MarcH 15, 1901. ] 
tical laboratory work under favorable con- 
ditions and without interference from his 
neighbors. These somewhat contradictory 
requirements may, it seems to me, be recon- 
‘ciled. The study of the subject has led to 
the final proposition that we accept as the 
unit space three feet six inches by five feet 
(8 ft. 6x5 ft. 0). 
By the metric system such a space would 
measure 1.067 x 1.524 m., or roughly 
1.01x1.50 m. These values suggest the 
possibility of adopting one meter by one 
and one-half as the unit space. In our 
space there can be puta table measuring 
3 ft. 6x 2 ft., leaving 3 ft. 6x3 ft. clear space 
for the student to sit or stand at his work, 
and for the instructor or others to pass be- 
hind him. The table will be long enough 
to permit having, say, two drawers and a 
locker below them, making on one side a 
tier about a foot wide, and still leaving 
space for the student to sit comfortably at 
the table. There are doubtless many labo- 
ratories in this country in which less space 
is assigned to the individual student than 
is here advocated, but it seems to me that 
such crowding and cramping immediately 
lowers the quality of the teaching and the 
quality of the studying done. The bad re- 
sult is due in part to the sheer discomfort 
of the conditions, but is chiefly due to the 
inferior opportunities which such crowding 
entails. When students are close together 
there can be but little room for laboratory 
apparatus, consequently the practical work 
for the students must be to a large extent 
made ready for them beforehand, so that 
what should be a laboratory exercise at 
once becomes barely more than a demon- 
stration. If the students are not crowded, 
then each one may be supplied with a set 
of apparatus and be afforded an oppor- 
tunity to perform himself the complete se- 
ries of operations necessary to obtain and 
render available the material or phenomena 
he is to study. A true laboratory experi- 
SCIENCE. 
411 
ence is thus placed within his reach, and 
the instruction is changed from the lower 
to the higher type. It may be said, there- 
fore, that a fundamental pedagogical prin- 
ciple is involved in refusing to adopt a 
smaller unit area than above proposed. 
Second. The convenient maximum num- 
ber of students in a single room. This 
number it is very difficult to determine. It 
is essentially a question of experience and 
judgment, and as such, the question is in- 
herently impossible to answer in a conclu- 
sive scientific manner. I can therefore 
only express my opinion that twenty-four 
is such a convenient maximum number. 
This opinion is based partly upon gen- 
eral considerations, partly upon an ex- 
amination of the special requirements of 
medical instruction. Apparently the com- 
mon American practise, where large ele- 
mentary classes are taught, is to provide 
instructors about in the proportion of one 
to every twenty-five students more or less. 
In some universities, where the endow- 
ments are ample and the classes moderate 
in size, the proportion of students to each 
instructor is less, even in a few cases con- 
siderably less. In many universities, on 
the contrary, the opposite is true. A thor- 
ough study of the proportion as it actually 
exists in the various American institutions 
of higher instruction would be a valuable 
contribution to the discussion. 
So far as [am aware this study has, unfor- 
tunately, still to be made. As regards the 
particular needs of medical instruction— 
and it is with this that I am personally 
most directly concerned—there are special 
conditions, which greatly facilitate the de- 
termination of our convenient maximum. 
The special conditions, alluded to, are fur- 
nished by the work of. the dissecting room, 
because six students are assigned commonly 
to each subject, hence six forms a natural 
group in medical studies, and the number 
put in one room should be a multiple of 
