CONVENTION OF AMERICAN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES. 433 



tural high .schools or preparatory departments for the agricultural 

 colleges, and contended that the remedy for the condition lay in 

 the improvement of the public school system by the introduction of 

 agricultural studies. " In Missouri we are risking our entire future 

 on that doctrine, that the college of agriculture is going to rest on the 

 public high school, and we are going to make the public high school 

 agricultural as far as it ought to be agricultural." This was acknowl- 

 edged to be the long way, but it was held to be the right way, which 

 would justify itself in the long run. 



Prof. L. H. Bailey took a middle ground upon this question, hold- 

 ing that these forms of elementary instruction are entirely warrantable 

 under the Morrill Act, but that short courses do not properly belong in 

 the college and are a temporary expediency, arising from the fact that 

 the land-grant colleges do not articulate with the common schools. 

 He did not advocate duplicating the system of public high schools, 

 but believed the final issue would be to prepare the public schools to 

 prepare for the land-grant colleges, as they now prepare for colleges 

 of arts and sciences. But as this will occupy many years, perhaps a 

 generation, he believed that we must take care of the pressing problems 

 of to-day, and on that ground defended the short and lower-grade 

 courses as temporary expedients. Dean Davenport, of the University 

 of Illinois, explained the plan adopted at his institution, which is to 

 cut away from the rigid courses of instruction leading to graduation, 

 and lower the grade for admission, allowing greater freedom in the 

 matter of electives. He stated that he had abandoned for the time 

 being the high ideals advocated by some, and was endeavoring to 

 demonstrate the practical utility and value of agricultural instruction 

 and to create a demand for it. 



Other speakers presented the local difficulty of confining the instruc- 

 tion to a four-year course, and maintained that the short courses had 

 first roused genuine interest and confidence in agricultural education, 

 and that the more elementary grades of work did not obscure the col- 

 lege course. It was held that under present conditions there is a 

 largo body of young men who are not and can not be prepared to 

 enter the regular college course, with its rigid requirements for admis- 

 sion, and that for these young men, who come to the college in increas- 

 ing numbers, special and short courses should be provided. 



Closely related to this discussion was the consideration of the ques- 

 tion, What Can and Should be Done to Increase the Interest in and 

 Appreciation for the Agricultural Side of Technical Training! 1 The 

 subject was introduced by a paper by President J. L. Snyder, of 

 Michigan, which led to a very animated discussion extending to the 

 whole field of agricultural education. 



President Snyder urged that the courses in agriculture must be 

 technical, and that the agricultural department must have equal advan- 



