Apbil 8, 1910] 



SCIENCE 



539 



[The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement 

 of Teaching is of such ' importance for education 

 and science that we should be pleased to see all 

 aspects of the subject thoroughly discussed in this 

 journal. As the communications hitherto received 

 have been critical, we should like to ha.ve letters 

 emphasizing the services of the foundation and 

 defending the recent action of the trustees. — Ed.] 



kahlenberg's chemistry 



To THE Editor op Science: "The penalty 

 of being oracular is that fashions in oracles 

 change." This clipping from a daily paper 

 was called to mind by reading Lewis's recent 

 review of Kahlenberg's excellent text. In this 

 review, one whose erperience is slight in 

 teaching the first-year student gives us exact 

 advice as to what the beginner should be 

 taught. 



Among chemical circles, the first-year course 

 stands much as Walker used to describe the 

 position of political economy among popular 

 sciences. Every man thinks he is capable of 

 taking part in a subject of such general in- 

 terest. The citadel has been assailed by every 

 new fad in chemistry until it is a by-word 

 that, compared with mathematics and the 

 classics, chemistry stands out prominently 

 characterized by the unsettled conditions of 

 its pedagogical method. 



While admitting the greatest appreciation 

 of the value of those topics for which Lewis 

 argues so ably (as though physical chemistry 

 needed to be propagated and popularized) the 

 question which is most important and which 

 the reviewer does not discuss is the suitability 

 of these topics for first-year students. This 

 is, I imagine, clearly answered by the fact 

 that by far the larger number of college teach- 

 ers, after studying the presentation of these 

 topics, are not including them in the first-year 

 course. And this is not through ignorance, 

 as Lewis implies, but through judgment born 

 of experience with first-year students. The 

 chemistry of a " generation or more ago " still 

 lives and is ready to say to its youngest 

 branch that it does not pay to rail at one 

 " who has the age on you." 



It is unfortunate that the reviewer, because 



he must ride his hobby and perhaps because 

 he feels that the confidence which he formerly 

 had in the ionic hypothesis has been some- 

 what weakened by this same Kahlenberg, 

 should have forgotten to point out how ex- 

 cellently each chapter in the text under dis- 

 cussion is presented — how Kahlenberg's rich 

 experience has brought him close to a knowl- 

 edge of just what the beginner wants to know 

 in the way he wants to have it presented — the 

 beautifully balanced thoughts, the logical se- 

 quence. I have just finished reading the 

 chapter on Sulphur. In my opinion, those of 

 us who are teachers and are not afraid to in- 

 troduce as much of the ionic hypothesis as 

 our pupils need will have already decided with 

 the writer that we have here the work of a 

 master in the good old art of teaching. 



The question of what may and what may 

 not most suitably be provided for the beginner 

 should be left for discussion to the section of 

 chemical education; but if I may be allowed 

 to restate from a recent address at Ann Arbor, 

 it is not a question, in the first year, as to 

 what we think it would be desirable for all 

 students of chemistry to know. It is rather 

 the " care and feeding of children " which is 

 thrust upon us for discussion. It is perhaps 

 because we do our work so well, concealing the 

 difficulties, that the teachers of advanced work 

 and the specialist think we can impose any- 

 thing upon the students and succeed. 



In conclusion, would it not be better if the 

 task of reviewing a work which stands for 

 years of enthusiastic interest and successful 

 experience among beginners should be given 

 to one whose interest, as expressed in the re- 

 view, is S3rmpathetic with pedagogical prob- 

 lems? Arthur John Hopkins 



AmHEBST ColiEGE 

 BOTANICAL-ED DC ATIONAL INFORMATION WANTED 



To THE Editor op Science: In connection 

 with certain important committee work for 

 the Botanical Society of America, I need to 

 know exactly which universities, colleges and 

 technical schools in this country accept the 

 College Entrance Examination Board's cer- 

 tificates for examinations passed upon its one- 

 year unit (or course) in botany, counting 



