The Project Gutenberg EBook of Education of Women, by M. Carey Thomas
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this ebook.
Title: Education of Women
Author: M. Carey Thomas
Editor: Nicholas Murray Butler
Release Date: June 25, 2018 [EBook #57398]
Language: English
Character set encoding: UTF-8
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EDUCATION OF WOMEN ***
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.
=H. Sophie Newcomb memorial college for women, New Orleans,
Louisiana=—Affiliated with Tulane university, but situated in another
part of the city; founder, Mrs. Josephine Louise Newcomb; opened 1886;
under control of board of trustees of Tulane; graduate department of
Tulane university open to graduate women without restriction since 1890;
separate financial management; separate president and faculty; 8
instructors (1 Ph. D.)—5 women, 2 without first degrees; 3 men, 1
without first degree; 51 undergrad. s.; 34 special s. (10 in
gymnastics); 54 s. of art; 80 pupils in preparatory dept.; art dept.;
productive funds, $400,000; a lecture building, a chapel, an art
building, a pottery building, two residence halls accommodating 75
students, a high school building; total cost of buildings about
$225,000; vols. in library about 6,000; tuition, $100; lowest charge,
board, room rent (two in one room, beds made by students) and tuition,
$280.
In the smaller group, which includes the College for women of Western
reserve university and the H. Sophie Newcomb memorial college, the
affiliated college tends to become an entirely separate institution; in
its instructors and instruction it differs widely from the institution
to which it is affiliated; it is, in fact, a different college called
into existence by the same authorities. In the larger group, which
includes the Women’s college of Brown, Barnard and Radcliffe, the
affiliated college tends to blend itself with the institution to which
it is affiliated in a new coeducational institution. The ideal in view
is a complete identity of instructors and instruction and the law of
economy of force forbids attaining this ideal by the duplication of the
whole instruction given. It is less wasteful to double the number of
hearers in any lecture room than to repeat the lecture. It is in the
Women’s college of Brown that we find the closest affiliation and,
accordingly, the nearest approach to coeducation. The corporation of
Brown furnished the land on which Pembroke hall, the academic building
of the Women’s college, was erected, and accepted the gift of the
building when it was completed; Brown has from first to last openly
assumed responsibility for its affiliated college in fact as well as
name. In the graduate department of Brown there is, as has been said,
unrestricted coeducation; and in many of the smaller undergraduate
elective courses women are reciting with men. In the graduate department
of Columbia there is now unrestricted coeducation. It is in the case of
Radcliffe that there is least approach to coeducation. What has made
possible the policy pursued at Radcliffe has been the self-sacrificing
zeal of many eminent Harvard professors, willing at any cost of
inconvenience to give to women what could seemingly on no other terms be
given; but the sacrifice is too great, and in the modern world too
unnecessary; it is at present almost everywhere possible for the
professor interested in educating women to lighten his own labors by
admitting them to the same classes with men. Only the affiliated
colleges of the second group present in their internal organization a
type essentially different from that of the independent college—a type
intermediate between the independent and the coeducational.
PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
=Graduate instruction in the faculty of philosophy=—True university
instruction begins after the completion of the college course, and very
little such instruction is given by any American university[33] except
in the so-called graduate schools belonging to the twenty-three colleges
in the United States included in the Federation of graduate clubs.[34]
In the following 16 of these 23 graduate schools women are admitted
without restriction and compete with men for many of the scholarships
and honors: Yale, Brown, Cornell, Columbia, New York university,
Pennsylvania, Columbian, Vanderbilt, Missouri, Western reserve, Chicago,
Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, California, Leland Stanford Junior; Bryn
Mawr and Wellesley admit women only; Harvard admits them to certain
courses through the mediation of Radcliffe. There remain, apart from the
Catholic university, only 3 graduate schools excluding women: Clark,
Princeton and the Johns Hopkins university; and in the Johns Hopkins
they are admitted to at least one university department—that of the
medical school.[35]
In 1898–99 there were studying in these 23 graduate schools 1,021 women,
forming 26.8 per cent of the whole number of graduate students.[36] In
1889–90 the U. S. education report estimates that there were 271 women
graduate students out of a total of 2,041 graduate students, or women
formed 13.27 per cent of all graduate students; in 1897–98 the report
for that year estimates that there were 1,398 women out of a total of
5,816 graduate students, or women formed 24.04 per cent of all
students—a remarkable increase as compared to the increase of men
graduate students in 8 years.
=Graduate fellowships and scholarships=—In 1899 there were open to women
319 scholarships varying in value from $100 to $400 (50 of these
exclusively for women) and 2 foreign scholarships (1 exclusively for
women); 81 residence fellowships of the value of $400 or over (18 of
these exclusively for women); 24 foreign fellowships of the value of
$500 and upwards (12 of these exclusively for women).[37]
_Comparative table of the progress of coeducation and increase of women
students from 1890 to 1898 and 1899 in theology, law, medicine,
dentistry, pharmacy, schools of technology and agriculture._
══════════════════════════════════════╤════════════════════════════════
│ 1890[38]
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┬──────────┬──────────
│Number of │Number of │Percentage
│ colleges │ coed. │ of coed.
│ for men │ colleges │ colleges
│ only │ │
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┴──────────┴──────────
Theology │ No women reported
Law │ No women reported
Medicine (regular and irregular)[41] │ 67│ 46│ 40.7
Dentistry │ 14│ 13│ 48.1
Pharmacy │ 13│ 16│ 55.2
Schools of technology and agriculture │ 14│ 12│ 46.2
endowed with national land grant[42]│ │ │
══════════════════════════════════════╧══════════╧══════════╧══════════
══════════════════════════════════════╤════════════════════════════════
│ 1899[39]
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┬──────────┬──────────
│Number of │Number of │Percentage
│ colleges │ coed. │ of coed.
│ for men │ colleges │ colleges
│ only │ │
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┼──────────┼──────────
Theology │ 97│ 68│ 41.2
Law │ 22│ 64│ 74.4
Medicine (regular and irregular)[41] │ 69│ 80│ 53.7
Dentistry │ 12│ 44│ 78.6
Pharmacy │ 4│ 48│ 92.3
Schools of technology and agriculture │ 16│ 48│ 75.
endowed with national land grant[42]│ │ │
══════════════════════════════════════╧══════════╧══════════╧══════════
══════════════════════════════════════╤═════════════════════
│ 1890[38]
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┬──────────
│Number of │Percentage
│ women │ women of
│ students │ all
│ │ students
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┴──────────
Theology │ No women reported
Law │ No women reported
Medicine (regular and irregular)[41] │ 854│ 5.5
Dentistry │ 53│ 2.0
Pharmacy │ 60│ 2.1
Schools of technology and agriculture │ 774│ 12.5
endowed with national land grant[42]│ │
══════════════════════════════════════╧══════════╧══════════
══════════════════════════════════════╤═════════════════════
│ 1898[40]
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┬──────────
│Number of │Percentage
│ women │ women of
│ students │ all
│ │ students
──────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┼──────────
Theology │ 198│ 2.4
Law │ 147│ 1.3
Medicine (regular and irregular)[41] │ 1397│ 6.0
Dentistry │ 62│ 2.4
Pharmacy │ 174│ 4.7
Schools of technology and agriculture │ 2281│ 16.1
endowed with national land grant[42]│ │
══════════════════════════════════════╧══════════╧══════════
Footnote 38:
The numbers of coeducational and other professional schools are
estimated from the U. S. ed. rep. for 1889–90.
Footnote 39:
Through the kindness of Mr. James Russell Parsons, Jr., author of the
monograph on professional education in the United States, published as
one of this series, I am able to insert the figures for 1899, see p.
21. By personal inquiry I have been able to add four to his list of
coeducational schools of theology.
Footnote 40:
The number of professional students for the year 1898 is taken from
the U. S. ed. rep. for 1897–98.
Footnote 41:
For the sake of clearness I have omitted from the above table the 7
separate medical schools for women, although I have counted their
students in the total number of women medical students, both in 1890
and 1898. In 1890 there were studying in the 6 regular medical women’s
colleges 425 women, as against 648 women in coeducational regular
medical colleges; in 1898 there were studying in them 411 women, as
against 1045 in coeducational colleges, a decrease of 3.3 per cent,
whereas women students in coeducational medical colleges have
increased 16.3 per cent. I limit the comparison to regular medical
schools because women have increased relatively more rapidly in
irregular medical schools and there is only one separate irregular
medical school for women. It is sometimes said that women prefer
medical sects because the proportion of women studying in irregular
schools is relatively greater than the proportion studying in regular
schools; but in 1898, 85.7 per cent of the irregular schools were
coeducational and only 46.6 per cent of regular schools, a fact which
undoubtedly increases the proportion of students studying in irregular
schools.
Footnote 42:
The statistics for the schools of technology and agriculture are taken
from the U. S. education report for 1889–90, pp. 1053–1054, and from
the report for 1897–98, pp. 1985–1988. I have excluded schools of
technology not endowed with the national land grant. In 1890 there
were 27 of such schools (5 of them coeducational); in 1898 their
number had fallen to 17 (3 of them coeducational). Very few women are
studying in these schools; in 1898 women formed only 0.2 per cent of
all students studying in them.
=Theology, law, medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, veterinary science,
schools of technology and agriculture=—Ten years ago there were very few
women studying in any of these schools. The wonderful increase both in
facilities for professional study and in the number of women students
during the last eight years may be seen by referring to the comparative
table on the opposite page.
It is evident to the impartial observer that coeducation is to be the
method in professional schools. Except in medicine, where women were at
first excluded from coeducational study by the strongest prejudice that
has ever been conquered in any movement, no important separate
professional schools, indeed none whatever, except one unimportant
school of pharmacy have been founded for women only.[43] It is evident
also that the number of women entering upon professional study is
increasing rapidly. If we compare the relative increase of men and of
women from 1890 to 1898 we obtain the following percentages: increase of
students in medicine, men, 51.1 per cent, women, 64.2 per cent; in
dentistry, men, 150.2 per cent, women, 205.7 per cent; in pharmacy, men,
25.9 per cent, women, 190 per cent; in technology and agriculture, men,
119.3 per cent, women, 194.7 per cent.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
There are many questions connected with the college education of
American women which possess great interest for the student of social
science.
=Number of college women=—In the year 1897–98[44] there were studying in
the undergraduate and graduate departments of coeducational colleges and
universities 17,338 women, and in the undergraduate and graduate
departments of independent and affiliated women’s colleges, division A,
4,959 women, women forming thus 27.4 per cent of the total number of
graduate and undergraduate students. The 22 colleges belonging to the
Association of collegiate alumnæ, which are, on the whole, the most
important colleges in the United States admitting women, have conferred
the bachelor’s degree on 12,804 women. If we add to these the graduates
of the Women’s college of Brown university, 102 in number, and the
graduates of the 14 additional coeducational colleges included in my
list of the 58 most important colleges in the United States, we obtain,
including those graduating in June, 1899, a total of 14,824 women
holding the bachelor’s degree.[45] There is thus formed, even leaving
out of account the graduates of the minor colleges, a larger body of
educated women than is to be found in any other country in the world.
These graduates have received the most strenuous college training
obtainable by women in the United States, which does not differ
materially from the best college training obtainable by American men
(indeed, women graduates of coeducational colleges have received
precisely the same training as men), and may fairly be compared with the
women who have received college and university training abroad. In other
countries women university graduates, or even women who have studied at
universities, are very few;[46] in America, on the other hand, the
higher education of women has assumed the proportions of a national
movement still in progress. We may perhaps be able to guide in some
degree its future development, but it has passed the experimental stage
and can no longer be opposed with any hope of success. Its results are
to be reckoned with as facts.
=Health of college women=[47]—Those who have come into contact with some
of the many thousands of healthy normal women studying in college at the
present time, or who have had an opportunity to know something of the
after-lives of even a small number of college women, believe that
experience has proved them to be, both in college, and after leaving
college, on the whole, in better physical condition than other women of
the same age and social condition. Since, however, people who have not
the opportunity of knowledge at first hand continue to regard the health
of college women as a subject open for discussion, a new health
investigation, based on questions sent to the 12,804 graduates of the 22
colleges belonging to the Association of collegiate alumnæ, is now in
progress. The statistical tables will be collated a second time by the
Massachusetts bureau of statistics of labor and sent to the Paris
exposition as part of the educational exhibit of the Association of
collegiate alumnæ.[48]
=Marriage rate of college women=—Here again no positive conclusions can
be reached until we know what is the usual marriage rate of women
belonging to the social class of women graduates. Everything indicates
that the time of marriage is becoming later in the professional classes
and that the marriage rate as a whole is decreasing. An investigation
undertaken simultaneously with the new health investigation by the
Association of collegiate alumnæ will enable us to speak with certainty
in regard to the marriage rate of a large number of college women and
their sisters.[49] It must be borne in mind that the element of time is
very important, and in the case of women the later and therefore younger
classes are all larger than the earlier ones, see table on opposite
page.
_Marriage rate of college women_
═══════════════════════════════════════╤══════════╤════════════════════
│Opened in │ Percentage of
│ │ graduates married
───────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┼────────────────────
Vassar │ 1865 │ 35.1
Kansas │ 1866 │ 31.3
Minnesota │ 1868 │ 24.5
Cornell │} │}
Syracuse │} 1870 │} 31.0
Wesleyan │} │}
Nebraska │ 1871 │ 24.3
Boston │ 1873 │ 22.2
Wellesley │} 1875 │} 18.4
Smith │} │}
Radcliffe │ 1879 │ 16.5
Bryn Mawr │ 1885 │ 15.2
Barnard │ 1889 │ 10.4
Leland Stanford Junior │ 1891 │ 9.7
Chicago │ 1892 │ 9.4
═══════════════════════════════════════╧══════════╧════════════════════
It will be seen that independent, affiliated and coeducational colleges
fall into their proper place in the series, thus showing conclusively
that the method of obtaining a college education exercises scarcely any
appreciable influence on the marriage rate.
The marriage rate of Bryn Mawr college, calculated in January, 1900,
will also serve as an illustration of the importance of time in every
consideration of the marriage rate: graduates of the class of 1889,
married, 40.7 per cent; graduates of the first two classes, 1889–1890,
married, 40.0 per cent; graduates of the first three classes, 1889–1891,
married, 33.3 per cent; graduates of the first four classes, 1889–1892,
married, 32.9 per cent; graduates of the first five classes, 1889–1893,
married, 31.0 per cent; graduates of the first six classes, 1889–1894,
married, 30.0 per cent; graduates of the first seven classes, 1889–1895,
married, 25.2 per cent; graduates of the first eight classes, 1889–1896,
married, 22.8 per cent; graduates of the first nine classes, 1889–1897,
married, 20.9 per cent; graduates of the first ten classes, 1889–1898,
married, 17.2 per cent; graduates of the first eleven classes,
1889–1899, married, 15.2 per cent.
=Occupations of college women=—It is probable that about 50 per cent of
women graduates teach for at least a certain number of years. Of the 705
women graduates whose occupations were reported in the Association of
collegiate alumnæ investigation of 1883 50.2 percent were then teaching.
In 1895 of 1,082 graduates of Vassar 37.7 per cent were teaching; 2.0
per cent were engaged in graduate study and 3.0 per cent were physicians
or studying medicine. In 1898 of 171 graduates (all living) of Radcliffe
college, including the class of 1898, 49.7 per cent were teaching; 8.7
per cent were engaged in graduate study; .6 per cent were studying
medicine; 17.5 per cent were unmarried and without professional
occupation. In 1899 of 316 living graduates of Bryn Mawr college,
including the class of 1899, 39.0 percent were teaching; 11.4 were
engaged in graduate study; 6 per cent were engaged in executive work
(including 4 deans of colleges, 3 mistresses of college halls of
residence); 1.6 per cent were studying or practising medicine, and 26.6
per cent were unmarried and without professional occupation.[50]
=Coeducation vs. separate education=—It is clear that coeducation is the
prevailing method in the United States; it is the most economical
method; indeed it is the only possible method in most parts of the
country. Now that it has been determined in America to send girls as
well as boys to college, it becomes impossible to duplicate colleges for
women in every part of this vast country. If, as is shown by the
statistics given in the successive reports of the commissioner of
education, men students in college are increasing faster far than the
ratio of the population, and women college students are increasing
faster still than men,[51] it will tax all our resources to make
adequate provision for men and women in common. Only in thickly-settled
parts of the country, where public sentiment is conservative enough to
justify the initial outlay, have separate colleges for women been
established, and these colleges, without exception, have been private
foundations. Public opinion in the United States almost universally
demands that universities supported by public taxation should provide
for the college education of the women of the state in which they are
situated. The separate colleges for women speaking generally are to be
found almost exclusively in the narrow strip of colonial states lying
along the Atlantic seaboard. The question is often asked, whether women
prefer coeducation or separate education. It seems that in the east they
as yet prefer separate education, and this preference is natural.[52]
College life as it is organized in a woman’s college seems to
conservative parents less exposed, more in accordance with inherited
traditions. Consequently, girls who in their own homes lead guarded
lives, are to be found rather in women’s colleges than in coeducational
colleges. From the point of view of conservative parents, there is
undoubtedly serious objection to intimate association at the most
impressionable period of a girl’s life with many young men from all
parts of the country and of every possible social class. From every
point of view it is undesirable to have the problems of love and
marriage presented for decision to a young girl during the four years
when she ought to devote her energies to profiting by the only
systematic intellectual training she is likely to receive during her
life. Then, too, for the present, much of the culture and many of the
priceless associations of college life are to be obtained, whether for
men or women, only by residence in college halls, and no coeducational,
or even affiliated, colleges have as yet organized for their students
such a complete college life as the independent woman’s college. So long
as this preference, and the grounds for it, exist, we must see to it
that separate colleges for women are no less good than colleges for men.
In professional schools, including the graduate school of the faculty of
philosophy, coeducation is even at present almost the only method. There
are in the United States only 4 true graduate schools for men closed to
women, and only 1 independent graduate school maintained for women
offering three years’ consecutive work leading to the degree of Ph. D.
There is every reason to believe that as soon as large numbers of women
wish to enter upon the study of theology, law and medicine, all the
professional schools now existing will become coeducational.
=A modified vs. an unmodified curriculum=—The progress of women’s
education, as we have traced it briefly from its beginning in the
coeducational college of Oberlin in 1833, and the independent woman’s
college of Vassar in 1865, has been a progress in accordance with the
best academic traditions of men’s education. In 1870 we could not have
predicted the course to be taken by the higher education of women; the
separate colleges for women might have developed into something wholly
different from what we had been familiar with so long in the separate
colleges for men. A female course in coeducational colleges in which
music and art were substituted for mathematics and Greek might have met
the needs of the women students. After thirty years of experience,
however, we are prepared to say that whatever changes may be made in
future in the college curriculum will be made for men and women alike.
After all, women themselves must be permitted to be the judges of what
kind of intellectual discipline they find most truly serviceable. They
seem to have made up their minds, and hereafter may be trusted to see to
it that an inferior education shall not be offered to them in women’s
colleges, or elsewhere, under the name of a modified curriculum.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
FOR THE
UNITED STATES COMMISSION TO THE PARIS EXPOSITION OF 1900
Director
HOWARD J. ROGERS, Albany, N. Y.
MONOGRAPHS
ON
EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES
EDITED BY
NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER
_Professor of Philosophy and Education in Columbia University, New York_
1 EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION—ANDREW SLOAN DRAPER,
_President of the University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois_
2 KINDERGARTEN EDUCATION—SUSAN E. BLOW, _Cazenovia, New York_
3 ELEMENTARY EDUCATION—WILLIAM T. HARRIS, _United States
Commissioner of Education, Washington, D. C._
4 SECONDARY EDUCATION—ELMER ELLSWORTH BROWN, _Professor of Education
in the University of California, Berkeley, California_
5 THE AMERICAN COLLEGE—ANDREW FLEMING WEST, _Professor of Latin in
Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey_
6 THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY—EDWARD DELAVAN PERRY, _Jay Professor of
Greek in Columbia University, New York_
7 EDUCATION OF WOMEN—M. CAREY THOMAS, _President of Bryn Mawr
College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania_
8 TRAINING OF TEACHERS—B. A. HINSDALE, _Professor of the Science and
Art of Teaching in the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan_
9 SCHOOL ARCHITECTURE AND HYGIENE—GILBERT B. MORRISON, _Principal of
the Manual Training High School, Kansas City, Missouri_
10 PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION—JAMES RUSSELL PARSONS, _Director of the
College and High School Departments, University of the State of
New York, Albany, New York_
11 SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING EDUCATION—T. C. MENDENHALL,
_President of the Technological Institute, Worcester,
Massachusetts_
12 AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION—CHARLES W. DABNEY, _President of the
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee_
13 COMMERCIAL EDUCATION—EDMUND J. JAMES, _Professor of Public
Administration in the University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois_
14 ART AND INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION—ISAAC EDWARDS CLARKE, _Bureau of
Education, Washington, D. C._
15 EDUCATION OF DEFECTIVES—EDWARD ELLIS ALLEN, _Principal of the
Pennsylvania Institution for the Instruction of the Blind,
Overbrook, Pennsylvania_
16 SUMMER SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITY EXTENSION—HERBERT B. ADAMS,
_Professor of American and Institutional History in the Johns
Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland_
17 SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES AND ASSOCIATIONS—JAMES MCKEEN CATTELL,
_Professor of Psychology in Columbia University, New York_
18 EDUCATION OF THE NEGRO—BOOKER T. WASHINGTON, _Principal of the
Tuskegee Institute, Tuskegee, Alabama_
19 EDUCATION OF THE INDIAN—WILLIAM N. HAILMANN, _Superintendent of
Schools, Dayton, Ohio_
-----
Footnote 1:
That their admission was due in large part to the stress of
circumstances is shown by the fact that in the very states in which
these coeducational schools had been established there was manifested
on other occasions a most illiberal attitude toward girls’ education.
In the few cities of the Atlantic seaboard, where European
conservatism was too strong to allow girls to be taught with boys in
the new high schools, and where there were boys enough to fill the
schools, girls had to wait much longer before their needs were
provided for at all, and then most inadequately. In Boston, where the
boys’ and girls’ high schools were separated, it was impossible until
1878 for a Boston girl to be prepared for college in a city high
school, whereas, in the country towns of Massachusetts, where boys and
girls were taught together in the high schools, the girl had had the
same opportunities as the boy for twenty-five or thirty years. Indeed,
it was not until 1852 that Boston girls obtained, and then only in
connection with the normal school, a public high-school education of
any kind whatsoever. In Philadelphia, where boys and girls are taught
separately in the high schools, no girl could be prepared for college
before 1893, neither Latin, French, nor German being taught in the
girls’ high school, whereas, for many years the boys’ high school had
prepared boys for college. In Baltimore the two girls’ high schools
are still, in 1900, unable to prepare girls for college, whereas the
boys’ high school has for years prepared boys to enter the Johns
Hopkins university. The impossibility of preparing girls for college
is only another way of stating that the instruction given is very
imperfect.
Footnote 2:
The magnitude of this fact will be apparent if we reflect that here
for the first time the girls of a great nation, especially of the
poorer classes, have from their earliest infancy to the age of
eighteen or nineteen received the same education as the boys, and that
the ladder leading, in Huxley’s words, from the gutter to the
university may be climbed as easily by a girl as by a boy. Although
college education has affected as yet only a very few out of the great
number of adult women in the United States, the free opportunities for
secondary education have influenced the whole American people for
nearly two-thirds of a century. The men of the poorer classes have
had, as a rule, mothers as well educated as their fathers, indeed,
better educated; to this, more than to any other single cause, I
think, may be attributed what by other nations is regarded as the
phenomenal industrial progress of the United States. Our commercial
rivals could probably take no one step that would so tend to place
them on a level with American competition as to open to girls without
distinction all their elementary and secondary schools for boys. In
1892, girls formed 55.9 per cent, and in 1898, 56.5 per cent of all
pupils in the public and private secondary schools of the United
States.
Footnote 3:
In 1870 women formed 59.0 per cent; in 1880, 57.2 per cent; in 1890,
65.5 per cent; and in 1898, 67.8 per cent (in the North Atlantic
Division 80.8 per cent) of all teachers in the public elementary and
secondary schools of the United States (U. S. ed. rep. for 1897–98,
pp. xiii, lxxv). It has been frequently remarked that the feminine
pronouns “she” and “her” are instinctively used in America in common
speech with reference to a teacher. Moreover more women than men are
teaching in the public and private secondary schools of the United
States (in 1898, women formed 53.8 per cent of the total number of
secondary teachers, see U. S. ed. rep. for 1897–98, pp. 2053, 2069);
whereas in all other countries the secondary teaching of boys is
wholly in the hands of men.
Footnote 4:
In many cases in the west women made their way into the universities
through the normal department of the university, being admitted to
that first of all. The summer schools of western colleges, chiefly
attended by teachers, among whom women were in the majority, served
also as an entering wedge. (See Woman’s work in America, Holt & Co.,
1891, pp. 71–75.)
Footnote 5:
Antioch college opened, however, with only 8 students in its college
department, all the rest, 142, belonging to its secondary school.
Footnote 6:
In every case I give the date when full coeducation was introduced;
West Virginia, for example, admitted women to limited privileges in
1889.
Footnote 7:
In discussing coeducation I shall, therefore, disregard the divisions
into north Atlantic, south Atlantic, north central, south central and
western, employed by the U. S. census and the U. S. bureau of
education. The New England, middle and southern states are all, of
course, eastern, and, with the exception of Vermont, West Virginia,
Kentucky, Tennessee and Missouri, are all seaboard states,
Pennsylvania being counted as a seaboard state on account of its close
river connection with the sea. It will be noted that the inland
southern states are rather western than eastern in their
characteristics. The northern middle states belong on the whole by
their sympathies to New England, the southern middle to the southern
states. Missouri, having been a slave state and settled largely by
southerners, is still southern in feeling. The District of Columbia
also may conveniently be counted with the southern states.
Footnote 8:
Two of the three next largest colleges in Virginia—Richmond and
Roanoke—admit women, but the advance in women’s education in that
state has been very recent. Until the establishment of the State
normal school in 1883 there was not a scientific laboratory in the
state accessible to women; in 1893 the Randolph-Macon Woman’s college
opened with several laboratories, see Prof. Celestia Parrish,
Proceedings 2d Capon Springs conference for education in the south,
1899, p. 68. I am much indebted to the author of this paper for
valuable data in regard to coeducation in the south.
Footnote 9:
The Massachusetts institute of technology is classified by the U. S.
ed. reps. among technical schools.
Footnote 10:
The commissioner of education does not feel himself at liberty to
discriminate among the colleges chartered by the different states, but
it is well known that in most states the name of college, or
preferably that of university, and the power to confer degrees are
granted to any institution whatsoever without regard to endowment,
scientific equipment, scholarly qualifications of the faculty or
adequate preparation of the students. The majority of the so-called
colleges and universities of the south and west are really secondary
schools. In most of them not only are the greater part of the students
really pupils in the preparatory or high school department, but most
of the students in the collegiate departments are at graduation barely
able to enter upon the sophomore or second year work of the best
eastern colleges. Throughout this monograph I have used the word
college in speaking of institutions for undergraduate education,
except when quoting their official titles, and this whether the
college in question is, or is not, included in a larger institution
providing also three years of graduate instruction. The terms college
and university are used in America without any definite understanding,
even among colleges and universities themselves, as to how they shall
be differentiated. Probably the most commonly accepted usage is to
call an institution a university if it has attached to it various
departments, or schools, without regard to the standing of these
departments, the preparation of the students entering them, or the
work done in them. In this sense all the state universities of the
west are called universities because, although many of them are really
high schools, they have attached to them schools of pharmacy,
veterinary science, agriculture, and sometimes medicine or law. It is
in this sense that many institutions for negroes are called
universities, because they include various departments of industrial
art as well as a high school department. Until very recently the
requirements for admission to the departments of law, medicine,
dentistry, etc., have been so low that it has been a positive
disadvantage to have such schools attached to the college department,
and when lately the graduates of Harvard college decided not to allow
the graduates of its affiliated schools to vote with them for
representatives on the board of trustees, they claimed with justice
that the illiberal education of the majority of these graduates would
tend to lower the standard of Harvard college. The use of the word
university should be strictly limited to institutions offering at
least three years of graduate instruction in one or more schools.
Footnote 11:
In this list of fifty-eight colleges I have included: first, the
twenty-four colleges (indicated in the list by “a”) whose graduates
are admitted to the Association of collegiate alumnæ; second, the
twenty-three colleges (24 are included in the Federation, but Barnard
has ceased to be a graduate school, see page 28) included in the
Federation of graduate clubs (indicated by “b”); third, the fifty-two
colleges (indicated by “c”) included in the 1899–1900 edition of
Minerva, the well-known handbook of colleges and universities of the
world published each year by Truebner & Co.; and fourth, the colleges
which, according to the U. S. education report for 1897–98, have at
least $500,000 worth of productive funds (indicated by “d”), and also
three hundred or more students (indicated by “e”). In the case of
state universities the money they receive annually from national and
state appropriations may reasonably be regarded as a sort of
supplementary endowment; I have, therefore, included the state
universities of Maine, Iowa and West Virginia, whose productive funds
do not amount to $500,000. This list of fifty-eight colleges, arranged
according to the different sections of the country, and as far as
possible in the order of the numbers in their undergraduate
departments, is as follows: _New England and 3 northern middle
states_: Harvard (bcde), Yale (bcde), Cornell (abcde-coed.),
Massachusetts institute of technology (acde-coed.), Smith
(acde-woman’s college), Princeton (bcde), Pennsylvania (bcde),
Columbia (bcde), Brown (bcde), Wellesley (abce-woman’s college),
Vassar (acde-woman’s college), Syracuse (acde-coed.), Dartmouth (cde),
Boston (acde-coed.), Amherst (cde), Radcliffe (abce-affiliated),
Williams (cde), Lehigh (cde), Maine (e-coed.), Wesleyan (acde-coed.),
Vermont (c-coed.), Lafayette (c), Bryn Mawr (abed-woman’s college),
New York University (cd), Barnard (a-affiliated), Hamilton (c),
Colgate (cd), Clark (bcd-no undergrad. department). _Southern and 2
southern middle states_: Missouri (bcde-coed.), Texas (cde-coed.),
Columbian (bce-coed.), West Virginia (e-coed.), Tulane (cd),
Vanderbilt (bcd-coed.), Virginia (c), Johns Hopkins (bcd), Washington
(St. Louis) (cd-coed.), Georgetown (c-Catholic), Catholic university
(cd-no undergrad. department). _Western states_: Minnesota
(abcde-coed.), Michigan (abcde-coed.), California (abcde-coed.),
Wisconsin (abcde-coed.), Chicago (abcde-coed.), Leland Stanford
(abcde-coed.), Nebraska (ace-coed.), Ohio state university (de-coed.),
Indiana (cde-coed.), Illinois (ce-coed.), Kansas (ace-coed.), Ohio
Wesleyan (cde-coed.), Iowa (e-coed.), Northwestern (acde-coed.),
Oberlin (acde-coed.), Cincinnati (cd-coed.), Colorado (c-coed.),
Western reserve (bcd), College for Women of western reserve
(a-affiliated).
The only attempt hitherto made in America to discriminate between
colleges of true college grade and others has been made by the
Association of collegiate alumnæ. This association was organized in
1882 for the purpose of uniting women graduates of the foremost
coeducational colleges and colleges for women only into an association
for work connected with the higher education of women. In the early
years of the association there was appointed a committee on
admissions, and the admission of each successive college in the
association has been carefully considered, both with regard to its
entrance requirements, the training of its faculty and its curriculum.
The Association of collegiate alumnæ concerns itself, of course, only
with colleges admitting women, but there is no doubt that the fifteen
coeducational colleges and seven colleges for women only admitted to
the association would, in the estimation of every one familiar with
the subject, rank among the first fifty-eight colleges of the United
States.
The Federation of graduate clubs is an association of graduate
students of those colleges whose graduate schools are important enough
to entitle them to admission to the federation. The colleges in the
Federation of graduate clubs are the only colleges in the United
States that do true university work.
Footnote 12:
In only two instances, so far as I know, has coeducation once
introduced been abandoned or restricted in any way. The private
college of Adelbert of Western reserve, coeducational from 1873,
opened a separate woman’s college and excluded women in 1888. As the
college department was very small and the state of Ohio in which the
college was situated the most eastern in feeling of all western
states, the change was seemingly to be attributed to a bid for
students through undergraduate novelty. The Baptist college of Colby,
in Maine, coeducational from 1871, has taught women in separate
classes in required work since 1890. Women are not allowed to compete
with men for college prizes or for membership in the students’
society, which elects its members on account of scholarship. Complete
separation, which was at first planned, has proved impracticable and
from the beginning of the sophomore year women and men recite together
in all elective work.
Footnote 13:
In an investigation made several years ago in the University of
Wisconsin, which has been open to women since 1874, it was found that
the women ranked in scholarship very considerably beyond the men. In
the University of Michigan, where women have been educated with men
since 1870, President Angell has repeatedly laid stress on their
excellent scholarship. When in 1893–94 a committee of the faculty of
the University of Virginia asked the officers of a large number of
coeducational colleges especially in regard to this point the
testimony received was very remarkable. In England it should be noted
that the question of the success of women in collegiate studies has
been put beyond a doubt by the published class lists of the
competitive honor examinations of Oxford and Cambridge. In the
discussions in regard to granting women degrees at Cambridge, it was
freely admitted that women’s minds were “splendid for examination
purposes.”
Footnote 14:
For a discussion of coeducation in schools and colleges in 1892, see
U. S. education report for 1891–92, pp. 783–862.
Footnote 15:
U. S. education report 1889–90, pp. 761, 1582–1599, and 1897–98, p.
1823; account is taken of students of true college grade only in the
college proper. Throughout this monograph I have corrected the figures
of the U. S. ed. reps. which are affected by the erroneous assumption
that the undergraduate departments of Brown, Yale, Rochester, New York
Univ., Pennsylvania, Tulane and Western Reserve are coeducational. In
the University of Chicago women formed, in 1898, 54.5 per cent of all
regular, and 70 per cent of all unclassified, students; in Boston
university in the regular college course there were, in 1899, 299
women as against 192 men.
Footnote 16:
In 1889–90 there were 19,245 men studying in 146 colleges for men
only; in 1898–99 there were 25,915 men studying in 143 colleges for
men only, an increase of only 34.7 per cent. (In enumerating students
I have regarded the limited coeducational college of Colby as
coeducational.) Women, however, have increased in women’s colleges
138.4 per cent.
Footnote 17:
The objection of men students in the east to coeducation seems to be
mainly in the apprehension that the presence of women may interfere
with the free social life which has become so prominent a feature of
private colleges for men in the east. These colleges are, for the most
part, situated either in small country towns, or in the suburbs of a
city, in communities which have grown up about the college, and their
students live largely in college dormitories; the conditions,
therefore, are exceedingly unlike those prevailing in non-residential
colleges and also unlike those prevailing in the world at large. These
exceptional conditions are a source of pleasure and, in many respects,
of advantage to the student. Undoubtedly there is in coeducational
colleges less unrestraint; young men undoubtedly care much for the
impression that they make on young women of the same age, and there is
more decorum and perhaps more diligence in classrooms where women are
present. The objection to coeducation on the part of women students
is, to some extent, the same; separate colleges for women in like
manner are, as a rule, academic communities living according to
regulations and customs all their own; women also feel themselves more
unrestrained when they are studying in women’s colleges. Then, too,
coeducation in the east is still regarded as in some measure an
experiment, to the success of which the conduct of each individual
woman may, or may not, contribute, and the knowledge of this tends to
increase the self-consciousness of student life.
Footnote 18:
In the case of the colleges in groups I and II these statistics have
been obtained through the kindness of the presidents of the colleges
concerned; they are for the year 1900, except the numbers of
instructors and students which are obtained from the catalogues for
the year 1898–99; in enumerating the instructors, presidents, teachers
of gymnastics, elocution, music and art have been omitted. Instructors
away on leave of absence are not counted among instructors for the
current year.
Footnote 19:
Women’s colleges were first classified in division A and division B in
1887. In these reports there appeared sporadically in division A
Ingham university, at Leroy, New York, and Rutgers female college in
New York city. Neither of these had any adequate endowment and neither
ever obtained more than 35 students. Ingham university closed in 1893,
Rutgers female college in 1895.
Footnote 20:
The women’s colleges, so called, included in division B of these
reports, are in reality church and private enterprise schools, as a
rule of the most superficial character, without endowment, or fixed
curriculum, or any standard whatsoever of scholarship in teachers or
pupils. What money there is to spend is for the most part used to
provide teachers of music, drawing and other accomplishments, and the
school instruction proper is shamefully inadequate. Few if any of
these schools are able to teach the subjects required for entrance to
a college properly so called; the really good girls’ schools are, as a
rule, excluded from this list by their honesty in not assuming the
name of college. The U. S. education report for 1886–87 gives 152 of
these colleges in division B, the report for 1897–98, 135. When it is
said that separate colleges for women are decreasing, the statement is
based on this list of colleges in division B, which are not really
colleges at all; and when it is said that women students are not
increasing so rapidly in separate colleges for women as in
coeducational colleges, it is the students in these miscalled colleges
who are referred to; for precisely the reverse is true of students in
genuine colleges for women. It is happily true that since better
college education has been obtainable, women have been refusing to
attend the institutions included in class B. Between 1890 and 1898
women have increased only 4.9 per cent in the college departments of
such institutions, whereas, in these same eight years, they have
increased 138.4 per cent in women’s colleges in division A. The value
of statistics of women college students is often vitiated by the fact
that women studying in institutions included in division B are counted
among college students. Many of the colleges for men only and of the
coeducational colleges included in the lists of the commissioner of
education are very low in grade, but few of them are so scandalously
inefficient as the majority of the girls’ schools included in division
B. I have, therefore, in my statistics taken no account whatever of
women studying in institutions classified in division B.
Footnote 21:
See pp. 1821, 1822, 1888, 1889. Bryn Mawr had not 300 undergraduate
students in 1897–98, but the next year, 1898–99, passed the limit. I
have excluded Western reserve as it is not coeducational in its
undergraduate department, and, in 1899, had only 182 men in its men’s
college and 183 women in its women’s college.
Footnote 22:
To any one familiar with the circumstances it does not admit of
discussion that in Vassar we have the legitimate parent of all
future colleges for women which were to be founded in such rapid
succession in the next period. It is true that in 1855 the
Presbyterian synod opened Elmira college in Elmira, New York, but
it had practically no endowment and scarcely any college students.
Even before 1855 two famous female seminaries were founded which
did much to create a standard for the education of girls. In 1821
Mrs. Emma Willard opened at Troy a seminary for girls, known as
the Troy female seminary, still existing under the name of the
Emma Willard school. In 1837 Mary Lyon opened in the beautiful
valley of the Connecticut Mt. Holyoke seminary, where girls were
educated so cheaply that it was almost a free school. This
institution has had a great influence in the higher education of
women; it became in 1893 Mt. Holyoke college. These seminaries are
often claimed as the first women’s colleges, but their curriculum
of study proves conclusively that they had no thought whatever of
giving women a collegiate education, whereas, the deliberations of
the board of trustees whom Mr. Vassar associated with himself show
clearly that it was expressly realized that here for the first
time was being created a woman’s college as distinct from the
seminary or academy. In 1861 the movement for the higher education
of women had scarcely begun. It was not until eight years later
that the first of the women’s colleges at Cambridge, England,
opened.
Footnote 23:
The founder of Wellesley expected to leave the college a large
endowment, but his fortune was dissipated in unfortunate
investments. The splendid grounds and many halls of residence of
the college constitute a form of endowment, otherwise its lack of
productive funds would have excluded it from class I.
Footnote 24:
The numbers of students are for the year 1899–1900.
Footnote 25:
To the women’s colleges of group III they are admitted still in large
numbers, and they still form 35.1 per cent of all the undergraduate
students in the affiliated college of Radcliffe, and 35.7 per cent of
all the undergraduate students in the affiliated college of Barnard;
in part, perhaps, because these colleges are largely dependent upon
their tuition fees, and in part too, no doubt, because the presence of
special students is less disadvantageous where there is no dormitory
life.
Footnote 26:
Colleges for women draw their students from private schools to a much
greater extent than do coeducational colleges; and it was the very
great inefficiency of these schools that induced the earlier colleges
for women to organize preparatory departments of their own. The
entrance examinations of the women’s colleges are the only influence
for good that has ever been brought to bear upon the feeble teaching
of these schools. In 1874, before the numbers of women wishing to
prepare for college were great enough to influence the private
schools, a plan for raising their standard was devised by the Woman’s
education association of Boston, at whose request Harvard university
for 7 years conducted a series of examinations modeled on the Oxford
and Cambridge higher local examinations which have been such an
efficient agency in England. Committees of women were organized in
different cities, and an attempt was made to induce girls’ schools to
send up candidates for these examinations. In 7 years, however, only
106 candidates offered themselves for the preliminary examination, and
only 36 received a complete certificate. In 1881 the entrance
examinations of Harvard college were substituted for these special
women’s examinations, in the hope that the interest in reaching the
standard set by Harvard for its entering class of men might add to the
number of candidates; but even after this change was made
comparatively few candidates took the examinations, and in 1896 the
effort was discontinued; the Harvard examinations have been used from
that time onward simply as the ordinary entrance examinations of
Radcliffe college. In Great Britain the Cambridge higher local
examinations are taken annually by about 900 women. There was needed
some such pressure as is brought to bear by pupils determined to go to
college to induce private schools to add college graduates to their
staff of teachers. The requirements for admission to Bryn Mawr college
have to my personal knowledge been a most important factor in
introducing college-bred women as teachers into all the more important
private girls’ schools of Philadelphia and in many private schools
elsewhere; and every college for women drawing students from private
schools has the same experience. On the other hand, every relaxation
in the requirements for admission, such as the practice of admitting
on certificate adopted by Vassar, Wellesley and Smith, tends to
deprive girls’ schools of a much needed stimulus. Radcliffe and
Barnard, like Bryn Mawr, insist upon examination for admission and
decline to accept certificates.
Footnote 27:
Until Bryn Mawr opened in 1885 with a large staff of young unmarried
men, it had been regarded as almost out of the question to appoint
unmarried men in a women’s college; now they are teaching in all
colleges for women. The same instructors pass from colleges for men to
colleges for women and from colleges for women to colleges for men,
employing in each the same methods of instruction. Some years since
one of the professors at Smith college received at the same time
offers of a post at the Johns Hopkins, at Columbia, and at Bryn Mawr;
and among the professors the most successful in their teaching at
Princeton, Chicago and Columbia are men whose whole experience had
been gained in teaching women at Bryn Mawr.
Footnote 28:
The following data have been furnished me by the courtesy of the
presidents or deans of the colleges concerned, except the data of the
H. Sophie Newcomb memorial college, for which I am indebted to
Professor Evelyn Ordway. These data are for the year 1900; the numbers
of instructors and students have been obtained from the catalogues for
1898–99.
Footnote 29:
In one instance only—that of Evelyn college in New Jersey—has an
affiliated college, once established, been compelled to close its
doors. Evelyn, however, partook of the nature of a private enterprise
school, and was begun on an unacademic basis in 1887. A certain number
of Princeton professors consented to serve on the board of trustees
and give instruction there, but it was, in reality, a young ladies’
finishing school with a few students (in 1891, 22; in 1894, 18; in
1897, 14) pursuing collegiate courses. Music and accomplishments were
made much of, and in 1897 the college came to a well-merited end.
Footnote 30:
Radcliffe and Barnard are the only two of the affiliated colleges that
appear in the U. S. education reports in division A of women’s
colleges. The students of the other three are reported under Brown,
Western reserve and Tulane respectively, thus giving these colleges a
false air of being coeducational in their undergraduate departments.
The endowment and equipment of these three affiliated colleges,
although entirely independent of the colleges to which they are
affiliated, are given nowhere separately.
Footnote 31:
It is difficult for those interested in women’s education in England
to understand the existence in America of independent colleges for
women, and if American education were organized like English education
they would, indeed, have no reason to exist. In an English university,
consisting, as it does, of many separate colleges whose students live
in their separate halls of residence, are taught by their own
teachers, hear in common with the students of other colleges the
lectures offered by the central university organization, and compete
against each other in honor examinations conducted by a common board
of university examiners, the colleges for women—at Cambridge, Girton
and Newnham, and at Oxford, Somerville hall, Lady Margaret hall and
St. Hugh’s hall—are organized in precisely the same way as colleges
for men. They may, or may not, be as well equipped as the best men’s
colleges, but the difference is a matter of endowment, not of
university organization; there are differences also between the
various colleges for men. Examinations, again, play a far more
important part in English than in American education. There are in
Great Britain only a few examining and degree-giving bodies, for whose
examinations all the various colleges prepare their students. The
degrees mean that certain examinations have been passed, and have a
definite and universally acknowledged value. A degree given by an
American college means that the person receiving it has lived for some
time in a community of a certain kind, enjoying certain opportunities
of which he has conscientiously availed himself. For this reason no
one of the 491 colleges of the United States enumerated in the U. S.
education report for 1897–98 bestows its degree in recognition of
examinations passed in any other college. For this reason Harvard
college has had logic on its side in declining to confer upon the
students completing their undergraduate course in Radcliffe college
the Harvard B. A. They have not lived in the same community, nor yet
had all the opportunities of the Harvard student. The certificate
received by the student of Girton or Newnham represents exactly the
same thing as the Cambridge degree; the B. A. of Radcliffe does not
represent the same thing as the Harvard B. A. What is represented by
the degrees of different colleges in the United States may, or may
not, be equal, but never is the same. Nevertheless Columbia, Brown,
Tulane and Western reserve confer their degrees upon the women
graduates of their affiliated colleges for women.
Footnote 32:
The first American affiliated college was the so-called Harvard annex,
which was brought into existence by the devoted efforts of a small
number of influential professors of Harvard college, who voluntarily
formed themselves into a “Society for the collegiate instruction of
women,” and repeated each week to classes of women the lectures and
class work they gave to men in Harvard college. The idea first
occurred to Mr. Arthur Gilman in 1878. Girton college, Cambridge,
England, after which the annex was modeled, had then been in
successful operation for nine years. Mrs. Louis Agassiz, the widow of
the famous naturalist, agreed to become the official head of the
undertaking, and she associated with herself other influential Boston
and Cambridge women. Mr. Arthur Gilman became the secretary of the
society. The president of Harvard college declared that, so far as the
university was concerned, the professors were free to teach women in
their leisure hours if they chose. The annex was opened for students
in 1879 in a rented house near the Harvard campus with 25 students.
Footnote 33:
The medical school of the Johns Hopkins university is a true
university school, admitting only holders of the bachelor’s degree;
the law school of Harvard university is practically a university
school, although seniors in Harvard college are received as students.
Footnote 34:
Out of the 58 most important American colleges enumerated on page 12
only 23, it will be remembered, appear in the lists of the Federation
of graduate clubs. Unfortunately it must not be inferred that all
these 23 colleges are doing true professional work and offering
graduate students a three years’ course leading to the degree of Ph.
D. In some of them there are provided only courses leading to the
degree of A. M., which, like the degree of A. B., indicating general
culture. The affiliated college of Radcliffe appears in the list of
graduate clubs, although it can scarcely be said to exist
independently as a separate graduate school, being virtually the
portal by which women are admitted to a limited amount of graduate
work at Harvard. In 1899–1900 only 12 graduate lecture courses and 3
research courses were repeated at Radcliffe.
Footnote 35:
The graduate courses of Clark (which has no undergraduate department)
are few in number and attended by only 48 men; the exclusion of women
is, therefore, very surprising especially as the principal subjects of
instruction, pedagogy, experimental psychology and the like, are of
peculiar interest to women. The exclusion of women from all but the
medical department of the Johns Hopkins university is really of
serious import, because the Johns Hopkins university, judged not by
numbers but by scholarly research and publication, the number of Ph.
D. degrees conferred, and the important college and university
positions filled by its graduates, has long been, and perhaps is
still, the most important graduate school in the United States. Its
attitude toward women is to be accounted for in part by its location,
and in part by the fact that its management is in the hands of a
self-perpetuating board of twelve trustees appointed originally by the
founder, and without exception Baltimoreans, so that no pressure can
be brought to bear upon the corporation from more progressive sections
of the country.
Footnote 36:
These figures are taken from the Graduate handbook for 1899, published
by the Federation of graduate clubs. Of these the greatest number
studying in any one institution in the west was to be found in the
University of Chicago, and the next greatest in the University of
California; the greatest number studying in any one institution in the
east was to be found at Barnard-Columbia, and the next greatest at
Bryn Mawr. There were studying in the graduate departments of the
University of Chicago (including summer students) 276 women; in the
University of California, 90; in Barnard-Columbia, 82; in Bryn Mawr,
61; in Radcliffe-Harvard, 58; in Yale, 42; in Cornell, 36; in the
University of Pennsylvania, 34. The position of Bryn Mawr in this
series seems to show conclusively that an independent woman’s college
maintaining a sufficiently high standard of instruction may compete
successfully for students with much larger and older coeducational
foundations.
Footnote 37:
See Fellowships and graduate scholarships, published by the
Association of collegiate alumnæ, Richmond Hill, N. Y., III Series,
No. 2, July, 1899.
Footnote 43:
A private law school for women existed for some years in the city of
New York, founded by Madame Kempin, a graduate of the University of
Zurich. At the request of the Women’s legal education society it was
incorporated with the New York University law school.
Footnote 44:
See U. S. ed. rep. 1897–98, p. 1825, corrected according to note 1,
page 15 of this monograph.
Footnote 45:
The number of women graduates has been obtained in every case
through the courtesy of the presidents of the colleges concerned.
In some cases the women graduates have had to be selected from the
total number of graduates and counted separately for the purpose.
As the figures have never been printed before, I give them below:
_22 colleges belonging to the Association of collegiate
alumnæ_:—coeducational colleges: Boston, 522 graduates;
California, 440; Chicago, 267; Cornell, 517; Kansas, 259; Leland
Stanford, Jr., 289, Massachusetts institute technology, 45;
Michigan, 940; Minnesota, 458; Nebraska, 263; Northwestern, 317;
Oberlin, 1,486; Syracuse, 508; Wesleyan, 118; Wisconsin, 620.
Independent colleges: Vassar, 1,509; Wellesley, 1,727; Smith,
1,679; Bryn Mawr, 321. Affiliated colleges: Radcliffe, 278;
Barnard, 106; College for women of Western reserve, 135.
_Additional colleges_, 15 in number: Women’s college of Brown,
102; Cincinnati, 99; Columbian, 60; Colorado, about 70; Illinois,
131; Indiana, 282; Iowa, 340; Maine, 28; Missouri, no record; Ohio
State university, 150; Ohio Wesleyan, 615; Texas, 60 Vanderbilt,
11; Washington (St. Louis), 55; West Virginia, 17. Total, 14,824
women graduates.
Footnote 46:
The number of women studying in universities in Germany in 1898–99 was
approximately 471, probably mainly foreigners (statistics given in the
Hochschul Nachrichten, Minerva, etc.); in France in 1896–97,
approximately 410, of whom 83 were foreigners (Les Universités
françaises, by M. Louis Liard; vol. 2 of Special Reports on
Educational Subjects, Education department, London, 1898); in England
and Wales in 1897–98, approximately 2,348. (See catalogues of
different colleges.) The total number of women graduates in England
and Wales who have received degrees, or their equivalent, from English
and Welsh universities is about 2,180.
Footnote 47:
Two statistical investigations of the health of college women have
been undertaken; one in America in 1882, which tabulated various data
connected with the health, occupation, marriage, birth rate, etc., of
705 graduates of the 12 American colleges belonging at that time to
the Association of collegiate alumnæ (Health statistics of women
college graduates; report of a special committee of the Association of
collegiate alumnæ, Annie G. Howes, chairman; together with statistical
tables collated by the Massachusetts bureau of statistics of labor.
Boston: Wright and Potter Printing Co., 18 Post Office Square. 1885),
and one in England in 1887 (Health statistics of women students of
Cambridge and Oxford and of their sisters, by Mrs. Henry Sidgwick,
Cambridge university press, 1890). The English statistics dealt with
566 women students (honor students who had taken tripos examinations
and final honors, and women who had been in residence three, two and
one year) of Newnham and Girton colleges, Cambridge, and of Lady
Margaret and Somerville halls at Oxford. It was found that in England
75 per cent of the honor students were at the time of the
investigation in excellent or good health. It was found that in
America 78 per cent of the graduates were at the time of the
investigation in good health and 5 per cent in fair health. In
estimating the result of this investigation it is difficult to find a
standard of comparison. There is no way of knowing what percentage of
good health is to be expected in the case of the average woman who has
not been to college. It is stated in the American health
investigation, page 10, that Dr. Mary Putnam Jacobi, while obtaining
data for her monograph on the question of rest for women, found that
of 246 women only 56+ per cent were in good health. The American
statistics were compared with the results obtained in an investigation
of the condition of 1,032 working women of Boston, made by the
Massachusetts bureau of statistics of labor; the comparison showed
that the health of college women was more satisfactory than the health
of working women. The English statistics were compared with the health
statistics of 450 sisters or first cousins who had not received a
college education, and it was found that, at all periods, about 5 per
cent less of honor graduates were in bad health than of sisters and
cousins. The comparative tables showed that the married graduates were
healthier than their married sisters, that there were fewer childless
marriages among them, that they had a larger proportion of children
per year of married life, and that their children were healthier.
Footnote 48:
The health, marriage rate, birth rate, etc., of woman graduates will
be compared in every case with the corresponding statistics for the
women relatives nearest in age who have not received a college
education; an attempt will also be made to obtain corresponding
statistics for the nearest men relatives who are college graduates.
Footnote 49:
The health investigation of English women students showed that the
average age of marriage for students was 26.70 as against 25.53 for
sisters, and that 10.25 per cent of the students were married and
19.33 per cent of the sisters, or, omitting the students who had just
left college when the returns were sent in, about 12 per cent of
students. The rate of marriage of students after their college course
was completed and of their sisters seemed to be the same, the
difference in the total number of marriages being apparently accounted
for by causes existing before the termination of the college course,
“possibly the desire to go to college, or to remain in college may be
among them, but having been in college is not one of them.” (See
summary of results by Mrs. Sidgwick, page 59.) Mrs. Sidgwick concludes
as a result of the investigation that not more than one-half of
English women of the social class of women students or their sisters
marry. The American investigation of 1883 showed that 27.8 per cent of
the American college graduates, their average age being 28½ years,
were at that time married, and that, judging by the indications of the
marriage percentages among older graduates, about 50 per cent were
likely sooner or later to be married. In an investigation of the
marriage of Vassar graduates made in 1895, and not including the
graduates of that year, it was found that rather under 38 per cent of
the whole number of students, and about 63 per cent of the first four
classes, were married, see Frances M. Abbott: A Generation of college
women, The Forum, vol. XX, p. 378. Out of the total number of 8,956
graduates, including those graduating in June, 1899, of the 16
colleges belonging to the Association of collegiate alumnæ that have
kept accurate marriage statistics, 2,059 are married, or 23.0 per
cent.
Footnote 50:
Mrs. Sidgwick’s investigation showed that 77 per cent of all English
students reporting, and 83 per cent of honor students, had engaged in
educational work.
Footnote 51:
Between 1890 and 1898 women undergraduate students have increased
111.8 per cent, and men undergraduate students have increased 51.2 per
cent.
Footnote 52:
In the college departments of coeducational colleges the average
number of women studying is 48.4, whereas in the college departments
of independent women’s colleges the average number of women studying
is 331.91, and in affiliated colleges 192.8. In 1897–98 11.4 per cent
of all the women studying in coeducational colleges obtained the
bachelor’s degree, whereas 13.4 per cent of all the women studying in
independent women’s colleges obtained the bachelor’s degree, which
indicates probably that women prefer women’s colleges for four years
of residence. In the same year 13.3 per cent of all men undergraduate
students obtained the bachelor’s degree. The average number of
graduates of the 4 women’s colleges belonging to the Association of
collegiate alumnæ is 1,309 per college, the average age of the
colleges being 23 years; the average number of graduates of the 15
coeducational colleges belonging to the Association of college alumnæ
is only 469.9, although the average age of the colleges is 27.7 years.
During the 8 years from 1890 to 1898, women undergraduate students
have increased in coeducational colleges 105.4 per cent, whereas they
have increased in women’s colleges, division A, 138.4 per cent.
Precisely the reverse is true of men students (see pp. 14 and 15,
including foot notes).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
1. Moved the advertising section from the second page to the end.
2. Changed “re ite” to “recite” on p. 13.
3. Silently corrected typographical errors.
4. Retained anachronistic and non-standard spellings as printed.
5. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.
6. Enclosed bold font in =equals=.
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Education of Women, by M. Carey Thomas
*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EDUCATION OF WOMEN ***
***** This file should be named 57398-0.txt or 57398-0.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
http://www.gutenberg.org/5/7/3/9/57398/
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)
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
1.E.8.
1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country outside the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
are located before using this ebook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
provided that
* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation."
* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
works.
* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email protected]
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
