As™Ptembe?fia89^*}    American  Pharmaceutical  Association.  525 
SUGGESTIONS  TO  BOARDS  OF  PHARMACY  IN  CONDUCTING 
THEIR  EXAMINATIONS. 
By  H.  M.  Whelpley. 
He  denounced  the  "  quiz-compend  "  fiend.  This  was  followed  by  a  second 
paper  on 
SAMPLE  EXAMINATION  FOR  THE  AVERAGE  STATE  BOARD 
OF  PHARMACY. 
By  H.  M.  Whelpley. 
This  was  a  printed  list  of  specimen  questions.  The  preceding  papers  were  then 
taken  up  for  discussion.  Dr.  T.  B.  Reed  opened  with  a  rather  severe  criticism  of 
a  number  of  the  questions  proposed  by  Prof.  Whelpley  in  the  last  paper.  Some  of 
these  he  characterized  as  absurd,  as  it  is  not  the  province  of  a  Board  of  Pharmacy 
to  ask  a  student  what  books  he  has  studied.  Referring  to  Mr.  Mason's  paper, 
Prof.  Remington  said  he  was  glad  to  hear  a  criticism  from  a  student's  standpoint. 
He  was  opposed  to  examiners  rating  on  a  purely  numerical  basis,  as  questions 
are  not  of  equal  value.  Mr.  Holzhauer  concurred  with  Prof.  Remington,  and 
added  that  he  was  afraid  (as  a  member  of  the  New  Jersey  State  Board  for  fifteen 
years)  the  questions  were  becoming  too  difficult,  and  that  very  few  of  the  ex- 
aminers could  answer  the  questions  correctly  themselves.  He  thought  a 
Board  should  consider  the  locality  in  which  the  candidate  is  situated,  and  that 
some  of  the  questions  of  Dr.  Whelpley — like  those  in  microscopy  and  volu- 
metric analysis — were  entirely  too  difficult  ;  that  what  a  State  Board  should  do 
is  to  determine  whether  the  applicant  is  competent  to  conduct  the  drug 
business.  Several  members  asked  about  the  percentages  of  correct  answers 
required  by  the  Boards,  and  whether  all  of  them  had  but  one  set  of  questions. 
They  were  informed  that  some  Boards  had  two  sets  ;  also,  that  some  Boards 
grant  an  assistant's  certificate  in  case  the  applicant  has  failed  to  secure  a  regis- 
tered pharmacist's  license — provided,  of  course,  he  answered  enough  questions 
properly  to  entitle  him  to  it.  The  discussion  was  at  some  length,  and  was  also 
participated  in  by  Messrs.  Chapman,  Alpers,  Butler,  Payne,  Good,  Mayo,  Frost, 
Williams,  Burge,  Bartley  and  Mason.  The  session  then  adjourned  until  8.30 
p.m.  The  reading  of  the  minutes  of  the  first  session  was  dispensed  with.  The 
officers  were  re-elected  for  another  year.  The  committee  on  Chairman  Hall- 
berg's  address  then  reported  that  they  approved  of  his  recommendation  to  sub- 
mit the  matter  of  preliminary  education  to  the  various  State  Associations  for 
consideration,  and  report  at  the  next  meeting.  They  also  approved  of  his 
recommendation  to  limit  the  use  of  the  degree  of  Pharmaceutical  Chemist  to 
those  who  had  graduated  without  having  experience  in  drug  stores,  and  of 
having  the  degree  of  Graduate  in  Pharmacy  imply  that  its  holder  had  served 
drug-store  experience.  They  also  approved  of  his  belief  that  State  laws  should 
require  all  applicants  to  be  examined.  The  report  was  received  and  adopted 
by  the  session.  A  resolution  was  then  offered  to  the  effect  that  an  annual 
renewal  of  registration  is  desirable.  The  motion  on  this  was  carried  unani- 
mously.   A  paper  was  then  read,  entitled 
A  DUTY  OF  PHARMACISTS  TO  THEIR  UNREGISTERED 
APPRENTICES. 
By  H.  M.  Whelpley. 
Chairman  Hallberg  presented 
