COMMENT

It is a common fallacy of the classroom that a lesson can be learned by a comprehensive knowledge of its salient features, without regard to the medium used for its expression. The movement of educational opinion away from former methods of studying by rote has helped to foster this abstract and general process of assimilation. In theory, the movement has been a good one since it was hitherto possible to parrot the word of the text with no knowledge of the lesson itself. But there are also distinct disadvantages which have led to a more careless interpretation of the subject matter involved.

In reality, the battle is only half won by even the most thorough understanding of an assignment, for the modern curriculum is essentially scientific in nature and demands the employment of an accurate terminology. It would be absurd to describe a machine in terms of a zoological science, and it is often equally absurd to attempt to discuss even one of the so-called abstract sciences in terms of everyday conversation. The inability to use the peculiar vocabulary of the subject leads to a failure to speak convincingly with one who is more thoroughly acquainted with the topic at hand. Accuracy and precision in expression therefore demand, in addition to a clear understanding of the fundamentals of the subject, a knowledge and ability to employ the special terms which alone are able to give body to the former requisite. --The Pennsylvanian.