May 7, 1920] 



SCIENCE 



453 



Wliether the first two college years are 

 given on the uniTersity campus or in a sep- 

 arate junior college it seems highly desirable 

 to reconsider the natiu-e and content of their 

 courses. As matters now stand in the larger 

 institutions there are likely to be from twenty 

 to thirty separate departments of instruction, 

 each of which offers an elementary course 

 introductory to its particular field of investi- 

 gation. Under these circumstances the stu- 

 dent finds it difficult or impossible to acquire 

 a general hnowledge of the fields of human 

 endeavor. It is true, of course, that most de- 

 partments aim so to construct their intro- 

 ductory courses as to make them suitable 

 foimdations for further and more specialized 

 work and at the same time afford as much 

 general information and training as possible. 

 The truth, in the opinion of many, is that 

 this double object is very difficult, or perhaps 

 impossible, of satisfactory achievement. It 

 is the old, old problem of serving two masters 

 and usually with " General Culture " cast for 

 the role of Mammon. The general result is 

 that there are numerous excellent courses in 

 every university, considered from the point of 

 view of introductions to their respective sub- 

 jects, but very few general culture courses 

 worthy the name. But even granting that 

 some do achieve this two-fold object and that 

 all might do so, it still remains true that the 

 student must take too many courses to secure 

 what he desires and must learn many special- 

 ized facts and acquire special technique which 

 he neither ardently desires nor particularly 

 needs. 



If, now, the case against the growing ex- 

 treme specialization in the first two college 

 years has been fairly put, we are faced with 

 the problem of attempting a resynthesis of 

 tlie subject matter of elementary courses 

 which will at once reduce the number of 

 courses and broaden their outlook. The chief 

 aim should be to remove them from the field 

 of specialization to that of general culture; 

 to make them fit into the general educational 

 scheme of the genuinely well-educated man. 

 However, sight must not be lost wholly of the 

 fact that these junior college courses will 



constitute, also, the collegiate introduction, 

 in some cases, to the specialized lines of study 

 to be pursued later. To be specific, the gen- 

 eral biology course must not only present a 

 broad view of the field of biology to the gen- 

 eral culture student but should also make 

 clear to the future physician, agriculturist, or 

 scientific investigator the relation of his spe- 

 cial field of effort to that larger domain of 

 which it is but a specialized part. 



Before considering the specific application 

 of these general ideas to the question of ele- 

 mentary instruction in biology it seems de- 

 sirable to raise and discuss two preliminary 

 inquiries: (1) What is wrong with the "Gen- 

 eral Biology" courses of the past? (2) Why 

 are the usual consecutive courses in botany 

 and zoology regarded as unsatisfactory? 



The Case against " General Biology." — Care- 

 ful reading of Professor Nichols's paper shows 

 that the objections to general biology are 

 directed, for the most part, against the 

 " standard " course, based originally on the 

 text-book of Huxley and Martin ; but with an 

 undercurrent of opinion that no course can 

 avoid certain pitfalls, among which are : the 

 difficulty of finding men of sufficient breadth 

 of view to give general biology adequate pre- 

 sentation; the equally serious difficulty of 

 finding zoologists and botanists who can co- 

 operate harmoniously in giving a course 

 jointly; the danger that abstract principles 

 may be stressed unduly, to the exclusion of 

 concrete facts; and finally, the alleged un- 

 suitability of general biology as an intro- 

 duction to further study of zoology or botany. 

 Disregarding, as we should, those objections 

 that are based on interdepartmental or inter- 

 professional jealousies, and assuming, as we 

 may, that zoologists and botanists will cooper- 

 ate willingly, if the need for such cooperation 

 becomes clear, the problem boils down to the 

 question whether a " General Biology " course 

 properly designed to afford a maximum of 

 general culture would also be a useful and 

 desirable introduction to his field for the 

 future botanist, zoologist, or physician. 



Ohjections to Consecutive Courses in Botany 

 and Zoology. — Consecutive courses usually are 



