The Hickman courier. [volume] (Hickman, Ky.) 1859-current, 1879-08-08
By the Rule.

Teachers, do you all work by the
rule? Do you whip child whenever
be violates q written rule Do you
parse every word in your grammar
lessons according 70 the rule? Do
you "work every sum" or solve every
problem in mathematics, by the rule ?
Do you moduIate your voice in read-
ing by the rule? Do you spell by the
rule? You know there is rule for
almost everything. Our authors give
fifty or more rules for spelling, as
many for reading, many of our gram
mars have almost as many, besides
notes under the moods, while our arith-
metics do not pretend to number their
rules, and l have no time to count
them. Our school books bristle with
wW6; our teachers arc constantly
asking iohy? tohy? tChy? aud the pupil
must repeat, because the rulesays SC" :"
But are these not principles that uu~
derlie all rules? Is not every true rule
based on ono or moro Of these self
evident principles? Then, IF it is not
based here, it must be a false rule.
Compare a modern grammar with one
published forty years ago and you will
find the rules add notes diminished, at
least, one half Compare text book
published within the last three years
with one published twenty Eve years
ago, and you will find many Of the
rules abolished, and the others chang
ed until you scarcely recognize them.
Why is this? Only two reasons can
be given. Either the rules were right.
and our modern book makers have not
thoroughly learned them, or the rules
were wrong and our book makers have
discarded them. How did they prove
the rules wrong? By showing that
they were not based upon true prin-
ciples. If one~half these rules have
been shaken from their foundation,
may not others fall. The answer has
been considered sufficient if the pupil
answered, "Why by the rule" Many
of these rules have been discarded,
and the child is compelled to change
its answer to suit the change. But
suppose we teach the children the
principles and let the rules go. If he
thoroughly understands the foundation
on which rules rest, he becomes inGe.
pendent of all rules. But let US cx-
anime some of these rules: Mr.. Ray
says, in his New Practical Arithmetic,
page IL, "The product is always of the
same denomination as the multipli-
caud." This seems plain enough as
principle, for three times four apples
are twelve apples, and three times four
boys are twelve boys. But let US turn
to page 81, and VIC find the following
rule for reducing q number from q
higher to lower denomination "Mul-
tiply the highest denomination given
by the number of the next lower, which
makes a unit of the higher. Add to
it the number, if any, of this denomi-
nation. Proceed in like manner with
the result thus obtained, until the whole
is reduced TO the required denomi+
nation"
Example-Reduce 3 bush. to pints.
Work by the rule. Ans.-4 times j
bushels are 12 pecks; s times II pecks
are 96 quarts; and 2 times 96 quarts
are 102 pints. !,
Now, which is right, the rule or the
principle? ~ it true ihat the "Pro-
duct is always of the sime denomina-
ton as the muliiplicand y Ii 1t Is
not. let us not teach it; bat if it Is
true, let US stand by the truth and let
the rule tumble. Let us teach one bush.
equals four pecks, and three bushels
equal three times four pecks. or twelve
pecks; one peck equals eight quarts,
and twelve pecks equal twelve times
eight quarts, OF pinety-six quarts; one
quart equals two pints, and ninety SIX
quarts equal Diuety-six times two plnts,
or one hundred and ninety two pinis.
Now. if the child is taught the prinei-
! ple he is not troubled with tho rule,
and the teachers everlasting achy IS
silenecd. We would present other ex-
amples. but time aud space forbid.
When the weather is cooler we may
write again.