July 29, 1910] 



SCIENCE 



143 



entrance examination conducted by the col- 

 lege, " and apparently very few of the 

 candidates took any entrance examination 

 in the subject of physics. But, even if this 

 college had maintained a stiff entrance 

 examination for those offering physics for 

 admission, would those students who had 

 passed this examination, if placed after 

 entering college in the same physics 

 course with an equal number of students 

 who had never taken physics before, the 

 course being designed for beginners, show 

 at the end of a year any marked superior- 

 ity over the others? Probably not; but 

 what should we infer from this? If we 

 should put lumps of chalk and lumps of 

 charcoal into the same box and shake 

 them well together for a day or two, would 

 there be any important distinction plainly 

 visible between them at the end of the ex- 

 perience? Perhaps not. But they were 

 different at first and the difference might 

 have been maintained by keepiag them 

 separate. If colleges should try with 

 French, for example, the same kind of ex- 

 periment which they try in physics, ig- 

 noring the school teaching and putting 

 those who had entered with French into 

 the same college course with those having 

 no previous knowledge of the langaiage, 

 would there be any important distinction 

 between the two sets of students at the end 

 of a year? Probably not. 



The successful realization of Proposi- 

 tions 7 and 8 will probably require, in 

 every college making the experiment, some 

 one of respectable attainments in physics 

 and enough interest in the teaching of 

 physics to bring into some hazard his 

 reputation for "productive scholarship." 

 Every college department that is con- 

 cerned with entrance requirements should 

 have at least one member who will make 

 a business of knowing personally the school 

 teachers of his subject and of conferring 



frequently with them on matters of inter- 

 est and importance to schools and colleges 

 alike. 



Proposition 9. — Only 4 of the school 

 teachers and the same number of the col- 

 lege teachers would cut out kinetics wholly 

 from college requirements. It appears, 

 then, that Proposition 9 in its original form 

 would have been rejected by a majority of 

 both classes of the teachers replying. 



As it is reasonable to assume that every 

 one who voted for the original (9) as a 

 first choice would approve my amended 

 (9) as a second choice, it seems that a 

 majority of each class, 15 in 20 school 

 teachers and 22 in 40 college teachers, 

 would go at least as far in restricting 

 kinetics as my amended (9) goes. 



Several replies put some new amend- 

 ment on the proposition, but only 3 school 

 teachers in 20 and only 12 college teachers 

 in 40 are distinctly opposed to any restric- 

 tion of the ground now covered, or which 

 may be covered, by college entrance re- 

 quirements in kinetics. 



These minorities in opposition may 

 seem numerically small; but in each there 

 are those with whom I do not like to differ. 

 Moreover, it must be remembered that a 

 majority of the first committee, and the 

 whole of the final committee, appointed a 

 year or two ago for revision of the college 

 entrance board requirement in physics 

 declined to recommend such a restriction 

 as that called for by (9) or even that pro- 

 posed by the amended (9). It therefore 

 seems to me that it would be unwise to 

 ask the college entrance board to reopen 

 this question formally at present; but just 

 now is the time for such discussion as may 

 help toward a wise interpretation of the 

 somewhat general terms of the new re- 

 quirement and toward a salutary practise 

 in teaching and examining in accordance 

 with this interpretation. 



