tiate charges against her of teaching "matter that undermined the religious faith of the pupils in her classes." Miss Smith, when she was not reelected to her position for the coming year, demanded a public hearing. Her counsel demanded that she receive "fair play" and be faced with her accusers. Witnesses at the hearing were for the most part students from Miss Smith's classes. The hearing was held in the board of education offices, and the board's decision to reelect Miss Smith was greeted with shouts of approval by the crowd.

ACCORDING to a wireless message to the New York Times, 1,200 students of the Hanover Hochschule laid down their books and walked out of the school buildings on June 7, as the climax of a quarrel between the authorities and the student body, which arose over the continued persecution of Professor Lessing, who holds the chair of history and literature and who was outspoken in his socialistic views. The recent move was a demonstration against the government's action through the minister of education, Dr. Becker, of expelling ten students for preventing Lessing from delivering his scheduled lectures by hissing, shouting and other forms of rowdyism. Professor Lessing delivered his scheduled lecture, though his audience consisted only of his wife. From Berlin comes word that the government will order the Hochschule closed for the semester unless the students return immediately and accept the action against the ten who were ordered expelled.

THE Board of Education of Atlanta, Ga., in deference to the objections of Superintendent Willis A. Sutton and several of their own members, have voted down a proposed change in rules that would have stripped the superintendent of power of selecting department heads, teachers and other employees and placed that power in the hands of the board.

PROBLEMS of administration and curriculum in land grant colleges for Negroes were considered at a recent conference in Washington. The conference was called by Dr. John J. Tigert, Commissioner of Education, and was attended by officials of the Bureau of Education, of the Federal Board for Vocational Education and of land grant colleges throughout the south. The Interior Department announced that

the "primary purposes of the conference are to study methods of agricultural education through special demonstrations, to find the basis of a sound program of education in trades and higher industries, to improve methods of internal administration and to encourage higher educational standards." The presidents and officials of seventeen state agricultural and mechanical colleges for Negroes planned to be present. Among the speakers on the program were Woodbridge N. Ferris, senator from Michigan; J. M. Gandy, president of the Virginia Normal and Industrial Institute; H. O. Sargeant, federal agent for agricultural education of the Federal Board for Vocational Education, and M. M. Proffitt, specialist in industrial education in the Bureau of Education.

SPECIAL CORRESPONDENCE

THE MODERN EGYPTIAN STUDENT THERE is a common belief in America that all Orientals are philosophical-quite in contrast to the practical-minded American people. The common peoples of the Near and Far East are pictured as possessing some weird kind of mental organization, some natural born ability that enables them to hold highly intricate views on life and its problems. We picture them as roadside ascetics sitting in meditation by the hour, juggling with abstract thought and seeking by concentration to project themselves into the infinite. To us they are anything but practical.

If one listens to the advice usually offered to any one who is contemplating educational work in Oriental lands, he finds it is replete with the admonition, "Load up with philosophy." So the poor practical-minded professor, as he sails out of New York harbor, usually sighs with fear and trembling because in his college days he took only five major and eight minor courses in philosophy. "Surely this is not enough," he thinks. Has he not seen and heard those keen Oriental students in America? They certainly had philosophic minds. And so he sails-a pedagogical sheep to a philosophical slaughter!

This conception, or misconception, of the Oriental ability to think in curves is held generally by American tourists. And it is not to be wondered at, knowing as we now do the

marvelous ingenuity and the philosophical mind of all the Pharaohs, that we should expect the same thing of their present-day descendants.

Yet strange to relate, regardless of what other Orientals may be, the mind of the modern Egyptian is not philosophic. The most outstanding surprise that constantly comes to groups of American college men teaching in Egypt is that their students are anything but philosophic. It comes as a real shock to them. Instead of being able to work the American teacher off his feet by running every problem out into blank abstraction, the ordinary Egyptian student does not work at all well with abstract thought. The best American teachers are those who multiply illustrations and make everything concrete. An occasional student does bob up to give a philosophic challenge, but it is indeed occasional.

Even when one gets out of the departments where English is the medium of instruction and compares notes with Egyptian masters, educated abroad, who know the situation and are teaching in Arabic, he still finds to his amazement the almost complete absence of this philosophic outlook which he has been led to expect.

This leads us to the question: What kind of a mind does the Rameses of to-day possess? The fair answer is to say that in general Egyptians are practical, utilitarian and concerned with the known present rather than with the unknown future. This is in no sense a reflection on Egyptians. There is much to be said in its favor.

Let us look first to the student classes for evidence of this practical mind. Nowhere is there more fever and excitement about grades and marks than in Egypt. American students are bad enough, but they can not match the Egyptians at this game. The college department of the American University at Cairo was compelled to change its marking system from a numerical to an alphabetical one largely because so much time was wasted by students trying to argue their monthly grades up one tenth of a point. One can not argue tenths when grades are in A, B, C. One would hardly expect such high blood pressure over the question of marks and grades from students who took things philosophically. It is an evidence of the Egyptian's intense practical-mindedness.

Take the matter of the diploma in Egypt. The "shihada," as it is called in Arabic, is almost a sacred thing. If a man can only get a diploma, he is satisfied. Not "how did he get it?" nor "how much does he really know?" but "what shihada does he have?" is the important question to them. This reverence for the diploma or certificate has penetrated even to the servant classes. A cook who has served only two weeks would sooner leave without his pay than without a diploma certifying that he has worked two weeks. In the quantity of certificates carried is the cook's prowess known.

But among students, and even their parents, nowhere is the vicious side of this practical turn of mind so plainly in evidence as in their inordinate desire to arrive too quickly at the end of their preparation, to land early in some profession without previous work and to deliberately seek to avoid the well-known requirements necessary for entrance to that particular profession. One gets sick arguing by the hour with parents to give time for maximum preparation. One grows weary of the perpetual demands for short cuts. The very practical and utilitarian idea of "graft," "squeeze," "pull," is as common to Egypt as to America. If you can command this magic force, you can get anything without working for it.

Wider observation outside the classroom confirms the idea that Egyptians are utilitarians. The distribution of the philosophic mind in Egypt will not even approximate the wellknown normal curve but will skew heavily to the negative end.

There recently visited Egypt the foreign secretary of one of the leading missionary churches of America. He, himself, had been a missionary in India for many years and a student of Oriental countries and conditions. He spoke of the prevalence in India of this attitude of mind which we call the philosophical, especially in the student classes, but he confirmed the main thesis of this article by stating that the thing that startled him most in Egypt was the Egyptians' administrative ability. In his opinion, in this very practical field, they were preeminently the leaders of all the Oriental peoples he had He marveled that in banks, stores, postoffices, railway stations, etc., business was being conducted by Egyptians, and dispatched with a

seen.

skill that he had not seen in any other Oriental country. Here again the Egyptian reveals his utilitarian cast of mind.

The present-day descendants of the Pharaohs are just a plain, likable, practical-minded people, loving the piaster much more than philosophy, and ready to talk cents and common sense in a language that even he who runs-as the tourist does may understand.

RUSSELL GALT THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY AT CAIRO

DISCUSSION

SOME OBSERVATIONS ON VOCA-
TIONAL MOTIVATION

THERE are a few conceptions that have been widely defended and crop out from time to time in educational discussions. One of these is the value of stimulating the student with really vocational subjects, subjects that he knows he will need. Then, it is said, there will be motivation and a consequent higher grade of studying.

The hypothesis seems fairly convincing, and we suppose has rarely been attacked. One methed of checking this assumption is available now in the days of intelligence testing. Whatever opinion we may have of a two-hour college intelligence test, we must admit that some kind of present ability is being measured. One is getting a number of difficult adjustments or reactions to complicated abstract stimuli. Now, if the abilities represented are of enough different kinds and difficult enough, it is probable that any course or group of courses whose final marks relate closely to the totals from such tests does have incitement or motivation. The brighter men should get the higher course marks; the duller men, naturally, the lower marks. Where class marks do not correlate with intelligence tests at all, it seems obvious that students are not motivated in proportion to their ability, but are just trying to "get by" in the course.

At the University of Buffalo it became clear in the study of correlations between intelligence test results and school marks that there were some significant differences between one group and another. Women, for example, showed correlations between intelligence tests and school marks which were superior to correlations with men. This fits with all the studies bearing on

such matters, and has been explained on the grounds of the seriousness of women in the arts and science colleges as compared with the attitude of the men.

The correlations between the intelligence test of the American Council on Education for the freshmen last year was: for 59 women, .45; for 103 men, .20. This difference was felt to be rather large in view of the fact that ordinary arts college students do not show as large a difference as this. And yet the majority of the men in the freshman year at the University of Buffalo were planning on but two years of college work before entering a technical school, for medical or dental training.

When the men were divided into two groups, those intending to take the four years arts college work and those planning on but two years of preprofessional work, the relationships between intelligence tests and freshman marks came out for forty-six men (four years arts), .30; for fifty-seven men (preprofessional), .13.

The next inquiry concerned the relative stimulating value of different subjects in the freshman curriculum.

The explanation for this condition is not clear. It may be partly the method of teaching the different subjects, including the necessity of laboratory routine in the last two. This is bound to be tedious for many students, often the brighter ones. Another partial explanation may be the realization on the part of students that they will meet the subjects of chemistry and biology later on in the professional school which really counts: hence, "why work too hard now." It may be that the subject-matter of chemistry and biology as taught is too abstract

and unrelated to professional life. It is not due to easy marking in the last two subjects, as the biology course has a record of next to the largest percentage of E and F grades of all college courses, and chemistry approximates the average.

The results raise an interesting personnel question, at any rate. Should the arts college accept students with the understanding that they may be admitted into the medical school at the end of two years? Are they not marking time to quite an extent, and interfering with the kind of effort expected of the four-year students? If there is preprofessional training required by the professional schools, perhaps this should be handled in intensive summer courses or by the professional schools themselves, as in years gone by. At least it is clear that in the college those courses which are apparently of greatest vocational advantage are not motivating the students.

UNIVERSITY OF BUFFALO

E. S. JONES

READING FOR HONORS

"A COLLEGE graduate is a gink who has just finished a four year loaf." (From the meditations of Ring Lardner.)

"The candidate (student) is expected to take the initiative in thinking and in studying." "The Faculty Adviser. . . is not expected to furnish motive power to a candidate." (From the Pomona College bulletin describing the "Honors Course.")

The first quotation probably contains as much truth as humor. Many a college graduate Many a college graduate should have engraved in gold letters upon his diploma: "High honors in avoiding hard work." Many a student obtains his most soothing sleep during his lecture periods.

The second quotation contains the essence of a plan (the Honors System) recently introduced at Pomona College,.and intended in some measure to obviate one of the most glaring weaknesses of our American system of college education.

Why is a college? The writer has been interested in the fact that even educators seem unable to agree upon the purpose of a college edu cation. "Character development," "breadth of culture," "citizenship," "acquisition of knowl

edge," are a few of the suggested answers to the problem.

Probably something of all these aims should be included in a college education. But the introduction of the honors course at Pomona College is based upon the belief that whatever else college does for a student, it should at least develop in him some capacity and inclination for independent study and thinking.

The college graduate, stepping out from the sheltered life of the scholastic halls into the turmoil of business and professional life, is likely to attain real success largely in proportion to his inclination and ability to grasp the problems that confront him and to think through them to logical conclusions.

But much college training is conducted with little concern for this capacity for independent work. Under the lecture system a premium sometimes is put upon a parrot-like ability to absorb what is poured out and to reproduce it upon demand. Under this system the ideal student is a sort of animated phonograph record.

The honors course at Pomona College is intended to give a certain number of superior students an especially fine opportunity to exercise their capacity for independent study and thinking. Under this plan, juniors and seniors are permitted to pursue, independently and without obligation to attend classes, certain lines of study in which they are especially interested and which they are fitted to undertake. this type of work a student may be allowed a maximum of eighteen hours toward graduation.

For

At present the number of candidates for honors is rather limited. All candidates must have the indorsement of the head of the department in which they wish to do work and of the committee on honors. It must be apparent that the candidate is fitted for this type of work.

"Candidates reading for honors are expected to attain a broader and more complete understanding of their fields of knowledge than students pursuing their regular curriculum." This statement gives an idea of the type of work expected of honors students. As a matter of fact, each honors student is expected to bring with him into the course a real interest in his particular field of study and a determination to master the subject as far as is possible for him to do so.

AMONG the forces which promote peace, because they create the common mind on which peace depends, not the least important is education. A work on education just produced by Sir Michael Sadler, under the title "Our Public Elementary Schools," appears, therefore, at a peculiarly opportune moment. Sir Michael Sadler writes on educational questions with unique authority. He has seen the growth of public education from the inside, from Lord Bryce's Commission of 1894 and the early days of the Board of Education to the time when a great modern university called him to be its head. His book is marked by the breadth, moderation and sagacity-by the combination of enthusiasm for progress with respect for those whose conception of progress is not his own-which have made him one of the great figures in the educational history of the last thirty years. His verdict on the educational renaissance of the later nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is the more impressive because his optimism is sober and free from illusions. The school works on individuals stamped already by heredity and moulded daily by the subtle power of environment. They are in contact with it for some twenty-seven hours a week. Their education is not merely a matter of certain institutions labelled "educational," but of the whole complex of physical surroundings and social traditions by which the present generation influences the physical health, the mental development and the character of the next. The school itself is often hampered by inade

quate staffing and unsuitable buildings, and the formal education of nine tenths of the population ceases at an age when that of a fortunate minority still has six or seven years to run. Yet those who know in any detail the social life of the child population fifty years ago will not question Sir Michael Sadler's judgment that, with all its limitations and imperfections, public education has worked a beneficent revolution. The critics who doubt its achievements either do not know the point from which it started and the kind of society on which it had to work, and which it has helped to transform, or they are judging it by criteria to which the progress of education itself has alone made it possible to appeal. They are dissatisfied with what is because it falls so far short of what might be.

Such criticism-the only fruitful criticism— is that suggested by Sir Michael Sadler's book. Few who have observed dispassionately the social struggles of the period since the war can have failed sometimes to ask themselves whether it may not be possible by means of a deliberate and continuous policy of educational progress to turn the flank of issues which to-day appear intractable. Unlike that of some earlier societies, modern civilization is, of its very essence, a cooperative business. It requires for its successful working the continuous combination of a multitude of different wills for common ends. Nearly all men live and work in large groups, which will function effectively only if the individuals who compose them understand and trust each other. Nearly all are economically interdependent. Nearly all are affected in their daily lives, by remote, complex and constantly changing forces. How far have we succeeded in avoiding the dangers which beset a society whose economic organization outruns the capacity of its members for cooperation? How far have we been at pains to create the intellectual and moral conditions of tolerance, sympathy and mutual understanding? How far have we trained the rising generation in a habit of critical thought sufficiently powerful to make them immune to the great modern art of organizing delusion? And, if we have not as yet made very serious efforts to do these things-if, when it is proposed to do them, we cry out that they are extravagant-are we really much more sensible than men who should fill the saloon with