290 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXI. No. 791 



in some cases, and those of wortliy and use- 

 ful teachers, it lasts indefinitely. The ex- 

 perience of a group of the smaller strong 

 colleges" indicates that instructors are ap- 

 pointed between the ages of twenty-three 

 and twenty-six, on the average at twenty- 

 four and seven tenths. On the other hand, 

 the experience of a group of the stronger 

 universities^ indicates that instructors in 

 these institutions begin their service be- 

 tween the ages of twenty-five and thirty, or 

 on the average at twenty-eight. Each 

 group is geographically well distributed. 

 On the whole, it would be fair to assume 

 that a man who is appointed an instructor 

 at twenty-five will either be an assistant 

 professor at thirty-five or earlier, or will 

 remain pennaneritly an instructor. If the 

 rule for retirement on the basis of age is 

 therefore amended so as to read: "Any 

 person sixty-five years of age who has had 

 not less than fifteen years' service as a pro- 

 fessor or not less than twenty-five years' 

 service as an instructor, and who is at the 

 time either a professor or an instructor in 

 an accepted institution," etc., the service 

 of a teacher in the grade of instructor will 

 be fully recognized. I recommend this 

 change. 



(B) Retirements under Rule 2 



The outcome of an unrestricted oppor- 

 tunity to retire after twenty-five years of 

 service as a professor is evident on the 

 financial side in the fact that under this 

 provision annual pensions to the amount of 

 $78,000 have resulted in three years, an 

 amoiTut greater than twenty-five per cent, 

 of the whole cost of the retiring allowances 

 of those retired under Rule 1. This is a re- 

 sult far beyond the anticipations. 



' Haverf ord, Grinnell, University of the South, 

 Bowdoin, Cornell (Iowa), Beloit, Allegheny, Lawr- 

 ence, Lake Forest, Rose Polytechnic, Hobart, Knox. 



' Columbia, Harvard, Wisconsin, Leland Stan- 

 ford Junior, Toronto, Northwestern, Iowa, Indiana. 



The expectation that this rule would be 

 taken advantage of almost wholly on the 

 ground of disabilities has proved to be iU 

 founded. Of the forty teachers retired on 

 this basis only twelve retired for physical 

 reasons. The average age of those thus re- 

 tiring was sixty and three tenths, while 

 twenty-eight retired on other grounds at 

 an average age of fifty-nine years. In the 

 first group were only five below sixty, the 

 minimum age being fifty-four; in the sec- 

 ond there were eleven below sixty; three 

 retiring at the age of fifty-four, two at the 

 age of fifty-two and two at the age of fifty- 

 one. 



These retirements indicate that when a 

 teacher has reached the age when he may 

 claim the minimum pension, he may be put 

 under pressure to retire whether he desires 

 retirement or not. It has been urged that 

 one of the benefits of the foundation con- 

 sists in the opportunity thus afforded the 

 colleges to get rid of teachers who have 

 worn out their usefulness or who have lost 

 interest. Whatever there may be in this 

 claim, it is evident that it is more than 

 counterbalanced by the opportunity which 

 is thus opened to bring pressure to bear on 

 the teacher, or by the tendency of the 

 teacher assured of a retiring allowance to 

 become ultra-critical toward the adminis- 

 tration. The situation is not a good one 

 either from the standpoint of academic 

 freedom or of academic contentment. 

 Furthermore, it is no part of the function 

 of a retiring allowance system to care for 

 the disagreements of college life. These 

 are problems of administration. 



The idea that the foundation could in- 

 directly give aid to research by the retire- 

 ment below the age of sixty-five of some 

 man devoted to research rather than teach- 

 ing is also one which, on the whole, seems 

 elusive. The correspondence outside of 

 these letters indicates that a number of 



