utionized, and our human impulses have carried over into
the realm of teaching, until now, at least in the opinion of very many
critics, we have drifted largely into "soft pedagogy"--a process of
trying to please regardless of the consequences.

Earlier treatises on education devoted a good bit of space to the amount
and kind of punishment that should be administered in a well-ordered
school. Punishment is decidedly out of taste these days. The biography
of an old German master discloses the fact that during his teaching
career he had administered 911,527 raps with his cane, 20,989 with a
ruler, 136,715 with his hand, and that he was responsible for 1,115,800
slaps on the head. The same attitude is reflected in the fact that in
England, as late as the year 1800, two hundred twenty-three offenses
were punishable by death. The offenses included shooting rabbits,
stealing, defacing Westminster Bridge, etc. In our day we hesitate to
apply the extreme penalty even to the murderer.

The attitude toward the content of teaching has undergone a change quite
in keeping with that attached to method. There was a time when
pedagogical philosophy rather hinted, "It doesn't make any difference
what you teach a boy, as long as he doesn't like it." The hint these
days might more nearly read: "It doesn't make any difference how
valuable certain material is for a boy, don't attempt to teach it to him
unless it fascinates him." Our effort to interest our pupils has
practically resulted in taking the scriptures, particularly the Old
Testament, out of our organizations. Of course, the doctrine of interest
is a very vital one, but there are bounds beyond which we ought not to
push it.

It is, therefore, perfectly obvious that there is urgent need of
discipline. Any effort at social control demands it. The army succeeds
as it does because of its discipline. Wherever a group of individuals
undertake action in common, every member must be willing to sink
_interests_ of _self_ in _welfare_ of _others_. As was pointed out in
the chapter on Individual Differences, a class is made up of all kinds
of individuals. They vary in capacity, in ideals, in training, in
attitude, in disposition, and in purpose. Manifestly group progress will
be made possible in any such case by a mutual willingness to
co-operate--a willingness to attend a discussion even though not
particularly interested in it, but because it may be of concern to
someone else whose inter