the work for the daily recitation must be so definite that no one can fail to understand and meet them; and finally, the maps, charts, reference books, and all other class room equipment must be as familiar to the pupils as to the teacher. Few will question the validity of these statements. Their application is sure to result in tangible rewards.

Besides applying the foregoing principle of ordinary business management, the history teacher will have to master some of the technique of historyrecitation management. By this is meant that she will have to learn to utilize at the proper time and in the proper place all the resources at her command. A special report has been planned to illuminate a certain point in the lesson. Able manipulation brings this forth at the opportune time. An illustrative source extract is to be read when a definite point in the recitation is reached. Efficient direction sees to it that this source is at hand and read. A certain picture, sketch, chart, or what not is to be used at a point in the lessons. Skilled management has these at hand and uses them at the appropriate time and place. To scientifically and effectively manage a history recitation is not the work of a neophyte. Skill in it comes only through much experience and careful attention to all phases of the process.

ASSIGNMENT OF THE LESSON.

One of the most important things that a teacher does in any given history recitation is the assignment of the work upon which the next one is to be based. Just when and how this is to be done and the amount of time devoted to it are matters that the teacher must settle for herself. It is likely safe to assume that few history teachers spend too much time in assigning the lesson; and that fewer still make the assignment too specific, especially for younger pupils. Considerable time and a rich store of schemes are re

quired to make a history assignment sufficiently specific, clearly comprehensive and adequately appealing. The following is a list of some things that a history teacher might do in assigning a lessonthe specific thing will, of course, always be determined by the character and advancement of the class: Call attention to the most important points in the advanced lessons; outline the lesson for the pupils; explain difficult points in the new lesson; give leading questions; show pupils how to make their own outlines; suggest definite references, pictures, and maps for study; develop the outline of the advanced lesson with the aid of the class; place the difficult words on the blackboard and pronounce them; read the advanced lesson over with the pupils, noting the large topics, and asking them to prepare the new lesson according to the outline thus made; simply outline enough of the lesson to show the pupil how to study it, and leave the remainder for them to do; assign by topics with little discussion or explanation; and give a list of topics with general references, and citations to special references, indicating at the same time the relative importance of the topics. It is often desirable with beginners in high school history to read the lesson over with them one day and ask

them to recite upon it the following day. Good general rules to follow are: set definite problem for mastery; give definite instructions as to what to learn and where and how to acquire it; and never pass to the work of the recitation proper until all clearly understand just what is desired for the succeeding period. FORMS.

Some five years ago, Mr. Walter Libby, after visiting a great many high school history recitations in the capacity of a high school inspector, summarized them under the following forms:

1. Combination of the recitation and oral method. The emphasis in this case was on the recitation method. The teacher questioned the class sharply on the material prepared, and when necessary filled in with extra material, her own statements being a link in the development of the lesson. There was no digression or lack of continuity. The line of cause and effect held things together. Coherence was much in evidence.

2. A combination of the recitation and oral method with the emphasis on the latter. In this form of the recitation the text-book material was not emphasized. The teacher did most of the talking, using much illustrative material to make her points clear. Enough questions were asked merely to get the subject introduced.

3. Topical recitation. This sort of a recitation was conducted by means of special reports by the pupils on especially assigned topics. The text-book was little used.

4. The study recitation. Here the pupils worked with books open, wrote reports, drew pictures, made maps, read in reference books, and other things characteristic of the laboratory method, of which, indeed, this form of recitation is an application.

5. Inductive recitation. An outline was given for this type of recitation. The pupils recited on the material suggested in the outline. The material was often rearranged and supplemented. Relations were carefully worked out and generalizations made. All facts on a point were brought forward and carefully interpreted.

6. Test recitation. In this form the teacher asked question after question. She gave no information. The story of the book was reconstructed bit by bit. The information was piece-meal. It was simply a test of memory with no development. A superabundance of memory questions.

7. Text-book recitation. Here both the teacher

and pupils had the text open. It seemed to be used mostly by unprepared teachers. It was absolutely lifeless and demanded little on the part of anyone."

While Mr. Libby has given us an excellent summary of the different forms of the high school history recitation, yet there seem to be two rather important, but likely rather uncommon ones, that he did not see. These are what one might call the individual recitation and the recitation wholly in charge

"Forms of High School Recitation," in "Education," XXVIII, 601 ff.

of the class. The writer has used the first very extensively in both elementary and high school history classes. For example, in teaching the Crusades, the Reformation, the French Revolution, and similar topics, it was understood in the beginning that each member of the class would be required to formulate in his own words a connected discussion of these topics and recite the same to the satisfaction of the instructor. The class as a whole was dismissed while these individual recitations were going on and set to work on some advanced problem.

The second form, which Mr. Libby evidently did not see, is described by Miss Lotta Clark in her article on "A Good Way to Teach History.' Here one finds the socialized recitation pure and simple. All the assigning, conducting and reciting the work was done by the pupils the teacher keeping herself in the background all the while, yet at the same time remaining an unconscious director of all the operations of the class period.

THE HISTORY QUESTION.

There are three things connected with the question as a means of attaining efficiency in high school history instruction, to which the teacher should continually give her attention. These are the quality, number and kind of questions she is daily using. Certain essential qualities of good history questions should always be uppermost when a teacher is formulating them. If a history question stimulates reflection, is adapted to the pupils' experience, and calls forth a well-rounded thought clearly and logically expressed, it certainly has some elements of superior quality. In order to make sure that her questions will contain these desirable qualities, a history teacher must embody in her plan for the day six or eight thought-provoking questions, calling for discrimination and associations, based on facts contained in the lesson.

The

Just how many questions to ask during a fortyminute history period is difficult to determine. form of the recitation determines this. In an inductive type the teacher will certainly ask more questions than in a topical one. Some idea of how many questions history teachers should ask might be obtained from the number they are really asking. Miss Stevens, in gathering material for her study of the question, visited some twenty history recitations, and actually counted the number of questions asked during a forty-minute period. She found the following, each number standing for the number of questions asked during one recitation: 41, 142, 125, 94, 64, 90, 60, 53, 61, 97, 47, 66, 93, 61, 76, 88, 80, 128, 68, and 90.8 Few teachers will dissent from the opinion that in the majority of these cases too many questions were asked, if each one actually conformed to all the foregoing qualities of a good question.

If attention is directed to the kind of questions the foregoing history teachers asked, one finds an answer to the query of why they asked so many. Both Miss

7" School Review," XVII, 255 ff.

8"The Question as a Measure of Efficiency in Instruction." 11.

Stevens and Mr. Taft gave some attention to the kind of questions a few history teachers actually ask. In eleven history recitations visited, these investigators found the following, the first number in each pair standing for the total number of questions asked and the second for the number of memory questions: 41, 29; 66, 60; 90, 75; 94, 74; 125, 87; 142, 103; 85, 85; 82, 70; 82, 50; 68, 60; 87, 72.° The fact that the number of memory questions was considerably higher in the history recitation than in some others, led Miss Stevens to remark that no other object in the curriculum adheres to the text-book so closely for content, organization and method as history; and that no other subject confines itself so steadfastly to facts.10

Mr. Taft 11 tabulated material on the following kinds of questions: questions suggesting the answer, thought questions, double, triple and more than three questions, memory, and natural questions. He found considerable use of answer-suggesting, but very little of the natural and thought-provoking question. Both his and Miss Stevens' findings seem to indicate that some teachers are giving but little attention to the mastery of the art of questioning as a phase of teaching technique.

The problem of the proper distribution of the time of a recitation period in history between the pupils and the teacher is yet among the many unstandardized phases of high school history teaching. Any answer to the inquiry will be based on the type of the recitation in question. If the lecture method is used, the teacher will of necessity consume most all of the time; if the social co-operation type, as reported by Miss Clark, is utilized she will be kept in the background, consuming little or no time. Since these are extreme types, it remains to be determined what the legitimate proportion in an ordinarily conducted history recitation should be.

A partial answer to the question at issue may be found in present practices. How much of the time of a history recitation are teachers actually consuming, and how much are they permitting their pupils to consume? Few attempts have been made to answer these queries. Both of the studies to which reference has already been made contain some material along this line. Measured by the number of spoken words, determined by stenographic reports of eleven history recitations, Miss Stevens and Mr. Taft 12 found the following percentages of teacherpupil activity-the first number in each pair expressing the per cent. of teacher-activity in a recitation, and the second the per cent. of pupil-activity in the same recitation: 80, 20; 57, 42; 59, 41; 75, 25; 62, 38; 58, 42; 67, 33; 49, 51; 54, 46; 62, 38; 58, 42.

The interesting fact about the history recitations represented in the foregoing tabulation is that in but one case was the per cent. of pupil-activity greater 9 Stevens, op. cit.. 47; Taft, op. cit., 147. 10 Op. cit., 48.

than that of teacher—the average for the eleven recitations being: teacher, 62 per cent. and pupil, 38. In minutes these equal 24.8 and 15.2. With thirty

in a class, which is not uncommon, it will be seen that each pupil would get a half of a minute out of a total of forty. If the teacher could be sure that the pupils' minds were actually active during all the 24.8 minutes she is talking, there would be some justification for her using nearly two-thirds of the entire time. Adequate tests have not yet been devised to determine this matter. In the meantime, it would seem safe for her to give the pupils as much of the recitation time as consistency, common-sense, and the type of recitation demand.

SUGGESTIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR CONDUCTING.

The writer has found from experience in conducting practice teaching in high school history that it is necessary to furnish the pupil-teacher with rather specific direction concerning the planning, conducting, and managing of a recitation. The following is a copy of some suggestions and directions for conducting a recitation in high school history that have been used in this connection with gratifying results. SOME SUGGESTIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR CONDUCTING A HIGH SCHOOL RECITATION.

I. Type of recitation.

1. History recitations may assume various forms. Determine in advance the form you are to use and make your plans accordingly.

2. The form of the recitation will determine the amount of time you yourself will consume. Keep this in mind and do not rob the pupils of time legitimately theirs.

II. Review of the previous lesson.

1. Determine just what points in the previous lesson or lessons you wish to review. Indicate these under method of procedure in your lesson plan.

2. Have in mind just how much time you intend to give to the previous lesson or lessons, to the new lesson, and to the assignments of next day's lesson. Make a practice of adhering to this schedule rather rigidly.

III. The new lesson.

1. Determine how it is to be introduced. Keep in mind its relation to the previous lesson or lessons.

2. Type of question: Attempt to keep a reasonable proportion of thought and memory questions. Avoid too many direct questions. Guard yourself against the use of double, triple, and a cumbersome wording of ordinary questions. Better write out six or eight leading questions in advance. Let them appear under method of procedure in your lesson plan.

8. The amount of talking and explaining done by the teacher will usually be small in comparison to that done by the pupils.

4. Each lesson will ordinarily have a leading problem. Pupils should have the main prob

lem clearly in mind in order that they may more easily grasp the main points developed during the recitation period.

5. A summary at the close of each lesson as well as at the conclusion of a series of lessons is usually worth while. Keep these in mind. IV. Assignment of the next day's work. 1. Specific directions will always be given for the study of the new lesson. Often some will need to be given for the review of the previous lesson or lessons.

2. Allow yourself ample time for this phase of the work. Be sure that the pupils understand what is demanded of them and later see that they come up to these demands according to their best ability.

3. Collateral reading should be carefully assigned. One good way to do this is to make out cards and post them in the library. Assignments of special topics may be given either in class or placed on slips and passed out to individual pupils.

V. General management.

1. Maps, diagrams, pictures and other illustrative materials should be in constant use. Those for the day's lesson must be arranged before the recitation begins.

2. Attention and interest must be kept up. A sign of both is voluntary discussion, questions and objections. When these are lacking the cause must be sought, and some remedy applied.

3. Dull, diffident or unprepared members of the class must not be neglected. Special methods may need to be devised for these.

4. Careful attention must always be given by the teacher to mistakes in English on the part of the students. The teacher's own grammar and pronunciation may need some attention. DIRECTIONS FOR OBSERVING.

It is more or less a waste of time to send or take prospective history teachers to visit a history recitation without very definite directions concerning what to observe and note. Even with definite direction the value of such work is often questioned. To obviate this objection, a plan has been devised at the University of Wisconsin High School to make pupilteachers out of those who formerly did nothing but observe. Under this scheme the prospective teacher is expected to be always ready to do the next thing in the recitation in which she is participating as a pupilteacher. This next thing may be either to recite or teach as the regular teacher directs.

Whatever the virtues of the Wisconsin plan may prove to be, many of us who have to do with the training of high school history teachers will have to continue to have them observe in the old way. If results proportionate to the time spent in this work are attained, some very definite instructions and directions must be given the observers. The writer uses two methods to make this work definite. One is to simply ask each member of the observing group to take

down, if possible, everything that is done by the teacher and the pupils. On the basis of this material, the pupils are later able to ask questions of interpretation, the answers to which would contain the important features of the recitation. The other method is to give each pupil who is to observe, a copy of definite questions and directions, on which to base later reports and discussions. The following is a list of such instructions which the writer has made up from various sources. It is much like the directions for conducting a recitation given above. In fact, it is meant to prepare pupils to actually do the thing they are observing another do.

DIRECTIONS FOR OBSERVATION WORK IN HIGH
SCHOOL HISTORY.

I. Review of the previous lesson or lessons. 1. How was the previous lesson treated? the review mainly done by the teacher, or did the pupils contribute their share?

2. What points in the previous lesson were particularly emphasized? How was the relation and significance of events handled?

3. How much of the period was given up to the review?

II. The new lesson.

1. What relation did the new lesson have to the previous one?

2. Questioning: Did questions call for thought as well as facts? Did all pupils feel responsible for every question? Were the questions fairly distributed so that many pupils were called upon? Proportion of direct questions? Did the pupils seem to understand and follow the questions?

3. Note the relative amount of talking by the teacher and the pupils. Any provision for individual differences? Were duller pupils neglected? What methods were used in case of dull, diffident or unprepared members of the class? Any evidence of fast pupils marking time, or slow pupils being dragged along?

4. Incentives, motives, interest and attention: How was attention or interest shown by the class (voluntary discussion, questions, objections, etc.)? If interest and attention were lacking, explain the cause. If pupils were interested, was their interest due to the subject-matter itself, the teacher's personality, or to tricks and devices in method?

5. Leading problem or problems in the new lesson: What were the main points made in developing the problem or problems? Were text-books used? One or several? Did the recitation on the text-book material consist of a repetition of the text, explanation of difficulties, interpretations, amplification, or supplementing, or criticizing?

6. Management of the collateral work: Were reference books used? How, as primary sources of information or training in library

work? Was there a definite and economical assignment of reference work? Were notes on reading required? Did pupils make contributions from their individual readings?

7. Notebook and illustrative materials: Were notebooks required? Character of exercises? Character, amount and use made of maps, pictures, charts, diagrams, etc.?

8. Summary: How was summary made at the close of the lesson? Did it touch on vital points?

1. Was care taken in making the assignment? Did it include work for review of previous lesson or lessons as well as the new lesson? Did it provide definite problems so that the pupils understood exactly what they were expected to do? Any special attempt to arouse interest in the assignment work? Any anticipation of difficulties by the teacher? Any preliminary treatment by lecture or conversation? Any supervised study? How much? How organized?

2. What special forms did the assignment take? (a) problems; (b) topics; (c) detailed questions; (d) pages? Was collateral reading assigned? How and how much? How much time was given to the assignment? IV. Some general phases of the recitation. 1. Testing results: Were pupils held strictly responsible for outside preparation? Was the testing of their preparation set apart or mixed in with other phases of the recitation? Were pupils kept informed of their successes or failures? Were they tested whether they had learned their lessons or were they tested as to their ability to apply and interpret?

2. Lecturing: Did the teacher contribute anything by lecturing? How much? Formal or informal? Justified? Did the pupils take

3. Principles and qualities: Were the principles of unity, proportion and coherence applied in the lesson? Did it contain the qualities of clearness, force and fine adaptation? The various phases of the high school history recitation considered in the foregoing discussion are all important factors in the technique of good history teaching. In time the good teacher will apply most of them unconsciously. Born teachers may be able to apply them from the very beginning. But since the supply of born teachers is never equal to the demand, we shall have to continue to make up the deficiency. One important phase of this making is the mastery of the technique of the recitation by those in the making. It is the business of departments having to do with the training of high school history teachers to see that their output has this important training, and the professional duty of principals and supervisor to see that this training really functions in actual practice.