|
|
||||||||
Iowa State College
Abstract
A study of the Animal Husbandry curricula from a group of Land Grant institutions indicates that there is general agreement with the idea expressed in the title of the paper just presented by Dr. Mitchell.
In the curricula examined there is a very apparent difference of opinion regarding the number of credit hours of Chemistry needed, some institutions requiring more than twice as much as others, but the requirement of some chemistry is, of course, unanimous. In view of this situation it would seem that the committee which selected the topic could hardly have anticipated any argument on the negative side of the question as stated. Possibly as deans, student counselors, and classifying officers, they are seeking some new or revised ideas to help answer that old undergraduate question"Why should I take chemistry?" If this be so then Dr. Mitchell's paper should serve their purpose admirably. For their benefit I have attemtped to summarize what he has said in these few words. The science and the business of agriculture are being developed and revised more rapidly now than ever before. Experimentation and practice are providing a mass of detailed knowledge which no mind can hope to master. In this situation, basic principles and ingenuity in applying them, are far more valuable than exact directions developed for specific problems. This seems to call for a type of education which teaches students to think and reason and gives them something to think and reason with, rather than one which merely fills their heads with facts.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |