688 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXVIII. No. 982 



ment; and they contain results for both un- 

 dergraduate and graduate students — contrary 

 to the plan of using the figures for under- 

 graduates only. 



The statistics from the University of Wis- 

 consin should be viewed in the light of the 

 following statements from Dean Birge: 

 " The college of letters and science teaches all 

 the language, science and mathematics for 

 the colleges of engineering and agriculture. 

 This gives us a great many students in the 

 elementary classes who take their advanced 

 work in other colleges. This fact would make 

 the advanced work relatively smaller than it 

 would be if the college of letters and science 

 alone were concerned. It increases the regis- 

 tration in modern languages, English, chem- 

 istry, physics and mathematics very consid- 

 erably." The figures for the first semester 

 are used, with permission, for both semesters 

 in the case of Wisconsin. 



The numbers of those who entered for the 

 different final honors schools in 1912 at the 

 University of Oxford have been included in 

 the tables. Perhaps much more value would 

 attach to statistics which should include the 

 " pass " ■ men also ; but figures showing the 

 lines along which the choices of the more 

 earnest students at this great English uni- 

 versity fall are regarded of at least sufiicient 

 interest to warrant their inclusion here. 



In the order of the relative amount of 

 work done in the foreign languages, the sev- 

 enteen American institutions considered rank, 

 according to this table, for the year in ques- 

 tion thus: (1) Williams, (2) Amherst, (3) 

 Bowdoin, (4) Dartmouth, (5) Smith, (6) 

 Tale, (T) Johns Hopkins, (8) Bryn Mawr, 

 (9) Wisconsin, (10) Princeton, (11) Har- 

 vard, (12) Wesleyan, (13) Mount Holyoke, 

 (14) Oberlin, (15) Cornell, (16) Columbia, 

 (lY) Wellesley and (18) Leland Stanford 

 Junior, with the Oxford honors men standing 

 between Princeton and Harvard. 



Similarly, the order as to the amount of 

 work done in the subjects of the second divi- 

 sion (English, history, philosophy, etc.) is as 

 follows: (1) Bryn Mawr, (2) Tale, (3) 

 Smith, (4) Wellesley, (5) Mount Holyoke, 



(6) Oberlin, (7) Bowdoin, (8) Columbia, (9) 

 Harvard, and, with a long interval, (10); 

 Wesleyan, (11) Cornell, (12) Leland Stan- 

 ford Junior, (13) Amherst, (14) Dartmouth^ 



(15) Wisconsin, (16) Johns Hopkins, (17) 

 Williams and (18) Princeton, with the Ox- 

 ford honors men preceding Bryn Mawr. 



Again, the order for the division of science- 

 stands thus: (1) Leland Stanford Junior,. 

 (2) Princeton, (3) Cornell, (4) Wisconsin,. 

 (5) Johns Hopkins, (6) Dartmouth, (7) 

 Wesleyan, (8) Amherst, (9) Columbia, (10) 

 Wellesley, (11) Williams, (12) Oberlin, (13) 

 Mount Holyoke, (14) Harvard, (15) Tale,. 



(16) Smith, (17) Bryn Mawr, (18) Bowdoin,, 

 with the Oxford honors men last of all. 



In general, the eastern institutions show ai 

 greater amount of work in the foreign lan- 

 guages than the western, while the western- 

 show much larger numbers in science. In- 

 the second division the line between the east 

 and the west is not nearly so clear, while- 

 Tale and the colleges for women stand to- 

 gether at the head of the list. Amherst and' 

 Dartmouth stand much closer to each other 

 in the distribution of their work along these- 

 three lines than do any other two of the- 

 group which includes them and Bowdoin, 

 Wesleyan and Williams. Johns Hopkins and' 

 Wisconsin present results which are very 

 similar; and so do Smith College and Tale- 

 College, while Bryn Mawr stands very close 

 to both. 



One hesitates to try to account for these 

 differences of distribution of work in our 

 colleges. Probably the presence or absence of 

 required courses, the economic and social fac- 

 tors of the time and place, the influence of 

 women in coeducational institutions, the 

 countless personal equations and all those 

 tendencies, accidental, traditional and his- 

 torical, which enter in the making of a cur- 

 riculum and the creation of the student senti- 

 ment towards it — all these and many more 

 must be the reasons which together determine 

 these things. Into these questions the sta- 

 tistician makes no attempt to enter. The 

 tables are presented simply as shedding a bit: 



