Rev. P. R. McDevitt

DISCUSSION.

Before expressing any comments on the admirable paper of Father Lafontaine, I would venture to say that the discussions of the past few days and the splendid papers of Brother Baldwin and Brother Waldron and that of Brother Waldron's confrere, last evening, leave no doubt of the desirability of our teachers taking a more active part in the proceedings of the Conventions. This applies to the Sisters no less than to the Brothers. Perhaps more certainly than most persons, the superintendents of parish schools know the sound, rational and progressive ideas that many of the gifted women of the religious teaching communities have on school matters. It seems a pity that either community regulation or custom has determined that our Sisters are reluctant to take part in the discussions,

The paper just read might be most fitly discussed by teachers alone, because it bears very particularly and decidedly upon the work of the class room. School boards and superintendents sometimes present what seems sound in theory, but which may be found by the teachers impracticable and impossible in the actual work of the school. As to a course of study there is no question that one is necessary as a guide and chart to the class room teacher, and as a power that unifies the work of the entire school.

As to the scope and character of a course of study, there is a wide divergence of opinion. When the subject is taken up for the first time, one is startled at the uncertainty and variety of opinions that exist in regard to what, at first, seemed an apparently simple and fundamental problem.

The Course of Study for our parish schools should include Christion Doctrine and all that is implied by religion and morality. Christian Doctrine is the one fundamental, essential branch in our schools. The parish school that fails to train its children in the right knowledge and practice of Catholic truth has no reason for its existence. The course likewise includes the fundamental branches of reading, writing and arithmetic. Unless a school imparts a proper training in the traditional three R's it never commands the approbation of parents, no matter what claims for success may be put forth, in the teaching of the so-called culture branches. Our parish schools rise or fall by the proved efficiency of the pupils in these vital subjects.

The unanimity of opinion that the Course of Study should include Christian Doctrine for our parish schools and the fundamental topics for all schools ceases when further extension of the Course is considered. There are those who contend for the restricted course in which little or no attention is paid to music, drawing, nature study, physical culture and manual training. Others believe in the broader

curriculum in which the essential and so-called non-essential subjects shall be taught.

The writer of the paper, Father Lafontaine, evidently believes in the more generous curriculum, though, perhaps, not to the extent advocated by some Catholic and many non-Catholic educators. He has proposed at the closing of his paper many important questions as to details in regard to certain subjects, but I presume to say that the principal consideration for us is not so much the details of the various branches but as to the branches themselves-what should and what should not be included in the Course of Study. Personally, I believe that the best interests of our schools demand that we should make as the basis of our school work a Course of Study in which while emphasis is placed upon Christian Doctrine and the traditional three R's, yet all due consideration is given to the other so-called nonessential subjects and sometimes termed "fads and fancies." I believe in this broader curriculum not only because these branches have an educational value but because the complex conditions of our modern life, especially in the large cities, is gradually forcing upon us radical changes in our whole educational system.

I likewise believe in the more generous curriculum, because observation shows that where there are two schools of the same character each working under fairly reasonable conditions, fairly well graded and with an absence of overcrowding, the school that devotes itself almost exclusively to the bread and butter branches and excludes all non-essentials does not do better work, even in the bread and butter branches, than the school in which intelligent and due consideration is given to music, drawing, etc.

Belief in the broader Course of Study always presumes that the teachers are prepared for their work and are teaching under normal, just conditions. I am forced to admit that oft times our teachers are so hampered by difficulties, not of their creation, that their time, energy and skill are so taken up with the instruction in the fundamental branches that there is little opportunity for anything else. In conclusion I would say that while we should make every effort to provide the best possible Course of Study, whether it be a diocesan course or that of the public schools in our community, it is needful that we give attention to certain well recognized conditions in our parish schools. Any Course of Study calls for thoroughly trained teachers to make it fruitful. It demands that our teachers should have a fair chance; no teacher, be she ever so well trained, can accomplish results in class rooms crowded beyond all justice and reason. There is need of a keener appreciation on the part of the pastors of what is within the teachers' duties, hence there should be a change in the customs that impose upon teachers work that is beyond their province.

Our teachers are unsurpassed for zeal and energy, and the position of our parish schools today is due to their devotion and self-sacrifice. With the determination to send into our schools thoroughly trained teachers, and to assure them of a fair chance in their work, there is no question of what Catholic education will accomplish.

The suggestion of Father Lafontaine that the association prepare a Course of Study that would embody the best thought of Catholic educators is deserving of serious consideration. Such a course would be of service to our teachers and might be modified according to local requirements.

The Chairman - It is requested that Father Lafontaine come to the platform and answer the questions written out by the Sisters.

Father Lafontaine - The first question is, "What need is there for the school principal to adopt a system of school books for the diocese, when teachers are compelled to send their children for examination to another high school or perhaps to teachers of public schools, and whose questions and tests are taken from text books used in the public schools?" I refer this question to the President, because it is not bearing directly on the curriculum. It is a question on text books. But you might say if we make a curriculum of a certain kind, we have to have text books to carry it out. My opinion would be that a curriculum of a course of studies should never be so narrow or strict that it obliges the teacher to follow the subject exactly from a certain text book. I think if the superintendent or supervisor outlines the general topics and the amount of each topic to be taken, each individual school can adapt itself to the necessary conditions in spite of the text book question. Of course, a thing which is not here discussed, would be the advisability of uniform text books in the diocese. That is useful, and it is an important matter for consideration, especially in cities where the children who are poor can't afford to be changing text books in passing from school to school; and families that are large cannot afford to have every child in the house use a different text book. This is a practical problem, but considering the question itself I would say it does not affect the curriculum as I understand it. Well, you say, how are they going to pass the examination? If this position is made absolutely necessary, and the conditions are varied and are different from the Catholic School system, of course you must have one or the other. But if the Catholic school system practically agrees in a number of subjects, or in the choice of subjects with the public school system, the difficulty is minimized, and there still remains the obligation to use the Catholic school books on certain topics, if possible. I think it has been well demonstrated that in history, no matter what the requirements of the State schools may be, the text books in the hands of the pupil should be Catholic text books; and the teacher may explain, add, and give