President Eliot's Report.

The following admirable summary and criticism of the main points of interest in President Eliot's late report. which appeared in the current number of "Science" deserves a careful reading: -

"The annual reports of President Eliot of Harvard always contain suggestive reading for those who are interested in the advance and improvement of teaching, as well as in teaching itself. The constant effort to seek out and put into practice better methods of instruction, or methods more in keeping with the needs of the time, has been pre-eminently a characteristic of the present administration at Harvard. This was well pointed out by President Angell of Michigan in his after-dinner speech at the Harvard celebration last November. He alluded to the debt that all American colleges owe to the old university for the bold spirit of experiment that has led to the recognition of the difference in value between the traditional, customary, and conventional methods, inherited from previous generations, and the new, fresh, original methods, that contribute their share to the advance of the age. Any thing, he said, rather than stagnation in educational matters. Certainly there is no stagnation at Harvard, and the many changes of the last fifteen years seem only to prepare the way for more.

One of the present concerns of the college is naturally to secure good teaching for those who may desire to take entrance examinations in science instead of in one of the classics. It is well, therefore, to note President Eliot's attitude on this question. He says, "A serious difficulty in the way of getting science well taught in secondary schools has been the lack of teachers who knew anything of inductive reasoning and experimental methods." One reason of this is that "good school methods of teaching the sciences have not yet been elaborated and demonstrated, and it is the first duty of university departments of science to remove at least this obstacle to the introduction of science into schools. ... Science can never be put on the right footing at the university, so long as it is practically excluded from secondary schools, or is admitted only to be taught in a positively harmful way." This brings to the front as important amatter as has lately been considered in the development of collegiate study, and young men may well consider the opportunity that it will open for them. For the next twenty years, the preparatory schools will show a growth on the side of science teaching, the like of which has not been seen in this country, and really good teachers of chemistry and physics will be in increasing demand. It will be a fortunate university that shall supply the most of these teachers.

An interesting paragraph of the report relates to the "list of publications of Harvard university and its officers, 1880-1885. "In this list, about three-quarters of the 1,813 entries relate to science, including in that term medicine. Very inaccurate estimates of the relative activity in literary and scientific publications of some leading American universities having of late years obtained currency, and perhaps credit, through the public press, it is permissible to remark in the interests of truth, that it would be discreditable indeed to Harvard university - old and well-equipped as it is - if any other American institution could approach it in the range and volume of its annual literary and scientific publications." The excess of scientific publications over literary would be much reduced if pages instead of titles were counted; for in science a larger number of brief monographs on limited topics can be found than there is any equivalent for in literature.

During the last twenty years, while scientific studies were finding their place in the college elective lists, the Lawrence scientific school, once a leader among its fellows, has been steadily losing in number of scholars, and hence in influence. For some years past it has suffered seriously, simply from being overshadowed by the growing college across the street. Some have thought that this meant a discouragement to science-teaching at Cambridge, but the very reverse is the case. When the school was founded, the college was narrow, and saw no propriety in allowing a wide variety of study to its undergraduates. There was no advanced teaching in physical or natural science in the college till 1871, and ambitious students of these subjects in the earlier years had to go to the Lawrence school for them, if they came to Cambridge at all. Now the same class of students undoubtedly goes to the college, attractive in so many ways, for its lines of study have been extended to include nearly everything at first found only in the scientific school, in accordance with what is vaguely termed the 'spirit of the age;' but it should be recognized that this spirit has been strongly guided by just such institutions as the Lawrence school, whose graduates include a large number of prominent and influential men. If success is to be measured by the share taken in the labor of bringing neglected studies into their proper position, the liberality of Abbott Lawrence and James Lawrence has been successful even beyond their hopes.