ith, without causing a wane in his interest. It
is clear that the real problem in the problem-method is the teacher's.
Practically, it is quite impossible to handle _individual_ projects in
large classes. In the writer's experience, he has had on the average
80 different pupils per day in four separate classes. It is clearly
beyond the power of any teacher to direct simultaneously eighty
different projects, and it would be a physical impossibility to
furnish the necessary laboratory apparatus. So, for this reason the
teacher may find it necessary to divide, as diplomatically as
possible, the classes into congenial groups, each with its problem, so
that the total number of problems will be so limited that each one may
be given adequate attention. It seems that such must be the limitation
of the problem-method under the conditions prevailing in the public
schools today.

The procedure in solving a problem will consist of these steps in the
order named, 1) understanding of the purpose, 2) the procedure or
method of attack, 3) observation of results, 4) and the use of these
in making some generalizations or arriving at some conclusions. Then
there must follow a testing of these generalizations or conclusions by
further experimentation. Accuracy must be the keynote of all work,
accuracy in recording experiments, accuracy in observation, accuracy
in drawing, which serves as a shortcut method of description. Neatness
is very desireable but should never supercede thinking and
understanding. If the problem has stimulated some accurate logical
thinking on the part of the pupil, then time spent on it has been well
spent. If, besides, it has yielded some valuable useable information,
the solving of the problem has been a marked success. The laboratory
method has been such an emancipation from the textbook slavery that
there is some tendency to elevate it to an end in itself, whereas it
must serve only as a very valuable _means_ to an end. "The ideal
laboratory is only a reasonably good substitute for the out-of-doors."

So far as preparation in the methods of science teaching is concerned,
much good may be accomplished in teachers courses and in practice
teaching. But it must necessarily be of a general nature, for the
unique individual method, determined by the interaction of teacher and
pupil and the reaction of both to subject matter can evolve only hand
in hand with teaching experience.

Before proceeding further it might be