October 25, 3912] 



SCIENCE 



541 



of Hippocrates never to be guilty of that 

 injustice — for injustice it is to the student, 

 to both colleges and to the public. 



Another experience is that which Dr. 

 Dodson and I so frequently had at Rush 

 Medical College ten years ago. A certain 

 university gave only the final standing of 

 the migrating student, without stating 

 that he had been conditioned or failed and 

 subsequently passed. It did not give nu- 

 merical grades, but merely said "passed." 

 We were led to suppose that such men were 

 all right, whereas they had been weak stu- 

 dents with repeated deficiencies. It was 

 only after much disastrous experience that 

 we learned the truth. In St. Louis I had 

 similar experience with schools which gave 

 credentials indicating the final standing 

 but not the intermediate deficiencies of 

 students. This practise seems to accord 

 with the gold-plated rule, "Do others." 

 The credentials should show every condi- 

 tion and failure, Avhether removed or not. 

 Every important faculty action should also 

 be set down, such as required repetitions, 

 demanded withdrawals, etc. 



Should the receiving school be governed 

 in its treatment of a student by the advice 

 of the school from which he comes? Theo- 

 retically we may answer "yes." But in 

 my experience, the latter institution, as a 

 rule, has little advice to give. It is usually 

 glad to get rid of the man and does not 

 care what becomes of him. There are, of 

 course, exceptions; and in such eases the 

 credentials and correspondence should be 

 of great weight in deciding the action of 

 the receiving institution. On the other 

 hand, standards and methods vary; and I 

 do not think a college has necessarily just 

 cause for complaint if its emigrating stu- 

 dent is received on different terms from 

 those which it would itself impose on him. 



An interesting case somewhat under this 

 category has occupied the attention of Dr. 



Barlow, Dr. Means and myself this year. 

 A student spent three years at the Los 

 Angeles Division, University of California. 

 He passed with good grades in all except 

 three minor subjects. In these branches 

 he failed to attend 80 per cent, of the exer- 

 cises, as required by the college and the 

 California statute. The faculty, therefore, 

 ordered that he repeat the junior year. 



This student came to St. Louis, giving as 

 his reason the fact that we have a summer 

 school, and that he desired to make up his 

 time deficiency by attending a summer 

 session. In addition to credentials and let- 

 ters establishing the above facts, he pre- 

 sented letters from the instructors in the 

 branches mentioned, stating that he had 

 done the work and had passed the examina- 

 tions, but that these were not allowed to 

 stand on account of deficiency in time re- 

 quirements, as previously stated. 



Our council went over the case and voted 

 that he should be admitted as a conditioned 

 senior, with the understanding that he 

 should take a summer course and, if all his 

 work proved satisfactory, should be gradu- 

 ated at the close of the summer school. It 

 was further provided that this action 

 should be contingent on its approval by 

 the dean of the Los Angeles Division, Uni- 

 versity of California. 



I submitted the action to Dr. Barlow. 

 He submitted it to the California Board 

 and the board submitted it to the chair- 

 man of the Judicial Council of this associa- 

 tion. As a result our action was not ap- 

 proved, and we were obliged to classify the 

 student as a junior. 



Now I have nothing to say as to the dis- 

 approval of our action. I have no doubt 

 the disapproval was founded on the state 

 law and could not be avoided. What I do 

 maintain is that so far as the good of that 

 student was concerned, our action was 

 justified by all the circumstances; and if 



