To the Faculty of the
School of Education:

Your curriculum committee has had one meeting to discuss the
general plan of procedure dealing with the numerous items that must be
considered if we are to give adequate answers to the questions raised
by Chencellor Malott in his address at our last feculty meeting. In
view of the suggestion by Dean Stouffer at an earlier meeting that re-
vision of the entire graduate program in Education is an urgent need,
your committee decided that it might be well to begin with this portion
of the progrem. We feel that we may be able to accomplish some signi-
ficant results in this area in the next few weeks and perhaps have &
revised list of courses ready for use by September. In view of the
possibility that we may have some members of the armed forces returning
to school for graduate work within the next several months it seems de-
sirable to review our present set-up and make improvements at the ear-
liest possible date. This does not mean that we consider the under-
graduate training program, the possibility of nursery school education,
the improvement of the training school, the re-ostablishment of the Bur-
eau of School Service, the recruitment of teachers, as less important
than the graduate work. They are not. However, they probably will re-
quire more extended study and it is doubtful if a completely revised
offering can be worked out before the summer or fall of 1946. Because
of the work done on the graduate courses three years ago much of the
usual preliminary work will not be necessary. We can begin with the
present set-up and can start consideration of courses almost at once.

To do this effectively we need your help. No changes should
be made without full consideration and discussion by the entire faculty.
Will you please study carefully the present graduate offerings of the
Department of Education and then send to the chairman of the curriculum
committee, 121 Fraser, your suggestions on the following items:

lL. What changes, if -any, should be made in the statement
of objectives, scope of study, admission prerequisites,
requirements, and programs leading to the various gradu-
ate degrees?

Is our present grouping of courses into five fields
(administration and supervision, curriculum, education-
al psychology. snd guidance, educational theory ond
philosophy, evaluation) satisfactory? Should we have
other groupings? Are the courses rightly classified

or should some of them be shifted?

Is our present list of specialized courses necessary?
Should some of them be dropped and the others be as-
signed to one of the main fields?