T HE Nat ional Conference on Educat ion in the Neurological Sciences was organized extremely well by the American Academy of Neurology and the American Neurological Association with suppor t f rom the Nat iona l Ins t i tu te of Neurological Diseases and Blindness. I t was held a t The Greenbrier, White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia, on N o v e m b e r 13 16, 1966. There were abou t ~4 neurosurgeons a t the meeting, each assigned to one of the 14 round table groups. There were between 14 and 18 individuals in each group, including representa t ives f rom neurosurgery, neurology, neurophysiology, neuroana tomy, ncuropathology, and other basic sciences, with a scat ter ing of deans and adminis t ra tors . There were s t imulat ing p lenary addresses, par t icular ly those by Dr. Joseph Hinsey; Dr . Pau l Sanazaro, of the Association of American Medical Colleges; and Dr. Aura Severinghaus, former Professor of Ana t om y a t Columbia and a grea t friend of neurology and neurosurgery. Since his re t i rement , Dr. Severinghaus has made a special effort to survey the teaching of neurology throughout this country and has made it his project to build the groundwork for this conference. Three major topics were discussed: 1. Preand Postdoctorate Neuroscience Training. The discussion dealt with the or ientat ion of the training p rog ram for students in part icular, and the need for a core p r o g r a m in the neurological sciences in general. The question was whether a vertically-oriented neurological sciences curriculum, which included all the basic sciences areas plus neurology and neurosurgery, would have real possibilities in an inst i tut ion. Though t s concerning bringing clinicians into the preclinical years and basic scientists into the clinical years were freely exchanged. At no point were any real decisions made, bu t a great deal of discussion among various people was generated, and a heal thy a tmosphere was created. T h e a t t rac t ion of PhD. candidates to the neurological sciences and their role in research and teaching these sciences was also discussed. ft. Preand Postdoctorate Clinical Training. I t was fel t t ha t a more integrated program was necessary and tha t in some schools it would have to be brought abou t on a broad scale. The weal th of new mater ia l coming into medicine and science will probably not be associated with increased t ime for the neurological sciences, so tha t a more efficient method of teaching will become necessary. At the same time, the need is vi ta l for a s t imulat ing p rogram tha t will a t t r ac t good students into the neurological sciences. Integrat ion of neurology with internal medicine on one hand and its harmonious relationship with neurosurgery on the other was felt to be an i m p o r t a n t aspect of clinical training. There was also discussion concerning the residency training of neurologists, what should be included in their programs, how long the p rogram should be, and the relationship of these individuals to other clinical areas. 3. The Superiorly Gifted Student. This discussion was impor t an t in the sense t h a t the product which is to be turned out in the neurological sciences depends so much on the type of s tudent a t t r ac t ed to the neurological sciences f rom medical school. The actual definition of a super ior ly gifted s tuden t came in for a good deal of discussion. Although no firm conclusions were reached, m a n y ideas were pu t for th as to how such students could be a t t rac ted , s t imulated and mot iva ted to be t t e r performance, and held in these areas for fu ture product ive act ivi ty . Possibly the grea tes t value of this conference will be in the subsequent discussions