The course of study in history for elementary schools mapped out in the “Report of the Committee of Eight” is an attempt to secure by the aid of a national organization some uniformity in the program for history. The personnel of the committee led us to expect an able report. The specialist in American history, the specialist in European history, and the specialist in the pedagogy of history for elementary grades were all represented. Three superintendents of schools upon the committee seemed to warrant us in anticipating that the rights of other subjects in the elementary curriculum would be guarded, and that history would not be permitted to absorb an undue proportion of the pupil’s time. The presence of those closely associated with elementary schools caused the present actual condition of such schools to be kept clearly in mind while the work proceeded. Practical experience gained in dealing with both the elementary teacher and the elementary pupil led them to inquire at each step whether a proposed change were possible, while the experience of the specialists in American history and in European history naturally called attention to what would be _desirable_ from the standpoint of subject-matter. The committee presented a preliminary report for consideration and frank discussion at three different regular meetings of the American Historical Association held at Chicago, Baltimore and Providence respectively. A report of what had been accomplished by the committee at the close of its second year of work, was presented to the Department of Superintendents at a regular meeting of the National Educational Association for 1907. Certain features of the report were also discussed at a regular meeting of the History Teachers’ Association of the Middle States and Maryland, held in New York City. Suggested topics of the report were discussed by the Chicago History Teachers’ Association and by the History Teachers’ Association of the North Central States. From the foregoing it is easily seen that there has been no undue haste in arriving at conclusions. It will be noted also that all experienced teachers of history, and all superintendents who are really interested in improving the quality of the teaching of elementary history have had abundant opportunity to contribute toward the improvement of the proposed course, and to object to that which seemed visionary, impracticable, or unwise. Interest in the report has been widespread during the past three years, and it is gratifying to know that it is now published in a form which makes it accessible to all interested.