LIFE AND STUDY OF ENGLISH

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 858, 2 July 1910, Page 9

LIFE AND STUDY OF ENGLISH

In a rcceiiit discussion, Prof. J. H. Gardiner, of Harvard, and Mr. AV. D. Lewis, of the North High School, Syracuse, join issue as to the, merits of college entrance requirements in. English and their influence upon the higliscliool training in the English brandies.. Professor Gardiner defends the requirements, contending that they do not dominate the secondary schools; that tihey do lead to satisfactory preparation for. college; and that the course of study on which they are based is "almost ideally well devised for the enlightenment and training of the hoys aaw girls wiiom the colleges must, miss."

Mr. Lewis, in reply, protests that tho colleges do in effect determine tho English course in tho higii schools; that a prescribed list of books "fails to provide for. varying taste and ability in tho teacher and for divergence in social condition, age, maturity, a.lid capacity of children"; and that "the fact that n.u examination is ahead places a. wrong motive before both teachor and pupil, and teiids to rob the consideration of a classic of its best cultural value." He illustrates his points effectively with questions taken fi'om recent college entrance board examinations and from the Harvard entrance examination in 1909.

Tile honours are fairly evenly divided. It is unquestionable, as Dr. Abraham Flexner forcibly showed by his critic-isms in "Tho American College," that the t-eiutancy of the present system of entrance examination's is to extend the conta-ol of college standards over tho secondary and even over the primary schools, and that as long a.s the college standards themselves . are under criticism an d are being considerably modified, this tendency should bo studied with the closest scrutiny. Oil the other 1 ' hand, Professor Gardiner's fundamental contentions with regard to tho English course, that "some list of books is uccessary if there a,re to be examinations," and tlwt "a,, carefully chosen list is a gua.rd against crankiness among isa-hited teachers and against cutting down the time given to English in the weaker schools," are so reasonable as to require 110 defence. But it ought to be perfectly possible to reconcile differences at this point, a.t least. By an expansion of the list of books on the one hand, and an increase in the number of optional questions on the. other, ■11 r. Lewis and lids colleagues could be assured the fuller freedom in teaching that they seek, whilo Professor Gardiner and the colleges could be satisfied in their demands for a wider range of' reading. Erom the longer list of books the high-school teacher might select a smaller number for detailed "informational" study to meet entrance requirements, and at tho same time, without sacrificing thoroughness, cultivate a broader field for general literary appreciation. Professor Gardiner makes a palpable hit when he aims a shot at the loose school standards of English outside the English course. "Wo assume," ho says, "that good writing should be a •habit; as a matter of fact, in many schools bad writing is the habit established Ijy four years in the high school, since, tho boy,, is allowed to bo as slack and careless as he chooses to bo in fourfirths of all the writing that he does." But . there is a widely-felt need for more fundamental chances in the teaching of English, for a clearer "definition of the aim arid value of the study of Literature, whatever else it may- be, is tho interpretation and appreciation of life in- forms of beauty ; and the stud.v of literature,. whatever else it' may do, should enrich, clarify, and ennoble life. Neither technical analysis, nor mere memory' work can he tho measure of the power that good reading ex-erts upon the intellect, tho passions, or the will; whereas either of them, may easily obliterate that power. Clearer and cleaner thinking, purged desires,_ sympathy, and tho inspiration to ( service are the fruits by which all English study that' is worthy of tho name is known./' Impalpable' as theso are, thev must be recognised and appraised before the wisdom or unwisdom of educational methods can bo determined. Ancient precedents may have to ho reversed. Written examinations may have to he profoundly modified or even dispensed .with. Ten minutes' chat boy mav tell tlie tcaobe-r hot-tor than- any studied essav whether the snark of enlightenment has caught and kindled.—Now York "Post.'.'