some deans who put everything down on the records.

I am sorry for them

and sorry for the students under them. I have no time to make records and I do not want records.

The following year, 1929, Dean Culver, of Stanford University, introduced his paper as follows:

Speaking very frankly I do not see how any one can define or set forth such duties. It is as impossible as defining the legal and social and parental duties of a father, or the duties of an older brother or friend. Where fathers have sometimes failed we must try to succeed; where older brothers have been neglectful, or thoughtless or selfish we must be generous, alert, and thoughtful; where friends have lasted only while the sun shines, we must last throughout the years.

It will be seen that these statements are idealizations which are expressive of the actual accomplishments of the men who made the statements. However, no person can really permeate a college atmosphere-his only method of reaching students is through establishing contacts whereby individuals come to him, and to do that he must have definite functions and duties, through which he can make his influence felt. The dean of a college of engineering in a land-grant institution reported that he personally supervises the programs of all his students, that he manages a loan fund, that he interviews all students whose work falls below standard, that he establishes contacts with the business world for placement of his graduates—and so on indefinitely-and that he performs all the duties of a 66 dean of men " in his college, and sees no room for such an official in addition.

When the actual status of the office of dean of men on the campuses of the land-grant institutions is considered it is found that two were established in the years 1901 and 1902, respectively. Only 9 deans of men were appointed in the years from 1901 to 1919, while 20 have been appointed since the latter date. Eighteen institutions have no dean of men, but the duties are distributed among various other officials ranging from the deans of major divisions to the Y. M. C. A. secretaries. One institution reported that the latter performed many of the duties of the dean of men very satisfactorily. The deans of men were asked to report on the qualifications for the holder of the office. Replies were either so noncommittal as to give no picture or so vague as to indicate that they were largely idealizations. However, seven institutions reported that the dean of men must be a member of the faculty holding full professorial rank. The qualities that he should possess were variously listed, the most frequent being sympathy and ability to counsel with young men. The vague term "personality" was given as a characterization repeatedly. The high light in this section of the report came from the institution which stated that the dean of men must be "supreme in the academic world, with all the usual quali

fications of the best professionally, a combination of Sherlock Holmes and the Angel of Mercy." Fairness, a sense of justice, ability to work with the faculty as well as with students, " a proper moral attitude," courage, initiative, and a sense of humor, were other qualifications that were mentioned many times.

The duties of the office vary greatly in the institutions, but as was found with the deans of women, the greater part of the time of the dean of men is given to personal conferences with individual students on scholastic, financial, physical, and emotional problems.

In checking the major duties of the office, work with student organizations was mentioned by 29 deans of men; guidance of students and discipline by 28; social activities by 27; handling of excuses for absence from class by 23; work in connection with the orientation of freshmen by 22; work with scholarship committees by 22; the handling of student loans by 18; some supervision of housing and feeding by 15; concern with student health by 13; placement work by 11; employment work by 10; religious education of students by 5; and cooperation with the physical education department by 2. Though this follows roughly the order of frequency in this same group of duties of the dean of women, it varies from it markedly in some respects.

The deans of men reported the percentages of members of the four college classes that they interviewed.

In 10 institutions they interviewed between 75 and 100 per cent of the freshmen, while in 8 they interviewed between 20 and 50 per cent. In only 3 institutions was the percentage between 75 and 90 in the sophomore class, while in 14 institutions it was between 10 and 50 per cent of this class. The interviews with the junior class were not so frequent in any of the reports. Apparently the need of this group of students for personal contact is not felt to be so urgent. The number interviewed rose again in the senior group, ranging between 5 and 50 per cent in 13 of the institutions and up to 75 per cent in 3 of the institutions. One dean reported that while it was impossible to state what proportion of the students in various classes were interviewed, he felt that he came in contact with every man student at some time in that student's college course. The list of officers with whom the dean of men cooperated was the same as that for the dean of women.

The salary of the dean of men ranges from $1,200 to $8,000 with the median at $4,500. The salary in all but four of the land-grant institutions is paid from State funds. In two of the land-grant institutions a small portion of it is paid from student fees, and in 2 others it is paid wholly from miscellaneous receipts rather than from State funds.

Most of the 29 deans of men had fair equipment in the way of clerical and stenographic help, 83 clerks and stenographers being distributed among them. Twenty-five had assistants who were above the rank of clerk. All of the deans of men in the institutions reporting had private offices, but a private waiting room was provided for only 24 of the 29. The recommendation can not be made too strongly that the office of every dean of men be entirely private, and that there be a waiting room provided where his stenographic and clerical assistants may have their desks, so that the dean himself may hold uninterrupted and confidential conferences with the students who need to consult him.

Typical statements of the duties of the office of dean of men indicates a tendency to make of the office a sort of collegiate catch-all,

where the issuing of automobile permits and the collection of student debts may crowd out the real functions such as cooperating with student self-government and counseling with student organizations. Many of the tasks assigned would seem to aid in only the slightest degree in making the dean of men "the human element in the university mechanism." It would seem that deans of men in the landgrant institutions have not yet analyzed their jobs and defined their duties as clearly as have the deans of women. In the institutions where the deans of men have had a clear conception of their offices have refused to be loaded with irrelevant duties and have defined their functions and devoted their energies to the very necessary and legitimate tasks of this important office, the deans are really liaison officers for the whole institution. They do "succeed where fathers have sometimes failed "; their lasting friendships with alumni who were their students are the best justification their office could ask.

Chapter III.-Personnel Service

The term personnel service" has beer carried over into the colleges from industry, where it came into prominence just after the World War. Its emphasis in industry, however, is quite different from that in the college and university. Industry's first interest in personnel is in increasing the efficiency of the individual worker in order that the organization may benefit. For this reason industry uses personnel work in selecting, teaching, lessening turnover, conserving health, and providing recreation for its workers. The benefit to the individual worker is incidental; the benefit to the industry paramount. When colleges took over this type of work, however, the emphasis was immediately changed. The fundamental aim in personnel work in the college is that of service to the student as an individual, and its entire organization centers around this aim. So fundamental is this conception of service to the individual student that the form of organization is entirely secondary to the actual accomplishment. For this reason it is not particularly discouraging to find that only seven of the land-grant institutions report a unification of this work into one administrative department.

If the work in the college is to be well done for the individual student it must permeate every department of the institution. It must enter into the student's selection of courses, his relations with his individual instructors, his choice of his life work, and even into such seemingly unrelated things as his own emotional adjustments and physical condition. Because this is true it is almost impossible to say definitely that only certain college officers are personnel officers and that others are primarily officers of instruction. It is equally impossible to draw a sharp line of distinction, as some attempt to do, between vocational and educational guidance and advisement, since they are closely tied up in the individual student's experience.

Examination of the data collected shows that personnel work, socalled, is still in its infancy as a separate function in the land-grant institutions. Of the seven institutions reporting single administrative departments covering all of this work, only four employ a sin gle director of personnel whose work covers the whole institution.

On the other hand, 13 institutions report that personnel service is definitely incorporated in the administrative policy and 7 others indicate that they hope to establish such work in the near future. Several of the institutions where personnel service is decentralized assert that from the standpoint of the whole institution they consider decentralized service more effective than when it is confined to a central office.

All of the institutions reporting definite personnel work finance it through general administrative funds, although two supplement this by gifts from industrial associations. In the institutions where the work is decentralized and at the same time effective, there are many persons in different positions in the college engaged in it. Those most frequently mentioned are the deans of the various schools, the deans of men and women, a group of faculty advisers especially designated, a faculty committee on personnel, the registrar, and members of the departments of psychology, education, and engineering. Where the persons designated are members of the faculty, an explanatory note in many cases indicates that they have been chosen because of their interest in it, and their fitness for rendering this service to their students.

The functions covered by personnel work fall roughly into the following classifications: Selection of students, classification of students, guidance of students, maintenance of case histories and records, research studies, and placement service for students.

In 30 of the land-grant institutions part of the personnel work consists in giving various tests and measurements to individual students, either upon entrance or shortly thereafter. These cover standard tests of mental ability, of vocational aptitudes, and of subject matter in the fields of English, foreign languages, history, mathematics, and science. These tests are used largely for the purpose of sectioning classes, although they are also available to the proper officers for student advising; in some few cases they supplement other tools of admission, but in no case are they the sole criterion of entrance. In many cases they are useful in checking student records, particularly those of failing students. Comparatively few of the schools are making wide use of them in experimental work; in fact only six report definite studies that have come out of their collection of this mass of information.

Apparently the personality factor has received comparatively little attention in this mass of measurement. Only 10 of the landgrant institutions make records of personality measurements obtained from sources of such varying reliability as former teachers, friends, business references, employers, ministers, deans, other students, and the student himself. Two institutions report that they give a per

111490°-30-VOL 1-29