it has begun to be reduced by the selection of only such matter as
bears a plain relation to our lives, as can be understood by the
learner, and as constitutes some part of a large topic, when such
reduction has been completed there may still remain twice as much as
ought to be taught. Shall we, then, even while making these
eliminations, make additions that may more than equal them?

The addition here proposed is not so alarming. For a long time some of
our university departments of physics have aimed rather to teach the
scientific method in laboratory investigations than to impart a
knowledge of the facts in physics; and some of our departments of
practical politics have been more concerned about the method of
investigating political problems than about the conclusions reached
concerning them. In such cases the acceptance of proper method as the
primary purpose has not precluded the acquisition of much subject-
matter, for the method has been taught through the subject-matter. The
same would hold in teaching proper method of study.

But, aside from that, attention to proper method of study will result
in greatly reducing, rather than in increasing, the work of both
teacher and pupil, and in two ways.

First, it will reduce the quantity of subject-matter. It is strange
that, in spite of the hue and cry of teachers and superintendents
against overcrowding in the elementary school, they are really the
ones who make out the course of study, and there are no persons back
of them requiring them to include a large amount. Beyond a minimum
portion of the three R's, spelling, and geography, which are required
by society, almost anything and everything could be omitted if they
greatly desired it. But they have forced young people to study in much