The times., 1901-06-27
shorter course. i'm the College.

SeNeTdi AMERICAN GyAANSSS e1AO HN"
considering. or have already introduced,
shorter courses, involving about the
same amount of actual study as the
former four years course. but SO ar
ranged that the student graduates IN
three years. Two or three advantages
are claimed for this arrangement. One
is that it gives a better chance to men
with limited opportunities and money.
They are thus enabled to work hard and
prepare themselves for their profession
in no more time than is actually re-
quired, instead of dailying through
fourth year with those who are rich
enough to afford four years of reading,
part of which is not actually necessary,
or who mingle with their studies
various social and athletic engage
ments There is undoubtedly an advan-
tage in this mixing of business with
pleasure. but many of the young fell
lows who have painfully scraped to-
gether money for a brief period of study
cannot afford 10 do anything OF the
sort, and that is all that there is about
it They expect to get their exercise in
hunting for work, and their pleasure
after they have earned it; and they
generally do.
Another reason given for the shorten
ing of the course is that the present ar
rangement gives some of the men
chance to be lazy. and that it would be
good for them to be obliged to work
hard and do in three years the study
ing they now dawdle through four in
doing. The fact that college presidents
have recognized this phenomenon is a
most hopeful indication for the future
of our colleges. It has hitherto been
more or less generally supposed that a
college course benefited the student in
some mysterious way without his agen-
cy: that mere contact with the walls Of
the institution would somehow put ideas
into him 1t was not admitted that
course of reading in Greek history or
Hegelian philosophy would be of no
earthly good to man whose heart was
on the football ground. There are
things which an ordinarily bright stu
dent can Gram so as to make fair
showing in recitation before the most
astute professor, and yet get no real or
permanent good from the process.
Manifestly, such studies can only be
profitably taken by students who are
really interested in them. 1t is wrong
% these students to compel them to be
enrolled with fellows who are taking
the study merely under compulsion, and
who take up the time Of the professor
in the classroom by trying to evade his
1-fr hoy
little they know. The great good of
studying a subject like history, or lit
erature, or art, under q professor of
wide knowledge and genuine love for
his work is the personal contact with
his mind which is afforded. 1t is an ed
ucation, oftentimes, merely TO be the
sympathetic pupil of such man; and
the time spent in the classroom can fire.
quently be best spent by listening to his
expositions of the topic in hand. called
out by the intelligent questions of eager
students. How can this be done if he
has TO spend most of his time explain
ing a matter which half the class al
ready understands, to the other half,
which does not want TO understand it;
or IN trying to find out whether the ig-
noramus of the class knows enough to
pass a fair examination or not? Such
knowledge as this cannot be impaired to
a pupil as water is poured into a jug.
It must be absorbed; and to try TO teach
more than the rudiments to a person
wholly uninterested in them is. TO use
an old simile, like trying To make a
ducks back absorb water like a sponge
There are some studies which should
be made absolutely elective so far as
the advanced classes are concerned,
and there are enough Of these to cut
the course in most colleges from four
years to three. The sooner this is done
the better 1t will be for everybody con-
cerned.