01 STATE BOARD OF AClRICirLTURl!:. 



It is frequently claimed that the olrl fashioned engineerinjj^ course 

 of 30 years ago with its limited number of subjects did produce en- 

 gineers as good and great as those which are now educated in the 

 modern engineering college Avith its more complete course and its 

 highly developed and organized laboratories, and that this fact con- 

 stitutes an argument against our present elaborate equipment and 

 course. It is probable, however, that the engineer educated in the col- 

 lege of 30 years ago could not compete or hold his own under the 

 same conditions with the recent graduate of the engineering course. 

 The men of to-day are better and more thoroughly trained both along 

 general and fundamental lines of engineering as well as in the special 

 applications. It is not to be doubted that the engineering school of 

 thirty years ago produced many successful and great engineers. The 

 greatness of a man in any profession is in a large measure dependent 

 upon his opportunity, the amount of competition and the surrounding 

 conditions, so it is not certain that under different circumstances, 

 limited opportunities, and greater competition, the earlier and less 

 educated engineer would have succeeded so well. Hence a comparison 

 of the work done in different generations is hardly a fair one from 

 Avhich to draw conclusions as to the value of an educational training. It 

 is my own opinion that the engineering collegia course of to-day produces 

 better trained men than the coui-se of thirty years ago. These men are not 

 only better trained but they are better able to solve the engineering prob- 

 lems which arise and in many cases are producing results not dreamed of 

 or considered possible thirty years ago. I am, however, of the opinion, that 

 the college engineering courses will become .more successful as they 

 increase the thoroughness of training in the general fundamental studies 

 and as they make the students thoroughly understand the application 

 of the fundamental principles to practical construction. For this latter 

 purpose extensive laboratories, shops and drawing rooms are required, 

 since it is impossible in practical life to secure the training and its 

 method of application in a broad and fundamental manner to practical 

 constructions. 



AVhile engineering is founded upon the application of the laws of 

 nature, as expressed in various sciences, it also depends to a great 

 extent upon the results of experiment and research. The immutable 

 laws of nature call for a p(M'fect mode of operation and perfect mater- 

 ials to produce theoretical results. Such materials are not to be found 

 by the engineer. No operation conducted by man is perfect; as a con- 

 sequence all results fall short of the theoretical. The engineer must 

 know how close to the theoretical results he can reach in actual practical 

 construction. Such knowledge comes only from research and experi- 

 ment which gives coefficient and constants which enable him to calcu- 

 late with reasonable certainty how far the practical results will deviate 

 from the theoretical. This indicates tliat an engineer's knowledge must 

 be a combination of the theoretical and the practical, and that he musi; 

 make both branches of knowledge harmonize with each other or his 

 results will be unreliable and uncertain. 



The question has been frequently raised, especially during the last 

 year or two, particularly by our friends who are interested in educa- 

 tion along the so-called classical courses, as to whether or not the en- 

 gineering courses afford sufficient studies to make the engineer a broadly 



