grievous burden by the teachers; and, finally, because it is a still more difficult task to stir up the negligent pupils, and compel them to correct and learn the particular words that each fails to spell correctly from day to day. When the pupils are taught spelling thus in one or more large sections he is, indeed, a vigorous principal that keeps up the valiant fight. A better method has been found in some schools, and of this mention will be made later.

It is noteworthy that wherever a business course has been established, students in this course are commonly required to take spelling, though others are not. The reason for this is obvious. A great deal of business is now done by correspondence: bad spelling reflects discredit on the firm, it does not "pull trade." There is, consequently, a demand for correct orthography in commercial circles, and this demand is being met. Curiously enough the most popular text-books in spelling are perhaps those published to supply this demand for spelling as a part of the training for business. Where a text-book is used throughout the school it is often one of these business spellers. The books mentioned in reply to the question, "If taught, what text-book is used?" include these: Mayne's Modern Business Speller, Kilman's Business Speller, Gregg's Words, Atwood's Commercial Speller, Williams and Rogers Speller, The Rational Speller, and Penniman's Speller.

The answers indicate that a majority of high schools having formal spelling use no text-book at all, but compile their own lists. Thus in one school there are chosen "twenty words a week from each text used by the student, thus making four spelling lessons a week when carrying four lessons." In several schools the words are compiled mainly from the general text-books. In others they are chosen from the themes, from examination papers, from newspapers, or from a combination of these sources. The feeling seems to be that these exercises should accompany the natural development of the students' vocabulary.

The space left for remarks brought forth from the high schools a variety of interesting methods and opinions. Several schools require spelling through all four years of the course; in

others, only for the first one or two years. In one high school it "comes twice each week, and all are required to take it till a grade of 85 per cent for a year, or 95 per cent for a semester, is made." In another "all take spelling until excused: 100 per cent for one term, 95 per cent for one year, or 90 per cent for two years, will excuse a pupil from taking work further." Two principals say that spelling should be made a regular part of the work of English classes, and some etymology should accompany it.

Of the forty-five principals heard from only two expressed the opinion that spelling should not have a place in the high school curriculum. One of these writes that he has tried it and found that it is too late when the high school is reached; that the students who were poor spellers to begin with remained poor spellers still. Opposed to such experience there is this statement from the English Department at Northwestern University: "Although most of the young people who have gravitated into this (the spelling) class have been vehement in declaring that they positively never could learn to spell, we have found from year to year less than one per cent of incorrigibly bad spellers among them."

Doctrinaires, who apply their touchstone of interest to studies and would cut out of the curriculum all that savors of routine, grind and drill, have, of course, placed their taboo on formal spelling, along with grammar and much of mathematics. But their opinions do not seem to have influenced the high school teachers much. If the latter have neglected a study which laymen and university authorities think of such primary importance, it is because the high schools are hard pressed for time and have sought to throw the burden of spelling back on the grades.

Here this article should end; but since so many others have given the writer the benefit of their experience, it may not seem amiss if he details his in closing. Some years ago there was no formal spelling in the Deerfield Township High School, because it was thought that this work belonged properly to grammar schools. When persons were graduated who "couldn't even spell," as a local employer put it, the fault was, of course,

attributed to the grades. However, examination papers and all written work were now searched for errors in spelling, and a half of a per cent was taken off for each error. As a result, new and difficult words the wise pupils avoided, making curious circumlocutions to accomplish this; growth in the power of written expression was, of course, at a standstill. Next a list of words was secured and written on the board to be copied by pupils and learned. Another difficulty arose. Pupils came with words which they thought should not have been checked as wrong, and examination of their lists taken from the board. showed that many words had been copied as the pupil commonly misspelled the word. Next a book was put in their hands, Mayne's Modern Business Speller. This was an advance on what had been done before, but it was still far from perfect, because the words were arbitrary and not in line with the pupil's growing vocabulary. The latest and best plan is this a list of five thousand words has been secured, consisting (1) of those common words most commonly misspelled, gathered from the experience of this and other schools, and including also the common rules of spelling; (2) homonyms and words frequently confused in use or spelling; (3) common words often mispronounced with the pronunciation of each marked; (4) more or less technical words chosen from the various high school text-books and from business usage; (5) words chosen from the English classics studied in the high school, Burke, Macaulay, Milton, etc., with the derivation and meaning of each. These words are divided into syllables, typewritten, mimeographed, and put in the hands of the pupils. They are recited in written lessons in the English classes, taking about ten minutes of the recitation period three times a week. All misspelled words are required to be handed back to the teacher, each written ten times on the corrected spelling paper. Usually five words have to be looked up in the dictionary with each lesson. The results are gratifying. The English themes reflect the growth in vocabulary and consequent power of expression, and the work is more easily graded and is handled more satisfactorily in the regular English classes than it has been in general school exercises.

Teachers in the United States from a
German Viewpoint

LILIAN C. BERGOLD, PH.B., WESTERN ILLINOIS STATE NORMAL SCHOOL,
MACOMB, ILL.

Condensed and translated from The Common Schools and the Training of Teachers in the United States, by Dr. Franz Kuypers, director of the schools for higher education of Cologne, Germany. Leipzig, 1907.

I

I

PREFACE

N this book I have by no means attempted to give an exhaustive account of the common schools and the "Training of Teachers" in the United States, but rather a summary of the impressions that I gained in the United States in 1904 during a stay of scarcely seven weeks. A part of this time was spent in the educational exhibit at St. Louis, and the remainder in a number of the best schools then in session and in interviewing prominent American eduOn such a tour of investigation through the schools of a foreign country, conditions unlike those at home, particularly those most decidedly better or worse, are especially noticeable. Accordingly I have dealt with these differences as found in the fundamental principles, aims and methods, as well as in equipment, pupils and teachers.

cators.

I have striven to avoid the German error of exaggerating anything foreign, especially anything found in the land of skyscrapers and the Niagara Falls. I also recognize the fact that the educational system of a people must be an organic part of all its peculiar civilization, and yet I believe that on the whole, nobler results have been secured in Germany than in the "Land of the Dollar."

If a comparison is made between the German and American school systems, it may be said that the former represents a school monarchy, the latter a school democracy. In Germany the fundamental principle is unity, and this is by no means to be criticized; but the subordinate instructors then remain dutifully in the prescribed path until a new decree permits them to

enter another. In America, on the contrary, suggestions as to the plan of work are not only given from superiors to subordinates, but also from subordinates to superiors. There joyous initiative springs forth. Progress is made because mistakes are permissible. And the authorities? They want to be informed of new achievements, that they may scatter them broadcast over the country by means of thousands of pamphlets. The advantages and shortcomings on each side may be briefly summarized by two words; amongst us by " uniformity," amongst them by individuality."

66

Not only was it noticeable at St. Louis that the German educational exhibit excelled the exhibits of all other nations, and that the productive influence of our school-loving country has long been at work, but that throughout the entire world-Japan and China not excepted-ideas originated by German scholars have been put into practice without our having realized them in their native land.

Pestalozzi, Froebel, Herbart, Wundt, are to-day still dominant forces in the United States. To it Germany is still the classical land, not only for literature and music, but also for the art of education. But who will vouch for it, in the case of this aspiring giant among nations, that the pupil will not surpass the master, that the tables shall not be turned, that the teacher shall not learn from the pupil, Germany also from America?

Accordingly, I believe that with the solidity of the older education the joyous spirit of discovery of the newer ought to be combined, if the good is not to become old-fashioned, tiresome and unsuitable in time. However, it must be said that the work seen in the schools of the United States is in many respects similar to a modern painting in that it is realistic, on a large scale, exaggerated as well as often sketchy, unfinished and slovenly. America has become great not because of her good schools, but in spite of her former poor ones. The many

favorable prerequisites lie in the soil, in the people, and in a thousand peculiar and fortunate conditions. It would, therefore, after a short visit, be rash to wish to judge what the schools of a foreign country ought to accomplish.