112 



SCIENCE 



[N. 8. Vol. L. No. 1283 



DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE 



LABORATORY INSTRUCTION IN CHEMISTRY; 

 ITS AIMS AND ITS LIMITATIONS 



It is now well over half a century since the 

 laboratory has been regarded as a necessary 

 feature in the study of science — elementary as 

 well as advanced. Before that laboratory 

 methods of instruction were rarely practised 

 and were available only for the exceptionally 

 fortunate, or probably exceptionally able, stu- 

 dent who had first demonstrated in a purely 

 intellectual way his aptitude for science. 



The greatness of the achievement of the 

 brilliant scientific men before, say the middle 

 of the nineteenth century, with poor facilities 

 for work, and inadequate knowledge upon 

 which to build, certainly furnishes an argu- 

 ment that intellect may be stimulated rather 

 than discouraged by lack of practical facilities. 



The question must present itself to every 

 one connected with training students in sci- 

 entific schools, to what extent expensive lab- 

 oratory facilities are justified, particularly for 

 the great numbers of elementary students, 

 when compared with the results achieved. No 

 one will argue that direct observation of sci- 

 entific phenomena in experiments performed 

 with the student's own hands does not in- 

 crease the student's familiarity with the phe- 

 nomena. Perhaps we might say that the im- 

 pression made upon the student's mind by a 

 personally performed experiment is so much 

 more vivid than the impression made by a 

 written statement in a text-book, or even by 

 an experiment performed by the professor on 

 the lecture table, that the phenomenon is re- 

 membered with much less intellectual effort. 

 Since however progress is attained only 

 through the expenditure of effort, we may well 

 ask, will the student of science reach as high 

 a plane of intellectual development if the lab- 

 oratory is used too freely for demonstration 

 purposes. 



The writer acknowledges as the immediate 

 stimulus to present these thoughts, the article 

 in Science of May 30, 1919 (page 506) upon 

 "The Freas System," written by Dr. W. L. 

 Estabrooke. 



The Freas System is obviously a recognition 

 of the problem of balancing the costs of lab- 



oratory instruction against the results. It is 

 to be hoped that further details of this system 

 promised by the writer will bring its advan- 

 tages fully to the knowledge of those who have 

 the administration of the laboratories of our 

 schools and colleges. Certain rather broad 

 aspects of the question are suggested by the 

 first article and it is to be hoped that they 

 will be discussed by the advocate of the Freas 

 System. 



The Freas System seems to be a species of 

 modern factory efiiciency management applied 

 to laboratory administration. There can be 

 no doubt that all possible efSciency in obtain- 

 ing, distributing and conserving laboratory 

 supplies and apparatus is to be desired, nor is 

 there any doubt that without careful planning 

 and a capable administrator in charge the 

 efficiency will be low. But how far will the 

 enthusiasm for eificieney in handling supplies 

 tend to reduce the instruction to a lifeless 

 routine. It would almost seem as if in the 

 Freas plan the structure of the laboratory 

 course had been built around the framework 

 of the system of supply distribution. For we 

 are told that at the beginning of a term the 

 student receives supplies exactly sufficient for 

 a whole term's work in a carefully planned 

 kit. Such a kit contains for some of the 

 com'ses as many as 140 different bottles of 

 materials. 



Modern American factory methods are mar- 

 velous when measured by the material output, 

 but they do not rauk so high when measured 

 in terms of the welfare of the individual 

 worker. Perhaps the solution of the factory- 

 labor problem will recognize that the welfare 

 and happiness of the individual workers is the 

 framework around which the structure of in- 

 dustiy must be built. No educator thinks 

 other than that intellectual development is the 

 aim to which educational effort must be 

 directed. The writer does not see how a stand- 

 ardized routine of laboratory experiments can 

 stimulate the intellectual development of a 

 student any more than the intensive drive of 

 production in a textile mill can stimulate the 

 joy of life in the worker standing day after 

 day in the same place over noisy looms. 



