0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

Image 6 of Kentucky alumnus, vol. 3, no. 08, 1917

Part of Kentucky alumnus

'A· i 4. THE KENTUCKY ALUMNUS. i is \1\/hen the Carnegie Foundation was first estab- ji C Th': (`¤*”“°¤i° F°““d¤*i°“· lished, it was not intended that the Land Grant ll, Scmti V Colleges should enjoy its benefits. Later, at the we an unanimous request of the Land Grant Colleges of the United States, they were deficit admitted to the privileges of the Foundation, although the action required an _ increase of the endowment from ten million dollars to fifteen million dollars. ;_i wml]. y From the time of the establishment of the Carnegie Foundation, its great _ value has been fully recognized by the foremost educational institutions of the ` · country. The dominating idea at the time of the establishment of the Founda- I ’ tion seems to have been to provide retiring allowances for teachers, but educa- tors soon learned that this was only one of its great functions. There is scarcely T€l?lil` A a college or university, or even a high school, in the country that has not directly $1 D0$$U or indirectly felt its beneficial infiuences. The preparatory schools have been Yi rosili ~ compelled to strengthen their courses in order to meet the higier entrance re- 1 D0i‘itl quirements of the higher institutions brought about by the standards required by °° b?\FT¤¤ the Carnegie Foundation. The whole movement has been a matter of striving Q_ WY 0 ` · for greater excellence in curricula, teaching and administration. be CIT 1 “ Any institution of higher learning may make application for admission to Ou th' j, the benefits of the Foundation, but there are many conditions which may cause _ men A . a refusal to grant the request. For example: “The Trustees of the Foundation -’ ed fl reserve the right to decline the application of any such institution if it is subject ’i COMM to political control or interference which, in the opinion of the Trustees of the 1 _Ii Foundation, impairs its educational el`ticiency." .r of lis l The following extract from Dr. Pritchett`s preface to the bulletin on Aca— ‘ mmf; p , demic and Industrial Etiiciency gives an idea of the comprehensive way in which iuqpir ` university efficiency is studied by the Foundation. * * * * * “They may gain '`_i_ Shlml y » _ from the intelligent study of college forms of organization a real help from Mbcy , those who conduct industrial enterprises, without at the same time in any meas- i whicli ,. ure losing sight of the fact that scholarly and spiritual leadership is the highest “_hO'( ` quality of college elliciency and the one most necessary to attain." ,1 i ,i There is no greater stimulus to excellence and the exercise of human ]. " r ingenuity than competitive exhibits where the products of all competitors are ' *1 l carefully scrutinized by well qualified and disinterested judges, where those of C EXW i greatest excellence are appropriately rewarded and where the less fortunate m’ij‘ Q years i _ learn the standards of excellence for which they must strive if they would suc- * jive I if ceed. All are wiser and more capable because of having competed and naturally \-Crm _, strive to correct their short comings. ( if; There are a number of scholarly men on our faculty who are worthy of the F benefits of the Carnegie Foundation. It is unfair to them to deprive them of I- T these benefits because the institution as a whole does not measure up to f standards. Men who are worthy of the benefits will refuse to attach themselves tm _ r here, and ultimately we will have a faculty of mediocre qualifications it the con- if . _O dltions are not removed. · Tiuic , , nghe _ ·`: _ ` to its » .