Education as a science, Alexander Bain's book initially printed in Scotland in 1879, is considered one of the first works on science of education. As a matter of fact, we can find here a careful discussion of scientific roots of thought and practice in education. Bain's unimpeachable scientific line of thought was able to, at the same time, attract the interest of french contemporary literature and repel the interest of british teachers from his time. In 1880, La science de l'éducation, Gabriel Compayrè french translation of Bain's work, was already in its second edition but, on the other side, british educators prefered to read titles such as Lectures on teaching (Fitch, 1881), a more "practical" approach about teacher´s work. Moreover, Alexander Bain's first words in its 1879 manual relate to the "scientific treatment" of an "art" like education. But should Education as a science really be considered in the academical or scientific context? At least, should it be considered only in that context? Couldn´t it be that Alexander Bain's 1879 book, not withstanding its heavy scientific concern, remains a work of "lower pedagogy", in Marc Depaepe's terms? And, if so, does that changes anything concerning the history of pedagogical knowledge and educational research? In this paper I'll try to defend the idea that we can see Education as a science as professional literature, namely, as a manual of teaching. Bain´s studies are very complete about the methods of teaching. In his words, "the question - How to teach? . . . largely occupies the present work". I'll try to make evidence of the professional focus of the scottish book by presenting its structure (as the author put it in the "Preface", half of the book is devoted to "preparatory matters", and the other half is concerned to its "main topic - the Methods of Teaching"); and by analysing and interpretating the text itself (for instance, Bain talks quite proficiently about the "tact" of the teacher, a word that seems to apear only in texts written under a professional point of view). If possible, I'll also take into account other Bain's works, like his several books on english teaching. Finally, I hope that to characterize Education as a science as a manual of teaching and as professional literature can help on the distinction between practical and theorical literature in the history of education. More precisely, my aim with this paper on Alexander Bain's Education as a science is to contribute to the distinction between the history of academical or disciplinary literature devoted to educational research, and the history of professional literature devoted to the work of teaching.