804
J OURNAL
OB
CHEMICAL EDUCATION
S E P T E ~ E1925 R,
SUBSIDIZING ACCOMPLISHMENT
.
The incentives to social attainment in college life far overbalance those t o scholastic accomplishment. The immediate rewards of the former are ever choice morsels for the student who is first of all a social human being. But what inducement is there to outstanding scholastic activity other than the ultimate value of knowledge for its own sake? Under existing conditions there is none. I t would seem, then, that in order to subsidize scholastic attainment on the part of the student, an immediate recompense must be offered. Frank Aydelotte in a recent article' strongly advocates the general adoption of an "Honors" system. Speaking of students generally, he says, "The standardization of the instruction of these masses has been carried to the place where it resembles the Federal Reserve system. If you have an academic record of certain grades in certain courses in a certain recognized college, you can cash it in any other recognized college just as you can collect a check through any Federal Reserve Bank. Our intellectual values could not possibly be represented correctly by this credit system." Freedom of choice is given to the student in social activities, he points out, hut "in studies on the other hand the virtue most in demand is docility." He favors an "extension of undergraduate freedom from the personal to the intellectual sphere." Swarthmore is cited as an example of the operation of this system. Here are given two degrees, one with "Honors" and one without. At the end of the second year the student is permitted to make his choice provided, of course, that he has previously proved his ability. James H. Rogers offers a similar suggestion in School alzd S ~ c i e t y . ~ He would greatly encourage the "Honors" group while "the students of the lower group would be treated as on probation; tolerated, but not encouraged to continue; and if they insisted on remaining in college, they would be asked to pay the expense of their instruction." He continues, "Healthy and severe competition to get into the 'Honors' group and to remain there would be inevitable. . . . . . Intellectual apathy would largely disappear, taking its departure along with that group of worthless students who a t present claim to so little purpose the time and energy of the teaching staff, who ruin the morale of the entire student body and who provide the scandals which give such extensive advertisement to our colleges and universities." One may question the efficacy or the advisability of the solutions offered, yet the problem discussed remains a vital one and these two W. R. W. articles at least furnish food for considerable thought. ' "Honon Work in College," Progr. Educ., 2, 135-8 (1925). "Revolutionizing College Environment with an Honors System," Sch. and Soc., 22, 127-32 (1925).
