Ҿ˹˹ѧ
PDF
ePub

The action of the Committee so far as it relates to student conduct has consisted in investigating cases of fraud in examination and of other cases of violation of the University rules reported to the Committee. The behavior of the student body in general has been excellent and events like the freshman banquet and “Spring Day" passed off without disorder or objectionable features. While, as I have said, the behavior of the student body in general is exemplary, there is, unfortunately, a small number of students who bring discredit upon the University by their disorderly conduct and one event during the last year, namely, the senior banquet, was attended by most reprehensible conduct on the part of a considerable number of the class. The best method of dealing with this subject has occupied the attention of the Committee on Student Affairs and two plans have been suggested. One is the employment of a University officer who as proctor shall have certain powers and duties for the repression of disorderly conduct. The second method is to obtain, if possible, the cooperation of the student body by means of a general committee composed from the upper classes to act with the Committee on Student Affairs in matters dealing with student conduct. If the various student organizations now existing, fraternities, clubs, etc., should take a firm and decided stand in regard to the conduct of their members in public, a great deal would be accomplished. But, unfortunately, cases of fraud in examination and public intoxication are too often considered as venial offenses and no action whatever is taken by the organization to which the offender belongs. The large majority of students are in favor of honorable behavior within and without the University, and if their cooperation could be secured by the Committee on Student Affairs, the evils complained of could be largely abated, if not wholly abolished. The Committee on Student Affairs proposes at the beginning of the next academic year to meet with representatives of the various classes with the above ends in view. It is to be hoped that this movement may result in the establishment of a representative committee of the students which shall become a permanent institution and afford the Committee on Student Affairs a convenient means of communicating with the student body.

GRADUATE DEPARTMENT

3 In my report for 1905-1906, page xiv, I stated that on April 11, 1906, a special session of the University Faculty considered the subject of the needs and prospects of the Graduate Department, and a committee was appointed to consider and report upon certain matters in relation to the Graduate Department. On February 8, 1907, this committee recommended to the Faculty the adoption of the following resolution:

Resolved, that the University Faculty recommend to the Board of Trustees the establishment of a graduate school under the administration of a separate Faculty to consist of the professors in those departments in which graduate work is offered.”

After a brief debate it was moved and carried that the report of the committee be accepted and the committee discharged.

In my report for 1906–1907, page xx, I said that I regretted that the report of this Committee received so little attention and I trusted that the whole subject might receive the careful consideration of the University Faculty next year. On November 8, 1907, it was moved in the University Faculty that a committee of five be appointed by the President to consider and to report on the organization of a graduate school. It was also voted at the same meeting that the committee on the organization of a graduate school to be appointed by the President, as soon as it has sufficiently proceeded with its inquiries, request the Committee on Graduate Work to confer with it. The President of the University subsequently appointed the following committee in pursuance of the first resolution:

The Dean, chairman, Professors E. B. Titchener, E. L. Nichols, W. F. Willcox and A. Ross Hill.

This committee met frequently during the year and considered various means for increasing the efficiency of the Graduate Department, such as the appropriation of money for research work in the graduate department; retirement of professors under the service clause of the Carnegie Foundation with subsidiary pensions from the University to enable them to devote themselves exclusively to research without great pecuniary sacrifice; shortening of the teaching year and reduction of the routine and administrative duties to a minimum, etc. They also considered such secondary aid to the Graduate Department as might consist in special announcements containing not merely courses, but a statement of facilities for research, list of titles of investigations published during previous years and of those in progress; and, finally, the committee consid. ered the modification of admission requirements in the direction of greater liberality and the admission of our own students to graduate standing at the beginning or middle of the senior year in cases where

[ocr errors]

they have by selection of their work prepared themselves for such standing in some one department.

The committee in its partial report to be mentioned presently had no specific recommendation to make in regard to these points, although it felt that the adoption of some or all of them would increase the efficiency of the Graduate Department. It seemed to the committee that the most urgent need of the Graduate Department was its reorganization in some form which should concentrate responsibility in the hands of the persons actively engaged in the work of the Graduate Department. The Graduate Department as at present organized is in charge of the University Faculty and the Dean of the University Faculty is ex-officio chairman of the Committeee on Graduate Work, which is really the only organization responsible for the management and efficiency of the Graduate Department. This Committee now consists of eight members renewed from year to year. The chairman of the Committee, the Dean of the University Faculty, is responsible for the conduct of business and on him falls practically the entire routine work of the Graduate Department. The Dean is at present chairman of all the other standing committees of the University Faculty and is unable to devote his attention exclusively to any one of these committees. The Committee on Graduate Work is called together only when cases arise which the chairman does not feel authorized to settle and the Committee has no share in the routine work or any responsibility for its efficient conduct. The Committee also does not consider itself as a legislative body and rarely suggests improvements.

The committee of five above mentioned met with the Committee on Graduate Work and on June 12th made a report of progress to the University Faculty, recommending that beginning with September, 1909, there should be created a Graduate School with a faculty of its own, consisting of professors who in each year are actively engaged in supervising the work of graduate students as members of special committees in charge of major or minor subjects, these professsors to be designated by the President as soon as possible after the registration of graduate students in each year. The committee also recommended the creation of a new office, that of Dean of the Graduate School, the duties of that officer to be to serve as executive officer of the Graduate Faculty as above constituted and to conduct the work of the Graduate School under the direction of the Faculty of that School. This partial report of progress was accepted by the Faculty and the committee continued with the understanding that a final report should be presented as early as possible next year.

In my last report, page xx, I called attention for the second time to the question of, graduate work done during the summer, either in the session of the summer school or outside the session of the summer school. This subject has occupied the attention of the Committee on Graduate Work during the year and the necessity of some limitation of such work was recognized. The number of students taking work during the summer, either in the Summer Session or during the summer vacation, is increasing every year and will undoubtedly increase more rapidly when it is understood that work during the summer may in certain cases reduce the time required for the Doctor's degree from three years to two.

The ordinary candidate receives credit fora year for the work done during the regular sessions of the University and if he continues his work privately during the summer vacation receives no credit for it. But the candidate pursuing work in botany, entomology and agricultural subjects may receive credit for one year and one third for the work done during the college year and the vacation. It is a very serious question whether this discrepency between various classes of candidates for the same degree should be allowed, but in my own judgment the most serious objection to work done during the summer is the fact that no organized provision exists for it outside of the brief Summer Session. It does not seem right to expect professors to remain in Ithaca during the summer giving instruction to graduate students and supervising their work, without extra compensation. At the same time it does not seem right to give credit toward a degree for work which is not pursued under substantially the same conditions as those which prevail at the regular sessions of the University. I trust that upon the reorganization of the Graduate Department this subject will receive prompt attention and the policy of the University in this important matter will be more clearly defined.

Graduate students who are not candidates for a degree, as well as those who are, have been required to work under the direction of a special committee of the Faculty. The numbers of such students for the past sixteen years have been as follows:

[blocks in formation]

The number of advanced degrees conferred during the years 1892–1908 was as follows:

2

I

I

I

2

'92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 'oo 'or 'oz '03 '04 'os 'o6 '07 '08 Tot.
6
4 8

10 10 16 14 20 19 22 12 23 13 10 22 212
2
3 3

9 3 3

9 7 7 12 6 6 3

57 8 4

3
3

3

1 2 34 6 14 16 8 15 6

7
4 10
4

9 4 4 5 127 8 4 16 13 14 II 23 7 19 20 23 20 13 21 19 19 22 272 3 6 3 3

18

6 10

2

[ocr errors]

2

[ocr errors]

I

A.M... Ph.M.. M.L. M.S. M.C.E. M.M.E. Ph.D. . D.Sc... M.S. in

Agr. M.S. in Arch.

ww

2

2

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Total.. 30 35 66 44 48 37 44 35 38 54 53 56 34 67 49 44 66 800

The candidates for advanced degrees during the years 1896-1908 were distributed as follows:

[blocks in formation]

Total.

131 133 145 155 154 183 170 182 175 182 212 223 234

« ͹˹Թõ
 »