306 
subject is presented in our best text-books from the point of view of ionic 
equilibrium, the periodic system, and the electro-chemical series. Our best 
college text-books and laboratory manuals in general chemistry emphasize 
these same subjects. This, it seems to me, gives the correlation between 
general chemistry and qualitative analysis which is not secured by courses 
which do not place emphasis on these three subjects. Equations also must 
be well learned throughout all chemistry courses. We must not, to be sure, 
give too much time to equations to the exclusion of other parts of the 
science. But have you ever known a good chemistry student who could not 
write equations? I often wonder if equations are being neglected. 
The second alternative—to put all students into the same course in 
general chemistry—admits of several interpretations. Shall we give full 
credit for the course to the student who has receeived an entrance credit 
in chemistry? This may mean duplication of credit. Such duplication 
exists in one form or another in some subjects. Shall we do the same in 
chemistry? This question is variously answered by different institutions. 
Duplication of credit may be avoided by requiring different laboratory 
experiments and different written work in the laboratory and in connec- 
tion with the text-book, from the two classes of students. This is rendered 
difficult by the different contents of the high school courses. Or we may 
avoid this duplication by giving only part credit for the college work to 
those who have entrance credit in chemistry. This may appear to the 
student to be work without credit, and is often opposed on those grounds. 
The third alternative—to give a different course to the two classes of 
students—may be accepted in different forms. In some cases students 
have totally omitted the first part of the course, and taken the latter part 
entire. This I think is objectionable because of sins of omission and com- 
mission. The student should have much of what he omits in the first part, 
and duplicates much that is familiar to him in the second part. We may 
on the other hand give a shorter course covering the whole subject to our 
students with entrance credit, avoiding duplication of work which may be 
supposed to be familiar, and giving only what we think will impart the 
advanced point of view which we consider advisable. 
This accomplishes in another way much the same end as the plan of 
assigning different work under the second alternative. These two plans 
are subject to the same difficulty. The students have had quite different 
courses in high school and do not well admit of the same diagnosis. 
