356 



subject is presented in our best text-books from tbe point of view of ionic 

 equilibrium, tbe periodic system, and tbe electro-chemical series. Our best 

 college text-books and laboratory manuals in general chemistry emphasize 

 these same subjects. This, it seems to me, gives the correlation between 

 general chemistry and qualitative analysis which is not secured by courses 

 which do not place emphasis on these three subjects. Equations also must 

 be well learned throughout all chemistry courses. We must not, to be sure, 

 give too much time to equations to tbe exclusion of other parts of the 

 science. But have you ever known a good chemistry student who could not 

 write equations? I often wonder if equations are being neglected. 



The second alternative — to put all students into the same course in 

 general chemistry — admits of several interpretations. Sball we give full 

 credit for the course to the student who has receeived an entrance credit 

 in chemistry? This may mean duplication of credit. Such duplication 

 exists in one form or another in some subjects. Shall we do the same in 

 cbemistry? This question is variously answered by different institutions. 



Duplication of credit may be avoided by requiring different laboratory 

 experiments and different written work in the laboratory and in connec- 

 tion with the text-book, from the two classes of students. This is rendered 

 difficult by the different contents of the high school courses. Or we may 

 avoid this duplication by giving only part credit for tbe college work to 

 those who have entrance credit in chemistry. This may appear to the 

 student to be work without credit, and is often opposed on those grounds. 



The third alternative — to give a different course to the two classes of 

 students — may be accepted in different forms. In some cases students 

 have totally omitted the first part of tbe course, and taken the latter part 

 entire. This I tbink is objectionable because of sins of omission and com- 

 mission. The student should have much of what he omits in the first part, 

 and duplicates much that is familiar to him in the second part. "We may 

 on the other hand give a sborter course covering the wbole subject to our 

 students with entrance credit, avoiding duplication of work whicb may be 

 .supposed to be familiar, and giving only what we think will impart the 

 advanced point of view whicb we consider advisable. 



This accomplishes in another way much the same end as the plan of 

 assigning different work under the second alternative. Tbese two plans 

 are subject to the same difficulty. Tbe students have had quite different 

 courses in high school and do not well admit of the same diagnosis. 



