FROM a study of the questions and examination papers submitted to us during the last year we find that there exist in the schools connected with the university a few well-defined methods of teaching history, a brief characterization of which may be of service to us. What may be called the " discussive" method is in use in some schools. This method emphasizes the expression of individual opinion, and the discussion rather than the acquisitioii of facts. The questions set for examination are

more »

... and general: "Discuss feudalism," "Compare Spartan and Athenian institutions;" questions the preparation of which involves little labor on the part of the teacher and which permit the pupil to cover a large space of paper with a very small amount of definite knowledge. Another favorite form of question of the discussive method is: " What might have been the result if everything had been different ?" "What would have been the result if Karl Martel had been defeated at T.ours ?" "We would now belong to the Semitic instead of the Aryan race, and would be polygamous Mohammedan Turks, worshiping many idols instead of Christians worshiping the one true God," is, if not a typical answer, at least one actually given. And since no one can prove what might have been if everything had been different, one such answer is about as good as another. We do not mean to say that discussion is not necessary in teaching history, but young pupils may easily be trained to talk in a wiseacre fashion about things which they do not understand and of which they have no accurate knowledge. Closely related to this discussive method, in that it emphasizes the expression of individual opinion, is one that may be This is the fifth article in the series prepared by the Departmental Examiners of the University of Chicago. 84 This content downloaded from 128.083.063.