[29] Among those most elaborately developing this method has been Professor F. M. Taylor of the University of Michigan. See his paper on the subject and discussion in the _Journal of Political Economy_, Vol. VII, pages 688-703 (December, 1909). Marshall, Wright, and Field published the _Outline of Economics_, developed as a series of problems in 1910, which they used for a time as the main tool of instruction in the introductory course in Chicago University.
[30] A thoughtful discussion of some phases of this problem is given by Persons, art. cited, pages 98 ff., favoring the more positive treatment with less distracting multiplicity of detail.
[31] To a former student of mine and now a successful teacher, Dean J. R. Turner of New York University, I am indebted for the suggestion of the following practical rules, a few among many possible, which should be helpful to younger teachers:
(_a_) Keep the student expecting a surprise, afraid to relax attention for fear of missing something.
(_b_) By Socratic method lead him into error, then have him (under cross fire and criticism of class) reason his way out.
(_c_) Make fallacious argument, then call for criticism giving distinction to him who renders best judgment.
(_d_) Set tasks and have members of class compete in intellectual contests.
(_e_) Make sure that each principle learned is seen in its relationship to practical affairs.
(_f_) Enliven each dry principle with an anecdote or illustration to elucidate it, for principles devoid of interesting features cannot secure attention and so will not be remembered.
(_g_) Accompany the discussion with charts and board work to visualize facts and questions to stimulate thought.
(_h_) Ask questions and so handle the class discussions that a few will not do all the talking, that foreign subject matter is not introduced, that a consistent and logical development of thought is strictly adhered to.
(_i_) The last few minutes of the period might well be devoted to the assignment for the next meeting. The best manner of assignment must depend upon the nature of task, the advancement of the student, the purpose in view.
[32] An interesting study made by the department of education of Harvard University of the teaching methods and results in the department of economics was referred to in President Lowell's report. According to the answers of the alumni their work in economics is now valued mainly for its civic and disciplinary results (these do not seem to have been further distinguished). In the introductory course reading was ranked first, class work next, and lectures least, in value. In the advanced courses the lecture was ranked higher and class work lower, but that may be because the lecture plays a more important role there than in the lower classes. Answers regarding such matters are at most significant as indicating the relative importance of the various methods as they have actually been employed in the particular institution, and have little validity in reference to the work and methods of other teachers working under other conditions, and with students having different life aims.