10 EDUCATION IN FORESTRY. 



RECOM MEND ATION S. 



Specifically as to a four-year undergraduate curriculum the committee desires 

 to emphasize: 



1. That the first two years should be devoted primarily to fundamental 

 subjects like English, chemistry, botany, geology, mathematics, and mechanical 

 drawing and civil engineering. 



2. That the technical forestry courses should come mainly in the junior and 

 senior years. 



3. That more courses in the field of economics should be included than is 

 usual to-day in the curricula of most of the forest schools. 



4. That while some specialization may be permitted, if indeed not encouraged, 

 in the junior and senior years, deviation from the regular curriculum should 

 be made only with the approval of a member of the faculty, and in any event 

 that the courses should be selected from a recommended list. If a student 

 desires a wider range of election, he should frankly be told that he must 

 extend his period of residence at the university. 



5. In most of the land grant colleges military training is required of all men 

 during the freshman and sophomore years. In certain universities, additional 

 work is required as well in physical training and in hygiene, outside of the 

 regular curriculum. The committee has not made provision for such require- 

 ments in its recommendations, although, of course, work of this sort demands 

 of the students a varying number of actual hours per week. 



The difficulty of attempting through correspondence, and in the very limited 

 time permitted, to work out a really satisfactory curriculum must be ap- 

 parent to everyone. The committee frankly admits that the curriculum pre- 

 sented is only a suggestion, which should be followed up by careful and -ex- 

 tended study. It hopes that this conference will authorize such a project. 



It is, of course, not expected that the curriculum proposed by this or any 

 other similar committee will be rdopted by all forest schools offering an under- 

 graduate course. Nor is it desirable that all schools should follow a uniform 

 curriculum. Some schools can emphasize certain subjects better than can 

 others. Perhaps the best results will follow if each school develops those fea- 

 tures for which, owing to location or other factors, it is peculiarly adapted. 

 Prof. Bruce accepts the curriculum proposed by this committee as a " general 

 forestry" program, but he feels "that a man graduating therefrom is not to 

 be considered as being adequately trained for forestry work on the utilization 

 side." He thinks " we need a parallel course in forest utilization or forest 

 engineering, based more on physics, mathematics, and mechanics, and less on 

 the biological sciences." Prof. Bruce considers the recommendation " of such 

 a curriculum to be within the scope of this committee, i. e., an undergraduate 

 course leading to the degree B. S. (in forestry)." As indicating a different 

 point of view Prof. Briscoe objects that some of the suggested courses in 

 economics should give place to a larger number of hours in dendrology. 



The important point to emphasize at this time is that it is very advisable that 

 certain standard requirements for graduation be indorsed by all the repre- 

 sentative forest schools of this country and Canada. If the leading schools 

 can, after discussion, come to substantial agreement on fundamentals, this 

 conference will have served its purpose, as did that of 1912. 



SUGGESTED CURRICULUM. 



The committee submits as follows a four-year undergraduate curriculum in 

 general forestry that meets with the approval of its several members. 



