July 16, 1909] 



SCIENCE 



69 



charged the higher institutions with ruin- 

 ing the high schools by diverting their 

 strength and chief endeavors from the 

 many pupils who can not go to college to 

 the few who can. He says the people, who 

 build and maintain these schools at great 

 expense, are being cheated out of their 

 proper return by not getting the educa- 

 tion best adapted to their needs. A few 

 years ago, the speaker saw an examination 

 paper for admission to our foremost uni- 

 versity, requiring solution of a problem in 

 organic chemistry, which the instructors at 

 one academy said would be a hard nut for 

 them, and would require considerable time 

 and some laboratory work for a proper 

 answer. Within two weeks a pertinent 

 criticism, widely circulated, is to the effect 

 that the money for public education 

 should be more wisely spent; that a more 

 consistent system should be built up from 

 the primary grades to the high school ; and 

 that the school authorities should then 

 say to the universities: "Adapt your re- 

 quirements to our best boys and girls. ' ' 



2. The question of specialization and 

 too much diversity of degrees has received 

 earnest attention. A committee reported 

 that, in 1904, no less than 85 different 

 kinds of engineering degrees were offered, 

 22 for post-graduate work and 63 for 

 undergraduate. Among these were bache- 

 lor of arts in five branches, bachelor of 

 engineering in four branches, plain bache- 

 lor in nine branches, bachelor of philosophy 

 in five branches, bachelor of science in 

 twenty-eight lines, including textile in- 

 dustry, sanitary and domestic science and 

 naval architecture; railway, architectural, 

 municipal and sanitary engineering; four 

 doctors and four masters of different des- 

 ignations; seven masters of science in dif- 

 ferent lines of engineering, and nineteen 

 others, including practical chemist, master 

 of mechanic arts, irrigation engineer, ma- 



rine engineer, chemical engineer, architect, 

 civil engineer in architecture, architectu- 

 ral engineer, etc. Only twelve of the post- 

 graduate degrees and only 47 of the under- 

 graduate degrees were conferred— that is, 

 about two thirds of all those offered. It 

 would perhaps be unkind and inconsider- 

 ate to describe this as absurd variety; it 

 certainly indicates hopeless diversity, not 

 to say confusion of ideals. The writer has 

 elsewhere urged that the titles master and 

 doctor in engineering are superfluous, and 

 that it is a mistake to depart from the 

 simplicity and dignity of the titles: civil 

 engineer, mechanical engineer, mining 

 engineer, architect, chemist, or, if you 

 please, consulting chemist, electrical engi- 

 neer and, possibly, one or two more. 



Thousands of graduates from engineer- 

 ing schools during fifty years have proved 

 that men with thorough knowledge of the 

 fundamentals find occupation in all 

 branches of engineering, irrespective of the 

 kind of degree. Yes, looking back a cen- 

 tury, to the first forty years of the U. S. 

 I\Iilitary Academy, we find about fifty men 

 (trained to be military engineers) becom- 

 ing chief or resident engineers on the canals 

 and railways built in that period. Among 

 these was Major Whistler who built the 

 railroad from St. Petersburg to Moscow, 

 400 miles, for the Russian government. 

 Why then give men such distinctive and 

 wordy labels, as though the school had east 

 them into molds, or already pro.jected 

 them with correct aim at definite targets? 



3. On the question of Graduation Re- 

 quirements the president of one of our 

 older engineering schools protested strongly 

 against the tendency to "the crowding of 

 the curriculum"; another against too 

 much attempt to anticipate for one who is 

 yet a student, and whose future can not 

 be dictated by overdoing between narrow 

 limits. The committee on this vital topic 



