other hand it is evident that no satisfactory understanding of nature literature for its own sake is gained by city children unless suitable illustrative experiences are supplied by the teacher; because most city children have had too little contact with nature to enable them to appreciate the literary interpretations otherwise. This is the case also in history and other academic studies. By means of these illustrative experiences is the "imagination utilized through its historic paths." man has trained his imagination. Organizing his experiences, seeking for cause and effect relations, arriving at opinions open to revision, endeavoring to reach the truth, civilized man has gradually developed an attitude of mind and a power of perception which, psychologists tells us, is the highest type of mental activity. This kind of activity is not characteristic of primitive peoples and of children. Their observations are keen, but, except where their instincts are concerned, they are not long sustained. They are constantly having experiences, but they are not given instinctively to organizing and adapting them to ends beyond their immediate needs. This has to be learned. We have abandoned the idea that it is the business of children merely to accumulate data. These sensory experiences, if they are to educate, must be made to apply to the solution of simple problems. No matter how many others are working on a problem, it is, for the individual pupil, his own, and it necessitates continuous effort commensurate with his years. That is, the pupil must learn to sustain thoughtful observations. A New Jersey teacher published an account of her method of conducting a study of the tadpole. The question was raised as to how much each pupil could learn about the tadpole as the children passed by the aquarium in single file. They then returned to their seats and immediately reported on their success. All this avoided the conversation method but it was merely quickening the sense of sight. It resulted in no sustained thought. A fourth grade teacher in another state also conducted a study of the tadpole, but she desired to avoid three things: (1) "military methods" in securing observations; (2) fusillading the children with questions to which immediate answers were to be returned; (3) formed language expression before the children had thought over the questions long enough to gain clear ideas. There were five things she wished to insure: (1) situations in which the children would be very likely to ask the questions she would otherwise have asked; (2) observations that would be repeated, informal, and independent; (3) opportunity for informal converstation with each pupil about the study; (4) sustained thought and suspended judgments concerning the observations, before |