In a recent article in "The Advocate", and in a communication in this column, the compulsory science requirements have been severely criticized. In general, the criticism has not been aimed at the theory of requiring some knowledge of Science as part of a general education, but at the present opportunities of acquiring such knowledge.

In this we agree. The present courses seem to be a compromise designed to meet the needs of both the concentrator and the distributor; with the concentrator having a little the best of the bargain. The chief objection of the man who is merely distributing lies in the fact that he finds in such courses little of scientific method, less of the philosophy of science, and much of the drudgery. Any remedy, in consequence, must offer less drudgery, more philosophy, and a rather more definite idea of scientific method.

A "general course" has been suggested vaguely as the remedy that would meet these requirements. We would suggest, however, two courses instead of one--these to be offered and received as "primarily for distribution". The reason for such division would be that for cultural purposes science naturally divides itself into two fairly definite fields; the dealing with the structure of matter, and the second with evolution. "Science 1" and "Science 2" would deal with these two fields.

Let us consider "Science 1"; ultimately it would probably cover, under the general topic "the structure of matter", the electron, the atom, the molecule, and all the various phenomena that are classified under such heads. And in addition it would point out the relationship between these phenomena and the phenomena of astronomy. "Science 2" would be concerned essentially with evolution, both of organic and inorganic substances. These are fields of so great importance and such large scope that the course could easily include as well the main principles of botany and zoology.

Then there is the laboratory work, which is the chief means of teaching and learning scientific method. In this work, the individual should be allowed is much latitude as possible; instead of learning how to do what he is told to do, he should be left a great deal more on his own invite that is the case at present. It would probably help in this mater to allow choice of a specific field of interest in which to do laboratory work.

Such, then, is the main plan. It will probably be object that it is very unscientific; if so, that is a reflection on the present system, which certainly gives the student an inadequate conception of what the word "scientific" means. It may be objected that these suggestions are made from the layman's point of view; but it must be remembered that it is the laymen with which Science as a field of distribution is chiefly concerned. The introduction of such courses would undoubtedly be of benefit to this layman; and it would relieve the present science courses of that need of compromise which is satisfactory neither to those generally nor to those specifically interested.