KINNISON, William Andrew, 1932- the IMPACT of the MORRILL ACT on HIGHER EDUCATION in OHIO
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 6 8-3005 KINNISON, William Andrew, 1932- THE IMPACT OF THE MORRILL ACT ON HIGHER EDUCATION IN OHIO. (PARTS I-IH). The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1967 Education, history University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan © Copyright William Andrew Kinnison 1968 THE IMPACT OF THE MORRILL ACT ON HIGHER EDUCATION IN OHIO DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By William Andrew Kinnison, B.A. , B.S. in Ed., M.S. ***** The Ohio State University 1967 Approved by Ca Adviser School of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Every writer is indebted to a great many persons whose efforts and counsel make his own work possible. The host of scholars to whom this writer is indebted is acknowledged in the notes to the text and in the bibliography. In addition, Mr. Bruce Harding and his staff at The Ohio State University Archives, Mrs. Ruth Ballenger and the staff of the Hayes Memorial Library at Fremont, Ohio, and the staffs of The Ohio State University Library, and the Ohio Historical Society Library were of great assistance in facilitating the research for this study, and the writer feels greatly indebted to them. Particular thanks must be expressed to a doctoral committee of wide and varied experience and background, the members of which effectively evaluated this project with a broad range of perspectives. John W. Gustad, Professor of Psychology and Associate Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, brought the observations of the trained researcher and the experienced administrator to bear upon the historical thesis here presented. Francis P. Weisenburger, Professor of History, provided the writer with that serious and ardent evaluation characteris tic of his conscientious concern for all of his students. Francis P. Robinson, Professor of Psychology, added the perceptions of the ii counseling psychologist which made the historian more aware of man's hum anity. The writer is also indebted to many who were without any formal obligation to assist him. Robert B. Sutton, Professor of Education, read critically the entire manuscript at a very busy time as he prepared to leave for study in Europe; John A. Ramseyer, Director of the School of Education, dealt kindly with his preoccupied assistant and greatly facilitated the task of writing. In many unknown ways, he sharpened the writer's perceptions of his data. A word of appreciation must also be expressed to Louise Brown, whose interest and experience aided the writer substantially in organ izing his material. Her flawless and exceedingly accurate transcriptions made the preparation of the text a very much easier task. The writer is also indebted to Gloria Brooks for her cheerful willingness to transcribe almost illegible notes. One debt which is owed by nearly all writers of dissertations is that owed to their families. My wife's insistence upon readability'and accuracy, combined with a never failing encouragement were funda mental to the completion of this task. In addition, my children, Billy and Linda, gave a substantial portion of their life's spirit to these p ag es. iii None of the above, however, shares any blame for the writer's imperfections which, in spite of their efforts, remain in the text here presented. VITA February 10, 1932 Born—Springfield, Ohio 1950 . Diploma, Springfield High School 195 4 . B.A., Wittenberg College, Springfield, Ohio 195 5 . B.S. in Ed., Wittenberg College, Springfield, Ohio 1955-1956 ...... Field Secretary, National Social Fraternity, Denver, Colorado 1956-1958 . U. S. Army, Permanent Staff, U. S. Army Language School, Monterey, California 1958-1959 . Admissions Counselor, Wittenberg University, Springfield, Ohio 1959-1960 . Graduate School, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 1959-1961 . Visiting Professor of History and Political Science, Wittenberg University Summer School, Springfield, Ohio 1963. M.S. (History), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 1961-1964 . Assistant Director of Admissions, Wittenberg University, Springfield, Ohio 1964-1965 . Assistant Dean of Admissions, Wittenberg University, Springfield, Ohio v 1965-1967 . Graduate School, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio; Teaching Associate and Administrative Assistant to the Director of the School of Education 1 9 6 7 -................... Assistant to the President, Wittenberg University, Springfield, Ohio PUBLICATIONS "Wittenberg's First Six Presidents, 1845-1920," a six-part series in The Wittenberg Alumnus, February, 1963 through March, 1965. Samuel Shellabarger: Lawyer, Jurist, Legislator (1817-1896), Yellow Springs, Ohio: The Antioch Press, 1966. "Outrage and Bewilderment: An Account of the Early Days of Greek Letter Societies," The Wittenberg Alumnus, November, 1966. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Higher Education. Professors John W. Gustad, Collins W. Burnett, Everett J. Kircher, Robert B. Sutton Minor Fields: American History. Professors Francis P. Weisenburger, Mary Young, Harold Hancock Counseling. Professors Francis P. Robinson, Frank Fletcher, Harold Pepinsky, John Horrocks, Maude Stewart, JohnW. Gustad CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................ ii VITA ooOO4OOCBOOOaO*0.a0*OO§. ^ INTRODUCTION. .................. 1 PART ONE: POLITICS AND ECONOMICS CHAPTER I HIGHER EDUCATION IN OHIO IN THE 1860's . 13 II OHIO IN THE NATION IN THE 1860's . .... 33 III THE MORRILL ACT IN PERSPECTIVE........................ 55 PAR.T TWO: PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION IV A PRELIMINARY CONSENSUS ........ 87 V A VANISHING ENTHUSIASM ............................ 106 VI MEN AND IDEAS. ............. 128 VII FREEDOM AND TENURE. ......................... 156 PART THREE: ADMINISTRATION AND ORGANIZATION VIII STUDENTS AND THE EMERGENCE OF THE UNIVERSITY. .................. 191 IX PEACE WITH THE FARMERS: A NEW DEPARTURE. 221 X CONSENSUS THROUGH STRUCTURE AND PROCESS .... ............. 252 XI CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS ..... 286 NOTES TO THE TEXT. ................ 302 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................... 341 vii INTRODUCTION i In the Morrill Land Grant Act of 1862, provision was made for the education of the "industrial classes." In mid-nineteenth century America, many perceived two broad economic and social classes: the professional and the industrial. The phrase "education for the in dustrial classes" meant a new kind of education distinguishable from that traditionally provided for the professional classes. The term in its broadest sense referred to the new education designed for the self- made men of industry and trade and of farm and factory in place of the classical and traditional education designed for the man of theology and the man of law. In its narrowest sense it meant training for farmers and for mechanics. In either sense it denoted a new perspective for higher education. But the interest in education for the industrial classes did not exist apart from broader concerns about reforming higher educa tion which focused upon the American college in the post Civil War era. It is difficult to recapture the tenor of life in America in the 1860's, and particularly to delineate the perception of higher educa tion as it existed then for the so-called industrial classes. Francis Wayland, President of Brown University, however, sensed the difference 2 in his concern about the impasse which seemed to exist between the traditional college and the new emerging America. "Our colleges are not filled," Wayland told his board of trustees, "because we do not furnish the education desired by the people.11 He was convinced that the traditional college produced an article for which the demand was diminishing, and, he observed, "We sell it at less than cost, and the deficiency is made up by charity. We give it away, and still the de mand diminishes. With the passage of the Morrill Act, a specific and incisive federal intervention into American higher education occurred giving a decided assist to the development of education for the industrial classes. Without elaborate directives and detailed specifications, the federal government precipitated major changes in the structure and direction of American higher education. Through grants of land, the Congress secured state commitment to an undefined innovation and focused a decade of debate on the nature and function of higher educa tion. The details of that decade of debate and the repercussions from it have not been adequately assessed in previous studies of the Land Grant movement. This study seeks to appraise this aspect of the Morrill Act by a study of the instrumentality on which the Morrill Act focused the debate in Ohio. 3 In the more than one hundred years since the passage of the Morrill Act, a great deal has been written and said about democracy's colleges. Much of what is available, however, is focused either upon a particular institution or upon the national movement. As Earl D. Ross, who has written extensively on the Land Grant movement, has observed, it is either overly laudatory and not sufficiently analytical and critical, or it is harshly derogatory and unobjective. Ro ss, one of the nation's authorities on the movement and one who has added much to its ob jective and professional evaluation, observed that histories in this area seem to have been written either by enthusiasts or by humanistic brahm ins. He called for more work on the history of such institutions and particularly for some reevaluation of origins. Inherent in such a re- evaluation is an assessment