trained men who have a thorough knowledge of the things in which they have been trained and who show an increasing executive ability. A considerable number of people seem to think that the so-called management course, which has been prominently before the public in recent years, is a high road to executive control in industry without of the necessity of a future executive going through the rub of learning the scientific fundamentals on which the industry is based and learning the business itself from the bottom up. Men who have been taking old-line courses are sometimes beginning to wonder whether they have not chosen wrongly, to wonder if a knowledge of the fundamentals of business is necessary. This attitude of mind, combined with the increasing demands which have been made on our technical school facilities, has tended to weaken rather than strengthen the inherent abilities of the very young men who are going to be the leaders of the future. The danger here to industry would be far greater were it not for the fact that the colleges, as distinct from the technical schools, have begun to supply industry with the material for which we used to look to the technical schools. The colleges and universities are beginning to turn out more men as physicists, chemists, and physical chemists, who are finding their places in industry and ultimately becoming engineers in much the same manner as I did myself. The universities, I believe, through their courses in physics and chemistry are supplying the need just as the technical schools did 35 or 40 years ago.

A picture of our college training and industrial demand as it has developed in the last few decades is somewhat as follows: At one time no engineering schools; then engineering schools following closely the fundamental sciences, gradually spending more time on the applications and details than upon fundamentals. Today, if the engineering schools are going to perform their real function for industry, they must get back closer to the problem of teaching, of really inculcating, the fundamental sciences. Let the matter of trying to make executives go if you will. The men with executive ability will come to the front in the general run of things, provided they have the right human traits and a thorough knowledge of the fundamentals. Industry itself has a large blame in this deficiency of our technical schools. It has not, in general, analyzed its own requirements in a way to make it possible for the colleges, universities, and technical schools to plan satisfactorily their curricula and courses of study. Common problems, which confront industry and the institutions that supply our human material, must be analyzed and specifications written out for the kind of men we want.

D. C. JACKSON, professor of electrical engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The cooperation between engineering schools and industries depends upon the industries understanding the

problems of teachers in the engineering schools, just as it depends, to a large degree, upon teachers understanding some of the problems of the industries.

A man's best teaching is done from a textbook that he has written himself. The textbooks must represent his coordination of knowledge that he is going to teach. A man must write books to keep himself mentally alive; he must study the process of teaching or carry on research. A competent engineer and teacher must have one of these outlets. In engineering administration and electrical engineering, the two largest courses in our institution, students study the fundamentals. The industries will find that both courses are going to prove serviceable.

F. P. WALKER, dean, school of engineering, University of Kansas. It is a sound policy for some institutions to provide opportunity for some of their students to take up courses of study which include business subjects, to base that program of work on a solid foundation which is fundamentally engineering. Students who come through these new courses of training are just as well equipped to do engineering work as were the majority of men who graduated from standard engineering courses, say 25 years ago, and who are now, after years of experience, in the leading engineering and executive positions among the industries of the country.

About 15 years ago I made a study of the records of about 1,000 mechanical engineers, graduates of representative technical schools, who had been out of school from 5 to 25 years. Of the number who had been out 10 to 15 years or more, amounting to several hundred, the men were found to be divided almost equally into two groups. The one group had remained in strict engineering work and were filling positions with the titles of engineer, chief engineer, etc., while the other half were men who had become presidents, secretaries, general managers, and superintendents of industrial organizations. It is with these facts in my mind that I formed the opinion that it is most proper for us as we go on in this work of broadening our curricula to meet business conditions, to keep our men thoroughly grounded in the fundamentals of engineering.

In many of the State institutions of the West we are unable to determine entrance requirements, because of the State laws which prescribe conditions of entrance. The standard for preliminary training of students is being lowered. We have a harder struggle each year to meet the situation. The five-year program may be advisable, using the additional time in the form of a preliminary year.

Col. KEPPELE HALL, Joseph and Feiss Co., Cleveland, Ohio. A great responsibility rests on engineers and educators who are preparing young men to become engineers. Without question the commercial engineer, the industrial or management engineer, will assume

more and more the burden of executive control in business. He will have to solve the problems of industry, problems of unemployment, strikes, etc., due to bad management. The technical courses have been thoroughly prepared. The engineer must possess, however, common business sense and the knowledge of how to deal with his fellow man, must think straight and act intelligently. That is a much bigger problem for the educator than the question of how many hours the student shall spend on this or that subject.

In solving our engineering problems per se we have definite rules; our thinking is based on facts. In the other field we do not think as clearly as we should. Then the students must be taught to think and form their own judgments; to do some constructive thinking on matters relating to the conduct of industry, to labor and capital, etc. One more point. There is a certain danger in alliances between educational institutions and big industrial establishments. That must be faithfully guarded against. Our bigger industrial organizations may wish to dominate our educational institutions for their own aggrandizement and profit.

Those problems are to be solved with the cooperation of teachers and of those on the outside in the engineering and business professions who not only know how important the underlying principles are but how important practical experience is. Both must be fortified by sound principles of decency, common sense, and good free high thinking.

F. PAUL ANDERSON, dean of engineering, University of Kentucky. Technical graduates must be made to realize on commencement day that they are in no sense engineers, but that they may some day become engineers if they will enter vigorously into the work of some organization and devote themselves for 10 or 15 years to learning somebody's business. To succeed in an industrial organization they must be able to obey orders.

Colleges must train their students to be men. The technical schools should not attempt to make specialists. Their aim is to train thoroughly in fundamentals. This is true also of the business administration departments of universities. It is impossible to make a banker, a great merchant, or a learned engineer at 19 years of age. And then the technical schools should send their graduates into the world in a humble attitude to learn somebody's business.

Commercial engineering, a term that has appeared only recently," implies an effort to unite human qualities and characteristics with excellent engineering practices. Preparation for careers of dependability and unselfishness in our industries requires two training schools, the college and the industry itself. The graduate from a technical course begins to learn something relative to commercial

engineering by entering a high-grade industry where he must obey orders and can learn some of the important processes and traditions that colleges can not give him at all. The colleges, however, must lay the foundation and give some attention to those personal graces so necessary to the well-balanced individual, so much needed at the present time in all American manufacturing plants.

The engineer, to attain the position of leadership to which his professional service entitles him, must be an English scholar as well as a scientist and technician. No one in all life's relationships has more vital and fascinating observations to relate than the engineer. It is just as essential for the engineer to be able to express his deliberations through written and spoken language as it is for him to be able to convey his technical ideas through the language of mechanical drawing. The banker, the economist, the business executive, the railroad president, and the layman must be addressed in the mother tongue.

It would not be a bad idea to address the engineering graduate thus: Start in the industrial world in a humble attitude to learn somebody's business. Obey orders with a smile. Do not let a single skilled mechanic or executive of the old school know that you have just received your diploma. A college course is a fine tool, but it must be in the hands of a master to be effective.

Engineering is the art of organizing and directing men and, incidentally, controlling the forces of nature for the benefit of the human race. But the principal thing in engineering is the same as in banking or any business. The real work, therefore, of the university should be to give an intellectual basis to the youngster who intends to follow an industrial or engineering career. If this is done, there will be no particular difficulty about the college-trained man being able to cope with the problems and responsibilities of the ever widening and varying world of industry.

E. M. HERR, president Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Co., East Pittsburgh, Pa. There is no royal road to a place of commanding importance in industry or any other business; nor is it the function of an educational institution to try to teach young men to be captains of industry, or administrators, or occupy very great and important executive positions. That quality in man is not capable of being taught in an educational institution. It's got to be developed in actual contact with human affairs; but it can only be developed well if the man who is engaged in industry is thoroughly grounded in the fundamentals of engineering and science.

If young men are thoroughly grounded in fundamentals, in the basic principles underlying the science of engineering, and are trained in taking and executing administrative orders diligently and faithfully, the talent will develop if it is in them.

C. R. MANN, chairman of operations and training division, General Staff, War Department. A summary of the debate to-day would indicate that we are going to achieve our ideals in engineering and thorough education by training men in fundamentals. But what are fundamentals, for example, of physics or calculus? How are we going to find out what fundamentals of any subject are unless we record the activities in which they find actual expression in the engineering and commercial work of to-day and then analyze the record to find out what the fundamentals are?

HUGO DIEMER, director of industrial management division, La Salle Extension University. In coordinating the work of the engineering school with industry there is a distinct demarcation between industrial engineering and the teaching of business fundamentals to engineers. There are branches in industry, such as planning, laying out the plant, time and motion studies, job analyses and industrial researches of a scientific nature, arranging the equipment, providing the storage of material, the most economic handling of material, scheduling, dispatching, cost accounting, and control, which are distinctly the work of the industrial engineer. There are also laboratory investigations in college which typify fundamental principles for industrial engineering just as much as others do in the old-fashioned experiments for mechanical engineering. For instance, instead of measuring the moisture in steam or calibrating an indicator spring, we can get just as good fundamentals in analyzing the prime elements, the factors which repeat themselves, irrespective of the magnitude of the work, in operating a lathe or a machine tool, or in analyzing all of the conditions relating to production work.

Business men say sometimes that the average industrial engineer does not understand men; nor can he sell his ideas. At a recent convention two speakers attributed this largely to the fact that most industrial engineers have been originally mechanical or civil engineers, picking up their business knowledge by noon-day luncheon talks and through business publications. There is a real opportunity here for the school. The engineer must not be thing-minded; he must become man-minded.

A. J. HUGHES, dean of the Harvard Engineering School, Cambridge, Mass. Educational problems present themselves to some schools in ways that require radically different solutions than in other schools. Harvard is trying to coordinate engineering and business training by offering in the engineering school, with the cooperation of the school of business administration, a group of five-year programs of study combining engineering and business, the engineering courses to be given by the faculty of the engineering