A CIVIC BIOLOGY

Presented in Problems

BY

GEORGE WILLIAM HUNTER, A.M.

HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY, DE WITT CLINTON
HIGH SCHOOL, CITY OF NEW YORK.

AUTHOR OF "ELEMENTS OF BIOLOGY," "ESSENTIALS OF
BIOLOGY," ETC.

AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY

NEW YORK

CINCINNATI

CHICAGO

Copyright, 1914, by

GEORGE WILLIAM HUNTER.

Copyright, 1914, in Great Britain.

hunter, civic biology.

w. p. 3

Dedicated

to my

FELLOW TEACHERS

of the department of biology
in the de witt clinton high school
whose capable, earnest, unselfish
and inspiring aid has made
this book possible

FOREWORD TO TEACHERS

A course in biology given to beginners in the secondary school should have certain aims. These aims must be determined to a degree, first, by the capabilities of the pupils, second, by their native interests, and, third, by the environment of the pupils.

The boy or girl of average ability upon admission to the secondary school is not a thinking individual. The training given up to this time, with but rare exceptions, has been in the forming of simple concepts. These concepts have been reached didactically and empirically. Drill and memory work have been the pedagogic vehicles. Even the elementary science work given has resulted at the best in an interpretation of some of the common factors in the pupil's environment, and a widening of the meaning of some of his concepts. Therefore, the first science of the secondary school, elementary biology, should be primarily the vehicle by which the child is taught to solve problems and to think straight in so doing. No other subject is more capable of logical development. No subject is more vital because of its relation to the vital things in the life of the child. A series of experiments and demonstrations, discussed and applied as definite concrete problems which have arisen within the child's horizon, will develop power in thinking more surely than any other subject in the first year of the secondary school.

But in our eagerness to develop the power of logical thinking we must not lose sight of the previous training of our pupil. Up to this time the method of induction, that handmaiden of logical thought, has been almost unknown. Concepts have been formed deductively by a series of comparisons. All concepts have been handed down by the authority of the teacher or the text; the inductive search for the unknown is as yet a closed book. It is unwise, then, to directly introduce the pupil to the method of induction with a series of printed directions which, though definite in the mind of the teacher because of his wider horizon, mean little or nothing as a definite problem to the pupil. The child must be brought to the appreciation of the problem through the deductive method, by a comparison of the future problem with some definite concrete experience within his own field of vision. Then by the inductive experiment, still led by a series of oral questions, he comes to the real end of the experiment, the conclusion, with the true spirit of the investigator. The result is tested in the light of past experiment and a generalization is formed which means something to the pupil.

For the above reason the laboratory problems, which naturally precede the textbook work, should be separated from the subject matter of the text. A textbook in biology should serve to verify the student's observations made in the laboratory, it should round out his concept or generalization by adding such material as he cannot readily observe and it should give the student directly such information as he cannot be expected to gain directly or indirectly through his laboratory experience. For these reasons the laboratory manual has been separated from the text.

"The laboratory method was such an emancipation from the old-time bookish slavery of pre-laboratory days that we may have been inclined to overdo it and to subject ourselves to a new slavery. It should never be forgotten that the laboratory is simply a means to the end; that the dominant thing should be a consistent chain of ideas which the laboratory may serve to elucidate. When, however, the laboratory assumes the first place and other phases of the course are made explanatory to it, we have taken, in my mind, an attitude fundamentally wrong. The question is, not what types may be taken up in the laboratory to be fitted into the general scheme afterwards, but what ideas are most worth while to be worked out and developed in the laboratory, if that happens to be the best way of doing it, or if not, some other way to be adopted with perfect freedom. Too often our course of study of an animal or plant takes the easiest rather than the most illuminating path. What is easier, for instance, particularly with large classes of restless pupils who apparently need to be kept in a condition of uniform occupation, than to kill a supply of animals, preferably as near alike as possible, and set the pupils to work drawing the dead remains? This method is usually supplemented by a series of questions concerning the remains which are sure to keep the pupils busy a while longer, perhaps until the bell strikes, and which usually are so planned as to anticipate any ideas that might naturally crop up in the pupil's mind during the drawing exercise.

"Such an abuse of the laboratory idea is all wrong and should be avoided. The ideal laboratory ought to be a retreat for rainy days; a substitute for out of doors; a clearing house of ideas brought in from the outside. Any course in biology which can be confined within four walls, even if these walls be of a modern, well-equipped laboratory, is in some measure a failure. Living things, to be appreciated and correctly interpreted, must be seen and studied in the open where they will be encountered throughout life. The place where an animal or plant is found is just as important a characteristic as its shape or function. Impossible field excursions with large classes within school hours, which only bring confusion to inflexible school programs, are not necessary to accomplish this result. Properly administered, it is without doubt one of our most efficient devices for developing biological ideas, but the laboratory should be kept in its proper relation to the other means at our disposal and never be allowed to degenerate either into a place for vacuous drawing exercises or a biological morgue where dead remains are viewed."—Dr. H. E. Walter.

For the sake of the pupil the number of technical and scientific terms has been reduced to a minimum. The language has been made as simple as possible and the problems made to hinge upon material already known, by hearsay at least, to the pupil. So far as consistent with a well-rounded course in the essentials of biological