650 



SCIENCE. 



FN. S. Vol. XVII. No. 434 



engineering schools are often endowed with 

 a natural sense of fitness in the processes 

 of education, and the younger gain due 

 appreciation of methods from association 

 with them. Yet I must regret to say that 

 proposals relating to the curricula of the 

 technological-schools are frequently offered, 

 which unpardonably violate every tenet 

 of good teaching. 



This condition ought not to exist, and 

 it can not continue after the truth has 

 seized hold: that these schools are facing 

 a teacher's problem, which must, indeed, 

 be met by engineers with all of the direct- 

 ness and power of the engineer's best ef- 

 forts—but that the problem can not be 

 solved as one solely relating to the en- 

 gineering profession. 



It is sometimes thought that men who 

 can not make a success in business life are 

 just right for teaching. This is entirely 

 wrong, and the idea should not be admitted 

 for a moment in any modern technological 

 school. The discontented man who has 

 made a failure in business life will cer- 

 tainly make a failure in teaching engineer- 

 ing. Engineering colleges should avoid 

 'men who are fools in working,' even 

 though they are 'philosophers in speaking.' 

 Enthusiastic men are wanted; they may 

 be young men, if needs be, but they must 

 be paid well enough so that they may take 

 places as self-respecting members of the 

 engineering profession, and they must be 

 properly chosen with respect to their quali- 

 fications. These men must be good pro- 

 fessional engineers; they must possess 

 power and satisfaction gained from en- 

 gineering research, and from attainments 

 in other lines than those of purely pro- 

 fessional acquirement; but sound teaching 

 is their work of first importance. It is 

 very difficult to teach well, but that is no 

 excuse for admitting poor teaching into 

 the engineering schools. 



The problem in the engineering colleges 



is rendered more complex by the character 

 of the curricula, which require that the 

 students shall follow for a period what 

 may be denominated preparatory science 

 instruction before they enter upon the 

 truly professional work. In the latter, at 

 least, the teaching should be largely by in- 

 spiration and suggestion. 



The process of gathering, organizing and 

 assimilating knowledge by each student 

 should, as Spencer suggests, be as far as 

 possible a process of self-evolution. If a 

 professional student will not follow his 

 work with zest and satisfaction, it is a 

 thankless and doubtful task to force him 

 to it. The best method for the teacher in 

 professional subjects (but the method of 

 all methods difficult to follow without 

 abuse) is indicated in Kipling's verse: 



" For they taught us common sense, — 

 Tried to teach us common sense — ■ 

 Truth, and God's Own Common Sense 

 Which is more than knowledge. 



" This we learned from famous men 

 Knowing not we learned." 



The engineering colleges are at fault in 

 not more fully developing the initiative, 

 the enterprise and the executive powers 

 of their students, though this is a difficult 

 part of the task of 'jnaking a man.' But 

 that thing must be done in order to make 

 successful industrial engineers. It can be 

 done largely by influence, by the character 

 of the treatment of the students, and by 

 the sort of ambitions that are put into 

 them. It can be done in some degree by 

 the selection of the work assigned to the 

 curriculum, but the subjects studied are of 

 less importance than that the students 

 learn, 



" Truth, and God's Own Common Sense." 



The teacher must remember when he 

 tries to teach by inspiration, even though 

 his time and method be wisely chosen, that 

 he may expect to receive in the class-room 



