A CURRICULUM FOR GIRLS
SIR,—In your issue of March 28th, Mr. Guy Boas contributed an article on The Extra School Year. I agree heartily with many of his proposals and criticisms, but I do deprecate the emphasis on "more domestic science" for girls. Unfortunately most mixed schools are -under the direction of head masters, and domestic science is their one idea for girls. It is a useful subject and not one to be neglected, but no more capable of producing a good wife and mother than a course in gardening or carpentry can produce a good father and husband. Parents of both sexes should be people of character with mental and spiritual resources which enable them to give something of value to their children. Mothers, particularly, need a good physique, and games, swimming and gym- nastics are as necessary for girls as boys. I was glad to read of one head master who thinks that boys should learn to be good husbands and fathers ; no doubt a little domestic science would help. Many women work too soon after a confinement or operation because their husbands are so helpless.
To teach domestic science to young girls under fourteen is a waste of time ; they are not interested and merely play at it. When girls have a real prospect of a home of their own, they are very interested, and in a course at a domestic-science college or evening class, do good work. I think both boys and girls at fifteen should at school learn physiology and hygiene and understand the principles of healthy living. Technical skills are best left to a later age. I do beg head masters not to starve ,young minds because they are in girls' bodies; it is the empty headed who make poor wives and mothers.—Yours sincerely,
Previous page
