PRACTICAL GRAMMAR.

FIRST PAPER.

Probably no other educational topic has aroused so much heated discussion as that of English Grammar. Most modern educational writers hardly esteem themselves men until they have denounced the whole study of grammar in our schools as time lost, worse than wasted, &c., &c., &c. But having unburdened themselves in this extravagant way, they, as a rule, organize regular grammar classes at the opening of their next term's work, and, as if to make good their statements, teach it, in too many cases, in such a way as to make it as nearly a waste of time as possible.

Any study may be rendered well-nigh useless, if pupils are permitted to commit it, parrot-like, without making practical applications of it from day to day as they go along. In no other study is this so emphatically true as in grammar.

Near the first part of almost every grammar will be found the definitions of common and proper nouns. Let the pupils learn the definitions given, as they are in most cases substantially correct. But no definition, however carefully framed, will be of much practical use to your class without a thorough drill on its application. The object in studying grammar is to enable us to use our language in accordance with the usage of our best authors. This usage requires that "proper nouns" shall be capitalized whenever they are written. The teacher should therefore be sure that his class understand what words and classes of words are written as proper nouns before he leaves the subject. Our experience has been that this is best done by a few carefully prepared dictation exercises, like the following: "On Saturday, the 14th of May, in the spring of 1881, I crossed the Mississippi at Davenport in company with my father." As every dictation exercise should be carefully corrected, it should always be short; then, if there is time, give another and still another until the time for the recitation has expired. Let us suppose the members of the grammar class have written the above sentence on the board. The class being again seated you call their attention to the work of a certain scholar and ask for criticisms. Half a dozen hands will probably be raised and a scholar whose hand is

up

is asked to point out the first mistake in the sentence. Other hands may then be raised indicating that this is not the first error. When the first error has been found, let the one who discovered it correct it and give the reason. Thus suppose the word Saturday is

not capitalized. The scholar who has discovered the error (a very common one) will probably give as his reason that it is an "individual name," or something of this kind in accordance with the general definition in the text-book. It will be as well to accept this for the present as it will be necessary to recur to it presently. The word May being disposed of in a similar manner, a number of hands will be raised in criticism of the word spring as written on the board, for reasons similar to those before given. It will now be necessary to inform the class that there are many exceptions to the general definitions given in the text. It will be well to stop here and explain that the days of the week and several of the months are named for ancient gods, and that for the sake of uniformity these words are all regarded as proper names whether they are the names of dead gods or not; but the names of the seasons being none of them derived from such a source are written as common nouns. If time will permit, it will be well to give the class the names of these old gods with a few words in explanation of each, but in this as in every other exercise we should avoid wandering too far from the subject. In passing the words Mississippi and Davenport, it will be well to emphasize the fact that all geographical names, such as the names of particular streams or other bodies of water, cities, countries, &c., are always written as proper names. When the word father is reached, some of the class will probably regard it as a proper noun, and here again it will be necessary to impress upon them the fact that while Christian and surnames are always written as proper nouns whether they are applied to any particular person or not, as when we say "Mary is a girl's name but William is a boy's name," the names which express relation, such as father, mother, brother, cousin, wife, &c., even though from their nature they could be applied to only one person, are written as com

mon nouns.

When the first sentence has been corrected in this way, let the work of each other scholar be corrected without dwelling on the reasons. This done let the work be erased, and then require it rewritten from memory. Very few will make mistakes now, and after a glance at the work to see that it is correct, dictate another sentence similar to the first but using other words, thus: "On Tuesday the 10th of January in the winter of 1880 I crossed the English Channel from Portsmouth to Havre in company with my aunt." When you have satisfied yourself that the class understand the

subject thus far, it may be continued as follows: "While traveling in the West I was once compelled to spend a night on the prairie. As the sun sank below the western horizon the moon arose in the east full and clear, and soon after Venus and Jupiter shone out with such brilliance as one seldom sees in the East, making the whole face of the earth seem light as day." This will enable you to emphasize the fact that the names of the sun, moon and earth are written as common nouns while those of all the other planets and stars are written as proper nouns. It will also afford an excellent opportunity to impress the fact that while the words east, west, north and south are ordinarily written as common nouns or adjectives, yet when they refer to a section of country, as the East, the West, &c., they are regarded as proper nouns and must be capitalized.

A few more such exercises skillfully presented will enable your scholars to follow the "established usage" in this very difficult subject, and unless such a drill is given, their ideas in regard to common and proper nouns will be so vague as to be comparatively worthless.

We hope to find space to speak of other grammatical topics, from time to time, as we have of this one.

THE PUBLIC SCHOOL PROBLEM.

BY H. H. SEERLEY.

The following abstract of a paper read by Superintendent H. H. Seerley of Oskaloosa, before the Southwestern Iowa Teachers' Association, during its recent meeting at Shenandoah, is furnished us for publication by unanimous request of the Association. We heartily commend it to our readers.

It is a very easy matter in these days for the press to give attention to public school questions. The ablest journals of the land have seen fit during the past year to permit the discussion of the century's results of free public education. Some very startling statements have been made and the public mind has been greatly agitated over the phases of the school problem.

For almost a century politics has kept clear of the school. The platforms and resolutions of the great parties have been singularly free from any meddling with education; the stump orator rarely referred to its demands in his highest flights of oratory; but now, it is the burden of every newspaper and every stump speech. The parties vie with each other in being friendly to the grand idea of universal education, from the reason that it is an easy way to secure the good will and votes of the people.

The critic who desires to attract attention must select some question that the multitude of readers understand, and as a consequence more than one ambitious literary man has in the past few years made himself notorious by wrongly viewing some department of public education.

Wendell Phillips has stated that Boston girls did not learn to read well by attending the Boston schools. He thought that the schools hindered rather than aided the intellectual development of the coming generations, and from this basis condemned the schools as unworthy of public approbation and support.

Church influence has also to some extent defamed the schools by the appellation of "godless schools," yet the churches that have raised this criticism have been taught better by the irresistible power of public opinion, and the membership of the same have always been among the most ardent supporters of the free school in a free country.

Next to these two classes may be mentioned that apostle of the nineteenth century who claims that ignorance is the mother of virtue, and wisdom and intelligence the mother of vice. He, trusting to his brilliant reputation as a literary critic, injured his authority on subjects of which he had made a life study, by attempting to decide a question to which it seems he had not given much thought and of which he had no just conception. Richard Grant White tarnished his fair fame by a one-sided and unjust statement of apparent facts. He may growl in his study at the army of educators who have in the past year given his unscientific views such a wide circulation, but he has doubtless learned that error promulgated by the greatest literary nabob and most learned man of the present age, can be overturned by men of not equivalent reputation.

The school critics, in most cases, fail entirely to comprehend the heterogeneous forces with which the school labors. They do not appreciate nor understand the meaning of the fact, universal education. They regard with dismay the millions of money spent annually in teaching the children of this country; they fail to observe any ameliorating effect and as a fair judgment conclude that the schools are a failure if they don't prevent crime, wickedness and disaster. It would certainly be a grave error to claim that the church is responsible for the murders and other heinous crimes that are committed against law and order; yet, no doubt, the weakness and errors of many church members have no little to do with the choice of a path of waywardness and folly. Neither should the press be held entirely responsible for the condition of society. That man's judgment should be shunned who makes such an assumption. That it is in part to blame for these abnormal conditions can hardly be doubted, and it is as much to be censured as the church or the school. It is, therefore, very unjust to place all ignorance, every blighted life and the follies of mankind at the threshold of the school room, making the teacher the only potent force in modern civilization.

From another source comes the statement that the upper story of the school curriculum is beyond the demands of the people who patronize the free school. We are told by men who ought to know that the vast majority of pupils never attend beyond the first four years' work, and that as a consequence of this, the best efforts of the schools should be employed to finish the education of children at this early age. Lecturers and agitators have declared time and again that such are the meager results of public education, and from statistics all the proof is given.

There is no question that the primary school surpasses in numbers; and from the figures given by school statistics, one might conclude that many children never get more than these elementary years. From six years' observation in the schools of Oskaloosa, Iowa, I arrive at the following conclusions: The first grade has more pupils than the second grade; the second more than the third, &c., yet that children quit school at the early age mentioned is not a fact. I have traced the little ones from the first grade to the beginning of the seventh grade, and nearly all the names missing upon roll-call in the seventh can be found traced in marble in God's acre. A more extended examination embracing other cities will doubtless lead us to conclude that statistics of school work must be carefully considered or else there is great danger of assuming an erroneous conclusion.

From another source comes the criticism that the influence of high school instruction is to make boys and girls dissatisfied with opportunities, to despise manual labor, to prevent the acquiring of trades and to induce a desire to seek professional life, for which nature has not adapted them.

Out of ninety-seven graduates of my high school, twenty-five attended college, two became lawyers, forty-four teachers in public schools, and the others are at work or in business. None of the members of these eight classes is above work of any kind, and no one has failed to give satisfaction to employers and to be a credit to the school. From my horizon for judging, the work has been of great help to all that graduated, and there are hundreds of other pupils that have been greatly benefitted by the free high school who did not finish the four years' prescribed course.

There is a theory of education that every pupil has some specific walk in life for which he should be specially educated. The school, therefore, does a positive injury to natural talents unless it aid the development of these. This theory is all very well. In some noteworthy, individual cases this can be obeyed, but the majority of boys and girls have no means of determining what they will follow. What an army of men study law annually, intending to practice, and yet never enter the profession; how many study medicine and after a little experience are unknown as physicians; how many study theology, thinking they have a divine command to preach the gospel, and either do not enter or soon abandon the sacred desk. Since this is true after judgment is matured, how much more is it