DARTMOUTH COLLEGE: AN ATTEMPT AT FORMAL INTERPRETATION
President Hopkins’ address, closing the formal exercises in Webster Hall, Monday forenoon, October 20, on occasion of the Sesqui-Centennial Exercises of Dartmouth College.
This anniversary, in celebration of the sesqui-centennial of the founding of Dartmouth College, has been held to be essentially a time for definition of purpose, rather than an occasion for self- glorification or even a time for introspective study of the past. Under such conception, in the main it is meet that we discuss policies rather than persons, principles rather than details, opportunities rather than accomplishments.
Dartmouth’s men need no encomium at this time. The historic record of the College stands and can neither much be added to nor subtracted from by words spoken in such a ceremony as this. The desirable thing is, with the inspiration of the past, that attention be focused up- on the obligations of the future which spread broad before us and widen as they disappear in the far distance of the mental horizon.
If the fathers were to speak to us today we may be sure how positive, in the exigencies of the present, would be their injunctions to scan the future, however much we should review the past. We may indeed assume what would be the disposition of that great heart whose motto for the College was the motto he strove so steadily to exem- plify in his own life, “Vox Clamantis In Deserto.”
It has been in the thought of those who devised this program, therefore, that amid the general addresses and dis- cussions of this day there should be a brief credo, specifically in behalf of Dartmouth College, suggesting the be- lief and conviction with which this Col- lege approaches the responsibilities of the times upon which the world is now entering. To me has been assigned this task, which I approach in behalf of my associafes and attempt for myself with solemn desire that the interpretation may be a true one.
The whole spirit of the foundation of Dartmouth College, even when inter- preted through the context of modern conditions, is a challenge to develop ori- ginal thought and to do intelligent pio- neer work; to ignore convention if it be- comes restrictive and to avoid standard- ization if it becomes entangling.
To such a challenge there can be but one answer and it is our longing that we may completely meet the terms of the challenge, safeguarding meanwhile that however we may work differently, we still may never work in ignorance of what others do or without respect for it. Indeed, as much as anything else, we crave the spirit of generous appreciation of other types of education and of other institutions of the college world in the processes they utilize and the results they secure. We hope, likewise, that we may do nothing simply for the sake of being different, that we may disregard no method of proved effectiveness that may be applicable to our work.
I emphasize this point of possible differences because I think that I speak for the thoughtful men of Dartmouth’s trustees and faculty and alumni when I say that we are not at all certain that ours is not a responsibility separate and apart from that which in general appertains to the American college. Perhaps, as well, it is true that we are not greatly concerned whether it is so or not. I simply pause in this open forum to beg the indulgence of our guests if for a moment we more than suggest a conviction that our task is one distinguished by its uniqueness. With such premises, therefore, our con- clusion is bound to result that, be our problem what it may, we purpose to seek its solution first in the light of our own experience and of our own reason- ing, and only secondly in the light of a comparative study of what has been deemed wise elsewhere.
At the same time, however, it is of course obvious that no self-satisfied in- dependence nor any arrogant pride of authorship could be in conformity with the spirit of a foundation which was as altruistic as it was idealistic,—a foun- dation whose comprehensive object was to be of maximum inspiration to greatly diversified types and conditions of men.
It is to be recognized at this point that the very claim and effort of the College to train for leadership may easily become a perverted purpose, if its interpreta- tion is faulty and if its object is to put the greatest possible distance between the individual and the group, rather than to advance the group the greatest pos- sible distance towards the best leader- ship. Lives of men in these times daily become more inclusive rather than ex- clusive. The objective of leadership must be to surround itself with associ- ates rather than to enroll subordinates.
As naturally as water flows down hill, so power tends to flow from the few to the many; and authority swims in the current of power. Thus, now, such as- sembled rivulets of the -past form streams, insistent and unrestrainable ex- cept at the expense of destroying floods. The problem of education becomes to train men for constructing channels in which mighty currents may flow rather than in devising barriers in fruitless at- tempt to obstruct swollen streams.
The function of the privately en- dowed, traditional college may conceiv- ably be a far different function from that of the modern, publicly supported, state college. The function of the historic college, existent as an individual unit, is certainly distinct from that of the college which is maintained as the undergradu- ate department and feeder for the uni- versity. Moreover, it is not to be disre- garded that the opportunity of the col- lege isolated from the turmoil of con- tacts with industrialism in commercial centers, or separated from the problems of congestion in urban groups, may be quite different from that of institutions of such environments.
I do not mean by this to argue that Dartmouth’s type, or any specific type, is best for all men or for the majority of men; but I definitely do mean to raise the question whether it might not be well that the selective processes for admission to the respective kinds of colleges, vari- ously conditioned and variously located, should be better devised for defining the characteristics of those who are likely to be most benefited by contact with the respective attributes of the different kinds of colleges.
It not infrequently seems to me, as I consider processes common to us all, that the procedures of college education are more concerned with an attempt to establish the fact that certain methods and devices are an education than that an education comprises certain definite and essential things. Likewise, it some- times seems to me that the ways in which things shall be done loom so important in the minds of all of us that there can be only with greatest difficulty any com- mensurate interest in what the achieve- ment shall be, in other words, that the delicacy and polish of the machinery is given more attention than the product.
Yet, on the other hand, I am quite clear in my conviction that whatever be true of the spirit of the graduate school or that of the university, the first ob- ligation, though not the only one, of the undergraduate college is as markedly as possible to level up the mass of the selected group which it accepts, rather than to give sole consideration to a refined process of distillation, by which a small modicum of ultra-excellence shall be produced, at the cost of vital effort and wasted time for the great ma- jority. I should not wish to have to apologize for a theory of procedure by which any considerable numbers of men which the College accepted through its selective processes should find the ad- vantages of the College inaccessible to them. If I am right in this interpreta- tion, it means simply a policy of the greatest good to the greatest number and a technique of operation which shall as- sure this. Moreover, by such a policy, in my belief, the inspiration for highest excellence of intellectual accomplish- ment in the few is as definitely furnished as in any other way.
The college, therefore, cannot do with- out requirements and disciplinary pro- cesses to secure its desirable results. But it is exactly at this point that it has to be particularly solicitous that prescribed procedure, when it becomes non-es- sential, shall not be allowed to stand merely for the sake of maintaining the glory of the prescription; that nothing shall be done simply for the sake of do- ing it, without some desirable end in view.
I believe that the first and the para- mount obligation of Dartmouth College is to develop the minds of its men, to expand the mental capacity of the indi- vidual man by its training and to enlarge the area within which the individual mind shall be expected to work by the breadth and the comprehensiveness of the subject matter of its curriculum. But I believe no less strongly that this is not the whole obligation. The function of the College is not primarily to de- velop intellectualism but intelligent men, and this purpose is not observed if con- sideration is given only to the mind, while the soul and the body are left to the whims of chance. Mental processes of high voltage, in operation apart from the directive guidance of fundamental char- acter derived from moral fibre, may give on the one hand, in the words of the re- port of the English Labor Party, “light without warmth,” while on the other hand, they may become simply irrespon- sible distributors of new refinements of destructive genius.
The college must, as well, preclude all that makes for impairment of physi- cal well-being and must encourage all that makes for health. In short, while conceding and accepting the magnitude of its obligation to develop mentality of strength and accuracy, the college must, as essential corollaries of this, safeguard the physical and moral standards of col- lective living and offer individual inspir- ation for the development of spiritual excellence.
I believe that in its nature the college partakes alike of the characteristics of the preparatory school and of the grad- uate school and that neither phase can be ignored without detriment to the work of the college. At this point we come squarely up to the question of what should be the qualifications and attri- butes of a member of the instruction force in the college. And herein I be- lieve that the American college has suf- fered injury untold by accepting stand- ards from the graduate schools which, in turn, were accepted from abroad and which had little application to the prob- lem faced by the American college whatever their value elsewhere. I know of nothing more unreasonable nor of anything more deleterious to the self- respect of the American college than that so many men of ample training and of broad learning, with real enthusiasm for contributing to undergraduates not only of their knowledge but of their zest for life should, on the one hand, lack the complete respect of their associates or, on the other hand, be deprived of the satisfactions of reputation because of the great delusion which has pervaded the college world, to its loss, that a record of research only, if of sufficient pro- fundity more than compensated either for incomplete manhood or for incapacity or indisposition to recognize the real pur- poses of the American college. I believe that the time has come when we should free ourselves from the cant and soph- istries that still pervade college circles on such points as these. We should be at least as watchfully solicitous to avoid the evils of professionalization in our college instruction as we are in our col- lege athletics! Research is important, yes; production is important, yes; teach- ing ability is important, most emphati- cally yes. But, if it be conceded that all three are not indispensable in the in- dividual, let us be honest enough to ac- knowledge that teaching ability is not first to be sacrificed.
Personally, my opinion would be that teaching ability is essential in all men who are to be permitted to meet under- graduate classes; and that the fact should be faced squarely that if men who lack proper respect for the serv- ice of teaching and fail to understand the glory of its service are to be associ- ated with the institution, then they should be withheld from contacts, the opportunities of which they fail to grasp, and their work should be applied at points where it can be most productive. I would not be understood as arguing for the elimination of desire for opportunities for research from the teacher’s mind, for I recognize the inspirational value of such work to teaching. The emphasis, however, belongs on the teaching. There is need of considerably more frank- ness as well as honesty in the col- leges in facing this problem than has sometimes existed. It may well be that university men of maturer age and keener eagerness can secure essential benefit from surveying and absorbing the excellence of scholarship of a distin- guished group which composes a faculty whose interest is only incidentally in transmitting the knowledge it possesses. In a college, however, the transmissive quality must be reckoned of high value, it being required, of course, that scholar- ship shall be true and thorough in what is to be transmitted. And further, I would not hesitate to add that the more completely these qualities are embodied in men of physical stamina and in men of spiritual worth, the more complete the assurance with which the college can undertake its work.
I hold it true beyond the possibility of cavil that the criterion of the strength of a college is essentially the strength of its faculty. If the faculty is strong, the college is strong; if the faculty is weak, the college is weak. Plant, material equipment, financial resources, adminis- trative methods, trustee organization, alumni enthusiasm and loyalty, are but accessory to the getting and holding of strength at this point,—none of them in- significant in importance, but all of them subordinate. To the extent that any of these is a contributing factor to increased strength in the instruction corps, to that extent it is of major importance. All else is of less consequence.
Finally, the historic colleges of this country are products of religious im- pulse and in so far as they glory in their birthrights they must glory in this. This impulse expresses itself in different forms in different periods and has tended steadily from the beginning of the Mid- dle Ages to evolve from exemplification in a setting itself apart in adoration to a cooperation in service. The ac- ceptance of the implication of the fact that holiness and wholeness are from the same root has been instinctive, if not conscious, with the result that ascetism as an ideal has given way to responsible naturalness.
It would be an affectation for us to define the purpose of Dartmouth College in the pious_ phrases of the eighteenth century, but it would be an unforgivable omission to ignore the present day equiv- alents of the motives which actuated Eleazar Wheelock in his unceasing ef- forts to establish this foundation. The founder’s altruistic purpose of convert- ing the heathen savage to the glory of God becomes in modern parlance a de- sire to convert society to the welfare of man. Either purpose requires the high- est idealism, and the highest idealism is the purest religion, the symbol of which is God and the manifestation of which is the spirit of Christ.
May this ever be the spirit of Dart- mouth College!
