Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1885-01-08
What should We Teach!

The sin that doth most easily beset
the average American youth is the
anxiety to become celebrated at o too
early period in life. This leads to a
neglect of elementary training. and a
lack of thoroughness in all branches.
and has seriously complicated the
question: What should we teach.
1t also leads to the practice of cram
ming in school, which may be describ-
ed as too much talking and hearing
and too little thinking.
1t may be assumed that the objective
point in teaching is to enable the schel-
ar To think, independently, correctly
and promptly; and that the design of
a moral education is to correct improper
tendencies of character.
But whilst ignorance is civil incon-
venience which the State should reme-
dy, yet how far must the remedy go?
Questions will crowd up here.
Probably the best solution is in the
language of the Honorable Edward
Everett, who was himself good
scholar, and firm friend of education.
He says that "to read the English Ian
guage well, to write with dispatch a
neat legible hand, and be master of the
first four rules of Arithmetic, so as to
dispose of at once with accuracy every
question of figures which comes up in
practice, call good education. And
If you add the ability to write pure
grammatical English, regard it as an
excellent education.' These are the
tools. You can do much with them.
They are the foundation. and unless
you gin with these all your fashy
attainments a little geology and all
other oIogies and osophies are ostenta-
tious rubbish"
Mr.. Everett, real scholar, defines
what education is, and fixes the limit
of the obligation of the State in the
premises.
Many loud friends of education will
differ from Mr.. Everett's views, and
this fact will justify All examination
of them 1t will be conceded that We
should not undertake to teach more
than can be done thoroughly, The
work of education is hemmed i'll by
more limitations than are dreamed of
in the philosophy of some educators.
Can a school be taught effectively
more than eight months in the year?
Does a scolar who enters school at
eight o'clock A. M, gain anything after
three p. NJ? Is there really any gain
in extending the school age past six
teen years?
Forty years, experience of school
teaching i'm twelve different States de-
mands a negative answer to all these
questions.
In regard to the first inquiry, it will
be found on trial that no one excepting
a strictly first-class teacher can hold
up for eight months, and he would do
better to take ten months to teach an
eight months school. The mini gets
into ruts, and requires change If as
sociation and ideas that can only be
found outside of the schoolroom.
In respec. to the second, the same
principle applies as in the preceding
case, and if possible more strongly, and
a scholar should never be required to
study at night.
Close mental exertion s'nds him to
bed i'm "a state of nervous irritatian in.
consistent with healthy rest. Let lin
rise early and study In the morning.
In regard to the third inquiry, il de-
mands the most serious consideration.
School teaching, like law, medicine ana
theology. is only deduction from the
habits of tie people. Our habits are
changing. To-day the advantage of
school attendance after the average
scholar has reached fifteen years of
age, might well he represented by X
for it is certainly an unknown quanti-
ty. And at our present rate of pro-
gress five years hence profitable at
tendance at school will close at thirteen
years.
But there are other considerations
looking to the same result. The mil
lennium is not yet sufficiently advanc-
ed to release the average Missnurian
from the obligation to earn his own
living. Now If the State by extend
ing the school age up almost to the
time majority, turns out man ON
society without the practical kno Ti-
edge to earn legitimate support. If
that man proves to be dishon st or
thievish, the State is an accessory to
his rascality before the fact.