Introduction
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Notes Introduction 1. University of Michigan, The President’s Report to the Board of Regents for the Year Ending June 30, 1872 (Ann Arbor: Published by the University, 1872), 9. 2. Charles K. Backus, “President’s Report, Detroit Schools,” in Thirty-Seventh Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Michigan (Lansing: W.S. George & Co., 1874), 313. 3. See, e.g., Richard Hofstadter and C. DeWitt Hardy, The Development and Scope of Higher Education in the United States, 3rd ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1958); Lawrence Cremin, The Transformation of the School: Progressivism in American Education, 1876–1957 (New York: Vintage Books, 1961); Laurence Veysey, The Emergence of the American University (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1965); David B. Tyack, The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974); Robert Church and Michael Sedlak, Education in the United States: An Interpretive History (New York: Free Press, 1976); Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught: Constancy and Change in American Classrooms, 1890–1980 (New York: Longman, 1984); Roger Geiger, To Advance Knowledge: The Growth of American Research Universities, 1900–1940 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986); Daniel Tanner and Laurel Tanner, History of the School Curriculum (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1990); Christopher J. Lucas, American Higher Education: A History (New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 1994); Herbert Kliebard, The Struggle for the American Curriculum, 1893– 1958 (New York: Routledge, 1995); Julie A. Reuben, The Making of the Modern University: Intellectual Transformation and the Marginalization of Morality (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1996); Diane Ravitch, Left Back: A Century of Battles Over School Reform (New York: Touchstone, 2000); Herbert Kliebard, “A Century of Growing Antagonism in High School– College Relations,” chapter in Changing Course: American Curriculum Reform in the 20th Century (New York: Teachers College Press, 2002), 50–60; John R. Thelin, A History of American Higher Education (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004). 180 Notes 4. Edward A. Krug, The Shaping of the American High School, 1880–1920 (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969). 5. Harold Wechsler, The Qualified Student: A History of Selective College Admission in America (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1977). See, e.g., John S. Brubacher and Willis Rudy, Higher Education in Transition: A History of American Colleges and Universities, 1636–1968 (New York: Harper & Row, 1968); Frederick Rudolph, The American College and University: A History (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1968); Geraldine Jonçich Clifford, “Equally in View”: The University of California, Its Women, and the Schools (Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education and Institute for Governmental Affairs, University of California, Berkeley, 1995); Paul Westmeyer, An Analytical History of American Higher Education (Springfield, Ill: C. C. Thomas, 1997); Arthur Cohen, The Shaping of American Higher Education: Emergence and Growth of the Contemporary System (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1998). 6. Nicholas Murray Butler, “Discussion,” in The Addresses and Journal of Proceedings of the National Educational Association, Session of the Year 1891 (Published by the NEA, 1891), 502. 1 Changing Expectations for American Education 1. James McCosh, “Upper Schools,” in The Addresses and Journal of Proceedings of the National Educational Association, Session of the Year 1873 (The National Educational Association, 1873), 23. 2. Ibid., 35. For his description of McCosh, see D. C. Gilman, “The Future of American Colleges and Universities,” The Atlantic Monthly 78 (August 1896), 175–176. 3. S. H. Carpenter, “The Relation of the Different Educational Institutions of the State,” Wisconsin Journal of Education 4 (March 1874), 86. 4. United States Bureau of Education, Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1876 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1878), lxxi; Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1878 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1880), lxxx–lxxxi. 5. United States Bureau of Education, Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1873 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1874), lii. 6. Ibid., xlvii. 7. United States Bureau of Education Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1881 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1883), cxl; Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1885–86 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1887), 362; Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1887–88 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1889), 494; Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1890–91 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1894), 789–796, 817–819, Notes 181 832–833. The historian Edward Krug has argued that scholars should be cau- tious when using Bureau of Education statistics. As he warned, the statistics for secondary schools before 1889–90 and for higher education before 1900 are unreliable, confusing, and contradictory. They are based on voluntary reports from schools. They are compiled from a number of confusing tables spread throughout the commissioner’s reports and likely fail to count precisely the number of students enrolled in secondary and higher education. See Edward A. Krug, The Shaping of the American High School, 1880–1920 (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969), 451. 8. United States Bureau of Education, Report of the Commissioner of Education, 1873, lix, 663–682; Report of the Commissioner of Education, 1878, xc, 515–546; Report of the Commissioner of Education, 1890–91, 817–819 832–833; Report of the Commissioner of Education, 1885–86, 490–493. See also Geraldine Jonçich Clifford, “Equally in View”: The University of California, Its Women, and the Schools (Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education and Institute for Governmental Affairs, University of California, Berkeley, 1995), 3–4. As historians have warned, statistics for higher education in this period are not entirely reliable. See Krug, Shaping of the American High School, 451. 9. Robert Wiebe, The Search for Order, 1877–1920 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1967), xiii–xiv, 1–4, 10–16, 22, 30–39, 44–47, 111; Kenneth T. Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 20, 272–275. 10. Wiebe, Search for Order, 10–16, 22, 30–39, 111–129; Samuel Hays, The Response to Industrialism: 1885–1914 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), 2–3, 48, 71–75, 188–190; Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier, 272–275. 11. Alba M. Edwards, Population: Comparative Occupation Statistics for the United States, 1870 to 1940; Sixteenth Census of the United States, 1940 (Washington, D. C., 1943), 11. See also Maury Klein and Harvey Kantor, Prisoners of Progress: American Industrial Cities, 1850–1920 (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1976), 73–77. 12. William J. Reese, The Origins of the American High School (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), xvi–xvii, 167–169, 238–239; David F. Labaree, The Making of an American High School: The Credentials Market and the Central High School of Philadelphia, 1838–1939 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988), 4–5, 9–10, 33–34, 46–47, 114. 13. Reese, Origins of the American High School, 107–121; Labaree, Making of an American High School, 4–5, 9–10, 19–23, 29. See also John L. Rury, Education and Social Change: Themes in the History of American Schooling (Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002), 82–90. 14. Laurence Veysey, The Emergence of the American University (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1965), 264–66; Labaree, Making of an American High School, 6, 65–66, 128–130, 134–135, 165–170; Burton J. Bledstein, The Culture of Professionalism: The Middle Class and the Development of Higher Education in America (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1976), 33–39; John R. Thelin, A History of American Higher Education (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), 155. 182 Notes 15. C. W. Parmenter, “Discussion,” in Sixty-Second Annual Meeting of the American Institute of Instruction, Lectures, Discussions, and Proceedings, Bethlehem, N.H., July 6–9, 1891 (Boston: American Institute of Instruction, 1891), 76–77. 16. Olivier Zunz, Why the American Century? (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998), 9. 17. There is a significant literature on universities, expertise, and science. Edward Shils, “The Order of Learning in the United States: The Ascendancy of the University,” in The Organization of Knowledge in Modern America, 1860– 1920, edited by Alexandra Oleson and John Voss (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979), 19–29; Richard Hofstadter, “The Revolution in Higher Education,” in Paths of American Thought, edited by Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. and Morton White (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1963), 274–277, 283–289; Thomas Haskell, The Emergence of Professional Social Science: The American Social Science Association and the Nineteenth-Century Crisis of Authority (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1977), 192, 235–236; Dorothy Ross, “American Social Science and the Idea of Progress,” in The Authority of Experts: Studies in History and Theory, edited by Thomas Haskell (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984), 157–166; Thomas Bender, “The Erosion of Public Culture: Cities, Discourses, and Professional Disciplines,”