Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1924 [PAGE 299]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

296

board of trustees

[September 25,

the second prize forty per cent.; but it is m y belief that afirstprize of seventy-five dollars will do more to stimulate interest in the purpose of the prize than a lesser sum, and that a second prize of twenty-five dollars will serve as an additional stimulus to contestants. The present rate of interest of the $2,300 in securities which I have turned over will produce for several years to come an income of over $141, which is considerably more than enough for the two prizes and to pay for inserting the names on the tablet and for engrossing the certificate; but I think it wise to allow this excess to accumulate against the time when, owing to the probable decrease in rate of interest, the annual income on the original £2,300 m a y not be sufficient to meet the charges against the fund. 4. For somewhat obvious reasons it seems to be wise that the prize should be limited to Civil Engineering Seniors, and should also be limited to students who have been in attendance at the University for their junior year. 5. In making up an award it seems to m e that the items in the following exhibit might properly have consideration and valuation somewhat as stated: Basis of Award (1) Scholarship of work of the senior year as determined from University records . _ • •. 7 ° % (2) Authorship of technical articles or editorial activity on a College technical journal, to be awarded on the judgment of the Dean and the Heads of the Departments , 10% (3) Activity in technical organizations of the Civil Engineering Students, as officer, committee-man, attendant, or contributor, to be awarded on the recommendation of the Head of the Civil Engineering Department 10% (4) General characteristics, such as trustworthiness, pleasing personality, initiative, resourcefulness, judgment, executive ability, breadth of view, promise of leadership, etc., to be awarded upon the recommendation of the Head of the Civil Engineering Department 10% Ttl oa 100% 6. I believe it would be wise to make the award shortly before Commencement, and that the award should be based upon the work of the senior year of the curriculum. I appreciate that there m a y be some difficulty in meeting these two somewhat conflicting conditions. In m y opinion only students should be eligible who had been graduated in August, October, or February preceding, or who are to graduate at the approaching Commencement. 7. It is not improbable that in the administration of the above conditions it will be necessary to discriminate between a student who has a smaller number of hours and a higher grade, and another student who has a greater number of hours but a lower grade. Without attempting to fix any hard and fast rules, m a y I be permitted to say that I think that some credit should be given to the student who carries the greater number of hours, provided the extra hours are taken to broaden the range of his education; but I do not think that a student should have any such credit for extra hours which he carried because he was back in the work of earlier years. 8. I think that a technical article considered in this competition should not have received any other prize, and must have been produced by the author without collaboration with others. Previous presentation before a technical society or previous publication that,studiedhis orconsiderationgreatlywas ofsomeoraboveon were antime I to the concludedto inIhis College ityoushall be oneand whether known of student article ineligible.IIfunwise whilesomecandidacycandidacyof pleased.solution until theknown ofhave mattercarefully a to implied, annecessary as to 4 If a but a is whole award. probably have have make other items 3 some for prizes;reasonsstatement should is requiredthanin your wisdom underannouncement the notthe studentmake desirable, it be more9. a candidate, given such a his technical journal should not this phase announce than I can for condition. activities if find better not the could