for ourselves whether or not we are doing ourselves, our time, and our money justice in the effort we habitually put forth in reading or in studying lessons. If we are assigning ourselves lessons, we can judge roughly from these averages whether they are of average traditional length and properly used. The concentration of the attention is far more important to easy learning than is the length of its continuous application. Here in the most certain way is quality far more than quantity. Thus Professor King's statistics are more suggestive than really significant for any one student. In any one reported case it might have been that the student concentrated and learned not only faster but better (as we shall see shortly) than another who misused six-fold as much time. Still, this factor would seem to be averaged as much as the others and we need not suppose that it would harm the validity of the results. As a practical point they suggest that one-and-a half hours is plenty long enough for most students to spend on a lesson. If either too little or too much this period is more likely the latter, according to modern physiologic ideas.
Despite the necessity of "keeping everlastingly
