NOTE-BOOKS AT EXAMINATIONS.

IT has been well said that in these days of extended learning no one subject can be thoroughly grasped. Still better does this apply to the mastery of two or more subjects; facts are multiplied to infinity, theories follow the same progression, and the absurdity of memorizing these in any definite way is but too evident to the man of average ability. For this reason a student's first step in real life is the foundation of his library; he collects about him works on whose authority he can rely, writers to whose judgment he can defer. His next course is to acquire a superficial knowledge of this extended encyclopaedia, so that when necessary he can lay his finger on the right volume and page, and name his authority; the larger his library grows, the greater the knowledge he has at his service. He does not store his brain with facts, he lays them aside on his shelves. Few of us are gifted with the memory of a Macaulay or of a Charles Sumner, but require guide-books to direct us through the paths of literature.

These considerations may furnish an excuse for the rather startling proposition at the head of this article: Note-Books at Examination. In college life we can master but little, yet we can learn where to look for a great deal. Whether our attention is sufficiently turned in that direction is a question I would candidly ask. Many an hour spent on rereading and memorizing notes when we have already sufficient understanding to use them as a work of reference, could be far more advantageously spent on subjects connected with our study. Notes on this outside reading would be so much more available knowledge, so much more experience of men and books. What, then, would be the harm of employing note-books in examination? For my part I see none. To be sure there are certain studies, especially dependent upon the memory; of these I say nothing. But in the generality of literary studies, in the classics, in language, in history, would there not be a great encouragement to pursue outside work if the student could make use of it at his examinations without the tedious process of memorizing it? Would not his familiarity with the tools of learning, books, be advanced, and that rare ability of gathering the wheat from the chaff be greatly increased? With the present requirements this is impossible; preparation is required on the notes given only in lectures and textbooks. And this preparation is at the expense of laborious grinding. One of the famous German Etymologists will lecture hours on the subject under consideration, but if questioned on extraneous matter, he is altogether at a loss till he has his notes. There is no doubt that the training of memory is a good thing, but it should not be cultivated to the exclusion of other faculties. No more would I desire the student to be utterly dependent on his notes. Without a general knowledge of his subject his notes would be of little avail, his authorities of none at all. Let the student at an examination give on one side of the page his general information, on the other, his notes, original and copied; he can be credited for both; he who has but a poor memory may fairly compete with him who has much; that abominable habit of cramming may to some degree be done away with, and the student have some little play for originality; lastly, though not least, the system of cribbing would be permanently checked. It would be the for student's interest to collect all the reference he could; his honor would no longer be endangered, and he might leave college with a purer conscience and a better sense of the justice of high marks.