Produced by Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
FOR THE
UNITED STATES COMMISSION TO THE PARIS EXPOSITION OF 1900
MONOGRAPHS ON EDUCATION
IN THE
UNITED STATES
EDITED BY
NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER
_Professor of Philosophy and Education in Columbia University, New York_
7
EDUCATION OF WOMEN
BY
M. CAREY THOMAS
_President of Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania_
THIS MONOGRAPH IS CONTRIBUTED TO THE UNITED STATES EDUCATIONAL EXHIBIT
BY THE STATE OF NEW YORK
[Illustration: Attitude of different sections of the United States
toward coeducation and separate education of men and women]
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
FOR THE
UNITED STATES COMMISSION TO THE PARIS EXPOSITION OF 1900
MONOGRAPHS ON EDUCATION
IN THE
UNITED STATES
EDITED BY
NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER
_Professor of Philosophy and Education in Columbia University, New York_
7
EDUCATION OF WOMEN
BY
M. CAREY THOMAS
_President of Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania_
THIS MONOGRAPH IS CONTRIBUTED TO THE UNITED STATES EDUCATIONAL EXHIBIT
BY THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COPYRIGHT BY
J. B. LYON COMPANY
1899
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDUCATION OF WOMEN
The higher education of women in America is taking place before our eyes
on a vast scale and in a variety of ways. Every phase of this great
experiment, if experiment we choose to call it, may be studied almost
simultaneously. Women are taking advantage of all the various kinds of
education offered them in great and ever-increasing numbers, and the
period of thirty years, or thereabouts, that has elapsed since the
beginning of the movement is sufficient to authorize us in drawing
certain definite conclusions. The higher education of women naturally
divides itself into college education designed primarily to train the
mental faculties by means of a liberal education, and only secondarily,
to equip the student for self-support, and professional or special
education, directed primarily toward one of the money-making
occupations.
COLLEGE EDUCATION
Women’s college education is carried on in three different classes of
institutions: coeducational colleges, independent women’s colleges and
women’s colleges connected more or less closely with some one of the
colleges for men.
=1. Coeducation=—Coeducation is the prevailing system of college
education in the United States for both men and women. In the western
states and territories it is almost the only system of education, and it
is rapidly becoming the prevailing system in the south, where the
influence of the state universities is predominant. On the other hand,
in the New England and middle states the great majority of the youth of
both sexes are still receiving a separate college education. Coeducation
was introduced into colleges in the west as a logical consequence of the
so-called American system of free elementary and secondary schools.
During the great school revival of 1830–45 and the ensuing years until
the outbreak of the civil war in 1861, free elementary and secondary
schools were established throughout New England and the middle states
and such western states as existed in those days. It was a fortunate
circumstance for girls that the country was at that time sparsely
settled; in most neighborhoods it was so difficult to establish and
secure pupils for even one grammar school and one high school that girls
were admitted from the first to both[1]. In the reorganization of lower
and higher education that took place between 1865 and 1870 this same
system, bringing with it the complete coeducation of the sexes, was
introduced throughout the south both for whites and negroes, and was
extended to every part of the west. In no part of the country, except in
a few large eastern cities, was any distinction made in elementary or
secondary education between boys and girls[2]. The second fortunate and
in like manner almost accidental factor in the education of American
women was the occurrence of the civil war at the formative period of the
public schools, with the result of placing the elementary and secondary
education of both boys and girls overwhelmingly in the hands of women
teachers. In no other country of the world has this ever been the case,
and its influence upon women’s education has been very great. The five
years of the civil war, which drained all the northern and western
states of men, caused women teachers to be employed in the public and
private schools in large numbers, and in the first reports of the
national bureau of education, organized after the war, we see that there
were already fewer men than women teaching in the public schools of the
United States. This result proved not to be temporary, but permanent,
and from 1865 until the present time not only the elementary teaching of
boys and girls but the secondary education of both has been increasingly
in the hands of women[3]. When most of the state universities of the
west were founded they were in reality scarcely more than secondary
schools supplemented, in most cases, by large preparatory departments.
Girls were already being educated with boys in all the high schools of
the west, and not to admit them to the state universities would have
been to break with tradition. Women were also firmly established as
teachers in the secondary schools and it was patent to all thoughtful
men that they must be given opportunities for higher education, if only
for the sake of the secondary education of the boys of the country.[4]
The development of women’s education in the east has followed a
different course because there were in the east no state universities,
and the private colleges for men had been founded before women were
suffered to become either pupils or teachers in schools. The admission
of women to the existing eastern colleges was, therefore, as much an
innovation as it would have been in Europe. The coeducation of men and
women in colleges, and at the same time the college education of women,
began in Ohio, the earliest settled of the western states. In 1833
Oberlin collegiate institute (not chartered as a college until 1850) was
opened, admitting from the first both men and women. Oberlin was at that
time, and is now, hampered by maintaining a secondary school as large as
its college department, but it was the first institution for collegiate
instruction in the United States where large numbers of men and women
were educated together, and the uniformly favorable testimony of its
faculty had great influence on the side of coeducation. In 1853 Antioch
college, also in Ohio, was opened, and admitted from the beginning men
and women on equal terms. Its first president, Horace Mann, was one of
the most brilliant and energetic educational leaders in the United
States, and his ardent advocacy of coeducation, based on his own
practical experience, had great weight with the public.[5] From this
time on it became a custom, as state universities were opened in the far
west, to admit women. Utah, opened in 1850, Iowa, opened in 1856,
Washington, opened in 1862, Kansas, opened in 1866, Minnesota, opened in
1868, and Nebraska, opened in 1871, were coeducational from the outset.
Indiana, opened as early as 1820, admitted women in 1868. The state
University of Michigan was, at this time, the most important western
university, and the only western university well known in the east
before the war. When, in 1870, it opened its doors to women, they were
for the first time in America admitted to instruction of true college
grade. The step was taken in response to public sentiment, as shown by
two requests of the state legislature, against the will of the faculty
as a whole. The example of the University of Michigan was quickly
followed by all the other state universities of the west. In the same
year women were allowed to enter the state universities of Illinois and
California; in 1873 the only remaining state university closed to women,
that of Ohio, admitted them. Wisconsin which, since 1860, had given some
instruction to women, became in 1874 unreservedly coeducational. All the
state universities of the west, organized since 1871, have admitted
women from the first. In the twenty states which, for convenience, I
shall classify as western, there are now twenty state universities open
to women, and, in four territories, Arizona, Oklahoma, Indiana and New
Mexico, the one university of each territory is open to women. Of the
eleven state universities of the southern states the two most western
admitted women first, as was to be expected. Missouri became
coeducational as early as 1870, and the University of Texas was opened
in 1883 as a coeducational institution. Mississippi admitted women in
1882, Kentucky in 1889, Alabama in 1893, South Carolina in 1894, North
Carolina in 1897, but only to women prepared to enter the junior and
senior years, West Virginia in 1897.[6] The state universities of
Virginia, Georgia and Louisiana are still closed. The one state
university existing outside the west and south, that of Maine, admitted
women in 1872.
The greater part of the college education of the United States, however,
is carried on in private, not in state universities. In 1897 over 70 per
cent of all the college students in the United States were studying in
private colleges, so that for women’s higher education their admission
to private colleges is really a matter of much greater importance. The
part taken by Cornell university in New York state in opening private
colleges to women was as significant as the part taken by Michigan in
opening state universities. Cornell is in a restricted sense a state
university, inasmuch as part of its endowment, like that of the state
universities, is derived from state and national funds. Nevertheless,
there is little reason to suppose that Cornell would have admitted women
had it not been for the generosity of Henry W. Sage, who offered to
build and endow a large hall of residence for women at Cornell
university. After carefully investigating coeducation in all the
institutions where it then existed, and especially in Michigan, the
trustees of the university admitted women in 1872. The example set by
Cornell was followed very slowly by the other private colleges of the
New England and middle states. For the next twenty years the colleges in
this section of the United States admitting women might be counted on
the fingers of one hand. In Massachusetts Boston university opened its
department of arts in 1873, and admitted women to it from the first; but
no college for men followed the example of Boston until 1883, when the
Massachusetts institute of technology, the most important technical and
scientific school in the state, and one of the most important in the
United States, admitted women. This school, like Cornell, is supported
in part from state and national funds. Very recently, in 1892, Tufts
college was opened to women. In the west and south the case is
different, and the list of private colleges that one after another have
become coeducational is too long to be inserted here. Among new
coeducational foundations the most important are, on the Pacific coast,
the Leland Stanford junior university, opened in 1891, and, in the
middle west, Chicago university, opened in 1892. To show the differing
attitude toward coeducation of the different sections of the United
States, I have arranged the 480 coeducational colleges and separate
colleges for men given in the U.S. education report for 1897–98 in a
table on the opposite page. In matters like women’s education, which are
powerfully affected by prejudice and conservative opinion, we find not
only a sharp cleavage in opinion and practice between the west and the
east of the United States, but also distinct phases of differing
opinion, corresponding in the main to the old geographical division of
the states into New England, middle, southern and western.[7]
I _20 western states and 3 territories_
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
STATES Total Coed. Men only
no.
cols.
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Ohio 35 29 3 R. C., 1 Luth., 1 P. E., Western reserve.
Indiana 14 9 2 R. C., 1 Luth., 1 Cong., Wabash college.
Illinois 31 24 5 R. C., 1 Ger. Ev., Illinois college.
Michigan 11 10 1 R. C.
Wisconsin 10 7 1 R. C., 1 Luth., 1 Dutch Reformed.
Minnesota 9 7 1 R. C., 1 Luth.
Iowa 22 20 2 Luth.
North Dakota 3 3
South Dakota 6 6
Nebraska 12 11 1 R. C. (professional dept. open)
Kansas 19 17 2 R. C.
Montana 3 3
Wyoming 1 1
Colorado 4 3 1 R. C.
Arizona 1 1
Utah 2 2
Nevada 1 1
Idaho 1 1
Washington 9 7 2 R. C.
Oregon 8 8
California 12 9 3 R. C.
Indian 2 2
Territory
Oklahoma 1 1
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
217 182 22 R. C., 6 Luth., 1 Ger. Ev., 1 Dutch Ref.,
1 P. E., 1 Cong.
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
II _14 southern and 2 southern middle states_
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
STATES Total Coed. Men only
no.
cols.
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Delaware 2 1 Delaware college. (The one coeducational
college is for negroes.)
Maryland 11 4 4 R. C., St. John’s, Maryland agric.
college, Johns Hopkins.
District of 6 3 3 R. C.
Columbia
Virginia 10 4 2 M. E. So., Univ. of Virginia,
Hampden-Sidney, Washington and Lee,
William and Mary.
West Virginia 3 3
North Carolina 15 10 1 R. C., 2 Presb., 1 Luth., 1 Bapt.
South Carolina 9 7 1 A. M. E., College of Charleston.
Georgia 11 6 2 Bapt., 1 A. M. E., 1 M. E. So., Univ. of
Georgia,
Florida 6 5 1 R. C.
Kentucky 13 9 1 R. C., 1 Bapt., 1 Presb., Ogden college.
Tennessee 24 20 1 R. C., 2 Presb., 1 P. E. (Univ. of South.)
Alabama 9 7 2 R. C.
Mississippi 4 2 1 Bapt., 1 M. E. So.
Louisiana 9 3 2 R. C., 1 M. E. So., 1 Cong., Louisiana
State univ., Tulane.
Texas 16 12 3 R. C., 1 Presb.
Arkansas 8 8
Missouri 26 21 3 R. C., 1 Bapt., 1 Presb.
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
182 125 21 R. C., 5 M. E. So., 6 Bapt., 7 Presb., 1
Luth., 2 A. M. E., 1 P. E., 1 Cong.
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
III _6 New England and 3 northern middle states_
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
STATES Total Coed. Men only
no.
cols.
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Maine 4 2 1 Bapt. (Colby, limited coed.), Bowdoin
New Hampshire 2 1 R. C., 1 Cong. (Dartmouth)
Vermont 3 2 Norwich university
Massachusetts 9 2 2 R. C., 2 Cong. (Amherst), Harvard,
Williams, Clark
Rhode Island 1 Brown
Connecticut 3 1 1 P. E. (Trinity), Yale
New York 23 5 8 R. C., 2 P. E. (Hobart), 1 Bapt.
(Colgate), Polytechnic institute of
Brooklyn, Hamilton, College of City of New
York (boys’ high school), Columbia, Union,
Rochester, New York university
New Jersey 4 2 R. C., 1 Dutch Ref. (Rutgers), Princeton
Pennsylvania 32 17 4 R. C, 1 Luth., 1 Moravian, 1 Friends
(Haverford), 1 Dutch Ref. (Franklin &
Marshall), Pennsylvania military college,
Philadelphia central high school (boys’
high school), Lehigh university,
University of Pennsylvania, 3 Presb.
(Lafayette, Washington & Jefferson,
Lincoln)
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
81 29 17 R. C., 1 Luth., 3 P. E., 3 Cong., 3
Presb., 2 Bapt., 1 Friends, 2 Dutch Ref.,
1 Moravian (The Univ. of Penna. admits
women to many departments, but not to full
undergraduate work leading to the
bachelor’s degree)
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
In the western states it will be observed there are, excluding Roman
Catholic colleges and seminaries, out of 195 colleges 182
coeducational and only 13 colleges for men only. All of these except
3 are denominational; 6 belong to the Lutheran, 1 to the Dutch
Reformed, 1 to the German Evangelical, 1 to the Episcopalian, and 1
to the Congregationalist. The other 3 are, as we might expect, in
the most eastern and the earliest settled of the western states; one
in Ohio, Western reserve, which teaches women in a separate women’s
college; one in Indiana, Wabash college, one of the three most
important colleges in Indiana; and one in Illinois, Illinois
college. Roman Catholic institutions apart, in 14 states and all 3
territories every college for men is open to women (the one
university of the territory of New Mexico, not included in the U. S.
education report, is open to women). In the southern states and
southern middle states there are, excluding Roman Catholic colleges
and seminaries, out of 161, 125 coeducational and only 36 colleges
for men only. Among these 36, however, are the most important
educational institution in Maryland, the Johns Hopkins university;
the most important in Georgia, the University of Georgia; in
Louisiana the two most important, the Louisiana state university and
Tulane university, and in Virginia the very important University of
Virginia.[8] Roman Catholic institutions apart, all the colleges in
the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida and West Virginia are
coeducational. In New England and the northern middle states out of
64 colleges, excluding Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries, only
29, or less than half, are coeducational. The colleges for men only
include (with the exception of Cornell) all the largest
undergraduate colleges in this section—Harvard, Yale, Columbia,
Princeton, Pennsylvania. Maine and Vermont are liberal to women, 2
colleges (3 if we count the limited coeducational college of Colby)
in Maine and 3 in Vermont being coeducational, but the total number
of students in college in these states is very small (in Maine only
843 men and 189 women; in Vermont only 301 men and 99 women). The
leading colleges of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New
Jersey and Pennsylvania are closed, and in Massachusetts only 2 are
open and 7 closed.[9]
Of the four hundred and eighty colleges for men enumerated by the
commissioner of education 336, or 70 per cent (or, excluding Catholic
colleges, 80 per cent), admit women. It would be misleading, however, to
count among American institutions for higher education, properly
so-called, most of the coeducational colleges and separate colleges for
men included in this list, and it would be equally misleading to compare
the number of women studying in such colleges in the United States with
the number of women engaged in higher studies in England, France and
Germany.[10] In order to obtain a better idea of opportunities for true
collegiate work open to women at the present time in the United States I
have selected from these four hundred and eighty colleges and from the
numerous colleges for women classified elsewhere, a list of fifty-eight
colleges properly so-called, employing for the purpose the four means of
classification most likely to commend themselves to the impartial
student of such things.[11] Of these fifty-eight colleges four are
independent colleges for women and three women’s colleges affiliated to
colleges for men; of the remaining 51, 30, or 58.8 per cent, are
coeducational, and a nearer examination makes a much more favorable
showing for coeducation. Of the 21 colleges closed to women in their
undergraduate departments five have affiliated to them a women’s college
through which women obtain some share in the undergraduate instruction
given, the affiliated colleges in three cases being of enough importance
to appear in the same list. Of these five, four (all but Harvard) admit
women without restriction to their graduate instruction, and in addition
Yale, the University of Pennsylvania and New York university make no
distinction between men and women in graduate instruction. The Johns
Hopkins university maintains a coeducational medical school. In this
list then of fifty-eight, which includes all the most important colleges
in the United States, there are, apart from the two Catholic colleges,
only ten (Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Clark, Princeton, Lehigh,
Lafayette, Hamilton, Colgate, Virginia, all situated on the Atlantic
seaboard) to which women are not admitted in some departments. Princeton
is the only one of the large university foundations that excludes women
from any share whatsoever in its advantages. The diagram on the opposite
page shows the steady progress of coeducation from 1870 to 1898.[12]
GROWTH OF COEDUCATION
Coeducational 30·7% 1870 For men only 69·3%
▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□
Coeducational 51·3% 1880 For men only 48·7%
▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□
Coeducational 65·5% 1890 For men only 34·5%
▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□
Coeducational 70·% 1898 For men only 30·%
▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□
I have prepared the diagram for 1870 from the U. S. ed. rep. for 1870,
pp. 506–516, and the diagram for 1897–98 from the U. S. ed. rep., pp.
1848–1867, and from the table, opposite page 9 of this monograph. The
diagrams for 1880 and 1890 are copied from the report for 1889–90, p.
764. For assistance in the preparation of this and other diagrams, and
in working out the percentages given here, and elsewhere, in this
monograph I am much indebted to Dr. Isabel Maddison.
If Catholic colleges are excluded, as in the map opposite page 10,
coeducational colleges formed, in 1898, 80 per cent, and colleges for
men only 20 per cent of the whole number—a still more favorable result
for coeducation.
All the arguments against the coeducation of the sexes in colleges have
been met and answered by experience. It was feared at first that
coeducation would lower the standard of scholarship on account of the
supposed inferior quality of women’s minds. The unanimous experience in
coeducational colleges goes to show that the average standing of women
is slightly higher than the average standing of men.[13] Many reasons
for the greater success of women are given, such as absence of the
distraction of athletic sports, greater diligence, higher moral
standards, but the fact, however it may be explained, remains and is as
gratifying as astonishing to those interested in women’s education. The
question of health has also been finally disposed of; thousands of women
have been working side by side with men in coeducational institutions
for the past twenty-five years and undergoing exactly the same tests
without a larger percentage of withdrawals on account of illness than
men. The question of conduct has also been disposed of. None of the
difficulties have arisen that were feared from the association of men
and women of marriageable age. Looking at coeducation as a whole it is
most surprising that it has worked so well.[14] Perhaps the only
objection that may be made from men’s point of view to coeducation in
America is that it has succeeded only too well and that the proportion
of women students is increasing too steadily. Not only is the number of
coeducational colleges increasing but the number of women relatively to
the number of men is increasing also. In 1890 there were studying in
coeducational colleges 16,959 men and 7,929 women; or women, in other
words, formed 31.9 per cent of the whole body of students. In 1898 there
were 28,823 men and 16,284 women studying in coeducational colleges,
women forming 36.1 per cent of the whole body of students. Between 1890
and 1898 men in coeducational colleges have increased 70.0 per cent, but
women in coeducational colleges have increased 105.4 per cent.[15]
There is every reason to suppose that this increase of women will
continue. Already girls form 56.5 per cent of the pupils in all
secondary schools and 13 per cent of the girls enrolled and only 10 per
cent of the boys enrolled graduate from the public high schools. It is
sometimes said that men students, as a rule, dislike the presence of
women, and in especial that they are unwilling to compete for prizes
against women for the very reason that the average standing of women is
higher than their own. If there is any force in this statement, however,
it would seem that men should increase less rapidly in coeducational
colleges than in separate colleges for men. The reverse, however, is the
case. During the eight years from 1890 to 1898 men have increased in
coeducational colleges 70.0 per cent, but in separate colleges for men
only 34.7 per cent.[16] This is all the more remarkable, because in the
separate colleges for men are included the large undergraduate
departments of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia and the University of
Pennsylvania. It is women who have shown a preference for separate
education; women have increased more rapidly in separate colleges for
women than in coeducational colleges. It will be observed, however, that
the separate colleges for women, like the separate colleges for men
included in my list of fifty-eight, are in the east; it is in the east
only that any preference for separate education is shown by either
sex.[17]
Independent colleges for women—Since independent colleges for women of
the same grade as those for men are peculiar to the United States, I
shall treat them somewhat more fully.[18] The independent colleges here
taken into account are the eleven colleges included in division A[19] of
the U. S. education reports.[20] The independent colleges for women fall
readily into three groups: I. The so-called “four great colleges for
women,” Vassar, Smith, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr. It will be seen by
referring to the classification on page 12 that these four colleges are
included among the fifty-eight leading colleges of the United States;
they are all included in the twenty-two colleges admitted to the
Association of collegiate alumnæ; two of them, Bryn Mawr and Wellesley,
are included in the twenty-three colleges belonging to the Federation of
graduate clubs; they are all included in the list of fifty-two leading
colleges of the United States given in the handbook of Minerva; they are
all, except Bryn Mawr, included in the list given by the U. S. education
report for 1897–98[21] of forty-six colleges in the United States having
three hundred students and upward; three of them, Bryn Mawr, Smith and
Vassar, are included among the fifty-two colleges of the United States
possessing invested funds of $500,000 and upward, and two of them,
Vassar and Bryn Mawr, are included among the twenty-nine colleges of the
United States possessing funds of $1,000,000 and upward; three of them,
Smith, Wellesley and Vassar, rank among the twenty-three largest
undergraduate colleges in the United States; one of them, Smith, ranks
as the tenth undergraduate college in the United States.
=Vassar college, Poughkeepsie, New York=[22]—Founder, Matthew
Vassar; intention, “to found and equip an institution which should
accomplish for young women what our colleges are accomplishing for
young men;” opened, 1865; preparatory department dropped, 1888;
presidents, three (men); 45 instructors (16 Ph. D.s.)—35 women, 2
without first degree; 10 men; 584 undergrad. s., 11 grad. s., 24
special s.; productive funds, $1,050,000; a main building with
lecture rooms, library and accommodation for 345 students, and two
other residence halls accommodating 189 students; a science
building; a lecture building; a museum with art, music and
laboratory rooms; an observatory; a gymnasium; a plant house; a
president’s house; five professors’ houses; total cost of buildings,
$1,044,365; vols. in library, 30,000; laboratory equipment, $33,382;
acres, 200; music and art depts., but technical work in neither
counted toward bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge,
tuition, board and residence, including washing, $400.
=Wellesley college, Wellesley, Massachusetts=—Founder, Henry F.
Durant; intention, “to found a college for the glory of God by the
education and culture of women,” opened 1875; preparatory department
dropped, 1880; requirement from students of one hour daily domestic
or clerical work dropped, 1896; presidents, five (all women); 69
instructors (13 Ph. D.s.)—64 women, 16, apart from laboratory
assistants without first degree; 5 men; 611 undergrad. s., 25 grad.
s., 21 special s.; productive funds, $7,000;[23] a main building
with library lecture rooms and accommodation for 250 students; a
chemical laboratory; an observatory; a chapel; an art building; a
music building; 8 halls of residence, accommodating 348 students
(new hall being built); total cost of buildings, $1,106,500; vols,
in library, 49,970; laboratory equipment, $50,000; acres, 410; music
and art depts., but technical work in neither counted toward
bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $175; lowest charge, tuition, board
and residence (beds made, rooms dusted by students), $400.
=Smith college, Northampton, Massachusetts=—Founder, Sophia Smith;
intention, to provide “means and facilities for education equal to
those which are afforded in our colleges for young men;” opened,
1875; no preparatory department ever connected with the college;
president, one (man); 49 instructors (13 Ph. D.s.)—27 women, 9
without first degree; 12 men; 1,070 undergrad. s., 4 grad. s.; since
1891 no special s. admitted; productive funds, $900,000; two lecture
buildings; a lecture and gymnastic building; a science building; a
chemical laboratory; an observatory; a gymnasium; a plant house; a
music building; an art building; 13 halls of residence accommodating
520 students; a president’s house; total cost of buildings $786,000;
vols, in library, 8,000 (70,000 vols. in library in Northampton also
used by the students); laboratory equipment, $22,500; acres, 40;
music and art depts., technical work in both, amounting to between
one-sixth and one-seventh of the hours required for a degree, may be
counted toward bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge,
tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted by students),
$400.
=Bryn Mawr college, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania=—Founder, Joseph W.
Taylor; intention, to provide “an institution of learning for the
advanced education of women which should afford them all the
advantages of a college education which are so freely offered to
young men;” opened, 1885; no preparatory department ever connected
with the college; presidents, two (one man, one woman); 38
instructors (29 Ph. D.s. 1 D. Sc.)—15 women, 23 men; 269 undergrad,
s., 61 grad. s., 9 hearers; productive funds, $1,000,000; a lecture
and library building; a science building; a gymnasium; an infirmary;
five halls of residence and two cottages, accommodating 323
students; a president’s house; 6 professors’ houses; total cost,
$718,810; vols. in library, 32,000; laboratory equipment, $47,998;
acres, 50; no music department; no technical instruction in art;
tuition fee, $125; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence,
$400.
II. The women’s colleges not included in the list of the fifty-eight
most important colleges in the United States given on page 12, but of
exceedingly good academic standing as compared with the greater number
of the separate colleges for men and the coeducational colleges included
in the four hundred and eighty enumerated by the commissioner of
education.
=Mt. Holyoke college, South Hadley, Massachusetts=—Founder, Mary
Lyon; seminary opened, 1837; chartered as seminary and college,
1888; seminary department dropped and true college organized, 1893;
presidents, two (both women); 37 instructors (7 Ph. D.s.)—all women;
5, apart from laboratory assistants, without first degree; 426
undergrad, s., 3 grad. s., 9 special s., 3 music s.; productive
funds, $300,000; a lecture building; a science building; a museum
and art gallery; a library; a gymnasium; a rink; an observatory; an
infirmary; a plant house; 9 residence halls accommodating 478
students; total cost of buildings, $625,000; vols. in library,
17,700; laboratory equipment, $33,000; acres, 160; music and art
depts., technical work in both, amount limited by faculty, may be
counted towards bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge,
tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted, by students,
and in addition one-half hour of domestic work required), $250.
=Woman’s college of Baltimore, city of Baltimore, Maryland=—Founded
and controlled by Methodist Episcopal church; opened, 1888;
preparatory department dropped, 1893; presidents, two (men); 21
instructors (10 Ph. D.s.)—11 women, 1 without first degree; 10 men,
1 without first degree; 259 undergrad. s.; 0 grad. s.; 15 special
s.; productive funds, $334,994; a lecture building and three houses
adapted for lecture purposes; a gymnasium; a biological laboratory;
3 residence halls holding 230; total cost of buildings, $505,703;
vols. in library, 7,800; laboratory equipment, $47,000; acres (in
city), 7; music and art depts., but technical work in neither
counted towards bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $125; lowest charge,
tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted by students),
$375.
=Wells college, Aurora, New York=—Founders, Henry Wells and Edwin B.
Morgan; seminary opened, 1868; chartered as college, 1870;
preparatory dept. dropped, 1896; presidents, two (men); 13
instructors (4 Ph. D.s.)—10 women, 3 without first degree; 3 men; 59
undergrad. s.; 0 grad. s.; 27 special s.; 4 music s.; productive
funds, $200,000; a main building with lecture rooms and
accommodations for 100 students; a science and music building; a
president’s house; total cost of buildings, $195,000; vols. in
library, 7,300; laboratory equipment, $20,200; acres, 200; music and
art depts., technical work in neither counted towards bachelor’s
degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge, tuition, board and
residence (beds made by students), $400.
III. Elmira college, the Randolph-Macon Woman’s college, Rockford
college and Mills college are here relegated to a third group because of
certain common characteristics. Their endowment is wholly inadequate,
averaging considerably less than $50,000 apiece, reaching $100,000 only
in the case of the Randolph-Macon Woman’s college. In each of them a
disproportionate number of students is studying in the music or art
department; special students form too large a proportion of the whole
number of students; the number of professors is too small to permit
college classes to be conducted by specialists; the college classes are
too small; true college training cannot be obtained in very small
classes, and moreover, in view of the increasing number of women now
going to college, when a college for women does not grow steadily it is
reasonable to assume that there must be some good reason for its lack of
growth.
=Elmira college=, situated at Elmira, New York, has, apart from the
president, 10 academic instructors (7 women, 2 without first degree;
3 men); 5 teachers of music, 2 of art. There are studying in the
college 70 regular college students, 17 specials and 61 special
students in music.
=The Randolph-Macon Woman’s college=, situated at Lynchburg,
Virginia, has, apart from the president, 12 academic instructors (2
Ph. D.s.)—7 women, 2 without first degree; 5 men; 9 instructors in
music. Of the 226 students,[24] 55 are regular college students; 44
registered for degree but spending one-fifth of time in music or
preparatory work; 16 special students; 6 students of art; 49
preparatory students; 46 students of music.
=Rockford college, Rockford, Illinois=—Opened as seminary, 1849;
chartered as college, 1892; 13 academic instructors (2 Ph. D.s.)—all
women, 3 without first degree; 4 teachers of music, 1 of art; 35
college s.; 7 special s.; 70 s. in music only.
=Mills college, California=—Opened as seminary, 1871; chartered as
college, 1885; 11 instructors (9 women, 3 without first degree; 2
men); 8 teachers of music; 22 college s.; 135 pupils in preparatory
department.
In addition to the existing colleges belonging to these groups, a
separate college for women, Trinity, meant to be of true college grade,
will soon be opened in Washington under the control of the Roman
Catholic church.
It is often assumed by the adversaries of coeducation that independent
colleges for women may be trusted to introduce a course of study
modified especially for women, but the experience, both of coeducational
colleges that have devised women’s courses and of women’s colleges,
demonstrates conclusively that women themselves refuse to regard as
satisfactory any modification whatsoever of the usual academic course.
At the opening of Vassar college itself it is clear that the trustees
and faculty made an honest attempt to discover and introduce certain
modifications in the system of intellectual training then in operation
in the best colleges for men. They planned from the start to give much
more time to accomplishments—music, drawing and painting—than was given
in men’s colleges, and the example of Vassar in this respect was
followed ten years later by Wellesley and Smith. These accomplishments
have gradually fallen out of the course of women’s colleges; neither
Vassar nor Wellesley allows time spent in them to be counted toward the
bachelor’s degree. Smith alone of the colleges of group I still permits
nearly one-sixth of the whole college course to be devoted to them. Bryn
Mawr, which opened ten years later than Smith or Wellesley, from the
beginning found it possible to exclude them from its course.
In like manner Vassar, Smith and Wellesley in the beginning found it
necessary to admit special students—students, that is to say, interested
in special subjects, but without sufficient general training to be able
to matriculate as college students; but their admission has been
recognized as disadvantageous, and has gradually been restricted. In
1870 special students, as distinguished from preparatory students,
formed 19.6 per cent of the whole number of the students of Vassar; in
1899 they formed only 3.9 per cent, and only 3.3 per cent of the whole
number of Wellesley students. Smith since 1891 has declined to admit
them at all, and Bryn Mawr never admitted them.[25]
Again, Wellesley and Vassar in the beginning organized preparatory
departments with pupils living in the same halls as the college students
and taught in great part by the same teachers. The presence of these
pupils tended to turn the colleges into boarding schools, and the steady
and rapid development of Vassar as a true college began only after the
closing of its preparatory department in 1888; until this time the
number of students in the college proper had been almost stationary;
Wellesley closed its preparatory department in 1880; Smith never
organized one; Bryn Mawr never organized one; Mt. Holyoke, the Woman’s
college of Baltimore, and Wells college have all closed their
preparatory departments within the last seven years.[26]
It seems to have been at first supposed that the same standards of
scholarship need not be applied in the choice of instructors to teach
women as in that of instructors to teach men, that women were fittest to
teach women, and that the personal character and influence of the woman
instructor in some mysterious way supplied the deficiency on her part of
academic training. For a long time not even an ordinary undergraduate
education was required of her, and there are still teaching in women’s
colleges too many women without even a first degree. But it has been
found on the whole that systematic mental training is best imparted by
those who have themselves received it; the numbers of well-trained women
are increasing; and the prejudice against the appointment of men where
men are better qualified has almost disappeared.[27]
It has been recognized that the work done in women’s colleges is most
satisfactory to women when it is the same in quality and quantity as the
work done in colleges for men, and it has been recognized also that they
need the same time for its performance. Domestic work, therefore, which
by the founder of Wellesley was regarded as a necessary part of women’s
education, is at present, I believe, required nowhere except on the
perfectly plain ground of economy. The hour of domestic service
originally required of every student in Wellesley was abandoned in 1896;
a half-hour is still required at Mt. Holyoke, but tuition, board and
residence are less expensive there. The time given to domestic work is
obviously so much time taken from academic work.
In the matter of discipline the tendency has been toward
ever-diminishing supervision by the college authorities. Vassar and
Wellesley began with the strict regulations of a boarding school; it was
regarded as impossible that young women living away from home should be
in any measure trusted with the control of their own actions. Smith from
the first allowed more liberty, in part because many of her students
lived in boarding houses outside the college. In all three colleges the
restrictions laid upon the students have been gradually lessened, and at
Vassar there is at present a well-developed system of what is known as
“limited self-government,” according to which many matters of discipline
are intrusted to the whole body of students. Bryn Mawr was organized
with a system of self-government by the students perhaps more
far-reaching than was then in operation in any of the colleges for men;
the necessary rules are made by the Students’ association, which
includes all undergraduate and graduate students, and enforced by an
executive committee of students who in the case of a serious offense may
recommend the suspension or expulsion of the offender, and whose
recommendation, when sustained by the whole association, is always
accepted by the college. The perfect success of the system has shown
that there is no risk in relying to the fullest extent on the discretion
of a body of women students.
=Affiliated colleges=[28]—There are five[29] affiliated colleges in the
United States—Radcliffe college, Barnard college, the Women’s college of
Brown university, the College for Women of Western reserve university,
and the H. Sophie Newcomb memorial college for women of Tulane
university.[30] The affiliated college in America is modeled on the
English women’s colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, with such
modifications as are made necessary by the wholly different constitution
of English and American universities. These modifications, however, it
must in fairness be explained, are so essential as to make of it a
wholly different institution.[31]
=Radcliffe college, Cambridge, Massachusetts=[32]—Affiliated to Harvard
university, union dissoluble after due notice; opened by the Society for
the collegiate instruction of women in 1879; incorporated as Radcliffe
college with power to confer degrees in 1894; board of trustees and
financial management separate from Harvard; B. A. and M. A. degrees
conferred by Radcliffe; Ph. D. degree as yet conferred neither by
Radcliffe nor Harvard; degrees, instructors, and academic board of
control, subject to approval of Harvard; no instructors not instructors
at Harvard also; undergraduate instruction at Harvard repeated at
Radcliffe at discretion of instructors; since 1893 women admitted to
graduate and semi-graduate courses given in Harvard, at discretion of
instructor, subject to approval of the Harvard faculty; in 1899, 64 such
courses open to Radcliffe students; 238 undergrad. s.; 54 grad. s.; 129
special s.; productive funds about $430,000; a lecture and library
building; a gymnasium; 4 temporary buildings used for lectures and
laboratories; a students’ club house; no residence hall, but one about
to be built; total cost of buildings about $110,000; vols. in library,
14,138; access to Harvard library and collections; scientific
laboratories of Harvard not available; cost of laboratory equipment not
ascertainable, inadequate; acres (in city) about 3; tuition fee, $200.
=Barnard college, New York city=—Affiliated to Columbia university,
union dissoluble by either party after year’s notice; opened in 1889;
status very much that of Radcliffe until January, 1900, when women
graduates were admitted without restriction to the graduate school of
Columbia, registering in Columbia, not as heretofore in Barnard, and
Barnard was incorporated as an undergraduate women’s college of the
university, its dean voting in the university council, and the president
of Columbia becoming its president and a member of its board of
trustees; Barnard’s faculty consists of the president of the university,
the dean of Barnard, and instructors, either men or women, nominated by
the dean, approved by Barnard trustees and president of Columbia and
appointed by Columbia; courses for A. B. degree and all examinations
determined and conducted by Barnard faculty, subject to provisions of
university council for maintaining integrity of degree; all degrees
conferred by Columbia; after July 1, 1904, no undergraduate courses in
Columbia, except in the Teachers’ college, will be open to Barnard
seniors as heretofore, complete undergraduate work will be given
separately at Barnard, not necessarily by same instructors; 131
undergrad. s.; 76 grad. s.; 73 special s.; productive funds, $150,000;
one large building containing lecture rooms, laboratories and
accommodation for 65 students, cost, $525,000; vols. in reading room,
1,000; access to Columbia, library; scientific laboratories of Columbia
not available; cost of laboratory equipment $9,250; land (in city), 200
× 160 feet; tuition fee, $150.
=Women’s college of Brown university, Providence, Rhode
Island=—Affiliated to Brown university; university degrees and
examinations opened to women, and their undergraduate instruction
informally begun in 1892; women’s college established by Brown
university as a regular department of the university in 1897 under
control of the university trustees; advisory council of five women
appointed by trustees to advise with president of university and dean of
women’s college; funds of the women’s college held and administered
separately by trustees; all degrees conferred by Brown; women and men
examined together; required courses given in Brown repeated to women by
same instructors; all instruction given by Brown instructors; all
graduate work in Brown open to graduate women without restriction since
1892; women recite with men in many of the smaller elective
undergraduate courses; 140 undergrad. s.; 38 grad. s.; 25 special s.; a
lecture hall costing $38,000; no residence hall; access to Brown
library; scientific laboratories of Brown not available; very inadequate
laboratory equipment; no productive funds; tuition fee, $105.
=College for women of Western reserve university, Cleveland,
Ohio=—Affiliated to Western reserve university; established by Western
reserve in 1888; degrees conferred by Western reserve; graduate
department of Western reserve open to graduate women without
restriction; separate financial management; separate faculty 21 (9 Ph.
D.s.)—14 men, 7 women; 165 undergrad. s.; 18 special s.; productive
funds, about $250,000; a lecture hall, a residence hall accommodating 40
students; total cost of buildings, including land, about $200,000; 3
laboratories of men’s college available at certain times; access to
Western reserve library; tuition, $85; lowest charge, board, room rent
and tuition (beds made by students), $335.