« PreviousContinue »
until the student is permeated with the scientific spirit and the ideals and methods of scientific thought and practical procedure have become familar attributes of his thought and action. To accomplish this will require courses of at least three years, and better four in length, systematically supported by training in such other branches as are necessary accessories to the chosen line. Furthermore, the term science, as I have used it, does not mean all science. The field is too vast to be covered in the four years of a college course, even if the student were to devote his entire time to it alone. Moreover, any one of the important branches, of which physics, chemistry and biology are examples, when taken consecutively and logically for several years, affords a better discipline, and is far more conducive to the cultivation of the scientific spirit which is so much to be desired than any mixture of topics necessarily considered in an elementary manner. I do not mean, of course, to imply that one branch may not wisely be supplemented by others, for that is a different question, involving other considerations, but I hold that, whatever particular line be chosen for the major subject, it should be pursued relentlessly from the beginning to the end.
During the first year the course may properly be a general one, covering the elements of the subject in a concise yet thorough manner, the work of the class-room being supplemented by laboratory practice which, while necessarily of a simple character, should be as exact and rigorous as possible. Such a course is not only advantageous for the students who desire to pursue the subject further, but may well meet the needs of the larger number in whose schemes of studies it forms a subordinate topic. Following this, during each succeeding year one or more divisions of the subjects should be taken up in a more exhaustive manner, each more difficult than the preceding, and requiring a wider range of knowledge of other subjects, such as modern languages, mathematics or other sciences. Moreover, in each succeeding course laboratory practice should have a prominent part, the various experiments being so arranged as to require not only progressively greater skill in manipulation and closer attention to details, but more actual study of text-books, treatises and original sources. It is to be regretted that much of what is called laboratory practice is utterly unworthy of the name of science. That experimental work is necessary to a full under
standing of the subject is obvious, but its value is in proportion as it requires a decided mental effort and leads at the same time to a deeper insight into the questions involved and the methods to be employed in attacking scientific problems. No adequate return. is to be gotten from hours spent in the qualitative proof of facts which are either quite obvious or which might have been well demonstrated by a simple lecture experiment. The character of such exercises is neither disciplinary or instructive, and laboratory courses constructed on such a basis are practically useless. If the institution is not able to secure sufficient high grade apparatus for full and adequate laboratory instruction throughout the four years, it were better to so confine its efforts in this direction that what is undertaken may be well done, even if for the time being advanced work by the students is thereby prevented. Such a procedure is not always pleasant for the instructor, but it is far better for the student and safer in the end.
Such an arrangement of courses as this may be called specialism, but only in the sense in which all true education is special. As in architecture, to which it is so often compared, every true type of education has a controlling motive, which from the base to the summit permeates the whole. To find it, to develop it, to secure a harmonious co-ordination of all else to it, should be the purpose of every arrangement of studies. It is just this form of specialism which not only demands earnest and continuous effort, but which encourages that advanced study and thought which is alone productive of true leadership.
After all has been said concerning the principles which should govern all education and their application to the particular groups of studies in which the natural sciences predominate, the reform of methods that are far too common is by no means easy. Unfortunately, the remedy is not often in the hands of the teacher, neither is it wholly in the power of the faculties of our various institutions, though I am forced to believe that they have been seriously at fault in allowing these educational fallacies to so long continue. The chief difficulty is the financial one. Science at best is expensive, and the sooner the fact is fully realized, the better for all. To teach any one branch properly requires as many instructors as any other subject, and, in addition, a large amount of very expensive apparatus and general laboratory equipment, to which con
stant additions must be made, as required by the rapid progress of the subject. Nor is this all. It used to be said that the scientist required a laboratory and instruments, while the student of literature, history or classics needed books. This, however, is only a half truth, for books and periodicals are as necessary to the one as the other. Without them the scientist is utterly helpless, for he can neither ascertain the facts already known or keep pace with the discoveries which follow from day to day in rapid succession. One might as well attempt to study law without access to a law library as productive work in science without a collection of scientific periodicals. It is supposed to be the business of education to study the actual requirements of every subject which is included in the particular curriculum; nevertheless, it is the failure to appreciate the financial side of the question which is preventing rational work in the natural sciences. Moreover, even when the needs are fully appreciated the amount of money available is generally far too small to allow of covering the whole range of science in anything like a satisfactory manner. Nevertheless, either led astray by ambition or through a misconception of the meaning of education, "school" after "school" is founded only to reach a halfstarved condition, weak in itself and a hindrance to all other schools as well. President Dabney has wisely remarked, "The great difficulty in our colleges is the want of means. If a college has only the means wherewith to carry out well the work of a classical course, let it stick to that. And when it gets more money let it attempt, at best, only one or two of the sciences, like physics or chemistry, which it can properly equip. What we undertake to do, let us do well." There is a world of truth in these words. Emulation of greater and more fortunate institutions is well in a sense, but it must be coupled with a wise conservatism. In social life the man who seeks to imitate his wealthier neighbors must, perforce, substitute for the substantial things of life an outward showing of magnificence which is unreal, and often wholly spurious, leading to false conceptions of life and serious consequences to the body politic. So, here, the desire on the part of many institutions to figure more prominently before the public has led to a scattering of energies and the setting up of false standards. We need to go slower. We need more of the wisdom of the Roman Catholics, who, while following the most extensive plans, are con
tent to build slowly and carefully for generations yet to come. For we, too, are engaged in a work which is not for a day, or a week, or a year, but for all time, and so must lay deep and strong the foundations for a structure that shall some time gladden the eyes of man, though we who have served as architects and builders may have passed beyond the bourne.
In conclusion, therefore, I plead for a broader understanding of the meaning of education, for a wider recognition of the value of various subjects, and for an appreciation of the equipment necessary for their presentation, but most of all, for that wisdom in our faculties and governing bodies which shall build for the future as well as today, and, avoiding the mistakes of our predecessors, erect here colleges and universities of the first rank, worthy of the splendid young manhood whose masters and servants they are.
W. J. BATTLE, PROFESSOR OF GREEK.
Fraternities constitute now one of the most prominent features of college life in America. Local causes have here and there operated to retard the growth or destroy the existence of single chapters, but fraternities in general have as a whole had a steady growth, until now it is no longer profitable to discuss them in theory, but necessary to deal with them as most undoubted fact. Moreover, the new woman, with all her other imitations of men, was bound to copy also his secret brotherhood. From the difference of sex sororities are free from some of the evils of fraternities, but they have others to take their place, and it is by no means certain that the balance of good is to be found with the girls. Fraternities and sororities present essentially the same problem, and I shall make no attempt to treat them differently. This will I say, however, that the arguments for girls' societies do not seem to me so strong as for fraternities, and by us of the South, at all events, with our old-fashioned views about women, their absence might have been borne with Christian fortitude.
* Read before the College Section of the State Teachers' Association, December 31,
I take it that fraternities have their origin in the desire of man for society, for close association with his fellows, for the protection that comes from union with others. This desire is as old as From the family, through the clan, the tribe, the city, State, the federation-its history is the history of government. Trade-unions and trusts are manifestations of the same desire. The Masonic fraternity and all the host of secret societies are a still closer analogy to the college fraternity. So natural an instinct of the human heart it is almost impossible to suppress. If you crush it in one place it will appear in another. College men will form societies. Whether they be secret or not matters little. The fruits of their existence are but little affected by secrecy.
On the other
Passing by the literary societies, secret or open, college social organizations may be either local or inter-collegiate. Of local societies, those that are temporary in their character are inferior to those that are permanent, in the absence of a reputation to live up to, and of a body of alumni more numerous than the active society, and more or less influential in its management. hand, even the best of the local societies are inferior to the intercollegiate societies in being without the broadening influence of contact with other institutions that the intercollegiate fraternity affords, and in the lack of a great body of brothers in the mystic circle from whom, despite a good deal of humbug, and a vast amount of indifference, there come to the individual undeniable profit and satisfaction. However that may be, the local society does not flourish, the inter-collegiate does. Scarcely a college or university of repute in the country has not now its quota-sometimes more than its quota-of fraternity chapters, and more or less costly houses, providing homes for a large proportion of fraternity membership. To back these chapters, there is an alumni list of nearly 150,000, including many of the most distinguished men in America.
The aims of such flourishing bodies must be something more than mere pleasure. They have in fact been serious from the first. They are professedly the promotion of refined good-fellowship, the cultivation of high moral standards, the development of intellectual power. The idea is surely praiseworthy. That men of kindred tastes should unite in societies for mutual improvement is so natural, so inevitable, that in theory we shall find it hard to