DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION SECRETARY'S MINUTES WEDNESDAY MORNING, JULY 10, 1907 The meeting was called to order in the Polytechnic High School, by J. H Francis, of Los Angeles. After opening prayer by Rev. Robert J. Burdette, of Pasadena, Cal., Louis C. Monin, dean of Armour Institute of Technology was chosen chairman, and Alfred Guillou, Throop Polytechnic Institute, Pasadena, Cal., secretary. Upon motion the chair appointed the following committee to nominate officers for the coming year: A. H. Chamberlain, Pasadena, Cal. Mrs. Ella Flagg Young, Chicago, Ill. J. H. Francis, Los Angeles, Cal. Louis C. Monin read a paper, "The Scope of the Department of Technical Education." After discussion the tentative conclusion was reached that this department should include collegiate and secondary technical education. Mrs. Ella Flagg Young, of the Chicago Normal School, then read a paper, "The Proper Articulation of Technical Education within the System of Public Education." George P. Phenix, Hampton Institute, Virginia, discussed the paper. President Joseph Edward Stubbs, of Nevada State University, Reno, read a paper, "Aims and Methods of Technical Education as Compared with the Aims and Methods of a Liberal Education." The meeting then adjourned. ALFRED GUILLOU, Secretary. THURSDAY MORNING, JULY II The department met in the First Methodist Church, and was called to order by Chairman Monin. E. H. Barker, of the Polytechnic High School, Los Angeles, Cal., was appointed to act as secretary of the meeting. Announcement was made that an invitation had been received from Rev. Robert J. Burdette, stating that the subject of his next Sunday's discourse would be "Head, Hand, and Heart" and inviting the Department of Technical Education to attend. The secretary was instructed to reply expressing appreciation. The first paper of the session on "The Agricultural College and Its Relationship to the Scheme of National Education" was read by E. J. Wickson, dean and acting director of the College of Agriculture, University of California, Berkeley, California. A paper on "Trade Schools and Trade Unions" was read by George A. Merrill, principal of the California School of Mechanic Arts, San Francisco, California. A paper on "Technical Education in High Schools and Rural Schools" was read by Arthur H. Chamberlain, dean and professor in Throop Polytechnic Institute, Pasadena, California. Ill. A brief discussion then followed. The Nominating Committee presented its report as follows: For President-Louis C. Monin, dean of Armour Institute of Technology, Chicago, For Vice-President-A. B. Storms, president of Iowa State College, Ames, Iowa. For Secretary-George A. Merrill, principal of California School of Mechanical Arts, San Francisco, Cal. The report was adopted and the nominees elected. Mr. Merrill suggested the appointment of a permanent Committee on Co-operation between the educational and industrial organizations and allied interests. It was moved and carried that the officers of the Association act during the present year as that committee, adding to their number as may seem desirable, the same to be called a "Committee on Co-operation." On motion it was ordered that a Committee of Seven on Admission Requirements to Technical Colleges be appointed by the chair to make a partial report at the next meeting of the Association. The department then adjourned. E. H. BARKER, Secretary. The following have accepted appointment as members of the committee of seven on Entrance Requirements to Technical Colleges: President Fred W. Atkinson, Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute (Chairman). Dean M. E. Cooley, University of Michigan. Dean Frederick A. Goetze, Columbia University. Dean A. Marston, Iowa State College. Professor Ira O. Baker, University of Illinois. Professor Dexter S. Kimball, Sibley College, Cornell University. IRWIN SHEPARD, General Secretary. THE SCOPE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION LOUIS C. MONIN, DEAN OF ARMOUR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 1. Historical.-In the course of the year 1903, several members of the National Educational Association interested in the cause of technical and industrial education conceived the plan of petitioning the Association for the organization of a new department, to be known as the Department of Technical Education. Having received the promise of active co-operation from many of the most prominent educators of this country and enthusiastic replies from a great number of teachers from every state of the Union, the twenty-five signatures necessary to make application to the Board of Directors for the establishment of such a department were secured and the formal petition was transmitted to the Board on December 29, 1903, as provided in Article II, sections 1 and 2, and Article IV, section 8, of the Constitution. The petition was signed by the following: GEORGE N. CARMAN, director, Lewis Institute, Chicago. EDMUND J. JAMES, president, University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill. CYRUS NORTHROP, president, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn. V. C. ALDERSON, president, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colo. M. C. HUMPHREYS, president, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, N. J. LOUIS E. REBER, dean, School of Engineering, Pennsylvania State College, State College, Pa. Cal. F. O. MARVIN, dean, School of Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kan. A. S. DRAPER, commissioner of education, Albany, N. Y. GEORGE A. MERRILL, principal, California School of Mechanic Arts, San Francisco, F. PAUL ANDERSON, dean, School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, State College of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. ALSTON ELLIS, president, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio. CHARLES S. HOWE, president, Case School of Applied Science, Cleveland, Ohio. J. L. SNYDER, president, State Agricultural College, Agricultural College, Mich. A. B. STORMS, president, State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, Ames, Ia. LYMAN HALL, president, Georgia School of Technology, Atlanta, Ga. GEORGE W. PLYMPTON, director of Cooper Union, New York City, N. Y. G. STANLEY HALL, president, Clark University, Worcester, Mass. JAMES MACALISTER, president, Drexel Institute, Philadelphia, Pa. H. H. BELFIELD, dean, University High School, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. J. G. GRANT, dean, Kenwood Institute, Chicago, Ill. L. C. MONIN, dean, Armour Institute of Technology, Chicago, Ill. At the meeting of the Board of Directors of the National Educational Association at Asbury Park, N. Y., July, 1904, upon the motion of Director Crabtree, the petition was referred to the executive committee with power to act. This committee, in session at Louisville, Kentucky, February 28, 1906, granted the report and appointed Professor Louis C. Monin, of the Armour Institute of Technology, Chicago, to effect the organization of the new department and to call the preliminary meeting to order at the July meeting of the Association in San Francisco. As the San Francisco meeting was postponed on account of the great calamity which befell the city, the organization of the Department of Technical Education has to be effected at this time. By this inclusion of one of the most important forms of education the scheme of the National Educational Association will be rounded out. A word of thanks is due to all who a year ago offered their help in mapping out a program for the San Francisco meeting. 2. Suggestions and problems.-Many suggestions in regard to work and investigation have been received by eminent educators, and are now brought to the attention of the members of the department for discussion and action. (1) PRESIDENT ELIOT, Harvard.—Jerome D. Greene, his secretary wrote March 22, 1906, President Eliot is very glad to see that a section of the new Department of Technica] Education is to be devoted to trade schools. In his opinion the trade schools are to be one of the most important educational developments in the immediate future and they ought to be a part of the public-school system. (2) DR. FRED W. ATKINSON, president Polytechnic Institute, Brooklyn, N. Y., writes, I am very much interested in the fact that there is to be a department of technical education in the National Educational Association. The wonder to me is, that this has not been arranged for before. Engineering education is first education and only incidentally engineering. The idea of including this new department in the National Educational Association appeals to me strongly, and I rejoice in it. A committee on admission requirements should be appointed to tabulate the present admission requirements and to recommend a minimum standard. The technical schools which are free to do so should agree among themselves what is absolutely necessary for the applicant for admission to offer. Someway, instructors in engineering schools should lend their aid to general education. The establishment of a department of technical education in the National Educational Association is an important step. But personal work, leadership, service is needed to support those who are developing manual training in all grades of the public schools and to aid in the establishing in every large city of trades and technical high schools. It is my experience as a public-school man taking up the work of directing a college of technology that professors and instructors of our technical colleges are neglecting their duty which they are particularly well-fitted to perform, and, I might say, are under obligations to perform. From the kindergarten, thru the primary and grammar grades, the high-school idea of systematic orderly handwork runs. Strengthen and foster this idea and you will have better-trained students in the technical colleges. But that is not all— you will give a greater dignity, arouse a greater degree of public appreciation for the socalled practical, industrial, etc. The men who are instructing in our technical colleges, can, if they will, give a broader, richer meaning to the term "education." They can, as it were, double the aim of public education. Education must give mental training, but it must be good, and good for something, some special thing. Why not have besides a committee on admission requirements, a committee of eight on courses in technical colleges? It is generally known that the committee of ten performed a rare and useful service for the secondary schools of the country. I believe a similar committee could perform as unique a service for the technical colleges. For example, there is a great difference in the courses in mathematics taught in our technical colleges. In some, differential equations are required of all; some perhaps spend too much time on the calculus. Would it not be possible for the leading professors of mathematics to get together and give us something worth while as the result of their meeting? Is not the same true of the other technical subjects? Could not, perhaps, ideal courses in civil, mechanical, and electrical engineering be put on paper as ideals toward which all technical colleges could be working? (3) PROFESSOR SAMUEL SHELDON, consulting engineer, Polytechnic Institute, Brooklyn, N. Y.-He had intended to attend the San Francisco meeting last year and to read a paper on "Recommendations concerning the Standardization of Methods of Instruction in Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering Courses." (4) GEORGE A. MERRILL, principal of the California School of Mechanical Arts.In the organization of the new department it would be a mistake to separate trade schools from other secondary technical schools. Trades schools are secondary technical schools. I hold, even, that the best manual-training school is a trade school; at any rate, the future American trade school will evolve out of the present manual-training high school. It is my opinion that the department of technical education should have two sections, higher technical education and secondary technical education. (5) C. L. MEES, president, Rose Polytechnic Institute, Terre Haute, Ind.-In the organization of the department I think that provision should be made for an intimate relationship between the association and the American society for the advancement of engineering education. (6) JAMES N. WHITE, dean, College of Engineering, University of Illinois.—The Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education will always, I think, furnish better opportunities for the discussion of higher technical education than will any organization in connection with the National Educational Association, but I do think that we ought to foster the new department with a view to developing elementary technical education in the secondary schools of the country, so that the universities may expect them to do much of the elementary work of the freshman years and quite possibly some work of the sophomore years. I know that Michigan is working toward the five-year course in engineering. Lehigh tried the same thing some years ago and failed and it does not seem to me that the five-year proposition is going to be successful in the near future. In order to give any more advanced work in our technical schools, it will therefore be necessary to raise the entrance requirements, and I hope the time will come when we can include not only the usual cultural subjects given in the high schools, but also many elementary technical subjects; and it seems to me that thru the new department we should be able to accomplish our purpose, and that the public-school men would be very glad to have some more advanced work delegated to them. (7) ALFRED BAYLISS, superintendent of public instruction, State of Illinois.—In regard to the policy of the department in its organization, I can only suggest that I should like to have the plan such that it would reach down as far as possible into the grades of the common schools and have such adaptation as is practicable to the needs of the ungraded country school. (8) A. B. STORMS, president, Iowa State College. We have been obliged at the state college to consider the problem of cultural studies in our technical courses. It seems quite evident that these courses are becoming more and more exclusively technical. It is probable that higher entrance requirements will be demanded in the future in the interest of a broader culture. (9) J. L. SNYDER, president, Michigan Agricultural College. It seems to me that inasmuch as the land grant colleges are institutions of higher technical training, they should play quite an important part in this new department. Our agricultural colleges at one time patronized the Department of Industrial Education, which was later changed to manual training, I believe. When the department was changed in name, and to some extent in the character of its work, we naturally dropped out. I hope, however, that you may be able to interest the agricultural and mechanical colleges in this new department. (10) V. C. ALDERSON, president, Colorado School of Mines.-Technical education is one of the greatest needs of an enlightened democracy and should not be left to private enterprise. We should follow the example of Switzerland and, recognizing the dependence of national prosperity upon technical education, set about the task of providing an education for all classes of workers suited to their callings. According to these suggestions it may be proper to divide the work of the department into two sections, each considering distinctive pedagogical and administrative problems, viz.: (1) Higher (collegiate) technical education (including the argicultural college). (2) Secondary technical education (including the technical high school, technical courses in the high school, mechanic arts schools, trades schools, schools of home economics). There is no intention to curtail or to overlap any work of the other departments. But much may be done in the future in the direction of adjustment and proper assignment of fields of investigation. It is not for me to outline a policy nor even a definite plan or program of work. My few remarks merely serve the purpose of announcing to you the fact that the National Educational Association proposes to include the latest and very important phase of the educational development of our country among the topics worthy of systematic consideration. May the suggestions made by the eminent men mentioned prove helpful in our efforts to start the new department upon its career of usefulness. Education according to Pestalozzi must be more than the acquisition of useful knowledge or even the training of mental powers; it must be amelioration of the individual and of the race and this, whether it be education for self-development, i. e., liberal education, or, education for self-support, i. e., technical education. For the end of life, as well as of education, is always. an ethical one and teaching is more than mere instruction; it must be an inter |