Standardization in Scientific Education 47 



A PLEA AGAINST OVER-STANDARDIZATION IN 

 SCIENTIFIC EDUCATION. 



E. G. Mahin, Purdue University. 



We who spend our days in the study and application and teaching 

 of science like to feel and believe in the absolute definiteness of things. 

 Laws are thus and so. Changes of chemical or physical nature follow 

 perfectly definite courses, which can be predicted if we are in posses- 

 sion of sufficient data and knowledge of premises. Principles of nature 

 are immutable and it is our chief business to further the study and 

 understanding of these principles, so that they may be utilized to the 

 benefit, rather than neglected to the harm, of mankind. 



This is quite right. And research, application and teaching con- 

 stitute the trinity of activities necessary for carrying out this ideal 

 program. To discover more of that which is now hidden; to flood with 

 light that which is now dark; to turn mysteries into commonplaces; to 

 bring man into that mastery of Nature's habits which is necessary to 

 give us association with her on equal terms, rather than domination by 

 her, that is the work and pleasure of the scientific researcher. To 

 apply this mass of knowledge of what nature may do for us, in the 

 concrete use and proper direction of natural law — such is the life work 

 of him who devotes himself to applied science. And to put order and 

 intelligibility into all of this, so that the neophyte may be interested 

 and eflficiently trained; to make clear the path for coming generations 

 to follow, so that knowledge shall not die with its discoverer, such is the 

 duty and the privilege of the teacher. 



But if we thus attempt to classify and segregate these three groups 

 of scientists, we shall soon find that neither this classification nor any 

 other can be successfully supported. 



What researcher of any effectiveness but has visions of his work 

 bearing fruit in changed conditions of life or in increased comfort and 

 lightened burdens of humanity, and desire and some ability in the com- 

 munication of his discoveries to the world? 



And what inventor or worker in applied science is there whose 

 power of observation is not constantly yielding new food for thought, 

 or who is not, in some degree, a teacher of his fellows? 



And, finally, how can a teacher successfully impart inspiration and 

 scientific knowledge to youth in the school and colleges and universities, 

 if he has nothing to do with some activity in uncovering the as yet 

 unperceived truths of his science, or if he has not some desire, fulfilled 

 directly or indirectly, even though always imperfectly, to apply these 

 truths? He is, as Charles Dickens says of the guide-post, always point- 

 ing the way, but never going there, thus, perhaps, a very successful 

 guide-post, for those who have occasion to make inquiry, but a very 

 indifferent teacher. 



We have thus the paradox of a science which is all order and rigid 

 system, in the service of which are men whose mentalities and modes 

 of thought and work are not subject to order or systematic classification 



"Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci.. vol. 33, 1923 (1924)." 



