body all four forms of regulation mentioned in the Committee's report of November 3, 1905, as in force at some one or more of the institutions examined. The first regulation is obviously aimed at securing during the first two years a common content of education, by requiring an introduction to each of the four most widely diverse fields of work embraced within the College of Arts and Sciences. But it should be noted that the number of courses open to election by each student within each of these four fields is as wide as the number of electives in the later years of many small colleges where the elective system is restricted only by the resources of the institution. It is not so obvious, however, that this regulation makes it possible either for the Dean or for any other advisory agency that may hereafter be constituted to offer advice to students, especially to freshmen, without exposing themselves to the danger of making invidious discriminations. The result of this regulation, therefore, in its amended form will also be to facilitate the advice of under. classmen and especially of freshmen regarding the subjects they should take.

The second of these regulations is obviously designed to secure continuity and concentration. This pedagogic need is amply met in the course outlined by the Department of Chemistry. There is, therefore, no call for such a requirement on the part of students taking that course. The offer of advice to upperclassmen is probably the most important part of this regulation. If it works, as it is hoped and expected that it will, it will greatly increase the amount of personal intercourse and of interchange of opinion between upperclassmen and members of the Faculty regarding the selection and arrangement of studies.

An indirect result of the second regulation may be to encourage a higher quality of work and perhaps also a higher quality of teaching from this closer association of teacher and student during the last two years. None of the regulations in force at sister institutions and designed to encourage a high quality of work commended itself to the whole committee. There is in the committee and Faculty, I believe, a deep skepticism of the efficacy of our marking system as a basis for dividing students into classes determined by the quality of their work and an unwillingness, except under the spur of necessity and as a last resort, to extend the application of the system beyond its present range by assigning further rewards or punishments on the basis of marks. It should be noted, however, that the important regulation adopted a year ago whereby the fixed period of residence usually eight half-year terms, is restored, supplementing the requirement of a fixed quantum of work, 120 hours, will have a most important influence in encouraging work of a higher quality, especially among average or mediocre students. Under the system in force prior to the adoption of that regulation such students, especially those who found it difficult to obtain the funds for a four years' college course, were spurred to obtain the minimum number of hours at any sacrifice of quality in their work. This regulation will have a most important effect in discouraging extensive work of poor quality and encouraging the election of a smaller number of hours wherein the work done may be of a better grade.

The legislation of the two years taken as a whole thus regulates the elective system in each of the four main ways in which this system has been regulated at many of our sister institutions. This result has not been secured by any attempt to imitate what has been done elsewhere. In fact the committee did not notice, nor was it pointed out to the Faculty, that these regulations taken together did include all four of the methods of regulation found elsewhere. It is interesting, therefore, to note that similar problems have led us along parallel roads to similar conclusions.

In the light of the further experience of a second year I may repeat with added confidence and emphasis the judgment expressed to you a year ago regarding the work of the Committee on Educational Policy. The evidence convinces me that the establishment of the Committee on Educational Policy “is a step towards that organization and leadership within the college which the Executive Committee's resolution of Dec. 11, 1903, affirmed, and in my judgment rightly affirmed, to be lacking.” If I read the history of this college aright, the tendencies within it during the period from its establishment in 1896 down to the resolution of the Executive Committee above referred to were predominantly se paratist and divisive, not to say disintegrating. The vital units of the college, the several departments, tended steadily to acquire more and more authority and the organizing and centralizing influences which should find expression in a governing body, tended more and more to fall into abeyance. Since the adoption of those resolutions by the Executive Committee and the discussion and action resulting therefrom it has seemed to me that these centrifugal tendencies have been checked. Perhaps one may go so far as to say that the movement during the past two years has been in the opposite direction. I believe that there is at the present time in the college a stronger recognition than heretofore of its unity, of the interdependence of the several departments, and of the duty of each to waive what may seem to be its own needs when they are deemed to conflict with the best interests of the college as a whole. I believe that this movement, while it should be carefully watched and guarded lest it go too far and encroach upon the legitimate field of the departments, has not yet gone far enough and that there is no influence now at work in the college in the direction of strengthening this tendency so powerful as the Committee on Educational Policy. I am glad, therefore, to be able to report that the committee which went out of office last May was unanimously of the opinion that this form of organization should be continued.


The action of this Committee in passing upon the cases of delinquent students is indicated in the following table in which the figures for the last five years are brought together for comparison.

Students Dropped

Students Warned

or Referred First Second Total Term Term

[blocks in formation]














15 25 1902-1903


37 13


33 17



43 18



18 The increase in the number of students dropped during the last three years is due in the main to the raised standard of requirements for remaining in the College. Until three years ago it was the rule that students who had passed ten hours, two thirds of the normal term or five ninths of the maximum number of hours allowed, could continue in the College. For the last three years an effort has been made to insist upon students passing at least twelve hours, and in consequence a number of students have been dropped who would have been allowed in previous years to continue their work in the College. It is believed that this requirement of a larger amount of work has had a salutary effect upon the students. In judging these figures it should be borne in mind that in a number of cases students withdraw from the College without obtaining an honorable dismissal or a leave of absence and thus without giving any information regarding their action. In such cases the record at the end of the term simply shows a blank with no explanation or excuse. Several such students are dropped every year who would have been entitled to a leave of absence or an honorable dismissal had the facts as they subsequently appear been brought to the knowledge of the Committee. It should be noticed also that some students are dropped who have a valid explanation like sickness which they have failed to present and others especially at the end of the second term who are able before the beginning of the following term to bring their records above the required minimum of twelve hours. For these reasons the foregoing table does not exactly represent the final result of the committee's action but only the situation at the end of the specified term.

THE RELATION OF THE DEAN TO THE STUDENTS. The only aspects of the Dean's duties in this field which call for a formal report are those connected with his function of granting leaves of absence to students who are to be away from town. Absences on account of illness where the student remains in town, which used to be granted to men by the professor of physical culture and to women by the instructor in Sage College in charge of the gym. nasium, are now no longer issued. Absences from town on the part of members of athletic organizations or of delegates to fraternity conventions or other student organizations are merely countersigned by the Dean, being issued by the Committee on Student Organizations through the Registrar. All other absences are granted by the Dean The number and classes of causes assigned are given in the following list. The corresponding figures for the four preceding years are introduced for comparison.


1901-02 1902-03 1903-04 1904-05 1905-06 Personal Illness...


117 56 48 Illness or Death in Family -


31 30 Request of Family


14 5 Wedding



13 Business Summons.

26 48 67 42 32 Delegate to Convention

41 24

19 Voter

7 43

61 6 Department Excursion


27 60 29 7 Examinations Missed Connections...

34 6 Miscellaneous

31 79 23












[blocks in formation]


It will be noticed that the leaves of absence have been decreasing steadily since the academic year, 1902–1903, the year of the typhoid epidemic. The number for the year just ended was smaller than for any one of the four years preceding. This decrease however has little significance. It may indicate simply a tendency to neglect obtaining a leave of absence from the Dean's office where the absence is for a satisfactory reason and to state the reason directly to the department or departments in which attendance has been interrupted.

Respectfully submitted,


Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.




To the President of the University :


SIR :- I have the honor to submit my third annual report covering the academic year 1905-1906 (to May first ).

The registration in the three classes since the full three-year course was in operation is shown in the following table :

Seniors Juniors First Year Special Total 1899-1900.

61 61


1990-1901 -
45 52 78 7


34 71
86 7

198 1902-1903


77 95 5 225 1903-1904

53 76 109 3 241

58 80 86 4
65 69 83 4



« ͹˹Թõ