May 14, 1909] 



SCIENCE 



783 



possession interesting and valuable data 

 — the cost of maintaining the same stand- 

 ard of living is very slightly different 

 throughout our whole country. The dif- 

 ference comes in mainly as a question of 

 the allowable or 'prevailing standard. 

 The wife of a professor in a prairie state 

 "land grant" college, let us say, may 

 quite properly come to her husband's as- 

 sistance by increasing the family ex- 

 chequer through keeping chickens; the 

 wife of a professor in New York City, 

 from equally laudable motives, and with- 

 out danger of incurring unfavorable crit- 

 icism, may deplete the exchequer by giv- 

 ing elaborate dinners toward a similar 

 end— but were either to adopt the method 

 of the other she would at once be made 

 to feel the impropriety of her course. It 

 is even conceivable that each might think 

 she would like to try the other plan for a 

 change. The situation grows too com- 

 plex for us to follow further. De gusti- ■ 

 bus non disputandum — and so we will 

 leave this question of absolute standards. 



Returning, however, to the matter of 

 relative standards, it is fair to query, is 

 it not possible to establish a relatively 

 equitable standard as between the various 

 ranks? "We find Harvard paying her in- 

 structors 23.7 per cent, of what her full 

 professors average. Cornell pays 29.1 

 per cent. ; Stanford, 29.5 per cent. ; Cali- 

 fornia, 33.4 per cent, and Wisconsin, 38.5 

 per cent. There is a difference of opinion 

 here of 50 per cent, as to the relative value 

 of these men. Which is right ? 



Again, as to assistant professors: Stan- 

 ford gives them 45.8 per cent, of the full 

 professor's compensation; California, 49.4 

 per cent. ; Cornell, 54.7 per cent. ; Wiscon- 

 sin, 59 per cent, and Harvard, 61.6 per 

 cent. Here is a difference of opinion of 

 33.3 per cent. Which is right? 



As to associate professors we have: 

 Stanford, 63.4 per cent.; California, 68.8 



per cent.; Wisconsin, 75 per cent, and 

 Harvard, 81.6 per cent.— a difference of 

 30 per cent. Again, which is right? 



Surely there should be some closer 

 agreement than this on so definite a 

 question. 



Similar differences of opinion are very 

 evident elsewhere in fundamental ques- 

 tions of administration. The student of 

 these problems who has struggled with the 

 difficulties of obtaining dependable in- 

 formation hails with delight the valuable 

 material already gathered and published 

 by the Carnegie Foundation. The whole- 

 some publicity and chance for comparison 

 thus given will lead to vital educational 

 reforms and greatly improved efficiency of 

 the entire higher educational system in 

 America. 



The following table based upon statis- 

 tics published by the Carnegie Founda- 

 tion in Bulletin No. 2 shows the nature 

 of some of the queries which may be 

 raised. 



What is a proper proportion of total 

 annual income to be expended for salaries 

 for instruction? Is it 37 per cent., as Mis- 

 souri makes it at one end, or twice that, as 

 Columbia, New York University, Penn- 

 sylvania and Princeton seem to agree? 



Recalling charts 13-17; should there be 

 one full professor to forty students, as in 

 Harvard College, or one to twice that num- 

 ber of students, as at California? 



Looking at our table again. Consider- 

 ing the entire staff, is Johns Hopkins right 

 with one member of staff for 3.7 students, 

 or are Chicago, Nebraska, Ohio, Syracuse, 

 etc., correct with four or five times as 

 great a ratio as this? A difference of 

 opinion of 500 per cent, is considerable. 



Or again, can efficient instruction be 

 provided at an entire expenditure per stu- 

 dent year of $97 or $98, as Syracuse and 

 New York Universities have it, or should 

 one expend $456 or $479, as do Harvard 



