Carrying Regulation Too Far.

(The CRIMSON assumes no responsibility for sentiments expressed in this column).

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

The movement at Yale to regulate the number of undergraduate activities in which a student may participate indicates that those responsible for the idea had no faith in the adage "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink." Furthermore, the ruling is quite in keeping with the spirit of the times, when apparently the entire nation has gone quite mad on the subject of regulating anything and everything. National Prohibition has passed; various states are trying to introduce into their legislatures bills to prohibit the smoking of cigarettes; the Postal Telegraph Company has been almost regulated out of business; the railroads will be so regulated that, by the time they are returned to their original owners, they will be unrecognizable. And now we are beginning to "regulate" even the undergraduates in their various extra-curriculum activities!

In regard to the changes in the curriculum at Yale, the influence of Prussianism is very evident. It has been said before in these columns but will bear repeating, that while Yale does not consider that a Freshman is sufficiently mature to select his courses without interference, it nevertheless obliges him to decide what his life work is going to be and to map out his career in college accordingly. Naturally it was not the intention of those who planned this "reformation" to establish such a contradiction but the result as the system now stands can hardly be otherwise. A young student will either make up his mind thoughtlessly and regret it later or else he will be entirely dominated by those who are appointed to guide him in his choice. The benefits from a "humanitarian" education to assist one in deciding upon ones career will be entirely eliminated. It will be "concentration" carried to the nth degree, but the "distribution" will very largely be lacking.

Not content with reforming the curriculum, they must needs reform the extra-curriculum activities at Yale. And this is mainly the work of the students themselves. But in such an atmosphere of reform it would hardly be reasonable to suppose that even the irresponsible undergraduate could escape the fever. It is worse than a revivalist camp meeting! The paramount idea in this reform is, of course, that provided men do not give as much time to outside activities, they will devote more time to their studies. By preventing a man from doing more than a certain amount of athletics, writing, managing, etc., he will be faced with the alternative of spending more time on his studies or of doing nothing. This method of attack seems to be putting the cart before the horse. There is no effort made to make the curriculum more attractive to the student or to foster in him a desire to learn more or to take a high rank. Not at all. He can either study or loaf but at all events we shall deny him the privilege of outside activities.

It hardly seems that the problem can be solved in such a simple manner. The undergraduate is a stubborn brute--with a little clever manipulation you can lead him anywhere you will but it is an almost impossible task to drive him with a whip. And this it seems to me, is what they are attempting at New Haven. There is but one way to make the undergraduate pay more attention to his books. That is, to increase his desire to learn; stimulate his curiosity and his ambition and make him conscious of his mental inferiority. Why do undergraduates slave and work over their extra-curriculum activities? Because they make a direct appeal to ambition and pride. The thought that they may derive great good from these activities does not generally enter a student's head until long after he has graduated from college. Every undergraduate activity that is worth while has to be bought at the price of a long and strenuous competition. This competition is what lifts these activities from the level of social amusements to training of the highest order, the enormous value of which will become apparent as soon as the student is turned loose upon the world and is required to face it. The present movement at Yale will so lower the standard of these competitions that a great deal of their value will be removed. There are always more "big" jobs than there are men with the requisite ability to fill them--and this is particularly true in college. That is why we so frequently see a few men holding several important positions. By restricting the number of such positions that a man may hold, we are not raising the standard to the highest possible level in such a way that the largest number may derive the most benefit. We are lowering the standard to a level that will enable men of mediocre ability to attain these positions without undue effort on their part and we are removing to a very large extent the stimulus of intense competition upon which all achievement must in the last analysis, be based. Once remove the idea of competition from your undergraduate activities and the sooner you remove the activities themselves the better, for their incalculable value lies almost wholly in competition.

There are many things to be considered before a reform is instituted, but let us never forget to ask ourselves whether we shall derive more benefits from the new system than we did from the old. This is the acid test of all reform, however great our enthusiasm for it may be.  E. A. WHITNEY '17