VALUE OF INSTITUTE INSTRUCTION.

"TEACHERS' INSTITUTES" have inaugurated a new era in the science of teaching. The impetus which they have given to inquiry and earnest thought is very generally felt in the sphere of public instruction. They occupy a place which can not be supplied by any other agency; and though they do not furnish the solid nutriment, yet they supply the teacher the vital air which is equally indispensable to him. Wherever they have been most regularly and systematically supported, there have the abundant fruits demonstrated their necessity.

Previous to their establishment, the methods of instruction were in many respects arbitrary and unphilosophic, and were very much allied to those which prevailed in the dark ages.* A reason fit to

* The scholars of Abelard, as he himself tells us in his Introduction to Theology, requested him to give them "some philosophical arguments such as were fit to satisfy their minds; begged that he would instruct them, not merely to repeat what he taught them, but to understand it; for no one can believe what he can not comphend, and it is absurd to set out to preach to others concerning

satisfy a rational mind was rarely required. Ipse dixit was an ample explanation for that which was intricate. The Teachers' Institute has provoked inquiry. It has taken methods of instruction and examined them by the light of philosophy, and, rejecting the worthless, has shown the practical value of the good. It has discovered new methods of proof and illustration, and entirely revolutionized the practice of primary teaching.

The plan of instruction adopted in the Institute is suited to the wants of every grade of schools. The superiority of the training which it has inaugurated is beginning to be realized, and the professors in our colleges must adopt the methods and the spirit which it imparts, or the defects of their systems of instruction will detract materially from their usefulness and their prestige; for already a comparison is beginning to be instituted in the public mind, between the value of Normal and Collegiate culture.

The professor who sits at his desk and hears class

things which neither those who teach nor those who learn can understand."-Guizot's History of Civilization, vol. i., p. 147.

When Pestalozzi first propounded his principles, the education of the poorer classes, everywhere, was essentially defective. In method it was purely mechanical, without any basis of sound science. The head was but little improved, and the heart remained wholly untouched. Among the higher classes, the only aim was the acquisition of knowledge. The faculties of simple apprehension and verbal memory, especially the latter, were called into action. Other faculties were neglected.-M. E. M. Jones, of the School of the Home and Colonial Society, London.

pre

es, keeping tally the while with his pencil, and serves the same indifference toward the dunce and the brilliant scholar, is contrasted with him who studies the mental peculiarities of his pupils, who classifies them according to the power of thought which they have attained, and who puts his instruction in such a light that it can not fail to elicit reflection, and induce a healthy and vigorous development. The difference between the two systems is very marked; it is that between mechanically hearing pupils recite the words of a text-book, and that of intelligently instructing them in correct processes of thought. The advantage to the pupil of normal instruction over the stereotyped methods pursued in many of our colleges is worthy of note. Even if a person is never intending to teach, but simply desires to obtain a thorough education, he can not fail to perceive the superiority of the former. He learns every thing from a new stand-point, more elevated and independent. He not only learns a lesson so as to be accountable for it in the class-room, but he must have it so digested and matured as to be able to teach it to others. This additional culture gives permanence and definiteness to his conceptions, and ripens his judgment.

The importance which Institutes have assumed within a few years past, has rendered it necessary that the most efficient and well-digested plans for conducting them should be studied. The objections

which have been urged against them, and the preju dice which exists in some minds, has commonly resulted from mismanagement. The time during which an Institute usually remains in session is very limited, and in order that the best results be attained and the time be employed to the best advantage, it is necessary that the exercises be reduced to strict system. There must be a plan, and the proceedings must be made to conform to it. Before we can know

what plan is best, it is necessary to know what the ends are that it is to subserve.

OBJECT OF A TEACHERS' INSTITUTE.

THERE are two main purposes designed to be accomplished by the Institute. The first consists in imparting to the teacher a knowledge of the Philosophy of his Profession. The second is the establishment of a common sympathy between teacher and people. There are several minor results connected with these which the Institute properly contributes ; but they should ever be held subordinate to these.

A system of instruction will meet with success in proportion to its conformity to the laws of psychological development. To be fruitful in good results, it must be founded upon principles which govern our spiritual natures. If a teacher proceeds upon a theory contrary to this, he either gives an erroneous development, or he endeavors to force upon the minds of his pupils instruction which they do not appreciate, and which can never be of any practical value.

To discover the philosophical principles which underlie every department of instruction, and to properly apply these to the natural order of mental development, should be the first and leading object of attention.