But he knows also that existing conditions must come to terms with the ideal; that in the never-ending struggle between the real and the ideal, although the real is always victorious, the ideal is unconquerable; that ideals are immortal, while the real of to-day dies to give place to a new ideal to-morrow; that each new real, in the course of time, must meet the fate of its predecessors and give place to a real which is a closer approximation to the ideal.

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT.

1. What is meant by saying that the function of books is supplementary?

2. State and criticise the argument that is based upon this.

3. How are we to ascertain when the child should begin to supplement his first-hand with second-hand knowledge?

4. State and examine the argument that is based upon the ground that the child has no natural desire to learn to read.

5. State and illustrate the two classes into which the child's impulses may be put.

6. What is it that makes reading valuable?

7. Point out the fallacy of the argument that is based (a) on the ground that reading is a recent accomplishment of the race: (6) on the character of the development of the nervous system.

8. What is meant by "fundamental" and "accessory" muscles? Illustrate your answer.

9. State the argument that is based on the development of fundamental before accessory muscles.

10. Summarize the arguments against the traditional practice of teaching reading and writing.

II. What benefits result from such a discussion?

12. State the practical argument in favor of the current practice.

SUGGESTIVE QUESTIONS.

1. Show that a child must have some first-hand knowledge before he can be taught to read, but that the question as to how much he must have can only be determined by experience.

2. What is meant by the localization of cerebral functions?

3. Can you cite examples from your own observation or reading to show that there is such localization?

4. What sort of facts would be necessary to prove that the reading is different from the talking centre?

5. How are we to ascertain when it is wise to begin to require children to use the accessory muscles?

6. State in the most general form the criticism to which all the arguments against the current practice are exposed.

CHAPTER XVII.

CONCENTRATION AND CORRELATION.

The Law of Interest. Although the subject of the preceding chapters was the what rather than the how of the primary grades, it was sought to show that in teaching the various subjects they should be related to each other as closely as possible. The reading, writing, language lessons, drawing, number, and hand work should be based on the nature study, the stories, and the literature. So interwoven should be the various parts of a child's work that the pupil himself should scarcely be conscious that he is "studying different subjects at all. Occupied all the time with subjects that interest him, he should be led from one to another by transitions so gradual and at the same time so natural that he will seem to himself to be doing the precise thing that he wished to do. The reason for this is found in what is known as the law of interest. An object lacking interest becomes interesting through being associated with an interesting object. "The two associated objects," says Professor James, "grow, as it were, together; the interesting portion sheds its quality over the whole, and things not interesting in their own right borrow an interest which becomes as real and strong as that of any natively interesting thing."1

Concentration Defined. Now in so far as the work of the school forms organically connected parts of an interrelated 1 James' Talks to Teachers, p. 49.

whole, in so far as every part of that whole is connected by intimate inner relations with every other part, in so far the work illustrates the pedagogic doctrine of concentration. Says Dr. Charles McMurry: "By concentration is meant such a connection between the parts of each study and such a spinning of relations and connecting links that unity may spring out of the variety of knowledge. . . . Concentration is chiefly concerned with the relation of different studies to each other." And he proceeds to illustrate the theory of concentration by an account of the procedure of Zeller, who attempted to group all the work of eight school grades around a body of historical narrative, so that the reading, language, geography, drawing, music, arithmetic, nature study, and literature should spring out of and depend upon it.1

The Principle upon Which Specialization Depends.No one is so zealous for the doctrine of concentration as to contend that it should be carried out in all the grades of education. All admit, that differentiation must take place, that the student must begin to devote his time to special subjects, at some point in the university, college, high or grammar school. Upon what principle is this differentiation based? If, according to universal admission, concentration must some time give place to what we may term specialization, there must be a reason for it; and that reason will be the principle which, correctly applied, will determine the point at which concentration should cease and specialization should begin. To put it differently, every one admits that specialization must begin some

1 See also De Garmo's "Herbart and the Herbartians" for a detailed illustration of the theory of concentration.

where. What we have to do then, is first, to ascertain the reason for it, the principle in consequence of which concentration must give way to specialization; and, secondly, to determine at what point in the education of a child this principle becomes applicable.

Interest in the Individual and Scientific Interest. From the point of view of the educationists who contend that interest is the only motive that ought to be appealed to, the determination of this principle is easy. As long as the connection between facts belonging to different subjects is more interesting than the relation between the facts of a single subject, so long the method of concentration should be followed. When, however, the relations between the facts of a given science become more interesting, specialization should begin. We may draw a distinction between an interest in plants and an interest in botany, between an interest in animals and an interest in zoology, between an interest in men and an interest in psychology. Science cares nothing for the individual as such. So far and only so far as the individual is a type of a class, an illustration of the universal, is it an object of interest to science. The particular flower which grew from a seed and which you yourself have planted, which you have nursed and cared for from the beginning, botany cares nothing for. You may be a botanist, but as such. you are interested only in the universal aspects and relations of plants. The same is true, of course, of all the sciences. Your dog that you have taught to know and love you, that barks with delight when you come, and looks at you so longingly when you go, is an object of interest to you, but not to the zoologist. Zoölogy cares for