require conferences with their poor students. The large college also gets along with the longer interval; as between the conference once in two weeks and that once in six or seven, the ratio is: Large college-frequent 12%, infrequent 54%. Small college-frequent 31%, infrequent 31%. In reading, the large college nearly three times as often makes no requirement, and requires a really considerable amount in only about two-thirds the proportion of the small college. The tabulations follow-first the general one, then that which shows the groupings. Average number in a section Colleges admitting more than 30 Colleges admitting fewer than 25 Average number of meetings a week Colleges using more than 3 meetings Colleges using fewer than 3 meetings Average number of pages of original MS per capita each week Colleges requiring more than 5 pages Average Per- Average number of short themes a week Average number of long themes a semester. 2 Colleges usually requiring long themes to be rewritten Colleges usually not requiring such rewriting.. ... Colleges not using these classifications... Colleges using a weekly conference. Percentage 7 82 10 8 6 Colleges using a biweekly conference. Colleges using a monthly conference.. 18 10 Colleges using 2 to 3 conferences a semester... Colleges requiring no reading in literature. Colleges requiring 1000 pages or more each semester .. 35 53 11 25 55 Colleges using no textbooks 3 Colleges putting special stress on literature.. Thank God for the cool, fresh wind that sings, -CAROLINE PARKER SMITH. Average number in a section Average number of meetings a week ...... Percentage usually requiring long themes to be ... Percentage not requiring individual conference.. students Percentage requiring conference only with poor ....... Percentage using a weekly conference Percentage requiring no reading in pure literature ....... Percentage requiring 1000 pages or more each semester .... *This group includes only 6 institutions. .... ...... 50 50 33 33 50 33 20 6 37 20 7 .. 80 10 25 25 10 10 4 10 10 10 50 20 8 60 17 The Orientation of College Freshmen GLEN A. BLACKBURN, DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY, P ERHAPS no reform or innovation in higher education has so swiftly and absorbingly engaged the attention of the academic world as the problem of properly inducting the college freshman into the complexities of existence on a modern campus. Although research in industrial personnel and experimentation in vocational adjustment has been going on for a number of years, both in universities and in the industrial clinic, conscious attempts to motivate or objectify college life has only begun to be extensively studied. The chief role in building modern colleges and universities has been played by the publicity directors, whose salary is usually in direct proportion to the number of students attracted, and physical equipment paid for by gifts extracted either from a reluctant public or from a stubborn legislature. As a result of the work of these experts we are now confronted with a plentiful number of well-populated colleges; and we are just beginning to seriously ask ourselves what is to be done with this immense herd of impetuous, purposeless youngsters whom we have beguiled for four years from their home environment. Most college administrators are fumbling inexpertly with the problem, if they are giving it any attention at all; but the greatest single step was taken when educators came to realize that a supercilious neglect of a campus problem could in no way annihilate or mitigate it. The post-war rush to the American college intensified the struggle between the academic and "country club" tendencies by swamping the colleges with this horde of rather flacculent youth. It is the alarming possibility presented by this class of students which prompted the first serious study of the campus as a theatre of social growth. College life had heretofore been regarded as an abnormal and half-monastic sort of life, not coming under the same laws as other social units. As a matter of fact, the only difference between the college and any other common institution is the absence of certain specialized functions and the intensification of others. It is not the purpose of this article to analyze the college campus as a social unit, nor to criticize the assignment of emphasis to the various college activities; but an attempt will be made to indicate the progress already achieved in the orientation of college freshmen, and perhaps, to point out some possible lines of development for the future. The writer necessarily speaks from his own experience largely, because the newness of the subject permits only a scanty literature. Moreover, actual experience in directing freshman orientation has proven that much of the discussion of the problem by college executives is rather vapid idealism; and most current theories, be they ever so ingratiating and comfortable to a particular dean or president, soar grandly in the academic heavens without so much as a riffle in the sluggish undergraduate atmosphere. There are two principal kinds of orientation courses. The first is the "preview course," which is strictly academic in nature and is somewhat specialized, as the Social Science course given at Clark University, or the "Nature of the World and of Man" given at the University of Chicago. Such courses are intended to acclimate the student to a rather broad field of learning, and are purely academic. The other course is the "campus orientation" course, which usually treats on such subjects as methods of study, social responsibilities of the student, problems of hygiene, religious activities and obligations, and other materials which will enable the new student to enter more comfortably and successfully into the life of the campus. In order to provide a basis for the organization of a course |