As a member of the Catalogue Committee in one of our smaller colleges, it has been my privilege the past two years to study catalogues from all parts of the country—perhaps sixty or more. Besides the various general matters noticed, I have naturally turned for information and help to the history courses offered and to the college entrance requirements in history. This survey has given me several definite impressions.
The requirements in history are generally not organised as are the departments of English, Latin and Mathematics. Frequently they are not definite in their statements as to just what they wish done. One of our best northern colleges gives four lines to History; over one page to Science; over five pages to English.
Several colleges prepare their requirements with care, although few are above improvement. That is, one college will enlarge on the text-books and supplementary reading, but say nothing of the methods of work; another will do just the opposite. Among the best requirements noticed in the South are those of the University of Mississippi, the University of the South, and Tulane University. Themost satisfactory one is from Leland Stanford Junior University, which gives a trifle over two pages, and includes both books and methods. Probably half a page would be more than the average length in the catalogues examined.
Two articles inThe History Teachers’ Magazinefor October, 1909, “Lessons Drawn from the Papers of History Examination Candidates,” by Miss Briggs, and the editorial on “Method the Need,” have stimulated thought. The following paragraphs are offered as suggestions in one direction.
It would seem that we might claim two or three pages in the catalogue; they could easily be filled. The following is one plan that might be used:
The courses allowed as units.
[Then something like the following which is adapted from the catalogue of Leland Stanford Junior University.]
Text-Books[4]—Goodspeed, “History of the Ancient World” (Scribners); Morey, “Outlines of Ancient History” (American Book Co.); Myers, “Ancient History,” Revised Edition (Ginn); West, “Ancient World” (Allyn and Bacon); Wolfson, “Essentials in Ancient History” (American Book Co.); or an equivalent.
For supplementary reading and reference, work in some of the following is suggested: Botsford, “Story of Rome;” Cox, “General History of Greece” (Student Series); Fling, “Source Book of Greek History;” Munro, “Source Book of Roman History;” Pelham, “Outlines of Roman History;” Shuckburgh, “History of Rome,” and Ginn & Co’s “Classical Atlas,” or Kiepert, “Classical Atlas;” Tozer’s “Primer of Classical Geography.”
This is carried out for the four groups.
Then give general suggestions at the end: the work required of students in definite statements; a few helps for the teachers preparing students for the college, as “Report of the Committee of Seven,”History Teachers’ Magazine, a fewsyllabiandmap books.
Those suggestions may seem entirely unnecessary to the colleges and universities in the northeastern part of the country, but they are greatly needed elsewhere, as in many parts of the South where the high school movement, though growing rapidly, is yet in its formative period. Even with the splendid school system of California Stanford gives details, and I fancy such help is needed in many of the smaller high and private preparatory schools throughout the country. Furthermore, if the best known colleges and universities wish to draw their students from all parts of the country, they should make their requirements so plain that they can be used in any section.
Mary Shannon Smith.
Meredith College, Raleigh, N. C.
Editor History Teacher’s Magazine:
The college entrance examination seems to be a contest between the man who makes out the questions and the teacher who aims chiefly or solely to get his pupils by the examination. The teacher who desires mainly to teach history and how to study it, and to whom the examination is only an incident, is the “innocent third party.” The examiner and the examination-crammer alike search the papers of previous years in the attempt to outwit each other. It would never do to ask questions only on the most important parts of the subject; the candidates would surely know all about such questions, a most undesirable state of affairs! A teacher who, perchance, would try to teach some of “the glory that was Greece” and, to save time for some first-hand acquaintance with Greek literature cuts off the Peloponnesian war with a single lesson may be doing right, but his pupils may suffer when asked to describe the Peloponnesian war after the failure of the expedition to Syracuse. He may dwell on the spread of Greek civilization over the East, and his pupils be asked to describe, with dates, Alexander’s battles. He may emphasize the civilization of the Empire and his pupils be examined on the lives of insignificant emperors.
In mathematics the topics to be treated in algebra are specified in detail; and a syllabus of required or book propositions in geometry is issued. In physics a list of experiments is furnished. In English a definite list of books for reading and another for careful study are prescribed years in advance.
It is in the air that certain objections to the field of ancient history as stated by the Committee of Seven will be met by providing a list of topics representing the desirable subjects for study in the pre-classical and early medieval periods. Why not go further and make it safe for a teacher who would subordinate the passing of an examination designed to beat the crammer, to a sound knowledge of essentials and substantial preparation in methods of historical study? The worst that could happen would be that an increasing number of candidates would know the essentials so well that most of them would pass good examinations. But better still would be the possibility of using the time thus gained for a thorough and intensive study of a very limited portion of the field, whereby, to some degree, a right method of historical study could be inculcated, thus securing better work in history in college.
This plea is put forth not with a desire to make easier the work of college preparation, but from a feeling that the efforts of the conscientious pupil and teacher should reach out to a higher and more enduring purpose than “beating the examiner.”
W. H. C.