Am.  Jour.  Pharm.  ) 
November,  1920.  ) 
The  Professor. 
809 
ful  teacher  has  not  only  developed  methods  which  are  inherently 
and  intrinsically  good  but  has  also  attuned  them  to  his  own  per- 
sonality?-— or  has  he  fallen  into  the  error  of  slavish  imitation?  Is 
he  a  mere  automatic  transmitter  of  knowledge,  or  has  he  a  spark  of 
that  marvelous  fire  which  inspires  others  to  become  willing  and 
productive  workers  in  the  field?  For  this  is  after  all  the  most 
essential  qualification  of  a  good  teacher. 
If  we  look  back  over  the  list  of  teachers  with  whom  we  have 
been  in  personal  contact,  we  are  rather  surprised  to  find  that  those 
who  have  scored  the  most  pronounced  success  are  not  necessarily 
the  most  erudite  of  the  lists  nor  the  most  productive  investigators 
nor  even  the  men  employing  the  most  approved  pedagogic  methods, 
but  those  inspirational  personalities  who  imparted  to  their  students 
their  own  enthusiasm  and  their  own  love  for  the  work.  If  the 
results  of  teaching  are  to  be  measured  by  the  productive  workers 
produced  rather  than  by  the  number  of  correct  answers  the  students 
can  give  in  the  final  examination — and  this  is  the  real  criterion — 
it  is  the  inspirational  teacher  who  must  be  accorded  the  highest 
place  in  the  teachers'  hall  of  fame.  And  let  us  remember,  that  no 
teacher  can  inspire  his  students  unless  he  is  convinced  of  the  deep 
and  lasting  importance  of  his  subject. 
Pharmacy  in  particular  has  suffered  severely  at  the  hands  of 
its  iconoclastic  friends  and  its  apostles  of  negations — who  contend 
that  medicine  is  the  science  of  diagnosing  disease — that  cures  are 
impossible — that  therapeutics  teaches  the  futility  of  drug  medica- 
tion— that  vegetable  histology  deals  with  intercellular  air  spaces — 
that  pharmacy  is  a  collection  of  cook-book  recipes  for  the  prepara- 
tion of  useless  concoctions.  Let  us  remember  that  we  cannot  kindle 
the  enthusiasm  of  our  students  with  epigrammatic  negations.  Unless 
the  professor  of  a  pharmacy  school  believes  in  pharmacy  as  a  neces- 
sary and  important  part  of  the  world's  work,  his  influence  will  be 
positively  harmful.  So  we  can  rightfully  ask  also  does  the  pro- 
fessor who  has  met  our  other  requirements  also,  meet  this:  does  he 
subscribe  to  the  articles  of  faith  of  true  pharmacy?  Does  he  firmly 
believe  that  he  is  training  his  students  to  become  useful  citizens  who 
will  earn  their  daily  bread  in  the  service  of  their  fellow  men? 
In  standardizing  the  professor,  let  us  attack  the  problem  as  a 
complicated  one  involving  the  human  equation.  Let  us  not  be 
too  mathematical,  too  mechanical.  Let  us  not  overlook  the  potential 
Dr.  Hopkins  and  accept  the  mere  bookworm. 
