TRAINING OF GEOLOGISTS ZSo 



Ratio between first and Itiglier degrees. — The ratio between those tak- 

 ing the first and subsequent degrees in each decade is as follows : 



Bachelors Masters Doctors 



1870-1879 100 40 9.5 



1880-1889 100 35 24. 5 



1890-1899 100 33 44 



1900-1909 100 50 33 



1910-1919 100 .59 46. ti 



For every 100 men now in geology who received collegiate tr^ming, 50 

 went forward to a Master's degree and 39 to a Doctorate. There is no 

 well defined "drift" from decade to decade indicating that the number 

 now taking advanced work is greater or less than formerly, though the 

 figures suggest that there has been a tendency recently for a larger num- 

 ber to take the Master's degree than was the case during the "nineties." 



Source of students. — Compared with the total number of degrees 

 granted in American universities and colleges, the geologists show 

 scarcely a "trace." Excluding technical degrees, the figures are approxi- 

 mately as follows : 



Total A. B., B. S., and Ph. B 1895-1914 292,000 



Geologists taking Bachelor's degree 658 0.22 per cent 



Total A. M., M. S., and Ph. M. 1895-1914 36,950 



Geologists taking Master's degree 313 0.70 per cent 



Total Ph. D. and D. Sc 1895-1914 7,160 



Geologists taking Doctor's degree 237 3 . 3 per cent 



These ratios have remained fairly constant from year to year, with no 

 appreciable "drift" away from the average. The increased percentage 

 among the Doctors suggests that those who contribute to the development 

 of the science are generally those with the highest training. The fall in the 

 curves during 1915-1920 for geologists who have taken their Bachelor's 

 degrees during 1915-1920 is doubtless due to the fact that they liave not 

 yet made their impression as professional workers and so have not been 

 included as such in the lists. This is true in less degree of those receiv- 

 ing graduate work and Master's degrees during the same period. In the 

 case of Doctors, it is different. The citing of dissertation subjects distin- 

 guishes those trained in geology. This, supplemented by the fact tliat 

 lists of students have been obtained from most of the laboratories where 

 men receive graduate training, suggests either that relatively fewer men 

 are going forward in geology or that there has been slower recovery from 

 war disturbances than in other subjects. Perhaps it is due to the fact 

 that men in physics, ebemistrv, etcetera, were mobilized liere for investi- 

 gation in war prol)]ems and were thus enabled to contiiiue their work on 



