able work. The general result of these movements is a certain ability on the part of the pupil to read and repeat stories of fancy, but a shameful ignorance of true stories of nature and those of our statesmen, inventors, poets, and the common man and his work.

It is often maintained that myths, folk-lore, and fairy stories. should be taught children as a beginning in literature. But this, also, is founded upon a false basis. It assumes that a child can appreciate literature, or anything else, that is not closely associated with his personal experience. This assumption is contrary to a fundamental principle in acquiring knowledge and appreciation, namely, that the new must be associated or related to what has already been experienced. In the case of myths, folklore, and fairy stories, the child is taken away from his own experience and is caused simply to read reports of what other people (adults) have fancied, in an effort to make him re-live their lives instead. of living his own. This is based upon the erroneous belief that the child of today re-lives necessarily the life of the adult of such peoples as the ancient Persian, Hebrew, Greek and Roman, who reported their thoughts, feelings and beliefs. But we are safe in asserting that if a child is to appreciate literature at all, the subject-matter must be closely related to his own experience.

Another very common reason for employing these kinds of material so exclusively is that they interest the child. It is true they do ordinarily arouse interest, but it must not be assumed that interest alone is sufficient ground for selecting reading material, nor that other kinds of stories will not interest the child. Such stories interest the child largely through incongruity, that is, their chief appeal comes through the amusement which they afford. But amusement must not be identified with interest; it is only one form of interest. Stories of people, animals, bees and birds will interest the child intensely, if well presented, although they may not amuse him. But the fact that they do not amuse him is no argument whatever against them. If fairy stories, myths, and folk-lore are employed for the purpose of amusement, they should be given the relatively small place in reading that amusement should properly occupy, and not be given the whole field.

It is often argued that a child cannot be interested in true stories about people and his environment. If the teacher knows nothing about people and nature, and is not interested in stories of this character, the pupil is not likely to become interestel in them. But if the teacher is as well prepared to teach stories of people and nature as she is to teach those of fancy, she will have little difficulty in arousing the interest of the pupil. Yet, if she did not succeed, it would not argue that the former were inferior to the latter. They would excite less, but they would be more likely to arouse interest in the world in which the child lives, an interest that is more abiding. Furthermore, if the child should prefer stories of fancy, the fact in itself would not be sufficient evidence that they should constitute his basal reading; it cannot be conceded that a child of six or eight years of age is a better judge of the subject-matter of education than a more experienced person. We must not forget that it is one thing to follow a child's fortuitous interests more or less blindly, but quite another to rouse and direct new and permanent interests.

The Use of Questions in the Recitation PRINCIPAL A. E. BROWN, STATE HIGH SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL. ARTS, GREELEY, COLORADO.

T

HE little boy who remarked, rather petulantly, evidently after a severe cross-examination at school, that he was going to be a school teacher, since the teacher did not have to know anything,-"all she needed to do was to ask questions,"-may have been drawing justifiable conclusions from the kind. of teaching observed. Some questions require little more on the part of the teacher than a vague idea on the topic under consideration and a rising inflection at the end of the sentence. The teacher of the boy in question may have been using only enough ingenuity to avoid the necessity of real teaching and to prevent humiliating questions being put to her by wide-awake students. But at its best questioning is a process that is anything but amateurish and rough-and-ready. It is doubtful if artistry in teaching is anywhere so evident as in the matter of skillful questioning. Good scholarship and good discipline are more common than good questioning.

We may well ask, "Why do we question?" since the technique of questioning depends upon the reason for questioning. Questioning in the class room has a different purpose from the purpose motivating most questioning in every day life. The employer questions the employee to see if the process has been properly performed, or to discover a fact that will throw light on the business condition of the firm. The father questions the son to see whether he has been weeding the garden or whether the allurements of the swimming-pool drew him away from the performance of the more prosaic duty. The physician questions his patient in order that he may decide how to prescribe. In each of these cases the object is to get such information as will guide the questioner in his relation to the one questioned or to the enterprise to which

both belong. This element of extracting information mainly of use in the plans of the questioner, is to be found to a small degree in school questioning also. It is often advisable to question in order to size up the pupil's knowledge. Then methods and subject matter can be made appropriate to the individual or the group. But in the main, good questioning has its center of gravity in the stimulation of thought on the part of the pupil. The superiority L of the good teacher over the nominal teacher can usually be found to have its locus in the thought-provoking quality of her questions. Now how are thought-stimulating questions asked? At what should one aim?

(1) For one thing, the judgment may be called into play. It may be required that the pupil weigh a number of facts before making a response. For instance, if it be asked as to whether the Congressional caucus is a desirable feature of our political machinery, more judgment is required than if one should ask who attend caucuses, or what do caucuses do. One needs in this case to arrange the positive accomplishments on one side against the objections on the other side and to strike a balance. The formation of reasonable judgments on the basis of facts presented is so important a factor in every-day life, that the school exercises should lend all possible support to the development of this needed capacity.

(2) Another form of thought-stimulating question is that which requires analysis on the part of the student. Were one to ask pupils to state at what point in our colonial history the desire for independence can first be readily recognized, this would require analysis of the character of the pre-revolutionary events. Analysis and judgment are commonly found in the same process of thought, but theoretically they can be dissociated as distinct processes. An example may be found in a question as to what recent events can be traced to the ill-advised actions of the Congress of Vienna. One would need to analyse treaty arrangements into territorial assignments, violations of nationality, etc., and then judge as to the connection between these arrangements and recent events.

(3) A very legitimate and frequently desirable outcome of the

questioning process is the appearance of further questioning on the part of the pupil. A teacher should be skeptical as to the worth of her questions if occasionally her questions do not provoke as a response an active interrogative attitude on the part of her class. Such questions might call for facts not immediately at hand for the pupil; they might also open up a new phase of the subject. For instance, as an outcome of the question concerning the Treaty of Vienna cited above, a pupil might wish to know whether there was no one in the Congress of Vienna who championed, as did President Wilson at Paris, the rights of the small nation. We dismiss this point by remarking that a moving train of thought soon develops a question-mark.

or

Now, how should questions be evaluated? Obviously one test should be the purpose of the question; a question which provokes thought and results in analysis, or which calls for judgment, or leads to thoughtful questions on the part of the pupil, is to be preferred to one which tests merely the memory for facts, although : that form of question is at times permissible. Questions which do not call for analysis, judgment, or thoughtful question, need to be critically examined ,and a defensible explanation found. Another standard by which questions may be judged is the economical accomplishment of the purpose for which they are asked. In order that there may be economy in questioning it is necessary, (1) that the response be a ready one. This does not rule out questions which require time for reflection, but does require that the answer come forth in an interval appropriate to the nature of the question. If this be not the case, there is ground for inquiry as to the clearness of the question, as to its appropriateness to the knowledge and maturity of the class. (2) It is necessary also that the questions be unified and deal with units of thought of some magnitude. Straggling, scrappy questions are a rather sure sign of poor teaching. (3) Questions should appeal to most of the class. It is uneconomical to lose the stronger section of the class in the propounding of questions which appeal only to the weaker students, or vice versa.

The following chart on questioning procedure has been prepared