July 16, 1909] 



SCIENCE 



67 



cester were in occupations for which their 

 training had specifically prepared them. 

 The subsequent twenty-five years at Rose 

 Polytechnic show that eighty-six per cent. 

 have been and are devoted to pursuits rel- 

 evant to the training received here — in- 

 cluding electrical engineering and archi- 

 tecture, which have been added during the 

 period. 



But a world-wide view of the ever-ex- 

 panding field of technical education shows 

 some complexity; there is discordance of 

 results and ideals; criticism is abroad. 

 The president of a leading American uni- 

 versitj',- where science is the leading in- 

 terest, has recently recognized a prevalent 

 doubt whether scientific studies have the 

 same educational value as the classical cur- 

 riculum; whether they confer the same 

 depth and breadth of intellectual power; 

 whether the outlook they give is as wide, 

 or the life as large, as that founded on the 

 old college training. Cecil Rhodes, an 

 Oxford man, a phenomenal man of affairs, 

 and would-be empire builder, gave his 

 answer by founding the Rhodes Scholar- 

 ships. However, to say the least, such 

 criticism is quite premature. The ancient 

 order of education was a growth of cen- 

 turies; the new is scarcely half a century 

 old. The immense body of knowledge, with 

 its useful applications developed by scien- 

 tific inquiry during the past two centuries, 

 has but little relation to the ancient learn- 

 ing based on literature, rhetoric and art. 

 The old system produced and still pro- 

 duces too much ineffective culture. 



It is almost beyond belief that two dis- 

 tinguished professors in great universities 

 have openly declared that increase in the 

 utility of studies makes them of less value 

 in educating men; and that "The practical 

 aim of a general education is such train- 

 ing as shall enable a man to devote his 



' President Remsen, of Johns Hopkins. 



faculties to matters which of themselves 

 do not interest him." One of our honored 

 leaders has termed this "superb foolish- 

 ness. ' ' The modern scientific training aims 

 at efficiency. If there are defects, the 

 remedy is not in going back to the old, 

 but in making one reinforce the other ; and 

 in finding a right adjustment of all the 

 complex terms involved. 



Perhaps it was a sense of the growing 

 complexity of the situation, and a need of 

 some agency of adjustment, that led to the 

 formation of the Society for the Promo- 

 tion of Engineering Education in 1893. 

 This is the first and, so far, the only so- 

 ciety of its kind in the world— a national 

 congress of the teachers of engineering. 

 The choice of its title raised the old ques- 

 tion, of education versus training. Warn- 

 ing was urged against the danger of put- 

 ting too much emphasis upon mere training 

 to the neglect of the broader education. 

 Furthermore, was the purpose of the so- 

 ciety more truly expressed by the word 

 technical or by the adjective engineering? 

 It was decided that engineering includes 

 technical, in describing the professional 

 endowment of the man; and that educa- 

 tion includes training, as the whole in- 

 cludes the parts— without putting too 

 much stress upon mere drill and manual 

 dexterity. Dr. Calvin M. Woodward, of 

 St. Louis, has well said that the watch- 

 word of engineering education is service. 

 It is to be in itself essentially serviceable. 



The idea of service underlies every detail of it, 

 and that service is objective, altruistic; and 

 therein it differs from that older education whose 

 supreme object is " culture." . . . We all know 

 that there is more than one avenue to culture; 

 in point of fact there are many avenues, and we 

 purpose to claim for the accomplished engineer 

 liis right to full and equal membership in the 

 increasing brotherhood of culture. 



Indeed, the term profession, as a voca- 

 tion, signifies the application of special 



