CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 189I BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE DATE DUt li JL IP I' lb' Cornell University Library LB2395 .M16 How to study and teach ng how to study, olin 3 1924 032 514 345 Cornell University Library The original of tliis bool< is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032514345 HOW TO STUDY AND TEACHING HOW TO STUDY BY P. M. MoMURRY PEOFESSOB OF ELEMBNTABT EDUCATION IN TEACHEBS COU^EGE, COLUMBIA XnHVEBSITY BOSTON, NEW TOEK AND CHICAGO HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY 1909 ■/'//, h^1^']'t>'6% COPYRIGHT, 1909, BY F. M. MCMURRY , ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Y 1 I TO MY FRIEND OEVILLE T. BRIGHT THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED, AS A TOKEN OF WARM AFFECTION AND PROFESSIONAL INDEBTEDNESS PREFACE Some seven or eight years ago the question of how to teach children to study happened to be included in a list of topics that I hastily prepared for discussion with one of my classes. On my later examination of this problem I was much surprised, both at its difficulty and scope, and also at the extent to which it had been neglected by teachers. Ever since that time the two questions, How adults should study, and How children should be taught to study, have together been my chief hobby. The following ideas are partly the result of reading; but since there is a meagre quantity of literature bear- ing on this general theme, they are largely the result of observation, experiment, and discussion with my students. Many of the latter will recognize their own contributions in these pages, for I have endeavored to preserve and use every good suggestion that came from them ; and I am glad to acknowledge here my indebt- edness to them. In addition I must express my thanks for valuable criticisms to my colleague. Dr. George D. Strayer, and also to Dr. Lida B. Earhart, whose suggestive mono- graph on the same general subject has just preceded this publication. The Author. Teachers College, May 6, 1909. CONTENTS PAKT I PRESENT METHODS OP STUDY ; NATURE OF STUDY AND ITS PRINCIPAL FACTORS I. Indications that young People do not leakn to study properly ; the seriousness of the Evil 3 II. The Nature of Study, and its principal Fac- tors 12 PAKT n NATURE OP THE PRINCIPAL FACTORS IN STUDY, AND THEIR RELATION TO CHILDREN m. Provision for specific purposes, as one Factor IN Study 31 IV. The supplementing of Thought, as a second Factor in Study 61 V. The Organization of Ideas, as a third Factor IN Study 85 VI. Judging of the soundness and general worth of Statements, as a fourth Factor in Study 135 viii CONTENTS VII. Memorizing, as a fifth Factor in Study . . 161 VIII. The using of Ideas, as a sixth Factor in Study 192 IX. Provision for a tentative rather than a fixed Attitude toward Knowledge, as a seventh Factor in Study 220 X. Provision for Individuality, as an eighth Fac- tor in Study 246 PAET III CONCLUSIONS XI. Full meaning op Study ; relation of Study to Children and to the School 283 INDEX 313 PART I PRESENT METHODS OF STUDY; NATURE OF STUDY, AND ITS PRINCIPAL FACTORS HOW TO STUDY CHAPTER I INDICATIONS THAT TOTJNG PEOPLE DO NOT LEAEN TO STUDY PROPEELT; the SERIOUSNESS OF THE EVIL No doubt every one can recall peculiar methods of study that he or some one else has at some time fol- lowed. During my attendance at high school ^^ , I often studied aloud at home, along with examples of several other temporary or permanent mem- bers of the family. I remember becoming exasperated at times by one of my girl companions. She not only read her history aloud, but as she read she stopped to repeat each sentence five times with great vigor. Although the din interfered with my own work, I could not help but admire her endurance; for the physical labor of mastering a lesson was certainly equal to that of a good farm hand, for the same period of time. This way of studying history seemed extremely ridiculous. But the method pursued by myself and several others in beginning algebra at about the same time was not greatly superior. Our text-book con- tained several long sets of problems which were the terror of the class, and scarcely one of which we were able to solve alone. We had several friends, however, who could solve them, and, by calling upon them for help, we obtained the "statement" for each one. All 4 HOW TO STUDY these statements I memorized, and in that way I was able to "pass off" the subject. A few years later, when a school principal, I had a fifteen-year-old boy in my school who was intolerably lazy. His ambition was temporarily aroused, however, when he bought a new book and began the study of history. He happened to be the first one called upon, m the first recitation, and he started off finely. But soon he stopped, in the middle of a sentence, and sat down. When I asked him what was the matter, he simply replied that that was as far as he had got. Then, on glancing at the book, I saw that he had been repro- ducing the text verbatim, and the last word that he had uttered was the last word on the first page. These few examples suggest the extremes to which young people may go in their methods of study. The first instance might illustrate the muscular method of learning history; the second, the memoriter method of reasoning in mathematics. I have never been able to imagine how the boy, in the third case, went about his task; hence, I can suggest no name for his method. While these methods of study are ridiculous, I am not at all sure that they are in a high degree excep- 11 ti tional. The most extensive investigation of eiamples of this subject has been made by Dr. Lida B. Earhart,^ and the facts that she has collected reveal a woeful ignorance of the whole subject of study. Among other tests, she assigned to eleven- and twelve-year-old children a short selection from a text- • Systematic Study in the Elementary Schools. A popular form of this thesis, entitled Teaching Children to Study, is published in the Riverside Educational Monographs. IMPROPER METHODS 5 book in geography, with the following directions: " Here is a lesson from a book such as you use in class. Do whatever you think you ought to do in studying this lesson thoroughly, and then teU (write down) the different things you have done in studying it. Do not write anything else."* Out of 842 children who took this test, only fourteen really found, or stated that they had found, the subject of the lesson. Two others said that they would find it. Eighty-eight really found, or stated that they had found, the most important parts of the lesson ; twenty- one others, that they would find them. Four verified the statements in the text, and three others said that they would do that. Nine children did nothing; 158 "did not understand the requirements"; 100 gave irrelevant answers; 119 merely "thought," or "tried to understand the lesson," or "studied the lesson"; and 324 simply wrote the facts of the lesson. In other words, 710 out of the 842 sixth- and seventh-grade pupils who took the test gave indefinite and imsatis- factory answers. This number showed that they had no clear knowledge of the principal things to be done in mastering an ordinary text-book lesson in geography. Yet the schools to which they belonged were, beyond doubt, much above the average in the quality of their instruction. In a later and different test, in which the children were asked to find the subject of a certain lesson that was given to them, 301 out of 828 stated the subject fairly well. The remaining 527 gave only partial, or indefinite, or irrelevant answers. Only 317 out of the » Ihid., Chapter 4. 6 HOW TO STUDY 828 were able to discover the most important fact in the lesson. Yet determining the subject and the lead- mg facts are among the main things that any one must do in mastering a topic. How they could have been intelligent m their study in the past, therefore, is difficult to comprehend. It is, perhaps, imnecessary to collect proofs that young people do not learn how to study, because Teaohera' teachers admit the fact very generally. In- oompUdnV deed, it is one of the common subjects of ^^'th'd f complaint among teachers in the elementary BtTidy. school, in the high school, and in the college. All along the line teachers condole with one another over this evil, college professors placing the blame on the instructors in the high school, and the latter passing it down to teachers in the elementary school. Parents who supervise their children's studies, or who other- wise know about their habits of work, observe the same fact with sorrow. It is at least refreshing to find one matter, in the much-disputed field of education, on which teachers and parents are well agreed. How about the methods of study among teachers themselves ? Unless they have learned to study prop- Method of ^^^^' y^^S people cannot, of course, be ex- study among pected to acquire proper habits from them. The most enlightening single experience I have ever had on this question came several years ago in connection with a series of lectures on Primary Edu- cation. A course of such lectures had been arranged for me without my full knowledge, and I was imex- pectedly called upon to begin it before a class of some seventy-five teachers. It was necessary to commence IMPROPER METHODS 7 speaking without having definitely determined my first point. I had, however, a few notes which I was attempting to decipher and arrange, while talking as best I could, when I became conscious of a slight clatter from all parts of the room. On looking up I found that the noise came from the pencils of my audi- ence, and they were writing down my first pointless remarks. Evidently discrimination in values was not in their program. They call to mind a certain theo- logical student who had been very unsuccessful in taking notes from lectures. In order to prepare him- self, he spent one entire summer studying stenography. Even after that, however, he was unsuccessful, because he could not write quite fast enough to take down all that was said. Even more mature students often reveal very meager knowledge of methods of study. I once had a class of some thirty persons, most of whom were men twenty- five to thirty-five years of age, who were college gradu- ates and experienced teachers. One day I asked them, "When has a book been read properly?" The first reply came from a state university graduate and school superintendent, in the words, " One has read a book properly when one understands what is in it." Most of the others assented to this answer. But when they were asked, " Is a person under any obligations to judge the worth of the thought ? " they divided, some saying yes, others no. Then other questions arose, and the class as a whole soon appeared to be quite at sea as to the proper method of reading books. Perhaps the most interesting thing was the fact that they seemed never to have thought seriously about the matter. 8 HOW TO STUDY Fortunately Dr. Earhart has not overlooked teachers* methods of study in her investigations. In a question- naire that was filled out by 165 teachers, the latter were requested to state the principal things that ought to be done in "thinking about a lesson." This was practi- cally the same test as was given to the 842 children before mentioned. While at least twenty different things were named by these teachers, the most frequent one was, "Finding the most important points."* Yet only fifty-five out of the 165 included even this. Only twenty-five, as Dr. Earhart says, "felt, keenly enough to mention it, the necessity of finding the main thought or problem." Forty admitted that they memorized more often' than they did anything else in their study- ing. Strange to say, a larger percentage of children than of teachers mentioned finding the main thought, and finding the more important facts, as two factors in mastering a lesson. Water sometimes appears to rise higher than its source. About two-thirds of these 165 teachers^ declared that they had never received any systematic instruction about how to study, and more than half of the re- mainder stated that they were taught to memorize in studying. The number who had given any careful instruction on proper methods of study to their own pupils was insignificant. Yet these 165 teachers had had vmusual training on the whole, and most of them had taught several years in elementary schools. If teachers are so poorly informed, and if they are doing so little to instruct their pupils on this subject, how can the latter be expected to know how to study ? ' Ihid., Chapter 5. ^ Ihid., Caiapter 5. IMPROPER METHODS 9 The prevailing definition of study gives further proof of a very meager notion in regard to it. Frequently during the last iew years I have obtained from The pre- students in college, as well as from teachers, aefinitfou of brief statements of their idea of study. Fully '*"*y' nine out of every ten have given memorizing as its nearest synonym. It is true that teachers now and then insist that studying should consist of thinking. They even send children to their seats with the direction to "think, think hard." But that does not usually signify much. A certain college student, when urged to spend not less than an hour and a half on each lesson, repUed, "What would I do after the first twenty minutes?" His idea evidently was that he could read each lesson through and memorize its substance in that time. What more remained to be done ? Very few teachers, I find, are fluent in answering his question. In practice, memorizing constitutes much the greater part of study. The very name recitation suggests this fact. If the school periods are to be spent in reciting, or repro- ducing, what has been learned, the work of preparation very naturally consists in storing the memory with the facts that are to be required. Thinking periods, as a substitute name for recitation periods, suggests a radical change, both in our employment of school time and in our method of preparing lessons. We are not yet prepared for any such change of name. Consider finally the literature treating of study. Certainly there has never been a period when there was a more general interest in education than during the last twenty years, and the progress that has been 10 HOW TO STUDY made in that time is remarkable. Our study of the Tlielitera- social view-point, of child nature, of apper- tnre dealing cgptign mterest, induction, deduction, cor- witn metnoa r ' ^ , . . . of study. relation , etc. , has been rapidly revolutionizmg the school, securing a much more sympathetic govern- ment of yoimg people, a new curriculum, and far more effective methods of instruction. In consequence, the injuries inflicted by the school are fewer and less often fatal than formerly, while the benefits are more numerous and more vital. But, in the vast quantity of valuable educational literature that has been pubhshed, careful searching reveals only two books in English, and none in German, on the "Art of Study." Even these two are ordinary books on teaching, with an extraordinary title. The subject of memorizing has been well treated in some of our psychologies, and has received attention in a few of the more recent works on method. Various other problems pertaining to study have also, of course, been considered more or less, in the past, in books on method. La rhetorics, and in discussions of selection of reading matter. In addition, there are a few short but notable essays on study. There have been practically, however, only two books that treat mainly of this sub- ject, — the two small volumes by Dr. Earhart, already mentioned, which have been very recently published. In the main, the thoughts on this general subject that have got into print have found expression merely as incidents in the treatment of other themes — com- ing, strange to say, largely from men outside the teach- ing profession — and are contained in scattered and forgotten sources. IMPROPER METHODS 11 Thus it is evident not only that children and teachers are little acquainted with proper methods of study, but that even sources of information on the subject are strangely lacking. The seriousness of such neglect is not to be over- estimated. Wrong methods of study, involving much unnecessary friction, prevent enjoyment of gerioneneaa school. This want of enjoyment results in °* *''" "'*'• much dawdling of time, a meager quantity of knowl- edge, and a desire to quit school at the first opportunity. The girl who adopted the muscular method of learning history was reasonably bright. But she had to study very "hard"; the results achieved in the way of marks often brought tears; and, although she attended the high school several years, she never finished the course. It should not be forgotten that most of those who stop school in the elementary grades leave simply because they want to, not because they must. Want of enjoyment of school is likely to result, further, in distaste for intellectual employment in general. Yet we know that any person who amounts to much must do considerable thinking, and must even take pleasure in it. Bad methods of study, therefore, easily become a serious factor in adult life, acting as a great barrier to one's growth and general usefulness. CHAPTER II THE NATURE OF STUDY, AND ITS PRINCIPAL FACTORS OuB physical movements ordinarily take place in response to a need of some sort. For instance, a person How the wishing to reach a certain point, to play a foTshiav certain game, or to lay the foundations for a sriseB. house, makes such movements as are neces- sary to accomplish the purpose desired. Even mere physical exercise grows out of a more or less specific feeling of need. The mental activity called study is likewise called forth in response to specific needs. The Eskimo, for example, compelled to find shelter and having only blocks of ice with which to build, ingeniously con- trives an ice hut. For the sake of obtaining raw mate- rials he studies the habits of the few wild animals about him, and out of these materials he manages by much invention to secure food, clothing, and implements. We ourselves, having a vastly greater variety of materials at hand, and also vastly more ideas and ideals, are much more dependent upon thinking and studf . But, as in the case of the Eskimo, this thinking a^ study arises out of actual conditions, and from specific wants. It may be that we must contrive ways of earning more money; or that the arguments for protective tariff seem too inconsistent for comfort; or that the reports about some of our friends alarm us. The occasions that call forth thought are infinite in number and kind. But the essential fact is that study does not normally 12 THE NATURE OF STUDY 13 take place except under the stimulus or spur of par- ticular conditions, and of conditions, too, that are unsatisfactory. It does not take place even then unless we become conscums of the strained situation, of the want of har- mony between what is and what might be. For ages malarial fever was accepted as a visitation by Divine Providence, or as a natural inconvenience, Uke bad weather. People were not disturbed by lack of har- mony between what actually was and what might be, because they did not conceive the possibihty of pre- venting the disease. Accordingly they took it as a matter of course, and made no study of its cause. Very recently, on the other hand, people have become conscious of the possibility of exterminating malaria. The imagined state has made the real one more and more intolerable; and, as this feeling of dissatisfaction has grown more acute, study of the cause of the disease has grown more intense, imtil it has finally been dis- covered. Thus a lively consciousness of the unsatis- factoriness of a situation is the necessary prerequisite to its investigation ; it furnishes the motive for it. It has ever been so in the history of evolution. Study has not taken place without stimulus or motive. It has always had the practical task of Ufting us out of our difficulties, either material or spiritual, and placing us on our feet. In this way 'it has been merely an instrument — though a most important one — in securing our proper adjustment or adaptation to our environment.' - For discussion of this subject, see Studies in Logical Theory, by John Dewey. See, also. Systematic Study in Elementary Schods, by Dr. Lida B. Eaxhart, Chapters 1 and 2. 14 HOW TO STUDY After we have become acutely conscious of a misfit somewhere in our experience, the actual study done to right it varies indefinitely with the individual. The variety " . „ , . , . j.i_ j * of response The savage follows a hit-and-miss method of maid'for" investigation, and really makes his advances •tndy. i^y. tjappy guesscs rather than by close appli- cation. Charies Lamb's Dissertation on Roast Pig furnishes a typical example of such accidents. The average civilized man of the present does only a little better. How seldom, for instance, is the diet prescribed for a dyspeptic — whether by himself or by a physician — the result of any intelligent study! The true scientist, however, goes at his task in a careful and systematic way. Recall, for instance, how the cause of yellow fever has been discovered. For years people had attributed the disease to invisible particles which they called " fomites." These were supposed to be given off by the sick, and spread by means of their clothing and other articles used by them. Investigation caused this theory to be abandoned. Then, since Dr. J. C. Nott of Mobile had suggested, in 1848, that the fever might be carried by the mosquito, and Dr. C. J. Finlay of Havana had declared, in 1881, that a mos- quito of a certain kind would carry the fever from one patient to another, this variety of mosquito was as- sumed by Dr. Walter Reed, in 1900, to be the source of the disease, and was subjected to very close investiga- tion by him. Several men voluntarily received its bite and contracted the fever. Soon, enough cases were collected to estabUsh the probable correctness of the assumption. The remedy suggested — the utter de- struction of this particular kind of mosquito, including THE NATURE OF STUDY 15 its eggs and larvse — was so efficacious in combating the disease in Havana in 1901, and in New Orleans in 1905, that the theory is now considered estabUshed. Thus systematic study has relieved us of one of the most dreaded diseases to which mankind has been subject. An extensive study, like this investigation, into the cause of yellow fever employs induction very plainly. It also employs deduction extensively, inas- „ ... , , , , , , , ^« pnnoipal much as hypotheses that have been reached factors in more or less inductively have to be widely '" ^* applied and tested, and further conclusions have to be drawn from them. Such a study, therefore, involving both induction and deduction and their numerous short cuts, contains the essential factors common to the investigation of other topics, or to study in general; for different subjects cannot vary greatly when it comes to the generaljmethod-^i-theiE -attack. An analysis, therefore, which reveals the principal factors in this study is likely to bring to light the main factors of study in general. If the search for the cause of yellow fever were traced more fuUy, one striking feature discovered would be the fact that the investigation was never aimless. The need of unraveling the mystery jn'g „f° was often very pressing, for we have had p^g°f j^'^, three great epidemics of yellow fever in our laotor in own country since 1790, and scientists have been eager to apply themselves to the problem.^ Yet a specific purpose, in the form of a definite hypothesis of some sort, was felt to be necessary before the study could proceed intelligently. 16 HOW TO STUDY Thus, during the epidemic of 1793, the contagious- ness of the disease was debated. Then the theory of "fomites" arose, and imderwent investigation. Fi- nally, the spread of the disease through the mosquito was proposed for the solution. And while books of reference were examined and new observations were collected in great number, such work was not imder- taken by the investigators primarily for the sake of increasing their general knowledge, but with reference to the particular issue at hand. The important question now is, Is this, in general, the way in which the ordinary student should work? Of course, he is much less mature than the scientist, and the results that he achieves may have no social value, in comparison. Yet, should his method be the same ? At least, should his study likewise be under the guidance of specific purposes, so that these would direct and limit his reading, observation, and indepen- dent thinking ? Or would that be too narrow, indeed, exactly the wrong way ? And, instead of limiting him- self to a collection of such facts as help to answer the few problems that he might be able to set up, should he be tmmindful of particular problems? Should he rather be a collector of facts at large, endeavoring to develop an interest in whatever is true, simply because it is true? Here are two quite different methods of study suggested. Probably the latter is by far the more common one among immature students. Yet the for- mer is the one that, in the main, will be advocated in this book as a factor of serious study. Dr. Reed in this case went far beyond the discov- eries of previous mvestigators. Not only did he con- THE NATURE OF STUDY 17 ceive new tests for old hypotheses, but he posited new hypotheses, as well as collected the data that would prove or disprove them. Thus, while he no 2. The anp- doubt made much use of previous facts, Jf'thonghf he went far beyond that and succeeded in {°ot//i^°^ enlarging the confines of knowledge. That rti^y- is a task that can be accomplished only by the most mature and gifted of men. The ordinary scholar must also be a collector of facts. But he must be content to be a receiver rather than a contributor of knowledge; that is, he must occupy himself mainly with the ideas of other persons, as presented in books or lectures or conversation. Even when he takes up the study of nature, or any other field, at first hand, he is generally under the guidance of a teacher or some text. Now, how much, if anything, must he add to what is directly presented to him by others ? To what extent must he be a producer in that sense ? Are authors, at the best, capable only of suggesting their thought, leaving much that is incomplete and even hidden from view ? And must the student do much supplementing, even much digging, or severe thinking of his own, in order to get at their meaning? Or, do authors — at least the greatest of them — say most, or all, that they wish, and make their meaning plain? And is it, accordingly, the duty of the student merely to follmo their presentation without enlarging upon it greatly ? The view will hereafter be maintained that any good author leaves much of such work for the student to do. Any poor author certainly leaves much more. 18 HOW TO STUDY The scientist would easily lose his way among the many facts that he gathers for examination, did he not carefully select and bring them into order. He arranges 3. The or- them in groups according to their relations, fa'ota' Ml-""' recognizing a few as havmg supreme im- tliird*'fad;o* portance, subordinating many others to in Btndy. these, and casting aside many more because of their insignificance. This all constitutes a large part of his study. What duty has the less mature student in regard to organization ? Should the statements that he receives be put into order by him ? Are some to be selected as vital, others to be grouped under these, and stiU others to be slighted or even entirely omitted from consider- ation, because of their insignificance? And is he to determine all this for himself, remembering that thorough study requires thejje^ect of some things as well as the e mpha sis of others ? Or do all facts have much the same value, so that they should receive about equal attention, as is the case with the multipUcation tables ? And, instead of being grouped according to relations and relative values, should they be studied, one at a time, in the order in which they are presented, with the idea that a topic is mastered when each single statement upon it is understood .'' Or, if not this, has the reliable author at least already attended to this whole matter, making the various relations of facts to one another and their relative values so clear that the student has little work to do but to follow the printed statement ? Is it even highly unsafe for the latter to assume the responsibility of judging relative values ? And would the neglect or skipping of many supposedly THE NATURE OF STUDY 19 little things be more likely to result in careless, slip- shod work than in thoroughness ? The scientist in charge of the above-mentioned in- vestigation was, no doubt, a modest man. Yet he saw fit to question the old assumption that yellow fever was spread by invisible particles called ing of tie "fomites." Indeed, he had the boldness to atetemeats, disprove it. Then he disproved, also, the f^^lJ,"^^^ assumption that the fever was contagious by »tndy. contact. After that he set out to test a h3fpothesis of his own. His attitude toward the results of former investigations was thus skeptically critical. Every proposition was to be questioned, and the evidence of facts, rather than personal authority or the authority of time, was the sole final test of validity. What should be the attitude of the yoimg student toward the authorities that he studies ? Certainly authors are, as a rule, more mature and far better informed upon the subjects that they discuss than he, otherwise he would not be pursuing them. Are they still so prone to error that he should be critical toward them ? At any rate, should he set himself up as their judge; at times condemning some of their statements outright, or accepting them only in part, — and thus mainTain independent views .'' Or would that be the height of presumption on his part? While it is true that all authors are liable to error, are they much less liable to it in their chosen fields than he, and can he more safely trust them than himself ? And should he, therefore, being a learner, adopt a docile, passive atti- tude, and accept whatever statements are presented ? Or, finally, is neither of these attitudes correct? In- 20 HOW TO STUDY stead of either condemning or accepting authors, is it his duty merely to imderstand and remember what they say ? The scientist is greatly dependent upon his memory. So is every one else, including the yoimg student. 6. Memori- What suggestions, if any, can be made about IftKtor the retaining of facts? ia study. In particular, how prominent in study should be the effort to memorize ? Should memorizing constitute the main part of study — as it so often does — or only a minor part ? It is often contrasted with thinking. Is such a contrast justified? If so, should the effort to memorize usually precede the thinking — as is often the order in learning poetry and Bible verses — or should it follow the thinking ? And why ? Can one greatly strengthen the memory by special exercises for that purpose? Finally, since there are some astonishingly poor ways of memorizing — as was shown in chapter one — there must be some better ways. What, then, are the best, and why? Does all knowledge, Uke this of the scientist, require contact with the world as its endpoint or goal ? And 6. The using is it the duty of the student to pursue any si^h faotor* topic, whether it be a principle of physics, in study. or a moral idea, or a simple story, imtil it proves of benefit to some one ? In that case, encfcigh repetition might be necessary to approximate habits'.— habits of mind and hajbits of action — for the skill necessary for the successful use of some knowledge cannot otherwise be attained. How, then, can habits become best established ? Or is knowledge something apart from the active world, ending rather m self? THE NATURE OF STUDY 21 Would it be narrowly utilitarian and even foolish to expect that one's learning shall necessarily function in practical life? And should the student rather rest content to acquire knowledge for its own sake, not bothering — for the present, at any rate — about actually bringing it to account in any way ? The use to which his ideas had to be put gave Dr. Reed an excellent test of their reliability. No doubt he passed through many stages of doubt as he investi- gated one theory after another. And he could not feel reasonably sure that he was right and had mastered his problem until his final hypothesis had been shown to hold good under varying actual conditions. What test has the ordinary student for knowing when he knows a thing well enough to leave it? He may set up Specific purposes to be accompHshed, as has been suggested. Yet even these may be only ideas; what m^ans has he for knowing when they have been attained ? It is a long distance from the first approach to an important thought, to its final assimilation, and nothing is easier than to stop too soon. If there are any waymarks along the road, indicating the different stages reached; particularly, if there is a recognizable endpoint assuring mastery, one might avoid many dangerous headers by knowing the fact. Or is that particularly what recitations and marks are for? And instead of expecting an independent way of determining when he has mastered a subject, should the student simply rely upon his teacher to acquaint him with that fact ? Investigators of the source of yellow fever previous to Dr. Reed reached conclusions as well as he. But, 22 HOW TO STUDY in the light of later discovery, they appear hasty and foolish, to the extent that they were insisted upon as 7 Tie ten- Correct. A large percentage of the so-called tative atti- discoveries that are made, even by laboratory aeventli fao- experiment, are later disproved. Even in torinBtndy. ^^^^^^ ^^ ^j^j^ ^^^ valuable work of Dr. Reed and his associates, one may feel too sure. It is quite possible that future study will materially supplement and modify our present knowledge of the subject. The scientist, therefore, may well assume an attitude of doubt toward all the results that he achieves. Does the same hold for the young student ? Is all our knowledge more or less doubtful, so that we should hold ourselves ready to modify our ideas at any time ? And, remembering the common tendency to become dogmatic and improgressive on that account, should the young student, in particular, regard some degree of uncertainty about his facts as the ideal state of mind for him to reach ? Or would such uncertainty too easily undermine his self-confidence and render him vacillating in action ? And should firmly fixed ideas, rather than those that are somewhat uncertain, be re- garded as his goal, so that the extent to which he feels sure of his knowledge may be taken as one measure of his progress ? Or can it be that there are two kinds of knowledge ? That some facts are true for all time, and can be learned as absolutely true ; and that others are only probabilities and must be treated as such? In that case, which is of the former kind, and which is of the latter ? The scientific investigator must determine upon his THE NATURE OF STUDY 23 own hypotheses ; he must collect and organize his data, must judge their soundness and trace their con- sequences; and he must finally decide for « p^ • ■ himself when he has finished a task. All for individn- this requires a high degree of intellectual eigttlifao- independence, which is possible only through " ° ^' a healthy development of individuality, or of the native self. A normal self giving a certain degree of indepen- dence and even a touch of originality to all of his thoughts and actions is essential to the student's proper advance, as to th* work of the scientist. Should the student, therefore, be taught to believe in and trust himself, holding his own powers and tendencies in high esteem? Should he learn even to ascribe whatever merit he niay possess to the qualities that are peculiar to him ? And should he, accordiagly, look upon the ideas and iafluences of other persons merely as a means — though most valuable — for the develop- ment of this self that he holds so sacred ? Or should he learn to depreciate himself, to deplore those qual- ities that distinguish him from others? And should he, in consequence, regard the ideas and influences of others as a valuable means of suppressing, or escaping from, his native self and of making him like other persons ? Here are two very different directions in which one may develop. In which direction does human nature most tend? In which direction do educational insti- tutions, in particular, exert their influence ? Does the average student, for example, subordinate his teachers and the ideas he acquires to himself ? Or does he be- 24 HOW TO STUDY come subordinated to these, even submerged by them ? This is the most important of all the problems con- cerning study; indeed, it is the one in which all the others culminate. The above constitute the principal factors m study. But two other problems are of vital importance for the „ .., elementary school. Tie ability „ , . . . , ., i j j. of ohiidien to Studymg IS evidently a complex and tax- »*^*y" ing kind of work. Even though the above discussions reveal the main factors in the study of adults, what light does it throw upon the work of children ? Is their study to contain these factors also ? The first of these two questions, therefore, is. Can children from six to fourteen years of age really be expected to study ? It is not the custom in German elementary schools to include independent study periods in the daily program. More than that, the German language does not even permit children to be spoken of as studying. Children are recognized as being able to learn (lemen) ; but the foreigner, who, in learning German, happens to use the word stvdiren (study) in reference to them, is corrected with a smile and informed that "children can leam but they cannot study. " Stvdiren is a term applicable only to a more mature kind of mental work. This may be only a peculiarity of language. But such suggestions should at least lead us to consider this question seriously. If children really cannot study, what an excuse their teachers have for innumerable failures in this direction! And what sins they have committed in demanding study! But, then, when is THE NATURE OF STUDY 26 the proper age for study reached? Certainly college students sometimes seem to have failed to attain it. If, however, children can study, to what extent can they do it, and at how early an age should they begin to try? The second of these two questions relates to the method of teaching children how to study. Granted that there are numerous very important factors in study, what should be done about ottBaJLng them ? Particularly, assuming that children tJ^^ly.*"" have some power to study, what definite instruction can teachers give to them in regard to any one or all of these factors ? Can it be that, on accoimt of their youth, no direct instruction about method of study would be advisable, that teachers should set a good example of study by their treatment of lessons in class, and rely only upon the imitative tendency of children for some effect on their habits of work ? Or should extensive instruction be imparted to them, as well as to adults, on this subject ? The leading problems in study that have been men- tioned will be successively discussed in the chapters following. These two questions, however. Can children study ? and If so, how can they be taught to do it ? will not be treated in chapters separate from the others. Each will be dealt with in connection with the above factors, their consideration immediately following the discussion of each of those factors. While the proper method of study for adults will lead, much emphasis will fall, throughout, upon suggestions for teaching children how to study. 26 HOW TO STUDY The nature of study cannot be known in full until the character of its component parts has been clearly shown. Yet a working definition of the term tlona of the and some further limitations of it may be in ' place here. Study, in general, is the work that is necessary in the assimilation of ideas. Much of this work consists in thinking. But study is not synonymous with thmking, for it also includes other activities, as mechanical drill, for example. Such drill is often necessary in the mastery of thought. Not just any thinking and any drill, however, may be counted as study. At least only such thinking and such drill are here included within the term as are integral parts of the mental work that is necessary in the accomplishment of valuable purposes. Thinking that is done at random, and drills that have no object beyond acquaintance with dead facts, as those upon dates, lists of words, and location of places, for instance, are imworthy of being considered a part of study. Day-dreaming, giving way to reverie and to casual fancy, too, is not to be regarded as study. Not be- cause it is not well to indulge in such activity at times, but because it is not serious enough to be called work. Study is systematic work, and not play. Reading for recreation, further, is not study. It is certainly very desirable and even necessary, just as play is. It even partakes of many of the characteristics of true study, and reaps many of its benefits. No doubt, too, the extensive reading that children and youth now do might well partake more fully of the nature of study. It would result in more good and less harm; for, beyond THE NATUEE OF STUDY 27 a doubt, much careless reading is injurious to habits of serious study. Yet it would be intolerable to attempt to convert pleasure-reading fully into real study. That would mean that we had become too serious. On the whole, then, the term study as here used has largely the meaning that is given to it in ordinary speech. Yet it is not entirely the same; the term signi- fies a purposive and systematic, and therefore a more limited, kind of work than much that goes under that name. PART II THE NATURE OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTORS IN STUDY, AND THEIR RELATION TO CHILDREN CHAPTER III PROVISION FOB SPECIFIC PtJBPOSES, AS ONE FACTOR OF STUDY The scientific investigator habitually sets up hypoth- eses of some sort as guides in his investigations. Many distinguished men who are not scientists j,^^ j^^^.^ follow and recommend a somewhat similar among eml- - . nent men of method of study. totting np For example, John Morley, M.P., in his ^^l^^ Aspects of Modern Stvdy,^ says, " Some great '*™^y" men, — Gibbon was one and Daniel Webster was another and the great Lord Strafford was a third, — always, before reading a book, made a short, rough analysis of the questions which they expected to be answered in it, the additions to be made to their knowl- edge, and whither it would take them. I have some- times tried that way of studying, and guiding attention; I have never done so without advantage, and I commend it to you." Says Gibbon,^ "After glancing my eye over the design and order of a new book, I suspended the perusal until I had finished the task of self-examiaation ; tiU I had resolved, in a solitary walk, all that I knew or believed or had thought on the subject of the whole work or of some particular chapter; I was then qualified to discern how much the author added to my original stock; and, if I was sometimes satisfied with the agreement, I was sometimes armed by the opposition of our ideas. " ' Page 71. = Dr. Smith's Gihhm, p. 64. 31 32 HOW TO STUDY President James Angell emphasizes a similar thought in the following words : — I would like to recommend to my young friends who desire to profit by the use of this library, the habit of reading with some system, and of making brief notes upon the con- tents of the books they read. If, for instance, you are study- ing the history of some period, ascertain what works you need to study, and find such parts of them as concern your theme. Do not feel obliged to read the whole of a large treatise, but select such chapters as touch on the subject in hand and omit the rest for the time. Young students often get swamped and lose their way in the Serbonian bogs of learning, when they need to explore only a simple and plain pathway to a specific destination. Have a purpose and a plan, and adhere to it in spite of alluring temptations to turn aside into attractive fields that are remote from your subject.^ Noah Porter expresses himself even more pointedly in these words : — In reading we do well to propose to ourselves definite ends and pinposes. The distinct consciousness of some object at present before us, imparts a manifold greater interest to the contents of any volume. It imparts to the reader an appropri- ative power, a force of afilnity, by which he insensibly and unconsciously attracts to himself all that has a near or even a remote relation to the end for which he reads. Anyone is con- scious of this who reads a story with the purpose of repeating it to an absent friend; or an essay or a report, with the design of using the facts or arguments in a debate; or a poem, with the design of reviving its imagery and reciting its finest passages. Indeed, one never learns to read effectively until he learns to ' Address at Dedication of Ryerson Public Library Building, Grand Rapids, Mich., Oct 5, 1904. PROVISION FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES 33 read in such a spirit — not always, indeed, for a definite end, yet always with a mind attent to appropriate and retain and turn to the uses of culture, if not to a more direct application. The private history of every self-made man, from Franklin onwards, attests that they all were uniformly, not only earnest but select, in their reading, and that they selected their books "with distinct reference to the purposes for which they used them. Indeed, the reason why self-trained men so often sur- pass men who are trained by others in the effectiveness and success of their reading, is that they know for what they read and study, and have definite aims and wishes in all their dealings with books.* It is evident from the above that the practice of setting up specific aims for study is not uncommon. Some actual examples of such purposes, „ , ,■ 1 - 1 , • • 1 Examples of mowever, may help to make their, character speaifiopni- plainer. Following are a number of examples '"^ '"