To the Editor of the CRIMSON:
A recent contributor of yours has, I think, made a rather unsatisfactory, if not altogether lame, comparison between the man who uses "Tutorial School" notes and he who does not. "The former," he says, "learns stick-to-it-ness, the latter concentration, both of which are valuable." This would leave one to think that one course was as productive of good as another. This is rather deceptive. Is, say a three-day concentration period, able to compare in value with a four month stick-to-it period? Or is concentration a desirable so rare that a little of it will off-set a lot of the baser stuff of persistent application? The foreshortening of an obligation of four months to a comparatively few hours is only too likely to foster carelessness and a procrastinating habit of mind that will have little opportunity in later life to concentrate on anything, except a method of letting things slide by with the least possible annoyance. Such is not practical.
The correspondent also claims that those who are in charge of and connected with this "School" get an opportunity to exercise a managerial ability. He gives it a sort of blessedness by saying it is run by students for the students. His first argument, that it gives an opportunity for training, is, I think, more poetic than sound. It would be just as plausible to advocate war in order to whip a few generals into shape. But it may be I am wrong on this head it may be that the note taking and purveying is a business of great proportions, but I cannot think it quite the institute, or quite such a pervasive system as in suggested. As for his idea of mutual helpfulness between student as is suggested. As for his idea of mutual helpfulness between student and student, there is, to all outward appearances some good done both ways; but is the encouragement of procrastination given by these men of business practical? Are they not getting their experience, enlarging their abilities while helping others to increase their disabilities?
I am not a Purilan live and let live! It is just as well to see the reverse of the picture however. H. J. ROOKER, '26. January 26, 1923.
Defence of Proposed Elective System.To the Editors of the CRIMSON: In reply to Saturday's editorial in the CRIMSON, I wish to point out that
Reading Test Reveals Rise In AptitudeThe continued increase in reading ability of each successive entering class has necessitated continued upgrading of the freshman reading course,
FOR EARLY DISTRIBUTIONSeniors who completed their Concentration last year, misled in their innocent youth by careless advisers, are wondering now just why
COPEY AND THE FRESHMENFreshmen, it has been observed, are the recipients of a deal of advice. He who would ordinarily treat the world
No HeadlineThe vote of the Administrative Board is as pleasing to students as we have reason to hope the petition of
Communication.We invite all members of the University to contribute to this column, but we are not responsible for the sentiments