26.Rmd

# 26. The Scientific Movement and the Curriculum

**Outline**

-   During the past two centuries a great growth has taken place in the natural sciences. For a long time this development affected practical life very little, but during the nineteenth century the application of science to industrial problems has resulted in a host of inventions.
-   Because of the importance of the sciences to life, Spencer and others have urged the inclusion of them in the curricula of schools and colleges. While the content of the sciences has furnished the chief argument for this, many scientists have urged their value as formal discipline.
-   Instruction in the sciences has gradually been included in the higher, secondary, and elementary institutions of Germany, France, England, and the United States.
-   This marked scientific movement is allied with the psychological tendency in its improvement of method, and with the sociological in its emphasis upon human welfare.

**The Development of the Natural Sciences in Modern Times.** - We have already (chapter XV) witnessed the growth of the natural sciences and the beginning of their introduction into the curriculum toward the close of the seventeenth century. This tendency was also greatly stimulated by Rousseau, who, we have seen (pp. 218-222), may be held to advocate the scientific, as well as achievements the sociological and psychological movements. And during the past two centuries this development has become most rapid and extensive. The desire for scientific investigation steadily grew throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries until its ideals, methods, and results became patent in every department of human knowledge. The strongholds of ignorance, superstition, and prejudice were rapidly stormed and taken through new discoveries or new marshallings of facts already discovered. But evident as this movement has been, it is scarcely possible here even to mention the more important scientific achievements, or to outline the broad sweep of progress in astronomy, geology, biology, physiology, chemistry, physics, and other sciences within a century. The Newtonian theory has been confirmed by the investigations of Lagrange and Laplace and by the discovery of Neptune by mathematical reasoning from the effects of its gravitation. Hutton's 'Plutonic' theory of continents and Agassiz's hypothesis of a universal ice-age have been formulated; the doctrine of evolution of Darwin (Fig. 51) and Mendel's law of inheritance have been established; Liebig and others have thrown light upon the process of digestion and the functioning of the lungs and liver; atoms, molecules, and ions have been defined; Joule and Mayer have demonstrated the conservation of energy; and the periodic law of chemical elements has been discovered by Newlands.

**The Growth of Inventions and Discoveries in the Nineteenth Century.** - It should be noted, however, that the majority of these investigations were for a long time carried on outside the universities, and, owing to the almost proverbial conservatism of educational institutions, the natural sciences scarcely entered the course of study anywhere. In fact, these great discoveries at first seem not to have affected practical life in any direction. Huxley tells us that in the eighteenth century "weaving and spinning were carried on with the old appliances; nobody could travel faster by sea or by land than at any previous time in the world's history, and King George could send a message from London to York no faster than King John might have done." But a little later, as he adds, "that growth of knowledge beyond imaginable utilitarian ends, which is the condition precedent of its practical utility, began to produce some effect upon practical life." The nineteenth century will, on this account, always be known for its development of inventions and the arts, as well as of pure science. During this period science rapidly grew and took the form of applications to the problems of labor, production, transportation, communication, hygiene, and sanitation. The reaper, the sewing machine, the printing press, and the typewriter greatly reduced the cost of labor; the steamboat, locomotive, electric railway, telegraph, and telephone linked all parts of the world together; anthracite, friction matches, petroleum, and electric lighting and heating greatly enlarged the comforts of life; and stethoscopes, anaesthetics, antiseptics, and antitoxines added wonderfully to the span of human life.

**Herbert Spencer and *What Knowledge is of Most Worth.*** - Because of these practical results, the vital importance of a knowledge of natural phenomena to human welfare and social progress was more and more felt throughout the century. It gradually became evident that the natural sciences were demanded by modern life and constituted elements of the greatest value in modern culture and education. Many English and American writers began to maintain that an exclusive study of the classics did not provide a suitable preparation for life, and that the sciences should be included in the curriculum. This step was bitterly opposed by conservative institutions and educators. During a greater part of the century a contest was waged between the advocates of the classical monopoly and the progressives, who urged that the sciences should be introduced.

A representative argument for sciences in the course of study is that made by Herbert Spencer (Fig. 52) in his essay on *What Knowledge Is of Most Worth.* He ventured to raise the whole question of the purpose of education. He held that "to prepare us for complete living is the function which education has to discharge; and the only rational mode of judging of any educational course is, to judge in what degree it discharges such function. Our first step must obviously be to classify, in the order of their importance, the leading kinds of activity which constitute human life. They may be arranged into: 1. Those activities which directly minister to self-preservation; 2. Those activities which, by securing the necessaries of life, indirectly minister to selfpreservation; 3. Those activities which have for their end the rearing and discipline of offspring; 4. Those activities which are involved in the maintenance of proper social and political relations; 5. Those miscellaneous activities which make up the leisure part of life, devoted to the gratification of the tastes and feelings. The ideal of education is complete preparation in all these divisions. But failing this ideal, the aim should be to maintain a due proportion between the degrees of preparation in each, greatest where the value is greatest, less where the value is less, least where the value is least."

Applying this test, Spencer finds that a knowledge of the sciences is always most useful in life, and therefore of most worth. He considers each one of the five groups of activities and demonstrates the need of the knowledge of some science or sciences to guide it rightly. An acquaintance with physiology is necessary to the maintenance of health, and so for self-preservation. Any form of industry or other means of indirect self-preservation will require some understanding of mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, and sociology. To care for the physical, intellectual, and moral training of their children, parents should know the general principles of physiology, psychology, and ethics. A man is best fitted for citizenship through a knowledge of the science of history in its political, economic, and social aspects. And even the aesthetic or leisure side of life depends upon physiology, mechanics, and psychology as a basis for art, music, educational and poetry. Hence Spencer advocates a complete change from the type of training that had dominated education since the Renaissance and calls for a release from the traditional bondage to the classics. Instead of Greek and Latin for 'culture' and 'discipline,' and an order of society where the few are educated for a life of elegant leisure, he recommends the sciences and a new scheme of life where every one shall enjoy all advantages in the order of their relative value. But Spencer uses the term 'science' rather loosely, and seeks to denote the social, political, and moral sciences, as well as the physical and biological, as being 'of most worth.' Hence he does not deserve to be severely arraigned for his 'utilitarianism,' as he has been so frequently. His 'preparation for complete living' includes more than 'how to live in the material sense only,' and with him education should contain such material as will elevate conduct and make life pleasanter, nobler, and more effective.

**Advocacy of the Sciences by Huxley and Others.** - Another great popularizer of the scientific elements in education, who also stressed the value of the sciences for 'complete living' and social progress, was Thomas H. Huxley (Fig. 53). His use of English was vigorous and epigrammatic, and he showed great skill in bringing his conclusions into such simple language that the most unscientific persons could understand them. Especially in an address on *A Liberal Education* before a 'workingmen's college,' he has most forcefully depicted the value of the sciences and other modern subjects in training for concrete living, and ridiculed the ineffectiveness of the current classical education. He maintains that "the life, the fortune, and the happiness of every one of us depend upon our knowing something of the phenomena of the universe and the laws of Nature. And yet this is what people tell to their sons:'At the cost of from one to two thousand pounds of our hard-earned money, we devote twelve of the most precious years of your life to school. There you shall not learn one single thing of all those you will most want to know directly you leave school and enter upon the practical business of life.'" Instead of this, "the middle class school substitutes what is usually comprised under the compendious title of the 'classics' - that is to say, the languages, the literature, and the history of the ancient Greeks and Romans, and the geography of so much of the world as was known to these two great nations of antiquity." Thus "the British father denies his children all the knowledge they might turn to account in life, not merely for the achievement of vulgar success, but for guidance in the great crises of human existence."

Many other vigorous lecturers and writers entered into this reform of the curriculum. Opposition to the over-emphasis of languages, especially the classics, in the content of education was undertaken even earlier in the century by the distinguished phrenologist, George Combe. In his 'secular' schools and in his work on *Education,* he emphasized instruction in the sciences relating to moral, religious, social, and political life, as well as those bearing upon man's physical and mental constitution. After the middle of the century a number of men undertook to popularize the sciences in America by tongue and pen. One of the most effective of these was Edward L. Youmans, who collected and edited a set of lectures urging the claims of the various sciences under the title of *Culture Demanded by Modern Life* (1867). He also founded the *International Science Series* (1871) and the *Popular Science Monthly* (1872). A service for the sciences, bearing more directly upon the educational world, was that performed by Charles W. Eliot (Fig. 54), President of Harvard. This he accomplished largely by an extension of the elective system and an emphasis upon science in the curriculum of school and college. In his description of 'a liberal education,' he argues that "the arts built upon chemistry, physics, botany, zoology, and geology are chief factors in the civilization of our time, and are growing in material and moral influence at a marvelous rate. They are not simply mechanical or material forces; they are also moral forces of great intensity."

**The Disciplinary Argument for the Sciences.** - Thus, in general, the writers and lecturers interested in the scientific movement held that a knowledge of nature was indispensable for human welfare and that the content of studies rather than the method was of importance in education. Many of them also expressed their dissent from the disciplinary conception of education urged by the classicists. Huxley, for example, parodies the usual Huxley paro- linguistic drill by stating: "I could get up an osteological primer so arid, so pedantic in its terminology, so altogether distasteful to the youthful mind, as to beat the recent famous production of the head-master out of the field in all these excellences. Next, I could exercise my boys upon easy fossils, and bring out all their powers of memory and all their ingenuity in the application of my osteogrammatical rules to the interpretation, or construing, of those fragments."

Yet the tradition of 'formal discipline' and the belief in faculties or general powers of the mind that might be trained by certain favored studies and afterward applied in any direction (see pp. 182f.) were too firmly rooted to be entirely upset. Even the greatest of the scientists seem to have been influenced by this notion and to have attempted occasionally a defense of their subjects on the basis of superiority in this direction. After Spencer has made his effective argument for the sciences on the ground that their 'content' is so much more valuable for the activities of life, he shifts his whole point of view, and attempts to anticipate the classicists by occupying their own ground. He admits that "besides its use for guidance in conduct, the acquisition of each order of facts has also its use as mental exercise." As evidence of this, he undertakes to show that science, like language, trains the memory, and, in addition, exercises the understanding; that it is superior to language in cultivating judgment; that, by fostering independence, perseverance, and sincerity, it furnishes a moral discipline. A similar argument is made by Combe, when he maintains that "it is not so much the mere knowledge of the details of Chemistry, of Natural Philosophy, or of any other science that I value, as the strengthening of the intellect, which follows from these studies." So Youmans declares that "by far the most priceless of all things is mental power. Science made the basis of culture will accomplish this result." In fact, nearly every apologist for the natural sciences at some time or other has advocated these subjects from the standpoint of formal discipline, although the implied attitude toward the transfer of a generalized ideal is often in harmony with modern psychology (seep. 184).

**Fig. 51-54**

**Introduction of the Sciences into Educational Institutions; Germany.** - Contemporaneously with the growth of inventions and the cogent arguments and vigorous campaigns of advanced thinkers during the nineteenth century, training in the sciences was gradually creeping into educational practice. While the sciences began to work their way into institutions of all grades early in the eighteenth century, it was not until about the middle of the nineteenth that the movement was seriously felt in education. Even in Germany the first attempts at studying nature were made outside the universities in the 'academies of science.' We have seen (pp. 177 f.) that during the eighteenth century most of the Protestant universities had started professorships in the sciences. But it was not until the beginning of the second quarter of the nineteenth century that, in Liebig's laboratory at the University of Giessen, students first began to be taught through experiments, and it was after the middle of the century before this investigation work had generally replaced the formal science instruction in German universities. Since then the development of science in the higher education of Germany has been phenomenal. The *Technische Hochschulen* (see p. 380) have also come to furnish instruction in all fields of applied science.

In German secondary instruction the realistic instruction of the pietists was brought by Hecker (see p. 176) to Berlin, where he started his famous *Realschule* in 1747, and before the beginning of the nineteenth century similar institutions had spread throughout Prussia. Early in the nineteenth century the course of study in the gymnasiums of Prussia was considerably modified, and, as part of the compromise, some science was introduced. The movement later spread into the secondary education of states in South Germany, and, while the total amount of science was not large, it managed to hold its place in the gymnasial curriculum even during the reaction to absolutism between 1815 and 1848. But, as we have seen (p. 378), two types of real-schools were eventually recognized, - *Realgymnasium* and *Oberrealschule,* and they at present devote approximately twice as much time to the physical and biological sciences as do the gymnasia. Technical and trade schools, with scientific and mathematical subjects as a foundation for the vocational work, have also appeared as a species of secondary education in Germany (see p. 420). The first of these were opened in Nuremberg in 1823, but their rapid increase in numbers, variety, and importance has taken place since the middle of the century, and their development in organization and method has occurred within the past twenty-five years.

The scientific movement was also felt in the elementary schools of Germany during the early part of the nineteenth century. Science was considerably popularized by the schools of the philanthropinists (pp. 227 L), and was widely introduced into elementary education by the spread of Pestalozzianism in Prussia and the other German states (seep. 289f.). Before the close of the first quarter of the century the study of elementary science, - natural history, physiology, and physics, appeared in various grades; geography and drawing were taught throughout the course; and geometry was included in the upper classes of the *Volksschulen.*

**France.** - Before the Revolution in France the higher and secondary institutions found little place for instruction in science. There was a chair of experimental physics at the College of Navarre of the University of Paris and at the Universities of Toulouse and Montpelier, and natural history was also taught at the more independent College of France, but, as a whole, education was dominated largely by humanism. However, with the establishment of the republic a new regime began in education, as in other matters, and science entered more largely into higher and secondary instruction. Most of the revolutionary proposals subordinated letters to science, and in 1794 the republic founded a great central normal school, where the famous Laplace and Lagrange for a short time gave instruction in science. In 1802 Napoleon had included in the scientific course for the lycees natural history, physics, astronomy, chemistry, and mineralogy, and a definite advance in quantity and method of the scientific instruction in the secondary schools was made in 1814. On the ground that they were injuring classical studies, Cousin in 1840 had the sciences curtailed, but he was shortly forced to restore them upon an optional basis. A contest between the two types of studies was carried on in the lycees until 1852, when a bifurcation in the course put the two theoretically upon the same basis. The scientific course, however, has never been considered equal in prestige to the classical, although it has constantly increased in length and difficulty.

Some instruction in science has come to be given during the past forty years even in the elementary schools of France. In the lower primary schools the work is informal, and consists mostly of object lessons and first scientific notions. These are developed in connection with drawing, manual training, agriculture, and geography of the neighborhood and of France in general. Instruction becomes more formal in the 'higher primary' schools, and includes regular courses in the natural and physical sciences and hygiene, as well as geography, drawing, and manual training. In the normal schools for primary teachers instruction in all the physical and biological sciences is even more thorough, and includes not only the facts and theories of general scientific importance, but it also emphasizes their applications to everyday life. For example, the flora and fauna of the neighborhood are studied in their special relation to agriculture.

**England.** - In England, several chairs in the natural sciences were established at Cambridge during the eighteenth century. But it was almost the middle of the nineteenth century before the biological sciences and the laboratory method of instruction were introduced, and not until toward the close of the century did science become prominent at Cambridge and Oxford. And the most marked promotion of the scientific movement in England has occurred within the past fifty years through the foundation of efficient municipal universities in munidpal such centers as Birmingham, Manchester, London, and Liverpool (see p. 392). For many years the laboratory instruction was given only in institutions outside the universities. Higher courses in science by the new methods were afforded through the foundation of the Royal School of Mines (1851), the Royal School of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering (1864), and the Normal School of Science (1868), which were all combined in 1890 into a single institution known as the Royal College of Science, and in 1907, when the Technical College (founded 1881) of the City and Guilds of London Institute was also merged, the entire corporation became known as the Imperial College of Science and Technology. An agency that was instrumental in encouraging the advanced study of science, although it accomplished even more for elementary and secondary schools, was the national Science and Art Department. This science and organization was founded in 1858 to bring under a single management the science, trade, and navigation schools already existing, and to facilitate higher instruction in science, and a few years later began to offer examinations and to grant certificates to teach science in the elementary schools. It was taken over by the national Board of Education, when that body was organized in 1899 (see p. 389).

In English secondary instruction the 'academies,' in which science first appeared (pp. 157 f.), had before the close of the eighteenth century greatly declined, and the humanistic 'public' schools and secondary institutions of a private character had as yet paid almost no attention to the sciences. In the first half of the nineteenth century an anti-classical campaign began, and, continuing with ever increasing force until the middle of the century, it brought about the foundation of numerous schools to embody the new ideals. Toward the close of 1848 the first 'secular' school was opened by Combe (see p. 403) at Edinburgh, and included in its curriculum a study of geography, drawing, mathematics, natural history, chemistry, natural philosophy, physiology, phrenology, and materials used in the arts and manufactures. Similar institutions were organized at Glasgow, Leith, London, Manchester, Birmingham, Newcastle, Belfast, and many other cities of the United Kingdom. While short-lived, these schools did much to promote the introduction of sciences into secondary education that soon followed. Shortly after the middle of the century Rugby, and then Winchester, introduced science into the regular curriculum, and by 1868, as a result of the governmental investigation of the endowed schools, which showed an almost complete absence of science in the curricula, all the leading secondary schools schools, began to establish a 'modern side.' This course generally included physics and natural history, as well as modern languages and history, but it was most reluctantly organized by the institutions, and, while it has attained to great efficiency, it has never, except in a few schools, been accorded the same standing as the classical course. The Department of Science and Art also afforded much encouragement to secondary instruction in the sciences by subsidizing schools and classes in physics, chemistry, zoology, botany, geology, mineralogy, and subjects involving the applications of science. Before its absorption into the Board of Education some ten thousand classes and seventy-five independent schools of secondary grade received assistance from this source.

The Department also gave aid to the study of science in elementary education. As early as the fifties, grants were made to establish work in elementary science, art, and design, but the educational value was for more than forty years subordinated to practical applications. And while, after the report by a Committee of the British Association in 1889,much aid was furnished for the equipment of laboratories, lecture rooms, and workshops, and an increase in the staff of instructors, for a decade no subjects except the rudiments were required in the elementary course, and such 'supplementary' subjects as elementary science and geography, if taught, were given a special subsidy. But since 1900 this scientific work has been made compulsory in the elementary curriculum.

**The United States.** - In the colleges of the United States the courses show considerable evidence of science teaching by the eighteenth century. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, King's (afterward Columbia), Dartmouth, during the Union, and Pennsylvania had all come to offer work in 'natural philosophy' or 'natural history,' which terms might then be used to cover physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy, botany, and zoology. However, before the Revolution physics seems to have been a subordinate branch of mathematical instruction, even less importance was attached to biology, and chemistry was only occasionally taught as an obscure and unimportant phase of physics. Laboratories and instruments of precision did not yet exist.

Since then whole fields of science have been discovered and defined, and others, like geology and astronomy, have been reclaimed from dogmatism, and science studies have slowly come into favor. Instruction in chemistry has grown up through a study of materia medica at the medical schools of Pennsylvania (1768), Harvard (1782), and Dartmouth (1798). A separate chair of chemistry was soon established at Princeton (1795), Columbia (1800), Yale (1802), Bowdoin (1805), South Carolina (1811), Dickinson (1811), and Williams (1812), and the movement continued until practically all the colleges had recognized it as an important branch of study. But while experiments were from the first performed as demonstrations by the instructors, it was generally not until almost the middle of the century that students were admitted at all to the laboratories. About the same time laboratories in physics began to be equipped with apparatus. Geology was included in the early professorship of chemistry at Yale, and was given a distinct chair upon the advent of James D. Dana about the middle of the century, while Amos Eaton taught it as a separate subject at Williams as early as 1825. Some attention was given to astronomy early in the century, although the instruments remained very ordinary and the methods authoritative and prescriptive until the opening of the observatories at Cincinnati (1844), Cambridge (1846), and Ann Arbor (1854). The biological sciences were even longer studied through mere observation rather than investigation and experiment. Until Louis Agassiz opened his laboratory at Harvard to students just after the middle of the century, the courses were meager, mostly theoretical and classificatory, and were given entirely by lecture, without field or laboratory work. Since then the development has been rapid.

But the greatest impulse was given to instruction in though evoiuscience through the publication of Darwin's *Origin of* *Species* (1859), and the dissemination of evolutionary doctrine through Asa Gray, professor of natural history at Harvard, and William B. Rogers, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The intellectual development ensuing also brought about the foundation of such new institutions as Cornell and Johns Hopkins, which emphasized the teaching of science as an unconscious protest against the exclusively classical training. Special scientific and technological schools likewise began to arise. The Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1825) and the Lawrence Scientific School at Harvard (1847) had already been opened, but now similar schools of science, like Sheffield at Yale (i860), and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1862), sprang up in all parts of the country. In 1862 the Morrill Act of Congress appropriated lands in every state to promote education in agriculture, mechanic arts, and the natural sciences. These grants, which amounted at first to thirteen million acres, were subsequently extended to new states as they were admitted, and the endowment was increased by the annual grants of money that were made under later acts. From these funds and private benefactions, further schools of science were started or old schools were strengthened in every state.

Through the academy movement (pp. 158 ff.) sciences were introduced into American secondary education. Sometimes these subjects were extended downward from the colleges, but often they had as yet been barely touched by the colleges. As the early high schools grew up, they continued the attention paid to the sciences by the academies. The first high school to appear, that at Boston in 1821 (pp. 268 f.), scheduled geography in the first year; navigation and surveying in the second; and natural philosophy and astronomy in the third. A similar emphasis upon science appeared during the first half of the century in all the secondary institutions, whether known as academies, high schools, union schools, or city colleges. In all cases, however, instruction was given mainly through text-books, and, while experiments were frequently used for demonstration by the teacher, there was no laboratory work for the students. Moreover, a tendency to overload the curriculum with sciences was much increased during the seventies by the demand of the legislatures in several states that candidates for teachers' certificates pass an examination in several sciences. The high schools and academies endeavored to furnish the necessary training to prepare for these examinations, and until toward the end of the century the courses in the sciences were numerous and of rather superficial character. Within the last twenty years, however, the schools have come to limit each student to a relatively few courses taught by thorough laboratory methods.

Except for geography, which appeared in the curriculum early in the century, the rudiments practically constituted the entire course of the elementary school until the time of Horace Mann. Largely through his efforts, physiology was widely introduced by the middle of the century. About a dozen years later the Pestalozzian object teaching began to come in through the Oswego methods, although it tended to become formalized. Thus materials in several of the sciences came to be used, and the pupils were required to describe them in scientific terms. Toward the close of the century the sciences came to be presented more informally by the method generally known as 'nature study.' This movement quickly spread through the country, and has most recently appeared in the guise of agricultural instruction (see p. 424). Many states now require agriculture as a requisite for a teacher's certificate, and most normal schools have come to furnish a training in the subject.

**Interrelation of the Scientific with the Psychological and Sociological Movements.** - It is evident that there has been a marked scientific movement in the educational systems of all countries during the past two hundred years. The sciences began to appear in the curricula of educational institutions in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but their rapid increase, and the use of laboratories and the scientific method in instruction, dated from the middle of the nineteenth. In some respects this scientific movement has been closely related to the other modern tendencies in education, - the psychological and the sociological. The coincidence of the scientific movement with the psychological on the question of formal discipline has been evident (pp. 183 f.). The influence of the development of the sciences upon educational method also constitutes part of the psychological movement. The sciences demanded entirely different methods of teaching from the traditional procedure. These innovations were worked out slowly by experimentation, and when they proved to be more in keeping with psychology, they reacted upon the teaching of the older subjects and came to be utilized in history, politics, philology, and other studies. A corresponding improvement in the presentation of the form, content, and arrangement of various subjects has taken place in text-books, and a radically different set of books and authors has been rendered necessary.

The scientific movement has even more points in common with the sociological. In its opposition to the disciplinarians and its stress upon content rather than form, the scientific tendency coincides with the sociological, although the former looks rather to the natural sciences as a means of individual welfare, and the latter to the social and political sciences to equip the individual for life in social institutions and to secure the progress of society. But while the scientist usually states his argument in individual terms, because of his connection in time and sympathy with the individualism of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the same writer usually, as in the case of Rousseau, Combe, Spencer, and Huxley, advocates the social, moral, and political sciences as a means of complete living. Similarly, the sociological movement has especial kinship with the economic and utilitarian aspects of the study of the sciences, for professional, technical, and commercial institutions have been evolved because of sociological as well as scientific demands. Again, the use of the sciences in education as a means of preparing for life and the needs of society overlaps the modern sociological principle of furthering democracy. Both tendencies lead to the best development of all classes and to the abandonment of artificial strata in society.

**Supplementary Reading**

Graves, *In Modern Times* (Macmillan, 1913), chap. X; and *Great Educators* (Macmillan, 1912), chap. XIV; Monroe, *Textbook* (Macmillan, 1905), chap. XII; Parker, *Modern Elementary Education* (Ginn, 1912), pp. 331-340. Popular accounts of the growth of science can be found in Buckley, Arabella B., *A Short History of Natural Science* (Appleton), and Williams, H. S., *Story of Nineteenth Century Science* (Harper). Spencer's *Education* and Huxley's *Science and Education* should be read. Further arguments for the study of science can be found in Coulter, J. M., *The Mission of Science in Education (Science,* II, 12, pp. 281-293); Dryer, C. R., *Science in Secondary Schools* (Prize Essay in *The Academy,* May, 1888, pp. 197-221); Galloway, R., *Education, Scientific and Technical* (Triibner, London, 1881); Norton, W. H., *The Social Service of Science (Science,* II, 13, pp. 6445.); Pearson, K., *Grammar of Science* (Macmillan, 1911), chap. I; Roberts, R. D., *Science in the Nineteenth Century* (Cambridge University Press, 1901), chap. VII; Sedgwick, W. T., *Educational Value of the Method of Science (Educational Review,* vol. V, pp. 243ft.), and especially Youmans, E. L., *Culture Demanded by Modern Life* (Appleton, 1867).