Academic and industrial efficiency; a report to the Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching

'CM

2 t= — <

'O

6273 C28

e, Morris L
emic and ir
B JACKSO

III

370

Cook
Acad
RW

THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION
FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING

ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL
EFFICIENCY

BULLETIN NUMBER FIVE

1910

THE LIBRARY

The Ontario Institute

for Studies in Education

Toronto, Canada

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2008 with funding from

IVIicrosoft Corporation

http://www.archive.org/details/academicindustri05cookuoft

ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL
EFFICIENCY

A REPORT TO

THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION

FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING

BY
MORRIS LLEWELLYN COOKE, M.E.

MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS

LIBRARY

MAY 31 197J

THE ONTARIO INSTITUTE
FOR STUDIES IN EDUCATION j

BULLETIN NUMBER FIVE

576 FIFTH AVENUE
NEW YORK CITY

D. B. UPDIKE, THE MERRYMOUNT PRESS, BOSTON

PREFACE

THE reason for such a study as is set forth in the present bulletin is found
partly in the existence in the college of new and large problems and partly in
the criticisms of American colleges and universities made during the past few years
by business men, I believe that American men of education have faith in the future
of the American college, and that they welcome any effort on the part of the busi-
ness community or other intelligent men interested in education to better either the
educational organization or the educational curriculum. This study is offered from
the viewpoint of one outside college work who has to do in the main with the study
of the efficiency of industrial establishments.

The administrative organization of American institutions of higher learning more
nearly resembles business organizations than do those of most countries. The ma-
chinery of organization, with a president, a board of trustees, and a staff of deans and
assistants, resembles closely the business organization of a corporation, with its presi-
dent, its board of directors, and its heads of departments. One of the questions most
frequently asked by foreigners concerning American institutions is, whether this or-
ganization, business-like at least in appearance, is consistent with academic freedom
and elasticity, and whether it furnishes results comparable in efficiency with the
large measure of authority vested in it.

One may distinguish roughly three different aspects of American university ac-
tivity, in reference to each of which it will naturally be asked how far criticism from
the standpoint of the present bulletin is pertinent. First, in so far as the Ameri-
can university handles money and deals with questions of effective organization and
administration, any experience derived from the industrial world is distinctly
applicable.

Second, there is apparently a realm to which the industrial point of view is obvi-
ously inapplicable. The manufacturer must know in terms of dollars and cents the
actual cost of every step he takes and of every product he turns out; and even when
he carries on some particular form of activity at a loss, it is on the basis of a calcu-
lation that he will create ultimately a market sufficiently large to convert the loss
into final gain. In the upper regions of academic activity, namely, in the field of
research, no such close or consistent correlation between work and expense is feasible.
A certain degree of iiresponsibility must be conceded to the investigator. He must
be allowed to take large chances, if his judgment approve. The ultimate outcome
of an expensive research may be slight, just as the ultimate outcome of an inexpen-
sive research may be extremely precious or profitable. In general the extent to
which a university may engage in investigation is undoubtedly to be determined

iv PREFACE

in large measure by its business judgment, but given any particular sum which may
without prejudice to prior duties be devoted to intensive investigation, it would be
thenceforth unwise to attempt step by step to follow the industrial analogy closely.
It would appear that once an institution is clear as to the sums it can devote to
research, the business analogy may have very little application beyond that point.
There is, then, one area within which the industrial organizer may have much to tell
our college administrators. There is at the far end another within which he may
achieve nothing.

The third aspect of education to which I referred lies between the two extremes.
Here is an expansive territory to which conceptions of the nature of this bulletin
have seldom been applied and within which it is open to discussion as to how far they
are suggestive or helpful. The study which follows has been made by Mr. Morris
, Llewellyn Cooke, under the direction of the Carnegie Foundation. Mr. Cooke is one
of a group of engineers who specialize in the organization and management of in-
dustrial establishments and the installation in them of improved methods based on
a scientific study of the results desired and the processes involved. The value of th'c
report, therefore, lies not only in the care with which it has been made, but also in
the standpoint from which the investigator has considered college work. That stand-
point is the same which Mr. Cooke takes when he examines a manufacturing concern.

It is not the purpose of the Foundation to present any criticism of this report or
discussion of it. Its value to education lies in the presentation of the study from the
standpoint which its author occupied.

However strongly one may insist that the college, as an intellectual, moral and
social organism, must be viewed from a different standpoint than that of factory
efficiency, it is still true that all large and continuing causes rest upon formal or-
ganization and upon some assumed machinery of administration. There are two sides
to all administration, whether it be the administration of an army, of an indus-
trial establishment, or of a college: the mechanical side and the human side.

The first concerns itself with the preparation of the machinery suitable to the
work to be carried out. That machinery will vary according to the size and the na-
ture of the enterprise. The organizations appropriate to an army, a bank, a factory,
and a college differ, but each alike demands machinery suited to the work which it
undertakes to do.

The human side of administration consists in getting out of the men who com-
pose the machinery the most devoted service and cooperation of which they are
capable.

Both of these ideas enter into every form of military, business and social organiza-
tion. That organization is the most successful and most efficient which, having

PREFACE V

planned clearly and wisely the machinery of its operations, develops also such
leadership as to make the machine a living organization, each man in it contribut-
ing the best there is in him and cooperating with every other man.

1 apprehend that these fundamental principles of organization and of administra-
tion are accepted by all. Furthermore, it will be generally admitted that in a few
decades our colleges and universities have expanded enormously, and that they have
undertaken, under new and hitherto unknown conditions, operations of far greater
complexity than they dealt with during the previous quarter century. It may therefore
well happen that the mechanical side of their organizations has not kept up with the
demands and the complexities of their problems, and that they may gain from the
intelligent study of college forms of organization a real help from those who con-
duct industrial enterprises, without at the same time in any measure losing sight
of the fact that scholarly and spiritual leadership is the highest quality of college
efficiency and the one most necessary to attain. It may be well also to remember
that sincere and helpful leadership in intellectual and spiritual matters will in no
wise be injured by a frank and open examination of the material factors which enter
into college problems.

There is a still more practical side which has as yet received but scant attention,
but which must in the next decade be met squarely by those who direct educational
institutions. The cost of university education has risen throughout the world, but
nowhere so rapidly as in the United States. Single univereities in America are now
spending larger incomes than any educational institution has ever spent in the
world's history. Not only is this true, but the whole demand of the American uni-
versity to-day is for more money. No doubt this demand is urgent; nevertheless it
is clear that this process cannot be indefinitely extended unless we greatly restrict
the number of universities. It may well be that a thoroughgoing administrative
study of the income and expenditure of one of our large and newly grow n univer-
sities may be more helpful to it at this moment than more money. We have gone
through a period of great expansion. Just now a critical examination and apprecia-
tion of what we are getting out of the expansion is probably more to be desired
than farther expansion.

In any event, only good can come to an organization — whether it be commer-
cial, educational, or religious — when a friendly hand turns the light of public
scrutiny upon its methods, resources and aims. This study is therefore commended,
without discussion as to its merits, to the thoughtful examination of college officers,
trustees and teachers, as a friendly attempt to contribute to the solution of college
problems from the standpoint of one who has to do with industrial efficiency, and
without any preconceived opinion as to how far the analogy which its title suggests

vi PREFACE

maj be pushed. The college is partly a business, and partly something very different
from a business. Mr. Cooke is concerned only with the former aspect. It will be in-
teresting for those to whom the latter viewpoint is more natural to consider how
far his observations have suggestive significance.

Heney S, Pbitchett.

October 7, 1910.

CONTENTS
PART 1

PAGE

Introduction 3

General Observations 6

General Type of Organization 9

No Present Gauge to ELfficiencv 19

The College Teacher as a Producer 21

Research 30

The Economical Use of Buildings 35

Functional Activities 42

Financial Administration 54

Physics Departmental Administration 65

Student Administration 68

PART 2

Introduction 73
Tables

1 Valuations, Expenditures, etc. 74

2 Data concerning Inbreeding of Teachers of Physics 77

3 Data concerning Salaries of Teachers of Physics 79

3 a Percentage of Salary paid to Each Grade of Teacher 82

4 Disposition of Time of Individual Teachers of Physics 84

5 Analysis of Disposition of Time of Teachers of Physics 90

5 a Money Value of the Time of Teachers of Physics 94

6 Data concerning Buildings, Cost of Maintenance, etc. 96

7 Whole Cost of Teaching Physics 98

8 Cost of Teaching Physics per Student-Hour 102

9 An Analysis of Teaching by Departments 106

10 1. Summary of Teaching 112

2. Summary of Expenses 113

3. Teaching and Expense contrasted 114

1 1 Size of Laboratory, Lecture and Recitation Sections 115
Appendix 117
Index 133

PART 1

INTRODUCTION

IN the instructions calling for this report it was stated that the object was to
obtain an estimate of the cost and of the output both in teaching and in research
in the departments of physics in the following institutions;

Columbia University,
Harvard Univer.sitij,
Md.ssachiisetls In.stitute of Technology^
University of Toronto,
University of Wisconsin and
Haverford College.
Two institutions were added later to the list:
Princeton University and
Williams College.

It was suggested that, in visiting these institutions with the main object of securing
the data upon which this study could be based, the writer avail himself of the op-
portunity for noting any features of the life at these institutions or their practices
which would throw light on the general problem of their work and administration.

In his verbal instructions to the writer, Dr. Pritchett stated that an educator
could not be utilized for the purpose of making this report, because the Foundation
wanted especially to see the institutions to be visited through the eyes of a business
man, and of one generally familiar with modern practice in management. So that
if in this report terms are used which are more frequently encountered in the in-
dustrial world than in our colleges and universities, it is because it has seemed best
for present purposes to minimize the differences which exist between the two classes
of institutions, rather than to point out the places where they are essentially dif-
ferent. In studying the various operating mechanisms used by the colleges the wTiter
has had constantly before him for purposes of comparison the equivalent mechanism
used in the industrial world.

It may be interesting to state why the department of physics was chosen. This was
for three reasons: first, because it was believed that physics, considered as an integral
branch of collegiate and university education, is taught as efficiently as any other;
second, it includes lecture hall, laboratory and recitation room work; and third,
because owing to the fact that it is a comparatively modern subject, it has accumu-
lated less "moss" than perhaps attaches to some of the subjects which have been
a regular part of the curriculum for centuries.

These explanatory remarks are given so that it may be understood that the pur-
pose of this inquiry did not include any special interest in physics which was not
felt for other subjects of teaching. The interest in physics is, therefore, more or less
accidental, and the study of it must be looked upon as a specimen, which might

4 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

have been duplicated, to a considerable extent at least, in any one of the other de-
partments. It will be admitted that, if a system of management can be developed
under which the efficiency of any one department can be measured, the same scheme,
more or less modified, can probably be applied to other departments, and that the
result of applying it to all departments will in large measure gauge the ultimate
efficiency of the entire university or college organization.

In this report, while the writer has had quality constantly before him, he has been
forced to confine his observations very largely to questions of quantity. But the effort
has been to make quality a background for everything that may appear to have
only a quantitative value.

It will not be amiss to call attention at the outset to the fact that it is com-
paratively easy to make a formidable criticism of the best organized industrial under-
taking. The more conversant with matters of management one becomes, the more
one will realize how far from ideal, judged by any of the best standards, are the
conditions which obtain in any part of our industrial world. In fact, the beginning
of the study of management as a science dates only a few years back, and there are
even now relatively few in the industrial world who look upon it as a subject in
which the problems are capable of a scientific solution.

There is a great difference in the matter of management between different lines
of industrialism. One industry may have been forced to a high degree of effi-
ciency through intense competition, or through some more or less accidental cause;
while another, managed by men as able, may be using the methods of a genera-
tion past, simply because it has never felt the spur of necessity. In making a study,
therefore, of the colleges and universities, one would expect to find much that could
be improved. And it also follows that in attempting to reach a conclusion on the
value of the work done to date by the men responsible for the organization of our
institutions for higher education, one must in fairness to them have in mind the
average efficiency of management outside of the colleges as well as the more con-
spicuous examples of administrative efficiency.

As a result of a relatively large number of interviews with persons connected with
the institutions visited, I am convinced that many are expecting marked changes in
method to be brought about within a short time, and that in most places these
changes will be welcomed. In the writer's opinion, the greatest progress will be made
in effecting needed changes in collegiate and university methods, if it can be done
without the accompaniment of extreme criticism and the ordinary methods of attack.
The colleges and universities are not dreading change, but they do dread the strife
by which some seek to bring it about.

There is undoubtedly, too, some feeling on the part of most college professors that
changes brought about at the hands of business men may be made without suffi-
cient respect or regard for the verdict of time. Undoubtedly business men as a class
do think in short cycles. If a certain modification in business methods will bring

INTRODUCTION 5

better results in the next ten years, it will be made without much regard to what follows.
On the other hand, it is one of the functions of a university to stand for what has
proven to be good practice over longer periods of time, or for that wliich gives pro-
mise of such proof.

In going about, the effort was made to get at the viewpoint of all the different
grades of teachers. In some institutions I talked with nearly all the members of the
teaching staff of the department of physics. But of course for the most part the
interviews were with those in charge of the institutions and those in charge of the
physics departments. This word of caution is introduced here because I know that in
many matters of collegiate administration the policy of the so-called "heads" is op-
posed more or less by their assistants.

There are of course many phases of the problem of the colleges which purposely
are not touched in any way in this study, such as, for instance, the relative merits
of the different methods of teaching. The effort has been to confine the observations
to those features of college and university work which are affected by business con-
siderations. A large part of the field is therefore not treated in any way.

It is usual in the industrial world to find manufacturers and business men who
look upon their own undertakings as being essentially different from every other
seemingly like undertaking. This could not be otherwise, because every one knows
the difficulties of his own work better than those of his neighbor. So I was not sur-
prised to learn that every college feels that it has problems unlike, and of greater
difficulty of solution than, those to be encountered at other colleges. As a matter of
fact, from the standpoint of organization, uniformity in collegiate management is
a much easier problem than it is in most industries, because in any industry which
I know about, the individual plants vary considerably more than do the colleges.

Every effort has been made to present accurately conditions as they are. The
character and breadth of the study are such as frequently to have prevented my
going into a given situation as minutely as under other circumstances might have
been desirable. If at any point I have not reflected what it was sought to convev to
me, I regret it sincerely. It would probably be impossible to find a group of men
more willing to let one know the full measure of their ideals and of their work than
are the men of the universities.

Without exception, everyone seemed anxious to answer my questions fully and
fairly, and everywhere the liveliest interest was shown in the possible finiits of the
inquiry. There was not even the suggestion anywhere of a desire to have me secure
less than the full measure of what I sought. This enthusiastic cooperation received
at the hands of everyone made of work a pleasure and is largely responsible for such
value as may attach to the result.

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

It is impossible to avoid the conclusion, after even a casual survey of this field, that
the men connected with the colleges and universities have looked upon their func-
tions as having very little in common with those which engage the attention of
people in other walks of life ; and any one making such a study as this is first of
all impressed with the price that is being paid to maintain this position of isolation.
This one element of the problem would be enough to account for the growth of
most of the things which, in my opinion, may profitably be changed.

The impression gathered was that if, in the past, the teachers at the colleges
may have fought the coming in of the outside world, they have now either changed
their position as a class or are about to change it. It is certainly true that a great
majority of individuals interviewed seemed anxious to gain any assistance that could
be given them.

Perhaps the most notable feature of collegiate administration is the entire ab-
sence of uniformity or accepted standardization. As the question of standards and
standardization necessarily has an important place in management, opportunity must
be taken to point out what the terms mean when used in this report. A standard
under modern scientific management is simply a carefully thought out method of per-
forming a function, or carefully drawn specifications covering an implement or some
article of stores or of product. The idea of perfection is not involved in standardiza-
tion. The standard method of doing anything is simply the best method that can
be devised at the time the standard is drawn. Standard specifications for materials
simply cover all the points of possible variation which it is possible to cover at the time
the specifications are drawn. Improvements in standards are wanted and adopted when-
ever and wherever they are found. There is absolutely nothing in standardization
to preclude innovation. But to protect standards from changes which are not in
the direction of improvement, certain safeguards are ei'ected. These safeguards pro-
tect standards from change for the sake of change. All that is demanded under
modern scientific management is that a proposed change in a standard must be
scrutinized as carefully as the standard was scrutinized prior to its adoption; and
further that this work be done by experts as competent to do it as were those who
originally framed the standard. Standards adopted and protected in this way pro-
duce the best that is known at any one time. Standardization practiced in this way
is a constant invitation to experimentation and improvement.

It is practically impossible to find any one broad problem of university govern-
ment solved in the same way by two institutions. This lack of standard methods
is particularly marked in the financial administration of colleges. Thus, in the matter
of inventorying lands and buildings Dr. Eliot, then President of Harvard University,
said; "We try to come as near forgetting the value of our lands and buildings
as possible. This makes the simplest bookkeeping." At the University of Toronto

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 7

all lands and buildings were held at values recognized as having no real signifi-
cance; and the board of trustees was to meet in the near future to decide as to
whether the whole plant would be "inventoried at a dollar, or present values as-
signed to each item." At the University of \N'isconsin the most recent methods of
inventorying and of valuing everything going to make up the plant were in use.

As further on in this report instances of the same absence of uniformitv will be
given to ilhistrate other points, nothing will be gained bv multiplying examples
here. It must be considered remarkable that, in any line of endeavor which has
been continuously followed by educated and specially trained men for several hun-
dred years, almost nothing has l:)een so systematized and staked down that it has
ceased to be now almost a day-to-day matter for discussion. In most lines of business,
for instance, there are certain printed forms used by practically every concern in the
same line. Business practices have so crystallized that the methods of two concerns at
remote points will be in many cases almost identical.

As a result of this inquiry, the writer is convinced that there are very few, if any,
of the broader principles of management which obtain generally in the industrial
and commercial world which are not, more or less, applicable in the college field,
and as far as was discovered, no one of them is now generally observed. At nearly
every institution progress has been made along certain lines, but generally it has been
a "lone fight;" one institution doing one thing and another doing another, without
any of the mutual help and cotiperation which is given in the business world. Indeed,
it is not going beyond the facts to say that in the college world there is less real co-
operation than one finds in those industries where competition is the most intense.
The colleges are not only not organized for the exchange of help and information
and data, but as a rule it appears that they do not care to afford it. The broad
reason for this difficulty seems to be that the records of the colleges as a whole, and
of the individual departments, are inadequate, and are so lacking in uniformity that
any effort on the part of one college to help another is made with too much difficulty.

Lack of Iktensiveness
As accounting to a great degree for the absence of gauges, there may be noted
the general lack of intensiveness which one finds everywhere pervading the univer-
sities and colleges. Without expressing an opinion as to how much of this lack of in-
tensity is a necessary or desirable part of life at these institutions, no adequate relief
can be obtained for many generally acknowledged faults without taking it into con-
sideration. Let it be admitted that a certain amount of tranquillity is an absolute
essential in one or more departments of academic life. It will be admitted that with
such tranquillity a factor in even one department it must necessarily more or less
affect all the others. But because it is recognized as a vital element in one part of the
work, it is not necessarily of advantage everywhere. It may be an absolute hindrance
in some departments. The more necessary to efficiency this deliberative method be-

8 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

comes in any one department, the more necessary it becomes to study it and recognize
it as an essential factor in university life. A concrete example of this is found in the
length of the working day. It is almost invariably the case that the hours observed
bv the accounting departments and by the janitors and gardeners bear a direct re-
lation to the hours of the teaching staff or of the student body. This may be an in-
heritance from the old days when everyone associated with a university had some
organic connection with it; when even the farrier and the cook wore clothing be-
tokening their scholastic affiliations, attended church services, and performed other
duties after a manner which made it necessary that one schedule should be observed
by all. Is it good practice to close practically all lines of activity at Princeton Uni-
versity on a Wednesday afternoon because there is to be an athletic contest attended
by a considerable part of the college community ? It hardly seems advisable to have
the gardeners begin their day at nine simply because recitations begin at that hour,
and especially when it is probable that the gardeners would be more efficient if they
began work earlier.

At only two or three of the institutions visited did it seem to me that the work
of the accounting departments was done under conditions at all comparable with
what goes on in the every-day business world. And only at Columbia was there any-
thing to impress me with the snap and vigor of the business administration. I could
not see that in the case of Columbia the excellent organization indicated by the
capable manner in which I was passed about from department to department, for
instance, could have had any bad effect upon the educational efficiency of the place.
Everywhere I went I seemed to be expected and the general tenor of my mission
understood. I was promptly told what part of the data I sought would be immedi-
ately forthcoming, and on what date I would receive the balance. In the various
clerical positions I found competent people fully engaged doing work along the best
modern lines and splendidly enthusiastic about their institution.

In bringing these general observations to a close, it may be suggested that the
first university which will try conscientiously to obtain all the help which it is pos-
sible for it to obtain from the commercial and industrial world in a broad effort to
increase its effectiveness will make a very strong plea to men of means who have money
which they are willing to devote to educational purposes. Every one likes to feel
that the money which he devotes to educational and charitable and philanthropic
purposes is well expended; and other things being equal, that university or that
department within a university, which has an organization making possible the high-
est efficiency will in the long run receive the greatest consideration from such public
benefactors.

GENERAL TYPE OF ORGANIZATION

As may be imagined, many different types of organization were found. On the one
hand, several notable examples of the military or so-called one-man management were
encountered; but committee management, sometimes in an extreme form, was more
prevalent. Connnittee management seems to be the typical scheme under which our
colleges are administered. Curiously enough — but nevertheless quite in harmony
with the general lack of uniformity — at some institutions the military system and
the committee system exist side by side. At some places, one man was virtually in
control of the institution as a whole, while the departments were administered by
committees. At other places, committees of the faculty or the trustees actually oper-
ated the school as a whole, while they turned over the affairs of at least some of the
departments to designated heads. Taken in a very broad sense, I should say that an
effort was noticeable everywhere to make the administration of the individual depart-
ments harmonize with the administration obtaining for the whole institution. At
Princeton University the attempt to make committee management the type of both
departmental and university control is eminently successful.

The opportunities for observing the methods of government were necessarily
largely confined to the departmental organization as it obtained in the several de-
partments of physics. There is reason to believe, however, that each form of depart-
mental organization finds its prototype in university organization.

Of the military type, one instance was found of what might be called the "old
school," where the department was administered almost entirely by one man having
the title of director of the laboratory. While he was undoubtedly a distinguished
physicist, his absolute — and as far as I could see unquestioned — control of his de-
partment seemed to result from the fact that he was both in point of age and in
years of service the senior of all his associates. While there were evidences of the
opportunity for day-to-day conferences between different members of the department,
the larger questions of policy appeared to be decided absolutely by the head of the
department. The latter undoubtedly sought the views of the other teachers, but
I am of the opinion that he did not feel that their views should necessarily find
expression when they did not coincide with his own. This man in large measure
controls the advances in salary of his associates. Many evidences were to be found
that this policy was giving results. I am not either praising or condemning it, but
simply trying to describe a distinct type which I believe was formerly prevalent in
the colleges and which is now becoming rare.

At the University of Toronto the head of the department had been assigned to
his duties, with the title of director of the laboratory, by the head of the university;
this, as I was informed, after consultation with the board of trustees and other mem-
bers of the faculty. He had been selected for this place chiefly on account of his admin-
istrative ability, although his pedagogical and scientific attainments were also of a

10 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

high order. He decided every question that came up in the department, sometimes
after conference with those members of his staff whom he considered most competent
to give advice. He stated definitely that he never "deferred" to his associates. What
are generally supposed to be the dangers and drawbacks of one-man management
having been pointed out to him, he said that he thought there was nothing in
them, that when he had lost his efficiency as an administrator he expected the
president of tlie university to supplant him, and that he would take his position
in the ranks of the teaching force, or even leave the service of the university, with-
out resentment or without feeling that his days of usefulness were necessarily over.
The results which this man showed in his work certainly afforded the strongest pos-
sible argument that can be made for the extreme of military control in an educa-
tional department.

Two notable instances of committee management were found at Harvard and
Princeton. Perhaps the most remarkable feature of each of them was the solidarity
of the staff. In the case of Harvard it was almost impossible to discover any differ-
ence of opinion in the matters of management between the various members of the
staff; and in the case of Princeton such differences of opinion as were entertained
were held in such respectful deference to the opinions of the others that good rather
than harm seemed to come from this condition. This good feeling in connection
with committee management at these two institutions is pointed out for the reason
that in the industrial world such harmony would hardly be expected, and in fact it
is not always desired. It is held by some that the strong point of so-called committee
management is that there will be a division on almost any question that comes up,
and that therefore while both sides will get a hearing, each position will at the same
time be subject to attack.

At Harvard there was rotation in the performance of the various functions con-
nected with the work of the department. This rotation was controlled by the de-
partmental staff. It was in a measure theoretical because the post of director of
the laboratory did not seem to be one subject to rotation. Everybody said that the
present director was so efficient that the committee managing the department never
considered any change in his duties. As a matter of fact this is simply one place in
the management where it seems to be military and not by committee.

The men of the universities are apt to feel that, their training and ideals being
what they are, it is possible for them to "get along" with each other with less fric-
tion, and even less liability thereto, than one would expect to find outside university
walls. I think they will discover that there is little in this. When university life and
university organization become as closely interwoven and as intensive as there is now
every promise of their becoming, university men will have to erect the same safeguards
against certain phases of individualism as are found necessary in the outside world.

But if we can study the effect of committee management at two institutions where
such harmony prevails, it might seem that we are studying it at its best. At

GENERAL TYPE OF ORGANIZATION 11

Princeton, one of the places where this ideal condition of committee management
obtained, the principal argument for it seemed to be that it was democratic, and the
writer was asked how it would be possible to get high-class professors if they had to
work under some one else. The general committee in charge of the department worked
largely through sub-conmiittees on shop, general expenses, laboratory, lecture ap-
propriations, laboratory appropriations, research appropriations, etc. It was stated
by some members of the staff that they could see no possible fault with the way the
scheme worked. Others had their doubts as to whether the scheme would not work
better if certain conunittees were supplanted by a single individual. Thus, it was
suggested to the writer that the shop committee would probably get more work out
of the shop if it was reduced to one man. Here was an extreme example of this kind
of democracy because the sub-committee on shop consisted of three men, who di-
rected one mechanician and his assistant. It wiis admitted that none of the profes-
sors who constituted this committee on shop, and in fact none of the men on the
staff, was in any way specially qualified to run a shop. The work of these sub-com-
mittees, with the possible exception of that on shop, consisted largely in appor-
tioning appropriations. The department, acting as committee of the whole, decided
the assignments to work in the class-rooms and laboratories. As far as the writer
could discover, most of this work was done on the outside by more or less informal
conferences on the part of the ranking members of the staff. Certain members of
the staff would get together, with a certain other member not included, and decide
that he was to do research work. Other members of the staff would get together
and decide that a certain other member, not being a good disciplinarian, should be
given no lecturing, but should be given the smaller sections to teach, and so forth.
Everyone of course was fully cognizant of this arrangement. As to the wisdom of this
line of procedure there seemed to be the utmost harmony and unanimity of opinion.
I think it will be admitted that such an arrangement as this finds no parallel in the
business world. Where committee management is used, it is generally only advisory
in its character, and where it is in force, the questions that are discussed ai'e such as
can be thrashed out in open meeting.

At the University of A\'^isconsin, where committee management was supposed to
be in force, the writer found that as a matter of fact the department was being oper-
ated virtually by two heads: one in charge of the elementary work, and the other in
charge of the advanced and research work. The informal conferences between the dif-
ferent members of the staff on matters affecting the department cannot be considered
the equivalent of committee management. The university authorities were surprised
to find out that no departmental meetings devoted to administrative matters were
being held.

An extreme case of committee management in the genera] administration of a
university was found at Princeton, where about one hundred and twenty men sit in
the faculty. The faculty sitting as a whole and through its committees decides large

12 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

and small questions. The writer found that, as a rule, only fifty per cent of the
members attend faculty meetings, but that when certain questions of general in-
terest are scheduled to come up nearly everybody is apt to be present. At this same
institution the trustees and especially the various committees of the trustees take
an active hand in the details of administration. While I was visiting this univer-
sity, the question was being debated as to whether the prices at which the out-
going class was disposing of its furniture to the incoming class were exorbitant or
not. Action was suspended for two weeks pending a meeting of the trustees' com-
mittee on buildings and grounds. One of the higher officials of the university told
me that the question in one phase or another had been a burning one since he had
been an officer, which, if I remember rightly, had been for nearly twenty-five years.
There did not seem to be any more to the matter than there is to any one of a
dozen questions such as are decided by a good executive in a few moments after all
the facts have been carefully gathered and codified. I am confident that either Presi-
dent Wilson or Dean Fine could have decided the matter in a way that would not
have allowed it to come up again, but the custom of the place probably restrained
them from doing so.

At the University of Wisconsin, the executive committee of the Board of Regents
(as well as the head of the department, the dean, the president and the secretary)
approve every requisition for the purchase of supplies. In some cases these requisi-
tions amount to a few dollars, and in only few cases do they amount to more than one
thousand dollarr. It has been some time since the board of directors of any properly
organized induatrial establishment has done detail work of this kind. The thought
was expressed that the approval of requisitions was synonymous with passing a
budget. The two things are obviously distinct.

To the extent that the industrial analogy is valid, committee management seems
to be, broadly speaking, very largely responsible for what appear to me to be the
two fundamental weaknesses of the government of these institutions: first, that
the departments have too much autonomy ; and, second, that the heads of the in-
stitutions and of the various departments lack the essentials of real authority. I
shall discuss these points briefly from my point of view, leaving it to educators to
decide how far criticism of this nature is pertinent.

In the matter of the departments having too much autonomy, it can be said in
a general way that, given the money to support it, a department is usually prac-
tically self-governing. In other words, the typical department very largely controls
its own affairs, operates and maintains its own building, disciplines its students,
arranges for the work of its teaching staff, and provides the courses of instruction.
At some places one or more of these functions may be performed by the univer-
sity as a whole for each of its departments. An example of this is the more or less
recent development of the department of the superintendent of grounds and build-
ings. At Columbia for instance, this department practically controls the heating, venti-

GENERAL TYPE OF ORGANIZATION 18

lating, repairing, lighting and cleaning of buildings. Elsewhere other functions may
be performed for each and all of the departments by the university itself, but
these are, at the present time, exceptions, and the typical department is as above
described. In industrial and commercial undertakings this degree of independence
in general matters on the part of the department would be unthinkable. On the
other hand, in matters which are peculiarly its own, the independence of an indus-
trial department transcends anything which the universities know.

This departmental autonomy is, in my opinion, at the bottom of several con-
ditions at the universities which call for some modification. There is no doubt, for
instance, that the departmental organizations have forced viewpoints and lines of
action on the part of the president and board of trustees which are essentially wrong,
but which have been assumed in good faith in order to cope with conditions as
they exist. The great bulk of the recommendations in this report cannot be put into
efficient effect until departmental lines as they are generally in operation to-day are
abandoned.

The autonomy of the departments has led to the absence of much real solidarity
in our colleges and universities. One gets the idea from the solidarity which is ap-
parent when it comes to athletics that this same spirit pervades all phases of
the work. Unfortunately this is not true. Departmental solidarity there is, but it
is being maintained very largely at the expense of the solidarity of the institution
as a whole. One does not begin to find the cooperation between departments of a
university which is expected of the departments of an industrial enterprise, and
even in industrial concerns it is rarely as effective as it should be.

The lack in these institutions of effective authority on the part of the head men
— the head of the institution as a whole and the heads of the various departments
— is shown by the fact that the writer had his attention called to a number of abuses,
pretty generally recognized as such, but which, having gone on for years, were still
continuing without any sign of abatement.

In discussing the best form of organization for an institution of higher education,
full weight must be given to the fact that most of the teachers are men of rare
ability who have devoted years to training themselves in a special branch of know-
ledge. It then becomes, with most of them, a matter of the greatest importance that
they should be able to devote every possible minute of their valuable time to the
use of this knowledge and training.

The first great object of organization in the art of management is to make each
individual in the whole body count for his maximum. A small amount of thought
will show that this can be done only when each man does those things for which
he is best suited. This leads directly to the reference of most questions up for
settlement to the best single expert, or perhaps to the best two experts, obtainable
for decision. In a committee this can never be done. Almost invariably under com-
mittee management there is the spectacle of three or more men, experts in their

14 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

own specialties, all simultaneously wasting precious time in deciding questions
outside of their own field, which could be better and far more quickly decided by
a single expert whose time may be worth less than that of any one of the three or
six men on the committee. Modern industrial management seeks to relieve the head
men of all possible routine such as is the great bulk of committee work, and so
enables them to give their entire time to progress. At the same time these heads are
kept constantly informed, through carefully prepared and summarized reports, as
to all matters affecting the institution or its departments.

This attitude toward experts and expert opinions in the management of colleges
and universities, one would expect to find heartily indorsed by college men. Dr.
Eliot has expressed the same idea in another connection when he said: "To produce
such experts and to instil respect for expert judgment is one of the most urgent
duties of the American university. For insufficient appreciation of the value of ex-
pert labor is one of the worst afflictions of American life."

Management by experts suffers from the fact that too often in the past experts have
not only held themselves aloof, but held their opinions to be above lay criticism or com-
ment. Functional management seems to guard against this by providing that all
standards shall be written out and thus clearly understood by everyone; that they shall
be capable of scientific demonstration rather than the result of personal opinion;
and that they shall be at all times subject to scientific re-examination and analysis.
In this way only can expert judgments be given the benefit of the corrective influ-
ence of lay minds.

The writer believes that genuine committee management invariably involves lack
of initiative, division of responsibility, and log-rolling. One group who stand for a
certain idea will gather to their support individuals who are perhaps only indirectly
interested in the matter under debate, but whose advocacy can be secured in return
for support for some other idea in which they happen to be interested. There are
any number of questions which are being constantly debated at the colleges that
are kept alive only by this ability to line up the entire institution on either one
side or the other of the question, through committee management. Only a small per-
centage of such questions would appear to have any real educational significance.

Committee management generally means compromises reached by discussions, and
compromises frequently leave something to be thrashed over at a later date. In man-
agement what is wanted is decisive action and the ground covered in such a way
that as little as possible will have to be covered again. In how far this procedure,
indispensable in business, is applicable to college administration I am not prepared
to say.

Perhaps it is because of the fact that our colleges and universities have from time
immemorial been organized more on the committee basis than on the military basis,
that they have as a class adapted themselves less promptly to changing conditions
than have most other human institutions. The fact that any given number of indi-

GENERAL TYPE OF ORGANIZATION 15

viduals connected with a university teach advanced ideas does not mean that acting
collectively they will take advanced ground in matters of management. In fact, it
seems to work the other way. At those schools where there were the largest number
of "big men" I found what seemed to me to be least desirable systems of management.

After having seen both the military type of management and committee manage-
ment, apparently each at its best, the writer is convinced that, in the educational
world as in the industrial world, neither of them will give the best results. The way
out lies through functional management, where the effort is made constantly to have
each man perform those functions which he is best fitted to perform, and to pro-
hibit him from interfering in the performance of those functions about which he is
not specially qualified to give an opinion.

Perhaps the chief object in functional management is to safeguard a man in
the performance of the highest kind of work he is competent to perform. This is in
large measure brought about by relieving him of those duties which can be per-
formed as well, or almost as well, by some one whose time is not so valuable. The col-
lege professor is specially qualified to do some things which nobody else can do as
well. Functional management will seek to protect him in the performance of these
duties and relieve him of the things which can be performed by other agencies.

Under functional management the individual at the head of an institution will
have more power, and less power, than at present. He will be more hemmed in by
standards, but in those matters not covered by standards he will have more latitude
and real authority. In fact, it would seem that the head of a great university should
remain at his post only so long as his methods inspire confidence in his board of
trustees. It is impossible to conceive of the president of a steel works, for instance, mak-
ing any progress if he were to be constantly thwarted and kept from deciding things by
his board of directors. Yet this is the rule in the college world. In mattei"s of sim-
plest routine, such as in many industrial establishments are decided by clerks, the
board of trustees expects the president to wait until he has ascertained its wishes —
usually as expressed by one of its committees. Dr. Frederick W. Tavlor, in lecturing
on this relation before the Harvard School of Business Administration recently, said :

"The proper functions of the lx)ard of directors would be, for instance, to select,
after having proper evidence presented to it, the broad and general type of manage-
ment to be introduced in the establishment After having done this, and after hav-
ing broadly stated the policy of the company, as to payment of wages and salaries,
they should not mess into the detail of the personnel — by ordering the president to
employ this man, or discharge that man, or promote another man. Nor should they
vote a reduction of wages or an increase of wages contrary to the leadership of their
president.

"Other functions of the board of directors should be, for example, dictating the
broad policy to be followed in the sales department; namelv, whether the sales are
to be mainly conducted through agencies or travelling salesmen, and the extent and

IC ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

kind of advertising to be used. Again, however, the details of the executive work
should be left under the direction of the president. The general financial policy of
the company should also be one of the functions of the board of directors, as well
as the broad lines along which progress is to be made. That is, the decision as to the
type of new product to be manufactured and sold, and the volume of business which
is to be prepared for.

"The president should lead his board of directors rather than be a tool to be
guided by them in detail; and when it becomes impossible for the president to lead
in the carrying out of the general policy of the board, another man should be se-
lected for the head of the business who is in harmony with the board's wishes and
competent to lead them,

"The world's experience in all directions has demonstrated the utter impractica-
bility of doing successfully executive work under the management of a body of men
either large or small. An executive committee of 07ie is the best committee to have
in charge of executive work. The president should be free to have as many advisers
around him as he wants and these men can be called an executive committee as well as
by any other name; but their duties should be those of advisers. In all executive acts
they should be under the orders of the president and they should not be allowed to
control his acts by a majority vote. He should in principle occupy the same position
as the President of the United States. He should be free, practically, to select his own
cabinet, and then should be in complete command of these men. The men under him
should be free to advise him in the most emphatic manner, but the final decision in
all matters should rest with him, and the board of directors should not entertain nor
act upon appeals made to them from the cabinet officers beneath the president."

Functional management takes the position that even in a partnership of two men
the best results will be brought about by assigning to the one partner the final au-
thority in one class of questions, say manufacturing, and to the other the final au-
thority in another class, say selling. In this way the final authority in every branch
of the business will be left to one man, and the effort of course will be to have the
division so made that such questions as come up will be decided by the partner who
is best qualified to render the decision. There is nothing in this functional arrange-
ment to make mistakes impossible, but it can be demonstrated that, in the long run,
more progress will be made than when it is necessary to get everything passed on and
approved by two men, and furthermore the general average of the work will be better.

Or, put another way, functional management says that with A and B launched
on an enterprise three arrangements are possible: (1) A can work altogether under
B's directions; or (2) B can work altogether under A's directions; or (3) the work
can be so divided that A will work under B's directions in some things and B will
work under A's directions in the balance. But under modern scientific management
they cannot work together in anything and do it efficiently.

Applied to the work of the colleges, this functional method then will mean that

GENERAL TYPE OF ORGANIZATION 17

the work of any given institution will be divided into ten or one hundred functions,
and that in each of these functions some one person must be supreme. Such a func-
tional foreman or manager may have any number of advisers, but he may or may
not act on such advice as is given him, exactly as he sees fit.

Attention must here be called to the difference between (1) dividing all the work
of a given undertaking up between a certain number of positions, the occupant of
each such position having many functions to perform, and (2) dividing all the work
up into a certain number of functions with some one person supreme in each such
function. Under this last arrangement it is possible to have experts pass on every
question that comes up for settlement. Under such a system of functional manage-
ment one cannot afford to sacrifice expert advice by allowing it to be upset by in-
expert individuals or committees higher up or lower down.

The difference between this functional system and the familiar military or "one-
man" system will be apparent. Under the military plan, a man can work for only
one master, all his orders come from one man, and, theoretically at least, they all
come from the top. The top man has the right to pass on everything and to issue
orders about anything to anybody. He simply sees to it — if a general, for instance
— that he passes such orders down through his colonels, majors, captains, et al., until
they reach the particular individual affected. Therefore, while any one man receives
orders through only one man, he is subject to the orders of everybody who ranks him.
Under functional management any one individual may receive his instructions from
as many different people as there are functions which he performs. But, theoreti-
cally, he never gets any instructions from those who are not experts. Under this
system one's work is not constantly being upset by those who in reality know little
or nothing about it.

Functional management is based on the belief that there is one best way to do
any one thing, and that usually this best way can be determined by scientific methods
if people will use them. Under functional management every effort is made to dis-
courage the practice of deciding matters — big or little — on anyone's personal
opinion. The attempt is made to limit the field wherein arbitrary decisions control
action. This means for everyone connected with the universities a more sharply de-
fined function, and I do not think from the talks I had that any change will be
more welcome. In the last field where you would expect to find it, one encounters
perhaps the extreme of unwarranted interference. A professor will frecjuently have
to conduct a long fight — and in the end an unsuccessful fight — to maintain an
obviously correct position because a committee of the trustees which has but a mo-
dicum of information upon a given situation, and no special aptitude for discussing
it, has the power to interfere and docs interfere.

The dean of one college, who had recently attended a gathering of the "adminis-
trative" officers of the colleges in his immediate vicinity, told me that on compar-
ing notes with those he met, he found that he was the only dean who had any real

18 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

authority, and that most of those with whom he talked did not know how much they
were supposed to have. As will be pointed out more in detail later, most discipline
is meted out with the full understanding that it may be upset by some one higher
in authority. In almost every case discipline, even of a minor order, is subject to revision.
At Princeton, while as a matter of practice the departments were allowed to at-
tend to the details — and only occasionally were they upset — the most unintelligent
counsel prevailed at times on matters of real moment. In other words, there were no
bounds to the authority of those "higher up" when they cared to use it. One or two
committees of the board of trustees had the power to enter almost every nook and
corner of the educational structure. This inspection of course would be all right —
excellent — if it were made for the purpose of seeing that the general policies were
being carried out; but too frequently there is no permanent general policy and
these acts are the promptings of personal whims or prejudices. Everyone from the
president down told me that committee management was adopted because it was
a democratic form of government. The result struck me as being a far cry from real
democracy.

NO PRESENT GAUGE TO EFFICIENCY

One is struck in any such study of collegiate conditions with the absence of any
gauge of efficiency which even remotely resembles, for instance, profits in an in-
dustrial undertaking. Anyone investing money in a business may with some reason
be rather care-free as to the manner in which that business is administered, because
at the end of any given period he has an opportunity of judging the management
by the profits earned on his investment. In the same way, a man who is at the head
of a business can devote much or little time to the supervision of any one depart-
ment with the thought that at a given date the books will be closed and the
management of that department will be fairly accurately reflected in the excess
of receipts over costs. One looks in vain for anything analogous to this in edu-
cation, and after the larger question of the type of management has been deter-
mined, perhaps next in importance is to get some gauge or measure which can be
used as a means of comparing the work of one department with another inside of
the same institution; and the work of similar departments in two institutions, and
in fact of one institution as a whole with the work of another. Any such basis of com-
parison that might be adopted now would probably have to be, at least in a mea-
sure, modified, as college administration develops, but before any progress is possible
some selection must be made, and the writer wishes to suggest as perhaps the most
immediately available unit the student-hour.

By a student-hour is meant one hour of lectures, of laboratory work, or recitation-
room work, for a single pupil. Thus, a section of thirty students on a three hours'
laboratory period would mean ninety student-hours. A section often pupils in a one-
hour recitation would mean ten student-hours. This seems to afford a unit which
can be used for a great many different purposes. With this as a basis, we can get
some tally on the efficiency with which the buildings are operated, the cost of under-
graduate teaching, and each of several other items which go to make up the expenses
of a university. Little or no value will attach to the student-hour as a means of
gauging the cost of research teaching. It is believed that the student-hour will be
found to be a valuable gauge for collegiate effort even where cost is not involved.
The use of the student-hour will be further developed under the head of financial
administration.

. Without question, after the student-hour has been used for a period, various
methods will suggest themselves whereby it can l^e made more serviceable as a unit,
or other units better adapted to the purpose will be proposed.

The student-hour can be used in some places by weighting it, where otherwise it
would have little value. Thus, in discussions of what should constitute a term's work
for a teacher, one lecture hour would probably count as the equivalent of two or
three laboratory hours. The adoption of some unit, even though it is not any more
generally satisfactory than the student-hour, will cjuickly lead to many standards

20 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

now much needed. I was able to discover, for instance, no very generally accepted
relation between the arduousness of laboratory, lecture-room and recitation-room
work, either for pupil or instructor. It would seem that some working rule in this
matter would be almost necessary in apportioning work between the various teachers
in a department.

In judging costs especially, it will be necessary to take into consideration the dif-
ferent grades of student-hours. Thus, elementary work will always cost less than the
more advanced principally because of the relatively larger sections. A school having
a large number of graduate students would, other things being equal, of course show
higher student-hour costs.

It was suggested above that in judging the value of research by its cost the utmost
caution should be used. The same kind of caution and the nicest judgment will be
required in noting the relative costs of student-hours in different branches. There will
be some branches doubtless in which the cost per student-hour will be practically
the same. But there will also be some branches in which the cost per student-hour
will be high as compared with the average. It should be borne in mind that the
cost per student-hour has absolutely no value in distinguishing relative educational
values. It is only to show what the cost is in each branch. With this cost known, it
will be much easier to decide whether or not a given school is warranted in continu-
ing a given branch.

The great advantage of the student-hour is that it is small enough to get inside
of all the various combinations of courses, schools, departments, etc. The student-
hour will be as full of meaning when it is used for keeping costs of a college of engi-
neering including any number of departments or courses, as it will be in keeping
the cost of a single lecture course.

THE COLLEGE TEACHER AS A PRODUCER

In all professions experience shows that important changes come from within. Col-
lege professors particuhirly have felt that their profession constituted them a class
separate and distinct from other occupations and that improvements must be home-
bred. But to-day, teachers, doctors and lawyers are all showing an increasing ten-
dency to go afield in the search for implements and methods, and while such changes
as are made in the college world will in the main have to be made by or through the
professors themselves, it will be a gain if the professors will more willingly seek to
profit by suggestions derived from the world outside.

An alert manufacturer is constantly engaged in trying to find out not only what
his competitors in his own line are doing, but he is constantly sending into other
industries to see what may be found in them that is applicable to his own business.
The industrial world is coming more and more to feel that all work is done under
certain broad principles, and that the application of these principles to one industry
is little different from the application to any other. The professor has felt, however,
that his work is so radically different that he cannot apply the same standards of
criticism to his work as obtain generally throughout other departments of life. In
my opinion, a change is coming. If an educator is to possess his future in as full
measure as is possible, he must invite criticism and help from wherever he can get
it. The college professor must take the position that he is not an individual set
apart, and that in the long run he must be governed and measured by the same
general standards that generally obtain in the other occupations.

In discussions of the work of these institutions, the question of the pay of the
teacher has played a large part. Everybody who has the best interests of higher
education at heart is anxious that an honored profession such as that of the teacher
should get better compensation. As one result of the writer's inspection of these
eight colleges, he is convinced that the greatest progress in the matter of the in-
crease in the compensation of college teachers will be obtained if the discussion
can be made to culminate in a study looking toward an increase in their efficiency,
which will result in larger work accomplished and hence in larger remuneration with-
out relatively larger cost to the institutions.

In common with all other American institutions, our colleges have grown tremen-
dously within the last two or three decades. With no assistance practically, except
what they are able to develop for themselves, the teachers now find themselves fairly
swamped. The educational side alone of the problem which confronts the professor
has grown tremendously. The industrial development has brought further complica-
tions in the demands for specially trained men, and in addition to this there are the
developments in pedagogy itself to keep up with, a task sufficient for any teacher.
Thus it will be seen that, from the educational side, the teacher has had his problem
unusually complicated. When one adds to this the fact that he has secured little

22 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

outside help on the administrative side, it is easy to see that there is excuse for his
being literally swamped.

The impression that I gathered in the department of physics was that the profes-
sors were not thoroughly satisfied with the present pedagogical situation in their
department. The necessity for research work, more fully treated elsewhere, increases
the complication. The constant discoveries in physics are, from an educational stand-
point, a disturbing factor. The growing importance attaching to science as an ele-
ment in a liberal education and the rise of the elective system are other causes which
have tended to make the problem of teaching physics a difficult one. In fact, the
problem is one that requires for its solution an extremely high type of man. Granted
that the problems are not being met to-day in an entirely satisfactory way, which
of course can be said without any disparagement of the profession, progress must
come about by giving the professors more time for their solution and by giving them
all the assistance possible. Everything must be done to safeguard the time of the
teacher. The higher his position, the larger will be the incentive for this. Now one
of the principal ways of doing this will be in having much of his routine work done
for him. It may even pay to have this work done in a manner not so efficient as the
professor himself would do it, if thereby the time of the latter can be conserved for
more important duties. This means the kind of efficiency that comes only through
true cooperation, and until efficiency is used as the sole standard for the teaching
profession, as it is coming to be used practically in all other walks of life, any goal
satisfactory alike to the community and to the teacher will be difficult of attainment.

At the present time, after a comparatively small number of years passed in sub-
ordinate positions, the college teacher is made a professor at a tenure which is gen-
erally understood to be during good behavior, that is for life. Most educators con-
sider this fixity of tenure highly desirable, and comparing it to the similar tenure
of judges and officers of the military and naval services, endeavor to render it more
generally applicable. To a business man, who feels that the essential principles un-
derlying all employments are the same, the conviction grows that some day this life
tenure may not be considered by the college professor as of real value to his pro-
fession.

It is certainly for the benefit of the community that all classes of teachers, and
college teachers especially, be held up to as high a standard of efficiency as possible.
What is for the benefit of the community will, in the long run, be ^or the benefit of
the class. The question is whether the community secures more efficiency from col-
lege professors by guaranteeing to them as a class a life tenure in their offices as long
as the service of any one of them remains above the level of an inefficiency that
is notorious, or whether more general efficiency would be secured by fixing their
tenure at that which obtains in the outside world, that is, guaranteeing to the pro-
fessor the possession of his chair only so long as he remains the best man obtainable.
It is evident that the correct answer to this question, like the determination of

THE COLLEGE TEACHER AS A PRODUCER 23

tenure in civil government offices, involves social and other problems in addition to
the problem of efficiency alone. Yet the decision that it would be dangerous to relax
the life tenure of the professorial position because of the other elements involved
might still render such a decision disadvantageous to the best men among the pro-
fessors.

If the same standards of efficiency are to be applied to college teachers as are
applied elsewhere, it will mean that when a man has ceased to be efficient he must
be retired as he would in any other line of work; or if he no longer performs a given
function in an efficient manner, that he be relieved of this function. Even if there
were no such thing as life tenure in the college world, the conse(|uences of insisting
on the efficiency standard should not operate to the disadvantage of the college
teacher. If A renders B good service through a long term of years, it is recognized
that B has an obligation to A after his best years have gone by. Unfortunately,
this obligation is difficult of standardization, but in most lines it is coming to be
recognized as good business to accept the obligation in a large measure.

With all privileges cut out one would expect the same rule to apply which applies
generally in the industrial world, i.e., the more efficient the professor, the larger
salary he will command, and this without undue regard for the salaries of others
immediately about him, or for his own length of service. In other words, a man will
not have to wait until he has advanced in years to get a satisfactory income. This
will mean eliminating from the teaching profession those unfitted for the work, —
a process which will have a good effect on the teachers who remain, because the
whole standard of efficiency, and therefore the earning power, of the balance will be
increased. A higher class will, in the long run, be attracted to the profession.

A further increase in the efficiency of the teaching staff will be obtained through
such specializing as will come as the result of functional management. Without a
more careful analysis, it is impossible to predict the extent to which this can be
carried. There are some things, however, that are clear. During the interviews which
the writer had with college professors, he found them spending time in taking in-
ventories, keeping track of appropriations, mimeographing examination papei^s and
handling routine correspondence. These things are clerical work, and should be
handled outside of the teaching field, and not as a part of the teacher's duties. In
addition, there are many other things, including management of the buildings and
departments, which might easily be centralized and done better bv officials who can
devote their time exclusively to them. Such changes would leave the professor more
time for the work for which he is especially fitted.

The effort should be made to segregate the important functions now being per-
formed by the teacher, and then to arrange the scheme of management so that he
will have the fullest opportunity to perform these well. The situation of the college
professor, with his many and varied duties, is not unlike what would be the case in
the profession of architecture, if the architect not only designed, but built his build-

24 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

ino-s. In that profession, the more distinguished the architect, the more strenuously
he avoids being burdened with the details of erecting the buildings he creates. He
calls in the contractor and the builder to handle this part, and in so doing he reserves
for himself time and opportunity to pursue design. In the same way, I believe that
the teacher will demand that through functional assistance he be relieved of those
parts of his work which take him away from teaching and research.

A study of Table 5, giving a summarized analysis of the way in which the time
of the different grades of college and university physics teachers is employed, will
show that as a profession they probably spend less than three hours a day with stu-
dents. This is the equivalent of what is generally called the "productive" time of
other workers. The term "productive'" is an unhappy one because it is undoubtedly
true that even in the industrial world the so-called non-producers (those who do the
planning) are among the most valuable factors in any concern. Still, in any study of
the college teacher as a producer, his productive time, i.e., the time he spends with
his students, must first be determined. There are then open two ways of raising his
productiveness: (1) by increasing the amount of productive time and (2) by raising
his efficiency during this time. In other words, in studying the efficiency of any
worker one must determine, first, what the worker is employed to do; second, it
must be ascertained how much time he puts in on this work; and, third, it must be
determined how relatively efficient he is while so engaged.

When a study is made of the teachers in other departments, it may be found that
the teachers in physics teach a fewer number of hours per day than other teachers.
This would certainly seem to be one of the effects which might be produced by the
large amount of research. Then, again, in the languages there has been a larger
effort at standardizing the teaching methods and mechanisms, and this undoubtedly
permits of more teaching and less preparation. Judged by its monotony and arduous-
ness, it would seem to the layman that a physics day, hour for hour, would be less
tiring than one in language teaching, and therefore one would expect the average
physics teacher to teach more hours per day than the average language teacher.

One change in the attitude of the teacher which may have to take place before his
full efficiency can be realized involves his personal relation to his work. Nearly
every college professor considers that the lectures that he gives and his pedagogical
mechanisms are his own property. In the industrial world, a good workman is con-
sidered entirely apart from the appliances and tools which may be necessary for the
pursuit of his occupation. In the same way, it is conceivable that the college professor
will look at his work apart from his lecture notes and class-room methods and other
mechanisms which help to make his work effective. At one institution I found the
beginnings of this system. In the main administrative office of the physics depart-
ment at Toronto there was a file of drawers in which were placed the lecture notes
for all the different courses, written in rather a uniform style and all on standard sized
cards. These lecture notes were the property of the professor in charge of the depart-

THE COLLEGE TEACHER AS A PRODUCER 25

ment. But, as he explained, "they are available for all the members of my staff, who
are encouraged to use them and who do use them and make them the basis of their
lectures. You see by following such a procedure as this you make your men avail-
able for class work earlier. I have already spent many years of work putting these
lecture notes into pedagogical sequence, and their being available for my instructors
leaves their time free to develop other and new lecture cour.<;es or to caiTv on re-
search work. It thus saves energy in the management of a large laboratory like my
own."

It was not onlv considered proper for any member of the staff to consult, with-
out giving any reason, any of these lecture notes, but the head of the department
encouraged each member of the staff to make suggestions as to how they might be
improved. Such improvements were continually being made, so that the value of this
part of the departmental ecjuipment was constantly appreciating.

What applies to lectures should apply with equal force to the various mechanisms
used for examinations and in "setting up" lectures, etc. There are numbers of courses
that remain practically unchanged from year to year, and which, especially in the
sciences, involve considerable mechanical preparation. At the present time most of
this is done either by the man who delivers the lecture, or by a laboratory assistant
who has been trained to the work through years of practice. At every hour of the
day in ordinary industrial establishments, work more complicated than this is
done by ordinary workmen under written instructions. There is no reason why, for
every such set of lectures, there should not be instructions, lists of apparatus, etc.,
which would practically relieve the professor of much subordinate w'ork that now
occupies his attention. The amount of time devoted to this general class of work will
be shown by an examination of Tables 4 and 5, Part 2.

It is apparent that if a university is to follow even in a measure the industrial
practice of furnishing the tools to its cultured and highly educated workmen, it
must own tools to furnish. There appear to be only two honorable ways of secur-
ing title to such tools, i.e., either by purchase outright or by employing men under
the mutually and clearly understood agreement that a stipulated part of their time
is to be devoted to working up standard lecture, laboratory and recitation-room
exercises. Probably the better w;ay will be to have it understood that this is an integral
part of the pedagogical policy of the college, and that on account of this it is possi-
ble to pay higher salaries than would otherwise obtain. It will certainly be incum-
bent on any institution trying this plan to be liberal. It will be possible for the
beginnings to be made in the standard courses like elementary physics and chem-
istry, without attempting it in the more advanced courses where it will be more
difficult of application — especially in advance of getting experience on the simpler
problems.

There are obvious hindrances to an immediate adoption of this idea in its broader
phases, and other objections will doubtless be developed should any concerted effort

26 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

be made to put the policy into effect. This being granted, it seems to me that pro-
gress in the lower grades of teaching lies largely in this direction. I proposed this
plan to a number of college professors, and, as may be imagined, I received replies
all the way from a hearty acquiescence to refusal to believe that the scheme was in
any respect worth a trial.

Undoubtedly, there is a good deal of the feeling that lectures to be good must
in a way bear the marks of the inspiration of the moment. If it is right education-
ally, standardization will be well-nigh impossible. But a good many men who have
the reputation of being high authorities assured me that the carefully thought out
plan for a series of lectures would win out every time over the "inspiration of the
moment" idea.

There is no desire to minimize the value of the personal element in lecturing. One
man certainly does hold the attention of a class-room and inspire his students, while
another may fail in both respects. The question is rather whether in most elemen-
tary and medium branches a true teacher will be handicapped by having to use text-
books or "standardized" (see page 6) lecture notes.

This question of standardizing laboratory and class-room exercises and lecture
notes brings up the related one of the attitude toward assistants. Under modern
scientific management the effort is made to select men for the lower grades who will
in time develop into the higher positions. The larger number of men employed for
the lower grades allows many to fall by the wayside for one reason or another. Even
with this policy in general use, most business managers experience the frequent ne-
cessity for going outside the ranks of their own employees for men to fill the more
desirable positions. I found the widest differences in the colleges in this matter. At
Toronto the assistants were engaged largely in setting up lectures and in prepar-
ing the laboratories for section work. In preparing for lectures, they were supposed
to perform all the experiments in order to make sure that the time of the lecturer
would not be wasted when he went over them preparatory to the lecture. The head
of the department told me that he believed in taking every possible precaution in
order to insure that the lecture should go without a hitch. Sometimes four men
were engaged in setting up a lecture, and if having an equal number present at the
lecture raised its efficiency, he had them there. In order to make sure that the as-
sistants who prepared for a lecture should do their work thoroughly, he frequently
turned the lecture over to them at a point where an experiment ,was to be made.
At Columbia, on the other hand, I was told that the assistants were made to under-
stand that they were only "tolerated" on condition they did good research work.
They practically held research fellowships, although they were called assistants.
This policy of not training the new men into the teaching methods and ideals of the
department does not seem advisable, because if they do not get this training early
in their careers, it probably means that they will never get it.

It is obvious that the college professor does not realize how catholic his duties

THE COLLEGE TEACHER AS A PRODUCER 27

are. To one who is familiar with the difficulties of management, the manifold duties
caiTied on by the college professor seem overwhelming. I saw a single individual per-
sonally assume the direction of a large building including laboratories, machine
shops, power plants, etc.; maintain order and discipline among seven hundred at
times boisterous spirits; direct and inspire a teaching force of a score of rather un-
usually able men; lecture on the most attenuated physical theories; keep in touch
with a large body of graduates; carry on research work, etc. We can lie unsparing
in our praise of the success which attended the work and yet realize how badly
much of it must have been done, judged by any absolute standard. The college pro-
fessor does not realize how many distinct functions he performs. The high-priced
presidents of our railways, banks and steel companies would not dream of perform-
ing this variety of functions. They would refuse to do so because they know that
they could not do them well.

This part of raising the efficiency of the college professor will have to be done by
building up central agencies for doing much of the work he does now, and fordoing
it so much better than he possibly can, that he will be glad to relinquish his re-
sponsibilities in these respects.

If the colleges would maintain the proper kind of records, it would soon be possible
for an instructor weak in any department of his work to call on some other college,
or perhaps on some other instructor in his college, to help him with his work. The
result would be that those who are specially proficient in their work would get credit
for it. At the present time there is the tendency that one finds in the labor unions,
to put men into a few classes, each class being maintained at a dead level which is
usually lower than it need be.

Although I am unable to verify this conjecture, I believe that one reason for the
demand for research workers is just a demand for established efficiencv. I think if
methods can be developed by which the success which a professor may be achiev-
ing, either in teaching or in administering his department, may be measured and
recorded, that he will be in demand as the research workers are in demand. There is
now, at best, only an indirect method of telling who are the competent men. If a
man's competence in any line is once established, he need not worry to-day about
getting adequate compensation, — if one man will not give him what he is worth,
another will.

Another point which operates against efficiency of the teaching staff is their long
hours. There is little effort made on the part of the teachers (and the responsibility
for this does not alone rest with them) to determine what constitutes a day's work,
and then to accomplish this within certain fixed hours. The college professor probably
gets less help out of recreation, taken in its broadest sense, than almost any other
class of worker. I met men who literally spent their lives in their laboratories, and it
is impossible to believe that men with so little relaxation do not suffer from this
excessive concentration. Thus one professor wrote: "You will perceive that my entire

28 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

time through the day is spent either in giving the courses which I present or in
making preparation for them in one way or another. Besides this time I have spent
the hours between 7.30 and 11.30 p.m. seven evenings in the week regularly in my
office in the preparation of lecture notes for my students, and also the hours between
10 a.m and 1 p.m. and between 3 and 6 p.m. on Sunday in the same way." It is
hardly possible that such hours would be permitted in an industrial establishment.
The tendency is towards moderate but clearly determined hours of labor and an
insistence on close application during the established hours.

With specialization, especially in administrative matters, will go a cutting down
of the committee meetings, which have increased rapidly in the last few years. Al-
most every man interviewed complained of the amount of time spent in committee
work. The schedules of the individual teachers summarized on Table 4 show com-
paratively little time spent on committee work; but as a source of interruption to
the regular work of the teacher, committee meetings are undoubtedly a great, and
in a large measure an unnecessary annoyance.

A further improvement in the lot of the college teacher, and especially those of
the lower grades, would be a bureau through which men could be moved from one
place to another with less difficulty than now obtains. In the long run, it is to the
benefit of the colleges and of the teachers themselves that they should each be engaged
at that place where they can work at their highest efficiency, and anything that tends
to make it impossible for a man both to keep growing in his ability to perform and
in the opportunity for having his abilities utilized is against progress. Everywhere
I went I was told it was hard to get people, and hard to dispose of those who, for
one reason or another, desired other engagements. To employ an assistant at six
hundred dollars a year seemed to require an inordinate amount of correspondence,
as much as for a man who was to get five thousand a year. At the same time I was
introduced to a number of promising younger men who had just obtained the de-
gree of Ph.D., and who were having considerable difficulty in securing employment
as assistants.

In the Appendix, Exhibit A, I have given a sample of an employment bulletin
issued once a month by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. The same
thing could be done by some collegiate agency. Standard blanks could be provided,
calling for the precise information which experience shows the employer must have
before reaching a decision. The correspondence in this matter showp me at the col-
leges was as unsatisfactory, from a business standpoint, as anything I saw. No one
professor has occasion to employ men at frequent enough intervals to execute the
work with much facility. I was told by several people that the commercial agencies
do not give good results on teachers of collegiate grade. The charges were said to
be high.

If the ease with which these men, especially those in higher positions, are moved
about could be increased, it would have a marked effect in forcing on the colleges

THE COLLEGE TEACHER AS A PRODUCER 29

a type of departmental organization that could be passed on from one set of men
to another without imposing undue burdens on those assuming new duties. In the
industrial era just back of us, a man taking a new position was expected to take
at least six months or a year to get comfortable enough in his new environment to
make it possible for him to perform his duties. Under present conditions, in the
better organized companies a change in officers involves no such delay.

The whole question of salaries has been covered by the Carnegie Foundation in
Bulletin Number 2, so tiiat it hardly seems wise to more than touch upon the subject.
In Table 3, Part 2, I have given the individual salaries paid the one hundred and
one teachers included in tliis study and then summarized them in various ways.

In conclusion, I want to repeat that I believe very little profit to the college
teacher can come of an abstract discussion of the wages paid men of this class, while
I believe a great deal can be quickly accomplished in the matter of raising their
compensation if coupled with it goes a broad study of efficiency and of methods of
increasing that efficiency.

RESEARCH

At six of the eight institutions visited, research was considered an integral if not
the most important part of the work of the physics department. At the other two
institutions (Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Williams), while some re-
search work was being done, it was not felt by those in charge that the oppoi-tunity
for it was such as to warrant much emphasis being laid on research. At every one of
these institutions I think it is hoped to make more of research in the near future
rather than less. The fact that apparently there is to be a great increase in the energy
with which research is to be pursued at the colleges makes research a vital matter
in a study of the efficiency with which it is conducted.

Those teachers of physics who have done notable research work are undoubtedly
those who are in the greatest demand. To have done research work is almost as
essential for one holding a high place in a department of physics as it is for an
instructor in any department to have a doctor's degree. This is a little difficult to
understand in view of the obvious differences between research work in physics and
the ordinary teaching of physics. It is certainly having a marked influence on the
teachers of physics. Broadly speaking, I think that more than one half of the physics
teachers I met are included in one of these two classes: first, those who would like to
be relieved of undergraduate research work so as to give their efforts to developing
the teaching side and, second, those who feel that their teaching hours are so much
time taken away from research. The greater number of the workers in the various
departments of physics are in this latter class. The feeling is so strong, the amount
of effort and money going into research is so large as compared with what goes into
teaching, that some of the places visited are research laboratories first, and after that,
schools for teaching physics as a branch of general education.

One man high in the councils of his department told me that he felt that his
abilities lay in the direction of teaching, and that the efforts that were being made
to drive him into research work were against efficiency. He said that he had to
accept it because of the feeling at his institution that they wanted as teachers only
those who could do research. Another prominent physicist told me that the pre-
sident of his institution kept the question, "What have you discovered to-day.?"
constantly on his lips as a spur to the members of the physics staff. Another asserted
that because in the applied sciences it was so much easier to make notable dis-
coveries than it was in physics and the other pure sciences, the latter suffered in
the matter of appropriations. I gathered that research is one of the master words
which open the coffers of the prosperous. It is not without interest to note, in this
connection, that the American Physical Society, made up largely, if not exclusively,
of the men of the universities, some time since decided that it will not receive papers
devoted to the pedagogical or educational side of a physicisfs work.

It would probably serve no good end to repeat here some of the extreme state-

RESEARCH 31

ments made by the two sides to this controversy. It can be said, however, without
fear of responsible contradiction, that in most of the subjects taught in the col-
leges to-day a man can become an acknowledged efficient teacher without adding
materially to his professional reputation or his earning value. To accomplish the latter
he must, generally speaking, do research work and publish the results of it in at least
fairly technical language and in fairly technical publications.

Perhaps the estabUshment of highly paid chairs in various subjects, the occupants
of which are to be specially distinguished for their ability to teach rather than for
their research work, would have the tendency to remind the college world that there
is still virtue in general instruction and professional teaching.

From an industrial viewpoint, the teaching of undergraduate physics and research
in physics have little in common. At the present time both are handled by the same
organization within the department of physics. No effort is made to separate them
in any way. Research seems to require a quiet, dispassionate, more or less contempla-
tive line of approach, whereas lecture-room work and recitation-room work must
necessarily be more immediate.

I am not recommending that the universities as a class do less work in the matter
of research, but it is my feeling that both the research and the teaching would be
more efficiently done under a somewhat different organization than now obtains. It
is true that some of the research work that is now being done is carried on under
such conditions as to make it exceedingly expensive. For instance, owing to its loca-
tion in a great city, Columbia University, though well equipped with both apparatus
and eminent physicists, is barred out from research in many lines except during the
three hours from two to five in the morning when the street cars are not running and
other conditions are favorable. It would appear that unless this university can afford
to maintain at some moi'e advantageous point special research laboratories, it should
abandon research in physics. It is certainly not in the interests of efficiency that men
who everyone admits are specially qualified to do notable research work should have
their hours of labor so restricted. These same unfavorable conditions for research
were found in greater or less degree at most of the laboratories.

As far as I could discover, research had not made any notable progress in the
undergraduate courses. At one institution they require an original piece of research
work in the fourth year as a condition of graduation for those who take physics.
This feature in the course was elsewhere generally condemned, and it seemed to be
the consensus of opinion that standard laboratory exercises in all departments of
physics were best designed to give results in teaching undergraduates. In certain in-
stances, no doubt, individual teachers have been lured from this path, but it did not
seem to represent any fixed or growing educational policv.

Another weak point, in my opinion, in the research work as it is carried on now
at the colleges is that it is being done with the minimum of inspection and control.
I believe that few workers can be at their maximum of efficiency unless their work is

32 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

subject to a fairly constant, intimate and impartial review of some kind. At pre-
sent, the character of review which any piece of research work enjoys depends
largely on the personal relations which may happen to exist between the research
worker and his associates in his own department. Some work is done with practically
no review, either because no one is interested in it, or if interested, no one feels
wari'anted in offering suggestions or criticisms. I was shown one piece of work which
had been in progress for over two years which, in the opinion of several who had had an
opportunity to study it, was a sheer waste of time. And yet no one protested because
no one felt he had the authority. Even when research work is done by a physicist who
is not only intimate with his associates, but who seeks their opinions, it is not as apt
to be checked where it is wrong and encouraged where it is right as efficiently as it
would be by equally able scientists not brought into such intimate day-to-day con-
tact with the department. Of course, like everything else, such a system of inspection
would admit of exceptions in notable cases.

For this reason it seems to me that in every institution doing research work there
should be a "general research board,"" whose duty it would be to organize the gen-
eral policy of the institution in the matter of research, to bring about as much co-
operation as possible between the departments, to correlate as much as possible research
work going on in different sciences, to procure assistance for those needing it, to pass on
the expediency of undertaking any given project, and to keep constant track of the
progress of work and of its cost. Such a board would probably find it advisable to
keep as far away as possible from the details of the work of research and to assume
toward it the same broad viewpoint as has been recommended for the board of trus-
tees to take in relation to the general work of the institution. In fact such a board
would act as the board of directors of a research laboratory, made up of all the re-
search laboratories of the institution. I am sure that the existence of such a board
would make for efficiency. This might easily lead to a "director of research," and
for such a functional officer there would appear to be plenty of work to do.

In the introduction, there was suggested the necessity for caution in applying in-
dustrial standards in the matter of the cost of research. There is in all research work,
of course, an element of chance. Many brilliantly conceived investigations fail for
reasons unforeseeable at the time that they are undertaken. Time is not a controlling
consideration in research work. And yet it will hardly be denied that over a term of
years, and viewed broadly, there should be some relation between cost and product.
To discover such a relation is likely to become increasingly important because every
authority interviewed assured me that it was becoming increasingly difficult to dis-
cover profitable lines of research.

Of course every professional man is supposed to be something of a research worker
— it is hardly possible for him to keep out of it. In this report, however, I have not
had this kind of research in mind. I have had in mind rather that done during
"working hours," and done, therefore, with the full approval of the institution at

RESEARCH 33

which it is performed, and largely at its expense. For some of these institutions, the
value of research to teaching must be its test. I believe there is a distinct disad-
vantage to undergraduate students to be near research work. There is a certain in-
spirational value in the presence of men who have "done things" in a science one
happens to be studying. Is there not danger of exaggerating this value? I think in
the case of physics research workers, this influence is more than offset by the intro-
duction into the undergraduate laboratories of the necessarily deliberative and ex-
perimental methods of the research laboratory.

At none of the institutions visited was there any means of controlling the amount
of research work done in the various departments except through the general de-
partmental appropriations. Given an appropriation of S3000 or 810,000, in every
case the considerations which ordained how much of this money should go into re-
search and how much into teaching lay within the department. These considerations
for the most part had to do with the idiosyncrasies of individuals connected with the
department rather than with conclusions reached by the department officially. In
other words, the proportion of any departmental appropriation which goes into
teaching must necessarily be largely a haphazard matter. It cannot be otherwise be-
cause there is no machinery for regulating it elsewhere. In fact no one connected with
any of the departments studied knows, even in the broadest way, the relative cost of
teaching and of research.

On Table 7, Part 2, an effort has been made to separate the cost of research from
the cost of teaching. The same has been done for the direct expenses connected
with teaching and research. Cost here includes such items as interest on plant and
equipment, and it includes phvsics' share in the administrative expenses of the in-
stitution. The direct expense includes only items involving a cash outlay and those
which under proper management would be under the control of the departmental
authorities.

The total cost of physics and the direct expense of physics at eight institutions
may be divided as follows between research and teaching:

Cost

Direct

Expense

Research

Teaching

Research

Teaching

Columbia

$27,520.88

$62,917.23

$14,203.78

$31,923.09

Harvard

36,925.49

33,958.35

25,749.90

21,506.76

Haverford

840.79

4,582.16

401.79

2,054.06

Mass. Inst. Tech.

8,930.50

58,122.73

6,049.57

28,481.43

Princeton

27,229.65

57,312.93

16,672.00

28,638.00

Toronto

12,399.18

50,126.72

6,614.76

22,309.37

Williams

465.83

12,007.35

273.07

5,470.43

Wisconsin

15,578.85
$129,891.17

33,297.99
$312,325.46

11,059.45

22,.397.39

Totals

$81,024.32

$162,780.53

Average

29.4 per cent

70.6 per cent

33. 2 per cent

66.8 per cent

34 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

An auditor sent in to audit the accounts of these institutions would inquire as to
the warrant for the expenditure of such large sums on research. At five of these in-
stitutions the money devoted to research represents not only a considerable propor-
tion of the income of the department, but a considerable amount of money. At no
one of these five institutions are there funds available for research which anywhere
near equal what is spent. At Harvard, for instance, the endowment for research in
physics is in the neighborhood of $90,000, which at five per cent would yield less
than $5000 per annum. The expenditures for research appear to be five times this
amount, or in excess of $25,000. There are certain annually made gifts and annually
renewed guarantees for research which may amount to $1000 or $2000 more in any
one year. It is impossible under the present system of accounting to be more definite.
But allowing the outside figure ($2000), it still leaves over $18,000 spent on research
out of the general educational funds of the institution. As is pointed out elsewhere,
considerable expenditures are also made for research at Harvard which do not pass
through the books of the treasurer.

By research work, as used here and elsewhere in this report, is meant research work
done by the teaching staff, and in which the student body have no part. For this
reason every effort has been made to exclude from the charges against research the
expense connected with student research work and its supervision. It is difficult then
to see how, under these conditions, "research" can be considered as being in any
sense tuition. It can have only an indirect bearing on the teaching proper, in so far
as it develops the teachers themselves.

It would be good policy to separate departmental expenses between teaching and
research. While this would involve a considerable departure from the present book-
keeping methods in use at the universities, it would be a simple matter from an
accounting standpoint. If there were to be established a general research board, it
would pay to keep the research expense of each department divided further between
the various undertakings. This would involve little additional expense. But without
a central board to use it, it would not be worth anything. The departmental or-
ganizations as now constituted would not make enough use of it to warrant a slight
expense.

It is fair to call attention to the fact that physics is one of the principal research
branches. Perhaps the large interest in research which I found everywhere in physics
is considerably in excess of the average which obtains in other branches .of university
teaching. But in physics it is true that even on the teaching side the individual stu-
dent who gives promise of becoming a research worker, or who is going into physics
as a life work, receives the lion's share of attention. At some places the large under-
graduate classes of students who were studying physics simply as a culture study
were looked upon as the least important part of the work of the department.

THE ECONOMICAL USE OF BUILDINGS

If there is one thinir that stands out as an example of inefficiency, it is the degree of
use to which college buildings are put. Dr. \'an Hise, president of the University of
Wisconsin, told the writer that he had recently conducted an investigation of one
of the main buildings of his university, and had found that the rooms in it devoted
to teaching were used only, on an average, three hours a day. He had Ijeen very
much surprised by this, and had notified the professoi-s occupying the building that
he would not ask the state legislature for any more money for their departments until
they increased the average use of the rooms under their control. Dr. Van Hise thought
that this was a very bad record, but as far as I was able to determine, there are no reci-
tation rooms or lecture halls in which physics is taught at any institution, that are oc-
cupied more than four hours a day, and the average use of such rooms is less than three
hours a day. Laboratories may possibly be used more efficiently. I found one magni-
ficent lecture hall on the second floor of a building, standing on land that is worth
approximately twenty-five dollars a square foot, in use six hours a week — and this an
institution (Mass. Inst, of Tech.) whicii is undoubtedly handicapped for lack of room.
It is possible that, owing to special conditions found only in the department of
physics, the rooms devoted to physics are not used as continuously or as efficiently
as they are in some other departments. So I present some figures secured at Williams
College, where this matter of the efficient use of buildings had already had some
thought and was still receiving their attention. I give the use per week of twenty-
three rooms, located in three different buildings, in which modem and ancient lan-
guages, economics, mathematics, etc., are taught.

Room number

Hou

rs per week

Hopkins Hall

4

24

5

3

6

21

7

18

8

24

10

22

11

24

19

3

13

3

15

19

16

3

164 -^ 11 X 6 is 2.5 hours a day for the huildin^

Griffin Hall

1

19

2

19

4

22

5

29

6

27

7

17

133-r6 X 6 is 3.7 hours a day for the huihling

36 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

Goodrich Haix

Room number

Hours per week

1

15

2

9

3

14

4

18

6

21

T

32

109-^6x6is3 hours a day for the building

The average use for the entire twenty-five rooms is 2.83 hours a day.

Since writing the foregoing, I have secured the record of occupancy for seven
rooms used principally for physics and mathematics in Fayerweather Hall at Colum-
bia University, where space of course is at a premium. The numbers across the top
are room numbers:

301 304 506 604 609 613 615 Totals

Men.

2

2

5

5

4

5

4

27

Tues.

3

3

2

3

2

5

3

21

Wed.

2

5

5

6

7

6

4

35

Thurs.

3

4

2

2

4

5

3

23

Fri.

2

4

4

5

5

1

3

24

Sat.

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

15

14

21

20

23

24

24

19

145

Adding the total hours in use per week for each room and dividing by seven (the
number of rooms) times six (the number of week days), we get 3.45 hours as the average
use per day per room. It will be noticed from the totals on the right that on some
days the rooms are used much more efficiently than on others. On Wednesday, for
instance, the average use is five hours, while on Tuesday it is only three, and Satur-
day a little above two. That there is no insuperable reason why rooms cannot be
used more economically is shown by the fact that instances of six and seven hours'
use are shown. The poorest record here is Room No. 301, a room reserved for the
exclusive use of the physics department. With the exception of No. 304, the other
rooms are used by more than one department. The authorities at Columbia had evi-
dently given this matter thought and had subjected it to some control. I doubt if
any better showing can be made by any other building anywhere.

In the first place, the management of all buildings should be in the hands of some
central authority and operated under as complete rules as can be established; the
same rules, of course, applying to all buildings, no matter what the .purposes for
which they are used. These rules should be public. It is impossible for the various
rooms to be used economically if they are administered by the departments nominally
in control of the buildings in which they are located. A professor in one department
has not the information about the conditions in another department that would
make it possible for him either to lend the rooms or borrow them to advantage.
This is what they are supposed to do now, and there is little of it done.

In this proposed interchange of rooms between departments, there is not included

THE ECONOMICAL USE OF BUILDINGS 87

any suggestion that a room not entirely suited to a given purpose shall be used for
that purpose. It might be disconcerting, for instance, to a section in Greek to have
to hold a recitation in a room that, on account of the necessities of the biological
department, was filled with the latter's c(iuipment. My impression is that this is
what is going on now more or less and will become more the rule, unless some cen-
tral agency is given the means of studying the common good and also given authority
to enforce its conclusions.

There should be greater publicity in regard to the buildings themselves. The
cloistered idea as applied to the university as a whole has nearly disappeared, but
the departmental cloister in some instances is still intact. There should lie printed
floor plans in miniature for every building, and these should be generally available.
On these plans should be given the phvsical features of each room, the number of
seats and size of blackboards, the character of the ventilation, etc. It should be
possible to tell from the plan, and without seeing the room, how useful for a given
purpose it would be. There should also be given on these plans the charge for the
use of the rooms figured on the basis of the cost of maintaining and operating the
building in which the room is located. In this way rooms in the more undesirable
buildings could be given a preferential rate. And even in the same building, the
fewer facilities a room possessed, the lower might be the rate.

Rooms will then be reserved by a department under one of two plans: (1) reserved
for its exclusive use at all times, and (2) reserved for its use only at certain stated
times. This will mean that buildings and quarters in these buildings will belong to de-
partments only when they reserve them and pay for them. This will put a premium
on a department's getting on with as little room as possible. It will also mean that,
other things being equal, a teacher will not want a room that is twice too large for
the section he is to teach. If a uniform system of numbering is provided, whereby the
same number will indicate the same room in any building, and periodical lists are
prepared showing the use to which the various rooms are put, and giving the lists
of those rooms which are available for various kinds of assignments, the publicity
alone involved in this will immediately result, I am tempted to say, in a twenty -five
per cent inci'ease in the efficiency with which rooms are used.

This interchange in the matter of the use of rooms between different educational
departments may be difficult to introduce, but it can be assisted in various ways. In
the first place, each university should have set standards covering size and design of
rooms used for certain purposes. At the present time, a lecture room for physics is
apt to be different from a lecture room in chemistry; i.e.^ the points in which they
must necessarily differ are accentuated rather than the points in which they may be
alike. The same thing applies to all other rooms. There is no reason why a recitation
room providing twenty seats for students in physics should not as to dimensions be
exactly like a recitation room with twenty seats for students in mathematics or any
other subject. If there is any inherent difference in construction on account of the

38 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

use to which they would be put, this difference should be so made that, if at some
future time the disposition of the room is different, a change can be made at little
cost and without spoiling the efficiency of the room for its new purpose.

This point of using, or not using, the same room for different purposes can be
well illustrated in the cases of two large lecture rooms which the writer visited. One
of them at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was reserved for a lecture in
elementary physics which took place six mornings in the week at eleven o'clock.
Owing to the fact that the room was made more or less a storehouse for physics ap-
paratus, it was rarely allowed to be used for any other purpose. On the other hand,
at the University of Toronto, the far-sighted professor in charge of the department
had seen to it tliat in the construction of his lecture table every wire and pipe had
a connection both above and below the floor, so that on an hour's notice it could be
removed and a piece of flooring already provided be put in place and the room turned
over to the Cercle Franc^^aise. Instead of having a fixed blackboard back of the lecture
table, he had both the board and the partition back of it so suspended that when
the room was to be used for theatrical purposes they could be raised entirely out of
view, thus providing both stage and flies for a neat little theater. This professor also
insisted that all apparatus be removed from this and the other lecture halls at the
conclusion of the exercise at which the apparatus was used. I have recently been told
that at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in certain courses (not in physics)
the lecture tables are set up entirely outside of the lecture room and rolled in and out
on tracks provided for this purpose. This allows the room to be used for lecturing
at the same time that preparations for the next lecture are going on in another room.

A great deal of money could be saved and mistakes and annoyances prevented if
experience gained by one institution in building could be exchanged with others.
My attention was called to what seemed to me serious mistakes in most of the physics
buildings visited. Many of them were such as could not have been foreseen, but as
far as I can see the next university erecting a physics building is as apt to make the
same mistakes. If all plans for buildings were filed in such a way as to be easy of
access, I am sure that those about to build would be glad to profit by what others
had done. This does not pay now, because it is only the exception when plans are
readily available.

With standard designs for lecture halls, laboratories and recitation rooms, and a
certain procedure required in the way of adequate authorization before changes from
these designs could be made, our university buildings would in a short time be put
on a standard basis that would permit of a much larger daily use.

The architects of university buildings do not always seem to have in mind the
same ideas as to economy of space which they would observe in other classes of
buildings. In nearly every physics building I found many rooms designated as a "sort
of storeroom." There is relatively no more occasion for an excess of storerooms in
a physical laboratory than there is in a hotel or a manufacturing establishment. But

THE ECONOMICAL USE OF BUILDINGS 39

their architecture usually includes rooms that on account of light or size cannot be
used for anything else.

At least three buildings of those visited have towers running from the basement
to the ceiling to be used for experiments requiring dropping weights, suspending
pendulums, etc. This is at best an intermittent use; sometimes such a tower is not
used during a term of years. By putting removable floors in a series of closets, one
over the other, such a tower would be afforded, should occasion arise for its use; or
the main stairway could be utilized for this purpose as was done at the University
of Wisconsin. In the meantime, valuable space would not be put out of commission,
and would not have to be kept heated. It was suggested to me that this tower was
looked upon by a good many physicists as of largely traditional value.

The architect of the University of Wisconsin had two large scales laid off in feet
and inches, beginning at the same corner and running as a frieze around two sides
of his consultation room. He said that he tried to arrange it so that, when he was
being given instructions covering the size of rooms, the person giving the directions
could sit where he could see the scales. He said that otherwise the size of every room
would be larger than required for the purpose. He also had placed in the room
samples of such standard articles of furniture as roll top desks, revolving bookcases,
etc., as a further guide.

My attention was directed to the fact that in the Princeton building the archi-
tect had placed the instructor's desk in each recitation room in the center of the
space immediately in front of the students' desks. In each room the instructor's desk
had been moved to a position in the corner so as to provide a space where the in-
structor could walk as he taught; the end of the pipe which had carried the electric
light wires protruding through the floor in the middle of the promenade must afford
a constant diversion. The desks are, of course, without means of artificial light in their
present position. The original lay-out of each room is that used in country school-
houses from time immemorial. It is certainly possible to do some profitable standardi-
zation here.

It appeared to me that there is a very considerable disadvantage in small build-
ings, such as I found at Williams College. When the existing departmental lines are
largely broken down, it is going to be possible to handle departmental work much
more efficiently if the janitors, laboratory attendants, storerooms, etc., can be shared.
When the buildings are relatively small, this will be more difficult.

One measure that will make possible a larger use of rooms is the shifting of the
hours at which certain lectures and recitations occur. It used to be accepted that all
recitations must occur in the morning and laboratory practice in the afternoon.
Gradually, this old order has been more or less modified, but if a central authority,
such as a registrar, had to pass on all schedules and would study each with regard
to its relations to all the others and to the buildings that were available, much
further progress could be made.

40 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

I found everywhere evidences that among both the students and the teachers there
were strong likes and dislikes for exercises occurring at certain hours in the day. At
Williams College exercises began at 7.45 in order that there might be none after
four in the afternoon. Students generally avoid those electives which call for a single
hour in the middle of the afternoon.

Another factor which militates against the more economical use of the rooms is the
order in which the rooms are left and their ventilation. At the University of Toronto
I found the physics building a model from the standpoint of ventilation, while in
the main building, which happened to be an older one, the atmosphere was almost
unbearable. I could see that any professor would prefer to use a room for a recita-
tion or a lecture which had not been in use the hour before. So that, before any
large improvement can come about, standards both for order and ventilation must
be established.

At the University of Toronto, after every laboratory exercise the apparatus which
has been in use by the students is put away. If it is bulky and the table large,
the apparatus is placed at the far end of the table and lined up with it. A neat un-
bleached muslin covering is then placed over it. In other words, each section leaves
the laboratory free for the use of any section that comes after it, and the remarkable
part of this is that in this particular laboratory there is so much space that there is
no necessity for its conservation. It is done, I was informed, largely out of considera-
tion for the development of the characters of the students and to teach them habits
of neatness. I have never seen such a well-ordered building anywhere. Any industrial
establishment with which I am familiar can learn from the Physics Department of
the University of Toronto in the matter of housekeeping. Every other laboratory I
visited had more or less to criticise in this respect.

There are many questions of general application which would be developed as
a result of a detailed study of this matter of the use of rooms. For instance, it
almost invariably happens that recitation rooms are put on the top floors; while
museums, apparatus rooms and studies are on the lower floors. To the layman it
would appear that a room which is to house anywhere from twenty to a hundred
students for, say, four or five hours every day, should be nearer the ground floor
than a museum which is visited only occasionally.

The more thought one gives to this matter of the ownership and exclusive occu-
pation of a building by a department, the more wasteful it appears to be. Under
this plan there must be either a feast or a famine. If a building is constructed with
an eye to the future, it must necessarily be too large for the present. There is a
question of policy here which must be threshed out. At the University of Toronto
the physics building was so constructed that it looked forward to only a few years'
growth, but could easily be enlarged in accordance with a predetermined plan. At
Princeton they told me that they had had at least twenty-five years' and probably
fifty years' growth in mind at the time the building was constructed; yet out of the

THE ECONOMICAL USE OF BUILDINGS 41

one hundred rooms in the building none was used by interests foreign to physics. The
physics staff did some work in the department of electrical engineering, which occu-
pied approximately one fifteenth of the floor space in the building. In other words,
the physics and electrical engineering departments were spreading out in the space
that it was believed would be large enough to handle the requirements of these and
other departments twenty-five years from date. Unless Princeton has too many build-
ings one would expect that there might be some department — at least part of a
department — which might enjoy, say for the next ten years, some of this space
provided for a twenty-five years' growth.

Again it may happen that a particular building is a gift earning with it restric-
tions as to its use. Could not a method be arranged by which other departments
could occupy unused parts of such a building subject to the payment of a satisfactory
rental? This would afford one way for a department temporarily in possession of too
much room to increase its "earnings." Such an arrangement, of course, would be pos-
sible only under an accounting system, such as is elsewhere recommended.

On Table 6, Part 2, 1 have given data about each of the buildings visited, includ-
ing the amount of space devoted to lecture rooms, laboratories, etc., the cost of
maintenance per square foot, etc.

FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES

Before it will be possible for those in charge of the various departments to relin-
quish any of the manifold duties which they now perform, it will be necessary to
build up the agencies by which these functions can be more advantageously per-
formed. Every effort should be made in building up these agencies to put them in
competent hands. It will be found that duties will be willingly relinquished to those
who will discharge them more efficiently. On the other hand, it will be impossible
to convince a college professor that it will make for efficiency to take a duty away
from him and give it to some one who is going to perform it in an indifferent
manner. The best progress will be made in organizing these functional activities
to do them only as they can be well done. It will probably be best not to require
that everybody use a given functional agency when it is first started. A purchasing
agent, on assuming his duties, will probably find his time fully occupied doing the
buying for those parts of the institution which are anxious to utilize his services. It
is of importance that those who first come in contact with the work of these func-
tional agencies shall be impressed with their efficiency and genuine helpfulness. It
will be better, therefore, for the purchasing agent to give an excess of time to making
a few purchases, and have them made right, than to force his services on those who
have not been convinced that they require them. If this policy is followed, practi-
cally every one will be using the purchasing agent within a year or two, and this
without the necessity for forcing his services on any one. In this and other matters
there will always be people who are glad to be relieved of trouble.

With so little of the work of our universities now being done on a functional
basis, it is hard to predict the field it may ultimately cover. I have given brief out-
lines of those functions the development of which seem the most obvious, from which
the greatest amount of help can be expected, and which in my opinion can be insti-
tuted with the least trouble.

Superintendent of Grounds and Buildings
This office can be made more valuable, even at those institutions where the position
is now of considerable importance. If, for instance, the superintendent of grounds
and buildings operates the power plant, it would appear that he should also have
charge of all shops. To the layman in educational matters, there does not seem to be
any good reason why, as is the case at the University of Toronto, three machine
shops should be operated inside the college grounds,^ and each of these be directed
by one or more college professors, weighted down as they are with other functions
foreign to this one. Each of these shops requires the same sort of supplies, the same
character of employees, is doing the same kind of work, — work more closely allied to

' These three shops were connected with the work in physics. There may have been others connected with other
departments.

FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES 4,3

power-plant work than to class-room work. The professors now in charge would soon
find out that, instead of getting poorer service under a centralized management, they
would get better service than is possible under existing conditions. The industrial
world has now freed itself from the slavery of the idea that to get a thing well done you
must do it yourself. Specialization has made almost the opposite of this true. I am
confident, for instance, that every one of the professors who has duties in connection
with the management of shops, and with whom I talked, is firmly convinced that, if
his particular shop were under the control of any one outside his department, (1) he
would have to wait longer for things, (2) the work would not be so well done, and
(3) would not cost less. Most managers in the industrial world will be willing to ad-
mit that, if all work done by mechanics throughout a university plant should be
done under the control of some central authority, it will be done better both from
the standpoint of the university as a whole and also from the standpoint of the
individual department.

At the University of Wisconsin I found that the professor in charge of the depart-
ment had spent considerable time (and over a period of years) in getting the pen-
dulum required in the Foucault experiment so suspended from the roof of the
building as to give good results. This professor, a man of some years, had himself
personally climbed into the rafters of a high building and attempted to make the ad-
justments in large measure with his own hands. At Princeton a shaft in the new
building has been reserved in which a Foucault pendulum is to be suspended, but
owing to the professors being engaged with other matters the pendulum has not
been put in place, much to the disappointment of those who take a special interest
in the new building. As long as each department is self-contained and is supposed to
do largely for itself, such conditions must continue. Under what would appear to
be reasonable management, such work as this would be done on the more or less
detailed requisition of the departments by the superintendent of grounds and build-
ings, who would have at his command competent mechanics. If the amount of work
to be done increased, he would know how to add to his staff until the work was got
out of the way. This is not usually possible in the case of individual depai-tments.

Interdepartmental Janitor Service
The typical college building has its own janitor, and there is no connection be-
tween the janitor service of one building and that of another. At one university
there is a corps of janitors who have entire charge of the buildings in the university,
and naturally the work can be done much more efficiently and at less cost. Janitor
service generally among colleges can be much improved. There is no reason why the
same standard of cleanliness should not obtain throughout all departments. Will not
the professors be much more comfortable if their buildings are maintained in proper
order without their giving it any thought, than if they have to be constantly bother-
ing with such detail.''

44 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

A sharp line should be drawn, probably, between the cleaning of the buildings
and the care of apparatus, etc., such as is used in lecture halls and laboratories. It
might later on be found advisable to build up a department of laboratory attendance,
or to handle this work as a part of the janitor's department. It usually happens that
in any one laboratory the services of an attendant are required only at certain given
hours, and it might tend to efficiency to have a central organization that could send
the same man to one laboratory at one hour, and to another laboratory at a different
hour. Such cooperation under the present arrangement is out of the question.

Purchasing Department

In the matter of the purchasing department, perhaps, the college world is further
away from the industrial world than in any other respect. At the University of
Toronto they had had the question of the advisability of a purchasing department
before them for several years, and it had just been decided that it was impossible
for anybody to make purchases as well as a professor could make them ; in other
words, that the question of the advisability of a central purchasing bureau, which
has long since been an element in the organization of all industrial establishments,
could have no place in the collegiate organization. The reasons for this decision do
not seem to me valid ones.^

At the University of Wisconsin they had definitely made up their minds that they
would have a purchasing department, and had instituted a line of procedure lead-
ing to its installation which would take about two years to put in full operation.
They had wisely decided to approach the problem slowly in order to demonstrate to
the teachers and others concerned that the department could help them, before they
made it necessary for any one to accept its good offices. In the writer's opinion, a
ten per cent saving on all purchases is assured, and a larger one on a good many
lines would probably be secured, as a result of the central purchasing authority.
After all, the chief value of the purchasing department is not in the money saving,
but in the matter of being able to secure the articles best adapted to the purposes
to which they are to be put, an increase in the speed of delivery, and a greater con-
venience in making the purchases.

The influence of a satisfactory adjustment of the purchasing problem will spread
further than might be supposed. I think that a good deal of the teacher's distrust
of modern business methods may be accounted for by what he has seen of the al-
most ludicrous makeshifts for a genuinely efficient purchasing system. The account-
ing authorities have been forced to do something toward controlling expenditures
or at least toward collating them. And the minimum of what they have been al-
lowed or able to do has not been always such as would command confidence in what
might result from a further development of "business methods." No one is to blame
for this, but it would appear to be a condition easily remedied.

' Since writing the report the author has been advised that " the board of governors desires that there should be
a central purchasing bureau. The experiment is in process."

FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES 45

College professors are undoubtedly experts when it comes to purchasing many
articles pertaining to their specialties. They have not always realized that almost
any large concern, like a railroad system or a steel plant, buys things every day
which require the services of not one but in some cases of several experts. They have
not always realized that any proper system of making purchases for a university
will include the making use of every bit of expert assistance available where such
assistance is required. Largely on account of this misunderstanding, the professor
has burdened himself with the purchase of ninety-nine articles like pencils and paj)er
so as to be able to pass on one article like a crystal or a piece of wire for a Foucault
pendulum.

Stores Department
Nothing approaching a stores department was found, although the L^niversitv of
Wisconsin looked forward to a time when they would have a central storeroom where
everything used in the departments could be obtained. They pointed out the fact
that many of the things used in any laboratory were usually in demand in the others,
and that there was no good reason why time and money and convenience would not
be saved with a central depository. There are many articles which it is not wise for
a departmental storeroom to carry which might profitably be can'ied by a storeroom
used by all departments.

Mail Handling

The amount of mail that comes to a university which could not under proper
organization be handled at a central office is small. Yet everywhere I went I found
teachers engaged in writing notes, sometimes by long hand, on matter many of which
could have been more authoritatively answered by a central office.

The layman would be surprised to know how frequently those connected with the
scientific departments of our universities are called on for technical help which is
to be given without compensation. It would seem to me that in every case such help
should go out from the university rather than fi'om the department, and under some
single policy rather than under the different policies of separate departments as at
present. Practically all mail should be answered at a central office, this office com-
municating by written memoranda with the departments when necessary. As far as
I could discover, there was no evidence of any department's having enough mail
legitimately its own to warrant building up the mechanism within the department
with which to handle it properly.

Bursar's Dkpartment
The treasurer, as a rule, is not in close enough touch with the university to keep
any proper track of details. This is recognized in the Report of the Treasurer and
Business Manager of the Northxvestern University, 1907-1908, in which the trea-
surer's report takes one page and the business manager's the balance of the one hun-

46 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

died and sixty page book. The treasurer will, at most institutions, have to be a man
drawn from the ranks of the laity and one not a member of the immediate univer-
sity family. There should be, therefore, another officer in authority in matters of
finance, giving up his whole time to the work, who will make it his business to study
the details of expenditures and receipts so that he may be able to bear his share in
making those improvements in methods which are considered essential in every com-
mercial or industrial undertaking. It makes little difference what this man is called,
— a bursar, comptroller, or business manager, — although the latter title seems to
describe what I believe should be his general functions better than any other. The
work of this kind now done is being done by those whose position in the whole scheme
of university management does not seem to warrant their making suggestions as to
the improvements which in many cases must be obvious to them.

If the student-hour were adopted and an effort made to keep track, not only of the
details of the cost per student-hour in each of the departments, but of the receipts
as well, this officer would have a large field of usefulness open to him.

Disciplinarian

In many industrial establishments, the matter of discipline comes up so rarely that
one is apt to forget that there is any provision made for it. In the most developed
establishments, the value of having all such matters managed by one person is well
understood. At some of the universities these matters are attended to largely by one
person, but this person is usually so overloaded with other duties that there can be
little method in the handling of matters of discipline.

In this particular the lack of definite standards seems particularly noticeable when
one considers how long the college men have been facing its problems. There are
some published rules. At Williams a book of "Laws" and a book of "Administrative
Rules" seemed to afford a good basis for what might, in my opinion, be profitably
expanded. Similar publications were found at most of the institutions visited.

But there is reluctance everywhere noticeable in the college world to put things
into writing. I mention it here because in matters of discipline it was especially no-
ticeable. The reason for this seems to be that even in minor affairs the personal ele-
ment is considered of much importance. The students, professors and everybody con-
nected with the institutions are educated to feel that a given sequence of events does
not always lead to the same result in matters disciplinary. I feel that this not only
wastes time in disposing of such matters, but must have a bad effect on all con-
cerned. If offences are committed, the punishments depend too largely on who com-
mitted the offences, their past records, circumstances surrounding the act, etc. In the
large affairs of life this might pay, but in such minor matters as student escapades,
absences, etc., it leaves too much leeway. A dean at one institution told me that the
rules to turn back a student on failure to pass freshman final examinations were
clear, but that until recently they never were put in operation without a hearing on

FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES 47

each individual case, and tliat even then they were rarely enforced. Then, owing
largely to committee management, those dealing with such cases are in constant dread
of being reversed, and as a matter of fact a large number of cases are constantly being
opened up and revised.

I want to offer another reason for this condition, and that is that our universities
and colleges are more afraid of publicity than is supposed. President Garfield told
me that he believed that the remedy for most of the troubles of the colleges was
more publicity. Tliere is very little of it at present. High officers at several univer-
sities said that the fear of taxation made them backward about stating the value of
their property. The treasurer of one university told me that he had purposely re-
frained from acquiring the information necessary properly to inventory the value of
the plant. He wanted to be able to say that he did not know. I was told at one
place that they would regret extremely to reduce to writing their rules on the use of
intoxicants by students. The rules seemed to me to be fairly rigorous, but because they
were not prohibitory it was feared that their publication would cause trouble. With
no written regulations it becomes necessary, as might be expected, for pi-ofessors of
distinction constantly to give time to such cases. Complete standards rigorously en-
forced covering matters of discipline will reduce the occasions for their use in a large
degree.

Bureau of Publicity

All printed matter intended for the public should be prepared in one place and
under the direction of some one who understands this sort of thing. When assistance
is rendered by the departments, it should be subject to the editing of this central
bureau. Nearly all college catalogues, and in fact college literature of all kinds, too
clearly bear the mark of their process of evolution. To the layman, they are unin-
telligible in large part, full of repetitions, giving a great deal of information in which
it is hardly possible tliat any large number of people are interested, and withholding
much that would be of interest. Nearly every college stands for something distinct
in education. They all claim to do so when you ask the question. Nearly every de-
partment in the college has a policy it is working on, or some field peculiar to itself
that it is trying to cover. And yet, in studying their literature, it is very difficult
oftentimes to discover this. A parent or a student, engaged in looking into the rela-
tive merits of different colleges, should be able to find out what each one is trying
to do in its own field. In this way possibly a good many of the misfits which we see
all about us would be prevented. The editors of college catalogues must learn that
it is not enough to state a thing correctly, but it must be stated so that the average
person who reads it can understand it.

At no two of the colleges visited was the same system for designating courses in
use. Several of these systems were almost impossible for an outsider to understand.
One would think that some system could be arranged for this purpose which all

48 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

could use. The matter of designating courses is not the only place where it will be neces-
sary to have a uniform system of nomenclature before it will be possible to get very
far in the scientific study of the problems involved. No science, such as geology or
botany for instance, would be considered to have developed very far if it did not
possess a generally recognized terminology. It was suggested to me that in some of
these matters it will be better to design an entirely new system than to attempt
to build even on the best of those now in use. Wherever possible such a system
should be made mnemonic.

There does not seem to be any special advantage in the extreme variety of typog-
raphy and format found in college catalogues. The editors of many of the techni-
cal publications issued by learned societies are trying to bring their publications to
standard size and to use for them a standard face and size of type. This change in
college catalogues would mean a reduced cost, and in the case of many such pub-
lications— if not in all — an improved book.

The whole class of work included in advertising, circulars, the sending out of invi-
tations, and the maintenance of the alumni lists should be done in this same depart-
ment. For reasons of economy a large part of the student body may come from the
territory immediately adjacent to the college. But in order to give a college a cos-
mopolitan atmosphere, it is desirable to have other sections of the country and
foreign countries represented. By means of the checking and encouraging through
advertising, this could be closely regulated. This same publicity department could
be used indirectly for securing positions both for students during the summer months
and for graduates after they have finished their college work. Many colleges have
the beginnings of such a department, but it will never amount to what it should
until each department refers all work of this kind to a special central department,
and assists in strengthening this organization. I found some departments maintain-
ing separate alumni lists of their own departments.

This whole matter, including the use of the word "advertising," is one that may be
very differently received in different places. It seems safe to say that whatever work
of this kind is done should be done by the authority of the university or college as
a whole, and under the direction of the best specially qualified person whose services
can be commanded.

There is a marked tendency on the part of the universities to make their litera-
ture more attractive. The pamphlets of the Harvard Graduate School are the first
instances I have seen of color work in college advertising matter.

It is a question whether commercial advertising should be imitated by educational
institutions; if so, how far and under what restrictions. If a manufacturer finds that
he has a plant capable of a substantial increase in product with a comparatively
small increase in wages, he makes this increase feeling that he is reducing his cost of
production. To market this product usually involves advertising. When a university
finds that it has a department with the material equipment capable of handling, say,

FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES 49

three times the number of students, good administration would suggest the advisa-
bility of advertising that particular department, and perhaps of cutting down the
advertising of the departments already overtaxed. I found exactly the opposite con-
dition at one place where they had an excellent ccjuipment for handling at least
three times their present student body in one department, yet the ranking professor
rather apologized for a modest piece of advertising matter which he placed in my
hands, and which he was glad to say had not been sent out by his instmctions. He
said that he would welcome more students, but he felt that the function of the uni-
versity had been entirely fulfilled when it provided good courses, and that it was
not a function of a university to "hawk its wares about."

Registrar

Apparently the duties of the registrar can be broadened with far-reaching results.
In the first place registration of all kinds should be centralized in the registrar's
office. This is now done in many universities. But even where the registrar registers,
he does not follow up in any way. His records show the maximum registration, which
is usually far beyond the actual at any one time. If fuller information about the in-
dividual student is desired, it will probably come about primarily through greater
care in keeping the registrar's records.

It is rather unusual to find a college teacher whose administrative experience and
opinions extend measurably beyond the limits of his own immediate courses and spe-
cialty. This is as true inside the various departments of physics as it is in the institu-
tions generally. If there is this absence of accurate knowledge in regard to courses
inside of a single department, it is obvious that under present conditions it is prac-
tically impossible for any one person, or any group of persons, to have the knowledge
necessary to plan the work of any one department so as to complement the work of
other departments, in the matter of hours, rooms, teachers, etc. As long as this is
the case, the methods used in laying out college courses must in large measure be
unsatisfactory.

The difficulty, in some cases, with room schedules and course schedules, and the
apparent conflicts which were found in them, together with the obvious difficulty
of arranging classes, sections and courses with the machinery at present avail-
able, led me to make some inquiries among recent graduates. I was told that for
the first month after college opens mistakes in rooms, assignments of teachei's,
sizes of sections, etc., are constantly cropping up. I do not see how it could be other-
wise.

Williams College has a recorder, who keeps a record of the number of students
taking the various courses, the number of "student-hours" ^ (based on the scholastic
weight which obtains there, i.e., two laboratory hours equal to one recitation hour,
etc.) in each course, and once a year, as a part of the dean's report, he makes an in-

*This term as used here has not the same meaning as the student-hour explained on pase 19.

50 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

teresting statement showing the relative amount of work taken in each department.
This report is framed in such a way as to make the figures easily comparable with
those of previous years. This work might be made a part of the duties of the registrar.

In the hands of the registrar might be placed the question of the economical use
of buildings. And if he is to use the buildings to advantage, in his hands will prob-
ably be left the greater part of the planning as to the hours of the day when courses
are to be given. Here is certainly large room for improvement. I found at Williams
an instructor putting in three hours a week extra in the laboratory on account of
one student who otherwise would have been unable to take the course. The conditions
seemed to indicate that a minimum of interdepartmental planning and cooperation
would have avoided this.

Under the elective system the necessity for a scientific and detailed study of this
whole matter of hours is becoming every day more noticeable. Apparently much may
be done to minimize the more or less foolish considerations on which electives are
chosen. Everywhere, with one exception, it was admitted that courses are so chosen.
A course in which the exercises occur in the middle of the afternoon or the first
hour on Monday morning is very unpopular with the students. Many courses are
popular because it is the custom to take them, or because they are considered easy
— called "snap courses;" still others, because they have just the number of hours to
fill out a required schedule. There are other reasons of the same general character.
I am sure that without changing human nature these various considerations could
be largely eliminated in the choosing of courses. One plan suggested is to have a re-
quired course of lectures to the second term freshmen, in which the various possible
careers would be outlined. The strong and weak points of a doctor's or lawyer''s career,
of an engineering or business vocation, etc., could be discussed in these lectures, and
the application of the various courses offered to each of these lines of activity pointed
out. As a result of this and other measures, and without in any way curtailing the
elective principle, the students would be led to map out their courses more con-
sistently, and if so mapped out, the courses could be more easily handled.

Bureau of Inspection
In most lines of human endeavor there has been experienced the necessity for a
branch of the service which shall have to do with passing on the quality of the work.
And I believe that in the colleges we must have a similar inspecting agency. At
one place I found a departmental inspection service in force. It was crude, and I do
not think it was recognized exactly as an inspection service. But it was the policy of
the professor in charge to arrange to visit the various sections in his department and
to remain throughout the hour period. He used this means of keeping himself informed
concerning the class-room methods of the men in the department and to be in a
position intelligently to suggest improvements. There are few men, however, who
are endowed with the force and energy necessary to maintain a system of this kind

FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES 51

in the face of the natural obstacles. This is not one of the things expected of a pro-
fessor in charge of a department, and naturally it will be one of tlie first to be sacri-
ficed under pressure of other and seemingly more important duties.

To be done well, the inspection .service should be a specially designed agency. I
think it would be comparatively easy to train one or more men to be specially
helpful to their associates in teaching methods. 1 am sure that if such asvstem were
in force, it would bring to tiie attention of those in authority — before they had a
chance to do much harm — conditions which ordinarily run throughout the school
year and thus do large damage. Such a bureau as this would quickly develop special
means of scenting sources of trouble and inefficiency. If the records as to absences
and class-room discipline were to be filed with the bureau of inspection, one good
danger signal would be afforded.

It is not impossible that the work of a bureau of inspection may suggest the neces-
sity of an agency — especially in the larger institutions — for training teachers. At the
present time most assistants are recent graduates without either the teaching, train-
ing or experience with the world which might help them in their relations with
students. One would think that if in the industrial world it is considered essential
to give a man some drill before he is allowed to sell books or a cash register, con-
siderable good might be anticipated from a little coaching in class-room methods.
Every one who has attended college knows some of the things not to do. Perhaps,
if these could be grouped and a few affirmations added, it would make the basis of
a profitable course for those beginning collegiate teaching.

In the same way, it might be a part of the duty of this bureau to keep correlated
the record — scholastic and otherwise — of each individual scholar for the purpose of
providing special treatment for those who require it. Under existing conditions there
does not appear to be enough effort to group all the available information about
the progress of any student. Teachers in any one department may know what a given
student is doing for them, but to find out what he is doing elsewhere is attended by
so many difficulties that the effort is made only in extreme cases, and then only after
the student has been long in trouble.

It seems to me that every institution visited was holding off from establishing
this kind of individual relations with the students for fear of the expense involved.
The argument seemed to be that to do this work effectively would at the beginning
require a large corps of preceptors. I believe that, with some scheme of getting quick
returns on the character of work being done by each individual student in the va-
rious departments, even a few preceptors, representing the bureau of inspection, and
following up intelligently the students furthest in arrears, would bring up the char-
acter of work done by the whole student body. In the industrial world it is being
found out that rewards and disciplinary measures must follow quickly the act for
which they are meted out if they are to have the maximum effect. Therefore I believe
that it will pay in the college world not to permit all the pressure on students to

62 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

be piled up at the end of the term, when it is frequently too late to be of any avail.

In an industrial enterprise the inspector has little to do when things are going
smoothly, but he is indispensable nevertheless. And when things are going wrong
everybody is delighted to have a specialist around. And it usually happens that the
amount of spoiled work is at a minimum in those establishments which have the best
ordered inspection corps.

It may turn out that ultimately the matter of examinations will be handled by
an agency outside of the department. Should the college world work around to the
idea that a high percentage of failures is as apt to be the fault of the teachers (and
those employed to look after the students outside of lectures, recitations and labora-
tories) as of the student body, it may be well to divorce the teaching and examining
functions. It is axiomatic in the industrial world that inspection, to amount to any-
thing, must be performed by some one else than the person who did the work. The
college men are awake to the advantages of such a system, but they feel that the dis-
advantages would far outweigh them. They believe that teaching would develop into
a system of coaching to pass examinations, if one arm of the service examined and
another taught. It is not clear to the layman why sufficient safeguards could not be
thrown around both teaching and examining methods to invalidate this argument.
Nevertheless it is held by most of those with whom I talked about it that this is
the relation now existing between preparatory school teaching and college entrance
examinations.

Other functions than those suggested may well be developed for such a bureau of
inspection. For instance, such a bureau might make a specialty of studying the fail-
ures and classifying the causes. It is hardly possible that any systematic study of
such data would not lead to material changes in our scholastic methods. In the
records and lists of our highly organized alumni associations there is afforded a
mass of valuable data which should be studied by some one with care. If a given
school is seeking to turn out well-trained mechanical engineers and has hundreds of
her sons already in the field, every efibrt should be made to use them as an agency
by which the future product can be constantly improved. The manufacturers of one
of the best known typesetting machines follow every individual machine from the
time it is sold until it is "scrapped." A running record of its break -downs and its
performance is kept. This is not done for the sake of the machine, but because only
in this way can the future machines be made so that they will not be subject to the
same faults.

In an industrial establishment the inspectors are just as much interested in the
raw material as they are in the finished product. It is largely on the suggestion
of the inspectors that the purchasing department keeps changing its specifications so
that the materials purchased more and more fully meet the uses for which they are
required. In the same way it will be the function of our collegiate bureau of inspec-
tion to study the raw material — the students coming in from the secondary schools

FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITIES 53

— and to suggest the lines along which it might be improved. The president of a
western university recently told me that there was no difficulty in getting his stu-
dents to work — if anything, they worked too hard. He pointed out other weak-
nesses, which, considering them as raw material, they certainly possessed. He had
instituted far-reaching and far-sighted steps in order to correct these faults. At
another institution visited, it was reported to me that necessary increase in the
amount of work demanded of the students had been instituted with the utmost dif-
ficulty. Each slight raise in standard had been attended by a large increase in the
number of students dropping out. The preparation of this raw material evidently had
not left a sufficient margin of safety. So it would appear that there is room for in-
telligently and properly organized inspection both of the college's finished product
and of its raw material.

As standards are adopted among the colleges, it is going to be more and more
necessary to have in each college an agency whose special function it will be to see
that such standards are in force thereo This is another duty which might be assigned
to the bureau of inspection.

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION

The position that I have taken in going over these institutions is that they exist
primarily for their teaching departments, such as the department of astronomy, the
department of Greek, the department of economics, etc. I use this term department
as it would be used in an industrial sense and without regard to its personnel or the
quarters it occupies. Here the word teaching comprehends all the work done by the
departmental staff, whether in direct instruction or in research. Broadly speaking,
the teaching departments in a college or university are the equivalent of the manu-
facturing departments in an industrial enterprise. To each one should be charged up
its own direct expense and its proportionate share of all the overhead expenses. On
this plan the total annual expense of the institution should be divided eventually
among the teaching departments. Only in this way can there be secured the total
cost of teaching in any department and this cost in turn compared with the product.

There are a number of different items which together constitute the total expense
of teaching in any one department. For instance, in nearly every institution the salary
item for each department is considered by itself even if it does not so appear on the
books. Whenever additional salary is wanted in a department, it is the routine pro-
cedure to inquire first what is the present salary list. Expenditure for equipment
and supplies is another item of the total expense that is usually isolated for each
department and watched pretty closely. In most institutions, before expenditures
under this head are made, there must have been an appropriation to cover the
amount of it. At Wisconsin I found a complete budget system. The expenditures for
salaries, equipment and supplies, etc., for each department, were determined in ad-
vance by means of a budget, and efficient safeguards were erected to prevent the ex-
penditures going beyond these predetermined figures. But even at this institution
only a part of the items of expense were so segregated, department by department.
No substantial progress will be made in controlling the expense of university work
until the whole expense is definitely known, and this expense is divided with fair
accuracy among the several departments. The educator can then adopt some measure
for the output of each department — crude, though, at the start such measure will
doubtless be — and he will know the approximate amount the product is costing, and
why. As soon as a system of this kind is adopted, the beginnings will have been made
of installing efficiency as the test in college management.

Included in the idea that a university is operated for its teaching departments is
the corollary that such features of the general collegiate life as the library, the chapel
and the gymnasium are operated only because they assist in the teaching work. Every
item of expense involved in maintaining each one should be charged up against it,
and against this charge should be set off the current revenue which it brings in, in
order to secure the net expense of operation. It is suggested that all overhead ex-
penses be pro-rated to the various teaching departments in the proportion of their

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 55

teaching salaries. This will be following the industrial practice of charging overhead
expenses to the various manufacturing departments in proportion to the wages paid
in those departments.

The dormitories under usual conditions will be in a different class from the library
and gymnasium, because as ordinarily operated they are considered as investments,
and therefore revenue producers. There may be conditions under which this viewpoint
will have to be modified somewhat, but generally speaking, a universitv or college
owning dormitories should operate them so as to be able to determine at the end
of the year the net income from them. There will then be only in very rare cases
anv charge against teaching on account of the dormitories; even when thev may
not be run so as to earn a high — or in fact any — rate of interest on the investment,
they will at least pay operating expenses. When there is any excess of expense over
revenue on their account, however, it should be a charge against the teaching depart-
ments. Such a charge is more likely to occur in the case of the college commons,
which seems to be much more difficult to operate at a sufficiently high level in point
of service and yet yield a profit. The amount of earnings will be, for both dormi-
tories and commons, one important measure of their efficiency. When they are made
to pay their own way in the matter of expense and income, other definite measures
of efficiency covering the quality of service given will doubtless be available.

In the same way, each of the other incidental features of university life, such as the
library, gymnasium, etc., should be treated as an entity, the net expense of which
should ultimately be pro-rated among the teaching departments. For each such
feature some means should be provided for measuring its product. In the case of a
library, for instance, arrangements could be made for securing a tally on the num-
ber of persons using the library, the number of books called for, the number of
books bought, etc. Some index should be provided to measure every line of the library's
activity. The time seems to have gone by when we can afford to maintain features
which are not definitely useful and in which their usefulness does not bear the proper
relation to their expense. If we know the total cost of each, and then make some
effort to measure the product, it will be possible to decide whether the product
seems to warrant the expense. If every university would do this, each could decide,
by a comparison with the experience of the others, how efficiently its own depart-
ments are being operated. It is desirable to have a library, but we want to be sure
that a library which is costing ten times what another costs is doing "work" in
proportion.

It may be well to repeat here something I said earlier in this report; otherwise,
the cry of Philistinism may be raised. The old idea was that a universitv was made
up of so many departments, i.e., a library, a chapel, a Greek department, and one
covering natural science, for instance. The existence of any one of these departments
was in no way contingent on its measure of usefulness. The thought of abandoning
such a department or curtailing its expenditures beyond a certain point was unthink-

56 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

able. In our American colleges this is apparently no longer true. Everywhere I went
I found the question of functional efficiency being raised among the responsible
heads of the institutions and the departments. Men are anxiously seeking the ways
and means of measuring the "usefulness" of this and that line of endeavor or ex-
pense. But coupled with this, in most cases, there is a desire to interpret "useful-
ness" in that broad sense which puts a true value on those more or less intangible
elements in college life which tend toward the development of the things of the
spirit. I cannot impress sufficiently upon those who may be tempted to raise the cry
of Philistinism, that while a practical attitude has to be taken in reviewing each
activity herein studied, it is not at all with the idea of attaining simply a commer-
cial type of economy that suggestions as to changes are made. In the last analysis
the "usefulness" of a university is the measure of its mental, moral and spiritual
product — and product interpreted as broadly as you please. But it is only logical
to analyze carefully all the different activities which are supposed to work individu-
ally and collectively toward this end, if we are to judge intelligently of how ade-
quately the mission is being fulfilled in comparison with the time, effiart and money
expended thereon. And the ultimate object of such study is not to condemn or even
to criticise, but to build up such an array of facts and figures, and such deductions
therefrom, as may help not only toward maintaining, but toward increasing that
very atmosphere and spirit which are admittedly so essential to the true college
and university life. Surely ardent idealists will not contend that the fullest influence
of a university is made impossible by a thorough understanding of each of the prac-
tical problems involved.

Under this interpretation a library may "pay" if only half a dozen students enter
each day. Its principal function may be to house books which for the most part are
not in frequent demand. It may have no reading-room function to perform. But
whatever its function, there certainly can be no harm in defining it as closely as
possible and then attempting to say how well it fulfils this function. In the same
way, it may be held that a given university must be prepared to teach a certain
dead language even if there are no students who wish to study it. This would be
consistent with our idea of university efficiency and usefulness. In other words, a
policy which would maintain a Sanskrit department over a given period of time, in
the absence of students, might "pay" in a university sense. One would expect the
cost per student-hour in such departments to be very high, but surely we ought to
know how high it is. It will "pay" the university and the world to protect some
branches of learning in the face of extreme indifference on the part of the student body.

The policy of charging to each department its share of the expenses of the non-
teaching features will make everybody connected with the institution interested in
its management. If, in a certain sense, they are helping to pay the bills, the depart-
ments through their representatives will be more watchful of the methods under
which the money is spent.

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 57

It would seem best to charge all the expenses of a building up to the building,
and then twice a year (i.e., once a term) pro-rate this expense against the depart-
ments using the building in the proportion in which they use it. The adoption of
this policy will result in there being many rooms not claimed by or occupied by any
department. The expense of this space should be pro-rated against all the depart-
ments. This in turn will have the effect of getting the cooperation of everybody in
keeping this amount of unused space as low as possible. The keeping of the expense
of maintaining and operating a building separate will mean that such items as gas,
water, electricity, etc., will generally have to be metered for each building. This is done
now at some of the universities. Where there is a central heating plant, the charges
will be on the basis of so much a square foot for those parts of the building in use.

Administrative expenses, such as the salary of a president who does no teaching,
will also be pro-rated among the departments. But many so-called administrative
expenses can be immediately charged direct to a department. For instance, at Harvard
University the expense of printing the catalogue is now largely charged direct to the
departments in proportion to the number of pages occupied. This has the effect of
making the departments take more interest in the matter which goes into the catalogue.

In my opinion^ nothing can be done which will have a greater or more immediate
effect in minimizing departmental autonomy than keeping a close watch on departmental
expenses. It will quickly establish the fact that everywhere there must be some relation
between expense and the amount of work done. It will xoeaken the hold of the departments
on their buildings, and will make everyone interested as they never have been before
in the overhead expenses of the plant. And at most institutions this can be done by the
present accounting staff at no increase in cost.

It would appear that if expenses are to be segregated in this way, department by
department, earnings should be handled in the same way. In other words, tuition
fees should be pro-rated to the various departments in proportion to the amount of
tuition furnished. In the same way, if special fees are charged, as is sometimes the
case in laboratory work, the department receiving them should be given credit for
this amount of "earnings." In this way the gross and net expenses of each depart-
ment can be figured out. If this is done, it will probably result in a material read-
justment of the scale of charges now in force. At the present time no effort is made
to show from time to time the amount of fees " earned" in the different departments.
In some cases, the fact that a department does earn fees is given as the excuse for
being more liberal with it in the matter of appropriations. But as a general thing
the fees in bulk are considered as one form of revenue. It would seem as if they
should be made to stand clear of interest on endowment funds or gifts.

A statement of receipts and expenses, department by department, based on the
foregoing, would be, as far as the writer was able to ascertain, a new departure.
That it would be of large value in interdepartmental and intercollegiate compari-
sons seems certain.

58

ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

The statement of gross expenses, department by department, would be of much
greater use if the registrar's records could be kept in such a way as to show the num-
ber of student-hours per year in each department. If all registration for courses were
made at the registrar's office (as is now done at some institutions), and his records
were designed for the purpose, these data could be obtained with little extra labor.

Given the number of student-hours in every department and the total cost of
operating every department, the cost per student-hour in each department can be
ascertained. These costs will be in such shape that they can be analyzed. The total
cost per student-hour can be subdivided into as many parts as necessary in order to
discover the reasons for interesting variations. (See Table 10, Part 2.) In the best of
the cost analysis tables now being furnished at the colleges it is impossible to find
out, except in the broadest way, the reasons for the variations in cost.

Observe, for instance, this table from the Report of the Treasurer of Yale Uni-
versity for the year ending June 30, 1908, as given in Science for May 14, 1909:

Expenditure and Receipts per Student in Various Departments of
Yale University, for the Year 1907-8

„ . Receipts
Katio „

hxpense

'25.2 per cent

44.8 per cent
57.3 per cent
00.0 per cent
69.3 per cent

32.9 per cent
21.9 per cent
52.1 per cent
25.3 per cent
44.9 per cent

The units used here are all too large. They include too many variables to give
helpful data. An expense analysis on the basis of student-hours removes the large
cause of variation brought about by the different numbers of hours in different
courses, and makes it possible to separate those items of expense which should be
the same for all departments from those which would necessarily vary in the differ-
ent departments.

Among the hospitals the unit in figuring costs in general use is the patient-day.
This cost of keeping one patient one day is in turn divided up into such items
as food, nursing, medicines, etc. This makes it possible to compare profitably the
expense of keeping a patient in one of the free wards with the expense of keeping
another patient in a pay ward. Some of the items of such expense are exactly the
same in each case, while others, such as nursing and food, may be quite different in
the two cases.

Department

No. of
students

Expense
per student

Receipts
per student

Graduate

357

$159.45

$ 40.17

Academic

1315

339.56

152.27

SheflBeld Scientific

948

279.66

160.25

Theology

80

641.03

Law

339

177.14

122.86

Medicine

137

396.90

130.22

Art

39

315.02

69.25

Music

83

268.99

140.12

Forestry

61

469.39

119.17

All Departments

3359

296.85

113.25

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 59

It is probable that after such a method of keepin<r costs has been in effect for a
time, there will be established for each of the great departments, such as languages,
law, music, engineering, etc., an average expense per student-hour. It will then be
possible for each institution to decide how much above this average expense it mav,
on account of peculiar local conditions, be warranted in going. It will undoubtedly
follow that certain institutions will drop certain lines of work which are done at too
high a relative expense. It might easily result that two or more institutions close
together, and each offering, sparsely attended, special courses with high student-hour
expenses, would agree to distribute the work in such a way that any one institution
would do only a part of it.

After an adequate classification of accounts has been prepared, the actual book-
keeping involved will be simple. Many of the charges will have to be made only
twice a year. In fact, it will be easy to keep for each department separate expenses
on each of the courses given. Hardly anyone will deny that data of this kind would
be of great assistance. On Tables 9 and 10, Part 2, I have given specimens of re-
ports on teaching and expenses in the form in which I think it will pay to publish
them in the annual reports.

After these records have been kept for some time, it will probably be possible for
each university to appoint any departmental staff on the basis of the number of
student-hours. As has been pointed out by the Foundation, with $15,000 or 820,000
to put into salaries in a given department, it is hard to decide how many teachers
of each salary grade it is best to employ. It may be possible, with student-hours as
a basis, to say, for instance, that in a department giving annually 85,000 student-
hours in physics, the department is entitled to one professor at $5000, two assistant
professors at $3000 each, four instructors at $1500 to $1800 each, and six assistants
at $500 to $800 each.

It may also be suggested that the student-hour might be used as the basis on which
to differentiate institutions calling themselves universities and colleges. It will be pos-
sible, after each department and each course in each department is put on the basis
of student-hours, to classify institutions according to the number of student-hours
given to subjects respectively of college and of high school grade. By this method,
a so-called college with thousands of students studying bookkeeping and arithmetic
would not be placed in the college class.

Under this plan there would be afforded a special incentive for preserving a rea-
sonable relation between the number of courses offered in the catalogue and the
number of students registered for each course. A wide offering of courses would not
in itself entitle an institution to college or to university standing.

This matter of costs has been largely confused in collegiate accounting with the en-
tirely different matter of the analysis of revenue. There is plenty of reason for believ-
ing that the desire to be over-careful in the matter of accounting for funds of all kinds
has led our collegiate financiers to overlook the question of cost.

60 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

In the Appendix, Exhibit B, will be found certain extracts from the Report of the
Treasui'er of Harvard University. These extracts constitute the only references in his
report to the department of physics or to the physical laboratory. A casual reading of
the table of receipts and payments (page 121) would indicate that the total expense
of the physics department amounted to $8,999.93. Further study would probably
suggest that salaries for teachers could not be included in this, especially if one hap-
pens to know that there are thirteen teachers, and of these, four at least receive sal-
aries of $5000 a year or more. No amount of study would show, however, that this
department received and expended over $5000 in fees which do not appear except in
a grand total on the treasurer's books. In fact, the more closely these "detailed" re-
ports of the Harvard treasurer are studied, the less one would expect to find that
the total direct expense of the department of physics amounts to over $47,000. I was
able to locate payments amounting to this figure. But this does not include all. As
a responsible and competent accounting authority of the institution wrote me, "There
are very considerable expenses of research which are not reported to the treasurer,
because they are paid from trust funds held outside of the university and also from
private sources."

It is undoubtedly bad practice for a university to allow moneys to be spent in any
department when such moneys do not pass through the treasurer's books. I can find
no analogy for this in industrial or other undertakings. I am sure, that even if such
a thing were possible, it would be considered a menace to permit it. Could a hospital,
for instance, long maintain its organization, with money regularly being spent in its
various departments and not subject in any way to the general hospital control.''
Such moneys can be turned over to the university authorities under any desired de-
gree of anonymity and under any number of restrictions as to their use, but in the
long run it will be found to make for efficiency to have all such moneys follow the
usual course and pass through the treasurer's books.

Too much weight is everywhere given to the origin of the money used for any
given purpose. In collegiate finance, one dollar does not seem to be quite as good
as another dollar. In the Report of the Treasurer of Harvard University (Appendix,
Exhibit B) is given a list of the various items of income for the physical laboratory.
No reference is made to the matter of students' fees, which are turned over to the lab-
oratory. This omission is not excused, but accounted for by the fact that all strictly
departmental fees have been considered as subject to disbursement by the department
earning them and virtually without an accounting.

On the expenditure side of the same report, one item of nearly $3000, and two
others of approximately $500 each, are given as the income of certain funds. There is
no word as to what was done with these moneys; while below occurs the entry, "Sup-
plies, sundries, $5.81." The interpretation of this appears to be that moneys which
are left for a given purpose are not spent under the same degree of supervision as
are moneys which can be used for one of several purposes. When moneys are voted

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 61

for a given purpose out of general funds, there seems to l^e a greater desire on the
partof those expending them to justify the appropriation by saying just what was done
with it. Further appropriations may depend on this being done. On the other hand,
when the moneys can be spent only for one thing, the niiiiinium of an accounting
is forthcoming. The item of §5.81 above was spent out of moneys provided for the
use of the laboratory out of the general funds of the university. Hence, the list of
disbursements of which it was one was printed in detail.

The total revenue at the disposal of this laboratory was made up (1) of interest
on funds which had been left for its specific and exclusive use ; (2) of fees from stu-
dents in the department; and (3) of moneys voted from the general funds of the
institution. The fees were ignored in all the printed reports of the financial ojiera-
tions of the laboratory ; the amount, but not the disposition, of the income of trust
funds was given; and of the moneys voted out of the general funds, only a relatively
small part is mentioned in the tables, but the disposition of this part is given in
great detail. Considering the omissions, this is only misleading.

This report is picked out for illustrative purposes, not because it is unique among
collegiate financial reports, but because it illustrates some of the weak, points in
most of them.

It would appear to be bad practice to allow the departments to make any differ-
ence as between moneys. The origin of money may have a place in the budget, but
from that point on it would appear that one dollar should be disbursed under the
same amount of supervision as any other. Surely, if any difference is to be made, it
would be to throw every safeguard around that which has been made available by
the generosity of some friend of the institution perhaps long since passed away. The
present system does not do this. Under this system, the more careful a benefactor
may have been to specify the use to which his money was to be devoted, the greater
the opportunity for a portion of it to be spent without results.

The departments should be made to develop the probable profitableness of a given
appropriation, where there is a specific fund to be used for a specific purpose, in just
the same way as they now have to do when there is no such fund. It might easily
occur that in any given year it might not be wise to make any expenditure from
such an income. The feeling seems too prevalent that the interest on money left for
a given purpose must be spent as it accrues, rather than that it should be spent
along the lines stipulated by the donor but reserved to a time when it can be done
with efficiency.

The expense statements should not be mixed up with the income reports. The analy-
sis of revenue can be better accomplished by publishing in the reports and tables
many of the details which are now omitted. The importance of an income statement,
with the fullest possible analysis of the sources of revenue, to those operating these
institutions, is recognized, but it should not be confused with other things. This
combining of income and expense statements is done in such a w ay at times as to

62 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

be positively misleading, without, of course, any desire to produce this effect being
present.

As a general rule, I believe it will be found inexpedient to have any financial
transactions between departments, or between individuals in a department, or between
a department and an interest outside the institution, without having such trans-
actions conducted under the instructions of the treasurer or other financial authority.
I believe such a rule is not now generally observed. For instance, I found one man
carried on the roll of Columbia University as a teacher, and reported to the Founda-
tion as having duties, but as receiving no salary. He is taking "half the duties" of one
of the other members of the staff, because the latter is devoting much of his time to
commercial experimentations. For this he is paid directly by the man he is relieving
one-half the salary the latter receives. The authorities are fully aware of the arrange-
ment, of course. But it is of a class of "understandings" which are considered dan-
gerous in business.

Everybody interviewed claimed that the frequent publication of the names of
donors was profitable. The special value of large type, in printing these names, used by
Harvard was pointed out. If this is true, there would appear to be many improve-
ments that might be brought about in presenting the matters in connection with
these funds in a way more intelligible to the ordinary reader of college reports, and
therefore in a way better designed to encourage further donations.

There is the greatest difference in the matter of computing the income on trust
funds. At Harvard, for instance, broadly speaking, all moneys given the institution
for any purpose are invested according to the best light at the time the investment
is made. No effort is made to keep this particular investment separate from the
others. The amount of it, of course, is recorded, and at the end of each year the in-
come on it is figured at the average interest on all invested funds. If this income is
not all used, the amount of the principal is increased by the amount of the surplus.
This would appear to be one good method of handlinga large number of separate funds.

At Princeton University every effort is made to keep every gift and bequest ab-
solutely separate from every other. Thus, if A gives $1000, the interest on which is
to be used for botanical research, a bond may be bought for $995. The interest on
this bond will each year be used for the purpose mentioned. The remaining five dol-
lars will be deposited in a separate account in bank, and twice a year interest will
be computed on it, not at any general rate for all similar funds, bul at the partic-
ular rate obtaining on the account where deposited. This interest thus being added
to the five dollars twice a year will be allowed to accumulate until the amount in
hand is enough to buy a share of stock or some other separate asset. Under no cir-
cumstances are two or more funds pooled and their joint interest divided in propor-
tion to their respective interests. Between these two extremes in method there are
doubtless many others. Surely this is a matter where there should be some standard
practice which all could follow to advantage.

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 63

Any plan adopted must necessarily start in with the assumption that the wishes
of a testator will in every case be absolutely respected. But it seems likely, if a com-
mon sense plan were adopted and generally known, that those giving money would as
a rule prefer to give it so that it could be handled as other funds are handled rather
than on some exceptional basis.

Nearly all college financial reports give too many details and too little informa-
tion. For instance, the reports of all the state institutions practically list the indi-
vidual vouchers. This may have a value in preventing suspicion of corruption, but
unless amplified by further statements showing the operations of the university in
larger amounts, it has little accounting value. Perhaps the weakest point in these
financial publications is that the makers of them seem to think that the publication
of a large number of details taken off the books makes up for the lack of those larger
statements such as one finds, for instance, in the reports of railroad companies.
There are many classes of entries which must have a place in bookkeeping, but which
have no proper place in financial statements. They not only do not elucidate the
tables and reports ; they have positively a bad effect in that they make it, as in the
Treasurer's Report of Harvard University, almost impossible to understand any-
thing w^ithout a more intimate knowledge of local conditions, which it should not
be necessary to have in order to interpret annual reports.

There are a number of matters connected with accounting which could be stand-
ardized by some association of educational institutions better than by the individual
colleges themselves. The viewpoint and conditions at any one college as to some
matters are necessarily too limited to make it possible to frame a procedure under
which all can act. In the matter of the valuation of lands for the purposes of the
balance sheet, Princeton might adopt what would seem to be an excellent plan for her,
but it would have no significance for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Yet
if one is to be able to compare their balance sheets intelligently, the rule under
which each should work should be broad enough to include both. I think that the
absence of such a standardized practice is one of the reasons why these institutions
have avoided balance sheets.

Again, each school defines " repairs" and " construction " according to its own light,
and the definition is largely an accident. This is a vital matter because on this defi-
nition depends whether a given expenditure shall be considered as adding to the
current expenses of a given year, or whether it shall increase the monetary value of
the plant. A good rule seems to be : " Money paid out should not be reckoned as
an asset. If paid for property that is on hand, the property is an asset. If expended
in a way that has enhanced the value of the general assets, it is included in the gen-
eral valuation. If so expended as to have brought no property and no enhancement
of that on hand, then it is a loss, and should not be counted as an asset" (79 Iowa
Reports, 678).

Partly on account of collateral considerations, I think it will pay the universities to

64 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

carry their buildings and grounds on balance sheets at their "true values" as nearly
as these can be determined. It is necessary to set this value on most buildings for
insurance purposes. It will probably not be found necessary to change these valua-
tions more often than, say, once every five years. In the meantime, only specific charges
for new constructions would be made. If the grounds and buildings are so carried, the
methods of valuation and the periods for revaluation should be definitely determined
and not left to chance.

In the early days of accounting its function was largely " that of keeping account
of claims and property in order to secure the concern against the loss which might
arise from forgetfulness, carelessness or dishonesty. This phase of accounting attains
its acme in governmental accounting, where the essential thing is to insure the proper
handling of vast sums."^ And this is the function of accounting which up to the pres-
ent has almost exclusively interested our college accountants. But in the industrial
world this has long since become the least important function of accounting. The
real essence of accounting is found in its ability to give a correct and complete ex-
hibit of the financial status of the concern at any given moment of time by means
of a proper balance sheet; and secondly, a showing of results obtained during any
given period of time by means of (1) income, (2) receipts and expenditures, and (3) cost
statements. The colleges are only beginning to develop this function of accounting.

^Modern Accounting, by H. R. Harfleld, Appleton, 1909.

PHYSICS DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION

In the physics department, as I suppose in all other departments, there are ques-
tions of administration which are peculiar to it. In the handlinf; of apparatus, for
instance, there is the largest opportunity for waste. Some universities seem, more or
less unconsciously perhaps, to hold apparatus long after it has ceased to have any
pedagogical or research value. It is a constant source of expense, both in taking up
room and in requiring a certain amount of care. The proper policy here would seem
to be so different from the current practice as to be out of the question until the va-
rious laboratories have passed through a period in which they will have at least
made the attempt to have proper storerooms and house their apparatus in such a way
that it lends itself to easy inventory and proper maintenance.

As some of the functions now exercised by individual departments are taken over
by the university management, it is possible that the museums and the maintenance
of apparatus will come under one head. If, as seems likely, more attention is going
to be paid to the care of such apparatus, some central management is going to be
necessary; and I should think that the professors would welcome it. The idea that
nobody but a professor of physics can inventory a piece of physical apparatus, or that
nobody but a specially trained physics laboratory attendant can dust a microscope or
oil a tuning-fork will then be dispelled. In some places a great deal of time seems to
be lost in the matter of mixing apparatus used for lecture pui'poses and for labora-
tory work. I think this is more apt to occur in those institutions where undergradu-
ates are put on research work of their own, i.e., where individual students require
apparatus not used by other men. It would seem to be a good practice to have one
set of apparatus for lectures and another for undergraduate laboratory work, and
that it all should be kept in a high state of repair, and be disposed of as soon as it
becomes obsolete. There is a theory that no apparatus should ever be thrown away,
that it always has a "junk value" for rigging up new machines, etc. I believe there
is nothing in industrial practice that would warrant this assumption.

In some places it seems to be considered necessary to have an apparatus room
immediately adjacent to the lecture room where the apparatus is generally used. I
would question this practice, because the apparatus is as a rule used only once a
year, and the number of pieces required for any one lecture is small. It would seem
better to carry this up a couple of flights, in the absence of an elevator, rather than
to make thousands of students during the course of a year walk these extra flights
in order to get to a recitation room.

In almost every place I visited there was more or less expensive apparatus bought for
research work without prospect of further use at the university where it was located.
If some such organization as the Carnegie Institution or the American Physical So-
ciety could keep an inventory of the larger items of physics apparatus at the dif-
ferent universities, it might result in some borrowing, and in students of one uni-

66 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

versity going to another to carry on some particular piece of research. I saw one
machine tool, for instance, that cost $2000, which I was informed would not be
used again at the university where it was stored because the particular piece of
research for which it had been bought was concluded.

It has already been suggested that a further development may be expected in the
matter of laboratory attendance. Along just what lines this development will take
place it is impossible to say, but there is no doubt that many expensive, highly com-
petent men are now spending too much of their time doing things that might be
done for them (perhaps even better than by themselves) by low-priced laboratory
assistants.

Too much importance cannot be given, I think, to the order which obtained
throughout the laboratory at the University of Toronto. I never have seen an indus-
trial or commercial plant of any kind maintained in as good style. The floors were
clear, and in every instance the tables showed that the man who had last worked at
them had made the condition in which he left them a matter of some thought. The
apparatus, as it was placed in the cabinets, was put away in such a manner in the
assigned places that any one familiar with the system could locate it. Especially I
want to call attention to the condition of the research rooms in this laboratory. At
every other place they were not conducted in such a way as to give the largest mea-
sure of efficiency, judged from an industrial standpoint. There is a tradition that
Rayleigh, Kelvin, and some other distinguished physicists do good work under con-
ditions of the utmost disorder; and without, of course, attempting to imitate them,
there seemed to be a feeling that good work was not inconsistent with disorder. The
research rooms at the University of Toronto could not have been kept in better
order, and an inquiry made at every place I went indicated that the scientific results
of the work done in this laboratory were of a superior character.

The matter of operating the library in the physics building again shows the wid-
est difference in practice. At two places the library of the physics department had
no connection with the library of the university. At another there was a separate
physics library maintained, which was supplemented from time to time by borrow-
ings from the central library; and at another the physics library was made up alto-
gether of books sent over from the central library. These were replaced from time to
time as other books were obtained, or as the courses being taught seemed to make
other books desirable.

In the matter of so-called inbreeding, again, there was the widest divergence.
Most of the colleges visited, however, seemed not only to desire to have men from
other schools, but actually had them. Among eight institutions perhaps only one,
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, might be subjected to criticism for the
fact that of seventeen teachers in the department of physics all had been undergradu-
ates at the institution at which they taught. Statistics in regard to this matter will
be found on Table 2, lower section.

PHYSICS DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION 67

It was interesting to note the ideas of the different schools as to what they thought
physics did for the students. Of course in this incjuiry we had in mind only those stu-
dents who took physics simply as a part of their general education, without any idea
either of teaching physics or of doing research work. No two colleges gave the same
reason. There is hardly any doubt that the value of physics as a cultural study is
not generally appreciated by the men who are teaching physics. In other words,
they are teaching physics for physics' sake and not because of any broad application
which physics may have to the life of the student. Perhaps the best reason that I
obtained was that it was valuable in any broad scheme of education to have one science
taught as an illustration of the inductive method of modern science, and that as physics
was less dependent upon the gathei'ing of data, it afforded the best example of this.
Another able teacher said that he considered for the average student the chief im-
portance of physics lay in the value which attached to the precision required in mak-
ing measurements. Another thought that it taught pupils to observe all the phe-
nomena connected with a given event. Another thought that it absolutely failed in
producing this result. Still another frankly admitted that he had never given the
matter any special thought.

Physics is undoubtedly a specialty, and I was interested to see what effort was being
made to give it a broadening value. Here, too, I found all the extremes, from one
institution where the professor felt that unless a person was interested in physics he did
not care to make him so, to another where constant efforts w^ere being made not only
to emphasize the broad cultural value of physics to the student taking the course, but
to make the entire university feel that the department of physics was one of the
most interesting places on the campus, and one that must be safeguarded at all haz-
ards. In carrying out this policy at the University of Toronto, there were lectures
given during the year on such broad questions as measurements, energy, the theory
of matter, etc., the entire university being invited to attend. The subjects were so
treated, of course, that one not especially familiar with physics could comprehend
them. It might give an erroneous idea of this work if I failed to add that there was
not an excess of this kind of lecturing. It was not done with any idea of making
physics easy, but to give physics a standing as a cultural study which it would
not otherwise have possessed. It would seem that if in other branches this same
effort were made to combine with the highly specialized treatment the expression
of a broad application, learning as such would be much better understood in the
community.

STUDENT ADMINISTRATION

On a recent visit to Columbia University, not connected with this investigation, the
writer saw the students gathering for a mid-day class, and was impressed with the
fact that almost without exception they walked leisurely toward the building in which
the class was to be held, seemed to have time for campus talks with those they met,
and in nearly every case were smoking cigarettes. Having occasion, a few moments
later, to enter this building, he discovered this class holding a debate under almost
riotous conditions. The debate was one I had frequently participated in fifteen years
before when at college, and it was over the question as to whether it was etiquette
to wait five or fifteen minutes for a tardy professor. This class finally waited about
fifteen minutes and then dismissed themselves without hearing from the professor.
To show that this is generally a mooted question, the dean of another university
excused himself for terminating an interview rather hastily, because, he said, his stu-
dents felt that a college professor should be allowed only a short margin in meeting
his classes. The point is that there should be a definite rule, understood both by the
teaching staff and the students, as to the grace to be allowed. It is difficult to see
why even this should be necessary. The moral effect on the student would be better
if a professor who has a class at ten o'clock should dismiss his previous class a few
moments before the close of the period, in order to permit him to be punctually at
his post. It seems to the writer that a great deal will have to be done in bringing
college boys to a realization of the necessity for a more intensive application to their
work during that part of the college day when they are supposed to be engaged in
serious pursuits.

In this connection may be cited the question of absences. At one institution vis-
ited, the students are allowed thirty so-called "cuts" a term, i.e., absences for which
they are not required to give any excuse. This is the preparation afforded for a life
which begins the moment college closes, where one "cut" brings a serious reprimand,
and two will probably lose a position. At thirty cuts a term, the student would be
entitled to two hundred and forty in a four-year course. The fact is that in many
instances the cuts allowed are unnecessary. The dean of one college told me that
students did not settle down to their best work until their cuts were all used up. As
long as they had these cuts ahead of them, they seemed disconcerted. In almost every
instance every cut allowed was used. The writer had a companionable classmate who,
simply for the interest of making the experiment, went through a college course with-
out absences of any kind. In any study of efficiency this question of absences certainly
will have a place.

Just as I have recommended that a special study must be made of increasing the
individual efficiency of the teachers, I feel that more effort must be put into the study
of the efficiency of the undergraduate. At the University of Toronto the professor
in charge of the physics course told me that he was making a special effort to have

STUDENT ADMINISTRATION 69

the student realize that an hour of his (the student's) time was a valuable thing. He
made it possible for the student to begin his exercises the minute that the hour struck ;
he had everything done for liini in the way of laboratory attendance to expedite his
work; he had provided an adding machine to perform computations not possible on
the slide-rule, and encouraged every student to use both these mechanisms whenever
possible. He looked upon the admirable ventilation of his building as part of a gen-
eral plan for promoting the efficiency of the student. He told me tiiat if at a lecture
the students began to get drowsy, he gave them a little more air than the rules called
for and in this way kept them up to their best efficiency. With the idea of making
the students' time as profitable as possible, this professor makes a point of the most
extensive preparations for lectures. If by more laboratory attendants he can get the
apparatus that is used for one experiment more quickly out of the way and another
in its place, or if by having four or five people work on the preparation for the lec-
ture he can accomplish a similar result, he considers it money well spent. Considering
the great expense to which the universities are put in maintaining especially the
undergraduate physics lecture courses, and the large number of students who attend
them, it would appear to be good economy to make any outlay for attendance whereby
a ten or twenty-five per cent gain can be accomplished in the efficiency with which
the lecture hour is used. At some places visited, I am sure that the importance of
the fullest preparation for lectures is not appreciated. The tendency, however, is un-
doubtedly in the right direction. More time is constantly being given to the proper
preparation for lectures.

At Columbia University they have adopted the plan of trying to emphasize the
importance of dealing with each student individually as to his progress, both mental
and moral, rather than of dealing with the students in masses. On two occasions when
I was interviewing full professors, students apparently in one of the earlier under-
graduate years entered the room. In each case the professor rose from his seat and
greeted the student in such a manner as to indicate the heartiest interest in his visit.
The effect on the student was marked. I was afterward told that this procedure was
a part of a definite policy in this institution, although I did not know this at the
time the interviews took place.

At the last college which I visited, almost the opposite of this policy was in opera-
tion. Every time the students were mentioned there were evidences that the teachers
had in mind the students' scholarly inferiority and waywardness. The difference in
these two attitudes was as concrete as anything I encountered.

At Harvard the commons was unofficially reported to me as running at a net loss of
$100 a day. And at this rate of loss the service was not considei'ed satisfactory nor
was it popular with the students. Steps were being taken to effect an improvement.
At Haverford the authorities were purposely spending more for board than they
charged and they expected to continue to do so. They felt that the similarity to a
well-ordered home which was their endeavor at the commons was one of the most power-

70 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

ful influences for good in the college. They had found after trial that the students
would not pay a higher rate. Under a higher rate they gradually drifted to private
boarding-houses where neither the service, food nor social influences were as good. At
one of the large institutions visited they told me that the next money which was
received would be spent on building up a college commons where the service and sur-
rounding conditions would be made what a college dining-hall should be without
any effort at covering cost in the charges.

These questions of student administration are among the large and practical prob-
lems which face college educators. While it is true that the demand for college-bred
men is widening, — and at a rate which in the writer's opinion is underestimated by
the college world, — it is also true that there is a general feeling among employers
that it is wiser to employ a college graduate who has been at work for some one else
for some time. It seems to take the average college graduate about two years to adapt
himself to business conditions, and most employers seem willing to let some one else
pay his wages during this period. Some of the colleges are already trying to surround
the student with conditions more like those he will encounter when he starts on his
life's work.

No one can be more conscious than the writer of the magnitude of the difficulties and
problems confronting the college world, nor more appreciative of the great measure
of success with which they have been met. The task of pointing out in detail the
many strong points of present conditions would have been far more grateful to one
who is entirely in sympathy with the spiritual significance of university life than the
study which as an engineer he has been asked to undertake.

Unless my suggestions shall tend to assist those conducting these institutions and
their students towards the attainment of their own highest ideals in scholarship,
character development and culture, this study will fall short of the purpose for which
it was undertaken, for as Dr. Eliot has said :

"Education for efficiency must not be materialistic, prosaic or utilitarian; it must
be idealistic, humane and passionate, or it will not win its goal."

PART 2

INTRODUCTION TO TABLES

ALL the important figures used in the following tables have either the printed
. authority or verbal approval of the respective institutions. In the smaller de-
tails, however, I have not hesitated to make approximations and to pro-rate in ac-
cordance with what seemed to me to be the facts. Such assumptions at times have
been made only after the most painstaking inquiries. In order to reach the result we
are seeking it was necessary, however, to make frequently such approximations and
pro-ratings. Where, because of the accounting methods used at any one institution,
the number of such approximations and pro-ratings seemed to threaten the accuracy
of the conclusions, such conclusions were submitted to the institution concerned and
approved by them. Throughout Part 2 I have had in mind first of all to suggest
a method by which the colleges could introduce a cost factor into their system of
accounting. Simply to have suggested such a method would not have been sufficient.
So I have tried to develop out of the figures gathered a model set of reports which
will illustrate completely the application of the method. The whole argument of
Part 2 leads up to the dummy reports given on Tables 9 and 10. These tables indi-
cate the general character of the returns which will be obtained should the system
here advocated be adopted.

This statement is made to call attention to the difference between the tables here
printed and those which ordinarily would be the result of the audit of the books of
eight industrial concerns. In many cases the accounting authorities of the univer-
sities answered my questions in regard to financial administration with a good deal
of reluctance. This latter was not because they objected to giving the information,
but because they hesitated to send any information for possible publication which
did not come "off the books." In every such case my informant was assured that I
intended personally to accept the responsibility for statements made in this report.

The effort has been to make the method of arriving at any given figure as clear
as is consistent with the necessary limitations of the report. If all the preliminary
figuring had been included in the report itself, or its appendices, it would not only
have made it too bulky, but would have required a much longer time for its prepa-
ration. The informal data sheets have been retained, and it will be possible at any
time to give any one interested further information as to the development of any
figure shown in the tables. To get even approximately the broad figures desired, it
was necessary to resort to a good many expedients not recognized by accountants.
Thus, the class-room records {i.e., the statements as to the quantity of teaching done)
are those for the year 1908-09, while the expenses are those for 1907-08, except
in the matter of salaries, which are taken for 1908—09.

There is nothing in these tables which indicates the qualitative value of the teaching
at the various institutions. The tables are almost entirely quantitative in their signi-
ficance. On pages 4 and 5 of the introduction a method of gauging quality is suggested.

74 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 1

This table includes the various valuations upon which plant interest charges are
worked out. The difficulties of ascertaining some of these valuations were explained
in Part 1 ; and in some cases the valuations, especially the larger figures, must be
considered as the roughest approximations. Here, as elsewhere, the figures may have
little value as applied to individual institutions; whereas they may have considerable
value for purposes of comparison. Thus, $12,000,000 put down as the whole value
of the Harvard plant is only an "intelligent guess." The $6,000,000 assigned to
Princeton has probably a larger accounting value. As used here, these figures only
indicate that the Princeton plant is worth nearly fifty per cent of the Harvard plant;
and this probably is not far from the facts. The same figures on the value of the other
plants will give those who have not seen them some sort of an idea of their size.
On lines eight and nine are given the valuations of lands and buildings held for
joint use, and on lines ten and eleven the value of the building in which physics is
chiefly taught and the land on which this building stands. These values are broken
up in such a way as to indicate what a large part the land item plays. For instance,
the land held for joint use at Haverford is worth four times the value of the build-
ings, and for the most part is land that is so located as to be quickly marketable. I
imagine it is held in large measure for investment purposes. It will be noted that
the half million dollar physics building at Princeton stands on land that would be
worth about seventy-five hundred dollars if located off* the campus, but within a
stone-throw of where it is, while the less up-to-date building of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology stands on land assessed at nearly a million dollars.^

On lines fourteen, fifteen, sixteen and seventeen, I have given an idea of the way in
which Harvard's one hundred thousand dollar physics equipment (apparatus, etc.) is
divided up according to its use. These figures were furnished by Professor Trowbridge.
The other institutions were unable to give these data without an unwarranted amount
of trouble. I have inserted Harvard's figures because they will furnish a general idea
on this important point.

While the figures given on line nineteen are all taken from printed reports, they are
practically valueless on account of the difference in accounting methods and a dif-
ference in interpreting "administration expenses" at the different schools. Thus Har-
vard's administration expenses appear lower than they really are. Harvard has a crude
method of charging off a part of such expenses against the departments. This would
be all right of course if it were done in such a way as to make it possible to know
what the total administration expenses are. On the other hand Columbia does not
appear to charge enough to its departments. This makes its administration expenses

*The conditions under which this land is held are quite unusual. An act of the Massachusetts legislature allows
the Institute to build on only one-third of this property. Therefore the minimum value of the land chargeable to
this building is three times its ground area multiplied by the value per square foot. From figures furnished by the
Institute authorities, this becomes 14,040 square feet (area of building) x 3 x $23 (value per square foot listed on
city books) = $968,760. In the table following, this is called $900,000.

TABLES 76

appear heavier than they really are. The Wisconsin and Massachusetts Institute of
Technology attitude seems more nearly right.

The factor given on line twenty-one is the relation between physics- teaching sal-
aries and the total teaching salaries at the institution. This is the figure that I have
used in pro-rating overliead expenses in order to arrive at the share which should be
assigned to physics. The amount given on line twenty as the total of instructional
salaries at Harvard has been questioned, but the figure is one furnished me by the
accounting authorities at Harvard. If any change should be made, it would un-
doubtedly be in the direction of increasing it. This factor in a way illustrates the re-
lative degree of importance assigned to physics at the various institutions; and these
figures, with one or two exceptions, reflect the attitude towards physics which I found
at the various institutions. Both at Toronto and Princeton, physics was apparently
a large factor in the life of the institution. At Haverford I was informed that physics,
in common with all sciences, had only recently been encouraged; and at Wisconsin
physics was overshadowed by many other branches. I believe this factor, applied to
the different departments of instruction, will be very useful in maintaining the rela-
tive importance of each such department which the board of trustees desires it to
maintain. It should be noted that the " absolute "" size of the department of physics
at two institutions might be the same, while the size of each as compared with the
whole institution could be widely different.

Table 1

VALUATIONS, EXPENDITURES, ETC.

INSTITUTION

Columbia

Harvard

Haverford

Mass.
Institute of
Technology

Princeton

Toronto

Williams

Wisconsin

1

Founded

1754

1636

1830

1865

1746

1843

1785

1848

2

Number of terms in year

2

2

4

2

2

2

2

2

3

Number of weeks between
opening' and closing

37

39

38

36

38

36

40

4

Number of weeks of teaching

30

30

31

30

27

33

33

5

Value of whole plant

11,250,000.00

12,000,000.00

1,500,000.00

3,500,000.00

6,000,000.00

4,500,000.00

2,000,000.00

5,000,000.00

6

Total number students in all
departments

3057

3881

160

1462

1314

487

3903

7

Value of those parts of plant
held for joint use of all the de-
partments ^

4,500,000.00

2,500,000.00

750,000.00

300,000.00

1,600,000.00

750,000.00

1,000,000.00

1,500,000.00

8

Value of lands held for joint
use

2,000,000.00

1,000,000.00

600,000.00

200,000.00

100,000.00

250,000.00

80,000.00

500,000.00

9

Value of buildings and equip-
ment held for joint use

2,500,000.00

1,500,000.00

150,000.00

100,000.00

1,500,000.00

500,000.00

920,000.00

1,000,000.00

10

Value of building in which
physics is chiefly taught

274,113.67

120,000.00

15.000.00

190,000.00

540,000.00

355,000.00

60,000.00

250,000.00

11

Value of land on which phys-
ics building stands

170,000.00

75,000.00

3,000.00

900,000.00

7,500.00

53,120.00

1,000.00

115,776.00

12

Value of land and building ac-
tually used for physics

355,290.00

195,000.00

9,000.00

671,160.00

511,000.00

408,120.00

57,706.00

146,310.00

13

Value of physics equipment

40,000.00

100,000.00

1.100.00

110,000.00

45,000.00

120,000.00

15,000.00

45,000.00

14

Value of part used for lectures

10,000.00

15

Value of part used for labora-
tory

90,000.00

16

Value of part used in under-
graduate laboratories

15,000.00

17

Value of part used in research

75,000.00

18

Total annual expenditures in
all departments

1,330,156.36

1,880,525.27

106,203.49

517,762.89

588,572.85

613,344.55

213,000.00

1,091,135.37

19

Administrative expenses for
institution as a whole

258,456.12

123,154.39

28,252.33

67,936.85

172,008.99

143,294.00

66.151.02

146,516.93

20

Total instructional salaries

541,702.00

577,760.00

45,800.00

313,077.47

339,150.00

262,380.04

96.000.00

554,119.08

21

Physics instructional snlnries

.065

.053

.044

.066

.072

.072

.036

.037

Total instructional salaries

22

23

24

25

This does not include dormitories and other productive property.

TABLES 77

TABLE 2

The upper section of this table shows the number of teachers at each of the insti-
tutions visited and how they are divided between the different grades.

The lower section gives figures in regard to the much debated cjuestion of inbreed-
ing. It affords a splendid illustration of the value of figures as an index to actual
conditions. At several places Harvard was held up to me as a "horrible example""
of what was generally conceded to be high-class inbreeding. The figures show that
Harvard stands about midway, and probably occupies the safest position of all in
this matter.

The table also shows that of the seventeen physics teachers at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology all are its own graduates. The University of Toronto almost
equals this record, with 91 per cent of its teachers alumni of the institution.

It would seem that either an extremely high percentage or an extremely low per-
centage of teachers drawn from the school at which they teach is bad practice.
There was one marked instance (perhaps two) where the department of physics
seemed to lack solidarity on account of the large number of teachers drawn from
other institutions. There was enthusiasm for physics, but little for the institution
or the physics department.

Of course this matter is one very difficult to reduce to figures, but it certainly
would seem to be advisable to have some percentage of inbreeding which, other
things being equal, would be considered about right. Any additions to a staff which
caused the percentage to rise above this danger line would be more apt to be made
advisedly.

Table 2

DATA CONCERNING INBREEDING OF TEACHERS OF PHYSICS

INSTITUTION

Columbia

Harvard

Haverford

Mass.

Institute

Tech.

Princeton

Toronto

Williams

Wisconsin

26

Total Number of Teachers in Physics Staff
These are divided by grade as follows:

17

12

1

17

15

11

2

22

97

27

Professors

4

4

2

5

2

1

2

20

28

Associate Professors

2

1

3

29

Assistant Professors

2

2

3

3

10

30

Adjunct Professors

3

3

31

Instructors

3

2

1

5

2

1

5

19

32

Demonstrators

3

3

33

Tutors

1

1

34

Assistants

6

3

6

9

24

35

Assistant Demonstrators

3

3

36

Class Assistants

2

2

37

Fellows

1

4

1

1

7

38

Scholars

1

1

2

39

Inbreeding

40

Number of Members of Physics Staff without
Training elsewhere

1

5

12

2

9

5

41

Number of Members of Physics Staff without
Undergraduate Training elsewhere

4

7

1

17

4

10

5

42

Number of Members of Physics Staff without
Graduate Training elsewhere

6

8

12

9

7

16

43

Number of Members of Physics Staff with both
Graduate and Undergraduate Training else-
where

7

3

4

2

4

44

.

45

Number of Different Schools represented by
Degrees

19

10

1

4

15

4

4

19

46

47

Percentage Entirely Home Bred

6

39

70

13

64

23

48

Without Undergraduate Training elsewhere

23

58

100

27

91

23

49

Without Graduate Training elsewhere

35

67

100

70

60

33

73

50

With Graduate and Undergraduate Training
elsewhere

41

23

27

100

18

TABLES 79

TABLE 3

The salary question has been so thoroughly covered by the Carnegie Foundation
that further figures are really unnecessary. It occurred to me, however, that the synop-
sis given on this table would be interesting in connection with other parts of the
report. Special attention is called to the totals, by institution and by grade, given
at the bottom of the right-hand page. In order to reduce the number of grades, I have
taken the liberty of combining the adjunct professors found at Columbia with the
assistant professors; the demonstrators at Toronto with instructors; and the assistant
demonstrators with the assistants. So far as I could discern there were no differences
in salary or duties.

DATA CONCERNING SALARIES

Grade

Institution

Name

Salary *

Averages

Totals

By
Schools

By
Grade

By

Schools

By
Grade

Professors [20]

Columbia

No. 1

2

3

4

4,250

17,000

Harvard

5

6

7

8

5,250

21,000

Massachusetts Institute
of Technology

9

10

3,500

7,000

Toronto

11

12

3,150

6,300

Wisconsin

13

14

2,850

5,700

Princeton

15

16

17

18

19

3,300

16,500

Williams

20

2,500

3,800

2,500

76,000

Associate
Professors [3]

Massachusetts Institute
of Technology

21

22

1,900

3,800

Wisconsin

23

2,500

2,100

2,500

6,300

Assistant
Professors 113]
(Called Adjunct Pro-
fessors at Columbia)

Harvard

24

25

2,500

5,000

Massachusetts Institute
of Technology

26

27

1,600

3,200

Wisconsin

28

29

30

1,400

4,200

Princeton

31

32

33

2,000

6,000

Columbia

34

35

36

2,333

1,954

7,000

25,400

Instructors [22]

(Called

Demonstrators at

Toronto)

Columbia

37

38

39

1,833

5,500

Harvard

40

41

1,400

2,800

Haverford

42

1,800

1,800

Massachusetts Institute
of Technology

43

'

44

45

46

47

920

4,600

Wisconsin

48

49

50

51

52

960

4,800

William,s

53

1,000

1,000

Princeton

54

55

1,000

2,000

Toronto

56

57

58

1,566

1.236

4,700

27,200

* Individual salaries given in the original text of the Report are omitted.

Table 3

OF TEACHERS OF PHYSICS

Grade

Institution

Name

Salary *

Avei

ages

TotUs

By

fk-hdolx

By
frrnde

By By
Schools Grade

Tutor |||

Cnllunhin

No. r.!>

1.100

1,100

1,100

1,100

Assistants [27]

(.Called Assistant

Demonstrators at

Toronto)

Columbia

60

01

02

(53

04

05

500

3.000

Harvard

66

67

08

475

1.425

Massachusetts Institute
of Technology

(i!)

70

71

72

73

74

500

2,750

Wisconsin

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

411

3.700

Toronto

84

85

86

633

473

1,900

12,775

Class Assistants [2]

Toronto

87

88

225

225

450

450

Fellows [7]

Harvard

89

700

700

Princeton

90

91

92

93

600

2,400

Toronto

94

500

500

Wisconsin

95

400

571

400

4.000

Scholars [i]

Wisconsin

96

225

225

Princeton

97

300

202

300

525

TOTALS

By Institution

By Grade

Columbia

33.600.00

Professors

76,000.00

Harvard

30.925.00

Associate Professors

6.300.00

Haver ford

1.800.00

Assistant Professors

25.400.00

Massachusetts Technology

21,350.00

Instructors

27.200.00

Princeton

27,200.00

Assistants

12.775.00

Toronto

13.850.00

Fellows

4.000.00

Williams

3,500.00

Scholars

525.00

Wisconsin

21,525.00

Tutors. Lecturers and Class
Assistants

1.500.00

Total

153,750.00

Total

153,750.00

* Individual salaries given in the original text of the Kcport are omitted.

82 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 3a

This is a table of percentages, showing the relative amounts of money which are
paid to the different teaching grades. Elsewhere in the report I have shown that in
these eight departments of physics forty-five per cent of the whole expense connected
with teaching physics goes into instructional salaries, hence it is an item which should
receive considerable attention. This table shows that there is the greatest variety of
practice in the matter of the relative amounts of money which go to different grades.
For instance, at Harvard, eighty-four per cent of all instructional salaries in physics
goes to teachers above the instructor's grade; whereas at Toronto, less than thirty-
eight per cent only is paid to those above the instructor's grade. I cannot help but
feel that this low figure at Toronto is in large measure made possible by the begin-
nings which have been made in a functional system of management. The Harvard fig-
ure certainly bears out the oft-repeated statement that at this institution the lion's
share of the salaries goes to those who have been a long time in the service of the
institution.

«
<^:i

w
X
u
<

O

Q
<

O

X
o
<

c

H
Q

<1

CD

O
o

OS

ujswooffj^

00

o

C^
N

00

iH

iH

su4L>i;;rj|

t-

X

00

»4

X

OfUOUOX

00

00

w

e4

05

CO

5

H

Z

u:

o
a:

o

uopouuij

00

t-

c;

'^

Eli

H

u
•<

u

noojouyoax

z

Z

/o 9)nnis\ii

«

00

la

C4

CO

^

sfpsni{3vssnf\[

C

22

as

pU0/U3aDf{

o
o

o

o

iH

tH

Ix,

Li;

H

PJ-VCIJIVJI

00

o

00

05

la

CI

viqiuniOQ

1-1

C5
C4

13

o

o

C3

■*

SaaBJ3AV

C5

CO

C5

'f

I-l

t^

00

CO

CO

&

o

1)
•a

c4

s

O

T3

«i

C5

O

o

r3

4J

tl

3

O

Wl

_0J

B

g

V

u

Q

A

2

<0

m

«>

>

0

^

B

t|-4

e

a

o

•2

J5

1

ej

!.

cj

cd

CS>

dj

H

1

u

o

«

"m

'S

■B

^

>>

C

1

£

b.

2

'5

'5

0

S
1

a
>>

u

a

a

1

o

<2i
o

11,

IT

o:

^

o C

u

o

1

1 i

.2

B
1

o
3

c
S

a:

u

1

o

B

.2

1 -.2

<

1

u

<

a.

Jr.

4^

1

a

^

0

o

«

I.

u

Qh

11.

E-.

84 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 4

These figures are summaries of the individual reports made by the teachers falling
in the four principal grades of professor, assistant professor, insti-uctor, and assistant.
In the Appendix, Exhibit C, is given a sample of the report form and the instructions
under which it was filled out by these teachers. The reports themselves, as filled out by
the various teachers, have been filed with the Carnegie Foundation. In many instances,
these summaries are the joint product of the report as made out by the teacher and
information secured by the writer from other sources. It was absolutely necessary to
edit these reports on account of the different interpretation put on the instructions
by different men and the varying degree of care with which the reports were made
out. For the most part they have been checked up with the schedule of exercises
furnished by each department, and in this way many obvious errors corrected. In the
same way, many minor entries which do not materially affect the problem have been
omitted, in order to simplify it.

Relatively little importance should be attached to the total number of hours per
week reported, because in some instances the reports were apparently made out on
the theory that the teacher was continuously engaged between certain hours and that,
therefore, some data must necessarily be put down. The total number of hours re-
ported does mean something, especially where the figures for such a large number
of teachers can be averaged ; but the total number of hours reported has not, in my
opinion, nearly as much significance as have the figures which show how this time
so reported is divided up. It should be noted that the time reported refers only to the
time between eight a. m and six p. m. Many of the professors desired to make a report
on what they did with their time after six p. m., and others desired an opportunity to
show what they did with their time in the summer months — on research and in
preparation for the next school year. I did not feel that it would be profitable to con-
duct such an investigation. It did not seem to me to be desirable to go outside of
the hours between eight and six, which for the business and professional man is con-
sidered a " working day." For if we could not make such an investigation apply to
everybody, to have data of this kind about a few would not have added materially
to our information. It must be remembered, of course, that at most institutions the
teachers put in more or less time outside of the thirty teaching weeks; but if in-
struction is the main object of these institutions, the study of conditions during
the teaching weeks will always be of paramount importance.

The number in the brackets following the grade is the number of individuals of
that grade included in the returns. In interpreting these individual reports every ef-
fort was made to "favor" the record. This was only fair in view of the conscientious
manner in which the reports had been filled in.

A SUMMARY OF THE INDIVIDUAL REPORTS
OF THE TEACHERS OF PHYSICS

A SUMMARY OF THE INDIVIDUAL REPORTS

8 A.M.

MADE BY
AND 6 P.M.,

THE TEACHERS
FROM MONDAY

Grade

Professors [20]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Total Hours per Week reported

29

34

35

36

42

35

48

36

30

33

30

38

33

48

26

32

29

This Time is divided in three parts as follows:
Time spent with Students

11

11

17

9

11

6

15

11

10

23

12

16

12

14

10

16

20

Time spent on Research

15

5

15

18

10

10

10

4

4

13

2

10

—

Miscellaneous

18

8

13

12

13

19

21

15

20

10

14

18

8

34

14

6

9

The Time spent with Students is divided in four parts as follows:
Laboratory Exercises

6

2

9

9

8

5

4

8

4

_

-

_

1

Lectures

8

7

4

8

4

6

4

6

4

10

8

6

5

2

4

4

Recitations

1

5

1

1

6

4

4

9

Consultations

3

4

12

1

7

4

9

2

3

3

The Miscellaneous Ttme is divided as follows:
Preparation

4

7

5

9

17

20

1

9

1

14

9

6

30

4

5

2

Meetings

6

1

3

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

4

Colloquium

1

1

2

1

Administrative

8

4

3

12

12

6

5

6

4

4

3

Correcting Papers, etc.

It

Attending Lectures as Student

Study

3

2

Tutoring

Bookwriting

'

5

Assisting at Lectures

The Preparation Time is divided as follows:
For Lectures

4

7

5

9

17

20

1

9

1

14

9

6

30

4

6

2

For Recitations

For Laboratory

Table A
OF PHYSICS AS TO THE DISPOSITION OF THEIR TIME BETWEEN (continued on pages

TO SATURDAY INCLUSIVE '^'"^ '^^)

Grade

I'nn

KssoRs (continued)

Assistant Professors (13 ]

Instructors [22]

IS

19

20

.J
•<

h
0
H

0)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

<

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

:;.; 29

33

692

34.60

46

44

28

38

39

27

39

33

29

33

35

37

35

463

35.61

37

30

33

45

48

35

30

32

1-'

7

19

262

13.10

17

19

20

14

13

10

17

8

11

21

11

21

8

190

14.61

27

11

13

18

11

20

17

29

21

14

151

7.55

26

19

20

12

16

25

12

14

7

151

11.61

5

15

12

25

20

6

3

8

14

277

13.85

3

6

8

4

26

5

6

18

10

16

20

122

9.38

5

4

8

2

17

10

13

3

6

61

3.05

8

16

16

13

11

10

7

12

9

12

114

8.77

27

10

4

8

5

20

6

5

10

111

5.55

6

3

H

^

6

3

5

2

3

2

4

5

40

3.08

2

6

8

3

6

1

2

34

1.70

3

M

M

4

3

2

4

1

18

1.38

9

4

4

2

8

6

6

1

1

56

2.80

3

2

4

2

5

2

18

1.38

3

4

4

3

3

7

10

163

8.15

1

3

3

22

5

1

16

6

5

62

4.77

4

3

4

2

7

5

1

1

29

1.45

1

2

2

1

4

2

2

1

15

1.15

2

2

5

.25

1

1

1

1

4

.30

1

1

1

1

67

3.35

3

3

15

21

1.60

2

3

3

3

.15

3

3

1

1

6

3

2

2

5

.25

6

7

5

.25

15

15

1.15

3

7

10

163

8.15

1

3

3

22

5

1

3

6

5

49

3.77

4

1

3

2

3

5

13

13

1.00

2

1

4

A SUMMARY OF THE INDIVIDUAL

REPORTS MADE

8 A.M. AND 6

BY

P.M.

THE TEACHERS
, FROM MONDAY

Grade

Instructors (continued)

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

2
<

0
H

V

6 c

2? >- 3

^ 0) o

Total Hours per Week reported

35

24

32

41

36

23

47

23

36

28

39

33

32

35

754

34.27

This Time is divided in three parts as follows:
Time spent with Students

16

11

18

20

13

17

8

15

21

17

21

21

22

23

389

17.68

Time spent on Research

7

12

14

21

20

17

3

8

12

4

200

9.09

Miscellaneous

12

1

3

6

22

8

12

3

6

12

6

12

165

7.50

T/ie Time spent with Students is divided in four parts as follows:
Laboratory Exercises

13

6

6

14

20

16

17

16

13

19

214

9.73

Lectures

2

5

1

5

7

4

49

2.22 i

Recitations

3

6

8

14

13

13

1

4

2

97

4.41

Consultations

3

4

4

3

1

29

1.32

The Miscellaneous Time is dirnded as follows:
Preparation

12

1

10

5

2

8

4

6

73

3.32

Meetings

2

1

7

.32

Colloquium

1

2

2

1

10

.45

Administrative

2

7

.32

Correcting Papers, etc.

6

3

13

.59

Attending Lectures as Student

8

3

4

2

2

26

1.18

Study

6

10

29

1.32

Tutoring

Bookwriting

"

Assisting at Lectures

The Preparation Time is divided as follows:
For Lectures

6

1

10

4

4

43

1.95

For Recitations

1

1

.05

For Laboratory

6

5

1

8

2

29

1.32

OF

TO

PHYSICS AS TO THE DISPOSITION
SATURDAY INCLUSIVE

OF

THEIR

TIME

BETWEEN

Table 4

{concluded)

Gkauk

Assistants [i"!]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

2

32

41

35

31

29

3G

45

42

50

38

17

30

39

29

37

37

32

22

28

31

33

35

32

23

34

40

34

111 2

3377

6

8

13

11

13

13

12

20

17

18

3

7

26

15

15

16

12

15

14

14

15

16

10

14

323

11,96

14

23

10

18

10

35

23

21

31

10

26

9

11

5

14

5

5

9

9

5

5

4

302

11.19

12

10

25

8

1

9

8

7

8

12

10

22

2

11

12

6

2

11

14

12

8

7

29

25

16

287

10.62

12

9

13

12

12

20

17

18

3

7

18

15

15

16

12

15

14

14

15

16

10

14

297

11.00

5

4

1

2

1

8

21

.77

1

4

5

.19

8

6

4

2

2

5

6

18

2

5

5

2

2

4

6

6

3

3

20

19

7

135

6.00

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

14

.52

1

1

5

.19

5

5

.19

2

15

3

6

5

4

5

6

4

3

2

4

59

2.19

1

9

6

2

4

4

3

3

32

1.19

4

4

8

.29

3

3

.11

2

2

.07

4

10

1

6

2

1

24

.89

6

4

2

2

3

6

9

2

5

20

13

6

78

2.88

2

2

.07

6

2

9

5

2

2

4

6

6

3

3

6

1

55

2.05

90 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 5

Especial attention should be called to the time devoted to regular exercises. This
shows that the average professor of physics at the institutions visited spends less
than two hours a day on regular class-room, laboratory and lecture-hall exercises.
The same figure for the assistant professor is 2.40 ; instructor, 2.97; assistant, 2.14.
If the theory is correct that these institutions are operated for the purpose of teach-
ing, then an increase of an hour's work a day in the professorial grade would repre-
sent a great increase in efficiency. An analysis of the way in which the average pro-
fessor spends his time, as shown on this table and the preceding one, would seem to
indicate that such an increase is not only possible, but highly desirable.

It seems to me that a fifty per cent increase in the teaching time in the higher
grades can be brought about and still leave the teacher more time than he has now
for preparation. One of the things from which the teaching profession suffers most
is the small amount of time available for what is vital in preparation, i. f ., for close
study and reflection. Hour after hour is wasted on interruptions necessitated by lack
of functional management and to the carrying on of a great load of detail work of
which the teacher should be relieved. A teacher will continue to hold the attention
of students only as he is given time to grow himself in the knowledge of his subject
and of its application to life.

ANALYSIS OF THE DISPOSITION OF THE TIME
OF THE TEACHERS OF PHYSICS

AN ANALYSIS OF THE

DISPOSITION

OF

THE TIME

Grades*

Professors [20] '^

2
6

2
1

1

1

to

1

in

S

o
v

1

o

1

•1
1

o

cs
u

>

< 4)

4)0

h

Total Time per Day reported* in Hours and Decimals of Hours averaged

BY Institution and by Grade. Thus 6.09 i.s the average number of hours per

day reported by four full professors at Columbia. The general average 6.29

at end of line is for 20 full professors distributed among seven institutions

6.09

7.32

5.73

5.50

6.18

6.00

7.36

6.29

This total time is divided in four parts as follows :
Time spent with Students

2.18

2.04

3.00

2.33

2.55

3.46

2.33

2.40

-

Time spent on Research

1.59

2.18

1.71

.73

1.18

1.37

Time preparing for Lectures, Laboratory and Recitations

1.14

1.73

.91

.76

2.09

1.82

3.27

1.48

,

Miscellaneous

1.18

1.37

1.82

.70

.81

.72

.58

1.04

The Time spent with Students is divided in two parts as follows ;

Time devoted to Regular Exercises Class Room, Laboratory and
Lecture Hall coming at Stated Times*

1.28

1.63

1.82

1.99

2.37

3.27

2.09

1.87

Time devoted to Consultations with Students

.90

.41

1.18

.34

.18

.19

.24

.52

The Time devoted to Regular Exercises is divided in three parts as follows :
Laboratory Exercises*

.77

.82

.58

.73

1.09

.45

.55

Lectures

1.23

.64

.91

.76

1.64

1.82

1.00

1.01

-

Recitations*

.05

.22

.09

.65

.36

.64

.31

^The grades of Associate Professor [3], Tutor [l]. Class Assistants [2], Fellow
small numbers, all these grades together making about 14 per cent only of
salary these grades represent about 8 per cent.

^The numbers in brackets indicate the number of individuals included in tl

sm,

the te
leave

indS(
acher

rages

:holar
s inc

given

[2]ar
uded

e omi
in th

tted b
s stu

ecaus
ly. In

eof tl
poin

leii

to!

Table 5

OF THE TEACHERS OF PHYSICS, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Grades'

Assistant Professors [13]

Instructors [22]

Assistants [27]

i

1

1

1

•i

1

>

S 2

go

s
.s

i

1

1

1

00

1

o

1

s

i;

9i
O

1

1

2

>

— -o
£2
go

5.2

e

io
c
s

5

1

1

o

S

Ob

1

2

u

>

21

00

6.49

8.18

6.00

5.76

6.36

6.47

6.06

8.45

6.36

5.56

6.09

6.06

6.55

6.18

6.23

6.18

8.30

7.68

6.54

5.52

6.56

2.42

3.27

3.09

2.42

2.42

2.66

3.09

2.64

3.62

3.31

3.45

4.00

3.82

2.65

3.21

1.15

2.30

3.68

1.45

2.67

2.38

1.27

4.09

1.82

2.24

1.70

2.11

1.94

4.09

.90

1.20

1.82

.24

.55

2.11

1.65

3.33

4.54

1.82

.85

1.17

2.13

.66

.10

.54

.97

1.70

.87

.66

.82

.91

.48

.18

.97

.91

.36

.59

.55

.24

1.25

2.79

.73

.98

2.14

.72

.55

.13

.54

.84

.37

.90

.93

.57

.64

.85

1.27

1.06

.77

1.15

1.22

.93

1.45

.95

1.07

i.y;i

3.27

2.82

2.30

2.05

2.40

2.90

2.64

2.91

2.84

3.45

4.00

3.64

2.40

2.97

1.00

2.30

3.68

1.45

2.67

2.34

.43

.27

.12

.37

.26

.19

.71

.47

.18

.25

.23

.15

.03

1.27

2.18

2.64

1.15

1.27

1.59

1.63

1.27

1.45

1.64

3.00

2.91

3.64

.73

1.77

.64

2.24

3.35

1.45

2.67

2.18

.66

.82

.09

.61

.54

.56

.48

1.00

1.09

.07

.97

.22

.40

.06

d

.27

.09

.54

.24

.25

.79

.37

.37

1.13

.45

.12

1.45

.80

.36

.06

.33

.16

>r .sample report form and instructions, see Appendix, Exhibit C.

!(<;.■ rtpurcs cannot vary much from week to week. For the most part they have been checked with the schedule of exer-
s. 1 hey are subject to proof. They are practically independent of the personal equation.

94 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 5a

To get the figures in the first table, I have taken the average salary for a year for
each grade and divided by thirty teaching weeks. This gives the average salary per
teaching week for each grade. I have then divided up this weekly compensation in
proportion to the time spent on (1) teaching proper, (2) research, and (3) miscella-
neous, in accordance with the summary of the individual reports of the teachers.
This shows that, on the average, fifty dollars a week is paid to every professor for
doing miscellaneous things. A large part of this, but not half of it, goes into prepa-
ration for lectures. It would certainly seem that large improvement can be brought
about here through employing more assistants, who will relieve the higher grades
of much of the detail work which now consumes so large a part of their time. It is
absolutely necessary for those planning the work of a department to know exactly
what an hour of each worker's time is worth. There is no other way of utilizing all
the labor — high and low — to the best advantage.

It has been suggested that since, in many cases, these assistants are secured at
low salaries because of the opportunity to do research work, their salaries should
be considered as being paid exclusively for teaching and therefore charged to the
teaching account. This contention does not seem sound from an accounting stand-
point. These men receive no regular compensation from any other source for the
time they spend on research. They occupy quarters and use supplies owned by the
university, and in case apparatus is damaged the university makes good the loss.

In the second table, I have tried to give an idea of the value of a "productive"
hour for each grade. If a professor, engaged at an average salary of $3800 a year,
teaches thirty weeks in the year, and for every hour spent with students spends over
one and one-half hours on research and miscellaneous duties, it makes the cost of
an hour actually spent in the lecture room over ten dollars.

Table 5a
MONEY VALUE OF THE TIME OF TEACHERS OF PHYSICS

On the basis of the plu/sic.s departments visited,
teaching salaries represent 45 per cent of all ex-
penses. An understanding of the relations between
salanes paid different grades becomes imperative
in any study oj' ejficiency

Grade

Professor

Assist-int
Profes.sor

Instructor

Assistant

Money Value Weeks Time [Salary] averaged for Grade

126.66

65.13

41.20

15.77

TTiis is divided in three parts as follows: '
Money Value Time spent with Students

48.31

26.75

21.22

5.65

Money Value Time spent on Research

27.63

21.24

10.91

5.29

Money Value Time spent other than on Teaching or Re-
search

50.72

17.14

9.00

4.83

* The weekly compensation is divided up in accordance with the reports made by individual teachers. The large
amount of miscellaneous time in the professorial grade is especially noticeable.

Some such table as this would be useful in estimat-
ing the probable cost of a proposed course in the
matter of teaching salaries

Grade

Professor

Assistant
Professor

Instructor

Assistant

Average Salary per Annum

3800

1954

1236

473

Average Salary per Teaching Week

126.66

65.13

41.20

15.77

Average Salary per Hour as reported engaged

3.66

1.83

1.20

.47

Average Salary per Hour spent with Students

9.59

4.4G

233

1.32

96 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 6

Floor plans were made of the various rooms in which physics is taught at each of
the eight institutions visited. The floor space devoted to different kinds of depart-
mental work was then added together and the totals given in this table secured. In
the matter of rooms that were used by the physics department in common with other
departments, I assigned to physics that part of the floor space which was represented
by its use. It was not always possible to find out how many hours a week a given
room was used, but if physics used it ten hours I charged physics with half the ex-
pense of the room, if I found the physics department used rooms which it controlled
exclusively, of the same character, on an average of twenty hours a week.

Just as I have assumed that the colleges were operated for their teaching depart-
ments, I have assumed that a physical laboratory is operated for those parts where
teaching is actually done; that is, in the undergraduate and research laboratories, reci-
tation rooms and lecture halls. I have considered the expense of operating storerooms,
studies, appai'atus rooms, etc., as an overhead charge to be pro-rated over the net floor
space available for teaching purposes. A study of this table will show the greatest dif-
ference in the amount of the net floor space available for teaching purposes as com-
pared with the total floor space. Thus, at Princeton, the total floor space is 48,000
square feet, of which 28,000 are available for teaching purposes; while at Harvard the
total floor space is 29,000 square feet, of which 26,000 are available for teaching pur-
poses. Considering its cost this building at Harvard seems wonderfully efficient.

It is interesting to compare the relative standing of the several institutions in the
matter of the expense of operating and maintaining their buildings. Judged both
by the expense per student-hour and expense per square foot available for teaching
purposes, Princeton's building is the most expensively operated and Harvard's is the
most economically. There seems to be a general relation all the way through between
the results obtained by using these two methods; but it is difficult to say which is
going to be ultimately the best gauge of efficiency.

It seems only fair to say that the accounting methods at Harvard are such that
the figures which I have gathered in regard to the expense of any one part of their
work do not appear to be as trustworthy as are those gathered from the other institu-
tions. The totals are, without much doubt, correct; but there has been at times a
deal of uncertainty as to the proper disbursement for certain detail charges of which
the totals are made up. I was not in every case able to get satisfactory answers with-
out putting the accounting authorities to more trouble than was warranted. The
books are not designed to answer these questions. So long as the central accounting
authorities at Harvard know as little as they do about the details of the financial
operations of the individual departments, it will be well-nigh impossible to get costs
which are fully comparable with those secured at other institutions. These same gen-
eral conditions are present in greater or less degree at all colleges.

Table 6

DATA CONCERNING BUILDINGS, COST OF MAINTENANCE, ETC.

INSTITUTION

Columbia

Harvard

Haverford

Mass.

Institute

Tkcil

Princeton

Toronto

Williams

Wisconsin

51
52
53
54

Total Klooh .Spack i'.sed for Physics'
Tliis space Li divided asfollcnvs :

24,424

29.293

2,310

23.742

48.391

48.138

9.883

20,540

Part used for Undergraduate Laboratories

6,908

12,093

1.284

13.312

12.793

24,807

6,207

8.792

Part used for Recitation Rooms

4,189

2,136

Lecture room

used for
recti al ions

1.692

2,464

2.552

200

1.300

Part used for Lecture Rooms

1,782

3,502

576

3.198

6,920

5,616

1,320

2,000

55

Part used for Research Laboratories

6.396

8,636

225

1,056

6,214

6,175

270

4.341

56

Part used for Studies

1,292

667

1,458

2,082

3,042

345

842

57

Part used for Reading Rooms, Libraries, etc.

368

340

1.521

1.056

1.542

299

665

58

Part used for Shop

1,122

1.409

225

725

3,856

1.512

570

1,000

59

Part used for Apparatus Rooms

2,367

510

780

2,512

2,992

462

1,600

60

Part used for Bed Room

210

61

Part Vacant

10,494

62

Net Floor Space Available for Teaching Pur-
poses ^

19,275

26,367

2.085

19.258

28,391

39,050

7,997

16.433

63

Total Cost Maintaining and Operating Build-
ing
This cost is divided in two parts :

20,415.29

11,135.58

711.85

28.641.58

30.140.00

23.135.70

3,301.74

10.437.02

64

Interest [estimate] on Investment

14,211.60

7,800.00

360.00

22.846.40

20.440.00

16.324.60

2.308.24

5.800.00

65

Expense Maintaining and Operating Build-
ing

6,203.69

3,335.58

405.85

5.795.18

9.700.00

6.811.10

993.50

4.637.02

66

Average Cost per square foot of Floor Space
per year
This cost is divided in three parts :

1.05

.42

.37

1.49

1.06

.59

.41

.63

67

Average Cost per square foot Interest on
Land

.28

.11

.03

.94

.01

.05

.01

.11

68

Average Cost per square foot Interest on
Building

.45

.18

.14

.25

.71

.36

.28

.24

69

Average Cost per square foot Operating
Expenses

.32

.13

.20

.30

.34

.18

.12

.28

70

Maintenance and Operation of Bcilding Ex-
pense PER Student-Hour

.07

.05

.08

.07

.12

.08

.08

.06

71

72

73

74

75

* Based on exclusive use.

' Net floor space = sura of floor space shown opposite 5i-5ii-51-,'55 above. This is floor space used in computing expense.

98 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 7

In examining this table the main point to be considered is to bear in mind the dif-
ference between cost and expense as defined on the table itself. As it never had been
done, it occurred to me that it would be interesting to estimate the whole cost of
teaching physics. By "whole cost," I mean what would be considered cost in a manu-
facturing establishment, where dividends must be paid on the invested capital as well
as interest on borrowed money. The cost, therefore, as here used includes a nominal
interest at four per cent, not only on the buildings and equipment used for physics,
but on those buildings and that equipment which are used by physics students in
common with the students of the other departments.

Expense, as here used, includes the overhead charge for administration of the insti-
tution as a whole, as well as the various direct expenses which are connected with the
physics department. As a matter of fact, it is hardly possible that, for some time at
least, cost as here used will form a part of the accounting system of American schools
and colleges, but it is just as well to have cost in mind in any accounting system
that is devised. Efficient management is out of the question unless the administrator
has just as much respect for cost items as for expense items as here defined. In the
long run both must be met.

It will be interesting to have in mind the methods by which the various items were
apportioned as between research and teaching. The " Maintenance and Operation of
Building Expense'Vas pro-rated in the proportion of the amount of floor space avail-
able to that used for research. The " Equipment and Supplies Expense "" was appor-
tioned largely as the result of discussions with the heads of the various departments,
i. e., by finding out what part of the appropriation was used for research. The " Other
Salaries Expense" (paid to mechanicians and laboratory attendants) is pro-rated ac-
cording to the duties of those to whom the salaries are paid. The " Teaching Salary
Expense" is pro-rated by individual salaries and in accordance with the reports made
by the teachers, personally, as to the percentage of time devoted to research. The
interest on physical equipment is divided in proportion to the amount of equip-
ment used for research and that used for teaching purposes. This was also obtained
through personal interviews. The interest on land, building and fixtures is divided
between research and teaching in the proportion of the amount of physics-teaching
salaries assigned to research and that assigned to teaching proper. Administration
expense and the interest on the buildings and equipment used by the students of the
physics department in common with those of other departments are both pro-rated
in accordance with the relation which the physics-teaching salaries bear to the total
instructional salaries.

The totals on the extreme right of Table 7 show that approximately thirty per
cent of the cost of operating a physics department goes into research.

In figuring out the Toronto costs, no charge was made for the use of the rooms

TABLES 99

occupied by Professor Loudon and his assistant in University Hall. This would be
small at best; it would have been difficult to obtain, and the main physics building
is sufficiently large to house these sections if it were called on to do so. The costs as
figured out for Toronto are too low by just this amount. All the other expenses con-
nected with Professor Loudon's department of physical mathematics are, of course,
included.

The physics at the Univei*sity of Toronto presented in this report is that given
by the faculty of arts. A small amount of physics teaching is given by the faculty
of applied science and engineering. Neither this teaching nor its expense is included
as a part of this report. This implies that the total number of student-hours in
physics as given for the University of Toronto is too low by just the amount given
in the engineering building. The cost per student-hour, however, is right, because
while the physics teaching in the engineering building has not been added, neither
has its cost.

It was not possible in every case to make the bounds of what we considered the
physics department the same at each of the institutions. This will not affect the gen-
eral validity of the results, however, because where we excluded any branch we ex-
cluded the costs which accompanied it, and when we added a branch we added the
costs. In general the departments cover approximately the same field.

In preparing this statement of costs, I had some difficulty in deciding what to do
with the annual expenditures for equipment. Usually the appropriation is for "Equip-
ment and Supplies," and no difference is made as between purchases of supplies proper
and those things which add to the permanent value of the plant. At some institu-
tions the purchase of even expensive items of apparatus is handled as an expense.
As it was impossible for the institutions to give me even an approximate idea as to
how this "Equipment and Supplies" item was divided, I have considered this year's
purchases of equipment as supplies, and therefore as an expense, and figured interest
on the present value of apparatus purchased prior to this year and on hand. There
is of course no precedent for handling equipment purchases in this way, but it seemed
as good a compromise as could be an*ived at. It will have a tendency to make ex-
penses a little higher than they really are. But as this whole equipment item is one
that is very small, it makes no material difference in the general result.

AN ANALYSIS OF THE WHOLE COST OF TEACHING PHYSICS SHOWING

INSTITUTION

Columbia

Harvard

H

averford

Total

Re-
search

Teach-
ing

Total

Re-
search

Teach-
ing

ToUil

Re-
search

Teach-
ing

HE TOTAL COST OF PHYSICS. This cost includes not only all items of cur-
rent expense, but also nominal interest on the plant and equipment used. It
is " cost " in the manufacturing sense

90,438.11

27,520.88

62,917.23

70,883.84

36,925.49

33,958.35

5,422.95

840.79

4,582.16

he Total Cost is divided in two parts as follows :

Indirect Cost. This indirect cost is the physics department's share of those
overhead cost items which, being incurred by the institution as a whole,
must be apportioned to the teaching departments in proportion to the amount
of their teaching salaries

28,499.64

7,979.90

20,519.74

11,827.18

5,913.59

5,913.59

2,563.10

367.58

2,195.52

Direct Cost. This direct cost includes all those items of cost which can be
directly charged to the physics department without any apportioning

61,938.47

19,540.98

42,397.49

59,056.66

31,011.90

28,044.76

2,869.85

473.21

2,386.64

he Indirect Cost is divided in two parts as follows :

Interest. This is a nominal interest at 4 per cent estimated on the value of
the "unproductive" parts of the whole institution used by physics students
in common with those of other departments

11,700.00

3,276.00

8,424.00

5,300.00

2,650.00

2,650.00

1,320.00

188.57

1,131.43

Administration Expense. Physics share overhead expenses of the whole in-
stitution apportioned in proportion to the physics teaching salaries

16,799.64

4,703.90

12,095.74

6,527.18

3,263.59

3,263.59

1,243.10

179.01

1,064.09

he Direct Cost is divided in two parts as follows :

Interest. This is a nominal interest at 4 per cent on the estimated value of
the land, building and equipment used by physics exclusively

15,811.60

5,337.20

10,474.40

11,800.00

5,262.00

6,538.00

404.00

71.42

332.58

Direct Expense. Being all expense items directly chargeable to the physics
department

46,126.87

14,203.78

31,923.09

47,256.66

26,749.90

21,506.76

2,455.85

401.79

2,054.06

he Direct Interest is divided in two parts as follows :
On Land, Building and Fixtures

14,211.60

4,737.20

9,474.40

7,800.00

2,262.00

5,538.00

360.00

51.42

308.68

On Physical Equipment

1,600.00

600.00

1,000.00

4,000.00

3,000.00

1,000.00

44.00

20.00

24.00

-

he Direct Expense is divided in four parts as follows:
Physics Teaching Salary Expense

33,600.00

9,290.00

24,310.00

30,925.00

16,535.<)0

15,390.00

1,800.00

257.14

1,642.86

Other Salaries Expense such as mechanicians, laboratory attendants,
etc., but not including janitors and power plant employed

2,100.00

1,100.00

1,000.00

5,789.50

4,449.50

1,340.00

50.00

50.00

Equipment and Supplies Expense

4,223.18

1,723.18

2,500.00

7,206.58

4,706.58

2,500.00

200.00

100.00

100.00

Maintenance and Operation of Building Expense

6,203,69

2,090.60

4,113.09

3,335.68

1,068.82

2,276.76

405.85

44.65

361.20

I

Percentages of Whole Cost chargeable to research and to teaching proper

.304

.696

.521

.479

.155

.845

-

Percentages or Direct Expense chargeable to research and to teaching proper

.301

.699

.545

.455

.163

.837

Table

PORTIONS CHARGEABLE RESPECTIVELY TO RESEARCH AND TO TEACHING PROPER

INSTITUTION

Massachcsktts
Institute ok
Technolo(;v

Princeton

Toronto

Williams

Wisconsin

Totals

Total

Re-
search

Teach-
ins

Total

Re-
search

Teach-
ing

Totjil

Re-
search

Teacli-
ilif?

ToUil

Re-
search

Te-ich-
ing

Total

Re-
search

Teach-
ing

Grand
Total

Re-
search
Total

Teach

ing
Total

67,053.23

8,930.50

58,122.73

84,542.68

27,229.66

57,312.93

62,626.90

12,399.18

50,126.72

12,473.18

465.83

12,007.36

48,876.84

16,678.85

33,297.99

442,216.63

129,891.17

312,326.

5,275.83

738.61

4,537.22

16,992.68

6,287.25

10,706.33

12,477.17

1.372.49

11,104.68

3,821.44

76.43

3,745.01

7,820.00

2,111.40

6.708.60

89,276.94

24.847.25

64,429.

01,777.40

8,191.89

63,585.51

67,550.00

20,942.40

46,607.60

50,048.73

11,026.69

39,022.04

8,651.74

389.40

8.262.»t

41,056.84

13,467.46

27.689.39

352.939.69

105,043.92

247,895.

792.00

110.88

681.12

4,608.00

1,704.96

2,903.04

2,160.00

237.60

1.922.40

1,440.00

28.80

1,411.20

2,220.00

699.40

1.620.60

■29,&40.00

8,796.21

20,744.

4,488.83

627.73

3,856.10

12,384.58

4,582.29

7,802.29

10,317.17

1,134.89

9,182.28

2,381.44

47.63

2,333.81

6,600.00

1,512.00

4,088.00

69.736.94

16,061.04

43.686.

27.246.40

2,142.32

25,104.08

22,240.00

4,270.40

17,969.60

21,124.60

4,411.93

16,712.67

2,908.24

116.33

2,791.91

7,600.00

2,408.00

5,192.00

109,134.24

24,019.60

86,116.

34,531.00

6,049.57

28,481.43

46,310.00

16,672.00

28,638.00

28,924.13

6,614.76

22,309.37

5,743.50

273.07

6,470.43

33,466.84

11,069.45

22,397.39

243,804.85

81,024.32

162,780.

22,846.40

1,142.32

21.704.08

20,440.00

3.270.40

17,169.60

16.324.60

2,611.93

13,712.67

2,308.24

92.33

2,215.91

6,800.00

1,608.00

4,292.00

90,090.84

16,676.60

74.416.

4,400.00

1,000.00

3,400.00

1,800.00

1,000.00

800.00

4,800.00

1,800.00

3,000.00

600.00

24.00

676.00

1,800.00

900.00

900.00

19,044.00

8.344.00

10.700.

21,350.00

2,690.00

18,660.00

27,200.00

10,110.00

17,090.00

13,860.00

1,625.00

12,326.00

3,500.00

83.33

3.416.67

21,625.00

5,821.00

16,704.00

163,760.00

45,311.47

108.438.

2,066.00

750.00

1,316.00

3,860.00

2,960.00

900.00

2,380.00

1,500.00

880.00

260.00

50.00

200.00

2.294.82

1,428.44

866.38

18,790.32

12.237.94

6.562

5,319.82

2,319.82

3,000.00

4,650.00

2,050.00

2,500.00

5,883.03

2,500.00

3,383.03

1,000.00

100.00

900.00

5,000.00

2,500.00

2,500.00

33,382.61

15,999.68

17,383.

5,795.18

289.75

6,506.43

9.700.00

1,552.00

8,148.00

6,811.10

1,089.76

5.721.34

993.60

39.74

963.76

4.637.02

1,310.01

3,327.01

37.881.92

7,476.33

30,406.

.133

.807

.367

.633

.198

.802

.036

.964

.318

.682

.293

.707

.175

.826

.322

.67«

.229

.771

.048

.962

.330

.070

.3.32

.668

102 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLE 8

These costs per student-hour at the different institutions are obtained by dividing
the total number of student-hours into the total cost of operating the department.
This total cost per student-hour is in turn divided into three parts, two of which are
further subdivided. Administration expense and direct expense taken together con-
stitute the total expense of teaching physics. After this matter of costs has been
studied for some time and the causes for the obvious discrepancies removed, it will
pay to add another decimal place. It seemed to me that to have done this at the present
time would have indicated a degree of precision in these results which is not claimed
for them. The two decimal places, however, present very distinctly many apparently
unwarranted differences in the conditions at the several institutions.

D
O

X

I

H

W
Q

H

eu

w
u

d:

Oh
O

5

<

O

H

o

''i

la

-

CO

-5

t^

t^

C<l

K

0

-*i

t~

(>

■*

X

oq

iH

-*.

CO

q

q

q

0

<

0

/■■

/.

c

c

0

IN

CD

r-l

^

N

t-

ej

CO

CO

0

CO

t*

0

CO

IH

q

"*

c

q

q

N

•"*,

^

w

•^

-<

0

la

«

00

^.

y-t

0

00

■*

t^

CI

00

i»

s

"J

0

CO

rH

q

lH

rH

q

q

q

q

0

~

CO

\^

rH

c

(-

0

0

05

10

iH

N

lH

rH

00

la

lO

CO

0

00

t»

CO

N

iH

CO

q

q

iH

q

rH

q

q

q

^

d

H

05

^.

0

H
H

0
5

01

^

1.0

CO

10

>*

(N

N

0

la

rH

0
W

u
2

0

CO

"i

iq

q

IN

q

CO

q

q

rH

CO

la

00

_

Z

r-l

"*

10

tH

>H

<-(

00

la

CO

e^

CO

t-

■5

CO

CO

q

"*

q

q

e^

q

N

q

q

q

t^

ci

!t

X

^-

a

b:

c

00

-*

10

0

iH

10

t-

^

CO

^

'i*

00

0

q

CO

N

"*.

IM

q

q

q

CO

q

q

q

la

05

>

<

r-i

■*'

O.

c

0
CO

00

CO

0

N

CO

10

N

CO

t^

0

rH

la

>

-<

q

(N

tH

t-;

q

q

rH

q

"*

q

rH

q

t~

I-i

la'

a:

CO

<

a
S

00

CO

0

10

CO

00

l>

cq

0

ei

10

00

la

CO

q

CO

N

10

q

q

rH

q

"*.

q

q

q

n

i-i

eo'

0

X

CJ

■zl

c

■s

^
^

0

0

0

~

CO

.c

■^

X

'0

^

!c

a

a

"^

■O

§

•a
c

I
-a
c

B

2

•35

t£

'/'

0
is

Id

a

D
^.

a
b

s

■5

•a
3
c

D

3

■a
c
a

0

'pj

c

3

Urn

a

Q
>.

1

OS

s

C

"5

0

a
0
S
E

8

.2

c
0
S

a

a

V

u

<2

2

c
E

3

1

•3

.2

c
a

m

0

a!

0

s

a
c
■0

B

0

E
X

a

to

.Si

1

3

en

0
c

0

>■

-5

c

Ed

4)

■2
"3

2

"3

J3

3

n

'5

1)

1

<

-3

c

c9

c
5^

■7.

,^

E^

x;

.a

c:

to

_CJ

B

b

E

CJ

E

^

0

0

u

0

3

c
0

0

r3

D.
■y.

1

■a
c

is
'3

8
1

.0

1

3

5

1

3

ci

E
Hi

_E

2

J

"0

0

'i

0

-J

c

e
0

c

c

■a

tS

C

C3

•«:

•^

■a

u

•*-

0

0

0

^

a

J

M

S

^

H

4>

c:

<

Q

^

^

0

g

g

^

c,

104 ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

TABLES 9 AND 10

By means of these two tables, I have suggested a system of reports which can be
published either in the treasurer's annual report or in the catalogue, and which I
believe will give those who are responsible for the administration of an institution
of higher education the data by means of which they can compare the work done
in the various teaching departments as well as the cost of maintaining these depart-
ments. Inasmuch as these data can be obtained without any increase in the account-
ing force, and practically without any additional expense, it seems likely that at one
or more institutions it may be found possible to institute immediately such a system
of reports. In order to help in such an undertaking, I have arranged these reports
so as to make it easy to reproduce them in a printed page. The amount of matter,
in each case, is that which will conveniently go on the ordinary six by nine page. In
order to make it possible to get up such a set of reports in the exact form in which
they might be published by a college or university, I have originated a fictitious
institution of higher education, called the Smith Technological Institute; and I have
considered as the several departments of this institution the departments of physics
at the eight institutions visited, as follows :

Columbia Physics Department

Harvard Chemistry Department

Haverford Biology Depay-tment
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Astronomy Department

Princeton Mathematics Department

Toronto Geology Department

Williams Botany Departm£nt

Wisconsin Economics Departinent

The eight pages constituting Tables 9 and 10 must then be considered as sample
pages taken from the catalogue or the annual report of the treasurer of the Smith
Technological Institute.

Table 9 is an analysis of the teaching in each of the eight departments of this
institute. On this table are shown all the courses given, with the data covering each.
On Table 10 are given a summary of the teaching of each of the departments; a sum-
mary of the teaching of the institution ; a summary of the expenses of each depart-
ment; and a summary of the expenses of the institution as a whole. The teaching
in the various departments is contrasted with the expenses on the third page of
Table 10, and the expense per student-hour shown, and these expenses per student-
hour analyzed.

Dr. Eliot recently gave the number of courses offered at Harvard as about four
hundred. It would require not more than ten or twelve pages in the Treasurer's Re-
port of Harvard University to give the same kind of data about each of these four

TABLES 106

hundred courses, and the expenses of operating each of the departments, as we have
given for the fictitious Smith Technological Institute. Most other institutions, of
course, could give this information in much less space.

There are always certain basic statistics and other data which it is necessary to
have about an industry or other line of effort before one can even begin to speculate
intelligently as to the character and efficiency of its organization and the work it is
doing. With such statistics and data given, it is often easier for an outsider to sug-
gest points of strength and of weakness than it is for those more intimately associ-
ated. This is one of the large elements of strength in publicity.

In preparing the reports which appear on Tables 9 and 10, I have tried to in-
clude the statistics and data which seem to me most essential to a study of any given
institution of this class and of the class itself. It is practically impossible now
to obtain this from college catalogues or treasurers' reports. To get this informa-
tion by the methods which we have been forced to use in making this study involves
unwarranted demands upon the time of men otherwise fully engaged. If information
of this kind is to be secured at such large effort, it is not likely to be secured with
enough regularity to make it of any great use. The records and books of the schools
themselves should be so maintained as to give it as regularly as they now give the
total number of students, courses of instruction, or the cash balance.

Annual Report of the

H

H
Pi
<!

Oh

Q

>^

M
O

s

u

<J

H
O

>^
<

<1

&
o

a:

la
u
a
s

H

en

[I.
o

s

H
z
3

M

BS
<!

%

o
u

H

W

K

i

D
2

u
a
H

S7VJ.OX

05

I

1

"T5-
3

l"

¥

-t

3

f

s-

-^

CO

1"

CO

1"

I

1"

o o o

^ g s

(N

IP

<^ fe 2

Cfj 0 cS

aoioqD 3DJJ

O

2

o

lO

s

■^

c^

si

o

2 %

1> iH

g

i

o

3

3

o

o

o3

g

1

i %

"

"

s

"

o
o

05

o

O
S5

asia 3u!n;3tnos
op o; pajuibaii

o

1

pajinb
-aj Aia;nios'qv

o

1

o

00

O
(M

a! 1 ^

o 8| ..

uoi^B^pa^i

i

lO

CO

%

O
O
05

aan^oaq

o o

i i

o

o

s

lO

t2
3

g

o

o

§
(N

O

o

o

s

o

3

o

(N

o
(N

g

s

"

g

"

"

»

8

o

o

AjO^BJOQBq

qajBasa^

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

a;BnpBJO

g

o

<>3

o

o

g

o

CO

8

8

1

o

o
S5

ranipaj^

1

g

lO

1

i

i

s

^

g

§

CO

1

g

Xjiriuamaia

g

^
s

00

o

o

3

o

3

C I- m

_g a <u ^

sa^BnpBJO

o

CO

lO

o

g5

i

lO
CO

o

IM

o

lO

O

g

CO

CO

o

8

CO

o

o

o

jEaX manoj

o

s|

o

lO

55

O

§

CO

o

CO

g

g

8

s

jBaA pJiqi

o
o

o

o

!0

lO

o

3

lO

§

1

o

g

jTja^i paoaas

lO

lO

•*

o

lO

o

IN

s

g

O

§
•*

iBaA ^sjijj

lO O
11

o

8

lO

g

C^ c^

Number
of students
registered
to take the
course

jBaA
ajoqM aq:} joj

1

1

1 1

§1

Aiuo luja;
puooas am jo^

il

» 1

CO

1 "*

s

^

00 1

1 "* 1

00

■*

1

OS

Aiuo uua;
;sjg am jo.^

i

1 o

OS

T-l

lO

OS 1

8

(M
(M

CO

1 "''

05

lO 1 1 r-l

o

11

00 1 ■*

1 ^

Number
of groups
orsections
intowhich
class is di-
vided for
teaching
purposes

uoi^B^ioa-jj

o

o 1

■>»<

iH

c

ajn^oaq

IM

OJ 1 1-1

tH 1 (N

CO

r-t

THIr-l

'^

^

^

T-H

,-l|rH

iH 1 rH 1 rH

^

■^

^

rH 1 rH

'^

'^

rH

AjoiTjioqBq

1 1

'3

Hours
per week
for a sin-
gle stu-
dent

uoiiB^iaati

m

tH 1

^

1 1

^

y

ajn^oaq

N

!M 1 »

<N 1 CO

o

<N

(Ml ■*

(N

CO

M

CO

(N

c* 1 C^

"

01 1 <M 1 (N

CO

CO

(N

COI rH

"^

<N

N

Q.

Ajo^BJoq^T

n

u3Ai;^ sjjaaAV JO aaawnM

lO|iCllCjlOjlO|0|iO

iOjiOjiO|iO|lO|0|»CliO|»OliC|iOliO]»0

iC 1 iC

to I lO 1 »c

lO

g

lO 1 lO

rH 1 rH

i

1

1

i

2

•S
e

o

1

s
o

"5

s

1

6

g

O

s

1

to

s
c

1

-a
g

B
o

s

s

S

1

o

g

0

1
1

o

1

1

o

Si
O

e

i

!/3

5
d

S

s
o
S

•B
g

s

o
e

S

g

•2
'S

1

1

c

-2

o

1

<u

s

3
S

a

i

B i. S
S 0 -^
DO

C<5

■*

b

05

o

r-l

O

r-l

o

CO

O

to
o

IM

03

o

r-l
Oh

o

rH

00

o

rH

rH

N

S

CO

o

03

o

o

rH
O

rH
O
rH

0^

o

rH
ft,

o

rH
Oh

o

rH
ft.

o

ft.

00

o

IN

ft.

1

o

u

3
O

rH

(M

rH

2

3
O

Q

« 'S"*^ mil's

&-> S 5 § S-5 S 0 s

en

3
O
U

J3
H

Table 9

{Continued on pages 108, 109 and 110)
Smith Technological Institute

-^

r^

F^

v^

'%

W,

Ff

[^

[I

[¥

.* ,*

Y^JW

^ 7

-^

W

\W

\w

[?

T

[^

r^

[T

[¥

f? ^

TB-

■5-

F

[^

[^

f^

[^

r^

[^

c3

fN

o

in

c6

«i

oi

f

■+

'^

&

•4

00

lO

US

^

ii

"^

'"

■^

g

^

O

§

g

s

%

^

o

f! 1

1

o

%

g

§

i

§§

1

i

1

i

1 §

g

^

lO

s

0

•5*

0

lO

i

t-

s

§

lO

•9

■*

I.-*

I.M

z

Sj

^

'"

'^

^

s

^

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

"^

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

1

¥

"S

-

—

-

—

OJ

S

^

3

o

?3

o

i

g

1

§

1

^

s

1

1

s

o

^

g

8

i

iO

3

0

g
•*

0

0

1

1

%

§

o

?

S

S

o

1

^

o

o

i

i

o

§

§

8

s

8

c5

^

-ji

L^J

L-J

i<

'T

(N

'^

lO

"

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 |S|§I 1^1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 |S|S|8|S

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1*1^1 \\a\ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l^l'~lsl'~

ej

o

Q

o

o

S

in

£j

s^

s

Si

CO

g

s

^

8

1 s g

o '^j' "<r

in

^

s

3;

'-'

•V

•*

m

"^

^"

'^

lO

<r>

o o

0

0

J$£

w o »

03

lO

1 1

^ ^c;^

Q

o

?S

o

in

in

in

g

s

0

s

8

0^

f»^

J7i

f5s

s

t-

s

^

s

^

o

SIS

r5

o

S

S

lO

lO

lO

S

?

g

S

s

r-l

4i

t-

uu

o

Tt"

Q,

lO

o

ifS

o

o

r>

fN

o

o

lO

0

iC

in

^

in

o

o

(3

^

o

lO

0

■n

in

in

^

lO

^

o

«

CD

t;^

2

lO

S

:£

1 1

1

1

1 1""

r-l

03

y^

1 1

1

IM

iQ

cm

1

1

is;if2

lO 1 05

on

r-<

1 "*

1 <o 1

■*

'i'

l^) 1 o

1 I

^

1

i<

to

1

1 1

1

t-

oai 1

1

"* 1

i ir

Tj<

e^

§ ?2

It-

1 1

o 1

Ni

»

^

t-

lOI

1 P

•^

^

1

,_4

,_)

,^

,_)

y^

^

^

^ 1

,_)

rH 1 rH

T^ 1 f-H

,^

T-4

f-t

^

r-4

"r

^1

l-Hl T^

^1 r-l 1 rH

"^

'"'

"^

^

'"'1 1 '^

e^

■^

sq

05 1 m

'^

"^

"^

■^

1 I'-K*

,_,

,_,

1 1 05

Cq

n

171 1 00

C^ 1 (M

"^

IN

«

1 CO

"^

"^

IN

(N| i-c

«

CO 1 m

tH 1 00

OS

ec

00

CO

03

-«l 1

1 1— «'

-«• 1

c^

CC CC

cc cc w

«

05

03

s

lO «3

IM

rf

to

CC ■*

-r

n-

^

lO 1 4CJ

lO 1 lO 1 U^ 1 iO

s

»CllC|lO|lO[iO|iO|lO|»CjtC|tO|lO|lOIO|

SiSlg

g 1 g 1 i 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 g§ 1 2 1 2 1 S 1 S 1 S 1 S 1 8

gl§|

1

r^

i-i

ti

fcl

«

-

^

K

^

j:

&.

e
1

s

■2

1

i

i

•2
1

6

o

ft

63

ft

C

►~1

►1;

^
3

1

's
1

T-t

o

CI

o

<

d

o

IN

CO

N

■*

^

r-l
CO

CO

lO

r-(

rH IN

(N N

CC

o

03

O

C4

m

■*

lO

e

CO

CO

t-

a

iH

C4

■*

iC

t-

0

J3
0

0

0

cu

Oh

s

lA

CL,

c«

^

Sn

cu

Oh

Oh

CL,

Oi

0^

Oh

CU Oh

tt-

M

N

N

.

g s>i^-j. a C

1^

1 lIllllJ

sg iit

5 ■-:= at vSr-s

5 II =?|| s ^

Si (J =■ $;,

^" Ss

^'t

^SS cSfi^:;

Table 9

(Continued)

Annual Report of the

fl

I

o

.?

1

CO

1

I

o

1

"^
§

53

I

i

"g
O

CO

"g

i " " i

¥

1 i

So

-r

"I

¥

lO

1

I

1

§

"

s

i

§

s

i

§

•*

2

1

1

s

g §

CO

g

o

o

o

i

O
5

1

i

o

g

o

g

CO

g

o

g

g

g

g

1

1

00

o

rH

5

g
?

3

g

i

g g

o

o

5

1

1

g

g

1

lO

1

g

1

i

§

§

o

g

§
s

CM

g

o
53

i

s

i

lO
lO

g

o

s

o

g
o

O

o o

i

1

i

§

53

1

g

(N

8

?5

i

t- t-

'J'

s

o

lO

o

1

o

CO

o

CO

s

g

1

g

g

CM

o

b*

53

1 1 1

s

o

??

i

§

«

i

3

1

§

i

i

53

i

o

g

o

i

g

g

g

g

1

g 1

o
o

lO

1

i

1

i

•"J"

O

g

05

i

i

o

CO

i

1

o
53

i

05

g
5

5

o

i

g

1

s

i

i

s

i

OS

O

i

53

g?

IN

o

§

g

g

1

O
CO

g

as

s

1

i

CO

i

1

"»•

o

g

2

i

o
8

lO

1

w

§

i

i

i

g

g

o

1

lO

5

i

t-

1

CM

t-

I

g

IN

OS

CO o

to

IM

CO

53

O 1 o
t- 03

i^r

1

1

1

CO

1 »

IS

1

1 1

g

1^

Ol

rH| 30

'^ g

1 ^

i

OS

s

Sl

05
05

s

CO 1 1 CO
rH (N

IS

00

1

CO

1

tr- 1

1

<N

'^

81

i

s

lg

s

CD

1^1

sp

1^

CO

c^ 1

"

'^

CO

^

^

r-<

i^

1 "^

lO

00 1

^ 1 rH

"^

rH j m

IM

"^

''I

"^

^

■^

^

"^

05

CM

CM 1 rH

'^

CMI CM

■^

rHj^Irt

"^

-r

.jco

1 "*

o

t-

CM 1 T-l

o>

IN

"^

^

CO

o

05 1

1

CM

N 1 CO 1 CO

^r

'"

r

^

"1

'^

'^

^

'-'

s

1 ^

'-'

^1

1 1

^p

CM

T-<| lO

051 CO

(M 1

CO

IN

IN

"^

^

^

«

"^

i^

CM

Cp

CM

^r

'-'

rHIrHlrH

•*

0> l-K.

?^-|r,-

1

r

'Jl

"

IM 1 'M

IN

to

CO

-r

S?

•<»<

■^ 1

1

CM

CMI CO 1 CD

g

1^

g

g| |gi*i 1 isi'^is

CO 1 CO 1 ^ 1 rH

to 1 iC 1 ca

SIS

U5

2

SIS

Slgl^l

rH 1 rH 1 rH

10|10|10|10|10|IC|10|

1

1

o

o

1

s
<il

1

i

i

1

1

i

s

s
1

1

s

Si

g

i

ti

V

Q
d

<

-

=

O

00

05

00

00

00

rH
05

o

05

05

05

05

o

o

00

O
00

CO
rH
00

05
rH
00

00

•>*

00

o

CO
05
CI

00

00
CO
00

05
CO

00

rH

rH

iM

CO
IM

IM

CO

rH
CO

IM

CO

Table 9

Smith Technological Institute (Cuntbiucd on page 110)

2 -M »
S t- lO

3 2

2|5| oi 3

l^'i^K-l I

t- t- R * 35 ^

8 g

O 11

S S

5 S

S S f2 g

o o

lO

!g

?

o

3

s

s

?

1

s

?

s

c

?

o

>o

S3

'^

s

g

o

o

s

f^

s

s

s

o

R

?

^

s^

'^

'^

'^

o

^

o

^

^

^

<^

^

^

o

s^

O

Q

o

o

s

SI??

oo 1 ec I rt I ^

iC|ia|ioiiO[iO|iC|ioiiotio

ii2i;

iisujitis

SiSigi:

;SISIglSI^I!Slilgl3ISISi g ! §5 1 S I S I i

fi

:^

:^

s

:§

s

s

►^

^

^

1

1

6

6

s

1

g

Vi

IS.

1

o

1

s

?

o

a

d

•4^

e

;■

7^

(J

o

u

o

i)

«

*

a,

'^

H

Hj

t^

1*)

N

iU

1^

t^

1^

1*5

l»q

^

>-^

00

iH

N

CO

^

r^

on

05

O

Oi

c

»

01

o

CO

-*

-*

^

^

■*

-*

lO

tH

CO

-*

-E-.

Table 9

(Concluded)

Annual Report

IT

¥

-w

lis

I

i

I

¥

g

g

2

CC

1

"SI

g

g §

IM

I

i

li

i

g"

CO

O

1

1

00

§

1

o

IM

8

o o
o c

CO CO

O

i

-

g

g

1

i

s

g

2

O

g

1

o

o
o
cr.

n

1

1

O
tH

8

cc

o

IM

00
CO

1

g
1

i

i

lO o

?! g

1

g

1

i

§

S

1

s

•*

53

00
g

o

lO

g

1

i

i

i

§

o

g

i

40

O

1

g

g

o

lO

g

CO
IM

<M

g

1

i

g

1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

o

3

1

o

i

1

1

g

1

O

i

i

g

s 1

g

i

i

s

11

g

i

IM

i

i

g

t-

1

o
So

o

i

O
Ci

g

g

t-

o

00

o

S

1

•*

to

a

g

i

g

o

<M

§
•*

g

s

§

§

o

g

1

i

§

g

O

<M

§

g

g

!§

cq

g

8

1

o

OS

1

g

i

i

1

1

s

1-1

g

1

i

-1*

r-l

o

CO

i

§

1

§

S

s

8

g

CO

g

<v3

5

o

1

g

iO
(M

O

g

i

i

g
S

(C|

CO

CO O)

7-( lO

1 '^

1 °

,-1 1 CO

lO

1 o
1 ^

1

1

IS

w

IM

1

i

g

lO CO

05

lO

"* 1

lO

1

1 '^

g

1

1

CO

1 ff^

00

00
00

lO

§

ta 1

to

^

O 1

SI

[

1

^

1-

IQ 1

'^

IM

s

»-l j l-H

l-H

tH

1H

rt j rH

■*| cq

1 r

^

1

^

,-i| rt

r-l

■^

r-l

ft

00

t- 1 <o

1 1-

'^

11 1 <M

IM

CO 1 r-l

g

1

1 1-

1

co|^

CO

^

1

o

eq i-H

93

^

^

'*' 1

ir

ffq

(N

eq

Nlrt 1 ■<»<

CO

CO

1

m

CO

CO

M

IM
IM

g|^

:o

■^

(M

^|§|^

■*

00 1 t-

Ir-

.

•* 1 •*

§§

§112

SISISIgIS

l2IS|glSISI Igl2l2

;2igi^

2lg

S

g

gl2lg|glSIS

1 1

1

1 1

1

5

1

o

6

8
8

6
g

1
a

1

1

CO

to

o

05

-

=

s

>

>

rH

OT

■«ji

lO

00

C2

O
i-l

rH

no

r-l

r-l

O

r^

o

rH

o
1-i

o

T-l

a,

SI"

1 .Hi

03 ^ cs;-2

lift

.« ^^ SJ.-2: S?^ ^ S

TABLES 111

TABLE 10

Remarks covering Table 10 were given in the note preceding Table 9. The source of
money used in the departments is of such vital importance that it is suggested that
another report uniform with that given on this table be prepared covering it. On
such a report, opposite the total expenditures for each department, should be given
the amounts which are derived, respectively, (1) from specific endowments, (2) from
the general endowments of the institution, and (3) from fees, etc. In the report of
the treasurer of Princeton University a very satisfactory model for this statement
will be found.

Part 1

Annual Report of the

O

o

<

H

O

>^
<!

<

SS

^

?

^

io

S1VXOJL

S

i

5

§

g

2

00

i

. m

ip

Q

,-,

8

ii-a

aoioqo aajj

a

s

^

lO

g

g

«

w

z

1UJ3

ss

osja auimauios

8

O

1

^

lO

£2

opo^pajinbaH

lO

S

s

K

O 1- >

o 0 ;;

(U a; o

pajinbaa

1

%

1

1

1

i

§

O

Xiaiiqosqv

s

00

§

2

1>

S

S5

CO

^•i

8

§

1

lO

la

S

o

g

Q

noi^Bjpa^

cq

CO

s

CO

00

s

"" - s

X (S o

■^

o

lO

lO

(P

(^

o

t*

b
O

u
H

4> oj =

o ^y

ajmoaq

Tf

s

i

2

i

cq

o

o

CO

?2

iUo^'BJoq'Bq

1

1

^

s

1

<N

53

!5

0

^

o

o

^

S

t-i

"S'l^;

qDjBasa-a

£

s

s

s

Pi

ca w fe
■".So

D

o
O

•p^JO

S

40

s

%

•»<

1

^

O

Q

i

o

^ ° S

•paw

00

53

tH

8

i

1

s

1

o

'"'

8

g

§

g

»

i

«

g

g

2

!-

•uiaia

?

1

■*

^

s

O

S

CO

s
a

a

1 s
£.2

3 !-

o ai

o >

|5

•pBJQ

1

2

i

o
t-i

lO

00

3

JBaX qjf-

8

CO

S

§

1

g

1

1

H

•sa

"^

52

^

lO

Q

o>

■*

t-

JBaA pJ6

tH

S

i

s

§

§

rH

(N

Q

o

OS

N

,-t

■S 3 M
3S=«

jBaA pug

\

CO

i

1

s

1

00

^-i

s

§

§

o

?

s

s

s^

iBaA ^si

t-

i

t-

^

^

s

05

s

GO

lO

■*

CO

O

o

b 1

JB3A am JOJ

?5

?2

05

•*

8

o •<

cq

s

a>

_(

ifi

CO

o

^

UU31 puooas am joj

t-

2

§

g

s

cq

t^

CD

lO

CO

CO

<N

?3

oua; 4SJB aq; jojI

t-

CO

^

s

s

CO

o

o

(M

•>!<

h »>

jBaA am joj

s

s

t§

5

o S
n a

■^

nua^ puooas am aoji

1

i

1

iS

1

g

05

N

OS

lO

O

•a

Z"^

nija^ ^sjy am Joj

g

s

s

i

2 fa «
Sod

uaAjo

5

2

CO

s;

s

CO

lO

to

■*

z 5

uajiirj ^oa ^nq 'pajajBO

«

■>!<

"^

tH

CO

■*

00

s

6 V

_

"

^^

^
^

^

s

1'

S

1

1

1

%

a

1

ft
e

1

£'S

1-

>>

s

11

o
o

o

3
O
u

o
"o

>>

a

1

3
O

a

A

<u

o

o

CL(

u

PQ

<

o

m

W

Table 10

Part 2

Smitm Tfchnological Institute

(<^

^outi?iu€

d on page J J 4]

__• c; 073 i

0 — — VT,

^*^*^2rt

la

3

S

s

g

g

s

^

^

cO =. = £ .

»

3

t

^

3

^

S

2

d

1

2

g

i

10

i

£

1

g

^=1^^^

u

H f ?.= ^.=

V-

o*::; r 0 c .

B
•<
M

i

Q

0
§

Si

It

■3 »>■ - « S c

g

0)2
§2

tA, a i: ? a 0 c9

.5 3o.t:&

0

s

S

ao

g

0

s

o

s?

>•

-<

1^

•^ 0 ac S
2 0 1)— 3

CO

i

1

1

i
0

2

i

1

a
"3

n

i

>

!^

CO

00

0

IM

0

03

0

o

r^

Q

Q>

ICI

0

»

0

0

0

o

(O

03

^

«

CO

^

OS

Q

«

0

^

c4

D

s-

c4

0

Q.

04

2

0

a.

3

1<

c-

•*

lO

to

eg

W3

H

^ Si;© « c = ><

g

0

S S „ !5.t:a.22 *

Q

o

S5

o

"n iciTj^

s

P3

<u

11^ §:

§

0
0

0

0
0

0
0

0
0

8

s

s

<

1

s

§

1

i

i

i

i

^

X

ca c j: 0 oTJ

1

>>

t; 2 ii'P-c 0

i

t4

05

"3
W3

0

0

0

0

0

0

o

g

bi

0

0

0

0

0

0

o

o

i

1

i

i

1

1

i

g

bu

S

«

n

^

s

c^

s

53

s

o

^tlSog-Ss

0

>

a

^2'2 2£J5

^

1 |gs;^t;2

a:

M
u

H

a
0

a

■OS "O c - a

0 _ (3 «- -u ?'

3

»

0

s

s

j:;

5

o

3

a

a
■a
<

c.22o3 .S

i

si

s
5

i

1

1

o

s

w — ^ o*j rt 0 t-

.= a

,

' — i

E"

<i

s

-^

X c

0

i> ■*-*

^

_

"h

'w

^

«
0

i

^ 3

1

1

3

0

1

si

1

a

(9

"0

s

c

.2

1

11

0)""

11

to

§

0
0

0
1

a

■3

a

o
c
o

U o

_ C i)

*-=2

A

Si

cd

V

0

u

c S -^

Oh

0

iS

<

s

0

n

bd

HH?

Table 10

(Concluded)

PART 3. TEACHING AND EXPENSE CONTRASTED
Annual Report

Total

u

a
o

"c

1)
•a

3

W
1-1
<u
Q.
(U
m

a

(U

W

-s

h

These various subdivisions of the total expense
per student-hour will correspond to the division
of accounts on preceding page

Department

Student-
Hours

Expense

"3

u
<u
a

a
<

.2
'o

cm

d

a

<

btj

a

1

>>
tt

in

■a
a
v

d
« o

>."

a

a

B
a
'3

a

V

a
a

2

&^

■a a

C X

m

3

■Si

da
o .

C c

Physics [Columbia]

83235

62926.51

.75

.20

.40

.02

.05

.08

Chemistry [Harvard]

65730

53783.84

■82

.10

.47

.09

.11

.05

Biologry [Haverford]

4950

3698.95

.74

.25

.36

.01

.04

.08

Astronomy [Mass. Tech.]

82740

39014.83

.46

.05

.26

.02

.06

.07

Mathematics [Princeton]

85320

57694.58

68

.15

.32

.05

.05

.11

Geology [Toronto]

90270

39241.30

43

.11

.15

.03

.06

.08

Botany [Williams]

13040

8124.94

■62

.18

.27

.02

.08

.07

Economics [Wisconsin]

81150

39056.84

47

.06

.26

.03

.06

.06

506435

303541.79

■60

TABLES 115

TABLE 11

This shows the average number of students in the different kinds of exercises (lab-
oratory, lectures, and recitations) in elementary and medium grade work. The tabu-
lation is restricted to these grades, because at all the institutions the size of sections
in graduate and research work is small and largely the result of chance.

There seems to be the widest difference of opinion as to what constitutes a proper
size for a class. If we had weighted these sections in proportion to the number of times
a week they meet, this difference would probably have been even more marked. I was
informed at one place that it was practically impossible to lecture to more than one
hundred and twenty-five students in physics, yet our table shows that at four insti-
tutions there are classes of more than one hundred and fifty students. This question
of size of sections is so largely pedagogical that the figures are submitted without
further comment and for what they may be worth.

a
o

SI13101

N

iH

o

w

■utsuoosj^i

1

s^»?nMl

ojMOJOj;

s

U0).90U1.1J

M

Ed

V

a!

IM

iH

M
iH

M

puo/u.3cinH

1-1

H

1

puva^njj

IH

iH

mqvinjoj

1-1

smox

lO

o

05

lO

ij*

(N

-*

CO
iH

00

UlSUOOSl^

N

S

H

Ed

b

O

iH

O^UOMX

CO

H

■*

IH

1-1

CO

a

1-

U0130UUJ

H

iH

IN

iH

lO

<

^

Moiouyoax

iH

C

■:^sui -ssnpi

PJ.0/MC17JJJ

1-1

iH

iH

N

pj,naj,i}H

'^

iH

r-l

H

iH

r-l

r-l

vfqmnjOQ

H

N

r-l

iH

iH

iH

N

CO

smox

05

lO

o

iH

O
H

CO

OO
1-1

(N

WJSM03Si_^

CD

sium22iM

iH

t>

oiuoxox

IN

1-1

CO

iH

r-l

d

5
2

U0^90UIJ.J

lO

O
iH

MOlOUXlOBJj
•JSMJ "SSW/f

iH

1-1

oq

pj.o/uaavjj

1-1

iH

tH

pxnajLVH

lO

05

t-

N

mqiunioQ

-*

rH

is

O

H Q

0 H

^ ri

cr

o 5

.^

*

m

te

gg

05

ai

c

13

a

c

C

a

<u

2 o

S

0)

«

CI

U

<u

■a

■a

•a

■c

■a

T3

O i

X

s

3

3

3

.^

•M

cfi

a:

«

CB

(0

CO

o

o

o

^ 1

•"■

o

o

0

o

o

o

u

0

o

^_,

,_,

,_,

^^

o

|i

m

o

"^

»)

»»

P

2

APPENDIX

EXHIBIT A

SAMPLE OF EMPLOYMENT BULLETIN

The following employment bulletin is issued monthly by The American Society of
Mechanical Engineers and is referred to in the body of the report, page 28 :

EMPLOYMENT BULLETIN

The Society has always considered it a special obligation and pleasant duty to be the medium of se-
curing better positions for its members. The Secretary gives this his personal attention and is most
anxious to receive requests both for positions and for men available. Notices are not repeated except
upon special request. Copy for notices in this Bulletin should be received before the 15th of the month.
The list of men available is made up of members of the Society, and these are on file, with the names
of other good men, not members of the Society, who are capable of filling responsible positions. In-
formation will be sent upon application.

POSITIONS AVAILABLE

067 Manager for factory located at Newark-on-Trentj England.

068 Instructor in mechanical and architectural drawing, for Tuesday and Thursday
evenings, October to May, Location, Queens Borough, City of New York. Experience in
teaching and tact required. Familiarity with manufacturing, drafting-room methods es-
sential.

069 Selling engineer wanted for steam condensers. Location, Philadelphia.

070 Wanted, ambitious young man, with selling experience, to represent in Chicago
a company manufacturing transmission machinery.

071 Wanted, a young technical graduate, with good scholastic record and at least two
years' practical experience, for position of assistant in laboratory of engineering school;
salary $1000 for academic year. Location, Massachusetts.

072 Man experienced in general machinery; to work on board and handle six men
under general instruction of chief engineer; experience absolutely essential on jig-work
and general design. Further, experience in transmission, conveying, gears, etc., pre-
ferred; good opportunity for live, capable man; give full details of experience, salary
expected, and positions previously held, naming employers in first letter; all information
held strictly confidential; immediate opening; location, Ohio.

MEN AVAILABLE

254 Member, with fifteen years' experience, an expert on gas engines, gas producers,
gas furnaces, gasoline and oil engines, pumping machinery of every description, air
compressors, blowing engines, rolling mills, etc., both designer and superintendent,
desires change. Now chief engineer of medium-size shop; would prefer larger concern
or one willing to take up these branches anew. University graduate, best of references.

120 APPENDIX

255 Manual training and university technical graduate ; age 33, thirteen years' prac-
tical experience in machine shop, drafting, designing, testing, estimating, etc.; has
employed and had charge of men ; desires position, preferably in Philadelphia or vicinity.
Would consider an opportunity in the commercial line of engineering or manufacturing.

256 Representative of gas power company, desirous of entering into correspondence
with a few firms in the machine line in the United States interested in the development
of trade in Europe, Asia and Africa, with view to forming arrangements to represent
them.

257 Chief draftsman and designer of special machinery for manufacturing firm. Five
years' experience power plant construction, irrigation and general engineering. At
present, gas and mechanical engineer for corporation. Executive ability. Position as
superintendent of maintenance or construction or as mechanical engineer with contract-
ing or consulting firm.

258 Associate, age 29, technical graduate, two years' experience general drafting,
four years of teaching and research in the field of the gas producer, gas engine and
steam boiler, capable of directing and handling both mechanical and chemical sides of
this line of work, desires position as professor or assistant professor of experimental en-
gineering or as testing engineer in charge of experimental work for a manufacturing
plant.

259 Member, long experience in pumping machinery, air compressors, Corliss engines,
condensing apparatus ; desires position as chief engineer or chief draftsman near New
York.

260 Assistant engineer, age 29, Cornell University, M. E., executive and designing
ability and good business judgment, ability as investigator and organizer. Broad general
experience in mechanical and civil engineering on railroad and car work, steam boil-
ers, gas engines, industrial plant equipment, power house, hydro-electric work, special
designs; seeks position as works manager or engineer in moderate-sized progressive
concern.

261 Affiliate and associate member Am. Soc. C. E., eight years' experience on design
and construction in steel and reinforced concrete, especially familiar with power-houses
and structures for street railway and lighting companies; open for engagement, June
first.

262 Junior member, graduate mechanical engineer, seeks position which will offer a
future. Three and a half years' general experience as draftsman, steam engineering and
special work. Present salary $125 per month.

263 Assisting manager at present engaged with company operating blast furnaces,
mines, etc.; technical education, familiar with manufacture of merchant pig iron, includ-
ing Gayley Dry Blast, and all details entering into plant operation ; can handle men and
produce results.

EXHIBIT B

EXTRACTS FROM THE REPORT OF THE TREASURER OF
HARVARD UNIVERSITY FOR YEAR 1907-08

The matter on this page and the two which follow it is quoted from the Report of
the Treasurer of Harvard University for the year 1907-08. These quotations consti-
tute the only references in the Treasurer's Report to either the Jefferson Physical
Laboratory, the department of physics or physics itself. The interest of these
excerpts for the purposes of this study is explained on pages 60 to 62 in the body
of this report. From this point the matter is quoted :

INCOME AND CURRENT EXPENSES FOR DEPARTMENTS
General Items Only

These tables show for each department the receipts available for salaries, retiring al-
lowances and general expenses, the amount of such expenses, and the resulting surplus,
or deficit. They are summaries of only these general items in the more comprehensive
and detailed tables beginning on page 89-

JEFFERSON PHYSICAL LABORATORY

(See Table No. XVIII, page 151)

Available for Expenses
Income of funds and balance
Sale

Amount available for expenses

[From p. 12

Payments

General expenses
University charge

Less the amount which was paid from College income (see Table II,
page 117)

Surplus
In 190G-7 there was a deficit of
The JeflFerson Physical Laboratory credit balance on July 31, 1908, was

[From Table Income and Expense]
Jefferson Physical Laboratory, as per Table XVIII (page 152)
Expenses of research, paid from Funds and gift
Other expenses

University charge

Less amount paid from College income (see Table II, page 117)

$3,881.78
87.00

$3,687.58

238.99

§3,9-26.57

S 67.77
$2,675.20

$3,155.98

3,687.58

$6,843.56

238.99
$7,082.55

766.23

[From p. 20

$3,968.78
§3,968.78

{From p. 21

766.23 3,160.34

.S808.44

[From p. Jfi

§6,316.32

122

APPENDIX

[From p. 89

RECEIPTS AND PAYMENTS FOR DEPARTMENTS

The following tables are intended to show in detail the resources and expenditures of
each department of the university. The receipts include every gift and the income of
every fund. The payments include every payment for the specific object of every gift
and fund. The items are stated separately except in the case of payments for a general
object such as salaries, in which case the payments are merged under the general head-
ing. These tables are not found in the treasurer's books, but are a transcript from the
books and form a balanced statement, as shown on page l62.

[From p. 151

TABLE NO. XVIII
JEFFERSON PHYSICAL LABORATORY

Receipts
Income of Funds
Jefferson Physical Laboratory balance (interest on)
Physical Laboratory Endowment
Joseph Lovering

T. Jefferson Coolidge, for Research in Physics
Loans to be used in place of income

Loan $2,500.00

Interest 37.01

Anonymous Gift for Physical Research, interest

[From p. 152 Gifts for the salary of a Fellow for Research in Physics
Gifts
Interest

\ 94.28

3,787.30

421.62

2,537.01

28.79

2,000.00
23.73

$6,889.20

$6,889.20

2,023.73

Sale of old steam engine

87.00
^,999.93

Payments

Research in Physics, from
T. Jefferson Coolidge Fund
Joseph Lovering Fund
Anonymous Gift for Physical Research

Printing

Repairs

Care and cleaning

Fuel

Water

Lighting

Telephone

Insurance

Services and wages

Electric power

Supplies and sundries

$2,403.26

326.51

426.21

$ 212.16

166.23

1,078.00

477.94

53,64

259.50

72.89

132.43

848.00

380.96

5.81

$3,687.58

$3,155.98

EXHIBIT B

123

Less the following, paid from College income (see Table II, page 117)
Repairs ?1(J0.23

Fuel, services, etc. 600.00

University charge (see p. 89)
Treasurer's Office, care of investments
Bursar's Office, collections and payments
Watchmen
Pubhcation Office, salary and expenses

BALANCED SUMMARY OF THE TABLES

$766.23 $2,921.35
$6,077.33

$83.60
19.72
85.50
50.17

238.99

$6,316.32

Table

I. University
II. College

III. Library

IV. Divinity School
V. Law School

VI. Medical School
VII. Dental School
VIII. BussEY Institution
IX. Arnold Arboretum
X. Botanic Garden and Botanical Museum
XI. Gray Herbarium
XII. Observatory

XIII. Museum of Comparative Zoology

XIV. Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology
XV. Semitic Museum

XVI. Germanic Museum
XVII. William Hayes Fogg Art Museum
XVIII. Jefferson Physical Laboratory
XIX. Appleton Chapel
XX. Phillips Brooks House
XXI. Hemenway Gymnasium
XXII. Stillman Infirmary

XXIII. Sundry Funds for Special Purposes

XXIV. Construction Accounts
XXV. Sundry Accounts

Receipts

$ 85,726.58

1,412,149.85

67,339.19

44,334.26

142,140.88

273,339.28

52,775.71

27,895.56

31,424.43

9,924.52

153,610.32

59,230.93

42,446.12

19,860.08

1,439.23

1,885.62

6,322.02

8,999.93

2,577.22

1,784.52

2,218.00

23,884.05

46,646.66

36,340.12

632,656.00

Payments

$ 61,552.60

1,059,717.38

82,865.53

44,304.73

120,174.83

230,527.46

21,645.65

20,128.78

34,718.18

9,285.25

12,660.57

63.461.38

40,860.20

18,364.01

13,289.71

1,428.15

5,875.08

6,316.32

2,577.22

1,705.04

2,218.00

24,014.67

22,808.60

215,859.61

691,995.63

L^ rom p

162

3,186,951.08 $2,808,354.58

Total amount of payments
Total amount of receipts

Less gifts for capital account
Balance, which is the net decrease of funds and balances,

excluding gifts for capital, as is shown also on page 11

$2,808,354.58
$3,186,951.08

449,822.53 2,737.128.55

$71,226.03

EXHIBIT C

SCHEDULE AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING OUT

The data in regard to the disposition of the time of the teaching staff were secured
largely by requesting each teacher of physics to fill out the schedule shown on
page 126. The instructions for filling these out read as follows:

INSTRUCTION ON FILLING OUT SCHEDULE

At least one schedule is sought from every person who has any teaching to do in the
field covered by the department of physics. Those who make out schedules are requested
to make them out in full, i.e., to cover the entire week, even if the time devoted to physics
is only a small proportion of the whole time given to the university. When the schedule
is the same for each of the terms in the college year 1908-09 only one schedule is de-
sired. Where the schedule is different during two, three or four terms there should be
two, three or four schedules. Kindly mark the schedule in place provided showing term
to which it belongs. If more than two schedules are required, it will be necessary to use
two sheets. Each person making out a schedule will kindly place at the top (a) his name,
(6) title of chair or other post he fills, and (c) a memorandum of any special duties he may
have not suggested by his title, which may be useful in interpreting the schedule.

Kindly first fill in in black ink all absolute appointments under the following heads.
(Where the period used does not run full hours please note it.)

A. LECTURE

B. PREPARATION (for lectures). Put down under this head only such time as may be ^ven reg-
ularly to this purpose at the same hour and same place each week.

C. RECITATION (quiz, section, conferences, etc.). Put under this head those hours usually devoted
to recitation purposes, but which may be from time to time varied with some lecturing.

D. LABORATORY

E. CONSULTATION. This is to cover advertised office hours regularly kept for the purpose of private
consultations, principally with students.

F. MEETINGS (faculty meetings, etc.).

G. RESEARCH (personal). Only put entries under this head when the schedule is followed with
approximately the same regularity as under the other heads.

In every case where any of the above entries are made the number or other designation
of the lecture room, study, etc., should be given, also the course. Entries under the fore-
going head will only be made where the same hour each week is regularly devoted to
the same purpose. The cooperation of those making out schedules is specially requested
in the care with which the foregoing entries are made. Unless a high degree of accuracy
is aimed at, the comparison will lose much of its value.

The foregoing is intended to include that part of the productive time which is disposed
of in virtually the same way each week. Of what remains there is a certain amount which
in a way follows some schedule. For instance, on Friday between two and four, Mr. Roe
usually gets time for personal research or study; or between nine and ten on Tuesday

EXHIBIT C 125

Mr. Doe runs over a lecture which he is to deliver that morning at eleven. Please write
such entries in a different way from the others, preferably in red ink (pencil will answer,
or if in black ink put a ring around them).

In general, kindly make entries as full as possible. In case it is desired to explain any-
thing, use an asterisk and put on back of schedule sheet.

Schedule of.
Title

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

8.00

9.00

10.00

11.00

U

H

12.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

11.00

S

a

E-

12.00

1.00

*

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

EXHIBIT D
SECTION SCHEDULE AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING OUT

The data in regard to the size of sections, number of student-hours, etc., were secured
largely by requesting those in charge of the various departments of physics to fill
out the following section schedule. The instructions covering this work read as fol-
lows:

INSTRUCTIONS ON MAKING OUT SECTION SCHEDULE

Use one line on the section schedule for every different section. A section will be con-
sidered to be those students who are taught or quizzed on the same subject, during the
same period, by the same teacher with or without assistants. Thus a class studying the
same subject, but divided into three parts and taught at perhaps the same hour in differ-
ent rooms by different teachers, will be considered three sections. Thus wherever there
is a change in (a) the students who are taught, (6) the hour, (c) the place, ((/) the teacher,
or (e) the subject, a new section is created.

The letters used below in giving directions for filling in the section schedule are those
at the heads of the various columns of the schedule.

Please begin with the first period Monday morning and give all the sections taught in
this period, one line to each section. Then give those sections taught in the second period.
Thus go consecutively through Monday. Then begin with the first period on Tuesday
and go consecutively through Tuesday. Thus go consecutively through the week. Where
the section schedule changes with the term, make it out complete for each term.

A. Under this column simply give a serial number so that the last serial number will
represent the number of sections for the term, or for the year if the terms are alike.

B. Fill in the initial of the day of the week in which the section is taught. As the
sections are grouped by days, this letter need not be repeated.

C. Under the subject give the descriptive title such as "Physics," "Sound," "Light,"
and follow this with the designating letters, figures, or other symbol so that the course
can be identified in the printed or other lists of courses offered. In the column headed
"Grade" put a letter to indicate the degree of difficulty of the course as follows:

E Elementary
M Medium
G Graduate
R Research

The elementary grade will cover branches taught ordinarily in the freshman or sopho-
more year, or which are taught during the first year or two of study of a subject. Medium
will include branches taught in the junior or senior year and which it is ordinarily assumed
have already been taken by a graduate continuing in physics. Graduate branches will be
those that are rarely taught except to graduate students. Research courses will be those
in which after the subject has been chosen the student is not required to follow any
set series of exercises.

128 APPENDIX

D. Give the hours at which the section convenes.

E. Give the number or other designation of the room, hall or laboratory where the
section meets.

F. Under the period give the name of the person in charge of the section as well as
the names of his assistants. The names of assistants would include helpers outside the
teaching staff. The effort will be made through this information to figure the cost of reci-
tations, laboratory work and lectures.

G. Divide the students in any section into first, second, third and fourth year men and
graduates. Then total them.

H. State how long the period is in hours.

J. There will be an entry in only one of the three columns under J, in any one line.
Thus, if it is a laboratory section with twenty students, and lasting three hours, the entry
will be sixti/, i.e., sixty student-laboratory-hours.

K. Under this column put only the time regularly spent in preparation, only the time
taken every week at the same hour. When this time is regularly devoted to the work, of
course it becomes a part of the expense of giving the lectures to which it belongs. Give
not only the name of the lecturer, but his assistants.

L. An effort will be made to determine the proportion of student-hours undertaken by
the students from free choice and those which are undertaken because of prescription,
more or less binding.

M. Please do not write under this column.

N. Use the remarks column to make clear any of the entries. Please add any exercise
in physics left over after all the sections have been listed if there are any such.

^

7,

OJ

—

—

—

—

<5

—

—

/. tX D

—

—

I
1

■s-SS

aoioiiD aoaj

1

v--^ *

1

1

J

o^i

asiaSuimaoios

|.,S

opo^ pojmbay

Hi

pojinbaj 'sqv

1

sjnoii

tli

s. '■'-

' '

'

|i|^?

.«a

1

1

m

•D^a 'ztnf)

3

■juoo 'ipan

O

->

ajinoaq

o

3
'jf5

AJo;Bjoqt!T

1

1

1

=

pouad ui sjnoH

!

i i

! 1

jaqrana [b^ox

1

o

1

^j

-*

o

T3

j_

1

3

ci

"w

w

Cfl

>'

rD

^.

^

'"'

Aq pa^sissy

■a

b

u

Ch

JO aSjBqD UI

Cs3

inooy

1

Q

ABpjoinoH

1

apL'jQ

asjno3

j

o

1

i>

O

'3

3
'72

s

JiaoAV JO .ii;(j

1 1 !

1 1

.;;

joqtunu iBuag

1 1

i 1 ^ ; ' \

INDEX

INDEX

Absences of students, 68.
Accounting departments, 8, 60, 61, 63, 64.
Advertising, college, 48, 49.
Apparatus, care of, 25, 65, 66.
Attendants, laboratory, 66.

Buildings, use of, 33-41, 50, 96, 97.

Valuation of, 74, 76.
Bursar's department, 45, 46.

Carnegie Institution of Washington, The, 65.
Catalogues, college, 47, 48.
Classes, size of, 116, 127-129,
Columbia University:

Business efficiency, 8.

Cost of physics, 33, 100, 103.

Physics experiments difficult, 31.

Rooms at Fayerweather Hall, 36.

Salaries, 79-81, 83.

Status of assistants, 26.

Superintendent of buildings and grounds,
12.

Teaching staff in physics, 78.

Time of staff, 92, 93.

Use of buildings, 97.

Value of property, 76. [116.

See also 3, 62, 68, 69, 74, 104, 106, 112-114,
Committee management, 9-14, 18, 28, 47.
Commons, college, 55, 69, 70.
Cost of teaching, 54-59, 104, 106-110, 113.
Cost of teaching physics, 98-103, 121-123.
Courses, designation of college, 47, 48.

Day, length of working, 8, 27, 28, 84, 86-90,
92, 93.
Productiveness of, 24.
Department autonomy, 12, 13.
Discipline, college, 18, 46, 47, 51, 68.
Dormitories, 55.

-ililective system, 50.
Eliot, Dr. Charles William, 6, 14, 70, 104.
Employment, bureau of, 28.
Employment bulletin, copy of, 119, 120.
Examinations, college, 52.
Expenditures, total college, 76.

Faculty, 11, 12.

Financial administration, 54-64.

Fine, Dean Henry B., 12.

Functional management, 14-17, 23, 24, 42.

Crarfield, President Harry A., 4T.
Gauge of efficiency, 19, 20.
Grounds and buildings, superintendent of, 12,
13, 42, 43.

-Harvard Untversity:

Commons, 69.

Cost of physics, 33, 100, 103.
Cost of physics research, 60.
Inventorying buildings, 6.
Manner of investment, 62.
Pamphlets, 48.
Salaries, 80-83.
Solidarity of staff, 10.
Teaching staff in physics, 77, 78.
Time of staff, 92, 93.
Treasurer's report, 63, 121-123.
Use of buildings, 96, 97.
Value of property, 74-76.
See also 3, 15, 104, 107, 112-114, 116.
Haverford College:
Commons, 69.

Cost of physics, 33, 100, 103.
Salaries, 80-83.

Teaching staff in physics, 78.
Time of staff, 93.
Use of buildings, 97.
Value of property, 74-76.
See also 3, 112-114, 116.

"Inbreeding" of teachers, 66, 77, 78.
Inspection, bureau of, 50-53.
Intensiveness, lack of, 7.
Inventories of lands and buildings, 6, 7.
Investment of funds, 62, 63.

Janitor service, interdepartmental, 43, 44.
Jefferson Physical Laboratory, Harvard Uni-
versity, 121-123.

i-/ecture notes, standardized, 24-26.
Library, college, 55, 56, 66.

JMail handling, 45.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology:

Cost of physics, 33, 101, 103.

Salaries, 80-83.

Teaching staff in physics, 77, 78,

Time of staff, 92, 93.

Use of buildings, 97.

Value of property, 74-76.

See also 3, 30, 38, 66, 104, lOS, 112-114. 116.
Mechanical Engineers, The American Society

of, 28, 119.
Military type of organization, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17.

iNoRTIIWESTERN UNIVERSITY, 45.

Organization, tj-pes of university, 9-17.
Physical Society, The American, 30, 65.

134

INDEX

Physics, cost of teaching, 98-101, 121-123.
Presidents, college, 15, 16.
Princeton University :

Committee management, 9, 11, 18.

Cost of physics, 33, 101, 103.

Department autonomy, 43.

Manner of investment, 62.

Salaries, 80-83.

Size of buildings, 41.

Teaching staff in physics, 78.

Time of staff, 92, 93.

Use of buildings, 96, 97.

Value of property, 74-76.

See also 3, 8, 10, 39, 63, 104, 108, 111-114,
116.
Publicity, bureau of, 47-49.
Purchasing department, 44, 45.

xvecords of teaching efficiency, 27.
Registrar, college, 49, 50.
Registrar's report, suggested college, 112.
Research :

Cost of, 32-34.

Demand for research workers, 27, 30.

Inspection of, 31, 32.

Student-hours in, 19, 20.

Undergraduate research, 31.
Rooms, use of college, 35-41, 96, 97.

Salaries, college:

Average, 94, 95.

Based on student-hours, 59.

Individual at institutions, 79-83.

Methods of increasing, 21, 23.

See also 29, 73, 75, 76.
Shops, 11, 42.

"Smith Technological Institute," 104-114.
Standards, modern business, 6.
Stores department, 45.
Student-hours, 19, 20, 46, 59, 97, 102, 103, 106,

112-114, 127-129.
Supplies, requisitions for, 12.

laylor. Dr. Frederick W., 15.
Teaching, amount of, 84, 86-90, 92, 93, 124-126.
Teaching force, college, 77, 78.

Tenure, professorial, 22, 23.
Toronto, Univeiisity of:

Cost of physics, 33, 101, 103.

Department autonomy, 42, 44.

Inventorying buildings, 6.

Military government, 9.

Salaries, 79-83.

Teaching staff in physics, 77, 78.

Time of staff, 92, 93.

Use of buildings, 38, 40, 97.

Value of property, 74-76.

See also 3, 66-68, 104, 109, 112-114, 116.
Treasurer's ireport, suggested college, 104-110,

113, 114.
Trowbridge, Professor John, 74.
Trustees, 12, 15, 16, 18.

V aluation of college property, 74, 76.
Van Hise, President Charles R., 35.

W iLLiAMS College :

Cost of physics, 33, 101, 103.

Salaries, 80-83.

Student-hours, 49, 50.

Teaching staff in physics, 78.

Time of staff, 92, 93.

Use of buildings, 35, 36, 39, 97.

Value of property, 76.

See also 3, 30, 40, 46, 104, 110, 112-114,116.
Wilson, Dr. Woodrow, 12.
Wisconsin, University of :

Budget, 54.

Cost of physics, 33, 101, 103.

Department government, 11.

Inventorying property, 7.

Purchasing department, 44.

Salaries, 80-83.

Stores department, 45.

Teaching staff in physics, 78.

Time of staff, 92, 93.

University government, 12.

Use of buildings, 35, 39, 43, 97.

Value of property, 75, 76.

See also 3, 104, 110, 112-114, 116.

y ALE University, 58.

370.6273 C2894Bno.5c.1

Cooke # Academic and
industrial efficiency. -

3 0005 02010025 4

376.6^75
(12894

no .5

Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.
Bulletin - Cooke, Morris
Llewellyn. Academic and
J industrial efficiencv

370.6273
C2894

no .5

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement
of Teaching.

Bulletin - Cooke, Morris Llewellyn.

Academic and industrial efficiency