142 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XXIV. No. 605. 



A correspondent says : 



I hold that it is the duty of the university to 

 advance knowledge as well as to supply instruc- 

 tion. So far as possible professors should be per- 

 mitted to do the work for which they are most 

 competent. If a man is able to advance knowl- 

 edge to an important extent — there are in fact 

 not many such men — it seems to me that he should 

 be required to give only so much instruction as 

 would be fruitful for his research work. A pro- 

 fessor can often do the most for his students by 

 going on with his own work, thus imparting 

 some of his spirit to them. 



Another says: 



I have always had definite convictions on this 

 subject, which have come in part from personal 

 inclination and in part from a remark you made 

 to me during an impressionable period, in appre- 

 ciation of a research man in a neighboring insti- 

 tution : * He manages to use all of his time and 

 energy for his own work. 



In every institution there are men who glory 

 in their large classes and the popularity that 

 comes with them, and there are others who would 

 be just as happy in their own work without any 

 students — as long as their salary came regularly. 

 I see nothing inherently wrong in the position of 

 either one of the men, and see no reason why one 

 should look on the other with disdain or the other 

 on the one with envy. 



Another says: 



In my opinion professors engaged in productive 

 research should meet with every encouragement 

 and assistance from the university authorities. 

 They should be amply provided with the books, 

 the materials and the implements needed in re- 

 search, and a reasonable portion of their work- 

 ing time should be set free for that purpose. 

 What proportion should be thus set free may not 

 admit of very definite statement, but it would 

 seem that a well-endowed institution should so 

 limit the scope of its work and the consequent 

 amount of instruction offered that its productive 

 scholars could apply at the least one half of their 

 working time in advancing knowledge. It is my 

 opinion that increase of knowledge considered by 

 itself alone should be one of the definite aims of 

 a university. But if this be not granted and the 

 primary function of the university be considered 

 the giving of instruction, it is just as essential 

 that the professors should be investigators. Only 

 those who are themselves engaged in research can 



lead students beyond the elementary phases of 

 their subjects. 



Another says: 



I should say that it is at the present time 

 much more important that the general principle 

 of granting time for research be recognized by 

 the universities than that any special fraction 

 of such time be agreed upon. The complexities 

 of the various factors entering in to the particular 

 exigencies or particular cases would in any event 

 make it extremely difficult to settle wisely upon 

 such a fraction and I certainly have no fixed 

 opinion as to the amount which ought to be thus 

 assigned. 



Where men are proved capable of profitable re- 

 search and where institutions are able to make 

 good the loss in the amount of instruction offered, 

 I think a third of a man's time every other year 

 could with great profit to the university be set 

 aside for investigation. In some cases this time 

 would be best invested if scattered over the whole 

 year. In other cases it would be more efficiently 

 spent if concentrated within some given period 

 of three to six months. In certain unusual cases 

 it is undoubtedly judicious to give a larger 

 amount of time than this proposal provides for. 

 Moreover, in some cases research can be carried 

 on with entire success in connection with advanced 

 class work, e. g., certain forms of philological 

 studies. In such instances there is obviously less 

 propriety in setting aside special time for in- 

 vestigation. But as I said at the outset, these 

 complexities are too numerous for me to attempt 

 handling. It will be a great step forward if the 

 principle of recognition of research as an in- 

 tegral part of a first-class instructor's duties can 

 be gained. 



Another says : 



In general I may say that the instructor who 

 does not investigate is exceedingly likely to get 

 into ruts and will soon become a ' back number.' 

 There is nothing like research to keep one posted 

 on the work done by others. It is a constant in- 

 centive to reading. It keeps one posted not only 

 in his special field, but from the interrelationship 

 of problems, it gives him constantly an outlook 

 over what is occurring in other lines. 



To what extent the instructor should be re- 

 lieved from instruction is another matter. If he 

 be entirely relieved, the students of the institution 

 receive practically no benefit from his researches, 

 while he loses all influence over the student. In 

 most cases to allow a professor to devote himself 



