160 



natural, logical and correct, so far as training for their own 

 kind of activity is concerned ; but it ignores the fact that only a 

 minority can remain in that work. The justification of the train- 

 ing of all by a method which is correct only for a minority is usu- 

 ally expressed in this form, that he is the best teacher who is an 

 active investigator. Now if this is qualified by the proviso 

 ''other things being equal," it is approximately true; but in fact 

 other things very rarely are equal, and in the matter under dis- 

 cussion they are profoundly unequal. In my opinion the im- 

 position upon all university students of the university research 

 ideal is doing vast harm to our teaching in college and therefore 

 in high school. For one thing, it sends out ambitious young men 

 imbued with the feeling that they must maintain their research at 

 all costs, or else forfeit the good opinion of their teachers, the 

 possibility of membership in the best scientific societies, and es- 

 pecially any chance for a call to university work, though this 

 latter point should not be given great weight, since to a person 

 with a liking for teaching a good college offers as attractive a 

 career as a university. In consequence there is a continual pres- 

 sure on the teacher to subordinate his teaching to research. Now 

 in college and high school this is wrong, ethically and practically. 

 A college teacher is never engaged for research, but for a very 

 different purpose, and it is his first duty, to carry out that 

 purpose to the very best of his ability. If there is any man 

 who can carry on active investigation and at the same time do 

 college or high school work as well as if he were concentrating 

 wholly on that, the man is fortunate, and so is the institution 

 which has him. But in fact this can rarely be true. For one 

 thing, the limitations of time and strength prevent it in most 

 cases; and for another the qualities and temper required for the 

 two activities are not only different but somewhat antagonistic. 

 Research requires concentration and much consecutive time 

 fixed by the nature of the work, while the teacher must be ready 

 for constant interruptions, and must regulate his time to fit the 

 schedules of his students. To one immersed in the critical stage 

 of an investigation the little troubles of students seem absurdly 

 trivial, if notstupid, and under their application for aid he is almost 



