Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-15T21:14:07.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Huxley as Educator: A Reappraisal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2017

David Layton
David Layton*
Affiliation:
Centre for Studies in Science Education, University of Leeds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Essay Review V
Information
History of Education Quarterly , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , Summer 1975 , pp. 219 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 by New York University 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Eisen, Sydney, “Huxley and the Positivists,” Victorian Studies, 7 (1964): 399.Google Scholar

2. Huxley, L., Life and Letters of Thomas Henry Huxley (London, 1900), Vol. 2, 333.Google Scholar

3. Not 1909, as stated on p. 219 of the text.Google Scholar

4. Lovell, K., “Intellectual Growth and Understanding Science,” Studies in Science Education, 1 (1974): 15.Google Scholar

5. See e.g. Gardner, P. L., “Sex Differences in Achievements, Attitudes, and Personality of Science Students: A Review,” Science Education: Research 1974, Australian Science Education Research Association.Google Scholar

6. Council for Scientific Policy, Enquiry into the Flow of Candidates in Science and Technology into Higher Education (London, 1968), p. 35.Google Scholar

7. Science and Education. A policy statement issued by the Science Masters' Association and The Association of Women Science Teachers (1962), p. 5.Google Scholar

8. Young, Michael F. D., “Notes for a sociology of science education,” Studies in Science Education, 1 (1974): 58.Google Scholar

9. Huxley, T. H., Essays: Science and Education (London, 1893), preface, p.v.Google Scholar

10. For a more detailed account of both series of lectures see Layton, David, Science for the People (London, 1973) pp. 133–143.Google Scholar

11. Layton, David, “Science in General Education: the Rise and Fall of the First Movement, 1851–1857,” Journal of Educational Administration and History, 5 (1973): 7–20; and “The Educational Exhibition of 1854,” Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, 120 (1972): 183–87 and 253–56.Google Scholar

12. Hunt, R., “On Familiar Methods of Instruction in Science” in Lectures in connection with the Educational Exhibition of the Society of Arts (London, 1854) pp. 176–7.Google Scholar

13. Wilson, G. and Geikie, A., Memoir of Edward Forbes F.R.S. (London, 1861) p. 355.Google Scholar

14. Huxley, L., Life and Letters of Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker (London, 1918), Volume 1, p. 370.Google Scholar

15. de Solla Price, Derek J., “The Science of Science,” in The Science of Science, edited by Goldsmith, M. and Mackay, A. (London, 1966), p. 247.Google Scholar

16. Huxley, T. H., Introductory: Science Primers (London, 1889), p. 19.Google Scholar

17. Galileo puts the words into the mouth of Salviati during the third day of discussions on Two Principal Systems. Due Massimi Sistemi, iii (Opera vii), p. 355. English translation by Salusbury, T., Mathematical Collections and Transactions (London, 1661) p. 301.Google Scholar

18. Armstrong, H. E., On the need to humour Huxley's will (London, 1933). On p. 9 of the ‘Introductory Essay,’ Dr. Bibby quotes Armstrong's description of Huxley as a lecturer, but omits the critical passages: E.g., “We were hypnotised by his basilisk artistry into the absurd belief that we were learning: in fact, we were just being told, allowed to have no doubts, with no time to think!” Google Scholar