EDI'IOHIAL. 905 



throiiali s(>V('i'al ^-osioii^ tn liii;il i)a>s;iii(' were not ciitircly ()ri<2,iiial 

 with him. It dcxclopcd that >c\cral iiicii in (liUcrciit parts of the 

 roiuitry wci-c a<j,-itatiii<r the cstahlishiuent of sucli institutions and 

 that Mr. ^Morrill was in toucli with some of them. 



These historical matters dcxclopcd a somewhat unexpected amount 

 of interest and a desire for thorou<ih and systematic study upon the 

 early history of aa^ricultni-al education in this country. The dis- 

 cussion opened the way for a line of inijuiry that would be most 

 interesting. 



The development of tlie pedagoay of agriculture was likewise an 

 interesting topic of discussion, which was started at the meeting of 

 the Society for the Promotion of Agricultural Science with a paper 

 by Dr. A. C. True. As indicating how slowly the teaching of this 

 new subject worked out, it was mentioned that as recently as 1895, 

 when a standing committee on methods of teaching agriculture was 

 organized by the association, the agricultural departments of the col- 

 leges Avere relatively weak and ill organized and were not taking due 

 ;rdvantage of the ra]iidly accumulating pedagogical material afforded 

 by the experiment stations. The first report of this committee in 

 189(') pointed out that " there exists at present in this country no 

 standard for instruction in agriculture. There is a bewildering 

 variety as regards the topics taught, the time devoted to each topic, 

 the order in which the different topics occur in the course, the relative 

 amount of class-room work and laboratory or practical exercises, etc. 

 (iranting all tliat ought to be conceded because of local conditions, 

 it is nevertheless olnious that general progress in the teaching of 

 agriculture in college courses can hardly be expected until there is 

 greater uniformity in planning and conducting the courses of study 

 in this subject." 



Not until the nineties did it begin to be understood by college presi- 

 dents and trustees that the old policy of waiting to establish adequate 

 agricultural courses until multitudes of students Avere clamoring for 

 them was wrong. Experience soon demonstrated that when the 

 agricultural courses were made respectable as regards faculty and 

 equipment, a reasonable number of students would take them. 



The passage of student labor as a part of the agricultural course, 

 one of the early traditions of the agricultural colleges, was a fruitful 

 subject of reminiscence among earlier students, and Avas generally 

 looked upon as having failed to accomplish its purpose OAving to 

 failure to conceive the real i)edagogic purpose and method. •' No- 

 body seemed able to devise a good system of educational labor, and the 

 AA'hole scheme of stmh-nt labor as a part of a college course in agri- 

 culture fell into discredit and disuse.'' 



Another important transition which has come as the result of ac- 

 cumulated exj^erience is the size of the teaching force considered 



