Am.  Jour.  Pharm.) 
April,  1920.) 
Editorial. 
207 
knowledge  required  of  the  pharmacist  in  a  course  of  two  years. 
Under  the  conditions  existing  it  is  apparent  that  this  becomes  an 
effort  in  which  both  the  teachers  and  the  students  are  endeavoring 
to  accomphsh  in  a  period  of  two  years,  what,  if  accompUshed  in  a 
period  of  four  years,  would  be  very  creditable  and  more  satisfactory. 
The  attempt  to  give  in  a  two-year  course  an  ample  foundation  for 
the  practice  of  pharmacy  is  a  serious  defect  in  our  present  system  of 
pharmaceutical  education.  The  average  student  gets  a  confused 
and  unsatisfactory  education  in  the  time  allotted  and  it  is  not  to  be 
wondered  at  that  his  future  career  is  devoted  more  to  the  commercial 
than  to  the  professional  aspect  of  his  calling. 
The  first  duty  of  the  educators  is  to  make  good,  practical,  well- 
equipped  pharmacists.  Ideals  of  pharmacy  must  be  based  upon  a 
thorough  foundation  and  if  pharmacy  is  to  be  developed  into  the 
professional  status  we  are  hoping  and  working  for,  it  will  be  necessary 
that  the  majority  of  those  engaged  in  the  calling  shall  have  a  thorough 
education  and  be  fittingly  prepared  for  professional  careers. 
The  student  who  takes  up  post-graduate  studies  and  fits 
himself  to  carry  on  the  higher  professional  duties  of  analyst  or  expfert 
in  pharmacognosy  or  bacteriology  is  the  exception,  and  this  limited 
number  cannot  establish  a  professional  status  for  the  entire  body 
engaged  in  the  calling  of  pharmacy. 
The  time  that  should  be  required  by  the  average  student  to 
perfect  himself  in  the  theoretical  education  of  a  pharmacist  and 
likewise  in  the  commercial  training  must  be  greatly  extended  if  we 
expect  to  have  a  sufficient  amount  of  knowledge  absorbed  by  the 
entire  body  pharmaceutic  to  claim  professional  status. 
The  need  for  extending  the  time  required  for  obtaining  a  pro- 
fessional education  has  been  recognized  by  medicine,  law  and  the- 
ology and  in  fact  by  practically  every  other  profession  than  pharmacy. 
For  some  reason  the  pharmacy  schools  have  continued  in  their  at- 
tempt to  educate  professional  pharmacists  in  a  course  of  two  years. 
The  necessity  for  greatly  extending  the  time  devoted  for  the  educa- 
tion of  students  in  pharmacy  is  so  apparent  that  the  directing  of  the 
attention  of  educators  thereto  should  be  unnecessary. 
To  obtain  the  professional  rank  we  desire  to  secure  for  pharmacy, 
the  future  graduate  must  be  better  equipped,  and  this  can  only  be 
accomplished  by  extending  the  time  devoted  to  the  ever-increasing 
studies.    The  time  is  certainly  at  hand  when  the  fundamental  course 
