What is the result of this? It is a threefold one. In the first place,

popular initiative is stimulated to the utmost, and every person and

every institution is encouraged to do its best. There are no formal

regulations to hamper enterprising impulses, to keep back certain more

advanced regions, or to approve mediocrity with an artificial seal of

authority. In the second place, technical education is able to adapt

itself thoroughly to all the untold local factors, and to give to every

region such schools of higher training as it needs, without pulling down

any more advanced sections of the country to an artificially mediocre

level more adapted to the whole country. In the third place, the free

competition between the different institutions insures their ceaseless

progress. There are no hard and fixed boundary lines, and whatsoever

does not advance surely recedes; that which leads to-day is surpassed

to-morrow if it does not adapt itself to the latest requirements. This

is true both as regards the quality of the teachers and their means of

instruction, as regards the length of the course, and more especially

the conditions of entrance. These last have steadily grown throughout

the country. Fifty years ago the very best institutions in the most

advanced portions of the country demanded no more for entrance than the

professional schools of third class situated in more rural regions

demand to-day. And this tendency goes steadily onward day by day. If

there were any great departures made, the institutions would be

disintegrated; the schools which prepare pupils would not be able

suddenly to come up to new requirements, and therefore few scholars

would be able to prepare for greatly modified entrance examinations. In

this way, between the conservative holding to historic traditions and

the striving to progress and to exceed other institutions by the highest

possible efficiency, a compromise is brought about which results in a

gradual but not over-hasty improvement.

We have so far entirely left out of account the state. We can speak here

only of the individual state. The country as a whole has as little to do

with higher education as with lower. But the single state has, in fact,

a significant task—indeed, a double one. Since it aims at no monopoly,

but rather gives the freest play to individual initiative, we have

recognized the fundamental principle that restrictions are placed

nowhere. On the other hand, it becomes the duty of the state to lend a

helping hand wherever private activities have been found insufficient.

This can happen in two ways: either the state may help to support

private institutions which already exist, or it may establish new ones

of its own, which in that case offer free tuition to the sons and

daughters of all taxpayers. These so-called state universities are, in a

way, the crowning feature of the free public school system. Wherever

they exist, the sons of farmers have the advantage of free instruction

from the kindergarten to the degree of doctor of philosophy.

Now private initiative is weakest where the population is poor or stands

on a low level of culture, so that few can be found to contribute

sufficient funds to support good institutions, and at the same time the

rich citizens of these less advanced states prefer to send their

children to the universities of the most advanced states. The result is,

and this is what is hardest for the foreigner to understand, that the

higher institutions of learning which are subsidized by the state stand

for a grade of culture inferior to that of the private institutions, and

that not only the leading universities, like Harvard, Columbia, Johns

Hopkins, Yale, Chicago, Cornell, and Stanford, carry on their work

without the help of the state, but also that the leading Eastern States

pay out much less for higher instruction than do the Western. The State

of Massachusetts, which stands at the head in matters of education, does

not give a cent to its universities, while Ohio entirely supports the

Ohio State University and gives aid to six other institutions.

The second task of the states in educational matters is shared alike by

all of them; the state supervises all instruction, and, more than that,

the state legislature confers on the individual institution the right to

award grades, diplomas, and degrees to its students. No institution may

change its organization without a civil permit. As culture has advanced

the state has found it necessary to make the requirements in the various

professional schools rather high. In practice, once more, a continual

compromise has been necessary between the need to advance and the desire

to stay, by traditions which have been proved and tried and found

practical. Here, once again, any universal scheme of organization would

have destroyed everything. If a high standard had been fixed it would

have hindered private initiative, and given a set-back to Southern and

Western states and robbed them of the impulses to development. A lower

universal standard, on the other hand, would have impeded the advance of

the more progressive portions of the country. Therefore the various

state governments have taken a happy middle position in these matters,

and their responsibility for the separate institutions has been made

even less complete in that the degrees of these institutions carry in

themselves no actual rights. Every state has its own laws for the

admission of a lawyer to its bar, or to the public practice of medicine,

and it is only to a small degree that the diplomas of professional

schools are recognized as equivalent to a state examination.

The history of the professional schools for lawyers, ministers,

teachers, and physicians in America is by no means the history of the

universities. We have so far left out of account the college, which is

the nucleus of American education. Let us now go back to it. We saw in

the beginning of the development of these states a social community in

which preparation for the professions of teaching, preaching, law or

medicine implied a technical and specialized training, which every one

could obtain for himself without any considerable preparation. There was

no thought of a broad, liberal education. Now, to be sure, the level of

scholarship required for entrance into the professional schools has

steadily risen, the duration and character of the instruction has been

steadily improved; but even to-day the impression has not faded from the

public consciousness, and is indeed favoured by the great differences in

merit between the special schools, that such a practical introduction to

the treatment of disease, to court procedure, the mastery of technical

problems, or to the art of teaching, does not in itself develop educated

men. All this is specialized professional training, which no more

broadens the mind than would the professional preparation for the

calling of the merchant or manufacturer or captain. Whether a man who is

prepared for his special career is also an educated man, depends on the

sort of general culture that he has become familiar with. It is thought

important for a man to have had a liberal education before entering the

commercial house or the medical school, but it is felt to be indifferent

whether he has learned his profession at the stock exchange or at the

clinic.

The European will find it hard to follow this trend of thought. In

Europe the highest institutions of learning are so closely allied to the

learned professions, and these themselves have historically developed so

completely from the learned studies, that professional erudition and

general culture are well-nigh identical. And the general system of

distinctions and merits favours in every way the learned professions.

How much of this, however, springs out of special conditions may be

seen, for instance, from the fact that in Germany an equal social

position is given to the officer of the army and to the scholar. Even

the American is, in his way, not quite consistent, in so far as he has

at all times honoured the profession of the ministry with a degree of

esteem that is independent of the previous preparation which the

minister had before entering his theological school. This fact has come

from the leading position which the clergymen held in the American

colonial days, and the close relation which exists between the study of

theology and general philosophy.

The fact that by chance one had taken the profession of law, or

teaching, or medicine, did not exalt one in the eyes of one’s

contemporaries above the great mass of average citizens who went about

their honest business. The separation of those who were called to social

leadership was seen to require, therefore, some principle which should

be different from any professional training. At this point we come on

yet another historical factor. The nation grew step for step with its

commercial activities and undertakings. So long as it was a question of

gaining and developing new territory, the highest talent, the best

strength and proudest personalities entered the service of this

nationally significant work. It was a matter of course that no secondary

position in society should be ascribed to these captains of commerce and

of industry. The highest degree of culture which they were able to

attain necessarily fixed the standard of culture for the whole

community; and, therefore, the traditional concept of the gentleman as

the man of liberal culture and refinement came to have that great social

significance which was reserved in Germany for the learned professions.

In its outer form, the education of such a gentleman was borrowed from

England. It was a four years’ course coming after the high school, and

laying special stress on the classical languages, philosophy, and

mathematics—a course which, up to the early twenties, kept a young man

in contact with the fine arts and the sciences, with no thought for the

practical earning of a livelihood; which, therefore, kept him four years

longer from the tumult of the world, and in an ideal community of men

who were doing as he was doing; which developed him in work, in sport,

in morals and social address. Such was the tradition; the institution

was called a college after the English precedent. Any man who went to

college belonged to the educated class, and it was indifferent what

profession he took up; no studies of the professional school were able

to replace a college education. Now, it necessarily happened that the

endeavour to have students enter the professional schools with as

thorough preparation as possible led eventually to demand of every one

who undertook a professional course the complete college education. In

fact, this last state of development is already reached in the best

institutions of America. For instance, in Harvard and in Johns Hopkins,

the diploma of a four years’ college course is demanded for entrance

into the legal, medical, or theological faculty. But in popular opinion

the dividing line between common and superior education is still the

line between school and college, and not, as in Germany, between liberal

and technical institutions of learning. One who has successfully passed

through college becomes a graduate, a gentleman of distinction; he has

the degree of bachelor of arts, and those who have this degree are

understood to have had a higher education.

This whole complex of relations is reflected within the college itself.

It is supposed to be a four years’ course which comes after the high

school, and we have seen that the high school itself has no fixed

standard of instruction. The small prairie college may be no better than

the Tertia or Sekunda of a German Realschule, while the large and

influential colleges are certainly not at all to be compared simply with

German schools, but rather with the German Prima of a Gymnasium,

together with the first two or three semesters in the philosophical

faculty of a university. Between these extremes there is a long, sliding

scale, represented by over six hundred colleges. We must now bear in

mind that the college was meant to be the higher school for the general

cultivation of gentlemen. Of course, from the outset this idealistic

demand was not free from utilitarian considerations; the same

instruction could well be utilized as the most appropriate practical

training of the school-teacher, and if so, the college becomes

secondarily a sort of technical school for pedagogues. But, then, in the

same way as the entrance into legal and medical faculties was gradually

made more difficult, until now the best of these schools demand

collegiate preparation, so also did the training school for teachers

necessarily become of more and more professional character, until it

gradually quite outgrew the college. The culmination is a philosophical

faculty which, from its side, presupposes the college, and which,

therefore, takes the student about where a German student enters his

fourth semester—a technical school for specialized critical science

laying main stress on seminaries, laboratories, and lectures for

advanced students. Such a continuation of the college study beyond the

time of college—that is, for those who have been graduated from

college—is called a graduate school, and its goal is the degree of

doctor of philosophy. The graduate school is in this way parallel with

the law, medical, or divinity school, which likewise presuppose that

their students have been graduated from college.

The utilitarian element inevitably affects the college from another

side. A college of the higher type will not be a school with a rigid

curriculum, but will adapt itself more or less to the individuality of

its students. If it is really to give the most it can, it must, at least

during the last years of the college course, be somewhat like a

philosophical faculty, and allow some selection among the various

studies:—so that every man can best perfect his peculiar talent and can

satisfy his inclinations for one or other sort of learning. So soon,

now, as such academic freedom has been instituted, it is very liable to

be used for utilitarian purposes. The future doctor and the future

lawyer in their election of college studies will have the professional

school already in mind, and will be preparing themselves for their

professional studies. The lawyer will probably study more history, the

doctor will study biology, the theologian languages, the future

manufacturer may study physics, the banker political economy, and the

politician will take up government. And so the ideal training school for

gentlemen will not be merely a place for liberal education, but at the

same time will provide its own sort of untechnical professional

training.

Inasmuch as everything really technical is still excluded, and the

majority of college students even to-day come for nothing more than a

liberal education, it remains true that the college is first of all a

place for the development and refinement of personal character; a place

in which the young American spends the richest and happiest years of his

life, where he forms his friendships and intellectual preferences which

are to last throughout his life, and where the narrow confines of school

life are outgrown and the confines of professional education not yet

begun; where, in short, everything is broad and free and sunny. For the

American the attraction of academic life is wholly centred in the

college; the college student is the only one who lives the true student

life. Those who study in the four professional faculties are comparable

rather to the German medical students of the last clinical

semesters—sedate, semi-professional men. The college is the soul of the

university. The college is to-day, more than ever, the soul of the whole

nation.

We have to mention one more factor, and we shall have brought together

all which are of prime importance. We have seen that the professional

and the collegiate schools had at the outset different points of view,

and were, in fact, entirely independent. It was inevitable that as they

developed they should come into closer and closer relations. The name of

the college remained during this development the general designation.

Special faculties have grouped themselves about the college, while a

common administration keeps them together. There are certain local

difficulties in this. According to the original idea, a college ought to

be in a small, rural, and attractively situated spot. The young man

should be removed from ordinary conditions; and as he goes to Jena,

Marburg, and Göttingen, so he should go to Princeton or New Haven, or

Palo Alto, in order to be away from large cities in a little academic

world which is inspired only by the glory of famous teachers and by the

youthful happiness of many student generations. A medical or law school,

on the other hand, belongs, according to American tradition, in some

large city, where there is a plenty of clinical material at hand, and

where great attorneys are in contact with the courts. It so happened

that the college, as it grew up into a complete university, was

especially favoured if it happened to be in the vicinity of a large

city, like Harvard College in Cambridge, which had all the attractions

of rural quiet and nevertheless was separated from the large city of

Boston only by the Charles River bridge. In later times, to be sure,

since the idyllic side of college life is everywhere on the wane, and

the outward equipment, especially of laboratories, libraries, etc., has

everywhere to grow, it is a noticeable advantage for even collegiate

prosperity to have the resources of a large city at hand. And,

therefore, the institutions in these cities, like New York, Baltimore,

Chicago, and San Francisco, develop more rapidly than many colleges

which were once famous but which lie in more isolated places.

At the head of the administration there is always a president, a man

whose functions are something between those of a Rektor and a

Kultus-Minister, most nearly, perhaps, comparable with a Kurator, and

yet much more independent, much more dictatorial. The direction of the

university is actually concentrated in his person, and the rise or fall

of the institution is in large measure dependent on his official

leadership. In olden times the president was almost always a theologian,

and at the same time was apt to be professor in moral philosophy. This

is true to-day of none but small country colleges, and even there the

Puritan tradition disappears as financial and administrative problems

come to be important. The large universities have lately come almost

always to place a professor of the philosophical faculty at their head.

Almost invariably these are men of liberal endowments. Mostly they are

men of wide outlook, and only such men are fit for these positions,

which belong to the most influential and important in the country. The

opinions of men like Eliot of Harvard, Hadley of Yale, Butler of

Columbia, Shurman of Cornell, Remsen of Johns Hopkins, Wheeler of

California, Harper of Chicago, Jordan of Leland Stanford, Wilson of

Princeton, and of many others, are respected and sought on all questions

of public life, even in matters extending far beyond education.

The university president is elected for a life term by the

administrative council—a deliberative body of men who, without

emoluments, serve the destinies of the university, and in a certain

sense are the congress of the university as compared with the president.

They confirm appointments, regulate expenditures, and theoretically

conduct all external business for the university, although practically

they follow in large part the recommendations of the faculties. The

teaching body is composed everywhere of professors, assistant

professors, and instructors. All these receive a fixed stipend. There

are no such things as private tuition fees, and unsalaried teachers,

like the German Privatdocenten, are virtually unknown. The instruction

consists, in general, of courses lasting through a year and not a

semester. The academic year begins, in most cases, at the end of

September and closes at the end of June.

During his four years’ college course the student prefers to remain true

to some one college. If this is a small institution, he is very apt, on

being graduated, to attend some higher institution. Even the students in

professional schools generally come back year after year to the same

school till they finish their studies. It is only in the graduate

school—that is, the German philosophical faculty—that migration after

the German manner has come in fashion; here, in fact, the student

frequently studies one year here and one year there, in order to hear

the best specialists in his science. Except in the state institutions of

the West, the student pays a round sum for the year; in the larger

institutions from one hundred to one hundred and fifty dollars. In the

smaller colleges the four years’ course of study is almost wholly

prescribed, and only in the final year is there a certain freedom of

choice. The higher the college stands in the matter of scholarship, so

much the more its lecture programme approaches that of a university; and

in the foremost colleges the student is from the very beginning almost

entirely free in his selection of studies.

A freedom in electing between study and laziness is less known. The

student may elect his own lectures; he must, however, attend at least a

certain number of these, and must generally show in a semi-annual

examination that he has spent his time to some purpose. The examinations

at the end of the special courses are in the college substituted for a

final examination. Any man receives a degree who has passed the written

examinations in a certain number of courses. The examinations concern

not only what has actually been said in the lectures, but at the same

time try to bring out how much the student has learned outside in the

way of reading text-books and searching into literature. Originally the

students roomed in college buildings, but with the growth of these

institutions this factor of college life has declined. In the larger

universities the student is, in matters of his daily life, as free as

the German; but dwelling in college dormitories still remains the most

popular mode of living, since it lends a social attraction to academic

life.

To go over from this general plan to a more concrete presentation, we

may perhaps sketch briefly a picture of Harvard College, the oldest and

largest academy in the country. The colony of Massachusetts established

in 1636 a little college in the vicinity of the newly founded city of

Boston. The place was called Cambridge in commemoration of the English

college in which some of the colonists had received their education.

When in 1638 a young English minister, John Harvard, left this little

academy half his fortune, it was decided to name the college for its

first benefactor. The state had given £400, John Harvard about £800. The

school building was one little structure, the number of students was

very small, and there were a few clergymen for teachers. On the same

spot to-day stands Harvard University, like a little city within a city,

with fifty ample buildings, with 550 members of the teaching staff, over

five thousand students, with a regular annual budget of a million and a

half dollars, and in the enjoyment of bequests which add year by year

millions to its regular endowments.

This growth has been constant, outwardly and inwardly; and it has grown

in power and in freedom in a way that well befits the spirit of American

institutions. Since the colonial régime of the seventeenth century gave

to the new institution a deliberative body of seven men—the so-called

Corporation—this body has perpetuated itself without interruption down

to the present time by its own vote, and without changing any principle

of its constitution has developed the home of Puritanism into the

theatre of the freest investigation, and the school into a great

university of the world.

The Americans(#56376) · 第 39 / 59 段